By Emelie Rutherford
Military officials sought to alleviate congressional concerns yesterday about the Pentagon relying in the future on one main contractor for tactical aircraft, pointing to planning for future sixth-generation fighters and ongoing production of other jets.
House Appropriations Defense subcommittee (HAC-D) members Jim Moran (D-Va.) and Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.) expressed unease with plans calling for Lockheed Martin [LMT] to build most of the Pentagon’s tactical aircraft, in the form of the multi-service F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, after production ceases of Boeing‘s [BA] F/A-18 fighters.
“This issue…has been a continuing concern to the committee, our overreliance upon a single contractor, even as respected as they may be,” Moran said during a hearing on combat-aircraft requirements with Air Force and Navy officials
Rear Adm. David Philman, director of the Navy’s Air Warfare Division, noted that his service plans to buy F/A-18s through fiscal year 2013, for delivery up to FY ’15.
“So that’s a line that is hot,” Philman said, adding having that ongoing F/A-18 production will help “as the Joint Strike Fighter line matures and we understand it better.”
“That gives us some flexibility,” he said about Boeing’s F/A-18 production line.
Moran, the No. 3 Democrat on the powerful HAC-D, said he remains concerned about the future fighter industrial base. Panel members reiterated anxiety about F-35 program delays, as well as support for continuing aircraft’s alternate engine, developed by General Electric [GE] and Rolls-Royce. The Pentagon strongly objects to developing more than one engine for the F-35. Moran cited benefits he sees to having competition for the future fighter’s engine, including keeping costs low and ensuring there isn’t “monolithic control.”
Air Force Maj. Gen. David Scott, director for operational capability requirements and deputy chief of staff for operations, plans, and requirements for his service, told the HAC-D he agrees that “one, competition is extremely good, and two, we are worried about the industrial base.”
Scott and Philman are part of the Joint Air Dominance Organization, which looks at present and future Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps aircraft plans.
“I believe you will see, not in the very near future but pretty close, you’ll start to see us talking about where we’re going in the tactical-fighter realm from a air-dominance and what we can do (with could be called) a sixth-generation fighter,” Scott said. “I’ll just call it the next-generation air-dominance fighter, whether it’s manned or unmanned.”
That aircraft, he noted, will come about after an industry competition.
Scott also emphasized that a program’s prime contractor, like Lockheed Martin for the F-35, is not the only aspect of the industrial base that benefits, because multiple subcontractors also are involved.
Meanwhile, lawmakers received data on the F-35 alternate engine from the Pentagon yesterday. The information was delivered in response to a congressional request for data backing up Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ argument that the “business case” supports discontinuing the F-35 alternate engine. Sources said the newly delivered data supports the stance that at this point continuing with the second-engine effort would not cost more than cancelling it.
Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) chaired yesterday’s HAC-D hearing but officially remained its vice chairman, following the Feb. 8 death of the former chairman, Pennsylvania Democratic congressman John Murtha. Dicks is expected to be officially promoted to HAC-D chairman by House Democrats in the coming weeks.
The panel observed a moment of silence in honor of Murtha, and Philman and Scott joined most members in lauding the deceased congressman’s service.