Noon = Doom for GE’s F136; GE Strikes Back

Noon = Doom for GE’s F136; GE Strikes Back

UPDATED: HASC Chair Promises Fight as DoD Announces Stop Work Order;

General Electric and Rolls Royce suffered what could be the final blow in the second great engine war as the Pentagon announced it issued a stop work order for the Joint Strike Fighter’s second engine.

“The administration and the DoD strongly oppose the extra engine program, as reflected in the President’s fiscal 2012 budget proposal that was recently submitted to Congress, which does not include funding for the program.  In our view it is a waste of taxpayer money that can be used to fund higher Departmental priorities, and should be ended now,” the Pentagon press release notes.


“The House of Representatives has recently expressed its own opposition to the extra engine in its passage of H.R. 1 including the adoption of the Rooney Amendment which removed all fiscal 2011 funding for this program. In addition, funding for the extra engine was not authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2011, enacted in January.  In light of these recent events, Congressional prerogatives, and the administration’s view of the program, we have concluded that a stop work order is now the correct course. The stop work order will remain in place pending final resolution of the program’s future, for a period not to exceed 90 days, unless extended by agreement of the government and the contractor,” the release said.

This could well spell the effective end of the program, one that partners GE and Rolls Royce and their congressional allies have battled tirelessly to keep going.

Rep. Buck McKeon, chair of the House Armed Services Committee and longtime supporter of the F136, promised to use every legislative lever to keep the program going.

“Yesterday, my staff director at the House Armed Services Committee received a call from Under Secretary of Defense Ash Carter informing the committee of the Department’s decision to discontinue funding for the Joint Strike Fighter’s competitive engine program.

“The views of the President and Secretary Gates are well known on this topic, but those opinions—however strong—are not the law. The Joint Strike Fighter F136 engine program is funded under the current Continuing Resolution. The Secretary should follow current law and not pre-empt the Congressional deliberation process by yanking funding after a single amendment vote,” McKeon said in a press statement. “The Department’s decision is especially troubling when you consider their preferred engine has experienced development delays and a cost to complete increase of 445 percent over the last three years. “Going forward,” he promised, “we will explore all legislative options available to us to maintain engine competition in the largest acquisition program in U.S. history.”

GE struck back within minutes of receiving the stop work order, saying it would “self-fund” the engine for the next 90 days, clearly hoping to keep it going long enough to mobilize congressional supporters and save the program.

Here’s the gist of the statement from spokesman Rick Kennedy:

“While the F136 development contract contains a “stop work” clause, we are disappointed that DoD took this unilateral action before Congress has completed its work on the fiscal year 2011 budget. However, we are not deterred by this decision. We feel so strongly about this issue, as do our Congressional supporters, that we will, consistent with the stop work directive, self-fund the F136 program through this 90-day stop work period.

“We are fully committed to delivering a better engine for the F-35 program, and have no intention of abandoning the warfighter and taxpayers.
Everyone knows competition saves money. Our supporters in Congress are more determined than ever, and are encouraging us to press the merits of
our case.

“We will not walk away from a $3 billion taxpayer investment and your hard work to deliver what the Senate has called a “near model program.“
The F136 engine is meeting or exceeding performance expectations, is demonstrating significant advantages over the Pratt & Whitney engine, and is nearly complete.

“The F135 has racked up $3.4 billion in cost overruns with continued delays and technical issues. Just last week, House hearings confirmed
that the P&W engine has not met required testing for the JSF flight envelope after four years.

These issues won’t fix themselves. Only competition creates performance based rewards and delivers better and better capability … it’s just that simple. Mischaracterizing the F136 as “redundant” does not support our founding principles of competition and excellence which are at the core of the US military.”

In an earlier statement sure to raise some congressional hackles, Kennedy went on to say there is “significant remorse on the Hill over Rooney’s amendment vote earlier this year to line the pockets of Connecticut and Florida with more P&W jobs.” GOP Rep. Tom Rooney of Florida offered the amendment that attracted significant Tea Party support and marked what looks increasingly like a fundamental change in the power calculus on the House side since the vote went against the support of Speaker John Boehner, HASC Chairman Buck McKeon, and two lions of the appropriations committee, chairman of the defense subcommittee, Rep. Bill Young, and the HAC’s chairman, Rep. Hal Rogers.

This final push — if it comes and if it holds in the face of congressional opposition — by Defense Secretary Gates would mark a major win for the Obama administration and put yet another notch on the secretary’s budget blunderbuss.

Join the Conversation

Why would anyone believe that competition would decrease the price of these engines or their development programs? Come on, people, this is the United Socialist State of America!

With the introduction of the GE F110 engine, the average acquisition price of the F-16 fell 26%. When that percentage is applied to the today’s Joint Strike Fighter, those savings add up to $20 billion.

This would be worse than shutting down the F22 line. We spend 1B for a no-fly zone like its peanuts. But, we won’t fund 800K to save the US taxpayer 20B.….no wonder this country is TRILLIONS of dollars in debt.

There goes my job.

Mine too

one more here :(

this program.…

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011–03-24/pentagon

what a collective group of backside orifices. i’m so glad these exalted leaders are providing for our national security.

There is an indeference of opinion between a jet design engineer and an accountant on the outlook of the jet design.

GE Employees,

Please let us know if/when work actually starts and folks get laid off. You can reach me at ozjude@gmail.com. We won’t use any names. Good luck.

For accuracy, first I’d suspect that the stop work order is simply the formal notice at the end of the FY 2010 congressional add funding. But, given the initial push to spend some FY 2011 Continuing Resolution money on it — to which I objected — is the stop work related to FY 2011 funding? Need confirmation.

Second, if they are true believers, then GE should front the rest of the F-136 development costs on their won dime. That will keep them honest. From a financial perspective, they just subtract the estimated $2 billion development completion cost by amortizing it in the competitive savings numbers each year once production starts.

How about pw funds “just” their overruns on their own dime?

I wish DoD would show one tenth the concern about the $30B over-run on the F-35 SDD program, the projected $200B increase in total acquisition costs for the program, or the buying of hundreds of mistake jets before completion to SDD & OPEVAL.

Too bad on this one, GE is a great engine maker. I’m guessing that F135 prices will be going up soon.

The problem with that rational is that the relative cost of the engine to the airframe is different. Last I read the price per engine was ~$12-$15M a piece with the complete plane being $112M. That said this program can never drop the aircrafts’ cost by 26%.

Justifying this engine by cost savings is the wrong approach. For example, when the Government pushed for cost reductions from P&W, P&W’s parent company layed off significant parts of their staff to elimnate overhead to get a 16% cost reduction; and since their main concern was development it mostly came out of their gaging and QC departments. Now they suffer from inadequete man power which is leading to their delays.

Cost reductions are great on paper and they should be used to make a decision, but not to justify indecision. As it is, just to break even and justify the developement cost the F136 needs bring the price tag of the F135 down by $5M a piece or be that much cheaper. That seems unlikely.

GE is choosing to self fund the remainder of developement, if necessary, because they believe they have a good engine. I say IF they succeed, buy their engine and let the F135 sink. Just focus on performance and stop using cost savings as justification for something that is mathematically incapable of ever paying for its parallel existence, because at the end of the day which ever engine is purchased it isn’t enough to only justify one multi-billion dollar engine developement, because the F136 being the alternative has to justify both. That is their uphill fight.

If I were GE, I would move my corporate headquarters out of Connecticut and avionics out of Florida.

This is a sad example of the false economy that dominates U.S. politics. Save a penny now to look good whilst you are in office, and cost the country billions in lost competition in the long term.

The jobs to manufacturer the total number of engines still exist, just not in Ohio.…so move to the job. All these politicians know what’s better for our defense than the DOD? Give me a break, it’s pure politics and nothing more. No doubt GE is a great company and they make great products.…I love my GE dishwasher; but when you’ve got the Sec of Defense screaming that he doesn’t want or need an alternate engine, somebody’s got to listen. Thankfully it seems like some people are listening but I think we all know the GE lobby machine is going to keep up the pressure to fund something unnecessary for years to come.

Who wants to fund a second engine vendor for a jet program that will be lucky to see a few hundred mistake-jets made before it is canceled?
And as Weaponhead stated before, the silence on funding $50B for hundreds of F-35 LRIP mistake-jets is deafening.
In other news, the rest of the F-35s are allowed to test again. They say it was an MX fault and too much oiling and well everything is rosy. Yet, Flight Global pulled that article. Why?

ELP, would you please stop trolling F-35 new articles and posting the same “mistake-jet” comment.
I understand your position and the reasoning behind it but your strident presentation has become exasperating and unconstructive.

I’m surprised GE/RR haven’t gone to the international partners and asked them to firm up their engine orders. Given the industrial relationship GE/RR have with several of the partners I’m sure they can secure some support. Kudos to them for self funding the F136 in the interim.

“exasperating and unconstructive” is best reserved for the raft of media that–due to a complete lack of understanding of the topic–thinks that killing the alternate engine is a big DOD savings as opposed to the big Elephants in the room.
“exasperating and unconstructive” is watching the same F-35 cheerleading going on with poor or no accountability. Best save your complaints for the Gates fan club who think he adds any kind of value to this discussion.
“exasperating and unconstructive” also applies to nameless internet trolls.

Good idea really. If they have to wait too long or for political reasons can’t buy any jet engines from us, why not?

I take your first two points but I don’t think your presentation helps advance what I think are your very valid arguments and criticisms. Your phrasings only elicit knee jerk responses from the fanboys of which I am not one. I’m nameless (though I always post under the same screen name) because I thought the Ares blog/f-16.net/airliners.net/key forums folks preferred it that way.

The introduction of the F110 had little to do with the acquisition price of the F-16.

Defense spending is DOWN (even including the WOT) vs the historical average. And continuing funding of the F136 is NOT going to save any money.

However…current/future funds marked for the F136 should be marked for GE’s ADVENT (ADaptive Versatile ENgine Technology) program. Post-2020 F-35’s would benefit MUCH more from an ADVENT engine than ANY F-35’s with a F136.

Pathetic. The DOD has shown GREAT concern about the the F-35 SDD program cost over-run. The biggest problem however is the idiotic way in which the program cost over-run has been dealt with. Cutting &/or delaying production has & always will only make matters WORSE!

The is NO reason for F135 prices to go up. They are still on their way down. In fact with the increase in production due to no F136s should in fact cause the price of the F135 to go down even MORE & even FASTER.

oh ok.

They should change the law to where the people vote on what the government spends money on. Because apparently congress should take financial management classes like they make us Marines take every other day. Public offices such as congress, president or any other job to which somebody is elected to should not get paid. It should be public service and done for free, that ways we don’t get people that are just in it for the money and perks but do absolutely nothing for anybody but themselves. Their might be many grammatical errors in the previous sentences but I just don’t give a f***.

Kind of hard to apply ADVENT technology to an engine that wouldn’t exist post 2020.

If you only knew what you were talking about maybe then I would believe you. I have sat in meetings with JPO and know for a fact that the only reason that P&W has been as attentive to solving problems up to this point is because GE F136 was making them look bad. If there is no competition P&W will milk this bell cow for all they can get.

he can post anything he dang well please. this is an interent forum. if here is not the place to express exactly what one wants to, then where? JSF and F136 advocates have millions of dollars in marketing, politicians, and our senior leaders acting as industry and congressional district cheerleaders and we end up with excessively complex, over budget, defective, late weapon systems. this results in an ancient force structure we try to accomplish missions with obsolete platforms. DoD is out of control — no ability to control costs, execute programs correctly, operate within a budget and accomplish its missions. even with $550B+ budget it cannot decisively accomplish missions without black hole supplementals. It is losing trust and faith of the American public. JSF is a bloodsucker and let it and all the other bloodsuckers die. Come up with a new way. The sooner we kill the bloodsuckers, the sooner there is more resources with which to develop new programs based solid foundations that we have known about for decades but DoD stubbornly refuses to implent. Mostly: cultivate some integrity, which is nonexistent and will suffer even more if the “mistake jets” way of doing business is to go forward.

cutting & delaying the program isn’t necessary in order to prevent a cost overrun. it’s necessary because the developmental effort is a failure and additional resources are required in order to try to salvage the program, which is quite possibly unsalvageable. You need to properly develop something in order to produce it, I’m sure you are aware of this, yes??? Then you are in no position to be making predictions and promises about where prices will go. we’ve heard this crap before a million times and prices of failed programs do not come down. the programs fubar’d, anything can happen.

The issue of the P&W F-135 for the F-35 was a reward for the cancellation of the F-22A program.
There are issues with any jet engine development and in a sole source environment, there is
no incentive to come up with a solution either. The F-14A had decrepit P&W engines as a result
of the cancellation of the F-111B program. Deja Vu for the US Navy on this decision. The
F-14B with the GE engines was far superior to the F-14A. Given the track record of these two
companies, perhaps GE is right to continue funding on their wn dime and sell the superior
engines to a European manufacturer!

Hey, did you figure out how to operate “Super” Hornets off amphibious assault ships yet? I notice there are no CVNs for Libya but the Harriers on gators are in the fight. *snort* *guffaw*.

Hate to break it to you but if you think cancelling the F-35 and starting over will get a better jet on the ramp sooner and for less money you need to get your head out of the clouds. And if you think we can stick with 40 year old designs while everybody else rolls out 5th generation aircraft well, there’s no help for you.

dude no help involving threatening me about the case for the f-35 is needed. i’m doing fine thanks. i’m the one that’s going to be helping you out, actually. i’m not in the clouds, i’m the one in reality cause i deal with a world crap you have no idea about. we could cancel f-35, restart f-22, f-18, f-15, and f-16 sustainment and modernization efforts and maintain tacair dominance indefinitely. there simply is not a threat in this area that we cannot manage and for which we do not already have overmatch capability. meanwhile our air power and naitonal security enterprises as a whole, and for which f-35 would be useless without, is starved as the resources go into the f-35 gobbler. why do you think USAF will not get serious about starting the next bomber?

so screw u basicaly because there are strategic options that would result in a stronger nation that you are not open to cause your mind is screwed into thinking f-35 is the only COA for our nation’s security. i’ll be educating you for years and dealing with your defensiveness crap, i’m sure. in the end you’ll be better for it. the need for and theoretical solution provided by the f-35 is based on fundamentally bad science, and unproven, untested hypotheses that span the whole spectrum of rational thinking, which judging by your snarky post you are unwilling or unable to engage in.

have we screwed up 10 years of GWOT due to an insufficient VTOL from amphibious assault ships? the answer is no. so if f-35 is canceled and we as enterprise need to come up with alternatives to what f-35 is supposed to do fo rthe usmc so be it. there are much greater problems with national defense, smart aleck.

“Threatening”? Give me a break. As for the rest of your diatribe you’re not doing yourself any favors if you’re trying to convince anybody your head isn’t in the clouds. The more you talk the more you demonstrate you really don’t have a clue.

Yeah, because we’re only going to be fighting camels for the next 40 years. Like I said, get your head out of the clouds man.

LOL! That’s quite a mouth you have on you there. Put down the Red Bull keyboard warrior.

please let us know if you are ever serious about national defense.

it’s a pattern in human history that people who challenged the stupidity of the status quo experience the insults of the corrupt and/or unenlightened. i don’t expect nor need any favors. when you are able to engage in a logical, professional conversation free of childish insults i’ll be here.
by threatening i mean the pattern of political engineering designed to force the american taxpayer into going along with the most nauseatingly offensive policies imaginable, i.e., too big to fail, no alternative available policies.

i never said we’d be fighting camels. you’ve created a strawman argument and attributed it to me. this is a common sleazy argumentation tactic used by an unethical and poor debater. again, when you’re ready for the next level of intellectual thought, let’s go there.

This is like a kid who can’t take ‘no’ for an answer!

@ BreakTheCycle

Yes he’s well within his rights to post. It’s not his opinions that are starting to annoy it’s his presentation, frequency and the redundancy of his posts…everywhere. Google an arbitrary news article on the F-35 and he’ll be there spouting the same line about “mistake jets” and a limited production run. IMHO, if you are going to tilt at windmills at least vary your technique..it makes for better reading.

if it annoys people that need to be annoyed then good. DoD annoys us to the tunes of billions of dollars wasted in failed programs, the Internet community is just going to have to deal with someone that calls it like it is.

and pratt is like a kid who is scared to show up to the fight and sends in big brother (lobbyers)…

Not much of an argument when the F-35 won’t stand up to advanced threats and won’t be affordable.

frequency and redundancy, you mean like Lockheed Martin talking points?

Hows that F-35 cheer-leading campaign sferrin?

@ELP

I can only speak for the LockMart presentations I’ve actually seen: Farnborough 2010 and AIAC AGM 2010. They were both comparatively reasoned and restrained as would be expected with technical audiences. I’ve seen far worse from Dassault, Eurofighter, Sukhoi, Saab and Boeing.

I’m sure LockMart have been hyperbolic in describing the JSF particularly to lay audiences.
In other words, I mostly agree with you on the overhyping of the JSF to the public. What then do you hope to accomplish with your approach? Sway an indifferent public? your peers? Politicians?

Glad to see GE has such concern for the taxpayer.

http://​finance​.yahoo​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​H​e​r​e​-​H​o​w​-​G​e​n​e​r​a​l​-​E​l​e​c​t​r​i​c​-​G​E​-​w​s​c​h​e​a​t​s​-​2​9​2​6​8​6​2​1​8​3​.​h​t​m​l​?​x​=​0​&​a​m​p​;​amp;.v=1

Enough of the corporate welfare.

Oh look here folks, its another episode of sferrin goes wild! As long as you support the F-35 and trash everything else flying, your good people!

Please continue! I’ve really enjoyed watching your delusional rampage today. Its certainly entertaining to watch a grown man act like a fool while backing the biggest military aerospace Ponzi scheme in history (the F-35).

Once again the CIA THUG (Mr. Gates) gets his way!!

GE might be in a better position than we surmise. If the F-35 bird is like many others, it will be modified for improved avionics, weapon-carrying capabilities and range — - all of which will increase gross weight and demand extra thrust. When that happens, the P&W engine will be underpowered for the job, and a new engine will be needed.

Just look at the track records for large-scale productions of militar fighters.

I’m sure you will all survive. Take your knowledge and do something ethical, sustainable, and rewarding, like teaching kids math. if any of you are talented engineers there is no shortage of demand for your skills.

this is good because it perks up competition for more quality work at a better cost ratio and performance as well… good for you GE–get that demand through gentleman. The f35 is the most advanced aircraft jet fighter to date and all of those rand reports came later as inconclusive and opinionated without facts. America needs the f35 not only for us but for our allies. I say fund the f35 all the way but stop shooting 100 tomahawks that cost 1million per missile at all these broke 3rd world countries so we can affect OPEC

Considering that GE spent $28 million over the past two years for the second engine…what are you talking about??

I wasn’t aware GE had their headquarters in Connecticut, which is the heart of P&W I believe.

I don’t get how (currently) the general consensus is that the F-35 should be canceled, yet people are upset about this F136 decision.

Now I am generally pro-F-35. I believe it can become the strike-fighter we need and still be affordable in the process. Yet until it reaches that point I don’t see why the government should fund the F136.

Well said.

You may see GE do a lot of things if this engine gets termintaed. Moving the Corporate HQ out of Connecticut and most of its businesses out of Florida is a real possibility.

Steve, get you facts straight. It was 28M for ALL lobbiests.…NOT just the engine. GE has many busineses you know.

I think “Pandoras Box” was just opened on this F35 Program. The stop work is going to get reversed.…stay tuned.

Are you serious? Two years ago when the layoffs started I tried just that. I have a BS and MS in EE. I have a MA in Finance. I have over 20 years experience. However, I do not have an Education degree or a Teaching Certificate. Due to that there was not a single school district in TX, NM, AZ or CO that would consider hiring me (even as a substitute teacher). Knowing math or science is not required (or even desirable) to teach these subjects — Having a degree or certificate saying that you know the current fads in teaching is an absolute requirement.

me < not upset that F136 canceled. I’m happy. Will be happier if/when F-35 gets canceled, and DoD demonstrates it can properly manage a progrma. As far as your “belief” that F-35 can become the strike-fighter we need, ay yi yi. i take it you are not in the know as far as the data that independent observers at OSD and GAO are receiving about this failed program. and how on earth is affordability of this program salvageable??? do you know how to read DoD SARs??

sounds like you need to relocate. in the DC area you’ll make six figures.

I’m concerned with the technical progress of the plane, not the dozens of contradicting cost reports flying back and forth. I’ve leave that for accountants to argue about.

then your view is too limited. planes don’t provide national security & win wars, the combination of people, technology & organizations do. a plane is worthless without proper integration, spare parts, trained personnel, fuel, weapons, aerial refueling, air traffic control, etc. DoD has a consistent problem of viewing the warfighting end item as a technological panacea. Due to failed program management & systems engineering, costs & schedule soars, and performance shortfalls are realized. The technology becomes a crutch. DoD is so costly to operate that it cannot accomplish its missions in a decisive fashion. This is how we end up 10 years into GWOT with dubious objectives accomplished, a broken military, and a broken economy with which you cannot sustain a military anyway. So if you want to be taken seriously when it comes to talking defense acquisition, you are going to have to understand the holistic, system, enterprise wide perspective, including the accountants’.

The DoD SARs are not debatable footballs to be flown back and forth, they are the programmatic baseline synthesizing the collective position of DoD on its own acquisition programs. The DoD SARs are quite clear that F-35 is (another) abysmal failure. What amazes me is how utterly stupid America is when it comes to defense spending, repeating the same mistakes over and over again. And this is when it comes to technology development. If we can’t put together a successful program when it comes to building something where there is no adversary, how the heck are we supposed to believe we can actually accomplish missions against determined, adaptive adversaries???

Programmatic baseline synthesizing the collective position of the DoD on its own acquisition programs? Your fluent in Pentagonese I’d say. I’m going to stay away from the financial arguments and stick to the design itself, but there are plenty out there who disagree with the GAO and other assessments.

When it comes to the design itself I have one major concern, weight. Possible problems with the generator configuration and the composite bulkhead of the B variant can be traced back to weight reduction efforts. Yet the aircraft is heavy enough as it without giving up such lighter components.

Regardless of GAO assessment. The Pentagon’s own synthesized assessment is that F-35 is a failure. It is already projected to overrun $95B for 400 less fighters. We are $67B sunk into this nightmare through FY11. For the remaining $261B balance we could have a recapitalized fleet of F-22s, F-18s, F-15s, F-16s and start a do-over for a next gen strike fighter. For the F-35 overrun alone we could have the next gen Bomber, which DoD will not start until the F-35 is into production. This is NOT Pentagonese, this is fact, this is reality.

The whole thing is intertwined with Pentagonese insanity. Every major procurement program is. I fail to see how starting over with a new fighter program with similar objectives would end up cheaper than fixing the F-35. Unless the stars align and everything started running efficiently it would probably face many of the same challenges the F-35 does.

It doesn’t help that the software related challenges for the F-35 were vastly underestimated as usual. The DoD does not have a good record in regards to software development.

F-35s costs are unknown. F-22, F-18, F-15, F-16 costs are well known, and will get better with greater production runs. F-35 is a pooch screw. we get more and better defense for the remaining balance of the program. If we cancel F-35, we can relearn software development and systems engineering in general, and then apply proper methods to a restarted strike fighter program. this is how you would avoid the mistakes F-35 made.

Wrong. The F135 has plenty of thrust growth available. Unlike most previous military fighters, the F-35 was DESIGNED with growth (weight, thrust, et cetera) in mind & that INCLUDES higher thrust from later model F135s.

I have no pity for GE when they make 14.2 billion in profits and pay no taxes whatsoever. If I was Gates I would tell GE that there is a price of admission for the 2nd engine and GE, use what you would have paid in taxes for a profit of that amount and develop it on your own nickel

GE offset gains with the large losses sustained by GE Capital. That’s totally legal and it would be stupid for GE to pay taxes that it doesnt have to. Do any of you purposefully overpay your taxes by not using the deductions that are legal?

And did you know that GE doesn’t even pay income taxes?

What an unbelievable misinformation campaign by GE and its lobbyists. Where is the “competition” to GE on the F-18 with their F404, or on the BlackHawk & Apache helicopters with the T700? With these sole source contracts, GE has managed to procure more than 70% of U.S. military engine market share! Actual F136 accumulated engine test hours is approximately 200 hours vs. 20,000 hours for the flight qualified F135 Initial Service Release production engines on all three F-35 variants (A/F CTOL F-35A, Marine STOVL F-35B and Navy CV F-35C). And the common F119/F135 core has achieved almost 400,000 hours of test time. All flight test requirements have been met, and the so-called F135 engine “cost overruns” were a result of having to increase thrust output to overcome the initially weight-challenged F-35.

The cost estimate of less than $3B remaining to complete the F136 is also a joke… Vertical landing has everything to do with level 1 flying qualities — all a result of the proven advanced control system of the F135 (not the F-35) — which has completed approximately 50 vertical landings to date and IS NOT common with the F136. I’m sorry, but this debate is over. Goodbye and good riddance of the pork barrel F136 program… why not spend the time and money and ADVENT technologies for future Long Range Strike Bombers?

http://​moneywatch​.bnet​.com/​e​c​o​n​o​m​i​c​-​n​e​w​s​/​n​e​w​s​/​2nd
And these people want to build the F136.

GE is a bully. Pay no taxes, have nuke failures in Japan. F404 and F414 were never competed.

If you can’t do a in-flight engine replacement, whats the point of having a second engine? Makes no sense atall, non what so ever.

F-22 is Dead, JSF is worthless.… Hummmm I wonder way we stop production of F-22??? Stealth is Dead!!!Lockheed & GE want additional Goverment Free funding for Wall Street!!!! GO GE!!! More Government funding to raise their Stock price. Greed Strikes again.… GE is saying the H#*L with the Country, Capability and the Warfighters… GO Stocks!!! GO Wall Street!!! GO Bonuses!!!! Lockheed & GE They both “Bring Good Things to Life”!!!

Chopping Block, shopping list: JSF, F-22, Next Gen Bomber. These three platforms alone would pay off the National Debit in Savings. This is not hard.

Kill JSF NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This program is a plague.

I see a contraction coming on the lines of post Vietnam era. That produced Desert One.…it wasnt until Reagans 2nd-3rd year in office that things noticeably changed, across the board, with that military build up used in Desert Storm. Yes there is a point for cuts, but please Obama, dont pull a Carter or a Clinton.…Clinton in ’96 advertised 26 percent cut that in reality was closer to 45 percent and opened the door for the dots not to connect on 9/11.

Dfens,
It worked for the F-16 program, Both P&W & GE had vested interests in keeping costs down, so they didn’t want to lose their piece of pie.

*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

AdChoices | Like us on , follow us on and join us on Google+
© 2014 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.