• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

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

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
23
Orionblamblam said:
Apparently you haven't seen the tailfins.
So fix that problem for me! ;D
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,253
Reaction score
1,281
does it come in blue on shiny paper? ;D
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,995
Reaction score
774
Scott, we have our wallets and credits cards ready to see the tailfins
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
23
Dunno if you want somebody with a bit more experience, but I'd try this out. It'd be a good way for me to get into figuring out a lot of GIMP, which so far I haven't really been all that motivated to do for lack of need at this point. Sometime in the future I plan on using it to illustrate the Falcon thing I've been researching for way too long.
 

TinWing

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
888
Reaction score
47
SOC said:
Dunno if you want somebody with a bit more experience, but I'd try this out. It'd be a good way for me to get into figuring out a lot of GIMP, which so far I haven't really been all that motivated to do for lack of need at this point. Sometime in the future I plan on using it to illustrate the Falcon thing I've been researching for way too long.
GIMP is actually quite a nice open sourced alternative to Photoshop and the latest versions aren't especially buggy. The interface is a bit intimidating and I'm not sure you can call it fast loading. Paint.net is a somewhat more simplistic and approachable Photoshop alternative - lightweight, quick to load, no problems cutting and pasting images from the clipboard, etc.

It's really not all that hard to turn a fuzzy, wuzzy blueprint into a more attractive drawing, just time and patience. The important thing is to start with a really big scale to begin with. For instance, if my starting point was the tantalizing forward fuselage preview, I'd scale it up from 771 x 628 Pixels to 5000 x 4073 Pixels (for instance). I'd add a transparent layer and then literally trace over the original blueprint. When finished I'd save that transparent layer as a simple 1-bit black and white .gif, which isn't what Orionblamblam is looking for as an end product, but merely a beginning.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,255
Reaction score
2,929
TinWing said:
SOC said:
Dunno if you want somebody with a bit more experience, but I'd try this out. It'd be a good way for me to get into figuring out a lot of GIMP, which so far I haven't really been all that motivated to do for lack of need at this point. Sometime in the future I plan on using it to illustrate the Falcon thing I've been researching for way too long.
GIMP is actually quite a nice open sourced alternative to Photoshop and the latest versions aren't especially buggy. The interface is a bit intimidating and I'm not sure you can call it fast loading. Paint.net is a somewhat more simplistic and approachable Photoshop alternative - lightweight, quick to load, no problems cutting and pasting images from the clipboard, etc.
GIMP works pretty well on Linux, but it was a bit flaky on Windows in my experience. Paint.net is good - I use it at work for general image handling.
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
23
TinWing said:
GIMP is actually quite a nice open sourced alternative to Photoshop and the latest versions aren't especially buggy. The interface is a bit intimidating and I'm not sure you can call it fast loading. Paint.net is a somewhat more simplistic and approachable Photoshop alternative - lightweight, quick to load, no problems cutting and pasting images from the clipboard, etc.

It's really not all that hard to turn a fuzzy, wuzzy blueprint into a more attractive drawing, just time and patience. The important thing is to start with a really big scale to begin with. For instance, if my starting point was the tantalizing forward fuselage preview, I'd scale it up from 771 x 628 Pixels to 5000 x 4073 Pixels (for instance). I'd add a transparent layer and then literally trace over the original blueprint. When finished I'd save that transparent layer as a simple 1-bit black and white .gif, which isn't what Orionblamblam is looking for as an end product, but merely a beginning.
Ah, so you mean something like this. Bear in mind that I just worked this out in about 10 minutes and it's not quite as polished as it'd be if I wasn't fooling around. This is pretty damn clever, actually.
 

Attachments

TinWing

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
888
Reaction score
47
SOC said:
TinWing said:
GIMP is actually quite a nice open sourced alternative to Photoshop and the latest versions aren't especially buggy. The interface is a bit intimidating and I'm not sure you can call it fast loading. Paint.net is a somewhat more simplistic and approachable Photoshop alternative - lightweight, quick to load, no problems cutting and pasting images from the clipboard, etc.

It's really not all that hard to turn a fuzzy, wuzzy blueprint into a more attractive drawing, just time and patience. The important thing is to start with a really big scale to begin with. For instance, if my starting point was the tantalizing forward fuselage preview, I'd scale it up from 771 x 628 Pixels to 5000 x 4073 Pixels (for instance). I'd add a transparent layer and then literally trace over the original blueprint. When finished I'd save that transparent layer as a simple 1-bit black and white .gif, which isn't what Orionblamblam is looking for as an end product, but merely a beginning.
Ah, so you mean something like this. Bear in mind that I just worked this out in about 10 minutes and it's not quite as polished as it'd be if I wasn't fooling around. This is pretty damn clever, actually.
I'm not sure that the word "clever" applies but it is effective. One thing I would suggest is scaling up even more. When I suggested 5000 pixels wide, I was being conservative. For a full drawing, you might want to start with a width of 10,000 to 15,000 pixels.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
I've done some profile work. I could give it a shot if you need someone to work on this. Just let me know.
 

aim9xray

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
550
Reaction score
175
Orionblamblam said:
SOC said:
not getting how this jet was supposed to be butt ugly.
Apparently you haven't seen the tailfins. To my eye, it's a beut from the nose to *not* *quite* the trailing edges of the tailfins. Something aesthetically unfortunate happened back there.
Think: batplane
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
23
TinWing said:
I'm not sure that the word "clever" applies but it is effective. One thing I would suggest is scaling up even more. When I suggested 5000 pixels wide, I was being conservative. For a full drawing, you might want to start with a width of 10,000 to 15,000 pixels.
Yeah I only scaled up to 3,000 pixels, just to mess with it. I can see how scaling up even more wouldd be beneficial, it'd help get all of the detail and the curved surfaces like the canopy more accurate. This is pretty fun.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
That tail looks to me like they crossed the YF-22 with the YF-23. It does end up looking like the Batplane, as was noted upthread. Thanks for the pic. If you want a profile, I would need something a little larger, though, as it's hard make out details at this level. I have to say, though, I don't think it's as ugly as I was lead to believe.

The two seater should prove interesting as well.

Just a ref for making profiles, if you have the software. I make the panel lines in Adobe Illustrator, a vector graphic program, so the scale isn't that important if you can see what you're working on. The reason I bring that up is because vector graphics are completely scalable. Then I set it at the resolution I want for Photoshop. I don't know if that helps anyone, I just thought I would bring that up.
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
23
Yeah it's not quite ugly, but ddefinitely weird. The tail section looks like they cut it off because they ran out of space, and then just serrated it for rear-aspect RCS. I wonder if it had control issues, as it appears to have TVC? It definitely does look like a very nearly clean sheet of paper design. Lockheed's NATF wasn't simply an F-22 with a tailhook either, but it had a lot more to do with the F-22 than this appears to have with the F-23. Regardless, very cool to finally see the design out in the open.
 

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,240
Reaction score
415
My apologies if I'm a bit slow on this one, but is this supposed to portray the planned production F-23?
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,556
Reaction score
135
Nose up with those canards and bat-tails flapping as it comes into trap a wire, it would have been beautiful...
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,616
Reaction score
98
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
TinWing said:
...you might want to start with a width of 10,000 to 15,000 pixels.
I would argue with this. Are there really enough details that can benefit from such a large size? I did my PAK FA drawing cca 3500x3500 pixels (remember that it is drawing made from real plane, it means all the details are visible on the photos) and I didn't have any problems to use it for any purpose.
 

lantinian

Inspired
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
500
Reaction score
6
Website
www.lantinian.blogspot.com
Yeah it's not quite ugly, but definitely weird. ...... It definitely does look like a very nearly clean sheet of paper design. Lockheed's NATF wasn't simply an F-22 with a tailhook either, but it had a lot more to do with the F-22 than this appears to have with the F-23.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. No wander the NATF was a factor in the final decision ATF decision. Had they Had they proceeded with the program, it would have been the TFX all over again.

I can't even believe my eyes how different this plane is :(
I bet Woody would love it. Me not so sure.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,255
Reaction score
2,929
Canard - odd - only similarly positioned canard I can recall is the F-19 :)

Tail - very odd. Looks like someone took a chainsaw to the end of the plane so it fits the Navy length requirement.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,253
Reaction score
1,281
Orionblamblam said:
I've finished cleaning the scan. Here it is, in slightly reduced resolution.

Additional: a second, larger drawing with more details, including 2-seater, has just come in.

That doesn't really even look like an F-23 anymore. ???
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,255
Reaction score
2,929
Well, I'm not sure Lockheed's NATF looked much like the F-22 either. They were supposed to use the same subsystems (avionics, engines etc), not have any great commonality in airframe.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
Orionblamblam said:
Sundog said:
it's hard make out details at this level.
Well, I should *hope* so...
I was referring to making profile art. You said you needed people to make profile art and then posted a drawing too small to make profile art from. So you're hoping people can't make profile art for you for free from a drawing too small to make profile art from? OK.
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,336
Reaction score
605
Wow, the F-23 NAFT.... :eek:
This is the thread of the month. :)
Scott, thanks for posting the "appetizer". I hope to see or buy soon a larger version.
Can you tell us how you get these drawings, or is your source confidential?

To all other folks,
I presume, Scott has already or will soon send a larger version via PM/ E-Mail to serious members, so they can start making profiles.
Yeah, well. The Dude abides.... ;) :D
 

TinWing

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
888
Reaction score
47
Sundog said:
Just a ref for making profiles, if you have the software. I make the panel lines in Adobe Illustrator, a vector graphic program, so the scale isn't that important if you can see what you're working on. The reason I bring that up is because vector graphics are completely scalable. Then I set it at the resolution I want for Photoshop. I don't know if that helps anyone, I just thought I would bring that up.
The open source equivalent to Adobe Illustrator is Inkscape, which incidentally, is a lot quicker to open than the last version of Illustrator that I played with some years ago. I'm no expert when it comes to vector graphics.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
fightingirish said:
PM/ E-Mail to serious members.
So you're implying I'm not serious. Interesting.

[quote author=TinWing]The open source equivalent to Adobe Illustrator is Inkscape, which incidentally, is a lot quicker to open than the last version of Illustrator that I played with some years ago. I'm no expert when it comes to vector graphics.[/quote]

Vector graphics are great for also creating all of the markings, national, squadron, etc. Once again, due to the scalability. In fact, at one time I tried to make an entire profile in AI just to see what I could do with it. I never quite finished it and I've been trying to find the source file, but this is as far as I made it doing it entirely in AI, which is somewhat masochistic.

 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
Orionblamblam said:
Sundog said:
You said you needed people to make profile art and then posted a drawing too small to make profile art from. So you're hoping people can't make profile art for you for free from a drawing too small to make profile art from? OK.
Got it in one.
Well then I would like to make a request of the profiler. To make one of the images a scaled side view of the YF-23, F-23A, NATF, and if you have good enough info, the FB-23, together, sort of like I did in the image above. That would be cool.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
So, does that mean I should just work on the F-23A? Also, what res do you like them in? I mean hell, I do this for my own edification anyway. BTW, I already have great images/drawings of the F-23A from the thread here.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
Yeah, I'll tackle that, I would love to make a comparison of the three designs in profile.
 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
2,925
Reaction score
394
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Damn interesting - will this be a forthcoming Aerospace Projects Review? Can't wait!

Regards,

Greg
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
GTX said:
Damn interesting - will this be a forthcoming Aerospace Projects Review? Can't wait!

Regards,

Greg
To answer your question, Yes, according to Scott, which is why he posted here I'm assuming and not the open forums.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,255
Reaction score
2,929
Yes, that was his intention. There is more to reveal regarding intended production configurations of the F-23 too.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
overscan said:
Yes, that was his intention. There is more to reveal regarding intended production configurations of the F-23 too.
Right now, I'm just concentrating on the YF-23A and F-23A profiles for the article. :)
 

lantinian

Inspired
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
500
Reaction score
6
Website
www.lantinian.blogspot.com
Thanks Overscan...

I definitely don't like the feeling I get when I look at this design :-\ It has none of the things that make the YF-23 look unique and alien.

It's actually reminds me of Hornet 2000, more than the YF-23
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,255
Reaction score
2,929
Intakes are like the production F-23 (serrated cowl, centrebody) and the canards are a bit like a forward v tail due to their angle. Engines are no longer in nacelles above but centrally mounted. Its more interesting looking from other angles.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
245
I have only the smaller drawing Scott put up and the forward snippet, but are you sure the intake's centerbody is like the F-23A's? I just ask, because it looked to me to be a bit more like that of the F-111's, in terms of the centerbody location, based on what I was able to discern, but you've probably seen more than I have. I have to say, either way, I think it's a very cool looking design. Not as cool as the F-23A IMHO, but cool none the less. it also looks like the wing is so thin they had to add a bump to fit the wing fold mechanism.

In terms of planform, it reminds me of the naval variant design study of the X-36.

Edited: Going back and looking for that naval X-36, which can be found in this thread

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3547.0/highlight,x-36.html

I ran across this thread on the JSF/JAST designs and you can really see the design lineage from the NATF design to the McDD JSF design study wind tunnel model Overscan posted pictures of here

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2392.45.html
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,995
Reaction score
774
from 2007
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1092.msg14363.html#msg14363
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2150.msg24126.html#msg24126
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,556
Reaction score
135
Here's a quick lash up of the Northrop NATF in the one pixel equals two feet scale of ShipBucket. The NATF is placed on a CVN-68 deck with a couple of other aircraft to show the scale and spotting issues. It is so long it would need a folding nose to fit in the elevators. The Hornet looks pretty demure beside one...

Picture removed pending update.
 

lantinian

Inspired
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
500
Reaction score
6
Website
www.lantinian.blogspot.com
The comparison is really telling however i do believe you have gotten the sizes wrong. It cannot be that big. AG Can you please post a size comparison of the NATF-23 and the F-23A or the YF-23?
 
Top