Engine Stall

A plan to radically alter the way the Air Force sustains the Boeing-built C-17 airlifter has unraveled, leading the service to leave the current structure -- a performance-based logistics contract with Boeing, who subcontracts engine work to F117 motor manufacturer Pratt & Whitney -- in place for now.

As Inside the Air Force reported in April, the service hoped to separate F117 engine sustainment from the C-17 Global Integrated Sustainment Program (GISP) led by Boeing, and compete sustainment and supply-chain management of the engine on a standalone basis. But Boeing and Pratt & Whitney, who owns the data rights to that motor, raised concerns long ago that the Air Force lacked the information to hold a true competition.

The Air Force appears to have come to the same conclusion, according to a statement today from service spokesman Ed Gulick:

The Air Force issued a competitive solicitation for F117 (C-17) engine sustainment in 2013, based on rigorous market research into industry capabilities to provide both engine overhaul and supply chain management. The Air Force anticipated significant savings and preferred terms and conditions to be derived from the competition. Unfortunately, no viable offers were received. As a good steward of taxpayer dollars, the Air Force cannot justify continuing the acquisition and is canceling the existing F117 engine sustainment solicitations. We will be revisiting the strategy to develop an affordable approach to achieve both the near- and long-term goals of the Air Force, while ensuring continued warfighter support for F117 engine sustainment on the existing C-17 Globemaster Integrated Sustainment Partnership until the revised strategy is implemented.

Defense companies Chromalloy and MTU, as well as commercial airlines that operate and maintain the engine the F117 is derived from like United Airlines, had been rumored as potential competitors to Pratt.

Boeing's GISP program manager, Gus Urzua, highlighted the challenge of holding a competition without access to sufficient technical data in an interview with Inside the Air Force in September 2012:

"If you're Pratt & Whitney or any other company, you say, 'Hey, I spent my money to develop it. I don't owe it to you and I'm not going to give it to you,'" Urzua said. "Now that's where it gets into a little bit of a controversy, is whether or not the Air Force has enough data to be able to populate a solicitation and give the supplier that's bidding enough information . . . to be able to execute to the contract they're bidding on. I'm not going to tell you one way or another, but there are varying opinions as to whether or not that exists and whether or not the Air Force can viably compete."