Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet pptx

For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Project AIR FORCE View document details Support RAND Purchase this document Browse Reports & Bookstore Make a charitable contribution Limited Electronic Distribution Rights is document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. is electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND electronic documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND electronic documents are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. Skip all front matter: Jump to Page 16 e RAND Corporation is a nonprot institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. is electronic document was made available from www.rand.org as a public service of the RAND Corporation. CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EDUCATION AND THE ARTS ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORTATION INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS LAW AND BUSINESS NATIONAL SECURITY POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Christopher A. Mouton, David T. Orletsky, Michael Kennedy, Fred Timson Prepared for the United States Air Force Approved for public release; distribution unlimited PROJECT AIR FORCE Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet Options for the Current Fleet and Next-Generation Aircraft The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. R ® is a registered trademark. © Copyright 2013 RAND Corporation Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND documents are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND permissions page (http://www.rand.org/publications/ permissions.html). Published 2013 by the RAND Corporation 1776 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050 4570 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2665 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: order@rand.org Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mouton, Christopher A. Reducing long-term costs while preserving a robust strategic airlift fleet : options for the current fleet and next-generation aircraft / Christopher A. Mouton, David T. Orletsky, Michael Kennedy, Fred Timson. pages cm Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-8330-7701-1 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Airlift, Military —United States—Planning. 2. United States. Air Mobility Command. 3. Galaxy (Jet transport)—Costs. 4. C-17 (Jet transport)—Costs. 5. United States. Air Force—Appropriations and expenditures. I. Title. UC333.M68 2013 358.4'46 —dc23 2012048114 Cover image courtesy of U.S. Air Force/Staff Sgt. A.C. Eggman. The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Air Force under Contract FA7014-06-C-0001. Further information may be obtained from the Strategic Planning Division, Directorate of Plans, Hq USAF. iii Preface is document reports the ndings of a scal year 2010–2011 RAND Project AIR FORCE study, “U.S. Air Force (USAF) Intertheater Air- lift Fleet Recapitalization Strategy.” 1 In this study, we conducted a cost-eectiveness analysis to determine the best way to recapitalize the USAF intertheater (strategic) airlift eet. e USAF intertheater airlift eet comprises C-5s and C-17As. is eet has been used more heavily since the attacks on September 11, 2001, as a result of overseas contingency operations. As a result, some aircraft will reach their ight hour limits earlier than initially expected, and recapitalization of the eet will be required to maintain capability. One option is the development and procurement of a new military airlifter, notionally called “C-X.” is would require a large capital outlay for research and development and early production units. Given the current downward pressure on the defense budget and the need to recapitalize other portions of the USAF eet, adequate fund- ing may not be available. Further, annual funding proles may need to be “attened” or “deconicted” with other USAF programs to t in the overall USAF budget. is study examined a broad range of potential aircraft alternatives and considered a number of permutations on USAF plans for the current eet, including a reduced requirement and retirement of all C-5As, to determine how best to recapitalize this 1 A companion volume to this document contains two additional appendixes. See Chris- topher A. Mouton, David T. Orletsky, Michael Kennedy, and Fred Timson, Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet: Appendixes C and D, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, MG-1238/1-AF, forthcoming, Not available to the general public. iv Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet eet. is study analyzed both the net present value life-cycle cost and annual funding proles of the options considered. Conclusions and recommendations are based on both of these measures. e research described in this document was sponsored by Gen Raymond E. Johns, Jr., Commander, Air Mobility Command, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois. e study was performed within the Force Modernization and Employment Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE. RAND Project AIR FORCE RAND Project AIR FORCE (PAF), a division of the RAND Corpo- ration, is the U.S. Air Force’s federally funded research and develop- ment center for studies and analyses. PAF provides the Air Force with independent analyses of policy alternatives aecting the development, employment, combat readiness, and support of current and future air, space, and cyber forces. Research is conducted in four programs: Force Modernization and Employment; Manpower, Personnel, and Train- ing; Resource Management; and Strategy and Doctrine. Additional information about PAF is available on our website: http://www.rand.org/paf/ v Contents Preface iii Figures ix Tables xiii Summary xv Acknowledgments xxvii Abbreviations xxix CHAPTER ONE Introduction 1 Organization of is Document 4 CHAPTER TWO Intertheater Airlift Fleet and Retirement Schedule 7 Projected Airlift Retirements 8 C-17A 9 C-5 13 Fleet Drawdown 13 Reduced Force Levels—Budget Control Act of 2011 15 Options Considered for the C-5 and C-17A Fleets 17 CHAPTER THREE Aircraft Alternatives 21 Aircraft Alternatives Analyzed 21 C-5 and C-17A Aircraft 21 A C-17A–Derivative Aircraft 22 Commercial-Derivative Freight Aircraft 22 vi Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet Foreign Military Aircraft 23 New Current-Technology Aircraft 23 New Future-Design Aircraft 23 Aircraft Alternative Weight Characteristics 24 Aircraft Alternative Payload and Range Capability 27 Mission-Capable Rates 28 Measures of Aircraft Technology Risk 28 CHAPTER FOUR Eectiveness Methodology and Results 31 Overview 31 Analyze Cargo Demand Based on Aircraft Capability 32 Compute Mission and Route Requirements 35 Compute Mission Times 36 Aircraft Ground Times 37 Aircraft Flight Times 40 Compute Fleet Size and Relative Aircraft Eectiveness 40 Eectiveness Results 41 Options Considered for Follow-On Fleet 47 CHAPTER FIVE Cost Analysis Methodology and Results 53 Fleet Size 54 RDT&E and Procurement Costs 55 Operating and Support Costs 58 Crew Costs 59 O&S Costs Excluding Fuel and Crew 60 Fuel Costs 62 Net Present Value Life-Cycle Cost Methodology 62 RDT&E and Procurement Spending Proles 63 Summary Cost Data 64 NPV of the C-5 and C-17A Fleet 64 NPV of Future Fleet Options 64 CHAPTER SIX Cost-Eectiveness Analysis 67 Contents vii Baseline NPVLCC Cost-Eectiveness 68 Cost-Eectiveness of C-17A Production Continuation 75 Continued C-17A Procurement at Six Aircraft per Year 75 Continued C-17A Procurement at Two Aircraft per Year 76 Sensitivity Analyses 78 Sensitivity to BWB-100++ Costs 78 Sensitivity to Service Life of C-5 and C-17A Fleet 80 Sensitivity to C-5A RERP Cost 82 Sensitivity to C-767 Procurement Cost 86 Sensitivity to Continued C-17A Procurement Cost 87 Sensitivity to Reduced Requirement Level 89 Sensitivity to Fuel Prices 92 Sensitivity to Life Span of Future Aircraft 96 Parametric Analyses 97 Cost-Eectiveness of An-124 and Il-76 99 Cost-Eectiveness of C-17A SLEP 102 Annual Expenditures Analysis 105 CHAPTER SEVEN Conclusions 111 Options for the C-5 and C-17A Fleet 113 Options for the Follow-On Fleet 114 APPENDIXES A. Exemplar Eectiveness Calculation 117 B. Aircraft Flight Time Modeling Details 121 Bibliography 125 [...]... single-aircraft fleets and mixed -fleet options The aircraft alternatives that cannot carry all the cargo must be paired with other aircraft to carry out the full requirement and therefore must be part of a mixed fleet Other aircraft are capable of transporting all the cargo These aircraft could be part of a mixed aircraft fleet or single-aircraft fleet We examined these alternative fleets through a range... Aeronautic Defence and Space Company EFH equivalent flight hours ETAR Ramstein Air Base, Germany (ICAO code) EW empty weight FH flying hours FY fiscal year ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization KCHS Charleston Air Force Base, South Carolina (ICAO code) xxix xxx Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet KDOV Dover Air Force, Delaware (ICAO code) LAIRCM large aircraft... Strategic Plans and Programs; and Richard Butler, William Green, and James Dice from AMC Operations, Plans and Requirements Finally, we would like to thank the Boeing Company, EADS North America, and Lockheed Martin for providing data and information for aircraft alternatives We appreciate the great support these xxvii xxviii Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet. .. some aircraft alternatives, we note the amount of cargo that could not be carried because of size limitations We computed the peak aircraft requirement for all alternatives and then computed an equivalency ratio relative to the C‑5M for each aircraft alternative (for the cargo the alternative can carry) to make comparisons among aircraft straightforward The final result for each aircraft alternative... Timson, and John Tonkinson, Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) for KC-135 Recapitalization: Summary Report, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, MG-455-AF, December 2005, Not available to the general public; and Michael Kennedy, Laura H Baldwin, Michael Boito, xxii Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet • Determine the retirement profile of the current fleet • For each aircraft... from our calculations 1 2 Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet tion units Air Force budget realities make funding a large new aircraft procurement program very challenging Other approaches may provide required capabilities without the kinds of spending peaks associated with new aircraft development We examined a broad range of potential aircraft alternatives and considered... the land campaigns To adequately analyze the number of each aircraft alternative necessary to meet the MCRS-16 demand, we modeled the actual cargo moved This produced a set of over 100,000 items shipped at various Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) for KC-135 Recapitalization: Executive Summary, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, MG-495-AF, 2006 The second analysis was conducted as part of the USAF... understand the robustness of the answers Aircraft Alternatives and Fleet Options We examined a broad range of potential aircraft alternatives These represent a broad spectrum of aircraft types, including current-inventory aircraft, commercial-derivative aircraft, foreign military aircraft, and future-design aircraft incorporating a range of technology options and other fleet derivative aircraft We... Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet times during a war This allowed us to differentiate between the types and amounts of different cargo that each alternative could carry This was especially important, since not all aircraft alternatives could carry all cargo We identified and analyzed different alternative fleets to meet the requirement, producing both single-aircraft and mixed-aircraft... was broadly similar to that for past recapitalization studies RAND Project AIR FORCE conducted for USAF.3 This methodology had four major elements: 3 We first evaluated options to recapitalize USAF’s aerial refueling aircraft in the KC-135 Recapitalization Analysis of Alternatives (AoA), completed in early 2006 The results of that study were that the total cost of maintaining aerial refueling capability . 21 C-5 and C-1 7A Aircraft 21 A C-1 7A Derivative Aircraft 22 Commercial-Derivative Freight Aircraft 22 vi Reducing Long-Term Costs While Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet Foreign Military. Preserving a Robust Strategic Airlift Fleet: Appendixes C and D, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, MG-1238/1-AF, forthcoming, Not available to the general public. iv Reducing Long-Term Costs While. Aircraft 23 New Current-Technology Aircraft 23 New Future-Design Aircraft 23 Aircraft Alternative Weight Characteristics 24 Aircraft Alternative Payload and Range Capability 27 Mission-Capable