From: scotth@felix.filenet.com (Scott Hopson)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Re: F-23 Dead?
Date: 10 Sep 92 07:48:21 GMT
Reply-To: scotth@fritz.filenet.com (Scott Hopson)
Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA

In article <1992Sep8.134328.5065@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> noyes@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov (tom noyes 283-4177) writes:
>In article <1992Sep7.21644.20727@ms.uky.edu>
>|> 
>|> The F-23 is dead.  Just dead.  The designers chose to put more
>|> emphesis on stealy and less on aerodynamics than the air force wanted.
>|> Of course, the air force decided this after the plane was built ...
>|> 
>LESS ON AERODYNAMICS?? The smooth fluid lines of the F-23 enabled it
>to achieve a supercruise speed of Mach 1.18, while the F-22 could only
>achieve supercruise of 1.05-1.10 with the same engines. The smooth
>lines of the F-23 were directly linked to Northrops B-2 bomber experience.
>The F-22's box like lines are linked to Lockheeds F-117 experience.
>Any Aerodynamicist or stealth expert will tell you that the F-23
>design is a generation more advanced then the F-22. The reason that
>the F-22 was chosen over the F-23, in my opinion, was that the USAF
>let pilots have too much input into which plane they wanted. Pilots
>by nature are concerned about ariel combat, the F-22 is better suited
>for this purpose, with its thrust vectoring nozzels contributing the
>principal advantage over the F-23. The F-23 better meets the USAF's RFP
>with the strategy of stealth, range, and supercruise over maneuverability 
>(if you can't see me, you can't shoot me).`

When I worked for Northrop, an article was circulated that stated
that experts felt that the YF-23 (F-23) was more stealthy and probably
a better overall choice but that Lockheed had a better management 
structure than Northop. This was said to be one of the reasons the
YF-22 (F-22) was chosen over the Northrop plane. Many people feel that
Northrop's technology is much better than Lockheed's, but Northrop has
always had to fight political battles that had nothing to do with
how good their planes were. I must say that I am biased abit, but I
do believe Northrop's technology has been ahead in many areas. You'll
hear lot's of people claim things like "The B-2 Bomber is not really
very stealthy" the problem is that the people who know the truth can't
say anything about it due to security reasons. I for one am proud to say
that I worked at Northrop and would gladly work there again if the 
economy would permit.

Northrop has been responsible for many inovations in aircraft design
and construction. The people of Northrop are a credit to our country
and to their professions. If we took all that knowledge and experience
and put it to work without the worries of government interference there
is no telling how beneficial technology could be produced. If the government
would put the various Aerospace Companies to work designing alternative
energy sources, transportation technologies, environmental cleanup methods,
etc. This country might turn into a real healthy and happy place to live.
We might even be able to help the rest of the world cleanup their act by
providing inexpensive and clean alternative technologies.

-- 
Scott Hopson   (scotth@filenet.com)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics