$1 Billion a piece? Thats 1 Tactical fighter for nearly 2 Long Range Strike Bombers. A completely unrealistic scenario. For the USAF the F-X replaces F-15C’s, F-15E’s and F-22A’s..Look at the fleet strength of these fighters and that will pretty much determine what the cost the developers will be required to play around.

Not at all. I think you’re going to have to think much larger than F-22A. Much higher persistence. It must have B-2 level stealth and require opponents to gear up their whole industry to compete. This is the genius of F-22, which both China and Russia hope to catch with their respective J-20 and T-50 programs. They have yet to build their responses to the F-35. By the time that incarnation roles around, go better in a whole another direction.

If it cannot fight alien technology then back to the drawing board. Realize Skynet type of drone scenarios are fun and all, but they couldn’t win against V. I’m not joking about going for $1 billion apiece. The 6th gen has to be extraordinary.

The quantity didn’t scare NATO, it was that by the 80’s the WarPact was receiving tanks and trucks with enough spare parts to actually enter western Europe. The quality suffered in the lead up to that point. And even after the Cold War ended, the quality of most Russian domestic vehicles were so poor and underpowered that they were abandoned in droves.

The Russian weapons tended to be rugged. They had to be field serviceable due to the great portion of duds. Russian built missiles were equally poor. Funny enough many WarPact members built their own ammunition to a higher degree of quality.

What could I get at $1 billion per plane, no size restrictions?

Ironically the six dozen T1’s could come at a price competitive to 36 brand new Rafales.

The NATO strategies of infiltration and interdiction would have been major destabilizing factors in a prolonged fight. NATO needed a protracted war to win. You basically turned reality on its head PLA-MK2.

Yes.. I was unable to find a single quote stating more than 6,000 h service life for the Su-35S.

In all honesty the MKI 6,000 hour airframe service life is a mature process. More than likely Su-35S will enjoy a third 3,000 hour stint once the platform matures and objective data points are quantifiable. Until then the commitment is for two 3,000 hour service periods.