3 questions with the EU defense chief on Europe’s future fighters

On the same subject

• 

  January 10, 2019 | International, Aerospace

  New Pentagon chief under scrutiny over perceived Boeing bias

  By ELIANA JOHNSON and DAVID BROWN Concerns about Patrick Shanahan's Boeing ties have re-emerged since President Donald Trump said he may be running the Pentagon ‘for a long time.' Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan's private remarks during his 18 months at the Pentagon have spurred accusations that he is boosting his former employer Boeing, people who have witnessed the exchanges told POLITICO — fueling questions about whether he harbors an unfair bias against other big military contractors. Shanahan, who spent 31 years at Boeing before joining the Pentagon in mid-2017, has signed an ethics agreement recusing him from weighing in on matters involving the mammoth defense contractor. But that hasn't stopped him from praising Boeing and trashing competitors such as Lockheed Martin during internal meetings, two former government officials who have heard him make the accusations told POLITICO. The remarks raise questions among ethics experts about whether Shanahan, intentionally or not, is putting his finger on the scale when it comes to Pentagon priorities. They also call new attention to a recent decision by the Pentagon to request new Boeing fighters that the Air Force has said it does not want — a request that Bloomberg has reported came after "prodding" from Shanahan. Concerns about Shanahan's ties to his former employer first surfaced during his confirmation hearing to be deputy secretary, but they have re-emerged since President Donald Trump said last month he may be running the Pentagon “for a long time.” In high-level Pentagon meetings, Shanahan has heavily criticized Lockheed Martin's handling of the production of the F-35 fighter jet, which is expected to cost more than $1 trillion over the life of the program, according to one of the two sources, a former senior Defense Department official who was present. Shanahan, this official said, called the plane “f---ed up” and argued that Lockheed — which edged out Boeing to win the competition to build the plane in October 2001 — “doesn't know how to run a program.” “If it had gone to Boeing, it would be done much better,” Shanahan said, according to the former official. As the Pentagon's No. 2, Shanahan repeatedly "dumped" on the F-35 in meetings, calling the program "unsustainable," and slammed Lockheed Martin's CEO, Marillyn Hewson, according to the second source, a former Trump administration official. "'The cost, the out-years, it's just too expensive, we're not gonna be able to sustain it,'" this person said, quoting Shanahan. The former Trump official said Shanahan "kind of went off" about the F-35 at a retreat for Republican lawmakers last year at the Greenbrier resort in West Virginia. This angered several members of the delegation who had home-district interests in the F-35 program, the former official said. "He would complain about Lockheed's timing and their inability to deliver, and from a Boeing point of view, say things like, 'We would never do that,'" this former official said. Shanahan is the first Pentagon chief to come purely from the private sector since the 1950s and has virtually no government or policy experience. He became the acting Defense secretary Jan. 1, following former Secretary Jim Mattis' resignation over Trump's abrupt decision to pull U.S. troops from Syria and begin drawing down from Afghanistan. He has signed an ethics agreement barring him from weighing in on any matters involving his former employer, the Pentagon's fifth-largest contractor in 2017. Shanahan's experience at Boeing is “his only reference point," the former Trump administration official said. "He doesn't have a lot of other experiences to draw on. He owns it in a powerful way because he doesn't have the military experience, he doesn't have the experience in government. So when he talks about those things, he's very forceful." His remarks about the F-35 stand in stark contrast to those of the president, who regularly praises the stealth fighter despite initially slamming its high costs. The F-35 program, while experiencing a number of setbacks, technical delays and groundings throughout the years, is generally considered to be on the mend. The Air Force and Marine Corps variants have been declared ready to deploy, and the Navy version is expected to reach that point as early as next month. And unit costs have come down for all three variants as the plane matures. Trump has praised Shanahan's ability to cut costs, calling him a “great buyer.” He is now among the candidates the president is considering as a permanent replacement for Mattis. Asked for comment, Shanahan's office released a statement saying he is committed to his agreement to stay out of matters involving Boeing. “Under his ethics agreement, Mr. Shanahan has recused himself for the duration of his service in the Department of Defense from participating personally and substantially in matters in which the Boeing Company is a party,” his office said. Full article: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/09/defense-patrick-shanahan-boeing-pentagon-1064203

• 

  September 9, 2021 | International, Aerospace

  Lockheed, Northrop invest in a startup that wants to refuel satellites in space

  San Francisco-based Orbit Fab secured $10 million in its latest funding round, and defense companies want to be a part of the company's growth.

• 

  December 17, 2018 | International, Aerospace

  Budget watchdog warns this fighter could cost three times that of the F-35

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — A next-generation air superiority jet for the U.S. Air Force, known by the service as Penetrating Counter Air, could cost about $300 million in 2018 dollars per plane, the Congressional Budget Office states in a new study. At that price, PCA would be more than three times that of the average F-35A jet, which is set at about $94 million to capture both the expense of early production lots and the decline in cost as the production rate increases, according the report, which predicts the cost of replacing the Air Force's aircraft inventory from now until 2050. This sum, while not an official cost estimate from the Pentagon, represents the first time a government entity has weighed in on the potential price tag for PCA. The CBO estimates the Air Force will need 414 PCA aircraft to replace existing F-15C/Ds and F-22s, the Air Force's current fighters geared toward air-to-air combat. It also surmises that the first aircraft will enter service in 2030, based on the service's stated desire to begin fielding PCA around that time frame. The reason for the whopping price tag? Part of it comes down to the cost of new technology. “The PCA aircraft would probably have a greater range and payload, as well as improved stealth and sensor capabilities, than today's F-22; those characteristics would help it operate in the presence of the high-end air defenses that DoD believes China, Russia, and other potential adversaries may have in the future,” the CBO states. The other reason comes down to history. The Air Force doesn't have a great track record when it comes to producing stealth aircraft at the low costs initially envisioned by leadership. Both the B-2 and F-22 programs were truncated in part due to the high price per plane — which in turn contributed to the production rate never accelerating to the point where unit costs begin to decrease. The early years of the F-35 program were also marred by a series of cost overruns that eventually prompted the Pentagon to restructure it. “Containing costs for the PCA aircraft may be similarly difficult,” the report states. The Air Force has said little about PCA since the release of the Air Superiority 2030 flight plan in 2016, which stated a need for a new fighter jet that would be networked into a family of systems of other air, space, cyber and electronic warfare technologies. “The replacement may not be a single platform,” Gen. Dave Goldfein, the Air Force's chief of staff, told Defense News earlier this year. “It may be two or three different kinds of capabilities and systems. And so as we look at air superiority in the future, ensuring that we're advancing to stay ahead of the adversary, we're looking at all those options.” Although Air Force leadership won't say exactly what it's doing to develop PCA or when a new jet may be coming online, it's clearly making investments. In the fiscal 2019 budget, the service requested $504 million for “next-generation air dominance,” its portfolio of future fighter technologies and weapons. The Air Force expects to ramp up funding to $1.4 billion in FY20, hitting a high in FY22 with a projected $3.1 billion in spending. According to the CBO's analysis, Air Force procurement of new aircraft could peak at about $26 billion in 2033, as the service buys both the F-35 and PCA. Those two fighters, together with the B-21 bomber, are set to be the largest drivers of cost as procurement reaches its height in the mid-2030s. “Although the Air Force could probably modify both retirement plans and replacement schedules to smooth out the 2033 peak, the average annual costs of procuring new aircraft would still be higher than in the recent past: $15 billion in the 2020s, $23 billion in the 2030s, and $15 billion in the 2040s,” the report states. Dealing with an upcoming bow wave CBO's estimates included 35 platforms that will be replacing legacy systems, with six programs making up more than 85 percent of the projected procurement costs cited throughout the report: the F-35, PCA, the KC-46A, the B-21, the C-130J cargo plane as well as the yet-unannounced C-17 replacement. The report envisions a future where the Air Force is allowed to retire all of its legacy fighter and attack aircraft — the A-10, the F-15, the F-16 and even the F-22 — in favor of three aircraft: the F-35, PCA and a light attack aircraft configured to take on low-threat missions. The Air Force has yet to decide whether to buy a light-attack aircraft or how extensive its purchase may be, although the service is expected to put out a request for proposals by the end of the month. “Funding for new fighter aircraft makes up about half of the total projected costs of procuring new aircraft,” the CBO states, with the F-35 set to be the most expensive program through the 2020s until PCA takes its place in the early 2030s. The Air Force could decrease costs in a couple of ways, although all of them come with significant drawbacks. For one, it could extend the lives of its legacy fighter and attack aircraft, and delay programs like PCA. However, the CBO notes that “obtaining replacement parts can be both difficult and expensive, and a refurbished fleet may not provide as many available and mission-capable aircraft as a new fleet.” If the service wants to increase the availability of its inventory without paying the high price associated with developing a new stealth fighter, it could retire its legacy F-15s and F-16s and buy new ones. That option is probably more expensive, but would result in aircraft that are more reliable. The Air Force could also defer the PCA program while allowing some of its legacy aircraft to be retired, the CBO posits. However, Air Force leadership contend that the service is already too small, with Secretary Heather Wilson arguing that the number of operational squadrons needs to increase from 312 to 386 — a goal that necessitates buying more aircraft. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/12/14/budget-watchdogs-warn-of-expensive-price-tag-for-next-air-force-fighter/