RetiredF4
Therefore to expect development problems on those new areas is understandable, but airframe and engine problems under such a restricted flight envelope like the jet is operated at the moment are hard to understand.
I can appreciate why you feel that. However modern power weight and fuel consumption requirements make big demands on today’s developers. I don’t pretend to know anything much about the F4 but I have flown it. Sure it did Mach 2 but you had better be pointing towards base (and not far away) when you did it! As for combat endurance when the USMC stated ACM trials with their new low fuel consumption turbofan donks in their Harriers back in the early ‘70s they played until their adversaries bingoed and then waited on the range for the next lot to come out to play. That got up a few noses I seem to remember. The only point I am trying to make is that times move on, capabilities improve and this all costs time and money. Lots of it.
Your next question is about what kind of aircraft will fill the gap for the next decade.
I only know what the USMC (not the USAF or UN) have said which is that they intend to start winding down their Harriers between 2027 and 2030. 2030 would be 59 years since they started in 1971.
LowObservable
You are of course right with what you say - we just have a different view on whether those facts are to be expected or not.
Incidentally back in the early ‘70s when the USMC air combat aces had their first look at what their new AV-8As would do, they achieved pitch rates at low speeds which were twice what jet engines were designed to cope with in those days. So the gyroscopic forces caused the fan to rub much to everybody’s consternation and providing much food for the doom merchants of the day. Hey Ho.