C-130J: Someone else's take a kicking....
"DoD Inspector General: C-130J Does Not Meet Operational Requirements
The DoD's Inspector General (IG) has determined that the C-130J transport aircraft produced by Lockheed Martin [LMT] does not meet operational requirements, leveling serious criticism at one of the Pentagon's largest programs.
"The Air Force conditionally accepted 50 C-130J aircraft at a cost of $2.6 billion even though none of the aircraft met commercial contract specifications or operational requirements," the IG said in the executive summary of its study. "The Air Force also paid Lockheed Martin more than 99 percent of the C-130J aircraft's contracted price for the delivered aircraft. As a result, the government fielded C-130J aircraft that cannot perform their intended mission, which forces the users to incur additional operations and maintenance costs to operate and maintain older C-130 mission-capable aircraft because the C-130J aircraft can only be used for training."
The IG recommends that Air Force acquisition chief Marvin Sambur "refrain from contracting for additional block upgrades until Lockheed Martin can design, develop, and deliver a contract compliant aircraft." The IG also recommends that future modifications should take into account Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 15 that requires contractor's pricing, cost and profit data.
The IG's third recommendation calls for the Air Force to increase amounts withheld to motivate Lockheed Martin to deliver an aircraft that meets contractual requirements. The IG also recommends negotiating a firm schedule for completion of known outstanding retrofits of fielded aircraft within six months.
Lockheed Martin was awarded a 60-aircraft C-130J multiyear procurement (MYP) award from the Navy worth $4.1 billion in 2003 (Defense Daily, March 17, 2003). As part of the deal, Lockheed Martin will deliver 40 J-model transports to the Air Force and 20 KC-130J tankers to the Marine Corps.
The report casts a critical eye on the Air Force's management of the program. "Since 1996, the Air Force issued three, consecutive, firm-fixed-price contracts for the C-130J aircraft even though Lockheed Martin continued to show little progress in delivering contract-compliant aircraft." The IG report also considers the MYP award a "poor decision" given that the aircraft was not performing or had passed operational testing.
The Air Force did not agree with the initial recommendation, noting that Lockheed Martin is already delivering C-130Js that are compliant with contract specification. The Air Force also did not concur with the second recommendation, stating that Part 12 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation met the requirements given the commercial nature of the C- 130J. Future upgrades would be contracted under Part 15 given that they would be government-financed initiatives.
Nor did the Air Force concur with the third recommendation, given that withholds are consistent with the terms of the contract and are based on government analysis of the price of noncompliant items. The Air Force did not concur with the final recommendation, noting that all outstanding retrofits have been either scheduled or completed.
Lockheed Martin backed the Air Force.
"Lockheed Martin is in full agreement with the Air Force's assessment of the DoD Inspector General's report," the company said in a statement. "In its comments regarding the report, the U.S. Air Force clearly states that it does not concur with any of the findings or recommendations in the report. The Air Force, ultimately the end user who is flying the aircraft, also says that the C-130J program is meeting cost, schedule, contract and regulatory commitments. The Air Force says, without qualification, that it fully endorses the C-130J program, that is it one of Air Mobility Command's top priorities, and that the aircraft meets the current contract specification. In addition, the Air Force notes that there is a disciplined plan in place to enhance the aircraft."
Lockheed Martin also pointed out the C-130J is in use with Italy, Australia and Britain in those countries' operations in Iraq and Afghanistan."
And how are ours? Any truth in the rumours of multiple aircraft sitting there waiting for black boxes to be mended because of a shortage of LRUs? Of aircraft parked up sans engine? Of short J-models that have to be part-fuelled, loaded with pax, then fully fuelled due to CofG concerns? Of a cargo handling system that buckles?