NATF: planned Navy versions of the F-22 and F-23

Interesting its been there since 2001 according the dedication. I think the first I saw of this design was 2010ish. Great find.
 
So why is McD or Boeing displaying a NG model?
Nonetheless I've seen the drawings, but in the flesh, this could-have-been is sex on wings.
 
You mean the model of the Northrop/McDonnell-Douglas YF-23 NATF ? ;D

They may have been the 'junior' partner but they did a lot of the work.
 
And it's entirely possible that, had the F-23 NATF gone forward, McDonnell Douglas would have had a more prominent role, since they were much more experienced at building naval aircraft than Northrop.
 
As someone pointed on GPTNW group on facebook, it is crazy that this model has been there for more than 10 years prior to the release of the diagrams in APR.

Or maybe that is the reason why there're no canards on the model.

Well as for the F-23A, the proposal were not the last iterations studied so maybe that canardless version was a later one.
 
Good Day All -

Never knew it was there and can't quite figure out why the model/monumment is located where it is. Seeing as I live in St. Louis, I will go by later this morning and take my own photos and share later.

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 
Found it via Google Earth. On the northwest corner of the intersection of Bellefountaine Rd and Chambers Rd.

38°44'59.52" N 90°13'28.20" W
 
Good Day All -

I went up to the park and photographed the model earlier today. I plan on going back and taking more pics with my quadcopter but am thinking about approaching the Mayor to ask about taking it down and cleaning it up before painting it for better weather protection. Maybe 3D scan?! I'll mull on that for a while first....

There is no obvious points for attaching or swapping out a section of the fuselage to fit canards. Not saying it wasn't tested with canards, just not obvious that they were "left off".

I cannot think of a reason why it is mounted where it is. It's no where near the airport/plant and there is no obvious offsite relationship to McDonnell Douglas. Probably related to someone from the area - a question to ask of City Hall.

So, in better detail, here she is.... Mark
 

Attachments

  • zMG_8836.jpg
    zMG_8836.jpg
    133 KB · Views: 1,157
  • zMG_8893.jpg
    zMG_8893.jpg
    112.5 KB · Views: 679
  • zMG_8892.jpg
    zMG_8892.jpg
    114.2 KB · Views: 673
  • zMG_8858.jpg
    zMG_8858.jpg
    125.6 KB · Views: 1,073
  • zMG_8850.jpg
    zMG_8850.jpg
    202.6 KB · Views: 689
  • zMG_8844.jpg
    zMG_8844.jpg
    117.1 KB · Views: 625
  • zMG_8842.jpg
    zMG_8842.jpg
    134.8 KB · Views: 911
  • zMG_8841.jpg
    zMG_8841.jpg
    113.2 KB · Views: 931
  • zMG_8840.jpg
    zMG_8840.jpg
    118.2 KB · Views: 957
  • zMG_8837.jpg
    zMG_8837.jpg
    106.4 KB · Views: 986
Beautiful detail on the all moving tail and B-2 style intakes. But darn, she needs restoring.
 
A crest of the city Bellefontaine Neighbors, an inner-ring suburb city in St. Louis County, Missouri, United States.
In this suburb the MDD NATF Monument is erected.
Source: https://www.cityofbn.com/
 

Attachments

  • Bellefountaine_20170217.png
    Bellefountaine_20170217.png
    131.8 KB · Views: 1,517
Great pictures Mark. Any ideas of the dimensions of the model. Its a shame its sitting out in the elements. I'd like to see it inside somewhere and cleaned up, like my garage B)
 
Hi folks,
now I find a few minutes to write a few lines to this topic.
I remember reading in the 90's, that the US Navy was very sceptical of canards during carrier approach and landing. That was one reason that Boeing, L-M, MDD and N-G cut off the canards on their JSF carrier variert design concepts .
So I wonder if this model still represents the NAFT design concept DP527 as shown and written in the book "Air Force Legends: Northrop YF-23 ATF by Paul Metz". Maybe N-G tried to please the US Navy and did some wind-tunnel tests with this model without the canards.
Another design concept designation like DP527 "letter" or DP5##.
On page 74 of that book you see a same model of the design concept DP527, but the label on model base writes DP531.
The design concept DP533, also shown on that page, has a conventional tail and no canards.
Maybe Tony Chong might give us some more information.

Anyway, great find and pictures, Airplane and Mark!!! :) B)
 
This configuration is presented in Paul Metz's recent (and excellent) book about the whole YF-23 story.
This one is an iteration of the NATF without canards called the DP-533.

Thanks for the great pictures: the nose configuration and IRST integration is especially beautiful.
The pictures in Metz's book do not show it in such detail.
 
Strictly speaking, the model as displayed does not have any canards. The DP-527 configuration did. You will note the covered hole in the side of the forward fuselage approximately where the "post" for the canard should be.

It also appears that the inlet shock cones were painted black. Between that and the deep shadows, it next to impossible to see them.

(Apologies to MarkN for mangling his excellent photo.)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_8840 edit.jpg
    IMG_8840 edit.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 1,091
Indeed, sorry for the confusion, I was wrong: this is obviously not DP-533 since it has no horizontal tail surfaces.
So it must be a DP-527 with canards removed, as you say.
The holes you mention are indeed located exactly where the DP-527 canards should be (significant dihedral).
 
Great eyes Craig - I readily stand corrected!

I am going to go up next week to City Hall and ask about our Museum restoring/painting it should I not be able convince them it deserves to be displayed inside at the Museum. I'll understand if the answer is no, just got to ask though!

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 
From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 24, 2001.

I'm sure there's a story of someone who knew someone at Boeing, asked for something appropriate as a military memorial, and this is what they came up with.
 

Attachments

  • clipping_9081372.pdf
    293.6 KB · Views: 252
Thanks George - saved me from hunting for it!

Indeed, I need to learn to ask the right question of the right person at the right time!

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 
aim9xray said:
It also appears that the inlet shock cones were painted black. Between that and the deep shadows, it next to impossible to see them.
Click to expand...

Yes, they're still there alright. Matt black paint hides the most surprising things, as witnessed with the Su-47 and its weapons bays or the shoddy build quality of the J-31.
 
https://www.ebay.com/itm/US-Navy-Naval-Advanced-Tactical-Fighter-Program-Lockheed-Boeing-General-Dy-Decal/183586270227
 

Attachments

  • s-l1600 (2).jpg
    s-l1600 (2).jpg
    263.1 KB · Views: 611
  • s-l1600.jpg
    s-l1600.jpg
    255.1 KB · Views: 1,038
Phos said:
Read through most of this thread, but didn't exactly see anyone mention (but could have missed) that the Northrop NATF looks a lot like Mcdonnell Douglas's RFI proposal? For convenience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Tactical_Fighter#/media/File:F-22_RFI.jpg
Click to expand...

Welcome aboard Phos,

which one exactly ?.
 
hesham said:
Phos said:
Read through most of this thread, but didn't exactly see anyone mention (but could have missed) that the Northrop NATF looks a lot like Mcdonnell Douglas's RFI proposal? For convenience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Tactical_Fighter#/media/File:F-22_RFI.jpg
Click to expand...

Welcome aboard Phos,

which one exactly ?.
Click to expand...
Thanks

Mcdonnell Douglas's only "air to air" RFI plane has rear mounted trapezoidal wings and canards, relatively narrow body (from above at least) and close set engines. I do recall someone in this thread posting that Mcdonnell Douglas might have taken the lead on their NATF proposal because of their CV aircraft experience, it seems that could have actually taken place.

Would this design have run into the same problems as the General Dynamics proposal of not being able to figure out the vertical stabilizer placement? Or do canards help with that somehow? I guess Chengdu was able to figure it out, guess canards are what made the difference.
 
They made it a more realistic design, that concept's original wings make the Hornet's wings look stubby, and they got rid of the F-4 style intakes because it looks to me that this type of intake on a plane the scale of the NATF would have seen intake piping longer than 20 feet. Plus, they're both high wing,or at least shoulder wing, in contrast to the YF-23's mid-low wing.

That NATF model's accuracy is pretty middling, it has the YF-23's, for lack of a better term, intake lumps vs the more F-15 style siamese nacelles.
 
Phos said:
They made it a more realistic design, that concept's original wings make the Hornet's wings look stubby, and they got rid of the F-4 style intakes because it looks to me that this type of intake on a plane the scale of the NATF would have seen intake piping longer than 20 feet. Plus, they're both high wing,or at least shoulder wing, in contrast to the YF-23's mid-low wing.
Click to expand...
You really should read Metz book on YF-23 to get the NATF-23 design evolution story from the first hands.
 
I was just going by what Lockheed had said, but I take your point.

1642892165667.png

from Lockheed Horizons Vol. 2 #2 12/90
 
Last edited:
Dew said:
overscan (PaulMM) said:
What is the source of the picture?

Naming sources is a key forum principle.
Click to expand...
The one I posted, or the two sferrin did? (or the two from flateric above that... or..) ?
Click to expand...
You, primarily, as you are quoting from the caption of an unknown publication. But yes, everyone should be doing it.

Your "Navy ATF" picture predates the unveiling of the ATF designs, and is not a real design.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom