Pentagon F-35 program chief lashes Lockheed, Pratt

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 9848
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀

Unread post06 Mar 2013, 07:35

Pentagon F-35 chief sees progress, but affordability still focus 05 Mar 2013 Reuters By David Alexander and Andrea Shalal-Esa

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pentagon-f-35- ... nance.html

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A week after his drubbing of the leading contractors on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter raised eyebrows at the Pentagon, the U.S. program chief sought to maintain pressure on industry, while citing progress on software development and production costs.

U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Christopher Bogdan told a defence conference that he'd reached his quota for "juicy, controversial, headline-making quotes" for the month after lashing the plane's manufacturer Lockheed Martin Corp and engine maker Pratt & Whitney during an air show in Australia.

Bogdan told a conference hosted by Aviation Week on Tuesday that his comments were taken "a little out of context" and he had never said the $396 billion fighter program - the Pentagon's largest weapons program - was in trouble.

"I will over communicate all the troubles we have on this program as long as you don't overreact," he said....."

More or less the same as previous post above otherwise.
RAN FAA A4G: http://tinyurl.com/ctfwb3t http://tinyurl.com/ccmlenr http://www.youtube.com/user/bengello/videos
Offline
User avatar

linkomart

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: 31 May 2010, 07:30
  • Location: Sweden

Unread post06 Mar 2013, 07:39

popcorn wrote:http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ty-383080/

"..."I need everybody in this enterprise to worry about affordability. I need everybody," says Bogdan. "And that was a shot across the bow, because I have been slightly frustrated with real results, real actions that need to happen to reduce costs on this airplane."


I wonder what he's like when he's really pissed off? :D


http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ty-383080/

This link works better.

Best Regards
Offline

maus92

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1493
  • Joined: 21 May 2010, 17:50
  • Location: Annapolis, MD

Unread post07 Mar 2013, 00:49

That was a fantastic non-retraction by Gen. Bogdan.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 9848
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀

Unread post07 Mar 2013, 04:04

Pratt & Whitney says drive to lower F-35 costs "burned in our brain" 06 Mar 2013 By Andrea Shalal-Esa

http://www.4-traders.com/BAE-SYSTEMS-PL ... -16508691/

"The head of Pratt & Whitney's military engine business said on Wednesday that driving down the cost of the F-35 fighter jet was "burned in our brain," but cuts sparked by U.S. budget woes could slow the effort....

...Croswell said Pratt, the United Technologies Corp unit that makes the F135 engine that powers the F-35, began a "war on cost" in 2009 that was already yielding results. He noted that Pratt had invested heavily to cut the cost of the engine by 40 percent since the first one was delivered.

"Since we launched that 'war on cost' in 2009, that message was burned in our brain from the very beginning," Croswell told reporters. "I concur with the general; he's right. We've got to continue to drive the cost down of this system."...

...Croswell said he expected negotiations about the sixth F-35 engine contract to proceed more quickly than the last time since Pratt had already signed a $65 million agreement with the Pentagon on maintenance of those planes.

The company also agreed to shoulder 100 percent of any cost overruns on the fifth batch of engines, which meant there was less new ground to cover in the next contract, he said.

Pratt reached agreement with the Pentagon last month on the fifth batch of jet engines to power 29 jets and three spares, a deal that lowered the cost of the engines by 5.5 percent.

Croswell said the company expected to lower costs further in the sixth batch, although he declined to say by how much. If the number to be purchased declined, he cautioned, the savings could well be less than currently proposed. "Potentially it could reduce the reduction," he said."

Stuff said by the intractable Bogdan also at the URL along with other stuff.
RAN FAA A4G: http://tinyurl.com/ctfwb3t http://tinyurl.com/ccmlenr http://www.youtube.com/user/bengello/videos
Offline

gtx

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post08 Mar 2013, 23:48

maus92 wrote:That was a fantastic non-retraction by Gen. Bogdan.


To me he was trying to clarify the taking out of context reporting that the journalists did.
Offline

aceshigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 256
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2011, 19:26
  • Location: Norway

Unread post09 Mar 2013, 04:39

gtx wrote:
maus92 wrote:That was a fantastic non-retraction by Gen. Bogdan.


To me he was trying to clarify the taking out of context reporting that the journalists did.


What out of context reporting are you referring to mr.gtx ? Have you seen Gen. Bogdan retracting any statements that was reported? He messed up that's all.
Offline

cola

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 488
  • Joined: 18 May 2009, 00:52

Unread post09 Mar 2013, 05:25

I don't think many of you get what's going on with the JSF program, so here's a help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf-Amvro2SY

(try to figure which one Lt.Gen.Bogdan is)
Cheers, Cola
Offline

gtx

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post09 Mar 2013, 06:49

aceshigh wrote:
gtx wrote:
maus92 wrote:That was a fantastic non-retraction by Gen. Bogdan.


To me he was trying to clarify the taking out of context reporting that the journalists did.


What out of context reporting are you referring to mr.gtx ? Have you seen Gen. Bogdan retracting any statements that was reported? He messed up that's all.


Bullshit!!!
Last edited by gtx on 09 Mar 2013, 22:07, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

gtx

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post09 Mar 2013, 06:50

cola wrote:I don't think many of you get what's going on with the JSF program, so here's a help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf-Amvro2SY

(try to figure which one Lt.Gen.Bogdan is)


What is that supposed to be saying?
Offline

XanderCrews

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1298
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post09 Mar 2013, 07:06

cola wrote:I don't think many of you get what's going on with the JSF program, so here's a help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf-Amvro2SY

(try to figure which one Lt.Gen.Bogdan is)


The blonde?
Offline

aceshigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 256
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2011, 19:26
  • Location: Norway

Unread post09 Mar 2013, 11:40

The quality of the debate is soaring :applause: :applause:
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 9848
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀

Unread post10 Mar 2013, 02:05

A very long article so only excerpts below (that interested me particularly although the HMDS & NavAv aspects always interest me)....

F-35’s ability to evade budget cuts illustrates challenge of paring defense spending Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Sunday, March 10, 2013

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... print.html

"...Bogdan, who served as Venlet’s deputy until December, when he took charge of the development effort, was astounded by what he found when he delved into the program.

“It was an unimaginable mess,” he said.

Taking countermeasures
An imposing former test pilot who wears an olive flight suit to his office in Crystal City, Bogdan spent his first two years on the job analyzing virtually every aspect of how the plane is designed and built. He and Venlet adjusted schedules and assumptions, and they implemented changes that brought the Marine version off probation. New goals call for aggressive testing and modifications over the next five years, and the start of full-rate production by 2018.

Bogdan thinks the program cannot afford another do-over. “There is no more money and there is no more time,” he said.

To stay on track, he has adopted a get-tough approach with Lockheed and Pratt & Whitney, the contractor building the plane’s engine. Instead of allowing Lockheed to manage the development of millions of lines of software code for the plane — one of the most vexing technical challenges — his office, which has now grown to 2,000 people, is taking charge. “We have forced discipline on them,” he said of Lockheed.

Until recently, he said, Lockheed’s software developers worked at computers that were not connected to each other. “I couldn’t believe it,” he said. Changes imposed by his office have reduced software revision cycles from 27 days to three....

...For Bogdan, an even bigger challenge involves the cost of flying and maintaining the F-35. The Pentagon estimates it could reach as much as $1.1 trillion over the life of the plane. Although unknown variables such as the cost of fuel could drive that figure down, Bogdan said the jet has serious sustainability problems. Chief among them are a greater need for maintenance and replacement parts than projected. “If we don’t do things now to change the game, this airplane will be unaffordable to fly,” he said.

He is pushing suppliers to make parts more reliable, and he has put Lockheed and Pratt & Whitney on notice that they should not assume they will be selected to fill the operations and maintenance contracts, which could be worth as much as $500 billion. He wants other firms to compete for parts of the work, reasoning that it will bring down costs.

To reinforce his seriousness, he has told Lockheed and Pratt not to wait him out. Unlike other senior officers, who change assignments ever few years, he intends to stay for 10 years. “The only way I’m leaving this program,” he said in the interview, “is if I’m fired.”


A dogfight no one wants
But Bogdan’s leverage is limited. Behind his feisty language lies an inescapable reality: The services don’t want to shrink their orders, and Congress doesn’t want to clip the F-35’s wings.

For many legislators, the F-35 is as much about employment as it is about air superiority. Lockheed has repeatedly emphasized to legislators, particularly those who sit on appropriations committees, that the plane supports 133,000 jobs, many of them at 1,300 subcontractors and parts suppliers spread across 45 states. When full-rate production begins, likely in 2018, the company says the employment figure will grow to 260,000....

...Bogdan is pressing Lockheed so aggressively to reduce costs. He knows the F-35 — despite the jobs it fuels, regardless of the needs of the Marines and Air Force — is a giant, unstealthy presence in the federal budget.

His best defense against cuts, he figures, involves showing that the long-troubled program can finally meet its targets — and that more reductions will just mean more-expensive aircraft.

“We have to understand there are trade-offs every time we cut spending on the F-35,” he said. “And none of them are very good.”"

BEST read this long article at URL.
RAN FAA A4G: http://tinyurl.com/ctfwb3t http://tinyurl.com/ccmlenr http://www.youtube.com/user/bengello/videos
Offline

aceshigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 256
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2011, 19:26
  • Location: Norway

Unread post10 Mar 2013, 02:23

I still think it was a mistake to air all this dirty laundry in public. But, what he reveals about the problems in the program makes his actions more understandable even if it is disturbing reading.
Offline

gtx

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post10 Mar 2013, 02:42

Speaking as one of those who were present when he said these things at Avalon, I can assure you that they had the desired impact with many there. People could see that there was a new sherrif in town who wasn't afraid to say tough things. Industry especially were very receptive to his approach.
Offline

XanderCrews

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1298
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post10 Mar 2013, 18:58

gtx wrote:Speaking as one of those who were present when he said these things at Avalon, I can assure you that they had the desired impact with many there. People could see that there was a new sherrif in town who wasn't afraid to say tough things. Industry especially were very receptive to his approach.


Thats the problem with the stories on Bogdan. First person accounts are seeing it as "tough love" and the media, yes you Bill, is trying to spin it as abuse and drive a wedge.
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests