U.S. Air Force Moves FQ-42 and FQ-44 Combat Drones Into Production

The U.S. Air Force has awarded production contracts to General Atomics and Anduril Industries for its first Collaborative Combat Aircraft, marking a major step in the shift from traditional fighter fleets toward human-machine air combat teams.

The contracts cover the first increment of the CCA program, with General Atomics producing the FQ-42 and Anduril producing the FQ-44. Both aircraft were previously known under prototype designations, YFQ-42A and YFQ-44A. Dropping the “Y” prefix signals that the platforms are moving beyond the prototype phase and into production.

This is one of the most important developments in U.S. airpower modernization. Collaborative Combat Aircraft are semi-autonomous, jet-powered uncrewed aircraft designed to fly alongside crewed fighters such as the F-35, F-22 and future F-47. Their role is to extend the reach, sensor coverage, weapons capacity and survivability of manned aircraft in heavily contested environments.

The Air Force wants these aircraft to provide combat mass without requiring a pilot in every cockpit. In a future conflict against a major power, the service expects that crewed fighters alone may not be enough to generate the number of aircraft, sensors and weapons needed across a large battlespace. CCA is intended to solve that problem by adding lower-cost uncrewed aircraft that can take on risk, expand coverage and support human pilots.

General Atomics’ FQ-42A is an uncrewed fighter developed from the company’s broader autonomous combat aircraft work, including technologies demonstrated through platforms such as the XQ-67A and the Gambit family concept. The company says the aircraft was developed and flight-tested on an accelerated schedule, moving from contract award to first flight in roughly 15 months.

Anduril’s FQ-44A, also known as Fury, is designed around a similar requirement: a fast, semi-autonomous combat aircraft able to operate with crewed fighters and provide additional reach, payload and tactical flexibility. Anduril has emphasized short-field operation, long ferry range and the ability to support modular mission packages.

The Air Force plans to field more than 150 combat-capable CCA aircraft by the end of the decade, while its longer-term objective is a fleet of around 1,000 aircraft. That number shows how central the program has become to U.S. planning. CCA is not being treated as a small experiment; it is being built as a new layer of airpower.

The contracts were awarded several months ahead of schedule, suggesting that both companies had met key requirements for cost, performance and production readiness. The Air Force has not disclosed the value of the contracts or the exact number of aircraft each company will build in the first lots. However, officials have repeatedly said the goal is to keep each CCA far cheaper than a manned fifth-generation fighter.

That cost target is central to the concept. The Air Force wants an aircraft that is capable enough to matter in high-end combat, but affordable enough to buy in large numbers. Earlier planning has often referenced a target of roughly one-third the cost of an F-35, though officials now say the program is meeting or beating its affordability goals.

The CCA program also changes how the Air Force buys combat aircraft. Traditionally, a fighter program combines the airframe, mission systems and software into one tightly integrated package. For CCA, the Air Force is deliberately separating the aircraft hardware from the autonomy software.

This strategy is being described as “software sold separately.” The idea is simple but important: the Air Force can buy aircraft from one set of companies and autonomy software from another, allowing the software to evolve faster without redesigning the aircraft itself.

Alongside the airframe production contracts, the Air Force has created a six-year mission autonomy software vendor pool. The companies in that pool are Anduril, General Atomics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, RTX Collins Aerospace and Shield AI. From that group, Anduril, Collins Aerospace and Shield AI have been selected for the first accelerated competition phase.

Those companies will compete through two six-month development periods, with the Air Force expected to select a primary mission autonomy provider for CCA Increment 1 by summer 2027. The service also keeps the option to license software from any vendor in the pool if another company produces better capability later.

This is where the program becomes especially significant. The aircraft itself is only part of the story. Mission autonomy is the core of the CCA concept. These aircraft are not meant to be remotely piloted drones in the traditional sense. They are intended to operate with a level of autonomy, taking direction from human operators while executing missions, navigating threats and supporting crewed fighters.

To make that possible, the Air Force is using a government-owned open architecture known as the Autonomy Government Reference Architecture. This allows autonomy software to be moved between aircraft and upgraded without locking the service into one vendor or one platform. In theory, this means the Air Force can continuously improve the “brain” of the aircraft while keeping the physical platform in production.

The mission set is expected to grow over time. CCAs could conduct air-to-air missions, reconnaissance, electronic warfare, strike, sensing, decoy roles or weapons carriage depending on configuration. Some may act as forward sensors for crewed fighters. Others may carry additional missiles. Some may enter areas too dangerous for manned aircraft.

That is why the program is closely tied to the Indo-Pacific. A conflict in the region would involve long distances, dense air defenses, advanced aircraft, electronic warfare and heavy missile threats. The U.S. Air Force needs more combat mass and longer reach than its current fighter fleet can provide alone. CCAs are designed to help solve that problem.

The F-47, the Air Force’s planned sixth-generation fighter, is expected to operate with these aircraft as part of a wider family of systems. But CCA is also relevant to current fighters. F-35s, F-22s and other platforms could eventually direct or coordinate with these uncrewed aircraft to extend their sensors, weapons and survivability.

For General Atomics, the FQ-42A production award validates years of investment in uncrewed jet aircraft. The company has built and flown platforms such as the MQ-20 Avenger and XQ-67A, giving it a long foundation in jet-powered unmanned systems.

For Anduril, the FQ-44A award is equally important. It places a newer defense technology company alongside a traditional unmanned aircraft producer in one of the Air Force’s most important future combat aircraft programs. The Air Force’s decision to keep both vendors also reflects its desire to maintain competition and avoid dependence on a single supplier.

The program still carries risk. Autonomy software must mature quickly, and the aircraft must prove that they can operate reliably in complex, contested combat environments. Questions remain over command and control, electronic warfare resilience, rules of engagement, weapons integration, logistics and how much authority human pilots will retain during fast-moving combat operations.

There have already been setbacks. One General Atomics prototype crashed earlier this year during testing, though the company said flights later resumed after a software-related issue was addressed. Air Force officials said the crash did not affect the decision to award production contracts.

Even with those risks, the direction is clear. The Air Force is moving quickly because it sees CCA as essential to future air superiority. The service does not want to wait until the 2030s to begin fielding autonomous teammates. It wants operational aircraft entering the force before the end of this decade.

If the program succeeds, the impact will be large. The U.S. fighter fleet will no longer be defined only by crewed aircraft. Instead, future air combat could be built around formations of manned fighters, semi-autonomous combat drones, distributed sensors, networked weapons and rapidly updated autonomy software.

The FQ-42 and FQ-44 are therefore not just new aircraft. They are the first production step toward a different model of airpower: one where pilots command teams of uncrewed combat aircraft, and where software competition becomes as important as airframe design.

For the U.S. Air Force, CCA is about generating mass, reducing risk to pilots and staying ahead of China in highly contested airspace. For the defense industry, it marks a new procurement model. For future warfare, it may be the point where loyal wingman concepts begin moving from test programs into real operational fleets.