F-35 Shortcomings

Because the person who placed the order didn't read The Art of The Deal.

Credible report or bullshit tabloid report?

>>33626767
No, it's credible. Why?

>avoid modern threat ground radars
SEAD is always a team effort.
>acquire targets
Recon is also a team effort.
>engage formations of enemy fighter aircraft due to unresolved performance deficiencies and limited weapons carriage
This is 100 percent fictitious

File: 1438385859656.png (377KB, 1198x800px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 1198x800px

Let's bring on the shitposting.

>>33626780
post the source then.

>>33626896
The F-35 still has a long way to go before it will be ready for combat. That was the parting message of Michael Gilmore, the now-retired Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, in his last annual report. The Joint Strike Fighter Program has already consumed more than $100 billion and nearly 25 years. Just to finish the basic development phase will require at least an extra $1 billion and two more years. Even with this massive investment of time and money, Gilmore told Congress, the Pentagon and the public, “the operational suitability of all variants continues to be less than desired by the Services.”

Gilmore detailed a range of remaining and sometimes worsening problems with the program, including hundreds of critical performance deficiencies and maintenance problems. He also raised serious questions about whether the Air Force’s F-35A can succeed in either air-to-air or air-to-ground missions, whether the Marine Corps’ F-35B can conduct even rudimentary close air support, and whether the Navy’s F-35C is suitable to operate from aircraft carriers.
He found, in fact, that “if used in combat, the F-35 aircraft will need support to locate and avoid modern threat ground radars, acquire targets, and engage formations of enemy fighter aircraft due to unresolved performance deficiencies and limited weapons carriage availability.”

https://warisboring.com/the-f-35-is-a-terrible-fighter-bomber-and-attacker-and-unfit-for-aircraft-carriers/

there ya go, now shut the fuck up

>>33626909
Ah a new article with citations from 2016 and before. Real top notch stuff

>>33626909
>war is boring

You've been disqualified.

File: 1474500904573.jpg (18KB, 552x389px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 552x389px

>>33626780
>No, it's credible

>>33626909
>warisboring

>>33626909
>War is Boring

Gee I wonder why you didn't want to post this

File: P562AoB.jpg (173KB, 1024x905px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1024x905px

>>33626694

Obligatory

Wait, are you guys being serious? What's wrong with War Is Boring? It seems credible.

>>33627057
It's been widely discredited, they cherry pick information against the F-35, they've used RT and Sprey as a source, and they don't actually have any editor or writer with a background in aviation or procurement.

File: 1491946472681.png (161KB, 433x484px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 433x484px

>>33627057
>What's wrong with War Is Boring? It seems credible.
Its the HuffPo of the defence industry.

File: 1381804662935.jpg (40KB, 300x544px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 300x544px

>>33627057
Warisboring peddles memes and clickbait in place of actual reporting. They're even worse than the regular media when it comes to military reporting, because they give the uninformed viewer the impression that they know a lot about what they're talking about, so people like you fall into the trap of thinking that they're even remotely reputable.

>>33627099
>>33627082

Well regardless the former director on the project still said that stuff though.

>>33627046
m8 you can't believe this
just upgrade the fucking F-18
the F-35 doesn't even have a decent payload
IT DOES NOTHING WELL
AT
ALL
the fucking engines have caught fire too many time, and the F-16 fucked it up constantly. I'd rather my country use the Rafale than this piece of shit.
god damn the f-35 defenders are fucking retarded

>bingo

>>33627046
If the F-35 wasn't so shitty, why is there a bingo for it?

File: 1468805062896.jpg (52KB, 1000x584px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1000x584px

>>33627127

>>33627141
Use your words, anon.

File: Radar_Plane.jpg (81KB, 1243x800px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1243x800px

>>33626694

What, did you want them to stuff a radar dish onto its back as well?

>>33627121
In what context though? The quotes in the article leave a lot of information out. Was he talking about the then-current block? The software? Certain issues that have since been fixed?

So without memes, what are the benefits of an F-35 over other currently used aircraft (namely in the RAF) such as the Tornado or the Typhoon?

>>33626694
>the F-35 aircraft will need support to locate and avoid modern threat ground radars
Bullshit. This is it's bread and butter.
>and engage formations of enemy fighter aircraft
That I can believe. Fortunately it shouldn't have to.

File: 1442100084205.png (288KB, 1236x888px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1236x888px

>>33626909
>warisboring

>>33627495
>Tornado
I thought the RAF didn't have too many of those left.

>>33627495
Stealth and avionics. The F-35 can see things before those things can see it, allowing it to deploy its weapons without being detected.

Kinematically, the Typhoon probably is noticeably better than the F-35, but on a strategic scale that's not really going to be all that important compared to the edge the F-35 has in avionics and stealth.

File: F-14 Tomcat.jpg (1MB, 3008x1960px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3008x1960px

Why the hell did we retire this bad bitch right here?
The plane is still perfectly competent and is more reliable and effective in battle than the shitty F-35.

BRING BACK THE F-14!!!!

>>33627595
About 80. They take care of nearly all ground strikes in the middle east, and by the looks of it they do a pretty good job.

>>33627099

Moran & freaking Shapiro.

Good book if you need to learn thermodynamics, I have it in a box somewhere.

>>33626694
>will need support to locate and avoid modern threat ground radars, acquire targets,

Are people seriously this dumb?
Y'all know (points above) is the f35s entire purpose, right?

File: vmaq3ea6b.jpg (2MB, 2800x2000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2800x2000px

Former Prowler guy.

Anyone know how much of the job of the ALQ99 pod the F35 can actually do? I've been told they are planning on using the F35s for Prowler missions if needed.

now i just work on 777 engines but I still got a lot of buddies in the Marines working on Prowlers and AV-8B's and have sort of been kept in the loop.

>>33627910
IIRC the Growler is going to handle the EW mission for the foreseeable future. Odds are the F-35 will get similar EW capabilities at some point, though. Depending on how automated they can get it, they might even be able to make it a bolt-on conversion.

>>33627675
It had a 28 year career. Conspiracy theories aside, the added weight and complexity of the swing-wings and their impact on maintenance times became an increasingly worse tradeoff for performance as conventional wing jets saw steady performance increases over its lifespan.

File: 1486427854150.jpg (2MB, 2501x1661px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2501x1661px

>>33627933

having the complete capabilities of the prowler as a strap on option is a pretty amazing thought.

Those EA-18s are nasty too. even with 1 ECMO they can handle a huge work load.

>>33627962
Granted that's just speculation from someone whos expertise is Aerospace rather than electrical engineering. What I'd imagine an EW F-35 would entail is:
>EW pods developed to fit in bays
>Heavy automation of EW pods
>Integration of EW pods with existing sensors on F-35
However, that doesn't take into account things like electrical power requirements, cooling, or how the transmitters would have to be configured, so I would take all that with a grain of salt.

File: aokaa.jpg (111KB, 1280x704px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1280x704px

>>33626909

File: F-14 Tomcat(1).jpg (70KB, 694x973px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 694x973px

>>33627950
This

I have a hardon for the B-1B that never goes away (The doctor stopped returning my calls), but I'm not going to sit around and bullshit about it being the best strategic bomber for the money. When you throw the dificulty of maintaining aircraft in the finite space and with the finite resources of a carrier, it becomes pretty hopeless. In the air the F-14 was a brilliant aircraft that did a wonderful job of rectifying a lot of the issues the F-4 faced. On the deck, however, it was a bit of a mess, especially towards the end.

File: 1473666526127.jpg (1MB, 3008x1960px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3008x1960px

>>33627675
she was too perfect for this world, too pure

>>33628046

A Man's plane, without doubt.

File: 1473660995009.jpg (721KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 1680x1050px

>>33628048

File: B-1B(2).jpg (941KB, 2100x1397px) Image search: [Google]

941KB, 2100x1397px

>>33628063
A true man's carrier based interceptor/ASF.

Real men love to B-One

File: 1473648183366.jpg (945KB, 2100x1366px) Image search: [Google]

945KB, 2100x1366px

>>33628082
>tfw there will never be a plane as sexy as this again

File: pgL_EP-10013_009.jpg (2MB, 2800x2000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2800x2000px

>>33628013

still a cool concept even if we don't see it.

Thanks for replying man. I heading off. I think working on prowlers made me develop a hard on for EW. They way EW fighters can take over an air space is pretty crazy. Like if you got 2 EA-18s you can have an A/C-130 just chillin with minimal risk of it getting shot down and more information about the battlefield than they could ever wish for.

File: 1409446585426.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>33628090

File: 1439359130443.jpg (1MB, 2100x1181px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2100x1181px

>>33628104

File: F-86 Sabre.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>33628090
Say what you will will about performance, but fuck me if there isn't another nation on earth who can design aircraft as sexy as the USA

File: F-14_Tomcat_preparing_to_refuel.jpg (1MB, 1722x1078px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1722x1078px

>>33628115

File: 1489812478633.jpg (127KB, 1000x563px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1000x563px

>>33628115

File: F-14A_Tomcat_over_Iraq_during_Southern_Watch.jpg (1MB, 2073x1169px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2073x1169px

>>33628126

>>33627910
>Anyone know how much of the job of the ALQ99 pod the F35 can actually do?
Well as I understand it (and you probably understand this better than I do), the ALQ-99 is an offensive jammer, with directional transmission antennas. Barracuda (the F-35's ECM system) is most likely (if you'll pardon the educated guess) a strictly defensive jammer with omnidirectional antennas only. So they're not really comparable, so far as I know.

That's not to say that the F-35 won't be able to mount offensive jammers externally in the future. The USMC is considering adapting NGJ to the F-35 as a prospective replacement for the Prowler.

>>33627675
We could always buy some back from the Iranians.

>>33627430
Read the damn report yourself, senpai. He was always talking about the overall situation during the reporting period, and every time those reports get released we get the usual suspects spamming that it doesn't matter because everything is now fixed. This has been happening for years now, yet the hard truth is that F35 is not in a combat worthy state yet and won't be in many more years.

What is also quite telling about the state of the F-35 program is that these DOTE reports keep time and time again revealing, with a few month delay, the bullshit behind all the "great success in excersise/test" PR statements coming out that praise the F35. e.g Succesfull weapons testing -> in reality F-35 could only complete handfull of the tests on its own and the rest required either control room intervention, hacky unrealistic workarounds or legacy planes to assist in locating the targets

File: 14425905241700.jpg (444KB, 1200x913px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 1200x913px

>>33628123

Russians shit all over your planes looks-wise.

It's not even a competition.

>>33629394
You don't want them back, man. They were hangar queens when they were brand new.

File: B-1 sex.jpg (356KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 1024x683px

>>33629746
You have one series of aircraft that look nice, the US has many more. Though there is something to be said for what aerodynamics will do to any man's duck.

File: 14425954668310.jpg (298KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1000x667px

>>33629757

You're like that guy who's into landwhales, just because landwhales are the only thing he gets.

Your taste is shit

>>33626878
>>avoid modern threat ground radars
>SEAD is always a team effort.
>>acquire targets
>Recon is also a team effort.
If "team effort" means having different planes in the sky for the same mission, then the F-35 is not multirole at all.
The Typhoon has the same flaw.

>>33629746
When you forgot to close the trunk and you're too drunk to notice it.

File: female f14 pilot.webm (1MB, 372x273px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 372x273px

>>33627675

>>33630130
You seem to be implying that the plane crashed because it was being flown by a woman. What happened was a stall and flame out caused by over compensation during landing, which typically happened to rookie pilots and was an issue throughout the F-14's life.

>>33630151
But how can we meme about women being useless if we have to use facts and critical thinking?

>>33628046

If there are so many complexities with it's design that makes it difficult to maintain, I often wonder how Iran manage to keep them air worthy.

>>33630156
the anecdote actually is about how she was put in control of the plane too early for ANY pilot because of pressure to put more females through for the sake of diversity quota. she was simply a pilot who was passed when she should have had more training because the higher ups were concerned with maintaining a female presence.

>>33629770
>mile wide thigh gap
Do they not have eye doctors in Russia?

>>33630164
No flight hours.

>>33630245
>implying better torque for the TVC and more room for the weapons bays is a bad thing

>>33630259
>Implying with Russian engines more yaw authority on your engines is a good thing to have
>Implying the space is for extra weapons and not the likelihood of catastrophic engine failure
What, you want to flat spin into an airshow crowd or something?

>>33630277
>Implying with Russian engines more yaw authority on your engines is a good thing to have
Both yaw and roll, and its not about more but being able to archive the same with smaller movements of the nozzles
>Implying the space is for extra weapons and not the likelihood of catastrophic engine failure
Yeah, you got me. Why would anyone want to carry 400km range air-to-air missiles, "290"km range (MTCR) supersonic cruise missiles or other stand-off range goodies internally in a stealth fighter

>>33626909
ah fuck nigga, what are you doing?

>>33630440
>not getting the joke
>4 missiles
>FOUR MISSILES

>>33627675
Honestly, the F-14 was just a Phoenix launcher. The US need another bad ass super long range missile like the Phoenix to scare the shit out of Russia or China.

File: IMG_2565.jpg (58KB, 640x472px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 640x472px

>>33627675

File: A-5.jpg (130KB, 800x715px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 800x715px

>>33628046
Speaking of maintenance nightmares.... pic related.

First flew in 1958 but she had...
>multi-mode radar
>a HUD
>fly-by-wire
>CCTV camera under the nose
>inertial navigation
and this was all controlled by
>a MASSIVE digital computer to manage/run it all

The thing used area rule and its design looks like something from the 70's, not the 50's. Trouble was, the A-5 needed an intense amount of maintenance per flight hour and was limited by its design to either being a nuclear bomber or reconnaissance aircraft.

Still pretty, still wildly advanced for its time.

>>33626694
>The DOT&E report by a civilian whose job is to be as negative as possible
>Most of the DoD considers the office worthless overhead

>>33627622
>Kinematically, the Typhoon probably is noticeably better than the F-35
Yeah, probably not. Current details indicate it dances better than a Hornet in high Alpha, and has better energy recovery than an F-16.

>>33628335
The Barracuda is a passive EWO system, not a jammer. That said, it has the most advanced set of RF antennas and analyzers on anything flying. To the point that it can tell the difference between real and emulated S-300 radars.

As for jamming, it can use its radar for forward jam operations.

>>33629646
>yet the hard truth is that F35 is not in a combat worthy state yet and won't be in many more years.
And yet there's already an operational F-35B squadron in Japan, and the Air Force plans to deploy As to the ME this year.

>>33627046
But the F-22 is better

>>33626909
>War is Boring

Into the trash it goes

>>33630151
Except this was a subpar pilot pushed through the program for PC reasons which ended up costing both the pilot and the WSO their lives

>>33630475
Europe has the METEOR.

>>33630794
"operational"
They may be cabable of doing basic training with them but that's about it. The software version those planes are using, as pointed out in DOT&E report, makes them utterly incabable of actually waging a war if they were called upon to do that

>>33630898
The software version they have gives them better capabilities than 4th gens already doing the job, your opinion is stupid.

>>33630898
And yet using that software they've dominated at Red Flag, etc. The F-117 was far less capable than the F-35 is today, yet it was one of the most effective strike aircraft in recent history.

>>33630777
Technically speaking the Barracuda is the overarching system in charge of EW; the passive antennas (which fall directly under its designation), the APG-81 radar, as well as towed decoys, flare / chaff dispensers fall under it's umbrella.

>>33628335
NGJ was originally planned for F-35, but postponed indefinitely; there's currently other unnamed initiates in the works for podded EW / cyber systems that might be a variation of NGJ or something else entirely.

>>33627910
With the APG-81, an F-35 can supposedly provide "80%" as much power as a Prowler with a standard 2x set of ALQ-99s - but only in the X-band. When it comes to ESM a single F-35 is better at geolocating than 3x F-16CJs surrounding a target and supposedly it's meant to have excellent deception jamming and cyber capabilities.

File: f352.jpg (81KB, 1200x875px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1200x875px

Unrelated to F-35 shit posting, but I just saw one while fishing down on the Gulf near Pensacola. Some sort of training/test flight. It flew by pretty low and God damn it looks sexy in flight.

Didn't have my phone near me and obviously it went too fast to grab it.

Anyways just figured I'd share my blog post in this thread of shit posting.

Is there a place left for large bombers like the Agro Vulcan anymore? They're aesthetic as fuck but I'm assuming, due to their role of fast nuclear delivery being taken by cruise missiles, there's no point in them right?

>>33631380
The Vulcan was smaller than the B-52, B-1B, B-2, etc; if anything the B-21 will likely be similar in size to the Vulcan.

>>33626909
Fucking jagoff.

File: IMG_1550.jpg (126KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1200x675px

AARGM-ER fits in an F-35 weapon bay.

>>33628013
You can air cool the kind of equipment they use for EW, right? I once heard a guy say they could remove the gun and the space as an inlet for air cooling the weapon bays.

>>33631638
*and use the space as an inlet

>>33630803
Only for air superiority. It barely has any ground attack capability, at least compared to the F35.

>>33626878
>engage formations of enemy fighter aircraft due to unresolved performance deficiencies and limited weapons carriage
>This is 100 percent fictitious
That depends on on the force disparity between "formations of enemy fighter aircraft" and "the F-35 aircraft."

Sooner or later an F-35 will need backup, this is neither Hollywood nor Gundam where the new fancy toy can down hordes of its immediate predecessors with a simple diagonal slash.

File: file[1].jpg (111KB, 710x476px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 710x476px

>>33631820
No, but a wing of F-35s can do things like remote guide weapons like the AIM-120D and SM-3 in on targets from other launch sources, drastically increasing their armament capabilities beyond normal load.

Also, when counting external loads the F-35 can actually haul four more A2A missiles than the F-22. The F-22 maxes at internal 6 AMRAAM, 2 Sidewinder, and 4 external AMRAAM for 12 shots. The F-35 for 4 Internal AMRAAM (6 in the future), and 8 external AMRAAM and 2 Sidewinder for 14(16) shots.

>>33631952

Thats not fair, for the F-35 you are counting dual launchers and not for the F-22 on the external amraams. Both have 2 hardpoints per wing, with the F-35 having wingtips.

File: f036abd11a3a87dc632a6a487a3ac290[1].jpg (50KB, 400x614px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 400x614px

>>33631988
The F-22 can't haul dual on both AND internal load.

File: smug anime girl expressing amusement.gif.gif (134KB, 340x340px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 340x340px

>>33631952
>PAK FA can carry more air-to-air missiles internaly than F-35 total external+internal

>>33632055
>The F-22 can't haul dual on both AND internal load.

clearly can, as your pic shows. Just no bags.

File: f-35-and-current-weapons-3-728.jpg (102KB, 728x546px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 728x546px

>>33627495
Sensors fusion, the F-35 is a premiere intelligence fighter that can search, coordinate and destroy better than most any platform out there. Add on stealth, an entirely acceptable flight profile (comparable to a superbug), long legs and a decent payload and comparable to the tornado at ground support. You really can't overstate how much the new sensors and systems will have an impact.

The Brits need a carrier aircraft anyways, and there's few that are comparable to the 35B.

>>33632074
There is no loadout that does that.

>>33632072

PAK-FA does 4 internally, friend, plus Two heaters.

>>33632088

Oh, and im sure you have access to every loadout?

Or is a dank infographic what the US airforce goes to when it cant decide?

Spoilers: It can load whatever it wants, barring weight restrictions on pylons and data hookups.

File: CUDA_2_zps5c16bec6[1].png (435KB, 1024x560px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 1024x560px

>>33632072
>CUDA/SACM-T
>12 internal AMRAAM-equivalent in both birds
>Can probably fit two 4-bangers on each wing on the F-35 for 28

File: sukhoi_pak_fa_l3.jpg (438KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

438KB, 1024x681px

>>33629746
>Squashed pancake plane looks nice

File: F_A-22A_weapons_load[1].png (31KB, 640x505px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 640x505px

>>33632099
>barring weight restrictions on pylons and data hookups.
And aerodynamic safety restrictions.

>>33632089
Try 8.

>>33632120
The f-35 looks like a fat rat. The pak fa is the looks pleasing because it follows the laws of nature, being a plane the prioritises aerodynamic performance over stealth.

>>33632131
>And aerodynamic safety restrictions.

Which clearly is not an issue being as how it can dual up amraams with bags.

>>33627082
More like the Kotaku of the defence industry

>>33632189
And not have any internal stores. That load has no internal weapons.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1920px

>>33632089
>Two deep 1m wide weapons bays
>I-it can only c-carry f-four 200mm diameter missiles

>>33632161

6 BVR's 2 AAM's. internal

F-35 total is 12 BVR's, 2 AAM's.

>>33632196
Nah, kotaku is dumb lazy clickbait, whereas War is Boring is biased lazy clickbait.

Now Foxtrot Alpha, it seems like Lockheed Martin ALSO ran over the new author's dog after murdering Tyler's whole family, it's the only thing that makes sense.

>>33632116
there's a reason why no one else has ever bothered with hit-to-kill missiles

>>33632206
>And not have any internal stores.

Due to the weight of the bags, sure. 1200 gallons is no joke.

Thats almost 4 metric tons.

>>33632243

US has been using HtK missiles for decades.

>>33632251
That's why I said "no one else". In order to get as good Pk's as regualr missiles you need to launch 2-3 of 'em and at that point it makes more sense to just use those regular missiles. Only reason why someone would think this was a good idea was if they were the one a) selling those missiles b) being bribed by those selling those missiles

>>33632307

Its not the 80's anymore. Sm-3 is launched one at a time in tests, unless multiple targets are flying.

>>33632225
Don't lie to me, you wanker. The f-35's total is 2 missiles and two bombs.

>>33632332

Wut. Block 3F finished up last year.

>>33632307
You are already launching more than one missile per target. Even if you launch the same amount of missiles space wise per target, 4 missiles (that take of the space of two conventional) is better.

>>33632348
1Q 2018 if there are no further delays

>>33632382

Testing. The code is done.

>>33632388
They've been saying that for years now, I'll believe that when I see it

>>33632082
These figures are total BS for both planes.

File: fucked lemon.jpg (222KB, 652x886px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 652x886px

>>33632623
Lets stick to the facts, then.

>>33632623
>>33632661
>Spreyposting

>>33632661
>dailymail infographic
>facts

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

>>33632181
>fancy maneuvering via ballistics instead of flight control

>>33632116
CUDA doesn't exist and no one is developing it.

>>33632307
They don't because it is easier to buy American than develop their own.

>>33627675
>I watched top gun and think the f14 wasn't a grape

>>33632661
>lets draw what we want and call it a fact

Stop bumping this shit thread, idiots.

>>33632869
Good job proving how ill-informed you are.

>>33630855
WSO made it out, she only killed herself.

>>33632661
>Clutch plates touch
Holy shit they better.

>>33631638
Technically you generally don't air cool the equipment directly, you have air cool a radiator which then sends liquid coolant to the actual electronics. As for the weapon bays, all they need is a very small vent system - the reason the bays get so hot is that on one side they have an extremely powerful jet engine separated mainly just by an air gap; on the other side they have the bay doors which are built of a composite designed to reflect / not let heat through.

>>33632161
>>33632225
The F-35 carries 4 AMRAAMs internally, the PAK-FA carries 4 R-77s + 2 R-73 internally.

>>33632219
Diameter doesn't matter; wingspan and separation safety does.

>>33632348
>>33632363
Here's Block 3F's estimated delivery as of February 2017:
F-35A:
October 2017 (without AIM-9X)
November 2017 (with AIM-9X)

F-35B:
November 2017 (Mach 1.3 max)
May 2018 (Mach 1.6 max)

F-35C:
January 2018 (Mach 1.3 max)
February 2018 (Mach 1.6 max)

>>33632439
They haven't; the code's development has been done for about a year now - that doesn't mean they won't release patched updates as testing finds issues though, it just means that they've figured out how to and written all of the code required for it's EW, cyber, fusion, comms, SAR, etc capabilities.

>>33632623
lol
>>33632661
That's about 4 years old.

>>33632869
CUDA is actively being funded and developed by Lockheed; CUDA is their proposal for the USAF's SACM (Small Advanced Capabilities Missile) program, although so far the USAF has chosen to fund Raytheon (who makes the AIM-9 and AIM-120) for R&D work.