IMO another example of how the F-35 is an over specified, over engineered and expensive turkey.
And here is a comment by someone who knows a lot more than I do.
And here is a comment by someone who knows a lot more than I do.
Fuel temperature is an important parameter for an aircraft because excessive vapors in the tanks can be problematic.
Other jet fighters have fuel temperature warnings (eg. F/A-18 is triggered above 65 degrees Celsius.) so your claim of "over engineered" F-35 is misguided.
Remember TWA 800? The fuel in the center tank vaporized and the jet exploded.
The Luke AFB crews are being appropriately cautious and implementing an appropriate temporary solution.
The f-35 Looks like a jack of all trades, but a master of none.
The big factual error is comparing the F-35 turning performance to an airshow F-16. An F-16 with external tanks and combat loads (missiles and bombs) doesn't turn as well an F-35.
The other big factual error is that Perre Spey seems to confuse program unit cost or total lifecycle cost with flyaway unit cost when comparing alternatives. The Pentagon demanded an analysis of the F-35 lifecycle cost, but without comparing it to contemporary aircraft like the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. An F/A-18E costs around $72m Unit Flyaway Cost, and an F-35A is about $95m in full rate production.
The F-35 has considerable advantages like 360 degree EODAS, which enables off-boresight missile shots, while avoiding hostile fire. It might not be a classic Mach 2+ interceptor like the F-15 or F-22, but it'll do fine in a dogfight.