How does the Super Hornet cost savings look now?

Add this as another consequence of the discovery of the J-20.

How does the multi-year buy of Super Hornets look now?  Information Dissemination ran an article in which he quotes Stephen Trimble on the cost savings of buying the Super Hornet.

You don't want to pick up Stephen's math and run with it, because if you do, you'll realize the Navy could replace every Hornet in inventory with a Block II, add an extra squadron of Block IIs to all 11 carrier air wings, add an 11th Carrier Air Wing, and still save money by sticking with SHs and choosing not to buy the Joint Strike Fighter.

Is the Joint Strike Fighter really worth all the extra money? It better be, but I remain unconvinced. It is clear the low number from Boeing explains the large order of 124, compared to the original estimates of ~70 a few years ago.

Read the whole thing but something is readily apparent.  If the US Navy has any chance of projecting power into the near future, it must acquire F-35C's.

UPDATE!
It seems that "Air Power Australia" has an "assessment" of the J-20 out.  Read it here.  They take the view that the J-20 will sweep the skies of all enemies, causing allied pilots to have nightmares.  Let me be clear!  I want an increase in the buy of the F-35 so that we can maintain our air superiority in light of these emerging threats.

I might be in the minority, but I believe that the F-35 will give us the edge necessary to keep us in control of the skies for years to come.  As far as the F-18 is concerned?  Not quite as confident.  While I believe it would be competitive against most airplanes, the appearance of stealth fighters from threat countries is worrisome.

Below photo is from Stephen Trimble's DewLine blogspot.  Does this 'advanced' F/A-18 look like it will be good enough now?