From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: Defense Aircraft Mission Capable Rates Generally Did Not Meet Goals Description: The Department of Defense spends tens of billions of dollars annually to sustain existing weapon systems in an effort to ensure these systems are ready for potential conflicts and other missions. Aircraft--like fighter jets and helicopters--are one category of weapon systems in DOD's arsenal. In a new report out today, GAO assessed the condition and costs of sustaining DOD's aircraft. We talk with GAO's Diana Maurer--an expert on defense strategy and DOD weapon system sustainment and a director in our Defense Capabilities and Management Team. Related GAO Work: GAO-21-101SP, Weapon System Sustainment: Aircraft Mission Capable Rates Generally Did Not Meet Goals and Cost of Sustaining Selected Weapon Systems Varied Widely Released: November 2020 [Into music] [Diana Maurer:] DOD continues to focus on improving mission capability. That is an issue that remains on Congress's agenda as well. [Holly Hobbs:] Hi, and welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and information from the U.S. Government Accountability Office--I'm Holly Hobbs. The Department of Defense spends tens of billions of dollars annually to sustain existing weapon systems in an effort to ensure these systems are ready for potential conflicts and other missions. Aircraft--like fighter jets and helicopters--are one category of weapon system in DOD's arsenal. In a new report out today, GAO assesses the condition and cost of sustaining DOD's aircraft. Today we talk with the director of this report--GAO's Diana Maurer--an expert on defense strategy and DOD weapon systems and a director in our Defense Capabilities and Management Team. Thank you for joining us Diana! [Diana Maurer:] Thank you very much. [Holly Hobbs:] So Diana, let's start with the condition of DOD's aircraft. How do you go about assessing conditions on a large, diverse fleet like these? [Diana Maurer:] So as you can imagine--looking at a large fleet like this requires a lot of data. In this case, we looked at 9 years of information--collected from the Army, and the Navy, and the Air Force and Marines--covering more than 9,000 aircraft, 46 different types, and our results ended up being broad and robust. We focused in on two major indicators. One is what's known as a mission capable rate--which assesses how frequently aircraft are able to fly and meet military missions--and the other is how much this all costs, right, the operating and support costs. And we rounded out that information, that analysis by talking with program offices and military officials across all of these different programs. [Holly Hobbs:] And what did we find? [Diana Maurer:] Well, first thing we found is that operating and supporting aircraft is very expensive. The military spends over $50 billion a year on that, which is a big number, and to put that in context, that's about what Germany or Japan or the United Kingdom spend on their entire military every single year. We also found that mission capable rates for the aircraft in our review have generally trended down over the last 9 years. [Holly Hobbs:] So, I assume DOD has goals for maintaining its weapon systems. How did what we found measure up to those goals? [Diana Maurer:] Unfortunately, not well. The vast majority of the aircraft in our review didn't meet their mission capable goals. In fact, out of the 46 that we looked at, only 3 met those goals in 2019. And this wasn't just a problem that focused on one year. Twenty-four [24] aircraft, or over half in our review, never met their annual mission capable goals for any year--from 2011 through 2019--but only three met those goals in the majority of years in our review. Perhaps of even great concern, in many cases, these aircraft fell considerably short of their goals. [Holly Hobbs:] And as you mentioned, your report looks at the cost of sustaining these aircraft. What stood out to you when you reviewed those costs? [Diana Maurer:] We know for example that for every dollar the military spends to build a new aircraft, they're going to spend more than $2 to operate and sustain it over its lifecycle. What we found is that there are a variety of factors that contribute to costs, and the potential cost growth over time. So for example, age of the aircraft is an issue. Some of these systems have been flying for a very long time. So B-52, which is a bomber that the Air Force flies, has been operating for over 60 years. And to put that in context, we've only had airplanes for 117 years. The actual mission of the aircraft can also play a role. So, those systems with lots of radar and sensors and other things tend to be much more expensive. In fact in some cases, upwards of $60 million per aircraft per year. But that's on the high end. [Music] [Holly Hobbs:] So, it sounds like the Department of Defense spends a lot of money and effort sustaining weapon systems to ensure that the U.S. maintains battlefield superiority. But that many of the aircraft we examined did not meet readiness goals for fiscal years 2011 to 2019. Diana, do we know why so many aircraft didn't meet these goals? [Diana Maurer:] Well as you can imagine, looking across 46 different systems, there are really 46 separate stories. But we did find some common themes. A number of these aircraft are quite old. And as they age, parts start breaking down more often or they're being used far beyond their expected, usable life. In other cases, the systems may have been around for so long that the original manufacturers of the spare parts that they need to fly have gone out of business. This has been a significant problem for example with the harrier jet the marine corps flies. In other cases, different systems have problems with unscheduled maintenance, and this can be a problem even with newer aircraft. So for example, the Navy has an advanced hawkeye command-and-control aircraft, only about four-and-a-half years old, but it's already facing some maintenance issues. [Holly Hobbs:] And is DOD taking any steps to try to improve its performance in this area? [Diana Maurer:] Yes they are and that's very encouraging. In fact, in recent years, in the last couple of years in particular, military leadership has been much more focused on this issue. They definitely have recognized that putting planes in the air more often enhances readiness. So those military services in particular have brought additional focus and resources to sustain this and performance. Former-Secretary [James N.] Mattis issued a direct tasking to the Air Force and the Navy to improve mission capability of its fighter aircraft. And as a result, the Air Force and the Navy devoted additional resources and attention to that. The Navy also recently launched a new initiative to look into and possibly adopt private sector best practice for how private industries sustain aircraft. This is certainly high on the agenda with the military right now and our hope is that it remains high on that agenda. [Holly Hobbs:] And Diana last question--what's the bottom line of this report? [Diana Maurer:] So the bottom line is this--the military spends over $50 billion a year, operating this vast fleet of aircraft that are frequently not capable of carrying out missions as often as the military would like. That is first and foremost of concern for the ability to project national power. It also is a concern from a taxpayer perspective. That's $50 billion a year not necessarily getting the desired outcome. DOD continues to focus on improving mission capability. We hope that this focus continues, and we hope that it's an issue that remains on Congress's agenda as well. [Holly Hobbs:] That was Diana Maurer talking about GAO's recent review of conditions and costs of sustaining DOD's aircraft. Thank you for your time Diana! [Diana Maurer:] Thank you very much! [Holly Hobbs:] And thank you for listening to the Watchdog Report. To hear more podcasts, subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts. And make sure you leave a rating and review to let others know about the work we're doing. For more from the congressional watchdog, the U.S. Government Accountability Office, visit us at GAO.gov.