PW Gets a Lesson in Customer Service

A few years ago, an F-15 depot guy told me that the Saudis were really unhappy with Pratt & Whitney engines in their RSAF F-15s and that they were going to switch to GE motors. I didn’t know the full story.

Now I do. It seems there were quality control problems with the engines. Saudi maintenance did the best they could but the best response they got back from PW is that they should be using less thrust. That was the wrong answer. The Saudis had enough and went with GE.

There are success stories with single engine maker jets. For example, line maintainers with the F-22 don’t worry too much about the PW F119 engines. They just work with little hassle. And before anyone makes too many assumptions that the PW F135 engine for the F-35 is based on the F119 and everything is grand, the F135 is a cousin design with different operational requirements and is not the same thing. Yes the experience is a help, but there still has to be a lot of real flight testing to prove things out. Both the PW F135 and GE/Rolls-Royce F136 engines have had setbacks.

What ever you do, don’t use the F-16 as a pure alternate engine success story. When they put the GE motor in the jet -except for a few early Block 30 F-16s – they had to alter the intake. It is not a drop in replacement. This causes logistics overhead in a combat theater where you have F-16s that can only use PW motors and those that can only use GE. Not the best way to do things.

For PW, the Saudis gave them an excellent object lesson in customer service.

H/T- ARES

F-35 Numbers Game for the USAF-AFRES-ANG

Even if the USAF has no one to blame but itself for the train-wreck that is todays recapitalization plan of aircraft, it might just pull off a reasonable defense of the U.S. if all of the hype we are led to believe of the F-35 is actually true.

While I doubt that the F-35 will come in on time with a low price, if it has a reasonable amount of firepower and the PowerPoint slides are true, it will be several times more effective than a legacy fighter aircraft.

Given everything else that the USAF has to pay for over the years – tankers, airlift, ISR, space systems, facilities upkeep and yes, fighter aircraft – there just won’t be enough money to go around for everything. It is too late to do much to fix all this. That train left already. A serious debtor U.S. federal budget has to be fixed and it is going to take a very long time.

The fighter force of the USAF has two primary missions – air sovereignty and air expeditionary – known as ASA and AEF.

With the uncertainties of the F-35 price and serious doubt if the USAF can ever buy F-35s up to plan, 48 per year once full rate production kicks in ( 2014 ? 2015 ? 2016 ? ) is all that can be expected.

Not to fear. If you believe in the F-35 capability like Mr. Gates, we can get through this. It will take a different mindset.

To really pull off the F-35 fielding into the USAF, the Fighter Group and not the Fighter Wing will have to be the big money saver. After all, modern logistics methods brought on by the F-35 ( really the F-22 and Super Hornet started it ) , will mean less over-head at the unit level for maintenance. With further reorganizations always on the horizon – the standard hobby of PowerPoint warriors – the F-35 will, in a Fighter Group structure, mean that the maintainer will be part of the flying squadron and so will lot of other maintenance support.

The Fighter Group in this new economic reality will have a high and a low squadron so to speak. 12 aircraft per squadron for a Fighter Group of 24 aircraft. Throw in the usual Security Police squadron, CE, Logistics squadron, A consolidated support squadron with the MPF, Finance and Services, along with a Medical squadron and a Ops squadron and you have an organic Fighter Group that can be run with a Full Colonel.

These Fighter Groups can be blended as needed. This means a Fighter Group could be a mix of active duty, reserve and guard personnel. Some may be all active duty, all reserve or all guard.

Taskings of the two fighter squadrons in the Fighter Group are split right down the middle with half for ASA and half for AEF.

A look at the chart below shows toward the top, 18 ASA locations throughout the U.S. Three of these can be covered by the F-22 (in grey). The rest by the F-35.

Foreign placements reflect the reality of todays threat. Europe doesn’t count for having a permanent base. Stateside USAF/AFRES/ANG fighters would always deploy there as part of exercises. The Pacific is where any money should go toward foreign basing of the F-35. Guam is especially handy because it can pitch in where needed. Guam, Kunsan and Misawa would also be deployment sites for stateside USAF/AFRES/ANG F-35s.

Given that there are going to be several partner nations using the F-35 (so we are told) the total number of F-35s for the USAF isn’t really all that small. A grand coalition of the willing should be able to cough up enough F-35 firepower to be effective. And that doesn’t even count the USN, or USMC.

If QDR doesn’t figure this out or even consider it, they aren’t doing their homework. Some kind of reality of what the USAF will be capable of doing in the coming years based on its limited funds has to be considered. While USAF certainly has not stated a case for even having the F-35, one has to consider if their claim needing 1763 F-35s is even logical. The head of the USAF recently stated that number could be lower but certainly more than 1500. What one is going to do with 1500 very expensive fighter aircraft is yet to be seen let alone justified.

Fly with the Hornets de España

A fun video showing the Hornets of Spain. Enjoy.

H/T Señor Lex

Flightsuits

Unless you are flying that day…. you don’t need to be wearing a flight suit. You are doing command post puke duty or not really flying ( UAV ). Deal with it. This is a very unfortunate syndrome in the USAF over the past several years.

F-22, The Gates Factor

My latest for F-16.net…

“The debate over the F-22 has shown that some have no limit to the amount of ignorance they can acquire. Since there are a large amount of people that can’t explain why they want to cancel it or keep it going, finding true clarity is a challenge.”

(USAF photo)

USMC Osprey Inventory

So how many Ospreys does the USMC have?

All Talk

So it looks like the U.S. won’t use any force to inspect NORK ships. All the talk of shadowing a NORK ship with a U.S. destroyer is all about nothing. The NORKs can just refuse and press on to a port of their choice. Nothing like a tough response to a nuke test. Laughable.

SA-5 Update

Time to update your threat folders kids. APA has an update on the SA-5 SAM system. While old, North Korea, Iran et al still have it.

Regardless of its ability, it will be a part of threat briefings. Back during the Prairie Fire / Eldorado Canyon days in 1986 – the first modern war on terror – the U.S. Navy successfully subdued Libya’s SA-5s.  SA-5 launch gear and facilities are not mobile.

With the retirement of the S-200 from Russian and most former Warpac nations’ service, this system has been exported widely. Notable users include:

Iran with two batteries of S-200VE, procured in 1989.
Algeria is claimed to operate a single battery of S-200VE.
Libya with four batteries (used in combat unsuccessfully).
North Korea is claimed to operate 4 batteries.
Syria with 2-8 batteries; Russian sources claim an Israeli E-2C was killed by a Syrian S-200 battery.
Ukraine operated 3 batteries, Poland 2 batteries, Hungary 2 batteries, Czechoslovakia 5 batteries, the DDR 4 batteries later transferred to the Luftwaffe and then disbanded.

As of December 2008, Sean claims there is still one active SA-5 site in Kaliningrad!  Check out his Worldwide SAM Overview.

Lets light one of these bad boys off!! A video dated February 2008.

“Fars News Agency reports the succesful upgrade of the originally Russian (Soviet) S-200 antaircraft SAM (SA-5 Gammon) by Iran’s defence industry.”

SASC = 18 F-18E/F

I am a little confused by what is stated in this quote-

-”U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said she lobbied for the restoration of nine F/A-18 aircraft that had been cut from the budget by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, increasing the authorization for F/A-18 purchases from 31 to 40″.-

For the 2010 budget, if the Senate Armed Services Committee proposal is a go, there will be 18 F/A-18 Super Hornets?

This White House / Gates 2010 budget shows 9 E/F model Super Hornets.

The reason I ask is that the rest of the Super Hornets ( EA-18Gs ) are their own budget grouping. Note here the White House / Gates budget for 2010 on EA-18 Gs shows 22 Griz and 9 F-18E/F for 31 total.

Her mention of 9+ F-18E/F brings us to 40 total (22 EA-18G and 18 F-18E/F). I think I have that right….

This doesn’t take into account the results of the Navy being approved to enter into a multi-year buy, with those numbers to be determined at a later time.

Fuhrer Directive FY2010 and the Randomizer Script

While the latest buzz-word in the Pentagram is “hybrid warfare”, don’t expect anyone there to come up with a credible roadmap of how to make the force structure fit into this latest marketing gimmick.

The top DOD officials and the White House are saying no more F-22 production is needed. This is interesting because the top general of USAFs Air Combat Command (ACC) stated that the decision to halt production of this aircraft had no hard analysis to back it up. The temporary help Secretary of the Air Force Donley – one of those service secretaries that don’t bring anything to the fight except purchase of new office furniture and an empty suit – stated the general was only stating his opinion and that he knows what policy is from the head office. Yes, of course.

The leadership in Congress want the F-35. Yet they still don’t understand that in order for it to have any chance of being affordable, one has to stay to the existing plan. Lowering production of the aircraft to pay for the alternate engine – the GE/Rolls-Royce F136 – is going to hurt the ability for the F-35 program to meet its goals. The only alternative if one wants to keep this engine and give the F-35 a chance, is to have the alternate engine funding completely separate from the F-35 program. This probably won’t happen. Even the word “veto” was thrown around on this topic. The money has to be robbed from somewhere if the alternate engine lives. Instead of a solution, we have extra weight around the neck of the F-35 program as it tries to swim to the opposite shore in a strong current.

The Navy is doing their very best to screw up a service that, on the class curve, looks like it knows what it is doing. The Littoral Combat Gyp will go on a cruise soon. Is it ready? It is as long as groupthink reigns supreme at the staff meetings. I hope there is a tug standing by.

It seems that everyone knows that there are serious problems with the ship-building roadmap but no one wants to do much about it except buy everything on the menu that is gold plated. The super dreadnought posing as a destroyer brings nothing to the fight. My wife says the graphic looks like a Civil War ironclad. Very little creative thinking is being done to address, well anything really. The Navy thinks it needs to stop building affordable Super Hornets and put money down on the roulette wheel for the F-35C. Question – If the short take-off and landing variant of the Joint Strike Fighter known as the F-35B is successful, can the Navy then get by with a build of small sky-jump carriers and F-35Bs in Navy colors to fill out some of the firepower and presence? This is worth thinking about. Don’t expect the Navy to push this plan forward. They still don’t know how to battle Rocko and Moose in the shipbuilding industry.

The Army’s Future Combat System (FCS) is officially dead. This may have been a good idea. However the top U.S. Army leadership didn’t suggest this. Don’t – ask – don’t – tell is the Gates theme for the FY 2010 budget. Senior leadership gets a gag order and cannot discuss requirements in an open manner.

The Fuhrer directive has been issued by Mr. Gates. And the Gates myth of competence gets plenty of play in the press. Congress isn’t much more than a randomizer script. The U.S. is making bigger and bigger weapons procurement mistakes which make any future plans look like tire patches to avoid disaster. QDR will not save us.