IBJNews

GAO finds cost estimates for F136 engine outdated

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Pentagon killed the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter's alternate engine, but some members of Congress are determined to revive it.

Rolls-Royce in Indianapolis had worked on the alternate engine in a joint venture with General Electric since 2002, but about 130 local engineers were reassigned to other jobs after the Pentagon killed the project in April. GE has said that about 2,500 jobs in Indiana and Ohio are tied to the alternate engine, called the F136.

A new report from the Government Accountability Office could aid a revival effort. While it doesn’t make a recommendation, the report notes that the Department of Defense has not updated its cost-benefit analysis to reflect recent changes, including the contractors’ offer to pay for the remaining development work.

“This report is further evidence that DOD must do a better job of developing a business case,” said Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat and chairman of the Armed Services Committee. A longtime proponent of competition in military contracting, he requested the GAO report.

Another F136 supporter is House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon, a California Republican. The F136 would have been built in Evandale, Ohio, which is in House Speaker John Boehner's district. He supports the project, but a majority of House members voted in February to kill funding for it. 

Levin also requested a 2010 report that found the Defense Department didn’t apply its usual level of “fidelity and precision” in coming up with a cost projection of $2.9 billion to continue work on the alternate engine until 2017.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates cited the nearly $3 billion cost in hearings this past spring.

Gates has been replaced by Leon Panetta, but the Defense Department still has no interest in updating its analysis.

“The basis for DOD opposition to the alternate engine program remains unchanged: the costs to pursue a second engine are significant and immediate, while the benefits are speculative and would not be realized until many years later,” Christine Fox, director of cost assessment and program evaluation, wrote in a response to the GAO's report, which was released on Sept. 14.

“We anticipate that many difficult decisions will have to be made on major weapon systems, including the Joint Strike Fighter program at large," Fox said. "We simply cannot afford to continue the second engine development activities with the many higher military priorities and stringent budgets we face.”

GAO staff concluded, “We continue to believe that acquisition decisions should weigh both near-term and long-term costs and benefits.”

The GE/Rolls-Royce offer to pay their own way could save $700 million through the 2012 fiscal year, the GAO found. The report also noted that other recent changes, such as the fact that the Pentagon has scaled back its purchase volume, could drive up the overall cost.

In any case, Defense Department cost analysts had not done a detailed assessment of the F136 in about two years, the report said.

Rolls-Royce spokesman George McLaren said the company would not comment on the GAO report or efforts to revive the F136.

Levin said in his press release on the report that in the past two weeks Pentagon officials have expressed a willingness to meet with the contractor team about the self-funding offer.

“I am hopeful that this shows more openness within DOD leadership to considering the benefits of competition for a program that may spend more than $30 billion on fighter engines,” Levin said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Facts Don't Lie
    The Pratt & Witley F135 engine does not produce enough thrust to allow the 'Joint Strike Fighter' to take off or land vertically (with an effective weapons load) or even defend itself with a comparable speed to existing enemy aircraft.

    Stealth is fine but their are plenty of other means available to track jet aircraft.

    The GE/Rolls Royce F136 engine does produce sufficient thrust to make this a real properly functioning fighter aircraft. As a bonus it also runs 25% cooler so it is at 25% more reliable.

    And the downside is - its being developed for free!

    Isn't America the land of the Free - or is it now just about circulating the money?
  • Rolls-Royce Corruption
    Are you aware that Rolls Royce paid millions of Dollars a year in secret corruption and slush funds to help sell their aero engines to airlines that will be "advised" (or forced!) by those receiving the secret slush funds.
    Just one example is that Tommy Suharto (son of the ex-Indonesian president) was given about 20 million dollars and a new blue Rolls Royce car by Rolls Royce (before he was jailed for murder!) to force the Indonesian airline Garuda to take the R-R Trent 700 engine on the A330 aircraft they were buying. They got a really bad commercial deal and the follow-on warranty and support was probably the worst any operator had ever had. When Tommy was jailed, Rolls then paid his millionaire friend, Soetikno about 1 million dollars a year! This was supported by the Rolls exec in Indonesia (Dr Mike Gray) because Mike was given "personal benefit" by Soetikno to keep the contract going. Mike even used RR staff to support the bar girl he was "knocking off" when his wife was away.

    Dick Taylor. (ex Rolls-Royce Chief Service Rep)
  • more waste
    So someone has asked the GAO to perform a study on the cost estimate of a program that the gov't decided they don't won't, and canceled. So how is this different than throwing money out the window /

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT