[freedumb2003]

>>Is this thing any good?

Not as being considered.

>>What does this do that the F22 does not do?

Nothing. The F22 could do the F35 mission and then shoot the F35 down. All while the F22 pilot is still in the shower.

>>Do we need both?

Not really. As usual, since the 70s when we created the fantastic F16, F14, F18 and the still ruling F15 (not to mention the SR71), military aircraft are not only subject to physics but the petty infighting of Congress.

[Kenny Bunk]

Thanks. You have answered my question. If I understand the answer, the smart move would be to build more F-22s and forget about the F-35, of which we can afford what, 5 planes? The CHICOM must be ROTFLTAO.

I do not understand these procurements. For one thing, the number of units always seems ridiculously low. We own what, 20 F-22s? WTF good is that going to do for us in a real war? It's obvious that the brunt of combat duties for the next 10 years will still fall upon upgraded F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, which thank God we have in large numbers.

E.G., we own 19 B-2 Bombers. With 19 bombers we're going to take out Iran? I doan theenk so.

[tanknetter]

Nothing. The F22 could do the F35 mission and then shoot the F35 down. All while the F22 pilot is still in the shower.

I know there's a lot of talk about how the laws of physics don't apply to the F-22 (usually by the Aggressor pilots at Nellis), but I believe it's incapable of operating from CVNs and LHA/LHDs ... which the F-35C and F-35B (respectively) can do.

I also believe that the F-22 is incapable of carrying 2000lb class weapons internally. Nor does it have any sort of integrated IR/Laser sensor/targeting suite.