Can we have a 6th gen concept thread?

1st gen: Prop planes
2nd gen: Jet fighters without the ability to mount guided air-to-air weapons
3rd gen: Jet fighters with the ability to mount guided air-to-air weapons
4th gen: Jet fighters with fly-by-wire and more advanced avionics
5th gen: Stealth

Basically something like that

...

>pointy nose
>6th gen
Just... No

>Canadair Sabre Mk6 can mount AIM-9B's
>this somehow makes it a 3rd gen fighter

That's random.

Eurofighter

You expect aerodynamics to stop being relevant for 6th gen designs?
>inb4 F-117

6th gen means unmanned.
That's why Lockheed was bragging about building the "last manned fighter".

no

Spoiler alert. America will be the first to complete, it will be the best, and it will be produced in larger numbers than any other 6th gen plane. If this statement makes you upset, you are willfully ignorant past history.

The Eurofighter definitely takes RCS into account in its design.

He cute

Attached: 1543700841695.jpg (1046x543, 46K)

The Eurofighter despite not being stealth has low-observability

The usual "generation" series starts with the first jet fighters

Manned command fighter + large unmanned system
Screenshot this

So does it use thrust vectoring to turn?

It has a new Euro-7 "French Arrogance" thrust vectoring engine
Basically the plane itself stays still, and the entire universe revolves around it until it reaches the desired destination

What’s sixth gen supposed to do?

Who knows
The best are on:
>complete sensor fusion with satellites, unmanned companions, ground forces and so on
>direct energy weapons
>eso-atmospheric capabilities (not sure what the tactical advantage would be but it gets memed a lot)
>neomaterials

Hmm, sounds familiar

Attached: fc361e18362139.562c838b94917.jpg (600x338, 126K)

Are we back in business?

Attached: BoeingnewF-X.jpg (490x366, 24K)

>5th gen: Stealth

That's really a stupid and arbitrary distinction.

Who gets to decide what the features of a 5th gen aircraft are?

Let me guess, is it Lockheed Martin?

>That's really a stupid and arbitrary distinction.
There's a bunch of different jet fighter generation classes, but most of them have stealth as a major facet of Generation 5.
>Let me guess, is it Lockheed Martin?
Why not? They're the ones pushing fighter design forward...

Attached: NG6thgen.jpg (600x826, 54K)

What's are the main differences between, let's say, an Eurofighter and an F-35, disregarding the obvious stealth features of the latter?
Serious question

I love how fucking tiny the engines are in those silly CG bullshit

The Eurofighter is the aerodynamic better aircraft.

Attached: S-70 Ojotnik and Su-57.jpg (2520x837, 1.27M)

Its 1 part of 5th gen, people forget the rest.
4th gen was the birth of fly by wire
5th gen is stealth, fully fly by wire, glass cockpit with fully MFDs and better data linking systems on front line craft as opposed to serving all data through awacs and back

Too bad that the F-22 can't properly communicate with other aircraft for sensor fusion.

Too bad the F-35 can't supercruise which was a key point for 5th gen aircraft propagated by Lockheed. But zoomers like you can't remember it.

Different design paradigms.
The Heavy sweep on the Typhoon's wings gives it great performance at high mach - but the main wing area being so far rear means that the centre of lift is reward, and therefore most weapons must be too.
This is why deltas tent to have limited payloads for their size.
The Cannards are an attempt to bring the lift area forwards so more ordinance can be used - but this means the aircraft is unstable, in heavy turns it will seek to deepen the turn resulting it good snap turns but high drag - this has to be countered by strong engines

The F-35 is a normal layout which is naturally stable, with less drag in sustained turns - but the Typhoon even with drag just compensates for drag with more throttle

>Too bad the F-35 can't supercruise which was a key point for 5th gen aircraft propagated by Lockheed
It can supercruise for 150 miles. Until other countries start to actually innovate (I won't hold my breath) Lockheed can say 5th generation is whatever they want.

Attached: lmNGAD.jpg (700x310, 109K)

>The Heavy sweep on the Typhoon's wings gives it great performance at high mach - but the main wing area being so far rear means that the centre of lift is reward, and therefore most weapons must be too.
>This is why deltas tent to have limited payloads for their size.
So basically you want delta wings for planes that need to go very fast, and not necessarily carry a big payload?
I guess it makes sense since the Eurofighter was born as an interceptor

With the advent of active defenses like laser pods, I'm wondering why we can't start looking at getting a big stealthy arsenal plane. I know they were looking at doing something like that with the B1 at one point. When you're heavily defended you wouldn't necessarily have to worry about being small and maneuverable.

Why would you want to make something so big when you can have 10-20 small expendable stealth drones slaved to a command fighter?

the B-1 variant you refer to is probably the B-1R, which was supposed to be an AA missile truck with a V-tail

Range

Range is a bit of a meme when you can launch drones from transport planes or ships
If you need to hit anything that far you may as well launch an ICBM

It can't exceed Mach 1 without the use of afterburner - no supercruise.

The fact that the aircraft can fly 150miles before reachning less than mach 1 numbers is not supercruise.

And good that you even say how bullshit your 5th gen characteristics are.

Attached: 1538893340828.jpg (1131x1622, 161K)

The Eurofigher has compared to other aircraft of its size class like the F/A-18 very good payload capabilities.

The French which was always designed for ground missions even more.

>Let's use bigger planes to launch smaller planes out of
You are retarded. Stop.

>It can't exceed Mach 1 without the use of afterburner - no supercruise.
Your uninformed opinions mean nothing, ineducable imbecile.

Attached: 6gen.jpg (649x487, 24K)

>IS 6TH GYEN PLANE
>AMERIKA XAXAXAXA SO FAR BEHIND
>NYET 12 GOOD ENOUGH NO MORE ASK

We are talking 6th gen. Why do you think the RC-200 has foldable wings?

Attached: 1551419756462.jpg (1920x614, 125K)

>Until other countries start to actually innovate (I won't hold my breath)
That arrogance and ignorance...

>I don't know what supercruise it

okay

best cameo

They were saying that about the f35 to and look at the joke its turned into, America is just another paper tiger these days same as any other "super power"

Are you trolling or legit retarded?

>Supercruise is the ability of a aircraft to go supersonic without the use of afterburners.
defenceaviation.com/2011/09/supercruise.html

Because small and expendable drones will still cost money when they're shot down. Also they won't have the same payload versatility of a larger missile/bomb truck.

Well expendable in the sense that they can be threw away, not suicide drones. I think it would help not putting all your eggs in just one basket

There will be remote carriers which also return.

The ones with the radar and other sensor suites will return. The affectors are the one without return capabilities.

Interesting post... Tempest has it's wings very far back and also an aggressive wing sweep, yet looking at it's nose, canopy etc (all of which are highly reminiscent of the F-35) it doesn't seem to be made for particularly high speeds. Why do you think that is?

Attached: image_257702.jpg (2397x1778, 303K)

Active cancellation and EWAR is almost the majority of stealth factor in F22, F35 and Su57, airplanes like rafale and typhoon rely on it almost exclusively and their only shaping is hiding the engine blades or making screws flush with the skin. Today we have computers and sensors that make 1980 and 1990 equipment used in these airplanes look like flint arrowheads. Modern EWAR used by the great powers is a minor artificial intelligence that adapts constantly to local environment and counter EWAR.

By 2050 when sixth gen hits the market it wont be necessary to mess with internal bays, screws or shaping as the computer can take that into account, only engine blades will have to be hidden since theyre moving and the program cant account for it, also moving parts (ailerons) made of radar transparent composites.
Basically 6th gen will look like rafale had a baby with a mig31 more or less.

The only sixth gen concepts which might look different are the forward drone controllers. Those need more space for a four or five man crew, even then attention will be strained since FDC need to control dozens of drone craft in higly jammy conditions PLUS direct communications from ground forces.
Only one guy needs to be flying the airplane, rest can be without windows and other bells and whistles. These might look like rafale had a baby with a su34.

>The only sixth gen concepts which might look different are the forward drone controllers. Those need more space for a four or five man crew, even then attention will be strained since FDC need to control dozens of drone craft in higly jammy conditions PLUS direct communications from ground forces.
Interesting idea. Why not control drones from a satellite relying commands from a ground based installation?

So you're saying that there will be 2 types of 6th gen planes?

A jack of all trades multirole aircraft
>like rafale had a baby with a mig31 more or less

And a plane which only controls drones
>like rafale had a baby with a su34

Doubtful, with extremely maneuverable missiles and directed energy weapons, maneuverability of the platform will be less and less important. Shaping will emphasize efficient speed and efficient range, as well as stealth. Active + passive stealth means the active EWAR systems don't have to work as hard, or can be more effective for the same output, so passive stealth shaping will still need to be considered.
They're more likely to look like faster hybrids of the B-2, B-21, every stealthy UCAV demonstrator so far, etc.

Adaptive camo

If you think the F35 is a joke there's nothing saving you/

600+ have already been delivered and they FAR outmatch the capabilities of 4th gens

Source?

Do you have any idea how far an SR71 can go from mach 3 with fully shut down engines? Or MiG31, F4 and F15 for that matter.

Supercruise is breaking mach without afterburners in level flight.

Because a missile is worth a lot of money and someone who loses an arsenal plane even to an accident is out enough money to buy a new air force. As a rule of thumb a modern fighter bomber airplane has to release all stores 3 times to pay for itself. Of course 5th gen have limited stores and cost more so that rule of thumb is out the window....

Who commands the slaves? We dont have AI good enough for it and even if we did there has to be man in the loop, which means 10-20 sweaty dude in portable housing clicking furiously on their shitty debian platforms.

Generally the longer a wireless connection is the easier it is to jam. Line of sight within 100km is almost unjammable, but this jet will need a dedicated turboshaft to provide the power.

There are many philosophies about what 6th gen should look like, the dust hasnt settled yet. Off the top of my head:
1. Extreme performance interceptor up to mach 7 that can wipe the floor with awacs, air superiority jets, and bombers while also delivering long ass range glide bombs and anti ship missiles. Basically a well armed SR71 on steroids.
2. A fat drone management boat with two engines to push it and a third turboshaft to power its sensors and coms. Doubles as signals intel and electronic warfare boat, the huge power generation can also be used for directed energy wepons.

The weakness of the first is that its not true air superiority, it cant go transonic or subsonic and circle around a suspicious signal to identify it. The weakness of the second is that it doesnt carry drones only control them, and its such a high value target that its going to be a bitch to defend.

Notice how theres no talk of 'air superiority' jets btw? Not a single 6th gen concept is a dogfighter...

>We dont have AI good enough for it
Airbus recently tested drones that can fly team up and fly in formation, replace losses, follow a manned fighter and so on. All autonomously
youtu.be/ZnjQG8aInB8
I think by 2035-2040 AIs will be advanced enough for fighter work, especially if you have a human element nearby calling the shots

(contd)
Air superiority is going to be handled wholly by drones like the barracuda. A FDC with one pilot and four drone operators aboard could defend itself from missiles with DEW/DIRCM and provide signalls intelligence while the four drone operators control a flight of four barracuda-like fighter drones that do all the close range shit. They can also control swarms of fuel tankers or missile trucks that orbit until needed.

BVR and WVR is completely out the window for 6th gen, because they have enhanced vision and deployable eyes. I think the destruction of BVR and WVR concept is what is going to define 6th generation more than anything else.

> replace losses
Look into what this means, a drone cant make a decision about where to deploy itself for best effect, is unable to identify what its looking at because it has no value system, and should never be given the decision to open fire itself because of so many frequent failure rates, and cant adapt to a changed situation. Thats what I meant about AI, being told to orbit a location or follow the leader is not AI, its just better programming and youre going to still need a guy who can use them when they need to be used.

> 2035-2040
More like 2135, modern AI is absolutely garbage or so huge in terms of hardware that its unusable for what we are talking about.

America is the only non paper tiger. Your using a coping mechanism

So what do you think NGF and Tempest will be?

Just by looking at the shape (and size) of their airframes, they clearly don't espouse the same concept at all.

>with fully shut down engines
If you're referring to the turbine parts, it still provided about 20% of thrust and power for accessories and hydraulics

No I was just pointing out that F35 has to go afterburner, go to max speed, and then shut down afterburner and just go full power dry thrust. Its speed then gradually falls until about 150 miles later it goes subsonic. This is not a supercruise its a joke.

Both are drone controllers but theyre sort of putting their toes in the water, dont want to take the plunge. The design is going to suffer because of that for both concepts, nothing can change it now, the bureocrats are in charge.

How would you then design a perfect, an ideal drone controller without bureaucrats or the like?

And also isn't a mach 7 interceptor impossible with today's materials? With the friction heat and everything?

>600+ have already been delivered

Are you from 2028?

I read the demonstrator for FCAS is supposed to use upgraded M88 engine.

I hope that isn't an indicator for the final size for the next-gen engine. Because the Rafale engines are small as fuck.

5.5th++ gen

>I hope that isn't an indicator for the final size for the next-gen engine.
forum.keypublishing.com/forum/modern-military-aviation/149074-franco-german-next-generation-fighter?p=3866318#post3866318

forum.keypublishing.com/forum/modern-military-aviation/149074-franco-german-next-generation-fighter?p=3860583#post3860583

safran-group.com/fr/media/un-moteur-futuriste-pour-le-scaf-20190418

TL;DR the reason why the demonstrator will use upgraded M88s is because those are being developed for the Rafale F4 which shall be ready 2024. The actual, new engine for FCAS shall be ready as a demonstrator in 2027.

Well, but the M88 is tiny.

>3.5m long
>0,9m diameter
>0.7m fan diameter

so it can fit in a weapons bay?

Hypersonic speed are limits because of jet engines not being able to operate at those speeds, they would need to be propelled by scramjets. Scramjet tech stalled after 1989 because USSR stopped, theyve only recently started researching them which led to new missiles in service now.

420 have been produced so far. 600 by 2021.

Attached: B8934DE7-A725-42C0-A0E2-0E7808C45C83.jpg (730x603, 104K)

Thats 2 years from now dude....

>produced
>delievered
>2021

So what? Rafale first flew with an American engine because the M88 wasn't ready back then. Means nothing. Unlike the Rafale which is small, the NGF will be pretty huge about as big as the Mirage 4000 (which employed two M53's, check the measurements on those). There's just no way the engines will be small.

Attached: Moteur_M53-P2.jpg (2592x1944, 1.94M)

>Jow Forums aeronautics experts
massive cringe

Well, the F404's general characteristics are actually pretty close to the M88.

So French or German cannon for the FCAS?

yes

Not really, the F404 is 40cm longer, has 11cm more inlet diameter than the M88 and weighs 130kg more. Which means that the Rafale's final engine was significantly smaller and lighter than the engine it used for it's first flight.

Following the logic above of Rafale using a smaller and lighter engine as it's first flying demonstrator, since the NGF demonstrator will use upgraded M88, it's final engine should be smaller and lighter than the M88 despite NGF being as big as a Mirage 4000.

Does this sound likely to you? Really?

wait a minute, that's just the cougar with bits cribbed from the 35 and 32!

No, so it can be launched from an A400M, unfold in free fall and then fly independently

I bet it's going to be German just like in the Eurofighter

They're both top tier cannons but I'd go with the BK27, due to the extremely high muzzle velocity (highest of all autocannons IIRC), availability of PELE ammo and linkless feed system.

DEW would be really tough to fit on a fighter platform.

What if you took an F-35B and used the extra engine as a power generator?