The US Accounts Chamber disclosed the cost of operating combat aircraft

23
The US Accounts Chamber disclosed the cost of operating combat aircraft


On November 10, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report titled “Weapon System Sustainment. Aircraft Mission Capable Goals Were Generally Not Met and Sustainment Costs Varied by Aircraft, dedicated to the state, combat readiness and cost of operating combat aviation armed forces. Of particular interest in this report are information of a financial nature. GAO discloses both the total cost of maintaining aviation and the average cost of operating equipment of different types.



General indicators


The new report examines various indicators of the Pentagon's manned aircraft in all its diversity. All planes, helicopters and convertiplanes in service with the air force, navy, and ground forces were subjected to study. The authors of the report took into account the degree of combat readiness of equipment, the cost of its operation and other indicators.

In order to get a more detailed picture, indicators were considered and compared between 2011 and 2021. Due to this, it was possible not only to establish the current state of affairs, but also to identify various trends, positive or negative. Their analysis will make it possible to make more accurate forecasts and take the necessary measures.

The US military currently has nearly 9300 aircraft, helicopters and tiltrotor aircraft, according to GAO estimates. There are 45 types and models of such equipment. At the same time, modifications of one aircraft can be considered as one type or as different - depending on various factors.


In FY2020 approx. 54 billion dollars. This is almost 2,9 billion dollars less than in 2011 (in terms of modern prices). At the same time, the structure of expenditures and their distribution by type of armed forces has changed slightly. So, over the course of a decade, due to changes in strategies and the corresponding fluctuations in the number of equipment, the cost of the Air Force and army aviation decreased. At the same time, spending on naval aviation increased.

Throughout the period under review, there are difficulties in ensuring the level of combat capability set by the standards. Of the entire fleet available, only the UH-1N helicopters of the air force have always fully met such requirements. At the same time, some samples of equipment in 2011-21. never crossed the predetermined threshold of readiness.

tactical cost


Of particular interest in the GAO report are operational and financial data for all types of aircraft in service. The total flight time for each type of vehicle for 2020 is given, the average flight time per one in 2021. The average cost of operating each aircraft and helicopter and the cost of a flight hour are also calculated - according to 2020 data.

In the field of tactical aviation, the F-22A fighter turned out to be the most expensive to operate. For each of the 186 aircraft of this type, 12,55 million dollars were spent. The cost of a flight hour exceeded 85,3 thousand dollars. At the same time, the cost of a flight hour fell by 2019% compared to 13,4. The newer F-35 proved to be cheaper to operate. For 365 aircraft of this type, it took $8,22 million each. An hour of flight cost less than $42, and this figure decreased by only 2,4% compared to 2019.


234 F-15C/Ds and 218 newer F-15Es remain in service. The operation of such aircraft in 2020 cost $6,23 and $9,16 million, respectively. The flight hour of the older modifications "C / D" cost almost 36,7 thousand dollars, and for the "E" this figure did not exceed 33,2 thousand dollars. Compared to 2019, the flight hour of the F-15C / D and F-15E went up by 4,2 and 7,6 percent. respectively.

The Naval Aviation continues to operate 305 F/A-18A/D fighters and 530 newer F/A-18E/Fs. Annual expenses for such equipment amounted to 5,98 and 7,5 million dollars for each aircraft, respectively. A flight hour for an older fighter cost $50,8, while modern E/Fs cost only $30,4. The fleet also has 131 EA-18G RTR/EW aircraft. Their operation required $8,15 million each; a flight hour cost $27. Flights for all versions of the F/A-18 also went up in price. For "A/D" growth exceeded 4%, for "E/F" it reached 7,2%.

936 F-16 fighters remain the most important component of the Air Force's tactical aviation. The operation of each such machine in 2020 cost $4,6 million, while the cost of a flight hour was less than $27. In this case, the cost of a flight hour increased by 16,3% over the year.

The A-10C attack aircraft turned out to be the cheapest in terms of operation. Its flight hour costs only 22,5 thousand dollars, which is only 4,5% more than in the previous year. At the same time, a little more than 281 million dollars was spent on each of the 2020 combat aircraft in 6.


Strategic spending


Long-range aviation has special features - and a corresponding operating cost. The most expensive in terms of spending in 2020 was the B-2A stealth bomber. For each of 20 such machines, 41 million dollars had to be spent. The cost of a flight hour increased by 2019% compared to 10 and exceeded 150,7 thousand dollars.

However, the supersonic B-1B became the most expensive in terms of the cost of a flight hour - approx. 173 thousand dollars. The annual growth of this indicator amounted to a record 38%. At the same time, 62 million dollars were spent on the operation of 19 bombers, i.e. half that of the B-2A.

The best economic results were shown by the old and well-deserved B-52H. There are 76 such aircraft in service, and the maintenance of each costs 16,6 million dollars. The cost of a flight hour does not exceed 88,4 thousand dollars, and over the year it has grown by only 4,4%.

Helicopter costs


The main attack helicopter of the US military is the AH-64D/E. There are 648 such machines in service, and they are distinguished by good economic indicators. In 2020, the operation of each such helicopter cost only 910 thousand dollars. The flight hour cost 5171 dollars, which is 5,6% more than the cost of 2019. Upgraded AH-1Z in the amount of 143 units. turned out to be less profitable. Almost 3,4 million dollars were spent on each of them, while the cost of an hour of flight was approx. 20,6 thousand dollars - 16,7% more than a year earlier.


The most massive Pentagon helicopter is the multi-purpose UH / HH-60 - in 2020, 1968 units were in service. Each of them spent $430 per year. An hour of flight went up by 7,6% and cost $3116. An important place in logistics is occupied by a heavy transport helicopter CH-47F. For 417 machines of this type in 2020, it took 550 thousand dollars. The cost of a flight hour did not exceed 3920 dollars, and its growth was only 1%.

Older transport UH-1N, despite all the upgrades, turned out to be less profitable. 63 such helicopters demanded $4,84 million each. The cost of a flight hour almost reached $14,5 thousand, although its growth was only 5,6%.

Of particular interest are the performance of the tiltrotor MV-22B. There are 301 such machines in operation, and in 2020 each of them required $6,33 million. - 42,8%.

Difficult and expensive


A new GAO report on the state of US military aviation and the cost of maintaining it points to a number of interesting phenomena and trends. First of all, it clearly shows that the construction and maintenance of a large fleet planes and helicopters is a very expensive affair. The operation of the existing 9300 aircraft alone takes about $54 billion a year.


Once again, it is confirmed that the cost of maintaining and operating equipment is directly proportional to its complexity. This is especially evident in the field of tactical aviation: in terms of the cost of service and flights, the modern F-22A fighter is several times more expensive than the old A-10C attack aircraft. A good example of complexity and high cost is also the tiltrotor MV-22B.

At the same time, quantitative aspects in the form of funding volumes are only limitedly related to qualitative indicators. Despite all the spending and various activities, the state of the Air Force, naval and army aviation is far from ideal. The combat readiness of various types of equipment does not exceed 70-80 percent. In the case of individual samples, it is not possible to reach the required level for a long time.

New tasks


It should be noted that despite all these problems, US military aviation remains numerous and shows acceptable combat capability, and is also capable of solving the bulk of its tasks. Despite all the restrictions, various training events are regularly held, during which the available forces and means show their abilities.

However, this state of affairs is considered unacceptable. It is necessary to take organizational, technical and other measures aimed at increasing combat capability and reducing costs. Whether it will be possible to do this and bring the performance of the air fleet to an acceptable level is unknown.
23 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -1
    22 November 2022 16: 11
    According to GAO calculations, the US military currently has almost 9300 aircraft, helicopters and convertiplanes. There are 45 types and models of such equipment.
    Give ist fantastic! And we were no better... request
    1. +4
      22 November 2022 19: 02
      As for fighter aircraft 4/5, the situation is pre-catastrophic.
      China has ~1200 4/5 generation fighters without J-7 and J-8
      USA ~ 1900
      European NATO members have ~1500.
      We don't have 400.

      For AWACS aircraft, tankers, electronic warfare, it’s just a catastrophe.
  2. +4
    22 November 2022 16: 14
    When we played with the girls in the store in childhood, then if there was not enough money (leaves), I went to the nearest tree and plucked more. In the USA, the same principle of the money tree operates - the FRS machine.
    1. +3
      22 November 2022 16: 28
      Quote: dementor873
      When we played with the girls in the store in childhood, then if there was not enough money (leaves), I went to the nearest tree and plucked more. In the USA, the same principle of the money tree operates - the FRS machine.

      In order to avoid hyperinflation in the yard, we agreed to use the leaves of only a hard-to-reach bush with a rich green color and density in the kindergarten under the protection of the caretaker Vasya. The bush did not grow anywhere else. The court agreement was solemnly approved by the initiator of the project in 1913 - the grandson of the old watchman - Vadik
      1. +2
        22 November 2022 16: 43
        They have already thrown their inflation on the EU, it's just that the sucker is not a mammoth, the sucker does not believe. This is enough for them for 5-10 years. During this time, they will pump up Taiwan so that with the beginning of the conflict, when Japan and Korea have to fit in because of semiconductors, all production will go to them, plus the return of American production from China to their homeland. And the profits of the oil and gas sector from the EU sitting on the needle will be fabulous.
  3. +1
    22 November 2022 16: 23
    I brought the data together, an interesting picture is obtained.
    The myth about the high cost of the F-35 does not correspond to reality, given the trend towards cheaper flight hours of the F-35, with the opposite trend towards higher prices for the F-16 and F / A-18A / D, then figures comparable to the 4th generation come out.

    F-22A - 85,3 thousand dollars
    F-15C / D - 36,7 thousand dollars
    F-15E - 33,2 thousand dollars
    F-35 - $42
    F-16 - $27
    A-10C - $22,5 thousand
    F / A-18A / D - 50,8 thousand dollars
    F / A-18E / F - 30,4 thousand dollars
    1. +2
      23 November 2022 05: 39
      The myth about the high cost of the F-35 does not correspond to reality

      to put it mildly, the conclusion is superficial, or in other words, it is pulling an owl on a globe. You are comparing the imaginary "economy" of servicing a single-engine F-35 with the "high cost" of a twin-engine F-15, F-18. If you want to compare correctly, compare the F-35 and F-16. Here is the difference in operation in 55%!
      1. +1
        23 November 2022 16: 44
        Just like the F-22 and F-15 twin engines, the fifth generation is more expensive to run. request
  4. 0
    22 November 2022 16: 53
    And the Navy hasn't touched it yet.
    It smells like...
    How does our mo live under sanctions?
    Saves?
  5. -1
    22 November 2022 18: 33
    Yes, an hour of flight has risen in price a lot (and the dollar has fallen in price). Old tables go on the Internet, there are much less, 3-4 times.

    No wonder we keep everything secret. Occasionally, figures accidentally pop up that they save on departures as best they can. A raid by strategic bombers, it surfaced, some meager numbers ...
    1. +1
      22 November 2022 20: 49
      Those "old tables" are tables in 2010 prices (like from memory). For the F-35, the "25-25" program is now in effect - an attempt to bring the price of a flight hour to 2025 thousand dollars by 25. in 2010 prices.
      PS All this is for the convenience of calculations in a program that lasts for decades.
      1. 0
        22 November 2022 22: 10
        Logically ....
        At least openly publish and discuss ..
        At VO, it was assumed that our cost of an hour is somewhere 2-3 times less, due to ruble payment
        But foreign news leaked out that there the hour of our planes is about the same as that of Western ones ...
        1. -1
          22 November 2022 22: 22
          Our fighters have much less airframe, avionics and engines resources. Needs more maintenance and repairs. This more than compensates for the cheapness of labor.
          1. +2
            23 November 2022 05: 55
            Our fighters have a much shorter airframe, avionics and engines resource

            why are you lying here? The resource of the Pratovsky engine for the F-18 does not exceed 2000 hours. The resources of our 31F3 are already more than 3000 hours. And the 41st has a GZ resource already at 4000 hours. Even a simple FP for MKI has 1500, but this is by no means
            many times less
            1. 0
              23 November 2022 08: 40
              As usual, you are engaged in juggling the facts, i.e. lies. Compare engines of different classes and times.
              RD-33 (manufactured in 1977) has a MTBF of about 500 hours, F404 (1978) - 1100 hours.
              As for 31F3 2013 with an allegedly 3000 hour resource, the 110 F132-GE-2003 has this resource up to 6000 hours.
              1. +4
                23 November 2022 08: 46
                Compare engines of different classes and times.

                I am not comparing years, but engines installed on existing aircraft! 31FP is installed on the Su-30MKI, 41-1C is installed on the Su-35, F404 is installed on the F-18. I indicated their RR. There are practically no RD-33 carriers in service, and what they have is riding on their latest modifications like the RD-33MK, where the resource is also at least 4k. We are comparing planes here, and you are doing your favorite thing - piskometry. There is no need to hysteria here - I will not encroach on your beloved USA.
                1. +2
                  23 November 2022 09: 16
                  Quote: Ka-52
                  Compare engines of different classes and times.

                  I am not comparing years, but engines installed on existing aircraft! 31FP is installed on the Su-30MKI, 41-1C is installed on the Su-35, F404 is installed on the F-18.

                  Strange. Compares the existing Su-30MKI and Su-35 aircraft with the non-existent F-18. It writes the opposite. Please calm down and write what you compare with.

                  The aircraft with the letter F-18 was never mass-produced, there were only prototypes. If you mean FA-18A / B, then they were produced in the 80s and decommissioned in the USA, it is also strange to compare them with aircraft of the 2000s, the difference between them is more than 20 years. They compare like with like, not aircraft of different decades and classes.

                  If we compare the FA-18 with the MiG-29 and the F-15 with the Su-27 (30, 35) of the corresponding years, then in each comparison the Americans will have an engine life of 2 times more, an airframe resource of 2-3 times, a radar of 3 -Five times.
            2. +1
              23 November 2022 12: 16
              It seems like it looks like you are making up stories. GE and PW engines have long had a life span of a fighter jet. They never change it, they just write it off along with the aircraft, i.e. it's 6-7k hours. Belief that our engines smartly doubled their service life to 3-4k hours is just as little, because. This is just a guess from the manufacturer. Those. F404 or F110 have flown millions of hours and they can know exactly the service life, but our latest AL41 or modern AL31 fly at most 5-7 years and are unlikely to get out in 1.5-2k hours, you don’t believe that our fighters have more than 150 hours of flight time in year?.
              1. -1
                24 November 2022 05: 20
                what the hell are you writing now? Firstly, there is such a thing as a "recommended resource". This is the value set by the manufacturer. It is adhered to in the service regulations.
          2. 0
            25 November 2022 09: 37
            According to the glider - fantasy. Much more resource.
            Avianics? And why does she need a big resource? It becomes morally obsolete, it is desirable to change it at least once every 7 years.
            Engines...well, maybe. But a large resource is often achieved by very expensive tricks, not the fact that it's worth it. Especially if you really fight.
            Maintenance and repair costs also vary. Western manufacturers have a wider mug, and therefore these procedures are more expensive for Westerners. And just the cheapness of labor more than compensates for the greater amount of work.
  6. 0
    22 November 2022 20: 49
    All costs for the combat and training operation of these aircraft are the resource consumption of the aircraft engines of these aircraft. The airframe of the aircraft itself is not so expensive to operate, as well as the payment of salaries to the pilots of these aircraft, they are constant. Maintenance of airfields, navigation systems, fuel consumption per flight hour are also constant. The more flight hours, the more expensive the maintenance of the aircraft, because the resource of its engine is limited.
  7. 0
    23 November 2022 09: 17
    Quote from cold wind
    I brought the data together, an interesting picture is obtained.
    The myth about the high cost of the F-35 does not correspond to reality, given the trend towards cheaper flight hours of the F-35, with the opposite trend towards higher prices for the F-16 and F / A-18A / D, then figures comparable to the 4th generation come out.


    These calculations are bullshit. Real cost should not be confused with artificially set tariffs. As many as they want, they will draw as much so that the congressmen do not get too drunk.
    Not to mention the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on the development of this prodigy (everything was paid for by the taxpayers anyway).
    Taking into account all the costs, one unit of the F-22 or F-35 will cost more than 500 million. Well, you can’t forbid living beautifully.
  8. 0
    25 November 2022 07: 42
    Quote from cold wind
    As for fighter aircraft 4/5, the situation is pre-catastrophic.
    China has ~1200 4/5 generation fighters without J-7 and J-8
    USA ~ 1900
    European NATO members have ~1500.
    We don't have 400.

    For AWACS aircraft, tankers, electronic warfare, it’s just a catastrophe.

    We might not have planes at all, because there is not as much sense from them as it seemed. If you have not forgotten, now the war is going on and planes are throwing bombs from a cabriolet, as in the Great Patriotic War. Well, what for then to us su34 and su-57? anyway, in any confrontation with Western countries in the sky, we will lose and hope only for air defense