More backing down from the superiority that is the F-35?

SSgt (Join to see) I'm not even complaining about the 3 branches, all 3 could use a strike or attack aircraft or even a CAS aircraft. So having slightly different variants of the same one for the Marines Navy and Air Force doesn't bother me at all. In fact that part I 100% support because it helps supportability aspects and lowers cost. It's the trying to cram 100 pounds of ___ into a 10 pound sack; or rather all the missions in one platform, that bothers me.

Exactly. It's as if as they were putting it together some new shiny thing would come along, therefore they had to try to fit it in. Decide what the bird is going to do, & build it to specs!

Yeah --- they made comments after Nam that they were stupid for considering it (multi-role) back then, and wouldn't do it again
So much for Hope & Change
Situation: Normal (FUBAR)

I fully agree with the JSF concept...that is to say I agree with and see the value of having a FIGHTER common to all three branches. The F-15, F-16 and F-18 have all proven to be extremely effective fighter aircraft; however, supporting each individual airframe requires unique maintainer and pilot (inefficient) training and complicates logistical operations. The F-22 could easily replace all of our legacy fighters as its published performance specifications indicate that it is more than capable of consistently matching and/or defeating the most advanced enemy tactical fighter threats known today, such as the Russian Su-50. An F-22 Navy/Marine Variant could easily include upgraded/beefier landing gears and a tail hook for carrier operations. All of that said, We're asking way too much of the F-35. The established laws of physics and previous historical blunders concerning "multi-role" aircraft indicate to me that the F-35 will be a Jack of all Trades and a Master of None, just as the LCDR pointed out. I just read an article on Military.com stating top AF brass are admitting that the plan now is for the F-22s to dogfight, not the F-35. What in the hell is going on? The F-35 is supposed to eventually replace all tactical fighter aircraft in our inventory...but it can barely perform any one existing airframe's duties with even marginal efficiency? I understand that the F-35's sensor suite is the most awesome thing on the planet and that it will likely, eventually, become the ultimate BVR fighter...but what happens with the enemy figures out how to defeat our technological advantage and close the gap? Our pilots will be sitting ducks flying F-35s. I mean, this is ridiculous. Air Force brass want to retire the A-10 because they allege it won't be able to survive in contested environments (as an A-10 avionics technician I can assure you that assumption is sorely misguided)...anyway, it doesn't look the F-35 will be able to survive encounters against Russian legacy fighters such as the Su-27s and MiG-29s. Given the performance specifications comparisons/analysis I've done thus far, it looks as if the F-35 will also need Air Supremacy Fighter escorts too (much like the A-10 would receives when providing CAS) when operating in contest environments. Unbelievably hypocritical. I hold steadfast in my assessment that the F-35 is an epic waste of engineering, production and monetary resources. I hope I'm wrong, but I see a l lot of our pilots and ground personnel dying as a result of introducing this aircraft into our operating forces. Maybe someone knows something that I do not, but it doesn't look good for the US at all.