Future Combat Air System (FCAS) - France/Germany

[Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik]

6th gen: Broadband, multi-spectral stealth, morphing wings, photonics, MUMT, DEW + core 5th gen features.

People know 6gen has been categoriged mostly like this since few years.
People are talking on many forums on each of these characteristics listed as they are likely to be seen in real.
However, morphing wings doesn't seem to be part of list, chatter, CAD speculations, etc. It could be part of long term research, not something which can be inducted in 15-20 years around world, especially in in IN & IAF.


The last point of potential suborbital flight was added to page on 28 dec 2024 citing article showing China's hypothetical "White emperor/Baidi" jet.

> ADA, DRDO has slides on DEW pod, TVC nozzle, but i couldn't find one on morphing wing.

> People know variable geometry wing, but morphing wing is something skeptical at this time. I did find some UNOFFICIAL articles by bloggers, journalists, that's all, very generic & superficial.
I couldn't find a diagram explaining practically how a trapeze perpendicular wing like of F-18 can become like highly swept delta & vice-versa.

> A wing has fuel, antennas, etc. I wonder how a morphing will will handle these components while changing shape.

The **** guys have this image -

7th gen: Hypersonic, metamaterials, quantum tech + core 6th gen features.

> Google search AI gives us this kind of answers based on content on Youtube, Facebook, Instagram, Quora, etc.

> In a time limited search, I can't find any thread or listed characteristics on 7gen anywhere. please let us know if you know.

> IMO it is premature to define 7gen. It is understood that every progressive gen would have better H/w & S/w. So every era has some generic, catchy, futuristic words which people can't explain & "meta materials", "Quantum computer" are today's buzz words, but that's not enough to define 7gen.

> And like i said, the emergence of agile hypersonic missiles & interceptors would impact decision to make manned or unmanned hypersonic aircraft.



It may be possible for S-400/500 & our tested interceptors to shoot down a hypersonic jet.



> Just the fuel requirement of hypersonic speed will put the jet at least the size of SR-71 with need to refuel in air.



> 4gen Rafale deal is so costly. 5gen deal costliier. It would take a fortune to make an entire fleet of hypersonic jet.

> Further we have to think about -
- pilots in spacesuit,
- weapons capacity of 7gen,
- seaparation from IWB at that high speed & altitude,
- getting detected in IR band due to friction creating plasma around, etc.
- poor maneuverability with inter-state turning radius,



> There are many pages on certain forums on historical hypersonic test articles, models, diagrams by Western nations, none got made or at least publicly known.

> I can believe a high supersonic jet to be 7gen like YF-12, mach 3-4

Manned or unmanned can be a design choice. Mig-41 will be a 7th gen, introduced by 2035, and will be manned in the beginning. Detailed design is complete and rumors of first flight before 2030. It was restarted after the F-47 program was green-lit.
The Russians are deliberately calling it 6th gen in order to steal the designation first, which will relegate the F-47, GCAP, J-50 etc to 5th gen status due to lack of high speed, high altitude performance. This is meant to create false-equivalence between PAK FA and F-47. Maybe the idea is to push the new jets down to 5.5th gen status like the Rafale and Typhoon were.
Previously too, the Russians were the first to claim the F-22 was 5th gen, which pushed the Rafale and Typhoon down to 4th gen, giving it a false equivalence with Su-27/30 even though these two jets were clearly a generation ahead. The Americans played along. So let's see if they will do the same this time.

> Physics, Chemistry, Maths of nature & hence scientific scale is same for everyone. Otherwise THAT'S POLITICS & PHILOSOPHY to show own weapons superior & others inferior. If every major jet making nations have their own internal way of describing generations like USA, China, Russia, Europe. That way nobody will ever agree on a common scale.China might call its J-20, J-35 as 4gen & J-36, J-50 as 5gen.

> New gen leap is said to occur when older airframe is insufficient & MLUs have their physical & cost limits. Hence, the only way of a global scale is to have a common set of core characteristics based on components & some optional custom ones based on performance.

> Yes we can see that Russians are quoting MiG-41 PAK DP to fly at more than SR-71's altitude of 85,000 ft & at Mach 3-4, that's High Supersonic, not Hypersonic. Russia is a continental country, so it needs high speed interceptor. USA wants to fight China in APAC so it may need one too. China is making J-36 for more payload. Who else?

> If POTUS said "F-47 will be most lethal, capable fighter. Nothing comes close to F-47 in speed, range, payload, etc so far.." then Russians will do something to counter it in form of high speed interceptor on the design philosophy of MiG-31 in their own words.
But i wouldn't call it 7gen.

> MiG-25 was considered 3gen. MiG-31 was considered 4gen. Russians might consider them a gen ahead but most of the world doesn't. Hence MiG-41 could be considered 6gen due to more payload, range, networked, DEW, MUMT, not bcoz of it very high altitude & high supersonic speed.

 

[randomradio]

I would be willing to buy this line if we had managed to solve our TF related woes. The way GoI has managed the Kaveri program & the question of acquiring a flying testbed doesn't fill me with hope.

We are gonna resolve it with French help though. The Japanese had bigger problems than engine alone.

I'm not that worried about a testbed yet. The Russian one is fine for Kaveri for now, and the French will help with AMCA's engine. Post that, 2035, yeah, we are gonna need our own stuff.

If the AMCA's induction timeline gets delayed enough we could be a 15 trillion-dollar economy before it enters service. Not really something to brag about.

How certain are we that the present induction timeline (2035) is solid?

If F414 is resolved soon, they should be able to meet that deadline to a certain extent, although I'm more focused on the definitive models after 2040 for AMCA.

But we are talking about a different issue. Rolling back AMCA will kill our entire aeropsace industry. Going for SCAF alone will ensure more imports even in the 2080s. So even if AMCA takes until 2045, we will have to stick with it. A stopgap can be imported to make up for the delays.

Furthermore, AMCA is a step up over the F-35 (even Su-57 in many ways) and will remain relevant for as long as the F-35 is. And it can be further modified into a 6th gen design by changing the rear fuselage and wings into a tailless configuration, as it was originally envisioned.

If the IAF wants an alternate jet, they need to find a way to do it along with AMCA. In any case, SCAF isn't meant for the same timeframe anyway.

Btw, the SCAF JV with India will be mostly France doing all the main work because the IAF believes the Indian industry is not ready for it yet. It is likely to go the same way as FGFA instead, where 50-50 became 85-15. So, AMCA isn't going anywhere. If the IAF pursues SCAF, it's going to be in parallel. I'm just challenging the journos' point.

 

[randomradio]

But one point they said is true, MK2 is outdated. I think MK2 still relevant against Pakistan &BD, but against Chinese this aircraft is outdated.

LCA Mk2?

No, it's relevant. The Chinese will have an even larger fleet of 4th gens compared to us.

 

[randomradio]

Well, in the hypothetical that India joins FCAS, this is exactly where Airbus' proposal of 2 different fighters makes sense, particularly for us. The bone of contention, outside of the workshare agreements, is the size of the jet itself. Spain-Germany's preference for long-range, heavyweight fits the bill as IAF's Su-30 replacement, and France's roughly Rafale sized fighter makes sense for IN's future airpower requirements. Our planners should hope that Airbus' proposal comes to fruition before making any concrete decisions (at least I would of I were in their shoes).

Yeah, I had brought up the 2 different airframe options in my discussions with Picdel two years ago. It's good if they pursue that.

 

[randomradio]

Upscaling is much easier (relatively) compared to downsizing. Given that space constraints are less extreme in a ~70,000 tonnes behemoth, a CLWR-B2 upscaled to ~250 MWth should fit the bill nicely, unless I'm missing some other factors which fundamentally differentiate the reactor design for sub use to that of a surface ship use which I'm happy to be educated on. Outside of the costs, I'd say the pros outweigh the cons.

IN wants a single 600 MW reactor on their carriers. BARC nuked the upscaling option too, said sub reactor cannot be modified for ships.

 

[randomradio]

People know 6gen has been categoriged mostly like this since few years.
People are talking on many forums on each of these characteristics listed as they are likely to be seen in real.
However, morphing wings doesn't seem to be part of list, chatter, CAD speculations, etc. It could be part of long term research, not something which can be inducted in 15-20 years around world, especially in in IN & IAF.

View attachment 50068
The last point of potential suborbital flight was added to page on 28 dec 2024 citing article showing China's hypothetical "White emperor/Baidi" jet.

> ADA, DRDO has slides on DEW pod, TVC nozzle, but i couldn't find one on morphing wing.

> People know variable geometry wing, but morphing wing is something skeptical at this time. I did find some UNOFFICIAL articles by bloggers, journalists, that's all, very generic & superficial.
I couldn't find a diagram explaining practically how a trapeze perpendicular wing like of F-18 can become like highly swept delta & vice-versa.

> A wing has fuel, antennas, etc. I wonder how a morphing will will handle these components while changing shape.

The **** guys have this image -
View attachment 50069

We are already testing it in the air in India.

India test morphing fighter jet wing tech in new DRDO breakthrough

India tests morphing fighter jet morphing-wing technology, as DRDO reveals a breakthrough to shape future combat aircraft.

aerospaceglobalnews.com

But yes, any attempt an aircraft with morphing wings will take us 15-20 years, but it's not due to the wings alone. We lack other foundational technologies that others already have.

> Google search AI gives us this kind of answers based on content on Youtube, Facebook, Instagram, Quora, etc.

> In a time limited search, I can't find any thread or listed characteristics on 7gen anywhere. please let us know if you know.

> IMO it is premature to define 7gen. It is understood that every progressive gen would have better H/w & S/w. So every era has some generic, catchy, futuristic words which people can't explain & "meta materials", "Quantum computer" are today's buzz words, but that's not enough to define 7gen.

Metamaterials in India:

India Unveils Groundbreaking 'Stealth Cloak' That Could Make IAF's Combat Fighters Nearly Invisible To Radars

By Air Marshal Anil Khosla (R) IIT (Indian Institute of Technology) recently unveiled the Anālakṣhya Project, a ground-breaking initiative to advance metamaterial surface cloaking technology. The project, led by researchers at IIT Kanpur, promises to enhance the strategic capabilities of the...

www.eurasiantimes.com

> And like i said, the emergence of agile hypersonic missiles & interceptors would impact decision to make manned or unmanned hypersonic aircraft.

View attachment 50083

It may be possible for S-400/500 & our tested interceptors to shoot down a hypersonic jet.

Hypersonic is meant for very high altitude, which complicates air defense in terms of numbers and expenses. Right now, you only need 1-2 missiles against a sub/supersonic aircraft. But will need multiple very large missiles against hypersonic. Plus it gives the aircraft more time to evade. It's all about improving survivability.

View attachment 50084

> 4gen Rafale deal is so costly. 5gen deal costliier. It would take a fortune to make an entire fleet of hypersonic jet.

Naturally, a combination is necessary. Just like fighters and bombers. Essentially a smaller, lighter sub/supersonic 7th gen jet operating alongside a larger 7th gen jet. One is in the 25-40T category as usual, the other in the 100-150T category.

> Further we have to think about -
- pilots in spacesuit,
- weapons capacity of 7gen,
- seaparation from IWB at that high speed & altitude,
- getting detected in IR band due to friction creating plasma around, etc.
- poor maneuverability with inter-state turning radius,

View attachment 50088

> There are many pages on certain forums on historical hypersonic test articles, models, diagrams by Western nations, none got made or at least publicly known.

> I can believe a high supersonic jet to be 7gen like YF-12, mach 3-4

View attachment 50087



> Physics, Chemistry, Maths of nature & hence scientific scale is same for everyone. Otherwise THAT'S POLITICS & PHILOSOPHY to show own weapons superior & others inferior. If every major jet making nations have their own internal way of describing generations like USA, China, Russia, Europe. That way nobody will ever agree on a common scale.China might call its J-20, J-35 as 4gen & J-36, J-50 as 5gen.

> New gen leap is said to occur when older airframe is insufficient & MLUs have their physical & cost limits. Hence, the only way of a global scale is to have a common set of core characteristics based on components & some optional custom ones based on performance.

> Yes we can see that Russians are quoting MiG-41 PAK DP to fly at more than SR-71's altitude of 85,000 ft & at Mach 3-4, that's High Supersonic, not Hypersonic. Russia is a continental country, so it needs high speed interceptor. USA wants to fight China in APAC so it may need one too. China is making J-36 for more payload. Who else?

> If POTUS said "F-47 will be most lethal, capable fighter. Nothing comes close to F-47 in speed, range, payload, etc so far.." then Russians will do something to counter it in form of high speed interceptor on the design philosophy of MiG-31 in their own words.
But i wouldn't call it 7gen.

> MiG-25 was considered 3gen. MiG-31 was considered 4gen. Russians might consider them a gen ahead but most of the world doesn't. Hence MiG-41 could be considered 6gen due to more payload, range, networked, DEW, MUMT, not bcoz of it very high altitude & high supersonic speed.
View attachment 50100

Mig-41 is expected to weigh 100T.

 

[Hydra]

Mig-41 is expected to weigh 100T.

100 T interceptor? Do they have the capability to build engine for such aircraft? And if yeas, what will be the wet& dry thrust?

 

[babablacksheep]

The difference between the two is small. Just 5 years

another claim that can't be verified until they actual show it.

And even if we accept it, its still half a decade.
If f47 is gonna be in early 2030s, let use 2033 as average, fcas will be 2038 at BEST after this 5 year delay, because I don't see French having any capabilities over Americans to fast-track it to reduce the gap given how fas Americans are progressing, french can't match that.

India's case, we need help elsewhere, not merely the core materials. We are behind in terms of cooling tech and mass production.

In french case, they alsk need help esle where, primarily in scale.
Plus according to you they are currently 5 years behind f47, a gap that I personally see increase in the future not decrease.

Sure, that makes it late 5th gen. Analog beamforming is early 5th gen. RBE2-XG is a step ahead.

The current Uttam Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, developed in India, primarily utilizes hybrid beamforming, which combines both analog and digital techniques.

Uttam varient for Virupaksha and Tejas mk2 will be digital.

Sure, that makes it late 5th gen. Analog beamforming is early 5th gen. RBE2-XG is a step ahead.

Digital beamforming uses a converter not a processor. The RBE has converter and processor on the TRM itself. Furthermore we are using SiC substrate while they are using CVD diamond which is multiple times more efficient.

Most industry experts expect the F5's radar to use GaN-on-SiC (Silicon Carbide), which is the current global "gold standard" for high-performance AESA radars. While France has demonstrated GaN-on-Diamond at the laboratory level, integrating it into a production fighter by 2030 (the F5's entry service date) is technically challenging due to cost and manufacturing.


DRDO has already achieved a major breakthrough in Gallium Nitride (GaN) on Silicon Carbide (SiC) technology
In late 2025 and early 2026, the DRDO officially confirmed that indigenous GaN technology is now deployment-ready.

It's expected to enter service in 2030 along with the F5.

*EXPECTED*

You don't build a demonstrator without the tech being ready first. It's the testing as a system bit that takes time. Individually, these technologies will be ready for the most part.

Looks like Americans readied their tech way before, now that prototype building has started for f47, while for FCAS even a demonstrator hasn't flown yet.

NGAD achieved TRL 6 in 2024. F-47 will achieve TRL 7 in 2028, just 1 year before SCAF.

SCAF is in TRL 3-4 at best, proof of concept stage with foundational technologies being readied.
American are way past that stage.
In 2029'z scaf's demonstrator will fly, while in 2028 F47's prototype will be fly according to current timeline.

I hope this gives you clues on how to read into things when it comes to development programs. Getting to first flight is a massive endeavour

And SCAF is 5 or more years behind Americans to achieve that massive endeavour.

and F-47 and SCAF are quite close

No.

They are all within 5 years of each other

I see SCAF being 7 years away from f47 at best.

They actually said that. Initial date was 2027, pushed to 2029.

*pushed* can be pushed even further.

The Americans started late, went slow, and then stopped. And then restarted. It allowed others to catch up.

Americans are still very much ahead even after slowing down, China is their direction competition which while has already flown prototypes, though still somewhat behind in some technologies readiness level like their VCE is still in demonstrator phase.

What do you mean imagination? What I posted is the actual schedule announced by ADA. I am skeptical of them achieving it of course, but this is the actual schedule.

*older* schedule, latest one is the recent one by Defence secretary.

Again, it's something we already know. It's recorded history

What's recorded in history is that rafale was delayed due to beaurocratic things.
It can help us speculate but not confirm that if beaurocratic hurdles were not there,rafale would have met its timeline, they are complicated programs both from program managing pov and technical pov.

We can tell only once it's been achieved.

EXACTLY

NGAD engine is expected to achieve TRL 8 in 2030. We can expect the main French engine of 11T to be ready just a few years later.

I don't.

 

[randomradio]

100 T interceptor? Do they have the capability to build engine for such aircraft? And if yeas, what will be the wet& dry thrust?

Of course. There are even heavier planes around. No clue about the thrust though.

 

[Hydra]

Of course. There are even heavier planes around.

But not a fighter jet or interceptor.

 

[randomradio]

another claim that can't be verified until they actual show it.

And even if we accept it, its still half a decade.
If f47 is gonna be in early 2030s, let use 2033 as average, fcas will be 2038 at BEST after this 5 year delay, because I don't see French having any capabilities over Americans to fast-track it to reduce the gap given how fas Americans are progressing, french can't match that.

It will never be verified though, they aren't interested in getting a new jet quickly. Their plan is to continue with Rafale if SCAF partnership fails.

And 5 years is quite short, which is what I'm getting at. They are not looking to compete with American or Chinese schedules. They have the tech for all this though.

In french case, they alsk need help esle where, primarily in scale.

The French believe in strategic autonomy. As for scale, they rely on exports.

The current Uttam Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, developed in India, primarily utilizes hybrid beamforming, which combines both analog and digital techniques.

Uttam varient for Virupaksha and Tejas mk2 will be digital.

Digital beamforming has nothing to do with GaAs or GaN. I'm talking about something else entirely.

Most industry experts expect the F5's radar to use GaN-on-SiC (Silicon Carbide), which is the current global "gold standard" for high-performance AESA radars. While France has demonstrated GaN-on-Diamond at the laboratory level, integrating it into a production fighter by 2030 (the F5's entry service date) is technically challenging due to cost and manufacturing.

That's actually why they are doing it much slower than everyone else.

*EXPECTED*

It's part of the Rafale F5, just like F414 is "expected" for LCA Mk2.

Looks like Americans readied their tech way before, now that prototype building has started for f47, while for FCAS even a demonstrator hasn't flown yet.

Generally speaking, France is a bit faster due to lack of competition. The Americans had to pick a winner.

No.

5 years is barely anything. Fighter development for a generation change is typically 20-25 years long.

AMCA started in 2010, we hope to get it done in 2035-40. The French stated their work on SCAF tech long ago, alongside the Americans.

I see SCAF being 7 years away from f47 at best.

Even more than that in the current situation. They are not competing with the Americans. If they want to compete with the Americans, plus independently, they can do it a lot faster than you think.

*pushed* can be pushed even further.

Look, you are confused between capability and reality. The French are already as capable as the Americans. Reality is they don't care.

Forget "pushed," SCAF can even get canceled this year if Germany backs out. Then the French will stop unless they find another money bag to partner with. We are discussing capability, not current events.

If SCAF P2 contract is not signed, there won't even be a demonstrator. They only plan on pursuing the engine at that stage.

Americans are still very much ahead even after slowing down, China is their direction competition which while has already flown prototypes, though still somewhat behind in some technologies readiness level like their VCE is still in demonstrator phase.

The Americans believe the Chinese are ahead.

*older* schedule, latest one is the recent one by Defence secretary.

Schedule wont change, only the dates will. For a 2029 first flight, production begins in 2033. For a 2031 first flight, production begins in 2035. That 4 year gap will remain 'cause that's under ADA's control.

What's recorded in history is that rafale was delayed due to beaurocratic things.
It can help us speculate but not confirm that if beaurocratic hurdles were not there,rafale would have met its timeline, they are complicated programs both from program managing pov and technical pov.

No, we know. And yes, bureaucratic, not technical.

I don't.

Lol, how else do you think the program will see progress then?

Rafale F5 will be inducted in 2030 with T-REX, which means the fully qualified engine will have to enter production in 2027. And if we are to see SCAF flying in 2033, then an initial qualified NGFE should become available in 2030.

AMCA engine's schedule is 13 years from contract to serial deliveries. 3 years to first flight, 4 years for initial qualification, 3 years for final, that's 10 years for R&D, and then 3 years for production. So signature in 2026 means delivery in 2039. I've always assumed 2040 for years now. SCAF engine development started in 2021, so 13 years would be 2034 for serial deliveries.

Anyway, I'm not confident SCAF will go through with Germany under current rules, but this has nothing to do with the French being technologically on par or not with the Americans. The Americans are the ones who screwed up, particularly Robert Gates.

 

[babablacksheep]

But not a fighter jet or interceptor.

Its all his speculation for now.
It could also be the stealth bomber project russia is working on

 

[randomradio]

But not a fighter jet or interceptor.

There are supersonic bombers around. Tu-160 has 245 kN turbofan. There's a more powerful version for Tu-160M and a dry version for their stealth bomber. So the tech exists.

Anyway Mig-31 is close to 50T, so Mig-41 is just twice that.

Although it has a different role, jets and engines of this size and weight are around.

 

[RationalGuy]

IN wants a single 600 MW reactor on their carriers. BARC nuked the upscaling option too, said sub reactor cannot be modified for ships.

Even USN doesn't operate 600 mw!!!!

 

[RationalGuy]

It will never be verified though, they aren't interested in getting a new jet quickly. Their plan is to continue with Rafale if SCAF partnership fails.

And 5 years is quite short, which is what I'm getting at. They are not looking to compete with American or Chinese schedules. They have the tech for all this though.



The French believe in strategic autonomy. As for scale, they rely on exports.



Digital beamforming has nothing to do with GaAs or GaN. I'm talking about something else entirely.



That's actually why they are doing it much slower than everyone else.



It's part of the Rafale F5, just like F414 is "expected" for LCA Mk2.



Generally speaking, France is a bit faster due to lack of competition. The Americans had to pick a winner.



5 years is barely anything. Fighter development for a generation change is typically 20-25 years long.

AMCA started in 2010, we hope to get it done in 2035-40. The French stated their work on SCAF tech long ago, alongside the Americans.



Even more than that in the current situation. They are not competing with the Americans. If they want to compete with the Americans, plus independently, they can do it a lot faster than you think.



Look, you are confused between capability and reality. The French are already as capable as the Americans. Reality is they don't care.

Forget "pushed," SCAF can even get canceled this year if Germany backs out. Then the French will stop unless they find another money bag to partner with. We are discussing capability, not current events.

If SCAF P2 contract is not signed, there won't even be a demonstrator. They only plan on pursuing the engine at that stage.



The Americans believe the Chinese are ahead.



Schedule wont change, only the dates will. For a 2029 first flight, production begins in 2033. For a 2031 first flight, production begins in 2035. That 4 year gap will remain 'cause that's under ADA's control.



No, we know. And yes, bureaucratic, not technical.



Lol, how else do you think the program will see progress then?

Rafale F5 will be inducted in 2030 with T-REX, which means the fully qualified engine will have to enter production in 2027. And if we are to see SCAF flying in 2033, then an initial qualified NGFE should become available in 2030.

AMCA engine's schedule is 13 years from contract to serial deliveries. 3 years to first flight, 4 years for initial qualification, 3 years for final, that's 10 years for R&D, and then 3 years for production. So signature in 2026 means delivery in 2039. I've always assumed 2040 for years now. SCAF engine development started in 2021, so 13 years would be 2034 for serial deliveries.

Anyway, I'm not confident SCAF will go through with Germany under current rules, but this has nothing to do with the French being technologically on par or not with the Americans. The Americans are the ones who screwed up, particularly Robert Gates.

US is still ahead in 6th gen their companies already flew prototypes albeit secretly around 2020. They're still flying next gen prototypes under the cover of darkness around Area 51.

These triangular shaped aircraft were also spotted as far back as 2014. Whether it's a next gen fighter or bomber idk. But even then, I am quite sure US has already tested 6th gen fighter much before China has which already puts them further along the curve.

And another bottleneck is engines where US is far and way ahead of France, France took 15 years almost to achieve M88 which can't hold a candle infront of F135 in thrust or MTBO reliability etc. US is even more ahead in 6th gen engines, so even if France can build an airframe as stealthy and novel as what the US can, they are decades behind in the engine front.

 

[randomradio]

Its all his speculation for now.
It could also be the stealth bomber project russia is working on

Stealth bomber will be around 200T.

 

[randomradio]

Even USN doesn't operate 600 mw!!!!

They do. I believe Nimitz is at 550 MWth and Ford is at 700 MWth.

BARC is designing a 200 MWe reactor for our ship, which should be around Nimitz's.

 

[randomradio]

US is still ahead in 6th gen their companies already flew prototypes albeit secretly around 2020. They're still flying next gen prototypes under the cover of darkness around Area 51.

These triangular shaped aircraft were also spotted as far back as 2014. Whether it's a next gen fighter or bomber idk. But even then, I am quite sure US has already tested 6th gen fighter much before China has which already puts them further along the curve.

And another bottleneck is engines where US is far and way ahead of France, France took 15 years almost to achieve M88 which can't hold a candle infront of F135 in thrust or MTBO reliability etc. US is even more ahead in 6th gen engines, so even if France can build an airframe as stealthy and novel as what the US can, they are decades behind in the engine front.

In terms of number of programs and maturity, the Americans are ahead. But in terms of possession of technologies, both countries are overall at par.

M88-4E was only surpassed by the F414 EDE a decade later. F135 is much newer and still not ready. The French have caught up with the F135 with the T-REX, at least in terms of TET, which is a bigger achievement due to its small size. We don't know the MTBO and reliability figures of either. Overall, they are on par here. The only difference is the Americans have a working demonstrator of a VCE while the French will start building one after the Phase 2 contract is signed with Germany. Then 3 years to build and start testing it.

 

[babablacksheep]

Stealth bomber will be around 200T.

Did some digging,.

Looking at these documents , maybe yeah 200tons

In terms of number of programs and maturity, the Americans are ahead. But in terms of possession of technologies, both countries are overall at par

American possessed and proved those technologies way before given their programs using those techs are at more mature stage or even in operational usage.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

When @randomradio is around, I don't need to bother anymore, and besides, if I said the same thing as him, there would be Australians and Americans who would come and make fun of me!