Grrrr…

Posted on by October 8, 2025

SSDD again…

The U.S. Navy is scavenging for spare parts from grounded materiel in order to address maintenance needs, a new government watchdog report found.

The problem arises from gaps in the Defense Department’s data rights for weapon systems that force Navy maintainers to rely on vendors for parts, which in turn can balloon maintenance timelines.

In the event of these repair delays, the service maintains operational readiness by repurposing parts from its own aircraft and submarines.

Full article HERE from Navy Times.

This is nothing new. We were doing this back in the 80s to keep things up and running. A lot of the blame for this lands squarely on the acquisition process, corrupt as it is, because Joe Average Sailor has NO idea what goes into maintaining parts inventory for their specific ship/sub/aircraft.

That was why we ‘usually’ had a hangar queen that was stuck off in the corner of the hangar that was the rob bird. Anything you needed to get your bird up came off that one.

It was pure hell trying to get the hangar queen flyable again… sigh…

At one point, the Marines were robbing parts off F-18s in museums to keep their F-18Cs flying… sigh

This is just one of MANY things that need to get fixed.

In other news, I’ll be out of pocket for a few days, taking a little vacation, so no posting until next Tuesday. Go read the folks on the sidebar, or pick up a book and read it!

 

Comments

Grrrr… — 8 Comments

  1. I’m going to tell you something from inside the industry and try to stay out of trouble. The problem that a certain very large fighter procurement program has is that by the time sustainment spares contracts or production lot contracts are definitized, the parts and materials required are already well inside lead time. If the contractor involved risks their own cash to procure ahead of definitiztion any imported or exported materials (of which there are many) do not get the US Government Contract Duty Free Entitlement and are subject to Tariffs. These can be reimbursed at definitzation but in the meantime Corporate cash is locked up and HQ does not like that.

  3. Twenty eight years as an enlisted maintainer and, in my experience, nothing was spared adequately. Much more glamorous and popular with the voters to buy the new sparkly airplane/ship/missile than to buy sufficient parts to keep it operational. Retired quite a while ago but during the 80/90s there were frequent trips down to the boneyard to scavenge parts for B-1s and other airframes. After I retired I went into contracting and retired from that too. Yep, a double dipper. Procurement is difficult and convoluted in large part because of all the conflicting laws passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. So many social welfare programs it isn’t even funny.

  4. During the 70s in SAC, one of the first things done in Maintenance Control at the start of an ORI (operational readiness inspection) was to pick a Can bird. The B-52 on the wash rack with two engines missing was it.

  5. Add to the acquisition process this problem: What is the government getting when they pay for the rifle/ship/airplane/etc? Full rights to the product including design and manufacturing specifications, full rights to the product but no design/manufacturing specs, or “here’s your finished product but you vill get nothing else, ve vill fix it for you (for a modest fee)” (a la F-35).
    Similar to the issue of “Right to Repair” – who owns the product in the long run. Did you buy a farm tractor, or you paying for a farm tractor that you cannot fix or modify, essentially leasing or renting the product. Same with software – you really don’t “own” the software.
    Yes, I took DIA’s Acquisition courses as a GOV and have been on the dark side of acquisition for a long time. The process reeks. Hence AF RCO and similar organizations.

    • Finally, someone commented on the relevant portion of the post. 😁