We are forgetting something. Probably a good 15-20 billion of the congressional cap went to developing technologies from scratch for the F 22. Gallium Arsenide chips, distributed architecture systems, stealth shaping were all in their infancy in the 80s, hence the tremendous cost testing, failing and finally correctly developing technologies. The result 20 years later? Gallium arsenide chips are in most cell phones, RCS prediction software fairly easy with todays affordable computing power. Distributed architecture? Every large office has it in simplified form. In fact data fusion tech is prob more advanced in commercial databasing applications. Manufacturing tech; that old chestnut. Very relevant to 80s, 90s Russia not so when they can BUY milling equipment from anyone. The new Active array modules are made with equipment purchased in Japan. Bottom line is Russia can look at the YF 23, YF 22, X 35, X 32, B2, X 36, Jast and countless other configurations for free, they can buy the best commercially available manufacturing equipment and have done so and finally don't have to spend a fortune developing basic technologiers since they are now commercially available. The F 22 costs c 140 million BUT it is built in the U.S not the cheapest place for labor. Russia is still considerably cheaper than the U.S for manufacture. Finally their Pakfa can be optimised for todays threats (L band VHF) not predominantly x band as the F 35 has been.