[Blennos]

That is one beautiful aircraft.

[Steely Tom]

That is one beautiful aircraft.

Look's like a high-school age aerospace nut's sketch of a "cool looking" airplane.

Actually, it looks better than that.

[Corey Ohlis]

Diamonds are a pilot’s best friend.

[Rockingham]

That it was. Yet, to the credit of the YF-22, it had two weapons bays and greater stealthy internal weapons carriage space than the YF-23, which ruthlessly applied the drag-reducing area rule design principle. This resulted in a gracile and sinuous shape for the YF-23 and gave it exceptional speed and range.

Although it would have been expensive, the US would have been better off to have completed development of both the F-22 and F-23 to keep the contractors putting out their best efforts on price, quality, and schedule. Moreover, even with the F-22 as the preferred type, a relatively small production run of the F-23 would provide US commanders with the relative advantages of both.

In combat, for example, a five to one ratio of F-22s and F-23s would give the US the ability to use the speed of F-23s for a rapid initial contact and missile volley, with the F-22s then arriving in order to use its maneuverability in a dogfight or its larger internal weapons capacity for bombing missions. Having both types available would also complicate mission planning by our adversaries.

Some observers suspect that US built a small number of F-23s for strategic reconnaissance purposes. Or at least that may be why key performance data remains secret for an aircraft that -- officially -- never went into production.