Pages

Thursday, February 27, 2025

2023 DOT&E Quick Hits

Following are some quick hits from the 2023 (released 2024) DOT&E annual report.  Again, I cannot stress the near-uselessness of the DOT&E reports since Dr. Gilmore left.  Nevertheless, consider these items:
 
 
CH-53K
 
The DOT&E report assess the CH-53K as not operationally suitable.
 
In the December 2022 IOT&E report, DOT&E determined that the CH-53K is not operationally suitable. The aircraft demonstrated acceptable results for all reliability and maintainability metrics.
 
However, the demonstrated low aircraft availability does not support sustained operations.  Additionally, the low probability of success of the automatic blade fold system will result in mission aborts and extended deck cycles that could hamper amphibious operations. The aircraft demonstrated its sortie generation rate requirement.  Unexpected main and tail rotor blade erosion damage was observed on aircraft operating in the desert environment during IOT&E. Extended time was needed to repair blade erosion damage because of the lack of a structural repair manual. Battle damage assessment and repair also requires a structural repair manual that has yet to be delivered.[1, p.161]

CMV-22B COD
 
As reported in the combined FOT&E and LFT&E report of June 2022, DOT&E found that CMV-22B was not operationally suitable due to failures of many subsystems … [1, p.164]

The miraculous V-22 is less than miraculous?
 
 
F-18 Software
 
The Navy stopped SCS [Software Configuration Set] H16 operational testing during 4QFY22 due to severe software deficiencies, but still fielded the system to the operational fleet in FY23 without completing the DOT&E-approved FOT&E test plan.[1, p.195]

So, severe deficiencies identified in testing but the Navy fielded the system anyway?  I don’t see any way that can go wrong.
 
 
Constellation
 
From the DOT&E operational effectiveness assessment, 
Unclassified risks to operational effectiveness include that the FFG 62 design does not have a tracker illuminator system, which is typically installed on other Aegis platforms, and that the design crew size will be highly reliant on currently unproven system automation and human system interfaces. The Navy acknowledges the risk of the current crewing strategy for FFG 62 … [1, p.201]

Independence LCS-MCM
 
Here’s the operational suitability assessment of the Unmanned Influence Sweep System (UISS) that is the actual sweep portion of the MCM module as opposed to the one-at-a-time hunting systems.  Doesn’t look good. 
UISS is not operationally suitable, as documented in the UISS IOT&E report dated June 2022. UISS’s reliability and availability do not support sustained mine sweeping operations.[1, p.207]

MQ-25 Stingray Unmanned Tanker
 
How’s that tanker coming along? 
DOT&E has not approved any operational test plans for MQ-25.[1, p.217]
Not even testing, yet???


SEWIP 
…preliminary data indicate SEWIP Block 2 fails to meet its reliability and operational availability requirements.[1, p.242]

John Lewis Class Replenishment Oiler 
USNS John Lewis could not support scheduled test events on five occasions due to equipment failures.[1, p.245]

Discussion
 
A few common themes jump out from the DOT&E report.
 
While it is perfectly normal for every new project to encounter problems, many of the systems being reported on are far from being new and the degree of problems encountered is not acceptable.
 
The number of scheduled test events that were cancelled due to equipment failure – often not of the test item, itself! – is disappointing especially when one considers that the tests were scheduled and the equipment presumably underwent meticulous tweaking prior to the test period.  The failures paint a picture of a Navy that is physically failing and is incapable of performing rapid, on-site repairs.  This speaks worlds – and poorly - to the specter of battle damage and our ability to ‘stay in the fight’ when damaged.
 
As noted many times in the past, the Navy lacks suitable, enemy-representative, target drones for realistic testing.  To paraphrase, ‘millions for new construction, not a penny for testing!’  The Navy’s priorities are beyond badly screwed up.

11 comments:

  1. My understand is that software base for Osprey is do disjointed that each individual bird is virtually its own subtype. Not one of them are the same in terms of software.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've haven't heard that and I can't imagine how that could even be. Can you explain further? What aspects of the software are different?

      Delete
    2. Steve, is it like F35 where there's BLOCK 2, BLOCK 3, BLOCK4 , etc or are you saying within those blocks the software is different? I can imagine there's different blocks which isn't great but common BUT individual birds having different software?!? After all these years and IN SERVICE, it's crazy to think if true that software is still this messed up.....

      I don't know where to go anymore with USN programs anymore, not like USAF or US Army are that much better BUT it does seem that USN is in a league of it's own when it comes to weapons systems having so much trouble....and this list isn't even complete. Nothing on FORD, which I heard still having some issues. SSN and SSBN program running late and over budget. Let's no even talk about the years of maintenance backlog....

      I just don't know what I would do or want any more with USN....just stop everything? Focus on maintenance and slow down purchases? Just buy more ammo and missiles instead? I don't know, it's almost like I would just give up it's so FUBAR.

      Delete
    3. "I just don't know what I would do or want any more with USN....just stop everything? "

      I've offered my answer to this question in the long distant past and, for fun, I'll toss it out again. I would place an instant moratorium on new ship construction that would last until every current ship is brought up to maximum maintenance and readiness. After all, if we can't maintain what we have, what's the point in building more?

      During the moratorium, I'd work hard on all new ship designs instead of going with Flt 47 of the Burke. I've discussed the kind of designs I'd want in the various blog posts.

      I'd also implement a host of 'simplification' initiatives and steer us away from overly complex technology that can't be maintained or repaired and is always degraded.

      At the end of the moratorium, we'd emerge with a finely tuned maintenance industry, new ship designs, and more combat-realistic philosophies.

      There's your answer!

      Delete
  2. Trump has mentioned putting the military back into the military. I sure as hell hope he does. The last 25 years have a been a disaster. China is now even holding exercises between Australia and New Zealand. Can you imagine this scenario even 15 years ago?

    Andrew

    ReplyDelete
  3. Let's remember there is heavy pressure on DOT&E to minimize negative findings, and they probably comply!

    ReplyDelete
  4. SWIP block 2 has been installed on a number of Navy ships but it is not meeting reliability & operational availabilty requirements ! So now I wonder about the reliabity of block 3 ! Test ,test & test before intalling on naval platforms.

    ReplyDelete
  5. A new great, great interview with former Navy SEAL and Blackwater guy Erik Prince about problems in our military:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx1Yoi3-mls

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Heaps of problems:

      https://www.twz.com/sea/warships-caked-in-rust-prompting-late-night-trump-texts-to-navy-secretary-nominee

      Delete
    2. This is a huge problem impacting readiness

      Delete
    3. KC-46, from day one, problems never end

      https://www.twz.com/air/cracks-in-kc-46-pegusus-tankers-halt-all-deliveries
       
      Meanwhile, China brings air battles to another level:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TwCVEoC7gM

      Delete

Comments will be moderated for posts older than 7 days in order to reduce spam.