I had the opportunity about 6 months ago to spend some time with a former USMC and Air National Guard pilot who retired as a Col. after 28 years. He had flown combat in Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. He had flown every fighter in the US inventory except for the F-22, and as I sat in his house looking at all the plaques on the wall, I could easily see this guy was Sierra Hotel. He’d gone to all schools, Top Gun, you name it. He had testimonials, pictures of him with famous people shaking hands, you could tell he made a mark.
I asked him what it was like flying against an F-22, and he said it was like being a baby seal. Not even close.
“Like being a baby seal...”
Those were his words...
The thing about the Raptor is that it is an all-round superlative fighter. Its survivability is not just all about 'stealth' (and people tend to overestimate stealth), but rather stealth + kinematics + avionics. It really is the perfect airframe.
As for comparisons between the F-22 and other fighters (other being the F-35, the SU-30, and the F-15/16/18) it is best to look at what the builder of the F-22 and the F-35 had to say.
(‘Raptor’s Edge’, 9 February 2009) "The operational arguments focus on combat effectiveness against top foreign fighter aircraft such as the Russian Su-27 and MiG-29. Lockheed Martin and USAF analysts put the (kill) loss-exchange ratio at 30-1 for the F-22, 3-1 for the F-35 and 1-1 or less for the F-15, F/A-18 and F-16."
3:1 is very good. Just nowhere as good as 30:1.
Now, from the very beginning the USAF was supposed to have a hi-lo mix of the F-22 and F-35 (stemming from the ATF at the high end and the JSF at the low end), but due to all sorts of nonsense and cuts the numbers of the F-22 have been cut to nothing (due to the Bush and Obama administrations, with the Bush administration making the cuts to 187 and the Obama chaps solidifying that ...it is just that most people just concentrate on Obama as if the Raptor program was doing well before that). Anyways, F-22 numbers were cut, and now the story changed into how the F-35 can do the job just as well (and not only that, but how upgraded F-15s, in particular radar upgrades to AESA, will be enough). That is correct ...the F-35 will be enough, as will upgraded F-15s. There is only one problem, and that is that the US will not be messing around with nations like China and Russia. Which I guess is ok, since (looking at the last couple of decades) the US has only engaged the likes of Grenada, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, the Balkans, Panama, etc. Even an up-to-date F-4 Phantom with breathed on avionics and more modern weapons would have been more than sufficient. However, if the US ever needs to do something in defense of Taiwan (which I doubt it would do anyways) then it will quickly discover legacy platforms like the F-15/16/18, and tier-2 assets like the F-35, will never be able to compete with what a F-22 would have been capable of. But hey, the US wouldn't go to Taiwan's defense anyways, so it doesn't matter. And against the likes of Iraq/Somalia/Afghanistan even a F-16 with an upgraded radar (maybe a RACR or SABR AESA kit) and some extended range JDAMs/SDBs with the AMRAAM-C+/D would be more than enough.
If I were Taiwanese I would definitely be spending more on my own defense. Or else risk getting the same harsh jolt to reality that Georgia's Mikheil Saakashvili received when the Russians rolled in and all NATO did is ....erm ....