disconnectedradical wrote:You were talking about acceleration.
No I was asking if the pilot's response was somehow a comparison between acceleration
and Energy retention numbers of the F-22 and the YF- 23. you respond as if I'm making claims when in reality, I'm asking a question.
disconnectedradical wrote:How can you make this comparison and analogy of F-35A vs F-35C when YF-23 and YF-22 fuselage are so different?
All I'm saying is a bigger wing usually translates into higher deceleration rates. Now if you have evidence that suggest the YF-23 will still maintain Energy and acceleration advantages over the YF-22 then please share.
Your argument that the YF-22 will have more surface area due to having more tail surfaces than the YF-23 is pretty much the same simplistic eyeball analysis of their drag profile as my bigger wing argument.
disconnectedradical wrote:You clearly don't know how this works.
Well I'm not going to claim to know how it works. From people that I know in the USAF, word can spread inside aviation circles that they were not "supposed" to know.
Gums shared a lot of insights about the F-35 before a lot of us got to know it. He had absolutely no business knowing that. They don't need to know specifics, a simple "the YF-22 accelerates faster" comment from one of the test pilots could spread like wildfire without breaking classified information protocols.
disconnectedradical wrote:F-22 lost volume over YF-22 especially in rear fuselage and is also a bit shorter.
But is still 10,000 lbs heavier
disconnectedradical wrote:F-23 is actually longer than YF-23 and looking at cross sections the fuselage volume increased especially at middle.
Hence will be much heavier.
disconnectedradical wrote:Why are you obsessed with making F-22 best at everything? It's a great aircraft but it's not magically unbeatable.
the YF-22 prototype beat the YF-23 and post above clearly says why. I'm not saying its undefeatable but it is better than than anything in service in A-A and better than a fictional F-23 variant.