glad rag,
You haven't flicked my switch at all old chap. But as I said, I despair that there are people (you're clearly not the only one) who don't trust LockMart's company spiel, but lap up Sukhoi's as if it were gospel. Seems like a very unbalanced position to take to me. Yes the Russians have been trying to figure out how to crack the stealth nut for decades, but that doesn't mean that they have. Even if they've got their design absolutely sorted at the first attempt, and their sensors have somehow incorporated alien technology, Russian aircraft maintenance and manufacturing is not world-reknowned for its quality, and LO aircraft are highly dependent on both to keep their signatures down.
I suppose your single-minded obsession for F-22 dog-fighting manoeuvrability is your reason for thinking that the F-35 isn't worth buying? I'm afraid that, as I'm only a simple pilot who's dumb enough to fly single-engined airplanes over the sea, I don't understand your banter. Ever since 1914 or so there have been highly manoeuvrable fighters (such as the Camel, Spitfire IX or F-22 and Typhoon), and slightly less manoeuvrable aircraft that are optimized for schwacking ground targets. The situation today is no different. Except there is a difference - if you're a really quite stealthy striker and have the best radar, IRST and datalinks on the battlefield, you've got no excuse for ever stumbling into a turning fight with anyone. How many turning fights did the F-117 get into during its service life, even including exercises? How many B-2s have been caught unawares in exercises?
Finally, if the US won't sell you an F-22 even if you wanted one anyway, surely it's a moot point? Unless you think BAE can just whip one up for us in a couple of years...?
We can do the whole 1 vs 2 engine debate somewhere else and some other time. Regards,
Single Seat, Single Engine, The Only Way To Fly