And there we have it. Even just two years ago we were being told it would be able to hold its own. No one was mentioning the things it can't do or the things it wasn't designed to do. Quite the opposite, in fact. I posted here the speed/altitude/turn rate/g/SEP graphs for other types which were misinterpreted by some posters here even though they clearly demonstrated pretty much what we see here.
Frankly, the JPO's "rebuttal" is nothing more than a bunch of excuses and, in equal measure, a series of admissions of the very points that were being made in the test pilot's notes.
Most of the 320 or so pages of this thread have contained a lot of very good information about the design, test point achievements and progress of the programme. Frankly, I understand (to a degree) why it is late, over budget and under-spec. Now we are starting to deal with the tactical and operational realities. Now we are starting to see the aircraft for what it really is. This is where I become less of a "neutral observer" and start to question the capability of the concept and the compromises that have gone, seemingly, unquestioned.
The "it wasn't designed for this" arguments should not sit well with the customers. They would do well to reassess what they need and how they are going to get it.