http://www.af.mil/specials/scope/f22_f35_program.html

I think this is stupid. Why in the he** would you build the world's most kicka** airplane and then limit its roles? I guess the CSAF wants the Raptor flying circles over Atlanta and D.C. instead of blowing up terrorists. It's fine that you want to put C model guys in the Raptor, but why in the world would he insinuate that F-16C, Strike Eagle, or F-117 guys don't understand the Air Superiority game as well as anyone else? Dumb.

Just my .02 but here it is. I don't think this is necessarily the entire reason but seems to me that you maximize it's roles in the requirements phase for a number of reasons. 1) when the program gets cut, which it inevitably will for budgetary reasons, you have something to fall back on. 2) if you're going to buy JSF, which the AF has committed to, you justify its existance by giving it a mission. Of course big AF and Navy for that matter understand that each aircraft can adapt to either mission and do it very well. So when it gets cut and bought and tested and sent into operational duties in it's current state, you can modify the mission to fit the needs. Not efficient but certainly viable. Case in point, the F-14 turned out to be one of the most lethal attack assets in the Navy for many years, not bad for an airplane designed around a missle. Your point is well taken however, but realize this: Raptor was not designed to fight the war on terror, nor will it necessarily. Think bigger picture and you will have your answer. For that, and I'm a Navy guy, it will be well served. Presence and capability go along way in deterrance. Again, just my .02.

Plus, I'd give small diameter bomb a maybe but in general I don't see the 22 ever being much of a CAS platform. Unless they start hanging externals all over it'll never touch an E (which wasn't necessarily a CAS platform at the outset either....) or a 10 of course. Though the F/A effort was amusing.

I think the previous point about justifying the JSF is probably dead on.

Soon the entire community will be taken over by dudes who won't allow themselves to say the "B" word.

Who cares if it carries SDB.

SDB is a great solution for a non-existant problem.

No problemo! The word "bomb" will be replaced by the acronym GEM, for "Gravity-powered Earth-intercept Missile".

Thats funny!

copy, so now that we have justified the development of the SDB (contracts and contractors) and other weapons designed for that PUNY weapons bay in the "Useless Double Deuce", i guess we can move on to justifying other useless things (like single role fighters).....ugh!!!

but it does put on a GREAT airshow routine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Like most people I could b!tch all day about the 22 but I actually missed the controversy on the SDB, what's that about?

I don't have a problem with the Raptor, it's a great jet and everyone I've talked to whose gone to the merge with one (if they got that far) agrees with that. I think it'll be an asset to the AF. However, I do have a problem with the single track focus of a dinosaur like Mosely has. Unless you have a one for one swap with the F-15C, then NO, the F-22 isn't a replacement for the Eagle. Sure, one F-22 can do the work of 4 Eagles, but unless we change our tactics to let lone fighters fly around then one F-22 can't be in all the places that 4 Eagles can be. The F-22 shouldn't be looked at as the "next generation _______" whatever. It's a whole different animal, so why in the world wouldn't we let it do all the things it can do? I just don't understand why in hell we'd spend a gazillion dollars on an airplane that would be completely useless unless we go to war with China. How about we build an airplane that is relevant to TODAY'S war AND would come in handy if we go to war with China? Call me cynical, but I think Mosely is playing fighter pilot chest thumping games rather then doing the right thing. He'd rather hook up his C-model "Bros" and keep the whole MiG killer mystique going than drop bombs on islamic terrorists.