Despite a statement that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is now “moving in the right direction” under the giant U.S. defence supplier Lockheed Martin Inc., a report to Congress on Monday, March 11, from the Government Accountability Office warns that the largest defence acquisition in U.S. history “still has tremendous challenges ahead” and remains only a fraction of the way through the development and testing that must be done before the F-35 is fully operational and combat ready.
In the meantime, because of the delays, the U.S. military is spending billions of dollars upgrading existing legacy fleets of fighter jets, as Canada may have to do, to fulfill defence and military requirements with full production of the F-35 now not slated to begin until 2019.
“Ensuring that the acquisition costs of the F-35 are affordable so that aircraft can be bought in the quantities and time required by the war fighter will be of paramount concern to the Congress, U.S. military, and international partners,” says the report from the Government Accountability Office.
“Once acquired, the current forecasts of life cycle sustainment costs for the F-35 fleet are considered unaffordable by defence officials,” the report said.
“Efforts are under way to try and lower annual operating and support costs. Uncertainties and delays in the F-35 program are forcing new plans for recapitalizing fighter forces and the military services are incurring increased costs to buy, modify, and sustain legacy fighters,” it said.
The Canadian government last December directed the Canadian Forces also to come up with a plan to extend the life of Canada’s current fleet of Boeing CF-18 fighter jets, which were slated to retire in 2020 after nearly 40 years of service following their acquisition in 1982.
As well, the government, partly in light of the fact that it might have to acquire a small fleet of newer modern fighters as a bridge to the F-35 or even to serve in conjunction with a smaller fleet of F-35 fighters than currently planned, has sent out letters to five other fighter jet makers, including Boeing, asking them to provide a range of operational capabilities to meet Canadian requirements under certain conditions, including a range of sovereignty, war and defence against terrorist attack situations.
For the first time, after a series of reports on the F-35 that began in 2010, the U.S. Government Accountability Office drew up a scenario outlining how the cost the U.S. acquisition of the aircraft would rise if partner countries such as Canada either lowered the number of jets they will buy or don’t buy any at all.
The cost of the jets have already more than doubled since the project began in 2001, and the largest single factor in keeping acquisition costs down for the U.S. and its partners is the economy gained through large-scale production by Lockheed Martin once testing and development are complete and the aircraft is combat ready.
Currently, a February report from the U.S military’s Director Operational Test and Evaluation said, pilots training on the F35 at a U.S. based in Florida are not even allowed to fly into clouds or bad weather because the plane’s instrumentation is inadequate. As well, the pilots, during a review of pilot training last September through November, could not fly in combat conditions or in close formation because of aircraft limitations. They also could not fly at maximum speed.
“To better understand the potential impacts on prices from changes in office did a sensitivity analysis to forecast impacts on F-35 average procurement unit costs assuming various quantities purchased by the United States and international partners,” said the Government Accountability Office report.
“For example, if the United States bought its full quantity of 2,443 aircraft and the partners did not buy any aircraft, CAPE calculated that the average unit cost would increase by six per cent. If the United States bought 1,500 aircraft and the partners bought their expected quantity of 697, unit costs would rise by nine per cent. If the United States bought 1,500 and the partners, unit costs would rise 19 per cent.
“In addition to the costs for acquiring aircraft, significant concerns and questions persist regarding the cost to operate and sustain F-35 fleets over the coming decades. The current sustainment cost projection by CAPE for all U.S. aircraft, based on an estimated 30-year service life, exceeds $1-trillion. This raises long-term affordability concerns for the military services and international partners,” the report said.
In the controversy last year over Auditor General Michael Ferguson’s criticism of the way National Defence has handled the program in Canada, he singled out the department for failing to include $10-billion worth of operating costs over 20 years of operation for a fleet of 65 F-35s, for which an independent review last December forecast a total cost of $45.8-billion for acquisition, sustainment and operation.
Retired National Defence procurement chief Alan Williams said the latest two reports from the U.S. reflect the “gravity” of the situation as the Canadian government continues to hold the F-35 out as a replacement for the CF-18 fleet, even though it says it is considering other options.
Mr. Williams agreed with the GAO statement that the F-35 project faces “tremendous challenges” and emphasized its warning that the program “must fully validate design and operational performance against war fighter requirements, while, at the same time, making the system affordable so that the United States and partners can acquire new capabilities in the quantity needed and can then sustain the force over its life cycle.”
NDP MP Matthew Kellway (Beaches-East York, Ont.) said the U.S. Government Accountability Office report, despite its statement that limited progress has been made, confirms what the opposition has been saying since Defence Minister Peter MacKay (Central Nova, N.S.) announced the procurement in July 2010.
“It’s too little, too late, and way too much,” Mr.Kellway said.
“If it ever does become a viable option to replace the CF-18, it'll be too late to participate in a transparent, open competition against other, real fighter jets, and no matter what happens with testing and scheduling, it costs way too much,” he said.
Mr. Kellway predicted the report’s estimate of operating costs will boost a recent Defence Department estimate of the cost to Canada for sustaining a fleet of F-35s from $20-billion to $66-billion over 30 years.
“That this Conservative government ever planned on sole-sourcing this plane and probably still plans to do so is tremendously worrying and reflects a level of risk and political gamesmanship with taxpayer dollars that is both immature and irresponsible in the extreme,” Mr. Kellway told The Hill Times.
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: TIM NAUMETZ
No comments:
Post a Comment