YF-22 vs YF-23

Anything goes, as long as it is about the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

charlielima223

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 729
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post17 Jul 2015, 08:23

popcorn wrote:
slapshot! wrote:Nonetheless, the YF120 was deemed "risky" and not picked up. 25 years later we are looking back at the technology for application in the F35 and other future aircraft.

In retrospect a wise decision. The F-22 program had a tumultuous gestation and the last thing it needed would be the additional challenges that would come wih the variable engine approach.


I would guess that because the engine technology would be in its early infancy, that would have been more problematic for the F-22. Already the F-22 was at a political disadvantage after 1991; Cold War was over, Eagle still reigns supreme, lower defense budget and restructure...

I had asked this question earlier somewhere else around here but I didn't get a definitive answer, just a "no".

Could the F-119 engine or F-22 be improved upon by taking advantage of the development in ADVENT or AETD engine technology and materials?
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1134
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post17 Jul 2015, 12:07

Thank you very much for all your helpful insights. Just to recap what I read,

the YF-120 was a revolutionary variable cycle engine that offered more thrust than it's more conventional low bypass turbofan YF119 counterpart.

The YF-119 on the otherhand was simply a very powerful low bypass turbofan similar to legacy the F100 series but manages to produce
far more thrust with fewer compression stages. It was also more reliable, able to whitstand very high core temperatures probably due to advanced materials.
In order to match the performance requirements of the more advanced YF-120, PW produced a larger fan, effectively making one of the
most powerful turbofan installed on a Fighter to date.

In light of this, it looks like GE won the performance criteria but PW won the reliability and risk mitigation.
PW would later go on and match the YF-120's performance with a larger fan.

But how would this affect performance at high altitude where the Variable cycle engines have certain advantages?
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1538
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post18 Jul 2015, 23:26

I think if the air force is honest with themselves, when they look at the YF-23a - they see only regret.

The F-22 is a magnificent bird, but the 23 had so much more potential IMO. Speed, legs and avionics/weapons growth in particular. May very well be the Raptors achilles heel (legs), especially in the Pacific theater...
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4174
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post18 Jul 2015, 23:59

mixelflick wrote:I think if the air force is honest with themselves, when they look at the YF-23a - they see only regret.

The F-22 is a magnificent bird, but the 23 had so much more potential IMO. Speed, legs and avionics/weapons growth in particular. May very well be the Raptors achilles heel (legs), especially in the Pacific theater...


Yeah but you just know "*GASP* breaking news, the USAF has been covering up the fact that the new, most expensive fighter in history, can't do a Cobra at the airshow" would have spewed forth from the Basement Dweller crowd. Because, you know, "a REAL man's fighter would have thrust vectoring and be able to do a Cobra." They'd have went on about "Northrop, not satisfied with only making the most expensive bomber in history now ups the ante to create the most expensive fighter in history". God, I f--king HATE stupid people.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

charlielima223

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 729
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post19 Jul 2015, 01:19

mixelflick wrote:I think if the air force is honest with themselves, when they look at the YF-23a - they see only regret.

The F-22 is a magnificent bird, but the 23 had so much more potential IMO. Speed, legs and avionics/weapons growth in particular. May very well be the Raptors achilles heel (legs), especially in the Pacific theater...


This always comes up :bang:

Its more supposition than anything else. Had the YF-23 been picked over the YF-22 it would have most likely run into the same political and economical problems as the F-22 had. The F-22 had shown that it clearly out performs the Wests best fighter at the time (F-15) and it still had to paddle up the s13rr@ hotel 1nd1@ tang0 stream known as politics.

As far as the avionics is concerned I think the YF-22 showed more maturity over the YF-23. For one the YF-22 was able to successfully deploy a Sidewinder and AMRAAM during the Demonstration Evaluation phase. Another is the cockpit. The YF-22's cockpit was a completely new design (eventually the F-22's cockpit would be similar to F-16's cockpit layout). To reduce cost and ease of manufacturing the YF-23 had a modified F-15E cockpit. With avionics growth that is again supposition. What the F-22 today has now is not what the USAF had envisioned. Some would say that the F-22 in some ways the F-22 had been neutered. Who is to say that the same thing wouldn't have happened to the "F-23"?

The fact is that both aircraft met and exceeded the standard the USAF put out. The timing was just bad. Had the YF-23 been picked over the YF-22 I don't believe that things would have been any different. You'd still have uneducated putzes going against it (POGO and the one of the most famous Delta-Foxtrot/blue falcon; Pierre Sprey). You would still have a shift in politics and economics. You would still have a down size in the US military.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6714
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post19 Jul 2015, 01:39

mixelflick wrote:I think if the air force is honest with themselves, when they look at the YF-23a - they see only regret.

The F-22 is a magnificent bird, but the 23 had so much more potential IMO. Speed, legs and avionics/weapons growth in particular. May very well be the Raptors achilles heel (legs), especially in the Pacific theater...

I've never come across any report of the AF expressing buyer's remorse over the selection of the YF-22.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 549
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post19 Jul 2015, 06:21

mixelflick wrote:I think if the air force is honest with themselves, when they look at the YF-23a - they see only regret.

The F-22 is a magnificent bird, but the 23 had so much more potential IMO. Speed, legs and avionics/weapons growth in particular. May very well be the Raptors achilles heel (legs), especially in the Pacific theater...


After the testing I think they wanted them both :D Both aircraft had there strengths, what we ended up with was a fantastic, but expensive, aircraft that has yet to be matched 25 years after it's prototype flew.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1134
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post20 Jul 2015, 15:30

The USAF and the Northrop program managers had the same basic reaction when they saw the YF-22.
"it was obvious that Lockheed, emphasized agility on their prototype design"

So I'm not sure where everyone is getting the impression that Lockheed's design only offered better maneuverability
in the slow speed and post stall arena.

According to Paul Metz, the TV nozzles are very effective in maneuvering the aircraft at the supersonic regieme as well.

Lets say in hypothetical Universe the YF-23\GE-F120 got the Nod and the YF-22\PW-F119 was scrapped. Can you imagine
what everyone would be talking about?

Just for fun


-The YF-22 was clearely the better design, with Thrust vectoring and more control surfaces it was more maneuverable than what the YF-23 could ever be,

-the airforce always seems to revert back to the thinking that we will never get into close in engagements again which is why they
picked the better interceptor, not the better fighter.

-If the YF-22 was picked, we would not be stuck with all these F-23s that are always grounded

-I heared the engine of PW was more reliable, but wasn't as powerful as the GE engine

-PW was testing a new fan on their prototype to match GE's thrust output, without any of the reliability issues.

-The YF-23 was slightly faster but the YF-22 had a superior maneuvering envelope, frankly maneuverability is more useful in
an air to air engagement than top end speed. Most fights happen in the high subsonic region anyway which is well within the capabilities of the YF-22.

-Lockheed had always made incredible aircraft like the SR-71 which has a topspeed unchallanged to this day, what has Northrop
created? oh a $2B bomber and this F-23 that is just as good as a clean F-16 in high G performance and a SHornet in high AOA,

Russian Sukhoi pilots are probably feeling sorry for us by now.

Offline

charlielima223

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 729
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post20 Jul 2015, 16:02

zero-one wrote:Lets say in hypothetical Universe the YF-23\GE-F120 got the Nod and the YF-22\PW-F119 was scrapped. Can you imagine
what everyone would be talking about?

Just for fun


-The YF-22 was clearely the better design, with Thrust vectoring and more control surfaces it was more maneuverable than what the YF-23 could ever be,

-the airforce always seems to revert back to the thinking that we will never get into close in engagements again which is why they
picked the better interceptor, not the better fighter.

-If the YF-22 was picked, we would not be stuck with all these F-23s that are always grounded

-I heared the engine of PW was more reliable, but wasn't as powerful as the GE engine

-PW was testing a new fan on their prototype to match GE's thrust output, without any of the reliability issues.

-The YF-23 was slightly faster but the YF-22 had a superior maneuvering envelope, frankly maneuverability is more useful in
an air to air engagement than top end speed. Most fights happen in the high subsonic region anyway which is well within the capabilities of the YF-22.

-Lockheed had always made incredible aircraft like the SR-71 which has a topspeed unchallanged to this day, what has Northrop
created? oh a $2B bomber and this F-23 that is just as good as a clean F-16 in high G performance and a SHornet in high AOA,

Russian Sukhoi pilots are probably feeling sorry for us by now.



:) :-D :lol: :lmao: :thumb:
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1182
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post20 Jul 2015, 18:07

zero-one wrote:
-The YF-22 was clearely the better design, with Thrust vectoring and more control surfaces it was more maneuverable than what the YF-23 could ever be,

-the airforce always seems to revert back to the thinking that we will never get into close in engagements again which is why they
picked the better interceptor, not the better fighter.

..................



Nail on the head I think :thumb:
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1538
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post20 Jul 2015, 22:49

zero-one wrote:The USAF and the Northrop program managers had the same basic reaction when they saw the YF-22.
"it was obvious that Lockheed, emphasized agility on their prototype design"

So I'm not sure where everyone is getting the impression that Lockheed's design only offered better maneuverability
in the slow speed and post stall arena.

According to Paul Metz, the TV nozzles are very effective in maneuvering the aircraft at the supersonic regieme as well.

Lets say in hypothetical Universe the YF-23\GE-F120 got the Nod and the YF-22\PW-F119 was scrapped. Can you imagine
what everyone would be talking about?

Just for fun


Yeah this was good... :)
-The YF-22 was clearely the better design, with Thrust vectoring and more control surfaces it was more maneuverable than what the YF-23 could ever be,

-the airforce always seems to revert back to the thinking that we will never get into close in engagements again which is why they
picked the better interceptor, not the better fighter.

-If the YF-22 was picked, we would not be stuck with all these F-23s that are always grounded

-I heared the engine of PW was more reliable, but wasn't as powerful as the GE engine

-PW was testing a new fan on their prototype to match GE's thrust output, without any of the reliability issues.

-The YF-23 was slightly faster but the YF-22 had a superior maneuvering envelope, frankly maneuverability is more useful in
an air to air engagement than top end speed. Most fights happen in the high subsonic region anyway which is well within the capabilities of the YF-22.

-Lockheed had always made incredible aircraft like the SR-71 which has a topspeed unchallanged to this day, what has Northrop
created? oh a $2B bomber and this F-23 that is just as good as a clean F-16 in high G performance and a SHornet in high AOA,

Russian Sukhoi pilots are probably feeling sorry for us by now.

Previous

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests