Certainly that is what a couple of agenda driven guys in the media would like people to think.

I don’t doubt the USAF is already starting to consider future versions of the F-35 and now 6th generation clean sheet designs. That is simply part of the business of staying ahead of the curve. It doesn’t mean the current version of the F-35 is somehow deficient.

A mid life upgrade of the airframe would be a good think to fight against large numbers of PAK-FAs and chinese stealth fighters. USAF officials have said that they have been surprised to see how quickly the potential opponents of the F-35 have turned out to be. And don’t forget that the F-35 was not meant to be an F-22, and that the plane in around 7 years late.

This is the DEAN MUSKETT photo 500% enlarged.

The rear of the plane doesn’t look much like on the drawing however. It might be another prototype.

It might be this one indeed. Maybe they are already testing prototypes.

This design is interesting because at the same time the fuselage is long so the bay can be long, and the mach angle may allow for a supersonic speed. It might be a good cost-effective compromise.

That’s why if they can install the engine on the F-35 they should consider seriously building the F/A-XX from the F-35 if possible.

From looking at 0:19 in the video, the wings don’t seem to be straight, and the wingspan seems smaller than that B-2 by comparing at 0:07.

It looks like this one:
http://www.google.fr/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flightglobal.com%2Fblogs%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fmt%2Fflightglobalweb%2Fblogs%2Fthe-dewline%2Fassets_c%2F2012%2F08%2Fnorthrop_grumman_NGB_bomber-thumb-560×373-162571.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flightglobal.com%2Fblogs%2Fthe-dewline%2F2012%2F08%2Fusafs-lrs-b-bomber-proceeds-bu%2F&h=373&w=560&tbnid=KpwuwSmmJb0JRM%3A&zoom=1&docid=IG0sSbxQXgDvdM&ei=QnjMVKKpAsXyUNfxgdAJ&tbm=isch&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=264&page=1&start=0&ndsp=8&ved=0CCYQrQMwAA

Would that kind of design have supersonic capability?

There is a solution that seemingly isn’t being considered.

Vertically deployable tail for the higher AoA stuff when you need it – you already have suitable storage spaces alongside the engines and behind the rear wing spar. If your maneuvering hard, then your already discovered and signature isn’t critical. Furthermore, there is nothing to stop you deploying them above or below the airframe, depending on your maneuver, so that large actuation envelopes are not needed to exert considerable control authority.

Probably quicker, cheaper and better aerodynamic fix than all the control hoops that they’ll need for a tailless solution – albeit with a slight weight and maintenance penalty. But the vertical tail would not be high-g rated items – so its not quite like the swing-wing complexities of MiG-23, Tornado or F-14.

I had the same idea for the vertical tails. 🙂

Canards could also be deployable ( for a delta plane they would be deployed for dogfighting and for landing on the carrier ).

I believe I had seen a design of 3D stealth thrust vectoring system some time ago. The nozzle had 4 ‘petals’ vs 2 on the F-22 for instance. Sort of rectangular. Does that remind you of something?