OSD, GE Keep Talking F136 Price

OSD, GE Keep Talking F136 Price

Talks between the Pentagon and the makers of the F136 about a fixed price deal have not broken off, signaling either high-level interest about the idea or a clever way to keep the competitive heat on Pratt & Whitney. Or a bit of both.

“I was at the Pentagon yesterday (Wednesday). They are continuing to review the fixed price approach. I still feel very positive about their reaction,” Jean Lydon-Rodgers, president of the GE Rolls-Royce fighter engine team, told me on the last day of the Air Force Association’s annual conference.

Lydon-Rodgers said she believes Pratt’s recent push to lower the F135’s price that their competitor is feeling the competitive heat. Pratt & Whitney sources have said they plan to Maj. Gen. David Heinz, JSF program executive officer, a “hard goal” of a 30 percent reduction in cost for the F135 engine by the time it reaches the midpoint of production, at engine 250. In addition, in the short term they want to cut reduce costs for LRIP 4 — some 36 engines — by 10 percent from LRIP 3.


One of the F136’s biggest supporters on the Hill, Rep. Neil Abercrombie, put out a letter on Monday — the beginning of the AFA conference — urging his colleagues to support the F136 because it forces Pratt to compete.

Here’s the essence of the letter:

“One of our colleagues recently wrote, asking us to support this $110 BILLION non-competitive deal and sign a letter to Chairman Ike Skelton. She didn’t mention her district’s economic interest in this sole source contract. She never talked to me, the subcommittee chair responsible for this program. I would have explained that the Armed Services Committee has no opposition to her constituent’s engine,” Abercrombie wrote. “But the committee does strongly believe that competition, particularly in this program, provides the best outcome for the Nation. If competition doesn’t apply to a $110 billion program, where does it apply?”

In this debate — this wonderful, brawling, gloves-off battle for the bucks — it is that argument about competition that the administration and Pratt are going to find so difficult to naysay. The engine wars may or may not be relevant. But there are almost no red-blooded Americans who would dare deny that competition is a good thing.

Defense Secretary Gates says there is no business case for the F136. The administration argues it’s a waste of money and some defense observers call it pork. But that emotional argument about competition will almost certainly sweep those intelligent and well-meant points into the old dustbin of history.

Just ask Sen. Daniel Inouye when he sits down to hammer out the final version of the defense spending bill in conference.

Join the Conversation

Perhaps there is really a case for the F136. P&W can make fine engines and the F135 promises to be one. Yet they can only produce them so fast, competition with GE, who seems to finally be getting somewhere with the F136, will ensure we don’t end up in a poor position.

The F135 may be based on the F119 but there are plenty of changes involved, meaning development will probably cost nearly as much as F136 development.

Is there a head-to-head comparison between the F135 and F136 engines of noise profiles available to the public? Lesser environmental impact might be a selling point for one engine over the other (e.g. to the Dutch).

You only have to look at the F-16 program to see the effect of engine competition. That aircraft was designed around the P&W F100, yet now 30 years later all the USAF combat coded F-16s are flying with GE F110 engines. Korea, who just bought the F-15 selected the GE F110 to power their aircraft, as did the Singapore. These were the first F-15’s ever to be bought with the GE engine. Letting the user chose given that two simlar products are available to chose from, should give you a pretty clear message as to which product is superior.

GE-RollsRoyce??? Do we really want to outsource our defense? Not a wise decision at all. It does not matter if it is outsourced to a “friendly” nation, the bottom line is that in an emergency we would not be self sufficient and would be dependent on foreign countries. Time to stop the madness and go with the company that is American, Pratt & Whitney.

Another thing to keep in mind is that we are spending tax dollars which the Citizens feel go toward the development of the US and don’t exit the country.

One more point, since when did GE forget how to build Jet Engines? They now need to partner with a foreign company? Lets not reward that type of lack of self sufficiency.

RR on the F136 is based out of Indiana. RR is building NEW manufacturing facilites in the USA (Virginia) to create American jobs. Note — MTU Germany is a partner with P&W to design and develop engine cores for the likes of F135, etc. GE is based in Ohio.

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement