rh200, I don't disagree with your point at all, the discussion was mearly about the Candian position. It has long been their feeling that they would rather have two engines for the northern areas where survival can be be a real challenge.
Agreed, we went down this road with the F16, F18 acquisition if I remember correctly, and also when the RFDS acquired the PC12, and we had the sky was going to fall in argument.
Whilst each country can be different, they will all have to apply weightings to all the pro's and cons. So I suppose it will come down to the statistical projections of what the failures and outcomes will be against the others.
The United States bases many of its F-22s in Alaska," he adds. "The F-35s will not be based in Alaska because a single-engine plane is inappropriate for the Arctic — the United States Air Force has decided that
The F-22 and F-35 are two very different beasts, apart from the F35 still being in development, I would think that the F-22's being in Alaska would be to defend against the most likely threat.