DOD Should Defer Buying New TACAN Equipment and Evaluate Other Alternatives

Gao ID: MASAD-82-6 November 12, 1981

GAO completed a followup review to a 1978 report on navigation planning. The report concluded that, because the Department of Defense (DOD) planned to replace the Tactical Air Navigation System (TACAN) with the NAVSTAR/Global Positioning System (GPS), expenditures to modernize and buy new TACAN equipment were questionable. The report also pointed out that interim fielding of new TACAN equipment could result in unnecessary expenditures and duplication and that, to maximize the GPS cost effectiveness, DOD should avoid buying new equipment that GPS could replace. Despite this, the Navy and the Air Force plan to spend approximately $49 million in the next 4 years on additional replacement TACAN equipment.

According to both the Navy and the Air Force, certain existing TACAN equipment cannot provide reliable service until TACAN is phased out. As a result, the $49 million expenditure is necessary for new equipment. GAO believes that lower cost alternatives exist which can provide adequate navigation until TACAN is phased out. The Navy and the Air Force have not specifically identified and measured the impact of these alternatives on tactical air navigation and, consequently, cannot adequately weigh such an impact against the resulting cost savings. GAO concluded that proceeding with the replacement of TACAN equipment without adequately evaluating all alternatives could result in unnecessary expenditures and duplication.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Warren G. Reed Team: General Accounting Office: Mission Analysis and Systems Acquisition Division Phone: (202) 275-4841


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.