Ken,
If you could answer the points I made.
I thought I had. But OK, lets try parsing your post line by line.
Do you happen to know what software version etc the F35s that took part in Green Flag? I only ask as it would be interesting to know what targeting pods or should one say subsystem they were using and communicating to the ground troops with and what besides 1,000lbs bombs they used for this stellar performance.
To the best of my knowledge no "pods" were used. And I have no idea what software version or what weapons were used. I presume the latest cleared software and whatever weapons were cleared and appropriate for the mission.
If I was at all cynical I could read into the press release a good dig at the US Congress that seems to insist that the A10 stays in the armoury when the USAF wants to save money by retiring them all and using the maintenance crews on F35s.
If you want to characterize it that way, you are welcome to do so. And yes, I agree, I would call that "cynical". However, the prep for the exercises had been ongoing for many months prior to the exercise, and well before the whole A-10 controversy erupted in the first place. If publishing the results (as has been done after each Green Flag) is "a good dig", then so be it.
I noticed the other day that there was a report of the first live bomb release from an F35, if the reports of a "stellar" performance as a CAS platform are true when many of the systems do not work with 2B or 3i software and that there are no external stores cleared one can only imagine what the performance will be described as when 3F planes and later versions take part in Green Flag.
I would say, one can let their imagination run as wild as one wants. However, the F-35 folks (including Lockmart, USAF, USN, USMC, RAF, etc etc) don't need to "only imagine". They have used and are using lots of sophisticated hardware and software to simulate/model F-35 performance using its full spectrum of weapons and other capabilities.
Did that clarify/satisfy?