Why the F-117N Seahawk Could Have Changed Naval Aviation Forever

[@PilotPhotog]

🎮 Play War Thunder for FREE! 🎮 playwt.link/pilotphotog24 New and returning players who use my link in the pinned comment or video description will receive a bonus pack with premium vehicles, the "Eagle of Valor" decorator, 100,000 Silver Lions, and 7 days of premium account-available for a limited time only!

[@nathanchristensen824]

You need a Growling Sidewinder "I'm a cat person" tee shirt with the venerable Tomcat in glorious form. Not paid, just a fan.

[@RedTail1-1]

War Thunder sucks.

[@RedTail1-1]

You're also misleading people telling them they can play "modern" vehicles. Sure, you can. If you play for 1-2 years. You can't just jump in and play what you want you start from WWI, not even WWII.

[@andrewpizzino2514]

In a saltwater environment with first generation stealth coatings don’t know how well that would have worked out

[@wildweasel3001]

It would wash off in minutes 🎉

[@alt5494]

Lockheed made a entire stealth ship(Seashadow IX-529)

[@robert506007]

You are probably right yes buuut I would still say at least test it out and try and figure a solution. If they hadthe F-35C would have been much better off. Actually probably all US Stealth planes would have benefited tremedously from the experience. No doubt they would have failed a lot but it would have saved time on latter Stealth coatings.

[@richtravis9562]

just slap some FS 26270 Haze Gray paint on top of it, she'll be right.

[@Hunterxrt]

What materials were used for the 1st generation stealth coatings?

[@hangtime79]

My favorite fact was this 5:39. This was when they put a full-sized mockup of the original variant on a pole and pointed a radar at it. They were hoping they would get a return of the size of something like a car. The RCS was that of a small bird. The project was immediately turned black after this. Sometimes being wrong is a good thing.

[@jamesmterrell]

You forgot the Navy A-12 that was also canceled. It didn't help when the Navy Program Office and General Dynamics briefed the program to him and said it was on track. Then, several months later came back for more money. It was so bad that the Navy announced the program manager had been selected for admiral was still going to be promoted. That promotion was canceled not long after that. The main lesson was lying to Cheny does not end well. The Super Tomcat was canceled by Cheny . He said it was a 'get well' program for Grumman. Also, the Naval Aviation leadership (Hornet Mafia) overtly shot down anything with the F-14. They were working on the Super Hornet and didn't want competition.

[@codename1176]

@@jamesmterrell wasn’t the future variant of the f-14 supposed to also serve as a drone controller? Funny how the navy is now scrambling for something like that.

[@matchesburn]

@@codename1176 "wasn’t the future variant of the f-14 supposed to also serve as a drone controller?" No plans for that, no. That's F-35/Super Hornet territory. Was never intended for the Tomcat. The ASF-14 would've been interesting, however.

[@andrewadkins5567]

Modifying an already as built is always more expensive and more project risk than starting from a clean sheet. To navalize an F 117 would have been too many compromises and increased the RCS.

[@azrooferkents]

The original 117 airframe wasn't beefy enough to handle carrier landings and the tailhook was in a sealed compartment to be used as a last resort. Also the internal structure of the wing assembly wasn't conducive to folding wing tips.

[@andrewadkins5567]

@@azrooferkents Thank you.

[@kevintemple245]

"Always" part is entirely incorrect. It may be less common and sometimes more difficult now, but if you look at almost every naval fighter in WWII and even into Vietnam, they started as land based aircraft. The only limitations in the conversions are landing gear and airframe strength. As long as the basic design is compatible, it can be converted. Using already designed platforms is far cheaper and easier than designing an entirely different aircraft. See the F-35 for a modern reference.

[@pamt9543]

​@@kevintemple245 Exactly. How could developing a entirely new airframe cheaper than modding land based craft

[@korvusknull1447]

It's amazing how quickly the Nighthawk went from the drawing board to mission capable. It is like the companies and engineers cared more about defence than dividends in those days. It is a shame that more than half the suppliers have been consolidated and many of the Pentagon budget auditors have been 'let go' during this modern era.

[@FloridaManMatty]

A big reason it happened so quickly was the Skunk Works preference for keeping the engineers and machinists in the same work space. Those guys streamlined the entire process and improved it along the way.

[@NarasimhaDiyasena]

The main reason why it was quick is because it’s based on the Horton X that the Germans were working on, transferred over via Operation Paperclip. One of the units crashed in Roswell, so to cover up Paperclip involvement it the Horton and it’s German Pilot were rebranded UFO and ‘little green men’. The civilians who bought into the Aliens story were then gaslight with the Weather Balloon, and those who saw too much had a ‘medical examination’ done to shut them up.

[@FloridaManMatty]

4:00 - Error - Kelly Johnson was VERY opposed to the Have Blue concept. Ben Rich was running Lockheed ADP at the time and butted heads with Kelly over the program. Johnson refused to believe that a faceted design would have a RCS lower that their D-21 drone. In a way, he WAS correct because that curved approach has definitely become the standard. Unfortunately at the time, the computers available to ADP were very limited and could only work out 2-D, faceted surfaces. Kelly did eventually give credit where credit was due. Ben Rich and Denys Overholser revolutionized Americans entire approach to air superiority to such a degree that we now prefer and can attain absolute air supremacy.

[@nateharder2286]

A good name would be the "Squall". A squall is a sudden sharp increase of wind at sea that shows up outta nowhere and is impossible to predict.

[@Saffi____]

18:55 Dang that guy pulled a drift during take of. Now thats some skill there.

[@alt5494]

Skunk works was led by Ben Rich during the stealth development. Kelly Johnson was semi retired advisor at the time. Initially he disregarded the project considering it impractical.

[@slartybarfastb3648]

Audio suppression was definitely NOT on the priority list of F-117. It is loud! Surprisingly loud. I'd say right there with F-16 or F-18. It rips the sky with military power noise. If you've ever heard one, you'll agree.

[@JSFGuy]

I have heard them a few times, I didn't notice that they were excessive or even normal on exhaust noise. I don't know how you come up with that.

[@slartybarfastb3648]

@JSFGuy I've heard them. Maybe loud is a subjective term, but to my ears they were indistinguishable from a F-16 or F-18. Not Eagle loud, but Eagles have the power of two F-16s, so that's expected.

[@slartybarfastb3648]

@JSFGuy Looking into it's further, they have the F404 engines. Two F404 which exactly matches the F-18. Maybe I was expecting a whisper jet, so the surprise of hearing a F-18 as it few over gave the impression of more noise. But, that still assumes the F-18 to be not loud, which it definitely is.

[@phillm156]

At 40-50k ft. Dropping Jdms. It’s very quiet.

[@slartybarfastb3648]

@@phillm156 This is true. The JDAM is audible before the F-18 is. And, the JDAM doesn't even have an engine. *Intersting fact: the primary reason the Boeing 787 is so quiet isn't due to engine noise reduction. It's those sawtooth joints on flight surfaces and engine nacelles. A lesson learned from why owls are so quiet in flight. Also a feature on the F-22 and F-35 exhaust nozzles. Not present on F-117.

[@DriveCarToBar]

The Nighthawk could have been a potentially solid addition as a replacement for the A6 although it lacked in a couple important areas. The biggest is payload capacity. The A6E could carry more Ordnance than the legacy Hornet. The F-117 couldn't come close because internal bays and limited hardpoints. It would have been a huge step backwards for the Navy. About the only space I could see the F117 working for the Navy would be as a stealthy replacement for the E2 Hawkeye, but you'd need to effectively double the F117's range to come close to the E2's loiter time. Oh yeah, and give it all the radar and electronics gear. It would be a radical redesign.

[@JSFGuy]

Public release right here right now.

[@LaurelFreeman-y6p]

Life is not measured by the breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath.

[@BansheeNT-D]

Landing this brick on an Carrier sounds like a nightmare :D

[@discmaniastudios]

Skunk works Everytime they release something they always seem to say "here's what we got but this is how much better it could be" and it's always what we wanted

[@sethb3090]

Correction: stealth was spearheaded by Kelly Johnson's successor, Ben Rich. Johnson had retired, and while he still came in as a consultant, he thought the concept was useless.

[@Chris_at_Home]

I read an article in an aviation magazine that had two Navy officers’ opinion on the Hornet versus buying a new stealth aircraft to replace it. When the Navy passed up going stealth they were disappointed but years later they were glad they didn’t. Because they kept the Hornet 2 they have more aircraft than they would ever had and also the expense of flying is less so they get more training. The Hornet 2 currently has a better radar and ECM than the F-22.

[@Gridlocked]

What is the Hornet 2?

[@aizseeker3622]

@@Gridlocked F/A-18E/F Block I/II/III

[@Gridlocked]

@@aizseeker3622 Never seen anyone call it that.

[@hoss1003]

I think the F•117N Seahawk, since it was stealthy, but to slow for the NAVY, should have been developed for the MARINES. Calling it the A•117M Steathhog. I would have taken the gun from the A•10 Warthog and placed it between those new GE Engines, that would have been lowered into the fuselage making a very stealthy gunship. For troop support for MARINES on the ground or to knock out enemy gun emplacements on shore before Marines hit the beaches. Send them in, in advance of C•130 Gunships and CH•47 Chinook troop carriers. The enemy would never know what hit them..

[@seifer918]

surprised you didn't mention the McDonnell Douglas A-12 Avenger II, which I think would be the biggest competitor for the F-117N project. Does the time line fit?

[@PilotPhotog]

I actually did a video all about the A12: kzbin.info/www/bejne/j2e7k6OZmculhZosi=8LxNViXRwPfu77AU

[@seifer918]

@@PilotPhotog of cos you did. I remember and saw that before and good work as always. My question has more to do with the timeline. Was A-12 cancelled when LM proposed the F117N? or was Navy saying "we have carrier stealth fighter at home (A12 and all its budget overrun)."

[@PilotPhotog]

@@seifer918 I think there was some overlap between the two, The F-117N proposal was short lived, I just thought it'd be a fun topic to explore - thanks for commenting!

[@RetinaBurner]

Is there enough info on the Super Tomcat '21' to justify a video on it? I've always liked the F-14. Amazing aircraft, even though it did have its problems.

[@marcmelissas8106]

The biggest challenge would be the inability to carry the Harpoon, HARM, etc., thus maintaining a requirement for F/A18s and limiting the number if F117Ns in a CAW. Otherwise, giving the CVBGs a stealth strike capability 20+ years earlier than the still problematic and limited numbers F35, could have been a ganer changer.

[@ExploreTechniques95]

This is one of the fastest drawing to production conversions I know of.

[@gareth204]

Massive amount of other projects missed out that had a direct influence on the F-117N/A/F-117X. The direct effect of the F-117B and C programmes had a massive impact on the N programme. The A-X, A/F-X, A-12 and NATF programmes took their toll on the need for N. Finally the F-18E/F/G programme also played its part in the lack of development of the N too.

[@timbaskett6299]

Was there ever a concept for an F-22"N"? Before the F-22 entered service, I drew a two seat Raptor. I think my two favorite "not to be's" were the F-20, and the YF-23. The F-117N Seashadow, or Shadowhawk.

[@JSFGuy]

No, this was an exclusive Air force contract requirement.

[@rileychurch1821]

Shadowhawk sounds cool af

[@mikekopack6441]

@@JSFGuy There actually were some concept designs/drawing for an F-22N.Sea Raptor. It was envisioned to have swing wings like the Tomcat.

[@kennychad2821]

@@timbaskett6299 I've always asked why not put an Apache AH-64 on carriers and in the naval fleet?

[@section8usmc53]

Ships that have attack helicopters already use the Cobra. Marine Corps is Department Of The Navy.

[@rmalmeida1976]

Naval aircraft are tough and need to be for the constant traps, cat shots, and harsh environment. Hard to imagine any stealth aircraft being able to stand up to the punishment without a god-awful amount of required maintenance per flight hour. I could imagine a whole squadron of stealth hangar queens.

[@RoberinoSERE]

The F117 was never a Fighter but a precision deep strike bomber. I never understood the F designation as it had no air to air defensive or offensive weapons.

[@Eflatun_28]

Afterborner olmadan bu uçak o gemiden kalkamaz. Motor çıkışını YF-23 gibi yapmadığınız sürece bu motor çıkışından afterborner calistiramazsiniz. Çalışsa bile arka taraf çok aşırı ısınmadan ya yanar yada çok fazla ısı tutar. 👍🏻

[@keibohow69]

A bit of history Pyotr (Petr) Yakovlevich Ufimtsev (Russian: Пётр Я́ковлевич Уфи́мцев; born 1931) is a Soviet Russian electrical engineer and mathematical physicist, considered the seminal force behind modern stealth aircraft technology. In the 1960s he began developing equations for predicting the reflection of electromagnetic waves from simple two-dimensional and three-dimensional objects.[1] Much of Ufimtsev's work was translated into English, and in the 1970s American Lockheed engineers began to expand upon some of his theories to create the concept of aircraft with reduced radar signatures.[2]

[@MacVerick]

Imagine trying to land one of these things at night in a storm on an aircraft carrier.

[@bbgcars]

TO THIS DAY, The F-14 Tomcat still flies for the Iranian Air Force!! shows you how good of an airplane it was and the fact they cant get parts for it but it still flies is a testament to its durability and sustainability

[@Gridlocked]

How do you know it still flies??

[@bryansweeney1633]

they are using chinese made clones of parts

[@Amen6magi]

@@bryansweeney1633 no

[@Amen6magi]

​@@Gridlockedthere are videos

[@JSFGuy]

Got to finish the show, well low observable technology and development was rapidly evolving so I think they also included let's wait a little longer on this so we don't have to replace it as soon as it comes out. The raptor being an example of that. Rather let the USAF go in in the first hours and hit most threatening targets and the USN can back that up. Fast forward to the JSF. We all know as soon as something comes out the replacement is in work. Probably not so much now as it used to be.

[@antilarge7860]

What a cool render of a navy f-117

[@subirmajumdar4493]

Forget the stealth coating, the Nighthawk was notorious for its handling characteristics. It would have been a nightmare to land it on a carrier, especially during adverse weather conditions. I am surprised how little people understand the difficulty in landing an aircraft on the carrier, especially with unused stores.

[@alex3261]

F-117A already had air+yo-air capability, being able to carry and launch AIM-9 missiles.

[@azrooferkents]

Not initially.

[@alex3261]

@@azrooferkents I do not know at what point the AIM-9 capability was added, but pilots say it was present on F-117A.

[@azrooferkents]

@@alex3261 When I left in the mid 80's while we were exploring the possibility, the requirement to lower the trap below the fuselage long enough for the IR seeker to lock on was too much a degradation to RCS to pursue

[@alex3261]

@@azrooferkents I got the info from the Fighter Pilot Podcast, episode 072 - interview with Maj. Robson Donaldson. The actual detail on AIM-9 is on episode 073 at minute 3.40 (answer to a viewer question, as a follow up of episode 072).

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

Just because you can carry, doesn't make you a good fighter. We have helicopters and they carry AIM-9's. That doesn't mean you want to go around chasing MIGs in one.

[@ottovonnekpunch1268]

F-117N Seahawk would have been a GAME-CHANGER! Perhaps worth revisiting the concept!

[@dwilson284]

I had a F-19 model kit as a kid. It was a concept decoy released to throw off public speculation about the design. Funny how things like that works.

[@autonoob]

The ”Sea no Hawk”

[@Tar-Numendil]

I'm disappointed the Seahawk isn't in Ace Combat 7. Hopefully it'll be in 8, if 8 ever comes.

[@ricky1231]

The Navy has never been very convinced with the concept of stealth. Even now they are only getting 273 F35Cs. The Marines end up with more F35s than the Navy !!!!! I won’t be surprised if the Navy’s F/A-XX is cancelled. The Navy has a frightening culture of burning the defence budget with failed programs like Zumwalt, Lithorial combat ship, upgrading the Ticonderoga cruisers then retiring them immediately afterwards, the Seawolf submarines and now we hear the constellation program is now in serious trouble. Its almost criminal.

[@Aaron-wq3jz]

Navy has repeatedly made the wrong decision this century

[@Gridlocked]

What makes you think that the Navy has never been very convinced with the concept of stealth? I find that very hard to believe, otherwise the Zumwalt never would’ve made it past the drawing boards.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

You are doing a lot of broad brush painting there.🎨👩‍🎨

[@aizseeker3622]

The Navy always have prioritize for range, payload and avionics. Stealth always been secondary. Theirs F/A-XX reflect that for longer range and bigger/heavier payloads with better avionics than Super Hornet. Stealth less than issues if yours payloads outranges enemies radar search/track. For Navy prioritize stealth over range and payloads is a demerit for naval aviation.

[@scubasleeve3497]

Maintaining the RAM coating at sea would probably have been a nightmare.

[@amcds2867]

Well worth the wait! Great job! I think they did well in not investing in a naval F117 seeing that the technology was evolving and the F35C is superior to any version the F117N might have developed into, despite the nostalgia the F14 provokes.

[@johnwurfel2862]

I believe stealth is more important for naval aitcraft, as there is no terrain masking and stealth aids in breaking the missle locks on Fox-3 BVR engagements, increasing survivability.

[@AlphaWhiskey_Haryo]

I made both of the A and N variant's papercraft. yes, they were not the best way to compare NH's flying characteristics due to the enormous drag, but I get to prove that the Seahawk glides better than the Nighthawk with its shallower angle of leading edge

[@JSTolozaOK]

Interesting and expensive proposal...; But what happened to the A-12 Avenger!?

[@af22raptor23503]

One of other issues with the F117N was that US NAVY Aircraft have two types of systems for the Control Surfaces Actual Wires that are connected to the Control Surfaces and the Fly By Wire system Computer Controlled so if there is a Catastrophic Electronics Failure the Stick and Rudder System Augmented by Hydraulics is always available but an Aircraft like the F117 that requires thousands of minor adjustments every second would have been Uncontrollable if the Fly by Wire went down that is one of the reasons the F-16 Fighting Falcon/Viper never had a Navy version for Carrier Operations and it is only used at Top Gun as an Enemy Aircraft. The F/A-18D-G do have both Systems but the aircraft can be controlled if the fly by wire fails it just feels like you are Driving a Mac Truck without Power Steering.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

You have been using fly by wire systems for like 50 years.

[@af22raptor23503]

@@WALTERBROADDUS Yes that is correct but all US NAVY Planes have a Primary System Fly By Wire and Secondary System Hydraulic System that is Analog NOT Computer Controlled I should have Explained Myself Better! If the Fly By Wire System gets FRIED the Pilot can switch to backup Hydraulic which basically old school cables and that are connected to Hydraulic Actuators and Pumps and will allow the plane to land somewhere safe but it will be a VERY BUMPY Ride because the Computer is not making the hundred or thousands of adjustments per second that some planes require. For example if an F-16 looses it Fly by Wire system the plane becomes UNFLYABLE and the Pilot 95% of the time will just Eject. That is why the Falcon/Viper has two computers that deal with the Fly by Wire. For what I know about the F-117 systems if the Fly by Wire goes out the Pilot has a very high possibility of dying!

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

@@af22raptor23503 that's pretty much true of all modern aircraft right now. Without a flight computer, these aircraft become unstable. And I just looking at this airplane , think the characteristics for deck Landing look poor. And your changes to the airframe are compromising the stealth characteristics. AND the Navy already had an A-12 Stealth program. This aircraft proposal, is strictly a proposal.

[@af22raptor23503]

@@WALTERBROADDUS True but the A-12 was cancelled but the X47B has shown great success I had several buddies that were involved in the development and testing of it. I believe the Navy's version of the 6th Gen Fighter is still going forward along with the Air Force and I hope that the Navy gets a decent Air Superiority Fighter since we do not have one right now. I would love to see a F-22 Navy version or perhaps a Naval Version of the revamped YF-23 that is being tested. Cancelling the Tomcat Upgrade Program was a MAJOR Mistake because I have talked with Grumman personnel that were involved in the development of the Upgrade Program and if it had been allowed to continue we would have a Stealthy New Plane along that same lines of the F-15EX Eagle 2 that would have been called Tomcat 2 or something along those lines since it would have kept the Swing Wing Technology plus an enclosed weapons bay. The best thing about the Tomcat was also the worse the Swing Wings which required allot of Maintenance but when compared to the Super Hornet which was sold as a cheaper aircraft to operate both planes are about equal and the Super Hornets are coming apart quicker than originally estimated.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

@@af22raptor23503 to be honest, there really isn't a lot of competition out there. The F-35 will continue on for next few years until the next Generation comes online.

[@ThePhengophobe]

The proposal for the F-117N certainly isn't new, The earliest mention I can find is in a magazine in 1993, with the Navy reiterating that they didn't want the F-117N. It's also mentioned in a 2003 book.

[@negroraven9458]

Sweet video!👌🏾

[@PilotPhotog]

Thank you!

[@tracym8952]

The tail would need more modification to work well on a carrier

[@youngthaiarfssoldier8732]

I think if we gonna do it today, we would have to enlarge the whole frame, with latest avionics, stealth materials, better control surfaces, even stronger airframe, a gun, etc. Not the best armed, but stealthist carrier-capable aircraft. Might be even better than F-35 in some or most aspects. Operating with Super Tomcat, great combination.

[@thomascarmichael6760]

No way that bird could exist on a carrier. The corrosion generated by the ocean environment would have wreaked havoc with everything on that plane. On top of that in order to beef the airframe up to take the stresses of catapult launches and arrested landings would have. broken that bird in no time not to mention how all the mods would have affected the flight characteristics of the plane. Also it couldn’t dog fight and had no gun in which to defend itself if detected. Don’t see it happening with that plane!!!

[@thesirmaddog8209]

We will have a even better Duo once the FA-xx comes out... With the F-35C at its side.... Not to mention the drones

[@WarGasm0824]

You should do a video on the F/A-22N

[@mr6johnclark]

I 2nd this!

[@Tar-Numendil]

The Seahawk is way better looking than the Nighthawk.

[@chandrachurniyogi8394]

the naval variant of the F117 could do with a wing (folding) design similar to that of the carrier borne F-35C Lightning II stealth fighter interceptor . . . the original design of the F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighter bomber is more than capable of being a stealthy naval fighter jet . . . really don't need to change F-117 wings for carrier ops . . . only thing it needs is a more powerful turbofan engine & incorporating a wing fold mechanism to the existing wing design . . . the naval carrier borne F-117AN Nighthawk stealth fighter interceptor . . . it'll also feature under wing hard points, reinforced airframe & strengthened landing gear . . .

[@geneard639]

To start with, the F-117N Navy Nighthawk version (base F-117 was 1982 and the F-117N was 1984) could not have been called Seahawk, that name was taken by the Sikorsky made SH-60B Seahawk (base H-60 Blackhawk 1972, Navy SH-60B 1983), so the F-117N 'Seahawk' name was considered a 'nickname' and was never official. Then there is the issue with the RAM Paint used on the F-117 fleet, it required Tyvek bunny suits and booties for techs working on it. Air Craft Carriers are dirty working environments, look at any video of an active flight deck of a ship deployed. All those aircraft are dirty as hell, and dirt and Stealth Coatings simply do not work. Then there was the flight dynamics and flight controls, lack of effective dynamic lift in the marine environment. We are talking about a laundry list of hurtles every aircraft has to address and the underlying F-117 Nighthawk design was inherently unstable in flight, something that does not work well in Carrier Based Aircraft. Then there is the costs, It cost more than an F-14 Tomcat, required special maintenance and materials and it had a limited combat capability. Trust me, Aircraft Carriers are NOT stealthy. Hell every nation with a foot of beach keeps tabs on exactly where our 11 deadly behemoths are at every day. The F-35 Lightening II is Stealth for tactical advantage, the F-117 Nighthawk was Stealth for strategic advantage. In the end it was too little bang for way too much buck.

[@SlowrideSteve]

The Navy didn't want ANYTHING to do with the 117 N

[@IndigenousAmericanTrucker]

Yeah, I always wondered why they designated it as F, instead of A or B, or at least F/A, since it's not a Fighter but an Attack/Bomber!

[@cliffwoodbury5319]

I think that the F-14 would still be around since they shared engines and in modern times it (f-14) would have become the stealthy F-21.

[@NormaBill]

They wandered into a strange Tiki bar on the edge of the small beach town.

[@danielrushton5142]

It's hard to say if the F-117 Sea Hawk would have been a better plane for the Navy at that time. If there was a more urgent need for such a plane at the time, then it may have been worth the expenditure & effort. . .

[@WakeMarine]

The F-35B Version of the Marine Corps aircraft should be re-named F-35B "Bulldog". Not Lightning. Love my Citizen 2003 Nighthawk watch!

[@OmegaEGGY]

I feel like based on the timeline, the Seahawk would never have had any chances to make it to production. The early 90s was around the time the Navy axed the A-12 Avenger II program and joined the JAST/JSF program. The then-future F-35C already occupied the Seahawk's niche, all while doing more and better. So what's the point of it then? Even if we go back to the 80s, it would still have to contend with both Northrop and McDonnell Douglas for the Avenger II program, and we know how that turned out.

[@VoreAxalon]

God that was good... my dad had Agent Orange effects too and now I know that Im at risk of cancer too because of it.

[@B0R3D0M5]

If it had a better stealth coat then the first generstion then maybe but with the first generstion the salt water would screw it up

[@TheJustinJ]

How

[@XLA-zg1nn]

Sorry Tog, but it was Ben Rich, Kelly's protégée who nailed the stealth

[@SmilingCamperVan-dd8cb]

An A-117N ,Super Tomcat airwing makes my imagination run wild!

[@TheLiamster]

I really wish this aircraft had entered service

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

No...... it would have been a pretty lousy airplane.

[@keyonno]

Could had been named SeaFalcon

[@Bonewerkz]

The F117 was a UFO reverse engeneered. The planes before and after was looking like airplanes, but this one was ...khm... a little bit different.

[@Getalife707]

That looks so much better then the original

[@keithwaller4545]

Good idea but in guess F117 would of required to much rework to navy . Don't even see why instead of F35 it isn't just a stealth drone. As F35 and hornet have limited range. And should of upgraded tomcat. Only if running cost and serviceability was improved.

[@stewarttomkinson3356]

They need to figure out how to take that airframe and turn it into a space fighter

[@herrolddickey7164]

Love the design

[@Dara-ih6jq]

The technology just wasn’t there yet and the early stealth was so temperamental required being out at what I’ve just been a pipe at that time due to material technologies available in this era.

[@RamblingRodeo]

I wonder how this is not being reconsidered for redevelopment, as the YF-23 is being actively reevulated in a new stealth aircraft, 22 of the F117's have been pulled out of mothballs, why?

[@koobuck]

Cool video but why is it a journey? You used it twice

[@kindasupersonic7114]

Technically they did do this.. it’s called the F35

[@michaelgautreaux3168]

GR8 vid. Many thanx PP 👍👍

[@johnn1250]

I think the A-12 Avenger 2 concept would have been a better option, as it was already a carrier based aircraft. For the cost of a redesign, you might as well build from scratch. That's why we are going to get the NGAD, instead of more Raptors.

[@aaronellington5546]

I’m sure one concept is built from another concept to improve capabilities

[@cwf081166]

The US Navy would probably want to keep F14 instead of carrier based F117 especially with the fall of the Soviet Union. Beside a carrier based F117 wasn't that far away. Training and landing gear would have been the major differences.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

The F-14 would have gone away. I don't really see this project going anywhere. And looks like a nightmare as a deck landing aircraft. The A12 program was already a thing.

[@bradenfredrick2720]

7:25 just wish war thunder had tanks v planes v ships would be sm fun

[@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe]

It would a 21st century Seafire. Skunk works all over the deck. What became of the A12?

[@JSFGuy]

Just about missed it it was down on the list, let's check it out.

[@PilotPhotog]

Let me know what you think!

[@Psalms919]

​@@PilotPhotoghi can you do a f 22 natf

[@jocax188723]

3:54 Kelly Johnson was actually pretty dismissive of the idea at first. Stealth development was actually pioneered by his protege, Ben Rich, who worked with Ed Martin and Denys Overholser to pitch the Hopeless Diamond, and later, Have Blue.

[@TheJustinJ]

Johnson was all about performance. He later agreed the F-117 was brilliant after it demonstrated to be fully invisible on radar. He did not believe it was possible at first.

[@markusjuenemann]

Ignore the first half of the video. The actual information about the "Seahawk" starts at 12 minutes into the video...

[@emilmlodnicki3835]

Wish we got the A-12 flying Dorito instead.

[@daviidtaplin1115]

If a force could have done this it would be the Navy.What a thought to done this..

[@W1ckedRcL]

Ufimsev's theories were not the start of or the foundation for stealth technology. Boeing and several other companies had been working on radar defeating technology for years before his theories or book were published.

[@VTdarkangel]

However, he did provide the math to be able to calculate diffraction, which is notoriously complex and a key part to understanding stealth. Stealth developers were kind of fumbling in the dark before they discovered Ufimsev's theories.

[@W1ckedRcL]

@@VTdarkangel yes, and very valid point.

[@alejobrcn6515]

Bad idea, it's a 80's design, for 80's radar tech

[@Joe-rx7ht]

The Air Force should’ve picked the Northrop, F-23 Black Widow II, to replace the aging F-15 Eagle. The Lockheed, F-22 should’ve gone to the Navy and received the Lightning II name instead of Raptor, to replace the retired F-14 Tomcat. The Lockheed, F-35 should’ve received the Raptor name (F-35 Raptor has a better ring to it). And on track to replace the Marines AV-8B Harrier and F-18A/B Hornet, with the F-35B. Air Force gets its F-35A to replace the F-16 Fighting Falcon. And the Navy gets its F-35C to replace the F-18C/D Hornets. And finally… The Northrop, X-47B autonomous flying wing, should’ve been green lighted and gone to the Navy. The F-18E/F Super Hornet, currently made by Boeing, should’ve never been a thing.

[@tomcatfoolery]

Stealth technology was several generations ahead of it's contemporaries. So, Stealth was lightyears ahead of it's contemporaries. That's no pun.

[@JasinTheZombie]

Landing the wobblin goblin on a moving carrier in rough weather..... Thats not going to turn out very well. 😂

[@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe]

Would have been USN Seafire and just as robust returning to the carrier.

[@rileychurch1821]

F-117N would be the sexiest jet, even sexier than a Tomcat

[@secretgoldfish931]

Call me Wokey McWokington, but the idea that anything could ever be sexier than an F14 is one of the most offensive ideas I’ve ever seen on the internet. Take that back a sir, or else it shall be pistols at dawn!

[@floofles9473]

the notion of ufimtsev being the guy who fathered stealth or at least the concept of stealth is shakey at best, there are multiple people who could be given the credit. I'd check out laser pigs video on it he goes into detail on why Ufimtsev may not actually be the guy who's science allowed for the nighthawk to be stealthy.

[@TheJustinJ]

He produced exact formulas that could be applied to deflect or direct electromagnetic radiation. Russia did not realize what applications this had. Stealth technology wasn't on anybodies radar.

[@southerndragon4933]

Could have still been used for land. Wouldve been cool to see.

[@0bserver416]

I have many hours of take off and landing on an aircraft carrier in the middle of nowhere during my multiple combat deployments in Ace Combat.

[@Brocuzgodlocdunfamdogson]

Give us a video about the X-15!