The YF-23 Couldn't Beat the F-22 Raptor for This One Reason
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- The YF-23 wasn't a bad design. Its competition was just that much better.
For every winner, there is also a second best. When it comes to military hardware there are plenty of designs that were very good, very innovative and likely would have been more than up to the role required - but there was simply something just a little better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for supporting our channel
Don't forget to like, comment, subscribe and share this video to your social media
I strongly disagree. Even the test pilot that flew BOTH planes said the YF23 was superior. The winner came down to politics.
The only thing the F22 had better than the yf23 was the maneuverability at low speeds
Probably costs, I think could be because it's harder to manufacture a shape that smooth as the yf23 Frame at an industrial level, and the complexity of the exhaust cooking system. also if the yf23 was that better than the f22, there is a good possibility that the people with the power of the decision just didn't choose the yf23 because there was no thread that needed a yf23 solution, so at the time simply didn't worth the money in such an overmatching plane, I think this is a good theory because that's the reason why we also didn't see such as great numbers in production of the f-22, even this days almost 40-30 years latter from when the program started and show results, the f-22 was the reputation of the most fearsome aircraft on the air. Another theory is that the ones that take the decision already known that the USSR was about to dissolve so they don't needed such a program anymore near that times, so they just keep up with the lowest cost, most usual and matching airframe that could be a solution for that times threads something like (so we have to choose one anyways, so lest choose the cheapest, at the end of the day, it will get the work done was we need it to be done)
when did he say that? Paul Metz said he never flew the YF-22, he flew the F-22 which is a very different aircraft from the YF-22. He also said, nobody knows the exact comparison of both aircraft except for the DoD panel, who selected the YF-22 as the winner.
I dare you to give me a link where Metz explicitly said the YF-23 was better than the 22, I have seen all his lectures, all he said was that the YF-23 is a very wonderful airplane and in "SOME cases" superior to the competition. Well that in turn means that it was also inferior in other cases.
@@michaeld1170 the company That made the yf23 also made the B-2 stealth bomber, so they have previous experience in making stealth aircraft. And based on the design and length, it was potentially faster than then the f22. And some of the Yf23 concepts were put in the F22
Just pointing what I seen and what I heard
@@localboi2330
yes, the YF-23 team (Northrop/McDonnel Douglas) also made the F-4, F-15 and F/A-18, they were a very experienced team.
But the YF-22 team (Lockheed, General Dynamics, Boeing) made the SR-71, F-117 so they're stealth resume is also commendable, plus the F-16 and C-5 galaxy as well
The Air Force Chief Engineer of the YF project had an interesting observation. He said Northrop was an engineering company that hired program managers, while Lockheed was a program management company that hired engineers. You can see this in the two designs; the YF-22 is more conventional, while the YF-23 was more technically exotic design wise.
@PointyTailofSatan The 23 was more "everything better" than the 22. Not seeing the "conventional" correlation with the 22 either.
As far as what some Air Force engineer's comment/opinion regarding some stupid opinion that he may have about either Northrop's or Lockheed's operations, I can assure you that no matter what rank anyone may hold in any branch of the US military, there's not a single one of them that ever got/gets to be present during the development of their(Northrop's) top secret projects. Unless Northrop allows them to be there. Even then, they (military member) are limited in what they're allowed to be made privy to.
@@hammernnails7314 I agree with Hammer here. I remember hearing the 23 was better and that the reasons USAF never went with it was because - 1. Lockheed low balled the bid. & 2. USAF mentioned that the Widow was using alot of untested technologies. Also USAF wanted alot of off-the-shelf tech for their ATF so the plane could be put into production faster and for ease of maintenance and to stream line the parts supply chain.
Now when I say it was a better plane, I mean it was better than an already superb YF-22. Not tossin shade on the Raptor at all here.
@@RafaleC77th it wasn't significantly better tbf. they were pretty much equally good but one is better at management and the other isn't.
I spoke with two of the YF23 engineers during the competition and what they told me was that even though the YF23 was the clear winner in the competition, the government wouldn't give Northrop the contract because they were already building the B2 bomber. Northrop was told they could either have the B2 or the YF23 but not both and since they already had the B2 in production they gave up the YF23. The sad part of that decision was the cancellation of the B2 with only a few planes built. Politics was the decisive factor in the competition not performance or cost.
The US made a very bad mistake with this program because they picked the one that was second best. The YF-23 was better than the F-22. There was no reason why you would need any extra agility that the F-22 supposedly had when you are invisible and unlikely to ever be in a dog fight. The range and ceiling of the YF-23 were vastly better and it is probably the greatest aircraft the US has ever made but sadly didn't mass produce.
F-22 has better maneuverability at low speeds i.e. "super maneuverability".
The YF-23 also had good handling at lower speeds
@@firestorm12he28 YF-23 didn't demonstrate high AoA.
.
@@valenrn8657 if a stealth fighter gets into a close range dogfight, they’ve failed their mission. So IMO for a stealth fighter, slow speed maneuverability means less than speed, service ceiling and the ability to detect the enemy while remaining undetected yourself. They YF-23 surpassed the YF-22 in all three of those areas.
According to the tests, the YF-23 should be able to detect the YF-22 much sooner than it could detect the YF-23, so with look down, shot down weaponry the YF-23 could just sit at it’s service ceiling and down the YF-22. Even if the YF-22 detected the launch, it would be at a distinct disadvantage especially with longer range engagements, which this would be, as it’s missiles, assuming both were armed identically, would have a shorter horizontal range, as they would also need to climb 15km.
@@johnpatz8395 Slow speed maneuverability means nose pointing and rolling sissor dogfights. ATF program is an Air Dominance fighter program, not a high-speed stealth bomber.
Both YF-22 and YF-23 has 65,000 ft (19,800 m) service ceiling. You based your arguments on flawed assumptions. Try again.
I saw that yf-23 back in the 90s and i know, its the winner.
What certifications do you have that qualifies you to determine that?
@@Henry-ms1lj thats an appeal to credentials fallacy. To dismiss any argument out of hand on the basis of the lack of credentials is fallacious and all and all, void of logic. But being he didn't make much of a compelling argument besides what he observed himself is not much of an argument to begin with. Not the lack of credentials. Its that mentality of worshipping those with white lab coats and those who have regurgitated their indoctrination is what has put us in this deteriorating society we are in today. The masses are just unable to think for themselves anymore...its a shame.
Wow gentlemen. This is the most erudite conversation I’ve read. No belligerent comments. Just facts.
But I prefer the 23.
And. Correction. The 23 was faster. A lot faster
Which is why it lost
@@animalanimal7939 not really they were both capable of Mach 2 and both exceeded the requirements of the program
The F22 has never been in a dogfight. That proves the superior speed, and stealth, and range of the YF23 would have been a better choice.
Just curious how the f22 never being in a dogfight proves that?
@@joshgilchrist8567 f22 was chosen for its agility to help in dogfights… which never ended up happening
@@mcmystix don't mean it won't.... We haven't been in a war with a country that has any kind of air force worth mentioning since the f22 has come into service....
@@joshgilchrist8567right lmao. It’s like saying nukes are useless cause you don’t use them.
@@BobJason1 they kinda aren they were destroyed to level down cities ans so far they have not been used since ww2 and they only can bring human extinction
YF-23 the one reason why couldn't beat the YF-22 was that Lockheed Martin's better lobby at Pentagon.
You should look up Paul Metz's comment on how the two compared. He is the only pilot to have flown both planes, and perhaps the ONLY truly reliable and authoritative source for accurate comparison between the YF-23 and the F-22. The YF-23 was only SLIGHTLY less maneuverable at very low air speeds, but was actually superior in almost all other arena, and this was WITHOUT vector thrust. Imaging how much more money you could save for a fighter that is no less than what you have, but needs no thrust vector?
Plus, if the US was to choose between the two again, I bet you they would choose YF-23. Why? One simple reason: a plane that is by no means inferior to the F-22, but with a vastly superior range. The US is shifting more and more of its focus on China now, and F-22's limited range is a huge shortcoming in fights against China. Even Chinese designers of the J-20 comments how F-22's short range will be a major disadvantage.
Yep, this dude is wrong! The YF-23 it's just a 6th gen Aircraft way ahead of time. The Butterfly tail screams, more Speed
Maybe they would. Many believe lockheed only won cause it lined the right pockets
when did he say that? Paul Metz said he never flew the YF-22, he flew the F-22 which is a very different aircraft from the YF-22. He also said, nobody knows the exact comparison of both aircraft except for the DoD panel, who selected the YF-22 as the winner.
@@michaeld1170 so paul metz got to fly an improved version of the yf-22 in the f-22 and he still thought the yf-23 was better. What point r u trying to make?
@@GonzoDonzo i dare you to give the link where he specifically said the YF-23 was better overall. It has to contain that phrase "better overall".
I've watched all of Metz's videos on RUclips, never did he say the YF-23 was better overall. He said the YF-23 is a "very good airplane and in SOME cases better than the competition"
Key word is some, not all, conversely that would mean it was also inferior in some cases.
I’m prejudiced, because my father was a key figure in the development of the 23. But, the majority of reviews by experts, by far, favor the 23. Who knows, we may see a version of it yet. I’ve learned far more about this aircraft in the last few years than I was ever told by my father, of course, and I’ve learned just how incredible it really was. I didn’t realize just how special it was until after my Dad was gone, sadly. This was quite a fighter.
Supposedly the Japanese F-3 fighter program may incorperate parts of the YF-23 due to it teaming up with Northrop
Well even test pilots of YF-23 mentioned some deficiencies like contrails on wingtips that appeared too frequently, inferior canopy compared to YF-22. AF didn't like small armament numbers (2 missiles fewer than YF-22 and stacked in more risky manner and this is already problem on F-22/F-35), prototypes had some cracked developed and - frankly speaking - its full potential depended on GE YF-120 engines. Also, Navy was allowed to vote and voted in favour of YF-22, NG was still viewed as risky after B-2 cost overruns (incurred by AF nonetheless), Lockheed looked like about to go out of fighter business so they wanted to preserve competition. Finally, just like F-14 won against F-15 in Iranian contract, NG was early to the game but LM had more agressive test flight schedule including weapons firing. Finally, NG built exactly to requirements - but LM had wit to approach AF brass and ask "OK, guys, what do you REALLY want" and they said "Super F-15" and that's what LM built.
No one talks about it but, having a family member the worked at Northrup Grumman for nearly 30 years, in all honesty, the F-22 win because if the fact that there was a "feud/bad blood" between the US Government/Military and Northrop from the early days of the OG flying wing of the 1950s and the subsequent B-2 and thus, because the 23 didn't blow the 22 clearly out of the water (most categories it was decently ahead but not by a huge a margin like the 35 was over the 36), the 22 won the contract.
The YF-22 was, simply speaking, a more 'conventional' design and the YF-23 was a design ahead of its time. The 22 was only slightly more manuverable at slower speeds than the 23, thanks to the thrust vectoring. While the 23 was reportedly faster (in super-cruise) and stealthier with a greater range. In the end, politics aside, the decision likely came down to the internal weapons bays between the two planes. The 22's internal bay took up more room but could fire missles independtly; while the 23's internal bay was slimmer but stacked missles for firing. This meant if there was a failure to fire of a missle (not terribly uncommon) then the 23's follow-up missles were trapped and couldn't be used in a dogfight. It was serious enough problem that likely could have been fixed in later development. But that little quirk would have made first-gen pilots nervous in a fight.
Head to head, in a turn & burn dogfight, the F-22 would have the advantage over an F-23. While a team of Raptors against a team of Black Widow's would likely be at a disadvantage in today's tactics of 'First to sight, first to fire, first to kill'. The irony is the decision for the "Fighter of the Future" was probably based upon ideas and values made 20-30 years (the vietname era) before the two aircraft were unveiled and competed for the next prize.
Problem is - it could NOT have been because it would require rearrangement of already very creatively arranged interior of aircraft.
The only thing the F22 that is better is Agility... Everything else was in the YF23 favor. Speed, Ceiling, Range and stealth. As I see it, BVR fighting will almost certainly win out before a Dog Fight occurs. And if that fails it was still a capable fighter or it ran. Wrong choice by far. Northrup just had previous blunders with the government which gave the f22 the win. This is the only reason. The better fighter lost. Non the less, the f22 is a beaut clark
ya. it was the outdated idea that you needed to dogfight. With the level of stealth and weapon radar range the F23 had. It wouldnt need to dogfight. The reason the f22 won was old school thinking. The 23 flew faster, farther, higher, longer. Was more stealthy. It was a better craft more of an interceptor. Politics and old style thinking made the Raptor win.
@@sabrevanson4412 bad management buy Northrup
the f22 only won in very low speed agility like airshow crap that may or may not have been practical.
Wrong. Metz, himself, said the TV assisted in high altitude flying by leaving the flight control surfaces at their optimum positions. The actual super-cruise speed of the Raptor is higher than the 'paper estimate' of the 23. All speed comparisons are estimates only as neither platform was tested at max. Yes slightly better RCS on the 23 but better IR suppression on the Raptor. It was very close between the two.
@@nwtruckerll considering the yf23 wasn't built and the raptor was this is a stretch. Initial capabilities were superior . But I'm sure your a aero space engineer and you could go toe to toe with 98 percent of the census against you .
Except the 23 went MUCH faster than the 22. It’s highest unclassified speed it just under 1500 mph.
The f22 could be faster but it's not because that speed is not good for stealth
@@capybarafan5859 yes but the 23 could be faster AND stealthier
The video clearly states the Raptor had a faster top speed over 1500mph. At 2:36 he states the yf23 had a top speed of 1451mph while the f22 had a top speed of 1599mph.
they went way way way above and beyond with that plane...i mean it had freaking space shuttle esque ceramic tiles around the exhaust ports, among countless other innovations...i bet if they chose the yf-23, it probably wouldve already been replaced because it wouldve been way too expensive to maintain in a post cold war world.
Not so fast my friend!! I would never say that because the truth is, that the YF-23 was even more stealthy than the Raptor and had it have been chosen and developed up like the F-22 , one could make a great argument that the YF-23 was superior!!
F-22A is different from YF-22 i.e. Look at i.pinimg.com/originals/22/68/a7/2268a7074555e9acb815010f8720ae55.jpg
YF-22's tail design was recycled for F-35A.
@@valenrn8657 yes, the design was improved before manufacturing began, but similar updates would have been done to the F-23 as well, so I’m not sure what your point is
@@johnpatz8395 USAF ATF is a design competition, YF-23 didn't demonstrate high AOA and firing AIM-120. Meeting the program requirements is not enough.
Thr YF-23 did have a lower RCS than the YF-22. The YF-22 had better IR suppression than the YF-23 however. If one looks at the basics of IR suppression one will see the shape of the Raptor's exhaust- perhaps due to the TV package(?)- is superior. Both had strengths. Both had weaknesses. The tie breaking missile test decided it.
@@nwtruckerll I’ve always wondered why RCS and IR suppression were weighted so evenly, I mean for a fighter whose primary mission will be intercepting enemy aircraft they really shouldn’t ever be flying away from an enemy fighter, at least not while within their IR detection range, as by the time they could be tracked with IR the enemy fighter should be falling to the ground in pieces
OK, If the U.S. Air Force took the F-22 fine. The U.S. Navy could of taken the F-23 as a replacement for the venerable F-14.
@Stargeneral410 Yeah The Swing wing F-22 would of been nice too. It seems like the Navy was not real big on stealth back then.
Well that's a load of crap. The reason YF22 was supposedly more agile is that the YF23 did not perform some maneuvers in the runoff that the YF22 did which was dictated by Northrup (mistake on their part). Consensus was that the dual angled control surfaces offset the advantage vector exhaust. Image if it had both. Hopefully Japan picks them up. Somebody should. Too good to waste.
It says here they chose the F22 because of an agility advantage but scrapped the F15-ACTIVE program because they felt agility was pointless in modern beyond visual range engagements
Ugh rip yf23 I miss u :(
Since its stealthier, maybe it should b used as a light penetrating bomber with a similar job to the Su-34.
This was a considered option by Northrop and the USAF but didn't happen
They should have made this instead of the F35. This would be the FA23 and F22 would clear the skies for it.
Politics and that one company exists now while the other doesn’t. Been this way for 100yrs.
I herd in another documentary that the yf -23 was faster...
either way whats not disputed was the range and ceiling of the yf23 being superior to the yf22
People don't realize...the YF-23 needed to focus on not just stealth but agility and maneuverability too. Otherwise, the military would have 2 great stealth aircraft in the F-35 and F-23 that would be shit in dogfights. We may think dogfights are obsolete, but history has ALWAYS repeated itself. And if the U.S. may engage in future conflicts where there will be situations where a dogfight can take place despite the best stealth capabilities. We can't just rely on stealth alone. Pilots need a fighting chance if a plan goes to shit. That fighting chance comes in the dogfighting capabilities of that plane.
I understood the biggest issue was economics. The U.S.A.F. felt burned by the costly budget overruns of the stealth bombers and didn't want to fall into another money pit (which ended up happening anyway).
The YF-23 was about 30yrs ahead of the f-22. The problem is the price was too high and the main issue was the military industrial complex and how it works. Lockheed was very in tune with now the system works. So for example. A Blackhawk helicopter. They could of put 2000SHP engines on the original uh-60A. They didn’t because then they wouldn’t be able to sell upgrades as easy. So they under powered it knowing the military would come back in a few years asking for more HP and that’s how they make there money. They intentionally under build things and sand bag just so they can sell upgrades. We just now got the uh-60M T700-701D - 2000hp engines. -- the MH-60M for 160th Soar engines are the (YT706-GE-700: 2,638 sHP) for special operations they give the best available. The rest of the military they play the game of selling underpowered equipment just so they can reserve business in the future. The FY-23 was at minimum 20yrs ahead of the f-22. But Lockheed know how the system works and so they built a aircraft that was cheaper and not toooo advanced. The speed and stealth of the yf-23 prototype was far superior. Keep in mind the actual f-23 was planned to be more advanced than the yf-23 which is why they didn’t stand a chance building a 6th gen fighter literally.
Dog fight?????? Not in todays' electronic era
Exactly
Yeah "it's more maneuverable" isn't a good reason to replace something especially if it's barely more maneuverable because the threat was from a BVR standpoint and it's even said that if a pilot gets into a dogfight something went horribly wrong so picking the more maneuverable one for dogfighting would basically say this is what we expect to happen so we choose what we hope won't happen
From my understanding the YF-23 was the better plane and the YF-22 was picked for various other reasons.
23 was faster & stealthier But the 22 was more agile. Plus Lockheed Martin had handled it's stealth aircraft development program better than Northrop did. Plus the 22 would have worked better on a carrier. Plus a few numbskulls mistakenly thought the 22 looked better.
Ever notice how most of the 6th gen fighter proposals look like variations of the YF-23
I'm curious as to why other countries don't buy this aircraft. The f22 is forbidden to be sold to any country outside the U.S.
But the YF-23 is not. And it is a very close second, so why not buy it when the f22 has so many countries wanting it, but unable to obtain?
Surely the whole point of stealth is that your opponents don’t know you are there, and you can strike them at a distance and get out without being observed.
Manoeuvrability only comes into play when you are observed, then close up and personal with your opponents,
at which point stealth has mostly left the equation.
Therefore a stealth plane that relies on manoeuvrability, is hardly a stealth plane at all.
those exterior missile mounts would have compromised the stealth capability of the yf-23 so it could have been another reason the f22 was chosen over it
If I was USAF, i would have choosen both.
The yf-23 was actually more agile, since it's horizontal stabilizers could turn as far as 40 degrees, which outmatches the raptor
The raptor made up for it with the the thrust vectoring which the yf23 lacked.
@@BJJ_Snake yeah, that is true
The yf-23 had practically the same agility WITHOUT the thrust vectoring.. imagine if thrust vectoring WAS incorporated, the agility would be unmatchable..
@@kidwajagstang yeah that would've been OP
I still think the YF-23 is a much better design fighter aircraft.To me,it's just a cool looking plane.
We may see the 23 back with newer avionics, after all. Its a natural nightmare for the J-20.
Soo wrong. The YF-23 beat the YF-22 (F22 Raptor) in every category, notably top speed, super cruise, range & especially stealth. Even though the YF-23 utilized thrust vectoring, the YF-23 equally matched the maneuverability due to it's rear vV wing. The only reason the YF22 was chosen by the Pentagon was purely POLITICAL
Both planes are beautiful but the YF-23 outshines the 22.
I call BS.
The higher ups in Northrop decided not to forward
in F23 demonstrating its high angle of attack maneuvers, thinking they didn’t need to.
The yf-22 simply was cheaper, probably better lobbied, and was produced by a fairly reputable company. The yf-23 was theorized to outperform the competition, however they didn't need that performance as the Soviet union was collapsing. Due to the lack of testing, promises, and companies bad history, it's a clear choice
This video is incorrect. I've watched several videos about the F22 & the YF23 & in most cases the experts said the YF23 was a better airplane. The only real advantage the F22 had over the YF23 is vector thrusting. which allows the F22 to have an advantage in slower speeds due to manuverability. The reasons the F22 was chosen is mainly due to cost, dog fighting ability, & politics.
The F22 was the best dogfighter , and the F23 was the best interceptor, the Air Force wanted and needed the best dogfighter because the Russians are building planes specifically to dogfight. Dogfighting will never be over as long as two planes are trying to kill each other, when people say that dogfighting is over I question their sanity.
No need to "dogfight" if you kill them first without being "seen" that was the whole point of the ATF. YF-23 was superior to the 22.
No point in dogfighting when u cant even initiated one if the enemy blows u up several miles away first without being seen because they had better range and stealth . I think that your sanity is the one that is questionable
@@yournamehere6240 you must be insane , you think that just because the radar can get a lock you think that the missile will hit , go take some common sense classes before you reply again .
@@tgtg7182. You must think this is ace combat where you can continuosly evade hundreds of missles just by simply turning Huh. What a joke. Evading a missle requires presision and timing. It's extremely difficult especially now since technology as improved vastly and it depends on the pilot's skills. You can either launch flares or do evasive Manuvures. But when you have multiple missles flying towards you at the same time or continuously, it's close to impossible and you won't last long in sky. Dogfighting is becoming a thing of the past, especially when most of the fighters in the future will be drone controlled.You are still living in the past where you think dogfighting is still mainstream. Judging by your assumptions, You don't have the slightest clue of how aerial combat works. I think you are the one that needs to take those classes instead.
@@yournamehere6240 you must be thinking that the counter measures have stayed the same since Vietnam , there was an article a few months ago that reported that F22's couldn't hit a drone that was flying in a straight line after shooting several missiles . Do your research on the actual hit probability of the missiles before you make a comment , I guess you think that if you went duck hunting you think that just because you see the duck you think that you'll automatically hit the duck , stop believing the video games that you play and use common sense , and besides the rules of combat require that you positively identify the aircraft before you shoot , by the time you've done that you're close to dog fighting range . I just realized that you don't know what dogfighting is , let me explain it to you , anytime that a plane shoots at another plane no matter if it's a gun , missile , Laser or any other weapon that's a dogfight , you think that dogfighting is using guns only .
Was it better in a dog fight? Maybe at very low speed. Modern fights are usually at distance, beyond visual range. The radar and some of the avionics from the YF23 ended up in the production F22A because they were better. Most importantly, the range, speed and loiter times are now the priority all of which are in the 23s wheelhouse. Additionally, the computer system that was designed into the 23 was ahead of its time and would be a better option for the distribututed operations that the US military is moving towards than what the F22A has currently. Replacement of the computer with something newer and thus smaller would provide potential space and available power for the incorporation of modular systems [like link16]. Last point, the winner was the YF22 because Lockheed's sale team did a better job of selling their plane as compared to Northrop's who was in the dog house over the B2 program cost overages.
The YF-23 was just TOO LARGE, it was even bigger than the F-22 which is already pretty big. The YF-23 would have made a great bomber, but not a fighter. My suggestion is this = double the size of the YF-23 and make that the next long-range U.S.A.F. bomber, that would be the best use of that design.
Not realizing that the F-15 was already equal or superior to any aircraft on production. They can still build the F-23. The British are building a new plane. Most likely they will be needed.
F23 was way better they lost the bid because of their previous performance and cost overruns.
Showing that a company's reputation is important.
That thrust vectoring made the difference.
The YF-23 couldn't beat the YF-22 in marketing. Lockheed Martin did a much better job of marketing the YF-22 to the air force. LM did nearly 70 test flights of the YF-22 and even launched an AAM from it. The YF-23 did a only few test flights and didn't show off its capability to launch missiles, so the government would have to spend extra money to make sure it could. Plus, extra money would have to be spent on the YF-23's angled tail plane, which doesn't sound too appealing, does it?
Yes, another video stating the F-22 is better, yet failing to mention any reasons why, he just mentioned their sizes and speeds.
there is literally nothing better the F22 had over the YF23, not a thing.. even low speed handling both shared a 70degree trim
There was NO agility match or test between two prototypes.
False claims IN video.
Agility is the only place that the f22 is superior. It was outclassed in speed, range, stealth and carrier operations. As the navy preference is 2 engine aircraft..
YF 23 was ahead of its time. Need to reevaluate with new materials and bring it up to today's standards. Think it would be a real problem for any enemy. Range and stealth capabilities off charts.
Exactly. This fighter is too good to be scrapped.
It's good Americans didn't choose this ugly plane without thrust vectoring.
F22 wasn’t better, we just didn’t want the best jet on the earth for the next decade for whatever reason. It was the wrong decision. Had they known what the modern battlefield would look like the YF23 would have won hands down not even close, and they definitely wouldn’t have only made a hundred or so planes.
and by decade I mean century
They should develop the jets to go 2,000mph
What money and power can do . Why the pentagon just said we paid half and half . Both firms are top manufacturer of airplanes
I was curious in wondering if you could tell me where you got the information about the top speeds of the Jets.
It was declassified when it lost the contract
@@camrunkey4089 the 23’s top speed remains classified to this very day. Same engines used in the 22, but the 23 was FAR faster.
@@jananney ruclips.net/video/Vpkv1ErWIf8/видео.html, the military only think in squares and triangles. Oct-26-1990 was the first flight of the 2nd YF-23 Grey Ghost. 30th anniversary it's today, Oct-26-2020.
There is no such thing as real figures as they're classified only conservative estimates.
@@jananney Sorry but every speed claim by MD has the GE F-120 comparison to the PW F-119 in the Raptor. Never with the same engines. I challenge anyone to show numbers. MD didn't know the top speed of the YF-23 as it was never flown past the competition phase...a waste of money. Any claim to superior speed just degrades my trust of MD and ALL associated with the 23's development,,,and it's 'supporters'.
Dude anyone who knows anything about planes knows the F23 had much better performance and RCS numbers than F22
Canada should adapt design and classify as Arrow 2...
That was another great aircraft, shame that one got scrapped.
Disagree. Both test pilots said YF-23 was better.
Stealing the U.S.S. Enterprise CV-6’s nickname of Grey Ghost for an Air Force prototype plane is just heresy. It deserved to fail for that. Yes I’m joking, kind of. From everything I’ve read the YF-23 was superior to the YF-22 (F-22) in almost every way possible and the only thing this plane didn’t have was the vector thrust control that was apart if the requirements from the AF.
Correct statement with an incorrect detail. They were not rwally looking for a better dog fighter, they were looking for a stealthier design which yf23 had. But it was more expensive, and yf22 had plans for a naval version which yf23 did not have. Also politics had a bit of a role, they always do. Lockeed Martin is a bigger company.
all in where priorities are. but the 23 was "better". More range higher ceiling better stealth and better super cruise cant be worse. The whole point of stealth is to not be in a dogfight to begin with. Raptors are said to be able to sneak right up undetected, imagine how lethal the grey ghost could've been. I hope its to be the basis for our next 6th gen fighter
Yf 23 is way better than the freaking f22
I saw the f22 & the yf23 at the airforce museum
It would've beaten it as far as the price per unit though.
I completely disagree, the only reason the F-22 Raptor was superior is lockheed martin was better at throwing dilla dollars at politicians
The 23 could fly 15.000 m higher than the 22 faster and stealthier...nuff said
If you ignore all the other reasons they went with the F-22, sure. But if you include estimated production cost, maintenance cost, and that both airframes were very similar in performance, and that Northrop ran massively over budgets with delays on the B2 program very recently at the time, and parent company McDonnell Douglas had internal management issues.. it’s pretty obvious why they went the way that they did. The YF-23 was marginally a better aircraft in most cases. I have a great deal of respect for the team that worked on it, it just wasn’t worth the extra cost and associated overruns and delays. They needed the fighter quickly at the time to maintain air superiority over the Russians. Prototyping is very different from production and Washington had a lack of faith in Northrop.
Actually, one of the major reasons the YF-23 was panned is because of Northrop's huge overbudget issues with the B-2 bomber. The US government simply didn't trust Northrop's estimate of cost of production for the F-23. This was unfair though, given the novel and previously uncharted issues with the design and production of a unique plane like the B-2.
Now it's Lockheed Martin's turn to feel the wrath of U.S. Government for going massively overbudget on an aero-defense program, i.e. the F-35 JSF. Not surprisingly, the contract to design and build the B-21 Next Generation Bomber went to Northrop Grumman. The funniest thing, however, was LM considered suing the U.S. Government for not winning the contract. The Department of Defense in turn basically told LM to shut up if it wants to participate in any other major aero-defense contract in the future, and LM quickly backed down.
Well, most of these overruns in already risky program were incurred by USAF who demanded low-level penetration. Original B-2 was basically today's B-21 Raider.
It makes me think that the Wallas who are in charge don't actually need or want these aircraft. It is more realistic to see warfare of isolating and hunting down enemies within national boundaries as the true battle scape.
Wrong, they had Pratt & Whitney YF119 and General Electric YF120 engines.
It was not capability it was politics.
F-22 is 5th generation while yf-23 must be 6th
F23 is an incredible machine. Too bad it wasn’t marketed as well as the F22. F23 would make a great 6th gen platform.
You guys need to watch an interview with the chief engineer of that program, who learned his lesson from the FTX program. It was an amazing doc he said both aircraft meet the requirements and the airforce got what I need. Both aircraft were equally good and was set up that way so no matter what the airforce got the air craft they wanted.. the could have simply flipped a coin. I was shocked when I heard it but it was genius.
spot on, sir.
Well, both aircraft met or exceeeded all requirements.
The top speed of the YF-23 is still classified along with its maximum altitude.
It cost more. Nothing mire nothing less.
Sorry but you’re wrong. This is where certain YT channels put out videos they claim have the facts to answer the question. But the “facts” in this video are wrong.
Everyone involved with this program new the YF23 was a superior aircraft. All the numbers said so.
It came down to what it always comes down to, political lobbying and back room deals and handshakes.
This doesn’t mean, however, the Raptor is a bad plain. It’s still better than anything out there and way ahead of it’s time. But the YF23 was a little better!
F 22 Raptor Has New Version
Yeah, I call bullshit. Politics won that dog fight.
YF23 was a FAR superior aircraft. This is what happens when politicians and high-ranking military officers who are far removed from combat are in charge of our military. F-15 should never be retired, F23 should have been the plane of choice instead of the F22 and the F35 is way over budget and really is NOT a great 1 on 1 fighter.
Sam Nunn - Chief of Armed Services Commitee, 1987 - 1995.
Democrat Senator, Georgia.
Lcckheed's factory - Marietta, Georgia.
YF 23 wont win the ATF project because the Air Force support Lockheed Matin Politically
Suddenly they will realize Japan's
F-3 (Modernized F 23) would have an better Fighter than USAF'S NGAD
They only made 2 yf23s and I saw one of them
The YF-23 was clearly the better airplane, better mainframe fly by wire avionics [for that time], better engines, better airframe. Dick Cheney had financial ties & vested interests in Lockheed. Once YF-23 test pilot Paul Metz became the F-22 test pilot Lockheed began to "borrow" YF-23 technology. McDonnell Douglas used 1 Billion of its own money to build the YF-23. The reason they merged with Boeing after losing the ATF. Alot of the YF-23 data is still classified. It was the baddest thing on the planet i.ibb.co/VHhxYfJ/thumbnail-2020-07-04-T201923-063.jpg
And the f22 had the most votes
The Philosophy of USAF for its Future 5th Generation (Steath) Fighter at that time includes Within Visual Range (WVR) Engagement (Dogfight). But, now they realized that Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Engagement is more advantageous for a Stealth Fighter. Trust Vectoring of YF-22 is not required by YF-23. The same effect can be achieved by the All-moving V Tail as they are very powerful. It boils down to the cost of the final product and USAF is correct. YF-23 will cost more as it has a radical design so it will cost more to develop to be Operational. However, it will be superior technically & technologically. The radar of YF-23 was used by F-22. The advanced Computer System Architecture (Super Computer at that Era) was adapted by F-22. Some design cues of YF-23 were adapted by F-22. The Chief Test Pilot of YF-23 became the Chief Test Pilot of F-22. Had USAF knew already at that time that BVR will be the norm in the future they may have selected the YF-23 as it is steathier, faster & longer range. Only in Agility in subsonic maneuver where YF-22 has slight advantage over YF-23. If YF-23 won, F-23 will be bigger and will perform better than the current F-22 but, it will cost more. These are the reasons why it became a Legend among Aircraft enthusiasts. This is a Loser which to some, is the Real Winner.
The yf 23 was to cite the pilots , not just faster, but much faster than the 22, and rest is secret
No pilot ever said that, the only pilots who flew the YF-23 was Paul Metz and Jim Sandberg. Both of them said they did not know the capability of the YF-22 as no person flew both, Paul Metz flew the F-22 which is a very different aircraft from the YF-22
I think you are referring to a documentary (YF-23 secrets declassified) where a Northrop executive said "it was fast, it was very fast, it was much faster than the YF-22"
However according to USAF Chief engineer, Eric Able, the 2 airplanes did not have identical test parameters and according to Paul Metz's graph itself, the YF-23 supercruised faster but the YF-22 had a faster topspeed.
My guess is, the supercruise was taken in an altitude that favored the YF-23 while the topspeed test was taken at an altitude that favored the YF-22
Michael D there is interviews on youtube from the af...
@@jonjonsson6323
they were not pilots, they were Northrop executives.
Only 2 pilots flew the YF-23, Jim Sandberg and Paul Metz, If you can give me the name of any pilot involved in the program who said the YF-23 was faster then post them here. You can also give me the link of these pilots who said the YF-23 is faster
Here is the interview with USAF chief engineer Rick able
ruclips.net/video/_MUK241uZHM/видео.html
Michael D to be honest i dont care..even the raptor is obsolete now and pretty unsuccessful use of money
@@jonjonsson6323 See there are none, define obsolete and what makes you think the F-22 is obsolete.
I'm not trying to offend you, but from what you have said so far, I don't think fighter aircraft is a topic that you very much about
1:03 did he just say "F-22 Lightning 2"? 🤦
While the 23 didn’t have thrust vectoring engines, like the 22, the test pilot at the trials only went to 25-33% of the potential angle of attack. Had he pushed the envelope the yf-23 May have won.
The YF-23 was the stronger competitor msinly because it had more potential for future upgrade and development,it was more maneuverable than the raptor and had better IR invisibility.
The F-22 had the better weapons carriage ability,but the YF-23,I am sure,would have addressed that issue.
The company the made the 23 had a reputation for over promising and it couldn't do all the trials it was required to allegedly. Also it couldn't hold as many weapons if I recall correctly.
It will be 6th gen fiter
The original design stage YF23 was superior. Developed F22 is currently superior only because it borrowed elements not in its original design. Let's develop the YF23 and see it blow the F22 out of the water.
F22 goes 1,500 mph yf23 goes 1,423 mph
I say Trump should purchase these. Looks good.
In long and mid range isn't lower as performance. In visual range even Su-30SM, Rafale and Eurofighter can beat F-22 but overall it's a knife for everything. As supersonic striker 23 it's better than 35A, it's like F-14 trading carier based function for stealth, carrying 3-4 guided bombs and 4 missiles would be a great multirole.
They could have had both types but it was framed as a competion not realizing that
If the idiots in the af would have chose the 23, instead of 22, than the aircraft would have continued to develop like the f22. The 23 could never have been beat....just a better build... And cheaper over the life of the aircraft.. js
23 was faster common knowledge