For DU'ers who know this stuff, what are the advantages of the F-35 over the F-22,

[Klaralven]

41. It's all due to a lot of bad bureaucratic regulation

The Air Force only flies fixed-wing aircraft, so they developed the A-10 for tank-busting. However, they consider that job beneath the proper function of an Air Force fighter pilot, so they don't like it. Instead, they want to bust tanks with a proper jet fighter like the F-16 or F-35 that can attain supersonic speeds.

The Army would probably like the A-10. At least the troops appreciate them. But the Army is forbidden from flying fixed-wing aircraft, so they develop their own very expensive, hard to maintain, and rather more vulnerable attack helicopters. The Army is permitted to fly, but only in a vehicle that is attempting to thrash itself apart.

The Navy can fly aircraft from carriers, but the planes need to not come apart when launched by catapult or when landed with a tailhook and arresting gear. So they are rather stronger and heavier in certain aspects than Air Force planes.

The Marines can fly aircraft as guest on the Navy carriers. However, they would like to have their own planes on their own vessels which don't have flight decks. Therefore, they want one that can take off and land vertically.

Some idiot decided to make the F-35 as a single design in three versions for the Air Force (F-35A), Navy (F-35C) and Marines (F-35B). It isn't good at any of the three jobs, and it is way too expensive. The F-35B is particularly poor, since if you add the weight of stuff to enable V/STOL, you no longer have as much range or payload.