Register here

Author Topic: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23  (Read 477771 times)

Offline KJ_Lesnick

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #210 on: October 26, 2008, 03:46:31 am »
donnage99,
Quote
There's one promotion video about northrop NATF proposal based on yf-23, but I've never seen a picture:

From what I remember it didn't look anything like the F-23

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10562
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #211 on: October 26, 2008, 07:40:26 am »
yeah, yf-22's stealth met the ATF prototype requirements, too.  Does it mean that it is as stealthy as the the yf-23? No.  So to say that since the yf-23 meets the ATF prototype requirement in term of agility, it must mean it's as agile as yf-22 is just not logical.  And yes, the decision was a shock, and I'm still mourning for the yf-23 till now, but then again, popular belief and sympathy are not necessary the right ones.  And I'm sorry I should be smarter to know that not everything can be said, even when it's true.  It's just distortion of what other said for the sake of winning an argument is just..... 

Anyway, can we stop this yf-22 vs. yf-23 trend that I've probably (and certainly many of you) seen a thousand times around different forums, and get back to my original question of technological feasibility, since everything else beside what the Air Force said that both aircrafts met or exceed the requirements and neither were significantly better than the other one, so the decision was more than just capabilities.  The rest are just thin air fabricated by the bias of both planes fanbois who don't fully know enough about the planes and the professional knowledge and experience to make judgment. 


You should probably avoid crap like "Though I try as much not to turn this into a yf-23 vs. yf-22 thread, I just found too many holes in this typical yf-23 fanbois argument. "  or your stay will be short.   If you have to have an A vs. B debate take it to another board.  I'm not a mod (obviously) but I can tell you the tolerance level for that stuff is VERY low here.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline lantinian

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 493
  • Inspired
    • Tech-Talk Blog
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #212 on: October 26, 2008, 08:30:24 am »
It all started here
Quote
As for the engine, is it technologically possible to have a 2d thrust vectoring nozzles but still maintain yf-23 nozzle stealth features?

donnage99 expressed his reasons for asking and  I expressed my point of view of why the quesion is irrelevant.

NO is my answer to the question because it will require redesign of the boat like rear fuselage to accommodate the extra supporting structure for the TVC and the expanded maneuvering envelope. It will also have negative impact on rear quadrant Stealth capability, something F-22 sacrificed to get the maneuvering bonus in subsonic speed. A No TCV nozzle can always be made more stealthy than TCV equipped one.

Sundog also expressed his view.

I respect everybody's opinion but believe strongly that any discussion for lightheartedly assuming an easy integration of TVC in the YF-23 is undermining Northrop amazing job with this aircraft and their choice of not using TVC.

It is not as if they forgot to think about the idea and it could just be added later with no penalty to the design.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2008, 08:32:22 am by lantinian »
We have to shape the future or others will do it for us.....Cdr. Ivanova, Babylon 5

Offline donnage99

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 948
  • "Robert Gates, is that you??" sublight
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #213 on: October 27, 2008, 08:20:47 pm »
You should probably avoid crap like "Though I try as much not to turn this into a yf-23 vs. yf-22 thread, I just found too many holes in this typical yf-23 fanbois argument. "  or your stay will be short.   If you have to have an A vs. B debate take it to another board.  I'm not a mod (obviously) but I can tell you the tolerance level for that stuff is VERY low here.
And I'm glad you aren't.  Taking verses out of context is not something mods should do.  I didn't mean to turn it into a A vs. B.  I never argued that yf-22 was a better aircraft; I don't even think it was.  I was simply correcting what, in my opinion, is false information and a typical fanboi argument. 

donnage99 expressed his reasons for asking and  I expressed my point of view of why the quesion is irrelevant.

NO is my answer to the question because it will require redesign of the boat like rear fuselage to accommodate the extra supporting structure for the TVC and the expanded maneuvering envelope. It will also have negative impact on rear quadrant Stealth capability, something F-22 sacrificed to get the maneuvering bonus in subsonic speed. A No TCV nozzle can always be made more stealthy than TCV equipped one.
If you read my post thoroughly, you would find that I'm NOT asking to REPLACE the TCV of the yf-22 with the b-2 style nozzles on the yf-23.  I did point out that yf-23's nozzle is stealthier, especially with infrared and heat seeking sensors.  I'm asking for a incoperation of both designs into a single design, which use some sort of a retraction and contraction device.  And my question is if that is technologically possible.   

Quote
I respect everybody's opinion but believe strongly that any discussion for lightheartedly assuming an easy integration of TVC in the YF-23 is undermining Northrop amazing job with this aircraft and their choice of not using TVC.
It is not as if they forgot to think about the idea and it could just be added later with no penalty to the design.

NO BODY SAID THAT.  I'm asking about technology feasibility.  If it's technologically feasible, doesn't mean choosing to do it is the right choice.  There's also cost, weight penalty, risk factors that add up and overwhelm the advantages gained by the specific design.  I'm asking if it's TECHNOLOGICALLY feasible, not whether it's a good choice or not.  I'm not criticizing northrop's decision. 

Offline lantinian

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 493
  • Inspired
    • Tech-Talk Blog
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #214 on: October 28, 2008, 02:47:22 am »
Quote
I'm asking about technology feasibility
I would assume that you have not gone trough the whole 15 pages of this tread. If you had, you might have noticed this post with official info:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1092.msg15388.html#msg15388

or this one with unofficial one:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1092.msg25618.html#msg25618

Actually you will find a lot of discussion about Trust Vectoring on the YF-23 on the first few pages. Some of it coming from the people that have worked in Northrop at the time.

I have personally come across information that Northrop had done some trade studies with a TVC version of the YF-23 but it was primarily as a backup should the AirForce decide that the technology was a must for the ATF.

Anyway I have also found that any further speculation about nonexistent projects and modifications of aircraft will result in the moderators encourage you to visit this page
http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php


« Last Edit: October 28, 2008, 02:58:33 am by lantinian »
We have to shape the future or others will do it for us.....Cdr. Ivanova, Babylon 5

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 #215 on: October 28, 2008, 02:53:33 am »
Play nicely please. No need to be rude with each other.
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline donnage99

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 948
  • "Robert Gates, is that you??" sublight
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #216 on: October 29, 2008, 07:26:03 pm »
I would assume that you have not gone trough the whole 15 pages of this tread. If you had, you might have noticed this post with official info:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1092.msg15388.html#msg15388

or this one with unofficial one:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1092.msg25618.html#msg25618


Actually you will find a lot of discussion about Trust Vectoring on the YF-23 on the first few pages. Some of it coming from the people that have worked in Northrop at the time.
I did, but those designs had nothing to do with the design I was suggesting.
Quote
I have personally come across information that Northrop had done some trade studies with a TVC version of the YF-23 but it was primarily as a backup should the AirForce decide that the technology was a must for the ATF.
Again, whether northrop did a study on it or not (I'm very confident they did), it had nothing to do with what I was talking about.
Quote
Anyway I have also found that any further speculation about nonexistent projects and modifications of aircraft will result in the moderators encourage you to visit this page
http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php
it's for making models, it has nothing to do with my question, which is technology application on real planes.

Offline donnage99

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 948
  • "Robert Gates, is that you??" sublight
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #217 on: November 05, 2008, 01:42:30 am »
I thought the recent restored one (dark one that posted on page 13) is the pav-1 black widow ii, but in this pic it said grey ghost:


Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8379
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #218 on: November 05, 2008, 02:50:47 am »
YF-23A *aircraft type* unofficial nickname was Black Widow II (due to specific view of its RCS pattern on radar screen and as heritage tradition of WWII Black Widow). PAV-1 prototype (dark-grey) was christened Gray Ghost by flight crew, PAV-2 (light-grey) was Spider.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2008, 02:52:32 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 frank

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 618
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #219 on: November 05, 2008, 05:37:46 am »

       I have read that there were access panels or some other doors or panels on its belly or that had been painted red & were the shape of a black widow's marking & that also attributed to the name.



YF-23A *aircraft type* unofficial nickname was Black Widow II (due to specific view of its RCS pattern on radar screen and as heritage tradition of WWII Black Widow). PAV-1 prototype (dark-grey) was christened Gray Ghost by flight crew, PAV-2 (light-grey) was Spider.

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8379
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #220 on: November 05, 2008, 06:02:24 am »
http://web.archive.org/web/20050906000951/www.wci-productions.com/infopg.htm

Quote
The shape of the plane was determined by radar and wind tunnel tests. During one type of radar test, the aircraft model was placed on a pole, and its cross-section illuminated with various high frequency radar signals. Early in the program, during one such RCS (Radar Cross Section) test, the YF-23 first acquired the name "Black Widow".

"We realized that the radar signature from the leading and trailing edges of the wing, and the wing tips formed and RCS pattern that looked like a spider. And I don't remember who it was that said it, but they said, Black Widow II, it has to be" .  - Bob Sandusky

Although Northrop held a name the plane contest, many employees entered the name Black Widow II.

Two days before scheduled roll out, Chief Engineer Bob Sandusky found a way to give PAV-1 its unofficial insignia. Crawling under the narrow wing space, he came across a sharp edge by the air vent. Bob Sandusky:: "I said, you know that looks dangerous, and we really ought to paint that sharp point there red."

Dave Maurice, crew chief for PAV-1 agreed: "So I painted the inside of the vent red so you'd be able to see it and try to get a little bit of a warning. All of a sudden it tuned into a hourglass like on the belly of a Black Widow spider".

But moments before the scheduled roll out, Bob Sandusky was forced to apply stealth interference of his own when an Air Force General wanted to carry out a last minute inspection. Bob Sandusky: "I literally threw my body in front of him and pointed him off to another part of the airplane so he wouldn't see the hourglass on the bottom of the airplane before the roll out."

If you ever see Bob Sandusky photo, you can understand that field of view he closed was impressive.

After PAV-1 appeared with hourglass logo on the cover of AW&ST, USAF officials pushed Northrop to remove it on reasons unexplained.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2008, 06:07:18 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 Cutaway

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 30
    • The Military Forums
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #221 on: November 07, 2008, 06:55:19 pm »
This plane would have been the best F-14 replacement. Better than the F/A-18 Superhornet and the F-35 JSF although some years older.

DILLIGAF KB Wilson.
Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset.
(Not KB Wilson ).

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8379
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #222 on: November 08, 2008, 05:21:44 am »
This plane would have been the best F-14 replacement. Better than the F/A-18 Superhornet and the F-35 JSF although some years older.



Err..what knowledge your predictions are based on? I know just a couple of guys who ever have seen NATF-23 proposal technical data and configuration - and all of them are talking of it as of bunch of compromises.
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline KJ_Lesnick

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #223 on: November 08, 2008, 03:45:21 pm »
Cutaway,

Maybe if the plane was over-engineered/designed with the extra strength built into the design for US Navy purposes from the beginning (I mean the F8U wasn't too much heavier than the F-100 and in many ways they were comparable) and carried those AAAM's (long-ranged missiles which were similar in size to the Sparrow/AMRAAM, weighed around 650 lbs, and had at least if not more range than the AIM-54 Phoenix)...


KJ

Offline donnage99

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 948
  • "Robert Gates, is that you??" sublight
Re: Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 and EMD F-23
« Reply #224 on: November 08, 2008, 08:39:07 pm »
This plane would have been the best F-14 replacement. Better than the F/A-18 Superhornet and the F-35 JSF although some years older.


Lol, wrong forum, mate! If you gonna make some baseless claim, you're gonna be crucified hard by these guys in this forum.  :D