Jump to content

OT: YF-22 vs YF-23


Recommended Posts

I don’t want this thread to become a flame war but I was just curious after watching a small documentary on the YF-23, why did it lose? I remember I read that the YF-22 was chosen due it its conventional shape? But didn’t the YF-23 perform better? Any info that would enlighten me would be appreciated.

 

And also, one small question, there was a red hour glass symbol at the belly of the YF-23 when it first flew, upon seeing that, orders came from top officials to have it immediately removed, why was that? Was something offensive about the red hour glass symbol?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

F-23 had bigger development risks and costs and less potential to grow, it was also decided that pure RCS and speed figures where the balckwidow excelled were no longer the most important factors with the demise of the soviet union. Besides lockheed martin was heavily lobied since early 90's. It just elbowed almost everyone else out of the fighter business in the US. Not only that but in other aerospace markets as well.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The F-22 had TVC already on the prototype, the black widow is one of the most, if not the most beautiful plane ever made, especially in white. And I'm sure the production model wouldn't get an ugly fat duckish nose. It was faster, stealthier and more maneuvrable aerodynamics wise (if the VF-22 would have its nozzles locked). Did I say it was gorgeous? Oh, it had a bigger weapon bay too. Conservatives (funny, in this case, as both are still ahead of their time) won :(

Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look back the Raptor was the most skidish of the 2 in the prototype phase. But it realy came arround in the development program, I believe Both the Raptor and black widow would have very similar capabilities today except that the widow would be much more costly than the raptor. For excample the exaust ports required extensive maintenance to keep the thermal tiles in order just like the space shuttle. The tail of the plane was probably the most expensive part of the plane to build and maintain.

F-22 has also a costly price tag associated to the engines because its ceramic tilting nozzles are hard to built but they dont require much constant maintenance, at the end of their operational life they just replaced by another pair. The F-23 couldnt do this, you had to babysit its fiery a$$, kinda like keeping a baby happy with tooshie powder :D

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yea the YF-23 had a pretty radical design (cool nonetheless but untested). Like Pilotasso said, there were risks. Especially the tail design, i believed it was called the Pelikan tail <-- not sure if i spelled that right, it was named after the guy who designed it.

 

Anyway, good question about the hour glass, I'm still waiting to find that one out.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both planes top speed are classified, then and now, both planes are/would be limited to mach 1.8 due to skin preservation reasons (thermoplastics) though their arframes could have allowed much superior speeds if a short life cycle for the skin could be allowed.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I actually herd that the rapto out proformed the 23, but the 23 was better in some ares. i think they are quite evenly matched.

 

as for the one looking better, i hve to say the F-22. The F-23 looks... well.. hard to explane. I just don't like it.

 

The F-23's name is the black widdow, do that Hour glass thing might have been made to resemble the actual spider. (Just a wild @$$ guess.) and i have no idea why they demanded to have it removed.

DCS Wishlist: 1) FIX THE DAMN RIVERS!!! 2) Spherical or cylindrical panorama view projection. 3) Enhanced input options (action upon button release, etc). 4) Aircraft flight parameter dump upon exit (stick posn, attitude, rates, accel, control volume, control-surface positions, SAS bias, etc). 5) ADS-33 maneuver courses as static objects. 6) Exposed API or exports of trim position and stick force for custom controllers. 7) Select auto multiple audio devices

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ya, that could be...

DCS Wishlist: 1) FIX THE DAMN RIVERS!!! 2) Spherical or cylindrical panorama view projection. 3) Enhanced input options (action upon button release, etc). 4) Aircraft flight parameter dump upon exit (stick posn, attitude, rates, accel, control volume, control-surface positions, SAS bias, etc). 5) ADS-33 maneuver courses as static objects. 6) Exposed API or exports of trim position and stick force for custom controllers. 7) Select auto multiple audio devices

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw a documentary on the YF-23 a while ago that mentioned the hourglass. If I recall correctly (and assuming the documentary got it right) the team put it on in the middle of testing as a fun thing to make it look more like its namesake spider. It took the USAF a while to notice, but when they did they insisted it be removed since it was viewed as unprofessional and potentially embarrassing if the press noticed.

 

Probably the same sorts of killjoy brass that that frown on nose art, IMHO.

CanadaDave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't find much of anything on the red hourglass-but I'm at work so I can't spend too much time on it. There is some commentary (speculation) that the DoD was kind of pissed off with Northrup & Mikkie-D. They were apparently both having a bit of bad luck with massive cost overruns on the B-2 (northrup) and McD. was reeling from the cancellation of some naval bomber (A-12).

 

On the flip side- Lockheed had impressed the hell out of some key people with the project we know as the "wobbly goblin" being completed early and UNDER budget. (F-117) So it may not have been all about the planes themselves..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be interesting to see who gets the next Bomber.

 

Lockheed and Boeing will muscle Northrop out to the side, then turn on each other in a bloodbath that would make any given episode of Celebrity Deathmatch pale in comparison.

 

I'd pay money to watch :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer is. They choosed F-22 instead of F-23 because mostly important people in US are stupid like G. B.

 

*sigh* what did i say in the very first sentence of this thread, i do not want this thread to become a flame war. This has been an intelligent talk so far, keep it that way, and keep politics out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree that they chose the YF-22 because of it being a more conventional design. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the reason these aircraft were developed also disappeared and I guess it was much easier to sell something that looks as an evolutionary step forward rather then something more radical, as was YF-23. Plus the fact that Lockheed had stronger background than Northrop and probably better connections..

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Politics - some bean counter decided to sole source LHM for all future fighters! Be interesting to see who gets the next Bomber.

 

Well- it always plays a role in every procurement decision. But it doesn't mean that the company on the short end of the stick this time will continue to be. You can bet that if Lockheed hosed up a project -they'd be cut off in a heartbeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found it. Jetfighter II.

 

It was a really sweet game.

 

More @ Migman.

 

Nice. Do you have ingame screenshots?

DCS Wishlist: 1) FIX THE DAMN RIVERS!!! 2) Spherical or cylindrical panorama view projection. 3) Enhanced input options (action upon button release, etc). 4) Aircraft flight parameter dump upon exit (stick posn, attitude, rates, accel, control volume, control-surface positions, SAS bias, etc). 5) ADS-33 maneuver courses as static objects. 6) Exposed API or exports of trim position and stick force for custom controllers. 7) Select auto multiple audio devices

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...