You and I need to debate this. I think you remember the last time we tried to take a single airframe and make it do all missions. The F-35 is a single engine lightweight version of the F-111 from a mission standpoint, with the same compromises for the sake of redundancy and costs as the Aardvark, the same need for better power, the same need for it's mission scope to be scaled WAY back, and the same over-confident procurment team expecting to turn a little piggy into a princess.
The stuff I hear about what the F-22 is doing to other aircraft in ACM in 1v3, 1v4 engagements is beyond anyone's wildest dreams. I'm told 4 Eagles against a single F-22 is not a fair fight. The Raptor locks and cocks before the Eagles get a blip. Angles off at the merge, nose on to a planview before the Eagle is halfway around, shots from just behind 3-9. You cant turn and burn from that.
Why do I get the feeling tests like that have the F-22 with the HCMS/AIM-9X and the Eagles with AIM-9M.
Or maybe it was just a Navy guy in the F-22 with your average two circle Air Force pukes in the Eagles.
Are you talking about the F-4, 14, 15, 16, 18 or 22? I don't at all think the F-35 can be compared to the F-111. In fact, I think there is a better comparison between the F-111 and the F-22. The F-111 was an expensive program full of leading edge technology that was made operational before it was really ready. The initial results were disasterous. Fortunately, the problems were worked out, and I would argue that the F-111 became a very successful strike aircraft that served its role well.
It's great that the F-22 can dominate a 1 v 3 ACM engagement. Now find me a scenario where we send our fighters into an environment where they might face a WVR 1 v 3 engagement. You show me an F-22 driver that commits to a 1 v 3 merge and I'll show you a guy who didn't know how to use the sensors the F-22 is built around.