PDA

View Full Version : So what's the reason YF-23 lost to F-22?


luvya
11-01-2004, 01:04 AM
I love them both, but I think the YF-23 is a more advanced looking fighter, while the F-22 still has a trace of F-15. I dunno...can someone sum up the differences between these two fighters? And what is happening to YF-23? Is it of no use now? That would be sad, considering the amount of money going into the R&D and other stuff.

YF-23 (http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/YF-23/Medium/EC94-42454-3.jpg)

F-22 (http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/f22/f22photos.htm)

Anubis
11-01-2004, 01:05 AM
i couldent t ell you what ewither of thoes look like or what they are used for other then the fact that they are jets i have no idea

FleshLight
11-01-2004, 01:06 AM
Lockheed was the lowest bidder?

dc
11-01-2004, 01:08 AM
i liked the yf23 more also.

LtPage1
11-01-2004, 01:10 AM
well, at least we know the people making the decision werent going on looks alone. :)

ed21x
11-01-2004, 01:11 AM
the yf was more stealthy while the f-22 had much better maneuverability. In the end, they chose the f-22 as the compromise.

UglyCasanova
11-01-2004, 01:15 AM
I remember watching a show on PBS about the contest they had, and something about the YF-23 didn't work right or something (vertical takeoff I think, but I could be way wrong) and that's a big reason why it lost. Then again that was a while ago and I hardly remember anything about it, so I'm prolly just talking out of my ass. :P

Godsend1
11-01-2004, 01:20 AM
Doh triple post.

Godsend1
11-01-2004, 01:20 AM
.

Godsend1
11-01-2004, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by: UglyCasanova
I remember watching a show on PBS about the contest they had, and something about the YF-23 didn't work right or something (vertical takeoff I think, but I could be way wrong) and that's a big reason why it lost. Then again that was a while ago and I hardly remember anything about it, so I'm prolly just talking out of my ass. :P

You have it right. The YF-23 had problems with the VTOL.

Don Vito Corleone
11-01-2004, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by: UglyCasanova
I remember watching a show on PBS about the contest they had, and something about the YF-23 didn't work right or something (vertical takeoff I think, but I could be way wrong) and that's a big reason why it lost. Then again that was a while ago and I hardly remember anything about it, so I'm prolly just talking out of my ass. :P

Actually that show was about the Joint Strike Fighter, not the F-22. It was a really interesting documentary, though. IIRC the Boeing X-35 couldn't perform the VTOL part of its demonstration without having a part of the skin removed, whereas the Lockheed Martin X-32 was able to do it seamlessly with the rest of the demonstration.

George P Burdell
11-01-2004, 01:26 AM
coz the F-22 will go stealth and pwn your ass

maddogchen
11-01-2004, 01:26 AM
YF-23 had VTOL? I don't think so...I don't think the F-22 has that either

I forgot since it was so long ago. i think it was because of cost, and the F-22 outperformed the YF-23 in flight tests, combat tests.

duke
11-01-2004, 01:27 AM
Originally posted by: Godsend1

Originally posted by: UglyCasanova
I remember watching a show on PBS about the contest they had, and something about the YF-23 didn't work right or something (vertical takeoff I think, but I could be way wrong) and that's a big reason why it lost. Then again that was a while ago and I hardly remember anything about it, so I'm prolly just talking out of my ass. :P

You have it right. The YF-23 had problems with the VTOL.

You're refering to the Joint Strike Fighter that was on Nova/PBS. Neither the YF-23 nor the F-22 is capable of VTOL.

Falloutboy
11-01-2004, 01:30 AM
the F22 was better was better in flight tests
the YF-23 was better in stealth but not by a whole lot
the F22 was cheaper. so they went with the f22.

now I read somewhere thier working on a tailess F-22 for testing that is controlled exclusivley by vectored thrust, now this thing should have some sick manuverabilty.

maddogchen
11-01-2004, 01:32 AM
oh yeah I forgot to mention....YF-23 did not have the supercruise and the vector thrusting thingofamajig...

ed21x
11-01-2004, 01:36 AM
Originally posted by: maddogchen
oh yeah I forgot to mention....YF-23 did not have the supercruise and the vector thrusting thingofamajig...


of course it did- as that was the requirement for competing with the f-22. In terms of specs, but planes were nearly identical-- however, the choice of the f-22 over the yf-23 reflected the emphasis of maintaining maneuverability over stealth. The yf-23 was an awesome plane, with 3d thrust vectoring, lower radar signarure, and supercruise- but the f-22 was far more agile.

maddogchen
11-01-2004, 01:41 AM
Originally posted by: ed21x

Originally posted by: maddogchen
oh yeah I forgot to mention....YF-23 did not have the supercruise and the vector thrusting thingofamajig...


of course it did- as that was the requirement for competing with the f-22. In terms of specs, but planes were nearly identical-- however, the choice of the f-22 over the yf-23 reflected the emphasis of maintaining maneuverability over stealth. The yf-23 was an awesome plane, with 3d thrust vectoring, lower radar signarure, and supercruise- but the f-22 was far more agile.

the YF-23 had 3D thrust vectoring? how can it have 3d vecor thrusting with its top mounted exhaust? it looks like it can only go 2d
YF-23 jpg with topmounted exhaust showing (http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/YF-23/Medium/EC94-42454-3.jpg)

0roo0roo
11-01-2004, 01:50 AM
yf-23 was more anime type cool

iwantanewcomputer
11-01-2004, 01:56 AM
I LIKE THE YF23 on looks alone, but i hear the f22 is more reliable and better at flying

dc
11-01-2004, 01:57 AM
heh, macross plus yf-19 (http://macrossplus.areaseven.net/mecha/yf19/index.html) vs. yf-21 (http://macrossplus.areaseven.net/mecha/yf21/index.html)

0roo0roo
11-01-2004, 02:46 AM
from what i remember the 23 loses someof its stealth with external weap mounts. the 22 has internal weap.

luvya
11-01-2004, 02:53 AM
Quoted from http://www.voodoo.cz/yf23/info.html: "In the pursuit of stealth, all of the weapons carried by the F-23 were to have been housed completely internally. The forward section of the fuselage underbelly was flat, with a capacious weapons bay immediately aft of the nose gear bay. The bay could carry four AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles. The missiles were to be launched by having the doors open and the missiles extend out into the airstream on trapezes. The missiles would then drop free and the motor would fire. The doors would then immediately shut, minimizing the amount of time that they were open and thus possibly causing more intense radar returns"

So it looks like the YF-23 hides all its weapons internally.

Chompman
11-01-2004, 02:55 AM
Either way they can pwn more or less anyone and cost more then we will ever see :D

Fritzo
11-01-2004, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by: Godsend1

Originally posted by: UglyCasanova
I remember watching a show on PBS about the contest they had, and something about the YF-23 didn't work right or something (vertical takeoff I think, but I could be way wrong) and that's a big reason why it lost. Then again that was a while ago and I hardly remember anything about it, so I'm prolly just talking out of my ass. :P

You have it right. The YF-23 had problems with the VTOL.

It wsa on Wings in Discovery Channel. They couldn't make a working YF-23 by the deadline and they were way over budget, plus the F-22 had better specs.

GoSharks
11-01-2004, 10:33 AM
According to the Air Force, factors in the selection for production of the F-22 were a better designed for maintainability, greater potential for future development, and slightly lower cost. A popular view is that the decision reflected a preference for maneuverability over stealth, and it is universally held that the YF-23 was by far the better looking aircraft.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-23.htm

maddogchen
11-01-2004, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by: luvya


So it looks like the YF-23 hides all its weapons internally.

all stealth jets have their weapons internally. Otherwise the weapons would give off radar signatures.

kaizersose
11-01-2004, 11:09 AM
wow, many misguided posts here...

the yf-23 and the yf-22 were experimental air superiority fighters. neither of them take or land vertically. the yf-22 was picked (as gosharks posted) for maneuverability, maintainability and cost. while it is not as stealthy as the yf-23, it is still a generation beyond anything in the air today.

the x-35 and x-32 are experimental multirole fighters. one version (meant for the marines) needed to have vertical takeoff and landing, one (for the navy) needed short takeoff and vertical landing and one version (for the airforce) has neither but a longer range due to the added fuel it carries. the x-32 had to undergo a major redesign very late in the game and was not quite ready to go when the competition was held.

ed21x
11-01-2004, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by: maddogchen

Originally posted by: ed21x

Originally posted by: maddogchen
oh yeah I forgot to mention....YF-23 did not have the supercruise and the vector thrusting thingofamajig...


of course it did- as that was the requirement for competing with the f-22. In terms of specs, but planes were nearly identical-- however, the choice of the f-22 over the yf-23 reflected the emphasis of maintaining maneuverability over stealth. The yf-23 was an awesome plane, with 3d thrust vectoring, lower radar signarure, and supercruise- but the f-22 was far more agile.

the YF-23 had 3D thrust vectoring? how can it have 3d vecor thrusting with its top mounted exhaust? it looks like it can only go 2d
YF-23 jpg with topmounted exhaust showing (http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/YF-23/Medium/EC94-42454-3.jpg)

actually now that you've mentionee t, it looks like the yf23 doesn't have thrust vectoring at all (my bad...) i always thought that was one of the main objectives for this generation to counter the su30 =)