Hill Aides Call For JSF Restructure

By Colin Clark Friday, October 23rd, 2009 2:11 pm
Posted in Air, International, Policy
A preliminary Pentagon cost estimate that the F-35 could cost as much as $17.1 billion more than currently planned is prompting calls from congressional sources for the program to be reassessed and restructured.

The congressional sources also wryly noted this seemed to raise questions about the wisdom of Defense Secretary Robert Gates recent trip to the F-35 plant in Fort Worth to show his support for the program. One aide scoffed that the new cost estimates were no surprise to anyone who hasnt drunk the JSF Kool-Aid.

The new cost estimate comes from the JSF Joint Estimate Team, formed this summer by Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn.

Two congressional aides familiar with the program said the cost estimate seemed to indicate that the approach of developing, building, flying and testing planes as they come off the assembly line known as concurrency may pose too much program risk in the short term and should lead Defense Secretary Robert Gates to scale back the emphasis on producing and testing planes and trim the number of planes the Pentagon wants to buy in next years budget.

Unfortunately, DoD has put all its eggs in the JSF basket and it is now too big to fail, just like Wall Street. The JSF program has shown no signs of getting back on schedule, and I think a Nunn-McCurdy is fairly likely. Gates should get out in front and restructure the program, said one congressional aide.

A second congressional aide agreed that the push by the program office and Lockheed Martin to build, fly and test may be too aggressive. I think what the JET is saying is, you know guys, you will just need more time to refine this configuration so you can be sure it all works the way it should, this aide said, noting that the program has completed about 2 percent of flight tests for the 50 aircraft authorized so far.

At the same time, this aide questioned the $17 billion estimate, saying it seems incredibly high to me. The earlier estimate of $7 billion seemed much more likely to this aide, who noted that no one on Capitol Hill had yet been briefed on the new numbers.

For its part, F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin said that while it recognized the Joint Estimate Teams earnest efforts it disagreed with the conclusions, said program spokseman John Kent.

Lockheed Martin acknowledges that modest risks to our cost and schedule baselines exist, but we envision no scenario that would justify a substantial delay to completion of development or transition to production milestones. We are on track to field 5th Generation fighters to nine countries and 13 Services Kent said in the statement.

Eleven SDD aircraft have been delivered thus far and the remaining eight jets are demonstrating greatly improved span times as are the 31 LRIP aircraft now in production. We are below the USGs Selected Acquisition Report estimate for production costs. Engineering development is 85% complete and yielding outstanding results in early ground and flight tests compared to legacy. Our test plans are based on detailed test requirements and build on the extensive investments in F-35 design architecture, systems engineering, risk reduction, and simulation facilities, as well as a rigorous disciplined verification plan, compared to legacy programs, Kents statement said. The program is early in the flight test phase, so it is much too soon conclude that the expected payoffs will not be realized.
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/10/23/hill-aides-call-for-jsf-restructure/

Thunder Supports Rafale

http://rafale.freeforums.org
http://rafale.freeforums.org/rafale-vs-f-16-aerodynamics-compared-t69.html

I would happily kill JSF, and buy more F-22s, and new build F-15s and Super Hornets. It would also allow the RN to buy Super Hornet, Rafale or dare to dream a navalized Typhoon (which is least likely of all).

Man I wish the RN still had the Sea Harrier.

"KIWIOZZYYANKY)
I would happily kill JSF, and buy more F-22s, and new build F-15s and Super Hornets. It would also allow the RN to buy Super Hornet, Rafale or dare to dream a navalized Typhoon (which is least likely of all)".

As an airman that would also be my choice but industrials have a voting weight in the US haven't they?

If you look at F-35 problems you will figure that it is typical of a generation of design done under mediocre management with under them newbies with a lot less experience and skills than the team who did put F-22 together.

While much smaller companies in Europe were able to ID the problem and asses it officialy with the support of gouvernement (nEUROn) the US manufacturers still have the habit of US gouv pouring solid gold into supporting a bad design, the kind that would have John Boyd say "Give it to me i screw it just as good"...

F-22 in NOT an option because it is NOT exportable, thus it is the Industry that wins over the best asset.




Thunder Supports Rafale

http://rafale.freeforums.org
http://rafale.freeforums.org/rafale-vs-f-16-aerodynamics-compared-t69.html

Thunder, true enough.

Although I think more than anything industry wants money. I would bet f-22 will be sold overseas within next 10 years. Of course until then industry wants to milk as much money as possible out of JSF.

The F-22 wont get exported in the next 10 years. If they do end up exporting it countries like Australia and Japan would be pissed off. They were pushed to buy the F-35 after asking for the F-22. America has very few traditional allies left and it wouldnt be in there interest to alienate 2 of them.

LOL!

You know, at the rate their own gov are screwing them over, the folks in Cambera or London won't notice too much, it just will taste the same as usual.


Quote:
"Of course until then industry wants to milk as much money as possible out of JSF. "

For the moment it is JSF which is milking money...

Thunder Supports Rafale

http://rafale.freeforums.org
http://rafale.freeforums.org/rafale-vs-f-16-aerodynamics-compared-t69.html

"The F-22 wont get exported in the next 10 years. If they do end up exporting it countries like Australia and Japan would be pissed off. They were pushed to buy the F-35 after asking for the F-22. America has very few traditional allies left and it wouldnt be in there interest to alienate 2 of them."

Selling F22 is not going to alienate an ally. Japan would be only to happy to be able to buy Raptor in 10 years, as would Israel and possibly Australia. If, and eventually it will, the US military industrial complex wants to sell Raptor to overseas customers it will happen. I cannot think of any fighter aircraft that the US has not eventually sold overseas. I doubt the F-22 will be the first. I would expect an export version will be sold. I doubt it would be the same aircraft used by the USAF.

I would also say that the main reason Raptor has yet to be sold is due to commercial considerations as much as military. If the US transferred such aircraft they would be transferring alot of cutting US knowledge on stealth and aircraft design. Such transfers could possibly jeaopardize areas of technology the US believes they have a lead in. 5-10 years from now the US will likely decide that other nations are fast approaching US industry in stealth technology so why not sell the plane overseas.



I would say the US has many allies left.

UK
France
Israel
New Zealand
Greece
Australia
Germany
Turkey
Poland
Spain
Netherlands
Canada
Iceland
South Korea
etc.

Being an ally does not mean that countries will agree on all theories, plans or goals, just as members of a family do not always agree.

I think it is not the way her meant it.

Japan and Australia have tried to lobby the US DoD for acquisition of F-22 for ages and were forced into the F-35 programe.

They have aging fleet of fighters/bombers to replace ASAP and canot wait for DoD to clear F-22 for export.

Thunder Supports Rafale

http://rafale.freeforums.org
http://rafale.freeforums.org/rafale-vs-f-16-aerodynamics-compared-t69.html

"Japan and Australia have tried to lobby the US DoD for acquisition of F-22 for ages and were forced into the F-35 programe.

They have aging fleet of fighters/bombers to replace ASAP and canot wait for DoD to clear F-22 for export."

I realize this. I also think 10 years for now it will not matter so much. Remember when the F-16 and I believe the F-15 too had restrictions on whom they could be exported to. Eventually those restrictions were lifted. I believe the same will happen with the F-22. Alot can change in 10 years.

As a lightweight fighter with literaly no BVR capabilties, F-16 was a lot less restricted when it first came out, but you are correct about F-15.

I do not share your opinion on the relaxation of F-22 technologies protection is such a little time:

Right now Europe can only come up to a level of EM L.O similar to that of F-35 with a multinational UCAV demonstrator or UCAV technology demonstrator in the case of the UK (Without the stealthy weapon bay and associated systems adding about £ 1 million to the developement cost even before completion)...

An "Export" version might be possible though.

Thunder Supports Rafale

http://rafale.freeforums.org
http://rafale.freeforums.org/rafale-vs-f-16-aerodynamics-compared-t69.html

The production line will be shut for the f-22 in 10 years so how are they going to build more for export? Australia and Japan have to pay to join the JSF program so I dont think they will throw that money away to wait 10 years to get the F-22. And yes Australia and Japan lobbied to get the F-22 and were told it would never be sold for export. So if America did a back flip it would piss them of just a bit. America wont allow the F-22 for export and KIWIOZZYYANKY if you have a problem with that take it up with robert gates.

"The production line will be shut for the f-22 in 10 years so how are they going to build more for export? Australia and Japan have to pay to join the JSF program so I dont think they will throw that money away to wait 10 years to get the F-22. And yes Australia and Japan lobbied to get the F-22 and were told it would never be sold for export. So if America did a back flip it would piss them of just a bit. America wont allow the F-22 for export and KIWIOZZYYANKY if you have a problem with that take it up with robert gates."


It will be shut according to this administration. I would not bet on it, if I were you. It's all about the Benjamins in the end. Politicians come and go, and I would bet this administration will be gone before the F22 line closes.

Are you trying to say, that America changing their mind of an aircraft is going to change an alliance? Are you serious? How so? Australia or Japan would not be forced to buy the plane. It would simply be another option to them. I think you hold the military alliances in very low regard if you believe the US changing their decision on F22 would jeopardize entire military alliances.

THUNDER. I am not sure about the Eagle. I just assumed if the 16 was restricted for export initially then so was the eagle.

Thunder, yes an export version is what I believe would be sold.