😂im old enough to remember they said something similar about windows 95, win 2000, nt, xp, 8.1, etc etc. Needs and desires of customers increase and change over time. Idk, creators keep limiting their imaginations by saying "aaaand...done." because an upgradable frame is, in time, an old, upgradable frame that isnt fit for the present and will need reimagining.
Trying to predict the future is incredibly hard. We often don't have the words, or even a concept of what will come. Making absolute statements about what will or won't be around, is extremely ignorant, borderline arrogant even. I'll make my own ignorant claim, and say that this video will age like milk 😁
Imagine a future conflict where a patrolling flight of aircraft detect an inbound threat, analyze it, download the info to a network that then uploads an upgrade to the aircraft...all in the same encounter. Crazy!!!
Yes agreed - crazy! How about as you approach an encounter with a known and analysed group of enemy combatants/devices, Big Military Brain AI at base has already simmed the battle thousands of times in the last 10 minutes of closure before uploading best vectors/courses of action including any needed upgrades to you and your cohort. Or does your onboard AI have the chops to do this sort of thing?
@@WillArtie Digging the concept of the "Big Military Brain AI" doing the "Game Theory calculations" 1000 times in a second, does a literal "shits its pants" moment and flashes a "Abandon All Stations" mere nano-seconds before a "total asset wipe-out" makes for a great Sci-Fi movie scene or action-packed written paragraph! Or a flipping IRL disaster because we placed too much reliance on automated systems! Sometimes, the very dangerous work of "forward deployments" pays big dividends in preventing unforeseen dangers!
@ottovonnekpunch1268 yes I like it! Win probability stayed under 30% over 120,000 game iterations so run-away was the best option lol. And of course the opposition is desperately gaming the encounter as well. I guess if you could broadcast believeable signatures for "ghost" units you could fool the opposition into thinking your force was larger or more capable? Def sci-fi material this kind of thing for film or writing. Thanks Otto!
I like that you made it very clear that the take away from this video is that the new tech will never be in generational fighter jet evolution, but will be in tech that consists of drones that swarm the area and can adapt and assist, and help as needed on the battlefield.
Why did I feel surprised this comment wasn't posted by an account with a pretty woman as a pfp and sus ink in bio 😂 This must be the most bott-y legit comment I've ever seen hahaha
@@ARGONUAT Yeah man, i just tried on destop and it worked fine. I've no idea why, your profile cant be accessed on mobile, its weird lol I thought as much, but found it funny how your comment sounded very reminiscent of typical bot posts, aka generic compliments not directly refferencing the video haha. That said, i do agree with what you said
@@Jugement Totally understandable. That’s basically my generic comment that I put in to simply feed the RU-vid algorithm so Alex gets additional credit for the great work that he does. I’m usually a bit more specific as I worked with a lot of the very early generation stuff that has become the amazing toys of today’s military.
The US Army just chose General Dynamics and Rheinmetall as finalists for the 4000 Bradley replacement IFVs. Could you do a Firepower series video about this program, the two finalists and the other three that dropped out. Or more generally the current state of IFVs (Bradley, CV90, Puma, Lynx) and their most likely future. Maybe even including anti air IFVs like some CV90 variants and SkyRanger.
The F-35 is already a supercomputer with wings. I always thought the defining feature of 6th gen was gonna be a max-unstable flying wing design that leverages all this cutting edge tech to essentially perfect aircraft aerodynamics.
Anytime a metric is developed to try to get a handle on something abstract, the post-hoc metric starts to become the intended goal. A great example not in aerospace, but economics is GDP. it used to be a metric for hitrocial economic performance, but then governments started manipulating their numbers to achieve better GDP for marketing terms.
then it will be dogshit in a thing atmosphere. it is a totally different enviroment. past the Karman line aerodynamic surface alteration wont work, you need to use thrust, above the line then the aerdynamic surfaces wont work. And please dont be so stupid to say include both. as having both comes with a weight penalty that would reduce the performance in both enviroments
@@jukeseyable still this is how it would be with 7th gen that go space too. splashed by A-A rocket over a distance of 3000 to 8000 to 12000 km, from 350 km high and mach 10+ (~3,5 km per second) impact. for info, you need mach 24+ (7,8 km/s) to be fast enogth to reach an loworbit without fallin down. a fight with lasers, will become dogfight.
@@danjames-ud7nr i said: fights with laserguns will become dogfights that with little 🧠 also be total diffrend to today hobs and guns (dogfight). but if you say so... it will probably be the 6th gen and 7th/8th interplanetar like starship just in small and dirty
I just had a fun idea of a cool fun video I’d definitely watch if you made Alex. Going through futuristic SYFY movie or shows like Stargate SG-1’s space plane the F-302 Battlestar Galacticas Viper MRK1-7 or even the awesome X-Wing from Star Wars. Of these 3 planes that can operate in both vacuum and atmospheric flight. How close in technology do you think we are from making our first space fighter planes like these amazing ships. Personally I think the F-302 is the one we’re close enough to build to fly in atmosphere but in regards to space flight there’s still 1 major hurdle we haven’t got to yet that I know of. That’s both a pair of engines that can fly both atmosphere and vacuum as well as a powerful enough fuel to make the plane fly!!!
Maybe we should designate an aircraft by the generation it was developed and went into service. In that respect, the F-22 and F-35 are "millenials", and their successors might be "Gen-Z". The F-16 and F-15 are Gen X. The F-4 Phantom is a Boomer, and the F-105 is in the Silent Generation, and the P-51 is in the Greatest Generation. ;)
I have three ideas as to why we wouldn’t have 7th generation fighter jets. 1. They will be replaced by a better propulsion system similar to the jump from propeller aircraft to jet engine aircraft. 2. They will no longer be needed because by the time they would come out, space warfare would be a possibility and spacecraft may be more important than a new fighter jet. 3. The world superpowers building these jets will start a war which will change so much about the world that the next generation will never get a chance to come. (These are all my personal ideas and I am aware there are many flaws with all of them. I just thought it would be interesting to think about it in other ways.)
Yes I agree that the only two things that could really put these fighters into a new generation would be either an entirely new revolutionary propulsion system, and space capability. Otherwise it feels like we are reaching the pinnacle of what improving aerodynamics and “stealth” can do.
Yes current trends show that ww3 will be majorly in space , the next war after will be 100% in space And there will be manned " fighters" in space because war is too unpredictable for machines
1. Faster engines are unnecessary and anything better would be a jet engine anyways as you need to expell matter backward if you want to accelerate forward. You watched too many scifi movies. 2. Space warfare in orbit will NEVER be a thing because of Kessler syndrome wrecking everything around earth and prohibiting humanity from getting there for centuries. If anyone dared to do that they'd just start nuclear war instead. Results will be the same, collapse of civilization. Again, too many scifi movies. 3. Agreed.
Before there was a concept of fighters by generation, there was the Century "Series". These aircraft were the stuff of the Air Force-led transition from piston to turbojet power. It was an odd assortment including three interceptors, two multi-role fighters, one legendarily tough ground attack bird and a very pretty mockup that may have flown in a wind tunnel. USAF had to spec a few large personnel transports before they could throw in a kitchen sink.
It would be more fair to point out there's a difference in generational designation, depending on whether someone's referring strictly to jet fighters or all fighters in general (my personal preference for a proper historical overview and to take account of inevitable future non-jet propulsion systems). The latter would be... 1: Biplanes and triplanes of WW1. 2: Monoplanes. 3: Jets. 4: Jets with guided air-to-air missiles and beyond. 5: Stealth with supercruise.
I think a "7th gen" would be a scramjet, something similar to the Dark Star on Top Gun that be able to do combat above the Karman line (100km) and drop precision bombs and Air to Air missiles
It's not the plane, it's the pilot. You briefly mentioned how the upgrades will happen while the pilot is asleep. Actually, the upgrade can happen while the pilot is flying. The technology they are using is Kubernetes in a Rancher package.
I imagine a fighter with hypersonic speed and complete stealth with option to not just use their own internal weapons but able to use weapons available in the entire theater of war. Same time able to control dozens of ai powered drone. This fighter will protected by not just its own internal capabilities but asl by drone.
Me -The reason there won't be a 7th gen fighter is simple. Everyone knows that the melee's job is to get the squishy spellcasters to about level 5. Mid to late game is completely dominated by spell casting classes. Hybrid classes enjoy slightly longer longevity, but like the fighters before them they too fall off sharply at about 10. Steve- We're talking about jets. Me- I didn't stutter.
nice , can see them going in that direction . . . sounds like how Germany in WW2 took the Bf /Me 109, a pre war design and kept updating it so it was considered top of the line (prop wise) by the wars end.
@@jamesgardner4126 every aircraft from the rear has a huge IR and radar signature. That’s also a completely null point anyway, if the enemy is already behind you you’ve already lost and stealth is more than likely not providing any advantage anymore
I mean have you seen F18's? It's simply impossible to be less stealthy with a full internal munition storage compare to F18 wing mounted missiles. Come on.
I think we do have a somewhat concrete definition of the different generations of combat aircraft, at least in that we have a certain set of attributes that fit different generations. 1st gen: ww1 biplanes and monoplanes 2nd gen: ww2 era prop planes. 3rd gen: post ww1 jet aircraft up to around the vietnam era where we saw overlap with 4th gen 3.5 gen: an intermingling era between the early jet fighters that we saw directly after the second world war and the the later 4th generation. an example of what I view as a 3.5th gen aircraft is the F-4 phantom. 4th gen: more sophisticated combat aircraft where we saw more advances being made, F-14, F-15, MIG-29, Eurofighter typhoon. these are the most common aircraft we see, with a hard emphasis on versatility and adaptability, the "multi role" generation. 4.5 gen: intermingling between 4th and 5th gen aircraft with 4th gen platforms seeing upgrades to keep them up to modern standard (F-15EX for example) 5th gen: the stealth generation, the currently most advanced generation of aircraft with an emphasis on air superiority through stealth technology. 6th gen: multi system integration with a hard emphasis on compatibility with other platforms and systems, the "smart generation" it will also have an emphasis on multi role capability through modularity in design. the characteristics of this generation have been seen in limited ways with the F-35, honestly I would call the F-35 a 5.5 gen, as it is a 5th gen but shares aspects of future 6th gen aircraft. 6th gen will have a larger focus on the modularity, being able to be upgraded and outfitted however they are needed for a given assignment and communications seamlessly with other systems. I believe that as we see more and faster advancements, we won't have a good idea of what "generation" certain aircraft fall into, we will have to look back after the fact to see what eras saw what characteristics. we didn't know what 5th gen would entail before we got to it, and we did not know what 6th gen would entail until recently.
Forgive a naive question, but couldn't computer-controlled wingmen be directed from a station on the ground, or a carrier, with other wingmen functioning as relays for the signal? If you then give the wingmen aerial refueling abilities, the last American fighter jock may already have been born.
Manned fighters are nearly dead. The closest we might see is an airborne drone control aircraft where operators can have line of sight communication to their drones to retask and give kill approval.
When I saw the title of this video I assumed the main reason that there would never be a 7th generation fighter was because the next major leap in technology would lead to all fighters being drones. The 6th generation fighter is already heading in that direction, so in my opinion by the 7th they will all be drones with AI controlled from far far away using satellites. 🤔 Thoughts?
based on combat capability, 6th gen fighters with their air teaming with drones would be equivalent to individual air squadrons in terms of strike capability, a 7th gen might be equivalent to a group
God I hope this trickles down into general aviation, how cool would it be to switch from to switch from to switch from a fast comfortable cruiser into a rugged backcountry plane and so on
Could you do a video about the future of Shorad? Will short range air defense provided by the laser stryker? Will the Bradley replacement IFV XM30 function as an anti air cannon? Should the US look at the SkyRanger / Skynex / millenium gun system? And will there be a Stinger replacement with a better battery, targeting, and most importantly more affordable? Or is this affordable future the APKWS guidance upgrade for the cheap and plentiful Hydra 70mm rocket? Should we slap that on Avenger Hummvees? Or IRIS-T? And how are M-shorad Strykers doing?
It's kind of like Naval ships. In WWII, ship classes sort of made sense. Now days, Frigate, Destroyer, Cruiser, not so much. It's kind of like, you paid for it, you own it, you can call it whatever you want to.
I’ve said it in the past, the Generation designation is for an American aircraft. We do it today prominently in the US automotive sector, also in American aircraft. It’s not meant for foreign aircraft, us and others have tried to adapt it to the world stage and it gets messy because of the ideology behind the rest of the pack is very different.
Wow! This is so cool! Not only will this be a better process for military jet evolution, but it will also be more difficult for the enemy to know "what" its opponents capabilities are? In other words, the enemy won't know what version of a fighter jet they are up against and that will make the choice to engage or not engage far more difficult. For example, one version of a form factor might have a laser cannon, while another has radar jamming instead of a laser cannon. This would also make it far cheaper to deploy more purpose built "plane body form factors" that are specialized for niche missions. Thus, the "main frame engine module" becomes the do it all component, while the body design can be cheaply swapped out to optimize mission capabilities. Perhaps with 3D printers or new tech for creating plane body form factors, they could make it cheap to create multiple mission specific "skins" that can travel with the plane and be swapped out on the battle field in real time as the situation evolves. The same concept could be used for the wing man drones which themselves, could fly with different "skins" to optimize them better for accomplishing specific tasks on the mission to assist the "primary" to accomplish his mission. This is such a cool idea, you actually have to make up words and phrases to try to better describe your thoughts about it! This really moves plane hardware design evolution processes closer to the constant stream of "updates" used to advance software design. I love it!
@@angelaferkel7922 I bet your fun at soviet parties. Wait, don't tell me, let me guess. Your real name is Olga! And that smile with a total of not one, but three gold teeth....Ooo-Lah-Lah Olga!
I more fully support updating older planes too. I am a BIG fan of the F-15EX and would love to see it done to the F-16 and F/A-18E/F as well. The F-35 can cover the stealth angle,if needed and if they decide to update the F-22,all the better although I think the F-15EX is more than enough to cover the air superiority angle.
Can we all please just stop calling it an F/A18, it's so inconvenient just call it an F18. I do agree though with upgrading older planes... and at this point I don't really see the alternative... By the time NGAD releases it would cost 400 - 500 per mil. per plane... so I would much rather upgrade like 10 F15's with that money...
@@galvinstanley3235 hence why they need an overhaul. The EX is not old,its based on the F-15SA and would be very modern. I am just saying do the same thing to the others,although I can understand why it might not even be feasible.
I thought the fundamental problem with NGAD is that if you can do some of the missions with the F-35 and wingmen and some with B-21 and wingmen, then what is the mission set that requires an NGAD?
It's meant to be an air superiority fighter. A true 'fighter' aircraft to threaten and conduct air to air combat or air interdiction missions. The F35 is a multi role fighter and air based combat multiplier. I still wouldn't take it over an F22 in a dog fight though. NGAD is meant to deter the enemy from putting any of their own aircraft in the sky and maintain your air superiority or, preferably, air supremacy.
@@heathwilliams9754 Except dog fighting is dead right? Especially with a multi-seat drone controller like the NGAD. It is much bigger than an F-22 or F-35 from what we have seen so far. That means it will not be dog fighting but using missiles (probably Beyond Visible Range) to do its work in conjunction with its drone wingmen. At that point, I can see ISR missions and strike missions being B-21 controlled. Air Superiority missions being F-35 controlled. We already have a limited number of F-22s because the pure Air Superiority mission is just not that broad. Which leads to, why make this when the vast bulk of missions can be covered by F-35 and B-21. So, the question to me is why make a pure Air Superiority fighter when we would more likely need an F-35 replacement instead of an F-22 replacement.
@jimsackmanbusinesscoaching1344 I think a big reason is the need for something with more range for a possible conflict in the Pacific. Also, advancements in stealth design and coatings would make the NGAD significantly more stealthy and robust than what we have now, and would be a big plus in dealing with China's anti-access area-denial tactic. A tailless design with ceramic based RAM that is tough, low-maintenance, and able to withstand higher temps alone would be a big advantage over the f35 and f22, not to mention all the other high-tech goodies that have been floated like adaptive cycle engines.
@heathwilliams9754 no one said dogfighting. You are confusing all air-to-air combat with "dogfighting." There's more to A2A than just that, and yes, a plane can still specialize in those other areas.
I like to think of it like this. Pc vs Mac. If you have a Mac you have to go to apple for upgrades. If you have a PC, you can go to numerous companies that make components and you pick the one you want.
I see a lot of comments here about 7th gen fighters possibly having EXO atmospheric capabilities but I don't quite think we're going to do that with 7th gen. I think if we get a 7th gen they are going to be the kind of revolutionary change we saw between the transition from piston-powered aircraft to jet power. Currently in early stages of theory and prototyping are technologies that could enable a radical change in the deployment of aircraft. I'm specifically talking about power beaming and other forms of remote power delivery. It is physically possible to build a scramjet or even ramjet type engine that instead of using ignited kerosene to heat the air and provide thrust, it uses electrical energy to heat the air and provide thrust. I would honestly expect to see, maybe in the next 30 years, an aircraft that carries minimal fuel, but with the assistance of either a ground-based station or satellites and maybe both can fly non-stop from London to Shanghai the long way without aerial refueling. And I honestly think that will be available before an EXO atmospheric fighter craft. It will probably be first implemented in larger aircraft like cargo or bombers, but I don't see why it couldn't be done in a fighter sized package. I dont actually consider beamed power to be that big of a difference as to reset the generation count like we did between piston and jets. Beamed power engines work pretty simularly to fuel burning engines, its just the method of heating the air that changes. Airflow is still simular, thrust is still created by throwing the expanded and heated air out the back of a nozel.
In the 1970s and 80s, when America still had a substantial manufacturing base, it took a really long time to build an F-15. At some point losses aren't really sustainable.
7th Generation, aircraft that can go into space, perform an exo-atmospheric battle, and/or hop out of the atmosphere, re-enter and perform combat operations.
The whole "generational" thing has become so in vogue that it's also become irrelevant. As always, Alex, great content! I'd really like to see you dive into some of the functional strategies the military aviation community is dealing with: low cost drone defense, CAS, etc.
Ironically, the F-22 has a lower power off stall speed than both the P-51 and the F-5, and when using power, the F-22 effectively has no stall speed. When ferrying, or performing non-critical flights, both jets are often flown at speeds that a P-51 can easily manage. 250-350kts is a typical cruise speed within US airspace for those jets, and it's likely the same speed they were flying for that heritage flight as well, something that the P-51 is certainly capable of while remaining within economy power settings. All four of those planes were quite comfortable at the speed they were flying. The biggest discrepancy in speed between the P-51 and these jets is the high speed flight regime, everything else is remarkably similar. Hope that helps put things into perspective.
Absolutely correct. This type of categorization should be left to historians. If we are really going to classify fighters it should be on some type of tier system based on craft currently in service. Such that an A tier fighter can dominate any lower tier and so on. The lower the tier, the greater the domination.
1st gen: biplanes 2nd gen: prop monoplanes 3rd gen: early jets 4th gen: jets with radars 5th gen: stealth jets 6th gen: stealth jets with hive mind that can control drone wingmen 7th gen: stealth jets that can escape terminal velocity and operate in low orbit 8th gen: can operate in both atmosphere and space in one flight 9th gen: nuclear powered 10th gen: light speed interplanetary travel If we survive WW3 anyways
Everything will be so stand-off eventually that a stealth bomber AI drone type will replace fighters entirely. There’s simply zero reason to ever be close enough to require the maneuvering characteristics of a fighter. That will be the responsibility of missiles and much smaller unmanned attack drones.
To be honest with you. The B21 checks most of the boxes outlined in your video, speculating on what capabilities the NGAD fighter would need for the Pacific theater. It's the first plane that came to mind when you reported the airforce may not pursue a next generation fighter. Imagine a highly stealthy fight with long legs that could carry a number of wingmen drones internally. Launch those drones when close to the battle space. Then, hang back while commanding those drones during the fight.
So, I don't know how I feel about open source code and I hope it means something totally different to the Air Force than how most people see it. They should have a test set of code, where a developer of hardware/software can test what they're doing in a platform, and maybe that platform even includes aircraft, but THEN I think the Air Force should have proprietary code where basically they replace the part of the code they provided for the developer to make a working system. Consider a command to shoot a missile. It has code to accomplish this where it takes all the inputs and makes a solution, and then fires when the operator tells the system to based on conditions being met for a firing solution. There's a lot of functionality there that a company doesn't have to worry about if the Air Force provides open source code for different functions, especially dealing with getting data from different sensors. But that doesn't have to be the code used in an operational fighter because it could be swapped out with secure code that very few people work with, NEVER to be able to access via the internet. So because a system dev didn't have to write code for different functionality since the Air Force provided it, it's easy for the Air Force to replace their open source functions with proprietary functions. THAT is how I HOPE the Air Force means open source. It's open source when being developed, but later turned into proprietary code.
No arguments about the "generation" classifications. Having worked in IT for a few decades, there is always a new system bus/architecture/etc. etc. It will trigger new capabilities and it will reflect the airframe it uses because it will need every edge and every inch to stay alive. It'll need more powerful generators or require more or less shielding... the physical will always reflect the capabilities and vice versa. The Next Big Stealth Thing will not be a code update, at least not every time.
I am 100% confident that UAP propulsion was reversed engineered many years ago. When revealed in an overt, contemporary vehicle, the generational taxonomy will end.
The most visible technology that could go on 7th gen aircraft are rotary detonation engines which are supposed to operate from stationary to hypersonic speeds and is extremely fuel efficient.
Sorry, Alex, but I think you're mistaken on this one. We can't possibly predict what new tech is going to come along in say, a decade or more. In the 1930s, supersonic jet fighters would've been inconceivable. In the 1970s, stealth would've been equally inconceivable. Both were completely transformative tech. Well, we already know about 2 possible developments we could see in the next few decades: hypersonic flight and spaceflight-capable jet-rocket hybrids. What would you call either of those? "6th-gen plus"? Neither of them is possible using a modular system based on existing 5th-gen fighters; they would require clean sheet of paper designs. So it's silly to say "we're reaching the end of generational concepts".
Alex, I was going to say that there will be no Gen 7 fighter because I believe that the NGAD will be the last manned fighter; I think that all fighters after that will be unmanned, AI platforms. Even now, the USAF is testing AI in an F-16, and that AI equipped F-16 is wiping the floor with manned fighters in exercises. Because AI doesn't have the same physical limitations of a human pilot, e.g. blacking out at 9 Gs, an AI controlled fighter can perform maneuvers that a human controlled fighter cannot. Also, with an unmanned fighter, there isn't the same infrastructure required for a human pilot; there's no seat, life support, or other systems adding weight to the aircraft.
Modular design has been proven to not being able to survive longer than other designs in different even easier fields of industry. And it will so in aviation as well.
Thank you for another informative video. The modular design concept with core elements is the may forward, using automated assembly and new 3-d additive manufacturing. The airframes will be cheaper to produce and maintain, and with open architecture software easier to upgrade than the F-22, and F-35.
ITS NOT ABOUT DESIGN! its about capability. Let me break it down, 1st generation is your jet engine, this offered a new capability in terms of fighter design. Speed created an untouchable aircraft compare to piston. 2nd generational was really about optimizing the aircraft with the jet engine, things like wing design really pushed the bounds of the engines creating an aircraft that was superiority in every way. 3rd generation is really where we see the deployment of missiles, the F4 phantom is a good example of this where they completely removed the gun of the pervious two generations and relying hugely on missiles. 4th generation is really a combination of all generations, attempting to create this complete fighter that could shoot and dodge missiles, that could dogfight with guns and win. 5th generation is where you move away from the conceptual fight and rely more on stealth and surprise, still pushing the bounds of 4th gen capabilities to new heights. What is 6th generation, cost cutting measure of no pilot and the sale of modules rather then planes with this concept of being disposable. your lolly ganging are your own inability to consider what a 6th generation fighter looks like, well to you it looks like money so yeah... Why spend that research and development money when you can just rebrand your upgraded 4th gen fighters and sell them at huge price points? AI doesn't offer that generational gap in capabilities, more so because the pilots are really no better then todays pilots and many would argue are 1million times worse when dealing with an unknown threat. Your just in marketing trying to sell a capability that you don't have, never will have and i would argue with diversity and covid19 attrition has alienated the defence companies from any and all levels of intelligence required to even design a 6th gen fight, let alone prototype it. Thing about competent people, there are always more job opportunities out there, the moment incompetent people demand authority over you, start demanding things like getting medically experiemnted on or forcing you to work with woman and blacks. Well you just walk away and find a job where you can thrive, rather then under pressure by a know nothing on a power trip. Culture matters and the socialists construct that is the military complex and its pathways into politics leave a sour taste in the private capitalistic society and the people who thrive within it. Fact is Americans want to strip their own militaries ability to wage war, NOT INCREASE IT! because they have turned into nothing but terrorists.
@@Unknown-gi1uj The f16 will be nullified without the f16 radar remotely aware of f35 presence,there’s stealth technology for you to learn from.When fat Amy can’t speed why not use the stealth to steer the end sign much quicker to the target!
7th gen fighters can be like the ones in independence 2 movie where the jets can travel to space or lets say luna then return back to earth, for earth only fighters i can say 6th gen will be the last generation of fighters
That is a great concept. Although iu do worry that the 6th. Get. and beyond is more susiciptle to hacking by countries who specialize in that activity!
There are still going to be incremental generations of fighters/bombers beyond the 6th gen. What’s going to change is the frequency in which we make that next step for all the reasons discussed here
This has applied to CPUs for years now. Those numbers like 7 nanometer and 5 nanometer are just marketing today, they don't technically mean anything specific, and haven't for years now. It just means the lower number is more advanced, more transistors and higher performance. Nothing really more specific than that.
The biggest problem with these 5th Gen fighter jets is cyber warfare.Sure its not like hacking a personal CP with Windows or Apple OS but anything that can be updated OTA and has a wireless internet connection could be vulnerable to a foreign military with a high tech cyber-warefare division with thousands of hackers and a massive budget. ( i would of thought updates would be done with special military hardware connections via hardware that doesn't have WIFI or Bluetooth etc )
That’s an interesting paint scheme on the f35, is the white radar absorbent? It’s nice to see the Lightning I, there’s a lot of good air show camera footage in this upload. It’s amazing to see how fast jets evolved between the Korean and Vietnam wars. Now with jets like the F35, are we near the peak of jet aircraft technology?
Those roumers where around in the early 70's 🎉😂 UK Japan Italy started building 6th gen this month. I hope i live long enough to find out. In the end it's only a designation.
I think its important to remain open the the concept that new technology will arise; it always seems like the most advanced technology could be the limit, but im sure in 50 years it will be clear that an entire upgrade is necessary. upgrading old technology will be cheaper and more common, but entirely new technologies will be applied to war and the sword will once again shatter the shield prompting a new shield to be designed.
Generation designation were made to roughly to represent certain characteristics that the Aircraft had to achieve which were not (or difficultly) achievable by the previous generation. The goal of these designations were to indicate the aforementioned aircraft was designed at the start with that "new" capability in mind. Now, it does not mean that certain of these capabilities were not retro-actively installed within the rest of the fleet. But it had to be part of a special retrofit program to "up-grade" them to the "standard" of that new Generation. Hence, the F-35 IS a 5th Gen aircraft as Stealth was the dominant feature of it's design with the idea of multi-roles capabilities in mind. And in order to support that "multi-role" capability, it stepped into some of the features required for what would now be considered 6th Gen Aircraft (i.e: Sensor fusion, networking & open architecture) However, the F-35 was NOT design in the get-go with 6th Gen capabilities in mind as those were not "defined" yet. My guess is the next 2 aircraft Generations will be more "conceptually" defined than "Physically" defined (i.e: Compute capacity, SW integration, Networking, Drone) The goal will probably be more about making dangerous, modular drones than human rated aircrafts considering the "Distributed Lethality" Doctrine now employed. However, I see a place for the 7th Gen to touch the realm of Hypersonic with complete drone integration in the SW architecture. (that would not be a 6th Gen characteristic) By that time, if SpaceX succeed with Starship and a robust LOE economy gets going, the Space Force and their space systems will become more "dominant" in the discussions.
