The F-35 and the USAF fy2010 budget

Now that the U.S. DoD Fiscal Year 2010 budget is approved, lets look at how much the United States AIr Force (USAF) pays for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

The F-35 is still in Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) so costs of the aircraft will be high. Because of the severe lack of flight testing and delays in getting AF-1, the first production representative conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) in to the air—it rolled out in December of 2008, we don’t know if costs of the aircraft will go down in the traditional sense. There is not enough test flight verification to confirm what is being produced.

Of more interest is that the USAF has not put any long range planning into the F-35 line-items for this years budget. This is most likely quadriennial defense review (QDR) realted. See this chart of the F-35 in the fy2009 USAF budget which shows estimated costs out to the end of the program. (click charts for easier reading)

Below are the F-35 specifics to the USAF fy2010 budget, not counting long lead items for follow-on production. The USAF is the biggest buyer of the F-35 and this is where one should start as any reference on F-35 aircraft price. Again, it is early in the program. This also shows why partner nations didn’t jump on to Operation: Lighting Strike; the effort launched in 2007 to give JSF partner nations a fixed price on early F-35 buys.

While the F-35 is meant to be export-friendly, the goal of the program is to provide an affordable aircraft. Given the progress in the program, it will be a very long time before we know any claims of affordability are true. Something to think about when the sellers of the aircraft say it is “affordable” and state some low price with 5 different conditions added to it. For the CTOL, always look back to the USAF for the baseline cost and adjust from that point. That advice comes with some caution.

Consider the accuracy of the USAF to price predict. Look again at the first chart above for the USAF F-35 fy2009 budget. Look at what USAF predicted that the “Flyaway Unit Cost” and “Wpn Sys Unit Cost” would be for fy2010 and compare it to what the USAF will pay in the fy2010 budget charts. Notice also that the USAF was supposed to get 12 aircraft for fy2010 and only got 10. There will probably be adjustments like this as we go along.

Hey, but good news. Discussions for the fy2011 budget aren’t that far away.

.

Iraq: US military contractor burns recyclables, violating contract

More folly from Operation: USELESS DIRT II.

As soldiers exit the dining facility, run by KBR and its subcontractor Najlaa International Catering Services Iraq, they see signs along the emerald walkway urging those who “like to recycle” to follow the path and “Think Green.” At the end of the path, soldiers sort aluminum cans and plastic silverware into separate bins.

But there’s one problem: The recyclable goods are thrown into a pit with the rest of the trash and burned. While this is likely to disappoint soldiers who “like to recycle,” it also is a breach of the government’s contract with KBR to run the dining facility on FOB Warhorse, according to the US government’s Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).

.

Minot AFB-5th Bomb Wing (B-52) commander fired

Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota; the graveyard of USAF command careers.

Just a little over two weeks after the missile wing commander (and others) were fired, the 5th Bomb Wing (B-52) commander has been fired after failing inspections.

The fired B-52 wing commander replaced a guy before him that was fired after base personnel mistakenly setup a B-52 with six-nuke cruise missiles which ended up flying to Barksale AFB, Louisiana with no authority back in 2007.

Now hiring equals now firing.

.

F-35 partner nation numbers—clear as mud

Any military program will have proposed numbers to be built change.

For the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), it is approaching the time where it may enter the classic death spiral. That is, because it was over-sold and “front-loaded” to Congress years ago with all kinds of hopeful language, not much of that over-sell matches the reality of today. That reality is of a program that is behind and over-cost. There is the risk that less aircraft will be purchased as problems develop.

The United States Air Force (USAF) is the biggest proposed buyer of the F-35. They are planned to get 1763 of the airframes. Back in 2006, there were almost 10 years added to the final order date of the F-35; 2028 to 2035-37. The motivation for this was that the USAF is low on money for just about everything. Nothing has changed today. The USAF still has not figured out how to purchase more than 48 F-35s per year once full rate production kicks in on the scheduled 2014 date. Add to this, full-rate production might not happen until 1015 or 2016. All that is happening now is that a lot of “mistake jets” are being procured with little flight test knowledge to back up current production methods. Since no one can state what Congress will authorize 10-15 years from now, let alone 5 years, a plan that states that the USAF will buy X number of aircraft so many years into the future is so much vaporware. USAF has already stated that there may be less than those 1763, but certainly more than 1500. Any number slip means that costs will rise. USAF at this time will be lucky to see F-35s numbering in the hundreds.

All of this has a huge affect on the F-35 JSF partner nations. If the biggest buyer of the F-35 is having problems, it won’t be easy.

The chart below shows the JSF partner nations. I consider it very optimistic. Many partner nations already have their own F-35 death spiral in progress. The asterisk shows partner nations that have some kind of overly obvious risk with the program. For example Canada and Denmark are looking at competition and not just the F-35 to replace their ageing fighter aircraft. The JSF plan (PDF) is an estimate of what partner nations will buy. It is not an absolute. Norwegian defence has stated that they will go with the F-35. The problem is that the politicians have to approve the money. This will be difficult with a military that is hurting in other areas. The Netherlands is not a done deal. Even if it does become one, the rising price in the F-35 project means that they will never see anywhere near 85 F-35s. The U.K. is a dying patient. Turkey looks good right now as they have a lot of home industry. Australia? Hard to say at this time what the politicians will fund. If they authorize money to be spent buying F-35s, it will join a long line of other high risk military procurement programs. This is a national tradition.

Maybe 2010 will be a year that the F-35 program gets turned around and shows real progress. Lets hope so.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Partner Nation Status
Country	Plan	Actual
Australia	100	100
Canada *	80	65
Denmark *	48	30
Italy	131	131
Netherlands *	85	85
Norway *	48	48
Turkey	100	120
United Kingdom  *	138	50
Totals	730	629

.

Cartoon Time—Boeing 7A7 tanker

Since we don’t know if Boeing will do a 767 body or 777 body for the next USAF air-refueling tanker, we get cartoons.

Boeing Hornets made it in to the cartoon. Ditto with F-22s, as Boeing makes a big chunk of that airframe. The F-35? No can do. “Winner take all” and all that.

As usual, this marketing video is like most weapon system adverts; moronic cliche and unoriginal.

.

Welcome to sunny Italy

I have come to the conclusion that the average Australian citizen treats the goings-on in the Defence bureaucracy much like Italians view government.

There is the shrug of the shoulders and a varity of comments that it has always been screwed up and the ability of senior Defence officials to have any sane control over things like Defence procurement and sustainment is a running joke.

Multi-billion dollar hopes and dreams of aircraft, ships, submarines and any other gold plated PowerPoint proposal to come down the pike is the the catalyst for more bad decisions from our senior Defence officials. This is the ultimate vicious circle.

The general public knows that most of this will get screwed up. While most wouldn’t know the very basics of all of this expensive military gear, they do know that there is such a wealth of management incompetence at the senior Defence levels that in the end everything evens out. While there are some outrageous fees to the taxpayer for all the faulty procurement and sustainment of weapons systems, it can only get so far because really big dollar efforts usually mean spectacular big dollar failure to deliver on the promise.

So, let them order subs, ships, aircraft and so-on well over to the tune of $100 billion dollars in total life costs. Those efforts—except on proven in-production projects that only require screw driver work and some warehousing along with turning one’s soveriegnty over to a foreign entity—will usually fail.

The other part of that public awareness—realistic public discussion on which weapons systems provide a practical defence for Australia, or how much all of this deskilling of Defence management will cost all of us—the quanity of quality discussion by the masses on how to fix all of this, is not present. “Italia”.

.

Links of Interest 30 Oct 2009 – Part 2

The failings of the U.K. MOD re: the 2006 Nimrod mishap should be required reading for those planning a strategic review of defence. It seems that a recent Pak military offensive has found some hints of 9/11.

The Serbian military pal up with a visit to the Chicoms. Indonesia, a rising middle power? South Korea lays blame for cyber-attacks on you-know-who. Also re: Korea, those recent NORK short-range missile tests failed. In Russia, a short-ranged ballistic missile self-destructed in a shoot-ex.

For the USAF, a look at KC-10 air-refueling tanker maintenance. Consider the value of big tankers. And finally, there is money to be made selling AFSO21 training to the USAF.

.

Skynet

http://xkcd.com/652/

Via http://xkcd.com/652/

H/T-David Axe

.

USAF F-35 candidate bases announced

The process of where to put the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) in USAF service continues. Some of these are obvious. I wonder about a few like Jacksonville. We will know more about the finalists in 2010.

“Eleven bases have been selected as candidate bases and include for training: Boise Air Terminal Air Guard Station, Idaho; Eglin Air Force Base, Fla.; Holloman AFB N.M.; Luke AFB, Ariz.; and Tuscon International Airport Air Guard Station, Ariz. The six bases selected as candidate bases for operations are: Burlington International Airport Guard Station, Vt.; Hill AFB, Utah; Jacksonville International Airport Air Guard Station, Fla.; Mountain Home AFB, Idaho; Shaw AFB, S.C.; and McEntire Air Guard Base, S.C.”

.

Links of Interest 30 Oct 2009

F-35 hearts Seoul

Towards a more muscular Pacific Command?

RecceLite for Luftwaffe Tornadoes

In Afghan Village, French Outreach Yields an Ambush

AXEGHANISTAN ‘09: CHICKEN & EGG

.