Guys, what will you fight on?
The US media has leaked data from a study by the US General Accountability Office (GAO) that tracked the readiness of US aircraft, including the F-22 Raptor. Well, if the data leaked, then there will always be someone who will publish this data, such as, for example, our old friend Kyle Mizokami.
As an example, and a well-known one: out of 186 F-22 Raptor fighters, only about 93 are ready to fly at any time. How many of them can not just fly, but perform combat missions is a question.
Turns out it's not as bad as we thought. Everything is much better when viewed from our side. The Pentagon's vast fleet of military aircraft is much less powerful than it looks. Since 2015, aircraft readiness indicators at all fleets decreased, sometimes the number of combat-ready aircraft was expressed in double digits, that is, in reality, hundreds of aircraft could not fulfill their tasks.
Such a disappointing conclusion was made in a new report by the US Office of General Accountability, a federal agency created to audit the rest of the federal government, including the Department of Defense.
The report states that out of 186 F-22 Raptor fighters, only about 93 are ready for combat missions at any given time. The numbers are equally grim for other aircraft, including the Navy's F/A-18E/F "Super Hornet". In some fleets, including B-1B bombers, there are fewer aircraft ready for combat missions than unready ones.
In a report entitled "Aviation Air Force and Navy: Actions Needed to Address Persistent Efficiency Risks, cites a sample of eight Pentagon fleets and tracks their combat readiness performance from fiscal year 2015 to 2021.
Here the term "Combat capability" is defined as the state in which the aircraft can perform at least one, and preferably all of its intended missions, which would correspond to the term "Combat capability".
For example, F/A-18E/F "Super Hornet" missions may include air defense, ground attack, and aerial refueling. As for the readiness rating, it is quite high, but definitely not up to "Full combat readiness".
The GAO report is sobering. It tracks the Air Force B-1B "Lancer" bomber, C-5M "Super Galaxy" and C-130T "Hercules" transport aircraft, F-22 "Raptor" and F / A-18E / F "Super Hornet" fighters, KC tankers -135 Stratofortress and KC-130T, as well as the P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft. Between 2015 and 2021, the combat capability of all aircraft declined, some quite significantly.
According to reports, the Navy operates 530 Super Hornets around the world, in fact, the number of combat-ready aircraft is much lower at about 267 vehicles.
But these are carrier-based fighter-bombers, weapon the first line of defense and attack in the United States. Conventional fighters included in the list are still worse in terms of reliability.
The F-22 Raptor air superiority fighter has dropped its readiness rates from 2015% of all combat-ready aircraft since 67 to just 50,3% in 2021.
The F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, which makes up the majority of the navy's fighter fleet, has dropped that figure from 54,9% of combat-capable aircraft to 51%.
In other words, every second "Raptor" or "Super Hornet" is simply laid up waiting for either a repair or a miracle. In general, according to the statements of responsible representatives of the Air Force and Aviation of the US Navy, at least 75% of the aircraft will be capable of performing combat missions if necessary. But the figure is somehow not very impressive, and one would like to note that the drawn planes do not fly.
As for other types of aviation, the situation is no better there. The combat readiness of the B-1B "Lancer" decreased from 47,5 to 40,7%, which means that of the 62 aircraft in service, only about 25 were ready at any given time for combat missions.
C-5M "Super Galaxy" sank from 68,1% to 57,5%. Even the relatively new P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, based on the highly successful Boeing 737 jetliner, boasts a 67% availability.
In 2015, only one aircraft, a veteran of more than 50 years, the KC-135 "Stratotanker", had an availability rate of 75%. But by 2021, none of the aircraft types tracked by the GAO had a 75% completion rate. At the same time, the KC-135 fleet reduced its readiness to 71,1%, but still remained the leader in American aviation. None of the aircraft types tracked by the GAO improved their performance between 2015 and 2021.
In general, it is sad when the most combat-ready aircraft of the Air Force are air tankers.
And this GAO did not check the performance of all Pentagon aircraft. Here, in the case of a global check, the results, perhaps, would drive many into depression. The F-16 "Fighting Falcon", F-35A "Lightning II" and C-17 "Globemaster III" fighters are the basis of fighter and transport aviation, but for some reason they were not included in the verification program.
But instead, the GAO indicated how often, between 2012 and 2021, American aircraft performed assigned tasks as part of various missions. The F-16 reached its zero mark (that is, no combat missions were completed during the reporting year) in nine years, the F-35A reached its goal in just two years of eight years of active service, and the C-17 in nine years .
Such low mission fitness rates are the result of several factors.
In 2021, Air Force magazine reported that the average age of an Air Force aircraft is 30,55 years, with B-1Bs and C-5Ms averaging 33 years old. Like old cars, trucks, and any other mode of transport, older aircraft are more complex and expensive to maintain. Often, fleets of older aircraft are short of spare parts, and stocks are running low or even run out (a nod to the B-52 situation). Manufacturers may no longer produce parts and assemblies, and some even closed long ago for various reasons.
Other factors include a lack of maintenance personnel to keep the aircraft in good condition and less budgetary funds for maintenance. Although the repair black hole of the US military is really a black hole, not a vacuum cleaner. And it is able to absorb a huge amount of not money - sums. As big as the entire American war machine.
Sometimes the technological sophistication of an aircraft works against it in peacetime. This is a frank allusion to the Raptor and the problems associated with its maintenance. Since the low-visibility coating applied to the outer surface of the F-22's wing and fuselage proved to be unstable, it was found to be difficult to maintain in operational conditions in perfect condition. This, of course, would be funny if it were not so sad in dollar terms.
There are several justifiable reasons. It turned out, for example, that in some parts the operational rates were above average and the same F / A-18E / F from the groups based on aircraft carriers on combat duty flew more than expected due to the need to use some aircraft as air tankers.
The US Air Force has reduced the number of its B-1B bombers by a quarter, hoping that this will improve the readiness of the rest. This action was taken relatively recently, so it is too early to draw conclusions. At least in the GAO report, this was not confirmed.
Of course, various aviation services are doing everything possible to ensure that the US Air Force remains "on the wing." It cannot be argued that they are not doing anything there, the only question is that the maximum that the Air Force and Navy services related to aviation are capable of today is corrective actions.
That is, what was said above: decommission 17 out of 62 B-1B bombers. Decommissioned and dismantled aircraft can serve as donors for the 45 aircraft remaining in service and maintain their combat capability for some time. This is a practice that we went through relatively recently, so any Russian military specialist will understand what is at stake.
The Navy is looking to procure the MQ-25 Stingray unmanned aerial tanker to take the load off the Super Hornet.
A good idea, because the MQ-25 "Stingray" can move up to 6800 kg of fuel to a range of up to 900 km, providing aerial refueling of the F / A-18 flight at a decent distance from the ship.
Everything will be fine if the MQ-25 "Stingray" flies into the series. If not, the Super Hornets will still be wasting their resource, playing the role of tankers for their colleagues.
Despite this, the trend for all six aircraft types covered in the report is towards declining availability, with no aircraft type performing better in 2021 than in 2015.
GAO reports say the Department of Defense "generally agreed" with recommendations to "quickly prioritize and complete necessary security checks" in order to develop plans to address deficiencies in maintaining the proper combat readiness of American aircraft. That is, to determine what is needed and what can be abandoned.
But the US Navy did not agree to complete the verification of support in a shorter time, citing limited resources. To be clear, the navy's 2021 budget was $161 billion (that's two annual military budgets for a country like Russia), and yet navy experts say they don't have enough resources to get to the bottom of the problems because for which half of the naval fighter-bombers are laid up.
What if there is a war tomorrow? And if with China, in the direction of which the United States is breathing more and more unevenly? That is, military operations are something comparable to the times of the Second World War, over the vast expanses of the Pacific Ocean?
Agree, if such a conflict began today, the United States would instantly have serious problems. Planes fight, not numbers. And in the United States, there would be far fewer aircraft in service than is clear from the figures of general statistics.
Yes, on paper, the United States has a significant advantage over China, numerical, technical, technological. However, I repeat, real planes will fight, and very unpleasant moments for the Americans are possible here.
Having more planes on paper is one thing, but having a fleet of planes that just can't go into combat for technical reasons is completely different.
Of course, the United States understands the depth and severity of the problem, but the US military machine is such a cumbersome apparatus that doubts creep in about the possibility of solving this problem in the coming years.
And what will the brave American guys from the aircraft carrier squadrons go into battle with - this will be a very difficult question.
Information