Trump described the high-speed stealth aircraft, dubbed the F-47, as the “most lethal aircraft ever built” and said a version has been secretly flying for the last five years.

The jet will replace Lockheed Martin’s F-22 with an aircraft that is also designed to fly alongside unmanned drones in combat, Trump announced at the White House.

The exact value of the contract remains undisclosed, but it is a boost for Boeing, which has struggled with sluggish commercial and military sales, as well as high-profile safety issues.

The design of the “sixth-generation” aircraft remains a closely-guarded secret, but reportedly includes high advanced sensors and engines in addition to their stealth capabilities.

An artistic rendering alongside Trump in the Oval Office of the White House only showed a small part of the aircraft and front landing gear.

“There’s never been anything even close to it, from speed to maneuverability, to what it can have, to payload,” Trump said.

Trump said the US military selected the number 47 – which he described as a “beautiful number” – for the aircraft. He is the 45th and 47th President of the US.

“The generals picked that title,” he said.

The Boeing deal also marks a defeat for competitor Lockheed Martin, which was recently eliminated from a separate competition to build a next-generation aircraft for the US Navy.

Sales of the company’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a fifth-generation aircraft, could also be threatened by mounting trade tensions between the US and its allies abroad.

Canada’s new prime minister, Mark Carney, has asked defence minister Bill Blair to review its purchase of the aircraft, which was developed with Canada as a partnership.

In Portugal, the country’s outgoing defence minister told local media that the country is re-thinking a purchase of F-35s to replace its older aircraft as a result of “recent positions” taken by the US government.

Each F-35 costs approximately $85m (£65.8m), with the price rising up to $150m with spare parts and support infrastructure included.

About 1,100 of the aircraft have been built, with F-35s in service with 16 militaries around the world.

Several countries are reportedly now mulling purchasing aircraft from European manufacturers such as Dassault and Saab, even if those aircraft lack the stealth capabilities of the F-35.

Elon Musk, a key ally of Trump’s, has previously expressed scepticism of manned aircraft.

He was at the Pentagon ahead of the F-47 announcement on Friday, on a visit which defence secretary Pete Hegseth said was related to cost-cutting.

The complaint alleges that John Barnett was subjected to a campaign of harassment, abuse and humiliation after he raised concerns about safety issues.

It claims that the conduct of the company was “the clear, foreseeable cause” of Mr Barnett’s death.

Boeing said it was saddened by Mr Barnett’s death and extended its condolences to his family.

The former Boeing manager was found dead from what police described as a self-inflicted gunshot wound in the car park of a Charleston hotel on 9 March last year.

The 146-page lawsuit has been brought by his mother, Vicky Stokes, and his brothers Rodney and Michael on behalf of his estate. It was filed on Wednesday in the US District Court of South Carolina.

It attributes his death to Boeing’s actions, including what it describes as a retaliatory campaign by his managers that amounted to a “hostile work environment”.

“Whether or not Boeing intended to drive John to death or merely destroy his ability to function, it was absolutely foreseeable that Boeing’s conduct would result in PTSD and John’s unbearable depression… Boeing’s conduct was the clear cause, and the clear foreseeable cause, of John’s death,” it says.

It describes Mr Barnett as a dedicated, idealistic worker who “took his role seriously in protecting the flying public” and “believed that he had a personal, legal and moral obligation to ensure… that every possible defect was identified, documented and remedied.”

It describes how he was allegedly harassed, denigrated, humiliated and treated with scorn and contempt, as well as being removed from investigations he was working on and blacklisted from transferring to other quality control positions within the company.

Mr Barnett took early retirement from Boeing in March 2017, at a time when the claim says he had been suffering from symptoms of depression and severe anxiety, and knew he was going to be fired. The lawsuit alleges the company continued to put pressure on him, for example by preventing friends who continued to work there from having any contact with him.

Among the exhibits put forward in support of the claim are an email, in which he says, “Boeing has completely destroyed my outlook on life” and his handwritten final note, which says “I can’t do this any longer!! Enough!!”

John Barnett worked for Boeing for 32 years.

From 2010, he was employed as a quality manager at Boeing’s factory in North Charleston, South Carolina. The facility builds the 787 Dreamliner, a state-of-the-art airliner used mainly on long-haul routes.

During his time at the factory, Mr Barnett raised a number of concerns with management about violations of safety procedures, as well as about defects in aircraft on the production line.

He later took his concerns to the media. In 2019, he told the BBC that:

• under-pressure workers had been deliberately fitting sub-standard parts to aircraft on the production line
• workers had failed to follow procedures intended to track components through the factory, allowing defective components to go missing
• he had uncovered serious problems with oxygen systems on the 787, which could mean one in four breathing masks would not work in an emergency

Boeing denied his assertions. However, a 2017 review by the US regulator, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), did uphold some of Mr Barnett’s concerns.

It established that the location of at least 53 “non-conforming” parts in the factory was unknown, and that they were considered lost. Boeing was ordered to take remedial action.

On the oxygen cylinders issue, the company said that in 2017 it had “identified some oxygen bottles received from the supplier that were not deploying properly”. But it denied that any of them were actually fitted on aircraft.

Safety standards at Boeing have come under a harsh spotlight since an incident last year in which a disused door panel fell off a brand new 737 Max aircraft shortly after takeoff.

The incident, which came five years after two previous catastrophic accidents involving the 737 Max, brought intense scrutiny of the company’s quality control procedures and conditions in the factory.

The company appointed a new chief executive last year, industry veteran Kelly Ortberg, and has produced a detailed action plan to address concerns raised by regulators about issues on the factory floor.

In response to the lawsuit being filed, Boeing issued a brief statement.

“We are saddened by John Barnett’s death and extend our condolences to his family,” it said.

Previously, however, the company has pushed back against the allegations made against it, telling the BBC: “Boeing reviewed and addressed quality issues that Mr Barnett raised before he retired in 2017, as well as other quality issues referred to in the complaint. Engineering analysis determined the issues he raised did not affect airplane safety.”

It also drew attention to a decision made earlier in Mr Barnett’s case, in 2020, in which the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration concluded the company had not breached whistleblower protection law.

It added: “We appreciate employees who raise their voice, and we have systems in place to encourage them to speak up confidentially or anonymously.”

Speaking on board one of the 35-year-old presidential planes that are currently in use, Trump also said he is looking for alternatives because it is taking Boeing too long to build the planes.

The contract for two updated versions of the presidential plane based on the modern Boeing 747-8 were negotiated during Trump’s first term in office.

Boeing did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BBC News.

“No, I’m not happy with Boeing. It takes them a long time to do, you know, Air Force One, we gave that contract out a long time ago,” Trump said.

“We may buy a plane or get a plane, or something.”

When asked whether he would consider buying new planes from Boeing’s European rival, Airbus, Trump said “No, I would not consider Airbus over Boeing, but I could buy one that was used and convert it.”

It comes days after Trump visited a 13-year-old Boeing 747-800 that had been owned by the Qatari royal family while it was parked at Palm Beach International Airport.

The new aircraft from Boeing were set for delivery in 2024 but the plane maker has pushed the delivery back to 2027 or 2028.

During his first term as president, Trump forced the plane maker to renegotiate its contract, calling the initial deal too expensive.

That contract has already cost Boeing billions of dollars.

Kitting out the planes for presidential use is extremely costly. It requires installing highly-classified and complex communications, safety and accessibility features.

Last year was dreadful for Boeing. The aerospace giant lost $11.8bn (£9.4bn) across the whole of 2024, its worst result since 2020, when the aviation industry was grounded by the Covid pandemic.

In the three months to the end of December, when strikes were affecting the business, it lost $3.8bn.

As well as suffering from well-publicised problems at its commercial aircraft unit, Boeing also faced issues with number of defence programmes.

The aerospace giant lost $11.8bn across the year, its worst result since 2020, when the aviation industry was grounded by the Covid pandemic.

In the three months to the end of December, when strikes were affecting the business, it lost $3.8bn.

As well as suffering from well-publicised problems at its commercial aircraft unit, Boeing also struggled with issues affecting a number of defence programmes.

Chief executive Kelly Ortberg said the company was focused on what he called the “fundamental changes” needed to restore its fortunes and restore trust.

Boeing has had a dreadful year by any measure. In January 2024, a door panel fell off a brand new 737 Max shortly after take-off, leaving a gaping hole in the side of the plane. Investigators said it had not been bolted on properly.

The incident highlighted serious quality control failings at the company – and at its main supplier, Spirit Aerosystems. It also reignited concerns about Boeing’s attitude towards safety.

Boeing had been trying to emerge from the shadow of two high-profile crashes involving a different 737 model, the Max 8, in 2018 and 2019, which killed 346 people.

The latest incident forced Boeing to curb production, as regulators called for changes on the factory floor, and demanded the implementation of a comprehensive safety and quality control plan.

In August, Boeing appointed its new chief executive Mr Ortberg, a veteran engineer who was brought in to steady the ship.

But he immediately faced a serious challenge.

A strike by 33,000 workers, most of them in Boeing’s heartlands around Seattle brought two of its most important factories to a halt, and halted production of the 737 Max, the 777 and the 767 freighter.

The seven-week stoppage, which began in September, reflected deep seated resentment among employees over their pay and retirement provisions. The dispute was settled in early November, but it cost the company billions.

Boeing did take action. It announced plans to lay off 10% of its workforce and began raising more than $20bn through a combination of share sales and borrowing in order to protect its credit rating.

It also delayed the entry into service of the 777X. A new version of the long-haul workhorse, it was already years late but had been expected to start operating in 2025. It will not now carry passengers until 2026.

In total, Boeing delivered 348 commercial aircraft last year. Its great rival Airbus delivered 766.

Problems at Boeing’s defence business have been less visible, but no less damaging. The unit lost more than $5bn, largely thanks to rising costs on fixed price military contracts.

Commenting on the results, Mr Ortberg said: “We made progress on key areas to stabilize our operations during the quarter and continued to strengthen important aspects of our safety and quality plan.

“My team and I are focused on making the fundamental changes needed to fully recover our company’s performance and restore trust with our customers, employees, suppliers, investors, regulators and all others who are counting on us.”

Boeing ended the year with a backlog of 5,595 unfilled orders.

Stricter scrutiny of the planemaker’s practices as well as industrial action, have hampered production at what is one of America’s largest manufacturers.

By contrast, its European arch-rival Airbus provided 766 planes.

Boeing said there was “work underway” to improve its culture, and to “restore trust and deliver for our customers”.

The firm’s production was hamstrung in 2024, first by serious concerns over quality control, both in its own facilities and at a key supplier.

Later in the year, a strike by workers in its Washington state heartlands paralysed two of its most important factories.

Together these factors helped bring its output down sharply from the 528 aircraft delivered in 2023.

Boeing’s year began badly. In January 2024, a panel fitted over an unused emergency exit door fell off a brand new 737 Max shortly after take-off.

The incident left a gaping hole in the side of the plane. Investigators later concluded that the panel had not been bolted into place properly.

The affair put quality control standards at Boeing and its primary supplier Spirit Aerosystems under a harsh spotlight.

An audit by the US regulator, the Federal Aviation Administration, found “multiple instances” where both companies had failed to meet required standards.

Boeing had previously been planning to ramp up production of the 737 Max, its bestselling aircraft. Instead, its output was capped by the FAA.

It also faced intense public criticism over its apparent failure to improve safety standards following two previous accidents involving the 737 Max five years ago.

The manufacturer has since faced increased oversight from the regulator, and is in the process of implementing a major safety and quality control improvement plan.

Boeing and Google each give $1m for Trump inauguration

While grappling with the fallout from the January incident, Boeing was also dealing with supply chain problems.

These have been affecting the industry as a whole since the Covid pandemic. Shortages of parts, including engines, slowed output of the 787 Dreamliner and the 777 Freighter.

In September, Boeing suffered another severe blow, when more than 33,000 workers in the US Northwest went on strike.

The dispute, which focused on pay and retirement provisions, was the first major walkout at the company since 2008.

It halted work at Boeing’s major factories in the Seattle region, paralysing production of the 737, the 777 and the 767 freighter.

The strike ended in early November, but disruption continued for several more weeks. The 737 Max production line did not restart until mid-December.

The difficulties Boeing has faced this year have also affected its future plans.

Deliveries of its newest aircraft, the 777X, have been pushed back again from 2025 to 2026, having already faced repeated delays due to problems with the plane and its engines.

The design, a major update of the long-haul 777, was originally scheduled to enter service in 2020.

Boeing’s problems, which have cost the company billions of dollars, have also created headaches for airlines.

Even before the events of the past year, it was struggling to build planes fast enough and the company now has a large backlog of unfulfilled orders.

The 528 aircraft delivered in 2023 fell far short of the pre-Covid era record of 806, set in 2018.

Airbus is in a much healthier position, but still fell narrowly short of production targets last year, as it grappled with its own supply chain issues. Its order backlog now stands at more than 8,600.

With Airbus unable to compensate for Boeing’s shortfall, airlines are struggling to obtain the aircraft they want.

In November, Ryanair’s chief executive Michael O’Leary described delays in getting hold of new aircraft as “a pain in the backside”.

The airline has repeatedly warned that a lack of planes will affect its growth plans, and will limit the number of passengers it can fly this summer.

Google has also confirmed that it has made a similar donation as the two firms join a growing list of major American companies contributing to the fund.

The list also includes oil producer Chevron and technology giants Meta, Amazon and Uber.

Trump’s inauguration, marking the start of his second term in the White House, is set to take place on 20 January.

“We are pleased to continue Boeing’s bipartisan tradition of supporting US Presidential Inaugural Committees,” Boeing said.

The company added that it has made similar donations to each of the past three presidential inauguration funds.

Boeing is working to recover from a safety and quality control crisis, as well as dealing with the losses from a strike last year.

The company is also building the next presidential aircraft, known as Air Force One. The two jets are expected to come into service as early as next year.

During his first term as president, Trump forced the plane maker to renegotiate its contract, calling the initial deal too expensive.

Google became the latest big tech firm to donate to the fund, following similar announcements by Meta and Amazon. It also said it will stream the event around the world.

“Google is pleased to support the 2025 inauguration, with a livestream on YouTube and a direct link on our homepage,” said Karan Bhatia, Google’s global head of government affairs and public policy.

Car companies Ford, General Motors and Toyota have also donated a $1m each to the inaugural committee.

In the energy industry, Chevron confirmed that it has made a donation to the fund but declined to say how much.

“Chevron has a long tradition of celebrating democracy by supporting the inaugural committees of both parties. We are proud to be doing so again this year,” said Bill Turene, Chevron’s manager of global media relations.

US District Judge Reed O’Connor in Texas on Thursday said that diversity, inclusion and equity – or DEI – policies in the government and at Boeing could result in race being a factor in picking an official to oversee Boeing’s compliance with the agreement.

The ruling creates uncertainty around the criminal prosecution of the aerospace giant in connection with the development of its bestselling airline plane.

The judge gave Boeing and the Justice Department 30 days to tell him how they plan to proceed. They could negotiate a new plea agreement, or prosecutors could move to put the company on trial.The Department of Justice said it was reviewing the ruling.

Boeing did not comment immediately.Paul Cassell, an attorney for families of passengers who died in the crashes, called the decision an important victory for the rights of crime victims.

“No longer can federal prosecutors and high-powered defense attorney craft backroom deals and just expect judges to approve them,” Cassell said. “Judge O’Connor has recognized that this was a cozy deal between the government and Boeing that failed to focus on the overriding concerns – holding Boeing accountable for its deadly crime and ensuring that nothing like this happens again in the future.”

Many relatives of the passengers who died in the crashes, which took place off the coast of Indonesia and in Ethiopia less than five months apart in 2018 and 2019, respectively, have spent years pushing for a public trial, the prosecution of former company officials, and more severe financial punishment for Boeing.

The deal the judge rejected was reached in July and would have let Boeing plead guilty to defrauding regulators who approved pilot-training requirements for the 737 Max nearly a decade ago. Prosecutors said they did not have evidence to argue that Boeing’s deception played a role in the crashes.

In his ruling, O’Connor focused on part of the agreement that called for an independent monitor to oversee Boeing’s steps to prevent violation of anti-fraud laws during three years of probation.

O’Connor expressed particular concern that the agreement “requires the parties to consider race when hiring the independent monitor … ‘in keeping with the [Justice] Department’s commitment to diversity and inclusion.’”

O’Connor, a conservative appointed to the bench by former President George W Bush, questioned Justice Department and Boeing lawyers in October about the role of DEI in the selection of the monitor. Department lawyers said selection would be open to all qualified candidates and based on merit.

The judge wrote in Thursday’s ruling that he was “not convinced … the Government will not choose a monitor without race-based considerations”.

“In a case of this magnitude, it is in the utmost interest of justice that the public is confident this monitor selection is done based solely on competency. The parties’ DEI efforts only serve to undermine this confidence in the government and Boeing’s ethics and anti-fraud efforts,” he wrote.

O’Connor also objected that the plea deal called for the government to pick the monitor and for the appointee to report to the Justice Department, not the court. The judge also noted that Boeing would have been able to veto one of six candidates chosen by the government.

Todd Haugh, a business law and ethics expert at Indiana University, could not recall any previous corporate plea deals that were rejected over DEI. He said the larger issue was how the deal took sentencing power away from the court.

“That is a legitimate argument from which to reject a plea agreement, but this particular judge has really stood on this DEI issue,” Haugh said. “It comes through loud and clear in the order.”

The ruling leaves prosecutors in a bind because they can’t simply ignore a government DEI policy that goes back to 2018, he said.

Prosecutors also must weigh the risks and uncertain outcomes before pushing for a trial.Boeing negotiated the plea deal only after the Justice Department determined this year that Boeing violated a 2021 agreement that had protected it against criminal prosecution on the same fraud-conspiracy charge.

Boeing lawyers have said that if the plea deal was rejected, the company would challenge the finding that it violated the earlier agreement. Without the finding, the government has no case.

The judge helped Boeing’s position on Thursday, writing that it was not clear what the company did to violate the 2021 deal.

The Justice Department accused Boeing of defrauding Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulators, who approved pilot-training requirements for the 737 Max.

Acting on Boeing’s incomplete disclosures, the FAA approved minimal, computer-based training instead of more intensive training in flight simulators. Simulator training would have increased the cost for airlines to operate the Max and might have pushed some to buy planes from rival Airbus instead.

When the Justice Department announced in 2021 that it had reached a settlement and would not prosecute Boeing for fraud, families of the victims were outraged. Judge O’Connor ruled last year that the Justice Department broke a victims-rights law by not telling relatives that it was negotiating with Boeing, but said he had no power to overturn the deal.

The 2021 deferred-prosecution agreement was due to expire in January, and it was widely expected that prosecutors would seek to permanently drop the matter. Just days before that, however, a door plug blew off a 737 Max during an Alaska Airlines flight over Oregon.

That incident renewed concerns about manufacturing quality and safety at Boeing and put the company under intense scrutiny by regulators and lawmakers.

The case is just one of many challenges facing Boeing, which has lost more than $23bn since 2019 and has fallen behind Airbus in selling and delivering new planes.

The company went through a strike by factory workers that shut down most plane production for seven weeks earlier this year and announced that it would lay off 10 percent of its workers, about 17,000 people. Its shares have plunged about 40 percent in less than a year.