Pentagon still determined to cut GE’s $3 billion redundant fighter jet engine

The Daily Caller ^ | 1/821/2011 | Jon Ward

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

The Pentagon’s top spokesman on Friday said that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates remains determined to eliminate funding for a $3 billion project contracted to GE, as the White House faced questions on the matter the day that President Obama named the company’s CEO to an uncompensated advisory post on economic affairs.

Critics of the administration raised questions Friday about the timing of a continuation of funding for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Extra Engine, implying that GE CEO Jeff Immelt may have been named chair of the president’s new Council on Jobs and Competitiveness only after the White House agreed to extend funding for the project through March.

The administration dismissed this, saying that a December 21 letter from White House budget chief Jack Lew to Sen. Sherrod Brown, Ohio Democrat, was not an intervention that changed policy, but rather an explanation of existing policy.

[FlingWingFlyer]

I don’t think it’s the Pentagon’s decision anymore. GE (Government Electric) is part of the White House now.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

I think the F136 is dead because Democrats do not control HASC and the House of Representatives. The F136 was their baby.

[darkwing104]

Ain't happening...

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

I agree. Its a dead project.

[gleeaikin]

Aside from fixed costs, the military and national security are the biggest chunk of the budget. Therefore it is especially valuable to cut waste and unnecessary systems there. If the F136 is not a valuable addition or replacement for our military, then it should be cut.

Personal note: I own some GE stock. My son is in Special Forces and doing his 20.

[bigbob]

They can always slip a few billion in unmarked bills over to GE in the form of cash subsidies for GE Wind or some R&D into camel-dung turbines or something. It’s not like Immelt cares about killing a few more American jobs.

[ZOOKER]

In the original specs they put out for bids was the concept of commonality - the Navy and Air Force variants were to be nearly identical, generating cost savings in spare parts, tooling, training of the mechanics, as well as pilot training.

Even the Marine variant, with its STO/VL equipment, was to share around 60% of components with the other models.

Making the F-35 with two different engines kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

This was a Democratic baby. The members of the Democratic HASC was pushing this program.

[ZOOKER]

Guess there would be a lot of pressure brought to bear here - if GE can't get in on the F-35, it's out of the military engine business.

That's an exaggeration - I'm sure they still supply engines for other military planes but this will decrease as older aircraft are retired.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

I agree with you.

[blueplum]

GE can do without the Pentagon now - Immelt will make sure they share ALL their technology with China - in the name of creating ‘jobs’, of course. China has a stealth bomber to get flying after all, and there are all manner of nuclear plants to build for them - not that China’s in any sort of arms race against the USA or anything.

[PIF]

Out of curiosity, do you consider DHHS’s $875 billion budget a fixed cost?

[PIF]

I'm-melting only got the post as a payoff for his jet engine joint venture with China's Avix. The entirety of GE's jet engine tech is now on it's way to China, as part of China's demand for any company doing business in China.

So the F136 engine design, specs, tools, dies, test data, etc, is now in China and, shortly, in the J-20.

This deal is comparable to the Loral-Clinton-China deal for missile guidance.

[Yo-Yo]

Making the F-35 with two different engines kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

The F135 and F136 are to share common mounting points and electrical, hydraulic, and fuel connections, to be completely interchangeable.