The PAK-FA and J-20 may now have a new adversary to plan for. Guess the snoops would be quite busy in the years ahead figuring out how to reverse engineer the thing!
However, the biggest hurdle would be where the funding is going to come from this time...
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22055 posts, RR: 51 Reply 2, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8974 times:
Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 1): Does anyone think that the US has any money to buy a new fighter?
The show must go on. There certainly is the need for other models beyond the F-35 in capability.
Manufacturers are talking about stuff with development and production cycles 10-30 years out.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1597 posts, RR: 4 Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8929 times:
The presentation seems to highlight the ability to do development work that encompass initial configuration evaluation all the way through tooling and rate production. The tools allow them to provide better estimates on design and costs. The fighter shown looks like just a straw horse that have been run through the exercise. Whether the final article is a next generation fighter, bomber or UAV, the program/process shown would allow the "customer" have a better feel that Boeing is providing a more accurate cost estimate/bid . . . hint . . . hint . . .
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 8859 times:
Sensor and processing technology keep improving so very soon a pilot could have very good SA without actually being in the cockpit, so it's not unreasonable to assume that a true unmanned fighter is next. The potential ability to pull 100 Gs is just too tempting.
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1597 posts, RR: 4 Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 8513 times:
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 4): The potential ability to pull 100 Gs is just too tempting.
Of course, while you are at it, why would you need planes that can do massive G's when you can design a weapons system (AKA Lasers and missiles) with 360 degrees coverage? But that debate is for another day.
It appears the old propaganda machine is alive, well-oiled and working. Although in fairness, it has been churning out real, verifiable flying prototypes of late. It's the aircraft's innards that remain a mystery.
AirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2529 posts, RR: 6 Reply 7, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 7789 times:
Boeing's only hope to stay alive in the fighter jet business (carry on McDD's strong reputation,) is to design for the US Navy a true replacement for the Super Hornet, which is in fact, never been a true replacement for the F-14D Tomcat. The USN needs something along the lines of the F-22 that the USAF enjoys, minus the low numbers and exorbitant price tag. If Boeing can provide the vision and design, then they might, just might preserve their ability to build and sell combat jets after the F-15 and F-18 are done.
474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9 Reply 8, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 7741 times:
Lockheed (and their partners Boeing and General Dynamics) won the contract to build the F-22 in April 1991 and even though the Defence Department has cut the number required time and time again it is still in production. If Boeing was to actually build the F-22 replacement (or supplement) it would not be off the drawing board many years with an in service date some time after 2030.
wvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 516 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 7233 times:
You sure thats a fighter concept and not the concept for the new bomber program set to start in 2015?
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14345 posts, RR: 26 Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5282 times:
Quoting AirRyan (Reply 7): which is in fact, never been a true replacement for the F-14D Tomcat.
It could have been, but the fact that it isn't can be laid squarely at the feet of Dick Cheney.
Quoting AirRyan (Reply 7): The USN needs something along the lines of the F-22 that the USAF enjoys,
They could have had it, but they cancelled it. There is a pattern here. The Navy and Cheney screwed up and now the Navy gets to pay the price for their shortsightedness.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Sponsor Message: 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4429 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 1901 posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22055 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
