• About
    • Mission
    • Biographical Information
    • Contact Us
  • Defense
  • Energy
  • Logistics
  • Innovation
  • In the News
  • Follow
  • Like
  • Linkedin
  • Youtube
February 22, 2011November 12, 2013Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D

← Back
← Previous Post
Next Post →

GE’s Alternate Engine Won’t Save Money (at Forbes.com)

February 22, 2011November 12, 2013Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D

The jet engine General Electric and Rolls-Royce are developing for the F-35 fighter suffered a major setback last week when the House of Representatives voted to deny funding for fiscal 2011. In doing so, the House followed the advice of defense secretary Robert Gates, who has argued since 2007 that the engine is a waste of money since the military already has an engine for the plane that works fine. GE argues that with two engines, the government can hold competitions that drive down prices and bolster performance. But that isn’t likely given the high cost of sustaining a second engine and the way that competition operates in the military marketplace. I have written an essay at Forbes.com this week explaining why GE’s “alternate engine” isn’t likely to deliver any of its promised benefits. The essay can be foundĀ here.

Print | PDF | EMail

Find Archived Articles:

This entry was posted in Early Warning Blog. Bookmark the permalink.
Sign Up For
LexNext Emails
1600 Wilson Boulevard - Suite 203
Arlington, VA 22209 USA
Phone: 703.522.5828
Fax: 703.522.5837
© 2023 Lexington Institute

Sign Up for LexNext Emails

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Sign Up for LexNext Emails

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.