Thanks to the sequester, the Defense Department is now required to cut more than $40 billion this fiscal year out of its $549 billion budget. But one program that's unlikely to take a significant hit is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, despite the fact that it's almost four times more expensive than any other Pentagon weapons program that's in the works.
We've compiled some of the most headache-inducing figures, from the program's hefty cost overruns to the billions it's generating in revenue for Lockheed Martin.
The number of planes currently on order. In 2010, the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction commission recommended cutting the number of planes ordered for the Navy and the Air Force by half and scrapping the Marines’ version, which has been plagued by the most problems.
The number of planes that have already been built, even though testing of the fighter is far from complete. And when all the tests are finished, "there will be no yes-or-no, up-or-down decision point," Pierre Sprey, one of the chief architects of the Air Force's older F-16 Fighting Falcon, told the Post. "That's totally deliberate. It was all in the name of ensuring it couldn't be canceled."
Lockheed’s approximate revenue from the F-35 in 2012, according to a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. While that figure represented 14 percent of the company’s total revenue last year, Lockheed said in the filing that it expects the F-35 “to represent a higher percentage of our sales in future years.”
Amount it could cost to develop, build, fly and maintain all the F-35s on order for 55 years — the lives of the planes — according to Pentagon estimates cited by Bloomberg.
While the F-35 is billions over budget and years behind schedule, the program seems to be doing better recently. A Government Accountability Office report released this week found that Lockheed has made progress in improving supply and manufacturing processes and addressing technical problems.
"We've made enormous progress over the last few years," Steve O'Bryan, Lockheed’s vice president of F-35 business development, told the Washington Post.
The military’s current head of the program, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, agreed that things have improved but said Lockheed and another major contractor, Pratt & Whitney, still have a ways to go.
“I want them to take on some of the risk of this program,” Bogdan said last month in Australia, which plans to buy 100 of the planes. “I want them to invest in cost reductions. I want them to do the things that will build a better relationship. I’m not getting all that love yet.”
Correction: An earlier version of this post included the estimated total cost of the F-35 program when it began in 2001 ($233 billion) as well as an inflation-adjusted figure calculated in 2013 dollars in parentheses. The $233 billion figure, however, already included projected inflation, so we have removed the inflation-adjusted figure.
Thank you for your interest in republishing this story. You are are free republish it so long as you do the following:
You can’t edit our material, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. (For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Portland, Ore.” to “Portland” or “here.”)
If you’re republishing online, you have to link to us and to include all of the links from our story, as well as our PixelPing tag.
You can’t sell our material separately.
It’s okay to put our stories on pages with ads, but not ads specifically sold against our stories.
You can’t republish our material wholesale, or automatically; you need to select stories to be republished individually.
You cannot republish our photographs without specific permission (ask our Public Relations Director Minhee Cho if you’d like to).
You have to credit us — ideally in the byline. We prefer “Author Name, ProPublica.”
Copy and paste the following into your page to republish: