Not irrelevant. It just assumes incorrectly that only F-22s will assure air dominance. This, of course, neglects the multitude of mult-service and allied F-35s, Patriots, Ground-based AMRAAM, Theater High Altitude Air Defense, Aegis Standard Missiles.…

Some nations may purchase a few of the very best Russian/Chinese aircraft. No threat nations beyond the U.S. and its allies will be able to afford the quantities of stealth aircraft (and anti-stealth air defenses) and fuel to feed them for training and daily ops like the West can.

187 to 220 F-22s would be more than enough with our expected F-35 fleets.

Now another conflict where again sandal clad insurgents using improvised weapons have held off a technologically superior force enjoying unlimited air superiority, spy satellites, etc., for over six years.

And from a cave in Afghanistan a 9/11 strike launched deep into the hearts and minds of America by, again, sandal clad fighters, that penetrated multi-billion dollar defenses, intel networks, etc., of a country enjoying air superiority over its own frontiers and airspace.

And in Afghanistan, after six years of fighting off a technologically superior force enjoying, again, unlimited air superiority, the insurgency is actually growing in that country.

Now, lets see, where do we deploy the F-22? Over which battlefield will it provide force projection, air superiority? Which hovel will it attack? Which cave will it seek out?

How many of the Taliban’s air force fighters will it engage in combat? Or Bin Laden’s bombers will it shoot from the skies? Or Chavez’s cocaine laden mini-subs coming ashore in the Caribbean? (Where drugs are, terror networks are not far behind).

The answer to the question of how many F-22s are needed to assure air dominance over the skies of Iraq and Afghanistan and Sudan and Somalia is “irrelevant.”

To all the budget weanies looking to shutdown its production, I am looking for the quantative analysis that answers this question: “What is the number of F-22s needed to absolutely ensure air dominance over any future combat zone?”

We Americans are forgetting that our soliders and Marines have been victorious in part due the complete air domaniance over every battlefield since WWII. Not having enough air superiority fighters to ensure this complete dominance is a sure way to disrupt ground combat.

You are right, of course, about sheer numbers making the winning argument, but the Russians have clearly been quite limited in their production capabilities in the years since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Even Sukhoi has commented that they will probably only manufacture 200+ Su-35 PAK FAs by that models’ production end date of 2020 (at around 20 per year), and most of those will be parceled out to various foreign nations, not to just one. At least at this time, it seems highly unlikely that a squadron of F-22’s would be facing 100x’s their number of older or future generation Russian fighters in combat any time in the foreseeable future.

The F-22 may well be the last of the manned fighters. However, it is going to be around for a long, long time. My money is on its taking a couple of decades to even come close to its avionics.

BTW: If you are or you are not impressed with the F22, wait until you see the F35 JSF!

You think perhaps China might be interested in challenging us in the next ten years over Taiwan or perhaps try to push us completely out of Asia? Russia? India?

All of these countries are developing fifth generation fighters more advanced than our F-16s and F-15s. The F-22 and F-35 are needed to maintain our edge in air superiority.

The problem lies in the cost. While I say we need these, we also need to be looking at more UAVs, which are cheaper and can do many of the Global Strike missions much more effectively than a manned aircraft.

BTW, Clark’s actual field performance is comprised of just one month and is highlighted by his leading his squad into a lethal ambush, after which brass wisely limited Clark to desk duty.

I am curious however as to why they chose to exhibit the raptor on the first trade day. If they’re not trying to sell it, why exhibit it on a day when only trade customers are there? Why not fly on the public days and wow the paying public?

However, I must say that the aerobatic routine and manouvreability of the Raptor, although amazing, simply wasn’t as good as the MiG 29 OVT from FI06. The F-22 is a much more powerful aircraft, but I’m sorry to say, the Russians can still do things that you can’t!

Instead they basically chose to one-up the acrobatics routines Sukhois have been legendary for, which makes perfect sense. It shows off our engineering talents, it makes great airshow spectacle, and it doesn’t play any of our wartime cards. It’s so fashionable for people to thumb their noses at the US these days that it’s not worth wasting effort trying to gain approval anyhow.