InsideDefense.com, Carlo Munoz and John T. Bennett, 8 september 2006 www.military.com target="_top"
The Air Force plans to reduce its expected purchase of
Joint Strike Fighters by 72 aircraft in the service's proposed six-year
spending plan due to skyrocketing costs in the Lightning II program,
defense officials tell Inside the Air Force.
The proposed reduction, roughly the equivalent of one fighter wing, is
part of the Air Force's fiscal year 2008 spending plan that the service
submitted to the Office of the Secretary of Defense on Aug. 15. That
budget blueprint spans fiscal years 2008 to 2013.
Defense Department officials anticipate acquiring just under 2,500
F-35s for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. The Pentagon's eight
international JSF partners are expected to purchase more than 770 of
the futuristic fighters.
For the U.S. military, it is designed to replace a number of aging
fighter platforms used for decades by the Air Force, Navy and Marine
Corps.
However, if the service's purchasing plan is adopted by OSD officials
and folded into the president's FY-08 defense budget request sent to
Congress in February, it would allow the Air Force to adhere to current
F-35 development and production schedules -- but with 72 fewer planes.
Such a move also would offset staggering cost increases that came to
light earlier this year, officials noted. Service officials want to use
the dollars that would have been spent to buy the 72 fighters to pay
the unexpected bills that triggered a substantial cost spike from last
year.
The total price tag for the tri-service Joint Strike Fighter program
shot up by nearly $19 billion during a four-month period in 2005,
according to a Pentagon selected acquisition report (SAR) released
April 7 after it was sent to Congress.
Prior to that significant increase, overall JSF cost growth set against
the program's 2002 baseline estimates came in at $75 billion over a
three-year span. 'Base year' cost estimates for the JSF totaled just
over $202 billion in 2002, states the April 7 report.
With that trend of cost spikes, the F-35's $276 billion price tag has
made it one of the most expensive defense acquisition efforts in
Pentagon history, according to defense officials and analysts.
The increase also placed the JSF program among the 15 platforms listed
in the April SAR that DOD says breached the Nunn-McCurdy statute during
the September through December 2005 time frame. The Nunn-McCurdy Act
places caps on single-unit cost growth for all major DOD acquisition
programs, notes the April 7 report.
Using dollars previously intended to buy a wing of JSFs to pay for the
2005 cost increase, however, is not a sign that Air Force officials are
re-thinking their place in the tri-service, international fighter
effort, one senior service official tells ITAF.
Brig. Gen Charles Lyon, deputy director of programs in the office of
the deputy chief of staff for strategic plans and programs,
characterized the change as more of a 'refinement' than a deviation
from the service's F-35 plans.
'We are not making any change that would push things to the right or
accelerate them to the left. We are staying the course on the JSF,'
Lyon said during a Sept. 6 interview at the Pentagon. "We just have got
to have it to stay a viable Air Force for years to come, and we know
that."
Lyons declined to discuss the specifics of the service's POM
submission, saying that doing so would taint the Pentagon's budget
process.
The service's proposal to cut its overall JSF buy comes only weeks
after Navy and Marine Corps officials submitted to Pentagon officials
an FY-08 spending plan that proposes a one-year delay in fielding the
fighter, InsideDefense.com reported on Aug. 18.
If approved by OSD, the Navy-USMC plan would delay fielding the first
Marine Corps F-35 squadron from 2010 to 2012, while also pushing
acquisition of 35 additional Air Force and Navy Joint Strike Fighters
beyond 2013, according to sources contacted by InsideDefense.com. Those
sources said the move would free up nearly $1 billion across Navy and
Marine Corps coffers.
OSD could reject the naval service' proposal, alter it or adopt it
outright as they craft a military-wide six-year spending plan over the
next several months. For his part, Lyon said the Air Force did not
follow the Navy-Marine Corps plan in its budget submission. Still, if
adopted by OSD, the kind of delay outlined in the Navy-Marine Corps POM
would undoubtedly create a 'ripple wave' effect on the entire program.
"Perturbations come from all different areas, they are just some things
that are a fact of life and happen," Lyon told ITAF. "What we will do
is we will be a partner with the Navy and the Marine Corps here in the
Department of Defense to keep this program on track and keep it solid."
If a delay in fielding the F-35 is enacted, such a move would force the
air service to recalibrate its ambitious aircraft retirement plan, Lyon
said. He added that a one-year delay in fielding the next-generation
fighter would force his service to keep more aging legacy fighters in
the air longer than under existing plans. "We would have to re-look it,
we would have to re-look the entire calculus of our retirement plan and
our basing plan and the impact on pilot production," the one-star told
ITAF. "There is a huge ripple effect there if we delay the genesis of
the F-35 into the Air Force."
The prospect of further extending the life of some aging fighters that
are on 'a glide path' toward retirement has some top brass concerned.
The service's aircraft fleet has an average age of 24 years. For
service officials, operating those platforms at full levels brings into
question whether or not the aircraft can perform under such demands,
Lyon said.
"This is the situation that we are in [because] we had a procurement
holiday in the 1990s' and legacy aircraft just got 'older and older,'
he said. "Now there are some that say that is just fine, that an aging
fleet is OK, but we are just really nervous about it."
Even if OSD and Congress enact all of the air service's desired
retirement and procurement plans each year until the FY-13 budget
cycle, the average age of the fleet would still be at 30 years at that
time, Lyon said.
Budgetary pressures facing the entire federal government, however, make
buying enough new aircraft between now and FY-13 to bring that number
down unlikely, according to defense officials and Pentagon observers.
"We had the luxury during the early part of the Cold War -- the 1950s
to 1960s -- to acquire a lot of aircraft in a very short period of
time," he said. "We do not have that luxury as a nation now."