The U.S. military’s F-35 fighter jets were available to fly only about half the time in 2024 due to maintenance and sustainment problems tied to Lockheed Martin, according to a new Pentagon watchdog report. The findings come from a recent audit by the Defense Department’s Office of the Inspector General, first reported by Reuters.
The audit found the aircraft’s availability rate fell well below Pentagon requirements, raising questions about contract oversight for the military’s most expensive weapons program. Reuters reached out to Lockheed Martin for comment, but the company did not immediately respond.
Why It Matters
The F-35 is the Pentagon’s largest acquisition program, with estimated lifetime costs exceeding $2 trillion to buy, operate, and sustain the fleet. Aircraft availability directly affects pilot training, force readiness, and U.S. military commitments worldwide.
Persistent sustainment problems have also drawn scrutiny from Congress and defense auditors, as lawmakers assess whether contractors and the Pentagon are enforcing performance standards tied to taxpayer-funded contracts.
What To Know
The Inspector General audit found that U.S. F-35 aircraft were available to fly only about 50 percent of the time in 2024—roughly 17 percentage points below the Pentagon’s minimum performance requirement. The report concluded that maintenance shortcomings and weak contract enforcement contributed to the shortfall.
According to the watchdog, the Pentagon’s F-35 Joint Program Office did not consistently hold Lockheed Martin accountable for poor sustainment performance. Auditors said readiness metrics and other measurable performance requirements were not included—or enforced—in certain sustainment contracts.
The report also found that the Pentagon paid Lockheed Martin about $1.7 billion under the sustainment contract without applying economic penalties, even though aircraft availability fell short of required levels.
Explicit caveat: The audit assesses aircraft availability and contract oversight but does not evaluate combat effectiveness, pilot proficiency, or whether the aircraft met operational mission requirements during deployments. The report also does not assign criminal or civil liability to Lockheed Martin.
What People Are Saying
The Defense Department’s Office of the Inspector General said in its report that the Pentagon “did not always hold Lockheed Martin accountable for poor performance related to F-35 sustainment.”
The watchdog said this occurred because the Joint Program Office “did not include aircraft readiness performance or other measurable contract requirements and did not enforce material inspection and government property reporting requirements.”
Lockheed Martin did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Reuters.
What Happens Next
The Inspector General recommended changes to contract structure and oversight to better enforce readiness requirements. Pentagon officials are expected to review the findings and determine whether contract modifications or corrective actions are warranted.
Congressional defense committees may also examine the report as part of upcoming budget and oversight hearings on the F-35 program.
