The US Navy and Air Force have become a tale of two sixth-generation fighter programs, with the former service pressing ahead with its F/A-XX and the latter holding fire on its NGAD. The divergent directions raise questions about the services’ future interoperability and the ability of the US to maintain air superiority in a future conflict with China.
US Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Lisa Franchetti recently announced that the Navy plans to award an F/A-XX contract soon, with defense contractors Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman all in the running to build the carrier-based combat jet, Air & Space Forces Magazine reported.
The F/A-XX aims to transcend and replace the F/A-18 Super Hornet and E/A-18 Growler with advanced sensors, lethality, range and integration with unmanned systems. According to the Air & Space Forces Magazine report, the fighter is expected to enter service in the 2030s.
At the same time, the Air Force’s highly anticipated sixth-generation NGAD, designed to replace the F-22 Raptor, faces potential budget cuts, with Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall reportedly seeking a more affordable design, the same news report said.
The Air & Space Forces Magazine report notes both services aim to align their future aircraft plans to ensure complementary capabilities. But while the US Air Force’s NGAD and US Navy’s F/A-XX advance unmanned integration and new technologies, they each face distinct challenges due to different priorities.
In a December 2023 article for The National Interest, Maya Carlin notes that the US Air Force’s NGAD project, rooted in 2014 DARPA studies, aims to replace the F-22 Raptor with a fleet of 200 stealth jets and 1,000 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) designed as “loyal wingmen.” The UAVs are less survivable but numerous and intended to overwhelm adversaries, including China’s now larger air fleet.
In line with Kendall’s search for a more affordable NGAD solution, Asia Times mentioned in August 2024 that the US Air Force is considering reviving its light fighter concept to address the NGAD’s cost challenges. This concept, resembling a scaled-down F-35, emphasizes adaptable, software-centric aircraft over traditional hardware-focused approaches.
The development comes in response to rising criticism of the NGAD project, with each sixth-generation stealth jet estimated to cost nearly US$250 million. The light fighter concept aims to balance high-end capabilities with cost-effective solutions to counter rapidly evolving new threats.
For the US Navy’s F/A-XX, Carlin notes it is designed to replace the F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and EA-18G Growlers by the 2030s, potentially incorporating drones and advanced stealth capabilities.
In March 2023, Asia Times mentioned that the F/A-XX is expected to feature advanced technologies such as modular design, AI and drone swarms and will serve as a “quarterback” in manned-unmanned teaming operations.
This development is a response to China’s advancements in fighter jet technology, including the J-31/FC-31 and the J-20, which may serve as a base for China’s sixth-generation fighter.
The F/A-XX is a significant advancement in the US-China air power rivalry, particularly in the Pacific region, where vast distances challenge the operational range of current US carrier-based fighters. The F/A-XX aims to address these limitations and maintain US air superiority in future conflicts.
Carlin notes that programs emphasize stealth, supermaneuverability, and digital designs, reflecting a shift towards unmanned operations influenced by recent conflicts. She mentions that the US aims to maintain air superiority through technological innovation, anticipating reduced dogfighting due to advanced sensors and long-range weapons.
As China develops its next-generation airframes, the US military’s focus on quantity and advanced capabilities underscores the strategic importance of these programs in future conflicts, Carlin says.
While both programs share similarities, such as the teaming of manned and unmanned systems, the NGAD is more focused on multi-domain operations involving long-range, land-based missions, whereas the Navy’s F/A-XX emphasizes naval-specific needs, such as carrier compatibility and extended strike ranges over large maritime areas.
However, conflicting budget priorities might keep the US Navy’s next-gen fighter plans on the ground. This month, USNI reported that in a recent letter to the House and Senate Armed Services committees, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin warned that funding a second Virginia-class submarine in fiscal year 2025 defense budget would jeopardize the F/A-XX program.
According to USNI, Austin’s letter emphasized that adding a second submarine would necessitate a US$400 million cut from the NGAD program, rendering it “unexecutable” and impairing the US Navy’s future aircraft capabilities.
USNI says that the US Department of Defense (DOD) has proposed a single submarine and a US$8.8 billion investment in the submarine industrial base over the next five years, diverging from its previous requests for two submarines annually.
While the US Navy and US Air Force grapple with how to speed up their respective next-generation fighter programs, the future of air superiority may lie in emerging technologies and innovative air superiority concepts, not costly sixth-generation fighters.
In May 2024, Asia Times noted that investing in sixth-generation and beyond fighter jets could waste resources and that the US military should prioritize more affordable unmanned systems and space-based weapons platforms, which are better suited to future strategic requirements.
Investing in overly complex and expensive warplanes may also hinder the US’s military competitiveness vis-à-vis China. For example, the US Air Force stopped producing the F-22 in favor of the F-35, which is less suitable for air superiority missions.
As such, the US may consider alternative concepts of air superiority for future conflicts. Peter Porkka and Vilho Rantanen argue in a September 2024 War on the Rocks article that the traditional goal of achieving air superiority is unrealistic and costly, especially in near-peer great power conflicts.
Noting lessons of the ongoing Ukraine war, Porkka and Rantanen highlight the challenges posed by modern integrated air defenses and the limitations of air forces in suppressing these defenses at scale. They emphasize a shift from air superiority to enhancing capabilities that support joint operations in contested airspaces.
Porkka and Rantanen advocate using alternative methods, such as long-range fires, drones and space-based capabilities that can achieve similar effects with lower risks and costs.
They urge military leaders to adopt a more realistic and flexible approach to airpower, acknowledging the complexities of modern warfare and the need for a Plan B in the face of increasingly capable adversaries.