So do you feel that the experience gained from building thousands of F-16s counts for naught, along with the F-22, when moving on to the next fighter?
It doesn’t really matter how many F-22s are built. What does matter is what it took to design it, and build it.

And strangely enough the F-22 did better in testing. The more challenging airframe with the more challenging design goals did better.

They sure can. All of that and plenty more will come in time, though the structural integrity can only be proven through load testing and flying. Not sure how you are meant to conduct either activity without airframes…

Would it suit you better if these test aircraft were all called SDD airframes and not LRIP, yet did exactly the same thing as is planned now? Seems like you are more interested in semantics. These LRIP aircraft will be flying test flights and training activities until the block upgrades are released anyway. It is not the case that users WILL be operating LRIP aircraft as if they were fully cleared, if that is not the case. To think they would…

As I pointed out above, a LARGE portion of the F-35 operating envelope has already been cleared and as these aircraft are unlikely to have the software to do the things you think are so important in the infancy of a flight test program anyway, the ‘steady as she goes’ method of clearing capabilities will be used irrespective of whether they are designated SDD or LRIP airframes.

Your current attitude is symptomatic of the current crop of ‘internet experts’ who raise a hue and cry over any tiny piece of apparently bad news and overlook (most often intentionally) the bigger picture.

L-M has a pretty decent track record of delivering combat aircraft. Their two most recent fighter aircraft are particularly outstanding. They had more than their share of development issues as does virtually EVERY modern fighter, an Szu-35 tester even crashed last year, but very little concern that caused amongst the Internet community, something that has NOT happened to F-35 (a very respectable achievement, considering the technical challenge of 3 differing variants they have set for themselves but do we ever see any praise? Of course not) but they also had the benefit of NOT having to endure the ‘outrage’ that relatively minor flaws in the overall scheme of things seems to engender, so long as it’s within the F-35 program and enabled by immediate and easy access to insight limited open sourced data, available on the web.

One further comment. I’d hate to be the next modern fighter designer if this sort of criticism actually matters. It’s only going to get worse…

Maybe we’ll get to the point where there is so MUCH diverse criticism that nothing EVER gets achieved. What a wonderful outcome that’d be…

The problem is that the test aircraft have not reached important milestones that should have been passed before LRIP starts.

Before development testing will have completed the US Armed forces are set to buy 420 airframes. So the plans to buy the plans has remained unchanged while the progress in testing and the foreseeable time frames in which certain milestone will be reached have slipped back by up to 4 years.

Read the GAO report for the details. And that was the schedule before the airframe problems now encountered.

Quick! Someone ring Lockheed Martin and let them know their plane isn’t ready for production yet…

I guess you’re not really getting the whole, ‘gradual roll out of various block capabilities’, thing are you?

No-one is SAYING that EACH LRIP aircraft will be “all singing all dancing” airframes…

L-M has said til it is “blue in the face” that you shouldn’t be comparing F-35 to previous aircraft types, because it IS being done differently. Now that you’ve identified this for yourself, perhaps you can start grudgingly admitting there might actually be something to what they are saying?

Hmm?

Sure, if you think things like high AoA capability, structural integrity or weapons release at supersonic speeds are something that the early blocks could do without in the worst case, well than it is really business as usual.

But the F-35 is about to enter low-rate porduction, while it is still far away from reaching IOC. If they would still be testing only, with series production not starting, it would be adffierent thing, yet the USMC still believes the first F-35B unit to form by 2012.

That is not a solution. The customer would be stupid to buy F-35Bs constructed to the same standard as the test airframe.
The reason must be found, a solution must be constructed, production airframes must be changed to have the corrected design and the new design needs verification before you should start serial production.

Good luck doing this without loosing another 1-2 years in the delivery schedule.

LRIP is out he question for F-35B at the moment.

That’s because the Br1150 Atlantic was designed to an international NATO specification. The Atlantique was named as such when it became appearant that there weren’t any foreign orders coming up.

Apart form the Germans.

I dont know how far we’ll get debating the precise nozzle angle here mate. For me it seems obvious that, with a rolling takeoff, the heat load on the surface is going to be much reduced over the requirement for a VTO.

Similarly Kandahar had enough hard surface to operate fixed wing slow movers and uav’s so I dont know if your description of a totally disrupted site is absolutely accurate – plus the Harrier’s where able to operate there and they weren’t vtol’ing it and weren’t sucking up intake fulls of FOD.

There are hundreds of small regional airfields the world over like Stanley that couldn’t support a Typhoon sqdn but could cope with a stol capable type like F35B. Expeditionary ops are what the plane is all about and it gives planners options and flexibility.

I guess that the exhaust is a little more powerful on the F-35B than on the Harrier. But yes, it is likely that F-35B could STOL from most airfields in the world with a hard runway.

Are you sure, I would have said they have rotated in down at least 45° at the start.

Kandahar had a very broken up runway and apron. The FOD damage was big and I can not see how F-35B would do much better in that department, apart from needing less clean runway, but maybe also putting more strain on the already very fragile concrete.

Airport like Port Stanley are F-35B heaven without a doubt and for the IDF/AF it makes extreme sense to get some. For the expeditionary role though I am not fully convinced.