The YF-23 aircraft, which gave the YF-22 (the precursor to the F-22 Raptor) a strong fight, flew for the first time thirty-five years ago, marking a watershed moment for its manufacturer, Northrop Grumman, the developer of the B-2 Spirit and B-21 Raider stealth bombers.
The F-22 Raptor, which entered service in 2005, is the crown jewel of the US Air Force (USAF) and the most coveted combat aircraft in the world.
With unmatched capabilities like supercruise, stealth technology, and sensor fusion, the F-22 Raptor represented such a massive leap in capability that the United States refused to export the aircraft.
In 1997, Congress passed the Obey Amendment, which prohibited the export of the F-22, driven by concerns about protecting classified technologies and ensuring the USAF maintained a technological edge over adversaries as well as its allies.
The USAF currently has approximately 183 F-22 Raptors in service, and plans to keep them operational into the 2040s. In fact, these stealth fighters are set to receive an array of new “viability” upgrades to help protect them from emerging threats and keep them relevant in the evolving combat scenarios against near-peer adversaries.
However, this is not about the F-22. Instead, this is about the aircraft that gave a neck-to-neck fight to the aircraft that went on to become the F-22 Raptor.
While the Raptor is believed to be the most sophisticated air superiority fighter in the world, there was a brief period of time when it was given a run for its money by another dominant air superiority fighter of a similar stature— Northrop Grumman’s YF-23.
In fact, the YF-23 Black Widow II was so potent and so promising that it was never really forgotten and is remembered every year on August 27, when veteran test pilot Paul Metz took it into the air for the first time.
The Aircraft That Challenged The Raptor
During the Cold War years of the 1970s, the United States—with the help of its spy satellites—discovered the advancement in Soviet combat aviation and air defense. New threats, including sophisticated Soviet fighters such as the Su-27 and MiG-29, as well as the A-50 AEW&C and sophisticated surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), were identified.
The USAF decided to find a replacement for the F-15 Eagle air superiority fighter. It launched the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) program in 1981, seeking a next-generation air superiority fighter with stealth, supercruise capability, advanced avionics, and enhanced survivability to outmatch the capabilities of the agile Soviet combat jets.
As the program gained momentum, the USAF narrowed down the selection to two contenders for the Demonstration and Validation phase. One was the Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics with the YF-22, the precursor to the present-day Raptor, and the other was the Northrop/McDonnell Douglas YF-23.
The YF-23 came into existence when Northrop, the lead contractor, partnered with McDonnell Douglas, leveraging their previous collaboration on the F/A-18 Hornet. Northrop handled the aft fuselage, empennage, and final assembly in Hawthorne, California, while McDonnell Douglas built the wings and forward fuselage in St. Louis, Missouri.
In 1991, after extensive flight testing, the USAF announced that the Lockheed YF-22A won the airframe competition. Northrop ended its ATF program, and the YF-23A went on display at the Museum in 2000, where it now shines as an extraordinary design attempt that continues to inspire and influence the future combat jets of the US.
But why did the YF-23 lose?
As recalled recently by popular aviation account ‘Air Power’ on X, “Northrop fighter was faster and more stealthier than the Lockheed YF-22 but was less manoeuvrable than the thrust vector controlled precursor to the Raptor.”
The YF-23 had an enviable stealth component. The aircraft featured diamond-shaped wings and a V-tail (butterfly tail) canted at 50 degrees. Its sleek, unorthodox design eliminated horizontal stabilizers to lower the radar cross-section (RCS) of this aircraft. Moreover, its pancake-like airframe and blended wing-body construction reduced aerodynamic drag and enhanced the aircraft’s stealth capabilities.
The YF-23 prioritized stealth over agility, using radar-absorbing materials, composite materials, and a shape that deflected radar waves. The radar cross section (RCS) of the Y-23 was reportedly lower than that of the YF-22’s, making it much harder to detect. In fact, it was said to be nearly 100% undetectable by nearly any radar system at the time.
It was equipped with the Pratt & Whitney YF199 engines. Notably, the compressor blades in the YF-23 jet engine were protected from radar by installing engine inlets beneath the fuselage. Both engines enabled supercruise at Mach 1.43–1.8 without afterburners, which was a key ATF requirement for sustained supersonic flight.
“In many ways, it certainly did its ‘best,’ as it had a top speed of 1,451mph to the YF-22’s 1,599mph, but the Northrop design had a longer range and a higher ceiling – 2,796 miles maximum range and a ceiling of 65,000 feet. By contrast, the YF-22 had a range of 2,000 miles and a ceiling of 50,000 feet,” states The National Interest.
However, the YF-23 lacked thrust vectoring, unlike the YF-22. The Northrop-led team opted not to utilize thrust vectoring for aerodynamic control, aiming to reduce weight while enhancing stealth.
Instead, they utilized the YF-23’s distinctive V-tail’s wide surfaces to aid the fighter in turning quickly. Some seasoned aviation experts have noted that despite not having thrust-vectoring, the YF-23 nearly matched the YF-22’s performance.
However, the thrust vectoring of the YF-22 gave it superior agility at high angles of attack, which the USAF valued for air superiority missions. In contrast, while the YF-23 could achieve high angles of attack, it was less agile in dogfights, which the USAF still considered critical, despite the growing emphasis on beyond-visual-range (BVR) combat at the time.
Thrust-vectoring technology is considered crucial in combat because it allows the pilot to adjust pitch, roll, and yaw, supporting the aircraft’s super-maneuverable flight characteristics during within-visual-range (WVR) combat scenarios, wherein the fighter may have to maneuver nearby enemies and evade incoming missiles.
In the late 1980s, the USAF anticipated threats like the Soviet Su-27 and MiG-29, which were highly maneuverable. The YF-22’s dogfighting capability was seen as a hedge against scenarios where BVR engagements failed, such as in poor weather or electronic warfare.
The importance of thrust-vectoring in combat is demonstrated by the relentless and painstaking efforts of Chinese scientists and officials to equip their fifth-generation J-20 aircraft with this capability.
Moreover, the YF-22 emerged as a winner for a simple reason: While the YF-23 had superior stealth, the YF-22’s stealth was still exceptional, meeting USAF requirements, and its slightly higher RCS was deemed acceptable given its agility. The USAF prioritized a balance of stealth and maneuverability over the YF-23’s stealth-focused design.
Experts agree that while the differences between the two aircraft were marginal in operational terms, the USAF valued the YF-22’s speed and agility for rapid engagement over the advantages that the YF-23 had, such as its range, which was less critical for air superiority missions within NATO’s theater of operations.
Some also believe that while the YF-23 had a clear advantage in fuel range and almost matched the F-22’s aerobatics, the fighters lost out to the Raptor due to Lockheed demonstrating its fighter’s capabilities more dynamically compared to Northrop. However, this information cannot be corroborated.
Nonetheless, it is widely known that Lockheed presented a robust sustainment and logistics plan, leveraging experience from the F-16 and F-117 programs.
Moreover, Lockheed’s larger industrial base, political lobbying, and relationships with Congress and the Pentagon gave it an edge. Many contend that it was the salesmanship rather than the actual capabilities that helped Lockheed win the US defense contract.
Some analysts and enthusiasts argue that the YF-23 would have proven to be the better choice for modern air combat, which increasingly emphasizes BVR engagements, stealth, and range in this day and age. Its lower RCS and longer range could have made it more effective against modern threats.
On the other hand, the supporters of the Raptor argue that the YF-22 was the right choice for its time. Perhaps, they are not wrong. The F-22 was the first operational aircraft to combine super-cruise, super-maneuverability, stealth, and integrated avionics (or sensor fusion) in a single weapons platform.
However, the YF-23 was a technological marvel of its time, despite being a loser.
- Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari9555(at)gmail.com
- Follow EurAsian Times on Google News
