On the topic of the F-35, I get the idea of commonality between the branches of the military; it improves logistics and lowers overall acquisition costs by introducing more users. However, the problem with that concept is exactly what we’ve been highlighting here: The missions for which each branch needs the plane have very little in common, so the plane winds up performing poorly for all of them. You can’t tell me an F-35 is a better interceptor than an F-22 (or even an F-16), or a better air superiority fighter than an F-15, or a better close-support aircraft than an A-10. It may be a better jumpjet than an AV-8B, but the cost of that compromise is that it sucks at doing anything else. And in the meantime, we’re stuck with the aging (but still capable) B-52, the incredibly costly B-2, and the B-1, which probably won’t hold its age as well as the B-52.