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