What’s wrong with the 22 and 35?
Both seem to be very successful projects.
22, nothing wrong with it per se except the oxygen system that caused hypoxia. The real problem is that Lockheed lobbied against a really good airplane, the 22, to provide funds to build one that would make more money for them, the 35.
As for the 35, it was at least 14 to 18 years in the making from selection to operational status depending on the version. That was because of massive teething problems and restrictions that still exist. An assessment of “successful” depends on how much you know. For example, you can have the near VTOL capability so long as you don’t try to carry too many weapons. You can also have stealth so long as you don’t try to carry any external stores. You can carry fuel so long as it is not too warm Other than that and a few other things such as continual cost over runs it is just fine. The ability to see through the airplane in all directions is remarkable.
Search “f-35 problems list” and you should be able to understand that it is not a great airplane and Lockheed are not a great contractor. Of course Lockheed will blame everyone under the sun and vice versa because the program is a failure aside from finally delivering a plane that took from 1996 when the concept was hatched until 2024 when “full production was announced. Good thing we were not at war and the airplane was not critical.