Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military From: shafer@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: F19 vs. F117 Message-ID: <1990Jul31.023014.19927@cbnews.att.com> Date: 31 Jul 90 02:30:14 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 26 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Mary Shafer Duane P Mantick (wb9omc@ea.ecn.purdue.edu) writes, in response to Adrian Hurt: >>17: Northrop F-17; competitor to F-16 which failed. Later resurrected as: >>18: McDonnell-Douglas F-18 Hornet > Hmmmm.....I don't think McD/D would agree with that.... :-) I don't know why not. McAir is quite honest about having stolen the Northrop design. :-) The Northrop parentage of the F-18 is well-known and acknowledged by all parties. The main reason behind the teaming with McDonnell was Northrop's inexperience with the ship-board environment. In fact, Northrop reserved the right to build the purely-attack A-18 were it ever preferred by a customer. The A-18 would not be carrier-capable. -- Mary Shafer shafer@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov ames!skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov!shafer NASA Ames Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA Of course I don't speak for NASA "A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all"--Unknown US fighter pilot