BEags,1.3Vs, smuj et al,
The F-35 is, first and foremost, an attack and electronic warfare platform (F- or B-designation irrelevant to the Americans, who chose the designation - witness F-105). We bought some natty destroyers to do the air defence bit. There are already arguments ongoing about whether the F-35 will need to augment this due to the issues of radar horizon, etc, but the number of F-35s we are going to get is almost certainly inadequate for them to be employed in both roles. If they are sat on CAP, the carrier will not be contributing very much by its presence. So they quite simply have to be attack platforms first, or the whole package will be exposed as a waste of money. A bomber numberplate is therefore entirely appropriate!
However I'm not convinced that the (undoubted)
PR value of 617 Sqn should be allowed to override the seniority order to such a gross extent - it is over 30 years younger than II(AC) Sqn, for example, and I am a bit surprised that the succession of that squadron hasn't been sorted out yet. 120 Sqn is out there, with early standard award, a maritime history and a far more important role in WW2, and while it is probably being held back for an as-yet unconfirmed MPA squadron, nominating such a famous Coastal Command unit would have shown a bit of an olive branch to the Navy after all the recent rancour. Nominating 617 just sticks up the middle finger, really - especially at their old rivals IX(B), who are by far the senior bomber squadron and have an exemplary operational history stretching through the entire history of the RAF, including sinking the Tirpitz!