In a presentation by the U.S. Department of the Air Force on the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) budget proposal to committees of the 119th Congress, Air Force Secretary Troy Meink, US Air Force-Chief of Staff General David W. Allvin and General B. Chance Saltzman (head of the US Space Force) made one thing clear: the budget proposal clearly prioritizes the development of the F-47 – supposedly named in honor of President Donald Trump’s second term as 47th US President – from Boeing.
This is clearly at the expense of several other systems. For example, the Navy’s 6th generation F/A-XX fighter, also developed by Boeing, is being pushed into the background (-> Delay in the new 6th generation fighter aircraft for the US Navy). Even the A-10C, the E-7 Wedgetail – the E-2 Hawkeye was recently brought forward instead – and parts of the F-35 fleet planning are affected by the US Air Force’s new plans.
F-47 as top priority
The presentation states, “Our fighter aircraft and the way they operate will undergo a revolutionary transformation. As recently announced by President Trump, the F-47 – manned platform of the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) family – represents a monumental leap to ensure America’s air superiority for decades to come. It will be the most advanced, lethal and adaptable combat aircraft ever developed.”
The F-47 should operate closely with the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), which integrates autonomous systems and AI in a modular architecture approach. This enables rapid technological upgrades while reducing system costs.
According to the presentation, despite this focus, current platforms are also to be further modernized, in particular the F-35 in Tranche 3 and the Block 4 upgrade, the F-15 with a shift from C/D and E to the F-15EX version, the F-16 as part of a service life extension and the F-22 with research and development for sensor technology, navigation and communication.
Wasn’t it the Navy that needed it most?
Many within the US military and observers openly state that rationality is not the highest virtue under Trump II. This can be seen as an internal contradiction: It is precisely the future Indo-Pacific battle space that administration officials have prioritized over Europe on numerous occasions.
With regard to China, which is itself investing heavily in 6th generation technologies, the US aircraft carrier battle groups of all things would probably be the USA’s most exposed means of power. According to various wargames and simulation games (-> Simulation game: US forces fail in Taiwan scenario), they would be the first to be involved in combat operations in the event of a conflict, both as an instrument of attrition against China and vice versa.
A new stealth fighter was supposed to replace the ageing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, which entered service over 24 years ago. However, the de facto end of the Navy’s F/A-XX project had already been looming since the USAF went public with its own “next-gen fighter”, the F-47. This was also a topic in the German-language media, for example at Futurezone.
The budget originally earmarked for the navy was instead allocated to the USAF. The project has now been officially discontinued – even if it is said internally that “minimal funds will continue to be made available to maintain development progress”.
The latter is likely to mean little more than the preservation of prototypes that have already been produced but never shown to the public, i.e. a trip to the museum, as was once the case with the YF-23 or the X-32.
Fewer F-35s in future production batches
F-35 procurement is also being reduced. The USAF’s original target was 1,763 units. However, the current order is currently being reduced from 74 to 47 jets, whether this is deliberately “symbolic” to match the number 47 remains to be seen.
In previous years, it was emphasized that unit costs were falling: the unit costs of the F-35A variant were estimated at 76 million euros for the 15th, 16th and 17th production batches. The vertical landing F-35B, on the other hand, is significantly more expensive with unit costs of around 100 million euros, as is the carrier-based F-35C at 94 million euros.
The carrier-based F-35C will now likely carry the brunt of the Navy’s fighter fleet for a long time to come as Super Hornets age after more than two decades of service. Nevertheless, the range of the F-35C in the Pacific is often too short.
As with many major weapons projects, the slow innovation cycle of conventional armaments technology remains a brake on the F-35. The programme is currently in its third modernization phase, in which newer, but by no means state-of-the-art processors are being used. The central problem: the slow hardware upgrade cycle prevents the F-35 from fully benefiting from the rapidly advancing developments in the field of artificial intelligence.
F-15EX: The best “Eagle” of all time
In contrast, the F-15EX Eagle II, inspired by the F-15QA for Qatar, is experiencing an upswing. At around 80 million euros per unit (second production batch), the fleet size will be increased from 98 to 129 aircraft. The FY26 draft budget earmarks around 2.54 billion euros for the program. This makes perfect sense, as the F-15EX offers high payload, range and sensor technology.
It is intended to fill the gap between the reduced number of F-35s and the delayed F-47, whose first flight is expected in 2028. Rumor has it, however, that the F-47 is already flying “incognito” in the southwest of the USA.
The tough “cannon bird” continues to be dismantled
The A-10C Thunderbolt II with its iconic 30-millimeter turret cannon is irreplaceable in ground combat missions, but its survivability over areas with strong air defenses (such as in a conflict with a “near peer”) is questionable.
For years, the US Congress has opposed the end of the A-10 fleet, which had already been sought by previous US administrations. Not least because there are members of parliament who have flown on this type themselves.
A total of 715 A-10s were produced between 1975 and 1986. The US Air Force currently still operates around 240 aircraft. Last year, 56 of these were taken out of service. The entire fleet was extensively modernized around ten years ago: new wings and extensive avionics and system electronics. But the final end seems to be only a matter of time.
Renunciation, contradictions – and a lack of methodological transparency
Beyond the “warrior ethos” of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, one thing remains clear: what America does – or fails to do – with its military has global security relevance. US allies and opponents also recognize this.
Radical course corrections are currently emerging not only in the US Air Force – the US Army is also striking a new, uncompromising tone in its structural and capability planning. In a sensational letter to the armed forces at the beginning of May, Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll presented and aggressively promoted the Army Transformation Initiative (ATI). The program is entitled: “Delivering critical combat capabilities, optimizing our force structure, and eliminating waste and obsolete programs.” The underlying message is clear: everything that does not directly contribute to lethal effectiveness in combat is to be eliminated.
In this context, Driscoll openly criticizes the previous course of the Ministry of Defence. The decision-making process has been “distorted” over three decades and has developed into a “provincially controlled company” that serves the interests of sub-organizations rather than the actual requirements of the troops. This is reported by the trade magazine Dronelife.
The French portal Meta-Défense commented: “Despite budget increases (up 15 percent to around 815 billion euros), we see unprecedented cuts, internal contradictions and a methodical lack of transparency that confuses even Republican MPs. Beijing, on the other hand, is pursuing stringent, progressive and long-term military planning with one strategic goal: to supplant the United States as the dominant military power of the 21st century.”
But the Trumps, Rubios and Hegseths of this “New World” are all about China – or are they?
Here for more news about Boeing and here for more news about the US armed forces.
