Key Points and Summary – How many F/A-XX jets should the U.S. Navy buy? Reuben F. Johnson argues the usual 200–250 figure—mirroring the Air Force’s F-47 plan—undershoots the Navy’s need.
-Unlike the F-47, the F/A-XX must replace both the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G while acting as a sixth-gen “quarterback” that commands manned and unmanned electronic-attack and strike assets.
-That expanded role could justify higher buys, if unit costs cooperate.
-Yet budgets and industrial limits bite: the Pentagon prioritized F-47, slowing near-term F/A-XX funding, while the Navy keeps Super Hornets to the 2040s.
-Bottom line: missions point up; money may pull down.
-Production risk and uncertainty persist.
Why 200–250 F/A-XX Jets May Not Be Enough for the Fleet
WARSAW, POLAND – The US Navy’s (USN) 6th-generation fighter program, known only at this point by its designation as F/A-XX, is billed as the service’s analogue to the US Air Force’s (USAF) Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) F-47 fighter aircraft.
This is, however, far too simplistic an analogy. Both aircraft are billed as 6th-generation designs, and both are supposed to be built in only limited numbers, but the latter is a point that may not be feasible in the long run.
The numbers that have been discussed for both aircraft are production runs of around 200-250 for each model. This suggestion was made for the F-47 on the basis that only 189 were built of the aircraft it is supposed to replace, the F-22A.
An infographic released in May by then-USAF Chief of Staff David Allvin suggested these numbers of 200-250 units. The USAF upper echelons also projected that the aircraft would cost less per unit than the F-22, and that the F-47 could be operational as soon as this year.
In the case of the F/A-XX, the aircraft is not just replacing one type, as the F-47 is taking the place of the F-22. The F/A-XX is required to replace the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and also the EA-18G Growler in the 2030s. The USN, as a hedge against program delays, intends to keep operating the F/A-18 fleet until the 2040s, which would allow for slippages in the production cycle.
F/A-XX Handout Photo from Northrop Grumman.
What Determines the Number to be Built
Given that the need for the electronic warfare (EW) in the future is only going to increase impacts on the numbers that Naval Aviation will require to perform its mission. Naval aviation experts describe the F/A-XX as being the “centerpiece manned fighter for carrier operations, but that it will control other manned and unmanned aircraft, particularly those with electronic attack capabilities.”
The role for F/A-XX is described as carrying out a futuristic “quarterback” role for electronic attack missions. With this mission profile, the F/A-XX platform will also direct a network of manned and unmanned systems.
The aircraft will therefore not always be the proverbial “tip of the spear” in naval air operations, but more of an airborne command center.
The pilot and air crew—and it is still not clear if there will be any two-seat models where the rear seater operates as a Weapons Systems Officer (WSO)—will act as the mission commander for both strike and electronic warfare.
Mission profiles envision that the unmanned systems that the F/A-XX will be quarterbacking will also include electronic attack drones to provide jamming for any multi-aircraft strike packages.
The F/A-XX will benefit from the ability of these unmanned electronic attack vehicles – to employ another American football analogy – run interference and to provide cover for strike packages.
Budgeting Issues for F/A-XX
Expanding the mission profile for the aircraft can provide the rationale to increase the production numbers. If the aircraft proves cheaper than previous generation fighters, it also creates the possibility for the production run to grow beyond the 200-250 number.
But, in the end, the total number of F/A-XXs built will largely depend on the final, multi-decade budget for the program.
The record so far, however, is one of budgetary ups and downs. The Pentagon had previously recommended delaying the program over concerns that US industry lacked the resources to develop the F-47 and F/A-XX in parallel and in the same time frame.
Budgeting for the program dropped dramatically to almost symbolic levels until Congress restored it.
“We did make a strategic decision to go all-in on F-47,” a senior defense official told reporters during a June 2025 Pentagon briefing. The decision was predicated on the “belief that the industrial base can only handle going fast on one program at this time, and the presidential priority to go all-in on F-47 and get that program right, while maintaining the option for F/A-XX in the future,” stated the officials that were quoted by multiple media outlets at the time.
About the Author: Reuben F. Johnson
Reuben F. Johnson has thirty-six years of experience analyzing and reporting on foreign weapons systems, defense technologies, and international arms export policy. Johnson is the Director of Research at the Casimir Pulaski Foundation. He is also a survivor of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. He worked for years in the American defense industry as a foreign technology analyst and later as a consultant for the US Department of Defense, the Departments of the Navy and Air Force, and the governments of the United Kingdom and Australia. In 2022-2023, he won two awards in a row for his defense reporting. He holds a bachelor’s degree from DePauw University and a master’s degree from Miami University in Ohio, specializing in Soviet and Russian studies. He lives in Warsaw.
More Military
Su-75 Checkmate: Russia’s Big Stealth Fighter Flop
Russia’s ‘New’ MiG-35 Fighter Looks RIP
5 Worst Aircraft Carriers Ever
Michael S Peters
September 13, 2025 at 12:04 pm
Navy needs a bunch of aircraft. Aircraft carrier takeoff & landings limit aircraft service life.
Lunas eclipse
September 13, 2025 at 1:24 pm
That depends under the condition that they can choose to make more at any time. Unlike the f22 program where it was decided to dismantle the tooling and stuff needed to make them and then when it was attempted to get more of them it was determined to rebuild all the tooling and restart the production was more expensive than building the replacement to the f22. Meaning that even if they wanted to more f22 are never being built.