Everybody else copied the F-22, and not the YF-23.I guess that was what the US airforce had in mind when they got the F-22, they saved the YF-23 design for later. Because it was way too advanced.From what I've read, everything the YF-22 could do, the YF-23 could do better.Better stealth, better supercruise, better payload, same maneuverability even without thurst vector.South Korea, Turkey, EU, China. Everybody got inspired by the F-22, none of them got a single thing from the YF-23.Now the US can just pull the F-23 out of their sleeves and say "HA, THIS ONE WAS BETTER ALL ALONG!"
>>64465997>better payloadhuh?
>>64465997No, the 22 was chosen because it was advertised and the 23 wasn't.
>Air Force chooses plane>therefore its competitor must have been betterWhat causes this thought process?
>>64465997We've been over this so many, many times.YF-22 had slightly superior maneuverability. YF-23 had a bigger weapons bay on paper, but there were structural issues that needed resolving before they could scale it up to the planned F-23. The program manager always insisted that both planes were "close" in every metric that they cared about at the time. Little else is known about the exact details, because a lot of that stuff is still classified today due to involving stealth.
>>64466040Contrarianism. By choosing the less popular thing, these people are able to pretend like they have some sort of hidden knowledge that puts them on a higher level than you.>>64465997No, the YF-23 had buckets of structural problems that needed a lot of work to figure out. Just like the JSF competition between the X-32 and X-35, it was decided by Lockheed showing up with a working plane and the other side only bringing a promise.
>>64466062It's cute!
>>64465997better bribes for a slower less stealthy plane that ended up costing way more, more delays, and never performed as promised. Its just bribes that gets contracts.
>>64465997All I'm saying is if the 23 was any good they'd be making copies of it instead of the 22
>>64465997The YF-23 is the Cybertruck of planes.
>>64465997They were bamboozled by Locksneed's faked up show'n'tell effort, the people in charge were>muh warbird legacy muh 'nam maneuveringBoomers, and the recent production fiascos Northrop had with the B-2 affected people's confidence in their delivery potential.Official history says the YF-22/F-22 had better maneuverability and a more complete/more R2G avionics systems.In reality Locksneed basically needed to throw out almost all of the YF-22's avionics (backend - only about half of the cockpit controls) and do as much work as Northrop Grumman also needed to finalize the YF-23's. The 23 was already on a fast avionics development track and had a handful of issues, but they were really waiting for program finalization and the concurrent avionics/radar program requirements to not be in prepro.Keep in mind the winner was selected in 1990 and the first real built didn't happen until 1996. As for maneuverability the only thing the 2DTV gave was some post-stall tricks.The YF-23 traded blows in maneuvering and had some clear advantages in areas of realistic flight altitude and speed regimes (with the F-22 having some different advantages in other specific scenarios of those realistic regimes - not counting 2dtv stall stuff.)At the end of the day nobody will ever actually know the truth about it all.But it is well understood in the public now (and at least as far back as the J-20's test flights) that a real finished F-23 would long term have been a far superior plane for the service's needs.Better speed, marginal but yes. Better range. Some better turn rate in certain anti missile aspects. Better stealth, better IR signature.We could have had an enduring legacy. 50 years a plane unbeaten. If only.
>>64466148>ended up costing way more, more delays, and never performed as promisedThat's another thing, how come the competitor would always totally deliver exactly as promised or better, on time and under budget and come across absolutely no development problems whatsoever?
>>64466040>What causes this thought process?.276 Pedersen.
>>64466344They literally select the competitor that will have the biggest budget overruns that lead to bigger kickbacks.
Theory: People wouldn't be as crazy about the YF-23 if shots of the underside got posted more often.
>>64465997F-22 > YF-23 > YF-22the YF-22 looks like baby face Vance, good thing the production F-22 is based as fuck
>>64466430SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX
>>64466430BLUE BOARD ANON!!!
>>64466447Sorry, anon. Those intakes are the aerospace equivalent of tiny, saggy tits
>>64466446wow its almost like Locksneed were making dogshit productions while jack northrop's legacy had solid foundation from the beginning. As a matter of fact what I just said is the exact truth.Locksneed went through no less than 4 major design revisions, and as many as 8 other sub-revisions, over the course of 1986 through 1990. Their attempt at the ATF went through rather large swings in shape and planiform all the way until the end - even the YF-22 has a fair amount of separation fro mthe real F-22. Almost as much as a Su-27 does to an F-15C.The good old boys at Northrop had their HSF concept for the YF-23 essentially finished by 1985.In 1985, Lockheed's dumb ass sized up an F-117 and put tails on it. That's where THEY were. Northrop had the actual plane already figured out by then.>>64466430I-It's even more girl tummy than Fat Amy.
>>64466430If we ignore the area ahead of the intakes, it looks like a flat chested, firm tummied girl raising her arms to reveal her armpits.
>>64466430Uuoooh! ToT
>>64466430>Look at those flush weapons bay doors.>And the tasteful thickness of it. (uuooohhhh!!!!)>My god it even has a watermark!
>>64466430
Anyone who thinks the F-22 was better is delusional and has buyer's remorse. The YF-23 was, if not a superior dogfighter to the F-22, then at least competitive with it. It had longer range, not just a little, but by almost a third. It was significantly faster in supercruise and slightly faster in top speed. Its internal weapons bay would have been able to carry 2000lb JDAMs, Harpoon antiship missiles, or up to 8 AMRAAMS. Last but not least it was significantly stealthier especially in IR and from the sides and rear. And all of this while being almost 1000lbs lighter.It had its problems but none were anything greater than what the F-22 faced in development. Northrup grumman had more experience making stealth aircraft and would have ironed out the issues. And if you modernized the design from the 1990s and put it into production today, it would be competitive with any modern 5th gen aircraft and probably the 6th gens as well.
>>64465997I used to work at a top secret Aerospace location as a janitor.And there were a lot of rumors floating around about a potential yf-23 inspired stealth aircraft. As a the janitor, no one pays attention when you're around and you hear all sorts of things. If you look at some of the renders for the f-18 replacement I can definitely see how a lot of the YF23s design carries over. It makes sense though. if you have something that worked, why start with something new?
>>64465997>Everybody else copied the F-22, and not the YF-23.the f22 shape was the optimal shape to be used against pesa radars at the time however as you have seen from literally anyone that is developing a 6th gen the shape is radically different
>>64466062No, you're wrong. Boeing was way "ahead" of Lockheed with the X-32. It was way more mature, and they had both the A and B models to demonstrate right away when only A model was called for show. The only downsides of the X-32 were, their B model could not go supersonic while the X-35B could. The X-32/F-32 also had zero room for future capabilities, while the X-35/F-35 had a lot of empty space in reserve.But if they'd gone with the "showed up with the working plane", the X-32 would have won. And it would have been a much worse choice. I just wanted to correct you on that.
>>64466430Well that's my nofap already gone.
imagine being a dicksucker for a plane that at demonstration could neither fly straight nor carry munitions
>"bro but it had better stealth bro"go ahead and call the fucking Su-57 a stealth plane then as well lmao
>>64465997Supposedly better stealth but inferior maneuverability and speed. Since the latter was a requirement at the time and nobody knew for certain that everything would become a BVR sniper competition combined with the fact that the 22 as a more mature demonstrator the decision makes sense. The real irony is that the US in early 90s produced four airframes better than anything anybody else can make thirty years later. The Europoors are poor and the rest of the world is either brown or suffering from catastrophic ennui, only white right wing Americans still fucking breed once exposed to industrial society. We might as well be aliens from Mars as far as they are concerned.
>>64466447>>64466457>>64466532>>64466502literally the most insufferable forced meme in the history of 4chan enhanced by the fact its coming from a board where single-digit usership is the norm outside the 'staff' and shift-workers on task making the insufferable forced content you see here
>>64466316“i can’t tell you how fast it went….. but it was… … much faster than the FY22”
>>64468584You have mental retardation if you think f-23 fanboying is millhouse tier.
>>64468639its the dogshit tummy sexxooooooo blue board fap fap fap plap plap plap and the same 3 images that trigger the bot to "tummy comment"
>>64468646I'm going to make a 1/20th scale model of the yf-23 and post a vid of me jerking off with my cock right between those engine nacelle humps.You faggot.You absolute buffoon.Fuck you.
>>64468659bumping to make this real
>>64468659>engine nacelle humpscertified sexo>saggy tit air intakesno goodI really doubt it would've made it to production without seeing a serious revision to the intakes.
>>64466369Pretty sure the m1 garand didn't use it because the US army had a fuck ton of 30-06 sitting around and they wanted to use it all.
>>64468659Why not do it on the real prototypes?
>>64468299You're forgetting the fact that the wing design was retarded and it couldn't do VTOL out of the box..t Boeing fag>>64468366Apparently they had an s duct design in the works but couldn't implement it for the test versions. A lot of the program was "we don't have that yet">>64468381I'm pretty sure it was the opposite. The yf23 had far superior high speed maneuvering characteristics while the yf-22 had better slow speed maneuverability.
>>64468366su-57 haters on suicide watch.
>>64466430Fit Amy
>>64470183I thought that the design itself had a lower RCS from more angles, minus the duct thing. And supposedly the exhaust was more concealed from ground observation. I actually tried to look shit up rather than just real wiki-shit but it all amounts to "somebody talked to somebody tangentially related to the project and they said".Either way my second point stands: YF-22, YF-23, X-32, and X-35 were all superior demonstrators to shit which is coming out today. For all the hate which the J-20 chink-shills deserve the airframe itself does not deserve it when examined in the context of what it actually is and how it is supposedly used in hypothetical chink doctrine. It's not equal to any of the aforementioned demonstrators but a decent attempt at an interceptor tailored to fuck with AWACS or rush around plugging holes in an air defense network. It isn't low-observable but it is less observable than the flying barn it is would be if no effort had been made. And that's about as close to a fifth gen airframe as anybody else has made, which is fucking sad since it isn't even close and it is now an old platform.
>>64471262lower RCSI believe there was an issue with the YF22s canopy have a huge radar cross section.So I don't think you could compare the 2 stealth wise.>superior demonstrators to shit which is coming out today.No they weren't.Our next gen shit is way ahead of schedule and don't have nearly as many issues as the gen 5 jets had..t aerospace fag.
>>64471515Is the Navy ever going to actually award the damn F/A-XX contract?
>>64471262I've said it before and I'll repeat myself until I'm proven wrong.The F-47 should be thought of as what the F-23 would have been, but in the scope of a 2010s program and technology base instead of 1980s.The yf-23 was 80% of the way there to a modern tailless all wing, high computer tech, long range monster.>>64470183>oppositeCorrect.It had superior turn rate in high speed and/or high alt BVR situations, similar performance in most other, and only lacked AoA control in situations where the F-22 has thrust vectoring.Take away the stealth, modern radar, computers, missiles and comparing the two planes on aerodynamics alone the only real advantage the F-22 has is close in slow speed dogfighting.
YF23 was cracking cockpit glass during the trials.
>>64471567My vg-10/ss laminate gyuto can chip the edge if I cut bone or large hard root vegetables.Your point? Or do you need me to explain mine.
>>64471579You have a shit knife? Like outside of using them as pry bars I've never chipped a knife. If it gets fucked up by hitting bone you have a paper cutter because guess what's usually attached to meat. If a plane cracks its cockpit during a hard maneuver than the cockpit is bad
>>64471606A 60-61 HRC, 12 degree edge angle, 6mm thick spine, 1% carbon, chrome-moly-vanadium blade is a purpose specific tool that far exceeds old standards such as a 1080 carbon, a 1080 french chef knife of (relatively) high hardness itself being easily damaged by hard cuts.Let's take a step back and answer my question.Do you need me to explain the point I made?
>>64471654kek, post this in the knife general.They'll explain how retarded you are.
>>64471682You are portent wastral.Pic unrelated.
>>64465997>From what I've read, everything the YF-22 could do, the YF-23 could do better.>Better stealth, better supercruise, better payload, same maneuverability even without thurst vector.How do we know the NGAD won't take heavily from the YF-23 design? It's supposed to be optimized for supercruise and range.
>>64471750It's not that it would "take from the design" but rather, improving a plane for those goals leads down the same path by necessity.A hammer is not a chainsaw after all.
>>64466502The sized-up F-117 with a tail was their *bomber* design, back when the planning was for a F-111-sized bomber. Then the requirements shifted towards a heavy bomber, and Northrup's revised flying wing was the only design that could scale up that far.
>>64465999>better payloadIt was bigger and I believe it had better weapons bays for more shit.
>>64471883ATF was never a bomber or heavy bomber program you crack smoking troglodyte.
>>64471654I have no idea what any of those words mean, sounds like a lot of marketing guff. I use my stainless santoku on everything from tomatoes to live turkeys and it's never chipped
>>64472013I have a great idea let's pretend we aren't on the internet at this very moment and can't just google search things.Now that we're in the real world it'd be quite helpful if you take your nearest gun and. Fucking kill yourself.:D
>>64472028Better idea, take that knife of yours and try to stab yourself with it. Hopefully it doesn't break trying to get past your skin
>>64471539Don't know about the Navy boys.Different bros.
>>64472033Thanks for the reply. Looking forward to seeing how closely this old concept resembles the final F-47
>>64472104>Looking forward to seeing how closely this old concept resembles the final F-47Hopefully it has a more unique, lower profile canopy. All modern stealth canopies look too similar.I dont care about function over form btw.
>>64472012True it was an anti-doggo program.
>>64468584.t wife left him for an Cessna
>>64468299Boeing's offering was crippled and retarded. The crews were leaving fucking fod in the cockpit, up to hand tools. They had to take off the chin intake for certain parts of the competition.Don't get it wrong, the F-35 was a POS at the time too. There were radical ideas like one piece aircraft skins, but it turns out materials warp and expand under the heat of the sun. -t.edwards knowerhttps://youtu.be/B0P0ckhQg2g
YF-23 was known at the time to have worse maneuverability
>>64466430> le smugface "they wouldn't like it if people posted undershotsMeanwhile, my honest reaction:HONKA BADONKASmanta ray of the air...
>>64475115The JSF was always garbage. The only F-35 that should exist is the F-35B, it's an amazing harrier replacement. No reason the air force and navy need to be flying VTOL bodied jets that were in development for decades.
>>64472012Yes, and the "F-117 with a tail" was their ATB proposal, which is why I brought it up.
>>64466316>the only thing the 2DTV gave was some post-stall tricksBeing able to turn hard and fast is also important in BVR, dummy.
>>64466040a good understanding of reality and air force procurement
>>64475561>Being able to turn hard and fast is also important in BVR, dummy.I'm glad someone finally said it.
>>64475561Ridiculous of you to think the vectoring is enabled at those speeds because it isn't - airflow alone is providing vastly more control potential than the g load the frame can handle, let alone the pilot.Holy fuck you're all so god damn dumb.
>>64476592At high altitudes?
>>64476592Yes thrust vectoring helps in supersonic flight, it helps to counter aerodynamic changes between sub and supersonic flight. Not to mention lessen drag caused by control suffuses.>Holy fuck you're all so god damn dumb.t. clueless gaynigger
>>64468646faggot
>>64465997Your women love bbc
>>64465997>>Better stealth, better supercruise, better payload, same maneuverability even without thurst vector.not at high altitudes
>>64475561Post stall tricks aren't relevant in BVR
>>64477100>he doesn't know that jet thrust falls with altitude
>>64477368>thrust vectoring is fast or some shit in supersonic because less drag or some shit>less dragThis nigga doesn't even understand basic vector calculus. I could explain vector sums to an 8 year old. This nigga arguing with me from way off in fantasy land.
>>64478153Non-sequitur, your original post is about airframe limits.Look up the term "trim drag" and see if you can learn yourself out of the retard pit with that knowledge
>>64478175At high speeds aerodynamic surfaces provide more control authority than TV, rising altitude doesn't change that as both aerodynamic forces and jet thrust fall together.
>>64478180So why would you disable TV at high speeds if the control surfaces are less effective?
>>64478183>So why would you disable TV at high speeds if the control surfaces are less effective?Oxymoron
Thrust vectoring is useless in high alt combat at speed.You only have 100% thrust.12% of it being directed downwards is 12% thrust you do not have for lateral acceleration.TV is only used at slow speeds, and if you're slow in a BVR you're dead. If you're dogfighting in an F-22 against a near peer you're already dead.Get your head out of your ass.
>>64476592Want to share your source on when thrust vectoring is disabled?>>64478151>thrust vectoring isn't limited to post stall, dummy.>>64478224Yes, taking thrust away from the forward component is literally how it works and why it is useful. As for altitude, BVR quickly descends towards the deck as fighters try to drag enemy missiles into denser air. As for speed, you are maneuvering hard in BVR, not as much as dogfighting, bit still hard and are going to bleed speed throughout the engagement. >>64478180>aerodynamic surfaces provide more control authorityAnd aerodynamic forces with thrust vectoring provide more control authority than aerodynamic surfaces alone. What's your point?
>>64478163Center of lift changes in supersonic flight. Do you really believe f22 has thrust vectoring for arishow stunts only??? F 14 solved it by pumping fuel in aft tanks.
>>64466062No idi8t we have correct knowledge you arw a fucking retard we got you hoax known as geh commanche canceled retarded stealth helicopter it does not work they you are stupid you spent all that and its still better than the f 35 isralei horsehit the f11 Harvard beat the f 35 disaster.......its the same fucking faggots that circled wagons around the f 4 phantom but hell the f4 phantom you uneducated asswine its a lemon its a lemon its a surface its for dual use in the market place its a boondoggle the f 35 is shit you pulling the john lear your right but wrong horsehit its stirling engines you are stupid reql physics professors leaked documents a d admission you sre pretending you arw sruoid you need to be silenced asswipe
>>64466381And dual use for the market place thisbis even worse and a newer thing than the f 4 phantom debacle yes and thebnsuopresion the soviet jewish zionist mossady adl bnai shit fo Fred drumpf devils island that bitch dreyfuss amd the hundreds what you gonna Mata hari aurora hoax
>>64465997Why did the f16.amd f 18 and f 14 and f 15 the best the latter still outperform the excellent. F2ql2 which then shits all up on that f 35 ass oh and nasa hoax the designs are pre1958
>>64468659Also bumping for this to be a thing
>>64471654You know when people sound like this... you just... well you hit them. I'm sorry to be like that but it's the only way. You hit 'em real hard and punch right through like you been taught. That's just what you do, any cop'll understand.
>>64478267You have zero understanding of how easy it is for a plane of that design to exceed structural g limits simply if the flight system allowed total pilot control, no intervention.650 knots at 38,000 feet is a hell of a lot of air to move through.
>>64465997The YF23 could do anything but get adopted or influence another plane in any way. It is literal marketing material at this point for Northrop to keep making up fables about how it literally could kill God, but the Airforce thought dogfighting mattered so it was unfairly dropped.
WAIT. you mean to tell me that the YF22 was further ahead in development and it was STILL inferior to the YF23?
>>64471654>6mm thick spineAre you splitting logs here?
