The YF-23's wind tunnel tests indicated that it was stable to 60 degrees angle of attack... in comparison, the dogfight-monster F-16 is stable to about 25 degrees. So while the thrust-vectoring YF-22 was superior in this regard, the YF-23 was still excellent. Also, NOTE THAT many of the improvements over the F-22 that the Air Force is looking for in a 6th generation fighter are areas where the YF-23 was ALREADY superior: Low observables, supercruise speed, large weapons bay, and range; while emphasis on maneuverability is DECREASED for the 6th gen program. Presumably the 6th generation fighter's performance will surpass that of the F-22 by a greater margin, but the point is, the thinking that went into the YF-23 was evidently more correct and future-proof than the thinking that went into the YF-22... and remember that the Air Force is now planning to EARLY-RETIRE the F-22. So we can't help but wonder whether the F-23 would indeed have been the better fighter by a worthwhile margin.
The irony is tangible: If the ATF decision had been postponed a year or two it could have averted ending up with an aircraft destined to an early end of production and early exit from service.
@@mortified776 The decision was made entirely to bail out Lockheed-Martin. Also, Northrop-Grumman likely anticipated Navy contracts, while Lockheed-Martin was focused on the Air Force. The Navy wanted a more general purpose airframe that could replace a number of different aircraft, not just a dogfighter. What's truly sad is the F-23 could have replaced the F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-111, F-117, A-6, and possibly EA-6 back in the early 00s - the very thing the F-22, and later the F-35, was SUPPOSED to do, but failed at miserably.
@@jfangm Yes, at that time Northrop had the B-2 program and McDonnell Douglas had the A-12 (not yet cancelled), while Lockheed had nothing comparable and would have struggled to survive without the F-22. That was most likely the crucial factor in picking the YF-22 over the, at least equally capable, YF-23.
Not sure if someone else stated before but another huge deciding factor for the f22 over the f23 was that Lockheed did actual weapon firing tests along with showing off the plane's extreme maneuverability. The yf23 wasn't ready for that and had a much more WIP design internally along with being unable to match what was shown off by the f22. Also the f22 was thought to be easier to convert to a navy version than the yf23 was.
@@kevinspecht1208 They both hit the required benchmarks, but LM have some amazing PR staff and hats off to them, cause that ATF contract was worth billions.
@@s3p4kner I worked at China lake naval base I saw both flying around the yf-23 was my favorite. I even had a picture of it in my lab. I was so disappointed when it wasn’t picked. I read an article that stated the ya-23 was the best design and it should have been picked.
I thought the long range high speed stealthier yf23 with it's compact wingspan was what the navy wanted in terms of an interceptor to replace a hole left by the F-14 (with its limited loiter time the super hornet is more of a band-aid). Maybe it will be explained if he does the NAFT-23 video, the canards would definitely help and eliminate the variable swept wing design the F-14 needed to fulfill it's roles.
One of the test pilots commented on an old documentary about the yf23 that it was the fastest out of the two. Not sure if he was talking about acceleration or top end speed.
YF-23 mainly loses because many of its features aren't mature enough. YF-22 is more 'simple' so it gets the deal. One of the main problems is the coffin-style weapon bay that has some reliability issues because the missile is stacked on top of each other if one below jam, all other missiles can't be used while YF-22 with a simple rack style is more simple, more reliable, and can fire another missile if one missile malfunction.
you should team up withy F&E and help them write these scripts. they could focus on cringey sponsor segues, and you could focus on actually relevant content.
The lack of trust from the US department of defense in Northrop after the massive cost overruns in the B2 program were also a factor in the decision according to many analysts. True or not? I don't know...
No, the reason was entirely down to Lockheed-Martin being on the verge of failure. As the F4U Corsair and F-35 have shown, the military is no stranger to aircraft that require a bit more development.
The thrust vectoring on the F-22 is one of the most amazing things I have ever seen. First time ever seeing a pilot, more or less, hover the F-22 at an air show, it was one of the coolest things ever. Though it would have been interesting to see what would have come out if the YF-23 had won.
And that was a downside of the 23. The ATF requirement required that the aircraft have nozzles on it to assist it in STOL. The YF23 had those nozzles on their aircraft but then did not test them and said it would be redundant to do so. Not only did the 22 test the nozzles as well as putting them on the aircraft, but they also put them on in such a manner as to have the incredible thrust vectoring that we see it have today. The 23 was a great aircraft but Northrop demonstrated it very poorly. Lockheed got the 22 into the air three months after Northrop got the 23 into the air but still flew twice as many hours. Northrop built the aircraft and then was like let's just show that we can achieve these parameters whereas Lockheed got their aircraft into the air and then flew the heck out of it and also collected a ton of data on the performance of the aircraft. So when the DoD would ask about a certain aspect of the aircraft then Lockheed would give them a huge stack of data on that particular aspect of the aircraft and Northrop was basically like we can make the combat version do that too but then showing little to no data to back it up.
Not taking anything away from the F-22 - it is an amazing aircraft. But the SU family of fighters have the best thrust vectoring period. See what those can pull off, the F-22 is nowhere near that. Still on of my top 3 all time aircraft - I do love the F-22, but the SU family take the number 1 spot.
Had the YF-23 won I would have envisioned a whole family of aircraft in the same vein as the F-15. The like the F-15, the F-23’s airframe in my opinion seemed a lot more versatile than the F-22 and I would’ve easily seen something like a Strike Eagle or Growler/EW version of the 23.
When I was 23 I worked at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. One day, I saw one of the YF-23's parked in front of the restoration hanger. I nearly drove off the road! It was totally unattended- you could walk right up to it. It'd be crazy to see a whole flight line of these things.
I stopped by the air museum in Titusville Ville FL (I think) when I was just passing thru on a slow weekday . Well the place was deserted so I wondered out of the museum and into an open adjacent hanger . BOOM center stage F14 Tomcat surrounded by engines on stands and all sorts of other cool flying machines including some sort of British Super Typhoon that came out as WW2 was ending and a big gondola that was used on one of the round the world balloon attempts . Jackpot . They must have stored airshow exhibits there . Never saw another soul just me and a buddy in a hanger full of cool stuff . It was a good day .
I've always loved this jet, it felt like Northrup brought a Gen 5.5 jet to a Gen 5 contest. Hope you do the Navy version as I've never heard of it before, the additional canards would have likely added some maneuverability so it seems Northrup was willing to make modifications to fit the feedback. Have to wonder if the child of this thing is flying somewhere in the Gen 6 contest (they did say the developmental turnaround was rather quick on that). Also, iirc, it was some military brass that didn't like the Black Widow mark and not management.
My bet is the mystery gen 6 fighter is a wing like the B-2 and B-21, just far smaller and a more swept back delta wing (wing-nose-wing angle more acute for higher speeds). Flying wings are the way to go, lift over the entire body, lot more efficient, and lowest radar signature. The only thing they haven't done with them so far is build a faster more agile one.
In my opinion she lost because back then we still emphasise on dogfight (WVR) and stealth fight (BVR) is still, in some sense, relatively new at the time, so despite being better at supercruise and has better stealth profile, it is understandable that air force did not want to bet on it. If the program was to happen today, I think 23 would win this time around. But that was only my perspective on the matter, please do not take it too seriously. But on the bright side, despite we do not get to see her flying, many features and components of YF-23 is in the F-22.
She lost because Northrop Grumman was deemed "unreliable" by the USAF in order to deliver the logistics that they required to maintain the airframe. They also worried that the costs would sky rocket, as they did with the B-2 Spirit. Despite all that, Lockheed still fucked up the F-22 and its costs.
@@yumyunrangLOAL so there were much more behind the curtain. I never went deeper than the surface level of detail and specs of the two crafts, so this information is very nice. Thank you kindly.
@@yumyunrangLOAL The YF-23 was from it's inception more expensive than the F-22. Stealth designs are inherently expensive and the YF-23 would have been no exception. It would have been more expensive if anything.
I’ve read one of the pentagons deciding factors was after the budget overruns, delays and bad press with the B2 they didn’t want to sign another deal with Northrop.
Northrop also got busted for giving the military faulty missile tests that the FBI raided one of their facilities. My old boss knows that one. It happened right around the ATF program.
Northrop was certainly in the dog house because of the B-2. But they also did handle the 23 horribly. The 23 was in the air for nine months and the 22 was in the air for 6 months yet the 22 flew twice as many hours. Lockheed had converted a Boeing passenger jet into a data center that would fly over the testing grounds and test every aspect of the 22 constantly as it was flying. So when the DoD would ask what their aircraft did in a certain situation or for data on this aspect or that aspect of the aircraft then Lockheed provided piles of data and Northrop provided little to no data. Northrop did not even test the 23's RCS in real time. They only tested the RCS on a wooden model. The ATF program had vectoring nozzles as a requirement for the program and Northrop had nozzles on the 23 but then never tested them because they said it would be redundant. Not only did the 22 build the nozzles correctly, but the 22's has incredible maneuverability because of how they integrated it into the aircraft. And Lockheed did actually test the 22 itself against radar while it was flying in the air. Both companies made fantastic aircraft and it would not surprise me if some of the technology in the 23 is being used or will be used somewhere else but Lockheed handled the competition way better and that gave the DoD the confidence that the 22 was the better platform and if I were in their shoes I would have done the same. They granted the contract to Lockheed because Lockheed gave them data and proof of what their aircraft would do and Northrop barely showed up to the game. Paul Metz frequently talks about how amazing the 23 was and its like I believe him but Northrop did not convey that to the DoD and that is 100% on them.
@@thefreeman8791 Thats incorrect.The Critical Elements of the ATF were :Super cruise lower consumption, Low RCS and stealth, Beyond visual range engagement, First sight /kill, advanced avionics and situational awareness, supported by next general computing power, ability to carry advanced weapons, and counter measures. Open architecture and scalability, Good high /low peed characteristics and maneuverability . Critically if the key design requirements are BVR, First sight /Kill - Northrop are 100% correct to have gone in that direction they did & their design team expressed that the plane would still be highly maneuverable with the moveable V-Tail ,being nearly the size of some planes wings !. Ok not quiet the same as thrust vectoring but still better than most and there was No direct dog fighting requirement - thats garbage only good high/low speed maneuverability . Most importantly the YF-23 was better in every single critical measure than the F22. It has far better range because it was less draggy and therefore used less fuel. It had a better RCS -especially at the rear, Northrops electronics and computers were the best in the industry & if I'm not mistaken they actual provide LM the electronics for the Raptor. The design team clearly stated that when the presentations were made there was no requirements to show "dog -fighting" capability. LM took the initiative and it must have factored in the decision - also indirectly because there was a concern of Northrop falling behind /cost over runs. But the D O D reasonings were far deeper than just this... It had to do with Northrop being too heavily invested in 2 massive projects with the B2, and the loss of competition and industry skill if LM lost the project. If we look at the direction the NGAD and other nations 6th gen concepts are heading, clearly the ideas are far nearer to the YF-23 and perhaps it may have been an easier transition with the concept already developed over 30 years. Who knows if Northrop scaled it up with upgrades etc, it may have alleviated the need for a totally new platform,
Requesting videos on the following: -switchblade aircraft designs such as the FA-37 Talon from the ‘05 movie “Stealth” or the X-02 Wyvern from the Ace Combat franchise -Supercat-21 -the NATF program -early ATF proposals
All your videos are just the best, and I'm a fan of all your work! I doubt it would get the views that modern stealth or popular jets like F-14/15/16 etc, but the Northrop F-5 Tiger has always had a special place in my mind because it ticked all the boxes needed to succeed as a cheap exportable lightweight fighter and it just never happened and it just became a trainer. A video about that would be interesting coming from you!
The YF-23 was in fact quite maneuverable. It excelled in all parameters, it's top speed is still classified. Northrop lost the bid mostly due to politics. They had fallen out of favor in DC as a result of the B-2 being massively over-budget and plagued with delays. The USAF brass didn't think Northrop would be able to stay on budget and deliver units on time.
@@tomriley5790 while I do agree that they may have been correct given the issues at the time, I think considering what the brass went through with the F22, I think that time period would have been where Northrop would have pulled through. USAF had doubts about both the B2 and F117, but they came through to be solidly reliable aircraft (despite nicknames like Wobbly Goblin). If only they were a little bit more longer ranged in their thinking, we would have had an aircraft that we -know- will rule the skies for quite some time. The F22 is king now, as they say (though i think only a peer-level conflict will determine how well or how badly it would really fare), it's sun is setting. This view is really short since it's only 15-20years, while the Eagle has been around a lot longer but is still in top level service.
Some of those intial Grumman concepts were on Fire. I can see how a low thermal exaust capability might be something to shoot for but not something to bet the farm on. With the existing empennage is already having to pull double duty some thrust vectoring would have gone a long way in leveling the playing field.
May not have flown in any official tactical mission but I do remember flying it fondly in games like Air/Ace Combat growing up. Also came across some time ago an interview video of someone that worked on the project and it was interesting that his explanation for the choice was basically one has to be chosen and the YF-22 won. Yet the aircraft themselves were spared the scrapyard with one going to the USAF museum in Ohio and the other to the Western Museum of Flight in California.
0:55 I often think of our human overloards taking the best concepts for themselves leaving us w/ the second best and tagging it as "lost competition". I have absolutely no proof its just a crazy thought. Explaining the why. A fascinating one tho.
Fun fact, air to air missiles actually hitting their target is generally a bad thing; the warheads are optimized to go off beside them rather than inside or at least pointed directly at them. The Russians got an early Sidewinder when it hit a MiG and got stuck; for quite a long time their copies were close enough to the originals to be more or less interchangeable.
They were interchangeable. Israelis captured more than a few examples of the Soviet copies - and they worked perfectly with almost no modification done off the Mirage’s sidewinder/Marta magic launch rails/systems.
At 05:09, you state that this S-shaped intake system help "beat the F-22" in stealth performance. Although the YF-23 was more stealthy, the F-22 also incorporates these "fixed geometry serpentine inlets" for its engines as well, so they did not play a role in a stealth advantage for the 23.
But not as capable at acting as an air superiority fighter, which is what these were competing to be. Unfortunately, the YF23 wasn’t as good of a fighter as the YF22. No thrust vectoring, less armament and not as maneuverable. If the contest focused more on Stealth, the YF23 would have won.
@@BrapBrapDoritoHonestly I think that was the governments fault. If they would’ve specified they wanted there new toy to be stealthy, maneuverable, and have a decent payload, the YF-23 most likely would’ve been modified to fit these requirements.
I worked the YF-23 program at the highest classification level. I completely disagree with the opinions expressed in this video, and with some of the comments other viewers have made. The YF-23 beat the YF-22 soundly in all areas. The decision was purely political. At the time the C-17 program belonged to McDonnell Douglas and the B-2 program belonged to Northrop. Lockheed had nothing of significance, which a certain senator from Georgia (Head of the Senate Armed Services Committee) would not allow. Interestingly, the specification for signature that was used to design the DEMVAL aircraft was changed when the actual RFP was issued. Supposedly, because the YF-22 could not meet the DEMVAL spec. The NATF development was started long before the Air Force decision to buy the YF-22, and the Navy folks I worked with were highly in favor of the YF-23 NATF variant. They backed out of the program when the YF-22 was chosen. Two other comments; 1. The launch of an AIM-9 by the YF-22 during the initial testing was nothing more than a publicity stunt. There was no avionics on the aircraft capable of actual interface with the missile. The equivalent of firing an unguided dumb missile. 2. The Air Force brass told the evaluating pilots from the Air Force Fighter Weapons School at Nellis AFB that their choice of aircraft would be the deciding factor. According to subsequent feedback, they did not pick the YF-22.
SquareSpace wasn't even existing in the 80s, Internet is also not accessible to the public yet. So SquareSpace won't have any effect on how YF23 could win the military contract.
The YF-23's computers would have been upgradable and affordable to swap out when the time came. Khanet Preeteepveruriya points out one of the major decisions to go ahead with the YF-22 but it also came down to the YF-23's composite body and odd shape which after the F-117 the brass had concerns about the YF-23's stability which was unfounded.
Awesome video! And the NATF topic is by all means imaginable is very interesting, too. Not that there's anything particularly wrong with the F/A-18, but there should be a stealth deck aircraft built specifically for carrier applications some day.
The P-61 was such a gorgeous aircraft and the design on the YF-23 was very well done and would do honours to the original Black Widow. I can see the YF-23 doing a similar role, solo night operations flying low, fast and destroying enemy aircraft on take off or landing.
@@FoundAndExplained love your videos I also love the other video about the YF-23 you made a couple years ago If I may suggest Make a video about B-21, B-2, H-20, J-31, and the J-20
cool video but I wanna mention a couple of things: the f 22 also has S shaped air ducts to hide the engines, it's a key feature in stealth aircraft, in fact some 4th gen aircraft have it too (the Eurofighter typhoon for one). I guess the higher stealth comes from the lack of 2 tail surface because of the V tail compared to the raptor also you mentioned the Russian borrowed the design of the tail from the yf23? what do you mean exactly? if you're talking about angled vertical stabilisers i don't think they copied it from anywhere, it's kind of a common thing. maybe the all moving vertical stabilisers? anyway cool video
Politics & money - the two horsemen of every cancelled military project... 👻 But I've never heard of the NATF-23 till this day so a full video on this wildly looking plane would be appreciated! 😎👍
25 years ago I bought a plastic model of the YF-23, I think that is one more aesthetic plane on my collection. I will love to see the video on the NATF-23
@@robert.m6755 I disagree, if you look at the two European 6th gen proposed fighter programs and Japan's fx fighter concept they look way more like the yf-23 than any current 5th gen fighter today
Allegedly the YF-23 was only *_SLIGHTLY_* less agile than the YF-22 despite not having thrust-vectoring, but Lockheed won the Public Relations war by performing slow-speed high-alpha maneuvers as well as firing an AIM-120 AMRAAM and AIM-9 Sidewinder for Air Force observers while Northrop didn't.
Exactly! The real time capabilities of the YF-22 sealed the deal. I am a YF-23 booster over 30 years now, but the USAF could not from their perspective at the time selected the aircraft. That said I wouldn't mind a updated F-23 high altitude interceptor/deep penetration strike bomber/high speed tactical reconnaissance with ultra modern avionics and weapons systems. The NGAD fighter kinda makes it redundant, but still one can dream...
Given the YF-23's stealth capabilities, perhaps the Black Widow II / Grey Ghost could have found a role as a replacement for the F-117 Nighthawk and F-15E Strike Eagle in the form of the proposed but rejected FB-23.
Love your videos, been subscribed for a long time! Thanks so much for working on this, the YF23 is my favourite "concept" jet that got genuinely made and it's a pleasure to see it on the channel! It would be *WONDERFUL* to see your high production and research take on the Navy model, please please please...
Northrop's YF-23 wasn't chosen for one reason. Northrop was in the process of making the B-2 stealth bomber, and the Government was afraid to split its resources y making two aircraft at once. They feared that neither would have Northrop's full attention. The Lockheed YF-22 also did one thing that was not on the comparison test by firing a missile during one of its flights. Northrop, unaware that Lockheed was to do this, did not even bring any missiles to the test area. They COULD have, but it wasn't on the test agenda, so didn't. The Government testers then said, "look at that, Lockheed's plane shot a missile while Northrop's didn't. Let's give it to Lockheed." They then told reporters that the reason was the bomber production reason.
2:02 Not gonna lie, the smoothness of the "segway" to the sponsor totally is Anthony Young level here. BTW you made me fire up good old JetFighter II again. I wish we had this thing in DCS though...
The "Grey Ghost" is at the aviation museum at Zamperini Field (Airport) in Torrance California. It is parked next to the chain link fence along with a F-14, viewable from the road behind the Honda dealership. I had no idea it was there till one day making deliveries looked up saw it and my jaw dropped. I believe that the red hourglass has been re-applied.
What makes this aircraft even more cool than the F-22 is the fact that the Japanese were planning on either continuing the black widow project to have there own 5th gen fighters or incorporating designs from the black widow into there own unique 5th gen fighter.
I remember back then, reading about rumours that the YF-23 was "not selected" because it was to ("secretly") end up being used as a replacement for SR-71s. I don't think that's what ended up happening, but that story circulated.
The YF-23 & P-38 are two of my favorite unusual fighters. Conisidering the original black widow, the P-61, I love the name of the YF-23 Black Widow 2. Edit: I’d Love a supplementary video on the Navy and Japanese info for this project! Thank you again for a great video.
Its tails were about the size of an f-35 wing alone and rotated on a huge axis, giving it almost equal performance to 2d vectoring the raptor had. It also was capable of manuevering better at higher speeds than the raptor, due to its airframe. Also it went mach 1.8 comapred to the raptors 1.5, actually anything above 1.8 was concidered classified so, it could actually went mach 2, while the raptor was going 1.5. It was also able to supercruise and hide its rear stealth signature miles better, and it was a bigger plane than the f-22 yet was stealthier and gave a smaller radar signature. If we would of went with this, wed be so ahead then we already are by now. And you wouldnt even really need to change its airframe much, you could add the panels the f-35 has making it even more stealthier and easier to work on, also they had to use the same tiles the nasa shuttle used to cool the exhaust, and this took alot of man hours to do, nowadays we have entire panels made of much better material and could be installed much faster. All it needs is a upgraded suite, upgraded weapons bay wich was also one if its best and worst features its bay is much larger than the raptors, but its weapon deliverance system at the time in theory could jam, we could fix this nowadays, they could probably give it even stronger engines id imagine. Wich may have to result in some airframe changes. But otherwise this was basically a 6th gen fighter made the 80s.
You didn't mention that in in the ATF competition, the YF-23 lacked "high agility" but didn't mention the caveat that, after the fact, higher kinetic performance (greater top speed, and range by virtue) was proven to be more important in a modern combat environment. It would behoove this video to mention the reason why the F-22 won and the rationale at the time (higher agility, thrust vectoring, lower cost than YF-23). It would add credibility to your video to address the Air Force's perception of the YF-23 in 1990 and the relevance in hindsight of its advacned features (supercruise better than YF-22, similar high speed maneuverability, and relative cost). Thank you for your consideration!
The "lacked high agility" comment was misleading. It had to match or surpass the F15 witch I consider very agile. Even if the lack of vector thrust made it less manuvirable doesn't mean it lacked high agility. Seen to me he finding it tough to find valid reason to why it lost. We all know its Politics. Imo it was the superior aircraft
The YF-23 as explained by it's designers could do the exact same maneuvers as the YF-22 however in their display they decided not to do extreme low maneuvers. Considering how indepth the research this channel normally does, I am surprised that this massive factor was missed. That the only reason the YF-23 was percieved to be less maneuverable was because those maneuvers where not decided to be done during the demonstration excersise. If they decided on showing the YF-23 it still would not have been chosen because of the politics and fact the aircraft would cost more than the YF-22. But atleast people would stop misunderstanding the performance of the aircraft as being lesser than the YF-22.
The 'looks' of the F23 falsely spooked some Air Force people; they stuck to the old saying 'that if it looks right, it'll fly right'. The F22 was more symmetric and false or not on flight mobility, the 'jet jocks' didn't want to be stuck with BVR as their only option. Frankly, I'm not sure the brass believed the 60 angle of attack, and turning ability of the 50 degree tails without an elevator would out turn the angled exhausts on the F22. They just didn't want to make the full leap the F23 was showing. If you can't see, can't catch it and can't put your nose on it given its steep angle of attack response, how are you going to engage it, let alone defeat it? I don't think the fighter jocks wanted to give up 'stick' manuvering.
Whatever the reasons for going with the F-22 the F-23 was a badass looking aircraft that still looks badass more than 30 years since she last flew. The F-22 might be able to handle a SU-35 or SU-57 in a turning fight but I wouldn't want to take that chance when you have superior detection range to launch at a significant standoff distance. It was probably the right choice at that moment, but it would have been great to have a few squadrons of them so that we could pit the advantages of the F-22 with those of the F-23 to inform future development.
This yf23 was vary late in getting finished and couldn't do a low speed maneuver which is the main reason the military rejected it. It will be rejected again unless they fix its maneuverability.
The YF-23 didn't need thrust vector technology. It was able to do everything without what was needed. The F-22 needed it to be able to do all this. Special in the flight envelope the planes where build for the F-23 had better parameters.
My best friends dad worked at Northrop for 37 years, and on the Black Widow II. The top speed of the F-22 Raptor is Mach 2.5. He said to me, the Widow went much, much, much faster.
People have been saying the age of dogfighting is over for decades. Yet it still happens, and is likely to continue happening as long as there are conflicts. Sure, technology makes BVR kills more likely today, but nothing is guaranteed. Whether through luck or clever tactics, it is still possible for a couple fighters to get close.
Im no engineer, but how the stabilizers on the back work might actually be really helpful in a gen 6 project that uses a flying wing design: not strictly necessary, but deployable in case more maneuverability is needed
I've seen the F-22 on Demo flights in Chile and it's ridiculous what it can do in the air. Very very impressive. I can see why the YF-22 would've impressed the Air Force compared to a more "regular" YF-23 Ps: Renders look dope 👌🏻
The YF23 team did everything by the book in their demo and really held back its full capabilities. The YF22 team did the opposite and performed aerobatics that weren't part of the requirements to "wow" the generals in attendance. It was a marketing ploy that worked in their favor and clearly persists today because people still think there was a huge agility gap between the two jets. There wasn't
The F-22 can't dog fight. It's too heavy and it's oxygen supply system isn't reliable under high G-Forces. Yeah, they still haven't fixed that problem. In simulated dogfights against the Eurofighter and various SAAB fighters, the adversary usually achieves lock on first. The F-22 is only effective at long over-the-horizon range.
Northrop brought a stealth fighter into the dog fight, the fight that is far less important for today's combat. Ironically, they lost because they were 2 decades ahead of the curve.
So many people say the YF-23 was a better aircraft. Simply because it was more stealthy, faster and able to fly at higher altitudes and a lot to do with how it looks. It seems to have a cult following of people claiming it was better. It wasn’t. Not only had Northrop mismanaged projects before this, overspending, delays etc made the military less trusting in their ability to run the program, but they also had more on their hands. The YF-23 was more expensive, this is seen as the main issue with the YF-23, but it is just one of the many issues. The YF-22 was further along in development, the 2 prototype YF-23 had multiple issues, especially the second ‘Grey Ghost’ which was supposed to be an improvement to the original, but it was a nightmare. The engines were less reliable and harder to manage than the YF-22. Part kept having to be changed. The windshield cracked on multiple occasions, including while sitting in the hanger. Which is an issue for obvious reasons. As mentioned, the YF-22 was able to fire a missile unlike the YF-23 which was unable to even carry weapons during the tests and only had one bay meaning a jam would leave it with no weapons. The YF-22 was also more manoeuvrable, possessing thrust vectoring and did a 9g turn during testing. Comparing that to the incomplete YF-23 which was unable to do many of the thing expected of it while the YF-22 was exceeding expectations. Although the YF-23 on paper had higher top speed and altitude, it wasn’t able to show it potential in testing. Adding the YF-22s superior avionics, the YF-23 was simply not ready. The YF-23 had a lot of potential, maybe even more than the Raptor (although I doubt it). But they decided on the more complete aircraft the YF-22.
The only thing the f22 had on the f23 was vectored thrust. Now when modern fighters stand off engage 20 nautical miles plus vectored thrust doesn't mean a thing. Also i think an f4 phantom could take down an f22 in close quarter combat today same with the f23
@@najlitarvan921 Politics can ruin things, but also prevent mistakes, like the highspeed railway in California, while it may seem like it failed in comparison to China, but if you live in California, you should be grateful for the bickering politics, because without them, we would be in debt up to our noses with the railways, like China is, barely any of China's propaganda railways break even, so in some cases politics may be stifling fantasies, but they also might be for our own good, saving us from ourselves
@@billc3271 The f-4 could not take on the F-22 in any possible scenario, the MIG-21 took advantage of the terrible turn radius of the F-4, and if a MIG-21 could out turn the F-4 than you better believe the F-22 could do it. There is no way the F-4 or the YF-23 would ever beat the F-22, unless the odds were HEAVILY stacked in their favor, like the F-22 pilot flying while intoxicated.
This jet may have lost to the yf22, but it really won! This jet was so good it couldn't have been mothballed! In my opinion, this jet was disguised to appear to have been sent to museums, but it was sent for classified further development, fitted with the latest ramjet - or even scramjets. Also, it may have been fitted with the latest small, but powerful, laser pods, capable of engaging targets over 100 miles away, and this is teamed up with the best short, medium, and long range missiles. They may have the latest stealth technology paints. Who knows, AI and quantum computing may be engaged, too.
YF-23 should have been reinforced then taken possession by the US Navy. One thing that wasn't mentioned in the video was the fuel economy of the YF-23 compared to the F-22. Even without thrust vectoring, the YF-23 met ALL of the ATF requirements. With a bit more tweaks here&there...YF-23 probably would have become a superior choice over the fuel guzzling F-22 and its expensive thrust vectoring components. Plus...she just looks so much cooler than the Raptor which in truth, sounds cooler. Whether you favor the F-22 or YF-23? Both are indeed beyond impressive!
Sometimes, when seeing, watching, and reading about vehicle visual designs in military, specifically U.S., I constantly keep thinking about how the visual design was so far ahead of its time. Living in Europe, born in '94, never knowing or seeing military planes, or, if seeing, never really realized that the plane I have seen was military plane, basically never knowing them in the way I know them now, those were just planes, and growing up with movies of planes I only saw such like Tomcats, Eagles, and Hover Jets like in True Lies movie. Years later, around mid 2010's I think I started to learn more randomly, interests expanded etc., and started to learn about F-22 and 35 through articles or what. Oh right, never really realizing, but in Battlefield 2 game there were F-35's if not starting from BF3, but never giving a thought, those were just planes for me, some cool looking planes or something. Basically all the same. But years later till mid 2010's I thought these were new planes, but actually they are decades old, in service since late 90's, but it feels like it has been made just recently in past decade. So different from automotive visual design patterns, only in last decade or so cars have started to look like fighter jets, like Lamborghini Aventador, Huracan, Gallardo. Ferrari has some models looking somewhat on that design side too that could've been slightly influenced by fighter jets. Audi and BMW as well. It seems like the automotive industry visual designs are only now looking similar to the designs of fighter jets made back in 80's and early 90's, in the concept stages for prototype and contest jets.
Wind speed tunnels and leaps forward in computer power probably has something to do with it? I believe they knew it in the fourties’ but went away from it. I jest cause I think they got their aerodynamics from aesthetics. Even the trucks back then were. lol
One thing that was not mentioned was that the previous two contracts Northrop recieved from the Pentagon went well over budget and not completed on time, including the B-2 Spirit bomber. The ATF was a program that the USAF did not want to have a run away budget. Lockeed was further along in the design validation of the YF-22's design than Northrop's YF-23. It was a big factor in Lockeed winning the contract.
You should do a video on the FB-23, it was interesting that they YF-22 prototype was taken away from the museum a few years ago when the bomber competition that would eventually brcome the B-21 was still in the planning stages
Good news, SU-57 has gotten its super cruise engines. And the pentagon is rolling out the YF-23 after all. A squadron of 5 have been spotted on deck at Edward's AFB less than 2 weeks ago. Guess they can't live without either.
Superb job on the visuals. Finally the F-23A production design in video. The arguments however could have been better researched. For example both designs met or exceeded all requirements including those on agility. The YF-23 however was deemed more expensive. If one looked however at the these aircrafts from today point of view stealth, speed and range would have been much more important and in those the YF-23 had a clear advantage.
1st air to ground radar was H2S, used by the Brits esp Bomber Command, my Dad had it in his Lancaster, so not the Blackbird. Still being used in Vulcans in Falklands war 30years later.
Kudos to whomever rendered those 3D images of the F-23, they are about the best interpretation of the blueprints I've seen so far. Were they inspired by the illustrations by Hangar B Productions ? [my desktop since 2018... I know... nerd XD]. For scale those tailerons are the same surface area as the wing of the F/A-18, that thing is one GIANT of a plane and that tail digs hard into airflow and never had any issue with maneuverability but, it surely had an issue with PERCEPTION which is solely the fault of Northrop. We'll never know the reasons behind the ATF selection until it's all released/declassified, but it won't be down to ONE thing and IMO I'll bet politics was lurking round every corner, isn't it always with these projects? The F-14 update was cancelled by Cheyney who allegedly had shares in Grumman's competitors. Just about all the retired Pentagon brass have given commentary/opinions/insight on YF-23 and I'll just say that it looks like the US procurement process is quite complicated and leave it there. XD In the end I suspect selection had less to do with the plane and more about the manufacturer, let's hope they learned lessons and their next fighter will blow our minds!
The YF-23's wind tunnel tests indicated that it was stable to 60 degrees angle of attack... in comparison, the dogfight-monster F-16 is stable to about 25 degrees. So while the thrust-vectoring YF-22 was superior in this regard, the YF-23 was still excellent. Also, NOTE THAT many of the improvements over the F-22 that the Air Force is looking for in a 6th generation fighter are areas where the YF-23 was ALREADY superior: Low observables, supercruise speed, large weapons bay, and range; while emphasis on maneuverability is DECREASED for the 6th gen program. Presumably the 6th generation fighter's performance will surpass that of the F-22 by a greater margin, but the point is, the thinking that went into the YF-23 was evidently more correct and future-proof than the thinking that went into the YF-22... and remember that the Air Force is now planning to EARLY-RETIRE the F-22. So we can't help but wonder whether the F-23 would indeed have been the better fighter by a worthwhile margin.
Finally someone who get's it
The irony is tangible: If the ATF decision had been postponed a year or two it could have averted ending up with an aircraft destined to an early end of production and early exit from service.
@@mortified776
The decision was made entirely to bail out Lockheed-Martin. Also, Northrop-Grumman likely anticipated Navy contracts, while Lockheed-Martin was focused on the Air Force. The Navy wanted a more general purpose airframe that could replace a number of different aircraft, not just a dogfighter.
What's truly sad is the F-23 could have replaced the F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-111, F-117, A-6, and possibly EA-6 back in the early 00s - the very thing the F-22, and later the F-35, was SUPPOSED to do, but failed at miserably.
@@jfangm Yes, at that time Northrop had the B-2 program and McDonnell Douglas had the A-12 (not yet cancelled), while Lockheed had nothing comparable and would have struggled to survive without the F-22. That was most likely the crucial factor in picking the YF-22 over the, at least equally capable, YF-23.
@@jfangm Too right, I forgot LM were on the ropes at the time.
Literally the most beautiful fighter jet ever build, real shame it was not meant to be...
Atleast we can play in ace combat, along with the SU-47
Agreed the yf-23 became my favorite aircraft when I first saw it in ace combat
@@toptiergaming6900 it's probably my favorite plane in AC, it and the F-22
bro i think you need lazer eye surgery
Honestly looks better than raptor ngl
Not sure if someone else stated before but another huge deciding factor for the f22 over the f23 was that Lockheed did actual weapon firing tests along with showing off the plane's extreme maneuverability. The yf23 wasn't ready for that and had a much more WIP design internally along with being unable to match what was shown off by the f22. Also the f22 was thought to be easier to convert to a navy version than the yf23 was.
True they were way ahead
@@kevinspecht1208 They both hit the required benchmarks, but LM have some amazing PR staff and hats off to them, cause that ATF contract was worth billions.
@@s3p4kner I worked at China lake naval base I saw both flying around the yf-23 was my favorite. I even had a picture of it in my lab. I was so disappointed when it wasn’t picked. I read an article that stated the ya-23 was the best design and it should have been picked.
I thought the long range high speed stealthier yf23 with it's compact wingspan was what the navy wanted in terms of an interceptor to replace a hole left by the F-14 (with its limited loiter time the super hornet is more of a band-aid). Maybe it will be explained if he does the NAFT-23 video, the canards would definitely help and eliminate the variable swept wing design the F-14 needed to fulfill it's roles.
One of the test pilots commented on an old documentary about the yf23 that it was the fastest out of the two. Not sure if he was talking about acceleration or top end speed.
YF-23 mainly loses because many of its features aren't mature enough. YF-22 is more 'simple' so it gets the deal.
One of the main problems is the coffin-style weapon bay that has some reliability issues because the missile is stacked on top of each other if one below jam, all other missiles can't be used while YF-22 with a simple rack style is more simple, more reliable, and can fire another missile if one missile malfunction.
The other issue outside of Jamming is being able to select a specific type of weapon which the internal rack really doesn’t allow for.
you should team up withy F&E and help them write these scripts.
they could focus on cringey sponsor segues, and you could focus on actually relevant content.
The lack of trust from the US department of defense in Northrop after the massive cost overruns in the B2 program were also a factor in the decision according to many analysts. True or not? I don't know...
Don't forget that despite its claimed speed, it failed to achieve it.
No, the reason was entirely down to Lockheed-Martin being on the verge of failure. As the F4U Corsair and F-35 have shown, the military is no stranger to aircraft that require a bit more development.
The thrust vectoring on the F-22 is one of the most amazing things I have ever seen. First time ever seeing a pilot, more or less, hover the F-22 at an air show, it was one of the coolest things ever. Though it would have been interesting to see what would have come out if the YF-23 had won.
And that was a downside of the 23. The ATF requirement required that the aircraft have nozzles on it to assist it in STOL. The YF23 had those nozzles on their aircraft but then did not test them and said it would be redundant to do so. Not only did the 22 test the nozzles as well as putting them on the aircraft, but they also put them on in such a manner as to have the incredible thrust vectoring that we see it have today. The 23 was a great aircraft but Northrop demonstrated it very poorly. Lockheed got the 22 into the air three months after Northrop got the 23 into the air but still flew twice as many hours. Northrop built the aircraft and then was like let's just show that we can achieve these parameters whereas Lockheed got their aircraft into the air and then flew the heck out of it and also collected a ton of data on the performance of the aircraft. So when the DoD would ask about a certain aspect of the aircraft then Lockheed would give them a huge stack of data on that particular aspect of the aircraft and Northrop was basically like we can make the combat version do that too but then showing little to no data to back it up.
Not taking anything away from the F-22 - it is an amazing aircraft. But the SU family of fighters have the best thrust vectoring period. See what those can pull off, the F-22 is nowhere near that. Still on of my top 3 all time aircraft - I do love the F-22, but the SU family take the number 1 spot.
Had the YF-23 won I would have envisioned a whole family of aircraft in the same vein as the F-15. The like the F-15, the F-23’s airframe in my opinion seemed a lot more versatile than the F-22 and I would’ve easily seen something like a Strike Eagle or Growler/EW version of the 23.
A stealth EW would be fucking cool
When I was 23 I worked at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. One day, I saw one of the YF-23's parked in front of the restoration hanger. I nearly drove off the road! It was totally unattended- you could walk right up to it. It'd be crazy to see a whole flight line of these things.
I stopped by the air museum in Titusville Ville FL (I think) when I was just passing thru on a slow weekday . Well the place was deserted so I wondered out of the museum and into an open adjacent hanger . BOOM center stage F14 Tomcat surrounded by engines on stands and all sorts of other cool flying machines including some sort of British Super Typhoon that came out as WW2 was ending and a big gondola that was used on one of the round the world balloon attempts . Jackpot . They must have stored airshow exhibits there . Never saw another soul just me and a buddy in a hanger full of cool stuff . It was a good day .
@@EdD-ym6le dyno guu%feew e d x2jdjdjdiei2
I9
This is the coolest fighter ever made and it deserves to make a comeback
I've always loved this jet, it felt like Northrup brought a Gen 5.5 jet to a Gen 5 contest. Hope you do the Navy version as I've never heard of it before, the additional canards would have likely added some maneuverability so it seems Northrup was willing to make modifications to fit the feedback. Have to wonder if the child of this thing is flying somewhere in the Gen 6 contest (they did say the developmental turnaround was rather quick on that).
Also, iirc, it was some military brass that didn't like the Black Widow mark and not management.
DoD decided Lockheed-Martin was "too big to fail" and bailed them out by choosing the YF-22.
My bet is the mystery gen 6 fighter is a wing like the B-2 and B-21, just far smaller and a more swept back delta wing (wing-nose-wing angle more acute for higher speeds). Flying wings are the way to go, lift over the entire body, lot more efficient, and lowest radar signature. The only thing they haven't done with them so far is build a faster more agile one.
@@jfangm the most realistic reason tbh.
They already made a video on the navy version a year ago. Have a look for NATF-23 Sea Widow
In my opinion she lost because back then we still emphasise on dogfight (WVR) and stealth fight (BVR) is still, in some sense, relatively new at the time, so despite being better at supercruise and has better stealth profile, it is understandable that air force did not want to bet on it. If the program was to happen today, I think 23 would win this time around. But that was only my perspective on the matter, please do not take it too seriously.
But on the bright side, despite we do not get to see her flying, many features and components of YF-23 is in the F-22.
She lost because Northrop Grumman was deemed "unreliable" by the USAF in order to deliver the logistics that they required to maintain the airframe. They also worried that the costs would sky rocket, as they did with the B-2 Spirit. Despite all that, Lockheed still fucked up the F-22 and its costs.
@@yumyunrangLOAL so there were much more behind the curtain. I never went deeper than the surface level of detail and specs of the two crafts, so this information is very nice. Thank you kindly.
@@yumyunrangLOAL The YF-23 was from it's inception more expensive than the F-22.
Stealth designs are inherently expensive and the YF-23 would have been no exception. It would have been more expensive if anything.
@@yumyunrangLOAL Lockheed not just fucked up F22, they also fucked up F35. Only recently F35 sales begin to fruition
The Airforce was upset at Northrop at the time because of the constant delays and over runs on budget with the B-2.
I’ve read one of the pentagons deciding factors was after the budget overruns, delays and bad press with the B2 they didn’t want to sign another deal with Northrop.
also a12 avenger history for McDonnell Douglas.
Northrop also got busted for giving the military faulty missile tests that the FBI raided one of their facilities. My old boss knows that one. It happened right around the ATF program.
And then the Pentagon drank all the booze they could find and went head long into the F-35 debacle.
Northrop was certainly in the dog house because of the B-2. But they also did handle the 23 horribly. The 23 was in the air for nine months and the 22 was in the air for 6 months yet the 22 flew twice as many hours. Lockheed had converted a Boeing passenger jet into a data center that would fly over the testing grounds and test every aspect of the 22 constantly as it was flying. So when the DoD would ask what their aircraft did in a certain situation or for data on this aspect or that aspect of the aircraft then Lockheed provided piles of data and Northrop provided little to no data. Northrop did not even test the 23's RCS in real time. They only tested the RCS on a wooden model. The ATF program had vectoring nozzles as a requirement for the program and Northrop had nozzles on the 23 but then never tested them because they said it would be redundant. Not only did the 22 build the nozzles correctly, but the 22's has incredible maneuverability because of how they integrated it into the aircraft. And Lockheed did actually test the 22 itself against radar while it was flying in the air. Both companies made fantastic aircraft and it would not surprise me if some of the technology in the 23 is being used or will be used somewhere else but Lockheed handled the competition way better and that gave the DoD the confidence that the 22 was the better platform and if I were in their shoes I would have done the same. They granted the contract to Lockheed because Lockheed gave them data and proof of what their aircraft would do and Northrop barely showed up to the game. Paul Metz frequently talks about how amazing the 23 was and its like I believe him but Northrop did not convey that to the DoD and that is 100% on them.
@@thefreeman8791 Thats incorrect.The Critical Elements of the ATF were :Super cruise lower consumption, Low RCS and stealth, Beyond visual range engagement, First sight /kill, advanced avionics and situational awareness, supported by next general computing power, ability to carry advanced weapons, and counter measures. Open architecture and scalability, Good high /low peed characteristics and maneuverability .
Critically if the key design requirements are BVR, First sight /Kill - Northrop are 100% correct to have gone in that direction they did & their design team expressed that the plane would still be highly maneuverable with the moveable V-Tail ,being nearly the size of some planes wings !. Ok not quiet the same as thrust vectoring but still better than most and there was No direct dog fighting requirement - thats garbage only good high/low speed maneuverability . Most importantly the YF-23 was better in every single critical measure than the F22. It has far better range because it was less draggy and therefore used less fuel. It had a better RCS -especially at the rear, Northrops electronics and computers were the best in the industry & if I'm not mistaken they actual provide LM the electronics for the Raptor.
The design team clearly stated that when the presentations were made there was no requirements to show "dog -fighting" capability. LM took the initiative and it must have factored in the decision - also indirectly because there was a concern of Northrop falling behind /cost over runs. But the D O D reasonings were far deeper than just this... It had to do with Northrop being too heavily invested in 2 massive projects with the B2, and the loss of competition and industry skill if LM lost the project. If we look at the direction the NGAD and other nations 6th gen concepts are heading, clearly the ideas are far nearer to the YF-23 and perhaps it may have been an easier transition with the concept already developed over 30 years. Who knows if Northrop scaled it up with upgrades etc, it may have alleviated the need for a totally new platform,
Requesting videos on the following:
-switchblade aircraft designs such as the FA-37 Talon from the ‘05 movie “Stealth” or the X-02 Wyvern from the Ace Combat franchise
-Supercat-21
-the NATF program
-early ATF proposals
All your videos are just the best, and I'm a fan of all your work! I doubt it would get the views that modern stealth or popular jets like F-14/15/16 etc, but the Northrop F-5 Tiger has always had a special place in my mind because it ticked all the boxes needed to succeed as a cheap exportable lightweight fighter and it just never happened and it just became a trainer. A video about that would be interesting coming from you!
Huh? The Tiger II got exported to plenty of places, hell plenty of places STILL use the Tiger II.
The YF-23 was in fact quite maneuverable. It excelled in all parameters, it's top speed is still classified. Northrop lost the bid mostly due to politics. They had fallen out of favor in DC as a result of the B-2 being massively over-budget and plagued with delays. The USAF brass didn't think Northrop would be able to stay on budget and deliver units on time.
To be fair they might well have been correct.
@@tomriley5790 while I do agree that they may have been correct given the issues at the time, I think considering what the brass went through with the F22, I think that time period would have been where Northrop would have pulled through. USAF had doubts about both the B2 and F117, but they came through to be solidly reliable aircraft (despite nicknames like Wobbly Goblin). If only they were a little bit more longer ranged in their thinking, we would have had an aircraft that we -know- will rule the skies for quite some time. The F22 is king now, as they say (though i think only a peer-level conflict will determine how well or how badly it would really fare), it's sun is setting. This view is really short since it's only 15-20years, while the Eagle has been around a lot longer but is still in top level service.
Dude I heard the same thing. Glad you said it. Also I’m glad I read the comments to not say the same thing.
Doesn't help that putting all your eggs into 1 basket (having 1 company manufacture your 2 spanking new aircrafts) is super risky
Both chief test pilots for the YF-22 and YF-23 have interviews on TH-cam and each has said there is no significant difference in maneuverability
Some of those intial Grumman concepts were on Fire. I can see how a low thermal exaust capability might be something to shoot for but not something to bet the farm on. With the existing empennage is already having to pull double duty some thrust vectoring would have gone a long way in leveling the playing field.
Okay, the NATF-23 looks so much cooler than the original YF-23, and I already thought the Black Widow II was a sexy looking beast
May not have flown in any official tactical mission but I do remember flying it fondly in games like Air/Ace Combat growing up. Also came across some time ago an interview video of someone that worked on the project and it was interesting that his explanation for the choice was basically one has to be chosen and the YF-22 won. Yet the aircraft themselves were spared the scrapyard with one going to the USAF museum in Ohio and the other to the Western Museum of Flight in California.
0:55 I often think of our human overloards taking the best concepts for themselves leaving us w/ the second best and tagging it as "lost competition". I have absolutely no proof its just a crazy thought. Explaining the why. A fascinating one tho.
Fun fact, air to air missiles actually hitting their target is generally a bad thing; the warheads are optimized to go off beside them rather than inside or at least pointed directly at them. The Russians got an early Sidewinder when it hit a MiG and got stuck; for quite a long time their copies were close enough to the originals to be more or less interchangeable.
They were interchangeable. Israelis captured more than a few examples of the Soviet copies - and they worked perfectly with almost no modification done off the Mirage’s sidewinder/Marta magic launch rails/systems.
It's the best stealth fighter in Ace combat 7
At 05:09, you state that this S-shaped intake system help "beat the F-22" in stealth performance. Although the YF-23 was more stealthy, the F-22 also incorporates these "fixed geometry serpentine inlets" for its engines as well, so they did not play a role in a stealth advantage for the 23.
The F-22s engine fan blades are even more hidden and completely unable to be viewed from any angles.
YF-23 was not only stealthier but faster and longer-ranged than the YF-22.
But not as capable at acting as an air superiority fighter, which is what these were competing to be. Unfortunately, the YF23 wasn’t as good of a fighter as the YF22. No thrust vectoring, less armament and not as maneuverable. If the contest focused more on Stealth, the YF23 would have won.
@@BrapBrapDoritoHonestly I think that was the governments fault. If they would’ve specified they wanted there new toy to be stealthy, maneuverable, and have a decent payload, the YF-23 most likely would’ve been modified to fit these requirements.
I worked the YF-23 program at the highest classification level. I completely disagree with the opinions expressed in this video, and with some of the comments other viewers have made. The YF-23 beat the YF-22 soundly in all areas. The decision was purely political. At the time the C-17 program belonged to McDonnell Douglas and the B-2 program belonged to Northrop. Lockheed had nothing of significance, which a certain senator from Georgia (Head of the Senate Armed Services Committee) would not allow. Interestingly, the specification for signature that was used to design the DEMVAL aircraft was changed when the actual RFP was issued. Supposedly, because the YF-22 could not meet the DEMVAL spec.
The NATF development was started long before the Air Force decision to buy the YF-22, and the Navy folks I worked with were highly in favor of the YF-23 NATF variant. They backed out of the program when the YF-22 was chosen.
Two other comments; 1. The launch of an AIM-9 by the YF-22 during the initial testing was nothing more than a publicity stunt. There was no avionics on the aircraft capable of actual interface with the missile. The equivalent of firing an unguided dumb missile. 2. The Air Force brass told the evaluating pilots from the Air Force Fighter Weapons School at Nellis AFB that their choice of aircraft would be the deciding factor. According to subsequent feedback, they did not pick the YF-22.
Thanks for the clarification. Pretty incredible to scroll and find this comment from someone who actually worked the program.
Yeah whatever you said...i agree
Couldn't agree with you more
SquareSpace wasn't even existing in the 80s, Internet is also not accessible to the public yet. So SquareSpace won't have any effect on how YF23 could win the military contract.
Huh. Never knew there was a planned naval version of this thing. Thanks for letting me know
What is your opinion on the conspiracy theory with the F-52 stated by former president Donald Trump?
The YF-23's computers would have been upgradable and affordable to swap out when the time came. Khanet Preeteepveruriya points out one of the major decisions to go ahead with the YF-22 but it also came down to the YF-23's composite body and odd shape which after the F-117 the brass had concerns about the YF-23's stability which was unfounded.
Awesome video! And the NATF topic is by all means imaginable is very interesting, too. Not that there's anything particularly wrong with the F/A-18, but there should be a stealth deck aircraft built specifically for carrier applications some day.
The P-61 was such a gorgeous aircraft and the design on the YF-23 was very well done and would do honours to the original Black Widow. I can see the YF-23 doing a similar role, solo night operations flying low, fast and destroying enemy aircraft on take off or landing.
I get extra happy whenever i see you upload
I get extra happy when I see a comment from you :)
@@FoundAndExplained love your videos
I also love the other video about the YF-23 you made a couple years ago
If I may suggest
Make a video about B-21, B-2, H-20, J-31, and the J-20
@@FoundAndExplained Do you? Glad to hear that!
Not gonna lie, that was the best ad segue I think I've ever seen on TH-cam so far.
cool video but I wanna mention a couple of things: the f 22 also has S shaped air ducts to hide the engines, it's a key feature in stealth aircraft, in fact some 4th gen aircraft have it too (the Eurofighter typhoon for one). I guess the higher stealth comes from the lack of 2 tail surface because of the V tail compared to the raptor
also you mentioned the Russian borrowed the design of the tail from the yf23? what do you mean exactly? if you're talking about angled vertical stabilisers i don't think they copied it from anywhere, it's kind of a common thing. maybe the all moving vertical stabilisers?
anyway cool video
Both YF 22 and 33 look outstandingly beautiful, USA knows how to make efficient and beautiful Jets.
Politics & money - the two horsemen of every cancelled military project... 👻
But I've never heard of the NATF-23 till this day so a full video on this wildly looking plane would be appreciated! 😎👍
25 years ago I bought a plastic model of the YF-23, I think that is one more aesthetic plane on my collection. I will love to see the video on the NATF-23
It's kinda strange how this fighter was designed the same time as the 5th gen raptor, but this looks like most counties 6th gen design 30 years later
Nah doesn’t look like a 6th gen design.
@@robert.m6755 I disagree, if you look at the two European 6th gen proposed fighter programs and Japan's fx fighter concept they look way more like the yf-23 than any current 5th gen fighter today
@@robert.m6755 You are right. It looks better.
Another great video of a legendary airplane!
this tail wing design is kinda sick
Allegedly the YF-23 was only *_SLIGHTLY_* less agile than the YF-22 despite not having thrust-vectoring, but Lockheed won the Public Relations war by performing slow-speed high-alpha maneuvers as well as firing an AIM-120 AMRAAM and AIM-9 Sidewinder for Air Force observers while Northrop didn't.
Exactly! The real time capabilities of the YF-22 sealed the deal. I am a YF-23 booster over 30 years now, but the USAF could not from their perspective at the time selected the aircraft. That said I wouldn't mind a updated F-23 high altitude interceptor/deep penetration strike bomber/high speed tactical reconnaissance with ultra modern avionics and weapons systems. The NGAD fighter kinda makes it redundant, but still one can dream...
I want to see the naval version of the UF 23!
It is so secret, nobody have ever seen the real one, but very popular on the internet CGI.
Given the YF-23's stealth capabilities, perhaps the Black Widow II / Grey Ghost could have found a role as a replacement for the F-117 Nighthawk and F-15E Strike Eagle in the form of the proposed but rejected FB-23.
Love your videos, been subscribed for a long time! Thanks so much for working on this, the YF23 is my favourite "concept" jet that got genuinely made and it's a pleasure to see it on the channel! It would be *WONDERFUL* to see your high production and research take on the Navy model, please please please...
Northrop's YF-23 wasn't chosen for one reason. Northrop was in the process of making the B-2 stealth bomber, and the Government was afraid to split its resources y making two aircraft at once. They feared that neither would have Northrop's full attention. The Lockheed YF-22 also did one thing that was not on the comparison test by firing a missile during one of its flights. Northrop, unaware that Lockheed was to do this, did not even bring any missiles to the test area. They COULD have, but it wasn't on the test agenda, so didn't. The Government testers then said, "look at that, Lockheed's plane shot a missile while Northrop's didn't. Let's give it to Lockheed." They then told reporters that the reason was the bomber production reason.
Yep a great PR attempt that paid off handsomely for Lockheed. Your explanations otherwise are also correct.
2:02 Not gonna lie, the smoothness of the "segway" to the sponsor totally is Anthony Young level here.
BTW you made me fire up good old JetFighter II again. I wish we had this thing in DCS though...
The "Grey Ghost" is at the aviation museum at Zamperini Field (Airport) in Torrance California.
It is parked next to the chain link fence along with a F-14, viewable from the road behind the Honda dealership.
I had no idea it was there till one day making deliveries looked up saw it and my jaw dropped.
I believe that the red hourglass has been re-applied.
What makes this aircraft even more cool than the F-22 is the fact that the Japanese were planning on either continuing the black widow project to have there own 5th gen fighters or incorporating designs from the black widow into there own unique 5th gen fighter.
can you do a video on the other blackbird designs?
It’s my very next video next week!! Poggers
I had a toy of this when I was younger and loved it ever since, but I never knew about a naval version. Definitely educate me on that!
I feel that the 5th gen jet in Top Gun Maverick should be YF23 because this plane looks way more imposing than SU57.
Where would Iran/Iraq even get YF-23s?
@@gibz5467 The Terrain and geography in the movie looks like it sets in Western Europe instead of Iran.
@@ReviveHF Where and when did any country in eastern europe obtain Tomcats, Felons AND GHOSTS????
While I get what you're saying, a huge difference is that Su-57s are actually in production. It wouldn't make any sense to see a YF-23 in TG2.
I remember back then, reading about rumours that the YF-23 was "not selected" because it was to ("secretly") end up being used as a replacement for SR-71s. I don't think that's what ended up happening, but that story circulated.
Early Gag! For the YF-23
The YF-23 & P-38 are two of my favorite unusual fighters. Conisidering the original black widow, the P-61, I love the name of the YF-23 Black Widow 2. Edit: I’d Love a supplementary video on the Navy and Japanese info for this project! Thank you again for a great video.
Its tails were about the size of an f-35 wing alone and rotated on a huge axis, giving it almost equal performance to 2d vectoring the raptor had. It also was capable of manuevering better at higher speeds than the raptor, due to its airframe. Also it went mach 1.8 comapred to the raptors 1.5, actually anything above 1.8 was concidered classified so, it could actually went mach 2, while the raptor was going 1.5. It was also able to supercruise and hide its rear stealth signature miles better, and it was a bigger plane than the f-22 yet was stealthier and gave a smaller radar signature. If we would of went with this, wed be so ahead then we already are by now. And you wouldnt even really need to change its airframe much, you could add the panels the f-35 has making it even more stealthier and easier to work on, also they had to use the same tiles the nasa shuttle used to cool the exhaust, and this took alot of man hours to do, nowadays we have entire panels made of much better material and could be installed much faster. All it needs is a upgraded suite, upgraded weapons bay wich was also one if its best and worst features its bay is much larger than the raptors, but its weapon deliverance system at the time in theory could jam, we could fix this nowadays, they could probably give it even stronger engines id imagine. Wich may have to result in some airframe changes. But otherwise this was basically a 6th gen fighter made the 80s.
Thank you for this man,love the black widow and your channel
You didn't mention that in in the ATF competition, the YF-23 lacked "high agility" but didn't mention the caveat that, after the fact, higher kinetic performance (greater top speed, and range by virtue) was proven to be more important in a modern combat environment. It would behoove this video to mention the reason why the F-22 won and the rationale at the time (higher agility, thrust vectoring, lower cost than YF-23). It would add credibility to your video to address the Air Force's perception of the YF-23 in 1990 and the relevance in hindsight of its advacned features (supercruise better than YF-22, similar high speed maneuverability, and relative cost). Thank you for your consideration!
The "lacked high agility" comment was misleading. It had to match or surpass the F15 witch I consider very agile. Even if the lack of vector thrust made it less manuvirable doesn't mean it lacked high agility. Seen to me he finding it tough to find valid reason to why it lost. We all know its Politics. Imo it was the superior aircraft
Yes, please make a video of the NATF-23. I would like to know more about that.
It's so fking beautiful
1:21 Lockheed sure loves _that_ particular style.
The YF-23 as explained by it's designers could do the exact same maneuvers as the YF-22 however in their display they decided not to do extreme low maneuvers. Considering how indepth the research this channel normally does, I am surprised that this massive factor was missed. That the only reason the YF-23 was percieved to be less maneuverable was because those maneuvers where not decided to be done during the demonstration excersise. If they decided on showing the YF-23 it still would not have been chosen because of the politics and fact the aircraft would cost more than the YF-22. But atleast people would stop misunderstanding the performance of the aircraft as being lesser than the YF-22.
The 'looks' of the F23 falsely spooked some Air Force people; they stuck to the old saying 'that if it looks right, it'll fly right'. The F22 was more symmetric and false or not on flight mobility, the 'jet jocks' didn't want to be stuck with BVR as their only option. Frankly, I'm not sure the brass believed the 60 angle of attack, and turning ability of the 50 degree tails without an elevator would out turn the angled exhausts on the F22. They just didn't want to make the full leap the F23 was showing. If you can't see, can't catch it and can't put your nose on it given its steep angle of attack response, how are you going to engage it, let alone defeat it? I don't think the fighter jocks wanted to give up 'stick' manuvering.
Whatever the reasons for going with the F-22 the F-23 was a badass looking aircraft that still looks badass more than 30 years since she last flew. The F-22 might be able to handle a SU-35 or SU-57 in a turning fight but I wouldn't want to take that chance when you have superior detection range to launch at a significant standoff distance. It was probably the right choice at that moment, but it would have been great to have a few squadrons of them so that we could pit the advantages of the F-22 with those of the F-23 to inform future development.
amazing plane
This yf23 was vary late in getting finished and couldn't do a low speed maneuver which is the main reason the military rejected it. It will be rejected again unless they fix its maneuverability.
The YF-23 didn't need thrust vector technology. It was able to do everything without what was needed. The F-22 needed it to be able to do all this. Special in the flight envelope the planes where build for the F-23 had better parameters.
Awesome graphics!!
I'd love to get hold of some hi-res screenshots of the YF-23 from your model setup, especially in black/dark grey!
You'll never see another dogfight again. The YF-23 was far superior in all aspects. Maneuverability wasn't an issue.
My best friends dad worked at Northrop for 37 years, and on the Black Widow II. The top speed of the F-22 Raptor is Mach 2.5.
He said to me, the Widow went much, much, much faster.
People have been saying the age of dogfighting is over for decades. Yet it still happens, and is likely to continue happening as long as there are conflicts. Sure, technology makes BVR kills more likely today, but nothing is guaranteed. Whether through luck or clever tactics, it is still possible for a couple fighters to get close.
Im no engineer, but how the stabilizers on the back work might actually be really helpful in a gen 6 project that uses a flying wing design: not strictly necessary, but deployable in case more maneuverability is needed
I've seen the F-22 on Demo flights in Chile and it's ridiculous what it can do in the air. Very very impressive.
I can see why the YF-22 would've impressed the Air Force compared to a more "regular" YF-23
Ps: Renders look dope 👌🏻
The YF23 team did everything by the book in their demo and really held back its full capabilities. The YF22 team did the opposite and performed aerobatics that weren't part of the requirements to "wow" the generals in attendance. It was a marketing ploy that worked in their favor and clearly persists today because people still think there was a huge agility gap between the two jets. There wasn't
... absolutely talk about the natf-23. I remember having a magazine back into the late 80's, early 90's, talking about the yf-22 and 23.
It’s already on the channel
why can’t they just give planes names, like raf, or bill, or taylor….
nvm, i see why
Hey, I just noticed that the overall shape of Su-57 is more similar to YF-23 than to F-22.
Coincidence? Don't think so!
Look at @03:15.
The F-22 can't dog fight. It's too heavy and it's oxygen supply system isn't reliable under high G-Forces. Yeah, they still haven't fixed that problem. In simulated dogfights against the Eurofighter and various SAAB fighters, the adversary usually achieves lock on first. The F-22 is only effective at long over-the-horizon range.
Well, in actual Red Flags, the 22’s have dominated since their Nellis debut in 2007. And I do believe the oxygen fix happened back in 2018.
What a cool jet! I'm fortunate enough to have a YF-23 on display in my town, so I think I'll have to go over and see it in person soon.
Northrop brought a stealth fighter into the dog fight, the fight that is far less important for today's combat.
Ironically, they lost because they were 2 decades ahead of the curve.
So many people say the YF-23 was a better aircraft. Simply because it was more stealthy, faster and able to fly at higher altitudes and a lot to do with how it looks. It seems to have a cult following of people claiming it was better. It wasn’t.
Not only had Northrop mismanaged projects before this, overspending, delays etc made the military less trusting in their ability to run the program, but they also had more on their hands.
The YF-23 was more expensive, this is seen as the main issue with the YF-23, but it is just one of the many issues.
The YF-22 was further along in development, the 2 prototype YF-23 had multiple issues, especially the second ‘Grey Ghost’ which was supposed to be an improvement to the original, but it was a nightmare. The engines were less reliable and harder to manage than the YF-22. Part kept having to be changed. The windshield cracked on multiple occasions, including while sitting in the hanger. Which is an issue for obvious reasons.
As mentioned, the YF-22 was able to fire a missile unlike the YF-23 which was unable to even carry weapons during the tests and only had one bay meaning a jam would leave it with no weapons. The YF-22 was also more manoeuvrable, possessing thrust vectoring and did a 9g turn during testing. Comparing that to the incomplete YF-23 which was unable to do many of the thing expected of it while the YF-22 was exceeding expectations. Although the YF-23 on paper had higher top speed and altitude, it wasn’t able to show it potential in testing. Adding the YF-22s superior avionics, the YF-23 was simply not ready.
The YF-23 had a lot of potential, maybe even more than the Raptor (although I doubt it). But they decided on the more complete aircraft the YF-22.
I know everyone loves the YF-23 but the truth is the F-22 was simply the better aircraft
and politics exist
The only thing the f22 had on the f23 was vectored thrust. Now when modern fighters stand off engage 20 nautical miles plus vectored thrust doesn't mean a thing. Also i think an f4 phantom could take down an f22 in close quarter combat today same with the f23
@@najlitarvan921 Politics can ruin things, but also prevent mistakes, like the highspeed railway in California, while it may seem like it failed in comparison to China, but if you live in California, you should be grateful for the bickering politics, because without them, we would be in debt up to our noses with the railways, like China is, barely any of China's propaganda railways break even, so in some cases politics may be stifling fantasies, but they also might be for our own good, saving us from ourselves
@@richardsears4665 what imainly meant is that lockheed was seen as a more likely company to give results, oh how that backfired with the raptor
@@billc3271 The f-4 could not take on the F-22 in any possible scenario, the MIG-21 took advantage of the terrible turn radius of the F-4, and if a MIG-21 could out turn the F-4 than you better believe the F-22 could do it. There is no way the F-4 or the YF-23 would ever beat the F-22, unless the odds were HEAVILY stacked in their favor, like the F-22 pilot flying while intoxicated.
This jet may have lost to the yf22, but it really won! This jet was so good it couldn't have been mothballed! In my opinion, this jet was disguised to appear to have been sent to museums, but it was sent for classified further development, fitted with the latest ramjet - or even scramjets. Also, it may have been fitted with the latest small, but powerful, laser pods, capable of engaging targets over 100 miles away, and this is teamed up with the best short, medium, and long range missiles. They may have the latest stealth technology paints. Who knows, AI and quantum computing may be engaged, too.
YF-23 should have been reinforced then taken possession by the US Navy. One thing that wasn't mentioned in the video was the fuel economy of the YF-23 compared to the F-22. Even without thrust vectoring, the YF-23 met ALL of the ATF requirements. With a bit more tweaks here&there...YF-23 probably would have become a superior choice over the fuel guzzling F-22 and its expensive thrust vectoring components. Plus...she just looks so much cooler than the Raptor which in truth, sounds cooler. Whether you favor the F-22 or YF-23? Both are indeed beyond impressive!
Sometimes, when seeing, watching, and reading about vehicle visual designs in military, specifically U.S., I constantly keep thinking about how the visual design was so far ahead of its time. Living in Europe, born in '94, never knowing or seeing military planes, or, if seeing, never really realized that the plane I have seen was military plane, basically never knowing them in the way I know them now, those were just planes, and growing up with movies of planes I only saw such like Tomcats, Eagles, and Hover Jets like in True Lies movie.
Years later, around mid 2010's I think I started to learn more randomly, interests expanded etc., and started to learn about F-22 and 35 through articles or what. Oh right, never really realizing, but in Battlefield 2 game there were F-35's if not starting from BF3, but never giving a thought, those were just planes for me, some cool looking planes or something. Basically all the same. But years later till mid 2010's I thought these were new planes, but actually they are decades old, in service since late 90's, but it feels like it has been made just recently in past decade.
So different from automotive visual design patterns, only in last decade or so cars have started to look like fighter jets, like Lamborghini Aventador, Huracan, Gallardo. Ferrari has some models looking somewhat on that design side too that could've been slightly influenced by fighter jets. Audi and BMW as well. It seems like the automotive industry visual designs are only now looking similar to the designs of fighter jets made back in 80's and early 90's, in the concept stages for prototype and contest jets.
Wind speed tunnels and leaps forward in computer power probably has something to do with it? I believe they knew it in the fourties’ but went away from it. I jest cause I think they got their aerodynamics from aesthetics. Even the trucks back then were. lol
this was a video topic that was definitely worth waiting
Yes, we would love to see the Navya YF-23 concept!
Agree totally with the best looking jet. Doesn't look like a 90s plane at all. Definitely be good to see the Navy version
I’m interested! The NATF-23 needs to be talked about. What another cool plane!
More info on the Navy and the NATF-23 please!
Came here to see people crying how the YF-23 would have been a superior choice and calling foul over Lockheed. Was not disappointed.
One thing that was not mentioned was that the previous two contracts Northrop recieved from the Pentagon went well over budget and not completed on time, including the B-2 Spirit bomber. The ATF was a program that the USAF did not want to have a run away budget. Lockeed was further along in the design validation of the YF-22's design than Northrop's YF-23. It was a big factor in Lockeed winning the contract.
Your a professional , and its appreciated thanks for info
Omg the animations are so good. Love seeing this thing fly
YAY finally , knew you would do this baby
Nice work on this
You should do a video on the FB-23, it was interesting that they YF-22 prototype was taken away from the museum a few years ago when the bomber competition that would eventually brcome the B-21 was still in the planning stages
I love this jet I’ll watch any video on it but a found and explained is the best
Good news, SU-57 has gotten its super cruise engines. And the pentagon is rolling out the YF-23 after all. A squadron of 5 have been spotted on deck at Edward's AFB less than 2 weeks ago. Guess they can't live without either.
Superb job on the visuals. Finally the F-23A production design in video. The arguments however could have been better researched. For example both designs met or exceeded all requirements including those on agility. The YF-23 however was deemed more expensive. If one looked however at the these aircrafts from today point of view stealth, speed and range would have been much more important and in those the YF-23 had a clear advantage.
No wayyyy ugggh I love this channel 💘💘💘💘💘
I love you too
Good video as usual 😎
Fantastic video my friend Bravo!!!
Thank you! Cheers!
1st air to ground radar was H2S, used by the Brits esp Bomber Command, my Dad had it in his Lancaster, so not the Blackbird. Still being used in Vulcans in Falklands war 30years later.
NATF 23, I didn't even know about that project!!!! More please!!!!!!!!!!
Kudos to whomever rendered those 3D images of the F-23, they are about the best interpretation of the blueprints I've seen so far. Were they inspired by the illustrations by Hangar B Productions ? [my desktop since 2018... I know... nerd XD].
For scale those tailerons are the same surface area as the wing of the F/A-18, that thing is one GIANT of a plane and that tail digs hard into airflow and never had any issue with maneuverability but, it surely had an issue with PERCEPTION which is solely the fault of Northrop.
We'll never know the reasons behind the ATF selection until it's all released/declassified, but it won't be down to ONE thing and IMO I'll bet politics was lurking round every corner, isn't it always with these projects? The F-14 update was cancelled by Cheyney who allegedly had shares in Grumman's competitors.
Just about all the retired Pentagon brass have given commentary/opinions/insight on YF-23 and I'll just say that it looks like the US procurement process is quite complicated and leave it there. XD
In the end I suspect selection had less to do with the plane and more about the manufacturer, let's hope they learned lessons and their next fighter will blow our minds!
Its the same model made by Hanger B
Dude I just found out ‘bout the sea dragon rocket!! PLEASE do a video about it!!! Other channelels have covered it, but your channel is the best!