Having read the AFA article I see there being challenges to the FB-22.

“Perrigo claimed that the FB-22 will be even stealthier than the B-2 bomber.

“It can go places other airplanes can’t go. Even the B-2 can’t go back there [far behind enemy lines] and survive and … do global persistent attack.””

Who’s going to authorise an aircraft that’ll degrade the world’s most expensive aircraft’s value?

I think the fact the F/A-22 can’t carry 2000lb munitions will be an issue too, yet it was meant to replace the F-117?

Those stealth pylons look interesting….!

Isn’t Alaska full of oil?

I’m talking about something you could hang 2 PGMs off of, some serious recon equipment or enough fuel to loiter a good distance from home, something Global Hawk scale. Cheers syers!

Does Russia have any experience of making serious UAVs? The US took a decade with multiple parallel research programs to get Global Hawk delivered to Beale and it can still only do half the mission of what it was designed to replace. Cheers syers!

The only difference I can think of is the F-117 laser designator and FLIR systems, they still look more suited for precision bombing than what the F/A-22 has normally. I don’t know what the accuracy difference between laser and INS/GPS guidance is for a 2000lb munition and I’d imagine the true difference is classified and totally different to what the media and company ads say but it must be enough to keep a whole type still in active duty. Cheers syers!

The owner of just a JSF and F/A-18 force wouldn’t be taking on China/Russia/North Korea! They’d be limited to keeping their neighbours peaceful, helping with regional conflicts or being part of a multi-national force where tankers would be in theatre.

The combat radius of 300 miles should be enough for them not to need tankers.

That does look like a good replacement for the F/A-18E as we’ll probably be shooting with lasers by then but if something was that big I’d want 4 engines.

For the next 20 years though the F/A-18E would compliment the JSF nicely.