F-35B USMC.

This is coolbert:

At least with regard to the F-35B warplane we can find some solace in the decades-long project to develop an air superiority multi-role combat-aircraft [MRCA]?

Once more from that isegoria.net Internet web site article and a comment to same:

"USMC F-35B pilots speak about their aircraft"

That comment by Bob Sykes says:

"Because of its small internal stores volume, on many (possibly all) missions the F35B will carry weapons and fuel tanks on pylons under its wings. This will severely degrade its stealthiness. Think F16 on the inbound, attack route and stealthy on the outbound, return route. Configured for aerial combat, it will be stealthy."

"On the other hand, its capabilities far exceed those the the Harriers it is replacing. The Marine amphibious carriers will now have an air wing similar in capabilities to those on the big deck attack carriers. We have nine Marine carriers. The F35B will essentially double the number of attack carriers in service."

That F-35B as used by the United States Marines having plus and minus! NOT so stealthy as desired on the approach to the target. But that STOVL [short take-off vertical landing] capability of the F-35B meaning during a time of war meaning: "The Marine amphibious carriers will now have an air wing similar in capabilities to those on the big deck attack carriers". A PLUS in that regard. How BIG of a plus remains to be seen?

"7 Things The Marines Have To Do To Make The F-35B Worth The Huge Cost"

"With the fielding of the F-35B, the Navy almost doubles its theoretical 'first day of war,' fixed wing capable, carrier force. This means that more ships capable of operating high-performance, low-observable, multi-role fighters, can be in more places at a single time."

DOUBLE THE NUMBER OF ATTACK CARRIERS BUT ALSO KEEPING IN MIND THAT AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER DOES NOT EXIST IN A VACUUM AT SEA SOLO BUT IS PART OF A NAVAL AVIATION AND SURFACE BATTLE GROUP WITH ATTENDANT SHIPS TO INCLUDE A SUBMARINE UNDER THE WATER AT ALL TIMES!!

RESOURCES ARE LACKING IN THIS REGARD?

coolbert.