WillM, the F22 is unobtainable. The program was unfunded this year, the factories mothballed. It would cost 4 billion just to reopen the factory.

It is a very nice plane, no question, and we could use a few of them. BUT the US has refused to sell them to anyone. Not to Israel, Britain, Australia or us, and we have asked. It is an air-superiority plane. While it can bomb, it is a waste of its strong points.

The f-35 is slightly less stealthy.
The f-22 tracks like a speeding marble, the 35, like a baseball. That is the relative difference in stealth.

The US has halted its production of F-22s for many reasons. One is, the F-35 is seen as a better option. It is more sophisticated on many levels.
Its price per unit is over 100 million dollars less to produce.

So, if you think the whining is bad because we agree to spend 8.7 billion for 65 planes, (133 each) what kind of hysteria would we have if we were paying 250 million for each f-22?

And finally, the sole sourcing issue is profoundly disingenuous. The whole process with many countries getting together to develop a plane for a cost of 300 billion is rich even for the trillions the US has been throwing around lately.

Yes, Lockheed isn't a Canadian company. Neither is Crysler or GM. But Canada makes lots of parts for all of them. Stronach and Magna come to mind with his billion dollar handshake.

I posted this earlier: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/17/business/global/17fighter.html

Its an article from the NY Times.

Lockheed is on record it expects to spend 10 billion dollars in Canada.
We pay 8.7 billion, we get 10 back.

The reason is, Lockheed expects to build and maintain 3,000 of these.
We buy 65 but get to supply parts for 3000. Its an incredible deal.
Employment for over 100 Canadian companies, high-tech jobs, great wages, big ripple effects, and yes even taxes garnered.

I am truly puzzled why we aren't ecstatic about this. Of course I had to go to the NY times to get the appropriate inf