2USARPAC8thTheaterSustainment By Kris Osborn, President, Warrior Russia’s ambitious and highly-touted “vision” for a 5th-gen “plus” or 6th-gen stealth fighter may or may not emerge from its current liminal status, as the future of the jet hangs in an unclear haze of uncertainty related to technological maturity and budget challenges. Some renderings have appeared in a few places in recent years, however very little is known about the MiG-41 apart from Russian press reports which say the configuration of the jet may resemble Russia’s existing Su-57. Called the Prospective Aviation Complex of Long-Range Interception (PAK DP), the MiG-corporation jet is slated to emerge by the end of the current decade. Available renderings and images of the aircraft reveal an F-35-like single-engine fighter with a blended wing-body, smooth rounded exterior [https://armyrecognition.com/focus-analysis-conflicts/army/analysis-defense-and-security-industry/focus-mikoyan-41-6th-gen-fighter-may-never-leave-the-drawing-board]and stealthy-looking fuselage. The front half of the aircraft looks almost like US defense industry 6th-generation renderings, as it is smoothly shaped in a blended, rounded, stealthy way. The back end of the MiG-41 looks very similar to an F-35 with tails and a single engine. This might seem to suggest that the plane is almost a 5th-to-6th-generation hybrid capable of increased stealth and a simultaneous ability to maneuver and vector as a multi-role fighter such as the F-35. US vs Russian 6th-Gen? While US 6th-generation aircraft [https://warriormaven.com/air/will-russias-mig-41-6th-gen-aircraft-ever-fly] have taken to the sky, there has been no public image of what it might look like. However, it is possible that Russia is not as far along in the realm of 6th-generation engineering because US 6th-gen industry renderings showed a tailless fighter jet, signaling that perhaps technology has been evolved enabling a tailless and fin-less fully horizontal fuselage to maneuver like a fighter jet. Should this be the case, it would introduce the prospect of breakthrough [https://regtechtimes.com/powerful-mig-41-outclass-f-35-global-sanctions/]vectoring technology. The Russian MiG may indicate 6th-generation ambitions on the part of Russia, yet it may not be clear that it will fly with truly 6th-gen technology, There is yet another problem with Russia’s MiG-41 [https://sofrep.com/news/will-russias-mig-41-6th-gen-aircraft-ever-fly/]related to budget. There may not be the available funding and industrial capacity to manufacture these aircraft in an impactful or valuable way. There has been a similar problem for many years with Russia’s Su-57 5th-gen stealth jet, as not very many have been able to be produced given budget and manufacturing complications. This creates a very substantial “mass” problem for Russia, because however advanced or capable its Su-57 may be, there simply are not yet enough of them present any kind of impactful challenge against the West and NATO. Europe, NATO and the US are rapidly acquiring hundreds of F-35s and would therefore clearly be in a position to overmatch any 5th-gen Russian fighter force. Russian “Mass” Problem Russia may have this problem with other weapons systems, particularly given Ukraine that the war has massively depleted their weapons systems, supplies and available rockets and artillery. The Russians may also suffer from a “numbers” problem related to some of its other exquisite breakthrough technologies such as its new Oreshnik missile or hypersonic weapons such as the Zircon, Avangard and Kh-47M2 Kinzahl. Russia has fired some of these weapons in Ukraine, yet there is little indication that there are enough of these weapons to actually generate a serious impact in a major-power war. This kind of scenario may prove to be quite similar to its emerging MiG-41 aircraft, as the stealth fighter has yet to exist. Russia’ production capacity is likely quite occupied or simply overwhelmed such that it cannot sufficiently produce new weapons systems. F-47 The Pentagon's emerging 6th-generation stealth fighter, now called the F-47, could prove essential in any effort to contain or defeat China in the air in the Pacific for a number of key reasons; it seems conceivable that the Pentagon might engineer a Pacific-specific F-47 variant designed to prevail in the extensive ranges or “tyranny of distance” known to characterize the region. A Pacific F-47 could be configured with larger fuel tanks for a massively expanded range, something potentially of great significance in a large-scale air war with China. While the growing, multi-service and multi-national fleet of F-35s continues to present a formidable deterrent in the Pacific theater, some might wonder if the current deterrence posture in the air needs the F-47 to meet a fast-evolving Chinese threat in future years. The concept of a specially configured long-range F-47 [https://www.sustainability-times.com/in-depth/unthinkable-truths-revealed-this-colossal-f-47-report-by-former-air-force-secretary-shakes-the-defense-world-to-its-core/]for the Pacific makes a lot of sense. Does the US Air Force need a new long-range, stealthy high-tech 6th-generation fighter to confront the growing mixture of threats presented by China in the Pacific theater? This may have been part of the thinking driving President Trump’s decision [https://www.airandspaceforces.com/ngad-kendall-2026-budget/]to build the F-47. Research Supporting F-47 A research essay by the Dept. of the Air Force’s China Aerospace Studies Institute (CASI) from October, 2024, as cited in an essay in Warrior Maven [https://warriormaven.com/china/does-the-us-air-force-need-a-pacific-specific-6th-gen-stealth-fighter-variant], sheds light on the question of a possible 6th-Gen as part of a broader analysis of the kind of Pacific strategy best pursued by the US Air Force. The paper, called “Charting the Course: How the PLA’s Regional and Global Strategies Should Influence the US Air Force’s Lines of Effort,” [https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/CASI/Display/Article/3932924/charting-the-course-how-the-plas-expected-regional-and-global-strategies-should/]draws upon research to make some key recommendations. Specifically, 5th-generation aircraft were not necessarily built with a China threat in mind, a critical point the CASI paper makes. “Aircraft like the F-22 and F-35 were built to penetrate enemy IADS and dominate the Su-series aircraft, predominant in the European theater. Informing the design of these aircraft was a mostly contiguous geographic region that provided short distances and a plethora of viable airfields where the “tyranny of distance” was not a factor. Furthermore, the requirements for the F-35 were developed during a time when the Air Force had many more fighter squadrons than today,” the CASI essay writes [https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/CASI/Display/Article/3932924/charting-the-course-how-the-plas-expected-regional-and-global-strategies-should/], as quoted in Warrior. The CASI research paper points out potential limitations [https://www.axios.com/2025/04/02/airforce-navy-manned-fighters-drones]central to the current US Air Force posture, yet does not specifically say a certain kind of manned NGAD must exist. However, the CASI paper does seem to align with the kind of thinking which likely informed the decision to build the F-47, because clearly something beyond the F-22 and F-35 might be needed in a confrontation with China. The expanse of the Pacific, as suggested by the essay, seems to call for the corresponding need to develop assets, weapons and platforms optimized for dispersed, multi-domain, long-range ground-sea-air warfare across a massive ocean, land & island expanse. Long-Range 6th-Gen for Pacific The Pacific of course includes vast distances of ocean separating islands, large land masses and ocean stretching thousands of miles from Northern Japan and the Korean Peninsula South to Australia. There are tactically relevant distances within the Pacific which, depending upon a given contingency, will need to be considered, as Taiwan is a very “reachable” 100 miles from the Chinese mainland. This Chinese proximity advantage, however, can be greatly mitigated or offset by forward-operating US Navy carriers and F-35B-armed amphibs within a few hundred miles of Taiwan. F-35 Limitations in Asia A map shows that the distance between the Northern-most parts of the Philippines and Southern Taiwan is only 155 miles, a circumstance which would seem to enable US allied 5th-generation aircraft to defend Taiwan from land-bases in the Philippines. An F-35A, for instance, operates with a range of 1,380 miles with a full weapons load could reach air-space over Taiwan and operate with some dwell time without needing to refuel with a risky and highly vulnerable tanker aircraft. This defensive posture would require the US to base F-35As in the Philippines, a deterrence concept which seems to make strategic sense. Despite this possibility, the CASI essay points out that even an F-35A would be confronted with clear range challenges in the expansive Pacific, an area well known for its “tyranny of distance.” “Platforms like the F-35 were designed for a European theater focused on a Russian threat. Although a versatile fighter platform, the F-35A lacks long-range and heavy payload capacity,” the report states. A longer-range, yet stealthy and highly advanced F-47 6th-generation aircraft [https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/the-boeing-f-47-fighter-has-no-room-failure], however, might be able to address this deficiency and position the US to prevail in an engagement with China. (Washington DC) It would stand to reason that the new F-47 will likely be faster than any fighter jet ever to exist, yet there are understandably too many unknowns at the moment, so the unanswered question will likely persist. However, according to numerous public reports and comments, the F-47 will succeed in flying at least Mach 2, a very significant speed, particularly when blended with stealth. An essay in NewsNation quotes Donald Trump stating that indeed the F-47 will hit speeds of Mach 2. Trump said, “Its speed is top, so ‘over two,’ which is something that you don’t hear very often,” the article says. In reality, the technological breakthroughs [https://apnews.com/article/fighter-jet-ngad-trump-hegseth-china-55d7b3d15e5a4fa9cb061ec85ac19ae2] woven into the F-47 are likely such that the aircraft’s ultimate speed may be much greater than Mach 2. An achievement of Mach 2 for a 5th or 6th-generation stealth fighter is quite significant, as Boeing and the Air Force may have found ways to reach optimal, unparalleled speeds without compromising stealth. This is quite an achievement, as most of the aircraft capable of Mach 2 or faster, such as the US F-15 and Russian Su-27, are not stealthy. [https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/trump-awards-boeing-much-needed-win-with-fighter-jet-contract-sources-say-2025-03-21/] Stealth & Speed Maintaining stealth at high-speeds becomes more challenging due to the temperatures and heat signatures generated, so it would appear possible that new discoveries are enabling fighter jets to reach Mach 2 or faster speeds without greatly enhancing radar signature. The F-35 optimizes stealth and multi-role functionality, yet its maximum speed is Mach 1.6. China’s stealthy, 5th-gen J-20 is listed with speeds of Mach 2.0, yet most fighter jets able to reach Mach 2 or faster are not stealthy, as reaching those speeds typically requires massive heat-generating propulsion and sharp, angular less stealthy shapes, structures and edges Perhaps there are new methods of thermal management or heat-signature reducing technologies? F-22 Speed The F-22’s top speed is listed at Mach 2.25, making it among the fastest in the world, yet speed alone is insufficient to ensure air combat supremacy as many variables inform this equation. Thrust-to-weight ratio, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/03/21/trump-f-47-boeing/] high-speed maneuverability and targeting are all determinative factors when it comes to which aircraft may or may not prevail in an air-combat engagement. The F-22 has among the best thrust-to-weight ratios in the world as well, something which means it can quickly reposition in the air as-needed to gain advantage in a dogfight. The lighter an aircraft is, in relation to the power and propulsion of its engine, the faster and more effectively a fighter-jet can maneuver. Sensing & Targeting Then there is the simple question of sensing and targeting, as these factors can just as easily determine the outcome in a dogfight. The F-35, for instance, has long-range, high-fidelity sensors such as the Distributed Aperture System (DAS) which can essentially “see” and target enemy fighters at standoff ranges where it cannot itself be detected. High-resolution, long-range sensors can, in some instances, obviate any need to dogfight, as engagements can be won at stand-off distances. There is also off-boresight targeting and weapons attack, such as what is possible with the AIM-9X fired from an F-35. This means a weapon can be launched and then change course in flight to attack a target which is beside [https://breakingdefense.com/2025/03/why-boeings-f-47-ngad-next-gen-fighter-win-was-existential-for-the-company/]or behind it. These kinds of attributes, when combined with speed and agility, are factors likely to determine which jet prevails in an air-to-air engagement. At the same time, sheer speed cannot be underestimated as it enables a jet to simply outrun an enemy or escape without being damaged or destroyed if necessary. There is also the speed of the attack element, as the F-22 is regarded as a “first-shot, first-kill” platform, meaning it can get into position to destroy an enemy and prevail before any response or engagement is possible. Portions of this essay first appeared in 1945 [https://www.19fortyfive.com/] Kris Osborn [https://warriormaven.com/author/krisosborn] is the President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
