Hornet Shortage Might Be Larger Than Previously Disclosed

It could be the Hornet shortage issue we discussed last week is larger than originally reported. Aviation Week is reporting the shortage could be as much as 300% highter than previously stated.

The U.S. Navy's most recent estimate of a 69 F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet shortage is getting ready to leap by about 300 percent.

"The 69 minimum assumes that the Joint Strike Fighter F-35C is operational in 2015 as currently planned, that they buy them at 50 per year and that the [older] F/A-18A -Ds are going to last 10,000 hrs," says a senior aerospace industry official with insight into the program. "All those are very optimistic assumptions, and the Navy's characterization of the shortage [as 69 aircraft] is the most optimistic [extrapolation of that] scenario."

The data on the F/A-18A-Ds is starting to come in and there are a significant number of hot spots requiring maintenance or structural repair like any aging aircraft, say Navy and aerospace officials polled on the problem.

I really don't blame the Navy for making the most optimistic case here. For the last several years, the Navy has reduced its aviation budget to increase its shipbuilding budget, in effect buying fewer planes for more ships. The Navy is simply trying to get to the F-35C with what it has, that way it doesn't have to spend more money for Super Hornets. Apparently they will not make it.

The article ends with a floated proposal by Boeing for the Navy to skip the F-35C altogether and simply use the F/A-18s SHs beyond 5th generation and skip to 6th generation, which I assume is the UCAS systems under development. I'll let the aviation experts decide if that is a smart move or not.

It goes right back to something Ronald O’Rourke added to his testimony the other day. The Navy who finds itself in the same position as the Air Force has adopted a policy decision that under no circumstances will they ask for more money. The Air Force on the other hand has said they need 20 billion dollars more per year. I don't know which approach is better, both services need the money, neither is likely to get more money, but it isn't a good thing that while the Air Force fighter programs are suffering fatigue the Navy is apparently experiencing the same problem with its aging air frames.

As we have highlighted in the past, the average age of the surface combatant fleet in the Navy today is about 5 years younger than the average age of the fighter force. That is a stunning thought if you think about it, particularly given how the Navy is dedicated to building 7 hugely expensive DDG-1000s.

And for those who think Boeing doesn't have a point about skipping the F-35C altogether, Lockheed Martin would be absolutely crazy if they don't think this is possible, in fact there are folks at Northrup Grumman who have previously told us they believe it might happen if the F-35C runs into major delays.

We predict there is going to be a public relations nightmare for the Joint Strike Fighter within the Navy and on Capital Hill if a UCAS lands and takes off from a CVN successfully before the F-35C does, and at the current rate of both programs, that might just happen.