Now F-35 is in a bit of trouble

[+Julhelm 266]

Source

 

An internal Pentagon oversight board has reported that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is two years behind schedule, according to multiple congressional aides familiar with the findings.

 

Talk of the program’s problems comes amid intense debate over the future of another fighter plane, the F-22. Defenders of the F-22 argue that continued production is vital to national security.

 

The White House and some lawmakers who favor halting the production of any new F-22 warplanes say the F-35 will fill the gap and meet the nation’s combat aircraft needs.

 

Senators and aides now lament that the Pentagon oversight panel’s more pessimistic view on the F-35 program was not publicly released during the F-22 debate. They are calling for more open disclosure of the problems with the development of the F-35.

 

The Pentagon’s Joint Estimate Team (JET), which was established to independently evaluate the F-35 program, is at odds with the Joint Program Office, which runs the F-35 program, the aides said. The oversight panel’s calculations determined that the fighter won’t be able to move out of the development phase and into full production until 2016, rather than 2014, as the program office has said.

 

That’s assuming there are no further problems with the program, which has already faced cost overruns and schedule delays. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) said the delay could cost as much as $7.4 billion. The discrepancy between the Joint Estimate Team and the Joint Program Office was noted in a March report by the GAO, but it received little attention at the time.

 

“In every parameter and in every respect, the Joint Program Office’s projections were always a hell of a lot rosier than what the Joint Estimate Team found,” said one Senate aide who was briefed on the findings.

 

Sen. Christopher S. Bond , R-Mo., who has often criticized the F-35 program and has called it the “Joint Strike Failure,” said his attempts to get internal Pentagon data on the program have often been rebuffed.

 

“They are wrapped so tight on that F‑35,” said Bond, who added that the Pentagon is so invested in the program that it is loath to release negative information, especially during a debate over Air Force funding.

 

“They bet too much on the F-35. It’s too big to fail,” Bond said. “It’s like Citigroup.”

 

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said there is no delay in the completion of the first production aircraft, which is due next year, but he said more testing is needed to determine whether full production would be able to begin on schedule.

 

“The JET is not the gospel. It is but one view, albeit an important one, of our testing program,” Morrell said. “The program office has a very different view. The truth is that we don’t know which will prove to be correct, but there’s no reason to believe our testing regime will result in the kind of delays the JET is predicting.”

 

The Joint Estimate Team’s report was given to congressional committees last year and was not hidden or suppressed by the Pentagon, Morrell said. He said it is now being dredged up by F-22 supporters.

 

Moreover, the Pentagon has the ability to fund increased testing to make up for any potential delays, he said.

 

The administration has requested billions of dollars more than last year to hasten the production of F-35 test aircraft, Morrell noted, saying that the program’s success depends on the funding.

 

John R. Kent, a spokesman for the F-35’s main contractor, Lockheed Martin Corp., said that, despite the estimate team’s findings, there has been no change made to the official F-35 production schedule.

 

Cheryl Limrick, spokeswoman for the F‑35 program office, said the “JET analysis is grounded in past performance of other legacy fighter programs and does not fully acknowledge proactive F-35 management steps.”

 

Air Superiority

 

Administration officials and senators repeatedly touted the F-35 program as the best bet to preserve U.S. air power superiority and as a primary reason to cap the F‑22 program at 187 planes. The Senate voted for the cap, 58-40, on July 21.

 

“If properly supported, the F-35 will be the backbone of America’s tactical aviation fleet for decades to come,” said Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in a July 16 speech at the Economic Club of Chicago, “if — and it’s a big if — money is not drained away to spend on other aircraft.”

 

Experts said Gates’ efforts to pressure senators to end F-22 production would have been hurt had the Joint Estimate Team’s findings been widely known.

 

“If this information had been part of the debate over the last couple of months, several Democrats, many of whom switched their votes at the last minute, would have been much harder to persuade,” said Tom Donnelly, director of defense studies at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

 

Any delay in full production of the F‑35 would affect the entire fighter fleet, Donnelly said, because the F-35 is meant to take the place of so many planes, including the F-15, F-16 and F-18.

 

Although the Senate voted to strip the defense authorization bill (S 1390) of funding to procure F-22s beyond 187 planes, the debate over the plane is sure to resurface when the House and Senate move their fiscal 2010 draft Defense appropriations bills. “The F‑22 debate is not over, so the administration’s credibility on the F-35 could really be hurt by this information,” Donnelly said.

 

Even senators who were fighting to save the F-22 referred to 2014 as the Pentagon’s official estimate for commencing full production, although there were hints that it might change.

 

“The F-35 was scheduled to begin construction in 2010. Since then, of course, it has been pushed back four years to 2014,” Sen. Christopher J. Dodd , D-Conn., said during floor debate. Dodd, an F‑22 supporter, added, “There are some rumors that this date may be pushed back even further.”

 

A delay in F-35 production could have international implications as well, because several allied countries are tied into the F‑35 program and are depending on that plane to contribute to their defense structures.

 

“Customers such as the United Kingdom, the Air National Guard, the Marine Corps and others are on very tight schedules because their current equipment is rapidly aging out,” said Douglas Birkey, director of government relations for the Air Force Association. “They need the F-35 as a backfill.”

 

Delays Attributed to Design Changes

 

The Joint Estimate Team reports internally to the Pentagon and includes representatives from each of the military services.

 

After extensive evaluations that included site visits and meetings with the program’s contractors, the team determined that added delays were caused by ongoing complications with the engineering and design changes to the plane, as well as software problems, Senate aides said.

 

The team’s findings were based on data from September 2008, and the next report won’t be available until at least October, likely well past consideration of the fiscal 2010 defense appropriations and authorization bills, the aide said.

 

The GAO reported in March that delays to the F-35 program schedule, as noted by the Joint Estimate Team, could add as much as $7.4 billion to its cost, and the Defense Department’s desire to accelerate production could cost an additional $33.4 billion,

 

F-35 “development will cost more and take longer than reported to the Congress last year,” the GAO report stated, adding that the Pentagon wants to accelerate procurement “despite cost and schedule troubles.”

 

Appropriators are dubious about speeding up F-35 production and have already reduced the president’s request for F‑35 procurement by $530 million in the House Defense appropriations bill, shifting much of that money toward research.

 

“This is a cut because we think they just can’t spend the money [that they requested],” said Rep. John P. Murtha , D-Pa., chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. “They’ve got to do a better job of oversight.”

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Any White House administration, the US in general and especially LM would be in a much dire position should the F-35 program fail. The F-22 program gets terminated, yeah, that's bad for the USAF, government and LM in general. But there's much, much more at stake with the F-35 program. It involves more countries, more services and replaces more aircraft... calling it a disaster would be an understatement of epic proportions!

[TheStig 39]

I knew this was going to happen. People in the WH hate our military!

[ezlead 42]

If they can give billions to the Buttwipes that screwed up the banking and mortgage industry,

Why can't they come up with the money for something that we need for defense of our country.

My 2 cents by the way.

This is not intended to get a political brewhaha started.

[eraser_tr 29]

Wasn't the reason we went with the X-35 was because boeing would have made design changes to the X-32, but we could have moved to a production F-35 much faster? We ought to shake up the leadership of LM like we did with the auto industry and a few banks, they've got the same (we can do anything and get a guaranteed flow of cash) mindset. Normally when you have a contract for something at a particular price, if you go over that ammount, you've still got to deliver the product at that price and work at a loss.

 

Why don't we just buy some Typhoons afterall, we've bought a british aircraft from time to time (harrier, canberra)?

 

Or do what most any organization would do when one is taking forever and too expensive to do something that is essential, give it to someone else! "Sorry LM, you F'ed up on two critical planes, Northrop gets the designs and construction rights"

[tflash 3]

Is buying some more F-16/F-15 not an option to bridge the gap? They could withdraw some older planes and replace them by new-built ones?

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

It's issues like this that make the advanced versions of the Viper and Mud Hen seem much more attractive...

[+ST0RM 145]

It's issues like this that make the advanced versions of the Viper and Mud Hen seem much more attractive...

 

Talking with the operators, many share the same thoughts.

 

No such thing as "On time, under budget", anymore.

[Hokum 0]

IMO I've never been a fan of the F-35, but constantly cutting back isn't progres either...

 

My Opinion on the VTOL JSF is even lower. Seperate lift and forward flight engines is not a step forward over the harrier...

[+Gepard 11,324]

Let the F-35. Not needed expensive toy!

A-10 is really needed. Save the live of lots of our soldiers in an enviroiment the F-35 would fail.

[FastCargo 412]

This kind of thinking is short sighted.

 

You do not buy weapon systems to fight the current war. You buy future systems to fight the next war.

 

The F-35 is for the next war, not the current war.

 

FC

[MigBuster 2,884]

IMO I've never been a fan of the F-35, but constantly cutting back isn't progres either...

 

My Opinion on the VTOL JSF is even lower. Seperate lift and forward flight engines is not a step forward over the harrier...

 

 

No but speed, sensors, stealth, range, and payload certainly are

 

...............

 

One thing it has over the A-10 is that it can get to an emergency a lot quicker - and its quoted weapons load is similar in terms of weight!

 

also over the A-10 it can also be used against a modern IADS (if required)

[JediMaster 451]

IMO I've never been a fan of the F-35, but constantly cutting back isn't progres either...

 

My Opinion on the VTOL JSF is even lower. Seperate lift and forward flight engines is not a step forward over the harrier...

 

There's only one engine. The old Russian Forger had separate engines, the JSF doesn't. It has a second lift fan, but it's powered via clutch/driveshaft to the main engine.

[MigBuster 2,884]

This kind of thinking is short sighted.

 

FC

 

 

Yes you might be right there :)

 

 

 

[Hokum 0]

There's only one engine. The old Russian Forger had separate engines, the JSF doesn't. It has a second lift fan, but it's powered via clutch/driveshaft to the main engine.

 

Not a true engine, but the device is still a heavy lump taking up space. It uses a similar process to the YAK-41/141.

[markkyle66 0]

Here's the kicker. Israels piece of the pie making up funding for the F-35 JSF will likely be withdrawn in substantial amounts in favor of cheaper 4th gen fighters/UAS, reason being the US will use Contracting/Maint./Production/Engineering/Support of the JSF program to make Israel fall in line with it's foriegn policy. More or less "we won't support your hardware if you keep such a hard line against iran and palestine." Thankfully, Israel will have none of that.

Edited July 28, 2009 by markkyle66

[Hokum 0]

"in favor of cheaper 4th gen fighters/UAS,"

Imagine Israel with Eurofighters or Gripen NG's!

 

Though i think they would probably go UAV?

Edited July 28, 2009 by Hokum

[jomni 6]

This kind of thinking is short sighted.

 

You do not buy weapon systems to fight the current war. You buy future systems to fight the next war.

 

The F-35 is for the next war, not the current war.

 

FC

 

UAV's will fight the next war.

[+Typhoid 231]

UAV's will fight the next war.

 

and be jammed out of the sky by a geek on the ground....................

[JediMaster 451]

Can we finish the ones we're in before we start the next one?

 

Oh, that's right, we can't. We never finish them, not since Vietnam in the 70s. We haven't left the mid east since we got there in 1990, but we were already doing stuff there before that (Beirut, Libya). Then there's that laughable "war on drugs" which seems to be fought with less zeal than I've seen the left and right wing commentators sling at each other on the 24 hr opinion networks.

 

So what the hell, let's fight a war that you need scientific notation to count the fronts on!

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Thankfully, Israel will have none of that.

 

Good luck getting F-35s if that's the case. The reason Israel was kicked from the program originally was because of it's hard line stance against Palestine and how it ran contrary at the time to the efforts of the US of trying to establish some level of peace in the region, even if it was only a cease fire of sorts. The US asked Israel to fall in line just so they could get some momentum behind the cease fire, Israel said they would, but still pursed their own agenda anyways...

 

We here in Australia started taking attitude from the US over the workload arrangement deal with the US manufacturers because our government's stance on Free Trade (particularly with how we were kicking up a storm about the US wanting Free Trade yet subsidising their own agriculture industry) and how we, along with the UK, Turkey, Norway, The Netherlands, Denmark et al, wouldn't be getting the promised transfer of technology that was agreed to when we all joined up with the program. Things have since changed, but timing was the key. If Israel wasn't bombing the crap out of Palestinians at the time or Australia wasn't arguing about US subsidies on Beef etc when the JSF program's nuances were being negotiated, the US would have used something else to lean on us during the negotiations. I'm neither condeming nor condoning it, it's just the nature of negotiations within international relations.

[SGCSG1 0]

I wish the Boeing plane had won the JSF contest. I thought it was an amazing design.

[JediMaster 451]

I've never been a fan of the chin-intake designs, personally. Not A-7, F-8, F-86D, or the X-32.

Realizing at the 11th hour that they need a tail and being a pure delta wouldn't cut it for carrier ops really hurt them I think.

[+ST0RM 145]

I liked the way the F-32 would have looked after the redesign.

 

It would be doubtful though that Boeing would have delivered their's on time and on budget, either.

 

-S

[Mynameizme 0]

Well, that's amazing.

 

We've now got no interceptor aircraft worth a damn, and our replacements for our nearly-40-year-old F-15s are being backlogged even further. Not to mention, LM's gonna lose a good bit of money. Loss of money means loss of jobs.

 

Seems, lately, that's all the government's been doing with its money: destroying jobs. GM, various banks, now LM.

 

It's really hurting my city's economy, considering we have a GM plant, a LM plant, and Six Flags as major sources of income. Oh, America, how thou hast failed me.