YF-23 (F-22 Competitor) flies with its ram air scoop highlighted with triangles for visibility [1070x845]

It was absolutely for visibility. Apparently it was really easy for ground crew to bang into it when it was open, so they painted it that way (without having permission to do so).

IIRC that's where the nickname came from.

[-]

rexregisanimi@reddit

It's actually both. Wikipedia reports with a good couple of references:

"PAV-1 briefly had a red hourglass painted on its ram air scoop to prevent injury to ground crew. The red hourglass resembled the marking on the underside of the black widow spider further reinforcing the unofficial nickname 'Black Widow II' given to the YF-23 because of its 8-lobe radar cross section plot shape that resembled a spider. When Northrop management found out about the marking, they had it removed." (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YF-23)

[-]

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Painting the bottom of the aircraft does not make anything more visible to ground crew. You wouldn't put an auxillary intake there, it would compromise forward RCS. The reference shows up in other places though. Awesome aircraft, we still could use a modernized one, but I think someone made up a reason to paint the jet.

https://www.afmc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2919261/flashback-northrop-yf-23-black-widow-ii/

[-]

Elias_Fakanami@reddit

There’s a video down in the comments showing exactly what and where this scoop is. It opens at low speed to provide cooling to the engines and, while it does affect the the RCS, it is only open for short periods at landing/takeoff.

Painting the bottom of the aircraft does not make anything more visible to ground crew.

I’m struggling to understand what you mean by this. Ground crews walk around under planes all the time and I’m pretty sure that it’s almost always with their eyes open. How would a big red triangle not be visible to them?

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

So then how is it a safety measure if you need to be crouched under the plane and looking directly upward to see it? What good is a safety marking if you can only see it when you’re already right on top of it?

I’m just wondering how you think this will improve any visibility to anyone adjacent to the craft?

[-]

Elias_Fakanami@reddit

It’s painted red to be more visible to people under the plane. If you can’t be bothered to look anywhere but down while you are under there I can’t fucking help you. That’s not really a normal problem for most people that can move their necks.

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

Is there a reason you decided to dance around my questions and respond so aggressively?

What safety value does this have if it’s only visible to someone within a foot of the warning? How will this improve visibility of anything?

Please explain to me the safety merit of this precaution. And try to do so without the emotionally charged vitriol.

[-]

peekdasneaks@reddit

Red is the most visible color in short distances and is a sharp contrast against the rest of the plane. Thats how it increases visibility.

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

Okay your explanation about why colors stick out visually doesn’t actually answer the real question.

Since this is only visible from directly underneath and right next to the viewer, what information does it convey that would otherwise go unnoticed?

Are aircraft technicians working underneath prototype military jets generally unaware of overhead hazards?

[-]

Elias_Fakanami@reddit

Are aircraft technicians working underneath prototype military jets generally unaware of overhead hazards?

They are aware of overhead hazards, in part because they are often painted red to enhance visibility, and thus awareness. Painting overhead hazards red to enhance visibility on aircraft undercarriages is an extremely common practice.

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

So was there a noteworthy rise in head injuries once the manufacturer decided to remove the paint?

Why aren’t there demarcations for other overhead hazards?

And I don’t think you know what arguing is. I’m just asking questions. I’m not making nor defending any assertions here. You’re more than welcome to stop replying if you think you’re getting too worked up

[-]

Elias_Fakanami@reddit

So was there a noteworthy rise in head injuries once the manufacturer decided to remove the paint?

No clue.

Why aren’t there demarcations for other overhead hazards?

It doe not have many of them because It’s a stealth fighter. By necessity it doesn’t have much that sticks out from the skin. More conventional aircraft have things marked like that quite often. Pitot tubes and air intake scoops, for example, commonly hang down.

And I don’t think you know what arguing is. I’m just asking questions. I’m not making nor defending any assertions here. You’re more than welcome to stop replying if you think you’re getting too worked up

I turned off cable news because this bullshit line is so prevalent and so transparently ridiculous. Getting tired of seeing it here.

It’s just a bad faith bastardization of the Socratic method. If you want to go that way you have to actually listen to what the other person is saying instead of playing dumb and acting like we aren’t (because we are) answering your questions.

It is, by definition, arguing, btw.

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

Hmmmmmmm another braindead reply. This sub sucks lol

[-]

snonsig@reddit

He answered your questions directly. You just proceed to post them again after they've been answered a hundred times.

[-]

Elias_Fakanami@reddit

And the scoop isn’t always closed. Sometimes it is open and a hazard, and thus, red.

[-]

peekdasneaks@reddit

you are dense.

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

I’m dense because you can’t be bothered to explain this unnecessary addition? Which the manufacturer also thought was unnecessary?

And the best you could do was revert to an ad hominem attack, just like the other guy who replied to me?

[-]

peekdasneaks@reddit

The fact that you believe no one has explained it despite this long ass thread of everyone explaining it to you, shows just how dense you are.

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

You think that just because you have replied a few times that you have satisfactorily explained this?

Lmao I can’t believe you think you’ve done a good job here. You’ve provided zero useful or relevant information.

[-]

peekdasneaks@reddit

You asked two specific questions that I answered directly and succinctly.

I can’t be bothered to make you understand sentences. Sorry.

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

You answered an aircraft specific question by explaining that colors stand out. What a trashcan of an answer. I’m done wasting my time with you. Toodles

[-]

peekdasneaks@reddit

glad you gave up your hilariously stupid line of questioning.

[-]

FranknBeans26@reddit

Yeah it wasn’t the braindead replies hahahaha

[-]

acrewdog@reddit

Lol, maybe if the thing actually hangs down under some circumstances. I haven't been able to find documentation of the scoop, where it is or its size. Otherwise it's just paint on the ceiling when you're walking around under there.

[-]

UselessBanana1@reddit

https://youtu.be/PYLiMYGBE2Q?si=o0kWKPQ38h5MPiOV&t=1750

Heres the Chief Engineer and Crew Chief talking about it. I dont think the intake they are showing is the actual intake they are talking about though

[-]

Dry_Emphasis8994@reddit

Thank you for sharing. I was so engrossed with this plane as a teen and this brought back so many memories of following the program with my dad. Thank you, thank you!

[-]

acrewdog@reddit

Awesome, thank you!

[-]

redmercuryvendor@reddit

This site has some walkaround photos, with the door open and visible.

[-]

acrewdog@reddit

Number 17? This would make more sense than anything else I've seen.

[-]

redmercuryvendor@reddit

22 also shows the APU exhaust vent. Next to the (fixed) vent is a hexagon that looks similar to, and is in line with, the intake. Possibly at some point the APU had both intake and exhaust with deployable ducts.

[-]

ThreeHandedSword@reddit

it's not that far-fetched, if it's an auxiliary intake for a jet fuel starter and has its own door(s). F-15 has one in about the same spot. However I have almost no idea how the YF-23 worked

https://i.sstatic.net/I95Mx.png

[-]

Misophonic4000@reddit

The "painted to prevent injury to ground crew" was the made-up justification they gave the brass to pain the black widow design on the plane. Once they were made to remove it, no one made any efforts to paint another warning symbol there...

[-]

wolfmann99@reddit

Thats CYA write up. They didnt get approval for the black widow name...

[-]

Friedl1220@reddit

Northrop: there's something on the plane that is both cool and a safety feature? Remove it immediately!

[-]

hoagiebreath@reddit

It was a happy accident they made the get rid of.

[-]

hoagiebreath@reddit

They kept hitting their head on the scoop during preflight. One person was decently injured. So their painted it. When in flight they realized it looked like a Black Widow. During testing, Northrup made the get rid of it.

I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted for posting history.

[-]

Elias_Fakanami@reddit

I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted for posting history.

In other threads you have people arguing that it’s useless to paint things for visibility on an aircraft undercarriage (which is a very common practice, btw) because people will only looking down when they are under there.

In other words, there are plenty of idiots roaming around here.

[-]

hoagiebreath@reddit

Crazy sonsidering the source is Paul Metz during a walk around of PAV-2

[-]

Orodel84@reddit

This thing has the same radar cross section as a F-16 (non stealth fighter). It is not a F-22 Competitor lol.

[-]

Bad_Human@reddit

gonna go out on limb here and say maybe the fact that the yf-23 was nicknamed black widow is the actual reason it has a black widow marking on it...

[-]

mz_groups@reddit

Having worked on the YF-119 engine and having read the press around that time, my recollections are consistent with that.

[-]

shedang@reddit (OP)

To prevent injury to ground personnel while under the aircraft, the ram air scoop was highlighted with a set of red and white triangles for visibility. The unintended coincidence looked like a Black Widow hourglass while the aircraft was in flight.

Link for where I got the title from

[-]

Tim_AZ@reddit

I challenge you to find a picture of this dangerous ram air scoop.

[-]

lothcent@reddit

https://youtu.be/iU8gWgz9n4U?si=9ffueHOD2k03YEwV

not just a picture- but a walkabout video with stories from the test pilot Paul metz

[-]

GreaseGeek@reddit

At 9:30

[-]

markthechevy@reddit

There isn't one, it didn't use them, used what they called a boundary air control system.

[-]

Locobono@reddit

There is one.

[-]

that-blurple-fz07@reddit

What ram air scoop though? I see the triangles where's the scoop?

[-]

Locobono@reddit

It pops out at low speed.

[-]

that-blurple-fz07@reddit

Yup found a video someone else posted

[-]

dr_white_rabbit@reddit

A Chinese copy. I feel sorry for these people. They don't have any original ideas

[-]

Iriangaia@reddit

It’s been like thirty years and China still can’t produce anything that rivals this - and this lost the competition.

[-]

echo11a@reddit

I didn't know that Northrop was a Chinese company? Even though they were headquartered in California, and were never owned/partially owned by any Chinese company?

Next time, why don't you do some research first before making comments like this? Unless you don't want others to take you seriously, that is. lol

[-]

Yeet0rBeYote@reddit

Me when I don’t know what I’m talking about

[-]

Econguy89@reddit

It was developed by Northrop…

[-]

wobblebee@reddit

The yf-23 should have won. You can't change my mind

[-]

HypurrD3v1l@reddit

^this. If memory serves at the time the comment was made the YF22 was selected due to commonality/resemblance with the f15 in some aspects and that decision was made to supposedly ease purchasing of hardware etc. and now we hear that the F22 has numerous obsolete items that are becoming hard to procure. While the yf23 was too cutting edge. Maybe it would be easier to maintain today… ahh the world will never know. Loved the look of the yf23.

[-]

System0verlord@reddit

The F-22 has the ability to fit external hard points. The yf-23 was strictly internal bays.

[-]

Impressive-Work-4964@reddit

Other countries want stealth aircraft, why not sell them this design?

[-]

Learn2Foo@reddit

Blackwidow II. It's way cooler than Raptor.

[-]

Apprehensive-Ear2685@reddit

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I once saw a documentary on the making of this plane, and heard it was the better plane between itself and the F-22 Raptor? In the end politicking and money was the deciding factor for the contract to be handed to Lockheed.

[-]

jar1967@reddit

The F-22 had several advantages. It could super cruise faster and had a smaller radar cross section.

[-]

Bean_from_accounts@reddit

Both wrong. The YF-23 was just as stealthy if not stealthier due to the low number of aligned edges on its planform.

While we do not know the exact figures since they were classified, it was reported that PAV2 could supercruise faster than YF-22 PAV1 with the GE YF-120 engine. Quite faster in fact, with a recorded top supercruise speed of Ma 1.72 against Ma 1.58 for the YF-22.

[-]

hoagiebreath@reddit

100%

[-]

SuspiciousCucumber20@reddit

Maybe in terms of air frame shape. But there were other drawbacks to the YF-23 that were probably seriously considered. For example, the weapons bay missile magazines. The 23 could only carry 4 AIM-120s or 8 AIM-9's or 2 AIM-120 and 4 AIM-9. This is a pretty big drawback considering the standard F-22 loadout of 6 AIM-120 and 2 AIM-9. Plus, the stores system was much more complex with many, many more moving pieces than the F-22

The YF-23 weapons bay made it a much more versatile aircraft in that it could carry 2,000lbs bombs internally and that the bay was modular. But versatile wasn't what the AF was looking for. They purely wanted air dominance.

[-]

hoagiebreath@reddit

Northrop was kind of in the hot seat to begin with overruns from other projects.

Lockheed knew how to play the game and delivered a much more finished prototype.

USG bought into thrust vectoring hook, line and sinker when the reality is that YF-23 was just as maneuverable with its ruddervators.

[-]

Bean_from_accounts@reddit

Exactly :)

[-]

YF-23aBlackWidowII@reddit

Hi!

[-]

ManaMagestic@reddit

Isn't Japan supposedly making a modern version for their Air Force?

[-]

DoreenTheeDogWalker@reddit

Read that as well. I don't know if it's true anymore though. They are partnered with Italy and the United Kingdom in developing a stealth fighter. They are also working with the United States on another unnamed plane. I guess will find out in a few years.

[-]

postmodest@reddit

Dear everyone saying "lol no! OP is dumb!": This is literally the testimony of the engineers who made the thing:

https://youtu.be/PYLiMYGBE2Q

[-]

ooklebomb@reddit

They discuss the hourglass marking at 29:10 in the video.

Timestamped link

[-]