Opening Statement (As Prepared)

Click here to stream the hearing.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you, Chairman Wittman, and welcome to our witnesses.
 
This subcommittee’s last F-35 oversight hearing was two and a half years ago. Given the fact that this is DOD’s largest weapons program, I think this public hearing is overdue and look forward to our government witnesses updating Congress and the public on F-35 program execution.
 
The F-35 is one of, if not THE most capable fighters on the planet. When I speak to military leaders around the world, I always hear how much they enjoy flying the F-35, and how impressed they are with its performance. I don’t want that point to get lost in today’s hearing. What’s important is that we continue to deliver future capabilities to the operational forces as soon as possible, and at costs that the department can afford. That’s what this hearing is about – oversight into the execution of development, production, and sustainment of this key weapon system.
 
Two months ago, we marked the 22nd anniversary of the start of F-35 development. Today, this program continues to suffer unforeseen cost overruns and schedule delays. The much-needed Technical Refresh 3, or “TR-3”, which will ultimately deliver Block 4 capabilities, is not ready, and the government ceased accepting deliveries of new aircraft until TR-3 testing is complete. Moreover, the department notified the committee a few months ago of another schedule delay that pushes delivery of TR-3 to mid-2024. Assuming this new schedule holds, that would result in almost 18-months of delays, and almost one billion dollars of cost overruns. I hope that our witnesses today will explain root causes for these delays and update us on progress toward executing this new schedule. We need to deliver Block 4 capabilities to the operational forces as soon as possible, and TR-3 is the hardware that supports these future capabilities.
 
The F-35 program is also in the early developmental stages of a future engine necessary to sustain the aircraft throughout the F-35 program’s life cycle. This issue is broader than just a discussion on the engine – it encompasses propulsion, system cooling, electrical power generation, and electrical distribution. We want this propulsion and air system sub-program to meet its cost, schedule, and performance metrics. We want it to be on time and on budget, and we want it to meet warfighter requirements. I look forward to hearing from the witnesses regarding this development effort, and hope that they will clearly identify the critical paths to success, and any mitigating efforts to drive out or minimize execution risk.
 
Turning to sustainment. The Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act prohibited the Department from entering into a multiyear Performance Based Logistics sustainment contract unless and until the Secretary of Defense certified to Congress that such a contract would either reduce sustainment costs or increase readiness. I understand that the Department recently ceased negotiations with Lockheed Martin regarding a potential sustainment P-B-L, and indicated as the primary reason that they could not meet the Congressionally mandated certification requirements. I find it puzzling that a multi-year sustainment contract, as compared to annual sustainment contracts, could not either drive down costs or increase readiness. Ultimately, sustainment costs will determine whether the Department can afford to procure to its objective fleet size of 1,763 aircraft for the Air Force, 420 aircraft for the Marine Corps, and 273 aircraft for the Navy. I think it would be helpful for our witnesses to update the subcommittee on the sustainment strategy and explain how this strategy will deliver the readiness we need at an affordable cost.
 
Finally, to our GAO witness – Mr. Ludwigson – we are very interested in your perspective on all these thorny issues. This subcommittee relies heavily on GAO to provide an independent and objective analysis of program execution, and your testimony here today will help this subcommittee determine where we should best focus our attention going forward.
 
In closing, the Tactical Air and Land Forces subcommittee remains supportive of this program, but the department must continue its work to drive out schedule delays and avoid cost overruns. I thank the witnesses for their appearance today and look forward to their testimony.
 
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.  
 
###