Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 38
Appendix D
Presentation Abstracts
Speaker: Lt Gen Judith Fedder, Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Installations and Mission
Support, Headquarters U.S. Air Force
Presentation Title: A4/7 Sustainment
Multiple factors influence life-cycle costs: spares/consumables, manpower, sustaining
support, fuel, depot Mx, other costs. Weapon system sustainment (WSS) is a key measure of
component repair/overhaul; requirements are outpacing baseline funding, even with
retirements. Air Force acquisition and sustainment communities are working to decrease these
costs. Understanding sustainment factors and trade-offs early in the acquisition cycle is
needed. Analysis of mission requirements, operational costs, life-cycle costs, reliability and
speed of repairs, and using predictive maintenance tools and training is also necessary.
Weighing contractor versus organic sustainment options and considering resources required for
both the short- and long-term should be considered in this workshop. We are committed to
evolving our logistics core competencies to posture logistics resources for the next fight and
deliver cost-effective logistics readiness. Under the near term strategic priorities, we are
committed to understanding and inform the cost of logistics and re-establishing expertise
within life-cycle logistics. Considering resources to best meet readiness requirements
effectively and efficiently is paramount, outlining the need for focused efforts.
Speaker: Katherine Stevens, Director, Materials and Manufacturing Directorate Air Force
Research Laboratory
Presentation Title: Science and Technology for Sustainment
As the U.S. Air Force fleet continues to age, the cost of sustaining the fleet will consume
an ever larger share of the Air Force budget. The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)
executes approximately $2 billion per year on science and technology efforts for the Air Force.
A portion of these funds is directed towards sustainment, with an emphasis on keeping the
current fleet safe, improving aircraft availability rates, reducing life-cycle costs (LCC) and
improving the sustainability of future weapon systems. AFRL is executing an investment plan
with near-, mid-, and far-term technology goals. Recent technology successes have resolved
38
OCR for page 39
issues negatively impacting mission capable rates and resulted in multi-billion dollar LCC
avoidance. Results of recent studies conducted by the National Academy of Sciences and the
Air Force Scientific Advisory Board on the future of Air Force sustainment and how S&T is
responding to the recommendations will be presented.
Speaker: Steve Brown, C.P.L., Defense Acquisition University
Presentation Title: Institutionalizing Low Sustainment Aircraft
During his presentation titled “Institutionalizing Low Sustainment Aircraft,” Professor
Steve Brown discussed five issues critical to successfully reducing sustainment of military air
vehicles with the Air Force Studies Board at the National Academy of Sciences on December 4,
2012.
1. Sustainment cost requirements, data analysis, and reviews during the system life
cycle;
2. RAM (reliability, availability, and maintainability) performance requirements and
funding;
3. Emerging life-cycle program management best practices, including program support
manager key leadership position and benchmarking of services, industry, and allied initiatives;
4. Contracting approaches to grow implementation of performance based logistics
strategies; and
5. Enhanced Department of Defense (DoD) life-cycle workforce training, including new
Defense Acquisition University courses focusing on business acumen and senior seminar for
product support managers.
After highlighting current law and DoD policy related to each topic, examples of how
lower aircraft sustainment costs have been achieved were summarized and considerations to
institutionalize low-sustainment aircraft throughout the military service were proposed to
workshop participants.
Speaker: James Yankel, Technical Director, Directorate of Logistics, Air Force Materiel
Command
Presentation Title: Aging Aircraft Maintenance
The U.S. Air Force is going through a period of reduced recapitalization and increasing
sustainment requirements as current fleets have lives extended 10 to 30 years into the future
to maintain the current force structure. The efforts required to sustain these fleets is increasing
both in material solution efforts, as failure modes beyond those identified in design begin to
become more prevalent, and the resultant costs. Initiatives underway at Air Force Materiel
Command (AFMC) are aggressively looking at sustainment of aging aircraft execution and
issues. A discussion will be presented addressing the AFMC initiatives addressing organizational
39
OCR for page 40
structure for sustainment, processes for sustainment as an enterprise, and technology
development and insertion efforts for sustainment.
Speaker: Joann Berrett, Director, Aerospace Sustainment Directorate, Air Force Sustainment
Center
Presentation Title: Driving to Cost-Effective Readiness
The Air Force Sustainment Center (AFSC) recognizes the challenges the U.S. Air Force
continues to face to include aging aircraft fleets, the need to modernize weapon systems, rising
weapon systems support costs, and fiscal constraints. We must reduce the cost of executing
our mission. The cost of readiness will determine the size of our force, and the size of our force
will determine our ability to fight and win the next war. AFSC is addressing the cost of
executing its mission by focusing on cost-effective readiness through integrating efforts of
organizations involved in sustainment activities. Recent success stories shared include
reduction of flow days (or work-in-progress) for the KC-135 Stratotanker (the Air Force’s
primary in-flight refueling asset). This reduction in flow days resulted in the Oklahoma Air
Logistics Center earning the 2011 Robert T. Mason Depot Excellence Award (first-ever Air Force
winner). Another success story spotlighted a reduction in the number of C-130 Hercules
“mission incapable” aircraft and improved due-date performance, another Robert T. Mason
Depot Excellence Award Winner, but this time in 2012 (second Air Force winner in 2 years).
Other success stories included improvements to the periodic depot maintenance for aircraft
landing gear, concurrent E-3 Block 40/45 Modification installation (upgrade of electronics
system on Airborne Warning and Control Systems), and propulsion alternate sourcing of parts.
These efforts to date have provided seven additional KC-135s and 17 C-130s back to the field;
reduced landing gear (Mission Incapable) MICAP hours by 91 percent; saved 8 months of depot
possessed time for E-3s; and a cost avoidance of $65.4 million on propulsion parts.
Speaker: Mike Jennings, Deputy Director of Logistics (Acting), Air Force Life Cycle Management
Center
Presentation Title: Product Support Responsibilities and Cost Reduction Initiatives
As the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) has evolved from planning
efforts to standup, several initiatives have been pursued to ensure an emphasis on product
support and the enterprise-wide role that now exists with the AFLCMC commander. As
operations and support costs, including weapon system support costs, have continued to
outpace inflation growth (FY1996-FY2011), AFLCMC now has an opportunity to execute an
integrated, enterprise-wide product support strategy. Recommendations from the Life Cycle
Management Working Group (LCM WG) and AFLCMC objective efforts can ensure enterprise
visibility for the AFLCMC commander to exercise an influential role in product support activities
across AFLCMC, as well as integrating product support management with the product support
integrators and product support providers. AFLCMC has begun institutionalizing development
of product support human capital, developmental planning, and logistics/health assessment
40
OCR for page 41
recommendations from the LCM WG, as the AFLCMC commander has specific responsibilities in
these areas. Other recommendations from the LCM WG will require a strengthening of
AFLCMC commander roles/responsibilities. As initiatives progress, AFLCMC has the potential to
ensure program office decisions are in-line with the Air Force enterprise product support
strategy.
Speaker: Maj Mark Blumke, Deputy Chief, Mx Systems and Integration Branch, Directorate of
Logistics, Air Mobility Command
Presentation Title: Air Mobility Command Initiatives to Reduce Maintenance and
Sustainment Cost Drivers
No abstract submitted.
Speaker: SMSgt Kevin Mead, Air Force Element Vehicle and Equipment Management Support
Office
Presentation Title: AFELM Vehicle and Equipment Management Support Office (VEMSO)
Initiatives to Reduce Sustainment Costs
The Air Force is the fourth largest fleet within the federal government and supports
more than 300 locations through 16 different regional headquarters. This results in significant
duplication of effort and resources to meet the various missions. Knowing we cannot continue
to operate this way in a fiscally challenging environment, Headquarters U.S. Air Force directed
action to centralize management of the Air Force’s vehicle fleet. The initiative is referred to as
Installation Support Centralization (ISC). The ISC initiative consolidates enterprise vehicle fleet
management and sustainment processes in support of logistics readiness operations, via Direct
Liaison Authority (DIRLAUTH), with base level units, MAJCOM, and HAF staff. Consolidated
activities are to be executed by AFELM VEMSO in the most efficient manner through
continuous and deliberate reengineering of processes while enhancing global management and
situational awareness of the Air Force’s $7 billion vehicle fleet. Centralization has allowed
AFELM VEMSO to implement several initiatives to reduce sustainment costs, including fleet
validation/rightsizing and budget forecasting from an enterprise perspective. VEMSO is also
leveraging technology to reduce costs with the implementation of the Automotive Information
Management (AIM-2) system to collect vehicle data and automation of 10 fleet management
processes to facilitate data integrity and reduce man-hour strains.
Speaker: Lt Col Brian Godfrey, Chief, Airborne Branch (A4CA), HQ Air Combat Command
Presentation Title: Air Combat Command Sustainment Challenges
Corrosion/structural cracks and wiring faults are factors driving sustainment costs in Air
Combat Command (ACC). These factors are made worse by decreased manning, increased ops
tempo, and aging fleets. Low observable (LO) maintenance in our fifth-generation fighter fleet
41
OCR for page 42
continues to be an NM driver as well. ACC sees a potential for research into corrosion
prevention, detection, treatment, and LO restoration to reduce sustainment costs. In addition,
the ability to troubleshoot wiring and intermittent line replaceable unit faults with a test unit
common across multiple airframes with more accuracy could greatly reduce sustainment costs.
Finally, ACC would like to leverage state-of-the-art information technology tools, such as
electronic tablets with mobile apps, to allow maintainers to reference tech data, conduct
remote troubleshooting, order parts, close out work orders, etc., from the aircraft.
Speaker: BG Edward Dorman III, Director for Logistics Operations, Readiness, Force
Integration and Strategy, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-4
Presentation Title: Informed Sustainment
The Army is developing “Lean” approaches to power and sustain its operations in the
face of global, dynamic threats, while streamlining the force to meet resource constraints. Two
examples, energy-informed operations and condition-based maintenance, tie investments and
priorities to operational significance and risk. Energy enables all operational capabilities, but
delivery incurs casualties and cost—about $2 billion per year in Southwest Asia. The Secretary
of the Army has endorsed a new initiative to establish an “energy-informed” culture, which
admonishes the total Army to behave in ways that maximize the net operational benefit from
energy. This requires a combination of information, education, technologies, and processes to
inform decisions and enable behaviors. Condition-based maintenance invokes a similar
mission-informed decision process to focus reset efforts in order to manage risk and maintain a
ready posture in the wake a decade of high operational tempo. Each of these initiatives
illustrates a maturing Army capability to focus resources and priorities based upon mission
demands.
Speaker: Joe Guenther, Vice President and General Manager, Evandale Turbofan and Turbojet
Engines, General Electric Aviation
Presentation Title: GE Initiatives to Reduce Sustainment Costs
In 2011, the global fleet of military and commercial aircraft was powered by more than
50,000 engines provided by GE and its partners. GE Aviation is under a variety of service
contracts to provide sustainment for, more than 11,000 of those commercial and military
engines. Factors driving GE Aviation sustainment costs and how those factors change over time
will be discussed. Examples of successful management of commercial and military engine
sustainment costs will be examined, and emerging technologies that have demonstrated
reduced sustainment costs will be presented. In closing, recommendations to take advantage
of emerging capabilities will be provided.
42
OCR for page 43
Speaker: Raymond Valeika, Retired Senior Vice President for Technical Operations, Delta
Airlines
Presentation Title: Sustainment: Managing the Consequences of Failure with Transparent
Information
Sustainment or the maintenance of aircraft is a very complex business. The multiplicity
of variables often drives actions and polices in a variety of directions. This then increases cost
and often does not add to safety and availability of aircraft for the intended missions. This
discussion deals with two fundamental issues in effective sustainment programs: understanding
the consequence of failure and then assuring that proper information is available not only to
understand the consequence of failure, but also to analyze life-cycle activities to determine
their effectiveness. Consequence of failure determines the maintenance requirements. The
analysis behind that is critical to ensure that both safety and economics are considered.
Information is then the key for assuring the ongoing maintenance provides the necessary
results. The free flow of information is critical in measuring and establishing goals and
accountability. This paper discusses both the technical factors and organizational impacts of
ongoing maintenance requirements and then gives some examples of programs that worked.
Speaker: Mike Buongiorno, Director, Military Engine Aftermarket Business Development,
Pratt and Whitney (P&W)
Presentation Title: P&W Life Cycle Cost Management
With the continued emphasis on tight defense budgets both within the United States
and our global allies, P&W remains aligned with our customers though our Integrated Program
Deployment (IPD) strategy. Through IPD, P&W focuses on reducing the life-cycle cost of the
propulsion system from product development, through production and into sustainment. P&W
has demonstrated success in design for reliability/maintainability, production cost target
achievement, and integrated sustainment solutions that not only reduce depot maintenance
cost but also focus on reducing maintenance through increased time on wing, optimized
operations and sustainment integration with original equipment manufacturer knowledge.
P&W leverages lessons learned in legacy programs to drive continuous improvement into new
products as well as flows new technology back into mature platforms to enhance their
durability and reduce operating cost. P&W remains engaged with the services through the
Component Improvement Program and other government and company-funded initiatives to
reduce the cost of propulsion sustainment.
Speaker: VADM Walter Massenburg (USN, Ret.), Senior Director, Mission Assurance Business
Education, Raytheon Company
Presentation Title: Enterprise, Why Now?: Naval Aviation Enterprise Model
43
OCR for page 44
In 1999, naval aviation was in crisis. As leaders of naval aviation in the 1990s prioritized
building the future force structure to replace an aging aircraft fleet, the existing fleet continued
to age, and the budget to preserve and manage the aging fleet was continually cut. Naval
aviation faced the unprecedented crisis of having a force not ready to fight, while losing a
generation of leadership. The “stovepipes” of operations, maintenance, and supply that
contributed to current readiness retrenched and sought to optimize their activities at the
expense of others. If not addressed, this “downward death spiral” would have resulted in a
greatly reduced force structure, and warfighting capability would have been compromised.
Across the years 1999-2007, naval aviation created a different business model which valued
cost wise readiness and developed the concept of single process ownership and the single fleet
driven metric to establish a horizontal behavior model that valued aviation units ready for
tasking at reduced cost—today, tomorrow, and in the future. They adopted continuous process
improvement (AIRSpeed), public private partnerships, performance based logistics, and other
tools to enable the transformation. Today, the cost of naval aviation current readiness is
predictable, billions of dollars remain in the Future Years Defense Program to recapitalize the
force, and the level of readiness (availability) that is required is understood, achieved, and
maintained. The Naval Aviation Enterprise operates as a true enterprise where readiness at
reduced cost is everyone’s responsibility. Today, the Air Force is experiencing the same crisis
that naval aviation experienced in the late 1990S—aging aircraft fleets, austere budgets, and
“stovepipes” that drive cost. This naval aviation enterprise concept is applicable in any
government organization; but now, as service budgets face severe pressures, the Air Force
could use this current crisis to adopt an enterprise model and change from a “business of
consumption of resources” to one that values a “business of conservation of resources.”
44
