In message , Ed Rasimus
writes
UK is credible, but may not be financially able.

The COEIA in 1995 put the F-22 clearly top of the tree in capability,
but even at the prices then estimated it simply wasn't available in
adequate numbers compared to the alternatives; and the combat modelling
included numbers flying as a factor. The Raptor was outstanding when it
met the enemy, but the vignettes modelled ended up with too many Red
raids getting through without being intercepted when a (constant-budget)
force had F-22s: while Typhoon at that point was "half as good" (the
JOUST modelling put its exchange rate against a 'son of Flanker' at 4.5
to 1, compared to 9:1 for F-22 in the same conditions - a gross
oversimplification of some careful work, but a handy headline number)
but was available in sufficient numbers to actually meet and beat Red in
the scenarios seen.

I recall saying a decade ago that while Raptor was excellent, it was
expensive enough that only the US could afford a usefully-sized force
and even that wasn't certain... indeed I remember suggesting - in jest
at the time - that the US might end up with fewer F-22s than the UK were
getting Typhoons.

--
The nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its
warriors, will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done
by fools.
-Thucydides


pauldotjdotadam[at]googlemail{dot}.com