The Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23A was a contender in the bid for an advanced tactical fighter to replace the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle in US Air Force service. The first of two prototypes flew in August 1990, the second aircraft being powered by General Electric YF120-GE-100 turbofan engines. The YF-23A was designed to be ultra-stealthy and incorporated many of the stealth features of the Northrop
Grumann B-2 bomber, and all its planned weaponry was to be housed in an internal bay to reduce the radar signature. The two YF-23s
successfully completed their flight test programme, but the Lockheed YF-22 was selected to meet the USAF requirement.
Robert Jackson "The Encyclopedia of Aircraft", 2004
Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23 Black Widow II on YOUTUBE
Does the yf-23 still fly for testing purposes or does it have to be scrapped? It would be nice to see it at an airshow but i doubt the government will let that happen.
As the one guilty of the "aircrafts" incident, I find it interesting that over a year later there are still posts to this blog mentioning the error, and seemingly becoming more and more hostile. Please forgive my ignorance, and my horrific error. I had no idea that such a mistake would cause such an incredible reaction. On the other hand, I won't mention the fact that your post also included spelling errors, because my mistake is due to my being an imbecile, whereas yours is simply a mistake, I'm sure.
Also, don't lump me in with those who feel as though the 23 should have won because it was a better looking aircraft. It should have won because it was a better fighter in most every way, and matched up better to the requirements set forth by the airforce. Of course, I am somewhat prejudiced since my father was the chief engineer on the ATF 23 for McDonnell Douglas. However, I think the majority of independent military strategists would agree that the 23 was the more capable vehicle.
Thanks again for your continued interest and commentary on my spelling error.
Gareth, I share your concern about the poor spelling exhibited here. In addition, although you failed to mention it, I am certain you share my aversion to poor grammar. Therefore you will also understand that I must correct the following (corrections are capitalized): "but not as surprised as I am by uttely appalling spelling and grammer of almost everybody here.", should be expressed as "but not as surprised as I am by THE utteRly appalling spelling and grammer of almost everybody here." Thank you so much for raising the bar, my friend.
I was surprised that the F-23 did not win, but not as surprised as I am by uttely appalling spelling and grammer of almost everybody here. "Aircrafts" "loose" not "lose", water "vaper". Didn't any of you people learn English at school? It's also amusing to note that so many of you imbeciles feel that the prettiest aircraft deserved to win the contract.
I've been to the Air Force Historical Research Agency at Maxwell AFB and tried to find information about the YF-23. It remains classified to this day. I have heard it was far faster than the YF-22 but the figures are classified. Bear in mind though that the airplane was being produced by the Northrop /McDonnell Douglas team and at the time there was fear that McDonnell Douglas couldn't produce the airplane at the contract price and on time. McDonnell Douglas's reputation contributed to the demise of the YF-23, but later they regained it by producing the C-17 at contract price and on time.
Someone said the F-22 is 15 years behind schedule... more like 2. The only problem is that the F-22 has had to change a number of components, adding to the original cost, thus pushing back the program and creating a reduction of the total production. If cost was the initial factor for choosing the YF-22 over the YF-23, by now the numbers would have been negligable. YF-23 anyday!!
I think both are awesome and yes yf23 has the better specs that the f22, like some of you guys are saying "politic" or maybe there are things that we don't know why they choose f22 over f23 besides the politics. it maybe less expensive that the f22 but is it easy to be upgraded.think about this, when they bild the AH-64A and it was battle tested and so many confim kills, but they wanted a newer model and thats why the made the AH-64D..from looking at the picture you can see a little diff..but there's more into it and made an upgrade from AH-64D lot 1 to now the most or shall I call it super apache the AH-64D lot 9...why didn't they do that to the Alpha model..who nows
After reading all these comments I think I've found the answer to everyone's dilemma. Why not buy Sukhoi aircraft and build them in the USA? Cheaper, less than half the price of any American fighter in production. Faster than any American aircraft. Flies just as high fully laden as the F-23 will empty. Flies much further than any US aircraft. Turns inside all US aircraft. Similar avionics and weaponry. Too easy!
im sorry but i cant see how the f-22 won, the black widow 2 is faster, prettier, more stealthy and cheaper i think then again, i am a bit bias, it is my favourite american aircraft!
Mr. Husteds' information is 1,000% accurate and truthful in that it's all confirmed by hundreds of first person eye witness accounts, flight test reports and actual missions flown from Edwards and Nellis AFB re: the YF-23 vs. the YF-22. The Northrup aircraft was and is superior all around to the Lockheed submission and just now in early 2008 the F-22 is coming into squadron service. That's 15 years BEHIND schedule and I don't want to know the cost ovveruns on this program. Again, Northrop and the American people got the shaft.
It's "aircraft" for singular or plural use, not "aircrafts." (think "deer")
Why was one chose over the other? There is not simple answer to that one. It's too bad that the Navy and Marine Corps did not choose to go with the YF23 instead of the JSF...but that decision was made for them in the early 90s by the Clinton Administration.
Absolutely right. As was mentioned earlier, Sam Nunn was the Chairman of the Armed Service Committee, and Sam happens to be from Georgia where Martin Marietta is based. No surprise there. Janes said that the F-23 was the better plane, and more in line with what the Air Force wanted.
The F-15 is a great fighter, and one of the few aircrafts that can fly completely vertical and accelerate at the same time. You've probably seen the comments from the test pilot of the 23 that have said that when he took off, he was pulling away from F-15's while the 15's were in full "re-heat". But speed was just one of the amazing attributes of this plane- the avionics were unmatched and are still unmatched today.
I believe the main reason was politcal for this reason. Northrop just rolled out the B-2, and the powers to be were not going to give the two largest advanced next generation stealth contracts to the same company. That would have meant we were going to single source stealth to one company for the next 20 years. While the F-23 was the better plane Northrop should have teamed up with another contractor to prevent the decision.
My Dad was the chief engineer for the F-23 at McDonnell Douglas. I think he would be very pleased with the comments that you folks have made about this aircraft. He was an amazing man, and he was sure this aircraft was the best in the world. It was a hell of a plane, and I hope that the plan for this is still alive. Thank you all.
Jim Smith, there are no YF-23 Blackwidow IIs in service sadly. This is becaue only the F-22 was given a production contract. Though both the F-22 and YF-23 are great aircrafts, only one was allowed to go into production. Though in my oppinion, the YF-23 could have easily been made the replacement for the F-117 Nighthawk.
