By: Anonymous
- 7th June 2009 at 18:35Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Because of the time required to maintain the stealth features of the aircraft,
only 60 percent of them are available for service at any given time.
What part of that text is refutted, and by whom ?
I've have seen nothing from the USAF to support such a claim of 60%.....:confused:
Funny, the USAF is and has been forward deploying Raptor all over the World. Including to Okinawa at this very moment. Funny, I don't see or hear of 60% of the aircraft being grounded each day...................
Regardless, the F-35 is designed to be much better........and we are discussing the Lightning and not the Raptor.
By: Loke
- 7th June 2009 at 20:30Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Would you like to provide a source to support that argument..........
I've have seen nothing from the USAF to support such a claim of 60%.....:confused:
Funny, the USAF is and has been forward deploying Raptor all over the World. Including to Okinawa at this very moment. Funny, I don't see or hear of 60%
Scooter, you are very good at asking others for sources but you hardly ever provides sources yourself for the statements you are making. Now, why don't you for once provide a source demonstrating the high MTBF and high availability of F-22? Preferrably a reliable, recent source... :rolleyes:
By: Arthur
- 7th June 2009 at 21:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Funny, the USAF is and has been forward deploying Raptor all over the World. Including to Okinawa at this very moment.
And Okinawa before (remember the 180deg longitude crossing). That's it. A repeated deployment to a fully equipped USAF airbase on an island that's essentially an American garrisson isn't really 'all over the world', now is it?
Wake me up for the first Coronet Whatsit deployment to Ahlhorn, or a -gasp- operational deployment to the Gulf or Afghanistan.
New
By: Anonymous
- 7th June 2009 at 22:48Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Scooter, you are very good at asking others for sources but you hardly ever provides sources yourself for the statements you are making. Now, why don't you for once provide a source demonstrating the high MTBF and high availability of F-22? Preferrably a reliable, recent source... :rolleyes:
L
This is from a recent deployment from a actual F-22 Sqaudron.......
Quote:
3/24/2009 - ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE, Alaska -- The 525th Fighter Squadron makes a perfect score.
The Bulldogs recently returned from their extended deployment to Nellis Air Force Base, Nev, and Holloman Air Force Base, N.M. The squadron members participated in Red Flag while at Nellis, and accomplished valuable training while at Holloman.
The squadron members originally left on temporary duty to Nellis for two and a half weeks of training. "Red Flag simulates the first couple weeks of a conflict or war," said Col. James Hecker, the 3rd Operations Group commander. Because, of recent activity from Mount Redoubt, the squadron's deployment was extended for just over a month.
With the volcano at aviation color code orange at the time, the unit was unable to return to its home station here. The aviation color code orange means a volcano is exhibiting heightened or escalated unrest with increased potential of eruption, which the timeframe for is uncertain, or an eruption is underway with no or minor volcanic-ash emissions.
"When the air warning level elevated to orange due to the volcano, our leadership made a decision for us to stay down in the (contiguous U.S.) out of harm's way," said Capt. Jammie Jamieson, the 525th Fighter Squadron director of operations. "We were bedded down at Nellis, and when the next Red Flag had to roll into town, there was a shortage of ramp space. So, the 49th Wing at Holloman graciously opened their buildings and ramps."
Holloman is the next base to receive the F-22s. While the base currently has five F-22s at its disposal, having the 525thFS members there to practice with and share their knowledge was an excellent training exercise for the 49th Wing members at Holloman.
The F-22 pilots were able to accomplish all of their sorties with the help of the weather and elements, but most importantly their maintainers. "Our maintainers really did a great job keeping the jets available for us the whole time," she said.
While at Red Flag, the 525th members were able to complete an unheard of 350 out of 350 sorties. "During the entire deployment, the 525th flew every scheduled sortie," said Hecker.
Not only were they able to accomplish all of the sorties, but all 14 jets returned home at the same time. The colonel said each aircraft arrived here with-in an hour of each other on March 6.
While the unit was deployed, they accomplished a large number of training sorties. "It was a superb team effort all the way from the project officer, Capt. Jamieson for scheduling everything to the squadron commander, who was the deployed commander for both operations," said Hecker.
The colonel said he was most impressed with the maintainers who were there for the duration. "The tremendous support the maintainers gave to ops was just phenomenal," he said.
The fighter squadron returned in one piece and with a considerable amount of experience under its wing. "A fighter squadron is a deployable fighting unit, and we just did what we would do in war time," said Jamieson.
By: bring_it_on
- 8th June 2009 at 04:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
60 percent of them are available for service at any given time.
I dont think that 60-65% combat coded ready to fight fleet is all that bad nor is the 60% Ao given that most of them acheived that mark by early last year and have bettered it now (this is still a young program from the warfighter point of view) , but i SERIOUSLY DOUBT that 40% of the fleet is grounded due to stealth maitnaince issues , specially when the raptor can take dings and still fly in Red-stealth mode. Given that there are certain raptors for TRAINING , TESTING and what not i dont think that 60-70% combat coded and ready at all time is far off !!. But i will definately like to see a SOURCE that 40% are grounded for maintaince on account of stealth and airframe maintaince more so because the DOD has Awarded LMA and USAF awards and recognition for superior maintaince and improved readiness
Using a life-cycle focused strategy, the Air Force and Lockheed Martin
team implemented a continuous reliability improvement program, increasing mean
time between maintenance by 69 percent fleet wide. The team drove a 15
percent improved mission rate and reduced repair time by 20 percent.
While at Red Flag, the 525th members were able to complete an unheard of 350 out of 350 sorties. "During the entire deployment, the 525th flew every scheduled sortie," said Hecker.350 out of 350 sorties. With the JDAM, that is up to as many as 700 DMPI's that an enemy air defense has to eat. What else does this mean? It means that the well motivated United States Air Force aircraft maintenance culture is unstoppable. Some people in the USAF have been trying to fix things that were not broken. For example pulling money from one program that shows great metrics only to watch it suffer a year or so later because some unknowing PowerPoint warrior was trying to go to the well too many times to find “savings”.
For years the USAF has been a thin greyhound that has already missed a few meals. Pulling money from USAF maintenance weakens the USAF and thereby weakens the nation. This means that PowerPoint warriors by their very nature commit treason just to get a few extra nice bullets in their officer evaluation report.
The F-22 became operational just a few years ago. This means the learning curve for a lot of things is still being tweaked. How many flight hours/time between phase/isochronic maintenance? What different colors of money need to be in what locations in a maintenance squadron? What kind of training needs to be stressed? How much to invest in spare parts? What kind of things should be in the deployment kit? What is the right balance on the low observable signature diagnostics as a result of maintenance actions? And so many other things. The F-119 motors contribute to good maintenance for the F-22. Maintenance supers have stated that they are little worry and don’t get pulled much.
What does this mean for F-35 maintenance should everything get figured out? Probably all good. For the F-35, Performance Based Logistics (PBL) will be used. While PBL hasn't been completely figured out yet, the F-22 uses some "legacy" maintenance and PBL. The 350 out of 350 could be a feather in the cap for PBL.
The USAF has the right people to do the job. The greatest enemy that the USAF will encounter is a PowerPoint warrior or a weak senior leader that won’t go to bat for the right things. Topping that off is that there are no senior leaders with the courage of a LeMay to state their case and stand tall.
The USAF now knows what it takes to put in a stunning 100% mission capable rate (MC rate) on an F-22 deployment. 350 F-22 sorties means that what ever is left of the enemy can probably be done with legacy aircraft.
By: irtusk
- 8th June 2009 at 04:54Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
While at Red Flag, the 525th members were able to complete an unheard of 350 out of 350 sorties.
. . .
The USAF now knows what it takes to put in a stunning 100% mission capable rate (MC rate) on an F-22 deployment. 350 F-22 sorties means that what ever is left of the enemy can probably be done with legacy aircraft.
it would be fair to point out that doing 100% of the sorties means nothing without more information
for instance, bringing 20 aircraft but only ever scheduling 10 in the air at a time might give you a 100% sortie rate, but that only proves 50% of your planes can fly at any one time
By: bring_it_on
- 8th June 2009 at 05:04Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
it would be fair to point out that doing 100% of the sorties means nothing without more information
for instance, bringing 20 aircraft but only ever scheduling 10 in the air at a time might give you a 100% sortie rate, but that only proves 50% of your planes can fly at any one time
Not going into a big debate regarding this , but what it means for me is that what was SCHEDULED for the raptor squadron was acommplished without any sorties being cancelled or mission being aborted due to mx issues or what ever other issues that can come up (be it avionics , engine , tyres and what not).
No doubt that the F-22's LO features have caused problems throughout its initial operation and low numbers only adds to the problems , however they have improved greatly since LRIP days and will do so as it becomes more and more gelled within the system . The F-35 is totally different machine when it comes to LO and its application , maintaince , it is not ONE STEP BEYOND the F-22 , but much further and they have improved it along the way aswell !!
By: djcross
- 8th June 2009 at 05:06Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The factors that drive Mission Capability Rate are Phase Inspections (similar to the A, B, C, D checks airliners undergo) and depot modifications to incorporate design changes.
The dock/hangars that perform Phase Inspections are run as a little fiefdoms by the maintainers. The Phase Dock working conditions are cushy, two shifts working 6 hour days, no weekend work and no 2AM wakeups to prepare an airplane in the cold rain/snow for a 6AM flight. Phase typically gobbles up 10% of the MC rate and supply shortages another 5%. That means your fleet starts out at 85% MC rate and goes down from there once you account for equipment breakages inherent to the design.
The older F-22s are going through a mod program to incorporate design changes/mod kits to correct deficiencies found during operational use. The mod programs are run by Depot teams because Air Combat Command has a policy that flight line maintenance cannot install a mod kit that require more than 20 manhours to complete. The good news about the mod program is that fleet's MC rate will improve as the mod kits are installed.
New
By: Anonymous
- 8th June 2009 at 05:08Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I dont think that 60-65% combat coded ready to fight fleet is all that bad nor is the 60% Ao given that most of them acheived that mark by early last year and have bettered it now (this is still a young program from the warfighter point of view) , but i SERIOUSLY DOUBT that 40% of the fleet is grounded due to stealth maitnaince issues , specially when the raptor can take dings and still fly in Red-stealth mode. Given that there are certain raptors for TRAINING , TESTING and what not i dont think that 60-70% combat coded and ready at all time is far off !!. But i will definately like to see a SOURCE that 40% are grounded for maintaince on account of stealth and airframe maintaince more so because the DOD has Awarded LMA and USAF awards and recognition for superior maintaince and improved readiness
While at Red Flag, the 525th members were able to complete an unheard of 350 out of 350 sorties. "During the entire deployment, the 525th flew every scheduled sortie," said Hecker.350 out of 350 sorties. With the JDAM, that is up to as many as 700 DMPI's that an enemy air defense has to eat. What else does this mean? It means that the well motivated United States Air Force aircraft maintenance culture is unstoppable. Some people in the USAF have been trying to fix things that were not broken. For example pulling money from one program that shows great metrics only to watch it suffer a year or so later because some unknowing PowerPoint warrior was trying to go to the well too many times to find “savings”.
For years the USAF has been a thin greyhound that has already missed a few meals. Pulling money from USAF maintenance weakens the USAF and thereby weakens the nation. This means that PowerPoint warriors by their very nature commit treason just to get a few extra nice bullets in their officer evaluation report.
The F-22 became operational just a few years ago. This means the learning curve for a lot of things is still being tweaked. How many flight hours/time between phase/isochronic maintenance? What different colors of money need to be in what locations in a maintenance squadron? What kind of training needs to be stressed? How much to invest in spare parts? What kind of things should be in the deployment kit? What is the right balance on the low observable signature diagnostics as a result of maintenance actions? And so many other things. The F-119 motors contribute to good maintenance for the F-22. Maintenance supers have stated that they are little worry and don’t get pulled much.
What does this mean for F-35 maintenance should everything get figured out? Probably all good. For the F-35, Performance Based Logistics (PBL) will be used. While PBL hasn't been completely figured out yet, the F-22 uses some "legacy" maintenance and PBL. The 350 out of 350 could be a feather in the cap for PBL.
The USAF has the right people to do the job. The greatest enemy that the USAF will encounter is a PowerPoint warrior or a weak senior leader that won’t go to bat for the right things. Topping that off is that there are no senior leaders with the courage of a LeMay to state their case and stand tall.
The USAF now knows what it takes to put in a stunning 100% mission capable rate (MC rate) on an F-22 deployment. 350 F-22 sorties means that what ever is left of the enemy can probably be done with legacy aircraft.
As I stated earlier.........The F-22 has a better MTBF than the F-15 did during the same time frame of development. With the odds being more favorable for the F-35.........
By: bring_it_on
- 8th June 2009 at 05:19Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From CodeOne
"Last year was our first winter to operate the F-22 in Alaska," notes CMSgt. William Holm, the aircraft maintenance unit superintendent for the 90th Aircraft Maintenance Unit. "During the coldest days of that first winter, we hosted a lot of visitors."
While some of those visitors expected the weather to cause a lot of problems for the Raptors, only minor issues arose. "A few computers and boxes on the fighter didn't start up as quickly as we wanted," continues Holm. "Also the alcohol/water mixture we use to clean the F-22 canopy froze at very low temperatures. We didn't expect that."
The low-observable coatings challenge maintainers because the technology is new to most of them. But they are learning to work with the coatings. "Maintaining coatings requires a different mindset," explains Holm. "They are not just paint. They are another system on the aircraft and have to be treated as such." The aviation-grade sand used to provide traction on icy runways can affect the coatings. "We clean the jets after every flight to ¬thoroughly inspect the coatings," Holm continues. "That activity takes additional time. The F-22 isn't dainty or oversensitive—it's just different. And we have to use different procedures to maintain it."
The F-22 offsets these additional requirements with a much more capable laptop-based maintenance system. "Overall, the F-22 is very maintainable," Holm says. "It represents an advance in self-diagnostic capabilities." The F-15C employs an aircraft status panel that shows a little white ball popping up to indicate which line replaceable unit is bad. The F-15E uses fault codes to provide a little more information on what might need attention. "The F-22 generates fault reporting codes that tend to be real accurate," offers Holm. "While the Strike Eagle fault codes got us in the ballpark, the fault reporting codes on the F-22 tell us exactly what is wrong.
We have also done away with phase inspections with the F-22," Holm adds. "The F-15 requires phase inspections every 200 flying hours. That frequency demands planning because the detailed inspections require an airplane to be down for a week or longer. Losing too many aircraft to phase inspections can impact a flying schedule.
"The F-22 has a completely different inspection concept," Holm continues. "First, it's every 900 hours. Second, the inspections are not as complex as the phase inspections for the F-15."Routine maintenance on the F-22 and every other aircraft is just subject to the environment of Alaska. Changing a tire at 15 degrees Fahrenheit is a little more difficult than changing a tire at 70 degrees Fahrenheit. And those 15-degree days represent the average for January—the coldest month in Anchorage. "Elmendorf is fairly dry most of the year, which may seem counterintuitive," says Niemi as he looks out his office window to a line of F-22s parked on a ramp covered in three inches of snow. The snowfall is the third of the season—and it's only mid October.
By: Anonymous
- 8th June 2009 at 05:19Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not going into a big debate regarding this , but what it means for me is that what was SCHEDULED for the raptor squadron was acommplished without any sorties being cancelled or mission being aborted due to mx issues or what ever other issues that can come up (be it avionics , engine , tyres and what not).
No doubt that the F-22's LO features have caused problems throughout its initial operation and low numbers only adds to the problems , however they have improved greatly since LRIP days and will do so as it becomes more and more gelled within the system . The F-35 is totally different machine when it comes to LO and its application , maintaince , it is not ONE STEP BEYOND the F-22 , but much further and they have improved it along the way aswell !!
In short lesson learned from the F-22 Program. Have been incorporated into the F-35 Program.:cool:
By: Jwcook
- 8th June 2009 at 09:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
In short lesson learned from the F-22 Program. Have been incorporated into the F-35 Program.:cool:
lol like not committing to production till adequate testing has been completed or the lesson hasn't been learnt
Is it acceptable for one third of your f-22 not being combat coded because they are pre-stable production designs that are a nightmare to maintain.
Oh well, we shall see if the most aggressive flight testing schedule to ever run concurrently with production actually works, and what a brave decision to do it on the biggest military program too. man you have to be very confident or totally stupid.
[Air Force chief of staff Gen. Norton] Schwartz said “the truth of the matter is” the F-22’s rate is 60 percent including stealth issues and is “in the mid- to high-70s without low observable” issues. Looking at the system overall, the F-22’s reliability “is respectable,” he said.
however to me, that isn't an argument against the F-35 as much as it is an argument against the F-22
'Let's go all F-22!!!111'
well, we can't afford that, neither to buy it nor to maintain it
the F-35 will be cheaper to maintain
fewer engines, more advanced RAM, less overall RAM (smaller size), less mechanical complexity (thrust vectoring), more emphasis on maintainability from the very beginning
By: bring_it_on
- 8th June 2009 at 15:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
however to me, that isn't an argument against the F-35 as much as it is an argument against the F-22
Well , 2 points --
1) The mx issues are compounded by few numbers spread through units , equip 1.5 sqd per aef and you have more assets to play with , and concentrations can be built up at depots etc , for me the raptors are too few to do anything about it , you cant pour millions to improviing mx with such small a fleet , it just becomes cost prohibitive. With the F-35 it will be very very different also a lot of commercial influence , you will see LMA come up with a lot of Lifetime support deals with the F-35 which are more like Airbus and boeing commercial airliners.
2) The early birds are always going to be a challenge , THIS IS THE FIRST FIGHTER JET with all aspect STEALTH , and you will pay the price for being the first there and you will be at the begining of the learning curve. Tactical advantage gained will trump extra headaches anyday provided you have the numbers to get some sort of decent scale . Ask USAF if 80 precent readiness rates will be acceptable without stealth or LO and they wont take it !!
well, we can't afford that, neither to buy it nor to maintain it
But we can , only if we spend wisely on what is needed and dont spend money on what is not !!
the F-35 will be cheaper to maintain
Yes most will agree to this !!
more emphasis on maintainability from the very beginning
Reply With Quote
Also greater numbers to play with which means greater incentive for industry and service to come up with new inovative programs to reduce cost further (these programs wont be economical for few numbers as ususally you need large investments to reduce mx and procurment cost by a small degree).
[Air Force chief of staff Gen. Norton] Schwartz said “the truth of the matter is” the F-22’s rate is 60 percent including stealth issues and is “in the mid- to high-70s without low observable” issues. Looking at the system overall, the F-22’s reliability “is respectable,” he said.
however to me, that isn't an argument against the F-35 as much as it is an argument against the F-22
'Let's go all F-22!!!111'
well, we can't afford that, neither to buy it nor to maintain it
the F-35 will be cheaper to maintain
fewer engines, more advanced RAM, less overall RAM (smaller size), less mechanical complexity (thrust vectoring), more emphasis on maintainability from the very beginning
Remember that any DoD program starts out with a Mission Capability rate of 85%...that's 15% in the hole due to the way DoD performs inspections and stocks spare parts. With a lot of complex stuff crammed inside, you'll be lucky if any modern airplane has an MC rate of 75% (RAM failures excluded).
By: djcross
- 8th June 2009 at 22:35Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Between 60 and "mid to high seventies" is a bit more than 10%.
And you could look at it from another angle.
Availability including stealth issues: 60%
Availability without stealth issues: mid to high seventies, so lets say 77%.
Now look at non-availability.
Without stealth: 23%
With stealth: 40%
That means that about half the F-22s not available are so due to stealth-related issues.
To be fair, the guys in Fort Worth reviewed the problems F-22 is having and implemented changes. Expect F-35 Low Observables maintenance to be significantly lower than F-22.
By: Anonymous - 7th June 2009 at 18:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I've have seen nothing from the USAF to support such a claim of 60%.....:confused:
Funny, the USAF is and has been forward deploying Raptor all over the World. Including to Okinawa at this very moment. Funny, I don't see or hear of 60% of the aircraft being grounded each day...................
Regardless, the F-35 is designed to be much better........and we are discussing the Lightning and not the Raptor.
Posts: 3,280
By: Loke - 7th June 2009 at 20:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Scooter, you are very good at asking others for sources but you hardly ever provides sources yourself for the statements you are making. Now, why don't you for once provide a source demonstrating the high MTBF and high availability of F-22? Preferrably a reliable, recent source... :rolleyes:
L
Posts: 7,877
By: Arthur - 7th June 2009 at 21:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And Okinawa before (remember the 180deg longitude crossing). That's it. A repeated deployment to a fully equipped USAF airbase on an island that's essentially an American garrisson isn't really 'all over the world', now is it?
Wake me up for the first Coronet Whatsit deployment to Ahlhorn, or a -gasp- operational deployment to the Gulf or Afghanistan.
By: Anonymous - 7th June 2009 at 22:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is from a recent deployment from a actual F-22 Sqaudron.......
Quote:
3/24/2009 - ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE, Alaska -- The 525th Fighter Squadron makes a perfect score.
The Bulldogs recently returned from their extended deployment to Nellis Air Force Base, Nev, and Holloman Air Force Base, N.M. The squadron members participated in Red Flag while at Nellis, and accomplished valuable training while at Holloman.
The squadron members originally left on temporary duty to Nellis for two and a half weeks of training. "Red Flag simulates the first couple weeks of a conflict or war," said Col. James Hecker, the 3rd Operations Group commander. Because, of recent activity from Mount Redoubt, the squadron's deployment was extended for just over a month.
With the volcano at aviation color code orange at the time, the unit was unable to return to its home station here. The aviation color code orange means a volcano is exhibiting heightened or escalated unrest with increased potential of eruption, which the timeframe for is uncertain, or an eruption is underway with no or minor volcanic-ash emissions.
"When the air warning level elevated to orange due to the volcano, our leadership made a decision for us to stay down in the (contiguous U.S.) out of harm's way," said Capt. Jammie Jamieson, the 525th Fighter Squadron director of operations. "We were bedded down at Nellis, and when the next Red Flag had to roll into town, there was a shortage of ramp space. So, the 49th Wing at Holloman graciously opened their buildings and ramps."
Holloman is the next base to receive the F-22s. While the base currently has five F-22s at its disposal, having the 525thFS members there to practice with and share their knowledge was an excellent training exercise for the 49th Wing members at Holloman.
The F-22 pilots were able to accomplish all of their sorties with the help of the weather and elements, but most importantly their maintainers. "Our maintainers really did a great job keeping the jets available for us the whole time," she said.
While at Red Flag, the 525th members were able to complete an unheard of 350 out of 350 sorties. "During the entire deployment, the 525th flew every scheduled sortie," said Hecker.
Not only were they able to accomplish all of the sorties, but all 14 jets returned home at the same time. The colonel said each aircraft arrived here with-in an hour of each other on March 6.
While the unit was deployed, they accomplished a large number of training sorties. "It was a superb team effort all the way from the project officer, Capt. Jamieson for scheduling everything to the squadron commander, who was the deployed commander for both operations," said Hecker.
The colonel said he was most impressed with the maintainers who were there for the duration. "The tremendous support the maintainers gave to ops was just phenomenal," he said.
The fighter squadron returned in one piece and with a considerable amount of experience under its wing. "A fighter squadron is a deployable fighting unit, and we just did what we would do in war time," said Jamieson.
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 8th June 2009 at 04:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I dont think that 60-65% combat coded ready to fight fleet is all that bad nor is the 60% Ao given that most of them acheived that mark by early last year and have bettered it now (this is still a young program from the warfighter point of view) , but i SERIOUSLY DOUBT that 40% of the fleet is grounded due to stealth maitnaince issues , specially when the raptor can take dings and still fly in Red-stealth mode. Given that there are certain raptors for TRAINING , TESTING and what not i dont think that 60-70% combat coded and ready at all time is far off !!. But i will definately like to see a SOURCE that 40% are grounded for maintaince on account of stealth and airframe maintaince more so because the DOD has Awarded LMA and USAF awards and recognition for superior maintaince and improved readiness
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS214651+01-Oct-2008+PRN20081001
From our member blogger eric palmer's blog ----
While at Red Flag, the 525th members were able to complete an unheard of 350 out of 350 sorties. "During the entire deployment, the 525th flew every scheduled sortie," said Hecker.350 out of 350 sorties. With the JDAM, that is up to as many as 700 DMPI's that an enemy air defense has to eat. What else does this mean? It means that the well motivated United States Air Force aircraft maintenance culture is unstoppable. Some people in the USAF have been trying to fix things that were not broken. For example pulling money from one program that shows great metrics only to watch it suffer a year or so later because some unknowing PowerPoint warrior was trying to go to the well too many times to find “savings”.
For years the USAF has been a thin greyhound that has already missed a few meals. Pulling money from USAF maintenance weakens the USAF and thereby weakens the nation. This means that PowerPoint warriors by their very nature commit treason just to get a few extra nice bullets in their officer evaluation report.
The F-22 became operational just a few years ago. This means the learning curve for a lot of things is still being tweaked. How many flight hours/time between phase/isochronic maintenance? What different colors of money need to be in what locations in a maintenance squadron? What kind of training needs to be stressed? How much to invest in spare parts? What kind of things should be in the deployment kit? What is the right balance on the low observable signature diagnostics as a result of maintenance actions? And so many other things. The F-119 motors contribute to good maintenance for the F-22. Maintenance supers have stated that they are little worry and don’t get pulled much.
What does this mean for F-35 maintenance should everything get figured out? Probably all good. For the F-35, Performance Based Logistics (PBL) will be used. While PBL hasn't been completely figured out yet, the F-22 uses some "legacy" maintenance and PBL. The 350 out of 350 could be a feather in the cap for PBL.
The USAF has the right people to do the job. The greatest enemy that the USAF will encounter is a PowerPoint warrior or a weak senior leader that won’t go to bat for the right things. Topping that off is that there are no senior leaders with the courage of a LeMay to state their case and stand tall.
The USAF now knows what it takes to put in a stunning 100% mission capable rate (MC rate) on an F-22 deployment. 350 F-22 sorties means that what ever is left of the enemy can probably be done with legacy aircraft.
Posts: 1,006
By: irtusk - 8th June 2009 at 04:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
it would be fair to point out that doing 100% of the sorties means nothing without more information
for instance, bringing 20 aircraft but only ever scheduling 10 in the air at a time might give you a 100% sortie rate, but that only proves 50% of your planes can fly at any one time
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 8th June 2009 at 05:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not going into a big debate regarding this , but what it means for me is that what was SCHEDULED for the raptor squadron was acommplished without any sorties being cancelled or mission being aborted due to mx issues or what ever other issues that can come up (be it avionics , engine , tyres and what not).
No doubt that the F-22's LO features have caused problems throughout its initial operation and low numbers only adds to the problems , however they have improved greatly since LRIP days and will do so as it becomes more and more gelled within the system . The F-35 is totally different machine when it comes to LO and its application , maintaince , it is not ONE STEP BEYOND the F-22 , but much further and they have improved it along the way aswell !!
Posts: 5,396
By: djcross - 8th June 2009 at 05:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The factors that drive Mission Capability Rate are Phase Inspections (similar to the A, B, C, D checks airliners undergo) and depot modifications to incorporate design changes.
The dock/hangars that perform Phase Inspections are run as a little fiefdoms by the maintainers. The Phase Dock working conditions are cushy, two shifts working 6 hour days, no weekend work and no 2AM wakeups to prepare an airplane in the cold rain/snow for a 6AM flight. Phase typically gobbles up 10% of the MC rate and supply shortages another 5%. That means your fleet starts out at 85% MC rate and goes down from there once you account for equipment breakages inherent to the design.
The older F-22s are going through a mod program to incorporate design changes/mod kits to correct deficiencies found during operational use. The mod programs are run by Depot teams because Air Combat Command has a policy that flight line maintenance cannot install a mod kit that require more than 20 manhours to complete. The good news about the mod program is that fleet's MC rate will improve as the mod kits are installed.
By: Anonymous - 8th June 2009 at 05:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I stated earlier.........The F-22 has a better MTBF than the F-15 did during the same time frame of development. With the odds being more favorable for the F-35.........
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 8th June 2009 at 05:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From CodeOne
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/2009/articles/jan_09/f-22_alaska/index.html
By: Anonymous - 8th June 2009 at 05:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
In short lesson learned from the F-22 Program. Have been incorporated into the F-35 Program.:cool:
Posts: 1,067
By: Jwcook - 8th June 2009 at 09:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
lol like not committing to production till adequate testing has been completed or the lesson hasn't been learnt
Is it acceptable for one third of your f-22 not being combat coded because they are pre-stable production designs that are a nightmare to maintain.
Oh well, we shall see if the most aggressive flight testing schedule to ever run concurrently with production actually works, and what a brave decision to do it on the biggest military program too. man you have to be very confident or totally stupid.
Cheers
Posts: 1,006
By: irtusk - 8th June 2009 at 13:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
60% for the F-22 is real
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/02/17/af-likely-to-get-60-more-f-22s-allies-out-of-luck/
however to me, that isn't an argument against the F-35 as much as it is an argument against the F-22
'Let's go all F-22!!!111'
well, we can't afford that, neither to buy it nor to maintain it
the F-35 will be cheaper to maintain
fewer engines, more advanced RAM, less overall RAM (smaller size), less mechanical complexity (thrust vectoring), more emphasis on maintainability from the very beginning
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 8th June 2009 at 15:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well , 2 points --
1) The mx issues are compounded by few numbers spread through units , equip 1.5 sqd per aef and you have more assets to play with , and concentrations can be built up at depots etc , for me the raptors are too few to do anything about it , you cant pour millions to improviing mx with such small a fleet , it just becomes cost prohibitive. With the F-35 it will be very very different also a lot of commercial influence , you will see LMA come up with a lot of Lifetime support deals with the F-35 which are more like Airbus and boeing commercial airliners.
2) The early birds are always going to be a challenge , THIS IS THE FIRST FIGHTER JET with all aspect STEALTH , and you will pay the price for being the first there and you will be at the begining of the learning curve. Tactical advantage gained will trump extra headaches anyday provided you have the numbers to get some sort of decent scale . Ask USAF if 80 precent readiness rates will be acceptable without stealth or LO and they wont take it !!
But we can , only if we spend wisely on what is needed and dont spend money on what is not !!
Yes most will agree to this !!
Also greater numbers to play with which means greater incentive for industry and service to come up with new inovative programs to reduce cost further (these programs wont be economical for few numbers as ususally you need large investments to reduce mx and procurment cost by a small degree).
Posts: 5,396
By: djcross - 8th June 2009 at 18:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Remember that any DoD program starts out with a Mission Capability rate of 85%...that's 15% in the hole due to the way DoD performs inspections and stocks spare parts. With a lot of complex stuff crammed inside, you'll be lucky if any modern airplane has an MC rate of 75% (RAM failures excluded).
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 8th June 2009 at 19:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A while back a US Naval rep stated that the F-35 will be able to complete 75+ hours of naval ops without any reduction in RCS.
I am looking for the original quoting source.
Posts: 1,426
By: pfcem - 8th June 2009 at 20:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Note that "stealth issues" only added 10% to the total...
Posts: 753
By: Satorian - 8th June 2009 at 21:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Between 60 and "mid to high seventies" is a bit more than 10%.
And you could look at it from another angle.
Availability including stealth issues: 60%
Availability without stealth issues: mid to high seventies, so lets say 77%.
Now look at non-availability.
Without stealth: 23%
With stealth: 40%
That means that about half the F-22s not available are so due to stealth-related issues.
Posts: 5,396
By: djcross - 8th June 2009 at 22:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
To be fair, the guys in Fort Worth reviewed the problems F-22 is having and implemented changes. Expect F-35 Low Observables maintenance to be significantly lower than F-22.