gwh%earthquake.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) (10/04/90)
From: gwh%earthquake.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) In article <1990Sep28.014435.13932@cbnews.att.com> umhudso7@ccu.umanitoba.CA (Wayne Hudson) writes: > >But I thought the 'F-19' has turned out to be alot like the new (Lockheed?) >entry into the ATF competition (mach 2+, w/ some stealth capabilities). >It reportedly (haven't seen anything of it myself) has the same basic shape, >but differences in things like the tail being angled out instead of in (but >at the same angle...). Anyone else? There was speculation that Testors >acually HAD good spy info, just got the wrong company... Having looked at both the model in detail and all the published photos of the YF-22, I can say conclusively that they have no simmilarity whatsoever besides both being twin-engined fighters 8-) The model was of a plane built with rounded surfaces. The YF-22 has almost no rounded surfaces... Like the F-117, it employs faceting (or as they described it, stealth discipline). The plane is basically built out of flat plane surfaces...slab sided fuselage, vertical tail fins at the same angle (canted out) as the fuselage sides, horizontal tail fins set nearly at the level of the wing and level with it... the only real curvature is near the nose, where the cockpit is. The canopy is remarkably bulgy, giving excellent visibility (both the F-22 and F-23 have this feature) but standing out as the single most draggy protrusion on the plane. Preliminary analysis indicates (rather suprisingly) that the Locheed plane is a better contender for the NATF than the F-23... == George William Herbert == **There are only two truly infinite things,** == JOAT for Hire: Anything, == * the universe and stupidity. And I am * =======Anywhere, My Price======= * unsure about the universe. -A.Einstein * == gwh@ocf.berkeley.edu == ********************************************* == ucbvax!ocf!gwh == The OCF Gang: Making Tomorrow's Mistakes Today