MOL - perhaps on the planet you're living on (one where we Brits have signed up to the European single currency instead of retaining the Pound) but...
It's already been explained that the main reason we Europeans haven't bought into the F-22 is because we can't afford the thing; also because ,
1. Based on past history, we don't trust you American chappies not to offer marginally downgraded versions (understandable) which would be much more expensive but but not so much more capable than Typhoon as to justify the difference in price.
2. Because it'd cost an absolute fortune to procure
3. Because we would want a degree of tech transfer and operational sovereignty that the US is quite unlikely to grant (understandable)
4. Because the cost of operating the things is too much for us to bear with our defence budgets
5. Because it would be politically unacceptable to obtain a highly expensive platform which is perceived as being an irrelevance in modern operations. Typhoon, designed from the outset as a multi-role platform, has faced this charge, so how d'you think the idea of buying the archetypal Cold War legacy combat aircraft would go down with the media over here?
6. Because we don't think we're likely to be running into hordes of enemy F-22s in the lifetime of the Typhoon, just as one would hope that no US citizen will be hoping to see a USAF F-22 take on four Luftwaffe Typhoons at any point in the next century... So, we are content with the idea that the Typhoon will be able to handle itself against likely adversaries, not least since any really difficult adversaries are going to be tackled in coaltion with the US which has F-22s. Another reason why we don't quite see the need to buy the F-22 instead.
7. Did I mention the cost?
By the by, if you're claiming the YF-22 as the progentior of the F-22 (not unreasonable) I have to note that the EAP, a similar progentior of the operational type which ultimately emerged, flew in 1986.
Last edited by Archimedes; 22nd Nov 2008 at 00:57.