via Motley Fool...
Capt. Hendrix -- a former naval aviator himself -- argues that "if the Joint Strike Fighter truly was going to replace the capabilities of the F-14 Tomcat and the A-6 Intruder, then range should have been a critical factor in its design." Instead, the F-35C was designed to have a combat range of 730 nautical miles, and recent tests suggest it will average closer to just 550 miles, only 50 better than the F/A-18.Then this...
Now, BGA-Aeroweb prices the latest model F/A-18 at about $65 million. In contrast, the F-35 costs anywhere from $116 million (Lockheed Martin's estimate) to $170 million (BGA-Aeroweb) to $337 million (say its critics). And not everyone agrees that paying $105 million for an extra 50 miles of range is the best way to spend the military's money.Story here.
How do I know that bad news is baked into the cake for the F-35? Easy. Mainstream media is inundated with stories about how it isn't the cure for US air superiority issues.
When the MSM climbs on board, especially when they make their living by printing stories that are fawning of every procurement project, then you can bet your money that they're being encouraged by someone in the DoD.
Which means that the death spiral isn't only here, but that we might actually be seeing the first of a couple of steps toward the USN leaving the program completely.
More to come I'm sure.