Status of the USAF

[DesertRat]

Don't worry, nothing posted here is classified.


Tuesday, February 3, 2009

AFA members, Congressional staffers, civic leaders, and DOCA members, it's February and soon President Obama will deliver his State of the Union Speech to the nation. I thought I would take the opportunity to give you some data on the State of the Air Force."

First, your AF is strong. Its members are serving all over the world, participating in the many on-going operations, delivering precise intelligence, ordnance, and supplies, fuel, and effects to support joint commanders world-wide, flying satellites, sitting air defense and missile alert. Last year the Air Force flew over 18,000 tanker sorties, 13,000 ISR sorties, 49,000 airlift sorties, 18,000 CAS sorties in Iraq, and 19,000 CAS sorties in Afghanistan. Several airlift records were set – including the largest amount of cargo moved in one day (3.92 million lbs), largest # of passengers moved in a month (119,394), and largest amount of cargo moved in a month (82+ million pounds) [For a more detailed breakout, go our websiteat this link

Second, your Air Force continues to get older.

(average age)

Fighter Aircraft: over 20 years old (oldest – F-15 A/B – over 31 years old

Bomber Aircraft: 33 years old (oldest – B-52H – over 47 years old)

Tanker Aircraft: 45 years old (oldest – KC-135E – over 50 years old)

Strategic Lift: 16 years old (oldest – C-5A – over 37 years old)

Tactical Lift: over 24 years old (oldest – C-130E – over 44 years old)

C2 Fleet: 23 years old (oldest – E-4B – over 34 years old)

Manned ISR Fleet: 31 years old (oldest – NC-135W/OC-135B/RC-135S/RC-135W/TC-135W/WC-135W – over 46 years old)

Special Ops Fleet: over 26 years old (oldest – MC-130E – over 43 years old)

CSAR Fleet: over 23 years old (oldest: HC-130P – over 42 years old)

OSA/VIP Fleet: 27 years old (oldest – UH-1N – over 38 years old)

Trainer Fleet: over 25 years old (oldest – AT-38B – over 45 years old)

ICBM Force: over 34 years old

The press has asked me to simplify this and the best way to do so is to look at a chart on fighter procurement. We simply stopped buying airplanes. The one I showed many in the press can be found on our website at this link

Third -- During FY09 – the Air Force intends to acquire 117 aircraft and retire 188. Of the 117 acquired, many are ISR aircraft: [9 -- MQ-9s, 5 – RQ-4, 38 -- MQ-1, 24 -- RC-12] = 76 of the 117

Fourth, many aircraft are either grounded or have restrictions to their use. In the past 14 months, the AF has had to ground the entire F-15 fleet, the T-38 fleet, the A-10 fleet, and the B-2 fleet.

The following shows key groundings/restrictions:

A-10As – 73 out of 182 are grounded due to wing cracks. All 182 are Service Life Restricted due to Service Life Extension Program. Also as A-10As are converted to A-10Cs, the quantities of A-10A aircraft will decrease

A-10Cs – 58 out of 174 are grounded due to repair of wing cracks. One aircraft is grounded due to a gun malfunctions. As with the A-10A fleet, all 174 aircraft are restricted due to Service Life Extension Program

B-1Bs – All aircraft (66) are restricted due to structural issues in the speed brake area

B-2As – All aircraft (20) are restricted due to windshield bolt hole cracks

B-52Hs – 2 of 79 are grounded – one awaiting input to AMARC (boneyard) and one to Depot. In the past year 7 aircraft were removed from inventory to to input to AMARC (4), retirement to maintenance ground trainers (2) and Safety Board trainer (1)

C-5As – 1 of 59 is grounded due to structural cracks. 4 are restricted for a variety of reasons, and 35 are restricted due to a crown skin restriction

C-5Bs – 4 of 47 are restricted due to a Torque Deck Restriction

C-5Cs – 2 of 2 are restricted for a variety of reasons

C-130Es – 1 of 93 is grounded due to center wing cracking. Further, one is restricted for exceeding center wing service life

C-130H – 5 of 269 are restricted for exceeding center wing service life

EC-130H – 2 of 14 are grounded for Center Wing Box replacement

EC-130J – 3 of 7 are restricted -- HF radio interferes with some cockpit indications on certain freqs

F-15A/B – 32 of 32 are restricted due to vertical stabilizer structural issues

F-15C/D – 2 of 375 are grounded due to longeron cracks. All are restricted due to vertical stabilizer structural issues

F-15E – 219 of 223 are restricted due to vertical stabilizer issues.

F-16 C/D – 7 of 1188 are grounded due to a variety of reasons to include bulkhead cracking and cockpit corrosion. 28 are restricted for wing pylon rib corrosion. 620 aircraft are restricted for additional inspection requirements – fuel shelf joint, bulkhead vertical tail stabilizer, horizontal stabilizer bearings, wing rib pylons, leading edge flaps, and keel beam.

F-22 – 1 of 127 is restricted due to finger tip formation lights. 2 (test birds) are restricted due to wing structure

HH-60 – 1 of 101 is grounded due to beam tab crack

KC-135E – 20 of 37 are grounded due to engine strut corrosion. Only 5 aircraft are actively flying.

MC-130E – 2 of 14 are grounded for exceeding depot waivers. 1 is restricted (was RDT&E test platform – has no radar)

MQ-1 – 2 of 116 are grounded due to A-Frame cracks.

T-6A – 48 of 354 are grounded due to engine propeller sleeve touchdowns (45) and fuselage skin cracks (3)

T-38C – 10 of 451 are grounded – awaiting TCTO compliance

[Other than gliders, if I did not mention an MDS, then none are grounded or restricted]

Space Forces

DSP – inventory size: classified; design life: 3 yrs/5 yrs; average age – classified

SBIRS HEO – inventory size – 2; design life – classified; average age – classified

SBIRS GEO – inventory size -- 4; design life – 12 yrs; in acquisition

GPS IIA – inventory size – 15; design life -- 7.5 yrs; number of sats past design life – 15; average age – 14.5 yrs

GPS-IIR – inventory size – 12; design life – 7.5 yrs; number of sats past design life – 6; average age – 7 yrs

GPS- IIF – in acquisition

GPS-III – in acquisition

DMSP – inventory size – 5; design life – 4 yrs; number of sats past design life – 3; average age – 7.4 yrs

NPOESS – inventory size – 4; design life – 5 yrs; in acquisition

DSCS – inventory size – 8; design life – 10 yrs; number of sats past design life – 4; average age – 10.6 yrs

WGS – inventory size – 8; design life – 12 yrs; average age – 1.3 yrs

Milstar – inventory size – 5; design life – 10 yrs; number of sats past design life – 2; average age – 9.7 yrs

AEHF -- inventory size – 4; design life – 14 years; in acquisition

Interim Polar System – inventory size – 2; Data classified; to be replaced by EPS

Enhance Polar System – inventory size – 2; In acquisition

Space Surveillance Network – inventory size – 8; design life 15-25 years; number of sats past design life – 7; average age – 31 yrs

Pave Paws – inventory size –2; average age – 30 yrs

BMEWS – inventory size – 3; average age – 15.75 yrs

PARCS – inventory size – 1; age – 32 yrs

Western Launch Facilities – inventory size – 4; design life – 25 yrs, average age – 13 years [SLC-6 (20 yrs); SLC-3E (4 yrs)]

Western Launch Facilities – inventory size – 1; design life – 25 years; average age: Radars – 25 yrs; Telemetry – 35 yrs; Cmd terminate – 30 yrs; optics – 40 yrs

Eastern Launch Facilities – inventory size 4; design life – 25 yrs; Average age – 14 yrs [SLC-37 (8 yrs); SLC-41 (8 yrs); SLC-17 (19 yrs)]

Eastern Launch Range Facilities – inventory size 1; design life 25 years; average age: Radars – 25 yrs; Telemetry – 35 yrs; Cmd Terminate – 30 yrs; optics – 40 yrs

AF Satellite Control Network – 8 tracking stns; 16 antennas; 2 C2 Ctrs; deisng life – 20 yrs; number of units past design life – 17; average age – 23 yrs

Finally, for this nation to continue to enjoy the blessings we have had, the relative security we have enjoyed, and the successes we have had in combat, we have to provide modern tools for our valiant men and women who are serving both stateside and abroad … protecting us. We should never forget that freedom is not free.

For your consideration.

MD

Michael M. Dunn, Lt Gen (Ret)
President/CEO

 

[symyn]

Interesting... and not to get political, but Democrats don't spend to much on defense rather they focus on social programs. IMO It is going to be a long 4 years for buying planes.

 

[AVB]

President and CEO of what? The USAF doesn't have either.

For your consideration.

MD

Michael M. Dunn, Lt Gen (Ret)
President/CEO

 

[DesertRat]

President and CEO of what? The USAF doesn't have either.

[

The AFA - Air Force Association

 

[Turk10mm]

something tells me information like this should be classified. I also would assume that this guy will be seeking employment. If I did this reporting on my company, I'd be blackballed forever.

 

[tone-ny]

It is public information, part of the stuff that has to be reported to congress and free for all to see.

 

[billbaker3]

Have you guys seen this?

Link

Its all about the F-22 Raptor program and keeping it going.

 

[Spad31]

Well, the general public won't see it, read it or give two flips about it. A shame.

Most of our country seems to live on another planet anyway. Lots of unicorns and rainbows on that planet, apprently.

But not to worry...I'm told there's change I can believe in.

 

[DesertRat]

something tells me information like this should be classified. I also would assume that this guy will be seeking employment. If I did this reporting on my company, I'd be blackballed forever.

As was said earlier, all this information is freely available and is far from being a secret. The Air Force and Defense industry representatives have been very outspoken for years about the need to recapitalize our aging fleet of aircraft and it is through the disimination of this type of information that makes people step up and take notice and call upon the government to take action.

 

[Gonz]

So what's the point of this message? Other than to challenge the current president and make him look bad if he doesn't do what you want, and to get members of CP to start arguing about defense spending and whether or not it's sufficient?

Why is it so hard for people to just lay off the politics?

 

[Bxcigrfan]

i have a ? and its not political but an inquiry to the state of military aircraft across nations.

does anyone know if any countries are using military aircraft (primary the so called fighter jets) that are (for the lack of a better term) "new models"

i think i recall an episode of future weapons that had these new fighter jets being tested, but i don't recall if any where in use.

 

[Spad31]

So what's the point of this message? Other than to challenge the current president and make him look bad if he doesn't do what you want, and to get members of CP to start arguing about defense spending and whether or not it's sufficient?

Why is it so hard for people to just lay off the politics?

Gonz, for the folks in the military, I'd say it's pretty damned relevant to discuss the age of the hardware and equipment flying our asses around, especially considering the folks back home have no stomach for mistakes or loss of life. You'd expect the same discussion of age/status on your civillian fleet, yes? We'll have enitre days devoted to bitching about a tax on cigars, but 10 responses into a thread on militay equipment status, and it's a dig on Obama and too political? I think not.

Trey

 

[Gonz]

Trey, what about your own post where you said

But not to worry...I'm told there's change I can believe in.

Seems a bit politically inclined, no?

 

[Spad31]

Yes it did, and I apologize for the snarky tone.

/Buys next round

 

[DesertRat]

So what's the point of this message? Other than to challenge the current president and make him look bad if he doesn't do what you want, and to get members of CP to start arguing about defense spending and whether or not it's sufficient?

Why is it so hard for people to just lay off the politics?

Gonz,

There was absolutely nothing in the OP that was intended to be politically motivated or to prompt a political discussion of any sort. If someone interjects a political jab into a topic here and there are we to then ban the discussion or topic completely?

There was no challenge made to the current administration and no barbs thrown at previous administrations in my post. Simply a laying out of the facts regarding the aging of our Air forces and the post was primarily aimed at the many current and former members of the USAF (and other military) that inhabit these boards.

In all reality there are few topics that could pass the test of being 100% politic free. Cigars? Every topic on cigars could be judged political as soon as someone decided to interject politics into the thread and the rediculous continuance of the ban on Cuban cigars, cigar taxation etc...

It is now tax time in America, are we not allowed to make a post that comments on the pain in the butt we all go through called tax preparation because someone may decide in their mind that it is a challenge to the current administration because of their stand on taxes?

How about a California member lamenting the fact they they will get an IOU instead of a tax refund and therefore may not be buying the cigars they wanted?

Do we not comment on Michael Phelps smoking pot because pot is illegal and a large group of people in the country think that is wrong and therefore talking about it is a challenge to the politicians who keep it illegal?

How far are you willing to police these boards for the sole purpose of not allowing a discussion to start because somehow somewhere there is someone who might find a way to politicize it?

If I had wanted this post to be politically motivated, I would have said "Obama wants to destroy the Air Force!!!!!" and let the arrows fly. I didn't do that, did I? When someone tossed a barb out it purposefully wasn't replied to so that a political discussion did not evolve.

I believe 100% in the self moderated nature of CP but sometimes people need to not overthink things for the sole purpose of creating a confrontation when there was none intended.

 

[Mike33]

i have a ? and its not political but an inquiry to the state of military aircraft across nations.

does anyone know if any countries are using military aircraft (primary the so called fighter jets) that are (for the lack of a better term) "new models"

i think i recall an episode of future weapons that had these new fighter jets being tested, but i don't recall if any where in use.

You'll have to be more specific about what you mean "new models." I'll preface my answer by assuming you mean next gen aircraft like the F-35 and F-22. The answer, I believe is no.

Most of the elite air forces of the world are flying planes that were first put into service in the 90s, 80s, and 70s. Israel flies F-16s and F-15s. Australia, Canada, and numerous other nations fly the F-18s. Russia, India, China and others fly the Mig-29 and Su-27/37s. Most of the EU fly either the Mirage 2000 or the Eurofighter. All of these are the top of the line fighters currently being flown and all were developed years and years ago. All of these are referred to as Gen 4 fighters.

The F-22 and F-35 are a completely new generation of fighter (Gen 5), as is the new T-50 that Russia is developing (don't know much about it). The F-35 will be sold to around 8 other nations I believe, while the F-22 is not going to be sold to other countries initially. So, no nation currently is flying a "new model" so to speak, but within the next several years, they will be.


As far as the article, I don't understand the point other than to say we have an aging fleet of planes in the AF, much the same way the Army, Navy, and Marines complain about their equipment. I'm sure every branch would like all new ships, tanks, ect., but that isn't going to happen. This is a continuing argument under every administration; the last administration killed the "Crusader" artillery system which the army said it had to have and drastically scaled back the F-22 program. Not sure of the political point to this thread, but the argument is merely one that has been repeated under every President, Dem or Rep.

 

[DesertRat]

The F22 is now operational and deployed. while tests for modifications are underway it is now considered to be an operational weapon system.

the F35 is still in early flight test phase. There are only a couple aircraft built and in use for static as well as flight testing. It still has a long way to go towards becoming operational.

 

[Mike33]

The F22 is now operational and deployed. while tests for modifications are underway it is now considered to be an operational weapon system.

the F35 is still in early flight test phase. There are only a couple aircraft built and in use for static as well as flight testing. It still has a long way to go towards becoming operational.

Is the F-22 combat deployed yet? Also, I thought I read the F-35 was going to be ready for delivery by the end of 2010?

 

[billbaker3]

Have you guys seen this?

Link

Its all about the F-22 Raptor program and keeping it going.

The F22 is now operational and deployed. while tests for modifications are underway it is now considered to be an operational weapon system.

the F35 is still in early flight test phase. There are only a couple aircraft built and in use for static as well as flight testing. It still has a long way to go towards becoming operational.

Is the F-22 combat deployed yet? Also, I thought I read the F-35 was going to be ready for delivery by the end of 2010?

Go to the link. I posted this earlier.

 

[Mike33]

Have you guys seen this?

Link

Its all about the F-22 Raptor program and keeping it going.

The F22 is now operational and deployed. while tests for modifications are underway it is now considered to be an operational weapon system.

the F35 is still in early flight test phase. There are only a couple aircraft built and in use for static as well as flight testing. It still has a long way to go towards becoming operational.

Is the F-22 combat deployed yet? Also, I thought I read the F-35 was going to be ready for delivery by the end of 2010?

Go to the link. I posted this earlier.

Yes, but that doesn't answer the question of the F-22 being combat deployed. I read that it has been deployed to Alaska and Okinawa, but I don't think anything I have read states that it is combat ready.