Weapons System
Sustainment Planning
Early in the
Development Life Cycle
Committee on USAF Sustainment Planning
Early in the Development Life Cycle
Air Force Studies Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract FA955016D0001 between the United States Air Force and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-67585-7
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-67585-5
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25756
Limited copies of this report may be available through the Air Force Studies Board, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001; (202) 334-3111.
Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2020 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Weapons System Sustainment Planning Early in the Development Life Cycle. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25756.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON USAF SUSTAINMENT PLANNING EARLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE
FRANK KENDALL, Independent Consultant, Chair
MARK D. HARNITCHEK, Independent Consultant, Vice Chair
ANDREW E. BUSCH, AE Busch Consulting, Inc.
KATHLEEN M. DUSSAULT, Lemon Grove Associates, LLC
WESLEY L. HARRIS, NAE,1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
BRUCE A. LITCHFIELD, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company
OZDEN OCHOA, Texas A&M University
CHRISTINA L. TRUESDALE, KBR Wyle, Inc.
ANGIE L. TYMOFICHUK, Logistics Specialties, Inc. (through June 2019)
DAVID J. VENLET, DJ Venlet, LLC (through February 2019)
Staff
ELLEN CHOU, Study Director
ADRIANNA HARGROVE, Finance Business Partner
MARGUERITE SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator
STEVEN DARBES, Research Associate (through October 2019)
CATHERINE PUMA, Research Associate
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
AIR FORCE STUDIES BOARD
DOUGLAS M. FRASER, Doug Fraser, LLC, Chair
KEVIN G. BOWCUTT, NAE,1 The Boeing Company
TED F. BOWLDS, IAI North America
CLAUDE R. CANIZARES, NAS,2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MARK COSTELLO, Georgia Institute of Technology
BRENDAN B. GODFREY, University of Maryland, College Park
MICHAEL A. HAMEL, U.S. Air Force (retired)
WESLEY HARRIS, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JAMES E. HUBBARD, JR., NAE, Texas A&M University
LESTER L. LYLES, NAE, The Lyles Group
WENDY M. MASIELLO, Wendy Mas Consulting, LLC
ALEX MILLER, University of Tennessee
LESLIE ANN MOMODA, HRL Laboratories, LLC
OZDEN OCHOA, Texas A&M University
F. WHITTEN PETERS, Williams & Connolly, LLP
HENDRICK RUCK, Edaptive Computing, Inc.
JULIE J.C.H. RYAN, Wyndrose Technical Group
MICHAEL D. SCHNEIDER, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
GRANT H. STOKES, NAE, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
ZACHARY TUDOR, Idaho National Laboratory
DEBORAH WESTPHAL, Toffler Associates
MICHAEL YARYMOVYCH, NAE, Sarasota Space Associates
Staff
ELLEN CHOU, Director
GEORGE COYLE, Senior Program Officer
RYAN MURPHY, Program Officer
ADRIANNA HARGROVE, Finance Business Partner
MARGUERITE SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator
STEVEN DARBES, Research Associate (through October 2019)
CATHERINE PUMA, Research Associate
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
Preface
According to the Government Accountability Office, sustainment of weapon systems accounts for approximately 70 percent of the total life-cycle costs, but is rarely factored into the total cost of acquisition for the program of record. When sustainment is not considered early in the development process or as an integral part of the systems engineering design, it can negatively affect the ability of the Air Force to maintain and improve the weapon system once it enters service. The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (SAF/AQ) requested the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a workshop and consensus study to determine how and when sustainment planning should be integrated into weapons system development. The statement of task for the study is given in Box P.1.
From October 2018 to October 2019, the Committee on USAF Sustainment Planning Early in the Development Life Cycle held a 2-day workshop and convened five meetings to receive expert testimonies and gather information about the state of sustainment efforts in the Air Force. Experts consulted involved acquisition, logistics, engineering, and cost estimator professionals from the Department of Defense, including Service representatives from the Army, Navy, and Air Force, along with subject-matter experts from the RAND Corporation, the General Accountability Office, the Congressional Budget Office, and Carnegie Mellon University’s Software Engineering Institute. Members of the study committee also visited several Air Force and commercial facilities engaged in product support, including the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Air Force Sustainment Center at Tinker Air Force Base, Ogden
Air Logistics Complex at Hill Air Force Base, Delta Airlines Technical Operations in Atlanta, Georgia, and Amazon Web Services in Arlington, Virginia. (Meeting agendas are provided in Appendix D.)
The study committee developed a set of findings and recommendations that if fully implemented will address sustainment areas of cost of operation, readiness, and reliability. The proposed recommendations should not involve significant amounts of new resources or people. However, some reallocation of resources from a program investment to an enterprise investment would be required, and there would need to be appropriate taskings to reflect this approach. The study committee did not address any specific organizational mission realignments, which is outside the scope of the statement of task and which the committee believes would be better suited for the Air Force to address. The study’s recommendations are mostly about improving acquisition processes, improving the tradecraft of sustainment and product support personnel, making sustainment co-equal with technical performance early in the acquisition process, and more rapidly adopting well-established commercial processes that produce superior technologies that are reliable and cost effective to operate.
Frank Kendall, Chair
Committee on USAF Sustainment Planning
Early in the Development Life Cycle
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommenda-
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
2 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
tions of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by John P. Stenbit, NAE, TRW, Inc. (retired). He was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
Contents
1 Identifying When Sustainment Planning Should Be Integrated into a Program
2 Examining How Sustainment Planning Should Be Evaluated Throughout the Development Process
3 Investigating Current Challenges and Acquisition Process Changes with USAF Sustainment Planning
4 Identifying Opportunities for USAF to Gain Greater Access to Sustainment Expertise
B Committee Member Biographical Information