fighter

The Turkish Air Force looks set to receive a major boost to its fighter fleet, with the delivery of dozens of F110 engines required to power the homegrown TF Kaan combat jet. This would be one of the most significant positive developments in U.S.-Turkish defense relations since Turkey was ejected from the F-35 program in 2019, and may even pave the way for Ankara to rejoin that effort.

Citing four sources familiar with the matter, Reuters reports that President Donald Trump’s administration plans to go ahead with the engine sale, said to be worth more than $700 million, despite some resistance from Congress.

Ahead of his July trip to a NATO summit in Turkey, Trump was asked by a reporter whether Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan would be provided with a “big gift” in the form of F110 engines and potentially F-35 fighter jets.

“He’s a member of NATO,” Trump replied. “He really is a strong member of NATO. Yeah, I’m going to probably do something that’s going to make him very happy.”

Speaking alongside Trump, Vice President JD Vance said a review was underway to see if Turkey could receive the F-35.

“Pete and the entire team are reviewing this right now, because there are certain things that we have to certify have happened … in order to comply with American law,” Vance ⁠said, referring ​to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

The question of whether Turkey might receive F-35s has long been a fraught one, with Ankara kicked out of the program back in 2019, a development we will return to later.

For now, however, Turkey’s priority seems to be securing F110 engines.

Turkey’s TF Kaan next-generation fighter is a flagship program of the country’s burgeoning aerospace industry. The program was launched in 2010, and the first prototype took to the air in early 2024.

Reportedly, Turkey plans to complete three pre-production prototypes, to be followed by 250 series-production aircraft, incorporating various refinements.

Last month, a contract was reportedly signed for 20 examples of the initial Block 10 versions of the Kaan.

The twin-engine Kaan was developed with a reduced radar signature in mind, as well as a high level of performance and modern avionics and other systems. As a result, it doesn’t offer the same level of low observability as the F-35, while its sensor fusion, electronic warfare capabilities, and other ‘fifth-generation’ features lag behind the U.S.-designed jet.

Critically, the Kaan is powered by U.S.-supplied General Electric F110 turbofans.

F110s are assembled under license in Turkey by TUSAS Engine Industries (TEI) but are still governed by U.S. export restrictions. These engines are already used in significant numbers by the Turkish Air Force F-16 fleet, the third-largest in the world. Outside of the F-16, the F110 is also used in the F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15EX Eagle II, among other F-15 variants. An F110 comes with a typical flyaway unit cost of $10 to $15 million.

The Kaan program has long been overshadowed by the question of whether Washington will make available in larger numbers the F110 turbofans used in the prototype. Reportedly, an initial batch of 80 engines is required.

While Turkish officials have expressed hope of ultimately switching to a domestically produced engine type for the Kaan, TEI’s TF35000, it’s unclear how realistic this is, at least in the near term. Turkey has also looked at acquiring alternative engines, too, including those from Russia or Rolls-Royce in the United Kingdom.

In the meantime, the importance of the Kaan to the Turkish Air Force increased significantly in 2019, when it became clear that Ankara would be kicked out of the F-35 program, in which it had a considerable industrial stake, and a plan to buy around 100 of the fighters. Washington took that decision after Turkey refused to abandon its purchase of Russian-made S-400 long-range air defense systems.

As well as the S-400, U.S. lawmakers were unhappy with Turkey’s worsening relations with Greece, its other connections with Russia and Azerbaijan (which included the deployment of F-16s to the latter country), its conduct in the Syrian civil war, and human rights abuses. Turkey’s opposition to Sweden joining NATO also proved to be a significant hurdle.

In the wake of all this, the chances of Turkey receiving F110 engines were dramatically reduced. At the same time, Turkey’s request to buy additional F-16 fighters was also turned down. Turkey reportedly also began stockpiling spare parts for its F-16 back in 2019, fearing the effects of U.S. sanctions.

Toward the end of the Biden administration, U.S.-Turkish relations began to improve, and Washington moved to push through sales of new F-16s and upgrade kits for older jets to Turkey. There also began to be suggestions that the F-35 was potentially back on the table for Turkey.

Under the Trump administration, Washington’s relationship with Ankara has become closer, with Erdogan frequently praised by the U.S. leader.

In early 2024, the U.S. State Department finally approved a possible Foreign Military Sale to Turkey of 40 new F-16C/D Block 70 fighters, plus the upgrade of 79 existing aircraft to F-16V configuration.

At the same time, the issue surrounding the S-400 and the sanctions that followed that acquisition remains.

As it stands, U.S. law does not permit Turkey to operate or possess the S-400 system if it wishes to rejoin the F-35 program, as a result of security concerns around the Russian-made system.

During a visit to Turkey in early 2024, the U.S. Acting Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland reportedly suggested that the United States might be willing to offer Patriot air defense systems if it were to give up its S-400s, which could also clear the way to re-entering the F-35 program.

“Frankly, if we can resolve this S-400 issue, which we want to do, the United States would be pleased to welcome Turkey back into the F-35 family,” Nuland said. “But we must solve this other issue first, and while we solve it, we must also ensure that Turkey has a strong air defense.”

The apparent decision to clear the F110 sale certainly represents a further softening of Washington’s stance, and it could be a stepping-stone to Ankara eventually being readmitted to the F-35 program.

Turkey’s desire for F-35s has only been intensified by the fact that Greece, its major strategic rival, has been approved for a purchase of the jets. You can read all about how tensions between Greece and Turkey are reflected in the countries’ respective air forces in this previous feature.

Even regarding the F110 transfer, some opposition to defense sales to Turkey remains in Washington.

In particular, Representative Gregory Meeks of New York, the leading Democrat on the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, has reportedly stood in the way of the engine sale during an informal review process.

However, according to the four sources who spoke to Reuters, the F110 deal should be “finalized in the coming days, followed by a formal notification from the State Department to Congress.”

While lawmakers can use the congressional review process to raise their concerns over big-ticket defense exports, the administration can override these.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Trump administration is expected to override Meeks’ effort to block the engine deal.

For the Kaan program, the F110 is vital.

Denied the F-35 and with F-16 deals moving forward only slowly, Turkey has been forced to look elsewhere to meet its short-term fighter needs. Most significantly, it signed a deal for 20 Eurofighter Typhoon jets last October.

Turkey has also been investing heavily in drones, including the ANKA-3, a low-observable flying wing uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV), and the fighter-like Bayraktar Kizilelma. Still, these are viewed as adjuncts to advanced crewed fighters, like the Kaan.

Whether securing the F110 engines means the Kaan meets its target of service entry around the 2030 timeframe remains questionable.

However, it is a major step in that direction.

As well as being fielded by the Turkish Air Force, the Kaan could have significant potential for export, although sales would be governed by U.S. restrictions on its engines. It is one of a number of medium-weight fighters that feature low-observable characteristics and advanced avionics. These include China’s FC-31 and South Korea’s KF-21.

Reportedly, Indonesia already signed a contract for 48 Kaan fighters last June.

Perhaps most importantly, the F110 deal would get back on track what is very much the flagship of Turkey’s military aerospace industry. At the same time, a U.S. decision to provide Ankara with these engines will also be welcomed by those in Turkey who still wish for a way back into the F-35 program.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Turkey’s Baykar and Leonardo of Italy say they have successfully completed the first live trials of their K-SWARM concept, demonstrating collaborative operations between crewed and uncrewed aircraft as part of an effort to develop next-generation autonomous air combat capabilities. The trials, involving Baykar’s Kizilelma uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV) and Leonardo’s M-346 light fighter-trainer aircraft, are the latest to explore what is fast becoming a key element in the evolution of air combat.

Leonardo and Baykar announced the development today. The trials took place last month at Baykar’s flight and test center in Çorlu, Turkey, and involved a Leonardo-owned M-346 Fighter Attack variant and a Kizilelma UCAV. An Italian Air Force T-346A, the trainer version of the M-346, was on hand as chase aircraft.

During the flight-test campaign, the Kizilelma completed its taxi and takeoff autonomously. It then autonomously joined the M-346 in formation. At this point, the two-person crew in the jet assumed full control of the Kizilelma.

The Kizilelma used so-called Smart Fleet Autonomy algorithms developed by Baykar’s Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) Laboratory for the trials.

Once ‘handed over’ to the M-346, the pilots in the jet made use of a newly developed and fully integrated avionics suite to command different formations. Via a crewed/uncrewed computing system, the Kizilelma performed different maneuvers and formations, including position changes, separations and rejoins. These were executed autonomously by the drone, with the M-346 pilots only responsible for providing the initial commands.

What was described as an advanced radio-frequency data exchange system was used to share all data between the platforms.

The Kizilelma/M-346 trials in Çorlu were the first live phase of Leonardo and Baykar’s K-SWARM program, which focuses on developing interoperability between crewed and uncrewed aircraft. The companies refer to this as crewed/uncrewed teaming (CUC-T), but it’s also referred to by other names, including manned-unmanned teaming (MUM-T), or collaborative combat teaming.

TWZ was provided the opportunity to experience the M-346FA firsthand during a visit and demonstration flight at the Beech Factory Airport in Wichita, Kansas:

We Fly Aboard The M-346 That Could Become The Navy’s Next Jet Trainer

Whatever the term, the ambition is similar: to have future fighter pilots go into battle accompanied by drones under their control, ready to fire weapons, gather intelligence, jam communications, or serve as decoys.

Baykar and Leonardo helped accelerate the start of these crewed/uncrewed teaming trials by first running simulated missions, including using an M-346 full-mission simulator in Venegono, Italy, and the Leonardo product capability and concept laboratory, or PC2LAB, in Turin. This meant that algorithms, as well as tactics and procedures, could be tested in the virtual realm first.

The Kizilelma’s rapid rise to prominence as a fighter-like UCAV has been notable, and there have been some impressive milestones along the way.

In general, the Kizilelma is one of only a few fighter-type air combat drone projects to have resulted in hardware. The development of the Kizilelma began as long ago as 2013, although the project was only revealed to the public in July 2021, when conceptual studies were presented. 

Kizilelma was flown first — very briefly — in December 2022, as you can read about here. That milestone came only weeks after the Kizilelma’s emergence for ground testing.

The UCAV is claimed to be supersonic (at least in later versions), have a degree of reduced-observable characteristics, and be tailored for the kinds of air combat missions typically undertaken by crewed fighter jets. In particular, it is eyed as being a drone companion to Turkey’s next-generation TF Kaan crewed fighter. In its definitive form, the drone is powered by a single Ukrainian-made Ivchenko-Progress AI-322F turbofan delivering close to 10,000 pounds of thrust with afterburner.

Late last year, Turkey announced that the Kizilelma used a Turkish-made Gökdoğan air-to-air missile to destroy a target drone, marking the first occasion a UCAV had launched a radar-guided air-to-air missile. Days later, Boeing followed up the feat when its MQ-28A Ghost Bat drone launched an AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) in southern Australia.

Bayraktar #KIZILELMA | GÖKDOĞAN Füzesi Atış Testi

A next set of K-SWARM tests is planned for the coming months, with more complexity and additional functions. The companies say these will require greater levels of situational awareness and assets working together ‘as one’ toward mission objectives. Further details, including how enhanced situational awareness will be achieved, were not disclosed, but it should be noted that the Kizilelma has already been tested with a Toygun electro-optical sensor and targeting system, as well as an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar.

Ultimately, however, the K-SWARM program aims to harness AI technology to enable uncrewed systems to incrementally shift from remote piloting to autonomy, suggesting that, in future trials, the Kizilelma will autonomously conduct more complex missions and maneuvers on the command of the M-346 pilots. At all times, those human pilots will maintain full control and decision-making, the companies say.

A UCAV operating under the control of a crewed tactical jet represents a major milestone for Turkey, placing it among a very small group of countries pursuing this advanced capability. Publicly, such crewed-uncrewed teaming has largely been confined to experimental efforts in the United States and China. We meanwhile know a lot about what the United States has been doing in the “white world” in this regard, and it is now only accelerating its CCA efforts, while it is clear that China has also prioritized it.

Russia has also reportedly flight-tested its S-70 Okhotnik UCAV with a crewed Su-57 Felon fighter, but there is no confirmation about the degree of collaboration achieved. Last year, meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force demonstrated an MQ-20 Avenger drone being controlled by a pilot in an F-22 Raptor, during a mock mission.

Given the current surge in interest in collaborative combat aircraft (CCAs), the joint trials by Baykar and Leonardo also appear especially well-timed.

To take just one European country, Germany currently has a stated requirement for an operational CCA to be fielded before the end of this decade. While the Kizilelma might not necessarily be in the running for that, the AI technology that it is now demonstrating could be of considerable interest to a variety of export customers.

Meanwhile, the Kizilelma, like other Turkish defense products, comes with the advantage of being free from the restrictions imposed by the U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) guidelines. ITAR serves to limit the transfer of defense and military technologies and services — especially the more sensitive ones — to certain countries. Already, Turkey has leveraged its drone developments to secure major arms sales to a variety of countries for which these kinds of capabilities would otherwise be out of reach — in both technological and political terms.

The opportunity for Turkey to offer for export the Kizilelma in concert with the high-end TF Kaan, or the lower-end Hürjet light combat aircraft, would put it in a unique position, at least in Europe. The same platforms could also be supplied with integrated weapons options, providing another significant advantage.

As for Leonardo, the M-346 has recorded some notable sales, with the combat-optimized Fighter Attack version also gaining increasing traction. Meanwhile, through its stake in Eurofighter, the Italian firm may well be looking forward to offering these ‘drone commander’ capabilities to the multirole fighter. As we have discussed only recently, the collapse of the pan-European Future Combat Air System (FCAS) effort means that CCA capabilities are even more in the spotlight, including efforts to team UCAVs with advanced fourth-generation platforms like the Eurofighter Typhoon.

For Baykar and Leonardo, demonstrating that the Kizilelma can be commanded from an M-346 is an important achievement, but scaling that capability to different aircraft, larger formations, and increasingly autonomous mission execution will ultimately determine whether K-SWARM becomes an operational capability rather than simply a technology demonstrator. It should also be remembered that while the autonomy engine and AI agent are critical parts of an effective fighter-CCA teaming concept, it is unclear how developed these technologies are in the K-SWARM experiments. After all, just controlling the UCAV is one thing, but having the drone do much of the thinking while the pilot gives approvals and basic directions is the key. The companies have also proposed developing these technologies further to achieve ‘swarming,’ which presents an even greater challenge in this context.

However, with demand for affordable force multipliers continuing to grow and air forces looking for ways to increase combat mass without buying ever more expensive crewed fighters, a UCAV that can combine with a crewed combat aircraft further demonstrates the rapid pace of advances in Turkey’s burgeoning drone capabilities.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Well, that just happened.

The president held a cage fight on the White House South Lawn, complete with flyovers, fireworks, mini-skirted “octagon girls” and the surrealistic sight of mixed martial arts fighters striding through historic White House rooms flanked by National Medal of Honor winners.

Despite wide public disapproval for Sunday’s event and much scathing commentary about the political and psychological messaging of Donald Trump’s choice of a Vegas-like spectacle to celebrate his 80th birthday, and the country’s 250th, the sky did not fall, the original Constitution in the nearby National Archives did not tear in two and none of the fighters passed out from the heat or bug bites.

Things didn’t even get bloody until the final match in the fifth hour, when Justin Gaethje kicked and punched the crap out of widely favored Ilia Topuria.

Even so, it was impossible to emerge from watching UFC Freedom 250 without feeling punch-drunk.

Not because of the fighting; because of almost everything that was not the fighting.

Beginning with Paramount+, owned by the Trump-friendly Ellison family’s Paramount Skydance, which recently received Justice Department clearance for its highly controversial acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery.

The jarring sight of past UFC matches being seemingly projected onto the Jefferson Memorial and the Capitol gave way to a series of poorly produced “historical” moments in which UFC fighters were cast as inheriting the same “fighting spirit” that motivated this nation’s Founding Fathers, past presidents and war veterans. Down to the inevitable strains of the Village People’s “Y.M.C.A.” (the baffling anthem of MAGA), the event projected a macho-man view of patriotism that was just as ghastly as many feared it would be.

UFC fighters are indeed dedicated and talented athletes who have overcome all manner of personal obstacles. But to compare them with Thomas Jefferson or American soldiers storming the beaches of Normandy is absurd and more than a little insulting.

The tens of thousands of UFC and Trump fans who gathered on the South Lawn and the Ellipse, however, were clearly having a very good time. Proceedings were delayed an hour by the threat of storms, but the weather cooperated in the end. “The President’s Own” United States Marine Band, and in particular, soloist Staff Sgt. Hannah Davis, gave masterful performances throughout. And while the Claw, the 600-ton steel structure arching above the Octagon, certainly looked like the first stage of an alien attack during the day, it put on a pretty terrific (if more than a little Vegasy) light show at night.

For those watching from home, however, these bright spots were glimpsed and heard infrequently, drowned out by the endless hyperbolic intonations of commentators (including Joe Rogan, who initially criticized the event), the long and invariably self-aggrandizing introductions of the various participants and the onslaught of frequently militaristic commercials, more than a few of which, included ads for Ram, featured UFC President and Chief Executive Dana White.

Which isn’t surprising when you think about it. White’s longtime support for the president culminated in his organization covering the event’s $60 million in production costs, and from the moment a smiling White joined Trump as he made his way through the White House to the front row, the event served as an almost-six-hour ad for the UFC.

Though I am not a UFC fan, I realize that showmanship is key to the sport’s wild and increasingly broad popularity. Championship matches, which rarely last longer than 30 minutes and sometimes much less, are inevitably preceded by hours of participants making all manner of florid claims and trash-talking their opponents. (Which may explain Trump’s fondness for the UFC.)

But when all of this strutting, preening and wild-eyed reaction revolves around what was, for better and worse, a series of rules-free brawls being force-fed into a narrative about this country’s enduring strength, what emerges is not so much a sporting event as it is a piece of naked and nationalistic propaganda.

Which came to a head in the final fight. After the six previous matches concluded rather quickly with bloodless knockouts (a UFC record), the fight between American Gaethje and the German-born, Georgia and Spain-representing Topuria lasted much longer. Gaethje, introduced as “the most violent man in the most violent sport,” left the lightweight champion’s face such a mess that even Rogan was shocked.

By all metrics, including Topuria’s refusal to go down, it was the best fight of the night. But hearing the crowd chant “USA, USA” as the bloody blows fell … well, let’s just say it was not everyone’s notion of a presidential birthday celebration.

Some have suggested that Trump staged the event in the hope of regaining the support of young men who helped him win the last election. Even if that was not the case, it was difficult to view UFC Freedom 250 in any way nonpartisan (especially after British former heavyweight champion Tyson Fury strode out of the White House wearing a “Trump for Prime Minister” hat).

Yes, several of the six non-American participants entered to Spanish or Portuguese songs (why so much fuss then about Bad Bunny at the Super Bowl?) but some of the winners are longtime MAGA supporters and made that very clear — Bo Nickal thanked Trump for being the only one “to have the balls” to stage such an event while Josh Hokit followed up his thanks to “my lord and savior Jesus Christ” with “Michelle Obama is a man. Am I right, America?”

Because it was Trump’s birthday after all.

In a significant development for Europe’s future air combat ambitions, Airbus is trying to restart the program to develop a sixth-generation combat jet, now under German and Spanish leadership. This comes less than a week after the Franco-German-led New Generation Fighter (NGF) effort effectively collapsed in its original form, amid acrimony between Paris and Berlin. The NGF was planned as the crewed centerpiece of the pan-European Future Combat Air System (FCAS), which Airbus, as the leading European aerospace corporation, now hopes to get back on track.

Airbus’s Defense and Space unit launched the ‘Team Gen 6’ initiative today with a message on X, declaring that it was “an exciting step for European sovereignty.” So far, eight German defense and aerospace contractors have signed a strategic positioning paper as part of the effort. Those firms are Autoflug, Diehl Defense, Hensoldt, Liebherr, MBDA Germany, MTU Aero Engines, and Rohde and Schwarz.

Reflecting the German-Spanish nature of the new program, those companies are now “closely integrated” with firms from Spain, comprising GMV, Grupo Oesia, Indra, ITP Aero, and Sener.

“While the development of the overarching [FCAS] ‘system of systems’ is progressing as before, the sixth-generation fighter aircraft integrated within it requires a new, agile industrial setup,” Airbus said.

“As Team Gen 6, we have the capabilities and the capacities. Now, we are looking for close alignment with policymakers and the air force[s] to drive forward a superior European air combat system for collective security,” the X post stated.

Airbus also presented a video showing a notional concept aircraft flying with multiple uncrewed platforms. While not too much (as in not much at all) should be read into this, the crewed aircraft features canard foreplanes, a chin intake, and an unusual cranked wing.

Speaking just ahead of the announcement, at the ILA Berlin airshow today, where TWZ was in attendance, Jean-Brice Dumont, head of air power at Airbus Defense and Space, said the company remains committed to delivering a sixth-generation combat jet. “There is a need for a bit of a reshaping and reconsidering the reality of today,” Dumont added.

Dumont explained that the now-abandoned NGF was one of seven separate “pillars” of technology development being worked on under FCAS. As well as the crewed jet, pillars include powerplant, remote carrier vehicles, precision-guided weapons, and data connectivity.

“We have to consider safeguarding areas where it works, and how we reshape,” he added. “At the moment, we are going to seek guidance from our governments [on] what they want us to do. There has to be demonstrated an industrial feasibility of what is being asked — not only technical. That’s probably a lesson now,” Dumont added.

Dumont continued: “The world in 2026 is very different to the world of 2017 when the [FCAS] programme was launched. We have to accept that fact and reshape it — we need another way to get to the same goal, with faster milestones.”

“The problem we had is that we had drawn a line to 2040, and new technologies for everything,” Dumont added, referring to the goal of having the FCAS, including the NGF, in service by that date. “Today, you see demonstrations of connectivity, systems of systems and unmanned vehicles all around the world. The need is there, and in the countries that we are competing with, they are using it already.”

According to Dumont, the company has “put a number of options on the desk of our ministers and ministries of defense,” and is now awaiting further guidance from officials.

As the centerpiece of FCAS, in its original form, the NGF element was the most high-profile and challenging component of the project. However, it had long been dogged by disagreements over industrial workshare and leadership between Airbus and Dassault Aviation, which were the prime contractors for Germany and Spain, and France, respectively.

Dassault had demanded that it play the defining role in NGF, reflecting key requirements for the jet driven by the French Armed Forces. These included the ability to operate from aircraft carriers, and provision to deliver nuclear weapons. Germany or Spain needed neither of these functions.

Despite the disagreements that derailed NGF, Dumont argued that there had still been useful lessons learned from the FCAS program.

“What Phase 1A and 1B [of the program] have given is a very thorough analysis of the repartition of the work between the crewed and uncrewed platforms, and this remains. That kind of shapes what the manned aircraft will have to do.”

As an example of this work, Dumont pointed to ongoing work that will involve trials of a Eurofighter operating as a “command fighter” — a crewed jet that can operate in collaboration with drones, or what Airbus now refers to as uncrewed collaborative combat aircraft (UCCAs). The tests will see a Eurofighter fitted with a Rafael Litening 5 targeting pod modified to serve as the interface between the crewed jet and UCCAs. This should pave the way toward an in-service command fighter capability being introduced to the Eurofighter, something that will be incorporated in the sixth-generation combat jet from the outset.

Initial trials will involve a Learjet test configured as a surrogate command fighter and flying with drones in an “enhanced teaming” mode. Airbus hopes to have the command fighter-configured Eurofighter ready for operational service in 2029.

“The demand from the customers is: be ready early,” Dumont explained. “This is not a contradiction to the Future Combat Air System challenge — it is the need to have our platforms evolved earlier than we had traditionally planned.”

The termination of NGF and the launch of Team Gen 6 leaves plenty of questions over the future of Europe’s air combat landscape.

TWZ spoke to Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) research institute in London, for his take on what might happen next.

On the matter of Germany and Spain now teaming up under the Airbus umbrella, Barrie said that the relationship makes a lot of sense, but its success is far from certain. On the one hand, the two countries already work together within Airbus, and both Germany and Spain are seeking a replacement for their Eurofighter fleets.

“In terms of Team Gen 6, I do wonder if there’s an element of trying to kind of scramble to recover something from the wreckage of NGF, as it were, that the collapse of NGF doesn’t signal the end of Spanish industrial interest in next-gen combat aircraft development,” Barrie said. “But if somebody asked me, do I think between Germany and Spain, they can put together a credible program if nobody else is involved? I think that the numbers would be very difficult to stack up.”

Putting the German and Spanish future fighter requirements together, the two countries might, at best, need to build 300 new combat jets, with a figure of 250 more likely, Barrie contended. Team Gen 6 would then face a real struggle to break even.

This reality will, Barrie believes, force Germany and Spain to look for other partners, which will likely come down to a choice between the British-led Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) and the Swedish next-generation combat aircraft program, led by Saab. Of these, GCAP has the Tempest crewed fighter as its centerpiece, and also involves Italy and Japan. Sweden’s crewed fighter requirements are less clear at this point.

Building a role for Airbus in GCAP would be difficult at this point. With the industrial architecture already in place, bringing not one, but two more partners into that program would be disruptive, particularly in terms of timeline. Already, the Japanese in particular are concerned about the pace of the program, especially since the United Kingdom has not yet fully committed to it in terms of funding.

“My own view is that the United Kingdom remains committed to the program, but there are financial pressures elsewhere,” Barrie noted. “I think that the more likely outcome in all of this is a kind of German, Spanish, Swedish tie-up. The kind of requirements in some ways are aligned a bit better.”

This extends to the size of the aircraft, Barrie observed.

“The kind of aircraft that the Swedes seem to be thinking about, the crewed element is probably more of a bigger Gripen E/F, heading towards Typhoon, in terms of size. This is more in keeping with what the Germans and the Spanish seem to be looking for. Obviously, the United Kingdom and Japan, in particular, need something with longer legs and bigger internal payload, hence GCAP.”

“GCAP will be highly capable,” Barrie continued. “That will come with a unit cost to go with it. Maybe what the Swedes, the Germans, and the Spanish might do will be cheaper.”

Provided a German, Spanish, Swedish teaming arrangement could work, the resulting combat jet could still enter a space where it would face competition for important export orders from France, which looks set to continue the development of the Rafale, especially now that NGF has collapsed. Further competition could be provided by South Korea with further developments of its KF-21 and Turkey with the TF Kaan, although these are notably less-ambitious fifth-generation designs.

The Tempest, as currently envisaged, with its very different set of requirements, would not necessarily be a direct competitor to Team Gen 6, Barrie argued, since it would be a closer match to the F-47 in terms of size, capabilities, and cost. While the potential size of this market would be more limited, probably U.S. reluctance to export the F-47 would play in the Tempest’s favor.

As to the possibility of the United States offering a ‘watered-down’ export model of the F-47, Barrie considers this unlikely to generate much interest.

“Yeah, you can have a downgraded version of my super airplane — as a kind of marketing slug that hardly sells, does it?” Barrie continued. “Even if it’s 10 percent less capable, even if it’s 10 percent less expensive, it’s still a likely unit cost of $250 million or more, which is eye-watering.”

This leaves us with the French, and what they might be able to recover from NGF.

If France goes it alone with a sixth-generation combat jet, Dassault will likely be strongly backed by the French government, and the company has traditionally punched well above its weight.

In the medium term, Dassault has a healthy backlog of orders for the Rafale and is very much at the right end of the cost curve. Barrie considers that the Rafale will remain a profitable airplane for the foreseeable future, but at some point, France will need to think about a successor based on an all-new airframe. Industrially, France has the capability to go alone with this, but they would likely look to a partner or partners to come on board. The likelihood of those partners coming from Europe has now been reduced, but other possibilities might be found in the Gulf states.

Then there is the question of India, which may still buy more Rafales but which, in the fullness of time, is likely to look for a new-generation fighter, and could be a potential partner for France.

“I don’t see the Indians ever being fully committed to only one country,” Barrie continued. India has already hinted that it might want to try and join the pan-European FCAS or GCAP. Meanwhile, Russia has been a long-term military partner for India, and Barrie thinks that the recent appearance of a two-seat version of the Su-57 Felon may well indicate another effort to sell that fighter to India.

Were India to continue its pattern of buying Russian combat aircraft, that would give any potential European partner serious pause for thought, based on the security implications. Meanwhile, India also remains committed to developing its own next-generation fighter.

What the NGF debacle has demonstrated is that any potential partner with France on its next-generation combat aircraft program will likely have to be happy taking a junior role, with Dassault calling the shots.

The collapse of the New Generation Fighter could well be a pivotal moment for European defense cooperation, but it does not signal the end of Europe’s sixth-generation combat aircraft ambitions.

Airbus’s Team Gen 6 announcement marks the start of a German-Spanish-led industrial approach that its backers hope will be more agile and less contested than its Franco-German-led predecessor. However, significant political, financial, and industrial challenges remain, including the search for a reliable partner, or partners. As with NGF, the success of Team Gen 6 will ultimately depend on whether European governments can align their strategic priorities and industrial interests to deliver a sovereign future air combat capability.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

WASHINGTON — One by one, the burly mixed martial arts fighters made their entrance past the solemn, hulking marble statue of America’s 16th president and jogged down the steps of the Lincoln Memorial to roars from thousands of fans drawn to the unusual sporting weekend marking the nation’s 250th anniversary and President Trump’s 80th birthday.

The news conference Friday night featured the fighters who are preparing to face off Sunday in the Octagon built outside the White House. But it was also a chance to see the UFC fans who have thronged to Washington and endured lightning, humidity and bugs.

Tracy Philbeck and his son Levi drove from Charlotte, N.C., with a group of friends to support their favorite fighter, American Justin Gaethje, in the upcoming lightweight title bout against Georgian Ilia Topuria.

“You will hear an eagle screaming when Justin Gaethje wins,” the elder Philbeck said with a chuckle.

David Halstead journeyed from Albany, Australia, to watch the sport he has loved for a decade. Halstead said Trump, who regularly attends the fights, “put UFC on the map.”

The UFC has said it spent $60 million on this weekend’s festivities, and the president has billed his birthday fete as “the greatest show on Earth.”

Not everyone agrees.

The Public Integrity Project described the event as a “private, commercial, corrupt use of our most sacred national monuments for private gain” in a lawsuit the watchdog group filed to try to stop it from happening on federal land. A federal judge ruled Friday that the White House was allowed to go ahead.

About 1 in 10 U.S. adults consider themselves mixed martial arts fans, according to Ipsos Sports polling conducted in February and March. That survey suggests MMA fans tend to be male and nonwhite. They are more likely to identify as Republicans than Democrats.

“One misconception is that everyone who watches UFC is a Trump supporter, but that’s not the case,” said Ricardo Rodriguez, 24, explaining that he loves the physicality of the sport. “People also expect a knockout every time.”

Ellie Louizes, who practices Muay Thai, or Thai kickboxing, and jujitsu martial arts, drove from Daytona Beach, Fla., with her boyfriend, Jacob Purvis.

Female fans of MMA are the minority. But Louizes said she knows a lot of women who get into watching the sport through their male partners. She said “female fighters are often way more aggressive” than the men.

Fans brushed off criticism

The fans at the Lincoln Memorial brushed off criticism about the bouts being held at the White House — on federal grounds owned not by its occupant, but by the American people.

Holding fights at the “people’s house,” Tracy Philbeck said, “goes back to the days of Teddy Roosevelt.”

President Theodore Roosevelt regularly held sparring sessions at the White House, though they were not formal, public prizefights. He was an enthusiastic amateur boxer who had boxed at Harvard and continued the sport throughout much of his life.

Boxing fans also make up a large part of the UFC’s fan base.

At a UFC-sponsored community event this week at the District of Columbia’s Midtown Youth Academy, the boxing gym’s executive director was helping out with a visit from UFC fighter Randy Brown, who sparred with more than a dozen local teenagers and preteens.

Gloria Lee said meeting the fighter was a big deal for kids at her gym. “It’s just been a thrilling week, and I was about to fall out when he came in the door!” she said.

Asked about her personal UFC fandom, Lee said she had not watched it much. But by the end of Brown’s visit, she got into the ring with the professional fighter and threw some slugs of her own.

Hussein writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Linley Sanders contributed to this report.

The troubled pan-European Future Combat Air System (FCAS) appears to have lurched to an undignified — but predictable — end, at least in its current form. A flurry of media reports today indicate that France and Germany, the two major partners in the program, have abandoned their program to develop a crewed New Generation Fighter (NGF) aircraft together, a conclusion supported by a French diplomat who spoke to TWZ today.

According to sources including the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has urged French President Emmanuel Macron to pull the plug on the NGF. The German newspaper cited unnamed government sources in Berlin. Reportedly, the French and German leaders concluded that the companies involved — Dassault and Airbus — have been unable to reach agreement on key aspects of the project, specifically relating to the jointly developed fighter jet.

At this stage, it is reported that Merz and Macron cannot see a future for the NGF, although it is apparently still unclear whether the French government fully shares this assessment and is prepared to accept its consequences.

At this point, it should be recalled that there are at least three separate FCAS initiatives in Europe.

As well as the pan-European version headed up by France and Germany, with Spain and Belgium as junior partners, there is a rival British-led FCAS. This has the Tempest crewed fighter as its centerpiece, involves Italy and Japan, and is now more commonly referred to as the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP). Finally, the Swedish next-generation combat aircraft program, led by Saab, is also known as FCAS.

Returning to today’s developments, French officials are reportedly surprised by what they viewed as uncoordinated messaging from Berlin. From Paris’s perspective, it is the responsibility of political leaders to provide industry with clear direction.

The French government is also said to be frustrated over what it sees as Germany’s increasing preference for national solutions, which threatens to sideline its own industrial input.

A French diplomat told TWZ: “The President of the Republic and the Federal Chancellor have held extensive and frequent discussions on ways to move forward with this important project for European defense. Both leaders expressed regret that the industrial partners have been unable to reach an agreement on the continuation of the project. The German authorities considered that it was not possible to exert further pressure on the companies involved. France remains convinced that Franco-German cooperation is essential both for our two countries and for our European partners in the fields of defence and security.”

The diplomat added: “The French authorities will continue to encourage our industries and armed forces to explore avenues for ambitious European projects that are consistent with our national security interests.”

According to reports, Macron and Merz discussed the future of FCAS last week, in the latest of several recent efforts to keep the program on track. At the same time, however, Merz had become increasingly vocal about his skepticism regarding the project’s prospects.

The FCAS program was launched back in 2017, with the primary aim of replacing France’s Rafale fleet and Germany’s Eurofighters.

FCAS was envisioned as a next-generation European combat air system entering service around 2040, spearheaded by the NGF crewed fighter. As of 2022, it was envisaged that “in-flight demonstrations” would be achieved by 2028 or 2029. 

Before long, however, the project was overshadowed by arguments over workshare agreements, and it is unclear how far the partners had got in terms of agreeing on NGF requirements and starting its design.

For a while now, there have been reports that Germany is exploring alternative paths, including the possibility of separating itself from France within the program entirely.

By February of this year, Merz was publicly raising doubts about the program’s viability, arguing that key issues had never been fully resolved during the planning phase. According to the German leader, Germany and France have fundamentally different operational requirements for a future combat aircraft.

Merz pointed to the specific French requirements that call for aircraft to be capable of carrying nuclear weapons and operating from aircraft carriers. Merz argued that Paris is seeking to shape the aircraft around French military requirements, which do not necessarily align with Germany’s needs.

“This is not primarily a political disagreement,” Merz said. “The real issue lies in the requirements profile. If we cannot reconcile those differences, the project cannot continue.”

Within France, Dassault CEO Éric Trappier recently declared the FCAS project dead if Airbus refuses to cooperate, while Macron continued to make efforts to resuscitate the program.

There are indications that Paris will still try to do its best to keep the program alive, and it remains possible that the broader FCAS architecture, or parts of it, could continue even without the NGF. FCAS has always intended to field families of drones, air-launched weapons, and potentially other aerial platforms, within an overarching ‘combat cloud.’

The German government considers that the “true essence of FCAS” should be continued as a European system of systems, according to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

FCAS System of Systems

Whatever happens next, the program appears to be at a crossroads, and facing its biggest existential challenge yet.

It is highly questionable whether either France or Germany (even with Spanish industrial support and finance) could develop a fighter without the other major partner.

This could open the door to a radical reshaping of European combat air programs.

There have already been suggestions at the highest military levels that the British-led and Franco-German FCAS efforts could be fused in some way. However, it seems highly unlikely that all these partners could come together with agreement. Just as questionable is whether the GCAP effort would be able to admit new major partners at this late stage.

Then there is the issue of Sweden.

Last month, we reported on Airbus having raised the possibility of teaming with Saab on the manned tactical component of FCAS. That was one of the clearest indications yet that Airbus is actively exploring post-FCAS alternatives, or, at the least, a major overhaul of the program’s structure.

Potentially, Airbus and Saab could now team up to develop a joint next-generation fighter, with their requirements likely to be more closely aligned than those of France. Germany and France also have a less urgent need for a sixth-generation combat jet, with Sweden only now introducing the Gripen E, and with Germany looking forward to receiving F-35s as well as more Eurofighters.

For France, losing its partners for NGF could be more critical, although it continues to work on advanced versions of the Rafale. In 2024, France also unveiled plans to develop a new uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV) that will complement the forthcoming Rafale F5 crewed fighter. The industrial side of the drone program will be headed up by Dassault, drawing upon its previous nEUROn UCAV demonstrator, which has already been used in trials with crewed combat aircraft.

The F5 standard of the Rafale is planned to keep the multirole combat aircraft in frontline service until around 2060. That will at least give France some time to consider what to do about a future crewed fighter.

Drones are also increasingly part of the combat-air picture in Germany, too. Delays in fielding a sixth-generation fighter could be mitigated, to a degree, by Airbus developing combat drones. Airbus and Kratos are already pitching the stealthy XQ-58A Valkyrie drone to Germany, and Airbus has also been working on a stealthy CCA-like concept of its own, known as Wingman.

In the background, the U.S.-made F-35 continues to expand its customer base in Europe. There is also the prospect that, in the future, the sixth-generation F-47 might also be offered for export in the region, although this might only be in a watered-down form.

Overall, though, the latest development is a poor reflection on Franco-German cooperation, which has singularly failed to come to agreement about what should be a flagship program, providing a cornerstone of efforts to strengthen Europe’s defense capabilities.

With the ILA Berlin airshow starting on Wednesday, this news could hardly be worse-timed. On the other hand, we may well learn more about Germany’s vision for its future combat aircraft program before the week is out.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Still, 80,000 seats is a lot to shift and in today’s environment, only the top heavyweights, plus a handful of other stars including Saul ‘Canelo’ Alvarez and Naoya Inoue can hit such heights.

For Taylor, 39, and her team to have ambitions to command such an audience is evidence of the reverence in which she is held.

After Friday’s news conference, the Bray native and team set off on a four-day promotional tour around the island of Ireland, beginning in her home town.

It may be a farewell, but a test and not a testimonial is how Taylor wants to sign off.

The opportunity to regain the WBC portion of the light-welterweight title [which was made vacant after last year’s Serrano win] and retire undisputed is the dream.

But she has no designs on getting swept up in the emotion with undefeated Frenchwoman Flora Pili standing in her way.

The Croke Park door appeared shut when an agreement could not be reached between Hearn and stadium authorities three years ago, so what has changed?

With costs to hire the stadium “twice as much as Wembley” according to the Matchroom chairman, it was difficult to see how the impasse would be broken.

For the company there is “not a whole lot financially” to be gained, but just as the rematch between Carl Froch and George Groves at Wembley Stadium in 2014 proved a big night for Matchroom, 80,000 at Croke Park can do likewise according to Hearn.

“That a female is fighting in front of 80,000 people, I think it’s the greatest moment of our [Matchroom’s] boxing history,” he said.

“We’re not going to be making much money on the night, but this is about more than that. My dad [Barry, Matchroom founder and president] might kill me, but what does it really matter what we make on a night like this?

“What we leave with is something we’ll never forget and also it’s important for the brand of our business.”

Yesterday, TWZ published an analysis of a thermal image purportedly showing a previously unseen advanced aircraft design, which appears to be a precursor to the U.S. Air Force’s forthcoming F-47 fighter from Boeing. The image, which went viral online and is from a video that has now been released, is said to have been captured near the U.S. military’s secretive Groom Lake test base, better known as Area 51. It turns out, as a number of our readers have pointed out, there may be some interesting similarities between this secret aircraft and a “Christmas tree” fighter design concept crafted decades ago by Darold Cummings, one of the top minds behind Northrop’s YF-23 Black Widow.

You can find our full initial assessment of what we may be seeing in the viral image, first posted online by the Project Fear YouTube channel earlier this week, here. What we saw initially, as shown below, appeared to feature what could be described as a “double arrowhead” profile to its forward fuselage. This is a very distinct design cue, but it could also be a result of the low quality of the image and the artifacts that come with consumer-grade thermal imagers, which was what the aircraft was recorded with.

Project Fear has now released the full video it says it captured near Area 51, seen below, and it underscores the aforementioned points about image quality. So, it is possible the aircraft has a more traditional low-observable ‘shovel nose,’ instead. Nonetheless, the Christmas tree fighter is an interesting trip down lesser-known fighter development memory lane that is worth examining, in particular what such a unique nose configuration would provide an advanced fighter aircraft.

The full clip of the mysterious aircraft passing by starts at around 49:34 in the runtime of the video below if it does not automatically start playing at that point.

​We Filmed a Top Secret Craft Flying at Area 51

In a post on LinkedIn around the end of last year, Darold Cummings shared an intriguing blueprint of a relevant-looking advanced fighter concept, along with additional details about the design and its genesis. Cummings is currently the founder and president of ForzAero, but has an extensive resume in the aviation industry dating back decades. As noted, he was a key figure at Northrop in the development of the YF-23, which ultimately lost out to what became Lockheed’s F-22 Raptor. He also led the team at Boeing that developed the X-40A Space Maneuver Vehicle, which was used as a testbed in support of work on what evolved into the X-37B reusable spaceplane. He was Chief Engineer/Chief Designer of Rockwell’s Ranger 2000 Jet Trainer, as well.

“I was hired by Bob Sandusky in 1982 to be the Chief Configurator for the Northrop ATF [Advanced Tactical Fighter] program (YF-23). In early 1983 Bob said that Northrop had tried to develop a ‘4-spike’ (like the B-2) fighter, but it couldn’t be done, since a flying wing fighter was not possible,” Cummings wrote in his post on LinkedIn. “I told him I could design one, and he said to give it a try. The only way to accomplish this was with a series of highly swept (55 degree) surfaces over the entire length of the aircraft. The result was the DP-21, created in June of 1983.”

“4-spike” here essentially refers to the total number of radar cross-section hot-spots and where they are located, each pointing in a different direction in azimuth. The fewer ‘spikes’ a low-observable (stealthy) aircraft has, the easier it is to manage its radar signature, and to make it harder to detect and lock onto, but it’s also where those spikes are located that matter.

A four-spike design like the B-2 critically has nothing from the head-on aspect, as well as from the rear, which helps immensely with survivability. These are the most critical signature areas, especially the front as the aircraft is heading into hostile territory. Also, because these are located along the path of flight, these spikes can stay consistent on a threat radar as the aircraft moves directly toward or away from the sensor, and are not fleeting in nature like those from the side. So a four spike aircraft would be very attractive for a tactical fighter meant to persist in contested territory.

“I never considered this to be a serious contender for the ATF program, as the aircraft was unstable beyond 10 degrees angle of attack!” he also noted.

“Back in 1983, the ‘Christmas Tree’ DP-21 would have been difficult to fly. However, with modern flight control systems, this design could be controlled, even at high angle of attack,” Cummings told TWZ directly today after we reached out for more information. “Low observability is always better served with long edges on the design, so the small arrow-shaped foreplane is not ideal, but it still has low RCS characteristics, just not the optimum.”

“Wing shaping is always a trade-off for maximizing LO. Most of the trades have to do with the leading edge contour, which is a large contributor to signature,” he continued. “The canard has to be designed to be ‘ported’ during penetration, as this minimizes the signature. On the YF-23, the V-Tail was ‘ported’ in penetration for the same reason. This is certainly possible with modern flight control systems.”

“Ported” in this instance refers to keeping the control surface locked in the same geometric plane as the wing while cruising.

We also asked Cummings directly whether it was possible his DP-21 concept had an influence on what is seen in the viral thermal image, assuming it is authentic. And we asked for his take on what impacts Boeing’s experimental X-36 and Bird of Prey designs may have had on the F-47, as well.

“My DP-21 aircraft image has been available publicly for quite some time, so it is possible it had some influence, but that is only speculation on my part,” he told us. “I believe the X-36 and Bird of Prey have both influenced the F-47 design. I have always been impressed by the X-36, as it seemed to be ahead of its time.”

“The Groom Lake images are truly intriguing,” he also noted. “It is a viable concept.”

“I think the main thing to remember is that NO ONE thought a 4-spike design (like the B-2) was possible, and my DP-21 was an example of how it was possible,” he added. “A 4-spike design for the F-47 would truly be impressive!”

As TWZ already wrote yesterday, based on what is visible in the image:

“The image shows an exotic design by any interpretation. The aft-set lambda-type wings appear to have a camber and wingtip droop, as on the Boeing Bird of Prey demonstrator. There are very large canard foreplanes — a feature that appears prominently on F-47 renderings and which we have written in detail about in the past. The broad nose, too, is something that has been included in depictions of the F-47, although we have really no idea to what degree these are based in reality. It’s worth noting that in this new thermal image, it has a distinctive double-arrowhead shape, tapering in again in front of the canards. Even the canards themselves may have more than one plane, with the outer tips being drooped, matching similar architecture as the wing. The fuselage then tapers down in the center before the wing roots begin.”

“The aircraft is very likely to be tailless, a feature common to most sixth-generation concepts seen so far. However, since it’s seen from below, we cannot be sure about this aspect of its configuration.”

“As for the powerplant, it is most likely a twin-engine design, like the F-47, a theory reinforced by the sawtooth-type trailing edge. There is no obvious suggestion of any exhaust plumes, which seems odd, but that could be the result of the sensor being used in combination with the aircraft’s power setting at the time of recording, as well as general thermal signature reduction capabilities that are part of the design.”

“Soon after Boeing won the contract for the F-47, we looked at how it might have been influenced by the Phantom Works X-36, also a tailless-canard design.”

As mentioned earlier, the full video Project Fear released today does raise new questions about the exact profile of the front of the design seen in the footage. The idea of using a shovel nose profile on a stealthy aircraft dates back to Northrop’s Tacit Blue demonstrator, and it was found in its modern form the YF-23. It has since become common to see on low-observable (stealthy) designs, and has been notably present in official renders of the F-47 released to date.

Beyond the nose end, there are still some very broad similarities in the shaping of the wing and main body of the aircraft seen in the footage and Cummings’ DP-21 concept.

To date, there are no indications that an F-47 EMD prototype has flown. Air Force officials have said on multiple occasions now that first flight of the service’s new sixth-generation fighter is expected to come in 2028.

We do know that Boeing and Lockheed built flying demonstrator designs that fed into the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) initiative, under which initial development of what has become the F-47 was carried out. Past reports have raised the possibility that there was a third NGAD demonstrator, which might have been built by Northrop Grumman. That company voluntarily dropped out of the NGAD combat jet competition around 2023, and is said to have been on the verge of being cut at the time.

As we noted yesterday, what is seen in the viral thermal image could be unrelated entirely to the F-47. The Navy has also been pursuing a carrier-based sixth-generation fighter, commonly referred to as F/A-XX, in recent years. There has been at least some crossover between F/A-XX and the Air Force’s NGAD effort. A rendering Boeing has shared of its proposed F/A-XX design looks very much in line with what has been shown of F-47 to date. Northrop Grumman is the other company currently competing to build the Navy’s sixth-generation carrier fighter, and has released its own renderings.

In addition, it should be said that official F-47 and F/A-XX renderings released to date will have been carefully manipulated to maximize security of the programs, both of which remain highly classified, and to provide disinformation to adversaries.

As an aside, Darold Cummings also shared his take on a prospective navalized version of the F-47 in a separate post on LinkedIn last year. At that time he wrote:

“I received a DM asking if I had envisioned a Navy version of my recent F-47 fighter concept,  such as  the F-35A to F-35C approach. I recently completed my F-47 Navy version, which I call the F-47N. However, the approach I took was somewhat different: The F-35C used a larger wing for low speed lift, whereas I used my original F-47 wing planform, and added a canard for more low speed lift and control. The canard design (inspired by the X-36), coupled with the Multi-Axis Thrust Vectoring (inspired by the X-44), provided a very reasonable first cut at a Navy version. In general, a canard layout has been treated as adding more radar signature to a fighter. However, on the YF-23 we found that if the all-moving surface (it was a V-tail on the YF-23) was kept “ported”, in this case aligned with the wing plane during cruise, the impact on LO was not a large impediment to signature reduction. The ability to keep the canard ported is achievable using thrust vectoring for trim in cruise and penetration modes.”

Cummings’ interpretation of the F-47 design at that time notably did not reflect his previous DP-21 concept. The X-44 design he mentioned is also known as the Multi-Axis No-Tail Aircraft (MANTA), and was derived from F-22. At least to our knowledge, the MANTA never came to be. The designation was recycled for an entirely unrelated flying wing-type drone, the existence of which was first reported by TWZ.

It’s also worth noting that the design in the newly emerged thermal video could be tied to one of many other programs, including uncrewed ones. Still, it is very much in line with what we would expect to see from a design related to the F-47 and it seems very likely this is the Boeing NGAD demonstrator, if the video is indeed authentic, which it appears to be.

It would be nice to say that we will have to wait and see whether this aircraft turns out to have a more traditional shovel-shaped nose, or even a mild Christmas tree-like design, but we may never see it again. Hopefully that is not the case, especially after the F-47 goes public, but the final design will have significant differences from its technology demonstrator forebears.

Special thanks to @ElectroFluidSys on X for bringing Darold Cummings’ posts on LinkedIn to our attention.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com