Unlike with the Global Hawk/U-2 fight, where only one platform could be funded, the F-35 is guaranteed to receive investment dollars. It’s not a question of which to cut, but rather if the A-10 should be kept around. The Global Hawk “might just be a unique beast, because there are two similar ways of doing the mission,” said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the Teal Group. “It really comes down to budget more than operational doctrine.”

In August, the F-35B performed its first night vertical landing aboard WASP. This type of capability would “suit Singapore future procurement plans,” Thayer said. But not everyone is sold on the idea. “I’m sure it has its appeal, not just from a power-projection and anti-piracy perspective but also from a force survivability standpoint,” said Richard Aboulafia, vice president for analysis at the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va. “But it would add considerably to Singapore’s F-35 acquisition bill.” Costs could increase as much as 25 percent to buy and operate the F-35B relative to the standard takeoff version. This would mean fewer planes, Aboulafia said.

“It sounds like [the Boeing] 787, 747-8 and [Lockheed Martin] F-35 to me,” says Richard Aboulafia, vice president for analysis at the Teal Group, referring to programs that had to incorporate late design changes during production ramp-up. “If you are missing important milestones, you get beaten up by the financial markets or your customers. . . . You want to meet time guarantees more than performance guarantees.” Introducing upgrades later in production while keeping the schedule intact “is more of a problem in the long term,” Aboulafia asserts. One of the major issues of putting risks on balance sheets is the question of residual values, which become relevant when an operator plans to sell an early-batch A350. The approach is also very expensive, both for Airbus and its suppliers.

SpaceX’s prices are so low that they could upend the price structure the Air Force has used in sending military satellites into orbit. “What we do know is that if you look at a SpaceX heavy launcher like a Falcon 9 or a Falcon heavy, it’s at least 50 percent cheaper than a comparable vehicle by Boeing or Lockheed,” said Marco Caceres, senior analyst at the Teal Group Corp. in Fairfax, Va. “We’re talking at least $50 million cheaper per vehicle so it’s a significant cost saving for the Air Force.”

Virginia-based Teal Group analyst Joel Johnson said the move could help American firms to put themselves in a position to benefit if a broader softening of sanctions is agreed. "It allows some US companies to get a foot in the door and restore relations that they have not had for over 20 years," Johnson said.