By Marina Malenic
The Air Force’s second in command said yesterday that “it’s a little early to tell” how the United Kingdom’s plan to reduce its F-35 Joint Strike Fighter buy quantity and to switch which variant it will purchase could affect the program as a whole.
“I’ve talked with my Marine Corps counterpart on this topic,” said Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Howie Chandler. “We’re still working through how that may impact” the B- model variant of the aircraft.
Chandler was speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.
Lockheed Martin [LMT] is building three versions of the F-35 for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, as well as several foreign militaries. The A model, to be flown by the Air Force, takes off and lands conventionally; the Marine Corps’ B model is a short take-off/vertical landing (STOVL) variant; and the C model is to be flown from carriers by Navy fighter pilots.
The United Kingdom, which had been the Pentagon’s most significant international partner in the venture until earlier this month, had plans to purchase the STOVL version of the aircraft. However, last week London released its Strategic Defense and Security Review (SDSR), which recommends cutting defense spending by eight percent over four years. In that review, the number of F-35s to be acquired is reduced, and the B model is dropped in favor of the carrier variant.
“Overall, the carrier-variant of the JSF will be cheaper, reducing through-life costs by around 25 percent,” the SDSR states.
Chandler yesterday would not comment on whether the Air Force is anxious to isolate the F-35A from any further cost overruns that occur as a result of the British decision.
“We feel very comfortable with the Air Force variant of that aircraft,” he said. “We’re ahead on test flights.”
The B model, which is technologically the most difficult of the three variants to build, has suffered by far the most setbacks in development and testing.
Last month, the Defense Department and prime contractor Lockheed Martin finally agreed to terms for the fourth low-rate initial-production contract for 32 F-35 aircraft, following months of delays. In February, Defense Secretary Gates eliminated over $600 million in performance fees to Lockheed Martin for problems with the program.
Chandler also said he and his counterparts in the other services have been discussing the potential for greater synergies between the military branches to reduce costs. For example, he said the Air Force and Navy have been in talks over an “air-sea battle concept” that could eliminate redundancies, while the Army and Air Force have discussed things like precision-guided weapons.
Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. “Pete Chiarelli has talked a lot about munitions,” Chandler said. “He has a portfolio of precision-guided munitions; so does the Air Force. Why is it we don’t necessarily measure across the services in terms of quantities or types of systems?”
The Air Force vice chief also said that a top-level nuclear review is being launched in the wake of an equipment failure incident at a nuclear missile facility in Minot, N.D. According to the Air Force, an equipment failure disrupted communication between 50 nuclear-tipped missiles and the launch control center at Warren AFB, Wyo., for less than one hour on Oct. 23.
Late last year, the Pentagon consolidated Air Force nuclear assets under Air Force Global Strike Command. The Command was formed at Barksdale AFB, La., after the Air Force was plagued by a series of nuclear mishandling incidents.
Chandler said the Air Force plans to seek more funding for its nuclear activities next year than it did in Fiscal 2011.
“It was a five-billion-dollar portfolio” this year, he said. “I fully expect it to be a larger portfolio next year.”