You have a good point in that it was supposed to replace all kinds of aircraft. It was kind of its thing. I haven’t been following too closely but it’s had issues filling all the roles.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_program

It's a little too late for that. The JSF program probably should have been cancelled or completely restructured circa 1996. But now there's no remaining alternative. The inventory of legacy AV-8, F-16, and A-10 aircraft are going to be retired no matter what because they're literally falling apart and it's impossible to keep extending their service lives.

> and it's impossible to keep extending their service lives.

B52 projected to last till 2050

B-52s aren't subject to the same stress as fighter aircraft are, that's why they are able to keep flying for so long (among other reasons).

You can build five F-18s for the price of one F-35.

Wrong. The current unit cost for an F-35B is about $109M while an F/A-18E/F is about $55M. That's a difference of 2×, not 5×. And more importantly, the F/A-18 can't operate from amphibious ships to support Marine Corps ground forces. If it can't accomplish the required mission then the cost is moot.

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/newest-f-35-f-15ex-contr...

It's disappointing to see people post lazy, low-effort comments like this without bothering to do even basic fact checking.

It's extremely practical and a good aircraft. Not to mention cheap, now that the development costs are paid for.

There is no aircraft in history that did not have hiccups during procurement. Even "ol reliable" platforms like the Blackhawk or the F-16 had much worse reputations when they were first introduced.