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

I'd say similarity is rather subtle...
 

Attachments

  • DF-ST-87-12791.JPEG
    DF-ST-87-12791.JPEG
    2 MB · Views: 1,546
  • NATF-23 - 2.jpg
    NATF-23 - 2.jpg
    167.8 KB · Views: 1,355
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:
LowObservable said:
Abe G - IIRC the v-tails on the YF-23 were used entirely for pitch and roll. Yaw inputs came from differential movement of the wing TE surfaces.
Click to expand...

Now that's interesting. I think it is common practice nowadays that all control surfaces of a fighter work in concert to establish the desired movement. Was yaw really entirely controlled by the TE surfaces?
 
VTOLicious said:
LowObservable said:
Abe G - IIRC the v-tails on the YF-23 were used entirely for pitch and roll. Yaw inputs came from differential movement of the wing TE surfaces.
Click to expand...

Now that's interesting. I think it is common practice nowadays that all control surfaces of a fighter work in concert to establish the desired movement. Was yaw really entirely controlled by the TE surfaces?
Click to expand...

In this video former NG test pilot Roy Martin explains how the control system works... The above statement is not confirmed.

View: https://youtu.be/aNFYdMkc09I
 
Quick question, one of the reasons given for the NATF cancellation was a reduction in the production rate of the ATF/NATF to a point the Navy thought unit prices would be unaffordable. Does anyone know what the original production rate per year was supposed to be, and what it dropped to that may have caused the Navy to drop out?
 
A 3d model of the natf-23 is available At turbo squid

It is of good quality, and allows you to confirm that the canards make the rear hemisphere visibility non existent. I don't see how such a design would have been accepted by the navy. Thus, I wonder if the wind tunnel model was tested with or without canards.
 
Lockheed's NATF larger and heavier than YF-22. (Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter)
Source: Defense Daily
Publication Date: 30-JAN-91

The Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter NATF) will have essentially
the same guts as the Air Force ATF, but, because the NATF will be carrier based and required to
carry more fuel, it will be a larger aircraft and have a heavier airframe than the Air Force derivative,
Lockbeed Vice President and ATF General Manager James "Mickey" Blackwell said yesterday.
The NATF will carry virtually all the avionics that will be used in the ATF, but will also have avionics
particular to carrier-based aircraft, Blackwell said. The NATF airframe will be considerably different
than the ATF because it will be required to land on carriers. The catapult and stopping mechanism
on an aircraft carrier places tremendous strain on an airframe, Blackwell said, which requires a
more sturdy airframe than land-based aircraft.

As in the F-14 Tomcat, the Lockheed NATF will have swing wings, which, when set in a forward
swept direction, will provide the aircraft greater lift needed for carrier launches.
The main criteria for that Navy airplane is carrier suitability, which translates into high lift, Blackwell
said. "You have to maximize the high lift of a Navy airplane in order to get on and off a Navy
carrier. That will require a different wing on the airplane rather than what we have on the ATF. But
when you look at the two airplanes from a distance they will be brother and sisters. Swing wings
let us optimize several flight regimes. Rather than going out to supercruise, air-superiority
missions for the F-15, it does that and does it well, but it also does the combat air patrol mission.
It has longer legs and it will endure longer."

The NATF will also be required to fill a limited attack role, while the ATF is purely an air-superiority
aircraft. However, Lockheed's ATF could be further modified to include an attack role.

Low Observable Capability Diminished Due To Size Of NATF

With the added size of the airframe, the low-observable signature of Lockheed's NATF will
increase. However, Blackwell said trade-offs were expected, "the airframe will be tailored to the
Navy mission." About 25 percent of the NATF airframe will be common with Lockheed's ATF. "The
Navy airplane uses 100 percent of the ATF avionics," Blackwell said. "We marinized the engines so
they will be used by both aircraft. Virtually all the subsystems will be common." Lockheed is also
studying a two seat aircraft for the Navy contract, Black-well said.

At the low and high ends of speed extremes the YF-22 ATF's thrust vectoring will provide the
aircraft with the ability to maneuver with greater efficiency than its predecessors, Blackwell said.
Thrust vectoring is the ability to guide the thrust of the engines in an up or down direction to
further enhance maneuverability of the aircraft. At very high speeds the aircraft's controlling
surfaces are limited in their ability to influence movement through the air, Test Pilot Dave Ferguson
said. Thrust vectoring provides greater control to the pilot. It is also important because it allows
for greater maneuverability at extreme high angles of attack. With vectoring controlling the
direction of the aircraft, controlling surfaces are free to manage roll and other maneuver
capabilities, Ferguson said. The YF-22 reached a 60 degree angle of attack in prototype testing
and displayed an ability to role 100 degrees at that angle of attack.

The Lockheed team's competitor, the Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23, does not utilize thrust
vectoring.

Achieved Every Goal

Blackwell said Lockheed approached the ATF program with eight specific goals, which included:
building a stealthy plane; achieving supercruise; extreme maneuverability; lethality; advanced,
affordable avionics; built in growth for the aircraft; a supportable aircraft; and overall affordable.
He said the Lockheed team had achieved all its goals.

There will be minor changes in the airframe from the prototype aircraft to the production aircraft,
according to Blackwell. He said the canopy of the aircraft will be moved slightly forward, while the
landing gear doors will be more parallel to the wind. There will, however, be "massive changes"
internally. Blackwell said there will be a great use of composites. He said that all internal loads
were theoretical in the prototype stage and that attempts will be made at every opportunity to
decrease the weight of the aircraft.

To date approximately $1.9 billion has been invested in the ATF demonstration/validation program
by the Air Force, Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics and their subcontractors. The Air Force
provided $818 million, Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics split equally $675 million and
subcontractors invested $408 million. The Navy has provided $65 million for the NATF to date.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lockheed says NATF meets nearly all AX requirements.
Click to expand...

Source: Defense Daily
Publication Date: 09-SEP-91

(Las Vegas) The Lockheed-Boeing-General Dynamics team's naval version of the Advanced Tactical
Fighter (NATF) currently meets 95 percent of the Navy's requirements for the future AX bomber,
Lockheed officials said last week.

"The NATF was developed with significant air-to-ground capability, and while I can't go into
numbers, I'd have to say it was significant and in fact, the way the NATF sits today it can meet 95
percent of the AX specification requirements," one Lockheed official said during the 34th annual
TailHook Association Convention last week. A request for proposals (RFP) was released to
contractors by the Navy during a classified briefing over a week ago outlining requirements for the
AX (Defense Daily, August 29). The service plans to procure 234 AX aircraft to enter the carrier
airwing fleet by 2010, according to the RFP.

The Lockheed official said that, "there were a lot of compromises in the YF-22 prototype design to
accommodate a Navy airplane, but we worked very, very hard on that."

"We have a Navy version that has a swing ring that was never built ... that is carrier-suitable and
also has a capability to get into the higher speed mode of the outer air stealth ... for the
strike/fighter design," the official said. He added that while the NATF was designed with both
strike and fighter capabilities in mind, "we feel very strongly that if the Navy chooses to go the
strike/fighter route in the AX, the type of airplane we would build on paper, or NATF, would be
competitive."

Lockheed officials also said that the aircraft can meet the service requirement of carrying weapons
both internally and externally. The Navy "could hang a bunch of bombs on it and still maintain the
stealth ... but we have an internal stealthy capability and then an external capability that can get
you a significant total amount of weapons," one company official said.

The Navy canceled its participation in the Air Force-led effort to develop an advanced tactical
fighter last year. In late April, the Air Force selected the team of Lockheed-General Dynamics-
Boeing to develop its YF-22 ATF prototype aircraft. The Lockheed team intends to offer a version of
the YF-22 as the basis of its bid on the AX.

A total of five industry teams or individual firms will be selected to enter AX Concept Exploration
Definition studies, which are estimated to be worth $20 million a piece. In addition to the
Lockheed proposal, three teams have announced they will compete for the development of the AX.
Lockheed will offer a new design with teammates Boeing and Grumman. General Dynamics and
McDonnell Douglas will submit a version of the now-defunct A-12. McDonnell Douglas and LTV will
team to offer a new design.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Came to me as a blank... 1:40th Northrop NATF-23. 2nd one I have had. Still trying to decide if I want to put the panel lines/flying surfaces on it. Getting lazy in my old age.
 

Attachments

  • FullSizeRender 3.jpeg
    FullSizeRender 3.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 277
  • FullSizeRender-1.jpeg
    FullSizeRender-1.jpeg
    1.7 MB · Views: 362
allysonca said:
Came to me as a blank... 1:40th Northrop NATF-23. 2nd one I have had. Still trying to decide if I want to put the panel lines/flying surfaces on it. Getting lazy in my old age.
Click to expand...
I have the same model, given to me when I was at Northrop, it was a blank as well and I finished it. I will take a photo and post it.
 
allysonca said:
Came to me as a blank... 1:40th Northrop NATF-23. 2nd one I have had. Still trying to decide if I want to put the panel lines/flying surfaces on it. Getting lazy in my old age.
Click to expand...
Here is my NATF-23 model, not as nice as yours, my raw casting blank was kind of rough.
 

Attachments

  • NATF-23 Model.jpg
    NATF-23 Model.jpg
    50 KB · Views: 334
Looks great! Mine was the yellow stinky resin as I am sure was yours. A lot of filling and priming to be sure. I started with a splinter camo and was almost done.... and decided on the layout you see, so a bit of sanding and Taaa Daaaaaa!
 
allysonca said:
Looks great! Mine was the yellow stinky resin as I am sure was yours. A lot of filling and priming to be sure. I started with a splinter camo and was almost done.... and decided on the layout you see, so a bit of sanding and Taaa Daaaaaa!
Click to expand...
Mine was the same yellow resin as well, I thought my buddy in the model shop maybe had mine made from cheese.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom