[Nowhere Man]

There was one that was being developed for Israel that with the use of water injection, it could top Mach 3 at high altitude.....IIRC it was called the F-4X. The State Department nixed it, and later the Air Force pulled funding because it would interfere with the F-15 project.

Then there is the F-4 2000 “Super Phantom”/Kurnas 2000, or the Turkish version of the Kurnas known as the F-4E 2020 Terminator.

IIRC, I think you can nudge a stock F-4 to Mach 2.6 so Mach 3.0 is not too far out of the question. The only downside is that there are times it might not be as maneuverable but for cost and a few updates in avionics, it wouldn't be a bad fighter in today's world. Even the F-15 could deal with anything out there now and the foreseeable future. I don't know, to me the F-35 JSF looks like a piece of junk, maybe I'm wrong but when I see it, it screams out "Yugo" to me. The F-22 is OK and cool, the cost is a downer but when you think about it, I think if you built a new F-15 today, it could come close to costing what an F-22 would.

[2CAVTrooper]

“for cost and a few updates in avionics, it wouldn’t be a bad fighter in today’s world.”

That’s why Turkey went the route they did with their F-4E’s, and have effectivly extended their useful service life to at least 2020.

“Even the F-15 could deal with anything out there now and the foreseeable future.”

The F-15 needs some structural reinforcement, and a more stringent inspection routine to prevent the recent string of losses to the fleet.

I agree with you on the F-35. They want too many capabilities incorporated into the design and as a result it isn’t going to do anything as good as a purpose designed aircraft could. With exception of stealth, it barely has the performance of the F-16 it’s supposed to replace.

The F-22 is a cool aircraft. The one thing I could never understand about the Air Force is their need for everything to be multi-mission. So instead of using the F-22 the way it’s supposed to be used, some pencil pushing weenie decided that the Air Force needed to hang bombs on the F-22 to make it more a more “glamorous” multi-mission aircraft. So now what’s the point of going through with the F-35A when the F-22 has already been given mud moving capability? I say either strip the mud moving from the F-22 and use it as it was designed, or cancel the F-35 outright.

In 1998 dollars, the F-15C had a fly away price of $29.9 million per airframe, so even if the cost has doubled, we can still probably buy at least 3 for the price of one F-22.