In a recently released Inspector General report, the US DoD has identified shortfalls in training for the Patriot air defence systems transferred to the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF).

Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the US has committed over $44 billion in security assistance to the country’s government... Continues below

Newsletter Sponsor:

Above: Ukrainian troops were instructed on operating and maintaining Patriot systems at Fort Sill using adapted US Army courses, but life-cycle sustainment aspects were not covered. (Photo: US Army)

As part of that assistance, Washington committed to provide air defence capabilities that allow the UAF to detect and intercept aircraft, projectiles and UAS. As the Inspector General report emphasises, Patriot systems ‘are a significant capability that the United States provided to defend against air and missile threats to Ukrainian forces, cities, and critical infrastructure’.

Patriot systems were first transferred to the UAF in April 2023, with US Army officials deciding to source these from training installations rather than operational units to reduce impacts on readiness.

The DoD report, with some elements redacted due to operational security issues, explored a range of sustainment strategies that were implemented as part of the transfer. One of the key issues concerned the scope of training provided with the systems.

MVRsimulation’s VRSG: bringing military simulation training to life.

The report describes basic operation and maintenance training courses for the UAF on Patriot systems at Fort Sill, Oklahoma (the US Army Fires Center of Excellence) and in Poland, explaining: ‘[T]he training was adapted from existing Patriot air defence system training provided to US forces. For example, the number of training weeks was reduced by splitting the topics into separate, concurrent courses to deliver the same amount of training in a shorter time.’

Significantly, it adds that the training ‘did not include any life-cycle sustainment tasks’.

The report asserts that the components of a Patriot system ‘require complex, frequent, and regular sustainment and replenishment to maintain their operational capabilities, in addition to any repairs due to use or battle damage’.

In a key finding, it notes: ‘Without formalised training, infrastructure, technicians, materiel, logistics, and policy, sustaining the operational capability of these systems may present significant challenges for a partner nation, especially in austere or combat environments.’

Further comparing Ukraine’s package to training and support efforts provided to the US Army’s Patriot programme, the report highlights challenges resulting from the urgent transfer of high technology equipment.

Officials had used existing processes to meet urgent demand: ‘Rather than establish a sustainment strategy that included the training, maintenance, supply, and facility components similar to the US Army’s LCSP [Life Cycle Sustainment Plan] for the Patriot… systems, officials from [Army Materiel Command], [Army Aviation and Missile Command], and the Security Assistance Group–Ukraine (SAG-U) stated that DoD officials provided additional sustainment support for the Patriot air defence systems on an “as requested” basis.’

The Inspector General’s recommendations include the development and implementation of a complete sustainment strategy for the Patriot air defence systems transferred to the UAF. Training personnel to operate a complex weapon system will be of little long-term use if their army is unable to sustain it.

Other articles in this newsletter:

Studying the opposition – how US Army trainers are learning from Russian tactics

Cold front – how Norway is sustaining vital combat training capabilities

Don't want to miss out on future Decisive Edge content? Make sure you are signed up to our email newsletters.