Global 6th Generation Fighter Aircraft Projects

[randombully]

The poster model X-jet could be modified version with 2 engines, canards & different wing config yet to be fully revealed.
A public ceremony would probably reveal the production IOC version.

With such heavily edited poster, without the hidden rear half, it is difficult to say if the jet would look similar to Bird-of-Prey with canards or F/A-XX advertised so far, or combination of both.

Following is the approximate scaled comparison of Bird-of-Prey Vs F-22. For payload, fuel, range more than F-22, the actual NGAD fuselage could be roughly double BoP's fuselage.

View attachment 28268


Following is F/A-XX concept comparison with poster model:

View attachment 28274

Some more material for assumption purpose

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Some more material for assumption purpose

Yeah, already saw 2nd & 3rd diagrams on other forums.
There are other 2D, 3D stuff across internet.
But i'm always keeping Trump's words in my mid - "most advanced, capable, lethal. Nothing comes even close from speed to maneuverability to payload".

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

F-22's F119 engines have 156 KN wet thrust giving it wet T/STOW = 1.1
F-35's F135 engine have 191 KN wet thrust giving it wet T/STOW = 0.76 for C & 0.87 for A models.

If NGAD's A-10X engine is assumed 230 KN wet thrust, that's 230/156=47.4% increase over F-22. Let's adjust it to 234 KN or 50% for easy number. That means maintaining the same wet T/STOW of 1.1 the NGAD's STOW can be 50% more than F-22 or 29*1.5=43.5 tons & MTOW of 38*1.5=57 tons.
So volume can be assumed 50% more for easy understanding for now.
Considering same airframe density, a 14% increase in L*B*H each gives 48% increase in volume.
But if height of airframe is kept same then 22% increase in width & length gives 48% more volume.
In terms of F-22 it would look like following bigger F-22, which would look same from top but stretched sideways from front/back. May be this can give some idea about NGAD's size.

 

[randombully]

Studies by Boeing in past.
Can give rough idea of how f-47 can look like based on artist impressions shown in white house.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Studies by Boeing in past.
Can give rough idea of how f-47 can look like based on artist impressions shown in white house.

Yeah, an interesting study revealed out.
The wing can be Cropped-Diamond, Lambda, etc.
Now the speculations of F-47's looks are being related to -
- Bird of Prey TD.
- F/A-XX concept.
- YF-23.
There have been some edited drawings in past about YF-23 with canards.

 

[randombully]

Yeah, an interesting study revealed out.
The wing can be Cropped-Diamond, Lambda, etc.
Now the speculations of F-47's looks are being related to -
- Bird of Prey TD.
- F/A-XX concept.
- YF-23.
There have been some edited drawings in past about YF-23 with canards.

View attachment 28472
View attachment 28473

Usaf wants "high agility" along with better stealth than f22 and f35
The cranked arrow wings provide more space for control surfaces.
Given it's most likely gonna be tailess, the plane will depend on canard and wings for agility, so cranked arrow style wing makes more sense.
And It's myth that yf23 was better than yf22 and lost due to usaf having more confidence on lockheed to manage the program, while it did played a role.
But yf 23 has lots of problems.
First it's intakes caused more exposed fan blades(To radar, no to eyes) compared to yf 22 which had completely hidden ones.

Also their shape was worse in supersonic flight than yf22's intakes
Plus no ramp to break the air into subsonic like yf22.
So worse supersonic performance.
Plus those marked areas, almost form 90° relative to the wing, no-no for stealth.



Then it's IWB was more complex and sucked.
If a bottom bomb malfunctioned to release, the top ones will be blocked too

The YF-23's Weapons Bay Layout Was One Of Its Best Features And One Of Its Worst

Northrop's entry into the ATF tender had a big, ambiguous weapons bay that likely hurt its chances of being selected but would be prized today.

www.twz.com

Third myth is its manurablility,
" some says those v tails were so good that it almost matched yf22 in manurablity which also had tvs, that yf23 lacked".

This is bullshit, those v tails even if they had big effect, ain't gonna help in high AoA, you need canards, lerx, horizontal tails for that.
Neither it will help in fast turn rate relative to yf22.

And as before, yf23 design prohibited addition of thrust vectoring.

So a major redesign in yf23 will be needed if they go for it, and at this stage just better to start from scratch.

And if your designing a "high agility" and "high stealth" fighter without vertical control surfaces( causes more radar return compared to horizontal ones).
So a cranked arrow wing, is more desirable than a diamond or delta wing.

Most likely configuration is :- canards, cranked arrow wing, TVC.

Now with that , can't guarantee 100% that it will look like that.

 

[GodEmperorDoom]

Usaf wants "high agility" along with better stealth than f22 and f35
The cranked arrow wings provide more space for control surfaces.
Given it's most likely gonna be tailess, the plane will depend on canard and wings for agility, so cranked arrow style wing makes more sense.
And It's myth that yf23 was better than yf22 and lost due to usaf having more confidence on lockheed to manage the program, while it did played a role.
But yf 23 has lots of problems.
First it's intakes caused more exposed fan blades(To radar, no to eyes) compared to yf 22 which had completely hidden ones.
View attachment 28476
View attachment 28478Also their shape was worse in supersonic flight than yf22's intakes
Plus no ramp to break the air into subsonic like yf22.
So worse supersonic performance.
Plus those marked areas, almost form 90° relative to the wing, no-no for stealth.



Then it's IWB was more complex and sucked.
If a bottom bomb malfunctioned to release, the top ones will be blocked too

The YF-23's Weapons Bay Layout Was One Of Its Best Features And One Of Its Worst

Northrop's entry into the ATF tender had a big, ambiguous weapons bay that likely hurt its chances of being selected but would be prized today.

www.twz.com

Third myth is its manurablility,
" some says those v tails were so good that it almost matched yf22 in manurablity which also had tvs, that yf23 lacked".

This is bullshit, those v tails even if they had big effect, ain't gonna help in high AoA, you need canards, lerx, horizontal tails for that.
Neither it will help in fast turn rate relative to yf22.

And as before, yf23 design prohibited addition of thrust vectoring.

So a major redesign in yf23 will be needed if they go for it, and at this stage just better to start from scratch.

And if your designing a "high agility" and "high stealth" fighter without vertical control surfaces( causes more radar return compared to horizontal ones).
So a cranked arrow wing, is more desirable than a diamond or delta wing.

Most likely configuration is :- canards, cranked arrow wing, TVC.

Now with that , can't guarantee 100% that it will look like that.

Don't speak Nonsense. In any plane, airflow needs to slow down to Subsonic level before it enters Jet Engine other wise the Engine would get destroyed. There is no ramp in F-22 and neither it's needed. You could slow down airflow through curved intakes which both F-22 and YF-23 could do.

 

[randombully]

Don't speak Nonsense. In any plane, airflow needs to slow down to Subsonic level before it enters Jet Engine other wise the Engine would get destroyed. There is no ramp in F-22 and neither it's needed. You could slow down airflow through curved intakes which both F-22 and YF-23 could do.

Just checked,You are right about the lack of ramp, looks like they abandoned the idea on 22, and opted for fixed geometry to shock the air into subsonic speeds.