Northrup releases a 6th Gen teaser

a reply to: PhantomTwo

I know it's not an actual manufacturing plant, but the idea it tries to convey is what I mean.

a reply to: PhantomTwo

The Northrop UCLASS entry was going to be an improved X-47. As it stands now, the -47 was incapable of doing the mission, so they were going to increase the size somewhat along with some other changes, from what I've heard. Same basic design, but changed to fit the requirements.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I heard the x47 added a lot of the DNA for the 180. not all of it. but alot of what they learned from the 47 went into consideration when coming up with the 180.

heres what id do. why not make a basic body with various wing attachements? a model got folding wings sells to the navy. b model has higher angle if attack on the wings and has another job, c model has extra long wings for high altitude and loiter. the fuselage has modular bays so you can swap what you want when you want it. wings detachable and swapable. one bird, three missions capabilitites. wouldnt it be cheaper in the end and more versitile, appealing to a wider swath of potential buyers to go that route. car manufacturers can do it. why not aircraft manufacturers.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

They may have used some stuff from ground testing but the -180 was flying before the -47 really hit its stride.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Did you hear what Lockheed, Boeing or General Atomics had planned?

I polled GA directly for an article I wanted to write about using an adapted HEL/Sea Avenger hybrid and was told 'no comment.'

a reply to: anzha

Just airframe wise. Boeing and Lockheed were using clean sheet designs and GA was using the Avenger. No one released anything about sensors or weapons.

a reply to: Zaphod58

interesting. what about dark star? to me it seems like the two were intended to support different birds and missions. with dark star having a counterpart.

180 although newer. not the same mission?

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
although it could be artistic license notice how powerful, but tinsy, the engines are on the 6th gen concept.

One engine with 2 exhausts? Shut off one exhaust completely to re-direct that into an energy weapon charging system of some type. I know it's far fetched, just tossing out ideas.

a reply to: PhantomTwo

that's possible. could also be two engines two exhausts. I like how they depicted the intakes a long ways away from where you would expect the tubrine to be. I find it I teresting, if it's not totally artistic freedom

originally posted by: PhantomTwo
a reply to: Jonjonj

that voice over is the Captain Obvious version. I prefer the more ambiguous one.

Lol that was kind of my point in posting it.

Boeing is starting to leak info on their sixth gen now. Nothing like Boeing has, but its a two seater, twin engined and optionally manned.

a reply to: anzha

Northrop says in the article that they need some system to cool the laser.

wonder if you can combine a coflow thrust vectoring system with the system pseudo discussed in your laser thread? like have a third intake or bypass duct in front of all that other "stuff" for the co flow or whatever. cold supersonic air good for cooling componants?

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I think Zaphod nailed it as to why ADVENT has the that bypass and you're following through with the thought. They will be using that flow to cool internal components. Lasers are probably one of them. I have to wonder if we'll see radars with a great deal more power too so it can be used to burn out electronics as well.

random question: what are its specs?

a reply to: anzha

so super AESA, lasers, advent, fluedic thrust vectoring, new skins, and that "something else" that's very impressive and all the things that come along with it. future looks amazing for the upcoming 6th gen.

a reply to: farmville

The Air Force hasn't decided yet, so no one knows.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Just to reinforce this, the USAF is barely started on the 6th gen studies.

My biggest concern is they will overreach and come up with stuff that's either not feasible or will cost too much.

My hope is they will take cues from the LRSB and rescope it so they can do an IOC in ten years after doing some demonstrators. I can hope, but I know the procurement business a bit too well and its a depressing beast.

a reply to: ThePeaceMaker

Now if I see a white light underneath the nose and both wings, and a red light directly under center of this bird, I'm gonna know what people have been seeing for at least 20 years in the skies!

TheBorg

a reply to: anzha

good point. with all the bells and whistles they could incorporate unto it would end up sone super bird but super expensive and never ready for IOC. I guess with 6th gen it's more a matter of deciding which accessories to go with, time frame and budget.

a reply to: anzha

We've got an insurmountable tech lead, that much is undisputed.

Considering that a matchup between the quarter century-old F-22 and the current Russian and Chinese "5th generation" platforms (that are still nearly a decade from IOC) still looks as lopsided as the one between the aliens and Bill Pullman in Independence Day (and the Russians/Chinese don't have Jeff Goldblum to save the day), I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to build a relatively modest "gen 5.5" craft quickly and in huge numbers, rather than pursuing some far-out science fiction-looking 6th gen craft that we'll get 150 of, and entering service in 2035.

It'd still be decades ahead of anything the Russians or Chinese might throw together.