Analysts say Navy ship plan faces uncertainties

Hampton Roads Virginia-Pilot ^ | December 6th, 2005 | Dale Eisman

[Paul Ross]

Ships are not the only next-generation assets being short-changed. Look at the administration's trashing of the F-22 production numbers:

QDR Will Hold Line on F/A-22, F-35: Analyst
By MICHAEL FABEY

The Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) debate about the Pentagon’s next-generation combat jets has come to an end, and like most roller-coasters, it left the programs just about where they started, analysts say.

When it is released early next year, the QDR is expected to recommend that the Air Force buy about 180 F/A-22 Raptors and 2,500 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters (JSFs) — about the same number the Pentagon had planned at the beginning of the year, said the Lexington Institute’s Loren Thompson and other industry analysts.

There could be small changes in production runs near the end of the decade, Thompson said.

Analysts said the QDR calls for keeping the three different JSF variants: a bigger Navy plane, a lighter Air Force aircraft and the short-takeoff and vertical-landing Marine Corps jet.

Throughout the year, the Pentagon had asked the Air Force to study various hypothetical mixes of F-35 variants and other tactical fighters, said U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Brick Izzi, in his service’s directorate of JSF requirements. Some of these studies made their way into news stories, erroneously, as recommendations or decisions, Izzi said.

One report had the Air Force ditching its F-35 variant to go with the Navy’s. Izzi refuted that, saying that the carrier variant, while a good choice for the Navy, was too heavy and complex and cost more than the Air Force version. It also lacks an internal gun, deemed essential to meeting Air Force stealth requirements, Izzi said.

Under the QDR, the Air Force would buy about 1.4 Raptors per month, which would keep Lockheed Martin’s production line running until JSF production begins, Thompson said. “This would allow them to keep the production line without violating their plan,” he said.

At October’s Air Force Association conference, Lockheed officials had asked for enough orders to produce two a month.

Congressional Research Service analyst Christopher Bolkcom said capping the Raptor buy could help stabilize that program if the decision is based on “prudent” business and budget reasons. But stretching production could be a different matter.

“Both congressional friends and foes of the Raptor are likely to be concerned if the QDR recommends slowing F/A-22 production,” Bolkcom said. “While creating a bridge to the JSF may appear a prudent hedging strategy, the impact on F/A-22 costs appears unfavorable.”

Richard Aboulafia, vice president of the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va., has said for months the QDR would do little to change the Raptor or JSF numbers. “It sounds like they’ve decided to leave the decision to someone else, later,” he said. “Smart move.”

The Air Force wanted the Raptor so badly, it volunteered to buy fewer than the planned 1,735 JSFs, Thompson said. That decision won’t have to be made for a few years; the first planes for the service fleet aren’t due until early in the next decade. But it appears that the Air Force’s hopes to buy 381 Raptors are dead.

Still, the JSF — at about $250 billion, the Pentagon’s biggest project — has been a bull’s-eye for QDR analysts and other budget-cutters. Even if the QDR put JSF back on track, there’s still a possibility of financial derailment. Development costs recently rose $8 billion to a total of $40 billion; Air Force officials worry that the price could balloon as the Raptor’s did. The critical design review (CDR) in February should show how real development estimates are now.

“The CDR is when the government says if we have a viable design that meets the criteria,” Lockheed spokesman John Smith said. “If there any tweaks needed, we operate with a management reserve.” He did not know how much the reserve is.

Still, with the Pentagon operating in the red, a big-buck item like JSF is a target.

“The Congressional Budget Office projects annual DoD shortfalls of $50 billion to $150 billion in the out years,” Bolkcom said. “If these projections hold, a program as large as the JSF is likely to be vulnerable to budget cuts for many years to come.”

Lockheed officials said they had heard of no Raptor decisions yet.

“We have not been notified of any changes in the program of record,” company spokesman Jeff Adams said. •

[TruthNtegrity]

And knowing what the Raptor is capable of doing and how much we need what it can do - that makes me just nuts.

What? Does Congress think we can keep flying EP-3's and get the "job" done?

If the Forces aren't going to ask - change that - DEMAND the equipment and armament they need, we are going to be SO caught short in 10-15 years by that unknown-as-now threat that is going to materialize.