Jackjack, IIRC the numbers in Wiki (source no longer avail) has to do with total costs, not SDD.

This includes test articles, fuel, parts, etc.

A non-US buyer pays significantly less for the F-35 than the US taxpayer will simply because, depending upon their tier, it pays little or nothing for the cost of developing the aircraft.

Here is a breakdown of the Development Costs taken from the latest MOU. You will notice that while some partners are paying less as a part of the Development, their Per-Airframe cost of Development is virtually the same no mater who they are.

Participant Maximum Contribution Airframes Per Airframe<br />
Australia 690,000,000 100 6,900,000<br />
Canada 551,000,000 80 6,887,500<br />
Denmark 330,000,000 48 6,875,000<br />
Italy 904,000,000 131 6,900,763<br />
The Netherlands 586,000,000 85 6,894,118<br />
Norway 330,000,000 48 6,875,000<br />
Turkey 690,000,000 100 6,900,000<br />
United Kingdom 952,000,000 138 6,898,551<br />
United States 16,843,000,000 2443 6,894,392<br />


I don’t know.. I personally find that flyaway price (pure airframe cost+systems+engine+avionics) a totally useless figure because it seldom appears published and cannot be taken as a base for comparison.

While that “may” be true of partner or FMS orders, the DoD has very detailed cost records for any fighter program.

Btw, why can’t it be taken for comparison?

I agree. The F-22A is close to the F-117A, than comes the B-2A. When all promises will come true the F-35 will follow before the B-1B.

Still not quite right.

In terms of RCS , it goes F-22 < F-35 < B-2 < F-117

Um, no.. The F-35 has better VLO features than the F-117.

The less stealthy (and much cheaper) F-35, is equal to a metal golf ball. The F-35 stealthiness is a bit better than the B-2 bomber, which, in turn, was twice as good as that on the even older F-117.

All B/C models come with the P&D system. It is the A version that will have a boom system (USAF) but still have room in the nose for the P&B (partner nations).

PGMs were in their infancy in the 70’s.

According to publicly available data, the program / aircraft will cost significantly more than envisioned

If LM can produce LRIP-4 for 40% under what CAPE estimated (the basis for the above “public data”), what will this say about CAPE’s credibility with it’s own estimates?