Thread 64060997

Our obsession with aesthetics will be our downfall.

>>64060997 (OP)
Why don't we ever retain the option to use the runner up?
I bet Northrop would have jumped out of their seats if we asked them to make F-23s for us.

>>64060997 (OP)
it really wasn't

>boeing
dodged that bullet (inb4 muh boingo defense is diff)

>>64060997 (OP)
:D

>>64060997 (OP)
>X-32 was better

The funniest part about X-32 is that if the US went for it, we'd have ~10 other projects across the world who'd attempt to ape this retarded look kek.

>>64061391
Imagine the Chinese J-32, we should have pretended to build it with flawed stealth coatings and gave them all of the info so they could have this retarded looking whale of a fighter jet.

>>64060997 (OP)
>our

>>64060997 (OP)
In what way?

>wasn't modular
>vtol sucked, svtol sucked worse
>couldn't transition between hover and supersonic without shitting the bed

uhm

>SEAmonkey or russian screencap timezone
>our

>>64060997 (OP)
Cool looking planes are better for scaring thirdies who might start shit

>>64060997 (OP)
It was bound to fail. Its manual of arms diverged from the M16's.

>>64061449
>implying anything would be scarier than a smiling jet

>>64060997 (OP)
They couldnt mass produce the wing section

>>64061391
>we'd have ~10 other projects across the world who'd attempt to ape this retarded look kek.
Who said no one is?

aesthetics is not a function of firepower

The effectiveness of an aircraft scales directly with how beautiful it is. The P-51 and Spitfire performed well because they are beautiful.

>>64060997 (OP)
>random headline
>no link
>no information
>post is just empty reddit speak

>>64060997 (OP)
It looked like a fat retard though.

>>64062236
>well poisoning spam

>>64062288
I kinda miss the russia stronk spam, at least then you were more blatantly retarded.

>>64060997 (OP)
>Just take the good technology, release it to the public first, build it and then give it to your 'allies' who will hem and haw and bitch about anything you do
>Instead of building the cheap, shitty alternative for your allies and keeping all the best tech for yourself so that when they bitch and hem and haw you can tell them to fuck off

Working as intended. This is a case of OP not understanding how hard America actually dunks on the rest of the world.

>>64060997 (OP)
Convince me that a belly air intake isn't worse at high AOA than side intakes

>>64060997 (OP)
It wasn't better but I guess people love to claim the YF-23 was better than the YF-22 so whatever, let people live in their delusions.

>>64064308
We kept the Constellation-class so tightly to our chest that it won't ever be built. Winning!

>>64060997 (OP)
It's not nothing to do with aesthetics and everything to do with alternating suppliers so that one company doesn't hold a monopoly on fighter design.

>>64060997 (OP)
Its smile still lives on in our heart.

>>64060997 (OP)
>While unconventional in appearance, the X-32 was designed for simplicity, affordability, and manufacturing efficiency

All qualities Boeing is known for failing to achieve.

If you're wondering about the author's cred and bias

>Andrew Latham is a non-resident fellow at Defense Priorities and a professor of international relations and political theory at Macalester College in Saint Paul, MN.

Defense Priorities is one of the Libertarian Axis of Evil paper mills. Rand Paul, Koch, CATO - the usual suspects. They hate all government spending, and always bitch about whatever the Pentagon is buying, and say they should buy something else or nothing.

>>64065847
>F-32 with a fan
wut

>>64065847
>fuck the air duct

>>64060997 (OP)
hehehe :)

>>64061391
makes me think we built the railgun as bait to get other countries to try and build them too

>>64061430
The world would be a happier place if the airforce adopted this goofy ass plane.

>>64060997 (OP)
>stealth is the only consideration
if that was the case they wouldnt have progressed passed the F22

>>64060997 (OP)
>Boeing
Lol.

>>64067972
McDonnell Douglas' toxins had not yet fully permeated Boeing at the time.

>>64067929
>if that was the case they wouldnt have progressed passed the F23
FTFY

>>64067439
>All qualities Boeing is known for failing to achieve.
Part of what you are buying is the reputation of the manufacturer. Boeing couldn't even manage the fly-off properly to win the contract.

>>64060997 (OP)
you fell for the click bait you retard, the x-32 is aids.

>Don't worry. Give us the contract and we can fix it!

No -- you can't.

>>64069600
>his smile and optimism: gone

>>64067661
it's the FS-20 from nuclear option, a lightweight stealthy strike fighter that's a sort of YF-32 and F-35 hybrid

>>64060997 (OP)
Every unbuilt design is better because it would have worked exactly as expected, require no compromises, and have zero flaws whatsoever. There would have also been no delays or cost overruns, no picnic would ever be ruined by rain and the home team would win every game.

>Had the X-32 been selected, its simpler production and maintenance requirements might have fostered a more agile, exportable, and strategically autonomous ecosystem.

Sure.

>>64060997 (OP)
https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/forget-the-f-35-boeings-x-32-stealth-fighter-was-better/

>>64069610
>The things i saw, man...

>>64069678
It would absolutely be simpler to produce and maintain.
...and still crash regularly because of rushed software update, undocumented change in process and components bought from the lowest bidder.