Sustained Materiel Readiness David Pauling, ADUSD (MR&MP) APEX 21 THE WARFIGHTER NEEDS…………...

Sustained Materiel Readiness

David Pauling, ADUSD (MR&MP)

APEX 21

THE WARFIGHTER NEEDS…………AVAILABLE, TECHNICALLY SUPERIOR WEAPON SYSTEMS THAT ENABLE –

SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THE MISSIONRETURN HOME SAFELY

Aligning Strategies & Goals

The President’s Management Agenda (PMA)

SECDEF - Transformation and Joint WarfightingDoD Transformational Planning GuidanceFY 2005 Top 10 PrioritiesBalanced Score Card / Risk Management

Framework

1. Acquisition Excellence with Integrity 2. Logistics: Integrated and Efficient 3. Systems Integration & Engineering for

Mission Success 4. Technology Dominance5. Resources Rationalized 6. Industrial Base Strengthened7. Motivated, Agile Workforce

AT&L Seven Goals Support PMA and SECDEF

“…dedicated to ensuring that the resources entrusted to the federal government are well managed and wisely used. We owe that to the American people.”

USD (AT&L) Seven GoalsAcquisition Excellence with

Integrity Logistics: Integrated and Efficient Systems Integration &

Engineering for Mission Success Technology DominanceResources Rationalized Industrial Base StrengthenedMotivated, Agile Workforce

Leadership and Goal Alignment

SECDEF Top 10 Priorities

1. Successfully Pursue the Global War on Terrorism

2. Strengthen Combined/Joint Warfighting Capabilities

3. Transform the Joint Force

4. Optimize Intelligence Capabilities

5. Counter Proliferation of WMD

6. Improve Force Manning

7. New Concepts of Global Engagement

8. Homeland Security

9. Streamline DoD Processes

10. Reorganize DoD and USG to Deal with Pre-War Opportunities and Post-War Responsibilities

Goa

l Alig

nmen

t

Leadership Alignment

Our Goals Will Transform Defense Acquisition, Technology & Logistics

End-to-End

AT&L Goal 6 – Industrial Base Sustainment

AT&L Goal 7 – Motivated, Agile Workforce

AT&L Goal 5 – Resources Rationalized

AT&L Goal 4 – Technology Dominance

Goal 4 – Technology Dominance

AT&L Goal 3 – Systems Engineering Philosophy Restored

AT&L Goal 2 Logistics: Integrated and Efficient

AT&L Goal 1 – Acquisition Excellence with Integrity

AT&L Goal 6 – Industrial Base Sustainment

AT&L Goal 7 – Motivated, Agile Workforce

AT&L Goal 5 – Resources Rationalized

AT&L Goal 4 – Technology Dominance

Goal 4 – Technology Dominance

AT&L Goal 3 – Systems Integration & Engineering for Mission Success

AT&L Goal 2 Logistics -- Integrated and Efficient

AT&L Goal 1 – Acquisition Excellence with Integrity

AT&L Goal 1:Acquisition Excellence with Integrity

Bring Joint Capabilities Perspective to Acquisition- Conduct Senior Leadership Reviews for each

Functional Capability Area (FCA) - Map all programs with FCAs

- Re-structure PDM to Enforce Results of Senior Leadership Reviews in the Resource Process

- Transition from “System Focused” to

Capabilities-Based DAES Reviews

Increase Accuracy and Credibility of Cost Estimates Shorten Acquisition Cycle Time

- Increase use of evolutionary acquisition including spiral development

- Maximize use of mature and commercial technology

- Expand use of technology demonstrations (ACTD/ATD) - enter acquisition process “closer to production”.

BattlespaceAwareness

Command& Control

Focused Logistics

ForceApplication

Force Protection

Five Functional CapabilityAreas (FCA)

Supporting ObjectivesSupporting Objectives

AT&L Goal 2:Logistics: Integrated and Efficient

Enterprise Integration

Expand End-to-End Policies

Reliable Delivery

Weapon System Support

Sustain Weapon System Material Readiness

Logistics: Integrated and

Efficient


AT&L Goal 3:Systems Integration & Engineering for Mission Success

Lead Development of Systems Views of Integrated Architectures

Lead Development of Integrated Plans and / or Roadmaps Establish a Broader Mission Context for DAB Reviews Foster Interoperability, Jointness, and Coalition Capabilities Improve the Systems Engineering Environment Provide Effective Systems Engineering Policies, Practices,

Procedures, Methods, and Tools Provide for a Professional Systems Engineering Workforce Improve Balance of Cost, Schedule, Performance, and Risk

in Programs Reduce the Life Cycle Cost of Defense Systems Assess System Technical Maturity / Readiness for Ops

Testing based on Developmental Test Results


AT&L Goal 4:Technology Dominance

Increase technical personnel in DoD Improve intelligence analysis & systems Stimulate and focus research and engineering Accelerate acquisition cycle and enable joint acquisition Enable Network Centric Warfare through innovative

technologies Leverage technologies to enable rapid defeat of adversaries


AT&L Goal 5:Resources Rationalized

Resource joint warfighting capabilities (Link resources to capabilities-based approach to enhance Joint warfighting capability)

Rationalize infrastructure to support joint warfighting capabilities (BRAC, RRPI, Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy)

Achieve domain owner objectives (Fundamental business process change and streamlining)

Rationalize contracting (Business process streamlining)Enhance outsourcing / competitive sourcing (Revised

OMB A-76)


AT&L Goal 6: Industrial Base Strengthened

Develop & employ a logical, capabilities-based approach to identify and evaluate industrial base sufficiency

Establish organizational cross-feed mechanisms for major industrial base assessments and associated recommendations

Develop and implement policies that encourage smart industrial base management on the part of program managers

Help emerging defense suppliers navigate and bring value and innovation to DoD


http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/16456.html

AT&L Workforce ManagementTeam Effort!

AT&L Goal 7:Motivated, Agile Workforce

Flexible Personnel SystemStreamlining DAWIA initiative Implement a Central Referral

SystemMarketing and targeted

recruitingRapid Deployment TrainingAT&L Performance Learning

Model (PLM) - an overarching learning strategy

Flexible Personnel SystemStreamlining DAWIA initiative Implement a Central Referral

SystemMarketing and targeted

recruitingRapid Deployment TrainingAT&L Performance Learning

Model (PLM) - an overarching learning strategy

AT&L Workforce Transformation


300 Ships

100,000+ GroundCombat/Tactical Vehicles 900 Strategic Missiles

15,000 Aircraft/Helicopters

+ 250K+ Wheeled Vehicles+ Comm/Electronics Equipment+ Support Equipment+ ...

Maintained by:• 681,000 DoD personnel• Private sector companies

Maintenance cost:~$59B per year

National Defense PP&E is valued at $600 Billion

Systems Supported

Source: LMI

DoD Field- and Depot-Level Maintainers Distribution by Service (in 000s)

Totals

Field-Level Maintainers 631.1 ~93%

Depot Maintainers 44.1 ~7%

Army Field Maintainers

220.8 (33%)

Army Depot

Maintainers

7.2 (1%)

Air Force Field Maintainers

186.8 (28%)

Air Force Depot

Maintainers

15.1 (2%)

Navy Field Maintainers

173.6 (26%)

Navy Depot

Maintainers

20.9 (3%)

Marine Corps Field Maintainers

49.9 (7%)

Marine Corps Depot

Maintainers

0.9 (<1%)

Major Intermediate-Level Activities

• Army• 21 Aviation Intermediate Maintenance (AVIM) companies

• 31 Direct Support/General Support (DS/GS) companies

• Navy• 15 shore-based Aircraft Intermediate Maintenance Detachments (AIMDs)

• 12 carrier-based AIMDs

• 6 Shore Intermediate Maintenance Activities (SIMAs)

• 2 Trident Refit Facilities (TRFs)

• Air Force• 65 aviation maintenance groups

• Marine Corps• 12 Marine Aviation Logistics Squadrons (MALS)

• 11 Amphibious assault ship-based AIMDs

• 3 Force Service Support Groups

14

Organic – Commercial Distribution

of DoD Depot Maintenance

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Army NavyAir Force

FY

03 $

(in

bil

lio

ns)

USMC

85% Organic

52%

56%

54%

48%

44%

46%

DoD-wide: 54% Organic; 46% Commercial

Commercial

Organic

Source: USD(AT&L) report Distribution of DoD Depot Maintenance Workloads: Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003, February 2004

24

• Field maintenance key to both DoD and commercial maintenance structures

• Maintenance structure drivers include . . .

– DoD deployable maintenance capabilities

– Equipment differences (e.g., age, complexity, role)

– Available commercial infrastructure

– Life-cycle status (i.e., position in life cycle)

– Business support concept (e.g., run to optimum age and dispose vs. continuous rebuild)

Depot (Centralized) vs.

Field Level Percentage of Personnel

Note: Commercial percentages are estimated based on available data

Field MaintenanceDepot Maintenance

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Legacy airline

Railway

Parcel trucking

Low cost air carrier

DoD maintenance

Trucking maintenance

125K

8.7K

15K

13K

681K

40K

Approximate Total Number of Maintainers

DoD/Commercial Sustainment Structure Comparison


ISSUE:

• Concentrate on achieving/sustaining SPG/CPG readiness

• Balance Safety, Reliability, Maintenance and supply distribution activities to achieve materiel readiness at best cost.

• Optimize “TIME-ON-WING” and “TURN AROUND TIME”

• Promote End-to-End (E2E) Materiel Readiness Value Chain Perspective across DoD

• Sustain Optimize Materiel Condition Reliability

• Sustain Optimize support cost, cycle time


WAY AHEAD:• Translate SPG/CPG capabilities to Weapon System/Materiel Requirements

• Develop cause and effect predictive models

• Foster and promote continuous process improvements

– Capability (Co)• Technical superiority technology insertion

– Dependability (Do)• Safety/Reliability/Condition Based Maintenance +

– Availability (Ao)• Cycle process discipline

– Lean, Six Sigma, Theory of Constraint, Etc.

– Institute Integrated Budgets (engineering, logistics, industrial)

• Update/execute Policy (E2E)

• Improve System Life Cycle Management Prediction Capabilities

•Expertise, Tools and T&E Facilities

•Cause and effect predictive modeling

• Optimize Materiel Safety/Reliability

•Sustaining CBM+/RCM

•Preventive Maintenance Addresses Failure Characteristics

•Optimize Repair/build specs

• Optimize Materiel Cycle Time

•Process Improvement (Lean, 6Sigma, Theory of Constraints)

•Integrated Depot and Intermediate Level Best Practices and Processes

•Parts forecasting

• Integrate Materiel Readiness Budgets

•Balanced Engineering, Logistics, Industrial Accounts

VISION - Focus AreasMateriel Readiness E2E

Planning and Process(es) Improvement

INTEGRATED REPAIR/BUILDCYCLE TIME PLAN

R&D

•S&T

•DesignSAFETY STANDARDS Technical PLAN

MATERIELREADINESS

GOALSACHIEVED?

Building the Optimum MaterielReadiness Sustainment Plan/Budget

MAINT/RCM STRATEGY

COMMON METRICS

PIPELINE

SPARES FORECASTING& PROCUREMENT PLAN

PROCUREMENT

O&M

• In Svc Eng/Log

DEPOT•

•DLRWCF

INTEGRATEDBUDGET

Required Amount of RFI Materiel

(installed + uninstalled)

READINESSBASED

MATERIELREQUIREMENTS

MODEL

SPG/CPG

INTEGRATEDMANAGEMENT PLAN

PLANNINGFACTORS

START

“WAR PLAN”

MATERIEL TRANSPORTATIONDISTRIBUTION PLAN

EQUIPMENT RELIABILITY

mission-based operationalreadiness requirement

Required Number ofRFI Weapons

mission-based materielreadiness requirement

YES

NO

Seek toreduce

sustainmentcosts

Seek to increasesustainment performance

Strategic Planning Guidance/Contingency Planning Guidance

Materiel Availability Requirement

Materiel Readiness Policy

Acc

omp

lish

Mat

erie

l Acq

uis

itio

n

Acc

omp

lish

Mat

erie

l Dis

trib

uti

on

Acc

omp

lish

Su

pp

ly S

up

por

t

Acc

omp

lish

Mat

erie

l Mai

nte

nan

ce

Acc

omp

lish

In

-Ser

vice

En

gin

eeri

ng

Materiel Readiness Metrics and Performance Standards

Sustainment Functions Integrated to Produce Materiel Readiness

SustainedMateriel Readiness Materiel

ReadinessData

Collection

DataAnalysis:

Does ValueChain Performance

MeetPlan?

Y

N

ADUSD (MR&MP)

(Process Integrator)

UndertakeCoordinated

ProcessImprovements

Responsibilities asADUSD (Materiel Readiness)

“Should Be”(Plan)

“As Is”(Actual)

AcquisitionPolicy & Metrics

DistributionPolicy & Metrics

ISEPolicy & Metrics

MaintenancePolicy & Metrics

SupplyPolicy & Metrics

SUMMARY

OSD and DoD Components• Identify Strategic Materiel Readiness Requirements• Employ useful Materiel Readiness Standards/Measurement

Tools/Processes• Resource to achieve/sustain Materiel Readiness most

efficiently/effectively

Five Pillars for Sustaining Materiel Readiness• Policy (E2E)• Measuring materiel readiness• Optimizing materiel reliability• Optimizing materiel turnaround time/cycle time• Balancing resources

UID/SIMenables

this!

Responsibility

Warfighter Combat Capability

Ensure a ready and controlled source capable of providing combat ready

weapon systems anytime and anywhere efficiently and effectively.

Program Manager

Private SectorGovernment Team (Engr,

Log, Ind)

Partnering

Materiel Readiness Modeling

Why?:• Prescribe policies/procedures and monitor/review/assess materiel readiness E2E

Value Chain operations relative to the ability of the Department’s major weapon systems to meet mission requirements.

How?:• Develop DoD-wide predictive modeling/analyses capability to determine cause and

effect relationship to materiel readiness-based outcomes, e.g.,:• Reliability improvement initiatives

• Cycle Time Process improvements for Supply/Maintenance/Transportation/Distribution

• Alternative resource strategies (short-term/long-term)

• Determining life-cycle costs from an integrated budget perspective when materiel readiness issues are addressed

Status: • Assessing current DoD and commercial models

• Submitted cross-cutting proposal – enhance best of breed model• Working with Services to convert status models to predictive models

Materiel Readiness Integrated Management (E2E)

Safety/Readiness

Integrated Budget

LogisticsRCMPRL

Inventory

TechnicalS&TCIPWeb

IndustrialDepotI LevelPFM

Integrated Approach Achieves Readiness Goals at Reduced Cost

Industrial Repair

Hardw

are Condition

FeedbackH

ardw

are

Con

ditio

n

Feed

back

Repair Execution• D/I/O Level Repair • Incorporate Config Changes• Incorporate Qualified Repairs• Repair to Build Spec/Processes

SustainingEngineering

Technical Integrity

• Analysis/ Test /Fix

• Predict/Prevent Fleet Technical Problems

• Solve Fleet Revealed Technical Problems

Config

Change/

Qualified R

epair

Config Change/Tech Data LOGISTICS

Fleet Support• Engineering

Investigations

• Reliability Centered Maintenance

• Maintenance plan / processes

• Supply/Transportation

Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses

Safety/Readiness

Integrated Budget

LogisticsRCMPRL

Inventory

TechnicalS&TCIPWeb



Industrial Repair

Hardw

are Condition

FeedbackH

ardw

are

Con

ditio

n

Feed

back


Hardw

are Condition

FeedbackH

ardw

are

Con

ditio

n

Feed

back



Technical Integrity




Config

Change/

Qualified R

epair

Config Change/Tech Data

Technical Integrity




Config

Change/

Qualified R

epair



Investigations




Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses


Investigations




Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses

Safety/Readiness

Integrated Budget

LogisticsRCMPRL

Inventory

TechnicalS&TCIPWeb



Industrial Repair

Hardw

are Condition

FeedbackH

ardw

are

Con

ditio

n

Feed

back


Hardw

are Condition

FeedbackH

ardw

are

Con

ditio

n

Feed

back



Technical Integrity




Config

Change/

Qualified R

epair


Technical Integrity




Config

Change/

Qualified R

epair



Investigations




Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses


Investigations




Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses

Safety/Readiness

Integrated Budget

LogisticsRCMPRL

Inventory

TechnicalS&TCIPWeb



Industrial Repair

Hardw

are Condition

FeedbackH

ardw

are

Con

ditio

n

Feed

back


Hardw

are Condition

FeedbackH

ardw

are

Con

ditio

n

Feed

back



Technical Integrity




Config

Change/

Qualified R

epair


Technical Integrity




Config

Change/

Qualified R

epair



Investigations




Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses


Investigations




Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses


Investigations




Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses


Investigations




Fleet Issue

Build

Spe

c / P

roce

sses

Condition-Based Maintenance Plus

Why?:• To improve reliability centered maintenance effectiveness and efficiency

through application of technology initiatives and process improvements• Sustain inherent performance, safety, reliability of materiel

How?:– Utilize interactive electronic technical manuals, portable maintenance aids

and other enabling tools and technologies– Implement diagnostics, sensors and prognostic algorithms and techniques– Employ reliability-centered maintenance concepts and practices– Enable statistical and engineering analysis processes– Develop condition-driven maintenance plans– Integrate maintenance and logistics processes and reporting systems

Status:• Completed survey of Service CBM+ Select Programs• Establishing the DoD CBM+ baseline• CBM+ website on-line and regularly updated• OSD/Service CBM+ Advisory Group meets weekly• Partnerships?

No Requirement to Build for Time on Wing

Build to Achieve Inherent Reliability

OCMOCMRepair Not Only What Is Broken but What Will Likely Fail Before a Defined Time on Wing

Repair Only What Is Broken

Maintenance IsUnplanned

Focus is Planned Maintenance Facilitates Resource Requirements Predications

Maintenance Driven byEquipment Conditioneror Lowest $/Shop Visit

Maintenance Based on LCC & Value

(What's Easiest Today)(What's Easiest Today) (What's Best for the Long Term)(What's Best for the Long Term)

OCM vs RCMOn-condition Maintenance vs

Reliability-centered Maintenance

RCMRCM

Fitz (LJM)/prop syst readiness.ppt/082800/11

New2nd

3rd4th

5th6th

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

US Army

Commercial

US Coast Guard

Full RCMTime on Wing

Growth

Full RCMTime on Wing

Growth

Partial RCMTime on WingDeteriorates

Partial RCMTime on WingDeteriorates

Current PracticesTime on WingDeteriorates

Current PracticesTime on WingDeteriorates

Engine Life Recovered After Repair

% N

ew

En

gin

e L

ife R

eco

vere

d

Reliability Centered Maintenance vs. Current On-Condition Practices

3X+ improvement in Time on Wing (TOW) with Comprehensive Reliability Centered Maintenance vs. Current On-Condition Practices

3X+ improvement in Time on Wing (TOW) with Comprehensive Reliability Centered Maintenance vs. Current On-Condition Practices

Engine Life RecoveredAfter Repair

RCM =ReliabilityCenteredMaintenance

Continuous Process Improvement

Why?:• Maximize weapon system readiness while minimizing materiel flows

and in-process inventories – Goal – Optimize reliability and cycle time while striking a reasonable

balance with costs across the total life cycle value chain How?:

• Employ:• Lean for eliminating all types of waste • Six Sigma (6σ ) for minimizing process variation • Theory of Constraints (TOC) for alleviating process “bottlenecks• CBM+ (Condition Based Maintenance Plus)

Status:• DOD CPI Transformation Review initiated• DOD CPI Policy in coordination• OSD-led CPI Working Group (O-6 level) meets weekly, updates OSD-led

GO/SES Group monthly• Partnerships?

83

40

1411 10

5

AIMD Lemoore Power Plants Shop Engine Repair Cycle Time

Apr-04Oct-02 Apr-03 Oct-03Oct-01 Apr-02

Focus on Continuous Improvement

(Maintenance Cycle Time)

CCAD Engine Turn Around Time Run Chart

Reduction in Mean & Variation Continue In 2004!Reduction in Mean & Variation Continue In 2004!

“Leaning” the Weapon Support Value Chain

Establish DoD-wideframework

Activities with highnear-term benefit

Comprehensive Effortacross WeaponsSystems

• Sharing lessons learned • Developing performance

measures• Standardizing education,

training and certification programs

• Aviation programs• Maintenance depots (e.g., ALCs)• Intermediate maintenance

activities (AIMDs/SIMAs)

• Continuous Process Improvement Lead Programs

• Annual progress assessments

Special Continuous ProcessImprovement (CPI) Projects

(E2E Materiel Readiness ValueChain Assessment)Air Force:

• F-15 aircraft

Army: • High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle• UH-60 Black Hawk Helicopter

Marine Corps:• Blount Island Command's tactical wheeled

vehicle intermediate maintenance line: HMMWV (A2 series) MK 48 Logistics Vehicle System (LVS) Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR)

Navy:• F/A-18 aircraft• SSN-688 Class submarines

Improving Materiel ReadinessReliability, Cycle-Time, Cost

Drive reliabilityup to

optimum level

Drivesustainmentcycle timedown to

optimum level

(O&S only)Higher $Lower $

more

less

reliability

Sustainment cycle-time

Life-cycle cost(acquisition + O&S)

Cost of Readiness

Higher $

Higher $

R&D/ACQ Only

R&D/ACQ/O&SLowest $

Lower $

Higher $

Engine Integrated Recovery Approach

300 Engines Repaired per year

600 Eng req’d to meet CNO goals

400 hour MTBR

$700/Flight Hour

$165K/Repair

108 Engines Repaired per year

390 Eng req’d to meet CNO goals

1000 hour MTBR

$380/Flight Hour

$250K/Repair

T58TEAM

Industrial•Industrial Process•Depot/I-Level (IA5A, FHP)•Facilities/Capital Equipment (IA5A)•Parts Forecasting (NWCF)•Depot/I-Level Production (IA5A, FHP)

Technical

•Life Management•Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) •Design Changes •Engineering Investigations•Failure Modes/Effects

Logistics•Publications•Parts Forecasting•Inventory Tracking•Build Specs•Configuration Tracking

Integrated Approach is HARMONY!

Current Process is out of TUNE

Integrated Approach isHarmony.

COMMERICALSPEC

VH SPEC

Optimized Repair Spec

• Update/execute Policy (E2E)

• Improve System Life Cycle Management Prediction Capabilities

•Expertise, Tools and T&E Facilities

•Cause and effect predictive modeling

• Optimize Materiel Reliability

•Implement CBM+/RCM

•Preventive Maintenance Addresses Failure Characteristics

•Optimize Repair/build specs

• Optimize Materiel Cycle Time

•Employ CPI (Lean, 6Sigma, Theory of Constraints)

•Integrate Depot and Intermediate Level Best Practices and Processes

•Parts forecasting

• Integrate Materiel Readiness Budgets

•Balance Engineering, Logistics, Industrial Accounts

VISION - Focus AreasMateriel Readiness E2E Planning and Process(es)

Improvement

Sustained Materiel Readiness David Pauling, ADUSD (MR&MP) APEX 21 THE WARFIGHTER NEEDS…………...

Documents

Transcript of Sustained Materiel Readiness David Pauling, ADUSD (MR&MP) APEX 21 THE WARFIGHTER NEEDS…………...