I recently watched a fairly interesting documentary on the YF-23 program and its competition with the YF-22. There are quite a few knowledgable aviation people on here (I’m very much only an interested amateur so please be gentle if this is a silly question) and I was wondering what they thought of it, was the right decision made to proceed with the YF-22 or why not?
I have to admit that on a purely aesthetic level I much prefer the looks of the YF-23 though I also heard that it some respects it was a more advanced design than its competitor and that the USAF chose the YF-22 because it was more conventional and a safer bet. Or was it simply that Northrop already had the B2 Bomber contract and economics dictated that Lockheed Martin should be chosen for the ATF program for that reason?
AIUI, the YF-23 was better, but the DoD wanted to punish Northrop for the B-2 program’s shenanigans several years ago and gave the contract to Lockheed instead. The YF-22 was also a bit more maneuverable, which was a plus in Pentagon eyes who still thought in terms of close-in dogfights.
And then I went down the stealth fighter/stealth aircraft/air superiority/advanced radar and detection rabbit hole. I always knew switching from aerospace engineering was a bad idea, and I still regret it. Maybe it’s time to go back to school again.
I concur on the styling - the YF-23 looks so much better. Too bad the issues with Northrop’s project management might have had an effect.
At the time the trade press pretty well said it was a pure case of industrial policy and the need to spread the contracts around. The merits of YF-22 vs YF-23 as aircraft were pretty evenly split.
Recall that was also the time of the cancellation of the Boeing (McD-D) A-12 fiasco. DoD was pretty peeved that none of their suppliers seemed to be able to play this game.
So they bet on Lockheed who’d done a darn good job as the successor owner of the F-16 project after General Dynamics divested it.
DoD was promptly rewarded with massive overruns and delays on Lockheed’s F-22 and then F-35. It seems that nobody really does know how to play this game.
Aside: IMO the tail feathers of the YF-23 always looked like an afterthought to me. It made the whole thing ungainly and unbalanced looking. By contrast the F-22 is much more integrated looking.
I have no idea if the early YF-23 design iterations really had no vertical tails but they couldn’t quite make it work or whether what we see is about what they started with. But to my eye it sure *looks *like an afterthought.
I looked up the problems with the B-2 program you mentioned, I see what you mean!
I recall the joke about the amount of money spent for total airframes meant that projected out somewhere around 2050 the USAF will be spending 90% of its budget on one airplane
While obviously exaggerated there was a grain of truth there.
And yes it really is an eye of the beholder thing, both F-22 and F-23 seem to have fans regarding their respective looks.
