Basically, wasn't the Bone scrapped by the Biden military? 
Yes, and the F-22 by Obama (2011). The way to have an expensive per unit program is to make just a few. They get cheaper as the costs are amortized over a larger number of units...
Now the F-35 is up for the axe, and the A-10s are up for retirement again.
While I understand the technology of the battle space is going through some real changes, those platforms still are relevant.
How often do we hear that quantity has a quality all its own? While unmanned systems will be the future, at least in part, for now the radars and missiles will be the determinant in air combat (as they will with drones), and close air support will remain the purview of those specialized systems that can get up close and personal, not just hammer away from 20,000 ft.
Pick an advanced system.
Refine it. Train the people to operate and sustain it.
Build it in quantity. This was supposed to be the F-35 in all its variants, something normalized between us and our allies, too. Right now, it looks like spinning the wheel for today's dollars and that just cannot be efficient, militarily or economically.
Having a few of one and just a couple of another makes procurement expensive, maintenance more difficult, spares problematical, and increases the logistical GFF, where parts and materiel may be sent to the wrong places.
When the troops were issued the same rifles, with interchangeable parts, and, with special exceptions, using the same ammo, then any could be picked up by any other trooper and used.
Refine the emergent weapons systems, in those limited numbers, as prototypes and proof of platform, before tooling up and taking them to production. Chalk it off to research if it doesn't work, and move on, without piling a grundle into a weapons system that will barely show on the battlefield.
