F-35 Parts Problems At Heart Of Low Readiness Rates: GAO

[nitpicker]

https://breakingdefense.com/2019/04/f-35-parts-problems-at-heart-of-low-readiness-rates-gao/?_ga=2.126591109.96834923.1556270300-1385115421.1501579770

F-35 Parts Problems At Heart Of Low Readiness Rates: GAO

By Colin Clark
on April 25, 2019 at 6:13 PM

WASHINGTON: The F-35 program has faced enormous challenges over the years, but the biggest today is particularly intractable: The program simply can’t keep the flow of parts moving around the world in the numbers and places necessary.

How bad is it? “F-35 aircraft performance is falling short of warfighter requirements—that is, aircraft cannot perform as many missions or fly as often as required. This lower-than-desired aircraft performance is due largely to F-35 spare parts shortages and difficulty in managing and moving parts around the world,” the Government Accountability Office said in a compelling report today. “F-35 aircraft were unable to fly nearly 30 percent of the May-November 2018 time period due to spare parts shortages. Also, the Department of Defense (DOD) had a repair backlog of about 4,300 F-35 parts.”

Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis established a goal of 80 percent readiness for all US tactical aircraft. Lockheed Martin has pledged to meet that goal and is pouring $180 million of its own money into the computerized system known as ALIS — meant to make to F-35 planning and parts management more efficient but actually an albatross for maintainers and aircrews — to bring things back on track.
(snip)

Meanwhile, the Joint Strike Fighter program has built a system to supply the US and allies with parts, but it just doesn’t the job well enough, the GAO found. “DoD purchases certain sets of F-35 parts years ahead of time to support aircraft on deployments, including on ships. But the parts do not fully match the military services’ needs because F-35 aircraft have been modified over time. For example, 44 percent of purchased parts were incompatible with aircraft the Marine Corps took on a recent deployment.” (Emphasis ours).

And things may not get much better for a while: “Without a detailed plan for the network, DOD may not be ready to support an expanding fleet.”
(snip)

[Sherman A1]

1. This program has been a

disaster from Day 1.

[Loki Liesmith]

3. It has its good points: Pilots LOVE it. But the issue is

that different services have different requirements and the whole plane has to be made like a lego sculpture with swappable components for each service or country that uses it. This is what’s at the root of the parts problem: the desire to have a single plane that can satisfy service’s distinct requirements.

[Sherman A1]

4. All well and good

As we bankrupt the budget building the thing.

[Loki Liesmith]

6. You'll notice I never made any argument about that

At this point, though, the costs are sunk. The government has decided it wants a joint strike fighter. This is what happens when you require a JSF. So we either muddle through or scrap it and start on another JSF and wind up with another program that overruns.

[Sherman A1]

7. I don't disagree with your logic

I believe that we could and should do better than this thing. I am old enough to remember the F-111 project as a development towards a joint strike fighter and it being replaced by the F4 Phantom built not far from where I lived.

I believe we would be far better off replacing aging airframes of our current generation of aircraft and looking towards the use of unmanned units.

[nitpicker]

2. A graph in the article

Says there are goals for 60% and 75% of the F-35s to be fully mission-capable and able to do at least one mission, respectively.

GAO found that from May to November 2018, the actual percentages were 27% and 52%.

[Sherman A1]

5. Even the goals which aren't being achieved

Are far too low.