Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:03:43.958Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A combat aircraft mission readiness model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

C. D. Burleigh  and
J. P. Fielding
C. D. Burleigh
Affiliation:
Canadair Ltd
J. P. Fielding
Affiliation:
College of Aeronautics, Cranfield Institute of Technology
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It has always been important for military commanders to be able to rely on their equipment being available to them during a conflict. Some recent published figures, however, showed that two modern fighter aircraft were only available for missions for 47% or 56% of the time.

A simple operation simulation model was derived to show an aircraft's sensitivity to the main availability parameters. This model can be applied to any aircraft type provided that the necessary inputs can be calculated. The simulated operations were as realistic as possible, although many assumptions had to be made.

For reasons of national security it was not possible to relate this study directly to any current service aircraft, so a design project study has been used as the baseline aircraft in the simulation model. This aircraft was the 1980 Mini-CAS, developed at Cranfield Institute of Technology. This was used because all the necessary data were available or could be estimated with reasonable confidence and also the operating conditions are comparable to a number of current service types employed in the Close-Air-Support role. Thus the simulation was kept realistic and the results and conclusions are directly applicable to real and projected designs. Subsequent work checked the validity of the model by simulating an A-10 exercise and Sea Harrier operations in the Falklands conflict.

The Operations Simulation Model proved to be a satisfactory means of assessing the effectiveness of a force of aircraft under war-time conditions. It was far more flexible than the Availability and Mission Readiness equations commonly used to compare the in-service performance of aircraft and highlighted areas where resources could best be concentrated to improve availability. Further improvements are necessary however, to take account of spares shortages and the effect of adverse weather.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 87 , Issue 870 , December 1983 , pp. 398 - 403
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1983 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. General Dynamics Corp. Fort Worth Division. Maintenance and Support Alternatives and their Impact on Aircraft Design and Support Planning. 3rd Annual Logistics Education Conf. Washington DC. November 1980.Google Scholar
2. News Article. Flight International Magazine 1244. 14th June 1980.Google Scholar
3. Fielding, J. P. 1980 Design Awareness Course: The Design of a Miniature Close Air Support Aircraft. College of Aeronautics Memo 8102. Cranfield Institute of Technology UK. 1981.Google Scholar
4. Burleigh, C. D. Mission Readiness of Combat Aircraft. MSc Research Thesis, Cranfield Institute of Technology, 1981.Google Scholar
5. Burleigh, C. D., and Fielding, J. P. A Combat Aircraft Availability Assessment Technique. College of Aeronautics Report 8228. Cranfield Institute of Technology, 1982.Google Scholar
6. Woicik, J. R. Aircraft Combat Survivability Design Considerations and Vulnerability Analysis. MSc Research Thesis, Cranfield Institute of Technology, UK. 1980.Google Scholar
7. Johnson, S. E. The Impact of Battle Damage on A-10 Availability and Sortie Rate. Institute for Defence Analyses — System Evaluation Division. Paper P-1205, May 1976.Google Scholar
8. News article. Aviation Week and Space Technology, 20th June 1977.Google Scholar
9. Munder, N. P., Altis, H. D., and Ramey, M. L. Fighter Superiority by design. AGARD CP-241.Google Scholar
10. Baldwin, G. C. Sea Harrier Operations in the Falklands. Air Pictorial, December 1982.Google Scholar
11. Hussein, A. M. Project Design of a Miniature Close-Air Support Aircraft, MSc Research Thesis, Cranfield Institute of Technology, UK 1982.Google Scholar