Harrier vs. JSF-35

Merlin wrote:
Why did the Lockheed X-35 beat the Boeing X-32 in the JSF competition
? Cheaper bid or better systems ?

Simpler design ?

Better performance. The lift fan gave the X-35 significantly better STOVL
up-and-away performance than the X-32. Even the Boeing team leader
acknowledged that they were sunk once LM demonstrated that the clutched lift
fan actually worked.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872

Thomas Schoene wrote:

Merlin wrote:
Why did the Lockheed X-35 beat the Boeing X-32 in the JSF competition
? Cheaper bid or better systems ?

Simpler design ?

Better performance. The lift fan gave the X-35 significantly better STOVL
up-and-away performance than the X-32. Even the Boeing team leader
acknowledged that they were sunk once LM demonstrated that the clutched lift
fan actually worked.

The question (or worry) has always been whether it would work reliably when
needed, as well as all the doors that also need to work. The Harrier design
using the Pegasus was never as efficient as using separate lift and
cruise/maneuver engines, but it had the advantage of simplicity and reliability,
and given thetechnology of the day none of the lift + cruise-engined beasts were
any better, and most a lot worse. The F-35 is something of a halfway step to a
separate lift engine, without that complication but relying on a highly loaded
shaft and gearbox. When it works, it works great. The remaining question is
will it work often enough and inexpensively enough, in squadron service. DoD is
convinced it will, and we'll just have to wait and see.

Guy