BY ORDER OF THE COMMANDER AIR EDUCATION AND TRAINING

AIR EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND INSTRUCTION 21-105

COMMAND
1 OCTOBER 2024

Maintenance

LOGISTICS PERFORMANCE
MEASURES REPORTING
PROCEDURES

COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

ACCESSIBILITY: Publications is available for downloading on the e-Publishing website at

www.e-Publishing.af.mil.
RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication.

OPR: 19 AF/A4PA Certified by: 19 AF/A4

(Mr. Jay C. Hennette)
Supersedes: AETCI21-105, 09 September 2020 Pages: 29

This instruction implements Department of the Air Force Policy Directive 21-1, Maintenance of
Military Materiel and aligns with Department of the Air Force Instruction (DAFI) 21-101, Aircraft
and Equipment Maintenance Management and the Air Education and Training Command (AETC)
Supplement. It establishes requirements and provides procedures for reporting aircraft
performance measures for all assigned aircraft. This instruction, coupled with regular internal
performance reviews by AETC and subordinate units, supports the goal of measuring and
evaluating maintenance performance and improving capability. This instruction defines logistics
performance terms and has reporting and review procedures to enable AETC to manage by fact.
This instruction applies to all AETC flying training activities. This instruction does not apply to
the United States Space Force, and AETC-gained Air Force Reserve Command or Air National
Guard units. Ensure all records generated as a result of processes prescribed in this publication
adhere to AFI 33-322, Records Management and Information Governance Program, and are
disposed in accordance with the Air Force Records Disposition Schedule, which is located in the
Air Force Records Information Management System. Refer recommended changes to this
publication to the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) using the DAF Form 847,
Recommendation for Change of Publication; route DAF Form 847 from the field through the
appropriate functional chain of command. This publication may be supplemented at any level, but
all direct supplements must be routed to the OPR of this publication prior to certification and
approval in accordance with Department of the Air Force Manual (DAFMAN) 90-161 Publishing
Processes and Procedures. (Note: This requirement does not apply to local maintenance operating
instructions.) After final publication, units will provide copies of their unit supplements to the
2 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

19the Air Force Maintenance Analysis Branch (19 AF/A4PA). The authorities to waive wing/unit
level requirements in this publication are identified with a Tier (“T-0, T-1, T-2, or T-3”) number
following the compliance statement. See DAFMAN 90-161, for a description of the authorities
associated with the tier numbers. Submit requests for waivers using DAF Form 679, Department
of the Air Force Publication Compliance Item Waiver Request/Approval, through the chain of
command to the appropriate Tier waiver approval authority, or alternately, to the Publication OPR
for non-tiered compliance items. See Attachment 1 for a glossary of references, abbreviations and
acronyms and terms. See Attachment 5 for required formulas applicable to this instruction.

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

This document has been revised and must be completely reviewed. The revision updates office
symbols, references and terms. Additionally, Monthly Logistics Indicators Report (MLIR)
language and timing were modified. Also, reference to flying scheduling effectiveness was
removed from Figure 1. Finally, Maintenance Scheduling Effectiveness Rate Table was removed
from Attachment 3.

1. Objective. ................................................................................................................. 3
2. Applicability. ........................................................................................................... 3
3. Responsibility. ......................................................................................................... 3
4. Overview. ................................................................................................................. 3
5. Method and Frequency of Reporting. ...................................................................... 3
6. Coordination Requirements and Correction Procedures. ......................................... 5
7. Special Request for Logistics Data. ......................................................................... 5
8. AETC Logistics Standards....................................................................................... 5
Figure 1. Logistics Indicators. ................................................................................................. 6

Attachment 1—GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION 7

Attachment 2—MLIR WORKSHEETS 14

Attachment 3—ANALYSIS COMMENTS FORMAT 17

Attachment 4—SENIOR LEADER COMMENTS TEMPLATE 23

Attachment 5—FORMULAS 24
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 3

1. Objective. The objective of the MLIR is to evaluate unit performance in an effort to improve
efficiency and effectiveness. An essential element for this evaluation is the metrics contained in
the MLIR. The metrics are a tool for gauging where focus needs to be directed. The result of
compliance with this instruction should be the accurate portrayal of unit performance and the
identification of areas which may require improvement or further investigation as well as
identification of support problems beyond the scope of the unit.
1.1. Each unit must emphasize the continual, in-depth analysis of aircraft maintenance
processes, the integrity of aircraft maintenance documentation methods, timeliness in
reporting, and comprehensive remarks describing particular unit support issues requiring
further analysis and action.
1.2. The role of the headquarters is to assess how well the unit is meeting mission
requirements, improving equipment performance, identifying emerging support problems, and
projecting trends. Maintenance performance is assessed through evaluation of MLIR data and
comments provided by senior leaders, maintenance personnel and unit level maintenance
analysts.
2. Applicability. All AETC units possessing or supporting aircraft will report their data as
specified in this instruction, unless they are specifically exempted. Units which possess more than
one mission design series (MDS) aircraft will list them separately; however, separate reports are
not required. (T-2)
3. Responsibility. Wing, Maintenance Group (or equivalent), and unit commanders are
responsible for compliance. (T-2) Each wing commander or designated representative will ensure
all reports cited in this instruction are prepared and transmitted as prescribed. The preparing agency
and OPR is the Maintenance Management Analysis Section or equivalent in civil
service/contractor activities based on organizational alignment. Commanders will review the
accuracy of the information required by this instruction and take action to improve deficiencies.
Units will notify 19 AF/A4PA and provide an Estimate Time for Completion (ETIC) when the
monthly report cannot be submitted on time. (T-2)
4. Overview. This section describes overall base-to-headquarters reporting concepts and
requirements. The data provided in the MLIR is used to provide the 19 AF Commander,
directorates, and various divisions with an overall assessment of unit and fleet health. It also
provides data used to create and validate maximum sustainable Utilization (UTE) rates and to build
future flying hour programs.
4.1. F-16 aircraft (F-16C/D models) are considered one MDS for reporting purposes however,
submit data by block numbers and for the fleet. (T-2)
4.2. AETC-possessed C-130 and HH-60s variants at Kirtland AFB, NM, will be reported
separately on the MLIR spreadsheet. (T-2)
4.3. T-38C units will report Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) and Introduction to Fighter
Fundamental (IFF) data separately on the MLIR. UPT includes: Specialized Undergraduate
Pilot Training (SUPT), Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training and Pilot Instructor Training. (T-2)
4.4. F-35A data will be reported on AETC assigned aircraft only. (T-2)
5. Method and Frequency of Reporting. Units will submit their MLIR via the 19 AF SharePoint
at: https://usaf.dps.mil/sites/aetc-19af/LG/LGP/LGPA/SitePages/Home.aspx or via e-mail to
4 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

mailto:19AF.LGPA.Workflow@us.af.mil (19 AF/A4PA Workflow in the Global Address List)

when connectivity is unavailable. (T-2) The monthly reporting requirements will include the
following four portions of the MLIR– the numbers spreadsheet, the analysis comments, the Senior
Leader Comments, and the Hangar Queen information.
5.1. Numbers spreadsheet. Units will only use the updated MLIR template provided at the
beginning of each fiscal year. The MLIR template will not be altered without prior approval
and coordination from 19 AF/A4PA. (T-2) A new spreadsheet will be available for download
before the beginning of each new fiscal year. Ensure any links established or developed locally
to populate the MLIR spreadsheet are broken prior to transmission. Submit this portion to
arrive no later than 1600 Central Standard Time (CST)/Central Daylight Time (CDT) the tenth
calendar day following the month being reported. (T-2) If the tenth calendar day falls on a
weekend or holiday, transmit these portions to arrive no later than 1200 CST/CDT the next
workday. If unable to meet suspense, notify the 19 AF/A4PA workflow box with an ETIC.
(T-2)
5.2. Analysis Comments. The analysis comments consist of two components: the table
information and the analysis narratives. In the table component, units will provide detailed
information for each metric regardless if the unit met the standard or not. In the analysis
narrative component, provide narrative comments on items that did not meet the established
AETC standard. Prepare analysis narratives in accordance with Attachment 3, Analysis
Comments Format. (T-2) Narratives are intended to help explain the “why” for the out-of-
standard indicator. Ensure all acronyms are spelled out the first time they are used. AETC has
established standards for Aircraft Availability (AA), Mission Capable (MC), Total Not
Mission Capable Maintenance (TNMCM), Total Not Mission Capable Supply (TNMCS),
Cannibalization (CANN), Sortie Scheduling Effectiveness (SSE), Abort (total), Break, Fix,
Average Fleet Time, Repeat and Recur rates. Submit this portion to arrive no later than 1600
CST/CDT the tenth calendar day following the month being reported. If the tenth calendar day
falls on a weekend or holiday, transmit the report to arrive no later than 1200 CST/CDT the
next workday. If unable to meet suspense, notify the 19 AF/A4PA workflow box with an ETIC.
(T-2)
5.3. Senior Leader Comments. The report requires senior leader comments to address an
overall assessment of unit, fleet, and maintenance health. Aircraft Maintenance Unit/Aircraft
Maintenance Squadron OICs or equivalent with the support of Analysis information will
prepare Senior Leader Comments for the Maintenance Group (MXG)/CC or equivalent to
review, edit, and submit to the 19th Air Force Logistics Division (19 AF/A4). Focus on issues
that headquarters can assist in resolving, i.e. supply, reliability, manning or depot issues in
relationship to issues with which the unit is challenged. Information in these comments is used
to brief AETC leadership and other agencies. It is suggested units address major programs,
concerns, and/or areas of interest within the maintenance group or wing. This section is not
intended to restate the comments previously put in the Analysis comments section, it is
intended for Wing/Group perspective/big picture items. Maintenance leaders are encouraged
to use these comments as a communication tool to the 19 AF staff. Prepare analysis narratives
in accordance with Attachment 4, Senior Leader Comments Template. (T-2) Transmit this
portion to arrive no later than 1600 CST/CDT the tenth calendar day following the month being
reported. If the tenth calendar day falls on a weekend or holiday, transmit the report to arrive
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 5

no later than 1200 CST/CDT the next workday. If unable to meet suspense, notify the 19
AF/A4PA workflow box with an ETIC. (T-2)
5.4. Hangar Queen Information. Hangar Queens are of great interest to the Command. It is
imperative that accurate information is provided. Transmit this portion to arrive no later than
1600 CST/CDT the tenth calendar day following the month being reported. If the tenth
calendar day falls on a weekend or holiday, transmit the report to arrive no later than 1200
CST/CDT the next workday. If unable to meet suspense, notify the 19 AF/A4PA workflow
box with an ETIC. (T-2)
6. Coordination Requirements and Correction Procedures. The Maintenance Group
Commander (or civil service/contract equivalent) will establish internal unit coordination
requirements/procedures to ensure an accurate report is released on time. TNMCS and CANN
drivers including narratives will be coordinated through maintenance and supply. Corrections to
monthly reports will be submitted by separate e-mail with reference to the incorrect or amended
data. Each unit maintenance analysis section (or civil service/contract equivalent) will maintain
copies of monthly reports for at least two fiscal years. File copies can be maintained electronically.
(T-2)
7. Special Request for Logistics Data. Instances may arise where recurring short-term special
reports and/or data may be required. Periodic requirements exist for collecting data to support
special projects or track specific maintenance information. A special request for logistics data e-
mail, from 19 AF/A4PA to the unit analysis section, will be used to task units. All efforts will be
made to obtain information from enterprise systems, however, when necessary, units will be
required to provide data/information. 19 AF/A4PA does not have access to the F-35 Maintenance
Information System (MIS) (Autonomic Logistics Information System), requiring more direct data
requests from these units.
7.1. Applicability. All AETC units possessing or supporting aircraft are subject to special
requests for logistics data.
7.2. Method and Frequency of Reporting. 19 AF/A4PA will provide submission instructions
and frequency requirements in the tasking e-mail.
7.3. Report Format. 19 AF/A4PA will specify report format in the tasking e-mail. Instructions
will specify content, procedures for data collection, and report termination date.
8. AETC Logistics Standards. Standards are set for logistics indicators to a level appropriate to
the tasking of the unit and the capability of the weapon system. Logistics standards are established
by MDS and may be further established by mission within a specific MDS. Standards are used to
keep leadership apprised of overall force readiness, identify and isolate breakdowns in logistics
processes and help determine if resources outside the unit’s control are needed. Standards also aid
in identifying units that need further examination and assistance.
8.1. Logistics Indicators. Logistics indicators are used to measure the health of a unit’s
operation. Achieving established standards should aid in meeting flying training requirements.
Standards are developed for the following logistics indicators:
6 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

Figure 1. Logistics Indicators.

8.1.1. Aircraft Availability (AA). 19 AF/A4PA utilizes the formula in DAFI 21-103,
Equipment Inventory, Status and Utilization Reporting, Attachment 25 to calculate each
unit’s AA standards.
8.1.2. AA standards will vary by unit; therefore, they are not published in the annual
logistics standards/goals document.
8.2. Modeling Process. A modeling process, as well as inputs from maintenance and supply
functional managers, is used to help determine the correct values for realistic, requirements-
based standards. No model reflects reality perfectly. If experience or a revised mission tasking
reveals a need for adjustment of any standard, an out-of-cycle review can be initiated by 19
AF/A4PA.
8.3. Standards and Goals Review and Development Process. Standards and goals serve as
thresholds for further analysis. They should be challenging and tough, but attainable. If they
are set too loose, unit capability may be degraded; if too tight, analysis tends to “chase ghosts,”
and, if out of reach, they become irrelevant and demoralizing. The review process is
accomplished annually, usually during the July to August timeframe, utilizing historical data
and projected flying hour requirements. Each review involves the following basic steps:
8.3.1. 19 AF analysts collect and analyze historical statistical data. 19 AF functional
managers (maintenance and supply) review the historical data and analysis. The standard
or goal for each indicator is evaluated to include current average, unit and fleet trends and
frequency units meet the current standard. 19 AF analysts and functional managers then
assess short-term and long-term support issues and make recommendations for changes, if
needed.
8.3.2. Historical statistical data and fiscal year projections are combined with all inputs
and evaluated. A detailed briefing along with recommendations for adjustments will be
briefed to the 19 AF/A4 Director or equivalent for approval.
8.3.3. The 19 AF/A4-approved standards are distributed to all AETC flying units.
8.3.4. This review process does not preclude units from developing local standards or
goals for other metrics as deemed necessary by their leadership.

KIRK W. PETERSON, Col, USAF

Director of Logistics, Engineering and Force
Protection
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 7

Attachment 1
GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION

References
AFI 16-402, Aerospace Vehicle Programming, Assignment, Distribution, Accounting and
Termination, 27 September 2019
AFI 21-101_AETCSUP, Aircraft and Equipment Maintenance Management, 10 August 2020
AFI 33-322, Records Management and Information Governance Program, 23 March 2020
DAFI 21-101, Aircraft and Equipment Maintenance Management, 16 January 2020
DAFI 21-103, Equipment Inventory, Status and Utilization Reporting, 1 November 2022
DAFMAN 90-161, Publishing Processes and Procedures, 18 October 2023
DAFPD 21-1, Maintenance of Military Materiel, 21 February 2024

Adopted Forms
DAF Form 679, Department of the Air Force Publication Compliance Item Waiver
Request/Approval
DAF Form 847, Recommendation for Change of Publication

Abbreviations and Acronyms

A/A—Air Abort
AA—Aircraft Availability
AAT—Aircraft Availability Target
AETC—Air Education and Training Command
AFI—Air Force Instruction
AMD—Average Mission Duration
AR—Attrition Reserve
ASD—Average Sortie Duration
AWP—Awaiting Parts
BAI—Backup Aircraft Inventory
CANN—Cannibalization
CC—Commander
CDT—Central Daylight Time
CFT—Contract Field Team
COMBS—Contractor Operated and Maintained Base Supply
CST—Central Standard Time
8 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

DAFI—Department of the Air Force Instruction

DAFMAN—Department of the Air Force Manual
DD—Delayed or Deferred Discrepancy
DDR—Detail Data Record
DIT—Data Integrity Team
DLA—Defense Logistics Agency
EAPS—Engine Air Particle Separator
ETIC—Estimated Time For Completion
FCF—Functional Check Flight
FDR—Flight Data Recorder
FMC—Fully Mission Capable
G/A—Ground Abort
IAW—In accordance with
IFF—Introduction to Fighter Fundamental
JFS—Jet Fuel Starter
LCN—Logistics Control Number
MC—Mission Capable
MDS—Mission Design Series
MICAP—Mission Impaired Capability Awaiting Parts
MIS—Maintenance Information System
MLIR—Monthly Logistics Indicators Report
MXG—Maintenance Group
NMC—Not Mission Capable
NMCB—Not Mission Capable Both (maintenance and supply)
NMCM—Not Mission Capable Maintenance
NMCS—Not Mission Capable Supply
NSN—National Stock Number
OCF—Operational Check Flight
OPR—Office of Primary Responsibility
PA—Programmed Allocation
PAI—Primary Aircraft Inventory
PMCB—Partially Mission Capable Both (maintenance and supply)
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 9

PMCM—Partially Mission Capable Maintenance

PMCS—Partially Mission Capable Supply
PRD—Pilot Reported Discrepancy
SGEM—Sortie Generation Estimation Model
SSE—Sortie Scheduling Effectiveness
SUPT—Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training
TDI—Time Distribution Inspection
TNMCM—Total Not Mission Capable Maintenance
TNMCS—Total Not Mission Capable Supply
UNS—Unified Numbering System
UPT—Undergraduate Pilot Training
UTE—Utilization
WUC—Work Unit Code

Office Symbols
19 AF/A3—19th Air Force Operations Division
19 AF/A4—19th Air Force Logistics Division
19 AF/A4PA—19th Air Force Maintenance Analysis Branch

Terms
Aircraft Availability (AA) (Actual)—Represents both primary and spare aircraft available to Ops
to execute daily flying hour requirements; 100% of AA aircraft will be made available to the flying
schedule. It is a variable requirement that will fluctuate on any given day/week, but should meet
or exceed the AAT for the month. AA aircraft must be MC and have sufficient hours available to
execute the flying schedule.
Aircraft Availability Target (AAT)—Represents the number of aircraft required to be MC
monthly to meet annual flying hour requirements. AAT is computed for each unit by MDS and
adjusted annually based upon the Primary Authorized Inventory (PAI) aircraft and MC standards.
Note: PAI aircraft adjustments are published annually in the Flying Hour Programmed Allocation
(PA) Document.
Actual Utilization (UTE) Rate—The average number of sorties or hours flown per PAI (or
average possessed aircraft, if below PAI). See UTE Rate for formula in Attachment 5.
Air Abort (A/A) Rate—The total number of air aborts per sorties flown. The purpose of this rate
is to reflect the percentage of aborted sorties once the aircraft is airborne. Declaration of an air
abort is an operations call. Include air aborts for maintenance causes only.
Attrition Rates—The total number of sorties lost (due to various reasons) per sorties scheduled.
Attrition rates are used primarily for two purposes. Programmatically, they are used to forecast the
number of scheduled sorties needed to meet the requirement. During program execution, attrition
10 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

rates help to pinpoint where the flying schedule is deviating from the plan and where to focus
management actions.
Attrition Reserve (AR) Aircraft—Aircraft procured to replace anticipated losses of PAI due to
peacetime accidents or wartime attrition. (See AFI 16-402, Aerospace Vehicle Programming,
Assignment, Distribution, Accounting and Termination, for more details.)
Average Fleet Time—The average number of flying hours available per possessed aircraft until
the next periodic or phase inspection. Fleet time is the prime leading logistics indicator that
identifies a unit’s ability to maintain future flying and dock flow requirements. Fleet time is only
tracked for those aircraft using the periodic or phase inspection system. The Integrated
Maintenance Data System product normally used to do this is the Time Distribution Inspection
(TDI).
Calculating Average Fleet Time—Take a fleet time measurements every day with the exception
of non-workdays, utilizing the TDI. Extract the total time remaining in hours and the total number
of aircraft from the TDI. Subtract out the hours and number of aircraft for aircraft not in possession
codes TF, or ZB at the time the product was run. Report the total hours and total aircraft in the
MLIR. See Table A2.3 for example.
Average Mission Duration (AMD)—The average number of flying hours per mission flown.
AMDs are normally used only for larger aircraft.
Average Sortie Duration (ASD)—The average number of flying hours per sortie flown. ASDs
are normally used only for smaller aircraft.
Average Possessed Aircraft—Possessed aircraft are available to accomplish the primary mission
of the unit. Aircraft with a possession code of TF, or ZB are considered possessed. Possessed
aircraft hours are the key elements in calculating aircraft status.
Backup Aircraft Inventory (BAI)—Aircraft over-and-above the PAI to permit scheduled and
unscheduled depot-level maintenance, modifications, inspections, and repair without a reduction
of aircraft for the assigned mission. (See AFI 16-402 for more details.)
Break Rate—The percentage of aircraft that land “Code-3” (“Alpha-3” for Mobility Air Force)
status (unable to complete at least one of its primary missions IAW the Minimum Essential
Subsystems List.) This metric primarily indicates aircraft system reliability. It acts as an early
warning indicator, which can lead to a lower MC rate and focuses on the quality of aircraft
maintenance and parts. Do not count Functional Check Flight (FCF) or Operational Check Flight
(OCF) code-3 landings as breaks.
CANN Rate—The number of aircraft-to-aircraft or engine-to-aircraft cannibalization actions per
sorties flown. The purpose of the CANN rate is to highlight what part of the sortie generation effort
is expended removing and replacing parts from one aircraft (or engine) to another aircraft for the
specific purpose of making the latter mission capable. CANN actions will be counted against the
end item that required the canned part. CANNs are reported during the month the removal action
is completed. Note: A demand must first be placed on the supply system, which subsequently
could not be filled.
Chargeable Deviation—A flying schedule deviation attributable to Maintenance, Operations, or
Supply.
Data Integrity Rate (Before Correction)—The percentage of records found in error in the MIS
subsystem during the Data Integrity Team (DIT) review. For DIT error rate computations, a record
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 11

is one Detail Data Record (DDR). When a DDR contains more than one documentation error, the
DIT error rate will reflect one error for the entire DDR. Take the number of errors divided by total
records checked. Report the uncorrected error numbers per DIT category on the MLIR.
Data Integrity Rate (After Correction)—The percentage of error records corrected in the MIS
subsystem during the Data Integrity Team (DIT) review. For DIT error rate computations, a record
is one Detail Data Record (DDR). When a DDR contains more than one documentation error, the
DIT error rate will reflect one error for the entire DDR. Take the number of errors corrected divided
by the total number of errors. Report the total number of errors corrected on the MLIR.
Delayed (or Deferred) Discrepancy (DD) Rate—The average number of delayed/deferred
discrepancies per possessed aircraft. Sometimes minor maintenance actions must be deferred to a
more opportune time. DDs fall into two categories; Awaiting Maintenance or Awaiting Parts
(AWP). Discrepancies that are deferred AWP must have a valid off-base requisition number.
Supply should maintain an aggressive follow-up program to keep visibility on those parts ordered
for AWP deferred discrepancies. Units will take three measurements before the end of month (with
a minimum of 7 days between each measurement), and take one final measurement on the last duty
day of the month. Only count DDs against currently possessed aircraft when calculating the DD
rate.
Fix Rate—The percentage of code-3 breaks fixed within 12 hours (8 hours for fighter aircraft.)
Time stops when all code-3 discrepancies are fixed and the aircraft returns to an MC condition.
Problems found by maintenance after the aircraft lands (ground found) are not considered in the
fix time. Do not count discrepancies found on ground aborts. (They are not code-3 landings.)
Fully Mission Capable (FMC) Rate—The percentage of possessed aircraft that are fully mission
capable (can fly all required missions.)
Functional Check Flight (FCF) Release Rate—The percentage of aircraft that successfully
complete an FCF versus the total number of FCFs attempted. (Attempts must log flight time.)
Check flights are performed to ensure an aircraft is airworthy and/or capable of accomplishing its
mission. The FCF release rate helps monitor the quality of maintenance performed following the
repair of critical components or systems.
Ground Abort (G/A) Rate—The total number of ground aborts per sorties attempted (sorties
flown plus number of spared ground aborts). Multiple ground aborts recorded against a single line
will be included in the number of ground aborts.
Maintenance Cancellation Rate—The number of maintenance cancels divided by sorties
scheduled multiplied by 100. It highlights the capability of maintenance to provide aircraft to meet
the needs of the daily flying schedule. Maintenance cancels are prior to crew show.
Maintenance Man-hour per Flying Hour—The average number of maintenance man-hours
required to support each flying hour. Include all direct man-hours documented against the aircraft
MDS and its engines. Units with T-1, T-6, T-38, TH-1, UH-1, or HH-60 aircraft should also
include all man-hours earned through Sortie Generation Estimation Models (SGEM).
Mission Capable (MC) Rate—The percentage of possessed aircraft that are mission capable
(either fully mission capable or partially mission capable).
Non—chargeable Ground Abort—Ground aborts that do not count as chargeable deviations
toward the SSE rate. However, they are still included in the ground abort rate. (EXAMPLE: The
12 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

prime and spare aircraft both ground abort against a single line; the first abort is non- chargeable
for SSE, but still counts toward the abort rate. Spared ground aborts are non-chargeable for SSE).
Not Mission Capable Both Maintenance and Supply (NMCB) Rate—The percentage of
possessed aircraft that are not mission capable due to both maintenance and supply.
Not Mission Capable Maintenance (NMCM) Rate—The percentage of possessed aircraft that
are not mission capable due to maintenance.
Not Mission Capable Supply (NMCS) Rate—The percentage of possessed aircraft that are not
mission capable due to supply.
Operations Cancellation Rate—The number of operations cancels per 100 sorties scheduled. It
highlights the capability of operations to provide aircrews to meet the needs of the daily flying
schedule.
Partially Mission Capable Both Maintenance and Supply (PMCB) Rate—The percentage of
possessed aircraft that are partially mission capable for both maintenance and supply reasons.
Partially Mission Capable Maintenance (PMCM) Rate—The percentage of possessed aircraft
that are partially mission capable for maintenance reasons only.
Partially Mission Capable Supply (PMCS) Rate—The percentage of possessed aircraft that are
partially mission capable due to supply reasons only.
Primary Aircraft Inventory (PAI)—Aircraft assigned to meet a unit’s primary mission
requirement. (See AFI 16-402 for more details.)
Programmed Allocation (PA) document—The document published by 19 AF/A3 annually that
prescribes PAI, programmed UTE rates, programmed ASD/AMDs, and programmed flying hours
for each MDS assigned to each unit.
Programmed Hours—The number of flying hours that are programmed to be flown as specified
in the PA document.
Programmed Sorties—The number of sorties that are programmed to be flown as specified in the
PA document.
Programmed UTE Rate—The average number of sorties or hours per PAI that are programmed
to be flown. (See UTE Rate for formula.)
Recur Discrepancy—A Pilot Reported Discrepancy (PRD) that occurs on the second, third, or
fifth (or attempted sortie) after corrective action has been taken and the system or sub-system
indicates the same malfunction when operated.
Recur Discrepancy Rate—This metric is a leading indicator. It is the total number of recur
discrepancies compared to the total number of PRDs. Recur malfunctions indicate a problem with
either troubleshooting or system maintainability. Do not count recurs on FCFs, OCFs, operational
checks, or ground-found problems.
Repeat Discrepancy—A PRD that occurs on the next sortie (or attempted sortie) after corrective
action has been taken and the system or subsystem indicates the same malfunction when operated.
Repeat Discrepancy Rate—This metric is a leading indicator. It is the total number of repeat
discrepancies compared to the total number of PRDs. Like recurs, repeat malfunctions indicate a
problem with either troubleshooting or system maintainability. Do not count repeats on FCFs,
OCFs, operational checks, or ground-found problems.
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 13

Sortie Attempted—Local sorties flown plus ground aborts.

Sortie Generation Estimation Model (SGEM)—SGEMs are a simple, easy way to account for
manhours expended for routine flightline tasks. Their use negates the need to document these tasks
in the MIS, thus relieving flightline maintenance personnel from this requirement. The models use
job standards that take into account how long each task takes, the crew size required, and the
frequency of the task. Examples of typical tasks in the models are launch and recovery, of aircraft,
servicing, cleaning, inspections (pre-flights, thru-flights, and post-flights, not phase inspections),
FOD walks, and daily computer use. Each task constitutes a reasonable average across the
Command and are vetted by applicable maintenance functional managers and maintenance
contract monitors. At the end of each month, unit analysts input factors into the models (O&M
days, sorties flown, hours flown, and average possessed aircraft) and add the results to the
manhours extracted from the MIS to report total manhours expended in the MLIR.
Sortie Scheduling Effectiveness (SSE) Rate—The percentage of scheduled sorties a unit
successfully launches as published in the weekly flying schedule. Schedule deviations are broken
down into two categories: non-chargeable and chargeable (see AFI 21-101, AETCSUP for a
detailed listing.) Non-chargeable deviations are used to adjust the flying schedule to factor out
uncontrollable elements. Chargeable deviations are then measured in relation to the adjusted
schedule to compute SSE. (Air aborts are not considered flying schedule deviations and are not
used in computing SSE rates.) The flying schedule sets the pace for the entire wing. It must be
built on sound principles that are clearly articulated and vigorously defended by wing leadership.
The flying schedule is the focal point of the Wing and drives consumption of Air Force resources.
Spare Factor—The percentage of aircraft committed to the daily flying schedule as spare aircraft.
Supply Cancellation Rate—The number of supply cancels per sorties scheduled. It highlights the
capability of supply to provide spare parts to meet the needs of the daily flying schedule.
Total Aircraft Inventory (TAI)—Total aircraft assigned to a unit. (PAI + BAI + AR) (See AFI
16-402 for more details)
Total Abort Rate—The total number of air aborts and ground aborts per sorties attempted.
Total Not Mission Capable Maintenance (TNMCM) Rate—The percentage of possessed
aircraft that are not mission capable for maintenance (NMCM + NMCB). The purpose of TNMCM
is to quantify how much aircraft downtime is attributable to maintenance and focuses on the
effectiveness of the maintenance workforce.
Total Not Mission Capable Supply (TNMCS) Rate—The percentage of possessed aircraft that
are not mission capable for supply (NMCS + NMCB). The purpose of TNMCS is to quantify how
many aircraft are not mission capable for lack of parts and focuses on the effectiveness of the
supply system.
Utilization (UTE) Rate—The average sorties or hours flown (planned or actual) per PAI or
average possessed aircraft. (When a unit’s average possessed aircraft for the month is less than the
established PAI, the average possessed aircraft for the month will be used to compute UTE rates.)
The purpose of UTE rates is to establish the primary performance standard that measures a wing’s
ability to meet its flying objective as well as the prime mechanism in resource allocation.
14 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

Attachment 2
MLIR WORKSHEETS

A2.1. Percent MC Aircraft Scheduled Sample Worksheet. This is a sample worksheet used to
collect information for the MLIR.

Table A2.1. Sample MC Aircraft Scheduled Worksheet.

MDS: T-38
Date Day # Acft # MC Acft (1 Sched Sched % MC Spare
of Possessed Hr prior to # # Acft Factor
Week First Launch Prime Spares Committe
d to
1-Jan Sunday
2-Jan Monday
3-Jan Tuesday 62 53 26 4 56.6 13.3
4-Jan Wednesday 64 55 28 4 58.2 12.5
5-Jan Thursday 63 56 28 4 57.1 12.5
6-Jan Friday 63 59 26 4 50.8 13.3
7-Jan Saturday
8-Jan Sunday
9-Jan Monday 63 59 26 4 50.8 13.3
10-Jan Tuesday 63 52 28 4 61.5 12.5
11-Jan Wednesday 63 54 28 4 59.3 12.5
12-Jan Thursday 64 55 26 4 54.5 13.3
13-Jan Friday 63 59 28 4 54.2 12.5
14-Jan Saturday
15-Jan Sunday
16-Jan Monday
17-Jan Tuesday 63 60 28 4 53.3 12.5
18-Jan Wednesday 63 59 28 4 54.2 12.5
19-Jan Thursday 63 58 28 4 55.2 12.5
20-Jan Friday 63 56 19 4 41.1 17.4
21-Jan Saturday
22-Jan Sunday
23-Jan Monday 63 54 28 4 59.3 12.5
24-Jan Tuesday 63 54 28 4 59.3 12.5
25-Jan Wednesday 63 54 27 4 57.4 12.9
26-Jan Thursday 63 55 27 4 56.4 12.9
27-Jan Friday 61 51 28 4 62.7 12.5
28-Jan Saturday
29-Jan Sunday
30-Jan Monday 62 51 28 4 62.7 12.5
31-Jan Tuesday 62 51 28 4 62.7 12.5
Overall 1257 1105 541 80 56.2 12.9
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 15

A2.2. DIT Sample Worksheet. This is a sample worksheet used to collect information for the
MLIR.

Table A2.2. Sample DIT Worksheet.

A2.3. Fleet Time Sample Worksheet. This is a sample worksheet used to collect information
for the MLIR.
16 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

Table A2.3. Sample FLEET TIME Worksheet.

AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 17

Attachment 3
ANALYSIS COMMENTS FORMAT

A3.1. Analysis Comments. Detailed analysis comments are required for the following rates that
miss their standard/goal/target for the month: AA, MC, TNMCM, TNMCS, SSE, Total Abort,
CANN, Break, Fix, Repeat and Recur. When documenting comments, ensure that the appropriate
Logistics Control Number (LCN), Unified Numbering System (UNS), Ref/Des, and WUCs digit
requirements are met for each discrepancy, i.e., if a WUC is 53000 do not abbreviate to 53. In
addition, do not use system WUCs unless the system was the discrepancy, always ensure the
correct WUC is documented. Address the root cause or causes for the missed standard. Explain
your analysis of top drivers, problem systems, problem aircraft, trends, or any other factors
affecting the indicator. Narratives must provide important details explaining why an item drove
unit performance, not just restating the number of hours or the number times something occurred.
Explain why; actually analyze the data. Long-term and short-term trends are important. Do not
focus solely on the current month data to determine if a trend exists. Look at the entire picture to
make those determinations. The question “why” must be addressed throughout the remarks. The
remarks section should be tailored to each situation.
A3.2. AA Target. When the established AA target is not met, a narrative explanation is required.
However, if it was missed due to a substandard MC rate, a statement of “see MC rate” is
acceptable. If it was not met because the average number of possessed aircraft was below PAI,
explain why aircraft were in non-possessed statuses. For example, “The AA target of 68 aircraft
was missed due to 10 aircraft being at Ogden for a major avionics upgrade. Additionally, four
aircraft were non-possessed while the wing attachments were replaced by a Contract Field Team
(CFT). During the quarter we possessed 90 aircraft, five below our PAI of 95.”
A3.3. MC Rate. List the reasons that contributed to the MC rate missing the standard for the
month. If it was attributed to the TNMCM and/or TNMCS rate(s) just state “see TNMCM and/or
TNMCS rate”.
A3.4. TNMCM Rate Narrative Example. “Two aircraft with cracks caused the windshield
NMC time during the month. The downtime was extended due to a bad (also cracked) windshield
received from the manufacturer. A second windshield was ordered and received to replace the bad
one. The NMCB time on aircraft 0298 was due to maintenance working delayed discrepancies
while waiting for the second windshield to arrive. The installation of both windshields was normal
with most (150 hours) of the time consumed during rigging. Both aircraft repairs have been
completed. Fuel system time was up for the quarter because of one aircraft (595 hours) with fuel
leaks. The majority of the NMC time (395 hours) was for a main cell. The installation and leak
checks took approximately 8 days. The repairs were completed on 29 March and no other leaks
have developed on that aircraft. Phase time was significantly lower than normal due to two fewer
phases than usual (4 versus 6) being accomplished.”
A3.4.1. TNMCM Driver Information. List the top three systems driving the TNMCM time.
Within each system, list the top three component drivers.
A3.4.2. If the top three systems are average and do not explain why the standard was not met,
list any systems that varied significantly. Explain anything that was out of the norm. List the
system and WUC details using the following format (round off all hours, no decimals.)
18 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

Table A3.1. System 71 – Power Plant – 270 TNMCM Hours.

WUC* NOUN TNMCM
719604 PAC low 67
71217005 Left engine gimbal mount bolt cracked 53
71960862 Right engine wingtip drain valve leak 49
Note: Repeat this structure for each of the top three TNMCM
* LCN for F-35s, UNS for CV-22s, Ref/Des for C-17s, WUC for
all other MDSs

A3.5. TNMCS Rate Narrative Example. “The supply standard was missed for the month. Two
MICAPs accounted for 41% of the TNMCS time. The leading supply driver was a Structural
Beam. (269 MICAP hours) It was a first-time demand at Base X. Assets were in restricted stock
at Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and required coordination with the item manager. The asset
was released and trucked to the base. Assets are currently on hand at the DLA and at the base.
Electro-Hydraulic (33x) accumulated 2215 TNMCS hours. A3717, A3822, A3546 and A3577
required props. They are not available because COMBS is waiting for Per-Occurrence overhaul
Government funding. Government did not forecast these overhauls. Flight Controls (14x)
accumulated 1145 TNMCS hours. A3920, A3785, and A3736 are all AWP for a control stick and
there is a 30-day turn-over with many in the repair pipeline. A3557 is also AWP for a pedal
assembly. The item was received on 21 March, but the bushing was stuck and the item was re-
ordered.”
A3.5.1. TNMCS Driver Information. List the top three systems driving the TNMCS rate.
Within each system, list the top three component drivers. Include the NSN for all NMCS or
NMCB status entries.
A3.5.2. For units supported by both COMBS and the standard base supply system, include the
number of TNMCS hours attributable to COMBS and the number of TNMCS hours
attributable to the standard base supply system separately. These units will also report all
COMBS parts that took longer than the contractual standard to deliver when those parts caused
a TNMCS status on the aircraft, including the number of TNMCS hours attributed to each part.
List the system and end item details using the following format (round off all hours, no
decimals).

Table A3.2. System 33 – Electro-Hydraulic – 2215 TNMCS Hours.

WUC* Noun/NSN TNMCS
33AAA Propeller/1234-56-789-1234 2215
Note: Repeat this structure for each of the top three TNMCS
driving systems.
*LCN for F-35s, UNS for CV-22s, Ref/Des for C-17s, WUC for
all other MDSs

A3.6. SSE Rate. Address themes and trends in month’s deviations. Concentrate on the
underlying causes for not meeting the SSE standard. Analyze operations verses maintenance
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 19

deviations. State how aircraft breaks or aborts led to a lack of available MC aircraft, which led to
maintenance cancels, etc. Identify any breakdowns in the scheduling process. Provide an analysis
of the deviations.
A3.6.1. SSE Narrative Example. “Last month, there were 222 chargeable deviations,
including 169 for ops (98 cancels for scheduling conflicts and pilot non-availability, 71 cancels
to reduce the number of frontlines required, and 23 adds for out-and-back conversions and
adding cross-countries.) There were also 28 ground aborts (9 for engines: 2 PMU, 1 amp, 1 no
start, 1 speedbrake, 1 fuel leak, 1 generator, 1 grinding noise, 1 tail pipe crack; 5 for
instruments: 2 altimeters, 1 engine data manager, 1 engine instrumentation display, 1 primary
engine digital display; 4 for airframe: 2 canopy won’t lock, 1 hyd service door latch worn, 1
canopy test light inop) and two maintenance cancels.”
A3.6.2. SSE Table. List the details for all chargeable deviations using the table format below.
Spell out all acronyms the first time they are used. Narratives under the discrepancy and
corrective action columns must be detailed enough to fully explain the deviation. Narratives
such as “ground abort,” “no acft,” or “ops add” are not sufficient to explain the reason for the
deviation. Provide noun of part and NSN for supply non-deliveries. Note: For maintenance
deviations, indicate any repeats or recurs, and identify the original discrepancy. Following the
table, list the total number of deviations by type IAW the example below.

Table A3.3. SSE Table.

ACFT DATE DEV WUC* DISCREPANCY CORRECTIVE
ACTION
0024 1 Mar AD/OPS PFT
Requirement/advance
time-line
0024 12 Mar AD/OPS PFT
requirement/advance
time-line
0024 1 Mar CX/MTX 660000 Blade fold wing stow R2 left white
posted multiple times blade de-ice
in park distributor
0024 15 Mar CX/MTX 632100 Control display unit R2 left PRGB
indicated left Prop- assembly
Rotor Gear Box
(PRGB) chips
0026 15 Mar GA/GAC 321001 Left MLG strut R2 left MLG
leaking shock strut
0026 18 Mar GA/GAC 321001 Left MLG strut R2 left MLG
leaking shock strut
*LCN for F-35s, UNS for CV-22s, Ref/Des for C-17s, WUC for all other MDSs
20 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

A3.7. Total Abort Rate. Address themes and trends in the current month’s aborts. Although the
statement “No Trends Noted” is completely valid, do not use it lightly. Concentrate on the
underlying causes for not meeting the abort standard. Determine if specific systems failed during
the month or if certain aircraft were primary contributors. Evaluate aborts from a preventable or
non-preventable viewpoint. Did more aborts occur on first launches? Are there problems with
preflight procedures? Is there a problem trouble-shooting and turning aircraft? Aborts that are
repeats/recurs require a full history of all discrepancies back to the original write-up. This history
will include discrepancy, corrective action, and number of sorties flown without the same problem
since the last abort.
A3.7.1. Abort Rate Narrative Example. “The fleet missed its abort standard for the third
straight month. During the month, auxiliary power was the leading driver with 17, that’s nearly
double the average. (12-month average = 9) Jet Fuel Starter (JFS) no-starts were the leading
discrepancy accounting for 70 percent of those; including a recur on one aircraft. (A5507,
original, 7 Feb, JFS no start X2/R2 JFS door switch adjuster….Recur, 10 Feb, R2 thermo relief
valve, 12 good sorties since). Auxiliary power, specifically JFS no-starts, have been identified
as a seasonal trend with December through February being the highest months, which accounts
for the spike last quarter. We expect JFS no-starts to decline next quarter as temperatures
increase.”
A3.7.2. Abort Table. List details on all aborts in the format below. Spell out all acronyms
the first time they are used. Narratives under the discrepancy and corrective action columns
must fully explain the abort. Narratives, such as “ground abort” or “engines,” do not provide a
sufficient level of detail. The format for listing details will closely match that of the SSE rate
section.

Table A3.4. Abort Table.

ACFT DATE DEV WUC* DISCREPANCY CORRECTIVE
ACTION
0024 28-Mar AA/MTN 27500 Left inboard swashplate CND
actuator fault

0024 29-Mar AA/MTN 27500 Left inboard swashplate Reseated loose

actuator fault connector

*LCN for F-35s, UNS for CV-22s, Ref/Des for C-17s, WUC for all other MDSs

A3.7.3. Abort Drivers. List the highest three systems and the top three common
discrepancies within each system.
A3.8. CANN Rate. Address reasons for cannibalizations. Identify parts continually canned and
projected get well date(s). Determine why the parts were unavailable. Also, address any trends in
canned items over the last 2-4 quarters.
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 21

A3.8.1. CANN Rate Narrative Example. “The fleet had 12 canns, three of which were for
a radar display monitor. The display monitor is normally a low demand item and is not
authorized stock. Two were ordered on 4 Oct and both were received on 6 Oct.”
A3.8.2. CANN Rate Table. List the top five canned items using the format below. List in
order of most frequently canned parts to least frequently canned items.

Table A3.5. CANN Rate Table.

WUC* Noun NSN Number of CANNS
22BLN Torque Power Unit 1234-00-567-6789 4
*LCN for F-35s, UNS for CV-22s, Ref/Des for C-17s, WUC for all other MDSs

A3.9. Break/Fix Rate. Address common themes in current month’s breaks and fix rate drivers.
Identify common write-ups within high driving systems or aircraft. Look for and comment on
trends beyond the current months data.
A3.9.1. Break Rate Narrative Example. “The break rate standard was missed for the month.
They had 19 breaks in this month; four of those were for Engine Air Particle Separator (EAPS)
blower failures on one aircraft, including two repeats, (A0026, left inboard EAPS blower failed
periodic built in test/bled #3 system and left blower inboard fail/tightened cannon plug, 16
good sorties since) and four of them were for right engines with low power.”
A3.9.2. Fix Rate Narrative Example. “The fix rate standard was missed for the fourth
straight month. They had 19 breaks this month and only ten of those were fixed within 12
hours. Six of those not fixed within 12 hours were fuel leaks that were awaiting sealant cure
time. Two were awaiting aileron actuators that were MICAP. The remaining break not fixed
within 12 hours was a cockpit leak check that had to sit overnight.”

Table A3.6. Break Rate Table/Fix table.

ACFT DATE JCN WUC* DISCREPANCY CORRECTIVE FIX TIME
ACTION

A3788 19-Dec-19 193530072 62AAA FCP VHF W/N R2'D VFH 12.1
XMIT. R/T
A3544 16-Dec-19 193500148 57AAA TOTAL AHRS R2 AHRS 19.9
FAILURE IN COMP
FLT.
A3652 17-Dec-19 193510099 42AAA GEN VOLTS ADJUSTED 32.3
READ 28.6V G.C.U
IN FLT. OVER
VOLTS.
*LCN for F-35s, UNS for CV-22s, Ref/Des for C-17s, WUC for all other MDSs

A3.10. Repeat and Recur Rate. Address common themes in the current month’s repeats and
recurs. Identify common write-ups within high driving systems or aircraft. Look for and comment
on trends beyond the current month’s data.
22 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

A3.10.1. Repeat Rate Narrative Example. “They missed the repeat rate standard for the
month they had 11 repeats this month, 8 for Flight Data Recorder (FDR) failures. Two aircraft
accounted for 7 of the 8. Six of those were corrected by replacing a wiring harness. Both
aircraft have now flown at least 10 good sorties.”
A3.10.2. Recur Rate Narrative Example. Address the same way as repeats.

Table A3.7. Repeat/Recur Rate Narrative Table.

ACF DAT JCN WUC Re Re DISCREPANC CORRECTIV Sortie
T E p# c# Y E ACTION s
Since

A3678 04- 19338012 63B0 1 UNABLE TO ADJUSTED 7

Dec- 1 0 TRANSMIT AND
19 ON UHF RESEATED
"ATC1 UHF
TUNING SIDETONE
FAULT MSG RELAY,
ON RMU
2A364 11- 19345011 51BB 1 FDR FAIL ON RESET FDR 20
6 Dec- 8 0 ENG IAW
19 SHUTDOWN. IT-6ABD-2-
NO 31-30-00 CKS
SUSPECTED GOOD
OVER G
*LCN for F-35s, UNS for CV-22s, Ref/Des for C-17s, WUC for all other MDSs
AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 23

Attachment 4
SENIOR LEADER COMMENTS TEMPLATE

Figure A4.1. Senior Leader Comments Template.

24 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

Attachment 5
FORMULAS

Figure A5.1. Aircraft Availability (AA) (Actual).

Figure A5.2. Aircraft Availability Target (AAT).

Figure A5.3. Air Abort (A/A) Rate.

Figure A5.4. Attrition Rates.

AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 25

Figure A5.5. Average Fleet Time.

Figure A5.6. Average Possessed Aircraft.

Figure A5.7. Awaiting Maintenance Rate.

Figure A5.8. Awaiting Parts Rate.

Figure A5.9. Break Rate.

Figure A5.10. CANN Rate.

Figure A5.11. Calculating DD Rates.

26 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

Figure A5.12. Cancellation Rates.

Figure A5.13. DIT Error Rate.

Figure A5.14. DIT Corrected Error Rate.

Figure A5.15. Fix Rate.

Figure A5.16. Fully Mission Capable (FMC) Rate.

Figure A5.17. Functional Check Flight (FCF) Release Rate.

AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 27

Figure A5.18. Ground Abort (G/A) Rate.

Figure A5.19. Maintenance Man-hour per Flying Hour.

Figure A5.20. Mission Capable (MC) Rate.

Figure A5.21. Not Mission Capable Both Maintenance and Supply (NMCB) Rate.

Figure A5.22. Not Mission Capable Maintenance (NMCM) Rate.

Figure A5.23. Not Mission Capable Supply (NMCS) Rate.

Figure A5.24. Partially Mission Capable Both Maintenance and Supply (PMCB) Rate.
28 AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024

Figure A5.25. Partially Mission Capable Maintenance (PMCM) Rate.

Figure A5.26. Partially Mission Capable Supply (PMCS) Rate.

Figure A5.27. Percent MC Scheduled.

Figure A5.28. Recur Discrepancy Rate.

Figure A5.29. Repeat Discrepancy Rate.

Figure A5.30. Sortie Scheduling Effectiveness (SSE) Rate.

AETCI21-105 1 OCTOBER 2024 29

Figure A5.31. Spare Factor (Actual).

Figure A5.32. Total Abort Rate.

Figure A5.33. Total Not Mission Capable Maintenance (TNMCM) Rate.

Figure A5.34. Total Not Mission Capable Supply (TNMCS) Rate.

Figure A5.35. UTE Rate.