{"id":12941,"date":"2014-03-21T06:00:45","date_gmt":"2014-03-20T19:00:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=12941"},"modified":"2015-04-27T12:36:58","modified_gmt":"2015-04-27T02:36:58","slug":"graph-of-the-week-f-35-update","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/graph-of-the-week-f-35-update\/","title":{"rendered":"Graph of the week: F-35 update"},"content":{"rendered":"
The National Security Committee of cabinet will soon consider a submission from Defence regarding the proposed approval of a buy of (probably) 58 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in addition to the 14 already approved.<\/p>\n
We\u2019ll be publishing a discussion paper on Monday that looks at the pros and cons of that proposition. And it won\u2019t be a surprise that one of the major issues will be the state of the F-35 development and production program. The F-35 and the process of developing it have been subject to some trenchant criticism over the years\u2014and with good reason. The performance of the prime contractor has left much to be desired at times, and the apparently hands-off management practiced by the Pentagon in the early years led to a series of cost increases and schedule slippages.<\/p>\n
Some of those trends weren\u2019t surprising, as early estimates of costs were well below the historical trend for combat aircraft. (The most recent ones certainly aren\u2019t.) And the joint development of three very different variants\u2014one for conventional takeoff and landing, one designed for carrier operations and a \u2018jump jet\u2019 for the US Marines\u2014meant that initial schedules were seriously optimistic.<\/p>\n
But some of the underperformance could squarely be sheeted home to poor program management. Combined with a tendency of those involved in program management and execution to downplay all of the increasingly obvious problems, a serious credibility issue developed. Some of us got to the point where a comment from an F-35 spokesman that it was a nice day would require confirmation from the US Government Accountability Office.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s all part of what the now head of program Lt General Chris Bogdan\u00a0 described here in Australia last week as the \u2018tragic history\u2019 of the F-35 program. But he also went on to describe a much tighter management approach today that has seen much improved performance against the program\u2019s 2011 revised milestones. Let\u2019s see what this year\u2019s Pentagon budget papers<\/a>\u2014released last week\u2014have to say about that.<\/p>\n