Why did the Black Widow lose?

[BlimpCommander]

I was just reading up on the F-22 and YF-23 and started wondering again about how the YF-23 could've lost. The impression I got was that the YF-23 was superior to the YF-22 in almost everything except maybe economy-related issues. I've seen a lot of discussions like this elsewhere when the F-22 Raptor won the ATF competition, but I'd be interested to hear what you guys think. Of course, nothing classified. :D

[old_pop2000]

I was just reading up on the F-22 and YF-23 and started wondering again about how the YF-23 could've lost. The impression I got was that the YF-23 was superior to the YF-22 in almost everything except maybe economy-related issues. I've seen a lot of discussions like this elsewhere when the F-22 Raptor won the ATF competition, but I'd be interested to hear what you guys think. Of course, nothing classified. :D


Where to start?

First thing to keep in mind, is that you are buying, not only the aircraft and its capabilities, but you are buying the company's management, design team and financials. This is a long term relationship, about thirty years worth. You are buying the company's ability to maintain the aircraft, provide timely modifications, provide follow on models, in a cost effective manner. You are buying management's ability to utilize its resources including labor and finances. You are buying the design teams ability to respond to maintenance and performance problems what will inevitably arise in the long life of this aircraft. You are also buying the companies history in aviation. Therefore, when the USAF made its decision, it had to consider those factors as it related to MacAir/Northrop versus Boeing/Lockheed/GD. I hope this is clear, because it is important in the consideration. GAO especially and the Congressional Budget Office will examine these factors carefully in the USAF's proposal.

Now, design wise, what is the difference between the two aircraft? Let me state this, right off of the bat. Air Force officers, are by nature and requirement, conservative. They like innovation but would like to see something that holds to traditional design concepts until the more innovative ideas have been fully tested. This was why the Stealth bomber and flying wing concept, took so long to become a reality. The USAF had to be certain that this innovative design was viable, over time. This idea is probably what happened to the F-23. The F-23 took a more radical approach to providing speed and maneuverability than did the F-22, and hence, was considered a more risky aircraft to purchase and maintain. The blended wing and fuselage, the wide separation of the engines, makes the F-23 a very unstable and therefore agile aircraft. The F-22 used a more conventional planform, with thrust vectoring and was shorter. It also was very agile with a slightly higher agility than the F-23 which emphasised straight line speed.

In the end, it was the confidence of DOD and the USAF in the Boeing/Lockheed/GD design team and Pratt and Whitney to produce the aircraft and engine at or below cost. It was felt that the F-22 had much more design extension built into it, for the future and that, over time, it will provide the best package in performance and maintainability. It was essentially a decision to buy manueverability over stealth. Again, DOD is conservative and the men making the ultimate decision are fighter pilots.

I hope that answers your question, to some extent.

[Ed Rotondaro]

I was just reading up on the F-22 and YF-23 and started wondering again about how the YF-23 could've lost. The impression I got was that the YF-23 was superior to the YF-22 in almost everything except maybe economy-related issues. I've seen a lot of discussions like this elsewhere when the F-22 Raptor won the ATF competition, but I'd be interested to hear what you guys think. Of course, nothing classified. :D


BC:

Dennis broke it down pretty good, but for what it's worth, I think the YF-23 was the cooler looking plane with the blended shape. It looked like something out of Star Wars.

[BlimpCommander]

Thanks Dennis, that was a very good explaination. The F-22 sure was the safer choice.

Ed:
Yeah the YF-23 does look cooler. I think the majority of people think so too. Maybe the USAF would've gone for the YF-23 had they still been facing a threat the size of the Soviet Union, in which the need for superior capabilities outweigh safety and long term economic concerns, just like how they chose the radical F-117 and B-2.