Well then, I'm guessing the you're guessing wrong. Do you really think the Royal Navy (and the other F-35 buyers) think they're buying F-22 dog fight performance? REALLY?!!
Nope, but I am guessing that they're expecting dogfight performance at least as good as their current crop of combat aircraft (nothwithstanding the Royal Navy, which doesn't have a current fighter, of course).
You are aware that the choice is not F-35 or F-22, right?
You're still missing it aren't you? F-35 is predominantly a tactical bomber. But one that can escort itself to defend itself against fighters. It is not nor was it ever meant to be an air superiority fighter.
I get it Ken, but I wonder if you do. You said it yourself -
predominantly. While no one is saying that it is expected to have Raptor-esque air combat capabilities, LM itself said that it should be able (and would be, going by past statements) to dogfight to defend itself. According to the test pilot, it can't.
2. If the F-35 cannot perform the mission, then the RAF/RN folks who set down the specifications need to sacked. Perhaps shot.
The aircraft is designed to the specifications, rather than the specifications being drawn-up to fit the aircraft. The specs come first, and it is the job of the designers to build the aircraft to those specifications (assuming they don't change, of course, which is never a given).
Would you now with the latest stance that you are taking on what the F35 is be advising Canada to replace it's Hornets with F35s as having an attack bomber as your sole air defence fighter is not a very sensible idea? Ditto Norway of course.
And the rest PhilipG - Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Turkey, etc, etc....
You should hear
our collective sigh, Ken.