Picture: Sneak Peek at 6th Gen?

[[email protected]]

"It's Boeing's latest artist's conception of the
U.S. Navy's proposed F/A-XX replacement for
the F/A-18E/F, notionally needed on carrier
decks around 2025. It's described as "6th
generation", but quite what that means I'm not
sure - expect that it's tailless for all-aspect
broadband stealth, like that other F/A-XX
candidate, Northrop Grumman's N-UCAS."

Source:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a0b718474-965c-46b6-802d-4e6c642d4f0e

[[email protected]]

Looks like Somebody at Boeing rented the Blu-Ray of Stealth.

Steve

[T.L. Davis]

On Wed, 6 May 2009 08:59:17 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>"It's Boeing's latest artist's conception of the
>U.S. Navy's proposed F/A-XX replacement for
>the F/A-18E/F, notionally needed on carrier
>decks around 2025. It's described as "6th
>generation", but quite what that means I'm not
>sure - expect that it's tailless for all-aspect
>broadband stealth, like that other F/A-XX
>candidate, Northrop Grumman's N-UCAS."
>
>Source:
>
>http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a0b718474-965c-46b6-802d-4e6c642d4f0e

"6th generation" was actually the YF-23, but it was too unconventional
looking to be approved. Likewise the F-32 when viewed from the top
(the intake could have been split for better aesthetics).

Or, baring those, the "Bird of Prey" demonstrator.

Just like the gas turbine cars we were all supposed to be driving by
now. Just a tease of what we could produce were we brave enough and
free of nay sayers...

One wonders how much cheaper the F-23 would have been and how many
copies we would have by now.

TL

[Jeb in Richmond]

On May 10, 1:49*pm, T.L. Davis > wrote:
> "6th generation" was actually the YF-23, but it was too unconventional
> looking to be approved. *Likewise the F-32 when viewed from the top
> (the intake could have been split for better aesthetics).
>
> Or, baring those, the "Bird of Prey" demonstrator.
>
> Just like the gas turbine cars we were all supposed to be driving by
> now. *Just a tease of what we could produce were we brave enough and
> free of nay sayers...

Gas turbine cars would make awful road vehicles, no matter how neat
the concept. Car & Driver did a road test of the Chrysler turbine car
many, many years ago, and concluded that while it was fun to waft
along, its performance would have been unsuitable for almost any
conditions.

[Ken S. Tucker]

On May 6, 8:59 am, wrote:
> "It's Boeing's latest artist's conception of the
> U.S. Navy's proposed F/A-XX replacement for
> the F/A-18E/F, notionally needed on carrier
> decks around 2025. It's described as "6th
> generation", but quite what that means I'm not
> sure - expect that it's tailless for all-aspect
> broadband stealth, like that other F/A-XX
> candidate, Northrop Grumman's N-UCAS."
>
> Source:
>
> http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController...

Looks good to me. Birds don't have vertical stabilizing
wings, they generally use feathers at the wing tips, like
that would copy, evolved over millions of years, in a
*survival of the fittest* enviroment.
Ken