Key Points – Boeing’s X-32 prototype, a contender in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) competition, ultimately lost to Lockheed’s X-35 (which became the F-35) for several key reasons.
-A primary factor was a mid-competition change in Navy requirements for maneuverability and payload, which Boeing’s initial delta-wing design could not meet.
-This forced Boeing to propose a completely different, conventional-tailed aircraft for the production version, meaning what they were flying in demonstrations was not what they intended to build.
-This, combined with the perception that the X-35 performed better in tests and “looked like a baby F-22,” sealed the X-32’s fate.
X-32: The Story of Boeing’s Fighter That Lost to the F-35
When the competition took place, we all knew that whoever won the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program would be a big player in United States defense export markets for decades.
As a long documentary on the program states up front, there will never, ever be a competition like this in the history of modern combat aviation.
This “Battle of the X-Planes” would mean much more than just a decision as to which US defense company would supply the next-generation fighter to three service branches and in three different variants.
The spoils to the victors would include replacing all previous-generation fighters like the F-4, F-16, F/A-18, and others currently flown by European and Asian countries.
The Boeing X-32 aircraft designs that lost to the Lockheed F-35 were interesting innovations in their day. They also demonstrated the design lineage and experience that Boeing Company had for decades with both carrier-capable and VSTOL aircraft designs.
It also was the basis for the creation of on-board subsystems that are still in use today. The “JSF Array” radar developed for the X-32 became the basis for the Raytheon AN/APG-79 radar that flies on board the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler EW aircraft.
Even though Boeing lost the competition, the company and its partners derived positive benefits from the technologies developed for the program.
Not Made For The USAF
There were plenty of naysayers regarding Boeing’s bid for the JSF contract. One common comment was that there were significant implications in that the United States Armed Forces would be the primary buyer.
More F-35A models for the US armed forces were to be manufactured than the other two variants – two and half times the total for the F-35B and F-35C models.
The F-35 will be a USAF aircraft first and foremost, said one long-time combat aviation correspondent I spoke with at Le Bourget one year. “You do not really think they—and their likely having the majority vote in the competition winner—will put their fate into the hands of Boeing, do you?”
Another comment, more superficial but not without merit, was that the Lockheed F-35 design “looked too much like a baby F-22 for the USAF to resist.
It creates an image—no matter how erroneous—that this single-engine and F-22-looking design will be cheaper and easier to operate jointly with its bigger ‘cousin’ the F-22 than the Boeing aircraft.”
The similarity in appearance and configuration is what had LM in 2018 proposing what was billed as an F-22/F-35 hybrid fighter to the USAF—an F-22 “old bottle” but with the “new wine” being the F-35-era on-board systems and open-architecture avionics suite.
The Redesign
The two Boeing X-32 prototype aircraft were originally constructed with a delta wing design. However, eight months into fabricating of the two concept demonstrator aircraft, the JSF’s maneuverability and payload requirements were modified at the request of the Navy. The Boeing delta wing design was unable to meet the new targets.
Boeing engineers modified the X-32 design by adding a conventional canted twin tail that reduced weight and improved agility in performance, but the demonstrator aircraft could not be altered.
Ultimately, Boeing proposed a major aircraft redesign with a new wing concept. This completely different version of the X-32 would instead be the production version if they won the competition.
Boeing officials who briefed the design at major international air shows made a point of showing the new wing configuration and constantly emphasized that the outer mold lines would not be changing. This is normally a sign that changing to the new planform would mean a significant expense to the effort.
This, nevertheless, did not help the X-32 concept demonstrators during flight trials. During this process, one of the Boeing X-32 test pilots recalls he began feeling that the JSF program office would be “hard-pressed to lean towards the Boeing design” for several reasons.
“Number one, because what they demonstrated was not their proposed final design. Lockheed’s was,” he explained. “And the fact that the Lockheed design had performed better than the Boeing design.”
About the Author: Reuben F. Johnson
Reuben F. Johnson is a survivor of the February 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and is now an Expert on Foreign Military Affairs with the Fundacja im. Kazimierza Pułaskiego in Warsaw. He has been a consultant to the Pentagon, several NATO governments and the Australian government in the fields of defense technology and weapon systems design. Over the past 30 years he has resided in and reported from Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Brazil, the People’s Republic of China and Australia.
Iran War
30,000 Pound Bunker-Buster Bombs Might Not Be Able to Destroy Fordow
Pingback: The US Navy's New F/A-XX 6th Generation Fighter Is On 'Hold' - National Security Journal