RAF Rivet Joint
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
USAF Rivet Joint aircraft are still unsafe!
A three-part investigative series regarding the dreadful state of USAF Rivet Joint aircraft published by the Omaha World Herald in June 2018. Follow this link. http://www.omaha.com/news/military/risking-disaster-offutt-s-aging-jets-are-breaking-down-at/article_dde63e61-06eb-517e-bd8f-b28269dd152b.html.
cpants,
Thanks for your post. A fascinating article. Interestingly, I happened to be using a UK VPN when I tried to read the article and I got this page instead:
It's a shame the Omaha World Herald is too lazy to make its website GDPR compliant. Any PPRuNers in Europe who want to read this will need a VPN. I use NordVPN and am very happy with it.
Thanks for your post. A fascinating article. Interestingly, I happened to be using a UK VPN when I tried to read the article and I got this page instead:
It's a shame the Omaha World Herald is too lazy to make its website GDPR compliant. Any PPRuNers in Europe who want to read this will need a VPN. I use NordVPN and am very happy with it.
Last edited by India Four Two; 1st Jul 2018 at 01:48.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a shame the Omaha World Herald is too lazy to make its website GDPR compliant.
Becoming GDPR compliant can range from the doing almost nothing, to undertaking a huge investment in consultation and time. It depends on the nature and geography of your databases (those containing private EU individual data sets) and especially on the range and geography of your sub-processors, together with a ton of other factors I would not dream of further boring you with.
Bottom line, it's nowt to do with laziness and everything to do with determining the return on investment (ROI) like the vast majority of business decisions in the commercial world.
Apologies...nobody likes a smartass, I'll get my coat.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Summary of C-135 story from the Omaha World Herald
A plane fire and an idea: How and why we did this series
It had been 30 years since the last fatal crash of one of Offutt's C-135 jets. But we started to wonder: How often do the pilots of these planes declare emergencies?
That question has proved surprisingly difficult to answer — though we soon realized that it happens a lot more often than we would have guessed.
We learned that, after certain incidents, 55th Wing pilots fill out a form called an "Aircraft Incident Worksheet." We filed a Freedom of Information Act request for four years of these worksheets, expecting to receive a small number. Instead we found 150 or more per year.
Many of them concerned relatively minor events, such as bird remains found on an aircraft after a flight. But dozens of others appeared to be more serious: engine failures, uncommanded rudder movements, electrical outages, hydraulic failures, fuel fumes, smoke. Several were harrowing to read.
We requested additional records, including:
» Listings from the Air Force's Integrated Maintenance Database
» Incidents reported to the Air Force Safety Center in New Mexico
» A 55th Wing database of "Pilot Reported Discrepancies," detailing maintenance problems noted by pilots after every flight
» Nominations for monthly Air Combat Command "Aircrew Safety Award of Distinction," which filled in details on several incidents and included several additional incidents not described elsewhere
These records helped us to build a history of flights cut short by mechanical failure for each of the Wing's 29 C-135 aircraft. Lists for some planes were longer than others, but mechanical failures led to in-flight emergencies on every single jet in the fleet. Sometimes we noted repeated failures of the same part or aircraft system on the same plane, within days or weeks.
Even this long list is most likely not complete. For example, the Russian media has reported — and the Air Force has acknowledged — several aborted flights involving Offutt's two OC-135 aircraft, which conduct aerial photography over Russia and other countries under the 34-nation Open Skies Treaty. Information about those missions isn't included in the documents we obtained.
We also found what appear to be very serious failures in the listing of pilot-reported discrepancies (such as in-flight electrical failures and large liquid oxygen leaks) with no other corresponding incident report or notation in the maintenance database.
We compiled a database of 55th Wing incidents and shared it, or the numbers we compiled from it, with about a dozen aviation experts. Most had a prior connection to the Air Force. Four (Reg Urschler, Thomas Keck, Don Bacon, Maj. Gen. John Rauch) are former 55th Wing commanders.
We also puzzled over a way to compare the number of incidents with civilian airlines or other military units. Then we discovered that the Tampa Bay Times had conducted a similar investigation into in-flight mechanical problems at Allegiant Airlines in 2016.
Using records obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration, Times reporters had painstakingly created a database of civilian airline flights interrupted by mechanical failure for the year 2015. Then they measured Allegiant's record against other U.S. airlines by looking at how many flights out of 10,000 had to land early because of mechanical failure. They called the metric "interrupted flights."
We queried the Times about it and verified with the FAA that the newspaper's methodology was sound.
To match that metric, we added up all of the aborted flights and in-flight emergencies involving 55th Wing C-135 aircraft for fiscal years 2012 through '16 (Oct. 1, 2011, through Sept. 30, 2016). We did not include 2017 data because 55th Wing declined to provide information from their maintenance database for part of that year, leaving us with an incomplete data set. We also omitted emergencies that occurred on the ground, or flights that were cut short because of bird strikes.
The "interrupted flight" total for those years was 413, out of a total of 12,529 sorties. We calculated a rate of 330 interrupted flights per 10,000.
We also calculated the rates for each of the 55th Wing's five missions and its training jets. They ranged from a low of 130/10,000 flights for Combat Sent, to a high of 596/10,000 flights for Constant Phoenix.
The World-Herald sought an interview with the current 55th Wing commander, Col. Michael Manion, in August 2017.
The 55th Wing offered a tour of several hours that included a visit to the Wing's Rivet Joint aircraft simulator, an off-the-record interview with the unit's aircraft scheduler, a chance to observe Manion's daily weather and maintenance briefing, to include an interview with Manion.
At the last minute, Manion's interview was canceled because of a schedule conflict and replaced by an interview with other senior Wing officers.
A follow-up request to interview Manion was declined, and further requests for information were referred to Air Force public affairs in Washington.
The 55th Wing was given an opportunity to review a late draft of these stories earlier this month as an accuracy check.
Wing officials were also invited to offer comments on the broader issues raised by the series."We have no further inputs and respectfully decline any additional interview requests at this time," 55th Wing spokesman Ryan Hansen said in an e-mail.
The Air Force, and the 55th Wing, are working to make investigations like this one more difficult. In mid-2017, the Wing began censoring certain information from the incident reports that it releases, including the tail number, aircraft type, and takeoff and landing location, in response to a Pentagon directive to limit the release of information about operations.
Soon to follow:
Part 1 "Risking Disaster"
Part 2 "Harrowing Close Calls"
Part 3 "Flying Past Retirement"
- By Steve Liewer / World-Herald staff writer
- Jun 24, 2018
It had been 30 years since the last fatal crash of one of Offutt's C-135 jets. But we started to wonder: How often do the pilots of these planes declare emergencies?
That question has proved surprisingly difficult to answer — though we soon realized that it happens a lot more often than we would have guessed.
We learned that, after certain incidents, 55th Wing pilots fill out a form called an "Aircraft Incident Worksheet." We filed a Freedom of Information Act request for four years of these worksheets, expecting to receive a small number. Instead we found 150 or more per year.
Many of them concerned relatively minor events, such as bird remains found on an aircraft after a flight. But dozens of others appeared to be more serious: engine failures, uncommanded rudder movements, electrical outages, hydraulic failures, fuel fumes, smoke. Several were harrowing to read.
We requested additional records, including:
» Listings from the Air Force's Integrated Maintenance Database
» Incidents reported to the Air Force Safety Center in New Mexico
» A 55th Wing database of "Pilot Reported Discrepancies," detailing maintenance problems noted by pilots after every flight
» Nominations for monthly Air Combat Command "Aircrew Safety Award of Distinction," which filled in details on several incidents and included several additional incidents not described elsewhere
These records helped us to build a history of flights cut short by mechanical failure for each of the Wing's 29 C-135 aircraft. Lists for some planes were longer than others, but mechanical failures led to in-flight emergencies on every single jet in the fleet. Sometimes we noted repeated failures of the same part or aircraft system on the same plane, within days or weeks.
Even this long list is most likely not complete. For example, the Russian media has reported — and the Air Force has acknowledged — several aborted flights involving Offutt's two OC-135 aircraft, which conduct aerial photography over Russia and other countries under the 34-nation Open Skies Treaty. Information about those missions isn't included in the documents we obtained.
We also found what appear to be very serious failures in the listing of pilot-reported discrepancies (such as in-flight electrical failures and large liquid oxygen leaks) with no other corresponding incident report or notation in the maintenance database.
We compiled a database of 55th Wing incidents and shared it, or the numbers we compiled from it, with about a dozen aviation experts. Most had a prior connection to the Air Force. Four (Reg Urschler, Thomas Keck, Don Bacon, Maj. Gen. John Rauch) are former 55th Wing commanders.
We also puzzled over a way to compare the number of incidents with civilian airlines or other military units. Then we discovered that the Tampa Bay Times had conducted a similar investigation into in-flight mechanical problems at Allegiant Airlines in 2016.
Using records obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration, Times reporters had painstakingly created a database of civilian airline flights interrupted by mechanical failure for the year 2015. Then they measured Allegiant's record against other U.S. airlines by looking at how many flights out of 10,000 had to land early because of mechanical failure. They called the metric "interrupted flights."
We queried the Times about it and verified with the FAA that the newspaper's methodology was sound.
To match that metric, we added up all of the aborted flights and in-flight emergencies involving 55th Wing C-135 aircraft for fiscal years 2012 through '16 (Oct. 1, 2011, through Sept. 30, 2016). We did not include 2017 data because 55th Wing declined to provide information from their maintenance database for part of that year, leaving us with an incomplete data set. We also omitted emergencies that occurred on the ground, or flights that were cut short because of bird strikes.
The "interrupted flight" total for those years was 413, out of a total of 12,529 sorties. We calculated a rate of 330 interrupted flights per 10,000.
We also calculated the rates for each of the 55th Wing's five missions and its training jets. They ranged from a low of 130/10,000 flights for Combat Sent, to a high of 596/10,000 flights for Constant Phoenix.
The World-Herald sought an interview with the current 55th Wing commander, Col. Michael Manion, in August 2017.
The 55th Wing offered a tour of several hours that included a visit to the Wing's Rivet Joint aircraft simulator, an off-the-record interview with the unit's aircraft scheduler, a chance to observe Manion's daily weather and maintenance briefing, to include an interview with Manion.
At the last minute, Manion's interview was canceled because of a schedule conflict and replaced by an interview with other senior Wing officers.
A follow-up request to interview Manion was declined, and further requests for information were referred to Air Force public affairs in Washington.
The 55th Wing was given an opportunity to review a late draft of these stories earlier this month as an accuracy check.
Wing officials were also invited to offer comments on the broader issues raised by the series."We have no further inputs and respectfully decline any additional interview requests at this time," 55th Wing spokesman Ryan Hansen said in an e-mail.
The Air Force, and the 55th Wing, are working to make investigations like this one more difficult. In mid-2017, the Wing began censoring certain information from the incident reports that it releases, including the tail number, aircraft type, and takeoff and landing location, in response to a Pentagon directive to limit the release of information about operations.
Soon to follow:
Part 1 "Risking Disaster"
Part 2 "Harrowing Close Calls"
Part 3 "Flying Past Retirement"
Last edited by cpants; 2nd Jul 2018 at 01:27. Reason: Missing quotation mark.
I found this site https://web-capture.net which converts web pages to PDF files. Here's the article.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
At the moment it is Apple and Pears. Are the findings mentioned above unique with similar aged airframes of comparable types having far fewer issues?
I remember in the 60s either a much newer airframe that we filed a Special Occurence report on a high number of flights. Engines were shut down for precautionary reasons. Expected mtbf of 1000 hours was rarely achieved with 300 perhaps the norm and 30 not that rare. Later that curve became flat.
is the 135 climbing up the other side of the maintenanc e line?
I remember in the 60s either a much newer airframe that we filed a Special Occurence report on a high number of flights. Engines were shut down for precautionary reasons. Expected mtbf of 1000 hours was rarely achieved with 300 perhaps the norm and 30 not that rare. Later that curve became flat.
is the 135 climbing up the other side of the maintenanc e line?
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Offutt pilots fly old, dangerous airplanes — and not just because of money
Hansen: Offutt pilots fly old, dangerous airplanes — and not just because of money
- By Matthew Hansen / World-Herald columnist
- Jul 7, 2018
Men and women stationed at Offutt Air Force Base fly some of the country’s most important spy missions in 60-year-old planes that are often too busted to take off.
When they actually get into the sky, these crews’ key missions — like tracking enemies in war zones, watching Russia and sniffing out potential nuclear blasts — are often aborted when the giant plane breaks down in mid-air.
These spy planes are 100 times more likely than a commercial airliner to land early because of mechanical failure.
That sounds incredibly dangerous. It sounds unnecessarily risky.
To Lisa Kort-Butler, it sounds ... familiar.
(READ MORE)
The 'old airplane' maintenance line ?
Pontius ….
I think this problem is not aged airplanes per se. Old age can often be dealt with well enough, though Trigger’s Broom might not always be the most economical solution.
In the current USAF RC-135 Rivet Joint context, it was the more or less accidental discovery by a highly experienced, professionally qualified and inquisitive mechanic, more than ten years ago, that significant scheduled maintenance and defect rectification was not being done, or was being done incompetently. This slack and undesirable practice turned generally serviceable airplanes into unsafe and unairworthy ones and repeats itself as a continuous warning drum-beat in this long-running thread and in similar safety and airworthiness discussions on PPRune
The management, who probably should have been aware of this, reacted badly when it was drawn to their attention internally. Management then ignored the problems that had been uncovered and instead, punished the messenger, who of professional responsibility and necessity, became a whistle-blower. The problem was escalated over several years, though still within government confines, but by all accounts was never fully resolved.
The issue has caught the attention of the Omaha World-Herald via several recent well-informed articles and of the Nebraska Senators and Representatives in DC who have just written to the Secretary of the Air Force, expressing their concerns. If half of it is true, as evidenced by publicly available official documents, it is not before time. I recently saw a long list of repetitive toilet system defects on these airplanes. You know what loose toilet fluids do to airplane metal if not dealt with promptly.
A very persuasive E-book on this specific subject written by the whistle-blower, entitled ‘Cowardice in Leadership’ is still readily available and makes for uncomfortable reading if one believes in the principle of ‘Safety is No Accident.’ Unfortunately the other lesson - ‘If you think Safety is expensive, try having an Accident’ seems to have been expensively discarded as a matter of policy, many years ago, by those who claim to control military air safety, particularly on this side of the Atlantic.
Whether any of these problems read across to the three RAF Rivet Joint RC-135W is anybody’s guess, but without doubt will be within the knowledge of some people. The cooks and the recipes are basically the same so one hopes that the bottle-washers are more on the ball. The type achieved full UK operational capability only this year, so there should be no catch-up backlog for a while – in any department.
As for the six RAF Sentry – E-3D AWACS, where the airframes are half the age of the RC-135s, one hopes that it is only the mission equipment that has been allowed to fall behind (since about year 2000) and that safe airplane maintenance and rectification continue in the best traditions of the Royal Air Force in its 100th year. Judging by some posts on the RAF E-3D AWACS Replacement thread, even the answer to that question is by no means certain.
LFH
...........
"... is the 135 climbing up the other side of the maintenance line?"
In the current USAF RC-135 Rivet Joint context, it was the more or less accidental discovery by a highly experienced, professionally qualified and inquisitive mechanic, more than ten years ago, that significant scheduled maintenance and defect rectification was not being done, or was being done incompetently. This slack and undesirable practice turned generally serviceable airplanes into unsafe and unairworthy ones and repeats itself as a continuous warning drum-beat in this long-running thread and in similar safety and airworthiness discussions on PPRune
The management, who probably should have been aware of this, reacted badly when it was drawn to their attention internally. Management then ignored the problems that had been uncovered and instead, punished the messenger, who of professional responsibility and necessity, became a whistle-blower. The problem was escalated over several years, though still within government confines, but by all accounts was never fully resolved.
The issue has caught the attention of the Omaha World-Herald via several recent well-informed articles and of the Nebraska Senators and Representatives in DC who have just written to the Secretary of the Air Force, expressing their concerns. If half of it is true, as evidenced by publicly available official documents, it is not before time. I recently saw a long list of repetitive toilet system defects on these airplanes. You know what loose toilet fluids do to airplane metal if not dealt with promptly.
A very persuasive E-book on this specific subject written by the whistle-blower, entitled ‘Cowardice in Leadership’ is still readily available and makes for uncomfortable reading if one believes in the principle of ‘Safety is No Accident.’ Unfortunately the other lesson - ‘If you think Safety is expensive, try having an Accident’ seems to have been expensively discarded as a matter of policy, many years ago, by those who claim to control military air safety, particularly on this side of the Atlantic.
Whether any of these problems read across to the three RAF Rivet Joint RC-135W is anybody’s guess, but without doubt will be within the knowledge of some people. The cooks and the recipes are basically the same so one hopes that the bottle-washers are more on the ball. The type achieved full UK operational capability only this year, so there should be no catch-up backlog for a while – in any department.
As for the six RAF Sentry – E-3D AWACS, where the airframes are half the age of the RC-135s, one hopes that it is only the mission equipment that has been allowed to fall behind (since about year 2000) and that safe airplane maintenance and rectification continue in the best traditions of the Royal Air Force in its 100th year. Judging by some posts on the RAF E-3D AWACS Replacement thread, even the answer to that question is by no means certain.
LFH
...........
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
From the excellent Omaha World-Herald series of articles cited above:
https://www.omaha.com/news/military/...ae869b8e3.html
Hopkins said there's a cautionary tale in the story of the Hawker Siddeley Nimrod, which used to fly reconnaissance missions for Great Britain's Royal Air Force.
Like the RC-135s, the Nimrods were built in the 1960s from a 1950s jet airframe.
Like the C-135s, they were plagued by aging aircraft problems.Then, in 2006, a Nimrod caught fire just after aerial refueling near Kandahar in southeastern Afghanistan. The plane exploded in flames and crashed, killing all 14 British airmen aboard.
Two government inquiries blamed the crash on a fuel leak that ignited because of a design flaw that had been known to the RAF but was ignored because it had never caused an accident. After a second nonfatal incident, the British Ministry of Defense permanently grounded the Royal Air Force’s entire fleet of 46 Nimrods.
To replace them, the Defense Ministry decided to spend $1 billion to buy three RC-135s, which they named "Airseekers." All three would be converted from KC-135 aerial refueling tankers that are more than 50 years old. Some in the RAF objected. “(They) were hostile to acquiring these three airplanes because they were equally aged and subject to similar vulnerabilities," Hopkins said. A Parliamentary inquiry into the Nimrod disaster ripped the RAF and a private safety consulting firm for fostering a culture of complacency that placed cost-cutting ahead of safety, as well as a failure to account for the problems associated with aging aircraft.
The inquiry described what it called a "normalization of deviance," in which military leaders learned over years to accept problems like the Nimrod's persistent fuel leaks. They compared it to NASA's complacency prior to the Challenger and Columbia space shuttle disasters.
A few 55th Wing veterans say they worry about what they fear is a similar culture of complacency in their old command.
"This whole thing stinks to me, to high heaven," said retired Brig. Gen. Reg Urschler of Bellevue, who commanded the unit and is a member of the Wing's Hall of Fame. "People have become accustomed to this. They believe it's normal, and they press on."
"It's unequivocally not normal," Hopkins said. "If you think this is acceptable, you're part of the problem."
Like the RC-135s, the Nimrods were built in the 1960s from a 1950s jet airframe.
Like the C-135s, they were plagued by aging aircraft problems.Then, in 2006, a Nimrod caught fire just after aerial refueling near Kandahar in southeastern Afghanistan. The plane exploded in flames and crashed, killing all 14 British airmen aboard.
Two government inquiries blamed the crash on a fuel leak that ignited because of a design flaw that had been known to the RAF but was ignored because it had never caused an accident. After a second nonfatal incident, the British Ministry of Defense permanently grounded the Royal Air Force’s entire fleet of 46 Nimrods.
To replace them, the Defense Ministry decided to spend $1 billion to buy three RC-135s, which they named "Airseekers." All three would be converted from KC-135 aerial refueling tankers that are more than 50 years old. Some in the RAF objected. “(They) were hostile to acquiring these three airplanes because they were equally aged and subject to similar vulnerabilities," Hopkins said. A Parliamentary inquiry into the Nimrod disaster ripped the RAF and a private safety consulting firm for fostering a culture of complacency that placed cost-cutting ahead of safety, as well as a failure to account for the problems associated with aging aircraft.
The inquiry described what it called a "normalization of deviance," in which military leaders learned over years to accept problems like the Nimrod's persistent fuel leaks. They compared it to NASA's complacency prior to the Challenger and Columbia space shuttle disasters.
A few 55th Wing veterans say they worry about what they fear is a similar culture of complacency in their old command.
"This whole thing stinks to me, to high heaven," said retired Brig. Gen. Reg Urschler of Bellevue, who commanded the unit and is a member of the Wing's Hall of Fame. "People have become accustomed to this. They believe it's normal, and they press on."
"It's unequivocally not normal," Hopkins said. "If you think this is acceptable, you're part of the problem."
Thank you Airbubba for your quote from the excellent, as you say, Omaha World-Herald. Oh to have such forensic and dedicated journalism on this side of the pond! That ex-55th Wing commanders are prepared to put their heads above the ramparts and call a spade a spade should be an example to follow for their UK counterparts. To the Hopkins quote:-
I would simply add for ex RAF personnel:-
If you think protecting VSOs is acceptable, you don't care for the future of the Royal Air Force!
If you think this is acceptable, you're part of the problem.
If you think protecting VSOs is acceptable, you don't care for the future of the Royal Air Force!
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
United States Secretary of the Air Force statement on RC-135 Fleet
Click here to view the actual letter.
The Honorable Deb Fischer
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Fischer:
Thank you for your June 29, 2018 letter addressing your concerns with the 55th Wing's C-135 fleet, to include the RC-135V/W Rivet Joint, RC-135S Cobra Ball, RC-135U Combat Sent, WC-135 Constant Phoenix, OC-135B Open Skies, and TC-135 Rivet Joint Trainer aircraft.
I appreciate your concerns given the recent articles published in the Omaha WorId-Herald newspaper and I share your focus on safety, security and mission focus of the 55th Wing. You have my assurance that the Air Force continues to work diligently to address any maintenance and sustainment issues for these aircraft, and all aircraft within the Air Force's inventory.
Below are answers to your questions, which I am confident will help you better understand the 55th Wing's, as well as the Air Force's, processes and oversight in maintaining and sustaining aircraft and keeping our Airmen safe.
Question #1 - What is your assessment of the health, readiness, and overall safety of the55th Wing?
The overall assessment of the 55th Wing's C-135 fleet is that it is a safe and effective weapon system. The aging fleet is being well maintained and the "health" is closely monitored for anytrends that require attention. The 55th Wing is ready to perform its mission and support the Combatant Commanders. The readiness of the 55th Wing is tracked monthly in the Defense Readiness Reporting System and all deficiencies are reviewed and addressed throughout all levels of the Department of Defense. Risk is inherent in all flight operations and all our Airmen take their responsibilities to provide a safe environment very seriously. To mitigate risk, the 55th Wing expects all members of the wing to participate in identifying and addressing safety issues. In 2015, the 55th Wing implemented a Risk Management Program that mandates aircrew to perform a personal and operational risk assessment before each flight. This gives every member an opportunity to voice their concerns heading into a flight, and the Aircraft Commander and Director of Operations review these assessments before each mission to ensure the sortie does not surpass an acceptable level of risk.
Question #2 - Has the Air Force observed any changes to the average monthly "health of fleet" aggregation for the 55th Wing?
When reviewing the average health of fleet statistics for the last 36 months, there have been no significant indicators. For the past three years, the fleet has maintained an average mission capable rate of 75.5 percent, slightly below the Air Force standard of 76 percent. This is in line with Air Force expectations for a fleet of this size and age. Small fleet dynamics drive a wider variance in expected rates. However, the C-135 fleet has remained within standard deviation. This is likewise true of 'break rates at 25.7 percent versus the standard of 24 percent, which is expected for the age of this fleet.
Question #3 - Is there any trend toward an increase in maintenance issues or safety problems?
There are no indications of increased maintenance issues or safety problems. The 55th Wing works closely with the headquarters and program office to address any negative trends in . maintenance. The highest maintenance drivers over the last three years have been engine and fuel system related. The Air Force is addressing the TF33 engine issues with additional engineering technical service support and in-depth analysis on engine sustainment. The program office has developed a robust depot improvement program that includes fuel tank inspection and refurbishment to mitigate the amount of fuel system leaks. Corrosion issues have also become an issue due to the age of the aircraft. This is a specific inspection item and is addressed at the depot for repair, sometimes leading to increased depot time and increased costs. There havebeen two high visibility incidents in the last three years: a galley fire in April 20 15 caused by a leaking oxygen line; and an engine fire in March 2017. Following the galley fire the Air Force initiated an inspection of the fleet finding no other aircraft affected. An in-depth engine failure analysis concluded the number two bearing failure caused the engine flIe. The program officehas taken action to institute a bearing time change replacement program. However, the overall safety record for the fleet is quite remarkable.
Question #4 - Do you assess that there is any increase in risk to the safety of pilots and aircrew due to current maintenance issues within the C-135 airframes of the 55th Wing?
Based on historical safety reports and current safety trends, there is no increased risk to the safety of C-13 5 aircrew. The Air Force strives to provide our aircrew the safest aircraft possible to meet mission requirements both at home and deployed. The aircrew are provided a safe, airworthy aircraft and are further afforded the opportunity to refuse it if anything seems amiss. The 55th Wing Safety Team tracks safety issues reported from depot, maintenance, aircrew, and anonymous reporting and implements mitigation efforts as issues arise. Of note, the 55th Wing's safety trends are better this year than in previous years.
The Honorable Deb Fischer
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Fischer:
Thank you for your June 29, 2018 letter addressing your concerns with the 55th Wing's C-135 fleet, to include the RC-135V/W Rivet Joint, RC-135S Cobra Ball, RC-135U Combat Sent, WC-135 Constant Phoenix, OC-135B Open Skies, and TC-135 Rivet Joint Trainer aircraft.
I appreciate your concerns given the recent articles published in the Omaha WorId-Herald newspaper and I share your focus on safety, security and mission focus of the 55th Wing. You have my assurance that the Air Force continues to work diligently to address any maintenance and sustainment issues for these aircraft, and all aircraft within the Air Force's inventory.
Below are answers to your questions, which I am confident will help you better understand the 55th Wing's, as well as the Air Force's, processes and oversight in maintaining and sustaining aircraft and keeping our Airmen safe.
Question #1 - What is your assessment of the health, readiness, and overall safety of the55th Wing?
The overall assessment of the 55th Wing's C-135 fleet is that it is a safe and effective weapon system. The aging fleet is being well maintained and the "health" is closely monitored for anytrends that require attention. The 55th Wing is ready to perform its mission and support the Combatant Commanders. The readiness of the 55th Wing is tracked monthly in the Defense Readiness Reporting System and all deficiencies are reviewed and addressed throughout all levels of the Department of Defense. Risk is inherent in all flight operations and all our Airmen take their responsibilities to provide a safe environment very seriously. To mitigate risk, the 55th Wing expects all members of the wing to participate in identifying and addressing safety issues. In 2015, the 55th Wing implemented a Risk Management Program that mandates aircrew to perform a personal and operational risk assessment before each flight. This gives every member an opportunity to voice their concerns heading into a flight, and the Aircraft Commander and Director of Operations review these assessments before each mission to ensure the sortie does not surpass an acceptable level of risk.
Question #2 - Has the Air Force observed any changes to the average monthly "health of fleet" aggregation for the 55th Wing?
When reviewing the average health of fleet statistics for the last 36 months, there have been no significant indicators. For the past three years, the fleet has maintained an average mission capable rate of 75.5 percent, slightly below the Air Force standard of 76 percent. This is in line with Air Force expectations for a fleet of this size and age. Small fleet dynamics drive a wider variance in expected rates. However, the C-135 fleet has remained within standard deviation. This is likewise true of 'break rates at 25.7 percent versus the standard of 24 percent, which is expected for the age of this fleet.
Question #3 - Is there any trend toward an increase in maintenance issues or safety problems?
There are no indications of increased maintenance issues or safety problems. The 55th Wing works closely with the headquarters and program office to address any negative trends in . maintenance. The highest maintenance drivers over the last three years have been engine and fuel system related. The Air Force is addressing the TF33 engine issues with additional engineering technical service support and in-depth analysis on engine sustainment. The program office has developed a robust depot improvement program that includes fuel tank inspection and refurbishment to mitigate the amount of fuel system leaks. Corrosion issues have also become an issue due to the age of the aircraft. This is a specific inspection item and is addressed at the depot for repair, sometimes leading to increased depot time and increased costs. There havebeen two high visibility incidents in the last three years: a galley fire in April 20 15 caused by a leaking oxygen line; and an engine fire in March 2017. Following the galley fire the Air Force initiated an inspection of the fleet finding no other aircraft affected. An in-depth engine failure analysis concluded the number two bearing failure caused the engine flIe. The program officehas taken action to institute a bearing time change replacement program. However, the overall safety record for the fleet is quite remarkable.
Question #4 - Do you assess that there is any increase in risk to the safety of pilots and aircrew due to current maintenance issues within the C-135 airframes of the 55th Wing?
Based on historical safety reports and current safety trends, there is no increased risk to the safety of C-13 5 aircrew. The Air Force strives to provide our aircrew the safest aircraft possible to meet mission requirements both at home and deployed. The aircrew are provided a safe, airworthy aircraft and are further afforded the opportunity to refuse it if anything seems amiss. The 55th Wing Safety Team tracks safety issues reported from depot, maintenance, aircrew, and anonymous reporting and implements mitigation efforts as issues arise. Of note, the 55th Wing's safety trends are better this year than in previous years.
Question #5 - What is the Air Force's long-term plan to sustain and recapitalize this critical capability?
The Air Force remains committed to sustaining this vital capability through aggressive depotinspection and repair of these airframes. This exhaustive process identifies componentsrequiring repair and replacement, ensuring platform safety, viability, and effectiveness in supportof our global missions. Missions system performance continues to benefit from our blockupgrade program and the consistent investment the Air Force has made in this capability. Asnoted in your letter, the Air Force is currently pursuing new platforms to replace the OC-135Bfor Open Skies missions, as well as the planned conversion of three modernized KC-135Rs intoWC-135R Constant Phoenix aircraft. The rest of the RC-135 fleet is deemed sustainable through2050, providing more than sufficient time to assess when recapitalization is necessary.
Thank you for your continued support of the Air Force and for our nation's defense.
Sincerely,
Heather Wilson
Secretary of the Air Force
Last edited by cpants; 19th Jul 2018 at 01:14. Reason: Added hyperlink to Senator Deb Fischer web page; press release 7/18/18
Block 45 upgrades on KC-135Rs (and special variants) are intended to keep 300 of them in service to 2050 alongside the KC-46 - the KC-10 will be retiring first.
USAF Breathing New Life Into Ancient KC-135 Tankers With This New Glass Cockpit - The Drive
USAF Breathing New Life Into Ancient KC-135 Tankers With This New Glass Cockpit - The Drive
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Block 45 upgrades on KC-135Rs (and special variants) are intended to keep 300 of them in service to 2050 alongside the KC-46 - the KC-10 will be retiring first.
USAF Breathing New Life Into Ancient KC-135 Tankers With This New Glass Cockpit - The Drive
USAF Breathing New Life Into Ancient KC-135 Tankers With This New Glass Cockpit - The Drive
Block 45 upgrades on KC-135Rs (and special variants) are intended to keep 300 of them in service to 2050 alongside the KC-46 - the KC-10 will be retiring first.
USAF Breathing New Life Into Ancient KC-135 Tankers With This New Glass Cockpit - The Drive
USAF Breathing New Life Into Ancient KC-135 Tankers With This New Glass Cockpit - The Drive
In that context, the USAF statistics of improved in service rates are really besides the point. An airplane may be perfectly serviceable except that corrosion has made it structurally deficient.
The Omaha World Herald highlights corrosion potentials as a serious issue, but only an independent inspection would settle that.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 55th Wing and a prayer
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts