David Hingtgen Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 The X-02 is slightly redesigned in every game, to take it further and further from the YF-23. Compare the YF-23 to the original X-02 design, from AC4, not the "redesigned to look less like a YF-23 copy" version from AC5 and AC0. The X-02 started out as 90% YF-23 parts, only recently has it been "resculpted" to only make it "similar" to the YF-23. And might as well: The XFA-27 is a modified F-14. Don't even think about denying that one, it shares PANEL LINES on 90% of the fuselage, exactly matching. Quote
Uxi Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 I actually like the YF-23 more. Less fussy shape. Yup. Speaking of which, I would be quite happy to find a decent YF-23 model kit. Quote
David Hingtgen Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 Italeri/Testors? Generally regarded as the best one. FYI, there's a guy working on a resin 1/32 YF-23. From scratch. But I've seen his other work and the incomplete -23, and I have no doubts when its done it'll be the best, most accurate, most detailed 1/32 fighter jet kit period. And I plan to buy one, unless the price is truly insane. (I'd guess/hope a couple hundred dollars) YF-23: Best-looking plane ever, period. Even the XB-70 and F-14 pale in comparison. And it's got the whole "one contrail" thing going. Quote
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 I got 2 of the Italeri kits. I agree its the best one. The Tamiya one looks out-of-shape. Wish the ruddervators had a firmer attachment though. Damn thing tends to fall off when I zoom the thing round the house and bump em slightly. Quote
TSP Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 I just can't believe nobody used the AC05 wallpaper as comparison. Quote
electric indigo Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 If I wanted to scratchbuild the X-02, I would not start with a kit of the YF-23, because the only parts I could use were the ruddervators and the landing gear. While the planes do share the same basic arrangement and the characteristic ruddervators, the cross sections of the fuselage are different from nose to tail. Without the wings, the body of the X-02 resembles more that of a SU-27 on a diet than that of the YF-23. The kit in the Hobby Japan mag shows the AC4 version of the plane. Quote
electric indigo Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 The XFA-27 is a modified F-14. Don't even think about denying that one, it shares PANEL LINES on 90% of the fuselage, exactly matching. oh well... modified indeed Quote
anime52k8 Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 (edited) The X-02 is slightly redesigned in every game, to take it further and further from the YF-23. Compare the YF-23 to the original X-02 design, from AC4, not the "redesigned to look less like a YF-23 copy" version from AC5 and AC0. The X-02 started out as 90% YF-23 parts, only recently has it been "resculpted" to only make it "similar" to the YF-23. no not realy, if you have the game and use the plane a lot (which I do) the models in each game are the same, and they've never shared more than a basic shape with the YF-23. the plane is much closer to a flanker (an Su-37 incorperating YF-23 derived low observable features) edit: I have pictures to prove it, the only difference is the nose is a TINY bit shorter In ACE4 when you look at the pictures (and I blame that mostly on perspective) Edited October 22, 2006 by anime52k8 Quote
KingNor Posted October 24, 2006 Posted October 24, 2006 it definately has some similaritys, but to me it looks like a unique design, especially in this image: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...st&id=37346 imho it is clearly NOT just a yf-22 with diffrent wings. Quote
Garou Kuroryuu Posted October 25, 2006 Posted October 25, 2006 YF-23: Best-looking plane ever, period. Even the XB-70 and F-14 pale in comparison. And it's got the whole "one contrail" thing going. I would add the SR-71 and Su-47 to the nominees list. Better get "categories": - Best looking strategic/secret ops plane: SR-71 Blackbird - Best looking bomber: XB-70 Valkyrie Runner-up: B-1B Lancer - Best looking fighter: I have it tough in here... for me, it's a hard-to-call tie between F-14 Tomcat, YF-23 Black Widow and Su-47 Berkut So we get a bunch of winners there Quote
sketchley Posted October 25, 2006 Posted October 25, 2006 it definately has some similaritys, but to me it looks like a unique design, especially in this image: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...st&id=37346 imho it is clearly NOT just a yf-22 with diffrent wings. Agreed. I see a bit of CF-18 action going on where the wings and the cockpit blend together. Something not seen in the YF-22. Quote
wldr Posted October 26, 2006 Posted October 26, 2006 I would add the SR-71 and Su-47 to the nominees list. Better get "categories": - Best looking strategic/secret ops plane: SR-71 Blackbird - Best looking bomber: XB-70 Valkyrie Runner-up: B-1B Lancer - Best looking fighter: I have it tough in here... for me, it's a hard-to-call tie between F-14 Tomcat, YF-23 Black Widow and Su-47 Berkut So we get a bunch of winners there We seem to like a lot of the same planes. Good call on that list I Really agree on the Berkut, it's a cool plane. Quote
David Hingtgen Posted October 26, 2006 Posted October 26, 2006 Berkut has a lot of Su-27 parts, FYI. Quote
Garou Kuroryuu Posted October 26, 2006 Posted October 26, 2006 Berkut has a lot of Su-27 parts, FYI. I know... but the canards/FSW configuration really put each other apart. Nonetheless, I also like a lot the looks of the Su-35, another Flanker spin-off Quote
KingNor Posted October 26, 2006 Posted October 26, 2006 to be honest i think the wings on both the x-02 and the 23 look stupid. :-P Quote
wldr Posted October 27, 2006 Posted October 27, 2006 Berkut has a lot of Su-27 parts, FYI. Agreed, but then I like the Flanker also. It is a good general all around combat plane in the game. Quote
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted October 29, 2006 Posted October 29, 2006 to be honest i think the wings on both the x-02 and the 23 look stupid. :-P Its the 'double diamond' wings and ruddervators which makes up part of why I think the YF-23 is the coolest looking fighter ever. Quote
David Hingtgen Posted October 30, 2006 Posted October 30, 2006 Exactly. YF-23 is the most modern, sleekest-looking plane ever. 20 years from now we still won't have planes that look like that. (Look at the F-35---a decade newer and is nothing more than a warmed-over YF-22/F-16 hybrid) Anyways--AFAIK there is still no term for the YF-23's tail fins. They are not ruddervators, as that would be a separate control surface from the main stabilizer. Bonanzas have ruddervators (I ALWAYS watch Bonanzas when I see them overhead). The YF-23's flight manual simply calls them "all-moving tail surfaces". I think "slab ruddervator" is a technically correct description, but you never actually describe it as such--that's like saying "slab elevator" instead of stabilator. Stabiruddervator? Quote
wldr Posted October 30, 2006 Posted October 30, 2006 Exactly. YF-23 is the most modern, sleekest-looking plane ever. 20 years from now we still won't have planes that look like that. (Look at the F-35---a decade newer and is nothing more than a warmed-over YF-22/F-16 hybrid) Anyways--AFAIK there is still no term for the YF-23's tail fins. They are not ruddervators, as that would be a separate control surface from the main stabilizer. Bonanzas have ruddervators (I ALWAYS watch Bonanzas when I see them overhead). The YF-23's flight manual simply calls them "all-moving tail surfaces". I think "slab ruddervator" is a technically correct description, but you never actually describe it as such--that's like saying "slab elevator" instead of stabilator. Stabiruddervator? Sounds like as good a term as any. New word or not, nicely said. Quote
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted October 31, 2006 Posted October 31, 2006 The YF-23's blended fuselage and 'double diamond and tail design' is one of those rare aircraft designs that comes once in a long long time. Stuff like the Su-27, F-18, Berkut, even the F-22 etc etc, are all refinements and evolutions from existing designs. The YF-23 to me is one big leap. Side rant : I am quite sick of FSW designs in games and animes. Everytime they want to design some fancy new fighter plane, they seem to whip out the FSW (which is basically some variant of the X-29's wing style) cookie cutter. I'd respect the game or anime designer who can come up with something from a totally new direction like the YF-23. Quote
David Hingtgen Posted October 31, 2006 Posted October 31, 2006 Ever see the 2nd-to-last F-15 design proposal? Matches the F-22 almost exactly. The YF-22 looked more next-gen than the F-22. They "F-15'd it up" for the production version. Quote
electric indigo Posted October 31, 2006 Posted October 31, 2006 I don't know about the performance, but the MIG 1.44 had an interesting configuration. I wonder why it was neglected by game designers so far. -i- Quote
RFT Posted October 31, 2006 Posted October 31, 2006 I've never seen that "F-22" F-15 proposal- is it online anywhere? the MiG-1.44 just leaves me cold- it looks too much like a copy of the Typhoon but with some added MiG-ness and an extra tail. Quote
RFT Posted October 31, 2006 Posted October 31, 2006 (edited) double post... Edited November 1, 2006 by RFT Quote
emajnthis Posted October 31, 2006 Posted October 31, 2006 Ever see the 2nd-to-last F-15 design proposal? Matches the F-22 almost exactly. The YF-22 looked more next-gen than the F-22. They "F-15'd it up" for the production version. I have tons of pictures and books of the YF-22, it was chunky and awkward compared to the YF-23 Quote
David Hingtgen Posted November 1, 2006 Posted November 1, 2006 The F-22ish F-15 design is only a silhouette, but trust me, it's 99% accurate to an YF-22. It was one of those "history of the design charts", and there were basically two final choices after all the refinements: What we got, and one that looks like the NEXT fighter we got. Quote
Knight26 Posted November 1, 2006 Posted November 1, 2006 The F-22 is really an aerodynamic step backwards when you think about it. The stealth features are not condusive to good aerdynamic airflow and really hinder performance, especially since they add drag. The YF-23 on the hand was very stealthy, and was designed to be very smooth producing some very nice laminar flow making it quite aerodynamic. Heck right now the F-22 has a flutter issue similar to what the early F/A-18s did. The hornet solved it with that vortex generator strake up on the LERX, but the F-22 designers are fighting against doing that bitterly since it will mess up the stealth features. They are primarily looking for a software fix to correct the problem that a simple 3"x8" vortex generator would fix. Your tax dollars at work folks. Quote
David Hingtgen Posted November 2, 2006 Posted November 2, 2006 Northrop jets have always been sleek as hell. The F-5 prototype could supercruise, the YF-17 could (yup, it's THAT much sleeker than a Hornet), and we all know about the YF-23. IIRC, the YF-22 design couldn't supercruise until they brought NASA on board to "tweak" about a zillion points on the airframe until it could slip through the mach. Whereas the YF-23 in mil power will easily out-accelerate a F-16 in burner. Quote
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted November 2, 2006 Posted November 2, 2006 I kinda predict that one day, either the USAF or even China with their XXJ-12 or later model will go back to the YF-23's design characteristics/philosophy. I will be popping champagne if the PLAAF unveils the XXJ-12 and it turns out to be a YF-23 clone! (I actually made a model of it. Slapped on PLAAF decals on a 23 toy) Quote
grebo guru Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 All this chatter about the X-02 version of the YF-23 got me thinkin'. What I've got here is just a rough draft, but I think it's got potential... an X-02 version of Macross Plus' YF-21: Quote
wldr Posted November 14, 2006 Posted November 14, 2006 That version might look ok with a few more modifications, but at the moment the wing add ons look out of place. Keep trying Grebo, you might find a good way to make it work. Quote
electric indigo Posted May 22, 2007 Posted May 22, 2007 (edited) Fans of the XFA-27 (or Ace Combat X), check out this wallpaper: http://www.acecombat.jp/ace-x/img/wp/WP_or...rcraft_1280.jpg Edited May 23, 2007 by electric indigo Quote
Duymon Posted May 22, 2007 Posted May 22, 2007 (edited) I got 2 of the Italeri kits. I agree its the best one. The Tamiya one looks out-of-shape. The testors, Italeri and Tamiya are like all the same kit/mold in a different box As a matter of fact just about all of Tamiya's 1/72 line are repackgaged italeri kits, down to the instructions and decals It's a great thing, except for that unlike Hasegawa Italeri Sucks and makes me have to get my own pilot figures The X-02 really does remind me of the YF-23. Biggest Give-away for me is the way the X-02 folds down it's vert stabilizers when goin supersonic, just like the Real World YF-23. Tis a Shame the YF-23 didn't beat out the raptor It's like the loser planes just LOOK cooler. YF-23 looks way better tha the raptor, and even in the latest JSF competition, I was rooting for the unconventional delta-wing X-32 Guppy over the F-35, despite the X-32 performing like doo doo on it's vertical take off tests Edited May 22, 2007 by Duymon Quote
F-ZeroOne Posted May 22, 2007 Posted May 22, 2007 Northrop jets have always been sleek as hell. The F-5 prototype could supercruise, the YF-17 could (yup, it's THAT much sleeker than a Hornet), and we all know about the YF-23. IIRC, the YF-22 design couldn't supercruise until they brought NASA on board to "tweak" about a zillion points on the airframe until it could slip through the mach. Whereas the YF-23 in mil power will easily out-accelerate a F-16 in burner. Did they ever release the speed figures for the YF-23? Last I heard, they'd been classified because... well, it was quick. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.