My father was a Computer Analyst Specialist for the Northrop on the F-20 project in Hawthorn, Ca.. He helped to create the fly by wire and routing the avionics for it. I remember being about 13 or 14 and seeing them sitting outside of a hanger getting preflight checks before they taxied and took off. To this day one of the coolest things I had ever seen.

@DesertPunks

3 жыл бұрын

You're a lucky man

@OhNoNotAgain42

3 жыл бұрын

We must be about the same age. I have the same memory with my dad who worked there at Hawthorne as well. We saw them fly out in Palmdale. I think that’s where you must have seen them as well. I don’t think the Hawthorne facility was directly connected to any runways.

@smussiejollett3193

3 жыл бұрын

So sick dude

@RameenFallschirmjager

2 жыл бұрын

You must be very proud of your father.

@taylorc2542

2 жыл бұрын

FBW was new back then, and they surprisingly got a lot right considering how hard it is.

The funny thing is, several of the nations that got the F-5 never got F-16's and really could have used the F-20s.

@m.salleh5919

3 жыл бұрын

Exactly. That's what I thought. Malaysia never thought it was alright to later buy Russian, read Mig29s. Their pilots and engineers disliked the smokey engines and heavy maintenance required. They were also not entirely happy with subsequent F18 and SU30 buys as these were expensive buys. The F20s would have been heavensent to cash strapped air forces.

@fulcrum2168

3 жыл бұрын

@@m.salleh5919 Well, they could buy those South Korean jet trainers like Philippines did

@m.salleh5919

3 жыл бұрын

@@fulcrum2168 To my mind, the Korean FA50s are just supersonic LIFT fighter- trainers. That makes the Pak JF17 a bit better than them

@DrSmallarms

3 жыл бұрын

As a good example, Canada went from F-5a’s to F-18s

@Shadx27

3 жыл бұрын

@@DrSmallarms I was thinking more along the lines of Mexico, Philippines, and a few others.

I worked on this very program for a year, until just before it was canceled. Very well done video. An interesting sidebar you didn't mention was the B-2 was in the design process at the same time. Engineers, like myself, were hired into the F-20 program, like a holding pen. We were vetted while working working on the F20, and those that passed muster were moved over to the B2. I didn't make it; I had changed address too many times. That shows the level of secrecy on the B2 program.

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

3 жыл бұрын

I thought about mentioning B2, but the video ran too long as it was.

@Ricky40369

2 жыл бұрын

Did you work in the PDC or the Tech Center? Your name is vaguely familiar.

@slappy8941

2 жыл бұрын

The criteria they use for determining security clearances are so random and arbitrary.

@MrWasurfer86

2 жыл бұрын

Ain’t that the truth. You have too much debt so we’re pulling your clearance until it’s resolved. No clearance means no work so you accrue more debt. I see a red flag with someone having a lot of debt and suddenly paying it all off. Pull their clearance until it’s investigated.

@JW20236

2 жыл бұрын

@@MrWasurfer86 If you have debt, it could be assumed that you would be more willing to do things for money than those without debt...like sell design plans to the Russians etc.

Still probably the most 'correct' looking fighter ever built. It just _looks_ right.

@svenschwingel8632

2 жыл бұрын

Bad visibility to the rear is the only drawback. The Tigershark's problem was that the Viper did everything better.

@TurboMountTV

2 жыл бұрын

@@svenschwingel8632 And at at lot more cost.

@svenschwingel8632

2 жыл бұрын

@@TurboMountTV which nobody in the government cared about since the taxpayer had to pay it anyway 🤷🏼‍♂️

@littlerougue

2 жыл бұрын

came here to say the same thing just a good looking plane not that the teen planes didn't look good but the F5/20 just looks right.

@gone547

2 жыл бұрын

It looks like it's doing 1,000,000 mph, even when stopped. If looks could kill.

I’m a big F-5 fan and the F-20 Tigershark looked so cool.Shame it never went into full production.

@vanstry

3 жыл бұрын

Blame congress. They paid countries to buy F-16's - so they were getting them cheaper than they could have bought the F-20

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

Love the Northrop designs. The Cobra was its ultimate evolution.

@fixedguitar47

3 жыл бұрын

It’s a very popular model. Ask anyone at a hobby shop.

@blingbling574

3 жыл бұрын

The F-20 spirit lives on in the Grippen.

@valenrn8657

3 жыл бұрын

@@blingbling574 FA-50 (mini-F-16) and T-7 (mini-F-18) also has GE-404 engines.

Northrop Grumman is literally the what if brand. I'm shocked they accepted the B2 spirit, The YF23 was an epic piece of kit.

@davidrussell8783

3 жыл бұрын

It was a better aircraft than the F-22 in so many ways. Ironic that the USAF wants rid of the F-22.

@psychohist

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidrussell8783 Maybe the YF23 should have been developed into a F24 for the Navy the way the YF17 was developed into the F18.

@davidrussell8783

3 жыл бұрын

@@psychohist I don't know that either could be suitable by design for carrier duty. And the F-35 "joint" stealth fighter was coming anyway. But the F-23 may not yet be dead. Rumor is that Northrop Grumman has been given a green light to continue its development with the Japanese ASDF.

@johnosbourn4312

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, but it proved to be too radical, and I think the flyaway cost, along with the cost of maintaining the aircraft throughout its projected lifetime meant that it lost to the YF-22 in the ATF competition. Also, in regards to maximum speed, the YF-22 demonstrated a higher speed of Mach-2.0, while the YF-23's max speed was Mach-1.80

@piotrd.4850

3 жыл бұрын

@@psychohist It was Navy that casted vote for F-22 - even though formally withdrawn at the time from ATF programme, it felt F-22 will be easier to navalize. Also everything boils down to fact, that Lockheed Martin asked brass "ok, here are reqs....now what do you REALLY want" - and they responded "Super F-15". LM had more aggresive test flight schedule, was felt as less risky design overall and in retrospective.... while all YF-23 issues could have been worked out, eventually (more stealthy canopy, lack of contrails on wingtips ) it would still make sense only with GE engines; F-22 still has no competitor and carries more missiles than YF-23 could.

I was with the AGRESSORS (crewchief) at Nellis AFB from 1980-83. We actually received literature and brochures on the F20. It was to be the new plane for the squadron. (57AGS / 64th AMU). When I see photos of #57 w/ Michael Christiansen ( my trainer out of FTD) stenciled on the canopy I trip down memory lane. I also had an unbeknownst appearance in the movie RED FLAG. After launching out an aircraft one of the film crew walked up to me and told me my launch was going to be in the movie. (They had been filming launches from the THUNDERBIRDS' hangar.) Hadn't thought about those days in a very long time........

@atomicorang

2 жыл бұрын

I missed you by a few years…Assigned Nellis T/A 86-89. Originally inbound to A-10 phase dock.

Trivia: Born in USA, chief designer of N-156 (T-38/F-5) was Velko Gasic of Yugoslav origin (father from what is now state of Bosnia&Herzegovina). He worked on F-5 development up to F-20, also on YF-17 and Senior Ice (Northrop B-2 Spirit).

If Soviets copied the F-20 it would've been called Mig 28

@kingdomofvinland8827

3 жыл бұрын

I would like to see a tigershark with a mig-28 paint job

@Barabel22

3 жыл бұрын

Fighters were all odd numbers, bombers even numbers, even for a movie, this was well known in in 80s for people into military aviation, and just makes the scene in top gun kind of ridiculous. EDIT: I’m talking about Soviet/Russian aircraft, which is why the MiG-28 designation does not make sense.

@gregfuchs8343

3 жыл бұрын

They did copy it and called it the JF-17

@shaider1982

3 жыл бұрын

They did flight test the F5's captured in Vietnam.

@guaporeturns9472

3 жыл бұрын

Are you REALLY a Sith lord? Be honest

Watched the F-20 go down in May of 1985 Goose Bay, Labrador. The whole community was in disbelief and shock. But what an jet it was...we were all left in awe of its performance...seriously, the base would practically stop and watch this amazing aircraft tear up the skies.

Another great show Ed. Always thought the F5 was a pugnacious little fighter . Looks like Northrop got kicked in the nuts to the tune of $1billion + ! Ouch ! Thanks Ed.

@DonMeaker

3 жыл бұрын

And they went back and did it again with the F-23, and it happened again.

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

That's why they protected themselves on the B-2! #NeverAgain!

@dalestephan6777

3 жыл бұрын

Northrop got even building the B2 at 2 billion a pop..

@DonMeaker

3 жыл бұрын

@@dalestephan6777 Since fewer than 75 were built, Northrop-Grumman was awarded 1.5 billion dollars for their tooling. They spend about 34 billion on research and tooling, and each plan cost about 600 million to build, roughly the same as the Boeing 747, but the research and tooling cost had to be spread over only 21 aircraft. That is why it was so expensive. The same research and tooling was designed for building the 134 aircraft that the Air Force said they wanted. Lockheed attempted to buy NorthropGrumman, but was prevented by DoD, for anti-trust reasons. No other companies had as good a handle on Stealth, even today.

I saw Northrop's test pilot Darrell Cornell fly the F20 at Farnborough in 1984. It was truly spectacular and was awarded "Best Display in Show" by SBAC. Tragically Cornell died one month later whilst demonstrating the F20 to the Korean Airforce, G-LOC being judged to be the cause.

@josephroberts6865

2 жыл бұрын

Interesting comment that brought back a memory. I was in Korea when Mr. Cornell perished in the F-20 at Suwon Airbase, a Korean base. The crash occurred just a few hundred yards west of the runway. I know it crashed inverted and I believe the video segment showing the F-20 descending inverted with virtually no airspeed was the Suwon accident. I was serving in the Army as a CH-47 instructor and was assigned to relocate the remains of the jet consisting of fuselage aft of the cockpit, wings, and fuselage aft the wings but forward of the tail. It was amazingly pretty much intact. I picked it up on slings and drogue externally with the Chinook and flew it to Osan Airbase at airspeeds between 30-40 knots. It was not a stable load in it’s inverted condition. I sat it down in one of the keyhole parking areas and returned to Camp Humphreys, Korea. The reason it was relocated to Osan, a USAF base, is so that it could be disassembled and loaded out on a C-5 or C-141 cargo plane for return to Northrop.

@mikem.s.1183

9 ай бұрын

Great comment. 👌 It must have been awfully sad to know that something bad had happened to pilot Cornel. Respect for your jobs, gents.

At least Shin was able to put it to good use in Area 88 :)

@Tigershark_3082

3 жыл бұрын

Yep, indeed he was. Still my favorite anime to this day...

@alexmcaruthur6966

3 жыл бұрын

@@Tigershark_3082 but he shot down 20 mig-21s in his F-8 Crusader in one dogfight that was insane

@Tigershark_3082

3 жыл бұрын

@@alexmcaruthur6966 Indeed. Then again, most of those Mig-21 pilots were inexperienced

@Rick1984FL

2 жыл бұрын

Is this a un squadron reference?

@rutilantracer9116

2 жыл бұрын

@@Rick1984FL ye

From the perspective of maintenance, it was great working on something that was made to be worked on. You didn't need platforms for every other chore and the engine swapped out fairly fast. It was the plane I wanted to bring home from work, it was just neat.

Easy to maintain and cheap is not what the Pentagon wants. Always loved this beautiful plane.

@ronaldkonkoma4356

7 ай бұрын

Fighter Mafia

Small correction, the F-5A and F-5B were named Freedom Fighter. The Tiger was in fact the F-11. The F-5E was named after the squadron that flew F-5A’s in Vietnam “Skoshi Tigers”, since Tiger was already used the next number in the line was “II” hence “Tiger II”

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

3 жыл бұрын

Indeed. My bad

@raz562

3 жыл бұрын

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters Still a very good video, featuring one of my favorite aircraft. Thank you

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

@@raz562 Germany, Canada and Japan did have an interest in the F11-1F Super Tiger but Lockheed happened.

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

The F-5 then evolved into the Cobra then Cobra become the Hornet. Northrop's designs are a beauty.

@valenrn8657

3 жыл бұрын

@@Joshua_N-A Hornet has further two derivatives with F/A-18E Super Hornet and T-7 Red Hawk.

When I worked for Northrop in in the 1980s I had an opportunity to fly from Hawthorne to Edwards AFB in a small, twin engine company plane. My pilot was Darrell Cornell, Northrop's chief F-20 test pilot. Less than 6 months later he was killed in the Korea crash.

“If it doesn’t cost 6 trillion dollars....it’s not a real fighter jet.” - Lockheed Martin

@davidrice4165

3 жыл бұрын

stupid comment is stupid

@clockworkorange5588

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidrice4165 You have to ignore stupidity, and ignorance.

@AClark-gs5gl

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly!!

@jb6027

2 жыл бұрын

Another current Lockheed motto: "Promise the moon, and deliver a half-assed product 10 years late".

The F-5 / F-20 platform is still the sexiest fighter jet in my books. F-15 a close second. Based on looks alone and not performance.

@daleford8621

2 жыл бұрын

Love the sleek lines on the intakes. Reminds me of a classic muscle car.

@georgesakellaropoulos8162

2 жыл бұрын

Performance in the Tigershark version isn't shabby. I imagine if stealth technology was applied, it could hold its own today. It's already small and fast.

@thesovietvorona1007

2 жыл бұрын

@@georgesakellaropoulos8162 I’ve made my own design which still isn’t super stealthy but would be more than a viable light strike aircraft. Shorter from nose length being shorter but bigger wings somewhat. But with the F-22 engine inside it’s uh, a beast?

As a lifetime military aircraft geek, I just discovered Ed Nash's channel yesterday. I have to say that this is absolutely fabulous! You won't consistently find this type of content anywhere else. Well done, Mr. Nash!

@blackdeath4eternity

2 жыл бұрын

yeah, his channel is a little goldmine.

I felt really sorry for Northrop at the time and I think that in more than one aspect the JAS-39 C/D/E/F Gripen and Korean T/F-50 Golden Eagle show, what potential that truly lightweight fighter had. Let's comfort ourselves with the thought that the Swedes and South Koreans took its concept a few steps further and that the F-5/F-20 heritage lives on in a way in these designs.

@skaldlouiscyphre2453

3 жыл бұрын

I agree in some ways, I've always been an F-5 fanboi. That said, I think that platform had basically reached the end of it's life, which is why all of the planes carrying on it's legacy are based on new platforms. Same thing happened with the JF-17, it started off as the ultimate MiG 21 but eventually became an entirely new aircraft. The F-17 Cobra represents Northrop's more focused attempt at building a proper successor, but the requirements resulted in a bigger plane than the F-5 series. In theory Northrop could have developed a smaller, lighter, single-engine Cobra, but that's not where the money was to be made so they filled that job with a hot-rodded F-5. Since I like light fighters I might sketch up a lighter, single engine Cobra.

@Blackbirdz2000

2 жыл бұрын

F20's legacy today lives on in the shape of Jf17 thunders. actually it really is a modernized F20, its the same design essentially with little tweaks here n there to as part of its modernization.

@thesovietvorona1007

2 жыл бұрын

@@Blackbirdz2000 I still like my new design better. As there’s no way this aircraft was near its potential. At least not now, with the tech we have now we could make the F-5 a viable option for 4.5 Gen replacements. Maybe even 5th Gen if you can make it stealthy. My design wasn’t but already would be a better option than the current version of the F-16

@fjeezy1305

2 жыл бұрын

The F/A-18 is also a distant relative of the F-5 family.

@Pincer88

2 жыл бұрын

@@fjeezy1305 True. But not as light as the other single engine ones. Still you can tell the relation by the Hornet's long nose with the gun mounted in front of the cockpit.

I remember Chuck Yeager doing demos for the TigerShark

I was 15 years old in 1989 when I was reading a Jane's Military vehicle book, when I came across this beauty. Ever since I have loved the look and capabilities of this little fighter, too bad it did not get to shine as the others. I wonder what it would be like now if we kept up with updating it and finally mass produced for sale.

@davidmehrhoff8271

3 жыл бұрын

Strange idea here we are looking for a new close air support aircraft we also retiring our trainer which is basically at F5 as a trainer

@danielc2701

3 жыл бұрын

It wouldn't have sold. People are nostalgic about this aircraft and for good reasons, it was a solid workhorse but there were some limitations. It was too light. But light is good right? Faster and more agile? Not really. Equipment was also getting heavier and when it comes to percentages, a heavier fighter has an advantage. Why? Because an increase in the same weight is a smaller percentage increase of a heavier fighter, so the F-5 lost out when it comes to new equipment. Engines were getting bigger and more powerful too so ironically a heavier fighter could and often did match the performance of the F-5 with the ability to carry more as a bonus. In the end, what killed the F-5 was not politics like people claim but the fact that technology started to go beyond what the F-5 could do. Hell, remember that the F-5 engines were recycled engines from the Quail decoy, there was a limit as to what they could do.

@thesovietvorona1007

2 жыл бұрын

I mean I can show you. I’ve worked on my own modernization of the F-5G. Naturally I placed in the F-22’s engine minus the thrust vectoring as it doesn’t need it.

@thesovietvorona1007

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidmehrhoff8271 we replaced that already.

Pretty sure every single one of my military aviation nerd friends is in love with the Tigershark, and so am I.. Wish it became a proper service aircraft back then and a DCS module now..

@thesovietvorona1007

2 жыл бұрын

Shocked it hasn’t considered all the other mods that are out. And they easily can use the F-5E base model as a good place to start.

@Tigershark_3082

Жыл бұрын

There have been WIP mods for the Tigershark that have popped up, but none succeeded. Oddly like the Tigershark

When the YF-23 was rejected in favor of the YF-22, can't blame Northrop for thinking the government had an axe to grind against them. Well, after the cost-overruns that plagued the B-2 program, perhaps they do.

@SouperAsH

3 жыл бұрын

The B2 expense was pure retribution, for the gutfuck Northrop was handed during the development of the F20.

@Boeing_hitsquad

2 жыл бұрын

The YF-23 was basically a vaporware offering with almost all key technologies not included on the prototype as it didn't yet exist. The Airforce would have been stupid to pick it

@danpatterson8009

2 жыл бұрын

NG is building the B-21 for God-only-knows how much money, so I'd say their relations with the gov't are OK!

Poor Carter. Couldn’t come up with a good decision if his life depended on it.

@jackmehoff6302

2 жыл бұрын

He will shine after we see four years of biden

@Regolith86

2 жыл бұрын

To be fair to Carter, he deregulated a fair number of things, including the airline, rail, and beer industries. I don't think Biden remembers what that word means.

@springbloom5940

2 жыл бұрын

Carter's problem is he was just a nice guy. President Mr Rogers.

@largol33t1

2 жыл бұрын

@@springbloom5940 He's a racist POS

@gillewilbanks8328

2 жыл бұрын

This thread is a circle jerk of nonsense.

I love flying the F-5E in DCS, it's underpowered and has many other limitations, yet its simplicity is unmatched, great cockpit layout, very intuitive + forgiving. The Tigershark would have been a great addition.

@danielc2701

3 жыл бұрын

Heard that the cockpit was very cramped, any truth in that?

@thesovietvorona1007

2 жыл бұрын

@@danielc2701 yes, but that is the cost of being a light strike fighter. Believe it or not outside of a better visibility the A-10 is equally as cramped in my own opinion.

@fightfish3265

2 жыл бұрын

The T-38 tactical trainer was based on the F5. It has unmatched stability. The main reason NASA uses it to this day for pilot training and certification.

“Well, with a name like Tiger Shark it’d better be good!!”

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

Northrop Grumman should make a new carrier capable fighter and call it King Shark.

@elphi4321

3 жыл бұрын

F-20, "Nice kitty."

@Jester-Riddle

3 жыл бұрын

Tiger Sharks live and thrive underwater ... so, maybe not the best name ... 😂

I'd love to see an up to date F-20 + YF-23 wingbody planform . Both were breathtaking Northrop designs, 👍

Many thanks to you for doing this great video. As a Taiwanese, I have mixed feelings about whole story. To against China's air force, we produced and operated 300+ F-5E/Fs since 1970s and still keep around 40+ of them as a lead-in fighter trainer role. You can image how we rely on these wonderful tiny fighters. F-5G or F-X program gave us a opportunity to keep air superiority but politics killed it and depressed us for a very long time. So we have to try another route, IDF program came up with tone of limitation by politics (again). Some of F-5G/F-20 technologies merged into IDF program and it succeed in the end, we got the fast scrambling capability, high reliability, availability, maintainability fighter (better than F-16 block 20 and Mirage 2000-5 in our air force). We appreciate everything happened as time went on, no matter good or bad things. Thank Northrop for creating this great fighter.

@michaelhuang8390

5 ай бұрын

F5系列我也有捐贈出我自己的零用錢，我真的很愛F5從A到G！❤❤❤

Kudos to your ability to analyze these aircraft & military matters in general. Really.

2 x 20mm cannon in the nose, ufff that's a bit of firepower right there. As a young tech in the Canadian Air Force, the CF-5 was the 1st aircraft I worked on.

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

What's amazing is how many fighter jocks get totally f'ed up by an opponent (still) with guns. You can't imagine how many, even Duke Cunningham, will have an "Oh, Shit!" memory of going head-to-head with a MIG-17 or 19 only to see those funny flashes, then esclaiming, "I forgot about those!"

@stancunningham3711

2 ай бұрын

Old Air Reservist here: I worked with an old airframe tech who had Saber, Voodoo, Star Fighter, CF5, and F/A 18 time and he had nothing but praise for the CF5. Best in reliability and ease of maintenance out of the whole bunch.

Sad that the F-20 program ended the way it did, but I think we can take comfort in the fact that the F-5 lineage lives on to this day in the F/A-18.

@jacobmccandles1767

Жыл бұрын

True....and yet the Legacy Hornet itself was vastly inferior to the F-16. ( I say Legacy Hornet because the Super Hornet is a similar looking but mostly unrelated development. A different bird.)

Just had an F-5E fly over yesterday, cool!

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

Sad Malaysia retire them years ago.

@Sshooter444

3 жыл бұрын

@Mark Hepworth Reno, NV he landed at the airport. Probably based at Fallon NAS

When the program finally matured enough to overcome its humble roots the, F-20's time had passed.

What an awesome and proper video. Your channel is a gem, keep it up man.

Can you imagine how strong this guy's accent would be 6 pints down the tube??

@Guilhem74

3 жыл бұрын

If you drank the 6 pints, you'd find he'd have no longer an accent!! Pints are magical!!

@1joshjosh1

3 жыл бұрын

@@Guilhem74 🤣👍

I love this series! This is quality content! Great stuff for aviation fans!

Thank you for the video Mr. Nash! The F-20 is one of my favorite aircraft, and your video analysis is superb!

Another excellent video, Mr. Nash

Suggestions for future videos Mirage 4000, Mirage IV Nuclear Bomber, Mirage 2000N

@sergiom9958

3 жыл бұрын

Excellent planes, i never understood why Dassault ended the mirage line production. They could had been a great combination for any european country to have a combination of EF2000 and Mirage 2000

Even Chuck Yeager couldn’t sell the F-20

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

He did his thing, and took his fee; the government at the time was really watching retired military with contractors. Now the revolving door is off its hinges; witness your DOD Secretary!!!

@Idahoguy10157

3 жыл бұрын

@@jamesunger6892 …. It is a revolving door. Yeager was recruited for his celebrity

It almost came back as competitor for the TX program.

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

Why'd NG pull out? Any reasons?

@nunyabidniz2868

3 жыл бұрын

@@Joshua_N-A My money is on politics... Grumman was always a Navy shop, Northrop never seemed to have particularly close ties to the AF either.

@DonMeaker

3 жыл бұрын

@@Joshua_N-A NG looked at the decision makers, and they seemed to be in bed with Lockheed, Boeing, McDonnell-Douglas.

@ztunelover

3 жыл бұрын

@@Joshua_N-A My bet is politics. NG usually produces the most capable aircraft, but the politicians are in bed with the other manufacturers.

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

@@ztunelover is that also the reason the Navy didn't get the ST-21 Tomcat too?

I've come back to this video a year later, and it's still my favorite video on the Tigershark. Not only did you absolutely nail the story, but you did so in a non-biased and easy-to-understand/digest way. From now on, if any of my friends ever ask about the Tigershark, I'll send them this video.

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

Жыл бұрын

Thanks you! Got some other very interesting American "what ifs" in the pipeline as well.

@Tigershark_3082

Жыл бұрын

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters That's great! I really look forward to hearing about them! (sorry about the late response, by the way)

A few favorite should-have-beens YF-23 F-20 Cobra/YF-17 N-400 Tomcat 21

@geeknproud321

3 жыл бұрын

But the YF-17 became the F18. And the F-5/F-20 program led to the YF-17 to begin with.

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

YF-17 couldn't match the YF-16. Turn rate, F-100 common with F-15, plus backing of USAF Fighter Mafia too! Yeah, the 404s are reliable; so what? Strakes?

@carlosandleon

2 жыл бұрын

definitely not the YF-23 Super overrated

@carlosandleon

2 жыл бұрын

what's the N-400

This plane would be perfect for countries like the Philippines Ireland and New Zealand to name a few.

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

... even the USA.

@bennuredjedi

3 жыл бұрын

Facts! The US Army wanted the F5/20 but the USAF denied them that capability

I was a crew chief on F-5E's in the USAF back in the 70's. They were such sweet jets to work on.

I imagine it could probably be resurrected today with updated avionics, electronics and weaponry, as a budget platform for countries that cannot afford the expense of today's modern warplanes. I always remember seeing F5's and watching how manoverable they were.

@bellisarius6968

3 жыл бұрын

it would be a tough sell, just look how hard it is for Saab to sell the gripen and thats one very very capable and affordable multi mission fighter. and as time goes by there will be less and less use for manned fighters especially cheap ones. already close air support is being done by reaper drones, drones will very soon kill the market for light attack aircraft like the Super Tucano

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

Northrup is too busy with the B-21 right now, along with Black projects, and who even knows about 6th-Generation.

@LSwick-ss6nm

2 жыл бұрын

The US airforce still uses this airframe as a training jet. I also believe one of the "new" Iranian jets is a modified version of this as well.

@thesovietvorona1007

2 жыл бұрын

I already did it.

@thesovietvorona1007

2 жыл бұрын

@@LSwick-ss6nm no we just got new trainers to replace em and more to come in the future to entirely replace the T-38, sadly.

The US Government dosen't like Northrop. F5 was a struggle. Then YF17, YF23, F20 to name a few.

@Persian-Immortal

3 жыл бұрын

Don't forget the wing bombers. I always felt they didn't like Jack Northrop and his company.

@StromBugSlayer

3 жыл бұрын

What are you talking about? The YF-17 lost, but the govt said "everybody gets a medal" and ressurected it for the Navy!

@dl6519

2 жыл бұрын

Northrop was ahead of its time in other areas as well. Back in the early 80's they were running ads which included this phrase: "Equal opportunity employer, M/F/H." I don't recall seeing any other big company being so openly and actively accepting of gays in that era.

@GoogleEqualsEvil

2 жыл бұрын

@@dl6519 I'm not sure if that's supposed to be sarcasm, but back then the world wasn't anywhere near as mentally ill and immoral as it is now, so companies weren't forced to cater to abnormal / deviant lifestyle choices back then. The "H" stands for *Handicapped*.

@dl6519

2 жыл бұрын

@@GoogleEqualsEvil No sarcasm intended; I had assumed for all these years that the "H" was for "Homosexual". But now I think you are correct, that it stood for "Handicapped". Thanks for the education!

F-20 was the ultimate evolution of an older airframe. The F-17 and F/A-18 are based on another much more substantial evolution of the F-5. Personally, I'd like to have seen an even lighter (F-5 sized) single engine variant of that, even if it's only based on Northrop concept art.

I had a buddy that flew it. Really liked the plane. He said the Air Force liked it too, except that it lacked range and carrying capacity versus an F-16 and had a different engine than The F-16 which was common with the f-15 so the Air Force only had that one engine to contend with. He also said it had 59 minutes of fuel on it, too small for what the Air Force was looking for. Other than that he said it flew great.

@DonMeaker

5 ай бұрын

At the same time that the world was told the Air Force didn't want an F404 engine aircraft, the Air Force had F-117s that used two F404 engines.

The RNZAF should have replaced its ancient Skyhawks with the F-20.

Hope you do the YF-17 Cobra soon.

I guess F20 was the true inspiration for the "Mig 28" in Top Gun, since it was a really advanced fighter compared to the original F5s.

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

Oh, Please. Hollyweird ain't that smart!

My old man had nothing but praise for the F-5, he started his carreer as an airforce mechanic with the Hawker Hunter before the F-5's were acquired and in the late 80's he was part of a delegation to israel to learn about the operation, installation and maintenance of upgrades made by the IAI.

My Dad worked on the f 20 project in support systems . Cool to see it again .

Thank you for another great video. Can I suggest an episode about the Fiat G91? Cheers!

The name of the F-5A, and B was Freedom Fighter, not Tiger. The Tiger name came from the USAF's F-5 Combat Evaluation program: " Project Skoshi Tiger", which saw the air force sponsor the modification of the basic F-5A into the F-5C, by upgrading the twin J85 engines, the weapons delivery system, and adding light weight armor, and an inflight refueling probe.

Well done, enjoyed the adversary footage. Hired on at VFA 127 for the hornet program became F-5E/F airframe mech a well. Saw a F-20 flight demonstration at China Lake, lots of low level afterburner, wow.

I always considered this one of the best fighters ever. It was tiny, making it hard to spot. It didn’t have smoke plumes from the engines like the F-4, further making it hard to spot. “1st look, 1st shot, 1st kill” is out the window at that point. And it could carry the newest weapons, allowing it to close within BVR and be a threat to anything in a dogfight.

It’s the AR 180 of fighters

But interestingly enough, Saab designed a fighter around the same small GE F414 engine, and the result is the JAS 39 Gripen, a highly-regarded fighter that has some enjoyed some export sales.

@lloydadkins885

2 жыл бұрын

agreed Saab updated and built the F-20

Great analysis, excellent episode!

Very interesting video,great catch!Thank´s for sharing!Huge LIKE!Greetings!

Could you do a video om the different sidewinders and their preformance differences?

@reecetaylor2626

3 жыл бұрын

@@intag8655 fucking legend. Wiki makes it a pain in the ass to find soecific info sometimes

@billhanna2148

3 жыл бұрын

@@intag8655 dude Thank you 🙏

@major_kukri2430

3 жыл бұрын

@@intag8655 this is an excellent breakdown of the sidewinder variants.

Oh will we get Lavi next?

Great video Ed thanks

The F-5/F-20 is one of the all-time coolest looking jet fighters. It's so sleek and beautiful, it's too bad we never saw the F-20 in full production.

This is a great video. But it downplays the intrinsic performance differences between the F-20 and the F-16A/B. The F-16 has more hard points and carries nearly double the weapons load. The F-20 has the same wing size as the F-5. While both the F-16's and the F-20's turning performance degrades with a heavy weapons load, the F-20 performance degrades much more severely. It was a total pig with any load at all. The other big difference was that the tiny airframe of the F-20 could not hold as much internal electronics, and the radome (and therefore the size of the radar antenna) is much smaller than the F-16. Although the APG-67 radar in the F-20 was capable, the physics of the tiny antenna placed a limit on its performance.

I remember this plane and at the time it had a laser INS which could set under 2 minutes. In the end it lacked payload and that’s where the Falcon had it beat.

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

Wrong, it had more hard points than the initial Falcons, and the system was an under 60 seconds align and launch - - it's right in the sales video!

@LRRPFco52

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesunger6892 We were at Edwards AFB during the development of the F-5G/F-20A and I studied it quite closely. F-20A never had the weapons station count or payload of any F-16. F-16A had 9 hardpoints with higher weight allowances for stations 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9. F-20A had 7 stations with significant limits. If you carried AIM-7s on the F-20, weather conditions would result in fin strikes on the runway due to the instability of the roll axis with certain crosswinds. AIM-7 was a non-starter for that reason, as it would FOD a runway for every recovery in-practice without a perfect wings-level touchdown. F-20A also only had 1/3 the combat radius of an F-16A, even with the F-16 carrying more payload. Fire Control Radar on the F-20A was a sad joke in terms of detection and tracking ranges. The avionics were great, but Radar antennae size was constrained by the tiny radome size, even with Northrop moving the bulkhead back to buy more radome volume. Then there was the lack of rear visibility and limited thrust-to-weight ratio, even though it significantly improved on the F-5E’s anemic T/W. F-16C was under development at the time and had USAF Mil-Std INS. F-20 was dead on arrival. I liked the aircraft a lot, but wasn’t aware of all its limits until I saw the numbers.

Great video Ed. I always was a fan of the F-20. I even brought a plastic model kit of it ages ago. No idea where that went, but I liked the plane enough to buy the kit (from memory, made by Hasegawa).

@sumig0318

6 ай бұрын

I once assembled 5 F-20 models produced by Hasegawa. One was given to my classmate, and two were broken. Currently, there are only two left.

Excellent video as always

I like the new T7 red hawk. Seems like it could fill a similar role to this.

@frankleespeaking9519

3 жыл бұрын

There is little doubt at Boeing that that will happen. I personally think that it will also someday take over the Thunderbird demo aircraft when the F16’s are too old.

@kevin_1230

3 жыл бұрын

@@frankleespeaking9519 The Canadian snowbirds need a replacement. This would be perfect.

@sergiom9958

3 жыл бұрын

Spain needs to replace its F5, a combat version of them it would be good one

@kevin_1230

3 жыл бұрын

@@sergiom9958 I think an armed version would be a great light fighter.

@johnosbourn4312

3 жыл бұрын

I don't think there could be a fighter derivative of the T-7A at all, unless the air force sees a need for a fighter version of the Red Hawk, if they see a need for it.

Well balanced vid

Worked as PMO on MCAS Yuma for a year or so. got to see on a regular basis the AV-8B, F-35 (when they first arrived), and the F-5N's. got to also guard some hornets and raptors. But that little plane, its something else. I'd always do a slow roll by when the crews were getting ready for a flight. It's such an under appreciated little craft that had so much potential if not fucked raw dog by the government. There's a reason why we use it for aggressor training squadrons and it needs to be known why. Great video Ed.

In the early 1980s, I saw the Tigershark perform at Farnborough Air Show. The flight display was very impressive.

Can you make a video on the modern equivalents to the F-5, such as the FA-50?

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

There is no modern equivalent. Show me an airframe that can pull 12 -13 G's, and you found your equivalent. Those demo pilots were extremely well qualified pilots, and they both died because of the excessive G-LOC.

Best alternative to MiG-21s and MiG-23/27s and it's variants.

This aircraft has been one of my favorites since I was quite young. I think that's because of its striking lines that just make it LOOK like a great plane. Funny how the vagaries of governmental acquisitions kill off completely viable, perhaps excellent, platforms.

Good video! I have liked the look of the F20 since I first saw it. Thanks for sharing!

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

Buy and build a model of it!

Like the YF-23, this is an aircraft that should have been.

@petersouthernboy6327

3 жыл бұрын

In 1981, when six Israeli F-16A’s put at least 8 dumb unguided 2,000 pound bombs through the reactor containment dome of the Iraqi Osirak facility - that was a big selling point.

Ah yes, my absolute favorite plane besides the SR-71 and IAI Kfir C.7

@alperakyuz9702

3 жыл бұрын

You have an unusual taste of aircraft, in a good way.

@Tigershark_3082

3 жыл бұрын

@@alperakyuz9702 Thank you. I tend to like the more obscure aircraft (The X-29 is yet another favorite of mine)

@skaldlouiscyphre2453

3 жыл бұрын

F-20 vs. F-21, who wins?

@Tigershark_3082

3 жыл бұрын

@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 Well, the F-21 Kfir was basically a Mirage with canards and a J79 engine, so I'm gonna go with the F-20 Tigershark

@SoloRenegade

3 жыл бұрын

​@@Tigershark_3082 Right there with you. Excellent selection of aircraft.

Navy TOPGUN instructors were really drooling over this. They’d already dubbed it the Gomershark, and they were all dreaming of the dirty tricks they were going to pull on their students.

I didn't know the most advanced versions of this craft was that good. Its alot more formitable than i once believed!!

Jimmy Carter's intelligence was short-sighted In fact, it had an astigmatism

@kutter_ttl6786

3 жыл бұрын

Carter was incredibly naive, it's fortunate he was only a one term president.

@nunyabidniz2868

3 жыл бұрын

@@kutter_ttl6786 He sacked the general who told him [correctly] that he couldn't cut off military support to South Korea. Carter can rest easy now that he is no longer in contention for worst U.S. President against Ulysses S. Grant now that Creepy Joe has snatched that title only four months into his Marxist puppetcy!

@John_Redcorn_

3 жыл бұрын

@@nunyabidniz2868 lol. Touché. But we cant forget to include woodrow wilson (federal reserve) 😒

Another pair of great What-Ifs would be the upgraded A6 and A7 the USN were developing that Cheney cancelled when he was Sec Defense. The reengined A6 would be especially useful now.

@KB4QAA

3 жыл бұрын

PF: While I"m a fan of the A-6, by the early 90's it was becoming apparent the A-6's day was ending. It was much slower than the F-14/F-18 and could not keep up to their optimum cruise speeds in a strike package. It also had a huge radar cross section. Smart bombs killed the need for a bomb dump-truck which was the A-6 forte. Finally, the end of the Cold War necessitated multi-mission strike fighters which the A-6 was not.(ret'd NFO).

Great air to ground fighter. Was able to fly these at the 425th Tactical Fighter Training Squadron in AZ. Wonderful to fly!!

Despite all its flaws, I still think the F-5 is the most beautiful military airframe ever produced.

*Resurrect this fighter please!* They're lot of 3rd world countries who really need budget fighter jets, in friction of cost before they choose China designed JF17.

@exploreradverturer8396

2 жыл бұрын

Too late buddy. JF-17 Block-3 is in the league of JAS-39NG.

The Tigershark It would have been an excellent fighter platform….the Pentagon was and still is very short sighted…

@jamesunger6892

3 жыл бұрын

Look at what the USAF/DOD Fighter Mafia had to do to get the F-16 and A-10! And you should hear them bitch about how the USAF grew the YF-16 and added all the weight!

Whenever I see the F-5’s, and even more so the F-20, I imagine a designer coming up with the most aesthetically pleasing “vision” of a jet fighter. Truly beautiful aircraft. Since then, the in service U.S. aircraft that comes the closest to such beauty is the legacy F/A-18 Hornet… IMHO.

A little known aspect is that this was virtually a GE airplane. GE had the engine, engine control, heads up display engine, guns flight control and radar. Each division picked up a piece without corporate realizing how deeply they were into it. The radar was especially difficult but ultimately achieved very high reliability very early. As we understood it, it had low range which was regarded as a plus since it limited the F-20 to self defense.

@danielescobar7618

Жыл бұрын

I make Leupold scope parts. Does that mean Leupold Scopes are virtually "Dan Escobar Scopes?" Naw, not how it works.

@DrJon-zf2xo

Жыл бұрын

Not the same, If Luepold sold their scopes with your parts in them and they were key parts thhey could well be clled the Escobar versions. Making aftermarket repair parts is not the same as providing OEM.

Cool looking jet. I wonder what the 6gen fighters will look like. I'm guessing they will have to be fully automated. Human body's limitations, must be at the max it can take with today's 4th and 5th gen fighters

@flavortown3781

3 жыл бұрын

Eh the human isnt really a limiting factor as they have to support humans on the ground, and such, 6th gen will likely see uav wingmen integrated to the datalink, wider datalink targeting control, millennium 7 has some good vids about it, I actually think the human is one of the best parts of an aircraft

@noodles169

3 жыл бұрын

@@flavortown3781 you make good points about the human factor. I'll check those vids out bro. Thanks 😎👍

One of the best looking series of aircraft ever.( I say that about every airplane)

Anybody notice the similarity in philosophy between the F-20 and the Gripen? Both small, very agile, very cost effective aircraft, both single engine (and basically, the same engine, for that matter), both Mach 2 capable. While the designs obviously have NO commonality, the end result in both cases was fairly similar.

@zippyzonka

3 ай бұрын

Some commonality exists... basically Same engine.

Amazing video, thanks.

The F20 had a lot going for it. Unfortunately it cost the same to buy as an F16, so the airforces of the world chose the latter instead..

Very well made video 👍 F-20 Tigershark would be really relevant as a Light Combat Fighter (LCF) in today's times for many Airforces who would gladly buy it for USD 20-25 mil per piece affordable price point as frontline fighters range anywhere from USD 60-90 mil per piece.🧐

Thanks alot Jimmy....

There is a book called "Warriors" by Barrett Tillman. It is a short easy read but it is a book that I have repeatedly read because it exemplifies what a small determined group of professional airmen can do with a small inexpensive but capable fighter aircraft, namely the F20. I think the US Government made a mistake by not investing further into the development and production of this machine since it was perfect for a small localized conflict. The ease of maintenance and serviceability at small out of the way fields was a key factor in the F20 as the book points out when the plane is selected. Unfortunately the Government was on a kick for multirole aircraft instead of a dedicated fighter but had the F20 been selected for production, I am sure it would have proven to be as valuable as the A10 Warthog is to ground troops.