The Mirage IV* was claimed to meet nearly every RAF requirement except for field length, and some claim it exceeded the F-111 slightly in speed and had at least equal range. The estimated cost was 2.321 million pounds per aircraft (for 50) or 2.067 million (for 110), less than the price of the F-111K. However Air Ministry and RAF studies of the proposal identified further modifications to meet the RAF low-level performance requirements. These included airframe strengthening and revised cockpit glazing to improve visibility for both the pilot and crew member. There was also a significant shortfall in range, despite the lengthened fusealage. BAC claimed that the British government evaluation into the Mirage IV* was "relatively superficial". RAF pilots who test-flew the Mirage IV were "favourably impressed" with its low-altitude handling. However, some British government officials, including Parliament members Julian Risdale and Roy Jenkins, questioned the Mirage IV*'s capacity to operate from unprepared airstrips or to operate at low level, or claimed that the F-111 was a superior aircraft "in a class of its own". Air historian Bill Gunston notes that low-level Mirage IV missions had been planned since 1963 and Mirage IVs operated regularly at low level since 1965, and argues that the ability of a strategic bomber to operate from unprepared airstrips is historically unimportant.