Given that the F-35 seems to be evolving into a strike aircraft and kind of a multirole stealth missile / drone control center, there may actually be a niche for the F-22 and 2 billion, in light of many other recent expenditures (military and otherwise), may not be beyond the pale in terms of budget. Nor the $20 billion or whatever it would cost to actually build some. I'd also throw in another 50% or so to come up with some modernization / improvements. Certainly they can upgrade the computer software.
I can think of many other things Uncle Sam pays for right now that I'd be willing to 'sacrifice' in exchange for a couple more Fighter Groups of F-22s.
Totally disagree and if you understand how the aircraft was built and deployed you'll find those improvements were actually made pretty rapidly. Many of the P-38s sub systems were designed based on government specifications. Lockheed did not have a free rein to make changes at will. (some things never change) The first P-38 mission over Europe occurred in late 1943, while the first P-38Js were just starting to be built. Explore how you heat a twin engine aircraft cockpit through heat exchangers and ducting and you can see why this was not an easy fix but it was done within the first year of combat. Combine that effort on a moving production line and I think the time span was very reasonable. Again the aircraft was designed and built in Southern California and although it was designed as a high altitude interceptor, no one could have envisioned in 1937/ 38, what type of mission the P-38 would be flying over Europe 5 years in the future.
The P-38 was deployed over the Aleutians. No complaints there!
But back to the main point
By coincidence, the 1st Fighter group, which is one of the few currently still equipped with F-22s, was one of the first flying P-38s in WW2. Their first action against German targets in the MTO was in
November 1942. Already at that point they were experiencing serious problems with overloaded electrical systems, lack of cockpit heating, roll rate and compressabilty which plagued that aircraft for the first year and a half or so of it's combat life, ultimately preventing it from being more widely used when they did in fact sort most of the problems out (I think a P-38L is a pretty badass fighter).
I hear what you are saying about Lockheed not having that much leeway, but Corporate defense contractors were not exactly wallflowers in WW2 any more than they are today. They have plenty of sway and for whatever reason, between the Army, the Federal Government, and Lockheed*, they didn't react to the problems fast enough. Putting in a second generator could have happened a lot quicker for example.
(* and her various other subcontractors - Allison for the engines, G.E. for the turbo, whoever made the propellors, whoever made the cannon etc. etc.)
I think it's a beautiful design. They overcame incredible obstacles to make it arguably the only truly effective twin engined day-fighter of the war. Nor is it the only success story by Lockheed during the war. The humble Lockheed Hudson, developed from the Civilian Super Electra, probably contributed more to the overall war-effort than a whole fleet of sexy late war fighter or bomber designs.
But with the Lightning it was almost a bridge too far. Something was wrong some things were wrong, that didn't get corrected fast enough. Yes it's a big ask, but other projects both in the US and overseas were improved more quickly. To be fair, many weren't and many never did get fixed the way the P-38 did. I just think they could have got it up to the (enormous) design potential quickly enough.
In the Aleutians they were mostly chasing Submarines and the occasional Japanese flying boat or float plane fighter. They didn't get attacked from above by Bf 109s so they didn't need to fight at 27,000 ft.