Salute!
Great point, ORAC, and the F-35 naval variant has more range than anything we have had in the U.S. since the Intruder. I compare with the one I flew in 'nam, and it beat the hell outta the A-4 and F-4.... the lowly Sluf. But range is not the biggie WRT operational capabilities the attack jet must possess now.
When I see the unit cost of the F-35 today, I am surprised. To see a $$ per plane half of what an F-22 cost 15 or 20 years ago is impressive. Oh, BTW, latest numbers show the USAF F-35 mission capable number highest of our fighter/attack inventory. An even bigger surprise. The logistic tail is catching up.
The folks against the F-35 keep using lifetime costs of the plane from cradle to grave. Look at the Viper from 1973, look at the Typhoon or Tornado, look at many and then project into the future. Trying to find actual combat use of the Tiffie, but the 35 has been used by IAF and the U.S. over hostile territory with decent results and no losses best we know.
To be very honest, many of we comat vets that flew in the Gulf and even Viet Nam had our doubts about the "bridge too far" aspects of the F-35. We still do. OTOH, the thing has done well in the big exercises, puts on a helluva good demo for a plane "that could not dogfight" and has actually flown over enema territory a few times.
Gums sends...