Raptor1,
The USAF does have an equivalent to "top gun". It used to be called the fighter weapons instructor course, and most USAF fighter squadron commanders are FWIC graduates. The school has been expanded to cover every system the USAF has, so it's been renamed "WIC" by dropping the word "fighter" in the name of the school. It is a lengthy course covering every possible mission your weapon system may be involved in, plus it covers integrating the operations of each system with the ops of every other system in the USAF. Graduates are often referred to as "patch wearers" due to the distinctive weapons school patch they are authorized to wear for the rest of their career.
As for AWACS being present in the fight against the IAF, there's a good chance it would have been shot down. We'd be idiots if we always trained in situations where we're equal or greater in numbers, and in a real shooting war against an opponent with a capable air force the odds and matchup seen in this exercise are definately possible. We try to train against what we see as a near worst case scenario and we're always trying to push that envelope. 4 v 30 isn't exactly a typical training scenario, but it could be a useful exercise to determine (for example) how effective a 4-ship might be if trying to protect a strike package or high value asset.
The overall point is that the F-15 is not a "modern" fighter anymore. We can stretch it's capabilities a bit further, but it has the radar cross section of a football stadium and that is becoming much more important than almost any of you guys realize, trust me. As an F-15E pilot I've ended up in more than my share of "fair fights" when training against other NATO aircraft and as a guy flying an attack fighter, it's not a position I enjoy.
Imagine you have a football team with a great offensive line and some world class linebackers. They win every game, and almost nobody gets hurt. Then after a while you find that the games are getting closer and closer, and suddenly you find that your running backs are starting to suffer injuries every game. You know that at the end of the season, you're going to have to play the best team in the other league, but the trend of close games and injured players is rapidly increasing.
Do you get some new blood in there for a few games before the season ends, or do you use that running back with the broken foot and hope he doesn't hold it against you when he gets his back broken in the first quarter and you lose the game?
Sure it's not the greatest analogy, but the point is that the F-15 is at the turning point in several negative areas. Maintenance is starting to become very expensive. Parts are being hand-made or simply being swapped jet to jet because the factories that made the originals closed down 10 years ago. Jets are starting to break, increasing the mishap rate and increasing the chances of mishap fatalities. And the latest generation of fighters and SAMs are just drooling for a shot at a flight of F-15s because they can see them a looong way away and may get the first shot while surviving our return fire.
So what part of that means it was all a setup and we don't really need a replacement fighter? To match the CURRENT generation of opposing weapons, we need a combination of weapons loadout, endurance, range, speed, and stealth that simply isn't available in anything we already have. What we ought to end up with is a plane that can not only match the current threats, but also be viable through the next generation as well. The F-22 and potential attack variants would likely be that plane. The JSF as a single engine single seat aircraft will never have the range and payload we need. JSF is an F-16, F-18, and Harrier replacement, nothing more. JSF fits a requirement we have, but it is not capable of taking over the air superiority role from the F-15 any more than the F-16 is.
