U.S. Air Force Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA)

What Are Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA)?

The U.S. Air Force is developing a new type of uncrewed weapon system called Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA). The Air Force plans to fly CCAs. The Air Force contends that CCA is being created as a so-called “loyal wingman,” a large uncrewed aircraft (UAS) that could fly alongside new and existing crewed fighter jets to enhance operations in contested airspace. The Air Force describes CCAs, large uncrewed aircraft (UAS) powered by jet engines, as potentially able to fly alone or in small groups, and potentially equipped for a variety of missions,equipped for missions including air- to-air combat; air-to-ground combat; electronic warfare; targeting; and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. The Air Force says CCAs’has said CCAs' AI-driven software would enable collaboration with, and take direction from, human pilots and that CCAs would serve to expand the fighter fleet and protect human pilots at a lower cost than current fighter jets. Then-Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall stated that there is a “planning assumption” of 1,000 CCAs, a number derived by projecting the use of two CCAs for each of 500 advanced fighters.

CCAs are part of the Air Force’'s Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) family of systems program (see CRS In Focus IF12805, U.S. Air Force Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) Fighter), which also may include a future crewed fighter platform, sensors, weapons, and more. The U.S. Air Force requested $557.1 million in its FY2025Congress provided $678 million in mandatory funding in the FY2025 reconciliation act (P.L. 119-21, §20007) for CCA development. For FY2026, the Air Force requested $111.4 million in discretionary funding for CCA research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) budget request for CCAs. Congress may approve, reject, modify, or choose not to act on the request.

Changing Concept of Operations

Aircraft are Military aircraft are generally expensive to develop, buy, and operate. Since the 1990s, the size of the U.S. Air Force’'s fleet has decreased, decreased, in part because of such costs. Air Force officials have estimated that CCAs mightbecause of those costs. Former Secretary Kendall has stated CCAs would cost roughly one-third the price of crewed fighters. Service officials also indicate that training on CCAs wouldcould occur virtually, so the airframes themselves would fly less, potentially leading to lower maintenance and sustainment costs. The Air Force could therefore potentially purchase them in quantities large enough to buttress its fleet. China’s usepotential savings may allow the Air Force to purchase CCAs in larger quantities than it could buy crewed fighters. China's development of anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities, such as long-range missiles and sophisticated air defense systems, has challenged the U.S. Air Force’'s ability to achieve air superiorityair superiority (i.e., the ability to control a certain air space to conduct operations without prohibitive interference from air and missile threats). A tactical fighter fleet that includes CCAs and crewed combat aircraft could potentially help the Air Force to gain air superiority.

by overwhelming air defenses. The Air Force is also pursuing a conceptconcept of operations—— similar to those being implemented by other military servicesbranches of the military—called agile combat employment (ACE). Under the ACE concept, operations shift from large, centralized

physical infrastructures to a network of dispersed locations. CCAs in those dispersed locations could help the U.S. Air Force add sensors or long-range weaponsweapons to its combat aircraft fleet. According to Commander of Air Combat Command General Kenneth S. Wilsbach, the addition of CCAs to the fleet could cause confusion for enemy aircraft and assist the fight for air superiority. “You can create mass, and so many targets out in the battlespace that your adversary will have to worry about … is that something that I have to use some munitions on,” Wilsbach said in 2023, when he was Commander of Pacific Air Forces.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Air Force, and Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)Air Force Chief of Staff General Kenneth S. Wilsbach, CCAs could assist U.S. forces in achieving air superiority in contested environments partly by confusing enemy aircraft. A 2025 Air Force report to Congress on Tactical Fighter Aircraft Force Structure describes the platform as an enhancement to, not replacement for, crewed aircraft: "Paired with fifth-gen fighters in a counter air role, CCA will be key to controlling future highly contested environments."

Acquisition

Increment 1

Source: Anduril.

Anduril. In 2023, Anduril purchased Blue Force Technologies, a company that had developed a large UAS called Fury. Anduril stated it invested in Fury to make it "a high-performance, multi-mission" aircraft that could serve as CCA. In January 2025, Anduril announced plans to manufacture Fury at a new factory in Columbus, OH. Anduril is integrating the Fury platform with its Lattice open systems software program to enable human-machine teaming. In March 2025, the Air Force announced the designation of the company prototype as the YFQ-44A. In October, Anduril announced that the YFQ-44A, designed to be semi-autonomous, made its first flight.

Source: GA-ASI.

GA-ASI. GA-ASI officials have said that the company based its CCA bid on an experimental platform, called the XQ-67A, which emphasized endurance over speed and maneuverability. In 2024, a GA-ASI official said that production of its first CCA had begun. In March 2025, the Air Force announced the designation of the GA-ASI prototype as the YFQ-42A. On August 27, the first pre-production prototype YFQ-42A flew for the first time.

Both test articles are undergoing developmental testing in California and operational assessments with an Experimental Operations Unit (EOU) at Nellis Air Force Base (AFB), NV. In May 2025, the Air Force announced Beale AFB in CA, as the preferred location for a CCA Aircraft Readiness Unit ready for rapid deployment.

Increment 2

The Air Force has reportedly stated that preliminary work has started on Increment 2. The service plans to work with more than 20 companies, including those not initially selected for Increment 1, for this phase of work. An Air Force official reportedly said the service may award Increment 2 contracts in early FY2026 to several companies, potentially including foreign companies. Multiple companies have reportedly developed competing concepts.

FY2025-FY2026 Funding

The Senate Appropriations Committee (SAC), in its report accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill, 2025 (S. 4921; S.Rept. 118-204), recommended transferring funding for CCA from the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) budget line to its own. In FY2025, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025 (P.L. 119-4), as detailed in department budget documents, provided $711.7 million in discretionary funding for CCA RDT&E. In addition, the FY2025 reconciliation act (P.L. 119-21, §20007) provided $678 million in mandatory funding for CCA RDT&E. The Air Force included this mandatory funding amount in its FY2026 budget request for CCA. Separately, for FY2026, the Air Force requested $126.4 million in discretionary funding for CCA, including $111.4 million in RDT&E and $15 million for procurement. Including both mandatory and discretionary funding, the Air Force identified $804.4 million in FY2026 funding for CCA. DOD is operating through January 30, 2026, under the Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Extensions Act, 2026 (P.L. 119-37).

Selected FY2026 Legislative Activity

NDAA. The House-passed Streamlining Procurement for Effective Execution and Delivery and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (NDAA; H.R. 3838), would authorize the requested amount of funding for CCA. The accompanying House Armed Services Committee report (H.Rept. 119-231) directs a briefing on planned CCA mission sets and resulting cost, schedule, and operational considerations; human machine interfaces and pilot vehicle interfaces for CCA operators; and the ability to scale prototypes to full-scale production. The Senate-passed version of the bill (S. 2296) would authorize $789.4 million in Air Force RDT&E funding for CCA. The accompanying Senate Armed Services Committee report (S.Rept. 119-39) directs a briefing on plans for integrating the F-35 aircraft and the National Guard and Reserve into the CCA operations structure; and a report on whether the EOU duplicates other testing efforts.

Appropriations. The House-passed Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2026 (H.R. 4016) would provide $494.9 million in Air Force RDT&E funding for CCA, according to the accompanying House Appropriations Committee report (H.Rept. 119-162). The report directs quarterly briefings on the status of the CCA program. The Senate Appropriations Committee-reported bill (S. 2572), would provide the requested amount funding for CCA, according to the accompanying report (S.Rept. 119-52).

Issues for Congress

Congress will have a role in considering, with the Air Force, the number of CCAs to be acquired and may provide oversight over the development of current and future prototypes. Members of Congress may or may not oversee how CCAs may interoperate with potential NGAD fighters and other combat aircraft in the Air Force fleet and with the other military departments. CCAs are intended to have some level of autonomy, with humans involved in their operation. As AI-enabled software technology progresses, future CCAs may be able to respond faster and more effectively to battlefield changes than human operators. Members may consider the risks and benefits of relying more heavily on autonomy. Congress may also consider whether the Air Force has adequately planned for procurement, testing, manufacturing, and employment of CCAs in large numbers, as well as the challenges of storing and transporting hundreds of large UAS. Congress could also consider seeking a report from the Air Force on CCA storage and sustainment plans.

As noted, former Secretary Kendall stated that the Air Force is using a “planning assumption” of 1,000 CCAs when analyzing “basic organizational structures, training and range requirements, and sustainment concepts.” In January 2024, the service awarded initial contracts to five companies to design and build CCAs: Anduril, Boeing, GA-ASI, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman. In April, the Air Force announced that two of those companies—Anduril and GA-ASI—won contracts to build production-representative test articles. Kendall told Members of Congress that the Air Force anticipates ordering more than 100 CCAs for Increment 1 in the next five years.

In FY2025, Congress authorized the Air Force to spend $3.3 billion for research and development of the service’s NGAD family of systems, which includes both the NGAD platform and the CCA. The Senate Appropriations Committee, in its report on the FY2025 Defense Appropriations Act, S.Rept. 118-204, recommended cutting $557.1 million from the NGAD platform and transferring that amount to the CCA, because the Air Force paused a planned NGAD platform contract award (Table 1).

The House Armed Services Committee, in its report on a FY2025 National Defense Authorization bill, H.Rept. 118- 529, encouraged the Air Force to consider drawing upon existing propulsion systems for CCA development to maximize affordability and minimize risk. The same report seeks a briefing on Air Force and Navy plans to incorporate modular open systems architecture standards into requirements for CCA.

Congress will have a role to play in considering, with the Air Force, the number of CCAs to be acquired and how CCAs may interoperate with potential NGAD fighters and other combat aircraft in the larger U.S. Air Force fleet and with the other military departments. CCAs are intended to have some level of autonomy, with humans involved in their operation. As AI-enabled software technology progresses, future CCAs may be able to respond faster and more effectively to battlefield changes than human operators. Members may consider the risks and benefits of relying more heavily on autonomy.