Thread by @USAS_WW1

#USNavy #USAF #avgeeks #aviationlovers - NATF-22? Yes, there could have been a navalized F-22 stealth a la F-14 Tomcat with swing wings, Mach 2.25 supercruise, heavier landing gear, and so much more. So why did the US Navy opt for the F-18 and F-35 instead? I'll tell you... 1/

2/ Congress wanted the NATF-22 but the US Navy pushed back. The swing wings would have compromised stealth and added to the maintenance woes. As it was, the F-14 was already far too expensive especially in the absence of the #USSR's military, which is why the F-14 was retired.

3/ The naval F-22, aka Sea Raptor, would have been slower than the F-14 and cost more. The F-22's unit cost was, ballpark, $138 million. A navalized one surely would have cost at least 20% more based on F-14 vs F-15 costs. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_…

4/ Imagine the technical difficulties of the F-22 or F-35, which has been fraught with teething problems, plus navalization. So the NATF-22 could have been so interesting but very unrealistic. With inflation, I'd expect $250 each. The Block III Super Hornets are $51 million each.

5/ So why not discard the swing-wing? It was needed to land slowly enough. Please reply with any comments or corrections.

Sources:

* diffen.com/difference/F-1…
* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F%…

Must read: @AlexHollings52 with yet another excellent article: sandboxx.us/blog/sea-rapto….

@AlexHollings52 6/ Related reading: here's the F-35 Lightning II multi-role fighter used by the #USN, #USAF, #USMC and others.

https://twitter.com/USAS_WW1/status/1594422600394067969