Can the Air Force Make Its Next-Gen Fighter Jet Cheaper than the F-35?
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a symbol of cutting-edge military technology, has been a focal point for the U.S. Air Force for over a decade but with its steep price tag, ranging from $80 million to $100 million per aircraft, depending on the model, the program has faced significant challenges in keeping costs under control. The journey to rein in these costs has been fraught with obstacles, including inflation, supply chain bottlenecks, shifting requirements, and developmental hurdles. However, with the next-generation fighter program, the Air Force faces an even steeper challenge: producing a sixth-generation fighter that costs less than the F-35.
Ambitious Goals, Daunting Obstacles
Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has publicly stated his desire to see the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) fighter come in at a price lower than the F-35. At the Air and Space Forces Association’s Air Space Cyber conference in September 2024, Kendall reiterated that the F-35’s cost represents the upper limit for what the Air Force is willing to pay for NGAD. “The F-35 kind of represents, to me, the upper bounds of what we’d like to pay for an individual NGAD aircraft,” Kendall remarked, adding that he’d prefer an even lower price point.
While this is an ambitious goal, achieving it remains uncertain. NGAD’s original concept was expected to cost about three times as much as an F-35, according to Kendall. This sticker shock forced the Air Force to hit pause on its NGAD contract process, initially slated for award in 2024, to reassess its approach. Some experts, however, caution that attempting to cut costs for such an advanced platform could compromise its capabilities, making it an irrelevant asset for future warfare.
The Cost-Capability Trade-Off
Heather Penney, a retired F-16 pilot and senior resident fellow at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, voiced concerns over NGAD’s pricing goals. “I think it would be extremely challenging, if not unrealistic, to get the kind of capability and performance that they need in NGAD [for] less than the cost of an F-35,” Penney told Defense News. She warned that excessive focus on keeping costs down could lead to the program’s eventual cancellation or result in a fighter that is “watered down” and ineffective in future conflicts.
This poses a crucial question for the Air Force: How can it strike a balance between affordability and the cutting-edge performance needed to ensure air superiority in future conflicts, particularly against peer competitors like China?
NGAD’s Cost Problem: A Hurdle Too High?
The Air Force envisions NGAD as a “family of systems” rather than just a single aircraft. This includes the manned sixth-generation fighter as well as a range of autonomous drones, known as Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), and advanced sensors and weaponry. The idea is that these unmanned drones would act as wingmen for the crewed NGAD fighters, taking on specific missions and reducing the load on the manned aircraft.
Yet, despite this innovative approach, the NGAD program has struggled with its cost. The Air Force has been secretive about NGAD’s specific capabilities, but Kendall admitted that the original concept had a prohibitively high price tag. “We’re looking at the NGAD platform design concept to see if it’s the right concept or not,” Kendall said, hinting at a potential redesign to lower costs.
Comparisons with Past Programs
NGAD faces an uphill battle due to its limited production run compared to the F-35. The F-35 has benefited from economies of scale, with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) planning to purchase about 2,500 units across the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, not to mention the contributions from international partners like the U.K., South Korea, and Israel. This large order volume helps to drive down the F-35’s unit cost.
In contrast, the Air Force plans to procure only about 200 NGAD fighters, which, without similar bulk purchases or international sales, will make it difficult to achieve the same cost efficiencies as the F-35. Moreover, unlike the F-35, the NGAD is not being developed in tandem with the Navy’s sixth-generation fighter program (F/A-XX), further limiting the economies of scale.
Possible Solutions and a Path Forward
To bring NGAD’s cost in line with expectations, the Air Force may need to rethink its design philosophy. One possibility is to increase the modularity of NGAD, allowing for more components like sensors and processors to be developed separately and later integrated. This approach could enable the Air Force to make iterative improvements without redesigning the entire platform.
Andrew Hunter, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, has emphasized that the service is reviewing the “design concept” of NGAD to find cost savings. Hunter acknowledged that there are several factors driving the platform’s costs, such as size, propulsion needs, and the complexity of its mission systems, but stressed that affordability remains a top priority.
Another option may be to rely more heavily on autonomous systems like CCAs to carry out certain missions, reducing the workload on the crewed fighter. As Kendall pointed out, CCAs could potentially transfer some mission equipment and capabilities away from the manned aircraft, making it possible to create a smaller, lighter, and less expensive NGAD fighter.
Will NGAD Deliver by 2030?
While the Air Force hopes to field NGAD by the early 2030s, there is growing skepticism about whether this timeline is realistic. John Venable, a senior resident fellow at the Mitchell Institute, argued that the program’s complexity and cost issues make it unlikely to meet the 2030 target. “The odds are against it happening,” he said, pointing out that no major defense program in the last three decades has arrived on time.
The program’s fate remains uncertain, and Venable warned that NGAD’s future is in jeopardy if delays and cost issues persist. “The way you kill things today is to study it until it’s no longer viable,” Venable remarked, suggesting that prolonged deliberation over the program’s cost could render it obsolete by the time it’s ready for production.
In the quest for a sixth-generation fighter, the Air Force is grappling with the same cost challenges that have plagued the F-35. While there are hopes that NGAD can be produced more affordably, the program’s complexity, limited production run, and advanced capabilities make this goal a difficult one to achieve. For the Air Force, the question remains: Can it produce a fighter that not only dominates the skies but also fits within its budget constraints? Only time will tell whether NGAD will meet these lofty expectations, or if it will become another cautionary tale in the annals of military procurement.
