In a drone-and-hypersonic weapon-dominated future, manned fighter aircraft appear anachronistic. Yet this has not stopped the US Navy and Air Force from devoting enormous resources to fanciful sixth-generation projects.
At the end of August, Boeing unveiled a striking new rendering of its proposed F/A-XX sixth-generation warplane for the United States Navy, sparking renewed interest in the future of carrier-based warfare. Sleek and stylized in the rendering presented by Boeing last month, this proposed stealth warplane represents the peak of modern American aerospace engineering, designed to dominate the skies of the world’s geopolitical hotspots.
As the US Navy seeks to maintain air superiority amid rising global tensions, the F/A-XX promises advanced capabilities that could redefine naval operations.
Still, beneath Boeing’s glossy artwork lies a program fraught with challenges, including Boeing’s spotty record regarding its civilian aircraft and spacecraft—most notoriously the 737 Max flap, the KC-46 tanker disaster, and the Starliner fiasco. American defense planners have a duty to not simply give the Navy what it wants without further investigation.
Will Congress Ever Ask the Pentagon Tough Questions?
Instead, real questions about this program’s feasibility in an era that is increasingly dominated by unmanned aerial systems along with hard queries about the costs of this complex program must be asked before any final decisions are made about producing the F/A-XX.
Based on the budgetary projections for similar next-generation stealth plane programs such as the United States Air Force’s F-47 or their B-21 Raider long-range bomber, it is believed that individual F/A-XX planes may cost north of $300 million.
Part of the Navy’s Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) family of systems, the F/A-XX is envisioned as a multirole strike fighter to replace the aging F/A-18E/F Super Hornet by the 2030s.
Mind you, the fifth-generation F-35C Lightning II from Lockheed Martin has yet to reach its full potential for the Navy, some five years after its introduction—and nearly twenty years after the F-35 program entered service. Amid budgetary constraints and developmental complications, most analysts project that the final order of around 260 F-35Cs will not be available at least until the mid-to-late 2030s.
Boeing’s latest rendering of their proposed F/A-XX depicts a tailless or near-tailless design shrouded in clouds above an aircraft carrier, emphasizing extreme stealth to evade advanced radar systems.
Of course, looking at the image, one might wonder how the F/A-XX is then to be detected by its own carrier. But rarely is such logic employed in the ad blitzes that lavishly-funded US defense contractors pay to convince the Pentagon and Congress on the need for these overly expensive platforms.
What We Know About the F/A-XX So Far
Key features of the F/A-XX apparent from the concept drawing include a cockpit canopy—similar to Boeing’s F-47, the Air Force’s proposed sixth-generation plane—but with a smaller, narrower radome optimized for high-angle-of-attack carrier landings. Potential canards and wingtips enhance low-speed handling, crucial for naval flight operations.
The F/A-XX boasts 25 percent greater range than current fighters, although this is far less than the Navy had originally wanted. Still, the extended range would theoretically enable longer missions in vast theaters like the Indo-Pacific. It incorporates derivative engines for reliability, advanced sensor fusion, artificial intelligence-driven autonomy, and the ability to team with unmanned drones. This sixth-generation warplane prioritizes survivability in anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) environments, integrating hypersonic weapons and electronic warfare (EW) suites to outmatch adversaries.
One can hardly blame the Navy’s logic for desiring the F/A-XX, in spite of its gargantuan price tag. The Navy wants the F/A-XX to remain competitive in an age of renewed great power competition—particularly in light of China’s rapid military modernization, the most significant strategic threat to the United States since the heady days of the Cold War.
On the other hand, however, it could be argued that the Navy wants the F/A-XX simply because their rival technical service, the Air Force, is getting its own sixth-generation platform. Interservice rivalry can never be underestimated, no matter how petty or marginal it might seem to those of us on the outside.
Of course, the Navy will argue that their current fleet of fourth-generation F/A-18E/F Super Hornets must be replaced because they are no longer relevant to the current strategic environment. After all, these birds were introduced in the early 1990s. Times have significantly changed since those halcyon days.
But does that justify the explosive costs and likely major delays involved with the F/A-XX program?
What Will the F/A-XX Really Do for the Navy?
The Navy intends to operate mixed fleets comprised predominantly of fifth-generation F-35Cs and the new Boeing F/A-XXs to ensure sea control and power projection in the face of new Chinese threats such as the fifth-generation Chengdu J-20 “Mighty Dragon” and the Shenyang J-35—as well as the new sixth-generation birds China has occasionally demonstrated. Of course, no one really knows if the planes military observers have seen in China’s skies are true sixth-generation planes, or if they are part of a misdirection campaign by Beijing.
With carrier air wings, along with the aircraft carriers themselves, facing obsolescence in the age of A2/AD challenges, Boeing and the Navy argue that their F/A-XX would puncture those A2/AD bubbles and keep the carrier more relevant. It is likely that the image Boeing posted was a hint that, irrespective of cost and technological delays, the government is going to spend an absurd amount of money to build a handful of the F/A-XXs over the next decade.
Winning the Air Force’s F-47 NGAD contract positioned Boeing to adapt similar designs for the Navy, promoting commonality and cost efficiencies. Pentagon officials prioritize experience over mishaps, viewing Boeing as the only contractor with the industrial base to handle dual sixth-generation programs. The most likely competitors are Lockheed Martin, which continues to be mired in F-35 delays, and Northrop Grumman, which is largely focused on bombers; these leave Boeing as the logical choice for the contract, in spite of its recent controversies.
Despite whatever the Pentagon may have told itself about the efficacy of relying upon Boeing over Lockheed for its sixth-generation warplane designs, the fact of the matter is that the F/A-XX is looking increasingly like the F-35. There are already projected to be massive cost overruns and performance shortfalls, which as a result will cause schedule slips—all while lifetime expenses for maintenance will far exceed whatever they are being projected to be.
Earlier this year, the Navy’s leadership itself triggered a hold on the F/A-XX project as even they could not ignore their doubts about Boeing’s capability to deliver a system that operated as advertised and was within budget or on time, for that matter. Funding disputes delayed $1 billion in FY2025 alone. The Pentagon, sensing engineering bottlenecks and aware of existing budget caps, had paused this monstrously expensive program.
The Future Is Drones, Not Monstrously Expensive Manned Aircraft
In a drone-and-hypersonic weapon-dominated future, manned sixth-generation planes appear anachronistic. Yet both the United States Navy and Air Force with their arms wrapped around these sixth-generation boondoggles.
With Boeing’s recent poster of their proposed F/A-XX flying over an American carrier, it is clear that the Pentagon is going to move ahead with this program regardless of financial and opportunity costs. This is a poor decision. Whereas the Air Force can somewhat justify its need for the F-47, the fact remains that the Navy is in a far greater pickle than even the Air Force. After all, the aircraft carrier itself is becoming more of a strategic liability than it is a strategic asset. And given that the launching platform for the proposed F/A-XX is not as relevant as it once was, why would the Pentagon want to push for the F/A-XX rather than cheaper unmanned systems?
About the Author: Brandon J. Weichert
Brandon J. Weichert is a senior national security editor at The National Interest. Recently, Weichert became the host of The National Security Hour on America Outloud News and iHeartRadio, where he discusses national security policy every Wednesday at 8pm Eastern. He is also a contributor at Popular Mechanics and has consulted regularly with various government institutions and private organizations on geopolitical issues. Weichert’s writings have appeared in multiple publications, including The Washington Times, National Review, The American Spectator, MSN, The Asia Times, and others. His books include Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. His newest book, A Disaster of Our Own Making: How the West Lost Ukraine is available for purchase wherever books are sold. He can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon.
Image: Shutterstock / i viewfinder.
