The CoD scrutinized the aircraft unit costs, technical calculations and overall decision-making process that underpin the Fighter Replacement Program (FRP) when it questioned defense minister Peter Christensen and officials from the New Fighter Program Office (NFPO) on Wednesday.
Moreover, the CoD asked the minister and NFPO experts to explain the rationale behind the eventual choice of aircraft, and to justify capital costs relating to both the flyaway unit purchase price and lifecycle for each of the short-listed aircraft competing in the FRP.
"Of fundamental importance is that we understand how the decision on selection was reached. We need to know the foundation for this, as well as the technical information and cost evaluation data on which calculations are based," said Rasmus Jarlov, chairman of the CoD.
The continuing talks on the FRP are expected to result in a preliminary cross-party agreement to purchase the F-35A ahead of the NATO summit meeting in Warsaw in July.
The NFPO’s calculations concerning flight hours per fuselage, and lifecycle costs of the competing aircraft, are proving to be particularly contentious against the backdrop of the ongoing cross-party political debate. The calculations were contained in the NFPO’s candidate aircraft evaluation report.
One major bone of contention is the NFPO’s assessment of the F-35. The agency calculated that the F-35 would deliver 8,000 flight hours per fuselage. By contrast, the NFPO returned 6,000 flight hours for both the Airbus-led European consortium’s Eurofighter Typhoon and Boeing’s F/A-18F Super Hornet.
Airbus and Boeing questioned the NFPO’s assessment of their aircraft when both manufacturers were invited, separately, before the CoD in the days after the Danish government F-35A announcement May 12. (end of exerpt)
Click here for the full story, on the Defense News website.
-ends-
from Defense Aerospace - Press releases http://ift.tt/25m6Yjt
via Defense
No comments: