3 ms·

JSF programs killed competiton, there's nothing else that can compete for 20-30 years assuming current non US 4.5/5th gen programs deliver.

trashtester 4y ago
I doubt they will dominate for that long. I think we should see 6th gen within 10 years, and AI may make unmanned aircraft more cost efficient than F-35s even sooner than that. But for anytone (who is friendly with the US) that need a multi perpose fighter sooner than that, the F35 is the obvious choice today. And it may stay useful even when 6th gen arrives, just like F16's are still relevant today.
- dirtyid 4y ago
  NGAD + MUM-T likely in next 10 years, but not for export. US allies also now doing their own 6th gen program, i.e. JP-UK-IT-SE (Global Combat Air Programme), FR-DE-ES (Future Combat Air System) and 4.5 gen SKR (Bormae), but that's still 10-20 years away. So in meantime 35 only obvious choice for anything over 4.5 gen. I do agree that AI fighters the future. Simply because once you engineer without human limits, flight envelopes / performance will shift in attacker favour. Anti-air missiles work by arbituaging gap unmanned and manned limits. I can see performant UAVs being magnitude more capable in dodging anti air to the point where it becomes not feasible in terms of cost and magazine depth to try to even shoot them down, especially from naval platforms, i.e. 500 VLS cells in carrier group with 30% dedicated to AA might successfully interdict 50 manned fighters and need 200 to overwhelm, but with manned fighters that might only be effective against 5 unmanned, or 20 unmanned to overwhelm. Realistically less because ships become significantly less useful if they have disproportionately focus on anti air. Basically skip job of stealth of being difficult to detect to being nearly impossible to hit in the first place. Hence airforce betting/pouring 1000 F35s worth of $$$ on B21s that's difficult to detect and fly in altitudes that's difficult to hit, straight from CONUS.
  - trashtester 4y ago
    I think most of what you write are possible futures. Though I'm not sure they're the only possible futures. As aircraft (and particularily unmanned ones) improve, air defense systems will be likely to change to meet the new challenges. I find it really difficult to conclude what the balance will be in that arms race (apart from the prediction that humans are not likely to be needed in every plante anymore). For instance, it may be that lasers mounted in ships (or even large planes) may become really good at countering many of the threats that appear. Then again, that could lead to mirror coating as a counter, but that may reduce stealth, and so on. Furthermore, the distinction between missile and aircraft can go away. We may get hybrids that have the range of aircraft, but the power an manouverability of missiles, but with very short range guns replacing the warhead, making them reusable. Launch platforms may also change. The B21 may very well be just as important for anti-air duty as the F-35, if the right kind of missiles/air launched drones are available. The F-35 on the other hand, can act as drone control platforms, privding more advanced sensors and compute than each drone would have. Over oceans, maybe surface ships become obsolete, but in addition to options such as lasers, rail guns and more advanced missiles, one needs to keep in mind that they can be hard to detect (if satellites are knocked out). Subs are likely to stay relevant, though, even though they too may become unmanned relatively soon.
    - dirtyid 4y ago
      Many possible futures, but IMO for short/medium term projections one can narrow down if extrapolating from can be feasibly procured in time frame and limits of said hardware. Personally have extreme doubts on direct energy weapons for anything other than homeland defense where power/magazine is not issue. Like I don't see existing fleets being overhulled for enough power generation for sustained DE use. Maybe in new DDGX but that's 10+ years of developmeent and another 20+ years to be aquired in numbers. Only realistic answer to saturation missile strikes is advanced interceptors because you can counter salvo, which is more or less what expert panels on hypersonics from last few years have said. IMO fighter design is roughly going to be larger airframes for IndoPac theatre where you need long range, and extending that range will be even longer range stand off missiles vs bullets. Hi-lo mix of with sacrificial loyal wingman. B21 very likely can be used for mesh sensor + anti air. Space infra is heading starlink, both PRC and US have 10,000s constellations planned, I think surface ships doomed. Autonomous subs probably big. Biggest development for me will be volume aquisition of long range bombers like B21/H20 and prompt global strike / long range precision strikes. Drop ordnance accurately in volume or with speed, using platforms completely hosted from homelands = skipping all the layers inbetween and going strait for strategic targets on adversaries home front (i.e. all major energy infra). AKA conventional MAD. Everything else is incidental if conventional war has escalation rung equivalent to being nuked.

trashtester 4y ago

I doubt they will dominate for that long. I think we should see 6th gen within 10 years, and AI may make unmanned aircraft more cost efficient than F-35s even sooner than that. But for anytone (who is friendly with the US) that need a multi perpose fighter sooner than that, the F35 is the obvious choice today. And it may stay useful even when 6th gen arrives, just like F16's are still relevant today.

dirtyid 4y ago
NGAD + MUM-T likely in next 10 years, but not for export. US allies also now doing their own 6th gen program, i.e. JP-UK-IT-SE (Global Combat Air Programme), FR-DE-ES (Future Combat Air System) and 4.5 gen SKR (Bormae), but that's still 10-20 years away. So in meantime 35 only obvious choice for anything over 4.5 gen. I do agree that AI fighters the future. Simply because once you engineer without human limits, flight envelopes / performance will shift in attacker favour. Anti-air missiles work by arbituaging gap unmanned and manned limits. I can see performant UAVs being magnitude more capable in dodging anti air to the point where it becomes not feasible in terms of cost and magazine depth to try to even shoot them down, especially from naval platforms, i.e. 500 VLS cells in carrier group with 30% dedicated to AA might successfully interdict 50 manned fighters and need 200 to overwhelm, but with manned fighters that might only be effective against 5 unmanned, or 20 unmanned to overwhelm. Realistically less because ships become significantly less useful if they have disproportionately focus on anti air. Basically skip job of stealth of being difficult to detect to being nearly impossible to hit in the first place. Hence airforce betting/pouring 1000 F35s worth of $$$ on B21s that's difficult to detect and fly in altitudes that's difficult to hit, straight from CONUS.
- trashtester 4y ago
  I think most of what you write are possible futures. Though I'm not sure they're the only possible futures. As aircraft (and particularily unmanned ones) improve, air defense systems will be likely to change to meet the new challenges. I find it really difficult to conclude what the balance will be in that arms race (apart from the prediction that humans are not likely to be needed in every plante anymore). For instance, it may be that lasers mounted in ships (or even large planes) may become really good at countering many of the threats that appear. Then again, that could lead to mirror coating as a counter, but that may reduce stealth, and so on. Furthermore, the distinction between missile and aircraft can go away. We may get hybrids that have the range of aircraft, but the power an manouverability of missiles, but with very short range guns replacing the warhead, making them reusable. Launch platforms may also change. The B21 may very well be just as important for anti-air duty as the F-35, if the right kind of missiles/air launched drones are available. The F-35 on the other hand, can act as drone control platforms, privding more advanced sensors and compute than each drone would have. Over oceans, maybe surface ships become obsolete, but in addition to options such as lasers, rail guns and more advanced missiles, one needs to keep in mind that they can be hard to detect (if satellites are knocked out). Subs are likely to stay relevant, though, even though they too may become unmanned relatively soon.
  - dirtyid 4y ago
    Many possible futures, but IMO for short/medium term projections one can narrow down if extrapolating from can be feasibly procured in time frame and limits of said hardware. Personally have extreme doubts on direct energy weapons for anything other than homeland defense where power/magazine is not issue. Like I don't see existing fleets being overhulled for enough power generation for sustained DE use. Maybe in new DDGX but that's 10+ years of developmeent and another 20+ years to be aquired in numbers. Only realistic answer to saturation missile strikes is advanced interceptors because you can counter salvo, which is more or less what expert panels on hypersonics from last few years have said. IMO fighter design is roughly going to be larger airframes for IndoPac theatre where you need long range, and extending that range will be even longer range stand off missiles vs bullets. Hi-lo mix of with sacrificial loyal wingman. B21 very likely can be used for mesh sensor + anti air. Space infra is heading starlink, both PRC and US have 10,000s constellations planned, I think surface ships doomed. Autonomous subs probably big. Biggest development for me will be volume aquisition of long range bombers like B21/H20 and prompt global strike / long range precision strikes. Drop ordnance accurately in volume or with speed, using platforms completely hosted from homelands = skipping all the layers inbetween and going strait for strategic targets on adversaries home front (i.e. all major energy infra). AKA conventional MAD. Everything else is incidental if conventional war has escalation rung equivalent to being nuked.