Grounded: Nearly two-thirds of US Navy’s strike fighters can’t fly

[SVPete]

Grounded: Nearly two-thirds of US Navy’s strike fighters can’t fly
By: Christopher P. Cavas, February 6, 2017

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy’s F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet strike fighters are the tip of the spear, embodying most of the fierce striking power of the aircraft carrier strike group. But nearly two-thirds of the fleet’s strike fighters can’t fly — grounded because they’re either undergoing maintenance or simply waiting for parts or their turn in line on the aviation depot backlog.

Overall, more than half the Navy’s aircraft are grounded, most because there isn’t enough money to fix them.
...
The Navy can’t get money to move around service members and their families to change assignments, and about $440 million is needed to pay sailors. And the service claims 15 percent of its shore facilities are in failed condition — awaiting repair, replacement or demolition.

Geeeeee ... why does this sound familiar? Oh yeah! The USAF's fighter fleet of F-15s and F-16s had a similar readiness rate at the end of Carter's MALAdministration. Carter, at least, had somewhat of an excuse, in that those birds were relatively new, and their engines, basically the same model, was also new and had teething problems. There is no such excuse for Obama or the R-"controlled" Congress (unless Obama's DoD people were concealing the truth.

Two further comments:

1.) Every time WashDC slashes defense budgets, soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen die.

2.) Connect the dots ... the reason for the partial failure of that recent raid in Yemen was ....... a V-22 Osprey failed. At the least, whoever's investigating this mission should look into that bird's maintenance records!

[J P Sousa]

The V-22 Osprey has had problems from the get-go.

[DumbAss Tanker]

The V-22 Osprey has had problems from the get-go.

I've never trusted them.  The Marines were the real drivers in buying them, the unstated reason being to expand their mission and therefore their budget portfolio.  The damn things are utterly dependent on a fly-by-wire power-balancing act and mechanically-complex power transmission system, exactly the sort of system that you absolutely don't want to risk a few random bullet holes nicking the wiring harness while employed in a role that virtually ensures they will get some random ground fire bullet holes.

As far as the strike fighters go, I have to say this reflects as poorly on the Navy's internal management of their O&M budget as it does on anything else, and it has to be said that both the Navy and Air Force have a bit of a track record for doing this sort of thing to force a crisis and then get emergency funding from Congress to restore mission capability.

[HAPPY2BME]

Nearly two-thirds of Navy strike fighters unable to fly

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/militarys-depleted-aircraft-will-take-years-rebuild-obama-era-defense-cuts/

[Crazy Horse]

Grounded: Nearly two-thirds of US Navy’s strike fighters can’t fly
By: Christopher P. Cavas, February 6, 2017

Geeeeee ... why does this sound familiar? Oh yeah! The USAF's fighter fleet of F-15s and F-16s had a similar readiness rate at the end of Carter's MALAdministration. Carter, at least, had somewhat of an excuse, in that those birds were relatively new, and their engines, basically the same model, was also new and had teething problems. There is no such excuse for Obama or the R-"controlled" Congress (unless Obama's DoD people were concealing the truth.

Two further comments:

1.) Every time WashDC slashes defense budgets, soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen die.

2.) Connect the dots ... the reason for the partial failure of that recent raid in Yemen was ....... a V-22 Osprey failed. At the least, whoever's investigating this mission should look into that bird's maintenance records!

I can only speak for the Naval aviation, "SEQUESTER". When that POS was done, the Navy made a call that they would continue current maintenance and in the out years it would start running into delays because of having to spend the money it took from other budgets to maintain our OLD ASS aircraft.

On point number 2, none of us know why that USAF CV-22 made a hard landing.  No need to speculate that it was maintenance driven.

[Crazy Horse]

The V-22 Osprey has had problems from the get-go.

Those problems were dealt with a decade ago.