F135 on the web:
Make your voice heard in the F-35 debate. Write to your Representative today to stop funding the JSF alternate engine for F-35.
President Obama Releases Budget Plan Citing Wasteful Spending on JSF Alternate Engine
-- President Barack Obama, May 7, 2009
Secretary Gates Feels Strongly - There is No Need for an Alternate Engine
What Others Are Saying About the JSF Alternate Engine:
|
|
F135 Joint Strike Fighter Latest News
Bottom Line On The Alternate Engine: A Waste Of Money
Loren Thompson
The Lexington Institute
March 8, 2010
However, the plan for low-cost, stealthy fighters is being undermined by constituencies that want to further their own agendas by attaching themselves to the program. One such constituency is the congressional faction backing an "alternate engine" that would be bought in addition to the primary engine already flying on the plane. Proponents of the alternate engine say that by developing two different engines, the government can have competition that will hold down costs while providing a hedge against a failure in the primary engine.
In reality, the alternate engine program is a subsidy for the aircraft-engine business of General Electric. GE lost a series of competitions in the early stages of the F-35 program to rival Pratt & Whitney, because Pratt was offering a more mature design based on the successful engine built for the F-22 fighter. Unwilling to accept that setback, GE organized congressional support for its alternative -- which is currently running about four years behind the development of the primary engine. The Bush and Obama administrations both concluded the alternate engine was a waste of money, but Congress added money to keep it going anyway.
Last month, the Pentagon told Congress that it will cost $2.9 billion beyond what has already been spent to get the GE engine to a point where it can compete with the primary engine. The Pentagon said that savings from competition over the lifetime of the program might cover the cost of developing a second engine, but there would be no net financial benefit. Backers have responded with a series of arguments about why a second engine is still desirable, but their reasoning is flawed and misleading. More…
Pratt & Whitney Conventional Take Off and Landing-Carrier Variant F135 Engine Receives Initial Service Release
Erin Dick
Pratt & Whitney Military Engines
March 5, 2010
Pratt & Whitney has achieved initial service release (ISR) for the conventional take off and landing/carrier variant (CTOL/CV) F135 engine, marking another major milestone as the engine is cleared for operational use in the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter. Pratt & Whitney is a United Technologies Corp. (NYSE:UTX) company.
“Achieving initial service release means the F135 CTOL/CV engine, with more than 13,000 test hours, has met all necessary requirements and proven the safety, reliability and performance of this product for operational use in the field,” said Warren Boley, Vice President of F135 Engine Programs. “I am so proud of the F135 CTOL/CV team and our partners at Hamilton Sundstrand, Lockheed Martin and the Joint Program Office for this great program accomplishment. We look forward to seeing the F135-powered Lightning II in operational flight.” More...
The F-35 Fighter Program Is Doing Fine. Really.
Loren Thompson
The Lexington Institute
March 4, 2010
But what gets lost in the news coverage is that these delays are not resulting from design or performance problems -- unlike the controversial alternate engine GE wants to build for the plane, which had to be redesigned after repeated test failures. Using its primary Pratt & Whitney engine, F-35 is proving to be more reliable than any other developmental fighter in modern times, as a letter in the Wall Street Journal Wednesday from program executive Tom Burbage noted. The simple truth is that F-35 is performing remarkably well in both ground and flight tests -- which is why the Marine Corps and Navy told Congress last week that they still expect their versions of the plane to become operational in 2012 and 2014. More…
“The secretary (Gates) has made it clear … that the pursuit of a second engine, in his estimation is a colossal waste of money …”
—Geoff Morrell, Pentagon Press Secretary, February 25, 2010
Cracks Appear in F136 Support
Colin Clark
DoD Buzz
February 24, 2010
At the first meeting of the HAC-D under the leadership of Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) several members expressed doubt about the need for a second engine, marking what two lawmakers said was the first time members have publicly questioned the F136 during a subcommittee meeting.
Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-Mich.) was the first to raise questions about the second engine program, asking Rear Adm. David Philman and Air Force Maj. Gen. David Scott if they thought a second engine was necessary. Philman expressed the Navy’s viand said, that a second engine just made life too complicated for a service with little space to spare. More…
F-35 Short Landing Video
Why the F135 Engine is the Right Answer for the F-35 JSF
THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF AND SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AGREE AN ALTERNATE ENGINE IS NOT NECESSARY. The President and military leadership have canceled funding for this project because there is no military requirement "In addition, we're going to save money by eliminating unnecessary defense programs that do nothing to keep us safe -but rather prevent us from spending money on what does keep us safe. One example is a $465 million program to build an alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter. The Defense Department is already pleased with the engine it has. The engine it has works. The Pentagon does not want -and does not plan to use -the alternative version.“
--President Barack Obama, May 7, 2009. More...
ALTERNATE ENGINE DOES NOT EQUAL U.S. JOBS. U.K. based Rolls Royce is developing and manufacturing 40 percent of the alternate engine, and a large portion of the Rolls Royce content is likely to result in overseas jobs. More...
EXPECTATIONS, FOCUSED ON COST REDUCTION. The F135 is performing exceptionally well in flight test and has retired 90+percent of program risk. It is a by-product of the F119 engine, powering the F-22and has logged more than 10,000 flying hours. This proven record offers a significant single engine safety advantage compared to the unproven alternate engine. With testing nearly complete and performance objectives being met or exceeded, the F135 engine program is focused on cost reduction. The F119 achieved a 30% cost reduction from development to production without an alternate engine. We are on a path to achieve similar cost savings on the F135. More...
TWO ENGINES WILL INCREASE COSTS NOT LOWER THEM. An alternate engine won’t lower costs because the government pays the costs to develop both engines. Taxpayers will also pay the costs for two sets of parts, two production and maintenance lines, and additional personnel and training. The current Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Gary Roughead, supports a single engine because as he says, “On a carrier, space matters.”. More...
Download the Right Answer for F-35
Click here to see Pratt & Whitney's advertising campaigns on the jsf alternate engine debate.
© 2009