Is the F-35 the Swiss Army Knife of fighter planes?

It's no F-15, F-16, and in no way, shape or form, AN A-10! The F-35 is just an officer's Viagra with wings. It serves no purpose in the GWOT but we've spent so much money on it the they HAVE to make it work. BRING BACK THE A-10!!!!!!! Who's with me??

Swiss Army Knife does not seem to be a good metaphor for modern fighter planes which tend to be very secularized MAJ Ken Landgren.  The A-10 Warthog would be better example of a Swiss Army Knife airplane.  The best examples would be the platforms that produced many different airplanes such as the transports that had verions of aerial refuelers etc.

A jack of all trades is a master of none. As I stated in another post on this subject, this is like making a hammer that also cuts wood and pours concrete, it will do none of them well. If you take a Formula 1 race car and make it capable of hauling rocks it won't win any races. This is what results of the Multi-role fighter concept. We need only look back to first Persian Gulf War to see how this concept is dangerous.

The theory of having a multi-role fighter, carrying bombs with missiles for air combat to fight its way into the target area, has proven to be risky. The first air campaign casualty, Navy pilot Scott Speicher, was shot down in his bomb laden and missile armed F/A-18 by a MiG-25. The other occasions occurred with F-15E Strike Eagles. Designed to perform long range, high speed interdiction without relying on escort or electronic-warfare aircraft, it didn't play out that way. Two "Mud Hens" were shot down by SAM's on two separate occasions while attacking a heavily defended oil field near Basrah. The death of two aircrew members and capture of another two were the result. Another two occasions took place on the first night where E-models were engaged by lone MiG-29's. They attempted multiple and simultaneous unsuccessful attempts to shoot them down.