Gee ... those are pretty big assumptions. I might suggest to your brother that overconfidence in the inabilities of his adversaries is not an optimal approach.
Don't even get me started on the logistics and time required to launch and marshal 72 aircraft without the benefit of aerial refueling - something the Chinese have tried, but are no good at and don't have the tankers to support it.
Manned spaceflight used to be beyond them, too.
Now, your brother is obviously closer to the topic than I am, but I can't help wondering if he's not just a bit too dismissive of the Chinese. Especially given that any war we fight against them will be a) closer to China; and b) long.
I think if he's even just a little bit wrong, the F22's qualitative superiority may not prevent losses; and as losses occur, they will be hard to replace; and the Chinese will continue to inflict losses.
As for me, I'd sure feel better if we had a crap-load more available airframes than we actually do.
Not assumptions; observations. As I wrote, he is in a position to know.
The author of the simulation/study thingy is the one who was making big assumptions. There's much more to consider than simple numerical and/or technical superiority of the aircraft involved. That was my brother's point.
Manned spaceflight used to be beyond them, too.
It still is.
Now, your brother is obviously closer to the topic than I am, but I can't help wondering if he's not just a bit too dismissive of the Chinese. Especially given that any war we fight against them will be a) closer to China; and b) long.
Not so much dismissive as informed. Fear is born of ignorance. The author doesn't know many of these things, so he makes incorrect assumptions and reaches an incorrect conclusion.
I added my brother's comments to shed the light of actual knowledge on this discussion. I'll trust knowledge over speculation every single time.