House committee votes threaten Marines' plan for new heavylift helicopters and may delay JSF programme
US lawmakers have launched surprise attacks on two major aerospace development programmes – Sikorsky's CH-53X Heavy Lift Replacement (HLR) helicopter and the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). With US secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld volunteering to withdraw the most controversial programme cut – a proposal to terminate procurement of Lockheed's C-130J tactical transport – the Congress's first public response to the Bush administration's $419 billion defence budget request for fiscal year 2006 has shifted to other aerospace targets.
A US Marine Corps plan to buy a new heavylift helicopter fleet is facing two major setbacks. The House Armed Services Committee (HASC) has voted to dissolve the HLR programme's $272 million budget next year and merge it with a long-term development effort led by the US Army, called the Joint Heavy Lift (JHL) project. At the same time, the Senate Armed Services Committee revealed that the current budget for the HLR project has been frozen by the US Navy, due to affordability concerns.
The combined blows could cause major disruptions in the heavylift programme, which is less than a year old. The USMC signed a $103 million deal late last year with Sikorsky to start developing a new, more powerful version of the CH-53E Super Stallion, capable of lifting a 13t payload. The army's JHL effort was also launched in late 2004, seeking an aircraft that can lift a Future Combat Systems-class vehicle weighing around 20-25t.
The HASC is arguing that the USMC and army requirements "are not that different", and that the military should reduce "the number of system development programmes where it makes sense to contain costs". The committee report acknowledges that delivery schedules for the two programmes are roughly a decade apart, but insists a joint programme could phase deliveries to meet the schedule requirements of each service.
USMC officials, however, argue that the service's maritime role dictates unique requirements, such as an aircraft that can be based on the decks of its existing amphibious carriers. The CH-53X HLR has been sized to provide the maximum lift within the CH-53E's shipboard footprint, and the Marines fear that the army-led JHL will produce an aircraft incompatible with regular ship operations.
But the HASC report again dismisses these concerns, stating: "While it may not be possible for each service to include precisely the capability it desires, it must be possible to agree on the essential capabilities to be included in JHL and at the same time draft a requirement that does not in an of itself force a particular technology solution."
However, the entire debate may become moot due to the ongoing budget freeze, which is linked to a cost-growth crisis. The USN agreed to budget for the HLR requirement, assuming a $3.5 billion price tag over the next six years. That estimate was based on a service-life extension programme for the CH-53E fleet, which was discarded last year. The current new-build effort produced a fresh cost estimate of $4.4 billion last December, which triggered the current stand-off. Navy acquisition officials are unsure whether the programme is still affordable under the six-year spending plan, and an ongoing budget review is not expected to shift the numbers greatly, further clouding the programme's future.
The HASC panel also voted to introduce a new delay for the Lockheed-led JSF programme. The US military has requested $152 million to order long-lead items next year so that it can start the low-rate initial production (LRIP) phase on time in FY07. But the HASC members objected to releasing the advance request, citing the aircraft's weight growth problem that emerged in 2004.
The committee report notes that Lockheed's solutions for the weight issue will not be tested until at least 2008, rendering an LRIP start a year earlier "premature". That provision may force a debate with the Senate panel, which did not include such a cut in its mark-up of the Bush administration's FY06 budget request.
STEPHEN TRIMBLE/WASHINGTON DC
Source: Flight International
