U.S. Jet Fighter Programs Beset by Prohibitive Rising Costs

[Batgirl]

The U.S. Air Force’s jet fighter programs — the F/A-22 and the Joint Strike Fighter — are beset by soaring costs, development delays and changing world threats that raise questions about their viability, Congress’ investigative arm said April 6.

The Government Accountability Office said in a report that the original business case for the F/A-22 has been “severely weakened” and that the original business rationale for the JSF “is unexecutable.”

The uncertainty surrounding the two fighter programs, which together require future investments of 240 billion dollars, have broad implications for the Defense Department’s program to modernize the air force’s fixed-wing tactical fighters, the report said.

They raised questions “as to whether overarching goals to reduce average aircraft age and ownership costs while maintaining force structure are now achievable,” the report said.

“Decreases in quantities (of aircraft) alone — about 30 percent since original plans — raise questions about how well the aircraft will complement our tactical air forces in the future,” it said.

The idea behind the $245 billion JSF program — the Pentagon’s costliest — was to bring down the cost per aircraft by developing a common fighter with variants for the air force, navy and marine corps. Foreign partners were brought in to add overseas sales.

The Pentagon originally planned to acquire 3,000 of the aircraft, but has since whittled down its projected buy by 535 aircraft.

The aircraft has experienced design and weight problems that have led to increased costs and schedule delays, the report said. Moreover, the program’s customers are not sure how many aircraft they will need.

“The combination of cost overruns and quantity reductions has already diluted DOD’s (Department of Defense’s) buying power and made the original JSF business case unexecutable,” the report said.

Warning that most critical technologies will not have been proven in time for a scheduled decision in 2007 on whether to begin low-rate initial production, the GAO urged that the program take time to gain greater knowledge about the risks before proceeding.

The F/A-22, which began development in 1986 and faces a decision this month on whether to go to full production, was originally developed to vie with Soviet fighters for control of the skies.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the air force has been forced to adapt the air-to-air fighter to a much different “global strike” mission.

Plans to add attack capabilities to the aircraft have driven up costs.

The Pentagon has reduced planned purchases of the fighter to fewer than 180, down from 750 in its original plans, and in December decided to halt procurement of the aircraft in 2008 rather than 2011.

“Changing threats, missions and requirements have severely weakened the original business case (for the aircraft),” the report said.

“Program milestones have slipped substantially, development costs have more than doubled and a modernization program was added,” it said.

“The recent budget decision to terminate procurement after fiscal year 2008, the prospect of additional cuts because of ceilings on program cost, and upcoming defense reviews have significant implications for the program’s viability and the future of modernization efforts,” it said.

Defense News

[Covertness]

I think the F-22 is a huge waste of money. The newest variant of the F-15 is still the master of the skies. Why invent another fighter when the one we got is the best? Shelve the F-22 and spend the money on R&D for the next generation of technological wonders.

Or better yet spend it on the grunts. I was reading on another site where this guy in the 101st was training prior to going to the sand box. No ammo, no blanks, the guys were forced to yell out "bang bang" when they were "shooting".

[Brad]

My brother flew the F-15, now flies F-16s. His vote is the same as yours. While the F-22 is a very impressive airplane, there is no current threat that can beat what we've got now. I guess we always have to stay ahead of the curve, but there's better places in our military to spend the money.

[USMCRET6391]

The Corps went through this with the F-14 program in the early 1970s. The Navy wanted us to buy the thing, it was big, expensive and didnt do what we needed it to do. In 1975 the Commandant canceled the whole thing and kept the F-4 until the F-18 was developed. I agree the F-22 is impressive technology, but is it really neccesary to have a VTOL fighter?

[Brad]

some specs on the F22...

the stealth capability and increased maneuverability are the strongest features. As I understand it, even our own radar can't see it. But, again, on today's battlefields, it's not our fighter aircraft that are at the most risk - it's the helicopters and transport in the air and the troops on the ground.

[Batgirl]

Pentagon OKs Full-Rate F/A-22 Production, Global Hawk upgrades

The Pentagon on April 17 formally announced that the U.S. Air Force’s F/A-22 fighter has been cleared for full-rate production and approved a series of electronic upgrades to the Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle.

The decisions, signed by Defense Department acquisition chief Mike Wynne on April 15, comes as the Quadrennial Defense Review debates the future of both programs.

The full-rate decision on F/A-22 is among the conflicting signals surrounding the program.

Although Wynne cleared the F/A-22 to enter full-rate production, a high-level budget review late last year cut the overall number of the planes to be purchased by one-third to about 180 jets. Some analysts and top service officials fear that if numbers are cut further unit prices will skyrocket, making the Air Force’s top modernization priority unaffordable.

The program was cleared for low-rate production in August 2001, with about 40 planes delivered to date — about 20 last year — and 83 jets under contract.

As for Global Hawk, Wynne has allowed the Air Force to use research and development funding for two key enhancements: the Advanced Signals Intelligence Program and the Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program. The moves ensure there is no break between production of the A and B models of the aircraft.

In his Global Hawk Acquisition Decision Memoranda — in the wake of a March 14 Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) meeting — Wynne directed the Air Force “to return before the end of 2005 to present an Interim Program Review” to the DAB.

Defense News

[cincymarsdad]

Originally Posted by USMCRET6391

The Corps went through this with the F-14 program in the early 1970s. The Navy wanted us to buy the thing, it was big, expensive and didnt do what we needed it to do. In 1975 the Commandant canceled the whole thing and kept the F-4 until the F-18 was developed. I agree the F-22 is impressive technology, but is it really neccesary to have a VTOL fighter?

The F-22 is not VTOL. The JSF has a variation that is STOL capable, but it's a strike "fighter", really tactical bomber. The newest Mirage and Sukhois are actually ahead of the F-15 in some respects. What makes the F-15 virtually unbeatable is the AWACs that lays out the battlefield so the individual units don't have to energize their radars until they are in a tactically superior position. And "Quantity has a quality all its own."

The Navy has the same sort of issue with the Seawolf subs. The LA Class subs are still superior to anything out there but we built three Seawolfs that ware much better.

Ye somehow when the military modernizes its platforms with "cheaper" variants, they end up costing a ton anyway. The F-16 was supposed to be a cheap fighter. All this said, new airframes with new avionics are very useful items. Perhaps we could refit the F-15s that way cheaper. The Buffs are still flying that were built in the 1960's, but they do need new engines someday soon.