Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 20 Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 20436 times:
Based on published data, probably the F-23.
Performance was superior except for weapons release tests (which were not performed so there was no data).
From what I've seen and heard of the tests and conclusions, everything was rigged to make the F-22 come out on top.
For example, the main factor in deciding on the F-22 over the F-23 was weapons performance. It was stated that weapons release characteristics had been proven to be better on the F-22. There was no data on the F-23 to prove or disprove this.
MikeN From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (12 years 3 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 20483 times:
When there's a competition between two or more aircraft, the U.S. government seems to always go with the more conventional-looking type. Yes, I know the F-117 and SR-71 are/were not conventional, but they had no competition and very special roles. I knew the YF-23 was doomed the moment I first saw it next to the YF-22.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 20 Reply 7, posted (12 years 3 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 20467 times:
The competition was probably rigged from the start.
The YF-23 was indeed too unconventional to ever stand a chance.
Why were no weapons release trials scheduled for it when those were to be the deciding factor?
Fireblade From Portugal, joined Feb 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (12 years 3 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 20466 times:
i'm a numbers' man so because you both clame that yf-23 was better choice why don't you give me some specifications comparation about like this one:
...................yf23 ..........f22...................................max speed 2.0............. 2.5 .....................
without aftb..1.6............. 1.5 .....................
S15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (12 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 20403 times:
I remember reading somewhere that YF23 was superior in virtually every performance testing conducted, but lost out to YF22 because YF22 offered lower maintenance cost and ease of maintenance... which pretty much means it was rigged for YF22 to win...
CannibalZ3 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 392 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (12 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 20395 times:
As far as I know, it's true that in some areas the YF-23 performed better than the YF-22. However, the YF-22 had a bit more speed to it I think, and maybe turned a bit tighter. That's not really the point though, because the YF-22 had better avionics, was easier to maintain, cost less to maintain the first place, and didn't handle as well. Granted, it was very close, but in the end I can understand why the YF-22 came out on top, if my impressions are correct. Feel free to correct me if they aren't.
474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9 Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 17639 times:
During the flight test program, Northrup made the same mistake with the YF-23 that Boeing made with the X-32. They only did the minimum requirements, while Lockheed went far beyond the flight test requirements. The YF-22 actually launched missiles, not a requirement but impressive. The X-35 actually lifted off vertically, again not a requirement but show that the aircraft could exceed, not just meet the requirements.
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3276 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 17600 times:
One of the things I read was the YF-22 was selected in part because it was more "agile" in dogfights.
Nevermind the YF-23 was far less observable, and much better at the "sneak up and smack them down" combat style that makes stealth > older cheaper frames. Don't need to dogfight if the first thing that tips them off you are around is the missile removing the back 1/2 of their plane.
Even worse, the YF-22 turned out to have little to nothing to do with the F-22 other than looks. Took an almost complete redesign to make it a serviceable platform.
Wvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 516 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 17544 times:
There was nothing rigged about it. Both aircraft performed very well in tests. The YF-23 had troubles with the weapons bay doors opening and closing properly "hence losing it stealth" the YF-23 was faster but had less manuverability in close dog fighting because it was not designed with thurst vectoring. The YF-23 people argued since it was the more unstable platform it would peform better, it was never proved. The YF-23 had the same cockpit that the F-15E has with some upgrades the F-22's was a totally new design with new avionics. The YF-23 control stick was mounted on the floor where as the F-22's was mounted on the side like the F-16's which is prefered by US pilots. The YF-23 was more stealthy in its design but also would have been more expensive to develop. Some of the developments learned in the YF-23 were later used and are now being used on the F-22 since northrop Grumman (YF-23 designers) are now assisting with some avionics on the F-22. I thought the YF-23 looked cool but like someone said above looks dont win wars. The F-22 was the more logical choice and cost effective choice for the time and still is. There was some political bickering going on but there always is, it doesnt mean the US picked the less capable aircraft though.
Blackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 17424 times:
-How much faster was the YF-23, then the YF-22 and how do they compare to the production F/A-22?
-Why didn't they put thrust vectoring on the YF-23 anyway? I mean instability and high-alpha is just one part of the equation, thrust vectoring nozzles is the other. Would thrust vectoring nozzles have made the YF-23 less stealthy?
-Why didn't the YF-23 use an entirely new cockpit with new avionics? Would it have been like the F-22 with it's superior situational awareness capabilities that enable the pilot to better manage the data influx from the radars?
-What caused the YF-23's doors to not close properly?
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 17345 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 19): How much faster was the YF-23, then the YF-22 and how do they compare to the production F/A-22?
Not to sound like a smart aleck, but that information is classified. I made a trip to Maxwell AFB in Montgomery, AL to do some unit research for a book I was working on, and while there did some searching for information related to the YF-23. All the documents they had were still classified top secret and I couldn't get the status downgraded.
I have heard it said the YF-23 was substantially faster than the YF-22 but don't know how much. Supercruise was supposed to have been about .3 mach number higher. Top end speed I never could get a good figure on.
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (6 years 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 17338 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 19): -Why didn't they put thrust vectoring on the YF-23 anyway? I mean instability and high-alpha is just one part of the equation, thrust vectoring nozzles is the other. Would thrust vectoring nozzles have made the YF-23 less stealthy?
Northrop apparently didn't believe they needed thrust vectoring. Whether it would have had an adverse affect on the plane's stealth characteristics is hard to tell. And apparently Northrop thought the weapons demonstration phase of the program would have come after the fly-off, when full scale development of the airplane would have demanded weapons demonstrations, maintainability demonstrations, proven reliability and a host of other essentials.
It's been suggested in another web site that Northrop used the competition just to flight test the YF-23 configuration; that it had no intention of winning. Sounds like pure nonsense to me but it's amazing what you see on the internet regarding the airplane. Do a search and you'll see what I mean.
I have read the YF-23 lost primarily because there was a question of whether the Northrop/Mcdonnell Douglas team could bring the airplane into full scale production without significant cost over-runs. McDonnell Douglas at that time was having management problems and this didn't help the reputation of the team. Little is said about this now, and the usual explanation for the YF-22 winning is that it was more manueverable.
CTR From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 303 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (6 years 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 17298 times:
Quoting 474218 (Reply 16): During the flight test program, Northrup made the same mistake with the YF-23 that Boeing made with the X-32. They only did the minimum requirements, while Lockheed went far beyond the flight test requirements. The YF-22 actually launched missiles, not a requirement but impressive.
Don't presume Lockheed was going the extra mile just to impress the Air Force. The position of the YF-22 self protect bays adjacent to the engine inlets created a potential for missle exhaust plume ingestion that was not a concern on the Y-23 configuration.
Having personally worked as an engineer on both the F-22 and F-23 almost twenty years ago, I am amused by the revisionist history that has been applied to the selection of the YF-22 as the winner of the ATF competition.
Northrup held the better cards. But Lockheed played the hand better.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7866 posts, RR: 5 Reply 24, posted (6 years 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 17296 times:
There was one thing that favored the YF-22 over the YF-23: Lockheed actually bothered to launch both the Sidewinder and AMRAAM missiles from the prototype, which demonstrated the plane's weapons capability far better than the YF-23. And the YF-22 sported far better manueverability thanks to the vectorable exhaust nozzles.
25 Blackbird: I think Northrop was really foolish. They should have went far beyond the minimum requirements. If you're trying to win a contract, doing the minimum
26 Boeing4ever: Well, we don't know that for sure at all...YF-23 never did weapons release testing. YF-22 did. I'm sure Northrop thought about that though and accoun