On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 01:01:26 +1100, "The Raven"
wrote:

We all know that the X-35 won the JSF contest which is now in the strategic
development phase as the F-35. At the time the competition winner was
announced (LM) I wondered why Boeing would scrap their whole concept rather
than push forward with it.

For various political reasons Boeing could have pushed forward with the X-32
into other non-JSF (and friendly) markets. Imagine the competition that
potentially could be generated from an F32 vs F35 sale to foreign nations?


Why would anybody buy the loser? The STOVL version barely was able to
do a vertical takeoff and landing at all. They had to strip it down
and go down to sea level to pull it off. God help them if they
actually put some payload on it. Also the X-32 would be WAY more
expensive because of the few numbers bought. Between the USAF, USN,
and Marines the requirement is for several thousand aircraft (whether
they'll get all they want is a differnet question).



Imagines LM's concern that potential partners may decide it could be more
cost effective to go with an F32? Imagine the potential (albeit unlikely) of
F32 going up against F35? Imagine the possibility of a second JSF-like
aircraft capability for the US to tap into if need be?

Imagine if the F-22 only cost fifty bucks. Look how many we could
buy. No offense but just about everything about the idea of Boeing
producing the X-32 is a bad idea.




For Boeing, excluding any political over-rides, they could have had a market
for their aircraft that competed directly against the F35 and/or eroded some
of it's competitors market.

Like who? Just about every potential buyer has already bought into
the F-35. The X-32 didn't exactly cover itself in glory during the
competition.


Additionally, it could upset the supposed
superiority of the F35 by offering something (possibly) similar in
capability to the F35 than anything else.

It isn't supposedly superior, it is superior. There was really no
debating it, unlike the F-22/F-23 competition.




So the question is, could there have economically been a market for the F32
outside the US and would the US government have allowed Boeing to produce
such an aircraft?

Nope and the only reason the government would be against it is because
it could be financially devestating to the company.




My initial assumption is that the US government wouldn't allow Boeing to do
such for reasons including: protecting LM's interests, ensuring that other
nations didn't end up with similar capabilities, and to protect US
"security".


Why would they want to protect Lockhed's interest? They didn't say
"Look Boeing, you can't sell F-15s anymore and you can't offer Super
Hornets to anybody else".