OK - I'll stick my toe in the water...
All new aircraft have had problems (a similar turbine problem occured to the K as well as it happens, the reason for 985 cruise instead of 1010. Nothing like history repeating itself is there!).
Agreed all new a/c have problems, but the 985/1010 issue with the T56 is not a problem. Allison have said since new that 1010 is "max continuous" power, but if you do that, it will shorten the life of the engine. So the 985 cruise is as much about £ as it is about servicability. FWIW, USAF cruises at 970 & Allison continually push even further power reductions...
The J can be a very capable aircraft, if allowed to be. It is only about 7 years old, however the unservicability has not been too good, (especially when you compare it to the c17, an aircraft of similar age), but we can put that down to teething problems.
Comparing the C17 & the J is apples & oranges - one was procured via the standard MoD procurement as lead customer for a new plane. The other was leased with restrictions imposed by the owner (Boeing) that it not be modified. Consequently, one works as advertised & the other doesn't (yet). The J would be further along if the MoD had procured it "off the shelf" as it were rather than attempt to subsidise the British aerospace industrie...
I fly classics (albeit a bit modified
), but have flown the J (even if only briefly). The J is a very capable a/c & will eventually fulfill all roles well. But the J's biggest problem is not that Lockheed took too big a leap, rather, they did not take a big enough leap. It's a beautiful glass version of an old-thinking cockpit...not a forward thinking version of a new cockpit.
One of my favourite jabs at Lockheed came when I flew with their test pilots - we were flying an a/c eventually destined for the RAAF, but Lockheed were still wringing it out. After a quite impressive MOS takeoff, the pilots were blathering on about how short it could take off, how high it could climb, & how fast it could go - this was nearly 10 years ago, but I recall a 140K pound plane taking off in 1800' climbing to FL380 & cruising at 360TAS. My very first comment to them was, "That's nice, too bad ATC will never let you up there - how's your fuel economy in the high 20s?" When they asked what I meant, I replied that at FL380, you're in the heart of the jet traffic & waaaayy too slow to keep up. They were a bit quiet on that point.
ATC will likely rarely let you above FL30 - not that the plane can't do it, but they can't accomodate you. Seems to me your fuel savings is lost when you're flying 10K feet below your optimum cruise ceiling & your "fast" TAS isn't quite realised...haven't we learned that lesson?
*donning flame retardant suit*