>> yes, sir. >> well, i will defer the details to general bogdan. this aircraft is going to be much more upgrade bl than the f-22 was. but having said that, we've already identified a need for an upgrade from the current -- well, from the now-being-installed technical refresh ii processer which provides additional capability relative to the processers that have been in the aircraft to this point. we've identified a need for an upgrade to that, a technical refresh iii processer. in this program moving from one processer to another is not nearly as arduous a problem as in the f-22 where there was a lot of software that was developed that was developed with features that were tied very specifically to the processers in order to maximize capability. but it's still not a trivial matter as has been demonstrated recently by the stability problems that we now hope have been resolved with the technical refresh ii processer. so, you know, upgradeability being built in, but that doesn't mean that it's going to be trivial to execute. >> okay. general bogdan, qu

bogdan: it is both. how do you provide the incentives for a military person to continue moving up in rank if you leave him in a job for five or six years? that is sometimes necessary for big programs. >> i've heard it from some of our partners overseas, or security partners generally when talking about acquiring certain weapon systems, they worry about beingg with a country -- a plane with a country instead of a country with a plane. what does that mean in terms of cost of the aircraft and the number of aircraft needed to contribute meaningfully to the program? how many joint strike fighters need a country supplier to have a meaningful contribution to defense? lt. gen. bogdan: an interesting question. countryto what each cares about in terms of its resources and what they care to defend. our i will tell you is even smallest nations on the program are looking at at least two squadrons of f 35's. willdea that a partnership be working together to maintain and train the airplanes is a huge deal for them beca

general bogdan. >> thank you, sir. chairman mccain, ranking member reid, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity here today to discuss the f-35 lightning 2 program. my purpose here today is to provide you an honest, balanced assessment of where the program stands today. that means i'll tell you the good, the bad and the ugly about the program and tell you what my team is doing to reduce costs, improve f-35 performance and meet our scheduled commitments. the f-35 lightning 2 is of vital importance to the security of the united states, and as the program executive officer and program director, i'm committed to delivering an affordable, reliable and sustainable fifth-generation weapons system to our war fighters and those of our international partners and foreign military sales customers. overall, the f-35 program is executing well across the entire spectrum of acquisition to include development and design, flight test, production fielding, base stand-up, maintenance and support and building

general bogdan, you were right. there's a perception issue both in what they are going to get and what they expect to get but there's also this perception that i've held and i use this as an example. i've been to no less than 14 hearings dealing with changes to retirement plans, taking away of the housing transferability and tri-care. when the pentagon needs to save money, they go to those programs and i always use the example that we haven't had as many of these. so i hear statements like this from one of our partners from the australian defense, keith joyner said it. he's responsible for evaluating this and he said some systems like the radar are fundamentally worse than earlier. that is not a good sign. the next software version won't be available. here we are with bug fixes for the next seven years and they are looking at -- am i correct in this? they are re-evaluating their purchases on this. i go back home and talk to soldiers and they say, i just lost a gi bill benefit. how do i talk to them about this? i kin

secretary bogdan?> i can't speak for certain but i think what he was trying to say is that both statements i think are correct. we will replace -- >> both statements can't be correct. >> we will replace the a-10 with the f-35. that is correct. but the f-35 will not do the missions in the same way the a-10 does. iit will do it differently. the a-10 is designed to be low and slow "-end-quotes to the target that it was engaging relatively speaking. we will not use the f-35 in the same way. so they perform the mission differently. >> select the ask doctor gilmore come if it is going to perform the mission very differently, is it not important that we understand how the two of them compare? so i would ask you how -- will there be comparison testing with other comparative frames that the kendal is going to replace and hobepleased at how will the operational testing comparing the capabilities the conduct of? >> if i could point out i have the operational requirements document for the f-35 and it says that it

in the village of zalyshany, about 32 miles southwest of chernobyl, eight-year-old bogdan vetrov suffersrom an enlarged thyroid gland. his mother, viktoria, believes it is due to radiation found in their food, but she says her family's options are: eat food that may be contaminated or starve. >> ( translated ): "we are aware of the dangers, but what can we do? there is no other way to survive here. especially in this region we just cannot survive." >> reporter: vetrov and his siblings are among 350-thousand children living in areas where monitoring radiation in the soil ended four years ago. greenpeace, the european union, and the world health organization have found links between contaminated produce and milk and increased levels of thyroid cancer. one e.u. study tracked 4,000 children for three years and found more than 80 percent of them had cardiovascular issues. doctors who perform annual checks on children here have seen that first-hand. >> ( translated ): "there are very serious pathological processes, which definitely will unfortunately have negative consequences on the developme

what you are not hearing -- i think general bogdan touched on this -- the war fighters that are flying this plane, what their perception is. my comment in the opening statement was the marines love this aircraft. absolutely love this aircraft. this is what they plan to go to war with if called upon. i think that you are going to hear that overtake the other rhetoric over time as more and more of our air force, marine corps and navy pilots and our international partners climb into this cockpit, see what its capability is, train with it and deploy with it over time. >> yes, mr. sullivan. >> your question is an excellent question. and it's not just the f-35 program. it's about the acquisition process. we do acquisition reform all the time. and actually, it has been improving the last few years. but the bottom line answer to this is, there's got to be a little truth in advertising when these weapons systems start up, because they're always started up with optimistic cost estimates and schedules. this program was originally planned to be completed, everything purchased by 2026. now that's 2

i asked on tuesday if general bogdan thinks we're spending our money wisely. we're on track to buy 243 aircraft. knowing the type of fight we're expecting you to fight right now and defend our country. if we traded ten, just ten f-35's we could increase the size of the special operation forces by over 700. in the world that you see today, i guess, are we concerned we're sacrificing short term needs for our long term security strategy? would ten less f-35's make that much difference down the road as it would make a difference today with 700 troops on the ground. >> you bring up the important issue we struggle with as we put the '17 budget together. we confront a wide range of challenges from russia, iran, north korea, china, as well as violent extremism. in effect the kind of situations you just outlined, are exactly the choices we made. we did in fact reduce the numbers of f-35's this year to balance in other capability areas to make sure that with the money that we had, the top line we had, we did the very best we could to make sure we are postured to deal wi