British Shift to F-35C: A Blow to the Beleaguered Joint Strike Fighter 'B' Model

The UK government has decided to shift its Royal Navy purchases of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) from the F-35B short take-off and vertical model (STOVL) to the F-35C carrier version, according to news reports. UK Prime Minister David Cameron said the F-35C is “more capable, less expensive and longer-range.”

The decision may have grave implications for the F-35B, which is the version of the JSF most troubled by technical problems and cost growth. The Brits’ decision means only the U.S. Marine Corps and the Italians plan on using the B model.

Fewer overall purchases of F-35Bs may increase the per unit price, weakening the case for the F-35B. According to a troubling August Armed Forces Journal article by Lt. Cmdr. Perry Solomon, “As the first airframe in full-scale production, the F-35B will experience the greatest fluctuation in price if quantities later in the production run are changed.” Solomon also notes that the “F-35B is four years behind schedule, and the per-unit acquisition cost has exceeded $120 million — almost triple the amount envisioned by the Joint Initial Requirements Document for the Joint Strike Fighter.”

Solomon explores some of the myriad problems associated with the F-35B in context of fiscal and international political pressures on the overall JSF program and concludes that “Marine Corps aviation is in danger of collapsing under the weight of its ‘inside the Beltway’ leadership.”

With problems with the F-35B and pressure from the U.S. Navy mounting, the U.S. Marine Corps leadership has recently signaled that it could be open to buying some F-35Cs in lieu of an all-F-35B force.

“So we have these two competing things, and we hold both dear, so what does that mean in context of JSF?” Lt. Gen. George Trautman, deputy commandant for aviation, told Inside the Navy on October 7. “What it means is we need to get the C [carrier] variant flying, we need to get it on the carrier, see what problems it has, what issues it has. Then we need to get the B [STOVL] flying, we need to get it on an L-class [amphibious ship] to see what issues it has, what problems it has, and then we need to get the B variant onto the carrier to see what technical issues occur and what it means for the operation of a carrier.”

-- Nick Schwellenbach

Image by Flickr user AereiMilitari.org, used under Creative Commons License.

Comments

[foggyworld]

I believe the Canadians have joined the Brits on this one though their initial acquisition quantity will be all of 1. Double impact fiscal prudence.

[Jonathan Kiser]

@ HRNTHNDLR

You are correct on this- the question remains- does America's inner government and the "military industrial complex" want superiority or are they afraid of offending or loosing the lockstep with their secret pals China/Russia or any other Nation that views Laissez Faire Capitalistic action as a threat to their "way of life"..aka...Power over their people..as opposed to real American policy that allows the people to be empowered and control the government for the good of all involved? This is just one example of the lobularity that is actually party of a planned agenda to further weaken and disposition America and the UK to become part of a One World Government where the Constitution is no longer valid and the UN Charter powers over all. It is really a matter of time..Obama and many of his predecessors sold us out a long time ago. It is all a charade...we went from a Cold War to a War Cold that is infectious and makes its viral contact to almost every area of the government. Imperialism is now the hidden backdrop of the uS under the mandates of the new House Daddy- the UN.

[JEKfromTX]

@ HRNTHNDLR Your idea is right on, that would work!

[Henry J Cobb]

Why not work in the cost of canceling the America class also?

Moving CVNs up to one every 3 years gives a final force of 16 of them. Use 6 for USMC aviation and 10 for USN. Use LCS or JHSV to carry cheap amphibious MRAPs and cancel the F-35B and EFV.

The result is a more capable and cheaper force that can deploy quicker and survives the loss of a single ship much better.

[Dfens]

More smoke and mirrors from the military-industrial complex. I mean, seriously, the F-35 is built using the same processes and techniques as the F-22, but it has one fewer engine and a lot more sophisticated avionics. The F-22 costs $135 million per airplane. So reasonably, what do you expect the F-35 to cost? If you said $100 million per plane, you've got a brain. Congratulations. Is the lift fan version going to cost a little more? Sure. No surprise there, right?

If I had my way, the whole program would be killed except for the lift fan variant. It's the only airplane that has a capability which makes it worth building. It's sad the Brits are cancelling the only version of that airplane they should have bought. They can only blame their own stupidity for that decision. I hope they enjoy their fleet of hangar queens. I guess Lockheed forgot to tell the Brits their company motto: You can buy better, but you just can't pay more.

[Hrnthndlr]

Wow, maybe the US will make the entire lift system in the US to drive the cost down.