“Extra” is essential in the case of F-35 jet engines

The GAO also predicted that competition would provide non-budgetary benefits such as accelerated timetables and increased innovation and contractor responsiveness.

Because the JSF is a one-engine plane there is no room for error.  Designed to allow either engine to “plug in” easily, in the unfortunate event of a major flaw with one design, an alternative would be available immediately instead of having to ground an entire fleet that will be the mainstay of our air defense.

Both engines are designed under military specifications with the same mission critical capability and repair cost radios.

With continued threats to American security from despots and terrorists around the globe, President Obama has been aggressively cutting military spending and classifies the alternative engine an “unnecessary expense.”

With cuts to a myriad of programs such as search and rescue helicopters and advanced transformational communications satellites, one wonders if this Administration considers our entire military infrastructure an “unnecessary expense.”

Historically, the Defense Department’s budgetary focus has been acting as good stewards of the money Congress and the White House send it rather than playing vendor referee.  Secretary Gates obeys his boss, as does the chain of command at DoD.  Air Force leaders don’t need to take their eyes off operational readiness to play political ping-pong in an engine purchasing dustup.

Last July, the Associated Press analyzed 570 Pentagon contracts for military base repairs and concluded that millions of dollars were saved through competitive bids.  At the same time, President Obama promised taxpayers “by ending no bid contracts … we can save the American people up to $40B every year.”

I don’t know a single soul at P&W, GE or Rolls Royce.  But my son is in USAF ROTC and his survivability could one day depend on the reliability of an F-35 engine.  I care – and the American people would too if provided with the facts and risks.

Competition always works, and nowhere is it more critical than when billions of dollars and military readiness are at stake.  Its past time for a serious public conversation on the importance of having two engines available for the one-engine fighter that will comprise 90% of our air security by 2035.

In early July, President Obama released his contracting reform initiative, claiming it will “change the way Washington does business” by “increasing competition and reducing high-risk contract practices.”

Sounds great.  The Joint Strike Fighter would be a good start.

Kerri Toloczko is Senior Vice President for Policy at the Institute for Liberty.