0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
100 $
DECEMBER 2022

U.S. GAO Finds Failure Is the Norm in U.S. Military Aircrafts: 26 of the 49 types of U.S. military aircrafts fail all performance goals.

Support SouthFront

U.S. GAO Finds Failure Is the Norm in U.S. Military Aircrafts: 26 of the 49 types of U.S. military aircrafts fail all performance goals.

Illustrative Image

Written by Eric Zuesse

Here is from the opening of the 10 November 2022 U.S. General Accounting Office study, “Weapon System Sustainment: Aircraft Mission Capable Goals Were Generally Not Met and Sustainment Costs Varied by Aircraft”, report # GAO-23-106217:

We looked at 49 types of military aircraft and found that only 4 types met their annual mission readiness goals from FY 2011 through FY 2021 — an overall decline over time. Program officials gave us various reasons for these results, including aging aircraft, maintenance challenges, and issues with getting parts and supplies. …

As shown below, 26 aircraft did not meet their annual mission capable goal in any fiscal year [it scored 0 in each and every goal in each and every year]. The mission capable rate — the percentage of total time when the aircraft can fly and perform at least one mission — is used to assess the health and readiness of an aircraft fleet.

U.S. GAO Finds Failure Is the Norm in U.S. Military Aircrafts: 26 of the 49 types of U.S. military aircrafts fail all performance goals.

Click to see full-size image

[Note that “*For this aircraft [7 aircrafts], the military department did not provide a mission capable goal for all eleven years.” The study also says “The mission capable rate — the percentage of total time when the aircraft can fly and perform at least one mission — is used to assess the health and readiness of an aircraft fleet.” For those 7 aircraft-types, the U.S. Department of Defense refused to provide data to calculate “the percentage of total time when the aircraft can fly and perform at least one mission.” Only 3 of those 7 aircraft-types showed more than 0 years in which some years’ data (2 years in each instance) when “Their Annual Mission Capable Goal” had been met: the P-8A Anti-submarine, and the F-35C and F-35A Fighters; but the F-35B Fighter was instead among the 26 aircraft-types that constantly failed its “Annual Mission Capable Goal.”]

Comparing fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2021, the average mission capable rate for the selected aircraft has fallen for the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, to varying degrees. The average mission capable rate for the selected Army aircraft has risen.

For fiscal year 2021, GAO found that only two of the 49 aircraft examined met the service-established mission capable goal. More specifically, for fiscal year 2021, 30 aircraft were more than 10 percentage points below the mission capable goal in fiscal year 2021; and 17 aircraft were 10 percentage points or less below the mission capable goal in fiscal year 2021.

Many of the selected aircraft are facing one or more sustainment challenges, as shown below. According to program officials, these challenges have an effect on mission capable rates.

Sustainment Challenges Affecting Some of the Selected Department of Defense Aircraft

Operating and support (O&S) costs totaled about $54 billion in fiscal year 2020 for the reviewed aircraft—a decrease of about $2.9 billion since fiscal year 2011 after factoring in inflation using constant fiscal year 2020 dollars. Maintenance costs became a larger portion of O&S costs—increasing by $1.2 billion since fiscal year 2011. Air Force and Army O&S costs have decreased, while Navy and Marine Corps O&S costs have increased. Based on our analysis and information provided by the program offices, these trends have largely been driven by changes in the size of aircraft inventory and reduced flying hours. Additionally, O&S costs have varied widely across aircraft fleets. For example, the total fiscal year 2020 O&S costs for the systems we reviewed ranged from [a low of] about $97 million for the KC-130T fleet (Navy and Marine Corps) to a high of about $4.3 billion for the F-16 fleet (Air Force). Based on our analysis and information provided by the system program offices, cost variances were based on aircraft type and factors such as age of the fleet, the number of aircraft included in the inventory, and the number of flying hours flown by a fleet.

Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Defense (DOD) spends tens of billions of dollars annually to sustain its weapon systems in an effort to ensure that these systems are available to simultaneously support today’s military operations and maintain the capability to meet future defense requirements. This report provides observations on mission capable rates and costs to operate and sustain 49 fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force.

GAO initiated this work in response to continuing interest in the operational availability and O&S costs for major weapon systems. We also initiated this work as part of our response to a provision in section 802 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 for GAO to report on sustainment reviews conducted by the military services, with a specific focus on O&S cost growth. In addition to this report, GAO plans to issue additional reports in response to the provision. GAO reviewed documentation and interviewed program office officials to identify reasons for the trends in mission capability rates and O&S costs as well as any challenges in sustaining the aircraft.

——

CLOSING NOTE BY ERIC ZUESSE:

The U.S. Government spends about half of the total world’s military expenditures (some portions of it outside of the Defense Department so as to hide from the public the total and deceive about comparisons with other countries’ military expenditures).

Though the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that only around 36% of global military spending is by the U.S. Government, that is including only the U.S. Defense Department’s military spending, and so it excludes the military expenditures that are in other Departments, such as the U.S. Treasury Department.

Furthermore: trillions of dollars in U.S. military spending are unaccounted for, and the U.S. Department of Defense is the ONLY part of the U.S. Government that has never been audited, because it is so corrupt that it cannot be audited.

Americans have higher confidence in the U.S. military than in any other “Institution” in the U.S., according to polling which goes all the way back to the 1970s. No other U.S. institution comes even close, except “Small business.” Other than “The military,” all other parts of the U.S. Government, and all news-media, score very low in the public’s confidence.

Furthermore, whereas prior to the formation of the U.S. Department of Defense in 1947 (which had been preceded by the U.S. Department of War), the majority of U.S. military expenditures were for soldiers (“Personnel”), that changed radically, and at least since 2004 less than 25% of it is, and the main costs are instead going to “Defense Contractors” such as Lockheed Martin, whose private owners (who also include owners of the media) profit from wars and from America’s vast and ever-increasing military spending. So, whereas “The military” was formerly referring mainly to soldiers, it now and increasingly refers instead to corporations such as Northrop Grumman, whose business is to sell to the U.S. Department of Defense and to nations that are ‘allied with’ (vassals of) the U.S. Consequently, Americans who express high confidence in “The military” are mainly expressing high confidence in the producers of those military aircrafts that predominantly fail all of their performance-objectives.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Support SouthFront

SouthFront

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
28 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JJ345

It is funny tho, I mean how many “God-blessed” weapons did the US and NATO send to Ukraine? None of those weapons changed anything on the ground for Ukraine. Yet, Iran sends some of its drones and it is the end for Ukraine.

The best thing the US and NATO did for Ukraine was sending mercenaries to fight in Ukraine, which cost NATO/US billions so far.

TLDR, all of the US military companies are scammers. I mean F-35 jets remember that shit? “The U.S. Pentagon has stopped accepting new F-35 jets after it discovered a magnet used in the stealthy fighter’s engine was made with unauthorized material from China.”

They had one job and they said it was gonna be cheaper and built by “ally” nations.

hash
hashed
...

The most powerful US weapon in Ukraine is – Starlink.

JJ345

Yes, but that wasn’t part of the US government aid to Ukraine, Elon give his Starlink severs for free to Ukraine, not the US government.

Martillo

“Elon” like “Jeffrey Pedovore”, “Jeff BeZos”, “Bill Gates” etc etc etc are actors. Behind these puppets are the stolen taxes of USSAN livestock. Al CIAduh and the chosenite banksters run these clowns. As for “Starlink”…. mucho hype as alway$.

JJ345

Starlink does the job stop downplaying its role in Ukraine. Elon doesn’t fully follow the plan of the US government, I mean think about if he was, the US government would have paid him fully and he wouldn’t give his Starlink for free to Ukraine.

Ukraine has been for years a money laundering country for the West, and a lot of aid from Ukraine comes back to US and EU. The people who support this war and push Ukraine for the worse are the ones you have to be on the lookout for.

Elon did talk about a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia, name one other rich clown in the US who talks about a peace deal. TBH I don’t care that much how people see Elon or what not.

Vanya

Ukraine and Putin’s garbage strategy has destroyed the Russian army.

Last edited 16 days ago by Vanya
JJ345

It is still called Russia SMO – You can’t blame the Russian army for taking ground slowly in Ukraine.

Also, Russia wouldn’t use its full force in Ukraine for many reasons. If the West going to use Ukraine as a testing ground why would Russia play their game? There are reasons why Russia doesn’t do that.

Martillo

Forgot your pills?

USA is a shithole, EU is becoming one

Because the purpose of US made weapons is to launder money for the military-industrial complex aka CIA, NSA and Wall Street parasites.

hash
hashed
Kbm

The pedophiles of the woke Washington Beltway and it’s Pedophile, Nazi Nato abomination won’t encourage half the world’s populations to join in. Russia, China just bidding time watching the Washington Parasites trying to destroy everyone; as they self implode.

hash
hashed
Comrade

Is there any transparency in the Russian military? None at all. No third party checks. Corruption is unchecked.

hash
failed
Harry Ballsack

Your really not that bright are you!

Eric Zuesse

If that were true, then Russia’s military would be uncompetitive with America’s which costs around 20 times more. But, clearly, that is NOT the case.

Vanya

How, Russia has clearly lost the war, more retreats are on the way and Putin still sits on his ass and does nothing.

lgbt vanya socialworker omaha

moron americunt vanya lose all wars–Russia easily demolishes nazi ukies–350 more dead ukies yesterday—3 critical towns liberated

Comrade

America hasn’t entered the fight. Most of the stuff they sent was Cold War surplus. Like if the US airforce were there, they would be doing thousands of air sorties a day like the invasion of Iraq.

Harry Ballsack

The joos laughing all the way to the bank (they own)

hash
failed
Vanya

GTFO, unlike the garbage Russian airfarce the American airforce can handle tasks.

hash
hashed
JJ345

Surely, as it did in the Vietnam war, the US air force was ahead of everyone during that time as well, why did the US Air Force got fuked so hard? Oh yeah, Soviet air defense systems.

Failure of the US Air Force in Vietnam: https://www.rbth.com/history/332396-how-soviets-fought-against-americans

You are going to cry and say what about Iraq, I have a story to tell you, buddy. Poland did study why Iraqi air defense systems failed to destroy the US Air Force. They outline two reasons (mainly) for Iraq’s air defense systems failures, one leak of maintenance, and the Iraqi air defense systems being outdated.

Also, don’t forget the role of the Iran Air Force during the Iraq-Iran war (8 years of war).

Poland study Iraqi air defense systems: https://philarchive.org/archive/RADAOI

JJ345

Surely, as it did in the Vietnam war, the US air force was ahead of everyone during that time as well, why did the US Air Force got fuked so hard? Oh yeah, Soviet air defense systems.

You are going to cry and say what about Iraq, I have a story to tell you, buddy. Poland did study why Iraqi air defense systems failed to destroy the US Air Force. They outline two reasons (mainly) for Iraq’s air defense systems failures, one leak of maintenance, and the Iraqi air defense systems being outdated.

Also, don’t forget the role of the Iran Air Force during the Iraq-Iran war (8 years of war).

JJ345

I did try to link my sources but it seems you can’t send links.

Let’s see if this works, Failure of the US Air Force in Vietnam: (https://www.rbth.com/history/332396-how-soviets-fought-against-americans).

Poland study Iraqi air defense systems: (https://philarchive.org/archive/RADAOI).

lgbt vanya socialworker omaha

vanya Sawyer lick Joe penis 9211 times

Vitex

Moral of the story – UH1 is a great helicopter

hash
hashed
Christopher

As is the Mi – 8.

tomsawyer aka vanya lgbt

us americunts incompetent hamsters—but we submissively lick all taliban penis

hash
failed
Nordic

The best fighter pilots in US Military left a decade ago. Most of these guys signed up believing they were serving Americans. They told me they refuse to drop bombs on innocent people. Most of them didn’t know until much later the US Government was lying to them. Remember, the internet wasn’t a big thing until about 10 years ago. Took people a while to learn what the heck was really going on.

Not surprised at all that aircraft are degrading. Too much corruption in the USA. Quality is never considered and they outsource most engineering to India. And, decent Americans do not want to join the US Military. It’s a disgusting organization that not only abuses the world but abuses US soldiers. They treat them like garbage.

hash
hashed
gustavo

It does not matter ! let us ask much more money to spend in military equipment. Who care ! money is the important thing.

hash
hashed
Elijah

Funny, the one aircraft that’s in the green is the UH-1N, or the “Huey”. For those who don’t know, that’s the Vietnam Helicopter.

hash
hashed
28
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x