Report on military’s $160mn combat aircraft comes days after one crashed in South Carolina
The fleet’s mission-capable rate — or the percentage of time a plane can perform one of its assigned missions — was 55 per cent as of March 2023, far below the Pentagon’s goal of 85 per cent to 90 per cent, the Government Accountability Office said on Thursday.
Part of the challenges stem from a heavy reliance on contractors for maintenance that limits the Pentagon’s ability to control depot maintenance decisions. Delays also arise from spare parts shortages, inadequate maintenance training, insufficient support equipment, and a lack of technical data needed to make repairs.
Because of the Pentagon’s inane IP laws, maintenance on these planes is a bureaucratic nightmare: defense contractors are able to limit maintenance of these things to only those they contract because of IP restrictions and are not required to teach the military jack shit. Meanwhile, they’re essentially a paperweight half the time because they’re not getting proper maintenance.
How are we supposed to patrol the Arctic with a plane that needs an American private subcontractor to perform essential maintenance on it?
The Gripen was an option better suited for protecting Canada, while the F-35 was a better option for if we wanted to project power abroad in support of the US.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Go ahead and develop your own jets then.
The Grippen was an option.
The Gripen was an option better suited for protecting Canada, while the F-35 was a better option for if we wanted to project power abroad in support of the US.
Canada has its priorities all out of whack.
We tried that once
I mean, it actually went really well. It was politics that killed the Arrow, not design, and the Canuck was a really solid plane for its time.