Christopher Bogdan puts cross hairs on Pratt & Whitney

The F-35 program went up $4.5B last year for the US program. A large portion of that appears to have come from Pratt & Whitney. Bogdan has publicly said that Pratt & Whitney is not meeting their commitment. He is accusing them of spreading overhead from other programs that have ended to the F-35 program.

Pratt & Whitney is claiming Competitive Privilege for refusing to give out prices for the F-35 engines. It also gives Gen Bogdan no leverage over the manufacturer to force them to lower costs.

Much of the $4.5 billion in cost increases in the past year to the now $398.6 billion U.S. portion of the F-35 program are due to overly rosy projections on anticipated decline in the “cost curve,” or price to build the stealthy fighter, says USAF Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, F-35 program executive officer.

Performance continues to fall short of projections for two major reasons: cost from the prime contractors and major subcontractors – including labor rates and overhead -- and delayed purchases by Joint Strike Fighter customers.

These are realities behind adjustments in the long-term pricing estimates for the multinational F-35 included in the 2013 selected acquisition report, a document required annually by Congress on major weapon systems. The F-35 program office shared this fact sheet with reporters to provide context for the report.

AvWeek

The adjustments in the long-term pricing estimates for the multinational F-35 are included in the program’s 2013 selected acquisition report, a document required annually by Congress on major weapon systems. Total U.S. program cost — including development, procurement and 55 years of sustainment — is estimated at $398.6 billion over last year’s estimate of $391.2 billion. Of that $4.5 billion is in the procurement portion of the program.

Bodgan says that in the context of the overall program’s price tag, this increase is negligible. But he remains frustrated with contractors’ pricing issues.

Pratt & Whitney spokesman Matthew Bates says the company has decreased its pricing 40% since the first production lot, but the company is claiming competitive privilege in its sole-source deal for F-35 engines in not releasing its actual numbers (AWIN First, April 7). Negotiations for low-rate initial production lots 7-8 are under way and slated for completion in the summer, he says.

Bogdan seems frustrated by the lack of leverage he has in dealing with a monopoly engine provider. “There is only one engine on the F-35. Period,” he said. “When you are in a sole-source environment it is difficult to find the right leverage and motivation and drive the cost out of a program.”

AvWeek 2

I'd hate to have to fly one of these things if it's under such pressure to be "cost-effective". Sooner or later pilots' lives will be added to the "cost" when stuff breaks.

a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

The goal of the "cost effective" portion is to get the life cycle cost down from $1T, to something more reasonable. Right now it's heading in the right direction, but it's starting to head back up some.

Bogdan seems frustrated by the lack of leverage he has in dealing with a monopoly engine provider. “There is only one engine on the F-35. Period,” - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Wasn't Roll's developing engines for these as well? I was certainly under that impression?

a reply to: solidshot

They were, and it was a pretty nice engine. Congress killed it.