Imagine if USAF had selected the F-23 and USN, the next-gen follow up F-14 mod... case closed

the YF-23 was too big for carrier use though

@@colten1825 Nobody was talking about YF-23 for carrier operations. The next-gen Super Tomcat would have covered that role and would be an operational game-changer if operating today . Whereas, the would-be F-23 assembly line today if it was the more prudent model selected back then would probably be producing at least a couple different evolved model specific types still today. case closed ✌

@@donkoh5738 F-14 had impressive capability for the time but it is a giant hunk of junk. Expensive, heavy swing wing mechanisms, compressor stall issues, lack of AMRAAM support, and more; the tomcat was a hangar queen, with extremely complicated maintenance. Plus, it was fucking HUGE for the boat. roughly 65x65 feet when fully opened.

Maybe the Navy doesn't fall for lobbying bullshit as easily.

The biggest lesson learned by Northrop is that your marketing team is just as if not more important than your engineering team.

@@longshot7601 is that why they lost to Lockheed Martin? 🛫

I agree. The majority of the research and development is already finished. Sure, they could refine a few things here and there and modify and upgrade anything else that could further improve its capabilities. It was designed WAY back in ‘92 after all.. basically, considering it’s highly capable design, most of the work has already been done, they should seriously consider looking into what an updated overall cost per unit would be today if they produced, say, 300 units vs what it would cost to start a whole new fighter program from scratch that would need to fulfill the same requirements of what the f-23 is capable of already doing according to its ‘92 prototype. I would imagine, even if you added in the costs of modifying the original design to incorporate various modifications to improve on the original, it would still end up being an overall bargain when compared with the typical disgustingly bloated costs associated with military projects. I would honestly love to see a comparison of the original ‘92 capabilities vs a modernized F-23 that has had various improvements afforded by the advancement of technology over the last nearly 30 years!! However, despite how awesome this aircraft was, it’s completely outclassed by what they created less than 10 years ago, but chances are those “won’t exist” for at least another 20 years or so.

Big fan of Macross! Plus had that Top Gun feel to the competition. I haven't watched it in years. Time to dust off the dvds.

Yeah also add "Day of the Cheetah" by Dale Brown. Loved both.

Weird how Macross predicted how the ATF program would play out. Just like the F-22 in real life, while the YF-19 won the competition for the UN Spacy's new mainstay variable fighter, the Excalibur would only be procured in limited numbers. And just like the Eagle which the Raptor was supposed to replace, production of the old VF-17 Nightmare (as the VF-171). would outlive that of the VF-19

@@kidwajagstang you're right it would be a bargain to build it now since they know what the airframe can do. Give it the same computer system as the F-35 and it should fit right in.

Not to mention the thing is amazingly beautiful! There goes the old adage, if it looks right…it doesn’t get the contract! YF-22 watered the Air Farce’s eyes with high AOA maneuvers & genuine thrust vectoring. The Navy was very unhappy with Northrip because of their failed stealth attack jet. I really feel it would have been a superior fighter. Ah well.

I preferred the YF-23 over the F-22 in the ATF competition, but honestly I preferred the X-35 over the X-32 in the JSF program. Fair disclosure: I'm somewhat biased by income source to prefer the 23 and the 32.

There's an interesting video on Mover's channel talking with the ATF program head, he mentioned how he took pains to ensure that whichever plane was chosen, all the basics that the Air Force wanted would be fulfilled, regardless of Pentagon politicking. So really, any benefits of one platform over the other were just bonus points on top of the critical requirements, and the YF-23 would probably have performed admirably as well. Don't sell your opinion short!

@@dsdy1205 I've watched that video.

@@kathrynck ayy, man is a role model to me tbh, how he managed the program

@Raider Primus You can look for yourself

We don't have enough f22s. I wish we had more AND the f23.

@Raider Primus www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/air/b-21-raider/ www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/2682973/b-21-raider/

With regards to the B2, there was no lesson for Northrup/Hughes/Motorola to learn....the program was cut to just a fraction of what was initially ordered and therefor, per the contract (like all DoD contracts), if you reduce the number of aircraft ordered, the price per aircraft goes up..... plus, the B2 was also an integrated R&D program with every revision (tech wise) requested and approved by the USAF..... The B2 (pieces) were actually built in Pico Rivera (assembled in Palmdale) and Hughes Aircraft had a R&D facility at that site as they developed/transitioned new/existing tech onto the planes as they were being built........ I could go on more about why the B21 is being funded but you would cringe!!!!!!!

@@lucastekkan Wasting your time providing information to a troll

To be fair, the blame for that lays at the feet of congress. They cut procurement numbers, which increased unit price, which was used as an excuse to further cut procurement numbers, which further increased unit price, which was used as a rationale to further cut procurement numbers... ad infinitum, until a $500 million dollar bomber became a specialty item with only 20 built, each one having to contain more and more of the full program cost, at 2.5 billion apiece. This has happened to other military hardware programs, but the B-2 is a textbook example of the problem. For the USAF to be pissed at Northrup over it is dumb. This is why it was a really big deal when the previous administration negotiated & placed a bulk order for nearly 500 F-35's, cash up front. Notice the price per unit dropped about 20% overnight? Instead of rising every year? If congress had any financial sense, at all, there wouldn't be much national debt. Of course at this point the debt kinda fuels itself, like an upside down retirement account.

@@kathrynck very good point a lot of people don't realize the economies of scale whether it's fighters or any other manufactured product.

As the US cuts the numbers of planes they want (after the proposal is determined) then the costs skyrocket as it is no longer spread out over a larger production.

Yup, that's what I'm thinking. The plane is too good. It has to be panned as "a loser" to our enemies. Aw shucks. Good try Northrop. 😜😜😜

@@TheZoePath Lol I just thought of an edit that would be better "... built in secret and deployed 6 months after the F-22, but they're so stealthy and lethal no one outside USAF pilots has ever seen one on radar or in visible range" I guess we'll never know

if you Amerikans start losing satellites at random, it's DEFINITELY just accidents.

@@jordansenna752 🤣

@@IshijimaKairo our enemies will run out satellites before 🇺🇸👍

Exactly

Rip USAF's budget

Yeah sure but Obama's stupid presidency is the reason of hault of F 22 production completely ruining things

@@diecastworld7962 you guys always blame everything on Obama don't you lol. Leave politics out of this the f22 had its own problems.

@@Intranetusa meanwhile people are crying about the F35 price...

There were three competitions essentially - avionics, engine and airframe.

@@piotrd.4850 That's the weirdest part of the competition IMO. YF-23 was more-or-less ready to fly as it was designed. YF-22 was NOTHING like the f-22. The design had so many issues that by the time they were done working them out, they'd basically designed an entirely new airframe.

debunked

@@mrbigberd "YF-23 was more-or-less ready to fly as it was designed" Apparently this was not the case. If it were NG would have done a more thorough demonstration of the -23's capabilities. The eventual Raptor was a marginally better aircraft, but LM did a way better job of selling their product than NG did with theirs.

very true.

Back then , the name of the Game was close combat, (dog fighting) and the F22 suit that particular mission to a T. And China wasn't much of a threat 30 years ago.

Yup. They should have greenlit both for one fully finished production machine to have another flyoff. IMO the same should have been done for the X32. The proposed changes Boeing had in the pipe would have been something to see.

If I'm not mistaken...Japan was supposedly getting talks going on the YF-23 not to long ago.(in the last year or two?) They were interested in it.

I’m sure the modifications needed to make them carrier capable would have been substantially expensive and offer less of a performance to make it feasible. There were attempts to look into bringing both the F15 and the F22 to The Fleet. Imagine these things being the true replacement to the Tomcat

The footage is amazing

The aircraft currently being tested are making the F-22 look like a P51 Mustang.

Probably

We already have a 6th gen prototype. It looks a lot like the yf23.

That's funny, I was thinking the exact same opposite. I would combine the F23 beauty with F22 technology.

@@xchalibur77 maybe ou and me will endup having somewhat of our wishes caming true if Japan buy the F 23 and using F 35 technology on it.

@@erickcredidiooliveira201 that would be a pretty sight. Until you get attacked by one of those things 😜

Very true the YF-23 was (and is) a beautiful aircraft! I’ve seen PAV-2 at the Western Museum of Flight. One thing not often mentioned is the engine nacelles are over-large because the plane was designed with thrust reversers, which requirement was cancelled.

Go overseas as infantry. It's not at all judged by what it looks. A10, c130 gunship aka spooky.

@@theodorethompson4536 I love the A-10 warthog. That Aircraft is the reason why I wanted the Cobra Rattler as a kid. It may be an ugly aircraft but it's a hell of a machine.. Ever since I looked down the barrel of one at an Airshow I was Is super impressed. The C-130 gunship Is mainly built as a cargo transport just shows you it shows you how Ingenuitive the United States is in our Is air power surpasses every Other military power.

Dude, I fly the hell out of my YF23 on Ace Combat too! Are you on the PS4? We should fly sometime.

@@nazz2406 no I'm a marine. We do appreciate all the things you blow up. But I digress. We love the hog and the spooky. The operators of those 2 platforms have saved the lives of my men and myself. The 10 thousand plus crowd playing video games up front qe appreciate you as well. Sir.

Glad you enjoyed the video!

Thanks, brother!

The YF-23 would have manuevers similar to F-35. The Black Widow is best used as a strike fighter. The Raptor is an air superiority fighter, designed to kill another fighter in both BVR and WVR.

The F23 was faster and stealthier. The F22 more agile. The AF chose the F22 because it was less risky and quite frankly LM had better Washington connections. Also Northrop already had it's hands full with the B2 bomber

It was far more in-depth than has ever been reported in the open. YF-23 represented greater risk because windscreens kept cracking during supersonic tests. Weapons bay couldn't carry much and had no solution demonstrated for storage and ejection/separation. The flight control system had double the amount of actuators to make the wings thinner/no bulbous fairings for full power actuators. The intake geometry and boundary layer control mechanisms didn't allow it to achieve its maximum propulsive potential, along with the windscreens failing. Neither of the YF-23 PAVs went Mach 2 as a result. They could have done so if those issues were resolved, but that required more RDT&E while YF-22 PAV1 already easily broke Mach 2, and both could carry and separate weapons. Most of the comments I've seen are opposite of what happened during DEMVAL.

The new 6th gen prototype we have appears to be based on it.

How do you add thrust vectoring to the low IR heat absorbing trenches though? Any directional nozzels retro fitted at the back would just light it up, and who needs thrust vectoring anyway? The age of dogfighting is sadly over, otherwise you wouldn't be bothering with stealth in the first place, and IR stealth is the new battle ground which the 23 has in spades over the 22. But yes, totally agree, i think the 6th gen fighters will take a lot from the 23

Payload was so small though. It could only carry 4 AMRAAMs.

As I remember it, it was after McDonnell Douglas lost its bid for the JSF, what later became the F-35, that they threw in the towel and merged with Boeing.

YF-23 cracked several windscreens in supersonic tests, so it never exceeded Mach 1.82 if I recall the graphs correctly. It also had problems with the intakes and boundary layer control systems at supersonic speeds. It also had dual actuators laid sideways for each control surface so they could keep the thickness of the wings as thin as possible for VLO, but added mechanical complexity to the FLCS. It still didn't have a solution for its weapons bay storage and ejection racks, and couldn't carry as many weapons as the YF-22. All of these issues represented serious cost risks to the whole program, so even though it met the requirements, it was a much riskier option from a company that had already demonstrated massive cost overruns with the B-2A in production and delivery to USAF. The YF-22 PAV-1 (GE YF-120L motors) was the only ATF prototype that exceeded Mach 2. They already had weapons bay solutions for AIM-9 & AIM-120 with demonstrated separation capability, and had an excellent bowless canopy with all-around view. The one area the YF-22 failed was weight. It was too heavy for the desired 1.2 T/W ratio on take-off, so engine performance increased to 35,000lbs per in production. As a result, the F-22A has monstrous T/W ratio and excess thrust throughout the regime. If the YF-23 had gone onto the F-23A, it was going to grow even more in length to accommodate another forward weapons bay and still not have the weapons load that the F-22A has. There were aspects of the YF-23 test pole model that had better VLO, but others on the YF-22 test pole that were better, especially looking at serpentine intake ductwork vs the YF-23's partially-exposed cold stage turbofan inlet guide vanes from lower frontal-oblique angles. Best thing going for the YF-23 was combat radius/range.

@@LRRPFco52 I love it when people bring cold hard facts to the table instead of ignorant arguments.

Black Widow looks amazing.

What are you talking about? Lockheed teamed up with boeing I think you meant, northrop lost because _______.

Glad to hear! Thanks for watching.

Money talks unfortunately

Lockheed: scandals go bribing

the head of the ATF program actually said as much, that Northrop was a company of engineers that hired some managers, and Lockheed was a company of managers that hired some engineers

Your comments are deeply unfair to the Skunk Works and to the brilliant minds working there there like Kelly Johnson, Ben Rich and Denys Overholster!

they should show dislikes for comments like this

I see it as a stealth Aardvark. Instead of Black Widow, Aardvark II would be perfect.