Boeing X-32: The ‘Ugly Duckling’ Stealth Fighter That Was Too Good To Be True

Summary and Key Points: After defeating Boeing’s X-32 in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) competition in the 1990s, the F-35 Lightning II emerged as an important tool for the United States Armed Forces and its allies.

-The JSF sought to eliminate the need for multiple specialist aircraft by providing the United States and its allies with multirole fighters, thereby streamlining air power.

-Boeing’s X-32, noted for its cost-efficient design and unique appearance, ultimately lost due to less favorable performance during flight tests.

-Only two X-32 prototypes were built, now displayed at the National Museum of the United States Air Force and the Patuxent River Naval Air Museum.

Boeing X-32: The Unattractive Contender That Lost to the F-35

TheF-35 Lightning II remains a constant centerpiece of the armed forces of both the United States and its allies. However, the F-35 had to defeat the Boeing X-32 in a head-to-head battle before it could go into production and be widely used.

The United States led a major contract competition in the 1990s to develop the Joint Strike Fighter, or JSF. Unlike the fighter contracts that had been awarded nonstop for decades, the JSF was unique. It marked a significant change in how the US Air Force was organized.

X-32: One Jet to Rule Them All

The A-10, for example, was designed for close air support. It was close air support, nothing more, no air superiority, no interception, no precision bombing. Of course, the A-10 has proven itself to be an excellent close air support aircraft. There are many such cases. The F-15 was designed as a pure air dominance fighter, “without a pound of air to ground.” Looking like a rocket, the F-104 was designed to intercept enemy fighter jets. The A-6 is designed to deliver bombs.

Although specialized airframes performed extremely well, this style was expensive. It was difficult. The logistics were really difficult. The United States military wanted a more streamlined, straightforward system that would enable greater effectiveness Force configuration. The result of such a goal is JSF. The objective of the challenge was to identify the jet that could best perform all tasks. A single jet that can perform multiple functions will simplify the procurement, training and maintenance process.

The JSF was designed not only to simplify the structure of the US military, but also to simplify the force structure of all of the United States’ allies. The UK, Italy, Canada, Netherlands, Australia, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Japan and Singapore will all benefit from the final product of JSF. Since everyone uses the same JSF, network connections will increase and collaborators will be able to synchronize.

Ugly Duckling

JSF had four submissions. Two were selected to test the prototype. There will be only one winner of the highly prized JSF contract. Naturally, the first airframe was the prototype Lockheed X-35, the ancestor of the F-35 (see our original photographs below). The second airframe was the Boeing X-32, a loss of the JSF that has since faded into oblivion and is known primarily for its unattractive looks.

A distinguishing feature of the X-32’s design was its unique engine inlet, which was placed directly under the nose of the aircraft. The engine inlet was sharp, spacey and oddly curved. The fuselage was not very attractive; It had a flared appearance and was tilted under a delta wing arrangement. Of course, development is Boeing’s main goal the X-32 was not to create an attractive airplane. Still, the X-32 rolled off the assembly line as a uniquely ugly bird.

Boeing emphasized the low production and lifetime costs of the X-32 in an effort to win the JSF contract. As a result, Boeing designed the X-32 with a large, single-piece delta wing made of carbon fiber that would serve as the basis for various X-32 versions. For the X-32, the firm also developed a basic direct-lift thrust vectoring system that was easily interchangeable with thrust vectoring nozzles that enabled vertical landings and short takeoffs. In effect, Boeing’s cost-flow strategy aligns with the JSF’s guidelines.

However, flight testing of the X-32 was not very efficient. During the test, the mechanics crew had to change the ground plane configuration from STOVL to supersonic. However, Lockheed’s entry has the ability to switch between supersonic and STOVL modes while in flight. It is hardly unexpected that the JSF evaluators preferred the X-35. As a result, the X-32 was neglected and never produced. A total of two X-32s were produced.

One is at the Patuxent River Naval Air Museum and the other is at the National Museum of the United States Air Force.

About the Author: Harrison Kass 

Harrison Cass is a well-known defense and national security writer who has authored more than 1,000 pieces. He was a lawyer, pilot, guitarist and semi-professional hockey player. He joined the US Air Force as a trainee pilot but was discharged for medical reasons. Harrison holds an MA from New York University, a JD from the University of Oregon, and a BA from Lake Forest College. He listens to Dokken and lives in Oregon.

READ | Russia’s supersonic bomber, the XB-70 Valkyrie, was rendered obsolete before its flight.

READ | 5 interesting facts about the Boeing 720