Did they pick the wrong one?
don't know what you're talking about, but this picture makes me want to watch the x-files.
>>31958077
Only certain angles are flattering for the YF
>>31958077
The mockups for a dedicated 5.5/6th gen bomber escort fighter look like a scaled up YF-23 with a fuckload more internal fuel and missiles.
Nope. The YF-23 had looming structural issues related to the weapons bay and it lacked the maneuverability of the YF-22.
Also, Lockheed's design was moving along far faster. The YF-22 even did some live firing tests during demonstrations, but the YF-23 had some major design changes that would have to happen before it reached production.
>>31958264
But it was faster and stealthier than the YF-22.
>>31958271
Doesn't matter. 90% as good delivered years earlier is better.
>>31958271
Yes, but the Air Force cared more about agility beyond a certain threshold. The F-22 was fast enough and stealthy enough to get the job done, and it was far more agile than the F-23. IIRC, it also helped that the YF-22 fit in better with existing infrastructure.
>>31958077
TBQH I don't think they could have gone wrong with either one. The F-22 is effectively similar to a stealth F-15 and the F-23 would have been revolutionary too.
>>31958301
I can't fathom why the military values agility in the age of BVR and 100% missile combat.
>>31958344
Well remember that this decision was made in 1990. The super-maneuverable AAMs we have now weren't a thing yet, and supermaneuverability and STOL were the flavors of the month. They did drop the STOL requirement very late in (part of why the YF-23 had such large engine nacelles), but supermaneuverability stuck with it until the selection process was over.
>>31958344
Agility is one of the primary methods of evading BVR weapons.
Its incredibly important.
Is it, dare I say it, the best looking modern jet fighter?