The way I see it, if it costs less than 120 times what a F-15 costs it is worth it. (241/2)
How many could we buy if we diverted the money from the UN?
The F-22 is a much better investment.
Saw some F-16s, but no F-22s. Guess cloaking is part of the new design.
If they would take the billions they are stuffing in Haliburton's pockets and wasting in Iraq they would have enough money to buy another hundred or so.
Only time media gives a crap about the cost of something is when it involves the military.
Considering that we still have superiority over anything else with such birds as the F-15, why not keep the F-22 program around and even advance that but also keep producing F-15s and improving those as well. I'd hate to see advanced aircraft not be developed but I'd also hate to see us with too few birds due to high costs.
It isn't a kill ratio that makes the aircraft so great once a seriously superior kill ratio has been established, it is getting those birds to every place they need to be around the globe. Too high a cost means fewer birds.
US war fighting doctrine begins with first obtaining air superiority. If we lack for enough F-22's to gain that air superiority, all the rest of our war fighting strategy collapses. Also, while the F-22 is way better than anything else at the moment, other nations will start closing the performance gap, and then we are going to need a lot more of them. With that said, UAV's are the wave of the future and manned fighters may be on the way out. UAV's without the need for life support, or g-force restrictions, are more nimble and potentially stealthier and definitely more expendable.
The price per plane I recently read was four hundred and thirty one million dollars.
Will post a link if I am able to find it.