LivingInMEM

How about the MULTIPLE F-15's with nearly all of the offensive capability (just not quite so stealthy) that Boeing offered for the price of one F-22? The fact that those aircraft were combined with datalink/HMS/advanced IRCMD/ESA/etc that already exists made it an even better decision.

I have never trusted the USAF procurement of the F-22 - they quit spending money on the F-15 (outside of software upgrades) in the '90's to make it look like we needed the F-22 all that much. Once the buy was made, they found the resources to add ESA/etc to the F-15.

By the way - if you buy into super-cruise you'll also buy into the Sham-Wow and every other marketing campaign out there. First of all, a clean F-15 (especially with -220's, but also with -100's) will super-cruise. Second, super-cruise means nothing more than Mach at mil - ever care to ask what the FF is at that power setting for the F-22 or how that compares to even min or mid-AB on an F-15 or F-16? It's not about super-cruise, it's about ability to cover the VUL - and F-22's make F-16's feel like Strike Eagles when it comes to endurance. Of course you can add external tanks, but what does that do to RCS even after the tanks are punched? Then, as the article alluded to, more complex equals more Red Balls and more Code-3's - ever hear them talk about the MR rate of this aircraft compared to 30-yr old F-15's?

Quit believing the hype and the invalid kill ratio (108 to 0 or whatever it is now) from supposed flags, etc. Get past the marketing, get past the "it's a cool airplane to fly", and compare the cost (loss of F-117's, loss of F-15's, loss of who knows what in addition to the true dollar cost) of 189 F-22's to what we could have had. you can have the greatest fighter in the world, but when you only have 4 or 6 airborne against 120 Chinese or NK Mig-21's, etc (and the F-22's are still carrying the same AAMRAAM that has always been carried), someone is going to get through. Kind of like this example: YouTube - T-38 vs F-22 . The F-22 may be a great airplane, but it is not magic - just like the AIM-7 wasn't in the '60's. It would better suited to be part of a mix of a larger fleet, even if the per-unit cost would be greater. I would rather have 40 more-expensive F-22's and 260 new-generation F-15's than 187 F-22's - it's all about missiles in the air.

You don't sell the farm to end up with a much smaller fleet that is 100% comprised of aircraft that were designed to counter 5% of the threat - no more than FedEx is going to buy anything other than 100% 777's (to the exclusion of everything else) when only 5% of the routes require it. Even if they told Fred Smith what a great and leading-edge aircraft it was, capable of handling any pallet size likely to show up for the next 30 years - he still wouldn't do it.


III Corps - the F-15A was quite a capable aircraft.