Defence Business: Making sense of the JSF order book | ADM Oct 2010
Australia and other international partners in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program have been warned that their industrial participation could be affected if firm commitments to buy the aircraft are delayed or amended.
Julian Kerr & Katherine Ziesing | Fort Worth
Speaking to Australian media in Forth Worth in August, Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin’s general manager and executive vice president for the F-35 program, said the eight international partner nations - Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Turkey and the UK - were “still soft on production schedules”.
To date, only five aircraft of the anticipated 800-plus international sales have been contracted by partner countries - three operational test aircraft for the UK and two for the Netherlands. Other nations are seeking changes in their delivery schedules.
“There’s a sort of a gentleman’s agreement in this game that ties industrial participation to buying airplanes,” Burbage said.
“Industrial participation is underway today in advance of anyone making a formal decision to buy an airplane.
“If, at some point in time, somebody says we are not going to buy any airplanes, that puts us in a pretty difficult situation, so there is a trust factor, sort of a partnership factor, that goes along with being part of the program,” he said.
“Even though people move on the margins for economic or financial crisis reasons or whatever, there is still the assumption of a long-term intent to pursue the airframe in the quantities that had been advertised.”
Burbage said Lockheed Martin was placing orders with its industrial contractors based on the agreed procurement stream.
“To all of a sudden have a partner that at the last minute decides ‘I am not going to buy this year; I am going to buy next year’ is a problem.”
Burbage said this was a possibility with several undisclosed countries and Lockheed Martin was in discussion with Australia about the same issue.
Australia said it had cashflow issues “and the profile they had planned is not the one they can afford from the cashflow perspective, and so (they’re asking) is there anything we can do or the US government can do to help their cash flow problems and keep their profile on track?”.
Australia intends to eventually purchase up to 100 JSFs and the government has approved, although not contracted for, an initial purchase of 14 aircraft.
These were to have been manufactured in low-rate initial production (LRIP) lot six (two aircraft), LRIP lot seven (four aircraft) and LRIP lot eight (eight aircraft).
However, Burbage said Australia now wants to move the four aircraft in LRIP lot seven back to LRIP lot eight and the eight aircraft now in LRIP lot eight to LRIP lot nine.
But when New Air Combat Capability director Air Vice Marshal John Harvey (now head of Capability Development Group) spoke to ADM last month he confirmed that the timeline outlined by Burbage is not set in stone, but is more planning guidance at this stage.
“The current plan as announcement by the government is to buy two places in LRIP 6, which is delivery in 2014,” AVM Harvey told ADM.
“The only other anchor in the program at the moment is that we will achieve initial operating capability (IOC) in 2018.
“The profile that he (Burbage) talks about is one nominal approach.
“We’re working closely with Lockheed Martin to work out what the best way to achieve that IOC is.”
Burbage said the actual procurement and delivery profile would not be determined until the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) placed its partner procurement request in mid-2011.
The anchor points as far as the program office is concerned are two aircraft in 2014 to start training, the first four aircraft in country in 2017 to begin operational testing and IOC in 2018, with details on training still very much being negotiated.
But it looks like maintainers will go to the integrated training centre at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida but pilots will go out to Luke Air Force Base in Arizona due to aircraft number restrictions at Eglin.
The average cost per aircraft over a six- to 10-year period was unlikely to change very much so long as the quantities remained the same, said Burbage, but the cost of the earliest aircraft would go up if the number of aircraft being bought in that year went down.
Plans for a consortium buy that were the talk of the JSF community last year have tapered off significantly but Burbage confirmed that the concept is not completely dead and buried yet.
Industrial participation
“Everyone wants their IP (industrial participation) plans to stay on track but nobody wants to keep their purchases on track,” Burbage added.
Lockheed Martin was closely monitoring the investments it was making in production capacity.
“We do not want to open capacity and have it sitting around with the lights on and nothing happening,” he said.
It was important, therefore, for governments to understand the need to adhere to planned schedules.
Also of interest to partner nations were reports that Israel was being given preferential treatment when it came to production contracts in the wake of their decision to purchase an initial 20 JSF aircraft.
“Israel’s industrial participation in the F-35 program is best-value based, with no offset arrangements, and will have no effect on the F-35 partner nations’ industrial plans,” a Lockheed Martin spokesman said.
“Israeli companies will compete based on cost, schedule and quality for F-35 work.
“Israel’s industrial participation agreement with Lockheed Martin is based on the Congressionally approved buy of up to 75 aircraft, not only the initial acquisition.”
Support in country
“From an Australian point of view, we will have sufficient in country support to meet our sovereign requirements to operate the aircraft as required,” AVM Harvey told ADM.
“We’re working towards arrangements were the aircraft would not have to leave Australia for ongoing maintenance.
“This work will be integrated as part of the global solution.
“But this is where it gets complicated.
“Some of the work that we will do here in Australia will be done with Australian companies that will work in a global sense and will do work globally, like Marand on the engine removal trailers.
“At the regional level, geography becomes a major issue.
“So if the Japanese, Singaporeans or Koreans buy a large number of aircraft, you have to think of the geography.
“Does it make sense for it to come here?
“And they will each want their own self-reliant capability for sustainment.
“Even things like a regional warehouse; what’s the most economical place for that?
Harvey also highlighted that timing would be a factor in any regional support plans.
As Australia is the first nation in the region to purchase the JSF, infrastructure and support for the aircraft would already be in place in Australia, making it easier for other regional players to leverage off existing capabilities to further reduce their costs.
“There’s no doubt that there will be a mixture of both global and local support measures,” AVM Harvey said.
“Some things we’ll do in country and some we’ll send back to the original equipment manufacturers (OEMs).
“It’s still in flux.”
The Australian project office is very much aware of walking the line between cost effectiveness of a truly global solution and maintaining sovereign capabilities, and where and how they are drawing the line.
The Australian program office has identified capabilities that will be done in country and those that can be done overseas but there are still aspects that will be decided as costings become firmer down the line.
“Take engines for example,” AVM Harvey explains.
“Because of the expected levels of reliability we’re still deciding the best arrangements.
“Do we have spare engines in country?
“Do we send them off overseas?
“Or because the engine comes in five modules, do you have spare modules in country?
“Or maybe you have repair facilities in country for the modules that you know need more support?
“But it’s not a Lockheed Martin engine, it’s either GE or Pratt & Whitney.
“So we have to look at what they each have in country supporting their other engines.”
Most of the hardware support for the JSF will be done in country but when it comes to some of the more complex systems, the issue becomes more complicated.
Line replaceable units, like avionics cards, can easily be replaced in country.
But for repairs to something like a radar system or a similarly large system, chances are the aircraft would head back to the OEM.
There are also plans for a surface treatment facility in country to deal with the low observable characteristics of the JSF but Harvey says this will be quite a few years down the track once Australia has been operating the JSF for some time as “there’s no use setting it up until you actually need it”.
Harvey also points to the fact that the JSF is designed from the ground up to be reliable, requiring less repair and maintenance.
Solid-state sensors and internal health diagnostics mean that repairs on the JSF will not be comparable to legacy aircraft.
Disclaimer: The authors travelled to Fort Worth as guests of Lockheed Martin.