We should be comparing to T-38, not F-5E. Don’t forget we’re talking existing F125, not the improved series. We aim for affordable and cheap for the trainer. If you want to expand the role to fighters then you hot rod from there.

If you are going to spring for a full afterburning F404 then you may as well opt for the non-afterburning F100 or F110 at the same price for better lifetime performance. I think the USAF is better served using an engine based on current product lines than to adopt a new engine it doesn’t use except in a few small niches.

I beg to differ on the F4x4 being the engine relative to the time period. One F125 can push 8-9K pounds of wet thrust. That is more than any other dedicated single engine trainer until the current generation. Most trainers topped out in the 5-6K pounds of thrust and solely had dry thrust. The JJ-9 is superior, but it isn’t really a dedicated trainer. An F125 would push a streamlined trainer similar to the T-38 across the same performance curve. Whether it can do it sufficient for the KPP is the issue. I do believe it would be lucky to do so, because the KPP threshold is ridiculously steep.

Most of the surviving Su-24’s, Tornadoes, Lancers, Backfires, Blackjacks, and Floggers were from the 80’s and 90’s. Much newer than the F-111. It’s contemporaries, the F-14’s and MiG-23’s are mostly gone forever.

I hope they get more granular pictures.

More comparisons. May be off a few %; I didn’t get the rulers out.