Was the YF-23 superior to the F-22?

In our previous videos, we have looked at several experimental US aircraft pushing aeronautical limits, but never saw service. The F-15 STOL MTD, the F-16XL, and the F-18 HARV to name a few. But there is one experimental aircraft that stands out above all the others for its cutting-edge design.

The Northrop YF-23 was in the competition, head-to-head with the demonstrator version of the F-22, and the Northrop/McDonnell Douglas team came up with a very impressive aircraft.

_____________ Disclaimer _____________
Original footage and recreated scenes may not be 100% accurate to the event being described but has been used for dramatic effect. This is because there may not have been original footage of a particular event available, or copyright prevents us from showing it. Our aim is to be as historically true as we can be given the materials available.

Copyright disclaimer under fair dealing sections ss 40/103C, ss 41/103A,ss 42/103B of the Copyright Act which includes research, study, criticism, review, and reporting of news. Copyright remains with the respective owners. These videos are made for educational purposes only.

The Australian Military Aviation History Association is a not-for-profit association with the intent of recording, preserving and promoting Australian military aviation history.

[SeanTheSarcastic]

I was a teenager during the YF-22/23 fly off and remember the news coverage showing the aircraft. The YF-22 looked like a more modern evolution of existing aircraft like the F-15, while the YF-23 truly looked futuristic to me. I was disappointed when it didn't win.

[Shaungaming-ipoj]

when i first saw the yf-23, i actually thought it was a 6th gen fighter that US was developing, and then i realised it was a plane of the 1990s...

[recoilrob]

I worked on the P&W 5000 engines used in the fly-off and one aspect of the thrust vectoring that I've not seen mentioned in video's is how it facilitates Short Take Off performance which was one of the 'desired' specs. During test runs they go full AB then vector up 20 degrees then down 20 degrees with about a second each then back to level thrust. The up vector pushes the tail down before the control surfaces have achieved enough authority then the downward vector pushes the aircraft up and off the tarmac....it's now flying at a positive attitude and having more than 1:1 T/W off it goes. I've not seen a demonstration of this during airshows as it no doubt is more risky than a conventional take-off...but that ability is in there if they ever need it.

We were getting regular reports of the Fly-Off and heard that GE guys were phoning back to the plant saying they had it in the bag because they were a bit faster than us....but the AF had changed the fan requirements late and we'd run into problems making the new ones in time so were using the older design which had less performance. The AF knew that it was only a delay and took this into consideration and in reality both engines met EVERY specification and people claiming that GE's were significantly faster are stretching the definition of 'significant'. Slightly is more accurate.

Also never mentioned was why the P&W 5000 was chosen over the GE....it was because it was SO much easier to maintain as that had been high on the priority list. Conventional jet engines have so many pipes, wires and fittings that things tend to overlap and lots of things need to be removed to service just one part. That was part of our design that individual components could be replaced with minimal disturbance of others which greatly reduces the time required. The 5000 fastener count of individual part #'s is also very low which simplifies maintenance and the AF really liked this with the maintainers working on both engines universally choosing the P&W as the better engine. Hope this helps add some info.

[Strato]

I've seen the YF-23 up close, and took many pics of her. She is a beautiful plane, and more so in person (I'm probably using terms that are not popular these days like referring to a plane as "She" but I'm old school that way).
I got to touch it, walk beneath the fuselage, took many pics of it when it was temporarily parked behind a local Torrance (Ca) business at the outer edge of Zamperini Field, in Torrance, Ca.
The version was the gray version, and of course all the Tech was removed ahead of time, (No engines, and canopy was blacked out)as to not be compromised in a public area where she ultimately was put.
I pass by her everyday to and from work, and now she's a part of the Western Museum of Flight, Torrance, California where she is proudly displayed. She still looks beautiful, and awe inspiring.

[quarters]

I really wish the YF-23 and YF-22 shared the same destiny as the F-16 and F/A-18.
Both great planes that were ultimately accepted.

[NegativeZero]

My understanding is that the contract mainly went to Lockheed because Northrop already had won the contract for the B2 over Lockheed and they had poured money into the project ($23 billion between 1981 and 1989, including a billion spent on redesigning the aircraft to be able to operate at low altitude), and military planners wanted to make sure they were not putting their eggs in one basket. Or at least that's the stated reason for going with what was on paper a worse aircraft - in practice I would imagine that Lockheed greasing some of the right palms helped too.

Shame though, the YF-23 is still an amazing looking aircraft - it looked futuristic in 1990 and IMO it still looks it now. Will be interesting to see if the rumors of a modernized version of the design being sold to Japan for their next generation fighter are true.

[mrnull]

If you haven't I would encourage you to watch the documentary about the YF23 and its test footage, It seriously blew my mind when I saw the fly by wire systems detecting small bumps in the runway and moving the flight control surfaces accordingly, truly impressive for its time!

[alexs]

Northrop guy here. The YF23 was better than the YF22. The modern F22 is far superior to both. Could the same be said of a F23 of it had happened? Im sure of it.

[Favk]

7:45 saweet JEEZUS what a gorgeous framing!!

[beauwulf]

One of the only two protypes of the YF-23 is available for public viewing at the Western Museum of Flight in Torrance, CA. Well worth it.

[verdebusterAP]

Ironically an evolved YF-23 design is what needed now

[jeffplana]

When I was a kid I grew up in Palmdale, California and I was fortunate enough. To see the YF23 in flight many times

[vortexgen]

I'm so glad that they didn't scrap the 2 YF-23s, because this design is where future aircraft are headed.

[TheDeadmanAU]

I first saw the YF-23 as a child in a video game I was playing and it quickly became my favourite aircraft in the game. Already having a love for aircraft. When I found out that it actually existed in real life I was so excited I kept bothering my grandfather (who shared my interest in aircraft) with questions and information about the plane for weeks.

[justacomment]

the yf23 was undoubtedly a stunning looking aircraft

[dl]

GREAT video!! About twenty years ago I had a conversation with one of the engineers who worked on the YF-23. He told me that the YF-23 beat the YF-22 by ten decibels at the radar range. (No, he did not tell me what angles nor what radar frequencies.) If my math is correct, this would imply a reduction in detection range of about 44 percent.

[flotsamike]

in the 43 years since 1981 it hasn't made any difference which plane was better. I'm sure though Yf23 could have shot down that balloon just as well as the F-22 did. Worrying about maneuverability at low air speeds over the ability for a infrared missile to lock on seemed silly.

[perrytheplatypus]

I have seen both the YF23 and YF23 prototypes at the US Airforce Museum, both are spectacular. I was surprised you can get so close to them. My read is Lockheed had at the time a much better track record of delivering working aircraft within expected budgets and this was the deciding factor. The USAF did not trust Northrop to deliver the F23 without significant delays and cost overruns.

[clchan]

Pretty crazy to realise that the less-capable plane from that 1990s competition is still unmatched 30-some years down the road

[gregjennings]

Ok. I played a very small part of YF-22. But, the point is, I was there. Watching the flight test programs super closely. After all, my job literally depended on it.

Point 1:
YF-22 was one of the most ambitious and successful flight test programs ever. We did a lot more than we had to. It demonstrated reduced risk for the AF and the taxpayer. You can also see the risk point play out in the AF selecting the P&W engines vs the GE. The Pratt was an evolutionary engine while the GE was revolutionary.

Point 2:
The YF-22 was a fighter plane that was very stealthy while the 23 was a stealth plane with fighter capability. The 22 aligned better with the lessons learned from Gulf War 1.

All that said, I feel that the 23 is one of the most beautiful fighter aircraft ever and I wish it had been produced for a different customer or role. Just to see them flying. Just gorgeous.