FA18,
The (10.65 billion$ in 2013 value means close to 205 million per copy) figure seems very difficult to explain. I tried all sorts of maths on it to see if I could work out what they meant by that figure, based on the estimated $m90 figure being used in Canberra at the moment. It's way too high for the unit cost and doesn't add up to the estimated total lifetime cost (itro £1 trillion for 50 years according to the USN?). Given the Aus dollar to US dollar exchange rate at the moment, it doesn't make much difference which you use. It's either a complete red herring or somebody's quoting a figure without telling us what it really means. But there are so many figures out there, it's hard to know who will pay what. For example, if Singapore is to pay $9 billion for 71 jets, they would come in at over £126 million each.
On cost per hour, the Pentagon's acquisition cheif (is that Kendall?) sees the cost per hour coming down from £31.9 thousand reported to last year's SAR, but not as much as Bogden is claiming - the Pantagon doesn't seem to be happy with the Company's new metrics. I think that's about as much as we can assume for now. I hope it's nearer the cost of the legacy jets than last year's estimates - we'll hear more next month.
Classification remains a big issue and is muddying the waters concerning costs. Some hope may be on the horizon there too:
“Adding insult to injury, the JSF program office classified all documents as “U.S. only,” which upset partner nations. Even if they are all buying the same aircraft, each country has its own air-worthiness qualification processes and other administrative procedures that require they have access to the aircraft’s technical data. JSF officials are working to re-classify the documentation, Bogdan said.”