全球智库信息集成服务系统

Decisions About U.S. Air Force Weapon System Sustainment Often Do Not Consider the Effects on the Broader Sustainment Enterprise

• Decisions about whether to use organic or contractor support for the long-term sustainment of a weapon system are often made within narrow organizational boundaries and do not consider the full range of capabilities in the enterprise to identify a more cost-effective option.
• A review of legacy program data also showed that this decisionmaking can be data-intensive and often occurs in isolation and late in a weapon system's acquisition process.
• History suggests that new aircraft systems generally act similarly to legacy aircraft systems at the technology/subsystem level. For this reason, the Air Force would benefit most from common sustainment strategies at this level as it moves forward with new acquisition programs.

The Air Force Would Benefit from a Framework to Support These Types of Decisions

• U.S. Department of Defense guidance states that above-core depot workloads (those that the government has the option to outsource) should be assigned on the basis of a best-value determination, but this guidance does not specify how to determine "best value."
• A RAND-developed economic-based framework addresses this gap by helping planners determine the "best value" when assigning above-core sustainment workloads, but such an analytic tool would have longer-term benefits for the Air Force. For example, it can help planners compare and discover commonalities across subsystems, identify the effects of new or emerging technology on Air Force sustainment strategies, and contribute to the Air Force's mission to shape its sustainment enterprise.