Northrop Grumman will not compete as a prime contractor for the USAF’s 6th Gen (NGAD) fighter:

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/07/nor ... ghter-ceo/

Technically; Lockheed and Boeing will compete, but given Boeing’s string of delays and screw-ups across so many other programs (Starliner, KC-46, Max8, Dreamliner) … would DoD seriously consider awarding NGAD to Boeing?

That's an excellent question. Boeing seems to have done a good job with the Super Hornet; I don't know of any major screwups in the P-8 or Growler, and lord knows they've been trying really hard with the F-15EX. Not to mention the C-17, Apache, AH-6, and other sustainment/improvement programs that they acquired and have not yet screwed up. If I were them, I'd be pointing at that track record while simultaneously insinuating that Boeing can't be any worse than LMCO's record on schedule and cost overruns on the F-22 and F-35.

I hope not.

Will Boeing offer an ugly NGAD that the USAF just can't bring themselves to buy?

And the taxpayer loses…..again.

As a former NGC employee who’s personally seen their ethical standards, I’m glad they won’t be a prime.

But to be fair, all the big defense companies have issues. It depends on what kind of culture management creates/allows to happen.

As far as performance for Boeing I wouldn’t consider the commercial airframes (different entity). T-7 and KC-46 would cause concern, haven’t heard how the MQ-25 is performing. It’s been a while since I’ve worked with Boeing Defense, I’ve heard prior culture issues are the root cause, hopefully that’s behind them now.

Lockheed has had it’s own issues as well. Part of the cost/schedule issues with the F-35 was due to a 4th or 5th tier supplier getting hacked by the Chinese. But they did have issues recently with violating the DFARs specialty metals clause. (Honeywell if I recall correctly). And going back to the early period of F-35, Ft. Worth lost their EVMS certification. That had major implications for the industry as a whole. There’s also the case of engines running too hot, but sounds like that’s more a case of insufficient room for growth based on the original DoD specs.

Of the large contractors I’ve worked with, BAE Ordnance Systems and LM Missiles & Fire Control were probably the most reasonable to work with.

Personally I’d like to see several smaller contractors take a larger role in the CCA partner for NGAD and develop the skill set to expand the industrial base.