Managing U.S. Air Force Aircraft Operating and Support Costs: Insights from Recent RAND Analysis and Opportunities for the Future

Abstract

• Case studies of the KC-135R/T and C-130H fleets identified four categories of operating and support (O&S) cost growth: Fuel costs drove 31 percent of overall O&S cost growth, unit-level personnel costs 30 percent, weapon system sustainment costs 27 percent, and modifications and other costs 12 percent. • The Air Force can affect some but not all drivers of O&S cost growth. • Unit personnel costs might be reduced by consolidating many maintenance activities within a global network of maintenance facilities and by increasing the size of operation squadrons. • Various fuel-efficiency initiatives can help reduce fuel costs, as can efforts to reduce total flying hours. • The root causes of weapon system sustainment costs are war-related effects and aging effects; while the former will diminish with the end of overseas contingency operations, the latter are more difficult to mitigate.

Improving Acquisition and Sustainment Outcomes for Military Commercial Derived Aircraft: The KC-46A <em>Pegasus</em> Experience

“…Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) aircraft depot maintenance costs had been increasing at a rate of 10 percent per year since 1996. 144 In response, the USAF decided that KC-46A sustainment would be organically oriented to be more cost-efficient. 145 This means that the USAF will have to bring all of the KC-46A's maintenance and upgrades in-house.…”

Quantifying the Effects of Aircraft Engine Upgrades on Operating and Support Costs

“…Previous studies (Mouton et al, 2015;National Research Council, 2007) have analytically investigated possible ways to reduce fuel usage and the feasibility of such proposals such as engine-out taxiing strategies, optimal flight level and speed, and reducing aircraft weight. Additionally, Boito et al (2016) discussed potential C-130 improvements, including the previous measures as well as load-balancing improvements, reduction of auxiliary power units, and installation of microvanes TM . Their study suggested that full implementation of these options could save about 16 million gallons of fuel annually.…”