Here we go again with an even more complex tri-service compromise. The Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps can use the same rifle. Not so with aircraft.
The mantra during F-15 design was "not one pound for air to ground". The result of this focus on air combat with no compromise is the only fighter plane in history never defeated in air combat. The F-22 could have been the next fighter to do this. So we dump it for a tri-service turd.
“The F-22 could have been the next fighter to do this. So we dump it for a tri-service turd.”
A lot of people have this impression from the trashing it’s received in the media. Instead, it’s an operational fighter being deployed where we really want to intimidate an adversary.
Reflect on the fact that the main reason the F-22 lines shut down is that no foreign sales were allowed - it’s considered too good (and too classified) for even our closest allies. Japan and Australia both wanted F-22s.
The mantra during F-15 design was “not one pound for air to ground”. The result of this focus on air combat with no compromise is the only fighter plane in history never defeated in air combat. The F-22 could have been the next fighter to do this. So we dump it for a tri-service turd.
That is true until the Air Force grew tired of the bland single mission concept and developed the F-15E Mud Hen.
They’ve been itching to kill the A-10 because it’s ONLY a single mission aircraft (at one point a CAS variant of the F-16 was tested)
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article18.html
And these same morons later dictated that the F-22 had to be able to carry bombs