{"id":199998,"date":"2007-06-12T06:34:00","date_gmt":"2007-06-12T11:34:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2007\/06\/12\/usaf-considers-scrapping-lockheed-martin-jassm-deal-07-06-2007-washington-dc-flight-international\/"},"modified":"2007-06-12T06:34:00","modified_gmt":"2007-06-12T11:34:00","slug":"usaf-considers-scrapping-lockheed-martin-jassm-deal-07-06-2007-washington-dc-flight-international","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2007\/06\/12\/usaf-considers-scrapping-lockheed-martin-jassm-deal-07-06-2007-washington-dc-flight-international\/","title":{"rendered":"USAF considers scrapping Lockheed Martin JASSM deal-07\/06\/2007-Washington DC-Flight International"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>This is a very large program, and it would be a <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">VERY<\/span> big deal if it got canceled, but it <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">should<\/span> be canceled.<\/p>\n<blockquote style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 153);\"><p> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.flightglobal.com\/articles\/2007\/06\/07\/214492\/usaf-considers-scrapping-lockheed-martin-jassm-deal.html\">USAF considers scrapping Lockheed Martin JASSM deal-07\/06\/2007-Washington DC<\/a><\/p>\n<p>By Stephen Trimble<\/p>\n<p>The US Air Force may cancel the Lockheed Martin AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile programme unless the government and the contractor can agree on a plan to resolve systemic reliability issues by 27 June. The air force has invited Lockheed to propose a way forward for the programme during a 30-day assessment period, but officials are not optimistic about the potential for a successful deal.<\/p>\n<p>The USAF is prepared to replace JASSM with a new-start programme or order an alternative, such as an air-launched version of the Raytheon BGM-109 Tactical Tomahawk or MBDA&#8217;s Storm Shadow.<\/p>\n<p>JASSM is a stealthy, penetrating cruise missile with a 453kg (1,000lb)-class warhead. Although the capability remains a requirement for warfighters, the USAF is willing to scrap the programme for a more reliable product. &#8220;We do not know if we will be able to certify this programme,&#8221; says Sue Peyton, assistant secretary of the air force for acquisition.<\/p>\n<p>The $5.8 billion programme needs to be certificated in order to proceed, after breaching the so-called Nunn-McCurdy limit, a congressional rule for any programme that exceeds its original budget by at least 25%. So far, the air force has spent $2 billion on developing and producing the weapon.<\/p>\n<p>&#8230;.<\/p>\n<p>The certification requirement allows the USAF to pressure Lockheed to resolve a perceived reliability crisis with JASSM. In 64 flight tests to date, the JASSM has recorded 39 successes and 25 failures, with the latter caused by a wide range of usually small manufacturing quality errors or design glitches.<\/p>\n<p>The air force wants Lockheed to submit an acceptable plan that would elevate the missile&#8217;s 58% reliability rate to a minimum of 75%, Peyton says. The service is willing to pick up some of the costs for the reliability improvements, but Lockheed&#8217;s proposal must show &#8220;the air force they really, really want this programme&#8221; by also contributing to the extra cost, she adds.<\/p>\n<p>&#8230;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Those numbers are hideous.  Even their 75% target is a big wet kiss to Lockheed.<\/p>\n<p>Cancellation for cause would be a good thing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This is a very large program, and it would be a VERY big deal if it got canceled, but it should be canceled. USAF considers scrapping Lockheed Martin JASSM deal-07\/06\/2007-Washington DC By Stephen Trimble The US Air Force may cancel the Lockheed Martin AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile programme unless the government and the contractor &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1008],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-199998","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-defense-procurement"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199998"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=199998"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199998\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=199998"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=199998"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=199998"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}