Fresh JSF risks?

Bloomberg reported on November 1 that another three years and US$5 billion would be required to develop the aircraft, which is reportedly having software issues and, the F-35B in particular, aerodynamic and vibration problems around the lift fan and auxiliary inlet bay doors.

A couple of days later, Lockheed Martin CEO Bob Stevens, while not giving any details away, confirmed that the company and JSF program office (JPO) are “probably going to examine the need for more time, more people and more dollars. ” New JPO head VADM David Venlet reportedly briefed US Defense Secretary Robert Gates on November 3, and his report was due to go before the US Defense Acquisitions Board meeting scheduled for November 22.

On top of this, the US Marine Corps is currently undergoing a medium to long term review of its tactical aviation (tacair) requirements, and there is a real chance the report may find the US DoD’s money would be better spent on more conventional carrier aircraft such as the Super Hornet rather than the F-35B, and rather than having its own organic tacair force, that USMC airmen and units would be better employed being embedded within Navy carrier air groups, as its classic Hornet and EA‑6B Prowler squadrons are now.

Naturally, this would almost entirely remove the need for the STOVL version’s existence, and it is unlikely Italy is going to pick up what development costs remain and future support costs alone.

But could the prospect of the STOVL being cancelled have even wider ramifications for the JSF program as a whole? Remember the design of other two models, the CTOL F-35A which will comprise more than 80 per cent of the projected build run, and the carrier capable F-35C CV, have basically been compromised to be as common as possible to the more technically challenging F‑35B in order to retain as much commonality and therefore build and support efficiency as possible. The stubby wings, bulky fuselage, and non-low observable jet pipe have been, in part, designed to accommodate elements of the short takeoff and vertical landing aspects required by the F-35B as well as the Marines’ close-air-support mission requirements. And while F-35 advocates say the aircraft’s stealth and exceptional situational awareness means it will still prevail against more powerful and manoeuvrable adversaries in the air-to-air arena, one can’t help but wonder what the design and performance characteristics of a JSF unencumbered by those required STOVL design elements would have looked like. One need only look at recent ideas publicly touted by Lockheed Martin officials to incorporate the F-35’s Electro Optical Targeting System (EOTS), Distributed Aperture System (DAS) and computer backbone into the F-22’s airframe to realise what could have been.

A major part of the Australian government’s decision to go with the JSF in 2002 without holding a full competition for Air 6000 was the timeframe in which the aircraft was going to be available to partner nations, and the likely cost. Back then, the RAAF was expecting to take its first F-35As in 2011 and achieve IOC in 2012/13, and the cost would be about US$40 million per aircraft in 2002 dollars.

Since then, the program has been ‘re-baselined’ several times, the costs are still an unknown, and the first RAAF delivery is unlikely to occur before 2015 with IOC around 2017.

Because of this slippage, the ADF has spent more than $3 billion on acquiring the Super Hornet bridging capability, and an as yet undetermined amount will need to be spent on further structural refurbishments as part of a new Phase 4 of the Air 376 Hornet Upgrade program (HUG) so the classic Hornets can get through to 2020.

With more than US$40 billion spent on the program so far and the future of the world’s largest defence company and most powerful military on the line, the JSF program has been described by some as being “too big to fail. ” But with partner nations reducing their orders or wavering, major technical issues still to be resolved, and budgetary risks to the large numbers required by the US services, the program faces more turbulence ahead.