[Goose]

https://www.airforcemag.com/dod-air-defe...-to-years/
In typical US fashion, when asked about NASAMS the answer given was that it was "several months away". Then you find out they are talking about FINALIZING THE CONTRACT, i.e paperwork, not when Ukraine will get the units!!

You must have some other source different from the link you gave.  The article at that link says 

 “I can’t give you details of where it is in the contracting process. But, you know, we don’t see any challenges.”

and

...still has no delivery date.
“It’s several months,” the defense official said

I take that to mean that the magazine understood the official to say the delivery would be several months off, not the final contract.  And not a year either.

I read it that the "several months" refers to the point when the contracting process will end and they will have a delivery date. If they say they still have no delivery date, I assume that is what they mean. If they had a contract, they would have a delivery date. They didn't say "the delivery date is several months from now". They said they didn't have one. Saying they can't give details of where it is in the contracting process but that they see no challenges indicates to me they don't yet have a contract and the no challenges are to the contracting process. 

Having worked with this process I know that there are contracting mechanisms that allow the contractor to start on the job while the details of the contract are worked out, but at that point there is a contract legally in place and at least a target delivery date. That appears not to be the case here based on their statements. Letter contracts at one point in history were common but today are rather rare. While it is possible a contractor will risk fund construction of a system if they are pretty sure there will eventually be a contract relying on that for something "important" is pretty much unheard of.

[Goose]

https://www.airforcemag.com/dod-air-defe...-to-years/
In typical US fashion, when asked about NASAMS the answer given was that it was "several months away". Then you find out they are talking about FINALIZING THE CONTRACT, i.e paperwork, not when Ukraine will get the units!!

You must have some other source different from the link you gave.  The article at that link says 

 “I can’t give you details of where it is in the contracting process. But, you know, we don’t see any challenges.”

and

...still has no delivery date.
“It’s several months,” the defense official said

I take that to mean that the magazine understood the official to say the delivery would be several months off, not the final contract.  And not a year either.

I read it that the "several months" refers to the point when the contracting process will end and they will have a delivery date. If they say they still have no delivery date, I assume that is what they mean. If they had a contract, they would have a delivery date. They didn't say "the delivery date is several months from now". They said they didn't have one. Saying they can't give details of where it is in the contracting process but that they see no challenges indicates to me they don't yet have a contract and the no challenges are to the contracting process. 

Having worked with this process I know that there are contracting mechanisms that allow the contractor to start on the job while the details of the contract are worked out, but at that point there is a contract legally in place and at least a target delivery date. That appears not to be the case here based on their statements. Letter contracts at one point in history were common but today are rather rare. While it is possible a contractor will risk fund construction of a system if they are pretty sure there will eventually be a contract relying on that for something "important" is pretty much unheard of.