A cost‐benefit analysis of military aircraft replacement policies

This paper describes a method of solving aircraft service life problems. The particular application concerns aircraft in the Naval Advanced Jet Training Command. The method of solution is comparative present value analysis of alternative replacement policies. The likely risks of estimation errors are reflected in the comparisons of present values. Differences are noted in the benefits associated with each policy, but external to Naval Aviation. Since the values of these benefits can be determined only at a higher level of decision‐making, the result of the study is not a conclusive selection among policies, but a schedule of present values on the basis of which, together with values of the external benefits, a decision can be reached. This paper discusses replacement policies for aircraft used in the Naval Advanced Jet Pilot Training mission. Taking engineering technology and the training syllabus as given, four feasible plans for introducing replacement aircraft into service are evaluated in terms of the present values of differential costs associated with the plans and in terms of the likely errors in cost estimates used in calculation of the present values. The trade‐off between present value of costs and planning flexibility is emphasized in choosing a recommended time pattern of aircraft replacement. The specific aircraft mixes considered are the TF–9J/TAF–9J and the TA–4F/A–4B. The first is the currently employed mix; the second is the proposed replacement. The problem is to select an optimal time‐pattern of replacement of F–9's by A–4's, given technological differences favoring the A–4 and increasing costs of maintaining squadrons of F–9's. Replacements by aircraft types other than the A–4 are considered impractical. Four feasible plans for introducing A–4's through a 5‐year period are evaluated in terms of current best estimates of the related costs of the plans and in terms of the flexibility of modifying each plan given future better information concerning the relevant costs. The method of analysis is comparative present value of expected costs.