Rare Earth Exchanges

Defense Supply Chain Issues: GAO Audit of F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

Leave a Comment

Highlights

  • The F-35 program faces significant production delays due to engine and aircraft delivery issues, with 91% of aircraft delivered late in 2023.
  • Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3) software and hardware upgrades have been hindered by supply chain disruptions and complex technical challenges.
  • Ongoing risks include potential combat readiness impacts, testing limitations, and a complex $2 trillion life cycle cost management strategy.

The U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO) 2024 report “F-35 JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER Program Continues to Encounter Production Issues and Modernization Delays (opens in a new tab)” highlights persistent delays in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program despite reaching full-rate production and completing initial operational testing. These delays, primarily in engine and aircraft deliveries, stem from a combination of manufacturing issues, supply chain disruptions, and challenges with a critical $1.8 billion hardware and software upgrade known as Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3). Delays in TR-3 development have had a cascading effect, slowing the broader Block 4 modernization effort, which aims to enhance the aircraft’s capabilities against emerging threats.

Lockheed Martin is accountable for the aircraft, and Pratt & Whitney is responsible for the plane.

Contributing Factors

A host of problems contribute to this situation. When reviewing the report, engine, and aircraft delays appear paramount.  Pratt & Whitney delivered no engines on time in 2023, citing hardware issues and quality concerns. Lockheed Martin faced similar challenges, with 91% of aircraft delivered late due to manufacturing inefficiencies, parts shortages, and disruptions from engine quality issues.

Software nightmares? Called TR-3, delays arose from supply chain issues, workforce shortages, and software stability problems, including critical failures in radar and electronic warfare systems. These delays forced Lockheed Martin to implement temporary workarounds, such as using rotatable TR-3 hardware kits, further complicating production timelines.

Then there are the testing bottlenecks, exacerbated by aging and frequently unavailable test aircraft, which have hindered the timely validation of new capabilities. Plans to add modified and new testing aircraft are underway but will take years to implement.

Finally, efforts to modernize the F-35’s engine and thermal management systems remain stalled due to undefined requirements and immature technologies. These upgrades are essential for future capabilities but face significant technical and cost-related risks.

Ongoing Risks

The delays threaten the timely delivery of enhanced capabilities critical to combat readiness. The aircraft was parked awaiting TR-3 installation risk damage, presenting financial and logistical liabilities. Testing limitations could prolong development timelines, while undefined modernization plans for power and cooling systems may further hinder post-Block four capabilities.

Key Questions and Overlooked Concerns

Aside from our usual rare earth questions, all sorts of questions come to mind. Are current mitigation strategies, such as TR-3 workarounds and increased testing capacity, sufficient to address ongoing delays? How will persistent supply chain vulnerabilities impact future production stability? Are the synchronization of engine and thermal system upgrades realistic, given undefined requirements and technological immaturity? How will the program handle potential capacity issues as testing and production demands increase?

Conclusion

The GAO report underscores a critical need for improved program management, clearer modernization strategies, and robust mitigation of production delays. For Congress and stakeholders, the focus must remain on addressing the root causes of delays while ensuring accountability and transparency in managing the program’s $2 trillion life cycle cost. Without decisive action, these challenges could significantly compromise the F-35’s strategic and operational goals.

Spread the word: