“We've proven with the Raptor that a silver bullet small fleet is a recipe for breaking the force. So when it comes to F-47, we've got to at least get to 250. And I'd argue that 500 is probably closer to the actual number you need when you take into consideration simultaneity and the geographies of global engagement. Because the fact of the matter is, one jet cannot be in more than one place at one time.”

…on the F-22. You know, at 187 jets, there was not enough jets for training, test, backup inventory, attrition reserve, or even really simply a rotational presence. There's been so much demand from combatant commanders for F-22. That fleet has been rode hard. They're a high-demand, low-density asset, and that has really worn the force prematurely. So we can't have F-47 be a silver bullet force. We've proven with the Raptor that a silver bullet small fleet is a recipe for breaking the force. So when it comes to F-47, we've got to at least get to 250. And I'd argue that 500 is probably closer to the actual number you need when you take into consideration simultaneity and the geographies of global engagement. Because the fact of the matter is, one jet cannot be in more than one place at one time. And quantity will be key to sustainability and more importantly, combat success. Laser Sledge, what are your thoughts to add? I mean, a lot of congressional delegations are tracking this topic, given the advanced age of fighters and the need to recapitalize, and just to be honest, bases in their districts.