APRIL 27, 2015
The government watchdog reports issued this month on the
$400 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter join a long list of
critical reviews that have picked apart the program’s ballooning cost, schedule
delays, problems with software and even the helmet.
Now the Government Accountability Office and the Pentagon’s
internal investigator have taken aim at the engine of the most expensive
weapons system in the history of the Pentagon.
In a report issued earlier this month, the GAO, using
unusually strong language, said that the “reliability of the engine is very
poor” and that “the program has a long way to go to achieve” reliability goals.
Then, in a report released Monday, the Pentagon’s internal
investigators said there were 61 violations in how the engine program is being
managed — dinging Pratt & Whitney, the engine manufacturer, for a variety
of missteps, including workers not always wearing protective gloves and masks
when working around dangerous materials and assembly areas not cleared of
foreign objects that could cause damage to the engines.
It is not the first time the watchdogs have found flaws in
the program — the GAO lists 40 related reports that date back a decade on the
F-35. And it is certainly not the last time the controversial fighter jet will
face scrutiny and criticism.
But now the Pentagon and the companies involved in the
program are pushing back.
Pratt & Whitney scheduled a news conference that came
about an hour after the Pentagon inspector general’s report was released, to
defend the program and offer context it says the investigators missed. Bennett
Croswell, president of military engines for Pratt, was quick to point out that
the report was an audit of the company’s management systems and adherence to
the contract.
The report “does not speak to the quality of our products,
which we believe are world-class,” he said. “The engine is reliable.”
The Pentagon office that oversees the F-35 disagreed with
three of the inspector general’s six findings. It said that the recommendations
for corrections “are unnecessary, and, if implemented, would add cost and
schedule growth to the program for items that are already well understood and
carefully managed.”
The aggressive stance follows a forceful defense of the
program last month by Air Force Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, who said that costs are
coming down, key milestones are being met and many of the issues that drove up
the program’s cost have been remedied.
It is a critical time for the F-35, which is built by
Bethesda-based Lockheed Martin and is often derided by
critics as the “jet that ate the Pentagon.” A July 1 deadline is looming for
the Marine Corps version of the plane to reach what is called “initial
operational capability,” when it would be declared ready for combat.
Pentagon officials concede that the program was way over
budget and years behind schedule. But in recent years, under new leadership, it
has gotten back on track, they say.
Still, in its report, the GAO found that “improving engine
reliability will likely require additional design changes and retrofits” that
could require even more money and time.
To rebut that, Croswell came to the news conference armed
with charts and data on the engine’s performance, and pointed out that the F-35
recently performed very well, taking off and landing on a carrier last fall.
The company plans for the engine to last as much as 50 percent longer than
required.
Asked if he was surprised by the GAO’s conclusion that the
engine was unreliable, he said, “Yes, very much so.”
The entire fleet of F-35s was grounded last summer after an
engine fire during a training mission at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida as a
pilot was beginning to take off. The root cause of the problem has been
discovered and fixed, officials said. And problems in a development program are
to be expected, they said.
But as the GAO noted, the fact that the aircraft is in
development at the same time it is being manufactured has caused problems,
which critics have long said was a violation of the acquisition tenet “Fly
before you buy.”
Another problem is that the F-35 is going to have to compete
“with other large programs for limited acquisition resources,” putting pressure
on the budget at a time when defense spending is being trimmed.
And the GAO predicted that, given the complexities of the
program, the literature of criticism is only going to grow.
“With more complex and demanding testing ahead and engine
reliability improvements needed, it is almost certain that the program will
encounter more discoveries,” the report said.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com