Battle of the X-Planes (the JSF project)

NOVA ^ | Feb 4, 2003

[John H K]

I just watched it myself.

Is it just me or is it blatantly obvious that the Boeing project head knew 100% before the decision was announced that Boeing had lost? Seemed obvious from his facial expression and body language (and they got the decision in the CEO's office, no workers around, in contrast to LockMart.)

Was there a leak, or did he pretty much know by how things had gone the previous few weeks? I don't rememeber much around the time period of the decision.

[Poohbah]

Tell that to the A-4 and A-7 drivers...they don't trust airplanes with more than one throttle lever, twice as many things to get fodded.

[ZinGirl]

the Boeing craft was butt-ugly.

LOL....and it took the JSF team a few years to figure out how to come up with the right wording to let Boeing down easy without saying, "but it's so ugly....there is NO WAY we want to look at that for 40 years".

[go star go]

No. The people that make these decisions make them based on set parameters. Boeing and LM knew who fit within those parameters. DOD contractors always know when they will win and when they will lose.

[Petronski]

I laugh at the bit above where it is stated that the Boeing nose configuration was nicknamed 'the Monica.'

I also thought the Boeing team was almost 'going through the motions' and knew they needed more time to completely redesign (in a direction of the Lockheed configuration, though they didn't know at the time).

I personally was talking to my television set when Boeing took their craft to sea-level for VTOL testing. I have a liberal arts education, and even I know that this was a serious cop-out.

[usmcobra]

The X-32 is no uglier then an A-6 Intruder or say a P-47.

[Petronski]

BTW, the 'Pelican' tail configuration is very cool. I wonder if we will ever see it.

[Magnum44]

Actually I know a lot of Crusader pilots who made the transition to dual engine. And every one I know would agree with the dual engine mentality. You fod an engine, you still have one to get you home. You take IADS fire, you PS (probability of survival) goes up considerably. On the other hand if you were going to FOD two engines, you certainly would have FODed one. I'll take two engines anyday. The only reason to have less is to show off your balls. Remember 'old pilots' vs 'Bold pilots?'

[spetznaz]

Now see Spetz... You know I love you

I know ...LOL. By the way that sounds like what a dad would say before he spanked the daylights out of his naughty kid (LOL)

You just used a Nova story on America's JSF to drop in some Russian desgns that are basically "crap". The JSF is more advanced than even the F-15 which I am sure you'd agree would make quick work of the two Russian examples you listed.

If you read my comments you will notice i clearly said both the Yak designs were crappy ...and not even nearly as compatible. And i was comparing them to the harrier ....meaning against the F-15 or JSF they are even less than crap. Comeon VaB, give a dude a break

It was a laugher and everyone knew it. I know you know it...I'll assume you listed it as a cheesy example of incompetence when designing effective Vertical Takeoff and Landing aircraft.~

Yes, that is what i meant. Which is why i said it was not nearly as good as the Harrier.

Then you said: "Yak-141 Freestyle (Now this was an aircraft that was formidable..." Let me jump in here. No it wasnt! LOL...A harrier would destroy this plane. The Harrier can perform a million and one different functions at low speed...this russian crap cant. I appreciate their having a similar design as far using the rear nozzle as a lift but it was basically a huge gas guzzling VSTOL that could hit Mach. I have no doubt that it's agility was severely limited due to its size and feul requirements.

You were right that i said the following words: ""Yak-141 Freestyle (Now this was an aircraft that was formidable..... I did say them. But maybe you missed what i said after that. I said: However this aircraft, although it has the distinction of being the first supersonic VTOL jet, does not even come close to matching the JSF, meaning it is already obsolete ....unless it is facing Harriers. And even that is questionable because based on UK Falklands results British pilots were able to use the subsonic harriers to great effect .....and a harrier in the hands of a competent ...read UK or US ....pilot is still an extremely deadly aircraft Basically the only thing i saw of worth on that craft was its disticntion of being the first VTOL to go faster than sound. I actually believe i said it was already obsolete, had nothing to hold up to the JSF, and even against Harriers flown by UK or US would not hold up. I did not push it

Basically i was not trying to push any aircract (even the pictures of the F-22 and YF-23 were just there because i had mentioned them on the previous post). Everything tied in to what i was discussing, and if you read what i said there was nothing there that should make you think i was advocating Russian designs.

Unless my calling them 'obsolete' and 'not nearly as good' is somewhat to be taken as a push-tactic on my part. Gosh, if what you said about me was halftrue i think Sukhoi and Mikoyan would be paying me to sell there stuff! LOL

Come-on VaB ...you know this time i was not pushing.

[ZinGirl]

watch it.....the A-6 had a funky fuel probe, perhaps.....but it didn't look at a greyhound bus. (you struck a nerve....my brother flew an A-6 during the Gulf War)

[Poohbah]

OK, and there are some Phantom/Tomcat drivers who will cheerfully point out that two engines means TWO sets of instrument gauges to monitor, and that means the A-4/A-7 drivers will have to take off their flight boots to make sure they can count high enough :^P

[ZinGirl]

at = like

as in "that x-32 looked a LOT like a flying greyhound bus....and I sure as heck don't want to go supersonic in a greyhound"

[ZinGirl]

well, go ahead a built a prototype, Petronski....I'll give it the once over and have my brother fly it.....what do you think?

lol...yes...I was hoping to see something different, too.

[Magnum44]

Like walking and chewing gum at the same time. I knew you couldn't restrain that sense of humor of yours. {:^D

[Paradox]

It was a great NOVA program, I Watched it even though I knew the outcome, it was exciting. Very informative as well.

[JimVT]

Fascinating program.

Interesting that Public TV Nova got the nod to do it.

Lot's of hints in the program that it was going to be literally a 'battle to the death' but I doubt it...especially with Boeing's leg up on unmanned a/c.

BTW....you sound like a very sharp young man from your bio.

Try not to trip on your ego as you climb the ladder of life.

Best regards from JimVT

[gaucho]

Not all of Boeing designs are ugly. The Bird of Prey is one such plane (actual photos of demonstrator in flight):



http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/q4/nr_021018m.html

[Petronski]

I'll give it the once over and have my brother fly it.....what do you think?

Hmmm. With Excel and Paint Shop Pro, hell, I can give it a whirl.

;o)

[Petronski]

That thing is wild! Is that really a flying prototype? Insane!

It would sure scare the poop out of some Iraqi grunt in a MiG!

[Optimist]

You REALLY picked a rather innocuous photo of the X-32. THIS image, however, lives up to the butt-ugly references on this thread. IMO it appears to be wearing a goofy grin(but "Monica" is also fitting).

Looks like the child of "thomas the tank engine" and a seaplane.