Key Points and Summary – This analysis explores the common reasons why two of America’s most famous prototype aircraft, the YF-23 and the X-32, ultimately lost their respective fighter competitions.
-While the YF-23 was faster and arguably stealthier than its rival, it lost to what became the F-22 due to being less maneuverable and perceived as a riskier, more unconventional design.
-The X-32 lost to the future F-35 because its compromised “one-size-fits-all” design had key technical flaws, particularly its vertical landing system.
-Both cases demonstrate that winning a major contract requires more than just raw performance.
YF-23 and X-32: Lost to the History Books and Museums
The Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23—the Advanced Tactical Fighter, or ATF, which was a direct competitor to the F-22 Raptor—and the Boeing X-32—Joint Strike Fighter, or JSF, which competed unsuccessfully against the F-35—were both, for their era, very advanced prototype aircraft that ultimately lost major aerospace competitions.
The prototype airframes belong to different eras and compete in different programs, but some commonalities explain why both aircraft ultimately lost out.
YF-23 Black Widow II Explained
The YF-23 was a highly stealthy air superiority fighter design that, according to certain metrics, outperformed Lockheed’s YF-22, the precursor prototype to the F-22 Raptor. Two key metrics of the YF-23, specifically its stealth and speed, were better. Thanks to the YF-23’s diamond-shaped planform as well as its engine arrangement, which saw the dual engines buried deeply within the YF-23’s airframe, the prototype jet had a very small radar cross-section, less parasitic drag, and, consequently, more efficient super cruise ability.
Additionally, the jet’s steeply canted V-tail arrangement and its widely spaced engines served to radically reduce the jet’s radar signature, providing an enormous boost to its survivability in contested and highly contested aerial environments.
Why it Lost
Despite these innovations, however, the YF-23 ultimately lost the Advanced Tactical Fighter program to the YF-22. There were multiple important factors for this loss, but a couple are particularly notable.
Compared to the YF-23, the YF-22 Raptor prototype was highly maneuverable and displayed an incredible amount of agility during its flight testing. Part of this high maneuverability was attributed to the jet’s thrust vectoring nozzles, which essentially allowed the jet engines’ exhaust to be directed in various directions, enabling the change of direction. For a United States Air Force leadership body that still placed a premium on the ability to dogfight and best an enemy in close-in distances, this was golden.
Another factor that led to the YF-23’s demise was the perception of risk associated with the prototype jet. That prototype’s design was particularly unconventional, despite its high performance, and therefore seen as potentially the riskier of the two choices. Maintenance, too, was seen as being more challenging as a consequence.
There were political and industrial factors that damaged the YF-23’s standing in the Advanced Tactical Fighter competition. Lockheed, the firm behind the YF-22 and ultimately the Raptor design, was perceived at the time as a safer option. Lockheed had a long and proven track record of successful fighter builds, including projects such as the F-16 and the F-117 Nighthawk.
Northrop Grumman, on the other hand, was still dealing with the fallout from the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber project and significant cost overruns associated with that project.
X-32
The X-32, a design from Boeing, competed against the X-35, built by Lockheed, for the Joint Strike Fighter contract, which holds a record today as the most expensive defense project in history. Boeing’s X-32, despite its bold innovations, had several flaws, and its loss is less controversial than that of the YF-23.
Boing attempted to make all three services—the United States Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps—that would fly the Joint Strike Fighter happy by incorporating all three branches’ design requirements onto one platform. The X-35, in contrast, proposed the concept of three distinct yet similar aircraft for each branch.
As a result, Boeing’s X-32 was a one-size-fits-all design that made significant compromises in various areas.
Boeing X-32 Fighter from USAF National Security Journal Original Photo. Taken July 20, 2025.
Boing’s fan approach for vertical takeoff/landing, or STOVL, was functional, but less elegant than Lockheed’s shaft-driven lift fan, which was ultimately more practical than the X-32’s option. The X-32’s odd-looking design, particularly from the forward aspect, which saw a rather large chin intake and wide wing, caused the US Navy to doubt the jet’s suitability for operations on aircraft carriers. This ungainly chin intake may have also contributed to prejudices against the aircraft. Commentators at the time frequently bemoaned the prototype’s appearance.
Ultimately, however, the X-32’s flight testing was troubled, which only served to reinforce skepticism about the aircraft.
The Fate of the X-32 and YF-23: We Saw Both 100 Feet Apart in the U.S. Air Force Museum
Ultimately, both the YF-23 and the X-32 demonstrated that successfully running and then winning a major fighter competition involves more than just sheer performance.
Catering to the service’s needs, reducing risk wherever possible, and convincing both Congress and the United States military that the platform can be delivered on time, on budget, and at scale are vital.
And in a weird twist of fate, you can see both the Boeing X-32 and Northrop YF-23 at the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio, displayed right across from one another. In fact, the pictures and video in this article come from a visit last month to see both fighters made by the National Security Journal.
YF-23 Black Widow II from National Security Journal Photo Shoot.
About the Author: Caleb Larson
Caleb Larson is an American multiformat journalist based in Berlin, Germany. His work covers the intersection of conflict and society, focusing on American foreign policy and European security. He has reported from Germany, Russia, and the United States. Most recently, he covered the war in Ukraine, reporting extensively on the war’s shifting battle lines from Donbas and writing on the war’s civilian and humanitarian toll. Previously, he worked as a Defense Reporter for POLITICO Europe. You can follow his latest work on X.
Military Affairs
China’s Stealth Air Force Has 1 Mission
