Actually, we have pretty definitive proof that the last remaining F-14s were destroyed on the ground. I agree that we have our own propaganda. And in merging our thoughts, I believe we did take out their nuclear capabilities with the "Midnight Hammer" B-2 attacks last year, which also means the current claims that we went in to stop their nuclear ambitions are bullcrap, upon which we are in agreement.
@courtland Keep your eyes out for an announcement on the F/A-XX by the end of September. The federal government's fiscal year ends on 9/30, including DoD, which makes the next 3 weeks paramount to awarding this contract. I have reason to believe Boeing is a very serious contender to win, which would see both the USAF's F-47 and the Navy's F/A-XX being built in STL. Fingers crossed...
^That's just a small part of the larger program; the order for the initial move to low rate production, and I think BJ likely has it wrong anyway. Per navair.navy.mil, it's for four at $805 M, and it will ultimately be for dozens so long as it isn't cancelled. The navy needs a lot more than four tankers. Neither the Superhornet nor the Lightning II has legs worth discussing. The Navy doesn't like getting outranged. It's happened before, but it's been a minute. They're talking about having several MQ-25s routinely accompanying strike missions. If every carrier air group has a half dozen of the things or so that'd be fifty four of the things, plus some spares for training, maintenance, and replacements, so eighty odd seems like a safe minimum. And if you get foreign orders it could well go higher. It's a pretty specialized aircraft, but it's not going to be something so precious as a stealth bomber. Boeing will make the thing in fairly significant numbers.
