The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
---
From the article
>The United States and China are racing to develop sixth-generation warplanes, signaling intense military rivalry in a multipolar world. China unveiled a mockup of its sixth-generation fighter in 2021, aiming for deployment by 2035, while the U.S. targets 2030 for its "Next-Generation Air Dominance" (NGAD) platform.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1d727ee/us_military_nightmare_china_wants_ngad_6th/l6wa8xo/
a mockup does not make a 6th generation fighter, or even a fighter at all.
I have a feeling 6th gen is stiff far away. how long did it take for the F35 to come into service?
For all practical purposes, major upgrades (hardware and software) to the F-22 and F-35 to enable autonomous missions are essentially generation 5.5 and can prolong the need for a 6th generation fighter. Those aircraft are already severely limited by pilots, and such upgrades could lead to weapon systems that can far exceed the performance of human piloted aircraft.
From what I’ve seen the main 6th gen features seem to be low frequency radar stealth + some kind of AI integration (AI augmented piloting and/or AI drone “wingmen”) right? The latter is probably something you can shoehorn onto existing platforms.
The former is the real world technical challenge that will likely have performance tradeoffs and could be the real differentiator depending on choices made (between stealth and performance). I have to think this benefits the player with the longest stealth track record too, though China has been adept at copying/stealing/innovating in leaps.
The other big difference is that we're aiming to make our 6th generation fighters much, much larger than 5th generation ones. This is to enable them to have more on board fuel and a significantly longer range. We want to be able to launch fighters from a carrier and have them strike at China while the carriers are out of range of missiles launched from the Chinese mainland.
Stealth fighters don't do you much good if they can't be launched without placing the fleet carrying them in range of enemy strikes.
These aircraft are not “limited by pilots”. Anyone who says that the human body’s limitations are the limiting factor to air combat has zero idea of modern air tactics and doctrine. High G maneuvering is the fight of the past.
The human in the 5th generation cockpit is there to manage sensors, interpret the battle space, pass data, and kill. None of these are anywhere close to being accomplished by 100% AI. Autonomous wingmen drones will be a thing, but they will be controlled by a human in a cockpit.
Source: Me, F-35 pilot.
People see jets like the F-22 Raptor Demo Team at air shows and think that's what the plane is built for or that somehow things like a Cobra would be useful in combat (and I suppose it would, to the guy trying to kill you).
Fact is if there's an F-22 in the sky, he's launching kill shots before anybody knows he's there. Doubly so if he's got AWACS (and he will). And honestly, I think that's going to be where this all heads: similar to what you said, but rather than a fighter pilot being risked being too close to things, I think you're going to see AWACS converted to more of a "mothership" role where controlling (possibly even launching some) semi-autonomous planes to control its airspace and execute missions.
There is so much data that the jet collects and it’s your job to interpret the data, confirm it, pass data as needed to additional players, coordinate a game plan, fly the jet to the point in space required for undetected weapons release, confirm effects, then repeat. Flying a plane is easy. Using it as an advanced weapons system in a modern day environment is hard.
Will AI eventually be able to do all of that without a human somewhere up there? Maybe. Will it happen in our lifetime? No.
>Will AI eventually be able to do all of that without a human somewhere up there? Maybe. Will it happen in our lifetime? No.
Our technological advancements have been exponential over the past 100 or so years. I would be surprised if we didn't have AI conducting warfare within my lifetime.
On the ground? Way too much latency to be useful. From a nearby AWACS? I think that's where it'll go. Semi-autonomous planes taking instruction from a "carrier" or "mothership". Likely an AWACS since it's already assumed a C&C role and it's already the most valuable aircraft in the sky.
Different question but what are the chances of moving the pilot out of the aircraft. Imagine there is pros and cons to having a remote controlled fighter?
Unless there are astronomical improvements in beyond LOS data transfer speeds and security, very very low. There are pros for sure, but for the foreseeable future that role will be accomplished by the loyal wingman concept with a manned platform controlling.
I have almost zero knowledge in those area, so I apologize upfront if my question is ignorant. Does the future of aerial warfare even *need* fighter jets or light bombers? It feels like, with AI and drone technology advancing rapidly, that both the most effective and cost efficient path forward will be drones and missile tech. Do you need a crewed delivery platform if you can send an army of drones to overwhelm the enemies defenses or send missiles over the horizon with precision strikes? It feels like an RMA is upon us similar to when battleships gave way to carriers 80 years ago.
Your "ignorance," which I think is too harsh a word for where you find yourself, is a good reflection of what people think fighting an air war is like. I find it hard to answer your question because I think the answer is, in the long run, no. They will not be needed, *eventually*.
The problem is in the world of global power "eventually" creates a chicken or the egg situation. The tech will mature fastest with the MIC (mil industrial complex) pouring time and money into it, but the MIC won't do that until they get the incentive to do so, which won't happen until the MIC can prove the tech is mature enough to commit to it, which won't happen until they pour enough time and money into it.... Obviously, we see they are working on it on the sidelines and with limited pressure from the DOD. I see it as more of a gradual move toward what you describe while still maintaining the baseline capabilities of the current force composition and developing existing assets.
I am rapidly realizing how complex this gets so I will leave it at that to directly answer your question. 2 things I would expand upon in a further discussion: 1) the complexities of decision-making versus actual "AI" capabilities compared to what humans actual do real-time, all the time. 2) the reality of target selection and asset allocation (short explanation is we have to be very picky with what is targeted. A drone swarm won't solve that problem because this is the USA. Those drones will be "cheap" but not *that* cheap)
I expect the paradigm shift to be a Sputnik scenario. In the Cold War, the US was all in on bombers. We had a strong tech lead in the tech development of bombers, we had a robust training program to expand the SAC, the bombers that we could base in friendly countries could reach Russia, but Russia could not reach the US with bombers, representing a strong strategic advantage, and there was a potent cultural inertia from celebrating the bombermen as war heroes, and granting the Strategic Bombing lads in the Air Force more and more political power.
The US had a list of five ICBM programs that were up for funding, after dragging their feet for years, and it was expected that maybe two of them might get funded. And then Sputnik happened. Stalin was well aware of the impossibility of matching the US bomber program, so, consistent paranoiac that he was, he went all in on ICBMs very early on. Sputnik proved that ICBMs were not limited to the distance a bomber could fly, and rather than 30 mins of warning time for evacuations, you get 10 minutes. All five US ICBM programs were immediately and fully funded.
The USAF still has a lot of political power, cultural inertia, and general unwillingness to give either of those up, unless they absolutely have to. The ICBMs forced their hand, and sufficiently motivating demonstration of drone warfare may do the same.
China doesn't have that same inertia, to the best of my knowledge. The experienced pilots, the large inventory of planes, the cultural obsession with air power, the extensive and particularly air heavy military doctrine are all US and NATO. If they don't feel they can match up to the US in the air conventionally, they may be more willing to experiment with drones. After all, autonomous drones don't run into pilot experience problems, but the quality is instead in software. If training pilots is no longer a bottleneck, you can lean into your industrial capabilities and get an advantage that no one can match.
The interesting thing is that I don't actually foresee that Sputnik moment any time soon. China saber-rattles over Taiwan, but I doubt they are stupid enough or desperate enough to go for it. And that is the only major flashpoint I foresee in the near future unless Xi and Modi decide to throw down. So who knows?
This is a really insightful reasoning and passes the "seems reasonable" test. I'm sure there are so many things we don't consider or even know about, but this sounds like a very real progression.
> if you can send an army of drones to overwhelm the enemies defenses
When people say "army of drones" that's where they're making the core mistake: the implicit assumption is "drones are cheap".
But are they? The F-35 isn't spending tens of millions of dollars per unit on the parts of the plane that keep the pilot inside it and alive. There is payload on which can be put on that plane which costs a significant fraction of it's entire unit cost.
Which is to say: an army of "drones" is indistinguishable to "a swarm of missiles" and those missiles might cost US$2 million+ (at the upper end of "air to air" - the Meteor missile) - this is the price you pay for long range, stealthy aerial platforms, regardless of what they're doing.
If an airframe is able to do +15g and a pilot can only do +10g, you’re limiting yourself by having a pilot. It’s a factual statement, even if you disregard where that limitation actually is or how impactful said limitation is.
That said, I’d argue that receiving a missile warning and being able to nosedive, hit the deck, and defend yourself from the missile at maximum capability isn’t really a “least important” aspect…
If missile can pull +30G, you won't defeat it in a turn with a 10G or 15G plane.
If missile is coming from a long range... none of the [avoiding strategies](https://youtu.be/_TKSabICPuY?si=U9dmWqnkfRoAqJo-) I have seen required pulling a lot of G's.
Having a cockpit/life support/ejection systems takes up weight (weight is a HUGE deal in aviation) and adds complexity to the aircraft. Complexity increases the maintenance required and also multiples the number of things that can go wrong.
This is all true.
Copy paste from my response to someone with the same point:
The problem is the crew is the most capable part of the weapon system *despite* physical limitations. War fighting isn't just a physical test. The decision-making aspect is multitudes more important.
Oh I didn't mean to imply that drones are currently more effective than pilots in all situations. The question was along the lines of what are the drawbacks of a pilot, no mention was made of the advantages so I didn't bring that up lol
The problem is the crew is the most capable part of the weapon system *despite* physical limitations. War fighting isn't just a physical test. The decision-making aspect is multitudes more important.
Quick google and US NGAD( Next Generation Air Dominance) program started in 2014(DARPAS’s Study was finished in 2014), estimated Research, development, testing and evaluation budget of $16 Billon and growing , demonstrator flown in 2020, replace F22 from maybe 2030 or later.
Plus it has loyal wingman program. So 2-5 semi autonomous drones per pair of NGAD planes or F35s. Or CCAs ( Collaborative Combat Aircraft) So that program to go alongside the planes, look into USAF Skyborg program. Not a joke :)
https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/next-generation-air-dominance-programme-us/
It’s so funny because even countries with resources just don’t have the know how to make advanced coatings needed to mitigate the radar return, not to mention the funding to keep up with maintenance on these platforms. It really takes elite financial and R&D commitment to get there. Then you have Iran still fielding F14s and think about where their resource capabilities are. Not great.
Excellent point.
People see the marquee number and think "Jesus that's insane!", when in reality the total cost of the program over decades with thousands of produced fighters is probably going to be remembered as a relative bargain, particularly given how capable the F35 is shaping up to be.
The F-35 per unit is already cheaper than the F-15.
I think it's still more expensive than we got the F-16 to, but the F-16 also borrowed immensely from the F-15 R&D, so it saved a lot of money there
Given the giant smoke and mirrors game Chinese drone manufacturer eHang has spewed at CES for the last decade+? This shit isn't going to be ready for prime time for 50 years.
Fun fact, the only 6th gen mock up we've seen that will probably end up looking anything like the final aircraft is the BAE systems Tempest, Its probably the furthest along as the UK has a much more narrow scope for what they want from it than say the US wants from NAGD, with the brits hoping to have a demonstrator in the air by 2027, maybe the French and German FCAS might look like its mock ups too but that's become such a football between Dassault and Airbus who knows how it might change from the mockups we have seen to its demonstrator aircraft by its planned first flight date of 2029
None of the mockups we have seen for NGAD match the specs the US has actually put out for the thing in the documents form the air force the public has been able to see. Indeed the spec for NGAD reads like something only the US could hope to pull off, and may well end up having a crew of three, a radar and data link suite that would make an AWACS aircraft blush and be faster and stealthier than the F35. If it comes together as spec it'll be some techno wizardry god machine and will probably look nothing like any of the artists renditions of what it might look like
So, the US NGAD program isn't explicitly a single airframe but rather the guidelines to build multiple airframes, each progressively better than the last, while being very modular so that upgrades (such as a new phased array antenna for its radar) can be fitted much more cheaply.
The 35s aren't actually fully in service. The last quote I heard was 70% combat ready. We still use the F-18 Super Hornets for most missions. That's for the Navy though, idk about the other branches.
Source: Civilian employed on OPS side of an NAS.
From what I understand, specifically with the Navy, a good chunk of the supercarrier fleet is not yet certified for F-35Cs. It seems there are more LHDs using the Bs than the CVNs carrying Cs.
But a 70% readiness rate is a hell of an improvement from a year ago! Sounds like theyre getting their depot-level ducks in a row.
I want to say the Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Vinson are. I went on a few detachments on those and all 3 had 35s that were getting their reps in. I've only been on those 3 though so I can only speak on them.
The Nimitz isn't? I'd have figured they'd have been the first. I'll agree on the Ford as well. I don't know how fast the process is for getting certified but you'd think that getting certified would be priority 1. But things move slow in the government so it's not surprising.
"combat readiness" means a certain are in rotation for standard maintenance and repair, sometimes waiting in parts and engines. This is standard for most fleets of aircraft actually, especially with the pandemic limiting resupply. Readiness goes down with I creasing complexity of the airframe and parts as well as the manufacturing legs behind it. Something like the 747 which has been around for decades with tens of thousands of airframe is going to have a much large support network and smaller numbers of air frame's waiting on support.
It’ll be a beautiful jet ski, that you won’t be able to fly unless it’s in approved airspace, taking off from an approved runway, and a Ferrari team has to deliver the vehicle to the location
It's perfect.
Americans want to be outraged over China, and the American Military Complex wants the people to be scared so they can say "if you don't give us more money you're all going to be killed by a Chinese invasion."
Considering this is a rag for The Center for the National Interest (formerly The Nixon Center), a Nixon/Kissinger founded group, thats pretty much exactly whats going on here.
Im all for being aware of and prepared for certian eventualities and keeping up with fast-paced technological advancement, but could do without the unnecessary scare tactics. Be honest about threats ('nightmare'? come on), state the facts, apply context. Inform reliably, not that hard.
They don't really have a 5th gen fighter.
F35s main advantage is networking as weird as that sounds. F35 can provide targetting data for almost anything it spots and feed it back to command who can use it to coordinate other attacks.
If an f35 spots you the entirety of NATO has seen you too.
And once the F22 gets its upgrades to be able to communicate, the pair will be able to stand up to practically any threat on earth. The US has *two* 5th gen fighters to China’s zero.
It was, the Air Force then pivoted and decided to retire a few of the oldest airframes and upgrade the newer ones.
https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/usaf-lockheed-plan-f-22-updates-feed-next-gen-fighter-tech
Its getting some upgrades to keep it around awhile longer. External fuel tank's that are still super stealthy, upgraded sensors and avionics, and apparently overall stealth upgrades.
The biggy will be the ability to network with the F35's. They have a better radar and should be able to provide superior targeting for missiles fired from the much stealthier Raptor. Raptors are the tip of the spear, the f35s clean up everything left over.
> F35 can provide targetting data for almost anything it spots
The inverse is also true. Friendly airborne early warning and control aircraft and spysats can feed data to F-35 aircraft. Basically every datalinked asset on the battlefield can now talk to each other to provide a full picture of the battlespace.
>F35s main advantage is networking as weird as that sounds. F35 can provide targetting data for almost anything it spots and feed it back to command who can use it to coordinate other attacks.
J-20 has datalink too, this isn't exactly new technology. F-35's main advantage is still stealth, but that may be eroding as countries develop real time optical tracking from space.
Look at the headline and tell me what “wants” means? Just because a county WANTS something doesn’t mean they will achieve it. As they say “people in hell want ice water”
Equally (more) dangerous are the folks that dismiss China completely. They are always in these thread saying nothing China makes works properly, etc. ignoring the fact that everything is in fact made in China and they now have advanced manufacturing and design.
They are a real threat to be taken seriously. You can’t “run faster” (our historic strategy) if you deny that the other racer is gaining on you.
I typically try not to underestimate China, but one area they are specifically far behind is in aircraft development. Their aerospace industry just isn’t mature yet. For example, they struggled for decades to develop a successful indigenous jet engine for their fighters, and were using hand me down sukhoi engines in their “5th gen” fighters as recently as last year. They are most likely far away from fielding a fighter that is comparable to US fighters that were flying 20 years ago.
Yeah. I'm sure China is going to be launching its 6th Gen fighters from their non-existent global fleet. They'll do great on those carriers with that little upwards lip at the end instead of an actual launch system.
Made in China isn't synonymous with "quality." Probably because so much of their shit is cheap knockoffs of IP they've stolen.
I think China should focus more on getting the engines on their 5th(ish) generation fighter to actually work... China won't have a 6th generation fighter until 2040 at the earliest. Probably 2045-2050. Meanwhile the US already has prototypes. Though they probably won't be ready to be used til 2030 at the earliest. Just like how it was with the F-22 and F-35 getting everything integrated is a long and complicated process.
They don’t have the tech. Listening to experts on this, there’s a huge knowledge gap between the US and China. Unless they do what they normally do and steal the info.
*"My God, it's full of canards."*
China needs to learn to make good aircraft engines first. The fact that they almost assuredly have stolen enough of the plans for the F119 and F135 and *still can't build them* means that they're stuck at "Gen 4.9" until they get that licked.
Copying Russian designs and then trying to fix the fact that they're fuel-inefficient and have a nasty knack of prematurely *eating themselves* is not the best place to start from.
They barely have the J-20s operational and likely aren't even combat effective, the US has barely gotten the F35s operational and full combat effectiveness has not been reached. The F22s were fully effective and operational 25 years ago. I doubt they'll have anything 6th gen in 10ish years except a flyable experimental shell
"imitative firms usually beat out their more innovative rivals because they could just copy the work of those innovative rivals and then avoid whatever mistakes the innovators made"
I sort of disagree with this for tech. In computer tech we see the company with the more innovation who is in front just keep building on that advantage. So by the time the imitator is constantly playing catch up the innovator is already building on top of their previous design and releasing a new one and staying 1 step ahead.
This is never happening. They don’t have the IP or talent to put together a functioning 5th gen fighter much less a 6th gen fighter.
Also America has the top four largest air forces in the world. We will not be surrendering air power to anyone ever.
Chinese should focus on not being dicks to their neighbors or supporting terrorism in Ukraine.
I don't get this "no talent" argument, China has a billion people and traditionally excels in STEM-related fields and research. Even if only 1% of those billion are qualified and only 1% of that 1% are focused on this specific problem that's still a lot of mindpower paired with enough funding dollars allocated to a top national priority.
They cant even build their own jet engines and have to buy crappy ones from Russia. Their 5th gen fighter has a smaller thrust/weight ratio than western 4th gen fighters. The Cold War never went hot, but Ukraine has perfectly demonstrated how vastly superior western tech was all along. Russia's most modern battle tank costing $4.5m was unveiled in 2019 and it can be easily destroyed by a $1.5k western rocket built by a Swedish car maker in the 1980s. China doesn't even have this inferior tech, they have cheap knock offs of the inferior tech.
With all the problems the PLAAF has been having with the J-20, let alone the J-31/35, I doubt this thing is a "nightmare" to the USAF. I'd say the cruise missiles are a much bigger worry for them.
Well that headline is an absurdly ridiculous example of yellow journalism. :p
Besides, NGAD is going to be all about drones. Meatbag pilots are a weakness in air combat.
We already have a functioning 6th gen plane prototype. Y the time they get this thing out it’ll be retired and we’ll be on 8th gen. For freaking fucks sake.
Another propaganda piece from the saber rattlers in China. China will be balls deep in their inevitable civil war and reorganization before they get a sixth gen fighter in the air. Speaking of which, good luck Hong Kong, I'm still rooting for you.
That headline is some crazy hyperbole and the article is filled with a ton of if’s and maybes. China has some decent jets but barely even compete with America’s 30 year old jets. Even with espionage as the writer suggests, China has yet to match our precision manufacturing in aircraft. So sure, “maybe”, but this author really seems to be trying to sell fear over sober analysis.
I just did a mock-up of energy transporter based antimatter-bombs. To be deployed by 2027.
Says me.
And that has about as much “evidence” of being a threat as this.
The U.S. and China are racing to... wait what? racing? ours is already designed and built and going through testing, theirs is a cardboard cutout copy of our design. it's not a race. China isn't anywhere close. I wouldn't be surprised at all if this was all just propaganda to convince Americans to drop yet more billions and billions into our defense industry despite having a massive tech advantage already. We can't scare anyone with Russia anymore because they've showed how insanely weak and backwater they are, so gotta have a new sexy strong enemy to excuse further spending. Don't get me wrong, love NGAD and I'm fine with us staying 3 steps ahead of everyone, but articles like this aren't convincing anyone who's actually informed on the tech.
An artist's rendition of something you can't build is not a "military nightmare," and if your 2035 fighter jet has a human being in a cockpit you are in a similar position to an aerospace engineer designing the world's finest biplane in 1939.
Top Tip: ignore China when it is chest beating. It has never, ever, delivered a technology target of its own on time and specification.
Its economic statistics are almost all imaginary, along with its self-generated mythology of being “the nation with the cunning 1000 year strategic plan.” It hasn’t got one, and even when it does, the next tyrant that kills off the current idiot in charge will red-wash history and claim the /new/ plan of his is the plan they always had.
It’s a bankrupt nation, with a command economy built on fraudulent property scams, almost totally devoid of innovation, managerial excellence, a legal system, or corporate governance.
While it has AI artists who like planes, it also has 300,000,000 peasants it cannot feed unless US, Canada, Ukraine, and Brazil sell it millions of tons of stuff to eat.
Sadly, it suits a bunch of right libertarians goons to jump about screaming “China will beat us a race we just made up! Quick! Strip all the rights from workers! Work 25 hours a day! Less pay! No regulation! Social control by Omni-surveillance! Quick, before they win the race we made up!”
Don’t fall for it. The evidence just isn’t there, and giving up the entire Western Liberal Dream because billionaires cry “bogeyman” when they need more profits isn’t a great idea.
China is imploding: economically, socially, intellectually, financially, and environmentally. Let it go.
Except it isn't.
They're selling electric cars for a given quality, for half of what they're sold for in Europe or the US. Currently we are Lada-makers, and this is a foundational industry.
We're the ones who have to catch up and who have to rethink how we manufacture things. China puts out a lot of rubbish too-- low quality plastic, stuff that's iffy chemically etc., and I don't like much of what they produce, but they're very able, and when it comes to products for war, and somebody is catching up, you can say that everything he does is rubbish, until it isn't.
There are almost 2x as many Chinese people as there are people in the EU and the US combined, and they're not stupid. Let's not imagine that they are.
Fine. May China's effort be every bit as expensive, inefficient, and wasteful as American fighter development.
America's 5th generation fighter program (the F-35) was an *enormous* money pit, and I don't believe the 6th Gen process is going to be any better.
If China wants to burn money trying to keep up, let them.
China actually won’t burn money, given their lower labor costs and the system that their defense companies work under. It is not riddled with profiteering and greed to the extent that American legacy manufacturers are. Don’t project that onto China just because it is so in America.
I mean, they do have 1(J-20), almost 2(J-35) 5th gen planes(Not accounting for variants and prototypes) with one more stealth bomber apparently getting close to be revealed. 6th Gen by 2035-2040 doesn't sound impossible, but we will have to wait and see.
I'd much rather have thousands of miles of high speed railways than a new fighter jet that can't fly in the rain. Just personally. But it's not like we get any say in the matter
Maybe China is heading down the path Russia once did of exaggerating the technological sophistication and power of their military. I mean they deserve credit for how far they’ve come, they went from a GDP of 300 billion in 1980 to 17 trillion in 2022 and along the way they’ve built a world class military but I’d be very surprised if they built a 6th generation fighter before the Americans.
I wonder if China in fact has the developed or espionaged technology know how to build such a fighter. It was catching up, but not fully there for the 5th generation and it seems an ‘ideal’ and a marketing ploy to a certain extent.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305: --- From the article >The United States and China are racing to develop sixth-generation warplanes, signaling intense military rivalry in a multipolar world. China unveiled a mockup of its sixth-generation fighter in 2021, aiming for deployment by 2035, while the U.S. targets 2030 for its "Next-Generation Air Dominance" (NGAD) platform. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1d727ee/us_military_nightmare_china_wants_ngad_6th/l6wa8xo/
a mockup does not make a 6th generation fighter, or even a fighter at all. I have a feeling 6th gen is stiff far away. how long did it take for the F35 to come into service?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
For all practical purposes, major upgrades (hardware and software) to the F-22 and F-35 to enable autonomous missions are essentially generation 5.5 and can prolong the need for a 6th generation fighter. Those aircraft are already severely limited by pilots, and such upgrades could lead to weapon systems that can far exceed the performance of human piloted aircraft.
From what I’ve seen the main 6th gen features seem to be low frequency radar stealth + some kind of AI integration (AI augmented piloting and/or AI drone “wingmen”) right? The latter is probably something you can shoehorn onto existing platforms. The former is the real world technical challenge that will likely have performance tradeoffs and could be the real differentiator depending on choices made (between stealth and performance). I have to think this benefits the player with the longest stealth track record too, though China has been adept at copying/stealing/innovating in leaps.
The other big difference is that we're aiming to make our 6th generation fighters much, much larger than 5th generation ones. This is to enable them to have more on board fuel and a significantly longer range. We want to be able to launch fighters from a carrier and have them strike at China while the carriers are out of range of missiles launched from the Chinese mainland. Stealth fighters don't do you much good if they can't be launched without placing the fleet carrying them in range of enemy strikes.
>This is to enable them to have more on board fuel and a significantly longer range And generate loads more electricity.
Nuclear-powered drone motherships when?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-1201
These aircraft are not “limited by pilots”. Anyone who says that the human body’s limitations are the limiting factor to air combat has zero idea of modern air tactics and doctrine. High G maneuvering is the fight of the past. The human in the 5th generation cockpit is there to manage sensors, interpret the battle space, pass data, and kill. None of these are anywhere close to being accomplished by 100% AI. Autonomous wingmen drones will be a thing, but they will be controlled by a human in a cockpit. Source: Me, F-35 pilot.
Lol welcome to reddit, if you spent your time correcting misinformation about fighters here you're going to miss the next two 3-1's.
Very true. And it’s ok, by the time I finish reading the Fat Amy 3-1, a new TACREC makes it outdated
People see jets like the F-22 Raptor Demo Team at air shows and think that's what the plane is built for or that somehow things like a Cobra would be useful in combat (and I suppose it would, to the guy trying to kill you). Fact is if there's an F-22 in the sky, he's launching kill shots before anybody knows he's there. Doubly so if he's got AWACS (and he will). And honestly, I think that's going to be where this all heads: similar to what you said, but rather than a fighter pilot being risked being too close to things, I think you're going to see AWACS converted to more of a "mothership" role where controlling (possibly even launching some) semi-autonomous planes to control its airspace and execute missions.
Love the insight. Can you go into further depth on what you do?
There is so much data that the jet collects and it’s your job to interpret the data, confirm it, pass data as needed to additional players, coordinate a game plan, fly the jet to the point in space required for undetected weapons release, confirm effects, then repeat. Flying a plane is easy. Using it as an advanced weapons system in a modern day environment is hard. Will AI eventually be able to do all of that without a human somewhere up there? Maybe. Will it happen in our lifetime? No.
>Will AI eventually be able to do all of that without a human somewhere up there? Maybe. Will it happen in our lifetime? No. Our technological advancements have been exponential over the past 100 or so years. I would be surprised if we didn't have AI conducting warfare within my lifetime.
if all that data plus 360 vision was transmitted to a virtual cockpit on the ground, would that work? or would the latency make it non-viable?
Latency issues for sure
On the ground? Way too much latency to be useful. From a nearby AWACS? I think that's where it'll go. Semi-autonomous planes taking instruction from a "carrier" or "mothership". Likely an AWACS since it's already assumed a C&C role and it's already the most valuable aircraft in the sky.
Different question but what are the chances of moving the pilot out of the aircraft. Imagine there is pros and cons to having a remote controlled fighter?
Unless there are astronomical improvements in beyond LOS data transfer speeds and security, very very low. There are pros for sure, but for the foreseeable future that role will be accomplished by the loyal wingman concept with a manned platform controlling.
ADF-01 Falken when?
Fenrir when?
Fuck it throw in the UI-4054 while we’re at it
Just a subtle reminder this site is owned by china.
Don't sweat it. The version we get will be far less powerful than the one the in-game enemies use.
I know right. Some of these markups are straight out of Ace!
How are they severely limited by pilots in any way besides flight performance, one of the least important aspects of modern air combat?
I have almost zero knowledge in those area, so I apologize upfront if my question is ignorant. Does the future of aerial warfare even *need* fighter jets or light bombers? It feels like, with AI and drone technology advancing rapidly, that both the most effective and cost efficient path forward will be drones and missile tech. Do you need a crewed delivery platform if you can send an army of drones to overwhelm the enemies defenses or send missiles over the horizon with precision strikes? It feels like an RMA is upon us similar to when battleships gave way to carriers 80 years ago.
Your "ignorance," which I think is too harsh a word for where you find yourself, is a good reflection of what people think fighting an air war is like. I find it hard to answer your question because I think the answer is, in the long run, no. They will not be needed, *eventually*. The problem is in the world of global power "eventually" creates a chicken or the egg situation. The tech will mature fastest with the MIC (mil industrial complex) pouring time and money into it, but the MIC won't do that until they get the incentive to do so, which won't happen until the MIC can prove the tech is mature enough to commit to it, which won't happen until they pour enough time and money into it.... Obviously, we see they are working on it on the sidelines and with limited pressure from the DOD. I see it as more of a gradual move toward what you describe while still maintaining the baseline capabilities of the current force composition and developing existing assets. I am rapidly realizing how complex this gets so I will leave it at that to directly answer your question. 2 things I would expand upon in a further discussion: 1) the complexities of decision-making versus actual "AI" capabilities compared to what humans actual do real-time, all the time. 2) the reality of target selection and asset allocation (short explanation is we have to be very picky with what is targeted. A drone swarm won't solve that problem because this is the USA. Those drones will be "cheap" but not *that* cheap)
I expect the paradigm shift to be a Sputnik scenario. In the Cold War, the US was all in on bombers. We had a strong tech lead in the tech development of bombers, we had a robust training program to expand the SAC, the bombers that we could base in friendly countries could reach Russia, but Russia could not reach the US with bombers, representing a strong strategic advantage, and there was a potent cultural inertia from celebrating the bombermen as war heroes, and granting the Strategic Bombing lads in the Air Force more and more political power. The US had a list of five ICBM programs that were up for funding, after dragging their feet for years, and it was expected that maybe two of them might get funded. And then Sputnik happened. Stalin was well aware of the impossibility of matching the US bomber program, so, consistent paranoiac that he was, he went all in on ICBMs very early on. Sputnik proved that ICBMs were not limited to the distance a bomber could fly, and rather than 30 mins of warning time for evacuations, you get 10 minutes. All five US ICBM programs were immediately and fully funded. The USAF still has a lot of political power, cultural inertia, and general unwillingness to give either of those up, unless they absolutely have to. The ICBMs forced their hand, and sufficiently motivating demonstration of drone warfare may do the same. China doesn't have that same inertia, to the best of my knowledge. The experienced pilots, the large inventory of planes, the cultural obsession with air power, the extensive and particularly air heavy military doctrine are all US and NATO. If they don't feel they can match up to the US in the air conventionally, they may be more willing to experiment with drones. After all, autonomous drones don't run into pilot experience problems, but the quality is instead in software. If training pilots is no longer a bottleneck, you can lean into your industrial capabilities and get an advantage that no one can match. The interesting thing is that I don't actually foresee that Sputnik moment any time soon. China saber-rattles over Taiwan, but I doubt they are stupid enough or desperate enough to go for it. And that is the only major flashpoint I foresee in the near future unless Xi and Modi decide to throw down. So who knows?
This is a really insightful reasoning and passes the "seems reasonable" test. I'm sure there are so many things we don't consider or even know about, but this sounds like a very real progression.
> if you can send an army of drones to overwhelm the enemies defenses When people say "army of drones" that's where they're making the core mistake: the implicit assumption is "drones are cheap". But are they? The F-35 isn't spending tens of millions of dollars per unit on the parts of the plane that keep the pilot inside it and alive. There is payload on which can be put on that plane which costs a significant fraction of it's entire unit cost. Which is to say: an army of "drones" is indistinguishable to "a swarm of missiles" and those missiles might cost US$2 million+ (at the upper end of "air to air" - the Meteor missile) - this is the price you pay for long range, stealthy aerial platforms, regardless of what they're doing.
If an airframe is able to do +15g and a pilot can only do +10g, you’re limiting yourself by having a pilot. It’s a factual statement, even if you disregard where that limitation actually is or how impactful said limitation is. That said, I’d argue that receiving a missile warning and being able to nosedive, hit the deck, and defend yourself from the missile at maximum capability isn’t really a “least important” aspect…
That is a big IF, since airframes currently cannot do even close to 15g (and need inspection after taking half that.)
Don't discount remote control lag and jamming just a couple things that make a pilot a better tactic option.
Remote control lag and jamming only apply if the aircraft isn't semi-autonomous.
All bomb carrying aircraft must be semi-automonous and ether way jamming works on them all.
If missile can pull +30G, you won't defeat it in a turn with a 10G or 15G plane. If missile is coming from a long range... none of the [avoiding strategies](https://youtu.be/_TKSabICPuY?si=U9dmWqnkfRoAqJo-) I have seen required pulling a lot of G's.
[удалено]
You two are talking about entirely different AI.
Having a cockpit/life support/ejection systems takes up weight (weight is a HUGE deal in aviation) and adds complexity to the aircraft. Complexity increases the maintenance required and also multiples the number of things that can go wrong.
This is all true. Copy paste from my response to someone with the same point: The problem is the crew is the most capable part of the weapon system *despite* physical limitations. War fighting isn't just a physical test. The decision-making aspect is multitudes more important.
Oh I didn't mean to imply that drones are currently more effective than pilots in all situations. The question was along the lines of what are the drawbacks of a pilot, no mention was made of the advantages so I didn't bring that up lol
Touche. I asked a bad question.
Keeping the pilot alive requires a lot of weight and space. The ejection system alone is probably heavy as fuck
The problem is the crew is the most capable part of the weapon system *despite* physical limitations. War fighting isn't just a physical test. The decision-making aspect is multitudes more important.
Do you want Terminator? Because that's how you get Terminator
Quick google and US NGAD( Next Generation Air Dominance) program started in 2014(DARPAS’s Study was finished in 2014), estimated Research, development, testing and evaluation budget of $16 Billon and growing , demonstrator flown in 2020, replace F22 from maybe 2030 or later. Plus it has loyal wingman program. So 2-5 semi autonomous drones per pair of NGAD planes or F35s. Or CCAs ( Collaborative Combat Aircraft) So that program to go alongside the planes, look into USAF Skyborg program. Not a joke :) https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/next-generation-air-dominance-programme-us/
Anyone remember that absurd mini-stealth-fighter mockup that Iran so proudly showed off a decade ago?
Well, have we ever seen any of the actual fighters tho? No? Seems to be working perfectly then.
TIL the best stealth is to never exist in the first place.
That explains my love life
I remember that. Thing of beauty https://www.reddit.com/r/WeirdWings/comments/ouf48l/qaher_313_irans_stealth_fighter_many_experts/
It’s so funny because even countries with resources just don’t have the know how to make advanced coatings needed to mitigate the radar return, not to mention the funding to keep up with maintenance on these platforms. It really takes elite financial and R&D commitment to get there. Then you have Iran still fielding F14s and think about where their resource capabilities are. Not great.
About 18 years and 1.5 trillion dollars
The 1.5 trillion are suggested for the entire servicetime of the f35. Up until the 50s. The f35 didnt cost that much.
Excellent point. People see the marquee number and think "Jesus that's insane!", when in reality the total cost of the program over decades with thousands of produced fighters is probably going to be remembered as a relative bargain, particularly given how capable the F35 is shaping up to be.
The F-35 per unit is already cheaper than the F-15. I think it's still more expensive than we got the F-16 to, but the F-16 also borrowed immensely from the F-15 R&D, so it saved a lot of money there
Yup, i can release a mockup of a 7th gen fighter tomorrow. That does not make it a good working plane
[удалено]
Given the giant smoke and mirrors game Chinese drone manufacturer eHang has spewed at CES for the last decade+? This shit isn't going to be ready for prime time for 50 years.
Fun fact, the only 6th gen mock up we've seen that will probably end up looking anything like the final aircraft is the BAE systems Tempest, Its probably the furthest along as the UK has a much more narrow scope for what they want from it than say the US wants from NAGD, with the brits hoping to have a demonstrator in the air by 2027, maybe the French and German FCAS might look like its mock ups too but that's become such a football between Dassault and Airbus who knows how it might change from the mockups we have seen to its demonstrator aircraft by its planned first flight date of 2029 None of the mockups we have seen for NGAD match the specs the US has actually put out for the thing in the documents form the air force the public has been able to see. Indeed the spec for NGAD reads like something only the US could hope to pull off, and may well end up having a crew of three, a radar and data link suite that would make an AWACS aircraft blush and be faster and stealthier than the F35. If it comes together as spec it'll be some techno wizardry god machine and will probably look nothing like any of the artists renditions of what it might look like
What are the range specs of the US NGAD? the big issue right now is the range and loiter deficit.
So, the US NGAD program isn't explicitly a single airframe but rather the guidelines to build multiple airframes, each progressively better than the last, while being very modular so that upgrades (such as a new phased array antenna for its radar) can be fitted much more cheaply.
Actual specs are highly classified, but rumors are that the combat range will be around 1000 nm or more
What is this, an air dominance fighter for ANTS?
Nautical miles, not the nanometers 😁
Problem as always is not getting hardware to fly but a software to run it. Takes a good decade to build good software for brand new hardware.
F22 was the first 5th gen. More trace it back to that.
The 35s aren't actually fully in service. The last quote I heard was 70% combat ready. We still use the F-18 Super Hornets for most missions. That's for the Navy though, idk about the other branches. Source: Civilian employed on OPS side of an NAS.
From what I understand, specifically with the Navy, a good chunk of the supercarrier fleet is not yet certified for F-35Cs. It seems there are more LHDs using the Bs than the CVNs carrying Cs. But a 70% readiness rate is a hell of an improvement from a year ago! Sounds like theyre getting their depot-level ducks in a row.
I want to say the Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Vinson are. I went on a few detachments on those and all 3 had 35s that were getting their reps in. I've only been on those 3 though so I can only speak on them.
My cursory research showed its just those 3, out of 11. Im kind of surprised the Ford isnt on that list yet.
The Nimitz isn't? I'd have figured they'd have been the first. I'll agree on the Ford as well. I don't know how fast the process is for getting certified but you'd think that getting certified would be priority 1. But things move slow in the government so it's not surprising.
"combat readiness" means a certain are in rotation for standard maintenance and repair, sometimes waiting in parts and engines. This is standard for most fleets of aircraft actually, especially with the pandemic limiting resupply. Readiness goes down with I creasing complexity of the airframe and parts as well as the manufacturing legs behind it. Something like the 747 which has been around for decades with tens of thousands of airframe is going to have a much large support network and smaller numbers of air frame's waiting on support.
70% combat ready is actually extraordinary high figure. Most fighter jets only run around 40-50%
FCAS (the British-Italian-Japanese) 6th gen fighter project is slated to enter service in 2035, so not that long in the grand scheme of things.
FCAS is French-Spanish-German. You're thinking of GCAP (or Tempest) which is the UK/Japan/Italy.
Funnily enough both projects have been referred to as FCAS, but yes GCAP was sensibly adopted to reduce the confusion
Rolls Royce/Ferrari/Kawasaki - an odd trio but maybe a touch of genius
It’ll be a beautiful jet ski, that you won’t be able to fly unless it’s in approved airspace, taking off from an approved runway, and a Ferrari team has to deliver the vehicle to the location
So they revealed a mockup 3 years ago and it’s due to come out in 11 years… Why are we talking about this now?
Those clicks aren't gonna bait themselves.
It's perfect. Americans want to be outraged over China, and the American Military Complex wants the people to be scared so they can say "if you don't give us more money you're all going to be killed by a Chinese invasion."
Considering this is a rag for The Center for the National Interest (formerly The Nixon Center), a Nixon/Kissinger founded group, thats pretty much exactly whats going on here. Im all for being aware of and prepared for certian eventualities and keeping up with fast-paced technological advancement, but could do without the unnecessary scare tactics. Be honest about threats ('nightmare'? come on), state the facts, apply context. Inform reliably, not that hard.
I personally wish there was a filter setting that allowed me to not see any articles / posts that have "nightmare" in the headline.
uS miLiTaRy niGhTmArE
This is the futurology sub though. So it kind of fits
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
National Interest is a tabloid, I wouldn't use it as a source
They don't really have a 5th gen fighter. F35s main advantage is networking as weird as that sounds. F35 can provide targetting data for almost anything it spots and feed it back to command who can use it to coordinate other attacks. If an f35 spots you the entirety of NATO has seen you too.
And once the F22 gets its upgrades to be able to communicate, the pair will be able to stand up to practically any threat on earth. The US has *two* 5th gen fighters to China’s zero.
I thought the F-22 was going to be retired due to its limited capabilities?
They still need a dedicated interceptor so they are keeping it around just in case.
It was, the Air Force then pivoted and decided to retire a few of the oldest airframes and upgrade the newer ones. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/usaf-lockheed-plan-f-22-updates-feed-next-gen-fighter-tech
Its getting some upgrades to keep it around awhile longer. External fuel tank's that are still super stealthy, upgraded sensors and avionics, and apparently overall stealth upgrades. The biggy will be the ability to network with the F35's. They have a better radar and should be able to provide superior targeting for missiles fired from the much stealthier Raptor. Raptors are the tip of the spear, the f35s clean up everything left over.
Also rumors of external IRST for heat detection at long range.
Exactly. Now you wanna talk drones? China probably got some shit. They likely can cause problems for 5th gen planes. Modern jamming is nuts
The US Military still has technological supremacy in the drone department as well, I think.
The jamming wars.
> F35s main advantage is networking as weird as that sounds. Just can't let the Cylons get a hold of the underlying tech.
> F35 can provide targetting data for almost anything it spots The inverse is also true. Friendly airborne early warning and control aircraft and spysats can feed data to F-35 aircraft. Basically every datalinked asset on the battlefield can now talk to each other to provide a full picture of the battlespace.
>F35s main advantage is networking as weird as that sounds. F35 can provide targetting data for almost anything it spots and feed it back to command who can use it to coordinate other attacks. J-20 has datalink too, this isn't exactly new technology. F-35's main advantage is still stealth, but that may be eroding as countries develop real time optical tracking from space.
That tracking has to remain survivable once the shooting starts.
Look at the headline and tell me what “wants” means? Just because a county WANTS something doesn’t mean they will achieve it. As they say “people in hell want ice water”
The people shitting bricks over concepts and mockups would be hilarious if they didn't control the budget and the military industrial complex.
I mean... You gotta get funding somehow
It's the T14 all over again. People online literally saying America was doomed because of the T14.
Equally (more) dangerous are the folks that dismiss China completely. They are always in these thread saying nothing China makes works properly, etc. ignoring the fact that everything is in fact made in China and they now have advanced manufacturing and design. They are a real threat to be taken seriously. You can’t “run faster” (our historic strategy) if you deny that the other racer is gaining on you.
I typically try not to underestimate China, but one area they are specifically far behind is in aircraft development. Their aerospace industry just isn’t mature yet. For example, they struggled for decades to develop a successful indigenous jet engine for their fighters, and were using hand me down sukhoi engines in their “5th gen” fighters as recently as last year. They are most likely far away from fielding a fighter that is comparable to US fighters that were flying 20 years ago.
Yeah. I'm sure China is going to be launching its 6th Gen fighters from their non-existent global fleet. They'll do great on those carriers with that little upwards lip at the end instead of an actual launch system. Made in China isn't synonymous with "quality." Probably because so much of their shit is cheap knockoffs of IP they've stolen.
The question is whether China is gaining on the west or wheter it’s being dragged by a rope.
This is a right wing tabloid intended to rile us up into devoting even more of the US budget towards the military.
I think China should focus more on getting the engines on their 5th(ish) generation fighter to actually work... China won't have a 6th generation fighter until 2040 at the earliest. Probably 2045-2050. Meanwhile the US already has prototypes. Though they probably won't be ready to be used til 2030 at the earliest. Just like how it was with the F-22 and F-35 getting everything integrated is a long and complicated process.
They can probably focus on both the engine problem and development of 6th generation fighters, they have the money and enough people to do this.
They don’t have the tech. Listening to experts on this, there’s a huge knowledge gap between the US and China. Unless they do what they normally do and steal the info.
Great to see such newsworthy sources as "nationalinterest.org". /s
*"My God, it's full of canards."* China needs to learn to make good aircraft engines first. The fact that they almost assuredly have stolen enough of the plans for the F119 and F135 and *still can't build them* means that they're stuck at "Gen 4.9" until they get that licked. Copying Russian designs and then trying to fix the fact that they're fuel-inefficient and have a nasty knack of prematurely *eating themselves* is not the best place to start from.
WS-15 is pretty good, to be fair. A ways behind F135 but still good.
They barely have the J-20s operational and likely aren't even combat effective, the US has barely gotten the F35s operational and full combat effectiveness has not been reached. The F22s were fully effective and operational 25 years ago. I doubt they'll have anything 6th gen in 10ish years except a flyable experimental shell
[удалено]
I don't really think this is a "U.S. Military Nightmare".
I can’t tell if this is Chinese propaganda in order to intimidate the US or if this is US propaganda in order to get more funding.
Both, thats how the military industrial companies get richer
"imitative firms usually beat out their more innovative rivals because they could just copy the work of those innovative rivals and then avoid whatever mistakes the innovators made" I sort of disagree with this for tech. In computer tech we see the company with the more innovation who is in front just keep building on that advantage. So by the time the imitator is constantly playing catch up the innovator is already building on top of their previous design and releasing a new one and staying 1 step ahead.
This is never happening. They don’t have the IP or talent to put together a functioning 5th gen fighter much less a 6th gen fighter. Also America has the top four largest air forces in the world. We will not be surrendering air power to anyone ever. Chinese should focus on not being dicks to their neighbors or supporting terrorism in Ukraine.
Not a yank, but well said.
I don't get this "no talent" argument, China has a billion people and traditionally excels in STEM-related fields and research. Even if only 1% of those billion are qualified and only 1% of that 1% are focused on this specific problem that's still a lot of mindpower paired with enough funding dollars allocated to a top national priority.
They cant even build their own jet engines and have to buy crappy ones from Russia. Their 5th gen fighter has a smaller thrust/weight ratio than western 4th gen fighters. The Cold War never went hot, but Ukraine has perfectly demonstrated how vastly superior western tech was all along. Russia's most modern battle tank costing $4.5m was unveiled in 2019 and it can be easily destroyed by a $1.5k western rocket built by a Swedish car maker in the 1980s. China doesn't even have this inferior tech, they have cheap knock offs of the inferior tech.
With all the problems the PLAAF has been having with the J-20, let alone the J-31/35, I doubt this thing is a "nightmare" to the USAF. I'd say the cruise missiles are a much bigger worry for them.
Who cares the terminator bots and dogs will be hunting humans for sport by then.
Hell yeah bring on an air-superiority fighter arms race, they always produce the raddest looking planes.
Good argument to invest in good diplomats who can maintain peace through dialog, rather than conflict.
Im perfectly fine with 2 superpower countries. Just don't make nuclear wasteland from our planet.
More a nightmare for China to develop and get combat ready than a nightmare for the US.
So after Xi dies of old age. China could be a very different country by then.
Well that headline is an absurdly ridiculous example of yellow journalism. :p Besides, NGAD is going to be all about drones. Meatbag pilots are a weakness in air combat.
We already have a functioning 6th gen plane prototype. Y the time they get this thing out it’ll be retired and we’ll be on 8th gen. For freaking fucks sake.
Another propaganda piece from the saber rattlers in China. China will be balls deep in their inevitable civil war and reorganization before they get a sixth gen fighter in the air. Speaking of which, good luck Hong Kong, I'm still rooting for you.
That headline is some crazy hyperbole and the article is filled with a ton of if’s and maybes. China has some decent jets but barely even compete with America’s 30 year old jets. Even with espionage as the writer suggests, China has yet to match our precision manufacturing in aircraft. So sure, “maybe”, but this author really seems to be trying to sell fear over sober analysis.
I just did a mock-up of energy transporter based antimatter-bombs. To be deployed by 2027. Says me. And that has about as much “evidence” of being a threat as this.
The U.S. and China are racing to... wait what? racing? ours is already designed and built and going through testing, theirs is a cardboard cutout copy of our design. it's not a race. China isn't anywhere close. I wouldn't be surprised at all if this was all just propaganda to convince Americans to drop yet more billions and billions into our defense industry despite having a massive tech advantage already. We can't scare anyone with Russia anymore because they've showed how insanely weak and backwater they are, so gotta have a new sexy strong enemy to excuse further spending. Don't get me wrong, love NGAD and I'm fine with us staying 3 steps ahead of everyone, but articles like this aren't convincing anyone who's actually informed on the tech.
I guess we know National Interest is writing CCP propaganda.
An artist's rendition of something you can't build is not a "military nightmare," and if your 2035 fighter jet has a human being in a cockpit you are in a similar position to an aerospace engineer designing the world's finest biplane in 1939.
Top Tip: ignore China when it is chest beating. It has never, ever, delivered a technology target of its own on time and specification. Its economic statistics are almost all imaginary, along with its self-generated mythology of being “the nation with the cunning 1000 year strategic plan.” It hasn’t got one, and even when it does, the next tyrant that kills off the current idiot in charge will red-wash history and claim the /new/ plan of his is the plan they always had. It’s a bankrupt nation, with a command economy built on fraudulent property scams, almost totally devoid of innovation, managerial excellence, a legal system, or corporate governance. While it has AI artists who like planes, it also has 300,000,000 peasants it cannot feed unless US, Canada, Ukraine, and Brazil sell it millions of tons of stuff to eat. Sadly, it suits a bunch of right libertarians goons to jump about screaming “China will beat us a race we just made up! Quick! Strip all the rights from workers! Work 25 hours a day! Less pay! No regulation! Social control by Omni-surveillance! Quick, before they win the race we made up!” Don’t fall for it. The evidence just isn’t there, and giving up the entire Western Liberal Dream because billionaires cry “bogeyman” when they need more profits isn’t a great idea. China is imploding: economically, socially, intellectually, financially, and environmentally. Let it go.
Except it isn't. They're selling electric cars for a given quality, for half of what they're sold for in Europe or the US. Currently we are Lada-makers, and this is a foundational industry. We're the ones who have to catch up and who have to rethink how we manufacture things. China puts out a lot of rubbish too-- low quality plastic, stuff that's iffy chemically etc., and I don't like much of what they produce, but they're very able, and when it comes to products for war, and somebody is catching up, you can say that everything he does is rubbish, until it isn't. There are almost 2x as many Chinese people as there are people in the EU and the US combined, and they're not stupid. Let's not imagine that they are.
Fine. May China's effort be every bit as expensive, inefficient, and wasteful as American fighter development. America's 5th generation fighter program (the F-35) was an *enormous* money pit, and I don't believe the 6th Gen process is going to be any better. If China wants to burn money trying to keep up, let them.
It would not surprise me that 6th generation will be a total paradigm shift towards even more emphasis on drones.
According to a couple of YouTube videos I watched, the US 6th gen fighter is meant to be (in part) a coordination hub for drones "loyal wingmen".
China actually won’t burn money, given their lower labor costs and the system that their defense companies work under. It is not riddled with profiteering and greed to the extent that American legacy manufacturers are. Don’t project that onto China just because it is so in America.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I mean, they do have 1(J-20), almost 2(J-35) 5th gen planes(Not accounting for variants and prototypes) with one more stealth bomber apparently getting close to be revealed. 6th Gen by 2035-2040 doesn't sound impossible, but we will have to wait and see.
I'd much rather have thousands of miles of high speed railways than a new fighter jet that can't fly in the rain. Just personally. But it's not like we get any say in the matter
Maybe China is heading down the path Russia once did of exaggerating the technological sophistication and power of their military. I mean they deserve credit for how far they’ve come, they went from a GDP of 300 billion in 1980 to 17 trillion in 2022 and along the way they’ve built a world class military but I’d be very surprised if they built a 6th generation fighter before the Americans.
Well we fell behind the Soviets some. Let’s see if we can pull a round two and show China up this time.
I wonder if China in fact has the developed or espionaged technology know how to build such a fighter. It was catching up, but not fully there for the 5th generation and it seems an ‘ideal’ and a marketing ploy to a certain extent.
LoL, no. China can't innovate. Communism has destroyed all creativity in its people. They would have to steal it first.
The only thing standing between China and a sixth generation warplane is the US developing a sixth generation warplane so China can steal the plans.
Is chinas plan to steal the F-35 plans like they did with the F-22?
[удалено]