The bottom line is that the US could not sustain ground combat operations anywhere on the planet.

  • Sasquatch@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    Misinformation. The article (which is just an uncited quote from the GAO report) says

    selected Army ground support vehicles achieved mission capable goals about 20 percent of the time

    That does NOT mean 20% of vehicles are mission capable. It means in the past 10 years, the Army has only acheived their missian capable target twice.

    Their mission capable target is 90%. All the article says is the army is usually sitting at <90% mission caapble, which honestly isnt saying much

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      They ran a sample on the vehicles and out of the vehicles that were sampled the following was found

      Five of six selected Army ground combat vehicles did not meet mission capable goals in any fiscal year (FY) during the time frame of GAO’s review. In the same time frame, selected Army ground support vehicles achieved mission capable goals about 20 percent of the time. The Marine Corps does not have a mission capable goal for its ground vehicles, though two of seven selected vehicles achieved positive changes in mission capable rates when comparing fiscal years 2015 and 2024. Sustainment Challenges Affecting Army and Marine Corps Ground Vehicles

      but whatever helps you cope there muffin

      • Sasquatch@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Okay so my app bugged out while sending my response, so this is a loose reiteration. Apologies if its redundant.

        Five of six selected Army ground combat vehicles

        This isnt 6 individual vehicles. Its 6 fleets of different vehicle models. 5 of the 6 fleets of army combat vehicles have not held a 90% mission capable rating for a full fiscal year.

        That is very different than saying 20% of ground vehicles are mission capable.

        Edit: It refers to “types” in the cover letter, not fleets

        To address our objectives, we selected 18 types of Army and Marine Corps ground vehicles.