YF-23 (Black Widow II): will KSA go for it?
- Thread starter The SC
- Start date
The SC
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2012
- Messages
- 32,233
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
The YF-23 was an unconventional-looking aircraft, with diamond-shaped wings, a profile with substantial area-ruling to reduce aerodynamic drag at transonic speeds, and an all-moving V-tail. The cockpit was placed high, near the nose of the aircraft for good visibility for the pilot. The aircraft featured a tricycle landing gear configuration with a nose landing gear leg and two main landing gear legs. The weapons bay was placed on the underside of the fuselage between the nose and main landing gear.[19] The cockpit has a center stick and side throttle.[20]
It was powered by two turbofan engines with each in a separate engine nacelle with S-ducts, to shield engine axial compressors from radar waves, on either side of the aircraft's spine.[21] Of the two aircraft built, the first YF-23 (PAV-1) was fitted with Pratt & Whitney YF119 engines, while the second (PAV-2) was powered by General Electric YF120 engines. The aircraft featured fixed engine nozzles, instead of thrust vectoring nozzles as on the YF-22.[11] As on the B-2, the exhaust from the YF-23's engines flowed through troughs lined with heat-ablating tiles to dissipate heat and shield the engines from infrared homing (IR) missile detection from below.[10]
The flight control surfaces were controlled by a central management computer system. Raising the wing flaps and ailerons on one side and lowering them on the other provided roll. The V-tail fins were angled 50 degrees from the vertical. Pitch was mainly provided by rotating these V-tail fins in opposite directions so their front edges moved together or apart. Yaw was primarily supplied by rotating the tail fins in the same direction. Test pilot Paul Metz stated that the YF-23 had superior high angle of attack (AoA) performance compared to legacy aircraft.[22] Deflecting the wing flaps down and ailerons up on both sides simultaneously provided for aerodynamic braking.[23] To keep costs low despite the novel design, a number of "commercial off-the-shelf" components were used, including an F-15 nose wheel, F/A-18 main landing gear parts, and the forward cockpit components of the F-15E Strike Eagle.[10] [15]
Possible revival
In 2004, Northrop Grumman proposed a YF-23-based bomber to meet a USAF need for an interim bomber, for which the FB-22 and B-1R were also competing.[36] [37] Northrop modified aircraft PAV-2 to serve as a display model for its proposed interim bomber.[28] The possibility of a YF-23-based interim bomber ended with the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review, which favored a long-range bomber with much greater range.[38] [39] The USAF has since moved on to the Next-Generation Bomber program.[40]
https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Northrop YF-23
YF-23 Could Set the Stage for Northrop Grumman’s Next Generation Fighter Proposal
March 23, 2015
...
The YF-23 was by all accounts a very capable aircraft, though the Air Force judged it to be a risky investment. Co-built with McDonnell Douglas, it was stealthier than its competitor, and could achieve higher speeds, especially while supercruising. The exact figures are classified at the moment but that should still give you an idea of what Northrop Grumman is capable of. Maneuverability, however, was another issue that led the Air Force to choose the YF-22, which featured two-dimensional thrust vectoring giving it unparalleled supermaneuverability, a factor that gives the Raptor the edge in dogfighting. Northrop Grumman’s Next Generation Tactical Aircraft proposal could, therefore, very well be a reworking of the YF-23, with newer computers and more advanced weapon systems, stealthier skins and powerful engines. Time and time again, just as we’re about ready to give up on close-in dogfighting, it becomes all the more relevant. So multi-dimensional thrust vectoring might just be another capability of the proposal. In addition to his mention of NG exploring a tailless design, Tom Vice also hinted at the possibility of fielding optionally-manned fighters as well. Lastly, the U.S. DoD has, in the recent past, indicated that directed energy weaponry (a.k.a. lasers) could potentially be ready to be deployed aboard smaller aircraft by the time the 6th gen Air Force and Navy fighters are fielded.
https://tacairnet.com/2015/03/23/yf...op-grummans-next-generation-fighter-proposal/
It was powered by two turbofan engines with each in a separate engine nacelle with S-ducts, to shield engine axial compressors from radar waves, on either side of the aircraft's spine.[21] Of the two aircraft built, the first YF-23 (PAV-1) was fitted with Pratt & Whitney YF119 engines, while the second (PAV-2) was powered by General Electric YF120 engines. The aircraft featured fixed engine nozzles, instead of thrust vectoring nozzles as on the YF-22.[11] As on the B-2, the exhaust from the YF-23's engines flowed through troughs lined with heat-ablating tiles to dissipate heat and shield the engines from infrared homing (IR) missile detection from below.[10]
The flight control surfaces were controlled by a central management computer system. Raising the wing flaps and ailerons on one side and lowering them on the other provided roll. The V-tail fins were angled 50 degrees from the vertical. Pitch was mainly provided by rotating these V-tail fins in opposite directions so their front edges moved together or apart. Yaw was primarily supplied by rotating the tail fins in the same direction. Test pilot Paul Metz stated that the YF-23 had superior high angle of attack (AoA) performance compared to legacy aircraft.[22] Deflecting the wing flaps down and ailerons up on both sides simultaneously provided for aerodynamic braking.[23] To keep costs low despite the novel design, a number of "commercial off-the-shelf" components were used, including an F-15 nose wheel, F/A-18 main landing gear parts, and the forward cockpit components of the F-15E Strike Eagle.[10] [15]
Possible revival
In 2004, Northrop Grumman proposed a YF-23-based bomber to meet a USAF need for an interim bomber, for which the FB-22 and B-1R were also competing.[36] [37] Northrop modified aircraft PAV-2 to serve as a display model for its proposed interim bomber.[28] The possibility of a YF-23-based interim bomber ended with the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review, which favored a long-range bomber with much greater range.[38] [39] The USAF has since moved on to the Next-Generation Bomber program.[40]
https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Northrop YF-23
YF-23 Could Set the Stage for Northrop Grumman’s Next Generation Fighter Proposal
March 23, 2015
...
The YF-23 was by all accounts a very capable aircraft, though the Air Force judged it to be a risky investment. Co-built with McDonnell Douglas, it was stealthier than its competitor, and could achieve higher speeds, especially while supercruising. The exact figures are classified at the moment but that should still give you an idea of what Northrop Grumman is capable of. Maneuverability, however, was another issue that led the Air Force to choose the YF-22, which featured two-dimensional thrust vectoring giving it unparalleled supermaneuverability, a factor that gives the Raptor the edge in dogfighting. Northrop Grumman’s Next Generation Tactical Aircraft proposal could, therefore, very well be a reworking of the YF-23, with newer computers and more advanced weapon systems, stealthier skins and powerful engines. Time and time again, just as we’re about ready to give up on close-in dogfighting, it becomes all the more relevant. So multi-dimensional thrust vectoring might just be another capability of the proposal. In addition to his mention of NG exploring a tailless design, Tom Vice also hinted at the possibility of fielding optionally-manned fighters as well. Lastly, the U.S. DoD has, in the recent past, indicated that directed energy weaponry (a.k.a. lasers) could potentially be ready to be deployed aboard smaller aircraft by the time the 6th gen Air Force and Navy fighters are fielded.
https://tacairnet.com/2015/03/23/yf...op-grummans-next-generation-fighter-proposal/
Similar threads
