6th Gen F/A-XX NGAD vs 5th Gen F-22 Raptor: Air Wing Battle | DCS
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 07. 2024
- With the introduction of Boeing's F/A-XX NGAD into DCS, what better way to test it than an air wing battle against the F-22 Raptor. NGAD uses Peregrine missile, Raptor uses AIM-260 JATM.
NGAD Battles:
NGAD Squadron vs F-22 & F-35 Air Wing: • 2030 6th Gen NGAD Squa...
NGAD Squadron vs 2 x Russian Air Wings: • 6th Gen NGAD Squadron ...
NGAD Squadron vs China Air Wing: • 6th Gen US NGAD Squadr...
NGAD Squadron vs F-22 Squadron: • 6th Gen F/A-XX NGAD vs...
Mods: • Free DCS Mods
PATREON: / grimreapers
0:00 Intro
0:18 Why Introduce NGAD?
1:42 Making The NGAD
2:59 Aircraft Details
7:36 Simba's thoughts on 6th Gen FA-XX
9:55 Predictions
10:52 Battle
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS (CZcams): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2 (CZcams): / @grimreapers2
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim-reapers
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDES: • DCS World Module Quick...
DONATE/SUPPORT GRIM REAPERS
MERCHANDISE: www.redbubble.com/people/grme...
PATREON monthly donations: / grimreapers
PAYPAL one-off donations: www.paypal.me/GrimReapersDona...
SOCIAL MEDIA
WEBSITE: grimreapers.net/
STREAM(Cap): / grimreaperscap
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD: / discord
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#GRDogfight #DCSDogfight #NGAD #FAXX #F22 #Raptor #6thgen #5thgen #BVR #Stealth #GR #DCSWorld #DCS #Dogfight #Aviation #AviationGaming #FlightSimulators - Hry
NGAD Battles:
NGAD Squadron vs F-22 & F-35 Air Wing: czcams.com/video/U8W90rb4rQs/video.html
NGAD Squadron vs 2 x Russian Air Wings: czcams.com/video/LdV-zF43iFA/video.html
NGAD Squadron vs China Air Wing: czcams.com/video/bfMYuWFrPoM/video.html
NGAD Squadron vs F-22 Squadron: czcams.com/video/bzdnlXIjP7w/video.html
My favorite genre of conflict: alien spaceships VS slightly older alien spaceships
Aliens vs Ancient Aliens, sounds like Discovery and The History Channel got together for a special! 👽
This is not "Alien" technology, the baseline tech (jet propulsion) is 100 years old.
@@purity_control perhaps, and only perhaps, a couple of people were merely sharing a joke, regarding the extent of technical advancement in terms of stealth, computing, advanced materials etc. Oh and maybe, just maybe you could loosen your pants a tad, they appear to be cutting off the blood and oxygen to your grey matter Internet captain. Have a great Saturday night!
@@jamiejones3309 Pants loosened 🫡 Cheers!
@@purity_control Have a great weekend and no hard feelings mate!
My understanding is that the Peregrine will replace the AIM-9x, as they are about the same size and the Peregrine has a three mode seeker, one of which is infrared, while the BVR missile will be the AIM-260. So giving it Peregrines up against an AIM-260 sort of hamstrings it. The Peregrine would be used in conjunction with the AIM-260, not as a substitute for it. Peregrine was meant to match AIM-120 range in an AIM-9 size package, but to be as agile a missile as the Sidewinder too. AIM-260 was made to extend the range of the BVR missile out beyond that of the PL-15. So it has to have both, really. The Valkyrie might just have peregrines, however, as it has more limited space available. Or maybe Valkyrie has 4 Peregrines internally, 2 AIM-260s externally, if it can manage that loadout. But NGAD definitely gets the AIM-260 for BVR, until something new is engineered.
I didn't realize that but it makes perfect sense. Peregrine would be a great sidewinder replacement.
The Peregrine is four feet shorter than the AIM-9X and about 40 pounds lighter.
@@CRAZYHORSE19682003 Even better.
Peregrine is just 6ft long and AIM-9x is 9ft long with triple the range. It's also just as maneuverable as an AIM-9x.
Throughout the video I was wondering why the NGAD doesn't have both. It makes sense.
When you first see the enemy you fire the AIM-260 but you keep closing in. Then when you're close in you use the Perigrine on whatever is left.
These stealth vs stealth fights are always interesting because the visibility brings the fight closer. There was a battle last month or so where british F-35s did quite well with ASRAAMs, I've been wondering whether leaning into an IR-heavy loadout might be a strong choice when expecting to be up against stealthed opposition.
im wondering how well AA10 IR missiles would work
Simba's philosophy is probably more correct. Each NGAD would be teamed with up to 4 collaborative combat drones. The NGAD would function as quarterback for whatever missions in the AO that need to be performed.
Like the Longbow Apache providing command and control for the other platforms nearby, but for NGAD, the other platforms would be AI drones. We'll have to see how resistant they are to jamming.
@@donkeysunited if it's a closed system with some general guidelines preprogrammed in, it shouldn't mess up it's ability to fight, justthe ability to recieve new information and communicate with said QB pilot
@@donkeysunited it is widely understood that the US have been at the forefront of EW since WWII. Probably not invulnerable, but probably very resistant.
Yeah it would have an AI wingman that also had a radar out in front of it. This is not how the next generation will be fought.
The NGAD will likely be able to command entire swarms of UCAVs like the XQ58. These things will be mostly autonomous, can be launched from a stand (no runway), and recovered by parachute (if they survive, which won't be a huge mission requirement due to their cost). The UCAVs can be stationed all over, anywhere you can fit one of the stands/launch racks for it, while NGAD will still need infrastructure and runways. XQ58 has a range of 3000 miles, will cruise at typical current fighter bomber speeds (mach .8, less for the Hornets loaded), and will have a decent internal payload, while being very L/O as well. A few NGADs with 100 of these UCAVs, Ucavs that only need to be launched when really needed during the mission, will overwhelm future threats in the air at sea and on land by numbers and autonomy/AI system. Imagine 800 lightweight AAM and 40 or so very long range AAM like the 260, all from such a force. The PRCAF will have a hard time dealing with that.
It's worth mentioning that the NGAD has been stated to be almost the size of a bomber. The NGADs stated goal is to be capable of air superiority over nation wide territories. The NGAD is being built with the pacific theater in mind. For an era without large super carriers. The NGAD is meant to change the definition of air-superiority. Its intention is to be more like a missile truck. With the next generation Variable Cycle Engines. It would be able to fly a route across the pacific without refueling. Some people have even suggested it would be able to cruise right at the edge of space, much higher than the F-35. Its probably true that the NGAD will be slower than the F-22, but not much slower. Its purpose is not to be air-superiority, but redefine what that means.
yeah 100%, but i think that they would use better engines like some ramjets or whatever the slightly weaker one is called, more fuel efficient and still pacific crossing capable. plus at the edge of space, why even stop there yk, 5th gen was quite a while ago and who even knows what they have cooked up. the space shuttle orbiters flew practically near the edge of space back then in the 60s and 70s. im sure they are going to surpass all standards set, given that it has already "broken records"
It's hard to say what will be used. FA-xx program is the Navy's version of NGAD and will use the same frame but different hardware.
One parallel technology that is being developed with possible adoption in the NGAD is the adaptive cycle engine, which is basically the 6th Gen jet fighter engine.
I agree that it might have a slower top speed than the F22, but that NGAD will be able to sustain much higher typical transit and combat zone/area speeds due to its design, fuel fraction, and the engines you mentioned.
Well it's important to note the NGAD prototype "Broke multiple records" they didn't state which ones but it obviously has a strong edge in some areas. They did leave it as though it is a very powerful aircraft for what it is. As to what it is we don't know. I'm assuming in the departments of speed and stealth and possibly... range? These are the only ones I can think of based on renders of its possible design.
I cannot wait for the tempest from Britain 🇬🇧🇬🇧❤️❤️
Uk can't afford it. Thanks to years of financial mismanagement by fecking morons posing as leaders and wasting trillions of hard working peoples taxes and lining there's and there chums pockets with lucrative contracts they never deliver. Baroness Mone bought a yacht with contract that gave NHS useless PPE It could have bought 2 F35's
It's a shame you can't have one plane spot for the other unless it's an AWACS, it would be interesting to see how different it would be with a NGAD up front stealth spotting, and F-15EXs or a converted C-5 carrying nothing but AIM-260s pumping out dozens of shots from a distance. Loving the work as always, but cursing the limits of the system!
That would be the loyal wingman drones. You send out an NGAD and there are 4 drones next to it with plenty of ammo. There's no reason why you couldn't expend all the ammo of one drone, have it return to base, and they send up a replacement drone. Either that or it hangs around a while and if an enemy fighter gets a lock on you the drone dives right in the way and sacrifices itself. This would be a last gasp, but it's much cheaper than losing an NGAD and an experienced pilot.
There may be a practical limit to how many loyal wingmen you can use. I'm thinking 4 sounds about right.
Also the NGAD launches from father away at a safe base, while the loyal wingmen launch from nearby in a more contested area. You can take more chances with drones.
If you really want to get special, have an option where the drone can refuel an NGAD. That would increase loiter time.
Cool and entertaining video! Here are my two cents:
1. NGADs should carry a mix of JTAMs and Peregrines. Maybe 3 AIM-260s and 6 Peregrines (plus the two sidewinders) would be a good combo? This will strike a balance between high probability of kill with numbers.
2. The radar would surely be much better on the NGAD than the Raptor. The F-35 already has a better radar in the form of the APG-81 and an upgraded radar for the Lightning is already under development (APG-85). Surely the NGAD will boast something even better.
3. Defensive (and possibly even offensive) directed energy weapons?
4. As Simba said, they should also be accompanied with loyal wingmen drones.
5. The NGAD will most probably be even stealthier than what you guys said. The Raptor if they were somehow able to apply modern RAM should easily be able to surpass 0.00008 sqm then there's the stealthier shape of the NGAD.
6. Jamming?
oh, and there's also the EOTS and DAS which will also surely be integrated to the NGAD which will allow it to detect stealth aircraft from further away.
It also would likely carry the LREW (another Raytheon future AAM) and the LRAAM (Boeing).
The AIM-160s (Peregrine) are stated to have the same range as the latest AIM-120, so it would likely have the range of the AIM-120D, which is basically the AIM-120C but with better software...
Most of the items you mentioned are applicable, but DCS isn't capable of modeling them. DCS is basically a game/sim engine designed for 1970's tech as far as radar and electronic warfare emulation.
@@jamison884true
@@jamison884how cant you implement two aim260 missiles or ad jammers
The NGAD fighters is planned to have much better range than other USN or USAF aircraft since it is planned to fight in the vast Pacific region.
Congrats on all the hard work Cap and team! My thoughts below are just based on the intro.
I've read a whole lot about the USAF and USN NGAD projects, with the USAF model being much closer to manufacturing and a down-selection to final contract awards due for next year.
I'm almost certain it it will be the following when compared directly to the F-22 Raptor:
- Larger - they're being designed to fight in the Pacific against China and across huge distances. Current ranges don't satisfy future requirements, which you've seen in your own naval simulated battles around Taiwan.
- Heavier - the larger airframe comes with a larger weight, as they need to fit not only a tremendous amount of fuel, ideally without ever using tanks, but also a whole lot of ordnance and systems. There will likely be onboard energy defense weapons (laser/microwaves) and the bay will be larger based on their experience with both the Raptor and F-35. They have had to make changes to the bay or various existing and future weapons for both the F-22 and F-35 and I believe this will result in them learning the larger the bay the better.
- Adcanced Missiles - The Peregine is a pretty good choice as one of the missiles carried, but I think there will be a mix between the smaller higher quantity AIMRAAM equivalent Peregine which will be able to use a hybrid multi-mode radar/infrared seeker head (or another modular missile in addition to Peregrine will be able to have a dual-mode seeker) to replace the AIM-9X altogether, and it will be combined with super long-range missiles as it must be able to out-range Chinese PL-15/PL-21 threats. It will likely be the AIM-260 initially, but here are at least three, and perhaps four missiles that are currently in development and rumored to be targeting the role as an even longer-range missile for NGAD. I'm writing this before the action but if the RCS is similar and Raptor out-ranges it, plus the NGAD doesn't have it's unmanned companions, I don't see how it would win in a direct fight. It wasn't designed to beat Raptor while handicapped without it's full complement of missiles or loyal wingmen.
- Lower RCS - They've learned about enhancing stealth for decades, and also how to enhance stealth while making the other features better, such as maneuverability. I believe it would be more along the lines of 0.00005 versus 0.00008. Your selection is close to my opinion, I think we're generally on the same page.
- Faster - it will be very sleak, they've designed better RCS coatings, it will have a lot more fuel, and it will be designed to travel the tremendous distances in the Pacific, so it will be fast, both in terms of a higher top speed, but also a slightly faster supercruise, at a more sustainable fuel burn-rate.
- Won't Move Like a Raptor - I don't believe it will be as agile as a Raptor overall, primarily due to the lack of some tail surfaces and the general design philosophy favoring stealth. However, the fly by wire flight control software, large control surfaces, and potentially 3-D thrust vectoring will likely get it very close to the agility of a Raptor; probably between the F-35 and F-22.
- Unmanned Buddies - The whole game plan will revolve around unmanned highly agile AI-powered drones. They have already released one just recently for training purposes that pulls 9G's plus and hits 0.95 mach at a pretty small overall design (designed by Anuril). There will be a variety of different models and most will have modularity to switch mission types. They have already officially announced they are looking to purchase at least 1,000 drones in the following few years to accompany the 200 initial USAF NGADs. I believe the USN will be a using a somewhat similar model, but since they're phasing out the F-18 and keeping the F-35, it will be something like 50% F-35/25% Loyal Wingmen/25% F/A-XX on each carrier.
- Each will Surpass an AWACS - The F-35 is already described as being as capable as an AWACS, but with a smaller radar merely due to size limitations. It is completely sensor driven and networked together with everything else, each being a redudundant hive mind of sensors and information. 6th-gen will only get better at this. Due to the potential for F-35s and specific loyal wingmen using ISR modules, we could also see the 6th gen taking one of a few routes: 1) continue with large radars, 2) allow their F-35/loyal wingmen/other air/ground/sea/space based assets to gather the inte and they serve as the networked router rather than using a large radar onboard, and instead using a smaller unit all things considered, or 3) allow for a modular front nose section to build or modify NGAD jets with/without radars, or different sizes of radar. It could become redundant and wasteful to have EVERY 5th/6th gen jet be it's own AWACS if they never travel alone, and potentially never travel with less than at least three other jets/loyal wingmen.
I know everyone is biased towards their own opinion, so I don't think there's anything wrong with what you guys have developed. I'm super proud of you guys for putting in all of the work. All I can end with: I've done a lot of homework. ❤
Cap: concerning the speed drag race. Let's think about this from a hardware perspective, as thrust will generally overcome relatively minor design variations, although I believe the NGAD models will ultimately be slippier through the air anyway.
The NGAD is absolutely, no question about it, getting two engines that are one or perhaps two generations beyond Raptor. According to rumors on GE and Pratt test models being evaluated for the F-35, they have about 20% greater thrust capability and a mode similar to jet airliners to maximize efficiency when needed. Overall, let's call it 25% or so better, overall, in all aspects, when compared with F-35. Now it has two of those, versus the Raptor's two older engines. On pretty much all points, I can happily call it a simple matter of opinion/guess as to what NGAD will be, but I think there's little doubt in the professional community that the NGAD engines will be far superior due to technological advances. Therefore, I don't see how it would be slower at any altitude. If you'd like to counter that, I'm totally up to listen, I just don't see much wiggle room here based on the public nature of the F-35 engine upgrade drama.
Finally watched the fight now.
Well that was not exactly expected.
Imagine how they would do with actual advanced real-world technology, a larger variety of modern missiles, exceptional electronic warfare, and all of their loyal wingman buddies - all things DCS can't model, but if it could, would be advantageous over all existing aircraft.
Agreed
Thanks J much appreciated.
F-35 is a superb dogfighter. Video proves it's at LEAST as agile as an F-16 in clean air show mode. It's the only plane capable of replicating some of the F-22's moves without thrust-vectoring.
Would it be possible to take the gunship concept for the B-1 and test that out, comparing it with AC-130? The addition of a ventral turret on a supersonic platform (presumably with greater ECM capability than an AC-130) looked intriguing. Especially given the B-1's own precision targeting capability.
6 gen is about interoperability with other systems. Integration with all assets that provide situational awareness.
I remember being a young man when the f 22 was going through the same thing and I loved reading about aircraft in the library
Classic GR start! I love this channel!
It's all best guess conjecture, but that was an interesting exercise. Thanks Cap, Dark, and Simba
If you're dodging, you're not lining up a target. That's all I've got.
I don't think DCS has the ability to use a DAS style system which gives the F-35 and new B-21/NGAD a huge advantage in situational awareness, being able to detect "Stealth" aircraft at far longer ranges than fighter aircraft radars can.
there is one thing missing, the advanced RAM coating that is currently being tested on a couple of F-22s
it is not only more resistant to heat and attrition but also said to further reduce radar returns as compared to the current RAM coating on the F-35
But whatever improvement that ends up being would also be on the 6th gen, then the difference comes down to geometry. So this is still a decent hypothetical comparison.
This will be Interesting!!!! Thanks guys!!!
There is a study called "Trends in Air-to-Air Combat: Implications for Future Air Superiority" which tries to show what a 6th fighter might look like ... and fighter jet manufacturers have confirmed that this idea comes pretty close to their own designs. They think that NGAD will basically be a subsonic flying wing bomber with huge range and massive payload capacity. It uses expendable UCAVs as sensors to shoot long-range missiles from far away, meaning that it won't be detected itself.
21:04-21:18 might be my new favorite DCS footage. That's a youtube short right there
I agree, that shot looked amazing.
Will an autonomous plane be able take tighter turns and longer Gs? Is it the airframe or the pilot that is the limiting factor?
It depends on both ai and airframe
Honestly if you look at certain already existing airframes I would say that actually the pilot is the limitation nowadays...
100% a pilotless aircraft is far less limited.
It is accepted knowledge that the soft smooshy thing in the cockpit is the limiting factor.
Assuming a purpose built drone that would likely be physically smaller and made with more lighter composite materials then it would defiantly be able to pull and hold significantly higher G forces. I think at that point the main limitation would be just how fast and reactive the AI systems are and just how fast sensor information can be collected, transmitted, and processes.
Great video, yes i agree with Simba since it is to replace the multi-role F/A-18 platform it makes perfect sense that it would be a sub mach 2 fighter with a fantastic weapon load/mission capability. And to top it off the Peregrine missile mission is exactly that load more into a confined space, then load AIM-260 onto older platforms as missile trucks. Well done Grim Reapers.
My idea is that it will be faster, worse turning, much lower radar cross section. And they will fly much like an awacs relative to the battle.
Wouldn't it have a better radar and IR sensors?
Almost certainly in real life.
2 things:
1: from what literature is available about the NGAD, its primary role will act as a hub from unmanned fighter squadrons, The price of it per unit (about 300million per airframe) already makes it impractical for mass adoption. Tailless designs are also particularly unweildy in high agility situations as yaw stability would entirely be dependent on thrust vectoring which could easily lead into flatspins if you're throwing your plane around in a dogfight.
2: if we're moving into the 2030s, we're going to need models for the Su75, H20, Type 004 carrier, Type 076 drone carrier, GJ11 attack drone, S70 Okhotnik attack drone and maybe the JHxx tactical bomber
Su75? Lmao if were modeling 2030 Russia may have sticks and rocks
@@Utubesuperstar as would NATO if nuclear war breaks out before then.
I agree 100 % with Simba on the 6th gen. He did a great job with his side of the argument .
Great video guys! Love the channel! Is the Air Force’ version of the 6th generation NGAD fighter not available in DCS yet?
I think Peregrine would be a really good concept especially for the Australian Air Force, the idea of F-35s armed with 8 or so Peregrines internally facing J-35s with only 4 PL-15s (or especially non-stealthy J-15s) makes me warm all over... Grim Reapers, if this is something you could do I would be forever in your debt
Though perhaps it could use a rerun
Cool Vid! ;)
Okay, so the navy FA-XX fighter is CONFIRMED to be a much bigger fighter than the F22 that can carry a LOT more than the raptor and that has more than double the range. It will also use next generation adaptive cycle engines. So, it should be faster than the raptor and should have higher acceleration. The NGAD being faster and having better acceleration is a given since supercrusing is a BIG emphasis. It will also VERY LIKELY have 2D thrust vectoring if NOT 3D Thrust vectoring. But I'm pretty sure that F22 will still have better manuverability.
Now for Stealth, both FA-XX AND NGAD Will NOT have vertical tail surfaces. That means that both next gen fighters will have significantly reduced RCS.
I want to say if you ever try and do this one again you should have one NGAD with several loyal wingman drones. Vs Chengdu J-20
Simba is right. Ngad will have multiple drones with it. It may not even be fighter sized. It could be a bigger flying wing design with extra fuel for range. Air dominance doesn’t have to mean fighters.
It would be smaller than F22 for me
@@fqeagles21that doesn't make sense, they're trying to give the F-35 MORE missiles, they realized 4 isn't enough, not take away.
@@SHINR__ could be,will see
With these game gfx, every raptor splash I was like " KILL, DOUBLE KILL, MEGA-KILL, ULTRA-KILL, MONSTER KILL, LUDACRIS KILL, HOLY SH** " 🤣
It'd be interesting to see that ability to spam missiles deployed in a fleet defence sense. What's the resulting range the F/A-XX can sprint out to and start pumping Peregrines at incoming attackers? How long can they do that for and how much fuel exhaustion would that result in? Do existing fleet missile systems come into play at those ranges?
I think I have to agree with Simba on this one
I feel as if the 6th gen fighters are primarily forward command bases not dog fighters. They send in drones to do the dog fighting and they sit farther back to command them. Honestly given the small detection radius it would be more fair to simply pit a swarm of drones vs the opposing force and leave out the sixth gen fighter entirely unless you want the slim possibility that it’s taken down to be a factor. So to simulate a future battle field you might not even need a model for a sixth gen fighter tbh.
Interesting how that went. I wonder if a 4th gen, knowing "this", could do the same?
Or would the stealth of F-22 completely overpower any amount of missiles the other side could possibly use? Like yes you could spam blind shots, but if the F-22's knows it's not going to hit, they could just ignore it and go to work.
No, the only reason this worked for the F/A-XX is because it could get close enough for a radar lock. The Raptors could just pelt a 4th gen from a safe distance.
@@totalnerd5674 yeah that's what I'm thinking would happen, normally.
But knowing about what played out in the video,, could a sneaky fleet of gen 4's exploit that weakness, and do whatever they can to exploit it.
for example, they could fire missiles (from high up) without a lock, just to force the F-22 to go defensive, and have other planes sneaking in low, using valleys as cover, to get close enough to get a lock.
I mean, the 4th gen's would still be seriously disadvantaged, but maybe they could fight the F-22's to draw??
What we saw in this video was unexpected, so maybe ??
Chances are it wouldnt be the NGAD that goes head to head with anyone but the loyal wingmen which I imagine would be designed for how it's being used here (smaller, faster, more agile, smaller rcs, etc). That's my understanding of 6th gen anyway
Loyal Wingman was a previous project of what is now MQ-28 Ghost Bat; I think it's still 5th Gen, to complement the F-35 with interchangeable nose cone to broaden the battle scope.
I think it's still an RAAF project with Boeing Defence Australia watching on (U.S. ties) to see if it's successful
Really informative. What would be interesting is how many of the kills are due to friendly fire. After the blues had pushed so far beyond bullseye, I wondered how many Blues were killed by Peregines from the next respawn? This may be the reason Reds got back to bullseye.
It would be an interesting stat to have friendly fire tally on the scoreboard.
Grump is back….been a long time
Simba has the complete right idea here. Long range missiles only really work when it is 4th gen vs 5th gen. Once you get into 5th gen peer combat, it doesn't matter if you have PL-15 or AIM-260 with 100+ mile range if no one is going to be seeing each other until they are within 15-20 miles thereby completely negating that long range advantage.
The F-22 really is the last of its kind which makes sense as it is basically the pinnacle of human understanding of air to air combat over the last hundred years. In order to understand the NGAD one needs to understand what it means to be in the digital age. The thing about NGAD is that it is going to be less a fighter & more of a mothership. The hallmark of the digital age is the merging of both man & machine & the NGAD program is going to be a reflection of that. It isn't about the man or machine, but rather to take the best of both worlds & have them operate in cohesion as one to accomplish an objective. I have compared it in the past to something more akin to a Longsword from Halo. It is going to serve as the brains of a vast neural network directing other assets in the ground, sea & sky. While it is obviously too early to say anything, I think it is safe to assume that there are a few key technologies that we can anticipate that will go on to define what we see as "6th gen". Enhanced networking is already one, but it is certainly safe to assume it is going to have greater stealth capabilities over the current generation. Survivability is only going to become more pertinent as systems & those operating those systems become ever more invaluable to a modern military. How this is achieved is anyone's guess as this could be achieved via better jamming, simple RCS or maybe even camouflage as we have seen F-22 outfitted with strange chromatic panels whose purpose still remains a mystery.
It might be safe to assume that the NGAD will have a greater speed than the F-22 but probably not hypersonic. Thanks to developments in computational power over the last 20 years, it is now possible to iterate & model flying designs that before would take enormous teams to develop in a significantly shorter span of time. If NGAD does end up being a tailless "flying dorito" design, it would be safe to assume that it would be more aerodynamic allowing for greater top speed overall. Wouldn't surprise me if there have been tests done with dynamic engine systems allowing for transition between traditional turbofan setups to ramjets in flight. We know there is some interest in that field with the SR-72/Darkstar. How far that goes is, again, anyone's guess.
Then there is the prospect of directed energy weapons "DEW" on board such an aircraft although I personally do not think we will see this with the initial batch, but it wouldn't surprise me if it does. Probably won't be until 2040s+ at a minimum before we start seeing something like that. There have been significant developments on beam cohesion & energy storage technologies over just the last five or so years on that front. That era of portable lasers is coming & this is becoming evident with the new generation of Strykers in the US ground forces that are going to be making their debut later this decade. It probably won't be much longer from there when these make their appearance in aerial platforms & I can see there being a "missile shield" version of a B-21 esque platform with an onboard laser used for highly contested airspace later this century like the old YAL-1 from the late 2000s if laser tech gets cheap enough.
7:00 Before the start, it strikes me that the double range of the AIM-120 should be a non-factor, as the NGAAD can't be seen at that range. I'd think the 12 missiles should be a much bigger factor.
28:00 You don't need a 120 mile missile when you can't see your target past 25 miles. If you're carrying 3x the number of missiles, you can take 3x the number of shots when both are shooting at the same range.
I think the Island ended up giving the 6th gen a bit more advantage then they would have otherwise had. It seemed once they got the initial advantage over the Island they'd start going low and would avoid hits because the terrain would provide cover, while the 5th gen jets were wide open over water. Even so 5th gen fighters kept it pretty close for most of the video despite the land advantage the 6th gen maintained through the video. So I think if you replayed the scenario but had it take place entirely over water, or entirely over land the results would be very close, and maybe entirely up to luck for who would win.
Well spoken Simba.
I was going to ask where is Grump, lol he's back!
Looking back at previous WarGames , how would the NGAD function vs those cheap drone trucks ? Smaller cheaper spamable missiles
NGAD: I am a whisper on the wind, a fleeting thought, made of everything you fear
F-22: ..........
I want to fight him
Interesting. If any GR are on reading this .or anybody really. There's a channel called "the Buzz". It's 6 mouths old. Title " updates on 6th generation fighter jets ". The F/ANGARD. seem to have been called F/A-XX. . which we'll have Multi - Domain Environment. ( space, air, land, sea and cyber- space. ).. also it might have drone insistence. Interesting stuff. 👍😊
I think the emphasis put on the kinematic characteristics of the FAxx is misplaced. It's the same gripe I have with the F-35. All these planes have the same radar. The FAxx just like the F-35 need better radars than what is in the rest of the planes. They also need better jammer. Is there a way to model that for the next fight? Along with the HMD of course. Lol!
It makes no sense that the NGAD would be slower than an F-22 when it has far superior engines and more resilient stealth coatings.
I don't see any NGAD having worse kinematics than F-22. I think the new engines will be that good & that the mission requires it.
Quantity has a Quality all its own.
Dawn of the Next-Gen SPAMRAAM Tactics
This makes me wonder if air to air missiles are going to start going towards longer range IR or Electro optical seekers.
I also think that the Ngad will be much less manuverable and fast than the Raptor, however the stealth should increase significantly as for the lacking tailfin as well as the steath materials needing to be less durable due to the lower speed and load they will experience
I have to agree to simba here. lower radar cross section and less kinimatic performance with additional uav assist is the way to go.
Hey GR, I recently heard of Admiral189 releasing a mod for the Sovremenny class destroyer. Could you potentially check it out? I imagine you could do a "stress test" of its air defense capabilities.
Simba is correct. Single piloted with up to six drones attatched with swarm and integrated combat technology. Basically a hive mind unit controlled by the lone pilot or task command.
Thinking about it the ideas of 6th gen technology, with the rise of laser protection and with the realisation of IRST neutralising stealth, do you think 6th gen jets will have some sort of means of reducing heat or laser systems that would purely server to confuse IR missiles (there almost certainly wouldn't be enough space of the aircraft to shoot missiles down but I think it may be big enough to fit one of the systems that would confuse things like iglas or stingers. Those systems currently exist on larger civilian aircraft and such)
I agree that the NGAD is an inferior dog fighter vs the F22 however I believe the Navy wants the FA-XX to be faster in order to fight in the Pacific and I would think an improvement in RCS of only 20% is a very large underestimate. Additionally I believe that the FA-XX will be larger to accommodate more fuel. So in short FA-XX faster, less maneuverable, and significantly improved RCS vs F-22. I do love what you all do. Keep up the great work
So from the cost factor on missies. What is the cost ratio of peregrines to AIM 260s? From an expense aspect looks like it is a nonfactor.
Not gonna lie was getting upset that you didn't make the NGAD the fastest most craziest thing we've ever seen 😂 oh well guess will all see it one day in real life
You should do another battle but use the drone as a missile boat attached to each F-22. maybe try them against some su-57
It will be very interesting to see the difference in results when using the full NGAD kit i.e. their collaborative drones.
hi!, im here from your civilian aircraft video you made 2 years ago. in mission editor none of the aircrafts i downloaded shows up ( i made the mods folder and aircraft folder myself it was not there before) im on open beta btw
Great work Cap and GR. If I was in charge of the NGAD program, I agree not to prioritize maneuverability. Pure speed and performance at altitude however, would be a priority of mine. Higher efficiencies at higher altitudes and faster speeds at those altitudes means greatly increasing the aircrafts range. Range increase was definitely a priority and was even outlined in requirements. With this better Speed at altitude means better missile ranges and performance regardless of what the NGAD is carrying. Maybe I am wrong and the plane will just be a mini B21 designed for air to air combat, but I think speed is a priority, maneuverability is not.
I think simbas correct to be honest
Simba is the closest to what the US Navy has publicly stated. NGAD is a quarterback for AI fighters and high end 4th gens like the F-15. Almost a mini-AWACS in a sense. When it does fight, its a sniper. If an NGAD is in a traditional dogfight, something has gone wrong.
I also believe that the NGAD's will have more powerful jammers to give them more of an edge.
Idea: 4th/5th Gen planes, using the OLDEST missiles available (a-g a-a)
Can you try Su-35 'IRSTS' vs. F/A-XX? NGAD?
We've made NGAD the same IR output as F-35, so IRST should be effective against it.
Just wondering, why does the ngad have the old usaf logo, not the low-viz one
NGAD is supposed to be an order of magnitude more stealthy than 5th gen so the RCS should be .00001 imo
I read somewhere the 6th gen tempest will be able to fly up to Mach 5 so I would have thought the Americans would be making something as fast. If the tempest will be able to go Mach 5 It will definitely become my favourite jet. I love what us Brits can build when we actually decide to make some new tech I hope it doesn't disappoint.
The missle blob. Go Nads!
The thing about 6th gen will be the variety of wingmen drones used for the “ dogfighting” , sensor proliferation, and the vast number of projectiles available. The drones will be the platforms carrying the majority of the weapons to be used.
The engines deserve some real attention IMO. A jet engine normally has a certain speed where it's most effective. Airspeed has an effect on the thrust output of an engine, and a given engine will be designed to be at it's best, (which may not be the point of absolute peak thrust, just where the engine is suffering the least negetive effects), at a specific airspeed, (altitude also has an affect and again a desired altitude will normally be selected for). Modern engine design can alleviate but not eliminate the effects of varying airspeed and altitude on the thrust of an engine but it can't eliminate it.
The type of engine being used in the NGAD however has the ability to alter it;s internal function in ways that can move the sweet spot around. There are limits still but it means that outside of wherever the F-22's sweet spot in terms of airspeed and altitude is the NGAD will likely have a significant thrust advantage, (relative to the aircraft's weight).
This is particularly relevant when it comes to extreme high altitude operation where the F-22 is almost certainly operating well outside it's ideal values.
Turning ability, assuming the airframe presents no extra limitations, is ultimately a matter of how much excess thrust you have available. Maneuvering creates in effect, extra drag, (compared to flying straight and level), if you don't want to have your airspeed fall you need extra thrust to compensate for that. If you can't your airspeed will start to fall, but the closer you are to meeting that extra thrust requirement the slower it will fall off.
That means better thrust output translates into better ability to sustain high g maneuvers across a wild array of altitudes and starting airspeeds.
So even if the NGAD isn;t being designed for high maneuverability and top speed as a core design goal it's choice of engine unless they're much smaller than the F-22's will likely still translate to significant speed, acceleration, and sustained maneuvering abilities across a wide array of altitudes and speeds, with the F-22 possibly achieving parity at a specific speed and altitude combination at best.
The absolute top speed may not be any better at lower altitude however because the airframe may indeed be a limitation there. Higher speeds and lower altitudes create more of a thermal load from air friction on the airframe and the NGAD may be limited by the ability of it's radar absorbing materials to withstand such loads.
All of this also has implications for maximum allowable takeoff weight and range. The same factors that allow for higher thrust at a wider rnage of altitudes and speed mean more available takeoff thrust and better cruise efficiency in flight.
Great vid reapers but in my humble opinion that 6th gen fighter should definitely be a better plane overall. Think about it us 5th gen have 3 planes yf23, f22 and f35 all mostly better than the gen before in their respective ops. That ngad fighter will be more stealthy, a lil faster, and maybe slightly more maneuverable than f22. It should also have better weapons systems. F22 is being most likely replaced by the fighter variant of the ngad since other countries has developed 5th gen fighters it’s basically a new version of f22 fixing all the problems and hopefully telling the world hey y’all may have caught up slightly to f22 but now we have something better and our f22 can’t beat it…. You won’t either lol
i agree, NGAD should definitely be faster or at least more efficient at staying fast for longer. It should definitely also have the advantage at range by a really great margin. and i think this goes without saying that it should be multi-weather applicable so its more versatile in combat.
SUPER wrong. No countries have caught up to the F-22. It might look like it, but they really have not. Nothing is stealthier than the 22. Plus, the YF-23 was a prototype.. It will be replaced by the NGAD, and the NGAD will use the GE XA-100 adaptive cycle engine (which will also be used on the f-35 block IV). Rumors said it will have about 40-45,000 pounds of thrust, and with 2 of those on a Super-maneuverable fighter is a scary thought. The NGAD should be able to exceed at least mach 2.8+.
@@patmahomesisthegoat1622 ok, given all that stealth like 0.0008, is super maneuverability even needed, and how on earth would it be functionally given that the shape of the aircraft will go without the iconic vertical rudder?
I also think this new gen is all about hit 1st and harder than the enemy can to overwhelm them. Drone support for pilots that can be missile trucks and also add pilot survivability in hostile environments. I think 6th gen is combining the lethality from f22, modern technology of f35, and maybe some features of older jets like f15s payload capacity.
@@StonedConqueror its size could be not only for alot of fuel, but perhaps the gigantic computer needed for the drones to work to their most optimal potential.
Looking forward to a RE-MATCH with all Human Pilots that will devolve into a Low & Slow, Turn & Burn dogfight 👍
In my opinion the biggest flaw in your sims is the way you do RCS. The frontal aspect RCS may indeed be close to the values you use, but the side-on RCS would be greater, and the rear aspect RCS would likely be greater still. The more sophisticated the stealth, the closer the rear value would be to the front value. For instance the rear aspect RCS of the J20 is likely far worse than the rear aspect of the F22, and the F22 rear aspect RCS is probably something like 10 times or more its frontal RCS (3-4dB+). I don't know how easy it would be to implement this change, but as you can imagine it would certainly impact both tactics and outcomes. This is simplified of course, a real plot of an aircraft RSC would show data from every aspect, with significant spikes at specific angles. (imagine the return from an F22 vertical stab when it is perfectly perpendicular to your radar for instance). That being said, if you could at least implement front, side, and rear RCS values that would be great.
is there any real way to calculate the wing load mathematically to figure out its flight performance as compared to the raptor? Just throwing ideas. I don't really care if it's better or worse than the raptor
Probably but TBH will need someone smarter than me to figure it out.
Hey Cap, do you plan to add the Mitsubishi F-2 to your simulations, it's a really cool plane with really cool armaments.
Oh what you could have been F14 or F21 stealthy high speed slick beautiful and deadly
It's an interesting doctrine the US is adopting, tech, more tech, fight smarter and cheaper, not harder. I can see how it's highly viable and although I can't predict how well it'll work overall, I can predict it'll lead to much more advanced information/electronic warfare systems to be developed by pretty much everyone. Mmm my favorite, when you look at your FCR and you've got jammers, jammers, and more jammers...
Enjoyed that. The point at the end summed it up well - no need for 160 mile range on a missile of you can't see the opposition until you are 20 miles away
Having said all that - would datalink missiles and awacs make a difference?
Perhaps that could be re-run with awacs support?
It is real world realistic to assume there would be awacs, so would that give the Raptor / 260 combo the edge?
F23 vs NGAD next?
Sorry to burst your bubble but the NGAD is the XQ-58 with Yaw axis thrust vectoring and the learning AI from the F-16VISTA. Its more maneuverable than you think. Can carry extra missiles for the F-22 of F-35 to use off aspect. Or it can carrie electronic warfare supplements as well. It is NOT supersonic interceptor its designed to dominate a theater of war so your enemy can not fly. These are very cheep and you can afford to fly a lot of them and you don't care if they get shot down so they can do very aggressive things you would not do with a human in the cockpit. It think you have still proven the concept even if the airframe is not correct.
Reapers: We've decided to use a balanced approach with performance and number of weapons.
Boeing: Yeah, yeah. Then what? What's the fuel load?
There is scant hard info on the web, I just spent 30 minutes looking and coming up with a wide range of specs. No doubt it will be stealthy AF. But the emphasis will be on the aircraft being sneaky and clever, not brute force awesome like the Raptor. But these speculation videos are fun to throw out the "what if". Just keep an open mind when hard info is released, incorporate it into your model and that's all you can do.
Looking at future scenario's, would it be worth running 6th gen manned (human players?) within a wing of Loyal Wing men (DCS AI), vs say J20 & J35, which may or may not have loyal wingmen of their own. I can't see US or NATO alliance 6th gen being on the field without Loyal Wingmen/ Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), given that CCA's seems to be further along the development pipeline & we'll likely see them paired with F35 & 4.5 gen before 6th gen reaches serial production. Though the CCAs for 6th Gen probably would be somewhat different or have improved via faster iteration process.
i think as stealth matures, visual fights will be more common because neither will see the other until merging, and the better dogfighter will win...
Also the ngad fa-xx had mountains to hide behind 2 hide missiles
NGAD needs smaller RCS
How about a loadout of half Peregrines, half AIM-260? Get your bandit stepping and fetching with a cheap shot, then follow up with a 260 while they're otherwise preoccupied...
Hey Grim reaper. I thank for answering my first question. I have another scenario for you to run and see if it could stop the Japanese: Could 4x Sea Harriers armed with Aim-9L's and 18x Rapier Sam battery's save Pearl Harbor?
You're not going to notch a peregrine due to the tri mode seeker, although I wouldn't be surprised if AIM-260 has a multimode seeker as well.
Only issue there is that multimode seekers aren't something that can really be modeled in DCS right now, at least as far as I'm aware.
As I have said before, the B-1R sorta functions like the NGAD is supposed too. Except its slower (the NGAD is probably going to have lower top speed than the F-22 but the highest super cruise speed ever in order to extend its range and give its missiles more speed/energy), non-stealthy (the B-1R only has reduced RCS), but has a much higher payload and much longer range. I also agree with others who think (like the B-1R) its not a dog fighter. But more an air dominance weapon, meaning its job is more to push away as much as kill enemy fighters. That doesn't require it to be dogfighter and so its stealth can be maximized. But everything else with the B-1R is very close, where the NGAD's job is to get as close and fast as possible to enemy fighter assets. Then fire off as many long range BVR air to air missiles like the AIM-260 and the next gen extreme range BVR missile. Guided by either longer range AWAC's or more likely its own new advanced mini-AWAC's next gen AESA radar system with greater range and coverage than any current airborne radar system. Control by the most power computer ever put on a combat fighter. So that it can help guide its missiles and those of its allies be they 6th gen, 5th gen or 4th gen using a next gen data link. While minimizing its own EM and thermal output in order to remain as stealthy as possible in all energy spectrums. The idea being to overwhelm opponents like Russia and China with the best BVR missiles against their more likely larger number of less capable but still very dangerous fighters/missiles. So if the NGAD gets into a dogfight something has gone terrible wrong and the mission would be aborted long before.
Interesting that many comments view the NGAD in the context as the end of CVs. I think they are correct, CVs are nearing their end game imo
The XX radar cross section should be much smaller though right? RIGHT?