On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 23:25:42 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:30:46 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

F-117A Webmaster wrote:
As I understand it, the Lockheed proposal that won couldn't fly!
So yeah... I guess they did need a "redesign".

The two YF-22 prototypes made over 110 test flights (more than 70
before contract award). I have no idea how you could square that
with the claim that the design "couldn't fly."

[snip]

Anyway of those seven designs they chose 1 and 2 to build prototypes,
which would become the YF-22 and YF-23. The design
*as presented* by Lockheed at that time was the one that couldn't fly.

OK, that makes more sense. It's certainly not the same as saying that the
plane that won the overall ATF competition could not fly, which is how the
orignal coment read to me.

(I am skeptical that the LM design literally woud not be able to fly. I'd
bet the phrase was first used in the idiomatic sense of "that won't be
acceptable.")


Nah, it was literally "it won't fly". In another post I gave links to
the pertinent information.