Sixth Generation Image War
Well, Russia has joined the "sixth generation image" war. The latest round of the rendering race has spurred the media to some downright silly and rather fantastical speculation about "what kind of car is this and what is it capable of?"
What can a picture be capable of? Naturally, to delight those interested in various images. Seriously discussing the performance characteristics of a combat aircraft is only possible after it takes to the skies and undergoes a series of tests. And even then, there's no guarantee that the intended performance characteristics will be met.
And we don't have to look far for an example: take the F-22, and let them bounce a meter off the concrete in their parking lots. Here's an airplane that was said to be one thing, but turned out to be something completely different.
We've already broached the topic of a sixth-generation aircraft more than once. And somehow it's all pointless, because it's incredibly difficult to implement something you can dream up on the couch, let alone on a decent computer. And we've ended up destroying what we dreamed up ourselves.
Near-hypersonic speed? Cruising at Mach 4 without afterburners? Yes, and a pilot who would be crushed to a pulp with minimal maneuvering at such speeds, or, alternatively, knocked out cold by a stroke.
Artificial intelligence that can fly at hypersonic speeds? Yes, but it doesn't exist yet. And what exists can't handle it. dronesYes, unmanned vehicles can fly alongside aircraft, acting as flying batteries, but the effectiveness of all these "faithful wingmen" has been best demonstrated by our S-70.
Spaceship-like aircraft capable of combat even in near space? Yes, that makes sense: once a bomber reaches an altitude of about 70 km, it becomes invulnerable (for now) to anti-aircraft fire. missiles, but this will come at the cost of additional engines (most likely rocket engines), a second set of oxidizer tanks (kerosene is perfectly acceptable as a fuel), a reinforced hull for near-space flight, life support systems, and so on. And yes, thermal insulation for re-entry into the upper atmosphere. In reality, these are monsters that weigh much more than even existing strategic bombers.
Stealth was also discussed. Naturally, it had to be better than that of fifth-generation aircraft. What would be needed for this? New materials, new signal reflection principles... In other words, things that haven't yet been observed.
And yes, these planes should be armed in theory. weapons, as one high-ranking politician put it, "based on new physical principles." What these new physical principles are, given that physics in our space remains the same—let's leave it to the speaker's conscience. It's worth simply saying that nothing more or less fitting this description has been invented. Yes, missiles have begun to fly further. And that's really all that all the world's weapons makers can boast about. Lasers, blasters, beam guns, and railguns remain in the distant future. A hundred years from now.
And so it turns out to be an interesting situation, like the saying about a known body part—it's there, but the words aren't. The sixth generation exists in drawings and designs, but it makes no sense whatsoever. At least not yet.
Now some will say - while some are drawing, others are already flying.
It's not that simple, ladies and gentlemen, it's not that simple. We'll talk about what's flying at the end. It's already flying, there's no getting away from it. Let it fly. We're more interested in what might fly in the future.
Let's start, naturally, with the Americans. Well, they're supposedly the most advanced, and their airplanes... the fire and fear of hot air balloons and drones.
Let's take their F-47s
More precisely, his murky drawings, which they call renders. All that could be gleaned from them was that the cult of the "stealth" icon continues. Which means we shouldn't expect hypersonic speeds and space-age flights from the F-47. That's not the physics of this project. And I'm sure that when they build a model for wind tunnel testing, the first tests will reveal this. The F-47 is a continuation of the F-22-F-35 line, and nothing more. The Americans have simply mastered the art of puffing out their cheeks. That's for sure.
By the way, further proof of this is the unsuccessful attempt to declare the B-21 a sixth-generation aircraft.
That was true, but the global expert community unanimously said, "Ugh," because the B-21 is really the next step in the B-2 line, a lesser effort to correct the mistakes, so to speak. And there's absolutely nothing in the Ryder that would qualify it as sixth-generation.
But at least the B-21 flies in metal. That's undeniable. The F-47, however, is a huge question mark. It's so... invisible that no one has even seen it yet. The Americans themselves are confused about the F-47, because either they're still in the process of customizing the first flight prototype, as Air Force Chief of Staff David Alvin recently stated, with the first flight scheduled for 2028, or flight prototypes have already been flying. He didn't specify where, however.
But many appreciated it, because what Alvin revealed left the jaws of most people knowledgeable about the subject on the floor. Here, we need to differentiate between two projects. The first, Lockheed Martin's NGAD, is one thing, while Boeing's F-47 is quite another. And, as far as anyone interested was aware, the first clear reports about the F-47 program appeared in March of this year.
Lockheed Martin had just announced test flights as part of the NGAD program, but... that was an F-16-based demonstrator, and they were testing individual components of the project. Yes, there were rumors that something similar had apparently flown at Lockheed's secret sites in 2019 and 2022, but nothing came of it. No one really saw what could have flown there, or whether it had flown at all.
You know, it's even interesting how, in such a curious country as the United States, during the five years of work and "flights" of the NGAD program prototypes, no one saw anything or captured anything on a mobile phone camera. Considering the Americans' love of advertising, and how they orchestrate "information leaks" for its sake, everything here is somehow too secretive. We don't even mention publicity, as one of the symbols of democracy.
This is precisely why the majority of the world's expert community has greeted the announcement that the F-47 is "just about to fly" with not just coolness, but downright pessimism.
The thing is, in the US, it's no secret to anyone in the know that General Alvin is a lobbyist for Boeing's interests, and they say it was old David who did everything he could to take the development contract away from Lockheed and into the hands of his friends.
However, lobbying in America is par for the course and is the foundation of politics. So Alvin's efforts here are clear and understandable. And it must be said that snagging such a contract for a company as troubled as Boeing deserves respect, and the general clearly deserved every dollar of his lobbying commission.
But the idea that Boeing, with its many problems, was able to overtake Lockheed, which had been tinkering with its project for five years, in just seven months—even in America, few believe it. Especially since the Americans are constantly being asked for confirmation. No one there has taken anyone's word for it for a long time.
Moreover, everyone is drawing parallels with how Northrop Grumman handles its B-21. Everything is as it should be—pictures, "leaked secret photos," a presentation, airfield demonstrations, and, finally, an actual flight. As the late Zadornov said, everything fits together. People believe in the B-21 because, as they say, everything is in the public domain.
By the way, they do something similar in China, but we'll talk about China separately at the end.
In the case of the F-47, there's complete silence and zero bits of information. No photos, no video, no data, no witnesses. Just a couple of vague renderings, 70% of which are smoke with something sticking out of it. In this day and age, that's incredibly insufficient to believe that something is actually flying out of that smoke. And the fact that the F-47 project was hailed from the podium by the greatest peacemaker on the planet only adds to the belief that it's simply part of a grand "Make America Great Again" show.
With pictures - that's doubtful.
But what do we have there in Europe?
And in Europe there were two projects, if you remember: GCAP or Tempest from Britain, Italy and Japan and FCAS from Germany, France, Spain and Belgium.
GCAP extension
FCAS
Even if the first project is moving forward, it's hard to detect without a microscope. Frankly, I don't think anything will come of this project. Yes, all three participants need to replace their old Tornados and Typhoons, and the Japanese need F-2s. But all three participants have F-35s…
In general, the F-35, despite all its shortcomings, which we have analyzed in detail down to the last screw, is good in the sense that it has completely destroyed the European aircraft industry.
It's hard to say how long the British will tinker with the "six" project. It's clear that Japan and Italy aren't helping, but rather... fellow travelers with money, and the entire burden of the work will fall on the British shoulders. How long they'll actually last is a question mark.
The second unfortunate partnership is in even more trouble. The alliance of France, Germany, Spain, and Belgium... is falling apart! Belgium has already withdrawn from the treaty, the Germans and Spanish are frantically searching for a way out of the current situation, and the French... well, the French have ruined everything. A gigantic scandal between Dassault Aviation, Indra Sistemas, and Airbus will put an end to the prospects of the FCAS project, Europe's main hope for reviving combat aircraft production. aviation as such.
Seven years of work by Airbus, Dassault Aviation, and Indra Sistemas had been wasted. FCAS was pitched not as a single aircraft, but as a system comprising a sixth-generation fighter (NGF), a suite of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for various missions, "loyal wingmen," and support aircraft. All of this was to be integrated into a "combat digital cloud," a network enabling real-time data exchange between various combat platforms.
The project was certainly impressive. On paper, it all looked simply fantastic. But the implementation… Five of the seven years were spent just coordinating the various bureaucratic details of a United Europe. And only in 2022 did any meaningful progress begin.
It must be said that nothing has changed in three years; the project has essentially remained the same. However, the French have decided that 80% of the new aircraft should be manufactured in France. Eric Trappier, head of Dassault Aviation, stated that:
“It’s easier for us to build the aircraft ourselves than to cooperate with the Germans, since we at FCAS own 90% of all the know-how.”
Overall, the French are looking to open their own bar with blackjack and other amenities. The main thing, of course, is that it doesn't turn out like "Rafale" again; anything better is good enough.
And the remaining former participants will remain with their old aircraft and... new F-35s.
The American F-35 program has arguably achieved its primary goal. With it, the Americans have virtually destroyed the European combat aircraft industry, rendering Europe completely incapable of developing and producing its own fighters. Nearly all European countries have purchased or will purchase the Penguin, and this process is virtually irreversible: they have no other options but the F-35.
After all, shouldn't we be buying planes from the Russians and Chinese?
And given the energy crisis Europe is literally being pushed into by Europoliticians like Ursula the Eurogynecologist, there's no point in even thinking about building any new aircraft. The money needs to be spent on helping Macron's lover in Kyiv, and Washington will give us the F-35s anyway. On credit.
Will France be able to pull off anything on its own? Doubtful. More accurately, it can develop it, but it's unlikely to build and complete it. Plus, there's the energy crisis, coupled with the financial one—what billions of euros are we talking about?
Is it better here?
In our country, we'll talk about our own, eastern half of the world. Here, of course, everyone's thinking about China and its two aircraft. The world is talking about "supposedly sixth-generation" these days. Fine, so be it; China is very good at keeping its secrets, and no one has leaked its performance characteristics for everyone to see.
But the J-36 and J-50, unlike all the other projects, are flying. Yes, the global expert community didn't classify these aircraft as sixth-generation, and it's naturally unpleasant to receive such a slap in the face from the Chinese. But China itself is somehow in no hurry to convince the world that these aircraft are sixth-generation.
Yes, the J-36 and J-50 are flying. Whether they're prototypes or flying models doesn't matter. What matters is that they're flying. How far into the future Chinese aircraft manufacturers have come is an unanswered question, but if China wants to, they'll answer it.
Here in Russia... It's somehow awkward to even talk about the sixth generation, considering we haven't really figured out the fifth generation yet. Yes, the Su-57 has more air victories to its credit than the F-22 and F-35 combined, even though comparing the number of aircraft produced is somehow even indecent...
But then again, work on the Su-57 is progressing, the plane flies, and what's more, it fights, and fights effectively. And it would be strange to wish for anything more.
So, with the fifth generation, we can tick off what we've accomplished and mastered. Let's move on. And then we have the sixth generation...
And here the question immediately arises: why?
The Americans understand—they simply need to be ahead of the curve. The Europeans understand—they need to escape US enslavement. China doesn't, but at least their adversaries are those who want to be ahead of the curve.
So the bacchanalia unfolding in the Russian information space is sometimes delightful, although at its core, it's mostly the fruit of the overactive imaginations of authors and artists. In fact, not one of these sixth-generation poets could even begin to articulate what the hell this plane is all about.
I won't go far; I'll just take one of our authors, who doesn't really understand aircraft, but still draws certain conclusions in his articles. We have many such authors in our country, unfortunately, but nothing can be done. I came across an article in which the author seriously discussed the future of our MiG-41, an aircraft that, as they say, "comes as close as possible to sixth-generation requirements."
The MiG-41 can presumably solve the following tasks:
- destruction of high-altitude supersonic and hypersonic, manned and unmanned reconnaissance and strike systems;
- interception of hypersonic missiles from combat alert mode in the air;
- destruction at long and ultra-long range of particularly important air targets, such as airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, refueling aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft, anti-submarine aircraft, and strategic bombers;
- use of anti-satellite weapons and delivery of payloads to low Earth orbit (LEO);
- use as a first stage for launching existing and future hypersonic missiles.
- destruction of high-altitude supersonic and hypersonic, manned and unmanned reconnaissance and strike systems;
- interception of hypersonic missiles from combat alert mode in the air;
- destruction at long and ultra-long range of particularly important air targets, such as airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, refueling aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft, anti-submarine aircraft, and strategic bombers;
- use of anti-satellite weapons and delivery of payloads to low Earth orbit (LEO);
- use as a first stage for launching existing and future hypersonic missiles.
It feels like they copied the Americans. A lot of clever buzzwords, but nothing really backed up by them. I doubt whoever wrote this has the slightest idea what a "manned hypersonic reconnaissance and strike system" is, but since writing nonsense isn't illegal in our country, they write it. And they're slapping the MiG-41 on top of this, for which, I should point out, the Ministry of Defense and the Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG haven't officially released any specifications.
Next we have "Intercepting hypersonic missiles from combat alert mode in the air"It's very difficult to translate this into Russian, but apparently the author had this in mind: a MiG-41 is patrolling somewhere on combat alert. Upon receiving information about the presence of a hypersonic missile, the aircraft will magically intercept and destroy it. Why "magically"? Well, there are currently two ground-based systems in the world—their Patriot PAC-3 and our S-500—that could theoretically accomplish this. Theoretically, because no one has tried it in combat mode yet. But would it be possible to cram the computing power of a ground-based system into an aircraft? Which, at a minimum, can fit in one hefty machine?
Next. "Destruction of particularly important air targets at long and ultra-long ranges"Okay, fine, I can agree with this point, because if you strip away the pomposity, it turns out that the aircraft can be equipped with long-range missiles. That's what the Su-35S does today.
"Use of anti-satellite weapons and delivery of payloads to low Earth orbit". Everything, as they say, is curtains, and here's why: let's start with the definition of LEO (low Earth orbit) as such.
Low Earth Orbit (LEO) is a space orbit around Earth located relatively close to the planet's surface. It ranges from 160 km to 2000 km above sea level.
That is, this so-called aircraft must rise to an altitude from which it can operate some kind of "anti-satellite weapon" of unknown origin (and the author hasn't said a word about what this weapon is) and launch satellites. In other words, it must replace the first and second stages of a space launch vehicle.
And how, excuse me, did the author plan to do this? Here's the icing on the cake:
Engine
For the basic version, the option of restoring production of the existing D-30F6 turbojet engines, which are part of the MiG-31, but in a modernized version, can be considered.
In particular, a certain conventional D-30F6M turbojet engine can be modified to include a modern plasma ignition system, a full authority digital control system (FADEC), new single-crystal turbine blades capable of withstanding high temperatures, and the like.
For the basic version, the option of restoring production of the existing D-30F6 turbojet engines, which are part of the MiG-31, but in a modernized version, can be considered.
In particular, a certain conventional D-30F6M turbojet engine can be modified to include a modern plasma ignition system, a full authority digital control system (FADEC), new single-crystal turbine blades capable of withstanding high temperatures, and the like.
What do you think? I liked it too. And by the way, I deliberately didn't provide links; there are hundreds of such, with your permission, "articles" in the Russian-language segment. They're spewing out terabytes of nonsense, and they're spewing it out precisely because there's so much room for experimentation due to the lack of coherent information. What results is a complete free rein for the imaginations of people who often don't even understand what an airplane is.
Meanwhile, some drawings have been leaked into our information space. These are clearly not a MiG-41; they were drawn somewhat differently. Or rather, completely differently.
So this has been called "the first image of a Russian sixth-generation fighter." What does that even mean? Mainly that someone, somewhere, drew this picture. And no further conclusions can be drawn for now, because it's just a picture. Hundreds, if not thousands, of such pictures are made during the aircraft development process. Perhaps I should explain?
I'm lucky, of course. There's an aircraft factory in town, and there are people there who can explain everything to a layman. And it was thanks to these good engineers that I realized all these drawings and renderings weren't worth much.
Where does aircraft development even begin? That's right, with the technical specifications. Because "Without a clear technical specification, the result will be..." you know, right?
And here two waves collide: the customer (the Ministry of Defense, in our case) says, "We need this!" And they list their desires: speeds of 4-6 Mach, pilot survival at such speeds, so the pilot can be reused, stealth, spacewalks, a laser system for shooting at satellites, and so on. That's how our would-be science fiction writers write.
The Contractor, in turn, writes a so-called Technical Proposal. That is, they state what they can create within the framework of the stated desires. They propose and justify the aircraft's aerodynamic design, the type of power plant, and other parameters. They then say that yes, it can fly into space, but it needs an oxidizer tank and another engine; stealth at Mach 6 is unlikely; radar-absorbing materials won't withstand it; a laser is possible, but it will require additional power generation. Otherwise, everything is feasible, we need to consider it. This is called a "preliminary design."
And then comes the preliminary design process. Sometimes it's done directly on computers, sometimes on paper, and then transferred to digital. Why is that? For now, paper is simply unavoidable; the working drawing, which the assembler carries with him when he climbs inside the aircraft being assembled, would be more convenient on paper. Tablets are also convenient, but they have a downside: a high mortality rate.
And different groups are working in the same direction. Some are creating and calculating design concepts, while others are working almost in parallel on aerodynamics, because they can easily change something in the design to suit the latter.
The preliminary design process involves developing general views and cross-sectional layouts, designing key components and assemblies, and developing schematic diagrams, equipment systems, controls, and the power plant. Weight, balance, and strength calculations are also performed separately.
All this gives a rough idea of what the final product might look like. Everything is reviewed, redesigned, and recalculated dozens of times. The end result could be the Su-35, or it could be the Il-112V.
Once everything has been accepted, calculated, and approved, detailed design begins—the final stage of technical documentation development. Assembly and detailed drawings are developed, and strength and weight calculations for the structure are refined.
And then, at this point, drawings of a "new plane" suddenly appeared. Of course, one could rush off and start fantasizing about what such "planes" could do. But it would be better to consider where they came from and what their purpose was.
Of course, the "airplane" shape is very similar to the infamous S-70 Okhotnik, with a second engine and manned by a pilot. The "flying wing" concept alone makes it clear that the speed and super-maneuverability that until recently were the trump cards of Russian aircraft designers are out of the question here. Stealth is certainly an option, but it's unlikely to fly into space. We haven't announced any new engines capable of such flights. Of course, given free rein, our visionaries would start producing not only the D30F, but also the R15V-300. It's very easy to do on the couch.
This is most likely one of the rejected concepts. And why they decided to "show it to the world" is clear. It's also clear that we're working on it, and I'd like to think it's moving in the right direction.
The Ministry of Defense, represented by the Aerospace Forces, didn't (quite rightly) voice any requirements for the new aircraft. RAC MiG and JSC Sukhoi Company also didn't omit anything of the sort from their reports, and that's truly encouraging. We shouldn't take a cue from the Americans, who are openly entertaining the world with drawings of their "miracle weapons," which later turn out to be neither miracles nor much of a weapon. Like the Zumwalt superguns with their truly miraculous shells costing half a million dollars apiece.
So what do we have?
USA – there is no sixth generation aircraft.
Europe – there are no sixth-generation aircraft, and there is confidence that there never will be.
China – there are planes, they fly, but to what extent they are “sixth” is very difficult to say.
Russia – there is no sixth generation aircraft.
Overall, work is progressing in our part of the world. Yes, we seem to be lagging behind the Chinese for now, but we shouldn't look at it that way. Just because something fails on our neighbors doesn't mean everything is lost; we need to catch up and surpass them quickly. China has one problem they can't solve on their own: engines. And the best proof of this is Pakistan's requests for Russian engines for its JF-17s. Chinese WS engines can't provide that kind of service life and power.
Platforms for exploring capabilities? Yes, why not? We have such a platform, the Su-57. These capabilities can be studied, and they are being studied, in combat. To study aviation operations in today's (and, it must be said, very different) environment, it's not necessary to build a hunting-like pancake. Conclusions on stealth have already been generally drawn based on the use of our aircraft in the Air Defense Forces.
Do we need American-style advertising? Probably not. They can wave pictures all they want, but pictures don't kill. Should we follow suit? I don't think so, for exactly the same reason. Pictures don't kill, and pictures don't win wars.
During the Soviet era, aircraft (and other things) were built in the strictest secrecy, and it paid off. The entire world was in a frenzy when "those Russians" rolled out yet another—and dare I say it—masterpiece. And these masterpieces served for decades, dominating the charts of the longest-lived aircraft in the world of aviation, leaving virtually no room for American, British, and French creations.
Of course, you can post pictures and write outright nonscientific nonsense, as a huge number of people in our country do. On the one hand, it seems useful; no enemy will be able to understand the swirls of gray matter that our science fiction writers churn out. On the other hand, it's somehow not very pleasant when our country's information space spews out terabytes of nonsense.
It’s a shame for the state, you know.
Information