The US Navy (USN) is pushing ahead with plans for a purpose-built sixth-generation fighter designed to operate from an aircraft carrier.
That comes despite a recent effort by the Trump Administration to significantly scale back investment in the programme, known as F/A-XX.
Commander of Naval Air Forces Vice Admiral Daniel Cheever on 26 August outlined the navy’s vision for such a fighter.
“I see a maritime version of the aircraft that starts at the carrier, is made for the carrier, and it’s a complete carrier version,” Cheever said at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC.
Known colloquially as the navy’s “air boss”, Cheever says procurement officials are preparing to announce their selection of a prime contractor for the new sixth-generation fighter.
Although details of the classified programme are limited, Boeing and Northrop Grumman are understood to be finalists for the effort, after Lockheed Martin was eliminated in March.
That same month, a Boeing design was selected by the US Air Force as that service’s new F-47, setting up a potentially intriguing situation where Boeing could provide both of the Pentagon’s sixth-generation fighters.
Lockheed enjoyed a similar position with fifth-generation aircraft, providing both the air force’s F-22s and the multi-service F-35.
While few details of the actual F/A-XX aircraft are known, the navy has begun outlining how it wants to employ the new jet and hinting at some capabilities, including air-to-air, air-to-ground and electronic attack.
“It will be replacing both the Super Hornet and the Growler,” Cheever says of navy’s current Boeing F/A-18E/F strike and EA-18G electronic attack fighters.
The air boss, who also serves as the commander of the USN’s Pacific Fleet, says that modernisation of naval air power will be key to maintaining Washington’s global maritime dominance.
“Sixth-generation means air superiority,” Cheever says. “As long as you have air superiority, you have sea control around the globe”
The USN’s current carrier air wings are based predominantly on the F/A-18, supplemented by a smaller number of squadrons operating the fifth-generation F-35C and EA-18G.
Although F/A-XX is meant to replace the navy’s fourth-generation fighters, the various classes will operate simultaneously for some time, Cheever says.
The final new-build Super Hornets are expected to roll off Boeing’s production line in the next two years, meaning that type will remain flying for several more decades.
“My predecessors… decided that a fourth-, fifth- and sixth-generation mix on the aircraft carrier, and manned-unmanned teaming, is the right blend,” Cheever notes.
“That is the future,” he adds.
However, that future looks less certain now.
Although the navy is moving forward with its source selection for F/A-XX, the White House has made public its preference for the land-based F-47 over the navy’s carrier-based sixth-generation programme, dismissing the latter as both a costly diversion of resources and untenable for industry.
“The administration strongly supports re-evaluating the F/A-XX programme due to industrial base concerns of two sixth-generation programmes occurring simultaneously,” the White House wrote in a June memo to Congress.
“Awarding the F/A-XX contract as written is likely to delay the higher-priority F-47 programme, with low likelihood of improving the timeline to field a navy sixth-generation fighter,” the Trump Administration added.
That statement was penned in response to a draft fiscal year 2026 defence budget that saw lawmakers restore F/A-XX funding the White House had cut in its proposed spending plan.
The president’s FY2026 budget request included some $3.5 billion for F-47 advancement, but only $74 million for F/A-XX development – a nearly $400 million year-on-year reduction for the navy programme.
“We did make a strategic decision to go all-in on F-47,” one defence official told FlightGlobal in June.
“Our belief [is] that the industrial base can only handle going fast on one programme at this time, and the presidential priority [is] to go all-in on F-47 and get that programme right while maintaining the option for F/A-XX in the future,” the individual added.
Industry leaders appear to disagree with the notion that they cannot support two sixth-generation development efforts at once. Boeing alone says it could handle work on both the F/A-XX and F-47 programmes.
“Can Boeing do both? Absolutely,” said Steve Parker, chief executive of Boeing Defense, Space & Security at the Paris air show in June.
Lockheed, eliminated from both sixth-generation programmes, has turned its sights toward developing a souped-up F-35 with 80% capacity of a sixth-generation aircraft at 50% of the cost – according to CEO James Taiclet – indicating available capacity for research and development.
Northrop, which publicly withdrew from the air force’s sixth-generation competition, has pressed on with F/A-XX, while advancing the B-21 stealth bomber, seemingly without any concerns over industrial capacity to deliver.
Congress has moved to restore F/A-XX funding, indicating that the programme will likely continue on its development trajectory, at least for now.
Even the reduced funding plan proposed by the Trump Administration would have allowed the navy to finalise a design for the new fighter, while deferring a final procurement decision until a later date.
Elected lawmakers in Congress ultimately have the final say in defence spending matters, a prerogative they have often exercised in disputes with the Pentagon and the White House over military procurement and operations.
