Update May 15: I have received a few emails about the chart being incorrect. Here is one good post about the perceived error. I don't believe it is an error. I could be wrong, but here is why I think some folks are misunderstanding it.Awesome.
In my opinion, APUC and PAUC both contain exactly what they should.
What some people reading the chart don't seem to understand is if you take you finger and run it along the line of a particular cost - where the line stops is above the column that particular cost adds to what's already to its left.
In other words, if you look a PUAC, it adds RTD&E plus MILCON to the APUC, weapons system cost, total fly away cost and URF costs to its left. The cost structure builds as you go to the right. TOC then adds the things in the final column to everything (cost) to its left.
PAUC is defined as:
PAUC (Program Acquisition Unit Cost) = RDT&E $ + Procurement $ + unique MILCON $ (in program base year dollars)/Total procurement quantity + RDT&E prototypes that are production reps used for IOT&E (if any)
Run your finger over the PAUC line and it stops right above the column that says "RTD&E" and "MILCON".
I hope that helps. It's a difficult issue and I am trying to explain costs as clearly as I can.
I know that doesn't matter to some who are against the F35 for various efficacy reasons, but let's all be clear about the cost.
Finally, answers to this vexing cost question.
Oh and Bill, I'm still waiting for your response. Heck, to be honest Sean, Bill, Ares Team...we're all waiting for your response. Love you guys but this is getting much too big to ignore.
So my friends where does that leave Bill right now? I imagine he's having a Bill Paxton moment in Aliens. See the video below.