Politics: Somebody's Lying.
The General Accounting Office revealed yesterday that wildly expensive Air Force Boondoggle the F/A-22 Raptor had once again breached a new level of cost-overrun. Remember, the Raptor was originally envisioned when we had a Cold War to fight, as Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass) points out in this Washington Post item.
Since that original requisition for 750 Raptors, the plane has grown more expensive, and the costs have forced the number that the Pentagon could buy further down. As of right now, the Air Force can only buy about 300 of the planes, and of course, they won't be ready until 2005. So, no plane, $37 billion spent and, according to the GAO report, a new cost overrun of $1.3 billion to go with the $876 million cost overrun from last year. That's more than $2 billion dollars.
Scared yet? How about this: The Pentagon thinks that the congressional cap on the plane nobody's seen yet is too low. Congress wants to spend no more than $37 million on the plane. The Pentagon thinks that, not including the $1.3 billion overrun announced this week, the plane will actually cost about $43 billion.
Shouldn't we maybe spend some of that money on these people?
Anyhow, here are three quotes from the Post piece referenced above. Who's lying?
The GAO?
Air Force Spokeswoman Teresa Connor?
Lockheed Martin spokesman Sam Grizzle?
The General Accounting Office revealed yesterday that wildly expensive Air Force Boondoggle the F/A-22 Raptor had once again breached a new level of cost-overrun. Remember, the Raptor was originally envisioned when we had a Cold War to fight, as Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass) points out in this Washington Post item.
Since that original requisition for 750 Raptors, the plane has grown more expensive, and the costs have forced the number that the Pentagon could buy further down. As of right now, the Air Force can only buy about 300 of the planes, and of course, they won't be ready until 2005. So, no plane, $37 billion spent and, according to the GAO report, a new cost overrun of $1.3 billion to go with the $876 million cost overrun from last year. That's more than $2 billion dollars.
Scared yet? How about this: The Pentagon thinks that the congressional cap on the plane nobody's seen yet is too low. Congress wants to spend no more than $37 million on the plane. The Pentagon thinks that, not including the $1.3 billion overrun announced this week, the plane will actually cost about $43 billion.
Shouldn't we maybe spend some of that money on these people?
Anyhow, here are three quotes from the Post piece referenced above. Who's lying?
The GAO?
The GAO report released yesterday chastised the Air Force for its failure to improve the production process in such a way that would help contain costs. "The Air Force has not addressed ongoing problems with the developmental testing and therefore remains at high risk for further schedule delays," the report said.
Air Force Spokeswoman Teresa Connor?
"We feel that we have good visibility in our cost estimate," said Teresa Connor, an Air Force spokeswoman. "It would be premature to respond until we have had a chance to review the final report in its entirety. The Air Force stands by the F/A-22 program and we believe that we have a plan to provide our nation with the world's most advanced air dominance jet that will serve a critical joint war-fighting mission and ultimately save American lives."
Lockheed Martin spokesman Sam Grizzle?
A Lockheed spokesman said company officials have not reviewed the report. "F/A-22 production costs have declined over time," spokesman Sam Grizzle said. "We anticipate that they will be reduced further as production quantities increase and further cost reduction initiatives are enacted."
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home