F-35 oppdatering fra USA og uro i UK

F-35 fighters still highest priority despite budget cuts: Pentagon

Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall speaks at the Reuters Aerospace and Defense Summit in Washington, September 4, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Larry Downing

By Andrea Shalal-Esa

WASHINGTON | Wed Sep 4, 2013 10:31pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon's chief arms buyer on Wednesday said he did not expect the U.S. Navy to significantly change its plans to buy F-35 fighter jets built by Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N), despite mounting pressure on the U.S. military budget.Frank Kendall, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, told the Reuters Aerospace and Defense Summit that the $392 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was the U.S. military's highest priority conventional warfare program.
He said the Navy needed the added capabilities that the F-35 offered, noting that other countries were developing their own radar-evading fighter planes, advanced electronic warfare capabilities and other advanced weapons that threatened the U.S. military's ability to "control the air."
"I don't see any indication that the Navy is going to change its plans in any fundamental way," Kendall told the summit.
The Navy and other branches of the military have been mapping out their options if lawmakers fail to reverse mandatory budget cuts and they are forced to implement an additional 10 percent budget cut in fiscal 2015.
One possibility under discussion has been a two-year pause in orders for the F-35C carrier variant, a move that could increase the cost of the remaining aircraft to be bought by the Marine Corps and the Air Force, according to four sources familiar with the issue.
Kendall's strong endorsement of the added capabilities of the F-35 marked a setback for Boeing Co (BA.N), which is offering the Navy upgrades of its F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter in the hopes that it can sell more of those planes.
"The F/A-18 is a great airplane, but it's a fourth generation fighter. The F-15 is a great airplane, the F-16 is a good airplane, but they're fourth generational fighters, and you get a quantum improvement in capability out of the F-35," Kendall said.
Lockheed is building three variants of the F-35 for the U.S. military and the eight partner countries that are helping fund its development: Great Britain, Australia, Canada, Norway, Italy, Turkey, Denmark and the Netherlands. Israel and Japan have also placed orders for the new jet.
Kendall said Pentagon leaders next month would assess a new lower estimate of the long-term operating and maintenance cost of the jets recently prepared by the F-35 program office.
He said he expected a drop in the previous estimate of $1.1 trillion, but perhaps not one quite as steep as the projection by the F-35 program office, which now estimates it will cost $857 billion to maintain a fleet of 2,443 jets for 55 years.
He acknowledged that a decision to reduce the size of the U.S. military spurred by the budget cuts could lead to a reduction in the total number of jets to be purchased, but said those decisions were still several years off.
In the meantime, he said the Pentagon was focused on increasing the production rate so that the price of each airplane would come down.
Kendall said the F-35 program was making progress, as was the complex pilot helmet built by a joint venture of Rockwell Collins (COL.N) and Israel's Elbit (ESLT.TA), which fuses data from the many sensors on board on the plane.
He said the Pentagon hoped to be able to use the primary helmet, but it was continuing to fund work on a less capable alternative being developed by BAE Systems (BAES.L) in case the other helmet did not advance quickly enough.
He said he also remained concerned about bringing the cost of the primary helmet down.
Follow Reuters Summits on Twitter @Reuters_Summits
(Additional reporting by Paige Gance; Editing by Ros Krasny, Lisa Shumaker and Edwina Gibbs)

Parliamentary Report Says U.K. JSF Buy Remains 'High Risk'

By Anthony Osborne tony.osborne@aviationweek.com

Source: AWIN First

September 03, 2013
Credit: US Navy

Members of the British Parliament have described the U.K.’s plan to purchase the Joint Strike Fighter for the carrier strike role as high risk because of the defense ministry’s lack of control of the program.
In a report released Sept. 3, the U.K. Public Accounts Committee (PAC) studied the ministry’s decision to flip-flop its choice of which F-35 variant to operate from the U.K.’s new Queen Elizabeth II-class aircraft carriers. It moved from the short-takeoff and vertical landing (Stovl) F-35B to the conventional catapult-launched F-35C in 2010, then reverted back to the F-35B in 2012.
The original decision to change variants cost £74 million ($115 million), and the decision to change back to the Stovl aircraft is likely to cost a similar amount, the PAC says, although the full costs will not be known until 2014. The ministry believes that, despite writing off the £74 million, reverting to the original decision will help it to avoid £600 million across the 30-year life cycle of the Carrier Strike program. However, the report states that the cost information is still not mature.
The report says the ministry provided its decision makers with “deeply flawed information” on the benefits of changing the type of aircraft to errors such as “omitting value added tax (VAT) and inflation from the costs of converting the carriers.”
Despite defense ministry assurances, the committee says it is not yet “convinced” that it has the aircraft contract “under control,” and describes the whole carrier strike program as high risk.
“Although Carrier Strike is over five years from planned operation, significant technical issues, costs and delivery dates for the aircraft are not resolved,” the PAC report states.
The report also addresses some concerns about the ministry’s definition of interoperability for the carrier strike capability. When the F-35C was selected the defense ministry said there would be interoperability between the U.S. and French navies because they also used catapult and arrestor-based carrier operations. However, when it was realized that the ability to land the carrier variant was more technically challenging than previously thought and the program reverted back to the F-35B, the PAC points out that the emphasis shifted to interoperability with the Italian navy and the U.S. Marine Corps.
Officials are looking toward “Main Gate 4,” a procurement contract milestone due to take place later this year that will not only buy the U.K.’s first squadron but also begin what officials call the transition toward operations. The order will be for around 14 F-35Bs. Around 2018 this squadron should move back to the U.K., where they would begin aircraft carrier trials with the aim of achieving an initial land-based operating capability by late 2018.
The PAC also outlines concerns it has with the planned late entry into service of the Crowsnest carrier-borne airborne early warning (AEW) capability planned for embarkation onto the new ships. The committee says it is not due to be fully operational until 2022. The PAC questioned senior defense officials about why the capability was not entering service at the same time as the ship, and that the lack of airborne-early warning coverage could constrain where the ship could operate.