>The Government Accountability Office report found that of the 18 different combat and support vehicles examined, 16 are not mission capable>combat and support vehicles, including Stryker Combat Vehicle, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and Joint Light Tactical Vehicles>five out of the six Army combat vehicles did not meet “mission capable” standards for a single year, while of the six Army support vehicles examined, they were mission capable only 20% of that time period. The Army’s own goal is to have vehicles ready 90% of the time>the number of vehicle overhauls done by Army maintenance depots dropped from 1,278 in the 2015 fiscal year to 12 in 2024>For the Marine Corps, the number dropped from 725 to 163 during that time period.https://taskandpurpose.com/news/army-marines-vehicles-delays-maintenance/
what doth mission capable?
>>64325438They're still in better condition than what pretty much every other country would consider good to go. This is just another case of the US military having insanely high readiness standards compared to everyone else and no reason to maintain wartime readiness levels in peacetime.
>>64325453...Except for Army aviation, that shit gets zigger-tier maintenance.
>>64325453>huffs /k/opium
>>64325438A broken sideview mirror technically renders a vehicle "non-mission capable" or NMC for short, always remember you need the raw statistics along with the criteria they use to come to conclusions
>They can't repair their some of their "own" vehicles because it goes against the contract>some people tries to change that with a new law>*AIPAC appears*Clown country.
>>64325438You don't get it bro we're re-tooling for warrior ethos and lethality
>>64325486source?
>>64325490>hegseth got so drunk he time traveled and fucked shit up in 2024suberashi
>>64325493incel flava z
One one hand it's shocking that this is even news. Everyone knows. The dumbest private in the Blackest Gorilla Nigger Division knows. It's almost fucking impossible to be a commander or XO and be honest about OR rates if you care about your career, because no one wants to be the bearer of bad news, or responsible for fixing everything, especially not if everyone else competing for that sweet MQ is telling the boss their shit is 100% FMC. On the other hand, maybe if there's enough media attention on the matter, we can finally start to fix what's broken in the maintenance and rating systems so we don't keep this nonsense going.
>>64325438>1,278 -> 12>99% drop>20% uptime>when the top brass comes out of the closet and the enlisted are Mexicans
>>64325453>laughs in motorpool of deadlined HMMWVs and LMTVs
>>6432545320% is a shit FMC rate by Air Force aircraft and other standards. More is broken than hardware.>>64325478That should be revised to PMC since they'd drive the fuck out of it in a war. Aircraft and terrestrial vehicles are pretty easy to fix if the parts are on hand.MC rates decline during funding shortages because Operation and Maintenance budgets are strained. No parts money? Deadlined.Airframes and vehicles unavailable for use can't support training. Cannibalization rates go up to buffer Supply, the added maintenance actions further strain maintenance units, retention suffers etc.I've seen this before in the previous Hollow Force era from which of course nothing was learned. I enlisted as it was ending in '81 thanks to Reagan being serious about deterring the Warsaw Pact/ChiComs/Norks/other Commie vermin. Ending the Hollow Force was a major Reagan accomplishment.
>>64326067Chasing stats inevitably happens, there's a brief intermission, and the eternal cycle continues.Wearing out maintainers rather than procure sufficient repair parts for aging systems is far from new. At least the turnover makes making rank easier.
>>64325453>20% vehicle readiness on average >Absurdly high standard
>>64325438It is usually tiny nitpick shit that causes them to be considered as NMC.Honestly one thing that should be learned from slav slapfight is that anything capable of moving on its own power is mission capable enough.
>>64325438Maintenance costs moneyhttps://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454
>>64325438Dreadfully misleading headlinetaskandpurpose should be ashamed of itself.as the document states, specific mission capable rates are not mentioned. therefore it is an impossibility to derive the information claimed in this headlinewhat the report actually states is that mission readiness rates of these 18 types of vehicles have declined by about 10-25% compared to 2015. which is concerning, yes, but doesn't mean that "most" are "not ready for combat".FOR EXAMPLE, it might mean that instead of 80% of the fleet being ready for combat at any time, perhaps 60% are ready.suck my dick, OP
>>64325486>>64326067literally kys, armatard
>>64325448first post most pertinent postX% of vehicles don't meet some standard, and that standard could be that the first aid kit hasn't expired, or it could be that the engine is able to turn.Does anyone know how they define mission capable?
>>64325438Can you tell me what the exact, to the letter definition of mission capable is in this context? We’ve had this situation before with the F35 where retards wrote similar headlines based on a similar misunderstanding.
notice how the shill wouldn't reply after realizing that his post was very quickly found out
>>64326643Task and Purpose is an anti-military shill? Lol. How sensitive can you be?
>>64326682What blew up this time ivan
>>64326682is Taskandpurpose in the thread with us right now?
>>64326685Absolutely mindbroken >>64326707Are you retarded? The OP is nothing but quotes from the t&p article
>>64326752>if OP quotes from the article that must mean OP is the article writeramazing logic>you could use some mental health supportoh look, this means I'm J K fucking Rowling
>1,278 in the 2015 fiscal year to 12 in 2024So is this just some GWOT vetbros turned journos seething that the US isn't keeping as many shitboxes ready for sandbox activities?
>>64326772it's glorified bloggers muckraking but not truly understanding what they're reading, hence the ludicrous claim which has nothing to do with the GAO report itself (but they're too retarded to understand that they've totally misread the document)
>>64326128It’s more newer systems have more issues than older systems, and are under contract for almost everything but PMCS. Inevitably, units start to lean on older gear but there aren’t enough parts in inventory for it since everyone else is doing the same thing. JLTV’s are one of the biggest offenders, with contractors not even being able to fix things fast enough since the system is so reliant on electronics.>high priority: grooming standards and (((warrior))) ethos>logistics? I never had to deal with that, that’s uncool shit, bad for PR. How are you supposed to fight if you’re fixing stuff?
>>64325453that's the line of thinking that leads to russia-tier performances
>>64325448>>64325478>>64326158>>64326255>>64326945>https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-25-108679Read the report and stop guessing. There are major systemic issues that need to be fixed.
>>64326096Ding ding ding we have a winner.
>>64327086Samefaggot
>>64325448Frittata.
>>64327011Good Lord
>>64328904>samefagging
I am demoralized it's so over burgerbros
>>64327011CheckedShills btfo'dThis could be solved by redirecting money meant for procuring new equipment towards overhauls and maintainence, but you don't get a shiny bullet on your OER by keeping what you got and using what's available. Got to keep the MIC/DIB flush with cash to keep the stock price up
>>64328916>retard can't handle a shred of criticism
>>64328918Its never been so ogre
>64328922>64328927>it's not like everyone literally has at least two different devices nowadaysbegone, shill
>>64328941>doesn't even know how to reply to posts correctlyOkay bot/jeet
>64328971lurk moar lmao
>>64328975>>64328941>>64328933>>64328918>>64328916Maybe you should prove you're not a samefag
>>64328904I don't believe this when it says there was a year where 90% of humvees were 'fully mission capable'Anyways all this says is that the army and marine corps have very high standards and are working to try to meet them.
>>64327011>Army officials stated that the Abrams program did not meet its 90 percent availability goal due to parts and materiel challenges.>3,898 fielded vehicles>GAO omitted information that DOD deemed Controlled Unclassified Information.>Mission Capable rates are CUIso we know they're not hitting the goal and readiness dropped by about 8%, so there's anywhere from 3,227 mission-capable abrams(no maintenance needed, no overhauls needed, no outdated tech) and 0. wow, riveting stuff. can someone go poke WT autists to get us actual numbers on what our NMC rates are?figure 8+9 is the only interesting ones here to me, suggests that manufacturing supply is the primary concern on the heavier equipment, but on lighter equipment, it's depot time.
>>64329022very well
>>64329022Just passin thru bud
>>64329035it's all a giant nothingburger that only proves that Taskandpurpose doesn't know how to read, much less count
>>64329031Humvees are pretty durable vehicles, and we bought tons of them, so I am able to believe that at some point there was a 90% available rate, even if it was just barely 90%.Yes, the standards are high, but not meeting them so often should raise some eyebrows, and at the very least requires some kind of forethought for future contract writing/ procurement procedures.
>>64329052Remember that the bar here is "fully mission capable" and not "sure, it works fine."
>>64329052is a 90% ground vehicle whole-fleet readiness rate even possible?I mean, the fucking Navy works on a sort of rule of three, that one in three ships is in maintenance at any time, don't they?tanks aren't ships, sure, but they're pretty complex machines nowadays too
>>64329066worth noting most large-scale US wargame exercises treat 80% mission capable as the 'highest' level of readiness that any unit can be in.
>>64326158Yes, that's how standards work. Having low or no standards would mean listing all of those vehicles as good to go even if they're not running. Having excessively high standards would mean listing those vehicles as needing maintenance if the headlights are foggy.
>>64326158>20% vehicle readiness>source: New Delhi
>>64329052>Humvees>durableYou have no fucking clue how many of those pieces of shit got scuttled via C4 in at Bagram the moment they turned out to uneconomical to repair, and that was back before the economy was totally fucked. The uparmor made it worse, but it wasn't great to begin with.
>>64326106Ya it should but there are many minor issues that technically deadline a vehicle, im just using that as reference to this hyperbolic news title
>>64325438That is a cultural problem present in the Army. If anybody reports faulty or missing equipment, they get blamed for it and have to suffer like hell. If they pencil whip the maintenance as all good, nobody bothers them. No good deed shall go unpunished. I don't know how long things have been this way, but the incentive structure needs to change so that soldiers won't start abusing the system to steal parts.
>>64326106FMC is a metric that makes little sense during peacetime because having an airframe ready for every single mission it was designed for makes training harder and more dangerous. Just MC is enough.
>>64326772Guy who wrote the article is an armchair journalist of 12 years but he does seem to focus on the current pivot. The article though, from the title to the vague timeline comparisons, it's just bad journalism while trying to make a point.
>>64325438Can't wait for the war with China
>>64325453Holy cope
>>64329365>ChinaI wouldn't hold China in any higher regard, they theoretically could be and should be considered so but realistically not likely. The US has these reports public so they can fix them, Im not sure China has anything similar even after a quick google search
While we're on the topic of this, I want to bring up the words of our new AF secretary:>when there’s a number of aircraft, non-operational, sitting around the ramp that aren’t even being worked on, because we simply don’t have the parts to do that, that’s a problem, right? We have to fix that, and there’s a series of things I think we’re going to have to do.>A lot of great work is being done, but we have to support them. We have to support the workforce. Recruitment is not an issue. We hit our goals 3 months in.>Anything that’s “not capable of operating in a contested environment” is going to get second priority>the only way we’re going to maintain our advantage is we have to innovate, and we have to innovate faster than our adversaries>He also said that “mass is critical … we have to have mass,” and the Air Force has, in concert with industry, “dramatically improved the production rates"Personally I think it's a really good step in the same direction that Kendall took, with maybe even a little better on integration than spacemaxxing. Kendall focused on satellites, NGAD, CCAs, reviving old bases, hypersonics (I still think they're a meme) and the platforms to deliver them. As of now all those things are going surprisingly well. Only thing that's far behind is munitions stockpiling. If we get a concrete plan drafted by Meink, I'm pretty confident that those operational readiness goals will be achieved in conjunction with the systems push that Kendall started. Especially hoping for the munitions problem to be reduced somewhat either by spam meme munitions or scaling production.https://www.airandspaceforces.com/meink-air-force-readiness-china/
>>64329022aw man, you got me anon
>>64329452not having spare parts on hand for planes that haven't been built in 40 years is kinda normalThese old air frames are way past what any company would keep operating themsimply because replacement programs were botched along the way
>>64329070This. It's also important to find out how much would be needed to make them combat ready. Is it full overhauls or just basic shit they don't do to save a few bucks?>>64329158It took like a decade and thousands of blown up soldiers mothers complaining to get plating on the underside lol.
>>64329035>>64327011>what we know is we don't know what is 'mission-capable' between 3,227 and 0.Thanks for blowing this thread away. Makes me mad when articles like these from 'experts' make gullible people believe it when actually the devil is in the detail, and the detail is the article doesn't know.
>>64327011Anon, the JLTV readiness is a nightmare because of parts availability and contractor support. Biggest issue we had with them was electronics failing. Peak readiness (as in, we could start the JLTV, lift it off the ground from its stops, then move) was 40% on Pendleton at the end of 2024. It got so bad OSHKOSH lost the contract and GM took over supplying snd manufacturing parts. A lot of the sensors would straight up fail or have inconsistent readings, not too mention newer turrets for the SABER were having issues, leading to a lot of units breaking out HMWVs.I reiterate: for a victor unit literally starting the damn thing and getting it to move was what we considered “ready” because of how few were running. It’s a maintenance queen that needs a lot of PMCS. ACVs…have other issues. I can speak on the USMC side of things, not the Army, but we’re mostly struggling because of contracts and companies not understanding how fast their stuff breaks in the hands of retards.>one JLTV was driven in to the ocean and fried the electronics>another had a forklift skewer it’s engine on ship. The fix? Swap engines withe a working one to make it not look bad on paper for how long it had been broken
>>64326106>20% is a shit FMC ratesource on the 20%?
>>64329371Let's see your car
