[kaizendad]

This was the idea behind the late-Cold War "high/low" concept that gave us the F-15/F-16 in the US Air Force, and F-14/F-18 in the US Navy. Initially the F-35 was supposed to be the "low" companion to the "high" F-22, but, with the end of the Cold War, that changed.

One major issue that the US has run into with deploying that strategy, in the absence of great power opponents, is that the largest long-term costs are not the airframes, but pilots and pilot training. An F-16 pilot isn't cheaper than an F-15 pilot, and getting hours for an F-16 pilot isn't cheaper than getting hours for an F-15 pilot, other than the lower fuel cost for the F-16.

That said, the F-15X that the USAF is procuring is basically going to be used as a lower-cost-than-F-35 "missile truck," so not incompatible with what you suggest.

[Pharmakon]

There is one other factor here along with the cost of pilot training, and that is maintenance. The F-22 (like the B-2 and F-117) was originally a beast to maintain. The RAM coatings had to be reapplied with extreme precision, along with RAM tape along seams. At first this was a manual process, then mechanized, but still expensive in terms of money and downtime for the aircraft. The one really good thing to come out of the F-35 program has been fiber mat RAM. No need to reapply paint and tape, the RAM is integrated into body panels.

Of course this should have been applied along with improved 3D thrust vectoring to a new block of F-22’s, but that doesn’t satisfy the Military Industrial Complex’s desire for endless money, and congresses insatiable need for pork barrel projects. Plus you have the usual pissing contests and budget infighting between services, all of whom basically want their own customized air force.

[duxup]

Yeah I suspect any project for "reasonable and cheap" quickly can turn into feature / jobs creep.

I expect a request for a dog could turn into robotic dog that can take out satellites in space....