I would love to see a marriage between the YF23 and the F32. Imagine the YF23 with VTOL. Pilot's high observability of surroundings with the F32 cockpit would be a bonus.
The thing about looking good, it isn't itself and its not supposed to look good, just that it can fly and if it have a really nice air tactical building like good AIR EQ that's all it would need.
Looks way better in the air and in motion than standing still on the ground. And also looks more futuristic than the X-35. Does anyone know which had the lowest radar signature of the two?
@cablebeach1 actually the primary reason was for the needed a larger air intake for its VSTOL, which utilized a traditional jump jet rather than the lockheed's lift fan style.
It looks like somebody took a F/A-22, chopped off the tailplane, and gave it a stealthy looking version of a F-8 nose, and then made it look more ugly by shortning it and making it look fat
I always liked this plane, the delta wing was cool. Too bad the intake was so bizarre looking. Might have been a cheaper aircraft. Possibly more agile, better turning radius for horizontal fighting? Maybe a better fit for the AF than navy or marines
I would love to see a marriage between the YF23 and the F32. Imagine the YF23 with VTOL. Pilot's high observability of surroundings with the F32 cockpit would be a bonus.
Scorpion85629 1 year ago
it looks happy! but i bet that intake could take much more air than what those puny suckers the F-35 currently has.
wizzzer1337 1 year ago
the JSF 32 was a much better fighter plane for Airforce , but didnt work well out for the navy nead !
hornborgdk 1 year ago
the front kinda reminds of a F-8
malibuler 2 years ago
DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN thats one ugly ass plane!!!!!!!!
Midship795 2 years ago
The thing about looking good, it isn't itself and its not supposed to look good, just that it can fly and if it have a really nice air tactical building like good AIR EQ that's all it would need.
Gunneryxc 2 years ago
Looks way better in the air and in motion than standing still on the ground. And also looks more futuristic than the X-35. Does anyone know which had the lowest radar signature of the two?
duplenty 3 years ago
If i remember correctly X-32 had smaller radar signature.
MokomaSusi 3 years ago
The reason why this aircraft look so ugly it's because it's supposed to carry 10+ Missiles
cablebeach1 3 years ago 4
@cablebeach1
it's not so ugly
George068890 2 years ago
@cablebeach1 actually the primary reason was for the needed a larger air intake for its VSTOL, which utilized a traditional jump jet rather than the lockheed's lift fan style.
in4ser 1 year ago
In waht way does it matter how the plane looks? Their purpose is not too look good.
pavel4441 3 years ago 7
I wonder...
...what would our younger generation future pilots think seeing the Thunderbirds perform in an F-32 or F-35.
Daddy look!
A flying bathtub!
It also has a HUUUUGE smile on it's face!
lol
lame
txmusician13 2 years ago
@txmusician13
if u notice if we remove "smile" "Bthtub"
will be like f22 from frot wiev
George068890 2 years ago
sort of does
txmusician13 2 years ago
@pavel4441 It doesn't esspecially.........particularly when the F-35 looks ugly as sin as well..... :P
pscott90 1 year ago
Agreed. X/F-35 looks much prettier in my eyes.
Mavidyoute14 3 years ago
I have to say the pilot looks cool, but the plane is really ugly
TPS996 3 years ago
It looks like somebody took a F/A-22, chopped off the tailplane, and gave it a stealthy looking version of a F-8 nose, and then made it look more ugly by shortning it and making it look fat
jxvwp 4 years ago
i wish this one would have won
poiuytrewq415 4 years ago
miss spending and manufacturing glitches ruined an excellent plane.
dxd48c 4 years ago
I always liked this plane, the delta wing was cool. Too bad the intake was so bizarre looking. Might have been a cheaper aircraft. Possibly more agile, better turning radius for horizontal fighting? Maybe a better fit for the AF than navy or marines
TonyHawkLookalike 4 years ago
interesting
hmn88 4 years ago