By Calvin Biesecker
An ongoing Pentagon review of the direction of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter should take regarding the flight-test program, which is underway, and a ramp-up in production is likely to result in a more conservative approach going forward that focuses on channeling more resources into software development and the flight-test program while building in flexibility for different production rates in FY ’11, Lockheed Martin‘s [LMT] Chief Executive said yesterday.
The Pentagon is buying 32 of the aircraft in FY ’10 and the original planned ramp-up was for 48 in FY ’11. Now it looks like the low-side buy in FY ’11 will be 42 planes with the possibility of building 48 depending on performance, Stevens said. Eventually, production could go higher, he said.
He also said that the contract structure for the F-35 could go to fixed-price one year earlier, in Lot 5 rather than Lot 6. If the requirements are set and funding is stable, Stevens said he “wants to get it under a fixed-price methodology.”
To help the ongoing System Design and Development phase of the F-35, Stevens said he would consider any request to not take award fees that haven’t been earned yet and reinvest them into the program.
Stevens said that the program will be supported in the FY ’11 budget request and the soon-to-be-released Quadrennial Defense Review. He devoted a chunk of his company’s fourth quarter earnings call yesterday to defending the F-35, which is behind by about six months in its flight-test program, and providing some high-level insights into the program review.
Some of the delays have been due to finding ways to better “optimize” the flight-test program, Stevens said. One example is not introducing another aircraft into the test regime until a software upgrade is ready to avoid duplicating flights later, he said.
So far, 15 of the planned 19 test aircraft have been delivered. The ongoing review is looking at what the appropriate number of test aircraft should be, Stevens said.
Stevens said the various review participants are “driving to a position of accommodation.” But, he said, the differences in the discussions have been real, frank and healthy.
The types of issues that are being “reconciled” include risk, schedule, costs and other estimates, Stevens said. He noted that Lockheed Martin’s own conclusions are similar to the Joint Project Office’s (JPO), although even the JPO’s estimates of program risk, cost and schedule are higher. On the other hand, a red team that is reviewing the program, called the Joint Estimating Team, has estimates that are further apart than the company and JPO, he added.
The types of questions being asked in the review include how many aircraft are needed for the flight-test program and what has to be tested, where it will be tested and what the costs will be, Stevens said. Not everything can be tested or testing would never end, he said. There just happens to be “different views” on all of this, he noted.
“The sky is not falling” on the F-35, Stevens said. While other DoD programs have been terminated or capped, including production of the Air Force F-22 fighter built by Lockheed Martin, Stevens said that the F-35 survived.
The program aligns with Defense Secretary Gates’ guidance that proven systems and technologies that meet joint solutions should be acquired, Stevens said. The aircraft design is sound, the propulsion system is delivering sufficient thrust and the stealth characteristics are effective, he said.
Stevens also said that the reliability of the software used on the aircraft is better than predecessor planes, but that more work needs to be done here.