Executive Vice President of Aeronautics, Lockheed Martin Corp
RAeS Webinar: Sopwith Named Lecture 2021
In this Sopwith Named Lecture, hear from Greg Ulmer, Executive Vice President of Lockheed Martin Aeronautics and Paul ...
About Gregory Ulmer
Gregory Ulmer, Executive Vice President of Aeronautics at Lockheed Martin, has discussed the F-35 program's progress in production, cost reduction, and sustainment. He stated that Lockheed Martin reduced its portion of F-35 sustainment costs per flight hour by 44% over the past five years and aims to lower it another 40% over the next five years, targeting a cost of $25,000 per flight hour by 2025. Ulmer noted that the company signed block buys for lots 12, 13, and 14, achieving an $80 million unit cost for the F-35A model in lot 13, one year earlier than planned, with the lot 14 price below $78 million. He also addressed the transition from the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) to the Operational Data Integrated Network (ODIN), describing an 80% reduction in hardware components and successful initial flight tests. Regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, Ulmer said supplier delays impacted production, leading to an alternate work schedule for 12 weeks, with a revised delivery target of 121 aircraft for 2020, down from a pre-pandemic plan of 141. Ulmer has also highlighted the F-35's international partnerships and capabilities. He noted that the United Kingdom, as a Tier One partner, builds 15% of the value of planned F-35s, supporting over 20,000 UK jobs annually. He confirmed that the F-35 was selected in Switzerland's competition, ranking first in three of four categories and quoted about 2 billion francs below the next competitor. On the fastener issue, Ulmer stated that a worst-case engineering analysis assuming every fastener was in the wrong location showed a design limit load of 131%, providing significant margin, and that corrective actions included kitting materials to prevent commingling. He also discussed the F-35's sensor fusion, 360-degree situational awareness, and plans to expand internal weapons bay capacity from two to six air-to-air missiles.
Transcript (37 segments)
B
Brian Burrage0:04
Well, good evening and a warm welcome to you all to this Royal Aeronautical Society Sopwith named lecture. I'm Brian Burrage, and I'm the Chief Executive of the Society. A particular welcome tonight to our speakers this evening: Greg Ulmer, the Executive Vice President of the Aeronautics business of Lockheed Martin Corporation, and Paul Livingston, the Chief Executive of Lockheed Martin UK. The plan is that we'll hear from both our speakers in that order and follow with a question and answer session, and we're going to finish at 18:15 UK time. This is an important fixture in the Society's calendar. The Sopwith named lecture was established back in 1990 to honor the achievements of Sir Thomas Sopwith, an honorary fellow of the Society. In the years prior to World War One, Sopwith became England's premier aviator and established the first authoritative test pilot school in the world. He also founded England's first major flight school, based on the proceeds of a £4,000 prize he'd just won for the longest flight from England to the continent in a British-built airplane. Such was the way back then that the UK's advance in aerospace was funded mostly from prizes. Between 1912 and 1920, Sopwith's company produced over 16,000 aircraft of 60 types. But it was actually a struggle: Spanish flu rampaged across the globe in the immediate post-World War One years, and the local Kingston papers of the day bear testament to the impact on the nearby Sopwith factory. Also, the market slumped after World War One, meaning that up to September 1920, just a couple of years after the war, the Sopwith company built only 15 aircraft while trying to diversify and maintain employment by moving into production of car bodies, motorcycles, and even aluminum saucepans. Then in 1920, the Treasury launched a huge claim against the Sopwith company for excess war profits. The company went into receivership, most wound up within weeks, but did meet all liabilities to its creditors. A few months later, Sopwith launched the H.G. Hawker Engineering Company Limited, with himself as chairman, Fred Sigrist as chief engineer, and Harry Hawker as designer and test pilot. The company very soon recruited Sydney Camm to work as a designer under Fred Sigrist, and Camm went on to design 52 different aircraft types which sold almost 30,000 aircraft — the famous ones like the Hawker Hart, the Hurricane, the Hunter, and the Harrier. The interesting thing about Sigrist is that he was originally recruited by Sopwith in 1910 as a chauffeur, mechanic, and general dogsbody, but rapidly became an outstanding and largely self-taught factory manager. So we can recognize three familiar points that Sopwith knew well: aerospace is a long-term game, great things can come out of adversity, and it's the sheer doggedness of the human spirit that makes it all possible. Now to our speakers. Greg Ulmer runs the Lockheed Martin Aeronautics business, a $20 billion-plus enterprise employing some 30,000 people. It includes fifth-generation tactical aircraft, air mobility aircraft, unmanned and ISR platforms and ranges — obviously across the F-35, F-22, F-16, and C-130, as well as advanced development programs at Lockheed Skunk Works. Greg has more than 30 years of experience in the defense and aerospace industry, and before this he was Vice President and General Manager for the F-35 Lightning II program, following a number of years in other roles in that part of the business. Along the way he was an executive and ops executive in the Skunk Works, and started life as a flight test engineer supporting the MD-11, the C-17, and the C-130J. Moving to our second speaker, Paul Livingston — a Fellow of the Society — is Chief Executive at Lockheed Martin UK and is accountable for the totality of Lockheed Martin's business with the United Kingdom. He's been around the company for 20 years or so, and notably was previous Managing Director for Ascent Flying Training, having led the company's bid for the UK Military Flying Training System. Paul began his career at Singer Link-Miles in 1987, and the term 'Link' conjures up many hours of pilots of my generation spent in the Link trainer. Paul was an engineering apprentice working in civil and military simulation, and on completion of that apprenticeship he was selected to spend a year in Sunnyvale, California, to develop code for the world's first image-slaved visual system — that should tell all you young people in our audience all you need to know about the value of an apprenticeship. As for tonight's subject, the F-35 is pivotal to the RAF's front line and to carrier strike capability. Only last week, aircraft flew combat missions off the Queen Elizabeth carrier alongside US Marine Corps jets. A couple of months earlier, the UK's Integrated Defense and Security Review was just a little coy about future numbers, so it will be very useful to hear from Greg and Paul as they outline the critical role the F-35 program plays in supporting the UK's ambition to be a global science and technology superpower — I know what that means for technology, jobs, and the economy. Greg, over to you.
G
Gregory Ulmer6:31
Thank you, and good evening and welcome from Fort Worth, Texas. Much appreciate the opportunity to speak with you all this evening. As mentioned, this lecture is named in honor of Thomas "Tony" Sopwith and helps increase the desire for aviation advancements, as a pioneer for industry, and helped pave the way for flight and aircraft production. It's an honor to be a part of the Sopwith Lecture alongside my colleague Paul Livingston. Paul and I both believe it is extremely important for us to gather leaders and visionaries from around the globe, across the military, business, and academia. The Royal Aeronautical Society allows us the opportunity, in Sopwith's name, to gather and enable innovation and collaboration to take place and further drive advancements in both air and space. Thank you again to today's host for facilitating these discussions and conversations. Today I'd like to share with you some of the history of the F-35 program, how it has helped strengthen and sustain the UK's combat air sector, where the program is today, how we will continue adding advanced capabilities while driving down costs, as well as how Lockheed Martin is investing in the technologies that will enable the future of air combat going forward. While there are many exciting developments ahead for the F-35 program and Lockheed Martin, it's equally important to look at the long-standing history we have with the UK that has spurred us both to look forward to the horizon of technology and allowed us to gain mutual benefit from that collaboration. I myself, as mentioned, supported the C-130J program from first flight all the way through certification. I worked very closely with the United Kingdom and their local team in Marietta, Georgia, in support of that program. About 14 years of my career supported that effort in collaboration with the United Kingdom. Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company and chief developer of the assembly line technique of mass production, said it best: 'Coming together is the beginning; staying together is progress; but working together is success.' The United Kingdom and the United States relationship, I believe, is a testament to what Ford describes as success, particularly the F-35 program, which builds on a long-standing partnership between Lockheed Martin and the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as drives meaningful collaboration and innovation across industry and around the globe. We are proud to have had the UK as the only tier-one partner during the system development and demonstration phase of the program. The United Kingdom's defense industry has played a significant, key role in the F-35 program since its inception. Our nations have worked side by side to develop the F-35 into the formidable program it is today. A prime example of this partnership is illustrated by the F-35B, also known as the short takeoff and vertical landing variant, in regards to the lift system developed by Rolls-Royce. The development of that system began more than 20 years ago. The challenge was to provide a safe and robust short takeoff and vertical landing system for the F-35B within the physical confines of a common airframe that aligns with both the A-model, the conventional takeoff and landing aircraft, as well as the C-model, the carrier variant designed and developed specifically for the United States Navy. The result was a first-of-its-kind integrated system that combines a center-mounted lift fan, a downward-swiveling rear nozzle, and flight-stabilizing underwing roll posts, all activated at the push of a single button. It's this unique short takeoff and vertical landing capability of the F-35 that gives the UK a strategic carrier strike advantage. I personally have talked to many Harrier pilots about the difference between a Harrier and the F-35, and hands down, the Harrier pilots very much appreciate the F-35 and its new capabilities. Rolls-Royce is among more than 45 United Kingdom companies that contribute to the F-35 program: from the Martin Baker ejection seat, to the Cobham refueling probe, to the BAE Systems-built aft fuselage and horizontal tails. Every F-35 has British parts incorporated from nose to tail through the work of British industry. The F-35 program generates tremendous economic benefits to the United Kingdom as well as ensures long-term development of British jobs and skills. UK companies alone build 15% of the value of the more than 3,000 planned F-35s, driving significant export revenue as well as GDP growth for the United Kingdom. The program maintains and develops UK intellectual property, along with supporting high-skill, high-value jobs, with a projection of creating and supporting more than 20,000 jobs per year across every region of the UK for decades to come. And we know there will continue to be opportunity for industry as capability advancements and modernization continue through the life of the program, which is projected to endure through the 2070 time frame. We are particularly proud of the capital investment in, and knowledge and technology transfer to, the United Kingdom, including the BAE facility in Samlesbury where the F-35 aft fuselage and horizontal tails are manufactured and assembled, with a just over £600 million investment, £3.3 billion value of technical data transfer, and almost £30 million of training and technical assistance in design, manufacture, installation, repair, and operation of the F-35. The F-35 has helped strengthen and sustain the UK's combat air sector. Additionally, the F-35 program mostly benefits the Northwest economically and by providing significant employment there. From a defense and security aspect, our partnership yet again fits Ford's definition of success. The F-35 also reinforces the UK's alliance with your strongest allies by driving collaboration across industry, government, and military. As General Jeff Harrigan, also known as 'Cobra,' of the United States Air Force, so eloquently stated at the F-35 rollout ceremony for Denmark just a few short months ago, he said: 'Baked into this platform is interoperability, lethality, and a mindset, a culture of fifth-generation attitudes that understands the importance of training, exercising, and operating together as an alliance because we share the same values.' Through our work together, through our mutual success together, the F-35 program will continue to derive prosperity and ensure security for decades to come. Today, the F-35's advanced capabilities such as stealth, sensor fusion, and electronic warfare give its operators an unparalleled advantage against near-peer adversaries, and we are working closely with our customers to continually deliver the cutting-edge technologies and capabilities needed to outpace rapidly advancing threats. As we look to the future, our technological advancements and focus on digital transformation continue to create disruptive innovation in our processes, technologies, and tools, driving faster deliveries, agile responsiveness, and data-driven insights for our customers. By employing data as a strategic asset and focusing on F-35 affordability in both production and sustainment, we continue to drive down the cost of the F-35. The program provides 21st-century capability at the same or less cost than late-20th-century 4th-gen fighters. By investing in new technologies to enhance reliability and maintainability of the jet, we've lowered Lockheed Martin's portion of F-35 sustainment costs per flight hour by 44% over the past five years, and we expect that we will lower that figure another 40% over the next five years going forward. One way we can accomplish this is through constant pursuit of opportunities to automate redundant systems and processes, both on the airframe and in sustainment of the weapon system. In 2020 alone, we worked on more than 100 additional robotic projects for the F-35 production system. If you walk through our factories both in Fort Worth and in Salisbury, you will see the same Industry 4.0 technologies you may use at home, like smart tools and connected machines that speed production and improve quality. The Common Analysis Tool Set Data Manager tool is just one example of Lockheed Martin's mission-driven transformation on the F-35 program. This tool generates an aircraft's structural digital twin and is used to host and deliver F-35 structural engineering data and products to our customers in a connected graphical way. Because we have implemented this advanced capability, Lockheed Martin has documented a 75% cost reduction in delivering data products like force structure maintenance plans and individual aircraft tracking reports compared with historical methods. And we're not stopping with the F-35. Behind the scenes, we have projects like StarDrive at the Skunk Works to help advance and accelerate our operations and innovations. StarDrive is a multi-year upfront investment to re-engineer how we develop and build aircraft, introducing processes and tools that operate in a fully integrated digital work environment and connect previously disparate systems together through the digital thread. With StarDrive prototypes, we are bringing mission-driven transformation to life. These prototypes are delivering results: faster build times, less rework, greater accuracy, and decreased schedules to first flight. And while StarDrive looks to the next generation of air power solutions, we're taking lessons learned and incorporating them on existing programs every step of the way, not just at Aeronautics but across our entire Lockheed Martin portfolio. Investments in digital engineering, advanced manufacturing, and next-gen software development enable us to field technologies on the F-35 that ensure operators stay ahead of ever-advancing threats and can perform on every single mission. The F-35 is capable and flexible, able to perform high-end missions like striking targets deep in enemy territory or suppressing and destroying enemy air defenses while avoiding detection. At the same time, it can continue to perform low-end missions more traditionally associated with fighter aircraft, like close air support in a more permissive environment. The F-35 can also operate well beyond the standard fighter mission set. Today, we see the F-35 defining the 21st-century battlespace. This is something we like to talk a lot about at Lockheed Martin and are laser-focused on, starting with our CEO Jim Taiclet all the way down. We know that our customers' dominance on operations will be determined by our ability to bring together high-tech platforms into one cohesive network that spans every domain: air, land, sea, space, and cyber. When this network communicates and analyzes data seamlessly, it represents a force multiplier that is flexible, formidable, and decisive. Thanks to the advanced sensors and enhanced network-enabled operations, a fleet of F-35s can share information seamlessly with one another, with other 4th-gen assets, with naval systems, ground air, or space assets, making the whole force more effective. I'm proud to say that Lockheed Martin continues to lead the industry in integrating, testing, and maturing open systems-compliant, open system architectures. We have demonstrated connectivity between the F-35, the F-22, the U-2, and ground-based capabilities including US Army long-range missile systems to increase synergies across systems that empower and optimize the joint force and shorten the kill chain. This multi-domain integration — or Joint All-Domain Operations — gives the F-35 the ability to act as a system of systems, as a data producer and data consumer, and to share data in a vast connected network. The F-35 also boasts the Active Electronically Scanned Array radar, Distributed Aperture System, Electro-Optical Targeting System, and Helmet Mounted Display System, making it the most advanced communication and sensor suite of any fighter in history. All of this information gathered through these suites is automatically shared with other F-35 pilots and command and control operators to create a common battlespace picture and unprecedented situational awareness. This allows the focus to be on the fight, not the flight. The exciting part of everything I have just shared is that this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the F-35 program and what is on the horizon. Our strong relationship with the United Kingdom and the United States will be critical as we continue to accelerate and move the needle with multi-domain integration and ensure an even stronger future. Ford said that working together is success, and I think the partnership between our countries clearly confirms what he said. The success we have had together and will continue to have as a result of our long and strong collaboration, our commitment to collaborating with the United Kingdom and the United States on long-term programs like the F-35, is critical to maintaining the confidence of our allies in future collaborations. We're seeing many of the capabilities I've talked about here today come to life as part of the ongoing carrier strike group deployment. F-35Bs from the Royal Air Force 617 Squadron and from the United States Marine Corps are on board HMS Queen Elizabeth for a months-long deployment that will cover 26,000 nautical miles, from the North Atlantic to the Indo-Pacific. Recently during that deployment, the UK took a big step toward a two-strike carrier navy when an F-35 was the first F-35 to land aboard HMS Prince of Wales. Commodore Steve Moorhouse, commander of the UK's Carrier Strike Group, said the strategic significance of the F-35 operating from the Prince of Wales as well as HMS Queen Elizabeth was profound. It means Britain has a continuous carrier strike capability with one vessel always ready to respond, and he said a few other navies can do that. Britain is back in the front rank of maritime naval power. These powerful words embody the sentiments and excitement we share for the future of the United Kingdom's F-35 fleet. The partnership we share, the benefits that have resulted from our special relationship, and the hope we have for what's next is unique and has set us up to be successful for decades to come. Thank you for your time this evening. Paul, I'll turn it over to you before we open the floor for questions and answers.
P
Paul Livingston21:59
Thank you, Greg. Thank you, Sir Brian, and it's a pleasure to be with you all today. I really regret we're not doing this at Hamilton Place and able to go for a drink afterwards. Greg's in Fort Worth, I'm in London, but despite that, it's still an honor for Lockheed Martin and for me as the new Chief Executive to be delivering the annual Sopwith Lecture. Greg has described the critical role that international and industrial collaboration and investment play in delivering innovative defense capabilities. The F-35 program not only brings together great ingenuity and technology from across allied nations to deliver interoperable forces, it also benefits the UK both socially and economically. As Greg said, the F-35 program is the preeminent example of how defense supports leveling up. Almost 50% of those 20,000 jobs it provides are in the Northwest of the United Kingdom. It's also an excellent example of the Defence and Security Industrial Strategy in action. Greg highlighted the significant investments the program has made in infrastructure, digital manufacturing, and training in the UK. The F-35 has developed onshore sovereign UK capabilities in the combat air sector. Revenues from the program worth over £40 billion up to 2038 alone let companies invest in cutting-edge R&D in combat air and in other technologies for defense and civil sectors. So the F-35 supports the UK's ambition to be a global science and technology power. But I would like to talk about the important role the defense industry plays beyond just designing critical platforms and systems. First of all, defense is here to deliver missions, not commercial contracts. For the F-35, Lockheed Martin and its industry partners have staff deployed on board HMS Queen Elizabeth supporting the carrier strike group's deployment and operations. Beyond the F-35, we also provide personnel giving operational support for the nuclear deterrent. Over the last year, we've supported the UK's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We've used our 3D printing capabilities across the UK to produce personal protective equipment for the National Health Service, local authorities, and care workers. As many others in the defense industry, we directly supported the establishment of a national testing laboratory at Alderley Park in Cheshire. We supported local communities through charitable donations and the individual voluntary efforts of our own staff. We invest in innovative companies that help accelerate genome sequencing and vaccine development, and we accelerated over £600 million of early payments to UK businesses to help them through these uncertain and challenging times. Defense does level up the UK, and it strengthens the union. Lockheed Martin has operated here in the UK for over 80 years. From 1939 to 1945, we worked in Liverpool, the Midlands, Scotland, and Northern Ireland to produce 12 different types of aircraft for the Royal Air Force, complementing the production by Hawker Aircraft as — as Brian noted — the second company founded by Sir Thomas Sopwith, building on the sterling work of his first company, the Sopwith Aviation Company, which produced aircraft for Allied forces during the First World War. Today, Lockheed Martin works in over 20 locations around the country, from Scotland and Wales to Cornwall. We provide the postal sorting technologies for Royal Mail. We will deliver the UK's first ever vertical space launch, and we support various elements of national security endeavors. We invest £1.6 billion a year, supporting 20,000 jobs and over 1,000 companies — 80% of those companies are small and medium-sized enterprises. This shows the benefits of inward investment in the defense sector. Lockheed Martin is a US-headquartered company, but we're also a multinational company with a significant onshore presence here in the United Kingdom. The reach-back to the world's largest defense and aerospace company means that we can invest, and the benefits can be seen from the F-35 program: BAE Systems, GE, Martin Baker, Leonardo in Edinburgh, Thales, Cobham, Ultra, UTC Actuation, and Rolls-Royce immediately come to mind, and Greg's mentioned some of them. But think about the smaller, specialist, highly skilled and focused suppliers. In the fishing town of Stranraer in Southwest Scotland, just over 100 people work for Gentex. They make the high-tech helmet systems and components worn by every F-35 Lightning II pilot. In North Wales, Sealand Support Services will maintain and repair all F-35 aircraft in Europe and potentially others worldwide; that work is worth potentially £2.5 billion to the economy. In Northern Ireland, highly skilled innovation leads the way with Survitec and the crucial survival equipment, anti-G clothing that ensures pilots can cope with the high levels of acceleration the F-35 delivers. And towards the South Coast, Aero Gearbox which provides gear systems for the F-35 has doubled in size because of this program alone. Beyond the F-35, Lockheed has continued to support the growth of the UK space sector. We have worked with companies like Moog, Astra, and Tyvak to establish manufacturing facilities and supply chains in the UK and to export UK products back to the United States. We are keen to invest more in space to grow and diversify the UK's onshore satellite manufacturing in collaboration with industrial partners and the UK government, and we're exploring opportunities to invest in complex and disruptive weapons like anti-ship weapons, directed energy, and hypersonics. And for helicopters, we can build on our rich heritage with the Merlin platform, our worldwide reputation from Black Hawk, and our work on future vertical lift technologies at Sikorsky. But defense companies do much more. We support multiple sectors. Earlier, I mentioned I work with Royal Mail. Royal Mail uses our image recognition software to categorize and sort 11 billion letters and parcels every year, underpinning a critical communications infrastructure which, in the pandemic, was even more important. Not many know that the image recognition capability provided by Lockheed Martin is based on the investments made in sensing and artificial intelligence technology originally developed to meet defense requirements. We are also investing in space launch capabilities. These have civil as well as defense applications. They could allow the UK to open a new global low Earth orbit economy for research and development in microgravity environments — there's already interest in that from the health and agritech sectors. This again could support the UK in becoming a science and technology superpower. And we're investing in the UK's rich ecosystem of innovative startups, academic spin-offs, and small and medium-sized enterprises. Since 2019, Lockheed Martin's venture capital fund has been investing millions of pounds in the UK through a partner fund. We and our peers are strategic partners across multiple sectors. Our heritage, large presence, and investment allow us to adapt and support national initiatives and infrastructure. Building on that, my final point: defense supports social value. The government rightly expects that its procurements, including those for defense, will help fight climate change, promote equal opportunity, enhance well-being, tackle economic inequality, and support recovery from COVID-19. These are at the core of Lockheed Martin's approach to business. I've already spoken about how we've supported the UK's COVID response and recovery; this continues. I've spoken about how our work supports jobs and the leveling up agenda; this will also continue. On climate change, Lockheed Martin has a global Go Green 2030 carbon goal, including our facilities here in the UK. We are committed to outperforming the science-based target to prevent 1.5 degrees of warming. Since we started Go Green, we have reduced atmospheric carbon emissions by 47%, our landfill by 51%, and energy consumption by 19%, and work continues as we shift towards making defense capabilities green. And while we are constantly improving our workforce inclusion and diversity, my personal aim is to ensure Lockheed Martin is a place where people from every background and human experience are able to bring the best of themselves to work every day. We have focus initiatives in many DNI areas, and especially at the moment we're looking at how we develop our post-pandemic work environment to allow greater flexibility for our team and greater output for our customers. Prosperity, innovation, and social impact sit alongside each other, and the defense sector has a strong foundation on which to build. So how can we enhance these strengths and do more? First, I want to see us continue to move away from overly commercial, transactional contracts and relationships. We must collaborate on mission outcomes for defense, for security, for social value. Secondly, moving the needle will mean we need new ways of collaborating and co-investing, including an appetite for higher-risk research and development and infrastructure investment. Finally, inward investment will allow the UK to leapfrog its ambitions for defense and social value. The UK should encourage this to help grow onshore skills, maximize value for money, and contribute to prosperity. I was very proud to be announced as a member of Lord Brimstone's UK Investment Council, which will make recommendations to ensure a competitive regulatory environment that supports inward investment and entrepreneurial growth. I also look forward to working with the Ministry of Defence on the practical implications of the Defence and Security Industrial Strategy in ways that support investment and international collaboration, building on the success of programs like the F-35. In the end, this all comes down to people working with people, sometimes wearing different badges, logos, or flags, but all with a shared vision. I'm confident that we will all become more collaborative for the defense of space, aerospace, and social value. So on behalf of Greg and myself, thank you for listening, and we look forward to your questions.
B
Brian Burrage34:09
Thanks to both of you for that insight into both the F-35 program and the way it fits into the UK. There's a lot of questions, and I'll approach them thematically. There's quite a lot about the F-35 obviously, but there's some broader questions covering space, climate change, those sorts of things. So right off the top, and it's to do with exports — it won't surprise you. First question: news in the last few hours that Switzerland has chosen the F-35. Could you make any more comment on that and about the nature of the winning package, and will it change work share?
G
Gregory Ulmer34:47
Brian, it's a very exciting day for us. We just learned probably a couple hours before this webinar that the F-35 was chosen — 34, 36 aircraft, I should say — in support of the Swiss competition. As I understand it, there were four different categories in the competition: effectiveness, product support, cooperation, and offset. The F-35 ranked first in three of the four, so a very strong performance. It also was quoted as being about 2 billion francs below the next competitor in the source selection. So it's an exciting time for the program from an affordability perspective. From an offset or workshare perspective, the partnership requirements are set within the partnership, so it will not change the partnership relationship. The UK offset agreement or partnership work content will not change as a result of that; actually, they will benefit. Every aircraft produced will still have the aft fuselage produced by BAE, every helmet as Paul alluded to will have UK content, every aircraft will have a Martin Baker ejection seat in it. So it very much grows the production scope of the program as well as on the sustainment side. That said, each nation, Switzerland and others, want the ability to self-sustain their platform, so we will be working as we do with all customers related to the ability to self-sustain and support their aircraft.
B
Brian Burrage36:34
Yeah, thank you. And congratulations on that; it's an important win for you. And related to that, how — with the benefit of hindsight and some years gone by — how significant do you think it was for the UK to be the sole tier one partner? What do you think are the lasting legacies of that relationship compared with the sort of industrialization that you tend to go through with any purchasing nation?
G
Gregory Ulmer37:07
Well, you look at the F-35, and it took a long time to get through the system development and demonstration phase. But the relationship we established with the UK industry base working through that, if you think about the helmet, the lift fan, the systems on the airplane, the ejection seat and escape system — it's very complex. From a data fusion and capability point of view and the sensor suite, it's also complex. So we worked and sweated together on the development of that, and you create lasting, enduring relationships in that regard. Just within this week, I have been on the phone with UK industry, in particular BAE, regarding the future of the program. The cooperation, the jointness that still remains today and will for the life of this program.
B
Brian Burrage38:18
Thanks. And related to that — and this is probably something Paul will have a view on as well — the airplane as it came into UK service represented a huge jump in complexity and technology involved, the degree of integration, etc. What did that mean for skills transfer, building up expertise on the front line and in depth maintenance, and what approach did the company take on that?
G
Gregory Ulmer38:56
Well, from a complexity point of view, in some aspects it's actually simpler. The way we can fuse data, present data, integrate data, we can make it a lot simpler to the end user. From a troubleshooting point of view, from a maintenance point of view, the diagnostic system and prognostic system on the aircraft have the ability as the aircraft is flying to essentially self-report its condition. So in many ways, it's more simplistic. I will also say the younger generation in particular seems very keen on that ability in that technology. There's a resonance, if you will. The way we present data through the HUD, for example — I have been in demonstrations where we've had senior pilots say there is no way the human can absorb and collect that information, and the pilot in the simulation I was sitting in turned to the general and said, 'You mean this, this, this, and this?' and he obviously had full understanding of the battlespace situational awareness. It's a different mindset, but it seems to have a resonance, and we seem to be very successful with that. Paul, I'd offer maybe your perspectives.
P
Paul Livingston40:25
Yeah, thanks, Greg. I think just going back to Brian, a bit of the previous question: there's also the operational relationship built during the SDD phase. The relationships between the Royal Air Force, US Navy, US Marine Corps, and the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy are unparalleled, and we see those play out right now on Carrier Strike Group 21 with the interoperability. I think in CSG21, we've gone beyond interoperability into what the First Sea Lord referred to last year as 'interchangeability,' because literally you can have an airplane land on the deck and there'll be a US Marine Corps tech on one side and a Royal Navy tech on the other. The foundation of those relationships goes all the way back to that SDD phase. In terms of the UK skill base, both through design, development, and now into the sustainment phase, and don't forget F-35 will continue to grow in capability as time goes on. It's absolutely clear to me that the skills transfer over several years has underpinned the UK's ability to stay in the combat air game. Some of the things around the Tempest program are skills and technologies that have flowed through from the F-35 program. What's also great now is to see our own Lockheed Martin employees and employees of our partner companies on the ground at Marham with their sleeves rolled up, operating the Autonomous Logistics Information System — can never say that word, ALIS — but as I said in my remarks earlier, we've got people on the carrier supporting it as they go forward. Those are skills that are there for the next generations. Certainly when we look to the future, we're not just trying to recruit people who come out of the forces — that's an absolutely important place in our business for veterans — but I also will always bang the apprenticeship drum, being an ex-apprentice. These kinds of programs are the kind of things that when you go and talk to young kids looking at apprenticeships, technical colleges, and vocational training, you show a picture of the F-35 or a Merlin helicopter, and they're like, 'Okay, that's cool. I'll come do that. I'll come work on it.'
B
Brian Burrage43:06
And related to that, again a tactical point: what sort of feedback have you had from Marham, from the school house for training technicians and maintainers?
P
Paul Livingston43:18
I'll start with this one then hand it over to Greg. Declaring an interest here: my apprenticeship, as you pointed out, Brian, was in the simulation trade. I was used to hanging oscilloscopes off circuit boards and trying to work out what gates were being flipped between ones and zeros, albeit a very long time ago. You go there now, and the experience of being in these simulators compared to the ones we were building a few years ago — it's kind of like going from an old Nokia flip phone to an iPhone 12. It's that gargantuan a leap in technology and experience. The visual systems, which were my original specialization, are just phenomenally realistic. It's up there with some of the best games engines out there. Anyone who knows about simulation knows that used to be all the high-end simulation was in the military and civil aviation, and game companies took that over and drove that technology to a point where we now pull the game technology into the military world because the visuals are so realistic. So it's been a really great experience. And of course, they've now got the deployable simulators on board the carrier, so they're able to do that quality of training on board both in terms of continuation training and mission rehearsal, which I'm sure has been pretty useful in the situation CSG is currently in.
G
Gregory Ulmer45:00
I'll just pile on to what Paul was talking about. The feedback we get from the maintainers in the United States — I don't have direct feedback from the Marham team — but in the US, when we talk to the mechanics and technicians comparing legacy F-16, F-15, F-18 with an F-35, none of them want to go back, relative to the technology and the visual representation that Paul refers to. We actually have virtual reality devices, either on an iPad or on goggles, to work on the aircraft as you perform your work. It is very transformational relative to the capabilities we're seeing, and the resonance with the workforce is dramatic.
B
Brian Burrage45:51
Just sticking with the sort of internationalization of the program, and to prove we're a global society, I've got a couple of points from India coming. The first is just to remind me that it was Thomas Sopwith who set medical standards for pilots in his original test pilot school, and we have an aviation medicine specialist group, so they would insist I know that. But secondly, there's a question here: what are your investment thoughts about India from an F-35 or in general?
G
Gregory Ulmer46:25
From an investment point of view, we have to look to the United States government — a government-to-government agreement — regarding the ability to export to India. We will follow suit to that. We are working with the government of India on C-130J and other Lockheed Martin aspects. We are also interested perhaps in some F-16 pursuit, or what we call the F-21, for India as well. So we're keen on that, but we have to be careful not to get in front of the government-to-government relationship.
B
Brian Burrage47:05
Sure. Just then moving on to production costs. You mentioned some staggering savings as the program has gone through, but it takes some 20 years for the F-35 from 'flash to bang.' The sort of thing you're doing now in the Skunk Works — do you see that timescale being significantly compressed by an order of magnitude, say, which is what our civil counterparts are looking at?
G
Gregory Ulmer47:29
We do. I talked briefly about a system called StarDrive. We have talked as an industry about digital thread, but we are designing systems and assemblies in a single digital environment. Think of requirement definition, the engineering definition passing those requirements in a single system to our suppliers as well as within our own factories, then producing the tooling as well as the product itself. We're seeing span reductions from an assembly point of view on the order of 40-60% reduction in span time. We're doing deterministic assembly where we pre-drill all the holes full size at our supply base, and we bring those in for final assembly, and we're finding 100% compliance relative to that assembly. If you looked at an F-35 line, even though we have auto drills, there are still many hand-drilled holes, and there's a lot of rework required. A human drilling a hole gives opportunity for mistake or rework. But we are seeing 100% compliance relative to the artifacts we're producing. So I see it as truly transformational in terms of manufacturability, and that will play into sustainability. We're going to take that digital thread and play it forward into sustainment. We have interchangeable part requirements on aircraft today — it could be an elevator, a rudder, a wing assembly — and a lot of that today still requires artisanship to ensure that occurs. My belief in the future, based on deterministic assembly, is that that artisanship will not be as required, and you may be able to produce that part, for example, with shipboard 3D printing. It's literally transferring a digital data file to do that assembly. It's going to be transformational.
B
Brian Burrage49:50
Related to that, clearly with any mature production process the sticker price comes down, and Paul, you mentioned the Autonomous Logistics Information System, ALIS. The UK customer is highly attuned now to performance-based logistics with things like Tornado Attack as was, and now with Typhoon and Titan. How close do you see the F-35 getting to those sorts of models?
P
Paul Livingston50:22
That's a really interesting question because there's that natural tension when you have a multinational program: the benefits are lots of people buying lots of stuff gives you economy of scale, which means the price of everything is coming down as production processes improve. The law of unintended consequences sometimes is that you end up with different nations wanting to do slightly different things around how they sustain. Greg just spoke to that earlier regarding the Swiss — people will want to have a sustainment solution that works for them, but then how do you cleave that into a global supply chain if they're all different arrangements? I absolutely recognize the UK's desire to get to a kind of Titan-like model for the F-35 in the UK, and we're continuing to support those discussions and work out how we best fit that in with how things are being done in the US. There's also the US government JPO in that mix, so it is tricky to navigate that sometimes. But we absolutely recognize the need to help continue, as Greg said, on this great trajectory of sustainment cost coming down. We're not satisfied with the floor of that yet; I know Greg and the team are focused on how to make that even better in the future.
B
Brian Burrage51:56
I was going to ask you, Greg, what's the American customer looking for? Also, a very broad question specific to ALIS: just a little more perspective.
G
Gregory Ulmer52:02
On ALIS: think of it as Paul made mention of a flip phone. The ALIS system is essentially 20 years old; it was designed before the smartphone. What we have done in the last two years, in conjunction with the Joint Program Office and the partnership, is transfer and demonstrate a new hardware suite. We've taken the software and hosted it on a modern, today's integrated hardware design. The processing power alone was probably four-fold, so we've seen a very strong improvement in the ALIS system. The focus next is to update the software architecture hosted on that hardware. The intent is that you can take that software design and hand it to a customer, and they can implement it on any hardware they want as long as it meets the requirement set, so you're not locked in from a hardware perspective. The other thing is to create firewalls so the data is internal to the system, and then you allow the interface to the operator to design a sustainment solution set — maybe the way information is presented, maybe condition-based maintenance — but it ties back into the global supply system in terms of ordering parts and the more mainstream elements of the program. So as we move forward, you're going to see the ability to tailor your specific desire or requirement going forward.
B
Brian Burrage53:47
Yeah, thank you. There's a question about investment in the UK, and Paul used the term 'cutting-edge R&D.' Would you describe the degree of noble work that the program has brought into the UK — design engineering, production design, and possibly even certification of many systems?
P
Paul Livingston54:09
When you look at that supply chain everywhere, from the big players like BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce down through Martin Baker to the niche suppliers, there's no doubt I don't think there's another program out there that would have delivered that level of technical competence into the UK economy from a defense point of view. Because effectively you're building a component — designing it, building it, certifying it — but every user of the F-35, not just a UK buyer or a European buyer, benefits. So I don't think I could easily quantify in numbers what it means in terms of percentage of investment, particularly over such a long scale of time. But the reality is, Lockheed Martin UK is about 2,000 people give or take. The F-35 alone is about 20,000 jobs in the UK supply chain, and the vast majority of those are high-paying, well-compensated aerospace and defense jobs. Where else would you have got that kind of deal? Going back to Greg's point about being a tier-one partner from day one, whilst the workshare competition was run on a best athlete basis, there is no doubt that the level of interaction and understanding of the requirements that the UK had, along with the incredible base the UK has in terms of its inherent skills, brought those two things together back in the day. That's why the UK has such a significant workshare on the jet compared to anyone else.
B
Brian Burrage56:20
Okay. We'll go into some broader subjects now if you don't mind. Some of it around the Defence and Security Industrial Strategy, but again Paul, you mentioned your vision of a world of collaboration, co-investment, focusing on social value. You'll remember Paul Draper's industrial strategy with Strategic Partnering Arrangements. In many ways, there's something countercultural about the vision you create there and the customer-supplier interface that is drilled into every Ministry of Defence in virtually every country. But you have a unique piece of experience because the Military Flying Training contract scored a third of the marks for partnership. So say a bit more about how you think this transition could work and actually stick.
P
Paul Livingston57:23
Very interesting question. I think it starts with an acceptance that to get that collaboration, there's a joint requirement to invest and look at the risk profile together. Part of the problem is, when we won UK MFTS back in 2006, you put champagne corks, everyone's happy, and then we went to start the negotiation to close the deal down, and it all got very transactional very quickly. I remember saying to an unnamed — no longer working at the MOD — official at the time, 'So I thought we were partnering to do this?' They're like, 'Oh no, we're not partnering anymore, we're negotiating.' So why did you put a third of the marks against partnering? It blew my mind. Anyway, we got there in the end. But the reality is you have to be able to have more open conversations, look at investing together in technology development, and not go down the path of infinitely defining a requirement, spending five years defining it, then two years competing, picking a winner, negotiating, getting on contract, and by then — six, seven years have passed in a procurement cycle — suddenly the front line says, 'I don't want that anymore because I now want this,' and you go back to the change cycle. Anyone who works in defense industries on this call will understand that cycle. Let me offer an example from our postal business. We work with PostNord, which does the postal business for the Scandinavian region, and we're their partner. We have a defined number of people assigned to develop applications for them, with a set amount of money and hours, price agreed. They consistently tweak and define what they want in an agile sense. So one morning they come in and say, 'We've got this new problem, is there something you can do about it?' We work with them on what that approach might be, then do a couple of agile sprints. If that starts working or looks like the right solution, we carry it on. And if that bit works and they want to contract for more of it, we take it out of that development box and put it on contract as a firm capability. Having that developmental sandbox where you can play is really important, and I think we need to do more of that — not just one-on-one MOD and one industry player, but find ways to do that more collaboratively across the industry and defense landscape.
B
Brian Burrage1:00:25
And Greg, how does that vision translate across the Atlantic? Would you see the same sort of conversations going on with the DoD?
G
Gregory Ulmer1:00:30
Yes, it's identical relative to the approach. I think the struggle we're having more broadly in aerospace and defense is the shrinking of industry supporting that. The commercial sector is very dominant, more so than it used to be in the past. It really does make it a little more difficult, and I'm talking about the speed of technology. Paul alluded to it, but the cycle times we are undertaking, because you've got to take something from — in the United States we call it TRL 3 or 5 — and get it to 8 in order to get to a production contract or take it forward. It is very competitive, and there's not a lot of dollars associated there. By the time you get it to a 7 or 8 where you can get to contract, time has gone by, but technology is screaming fast. So very much aligned with the comments Paul made.
B
Brian Burrage1:01:36
Thank you. I just want to switch back again to space. We have three areas of focus in the current era: climate change, future flight which includes space, and the aerospace professional of tomorrow. Just on space, you — as Paul mentioned — you're in the vertical launch business, and the UK has not been in that business since Blue Streak, and there aren't many people around who will remember that. But what enticed you to enter the UK's space sector?
P
Paul Livingston1:02:20
For us, space is one of the most — Lockheed Martin is structured into four big business areas; Greg runs one of them, and space is one of those four areas. It's fundamental to everything we do as a company because we've been involved in space for the longest time. We've been part of every one of the really critical space missions from the US. We know it's an area where it's important to do international growth. There's definitely an appetite from the UK government. I talked a little earlier about the investment council, and one of the questions the government has is 'What does it take for industry to invest in something?' This is broad, not necessarily aerospace defense. One of the things we look for is a consistent demand signal. Is this something that's just a one-off, or is this something where the UK as a government and a nation wants to have an enduring capability? So that drove part of it. Also, Scotland and vertical launch provides some unique abilities to access specific orbits. By the way, I'm going way beyond my technical competence here — I'm not a space engineer — but my understanding is that Scotland has some unique elements. So it could be that it's not just somewhere we launch for projects for the UK, but hopefully somewhere we're launching for international projects as well, providing that service. We're continuing to work with the UK Space Agency, Space Command, the space council within government, and all the government authorities. One interesting question I guess that's still being brought together is the regulatory framework: what will that look like, who will be the regulator? My assumption is it's the CAA, but I think that's yet to be confirmed. So one of the really interesting things to talk about between now and when we launch is who's regulating going up there and going through UK airspace.
B
Brian Burrage1:04:37
Yeah, and by that stage, we will — I'm assured — have the UK Space Strategy on the streets; we just responded to the consultation today in fact. What about your efforts in climate change? What advice, if any, are you being asked for by governments — US government, UK government — about the climate implications of the capability you provide? Is that a big issue yet in the US?
G
Gregory Ulmer1:05:08
It is becoming more of an issue in terms of the actual product itself: F-35, C-130s, what have you. They are very interested. We are doing quite a bit of work in the energy sector relative to electric-driven engines, motors, and systems — all electric systems as opposed to fossil fuel kinds of systems. But probably more importantly is the operational aspect, our factories, our office spaces, and the green associated with that. For example, in Palmdale, where the Skunk Works is, we have two separate solar farms that supply electricity to the facility. We also treat our own water in terms of clean water. So 'Go Green' as we call it in the United States is very prominent. We have contractual requirements coming in that ensure we will continue to advance in this regard. We are along the types of numbers Paul alluded to in terms of percentage landfill reduction and efficiency; we are making very similar advancements in the United States.
B
Brian Burrage1:06:24
And in the UK, Paul? The fourth document in the suite around the Integrated Review was the UK's Climate Change and Defence Climate Change Strategy. What's the dialogue like there?
P
Paul Livingston1:06:35
Very proactive. The MOD ran — I'm sure most people are aware — called the Defence Suppliers Forum. There's a climate change working group within that forum, so industry and MOD are participating in really good dialogue together. You'll have seen public procurement regulations coming out now around contracts over a certain value requiring a commitment to net zero. It comes alongside the UK government's leadership with COP26 coming up in Glasgow; it's very much on the agenda. And of course, as the MOD has looked at the definition of social value and scoring which will be scoring criteria, we're already seeing that come into current RFPs and invitations to negotiate. There is a requirement to make your commitments around how green your solution is going to be. One interesting thing we're all wrestling with: if you're a big company, you probably don't want to measure people just on their carbon neutrality on a single proposal, but look at what that company is doing overall towards global warming. The law of perverse incentives would be to go net zero on this thing because you've got to win it, but you can shuffle your manufacturing somewhere else, and actually it could become something you gain if you did it wrong. It's a really difficult one to judge because the approach for large companies versus SMEs would be quite different. What might allow the government to measure a large company well might be very onerous for a small company to comply to, and you don't want to drive them to be uncompetitive. So there's a very intelligent look that needs to be done, which is why the DSF has set up a working forum to look at climate change, and Lockheed Martin will play our part in that dialogue.
B
Brian Burrage1:08:55
Yeah, good. Time is coming against us. Just in our third area of interest, the aviation and aerospace profession of tomorrow — more of a comment really, but it's an interesting one and plays to the international flavor of both the Society and the sector. Here is a member from India saying he wonders whether there's any scope for international aerospace skill development programs so that graduates from different parts of the world can bridge the aerospace industrial skill gap, like something along the lines of an international apprenticeship program and internship at Lockheed Martin. For a global company, is that something that has resonance with you?
P
Paul Livingston1:09:51
From an international point of view, the one thing you always rub up against in the defense world is citizenship requirements, security requirements, and that can make those kinds of schemes more challenging to implement. That said, we have operations on and off in about 50 countries around the world. We have in Canada, Australia, Poland, in a lot of people on the ground, and in other countries we're looking at how to grow that presence. There are countries where we have put in programs to support education, Discovery Centers, R&D places to help garner and help talent along. The other thing we can do is be a flag bearer for the other industries in our supply chain because we're big and have a significant presence. One of the reasons we support the 5% Club as a patron is to underline our support not just for Lockheed Martin's apprentice, graduate, and early career schemes — which are excellent — but the wider UK, because we want to see a thriving skill base in engineering and technology throughout the UK supply chain, not just inside Lockheed Martin. It doesn't do anybody any good; it's got to be across the UK. Where there is opportunity to do international collaboration, we absolutely would look to do that, but there is always that difficulty in the defense sector around the requirements governments will put on us about who can and can't work on our programs.
G
Gregory Ulmer1:11:44
We are doing it, especially for the F-35 program. We have apprenticeships where we bring — we call them interns in the United States — actual college students or early career, some for many of the partner nations. Part of the agreement in terms of the partnership was participation within the program. For example, if we stepped out of my office onto the floor today, we would be able to find partner nation participants conducting work, participating in the program directly.
B
Brian Burrage1:12:27
Thank you for that. That's an optimistic note on which to close the question period. Thank you very much for a really interesting and in-depth look at both the F-35 and broader Lockheed Martin. It's striking how much technology has moved in the life of this program, and striking too that we have to make as much effort as Paul described in adjusting our behaviors to keep up if we're to preserve the good things that arise out of human interaction and collaboration. It's easy to find ourselves stepping back because the technology will do it, and that can be the worst thing that could happen. I know Tommy Sopwith recognized that much of what he wrote about is about the human endeavor in all of this. So some very good insights there which are really relevant for now and for the future. I'm really grateful for your time; you both have busy programs, and it's very good of you to spare the time for us. I will just mention a couple of our next events. First, our Amy Johnson named lecture takes place on the 8th of July, delivered by Air Commodore Suraya Marshall, who went through the MFTS program — I think, Paul, as a nav going to the F3? She's now coming down to the Royal Air Force College at Cranwell, and her address is entitled 'Inspiring, Training, and Developing the Next Generation.' That'll be really interesting; she's the first female commandant of the Air Force Academy. Then secondly, just before that, on the 5th of July and somewhat related to this lecture, we've got the Lanchester Lecture on aerodynamics and weapons integration. Trevor Birch, Technical Fellow at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, will talk about the integration of weapons and other stores both internally and externally — the internal part is something we wrestled with quite a lot in the early days of the F-35. That'll be a very interesting lecture, I feel sure. But bear those in mind — all on the website, you can book as normal. Meanwhile, thank you all for joining us tonight, and I wish you a good evening wherever you are. Good night. Good night.