The McGraw-Hill Companies
Aviation Week
MEMBER CENTER
LOG IN | REGISTER | SUBSCRIBE
Blogs Forums Photos Videos My Aviationweek

Blog Search

Search all Aviation Week.com blog content

Bookmark and Share
Blog Image
A Defense Technology Blog
F-35: The Debate Down Under
With the Australian government due to decide soon on the procurement of 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, the defense minister for material faces some tough questions on the topic in a national radio program.

The conversation doesn't break new ground, but it is interesting anyhow (you can listen here).
The Australian defense ministry has kindly released the following transcript of the interview between Greg Combet and Peter Mares on the National Interest radio show (which aired Oct. 30):

PETER MARES:  
The cost of building the state-of-the-art Joint Strike Fighter just keeps going up, with the US Defence Force facing a bill that will be $17 billion higher than originally expected before manufacturer Lockheed Martin can get the plane into mass production.

The Joint Strike Fighter program has been an ongoing concern of the Government Accountability Office in the United States . In March that office reported that the aircraft's development was about two years behind schedule and that fully integrated mission capable plane was not expected to enter flight testing until 2012.

In one example of the JSF's problems, only 30 of the 300 test flights scheduled for the last financial year actually took place.

This leaves little room for error for Australia which is planning to buy 100 of the Joint Strike Fighters to replace the RAAF's ageing fleet of F1-11s.

The man who inherited the Coalition Government's decision to buy the JSF - or Joint Strike Fighter - is the Minister for Defence Materiel, Greg Combet.

He recently toured the Lockheed Martin facility in Fort Worth, Texas, where the Fighter is being developed, and he joins us on the line from Newcastle.

Minister, welcome to National Interest.

GREG COMBET: 
Thank you very much.

PETER MARES:  
Now, it's been reported that the National Security Committee of Cabinet will sign off on the JSF acquisition in late November. Is that true?

GREG COMBET
Well, National Security Committee of Cabinet meetings are not something that are discussed publicly, but it's certainly the case that we'll be considering the next stage of decision-making for the JSF in the near future.

PETER MARES:  
And what is the next stage of decision-making? Does that commit us to buying the plane?

GREG COMBET: 
Well, it's just something that, I'm sorry, I can't speculate about and nor can I, of course…

PETER MARES:  
No…

GREG COMBET: 
...predict the outcome of the discussions.

PETER MARES:
No, no, I didn't mean you to predict the outcome. I meant if we decided to go ahead, does that then commit us to buying the plane?

GREG COMBET: 
Oh yes, well, the Government is due to make a decision about the purchase of the aircraft in the very near future and in particular the configuration, if you like, of the way in which we'll purchase it.

PETER MARES:  
Now, I - in my introduction I talked about the problems identified by the Government Accountability Office in the United States . What makes you believe that this plane is actually going to get off the ground, as it were?

GREG COMBET: 
Well, I've been working on the JSF project myself in two capacities for the last - in excess of 18 months; firstly, as the Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement, and since June of this year as the Minister for Defence Materiel and Science.

So I've taken a close interest in it. I've in fact been twice to the Fort Worth facilities of Lockheed Martin in the United States , and only recently I spent a fair deal of time in Washington and talking to our counterparts in the US administration and at the Pentagon as well about progress of the JSF.

I think one of the important things about it that does give the Government confidence about the program overall is that the US is really throwing all of the resources that they have at this particular aircraft.

It's extremely important for the future national security purposes of the United States . It's only recently secured its additional funding, or its funding for the next year from the Congress and now from - with the support of President Obama. And the observation was made to me by many officials in the United States administration, as well as in the military, that the United States has a lot riding on this particular aircraft and there's no way that it's not going to succeed.

Having said that, of course, there are issues about the program that are being ironed out, that this is a fifth generation aircraft that, when successfully developed, will have a tremendous capability and I don't think anyone expects it to be a straightforward effort.

But on all of the information that I have gained from working on the project for a quite a period of time now, the Government does have confidence that this is going to work.

PETER MARES:  
What will the cost be to us of these planes?

GREG COMBET: 
Well, the Government has budgeted in the ballpark of $16 billion for purchasing up to 100 aircraft. We're confident that we can work within that budgetary projection. But, of course, this is a procurement that will take place over quite a number of years and will - suffice to say, I guess, that the Government is going to be continuing a very close scrutiny of the cost projections for the JSF and to the future. It's one of the issues that we'll be looking at in the very near future again.

But we're also, it needs to be borne in mind, purchasing aircraft further back in the production schedule than the United States will be, and it's typically at those later phases of production when the costs start to come down. And we're looking very carefully at what that profile will look like.

PETER MARES:
Well Australia originally was going to be purchasing quite early in the production phase, in fact compared to other countries. Are you saying we're going to delay our purchases so that we get cheaper planes later in the production run as you say because prices come down as production continues?

GREG COMBET: 
Well we've been grappling with quite a number of factors, but in the White Paper that the Government produced earlier this year about six or seven months ago looking at our national security and defence requirements out to the year 2030. The Joint Strike Fighter of course is one of the key elements of our air combat capability that was looked at in detail, and we did allow the - our planned initial operating capability date to slip by 12 months at that time, so that's a decision that's already been taken.

PETER MARES:  
So will it slip further though? I mean…

GREG COMBET: 
No, no I'm certainly not speculating about that, but our initial operating capability is forecast for that period around 2017 to 2018 or so and that's what we're currently planning on.

PETER MARES:  
Other countries are beginning to sort of hedge their bets a bit on the JSF. Denmark , England , England has cut its numbers that it will buy. These decisions all impact on Australia because if other countries cut their orders or if the US were to scale back its order that will push up the price for Australia .

GREG COMBET: 
Well there's a very strong commitment for the aircraft. Just to put it in a bit of perspective. In the US the aircraft production run for the purposes of the US Navy and the US Air Force is likely to be in the order of several thousand aircraft. We're talking about up to 100. Great Britain is confronting some quite significant fiscal constraints and that would be conditioning their thinking.

But the overall commitment of all of the alliance partners to the Joint Strike Fighter is strong on all of our experience and engagement with them, and there's a very strong level of support for this.

Whilst a lot of the criticisms of the program of course get a lot of public airing the fact of the matter is that at the level of capability, at the level of cost and the risk that's still in the program, there's a lot of confidence that this program can be delivered and that the risks are being overcome. A lot of work's been done to try and contain cost, and it's a program where there's a strong level of commitment internationally.

PETER MARES:  
Yet the plan has not yet been tested or built and the Coalition made a decision to go with the Joint Strike Fighter back in 2002. It abandoned sort of due diligence, comparisons with other fighters that might have been on offer from other manufacturers, European manufacturers for example. Has the Labor Government looked seriously at other options and whether we might get a better deal somewhere else?

GREG COMBET: 
Well firstly just to correct the record slightly there. In fact the aircraft is under construction, is in manufacturing. In fact I witnessed the first aircraft on the production, the first full production aircraft on the line while I was at Fort Worth, and of course prior to that a number of test aircraft have been manufactured and worked on.

There are many different areas of activity ongoing and many of these things are maturing quite well. A lot of work's been done as you'd expect on all of the software code that underpins such a complex piece of capability. So all that's ongoing.

Back to your question though. One of the things that the Rudd Government did early in its term going back into early 2008, the former Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon had a good look at this issue and asked the Defence Force to review effectively the decisions that the Howard Government had made in relation to both the Super Hornets acquisition and the Joint Strike Fighter and to re-evaluate what Australia's future air combat capability needs were and the capability that was promised in the form of the JSF.

So we had a status report at that time which concluded that the JSF was a genuine fifth generation fighter aircraft and that the commitment to it was appropriate for the Government to continue. Obviously we have to keep a very careful eye on the issue of costs of the aircraft and to ensure that the capability is delivered…

PETER MARES:  
But what's…

GREG COMBET
…but we're confident of that process is well in train.

PETER MARES:  
What's plan B if the time lines slip and the Joint Strike Fighter's not available by 2017, what's plan B?

GREG COMBET: 
Well the Government of course is proceeding also with the purchase of the 24 Super Hornet aircraft which will fill the capability gap if you like as the…

PETER MARES:  
That's until 2017, but what happens you know if that capability gap, as it's called, continues?

GREG COMBET: 
Oh well the Super Hornets will be in operation well beyond 2017.

So the Government's confident we've got the air combat capability issue covered, but more importantly what I've indicated about our confidence in the JSF program is actually the case. And we're watching very closely all of these issues, we've got a very good project team working on the JSF, and I was very encouraged by the extent of the commitment and the work that's being undertaken in the United States to ensure that the JSF program delivers on what has been promised.

PETER MARES:
Minister thanks very much for your time.

GREG COMBET
That's a pleasure. Thank you.

Tags: ar99RAAFF-35Australia
Email this post
User Image
Martin wrote:
It is funny to see how government officals can talk around something they are responsible (are they) of, and the only firm info given is that two means several. So in a nutshell: I really donīt know much about aersopace, not fighters, but somebody hatched plan in the past without tenders or doing much analysis, we donīt know how we did it, and as we have no plan B and US government is pressing us hard, we will carry on. And donīt ask me any more and stop digging, as it is not public anyway and skeletons could start falling out of the closets.
11/3/2009 4:45 AM CST
User Image
Phyzz wrote:
He is simply saying that :
- the US gov (and partner nations less so) is strongly committed to producing the aircraft
- that the Lightning II is (as advertised) what will be needed from 2020 onwards
- that FUD won't change the course of the program : failure dooms us all, success will bring victory

This is a end-all-arguments card: we are assured that the program will be successful because the program must be successful, the program will deliver because the program must deliver, etc.

"I witnessed [...] the first full production aircraft on the line" For whom is this first full production aircraft to be delivered, and when? Considering testing is still far from being finished, what are the chances that several modifications will have to be made on the production line? Fanboys will say "very slim", haters will say "it's likely, gonna be costly"...

What about an update on milestones and achievements? Have the test aircrafts arrived at Pax and started what they were supposed to do?
11/3/2009 5:44 AM CST
User Image
Phyzz wrote:
11/3/2009 5:57 AM CST
User Image
ELP wrote:
-
The Boeing sales team is licking their chops. Either way, it is the fox telling the farmer the definition of a chicken.
11/3/2009 2:35 PM CST
User Image
Aussie Digger wrote:
And here is why I only post here now and again. Same tired old cliches from Eric. Same old ridiculous arguments over the minutiae of what a politician says.

Don't you guys get it yet? Nearly 10 years ago Australia said JSF is it's future fighter. They are still saying this. Not one thing has changed. The so-called "debate" downunder is nothing of the sort.

Just a few confused people who are standing at the docks trying to argue against a boat that sailed a LONG time ago...
11/3/2009 6:13 PM CST
User Image
Corvan wrote:
I can't help but hear some of those answers and think the Minister's trying to say - it's too big to fail...
11/3/2009 6:39 PM CST
User Image
Geogen wrote:
Aussie D -

Don't forget also, 10 yrs ago one of AUSgov's concerns was capability gap, under AIR 6000 NACC delivery plan. To address that potential gap has always been part of the issue as well.

With the first RAAF F-35 squadron probably achieving FOC by 2020, at the very least, there will need to be serious F/A-18 life-extension plans adapted into the equation to address this reality. I.E., F/A-18 aircraft will likely need to operate until at least 2022, as complement to slowly integrated, FOC achieved F-35 squadrons..

Personally, I would go with another squadron of new Supers+ to retire a squadron of F/A-18, say in 2016 (reluctantly supporting Supers, but probably most feasible) and then more smoothly integrate the first FOC block IV squadron by 2020 to 'quarterback' Supers.
11/4/2009 3:34 AM CST
User Image
Bill Sweetman wrote:
"Not one thing has changed."

Schedule? Price? Weight? Deliverable capabilities at Block 3?
11/4/2009 6:16 AM CST
User Image
RSF wrote:
Ditto from me on Bill's statement. With a total price tag now estimated at 1 trillion dollars (2009 JET report), what have we gotten so far? A fictional plane with vaporware capabilities, that LM can't seem to test fly as scheduled.
11/4/2009 8:04 AM CST
User Image
There's something missing from these comments....
11/4/2009 10:15 AM CST
1 2 3 >> Last
Defense Industry News
Recent Photos
Industry Insight: Defense & Technology Insight by
Raytheon
Selected Videos