Super Hornet Replacement

[Waynos]

Boeing has started to air its thoughts on how it will replace the F/A-18E/F after 2025. Here are a couple of designs which are quite different to each other and so show its still at an early stage. The upper one, thanks to the fuselage topline, has an almost Sukhoi-esque look to it.

What are peoples thoughts here?

[FLYBOYJ]

Interesting designs but in reality the decision to replace the Super Hornet by 2025 will not be Boeing's, all they can do is try to offer up a proposal and a lot can happen in 15 years. As of right now the only replacement for the Super Hornet will be the F-35 unless the US Congress and DoD decide to fund a direct replacement, and after a recent speech made by Secretary of Defense Gates, there Inst going to be any major defense procurements for a very long time.

[Matt308]

Nice art.

[tomo pauk]

Think that Super Bug is going to be replaced with UCAVs...

[red admiral]

What are peoples thoughts here?

As FlyboyJ said, the replacement for the F/A-18 is the F-35 CV which will still be in production in 2025. Most likely next generation carrier aircraft is looking to be a UCAV, probably based off X-45.

[FLYBOYJ]

UCAVs are going to be major players but you'll still see manned combat aircraft, especially in the air to air role.

[Waynos]

As FlyboyJ said, the replacement for the F/A-18 is the F-35 CV which will still be in production in 2025. Most likely next generation carrier aircraft is looking to be a UCAV, probably based off X-45.

From the responses on the thread it seems that people are interpreting this as an unsolicited proposal from Boeing.

Its not, its a response to a USN requirement, currently referred to as F/A-XX that is intended to find a Superbug replacement. This is not currently intended to be the F-35C, but I can see it becoming that, or a version of it.

As I understand it, the F-35C is set to replace the F-18C whereas the E/F are to remain in service. There is currently no F-35 two seater, as an eventual replacement for the F and G models, though I would expect to see one eventually.

I also foresee a future RAF requirement for a two seater (F-35, not F/A-XX) from what I have seen, though that would naturally be few in number and would also depend on an operational UCAV evolving either from Taranis or elsewhere and so would be absolutely dependant on a US need for a two seater in order to be satisfied.

Ultimately, I think that buying more F-35's as a SH replacement is probably more likely than an all new type, but the totally tailless design direction, pioneered by Boeing on the X-44 and continued here, is interesting.

[FLYBOYJ]

From the responses on the thread it seems that people are interpreting this as an unsolicited proposal from Boeing.

From your original post...

Boeing has started to air its thoughts on how it will replace the F/A-18E/F after 2025.

Its not, its a response to a USN requirement, currently referred to as F/A-XX that is intended to find a Superbug replacement. This is not currently intended to be the F-35C, but I can see it becoming that, or a version of it.

As I understand it, the F-35C is set to replace the F-18C whereas the E/F are to remain in service. There is currently no F-35 two seater, as an eventual replacement for the F and G models, though I would expect to see one eventually.

I also foresee a future RAF requirement for a two seater (F-35, not F/A-XX) from what I have seen, though that would naturally be few in number and would also depend on an operational UCAV evolving either from Taranis or elsewhere and so would be absolutely dependant on a US need for a two seater in order to be satisfied.

Ultimately, I think that buying more F-35's as a SH replacement is probably more likely than an all new type, but the totally tailless design direction, pioneered by Boeing on the X-44 and continued here, is interesting.

From Aviation Week....
U.S. Navy: Unmanned Combat Squadron by 2025 | AVIATION WEEK

Right now this is in a conceptual stage and a lot could happen in 15 years. More info...

Walkaround–F/A-XX concept ELP Defens(c)e Blog

[Waynos]

Yes FlyboyJ, if I'd added "if it wins an order through F/A-XX" to that line it would have been clearer. For some reason I assumed people already knew about F/A-XX. My mistake.

But otherwise I'm not sure what you are saying in response to the other part you quoted?

[FLYBOYJ]

Yes FlyboyJ, if I'd added "if it wins an order through F/A-XX" to that line it would have been clearer. For some reason I assumed people already knew about F/A-XX. My mistake.

No worries

But otherwise I'm not sure what you are saying in response to the other part you quoted?

If you gather everything up, I think its way too soon to even think about conceptual designs for a Super Hornet replacement as the UCAV world is still evolving and by the time the Pentagon is ready to plunk down money for this, the world and the mission might be a lot different than what's being advertised. As stated, a lot can happen in 15 years.

[Trebor]

I love the first one!

[Waynos]

Ah right, I get you now. I thought it might prove an interesting discussion point precisely because, as you rightly say, it is at such an early stage and so many options are still up for grabs.

There may be a parallel of sorts. It strikes me that F/A-XX is a similar sort of programme/requirement as the UK's FOAS in some respects. Although, in the finest British tradition, FOAS is no more, we are still pursuing the 'preferred option' that FOAS identified for our future needs. This involves a manned two seater that operates as a 'UCAV Leader' (for want of a better term) whilst itself being fully combat capable in its own right.

Taranis is the, current programme that, it is hoped, will lead to an operational UCAV. Either as a development of it or as a lead in to UK participation in an international venture (penny pinching again? what us? lol)

The 'UCAV Leader' element has been developed by BAE and QINETIC and recent flight trials occurred where a 'simulated UCAV (very much manned, just in case) was mission-led from a Tornado (I am presuming this involves a lot more than mere remote control )

This is where I see our possible future acquisition of a two seat F-35, providing the US builds one. Otherwise we would no doubt use a variant of the Typhoon T.2 for the job.

Now, being fanciful, the Boeing F/A-XX looks tailor made for this requirement at first glance so I don't see this proposal as necessarily detrimental to acquiring UCAV's. Another reason I am thinking along these lines was a report I saw a while ago where one of the US services, I cannot remember which one, is also looking at possible future UCAV operation in this manner, rather than the previously widely discussed 'fully autonomous' mode that has all the doomsday merchants wetting themselves (ie in the manner of the movie 'Stealth). IF, of course, it was the USN that was airing those thoughts, it all seems to fit like a jigsaw.

The potential here is quite stunning I think. I know lots can happen, both good and bad, but isn't speculation what a fair proportion of what this web site is all about?

[Waynos]

I love the first one!

I kind of prefer a mix with the wings of the lower one grafted onto the upper one

[red admiral]

There may be a parallel of sorts. It strikes me that F/A-XX is a similar sort of programme/requirement as the UK's FOAS in some respects. Although, in the finest British tradition, FOAS is no more, we are still pursuing the 'preferred option' that FOAS identified for our future needs. This involves a manned two seater that operates as a 'UCAV Leader' (for want of a better term) whilst itself being fully combat capable in its own right.

Do you mind if I ask where you're getting this information? I'm not aware of anything being released on this subject.

In the 1990s, the UK had FCBA (Future Carrier Borne Aircraft) which resulted in JSF (hopefully CV) though a number of other types were examined. This progressed into FOAS (Future Offensive Air System) which had a different focus. A number of types were examined for this, including JSF again. The BAeS designs (of which some images can be seen) are pretty much the ultimate manned strike/fighter aircraft . A lot more capability than JSF but likely more expensive. During the last decade, the threat changed and FOAS was discarded, being replaced by FCAC (Future Combat Air Capability) which I can't tell you anything about.

Taranis is the, current programme that, it is hoped, will lead to an operational UCAV. Either as a development of it or as a lead in to UK participation in an international venture (penny pinching again? what us? lol)

Sort of. Taranis is a technology demonstrator more than anything else (really effective at destroying wind turbines as well if you believe the press). Yet to fly but the programme seems to have been pretty successful. It puts the UK onto a similar level as the US for UCAV design so it doesn't just have to buy whatever comes out of X-45.

I'd assess the possibility of a two seat JSF as extremely unlikely. For a joint manned-unmanned air system? The technology has moved on since then.

Given the long lead times of aircraft (15 years is very little), I'd expect something based off X-45 for the USN's UCAV or the requirement to slip and more JSF (or developed JSF) being purchased.

[Waynos]

Do you mind if I ask where you're getting this information? I'm not aware of anything being released on this subject.

Not at all. I've been following BAE's UAV programme online (where permitted of course, much is released after the fact) and in Flight International for a number of years now. The stuff about the flight trials was on QINETIQ's own website, I tried to find it again to post a link but I'm afraid I can't anymore. There was a feature in Flight around a year ago that covered this and Taranis and how they tie in together in the UK's 'vision' for the future. I tried to find that on Flights online archive but its not sufficiently up to date.

Going back to those older impressions you referred to, they often showed a manned and unmanned version of the same design flying together, I recall. In reality we were never going to fund that sort of solution.

Sort of. Taranis is a technology demonstrator more than anything else (really effective at destroying wind turbines as well if you believe the press). Yet to fly but the programme seems to have been pretty successful. It puts the UK onto a similar level as the US for UCAV design so it doesn't just have to buy whatever comes out of X-45.

Yes, that's kind of what I was getting at (without the bit about wind turbines, lol)

I'd assess the possibility of a two seat JSF as extremely unlikely

It seems a logical progression to me, most types have a two seat counterpart. I'm not saying its certain, by any means, but I have haven't yet thought of a reason for them not to make one.

For a joint manned-unmanned air system? The technology has moved on since then.

This puzzles me, a lot of work is currently being put into making this a reality on both sides of the Atlantic and QINETIQ's recent experiment was a world first. In what way has it moved on? In the reports I've read the option to have unmanned delivery systems operating symbiotically with a manned formation is seen as highly desirable for the options it gives.

Given the long lead times of aircraft (15 years is very little), I'd expect something based off X-45 for the USN's UCAV or the requirement to slip and more JSF (or developed JSF) being purchased.

Or a mix of both, which is what I wouldn't be surprised to see.