Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: How Woulld the F-23 Do as a Future F/A-XX or NGAD canidate?
jessmo_24    9/4/2011 3:40:14 AM
The F/A-XX and NGAD are future programs to replace the F-18E *ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Air_Dominance I know we are in the era Now of tight budgets But I went to research somthing and took a stroll done memory lane when I bumped into the Y-F23. I also seem to recall that the navy will need another fighter in the 2020 time line to replace F-18ES. How well woudl the F-23 adapt to naval Life? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2b/Northrop_YF-23_DFRC.jpg/300px-Northrop_YF-23_DFRC.jpg 1. Do you esitmate that the plane has enough wing to allow proper low speed handling and bring back? 2. Do you think it could be developed Using some OFF the shelf components and Ideas derived from the F-35? 3. Are we done with manned aircraft after the F-35? 4. Can you Use the above mentioned available components nd Radars ( Northrop Builds the F-35s radar) to keep costs low. discuss
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
SERIOUS7       6/15/2012 1:21:21 PM
I thought it was a crazy idea to retire the two engine F-14 Tomcat for a plane with one engine the F-35 ..  Why the NAVY gave the F-23 no thought is also strange..
Now that both Russia and China have their own version of the  F-22 heat's things up ..  The F-23 would have been my choice to come off of the deck of any AMERICAN carrier , hands down...  
 
Quote    Reply

SERIOUS7       6/16/2012 3:28:39 AM
Enter the Proto type next NGAD off of the AMERICAN carriers..
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    Well, time marches on...   6/16/2012 6:39:00 PM


Has any progress been made on advancing, refining, improving the F-23?  The ten or twenty years F-22 has been in the pipe have only served to show its age and weaknesses.  Is F-23 decades better or decades behind a clean sheet of paper, or whatever Rutan was last working on in his basement?  Oh yeah, that 80s aircraft is no good, let's replace it with...another 80s aircraft!
 
Could we at least briefly recap the reasons WHY people want new life for the F-23?  'Cos all I know is it lost.  IIRC it was faster and stealthier than F-22, but less maneuverable; some seem to contend on the stealth; but I can see that in the new air doctrine of all-BVR-all-the-time, maneuverability may be deprecated and F-23 come into its own.  But is there anything else?  Some seem to talk of bomberizing it.  Then why not bomberize F-22?  Navalizing it?  Why not navalize F-22? 
 
I'm open to persuasion, tell me why. 
 
 
How about we reopen the Boeing X-32 and dump the F-35, I always liked the Monica for some reason.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    Meanwhile,   6/16/2012 6:41:42 PM
if you want to make a difference, let's discuss my JSA concept (search the SP forums here for JSA or Joint Service Airframe). 
 
Quote    Reply

SERIOUS7       6/16/2012 8:36:49 PM
How well the beautiful F-23 did in its short life only the test pilots really know  .. Now its a new day because NO jet fighter will ever outrun a missile , the "drones" which can be look at as a missile are the way of the future for the US Military ... The drone does not have the limitations of a human being , so expect to see more of them.. 
 
Quote    Reply

LB       6/16/2012 8:46:24 PM
Firstly the F-23 first flew in 1990 and the design is 25 years old.  So using it as the basis for a current design is questionable at best.  Secondly the NGAD is about 2/3rds the size of the F-23 (NGAD and F/A-XX are the same program).  Thirdly the F-23 was never designed as a carrier aircraft.  We can do a lot better starting from a clean slate than trying to force present requirements into a 25  year old aircraft. 
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo       6/16/2012 9:13:43 PM

 
2)  I think the state of the art will lead to countermissiles and/or DEW to guard against the missile threat
(why the heck shouldn't you be able to shoot down an S-400, it's fighting gravity and you know EXACTLY where it's going; you should be able to drop a Griffin or APKWS on it let alone an AMRAAM). 
 
3)  We might also see a tweak on the parasite fighter concept - a twin engine fighter whose engines are actually separable in flight and wrapped in the minimal possible aeroshell, with perhaps one or two weapons each and just enough fuel to fight a 20g dog, run whatever Wild Weasel/SEAD/DEAD gauntlet, ram whatever high value target, and park themselves back on the fighter if they survive (the fighter could on fly one engine, glide to some extent, have a small aux powerplant, have three engines, have a twin-engine configuration with one as a parasite and one captive, say stacked as with the B-58 weapons pod...or Zzzz...
 
Sorry, ran out of psychedelic drugs ;>
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    And again,    6/16/2012 9:15:28 PM
How are F-22 and F-23 so VERY different? 
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    And again,    6/16/2012 10:06:20 PM
How are F-22 and F-23 so VERY different? 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics