NATF: planned Navy versions of the F-22 and F-23

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Hard to believe NAVAIR voted for the LM because of their swing-wing behemoth over this sleek beauty. It looks relevant today. So if the Navy cast their vote for NG, would the outcome had been different?

The weight given to the Navy's opinion was, as usual, very low.

 

[RAP]

Interesting its been there since 2001 according the dedication. I think the first I saw of this design was 2010ish. Great find.

 

[donnage99]

Do you guys think it used to have a canards as separate pieces?

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

RAP, I was thinking the same thing too.

 

[Airplane]

So why is McD or Boeing displaying a NG model?
Nonetheless I've seen the drawings, but in the flesh, this could-have-been is sex on wings.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

You mean the model of the Northrop/McDonnell-Douglas YF-23 NATF ? ;D

They may have been the 'junior' partner but they did a lot of the work.

 

[GeorgeA]

And it's entirely possible that, had the F-23 NATF gone forward, McDonnell Douglas would have had a more prominent role, since they were much more experienced at building naval aircraft than Northrop.

 

[Ogami musashi]

As someone pointed on GPTNW group on facebook, it is crazy that this model has been there for more than 10 years prior to the release of the diagrams in APR.

Or maybe that is the reason why there're no canards on the model.

Well as for the F-23A, the proposal were not the last iterations studied so maybe that canardless version was a later one.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All -

Never knew it was there and can't quite figure out why the model/monumment is located where it is. Seeing as I live in St. Louis, I will go by later this morning and take my own photos and share later.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[aim9xray]

Found it via Google Earth. On the northwest corner of the intersection of Bellefountaine Rd and Chambers Rd.

38°44'59.52" N 90°13'28.20" W

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All -

I went up to the park and photographed the model earlier today. I plan on going back and taking more pics with my quadcopter but am thinking about approaching the Mayor to ask about taking it down and cleaning it up before painting it for better weather protection. Maybe 3D scan?! I'll mull on that for a while first....

There is no obvious points for attaching or swapping out a section of the fuselage to fit canards. Not saying it wasn't tested with canards, just not obvious that they were "left off".

I cannot think of a reason why it is mounted where it is. It's no where near the airport/plant and there is no obvious offsite relationship to McDonnell Douglas. Probably related to someone from the area - a question to ask of City Hall.

So, in better detail, here she is.... Mark

 

[Mark Nankivil]

...and a few details... Mark

 

[Airplane]

Beautiful detail on the all moving tail and B-2 style intakes. But darn, she needs restoring.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Great photos, Mark.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It looks a bit like the intake centerbodies were removed from the model?

 

[Airplane]

What is the decal or artwork on the tail? It's awfully washed out to my eyes.

 

[fightingirish]

A crest of the city Bellefontaine Neighbors, an inner-ring suburb city in St. Louis County, Missouri, United States.
In this suburb the MDD NATF Monument is erected.
Source: https://www.cityofbn.com/

 

[RAP]

Great pictures Mark. Any ideas of the dimensions of the model. Its a shame its sitting out in the elements. I'd like to see it inside somewhere and cleaned up, like my garage B)

 

[fightingirish]

Hi folks,
now I find a few minutes to write a few lines to this topic.
I remember reading in the 90's, that the US Navy was very sceptical of canards during carrier approach and landing. That was one reason that Boeing, L-M, MDD and N-G cut off the canards on their JSF carrier variert design concepts .
So I wonder if this model still represents the NAFT design concept DP527 as shown and written in the book "Air Force Legends: Northrop YF-23 ATF by Paul Metz". Maybe N-G tried to please the US Navy and did some wind-tunnel tests with this model without the canards.
Another design concept designation like DP527 "letter" or DP5##.
On page 74 of that book you see a same model of the design concept DP527, but the label on model base writes DP531.
The design concept DP533, also shown on that page, has a conventional tail and no canards.
Maybe Tony Chong might give us some more information.

Anyway, great find and pictures, Airplane and Mark!!! B)

 

[bipa]

This configuration is presented in Paul Metz's recent (and excellent) book about the whole YF-23 story.
This one is an iteration of the NATF without canards called the DP-533.

Thanks for the great pictures: the nose configuration and IRST integration is especially beautiful.
The pictures in Metz's book do not show it in such detail.

 

[aim9xray]

Strictly speaking, the model as displayed does not have any canards. The DP-527 configuration did. You will note the covered hole in the side of the forward fuselage approximately where the "post" for the canard should be.

It also appears that the inlet shock cones were painted black. Between that and the deep shadows, it next to impossible to see them.

(Apologies to MarkN for mangling his excellent photo.)

 

[bipa]

Indeed, sorry for the confusion, I was wrong: this is obviously not DP-533 since it has no horizontal tail surfaces.
So it must be a DP-527 with canards removed, as you say.
The holes you mention are indeed located exactly where the DP-527 canards should be (significant dihedral).

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Great eyes Craig - I readily stand corrected!

I am going to go up next week to City Hall and ask about our Museum restoring/painting it should I not be able convince them it deserves to be displayed inside at the Museum. I'll understand if the answer is no, just got to ask though!

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[GeorgeA]

From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 24, 2001.

I'm sure there's a story of someone who knew someone at Boeing, asked for something appropriate as a military memorial, and this is what they came up with.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Thanks George - saved me from hunting for it!

Indeed, I need to learn to ask the right question of the right person at the right time!

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Trident]

It also appears that the inlet shock cones were painted black. Between that and the deep shadows, it next to impossible to see them.

Yes, they're still there alright. Matt black paint hides the most surprising things, as witnessed with the Su-47 and its weapons bays or the shoddy build quality of the J-31.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Merged topics.

 

[allysonca]

This is a model I was fortunate to receive from my late friends collection. He worked at GD in Texas, and not sure how it wound up there, but happy to have it with the others.......Solid resin and about 14 inches. Wings are fixed in the full swept position. Enjoy!

 

[flateric]

Thank you!

PS (Looks like it's Lockheed/Boeing A/F-X (AFX-653) to be honest).

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4222.0.html

well, http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2150.msg277694.html#msg277694

It's interesting that on your model and that WT below one wingtips are not placed on one line with stabs though like on drawings.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2150.msg36548.html#msg36548

 

[FighterJock]

It is strange how both NATF and A/F-X almost look like each other and both faced the same fate, that of being cancelled.

 

[ScrutorAudax]

Mark, can you comment on the approximate dimensions of the model?

 

[TomS]

It is strange how both NATF and A/F-X almost look like each other and both faced the same fate, that of being cancelled.

Not that odd, since A/F-X was basically a strike-fighter successor to NATF. As to both being cancelled, well, NAVAIR has a lot to answer for in the 1990s.

 

[circle-5]

Underside view of Lockheed-Boeing A/F-X model ...

 

[FighterJock]

Underside view of Lockheed-Boeing A/F-X model ...

Is that an early EOTS system that I can see on the A/F-X behind the radar? :-\

 

[circle-5]

Underside view of Lockheed-Boeing A/F-X model ...

Is that an early EOTS system that I can see on the A/F-X behind the radar? :-\

I asked the model, but all I got was name, type and tail number ... The blister looks a bit narrow and small for an actual EOTS, but considering it was just a notional add-on at that point, it's quite possible.

 

[fightingirish]

That bilster would hold an electro-optical and infra-red search and targeting system (NOSS / Nav FLIR) similar to the F-14D. Just A2A mode, not like the EOTS system on the F-35, which has an A2G mode.
My assumption is based of the 3-view showing the NAFT version of the F-23. See it at page 76 in Paul Metz's book Northrop YF-23 ATF (Air Force Legends #220).

 

[flateric]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/US-Navy-Naval-Advanced-Tactical-Fighter-Program-Lockheed-Boeing-General-Dy-Decal/183586270227

 

[Phos]

Read through most of this thread, but didn't exactly see anyone mention (but could have missed) that the Northrop NATF looks a lot like Mcdonnell Douglas's RFI proposal? For convenience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Tactical_Fighter#/media/File:F-22_RFI.jpg

 

[hesham]

Read through most of this thread, but didn't exactly see anyone mention (but could have missed) that the Northrop NATF looks a lot like Mcdonnell Douglas's RFI proposal? For convenience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Tactical_Fighter#/media/File:F-22_RFI.jpg

Welcome aboard Phos,

which one exactly ?.

 

[Phos]

Read through most of this thread, but didn't exactly see anyone mention (but could have missed) that the Northrop NATF looks a lot like Mcdonnell Douglas's RFI proposal? For convenience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Tactical_Fighter#/media/File:F-22_RFI.jpg

Welcome aboard Phos,

which one exactly ?.

Thanks

Mcdonnell Douglas's only "air to air" RFI plane has rear mounted trapezoidal wings and canards, relatively narrow body (from above at least) and close set engines. I do recall someone in this thread posting that Mcdonnell Douglas might have taken the lead on their NATF proposal because of their CV aircraft experience, it seems that could have actually taken place.

Would this design have run into the same problems as the General Dynamics proposal of not being able to figure out the vertical stabilizer placement? Or do canards help with that somehow? I guess Chengdu was able to figure it out, guess canards are what made the difference.