Er winter08 by Logistics Officer Association

LOGISTICS OFFICER ASSOCIATION Post Office Box 2264 Arlington, VA 22202

Non-Profit Organization U.S. Postage

PAID

Permit No. 768 Nashville, Tennessee

The Exceptional Release

L O G I S T I C S O F F I C E R A S S O C I AT I O N Enhancing the military logistics profession since 1982

EXECUTIVE BOARD President Col Doug Cato president@loanational.org Vice President Col Robert Hamm vicepres@loanational.org Treasurer Lt Col Terry Dyess treasurer@loanational.org Information Officer Ms. Cathy Snyder InfoOfficer@loanational.org Membership Development Maj Jeff Martin membership@loanational.org

W I N T E R 2008 Features LOA Conference 2008… An AF Materiel Enterprise success! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 From The E-Ring, By Major General Robert McMahon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 The Loggies Are Always There . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Allocating Aircraft, Submitted by Lt Col Raymond E. Briggs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 Learning from Every Jet, Submitted by Mr. Bill Orndorff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 Sustaining the B-One, Submitted by Mr. Mark Quinlan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 High Velocity Maintenance, Subm.by Warner Robins Air Logistics Center HVM Team . .42 463rd ERRC AFSO21 Journey, Submitted by TSgt Brent Brandon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 The C-17 Program, Submitted by Major Craig Juneau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Aircraft Availability, Submitted by Capt Bill Ott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 DR’s: A Colossal Waste of Time? Submitted by Mrs. Barbara Westgate and Lt Col Keith Bearden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56

Chapter Support Lt Col Jeff King chaptersupport@loanational.org

eLog21, Submitted by Mr Robert Eardley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58

Executive Senior Advisor Vacant

Targeting Aircraft Availability, Subm. by Mr. Mike Howenstine & Mr. Thomas J. Girz . . . .70

Focus on a Chapter Leader: An interview with Captain Lupe Gutierrez . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 Weapon System Health Metrics, Submitted by Lt Col George LaVezzi . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 C-17 Aircraft Availability Initiatives, Submitted by Capt Thomas Hollender . . . . . . . . . . . .74

Webmaster/Website Maj JD DuVall webmaster@loanational.org www.loanational.org

THE EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE Editor Col Dennis Daley editor@loanational.org Assistant Editor Col (ret) Mary H. Parker assteditor@loanational.org LOA Executive Director ER Managing Editor/Publisher Marta Hannon marta@loanational.org ER Worldwide Staff Col Cheryl Allen, 560 ACSG/CC Lt Col Eugene K. Carter, 15 AMXS/CC Maj Richard L. Fletcher, 305 AMXS/CC Maj Paul L. Pethel, 100 MXS/CC Graphic Design MMagination LLC – Atlanta, GA www.mmagination.com LOA National PO Box 2264 – Arlington, VA 22202 Issue No. 110 - Winter 2008

Aircraft Inspection Regionalization… Just Do It! Submitted by Col Dennis Daley . . . . . .78 Mission Assurance: A Key Part of Space Vehicle Launch Mission Success, Submitted by Maj Gen Ellen M. Pawlikowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82 The Wheels Beneath the Wings, Submitted by Lt Col Eric Turnbull and Ms. Bonnie M. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88 DLA Comes on Strong with Demand Planning, Submitted by Mr. Will Daniel . . . . . . . . .90 What is DLA’s Aviation Supply Chain Doing to Help the Customer?, Submitted by Capt Rob Williams and Capt Jeremy Pankoski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94 The Top Ten Things to Know about Air Force Space Logistics, Submitted by Col Lou Johnson, Lt Col Bruno Mediate, Maj Mike McDonald . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100 Performance-Based Logistics Basics: PBL 101, Submitted by Mr. Jamie Marsh . . . . . .106 The Impact of Scheduling Initiatives on Fleet Health & Flying Effectiveness, Submitted by Major Nathan B. Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110

In Every Issue President’s LOG(istics) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Editor’s Debrief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 AFSO21 Crosstalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97 CGO Corner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114 Chapter Crosstalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116 Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120

President’s LOG(istics) LOA Members, I would like to thank the past National Board volunteers (President: Col Evan Miller, Vice President: Lt Col Pat Kumashiro, Treasurer: Lt Col Steve Petters, and Info Officer: Maj Stephanie Halcrow) for their dedication to LOA and the excellent leadership they provided to this ever growing organization, supporting logisticians world-wide, with over 70 chapters. Each board continues to build on the successes of past boards and our charter members. It’s these dedicated professionals that make LOA possible.

ER: PRESIDENT’S LOG(ISTICS)

Col Doug Cato

I’d like to thank one of those chapters for all their hard work and effort on the 2008 conference. We had another huge and successful National Conference in Columbus, Ohio with the help of the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Kitty Hawk Chapter. We had 1287 attendees at this year’s conference and 134 vendors in our exhibit areas. I would like to thank all those exhibitors and our sponsors for making the LOA conferences possible and look forward to seeing them again in 2009. Without their continued support, we would not be able to put on the quality of conference each of us enjoys. I also want to thank the many conference volunteers from across LOA for all their support and dedication. It’s our many tireless volunteers that help us keep our conference costs the lowest in the industry. Last, but surely not least, I would like to thank Marta for her continued work with LOA as we continue to expand our conference capabilities. We are going to continue to need our member support as we prepare for future conferences. As many of you know, the 2009 conference in Las Vegas, Nevada will be the first conference that we have not had a host chapter. The past National Boards have charted this path of a non-host conference in order to relieve the heavy burden we place on a host chapter. The preparation leading up to and executing a conference, as you might guess, expends multiple man-years. By making the conference more a “turn-key” operation, we slightly increase our costs, but remove the chapter burden and open up a wide variety of cities that can now host a LOA National Conference and don’t restrict ourselves to Air Force Base locations. We will be relying on our volunteers for their continued support of our outstanding conferences. We’ll be looking for volunteers to be General Officer and Senior Executive Service escorts, man the Command Post, and facilitate the golf tournament. If you would like to volunteer to help at the 2009 conference, please contact our new Conference Chairman, Lt Col John Kubinec via his email: conference@loanational.org. His team will be pulling together what will likely be our biggest conference yet. The conference theme for 2009 will be Connecting with (or “in”) the Joint Logistics Environment. We are looking at inviting a host of joint speakers to discuss operating in the joint environment and discuss integrating into the joint fight. As you also know, the new LOA National Board took over as the conference ended in Columbus (Vice President: Col Bob Hamm, Treasurer: Lt Col Terry Dyess, and Info Officer: Cathy Snyder). The team is excited about continuing to take LOA to new heights and spent four days over the Veterans Day weekend working on laying the foundation for the 2009 conference and updating the LOA National vision and mission. The new board is not shying away from taking on the tough challenges to further our member professional development. Our vision is “Professionals Shaping the Logistics Environment” and our mission is to “Develop Logistics Professionals and Foster Logistics Innovation to Enhance the Joint Fight”. Along with these updated vision and mission statements, we have charted four primary goals and objectives to accomplish each of those goals over the next two years. The first goal is to Develop Premier Logistics Professionals. During the 2008 conference, we received feedback the members would like to see interactive breakout sessions, and we plan to have at least one of those during the 2009 conference. We are emphasizing the scholarship program by adding some additional criteria and raising each scholarship to $2,500. Starting in 2009, we plan to offer graduates of Aircraft Maintenance and Munitions Officer Course and the Logistics Readiness Officer Basic Course one-year free memberships to expose them to LOA at the beginning of their careers. We will also be offering the distinguished gradate from each of those classes a lifetime LOA membership.

COVER PHOTO: SrA Anthony Barker, 376th Expeditionary Aircraft Maintenance Squadron crew chief, regulates the fuel pressure on a KC- 135 Stratotanker, at Manas Air Base, Kyrgyz Republic. The Stratotanker provides the core aerial refueling capability for the Air Force. (USAF photo by A1C Ruth Holcomb)

WINTER 2008

Our second goal is to Enhance Logistics Operations in the Joint Fight. We are tackling this one head on by making “joint” the 2009 conference theme. In the Exceptional Release you’ll see an effort to add articles on joint/combined operations. Our final objective under this goal is to double our joint and combined membership. The third goal is to Provide a Forum for and Incentivize the Exchange of ideas Among Logisticians. The National Board will be sponsoring an annual writing competition designed to solve a specific logistics challenge. The winning paper of this challenge will receive $1,000 and present their paper on the national conference main stage. In addition to this competition, we will be incentivizing other scholarly papers through a $250 award for the best paper presented in each AMMOS and ALROC class, starting in 2009. Finally in this area, you will see a LOA web presence where members can publish their innovative work and seek solutions to problems. Our final goal is to Continuously Improve Business Operations for LOA National. Our biggest goal in this area is to increase LOA National membership across the board by having 85% of all eligible AFSCs becoming LOA National members within the next 5years and we would like to double our civilian logistician membership over the same timeframe. In an effort to improve communication, we will be bringing back the electronic newsletter on a quarterly basis to be published via email between the Exceptional Release. There are several other initiatives we want to undertake that will improve overall LOA National business operations. You can see from our four primary goals and subsequent objectives, the LOA National board is stepping out and continues to seek organizational improvements and the benefits we bring to each and every LOA member. We value your thoughts, inputs, and constructive views via your Chapter President or if you are not associated with a local chapter, please feel free to contact the National Board direct. Best wishes,

COL DOUG CATO, PRESIDENT LOA NATIONAL

The Exceptional Release A Professional Military Journal written by logisticians for logisticians The purpose of the Logistics Officer Association (LOA) is to enhance the military logistics profession. LOA provides an open forum to promote quality logistics support and logistic officer professional development. Policy on Written Submissions: The editor invites articles and other contributions on issues that support LOA’s purpose. Direct manuscripts, letters and other communications to: marta@loanational.org and editor@loanational.org. Deadlines: The 15th day of January, April, July, and October. Story Format: Double-spaced, typed and electronically submitted to marta@loanational.org. Photos & Graphics: Send individual electronic files (hi-res JPG, TIFF or EPS with type as outlines) along with stories (as separate text files) and include cutlines/captions. All photos should be at least 300 dpi or greater resolution. Submitter data: Should be typed at the end of the story file. Information included should be: Rank; full name; service; home mailing address; business name and address; business phone (DSN and commercial); email; three to five sentence biographical sketch; and a photo (as a separate file – see photos and graphics above). Editorial Policy: The editors reserve the right to edit all submissions for length, clarity and libel. All submissions become the property of LOA. Advertisement Formats: Each ad must be sent as a composite hi-res (300 dpi or greater) EPS file with fonts saved as outlines. Full-page ads with bleeds should allow at least 3/8” bleeds. Ad rates visit: www.loanational.org/adrates.html Advertising Contact: Ms Marta Hannon, Managing Editor PO Box 2264 – Arlington, VA 22202 – email: marta@loanational.org – Phone 405-701-5457 Subscriptions: The ER is published quarterly and is available via membership in the Logistics Officer Association at the annual rate of $25. Access membership forms on the website at www.loanational.org.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Editor’s Debrief Wow!

Was the 2008 Logistics Officer Association (LOA) a conference or what? For those of

you who missed LOA 2008 in Columbus, you missed a well organized, information packed, fun event. Kudos to the LOA team and the Wright Brothers Chapter for providing a first-class conference for our members and attendees. There were three things that were very evident at this year’s LOA Conference…maybe more so than any other year. First, what really makes LOA special as a professional organization is its emphasis

Col Dennis Daley

on junior officer professional development and their inclusion into the conference itself. From senior officer panels to stars-and-bars luncheon to CGO focused breakout sessions to young officers introducing the speakers; it is obvious the conference and the organization have placed a high priority on junior officer professional development. Secondly, it is noteworthy to see the level of engagement that senior leaders (military and civilian) provided directly to the conference. These senior leaders dedicated their precious time to the conference to ensure its success. Finally, this conference’s briefings provided a constant theme that should leave no doubt …the Air Force logistics enterprise is in the midst of a major structural transformation. The next decade will literally re-engineer the way we provide logistics support to our Air Force mission. Logisticians—heads up…real transformation is coming.

ER: EDITOR’S DEBRIEF

That point was specifically referenced by our new Chief of Staff, General Norton A. Schwartz. General Schwartz’s briefing to the 2008 LOA conference was the first briefing by a Chief since General John Jumper briefed in 2003. Our new Chief outlined the absolute criticality of logistics in the AF mission while stressing the major transformation that our logistics enterprise is undertaking. Please read excerpts from General Schwartz’s speech to the LOA conference in this edition. It’s all about aircraft availability. The Winter ER edition is loaded with major initiatives that our Air Force is implementing to improve aircraft availability. Mr. Grover Dunn’s Perspectives reiterates General Schwartz’s view that Air Force logistics is about to become different…much, much different. This time it’s real process and policy changes that will transform the way we do business. Will we make 20% gains in aircraft availability? Not sure…but there is absolutely no doubt that across the spectrum, major change is underway that will advance our aircraft availability toward the stretch-goal of 20%. What an exciting time to be in our Air Force, as we are all part of this major leap in mission effectiveness while we transform our logistics support structure. Please note the From the E-Ring feature in this edition. Major General Robert H. McMahon dedicates this feature to a much deserved tribute to Lieutenant General Kevin J. Sullivan. For the many Airmen who have had the good fortune to know General Sullivan, General McMahon’s reflections ring true… we all are better Airmen because of General Sullivan’s influence. Please read this great tribute for this fine logistician and leader. Finally, congratulations to our first-time Exceptional Writer Award winners: Ms. Deb Shattuck, Voices from the Past Speak to Our Future (civilian category); Col Bob Hamm, Lt Col Ray Briggs, Maj Kirk Peterson, and Mr. Sean Driscoll, Thinking and Fighting As an Enterprise (field grade officer category); Captain (now Major) Paul Miller, Evolution of the Defense Logistics Agency for the Air Force Mission (company grade officer category). Well done all! Keep those great professional articles coming! We continue to get positive feedback on the rigor and breadth of our ER editions. Thank you for writing professional level articles or supporting those who do write articles. The Spring edition is focusing on logistics leadership, professional development, mentoring, and other people issues.

If you have a topic please let us know –

editor@loanational.org. The deadline for the Spring edition is 15 January 2009. Also, if you know a Chapter President doing good things out there… let us know for our Focus on a President section.

— COL DENNIS DALEY AND YOUR ER WORLDWIDE TEAM

WINTER 2008

LOA Conference 2008…

An AF Materiel Enterprise Success! Submitted By Mr. Charles Botello LOA Wright Brothers Chapter After much planning and preparation, the 2008 LOA National Conference was held in Columbus last week, exceeding expectations in rallying loggies from around the globe. What a week it was! The conference theme, “Leading the Materiel Enterprise,” was prominent in every presentation made in each morning’s plenary sessions attended by nearly 1,300 loggies, as well as in the myriad of breakout sessions that focused on select programs of significant relevance. These unique views proved to be very insightful on taking the materiel enterprise to the global fight on terrorism and other fronts. Discussions included Lessons Learned from Rebuilding the Afghan Air Corps, enhancing our logistics culture with Repair Network Integration, the Global Logistics Support Center concept and its regional hubs; other sessions centered on building on the tenets of AFSO 21 -- Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st Century, and on focusing on acquisition excellence to upgrade legacy systems as well as major systems procurement. The theme moniker reached the pinnacle at the banquet finale, opened with a toast by the GreatGrandniece of the Wright Brothers, Ms Amanda Wright-Lane. AFMC Commander, General Carlson was the Keynote speaker. The Wright B Flyer was an awesome backdrop with its propellers spinning; General Carlson gave a memorable address to the LOA members, emphasizing his passion for AF logistics and the materiel enterprise. The LOA National Conference was a most memorable week. As the local host, the Wright Brothers chapter invested much time and energy with a tremendous volunteer workforce to make it a showcase event that will remain a memorable highlight in everyone’s career. For those of you who volunteered your support or attended, we thank you for your participation. We look forward to seeing everyone next year in Las Vegas!

2008 LOA Conference Hosts: The Wright Bros Conference Team.

Sunday Golf Outing ame The Pre-g

Thank y ou for y our sup port

Stretch

ll! ot baseba n is is h t Hey The perfec t form

Lunch wa s tasty!

nyone? Seconds A

Sunday Icebreaker Banquet

eaker

cebr the I o t g Goin

Go Bucks!

Hey, weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re twins!

Chapter s Volunteer rk w hard at o

t try to! Or at leas

A packed house fo r CSAF

Monday

p for Fueling u a big day Center Commanders’ Forum

AFPC sign ups filled up fast

You see, y ou can’t break the se things!

We got our Park er giraffes - w e are GOLDEN !

Tuesday

Command post in action

Sometimes you gott a get out your big gi rl panties!

Do y ou man? know this Have duct tape, will travel

lad for your pie Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll trade you my sa work How do you this thing?

Wher

e are you go ing

next?

Who is that masked man?

Wednesday

I thought you said these were X-Ray vision glasses

Beam m e up, S cotty

rk All wo lay op and n f s Chie make really y thirst

Da Plane! Da Plane!

at Stars Sage advice ncheon and Bars Lu Heâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s watching Sponge Bob

n yet?

owee Is it Hall

Like f ath like da er ughter

g this are doin u o y d I gla Man am ar next ye

Banquet

ys of Ahhh- the jo ting assigned sea

Gen Carlson de livered a resounding spee ch

t e talen And th tops never s

inâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Smil Bob

adies! Hello L

2008 LOA Scholarship Winners SSGT MELVIN J. JACKSON - AIR COMMANDO CHAPTER SSgt Jackson is a Personal Property and Passenger Travel Specialist with the 1st Special Operations Logistics Readiness Squadron (AFSOC), Hurlburt Field, FL. He has holds a degree from CCAF in Transportation management and is currently studying Information Systems at Strayer University. He maintains a 3.529GPA and expects to graduate in December 08. After graduation he plans to apply to Officer Training School. As a future Logistics Readiness Officer, he would like to continue to make a positive impact in Air Force logistics by being an innovative and detail-oriented leader. His long term goal is to obtain a Master’s degree in Organization Leadership with a concentration in Information Technology Leadership & Management.

SSGT KISHIMA GARCIA - ARCTIC WARRIOR CHAPTER SSgt Garcia is the NCOIC of Procedures, Procedures and Accountability Office of the 354 Logistics Readiness Squadron, Eielson AFB, AK. She has completed Airman Leadership School and currently holds degrees in Office Management and Logistics Management. She is currently enrolled at Wayland Baptist University pursuing a BS in Management. She maintains a 3.26 GPA and expects to graduate in 2010. After completing her bachelor’s degree she hopes to be accepted to Officer Training School. She is dedicated to taking care of people and being involved in the everyday processes that sustain our country’s war-fighting capability. As an officer, she plans to bring the knowledge and proficiency gained as a noncommissioned officer and the management capability learned in becoming an officer to help all Airmen.

MSGT MICHAEL BROWN - CROSSROADS CHAPTER MSgt Brown is a Materiel Management Enlisted Career Broadener at Tinker AFB, OK. He is currently deployed with 379th Expeditionary Mission Support Group, Al Udeid AB, Qatar. He holds degrees in Logistics Management and Supervisory/Leadership and is currently pursuing a BS in Management/Logistics from Park University. He maintains a 3.5 GPA and expects to graduate in December 2008 after which he hopes to enroll in Colorado Technical University’s MBA Program, with a Concentration in Logistics/Supply Chain Management. His goal is to become a CMSgt in the United States Air Force and use his education and leadership to help guide the logistics community through future challenges and changes.

SRA SHEFFEY D. MARTIN - RAINIER CHAPTER SrA Martin is an Aerospace Maintenance Journeyman with the 62 AMXS, McChord AFB, WA. He expects to complete a degree in Aircraft Maintenance Technology through CCAF in December 08. He is also enrolled at Embry-Riddle University pursuing a B.S. in Professional Aeronautics. After graduation he hopes to apply for Officer Training School. Once commissioned, he hopes to remain in the logistics field as an Aircraft Maintenance Officer.

2008 LOA Scholarship Winners

(continued)

TSGT BRUCE L. MIMMS - SHOGUN CHAPTER TSgt Mimms is an Assistant First Sergeant/Readiness Flight Chief with the 18th Equipment Maintenance Squadron, Kadena AB, Japan. He holds degrees in Aerospace Ground Equipment Technology and Business Admin and is currently pursuing BS in Technical Mgmt at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. He maintains 3.9 GPA and expects to graduate in Oct 09. After graduation he hopes to apply for Officer Training School. Once commissioned, he hopes to become an Aircraft Maintenance Officer.

MSGT SAMANTHA S. STONER - WASATCH WARRIOR CHAPTER MSgt Stoner is a Wholesale Logistics Materiel Manager with the 518 CBSS, Hill AFB, UT. She holds degrees/certificates in Logistics, Life Cycle Logistics/Level 1 and is currently pursuing a BS in Logistics Management from Park University where she maintains a 4.0 GPA. She has taken classes at AFIT & DAU, been on two LEAN teams, and started working on her Green Belt in Six Sigma. As a senior at Park University, she has only 10 classes left to complete her Bachelor’s degree – having completed 14 classes since Jan 07. After that she hopes to work on a Master’s in Supply Chain Management.

2008 Lt Gen Michael E. Zettler Lifetime Achievement Award The purpose of the Gen Zettler Lifetime Achievement Award is to recognize members of the Logistics Officer Association who have demonstrated sustained, superior leadership in service to this organization. The nominees for this award must have at least 20 years of service in a logistics-related career and at least 10 years of membership in the LOA. Each LOA Chapter president and LOA Executive Committee member may submit a nominee for this award. LOA is proud to announce the winners of the 2008 Zettler Lifetime Achievement Award: Col (ret) Richard Stochetti and Col James Hannon.

Lt Gen (ret) Michael Zettler, Col (ret) Richard Stocchetti and LOA National President Col Evan Miller.

Lt Gen (ret) Michael Zettler, Col James Hannon and LOA National President Col Evan Miller.

Congratulations Chapter Award Winners The LOA Chapter of the Year Awards are given to an outstanding officially recognized LOA chapter in two categories.

LT GEN DONALD J. WETEKAM LOA CHAPTER

OF THE

YEAR AWARD

is given to an outstanding large chapter (41 or more members). The 2008 Lt Gen Wetekam LOA Chapter of the Year for Outstanding Large Chapter was awarded to the TINKER CROSSROADS LOA CHAPTER.

COL JAMES L. HASS LOA CHAPTER OF THE YEAR AWARD is given to an outstanding small chapter (10 to 40 members). The 2008 Col Hass LOA Chapter of the Year for Outstanding Small Chapter was awarded to the ELMENDORF NORTHERN LIGHTS LOA CHAPTER.

GEN GEORGE T. BABBITT NATIONAL DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD recognizes two LOA National members who made the greatest contributions to furthering LOA National's goals and objectives during the past year. Each active LOA Chapter President (or chapter senior advisor in the rank of Col or above) may nominate a chapter member. The 2008 General Babbitt National Distinguished Service Award winners are

BRIG GEN ART CAMERON III

MAJ JEFF MARTIN

Chapter Awards Continued MAJ GEN MARY L. SAUNDERS CHAPTER DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD recognizes a LOA National member who made the greatest contributions in support of their local LOA Chapter activities. The 2008 Chapter Distinguished Service Award winner is MAJ JAMES

MCARTHUR

OF THE

ELMENDORF NORTHERN LIGHTS LOA CHAPTER.

ER Exceptional Writer Awards T H E F G O C AT E G O RY W I N N E R : COL ROBERT HAMM, LT COL RAYMOND BRIGGS, MAJ KIRK PETERSON (not pictured), and MR. SEAN DRISCOLL (not pictured) for their article Thinking and Fighting as an Enterprise, featured in the Fall 07 ER.

T H E C G O C AT E G O RY W I N N E R : CAPT PAUL MILLER for his article Evolution of the Defense Logistics Agency for the Air Force Mission featured in the Winter 07 ER.

T H E C I V I L I A N C AT E G O RY W I N N E R : COL (RET) DEB SHATTUCK (not pictured) for her article “Voices From the Past Speak to Our Future” featured in the Spring 08 ER. (no photo)

2008 LOA National Conference Scholarship Donors Thank You for Your Continued Support!

Patrons – Scholarship Donations of $500-$999. (L-R) Mr. Larry Scheuble, BAH; Mr. Mike Underwood, Honeywell Aerospace; Col (ret) Robert Garcia, Raytheon; Lt Col (ret) Russ Hall; Col (ret) Bob Drewitt; Col (ret) Steve Farish.

Benefactors – Scholarship Donations of $1000 or more. (L-R) Lt Col (ret) Diana Francois, WBB Consulting; Mr. Hector Gavilla, ATTI; Mr. Tim Howard, BAE Systems; Mr. Travis Melby, Crestwood Technologies; Mike Wright, Boeing. (Not pictured Lt Gen (Ret) John Nowak)

Thank You LOA 2008 Conference Sponsors Platinum Sponsor Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Gold Sponsors Computer Science Corporation GE Aviation IBM Corporation Silver Sponsors Battelle Raytheon Bronze Sponsors AAI Corporation ATTI Internet CafĂŠ Sponsor Standard Aero Key Card Sponsor Battelle

Online Registration Sponsor Honeywell Aerospace

IceBreaker Sponsor Honeywell Aerospace

Golf Tournament Sponsor The Nordam Group

Loggie Reception Sponsor Boeing Company

Conference Guide Sponsor Honeywell Aerospace

2008 LOA National Conference Scholarship Donors Corporate Contributors ATTI The Boeing Company Booz Allen Hamilton Crestwood Technology Group Honeywell Aerospace Raytheon WBB Consulting Individual Contributors Col (ret) Robert Drewitt Lt Col (ret) Russ Hall The Nowak Family Foundation

($500 and up)

From The E-Ring A TRIBUTE

LEADERSHIP

By Major General Robert

History has ample examples of

McMahon

those that could either create a vision or lead the charge, but is

As most of you know, our sen-

much less abundant with those

ior loggie, Lieutenant General

who could do both.

Kevin Sullivan elected to

Sullivan was one of those rare

retire last September as part of

few who could successfully do

the fallout from a Department

both. Perhaps the best example

of Defense investigation into the

shipment

is from his time as an ALC com-

ICBM

mander.

LEAN as “the” way of doing

allow the Air Force in general,

business, then provided the

THE

and we logisticians in particutributions to our Air Force and

resources to jump-start the evolution.

More importantly, he

invested countless hours partici-

our nation. With your indul-

pating in Rapid Improvement

gence, I’d like to use “his” col-

Events, and taking out-briefs of

umn of the ER to partially rectify that oversight.

At Ogden, he chal-

lenged the ALC to embrace

His rapid departure did not

ER: FROM

E-RING

Forward Sections to Taiwan.

lar, to properly honor his con-

General

those events he was not personLt Gen Kevin Sullivan

ally championing. His focus on “walking the walk” and not just

I had the honor of working for General Sullivan on two different occasions; first while he was

“talking the talk” was the single largest factor in transforming

the commander of the Ogden Air Logistics Center, and then

the Center’s culture to one that embraced LEAN as a way of

while he served as the Air Force’s Deputy Chief of Staff for

doing business. The net result was a dramatic improvement in

Logistics, Installations, and Mission Support. During both of

the Center’s support to the warfighter at a time when that

those opportunities, I consistently observed three characteristics

improved support was needed most.

that underscored his style, and are worthy of emulation by all of us. They were…

Although General Sullivan epitomized the concept of “management by walking around,” it was the way he communicated

The ability to create a vision, and then lead people to that vision

with those he met while walking around that truly serves as a

Treating everyone with dignity and respect regardless of position

leader, every interaction he had was genuine and personal.

Striving for win/win solutions whenever possible

interested in what they had to say, regardless of what they did

model for us all. Not enamored with his position as a senior Those he met with knew he cared about them and was truly or where they worked. He had the ability to listen, even when

WINTER

2008

he didn’t necessarily like what he was hearing. These traits creat-

benefit for themselves. However, by striving for a “win/win” solu-

ed an environment that made his entire team comfortable sharing

tion, everyone will be much more likely to embrace the way

ideas, not just those in senior positions. More importantly, it cre-

ahead and success will be much more achievable. This revelation

ated an atmosphere in which members of the team felt they had a

for those he taught it to, even the most hard-headed of us, made

stake in where the organization was headed, and a desire to con-

us better Airmen and officers.

tribute to its success.

For nearly 35 years, General Sullivan admirably served his Air Force

Finally, he taught those he worked with that “win/win” solutions

and his nation. During that time, he made our Service better, and

were the best solutions, even if they took a little longer to

he made us better.

achieve. For many of us, this seemed an unnecessary complicat-

Airmen…officer and enlisted, military and civilian…who will be

ed requirement to mission accomplishment. After all, we had

better Airmen because of his guidance and leadership.

succeeded in the logistics business for years by relying on a “get ‘er done” mentality, and having to create “win/win” solutions seemed counter to our upbringing. General Sullivan’s point was simple...if you create a “win/lose” solution, half of those affected

His legacy will be the thousands of

Sir…thank you and June for your service to our Air Force and our nation…we salute you and wish all the best in the future. –THE MEN AND WOMEN OF AIR FORCE LOGISTICS

will be trying to undermine the plan because they don’t see any

Our technology and expertise played a key role in the transformation of Ogden, ALC at Hill Air Force Base. Enhancing processes and securely locating inventory at point-of-use proved dramatic results. More time available to turn out warfighter assets 11 More jets in the field Stock outs were eliminated by 100% Travel time was reduced by 330% Non-productive time was reduced by $83,000 a month Vending machines paid for themselves in under 6 months

Call us to see how we can help your logistics operation receive similar results or read a complete case study at: www.cribmaster.com/cs.htm

1.888.419.1399 --------------- -----------------------------------------

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

The Loggies Are Always There

The Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Norton A. Schwartz, delivered a speech at the Logistics Officer Association National Conference on 13 Oct 2008 entitled “The Loggies are Always There.” The following article is from the text of his prepared remarks. Thank you, Col Miller, for that kind introduction, and thanks to everyone for allowing me to join you today. It is always a pleasure to spend time with this remarkable group of logistics professionals. The work that you do is truly inspiring. Whether on the job or in professional development with an organization like LOA, you epitomize professionalism, devotion to duty and excellence. I thank you for serving and sharing your professionalism at this important conference. I use the word “important” to describe this conference because the Air Force logistics enterprise is undertaking unprecedented transformation. This conference and the work the association does at the many chapters around the world are critical to making this transformation a success. I realize the word “transformation” gets used, overused and abused, but I can think of no better example of true transformation than the work you are doing in Air Force logistics. I appreciate the editor’s piece in this summer’s Exceptional Release which described this transformation saying, “this time, it’s different….this time the transformation is more than just moving the org charts around…much more.”1 As many of you here know, I am not a big fan of simply moving the org charts around because the Air Force is only as effective as our logistics underpinning. There is nothing more important than promoting and preserving a strong and vibrant community of logistics professionals. A significant benefit of this association is the opportunity it provides us to think strategically and discuss the issues of our day with an emphasis on the professional development and refinement of our logistics officers and an understanding of how logistics helps in winning the fight. Whether we’re talking about the Expeditionary Combat Support System, the Global Logistics Support Center, Repair Network Integration, Centralized Asset Management, or Regionalized Isochronal Inspections, you are truly transforming Air Force logistics in a way that will make us more capable, more expeditionary, and more lethal in today’s fight and better prepared for tomorrow’s challenges. I salute your transformation efforts and the great promise they represent.

T H E P I L O T S A R E A LWAY S T H E R E An interesting news story appeared on the net a couple of weeks ago that illustrates this point. The story comes from Bagram in Afghanistan. The title of the story was “Top Cover: Airpower integral to ground force’s success.”2 The story reported how, “an impro-

WINTER

2008

vised explosive device had disabled a vehicle. Soldiers were stranded. Their brothers-in-arms responded to the scene.” A U.S. Army Staff Sergeant who survived what came next described events by saying, “World War III opened up…the initial ambush was awful.” He was speaking of a bone-chilling surprise attack which pitted some 60 enemy fighters against 18 isolated U.S. Soldiers. It is hard to imagine what it must feel like to face those kinds of odds in the far-off reaches of a barren and hostile landscape, or how the sergeant must have felt as five of his comrades were gunned down during the firefight that would last 45 minutes. One wonders if his life passed before his eyes as he himself was shot through the hand as he continued to fight. But as that grim situation neared devastating defeat, the game suddenly and irrevocably changed. One hundred meters away from the Soldiers’ position in the middle of the enemy force a huge explosion erupted. U.S. Air Force fighters delivered a “danger close” strike that silenced the enemy and saved the Soldiers. In a masterful stroke of understatement, the Soldier summed it up by saying, “it was kind of a moving moment.” The story went on to describe the U.S. Army’s philosophy on airpower with the words of a general in the 101st Airborne. He said, “the infantry’s best friend is the pilot…the pilots are always there, those planes are always there….These guys are capable…they will fly through anything to get to you.”3 The story paints a sobering scene and testifies to the effects of airpower in today’s fight—effects that leave no doubt in the mind of the teammate we support on the ground. As one of them said, “when we hear the planes overhead, we feel relief because we know it is going to be over, and we are probably not going to die that day.” It is important to reflect on this. Perhaps that peace of mind is the greatest gift we could give to those Soldiers, or to the Soldiers’ families back home, or to the Nation. But why would this story come to mind when we speak of logistics professionals and the community you represent?

T H E L O G G I E S A R E A LWAY S T H E R E The answer is simple. For those of us in this room who understand how this business really works, for those of us who understand the business of combat, for those of us who understand what it takes to win this kind of fight, we know the reality behind the words of the Airborne general. Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

The fact is this: the pilots are always there because the loggies are always there. The planes are always there, and they are so capable because the loggies are always there. Airpower is the result of a delicate, and sometimes indelicate, orchestration of efforts within the logistics profession. We know the truth about what happened that day and without taking anything from the skill and heroism of the pilots who flew those planes, this is a team sport, and our loggies are a vital part of the team. We can all agree that this story would not have turned out the way it did unless loggies across the world were always there. From the loggies on the ramp in Afghanistan, to the loggies supporting the effort in-theater, to the loggies building and delivering munitions. And Lord knows, if you ain’t ammo, [appropriate audience response rendered]. We all enjoy giving ammo troops a hard time, but you gotta love ’em! To the loggies working at the intermediate repair facilities,

those planes would not be so capable, so reliable, or so precise without this community of logistics professionals supporting the fight.

E R : T H E L O G G I E S A R E A LWAY S T H E R E

to the loggies working acquisition and sustainment at the depots,

What happened that day in Afghanistan illustrates the truth of those words you here have all heard before. It was Leo Marquez who said, “If our aircraft, missiles, and weapons are the teeth of our military might, then logistics is the muscle, tendons, and sinews that make the teeth bite down and hold on….” This story comes to mind because, as General Marquez said, “logistics is the jawbone” of airpower.4 I want you to be very proud of stories like this, because I am very proud of all you do.

NOT BY KINETICS ALONE I am proud not only of the stories of kinetic strike like this one, but the vast array of capabilities that logisticians generate. You provide world-class airlift capabilities that support the fight, and game-changing deterrence capabilities with our nuclear forces. You provide global vigilance with cutting-edge ISR capabilities, and also generate life-saving aeromedical airlift capabilities, truly global aerial refueling capabilities, and vertical lift combat search and rescue capabilities, along with a national treasure in the form of spe-

I am so proud of you who are responsible for generating and sustaining what we know as ass-kicking airpower—both hard and soft! cial operations capabilities. I am so very proud of all these.

I want to emphasize that word, “sustaining,” because it is important to recognize the significance of this effort. Acquisition, engineering and wholesale logistics form the foundation of all these capabilities. Logistics professionals who perform these services are critical to everything we do. As I think of the story from Afghanistan, I am mindful of the years of sustainment efforts that came together on that day to save American lives and make the mission a success. Our logisticians labor to keep these systems ready well beyond their intended design service life. Even as we’ve flown our platforms many years beyond our wildest expectations, airpower’s many capabilities continue to perform miraculously because of everything you do in logistics. We contribute to winning our Nation’s wars not by kinetics alone, but by the vast array of air, space and cyber power’s effects—effects made possible by our community of logisticians.

LEADERSHIP IN LOGISTICS So this is why I think LOA is so important to our Air Force. The relationships you build here with fellow “loggies,” with senior leaders and with industry will serve to build a transformed future. We need the very best ideas, the very best equipment, and more importantly, the very best logistics leaders in order to deliver airpower in the 21st Century. Because no matter how technologically advanced our systems become, there will simply never be a substitute for genuine officer and the very Senior NCO leadership in logistics. I believe firmly in the truth of the words written by Lt Gen Mike Zettler (Ret) where he argued that in modern airpower logistics, “officers provide the leadership, the technical skills are provided by the non-commissioned officer…” and that in the realm of logistics officer leadership, “the well educated generalist is desperately needed.”5 I see LOA and events like this as a critical part of educating logistics officers, and for providing a well-rounded educational foundation of mentorship and dialogue.

WINTER

2008

I applaud you all for being part of this, and I thank you for the privilege of joining you here. I challenge you to use this event and your time in LOA to make yourselves the best educated and most well-rounded professionals you can be. I assure you as one who has served with our joint partners, and also as one who knows what it is like to be a pilot on the scene during mission execution, it is good to know the loggies will always be there. For me it was CMSgt (then TSgt) Sammy Knag on a fateful day.

us confidence, and you give us strength.

You give

I cannot thank you enough for all you do in this most demanding of pro-

fessional disciplines. Before I close, let me address something that may be on your mind. The Taiwan trigger event resulted in an extensive internal AF review and a number of actions on the AF leadership’s part to enforce accountability. None of this was particularly pleasant, but it was necessary. None of the 15 officers involved were disciplined for willful misconduct. Each had performed, at least a portion of their responsibilities, some with an understandable focus on supporting CENTCOM requirements, quite well. But each of them, at the same time, did not do enough in the care of materiel associated with our nuclear deterrent and the Nation’s most lethal weapons. None of the jobs we hold are easy, ladies and gentlemen, and for most of us, and the solemn responsibilities with which we’ve been entrusted, good intentions are not—good intentions are not—good enough. I look forward to hearing from you now, and to answering some of your questions. Thank you once more for asking me to join you once again. K 1 2

3 4 5

Col Dennis Daley, “Editor’s Debrief,” Exceptional Release, Summer 2008, p. 4 Tammie Moore, SSgt, USAF. Top cover: Airpower integral to ground force’s success: Air Forces Central News, http://www.centaf.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123117451 accessed 28 Oct 2008. Brig. Gen. Mark Milley, Deputy Commanding General, Operations, 101st Airborne Division, quoted in Moore, “Top Cover” Air Force Journal of Logistics, Spring 1999, Vol. XXIII, No. 1, p 41. Michael E. Zettler, [then] Lt Col, USAF. “Air Force Logisticians: Generalists or Specialists?” Individual Studies Program Report, Washington, D.C., Industrial College of the Armed Forces, 1986, 14.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Perspectives IN STEP

WITH

MR. GROVER DUNN

Director of Transformation, Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Installations and Mission Support, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.

HOMETOWN:

Shawnee, Oklahoma

DEGREES:

1974 Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in Political Science, The Principia College,

Mr. Grover Dunn

Elsah, Ill.

BIO:

He began his civilian career with the Air Force in 1974 in the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center. He served in various managerial assignments connected with the B-52 and B-1 systems. In 1976, he became the manager of the Depot Maintenance and Modification Requirements Division where he reviewed, validated and oversaw execution of programs for depot maintenance and modification for the Oklahoma City and San Antonio Air Logistics Centers. He transferred to Headquarters US Air Force in 1979 as a modification programmer and then moved to

ER: PERSPECTIVES

Headquarters Air Force Logistics Command serving as Division Chief. He was promoted to Deputy Director of Aerospace Systems and was responsible for the overall logistics health of US Air Force aircraft and missile systems. As a result of a Headquarters’ reorganization, he was assigned Deputy Director of Strategic Forces for the Logistics Operation Center. In 1983, Mr. Dunn became Deputy Chief of the Aircraft Systems Division at Headquarters US Air Force and managed logistics for all Air Force aircraft, subsystems and embedded software, and sustaining engineering. A promotion in 1988 to Chief of the Weapon Programs Support Division brought Mr. Dunn the responsibilities of programming and budgeting for various logistics funding accounts. These accounts included such items as aircraft and missile modifications and spares; depot maintenance; contractor logistics support, stock fund; depot maintenance industrial fund; and the manpower and infrastructure for Air Force Logistics Command. Currently, Mr. Dunn plans, develops and implements innovative and transformative logistics concepts and initiatives across the full spectrum of the Air Force to enable the evolving expeditionary air and space force.

ER: eLog 21 projects a goal of a 20% increase in aircraft availability by 2013. How is the AF working to meet that goal?

MR. DUNN: First, let me say that the 20% goal was originally chosen to really stretch our thinking about what was possible and to get us to think about big transformation ideas and not just more marginal improvements. What we wanted to do was try to change the way we looked at our business. To get us more focused on what is important vice what is non-value added. The real objective here was to get all our Airmen to question every action they take in terms of whether that action contributes to improving availability and/or reduces cost. If it doesn’t—then why are you doing it? Let’s stop doing it or change to make it value added. Along the way we have migrated from looking at the original overarching 20% target and have developed specific targets for each of our systems based on operational needs. This provides us a more targeted and credible goal to shoot for. 24

WINTER

2008

To drive availability improvement, we are using two overall approaches. First, we have specific plans for each weapon system under an eLog21 initiative known as Aircraft Availability Improvement Program (AAIP). AAIP develops and manages actionable plans to meet desired weapon system availability targets needed to support mission objectives. The AAIP is currently being managed by HQ AFMC/A4W, with policy oversight by AF/A4MY. Each Mission Design Series (MDS) (e.g. F-15C, F-15E, C-130H, etc.) has an AAIP that is developed by the System Program Manager (SPM) in conjunction with the Lead MAJCOM. Since the AAIP reaches across multiple weapon system platforms, it provides an accurate picture of how the Air Force logistics community is doing against each MDS’s stated AAIP annual targets and overall improvement goals. The second approach includes the other eLog21 initiatives that attack cross-cutting enterprise logistics processes and systems which are often beyond the control of any one weapon system manager and/or MAJCOM. Changes in the way we fundamentally resource our business (Centralized Asset Management); buy our parts (Purchasing and Supply Chain Management); determine our needs (Advanced Planning & Scheduling); provide engineering support (System Life Cycle Integrity Management) are just some of the big changes we have implemented or are implementing. It is through the combination of these weapon system specific plans and the improvement to enterprise processes and systems that we expect to drive us ultimately toward our overall goals. ER: Are there any other eLog21 initiatives currently in implementation that you feel will provide significant benefits to increasing aircraft availability enterprise-wide?

MR. DUNN: Yes, we have a number of major initiatives. Some of them are:

Repair Network Integration (RNI) – Improves aircraft availability by developing management processes for the repair network. This includes standardizing how requirements are defined in order to better balance the maintenance workload and optimizing repair capability and capacity to meet Air Force-wide priorities for aircraft availability.

Air Force Global Logistics Support Center (AFGLSC) – Serves as the decision node, utilizing total asset visibility, to direct delivery of parts based on enterprise-wide prioritized needs. This also includes redirecting assets to replace inoperative parts in aircraft as opposed to filling a hole in War Readiness Spares Kits.

Product Life Cycle Management (PLM) – Implements a new approach to how we manage the configuration control and documentation of our products which will result in significantly improved bills of material for our maintainers to order against and our supply planners to buy against.

Asset Marking and Tracking (AMT) – Through implementation of Item Unique Identifiers (IUIDs) and Radio Frequency Identification Devices (RFID) we’ll be able to track and locate all our “stuff” in supply, in transit, in maintenance so that we can make better use of our assets and so that we discretely track failures to support improved reliability management.

ER: What is the Air Force doing to reduce the time an aircraft is awaiting maintenance?

MR. DUNN: We are doing several things. First, we are changing the way we determine what needs to be done and when to eliminate unneeded maintenance in the first place. The Air Force is moving to a new, predictive maintenance concept where repairs, upgrades, and inspections are performed when necessary based on historical data as opposed to current processes where aircraft are inspected and repaired based on calendar or flying hour interval. As a result, this new model will reduce the amount of time aircraft are in Phase/Isochronal Inspection, Program Depot Maintenance (PDM), etc. Continued on next page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Second, we are improving the processes and technology associated with providing better technical information to our maintenance workforce and providing timely technical responses through a program called Product Life Cycle Management. Third, collectively we are applying lean techniques to re-engineer the actual production flow of aircraft maintenance. This will ensure that what needs to be done is done effectively and efficiently. We’ve seen real progress in this arena at our depots and selectively throughout the other MAJCOMs. ER: Is there a communication plan to inform the Air Force members of the progress and status of our eLog21 goal?

MR. DUNN: Yes, there is but frankly it has not been as effective as it needs to be. We have web sites, place articles in publications, and brief/attend various group gatherings which has become pretty standard today. Until recently we have focused mostly on communications within the Air Staff and MAJCOM staffs to ensure that our leadership team was on board and up to speed. We are now beginning to focus more on integrating initiatives and increasing communications amongst our leadership team at all levels of command. If we are successful, you can expect to see those leaders engaging more often with our other leaders and with our workforce. Our team is working hard to provide our Airmen the most up to date information on these exciting new processes and technologies. Of course the old adage applies – you can never communicate enough! So we still have a long way to go.

ER: PERSPECTIVES

ER: What training is available on eLog21?

MR. DUNN: There are eleven logistics and supply chain training courses available through AFIT. These provide an overview of eLog21, some of its key initiatives, and industry best practices.

You can access these courses through the AFIT website at

https://online.afit.edu. Once there, you’ll find courses such as:

Introduction to Supply Chain Management – provides education on the role of supply chain management in the eLog 21 Campaign and how the Air Force is successfully applying it.

Enterprise Resource Planning Basics – provides education on the commercial business practice called Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP); the course describes what an ERP is and how it will be implemented and used in the Air Force.

Asset Marking and Tracking – provides introductory education on Asset Marking and Tracking (AMT), explains how AMT can be used to enhance Air Force operations, and articulates the role of AMT as a key component of the eLog21 campaign.

ER: One of the most aggressive eLog21 initiatives is the Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS). Initially it was planned for a 2010 roll out date. Are we still on track for a 2010 roll out?

MR. DUNN: Keeping a major acquisition program on schedule is a daunting task whether you are talking about a complex weapon system or complex IT system. Unfortunately the AF’s track record on logistics systems delivery has been poor to say the least. So yes – for now ECSS is still on track but this is a constant, major concern. Of everything we are doing, this is the one that most frequently keeps me up at night worrying. Thanks to the concentrated efforts of our team of over 400 Airmen and contractors, we have made substantial progress. We’ve completed process area blueprinting, which has captured all the current logistics processes to determine what information is necessary at each step of the supply chain. This information is being mapped into the suite of tools that make up the ECSS IT solution.

WINTER

2008

ECSS will be rolled out in three releases: Operations and Training Bases, Purchasing and Supply Chain Management/Product Support, and Depot Maintenance. Maxwell AFB, the first base, is scheduled to come online in April 2010, with Ellsworth AFB following a few months later. ER: The eLog21 campaign kicked off in 2003. Since then, what progress or initiatives have successfully been implemented?

MR. DUNN: eLog21 has achieved considerable progress to date. Some of the highlights include:

Implemented the Aircraft Availability Improvement Program – Created weapon system plans targeted at improving system availability for each weapon system.

Implemented Depot Maintenance Transformation (DMT) – Leaned maintenance operations to provide warfighters with responsive, predictable, and affordable support.

Stood up the Air Force Global Logistics Support Center (AFGLSC) – Provided centralized logistics command and control. (2008)

Implemented Purchasing and Supply Chain Management practices within AF – applying strategic sourcing principles to $3B of annual parts/repair spending via the establishment of 8 commodity councils. (2005)

Executed Centralized Asset Management (CAM) – Centralized budget execution authority to provide greater funding flexibility to match logistics capabilities with Air Force-wide priorities. (2008)

Implemented Active Radio Frequency Identification capability for tracking containers, pallets, and rolling stock transiting through the Defense Transportation System.

Implementing Item Unique Identifiers (serial numbers) for all items entering the inventory valued over $5,000 beginning with purchases starting in 2005.

Implemented Repair Enterprise for the 21st Century (RE21) – Successfully consolidated intermediate repair activities for B-1, C-5, C-130, E-3 and F-16 avionics.

ER: A major feature of eLog21 is based on centralizing processes into an enterprise approach. Some field units may resist that loss of base level authority to enterprise solutions, e.g. GLSC for supply, CAM for financing, repair network for maintenance. Is there a message you would like to express to the field units?

MR. DUNN: I doubt that there is anything that I could say that would ever overcome the concern and skepticism of the perceived loss of “control” by field units, MAJCOMs, or ALCs. I can’t imagine any manager at any level ever feeling comfortable about yielding what they perceive as the keys to their success. It just wouldn’t be natural. At the end of the day, words are meaningless – the only thing that really counts is performance. If you really think about this, all we are doing is accelerating the long-term course of our business. We’ve selectively been doing regionalized and/or direct to depot maintenance within the Air Force for the entire 34 years I’ve been serving it. We regionalized many supply squadron functions several years ago. A number of wings fell on their swords saying that Regional Supply Squadrons would kill them. It didn’t, if in fact overall supply support improved. Every time we have made these steps, the resistance has been there. In the end the only reason that these process improvements survived was because they succeeded. In a few cases, the initiatives didn’t perform and we ultimately rolled them back to the original baseline. Which means that we shouldn’t move forward based on blind adherence to salesmanship. Ultimately, the AF has to work and work effectively.

Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

We have done something different with eLog21. Too often in the past, we didn’t focus on the real underlying processes that drive our business and we did not plan out these changes as well as we should. We’ve actually designed a new overall process model that is comprehensive and coordinated and based on actual practices that have been used by the military and/or successful commercial companies. So we’ve done our homework pretty carefully. The entire focus of eLog21 is aimed at making us more effective at conducting our primary mission, which is performed by our Airmen within our wings, groups, and squadrons. This is about launching/recovering aircraft; keeping missiles on alert status; communication systems operating; and space systems ready in an environment that we all know too well—enormous pressure to perform while our overall resources, assets, and capabilities continue to be reduced. Our field units need to focus their attention on those things that directly contribute to mission generation. We are not changing any of that. What we are doing is better integrating and synchronizing all of the activities that ultimately support and enable mission generation from the field shops to ALCs to DLA to our industry partners.

This is

about leveraging and sharing our dwindling resources, capabilities, and assets across our Air Force to ensure we are supporting Air Forcewide priorities. Our studies, our experience, and our limited tests show that we should actually be able to better support all units better if we do this right. Of course the proof will be in the performance. ER: Will we get there… 20% improvements in aircraft availability by 2013?

MR. DUNN: In some cases yes, in others no, but that is now by design. We will get to our targets but these targets are now better focused around specific operationally determined targets for each of our systems rather the original single overarching 20% stretch goal. We fully expect to get to these individual system goals. K

ALLOCATING AIRCRAFT Submitted by Lt Col Raymond E. Briggs Aircraft availability is a measure of how much of a fleet is available for conducting a mission at any given time. It differs from Mission Capable rate in that depot time is factored into overall aircraft availability. The AF’s eLog21 program set a target of increasing aircraft availability by approximately 20% by FY11 as part of the Aircraft Availability Improvement Program. AMC has set an Annual Enterprise Improvement Priority of increasing aircraft availability by 20% by FY11 from FY03 baseline under Break Trough Objective #1, “Within 5 years, increase system velocity and precision to deliver the right effect to the right place at the right time…every time.” How do we get more airplanes out of maintenance; how do we get more airplanes out of depot; and how do we get more airplanes in the fight? I’ll submit that our problem is not aircraft availability. We already have more aircraft FMC hours available than we have aircrew to fly those hours. Why, then, are aircrew standing by on the flight line looking for an MC jet to go fly? The problem is not our aircraft availability, it is our aircraft allocation. In AMC, the tool used to slice the aircraft and aircrew pie is the Aircrew/Aircraft Tasking System or AATS . WARNING: Because we are talking about AATS and aircraft availability, it’s all in the numbers. Get your calculators out for this article, there is math involved.

Section I of the AATS CONOPS deals with allocating aircrews and Section II is allocating aircraft. AATS looks forward 15 weeks, and is one of the few data systems that is actually in the business of predicting the future….it is predicting AMC’s future combat capability, it’s unclassified, and it’s on line for everyone to see. A calculation ensues and the result is the number of 618th Tanker Airlift Control Center (TACC) taskable tails for each day of the week. To allocate aircraft, Plans, Scheduling & Documentation (PS&D) personnel calculate the number of aircraft that will be available each week and input that into the AMC/A4 AATS data system. They forecast 15 weeks in advance, and to add stability to the system, they are locked out of making changes in the last 3 weeks prior to execution. Any change made after the lockout period requires a reclama approved by HQ AMC/A3. AATS reports are available at: https://www.my.af.mil/gcss-af/USAF/AFP40/d/ 1074111948/Files/a4m/aats/hello.html As PS&D calculates the average number of possessed aircraft or Programmed Aircraft Allocation (PAA) assigned each week usually driven by depot inputs/returns and then round down. For example, if a unit has 18 tails Monday through Thursday, and a jet departs for depot on Friday, PS&D will load 17 tails for the entire AATS week. This means home station will have an extra tail on the ground for four days that TACC won’t be able to task. In the exam-

Photo: Six KC-135 Stratotankers demonstrate the elephant walk formation as they taxi down a runway right behind each other.(USAF photo A1C Laura Suttles)

ple above with AATS reflecting 17 tails, but there are 18 tails on the ramp M-T, this represents 3.25% of the unit’s weekly aircraft availability shielded from AATS.

block in a jet, perform good recovery maintenance of servicing, BPO/Preflight, and any additional maintenance required by the previous flying.

AATS runs on a calculation in accordance with Section II, Allocating Aircraft, of the AATS CONOPS. The AATS aircraft calculation starts with AFI 21-103 possessed tails, or the PAA, whichever is lower. Due to depot maintenance, possessed is usually lower, but not always the case. The AATS calculation follows possessed/PAA minus aircraft deployed to the AOR, multiply the result by the AMCI 10-202 volume 6 commitment rate and round down to the nearest whole number. From there, take out local training allocations and make any management adjustments necessary. The final result is the number of tails TACC can task the unit on any particular day.

In the push for increased aircraft availability, the focus is in two areas: 1) reducing the number of tails in depot and 2) increasing the commitment rate. Depot is a discussion for many other articles. Increasing the commitment rate is always seen as “getting more tails out of maintenance”. Let’s look at what goes into commitment rate.

E X A M P L E A AT S C A L C U L A T I O N : AATS Example: PAA = 12, possessed = 13, deployed = 0, commitment rate = 85%, local training = 2, and management adjustments = 0. Therefore, [12-0] * 0.85 = 10.2, rounded down to 10, minus 2 local training and zero adjustments yields 8 acft per day for TACC. AATS has a fundamental weakness with smaller fleet sizes. Rounding down has a much bigger impact on a small fleet than a large one. The more the fleets are divided to more bases, the more rounding down occurs and the more aircraft availability is lost. This was felt in the C-5 community as Dover and Travis decreased from 36 PAA to 18 and a host of small Guard and Reserve bases were stood up. Each new base brought a new “round down” to the final TACC taskable tails. In AATS methodology, a large Airlift or Air Mobility Wing brings more to TACC than 4 small ones. Try the math: 40 PAA, zero deployed, 85% commitment rate, 8 local trainers and zero adjustments gives 26 TACC tails. Divide the 40 tails to 4 bases of 10 aircraft each with 2 local trainers and you get 24 TACC tails. What happened to the extra 2 tails? The two tails represent a decrease in TACC aircraft availability of 7.7%. If that doesn’t indicate a process that is not totally visible, then I don’t know what does. Not only is AATS calculated on a weekly cycle, it is executed on a daily cycle based on universal time, or Zulu. An aircraft can land 15 minutes into the new z-day and be “counted” or “committed” for the entire Z-day. Conversely, an aircraft can land at 23:45 on the z-day and be expected to be generated and counted in the next day’s line up which starts in just 15 minutes. Most of the time, there are enough tails to put the late returners on the last take offs, or even slide them into the next Z-day so there is adequate time for recovery. But make no mistake, AATS does not consider anything maintenance needs to do to

The commitment rate, sometimes called the maintenance withhold, in AMCI 10-202 volume 6 is simply an estimation of how much of the fleet can be expected to be on the ground due to scheduled and unscheduled maintenance at any given time. If you look closely, you will see that the commitment rate is usually about 2~3 percent lower than the fleet mission capable rate for each aircraft. There’s no magic in calculating out what the commitment rate should be, but if you know 15% of your fleet can be expected to be in scheduled and unscheduled maintenance on any given day, then you shouldn’t try to fly 95% of the fleet on any given day. This also explains why we can sustain higher commitment rates while deployed and why deployed aircraft are taken out of the equation at the very beginning. Deployed aircraft leave the majority of their scheduled maintenance program at home station, tails are picked for deployment based on scheduled maintenance and are rotated home for HSC or ISO depending on the MDS. Therefore when those aircraft are in the theater, they do not bring the scheduled maintenance component of aircraft availability with them. That’s why there is an adjustment for having 6 or more aircraft deployed. This takes into account the impact of leaving the scheduled maintenance program at home. Understanding the value stream of aircraft recovery helps the situation. Aircraft block in, are debriefed, receive a BPO/Preflight, servicing, and any follow-on maintenance to return the aircraft to Continued on next page...

The nose is lifted and the ramp is lowered on a C-5 Galaxy (USAF photo by SMSgt John Chapman)

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

E R : A L L O C AT I N G A I R C R A F T

mission capable status. Now add a takt time. In my C-17 example, the debrief takes 15 minutes, BPO/Preflight takes 45 minutes for the BPO & 4 hrs for the preflight. Maintenance can take anywhere from 0 minutes to 48 hrs, but typically a C-17 can be turned in about 1 shift or 8 hrs after a preflight is completed. That gives about 12 hrs to turn a C-17 with good maintenance until it is ready to spot for its next mission. The amount of time a jet has to spot before it launches is also included in AMCI 10-202 volume 6. Spot time is important in the world of AATS, because once a jet spots, it is “counted” or “tasked”. For the C-17, it is a generous 5 hrs making the full recovery to launch cycle about 17 hrs. Like I said, that’s generous and most C-17 can be turned in 12 hrs with good maintenance. Bottom line, if Crew Chief SSgt Christopher Tripp’s crew prepares acft 6165, The Spirit of the the C-17 lands at 01:00 Z-day, then it should be ready to spot Constitution, as the 326 AS crew arrives for launch. (USAF photo) by 15:00 of the same Z-day. However, with AATS, it’s not “taskable” for another 9 hours. Conversely, if a jet lands at is in one thing: spares. AATS does not account for the price of 22:00Z, then it really won’t be ready for the lineup until 12:00 the spare aircraft. They have to be generated out of the maintethe next Z-day, but it is “taskable” in just 2 hours. A jet landing nance withhold, unallocated aircraft, or previously allocated airearly in the Z-day gives up 4 hrs of availability, or 16.7% aircraft craft that are now capable of filling the line. The waste in the availability is lost due to AATS rules. AATS system also allows maintenance to deal with the Without a corresponding increase in Mission Capable rate, planners can increase the commitment rate all they want. Maintainers will be maintainers and respond to the challenge for a while, months, maybe a year, but then we all know the consequences, it’s done on the back of the Airmen on the line and with a decrease in fleet health. Holdovers, longer work weeks, higher turnover, more accidents, etc. are all outcomes of increasing the commitment rate without a radical change in the process. The best way to increase the commitment rate without putting it on the backs of the maintainer is to change the way we allocate aircraft; get the waste out of the AATS system. I’ve already explained that AATS is a crash axe method of chopping up the fleet. With 3.25% AA lost to depot returns, 7.7% lost due to small fleet sizes, 16.7% lost to Z-day, it makes you wonder why we haven’t looked for something better. Is it too hard to believe that there is waste in AATS? Now those un-allocated tails are just sitting collecting dust. Maintainers know how to use them, some days are easy to fill the lines and some days impossible, even when not over tasked. The easy days are when the waste, unallocated tails, and mission return times work in the unit’s favor to keep tails from TACC. The hard days are when the AATS reflects more tails than possessed on a given day (can happen for 2 or 3 days in a stretch), and when tails are late to return in the z-day. If you check the flying schedule on the easy days, you still see all MC jets lined up against the flying schedule, the difference

WINTER

unknowns of the maintenance, repair, and overhaul business to generate spares, even when they are unaccounted. AFSO21 teaches the best way to add stability to a process is to control the flow of work. AATS is a 24/7 allocation method, but most units do not fly the local fenced trainers on the weekend. Before any C-5, C-17, KC-135, or KC-10 organization cries foul, read your LCOM and your award packages; they are all based on 24/7 ops; so when thinking weekend flying, are you truly 24/7? Most aren’t and the reason is they need time to “catch up” for the next week’s flying. That means producing more MC tails than AATS expects so there are spares available early in the week. If you always start the AATS week strong and are struggling to get through Thursday and Friday before the weekend to catch up, look at your spares allocations. You are paying for those out of the maintenance hide. To figure out how to get the most of the aircraft that are generated and ready to fly, we have to get out of the AATS box. Perhaps it’s time we learned something from our Satellite flying operators. Satellites are allocated, planned, maintained, etc. to the second. Once one task is completed, it seamlessly rolls into the next scheduled task and objective. Maintenance time is accounted for, and is just another task sent to the satellite. There is a mission need or user ready to take over the second, yes second the maintenance cycle is complete. The system that schedules and manages this is not much harder to understand than an Outlook calendar. It is broken down by day, hour, and second.

2008

GDSS II could very easily produce this calendar style view for our operational mission. What is missing is the maintenance information. Also, we would need to add a standard recovery time for each weapons system in AMCI 10-202 volume 6 which would work just like spot time. Add in maintenance ETICs, a scheduled maintenance plan, ground trainers, and spares then the fused complete view of aircraft allocation would be complete. The only problem is the absence of a usable scheduled maintenance tool in AMC. Hopefully, the centralized scheduled maintenance cell at HQ AMC will be able to solve this problem. Tail swaps would be as easy as dragging a mission from one tail and dropping on another. An automated notifi736 AMXS Pro-super MSgt Scott Adler and Expeditor TSgt Richard Bell meet with 326 AS Pilot Maj Mark Chagaris before mission launch while Crew Chiefs complete aircraft cation process could alert all appropriate agencies effecforms. (USAF photo) tively completing the 2407 process. What’s most important is the waste and unallocated tails become visible to all. If we slide the fire department training to the This idea, of an “Outlook-style calendar” for each of our jets would be a radically new way of allocating our aircraft. It would weekend, we may be able to squeeze in another local…. That require totally fused flying and maintenance information in a kind of thinking becomes possible with this type of view. It single picture. It would not do away with PS&D, as mainte- takes the fractions, rounding down, and Z-day out of the equanance scheduling would still be a demanding job. It would just tion. I’m not advocating that this will work to the precision of the satellite fliers down to the second, but moving AATS aircraft give PS&D the tools to better do the job. accounting from weekly to hourly will yield a significant increase It’s easy to view this style of scheduling. Just open an Outlook in aircraft availability. appointment and invite attendees. Add the names of 10 people with busy calendars. Now imagine that the names aren’t people, One of the most common failures of Lean is to continue to use but tail numbers, and the schedule events are not meetings, but existing scheduling practices. AATS is a scheduling practice in missions, recovery time, spot time, scheduled maintenance, and AMC, and until it is significantly changed to properly allocate even unscheduled maintenance based on scheduled completion and account for aircraft usage, we are just beating around the times. Now imagine being able to drag and drop requirements bush on aircraft availability. from one tail to another. It’s all possible with today’s technology. Recovery time is just another scheduled activity, same with spot time and pre-flight. All activities need to be scheduled to a tail, TACC missions, local flying, ground training, scheduled maintenance and even unscheduled maintenance. No, that is not an oxymoron to schedule unscheduled maintenance. Most unscheduled maintenance happens as part of the recovery time (12 hrs for the C-17). If that’s not enough time, the Estimated Time in Commission (ETIC) would instantly be visible and push the block to the right. Only after the ETIC is complete, would the jet be ready to spot again. Spares also need to be on the schedule. No hip-pocket spares, and if the choice is to fly without a spare, everyone knows it. Delayed Discrepancies, Time Change Items, and Time Compliance Technical Orders would just be another scheduled event.

i eLog21 AAIP Fact Sheet, 19 Kul 2007, (https://www.my.af.mil/gcssaf/USAF/ep/contentView.do?contentType=EDITORIAL&contentId=143795 0&channelPageId=-738606&programId=1446216) ii AMC AFSO21 Strategy Brief, 2 Oct 07, AMC BTO’s & Corresponding AEIP’s (https://afkm.wpafb.af.mil/ASPs/docman/DOCMain.asp?Tab=0& FolderID=OO-TR-AM-05-15-4&Filter=OO-TR-AM-05) iii HQ AMC AATS CONOPS, Nov 05, (https://www.my.af.mil/gcssaf/USAF/AFP40/d/1074111948/Files/a4m/aats/hello.html) iv (1 acft * 24 hrs * 4 days) / (17 acft * 24 hrs *7 day + 1 acft * 24 hrs * 4 days) * 100% = 3.25%

About the author: Lt Col Raymond E. Briggs is currently the Commander of the 736 AMXS at Dover AFB Delaware. While at the AMC staff, he helped draft the 2005 version of the AATS CONOPS and designed the current web based AATS tracking program.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Learning from Every Jet: 309 MXW Improves Programs to Finish Mods Early A new aluminum skid plate holds an A-10 nose wheel in place while Jack Hood, 576th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Squadron, performs a turning radius maintenance check. (Photo by Terry Vanden-Heuvel)

Submitted by Mr. Bill Orndorff Just as technology changes daily, innovations in work flow processes change as new ideas are developed by employees and management in the quest to work better, faster and cheaper. In recent years, the 309th Maintenance Wing at Hill AFB, Utah, has steadily improved delivering aircraft back to the warfighters, using programs, practices and processes that are often adapted further to get the job done. “We’re taking steps in 2009 to see just how doggone good we can get on all the product lines,” says Col. Walt Lindsley, 309th Aircraft Maintenance Group commander. “We re-value stream them and see what we can learn on every jet that we produce.” The 309 AMXG modifies, maintains and overhauls F-16s, F22s, A-10s and C-130s.

F - 1 6 M O D I F I C AT I O N S F-16 Fighting Falcons are routed through the 309 AMXG in cells, with the customer as the first cell, sending the aircraft in for modifications on time. Cells 2-13 include stripping the aircraft, modifying it, performing operational checkouts, and rolling it out for a flight test by the 514th Flight Test Squadron. From there, it is painted, then weighed and balanced before delivery back to the customer. “All along the way, it’s visually managed by the folks in each cell, visually ‘metricked’ by the people down on the cell doing the work,” Colonel Lindsley said. “For that day’s work, they know exactly what needs to be done. They have work control documents and they have equipment that is kitted by the System Program Office. We assemble the kits into the form, fit and function that they need to be. They’re delivered right to the technicians, right on the floor, right where they need them.”

Management is kept aware of any difficulties in the maintenance process by watching for red flags to be raised or seeing something noted on computer. “They can walk down to the visual board and talk to the crew about what’s going on and they can start removing the barriers that are going against making that aircraft successful,” Colonel Lindsley said.

HOW

D O E S T H AT I M PA C T A I R C R A F T AVA I L -

ABILITY?

From 2004 to 2008, the F-16s have had a zero-late aircraft streak. The 309 AMXG produces on the average of 211 jets per year with no lates. And while the mechanics are given 145 days to complete the aircraft, they average 125 days. “That allows the SPO and the customer to do a variety of things,” Colonel Lindsley said. “First, they could add more modifications that they need done — we still accomplish the work in the same 145, days but get more work out so when they get the jet back, it’s a more capable jet. Or, this allows the SPO to let it flow on the 125-day average and then they can push more of those aircraft through.” “Or, if the unit wants, some phase operations could be done or organizational-level work done on the jets as they’re coming through. That gives us the opportunity to cater to some of their needs so that when the customer gets the aircraft back, it is ready to go into the schedule and support flying operations.”

A-10 PRECISION ENGAGEMENT In January 2008, the 100th A-10C Thunderbolt, modified under the Precision Engagement program, took off from Hill’s runway destined

WINTER

2008

for Moody AFB, Georgia. The 309 AMXG started the PE upgrades in July 2006, and on average, technicians from the 571st Aircraft Maintenance Squadron (A-10), upgraded the A10C configuration in less than 90 days.

“Our process, as we were going into it, was not mature,” Colonel Lindsley explained. “To mature it exponentially, we stole ideas — Lean ideas from a variety of places; we stole the theory of constraints and how Concerto works from the C-130 line; we took the cellular flow and how you assign people to cellular flow from the F16 line. Basically, we designed and built our own cellular flow PE modification process from A to Z, and tracked it on a daily basis, so we could effectively and consistently, with repeated quality, get those jets out the other end, on time, on cost and on schedule.”

“While our overall modification time has been reduced, the increase in positive feedback from our warfighting customers has been our biggest success,” said Greg Hoffman, former 571 AMXS director. “Without giving them a quality aircraft to carry out their mission, we would have failed. The program was a challenge Today, the 571st can perfrom the start, but with A mechanic from the 571st Aircraft Maintenance Squadron performs exterior work on an Aform the PE modification the support of Team Hill, 10. (Photo by Bill Orndorff) in about 3,100 hours. As to include the 531st with the F-16s, the SPO Commodities Maintenance Squadron and our Lockheed Martin prime con- either adds modifications, or produces the jets early back to the field and programs more PE jets in at a cost-savings. tractor, we have been able to get better each day.” The modification upgrades the cockpit display, extends the life of the A-10 another 20 years, and gives the aircraft the ability to drop Joint Direct Attack Munitions. As the work was being kit-proofed by the 649th Combat Logistics Support Squadron at Hill, it was described as one of the hardest modifications the technicians had ever seen. “The modification entails tearing apart the cockpit, taking out all the old wire harnesses from the cockpit all the way to the wingtips, removing wires that aren’t necessary any longer, and adding the new wiring to support the Precision Engagement modification,” Colonel Lindsley said, “and getting all that done in a 90-day time frame. It is just a massive undertaking.” Work included routing A-10 pylons to the 309th Commodities Maintenance Group for refurbishing, and receiving the line replaceable unit, packaged by Lockheed Martin, both of which had to arrive in time to meet the flow for installation into the jet. Were the A-10 maintainers successful in meeting the customers’ expectations? At first, no. In March 2007, it took the 571st about 5,500 hours to do the modification that should have been completed in 3,500 hours.

I N N O VAT I O N The 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group, another maintenance group within the 309th Maintenance Wing, is based at Davis-Monthan AFB, Ariz. The 309 AMARG is best known for storing and preserving surplus aircraft, but also does programmed depot maintenance on C-130s and structural modifications on A-10s. During a radius maintenance check on A-10 nose wheel, mechanics found a way to keep the skid plates from slipping. The skid plates — steel sheets sandwiching a layer of bearing grease — support the nose wheel during final stages of the Service Life Extension Program so mechanics can test the ability to turn the nose landing gear. When the nose wheel repeatedly turned back and forth during the turning checks, the skid plate would slip, potentially injuring mechanics working on the aircraft, and causing delays in maintenance operations to put the plane back on the plate. Mechanics from the 576th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Squadron (Flight Test) and the 577th Commodities Reclamation Squadron (Reclamation, Wings) Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

ER: LEARNING

FROM

EVERY JET

worked together to invent — in three days — an A-10 skid plate based on a ball-andsocket. The new aluminum plate securely holds the wheel in a fitted cradle and acts like a heavy duty “lazy Susan” to turn with the wheel. “This sort of creativity from the 576 AMRS A10 SLEP line and the 577 CMRS machine shop is not surprising,” said Earl Wade, Documents, tools and a computer are within easy reach of Ron Kephart,F-16 cockpit mechanic at Hill AFB. Careful relocation of Miscellaneous Aircraft resources on the Common Configuration Implementation Program line gives the technicians everything they need to complete the Flight Chief. “I condaily tasks on the aircraft. stantly see people gathering together as informal teams to innovate new designs or adapt existing mate- ALC, Georgia.) on the C-130 Hercules lines working with the Defense Logistics Agency on supply issues. rials to overcome apparently insurmountable problems.”

FUTURE

EFFORTS

The 309 AMXG is doing structural retrofit and corrosion modification on F-22 Raptors in a partnership with Lockheed Martin. “The partnership’s awesome; Lockheed Martin provides very good just-in-time resources, right when we need them,” Colonel Lindsley said. “We are able to mature on the F-22 at a very rapid pace. Between our operation here and Lockheed Martin’s operation at Palmdale, California, and the speed-line that they operate at Tyndall AFB, we are able to work through a variety of issues on the F-22 — sustainment, keeping jets in the depot for a minimum amount of time — and get them back to the field, ready to go into the flying schedule.” In the future, the 309 AMXG will work a program similar to CCIP where the original block-produced F-22s will receive software upgrades and other upgrades and be as capable as the latest jets coming off the production line. Lessons learned in working the corrosion and the structural retrofit programs, plus initiatives like Lean, have helped the group redesign the methodology used on the jets, identify what needs to be done in what order, and resource it with the proper amount of manpower. The 309 AMXG plans to implement the High Velocity Maintenance program (currently being tested at Warner Robins

WINTER

“While Warner Robins continues to run their beta test, we’re making sure we understand what it is that they’re doing, what are the characteristics that make an operation high velocity, and what can we currently do right now to improve our production lines on C-130s,” Colonel Lindsley said. “Then, as the sustainment and program management pieces mature, we’ll be in a really good foundational position to switch over and incorporate all the high velocity characteristics into our C-130 production line out here.”

EFFECTIVENESS The changes and re-thinking involved in working more efficiently start, Colonel Lindsley notes, with good strategic knowledge of the Air Force and the Air Force Materiel Command goals. The 309 AMXG translated this to initiatives at squadron level and production-line level that improved aircraft availability by reducing defects, cost overruns, lack of supplies and delays. Using the A-10 PE program as an example, two years ago the 309 AMXG would have assigned the work to a tail team — eight to 10 technicians with a variety of skills. Each technician was required to know every complicated step in the modification — all 10,000 of them. The refresh rate wasn’t there and the quality wasn’t there because the technicians wouldn’t work on another A-10 again for 90 days.

2008

Now, the process is separated into cells, and technicians are assigned to one cell, one part of the process that involves only 500 steps, rather than the entire 10,000-step aircraft. “When we reduced what the technicians needed to know, they quickly became experts in the area where they’re working and now the work is standardized and consistent,” Colonel Lindsley said. “They know what they’re about to do and they are able now to detect things that are out of quality standards because they know what a good jet looks like.” By using standard work, cellular flow and theory of constrainttype management techniques, the technicians are able to do the PE work, on the average, 300 hours less than what was given by the SPO. “We have a great plan and our technicians bought into it,” Colonel Lindsley said. “They are awesome putting that jet together and they love what they’ve been able to accomplish. And, the customer plays a big role in this because we learn about what we were doing — good and bad — because the first people that received our product were Baltimore and Battle Creek.” Through a program called Team Spirit, technicians from the Maryland Air National Guard and Michigan Air National Guard visited the 309 AMXG to inspect their aircraft while it was being modified. The aircraft was released to the Maryland ANG in August 2007and the 309 AMXG heard nothing but praises for their work.

Brig. Gen. Guy M. Walsh, 175th Wing Commander, and Lt. Col. Tim “T-Bone” Smith, 104th Fighter Squadron, Maryland ANG, visited Hill AFB to commend the technicians for “a job well-done.” A video showed the A-10C successfully targeting a bomb factory, an Al Qaeda safe house and roadside bombs in Iraq. “By September 2007, 60 days after completion, the first A-10C dropped a JDAM precision guided bomb and took out its intended target without disturbing other buildings on the ground as much as other weapons,” Colonel Smith said during a presentation in the base theater. “From our perspective as a warfighter, the airplane is magnificent.” The colonel said the C model maintenance was 100 percent effective, and no losses were caused by aircraft problems. Team Spirit continues to bring unit technicians to the base to inspect the work. “The feedback we get on the work we do is a two-fold thing — the customer comes in and we educate them on our production line, how it works and what we do; and they educate our workforce with their operational wisdom on that jet,” Colonel Lindsley said. “It’s a really good trade-off and a really good communications forum. It builds a lot of trust between the units. We take the lessons that we learn from that and incorporate them right back into the process. It’s not finger-pointing — it’s consistent actionable issues as they relate to the quality of the product that we’re producing. “You bundle all that together and you can’t help but get better at what you do. It’s extremely meaningful work and the technicians that work here on aircraft, in aircraft assemblies and subcomponents realize just how meaningful it is.” “It is a lot of responsibility. And we’re just getting better all the time.” About the Author: Mr. Bill Orndorff, GS-12, is a management analyst for the 309th Maintenance Wing, Ogden Air Logistics Center, Hill AFB, Utah. He is responsible for the wing’s public affairs and history programs. His 34-year career as a journalist includes editing the Hilltop Times at Hill AFB and the Cannoneer at Fort Sill, Okla. E-mail: bill.orndorff@hill.af.mil

Electrician John Burton checks specifications for Aircraft 89-2029 as it goes through maintenance at Hill AFB. Paperwork, kits, specifications and other details are numbered to match the aircraft in cabinets, charts and display racks that follow the aircraft as it goes through the Common Configuration Implementation Program.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Sustaining the B-One

has been constantly deployed in active support of the AOR. Austere operating environments and high ops tempos have weighed heavily on the airframes and crews who fly and maintain the aircraft. All aspects of aircraft availability have been affected; Total Non Mission Capable for Maintenance (TNMCM) is up; Total Non Mission Capable for Supply (TNMCS) is above the standard; and Unscheduled Depot Possessed hours have increased.

Submitted by Mr. Mark Quinlan

Over the past several years the B-1 Bomber has become a premier weapon system in the Global War on Terror, actively supporting Operation ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) and Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF). The airframe brings a wide range of options to the fight. As a conventional bomber, the B-1 provides the capability for long range, long loiter The 427th Aircraft Sustainment missions and provides time sensiGroup [also known as the B-1 tive targeting to the combatant “Logisticians have to do better than System Program Office (SPO)], commanders. Recently the addiunder the guidance of Col just to manage…we have to lead.” tion of the Sniper Advanced Michael Pelletier and Mr. Sam Targeting Pod has given and Malone (B-1 System Program – Major General Loren M. enhanced the bomber’s ability to Manager and Deputy System positively identify targets; self genReno, Commander, Oklahoma Program Manager, respectively), erate target coordinates; and perCity Air Logistics Center has stepped up to the challenges form Non-Traditional Intelligence, of aircraft availability. Surveillance and Reconnaissance. Overcoming the challenges Another frequently called upon would require more than management, but rather the leadership capability in a non-traditional role for heavy bombers is close air support and low altitude, full afterburner show of force. The wide Maj Gen Reno spoke of, and teamwork with the entire B-1 enterprise. Maj Gen Reno recently expanded on his comments on logisrange of capabilities has kept the B 1 in high demand. tics leadership and captured the essence of the B-1 SPO’s vision on The B-1’s popularity in the OEF/OIF Areas of Responsibility improving aircraft availability. In recent correspondence with lead(AORs) has presented challenges in aircraft availability. Since the ers of the 327th Aircraft Sustainment Wing the General added beginning of FY06, one of the three B 1 combat coded squadrons “One of my five strategic objectives here at OC-ALC has been for Photo: A B-1B carries a “Sniper” Pod during the combined operational and developmental test program to certify the Sniper pod and pylon on the B-1. The sniper pod is mounted on the lower right fuselage. The sniper pod allows the aircrew to positively identify a target and quickly assess battle damage after an attack. (USAF photo by Jet Fabara)

WINTER

2008

us, the ALC, to ‘lead Aircraft Availability Improvement Program goal achievement.’ I don't see it as ‘the field is responsible for controlling the TNMCM and unit-possessed-not-reported while the ALC is responsible for the TNMCS and the depot-possessed.’ Instead, I look to the program managers to manage the latter two but to help the field with the first two.” In order to help the field with TNMCM and unit-possessed-notreported, the B-1 SPO has leaned forward with several initiatives providing manning assistance through depot and contract field teams. As in the rest of the Air Force, the 2006 force reshaping reduced the number of available maintainers for the B-1. This, coupled with the loss of experienced B-1 mechanics through attrition, has negatively impacted TNMCM rates. The B 1 SPO has worked with the 76th Aircraft Maintenance Group (AMXG) at OC-ALC to provide maintenance assistance to the two B 1 Main Operating Bases (MOBs) at Dyess and Ellsworth Air Force Bases. The 76 AMXG performs Programmed Depot Maintenance (PDM) for the B-1 and has provided critical assistance and expertise to support the field. The intent is to provide experienced B-1 maintainers to work difficult and time consuming projects, freeing up flightline personnel for sortie generation. Recently the 76 AMXG deployed two technicians, Mr. Craig Baumann and Mr. Joel Canaga, to a B 1 Forward Operating Location in the AOR. A B-1 was non mission capable due to repeat and recurring problems in the bleed air system. Once it was determined the problem would require extensive troubleshooting and repair, the pair of technicians deployed. Working with the engineers and technical support personnel in the B-1 SPO, the problem was quickly identified and resolved. While deployed, Baumann and Canaga continued to assist the FOL with other maintenance issues, further aiding the FOL maintainers to generate critical combat sorties. This is just one of many examples over the past year where OC-ALC personnel have leaned forward to aid field maintainers.

reduce the combined depot flow times for the five year inspection cycle to no more than the current PDM time, while eliminating the time required for the current isochronal inspections in the field. At the same time, the more frequent visits by the aircraft to the heavy maintenance docks will allow faster incorporation of depot level time compliance technical orders (TCTOs) and modifications, reducing the need for contract and depot field teams to deploy to and interrupt base level operations. The B-1 SPO has taken the concept of contractor field teams one step further by producing a contract vehicle to provide additional manpower to the two MOBs. The contract field teams will reach out to the experienced B-1 mechanics that have left the government but still have much to offer the B-1 repair enterprise. One 25-person team located at each MOB will conduct isochronal, home-station checks, TCTO inspections and time change item replacement on the B-1 aircraft’s structural, avionics, hydraulic, electrical and propulsion systems, allowing base maintenance personnel to concentrate on sortie generation and training. The teams are getting ready to deploy soon and the B-1 SPO is anticipating favorable results from this initiative. Another initiative the B-1 SPO recently implemented is the Maintenance Improvement Working Group (MIWG). MIWG is a joint effort between the SPO engineers, equipment specialists and the MOB maintainers to explore methods to improve aircraft availability by identifying and implementing solutions to reduce the B-1 maintenance rate. The MIWG will review the trends for high TNMCM rates; high maintenance man–hours; and high failure systems and subsystems, with the goals to improve identification of root causes; improve troubleshooting techniques; test equipment and tech order guidance; increase cross-talk of best maintenance practices at the MOBs; and where possible improve access and ease Continued on next page...

The area of scheduled maintenance has also been addressed through the conversion of the B-1 from a phase inspection schedule to an isochronal inspection program, allowing deployed aircraft to remain deployed for a full six months rotation without having to be returned to CONUS for major inspections or the need to deploy an extensive inspection team and equipment. Following up on that effort, the B-1 team is planning to program and implement the “High Velocity Maintenance” concept to combine the PDM and isochronal inspections and perform them in the existing Tinker AFB B1 heavy maintenance docks. The plan is to A B-1B Lancer prepares to take off. (USAF photo by Capt Carrie Kessler)

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

E R : S U S TA I N I N G

THE

B-ONE

replacement of failed items. A part of this program is aimed at reducing the need for the field to request added technical instructions to fix or accept out of tolerance conditions that are not specifically addressed in existing tech data. These are significant drivers in the Unit Possessed-Not Reported status category. Unscheduled Depot Possessed hours, which challenges aircraft availability, have been met head on by the B-1 SPO personnel. Over the past two years, unprogrammed depot level maintenance hours have risen significantly. A few Deployed airmen from the 28 MXG from Ellsworth AFB, SD awaiting arrival of the aircrew prior to a combat mishap aircraft account for the majority mission in the CENTAF AOR. (USAF photo by MSgt Ken Stephens) of these hours, yet a large part of this is due to the increased demand for maintenance assistance requests to solve complex trouble shooting The cornerstone initiative to address the TNMCS rate for the tasks. In response the B-1 SPO looked at the process for han- B-1 is the Enterprise Repair Initiative. Enterprise Repair is a coldling these requests in order to reduce response time and deploy laborative effort to clearly define the total system repair requirea maintenance team quicker. The new process reduced the flow ment and address root cause constraints. Enterprise Repair by 20 days and has increased the flexibility of the team to sup- began as a series of LEAN-type events centered on the ALQport the warfighter on-site. Further efficiencies will soon be real- 161, the B-1â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Defensive Avionics System (DAS). The events ized as the SPO implements electronic processing and tracking identified issues with test stations, as well as workload capability and capacity in the field and at the depot. Follow-on events of technical assistance requests. have expanded the concepts to other systems and commodity Since 2004, the B-1 has been overflying the programmed flying groups within the Air Force Global Logistics Support Center. To hours by an average of 131.4 percent. This has resulted in supdate, the ALQ-161 Enterprise Repair efforts have seen signifiply buffers being consumed faster than computed and a backlog cant improvements in several areas including reduced MICAP in the supply system. To further complicate matters, the aircraft hours, backorders and TNMCS rates on the DAS. Other comis flying heavier and longer missions than planned. This is modity groups have not been in place long enough to accumuadding new stresses to the aging airframe resulting in new failure late significant trend data, but indications are good that similar modes and lower Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) rates. results will occur. Things are breaking more often and in new ways. Combatant commanders in the field require the B-1 to be in the fight each and every day. At no other time in the history of the B-1 has it faced such a collision of challenges to aircraft availability. The B-1 SPO has developed and implemented a comprehensive plan to dramatically improve aircraft availability over the next three years. These initiatives call upon the skills of the entire B-1 community. Pivotal to this success are the B-1 logisticians, directing and coordinating all stakeholders in the success of our weapon system. Just as the B-1 is leading the way in the fight abroad each day, B-1 logisticians are leading the B-1 into a brighter future of availability. About the Author: Mr. Mark Quinlan is the Deputy Director of the 553rd Aircraft Sustainment Squadron (B-1 Production A B-1B Lancer carries a sniper pod while flying a test mission. The sniper pod is scheduled to be fully operational this summer. (USAF photo by Jet Fabara)

WINTER

Support) at OC-ALC, Tinker AFB, OK.

2008

High Velocity Maintenance An Enterprise-wide Methodology to Increase Availability of USAF Fleets Submitted by the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center HVM Team They knew they were facing a “perfect storm.” As maintenance professionals at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center studied the incredible convergence of numerous challenges to U.S. Air Force aircraft availability rates, attacking the problem was a daunting job. Most significant among these challenges was an increase in operations and maintenance costs associated with an aging fleet; high operations tempo and costs due to the Global War on Terrorism; reduced active duty end strength; and lack of fiscal resources to recapitalize the fleet in a timely fashion. To make it through the storm, experts in Air Force Materiel Command and at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center knew an initiative with service-wide applicability was needed – a plan that would dramatically transform heavy maintenance operations with the bottom line goal of increasing aircraft availability. WR-ALC has developed such a plan with High Velocity Maintenance (HVM), an initiative to revolutionize the Air Force approach to scheduled aircraft maintenance. HVM is a first-of-its-kind approach, taking a holistic view of all processes impacting scheduled aircraft maintenance. It will drastically alter scheduled maintenance, resulting in significant increases in aircraft availability, reduced field maintenance burden and greater depot work capacity. HVM seeks to emulate high touch labor rates achieved by commercial airline and defense contractor Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO) operations through robust planning, well-defined and choreographed maintenance processes, and integrated materiel support. WR-ALC established a high performance team (HPT) consisting of experienced subject matter experts from across the center to study

the HVM concept. The HPT examined current programmed depot maintenance (PDM) processes and industry best practices, developing a corresponding executable HVM plan. To break the initiative into more manageable pieces, the HPT was divided into sub-teams corresponding to product flow, funding, requirements, infrastructure, materiel support and information & technology.

CURRENT

S TAT E A N D A S S O C I AT E D AT T R I B -

UTES The HPT began its study by mapping the current state of PDM, including all processes which impact it. This effort, believed to be the first of its kind to look across the ALC enterprise, took several months to accomplish. It uncovered several overarching attributes which have inhibited expedient and effective scheduled heavy maintenance. Aircraft condition. In the current state, there is a lack of thorough understanding of aircraft condition prior to induction for repair. Lack of awareness of aircraft condition is exacerbated by the two relatively disconnected Air Force maintenance programs — one at the air logistics center and another at the field level. Besides the avoidable loss of availability due to duplication of maintenance activities and unnecessary inspections, the two-program approach impacts maintenance requirements definition. Neither the ALC nor the field maintenance program achieves a complete, accurate and timely capture of all observed damage/wear and tear to aircraft, and the remedial actions to correct them. Heavy maintenance interval. Scheduled maintenance requirements were initially developed by the original equipment manufacturer. This can pose a problem for weapon systems such as the C-130 for a number of reasons — the tendency to use aircraft well past the original design service life; changes in operational use compared to original design intent; extensive airframe modifications; and a

Photo:Studying scheduled maintenance cycles for the C-130 played a big role in the development of a HVM initiative at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center. (Photo courtesy of WR-ALC)

WINTER

2008

proliferation of mission design series. Consequently, modifications to scheduled fleet maintenance requirements can be based on insufficient or incomplete data. The length of the specified heavy maintenance interval for the C-130, approximately 60 months, was observed to have its own negative impact on PDM and aircraft availability. The aircraft being seen at the ALC every five years drives a “must fix now” mentality— the belief that inconsequential discrepancies had to be corrected prior to return to the user. Workplace environment. ALC maintenance operations rely on the mechanic to assemble required tools, equipment, and technical references prior to beginning repair work. In contrast, commercial MRO operations have established highly planned/disciplined processes whereby all daily tasks are organized and staffed to minimize delay. Planning and integration. Presently, planning documents, such as Bills of Materiel, do not provide sufficient detail to support task kitting and choreographed operations. Some kitting is performed, but not to the level required to sustain high man-hour rates during maintenance. There is very little integration of kitting with work flow.

Another telling observation was that profitable commercial MRO ventures do not seek to extend the interval between visits to heavy maintenance facilities. Instead, industry seeks to put eyes and hands on the aircraft more frequently, on the order of 18 months to two years. This should not be interpreted as accomplishment of a typical PDM-like package on a more frequent basis; rather, this is the accomplishment of inspection and activities similar to Air Force C-130 isochronal inspections in a heavy maintenance facility instead of on an operational flight line. This allows closer monitoring of individual aircraft condition and makes repair deferment to the next cycle a valuable, viable option. A major finding from industry benchmarking was that commercial MRO operations, compared to ALCs, put a notably greater emphasis on detailed work planning. An apt term to describe the level of planning in the commercial setting is “choreographed.” Planning is accomplished in such detail, for instance, that a commercial airline company can routinely strip an aircraft over the course of one work shift, including removal of all passenger seats, in a two-hour block. Also, detailed planning is accomplished continuously in industry, folding in lessons learned from past aircraft, as well as status on current maintenance tasks. This yields a highly disciplined daily process keeping heavy maintenance on

INDUSTRY BENCHMARKING

Continued on next page...

The HPT visited a variety of commercial sites including the American Airlines MD-80 heavy maintenance facility in Tulsa, OK; Cascade Aerospace in Vancouver, BC; and TIMCO in Lake City, FL. The team also visited the HON Company, a furniture maker in Georgia, to see how Lean methodologies have been successfully implemented outside the aircraft world. The team observed in multiple settings with both civilian and military aircraft, that high touch labor rates were not only achievable, but were routine. In fact, some companies had achieved touch labor rates four-to-five times higher than typical rates at ALCs for years. WR-ALC HVM team members map the course for the future. (Photo courtesy of WR-ALC)

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

ER: HIGH VELOCITY MAINTENANCE

schedule. In addition to detailed task planning, industry puts heavy emphasis on synchronizing materiel support. Besides comprehensive, rapid materiel support, industry also prepositions other support functions, such as engineering, adjacent to aircraft docks to minimize response time. Industry was also found to have a much greater mechanic-centric focus than ALCs. Mechanics were routinely provided with a much greater level of tools, parts, equipment and data support, enabling them to spend a significantly greater portion of their work shift performing actual maintenance. Overall, the HVM team found ALCs have better facilities, better equipment, more experienced personnel and more advanced technology than industry counterparts. In the final analysis, the significantly higher touch labor rates and aircraft availability by commercial aircraft activities is primarily due to higher frequency of inspections in heavy maintenance facilities, better process planning and task kitting.

AIR FORCE

F U T U R E S TAT E A N D A S S O C I AT E D

AT T R I B U T E S Prominent in HVM’s future state design is the need to reduce variability in the maintenance requirement by performing smaller packages more frequently. Consequently the current C-130 PDM package will be dissected into four smaller packages and accomplished at shorter intervals. The smaller cycles will be accomplished at a frequency corresponding to the current C-130 isochronal interval of approximately 18 months. This allows the isochronal tasks to be absorbed into the PDM tasks and accomplished as part of scheduled maintenance at a heavy maintenance facility, analogous to the airline approach. It also reduces the maintenance, facility, cost and manpower burden on field units and eliminates redundancy of maintenance tasks accomplished as part of isochronal inspections and PDM. This strategy also allows improved insight into aircraft condition and dramatically enhances the ALC’s ability to achieve the high maintenance velocities experienced by commercial airlines. During performance of maintenance for one cycle, evaluation and inspection will be performed for the next cycle in order to better understand aircraft condition and allow lead-time for parts, equipment, funding, manpower and engineering support. This innovative approach also seeks to change the current “find and fix” paradigm associated with five-year C-130 PDM intervals, allowing for repair deferment options routinely used in industry, but not currently available to the Air Force. With this four-cycle approach, the scheduled maintenance lifecycle for Air Force aircraft will come to more closely resemble

WINTER

that of commercial aircraft, with the accompanying reduction in depot work in progress and increased availability. In support of this maintenance concept, variability analysis performed by the Georgia Institute of Technology and the University of Tennessee revealed that breaking the existing package into four smaller packages should result in a much greater confidence in staying on schedule. As the specific tasks of each cycle are developed, aligned and choreographed, advanced technology can provide an avenue to accelerate PDM flow. Once the critical path in each cycle is defined, engineers and technology experts will look for areas where technology can achieve breakthroughs beyond process improvements.

BENEFITS The most important benefit of the HVM initiative is an estimated 14 percent increase in C-130 aircraft availability to the war fighter. Including the absorption of C-130 isochronal activities into the depot work package, this equates to 55 more aircraft available to the user each and every day for mission planning and increased flying hour opportunities. When transported to other systems, the higher aircraft availability rates achieved through HVM can afford senior Air Force decision makers the options of reducing aging aircraft inventories, while providing a more efficient and effective maintenance philosophy for business case analyses when procuring additional aircraft and the accompanying maintenance support for new systems. Improved maintenance velocities also enable increased depot maintenance capability to accomplish new work in support of the war fighter. Other tangible benefits from HVM spring from the transition to a “single maintenance system” philosophy. Integrating all scheduled maintenance tasks into a single plan will reduce the burden on, and need for, field level maintenance manpower for recurring field inspections. Consolidating execution of these inspection tasks at specific sites can yield savings attributable to lower inventories of equipment, kits and consumable materiel. Finally, consolidation of inspections with depot maintenance frees up field level infrastructure (hangars, tools, supplies) for redeployment to other war fighter priorities. About the author: The WR-ALC team is confident great strides in aircraft maintenance are in store through the HVM initiative. Implementation of the concept is fully expected to increase availability of a higher quality aircraft while decreasing operations and maintenance costs.

2008

463rd ERRC AFSO21 Journey (Left) A T56 engine in cell 4 of build up - Quick Engine Change Kit install. (USAF photo A1C Dickson Lee, LRAFB)

Submitted by TSgt Brent Brandon

CHALLENGES

In 1996, under the umbrella of the 463d Airlift Group and the control of the 463d Logistics Support Squadron (now the 463d Maintenance Operations Squadron), the Engine Regional Repair Center (ERRC) was established as a Contract Field Team maintenance site responsible for regionalized overhaul of T56 engines for the Air Mobility Command (AMC) C-130 fleet (Pope, Dyess, and Little Rock AFBs). The onset of 1997 saw the ERRC’s contract workforce integrated with a cadre of active duty Air Force maintainers, and from 1996 to 2005, it was recognized as one of the more efficient engine overhaul facilities in the Air Force. For those nine years, the ERRC, consisting of the Jet Engine Intermediate Maintenance (JEIM) section; the Modules (MODS) section; the Quick Engine Change (QEC) kit section; and Test Cell, all operated independently of each other.

Although the processes within each section of the ERRC had been realigned into cells, each section and cell continued to utilize a push-type production system, causing excess WIP and finished goods inventory to stack-up throughout the shop between sections (push production is described as producing more than the downstream cell can handle). November 2007, the ERRC engine line was shut down due to overproduction of T56 engines Air Force-wide, highlighting the unbalanced levels of T56 spares between the different MAJCOMS. T56-15 and -7 spare engines had overshot the War Readiness Equipment (WRE) level requirements set by AMC’s Command Engine Manager. The ERRC had been building engines to the increased production goal instead of actual customer demand. The fix seemed simple… the ERRC would just need to adjust the process to the actual demand. The problem was that no one could determine the actual demand for T56 engines.

AFSO21 JOURNEY In 2006, the ERRC was tasked to increase engine production output by 30%-40%, equal to approximately 30 more engines per year. Based on an average 20 work-days per month and 12 months in a year, an engine would have to be produced every 2 days to meet customer demand. In response, the organization conducted its first Rapid Improvement Event (RIE), resulting in JEIM revamping their entire section to establish an assembly line type of workflow. The section was reorganized into six cells, which included the overall teardown of the engine, modules and the QEC kit, as well as reassembling and testing the engine at Test Cell. The workload was analyzed to reduce waste and then distributed to balance across the cells to meet a 2day Takt time (i.e. maximum time allowed to produce a product to meet demand). The new cell concept changed the erratic 15-day engine flow to a steady flow of 12 days. This new concept established the foundation for which all other improvements throughout the ERRC were based. 46

In December 2007, the ERRC was asked to produce seven engines a month while closely monitoring the WRE levels. To continue perfecting and improving the new 2-day process without overproducing, engines were inducted every three days, but each cell was still producing at a 2-day Takt. The one-day gap between engine inductions allowed managers to shift people around to problem areas that had fallen behind and allowed additional time for parts to be delivered from supply. However, at the same time several problems in addition to those mentioned above were being covered up instead of eliminated. Reorganizing JEIM allowed for improved pull production within JEIM, but did not stop JEIM from pushing engines on MODS, QEC, and Test Cell. Engine production continued on-schedule by relying on market places or “buffer” assets (i.e. spare pre-built modules and kits), which provided a cushion for the other sections to catch-up. Buffer assets are clearly beneficial in moderate numbers to compensate for unpredictable production delays (i.e. parts availability or rework), but again, the solution masked other problems throughout the process.

WINTER

2008

The Little Rock Engine Shop Team. (USAF photo A1C Dickson Lee, LRAFB)

Fast-forward to January 2008. After a year of incremental improvements to its processes and repair flow, the ERRC was touted as one of the best engine repair facilities with some of the most visable AFSO21 efforts in the engine repair world. Due to that progress and success, the ERRC was tasked by the Special Assistant for AFSO21 to the Secretary of the Air Force, Dr. Ron Ritter, to construct an exportable, deployable model within 6 months that could be used as a template for all T56 engine repair facilities, with the stipulation that the new model had to include all T56 engine and propeller related maintenance elements. A series of several improvement events then followed to devise the plan to consolidate the different propulsion maintenance shops on Little Rock AFB.

RECENT

AND FUTURE EVENTS

When the ERRC began their Continuous Process Improvement (CPI) journey, the 314th Maintenance Group was under the Air Education and Training Command (AETC) host. The 314th Airlift Wing at Little Rock AFB still maintained functional control of the 314th Maintenance Squadron propulsion shop. The shop, which housed the engine Retained Task Center (RTC) and propeller sections, supported Little Rock AFB C-130s (both AMC and AETC) with retained T56 engine repair tasks and propeller repairs. The ERRC still supported the AMC C-130 community but through more in-depth overhaul-level of repairs, thus highlighting the obvious duplication of supporting structures, ranging from facilities to leadership to tools and support equipment. In the beginning of June 2008, the ERRC High Level Value Stream Mapping (VSM) event was held as the first step in developing the ideal state model and future layouts for the two maintenance shops. A layout of the ideal state was mapped out in which the shops were consolidated and placed into the ERRC’s existing building. The new plan brought all of the sections together into an assembly line, but required some building modifications for optimal efficiency, so a second layout was created within the facility’s current constraints. One of the other benefits from the whole project that began with the initial VSM was

the cooperation with other C-130 organizations, specifically, the propulsion shop from Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) at Hurlburt Field, Florida. Their dedication of personnel provided a critical element—an educated but “outside-looking-in” perspective that can honestly and unemotionally critique the process as well as the ability to share ideas in use at the Hurlburt shop. Late summer of 2008, the JEIM section (now referred to as the “Aline” or assembly line), Test Cell, QEC, and MODS all conducted tactical level VSM events. One of the major deliverables from the events was a scaled, physical shop map that laid out the footprint of engine maintenance equipment and structures in the proposed future state design. The teams rebalanced the workload to meet Takt and determine the new cell manning requirements for all sections. Again, AFSOC personnel travelled to the event and participated in the more in-depth look at the disassembly and reassembly processes. From 1997 to the present, the ERRC has seen an enormous amount of revolutionary change, in the overall culture of engine maintenance, the concept of operations, and the day-to-day production efficiencies that have highlighted the facility as one of the best in the Air Force. Over the next couple of months in the summer and fall of 2008, the remaining sections’ events (RTC, AGE, and Propellers) will be completed and the future state is scheduled to be fully implemented within the current building constraints by October 2008. At that point, with the new process and layout being tested, evaluated and perfected, the ERRC will be poised in partnership with the AFSOC propulsion shop to export its revolutionary changes to the rest of the Air Force T56 maintenance community and potentially, the rest of the Air Force engine maintenance community as a whole. About the Author: TSgt Brent Brandon joined the Air Force in October 1999 as a T56 Turboprop mechanic. Previously assigned as the 463rd Engine Regional Repair Center Module Section Chief, he now serves as in the AFSO21 office.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

P r-

rk r-

The C-17 Program A Winning Team Making Aircraft Availability a Reality Submitted by Major Craig Juneau As I sit here in my “war bunker,” otherwise known as my cubical, I gaze out the window of Building 1600 Headquarters Air Mobility Command and ponder how to tell the story of the C-17’s formula for success. As the command’s newest C-17 Weapon System Manager, I am impressed with the way this weapon system, and more importantly the team behind it, generates results. Results that allow America’s sons and daughters to accomplish the mission each and every day with the confidence that no matter what the enemy, the environment, or “Murphy” might throw at them, the C-17 they fly, maintain, load, support, and depend upon will not let them down. The Air Force vision for Global Reach calls for increased aircraft availability. This is exactly what the C-17 delivers in abundance. The key to this proven track record of success is the integral relationship between Air Mobility Command, Air Force Material Command, and Boeing. It is a truly seamless and winning team with a 20/20 focus on meeting the ever evolving needs of the war fighter. This team utilizes many methods to continually meet and exceed expectations; however, from where I sit, three incredible processes give the C-17 community at large a distinctive advantage over other weapon systems. The processes I am referring to are respectively the Deficiency Report/Material Improvement Project (DR/MIP), the Supportability and Operations Review Team (SORT), and the Executive Steering Group (ESG).

of the DR. If the DR meets established criteria such as safety, aircraft availability, fuel savings, or fleet mission accomplishment, then it is taken on as a MIP. Material improvement projects are planned engineering investigations to find root causes and corrective actions, or evaluate proposed enhancements to the aircraft. The MIP investigations result in technical data changes, quality improvements, or Time Change Technical Orders (TCTO) funded under Globemaster III Sustainment Partnership (GSP) or MIP implementation funds. MIPs also serve as the integration vehicle which allows Air Force and Boeing engineers to jointly work with parts manufacturers and suppliers to attack discrepancies with their products. The ultimate goal is to improve aircraft availability and make the C-17 a more maintenance friendly aircraft.

The DR/MIP process is a conduit that empowers field-level maintainers with a direct line to the entire leadership team of a C-17 deficiency with a system, parts, support equipment or process that affects either the aircraft’s serviceability or maintenance reliability. Once the field generates a Deficiency Report, a team comprised of Boeing employees, the 516th Aeronautical Systems Group (AESG) (formerly the System Program Office) and AMC evaluate the merit

A C-17 flies over the Cooper River Bridge in Charleston, South Carolina. (Photo courtesy of Boeing)

Photo: A team of maintainers prepare for a morning sortie. (Photo courtesy of Boeing)

WINTER

2008

projecting both the power The Supportability and and good will of the Operations Review Team United States. However, (SORT) provides a venue for the airframe is but one cog field units from AMC, Air that forms a weapon sysEducation and Training tem. The real power supCommand, Air Force Reserve ply for the weapon system Command, Pacific Air Forces, comes from the tremendous the Air National Guard, Royal team of professionals (miliAustralian Air Force, United tary and civilian) who Kingdom, and Canada to interstrive each and every day act with each other as well as to make the mission hapWarner-Robins Air Logistics pen. These amazing people Center, 516th AESG, and form a cohesive, flexible Boeing. The 516th AESG, and team that utilizes smartly Boeing leadership provides designed processes to make updates on new and on-going A C-17 supporting Operation DEEP FREEZE in Antarctica. (Photo courtesy of Boeing) a real impact on aircraft sustainment issues. This field availability and in the lives perspective is critical to the long-term health of the weapon system. During the SORT, the of our Airmen. It is indeed an honor to serve with this phenometeams evaluate the operational reliability and supportability of the nal team. C-17 fleet. They recommend needed improvements to enhance reliability, maintainability, aircraft availability, and lower life cycle cost. About the Author: Major Craig E. Juneau is the C-17 Section Chief, This forum allows unfiltered information flow from the flightline Headquarters Air Mobility Command, Scott Air Force Base, IL. K mechanic to the lead engineer. The initiatives presented at the SORT are assigned to integrated process teams to evaluate and develop into actionable items. The motivation and innovation of the representatives from the wings, especially the junior enlisted technical experts is invaluable to the success of the SORT. They provided hard hitting and specific input that will make fleet wide impacts. In addition, the vigor with which the Boeing teammates attack issues and make them their own was impressive. The sheer depth and breadth of knowledge assembled for the SORT make it a benchmark for all programs. The mission of the ESG is â&#x20AC;&#x153;to seek systematic and process improvements to maximize fleet availability by providing necessary senior leadership oversight, guidance and resource support; with the overarching goal of optimizing C-17 aircraft availability.â&#x20AC;? The original ESG started with one goal in mind increasing the mission capable rate and aircraft availability. The charter members realized a separate conference consisting of senior maintenance leaders was necessary to drive enterprise-wide improvements. Colonel (Ret) Tom Toole designed the format of utilizing teams based on the major maintenance functions and looking at areas of improvement. It truly was all about employee involvement, LEAN and bottom-up innovation. Today the ESG is held immediately after the SORT and gives the program that top-level direction and horsepower to make real change. The C-17 is the airframe of choice for Air Mobility Command to take the fight right to the door step of the enemy and humanitarian supplies to those in need. It is a tremendous platform for

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Aircraft Availability The C-5 Reliability Enhancement Re-Engining Program (RERP)

Submitted by Capt Bill Ott The C-5 has been and will remain a critical component of strategic airlift capability for the United States. Much has been said and written about its varying Mission Capable (MC) rates, Departure Reliability Rates, Mean-Time-Between-Failure (MTBF) and Mean-Time-Between-Repair (MTBR) rates, as well as the fact that currently two-thirds of the fleet is in the ANG and AFRC. In order to meet combatant commanders’ requirements for on-time airlift delivery of oversize and outsize (O&O) cargo, Air Mobility Command (AMC) must have access to a properly sized fleet of C17s and C-5s. This fleet must meet Air Force MC standards and be capable of accessing the preferred air traffic routings from North America to Europe and Northeast Asia. This reduces the need for air refueling support and more efficiently meets combatant commanders’ force closure times. The fleet must also adhere to internationally approved aircraft noise and engine exhaust standards to allow unrestricted international access. Currently, the C-5 fleet cannot meet these requirements without substantial modernization. A 1999 C-5 Development System Office Fleet Availability Baseline Analysis and a 2001 Analysis of Alternatives identified and validated that C-5 RERP, when combined with a purchase of additional C-17s, is the “best value solution” to meet the combatant commanders’ requirement for O&O cargo airlift. The 2005 Mobility Capability Study concluded that 292 strategic airlift aircraft (180 C-17s and 112 fully modernized C-5s) would provide sufficient capacity to support the National Military Strategy with medium risk. Subsequently, the FY07 National Defense Authorization Act stated, “effective October 1, 2008, the Secretary of the Air Force shall maintain a total aircraft inventory of strategic airlift aircraft of not less than 299 aircraft.” The current C-5 fleet consists of 111 aircraft (fleet size reduced from 112 to 111 after Class A mishap destroyed 1 C-5B in April 06), including 3 C-5Ms (RERP-modified C-5s are designated C-5Ms), 59 C-5As, 47 C-5Bs,

and 2 C-5Cs. The Oct 2007-Jan 2008 OSD C-5 RERP Nunn-McCurdy recertification process culminated in a USD (AT&L) Acquisition Decision Memorandum that directed a restructured RERP production modification of only 47 remaining C-5Bs and 2 C-5Cs, excluding the 59 C-5As. The combination of C-5 re-engining and subsystem improvements with C-5 logistics system improvements is the most cost effective option to achieve a wartime sustained MC rate of 75% for RERP modified C5s while also significantly reducing total ownership costs of the C5 fleet.

W H AT W I L L R E R P P R O V I D E ? 1 . I M P R O V E D P E R F O R M A N C E : The C-5M will achieve the required wartime 75% MC rate by integrating a commercial-off-theshelf (COTS) propulsion system, upgrading 70 subsystems and components (including 50 reliability enhancements), providing proper spares levels necessary for a >83.1% issue effectiveness rate, and improving the efficiency of C-5 phased inspection and maintenance programs. Improved C-5M climb performance over legacy C-5s will ensure access to preferred air traffic routings between North America and Europe or Northeast Asia, and provide the capability to operate with wartime planning factor loads from shorter runways in warmer climates. The C-5M engines will also meet worldwide aircraft noise and pollution emission standards. Communications, navigation, and surveillance architecture enhancements for the C-5 will be made separate from RERP under the Avionics Modernization Program (AMP), and will be incorporated on all C-5s.

WINTER

2008

2. REDUCED

OWNERSHIP COSTS:

The increased mean time between maintenance (MTBM), reduced maintenance man-hours per flying hour (MMH/FH), reduced fuel consumption, coupled with contractor warranties, will reduce C-5 operating and support costs. C-5 RERP will also implement the 2007 AMC/A4-directed Maintenance Training System Concept of Operation — a costeffective blend of maintenance training devices, integrated multimedia instruction, and on-aircraft training. Taking into account the investment cost of RERP development, production, depot stand-up, and MILCON, RERP is predicted to provide $8.9Bin reduced total ownership costs through 2040, based on the FY08 OSD Cost Analysis Improvement Group, Independent Cost Estimate.

3 . G R E A T E R O P E R A T I O N A L E F F E C T I V E N E S S : The C-5M will be capable of moving combat units more effectively and efficiently. For example, AMC will be able to move the 82d Airborne Division from Pope AFB NC more rapidly, with less reliance on inflight refueling support, because the C-5M can carry more cargo from shorter runways on hotter days. Also, the C-5M will enable use of preferred airspace routing, higher cruise altitudes with increased specific range, and higher cruise speeds. This will improve the closure time of other lead-the-fight units like the CONUS based 1st and 2d Marine Expeditionary Forces. The C-5M will operate globally in support of operations ranging from peacetime engagements to conventional, high intensity, and general warfare.

4 . A I R C R A F T A V A I L A B I L I T Y : MC rates, MTBF, MTBM, Mission Effectiveness and just about any other metric tied to or used by Air Force leadership are founded upon the single most significant metric — Aircraft Availability (AA). The aircraft must be available to the operational user, the theatre commander, TACC, USTRANSCOM, etc. in order to be meaningful. Availability is most impacted by how the weapon system is A modernized version of the C-5 Galaxy, managed on an enterknown as the C-5M, made its maiden flight prise level. For examat Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Ga.in June. ple, the RERP program (Lockheed Martin photo) will not provide a positive AA gain in the field until the initial negative AA balance (more aircraft in modification than have been delivered) is overcome, in approximately FY13. Projected RERP AA calculations will be updated annually based on updated RERP production progress. There are a few important programs that will

help ensure RERP production flows smoothly…and provides the operational units with sustainment support during the bed-down periods. As many of us have seen on other weapons systems, there will be prime contractor support for an initial period on the RERP program. There is always the question of “what does that get us?” whenever a loggie hears of some sort of contractor support to a weapon system.

W H AT W I L L T H E R E R P I N T E R I M C O N T R A C T O R SUPPORT (ICS) PROVIDE? The RERP ICS contract will be established from February 2009 to March 2012 to provide support until long term organic depot capability and contractor support are in place. The ICS contract will include provisions for development efforts required to fix emergency and urgent action deficiencies, if any, discovered during OT&E or after the System Demonstration & Development (SDD) inspection and acceptance period expires. Under this contract, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics (LMA) will provide supply management, engineering support, software maintenance, F138-GE-100 engine services, special studies and analyses, Diminishing Manufacturing Sources of Material Support (DMSMS) studies and analyses, and administration/management of these areas. LMA, operating as a Contractor Inventory Control Point under the auspices of HQ AF/A4R under the Contractor Supported Weapon Systems (CSWS) concept, will implement a comprehensive cost effective ICS program for the RERP modified C-5 aircraft. Contractor support for the C-5 RERP aircraft will be limited to new and peculiar systems/components installed as a result of the RERP modification; items common to legacy C-5s will still be supported through current organic supply and maintenance processes. During ICS, LMA will establish a contractor-operated supply support

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Continued on next page...

operation to support maintenance, supply service, spares, and steady state performance of all unique RERP spare components cataloged and managed by them. The intent is to provide seamless supply chain support to government locations supporting the C-5 program. They will provide a 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week response to all MICAP requests and fill CONUS MICAP requests within 48 hours, and ship to Overseas Continental US port within 48 hours. They will meet an issue effectiveness rate of 85%, which will facilitate achieving a 75% wartime MC rate (program threshold) and 82% peacetime MC rate (program objective).

E R : A I R C R A F T AVA I L A B I L I T Y

HOW DO WE C-5S?

FROM 3

TYPES OF

Based on current configurations of C-5s (A, B, C Models) and the revised RERP production authorization (52 M models); 3 types of C-5s must be managed as we transition all legacy aircraft to either AMP (Avionics Modernization Program) or RERP configurations. The 730th Aircraft Sustainment Group at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center has enterprise level responsibility to both maximize aircraft availability as well as transition C-5s from legacy to either the AMP or RERP configuration. This necessitated a change in how C-5 modification programs would be managed to better meet all stakeholder requirements. Fleet integration management will now integrate each of the weapon system management processes and tools through the use

of a comprehensive fleet management system. Most of us understand the role that Plans & Scheduling plays in executing the annual flying program, TCTO scheduling and other field level impacts on aircraft availability. In the case of the C-5 we take that same philosophy to the program level with an integrated master schedule. The C-5 Program Office Integrated Master Schedule is used to establish a C-5 Fleet Strategy that efficiently schedules depot level maintenance, aircraft modifications, and maintenance activities to maximize aircraft availability and minimize aircraft down time. IMS provides information to program managers and aids them in tail number scheduling for maintenance and modifications. All new C-5 aircraft modifications, maintenance and sustainment requirements performed at the depot level (currently not field-level) are now required to be integrated into the IMS prior to contract execution. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s important to understand that there are a host of initiatives other than RERP for improving AA although RERP is one that will be most noticeable in the operational environment. The 565th Aircraft Sustainment Squadron (under the 730th ACSG) is the single point of integration for scheduled modifications and major maintenance events on the C-5. This system will now improve through implementing the Industrial and Financial Systems (IFS) tool coming with the AF Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS). WR-ALC is cur-

Upgrades to the new C-5M include new, more powerful engines; a modern cockpit with a digital, all weather flight control system, a new communications suite and enhanced navigation and safety equipment. (Lockheed Martin photo)

WINTER

2008

tiated every two years. The C-5 SPM, through the AMC Requirements Planning Council, is planning the first block upgrade to begin development in the FY10 POM cycle. The goal of the first block upgrade will be to reduce the hardware and software differences between the AMP and RERP programs. This will help establish a common baseline across the C-5 fleet, and facilitate grouping of capabilities in later upgrades. The following areas are being considered for inclusion in block 1: Flight Management System (FMS) corrections; Attendees at the roll-out ceremony for the modernized C-5M receive a hands-on experience with the aircraft’s Common AMP/RERP Computer and modern cockpit. The ceremony was held May 17, 2006, at the Lockheed Martin facility in Marietta, Ga. Software (for example, the third Computer ((Lockheed Martin photo) Processing Module) for AMP; fixes for RERP OT&E Deficiency Reports (DR); rently working with IFS to refine weapon system requirements for and AMP DR corrections not previously incorporated into a more robust scheduling tool. The 330th Aircraft Sustainment RERP. The second block upgrade will consider, but will not be Wing has partnered with the 402d Maintenance Wing (home of the ECSS Integration Office) and the WR-ALC High Velocity limited to: RERP OT&E DRs; New Mission Computer; DRs Maintenance (HVM) office to introduce ECSS into depot sustain- from RERP/AMP; new Weather Radar; Mode 5 Identification ment activities. The scheduling tool is a small subset of the IFS Friend/Foe (IFF) and Automatic Dependent Surveillanceand using IFS as the integrator will ensure compatibility with the Broadcast (ADS-B). Full funding for these upgrades is a consisentire ECSS suite when that ongoing AF initiative arrives at WR- tent challenge, but the plan is to do as much as possible for each ALC. Just as ECSS will change the way we use/manage/interact block progression with short-falls being readdressed in subsewith maintenance related IT platforms, we are also changing the quent blocks. way we use/manage/interact with the C-5. A paradigm shift is coming in the form of a block upgrade program.

T H E PA R A D I G M I S S H I F T I N G One of the most valuable programmatic ways to improve AA and to provide continued capability is to adopt a C-5 Block Upgrade Program approach in order to implement a more predictable and executable modernization program. Though not new to other AF weapon systems, the Block Upgrade Program is a new concept to the C-5. This concept takes into account both hardware and software requirements needed in normal sustainment activities as well as requirements to add capability, all while managing them in a more coordinated manner. Until AMP and RERP, the C-5 was never viewed as a software intensive platform. Also, the number and nature of capability requirements placed on the C-5 to support Theatre Commander requirements (LAIRCM and Crew Armor as examples) have increased. Correspondingly, the funding to support them has gone up considerably in the last seven years. It’s time to integrate them into a more transparent, focused activity by adapting to this block upgrade strategy. Each block will be scoped into a 3-year development/integration/test period, with new blocks ini-

The C-5 will continue to be a strategic asset to the United States, delivering troops and O&O cargo to locations across the globe through its current service life of 2040. RERP, the Block Cycle approach, IMS, and CLS are vital to delivering that capability…they will make the C-5 a more robust airlifter, improve MC rates, Departure Reliability and, most importantly, be there when TACC and USTRANSCOM needs it to be. These programs are about improving weapon systems capability and aircraft availability…that’s what modernization should be all about. About the Author: Capt Bill Ott, C-5 Modernization Flight Chief, Robins AFB, GA. Capt Ott is a core Aircraft Maintainer currently in the ALEET Program, assigned to the 330th Aircraft Sustainment Wing in the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center. Contributors to this article: Col Jim Dendis, Commander, 730 ACSG, Robins AFB, GA; Ms. Linda K. Davis, C-5 RERP Program Manager, 716 AESG, Wright Patterson AFB, OH; Maj. Chuck Seidel, Operations Officer, 565 ACSS, Robins AFB, GA; and Mr. John Artuso, Director, 716th AESG, Wright Patterson AFB, OH.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

DRs: A Colossal Waste of Time?

Submitted by Mrs. Barbara Westgate and Lt Col Keith Bearden

B-1B Sustainment Block 12 upgrades updated the CITS software clearing the fault from the system.

Over the years I’ve heard every phrase in the book. “Filling out a DR [deficiency report] is a waste of time.” “The problem is not that bad.” “I can live with it.” “It’s only happened a couple of times.” “No one actually got hurt.” “They are not going to do anything with it.” I have seen and heard a veritable buffet of horror stories resulting from inaction to either submit a DR or to take action in response to a DR.

This example is unacceptable. On May 2, 2006, Air Force Materiel Command implemented a new DR process known as Deficiency Reporting, Investigating & Resolution (DRI&R). Governed under a revamped Air Force Materiel Command Instruction (AFMCI) 63510, the DRI&R process enables and engenders users to identify and correct deficiencies before they affect mission capability. Successful implementation of DRI&R requires total ownership costs to temper all resolution decisions, in order to correct, mitigate, and accept the risk of conditions impacting operational safety, suitability and effectiveness (OSS&E) of the system.

For example, on December 12, 1996, a maintainer at Ellsworth AFB wrote a Software Deficiency Report (SDR) against the B-1B Central Integrated Test System (CITS). The fault was relatively minor and displayed an error code not actually present. The maintainer recommended a simple solution and to change the fault filter for further examination before issuing a CITS fault. Oklahoma City-Air Logistics Center, Aeronautical Systems Center, Air Combat Command, Air Force Flight Test Center and Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center reviewed the D.R. and all agreed a repair was necessary. Lacking funding, however, left the DR open and the fault uncorrected. As a result, the SDR languished on the back burner for 12 years in the GO21 system, and for 4,211 days the same fault repeated 104 more times! Finally, on June 23, 2008,

I’d like to highlight how the process can work if everyone involved with DRs (the user, maintainer, logistician and engineer) is actively involved from the beginning. In 2007, the Air Mobility Command, Director of Operations (AMC/A3) requested an out-ofcycle change to the AN/AAR-47 missile warning system (MWS) (Figure 1) because of an inordinate number of laser false alarms. Many AMC aircraft as well as Navy and USMC use this particular MWS (Figure 2). AFMC immediately convened an integrated product team (IPT) and requested a DR from AMC detailing the deficiency. The DR

WINTER

2008

provided the IPT with a documented problem they used to seek outof-cycle funding to repair the deficiency. Without the DR the IPT lacks substantiated basis for performing any modifications to the system!

Figure 1: AN/AAR-47 MWS

then require to be tested with an approximate time of 6 months to conclude. Option 3 included starting a follow-on OFP to incorporate the requested change to the block cycle in Option 1. The follow-on OFP was already in the planning stages to allow multiple operator selections from the user interface and the requested change could easily be incorporated into this release. However, this OFP was scheduled for release approximately 24 months from the date of the DR submission. The Navy selected Option 3, while AMC selected Option 2 as the best solution. Air Mobility Command needed the change quickly and was not completely satisfied with the 6 month timeframe, but understood the required regression testing by AFMC and the Navy professionals drove the length of time. This is where the joint team really began to shine. Within 5 days of the DR, programmers coded a solution and began bench testing. Within 14 days, the programmers completed testing and sent the slightly modified OFP to the System Integration Lab for the C-130J to verify the new code for their aircraft. Within 2 months, they loaded the code onto a C130H2 for flight testing. Within 4 months, AFMC released the modification for all USAF AN/AAR-47 equipped aircraft. Fundamentally, the DR system works when everyone pulls together as a team. In 2004, it became apparent that GO21 was not sustainable until the Electronic Combat Support System could replace certain features of the outdated system. Consequently, in June of 2008, the Air Force instituted a new data base tool called the Joint Deficiency Reporting System (JDRS). JDRS provides sufficient capacity to house the 750,000 DR historical records, workflow management to establish uniform process execution, and the flexibility to accommodate process improvements. Furthermore, the Air Force, Army, Coast Guard and Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) use JDRS to manage all DRs, and the Navy uses JDRS for all aviation related deficiencies.

AAR-47 MWS Optical Sensors

With the DR in-hand the Air Force IPT began the resolution process. The IPTorganized a teleconference with the MWS stakeholders: HQ AMC/A3, ATK (the prime contractor), Navy program management (PMA-272) and Navy Electronic Warfare software authority at Point Mugu. During the lengthy teleconference, the IPT discussed three options to resolve the issue. Option 1 included modifying the latest Operational Flight Program (OFP) block cycle update undergoing bench test. This modification would delay release of the OFP by approximately 6 months, which was 12 months from the date of the DR, and would incorporate the most up-to-date results from live fire testing of enemy Man Portable Air Defense Systems. Under option 2, the IPT could quickly modify the fielded O.F.P. with the change. The modification would be “hard wired” into the code but would not affect the overall functionality of the system. The code change would take less than one day and

Deficiency Reporting, Investigating & Resolution is critical to the Air Force’s ability to deliver sovereign options for the defense of the United States of America and its global interests. DRI&R and JDRS not only help the Air Force effectively manage and resolve DRs, but also encourage information sharing with other parts of the DoD aviation enterprise to implement the best solutions possible and reduce duplication of effort. About the Author: Mrs. Barbara Westgate, a member of the Senior Executive Service, is Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Plans and Programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. She was formerly the Executive Director of AFMC at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio. Lt Col Keith Bearden is currently the Chief of AFMC's CAG also at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

eLog21 Aircraft Availability Improvement Program

A C-5 Galaxy sits on the flightline at Taegu Air Base, South Korea. (U.S. Army photo by PFC Nicholas Hernandez)

Submitted by Mr Robert Eardley Having just returned from the 2008 LOA National Convention, I learned the value of being a history major! My personal history tracks back to the beginning of General Wilbur L. “Bill” Creech’s mission capability rates, having just erased all remnants of OR, NOR, and NORS terminology from my morning charts. I was very lucky to hear the General Creech delivered “Slippery Slope” briefings, even if I was flipping the charts in the back of the room. Actually twice: once to the Tactical Air Command (TAC) Wing/CCs and once to the TAC Deputy Commanders for Maintenance (DCM). I still wonder why the language was a little saltier at the DCM briefing. As all the young flightline officers knew, achieving your mission capability (MC) rates was the way to guarantee a better day. What the AF learned years later was that systemic problems with aging fleets could be covered by the hard work at wing level. Roll around to the late 1990s when we had 150 KC-135s in the depot and excellent MC rates in our flying units. Good rates, but we could not generate a fleet to meet a contingency. The CSAF was losing ground with Congress when he asked for more money and they threw back those great rates. Aircraft Availability (AA) was how he got his point across—AA talked to fleet capabilities. AA measured the number of aircraft that were MC from the Total Active Inventory (TAI) – NOT just those that were parked out in front of maintenance. MC rates applied only to our Primary Aircraft Authorization (PAA) and did not account for those jets in extended depot maintenance or shortnotice drop-ins for specific repairs.

“Warp drive” to 2004, when the AF established the parameters of the Expeditionary Logistics for the 21st Century (eLog21) Campaign with a senior leader’s endorsed goal of a 20% increase in aircraft availability by FY11 (Fig. 1). By April 2005 we were ready to develop improvement plans for each Mission Design Series (MDS). First step was to formalize the definition of AA: Aircraft Availability (AA): The percent of a fleet that is available to support the mission. Calculation = (MC hours/TAI hours) X 100 = AA%.

A PROJECT BECOMES A PROGRAM We stepped out to develop what would be called the Aircraft Availability Improvement Program (AAIP) with a joint signed letter from AFMC/A4 and AF/A4M. We knew that our Air Logistics Centers had already worked with ACC/A4 to analyze and improve the overall system health of the B-1 and F-16 platforms. To be honest, AFMC/A4 captured the superb work of the B-1 and F-16 program offices to baseline what is now known as AAIP. It was only to last until 2011!!! AAIP has become a living management tool used to achieve, improve, and measure lifecycle support of our critical weapon systems. The AAIP plan is a collaboration between the System Support Manager and System Program Managers (SSM/SPM) and Lead MAJCOM to sustain, improve, and document changes to AA. It captures problems or the needed changes in ratings of four primary categories that impact AA: non-mission capable (due to) maintenance (NMCM), non-mission capable (due to) supply (NMCS), depot possessed (DP), and unit possessed, not reported (UPNR).

Photo: A C-5 Galaxy sits on the flightline at Taegu Air Base, South Korea. (U.S. Army photo by PFC Nicholas Hernandez)

Brilliant and simple, these four measureable areas easily capture where a platform is sick and where it can be fixed. The “bubble” chart became a fixture of each AAIP (See Figure 1). AAIP incorporates the full array of transformation initiatives, including Lean, systems and process re-engineering, structural changes, modifications, flight plans etc., into a weapon system specific actionable plan to optimize availability and reduce/minimize cost. Improvements can be found in reduced inspections, increased mission capability rates, extended on wing times, reduced labor standards, consolidated repair, centralized maintenance actions, and reduced costs. The goal was to establish an enterprise approach involving all players within the enterprise process. Managers were encouraged to reach the 20% goal with improvements at the depot, in the field, through component improvement, modification programs, training initiatives, supply initiatives and engineering improvements (See Figure 2). Early successes in reducing depot flow times for the F-15, F-16 Cellular Flow, C-130 High Velocity Maintenance (HVM), and C-5 Maintenance Steering Group 3 (MSG3) initiatives proved that AA improvements were there. The interesting insight came from a past ASW/CC when he commented, “I knew our Program Managers were doing wonderful things, but I had never seen their efforts all listed on one sheet together! Now I get to see how all our efforts work in concert.”

A A S T A N D A R D = ( PA A X M C S T A N D A R D ) / TA I These standards are considered an unconstrained value—the aircraft we need to meet all mission requirements without consideration to cost or manpower. The AA Projection is our planned availability for the current fiscal year and the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP). It is considered a constrained target, subject to manpower and fiscal restraints. The AA Projection is a collaboratively negotiated and agreed upon planned value between the SSM/SPM and Lead MAJCOM. Taking into account impacts to the fleet based on “known factors” not previously included in standards calculation (depot modifications, increases and decreases in TAI, changes in requirements, budget changes, etc) we found that many platforms would require years of hard work to meet AA standards. Continued on next page... Figure 1

However, it was quickly recognized that the 20% improvement goal was not necessarily a one-size-fits-all for the multiple platforms we support. Aircraft in or about to enter an extended period of aircraft modifications are not going to improve over the short term. How about all those A-10s in Precision Engagement (PE) and Thick Wing modification, and those tired C-130s needing new Center Wing Boxes (CWBs) or extended base level inspections until new CWBs are delivered? We had to take a step back and reevaluate our goals. By the end of 2007, we saw that AA was taking over the Air Force as the CSAF metric of choice. Aircraft Availability became a forward thinking methodology of looking at weapon system readiness. Improvements to acquisition strategy, repair processes, supply, and unit possession are highlighted so that warfighter support is enhanced. HQ AFMC/CC presented a twice yearly Weapon System Review (WSR) to the CSAF, all based on aircraft availability. Briefings that leaned forward 6 months to 5 years. FOR THE FIRST TIME we were briefing the Boss on what was going to happen on his weapon systems, not on some five month old MICAP. It is the Program Manager’s opportunity to highlight smart planning or point out where his system needed “four star” assistance. This was a big change to past presentations!

Figure 2

Currently, goals are based on operational requirements and are computed annually. HAF/A4LY established the AA Standards in December 2007 as an operational requirement based on MC rate, PAA and TAI.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Figure 3

These metrics are included in the desktop slide in the WSR (See Figure 3). Over 150 slides are included in the WSR. Every weapon system except Air Force One is reviewed twice yearly.

ER:

ELOG21

- A I R C R A F T AVA I L A B I L I T Y I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M

T H E TA K E AWAY AA is a fleet metric. It is a commanderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s assessment of his go-toward strength. The A4s are briefing their MAJCOM/CC quarterly on fleet health (See Figure 5). Program managers look at the implementation of operational upgrades, system upgrades, and depot program implementation and the effects those requirements have on AA. They look at the number of aircraft available and the non-availability metrics that are or will impact the fleet over time. Figure 4

AA is not a metric that can be managed from the flightline. Each unit can do their part to maintain system mission capable rates and working command and unit initiatives that support command goals and Air Force AA standards and projections. But our flightline shops should not look at the status board and think about AA, rather how they are managing resources to meet squadron/wing maintenance and flying goals. What we talk about is the idea that MC rates are leadership driven. Rates are affected more on average by what happens between 11 PM and 6 AM every day. Good 8 and 12-hour fix rates (and quality fixes) drive good MC rates. Those rates are measures of time divided by possessed aircraft. We look at AA as a metric that is affected by money. Fund the manpower, fund the modification and depot programs, make sure the supply bins are holding the right parts and the fleet thrives.

An F-15E Strike eagle conducts a mission over Afghanistan.((USAF photo by SSgt Aaron Allmon)

That is why the Centralized Asset Management (CAM) office at HQ AFMC/A4F reviews each AA target against projected funds. Part of the AAIP development process looks at the program funding to support planned targets. AAIP has come a long way, and is still growing and changing. But it will always support the warfighter to ensure each weapon system fleet is managed to the best possible standards. About

the

Author:

Mr.

Robert Eardley is the Weapon System Sustainment Branch Aircraft Sustainment Lead, WPAFB, HQ AFMC/A4US.

K 60

WINTER

2008

Focus on a Chapter Leader An interview with Captain Lupe Gutierrez Focus on a Chapter Leader features a selected LOA chapter member or officer. We spotlight these key Company Grade Officers to recognize their outstanding leadership at the local level which forms the foundation for the success of LOA nationally. In addition this feature provides insight to our readers to our future Air Force and LOA leaders. This issue’s “Focus” is on Capt Lupe Gutierrez of the Elmendorf LOA Chapter. What made you decide to commit to join our Air Force? First and foremost patriotism, I wanted to serve my country and do my part to defend freedom, but secondly I also joined because I wanted to be added to the coveted “Hall of Fame” picture-wall my Grandmother kept of all the previous members of my family who served in the military. Name three things that you think can be improved in the Air Force today: Accountability - holding personnel accountable for their actions or inactions Back-to-basics maintenance - put more boots on the flightline and less time doing computer based training or ancillary training Customer service - our Airmen deserve it in every facet from daily organization-to-organization interaction, to finance, to personnel issues, etc. Our Airmen are a precious resource and if they need help, we owe it to them to get the help or answers they need and that is done by personal customer service, not via e-mail or through a call center. Have you participated in any AFSO21 projects? Unfortunately no, although we have leaned out some of our processes such as initiating an electronic document control process for documents eliminating the need to maintain over 10,000 “hard copies”. Have you deployed recently? No, my last deployment was AEF Silver to Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar [Nov 03 - Mar 04], but I am always ready and willing to go wherever the Air Force needs me.

WINTER

2008

What is the biggest challenge you encounter as an officer in our Air Force today?

VITAL STATISTICS Name: Lupe Gutierrez

The biggest challenge has been trying to do it all by myself. Coming from a prior enlisted background I would make things happen regardless of what was asked of me, and I carried that attitude with me as an officer. But, I quickly learned that delegation and follow-up were the key to ensuring tasks were accomplished. Determining when I needed to get involved for that encouragement or that gentle push to watch our Airmen excel and do amazing things has also taught me that sometimes tasks can’t happen and that I needed to have the courage to tell the boss why we couldn’t make something happen. What do you think are the three most significant logistics challenges in the USAF today? Money – It seems we always get to a point where we are out of money, but then the end-of-year fall-out money becomes available, and there’s a scramble to execute the budget and spend those funds. I know that the last two years’ close-out processes have been much better as the money seemed to flow a little earlier and we had a priority list of items to buy with end–of-year monies that took into account mission execution and Quality of Life for the troops. I also know that our budget is dependent on Congress and it takes an effective end-of-year purchase list to make the right purchases, but it just seems to me there should be a better way. Red Tape – Why are we held to purchase from the lowest bidder? Then later when we receive that product and realize that it is inferior to what we needed—now more money will be spent either correcting that item or getting the item we originally wanted. I know due to past abuses by some, all major purchases need to be bid on by competing sources, but if they don’t deliver what is required, then why should our Airmen settle for less. Conflicting Priorities – A delicate art of balancing maintenance priorities and sortie generation.

Hometown: Victoria, Texas College: Wayland Baptist University Degree: Occupational Education LOA Chapter Affiliation: Elmendorf Professional Military Education: - Air & Space Basic Course, in residence 2003 - Squadron Officer School, in residence Nov-Dec 2008 Assignments: Aerospace Ground Equipment Craftsman at Hickam AFB, HI 1990-1993, Morbach, Germany 19931995, RAF Mildenhall, UK 1995-1999, Elmendorf AFB, AK 1999-2002 Munitions, Missile and Space Maintenance Officer 31st FW Aviano AB, IT 2002-2006 Munitions Accountable Systems Officer (MASO), Flight Commander & Executive Officer, Elmendorf AFB, AK 2006 – Present Significant Awards: 2004 USAFE Lieutenant General Leo Marquez Outstanding Munitions/Missile Maintenance Company Grade Manager of the Year 2007 and 2008 3rd WG Lieutenant General Leo Marquez Outstanding Munitions/Missile Maintenance Company Grade Manager of the Year 2007 3rd Equipment Maintenance Squadron Company Grade Officer of the Year Current Duty: Commander

Conventional

Munitions

Flight

Family: Georgia V. Gutierrez spouse for 21 wonderful years; son Lupe Ian Gutierrez Jr 20 yrs old and son Christian Xavier Gutierrez 17 yrs old

Inspecting an AIM-120 with MSgt Keith Boswell and TSgt David Walker.

Please provide a short summary of your leadership philosophy. My leadership philosophy is to set the example for my Airmen through my actions and words, and to inspire them daily to keep their eye on the mission. The way I try to inspire my Airmen is to always uphold the standards—make accountability mean something and yet still show compassion and to remember where I came from by never asking them to do something I wouldn’t do. I believe that if you truly care for your Airmen they will, in turn, take care of the mission and make the mission happen. Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Inherently our Airmen follow us by virtue of rank, but I want Airmen who will follow because they want to.

ER: FOCUS

ON A

CHAPTER LEADER

What are your long term goals and objectives? My long term goal is to remain a contributing member of the Air Force for as long as the Air Force needs me. My goal, if the Air Force gives me the honor and opportunity, is to command a squadron. My objectives are to continue to lead my Airmen, make the mission happen and to ensure that the civilian population, as well as the world, knows that the Air Force is second to Gutierrez with his JDAM FTD class. none. We as an Air Force need to do a better job of advocating what we bring to the fight! The Air Force & its Airmen are doing such a great job every day that it is practically boring news for the media not much is showcased or reported on about what our Airmen do on a daily basis. The civilian population does not hear about the countless daily sorties flown or the airspace protection provided for all services both in the AOR and at home via homeland defense. The only story that does get highlighted are incidents such as Minot or the shipment to Taiwan, it is our job and my objective to remind everyone of all the amazing things our Airmen do and not let the media misconstrue the image of our hard working Airmen. What do you think senior leaders can do better for our junior officers and Airmen? It’s not what our senior leaders can do better, but rather what they need to continue to do for our junior officers and that is—continued mentorship at every opportunity. We are their replacements so it goes without saying that they need to, “train their replacements.” For our Airmen, our senior leaders need to maintain a vision and not change or put their mark on something just because they are in the seat/or in charge. I am not advocating that our senior leaders don’t implement necessary change, what I am saying is that if the process isn’t broken and if there is no value added, then don’t implement the change. If change is needed, then effectively communicate the reason for the change; why it is important; and how it will improve the Air Force. Our Airmen want to understand the big picture/plan, but if it is constantly changing, this only causes disruption, confusion, and raises questions about what we, as leadership, are doing and ultimately we don’t get the “buy-in” from our Airmen. A role of any officer is to improve the quality of life of our Airmen. If you could do one thing to enhance our Airmen’s quality of life what would it be? My Airmen literally put their lives on the line each and every day handling explosives—if I could give them Hazardous Duty pay, I would. Today’s Airmen are more educated and have huge responsibilities which their civilian counterparts do not have, thereby in my opinion, they deserve more pay. What do you do in your free time? Fish, golf, read, play guitar, go camping with my family, solve crossword/cryptogram quip puzzles and work on my Master’s degree .K

Do you know an outstanding LOA Chapter Leader? Please contact the Col Dennis Daley (dennis.daley@dover.af.mil) if you would like to nominate a CGO who is active in one of our LOA Chapters for the next edition.

WINTER

2008

Today, as demands on the warfighter increase, Boeing is delivering innovative customer solutions to ensure total readiness. For airlifters, fighters, rotorcraft, tankers, weapons, bombers, satellites and network systems. Boeing brings together an unmatched breadth of expertise for total life-cycle sustainment. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a commitment of unequivocal support for the warfighter, now and in the future. Jeffrey Foor Tactical Aircraft Product Support

Weapon System Health Metrics T H E M AT H

Submitted by Lt Col George LaVezzi The AF is evolving the way it analyzes a weapon system’s health and life cycle sustainment. One way is by adopting metrics to gauge weapon system health which are fundamentally different from those used to assess unit performance. At the unit level, metrics focus on mission execution; performance efficiency/effectiveness; and readiness for sustained combat operations. Units watch utilization rates and Status of Training for mission execution; they track scheduling effectiveness, and mission capable rates for effectiveness; and they monitor delayed discrepancy and scheduled maintenance time distribution indexes to gauge their capacity to support sustained operations. By watching and understanding these metrics, units improve their maintenance resources allocation and distribution. The focus is on trained personnel and ready equipment. In contrast, the Air Staff, Program Managers and Lead Commands are not focused on unit performance, but rather the weapon system’s health—its reliability, maintainability and the behavior/performance of its logistics tail. At this enterprise level, the AF is not directly concerned with training personnel and fixing aircraft, but rather allocating money to buy the correct amounts of training, personnel, parts, etc. In the last few years, Aircraft Availability (AA) has been introduced to describe the performance of a weapon system’s logistics tail. Understanding AA enables the AF to make sustainment resource trades-offs between systems, and for a given system, allows trade-offs between the three areas of non-availability: unit maintenance; depot maintenance/support; and supply.

The Aircraft Availability-rate is calculated by dividing the number of Mission-Capable hours for the weapon system by the number of hours in the weapon system’s Total Active Inventory (TAI). Because many of the enterprise processes measured by AA take days, weeks or even months to complete, AA should be calculated on a quarterly or longer time period. Typical values for healthy systems are in the 60-70% range. Aircraft Availability-standards are calculated by multiplying the percentage of the inventory authorized as Primary Mission Aerospace vehicle Inventory (PMAI) by a percentage determined by the lead command as necessary to meet operational requirement. As of September 2008, there remains some ambiguity on the meaning of “operational requirement.” Some prefer that the AA-standard represent the availability required for units to meet their garrison training and to be ready to execute their Designed Operational Capability (DOC) statement, but this is not the only view. There are compelling arguments that the AA-standard should more closely match Combatant Commander demands, and that AA-standards should take these preferences and predicted contingency taskings into account. In any event, it is vital that the “operational requirement” mean the same thing to all weapon systems. The Air Staff will host a series of events to standardize the definition during FY09. From this brief discussion alone, one can see that the use of enterprise metrics and specifically AA is presenting a steep learning curve. While calculating AA is straight forward, interpreting it and taking actions require new ways of thinking.

Photo: F-16 Fighting Falcons wait on the "hot ramp" at a forward-deployed location while maintenance crews ready the weapons for a night mission. (USAF photo by SSgt Matthew Hannen)

WINTER

2008

The Lead Commands, Air Staff and Program Managers project weapons system AA requirements across the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) to make resourcing decisions; they monitor current year AA in order to adjust resources and take actions when weapon systems significantly under or over-run their AA-target; and they use AA as a “de-briefing” tool, looking back at AA-performance to enhance forecasting accuracy and current-year control effectiveness. In monitoring AA-performance, SrA Ken Badertscher inspects his aircraft for loose fasteners after a two-hour measuring and attributing the sortie. (USAF photo by SrA Larry Reid Jr.) non-availability contributions of unit maintenance, supply and depot; the enterprise can better determine where to apply (or targets which enterprise processes will meet by adjusting resources during the year of execution. Centralized Asset withhold) resources to achieve a target AA. Management (CAM) uses a banding system to determine which weapon systems should be given priority when allocating AA AND RESOURCE FORECASTING resources to meet AA-targets. As the enterprise processes for For forecasting, Lead Commands project the AA-requirement CAM, parts/equipment distribution (run through the Global into the out years. The process is similar to establishing the AALogistics Support Center) and the future repair network mature, standard, but both the inventory and operational requirement they will use AA to re-allocate resources, parts and repairs from may change based on future force structure. Lead Commands lower priority weapon systems to higher priority weapons systems also work with Air Staff and weapons system managers to deterthat are not meeting their AA-targets. mine what AA-level is obtainable given various resourcing options. During the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) In addition to using AA to control the focus and flow of process, the AF Corporate Structure uses these AA-estimates to resources during the current year, Lead Commands and weapon resource various programs and balance risks. It is the use of AA system managers also use AA to gauge the impact of real-world to balance risk across multiple diverse capability portfolios which events and take mitigating actions. For example, if a TCTO drives the need for a standardized meaning of the AA-standard. drives unexpected down time, the Lead Command and weapon The decision to fund a weapon system to only 90% of its stan- system manager may decide to accept the lower AA-rates; or dard must mean the same thing from system to system. attempt to re-allocate resources for manning assists (to include use of reserve component man-days); or contract for support [e.g. AA is also a powerful tool when working options for resourcing. using Contractor Logistics Support (CLS)]. It allows the AF to accept more or less risk in various operational capabilities by raising or lowering the AA-rates of the weapon MAJCOMs should track unit level metrics (i.e. MC, fix rate, systems which provide them. AA also enables the AF to deter- etc.), not AA, to monitor their units’ performance. MAJCOMs mine the “biggest bang for the buck,” it helps answer the ques- lack the control over enterprise level processes to make changes tions “where, why and on what”, we should we spend the next to improve AA, and lack visibility to ensure actions do not neg$1M to reduce sustainment risk. atively impact the enterprise as a whole. The MAJCOM and unit’s interest in availability should not be in a calculated AA rate, but rather in ensuring that depot and modification schedAA AND CURRENT YEAR EXECUTION The AF POM process results in deliberate decisions to provide uling will not cause the units to possess fewer than their primary weapon systems more or fewer (generally fewer) resources than aircraft authorization. required to meet their AA-standards. This produces annual AA-

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Continued on next page... 67

A1C Anthony Prewitt performs a post flight inspection on an F-15E Strike Eagle. (USAF photo by MSgt Robert Valenca)

E R : W E A P O N S Y S T E M H E A LT H M E T R I C S

AA AND IMPROVEMENT

The final way which AA is used to understand and affect enterprise level behaviors is by debriefing nonavailability performance and identifying areas requiring additional investigation. For example, if a weapon system is consistently exceeding its depot non-availability goal (too much time in depot), this may indicate problems in how we estimated the depot requirement; in how we estimated the time the repairs would take; and/or a problem in how we conduct the repairs. Debriefing can generate and measure the effectiveness of initiatives to reduce non-availability. It is no coincidence that after the AF started looking at availability, most MAJCOMs and weapon systems leaned-out or eliminated post-depot acceptance inspections. Advances in PDM quality as well as standardization of maintenance data systems made the majority of the inspection cards/items unnecessary. In these cases, the “AA-cost” was not worth the perceived benefit of the inspections.

CAUTIONS Enterprise metrics are not maintenance metrics, and their use by the maintenance community is in the early stages. Maintainers tend to expect metrics to reflect the performance of units and attribute challenges with meeting enterprise goals to unit rather than enterprise problems. If a fleet’s maintenance non-availability is increasing because jets are spending longer times in phase inspections, the enterprise level should look at the technical requirements of the inspections; the resourcing of wings to perform phase; and the reliability of the carded items—and must allow the MAJCOMs to investigate whether or not maintenance is being effectively managed at the unit level. There is also a tendency to over emphasize single metrics. No one metric captures everything important to weapon system health. Focusing AA-alone would allow a weapon system’s reliability and maintainability to degrade to a point where it could no longer be supported.

to portions of a weapon system’s inventory rather than the whole. Enterprise metrics are designed to measure the interplay of AF level processes for setting priorities and resourcing manpower, money, parts and equipment. Calculating an AArate for a MAJCOM is possible, but it may not be meaningful— the performance of MAJCOMs and units should be evaluated based on normal wing metrics. Enterprise metrics are tools used by sustainment leaders to gauge the effectiveness of past resourcing decisions and forecast future resource requirements. In this role, they compliment, but do not replace, wing level metrics which measure unit performance. Aircraft Availability is an enterprise metric which describes the effectiveness of a weapon system’s sustainment tail. Lead commands and weapons system managers use it to describe the top level output the sustainment process will produce in terms of mission capable aircraft; to judge sustainment system performance and forecast future resource requirements. Use of AA, and enterprise sustainment metrics in general, is in its formative stages, but it appears to be of great value in managing enterprise resource forecasting and distribution to achieve targeted levels of mission capable aircraft for a fixed budget. About the Author: Lt Col George LaVezzi is the Studies and Analysis Branch Chief, Weapons System Product Support Division, Directorate of Logistics for Air Staff. A core maintenance officer, his experience includes squadron command, contingency operations and wing-level maintenance assignments.

LaVezzi has served on the ACC staff, and in AFMC at Aeronautical Systems Center and Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center. Having determined the secret to a D.C. assignment is a short commute, he lives across the street from the Pentagon above an Irish Pub.

Finally, enterprise metrics quickly lose their meaning if applied

WINTER

Additionally, Lt Col

2008

Targeting Aircraft Availability

Submitted by Mr. Mike Howenstine and Mr. Thomas J. Girz As the USAF faces the increasing challenge of recapitalizing the force while maintaining its aging fleet in the midst of sustained contingency operations, sweeping changes are underway with regard to how the USAF manages the supply chain to improve weapon system availability. Through eLog21, the USAF established aggressive targets for reducing sustainment costs and increasing availability. Weapon system program directors are incorporating those targets into Aircraft Availability Improvement Program (AAIP) goals. The activation of the AF Global Logistics Support Center (AFGLSC) in March 2008, moved the AF toward a vastly more efficient supply chain man-

agement structure. This structure is geared toward improving weapon system availability by seamlessly integrating the entire supply chain management process. AAIP is a key tool to improving weapon system availability across the Air Force. The AAIP goal is to put the right amount of mission capable aircraft in the hands of the warfighters by supporting system program managers and lead commands in the development and execution of actionable plans. While the plans vary from platform-to-platform, one common thread is the establishment of Total Not-Mission-CapableSupply (TNMCS) goals that support operational needs for each weapon system. The challenge for the AFGLSC is to optimize the use of constrained spares funding to achieve those targets.

WINTER

Colonel Brent Baker, AFGLSC/CC, directed the employment of several well-

2008

known measurements of supply chain performance to gauge enterprise performance. These metrics include TNMCS, MICAP hours, customer wait time, readiness spares package fill rates, and backorder age. The first step was creating a performance baseline from historical data to determine our current operational effectiveness (see Figures 14). Additionally, Col Baker challenged every organization in the AFGLSC to establish new leading indicators that will allow the supply chain enterprise to get in front of the problems facing weapon system sustainment and find lasting solutions for better support. Time-Definite Delivery (TDD), which measures how well the supply chain responds to war fighter needs within a set timeframe, and Retrograde Cycle Time, which measures the velocity reparable items flow to their source of repair, are two of those leading indicators being developed and tested. Efforts to effectively measure supply chain performance are critical. However, the organizational changes brought about by the formation of the AFGLSC, and the organizational improvement initiatives underway reflect the real impact to the weapon system, and the war fighter. The AFGLSC represents the culmination of an organizational redesign that began in the late 1990s with the establishment of Regional Supply Squadrons that centralized “back shop” functions previously performed in base level supply organizations. The Combat/Mobility Air Forces (CAF/MAF) Logistics Support Centers at Langley AFB and Scott AFB further centralized retail supply activities. The AFGLSC combines those organizations with wholesale supply chain activities at HQ AFMC and the three Air Logistics Centers to place the entire supply chain under a single commander. The new structure reduces the seams between supply chain management functions and improves cooperation across and vertically through the supply chain.

Senior AFGLSC leaders met prior to activation to discuss the need to radically improve interaction between supply chain managers and warfighters. The popular commercial sector term is customer relationship management. By bringing USAF supply chain activities together, AFGLSC provides an opportunity to address what is often, and accurately, characterized as a confused and fragmented customer facing structure. The 635th Supply Chain Management Wing (Supply Chain Operations), which includes primary customer entry points at Scott AFB, Langley AFB, and the three Air Logistics Centers, is integrating and standardizing their organization and processes to ensure a similar and positive customer experience no matter who the warfighter contacts for support. This standardization will improve customer support through process improvement, expectation management to clarify the level of support that can be provided, and streamlining response processes to customer requests. Within the 448th Supply Chain Management Wing (Planning and Execution), wing leadership planned and embarked upon an intensive transformational journey known as the Wing’s 1000-Day Strategic Plan. Designed to radically improve supply chain performance, the plan leverages the successes and lessons learned from earlier transformational initiatives and will focus processes and workforce capabilities to improve spares support and prepare for the impending Air Force’s logistics information systems transition. The 1000-Day Plan leverages key aspects of the Purchasing and Supply Chain Management (PSCM) initiative, an eLog21 predecessor program, embracing many commercially proven processes. Pilot efforts in strategic sourcing, commodity councils, lean processes, workforce development, etc, launched during PSCM will mature to fruition under the AFGLSC. Improved planning, forecasting, and analytical processes will be added to proven PSCM techniques to improve spares availability. Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

E R : TA R G E T I N G A I R C R A F T AVA I L A B I L I T Y

The 448 SCMW leadership team is committed to applying proven supply chain practices to take on a more strategic focus, with more energy devoted to analytically-based operations and the corporate oversight of standard supply chain processes - all served by better methods, supply chain visibility, and tools. The transformation is designed to operate the supply chain more effectively to achieve assured deliveries to our customers as well as realizing the true savings potential associated with optimizing inventory. As an initial step, the wing established some very aggressive goals for the next three years. First, improve item-level forecast accuracy, parts availability and MICAP Hours â&#x20AC;&#x201C; each by 50%. Second, develop and implement sourcing strategies to cover 100% of the items managed by the 448 SCMW. Third, reduce administrative lead times for spare parts procurement contracts by 50%, and parts production/repair cycle times by 10%. As evolutionary processes continue to mature, the workforce development team is determining the personnel competencies necessary to execute the new processes. Personnel-related goals include sustaining a certified workforce at 90%, while achieving 100% of the appropriate skills mix necessary to perform future processes. These combined efforts focus on improving current weapon system support by making the supply chain more responsive to customer needs, while proactively working to enhance support over the long run. A key goal for AFGLSC leadership is to establish a capability to fuse supply chain data in real time from multiple sources to enable global supply chain command and control (C2), enterprise planning, and proactive strategy and integration within the AFGLSC, and across our customer portfolio and supplier base. Airmen of the 591 SCMG (Strategy & Integration) and 635 SCMW are working together on a fusion center capability that will respond decisively and rapidly to the global demands placed on our expeditionary combat support system. The goal of the fusion center is to provide a forward supplied agile combat capability and steady state CONUS based enterprise network to provide the right equipment, to the right people, at the right time to meet the full range of military operations. The AFGLSC Fusion Center, in conjunction with the DLA and USTRANSCOM Fusion Centers, will provide total asset and intransit visibility over the supply network, enabling near real-time operational supply chain support decisions, and provide customers near real-time requisition tracking information. This capability will help proactively improve support to the war fighter both at the strategic and tactical level. The real-time collaboration capabilities of the Fusion Center will enable the various

WINTER

activities within the AFGLSC to work with system program offices and lead commands at the strategic level, as well as the C-NAFs and repair network managers at the tactical level, to improve asset awareness across the Air Force. The DLA plays a significant, and increasingly important, role in the USAF supply chain. An AFGLSC priority is to partner with DLA to improve support in all areas impacting weapon system availability. Senior leaders from DLA and the AFGLSC chartered nine integrated process teams (IPT) reporting to a core IPT to address issues spanning the full spectrum of DLA supply chain support. Sub-IPTs defined processes, roles and responsibilities for the joint support of distribution planning, defining enterprise level metrics, integrating fusion centers, reducing inventory, planning for DLA managed consumables, developing sourcing strategies, mitigating stock outs, and developing weapon system specific availability targets. DLA and AFGLSC directed these teams to provide, by December 2008, solutions or action plans to improve collaborative planning, sourcing strategies, and distribution planning as well as develop a comprehensive communications plan to formalize roles, responsibilities, and touch points between AF supply chain managers and the single largest outside support provider. A key goal for all teams is to develop enterprise level metrics and performance indicators linking DLA support to aircraft availability. In addition to managing a number of ambitious improvement initiatives internally, AFGLSC Airmen are deeply involved in several AF-level efforts that will fundamentally change the management and funding of weapon system sustainment activities. The phased implementation of the Centralized Asset Management (CAM) initiative began in FY07 to centralize programming and execution of most weapon system sustainment funding previously managed by the operating commands.

2008

AFGLSC personnel are engaged with the CAM office to ensure AFGLSC efforts to improve spares requirements forecasting are synchronized with actions in CAM aimed at finding the optimal mix of spares and other sustainment funding to maximize aircraft availability. The standup of the Consolidated Sustainment Activity Group (CSAG), which combines the supply and depot maintenance working capital fund activities represents further streamlining of USAF sustainment funding processes. The USAF embarked on an effort through the Repair Network Integration (RNI) initiative to establish an enterprise-wide organic repair network that optimally supports the supply chain. As both a supplier and a customer of this evolving repair network, the AFGLSC is tightly linked with the RNI development. Along with these improvement initiatives, of course, the AF is well on its way to replacing its existing logistics IT infrastructure with an enterprise resource planning tool under the Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS) development activity. ECSS will profoundly change the way supply operates, and will be key to helping the AFGLSC achieve full operational capability. AFGLSC Airmen are actively involved in ECSS blueprinting efforts, and are part of a continuing change management dialog that must be part of a successful ECSS implementation. The AFGLSC, as the owner of the supply chain, is playing a central role in helping the USAF achieve ambitious aircraft availability improvement targets while reducing the resources required to operate and maintain legacy weapon systems. By finding more effective ways to measure and analyze supply chain performance, by improving customer facing and command and control processes, and by taking advantage of the more centralized supply chain command structure established by the formation of the AFGLSC, center members are driving process changes that will have significant and lasting impacts on weapon system support. The AFGLSC motto, “Global Logistics—War Fighter Focus,” succinctly captures the goal of the commander and the entire organization as it takes a unified and determined approach to making aircraft availability the centerpiece of supply chain management in the USAF. About the Authors: Mr. Thomas J. Girz is the director of the 948 Supply Chain Management Group (SCMG), 448 Supply Chain Management Wing, Air Force Global Logistics Support Center. His duties include managerial oversight of the Wing’s enterprise planning, foreign military sales, contract depot repair and transformation activities. Mike Howenstine is the director of the 402 Supply Chain Management Squadron (Enterprise Performance) AFGLSC. He has 28 years of experience as an AF logistician, having spent 24 years on active duty and the last 4 as a civil employee working at HQ AFMC and now the AFGLSC. His time on active duty included assignment to HQ AFMC (then AFLC) and in DLA, and two tours as a supply squadron commander.

C-17 Aircraft Availability Initiatives Submitted by Capt Thomas Hollender The C-17 Globemaster III is the newest, most flexible cargo aircraft to enter the airlift force. The C-17 is capable of rapid strategic delivery of troops and all types of cargo to main operating bases or directly to forward bases in the deployment area. The aircraft is also able to perform tactical airlift and airdrop missions when required. The inherent flexibility and performance characteristics of the C-17 make it a high demand asset. As with other aircraft, it is imperative the sustainment community work as a whole to maximize aircraft availability. The C-17 program is supported by a partnership between field units, Boeing, Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, and Wright-Patterson AFB, all of whom rely on teamwork to maximize quality and efficiency to meet commitments to customer’s needs of quality, affordability, and readiness expectations. The sustainment program is based heavily on just two scheduled maintenance events, Global Reach Improvement Program (GRIP) and Home Station Check (HSC). GRIP is a depot-level event to retrofit older C-17s with the latest and greatest capabilities while concurrently performing depot-level scheduled inspections and repairs. Block 17 is the most current configuration coming off the production line in Long Beach, CA, and

includes the latest upgrades such as Large Aircraft Infra-Red Countermeasures (LAIRCM), On-Board Inert Gas Generating System (OBIGGS II), weather radar andairdrop improvements. The GRIP modification line will bring older Block 13 aircraft up to the newest standards and ultimately increase aircraft availability. At the local base level, HSCs are performed every 120 days with an inspection cycle that culminates at a 2 year point. The length of these inspections varies from base to base but averages around 3 days of downtime. Each GRIP visit varies in length according to the magnitude of modifications to be accomplished, but overall the total downtime for scheduled maintenance is less than an airlifter sustained via a classic PDM/ISO/HSC inspection regimen. Nonetheless, several initiatives are underway to further reduce scheduled maintenance impact on the field and ultimately give the warfighter more jets to execute critical missions. The C-17 has attacked the aircraft availability (AA) issue from a multitude of directions and initiatives. It can be argued there isn’t a single person in the community that doesn’t have aircraft availability in the back of their mind when making any decision. This is true all along the way from the flight line to the program offices and spans from production through sustainment. Every engineer must weigh the impact of their decisions, every financial officer must ensure the programs are fully funded, and every base must look for

ways to LEAN their processes and increase efficiencies.

contract to maintain C-17 air vehicle airworthiness, but the 516 AESG at WPAFB still holds primary responsibility as the Airworthiness Authority.

Engineering has impacted C-17 AA through the use of Field Engineering Support and the Request for Engineering Disposition Instructions (REDI) process. Boeing field engineers Engineering has made steady improvements over the last 10 are stationed throughout the C-17 fleet and integrated within years to reduce engineering disposition (ED) cycle times. Cycle the maintenance team. This gives the field direct access to peo- times averaged around 35 hours back in 1998 which caused ple that understand the customer, the operational environment, major delays in returning aircraft back to mission capable. This and have the same focus - mission success. They are network time has been reduced to the point where an ED can be received connected to the Sustaining & Specialty engineering teams at other locations which allows them to build relationships and exchange design improvements, lessons learned, trial and error maintenance experiences, operational challenges and solutions not only with the customer, but with their counterparts as well. Furthermore, they have built customer confidence & trust by working daily hand-in-hand with the same mission focus as their customer. By finding the right personnel with the best skills, field engineers have increased mission readiness & departure reliability. In an effort to LEAN their processes and continuously improve, Boeing engiMaintainers from the 736 AMXS at Dover AFB prepare to launch a C-17 on its first training mission. neers and their operational customers have Dover C-17s have been flying training mission from Dover to McGuire to receive their HSCs for over a continuously sought to enhance and integrate year now as part of a regionalized C-17 HSC process. (USAF photo Dover AFB) their unique site’s request processes with that of the engineering response process to boost efficiency, timeliness and safely tailor and release engineering and back out to the field in roughly 3 hours. Major improveguidance specific to the operational condition, available equip- ments such as these are necessary if the C-17 community is going to reach their ambitious goals for AA, most assuredly the world ment and personnel skill levels. wide mission expects and demands it. The REDI process is a formal request from the field to engineering when technical orders do not address a technical issue relat- Over the 17+ years the jet has been in operation, many programs ed to the operation/maintenance of C-17 or the operational have been established to increase availability and create avenues situation requires unique guidance. The process is tailored from for the field to express concerns in regards to reliability of the USAF TO 00-25-107 - Maintenance Assistance, and typically airplane. The Deficiency Reporting/Material Improvement targets issues with troubleshooting, inspection, temporary repair, Program (DR/MIP) process is a premier process for maintainers fly-as-is, rigging, and permanent repair assistance. The Boeing to express their concerns with any aspect of maintaining the jet. Sustaining Engineering, Field and Technical Support (FETS) This program currently manages over 240 projects totaling over team has established an Engineering Disposition (ED) $300M in increased operational safety, suitability, and effectiveOperational Instruction that marries with the USAF REDI ness. It is estimated these initiatives will reduce NMC hours by process to ensure a standard, rapid response, and safe ED. While 14,000 per year once fully implemented. DR/MIP initiatives are this process is spearheaded by the program’s unique placement of scrutinized using the “payback model.” This innovative tool critical engineering skills forward, the engineering technical net- helps prioritize projects based on projected return-on-investwork across the operational, depot, logistics and engineering ment, which is especially important in fiscally conservative “homerooms” (both SG and Long Beach Engineering) are always times. a phone call, IM Message, text, e-mail, telecon or data system away – connected and highly effective. Boeing is required per Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

E R : C - 1 7 A I R C R A F T AVA I L A B I L I T Y I N I T I AT I V E S

One of the many success stories to come out of this program concerned a series of blown tire incidents. After investigating the incidents, the community determined the cause was frozen brakes due to excessive water running directly onto the brake assemblies. Engineering developed a suitable “gutter” system which channeled water away from this area and was a basic, but effective, solution to the problem. Using the DR/MIP process, this project went from contract to install in only 5 months. The estimated savings on this project alone reached $1 million and saved numerous MRTs due to blown tires every year. Benefits of this effort included an increase in aircraft availability, a reduction in brake-related safety incidents, and the manpower necessary to investigate them. The C-17 has utilized the Supportability and Operations Review Team (SORT) to inform the field on progressing initiatives and to give maintainers an avenue to vet their concerns. This conference is held every 6 months and is attended by maintainers who represent each C-17 location. It provides the field the opportunity to present “field issues” which can encompass anything that hinders them from generating a jet as efficiently as possible. These issues may be a lesson learned from another platform they worked on in the past to supply concerns, and often relate to a technical order change or an aircraft modification that can solve these concerns and many others. One such issue that came from the field in recent years concerned spare panels being issued out of supply unpainted. This created numerous NMC hours while panels are painted and cured. By coordinating with Boeing and their suppliers, the C17 community was successful at getting 84% of these panels painted just 14 months later and will be at 100% by the end of CY 08. The SORT is a great avenue for maintainers to voice processes that slow their ability to produce FMC jets. The quest for savings is a continual focus throughout the C-17 program. Many are summed up within the 20+ major initiatives outlined in the Aircraft Availability Improvement Program. Currently the program is moving towards creating a homogeneous fleet. Through modifications accomplished in GRIP, all C-

WINTER

A crew chief from the 736 AMXS at Dover AFB recovers a C-17. With the constant demand for airlift, maintainers across AMC keep busy readying the force to meet the demand. (USAF photo Dover AFB)

17s will eventually share a common configuration. This fleet configuration creates advantages in lowering spare part requirements that must be kept on hand and significantly reduces the strain on training technicians on multiple platforms. Another cost-saving initiative is the Vanilla Box, which is yet another opportunity to eliminate unique altered-item configurations, eliminating the need to support multiple common hardware configurations. By fielding “empty” LRUs that can be loaded with block-specific software at field level, this effort reduces spares requirements and improves maintenance flexibility by increasing the pool of common assets through the reduction of unique commodity configurations. C-17 implementation for the CIP (core integrated processor), completed in Jun 07, had an estimated savings of $7.5M through the reduction of spares requirements by approximately 50 LRUs. This will homogenize the fleet for troubleshooting and spares support, as well as reduce the spares pipeline and logistics footprint both downrange and at home station. There are currently 23 “Vanilla” LRUs on the C17 with an additional estimated savings of $85M with continued reduction in fleet-wide spares requirements. Leaders throughout AMC in coordination with the field have continued to emphasize creative ways to reduce the impact of Maintenance Recovery Teams (MRT) by establishing solutions that save on manpower and funds at the same time. An innovative test at Charleston AFB and McChord AFB to change tires during HSC using strict criteria has significantly reduced the number of MRTs being sent to change tires downrange. The

2008

number of tire change MRTs went from approximately 3 per month to 3 in 6 months. Other collateral benefits include a reduction in tires shipped OCONUS, as well as optimizing the time and place in which maintainers change tires, while freeing flight line maintainers to work other priorities. The goal is to eventually push this practice throughout the fleet in locations where the most impact can be gained. The C-17 community has been aggressively searching for ways to reduce the top NMC drivers. As typical with many weapon systems, scheduled inspections are the leading driver for this platform. One program that has gained momentum over the past 12 months is to change the current HSC interval from 120 days to 180 days. Engineering took an aggressive approach to find ways to combine inspections, thus enabling a potential savings of 2 NMC aircraft per year stemming from a reduction in scheduled maintenance time. This change is expected to take effect in the next few months thanks to extensive hard work from the C-17 community as a whole. Another innovative idea on the horizon is development of the “Usage Based Inspection Cycle.” This idea uses data such as flying profiles, number of landings, and engine cycles to create a unique inspection cycle that establishes the best time frame for inspections and ultimately increase fleet health. Under this concept, engineering would analyze each base’s flying data and suggest the best inspection interval for their respective fleet. Since each base utilizes their aircraft differently, the fleet could ensure they are not over-inspecting aircraft relative to that unit’s aircraft use. The C-17 community remains locked on target in achieving a 20% AA improvement by FY11. This will result in a 76.9% AA rate and ultimately means more aircraft in the war to transport people and deliver vital equipment. There is no one solution – it takes a focused concentration on a myriad of efforts, from smart usage of scheduled aircraft downtime, to rapid engineering and material response, to listening to the maintainers and logistics support experts in applying effective fixes and process improvements. About the Author: Capt Tom Hollender is an Integrated Logistics Support Manager at 516 AESG – C17 Sustainment IPT WPAFB, OH. He develops solutions to fleet wide landing gear, hydraulic, and OBIGGS issues. Manages C-17 AAIP program to reach GWOT mission availability goals and briefs senior leaders on current status of major projects affecting over 200 C-17 aircraft. Email: thomas.hollender@wpafb.af.mil.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Aircraft Inspection Regionalization… Just Do It! Submitted by Col Dennis Daley The time is right for regionalized aircraft inspections. This entire edition of the Winter ER demonstrates one constant theme…centralized processes can get us to that elusive eLog21 goal. Regionalized inspections are one of many successful initiatives that Air Force logisticians are implementing to improve eLog21 aircraft availability goals. We’re centralizing everywhere. From the Global Logistics Support Center (GLSC) to Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS) to Centralized Asset Management (CAM) to Repair Enterprise for the 21st Century (RE21); all based on centralized processes aimed at efficiency resulting from economy of scale and elimination of repair redundancies. It’s long overdue. The days of “milk and honey” with plentiful funding and manpower are long gone that provided the luxury to support multiple units (base-level and fleetwide) performing identical repairs. The “strong” logisticians will adapt to the new environment with innovative efficiency concepts and survive. The weak will not. There is hope. The C-5 Regionalized Isochronal Inspection (RISO) that was implemented at Dover AFB in June 2007 under Major General Bob McMahon’s (then AMC Director of Logistics) and Colonel Bob Hamm’s (then 436th Maintenance Group

Commander) leadership is achieving real results in quality and efficiency. After 16 months of C-5 regional inspections, there are several definite takeaways for other weapon systems considering regional inspections. Let us investigate centralized concepts for our fighter phase docks; or our HSC and ISOs inspection programs; or our vehicle and AGE programs; or our paint operations…you get the picture.

THE PERFECT STORM Three distinct but very powerful forces converged several years ago that created the ideal environment for regionalized C-5 ISOs. Without these forces, the stimulus and motivation for centralization would not have existed. First, the monumental Presidential Budget Directive (PBD-720) and the need for major reductions in our force structure to support acquisition shortfalls. Secondly, the eLog21 drive for a 20 percent improvement in aircraft availability created a long needed review of our basic logistics philosophies. Mr. Grover Dunn’s Headquarters Air Force transformation office developed and began implementation of a series of major centralizing initiatives (e.g. ECSS, GLSC, CAM, etc.). The eLog21 philosophy and the concept of centralization, with its economy of scale and reduced redundancy, removed the long held taboo of centralized processes across geographically separated bases. Finally, the stars were aligned with Major General McMahon—noted for his innovative enterprise

Photo: Maintainers with the 721st Air Mobility Operations Group at Balad Air Base, Iraq, remove the panels on a C-5 Galaxy to perform maintenance. The Airmen are deployed from Travis Air Force Base, Calif. (USAF photo Sr Airman Terri Barriere)

WINTER

2008

approach to maintenance planning—as the sitting AMC/A4. His personal engagement ensured RISOs would at least get an opportunity to prove its value. The synergy of these three forces provided the proper backdrop to initiate a C-5 RISO.

RISO BENEFITS There are major benefits the Dover RISO has yielded. We can group them into four areas. 1. Enhanced Productivity and Quality. Prior to regionalization, Dover’s ISO flow average was just under 28 days - measured from wash start to Exceptional Release ready. One year ago that was almost 23 days. Today the historical average is 17 days. In fact the last 6 jets averaged 15.4 days. Brother and sister logisticians—that is a 33 percent reduction in flowdays in a little over one year. Maintainers tear down a C-5 Galaxy main landing gear at Robins Air Force Base, Ga. (USAF

Why such a drastic improvement? First, performing standard photo by James Morrow) work using standard teams of technicians to accomplish maintenance was critical. Initially, our teams were not set and detect and address systemic fleet-wide trends. For example, regionwere not aligned with specific ISO cards and areas of inspections. al inspections observed several delaminated landing gear doors on The experience from the same technician inspecting the same area consecutively inducted C-5s. An analysis revealed that only a visuof each jet has greatly improved the quality of inspection, i.e. basic al inspection was required on the ISO work cards and at the depot. AFSO21 Lean 101—using standard work principles. Airman Smith No repair center, at the base or depot level, was completing anylooks at the same right wing area over multiple jets and learns what thing beyond a visual inspection of the main landing gear doors. to look for and how to look for it beyond what the printed ISO card During the regional inspection, we implemented a 100% structural illustrates. He gets real good at his little niche of the big process. “coin tap” check for delamination. Sure enough…we have replaced Note the curve below of the number of discovered discrepancies on or repaired almost 30% of the inspected C-5 main landing gear each C-5 in RISO. doors. Above and beyond the ISO inspection, the RISO is enhancAs the inspection teams gained experience, the number of total findings increased steadily from approximately 2,000 findings to 3,000 findings. This is the result of standard work reducing variability in the inspection process and a direct reflection of enhanced quality of inspections resulting from the standard work.

ing the reliability of the C-5 fleet. Another example of using a regionalized inspection to improve C5 fleet-wide mission capability is the regional approach to fuel cell inspections. Early on, analysis revealed that a particular fuel cell Continued on next page...

Secondly, starting with aircraft 86-0020 the total number of findings began to decrease. This directly corresponds with the return of the first jet through RISO for its second RISO inspection. Many of the major repairs, such as flight control replacements, engine replacements, and gear door repairs were not detected on the second pass. The quality built into the first pass RISO paid dividends on the return second inspection visit. 2. Real Fleet Management Preventative Maintenance. The centralization of the C-5 regional inspection process has yielded an unanticipated benefit… a unique opportunity to identify and address fleet management issues. When each base performed base-only ISOs, the ability to see fleet-wide trends was limited. However, with RISOs from Air National Guard, Air Force Reserve, and Active Duty units (A-, B-, and C- models), it is now easier to

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

E R : A I R C R A F T I N S P E C T I O N R E G I O N A L I Z AT I O N … J U S T D O I T !

condition was related to discrepancies with the boost pumps and aileron brackets. Although not included in the ISO inspection card, officials directed 100% inspections for boost pumps and aileron brackets. Inspections discovered three different C-5s with cracked aileron brackets requiring depot level in-tank fuel cell repairs. During the RISO’s first round inductions, technicians changed 23 C-5 engines…that’s right 23 TF39s for 37 jets. For the 3 jets going through their second pass, only one engine has been changed. Similar testimonies are available for flight control manifolds and other subsystems. The point is— although the RISO team leaned their processes to achieve a 33 percent reduction in flow-days, they have also added fleet-wide repairs that were not being addressed prior to RISO. The ability to look at the fleet holistically enabled RISO to address fleet-wide systemic issues. Bottom line—the fleet-wide approach that regional repairs provide, results in over-and-above inspections and repairs that positively affect the overall C-5 fleet readiness. 3. Economy of Scale Savings. The centralized concept greatly reduces the entire logistical footprint. One hangar at Dover fulfills the inspection facility requirement completely for Dover and Travis, plus partially for Memphis, Martinsburg, and WrightPatterson jets, thereby freeing up critical hangar space and generating energy savings at home stations. In addition, the cost of support equipment (test sets, special tools, tail stands, wing stands, etc.) is in the millions of dollars to support a single ISO. Saving just one base the need for the complete array of support equipment and stands is priceless. Further, manning could be another resource savings. Although Dover’s manning increased above the initial estimate of 131 people to now 180 people (nesting 57 3-levels included), the projected manning for the RISO for January 2009 is 145. Compare this with approximately 70 personnel typically required at each base for a single-base ISO plan. For Dover, assuming the RISO serves three customer bases, the manning savings could be 65 members (210 for 3 bases [with 70/base] less the 145 targeted manning for January 2009). In reality, we have plans with our continued leaning to get even further below the 145-person level and still maintain the 14-day flow-day goal. 4. The Big One… Aircraft Availability.

inspections in 14 days vice 25 to 30 days is a major improvement in aircraft availability. Last year Dover RISO completed 37 C5 inspections. Assuming a 25-Day ISO vice a 14-day ISO, the results are 407 days of “bonus” C-5 availability days. That equates to adding one C-5 to the fleet for a year. In summary, a centralized approach with dedicated inspection teams working repetitive tasks reduces flow days. The supporting data makes a compelling case for this RISO success. Almost all accept the evidence…almost all. There are several major take-aways from the above graph. Most noteworthy is the improving trend in reduced flow days resulting in enhanced aircraft availability. In addition, the C-5s returning to RISO for their second visit are definitely resulting in fewer flow-days. This is a function of the enhanced quality look and resulting major repairs form the first RISO inspection.

NON-BELIEVERS Non-believers do exist. Some maintainers argue that the emphasis should be to reduce an aircraft’s delayed discrepancies to zero during an ISO. They “believe” that a quality ISO should reduce delayed discrepancies, not increase aircraft availability. This would in turn, increase ISO flows to 20-30 days as the supply system would inevitably extend the repair cycle. Currently, the repairs for delayed discrepancies (DDs) are negotiated with units at the pre-dock meeting. The graph below tracks the delta between the DDs entering the RISO and the DDs exiting the inspection. For the most part, despite averaging 2,600 to 2,800 discrepancies per jet, the overall trend is pos-

Performing RISO

WINTER

2008

Current RISO Flow Days 30 Depot Level Fuel Cell Repair

Pylon change 25

9.65

RIEs Conducted

11.3

Implementation of Backline Team

20 15.9 15

AMC Goal OF 14 Days wash to Exceptional Release

2. External Support is Critical. In October 2007, we scheduled a cross-functional conference with our external suppliers, engineering support, AMC staff, contracted tech reps, and AFSO21 experts. We gained significant benefits with parts and engineering support. The lesson learned is to include your external support system into the planning meeting and make them part of the team. Without a dedicated external support structure, the local RISO process will be degraded. The external support players must be an active and integrated part of team. Start by inviting them into the RISO planning and review processes.

85-000 07 85-000 02 70-045 54 86-002 20 85-000 03 85-000 08 69-001 17 69-002 20 69-001 10 70-046 63 87-004 43 86-002 22 87-003 31 70-044 47 87-004 42 70-046 65 87-003 34 87-004 45 86-001 11 85-001 10 87-002 27 86-002 26 70-046 62 86-001 15 87-002 29 87-004 44 87-002 28 70-046 67 87-003 32 86-002 25 87-003 30 86-001 17 87-003 36 70-044 48 86-001 16 69-000 03 69-002 22 86-002 20 87-004 40 85-000 07 68-021 13 69-001 17 87-003 35 86-002 24 86-002 22

3. Feedback and Customer Relationships Matter. Be obsessive with feedback. We collect a written Pass Non-ISO Repairs 1st Pass of 2 Pass jets form following each inspection from the unit to evaluate our performance. In addition, if there are itive. Note that as we go into the second round, jets are arrivsignificant customer concerns, we schedule a teleconference with ing with fewer DDs. the customer Group and Squadron leaders to review each issue. There are several thoughts on the DD controversy. First, the Internally, we conduct a “hot-wash” of the entire inspection for days of scheduling aircraft down for 30 days to refurbish and each jet with all first-line supervisors and it is chaired by the work DDs are gone. The aircraft availability requirement super- Group Commander. These follow-ups identify opportunities for sedes the casual inspection processes of the past. In addition, improvement within the inspection process while also improving reducing DDs is important, but that should be managed at the customer relationships. base when the jet is down for other maintenance. This active 4. Fly-to-Fly. Reducing the inspections flow to 14 days is good, approach reduces the downtime for only working DDs and only if the jets are returned to service soon after the inspection. increases aircraft availability. The earlier discussion on overBoth delivery and pick-up scheduling issues extend the fly-to-fly and-above fleet ISO repairs (replacing gear doors, manifold period. The CONOPS calls for only a 48-hour window on the replacement, engine changes, etc.) is far more important as a front and rear of each ISO, but scheduling aircrews is often a facquality indicator for fleet health. tor that increases downtime on both ends of the ISO cycle. 2nd

LESSONS LEARNED OK, for you centralized regionalized inspection believers, before we begin to implement regionalized repair centers for other phase, HSC and ISO inspection programs, there are several key lessons learned that we collected while successfully implementing the C-5 RISO. 1. Standard Work with Standard Teams. The concept of repetitive standard work only applies if you use standard work teams, i.e. the same technicians doing the same inspection tasks for each jet. Initially we were picking ad hoc teams to work different parts of the jet. After observing that this was not effective, we set permanent teams to perform the backline portion of the inspection and the quality and production skyrocketed. Dedicated teams for dedicated specific tasks are a must. “PickUp” maintenance teams are not authorized.

The RISO process has demonstrated equipment and hangar savings, increased production quality, and enhanced aircraft availability. The centralized inspection process is still maturing, but it certainly offers great potential as we transform our maintenance processes to meet the eLog21 aircraft availability goals. The RISO concept is not perfect and there are areas that must be improved. But the Dover RISO was scheduled for 33 inductions for the first year and they completed 37. More importantly, the data reveals an improved inspection and added fleet health initiatives. Will we make the aggressive eLog21 goal of a 20 percent improvement in aircraft availability by 2020? You know…we just might do exactly that! About the Author: Col Dennis Daley is the 436th Maintenance Group Commander at Dover AFB, DE. In his infinite amount (ha) of spare time he is also the Editor in Chief of the ER.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

Mission Assurance: A Key Part of Space Vehicle Launch Mission Success Submitted by Maj Gen Ellen M. Pawlikowski Recent years have shown unprecedented levels of launch success for both Air Force and National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) missions. In order to achieve these results, many people and organizations have employed processes and worked in a disciplined and collaborative fashion to ensure every aspect of the mission has been examined; every scenario has been considered; and every risk has been understood, accepted, or mitigated before a multi-million dollar launch vehicle ignites, carrying a billion dollar payload. This collection of activities over the lifecycle of a space vehicle development program and through launch is called mission assurance. As in other national security space agencies, mission assurance is a key part of ensuring mission success for Air Force and NRO launches. All launches involve integrating the activities of one organization with another, whether those organizations are both internal to the Air Force or between the Air Force and the NRO. The mission assurance process allows the disparate organizations involved in the lifecycle of a program to speak in a common language with a common framework about different aspects of a mission. With mission assurance, program offices use a structured, disciplined, and layered verification process that requires rigorous analysis by subject-matter experts on every aspect of a mission to ensure all risks are known. Requiring programs to go through this process ensures that no rock is left unturned before launch. Mission assurance gives us the highest level of confidence to proceed with launch and ultimately ensures the best opportunity for mission success.

T H E N E E D F O R S T R O N G S PA C E V E H I C L E MISSION ASSURANCE PRACTICES In the late 1990s, the US launch industry suffered five major failures, including three Titan IV vehicles, losing Air Force and NRO payloads totaling over $3 billion. As a result of these failures, the president asked the secretary of defense to examine the failures and provide a report on the causes and corrective actions being taken to prevent their recurrence. The resulting Broad Area Review (BAR) of space launch, chaired by former US Air Force Chief of Staff, General Larry D. Welch (ret), was completed in November 1999. Three follow-up reviews were conducted through 2003. The series of BAR reports were critical of existing mission assurance processes, as modified during a period of acquisition reform in the

Photo: A Delta IV rocket lifts off from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. A Defense Satellite Communication System was placed into orbit by the rocket. (USAF photo by Carleton Bailie)

WINTER

2008

Third, independent space vehicle mission assurance includes additional technical assessments of the system design to increase confidence that no issue has been missed or incorrectly dispositioned during the certification and verification processes. This process represents a third set of eyes to ensure the contractor and program office’s technical and quality assurance processes have been adequately performed and all significant mission risks have been independently assessed.

early 1990s. The BAR recommended changes to strengthen those processes by returning to earlier methods to prevent future failures. The BAR recommended incorporating several key features, such as clear accountability; strengthened systems engineering; process discipline; independent reviews; and government involvement in the mission assurance process.

Beyond the specific launch failures of the 1990s, mission assurance is a mandatory Both the Air Force and NRO are doing this process that lays the foundation for sucroutinely and systematically. The Air Force, cessful launches. Each launch offers through the Space and Missile Systems Center one—and only one—chance at mission (SMC), has its Independent Readiness Review success. There are no unconstrained Team. The NRO, through its Office of Space post-launch orbital corrections, and there Launch, has its Mission Assurance Team. are no de-orbits of spacecraft to fix faulty Both organizations perform mission assurance wiring. There is no pre-launch flight checks and readiness assessments as independtesting—there is no second chance for Assembly of the Wideband Global SATCOM Satellite ent arms of their respective commanders. success. We must ensure that every took place at Boeing corporation facilities in launch places a satellite in the correct California. Here, the satellite is being enclosed within Carrying out these structured and disciplined orbit and that once there, the satellite the nosecone of the rocket that carried it into orbit. mission assurance processes is critical to mis(Photo courtesy Boeing) performs flawlessly. Because of this, we sion success. But equally important is maincontinuously incorporate the lessons of taining a culture of mission assurance. The the BAR into the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program way of doing the business of mission assurance requires strict attenthat provides the Delta IV and Atlas V space launch vehicles. tion to detail; rigorous analysis of issues; and a commitment to 100 percent mission success. Each individual must assume personal DEFINING MISSION ASSURANCE accountability and responsibilities both to perform successfully their Mission assurance is both a process and a culture that must be part of the mission and to work collaboratively with others to ensure adhered to by all individuals involved with launch. As a process, the process functions as a whole. This culture is revalidated perimission assurance is an iterative, continuous, technical, and man- odically and passed along as experienced personnel depart and new agement activity employed over the entire lifecycle of a launch sys- individuals and teams step in. In addition, mission assurance is tem to achieve confidence in mission success. Mission assurance incorporated into various training classes and certification programs. includes a disciplined application of systems engineering; risk management; quality assurance; and program management principles. Though we have had an impressive string of successful launch perMission assurance is performed by a partnership of both contractor formance in recent years, we must never become complacent with and government, beginning at concept design and continuing our successes. The culture of mission assurance requires recognition, acceptance, and continual awareness that each launch is unique and through launch operations and post-flight analysis. poses new and different integration challenges. While no two The launch mission assurance process consists of three primary ele- launches are the same, the process is. The mission assurance ments. The first two, system design assurance and operational mis- processes for the next launch must be carried out with the same sion assurance, together demonstrate that the fully-integrated rigor and focus as those for the last launch. We are only as good as launch vehicle and its payload have been reviewed; all known tech- our last launch. nical issues have been assessed and resolved; residual launch risks have been satisfactorily assessed and accepted or mitigated; and conK E Y F E AT U R E S O F S PA C E V E H I C L E L A U N C H fidence in launch mission success is acceptable. This process MISSION ASSURANCE requires an in-depth review and validation of the launch system design; launch system manufacture and preparation; launch site pro- Procurement strategy. The first key feature of space vehicle launch cessing; payload integration and mission design; and flight and mission assurance is the current “Buy 3” strategy for launch proground hardware, software, and interfaces. These two elements curement that makes industry a full partner in the mission assurance result in a design certification and launch readiness verification. Continued on next page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

was no single entity responsible for understanding and tracking the pedigree of a launch vehicle from design to delivery of a spacecraft on orbit.

ER: MISSION ASSURANCE

process. Largely a result of the BAR, “Buy 3” expands upon and normalizes the mission assurance features that were added to earlier buy strategies. Unlike the “Buy 1” and “Buy 2” strategies, which were both for commercial fixed price contracts, “Buy 3” separates procurement into two components—one a fixed price and the other a cost-plus contract.

Adopting the BAR recommendations, Air Force Space Command Instruction (AFSPCI) 10-1208, Spacelift Operations, and its lower level SMC Instruction 631201, assign overall responsibility to the commander of the SMC (SMC/CC) for delivering systems to orbit. These instructions implement Air Force Policy Directive 10-12, Space, Air Force Instruction (AFI) 101201, Space Operations, and AFI 10-1211, Space Launch Operations.

The fixed price portion of the contract is for the launch service—buying the hardware and touch labor associated with each individual launch, plus a mission success incentive. The cost-plus portion of the contract is to maintain launch capabilities for mission assurance—the workforce, facilities, and data sharing required to perform integration and launch; handle contingencies; and reach agreement—not just consensus—when issues arise. An award fee plan tied to this portion of the contract ensures that launch providers will maintain key mission assurance capabilities, irrespective of launch demands and form quality work.

Together, these documents establish Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) roles and responsibilities relating to spacelift operations. The SMC/CC is responsible for certifying spaceflight worAn Atlas V stands on Space Launch Complex-3 during its mobile servicing tower rollback. The Atlas launched at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. It carried a National thiness approximately one Reconnaissance Office payload and was the first Atlas V to launch from the West to two weeks prior to Coast. (USAF photo by A1C Christian Thomas) launch. Concentrating this authority and accountability in the SMC/CC ensures that the certifying individual gains timelines, and continue to perinsight throughout the development of the satellite-launch vehicle system to make the certification with confidence. Unlike “Buy 1” and “Buy 2,” with “Buy 3” mission assurance is Once that certification is made, equally important are clear roles no longer procured on an as-needed launch basis. Instead, indusand responsibilities between developers and launch operators in try has become a full partner in mission assurance because they the final weeks before launch. AFSPCI 10-1208 and AFSPCI are incentivized to maintain sound mission assurance capabilities 21-202v2, Missile Maintenance Management, outline the interacross launches. This procurement strategy provides assured US dependent responsibilities of the developers and acquirers at access to space and ensures that launch vehicle providers mainSMC or NRO and the launch operators at the 14th Air Force. tain the infrastructure and expertise to deliver mission success. Clarifying how these two organizations interact up to and on the Clear accountability. One of the key recommendations of the day of launch assigns clear responsibility and accountability to BAR was to de-fragment the accountability for spaceflight wor- ensure that nothing is overlooked due to confusion over roles thiness and launch. At the time the BAR was conducted, there and responsibilities.

WINTER

2008

One key individual in the final weeks between certification and launch is the mission director. Once spaceflight worthiness certification is made, the mission director is responsible for ensuring that flight worthiness is maintained all the way through the remaining operations, including countdown and launch. The mission director, under SMC authority for Air Force payloads and NRO authority for NRO payloads, is the overall mission team lead in establishing the focus for mission assurance and mission success. Continuity and independent verification. The Aerospace Corporation, a dedicated Federally Funded Research and Development Center supporting both SMC and NRO, plays a key organizational and technical role in providing mission assurance.

Lockheed Martin employees and airmen of the 3rd Space Launch Squadron unloaded a Titan IVB rocket from a C-5 Galaxy. (USAF photo by 1Lt. Warren Comer)

First, The Aerospace Corporation provides the critical role of technical continuity for SMC and NRO. Though active duty military personnel rotate frequently through launch and system program offices, The Aerospace Corporation employees can remain with programs through most or all of a development cycle.

been validated many times over through The Aerospace Corporationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ongoing support of all major Air Force space programs. Aerospace facilities, employees, and processes together create a level of technical expertise that has, many times over, been called on to determine whether a particular issue will result in mission failure. This technical depth and excellence is a critical component to mission assurance and final launch certification.

In addition, The Aerospace Corporation maintains a depth of independent technical capabilities to analyze potential issues and render assessments on spaceflight worthiness. The Aerospace Corporation has a long history of developing tools, models, data, analysis, and testing capabilities. These processes and tools have

Finally, the fact that the same Aerospace organization, personnel, and processes support both SMC and NRO ensures a bedrock foundation for those missions requiring partnership between SMC and NRO. Review process. The final key feature of the space vehicle launch mission assurance process is the series of extensive reviews, both those leading to the spaceflight worthiness certification and go/no-go decision for launch and the post-flight data reviews conducted after launch. The three major reviews preceding every launch are the Mission Readiness Review (MRR), Flight Readiness Review (FRR), and Launch Readiness Review (LRR). These critical reviews are in addition to the many reviews that the program office, contractors, and The Aerospace Corporation conduct throughout the design, development, and integration process. Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

ER: MISSION ASSURANCE

The first critical review, the MRR, evaluates the flight hardware; launch and support facilities; range and orbital operations; and readiness and training of the operating personnel. The purpose is to determine whether all elements of the launch system are ready to accept the payload and proceed toward launch. Successful completion typically results in a “consent-to-ship” the payload to the launch site, five or six months prior to launch. The second critical review, the FRR, focuses on launch vehicle, spacecraft, range and satellite control network readiness status; impacts from previous missions; open technical issues; and the launch mission assurance verification process. The purpose of the FRR is to ensure all stakeholders, including the system program office, launch program office, The Aerospace Corporation, prime contractors, and SMC/CC agree that the launch stack is spaceflight worthy and ready to begin final launch operations, one to two weeks before launch. The FRR results in the SMC/CC making the spaceflight worthiness certification based on the recommendation of the mission director and the senior representatives of the launch team. The final critical review, the LRR, ensures that all elements of the launch system are operationally ready to support the launch. Typically conducted the day before launch, the LRR results in a final determination to enter the launch countdown. The spacelift commander (SLCC), as the launch decision authority under the direction of the commander of AFSPC, chairs the LRR and calls for the launch site, range safety, and range operations go/no-go determinations for launch. During day of launch operations, the SLCC makes the “clear to launch” statement following the mission director’s final “go for launch” decision. This decision is based on the mission teams’ assessment of the integrated launch vehicle and spacecraft stack. Following launch, formal post-flight reviews are conducted by both The Aerospace Corporation and the launch vehicle provider for each mission. The post-flight analysis assesses any anomalies for a given flight, as well as any specified investigations in the event of a mission failure or mishap. Output products from each review, post-flight analysis, and lessons learned are assessed for impact on subsequent missions and the launch vehicle fleet as a whole. These reviews ensure that maximum value can be carried over from the lessons of one launch to the next.

WINTER

This extensive and exhaustive review results in more than 2,000 individual items being certified before launch, as well as many more areas examined in the weeks and months following. This attention to detail, from the bottom up, across every aspect of the mission, and through several different individuals and teams, is a critical component of mission assurance.

MISSION ASSURANCE WORKS There are many examples of how the rigorous mission assurance process has detected and corrected issues that would have caused launch failures if left uncorrected. In one example, an engine bearing failed several acceptance test firings, raising concerns over its reliability. Technical experts at The Aerospace Corporation analyzed test data and bearing design, manufacture, and materials. They concluded that the probable cause of the failure was a change to a lower-strength material for the bearing. They also concluded that low pressure in the turbopump gearbox during the initial test firing of the engine contributed to the failures. Based on these findings, new criteria were established for bearing acceptance and for the initial hot fire test run. Engines scheduled to fly were screened using these criteria, and where required, the bearing was changed. Additionally, the turbopump gearbox pressure requirement has become a standard screening criterion for Air Force engines and provides added engine reliability. Detecting this issue during testing shows that the many reviews, tests, and certifications are critical for mission assurance. The ability to examine the issue and identify its root cause demonstrates the necessity of the technical expertise of The Aerospace

2008

Corporation and their partnership with the Air Force and NRO. Incorporating the findings of these analyses into the overall verification means the mission assurance process will forever remember this issue and ensure that the same conditions do not place future missions at risk.

STRENGTHENING LAUNCH MISSION ASSURANCE FOR FUTURE

THE

A hallmark of mission assurance is striving for continuous improvement. Each mission and each launch teaches us one more thing about risk mitigation and technical excellence for spaceflight. Continuing the mission assurance process, consciously identifying successful and unsuccessful practices, and incorporating new developments will strengthen the mission success ratio. As the space vehicle launch mission assurance process itself is improved, we also must share successful practices across our space enterprise. One existing example of this is the annual Mission Assurance Forum. This forum brings together stakeholders from industry and government, across the space vehicle enterprise, to describe and baseline current processes; share lessons learned; and disseminate best practices. Increased interactions between the Air Force, NRO, NASA, Missile Defense Agency, United Launch Alliance, prime contractors, and others result in increased cross-pollination and increased mission success for all types of US space assets.

CONCLUSION

The Atlas V rocket with the Wideband Global SATCOM satellite rolls out to Space Launch Complex

41 from the Vertical Integration Building at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla. The Atlas V was In the almost decade since the costly failures of rolled to the pad in preparation for the launch of the first WGS satellite. (Courtesy photo United the late 1990s, SMC and the NRO have adoptLaunch Alliance by Karl Ronstrom) ed a “back-to-basics” approach to mission assurance. This refocused mind-set has permeated the national security space community and is manibetween the Air Force, NRO, and the other national security fested in a culture of assuring each mission is flightready and space agencies, and deliver the world’s best space capabilities to flightworthy. From the SMC/CC down, each individual involved our joint warfighters and the nation. in contributing to the mission feels accountable for thoroughly About the Author: Maj Gen Ellen M. Pawlikowski is the Deputy resolving every issue and assuring 100 percent mission success.

These revitalized initiatives will increase the credibility of the space vehicle acquisition community, strengthen partnerships

Director of the National Reconnaissance Office.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

The Wheels Beneath the Wings Submitted by Lt Col Eric Turnbull and Ms. Bonnie M. Jones Aircraft availability and vehicles…what could possibly be the connection? Vehicles providing base and flight line support may not factor in all of the formulas that influence aircraft availability, but rest assured that the Air Force could not accomplish a single mission without critical vehicles. No matter the mission—fighting the Global War on Terror, protecting us within the borders of this great nation with Homeland Security, supporting the training flights that keep our Airmen at the top of their game, or humanitarian relief both inside our borders and in many third world countries that need a helping hand—vehicles make it happen! It doesn’t matter what base you may be at—the base and flight line couldn’t operate without vehicles. No matter the command— AMC, ACC, AETC, AFMC, ANG, AFRC, CENTAF, PACAF, USAFE—they all have to have vehicles! No matter the aircraft—behind every aircraft is a “fleet” of vehicles that enable sortie success! You may have heard a motto that we in the Support Equipment and Vehicle community like to use—-“NO GROUND POWER = NO AIR POWER!” When you are working or visiting a flight line or base across the Air Force, do you ever wonder where all of these vehicles come from? Just like everything else in the AF inventory, there is a strong force of logistics professionals that takes care of all the details in getting the vehicles to the field and providing sustainment support on a daily basis. For over 40 years, the men and women of the 580th Combat Sustainment Squadron (Vehicles and Loaders), have procured and sustained all of the vehicles the Air Force uses. The 580th CBSS is part of the 642d Combat Sustainment Group (Support Equipment and Vehicles) and the 542d Combat Sustainment Wing, part of Warner Robins Air Logistics Center at Robins AFB, Georgia. Vehicles for the Air Force—it’s about more than cars and trucks! There are over 63,000 vehicles in the Air Force, and in FY 08 the Air Force procured over 7,400 of them. The vehicles are divided

into two categories, General Purpose and Special Purpose. General Purpose Vehicles include sedans, SUVs, ambulances, buses, concrete mixers, cranes, forklifts, dump trucks, dozers, sweepers and wreckers, just to name a few. Some of the Special Purpose Vehicles include tow tractors, warehouse tugs, water trailers, fire trucks, staircase trucks, HMMWVs, all M-Series trucks, even a Zamboni (for the Air Force Academy ice hockey rink). Let’s look at some specific vehicles that affect aircraft availability on a daily basis. A great example is the high speed chase cars used to support U-2 aircraft. For all of you car buffs out there, through the years U-2 chase cars have been represented by many different models including El Caminos, Cameros, Mustangs and now GTOs! Lt Col Mike Glaccum, the RS/CC at Beale AFB says “the U-2 mobile chase vehicles are a critical element of the mission team.” The U-2 is well known as the world’s most difficult aircraft to land. In addition to the 105-foot wingspan and unique bicycle landing gear arrangement, the U-2 requires a full-stall, tail wheel-first landing from an altitude of 2-3 feet. The pilot is required to wear a full pressure suit and helmet in a very small cockpit. Due to the difficulty in flying and landing the U-2, a second qualified U-2 pilot is assigned as a mobile officer (they get to drive the chase car). The mobile acts as a backup pilot for each operational mission, performing all pre-flight actions and also driving the chase car at speeds in excess of 120 mph to accelerate behind the aircraft while making precise altitude and alignment calls during landing. The time-critical nature of the mobile officer’s actions is a key part of each successful U-2 landing. Absolutely critical on every flight line are the multiple types of tow vehicles the Air Force purchases. Depending on the type of aircraft you have at your base, you may see a variety of tow vehicles in various shapes and sizes. The Flight Line Tow Tractor weighs around 8,000 lbs and can tow smaller aircraft weighing up to 70,000 lbs. It’s also used to move trailers and other support equipment. The MB4 Tow Tractor weighs around 19,000 lbs and tows aircraft weighing up to 175,000 lbs. It has four-wheel steering and four-wheel drive and is used to move aircraft such as the C-130. The MB-2 Tow Tractor weighs around 53,000 lbs and tows aircraft weighing up to 500,000 lbs. It also has four-wheel steering and four-wheel drive

This massive T-Tail stand is used during the C-5 ISO process. The built in elevator and florescent lighting system provide the maintainers a better tool to complete the ISO process. (USAF photo by Lt Jeff Fry)

and is used to move aircraft such as the KC-135 and the various bomber aircraft. The U-30 Tow Tractor is the largest Air Force tow vehicle. It weighs around 100,000 lbs and tows aircraft weighing up to 850,000 lbs. Like the other tow vehicles, it has four-wheel steering and four-wheel drive and is used to move large aircraft such as the C-5 and C-17. Other types of vehicles you may see on the flight line are the High-Lift and High-Reach Trucks. The High-Lift Truck has an elevating body capable of servicing the upper decks of large aircraft. The High-Reach Truck has a mounted personnel lift to work at various heights and can be used by maintenance personnel to reach the upper parts of an aircraft, or by Civil Engineer personnel to reach above ground lines and airfield lighting. De-icer vehicles resemble high reach trucks. There are various types, including the 1,800 gallon mobile de-icer and the extended reach de-icer used for reaching large aircraft wing and tail surfaces. As you can see, large aircraft require more types of support vehicles. The Staircase Truck can adjust to various heights and is used to offload passengers and crews from high above the ground. The Lavatory Service Truck ensures passenger carrying aircraft have serviceable bathroom facilities. The LN2900G Truck dispenses liquid nitrogen for aircraft fire suppression systems. The A-24 Potable Water Truck has a 250 gallon tank and dispenses potable water, demineralized water or water/alcohol mixtures to various aircraft. Let’s not forget about the refuelers…the R-11 refueler is the most common type and can refuel and defuel military and civilian aircraft. The R-12 refueler interfaces with in-ground type III hydrant fuel systems and can dispense 1,000 gallons of fuel per minute. The C300 refueler holds 1,200 gallons of fuel and dispenses it to combustion-powered support equipment. Fire fighting vehicles are used both on and off the flight line. The P-22 Pumper brings water and aqueous film forming foam to fires (try saying that really fast three times!). A high reach boom can be attached to the vehicle to fight fires in multi-storied buildings. The

P-23 Air Rescue and Fire Fighting Truck is used to fight aircraft fires and has roof and bumper turrets that are operated from the cab. Some of these trucks are fitted with a roof device that can pierce aircraft skin and deliver fire suppressing agent within the body of an aircraft. The P-26 Tanker can hold up to 4,000 gallons of water and can resupply fire trucks with water when no hydrants are available. These trucks can draft water from a pool, pond, bladder or other available water sources. The Medium Rescue Truck brings lighting, rescue equipment, a generator and winch to the scene of a rescue. The Brush Truck is used to fight brush fires with water or foam. Critical to the operation of all of our bases, there are numerous vehicles supporting the day-to-day mission. In addition to the high reach vehicles, Civil Engineer personnel also use Telephone Maintenance Trucks. These utility trucks come in regular, extended or crew cab models and support telephone maintenance, interior and exterior electrical service and plumbing. The Digger Derrick Truck is used by CE to set poles in the ground. And let’s not forget the other vehicles used on base such as staff cars, busses, sweepers, forklifts, warehouse tugs, security forces vehicles and ambulances. On the ground in the AOR the Air Force uses a variety of vehicles to support the war fighter. Explosive Ordnance Disposal Trucks act as emergency response vehicles to store and transport equipment to conduct mission essential EOD operations. The M-Series vehicles are tactical vehicles and include the up-armored and un-armored HMMWV used in convoy protection, escort, security and light transportation. There are medium tactical vehicles for transporting medium weight cargo and heavy tactical vehicles for heavy cargo transport. The latest family of vehicles is the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles. These vehicles provide operating forces with multiple mission-role platforms capable of mitigating Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), underbody mines and small arms fire threats which are currently the greatest casualty producers in the Global War on Terror. The MRAPs are saving lives every day! On one MRAP that was blown up back in April, this inscription was written on the door: “this truck saved my life as well as five others on 02 Apr 08.” This is just a small sampling of the hundreds of different types of vehicles the Air Force procures every year. Hopefully you see the critical link vehicles have to aircraft availability as well as every part of the Air Force mission. Always know that the men and women of the 580th CBSS (Vehicles and Loaders) are hard at work every day to support the Air Force mission by ensuring our Airmen have the vehicles they need to get the job done. They truly provide the “wheels beneath the wings”. About the Author: Ms Bonnie M. Jones (YC-346-03) and Maj James E. Turnbull work in the 642 Combat Sustainment Group (Support Equipment and Vehicles) at Robins AFB, Georgia. Bonnie.jones2@

Completing work on the C-5 ramp is no easy task but with support equipment such as these stands work is done safer and faster. (USAF photo by Lt Jeff Fry)

robins.af.mil DSN 472-1600 and James.Turnbull@robins.af.mil

DLA Comes on Strong with Demand Planning Submitted by Mr. Will Daniel The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is partnering with the Air Force logistics community in ways unimaginable just a few years ago. Hundreds of former Air Force employees now work for DLA in the same jobs at the same sites where they were Air Force employees just a little over a year ago, particularly at Air Logistics Centers. The congressional mandates of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005 had much to do with the transformation, and these mandates extend to DLA’s relationships with the other services as well. Even before DLA began implementing the BRAC 2005 mandates, however, DLA had been reaching out to the Air Force with its forward presence employees. “Extending the enterprise” has been a top goal of DLA leadership for years. It’s well known that interaction between DLA and the services it supports goes much more smoothly when DLA employees and the services’ artisans can interact right there on the shop floor. Defense Supply Center Richmond (DSCR) is the aviation supply and demand chain manager for DLA. Its commander, Brigadier General Andrew E. Busch, is establishing functions at Air Logistics

Centers and logistics support centers in cooperation with Air Force Materiel Command since he arrived in Richmond in 2007. With the initial DLA site activations at Warner-Robins ALC, Ogden ALC and Oklahoma City ALC completed, DLA is working to improve the process of getting parts to the shop floor when they are needed and in the quantities needed to keep the nation’s warfighting aircraft in the air. DLA must do this with the taxpayers’ interest in mind. Excessive quantities can hurt service capabilities in ways that can be as serious as not having enough. When the agency spends too much on excess parts, cash shortages can impede buys of critical items. DLA demand planners communicate events affecting existing demand forecasting, and changes in customer requirements or ordering patterns with an impact on demand forecasting. The demand planner coordinates on actions relating to demand collaboration and consensus. To achieve the goal of supporting the warfighters and taxpayers, DLA and Air Force officials are committed to improving demand planning accuracy. Several initiatives are taking place in DLA that will lead the way. Ms. Kathy D. Cutler is a member of the Senior Executive Service and DSCR’s deputy commander. Ms. Cutler is implementing

Photo: A C-17 Globemaster III lands in Southwest Asia. The C-17 performs tactical airlift and airdrop missions, transports passengers, and delivers troop resupply and all types of cargo throughout Southwest Asia. (USAF photo by A1C Jason Epley)

WINTER

2008

actions that DLA officials believe will revolutionize demand planning. “We are moving demand planning forward to the customer sites,” Ms. Cutler said. “We are looking for opportunities where we can get more ‘bang for our buck’ with specific customers. But I don’t foresee 100 percent of our demand planners across the board moving forward. Some demand planning, primarily item planning, will still be done here. We are working at both aspects so we can improve demand planning over all.” DLA’s forward presence obviously has a big impact on demand planning, as well as the aviation supply chain sites at the ALCs. “Our new supply storage and distribution sites can offer us additional insight into demand planning. We need to figure out the right mix of roles between forward presence and demand planners,” said Ms. Cutler. One of Ms. Cutler’s top priorities is to establish a robust demand and supply planning process within the aviation supply and demand chain. “I really want to make sure we have the appropriate skill sets, training, and tool sets to make those areas as robust as possible,” she said. “I think that is the key for overall success in providing the appropriate customer support and financial stewardship for taxpayers.” Ms. Cutler said that in order to establish a robust demand and supply planning process, she will develop a plan of action to include meetings between demand and supply planners for their feedback on how to make the process better. According to Ms. Cutler, team and individual metrics will roll into DLA employees’ National Security Personnel System performance targets. “We want to make sure that we get the appropriate demand and supply alignment between our customer opera-

tions and supplier operations personnel,” said Ms. Cutler. “That means understanding the priorities and translating those customer priorities into supplier capacities and financial requirements.” DSCR will emphasize demand planning accuracy in its metrics in order to help the aviation supply and demand chain establish and maintain its robust demand planning capability. According to Ms. Cutler, the metrics will measure logistics response time and it will be reviewed to make sure DSCR stays agile while fulfilling customers’ orders. To Ms. Cutler demand planning also entails focusing on executing the plan set forth. “What this means is that we meet the supply plan requirements as determined by our customers’ forecast and inventory positions to ensure there are no disruptions to customer support,” stated Ms. Cutler. She defined the path set forward when she stated, “We are working to cascade those metrics down so that the work force understands DLA and DSCR’s metrics, and we will also have individual metrics so that everyone understands how they are contributing to that overarching goal. For 2009, we have three levels of metrics Continued on next page...

A propane operated forklift, operated by civilian warehouse personnel stacks logistical supplies at one of many large Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Warehouses.(Photo by Mr. Curtis Lambert)

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

ER: DLA COMES

STRONG

WITH

DEMAND PLANNING

involving demand planning: overarching DSCR, organizational level and team/individual level. Demand planning accuracy is a key metric for the Aviation Customer Operations Directorate. At the team level, we’re looking at their contribution to demand planning accuracy in two areas — by category (business drivers) and by dollar value. We want forecasts that are solid and as accurate as possible.” Collaboration with the Air Force is a new process DLA is establishing in demand planning. “It is a monthly process we use to come up with the best forecast,” Ms. Cutler said. “We need (the Air Force) to help us. Often, the historical data is more accurate than the customer’s forecast. They can make sure they give us their requirements lead time in advance. That gives us time to react. Air Force officials, in recent meetings with DLA officials, stated they are interested in helping in any way they can. One way is through increased collaboration between Air Force employees and DLA demand planners. “We have to know what we need up front and budget for it to improve our ability to support the war fighter,” said Major General Gary T. McCoy, Director of Logistics Readiness for the Air Force. “The demand planning/supply planning function is an integrated, time-phased, enterprise-wide planning of customer needs based on historical demand, operational requirements and collaborative inputs between customers, planners, suppliers and internal experts. The Air Force’s supply plan becomes an input to DLA’s demand plan”. When you plan a vacation, you don’t plan in one room and your spouse in another,” General McCoy said. “You plan together. That is how the Air Force must operate with DLA — as a team. The Air Force will use predictive analysis and predictive forecasting to develop that plan. We want to make sure we’ve given DLA the most accurate plan so they can ensure we get delivery of the right part, to the right place at the right time. I call that true partnership.” Edward G. Lloyd is a DLA demand planner at Richmond. He said demand planning is receiving much greater attention at all levels. He works in the Aviation Engines and Airframes Division of DSCR’s Aviation Customer Operations Directorate. “The tools to measure accuracy have recently become available to the demand planners as well as supervisors,” Lloyd said. “Metrics reviews at the management level focus attention on low-performing demand forecasting units known as national item identification numbers, or NIINs, to our customers. Now that demand planners can measure the performance of their direct reporting units they know where to concentrate their efforts.”

management (NIIN level management for items with no formal collaboration), demand classification (the addition of four planning models based on demand patterns pulled from history), history clean-up (accurate data) and the further training of supervisors, business process analysts and demand planners. In FY08, demand planners received 40 hours of navigational training in SAP/Manugistics software. Shortly thereafter, demand planners were given a workload to analyze in one model developed for stable demands with no accuracy measurement tool available to the demand planner. Additionally, some items needed to be planned at an aggregated level where no formal collaboration was being gathered. “Our forecasts will always be wrong if they don’t represent how our customers are going to buy,” Lloyd said. “The models we use anticipate that history will repeat itself. Our customers are our partners in developing accurate forecasts to support their future requirements. We can’t afford to over forecast or under forecast on items they need. If our customers have requirements outside the norm, we need to do a better job of communicating surges and dips to DLA.” The former director of DLA, Lieutenant General Robert T. Dail, (ret) USA, was interviewed in a recent issue of ER. In the interview, General Dail summed up the DLA leadership position on demand planning: DLA is responding to aviation demand and supply chain challenges through improved demand planning, increased collaboration, and enhanced supplier/industry relations. A further, ongoing focus is on the BRAC supply, storage, and distribution (SS&D) and depot level repairable (DLR) procurement efforts to further improve overall demand and supply chain support for the Air Force. A critical factor for our success is the level of collaboration and partnership formed between DLA and the Air Force. As the Air Force continues to support multiple missions overseas, constant communication and collaboration with DLA is necessary for optimal support. In my opinion, if we’re able to collectively excel in demand planning and supplier collaboration, then our historical focus on symptoms such as fluctuating demand history, high inventory cost, and protracted lead times will drastically diminish. Demand planning is one example of how a team approach can produce improved results in the form of increased readiness, reduced overhead, and cost savings. About the Author: Will Daniel - Defense Supply Center Richmond Public Affairs; (Tonya Johnson, DLA Public Affairs, contributed

Lloyd said several changes from FY08 and FY09 have already started to pay dividends. Those changes include single sub-group 92

WINTER

to this report)

2008

What is DLA’s Aviation Supply Chain Doing to Help the Customer? Submitted by Capt Rob Williams and Capt Jeremy Pankoski Are you an Air Force loggie who doesn’t fully understand what the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) provides to the warfighter? DLA is undergoing painstaking transformations to ensure they provide topnotch, end-to-end materiel support to their customers. DLA recently completed its transition to an SAP-based business system referred to as the Enterprise Business System (EBS). DLA is learning new lessons everyday on how they can utilize the power of this new tool to improve their support posture. To put things in perspective, DLA totaled FY 07 annual sales of $34.4B and would be number 58 on the fortune 500 list behind Sprint Nextel. As one of eight DLA supply chains, the Aviation Supply Chain (ASC) alone accounts for $3.3B of DLA’s total annual sales. The Air Force is one of the largest ASC customers and processes over 1.7 million annual requisitions to the ASC. With this substantial workload, demand planning cannot be ignored, and as DLA has grown into its EBS environment, they’ve realized the importance of this vital piece of customer support. Bottom-line, enterprise success depends on improved and accurate demand planning. This article will begin with an explanation of DLA’s legacy environment followed by the transition towards today’s EBS. Additionally, this article will discuss culture changes and how DLA can better partner with the Air Force for future success.

LEGACY ENVIRONMENT In the pre-2006 legacy environment, DLA operated from a 1970s-

era product center-focused legacy system created around the organizational structure from the 1960s with zero concentration on demand planning. This legacy environment transitioned over time from a stovepipe organization to product centers consisting of item managers, product specialists, and acquisition specialists. Although not a perfect world, DLA centralized commodities, airframes, and engines in certain product centers where item managers managed by National Stock Number (NSN) and did not have assigned customers. Although the item managers were the closest to the customer, they lacked the focus and the tools to face the customer and forecast future demands. For the majority of items stocked by DLA, the legacy system would compute an average quarterly demand based off historical data, a forecast that was rarely shaped by future demand and customer collaboration. The legacy system was locally developed to maintain an internal DLA focus and enabled most to feel comfortable with DLA being organized around item managers. However, DLA’s vintage legacy system lacked interoperability and technical capabilities required to provide top notch future support to the warfighter. As the legacy system became more expensive and difficult to maintain, DLA realized the need to exploit demand planning as a critical element of its future system, based on a commercial-off-the-shelf SAP application. By focusing on demand planning, DLA vectored itself on the most critical factor in providing accurate end-to-end materiel management—anticipating customer needs and future consumption. In order to properly implement demand planning, DLA needed a new core business system; thus, the EBS was born.

WINTER

2008

ENTERPRISE BUSINESS SYSTEM ENVIRONMENT

culture that rewards the efforts of accurate demand planning and customer forecasting, versus rewarding the efforts of “parts chasers”. Parts chasing is successfully chasing down the right part in order to put out a fire brought on by the absence of this part. Parts chasing was a reaction to an inaccurate demand signal created by lack of collaboration. If the demand signal is wrong then everything afterwards is wrong as well, with EBS always playing catch-up. Demand planning is the foundation! The need to better demand plan and collaborate with the customer is being further enhanced through an independent business process review. In 2007, Defense Supply Center Richmond conducted a business process review on how to become better demand planners. The review focused efforts on merging the culture, people, processes, and information technology. This further focused efforts towards better demand planning and a refocus of DLA’s top tier metrics.

The core business system in today’s DLA enterprise transformation is EBS. EBS allows DLA to comply with DoD modernization mandates, restructure its workforce, and create a new demand planning tool. Unlike the legacy system, EBS supports Joint Vision 2020’s concept of “Focused Logistics”, DoD’s Business Enterprise Architecture, and DoD’s requirement for interoperability. Additionally, EBS allows DLA to reshape its workforce into a supplier chain to face suppliers and a demand chain to face customers to better focus on warfighter needs. To enhance DLA’s customer focus on the demand chain side, DLA changed their management strategy to a Department of Defense Activity Address Code (DODAAC) focus rather than by An operator forges a steel component with a 700 ton mechanical NSN. In EBS, the legacy “NSN focused” press at Ulven Forging in Hubbard, Ore. Depending on the steel item manager’s job evolved into three forged, metal bar stock is induction heated to temperatures rangnew positions: Customer Account ing from 1,800 to 2,200 degrees. Presses like this one are used Specialists (CAS), demand planners, and to form parts critical to the service life extension of the Air Force's supply planners. CASs and demand plan- A-10 Thunderbolt II. (DLA Photo) ners are aligned on the customer operaDLA’s aviation supply and demand tions side and assigned to customer relationship manager (CRM) chain’s FY 07-08 supplier operations top tier metrics include cells. The role of the CAS is order fulfillment or requisition pro- Purchase Requests (PR) awarded, aged PRs, and number of Long cessing—also known as “parts chasing.” The newly created demand Term Contracts (LTC) awarded. Brief overviews of these metrics planner’s responsibility lies in the forecasting area—heavily steeped are as follows. The “PRs awarded” metric measures the amount of in customer collaboration. With EBS empowerment for the first PRs awarded in relation to the goal assigned by the Aviation Supply time, DLA has a resource to face the customer. Also, demand plan- Chain. The aged PR metric measures PRs not awarded within their ners are given a complementary collaboration tool known as administrative lead time. Administrative lead time accounts for Demand Data Exchange (DDE). DDE allows DLA and their cus- procurement activities required to award a contract to a vendor. tomers to create demand signals for non-recurring demands. Non- The purpose of the LTC awarded metric is to cut down on the recurring demand is a requirement for materiel above and beyond amount of procurement activity required over time. For example, normal annual requisition quantities. The workforce, systems, and an NSN on LTC may have a 5 day administrative lead time versus demand planning tools are in place; however, there’s yet another a 50 day administrative lead time if it were not on LTC. The cuscrucial element involved in providing top-notch end-to-end tomer operations top tier metrics maintained a focus on customer materiel support—organizational culture. targeted outcomes. Customer targeted outcomes focus on cus-

C U LT U R E You may agree, modern technology is an enabler and it’s hard to imagine warfare without it. But the fact remains—people solve problems, systems do not. Thus, in addition to acquisition of a new system, a shift in organizational culture was needed. With the conversion of EBS, DLA is working on getting out of the “parts chasing” culture and with Air Force partnership, developing a solid demand planning foundation. Over time, DLA seeks to develop a

tomers’ fleet health and materiel availability by the need date. As you can see, the supplier and customer operations metrics required improved synchronization to avoid conflicting end-to-end materiel procurement, and financial management objectives. DLA’s new focus dictates a set of more value-added top-tier metrics which include perfect order fulfillment, demand plan accuracy, and attainment to plan for both supplier and customer operations sides. This focus is definitely vectoring DLA in the right direction; however, customer commitment is key to mission success. There are a lot of Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

future buys to the amount required. Once again, if the demand plan is accurate, DLA will have the materiel available when the customer needs it the majority of the time. However, diminishing vendor bases, raw materiel issues, and tech data or other support issues could be a few of the exceptions keeping DLA from procurement within lead time.

HELP?

As a key stakeholder, the Air Force has much to gain from the increased efficiencies obtained by timely and accurate collaboration with DLA for demand planning. In the current business environ- MRAP vehicles feature a V-shaped hull, which deflects, rather than absorbs, the blast of an IED. ment, each requisition DLA and DSCC are at the forefront of making sure the vehicles are ready for U.S. warfighters as In conclusion, DLA has to DLA creates a recur- quickly as possible. (U.S. Marine photo by Sgt. Tracee Jackson) taken tremendous ring demand signal on strides towards in getwhich an annual demand quantity is calculated, posturing DLA ting customers the materiel they need when and where they to determine an acquisition strategy and buy towards it. This need it. And DLA is getting better with the inception of EBS, type of demand planning is automatic. For example, assume DLA the new business environment refocused top tier metrics, better sold 100 widgets each year for eight years running—a constant demand planning and collaboration. The customer plays a crudemand signal. In the ninth year, 250 widgets are requisitioned cial role in this future success. As a partner in this process, the from DLA, generating over 150 back orders with an unacceptably key tenets remain: Collaborate with DLA, ensure DDEs are sublong production lead time—in come the legacy “parts chasers”. If mitted a lead time out, help DLA get out of the “parts chasing” DLA and the Air Force had collaborated with each other to fore- business, and stay focused on the demand planning sight picture. cast future demand , the end result would have been widgets delivered to the customer on time for all 250 requisitions. . About the authors: Captain Jeremy Pankoski is a USAF Logistics Since most of DLA’s Air Force ASC requisitions come from Air Career Broadening Officer assigned to Defense Logistics Agency, Logistics Centers to support a variety of depot maintenance Defense Supply Center Richmond since August 2007. He is one tasks—they are, relatively speaking, more conducive to forecast- of two Logistics Career Broadening Officers assigned to DLA and ing than much of the flightline demand. This stable forecasting his duty rotations include leading depot-level maintenance and supdoes not however exclude other customers from collaborating ply chain activities with a focus on weapon system sustainwith DLA. Increased flying hours no matter where, contingency or exercise, and aging aircraft issues can increase demand signals ment/modernization, acquisition logistics, and life cycle requiring increased customer collaboration. Collaboration is sim- sustainment support. He has served in an array of Logistics ply demand planning with individual customers to create demand Readiness Officer positions at Holloman AFB, Kunsan AB, and signal support for future requisitions. Elmendorf AFB.

E R : W H AT

D L A’ S A V I A T I O N S U P P L Y C H A I N D O I N G

WORKING TOGETHER

efficiencies to be gained if DLA and the Air Force partner together.

One way demand signals are created is through the requisition itself, enabling DLA to establish a level of supply for materiel. Any future demands above or below the average annual demand, or materiel that has not been requisitioned for awhile, will benefit from collaboration between DLA and their customers to create accurate DDE signals. DDEs are time definite demand signals submitted by the customer at preferably, a lead time out, and are imported into DLA demand planning data to forecast

WINTER

Captain Rob Williams is a USAF Logistics Career Broadening Officer assigned to the Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Supply Center Richmond since July 2008. He is currently assigned to the Bearings Division as a Supply Planner. He has served on both Wing and MAJCOM levels in an array of Logistics Readiness Officer positions.

2008

AFSO21 Crosstalk DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND Submitted by: Col Christopher Burke (christopher.burke@dla.mil) Northrop Grumman (NG) Technical Services Sector co-hosted a multi-sector meeting with the Defense Supply Center Richmond (DSCR) and recently completed a joint lean event focused on the reduction of contract administrative lead-time associated with the procurement of out-of-production aircraft parts. Contract administrative lead times exceeding 159 days limited the ability NG & DSCR to effectively manage and support customer requirements. The project team created a new process flow for the contract process. The most noteworthy success achieved was for contracts that are less than $100K. Based on the revised contract process flow, the project team reduced the cumulative contract administrative lead time by 36.2%, surpassing the goal of 10% initially set by the team. Follow up discussions held on the Lean event at the Joint Steering Group Meetings in May and September. Almost all the action items are complete and progress to date reflects a 31% decrease in cumulative contract administrative lead time.

62 LRS MCCHORD AFB Submitted By: Lt Col Travis Condon (travis.condon@us.af.mil) Enlisted Performance Reports and Decorations are critical to our Airman’s careers. In order to improve the quality and timeliness of EPRs and Decorations while simultaneously reducing the amount of time spent on these documents, we instituted a new process at the 62d LRS. The new process requires the Sq staff only to review those EPRs actually due during any given week. Instead of 30-40 EPRs in the Sq Leadership area being constantly reviewed, we went down to 1-7 during any given week. Furthermore, we reduced the time the Sq Staff spent on EPRs by 1,700 man-hours per year. Lastly, once turned into the Sq for the review, the EPR or Decoration never goes back to the Flight…no more back and forth. Best of all, the squadron Superintendent now has time to mentor NCOs on EPR writing.

62 LRS MCCHORD AFB Submitted By: Lt Col Travis Condon (travis.condon@us.af.mil) With our high operations tempo, there’s no doubt that most everyone visits the mobility bag section at base level. We found our customers spent too much time getting their bags while our mobility bag personnel were spending too much time determining requirements and issuing bags. We implemented a new process that reduced customer wait time from 76 minutes to 1-5 minutes. This also reduced bag production from 76 minutes to 1-3 minutes for the mobility bag section. Furthermore, we kitted like itemsmaking issuance and receipt much easier and faster. Kitting reduced the number of items managed/issued by over 65%... further improving efficiency. Now, Unit Deployment Managers schedule their personnel to pick up a bag at Mobility. The customer signs for a bag ehwn they show up and they are out of there…simple! The process equates to tremendous predictability for our Mobility Section and more time spent with their family. Our Mobility Section can easily outpace the number of personnel the deployment processing line can produce.

MOBILITY BAG RAPID IMPROVEMENT EVENT Team Members. From Left to Right Mr. Curtis Eubel, TSgt Michelle Vestal, SSgt Andrea Sayre, 2d Lt Paul Dryja, Ms. Chandra Callahan, Capt Jen Goetz, Mr. Paul Solomonson, Lt Col Travis Condon (Champion), Mr Wesley Nelson, CMSgt Darrell McKinney, Mr Dennis Martin (Facilitator), TSgt Niick Niicosia, Mr Chris Ferris (Team Lead), Capt Rick Garza, Amn Kimberly Machus (not pictured)

62 LRS MCCHORD AFB Submitted By: Lt Col Travis Condon (travis.condon@us.af.mil) Every base I visited stores information on a shared drive or on Sharepoint.. As most of you know, when you’re new to an organization that doesn’t help at all. Many shared information resources are not well organized. We changed the organizationby stanContinued on next page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

dardizing our shared drive. Prior to the change, our Airmen scrolled through at least 4 screens just to see the root directly., Additionally, there were 111 directories. Today, you can view the entire root directory in one screen and there are only 36 directories instead of 111. Finally, we set the goal to get to a file in only 3 clicks…before there was no standard.

62 LRS MCCHORD AFB Submitted By: Lt Col Travis Condon (travis.condon@us.af.mil)

VEHICLE MANAGEMENT WORK ORDER PROCESS Team Members. From Left to Right: Tim Hogan, Ron Patterson, Terry Wheaton, SSgt Michael Smith, SSgt Robert Dillinger,SrA Calvin Tang, Denis Martin

After the “Lean” culture became more engrained in our squadron, the Vehicle Management shop noticed they spent too much time walking work orders from shop-to-shop. Clearly, the process was full of waste. Vehicle Management decided to make themselves more efficient. The results were astonishing! They reduced travel distance by 89%, cut customer wait time 17% and reduced lead time by 12.5%...all through the use of our Sharepoint, making the process better and automating portions of the process as well.

E R : A F S O 2 1 C R O S S TA L K

62 LRS MCCHORD AFB Submitted By: Lt Col Travis Condon (travis.condon@us.af.mil)

VEHICLE MANAGEMENT 6S EVENT Team Members. From Left to Right TSgt Luffy, SSgt Garrity, SSgt Lara, Mr Kendrick, Mr Wheaton, SSgt Gracyzk, SSgt Sayre, SSgt Abel, Ms Obelsby, Mr Martin, Mr Hogan

Vehicle Management at McChord led the way in 6S. 6S principles are sort, straighten, shine, standardize, sustain and safety. The best place to start the 6S adventure was Vehicle Management. “Everything has a place and everything in its place” was the team mantra. They did a great job of cleaning out unnecessary equipment while keeping what they needed to do the job and putting it in the right place, all the time. By cleaning out excess equipment, Vehicle Management turned in $5,490 to the Auto Hobby Shop, $18,842 to DRMO and $7,300 claimed by other shops or turned into Supply for redistribution. 6S caught fire throughout all sections in Vehicle Management and recognized as the Air Mobility Command Standard!

62 LRS MCCHORD AFB Submitted By: Lt Col Travis Condon (travis.condon@us.af.mil)

TAIL NUMBER BIN MANAGEMENT PROCESS. From Left to Right (Back to front): Rich Ryan, Denis Vernon, SMSgt Mike Bridges, MSgt Alice Steele, Janice Barker, MSgt Mark Causby, Corrine Upton, TSgt Joseph “Nic” Nicosia, SSgt Lara Kraft, A1C Leandre Malijan, Don Sablan

WINTER

2008

Tail Number Bin (TNB) management is something we do for Aircraft Maintenance. The old process required numerous people conducting inventory on the TNB area throughout the week. Additionally, the area was not organized for efficiency and there were too many items in TNB. Now, we utilize visual management and changed the process eliminating the need for multiple inventories. We cut customer wait time was by 61% while reducing our own manpower requirement by 2,236 man-hours per year!

62 LRS MCCHORD AFB Submitted By: Lt Col Travis Condon (travis.condon@us.af.mil)

PRIORITY 03 DELIVERY TO AIRCRAFT Team Members. From Left to Right: Ron Seabourne, MSgt Michael Shipley, 2Lt Grace Miller, Kathy Morgan MSgt Marion Solomon, 2Lt Burgess Gow, MSgt Dennis Schulte

The Aircraft Maintainer’s job is to fix the aircraft…not go pick up parts, etc. Over a year ago, the 62d LRS teamed with Aircraft Maintenance to find a better way to do business. What we found was the flightline expeditor and aircraft maintainer wasted time coming off the flight line to research, order and pickup parts. We, the LRS, found we could deliver the parts to the aircraft and keep the maintainer in place to work on the plane….much like a surgeon in a surgical suite. We instituted delivery of Priority 03 parts to the aircraft resulting in a reduction of 63 minutes per order for the aircraft maintainer with only a 9 minute increase for the LRS. The savings to the AF was 54 minutes per order. Needless to say, aircraft maintenance gets better service than before for a very small cost to the LRS. It’s about the customer, that’s our focus and that’s where process improvement begins.

62 MXS MCCHORD AFB Submitted By: LtCol Alesia Quiton (alesia.quiton-02@mcchord.af.mil)

5S OF THE SHARED DRIVE Team Members. From Left to Right: James Pate, MSgt Richard Snyder, TSgt Ronnie Pippin, TSgt Chrisandra Davis,Denis Martin, Darren Hunter, MSgt Paul Smith, Lynne Kaser, SMSgt Frank Yukon

AMC’s largest munitions flight plans to streamline munitions operations, and create an annual NonAppropriated Funds (NAF) revenue stream of $155K. A cross-functional team including members from Mission Support and Maintenance Groups developed the plan to construct a new, energy efficient $3M Maintenance and Inspection(M&I) building modeled after Pope Air Force Base’s facility, eliminating one of two munitions operations areas. The consolidation will reduce travel time, security patrols, and save nearly $65K per year in operating costs. The old M&I area could be converted into an RV storage lot managed by the Force Support Squadron. McChord’s team is awaiting AFSO21 funds to get the project underway. When funded, it would be the first-ever AFSO21 event to generate a revenue stream.

437 MXG CHARLESTON AFB Submitted By: Col Tammy Livingood (tammy.livingood@charleston.af.mil) Charleston Air Force Base conducted a rapid improvement event to streamline the aircraft wheel and tire build-up process for the entire C-17 community. A “Wheel Team” outlined many new innovative ways to improve the wheel and tire process. Some key outcomes from the event included redirecting the commercial delivery of retrograde wheel and tires from the supply warehouse directly to the wheel and tire shop. Another significant outcome involved moving the hazardous waste accumulation point to the immediate area where the bearings are actually removed, cleaned and repacked. This eliminated unnecessary travel time by the personnel building the wheels and tires. Finally the future installation of a new 5-foot rollup door where a wall currently exists will provide direct access to the tire storage area and greatly reduce the distance traveled by technicians. These few simple changes will lead to a potential cost avoidance of $381,241 a year. K EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

The Top Ten Things to Know about Air Force Space Logistics Submitted by Mr. Lou Johnson, Lt Col Bruno Mediante and Mr. Mike McDonald The first thing the average logistician asks, or thinks, when confronted with the term “space logistics” is: “Exactly what are we maintaining in space? We don’t send anyone up there, do we? Surely we don’t send parts, perform Preventative Maintenance Inspections (PMIs) and Programmed Depot Maintenance (PDM), maintain support equipment, overhaul engines (buses), deploy, generate, and redeploy? Do we?” Most space logisticians are accustomed to these questions, having answered them many times. Therefore, the authors felt it was time to put something in writing to explain space logistics. Following are the top ten things one should know about Air Force space logistics.

S PA C E I S N ’ T Y O U N G A N Y M O R E .

While it still seems cosmic to many, the United States military has been in space over 40 years; two-thirds of the Air Force’s history. The official journey into space began October 4, 1957, when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik 1, the world’s first orbital spacecraft, which orbited the earth for three months. The space race was on, and in February of 1958, the United States launched Explorer 1. The first communication satellite was launched on December 18, 1958. Combined, the U.S. and U.S.S.R. launched six satellites in 1958, 14 satellites in 1959, 19 in 1960 and 35 in 1961. In 1962, the United Kingdom and Canada launched satellites of their own, along with the 70 satellites launched by the U.S. and U.S.S.R. The Air Force’s journey into space paralleled these events under the guidance of General Bernard Schriever. Under the leadership of General Schriever, the United States embarked on a course to develop a two-stage rocket that would permit a missile to be segmented for transport. In January 1955, the Titan I Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) program began in parallel with the Atlas program. The longer range and greater payload capacity enabled the Air Force to develop concepts for military applications in space. Improvements 100

WINTER

2008

eventually led to more capable launch vehicles with ever increasing capacity to place larger and more complex systems into space. To support the safe and successful launch of satellites into space, the Air Force built two ranges, now called the Eastern Range (45th Space Wing, Patrick AFB, FL) and the Western Range (30th Space Wing, Vandenberg AFB, CA). The ranges have expanded since the early 1950s to meet evolving space missions. Some of the equipment built to establish these two national treasures is still there, and presents a challenging logistics issue. Since most satellites require line-of-sight (LOS) for command and control, the need existed to have a global ground capability to “communicate” with the satellites in orbit. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the Air Force established several worldwide ground sites with equipment (some still there), initiating the Air Force Satellite Control Artwork of a deployed GPS satellite in orbit. Network (AFSCN). Throughout the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, as technology caught up (Courtesy Lockheed Martin) with our scientists’ ideas, the United States launched more and more capable TA B L E 1 . C U R R E N T A N D F U T U R E A I R F O R C E S PA C E satellites requiring ground control staW E A P O N S Y S T E M S / C A PA B I L I T I E S tions, bases from which to operate, and equipment for “users” to access the capaAF Space Program Weapon System Capability Provided to the Warfighter GPS GPS I Global precision navigation and timing bility. These systems included Global GPS II Positioning System (GPS), Defense GPS IIR Meteorological System Program (DMSP), GPS IIF Military Satellite Communications (MILGPS III SATCOM), Space Based Infrared System MILSATCOM DSCS Worldwide wideband secure communications (SBIRS) and many others (see Table 1). Milstar Worldwide secure, survivable protected communications Most of these programs continue today, AFSATCOM requiring more complex and capable WGS AEHF satellites, operators, ground stations, and TSAT user equipment. While one often reads about the logistics and sustainment struggles the Air Force has with its aging aircraft, most of the space systems and their technologies were also first fielded 30-40 years ago. Table 2 compares the first flight of various aircraft with the first launch or fielding of various space systems.

TA B L E 2 . A I R F O R C E S PA C E A N D A I R C R A F T SYSTEM FIELDINGS AF Space System 1st Launch-Cape 1st Launch-VAFB AFSSS DMSP DSP GPS

Year 1958 1959 1959 1962 1970 1978

AF Aircraft B-52 C-130 C-5 E-3 A-10 F-16

SBIRS

DSP SBIRS HEO SBIRS GEO

Early Missile Warning

DMSP

DMSP SEON, RSS

Worldwide space weather

AFSCN

Worldwide Satellite Control Network

Launch Ranges

Eastern Range Western Range EELV

Spacelift for access to space Test Range

2. EQUIPMENT

Year 1952 1954 1968 1975 1975 1976

I S E Q U I P M E N T . This brings us back to space logistics. Space requires a lot of worldwide assets “on the ground” to both control and access space. In fact, billions of dollars worth of equipment are fielded globally; and this equipment needs to be maintained at very high levels and modified/upgraded/improved to keep the United States military ahead of its ever-increasing threats to national security. For example, satellite systems require ground command and control systems, antennas, communications systems, portable user equipment and command post terminals.

Continued on next page...

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

101

A I R F O R C E S PA C E L O G I S T I C S ABOUT

KNOW TO

ER: THE TOP TEN THINGS

This equipment has several common attributes with equipment maintained anywhere throughout the Air Force: 1) they are constructed of hardware and contain software 2) both have a tendency to break, fail, or no longer meet new missions as they age 3) someone has to repair the failures to keep the systems up and running 4) there are two levels of maintenance, both organizational (O-level) and depot (D- level). Space ground equipment requires PMIs, PDMs, and modifications when the system becomes unsupportable; this is no different than most other weapon systems that exist in the Air Force today. In abbreviated conversations, the authors have simply described this equipment to other Air Force maintainers as complex and expensive Aircraft Ground Equipment (AGE) or support equipment—sustaining satellite operations rather than aircraft generation.

3. IWSM

ALIVE

AND

WELL

S PA C E .

While the rest of the Air Force has started to move away from the Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) Integrated Weapon System Management (IWSM) concept of the early 1990s, the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) has fully embraced it. IWSM maintains a Single Program Manager (SPM) throughout the life cycle of a program (i.e. from concept definition to disposal). For SMC, this includes the System Sustainment Manager (SSM) working for the Space System Wing/Group Commander ( SPM). This construct maintains a consistent “chain of command” regardless of where a space system is in its life cycle. In addition, management of all space weapon systems remains under the Program Executive Officer (PEO) for Space (AFPEO/SP), who is also dual-hatted as the SMC Commander, through their entire life cycle. This strong life cycle management philosophy has worked well for space systems. This IWSM concept for space systems is also driven by the reality that SMC seldom finishes delivery of a space program. Instead, SMC continually upgrades the navigation, communication, or warning capability by developing, producing, and launching the next generation of satellites into the constellation while fielding

the associated upgrades to the ground and user equipment. For example, the GPS program is presently upgrading its ground systems and satellites to support increased operational requirements while maintaining two to three generations of satellites still on orbit supporting today’s near term mission requirements.

4. COLORADO SPRINGS IS THE HOME OF AIR F O R C E S P A C E L O G I S T I C S . In the late 1970s and early 1980s, space systems were sustained through the Sacramento Air Logistics Center (SM-ALC). During the late 1980s, responding to an Air Force Logistics Command study entitled Pacer Frontier, SM-ALC moved its space sustainment professionals to Colorado Springs. Colorado Springs was home to the Air Force’s major command for space (now known as Air Force Space Command, AFSPC), two space operations wings (now Peterson AFB’s 21st SW and Schriever AFB’s 50th SW), HQ North American Aerospace Defense (NORAD) and the Cheyenne Mountain Complex. As a result, many space defense contractors established themselves in the area, including most with the contracted maintenance activities SM-ALC managed. This sustainment organization was originally aligned under Air Force Logistics Command. Once SM-ALC closed in the early 1990s, this organization then became part of AFMC. Finally, as a result of the Space Commission, this organization was realigned under AFSPC in 2003 and is now designated as the Space Logistics Group (SLG). This unit is comprised of government and support contractor personnel and has developed into a space logistics cadre with over 20 years of continued experience in managing space system sustainment. The SLG, together with logisticians and missile/communications maintainers at the five operational space wings, 14th Air Force, and HQ AFSPC, maintains and sustains space systems through a number of Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) contracts and organic depot partnerships—many of which are centrally located near Colorado Springs.

5. NO “BLUE SUIT” M A I N T E N A N C E O R S PA C E MAINTENANCE CAREER F I E L D . Since most space pro-

Launch Command and Control Station, part of the communication network on the ground that supports satellite launches into orbit. (USAF file photo)

102

WINTER

2008

grams use CLS for both O-level and D-level maintenance, military space maintainers do not exist (with a few exceptions for deployable systems and user equipment). Contractors who built space systems were often

the only source of capability to maintain these systems. Even as the systems have aged, AFSPC has continued to rely on their expertise. As a result, a “blue suit” space maintenance career field has never been established. This creates a unique challenge for AFSPC’s logistics and maintenance leaders, as there is no source of military personnel with significant experience to help strategically manage this ever-increasing and costly bill.

Replacing the GPS Ground Antenna Radome at Kwajalein Atoll in the South Pacific. (Photo courtesy of Boeing)

Space Logistics Group at Peterson AFB. The SSMs have overall sustainment management responsibility for fielded systems. Contractors are responsible for approximately 90% of depot level maintenance and very little space work is conducted at government depots. Additionally, 50% of all space items are nonstocklisted parts, and the SLG SSMs act as the primary supply chain managers for their assigned weapon systems. While Ogden Air Logistics Center (OO-ALC) does manage the largest share of space systems stock-listed parts, they do not manage the majority of all space system supply items.

Many of the military maintainers located at the five operational space wings are enlisted communications maintenance personnel, who are not managed as a space Over the past two years, SMC systems specialist, and usually has aggressively pursued a stratmove in and out of AFSPC egy to build a core space mainthroughout their careers. tenance capability at Others are missile maintainers government depots. In May who usually spend no more 2007, the SLG hosted the firstthan one tour at a space operever Space Depot Workload ations wing before moving High security levels exist at installations performing satellite operations, requirConference and in Aug 2007, back to a missile wing. In ing further coordination to enable access for on-site maintenance personnel. signed a Memorandum of addition, the operational space (USAF Photo TSgt Shane Cuomo) Agreement with the 309th wings are neither standardized Maintenance Wing at OOin their maintenance structure nor in the daily management and reporting of their maintenance ALC to pursue future space work, primarily software maintenance. Tobyhanna Army Depot has also explored opportunities activities. for future space systems hardware maintenance. In recent years, AFSPC has been pursuing a concept entitled PBL-S (performance based logistics for space) which seeks to 7 . S P A C E D E P O T S U P P O R T I S O N - S I T E . PDM in the combine both levels of maintenance on the same contract while Air Force is typically a scheduled cycle where aircraft are flown the government retains control of both levels of maintenance at to a depot facility to receive an overhaul, required periodic the organizational and depot levels. Under this concept, a sin- inspections, or any major/minor modifications that may be gle contractor would be rewarded for exceeding system perform- scheduled. This usually requires the aircraft to be disassembled ance metrics, improving reliability and maintainability, and in some way. Well, space is different. Space ground systems are reducing total life cycle costs. not transportable/deployable (with the exception of the few mobile systems which follow a similar cycle as aircraft); instead, 6 . T H E R E I S N O S P A C E D E P O T . There are three basic space ground systems are deployed-in-place throughout the functions of an Air Force depot: sustainment management, depot world. Therefore, space ground systems cannot be transported to level maintenance, and wholesale supply chain management. a depot. Space systems do, however, require periodic PDM. So, Within space, as previously discussed, sustainment management is conducted primarily under the IWSM concept within the Continued on next page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

103

A I R F O R C E S PA C E L O G I S T I C S ER: THE TOP TEN THINGS

KNOW

ABOUT

AFSCN's Tracking Station at Thule Air Base, Greenland (USAF file photo)

depot maintenance personnel go to the sites around the world and perform PDM-like functions, to include: inspections, corrosion control, major/minor modifications, rebuilding efforts, etc. What makes this more difficult than a scheduled aircraft PDM is the need to perform the maintenance without impacting continuous space operations. Former SMC Commander, Lt Gen Michael Hamel, likened this effort to changing out your engine while driving down the highway. In addition to the complexities of on-site PDMs, SSMs are also challenged with unscheduled depot requirements designated as Emergency Depot Level Maintenance (EDLM) and Urgent Depot Level Maintenance (UDLM). Complexities are magnified in these situations because 1) there are many unknowns until maintenance personnel arrive on site to evaluate the problem, 2) there is less time to adequately plan since the ground site is probably non-mission capable, and 3) people and parts will likely be traveling separately to the site’s location. As difficult as it sounds, this is routine space depot maintenance.

8 . 2 4 - 7 - 3 6 5 I S N ’ T A B U Z Z W O R D I N S P A C E . Space systems have very high requirements for continuous operational

104

WINTER

availability, which directly affects the logistics support concept. The nature of the space mission is to provide strategic worldwide coverage 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. For example, an accurate and uninterrupted GPS signal is required for commercial air traffic and maritime navigation, personal GPS receivers and business/industries requiring synchronized timing. Loss of the capability could have catastrophic consequences. Even more critical for national security are the military requirements for secure communications, navigation/timing, missile warning, imagery, reconnaissance, weather and many other military uses. A Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) becomes a 2000 pound “dumb” bomb without its GPS signal. Likewise, the loss of secure military communication prevents a forward air controller from transmitting a “break-off” signal, possibly causing friendly fire/casualties. To meet these challenging availability requirements, space systems have built-in redundancies both in their space segments (satellites) and in their ground segments to ensure backup capability exists. Even purely ground based systems, like the Air Force Satellite Control Network, must be available without

2008

interruption. This requires several strings of equipment and multiple communication paths at each level of the weapon system. Clearly, this provides both an operational and a logistical challenge. AFSPC operators continually meet the 24/7/365 requirement through seamless optimization of available sub-systems, in concert with extensive O-level and D-level maintenance and supply support efforts. While the “tip-of-the-spear” warfighters benefit from consistent access to space capability, the complex world of operations and maintenance activity on these redundant systems often goes unnoticed.

9 . S TA N D A R D M E T R I C S D O N ’ T T E L L T H E S PA C E L O G I S T I C S S T O R Y . The world of space logistics has always struggled with developing metrics that accurately portray the underlying complexity of space maintenance. As noted above, space systems are required to be available 24/7/365; as such, availability standards are usually above 95%. This standard is achieved primarily through the redundant architecture of space systems. Individually however, the subsystems, line replaceable units and software that comprise this architecture are not nearly as reliable. Standard logistics metrics supporting these higher level requirements, such as mean time between failures (MTBF), mean time to restore function (MTTRF), and non-mission capable (NMC)/partially mission capable (PMC) rates, are often captured against the system vice the individual pieces of equipment. Another problem is that many of these systems were developed in a research environment that led to one-of-a-kind systems fielded outside of normalized Air Force logistics processes. Technical and logistics data was often not purchased and maintenance data collection was not considered. As a result, HQ AFSPC has found it difficult to collect and analyze commandwide data and sustainers have had to rely on an assortment of

unique weapon system data collection systems for calculating reliability, maintainability and availability (RMA). This often places space at a disadvantage when comparing the health of its systems against those in the rest of the Air Force. Efforts are in place to standardize data collection and develop predictive analysis tools, but there will always be a disconnect between aircraft-centric metrics that deal with fleets of aircraft versus space metrics that deal with smaller quantities of ground equipment with such high system availability requirements.

1 0 . I F Y O U ’ R E N O T I N S PA C E , Y O U ’ R E N O T I N T H E R A C E . Whether you are a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine, space contributes to every mission area across the Department of Defense. No war today can be won, much less fought, without assured access and use of space. No GPS-guided bombs can be dropped. No communications can be sent. No live video fed from Predator unmanned vehicles can be provided. Deployed troops can’t even watch television or call home to their families. The homeland cannot be secured. For 60 years, the Air Force logistics community has correctly focused on aircraft maintenance and the required support to keep aircraft flying, fighting, and winning wars. With space now so integral to military operations, every logistician should have an understanding of the logistics support activities required to keep this critical capability available to the warfighter. About the authors: Col Lou Johnson, USAF (ret) is the Director of the Space Logistics Group. He served on active duty for 26 years in various logistics positions, including nine years in USAFE and five overseas deployments. Lt Col Bruno Mediate, USAF is the Deputy Director of the Space Logistics Group. He has 20 years experience in system acquisition

Pillar Point Tracking Station, CA. Supports spacelift from Western Range. (USAF file photo)

and sustainment, including tours at the Air Staff and F-15 Logistics Division at Robins AFB, GA Maj Mike McDonald, USAF (ret) is the Senior Logistics Plans and Programs officer for the Space Logistics Group. He served on active duty for 20 years in missile operations, systems

acquisitions

and

sustainment,

including tours at the B-1 Program Office and HQ AFSPC.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

105

PERFORMANCE-BASED LOGISTICS BASICS PBL 101 Submitted by Mr. Jamie Marsh Performance Based Logistics (PBL) and its strategies can help us better support and improve the life cycle logistics and product support needs of the Air Force. Life cycle logistics and product support, by their very nature, can be difficult to understand. Each deals with various fields of study and requires a breadth of expertise in areas such as maintenance, supply, transportation, training, support equipment, and technical data, just to name a few. The term PBL was first introduced to the Department of Defense (DoD) in the late

1990s and formally defined in DoD and the Air Force (AF) in 2001. However, many of us who arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t involved in the day-to-day product support planning activities remain confused about what PBL is; how PBL strategies align into their unique program or project support strategies; and even the acronym PBL itself often conjures many misconceptions.

Simply stated, PBL aligns product support per-

formance with dollar value.

PBL incentivizes support providers to

find and establish more reliable and maintainable solutions which provide the military support performance at the best value.

W H AT I S P B L ? Although PBL elements are not new to “what” DoD requires in terms of support, they do result in a change in “how” the military wishes to do business. The term PBL was first proposed to DoD by a Product Support Committee of Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) as part of a Joint Aeronautical Commander’s Group study performed in 1999. A 2001 Under Secretary for Defense (AT&L) PBL Memorandum clarified Defense Planning Guidance, thus establishing PBL as a “preferred” strategy; “PMs [Program Managers] shall develop and implement performancebased logistics strategies that optimize total system availability while minimizing cost and logistics footprint.”

nothing” proposal—in fact it is just the opposite. Product support is varied and complex and PBL strategies can include or range from a single logistics support element at the component level to all elements of support at the system level. Not every PBL strategy needs to be a large system level arrangement like C-17, F-117 or B-2. PBL strategies may provide both the “means” and “ends” of product support for these systems. The number of AF programs planning or currently executing PBLs is growing everyday. In an Oct 07 survey, over 29 programs within AFMC were actively involved in PBL with another 20 projected to use PBL during 2008-2010. That number will continue to grow as more contracts and agreements for program support emerge for renewal.

The DoD has formally defined PBL in 5000.1 Policy as “the acquisition of support as an integrated, affordable, performance PBL requires a different mindset in order to understand how we package designed to optimize system readiness and meet per- think about buying support. It is a support strategy that places primary emphasis on optimizing weapon system supformance goals for a weapon system through long-term port by requiring PMs to document warfighter persupport arrangements with clear lines of authority and PBL 12-step Process formance requirements as measurable responsibility. Performance-based stratemetrics in Performance-Based gies focus on achievement of performAgreements (PBAs) or contracts. ance outcomes, not the The focus is on metrics that transactional products or servdrive operational availabilices that enable those outity. A PBL strategy also comes.” requires the PM to desigThe Air Force further nate a single point of defines PBL in Air Force accountability for perInstruction 63-101 as a: formance using a Product “Product support strategy Support Integrator (PSI), where PM develops and and to develop support implements performancemetrics and accompanying based logistics strategies that incentives and penalties to optimize total system availensure that those performance ability while minimizing cost and objectives are met. However, PBL is logistics footprints. Trade-off decisions not just another name for contract involving cost, useful service, and effeclogistics support. There are also many tiveness shall consider corrosion prevention and mitigagovernment organizations actively participating in PBL tion. Sustainment strategies shall include the best use of public either as PSIs or produce support providers. A good example is and private sector capabilities through government/industry partthe B-2 Sustainment at Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center. It nering initiatives, in accordance with statutory requirements.” is one of six DoD PBL pilot programs designed to find new and So what does all this really mean? PBL buys performance, not better ways to execute government PBL strategies. goods and services. For example under a traditional support strategy, support providers are paid each time they provide the military a part or repair action. Under a PBL support strategy, support providers are paid based on the availability and/or reliability of the system. This strategy better meets our AF warfighting mission. PBL is not a “one size fits all” strategy or an “all or

BENEFITS An aging AF fleet; the cut in military and civilian workforce; and fiscal constraints have all contributed to the AF looking for a

Continued on next page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

107

ER: PERFORMANCE-BASED LOGISTICS BASICS - PBL 101

PBL IPT Meeting

strategy that could help improve overall warfighter performance. So why is PBL being used within the Air Force? First, PBL is the preferred method of support for the DoD and is required by DoD and AF Policy/Guidance for Acquisition Category (ACAT) I and II systems, plus is preferred on new ACAT III and fielded systems, if practical. Programs are asked to use PBL, but can opt out if a Business Case Analysis (BCA) determines PBL is not the correct strategy to use. There are times when it is not cost effective to enter into a PBL arrangement. Second, PBL can be used in many different ways. PMs are given a wide latitude in how they execute the policy, allowing them to choose those areas that will work for them in their unique environment. In addition, they can tailor a PBL strategy to use one, some, or all of the logistics elements. Third, reliability and maintainability improvements can be obtained from a well executed PBL strategy. PBL provides for incentives to improve availability or reliability of the system. PBL pays for performance outcomes, vice paying for transactions such as buying parts or services that may be unnecessary or inefficient. Traditionally, providers profit from the malfunction and maintenance requirements of weapons systems, whereas PBL providers are incentivized for fewer malfunctions. The AF has never needed a warehouse full of spare parts, what we needed was an ‘operational-go-to-war” system. PBL pays for performance of that system and incentivizes providers to find ways to reduce repairs, transportation, and other logistical related costs. For 108

WINTER

every part that doesn’t fail the Air Force can reduce the deployment footprint; use fewer supply resources to stock, store, and issue inventories; and employ fewer mechanics to remove and replace the items. All of these can result in significant life cycle cost savings. Paying for outcomes such as mission capable rates, availability rates, and longer mean time between failure rates, encourages overall life cycle cost reductions, thus allowing the Air Force to receive greater performance values at a lower cost. PBL also facilitates better communications among acquisition personnel, the war fighter, and support providers by better defining the necessary requirements. Finally, the successfulness of PBL strategies has been proven many times over. One Government Accountability Office (GAO) study from Sep 05 reported on 15 programs, and 10 of those programs exceeded the Performance Requirements cited in their PBL strategies. The remaining 5 met all Performance Requirements. The GAO stopped short of giving PBL full credit for this success because not all costs and other data were tracked under the PBL, but the DoD is convinced that it was the primary reason for this phenomenal success.

CHALLENGES Pulling together all the different aspects of PBL into an executable strategy can be challenging. Some of the questions any

2008

PM or PBL Integrated Process Team (IPT) may ask are: “How is funding going to work? How long should the terms of the contract be? How can we develop meaningful metrics? How do you do an effective BCA? How can we incorporate the PBL strategy into existing legacy systems? Answers to all of those questions and more are available with a little training and research. For example, funding can be a challenge under a PBL environment since it requires managers to enter into formal documented agreements with the major stakeholder earlier than other traditional strategies—sometimes even before final AF budget decisions. The funding must be available at the right time to pay for the agreed upon level of performance plus any improvement incentives. PBL funding strategies are best executed when they strive to establish long term contracts or agreements. These types of agreements provide the contractors the ability to invest in longer term reliability improvement projects. However, long term funding agreements can be difficult to negotiate due to the uncertainty of available AF dollars and the very real possibility of execution year budget cuts. A major challenge is to build some flexibility in performance agreements that allow for the inevitable priority and funding level changes. Another obstacle to successful implementation can be in the data systems arena. While each PBL strategy is unique and tailored to that particular program’s needs, some level of standardization is necessary for AF sustainment data systems. Most of our current data systems were built to support the traditional transaction based environment and therefore must be modified to fully support a PBL arrangement, until they are replaced in the coming years by the Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS). Until then, some work-arounds and patches have been made so we can operate under PBL and still communicate with all the necessary financial, supply, requirements data bases. These workarounds are sometimes costly and reduce some of the potential savings. PBL “Buy in” along with applying systems engineering and systems support are also challenges to overcome. From Senior Leaders to Program Managers to Contractors to the warfighter, the PBL strategy must be understood—government and industry are in this together. Once everyone understands this message, PBL can be very successful. Moreover, PBL functions correctly when proper systems engineering and system support functions are applied in a holistic manner. Unfortunately, there are times when this important step is omitted in the implementation process or not properly worked, thereby eventually driving unintended effects that suboptimize performance.

PBL TOOLS & TRAINING: In order to assist with developing and implementing PBL strategies, The Defense Acquisition University (DAU) developed a PBL 12 Step Process Model. DAU’s PBL tool kit provides an interactive web-based tool which navigates the user through each of the 12 steps. Directions are also provided on how to support the successful completion of each step, as well as supporting materials and resources. The model can be found at https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=32529. Properly following DAU’s PBL 12 Step Process Model will help improve the skills and habits of Program Managers, IPT members, and Airmen. Training courses for PBL are also available. Basic PBL tools and concepts are introduced in online Continuous Learning Lessons and formal classroom settings. Both Level 1 and 2 Acquisition Certification training requires individuals to take PBL related courses. We encourage you to take advantage of the training tools and courses available for individuals and teams. Along with training, you can also look around your work area or job for opportunities to use PBL strategies and principles. Take the time to suggest ideas and possible improvements to the appropriate decision makers. The bottom line is everyone in the workforce can contribute to implementing successful PBL. Remember, PBL is a great way to get better performance for every dollar spent over the life cycle of a system. PBL is a support strategy that rewards and incentivizes the right kind of behavior by providing improved availability and reliability of the system. The incentive for support providers is to make it last and reduce the number of spares/repairs. PBL doesn’t always produce instant results; long term reliability improvement can take time depending on the complexity of the system. Be patient. Continue to use PBL in as many programs as possible. Take the opportunity to learn more detailed information about PBL and how it can help your organization improve. Specific training is available, so take advantage of this rewarding strategy and see what PBL can do for you! About the Author: Mr. Jamie Marsh is an Acquisition Logistic Specialist at Wright-Patterson AFB, HQ AFMC/A4. His responsibilities include Performance Based Logistics and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

109

The Impact of Scheduling Initiatives on Fleet Health & Flying Effectiveness uction S - An Introd USAF AMMO

Submitted By Major Nathan B. , , John Jumper nd, General l a ve m -le om id C m t a Mitchell omb lected l nder of Air C FB, to train se the comma t the tactica ol at Nellis A a ho 01 es sc 20 ss s ce ic ne ro ist Ju p g In a lo gistics tenance and e stand up of editionary lo Over the last two years, B-1 maintevanced Main approved th ration of exp d g A te F in A e US th e in th s of in ta rm p fo ca e s th nance indicators including the abort logistic day in rt continues to all S). h O M ug level. This effo M ro th (A rate, 12-hour fix rate, repeat/recur rate y ol ne k jour cers Scho nging 14-wee ss conMunitions Offi lle ce a ro ch p a er st in a and flying scheduling effectiveness rate ts beg port m ion planCombat Sup ar, 12 studen ct ye ile a g s a A isi e cr es th nd tim a a vi have consistently not met Air Combat Three erate gistics e combat ciples of delib fect-based lo able effectiv en learn the prin aspects of ef to ts t en or es p ud p ng Command standards (Combat Air st su lle S lth cha AMMO combat struct. USAF raft fleet-hea irc expeditionary t a os te e M ra g g n. na te a ig in a to Forces [CAF] Maintenance mp illfully m ning and how of the air ca r lso learn to sk s in support tion. They a ely share thei a em iv st er ct sy fe en s Performance Indicators (MPI) g ef e on to rti p so wea ors able mbat-ready lified instruct ua q lly fu to ensure co e Workbook, April 2008). In an effort om students bec ation. importantly, rs at home st nce tactics, ee na p r te to increase fleet health and flying ei in a th m ith focus on m. knowledge w culum is the our curriculu rri of t cu S ec O sp M a effectiveness, previous solutions M y AF A into ever is lesson tal of the US e TTPs factor heduling. Th es sc Th ft ). ra A fundamen TP irc (T a of focused on maintenance-centric bility. procedures here is the art ircraft availa techniques & maximizing a ollessons taught ns e nd co a on st or e er ul improvements. As an example, all ns rn d io nce act flying sche One of the co uled maintena g on increasing airr building a d fo he Ps sc TT nt on re work centers in the Aircraft cusin focuses uting concur made ossible. By fo cus on exec re airframes um extent p o m m xi a re These TTPs fo Maintenance Squadron were on m a e its e th execute ing, ther actions to for a unit to ient schedul y fic idating those ilit ef b xi fih fle ni ug r four-days-on, three days-off 12-hour sig ro te in grea without bility th craft availa ft availability dule, resulting ra nt he irc sc a ce g e re in a nc y fly shifts, and the 9th and 28th the enha ten b available to on is how to h paper, writ orld aircraft ed in the less w is a researc w lo l ud a cl Be re . In d a t n. Aircraft Maintenance Units oa a io s kl miss er wor d he look sing manpow hell, in which ually increase ct itc a M d n a lie p th p a a cantly increa N (AMU) were combined into a sinMaj s wing pplyS graduate, e solutions hi ons officers a USAF AMMO searches if th e and muniti re nc nd na a gle AMU (researcherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s personal y! te m jo in le a En b ro lems. ple of m availability p al world prob re is is one exam e Th lv y. so ilit to b S ila knowledge). Still, fleet health and AF AF AMMO aircraft ava y dates for US ke learned at US & e ts â&#x20AC;&#x2122;v ey en th ev t flying effectiveness lagged. future ing wha summary of please find a e cl rti a is th At the end of Additionally, the cumulative AMMOS. Best Wishes,

ons e and Muniti , USAF Maintenanc L, Lt Colonel ed EL W nc va PO d J. A MATTHEW tes Air Force nt, United Sta Commanda ol Officers Scho

effect of reduced manning, budgets (SECAF and CSAF

PROBLEM S TAT E M E N T

Statement to the House of Representatives, 24 October 2007) and decreased parts availability— evidenced by the Total Non Mission Capable (Supply) rate not meeting the ACC standard for the entire period covered in the CAF MPI Workbook—had negative impacts on fleet health. The 7th Bomb Wing’s commander clearly expressed to the maintenance and operations leadership that additional funds, people and parts were not available in the short-term to correct this trend.

Evaluate the effectiveness of the scheduling initiatives Dyess AFB implemented against former scheduling processes using the abort rate, 12-hour fix rate, repeat/recur rate and flying scheduling effectiveness rate.

DISCUSSION PROBLEM

OF THE

The researcher found Dyess’ daily flying window lasted up Given these facts, the 7th to 15 hours (7th Bomb Wing Maintenance Group and 7th Weekly Flying Schedule, 20Operations Group commanders 26 August 2007, Figure 1). tasked a cross-functional team According to Air Force (which the researcher was part of) Tactics, Techniques and to create a schedule that allowed Procedures (AFTTP) 3the same amount of flying, but made 21.ACFTMX, “The fly/fix fundamental changes to the schedwindow dictates the amount uling process. The team focused on of time for actual aircraft three key areas of improvement: the maintenance. The flying winlength of the flying day, the per-day dow for a wing is the time Capt Mike McConnell, our resident munitions expert, branches out to sortie load of the weekly flying between the first aircraft taketeach some AMC concepts. (USAF photo Beale AFB) schedule and the total number of off and the last aircraft landaircraft needed to meet the flying ing. A longer fly window schedule. leaves less time to do maintenance and prepare for the followThis partnering cut across four distinct B-1 flying squadrons: a ing day’s flying schedule. The fly/fix window must be viewed combat coded squadron, a replacement training unit, the both by individual squadrons and by the wing as a whole” (emphasis from original text). This is due to two primary facts— Weapons School and the Test and Evaluation squadron. during the fly day most of the flightline’s resources are dedicated to the flying schedule and a longer fly window means less time I M P O R TA N C E / R E L E VA N C E O F T H E available to invest in fleet health and prepare for the next day’s RESEARCH flying and maintenance actions (AFTTP 3- 21.ACFTMX, Due to constricting budgets and decreases in personnel, fresh 2007). The extended daily flying window was the first issue approaches are necessary to correct adverse B-1 maintenance addressed by the Maintenance and Operations Groups. trends. Because of historical fleet health challenges and difficul- Operations agreed to a 12 to 12.5 hour flying window Monday ty meeting key performance indicators, maintenance and opera- through Thursday and a six hour flying window on Friday (7th tions invested significant thought into creating new techniques Bomb Wing Weekly Flying Schedule, 17-23 December 2007). for aircraft scheduling. This paper compares the abort rate, 12hour fix rate, repeat/recur rate and the flying scheduling effec- The second goal of the team was to arrange the weekly schedule tiveness rate since the implementation of the new methods to to provide the same number of sorties for the week but to arrange data collected before the new procedures began to determine them in conjunction with the expected health of the fleet. During the period examined, the 7th Bomb Wing flew approximately 40 their efficacy. Continued on next page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

111

E R : T H E I M PA C T

S C H E D U L I N G I N I T I AT I V E S . . .

sorties per week. Traditionally, the sorties were spread across the week equally, with a five turn-three average turn pattern. The team built a new schedule assuming a healthy fleet at the start of the week with attrition factored in. The weekly schedule was frontloaded on Monday and Tuesday and decreased through the week. This resulted in a typical six turn-four pattern on Monday and Tuesday, a five-turn-three pattern on Wednesday, a four-turntwo pattern on Thursday and a four-Engine Running Crew Change-two on Friday for the same net number of sorties as previous schedules.

the scheduling initiatives began. The average 12-hour fix rate before the initiatives began was 55.8 percent and 75.0 percent after the initiatives started. The researcher attributed this result to the compression of the daily flying window and to aircraft being utilized on consecutive days. The shortened flying window allowed maintenance technicians enough time to adequately troubleshoot and repair code-3 discrepancies before the aircraft was scheduled to fly again. Additionally, flying aircraft on consecutive days required focused maintenance attention on the aircraft that had flown that day since many of those jets would be utilized the following day as well. The combination of these two factors had the most impact on this measurement.

The consequences of the initiatives addressed the final area. The notional flying schedule before the changes required 17 aircraft to meet the home station requirements, and based on 26 avail- Although the other metrics were not statistically significant in able aircraft, consumed 65 percent of the fleet. According to their differences before and after the scheduling initiatives AFTTP 3- 21.ACFTMX, “[flying schedule] commitment levels began, all of the averages improved compared to the previous scheduling procedures should be based on pos(see Table 5). sessed aircraft, not to TA B L E 5 , B E F O R E A N D A F T E R AV E R A G E S exceed PAA. This These improvements Metric May 06 – Oct 07 Nov 07 – Apr 08 ensures the possessed reflect success of the inifleet is not over-committiatives. The researcher ted and that sufficient Abort Rate ( is good) 16.7% 15.1% concluded these metrics manpower is authorized proved his hypothesis, 12-hour Fix Rate ( is good) 55.8% 75.0% to maintain the flying and these results reflect aircraft.” The TTP furRepeat/Recur Rate ( is good) 16.8% 14.9% the successful implether states that as a rule mentation of a coordiFlying Scheduling Effectiveness 59.6% 65.3% of thumb for bombers, no nated, thoughtful plan. ( is good) more than 40 percent of the force should be comThe results of the survey mitted to the schedule. indicated a different Because maintenance had 12 hours between sorties, the unit was outcome. While the statistical analysis showed substantial able to schedule aircraft on consecutive days to reduce the over- improvement to key metrics, the survey revealed continued all number committed to the flying schedule. Flying aircraft on struggles with technicians not being familiar with the flying consecutive days required one less aircraft to build the weekly schedule, being moved from aircraft to aircraft in a reactive schedule despite increasing the total number of spare aircraft in response mode and the number of hours at work not decreasing. the schedule. These additional spares increased the opportunity More importantly, the technicians answering the survey clearly for a successful flying week. However, the total number of air- stated that the maintenance capability is being exceeded despite craft committed to the schedule was still well above the 40 per- the improvements in measured areas. The researcher believes the cent rule of thumb. Because fewer aircraft were required for the understanding of the flying schedule is not because of a lack of weekly schedule and maintenance had more “touch time” on air- communication on what the schedule requires, but a lack of craft due to the compressed flying window, maintenance and comprehension of what the schedule requires. The researcher operations leaders expected the abort rate, 12-hour fix rate, believes the remaining responses are due to two primary causes: repeat/recur rate and flying scheduling effectiveness rate to over-committing aircraft to the flying schedule and a lack of improve. Finally, the Aircraft Maintenance Squadron expected resources, primarily manpower and parts. the initiatives to create enough efficiency to stop the squadron’s normal 12-hour shift schedule. R E C O M M E N D AT I O N S Of the areas measured, the 12-hour fix rate was the only metric that was statistically significant in the difference before and after

112

WINTER

Based on the results of the analysis, the researcher recommends these scheduling initiatives remain in use and be written into

2008

local operating instructions so these techniques become the standard for scheduling. This action will prevent a regression to previous scheduling practices when current leaders move to new positions. Additionally, the researcher recommends these processes be evaluated at the next Tactics, Techniques and Procedures Conference for inclusion in the updated AFTTP publication. Further, units outside the B-1 community should evaluate these techniques against their scheduling procedures and determine the level of applicability to their airframes and flying organizations.

Capt Ty Joyce building bombs during AFCOMAC at Beale AFB. (USAF photo Beale AFB)

U S A F A M M O S E V E N T S & K E Y D AT E S

The researcher also recommends sustaining a continuing effort to communicate comprehension of the flying schedule to every level of the organization. The survey responses indicate a shortfall in this area from a significant number of respondents. Although it is unlikely that every maintainer will understand or care to understand operational requirements or the methods used to create a flying schedule, persistent and effective communication will provide maintainers with facts surrounding decisions their leaders make. In response to the survey answers highlighting the shortfalls of people and the widely perceived disconnect between maintenance capability and operational requirements, the researcher recommends the 7th Maintenance Group adhere to the AFTTP rule of thumb and commit no more than 40 percent of possessed aircraft to the schedule unless a compelling requirement exists. Additionally, an updated Logistics Composite Model simulation should be conducted by functional experts to determine the true production capacity of the 7th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron and 7th Maintenance Group. This study should evaluate the impact of recent decreases in personnel, the continued and systemic limited availability of spare parts and the additive effect of maintaining an aging fleet that is in constant demand in the current operational environment. Accurate modeling techniques are vital to this research to ensure the right mix of aircraft, people and equipment are forecast to provide the necessary resources and capabilities for the war fighter.

Addition of nuclear munitions maintenance lessons and guest speakers to the curriculum. Aircraft Maintenance/Munitions Tactics Conference (AMMTAC) – 22-24 Apr 09 — AF munitions leaders will gather to collect the latest aircraft maintenance tactics, techniques and procedures, after-action reviews and lessons learned from in-garrison and deployed locations. Munitions TTP Rewrite Conference — 17-29 Aug 09

To get involved in the AMMTAC or TTP rewrite, please call DSN: 652-5956 or visit our CoP for details: https://afkm.wpafb.af.mil/ASPs/CoP/OpenCoP.asp?Filter=AC-LG00-14. Other important upcoming dates:

Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class

08C Graduation—12 Dec 08 09C Application Deadline—Apr 09 09B Application Deadline—Dec 08 09B Start—11 May 09 09A Start—21 Jan 09 10A Application Deadline—Aug 09 09A Graduation—23 Apr 09 09B Graduation—12 Aug 09

About the Author: Major Nathan B. Mitchell is Chief, C/J4 Munitions, United States Forces, Korea. In this position he is responsible for the munitions supportability and feasibility of operations plans for the Korean peninsula.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

113

CGO Corner I B E T Y O U C A N ’ T E AT J U S T O N E In John F. Kennedy’s 1955 Pulitzer Prize winning book “Profiles in Courage”, he outlined key characteristics and intrinsic qualities that make great political leaders in peace and war. As I reflect on this text, I see many parallels between Kennedy’s writings and the many Air Force leaders I have worked with during my career.

Capt Ernest Cage

Impeccable intellect, rock solid ideals, and unmatched patriotism are quali-

fiers that define all the individuals Kennedy wrote about. However, I honed in on some more discrete characteristics referenced in the book that I have seen exemplary Air Force logisticians display. Caring, Honesty, Image, and Passion, or “CHIP” come together in a simple yet powerful acronym that each of us can exemplify everyday as we lead America’s most valuable treasure – its sons and daughters in support of our great Air Force mission.

Please allow me to share with you some real life examples that contin-

ue to define my leadership toolbox.

ER: CGO CORNER

CARING A few hours before I began writing this article I received a 5 x 4 envelope through the office distribution addressed to me from the two-star general officer who commands the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center where I presently work. To be honest, as part of the USAF Logistics Career Broadening Program at Tinker, my colleagues and I frequently support the front office for special events and a thank you note from the boss is not uncommon. I tucked the envelope into my portfolio to read later at home. After the gym, dinner, and three hours of PhD course work—with heavy eyes I finally got around to opening the letter. The hand written five-line note brought a smile and new energy to my weary demeanor creating a refreshing end to a long day.

The General had

taken time out of his busy schedule to thank me for a task that had taken minimal effort and time to complete – in fact I had forgotten about it. The face-to-face hand shake he had given me at the time of execution was more than enough. Yet this extra effort clearly showed me that he really cares about the Airmen he leads — go the extra mile to let those who work for you know that you really care. It will inspire a more dedicated and loyal work force.

HONESTY Finance officers are not part of the Air Force Logistics Community, but one of the best officers I know should be an honorary loggie. Capt Susan Sheets is a die-hard finance warrior who could go toe-to-toe with the toughest maintainer or LRO. Currently, she serves as the Lead Logistics Career Broadening Officer at Tinker, a challenging job leading 11 captains! Susan is razor sharp, professional, and brutally honest. I often find myself seeking her counsel on tough and not so tough issues, because I know the response will be well thought out and delivered in clear terms that leaves little room for doubt. Providing clear and direct feedback during counseling sessions and roll calls ensures that everyone is on the same page of music which will ultimately increase efficiency and team cohesiveness in your flight/unit. Truthfully, it can be hard to look your best Airman in the eye and tell him that he is not cutting it on the line. However, the mantle of leadership is heavy and does not always afford the luxury of short term popularity. Conversely, you should seek out and take honest feedback from your superiors and

114

WINTER

2008

SNCOs. Nothing is worse than operating under the assumption that you are doing a great job only to find out that you are failing to meet expectations – give it to them straight – your Airmen are counting on you to be honest.

IMAGE I will always remember SMSgt Sheila Bowles, my first superintendent when I was a Flight Commander as a lieutenant in the aerial port at Guam AB. She was, by all accounts, the epitome of a professional SNCO. Her uniform was always sharp, steel toe boots polished to a mirror shine, commanding presence, and a “yes sir” at the beginning and end of every sentence. When she said move, the Airmen asked how far. When the cargo needed to be loaded in a hurry, she was not afraid to throw off her BDU shirt and start pushing pallets or driving a K-Loader regardless of the rain or 103 degree temperature. She always let me make the tough decisions in the heat of the moment on the line in front of the Airmen and when things went wrong she was always right beside me in the director of operations’ office shouldering the consequences. The troops respected her and I admired her dedication to our Air Force core values and her willingness to mentor a young officer having the time of his life. We were so successful as a team because we disagreed in the confines of our offices, but sang from the same sheet of music in front of our Airmen. It is said that 60 percent of leadership is visual — that is how your subordinates see you act as a leader. I think SMSgt Bowles knew this very well — how do your Airmen view you?

PA S S I O N As a new second lieutenant serving as a “supply” officer at the Air Mobility Command Regional Supply Squadron - AMCRSS (now renamed as part of the AFGLSC), I did not know much, but there was one constant I found very quickly to be true.

That was

that the squadron commander, Colonel Ed Skibinski, was always in the office by 0630 and would not leave till 1830.

A former

C-141 pilot turned supply officer, Col “Ski”, as we called him, knew the supply business like the back of his hand and made it his personal mission to ensure that his new lieutenants understood supply from end-to-end. During our weekly “supply exam” in the Colonel’s office, he would quiz us on assigned readings from the multi-volume (two-bookcases in hard copy!) supply bible (AFI 23110). “Kind of—sort of” was not an acceptable answer and many of us left those sessions feeling less than smart. Yet we all returned to fight another day more informed and ready to answer the mail during stand up briefings to the two-star AMC/A4 across the street. Just imagine yourself as a second lieutenant briefing 10 slides of critical AOR supply metrics to a room full of O-6s and an O-8—talk about singled out! In time we all got very proficient at this, in fact so good that it became a bit of a competition between the lieutenants to see who could get a “good job, Lieutenant” from the General or perhaps a coin… Everyone in the AMCRSS worked hard to support the war fighting customer in the beginning stages of OEF. Our battle rhythm was seamless and our determination was rock-solid. We knew that the wheels and tires, oil, brakes, landing gear assemblies, etc. we managed were needed at Manas AB, Ali Al Salem AB, Kandahar Airfield, Bagram Airfield, etc. and no one took their eye off the ball. We were consumed by passion — a state of mind contracted from an outstanding leader —- are you contagious? In the final analysis CHIP and other leadership tools are what define the quintessential charge of offcership – to take care of Airmen and accomplish the mission. Go ahead and try it out—I bet you can’t just eat one! The CGO Corner is written by Capt “Nest” Cage, a Logistics Readiness Officer in his second year of the USAF Logistics Career Broadening Program at the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center. Nest has been a staff writer for the ER since 2006. He also currently serves as President of the Tinker Crossroads Chapter.

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

115

Chapter Crosstalk NORTHERN LIGHTS CHAPTER – ELMENDORF AFB, AK Submitted by Maj Jim McArthur

E R : C H A P T E R C R O S S TA L K

The Elmendorf Northern Lights Chapter helped their Army brothers and sisters see first-hand how the Air Force provides airpower. Solders from the 1st Battalion 501st Infantry, “GERONIMO Airborne” and members of the Northern Lights Chapter visited the 3rd Equipment Maintenance Squadron’s Munitions Flight on May 15th where they were treated to a GBU-32 (JDAM) bomb build. Northern Lights Chapter members and 28 solders that participated each had the opportunity to build 3 JDAMS, giving them valuable insight into the weapon system. Members of the Elmendorf AFB LOA Northern Lights Chapter join the Army Paratroopers and mem-

What made this event unique was the fact that bers of the Munitions Flight for a photo with their JDAM. these solders had just completed their rotation to Iraq where they often called upon the JDAM. Captain Jose Lemus, the Battalion Fire Support Officer stated, “…this was a great opportunity for our Paratroopers to witness the actual detailed process it takes to assemble a GBU/JDAM. Our Paratroopers witnessed first hand the lethality of these munitions against enemy safe houses and bunkers during our recent OIF deployment.” Successful events, such as this LOA sponsored tour, have a positive impact on our ability to wage war in a joint environment. Future joint ventures are currently in the planning phase and are sure to further develop our Airmen and Solders into an even more cohesive team.

SONORAN CHAPTER – LUKE AFB, AZ Submitted by Capt Kurt J. Umlauf What does baseball have to with logistics? The real question is how could professional baseball happen without logistics? Recently, members of the Sonoran Logistics Officers Association visited the Kansas City Royals Spring Training Complex in Surprise, Arizona to learn how logistics principles make spring training and minor league baseball happen for the Kansas City Royals. During the tour, Sonoran LOA members were introduced to the challenges and financial constraints to making a professional baseball enterprise function within a small market paradigm. A portion of the tour revealed how the Kansas City Royals staff took a hard look at how they do business and how they utilized Lean and Six Sigma approaches to make their enterprise more effective. Whether it’s producing professional baseball players, developing professional Airmen, or putting a bomb on target, logistics makes it happen.

116

WINTER

“Sonoran LOA members learn how Mississippi Mud is applied to baseballs before use.

2008

ALAMO CHAPTER – SAN ANTONIO, TX Submitted by Major Christine Peyton The Alamo Chapter has just elected a new board of officers and they are ready to take the chapter to the next level. The highlight of our luncheons this year was Lt Gen (ret) Leo Marquez, who addressed 60+ members of the Alamo chapter. General Marquez’s inspirational talk included the responsibilities of military and civilians being active members in LOA as well as the numerous Air Force transformation initiatives. In Oct 08, we held a chapter social at the Randolph AFB Officers’ Club to introduce the new officers. Col Robert Hamm, Vice President of LOA National spoke to our members and prospective members on the benefits of membership. The social was a resounding success!

WASATCH WARRIOR CHAPTER – HILL AFB, UT Submitted by Maj Rich Boatman During Sept our LOA Members toured the Odgen Autoliv plant, manufacturer of automotive airbags. This tour showed our members a great example of how Lean can make an organization competitive. Autoliv was on the verge of extinction and with Toyota’s help implemented the Toyota Production System to recapture market share and become the only surviving airbag manufacturer in the US. Our thanks to Capt John Groff for organizing this tour. Our Oct luncheon opened with a generous donation to our local scholarship fund from Battelle. We were honored to host Maj Gen Robert McMahon, AF/A4L, as our guest speaker. Our chapter thanks Gen McMahon for sharing his senior viewpoints on several topics.

Maj Gen McMahon shares views on current Air Force Issues during our Oct luncheon.

ALI AL SALEM CHAPTER By Capt David Breuer We recently stood up our new LOA chapter at the 386th AEW, Ali Al Salem AB, Kuwait. Known as “The Mighty Dub Dubs” for the prominent spiny tailed lizards native to the area, the Logisticians at Al Salem have already been out in force. Driven by senior mentor Col Herb Phillips and President Lt Col Al Bello, the Ali Al Salem LOA chapter is taking advantage of unique opportunities to expand their knowledge base as well as foster important host nation and interservice relationships. Capt Joaquin Glomski, 386 EAMXS operations officer, worked closely with Col Joel Mjolsness, 311th ESC Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations to set up an educational tour of US Army logistics operations. The 311th ECS is an organization created during the Army’s transformation efforts to reorganize its sustainment function into more modular entities. The command controls logistics supporting Iraq, Afghanistan and Kuwait for the Coalition Land Forces Combatant Command. The members of the Ali Al Salem chapter were treated to a mission brief, a guided tour of the facility, and the opportunity to join in on a battle update assessment (BUA), which is used to brief status and make decisions involving the Army’s logistics operations throughout the AOR. 1 Lt Grace Miller, the OIC of the C17 detachment of the 5th EAMS at Ali Al Salem, orchestrated a tour of Al Mubarak Air Base to include a mission brief and a tour of Kuwaiti Air Force maintenance facilities. 5 EAMS is unique in that it handles the greatest throughput of passengers and cargo of any station in the AOR. Also unique is the fact that roughly 80% of the traffic comes by way of commercial contractors. On a tour led by Al Mubarak Maintenance Manager Mr. John Delaney, officers were shown several maintenance back shops as well as a Kuwaiti Air Force L-100 where we received a rare chance to see how their host nation contends with their own logistics challenges. “Experiences such as these serve to broaden the horizons of our logistics officer corps by giving them a strong base on which to base future operational decisions as well as strengthening the ties of friendship with our host nation”, indicated Col Herb Phillips, 386th Expeditionary Maintenance Group Commander. “We hope to have at least two of these type exchange tours for each AEF rotation.” Check out the new Ali Al Salem LOA chapter web site at: http://www.loanational.org/ALIALSALEM/index.html Continued on next page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

117

RAZORBACK CHAPTER – LITTLEROCK AFB, AR

E R : C H A P T E R C R O S S TA L K

Submitted by Captain Denny Shofner In June 2008, members of the Razorback Chapter LOA at Little Rock AFB, along with one Air Force Academy cadet had the opportunity to tour the Remington Arms Manufacturing Plant, located in Little Rock, Arkansas. The plant consists of over 250,000 square feet and sits on more than 1200 acres. Chapter members were able to view the complete process of forging lead, molding plastic, and prepping primers for installation. The members toured the entire main aisle of the plant along with the shot tower. The Remington Plant is the only remaining commercial plant that makes ammunition in the United States. The plant is ISO 9000 certified and processes 40 million pounds of lead a year, producing eight million rounds a day or two billion rounds a year. The company has a very aggressive recycling program for lead, copper, and steel waste produced during manufacturing. They also recycle plastic left over from shotgun casings. The multi-die machines produce different sizes of ammunition based on supply and demand with very short reconfiguration time. The Turn Style Loaders (where the ammunition is packaged) have a built in safety feature: they have an invisible perimeter light beam to keep personnel out, and shuts down the production line. Our Air Force Cadet found out, first hand, when she leaned too close to the 12 Gauge line. It was very evident while touring the plant that very little gets wasted. They have incorporated LEAN into many areas of their manufacturing which they have labeled as successes. The success that stood out the most was a key logistical issue they discussed with their solution to a warehousing and shipping problem. The company noticed that they could barely fill up a tractor-trailer half way with ammunition without breaking weight restrictions, but they could fill it up entirely with guns and not even come close to the limit. Since guns are manufactured in Kentucky and New York, and all ammunition is manufactured in Arkansas, they decided to make a single warehousing and distribution facility in Memphis. This facility allows Remington to put a combination of high-volume, low-weight guns with high weight, low-volume ammunition into one tractor-trailer and ship customized orders to customers. This means more effective trailer space utilization and more efficient and responsive delivery options. The opportunity to receive such logistical mentoring was a wonderful experience.

AIRBRIDGE CHAPTER – DOVER AFB, DE Submitted by 1st Lt Matt Ratcliffe and 1st Lt Jeffrey Fry The Airbridge Chapter at Dover Air Force Base recently gathered a team of fourteen Airmen from both Dover and Charleston AFB and embarked on a four-day trip to the greater Cincinnati region. The purpose of the trip was to visit industrial workplaces that have implemented the Lean and Six Sigma processes, and then to bring back innovations and ideas to our bases. We started our tours at the Toyota plant in Georgetown, Kentucky, where they assemble Camry, Avalon, and Solara automobiles. Toyota has long been the forerunner in bringing Lean initiatives to the workplace, and that was more than evident at the Georgetown plant. Visual and aural cues existed all along the many acres of the plant’s flooring, providing workers and supervisors notifications of potential dangers or current production slow-downs. Safety was a huge part of the plant’s workplace, with safety boards existing in each work center, tracking mishaps, hazard training, and the overall direction of the safety culture at the plant. All supervisors are trained and well-versed in the “Toyota Production System” (TPS), which is their own unique name for their Lean processes, and the floor workers are encouraged to participate. The next day brought us to the General Electric Aircraft Engines plant outside Cincinnati, where they assemble and test many of their aircraft and ship engines. We received a tour through the entire engine assembly process, where each work cell focuses on a particular step in the building of engines. Finally, we received a lot of great information about the various engines made by GE, particularly the CF6 engine, which is being installed on C-5B aircraft as part of the Reliability Enhancement and Re-Engining Program. Particularly of note, we were informed of how the CF6 will perform at 52,000 pounds of thrust on the C-5M upgrade,

118

WINTER

2008

which is a 15% decrease from the maximum rated thrust of 62,000 pounds. The reason for this de-rating of the CF6 is to improve the durability and lifespan of the engine as it operates on the C-5M models. Our final tour brought us to the DHL operation located in Wilmington, Ohio. This facility flies over 115 flights and processes approximately one million packages daily. Lean activities were employed and very much in use at the DHL facilities. In their third party logistics warehouse, high use inventory is stored closer to the floor and toward the shipping dock in order to reduce the workers travel time and ultimately reduce waste from the process. Another example of Lean in work at DHL was the “Telecoding” section. In this section, hand label packages have a picture of their shipping information taken while on the sorting line. If the machine can’t read the shipping information it is then transmitted to an office where a group of six individuals sorts through these pictures and fill in the necessary data on a computer. The DHL “Telecoding” section views approximately 720 images an hour, averaging one picture every five seconds. By having this process in place DHL reduces the need to pull a package out of the flow process and also reduces the company’s error rate. To wrap up our trip, we paid a visited to Wright Patterson AFB and sat in on a presentation from Lt Gen Jack Hudson, the Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC) Commander. The briefing covered the role of the ASC in supporting our air frames while meeting the logistical challenges of today and the future. He also stressed the importance of abiding by the Air Force Core Values and challenged everyone to know the Air Force mission by heart - “To deliver sovereign options for the defense of the US and its global interests – to fly and fight in Air, Space, and Cyberspace.” Lt Gen Terry Gabreski, AFMC/CV, and Lt Gen (Ret) Mike Zettler were also in attendance. With all this great leadership in one place, there was a plethora of great information and advice to go around. The overall trip was a huge success. Every one of us that embarked on this trip returned to our bases with a new perspective on Lean concepts. We had the opportunity to witness the improvements and successes that Lean brings to the private sector and see— first hand—the future of Lean and what it can bring to the Air Force.

JAMES RIVER CHAPTER—DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND, VA Submitted by Capt Jeremy Pankoski It was a great year for the James River Chapter at the Defense Supply Center Richmond, DLA. The chapter executed three outstanding tours. Tours to the Anheuser Busch Brewing facility in Williamsburg Virginia and Wal-Mart Distribution Center in Sutherland Virginia gave our members a good view of logistics operations in corporate America. We were able to invite a few Langley AFB LOA members to participate in the Anheuser Busch tour with us. With help from our local Navy LOA members, we were able to tour the Navy’s Blue Angels Supply and Maintenance operations at Oceana NAS followed by an Air Show demonstration. Our chapter also teamed up with local Logistics Career Broadening Program (LCBP) students to host Air Logistics Center (ALC) LCBP students. The ALC LCBP students visit to DLA, Defense Supply Center Richmond, was a huge success and a great education and insight into DLA operations. We plan to give the new class of ALC LCBP students the same opportunity in 2009. K

EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE

119

Milestones MAJ CHRIS BORING

WRITES:

MR. KURT CONKLIN

I’ve moved from Fort Worth, TX where I was working for Lockheed Martin Aeronautics in the F-35 Autonomic Logistics Global Sustainment to Beale AFB, CA to assume the position of Lockheed Site Manager for U-2 Field Service.

LT COL PATRICK MCEVOY

LT COL DAVID FOOTE

WRITES:

I finished a year in Iraq working with the Iraqi Air Force; a great experience that I recommend to anyone contemplating such a TDY. I am now at Misawa AB as the 35 MXG Deputy and ready to embrace the winter along with a UCI/LSET inspection on the horizon.

COL ALGENE FRYER

WRITES:

I left the Valley of the Sun this summer after turning over command of the 56 MXG at Luke AFB, AZ. I am now on the HQ AFMC/A4 staff at Wright Patterson AFB, OH.

LT COL LAWRENCE HAVIRD

WRITES:

Transitioned from Little Rock AFB to Travis AFB and loving life in CA!

LT COL MICHAEL CANNON ER: MILESTONES

WRITES:

On the move from the 57 CMS Operations Officer at Nellis AFB to Eielson AFB, to become the 354th AMXS Commander. Looking forward to the challenge and I’ll miss all my friends in the 57 MXG and at AMMOS. Stay in touch.

WRITES:

Hola, I just arrived in sunny Rota, Spain to help stand up the 521st AMOG as the deputy. It is exciting to be involved in the transformation of the AMC en route system.

LT COL DEBORAH MESERVE

WRITES:

I just completed an outstanding tour as the Deputy MXG at Beale and moved to the A4M staff at HQ AFMC. Great seeing everyone at the conference in October.

WRITES:

After ending a great two years in command of the 325 AMXS at Tyndall, I left for a 365 tour in the IZ as the American advisor to the Iraqi Air Force A9. In the IqAF, the maintainers have their own directorate. By the end of the year, the Iraqis will double the size of their Air Force. They will triple it by Dec 09. It is quite an amazing mission in CAFTT. If you have FMS experience and want an exciting challenge, look for an opportunity to serve MNSTC-I/CAFTT in your future.

MAJ JONDAVID DUVALL

WRITES:

Deployed to Joint Special Operations Task Force – Philippines as the Deputy J4 and Transportation Officer. I highly recommend this deployment to any interested LRO (O-3 or O-4). See everyone at next year’s conference!

MAJ MICHAEL MILES LT COL RICHARD NELSON

WRITES:

In Jun 08, I moved from HQ AETC/A4M to the 2d Maintenance Group at Barksdale AFB.

WRITES:

All — just arrived at Wright-Patterson working on the AFMC staff. All is well!

COL SEAN CASSIDY

WRITES:

In June 2008, I moved from Kadena AB and took command of the 402d Aircraft Maintenance Group at Robins AFB.

Completed a tour at Osan AB, ROK, as the 7 AF/A4 and 607th Air Support Group Commander, and reported in to WrightPatterson AFB, OH, as AFMC/A4 as the Chief, Resource Integration Division (A4P).

MR. BILLY GILILLAND

COL ROBERT STINE

COL JOHN BUKOWINSKI

WRITES:

After a year in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia I’ll be moving back to Oklahoma City. I’ll be joining the ARINC Aircraft Integration and Modification Division leadership team. I’m looking forward to getting back to the great State of Oklahoma and Team Tinker.

MAJ TIMOTHY TRIMMEL

WRITES:

Recently PCSd from Air Command and Staff College to Yokota AB, Japan. Took command of the 374th Maintenance Squadron on 25 Jun 08. Happy to be a Samurai Warrior!

COL (RET) JOHN MILLER

WRITES:

I retired on 10 July from the Air Force Security Assistance Center at Wright-Patt...what an exciting and rewarding tour it’s been for me and my family serving in our great Air Force! Experiences and friends galore that will always be remembered. God speed to all our great logisticians—I have been honored to work with you along the way. 120

WINTER

WRITES:

Departed Kirtland AFB, NM as 58th Special Ops Mx Group CC for CENTCOM J4 Mobility Division Chief, MacDill AFB.

COL HERBERT PHILLIPS

WRITES:

Just took the helm of the 386th Expeditionary Maintenance Group at a base in Southwest Asia. Great job, people, and mission....little hot and very dusty.

LT COL ALLAN DAY

WRITES:

Folks, my Air Staff tour is complete June 08, and I am heading to Air War College. Hope to see some fellow loggies in class and I look forward to discovering what the AF has in store next.

COL CAROL JOHNSON

WRITES:

Just finished an outstanding 10 months at ICAF and am off to Travis AFB CA to take command of the 60 MXG. K

2008

LOGISTICS OFFICER ASSOCIATION Post Office Box 2264 Arlington, VA 22202

Non-Profit Organization U.S. Postage

PAID

Permit No. 768 Nashville, Tennessee