I work in the aerospace defense industry so I’m not naive to how government bumbling and shifting requirements can drive up costs. But the contractor is often just as at fault through poor program management and shoddy engineering. Yet there is little financial penalty since most of these programs are cost-plus - the contractor continues bumbling along while the government pays for it.
Lockheed has maneuvered itself into a good position. Program costs have exploded (+100%) and the schedule has slipped another 6 years (+60%). But they’ll get rather rewarded for their efforts because this program is “critical” to national security and must be funded. Despite a terrible track record with the F-22 and F-35, they will win future programs as well since the USAF in its myopia awarded all of the 5th-Generation fighter jets to Lockheed, effectively squeezing out Northrop and Boeing and leaving Lockheed with a monopoly on jet fighters.
You want to fix the national budget? Get defense contractors under control.
Now in my 39th year in aerospace, I will tell you it is NOT “control” of contractors that’s the problem.
Politicians designing systems by voting district (2nd engine supplier for F-35).
Establishing a contract price based upon an order quantity and then cutting the quantity in half. (Drives up unit price)
DoD treating the acquisition field like career purgatory. (They leave about the time they learn the ropes)
“Poor Program Mgmt”, driven by late funding, changing requirements, followed by customer pressure to meet the original schedule by cutting testing.
Customers end running the Prime contractor by going direct to the subcontractor.
It’s amazing to hear the former military come to work for industry and exclaim, “Oh, I didn’t realize what we did to you guys.”
You nailed it.