'LowObservable' correct me if my assumptions are incorrect.
You seem to be saying that one F-35B squadron will be on a CVF at all times.
AFAIK it is still undecided if two CVFs will be in service, meaning that one would be available most of the time, with one in reserve/maintenance. I do not think if two CVFs are available that one will be at sea all the time. How much at sea time I do not guess at - perhaps you have been briefed on that in your recent conference presentation attendance (which was wot/where pray tell)?
Then with USMC 10% F-35B STOVL Ops you seem to imply that only 10% of total missions will be STOVL (either ashore or afloat). IF this is the case then not all that mission time will be Mode 4 STOVL - my guess then is that 1% of the time will be in STOVL mode. Does my assumption accord with yours in this case?
It has been made clear that ashore the USMC will be landing on runways in conventional mode (non-STOVL) with occasional STOVL/RVL/VL landings for practice (because these are easy in the F-35B and it is easy to remain current it is thought - unlike Harrier Ops). Also use of the FMS simulators will allow fewer actual sorties to remain current (along with real sorties) in STOVL ops.
Apart from exercises why would the USMC want to operate from 'austere-bases', unless required to do so in wartime situations. The USMC have implied that more F-35Bs, rather than less, will be onboard LHAs as I understand, because these aircraft have more capabilities than AV-8Bs. As an aside it is stated that USS America can embark 19-20 F-35Bs if required.
And lastly why would USMC 'austere-base' exercises be "
PR Jobs"? If that is the case then any exercise by any armed forces are in effect just '
PR Jobs'? What a funny attitude you have - especially of course to the USMC - and now by implication to any other users of the F-35B. What gives?