In March of this year, a Pentagon report on the F35 leaked, highlighting yet more difficulties and problems facing the Joint Strike Fighter program - and adding more fire to the debate raging around what is considered to be the most expensive weapons development program in history.
The report highlighted problems with the new HMD (Helmet Mounted Display) blurring the pilots' vision, problems with aft visibility, lagging software development meaning that night time testing and advanced manoeuvres are still off the testing table and issues with the aircraft's ability to operate in cold weather (a serious issue for the Norwegians and the Canadians). This follows a grounding of the entire test fleet after cracks were found in the turbine blades of one of the aircraft.
The program is thought to be around 7 years behind schedule and its cost has risen by 70% since 2001, averaging around $373 billion dollars. Yet the program endures. Here is why.
First off, what is the JSF all about ?
The JSF concept was borne out of the realisation of the relative inefficiency of aircraft development by the US. Essentially the Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy would develop their own aircraft independently from each other based around each branches' specific needs and operational requirements. This, coupled with constantly rising costs of development as the hardware gets more and more advanced, led to the conclusion that the next generation fighters of American fighters would have to be developed co-jointly with all branches of the US military in mind. And thus was borne the JSF program.
The F35 Lightning II (named in honour of the P38 Lightning of World War 2 fame) was designed as a family of single seat, single engined, stealth, fifth generation multi-role fighters whose airframe could be declined into three main variants to fit the operational requirements of the Air Force, Navy and Marines. The F35 A would replace the Air Force's F16s and A-10s, the F35B with STOVL (Short Take Off and Vertical Landing) capabilities would replace the Marine Corps' AV-8B Harrier IIs, and the F35C would replace the Navy's F/A 18s. The idea is that the three versions would use many core parts (such as radar, combat software etc...) in order for them to be assembled on the same line, greatly reducing logistical costs.
On top of that, the program was to be jointly developed by eight other countries (though the US would provide the majority of the funding). The partner countries are the UK, Denmark, Norway, Italy, Canada, Australia, Turkey and the Netherlands. In recent years, Israel and Japan have also showed interest in the program. This international partnership would help alleviate the cost and boost interoperability. The final contract was awarded to Lockheed Martin and the first F35 flew in 2006. The aircraft is not expected to enter service until after 2016.
So what is going wrong ?
There are a number of reasons why the project has hit so many hiccups along the way. The aircraft would incorporate many technological advancements that are fairly new and thus need to be tested alongside the aircraft. Many fingers point towards lagging software development for the aircraft's complex electronic suites as one of the points holding the testing back. Others point to significant problems with the airframe. The one-size-fits-all approach is compromising the plane on core capabilities. Each setback translates into delays and rising costs. Aircraft development is fraught with hiccups during the development phase: these are highly complex machines combining myriad different systems to allow the whole thing to work.
Suffice to say, people are questioning the whole program more and more. With unit costs predicted to rise to around $200 million a pop, what started as a program to save money has become the most expensive weapons development program in US history.
So why isn't the whole thing being scrapped ?
On paper the JSF is a smart move and provides a huge leap forward over the current designs in service. The JSF would provide the worlds first true 5th generation multi-role fighter. The fighter would provide the crux of US military power from 2020 onwards. And the US is planning on purchasing 2,400 of the them.
Simply put the US and the other partner countries have put almost all their eggs into one basket and there is no plan B. The program must succeed. Yes, the combination of ballooning development costs and shrinking defence budgets have casts doubts over the feasibility of the whole thing - and Canada, Australia and Italy have already come out saying that they will probably purchase fewer planes than initially planned - but so much money has been spent at this point that scrapping the whole thing is no longer feasible.
On a smaller micro scale, in the US alone the program involves over 1,300 suppliers in 45 different states, assuring over 133, 000 jobs. Even more if you factor in the job creation in the 8 other partner countries. Many Congressmen and Senators who criticise the program have nevertheless never called for the JSF to be aborted. Even the very existence of Lockheed Martin, who solely provides for the military, is thought to be at stake.
Simply put, we have come too far, and the stakes and vested interests too high for it to be cancelled now. The JSF has become too big to fail.
