Register here

Author Topic: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23  (Read 477776 times)

Offline pometablava

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 3250
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #75 on: November 05, 2007, 05:48:23 am »
The most beautiful fighter ever designed ::)

Thanks for the pics

Offline F-14D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1713
  • I really did change my personal text
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #76 on: November 23, 2007, 08:43:11 pm »
Here are a couple of observations on these F-23 topics, I'll try to do more later.   First, regarding the NATF:   Commonality between the AF version and the Navy version would be primarily in subsystems.  Both Lockheed and Northrop planned to build the naval version on separate production lines since they would be so different.  The naval versions of both would be two seaters as the Navy correctly understood how much more effective the two crew concept is.   Lockheed's NATF would have been a variable sweep aircraft and in fact published artist's illustrations of it.  Northrop reportedly was going to use a canard design with a revised main wing location.   As for those who criticize maneuverability of canards, keep in mind that the Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen are canards and will outmaneuver any US fighter except Raptor, especially in the case of Typhoon.  

Part of the reason why there wasn't that much work or interest on the part of the contractors can be laid to a statement made by AF around the time of the rollouts.  Basically they said that the Navy would not be allowed to buy a version of the aircraft that was not selected for ATF.  While this may seem to be a cost decision, keep in mind the above that the Navy and AF version were going to be built on separate production lines, anyway and what would primarily be common would be subsystems (including engines and fire control, although the Navy version would probably have been more capable).  Possibly AF was wanting to avoid a repeat of the LWF situation, wherein the F/A-18A/B was noticeably more capable than the F-16 A/B (with the arrival of improved avionics in the Falcon C/D this gap was dramatically narrowed).  Who knows, but this gave USN a lot of pause.  They wanted much of the capabilities that AF was looking for but apparently thought that AF was concentrating too much on fighter abilities whereas they wanted a more versatile platform, given the fixed amount of deck space.   It seemed that they might have thought the AF model would be "too much" fighter and not enough other stuff.  And, the NATF was going  to be Very expensive, so if they couldn't get a version optimized for their needs, maybe they shouldn't continue through.  They probably also thought that an advanced Tomcat, combined with AIM-152 could give them "enough" fighter and they could concentrate their bucks on attack.  (Dick Cheney's cancellation of the F-14D was totally unexpected).  An F-23 NATF with its larger weapons capacity could accommodate AIM-152, whereas an F-22 NATF might not have been able to.  Also, Navy was a strong believer in IR guided missiles, while AF was not (at one point, according to press reports, AF argued that AIM-9 capability was unnecessary and recommended that it be removed from production F-22s in the interest of cost.  Even today, although F-22 can carry AIM-9X, there are no definite plans to install the hemet-moutned targeting system).  

Given this, Navy was not too enthusiastic a proponent from that point on.  The contractors saw the writing on the wall and wisely chose not to put an enormous amount of effort into the NATF.  To no one's surprise Navy pulled out of NATF and  Lockheed and Northrop's strategy turned out to be the right one.  
 
« Last Edit: September 17, 2009, 11:11:03 am by F-14D »

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8379
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #77 on: December 06, 2007, 01:25:20 am »
One of the last ATF-23 ads from April, 1991 AWST
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline consealed

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 315
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #78 on: December 06, 2007, 06:14:35 am »
Having seen the YF-22 and YF-23 close up, I think it is clear why Lockheed won. The YF-22 was an aircraft, a true protoype of the F-22. The YF-23 was a plastic model of the aircraft that Northrop would have built had it won.
With all my circuits on YF-23, I can't disagree.

Your disagree because although YF-23 looks more green than YF-22 but also more potential. Is my guess right?
The key to any great story not is who or what, when or where, but why

Offline consealed

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 315
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #79 on: December 06, 2007, 06:19:37 am »
Thanks Elmayerle.

Having said that, a F-23 with inlets shaped like the JIST inlet would work nicely.

Do you have any images/diagrams/links of the JIST intake tests? (I can only find committee reports) It would be great to update my virtual aircraft catalog without the need for so may jaggies.

I'm still a fan of 'low speed maneuverability" if by which you mean dog-fight maneuverability after the merge.

Cheers, Woody

Hi, Could you teach me what is JIST inlet? Do you mean CARET inlet or you mean others?
BTW, if you can flight in supersonic, why you perfer fall in subsonic if the manuverability is same?
The key to any great story not is who or what, when or where, but why

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8379
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #80 on: December 06, 2007, 02:21:33 pm »
Have uploaded DoD video of SOF Rice announcing ATF decision
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

AGRA

  • Guest
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #81 on: December 06, 2007, 07:43:30 pm »
Northrop reportedly was going to use a canard design with a revised main wing location.   As for those who criticize maneuverability of canards, keep in mind that the Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen are canards and will outmaneuver any US fighter except Raptor, especially in the case of Typhoon. 

I wouldn't want to overstate manoeuvrability courtesy of canards. Certainly the F/A-18F at Paris Air Show this year outperformed the “Euro-Canards” with high alpha manoeuvres and nose authority. And the Rhino was loaded with >2,000 lbs of external stores (AIM-120s and AIM-9Xs) when the Typhoon and Rafale flew only with smoke generators (pussys).

PS on NATF Northrop were playing around with high lift Coanda effect wings. The YF-23A was talked about in terms of BLC wing for high lift as a Senior Citizen solution in one of those Air International X-Planes books. Northrop’s late 80s ATA offer has pretty much exactly the same outer mould line and wing as the X-47B UCAS-D. These wings are very much Coanda effect high lift wings. Etc for the B-2. So the YF-23 might have made a nice NATF without clumsy, high weight, low stealth VG wings.

Offline consealed

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 315
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #82 on: December 06, 2007, 08:23:47 pm »
Overstate the superiority is not reasonable but you gave a wrong example to explain your opnion.
AoA is not everything for air-combat, I dare say the SH's maneuverability is much inferior than Eurofighter, compare with T/W rate, wing load, aerodynamec region, each aspect, Typhoon will go ahead of SH. If you search Google, you will find the Typhoon did some min-radius flip impressively, which only aircraft fitting with TVC can do it.
The key to any great story not is who or what, when or where, but why

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10545
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #83 on: December 06, 2007, 10:36:45 pm »
The Typhoon was supposed to have markedly better supersonic manouverability than previous, conventional fighters. This is a lot harder to judge at an airshow...
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

AGRA

  • Guest
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #84 on: December 07, 2007, 08:21:49 pm »
Of course manouverability is a very big word when it comes to air combat - what type of manouverability? Knife fight, supersonic, etc. However the context of the discussion I referred to was for dog fight, beyond the merge, WVR manouverability. As you can see in the 2-3 posts before mine. In which case I would bet on Rhino LERXs over Euro-Canards.... and wing generated lift for high alpha control rather than TVC generated directional thrust for high alpha control.

Offline F-14D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1713
  • I really did change my personal text
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #85 on: December 10, 2007, 11:07:06 pm »
Northrop reportedly was going to use a canard design with a revised main wing location.   As for those who criticize maneuverability of canards, keep in mind that the Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen are canards and will outmaneuver any US fighter except Raptor, especially in the case of Typhoon. 

I wouldn't want to overstate manoeuvrability courtesy of canards. Certainly the F/A-18F at Paris Air Show this year outperformed the “Euro-Canards” with high alpha manoeuvres and nose authority. And the Rhino was loaded with >2,000 lbs of external stores (AIM-120s and AIM-9Xs) when the Typhoon and Rafale flew only with smoke generators (pussys).

.


The Super Bug has outstanding low speed high AoA, possibly the best around not counting the Raptor in the West and the MiG-29/SU-27 and their derivatives.  That's its forte.   However, looking at all the aspects of maneuvering for ACM I daresay that Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen will eat it for lunch.  It's worthy of note that the USN itself said during development that the Super Bug would not have the all the agility of previous Hornets. 


BTW, the X-31 was a canard.  It was not a close coupled one like Rafale or Gripen, but more like the decoupled type, like Typhoon. 

Offline F-14D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1713
  • I really did change my personal text
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #86 on: December 10, 2007, 11:10:05 pm »
The Typhoon was supposed to have markedly better supersonic manouverability than previous, conventional fighters. This is a lot harder to judge at an airshow...

A few years back, some Eagles bounced some Typhoons over England.  At the time, the Typhoon had not yet been cleared for its full ACM envelope.   Still, after less than one complete turn the Typhoons were on the Eagles' tails and could not be dislodged until the "fight" was called off. 
« Last Edit: December 27, 2007, 12:53:01 pm by F-14D »

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8379
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #87 on: December 11, 2007, 01:57:08 am »
Have uploaded a Northrop video with Paul Metz comments on YF-23 performance.

Note in the last moments rare in-flight footage of YF-23 underbelly with famous Thomas Rooney's 'hourglass' markings, removed after first flight.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2007, 02:00:05 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8379
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #88 on: December 11, 2007, 02:33:15 am »
Metz, Ferguson and Morgenfeld (Lockheed YF-22 test pilots) remembering ATF 'fly-off' with some funny moments.
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10562
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #89 on: December 11, 2007, 05:48:55 am »
Have uploaded a Northrop video with Paul Metz comments on YF-23 performance.

Note in the last moments rare in-flight footage of YF-23 underbelly with famous Thomas Rooney's 'hourglass' markings, removed after first flight.

Got that video tape.  :)
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.