The use by the United States and its European allies of common fighter aircraft models such as the F-35 and F-16 should, in theory, represent a logistical boon. Common aircraft would mean that spare parts, ground support equipment (SE) and technicians could be shared between countries. However, a report published in September by the Rand Corporation reveals the practical difficulties of this theory. The report warns that factors such as different variants within the same model, incompatible support equipment and lack of shared data/procedures pose serious obstacles to interoperability between NATO countries.
Confusion of Different Variants and Incompatible Support Equipment
Chief among the problems is that common aircraft models have different variants. For example, the approximately 600 F-16s flown by non-US countries in Europe are spread over half a dozen blocks with different engine types, oxygen systems and control systems.
When it comes to ground support equipment (SE), the picture is even more complex. According to the Rand report, while some countries use US-standard SE, others develop their own equipment, leading to compatibility issues. The complexity is compounded by the fact that some NATO members, such as Poland, Slovakia and Bulgaria, have historically used Soviet-era fighter aircraft (such as the MiG-29) that were not designed for Western aircraft.
Agile Concept for Employment (ACE) and Logistical Barriers
The US Air Force’s Agile Concept of Employment (ACE) requires fighter squadrons to operate from dispersed air bases, which demands high mobility and flexibility. For the success of this concept, it would be of great convenience if, instead of constantly moving ground crews, US military aircraft could be serviced by local technicians at Dutch or Polish airports. In order to make ACE operations more agile and scalable, the US Air Force aims to ensure that US aircraft can be maintained using local personnel and equipment at partner air bases, without the need for dedicated US maintenance teams.
This cross-service application is also vital for operations between European countries, the report says. For example, one of the tangible benefits of interoperability is that Portuguese F-16s can be rapidly deployed to distant targets such as Lithuania without the need for aerial refuelling, using other allied bases for refuelling.
Source of Problems and Solution Suggestions
The Rand report notes that US security concerns and divergent policies are to some extent responsible for the interoperability problems. Allied countries’ security policies limiting the ability to cross-commission F-35s and different US fighter squadrons’ different policies on the use of allied support equipment create significant obstacles. In addition, insufficient sharing of knowledge and lessons learnt among key stakeholders (such as USAFE wings, USAFE HQ and AFLCMC) was identified as a key challenge.
To overcome these problems, Rand recommends that the US Air Force establish “a dedicated, tiered, supra-wing organisation or coordination cell, with a particular focus on partner interoperability” to oversee interoperability with allies.
According to Rand co-author Patrick Mills, solving these problems would make European air power “much more agile and confident” in a crisis. If allied fleets and bases could actually work together and integrate, Mills said, the vulnerability caused by the resource intensity of operations would be largely eliminated.
