Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II procurement is the planned selection and purchase of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, (JSF) by various countries.
The F-35 Lightning II was conceived from the start of the project as having participation from many countries, most of which would both contribute to the manufacture of the aircraft and procure it for their own armed forces. While the United States is the primary customer and financial backer, the United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands, Canada, Turkey, Australia, Norway and Denmark agreed to contribute US$4.375 billion toward the development costs of the program."F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning II – International Partners." GlobalSecurity.org. Retrieved: 7 April 2010. Total development costs are estimated at more than US$40 billion, while the purchase of an estimated 2,400 planes is expected to cost an additional US$200 billion.Merle, Renae. "GAO Questions Cost Of Joint Strike Fighter." Washington Post, 15 March 2005. Retrieved: 15 July 2007. Norway estimated that each of their planned 52 F-35 fighter jets will cost their country $769 million over their operational lifetime.41st PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION Standing Committee on National Defence Parliament of Canada, 24 November 2011. Accessed: 15 December 2011. The nine major partner nations, including the U.S., plan to acquire over 3,100 F-35s through 2035,"Estimated JSF Air Vehicle Procurement Quantities." JSF.mil, April 2007. Retrieved: 29 March 2010. which, if delivered will make the F-35 one of the most numerous jet fighters.
Participation and orders
There are three levels of international participation. The levels generally reflect the financial stake in the program, the amount of technology transfer and subcontracts open for bid by national companies, and the order in which countries can obtain production aircraft. The United Kingdom is the sole "Level 1" partner, contributing US$2.5 billion, which was about 10% of the planned development costs"JSF Global Partners." teamjsf.com. Retrieved: 30 March 2007. under the 1995 Memorandum of Understanding that brought the UK into the project."US, UK sign JAST agreement." Aerospace Daily New York: McGraw-Hill, 25 November 1995, p. 451. Level 2 partners are Italy, and the Netherlands, who are contributing US$1 billion and US$800 million each respectively. Level 3 partners are Turkey, US$195 million; Canada US$160 million; Australia, US$144 million; Norway, US$122 million and Denmark, US$110 million. Israel and Singapore have joined as so-called "security cooperative participants" (SCP).Schnasi, Katherine V. "Joint Strike Fighter Acquisition: Observations on the Supplier Base." US Accounts Office. Retrieved: 8 February 2006.
Some initial partner countries, including the United Kingdom, and Norway, Netherlands and IsraelJesmain, Andrew. "Report on U.S. Competitiveness in the Fighter Aircraft Export Market." Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2009. Retrieved: 23 November 2009. have wavered in their public commitment to the JSF program, hinting that the design goals are overambitious or warning that unless they receive more subcontracts or technology transfer, they will forsake JSF for the Eurofighter Typhoon, Saab JAS 39 Gripen, Dassault Rafale or simply upgrade their existing aircraft. While the General Dynamics F-16E/F Fighting Falcon costs $50 million per export copy, the F-35 is likely to cost between $110–130 million.Kathryn Carlson, "Fighter jets to cost more than $100 million each — US budget Watchdog" National Post, 30 March 2011. The exported F-35 versions will have the same configuration as the U.S. versions, according to Brigadier General David Heinz, program executive officer in 2009.Shalal-Esa, Andrea. "Pentagon F-35 chief blasts Boeing comments." Reuters, 15 June 2009.
In 2001, Lockheed Martin claimed a potential market of 5,179 aircraft, including exports beyond the partner countries. The size of the market was instrumental in determining many of the cost calculations and economies of scale. More recent critical analysis has seriously questioned the assumptions made in estimating these markets and hence the resulting unit cost of the aircraft and its life-cycle costs as well. Congress may allow the U.S. military to perform a "block buy" of 477 aircraft over 3 years, starting the cost/scale-spiral in a desirable direction. Several government officials, including Canadian Industry Minister Tony Clement, have used the production number of 5,000 as recently as September 2010 as an indication of the supposed benefit to industry in providing components and services for this large fleet. Analyst Kenneth Epps stated in November 2010: "The global F-35 market of 'up to' 5,000 aircraft cited by Canadian industry and government officials is outdated and now greatly overstated. Realistically, the likelihood of worldwide F-35 sales is closer to the figure now given as the order total for the program partner countries, that is, 'up to' 3,500 aircraft. The uncritical use of F-35 sales projections that are now almost 10 years out of date calls into question other claims made by officials about the F-35 program."
An issue that affects all the international partners in the F-35 involves access to the computer software code for the aircraft. The F-35 relies heavily on software for operation of radar, weapons, flight controls and also maintenance. The U.S. military has stated that "no country involved in the development of the jets will have access to the software codes" and has indicated that all software upgrades will be done in the U.S. The U.S. government acknowledges that Australia, Britain, Canada, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and Turkey have all expressed dissatisfaction with that unilateral U.S. decision. The UK specifically indicated they might cancel its entire order of F-35s without access to the coding, without which the nation will be unable to maintain its own aircraft. Allen Sens, a defence analyst at the University of British Columbia stated in November 2009: "What has happened is really quite unusual because we're talking about some of America's very close allies. You would have thought they could build in some maintenance codes that could be accessible to their allies." Sens indicated that the decision could be as a result of concerns about software security and also pressure from Congress to protect jobs in the U.S.Pugliese, David: U.S. denies Canada info needed to maintain jets, Ottawa Citizen. Ottawa, Ontario, 25 November 2009. pg. A.1
In December 2010, leaked United States diplomatic cables disclosed that the US State Department is actively engaged in marketing the F-35 internationally through diplomatic channels and that serious diplomatic pressure had been applied to Norway to buy the aircraft. Jeff Abramson of the Arms Control Association has said that the push to sell the F-35 is part of Obama's "national export initiative" which seeks to double America's export sales through increased arms sales.Neild, Barry. "Obama's F-35 sales push." Global Post, 24 February 2011.
European participation in the Joint Strike Fighter project has divided the countries and helped preempt a European fifth generation jet fighter program, undercutting exports for their existing models.Hoyle, Craig. "European firms urged to 'get on with it' on UAS collaboration." Flight Global, 22 April 2011.
In early 2012, after news leaked of a third restructuring of the program in three years, a parade of high-level visitors from the partner countries visited the United States to check on when they could get their aircraft."UK concern over future of U.S. F-35 fighter jets.", 5 January 2012, Agence France-Presse. Accessed 3 April 2012."US military cuts worry Norway.", 11 January 2012, Views and News from Norway. Accessed 3 April 2012.Reinout van Wagtendonk, "Dutch defence minister in Texas to discuss Joint Strike Fighter." , 11 January 2012, Radio Netherlands. Accessed 3 April 2012.Lanai Vasek, "F-35 Joint Strike Fighter delays could force Australia to revert to Super Hornet.", 6 January 2012, The Australian. Accessed 3 April 2012. Ahead of the usual biannual meeting of military leaders in Australia in mid-March, the partner nations agreed to hold annual meetings at the political level.Shalal-Esa, Andrea. "Support cited for F-35 fighter after joint meeting." Reuters. 2 March 2012.
In March 2014, a spokesman for Lockheed Martin Canada, Mike Barton, said "We've heard nothing about it impacting foreign interest," in reaction to General Mike Hostage, head of Air Combat Command, calling the aircraft irrelevant without accompanying F-22 Raptors.
Primary customer
United States
As of April 2010, the United States intends to buy a total of 2,443 aircraft for an estimated US$323 billion, making the sale part of the most expensive defense program in U.S. history."Pentagon's F-35 Fighter Under Fire in Congress." pbs.org. Retrieved: 28 September 2010.
In September 2010, American purchase plans came under review over the rapidly escalating development and production costs of the aircraft. Initial estimates of US$50 million per aircraft had increased to at least US$92 million, with some U.S. estimates indicating US$135 million. The US Undersecretary of Defense, Ashton Carter, issued a memo in September 2010 requiring proposals on how to drive program costs down, stating "The Department is scrubbing costs with the aim of identifying unneeded cost and rewarding its elimination over time." In response, Lockheed Martin has indicated that it is on "the path to achieving an average unit cost of about $60 million".
Also in September 2010, the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee indicated that the problems in the F-35 program were symptomatic of Pentagon mismanagement, pointing out "the lack of proper control in the defense budget process". The committee urged the Pentagon "to regain control over its budget". The committee also considered scrapping the entire program at that time, dissuaded only by the country's urgent need for new fighters.
New America Foundation defense analyst Bill Hartung has stated that the U.S. government may try to reduce the overall costs of the program purchasing fewer aircraft, but Hartung also notes that this will increase the per unit cost for international partners and reduce the amount of business given to companies bidding on manufacturing contracts in partner countries.
On 6 January 2011, United States Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates announced that the Defense Department would cut the number of planes the military will buy from Lockheed Martin in the next two years because of "significant testing problems" which could lead to a costly redesign of the F-35B that the program could not afford during federal budget cuts. "If we cannot fix this variant [F-35B] during this time frame and get it back on track in terms of performance, cost and schedule, then I believe it should be canceled," Gates said in a statement.
The United States Department of Defense planned to buy 14 F-35Bs in fiscal year 2012 and 25 the following year. Instead, six will be bought next year and another six in fiscal year 2013. Over the next five years, the Marine Corps will receive 50 F-35s, down from a planned 110. The number of Navy F-35Cs and Air Force F-35As will also be reduced. The Navy total was reduced by seven jets over the next five years, with most of the cuts in fiscal year 2016, while the number of Air Force jets was decreased by 57 over the next five years. Only 19 jets are slated for delivery next year.Mona Moore, "Effects of F-35 jet cuts on Eglin are unclear" . Northwest Florida Daily News, Fort Walton Beach, Florida, 6 January 2011