Forum: F-22A Raptor

Hey, I just stated something I had read a long time ago and asked some simple, general questions about the two ATF flyoff competitors.

No harm in that. Shrug

F-16.net Sponsor

Quote:

Consider this. Both of the ATF concepts were practically invisible to radar, and both had superior range, maneuverability, and speed to most aircraft in the US forces. so it came down to this. which one was more capable in a dogfight, and which was easier and cheaper to build and maintain?

In both aspects, the YF-22 won out. The YF-23 was harder to maintain, with the ceramic tiles needing meticulous attention. And though it nearly matched the YF-22 in maneuverability, the YF-22 always edged out just enough so that in a dogfight, if it came down to capabilities, it would win every time against the YF-23

I am merely curious. Has there ever been a requirement for any of these aircraft to dogfight to prove which one is best? I've never read or watched anything anywhere that mentioned that the YF-16/YF-18, YF-22/YF-23, or X-32/X-35 having to dogfight each other to prove their worth.

Quote:

I am merely curious. Has there ever been a requirement for any of these aircraft to dogfight to prove which one is best? I've never read or watched anything anywhere that mentioned that the YF-16/YF-18, YF-22/YF-23, or X-32/X-35 having to dogfight each other to prove their worth.

Regardless, it would have been amazingly cool to have watched the YF-23 and YF-22 duke it out. Very Happy

gosmack wrote:

I am merely curious. Has there ever been a requirement for any of these aircraft to dogfight to prove which one is best? I've never read or watched anything anywhere that mentioned that the YF-16/YF-18, YF-22/YF-23, or X-32/X-35 having to dogfight each other to prove their worth.

Dogfight each other?

Maybe both companies and the USAF would've considered it had they have the time after such a short amount of time to test, clear and expand just their flight envelopes.

Besides, just the flight test portion will yield data useful to calculate the potential better performer. Actual "dogfighting" with prototypes would not yield much overall useful data and would have been potentially dangerous. Anyways, changes from a prototype to production representative vehicles is guaranteed (i.e. YF-22 to F-22) and differences to the flying and handling qualities can be substantial.

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

gosmack wrote:

I am merely curious. Has there ever been a requirement for any of these aircraft to dogfight to prove which one is best? I've never read or watched anything anywhere that mentioned that the YF-16/YF-18, YF-22/YF-23, or X-32/X-35 having to dogfight each other to prove their worth.

Dogfight each other?

Maybe both companies and the USAF would've considered it had they have the time after such a short amount of time to test, clear and expand just their flight envelopes.

Besides, just the flight test portion will yield data useful to calculate the potential better performer. Actual "dogfighting" with prototypes would not yield much overall useful data and would have been potentially dangerous. Anyways, changes from a prototype to production representative vehicles is guaranteed (i.e. YF-22 to F-22) and differences to the flying and handling qualities can be substantial.

That's what I was thinking. It would be too much of a risk to the test pilots to place two unproven experimental aircraft in a scenario like that. The reason why I ask, is that earlier in the thread, theheik is implying that the F-22 won the competition due to dominance in a mock dogfight.

I didn't see either YF-23 test fire missiles like the YF-22 did... I believe the F119-powered YF-22 simply outdid the YF-23s in all of the important categories - including missile firings.

As much as I would love to see a USAF formation of F-23As and F-22As, only one could survive. Many have a strong loyalty to the YF-23, but I don't buy the argument that it easily outclassed the YF-22. Perhaps the YF-23 would have been the better choice if the USSR did not collapse, but my personal opinion is that the the YF-22 was better suited for the new global/political climate. It is quite possible the F-23 would have been canceled in the early 1990s where the F-22 survived.

I could be wrong however, and the F-23 could have been more successful in the political realm because it "looked" more like the future of aviation. While it may not have been chosen, the design of the YF-23 is bound to influence future Northrop concepts.

gosmack wrote:

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

gosmack wrote:

I am merely curious. Has there ever been a requirement for any of these aircraft to dogfight to prove which one is best? I've never read or watched anything anywhere that mentioned that the YF-16/YF-18, YF-22/YF-23, or X-32/X-35 having to dogfight each other to prove their worth.

Dogfight each other?

Maybe both companies and the USAF would've considered it had they have the time after such a short amount of time to test, clear and expand just their flight envelopes.

Besides, just the flight test portion will yield data useful to calculate the potential better performer. Actual "dogfighting" with prototypes would not yield much overall useful data and would have been potentially dangerous. Anyways, changes from a prototype to production representative vehicles is guaranteed (i.e. YF-22 to F-22) and differences to the flying and handling qualities can be substantial.

That's what I was thinking. It would be too much of a risk to the test pilots to place two unproven experimental aircraft in a scenario like that. The reason why I ask, is that earlier in the thread, theheik is implying that the F-22 won the competition due to dominance in a mock dogfight.

sheesh this forum is still going eh?

Anyways, I am not implying the two prototypes duked it out, rather that the YF-22 was more capable as a "Fighter". In this specific case I was referring to the YF-22's TVC capabilities, which in addition to making the plane more maneuverable in a dogfight, would give it a whole new set of moves such as the pugachev cobra, a move that could only be done by other TVC planes and the Su-27, the primary fighter jet of Russia even to this day. The yf-23 could not achieve these moves because it's airframe was designed for stealth rather than maneuverability and could not take TVC because it engines had the ceramic heat sinks that prevented movement. And these moves would potentially give a YF-22 an advantage over the YF-23,since in terms of speed and stealth both the YF-22 and YF-23 were good enough that neither was particularly above another. The YF-22 just had more points as a fighter in it's favor

And everyone knows that the cobra is such an important and effective thing in real-world fighter tactics today......

JetTest wrote:

And everyone knows that the cobra is such an important and effective thing in real-world fighter tactics today......

Not to mention both ATF finalists met the program KPP for maneuverability. I don’t doubt that the F-22 probably had some advantages in certain regimes, particularly the post stall and high alpha but I’m willing to bet that the F-23 would have been a very good dogfighter in its own right. It had not only a huge wing (110 ft² more than the F-22’s already huge 840 ft²) but it probably also had a lower effective wing loading since it’s fuselage was wide, flat and airfoil like. One area that I would think would have been problematical is that the secondary bay for the heaters doesn’t permit a very good FOV for the missile’s seekers unless it opens differently and the missiles extend down and out. Less of a problem today with the emerging LOAL tech tree spooling up.

I’ve heard anecdotally from folks purporting to have been involved in the program state that it would have had tremendous supersonic maneuverability. To me this seems to make sense since it appears outwardly that the design placed higher emphasis on LO and speed; i.e. emphasis on BVR capability. I wouldn’t be surprised that part of the reason the F-22 won was it was a more conservative design with less risk. Oddly, the F-23 would have been more appropriate in today’s post cold-war world with the current high capability threat focused on the pacific. The jet appears to carry more fuel and ordnance which is a factor in the current PacRim defense planning.

Yes, I think the award went to the most mature, conservative design that met the key program requirement, with the least risk, for both airframe and engine.

I've also read that Northrop did a crappy job on the actual EMD proposal especially on the avionics. Supposedly the Northrop avionics path was more supportable upgradeable a la F-35 (though probably still based on Ada software).

If it was just for looks the F-23 winds hands down. The AF will pick I high & low risk to if maturation of the more sophisticated AC can compete.

I shot this last week at the Western Museum of Flight

http://www.youtube.com/user/strykerxo?f ... 9-n3tNrec0

I always preferred the YF-22 for myself as far as looks go.

Forum: F-22A Raptor

YF-22 vs YF-23