Attack Plane Built for Afghanistan Comes Under Scrutiny by Clifford Davis, Florida Times-Union
Embraer rolled its first A-29 Super Tucano attack plane out of its Jacksonville facility to grinning politicians and military brass in September as part of the U.S. Air Force's contract to supply Afghanistan with its own ground-support capability.
Now, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) questions whether the 20 planes -- and the $429 million of taxpayers' money -- will be wasted.
Inspector General John F. Sopko noted his concerns in a letter dated Nov. 12 to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Gen. Lloyd J. Austin, commander of U.S. Central Command, and Gen. John F. Campbell, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and the International Security Assistance Force.
Sopko is concerned the Afghans don't know how to operate or maintain the aircraft and sending them to the country is futile…
Comments
Morgan, agree w/ your point 2 (point 1 would make this entire fiasco even more costly than it is now) but...why start now? We've been dealing with US solutions underwritten by US dollars since day one. No need to change now in ISAF's 11th hour unless we fully intend to completely redesign the Resolute Support mission, completely redefine and rewrite the ANA Nat'l Military Strategy, and force wholesale changes to their training strategies, accession strategies, and MoD budgetary processes. Cheaper just to let them keep what they've got, continue to agree to pay for everything, and hope for a decent interval.
On one hand, it is understandable why SIGAR would be concerned about delivering a system (aircraft in this case) to the Afghans (not "Afghani" as written in the article) that they cannot maintain.
On the other hand, this hasn't stopped us from giving ANSF other pieces of kit that they are going to be challenged to maintain, like MSFVs (beefed-up M1117s) and Harris radios, or even M-16s which require more maintenance than the AK.
Perhaps we, in conjunction with GIRoA, ought to consider (1) contracting out all maintenance for the ANSF (trucks, aircraft, comms, weapons) ensuring that they have functional equipment; and / or (2) replace the expensive western stuff with less expensive stuff...those Ford Rangers are rugged trucks and can go places their UAHs can't...they're easier to maintain & cheaper on fuel as well.
We always speak of "Afghan solutions for Afghan problems"....that would seem to indicate more "low-tech" and inexpensive solutions VS high-dollar, high-tech US solutions shoved down their throats.