Engines,
The F-35C should have a respectably short take-off run for a modern fast jet. My point was that it may be worth trading a little bit more tarmac for the C's greater capabilities over the B despite the latter's true STO run.
As far as endurance etc goes, this will clearly vary considerably on role and task. However, the unclass figures for a clean Typhoon suggest a combat radius of around 490nm. This compares to the combat radii for the F-35A (590nm), B(450nm) and C (600nm). However, I can think of few times when Typhoon will go into combat clean. More normally it'll have external tanks on which will extend it's combat radius to up to 1100nm. Unlike the F-35 ferry tanks, these are combat capable although I acknowledge they may have to be punched off. Realistically therefore, even a modest assessment of the Typhoon's combat radius would place it at 800nm. F-35 will only be able to reach that on current estimates with ferry tanks. Obviously however, Typhoon is not LO. But that's another argument and exactly why the 2 compliment one another.
As far as your comments ref F3 v Shar, a cursory glance through my past posts will illustrate that I'm a strong advocate of organic naval air. I'm not sure what your experience is; mine is 5000 hrs E-3D during which I've seen F3s, FRS1 and FA2 on live ops over Croatia, Bosnia, Albania, Kosovo and Iraq. In trg I've regularly worked those assets on opposing sides in exercises around the world. I would certainly agree that the Blue Vixen/AMRAAM mix was extremely capable. Unfortunately, it was mounted on a small, subsonic airframe the design of which originated in the first generation Harrier of the 1960s.
In a visual fight, a SHAR of whatever variant/AIM-9 should beat an F3/AIM-9. Likewise, when the FA2 got AMRAAM it was a very difficult opponent for any fighter equipped with only a SARH missile. However, the F3s additional speed, JTIDS and brain/pair of eyes still sometimes won the day. Once the F3 got ASRAAM, the capabilities of that missile largely offset the manoeuverability of the SHAR/AIM-9 in a turning fight.
However, I can think of very few cases where F3/AMRAAM/ASRAAM lost out to FA2/AMRAAM where exercise simulation/RoE/regen criteria etc were not a factor. Less manoeuverable yes, but the F3's 4 x AMRAAM/2 x ASRAAM, superior endurance, speed, JTIDS and EW gadgets various generally more than matched a subsonic FA2 with 4 x AMRAAM.
JTIDS/ASRAAM would have certainly helped the FA2 keep pace with the F3 upgrades although the pilot workload would have been huge. But FA2 and JTIDS/ASRAAM never happened.
I therefore stand by my earlier comments. From my op and ex experience, the F3 was more than equal to an FA2 in the majority of fights I've seen once the former received decent weapons. I still however lament the demise of the FA2 and AMRAAM.
Regards,
MM