| Depends on what you mean by "hasn't flown yet", as the prototype flight testing is finished and they are well into wind tunnel testing.
I believed it was optimistic that the F-22 would meet it's initial operational date as well, since it is even more expensive and thus, more in the crosshairs for budget cuts. Yet it made it's projected date with few problems. The F-35 has more friends in congress it would seem, since it was made to drop bombs. I doubt Hill will have a fully operational wing all at once, but I am confident we will see a roll out sometime before 2010. |
The X-35 is a long way from the F-35 and the F-35 hasn't flown. I don't doubt the F-35 will eventually make it to service, but this program is almost a perfect storm of things that delay implementation. You have a worst case "jointness" scenario (domestic and international) - i.e. a delay anywhere in the program creates bureaucratic (and engineering) reverberations that will gum up the works. It has a STOVL variant, which is historically the hardest class of the aircraft to bring into the fold and if it requires major re-engineering (and it may well), that could delay the "A" model as well. It also has an engine that is an unknown quantity. Lastly, it is the highest profile program at a time of war where budgets are getting very tight indeed. One F-35 buys a lot of ammo, Hummers and Strykers, which makes it any easy mark on the Hill.
There is also the fact that this is to replace the A-10. It'll likely come down to an either/or situation and I suspect once the groundpounders realize what's up they're going to start their own campaign against it.
I'll eat my shorts if it's 2010 or earlier that any sort of operational delivery occurs. My money is on 2015 or later.