On the F135/F136 Debate

Well, we have Pratt & Whitney talking to the press about how very serious they are about containing costs, even though the latest estimate shows that its price will increase to $8.3M an engine, up from $6.7 million in the most recent DoD estimate. (H/T ELP Defens(c)e Blog)

People who cover defense for a living are noting that also there is no real indicator of a cost savings by killing the F-136, it just saves a few pennies now at the expense of a few dollars later.

In any case, the DoD is in full "cover your ass" mode with Secdef Gates telling Program Executive Officer, General David Heinz, to sit down and shut up, because he is being too forthcoming about potential benefits.

We also have dueling consultants on Aviation Week's Ares weblog, with retired general Michael Hough (GE-Rolls Royce), dsaying that there was never a competition between the engines, and retired general Mike Loh (P&W) claiming that the bidders in the program competed the engines and selected the F136.

As it turns out, General Loh is lying. The bidders for the JSF, Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, and McDonnell-Douglas, never competed the engines, they simply selected an engine for the prototypes, and since the F119, the basis of the F135 engine was already in production, they deemed it more mature for the prototype effort. (see also
here)

It should be noted that the competition is already saving money for the government, as P&W is now offering a fixed price for the first 100 of their engines, in response to the GE-Rolls Royce fixed price offer.

BTW, as to the idea that P&W has their sh%$ together in regard to cost and performance? Maybe not, because the government is sending a team of fixers to evaluate the progam, a good indication of cost and schedule problems.