VOL. 26 - NO. 8
FEB 21 - 28, 2021
PO BOX 13283
OAKLAND, CA 94661-0283

510.595.7777 FAX

Joint Forces Journal is published privately, and in no way is connected with DoD, the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force or Coast Guard. This website and the printed newspaper are intended for the members of the Armed Forces and their families. Contents do not necessarily reflect official views of the U.S. Government, the Department of Defense or the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force or Coast Guard, and do not imply endorsements thereof. The marital status, physical handicap, political affiliation, or any other non-merit factor of the purchases, user or patron for advertisers prohibited. If a violation or rejection of this equal opportunity policy by an advertiser is confirmed, the publisher shall refuse to print advertising from that source until the violation is corrected. Editorial content is prepared and edited privately, and is provided by the Public Affairs Office of U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard installations. Correspondence and material for publication should be addressed to: Editor, Joint Forces Journal, P.O. Box 13283, Oakland, CA, 94661-0283. Deadline for receiving articles and photos is 3 p.m. Monday for publication on Friday of that week. Joint Forces Journal editorial policy is to use bylines and photo credits where applicable and when submitted.

US Military Aircraft Are Nowhere Near as Ready as They Should Be

Nov 20, 2020
by Ryan Pickrell
A lot of US military aircraft have fallen short of their readiness goals for the better part of a decade, including America's arsenal of fighter jets, according to a new government watchdog report.

Over the better part of the last decade, only three of 46 aircraft types in the US arsenal regularly met the service-established mission capable goals, and only one, the Air Force's UH-1N Huey, consistently met the readiness goal, the Government Accountability Office reported.

And, that's not even the worst of it.

From fiscal year 2011 to 2019, 24 military aircraft types, to include critical fighter aircraft like the Air Force's F-22 Raptor and the Navy's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, never once achieved their required mission capable rates.

Mission-capable rates are an important readiness metric that is defined as the percentage of total time an aircraft can fly and execute at least one mission.

A chart released by the GAO in its latest report shows just how bad the aircraft readiness situation is.

"Average mission capable rates for the selected Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps aircraft have fallen since fiscal year 2011," the GAO reported, noting that there were, however, some increases in readiness for Army aircraft.

Of the 46 aircraft that GAO evaluated, 19 were more than 15 percentage points below their target readiness goals. In that group were 11 that were at least 25 percentage points off the mark.

Another 18 aircraft evaluated were 15 to 6 percentage points below their goal.

Although the US military spends tens of billions of dollars a year ($49 billion in FY 2018) on maintenance and sustainment, issues like unexpected repair demands, maintenance backlogs, parts shortages, and a diminishing manufacturing base are making it tough fighter jets like the F-22 and F/A-18E/F to hit their goals.

Looking just at the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, the Navy carrier-based fighter jet saw its operating and support costs jump by $1.13 billion to $3.29 billion between 2011 and 2018, at which point maintenance costs alone had climbed to $1.45 billion.

During that same time period, the mission capable rate for this particular aircraft dropped below 50 percent, GAO reported, acknowledging that its data and evaluation process is different from those of the Navy.

In mid-September 2018, then-Secretary of Defense James Mattis sent out a memo that demanded that Navy and Air Force fighter jets, specifically the F/A-18, F-35, F-22, and F-16, achieve a minimum mission capable rate of 80 percent.

He wrote that this was necessary to ensure that US aviation assets "prove dominant over the battlefields of both today and tomorrow." But, that goal was not achieved, and readiness has actually gone down, despite some initial improvements following Mattis' memo.

Of the four US fighter aircraft types mentioned in Mattis' memo, only the F-35 has occasionally hit its readiness goals. The other three have never hit their goals any year between 2011 and 2019.

An official from the Office of the Secretary of Defense told the GAO that the US military had decided to move away from narrow goals for specific aircraft and was instead exploring " a more holistic view of readiness."

* * * * *

Photo caption: F-22 deploys flares. (Ben Bloker/U.S. Air Force)


Marine Corps Rifle Qualification Is Getting Its First Major Overhaul in More Than 100 Years

Pioneering Female Ranger School Grad: Lowering Fitness Standards for Women Is a Bad Idea

TRAVEL & ENTERTAINMENT: Marin Theatre Company and Round House Theatre Announce Extension of "The Catastrophist"

Seattle-Based Coast Guard Icebreaker Returns Home After First Mission in Nearly 40 Years to Wintertime Arctic

In a Navy with Lots of Traditions, a Small, Very Personal One Continues

TRAVEL & ENTERTAINMENT: The Marsh Presents Hai-Ting Chinn's "Science Fair: An Opera with Experiments"

Air Force Testing Out Weapons That Fry Enemy Drones with Directed Energy, Microwaves

Air Force's Troubled KC-46 Tanker to Begin 'Limited Operations,' 2 Years After Delivery