Originally Posted by
Kasserine06
Here is another hypothetical situation, we buy 380 F-22s and train like WWIII is around the corner.
I am not advocating buying more Raptors. They are expensive no doubt. But I do not agree that 180 are sufficient as is often argued. And since the -35 is still years off, we may go through a few years where we are less than capable of responding. Meanwhile the Chinese are bulking up. And as you noted the Chinese have the ability (technology and money) to build a lot of new machines. They also do not have to worry about basing.
As you hinted at in your post, the weakest part in our fleet is the tankers. Those are things we really need.
Very much so and like many things, the process has become very convoluted so the need is overshadowed by politics. As a former tanker puke, it always amazed me that the NVAF never came after us as we sat off the coast refueling the F-4s and -105s.
We do disagree, but this is not a new debate. Whenever new military equipment is introduced there are always those that think it is a waste and some that think it is vital. B-1A and M1A1 come to mind each with completely different results.
The BONE and the tank are interesting examples. The BONE for example seems to have finally come into its own as a stand-off platform but that certainly is NOT the mission it was designed for or intended for. But then the F-4 was originally designed as a fleet interceptor, not intended as a dog-fighter. This just goes to show the guys at the pointy end find ways of making things work in spite of politics.