The test pilots told David Axe no such thing. Someone inside the program leaked a pilot's report on a basic fighter maneuvering test. David Axe basically failed

The test pilots told David Axe no such thing. Someone inside the program leaked a pilot's report on a basic fighter maneuvering test. David Axe basically failed to understand 1) The exact nature of the specific F-35 used in that test, and how it differs from production aircraft in crucial ways 2) The intent of the test plan this test was conducted under. Axe says "The two jets would be playing the roles of opposing fighters in a pretend air battle, which the Air Force organized specifically to test out the F-35’s prowess as a close-range dogfighter in an air-to-air tangle". This basic assertion is incorrect. The intent was to test how the F-35's control laws responded to the kinds of inputs that it would receive in combat maneuvering, and how the pilot would feel about how the aircraft responded. As the pilot himself reports, "The test was designed to stress the high AoA [Angle of Attack] control laws during operationally representative maneuvers utilizing elevated AoAs and aggressive stick/pedal inputs". 3) The meaning of much of the language used in the pilot's feedback. The key takeaway from the report was not, as Axe says, that the F-35 " is demonstrably inferior in a dogfight with the F-16", but, as the pilot himself says in the leaked report (I will not link to it -- it is ITAR controlled and should not have been distributed in the first place, but Axe has posted it), "Whereas rudder inputs often feel sluggisth or gradual/delayed, the anti-spin logic is immediate, abrupt, and forceful. Perhaps some of the available authority may be given to the pilot while still preventing departure." In other words -- the plane has more maneuverability in it, please give that to me. The pilot also recommends some changes to the seat to allow for better visibility, and a change to how various regions of the control laws are blended together. By "Lockheed's response", did you mean https://www.f35.com/news/detail/joint-program-office-respons.. https://www.f35.com/news/detail/joint-program-office-respons.... ? Because that's not Lockheed, that's the JSF Program Office -- run by the government. Their response was more nuanced and detailed than what you describe. The pilot's remarks do not mean what you are asserting that they mean, as I have outlined above. F-15's have already been upgraded significantly. A-10s have received two different service life extensions. F-18 legacy Hornets are receiving entirely new center barrels. All of this helps, but it's not a long term solution. Making the F-22 cheaper sailed out the window when the current administration stopped production orders in 2009. Edit: also, "Cooked tests"? The test plans are approved by the government and are conducted with government engineers participating in every single step of the process, from test design, simulation, planning, briefing, execution, and data analysis. Nothing is passed through as OK until the JSF Program Office approves of it. Please refrain from baseless speculation on a process that you have not participated in or witnessed.