Genesis of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

TLDR

The F‑35 program emerged after the 1960s TFX effort failed, with the Navy withdrawing due to excessive weight, the Air Force left with an inadequate F‑111, and the technical challenge of developing a supersonic VTOL fighter. Early VTOL development progressed through 1950s tail‑sitter prototypes such as the XFV‑1, XFY‑1, and X‑13, illustrating the evolutionary stages leading to modern designs.

Abstract

greeted with considerable skepticism, largely because the joint Tactical Fighter Experimental (TFX) program of the 1960s had not succeededasajointprogram.TheTFXprogramwasintendedtosave several billions of dollars in life cycle costs by using a common airframe and engines to meet both the Navy’s fleet air defense requirement and the Air Force’s requirement for a long-range fighter bomber. The Navy withdrew from the TFX program when the aircraft became too heavy for carrier operations. The Air Force was left with an F-111 too small to be an effective bomber and not maneuverable enough to be a competitive fighter. In addition, developing a supersonic, vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) fighter was considered a significant technical challenge by itself. The stages in the evolution of VTOL aircraft are illustrated in Fig.2.The firstattemptstobuildaverticaltakeoffandlanding fighter werethetailsittersofthe1950s,includingtheXFV-1,theXFY-1,and the X-13. Because the thrust-to-weight ratio of fighter aircraft was already close to 1, designers thought that it would be a simple matter of standing a fighter on its tail and increasing the thrust a little to