The problem comes from both sides of the purchasing process.
LMT certainly has faults, but every advanced aircraft in history has been subject to specification creep. A contract is signed many years before deliveries are slated to start, and the government wants to include more advanced technologies developed well after the contract is signed. Who is to blame for that cost increase?
And, the government is sometimes harsh and rigid about meeting initial specs. For instance, if an initial range of 1000 miles is specified, and various upgrades in performance specs mean the max range is down to 988 miles, or the engines, which are on a parallel development path with the plane are 1% less fuel efficient mean a range of only 990 miles, the government will frequently insist on those 10-12 more miles, which means a complete fuel tank redesign. The cost is very high for this insistence on an arbitrary specification.
I know.
The central error in this program comes from a) inviting specification modifications/enhancements from “partner” nations, and b) trying to make this aircraft be all things to all branches of the service.
This never works.
Then add in the mission creep, technology creep, etc... and it’s going to become a bottomless pit for taxpayer money.
Kill it. Kill it now, while we can still get away from the majority of expense.