Heres something I posted to another Forum, I would like to get some feedback from the "Pro's" here, I'm not so sure about the JSF for the following reasons, If I'm really offbase please let me know.
All three versions have flown with success, including the STOVL which was too overweight to fulfil its mission goals.
The weight reduction measures are apparently successful too, but lets wait till the design is frozen(again), the aircraft being produced right now are not the aircraft thats being proposed now, while quite a bit of flight testing can be done in certain areas, we will have to wait for the lighter version to complete testing. (the programs already running a little late).
The airframe issue isnt a show stopper by any means, the US really really needs new aircraft, and are willing to compromise a little as there isn't an alternative for the US.
As for competing with the F-22, its a more political thing, If you read the sales brocures for the South korean and Singaporean competitions the F-15 is unbeatable and will remain so for the forseeable future, but listen to the domestic market in the US and Eurocanards are superior to the F-15 'thats why we need the F-22' chorus the USAF, Now if the JSF is marketed at the Eurocanards/Mig's etc as a 'superior Air to Air fighter', the reason for the expensive f-22 is compromised, ie they might ask " why do we need an expensive fighter if the JSF can handle them?." you have to be a bit careful there, there is a hugh budget bow wave coming through in the next 5 years, something will have to be cancelled or delayed, or funding will require a massive increase (on a level not seen since the cold war highest peak and then it would have to maintain that peak for several years). as yet there isn't a threat to justify that sort of spending(trouble in Tiawan or Korea might change this)
As for being too expensive, the cost benifits of mass production top out around 1600 airframes and there are three varients!! any major reductions will push up cost as will any major delays, likely with the budget bow wave!!.
The partners are looking not for an F-22's sidekick they are looking for an autonomous fighter/bomber, as the partners are not buying the F-22 the JSF will by neccessity have to fullfil most of the F-22's role.
What does that mean, well the cost of sensors goes up because it can't depend on the f-22 being there, as will the ECM/EW etc,the JSF will have to cover a very wide spectrum of roles to fulfil the partners requirements.
Now if you start to measure how effective it is against Eurocanards/F-22/Migs interesting questions get asked.
To be really successful it has to be better than everything else in the Ato A role with the exception of the F-22, while remaining affordable. that on its own would be quite impressive if it was pulled off.
Now the technology employed to make it such a success looks like being restricted (hence the large sum of money on the export varient), the UK is getting really bloody angry that certain technology including the software codes will not be released, and several high level complaints including a Blair to Bush 'chat' have failed so far to resolve it (see UK's Hansard)
Add this to the exiguous foreign workshare component and you can see why the northern europeans are moaning and threatening to leave the program.
Some of these problems of work/cost/capability are mutually exclusive.
If the codes are not released then the purchasher is tied to the US for support and weapon intergration, returning black boxes to the US for repair.
This could lead the user being denied support if US foreign policy is affected.
In short at this very early stage of the program, there are already dissatisfaction with restrictions, the lack of workshare needs to be addressed quickly, and the performance in AtoA needs to be finely balanced.
If you can do all that while matching several airforces mandatory requirements, for a price thats never been acheived before, in a timeframe that looks quite optimistic, I for one would be very very impressed.
Cheers