F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

[LETHALFORCE]

Italy Pressuring U.S., Lockheed Over JSF Work

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...channel=defense&id=news/asd/2010/04/01/01.xml

Italy Pressuring U.S., Lockheed Over JSF Work

GENOA, Italy — The Italian ministry of defense is increasing the pressure on both the U.S. government and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter prime contractor Lockheed Martin to win better terms for technology transfer and local industry involvement.

Guido Crosetto, the undersecretary of defense charged with crafting the deal, says he is confident negotiations will conclude “within two to three months.” During hearings before an Italian defense committee, Crosetto said bluntly that so far the ministry is not at all satisfied with the level of Italian participation in the program, which is “not adequate [considering] the investments that Italy has made and is willing to sustain in the future.”

Italian industry, in particular the defense electronics industry, is far from happy, although the situation is better in the aerostructures area thanks to the agreements signed by Lockheed and Alenia Aeronautica, mainly involving wing design and production.

To increase the pressure, Crosetto has blocked work from starting at the Cameri air force base, where the FACO (final assembly and check out) facility is to be built. The FACO is expected to build at least the Italian and, eventually, Dutch aircraft, but could expand its assembly activities to deal with other international customers. Furthermore, the FACO is to be used to support the F-35 fleet for its operational life, spanning 40 years. Crosetto says that both the U.S. government and Lockheed are now more willing to allow the Italian FACO to support the F-35 of other “European users.”

Crosetto says Italy deserves to be fully recognized as a JSF partner and not just a customer, and he also hinted that if the Italian requests are not met the program will have to be brought back to Parliament for further scrutiny.

Crosetto maintains there is a substantial potential for Italian industry to be active in the program: around 30 aerospace and electronic companies of all sizes could be involved, and the “potential” value of Lockheed work they would compete for is estimated to be $11.2 billion, as well as $2.4 billion from Pratt & Whitney and $4.2 billion from General Electric/Rolls-Royce.

Italy committed $10 million in 1999 for the early phases of the program, $1 billion in 2002 for the system design and development phase and then another $900 million for production and support for the life of the program (known as production sustainment and follow-on development, or PSFD). Italy also is planning to spend up to €605 million ($815 million) to build the FACO and €13 billion to acquire and provide logistic support for up to 130 F-35s. For FY 2010, €207.6 million has been earmarked.

Italy’s potential requirement at the moment stands at 131 F-35s, including 22 short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing (Stovl) F-35Bs for the navy and a mix of 109 conventional F-35As and Bs for the air force. But the high cost of the F-35B is putting budget pressure on air force plans.

Nonetheless, Italian defense officials consider the F-35 acquisition one of their highest-priority programs. The navy has no alternative to replace its force of AV-8B Harrier II Stovl aircraft. The air force is willing to replace the AMX fighter bomber first and then at least part of its Tornado fleet with the F-35.

The air force is urgently trying to assess what extra costs may stem from F-35 delays, recently acknowledged by the Pentagon, since it will be forced to keep its current fighter-bomber fleet in service longer. And having two fighter-bomber types is logistically and operationally complicated and very costly. In addition, the number of upgrades that the AMX and Tornado are slated to receive could increase if they are to remain in active duty for substantially longer. However, some internal trade-off studies call for retiring the AMXs on their original schedule.

So far the issue of the increased F-35 costs has not been officially tackled by the defense ministry or the parliament, but this is sure to be a hot topic when Italy finally signs production orders, when overall procurement numbers could be affected or procurement rates diluted.

 

[slenke]

That's quite a lot of money for a PIIGS nation..

 

[Armand2REP]

That's quite a lot of money for a PIIGS nation..

There is no way Italy will be buying 131 F-35s but then begs the question how many the US will let them cut and still get their workshare. Italy has already cut Eurofighter to put towards F-35, will they opt out of Tranche 3B all together? The cost spiral of JSF will determine much, watch closely.

 

[nandu]

DoD Begins New F-35 Cost Estimate

he Pentagon has officially kicked off another independent cost estimate for the embattled F-35 Joint Strike Fighter after formally notifying Congress that the program has breached the Nunn-McCurdy statute in the wake of cost estimates that price the jet at up to $115 million per aircraft in 2002 dollars, or $138 million in today's dollars.

The Pentagon will update the F-35s baseline number of jets in the program once this new review, which will take into account the total lifetime costs of designing and flying the airplane, is completed, according to the F-35 Selected Acquisition Report. The document states that Congress was officially notified of the Nunn-McCurdy breach March 26.

In mid-March, Ashton Carter, the Pentagon's top weapons buyer, told lawmakers that the program would breach the statute due to massive cost growth over 2001 estimates that pegged the F-35s price tag at $50.2 million apiece. At the time, the Defense Department stated the costs would balloon to between $80 million and $95 million in 2002 dollars. That's $95 million and $113 million in 2009 dollars, respectively.

DoD now predicts that the jets will now cost between $97 and $115 million each in 2002 dollars, when development work is included in the price tag, according to the newly released SAR.

The planes could cost between $79 and $95 million per-jet, in 2002 average dollars, when costs such as R&D are not factored into the buy, the document states.

In February, Defense Secretary Robert Gates conducted a sweeping reorganization of the program by shifting additional money and resources into the test program, extending the jet's test phase, slowing the production ramp and replacing the government program manager.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4571454&c=AME&s=AIR

 

[nandu]

Lockheed's 'Mission Systems F-35' enters flight test

Lockheed Martin has started the flight test of its first mission systems equipped F-35 Lightning II stealth fighters.

The test performed a series of flight-qualities maneuvers and checked the operation of the aircraft’s mission systems.

"Today’s flight initiates a level of avionics capability that no fighter has ever achieved," Eric Branyan, Lockheed Martin F-35 deputy program manager said in a news release
.

"The F-35’s next-generation sensor suite enables a new capability for multi role aircraft, collecting vast amounts of data and fusing the information into a single, highly comprehensible display that will enable the pilot to make faster and more effective tactical decisions," he added.

The F-35’s mission systems, process and apply data from a wide array of off-board sensors based on the land, in the air or at sea, enabling the aircraft to perform command-and-control functions while providing unprecedented situational awareness to air and surface forces.

The F-35 Lightning II is a 5th generation fighter combining advanced stealth with fighter speed, sensor information, network-enabled operations and advanced sustainability.

http://www.brahmand.com/news/Lockheeds-Mission-Systems-F-35-enters-flight-test/3578/1/11.html

 

[Agantrope]

U.S. Air Force Still Committed To F-35 Program

The U.S. Air Force is not looking at new options to extend the service life of its fighter fleet despite continued setbacks in the F-35 program, service officials told legislators on Tuesday.

The service will move forward with plans to upgrade its F-16s, F-15s and A-10s but will not launch any new programs, officers said in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee's air-land subcommittee.

The F-35, the Air Force's preferred aircraft to replenish its fighter fleet, continues to have development delays and cost increases.

Air Force officers on Tuesday said they expect the F-35 to reach initial operational capability is predicted for 2016, a three-year delay from the original plan.

"The Air Force is committed to the (F-35) Joint Strike Fighter to be our solution to recapitalization," said Lt. Gen. Mark Shackelford, military deputy to the assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition. "We are focused on the fifth-generation fighter."

The Air Force's F-16s, F-15s and A-10s are considered fourth-generation fighters because they lack stealth capabilities. The F-35 and F-22 are considered fifth-generation because of they are stealthy and have advanced electronics.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4581202&c=AME&s=AIR

 

[nandu]

US lawmakers push for back-up plans after F-35 cost increases

As cost estimates for the Lockheed Martin F-35 continue rising, some US lawmakers are pushing military officials to increase spending on fourth-generation fighters as a back-up.

Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut says he considers the F-35 a "really extraordinary aircraft", but is concerned about the military's projected tactical aircraft shortfalls.

"There will certainly be pressure to sustain the fourth generation and improvement of aircraft because the fifth generation is coming on more slowly and more expensively than we hoped for," Lieberman told a Senate hearing on the tactical aircraft budget on 13 April.

The US Navy has projected a 243-aircraft shortfall by 2017 and the US Air Force estimates a fighter gap of 800 aircraft after 2020.

Lieberman says the military should invest in a "combination of fourth and fifth generation [fighters] to keep us where we want to be". His concerns were echoed by Illinois Senator Roland Burris, who expressed his doubts in a question to the panel of military officers assembled for the hearing.

"What is the back-up plan in case we get to the point where the software won't really do what the engineers or all of the planners have anticipated and we run into a problem then of trying to scale back or make adjustments?" Burris asked.

Lt Gen George Trautman, deputy commandant for aviation for the US Marine Corps, suggests that the tactical aircraft shortfall may actually be less than currently projected. "It's almost impossible to predict, frankly, eight years from now specifically how many shortfall airplanes we're going to have, even if the ramp on [F-35s] stays precisely as we think it's going to occur today," he says. "And that's doubtful. Lockheed has been incentivised to beat the ramp that's laid out now, and they think that they can give us more [F-35s] between now and [2018]."

Senator Saxby Chambliss, an ardent Lockheed F-22 supporter, however, challenged Trautman's positive outlook on the F-35's future, pointedly questioning the progress achieved so far by the USMC's short take-off and vertical landing F-35B.

"I think you've tested your variant on the F-35 and I don't know what kind of confidence you have in that variant right now, but that's probably going to continue to be an issue," Chambliss says.

Meanwhile, navy and air force officials are starting to consider back-up strategies to compensate for the F-35 delays acknowledged so far. The USN is working on plans to upgrade parts of its Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fleet with 9,000h and 10,000h service life. Meanwhile, the USAF has started assessing a new structural upgrade for the its Lockheed F-16 Block 40/42 and 50/52 fleets.

It remains clear that officials from both services still consider the F-35 their most important budget priority for tactical aviation.

"We absolutely need the requirements brought by the fifth generation of the [F-35]," says Vice Adm David Architzel, a principal deputy for the USN's acquisition office. "And so we are committed to that as we go forward."

http://www.flightglobal.com/article...s-push-for-back-up-plans-after-f-35-cost.html

 

[nandu]

History in the making: First JSF training squadron stands up

A small squadron of Marines marched toward the future of military aviation, April 2.

Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 501, currently only 37-Marines strong, stood up as the Marine Corps' F-35B Lightning II training squadron in a ceremony at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. The squadron is the nation's first training squadron for the new Joint Strike Fighter, making the ceremony not only a first for the Marine Corps, but for the entire Department of Defense.

"We are beginning a new chapter of Marine aviation," said Lt. Col. James B. Wellons, VMFAT-501's commanding officer. "This is an honor and an opportunity of a lifetime."

The Joint Strike Fighter program was developed as a means to replace several Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps aircraft with a single jet. The Marine Corps' variant, the F-35B, will be the only version with short takeoff and vertical landing capabilities.

The F-35B is slated to replace the AV-8B Harrier and F/A-18 Hornet fighter and attack aircraft currently in the Corps' inventory.

The Lightning II is also proposed to have electronic countermeasures capabilities like those of the EA-6B Prowler.

"We have held out on buying another attack aircraft for 11 years," said Maj. Shawn M. Basco, VMFAT-501's executive officer. "We have been waiting for the F-35B to come along and provide us with an all-STOVL force. We will have the capabilities of a Harrier, some organic in a Prowler and some effects and capabilities of a Hornet in one aircraft."

Over the course of the next year, the training squadron is scheduled to receive its first of 20 F-35B Lightning II aircraft, allowing hands-on training for pilots and maintainers.

But, senior Marine leaders on hand for the ceremony said they are confident the squadron's Marines will be up to the task.

"There are great challenges ahead, but like the introduction of a lot of other aircraft, we will get through this," said Maj. Gen. James F. Flock, 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing's commanding general. "We have hard-charging Marines who make up VMFAT-501, and they are the Marines that are going to train the future pilots and maintainers of our Joint Strike Fighter squadrons."

Though VMFAT-501 may be America's first training squadron for the F-35 aircraft, the squadron itself is steeped in history.

The squadron's legacy comes from Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 451, which was originally formed during World War II as an F4U Corsair squadron. The squadron saw combat in Japan in 1945, and later flew F-4 Phantoms over Vietnam in the 1960s.

The "Warlords" of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 451 were retired in 1997. The squadron was reactivated at the National Museum of Naval Aviation aboard Naval Air Station Pensacola, Fla., April 1, to be redesignated as VMFAT-501.

It is military tradition to redesignate retired squadrons instead of creating new ones so that history may be continued rather than lost.

"This generation of Warlords is standing on the shoulders of the ones before it," said Gen. James F. Amos, the assistant commandant of the Marine Corps. "They will make history in many ways by flying an aircraft most people have never seen."

http://www.defencetalk.com/first-f-35-jsf-training-squadron-stands-up-25775/

 

[nandu]

F-35A Will Test Weapons

The seventh Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II flight test aircraft took to the skies for the first time today, with the overall objective of validating the F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant's weapons suite. The jet, known as AF-2 and piloted by Lockheed Martin F-35 Test Pilot Jeff Knowles, took off at 5:57 p.m. CDT from Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base and flew for 1 hour.

James "Sandy" Sandstrom, Lockheed Martin's F-35 U.S. Air Force program manager said "this aircraft is configured to test and verify the multiple weapons loads that will deliver 5th generation combat capability to the warfighter."

AF-2 will be used to verify the F-35A's ability to carry both internal and external weapons throughout the required flight envelope. The jet is also the first F-35 to have the internal GAU-22/A 25-millimeter gun system installed. The system, featuring a four-barrel Gatling gun which fires at a rate of 3,000 rounds per minute, is made by General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products in Burlington, Vt.

Gun testing on AF-2 will be used to confirm predictions of gun vibration, acoustic and recoil loads with the aircraft and various weapons. Additionally, the aircraft will be used to confirm vibro-acoustic loads with the weapons-bay doors open and closed with various weapon configurations. The measurements will validate the structural design of the jet, and provide evidence of the F-35A weapons' compatibility with gunfire and weapons-bay environments.

The seventh Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II flight test aircraft leaves the runway on its
first flight April 20 at Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base. The primary role
of the F-35A conventional takeoff and landing variant, known as AF-2, will be
weapons testing. Image: Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Angel DelCueto

Supersonic launch of internal weapons, including maximum-speed (Mach 1.6) launch of internal air-to-air missiles, is a feature of all F-35s. An internal-weapons-only configuration is used when Very Low Observable stealth is required to complete a mission. When VLO stealth is not required, more than 15,000 pounds of additional ordnance can be loaded onto six external pylons.

F-35 test aircraft are supported by the F-35 Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) and managed by the Lockheed Martin F-35 Sustainment Operations Center in Fort Worth. ALIS is the worldwide support system reporting and recording the prognostics and health of all F-35s around the globe to ensure mission readiness.

http://frontierindia.net/defense/f-35a-will-test-weapons

 

[nandu]

GE, Rolls Again Pitch Fixed-Price Deal For Alternative JSF Engine

General Electric and Rolls-Royce have once again pitched the Pentagon on a fixed price contract for roughly 150 of their F136 engines, a move designed to save the Pentagon $1 billion in the next five years.

The proposal, GE officials said, is meant to counter the Defense Department's justification for again cutting funding for the F136, the alternate engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

GE officials said last fall that the JSF main engine, being
developed by Pratt & Whitney, was nearly $2 billion over
budget. (GE AVIATION)

The Pentagon "talks about it being a difficult description" to cut F136 funding largely based on the assumption that the DoD won't save any money by pursuing an alternative to Pratt & Whitney's F135 engine, Russ Sparks, vice president of military strategy for GE's aviation division, said during an April 26 interview.

GE and Rolls-Royce approached the F-35 program office with the offer last week and are awaiting a response, Sparks said.

Recent estimates by the DoD's office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) "could only make [the price of buying two engines versus one] break even with the assumptions that they have," Sparks said.

"If we can change that calculation by a billion dollars, then it goes from break even to a billion dollars" in savings, he said.

CAPE estimates that about $2.9 billion in development work remains to be done on the F136.

GE and Rolls-Royce are banking on the hopes that the Pentagon's choice to exclude their engine from the program is a short-term budget choice.

By moving the program from break even to outright savings, the team hopes to motivate the Pentagon to go ahead with a competition between the F135 and F136 for the engines on the sixth-batch Low Rate Initial Production F-35s that should be delivered in 2014.

The engines would be purchased in 2012 and delivered starting in 2013, according to Sparks, who said that this is a five-year jump start over when the F-35 engine program is slated to move to the fixed price contracting phase.

Government Accountability Office estimates have predicted that competition between the two F-35 engine makers could lead to long term savings of up to 20 percent for the $100 billion engine program.

GE and Rolls-Royce say about $500 million of the proposed savings in a fixed-price deal would come from the companies beating Pentagon cost estimates. Another $500 million in savings would come from the increased pressure on Pratt & Whitney to perform if the Pentagon decides to go ahead with the fixed price competition for the 150 engines, Sparks said.

A fixed-price competition would pressure the competing engine-makers to perform better and reduce the financial risk to the Pentagon, Sparks said.

The companies made a similar overture to the Pentagon in September. That plan went nowhere after the Pentagon again refused to request additional funds to buy the engine in its 2011 budget request.

Pentagon officials insist that the second engine program is a luxury they can't afford during a period of tight budgeting. U.S. Air Force Secretary Michael Donley has even described the alternate engine as "another rock on top of" the beleaguered F-35 program.

"It's a close-enough call that we cannot see the benefits of considerable remaining investment in the second engine," such as a new logistics tail and remaining development work, Donley said during a Feb. 23 U.S. House Armed Services Committee hearing.

Lawmakers are keen to fund the second engine, with Congress inserting F136 development funding into the Pentagon's budget for the last several years. They argue that the competition will result in better engines and better prices for the engines.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4599880&c=AME&s=AIR

 

[nandu]

Joint F-35 electronic warfare squadron stands up

4/30/2010 - EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. -- The squadron serving as the sole Department of Defense provider of electronic warfare support for the F-35 joint strike fighter activated April 23 in a ceremony here.

Surrounded by artifacts from the history of airpower in the Air Armament Museum, the 513th Electronic Warfare Squadron stood up as a first step toward preparing Airmen, Sailors and Marines with the latest electronic warfare data for all three variants on the 5th generation aircraft.

"We are not supporting only one variant of the F-35, we are supporting all," said Col. Kevin J. McElroy, the 53rd Electronic Warfare Group commander. "One team, one fight, one guidon."

The squadron, currently manned by 32 technicians and engineers, will grow to 130 members at full strength. Squadron members will operate the $300 million United States Reprogramming Laboratory, that tests all aspects of the joint strike fighter's electronic warfare capability. Half of the staff will be Airmen, while the other half will consist of Navy and Marine members.

Electronic warfare is "any military action involving the use of electromagnetic and directed energy to control the electromagnetic spectrum or to attack the enemy," as described in Air Force Doctrine Document 2-5.1. Mission data is the descriptions the aircraft needs to identify both enemies and allies on the battlefield.

The laboratory is still under construction with a projected completion date of summer 2010 and hardware will arrive a year from now, the colonel said. Until that time, the squadron is performing a plethora of tasks as they become the "one-stop organic shop" for F-35 data.

"Our engineers are currently developing threat models and 5th generation mission data for the F-35," said Lt. Col. Tim Welde, the 513th EWS commander. "Our technicians are undergoing maintenance training as well as prepping the lab with power supplies, network connectivity and data storage devices. Next year, when the F-35 hardware is integrated and the lab is fully operational, the squadron will be able to successfully develop, test and deliver the critical mission data for JSF war fighters."\

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2010/04/mil-100430-afns04.htm

 

[nandu]

Carter: No Case for 2nd JSF Engine

Pentagon acquisition chief Ashton Carter said affordability is key to the success of the Joint Strike Fighter program.

"There is not a good analytical case that the upfront costs of the second engine would be paid back," Ashton Carter told an audience May 4 in Washington at the Sea-Air-Space symposium sponsored by the Navy League of the United States.

The engine issue has emerged as one of the most contentious concerns in debate over the fiscal 2011 budget request. The Pentagon wants to stick with the Pratt & Whitney F135 engine for the new aircraft, while Congress has repeatedly directed the Pentagon to include the F136 engine, made by General Electric and Rolls-Royce, for reliability and to compete with the first engine on cost.

"The key to success" in the JSF program "must be affordability," Carter said.

He pointed out that when a Pentagon analysis last fall showed that JSF costs were growing, he and Defense Secretary Robert Gates changed the program's schedule, appointed a new program leader and adjusted its budget.

Additionally, they "insisted that we and our industrial partners restore affordability to the program," Carter said.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4611238&c=AME&s=AIR

 

[nandu]

Lockheed Martin receives AIAA award for F-35 programme

Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II aircraft. Lockheed Martin Photo.

TEXAS : The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) has presented the AIAA Foundation award to Lockheed Martin for its "cutting-edge design and technology" for the F-35 Lightning II programme.

The 2010 AIAA Aerospace Spotlight Awards Gala was organised by AIAA on May 12 in Washington, D.C.

"This award reflects the dedication and innovation of those who have made the F-35 Lightning II fighter a reality and signifies a bright future as the programme ramps up flight test and commence for operational training in the months ahead," U.S. Air Force Major General C.D. Moore, the acting program executive officer for the F-35 Lightning II Program Office, said in an official press release.

According to the AIAA group, "the award recognises the cutting-edge design and technology of – and global collaboration involved in – the Joint Strike Fighter, enabling a unique battle-space capability for the future."

The AIAA Foundation Board of Trustees is the world's largest technical society dedicated to the global aerospace profession. They annually recognise unique contributions and extraordinary accomplishments by organisations or individuals in aeronautics and astronautics.

The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is a 5th generation fighter aircraft. It has a combining advanced stealth with fighter speed and agility, fully fused sensor information, network-enabled operations, advanced sustainment, and lower operational and support costs.

http://www.brahmand.com/news/Lockheed-Martin-receives-AIAA-award-for-F-35-programme/3899/1/11.html

 

[nandu]

New Stealth Concept Could Affect JSF Cost

FORT WORTH -- As the debate rages about Joint Strike Fighter life-cycle cost, Lockheed Martin officials are raising a previously unheard point to bolster their low-price claims -- a new low-observability (LO) substance called fiber mat.

Lockheed officials avoided the need to use stealthy appliqu�s and coatings by curing the substance into the composite skin of the aircraft, according to Tom Burbage, executive vice president of F-35 program integration for the company. It "makes this airplane extremely rugged. You literally have to damage the airplane to reduce the signature," he said in an interview with AVIATION WEEK. This top-fiber mat surface takes the place of metallic paint that was used on earlier stealthy aircraft designs.

The composite skin of the F-35 actually contains this layer of fiber mat, and it can help carry structural loads in the aircraft, Burbage adds. The F-35 is about 42% composite by weight, Burbage says, compared to the F-22 at 22% and the F-16 at 2%.

Lockheed Martin declined to provide further details on fiber mat because they are classified. But the disclosure of this new substance comes at a time when Lockheed Martin officials are arguing that maintenance costs for the F-35 will be lower than anticipated by operators.

Officials at the Pentagon are required to complete their life-cycle cost estimates for the Joint Strike Fighter by the end of the month to certify that the $328-billion program can move forward despite a major cost spike. However, this has been an issue of controversy. A U.S. Naval Air Systems Command study recently stated that 65 years of sustainment for the single-engine stealthy fighter could cost about $442 billion (in Fiscal 2002 dollars) more than planned.

U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz said in an interview this week with AVIATION WEEK that he feels maintenance numbers for the conventional takeoff and landing version are "manageable," but he did not provide a number. A sustainment cost for all three variants is needed to proceed with Nunn-McCurdy certification after the 57% cost overrun.

Amid this debate, Lockheed Martin continues to claim that sustainment costs for F-35 will actually be lower than its predecessors. But the company's argument faces the same challenge as its assertion that the Pentagon Cost Analysis and Program Evaluation (CAPE) office's development and production estimates are inflated. Fundamentally, company officials say, Pentagon estimates on both points rely too much on data from legacy aircraft.

Schwartz, who represents the service that will eventually operate the preponderance of the Pentagon's F-35 fleet, appears unsympathetic to Lockheed's complaints about the estimates. "This is a show-me situation for the government, the program office and the contractor," he says. "Notwithstanding what they think of the estimate, that is what we budgeted to. If they want to sell more airplanes, there is a clear path ahead."

http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,215074,00.html?ESRC=eb.nl

 

[nandu]

Israeli industry reveals JSF weapons work

Israeli defence companies are developing new weapon systems that will be carried by the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighters operated by the nation's air force.

Rafael confirms that it is developing smaller versions of its Python-5 short-range and Derby beyond visual-range air-air missiles, to enable the munitions to be carried in the stealth fighter's weapon bays.

Israel Military Industries is also developing a new series of internally carried bombs for the F-35. So far, it has only unveiled the MPR-500, which will offer improved penetration and timed detonation.

Sharing the configuration of the Mk 82 500lb (226kg) general purpose bomb, the MPR-500 is made of specially hardened steel and has a single aft fuze. It also features a redesigned nose section to enable it to penetrate multi-layered targets, says an IMI source.

The combination of precision accuracy with a timed fuze has enabled the company to reduce the amount of explosive charge required in the bomb by 50%, the source adds.

http://www.flightglobal.com/article...sraeli-industry-reveals-jsf-weapons-work.html

 

[AJSINGH]

so what is the cost of F-35 and F-22 ( export version )?

 

[Armand2REP]

so what is the cost of F-35 and F-22 ( export version )?

There is no export version of F-22. F-35 is projected to cost $140 million according to latest GAO estimates. Nearly the same flyaway price of an F-22.

 

[nandu]

Pentagon: Total F-35 Price Tag Could Reach $382 Billion

Senior Pentagon officials on June 1 announced the F-35 fighter and five other major weapon systems have surpassed a legal cost threshold, while also criticizing the review process that triggers the "Nunn-McCurdy breaches."

The Defense Department told lawmakers the F-35 fighter program could cost as much as $382.4 billion, with each Lightning II model coming with a $92.4 million price tag, according to DoD budget documents.

Those cost estimates assume the program continues down the current path, which officials told reporters they are working to avoid. One senior Pentagon official – who declined to point to a specific cost target - said efforts already are under way to move the overall cost of the F-35 program "as close as possible" back toward substantially smaller estimates crafted in 2002.

The Defense Department sent the new estimates to Congress after determining the program had breached the so-called Nunn-McCurdy statute, which requires the Pentagon to notify Congress when major defense programs experience substantial cost growth.

The $92.4 million per-model estimate is what defense officials refer to as a "cradle-to-grave" projection, meaning spanning each fighter jet's entire life, the senior official said.

The Pentagon restructured the F-35 program just several months ago after internal DoD cost estimates showed the tri-service, international fighter initiative's price tag had grown more than expected – and more than the joint program office claimed. This formal congressional notification, the senior official said, is merely a reflection of the same growth – "the paperwork has caught up to that."

Why the bigger price tag? There are several primary drivers. One is the Navy several years ago reduced the number of F-35s it will buy. A second is a more difficult development process, which required additional years – and thus, became more expensive. The senior official said the program "will continue to struggle" with keeping the development phase on track, in part because the technology on the short take-off and landing variant is so complicated.

A DoD summary of the F-35 breach calls higher than projected "contractor labor and overhead rates and fees" the "single largest contributor to cost growth."

The senior official said the new F-35 program management has been ordered to pare these costs because "I do not think that the department should have to incur those costs."

As for the projected $382.4 billion overall price of the program, the senior official said the hope is "the taxpayers never have to pay that bill."

Meanwhile, a senior Lockheed official said the company was very pleased with the results of the recent restructuring and reiterated the company's stance that it does not expect the program to cost anywhere near the Pentagon's $382 billion estimate.

"I cannot foresee any scenario where those numbers become a reality," the official said.

Instead, the official said he expects the next batch of 32 production jets, known as "low-rate initial production lot 4," to cost more than 20 percent less than that projection. The previous batch of production aircraft also cost about 20 percent below the Pentagon's per-jet projections.

Lockheed officials have said previous Pentagon F-35 estimates have relied too heavily on data from older fighter programs, such as the F-22 Raptor and F/A-18EF Super Hornet.

Also breaching the cost growth threshold was the Navy's truncated DDG 1000 destroyer program. Costs grew from $20 billion to just over $22 billion, DoD said. The senior official pegged this growth to the Navy opting to buy three instead of 10, which drives up unit costs.

As part of the Nunn-McCurdy process, DoD officials have ordered the destroyer program to strike the "Volume Searching Radar hardware from the ship baseline design "¦ in order to reduce cost for the program," according to a department fact sheet. The Navy has been ordered to shift the program's initial operating capability date back one year, to 2016, and alter testing and evaluation requirements.

The Air Force-led Wideband Gapfiller satellite program also experienced a breach, the result of a break in production (between satellites 6 and 7), and the subsequent production re-start costs when the service opted to build two additional WGS orbiters (satellites 7 and 8). The cost grew from around $3 billion to just over $3.5 billion. The officials said Pentagon officials are mulling future satellite communications needs, leaving open the door to buying additional WGS satellites.

The Army's Apache Block III program also made the list of over-budget programs. The initial intent was to overhaul 634 existing helicopters, but 56 "new build" birds were tacked on to meet war demands. The revamped helos saw cost growth of $9.9 billion to $12 billion; the new aircraft costs went from $2 billion in 2006 to $2.3 billion. The department has split the "AB3" program into two parts – one focused on the new helicopters and another for the upgrades ones – which has resulted in "a more conservative set of estimating assumptions." Both are slated for a milestone C review this summer.

Another Army program made the list: the Advanced Threat Infrared Countermeasures/Common Missile Warning System, designed to take out infrared homing surface-to-air missile attacks on helicopters. The ATIC effort's costs grew from $900 million in 2003 to $1 billion; the CMWs portion's estimated price swelled from $3.1 billion in 2003 to $3.5 billion. The causes were "technological immaturity and unrealistic performance expectations," according to a DoD fact sheet.

Further, the Navy's Remote Minehunting System breached the cost growth threshold primarily because of "the result of lower than planned procurement quantities, unrealistic estimating, and failure to adequately address reliability issues," according to DoD. Costs grew from $1.2 billion in 2006 to $1.4 billion.

Each of the six programs avoided termination because Pentagon acquisition executive Ashton Carter deemed each essential to U.S. national security, which is required by the Nunn-McCurdy statute.

But is the Nunn-McCurdy process worth it? The senior official said the Pentagon is working on cost estimates of how much the Pentagon puts into the Nunn-McCurdy process. Some DoD brass wonder "whether the Nunn-McCurdy process is in Nunn-McCurdy," the senior official quipped.

Another DoD official said that estimation should be completed in several weeks.

The senior official said Pentagon leaders want to use the new Performance Assessments and Root Cause Analysis (PARCA) office to perform a similar function. PARCA has established by 2009 defense acquisition reform legislation, but Congress allowed the Pentagon to craft its charter.

In December, Carter signed a memo outlining how PARCA would work.

Its members would spring into action upon request by the defense secretary, DoD acquisition chief, a service secretary or a DoD agency director, according to the Dec. 9 memorandum.

The group would perform one of two kinds of analyses on major acquisition programs: * A performance assessment, which would "evaluate the cost, schedule, and performance of the program, relative to current metrics, performance requirements, and baseline parameters," the memo said. "The assessments shall determine the extent to which the level of program cost, schedule, and performance relative to established metrics is likely to result in the timely delivery of a level of capability to the war fighter."

* A root-cause analysis, which would examine the "underlying causes for shortcomings in cost, schedule and performance." It would also determine whether program shortcomings were due in part to "unrealistic performance expectations; unrealistic cost and schedule plans; immature technologies; and excessive manufacturing or integration risk," the memo said.

Both kinds of analyses would look at whether problems were caused by "unanticipated design, engineering, manufacturing, or integration issues arising during program performance; changes in procurement quantities; inadequate program funding or funding instability; [or] poor performance by government or contractor personnel responsible for program management," the memo said.

One defense analyst said the re-certification of the F-35 program was a done deal, showing the Nunn McCurdy process might not be working.

"Certification of F-35 is no big surprise because three of the defense department's four military services are counting on getting it, and there is no evidence of major design or engineering problems," Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute wrote in a June 1 blog post. "But doesn't it make you wonder what the point of these costly reviews are, when even programs the department has targeted for termination are certified as complying with Nunn-McCurdy criteria for continuance?"  John Reed and Kate Brannen contributed to this report.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4652553&c=AME&s=LAN

 

[nandu]

Lockheed Sketches a Few F-35B Problems

Lockheed Martin has clarified reports by a senior Pentagon official June 1 that the Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing version of the F-35 Lighting II Joint Strike Fighter continues to encounter difficulties in flight testing.

While the Bethesda, Md.-based company has discovered several problems with the STOVL version of the jet during flight testing, none has caused the test schedule to slip, a senior Lockheed official said.

The Pentagon official told reporters that STOVL problems had helped cause the program's breach of the Nunn-McCurdy statute that caps per-unit cost growth on weapons.

The problems include ones that affect the lift fan doors and jet engine actuator nozzle. A packaging problem bent pins in the rudder pedals as they were shipped to Lockheed, according to the official.

The official would not elaborate on these "discoveries" or the fixes that have been developed for them.

"When you do flight test, the desire is" to discover any possible problems with the aircraft, the official said June 2. "We've done well and we're ahead of plan; so you try to discover as many things as you can, so it's really a tribute to the test program to exercise the jet in a manner where you could discover anything that could be improved."

He reiterated Lockheed's claims that the program is back on track following this spring's restructuring of the program that came in the wake of the Nunn-McCurdy breach.

The program has completed 93 test flights in 2010, three more than planned, the official said.

Numerous problems that arose during the development of the STOVL jet contributed to what eventually became a two-year delay in the jet's development program. The restructuring cut this delay by half.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4653927&c=AME&s=AIR

 

[tarunraju]

Lockheed F-35C Makes First Flight

Lockheed Martin has announced a milestone in its F-35 Joint Strike fighter program. The Navy version of the F-35, dubbed the F-35C, made its inaugural flight on June 6 from the U.S. Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base. The first flight for the aircraft lasted 57 minutes with Jeff Knowles at the controls. Knowles is a retired Naval Aviator and was the lead test pilot on the F-117 stealth fighter program.

"I am thrilled the F-35C has attained this milestone," said Vice Adm. Thomas J. Kilcline, Commander of Naval Air Forces. "This flight marks the beginning of a new chapter in Naval Aviation. The mission systems in this aircraft will provide the Carrier Strike Group Commander with an unprecedented ability to counter a broad spectrum of threats and win in operational scenarios that our legacy aircraft cannot address. "

The F-35C differs from its land-based F-35 siblings in that the Naval variant has larger wing and control surfaces to provide better low speed handling for carrier approaches and landings. The air frame is also stronger on the F-35C to allow it to withstand harsh at-sea conditions and carrier landings.

DefenseNews reports that the Navy will be purchasing 680 of the short-take-off-vertical-landing F-35B and F-35C aircraft. However, the Navy has not yet decided on the final mix of aircraft. Lockheed officials have stated that the F-35 program is three flights ahead of schedule for 2010 after completing 93 test sorties so far as of June 1.

The entire F-35 program has been under scrutiny by the DoD with recent projections estimating that the total price tag from the program could reach a staggering $382 billion. Each of the F-35 aircraft is expected to cost about $92.4 million.