Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

F-15 funding high/Navy aircraft maintenance funding slashed

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Good news for the Air Force, bad news for the Navy. The budget for FY14 will include money to upgrade the F-15E radar system to the APG-82(v)1 with APG-79 processors, with an IOC of 2014, and all aircraft done by 2021. They are also working on pushing the fatigue test certifications to 18,000 equivalent flight hours for the F-15C/D and 32,000 hours for the E. The original fatigue life was 8,000 hours with the oldest aircraft in the fleet having flown 10,000 actual hours to date.

At the same time, the Navy aircraft maintenance program has been slashed to almost nothing. Procurement of new aircraft will continue at the same pace ($17.6B FY12, $17.1B FY13, and $17.9B FY14), while maintenance is being slashed from $1.16B in FY13, to $916M in FY14. That will produce a backlog of 206 aircraft requiring depot level maintenance for FY14. Engine maintenance will go from a backlog of 273 in FY13, to 532 in FY14.

According to Navy sources a one year backlog is about the max that can be sustained without more tooling, equipment or space. A backlog of 100 airframes, and 340 engines is generally considered the maximum sustainable, but depending on aircraft and engine types that can go up or down.


The U.S. Air Force will have spent about $5.8 billion on F-15 programs between fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2017, with F-15E Strike Eagles accounting for about $3.2 billion of that total, according to an Aviation Week Intelligence Network (AWIN) analysis of data provided by Avascent050, an online market analysis toolkit for global defense programs.

Most of the work — about $3 billion — is for sustainment and modification of the Strike Eagles, the analysis shows. (See charts pp. 7-9.)

As the U.S. Air Force continues to work through cockpit breathing problems for its F-22 Raptor pilots, the service is pushing to more than double the life of its stalwart F-15 Eagles with a series of upgrades.

The U.S. Air Force wanted fatigue tests on C models starting about two and a half years ago, Boeing officials say.

As the F-15 fleet aircraft approached their life expectancies for total flight hours, Boeing says, the Air Force wanted see how far the service could delay fleet retirements.

Source


While proposed U.S. Navy aircraft procurement funding is set to hold steady in fiscal 2014, the service’s aircraft depot maintenance accounts are slated to take a nosedive and maintenance backlogs will balloon.

Navy spending for aircraft procurement has remained relatively flat—$17.6 billion in fiscal 2012, $17.1 billion in fiscal 2013 and $17.9 billion proposed for fiscal 2014—according to the service’s proposed fiscal 2014 spending proposal.

Meanwhile, aircraft depot maintenance, which dropped from about $1.17 billion in fiscal 2012 to about $1.16 billion in fiscal 2013, is proposed for another dip to about $916 million for fiscal 2014.

The decrease carries with it some alarming trends.

First, the percent funded of the total requirement is similarly dropping—from 100% in fiscal 2012 to 94% in fiscal 2013 to 79% in the proposed fiscal 2014 spending plan.

That all correlates to a growing backlog of work that needs to be done.

Source




posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Yet military costs are still raising overall.

More of it is underground than can be seen above ground.
edit on 26-8-2013 by Biigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Biigs
 


Actually military funding has dropped, it's just being shifted to more visible projects from others. The Air Force has slashed procurement for a number of projects, including new missiles, some F-15 upgrades, Space Fence, etc. It just looks like it's going up, because of that.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


As always Zaph, thanks for the thread. Saw you mention it in the Discussion board thread.


I can sort of relate with the industry I am in, however contrary to the OP, it is to impractical and costly from the production side for maintenance. Most clients would rather buy a whole new product and swap it out to save time as the money lost far exceeds the cost of a replacement.

None the less I would like to volunteer my help.

I will need a two four of beer, a wrench and someone to stand over my shoulder offering suggestions on what is wrong and how to fix it.
edit on 26-8-2013 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
I will need a two four of beer, a wrench and someone to stand over my shoulder offering suggestions on what is wrong and how to fix it.


Hell, I'd do it for an incentive flight.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   
How to fix it? "Break a pencil off in it" - I spent my career in this field - I would sit open mouthed at long range planning meetings and watch them extend life limits . . .
The age of most fleets is sobering to say the least. I think the end of the line is in the future for the "flying side" of the Air Force aside from drones - just my 2 cents. I started Navy and finished Air Force.
Familiar with running out of money for Maintenance in both branches by July and August and it only seems worse these days only the fleets even older. You can run me up the flag pole for this but I never saw much hope in the JST or the the F22 program. I spent 22 years in Air Craft production control - I would see the starry eyes over the new plans but when objective reality set in . . . didn't really see a future flush with programs in either case.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleBirdSaid
 


The F-22/-35 if you listen to the generals that want them so bad will do everything including the dishes. Realistically they will perform the basic mission they were designed for and not a lot else.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Return of the "Hangar Queens"



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by LittleBirdSaid
 


The F-22/-35 if you listen to the generals that want them so bad will do everything including the dishes. Realistically they will perform the basic mission they were designed for and not a lot else.


Eh, the 22's might see some action soon finally


Edit: Actually I think they were airborne during the ubl raid but didn't get to have any fun...
edit on 26-8-2013 by boomer135 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by boomer135
 


Be interesting as hell to see how they perform.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by boomer135

Edit: Actually I think they were airborne during the ubl raid but didn't get to have any fun...


There were reports that the Pakistanis had launched fighters and were heading towards the helos, but after the first couple of times in the revolution of stories that went away pretty quickly.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


There were 6 F-22's in the Persian Gulf at the time of the OBL raid if I remember correctly, how many were actually used is anyones guess but they probably would have had them in the area in case Pakistan launched fighters.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Stealthbomber
 


I guarantee at least four were in the area. Two pairs, one to play cover for the helos, or maybe beater, and the other to play anvil.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Do you know what aircraft was jamming the radars in Pakistan that night? There was a drone flying overhead aswell I think relaying video back to Obama et al.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Stealthbomber
 


I don't think we were to be honest. Jamming leaves a nice telltale signature that something is coming. Go in low with the helos and you can avoid radar without any kind of signal.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by LittleBirdSaid
 


The F-22/-35 if you listen to the generals that want them so bad will do everything including the dishes. Realistically they will perform the basic mission they were designed for and not a lot else.


Oh I know they want them soooooo bad - they Love them. Maybe I am just an old worn out NCO but pet projects and ego equipment - just didn't float my boat. But my bread was mostly buttered by A10s. Ugly, NOT fast. Deadly beast - accurate, and not prohibitively expensive and able to fly in all kinds of conditions. Forget FOD walkdowns the engines couldn't even suck a cotton ball off the flightline. Its like an old truck that can get in there and get you out of trouble. Its not a high tech, gloriously expensive piece of eye candy. But even A10 tech is 40 some years old at this point. You can only modify and upgrade for so long . . . just my 2 cents, aint worth much . . .
edit on 28-8-2013 by LittleBirdSaid because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
Return of the "Hangar Queens"


Amen to that. My old unit lost our A10s and gained F15s. Unfortunately they could barely keep em in the air let alone keep the pilots rated . . . . sad but true and still they love them damn lawn darts.





new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join