"The Coming Crisis in Naval Aviation" - Military.com

[RHPF]

http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,120378,00.html?ESRC=navy-a.nl

The Coming Crisis in Naval Aviation
Sea Power | John A. Panneton | December 11, 2006
Five years of combat have taken an awful toll on the equipment of U.S. naval forces. Marine Corps vehicles and battle tanks are being ground to dust, new types of weapons and small craft are needed, and equipment for the Navy Seabees must be replaced quickly.

The cost of re-equipping, or �resetting,� the Marine Corps is about $12 billion, some of which is being provided in the annual supplemental appropriations for the war in Iraq.

The Navy will require at least $7 billion.

But that is only part of the story. Looming behind the immediate needs of the naval forces is a coming crisis in aircraft procurement. The average age of the 3,880 planes in the Navy and Marine aircraft inventory is about 18 years, making it the oldest aircraft fleet in the history of the naval services.

Symptoms of this crisis already abound:

* Navy electronic attack pilots have been told not to maneuver their planes aggressively;
* The Marine Corps for months had weight restrictions on its 40-year-old CH-46 helicopters;
* Fatigue cracks and other deficiencies probably will shorten the service lives of Navy P-3C Orion patrol planes;

The Marine Corps is rotating older F/A-18 Hornet strike fighters from reserve squadrons into the active-duty force because many of the newer F/A-18C versions have reached their maximum number of catapult launches and carrier landings -- about 2,000 per aircraft.

As these aircraft have aged, maintenance costs have risen rapidly and they have become increasingly costly to fly. To keep costs down, the Navy has retired dozens of its older planes, including all F-14 Tomcats, most S-3B Vikings and nearly all of the Navy Reserve�s P-3Cs.

Other aircraft are being revitalized. Millions were spent to upgrade Navy EA-6B electronic warfare planes and Marine CH-46 choppers. Improvements to the CH-46 will almost quadruple the time between engine replacements.

In addition, the services are adopting new preservation strategies to keep their aircraft flying in the Middle East, where harsh environmental conditions and sand have wreaked havoc on helicopter rotor blades and aircraft engines, avionics and wiring.

Remedies include better inspection methods, new washing processes and the use of special coatings on compressor blades. Some mechanical adaptations have been made virtually on the fly. For example, helicopter rotors are now double-taped to reduce wear from the sand. More importantly, the services are developing better diagnostic systems to anticipate failures and foster proactive maintenance processes.

These remedies are vital. But they serve only to slow the decline of the naval aircraft fleet. Additional investment is required. Modest modernization of the fleet -- reducing the average age to 16 years, for instance -- would require the purchase of 170 aircraft annually, substantially higher than the current level of about 130.

The Navy�s 2007 budget projects an increase in aircraft procurement from 134 to 269 annually by fiscal 2010. But increases of this magnitude often are pushed to the �out years,� as budget constraints force the services each year to cut back on production volumes and reduce their cash flow.

Left untended, the aging fleet combined with the continued stress of current operations, inevitably will mean diminished performance despite the services� innovative efforts to keep the aircraft flying. Additional limits on weight, range and maneuver are a virtual certainty, and that could jeopardize readiness and ultimately affect the services� ability to conduct future operations.

We are confident Congress has the foresight and wisdom to avoid the coming crisis with appropriate funding for naval aircraft. Action in the near term is essential. The Navy League�s legislative representatives will ensure that aviation procurement is at the top of Congress� agenda during the coming session.

Semper Fidelis.

 

[scoober78]

I think that the Navy's response to this so far has been more rounds of "right-sizing". We had a brief with the detailers from Millington here the other day, and they commented that the Navy plans to cut at least 10000 pairs of boots this fiscal year. They also said that in terms of capital, those 10000 individuals represented a savings of 1 billion dollars. Additionally they pointed out that currently, 65 cents of every Navy appropriated dollar currently goes to personnel expenses...

The writing it appears, is on the wall. We are entering a do more with less cycle gentlemen.

I can't really speak to the fleet aircraft aspects...and did I mention...I fly a T-34C...introduced in the mid 1970's. Old isn't neccesarily bad though....worn is.

 

[nittany03]

The groundwork for the EA-18 transition has already begun; yes the Prowler is old, but it's also in the twilight of it's career. In 9 years, no more Prowlers except for the Marines.

 

[A4sForever]

.... Old isn't neccesarily bad though....

HEY !!!

I heard that ....

 

[RHPF]

HEY !!!

I heard that ....

A4's you mean saw that. I suppose scoobs was right, the problem is worn. (Please don't smite me!)

As for the actual thread, I just wonder if this means appropriate measures will be taken to replace failing parts or if they will attempt to 'band-aid' fix everything to 'get by'. I imagine even if Congress appropriated a ton of money it would find its way to various wasteful ventures. As far as worn aircraft go, the title has to go to the B-52s which are some how still in the air, and planned to go for another 20-30 years.

 

[tiger84]

I just hope this doesn't turn into force shaping a la the Air Force. I'd hate to be in my first few years and be politely told to take an early retirement.

 

[A4sForever]

A4's you mean saw that. .... (Please don't smite me!)....

No .... ACTUALLY .... I meant I "heard" that .... you better check your "6" ...

 

[bsm9531]

I just hope this doesn't turn into force shaping a la the Air Force. I'd hate to be in my first few years and be politely told to take an early retirement.

Happend to me in 1993... end of first sea tour in VP looking for orders was told to pack my trash and go home... they no longer had a need for us USNR types.

 

[CaptainRon]

So you were a pilot for 3 years until they just canned a bunch of people because they were over stacked? Yikes. That hurts. I'm sorry man. I also hope that doesn't happen to me.

 

[HighDimension]

Downsizing??

 

[Carno]

We should form an alliance.

 

[bsm9531]

It was the end of the first gulf war and the cold war... Clinton just got elected... the doors slamming behind me finally caught up. While in the RAG the let a few hundred go from the training command (1990) then they started merging and disestablishing VP squadrons. VP-6, 22 & 17 in Barber's point all got the axe, Moffett closed during a BRAC, Barbers closed due to BRAC and moved to the other side of the island. It was bad news back then. About 800 or so pilots let go that year alone. With just about 1,300 hours and no ATP I would have had to pay flightsafety $10k to get a $15/flight hour job flying ATR's our of god knows where.... said no thanks to all of that and became a CPA. Better off now but the transition was painful.

 

[CaptainRon]

Can't get good money flying ATRs?

 

[bsm9531]

would have been lucky to get ATR's.... most jobs back then (1993) were saabs, metorliners and brazilias with NW airlink, conair, TW express..... no sh!t food stamp income.

 

[hscs]

Ironic how both services are spending a lot of money with new platforms rolling out across all communities. Guess someone didn't realize that...