Bevo,
Thanks for coming back, and with an excellent input.
Yes, the USAF were very heavily involved with hydro-electric actuators (or electro-hydrostatic actuators (EHAs)) via the F-16 'AFTE' trials, and certainly had a vested interest in getting 'their' technology on to the F-35.
The sums seemed to show very good through life advantages, but as the F-35 programme developed some of the integration drawbacks manifested themselves. Heat dissipation was a big issue - on conventional hydraulic actuators, most of the heat generated is carried away down the return lines and dumped in the fluid reservoirs. Not so with 270V DC. The aircraft also had to carry a big 270V DC battery in case of a total elec failure, although this was partially offset by the ability to do away with lots of hydraulic system components. The EHA guys also claimed that volume and weight would be saved by eliminating hydraulic lines, but the 270V DC lines weren't exactly slender.
The actuators themselves got very big, but I'm not sure that conventional ones would have been a lot smaller. When the weight reduction plan was under way, there was a proposal to look at reverting to conventional hydraulics, but it was (in my view correctly) judged to be a step too far. Interesting to note that the outboard ailerons on the F-35C are hydraulically powered, not electrically.
This does highlight another area where F-35 is breaking new ground - it is a far more 'electric' jet than anything fielded so far.
You make an excellent point about the ability of the customer to independently and knowledgable verify a technical proposal - sadly, in the UK most of the MoD's ability to do this has been discarded over the past 10 years or so. Not good.
Best regards as ever to those racking and stacking the figures
Engines