Boeing X-32

20

reply

Sorry to disappoint all you guys with your so-called
copy of the Russians yahk-141. Have a look at the history
of the Harrier jumpjet. You will see that the Short sc-1
back in the 1950's hat four jet-engines installed vertically behind the cockpit and one in the tail. From this conception followed a series of planes manufactured
by France (Mirage-Balzac) and Germany and the Russians.
So don't go talking nonsense, just do a bit of recherche.

reply

Also, the x-32 was different in every way to the 141, as the x-32 had a pair of nozzles that rotated down from the middle of the aicraft on the center of mass, while the 141 had what i said earlier, not to mention the x-32 has a delta wing for anyone who didnt notice. The second picture with a full tailplane was just a mockup and didnt actually fly. The reason this plane lost to the f-35 was that they never completed a hover test without removing parts to lighten it. Once these parts were removed, the aircraft couldnt safely go above mach 1, while the x-35 could do both with no modification.

reply

For everyone saying the Americans copy the russians, all i have to say is Tu-4. Also, the F-35 doesn't really copy the Yak-141, as the Yak had twin lift jets while the F-35 had a single lift fan. Now, I'm not saying that these aircraft are better than the Russians other than the odvious avionics advances. I personally think every 5th gen American aircraft is sub par, and that the T-50 is better, and as an American that should end some arguments that we are brainwashed into thinking we are better than everyone else.

reply

The VTOL design of Boeing is more reliable than the Russian design of Lockheed martin. Lockheed won the aesthetic design but failed with the technology because it is a copy of a Russian design with so many moving parts that requires many hours to launch with so many technical problems after each flight. Jsf should have been a Boeing technology on a Lockheed design....the one who failed here were the jury... both Boeing and Lockheed should have won and built the jsf.

reply

Good God. Definitely the most hideous thing Boeing ever conceived.

reply

This was compared to the A-10 as being ugly. There is nothing about the A-10 that is ugly when one is flying a hundred feet over head and kicking ass. It was doing what the engineer designed it to do! Don't like it, change the design requirements.

reply

Hind sight,the f22 is plagued with very costly problems,and i think the vtol version will be too. I thought the boeing design was better,and just needed a few adjustments.

reply

Actually if you read the history of the Yak-141, Lockheed was on of the major supporters of the Yak-141 project. After Russia canceled it Lockheed used a lot of the Russian engineers in the F-35. One of the reason Boeing had problems was that on of the branches of military change requirements mid-build which gave them problems and the reason they had to do a redesign.

reply

The Russians have nothing good to say about the design of Americans a /c. They have copied so many of our planes it remains most difficult to tell them apart. Is that a B757
or the Russian prototype.

reply

It's a fucking rip-off of the Yak 141!

reply

this plane is awesome

reply

This plane actually met most of it's performance targets durring flight testing but the air force does not fly ugly aircraft with the exception of the A-10. The Air force guys fondly named the x-32 the Monica after the famous Clinton mistress.

reply

This plane actually met most of it's performance targets durring flight testing but the air force does not fly ugly aircraft with the exception of the A-10. The Air force guys fondly named the x-32 the Monica after the famous Clinton mistress.

reply

fucking F35 just pirating yak 141 design, 1t`s made usaf looks forgery?

reply

hmm any way the direct lift was the great idea, do you think f35 just cupied russian`s yak 141, but x32 didn`t its realy brand new or my be iproved from harrier?

reply

What no one is mentioning here is that Boeing's original X-32 design was a compact tailless delta wing plane, and this is what was built and flown (as seen in the first photo above). Halfway through the flyoff evaluation with Lockheed's X-35, Boeing suddenly announced that any production version of the X-32 would be extensively redesigned to have a more conventional wing and tail, like the X-35. The second photo above shows Boeing's mockup of the redesigned form, which was never actually built as a flyable airframe. I have never seen Boeing's rationale for this rather major change, but obviously Boeing had to feel that its original design was distinctly inferior to Lockheed's in some way, and was attempting to correct this with a drastic change. Perhaps USAF also felt the same way, and maybe that is one factor in the final selection of the Lockheed design: Lockheed "got it right" the first time, while Boeing literally had to go back to the drawing board.

reply

One of the ugliest airplanes ever designed - no matter how well it performed!

reply

Yip, F35 look much better

reply

What is not well known is why the Air Force preferred the XF-35 over the Boeing design. VTOL was not a requirement for the Air Force, but the Lockheed design used a robust power takeoff shaft to drive the vertical lift fan, unlike the Boeing design that achieved vertical thrust without a takeoff shaft. The Air Force is investigating a tactical laser weapon, and the power takeoff could be used to drive an electric generator to power the laser. Now you know the rest of the story.

reply