RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,184975,00.html Years back in the 1970's people in the congress talked about a 1 fits all services aircraft. They were proved to be idiots because one type of aircraft can not be everything to every one. That aircraft was the F-4 Phantom. She was a beautiful aircraft, but could not meet the needs of the Marines for STOL, or VTOL. So they went to the Hawker Harrier.
Today as "Cost Cutting" is back in vogue, we see the backward looking one fits all rearing it's ugly head again.
From what I have read and seen so far, the F-35 is doing fairly well in the limited tests so far. Once the F-35B and C are added, we will know much more.
We are over 40 years past the introduction of the F-4. Any comparison of the F-4 program and F-35 is moot. The F-4 was actually a USN acft that the USAF adapted.
The F-35 is far from a one plane fits all program. There are significant differences between the 3 distinct models that tailor them to the needs and missions of the users. While they are unique aircraft with distinct capabilities, there is enough commonality in design and equipment to result in considerable savings over the design, construction and testing of three stand alone designs in smaller production runs. Whether this theory pans out in the end remains to be seen, but I am hopeful because the loss of capability and the delay in reequipping U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine units not to mention those of key Allies could be catastrophic.
