From the mouth of Aristotle

[Zen]

Boron said:
It is costy but don't you think it is worth it ?

That doesn't include the actual costs, which are bloated to about 150-200% of that number due to the longstanding contracts with Lockheed/Boeing. For maintaining world superiority in aircraft? It's worth it IMO, but having pilots who cannot get enough flight time to maintain their flight status because of the decripitude of Naval and AFC aircraft is more concerning to me as a 'worth' factor.

The only Fighter which could perhaps beat a F-22 Raptor would have been the Mig 1.44 but unless they get financial aid from e.g. China they won't probably develop it further .

I highly doubt it, even during the engineering phase of the Mig 1.44 it had too many stress fractures in it's engines during upper G's which while not indicitive of anything (these things can be worked out) it put the publicity setbacks show that that particular development team doesn't have the funding/talent/history to produce an aircraft of the same caliber. Though wars are not won by high tech aircraft alone.

And what is your opinion about the Joint Strike Fighter ?

Functional, bugetable, maintainable and for it's purpose, everything it should be.