jvz@uunet.UU.NET (John V. Zambito) (05/21/91)
From: ccicpg!cci632.cci.com!jvz@uunet.UU.NET (John V. Zambito) Referring to MACHINE DESIGN March 7, 1991: Starting on page 56: The author talks about two separate decisions. Selection of the YF-22 or the YF-23 and Pratt & Whitney's YF119 or GE's YF120 engine. "Each team has designed and built two prototypes, one configured with Pratt & Whitney engines, the other with GE's." Yet, this group always discusses the Northrop/GE plane versus the lockeed/PW (I hope I have that right) face off. Was it two separate decisions or what? The article has a great picture of testing the agterburner on the F119 engine.
rqdms@lims05.lerc.nasa.gov (05/24/91)
From: rqdms@lims05.lerc.nasa.gov ccicpg!cci632.cci.com!jvz@uunet.UU.NET (John V. Zambito) writes... > The author talks about two separate decisions. Selection of >the YF-22 or the YF-23 and Pratt & Whitney's YF119 or GE's YF120 engine. >"Each team has designed and built two prototypes, one configured with >Pratt & Whitney engines, the other with GE's." Yet, this group always >discusses the Northrop/GE plane versus the lockeed/PW (I hope I have >that right) face off. Was it two separate decisions or what? Yes, it *was* two decisions -- one for the airframe, one for the engine (or one decision evaluating all four combinations of airframe and engine, if you prefer to look at it that way). Your confusion may result from the fact that there was contractor "teaming" on both competing airframes. Lockheed, Boeing, and General Dynamics collaborated on the winning YF-22, and Northrup and McDonnell-Douglas built the YF-23. Adding two engine contractors to the soup makes for an interesting evaluation, no ?? :-} -- Dennis Stockert * Air Force Liaison rqdms@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov * NASA Lewis Research Center No one that knows me would mistake my opinions for those of any respectable organization