Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 9/14/2004 1:05:35 PM EST
YF-23A "Black Widow II" PAV-2 (S/N 87-801) was at the Hawthorne Air Faire on August 14th.
The restoration included several changes, including new cockpit displays and other cosmetic modifications.

It was present at the Hawthorne Air Faire a couple of weeks ago.

Since the airshow at Hawthorn PAV-2 has been sitting at the Northrop El Segundo Plant quite visible from public streets.











From the current issue (13-19 July) of Flight International:

Northrop Grumman's "forgotten" advanced tactical fighter leaves museum
and could be heading for bomber contest

Northrop Grumman's long-abandoned YF-23A advanced tactical fighter (ATF)
is emerging as the possible basis for a surprise contender for the US
Air Force's interim bomber requirement.

The company recently retrieved the second of the two YF-23A "Black Widow
II" prototypes (PAV-2) from the Western Museum of Flight in Hathorne,
California, ostensibly for repainting for display at a forthcoming
Northrop Grumman-backed air fair in August. However, the restoration is
also thought to include several changes, including new cockpit displays
and other possible cosmetic modifications.

Northrop Grumman confirms restoration of the General Electric
YF120-powered PAV-2 is taking place, but declines to comment on whether
the revived YF-23A is linked to any USAF proposal. But sources close to
the studies, which were kicked off by the USAF's recently issued request
for information, say Northrop Grumman now includes a YF-23-based
"regional" bomber concept among its raft of proposals and that the USAF
"is interested".

Until now, the company's offerings are known to include an upgraded B-2,
X-47B unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV)-based studies, and possible
designs based on its quiet supersonic technology programme. The
distinctive, rhomboid-winged YF-23A lost out to Lockheed Martin's YF-22
in the ATF competition in 1991, but proved a valuable technology testbed
for Northrop Grumman, which gave it all-aspect stealth. The company says
it "drew upon a wide range of experience for its response to the interim
bomber RFI, and the YF-23 is one".

Other contenders include a Boeing's B-1R (regional) re-engined bomber
studies and a larger D-model version of its X-45 UCAV, while Lockheed
Martin is considering various derivatives of the F/A-22. These include
single- and two-seat, re-winged, and tailless versions dubbed the FB-22,
the larger of which would be able to cruise at Mach 1.8 and have 75% of
the range of the B-2 carrying up to 30 115-kg (250-lb) small-diameter
bombs. Lockheed Martin is also understood to be offering a variety of
other manned designs, including a flying-wing concept.

The interim bomber is intended to bridge the gap between the current
bomber fleet and a next-generation aircraft planned for 2037. The
present timetable calls for a development effort to start in 2006, with
an initial operating capability by 2015.

GUY NORRIS / LOS ANGELES
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 1:25:19 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 1:25:56 PM EST by Airwolf]
I've said it before... that aircraft gives me WOOD!

If they can pull this off it will rank right up there with the YF-17 being dumped and reborn as the F/A-18.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 1:26:20 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 1:28:10 PM EST
I think Northrop is the only contractor that can lose a competition and still be contracted to build airplanes.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 1:28:13 PM EST
Stretch it out a bit and add a second seat. Thats simply a WICKED looking AC. LOVE IT.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 1:30:21 PM EST
I always rated this plane over the F22… It LOOKS almost 'alien'…


Andy
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:01:26 PM EST
That bird is shit hot! However as awesome as she is I'd still like to see the USAF go with an upgraded and F-22 engined B-1(no replacement for displacement).
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:14:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 4:28:33 PM EST by Sturmwehr]
Northrop should've won the contact, IMO.

I mean, the YF-23 is simply a pure-breed eagle of ungodly death. The name "Black Widow" is fitting - for the opponets of the aircraft.

Quite possible the only aircraft I could masturbate to.



Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:19:51 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:20:43 PM EST

Originally Posted By kpel308:
Northrop P-61 Black Widow (sorry, no IMG links to this site)



Nightfighter. One of the best of its time.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:22:22 PM EST
Hot Damn!! I was rooting for that bird during the ATF competition w/ the F-22. Love the look of the thing; its smooth lines abd beautiful curves when compared to the 22.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:23:04 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:25:38 PM EST
The only reason that the YF-23 lost to the F-22 is that the Air Force is run by fighter pilots who are in love with manuverability, which the 22 had in aces. The 23 won in every important aspect but manuverability and thus it lost....stupid fighter jocks....
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:25:46 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:26:54 PM EST
The P-61 Black Widow
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:30:53 PM EST
The YF-23 is also much less vulnerable to heat-seeking missiles... I mean, look at the heat dispersion it has. It puts to shame the F/A-22's huge exhaust.

Much safer.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:32:58 PM EST

kewl plane !
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:36:34 PM EST
I never realized how big that plane is compared to a F-16
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:39:38 PM EST
That's one big MFing jet...for a fighter. Look how big that sucker is. Shiiiiite.

I'm telling ya, Americans can make some really, really badass shit.

I absolutely loooove threads like this.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:43:03 PM EST
I hope the aircraft succeeds in this role. It is too good a plane to not be in service in some capacity or other.

Isn't the 23 more stealthy than the 22? It would seem they would be the perfect pair to match up. Let the F-22 handle keeping the sky clear of enemy bandits and let the F-23 sneak in and knock the hell out of something. Kind of like how the F-15 and F-16 have been paired up over the past 20 some years. Or even more like the F-15C and F-15E have been recently. And while the F-23 may not share the maneuverability of the F-22, it should more than be able to defend itself in the air if need be.

I've long felt that retiring the whole F-111 fleet (as well as the US Navy A-6) left us too short on aircraft with deep penetration-precision strike ability. The F-23 could be perfect for the role. I so hope this happens. If they want an updated B-1, then go for it. But we need a new strike fighter to go with it. We only have something like 132 F-15E's and no F-111's or A-6's anymore. That means we have several hundred fewer aircraft to use in that role than we did just a few years ago.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:47:37 PM EST
You know, turning that thing into a bomber seems like the perfect thing to do.

BTW, are the '22 and '23 more stealthy than the '117? I'm guessing they are quite a bit more so, given that they are 10 to 15 years newer. If this is so, then the '117 could be replaced by the '23 quite easily. It would probably do a better job, too. Not that the '117 had deficiences (we've only lost one '117 to enemy fire since it became operational, IIRC).
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:47:50 PM EST
never really liked the look of the yf23
I want them to make a YF19
www.steelfalcon.com/Macross/yf19.shtml
www.ehobbyland.com/Macross/MAC-Hase-YF-19.jpg
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:54:10 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:03:08 PM EST





Link Posted: 9/14/2004 6:09:07 PM EST
It always thought it was the better looking of the two... Looks almost like a future space fighter or something. I know dick about performance differences though.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 6:17:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By kpel308:

Originally Posted By sharky30:
never really liked the look of the yf23
I want them to make a YF19
www.steelfalcon.com/Macross/yf19.shtml
www.ehobbyland.com/Macross/MAC-Hase-YF-19.jpg


ArfcommersSharky30








Go get a copy of "Macross Plus" and come back and say that again. There isn't anyone here that loves aircraft that won't and over the flying sequences.

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 6:25:05 PM EST
No matter what they do I personally hope they do not fase out the A-10. Too many people are getting so impressed with this wiz-bang stuff that they are losing sight of the simple fact that it is a slow low flying heavily armored craft that is best for CAS missions.

The A-10 can stay on target longer, take more damage, and deliver more brutal on target ordnance than any other currently active aircraft in the US arsenal.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 6:31:11 PM EST
A10s kick ass


and I'm wearning my super duper kevlar covered steel/ceramic composite cup, so that kick had no effect
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 6:31:32 PM EST
Anybody notice the SAC logo on the tail fin?
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 6:35:15 PM EST
Sweet. I love new aircraft. The AF needs a new medium bomber with high on station time. We need something that hold 15 jdams, and can orbit for hours. I know the heavy bombers can do it, but they are expensive to run. The F15 and F16 cant hold enough. I just with I could fly anything in the military. Stupid eyes......
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 6:36:02 PM EST

Originally Posted By stator:
Anybody notice the SAC logo on the tail fin?



Not SAC, ACC (Air Combat Command).
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 7:53:37 PM EST
It seems like the gov. had a hard time choosing between the F-22/F-23 so in AR-15.com tradition....
GET BOTH!!!!!!
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 7:59:19 PM EST
Sturnwehr...


Northrop should've won the contact, IMO.

I mean, the YF-23 is simply a pure-breed eagle of ungodly death. The name "Black Widow" is fitting - for the opponets of the aircraft.

Quite possible the only aircraft I could masturbate to.



Strangely, I agree with every word you said!
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 8:28:50 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 8:38:58 PM EST by Alien]
God I love that plane. That plane and the B1 are probably the two best looking aircraft ever made. They kick a shit load of ass to boot. It's a shame they didn't develop it instead of the F22. It looks a lot like the Centurion fighter from the old PC game, Privateer:

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 8:40:22 PM EST
I'm not sure how many bombs this jet could carry. I'm sure less than the F-111 or F-15E, as stealthy planes are forced to give up much of their payload to remain stealthy. But I bet that with more stealthy munitions themselves, you can sling quite a few under the wings as well as in the internal bay. In fact, we already have some bomb or missile with a stealthy appearance. Is it the JSOW? The weapon has the same angles as the stealth planes. That would have to help them when carrying external stores and allow them tp up their capability considerably.
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 8:52:28 AM EST
bump cuz this is a cool thread.
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 8:58:37 AM EST
That plane looks damn sexy when viewed from the front. The rear portion isn't pretty, but demonstrates how well thought out the design is. Just imagine how those engines set back into the fuselage will reduce heat signature for heat seeking missiles. This is a very well designed aircraft with tons of potential. I wouldn't want to give it up for the F-22 nor the F-22 for it. We simply need both!
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:11:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:

BTW, are the '22 and '23 more stealthy than the '117?



By multiples, from the information I've seen - although that isn't official.

By damned, both are more stable than a Nighthawk.
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:13:19 PM EST

Originally Posted By Lockem:
No matter what they do I personally hope they do not fase out the A-10.



The F/A-22 and YF-23 can't even compete with the A-10 for its designated role. Their loiter time is way too short and their payload and survivability isn't enough.
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:29:41 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/15/2004 3:30:25 PM EST by byron2112]
That thing is cool.

A year or two ago Popular Mechanics had a cover story on the theoretical "FB-22".The thing was wicked...tailess delta winged bomber version of the F-22 that in theory had very impressive range and payload.

If I wasn't web-tarded I'd post picks or a link to it.
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:32:53 PM EST
Shameless bump.
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:41:57 PM EST

Originally Posted By byron2112:
That thing is cool.

A year or two ago Popular Mechanics had a cover story on the theoretical "FB-22".The thing was wicked...tailess delta winged bomber version of the F-22 that in theory had very impressive range and payload.

If I wasn't web-tarded I'd post picks or a link to it.




Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:42:54 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 4:06:19 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 8:43:40 PM EST
The F-22 is SOOoooo much prettier than that fugly thing! Stealth is cool but speed+agility = life!

F-22 =sexy bitch.

S.O.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 2:46:50 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 2:47:43 AM EST by vito113]

Originally Posted By Sturmwehr:

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:

BTW, are the '22 and '23 more stealthy than the '117?



By multiples, from the information I've seen - although that isn't official.

By damned, both are more stable than a Nighthawk.



They are so far ahead of the F-117 that the USAF didn't get upset when an F-117 was downed over Sebia… it was not last years model, more like last 3 DECADES model!

Andy
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:01:48 AM EST

Originally Posted By byron2112:
That thing is cool.

A year or two ago Popular Mechanics had a cover story on the theoretical "FB-22".The thing was wicked...tailess delta winged bomber version of the F-22 that in theory had very impressive range and payload.

If I wasn't web-tarded I'd post picks or a link to it.



All these photoshops and mockups are just rehashing the Aurora, which I'd bet a month's pay is already around.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 2:14:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By MMcCall:

All these photoshops and mockups are just rehashing the Aurora, which I'd bet a month's pay is already around.



...Of course something like the Aurora is around.
Top Top