Department of Redundancy Department
I generally favor redundancy. I have a Mac AND a PC. I like carrying both a cellphone and a Blackberry. I have a camera that shoots video, and a video camera that takes pictures. More options are good. But they can also be expensive.
So I’m following with some interest the very public dogfight wars between GE and Pratt & Whitney over the spare engine for the F-35 Lightning.
When I was at the Pentagon in 2008, I remember sitting down with Gordon England, the then deputy defense secretary who walked me through why the extra engine was a superfluous luxury the department can ill afford.
But GE has managed to convince Congress up to now that it never hurts to have options, and really in its corporate heart, the company doesn’t think it should have lost out in the competition to Pratt & Whitney.
The two defense contractors have been taking potshots at each other this week in a series of full-page ads in The Washington Post that, while are no doubt helpful to the ailing newspapers’ bottom line, do little to provide insight as what the debate is all about.
One thing the ads show is that that if you are clever enough, and the facts are complicated enough, you can argue almost anything to the point where there’s enough confusion that the safe course of action is to buy redundancy.
But the reality here is the U.S. taxpayers can’t afford an extra engine for the F-35 anymore that I can afford an extra engine for my Toyota.
For the last four years, the Pentagon has tried the scrap the redundant engine, and for four years Congress has refused.
As a vote looms, I hope the lawmakers come to their senses.
When the Pentagon says it doesn’t need something, that’s usually a pretty good sign it’s a waste of money.
http://www.lineofdeparture.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/F-35-Lightning.jpg
Tags: F-35, GE, Pratt & Whitney, second engine
