F-35 engines, F-35 engines from United Technologies house. area unit proving therefore unreliable that U.S. plans to extend production of the fighter jet could also be slowed, consistent with law-makers auditors.
Data from flight tests evaluated by the govt. responsibility workplace show the responsibility of engines from the company’s Pratt & Whitney unit is “very poor (less than half what it ought to be) and has limited” progress for the F-35, the most costly U.S. weapons system, the watchdog agency aforementioned in an exceedingly report sent to lawmakers this month.
The Government Accounting Office cited the necessity to form style changes to the engines and so retrofit planes already designed, in conjunction with continued flaws within the plane’s computer code, in an exceedingly report that warned the Defense Department’s “procurement arrange might not be cheap.” The military plans to pay $391.1 billion for a fleet of two,443 planes from prime contractor Lockheed Martin house.
The Pentagon’s military officer issued a separate report Monday criticizing management of the engine program. It known sixty one “noncomformities” with United States Department of Defense necessities and policies and immersed the Pentagon workplace guilty of the F-35 to ascertain new quality goals and supply additional oversight.
As currently December, engines on the Marine Corps’ complicated version of the F-35, designed for brief takeoffs and vertical landings, flew regarding forty seven hours between failures caused by engine style problems rather than the ninety hours planned for this time, consistent with Government Accounting Office officers. Air Force and Navy model engines flew regarding twenty five hours between failures rather than the a hundred and twenty hours planned.
Company’s Response
Pratt & Whitney provided the info “underpinning the engine responsibility percentages in our report,” archangel Sullivan, a Government Accounting Office director for acquisition UN agency oversees its F-35 work, aforementioned in associate degree e-mail.
Matthew Bates, a spokesperson for Pratt & Whitney, aforementioned in associate degree e-mail that the Government Accounting Office “incorrectly assessed engine responsibility, because it didn't account for brand spanking new styles that are valid and area unit being incorporated.”
The USMC model’s responsibility “is at seventy one p.c of wherever it's expected to be” and “has created consistent improvement progress” since 2013, Bates said. He aforementioned the Air Force model’s engine “is at 147 p.c of wherever it's expected at this time.
”
Design Changes
The agency “has confused engine specification responsibility and craft specification responsibility, that area unit measured otherwise,” he said. “While the report lists some propulsion issues,” the Pentagon has “validated our responsibility performance.”
Sullivan of the Government Accounting Office aforementioned Pratt & Whitney’s figures “include style changes that area unit valid and area unit currently being incorporated into the engine, however haven't nevertheless been incontestible through flight testing.”
Bennett Croswell, Pratt & Whitney’s president for military engines, told reporters Monday in Washington that it'll take the corporate time to retrofit F-35s with planned responsibility enhancements and to accumulate actual flying hours “such that we’ll march up” the responsibility curve, he said.
Croswell aforementioned he was stunned that the Government Accounting Office referred to as the engine’s responsibility “very poor” once it’s meeting or olympian its goals by the company’s metrics.
‘Solutions Developed’
The Pentagon and Pratt & Whitney have funded initiatives since 2010 to boost engine responsibility, Joe DellaVedova, a spokesperson for the Defense Department’s F-35 program workplace, aforementioned in associate degree e-mail. “Solutions are developed and validated” and have already been incorporated, he said.
While the fixes can give the required responsibility for the Air Force and Navy versions, the Marine Corps’ F-35 “is projected to be slightly below specification necessities,” he said. The contractor and therefore the program workplace area unit “adding responsibility design comes,” he said.
Pratt & Whitney, the only real supplier of F-35 engines, conjointly has featured criticism from Pentagon officers for failing to scale back costs quickly enough and for lapses in quality.
The responsibility issue could also be reviewed by lawmakers as they weigh the Pentagon’s request for $1.2 billion to shop for engines next year, up from $873 million this year, with annual funding rising to $2 billion by 2020.
Congress up to now has approved a minimum of $17 billion of a planned $67 billion for F-35 engines, with purchases to extend to fifty seven engines next year, from thirty eight this year, and ninety two in 2020.
A House Armed Services Committee panel last week directed “an freelance check up on the engine program to form certain it's on the proper track,” its chairman, Republican Representative archangel Turner of Ohio, said. The language is within the draft of the business 2016 defense authorization bill that the total committee is scheduled to act on weekday.
Data from flight tests evaluated by the govt. responsibility workplace show the responsibility of engines from the company’s Pratt & Whitney unit is “very poor (less than half what it ought to be) and has limited” progress for the F-35, the most costly U.S. weapons system, the watchdog agency aforementioned in an exceedingly report sent to lawmakers this month.
The Government Accounting Office cited the necessity to form style changes to the engines and so retrofit planes already designed, in conjunction with continued flaws within the plane’s computer code, in an exceedingly report that warned the Defense Department’s “procurement arrange might not be cheap.” The military plans to pay $391.1 billion for a fleet of two,443 planes from prime contractor Lockheed Martin house.
The Pentagon’s military officer issued a separate report Monday criticizing management of the engine program. It known sixty one “noncomformities” with United States Department of Defense necessities and policies and immersed the Pentagon workplace guilty of the F-35 to ascertain new quality goals and supply additional oversight.
As currently December, engines on the Marine Corps’ complicated version of the F-35, designed for brief takeoffs and vertical landings, flew regarding forty seven hours between failures caused by engine style problems rather than the ninety hours planned for this time, consistent with Government Accounting Office officers. Air Force and Navy model engines flew regarding twenty five hours between failures rather than the a hundred and twenty hours planned.
Company’s Response
Pratt & Whitney provided the info “underpinning the engine responsibility percentages in our report,” archangel Sullivan, a Government Accounting Office director for acquisition UN agency oversees its F-35 work, aforementioned in associate degree e-mail.
Matthew Bates, a spokesperson for Pratt & Whitney, aforementioned in associate degree e-mail that the Government Accounting Office “incorrectly assessed engine responsibility, because it didn't account for brand spanking new styles that are valid and area unit being incorporated.”
The USMC model’s responsibility “is at seventy one p.c of wherever it's expected to be” and “has created consistent improvement progress” since 2013, Bates said. He aforementioned the Air Force model’s engine “is at 147 p.c of wherever it's expected at this time.
”
Design Changes
The agency “has confused engine specification responsibility and craft specification responsibility, that area unit measured otherwise,” he said. “While the report lists some propulsion issues,” the Pentagon has “validated our responsibility performance.”
Sullivan of the Government Accounting Office aforementioned Pratt & Whitney’s figures “include style changes that area unit valid and area unit currently being incorporated into the engine, however haven't nevertheless been incontestible through flight testing.”
Bennett Croswell, Pratt & Whitney’s president for military engines, told reporters Monday in Washington that it'll take the corporate time to retrofit F-35s with planned responsibility enhancements and to accumulate actual flying hours “such that we’ll march up” the responsibility curve, he said.
Croswell aforementioned he was stunned that the Government Accounting Office referred to as the engine’s responsibility “very poor” once it’s meeting or olympian its goals by the company’s metrics.
‘Solutions Developed’
The Pentagon and Pratt & Whitney have funded initiatives since 2010 to boost engine responsibility, Joe DellaVedova, a spokesperson for the Defense Department’s F-35 program workplace, aforementioned in associate degree e-mail. “Solutions are developed and validated” and have already been incorporated, he said.
While the fixes can give the required responsibility for the Air Force and Navy versions, the Marine Corps’ F-35 “is projected to be slightly below specification necessities,” he said. The contractor and therefore the program workplace area unit “adding responsibility design comes,” he said.
Pratt & Whitney, the only real supplier of F-35 engines, conjointly has featured criticism from Pentagon officers for failing to scale back costs quickly enough and for lapses in quality.
The responsibility issue could also be reviewed by lawmakers as they weigh the Pentagon’s request for $1.2 billion to shop for engines next year, up from $873 million this year, with annual funding rising to $2 billion by 2020.
Congress up to now has approved a minimum of $17 billion of a planned $67 billion for F-35 engines, with purchases to extend to fifty seven engines next year, from thirty eight this year, and ninety two in 2020.
A House Armed Services Committee panel last week directed “an freelance check up on the engine program to form certain it's on the proper track,” its chairman, Republican Representative archangel Turner of Ohio, said. The language is within the draft of the business 2016 defense authorization bill that the total committee is scheduled to act on weekday.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment