Potential 'Clean Sheet' fighter to replace the F-16

[bfng3569]

4.5 gen or something along those lines..... less complicated than F-35......

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39316/air-force-boss-wants-clean-sheet-fighter-thats-less-advanced-than-f-35-to-replace-f-16

[JasonJ]

4.5++++++++++7+77+++++

 

In other words, 4.7 gen.

[Angrybk]

Lol that was supposed to be the F-35. What could go wrong?

[Dawes]

Heck, just apply the "F-21" designation to a new F-16V and people will think it's an all new whiz-bang aircraft

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/f-21.html

[Simon Tan]

Even a F-16XL type aircraft would be better than the bulged out F-16. Better basic aero.

[Yama]

Yes "F-21" is an abomination. It's time to take put the old girl out of its misery.

Solution: Boeing F-39 Griffon

[TonyE]

1 hour ago, Yama said:

Yes "F-21" is an abomination. It's time to take put the old girl out of its misery.

Solution: Boeing F-39 Griffon

 

🥰🤞

[RETAC21]

Cheap and outsourced, not like the expensive swedish things:

[Rickard N]

Excuse my ignorance, but what bird is that?

/R

[bojan]

HAL Tejas, Indian flying dumpsterfire.

[Josh]

F-35 fly away costs are competitive with 4.5 gen fighters. The operating costs are not. That said, I can't imagine developing a new aircraft and logistical stream would be a cost saving endeavor. If they want more 4.5 gen aircraft, buy more F-15 which leverages existing training, parts, and infrastructure.

[Simon Tan]

Indian dumpsterfire is pointlessly repetitive. All Indian defense projects are dumpster fires by definition. 

[Yama]

Tejas is so 2018. India's newest hotness is the TEDBF (Twin-Engine Deck Based Fighter):

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EtNK90lWgAEv_nk?format=jpg&name=large

Edited February 19, 2021 by Yama

[bfng3569]

4 hours ago, Josh said:

F-35 fly away costs are competitive with 4.5 gen fighters. The operating costs are not. That said, I can't imagine developing a new aircraft and logistical stream would be a cost saving endeavor. If they want more 4.5 gen aircraft, buy more F-15 which leverages existing training, parts, and infrastructure.

They already are.

 

[Josh]

They are buying ~140 to replace Charlie’s at AD; I’m suggesting if they feel the need for a lower cost per hour aircraft for A2G they simply buy more.

[BansheeOne]

F-15 is not exactly an F-16 replacement though. And if you want a lighter clean-sheet Gen 4.5 design, the Eurocanards indeed pretty much have that market cornered.

[Kenneth P. Katz]

On 2/18/2021 at 6:56 PM, Angrybk said:

Lol that was supposed to be the F-35. What could go wrong?

Yes

[Burncycle360]

It's not going to work out the way they think it's going to work out.  They are not capable of programs that don't bloat horribly in time and cost, they couldn't even do it with the light attack program.

If they were serious about it,  IMO the simplest solution if you want a performance driven, less expensive F-35 is a "flatter" F-35 with less internal fuel (equivalent to an F-16 with CFT + about 10% to account for increase SFC for a savings of ~9,000 lbs over F-35A),  resulting in reduced base drag, 2D thrust vectoring, conventional cockpit and older HMS, no DASS, and conventional skin.   It won't have the low RCS of the F-35, but will be cheaper to maintain and should still run circles around an F-16 with TVC, cleaner exterior and nearly 10,000 lbs more thrust dry, would expect advantages in both turn rate and radius.






Overall arrangement wouldn't be far off from the General Dynamics ADF/LWF proposal of yesteryear (Top Left):




 

Edited February 20, 2021 by Burncycle360

[Yama]

Well, USAF has claimed that with their new design and procurement process they can produce completely new fighter type every 5 years. 'Digital Century Series', it is called. Supposedly T-7 is a forerunner of that. It was flown within 3 years of announcement of the project.

So if the companies have some back-of-the-napkin plans ready and the requirements don't include anything 'revolutionary' or 'transformative', I suppose it could be done. Would it be a GOOD idea? I dunno...

[Simon Tan]

Yes it would be a good idea since being super stealthy is pointless when conducting airstrikes against insurgents in Texas.

[Stuart Galbraith]

On 2/18/2021 at 11:56 PM, Angrybk said:

Lol that was supposed to be the F-35. What could go wrong?

Because they tried it to get it to do 3 different things instead of 1 or 2, which was difficult enough. Anyone that read the F111/F14 story knew that whatever F35 would be, someone was going to end up unhappy with it. Probably more than one customer.

I question whether a manned lightweight fighter is even necessary anymore.  Keep pumping out F16's and modify them to drone operation. Nobody is going to go dogfighting anymore unless they ran out of everything but the gun, or they are in the movies.

[Yama]

This is what Brown said, from transcript:

" Then there’s other, for
lower end -- there’s a high end fight, there’s also a mix for a
low end fight. I don’t know actually it would be F-16s.
Actually I want to be able to build something new and different
that’s not the F-16 that has some of those capabilities but gets
there faster using a digital approach, whatever comes next. I
realize that folks are going allude that it will be a particular
airplane but I’m open to looking at other platforms to see what
that right force mix is.

That TacAir mix has to do some analysis to show what is the right
mix not only in capability but also in numbers to assure we are
going to be successful in future conflicts. That requires some
modeling and simulation and analysis and that’s what I plan to do
here over the next, over the upcoming months to get there.
"

So it's not necessarily just some new type of airplane, but more comprehensive solution which presumably could perform basic air superiority and strike cheaper than F-22/F-35/NGAD. It could include UCAVs of some sort, we'll see. Also, there's the aspect that USA wants some kind of fighter aircraft it can export to places where stealth aircraft are either too expensive or not politically kosher. Atm legacy Teen aircraft have that well cornered, but in 10 years that will change.

F-16 doesn't cut it anymore. It has very limited internal space for avionics, aerodynamics can't handle more weight, structurally the plane is outdated, avionics architecture is archaic. You'd have to redesign the plane a'la Japan's F-2, and for that trouble you could just as well make a whole new aircraft.

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by Yama

[Nobu]

The brass has figured out the formula for how to get new toys after Christmas. They are needed to save wear and tear on the expensive ones they just got, and that their parents are still paying for.

[Josh]

I think actually he is referring to NGAD.  NGAD is not necessarily a single fighter program, or even a manned fighter at all, for all we know. 

[Yama]

He's not, I left out the preceding paragraph which mentioned NGAD as part of the 'high end'. But yes, NGAD is also referred (or at least Navy does) as 'system of systems' rather than single aircraft type.