U.S. considers more F-35 cuts, alternative engine cost debated again
Written by CHorgan
Tuesday, September 20th, 2011 Written by CHorgan
Tuesday, September 20th, 2011 Facebook
As Canada's government holds firm on its claim that $9 billion will now cover the cost of  -  according to associate minister of national defence Julian Fantino's office  -  "not only the cost of the aircraft, but training and initial set-up costs upon delivery of each aircraft through 2022," the U.S. continues to question various elements of the Joint Strike Fighter program.
Last week, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended that $695-million be cut from the program, and noted that for each plane the program produces now, "we will have to pay millions in the future to fix the problems that are identified in testing."
Now, according to Reuters, the Pentagon is considering postponing production "of an additional 100 F-35 fighter jets".
According to an unnamed source, the decision to do so will likely be made somewhere around November or December.
From Reuters:
The program has already been restructured twice over the past two years, postponing production of over 224 radar-evading fighter planes  -  moves that tend to drive up the price of each airplane in the short-term.
Lockheed Martin Chief Executive Robert Stevens, speaking at a Reuters summit this month, warned against under-investing in the program. It was important to increase production and start delivering the planes to the battlefield, he said.
One debate that has flown  -  as an F-35 presumably will  -  under the radar, is regarding the possibility of a second engine for the F-35. In 2010, the U.S. Department of Defense concluded that it would cost an extra $2.9 billion to fund a program to develop an alternative engine so that it could enter competition in 2017.
Last week, the Government Accountability Office released its report on that decision. It effectively concluded that Department of Defense's projection only comprises some of the information necessary for an effective analysis, given that there have been so many changes to the program. From the Government Accountability Office report (below):
Since the funding projection was prepared, most of the JSF restructuring has been completed, making substantive changes in aircraft and engine costs and schedules. Specifically, near-term aircraft and engine purchases were significantly reduced, development and test times were extended, and estimated costs for development, procurement, and sustainment were increased.
In effect, the Government Accountability Office concludes, developing an alternate engine (the F136) could either cost more or less than previously concluded. Effectively, the Government Accountability Office says if the Department of Defense were to update its assessment, it could provide some needed insight into the viability of a second engine.
Michigan Senator (and head of the Armed Services Committee) Carl Levin continues to maintain that the alternative engine project was cut too soon, and that it could have actually saved the program some money to have a competition for that component, as well.
Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin sent out a press release Tuesday saying F-35 "system development and demonstration flight test remains on or ahead of plan for 2011" despite two weeks after what Lockheed calls a "mishap", when none of the test planes were authorized to fly. The most important stat for Canada that Lockheed gives is that of the F-35A variant test planes, which it says have completed 314 flights. The total number of flights this year for the F-35 is 642.
GAO: F135 engine Loading