LO,
Thanks for the reply - always good to trade views.
The B's problems are real, because it's a really, really challenging aircraft - in some ways (not all) the most challenging of the three. But the int I get from the team (and I have good contacts) is that there are no major stoppers right now - it was interesting to note that the recent 'quick look' report did not bring up any major B peculiar issues. Lost of common ones, though.
Actually, this is a family of three types from a single common baseline that is more or less the A model. The A was the first to be designed and that formed the basis for the B and C. But, the overall sizing was driven by STOVL, deliberately so. The US had come off the back of four large failed combat aircraft projects, all twin engined. The rationale (and argue with it if you want, but that was their call many years ago) was that the next generation aircraft had to be single seat, single engined to be even remotely affordable.
Oh, and V-22 was an Army led joint programme (JVX), not a USMC one. They took it on and have stuck with it through all its travails. If you want to know what they aim to do with it and the F-35B, go to Quantico and watch their open strategy and tactics sessions, where one and two stars get really and openly grilled by the junior joes for days on end. Once they've agreed it, the whole of the USMC falls into line. It doesn't indulge in the puerile 'Tornado vs Harrier' backstabbing I saw at Strike. Actually, it's quite refreshing. Of course, disagree with it, but it's their train set and their call.
Oh, and finally, I spent a few years planning the the very thorough surface erosion testing on JSF. It's been done at Warton. The USMC plan to do STO RVL ops from 1500 ft strips. At those angles and with a moving aircraft, the exhaust does not rip up the asphalt. VLs would, but they don't plan to do those. That's why the team has built in incredibly good powered lift handling qualities.
Best Regards as ever
Engines