Find 10 people on forums and you will get 10 opinions as to what they “should have done”. Until you know the inner workings and the analysis they did you cannot pass credible judgement. As mentioned the munition programs were funded and even the A2A portfolio has seen a bump to both the AMRAAM and Aim-9X. As to how they prioritize the JSF FOD, that is something that is decided by the main operators i.e. folks that actually look at this from a position of experience and complete knowledge of the capability as well as the threat picture. What may look like an absurd list of priorities to you or me, may be completely logical if looked at through their prism with the data and information available to them.

Ask 10 pilots if they like the idea of losing some stealth and you’ll get only one answer…

Again originally the external rail launchers were supposed to be used when bombs were onboard.

The JSF program does not fund the development of weapons. That should be common knowledge. The Aim-9X block III would have been a Navy program but they chopped it off. The new efforts spoken about by the ACC boss appear to be a USAF initiative and if that is the case it will be a faster program because unlike the USN the USAF will have a very large 5th generation fleet in the early to mid 2020s. The USN has no incentive to push through F-35 weapons before mid to late 2020s given their delivery schedule and force structure. The USAF does.

As with most cases, the FOD program will prioritize budget, risk, and capability across all mission areas. What may be high priority to you, may not to the services that supply counter air or multi-role capability to the COCOMs.

Lol! That’s why initially there was a project to make an extendable arm launcher to launch the AIM-9X from the internal bay.. Using external payloads on a stealth aircraft is half retarded. The only case were the external 9Xs would be useful is when the aircraft carries external bombs.

And of course the USAF and USN field what they can afford, which in the last years have been far from what they really wanted. The fact that the NGM has been delayed and the 9X block III has been cancelled are good examples of that.

The USAF was supposed to have a much larger fleet of F-22s so the F-35 air to air specifications were not as high. When Gates decided to cancel the F-22, they should immediately have revised the a2a specs of the F-35, like accelerate the NGM with 6 internal missiles and field an ejectable 9X ASAP. Usually when a program is cancelled they find cheaper alternative to try and compensate for the lack of capability. In any case, even if they had changed the specs, the plane was such a mess at that time that it would have delayed it even more!

beats me too, its better served with a pod holding 2 aim 9x

I don’t really dislike that idea, but I think 1 9X would be enough. 2 would make the pod too draggy, and also the AMRAAMs have some WVR capability.

It might not be that easy to launch the missile though, you’d have to put the rail launcher on an extendable arm to not have separation problems with the aircraft. Something similar to the F-22 launcher with a deflector at the back.

The JSTARS would never be able to get close enough.

I wonder if they couldn’t expedite a delta tailless derivative of the F-35 to improve the stealth and range, with stock fuselage. Make it capable of only 4000 hours of flight hours to develop it faster. Minimal external payload if any to shorten dev time. The pilots would train mostly on the regular F-35s and in simulators. They could build like 50-100 of those and have them do SEAD, bomber escort and other things that require very high stealth with a2a capabilities.

Would the gain in stealth be sufficient that’s the question.

It would be good it it had the ability to see through folliage.

Anw, all these types do not have diferent ammos, no?

Kinda doubt it. Here’s the wiki page on the GSh-301. There doesn’t seem to be a specific ammo type per plane type. Maybe the PAK-FA uses a new variant of the gun, who knows..

Mig-29 100 or 150 round capacity
Rafale 125 round capacity
Eurofighter 150 round capacity
Su-25 250 round capacity
Su-35 150 round capacity
Su-34 150-180 round capacity
Gripen 120 round capacity
F-35A 182 round capacity
F-35B/C 220 round capacity (external pod)

All above numbers from Wikipedia.

The F-35 is pretty much right among the pack where ammo capacity is concerned. It isn’t a lot of ammo, but it is about what you get…

The Russians are working a on new generation of ammo for the PAK-FA apparently:
https://sputniknews.com/russia/201702231050984643-russia-shell-fifth-generation-aircraft/

Don’t know if they can be fired buy older planes.

The USN has only been involved in low intensity conflicts in the last 15 years so that would favor the super hornet. Hard to draw a definitive conclusion in those circumstances.