• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

80% mission capability in one year - Mattis

whitesoxnation

Active Member
pilot
Contributor
#1
https://news.usni.org/2018/10/09/se...ercent-super-hornet-mission-capable-next-year

Anyone know a bookie thats taking bets against this? As I look at my very thin logbook over the past year I can't help but think there is no way this is possible without fudging the numbers and/or parking the jets. I don't even remember the last time I flew a jet that was LEGIT FMC from startup to shutdown. 80% MC... sure... if "MC" is re-defined as a jet to sit in and chair fly but not really fly.

I've heard our leadership say that we're flying more and more but then I look at the logbooks and I don't believe it unless 1) it's a small amount of people getting rich and/or 2) people are getting it all at the same time... not sustainable quality flight hours.
 
Last edited:

nittany03

FUBIJAR
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
#2
https://news.usni.org/2018/10/09/se...ercent-super-hornet-mission-capable-next-year

Anyone know a bookie thats taking bets against this? As I look at my very thin logbook over the past year I can't help but think there is no way this is possible without fudging the numbers and/or parking the jets. I don't even remember the last time I flew a jet that was LEGIT FMC from startup to shutdown. 80% MC... sure... if "MC" is re-defined as a jet to sit in and chair fly but not really fly.

I've heard our leadership say that we're flying more and more but then I look at the logbooks and I don't believe it unless 1) it's a small amount of people getting rich and/or 2) people are getting it all at the same time... not sustainable quality flight hours.
In which an infantryman throws a number out regarding aircraft maintenance. Great goal, but I still recall when Rumsfeld was jumping up and down about the mishap rate, and swearing we could cut it in half. Then that ran smack into the law of diminishing returns.

The multi-billion-dollar question is whether the NAE will be resourced appropriately for the goal. Like the old guys say, “no bucks, no Buck Rogers.”
 

whitesoxnation

Active Member
pilot
Contributor
#5
There's a CNAF product that shows average monthly hours per aircrew in every squadron.
I would be interested in any data available (especially for the Marine side of the house). I could actually get on MSHARP and come up with the numbers on my own... maybe I'll do that. Based off perusing through some of the data though I don't think the flight hours (and sortie count) are getting spread evenly and consistently.

I think an interesting comparison would be mishap rate vs. measures of readiness. I know last FY was a good FY but you don't look at mishap rates in a vacuum. You have to compare them against something. I wonder if we even have quantifiable ways of measuring readiness/capability other than what people self report in DRRS. Tell me to take a test home and report my own grade and I'll get an A- every time.

ETA - I would also be interested to see what the manning situation looks like and the total amount of hours a squadron/service is flying year to year... not just average pilot flight time. You can easily have an increase in average pilot flight time when your manning/retention issues decrease the amount of people to give the flight hours to.
 
Last edited:

sevenhelmet

Uh oh...
pilot
#6
For my part, I didn't start seeing north of 8 hours per month until we started SFARP. Even then, the squadron was borrowing jets with no combat systems from the FRS, and we'd come home and basically stop flying. Now that we're in what meets "Big Navy" defined workups (e.g. starts at TSTA), the hours are starting to flow steadily. We're still giving hours back at the end of the quarter though.
 

Uncle Fester

Robot Pimp
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
#7
I once watched a lecture Schwarzkopf recorded shortly after his retirement, when he was regarded as the National Oracle of Leadership, etc. He told an anecdote of when as a staffer he was put in charge of readiness for an aviation unit (brigade-level, I think, don’t remember the exact details). Anyway, the point was he noticed that the unit had a target of X% quarterly aircraft readiness and had consistently reported X% readiness for years, despite no one knowing why it was X%. So he directed that next quarter it be X+25% and lo and behold, the next quarter the unit reported X+25%, despite absolutely nothing else changing - parts, personnel, utilization, etc.

Stormin’ Norman presented this as a "people can do amazing things when you give them clear goals" thing, but I had to wonder...you didn't think it weird that an aviation unit managed to meet a greatly increased readiness target despite not having any additional resources?

When you give a bureaucracy a number target and tell them that's the right answer, that's the number they'll tell you. If the answer DoD wants is 80% FMC, I'm sure CNAF and the DCA will find a way to make their reported number 80%. If they have to get a bit creative with the math or definitions to make it 80%, well, there's a lot of clever guys on staff.

I think on The Wire they referred to this as 'juking the stats.'
 

Hotdogs

Leeroy Jenkins
pilot
#8
I’d be more curious as to who he is posturing this message for ...vice being concerned about fudging numbers. We know what our logbooks have looked like and why that is happening, so it’s not really surprising Mattis wants better readiness to us. First time in recent years that we’re not having budget shenanigans, and an increase in defense spending. Printing F-35s off at the cyclic rate and striking some F-15/16/18s from the inventory probably might help as well. I wouldn’t exactly call it a crazy suggestion, providing those aircraft have enough aircrew and maintainers. I mean what is he supposed to say? 50%?
 

MIDNJAC

is clara ship
pilot
#9
It's not all great news on the USN side either, but I think being a VMFA guy is probably a particularly bad place to be these days, in terms of flight hours and "readiness". I'm sure things will improve once more and more F-35B/C come online, but I'll just say it.......something that rhymes with Super Hornet might have solved this problem many years ago. I know that didn't fit into the long range plan of Marine Air, but the last 10 years would have been a hell of a lot less painful for you all. Granted that would have only been a part of the solution (obviously the parts and support would have needed to flow as well).
 

EODDave

Heading to greener pastures!
pilot
Super Moderator
#10
No offense here and with all due respect, it isn’t gonna happen. And if by some miracle it does (ie changing readiness definitions or seriously fudging reporting), it won’t last long. 80% with our current inventory of aircraft and parts availability, no chance paddles.
 

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
#11
It's not all great news on the USN side either, but I think being a VMFA guy is probably a particularly bad place to be these days, in terms of flight hours and "readiness". I'm sure things will improve once more and more F-35B/C come online, but I'll just say it.......something that rhymes with Super Hornet might have solved this problem many years ago. I know that didn't fit into the long range plan of Marine Air, but the last 10 years would have been a hell of a lot less painful for you all. Granted that would have only been a part of the solution (obviously the parts and support would have needed to flow as well).
If USMC had bought super hornets back when it made sense, they’d also be broken as hell by now.

By the way, I’ve flown 4 out of the last 30 days, including reserve flying. The difference is I don’t have a ground job anymore.
 

RedFive

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
#12
If you want the real numbers, you can export that shit in SHARPS and plot a sweet little graph with a few clicks, followed by a beer to drain your sorrows once you've seen the real numbers :(. Then again, that's assuming nobody is logging heavy to make up for hardly logging anything at all. Gotta make them ATP mins!
 
Top