"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
The reason no-one has considered the X32 is simply because Boeing hasn't
proceded with it, for whatever reasons. Had Boeing said "We're going
ahead
anyway with a revised design that we believe will offer similar
capabilities
for a lower cost" then some may have expressed interest in finding out
what
this may be.

How do you figure it would be at a lower cost when Boeing would be
footing the entire developement bill *and* they'd be sold in fewer
numbers than the F-35?

The thing Raven seems to be missing is that any additional R&D spending
(of which there will be a lot) will be amortized over a much smaller unit
count. Meaning you'd have to strip a boat load of feature off an FX-32
to get the unit cost down to F-35 levels.

Has Boeing has ever produced a fighter aircraft?

Boeing? Nope. Which *definitely* doesn't inspire confidence. Sure
they have McDonnel Douglas that they incorporated but I'd be willing
to bet most of those employees were saying "hell no we didn't design
that POS".

That is a bit of an over statement.
Boeing built a fair number of fighters some time back. The last one that
required more than the fingers of one hand to count (the P-26 Peashooter)
marked the introduction of a fabulous innovation to US fighters: the mono-
wing.
That and you may want to give some credit to the MacAir part that was
assimilated a few years back.