The recent version of the compromise Fiscal Year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), restored to almost full funding, what is believed to be a special access program (SAP) that includes the US Navy’s F/A-XX fighter.
Earlier this year, the House Armed Service Committee in its version of the fiscal 2024 defense bill, cut $1.1 billion from the Link Plumeria line, citing “unjustified requirements”. The Navy requested $2.1 billion for Link Plumeria in its budget request for FY2024.
The current version of the bill cuts $50 million from Project 2937, which is the F/A-XX element inside Link Plumeria, due to “unjustified requirements”.
The F/A-XX is believed to be the manned fighter aircraft element of the Navy’s Next Generation Air Dominance program. Structured similarly to the Air Force’s NGAD, both programs are a “family of systems” that include the development of both manned fighters, unmanned drones and other technologies.
The manned fighter in the Navy’s NGAD will succeed the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, while the Air Force’s aircraft will replace the F-22 Raptor.
The connection between Link Plumeria and the U.S. Navy’s F/A-XX was made earlier this year after the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a statement in response to the cuts. “The Administration strongly opposes the $1.1 billion reduction to Project 2937 that supports the Navy’s F/A-XX program,” the released stated. “The 70 percent reduction breaks the program and leaves the acquisition strategy unexecutable. Additional details can be provided at higher classification.”
The bill also includes language requiring the US Air Force and US Navy to update Congress on the status of their Next Generation Air Dominance piloted fighter aircraft and the autonomous, uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft programs.
To this end, both services will need to provide two semiannual reports that each cover the cost and capability status of the programs.
The first report would detail “key milestones, development and testing events, and specific performance goals for the engineering manufacturing and development (EMD) phase,” this would include the following:
- Technology readiness levels of major
- components and subsystems and key demonstration and testing events.
- Design maturity.
- Software maturity.
- Subsystem and system-level integration maturity.
- Manufacturing readiness levels for critical manufacturing operations and key demonstration and testing events.
- Manufacturing operations
- System verification, validation, and key flight test events.
The second report would provide details on the “total cost for the Secretary’s service cost position for the EMD phase and low initial rate of production lots of the programs . . . and a matrix expressing the total cost for the prime contractor’s estimate for such EMD phase and production lots, both of which shall be phased over the entire EMD period,” this would include the following:
- Air vehicle.
- Propulsion.
- Mission systems
- Vehicle subsystems
- Air vehicle software.
- Systems engineering.
- Program management
- System test and evaluation.
- Support and training systems.
- Contract fee.
- Engineering changes.
- Direct mission support, including Congressional General Reductions
- Government testing.
- Ancillary aircraft equipment.
- Initial spares.
- Contractor support
- Modifications.
Aside from the congressional defense committees, these semiannual reports will also be submitted to the Comptroller General of the United States, after which the matrices will be reviewed and assessed. Following assessment, the Comptroller General will submit to the congressional defense committees a report covering their findings.
