It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Joint Strike Fighter: X-32 or X-35

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Key design goals of the JSF system include:

Survivability: radio frequency/infrared signature reduction and on-board countermeasures to survive in the future battlefield--leveraging off F-22 air superiority mission support

Lethality: integration of on- and off-board sensors to enhance delivery of current and future precision weapons

Supportability: reduced logistics footprint and increased sortie generation rate to provide more combat power earlier in theater

Affordability: focus on reducing cost of developing, procuring and owning JSF to provide adequate force structure

FAS: Joint Strike Fighter

X-35 vs X-32

Image and Video:
X-35B Vertical Landing from Wingborne Flight
X-35

X-35 Yahoo! Images

or

X-32 Vertical Landing

X-32 Yahoo! Images

Other Information:
Global Security: Joint Strike Fighter
Federation of American Scientists
Joint Strike Fighter
Air Force Technology

Out of the information I have given and whatever else you have, which out of the two planes would you pick?

Why? It's strong and weak points.
Will either be able to honestly meet all four of the 'key points' that have been asked of the designers?
What else would you expect of it?
What roles would you want to see it in?
Will it fill the roles of the planes they're replacing? Is it a worthwhile trade?
Anything else you can think of, good or bad for each of the planes.




posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I cant stand the way the boeing's version of the JSF looks. I think the pentagon made the right choice. I seen the show where both companies went at each other for the contract. The F-32 had problems with mid-air refeuling. The verticle takeoff and landing on the F-35 was also better. Boeing kept changing the way their plane looked while lockheed Martin didnt change a thing.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I actually liked the look of the X-32 better - that big sharkmouth intake is kind of intimidating looking - but the X-35 was much closer to a functional production aircraft than the X-32.

The X-35, interestingly, owes a lot to the Russian Yak-141, which never got past the prototype stage. Lockheed apparently worked pretty closely with Yakovlev in the early stages of the program.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 08:58 PM
link   
The X-32 was a better plane in engg. terms..more efficient...
DEFINITELY had a much simpler VTOL and hover mechanism..but the problem was that their delta design was being modified to a more "F-22 like" wing design for even more VTOL stability and that was not prototyped as yet..
If they'd started off with that design from the very beginnig they'd have won hands down..they had a BIG lead on lockheed..




IMO both planes are underachievements..
The X-35 VTOL system mis bound to cause maintenance problems in the future...Its just too complex for a "use everyday" fighter..

[edit on 12-3-2005 by Daedalus3]



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 01:31 AM
link   
I got to disagree about the F 32 looking better then the F 35. I cant stand the way it looks. Its different but its just not for me. I like the F 35 looks way better.



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 02:57 AM
link   
Its nicknamed the X-32 Pregnant Shark. Looks like it now?



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 03:08 AM
link   
I also would of chose the X-35, but not just for looks.

I think it will do a great job, and will be easier to maintain then the Harrier.
The nozzle pointing down and the lift fan behind the cockpit was a great idea, with the fan blowing cool air it prohibits the engines from sucking in hot exhuast, which makes it lose stability and is unsafe.

when doing testing and "showing off" for the AF Lockheed did better, they took off in a short distance and went supersonic and landed vertically. While boing needed to take some parts off their jet for it to go supersonic.

Its years away from production so its hard to say if it will replace everything it was meant to, or if there will be a few hundred made, or several thousand.

I think it will serve well.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join