https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...AAYXTUN?cvid=dc8e34fdaedc4e3a97b8ed689ab94676 And people here and elsewhere wonder why I continue to advocate for increased defense spending despite having no stake in it whatsoever.
Actually, in many cases this is impossible to correct. And no, it has nothing to do with greed or anything else. A lot our equipment is simply getting to be well past the "shelf life" that they were ever expected to operate. And as anybody should know, the older a piece of equipment is, the more it costs to keep it going. A hell of a lot of our equipment from tanks and ships, or aircraft, air defense systems, vehicles, and everything else is literally Reagan era equipment. That means it is 40 years old, and getting older each year. And the companies that originally made it have long ago moved on to other projects, so simply no longer makes large numbers of the replacement parts anymore. Think of it like this, good luck calling Ford and saying the radio in your 1964½ Mustang died. Not their problem, they long ago stopped making them, and no longer have any more in inventory. Fix it yourself, or go out and try to find a new one somewhere else. None of this equipment was expected to be the "front line" equipment to be used 40+ years later. The idea for most was it would be in use for 20 or so years, then replaced by something newer and the older stuff moved to Reserve units, allies, or things like that. Just as PATRIOT replaced the HAWK, the PATRIOT should have been replaced well over a decade ago. There have actually not been any "new" PATRIOT launchers built in well over a decade, just as there have been no "new" M1 tanks. They just take the main part of an old one and build a new one around it. Basically most is new, but the frame is old. And many that are built for nations overseas are not really compatible with US models. Many countries demand their own modifications, so parts from a US model will not work with theirs. The ordinance is compatible, but almost nothing else is. But it should really be obvious, it will continue to become more and more expensive to maintain our equipment. It is getting older and older every year, and how many of you are on a daily basis driving 40+ year old cars? How many trucking or transportation companies use 40 year old equipment? On average, most of them replace a vehicle after 6 years or so, they simply find that at around that point the maintenance starts to cost more than the vehicle is worth. I actually laughed when I would look at the data plate of the M-998 I was assigned in my last unit, and it dated to the Bush Administration. And no, not Bush 43, Bush 41. In 2019, our newest HMMWV dated to 1989. When I was in PATRIOT, I was the only operator in the Battalion that was older than his launcher. I have even seen things like trailers that no kidding, date back to the Johnson administration (in 2008 ). And tractors to pull them to the Nixon administration. It is simply impossible to keep more than around 60% of our equipment in "operational status". They need constant maintenance, and there are only so many parts and trained personnel to keep them that way. Even sitting in a garrison they break all the time (especially as they age). It would be almost impossible to keep them all fully operational. Even during the time when the budget was high under President Reagan, we still averaged only around 65% "combat ready". Even if just sitting in a motor pool things break, due to age if nothing else.
