A Pacific Vision war games report, about a US war games exercise said the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter could not turn, could not climb and could not run. It appears the analyst was then, fired.

Australian politician reveals details: Dennis Jensen, Federal Member for the safe Liberal seat of Tangney in Western Australia said he had ‘concerns about the Joint Strike Fighter, the actions of its proponents and Australia’s plans to buy the troubled aircraft’.

Lockheed has military mates in high places?: A US analyst at the RAND Corporation - whose Project Air Force section was behind the document - funded by the US military, was fired after he had criticised the performance of the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter after a Pacific Vision war games report.

Jensen told Parliament ‘ I recently received a document prepared by the RAND Corporation think tank as part of a major US war games exercise, in which the JSF was pointedly criticised.

Disastrous purchase for Australia: ‘The blunt assessment was that the JSF could not turn, could not climb and could not run. That is an assessment shared by many air combat experts around the world. The documents findings were also supported by the results of analysis before, supporting and following the war games themselves.

Australian sovereignty at risk: Jensen said ‘The RAND report, and some leaked details of the related Pacific Vision war games, held at Hickam Air Force Base in Hawaii, were released to the media by me in a bid to stimulate debate on what could be a disastrous purchase for Australia and may ultimately put at stake our very sovereignty’.

Government mates of Lockheed Martin not happy: ‘The storm of publicity predictably drew angry reactions from proponents of the projected US$500 billion project, particularly from the manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, some elements within the US Department of Defense and even our own military, which apparently briefed the Minister for Defence on the subject and told him the reports were false’.

Analyst, John Stillion disappears: “RAND Corporation itself, whose Project Air Force section was behind the document, is funded by the US military and eventually issued a brief and puzzling statement denying reports on the matter but failing to address any of the substance. At the same time, the lead author of the report suddenly departed from RAND and had his email address cancelled and his biography removed from their website. The author, a very senior and highly respected analyst named John Stillion, had worked for RAND for many years and was one of the top staff at Project Air Force”.

Missing in action: ‘His abrupt departure amid the controversy over his report raises some deeply disturbing questions’, said Jensen. Jensen’s qualifications and occupation before entering federal Parliament wewre BAppSc (RMIT), MSc (Melb), PhD (Monash).; Air traffic controller 1983-86; Research scientist, CSIRO 1995-99. Research scientist and defence analyst 1999-2004.

Removal was ordered by the US military? ‘There are suggestions in some quarters that he (John Stillion) was dismissed over the document and that his removal was ordered by the US military. I sincerely hope that this is not the case. My office contacted the head of Project Air Force and was told that Dr Stillion no longer worked there. No other information was provided. I should stress that Dr Stillion was not my source, regarding the document he wrote. I have never had any contact with him”.