File this under something you don't see every day. The total projected price for the Pentagon's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program--the most expensive weapons development program in history--has dropped. Though its program history is riddled with cost and schedule overruns alongside unforeseen engineering and design issues, the total price tag for the JSF fell $4.5 billion in 2012, the first time in the program's history that the projected cost has gone anywhere but up (and up and up).
The cost savings come from the Pentagon's annual selected acquisitions report (SAR), which reviewed 78 DoD programs and found that to absolutely no one's surprise the overall cost of Pentagon acquisition programs grew by nearly $40 billion (or 2.44 percent) on the whole last year. But it seems all the talk of federal belt-tightening might be having an impact on Pentagon culture. This was also the first time in a long time that no program in the SAR went 15 percent or more over its budget.
Pentagon officials credited the Better Buying Power initiative, an in-house effort to reform weapons procurement to better allocate resources and reduce redundant or wasteful spending, with helping to curb spending on several programs.
For a program with such a checkered past--it's been considered for the budgetary chopping block more than once--the drop in overall cost is huge for the JSF program and an indicator that it may finally be moving toward initial operating capability. Often a program finds a way to spend the money it already has in its projections, so the downward revision in total price may amount to something the JSF program really needed: a public relations boost at a point when pricey government programs are not popular with anyone.
So not only is the JSF the most expensive weapon ever developed, but it might now hold the title--at $4.5 billion--for the most expensive PR moment ever purchased.
Apparently they can be haggled down if they feel they could loose the whole deal, hmmm.
So the budget sequester that so many people were screaming about is actually causing agencies to re-prioritize and streamline their budgets? Go figure.
If you think Evelyn`s story is unbelievable..., three weeks-ago my mum's girl friend brought in $6578 sitting there seventeen hours a week from there apartment and the're roomate's mother-in-law`s neighbour did this for six months and actually earned more than $6578 in there spare time at their computer. use the guide at this website, Go to site and open Home for details
They'll give them to israel for free, like everything else we develop
If you think karenelijah1 story is unbelievable...three weeks ago my mom's girl friend brought in $1200 working as a Registered Nurse in a hospital for 48 hours a week and their friends mother-in-law's neighbour did this six months and actually earned more than $31371 working a real job. To find out more go to com./stop-putting-these-stupid-ad-traps-out.www
Why are these adds not being removed. I have not been to one but I can only imagine it leads people the computer virus of some sort.
The exact thing happen when the nation went over the top on home foreclosures with banks failing and the US government spent all its money to keep the banks from failing.
Since banks stop giving loans and money flow was gone, oil tankers and their oil\gas with less available money and the gas prices came down.
Hello, there is a pattern here!
Our military is 5 times larger than the next closest, Russia. We do not need these planes when know one can shoot down the F-15 we have now. A stealthy F-15 the Silent Eagle would be all we need for 10 more years or maybe 20. Also Europe need to build their own military and we need to get the hell out of there. 70 years is to long to protect their tails. Wake Up USA.!!
Reduced cost over time is a contractual requirement. It is also a natural function of several production phenomena: production rate (economies of scale), cost reduction programs (kaizen, suggestion programs, streamlining), moving from low rate production, where the technologies are in their infancy, to full rate, where they become more mature.
Pressures against low cost on this program were many, usually as a result of "requirements creep", which is where non-contractual features and functions are incrementally added to the program by the contractor in the spirit of "doing the right thing". Eventually this can create a situation where cost begins to rise to be able to develop the contractual things.
Cost and budget are continually scrubbed to look for economies and to root out perhaps "nice to have" vs. contractual requirements. It is far more complicated than the typical article can illustrate.
This particular program has a lot of concurrency, that is, aircraft production beginning while some of the final technical details are being sorted out. What this means is that a measure of risk is ingrained into the program, by design and at the urging of the government, to enable production to begin sooner. Modern technological design tools have reduced a lot of this risk, but hasn't eliminated it. The transparency of the program with the customer means that the risks and the items that require rework have been disclosed in the open and in real time, so that there are no customer unknowns or very few surprises.
It should be added that the contractor is not just selling the government an airplane. This program also developed a full spectrum, highly automated maintenance system that, when mature, will reduce the manpower and money needed to maintain the aircraft to a degree not imagined on the older airframes. This required an upfront investment that other programs have not had to contend with.
Those who suggest that upgraded older airframes could have achieved the same capability with less cost clearly do not have the information needed to make such assertions.
One last comment: the photo at the top of this article is one of the program prototypes that hasn't flown since the year 2001. The real deal is out there flying at 5 locations. And it is much more impressive than the prototype.