Military

Northrop Grumman's F/A-XX 6th-gen fighter breaks cover

Northrop Grumman's F/A-XX 6th-gen fighter breaks cover
Concept rendering of the Northrop Grumman F/A-XX
Concept rendering of the Northrop Grumman F/A-XX
View 1 Image
Concept rendering of the Northrop Grumman F/A-XX
1/1
Concept rendering of the Northrop Grumman F/A-XX

The US Navy's secretive F/A-XX sixth-generation fighter plane is a bit less secret after program competitor Northrop Grumman unveiled a new concept image of its version of the carrier-based warplane, giving us a few design clues.

Like the US Air Force, the Navy is keen on getting its hands on a sixth-gen fighter. However, due to the need for specialized carrier aircraft and good old-fashioned inter-service rivalry, the Navy would much rather have a dedicated aircraft of its own rather than a carrier variant of the planned F-47 NGAD.

It's a squabble that gets a lot of back channel chatter and the F/A-XX is often looked upon as the sacrificial lamb during defense budget talks as Congress questions whether America needs two advanced fighter aircraft in an age of budget cuts increasingly dominated by drone warfare.

Nevertheless, Northrop Grumman seems determined to show that it's still in the running against rival Boeing to secure the F/A-XX contract if it's finally approved.

The reason the Navy has given for the F/A-XX is that it has very different mission requirements from the Air Force. Aside from carrier operations, instead of concentrating on air superiority, the Navy prefers to deal in surface warfare, attacking ships and ground targets. In addition, the rising ambitions of China make longer-range fighters more suitable to operating in the Pacific Ocean.

The new image was posted without comment on the Naval Aviation section of the Northrop Grumman's website and shows the forward section of the concept F/A-XX on the ground. Though we can't see the wings or the aft section of the plane, we can make some deductions from the rendering.

First off, the lines of the concept are very similar to the Northrop Grumman YF-23 that the company is developing in competition for the Air Force's Advanced Tactical Fighter program. There's a sharp nose with a prominent chine blending the wings into the fuselage, which is optimized for stealth. This stealthiness is compounded by a top-mounted air intake, which is another indication of reducing the aircraft's sensor profile.

Along with this, the profile suggests a large interior volume for carrying more fuel, weapons, and other payloads. Also, there's a heavy-duty undercarriage with twin wheels, showing that it is designed for carrier operations where the fighter tends to land on the deck with a pretty hard thump.

The F/A-XX program is intended to replace the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler sometime in the 2030s as a multi-role fighter that can operate in hostile territory. Though the specifications are still under wraps, the competition expects the winning design to have 25% more range than the F-35C, or about 837 nautical miles (964 miles, 1,551 km) and can aerial refuel from the MQ-25 Stingray tanker drone.

Speed is also a bit vague, but it's supposed to be faster than current US combat aircraft. Other features include new sensors, advanced AI with advanced networking, and the ability to engage in manned-unmanned teaming (MUM-T) with Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) – more familiarly known as Loyal Wingmen.

If the program continues to be funded, a decision is expected by 2028.

Source: Northrop Grumman

9 comments
9 comments
Spud Murphy
Just imagine if all the money and resources the stupid human race spends on weapons of death like these were instead used to improve our planet and societies, humans would be so advanced by now. Instead, the greedy get richer while stealing from everyone else, and killing those who don't share their philosophies. Honestly, the human race really is a completely failed experiment.
Capt B.
Saying the YF-23 "is being developed for the [ATF] program" is over 30 years behind the program. You should catch up on that.
Francis Ojeba
Northrop Grumman s navy Ngad newest carrier based aircraft: F/A-XX 6th generation stealth fighter is at it again! This is proving to the aviation world: they could best their competitive edge, surpassing even the American giants- Boeing Aerobatics & host of others! USAF PENTAGON Defense planners; should not make the Same mistakes twice _; unlike, relegating this like the ' X-23 to F- 22, but , in later going back to correct the flaws! The USSN Defense & PENTAGON hierarchical Officialdom should ensure to commence its production and placement into active service duties on Uncle Sam's Carrier onward Services! The Usaf had its effectiveness with the production of their- F-47 for effectiveness in 6th generation Airpower contention! The USNN should follow suit for sea ,Airpower dominance aboard her Carrier fleets! Leet, theirs adversity countries : China, Russian Federations takes the lead upper hand!
Smokey_Bear
Looks badass, can't wait to learn more about it. I hope Boeing loses, they are the poorly run company, that has been making so many mistakes for too many years. let them die, which they won't, they will lose fat government contracts, and hopefully get lean & mean, and make good shit again. Lockheed makes better fighters then them Northrop makes better bombers & fighters then them. Airbus is doing better on airliners. What exactly does Boeing excell at...
Craig
Have to wonder how useful this will be since future warfare is all drone based as demonstrated in Ukraine. We are wasting our money because congress members vote to produce these expensive things of the past in their own districts regardless of their utility. Meanwhile, we produce almost none of the world's drones.
Victor-in-A2
Manned aircraft are DUMB in an era where AI pilotless aircraft will rule the skies. I move my swarm from Kings knight three to... oh, the old guard are still playing checkers.
Lamar Havard
Since Trump has already been briefed on at least 4 alien species working with us on the ground and in space, the Black Projects should go ahead and reveal the TR3-B, the Tic Tacs and the other human back-engineered anti-gravity crafts that we DO have in "service" right now. And maybe throw in the cool little boxes that suck energy straight from the magneto/electric field to run all of our stuff?
spyinthesky
Some strange comments here, but I don’t think the day of the (optionally) manned fighter is over for some time yet. Drones are certainly likely to take over as the weapon of choice eventually but as things stand we are seriously struggling to even ensure we have a secure link in the control of them, which is why super lightweight cables are becoming so important in Ukraine to ensure they aren’t a lost child in a maze. Far too dangerous to allow your whole strike and indeed defence force to rely upon it not being hacked. Loyal wingmen can achieve a great deal of resistance to this by direct focused links to the parent aircraft but we have a very long way to go before we simply conclude manned platforms are so yesterday, especially as our potential enemies are doing anything but. Options need to be kept as broad as possible, though two independent fighter projects does seem an exorbitant choice when most of the deficiencies of the F-35 is due to the VSTOL version compromising the other two versions rather than the AirForce and Navy requirements being a big hit. Indeed Lockheed are even onsidering the larger Navy C wing for an upgraded Airforce A version to increase range.
2Hedz
The need for two very different aircraft between the Navy and Air Force is because of the disparate mission requirements. Navy needs an 'off-roader' while Air Force needs a 'sports car'. Joint programs have been wrought with problems in the past . F-111 Aardvark, F-4 Phantom. Even the Navy variant F-35C has issues. Joint program's issues seem a lot due to poor communication and program management by the military but this is only part of the story. In theory costs could be greatly reduced if you could have a single company develop 2 separate aircraft so as to draw on common elements. But then you get into monopoly issues which stifles innovation/competition and is bad for national security. So in the end having 2 separate companies Boeing and Northrop develop the 2 is probably the best option.