The Pentagon must choose between waiting for the F-47 and hoping it is the right fighter to provide air superiority, or resurrecting the F-22 program.
Earlier this year, after Lockheed Martin failed to win the contract for the United States Air Force’s sixth-generation fighter at the center of the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program, the aerospace giant announced it would pivot by developing a more advanced F-35 Lightning II. The prospective upgraded version would integrate technology developed for its sixth-generation prototype, serving as a bridge from the fifth-generation F-35 to the Boeing F-47, the aircraft produced under the NGAD contract.
President Donald Trump, who praised the capabilities of the F-47, has recently suggested that Lockheed Martin could even produce a twin-engine F-35 variant, which he proceeded to dub the “F-55.”
“It’s going to be also with two engines because the F-35 has a single engine. I don’t like single engines,” Trump explained at the time.
However, aviation analysts quickly dismissed that such a transformation could be easily accomplished. For one, it would require a major redesign to the F-35, one that would take years to achieve. Moreover, with twin engines, producing a short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) variant with a lift fan would be all but impossible without significant changes.
Last week, a source with knowledge of aerospace engines further criticized any efforts by Lockheed Martin to double down on the F-35, especially if it meant doubling the engines.
“To make a twin-engine jet from the F-35, you’d need to completely redesign the fuselage, wing, tail, and stealth shaping,” the source told the Defence-Blog. “You’re not building a variant—you’re building an entirely new aircraft. These types of proposals are rarely about capability. They’re about keeping development dollars flowing after losing a major program like NGAD.”
That source compared Lockheed Martin’s efforts, which were meant to “prioritize sales over engineering,” to what Boeing attempted in the commercial world.
Lockheed Martin Keeps Missing Out on Contracts
In addition to not securing the NGAD contract, Lockheed Martin was also eliminated from the US Navy’s F/A-XX program that is seeking a replacement for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. Lockheed’s exclusion further explained why the company had sought to market a more enhanced F-35, as it was out of the sixth-generation fighter market.
Although there had been calls for the program to be put on a temporary hold to allow the Pentagon to focus on the F-47, the program is likely proceeding. Either Northrop Grumman or Boeing is securing the contract.
However, there is another possibility for Lockheed Martin that does not involve redesigning the F-35 as a twin-engine fighter. Instead, the company’s sixth-generation fighter technology could be employed on its F-22 Raptor—even as the production lines for the first fifth-generation air superiority fighter were shuttered in 2011.
As the Ukrainian-based Defense Express explained, US military planners did not see a need for an air superiority fighter as it was still engaged in the global war on terror (GWoT) and no near-peer adversary had anything close in capabilities. Instead, the F-35 was developed to fill a multitude of missions, with it being produced “in three distinct variants for the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps.”
However, the F-35 falls conspicuously short in one key category—namely air superiority.
“This was illustrated during the 2023 incident in which an F-22 was the only US aircraft capable of intercepting a high-altitude Chinese spy balloon,” Defense Express added.
Should the Pentagon Resurrect the F-22 Program?
The US military now has a choice: wait for the F-47 and hope it is the right fighter to provide air superiority while keeping an increasingly shrinking number of F-22s in service, or resurrect the F-22 program and incorporate some of the technology developed for the NGAD into the fighter.
However, as Defense Express further noted, that may be easier said than done, and it would not be “a quick or cheap process.” The supply chain for the F-22 simply no longer exists. Some component suppliers may no longer be in the industry, having been absorbed into other companies or simply being unable to source the components. Even those still in business can not merely resume making F-22 parts tomorrow.
However, that is not the biggest hurdle that restarting F-22 faces.
“Reopening the F-22 line and upgrading it would be smarter, cheaper, and faster [than developing an F-55 from scratch],” Defense Express concluded. “But doing so would force too many people in Washington to admit the truth—that the F-35 was never a true replacement.”
That serves as the final reminder. The greatest enemy for some military platforms is not another pilot, but lawmakers in Washington and industry leadership. The adversarial pilot’s mission is simply to shoot down the fighter. Those in the corridors of power have a mission that is centered primarily around maximizing profits, rather than doing the best thing for the national defense.
About the Author: Peter Suciu
Peter Suciu has contributed over 3,200 published pieces to more than four dozen magazines and websites over a thirty-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. He is based in Michigan. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: [email protected].
Image: Wikimedia Commons.
