YF-23: Why did the USAF reject this BEAST if it was BETTER than the F-22 Raptor?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- How was the YF-23 Northrop, the ship more powerful than the F-22 Raptor that was rejected? If you want to discover all the details about why the US said no to this beast, don't miss this video!
--------------------------------------------
In 1991 the United States had to define what its next combat ship would be. Options were the Northrop YF-23 and the Lockheed YF-22. With Monday's newspaper we know that the Raptor came out on top, but why? In terms of stealth capabilities and powertrain, the YF-23 was superior and featured a diamond-shaped wing design with a V-tail that reduced heat signature.
Do you want to know other failed aircraft projects? I leave you here! 👇
📌This is why you WOULDN’T want to FLY in the 'Soviet Concorde' I The TRAGIC STORY of the Tu-144
• This is why you WOULDN...
📌Why did the US transform an AIRPLANE into an AIRCRAFT CARRIER?
• Why did the US transfo...
--------------------------------------------
#YF23NORTHROP #F22RAPTOR #USA
Do you want to know other failed aircraft projects? I leave you here! 👇
📌This is why you WOULDN’T want to FLY in the 'Soviet Concorde' I The TRAGIC STORY of the Tu-144
th-cam.com/video/aoNIEWCCx1Q/w-d-xo.html
📌Why did the US transform an AIRPLANE into an AIRCRAFT CARRIER?
th-cam.com/video/YD0d-bxoOvg/w-d-xo.html
I'll NEVER subscribe to a Robo-Voice channel...
@@edwardfletcher7790 Yeah. "Don't recommend channel."
I would’ve loved to see both aircraft utilized: the f-22 becoming the air force air superiority fighter, and the yf-23 becoming the Navy intercept and tactical fighter.
Navy needs aircraft carrier capabilities. These fighters are too fragile lol
I mean, just look at the YF-23. I looks like it was designed and built by an alien intelligence. Amazing jet.
Sad to watch an absolutely marvelous piece of engineering go to waste because of bureaucracy
Basically a repeat of what happened between the 14 and 15 in the 70’s. Lockheed Martin plays politics big time and made a live fire test during the demonstration. In every regard the 23 was superior save agility. It’s worth noting the agility advantage was marginal and with the 23s superior range, ceiling, and stealth, who needs greater agility?
It would not be hard to put vectored trust on the YF-23.
@@chrisbraswell8864 she had vectored thrust. The raptor was slightly more agile. It was the only advantage she had on the 23.
As for the request of what aircraft to investigate see
"the Caspian sea monster"
Just remember the YF23 prototypes were made in 53 months clean sheet of paper. They were not juiced just vanilla they could have been so much better. Lockheed was the better showman thats all.
The B70...
Gotta sell yourself at all times.
Maybe that the YF-23 is meant for the sixth generation design.
The YF-23 is a beautiful aircraft. Given the politics at the time they still should've picked her. If they had, like the F-22 final product improvements would've been made to the F-23 final product. I'd venture to say a finished F-23 would have more capability than the F-22.
the F-22 was and still is the most advanced fighter aircraft ever put into service, and we've all but retired the fleet, as a whole. we've already flight tested out 6th gen fighter, which is likely orders of magnitude better than the YF-23...
the fact that the YF-23 never made it into service never put the united states at any tactical disadvantage and saved the taxpayers a bunch of money.
@@TheRedStateBlue What are you talking about retired the fleet?
Given what politics?
@@bryanhoppe1481he meant the atf program requirements for the fighter but tbh he just sounds like a yf23 soyboy. That thing barely flew and properly tested and ppl are calling it better for some reason. The yf23 stealth was only a bit better than the f22 not entirely better and the windshield somehow cracked during testing
I'll tell you why the yf-23 was not chosen Northrop the military felt couldn't be trusted. They were forced to repay 30 million dollars. Tight budgets and worrying about a contractor that is known for padding the bill. That's why their fighter was rejected one of the reasons anyway.
30 BILLION
Actually, the REAL REASON why is something that will NEVER be admitted to, The United States Air Farce, has always been and likely be in absolute love with LOCKHEED, and Pratt And Whitney, the Chair Force has always HATED General Electric, and Northrop Grumman, and This can be seen where the YF-23 with the General Electric engines was better during the flight tests, the YF-22 with the YF-120 engines was also better than both the YF-22 and YF-23 fitted out with the Pratt and Whitney engines, as you look at the ATF competition, you MUST look at it as 4 different fighters, where the YF-23 with GE engines was the best, by a TINY margin, and the YF-22 with the GE engines was second best, then the 3rd place finisher was the YF-23 with the Pratt and Whitney engines, and the Chair Farce obviously picked the last place finisher because again, LOCKHEED and Pratt and Whitney, are the primadona Chair Farce darlings, then leap ahead to the ASF competition, between the YF-32 and the YF-35, again, as ugly as it is, the YF-32 was a better option for an airframe than the YF-35, BUT this time, the baffoons of the Air Farce got it right with the Pratt and Whitney engines, they were actually the best engines for this competition, where the YF-32 with the Pratt and Whitney engines was first in meeting the requirements for the program, and the YF-32 with the General Electric engines was second, while the 3 place finisher was the YF-35 with the Pratt and Whitney engines, and the YF-35 finished last with the General Electric engines, so this time the awful force chose the 3rd place finisher instead of the last place finisher, at least that is an improvement I guess, but they got to scratch the back of their girlfriends LOCKHEED and Pratt and Whitney again, for decades the F-15 and F-16 have been dogged down with the Pratt and Whitney F-100 engines even though they have become more expensive to have new part manufactured, they just refuse to to stop lip locking Pratt and Whitney, but FINALLY the manufacturers of BOTH of those airframes are forcing the bumbling morons at the Air Farce into accepting a superior GE engines for the Newest F-15's and F-16's as both current fleets are slowly being upgraded with the GE F-110 engines, the YF-23 was in fact so good, that the flopping Air Farce actually took out almost all of the internal systems from the YF-23 and had them installed on the F-22 airframe, because it was BETTER STUFF!
And yf23 didn’t perform well during the test fight. 22 took 75 fought vs 23 50 flights
@@keithcharboneau3331yur wrong
The technology today on that black widow airframe would be ♥️
0:25 "YF-23 Northrop" proceeds to show an f-15 and an f-35
This video claims YF-23 had more range and better stealth profile (which is undisputed by other accounts) and that it was more "maneuverable", which is a contested point. Others point out that F-22 beat out YF-23 in dogfighting, which is why, in part, it was a winner. This video claims that YF-23 wasn't "sold well enough" on that aspect. It would great to hear more details on this particular point - was, in fact, YF23 a better dogfighter? Or was it F-22? I think that with modern weaponry, it's almost a secondary issue as aircraft rarely get close to one another and the one that detects the other first is usually the one that wins. BUT, it's true in current, low-intensity battlefields. A hypothetical war with China could see most of our military satellites shot out of the sky and sophisticated jammers used, reducing the impact of integrated weapons systems and reducing jet fighters to dogfighting. So, having dogfighting capabilities could be very underappreciated.
Yf23 want better plz watch the documentary
The F 20 tiger shark, based on the F5 airframe
In my opinion, I feel we lost the Tomcats due to this situation and the purchasing the Raptors? Although the Raptors are impressive! No doubt the upgrades available for the Tomcats wouldn't have gotten the kickbacks for the deciding governmental agencies involved in retiring the Tomcat fleet for the overpriced Raptors!!! Sorry!
Raptors have nothing to do with retiring of Tomcats. USN can’t manage their budgets and programs that’s why
YF 23 was the true 5th gen platform in groundbreaking tech and design. IMO they should've picked both of them.
Yf-23 is the most beautiful fighter ever built.
no way man, f22 is just tooooo damn good
@@yahir2043the yf-23 has a more unorthodox futuristic design it looks more like a Star fighter that belongs in space lol
Get over it you've lost to f 22
YF23 > F22. No contest.
It was not based on a practical reality of what was best … Lockheed knows how to buy influence in the top decision makers/influencers, has no qualms about it, and has more lucrative jobs for Pentagon generals when they retire.
I look they're going to retire the F-22 way before its time let me look at 16 still flying the F-15 they're building new f-15s but for some reason they don't build new f-22s and they was originally supposed to have 300 of 222 and now we only got like $180 it's just ridiculous they even got one in the Wright-Patterson Air Force well that's cool you know people can see it up close but it's kind of a waste you know it should be being used and the dumbasses let a hurricane fucking tear like a quite a few of them up you know just sitting on the fucking tarmac during a hurricane
The "YF-23 Northrop"?? Okay, amazing as the craft may be, that sets a really low bar for the effort put into researching for this video...
The F22 has a unit cost 10 times the original specification.
That's why America is broke!
On the question of good planes that didn't past the test & wasn't chosen to enter production- the F-16 XL comes to mind. I have no doubt that was the better aircraft design of that request from the government.
only 6th gen airframe yet to be made in a fighter, stealth, and flew very very well. My grandparents both worked at northrop grummun bethpage long island while the yf-23 was under development. And it went over mach 1.8 in trials, it was hitting over mach 2 from what i heard. Its just that at that time we werent allowed to say anything above 1.8 it was classified. It also had a larger weapons bay, that could of housed a way bigger variety of missiles and even bombs, the raptor may perform versatile but what it holds isnt versatile, it can only really hold air to air missiles. The yf-23 would of probably also been the best interceptor the worlds ever seen, to this day. Look at the chinese dragon thing, wich is an interceptor, this thing would make short work of that plane lol, it would make it look like 60s tech.
First of all, it's Grumman, not "grummun".
Secondly, Northrop Grumman didn't exist at the time the F-23 was designed and developed.
And thirdly, none of the two YF-23s that were built for, and flew during the DEM/VAL phase of the ATF program hit Mach 2 or "went over mach 1.8 in trials".
In fact, the only two aircraft that "went over Mach 1.8" during DEM/VAL were just both of the two YF-22s.
YF-23 PAV-1 (YF119 PW engines) flew no faster than Mach 1.8, and YF-23 PAV-2 (YF120 GE engines) flew no faster than Mach 1.72.
Meanwhile, YF-22 PAV-1 (YF120 GE engines) was flown to speeds slightly above Mach 2 and YF-22 PAV-2 (YF119 PW engines) was taken to a speed no greater than Mach 1.81.
th-cam.com/video/Vpkv1ErWIf8/w-d-xo.html
Could the two YF-23s fly faster than what they did? Yes, absolutely. But they didn't. That's why I say your assertions are false.
Finally, the YF-23 didn't really have larger weapons bays than the YF-22/F-22. Its single weapons bay had clearly more depth yes, but more actual usable volume and space for weapons? No, not really.
There is a reason as to why Northrop planned for the combat ready, mass production F-23A to have an additional weapons bay dedicated to carrying a pair of AIM-9s, in front of the main weapons bay...
And btw, the Raptor can carry more than just air-to-air missiles in its main weapons bay.
It can carry and employ GBU-31 JDAMs (1,000 lbs) and GBU-39 SDBs too.
www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/aero/documents/F-22/F22FastFacts62022.pdf
www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/f-22-weapons-2006.gif
@@turnnburn6892
You saved me some time. 😅
Same thing happened with the YF-17 (F-18) and the chosen F-16
Less agile and much more expensive. Considering the ridiculous cost of the F-22, I can't even fathom what the YF-23 would cost.
Lockheed got away with "a lot of hand waving" about "agility". You think you know what that means but in aircraft engineering agility is not the same as manuverability. As a matter of fact there is no accepted aerospace engineering defination of "agility".
Lockheed was using term to mean point the nose of the aircraft with out changing the flight vector of the aircraft. Think walking a straight line forward while slightly looking left. Your nose is pointing left but you are still moving forward. The advantage of that is negated by the use of helmet mounted sights and off bore sight missles.
Paul metz the test pilot for yf23 and later f22 when says yf which was a demo flew better than the f22 which was the finished plane
If you want to talk about ridiculous cost overrun that resulted in a jet with sub-par performance, you need to compare the the F-22 to the F-35.
@@mikeyz1080 but he never explained exactly what he meant by "flew better". YF23 had better range and higher ceiling, which could be what he meant, and not dogfighting.
@F15ElectricEagle How about comparing the F-15 to the F-16?
It's too good to be taken. It is better to be taken into research and studying concepts based on it while you through the F22 into the playground.
Wrong the F-22 has been nothing but a giant cost overrun along with a maintenance nightmare
Missiles I think it was probably a weapons detail the plane was advanced the missiles that should have came with it weren't available back then just and after that
Imagine here with The US having to Choose The Better Of Tech's unlike China who still upto this very day don't have or for that don't know the how's to make A Powerful Jet Engine. And to say China threatening The World! 😂 😂
Worked on drive systems test contract work in Arlington Texas and Bedford. I was sent to a different lab to build a platform that rotates 10'x10' . A rotating assembly for radar antennas was about 2 foot tall, with the outer area supported by large casters which didn't turn they moved in a circle only the wheels turning. We were not directly told why at first. Then we were working on making a rotor blade move remotely in 1° increments and to be sent for radar testing. We could see the aircraft in the hangar. It was a cobra set up for stealth. It had panels on the outside and around the main rotor hub. It was a proof of concept and probably was heavy like the stealth Blackhawk. Weight is king on a vertical lift. Made panels for increased lift and tested about 3% increase in lift on the XV-15 which would mean 1 more combat equipped soldier on a V-22 in a vertical lift.
You sir obviously have a higher education than I do lol!! that read just gave me a headache.
Why show the F35 talking about the YF23
YF-23 is a 6th gen aircraft 😅
F22 still much better in many criteria
Get that ai voice outta here
Turn it into an unmanned drone
Japan seeking to buy the f 23 air frame.
I just think someone in the YF-22's favor greased someone's palm a bit heavier and so the U.S.A.F. has a high cost plane already being replaced in the near future at tax payers expense
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
This jet is way better than f22 raptor they didn't chose this just beacuse of the lobby
Commen sense build them both no matter what cost would you rather give money to other countries that hate your country or defend your country.
Easy...it's about COST!
If cost not a problem,Africa also can have 7++ jet fighter😂
Awesome airplane. Keep going
Now how about the f-45
Australia should buy the plans and develop!
Would love to see the air force make this plane
Not gonna happen.
They have the funds for it. Let's do it
The F22 was picked due to better agility and air to air manoeuvring. That’s the main reason. It’s an air superiority fighter and that’s the main reason. Perhaps the f23 could have been turned into a fighter bomber.
this video claims it was "undersold" on maneuverability - it would be interesting to hear a definitive opinion of test pilots - i would trust them more than senior military bigwigs.
@@mrvk39 yes. M only going off conversations I’ve had with F22 pilots at Nellis during RAF/USAF beer calls.
Come n
🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸👍💕🙏💪
😎
The YF-23 has a giant fucking radar cross section
It's 40% lower than the f22
And it’s still lower than the F-22. Oops.
🤣🤣🤣
One of the stories is Lockheed was informed about how the stealth of the YF-23 was far superior to their design. Lockheed could not believe the numbers. Lockheed could only conclude that Northrop was lying about the radar pole tests. Lockheed told the goverment agent that the Northrop radar pole model did not have flight control surfaces realistically represented. That Northrop's pole model wings did not have leading edge slats, ailerons, and flaps. That Northrop was cheating the goverment by using a "solid" wing.
The goverment agent scheduled a meeting with Northrop to accuse them of falsifying test results. The Lead for Northrop takes the goverment agent to the pole model and has him place his fingers in the gaps for slats, ailerons, and flaps.
So yes, the stealth of the YF-23 'is that much better' than the the YF-22.
@@patrioticmarine7445😂
Then why not sell it to Israel?
You mean give
@@pashapasovski5860 Sorry, we are not a charity org. We are here to make money.
50% off? 🤣
Probable reason is that Israel also sale high tech to any country that can pay. Not ideal when you try to stay on top of the game
Exhaust.
Yf-23 exhaust is further away from behind . . and have shield at the bottom,
sacrificing maneuver ability.
Yf-22 exhaust can point up or down.
F-35 & SU-57 exhaust is round, sacrificing stealth at behind, gaining more manuver ability.
The competition between 22 & 23 was for air superiority, replacing F-15.
This imo is quite simple because everyone who have eyes 👀 can see it.
But I'll let you judge it for yourself.
Here is a comment for you. F-23 was a better plane. But do not give us "kilometers" for range. Give us miles. And do not give us "tons" for weight. Do it with pounds only.
Simply put:it wasn’t. It was much less maneuverable and slower than the modern F-22. The F-22 was the right choice. Why do ppl think the yf-23 was this super op plane better than the F-22 when the F-22 was significantly better?
TRUE
Not true.
Both were capable of 9.0 G . Pilots described the yf-23 as fast even though both planes were limited to Mach 2 . The yf-23 combined a stealthy (thermal too) design with a fuselage that followed the Area-Rule closer than anything in the sky. This gave it extended range and rapid acceleration. As the video said, the yf-22 had the more developed bomb bay. Northrop had planned a rotary launcher for the AIM-120 and a smaller bay forward with 2 Sidewinders. The planes met in what was called Dem/Val and Lockheed (who got a 6 month delay) turned it into a show.
The F-22 is significantly better than a 1995 prototype yf-23 that's sitting in a museum. Comparing the yf-22 to the yf-23 (throwing out politics, cost overruns and air show stunts) a impartial aviation engineer/pilot would have chosen the yf-23.
@@rapidsqualor5367 would it have been more expensive than the f 22 though? Economics is a factor.
@@Crimsonking741 Northrop est. 170 mil vs Lockmart 150 mil but they milked the pentagon worse than the B2. Your right Economics is a factor. Northrop had the B-2 and Lockheed (maker of the F-117) had the C-130 so the Pentagon threw them a bone. Then, with the F-35, they took the whole carcass.
@@rapidsqualor5367 for the u.s. military 20 mil's nothing, y'know what, maybe they should've used the yf 23. In the end, it doesn't really matter though because the f 22 ended up being such a good aircraft that we literally had to stop making them because they had(and still don't really) have any competition.
If you are going after English speaking audience you need to do what American creators do. If they use feet for measure they either say both feet and metric or show the other on the screen. Mostly just scientist use metric and most Americans have to do math in their head. We have no concept of what 23 meters is. Just about every American knows how far 100 yards is for example. We can visualize it through experience. Meters, not so much. If you are not going to do that than why use English? Use Chinese or whatever your language is that you must use a bad cheap auto reader.
Utter BS. The YF-23 being better than the YF-22 was nothing, but a press construct. YF-23 was only superior on paper promises.
The YF-23’s windscreens broke multiple times during the ATF competition. The fastest speed YF-23 ever attained was Mach 1.8
The YF-22 flew well over Mach 2, was more maneuverable, launched AMRAAMS, and looked like a fighter.
Fact is, the YF-23 was out performed.
The YF-23 was not taken onboard was because it couldn't Supercruise without using AfterBurners and alikes.
Not true at all. It was faster in supercruise. This is easily found.
Where did you get the idea the YF-23 could not obtain supersonic speeds without the use of afterburner?
The super cruise speeds for the YF-22 were published with the use of both engines, the PW YF-119 and the GE YF-120.
It is a fact the the GE-120 engines were more powerful than the PW entry.
The only speed published for the YF-23 in super cruise was with the weaker PW YF-119 engines. The super cruise speed with more powerful GE YF-120 engines in the YF-23 was so fast that the goverment classified it! And the super cruise speed of the YF-23 remains classified even to now.