The same mechanism, this time written out in full - F-35 Lot 6 advance acquisition (Lockheed Martin, about $7.19 billion)
A contract to Lockheed Martin awarded through the Defense Contract Management Agency, obligating about $7.19 billion. The description spells out F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter Low Rate Initial Production Lot 6 Advance Acquisition Contract.
Contract key facts
- RecipientLockheed Martin
- Contract value$7,186,135,705 (≈$7.19B)
- BranchDefense-wide
- Awarding agencyDepartment of Defense
- Awarding sub-agencyDefense Contract Management Agency
- Award typeDEFINITIVE CONTRACT
- Period of performance2011-08-08 〜 2023-05-31
- Contract ID (PIID)N0001911C0083
Contract scope (original)
F-35 LIGHTNING II JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER (JSF) LOW RATE INITIAL PRODUCTION (LRIP) LOT 6 ADVANCE ACQUISITION CONTRACT
Key points
- The description spells out aircraft, production stage, lot number and contract type in full.
- Another record this site holds writes the same mechanism as four words, "LRIP 10 AAC."
- The difference follows data-entry practice rather than the nature or size of the contract.
- Of the 207 records this site holds as of 2026-09-02, six mention F-35, totalling about $80.2 billion.
- Low-rate initial production is contracted lot by lot, so a programme total requires gathering across lots.
- Against about $7.19 billion obligated, outlays stand at about $19.1 million across a twelve-year period.
1The same mechanism written two ways
This description spells out the aircraft (F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter), the production stage (low-rate initial production), the lot number (6) and the contract type (advance acquisition contract). In another record this site holds as of 2026-09-02, the same mechanism appears as four words: "LRIP 10 AAC."
The difference in writing follows neither the nature of the contract nor its size but the practice of whoever created the record. The same programme and the same mechanism yield different amounts of readable information - the practical level of transparency is set by data-entry practice rather than by policy.
2The reach of one programme
Six records naming the aircraft come to about $80.2 billion. Including records that do not spell it out, the real figure must be higher, but binding by the wording of public data reaches only these six. When trying to establish programme-level spending, entry practice sets the ceiling of what can be counted.
3Contracts are cut per lot
Low-rate initial production is contracted lot by lot, which is why Lot 6 and Lot 10 survive as separate records. Establishing a programme total means gathering across lots, and records that do not carry a lot number in the description drop out of that count.
4The distance between obligation and outlay
Against about $7.19 billion obligated, outlays are recorded at about $19.1 million. In large defense contracts, obligation accumulates first and outlays follow over a long period as work proceeds. This record spans about twelve years, from 2011 to 2023.
Why it matters
Where programme-level spending is derived from public data, data-entry practice sets the ceiling of what can be counted. Analysis binding by aircraft name captures only the records written out and returns a figure smaller than reality. Supplementing with contract-number family, awarding office, recipient and period - or stating plainly what could not be captured - is the practical requirement for using this data.
FAQ
Why do descriptions vary between records?
Is this all the F-35-related spending?
Why do obligation and outlay differ so much?
Sources (primary)
This article is an independent organization based on the U.S. official spending data below. Verify the exact, latest details with the official source.
- USAspending (award details)
- Contract ID (PIID)：N0001911C0083