What could have been

>it's performance and capabilities were superior to it's Lockheed competition
this is completely false

The reason Lockheed wins so many high profile contracts is purely due to their lobbying and propaganda machine, not technical ability.

Doesn't that fuckhuge intake compromise stealth capabilities?

How so?

I don't know a lot about stealth, it just looks odd to me.

With stealth it’s all about angles and materials. Poorly designed intakes would compromise stealth, not well designed ones. Otherwise the f-22 wouldn’t have two giant ones on either side of the fuselage.

Performance points were also changed late in development.

So say we all.

>it's performance and capabilities were superior to it's Lockheed competition
This is blatantly false

literal fart sniffing failure of a plane

Attached: lolplane.gif (1200x787, 385K)

>fudds don't know to say "Incorrect"

>Why do the Marines need VSTOL anyway?Can't we all simply agree that VSTOL
how the fuck are you going to take off of a america class without VSTOL?

america classes are fucking stupid as well

Shut the fuck up retard.

I've always heard that huge air intakes are bad for stealth.

I don't get it, were they unable to push back that front inlet, like the f16?
Because that's the biggest thing that pops out when you look at it.

its clear that people in decision making positions shouldnt be there
good thing there are no real technocracies in the world or we'd surely lose

It seems OP has been BTFO'D in Russian drone thread. Dropping a sudden X32 thread is desperate tactic.

i was in the industry during the testing phases lockheed won because the boeing design concerned the high brass because of in-air-refueling

the boeing design's intake could suck in the chute or worse break the chute sending jet fuel into the intake

the more you know motherfuckers....

Attached: 1530840365366.jpg (1024x1024, 297K)

Which the X35 still met, so thats pretty irrelevant

Yeah thats the only reason right, not that the X32 was incomplete, miles behind the X35, would require significant redesign to even function and be produced, and relied on shitty radar blockers

lol seething mouthbreather

Yes, completely. Turbine rotors glow like christmas trees on radar and the X-32's front intake is a straight shot right onto the engine.

Its fitted with "radar blockers", essentially a screen of RAM-painted material, but its nowhere near 100% effective or as good as making your intake bend like well designed 5th gens do

Attached: x_32.jpg (777x513, 151K)

Looks like an f86 in a bodykit

So true, I also prefered the design of the JSF's alternativ, there was something aesthetically pleasing....... Also the I found the YF-23 looking a lot more better then the F-22.

Attached: A-7E_Corsair_II_Flightdeck.jpg (3000x1980, 1.39M)

>ywn have modernized beauty akin to the F-86

Attached: northamerican-f86-sabre_33.jpg (800x550, 55K)

I'd say looks more like the A-7 or F-8!!

Attached: IMG_1064.png (1080x1481, 1.22M)

They also literally changed the whole design 2/3 of the way through and never got STVL perfected

boeing is a big fat mistake

>that pic

Jesus Christ, that Corsair looks so fucking sexy I want it inside me.

Attached: The face of FUN.jpg (429x532, 30K)

Nice panel gaps, fags

Attached: X-32 No more smiles.png (275x234, 94K)

Actually there was a range of problems:

Boeing had a range of other military contracts already, so it was already likely to be the underdog in the decision making process.

Boeing wanted to use the new fibreglass manufacturing techniques they were using to make airliner tails to do the wings and tail of the X-23, but hit a problem the soviets found out when they tried making wing spars out on single long peices of steel; If the single, big, peice of the plane cracks or has a failing, the entire thing has to be replaced.
Unfortunately they found this out when the entire single peice fibreglass top and set of wings of the plane cracked during the manufacturing process just before the contest.

They hastily made a set of wings, a new tail and control surfaces and a top of the plane, but fitting all these to the design interfered with the stealthy covers on the swivel nozzles and the balance of the plane relative to the nozzles so the machine now couldn't do VTOL without the entire top of the plane being replaced, and that in turn meant it couldn't transition from VTOL to hoizontal flight.

The mouth being so big and not being S-ducted was a design feature neccesitated by the VTOL capabilities – if you look at the Harrier, the intakes flare outwards towards the front of the plane because VTOL operations need so much air supply. The lockheed solution of sticking a small Mig-15 behind the cockpit and having an intake and exhaust port open up is their solution to that problem, and notably it makes the F-35 completely unstealthy to operate like that. F-35B's VTOL capabilities are basically a special trick it only does during landing and take offs (contrast with how a harrier could use it's VTOL capabilities to augment dogfighting, something the original X-23 would have been capable of as well).

All this added together meant Lockheed's shitty Yak-141 ripoff won... but at what cost?

That's a Corsair II, not a Crusader

So the F-35 is bad because they decided to go for a more stealth focused aproach to vtol in the era of bvr combat instead of trying to be an akward apache, without rotating nose gun nor unguided rockets and maybe 2 or 4 hellfires at most.
Gotcha, I guess you are also angry that the F-35 pos is replacing the a-10

The X-32 was slower, with worse payload, worse range, worse practical maneuverability, worse stealth, higher program risk, worse VSTOL performance and to top it all off the prototype didn't even meet the absolute bare-bones program requirements when tested.

Just like with the ATF program, Lockheed had shown that they could make a demonstrator that actually demonstrated the program requirements, whereas their competition struggled.

indeed

Attached: imagesvc.timeincapp.com.jpg (1920x1080, 88K)

Also it wasn't able to aerially refuel as it was, so they would have had to change it anyway.

Attached: 1453590037868.jpg (1953x1058, 293K)

He did say Corsair you insane idiot.

It does look sexier, especially the engines . Why do the wings look like that though? Something to do with stealth?

Slimmer cross section so it doesn't reflect radar waves straight back at whoever is searching.

Instead of the Lockheed F-35 “Lightning II” we could have had the Boeing F-35 “Retardate Guppy”

For Japanese “helicopter destroyers” and whatever the Brits call their abomination.

Because with the F-35B the USN basically gains 9 light carriers. Yeah they had the Harrier, but it's not exactly up to snuff (and before the Brits start screaming, yeah I know they dunked on A-4s and Mirages, that was forty years ago and against shitty pilots).

Argentine pilots were pretty good actually.
Problem was that the Bongs had AIM-9L which was disruptive technology, all the Argie planes were operating at absolute max range, mostly loaded up with bombs and the British pilots had much better situational awareness thanks to better aircraft radar and fleet radars.

>VSTOL in a fighter is a ridiculous idea
why? air-to-air isn't dog fighting anymore.

>Business practises matter
Yeah Im sure that a couple 100 million in bribes to personelle at the Pentagon had nothing to do with it right?

>No proofs

Meanwhile the current secretary of defense is a former Boeing exec who constantly talks bullshit about the F-35 and is currently trying to push through a pointless F-15 buy for the USAF.

Tbf, the Air Force Chief of Staff says he's fine with more F-15s as long as the F-35 buy doesn't get lowered as a result.
>“We’ve got to refresh the F-15C fleet because I can’t afford to not have that capacity to do the job and the missions.” Goldfein explained. “That’s what this is all about. If we’re refreshing the F-15C fleet, as we’re building up the F-35 fleet, this is not about any kind of a trade.”

>He added that Air Force needs to buy 72 fighters a year to get to the amount they need in the future — and to drive average aircraft age down from 28 years to 15 years. And while Goldfein might want all 72 to be fifth generation F-35s, budgetary concerns likely won’t let that happen.

>“If we had the money, those would be 72 F-35s. But we’ve gotta look at this from a cost/business case.” he explained. “An F-15 will never be an F-35. Never. But I need capacity.”

yeah, let's cuck the airforces 2000+ airframes and the Navy's 300+ airframes for the sake up a few dozen planes for the bongs and crayon eaters

Was this another case of the YF23 being worse than the 22 or did it get shafted?

And that intake was poorly designed.

More accurately, the VTOL design put the engine very far forward, which didn't leave enough room in front to design a proper s-duct.

So that intake exposes the engine fan, which is very bad for stealth.

The Lockheed VTOL design allowed room for a properly designed intake.

They couldn't push back the inlet because of the VTOL requirement. Their VTOL design was to use the engine exhaust for primary thrust, which meant putting the engine very far forward so the vertical thrust would be near the center of gravity.

With the engine that far forward, there isn't enough room at the front of the plane to do the intake properly.

But at the cost of more moving parts, more small parts, more parts that suffer great heat and mechanical stress, and additional weight taking up room that fuel could have gone into.

You can basically have a stealth aircraft, or a VTOL aircraft suitable for smol carriers, but not both.

The F-35B is both of those things user

What might have been is fairly aesthetically pleasing. Of course, we'd be saying the same about a prospective F-35 had Boeing won the JSF contract.

Attached: F-32.jpg (2000x1125, 81K)

the Marines are ordering more Bs (340) than the Navy is Cs (260)
plus the British (138) the Japanese (42), and the Italians (30) are all getting Bs

>that Corsair looks so fucking sexy
I like the way most of them look now

Attached: A-7 cut up and dick shoved in mouth.jpg (640x439, 83K)

Attached: 1533964760724.gif (432x610, 3.04M)

The C is also less mature than the B, so blaming the B for the C's problems seems odd.

Nope. The 23 had a poison pill at the 12 o'clock low, right where emplacements would be scanning. Claims of being able to fix =/ being able to fix. The 22 was the more mature and far less risky design. History shows it was the clearly the right choice as it, to this day, reigns Supreme against all competitors, introduced or not. The risk on the 23 was, in hindsight, not needed. The yf-22 was a good call, the right choice.

youtube.com/watch?v=Y_WPLeDmU6o

maybe from the top, but from every other angle that horrible intake ruins it

Attached: X32.jpg (1465x1308, 820K)

imgur.com/gallery/ISlfNCg

Attached: zpWAMIf.png (1920x1080, 627K)

You bunch of contrarian fags would have been crying about how it's terrible and overpriced and jerking off to the F-35 proto instead.

>shitty Yak-141 ripoff won
The technology was not originated by Yak it was convair