If you’ve ever caught yourself wondering what air combat might look like in the decades ahead, you’re in good company. Right now, the United States is knee-deep in an intense push to build the next wave of fighter jets—aircraft designed to stretch the limits of technology and possibly reshape how wars are fought in the skies. But, as with any bold step ahead, the process is complex. It’s half cutting-edge technology, half budget politics, and half good old-fashioned inter-service competition.
At the heart of the Navy’s program is the F/A-XX initiative, the intended replacement for the stalwart F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. The vision: a sixth-generation stealth fighter filled with cutting-edge systems. Rear Adm. Michael “Buzz” Donnelly, who oversees the Navy’s air warfare community, has emphasized that additional range is not optional. The F/A-XX will fly about 25 percent farther than current carrier-based fighters.
That increase—combined with aerial refueling from the MQ-25 Stingray drone—has the potential to deliver carrier air wings with a much larger reach, and that is important with adversaries developing longer-range missiles and more advanced surveillance equipment. The jet also introduces more robust stealth, more pervasive AI integration, and the capacity to work in combination with unmanned aircraft. Rather than flying each drone directly, pilots will command them—a “man-on-the-loop” arrangement that allows them to operate a squadron of autonomous systems without controlling each action.
Across the Air Force, the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program—now formally branded as the F-47—has mapped a slightly different path. Boeing edged out Lockheed Martin on the contract after a lengthy and highly publicized competition. The Air Force is marketing the F-47 as the most versatile and capable fighter ever constructed. Former President Donald Trump went so far as to describe it as “massively overpowers the capabilities of any other nation.” The F-47 is designed for long-range, survivability, and the capability of flying in highly contested environments such as the Indo-Pacific.
It’s also being designed with sustainability and affordability in mind. Gen. David Allvin, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, has noted that early prototypes have been flying for years already—evidence, he maintains, that technology is not just on paper. Nevertheless, NGAD has had its share of rough roads: changing budgets, changing threat perceptions, and the sprinting development of unmanned systems have all compelled the service to reset timelines and expenses. The Air Force is aiming to keep the price closer to the F-35’s range, avoiding the sky-high projections that first swirled around NGAD.
That raises a bigger question: Should the Navy and Air Force work more closely together? Senator Mark Kelly, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, thinks they should—similar to the shared approach that birthed the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program. That program yielded three flavors—one each for the Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps—based on a common core platform. But for these sixth-gen aircraft, the services are taking different paths.
The Navy’s F/A-XX will be powered by a derivative engine, whereas the Air Force’s F-47 has a new adaptive propulsion system. Donnelly has explained: the F/A-XX is not merely a spin-off for the Navy from NGAD, although both services are assuring themselves that they’ll be able to operate side by side in combat.
One place they’re already in step is unmanned systems. Both see a future where human pilots serve as “quarterbacks” for battalions of autonomous drones, stretching the reach of the fighters and multiplying their firepower. The Navy also expects to have at least 60 percent of its carrier air wings unmanned by the 2040s, with the MQ-25 setting the stage. The Air Force, on the other hand, envisions its NGAD family of systems as encompassing loyal wingman drones and high-end C2 (command-and-control) technology to keep it all tied together. John Phelan, President Trump’s nominee for Secretary of the Navy, has advocated for this type of alignment as a way to ensure both services can realize maximum use from next-generation unmanned platforms.
All of this, of course, doesn’t come for free. The Navy extracted about $1 billion from its NGAD program in the 2025 budget, slowing the program down to deal with near-term readiness. The Air Force has been balancing NGAD prices with other huge initiatives, such as the B-21 Raider stealth bomber and the Sentinel ICBM modernization effort. There is fear on Capitol Hill that underfunding them might have the U.S. playing catch-up, particularly as China is dumping money into its advanced fighter aircraft and missile forces. It’s thought by some analysts that the answer could be more of a modular system: bring the initial versions online quicker, then gradually improve with advancing technology.
The context for it is an evolving threat environment. The Indo-Pacific’s huge distances, combined with a rising Chinese military presence, require planes with greater range, versatility, and endurance. The F-35 is a great strike fighter, but analysts such as Michael Bohnert of RAND point out it can’t wholly replace the air-superiority missions of the F-22—or the capabilities envisioned for NGAD and F/A-XX. The pressure to pursue sixth-gen fighters isn’t merely about prestige or following suit with competitors. It’s ensuring U.S. forces can live and win in the most difficult air combat environments the future may present.
Ultimately, no matter if the Air Force and Navy fly in tandem or closer formation, the fight for sixth-generation supremacy is more than stealth paint jobs, speed times, and firepower. It’s about innovation, flexibility, and cooperation—particularly when the path ahead is anything but a straight line.