Saxby Chambliss: “The business case for the F-22 is clear and was validated during the QDR by the Joint Army Dominance Study. This study…”

“The business case for the F-22 is clear and was validated during the QDR by the Joint Army Dominance Study. This study included any number of options of tactical air mixes, including various combinations of F-22s, FA-18s, and joint strike fighter and other airborne weapons systems, so we are not proceeding with a random plan but one that has been validated by careful analysis. The business plan was also validated by the IDA study, again the only independent organization that has looked at this multiyear plan. There are six criteria for meeting a multiyear contract. The independent IDA business case analysis judges the F-22 program according to each of these six criteria. I mention this because there is a GAO study that came out, coincidentally, this week relative to the multiyear procurement of the F-22. It is critical of the multiyear contract. The GAO study, though, contains, frankly, false factual information. For example, in the GAO study they talk about the cost of the airplane actually increasing under the multiyear contract. But what they fail to take into consideration is that originally, before the reprogramming to do 20 airplanes this year and 20 in the next budget and 20 in the next budget, the Air Force was going to ask for 29 planes in the next budget and 27 in the following budget. If you build 29 versus 20, it is going to be cheaper. But that is the factual information that the GAO plugged into their numbers--29 instead of 20.…”