Cost per unit of the F35
Executive summary
Official per-aircraft prices for the F‑35 vary depending on what is being counted: recent "flyaway" production averages put the F‑35A around $82.5 million, F‑35B about $109 million, and F‑35C roughly $102 million (production Lots 15–17) [1][2], while analyses that include ancillary equipment and spares report higher per‑unit totals—roughly $110.3M (A), $135.8M (B), and $117.3M (C) [3]—and engine and contract developments have pushed headline unit estimates toward about $100M per jet in some reporting [4][5].
1. Flyaway price: what governments and Lockheed cite as the "unit" cost
The most frequently quoted contemporary metric is the flyaway cost for specific production lots: Lockheed/F‑35 program numbers and industry reporting show average flyaway costs for Lots 15–17 at $82.5M for an F‑35A, $109M for an F‑35B, and $102.1M for an F‑35C—figures meant to represent a basic aircraft without extras and reflecting learning-curve production efficiencies [2][1][6].
2. "Unit price" with extras: engines, spares, ground support and logistics
When analysts fold in ancillary items—engines, depot maintenance, ground support equipment and spare parts—the per‑aircraft bookkeeping rises: a July 2021 breakdown gave per‑unit totals of $110.3M (A), $135.8M (B) and $117.3M (C) to reflect a more complete procurement burden beyond the bare airframe [3], and separate engine contracts and procurement bids have been reported as moving the effective price per jet toward $100M in recent deals [4][5].
3. Lifetime sustainment: why "per‑unit" can explode over decades
The Government Accountability Office and other watchdogs emphasize that annual operations and sustainment change the arithmetic: DOD estimates the Air Force will pay roughly $6.6 million per year to sustain an individual F‑35—well above original targets—and program-level life‑cycle cost estimates have moved from $1.1 trillion in 2018 to $1.58 trillion in 2023, with some reports and program office statements citing even larger multi‑trillion estimates tied to lifetime operation and upgrades [7][8].
4. Conflicting numbers reflect different agendas and accounting choices
Manufacturers and program advocates stress declining flyaway costs and jobs/economic benefits as justification for purchases [2], while watchdogs and independent analysts highlight rising sustainment costs, delayed upgrades, and reduced projected flight hours to argue the program is costlier than advertised [7][9]; media pieces and contract reporting likewise show lot‑by‑lot variability and that engine contract terms or included tooling/spares can make a single‑line "price" misleading [4][5].
5. Practical answer: what to tell a budget line‑item reader
If the goal is a concise per‑jet figure for budgeting a new purchase, contemporary flyaway averages (Lots 15–17) are defensible: roughly $82.5M for an F‑35A, $109M for an F‑35B and $102M for an F‑35C [2][1]; if one wants a near‑term procurement cost that includes engines, initial spares and ground support, plan on roughly $100–135M per jet depending on variant and contract terms [3][4][5]; if the question is lifetime taxpayer cost, any per‑aircraft figure must be multiplied by decades of sustainment and upgrade expenses that drive program totals into the trillions under some estimates [7][8].
6. What this reporting cannot resolve definitively
The sources make clear that the definition of "cost per unit" is decisive and contested: publicly available lot prices, program office summaries, watchdog lifecycle math and independent analyses each answer different questions, so a single immutable "per‑jet" number does not exist in the record reviewed here—only a range tied to specific accounting choices [2][3][7].