In an opinion piece on aviationweek.com on August 28, Michael A. Hough, Lt. General, USMC (Retired), weighs in on the critical issue of whether there should be competition for the engine that will power the advanced Joint Strike Fighter. The plane will replace a total of 11 fighter/attack aircraft in use by the U.S. and its allies around the world and in a few decades, nearly all U.S. fighter aircraft will be F-35s. General Hough — who is the former director/deputy director of the Joint Strike Fighter Program from 1997-2001 and deputy commandant of aviation from 2002-2006 — takes on the common misperception that there was a competition between Pratt & Whitney’s engine and the one being made by the GE-Rolls Royce team – and that P&W won. As the title of his piece succinctly says, “Competition for the JSF Engine? — It Never Happened!”
A giant acquisition reform opportunity: The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is the largest in U.S. history, with up to 6,000 being built over the course of the program. The warplane represents the future of fighter engine sales for decades to come, and may be the last manned fighter aircraft ever. However, Congress is currently considering cancelling funding for a second JSF engine, which would turn the $100 billion program over to a sole source manufacturer.
“I have watched with disappointment over the last few months as those advocates of sole-sourcing the F-35 with only the Pratt & Whitney engine have attempted to spin a tale of myth and innuendo to deliberately muddy the waters around the issue of the competition of the engine for the F-35. Let me set the record straight,” writes General Hough — who does not work for either of the engine companies.
“First, there was no JSF engine competition as part of the overall air frame competition. We didn’t compete the JSF engine … it never happened! In 1995, the three primes in the competition selected the core of F-22 engine (119) to power the JSF demonstrators during the Program Definition & Risk Reduction Phase (1996-2001). This was done to leverage the maturity of the F-22’s 119 engine core to not only save money, but also to save time by reducing the cycle time of the phase to meet the milestones in the aggressive demonstration schedule. Although it was simple as that, it was ‘not’ a competition!”
General Hough explains that in 1997, a group was formed to determine the benefits of a second engine for the JSF — and that its initial study, and another one conducted in 2002 — both validated the benefits. The studies, he writes, paved the way for “a plan that would compete the engines in the 2012-2013 timeframe. With both DoD and Congress’ support, the JSF engine competition became a reality and we saw immediate benefits in improvements in engine design, responsiveness of the contractors and reduction in costs.”
General Hough continues: “We were thrilled as were all of our eight international partners who invested significant amounts of their national treasure into the F-35 program as well. From the war fighter’s perspective, the second engine provided not only an interoperable alternative, but a ‘must have’ insurance policy if either engine became grounded due to design, fatigue, or other reasons (commonly called ‘red stripe’).
“Today, the Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force employ a fleet of aging legacy tactical aircraft (F-18, AV-8, F-16, F-15) that can back each other up when the engine or fatigue grounds a type model series. After 2020 and on, all of these legacy aircraft will be in a ‘sunset retirement posture’ with the JSF replacing all of the legacy aircraft in all services to include our closest allies in nine or more countries. It is vital that there is an ‘alternative’ for the heart of the JSF, the engine, so as to not put our war fighters and our national/international security at risk due to short sightedness at this time with the decision to not fund the remaining 30% of the cost to develop the second engine.”
He goes on to say, “I have never been an advocate of a single engine solution for the JSF. It simply is not good business and I believed it would fail to drive behavioral changes with the contractors and render potential decreased ‘aircraft availability’ down the road. As we have seen during the last few years, the positive aspects of competition have improved engine reliability, cost, and maintainability and our entire JSF program is better for it.
“Finally, the cost of competition in the near term is worth every penny. In today’s environment, it is surprising to me that DoD and the administration have turned their backs on the basic tenets of competing the engine makers against each other. No program within the government is a more positive example of the 2009 Weapon System Acquisition Reform Act than this F-35 engine competition.”
With Congress considering cancellation of funding for the second engine, General Hough urges legislators to reconsider, saying, “our war fighters deserve competition and the benefits that it brings to the table.”
* Read Lt. Gen. Hough’s full post on aviationweek.com
* Read Desert Storm air commander Gen. Chuck Horner’s opinion piece
* Learn the facts about the JSF engine on www.f136.com
* Read the JSF recommendations made by the Heritage Foundation
* Read the book The Air Force And the Great Engine War
* Read “House backs Joint Strike Fighter engine competition”
* Learn details about how the JSF engine is made
