last time an order for the F-35 was made (LRIP 9 if my memory serves well), it was 131 million dollars per aircraft (and I say AIRCRAFT, not empty shell), without any support or anything else. The Rafale, aircraft alone, costs way less than that. Maybe, some day, it won’t cost more than a Rafale (to speak about just one aircraft), but it is just speculation( or hope, if you prefer)

You can barely compare full annual cost of one US fighter to another (due to differently levels of maturity & Need) and trying to do so with a a foreign bid is just crazy. Case in point is the Rafale deal as a whole. There is a line item in that contract that adds $50 million per plane for “customization” which would not be there if it were sold to someone else and is why I did not count that cost. On the F-35, there are early annual costs that should not be counted either like standing up new bases, FMS simulators which are several million each, etc.

The only way to get a “true”, whole system cost comparison between the Rafale (or any other plane) and the F-35 is to have them bid on the same contract. That is not likely to ever happen, maybe Canada. The only other choice is to rely on quotes like the recent India “Bare Plane” quote about the Rafale and compare it to the F-35, which is where I got the $99/$103 numbers from. btw, The $99 mil is the whole F-35, engine and all.

pay attention I mentioned life cycle cost of weopons and systems development around LO fighter. it include utilizing much higher labor from final assembly all the way to suppliers. even upgrading bases and all the R&D engineers to produce LO parts. this is the most inefficient way to fighting a war beside relying too much on drones.

When you look at the entire cost of getting the mission done and compare the platforms of LO and non-LO, then balance that against the respective lifecycle costs of all the programs involved… LO is cheaper in the long run. The F-35’s CPFH is only 17% more than an F-16 but is exponentially more effective. The cost to upgrade (in dev and parts) is also less expensive for the F-35 vs current 4th gen assets.

Around 14000 workers work at LMT DFW for F-35 and they are barely producing 50 jets a year with all the oustource parts that need several times larger labor and than add few thousands to programe management of such complex programme.

Inflation is a bitch. The F-35 is cheaper than the Rafale, Eurofighter, and F-15E. Having a global supply chain means competition which drives prices down and allows access to markets with less expensive labor forces.

2 x F135 class ADVENT engines (F-35 will benefit from common engine)
F-35 avionics w/bigger radar & bigger EOTS sensor
Airframe & loadout to suit the requirement
RAS & RAM from the F-35
HMDS fro the F-35
Extensive use of Carbon Nanotube RP (already started on F-35)

Done in 1

They should do the same with the B-21 but with more engines.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]249597[/ATTACH]

F-15 upgrades are tied to the low number of F-22s.. you know, that plane that was supposed to replace them.

Did F-35 reach 9G?

9.9G in testing IIRC

I question the capabilities(block) for F-35, not that it has IOC or not.
The capability is delayed by many years.

Per the same 2001 PDF, Block 1 & 2 contain:
Basic Warfighter Utility
Flight Qualified
Baseline missile/ Bombs qualified
Close Air Support & Interdiction capability

A more detailed list of Block2B/3i capability can be found here.
https://i.imgur.com/VLc2UJJ.jpg

My point, the current F-15C MLU, is indeed a direct result of a F-35 program delays that has been delayed.

Low F-22 numbers, not F-35 delays. The F-35 is only 5 years behind schedule so that is a non-starter.