Hi Zim, thanks for finding the cannon numbers.
Then the F.14's 10 second cannon was 2.5 times the cannon power of the F-35, which is only 4 seconds.
I looked around a little more and found very pro F-35 articles and some that weren't so complimentary.
This article tells of truly amazing capabilities, but also considerable shortcomings of our stealth fighters.
Some of the problems relate to, you guessed it, dogfights. Stealth fighters don't have range. I don't know that it's a particularly good strategy to centralize functions in specific planes or ships that others need to rely on. They become HVTs and if you lose them, you're screwed. What has happened to our strategists, did Obama train them?
As an aside, it looks like I was wrong about poorly managed projects. Another article says the design criteria's set by the gov't and the suppliers aren't paid unless they deliver.
Why The F-22 and F-35 Stealth Fighters Will Revolutionize War in the Sky
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-the-f-22-f-35-stealth-fighters-will-revolutionize-war-17335?page=show
"The Rand Corporation’s Pacific Vision wargame simulating a conflict with China in 2008 found that even in a favorable scenario for the United States—half of U.S. missiles hit at long range and the none of their opponent’s do—a force of U.S. fighters outnumbered roughly three to one would be overwhelmed after firing off all its missiles. The less-maneuverable F-35s fared poorly in the ensuing dogfight. But in the end, nearly all of the U.S. fighters were lost.
Why? The hostile aircraft didn’t have trouble detecting the tankers supporting the U.S. forces. Unlike the F-22s and F-35s, tankers have neither the speed nor stealth to evade a determined attack.
If the tankers get shot down, it doesn’t just force the U.S. fighters to abandon the fight. It could force them to crash into the ocean, without enough fuel to make it back to base. In effect, a tanker would be a high-value target that U.S. air-superiority fighters would need to defend to the last."
| 
