[PreciousLiberty]

” Unfortunately, even at inflated F-35 prices, the F-22 is way more expensive and can’t carry large ordnance.”

Actually the F-22 now has a lower flyaway cost per copy. It can currently carry two JDAMs plus a couple of AMRAAMs, or eight SDBs. If fitted with external hard points like the F-35 has, it could carry plenty of ordinance when stealth is not needed (most of the time). There’s also a proposed FB-22 with a larger weapons bay, no vertical stabilizers, a larger wing, and two seats - an interesting variant potentially.

With supercruise and all-aspect stealth, the F-22 is a vastly superior plane to the F-35. No wonder 0bama hates it...

[tanknetter]

It can currently carry two JDAMs

But its limited to two 1000lb JDAMs, since the weapons-bay design was frozen before the decision to take the F-22 multimission (recall the F/A-22A era?).

The F-35 was designed from the outset for 2000lb-class bombs. Which include the 2000lb JDAM penetrators.

One thing that kinda annoys me about the F-35 debate is that the aircraft has been positioned as a strike-fighter in the same class as the F-16 and F/A-18 Hornet. Both of which originated as lightweight, highly maneuverable day-fighters. And onto which a light strike capacity was added (and in the case of the F/A-18 carrier capability as it evolved from the F-17).

The F-35 is really a light strike aircraft with a decent air to air capability. So think of it more as a platform that fulfills the A-7, F-117 and AV-8B role, but is better than all of those at air to air.