Forum: F-22A Raptor

aaam wrote:

psychmike wrote:

According to Volume 38 of World Air Power Journal, the F-22 won in part because: 1) McDonnell Douglas (partner on the YF-23) had just gone through the A-12 debacle; 2) the B-2 was having difficulty meeting RCS specs at that time; and 3) Lockheed had just scored a home run with the F-117 in Desert Storm.

Not having Volume 38 immediately to hand, I'd say that author's opinion is as good as anything else out there. Personally, I happen to be in the Industrial Policy camp (i.e. With less programs available coning up, this was the best way to maintain Lockheed's capability in the industrial base), but who knows? The unique thing about the competition was that barring something disqualifying one of the competitors, the Secretary of the Air Force could decide it any way he chose. All we've ever heard officially was better documentation and more confidence in management.

You're right. The author (Bill Sweetman) didn't state any sources but sounded authoritative.

F-16.net Sponsor

psychmike wrote:

aaam wrote:

psychmike wrote:

According to Volume 38 of World Air Power Journal, the F-22 won in part because: 1) McDonnell Douglas (partner on the YF-23) had just gone through the A-12 debacle; 2) the B-2 was having difficulty meeting RCS specs at that time; and 3) Lockheed had just scored a home run with the F-117 in Desert Storm.

Not having Volume 38 immediately to hand, I'd say that author's opinion is as good as anything else out there. Personally, I happen to be in the Industrial Policy camp (i.e. With less programs available coning up, this was the best way to maintain Lockheed's capability in the industrial base), but who knows? The unique thing about the competition was that barring something disqualifying one of the competitors, the Secretary of the Air Force could decide it any way he chose. All we've ever heard officially was better documentation and more confidence in management.

You're right. The author (Bill Sweetman) didn't state any sources but sounded authoritative.

I'll have to read it again. Bill Sweetman is a very knowledgeable person who has been at this a long time. If you've read some of his other writings or met him, he always sounds authoritative.

I've learned that Bill makes a lot of sh!t up also.

Now I've read Bill Sweetman's piece and it's pretty much as psychmike said. Sweetman discusses the decision in two place and he attributes it to (and clearly he was talking to Lockheed folks), in no particular order

1. The F-117 doing very well in Desert Storm

2. Problems with the TSSAM missile and radar RCS issues with the B-2 RCS.

3. MDD being part of the team involved in the A-12 debacle

4. The YF-22 being closer to the planned EMD version than was the YF-23.

5. Supposedly Lockheed's vg design for the NATF was an important factor over Northrop's canard.

My thoughts would be

1. Can't argue with that. For the role for which it was designed it was spectacular, fully redeeming its performance in Operation Just Cause.

2. The TSSAM suffered from a bizarre budgeting scheme, but Northrop also wasn't communicating its operations that well. The B-2's and RCS problems, but given the stage in its development it was at that point they weren't abnormal.

3. It was true that MDD was the junior partner in the A-12 fiasco, but the "leader" of that team was GD, who was on the YF-22 team. Plus, although Sec. Rice may not have known it at that time, DoD/Air Force were arguably major contributors to what went wrong.

4. I'm not sure about this; Both would undergo noticeable changes to go to EMD, but the EMD F-23 would not require a reduction in wing sweep or significant increase in span.

5. I must admit Northrop's NATF was not as pretty as their ATF, but it did look very Star Wars.

Like I said, I don't know the answer, so even though I'm in another camp, his explanation is as good as anybody else's.

Off topic comment.

aaam wrote:

My thoughts would be

3. It was true that MDD was the junior partner in the A-12 fiasco,

I doubt that MDD ever considered itself a "junior partner". They sure did not act like they did.

Back to the topic.

fisk

Roscoe wrote:

I've learned that Bill makes a lot of sh!t up also.

I have a really old "Stealth Aircraft" book (pre- F-117 disclosure) written by him, with a downright hilarious illustration of the assumed "F-19" configuration.

Would anybody be interested in a scan of it?

Prinz, please share!

Well... okay.

fiskerwad wrote:

Off topic comment.

aaam wrote:

My thoughts would be

3. It was true that MDD was the junior partner in the A-12 fiasco,

I doubt that MDD ever considered itself a "junior partner". They sure did not act like they did.

Back to the topic.

fisk

There's what the org chart says, and then there's reality.

In times past I have personally corresponded with some folks on that team, and they said they repeatedly tried to tell GD that the plane was going to be too heavy, wouldn't be a good carrier capable plane and significant changes needed to be made. According to them, GD just blew them off, saying they had it under control, their design was fine, and just get with the program.

Damn! F-22 getting no love up in here. Seriously though, does anyone have an illustration of the Black Widow's weapons bay? My understanding is that Northrop lost because they hadn't thought out how to actually launch weapons even though they had a space. I retrospect, a deeper centerline bay would have proven more useful for air to ground missions than the F-22's shallow twin bays that are best suited for air to air weapons.

aaam wrote:

fiskerwad wrote:

Off topic comment.

aaam wrote:

My thoughts would be

3. It was true that MDD was the junior partner in the A-12 fiasco,

I doubt that MDD ever considered itself a "junior partner". They sure did not act like they did.

Back to the topic.

fisk

There's what the org chart says, and then there's reality.

In times past I have personally corresponded with some folks on that team, and they said they repeatedly tried to tell GD that the plane was going to be too heavy, wouldn't be a good carrier capable plane and significant changes needed to be made. According to them, , GD just blew them off, saying they had it under control, their design was fine, and just get with the program.

Well, now you are hearing from someone who was on the team. (I was chief of the structural flight test team.) MDD and GD were equal partners on the team. We had MDD engineers working in our groups at GD and vice versa. Each team had certain responsibilities, bur overall they were equally responsible for the airplane, and for the failure of the program.

The MDD people you correspond with certainly have their point of view that GD was to blame for the failure ("GD just blew them off"), but that doesn't mean they really knew what was happening. Like any new airplane, there were development problems, but weight and carrier capability were not the cause of cancellation. As I said, MDD and GD shared in the failure, and there was also another equally guilty party, the US Navy.

There is much more to the story, but that's all you'll get from me.

NG's patent for the launching mechanism:
http://www.wikipatents.com/US-Patent-47 ... tem/Page-1

Also look here for a lot of info on the F-23.
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... l#msg14222

allenperos wrote:

After checking the web site on the F-22, the very first article on the forum shows an article for the commencement of F/A-22 to start in December 2005 at Langley.

As far as the YF-23 is concerned, one crashed and the other is at Wright Patterson on static display, enjoyed the evening with you guys!

No YF-23 ever crashed. And no YF-23 is on display at Wright-Pat... You're confusing the YF-22 and the YF-23.

One YF-23 was taken by Northrop (last 2 years maybe) and was used as a study for the 'Regional Bomber' conceptual work. The other YF-23 is at Muroc Airfield.

Back to the YF-23 versus the YF-22 discussion; I believe the USAF/Pentagon made the right decision in what plane to choose. The YF-23 was more of a long range interceptor, and not so much of a fighter. Yes, it cold cruise faster than the -22, but the TTWratio was in favor of the -22, which is of benefit in the spiraling downwards telephone pole of death in a turning engagement. The -22 is a true fighter. It's something of a super-Eagle, a plane which the USAF loves and is wideley regarded as the best fighter, ever.

The -23 would have been great at at long range BVR engagements because of its better stealth, faster cruise speed, and probably greater range. But it would not have been as great at more close-in encounters, the type of which has been the VAST, VERY VAST, majority of aerial engagements in history. When you're fighting in places like the middle east, the far east, etc etc, the -23 would have been like an Aegis destroyer operating in lake Michigan. The Cold War was over, and is over, and we will never have ATF's operating out of England to defend Western Europe at long range from an invading Russian military.

The -22 made/makes better sense for the current and projected threat environments for quite some time.

sewerrat wrote:

No YF-23 ever crashed. And no YF-23 is on display at Wright-Pat... You're confusing the YF-22 and the YF-23.

One YF-23 was taken by Northrop (last 2 years maybe) and was used as a study for the 'Regional Bomber' conceptual work. The other YF-23 is at Muroc Airfield.

Yes, no YF-23 ever crashed but as a bit of Wright Pat regular, I have to confirm that there is indeed a YF-23 on display there. Beautifully restored too after years of outdoor storage. It is currently located at the R&D hangar available for visiting by special bus. What a treat to see this bird. These photos were taken in early 2009.

The museum used to have the YF-22 on display but that went back to the Edwards museum. Wright Pat now has an EMD F-22 painted in Langley colors. The Air Force Museum is an amazing place – if you blink, you’ll miss a new exhibit going up.

Last edited by strykerxo on Feb 15, 2011 - 09:20 PM; edited 1 time in total

The PAV-2 Grey Ghost is at the Western Museum of Flight in Torrance, Ca.

http://www.wmof.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9-n3tNrec0

Agreed on the USAF Museum, got to get back

Forum: F-22A Raptor

YF-22 vs YF-23