How America almost put the F 117 on aircraft carriers
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ส.ค. 2024
- The introduction of the F-117 Nighthawk was a watershed moment in military aviation. After years of competing to field faster moving, higher flying aircraft that could outrun or out climb enemy air defenses, the Nighthawk adopted a new approach to fighting in contested airspace: stealth. Using the most powerful computers of the era, Lockheed's Skunk Works developed an aircraft that could elude enemy defenses, rather than defeat them through brute strength.
In 1993, four years after the U.S. Air Force unveiled the Nighthawk to the world, Lockheed approached the U.S. Navy with a proposal for a carrier-based iteration of the famed "stealth fighter." This new F-117N would be a low-observable (stealth) all-weather strike aircraft. At the time, it seemed like a logical progression for America's air power.
I know the airframe was designed with old ass computers but it's iconic look still looks like the epitome of a stealth plane. So cool so sleek, even if it had the horizontal stabs and resigned wings for the naval version.
No, it's damn ugly. It barely even flies.
@@carlosandleon it barely flies… insert all by design unstable aircraft… F-22, practically all Russian fighters, B-2, etc
Therapist: Naval raptor Doesn't exist, it can't hurt you!
The naval raptor : 10:29
I was mistaken, the F15 is not in the navy.
It’s really a super tomcat more than a naval raptor.
F14 + F22
Neat
Love the change in stealth tech forms, and coatings. Creates such a contrast, almost startling to see a F-117 next to a Raptor or F-35. Computers and coating couldn't handle the organic shapes needed (nor manufacturing) to reflect/absorb radar energy, so the F-117 (hopeless diamond) became a planar faceted oddball that could fly, but was really all about redirecting radar energy away from itself and the source emitter. Truly a novel approach, and pretty gutsy also, because even with the computers of the time, that thing wasn't meant to fly!
F-4's proved we can make bricks fly
Same with the f16. It was made to be inherently unstable to increase agility the problem was no human could fly it safely and computers weren't up to the task until years later. Now 50 years later it's still one the best air to air fighters.
@@Spectre-wd9dl are you sure it's not the f15
The most amazing thing about the F-117 was that they managed to keep it secret for 6 or 7 years, for a carrier based aircraft that kind of secrecy could have lasted days
Well… assuming that the crew would have to cut off their internet convection… oh wait. Exactly. It would make port calls annoying as all hell, since the aircraft would have to fly to base during the cover of darkness, and then come back. But carriers don’t often make port calls(since the navy learned from Pearl Harbor, as well as many ports, even those of allied nations disliking port calls by nuclear powered vessels, which I don’t understand because they have been around for 60 yearsish, and have yet to have but a few accidents mainly by submarines in unfortunate events
I think by the time any "Seahawk" were to see the flight deck of a carrier, the USAF's Nighthawks would have been publicly known for years.
F-117's and F-22's on carriers, Ace Combat has us covered in that regard. Every land based aircraft is considered carrier capable in Strangreal.
“I don’t care if it’s “not a carrier aircraft” or “too big” they’re an ace and we’re on the ropes! Let that A-10 down here, we’ll service ‘em on deck and get ‘em back in the air!”
They may also have longer carriers. Even not counting things like the Arsenal Bird with its 1100 meter wingspan.
The F-117 was tested on carriers back in the early 1980s. In fact, an F-117 was spotted flying in the Phillipines, apparently operating off the USS Kittyhawk. FYI, most planes (small enough to fit on the flight deck) can be launched from a carrier via a harness. Landing is much trickier.
Don't all aircraft have a tailhook for short emergency landings anyway? I wonder if those could be used for an emergency carrier landing..
@@sheilaolfieway1885 , no they don't. Carriers do have nets that can be mounted on the arresting gear to catch planes without tailhooks, or landing gear damage.
@@sheilaolfieway1885, it's had for civilization to understand, that Air Force air craft do have a tail hook for emergency landings on aircraft carriers. There is a ground tail hook function at Naval Air Station Whidbey, WA., that is were Air Force pilots practice their tail hook landings. I was in the Navy from 1980 to 1984, and I served aboard the USS Kitty Hawk from 1983 to 1984, and I do remember that operation. The Navy has tried to get Air Force pilots to actually land on aircraft cariers, but they won't, because, they fear landing on a aircraft carrier. I've talked to many former Air Force pilots, and they all gave me the same fear answer.
This sounds like a more optimized intermediate step towards the JSF.
It was very similar to Lockheed’s proposals for ATF in the late 1980s. Very shortly before the final designs were due to the USAF, Lockheed wiped the table clean and went back to the design from scratch, because they couldn’t area-rule the F-117 style fuselage to achieve the supersonic speeds for ATF. There’s a detailed history about this showing all their design proposals.
@@LRRPFco52
I've probably got concept art along those lines somewhere. It's interesting to look back on books from the 80s talking about fighters of the 00s to see how right they were and how wrong they were.
The nighthawk is nowhere near a fighter, but yeah. I really think that they should’ve just made a stealth aircraft for the navy then down/upscale for for the airforce
"Two small diameter bombs" is incorrect unless you consider 2000 lbs class weapons "small diameter".
Like I said. They need a fact checker.
Anything can be considered 'small diameter' if you're brave enough. c:
..well the weapons diameter is smaller than that of the engines... so.......... mmm, ...yeah.... [looks around bemused and vexxed with a raised eyebrow]
@@razor1uk610 yeah, I'm not sure what your point is.
Could just be one long boi
8:19 the hopeless diamond shape did not came out of DARPA. It was out of a Lockheed's Skunk Work radar specialist called Denys Overholser, based on the Method of Edge Waves in the Physical Theory of Diffraction by Pyotr Ufimtsev
Both statements are true. It depends on what they are referencing. The original shape comes from your explanation, Overholster's simulation work. However the physical prototype of the same name was DARPA funded. Thus "came out of DARPA"
@@otm646 I mean... Lockheed had to pay for their own expenses in the stealth competition... so no.
Lockheed wasn't originally part of the DARPA study for reducing radar signature. McDonnell Douglas and Northrop were officially part of the study, and Lockheed built their own model at their own cost and submitted it. The story goes that it was on the test stand, and the test engineers insisted that nothing was there until they looked out the window and saw it in place. As far as cross section reduction, it blew the McDonnell Douglas and Northrop submissions away.
Thrust isn’t measured in pound feet just FYI, pound feet is for torque. It’s just pounds of thrust.
Yes. Lbf just means pounds-force
It was an honor working at Area51 85-89, on this amazing airframe. Good memories.
A toy F117 and my grandpa started my fascination with planes, so cool to know more about this plane so many years later
Nostalgia mode activated ) that was my first pc game . I would drive around ( yes drive an airplane on the ground ) to see how many tanks I could ram ( yes ram as in running them over) .
I applaud your prior commitment to playing sim games properly as in the most backasswards way possible. 😆 Hope you continue that spirit of complete subversion of a game's intent to this day. Keep fighting the entertaining fight!
Super cool episode! I didn’t know anything about this! Fascinating! Thxs, Bro!
my dad flew the F-117 Nighthawk so I appreciate this video
I really love the look of the F117 Sea Hawk.
The Navy finally got their multi-role stealth fighter in the form of the F-35C. It’s a jack of all trades and master of absolutely none. Lockheed forced this turkey on Congress who in turn forced it on the DoD. The Air Force hated it from the start as it was not the aircraft we wanted or asked for but since Lockheed runs Washington nowadays we had no choice.
The engine is the F414 not F114. Thrust is measured in lbs not lb/ft. I like the content on your channel and website. You guys need a fact checker though. I see a lot of incorrect statements sometimes it's details, others it's lack of understanding a topic.
You don’t know what your talking about
@@johnatback2343 ok, I'll take the bait. Exactly what don't I know?
@@9HighFlyer9 that your way over your head he is just stating what information he received and the research he probably did on the internet while you probably did one search and was like “yup this is it” bruh🤓
@@johnatback2343 yeah because I watched the whole video checking everything he said. Finally I found two things and said "aha!! Now I've got him."
Or maybe I've spent my entire life around aviation and several things stood out as inaccurate.
@@johnatback2343 🤦
They are called horizontal stabilators not horizontal ailerons. This is because at the back there are on older planes a horizontal stabilizer (stab) which has an elevator attached to it to control the pitch of the aircraft. A stabilator combines the stab and elevator into one part. Typically needed for fast aircraft like the f18, f14, f15 so on and so forth. Often on modernist aircraft they not only act as elevators but ailerons as well in what's know as a "rolling tail" configuration. But they are still known as stabilators.
Lockheed to Navy: Oh you don't want our stealth aircraft? Fine the Airforce gets a new stealth fighter.
Man, it would have been nice to see a couple of them made. That's a good looking bird...
The book by Ben Rich himself contradicts a lot of the info on the F-117. I'd highly recommend it, it's called "Skunk Works"
First flown in 1981,..I don’t care what anyone says,..It’s STILL one of my absolute favorite looking aircraft!!! I love watching channels like Dimple , who take North Korean military defectors and show them videos of US military stuff for their opinion, whenever one of them see the F-117 it’s such a look of shock , same woth the stealth bomber. But the Nigh-hawk particularly the think becasue it’s so jagged and sharp it jsut screams insanity/alien in nature. Love it!
One thing is for sure, Lockheed has always been as good as salesmanship/marketing as aircraft design (if not better). Everything they pitched for the Navy version of the F-117 matches up closely with what the F-35C provides. As much difficulty as they had with the F-35, I have no idea how they would have fit everything into the low observable shape of the F-117.
Another big factor is that the Navy was attempting the McDonnell Douglas A-12 Avenger II program, which failed miserably and wasn't cancelled until the early 90's. The lawsuits over that program's cancellation didn't wrap up until over 20 years later. Right after that, they rolled into the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet program. There was no way they would have had the funding available for something the scale of the F-117N, especially with the Air Force working on F-22 and B-2 and the Navy/USMC V-22.
Not going to lie, the (A)-117N Seahawk as a capability replacement for the venerable A-6 Intruder is a pretty good sell for me. Combining 'good enough' performance with enough stealth to let the planes slip through AA radar screens the A-6 had to scream along at treetop level to dodge sounds like it would have been a good fit alongside the Tomcat's air-intercept and Hornet's all-rounder roles.
I'm not very fond of Lockheed as a company, but I'm actually a little sad this project didn't get made and see service now that I know about it. It's basically everything the A-12 program was promising but more likely to actually work as advertised.
I haven't seen F-19 Stealth Fighter since I was a kid! I'd completely forgotten about it
“As you can see here, we have two small diameter bombs” he says, referring to 2 ton course correcting bunker busters
Wow lockhead learned a lot from this jet and added it to the f-35 and f-22
Flip a model of the F-22 upside down then compare it to a model of the F-117A. Same geometry.
They actually changed the name to F/A 117. Fighter Attack stealth. I grew up near holloman, I sure miss seeing these daily. Some of my friends dads flew them, yes a few flew actual missions too.
Have a source for that other than growing up near Holloman? The Air Force still calls it F-117.
@@9HighFlyer9 www.holloman.af.mil/About/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/317344/f-117a-nighthawk/ mybad the a was after the 117 now lol. As a kid it was F/A, but that was the early 90s, it remained in there, they just moved where it is. The military has nicknames for everything, even their weapons and aircraft they will call by its nickname or unofficial name, I don’t know how many conversations I’ve had in acronym and calling things by its old or wrong name. We even got shit for calling our fuzzy stuff Velcro because that’s a brand name, not the actual name. I joined the Army later on, and learned this first hand, no one calls it an M16A2 or A4, it’s just an M16.
God that F-117N would have been one sexy aircraft.
There were two prototypes for the Navy. They were called “A-12”. The shape were more ‘triangles’. The intakes were under the plane. After the project was canceled. Both were scraped. The only part that showed the program was real was the bottom of the canopy, with the serial numbers printed on the inside in a scrap yard.
Proof
You’re thinking of the A-12 Avenger II program, a separate, flying delta wing aircraft design the navy was perusing in the 1990s. The program had a large amount of setbacks and cost overruns which ultimately resulted in its cancellation, and thus the scrapping of those canopies.
"wobblin' goblin" + "carrier landings"?
Sounds like a good way to kill pilots to be honest.
No one ever actually called it the wobbling goblin, that was a media fiction.
@@kdrapertrucker Nonetheless, with those aerodynamic curves, that wing sweep, no leading edge control surfaces, and the size & configuration of the vertical control surfaces in that V-tail... "carrier landing" isn't exactly the first thing which comes to mind.
Plus it was built on a very tight budget. It's mostly made of off the shelf bits & bobs. Carrier-ifying it would take a major structural redesign, or it would turn back into a pile of bits & bobs & stealth coating sheets on the flight deck.
You can do anything if you try hard enough. But it wouldn't exactly be an easy thing to do.
@@kdrapertrucker well the media called it wobblin goblin
@@carlosandleon hence the "media fiction"
but who am i kidding, when has the media ever provided false narratives,
Pilots said it handles like an F-4 without burner. That was from guys who had flown the F-4E and F-4G prior to going into the F-117A. There’s an excellent interview with one of them on The Fighter Pilot Podcast.
Nighthawk at supersonic would be scary👍
I wanna see a black widow on carrier👍
We had a show and tell years ago from a Skunkwork engineer at the UCLA aerospace society. He rolled out a huge blue print of the N and talk about design considerations for carrier operation. Shame it never came into service. Probably the best looking ugly bird there is.
Too bad. The F117 was a truly awesome looking airplane. It had a short service life, but what they learned from that technology is still influencing fighters today.
I've heard that the Air Force keeps them in flyable condition at Area 51, right next to the aliens.
@@mr_beezlebub3985 They keep some on active reserve, ready for deployment, and they even fly a few from time to time. www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a31784615/f-117-star-wars-canyon/
There was also a Microprose game in the 90s actually called F-117. You could do carrier operations in this game.
completely untrue. It was actually called "F-19 Stealth Fighter". This was mentioned just 1:47 into the video, which shows that you just wanted to peacock your opinion without even having watched the video.
@@Aeronaut1975 Right, wise ass, I spent hundreds of hours playing that game... So what is that then? www.google.com/search?q=microprose+f-117&rlz=1CAUBRP_enNL952NL952&oq=Microprose+F-117&aqs=chrome.0.0i355j46j0i22i30l4.5670j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
@@Aeronaut1975 The F-19 stealth fighter was earlier, true, but the F-117 one came out in 1991.
@@dutchbachelor iirc they're the same game, the F-117 is just a reskin more or less.
This Plane looks so cool.
“They will have a heck of a time to shoot it down”
Serbian air defence: “Yeah…right…”
Ya they shot one down and damaged a 2nd.
In an extremely specific situation yes. They did not kill it in aspontaneous encounter
@@ravener96 they shot it down with antiquated equipment .
@@paulthomson9014 yes, but is was a completely unscalable tactic.it would only ever work once, and required a huge amount of setup. the whole operation is more of a heist than proof of any value in the equipement. all the US had to do to become imune to the system was to not fly the same route at the same time for days.
How come they all didn't get shot down? 🤔
Ho-lee-shidge that F-117N is one sexy bird...
Takes everything we love from the Nighthawk, and mixes it in with a heaping spoonful of everything we love of the Gray Ghost...
well... _almost_ everything... those diamond wings can't be beat.
Nothing like landing one of the world's most unstable aircraft on one of the world's most unstable runways, WCGW
I added F-19 Stealth Fighter to my Raspberry Pi (Recalbox has Dosbox in it) - I still remembered all the keyboard shortcuts :) It didn't age well, but it's still pretty fun to play
Two things-
F19 was killer
God I’m old
I love this channel!
I know F22 or F35 are more modern and more stealthy than the Nighthawk but the Nighthawk looks much more futuristic even 30 years later something straight out of Starwars or Stargate Deathglider!
The radar cross section of the f117 is actually lower than the f35. Granted this is for standard versions of each where carrier based craft inevitably have bigger wings and more comprises for their use as opposed to stealth. This is true of the F35C that has a larger wing area for carrier operations and I am sure it would have been true of the F117 if it was developed into a carrier based craft and given a more typical control surface layout. The F22 does have a lower radar cross section than the F117, quite a bit lower, but it's due the the combination of design and materials and one of those isn't as durable. When the surface of the F22 is damaged from something like a bird strike it impacts the Radar absorbing material on the craft and can affect its function. Now with them all a decade old its showing signs of wear and is a difficult issue for how stealthy the aircraft actually are.
@@timothybayliss6680 But as far as looks are concerned, F117 is like out of scifi.
@@timothybayliss6680 General Mike Hostage has claimed USAF F-35A has a smaller RCS when compared to F-22A.
Nothing mentioned about the full-page ads in every aviation magazine?.. a mysterious overhead silhouette pasted onto carrier decks and runways, even promises of unmanned air superiority.
Love the fotage from the 117. Are from a VHS i hade when i was younger :D
Even before Microprose's F-19 was released, Hollywood was in on the secret. The movie "Spies Like Us" has a scene where the stealth aircraft is discussed. It was released in 1985.
I literally gasped at the picture.
In a way, the F-117 was a slightly longer lived, less confidential version of Tacit Blue. It may have been intended for production instead of just a test bed but the only role it ended up filling was rapid advancement of stealth tech.
With that said, though, the F-117 looked and performed like a great white that evolved to murder bumbling prey like the manatee that was the Tacit Blue. Can't even think of 2 more different looking craft.
~ beautiful ~thank you Sandboxx person =)
f1117a was the most menacing looking thing flying, even more than the sr71 or a close call between the 2
Very nice. I'll binge all you got, thanks.
7:46 this view is exactly why so many people thought they were seeing alien ships in the earth 80’s lol amazing!
1:47
I remember this computer game!! 😅
Spent many an hour playing F19, good video
It's cool but They should of went with a yf-23 design...that jet should be in the skys
The yf23 was enormous. Bad fit for a carrier
That was part of a plot on an episode of JAG. I'm starting to realize that show's writers just read the newspapers and made their own versions of stuff.
I remember that one!! It was a great episode, I believe in season 4 when Harm retrieved the F-117 back which had to land somewhere deep in the Iraqi desert due to mechanical troubles or something and then he landed it on a plane carrier. A typical day for Harm😎
Just think, somewhere in an alternate dimension, there's a model of the F-117 with a GAU-8 on it. That shit would be lit!
I highly recommend the audible audio book on the building and designing of this aircraft and the brainchild behind the engineering of it Ben Rich. It's a fantastic read/listen for any aviation enthusiast. I'll include a link in the comments.
Very cool video
I could see Project Aces (the production team behind the Ace Combat game series) cutting a deal with Lockheed for the rights for the NightHawk and SeaHawk.
Any video on the competition between Lockheed F-117 and Northrop's...
I’ve been saying this for 30 years! The Lockheed F-22 should’ve gone to the Navy to replace the F-14 Tomcat. And they should’ve named it the Lighting II, just like the twin engine Lockheed P-38 Lightning of WWII. The F/A-18E/F Super Hornet should’ve never been a thing.
The Northrop F-23 Black Widow II should’ve gone to the Air Force to replace the F-15 Eagle.
While the Lockheed F-35 JSF goes on to replace the Air Force F-16 Falcon, the Navy F/A-18C/D Hornet variants and the Marines AV-8B Harrier and Marines F/A-18A/B Hornet variants. The F-35 should’ve been the one named the “Raptor.” The Lightning name should’ve gone to the F-22.
Lockheed has pitched F-22N for USN's NATF program. The F-22N was studied in the Major Aircraft Review as an NATF concept, and canceled in large measure because the projected high gross take-off weight exceeds the capacity of current carriers.
the YF22 was called Lightning 2, then shortly after the release of Jurassic Park the name was changed for the production aircraft, I guess someone liked the large Deinonychus-based dinosaurs they incorrectly referred to as Velociraptor (the historical Velociraptor was about turkey-sized).
Used to enjoyy playing F-19 on the old trusty PC...
although angular compared to the f-22 the f-117 has a sleek look to it.
Next video:
How America almost put ac-130s into aircraft carriers.
the enhancements intended for the naval carrier borne F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighter bomber should have been incorporated into future variants of the USAF's F-117 fleet . . .
It was so advanced that its thrust was measured in torque.
Tom Clancy’s “red storm rising” chapter 17 “frisbees of dreamland” is the where the game got its idea for calling it the f19
I understand what it was pitched as the Seahawk. However, there was already a Seahawk in operation with the Navy, the Sikorsky SH-60.
Had the Navy acquired the F-117N, I wonder how they would have handled the name.
Also .food for thought. Adding the A-10 to the Navy mission.
Uh, no..... There are many reasons the Navy and Marine Corps have passed on it. Never had any overseas sales either. It's also basically a 50-year-old airplane design.
And what did the USAF just take delivery of? F-15EX.
That looks like a mean transformer. Decepticon for sure.
Izvinite nismo znali da je nevidljiv
I am sorry but the U.S. Navy made a Mistake in not adapting and buying the F-23 for carrier ops. With external stealth weapons pods that could contain and drop up to 4 GBU/24s or JADAMS in addition to its internal weapons bays for its AIM missiles. Too much penny pinching going on. Tax dollars most be spent so we can sleep good at night.
You gave figures for engine thrust using the unit "pound/feet". Isn't that for torque? Thrust should be just "pounds" or "Newtons".
how about you put the music in the discription ???
The F117 may be ugly but nobody can say they aren't intimidating and how awesome is that top down silhouette? The proposed navy fighter looks amazing though
Thank you for pointing out that the "F" 117 wasn't a fighter. So few documentarians seem to know this.
Well not quite. There was a fighter mission for The F117. Like the United States at the time the soviet union had also AWACS airplanes. The mission of the F117 would be to sneak in and shoot the soviet plane down. And while this mission never had been deployed we can say that at some point in time they really would become a fighter.
Look for the fighterpilot podcast with the F117 the pilot explains it in more detail there.
@@TitusFFM That was the loophole. The "F" 117 was a bomber.
@@RealStuntPanda i don't say it is a fighter. I pointed out that there was 1 mission set that would make this aircraft a fighter. But it never went beyond theory because there was no war between Warsaw Pakt and the NATO.
@@TitusFFM And I said that was the loophole that allowed the government to claim it was a fighter to avoid violating the SALT II treaty.
@@RealStuntPanda but did you listen to the podcast it was not a loop hole but a entire mission that was even more secret than the bombing stuff
my gf called my weapon a small diameter till it made her unable to walk properly the next morning
it's a shame they didn't build this....
Anybody in their right mind knows a 117 airframe wouldn't be able to handle a carrier launch or landing. See the yellow tail 117? It was one of mine. I helped bring them into Holloman.
Man just turned into
When america almost put _____ on carriers
not gonna lie, the F117N is kinda hot
Can you imagine that they make a similar plane and that it be delegated in honor of it? and that it is futuristic and advanced with technologies of the present, I would like the US to do that
Like for example, the B-2 with the B-21, etc
Can’t wait to see how the navy almost put a 747 on a carrier
The F-117 Nighthawk may be modified for the Navy anyway since they have not been destroyed. They could be modified for the aircraft carriers and more produced to put on some carriers and have them for bombing missions they don't want to use the F-18's for.
I feel like all jets should be carrrier capable in the case of an emergency
f117 did have anti awacs mission ability using sidewinders, fyi
I wonder what they gaind from F117 N and how much went into the F35 or even the new B21 bomber and son bof blackbird i gess things well never know
It wasn't meant 2b adapted 2 the Navy, They also tried 2 replace the A-6 Intruder w/ the Northrup Grumman A-12 Avenger 2, a low observable carrier-based attack aircraft, but it got cancelled. So, the Navy had 2 wait till the advent of the F-35 Lightning 2 JSF 2 have their own stealth aircraft. In the meanwhile, the USAF had 4 a time, a monopoly on low observable stealth aircraft.
That is the most disgusting way I've ever seen anyone type
@@whtbobwntsbobget What heck r u talking about? I'm stating the obvious. Whenever there's a proposal for a navalized stealth aircraft, it always gets turned down, & the same too for the NATF. The Navy had to hold out & wait until the arrival of the F-35C.
Should have made a Nightcat.
lets just honor how much clickbait the image was... That was NOT A F-117
HYPERSONIC I RESEARCHING THIS USAA IQ ETC
This channel is going places
*S-125 Neva enters the chat*
The navy is still pissed they got the F-35C instead of the F/A-22N.
I love f18 super hornet because it so agile
It looks way cool. I wonder how much that influenced politicians at the time
If it is true. It will be great modern jet fighter... ❤️💪 Design plan...