[Phlyer]

Well, the F-35 has some questions . . .

Back when I worked in the aerospace industry, we all decided we wanted to work for the "Controversial Aircraft Company" because they made all the aircraft.

Every aircraft has detractors who 'raise questions.' Many of them are sore losers whose particular favorite did not get chosen for production. Many are armchair generals who prove the adage about 'a little knowledge.'

That doesn't make them wrong, but it does mean that having 'questions' about a system is not a particularly compelling argument against it.

[Spktyr]

https://sofrep.com/fightersweep/report-air-force-f-35s-close-air-support-gun-doesnt-work-and-only-60-of-delivered-jets-fly/

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/12/the-pentagon-is-battling-the-clock-to-fix-serious-unreported-f-35-problems/

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/01/f-35-problems-late-iote-f-35a-gun-inaccurate-f-35b-tires-threat-data-cyber/

This is the Air Force itself admitting the problems.

[DesertRhino]

Very strong point about the sore loser concept. Looking back the Bradley did very well. And who would replace the F-16 with the F-20? I remember the M-1 tank being castigated with deep concerns about it’s turbine engine being unreliable in sand.