"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...

Well so much for Tarver being "reformed". You lasted what, four or
five days? I guess it was too much to expect for you to turn over a
new leaf.

I never made any claim that I was going to reform.

The impression I got from the other thread is that you were going to
refrain from sniping at people and grow up. My mistake.

Did you expect that somehow your ignorance would now go unchallenged?

Snipping out the 2/3 of your post that were without basis was intended to be
instructional for you in the future.

Any way the F-22 program turns out now, I will have been correct in my
agreement with the Congressman for California that the program should
have
died in '98.

*massive eye roll* No matter how it turns out huh? Well I'm glad you
are happy in that little fantasy world you've constructed for
yourself.

They are not enough F-22s to be cost competitive in an era of reliable
airborn weapons delivery platforms.

*IF* they get the full 277 they will have more than enough.

There is no 277, Ferrin and even that "full 277" is less than the "full 336"
of 2 years ago. The number of likely production F-22s is now well south of
180.

From an
air to air perspective go read up on how many F-15Cs were used in
Desert Storm. You also have to keep in mind that *reliable* and
*effective* are not interchangable.

Why would I have to keep that in mind? It is the weapons themselves that
need to be effective. Wasting money on flash is of little real utility.

A reliable airborn weapons platform is what is required, the F-22 does not
address the issues of today's warfare, let alone tomorrow's.