Sponsored by Lincad
————————————————————————-
14 Dec 18. Budget watchdog warns this fighter could cost three times that of the F-35. A next-generation air superiority jet for the U.S. Air Force, known by the service as Penetrating Counter Air, could cost about $300 million in 2018 dollars per plane, the Congressional Budget Office states in a new study.
At that price, PCA would be more than three times that of the average F-35A jet, which is set at about $94m to capture both the expense of early production lots and the decline in cost as the production rate increases, according the report, which predicts the cost of replacing the Air Force’s aircraft inventory from now until 2050.
This sum, while not an official cost estimate from the Pentagon, represents the first time a government entity has weighed in on the potential price tag for PCA.
The CBO estimates the Air Force will need 414 PCA aircraft to replace existing F-15C/Ds and F-22s, the Air Force’s current fighters geared toward air-to-air combat. It also surmises that the first aircraft will enter service in 2030, based on the service’s stated desire to begin fielding PCA around that time frame.
The reason for the whopping price tag?
Part of it comes down to the cost of new technology.
“The PCA aircraft would probably have a greater range and payload, as well as improved stealth and sensor capabilities, than today’s F-22; those characteristics would help it operate in the presence of the high-end air defenses that DoD believes China, Russia, and other potential adversaries may have in the future,” the CBO states.
The other reason comes down to history.
The Air Force doesn’t have a great track record when it comes to producing stealth aircraft at the low costs initially envisioned by leadership. Both the B-2 and F-22 programs were truncated in part due to the high price per plane — which in turn contributed to the production rate never accelerating to the point where unit costs begin to decrease. The early years of the F-35 program were also marred by a series of cost overruns that eventually prompted the Pentagon to restructure it.
“Containing costs for the PCA aircraft may be similarly difficult,” the report states.
The Air Force has said little about PCA since the release of the Air Superiority 2030 flight plan in 2016, which stated a need for a new fighter jet that would be networked into a family of systems of other air, space, cyber and electronic warfare technologies.
“The replacement may not be a single platform,” Gen. Dave Goldfein, the Air Force’s chief of staff, told Defense News earlier this year. “It may be two or three different kinds of capabilities and systems. And so as we look at air superiority in the future, ensuring that we’re advancing to stay ahead of the adversary, we’re looking at all those options.”
Although Air Force leadership won’t say exactly what it’s doing to develop PCA or when a new jet may be coming online, it’s clearly making investments. In the fiscal 2019 budget, the service requested $504m for “next-generation air dominance,” its portfolio of future fighter technologies and weapons. The Air Force expects to ramp up funding to $1.4bn in FY20, hitting a high in FY22 with a projected $3.1bn in spending.
According to the CBO’s analysis, Air Force procurement of new aircraft could peak at about $26bn in 2033, as the service buys both the F-35 and PCA. Those two fighters, together with the B-21 bomber, are set to be the largest drivers of cost as procurement reaches its height in the mid-2030s.
“Although the Air Force could probably modify both retirement plans and replacement schedules to smooth out the 2033 peak, the average annual costs of procuring new aircraft would still be higher than in the recent past: $15bn in the 2020s, $23bn in the 2030s, and $15bn in the 2040s,” the report states.
Dealing with an upcoming bow wave
CBO’s estimates included 35 platforms that will be replacing legacy systems, with six programs making up more than 85 percent of the projected procurement costs cited throughout the report: the F-35, PCA, the KC-46A, the B-21, the C-130J cargo plane as well as the yet-unannounced C-17 replacement.
The report envisions a future where the Air Force is allowed to retire all of its legacy fighter and attack aircraft — the A-10, the F-15, the F-16 and even the F-22 — in favor of three aircraft: the F-35, PCA and a light attack aircraft configured to take on low-threat missions.
The Air Force has yet to decide whether to buy a light-attack aircraft or how extensive its purchase may be, although the service is expected to put out a request for proposals by the end of the month.
“Funding for new fighter aircraft makes up about half of the total projected costs of procuring new aircraft,” the CBO states, with the F-35 set to be the most expensive program through the 2020s until PCA takes its place in the early 2030s.
The Air Force could decrease costs in a couple of ways, although all of them come with significant drawbacks.
For one, it could extend the lives of its legacy fighter and attack aircraft, and delay programs like PCA. However, the CBO notes that “obtaining replacement parts can be both difficult and expensive, and a refurbished fleet may not provide as many available and mission-capable aircraft as a new fleet.”
If the service wants to increase the availability of its inventory without paying the high price associated with developing a new stealth fighter, it could retire its legacy F-15s and F-16s and buy new ones. That option is probably more expensive, but would result in aircraft that are more reliable.
The Air Force could also defer the PCA program while allowing some of its legacy aircraft to be retired, the CBO posits.
However, Air Force leadership contend that the service is already too small, with Secretary Heather Wilson arguing that the number of operational squadrons needs to increase from 312 to 386 — a goal that necessitates buying more aircraft. (Source: Defense News)
13 Dec 18. Navy Achieves New F-35 Fighter Jet Milestone on USS Carl Vinson. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter completed a critical milestone aboard the USS Carl Vinson Wednesday as the Navy works to reach initial operating capability (IOC) next year for the stealth jet.
The Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 147 “Argonauts” completed carrier qualifications Wednesday, a final requirement for the commander of Joint Strike Fighter Wing (CJSFW) to endorse that the squadron has met its safe-for-flight operations certification, the Navy said in a release.
“The safe-for-flight operations certification (SFFOC) is the final step for VFA-147’s transition from the F/A-18E Super Hornet to the F-35C Lightning II,” the release said.
“This process ensures a squadron is manned with qualified personnel to implement maintenance and safety programs in support of fleet operations. All transitioning squadrons are required to complete this certification prior to independently conducting flight operations,” it said.
Related content:
- Navy Plans to Deactivate F-35s at Eglin Air Force Base
- Air Force Proposes F-35 Fighters Be Stationed at Tyndall
- Combat Debut: Marine’s F-35B Strikes Taliban Target in Afghanistan
“As the Argonauts close out 2018 and the final stages of our safe-for-flight certification, we continue to exhibit the relentless drive required to meet transition goals and milestones,” said Cmdr. Patrick Corrigan, commanding officer of VFA-147. “With this certification, we are announcing that we have the right skills, training and people to take this mission and execute it, to its fullest potential.”
VFA-147’s SFFOC requires equipment, personnel and programs to be in check. “Not least among them is the requirement for the squadron to be in the physical custody of at least 30 percent of the assigned aircraft,” the release stated.
Other requirements include the complete installation of networks and equipment to run and gather information from the jet, such as the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS). Personnel must maintain the highest standards of weapons and safety inspections, as well as maintenance procedures, among other proficiencies.
“The Argonauts’ safe-for-flight operations certification was earned through the Herculean effort of squadron sailors and is an acknowledgment that they have developed the skills to safely maintain and operate the F-35C Lightning II,” said CJSFW Capt. Max McCoy.
“We eagerly look forward to declaring IOC and integrating the F-35C into the carrier strike group. This aircraft is a key component to maintaining the U.S. Navy’s dominance anywhere in the world,” he said.
VFA-147 is slated to become the Navy’s first operational F-35C squadron. The service hopes to declare the F-35C IOC ready in February, with VFA-147’s first deployment scheduled aboard the Vinson in 2021.
Naval Air Station Lemoore is home to Strike Fighter Squadron 147, as well as Strike Fighter Squadron 125, a replacement squadron.
The latest news of the F-35C comes as the service anticipates a deactivation of its F-35 squadron at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and plans to move operations to NAS Lemoore, centralizing its Joint Strike Fighter operations out west. (Source: Military.com)
11 Dec 18. Pentagon claims nearly $4.4bn in savings last year. Can it top it for FY19? The Pentagon’s hunt for efficiencies found $4.372bn in savings during fiscal 2018, and has already found nearly $2bn in savings for FY19, according to new figures revealed Tuesday.
Lisa Hershman, acting chief management officer for the Defense Department, told reporters that the FY18 savings were the result of 114 potential projects identified by the CMO’s office as areas where work could net fiscal savings. While those figures are still being vetted officially by the comptroller’s office, Hershman expressed confidence they would be confirmed.
The Pentagon has been charged by the Office of Management and Budget to find $46bn in savings between FY19 and FY23; the department had previously tacked on the more specific goals of finding $4bn in savings in FY18 and $6bn in FY19.
In many cases, the money came from small projects able to collectively provide big savings, Hershman said.
“We were purchasing things like batteries and light bulbs that we would buy and we would store. So we looked at: Do we really need to do that, is there something we can move to the open market and not have to worry about inventory levels because things are readily available?”
Ending the storage of those kind of items, along with a large collection of maps, freed up inventory space five times the size of the Pentagon’s central courtyard, which led directly to savings, she said.
Those savings are then handed over to the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation as well as the comptroller’s office, and then redistributed to the department as part of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis’ drive to increase funds for the Pentagon’s war-fighting mission.
That the department was able to hit its FY18 target meant Hershman’s team was “jumping up and high-fiving,” she said, before adding that she hopes “to exceed” the $6bn target for FY19, thanks to having hit $1.7bn in savings through just the first eight weeks of the fiscal year.
Those early FY19 savings come in part from initiatives started in FY18, such as a look at the defense business systems — IT operations, essentially — that exist within the department. Of the 300 or so systems that exist, Hershman said, a recent review found that 45 are redundant and could be eliminated for $900m in savings.
Her office is broadly focused on four key areas for FY19: information technology, health care, the supply chain and the “fourth estate,” a term covering the headquarters staff in the department. Helping on that front are the findings of the Pentagon’s first-ever audit, which has laid out some areas to target in the coming year.
The savings were initially the project of Jay Gibson, who came in as the Pentagon’s chief management officer in February 2018. But by September, Gibson had been told he was fired and shortly afterward was told to no longer report to the Pentagon; however, he was not relieved of duty until November, creating an awkward absence for staff in the CMO office.
Asked if she was set to be nominated to officially replace Gibson, Hershman declined to comment other than to say she serves at the pleasure of the president. (Source: Defense News Early Bird/Defense News)
10 Dec 18. Trump changes his mind again on military spending, now wants a big boost next year. President Donald Trump this week is expected to announce plans for a dramatic boost in military spending next fiscal year, reversing course on previous pledges of a trimmed down defense budget, according to multiple news sources. The move comes after intense lobbying from congressional Republicans and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, who argued Trump’s announced $700bn military spending plan for fiscal 2020 was not only contrary to the administration’s national security build-up but potentially dangerous for the nation. The figure represented a significant drop from the $733bn mark that Pentagon planners had been anticipating would be unveiled in February, as part of the president’s annual budget submission to Congress. Trump had said the reduced military spending would be paired with a 5 percent cut for all other federal spending programs, to rein in the national deficit.
But Politico reported on Sunday that following a Dec. 4 meeting with Mattis, Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., and House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, Trump committed to a fiscal 2020 defense budget of at least $750bn, a nearly 5 percent increase instead of a 2 percent cut.
The news is sure to excite defense hawks in Congress at least in the short-term. Mattis and others have argued that years of military underfunding have left readiness and modernization priorities unaddressed, and that foreign adversaries — in particular, China — have seen the declines as an opportunity to flex their own military spending might.
But numerous congressional Democrats have argued that the Pentagon budget is already too bloated compared to other domestic spending priorities. They’ll take over control of the House in January, and any final budget deal will need a sign off from Democratic leadership.
That’s key, because lawmakers need to not only negotiate a new budget figure but also reach a broader government spending deal by next fall to avoid triggering automatic spending caps put in place in 2011.
I am certain that, at some time in the future, President Xi and I, together with President Putin of Russia, will start talking about a meaningful halt to what has become a major and uncontrollable Arms Race. The U.S. spent 716 Bn Dollars this year. Crazy!
Under those rules, defense spending would drop to under $600bn for fiscal 2020, a figure that defense leaders have labeled catastrophic.
While Republican defense lawmakers have lobbied for more military spending, they have found themselves at odds with fiscal conservatives on Capitol Hill who viewed Trump’s $700bn figure as a reasonable pull back in federal spending.
And just days after Trump floated that figure, Office of Management and Budget head Mick Mulvaney — a past critic of out-of-control military budgets — quickly ordered Defense Department planners to start revising their budget submissions to match the lower-than-expected mark.
It’s unclear whether Pentagon planners are again revising their budget documents to match the new $750bn figure. That work is typically finished in late December or early January, in preparation for the February release of the president’s full federal budget request.
House and Senate appropriators will debate the budget numbers through the spring and summer, in hopes of reaching a final spending agreement by the start of next fiscal year on Oct. 1. This year was the first time in a decade that the military budget was finished before that deadline. Several other agencies, including the State Department and Department of Homeland Security, still have not had their full-year funding finalized and could be shut down next week if a deal is not reached. (Source: Defense News)
09 Dec 18. SIPRI: US dwarfs rest of world in armaments production. US firms are by far at the top of the global arms trade, according to an expert report. Germany’s largest defense company landed at 25th among the globe’s top 100; Russia, Turkey and China are also boosting production.
US companies hold more than half of the world market share for military equipment, according to a recent study by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, SIPRI. The US company Lockheed Martin remains the undisputed leader among the world’s 100 largest defense companies — no other company in the industry made a larger profit in 2017. With sales amounting to $44bn (€27.8bn), Lockheed Martin leads the SIPRI ranking by a wide margin.
Germany’s largest defense group, Düsseldorf-based Rheinmetall AG, doesn’t even account for a 10th of this sum. With sales of $3.4bn, Rheinmetall ranks 25th.
Big buyer: Washington
The success of front-runner Lockheed Martin is based primarily on the large equipment requirements of the US armed forces, for which the group manufactures various weapon systems. These include the F-35 Lightning combat aircraft and the C-130 Hercules transport aircraft.
Boeing is the world’s second-largest arms manufacturer. In July, President Donald Trump awarded Boeing the contract to build two new Air Force One aircraft for the president’s travels. Trump bargained the price down to $3.9bn and did away with the previous light blue and white design.
Race for the best weapons
The most reliable customer for the American armaments industry is the US Army, which is constantly in the market for new weapons and is able to afford extremely expensive systems such as aircraft carriers.
The arms race with countries such as Russia and China also fuels business: Lockheed Martin is currently developing an expensive “hypersonic missile” that can bypass conventional radar systems. Russia and China already have long-range missiles of this kind that fly at multiple speeds of sound. The arms race now also includes space, which Trump wants to dominate with a future “space force.” In the coming year, the US intends to invest the record sum of $716bn in armaments.
Apart from the US, only a few European companies can compete in the top positions, including the Airbus Group, in which Germany also has a stake. Airbus produces the breakdown-prone transport aircraft A400M for several European armies.
Great Britain remains the largest weapons manufacturer in western Europe, followed by France. The British mega-group BAE Systems, which has more than 83,000 employees, is the only European manufacturer to make it into the top 5 in the world. BAE Systems is involved in the construction of the European fighter aircraft Eurofighter Typhoon, which is also sold to countries such as Saudi Arabia.
In 2017, Russian defense companies, which are benefiting from Putin’s modernization program for the army, made strong gains. State-owned Almaz-Antey, Russia’s largest armaments company, has for the first time made it into SIPRI’s top 10. Turkey is also arming itself: President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s strategy of becoming less dependent on arms imports has boosted Turkish arms manufacturers’ profits by 24 percent.
According to the Stockholm researchers, three Chinese companies should also be among the top players. However, since they publish little reliable information on their arms sales, they have not been included in the list.
Four German companies
Four German companies are among the world’s 100 largest arms manufacturers: Rheinmetall, Thyssenkrupp and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, which manufacture submarines, ships, tanks and armored vehicles for the German armed forces. They also sell them abroad. All three companies increased their profits in 2017.
New on the list is Hensoldt, based near Munich, which manufactures radars and sensors for electronic warfare. All in all, however, arms sales have little significance for German foreign trade, as they account for less than 1 percent of total German exports. (Source: Defense News Early Bird/https://www.dw.com)
————————————————————————-
About Lincad
Lincad is a leading expert in the design and manufacture of batteries, chargers and associated products for a range of applications across a number of different sectors. With a heritage spanning more than three decades in the defence and security sectors, Lincad has particular expertise in the development of reliable, ruggedised products with high environmental, thermal and electromagnetic performance. With a dedicated team of engineers and production staff, all product is designed and manufactured in-house at Lincad’s facility in Ash Vale, Surrey. Lincad is ISO 9001 and TickITplus accredited and works closely with its customers to satisfy their power management requirements.
Lincad is also a member of the Joint Supply Chain Accreditation Register (JOSCAR), the accreditation system for the aerospace, defence and security sectors, and is certified with Cyber Essentials, the government-backed, industry supported scheme to help organisations protect themselves against common cyber attacks. The majority of Lincad’s products contain high energy density lithium-ion technology, but the most suitable technology for each customer requirement is employed, based on Lincad’s extensive knowledge of available electrochemistries. Lincad offers full life cycle product support services that include repairs and upgrades from point of introduction into service, through to disposal at the end of a product’s life. From product inception, through to delivery and in-service product support, Lincad offers the high quality service that customers expect from a recognised British supplier.
————————————————————————-