Improvements Needed in the Air Force's Logistical Planning for the Coproduction of the F-16 Aircraft

Limited information is available concerning logistical planning for the coproduction of the F-16 aircraft. The Multinational Transportation Plan issued by the contractor, General Dynamics, in April 1976, was not clear in specific responsibility for bearing the costs of moving equipment from Air Force facilities to coproduction manufacturers or between various manufacturers. A review of freight documentation at military transportation facilities in Germany and The Netherlands indicated that the Air Force was paying all of the F-16 transportation costs regardless of the type of items shipped. Air Force transportation personnel suggested that all F-16 material should move through the Defense Transportation System, but there are two potential problems involved--a strong possibility of improper billings and higher transportation costs than under commercial transportation. Although General Dynamics made detailed projections of the cost of shipping F-16 equipment, parts, and assemblies between European manufacturers, the Air Force's Contract and Administration Services Offices had not analyzed these projections nor prepared independent transportation cost estimates. The Director of the F-16 Systems Program Office should: spell out whether the Air Force should fund all, none, or some of specific transportation costs of the F-16 program; accumulate and analyze transportation cost data to make sure that costs are reasonable and that the United States is paying for its fair share only; and develop the information needed for sound logistical planning.