Now, the most costly, ambitious weapons program undertaken by the Pentagon, the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, has breached an astonishing $2 trillion mark projected for the lifetime cost of this aircraft program.
This eye-watering amount disclosed by Congressional auditors has certainly thrown down the gauntlet in heated debate over the feasibility and sustainability of the very program.
As the most advanced fifth-generation fighter jet labeled by its makers, the F-35 was designed to meet the current and future national security goals of the U.S. Department of Defense.
The program has long been marred by these increasing costs and delays, but now that it has reached the milestone of “full-rate production,” the F-35—the fighter jet of all three U.S. military services: the Air Force, Marines, and Navy—is to have its flight hours reduced.
According to a recent GAO report, these higher costs have to do with a $16.5 billion modernization effort intended to fit the F-35 with capabilities, like radar, advanced munitions, and collision avoidance. The programs experienced multiple delays because of software stability problems, leading to a corresponding increase in the price.
The GAO also noted the thermal management of the F-35’s engine system as a concern. These systems must be powered up and must not overheat. So far, the military has not fully defined what they want on the power and cooling aspects of these upgrades, which presents another layer of technical risk and uncertainty regarding the financial implications of the program.
The Pentagon counters this by saying that because of the overall abilities offered, high prices are justified. This jet’s unmatched stealth capability, leading-edge avionics, and potent armament make it an indispensable prerequisite for any future war effort, especially in the face of increased tensions worldwide.
But sustaining costs for the program have ballooned from $1.1 trillion in 2018 to $1.58 trillion. Much of this spike is owing to further extending service life for the aircraft, an additional decade to 2088 from 2077.
Reliability and maintainability improvements on parts have saved an estimated $84 billion during the lifetime of the program.
However, the military services have also cut back their projected annual flight hours for the F-35. The Air Force and the Navy reduced their flight times by 19 and 45 percent, respectively.
This is considered one of the very few means to generate considerable cost savings for a program that has been battling itself to control rising costs over the years.
The House Armed Services Committee has fractured over the F-35 buy. As this year’s FY25 defense spending bill expresses support for buying 76 new F-35s-eight more than the Pentagon requested lawmakers said the program’s issues have been too deeply ingrained to justify giving the procurement any more airplanes.
“The execution was so egregious, so so badly managed, that Congress shouldn’t deliver any more aircraft until the F-35 meets its cost, schedule, and performance metrics,” Rep. Adam Smith and Rep. Donald Norcross said in their written comments about the defense policy bill.
The developer and manufacturer of the F-35, Lockheed Martin, has faced bipartisan criticism due to repeated delays and performance issues. Company officials have committed to partnering with the Pentagon in maintaining mission readiness and deterrence for the fighter platform.
The F-35 program continues to unfold, and the controversy about its cost in light of its value would not be out of place. True, it has the most advanced capabilities in its class. However, the money it costs the U.S. military and taxpayers is increasingly germane.