Sorry but speaking as an aerospace engineer working in the industry, and having actually spoken with those involved in both the YF-22 and YF-23 programs and reviewing actual data, the statements about YF-23 have been exaggerated to an absurd degree. To be clear, I still believe the F-23 is overall better than F-22 for how USAF is using the aircraft, but the difference isn’t as dramatic as some people say. It’s an overall stealthier design with more range. But some of the claims of how much better the YF-23 was over YF-22 has been greatly exaggerated over the years.
The main thing thats pointed out is YF-23 is faster and stealthier than YF-22, but this needs some clarifying. The YF-23 top supercruise speed was only listed as Mach 1.6+, and probably Mach 1.72 that the YF-23/YF120 was tested to. This certainly is quite a bit better than YF-22/YF120 which did Mach 1.58, but the YF-22 had oversized vertical tails and was much fatter in some areas because the design was rushed, while the F-22 fixed a lot of these problems so it has much better drag and can reach around Mach 1.8 supercruise. Also the F-23 didn’t really slim down from the YF-23, the volume from the big nacelles was just redistributed since it’s already good in drag, and reportedly has more fuel than the F-22 so in terms of range its better, but again it’s probably not as dramatic as some say. To clarify about better stealth, I think the main advantage of F-23 over F-22 is not that it’s an absolute lower RCS, but it has low RCS from a wider range of angles because the leading and trailing edge angles on the F-23 are the same, so there are not as many spikes.
But in the end, per USAF ATF chief engineer Rick Abel, both are great designs and the difference isn’t big enough that a clearly inferior aircraft was chosen. This is unlike some programs where clearly the inferior aircraft was chosen, like the TFX.
Other comments are pure nonsense, no first flight will be setting any classified records for climb or speed, that goes against the basic principles of flight testing.
Richard Hood, e-mail, 26.07.2017 00:46
I just found out recently about the F23. I agree that it is a much better fighter than the F22. How about compared with the F35? That's my favorite one now.
Da Gunny, e-mail, 08.08.2016 02:38
There were many in the Marine Corps Aviation community who wanted the F-23, because of it's performance abilities and it's structural strength/adaptability for carrier and expeditionary airfield operations. Pentagon politics blew it for the Corps and Navy. Besides, the agreement was who ever lost the fighter contract would be subcontracted anyway. They are still trying to unscrew the lack of inter-service operability the f-22/35 has suffered. Public specs on the f-23 are much lower than that aircraft's true capabilities.
Tom, e-mail, 28.01.2016 04:14
Check-out...F-22 (real speed),, then scroll down! Amazing if true, and somehow the "Real" stats were disclosed! Then it was disclosed, by one of the Test Pilots, that the F-23 was the "Fastest" plane he ever flew? Now, the intimation was that the F-23 was faster than the F-22! Wait until you see the F-22 speed results? I can understand the fast speed as the thrust to weight ratio is over 2 to 1 in the F-23, while the Ration for the F-22 is less than that!!
Dfens, e-mail, 29.12.2015 18:56
Since Northrop Grumman won the Long Range Strike Bomber (LRSB) program, the F-23 might get a second shot at life. Had NG lost LRSB, they probably would have been bought by Boeing or Lockheed. Now they should be around for a while and will very likely propose a version of the F-23 for the Navy's F-18 replacement program. I can't imagine the Navy turning this airplane down, even if just for the reason of rubbing the Air Force's nose in their mistake of choosing the F-22 over it.
Favián Perea, 22.08.2014 23:41
We need to overhaul our F-15 and F-16 fleet and supplement a combat hardened airforce with the YF-23. The YF-23 should number in the hundreds as to be able to supplement the U. S. Combat proven airforce
msgt [usaf ret.] b. laput, e-mail, 11.08.2014 17:58
instead of waisting hundreds of billons on the f-35 spend much less and purchase the yf-23.I just can't understand why our stupid defense department can't buy a fighter that is outstanding for once. No instead we have to satisfy some corrupt Politian who is most likey on the take!
Michel Sirois, e-mail, 23.02.2014 06:21
I thing the F23 Widow is the best between what we have today and better then F22.for me the speed is very important and F23 specialist says: F23 is very Fast more then F22.anyway God bless America.Michel
a.machia, e-mail, 25.08.2013 10:04
It is rumored that the US Navy may be interested in the F-23. I read this in an aviation magazine approx. 6 mos. ago.
cleo p landry, e-mail, 11.07.2013 02:19
we must be the best in the air
reuben, e-mail, 21.03.2013 06:36
only the Aurora "if its real"could beat. my Blackwidow!
Bill, e-mail, 16.03.2013 01:22
Northrop lost the F-23 contract for one reason...........They had the B-2. Lockheed was fading.
HyperSonic, e-mail, 29.03.2012 09:42
EVERY TIME ..(almost)an opportunity presents our country with a golden ticket to do the right thing, push the envelope a bit and demonstrate to the world we ARE as smart as we THINK we are, a couple idiots are allowed to be King & Adviser for a day and take full advantage of their new positions.Either some corrupt politicians or A sewing circle of "Depends" wearing "old Money" Geezers that disregard ALL the facts, better aircraft - the lack of conclusive WMD data, mass public opposition.Because their minds are made up
David P.Curcione, e-mail, 27.02.2012 19:19
1 Note: We Need to Build more Yf23-A Fighters passed all it tests too! Agreed! We need to build 2880 Yf23-A Fighters,Planes for the U.S.A.F too! Or the Air National Air Guard,Divsion of all in fifty States too!I agreed to hired moe people to get to work immeadly soon as possable too!c This Means more people needto go to work immeadly agreed! Message to the U.S.A.F Joint Chief of Staff Generals in charge too! There is alot of Air Force F-15s need to be replaced immeadly to replaced the old F-16s Jet Fighters are 4th Gerations Planes are 30 Years old to true They need to be Replaced Imeadly soon as possable newer Jet Fighters Jet Are YF-23_a Black widow 5th Gerations Faster Jet Fighters are needed for Defence of the U.S.A. & Nato Allies too! To keep world Piece too! And Law en order By Training Police in other Trouble Nations don"t want Piece too! This True!! This needs to Looked into true!! Sone of the Arabes Nations are Smaller Nations in the World too! I agreed!! Law Need to addressed in those areas immeadly by International Court of World Other Counties of Nations do Bleaved in Law enorder by Trained Police Foreign Officers of those trouble Nations too! Iagreed!! Let those Nations Take Care of there Responables in there own house in foreign Nations too! Agreed!!! The U.S.Forces should pulledout of those Nations to get on there Feets too! I agreed!! Get to work and Finished thoses Jopbe in other Nations And Get out of there Nations By Closing American Bases out those coountiesimmeadly as soon as possable too! Let"s Go Now Get going now!!! Agreed!!
William Neff, e-mail, 17.01.2012 06:33
Basic defence strategy 101(for dummies)
When deciding on the platform for advanced military technology, create a competition and narrow the competitors down to two or three. Then mothball the winning plane and go with the runner-up for actual application. A military should always have an "Ace in the Hole" so to speak. That way, if a war breaks out and you are matched by enemy technology, you already have a working, ready to go into production counteroffensive weapon at your disposal. The f-23 will see it's day in the sun with newer modern updates like advanced vectored thrust, more powerful engines, a stronger, more advanced skin allowing for earth re-entry, and most importantly... the ability to escape earth atmo and return safely thus providing a platform for the future of space-born fighters and cargo vessels. Both prototypes have been kept in storage while these advancements in technology are being studied for further use. I presume that they will be the only two made for quite some time.
Edwin L. Tan, e-mail, 29.12.2011 05:15
I think your new gerneration plane to replace the F-15 is so impresive but, can you inject the harrier tech on that plane i think it will be give more edge against the enemy can you send me a model of the plane coz i am a collector of new fighter jets more power and God bless Happy new year
Abe, e-mail, 25.10.2011 22:24
Being a former fighter pilot and engineer. I was writing technical manuals for and during the fly off. There was enough political influence in the fly off to make it one sided. As usual, Northrop lost. Now, in saying that... There were a few obvious problems with the F-23 that the F-22 did not have. Such as the wing tip vortices which would allow the airplane to be seen on radar for a brief second while in extreme maneuvering. The F-22 did not have these problems. The F-23 required more skilled personnel to maintain the airplane. The F-22 could be maintained by a typical F-15 ground service crew. Unfortunately, all the talking in the world about an airplane that has been parked is a mute point. Because, the corruption, politics, and policies of big business in coordination with the DoD and federal government events such as these will continue to occur. Remember: When a government gets bigger, and more and more people are being prosecuted as law breakers, that means that the government is afraid of its people and trying to keep them in line through fear. This kind of government never works and never stays for too long. We (the united states) are an empire like all others in history. And, we will fall like all of the other empires of history. It took Rome 2000+ years to accomplish the same things that we accomplished in 200. Look at history...we have the same problems, just in a new time.
a.machiaverna, e-mail, 27.09.2011 09:00
F-23 is a better airplane than the F-22. Politics?
David, e-mail, 20.07.2011 22:28
1.The Fifth Geration Fighter Jet Will Cruised at (M) 2.1 + too.
ERIC, e-mail, 07.07.2011 15:13
Taiwan,japan,south korean and many asean countries interested to buy YF23. Why USA refuse to sell them YF 23. YF23 for usa friends and allies. Good money and create more Jobs for USA.
David P.Curcione National Mili, e-mail, 18.04.2011 22:14
1.The YF-23A is Steath Fighter Jet is 5th Geration Fighters Jets for 2011 A.D. & Beyond too! We Need replacements immmedly now soon!! F-22s ,Yf-23s & F-35s too! There Speeds should be over Crusing is Mack-2.6 too! Top Speed is over Mack 2.7 + too!
David P.Curcione National Mili, e-mail, 18.04.2011 22:10
1.The YF-23A is Steath Fighter Jet is 5th Geration Fighters Jets for 2011 A.D. & Beyond too! We Need replacements immmedly now soon!! F-22s ,Yf-23s & F-35s too! There Speeds should be over Crusing is Mack-2.6 too! Top Speed is over Mack 2.7 + too!
David P.Curcione National Mili, e-mail, 18.04.2011 21:54
1.The YF-23A is Steath Fighter Jet is 5th Geration Fighters Jets for 2011 A.D. & Beyond too! We Need replacements immmedly now soon!! F-22s ,Yf-23s & F-35s too! There Speeds should be over Crusing is Mack-2.6 too! Top Speed is over Mack 2.7 + too!
Dfens, e-mail, 17.01.2011 23:59
Here's an email I received in November of 2007. Not only did the worst airplane win the competition, but it took 25 years to develop. We need to quit paying contractors profit on development. Once we started doing that, there ceased to be any reason for contractors to build weapons. That's why there are only 20 B-2's and 170 F-22's. The F-22 might not be the best, but it's better than a paper airplane for keeping the nation safe!
MEMORANDUM FOR CSAF SAF/OS SUBJECT: F-22A FOC Declaration
1. Mr. Secretary and Chief, I am honored to announce that after 25 years of collaborative effort, a key milestone for the F-22A is behind us. The integrated 1FW/192FW at Langley possesses sufficient Raptors, equipment and trained Airmen to provide Air Dominance for the Joint Force for many years to come. The Raptor is ready for global CFACC tasking ahead of schedule and I declare Full Operational Capability for the F-22A as of 12 December 07.
2. Our success at Langley is the showcase example of our shared vision for the Total Force Integration of tomorrow. 1FW Active duty and 192FW Virginia guard Airmen fly and maintain the world's premier 5th generation fighter with seamless integration, superior dedication and unmatched synergy. Team Langley represents the type of readiness and organization we need to maintain a dominant Joint Total Force for the future.
//Signed// JOHN D.W. CORLEY General, USAF Commander
Dfens, e-mail, 17.01.2011 23:47
The YF-23 was much faster than the F-22 and had much more advanced aerodynamics features. It also had a way of supressing the IR. It was not designed by McDonnell Douglas or Northrop. They had to hire some outside guys to do the design. The funny thing is those same guys had to fix the F-22 intakes so that program could get off the ground. Many of the features you see in common between the production F-22 and the YF-23 are because of tips the designers of the YF-23 gave the Lockheed guys when they did that work.
Serge L'Hostie, e-mail, 13.01.2011 18:52
I am very curieux ! about what happen to those 2 YF-23 ? and where they are now ?
Gerry Keffer, e-mail, 07.01.2011 01:47
What's up with this scam from 'Dr. Kenneth Kwaku' (or is that 'Quacko?'
This kind of stuff from him does not belong on this site. He needs to be caned and tossed to the curb.
Gerry Keffer, e-mail, 07.01.2011 01:44
I have a couple of photo's taken by AVIS (Air Force) of the YF-22 and the YF-23 during their 'fly offs.' Just looking at the YF-23 I could see that it was not only a better, sleaker looking aircraft but more adapted for the task at hand.
I agree, Northrop has always gotten the raw end of a very nasty stick/deal. Politics should not be allowed to determin which company wins which contract, That should be left up to the people that fly and maintain them. And as far as what NATO is flying, who gives a darn! Nato can go kiss a duck...
Masta, 30.11.2010 18:47
I wish Northrop can just move off shore. Just build stuff for Japan, maybe for the hell of it, Europe? Then when the best fighter jet comes out and sell it to multiple countries, it will really slap the US government in the face. So they know to stop playing political and start doing business with honesty. From Kirk's explanation, yes, I always do believe in the YF-23.
Kirk, e-mail, 01.09.2010 04:30
Having been part of the Northrop development effort for the YF-23, I have first hand knowledge of at least some of the factors that went into the selection. (I still have my first flight pins for the YF23 and B2)
#1- the one hard and fast requirement of the competing YF-22 and YF-23 build and fly offs, was that the aircraft MUST ABSOLUTELY meet 100% of the defined requirements.
The F22 met about 68% of the requirements, but outperformed by 200%+ many of the other requirements......The YF-23 met 100% of the requirements.
The one requirement the government ignored, was the one that was inviolate. Amazing! but typical of how Northrop was treated.
The F20 Tigershark was the same price as an F16, AND had 1/2 the life cycle cost, a 70% spare part interchangeability with the F5, and thousands of trained pilots and mechanics in the F5, worldwide, as well as 3,600 F5s to interchange with. The sales video showed 2 F20s at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska, at 56 below, when the klaxon blew. 60 seconds later, from a cold start, the F20s were airborne, and the weapons systems were up and armed (laser gyros are a wonderful thing!).
The F16 took 20 minutes to get off the ground, after hooking up the support truck (since remedied in current F16s).
The government stated that NATO required a common continental defense fighter, and F16s were already ordered by all NATO allies - the US would not buy the superior, lower cost F20. Northrop said fine! We'll sell it to the Foreign buyers that have F5s. The US Government nixed the plan, as they would not allow a superior fighter to be sold.
$1.1B of Northrop F20 internal development funds, down the drain, with no recourse.
B2's were the first military aircraft where the R&D was amortized into the price of the aircraft. A B2 costs 70% of a 747 to build, but amortize the $19.6B in R&D money into 125, no 75, no 35, no 15 aircraft, and the price appears exorbitant.
The YF17 (F/A-18) was a superior aircraft, but the Navy refused to buy from Northrop (an old Jack Northrop feud), so the agreement was struck with McDonald-Douglass to build F18s from Northrop provided airframes (Northrop El Segundo plant) for Navy use, and all land based F18s would be build by Northrop. Australia ordered 16 - the only land based F/A-18s built - the only US plane ever granted the distinction as a fighter/attack craft.
Go back to the YB-47, and the government forcing the scrapping and destruction of not only the planes, but the plans as well.
There is a reason that Northrop does not build aircraft anymore. If they were a bit less patriotic, they probably would have moved offshore, to avoid the corrupt US government.
Edward Myers, 13.07.2010 02:33
Does anyome know the RCS numbers of the nighthawk vs the YF23? Better.....worse? Obviously the F117 is a slug in the air. I hate politics....lol
Edward Myers, 13.07.2010 02:25
I dont know all the facts, but have read and watched as many shows as possible about the competition. And although the reptor won, I am still very intrigued by the F/A 23....and I will give it that status myself. America didnt lose a step either way. I just got to see my first fligt of a F22 over Traverse Bay Michigan on july 3rd, it is an amazing aircraft. I love the thing, it is very manueverabl3e and can perform things that other aircraft cannot, due to thrust vectoring. I will say that the F/A 23 is the sweetest plane that i have ever seen, and if everything I've read is true, there is no way NG should ever scrap the design ! Period ! But I also beleive that we should, as a country and not a company, be smart enought not to let that kind of technology get outside this country! That plane has a use in our military, F117s are fast aproaching ancient. Hopefully Northrup G will just keep inproving the plane and avionics.....we dont want war to be fair.....we want it to be quick and effective. I am just happy to be an american and to be protected by such an amazing military !
Colky7, e-mail, 27.06.2010 21:17
Hey Guys, I loved the F-23 too and thought it was a stunning looking plane. I wouldn't be too disheartened by the F-22 though as it is still the best fighter out there! I'm a Brit and would love it if the RAF could get their hands on the Raptor. I'm not particularly down on the Typhoon and think once we get the vector update and improved engine it will be a formidable aircraft and stealth aside nearly the equal of the Raptor. It may in fact be as good in a dog fight at this point. Trouble is it will never get into one as the Raptor will have shot it down 60 miles away! All in all though i loved the F-23, it was probably the best looking aircraft i've ever seen (much better than the Eagle or Tomcat), but you still got it pretty good in the USAF, I can't see any country getting a better aircraft for a few years to come!!
David P.Curcione, e-mail, 10.05.2010 22:54
1. The New Inproved newest Fighter Jet will has a higher top Speed too! Yf-23 Figher Jet#2 is top Speed is about mack 2.7+ too! Same as the F-22 Fighter Jet too! It"s top Speed is 2.7 + too. Agreed !!!!!! The F-35 Top Speed is Mack 2.9 + too!!
Joseph Clift, e-mail, 21.03.2010 03:54
Mike: The contrail(s) you speak of were an anomaly only on the right wing of the YF-23, and are not indicative of a failure in the design. A simple tweak to the leading edge after conclusion of flight testing would have been the fix on PAV-1 (PAV-2 did not demonstrate a similar "problem"). Furthermore, The YF-23 would not have required more "me" time in the hangar, as you state - the F-22 has taken 12 years in development, in a politically-charged atmosphere. Just FYI - after the contract was awarded to Lockheed for the F-22, they approached Northrop / McAir and offered to purchase one of the two YF-23s - in order to "mitigate further development time in reducing the F-22's RCS" - Northrop politely extended a middle finger to Lockheed and refused the sale. Lockheed engineers supposedly used photographs and surreptitious after-hours measurements of the existing aircraft planforms to change the F-22's planform to what it is today in the F-22A. Check for yourself - find any website that gives planform views of the YF-22 vs. F-22A, then compare those to the YF-23. Family resemblance? Sure.
Mike, e-mail, 27.02.2010 00:03
so then, most of you folks prefer the back-up quarterback, right? i'm surprised that the problem of wingtip contrails during normal maneuvering of the YF-23 haven't been mentioned here. nothing quite like advertising your difficult to detect aircraft's presence with some unwanted contrails, huh? any upsides to the YF-23 were not worth the risk associated with the technologies used to achieve those gains. if the poop ever hits the air mover, i'd rather we have an aircraft that doesn't require too much "me" time in the hangar.
tony andrade, e-mail, 05.02.2010 04:10
Im proud to say that I was a member of the debelopment of the yf/22.yf/23.R.N.D TRUST REVERSER nassles.Im now 45 years old living the american dream here in me country mexico.I will do it oll over again. I feel that f23 is not a figther is a work of art
isaac valencia, e-mail, 12.01.2010 20:09
hello! some of guys, can send me planes to build a rc model of northtrop? please? thanks!
Electric Joe, e-mail, 24.12.2009 08:05
I'm disinclined to favor comments on appearance, or from those with an obvious bias.
My understanding of the decision breaks down to this: 1) The F-22 was smaller and lighter (USAF fighter types are strongly biased toward minimum size and weight); 2) The F-22 was less risky and less expensive (if F-23 materials are similar to B-2 materials they could be a long-term maintenance nightmare and require the same special handling as the B-2, limiting deployability); 3) The F-22 was more maneuverable (by the time an engagement becomes a dog-fight, speed becomes irrelevant and energy addition and maneuverability become paramount--speed is merely a means of adding energy or disengaging); 4) The F-23 had a slightly smaller RCS (It is all well and good to have the RCS of a B-B, but if the RCS of a ball bearing is more than sufficient are the added weight, cost and complexity worth the tax dollars?); 5) The F-23 was faster (no aircraft truly fights at top speed--the speeds that are important are cornering speed, climb speed, cruising speed, and for interceptors, dash speed); 6) The F-23 had longer range (nice to have, but not a trump over othr factors); 7) The F-22 was more readily adaptable to using hard-points in environments that did not require maximum steath (not every enemy fields SA-12s and AA-12s, most field nothing better than an SA-18); 8) Both aircraft met the USAF's requirements (and both had their Congressional supporters, so neither side was without Senators and Representatives conspiring on its behalf).
If both aircraft meet requirements, you buy the cheaper aircraft to make the tax-dollars go farther.
As for appearance, neither aircraft is as attractive as the F-15 and F-14 both of which are classic designs. Stealth may cause aircraft to look futuristic, but it also causes them to look ungainly.
Xenostrike 06, e-mail, 06.11.2009 13:47
I really like this thing.. more than Raptor
Emnet Belewu, e-mail, 24.10.2009 08:51
Wow I like this one. It looks very sophisticated and Geneuous.Wooow!!!!!!!!!!
T.J., e-mail, 23.10.2009 22:51
The issue may be a result ofpolitics and design! The RCS of the F-23 was greater than that of the F-22 - look at the canopy design / difference and note the significance of that design difference! There is your issue - not that it makes any difference at this time!
Thor, e-mail, 17.10.2009 06:46
The fact is the YF-22 had its doors blown off by the YF-23 when the side by side speed test were conducted it was the YF-22 STANDING STILL not an F-15!The F-22 IS THE BEST OF THE BEST MSY SEE THE F-23BLACKWIDOW 2 OUT OF MOTHBALLS SOME DAY.
Evan, e-mail, 08.10.2009 23:46
I thought that the f-22 was the best of the best. Then i found out about the F-23. SO now every time i see a f-22 it just looks so stupid. The F-23 was much more of a stealth design and was very maneuverable, but that the USAF's problem. So thanks again for shooting your self in the food AGAIN!!!
manuel andrade, e-mail, 05.10.2009 07:04
im a mexican citizen and berry fortuned for the oportuniti to be a part of a teem member of the construccion of this magnificent machine I worked on rnd. on the late 80s/90s Im gratful to that grate country that make me feel like one of his oun.......I will doit oll ober again tanks.
Chris, e-mail, 16.09.2009 14:45
Ther is no way the F22 should have won that contest. Before i started studying the 23 i was absolutely fascinated by the 22 but now...
Dr Kenneth Kwaku, e-mail, 04.09.2009 22:00
From:The Manager, International Commercial Bank First Light Branch Top Urgent Message, Pls.
Hi,
This email is not in anyway an official but a personal and confidential proposal to you. My name is Dr Kenneth Kwaku.I am the manager of First Light branch of international Commercial Bank . I am married with two kids. I am writing to solicit your assistance in the transfer of US$ 3,550,020.00.
This fund is the excess of what my branch in where I am the manager made as profit last year.I have already submitted an approved for end of the Year report to the head office and they will never know of this excess amount that i have already put in an escrow deposit account anonymously.
As an officer of the bank, I cannot be directly connected to this money thus I am impelled to request for your mutual assistance to apply and claim this money into your bank account for further investment in your country. I intend to part 40% of this fund to you while 60% shall be for me.
There are practically no risk involved in this transaction and everything that you do to claim this fund will be under legitimate ground. The mode of transfer is practically on your instruction to the bank.
All I need from you is to stand as the original depositor of this fund. If you accept this offer,I will appreciate your timely response, or call +233 26 1283 444.
With regards, Dr Kenneth Kwaku.
Josiah, 06.07.2009 19:09
I guess it just gives new meaning to the old saying "good enough for government work".
Art deco, 02.07.2009 03:59
A naval fighter can be operated from land bases, but not necessarily the other way. It's more than a tailhook. Also, the wide range of naval munitions must be stored internally. Of course, the Air Force made a cute new skinnybomb for the F-22 just for show. I'm reminded of the Luftwaffe aversion to puchasing the He-100D or any Heinkel fighter because they made bombers. The government went through enough to kill the F-20. Even chuck couldn`t save it. They were on sale through the State Department! Ever see anybody in State that you would buy a car from! The decision for the F-22 was made in the usual way, by people who didn`t know or care and were made all the richer for it.
andrew douglass, e-mail, 01.07.2009 22:43
the navy could have saved a packet of money if they selected the yf 23 to fill the roles of a-12 f35 f18e/g
gerard, e-mail, 30.04.2009 10:50
I know its I before E in believe my spell check hasnt been the greatest lately.
Gerard, e-mail, 30.04.2009 10:47
The F-23, a sexy beast that turned heads and made you go hmmm, will always be number 1 with me. As for the F-22, it looks like the result of a one night stand between an eagle and a hornet( I'll admit it is a good plane too). All kidding aside, i beleive as long as politics has a hand in the process and the mind set of some of the top brass in the military as a determining factor in what we have, we will have to make the best of what we are given to play with. Although it would be nice to let us military grunts,(pilots, mechanics, etc), choose what we have in our toy box from time to time. F-23 powered by GE for the win.
Rob, e-mail, 08.04.2009 12:01
Yes the F23 was a better choice but issue now is to get enough F22's into service 183 is to small. 600 is what is needed. The F22's are over streached in service. The JSF is not a F22.
Glenn, e-mail, 03.04.2009 08:04
Problem is those assholes in washinton think they know better than pilots, being one myself. I actually flew this fine aircraft and it's better than anything I've flown. It looks a hellofalot better than the F-33 that's for damn sure!!
Dale, 12.02.2009 23:06
One thing that everyone here might find humorous: While both YF-23As were fflyable after the fly-off, neither of the YF-22As were. I know that one of the YF-22As had a hard landing on the lakebed and forced the main landing gear up through the wing. My memory is a little fuzzy on the other one but I seem to recall that it was lost when a major system failure cropped up in flight and the pilot had to escape the aircraft. I could be wrong on the second one.
A friend of mine, Cal Jewett, talked with Paul after the first in-flight afterburner test on the YF-23A. Cal said that Paul was actually frightened at the acceleration. He had given the F-15 chase-plane a few seconds head start and shortly thereafter blew by him like he was standing still. We, at the B-2 CTF, decided that the contract for the ATF was awarded on the basis of politics, not capability. The YF-23A truly was the superior aircraft.
Erik, e-mail, 30.12.2008 04:38
To all: There are several books, videos, and other resources available for personal research. Thus, you can draw your own educated conclusions about why one jet took the contract and the other did not. To summarize my own findings, the YF-22 was faster(initial top speed testing), more manueverable (in part due to its use of thrust vectoring and smaller size), and was cheaper by approximately $800,000 per copy. It was considered to use more reliable and conventional technologies. YF-23 was considered more "cutting edge" in terms of design and construction technologies, but the Air Force considered these technologies "riskier" and less proven. YF-23 posted substantially better RCS (stealth) numbers, had greater range (due to internal wing volume area) and a lower drag coefficient, even though it is a larger aircraft. Both Lockheed and Northrop engineers agree that (had further testing been approved)the YF-23 is the inherently faster design. And while the YF-22 canopy was one single piece with no framing obstructions, the YF-23 pilot sits much higher on the plane and has absolutely unparalleled visibility around his aircraft. Northrop chose to use a weapons bay mock-up demonstrator, whereas Lockheed actually built a working weapons bay into their prototypes. Yes, the YF-23 unveiled and flew more than a month before the YF-22. Yes, the YF-23 is a much more sinuous and better looking design. Overall I believe the YF-23 is dollar for dollar a superior and more capable aircraft. I believe Lockheed was more politically savvy and greased more palms with the Air Force, who took the cheaper and less radical design choice due to old school stick-in-the-mud conventionalist status quo mindset thinking. Short version: I gotta agree with Dennis Husted. Your tax dollars at work.
rpc, 21.12.2008 04:27
I remember working on the airplane during the f-22 and f-23 competition. The F-23 was superior in many instances, and the prototype was finished several months ahead of the f-22. The competition was held-up waiting for lockheed to finish the f-22. Quite frankly, the F-23 lost due to Northrop's poor relationship with the Government.
GrammarNazi, e-mail, 31.10.2008 19:17
Oh know I left of an ly while typing .... I must go kill myself now for my bad typing
GrammarNazi, e-mail, 31.10.2008 19:15
To the people that are worried about spelling issues. Have you ever considered that they were typing issues. Get a life. But then again it is always a good way to divert from actual discussing an issue.
nicolas, e-mail, 29.10.2008 01:35
i think that northrop grumann will turn around and sell it to the airforces that buy frm EADS (now that would be funny to see the best jet fighter in the world owned buy a country other than the U.S.).
vaughan drew, e-mail, 26.10.2008 21:02
Does the yf-23 still fly for testing purposes or does it have to be scrapped? It would be nice to see it at an airshow but i doubt the government will let that happen.
jay, e-mail, 15.10.2008 07:31
As the one guilty of the "aircrafts" incident, I find it interesting that over a year later there are still posts to this blog mentioning the error, and seemingly becoming more and more hostile. Please forgive my ignorance, and my horrific error. I had no idea that such a mistake would cause such an incredible reaction. On the other hand, I won't mention the fact that your post also included spelling errors, because my mistake is due to my being an imbecile, whereas yours is simply a mistake, I'm sure.
Also, don't lump me in with those who feel as though the 23 should have won because it was a better looking aircraft. It should have won because it was a better fighter in most every way, and matched up better to the requirements set forth by the airforce. Of course, I am somewhat prejudiced since my father was the chief engineer on the ATF 23 for McDonnell Douglas. However, I think the majority of independent military strategists would agree that the 23 was the more capable vehicle.
Thanks again for your continued interest and commentary on my spelling error.
David, e-mail, 12.10.2008 21:07
Gareth, I share your concern about the poor spelling exhibited here. In addition, although you failed to mention it, I am certain you share my aversion to poor grammar. Therefore you will also understand that I must correct the following (corrections are capitalized): "but not as surprised as I am by uttely appalling spelling and grammer of almost everybody here.", should be expressed as "but not as surprised as I am by THE utteRly appalling spelling and grammer of almost everybody here." Thank you so much for raising the bar, my friend.
Gareth, e-mail, 06.10.2008 23:36
I was surprised that the F-23 did not win, but not as surprised as I am by uttely appalling spelling and grammer of almost everybody here. "Aircrafts" "loose" not "lose", water "vaper". Didn't any of you people learn English at school? It's also amusing to note that so many of you imbeciles feel that the prettiest aircraft deserved to win the contract.
Earl, e-mail, 02.09.2008 04:09
I've been to the Air Force Historical Research Agency at Maxwell AFB and tried to find information about the YF-23. It remains classified to this day. I have heard it was far faster than the YF-22 but the figures are classified. Bear in mind though that the airplane was being produced by the Northrop/McDonnell Douglas team and at the time there was fear that McDonnell Douglas couldn't produce the airplane at the contract price and on time. McDonnell Douglas's reputation contributed to the demise of the YF-23, but later they regained it by producing the C-17 at contract price and on time.
EG, 16.08.2008 01:27
Someone said the F-22 is 15 years behind schedule... more like 2. The only problem is that the F-22 has had to change a number of components, adding to the original cost, thus pushing back the program and creating a reduction of the total production. If cost was the initial factor for choosing the YF-22 over the YF-23, by now the numbers would have been negligable. YF-23 anyday!!
Arc, e-mail, 05.05.2008 16:32
I think both are awesome and yes yf23 has the better specs that the f22, like some of you guys are saying "politic" or maybe there are things that we don't know why they choose f22 over f23 besides the politics. it maybe less expensive that the f22 but is it easy to be upgraded.think about this, when they bild the AH-64A and it was battle tested and so many confim kills, but they wanted a newer model and thats why the made the AH-64D..from looking at the picture you can see a little diff..but there's more into it and made an upgrade from AH-64D lot 1 to now the most or shall I call it super apache the AH-64D lot 9...why didn't they do that to the Alpha model..who nows
Brian, e-mail, 30.03.2008 18:49
I think McDonnell's Douglas builds really good planes such as the Hornet,Harrier,Phantom,and many many more. ^_^
norman, e-mail, 12.03.2008 01:52
yf23 was actually the better aircraft,but lockheed got the contract,politics. all spec's of yf23 vs.yf22,tell you that,what a shame
Greg Morgan, e-mail, 24.02.2008 10:57
After reading all these comments I think I've found the answer to everyone's dilemma. Why not buy Sukhoi aircraft and build them in the USA? Cheaper, less than half the price of any American fighter in production. Faster than any American aircraft. Flies just as high fully laden as the F-23 will empty. Flies much further than any US aircraft. Turns inside all US aircraft. Similar avionics and weaponry. Too easy!
calum morris, e-mail, 09.02.2008 16:09
im sorry but i cant see how the f-22 won, the black widow 2 is faster, prettier, more stealthy and cheaper i think then again, i am a bit bias, it is my favourite american aircraft!
Iron Mountain Man, e-mail, 22.01.2008 00:11
Mr. Husteds' information is 1,000% accurate and truthful in that it's all confirmed by hundreds of first person eye witness accounts, flight test reports and actual missions flown from Edwards and Nellis AFB re: the YF-23 vs. the YF-22. The Northrup aircraft was and is superior all around to the Lockheed submission and just now in early 2008 the F-22 is coming into squadron service. That's 15 years BEHIND schedule and I don't want to know the cost ovveruns on this program. Again, Northrop and the American people got the shaft.
LOL, 08.01.2008 21:12
It's "aircraft" for singular or plural use, not "aircrafts." (think "deer")
Why was one chose over the other? There is not simple answer to that one. It's too bad that the Navy and Marine Corps did not choose to go with the YF23 instead of the JSF...but that decision was made for them in the early 90s by the Clinton Administration.
SHark14, e-mail, 01.12.2007 21:40
Well, I agree the Yf-23 should have won and I think the YF-23 looks batter than the F-22 raptor.
Jay, e-mail, 09.11.2007 05:54
Absolutely right. As was mentioned earlier, Sam Nunn was the Chairman of the Armed Service Committee, and Sam happens to be from Georgia where Martin Marietta is based. No surprise there. Janes said that the F-23 was the better plane, and more in line with what the Air Force wanted.
The F-15 is a great fighter, and one of the few aircrafts that can fly completely vertical and accelerate at the same time. You've probably seen the comments from the test pilot of the 23 that have said that when he took off, he was pulling away from F-15's while the 15's were in full "re-heat". But speed was just one of the amazing attributes of this plane- the avionics were unmatched and are still unmatched today.
Rob, e-mail, 09.11.2007 00:17
I believe the main reason was politcal for this reason. Northrop just rolled out the B-2, and the powers to be were not going to give the two largest advanced next generation stealth contracts to the same company. That would have meant we were going to single source stealth to one company for the next 20 years. While the F-23 was the better plane Northrop should have teamed up with another contractor to prevent the decision.
jay, e-mail, 06.11.2007 05:32
My Dad was the chief engineer for the F-23 at McDonnell Douglas. I think he would be very pleased with the comments that you folks have made about this aircraft. He was an amazing man, and he was sure this aircraft was the best in the world. It was a hell of a plane, and I hope that the plan for this is still alive. Thank you all.
Tim, e-mail, 01.11.2007 18:46
Jim Smith, there are no YF-23 Blackwidow IIs in service sadly. This is becaue only the F-22 was given a production contract. Though both the F-22 and YF-23 are great aircrafts, only one was allowed to go into production. Though in my oppinion, the YF-23 could have easily been made the replacement for the F-117 Nighthawk.
Jim Smith, e-mail, 25.10.2007 21:59
Anyone on this website if you could find out how many are in service that would be great?
joe, e-mail, 25.10.2007 21:52
how many are in service
Wayne, 25.10.2007 01:42
Dennis Hussted is correct. In today world is not the best aircraft get the contract. Is the most political and cheapest. I beleive the YF-23 will make a come like the YF-17 as F/A-18
Dennis Husted, e-mail, 12.10.2007 20:11
I was taking a computer programming class in college and I was required to give a report on technology applications in the 21st Century. I chose the ATF competition and read all I could and studied both planes and read everything I could. 1.YF-23 was faster than the YF-22. 2.YF-23 could out accelerate a clean F-16 in afterburner going vertical. 3.The first time the YF-23 took off it reached a speed that was immediately classified which impressed the Air Force. 4.The YF-23 was much stealthier than the YF-22. 5.The YF-23 had a far less drag penalty than the YF-22 because of it's thrust vectoring nozzles which had a significant weight penalty. 6.The YF-23 proved to be much more maitainable by not having any flight delays due to maintenance problems which resulted in the YF-23 finishing all flight tests almost two months earlier than the YF-22. 7.The YF-23 had fewer parts to maintain versus the YF-22. 8.1000 fighter pilots were polled and asked which was more important to them in a dog fight:Speed or manuverability, over 90% chose speed! 9.The YF-23 had a greater range and was more aerodynamic and could fly farther are less fuel than the YF-22. 10.Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia was Chairman of the Armed Services Committee and the Lockheed-Martin plant is in Georgia whereas Northrop is in California. Sam Nunn influenced the Air Force to select the F-22 or their may not be enough money to fund any other program. Even though Northrop would have added 3000 more jobs over Lockheed, Nunn was not concerned about generating more jobs for the country as a whole as he was for Georgia to improve his chances or re-election. The F-22 decision was political.
Deron, e-mail, 20.09.2007 23:56
Politics made this decision. Texas connection factored in...
BRYON, e-mail, 19.08.2007 06:17
the YF-23 was agreat looking fighter, it had a greater mass than the F-22 AND ALSO LEFT WATER VAPER TRAILS IN ITS FLIGHTS THAT COULD BE PICKED UP BY RADAR THAT WAS THE BIGGEST REASON IT WAS NOT PICKED AND IT WAS FASTER THAN THE YF22.
Vimy, e-mail, 08.08.2007 06:38
I do remember hearing that the plane also prooved much less reliable during the testing compared to the Raptor
Tim, e-mail, 13.06.2007 04:59
The Yf-23 lost the contract for several reasons. -It was slightly harder to maintain than the F-22. -The YF-23 was less manuverable that the F-22. -It was also a more expensive aircraft over all, but not by much. -A possible sub reason is that the Yf-23 is large in size compared to the F-15 that it would have replaced had it got the contract. (YF-23 Length:67 feet, 5 inches [20.6 meters]; F-15 Length:63 feet, 9 inches [19.43 meters]) On the other hand, the YF-23 had a slightly better radar cross section than the F-22, though debatable, many say that the YF-23 was the better looking plane. many people thatI have talked to thingt the Yf-23 should have been given a contracts to replace the F-117 Nighthawk, but that probably wont happen.
tc, 13.05.2007 00:33
the Yf-23 lost the contract because the F-22 has a more convential looking plane than the F-22 and the F-23 was considered to radical for the time What i have read about the atf competition it was the airforces heirachy that decided that That is why the airforce has the F-22 and not F-23 i think the F-23 should have won and not he F-22
frank, e-mail, 10.12.2006 15:53
why did the YF23 loose the contract. what are the pro's & con's of this plane.
Frank, e-mail, 10.12.2006 15:50
why did it loose the contact. what were the pro's & con's of the YF-23
dani, 15.11.2006 18:28
well i like planes alot and im realy up to date with all new models f-22, and all the other, but wow this 1 never eraly heard of it.
