Notices
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Was the F-23 better then the F-22?

  1. #1 Was the F-23 better then the F-22? 
    Forum Freshman Undecided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    42
    What do you think? I've always wondered...the F-22 was picked mostly on economic considerations...and plus the F-23 was damn sexy.


    "A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy."

    -Benjamin Disraeli
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  

    Related Discussions:

     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor wallaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,521
    Personally i think the F-22 is a better choice.

    the F-23 does go a bit faster and higher, but can't carry as much payload/Weapons. so really if it did carry the extra weight it would be about the same as the F-22. the only advancement i think they made was some manuverability adjustments to increse the rate of accent.

    and besides the F-22 only costs about...$256.9 million per plane and the government wants about 279 of them.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    Hmm, I'm not familiar with the F23. How were the avioniccs on it, what kind of turns could it make. I assume it was also a trust vectored plane?

    I like the F22 in any case. It's really nice all the way around.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman Undecided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    42
    Actually no the F-23 did not have thrust vectoring, but it was supposedly more maneuvrable then the F-22. Just look at this darling:

    http://www.aerofiles.com/north-f23.jpg
    "A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy."

    -Benjamin Disraeli
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    I wonder if it can do greater then a 9 G turn like the F16. You got to love the F16.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor wallaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,521
    personally i like the F/A-18 as and attack fighter. it's been pretty good and reliable since 1978.

    as for the F-23... it is rumored that the F-22 was chosen because of better subsonic manuverability and thrust vectoring, but also because the weapons release mechanism on the F-23 is aparently flawed.

    As for the G force... the F-16 isn't much slower than the F-23 so i'd say that it could, but i don't think pulling more than 9-G's is really healthy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    74
    F23 sucks..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    India
    Posts
    65
    I feel both are good.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman cs-comm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by (In)Sanity
    I wonder if it can do greater then a 9 G turn like the F16. You got to love the F16.
    I wouldn't want a plane to do greater then 9 g's since that would kill the pilot.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by cs-comm
    I wouldn't want a plane to do greater then 9 g's since that would kill the pilot.
    Not strictly true:
    Time (min)......+Gx......-Gx......+Gz......-Gz
    .01 (<1 sec)......35......28......18......8
    .03 (2 sec)..…...28......22......14......7
    .1.......…..………..20......17......11......5
    .3..........…..…….15......12......9......4.5
    1.....……….........11......9........7......3. 3
    3...........…….…….9.......8.......6......2 .5
    10...........…….…..6......5......4.5......2
    30..........…..…..4.5......4......3.5......1.8

    From: Webb, Paul M. D. "Bioastronautics Data Book,", NASA SP-3006, 1964
    via http://yarchive.net/space/science/g_tolerance.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Professor wallaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,521
    i can't tell you just how much all those figures mean to me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Naw. go on, tell me. I wont tell anyone else. 8)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor wallaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,521
    people say that and then some how everyone mysteriously finds out.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman Swaroop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    currently India
    Posts
    26
    f-23 definitely looked a lot sexier...
    but eh, economics, and easy building and maintainace are very important right!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10
    Actually, both aircraft have better turning capability than the F-16. The slowest speed (corner velocity) at which you can pull max G's is at least as important as the max G's. The wing loading is a significant factor in determining this.

    As far as which is better? It's a toss up. The F-23 is slightly faster and stealthier but the F-22 is cheaper. This is significant because if there is anything that is better than a good airplane, it is 2 good airplanes.

    As far as the avionics is concerned, you can always update the electronics but you are stuck with the airframe (unless you get an entirely new aircraft).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman Wilhelm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Athens, Ga
    Posts
    23
    What about the JSF fighter, isn't that based around the F-22?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17 Are we talking about........ 
    Forum Professor leohopkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Dulwich, London, England
    Posts
    1,417
    Are we talking about the F22 Raptor or of the F22 Lightning ?
    The hand of time rested on the half-hour mark, and all along that old front line of the English there came a whistling and a crying. The men of the first wave climbed up the parapets, in tumult, darkness, and the presence of death, and having done with all pleasant things, advanced across No Man's Land to begin the Battle of the Somme. - Poet John Masefield.

    www.leohopkins.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by roger g
    The F-23 is slightly faster and stealthier but the F-22 is cheaper
    it doesnt matter how much stealthier the F-23 is since the F-22 is already stealthy enough to not be identified as a airplane. any more stealthiness would just be overkill.

    and i dont know about the F-23, but when the F-22 flew AGAINST OUR CURRENT PLANES in an excercise using digital bullets/missles, the F-22 posted a 108-0 kill ratio. that means that the F-22 never got shot down. in an interview with one of the pilots, he said, "in an F-22, its only a challenge when you have 4 or more planes trying to shoot you. the only time I thought i was done for was when I was alone against 10 planes. and i still prevailed". this shows just how good the F-22 is even against our current planes.
    I don't suffer from insanity, i enjoy every minute of it

    the road to succes is never paved or clearly marked
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by chamilton333 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by roger g
    The F-23 is slightly faster and stealthier but the F-22 is cheaper
    it doesnt matter how much stealthier the F-23 is since the F-22 is already stealthy enough to not be identified as a airplane. any more stealthiness would just be overkill.

    and i dont know about the F-23, but when the F-22 flew AGAINST OUR CURRENT PLANES in an excercise using digital bullets/missles, the F-22 posted a 108-0 kill ratio. that means that the F-22 never got shot down. in an interview with one of the pilots, he said, "in an F-22, its only a challenge when you have 4 or more planes trying to shoot you. the only time I thought i was done for was when I was alone against 10 planes. and i still prevailed". this shows just how good the F-22 is even against our current planes.
    Actually this is incorrect it was 107-3 and currently there are more problems with the F-22 than any other aircraft the USAF has ever purchased, besides the F-16 lawn dart of course. The only reason the USAF purchased the F-22 is because they wanted the JSF F-35 Lightning. Which was being designed by Lockheed Martin. However, Lockheed Martin was about to file for bankruptcy. So, in other words the USAF wasted 39.6 billion dollars so they could purchase another piece of crap produced by Lockheed Martin, The F-35. Oh and did I mention that the F-35 will be worthless against China's new J-20 and Russia's new Su-50. Not to mention the Su-50 has one of the most advanced radar packages ever built by man. One that see's the F-22 plain as day. And as for the YF-23 we will never no because it never reached production and it was never tested to its full abilities.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by On34Dam12 View Post
    Actually this is incorrect it was 107-3
    reported kill ratios of up to 108:0 during Exercise Northern Edge 2006
    Regardless, it's a bogus (i.e. entirely meaningless) figure.

    and currently there are more problems with the F-22 than any other aircraft the USAF has ever purchased
    Well duh.
    It happens to be A) the newest and B) probably the most technologically advanced. Ergo: problems.

    The only reason the USAF purchased the F-22 is because they wanted the JSF F-35 Lightning
    Somewhat unlikely since the F-22 was decided on in 1991 and the F-35/ F-32 decision wasn't made until ten years later in 2001.

    However, Lockheed Martin was about to file for bankruptcy
    Source?

    So, in other words the USAF wasted 39.6 billion dollars so they could purchase another piece of crap produced by Lockheed Martin
    Not supported by the dates.

    One that see's the F-22 plain as day.
    Source?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •