Will the final F-47 design have canards or not?

>>63977764 (OP)
Its designed by Boeing, so obviously it will have whatever is the most retarded solution.
>inb4 muh MIC boeing is different from civvie boeing
Lol, lmao

the official artwork has them. unless that's a simple placeholder to obfuscate, then they should have them; you can't rapidly change a design, and removing canards is that.

>>63977764 (OP)
I hope so because the proposed design was SEX.
And they weren't canards as control surfaces, more for directing airflow?

Implessive

>>63977874
>And they weren't canards as control surfaces, more for directing airflow?
Are you typically THIS retarded?

>>63977864
>the official artwork has them
It looked a lot like repurposed F/A-XX concept art. Maybe it has nothing to do with the actual PCA/NGAD fighter?

>>63977864
>the official artwork has them
anon, it was just a placeholder. I doubt that the damn thing even exists physically

Yeah

>>63977764 (OP)
how are they building it without chinese rare earths?

>>63977862
>whatever is the most retarded solution.
So swing wing canards?

>>63980860
If I were US DOD glowy, I would make the art look nothing like the plane at all, just to mess with copycat chink shills.

>>63977764 (OP)
Many engines, will be the fastest with the biggest numbers and like the biggest bestest with a beautiful number

>>63982054
Six engines, two for itself and four for the wingmen drones that detach from under it.

>>63977764 (OP)
it shall have deployable canards built into the leading edge wing root extension

>>63982656
F-14 did it first

>>63981370
Melting down smartphones and laptops given to "electronics recycling organizations" (CIA fronts). That's how these things cost eleventy gorillion dollars.

>>63982668
The auxiliary flaps of the F-111 were closer, those glove vanes are useless to control, they're more a trim for supersonic flight. 2 DoF is way harder than 1 DoF.

>>63981370
>how are they building it without chinese rare earths?
You bring up a good point since the US has never been able to obtain restricted resources from an enemy nation before.

>>63986321
>we wuz okey because big beautiful and powerful dorito
>the rest of the economy can make motors, speakers, actuators, hard drives, etc
:^)

>>63977764 (OP)
Vaporware

>>63986321
Was that before or after the US industrial base was dismantled and white engineers were replaced by H1Bs?

China can show their tailess supersonic aircrafts flying, can amelica do the same?

>>63986368
Implessive

>>63986353
I feel you, but he's talking about buying titanium from Russia through proxies.

>>63982059
Could we make it an odd number of engines?

>>63986368
You're not wrong, the chinese plane may or may not just be a bodykit with a third engine but the american F47 is right now just orange man saying "omg so fast, so deadly, bestest and greatest plane which is real".
Neither of which is very
>>63986691

>>63977764 (OP)
It might have swiveling wingtips

>>63986716
Granted, nine engines!

>>63986368
the us should have released footage of their flying ngad prototype in response (especially as they scrapped it anyway).

>>63986761
Nice, I am thinking a configuration akin to something like this.

Isn't that the chink J-50?

>>63990738
>samefagging this thread 1 whole day later
Grim, even for you chink

>>63990749
Why are you bumping a chink shill thread retard?

>>63990815
Why are you bumping a chink shill thread retard?

>>63982027
>swing wing canards
Make that retractable canards and it would be unironically based.

>>63986368
china flies their top secret prototypes in the middle of a city
US flies flies their top secret prototypes at area 51 so that nobody sees it

>>63982059
>arrives at mach fuck
>slows down
>drones detach and accelerate away
I can imagine the Ace Combat cinematic already

>>63992154
ahem *b21* ahem

>>63992552
Where's the X in front of the B?

What do you mean it's not a prototype?

>>63992552
Strategic bombers are only shown off because they have to be to stay in compliance with one of the old Cold War arms limitation treaties, I forget which one though. B2 had the same thing happen for the same reason.

>>63993009
>Cold War arms limitation treaties
New STAR is dead af retard and the B21 is not even in service. lmao even
vatnik tier of cope (1st june)

>>63993156
Russia is violating it but the US is still abiding by the terms until it expires. When it expires next year things might be off to the races though.

>>63977764 (OP)
it will have a morphing wing and no control surfaces

>>63993347
> US is still abiding by the terms until it expires.
Tell me, are the B-1B included in the controls of New START?
Are [all] the B-52H included in the controls of New STAR?
The USAF alone have more B-52 in service and reserve than the limit of New START and the 2010's Pentagon directive. Do you know why?
Explain why, how it's that even possible...
>the next generation superiority fighter nowhere to be seen, more secretive than a black project for the CIA or F117.
"curious" : ^)

>Also, the ATF prototypes were displayed 15 years before the introduction of the first 5th gen figther. The JSF is a 20-seasons-long drama...

>>63993428
All B-1Bs had their external pylons removed and were denuclearized due to treaty restrictions. They appear to be funding at least reactivation of external pylons since the treaty is expiring. Some but not all B-52s were also denuclearized but the capability can be reenabled after the treaty expires, and there is at least passing interest in doing so. NGAD is nowhere near as secretive as F-117, which was in service out of Tonopah for iirc the better part of a decade before being formally acknowledged. NGAD still has some level of secrecy, and lines up with massive new hangars being built at Groom, but we also know they’ve had at least one demonstrator flying since 2019 which they’d never have told us for old black programs. Frankly I wish they were being more secretive about it.

>>63993487
>2019
>trust me bro

>>63993491
They’ve been funding these programs since the Obama years, and fits the general timeline for US fighter introduction. It’s generally at least a decade from first flight of a demonstrator to in service stealth fighter, and they seem to want F-47 before 2030. They also caught something under a temporary shelter at Groom a couple years ago, which could’ve been one of the demonstrators or perhaps something else entirely.

>>63993506
>They’ve been funding these programs since the Obama years, and fits the general timeline for US fighter introduction.
With the current MIC that means nothing.
"Generally" and extrapolations are meaningless when EMALS doesn't works as intended after nearly 10 years in service. If you extrapolate the trend of Block 0 - 3 for the F-35 then Block 4 was planned to be ~10 years, it will be at least 18 years (2032).
The M10? dead, the next generation missile? it has been in development for +20 years, but this time it will enter in service.
The IHPTET? who? the promise of a T/W ratio of 15-20? lmao even. Then 5 more engine programs during the last 25 years and still nothing... btw, where's the product of the AATE/ITEP/FATE programs? The press releases weren't only terribly 'optimistic' about achieving every single target but they also were terrible vague, curious, because the only possible way to achieve some of those targets is comparing the engine with a mid-1950s turboshaft instead of a T700.

>>63981370
It's almost like rare earth deposits exist in places other than China.

>>63993598
They’ve been completely consistent with the timeline for the demonstrators having flown since they announced it had back in 2020, which also lines up with significant new hangars construction at Groom. M10 was cancelled because with had questionable utility and a terrible maintenance contract. GE and Pratt had adaptive engine prototypes for the F-35 complete, however the F135 ECU was chosen instead since they wouldn’t be compatible with all airframes. T901 exists but may or may not be funded further. Anything helicopter related procurement is very much in the air after seeing both how vulnerable they can be to drones and how much of their doctrinal role drones are stepping on. With the Army adopting a tiltrotor to replace I don’t think it’s a bad idea to cancel helicopter related programs when their utility and survivability is becoming questionable.

>>63993697
>They’ve been completely consistent with the timeline for the demonstrators having flown since they announced it had back in 2020
>trust me bro, again...
sure, and your proofs is (Ø)

>>63993697
>They’ve been completely consistent with the timeline for the demonstrators having flown since they announced it had back in 2020
>trust me bro, again...
sure, and your evidence is (Ø)

>>63993735
Deleting your post because you used “proofs” is pretty sad m8. At least own your fuckups.

>>63993741
"proofs" have obvious connotations, that's why I re-posted using "evidence" instead.
and as I said
(Ø)
none
nil
nashi

>>63993782
Sure thing buddy. Hope you get paid well for this at least.

>>63977764 (OP)
Do you really want my speculation?

>>63977764 (OP)
Most likely not. Look at all the "concept art" of all aircraft and they often differ radically from them once produced.

>>63993782
>"proofs" have obvious connotations

It sure as fuck does lmao

>>63993782
>(Ø)
Only terrible, horrible phoneposters such as I have the power to type in such things. Why? Why would you choose to reveal yourself like this?

I phonepost because I am lazy. Why do you phonepost? Is it because... you have multiple phones?!

>>63994023
Nigga, look at this:
ΩẞŊĦ ̛Ŧ ̛£’™⅛Ł×ÐĦ⅛±˚]]€[ŋĸˀħ#⅛£⅜ºÐ‚׺ẞÆ°±⅛£™⅜Ø⅛£⅜Ŧ

>>63993506
Don't bother replying to these people. At best they're just idiots but a fair assumption is they're malicious foreigners.

>>63977764 (OP)
WHO CARES STFU ABOUT THIS THING AND THE B2(1)

>>63993506
Just two more fiscal cycles
Dorito go nyooom

Chinese men are small and effete and do not have the strong libido to rape Chinese men like I do, so they will lose the war.