역사 1976년 - 해군이 LWF에서 패한 YF-17을 고른 이유는 엔진 갯수 때문

[위종민]

미해군이 LWF에서 YF-16에게 패한 YF-17을 VFAX 프로그램의 승자로 선택한 이유는 엔진 개수가 결정적이라는 기사입니다. 프로펠러기가 엔진이 고장나면 글라이더가 되지만, 제트기는 벽돌이 돼 버린다고. 

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/naval-flight-officer-explains-why-the-number-of-engines-was-key-for-the-navy-in-selecting-the-yf-17-over-the-yf-16/

Naval Flight Officer explains why the number of engines was key for the Navy in selecting the YF-17 over the YF-16 - The Aviatio

• Aviation History
• Cold War Era
• Military Aviation

Naval Flight Officer explains why the number of engines was key for the Navy in selecting the YF-17 over the YF-16

By Dario Leone

Jun 24 2023

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

‘We used to have a joke in flight training: “What happens to a prop aircraft when it loses its engine? It becomes a glider. What happens to a jet when it loses its engine? It becomes a rock.”’ Josh Bennet, US Navy Naval Flight Officer.

The US Air Force (USAF) Lightweight Fighter (LWF) program sought a small, lightweight, low cost, air superiority day fighter designed for high performance and ease of maintenance.

The Northrop YF-17 and the General Dynamics YF-16 competed one versus the other in the LWF program.

The LWF was initiated because many in the fighter community believed that aircraft like the F-15 Eagle were too large and expensive for many combat roles.

On Jan. 13, 1975 at Edwards Air Force Base (AFB), Secretary of the Air Force John L. McLucas announced that the YF-16 had won the competition over YF-17 for full scale development as the USAF’s next Air Combat Fighter.

Noteworthy the F-16 Fighting Falcon achieved combat-ready status in Oct. 1980. Since then many foreign nations, including Belgium, Denmark, Turkey, Egypt and Israel, have purchased the F-16.

Although it lost the LWF competition to the F-16, the YF-17 (which was nicknamed “Cobra” and was the culmination of a long line of Northrop designs, beginning with the N-102 Fang in 1956, continuing through the F-5 family) was selected for the new Naval Fighter Attack Experimental (VFAX) program and evolved in to the F/A-18. In enlarged form, the F/A-18 Hornet was adopted by the US Navy and US Marine Corps to replace the A-7 Corsair II and F-4 Phantom II, complementing the more expensive F-14 Tomcat. This design, conceived as a small and lightweight fighter, was scaled up to the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, which is similar in size to the original F-15.

This print is available in multiple sizes from AircraftProfilePrints.com – CLICK HERE TO GET YOURS. F-16CM Fighting Falcon – Wild Weasel 50th Anniversary, 2015

Why did the Navy choose the YF-17 over the YF-16?

‘I won’t dwell on this question for too long, but much of the reason why the navy chose [the YF-17 over the YF-16 for the VFAX program that evolved into the F/A-18] is that the [YF-17 and the subsequent] F/A-18 have 2 engines,’ Josh Bennet, US Navy Naval Flight Officer, says on Quora.

‘We used to have a joke in flight training:

‘“What happens to a prop aircraft when it loses its engine? It becomes a glider. What happens to a jet when it loses its engine? It becomes a rock.”

‘Without getting too deep into engines and aero, the aspect ratio (wing) of a Jet is much much smaller compared to that of larger commercial aircraft. Why? Because jets need to pull more Gs and they can’t do that with a wing that has good glide performance. The shorter, stubbier wing handles the force of the G’s much better ensuring that they don’t fall off in flight.
‘Without letting myself get too far off track, because of the lack of glide capability, if a jet loses an engine, it loses power needed to sustain lift. If this were to happen on a jet approaching a carrier on final approach, the pilot could very well not have time to eject before hitting the water. The F/A-18 has two engines, so if it loses one, it still has another working engine to get it home.

A parked YF-17A/F-18 Prototype aircraft at Naval Air Station, Miramar, San Diego, California, in 1977.

‘Other factors for why the F/A-18 was chosen over the F-16 include the size of the landing gear (landing gear is designed to fit the aircraft itself and the smaller gear on the F-16 wouldn’t be able to support the wait of the jet on a carrier landing), as well as how they conduct A2A refueling (drogue v boom).’

Actually the YF-17 did not feature a landing gear designed to land on aircraft carriers and relied on the boom system for aerial refueling, but once the Cobra was selected by the Navy, its design was adapted to naval use. The F/A-18 Hornet has a landing gear designed to operate aboard the service flattops and a drogue system for aerial refueling.

Bennet concludes;

‘For more information google has hundreds of articles about 18 v 16, funding, joint aircraft, etc that delve into the details about how, when and why the navy chose the F/A-18 and the Air Force chose the F-16, but personally, the number of engines is the determining factor.’

Photo credit: U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy

[엽군]

ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ. 그 시절 F-14 엔진 생각하면, 이해가 가능한 것 같읍니다.

[위종민]

Ah.. TF-30 ㅋㅋㅋ

[김용우]

TF-30은 그냥 꺼졌지만 F-110엔진은 아무 징조나 경고도 없이 느닫없이 뻥하고 터지는 버릇이 있었다는....
찾아보면 F-14 공중폭팔했다는 이야기들 꽤 있음.

[엽군]

ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ

[백선호]

F-8, A-4, A-7은 단발로 잘 썼는데 말이죵 ㅎㅎ

[엽군]

그 것도 그렇네요. 그런데 그 시절 단발기 손실도 만만치는 않았고, 단발기 사고 사례에 질려서 저런 소리가 나왔다면? ㅋㅋㅋ