What You Need to Know: The US Navy’s pursuit of carrier-launched drones dates back to the 1980s with the A-12 Avenger II, a planned stealthy bomber drone.
-Despite initial promise, the A-12 program, developed by Boeing and General Dynamics, was canceled in 1991 due to cost overruns, weight issues, and technological hurdles, particularly the difficulty of landing a drone on a moving carrier.
-Although deemed a failure, the A-12’s ambition paved the way for later successes like the X-47B demonstrator and the MQ-25 Stingray aerial refueler, demonstrating the Navy’s continued commitment to integrating unmanned aircraft into carrier operations.
From Dream to Disaster: Why the Navy Canceled the A-12 Avenger II
The United States Navy made history roughly ten years ago by launching the stealthy X-47B demonstrator drone from the deck of an aircraft carrier, a long-sought-after technological capability intended to usher in a new era of carrier air attack.
At the time, Navy weapons developers explained the long-term, massive developmental effort that went toward making this possible, as it involved the creation of complex new algorithms, navigational technologies, and command and control systems.
This was considered a major breakthrough achievement at the time. US Navy weapons developers described that attempting to land a drone on an aircraft carrier presented entirely new and different challenges than historic manned carrier flight.
In particular, Navy developers explained that a new generation of technologies was needed to enable an unmanned system to navigate changing sea states, wind conditions, and the challenges presented by landing on a “moving” carrier.
It is not clear what happened to Northrop’s X-47B after its successful flight, but in subsequent years, the service has developed a first-of-its-kind unmanned aerial refueler called the MQ-25 Stingray.
This platform, which brings carrier-launched unmanned technology to refuel from a carrier air wing, is now successfully arriving after years of development.
Many consider the X-47B and MQ-25 breakthrough developments because of the many years the US Navy had been attempting unmanned carrier flight.
Meet the A-12 Avenger II
As far back as the 1980s, the US Navy had been developing the stealthy A-12 Avenger II, a stealthy carrier-launched first-of-its-kind drone. The Navy developed the platform to launch from a carrier, land on a carrier, and perform bombing missions.
The Navy built and attempted tests on prototype demonstrators of the platform, and the project at times showed promise. Boeing and General Dynamics won a deal to develop the aircraft in 1988.
However, in 1991, the project was canceled by the Pentagon and former Vice President Dick Cheney for cost overruns, weight challenges, and other technological complications, according to an article from The National Interest.
The A-12 Avenger II was initially designed to replace Northrop’s A-6 Avenger. However, the project was abandoned in favor of the F/A-18 Hornet.
Why would this amazing breakthrough technology possibility be canceled?
Indeed, a stealthy bomber would have been and still is, an amazing value-added addition to a Carrier Air Wing. Such an airplane would bring new tactics, attack possibilities, and concepts of operation to US Navy aircraft carrier power projection.
Looking back a few years, the A-12 Avenger II was most likely canceled for technological reasons, given the complexity of the engineering challenges involved with landing a drone on a moving carrier.
The Stealth Bomber Idea Lives On
However, the concept and ambition certainly lived on, and the US Navy is now engineering special unmanned systems and command and control centers built to support drone flight from carriers.
Many news essays on the Avenger II spoke of soaring costs and design complications at the time of the cancelation.
The longstanding vision to accomplish this is quite likely why the successful take-off and landing of the X-47B was so monumental.
While the A-12 Avenger effort may have been regarded as a failure, perhaps it succeeded in successfully informing new stealth designs that are now supporting the US Navy.
About the Author: Kris Osborn
Kris Osborn is the Military Technology Editor of 19FortyFive and President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.

L. Lewis
January 15, 2025 at 11:11 am
A12 was to replace the Grumman A6-E Intruder. The A12 was not a drone. The Navy valued the teamwork enabled by the two seat A6, and wanted to keep that on the A12. The project ran into difficulties because Northrop had most of the stealth expertise, and General Dynamics and Mcdonald Douglas were the prime contractors. The collapse of the A12 had far reaching effects on Naval aviation, and the Navy had to start from scratch to develop a new stealth aircraft. This effect culminated with the F35C after 30 years.
Mike
January 16, 2025 at 12:48 am
Hard to “meet” a plane that never existed. Complete vaporware that never made it past committee work to even engineering studies, much less practical testing. The press mockup was mostly carved foam and fiberglass. The Sgt York as least made it to the prototyping stage.
Tybur Visarion
January 16, 2025 at 5:49 am
There’s a reason we don’t do flying wings, though. and that’s why I don’t understand why everybody is treating the chinese triangle strategic fighter bomber, whatever they’re calling it, with any degree of seriousness. the problems with flying wings aren’t fixable? Like it has to do with the fact that it’s a triangle. if they have a flying wing, that’s great for them, but it’s not a good plane, whatever it is.
Gary
January 16, 2025 at 11:24 am
As an engineer at the former McAir when the A-12 was being developed this article is “ nothing burger@ and wrong I.e. it was not to be a drone. I hate it when Army dudes try to write about aviation they don’t know anything about.
The Pentagon screwed this program from the start. The design was GD Ft Worth. But they had no experience with composites or the Navy. ( remember the navy dumped the F-111 and went to Grumman GD’s partner to develop the F-14) so with that history lesson the Navy forced GD to partner with McAir and divide the plane in half. Would you build a house this way, with two prime contractors? That’s what the geniuses at the Pentagon did.
6 months before it was canceled by “Dickhead” Chaney, GD came to McAir and said “we don’t know how to make these parts can you do it”? Composite S inlet ducts as an example. McAir was already building an all composite wing for the USMC AV-8B (29% composite by weight).
The fall of the USSR had more to do with the cancellation but $3B was spent and it would have made sense to complete at least 2 prototypes and flight test them to at least learn and provide something to show for the investment.
This is a Harvard case study in Pentagon stupidity and ass kissing Generals. The Clinton admin gutted the military and the industrial base. Look at where we are today- can’t build ships, subs or aircraft. The F-35 is a colossal failure after 24 yrs.