Contents: (1) Intro.: Alternate Engine Program; (2) Background: The F-35 In Brief; Three Versions; Alternate Engine Program; Program Origin and Milestones; Procurement Quantities; Program Mgmt.; Internat. Participation; Cost and Funding; Mfg. Locations; Proposed FY 2010 Budget; Proposed Termination of Alternate Engine; (3) Issues for Congress: Alternate Engine Program; Summary of Arguments; Admin. Perspective; Studies on F-35 Alternate Engine; Recent Developments; Development Status and Readiness for Production; Admin. Perspective; Affordability and Projected Fighter Shortfalls; Implications for Industrial Base; (4) Legislative Activity for FY 2010; Summary of Quantities and Funding; FY 2010 Defense Author. Bill. Illus.

The administration's proposed FY2010 defense budget requested about $10.4 billion in research and development and procurement funding for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. This would fund the procurement of 10 F-35As for the Air Force, 16 F-35Bs for the Marine Corps, and four F-35Cs for the Navy. The administration's proposed FY2010 defense budget also proposed terminating the F-35 alternate engine program, which is intended to develop the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136 engine as an alternative to the Pratt and Whitney F135 engine that currently powers the F-35. The Obama administration opposes further funding for the alternate engine program and has threatened to veto the FY2010 defense authorization or appropriation bill if either "would seriously disrupt" the F-35 program. The F-35 alternate engine program has emerged as a major item of debate on the FY2010 defense budget.

Provides background on debate surrounding development of General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136 engine as an alternative to the Pratt & Whitney F135 engine that currently powers the F-35 joint strike fighter. Examines current status of alternative engine program, including cost, relations with allies, and engine development issues. Covers FY2011 legislative actions, and reviews issues for Congress.

The Defense Department's F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is one of three aircraft modernization programs in tactical aviation, the others being the Air Force F-22A fighter and the Navy F/A-18E/F fighter/attack plane. The JAST/JSF program is designed to address the high cost of tactical aviation, the need to deploy fewer types of aircraft to reduce acquisition and operating costs, and projections of future threat scenarios and enemy capabilities. The program's rationale and primary emphasis is joint service development of a next-generation multi-role strike aircraft that can be produced in affordable variants to meet different operational requirements. This report discusses the background, status, and current issues of the JSF program.

The Defense Department's F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is one of three aircraft modernization programs in tactical aviation, the others being the Air Force F-22A fighter and the Navy F/A-18E/F fighter/attack plane. In November 1996, the Defense Department selected two major aerospace companies, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, to demonstrate competing designs for the JSF, a joint-service and multi-role fighter/attack plane. Lockheed Martin won this competition and was selected to develop and produce the JSF, a family of aircraft including conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL), carrier-capable (CV), and short take-off vertical landing (STOVL) versions for the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, the United Kingdom, as well as other allied services. Originally designated the Joint Advanced Strike Technology (JAST) program, the JSF program has attracted considerable attention in Congress because of concerns about its cost, effects on the defense industrial base, and implications for U.S. national security in the 21st century.

The Defense Department's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is one of three aircraft programs at the center of current debate over tactical aviation, the others being the Air Force F/A-22 fighter and the Navy F/A-18E/F fighter/attack plane. In November 1996, the Defense Department selected two major aerospace companies, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, to demonstrate competing designs for the JSF, a jointservice and multi-role fighter/attack plane. On October 26, 2001, the Lockheed Martin team was selected to develop further and to produce a family of conventional take-off and landing (CTOL), carrier-capable (CV), and short take-off vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft for the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps and the U.K. Royal Navy as well as other allied services. Originally designated the Joint Advanced Strike Technology (JAST) program, the JSF program is a major issue in Congress because of concerns about its cost and budgetary impact, effects on the defense industrial base, and implications for U.S. national security in the early 21st century. The JAST/JSF program evolved in response to the high cost of tactical aviation, the need to deploy fewer types of aircraft to reduce acquisition and operating costs, and current projections of future threat scenarios and enemy capabilities. The ...