I’ve long felt the flaws in the F-35 stem from the concept that the airframe could be adapted to be all things to all people. McNamara tried this with the F-111. He learned (eventually) that trying to make a plane that can do everything for everyone, especially in the hopes of saving costs usually ends up with a design that always costs far more than expected, and also usually results up in a compromise design that doesn’t excel in any particular area.
All in MHO, of course.
What’s interesting - why can different aircraft not be designed that use at least a base of same parts (weapons, propulsion, and other parts), while still having two distinct aircraft (or more)? What is the suppose logic behind a SINGLE aircraft that supposedly can be all things to all branches and purposes?