In a major milestone for the US Air Force’s ‘next generation air dominance’ fighter program, Dr Will Roper, the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, has revealed that the plane has already been built and flown.
With the growing success of Russian and Chinese fifth-generation fighter aircraft like the Su-57, J-20 and JF-31, the US has kicked off a suite of development programs to replace the ageing F-15 Eagle and fifth-generation F-22 Raptor air frames beginning in the 2030s.
While the US has plans to maintain fifth-generation combat aircraft like the F-22 and the F-35 and has recently announced the acquisition of an advanced F-15X variant, which will serve as the backbone of the US continental air national guard wings, the rapid evolution of potential adversaries’ fifth-generation air combat capabilities has forced a major step-change in the way the US responds to these evolving capabilities.
The 2016 ‘Air Superiority 2030’ study conducted by the US Air Force sought to identify the capabilities of the ‘Next Generation Tactical Aircraft’ air superiority/dominance fighter jet expected to enter service in the 2030s.
As part of this identification process, the US Air Force identified a suite of capabilities needed to survive in the increasingly complex future air combat environment.
“The future system will have to counter adversaries equipped with next-generation advanced electronic attack, sophisticated integrated air defence systems (IADS), passive detection, integrated self-protection, directed energy weapons, and cyber attack capabilities. It must be able to operate in the anti-access/area-denial (A2AD) environment that will exist in the 2030-2050 time frame,” the US Air Force solicitation stated.
The US Navy has also recognised a number of major capability gaps in both the F-35C and the F/A-18E/F and G series Super Hornet and Growler strike aircraft, namely the lack of low observable coatings, limiting survivability in complex integrated air defence environments and comparatively short, unrefuelled combat radius’ exposing the US Navy’s aircraft carriers to advanced Russian and Chinese anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles.
As a result of the different operating environments and requirements, the Pentagon, Air Force and Navy would be expected to avoid the joint development program model, which, while delivering the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, presented a series of challenges resulting in compromised capabilities.
Well ahead of the curve
Speaking to DefenseNews, Dr Will Roper, the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, has revealed to the surprise of many that the US Air Force has not only prototyped the aircraft, it has flown at least one aircraft as well.
This development comes years ahead of schedule and marks a major paradigm shift in the US Air Force’s research, development and acquisition process following teething problems with the fifth-generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
Dr Roper explained, “We’ve already built and flown a full-scale flight demonstrator in the real world, and we broke records in doing it. We are ready to go and build the next-generation aircraft in a way that has never happened before.”
This push to rapidly develop the successor to the highly capable, yet limited number of F-22 Raptors, also known as the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) platform, has reached a critical juncture, as the USAF is expected to deliver its final business case by the end of the year.
Shifting from the concepts established in the US Air Force’s ‘Air Superiority 2030′ plan, it is proposed that the future fighter would rapidly prototype technologies with a focus on maturing them for inclusion in an advanced aircraft to be fielded in the early 2030s.
This shift is something highlighted by Dr Roper: “Based on what industry thinks they can do and what my team will tell me, we will need to set a cadence of how fast we think we build a new airplane from scratch.
“Right now, my estimate is five years. I may be wrong, I’m hoping we can get faster than that – I think that will be insufficient in the long term [to meet future threats] – but five years is so much better than where we are now with normal acquisition.”
This focus aims to leverage the existing capacity of US industry and the cutting-edge technology developments to develop a family of networked fighter aircraft – each with varying degrees of commonality, yet designed with optimisation in various and complementary roles, ranging from an unmanned missile and bomb truck, through to a sophisticated sensor node or an airborne laser platform.
Leaving others in their wake
Achieving this will require a focus on three key areas, namely: agile software development – a process by which programmers quickly develop, test and implement code, soliciting feedback from users throughout the process; open systems architecture – enabling a great degree of plug-and-play functionality; and finally, digital engineering – including 3D modelling across the entire program to support lower costs, manufacturing and sustainment programs.
Dr Roper recently expanded on the aforementioned details, telling DefenseNews, “I hope to have the acquisition plan for NGAD rolling into the Digital Century Series this summer. I don’t want to go more specific than that and timeline and drumbeat for the team, because I have given them an unprecedented task.”
Expanding on this, he added, “How long we keep the aircraft is one of the variables that they are weighing [as part of the business case]. How many years make sense? It’s clearly not two, three, four, five, but we don’t want it to be 30 either. So, they’re looking at that.
“They’re looking at the amount of modernisation that would be expected — what we would expect that to cost and if it gets easier with digital tools. And then summing it all up to see whether the cost of having a lethal airplane per year is less than for the Digital Century Series model than for the traditional.”
Adding to this, Dr Roper explains the focus of the NGAD program, saying, “If it is, that is going to really help us, I hope, because we’ll show that data and argue that it is not just better from a ‘competing with China and lethality’ standpoint. It’s just better from a business standpoint.
“If it breaks even or is less [than traditional methods], I will be exceptionally happy. If it’s more expensive — and I hope not exceptionally more — then we’re going to have to argue on behalf of the program.”
Written by Stephen Kuper
Get in touch: [email protected]
