Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: fcrary@lightning.Berkeley.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: YF22 vs. YF23 Why?
Keywords: Technology at its best
Message-ID: <1991May1.030433.20214@amd.com>
Date: 30 Apr 91 01:55:13 GMT
References: <1991Apr24.054326.18229@amd.com> <1991Apr29.052647.6205@amd.com>
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: ucb
Lines: 22
Approved: military@amd.com


From: fcrary@lightning.Berkeley.EDU (Frank Crary)


john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes:
>Actually, I think (and the Pentagon seemed to confirm) that the YF-22
>would make the better Navy plane.  The big unknown here is if either
>plane could be Navalized without a total redesign.  I personally think
>that the YF-23 is too good of a plane to put on the shelf, although
>I also said this about the F-20 Tigershark.  Perhaps look for the F-23
>as a fast stealty Air Force recon plane--the RF-23.  Any comments?

Navalizing the YF-22 (or YF-23) may be very difficult. I recall an article
in AvWeek about the Radar Absorbing Materials on these aircraft. The
article said that the RAM was very prone to rapid salt water corrosion.

As for a RF-23, what could such a craft do that can not be done by the 
purely-stealty F-117? Speed and anti-air capability are all I can think
of, neither of which is too important for recon.

Frank Crary 
UC Berkeley