GAO Asks Pentagon to Justify Fighter Jet
Report Cites Cost, Delays on F/A-22
By Greg Schneider
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 16, 2004; Page E12
The General Accounting Office yesterday called on the Pentagon to do a better job of justifying why it needs the F/A-22 fighter plane, a Lockheed Martin-built Air Force program that the agency said continues to suffer from delays and escalating costs.
Coming in a climate when tight budgets and debate over future military needs has already led to the cancellation of one major weapons program, the Comanche helicopter, the GAO report renewed calls from opponents for an end to the F/A-22, which has already cost some $40 billion and could cost another $40 billion to complete.
"Congress needs to act swiftly and eliminate this platinum-plated boondoggle," Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense said in a news release.
A spokesman for Lockheed Martin Corp.'s factory in Marietta, Ga., that builds the plane said many of the problems identified in the GAO report have been addressed. "Overall the program is healthy. It's technically sound, and it remains the Air Force's highest modernization priority," spokesman Greg Caires said.
The GAO, which is the investigative arm of Congress, said the program's costs have climbed so much that the Air Force won't be able to buy as many of the radar-evading fighter planes as it wants. The service plans to buy 277 planes but could afford only 218 at current costs, the report said.
It said the per-plane price of the F/A-22, not counting the cost of development, has risen to $153 million from the $69 million envisioned by the Air Force when the program began in the late 1980s. The plane's technology is still being developed even though the Pentagon has already ordered 52 planes -- with preliminary orders for 22 more. Development costs have risen as well -- by 127 percent, the report said.
What's more, the Air Force plans to add extra air-to-ground missions to a plane designed for air-to-air combat, which could push costs up another $8 billion or more, the report said.
The GAO said it was concerned that glitches have caused so many delays that the Air Force will not have enough time to complete testing before it is scheduled to decide whether to start full-scale production of the plane in December.
For instance, the agency said the Air Force originally wanted to see the plane's sophisticated avionics, or electronics gear, achieve 20 hours of uninterrupted flying time without a software failure. When the plane couldn't achieve that, the Air Force changed its goal to flying five hours without a software failure. As of January, the plane could average no better than 2.7 hours.
In addition, the plane's microprocessor is an obsolete model no longer manufactured. The Air Force plans to switch to a newer type, including one created for the upgraded F-16 fighter jet, a type of plane far older than the F-22 but also built by Lockheed Martin.
The GAO also found that the F/A-22's computer-based maintenance system has suffered glitches that cause the plane to miss a significant amount of test-flying time. The Air Force had hoped to get the plane to fly nearly two hours between maintenance events by this point in the program, but has been unable to do better than an average of 30 minutes, the report said.
Caires said many of those problems have eased since January, when the GAO last investigated. The avionics gear is close to flying five hours between failures, he said. While the microprocessors are outmoded, they are ample for current mission requirements, and the plane has plenty of room to add computer gear, he said.
The maintenance system also is improving with use, "learning" how to adjust for real-world experience versus engineering expectations, Caires said.
He said the company was "willing to support" any effort by the Pentagon to look more closely at the costs and benefits of the program, as suggested by the GAO. The Defense Department, in a written response to the GAO report, said it was giving the program a more thorough review as part of the president's next budget submission to Congress.
Report Cites Cost, Delays on F/A-22
By Greg Schneider
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 16, 2004; Page E12
The General Accounting Office yesterday called on the Pentagon to do a better job of justifying why it needs the F/A-22 fighter plane, a Lockheed Martin-built Air Force program that the agency said continues to suffer from delays and escalating costs.
Coming in a climate when tight budgets and debate over future military needs has already led to the cancellation of one major weapons program, the Comanche helicopter, the GAO report renewed calls from opponents for an end to the F/A-22, which has already cost some $40 billion and could cost another $40 billion to complete.
"Congress needs to act swiftly and eliminate this platinum-plated boondoggle," Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense said in a news release.
A spokesman for Lockheed Martin Corp.'s factory in Marietta, Ga., that builds the plane said many of the problems identified in the GAO report have been addressed. "Overall the program is healthy. It's technically sound, and it remains the Air Force's highest modernization priority," spokesman Greg Caires said.
The GAO, which is the investigative arm of Congress, said the program's costs have climbed so much that the Air Force won't be able to buy as many of the radar-evading fighter planes as it wants. The service plans to buy 277 planes but could afford only 218 at current costs, the report said.
It said the per-plane price of the F/A-22, not counting the cost of development, has risen to $153 million from the $69 million envisioned by the Air Force when the program began in the late 1980s. The plane's technology is still being developed even though the Pentagon has already ordered 52 planes -- with preliminary orders for 22 more. Development costs have risen as well -- by 127 percent, the report said.
What's more, the Air Force plans to add extra air-to-ground missions to a plane designed for air-to-air combat, which could push costs up another $8 billion or more, the report said.
The GAO said it was concerned that glitches have caused so many delays that the Air Force will not have enough time to complete testing before it is scheduled to decide whether to start full-scale production of the plane in December.
For instance, the agency said the Air Force originally wanted to see the plane's sophisticated avionics, or electronics gear, achieve 20 hours of uninterrupted flying time without a software failure. When the plane couldn't achieve that, the Air Force changed its goal to flying five hours without a software failure. As of January, the plane could average no better than 2.7 hours.
In addition, the plane's microprocessor is an obsolete model no longer manufactured. The Air Force plans to switch to a newer type, including one created for the upgraded F-16 fighter jet, a type of plane far older than the F-22 but also built by Lockheed Martin.
The GAO also found that the F/A-22's computer-based maintenance system has suffered glitches that cause the plane to miss a significant amount of test-flying time. The Air Force had hoped to get the plane to fly nearly two hours between maintenance events by this point in the program, but has been unable to do better than an average of 30 minutes, the report said.
Caires said many of those problems have eased since January, when the GAO last investigated. The avionics gear is close to flying five hours between failures, he said. While the microprocessors are outmoded, they are ample for current mission requirements, and the plane has plenty of room to add computer gear, he said.
The maintenance system also is improving with use, "learning" how to adjust for real-world experience versus engineering expectations, Caires said.
He said the company was "willing to support" any effort by the Pentagon to look more closely at the costs and benefits of the program, as suggested by the GAO. The Defense Department, in a written response to the GAO report, said it was giving the program a more thorough review as part of the president's next budget submission to Congress.