The multi-criteria analysis, in cooperation with TNO and Dutch Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space (NLR)
was performed, was a time consuming exercise. First were 700 criteria
that the new fighter had to comply. Then experts gave a figure for each criterion. The weighted average of the scores was an indication of the system effectiveness of any device - in plain English: how well the aircraft was.
In the Court Brief on the JSF decision of February 11, 2002 was the multi-criteria analysis in detail. The government stressed in the letter detailed the purity of the process. The operation of the Air Force was rated by an independent working group of the Ministry of Defense, wrote the government.
It had ruled that "the candidates thoroughly and carefully review''was conducted.
The evaluation itself was not the House. The same was true for the so-called B / C paper, the results were described. Both documents contain confidential commercial information from aircraft manufacturers and are therefore confidential.
According to the Air Force, the uncertainties involved. In the multi-criteria analysis, as wrote the Air Force in the B / C paper, the uncertainties "adequately addressed".
In this analysis, some criteria are not one, but three scores out. The median score, the "expected performance" again. In addition, experts also had a top and a given value. After all values were added together, the multi-criteria analysis yielded three final scores on the system effectiveness.
The median score gave the Air Force how well the aircraft would be in 2010. The top score was the most optimistic expectations of the performance, the score was the worst case scenario. "This leads to more complete picture of system effectiveness with uncertainties, risks but also potential'', wrote the Air Force.