Those who know the Defense Logistics Agency won’t be surprised to learn it provides parts for the F-16 Fighting Falcon. What may be surprising is that DLA has been supporting the lightweight fighter for half a century.
Before the F-16 became operational Oct. 1, 1980, the U.S. Air Force launched initial production, and before initial production it developed prototypes. The service started consulting with DLA in late 1975 during the pre-production phase, giving the agency valuable – but temporary – experience with weapons-systems design.
Despite limited involvement with weapons-systems design today, DLA chose an ideal platform to showcase what it can offer. Designed to be flown internationally, the F-16 is one of the most produced fighter jets in the world. Almost 45 years after entering service, it still constitutes 40% of the U.S. Air Force’s fighter fleet and significant portions of allied fighter fleets. As recently as this year, Israel, which registered the first combat use of an F-16 in 1981, used it again during its 12-day war with Iran. With DLA’s F-16 weapons system program manager citing 25 countries flying 3,100 Fighting Falcons today, the jet remains big business for the agency.
Research on the F-16 began in the 1970s. The Air Force, dominated by pilots who wanted a return to dogfighting, sought a maneuverable single-pilot plane that could be flown by allies as well as the U.S. The service developed a plan for prototyping in 1972, evaluated prototypes in 1974 and decided to procure the General Dynamics model in 1975. While not completely avoiding the tendency to load aircraft with capabilities, the Air Force designed a multi-role version with all-weather capabilities in 1978. It was during this phase that it asked DLA for help.
The Air Force involved DLA because the agency was steadily increasing its spare-parts responsibilities, something it had been reluctant to do immediately after formation out of fear of delving too deeply into a service-centric function. Adopting a different approach in the mid-1970s, agency directors Army Lt. Gen. Woodrow Vaughan and Air Force Lt. Gen. Gerald Post sought ways DLA’s consumable hardware mission could save the Defense Department money.
Early cooperation between the Air Force and DLA occurred during F-15 Eagle design. Service leaders had given the agency’s Defense Electronics Supply Center in Dayton, Ohio, a seat on the plane’s parts control board, which saved money through standardization. Those same leaders, intending the F-16 to be inexpensive and quickly produced, wanted even more standardization. They correspondingly prioritized parts already in the federal catalog, a decision that involved the entire DLA enterprise.
Defense Contract Administration Services was the first DLA element to benefit from this outreach. DCAS performed pre-award surveys, post-award services and quality control for the plane’s landing gear, canopies, chaff dispensers, central computer and fuel tanks. It also identified training needed by government and plant personnel from Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway, allies helping the U.S. manufacture components and assemble planes.
DCAS managed contracts but buying commands wrote them. To provide the best assistance possible, the Defense General Supply Center established a support program at its Richmond, Virginia, headquarters and embedded a representative in the F-16 Resident Integrated Logistics Support Activity at the General Dynamics facility in Fort Worth, Texas. Daily interaction with the Air Force and contractor enhanced coordination and eased communication.
Along with supply centers in Philadelphia and Columbus, Ohio, the DGSC supported the F-16’s Pratt & Whitney engine. Also used by the F-15 Eagle, the F100 had 31,000 parts, many of them DLA consumables. Small enough not to require DCAS management, these parts were vital due to their quantity and replacement rate. In 2002, the three supply centers fulfilled 2,261 F100 requisitions worth $22,225,000. They fulfilled 3,404 requisitions worth $23,474,000 in 2003.
The Defense Electronics Supply Center also supported the F-16. Like airframe and engine parts, DESC parts didn’t have to be intensively managed, which eased provision. One important item was integrated circuits, which DLA ensured were common to increase availability and decrease cost. Other items were parts for the head-up display, an Air Force-managed component.
DLA’s support to the F-16 changed after fielding. As planned, countries other than the U.S. and its four manufacturing partners bought F-16s, making repair-part provisioning all the more important. Another change resulted from cataloging reform. While DLA managed the federal catalog when the plane was developed, the Air Force entered specification data for items it controlled. By the late 1990s, the agency had complete cataloging responsibility for all F-16 parts, to include those procured by the Air Force.
DLA’s involvement in the F-16 set a precedent. Immediately after assisting with the fighter, the agency used its knowledge of repair parts to help design the M1 Abrams tank. At the same time, the Defense Personnel Support Center in Philadelphia began advising the Army on a new helmet and combat ration. The helmet used Kevlar instead of steel and the meal, ready to eat, had precise specifications. With material selection important for both items, the contracting language had to be exact. DLA’s early involvement ensured manufacturers produced what warfighters needed.
The agency had inconsistent success with design-phase support in subsequent decades. While its track record has improved recently, the services tend to involve DLA only if they value competitive procurement more than the efficiencies that come from the prime vendor model.
That model leaves parts provision to the company manufacturing the system for as long as it can do so profitably. The F-16 proves this doesn’t have to happen. With the defense industrial base shrinking and procurement costs increasing, the agency’s involvement in system design today could save money and mitigate the risk of single suppliers. It would also put consumables management in the hands of the same agency providing cataloging and other logistics services.