Our services are aligned with Marine Corps avionics vision to increase fidelity of operational logistics cost tracking by improving efficiencies of critical spare parts supply lines required for repair jobs.
We support Marine Corps Avionics operations by integrating proprietary cost tracking systems, Logistics/engineering expertise & spare parts supply line solutions.
We aim become established as essential partners with Marine Corps for Logistics operations to design innovative supply line aviation support & services. It is important to design mechanisms for requesting new work order routing principles to perform component repairs on the fleet.
By signing up, we will expand Supply Line Logistics cost tracking & repair service jobs critical to Marine Corps Air Wing Success. Routing new Work Order requests for Marine Corps will enable us to further reduce Logistics costs, accelerate component repairs turn-times & increase operational readiness of the fleet.
We are excited that Marine Corps is considering options to implement our full suite of aviation repair & supply line Logistics services Repair Services we offer to Marine Corps complement, enhance & integrate well with existing supply line operations, providing accurate cost tracking for all Logistics Operations.
We are delighted to add Marine Corps aviation to our Logistics portfolio & we look forward to expanding our repair services to include key Field installations.
We are also pleased to announce that Marine Corps has expressed interest our approved repair & logistics programme to service wide ride range of Air Wings.
Increasing proximity Service & support for Marine Corps Air Wings is very important & we have built a solid reputation of quality repair services costing & supply line tracking work
We seek approval to build logistics supply lines & repair services on key Marine Corps customisations including cost estimates for avionics, equipment installations & Logistics level composite repairs.
We are excited to be considered as an authorised logistics & repair centre for Marine Corps aviation. Having exploded on Marine Corps aviation repair scene recently, we recognise importance of establishing quality work orders for tracking costs incurred during Logistics Operations.
We welcome this opportunity to build spare parts supply line work alongside Marine Corps to expand & extend our repair logistics services for multiple Air Wings.
1) Delivering Operational Results:
We designed essential mechanisms to effectively characterise Fleet equipment parts Type & Size Deployment administration. We used acquisition & sustainment logistics to integrate supply lines & build master equipment specs supply schedule deposit for sustainability track in sourcing simulator space.
2) Bringing Innovation to Problem Solving
We used Established Work Orders to create Fleet Type & Size equipment parts Deployment policy. We created new upgrade/repair schedules for equipment reset optimisation bringing ability to simulate best course of action for force structure requirements in defined sourcing work space. Factual contract sourcing timeline information was designed to allow for sound & logical acquisition decision-making & monitor equipment performance
3) Planning & Control
We delegated Fleet Type & Size equipment parts Deployment authority & assigned responsibility to design accurate work orders. We have defined supply line contract quote simulation to monitor sustainability of authenticated single source problem space information & master scheduling support tool for maintenance/modernisation processes.
4) Using Information Effectively
To move processes forward, we have assigned Fleet Type & Size equipment parts Deployment organisational structure dispatch teams to work on these issues. We have optimised target levels of equipment parts available & automated asset record books to predict equipment condition & performance-based metrics designed support readiness in meeting requirements for mission readiness.
5) Providing Excellent Services
We assigned Fleet Type & Size equipment parts Deployment with complete descriptions of mission, function, or task administration. We have identified common operating pictures to provide for evaluating cost-baseline decisions using sourcing diagram sequence tech to capture & integrate real-time info w/o losing past mission perform evaluation & indicators.
6) Attention to Detail
We initiated clearly defined Fleet Type & Size equipment parts Deployment course of actions to meet mission requirements. We extensively characterised equipment part installation records detail contract quote active status & mobile performance indicators to track equipment assets & ensure availability for surge operation requirements.
7) Adapting to Change & Uncertainty
We have created administrative Governance structure to optimise Fleet Type & Size equipment parts Contract quote conduct prior to deployment. We have enabled installation & frequency of upgrade/repair forecast for equipment & cost-based asset reset allocation. Also, our new processes support tools to enable mission assessment decisions in support of equipment asset sustainability costs & early warning of equipment problems in requiring upgrade/repair to perform at the highest operational level possible.
8) Developing Strategy
We established Fleet Type & Size equipment parts deployment reporting requirements to capture contract quote sustainability reports for equipment repair time & return to operational service schedule to optimise performance. We have updated existing contract procurement quote systems to detail supplier identity for meeting force structure requirements of real-world mobile operations.
9) Technical Expertise
We have established mechanisms to identify conditions changing, superseding, or canceling existing Fleet Type & Size equipment parts Deployment directives. We have ensured accuracy of equipment replacement/repair quotes based on assessments to sequence supply line capacity & costs to improve acquisition schedules.
10) Continuous Learning
We Established Fleet Type & Size equipment parts Deployment procedures, techniques, standards, guided & methods of performing duty, function, or operation. Our processes qualify fiscal decision-making w/ quality information & justify future operations based on sourcing field design/simulator. We have noted how new work order routing procedures line up with observations of force structure requirements for meeting surge contingency scenarios.
To be procure provider of choice for aviation maintenance, repair, overhaul capabilities & services.
To procure quality airframes, engines, components & support equipment providing service meeting Naval Aviation aircraft ready-for-tasking goals with improved effectiveness & efficiency.
Navy's shore-based off-aircraft & depot level aviation procure/repair providers. We supply skills, processes, installation resources needed to accomplish maintenance, repair & overhaul of aviation assets to procure forces assets ready to train, fight & win. Our procure professionals deliver mission capable & effective equipment platforms.
Our mission is to procure quality airframes, engines, components, support equipment & provide services to meet organisational goals directly supports mission to maintain, train & equip combat-ready forces.
Establishes one of the most significant changes in Naval Aviation procure/repair timelines to move maintenance, repair & overhaul capabilities as close to flight line as possible for greater operational speed. To provide more responsive & agile “off-flight line” repair capability by improving standardisation & ability to replicate best practices across installations.
Work closely with contractors to procure, repair aircraft & components, employing suppliers when in search of new technologies, parts & techniques.
Mission to provide agile, relevant, quality support equipment maintenance, repair & overhaul services to meet Naval Aviation procure requirements & fleet response requirements in efficient & cost effective manner. Services provide seamless integrated maintenance, repair & overhaul services to reduce time & improve availability of ready for use aviation support equipment assets for mission activities.
Sets organisational procure goals to utilise standardised processes across integrated workforce, facilitating readiness aligned to our mission and vision.
Provides procurement of full-depot equipment rework capabilities for both common & unique depot-level upgrades/modifications, for thousands of end items & oversight for select original equipment supplier depot maintenance:
End items supported include:
1. aircraft handling equipment
2. avionics test sets
3. aircraft weapons support equipment
5. aircraft engine test cells
6. support equipment engine overhaul
8. component design field team services
9. stationary test stands
10. miscellaneous support equipment items
Dispatchers have identified clear mission statements for DoD designed equipment upgrade/repair projects to help installations make better decisions faster when it comes to supplier quotes. What has historically been complex & time consuming process for DoD work order agents is now a snap with dispatcher designed advanced equipment Procurement Systems.
With smart equipment upgrade/repair mission goals in mind, dispatchers have engineered high fidelity procurement solutions to combine contract quote systems, work order task technologies & expert services to substantially streamline full spectrum of DoD procurement activities & processes required to secure optimal sourcing deals from equipment suppliers.
Primary use of dispatchers Procurement Systems is of clear benefit to DoD division organisations procuring any number of equipment types & sizes for upgrade/repair simulations. Sourcing Service is most effective with greatest return on supplier contract quotes when implemented just prior to the main information-gathering step in a procurement process, but can be implemented at any time over the course of introduction of work order tasks.
Dispatcher equipment Procurement Systems provide for quick/efficient collection & assessment of DoD organisation needs, work order objectives, goals & strategies for equipment upgrade/repair. Complete contract quote services are created utilising specific technology & provide for invitation of suppliers to participate in work order processes.
Dispatcher experts assist in administration of supplier quote processes, making smart use of technology to produce complete assessments of all equipment condition metrics involved in determination of quote requirements & supplier responses. Dispatcher Services provide robust assessment for upgrade/repair components to enable DoD work order task forces to visualise variety of surge contingency scenarios including all fiscal options, device configurations, volumes & implementations.
Dispatcher service strategies integrate seamlessly with current equipment sourcing processes. Flexibility of DoD administration frameworks for supplier quotes incorporate/address all organisational objectives for upgrade/repair including automated work order technologies. Dispatcher services leverage experience, goals/vision of DoD divisions to identify & facilitate success of each sourcing project milestone. Organisational benefits of utilising dispatcher team services include:
1. Dispatchers reduce problems with work orders associated with current complex overall DoD requirements to provide level of detail necessary to construct quotes with very tight specifications. Dispatchers engage suppliers to accurately quote specific devices with exact features for equipment upgrade/repair implementations with end result being more efficient devices offering faster services to include more features.
2. Dispatchers enable reductions in sourcing timeframes, with concrete & measurable milestones providing for swift completion of specific work order tasks in equipment upgrade/repair simulations. Dispatcher utilisation of technology facilitating integration of supplier quotes completes transfer of bulk manual tasks currently employed by DoD typically required in sourcing projects, freeing administrators to focus more attention on larger organisational objectives.
3. Dispatcher quote experts utilise new sourcing technology to generate complete specific quotes from complex equipment upgrade/repair requirements framework currently required by DoD. Quotes are accepted from suppliers pre-approved by organisation.
4. Dispatcher complete work order assessment capabilities for all equipment condition metrics provides for immediate, complete determination of capabilities. DoD can compare terms/conditions of supplier quotes, equipment upgrade/repair configurations, and different surge contingency scenarios involving purchase & cost per specs.
5. Dispatchers design rock-solid work order technology to be utilised by installations to compile complete contracts incorporating all terms identified in supplier quotes to include in final equipment upgrade/repair simulation goals & any additional contract documentation per DoD requirements.
6. Dispatchers issue immediate guarantees of quote terms focused on receipt of defined answers to equipment upgrade/repair questions typically receiving general answers from DoD when it comes to completing work orders. Supplier responses are incorporated into final contract documents by clearly defining performance terms & conditions.
7. Dispatchers ensure complete DoD contract compliance in work orders with measurable performance terms/conditions to guarantee prompt responses in efforts to address equipment upgrade/repair issues & special attention from supplier groups to all quotes & operational mission sets.
8. Dispatchers mitigate cost to DoD of supplier proposals through carefully defined equipment upgrade/repair specifications, maximising procurement cost value & reducing sourcing project timeframes. Dispatcher service provides integrated process for quote creation & work order administration.
9. Dispatchers ensure work order creation & assessments of multiple equipment configurations & upgrade/repair costing scenarios, producing smart deals for DoD involving contracts by optimising supplier quote processes. Dispatchers establish measurable guarantees, increased utilisation of contract compliance, defining establishment of procurement goals & standards.
10. Dispatchers define devices utilised in equipment upgrade/repair simulations & automated work order system specifications to compile/deliver quotes so DoD gets good deals. Dispatchers provide process for assessments of supplier offers/response determining requirements for assistance in drafting specific contract language.
As if we didn’t have enough shit to deal with, the Maintenance/Logistics guidance for the Helicopter Builds provided to us was usually a day late & dollar short—both too general as well as conflicting-- often at odds with directives from command & even established technical manuals. Which assessments were Correct? Many of the issues involved in our work orders could be debated by seasoned engineers & specialists, yet we were forced to make decisions on –the-fly.
Dispatchers are actively engaged in working with Navy to convert existing equipment supply contracts into performance-based standards. Dispatchers strive to clearly describe our basic efforts in terms of measured mission service outputs such as "what, when, where, how many & how well" work order tasks are to be assessed.
Some repair/upgrade overhaul activities occur at time intervals ranging from several months to several years. For primary systems e.g., aircraft, tracked vehicles & ships on work orders, costs should be included in estimates for the years in which they are expected to occur, accompanied by documentation on the cost per event & time interval between overhaul events.
Costs of major fleet mission items that have different repair/upgrade overhaul sequences i.e., structural subsystems such as hull, frame, or airframe; power subsystems such as engines or drive train & electronic/mechanical subsystems such as fire control system, armaments, guidance, or command & control equipment should be estimated & identified separately within work order elements. In some cases, the interval between end item overhauls may be expressed on work orders in terms of system operating hours, not calendar time.
When you do Order Entry w/ Parts Control Tool, process becomes complete solution for Helicopter Mission. You can view status of parts & what equipment is assign to operations. With all this info at your fingertips, Naval forces can better close deals—leading to increased mission success. Plus, if not enough parts on hand, you can recommend substitutes. You can even display a picture of the part or item for improved order accuracy.
We hope these mock test questions help with your duty discovery little bit. We will continue to add content as time allows. Keep checking back. You will not be allowed to begin work until you have been issued permit to work. It is not your duty to write risk assessments for your own tasks under this regime. If you are not able to follow provided method statements, you should discuss this with us before starting. The reason you must read instructions detailed in this report is because this is where you will find out what critical duties are placed on you.
1. Discuss role of maintenance/modernisation work orders in promoting successful force structure adjustment cases. What is your rationale for active maintenance/modernisation work order approaches with respect to expected return on equipment condition index status & resource supplier tracking risk?
2. Recommend maintenance/modernisation work orders approaches given beliefs concerning force structure adjustment case efficiencies. What predominant maintenance/modernisation work order biases do you suppose are present in resource supplier weighting schemes to be used in construction of equipment condition indices?
3. Compare & Contrast competing mode structures for establishing exposure of maintenance/modernisation work orders to force structure adjustment cases including separate or pooled resource supplier accounts. What approaches do you use for constructing equipment condition indexed work orders & what techniques would you recommend when given descriptions of force structure adjustment cases to be tracked?
4. Explain & Justify use of maintenance/modernisation work orders & discuss difficulties in applying force structure adjustment case definitions consistently, give assessments of equipment condition indices. How do you explain rationales & primary concerns of maintenance/modernisation work orders in force structure adjustment cases & what are key resource supplier risks of each work order?
5. Compare & Contrast techniques for identifying maintenance/modernisation work order type & characterise force structure adjustment case selection methods, details on resource suppliers or the results of return-based assessments of equipment condition. How would you interpret results of force structure case design & what consequences of changes in maintenance/modernisation work order changes will be discussed?
6. Explain use of maintenance/modernisation work order screens based on equipment condition index criteria & discuss potential impacts on characteristics of force structure adjustment cases. How would you compare & contrast maintenance/modernisation work orders, including resource supplier risks & what explanations for major fiscal crises may exist on difference sides of force structure adjustment cases?
7. Explain characteristics of mode-specific maintenance/modernisation work order exposure, compare & contrast with other resource supplier portfolios. How would you compare & contrast equipment condition index release disciplines of active force structure cases & impact on maintenance/modernisation work orders?
8. Contrast & justify enhanced maintenance/modernisation work orders mode installment techniques & justify enhanced equipment condition indexing strategies on basis of resource supplier control & information receipt ratios. How would you discuss & justify effects of risk-return frameworks on optimal force structure adjustment case allocations for new maintenance/modernisation work orders?
9. Explain maintenance/modernisation work order approaches to portfolio construction, discuss advantages & disadvantages of adding work orders to control overall resource supplier risk exposures. How do you plan to distinguish among equipment condition index components of maintenance/modernisation work order active return in force structure adjustment cases & assess associated resource supplier risks & relevance for mode selection policies?
10 . Review maintenance/modernisation work order processes of identifying & selecting resource supplier risks, including both qualitative & quantitative factors of equipment condition indices involved in building force structure adjustment cases. How do you plan on discussing maintenance/modernisation work order portfolio security selection processes & differentiate between different modes of force structure adjustment case approaches?
Dispatchers have detailed directives designed to advance the system processes involved in DoD contract logistics based on equipment condition indices for supply service route track for the fleet. Simple economics dictates that the cost & work involved in procuring equipment to deploy along a single route is dependent on the service levels of the entire group of routes in the sourcing system of the fleet. Consequently, mechanisms that promote the consideration of shared route service along the same track in a systems model grouping contract quotes are of crucial interest to the advancement of DoD deployment of equipment towards meeting common work order requirements to achieve upgrade/repair simulation success.
The intent of this report is to initiate a basis for informed decisions in the consideration of service route track sharing for equipment component infrastructure, including common work order approaches to an assessment of benefits & costs to DoD forces for demonstrating current practical processes & applications of different scopes for equipment upgrade/repair simulations.
Command & control dispatch systems are a cornerstone of approved procedures used along supply service routes to avoid operational crises & actions based on mission principles are significant to creation of any shared-track operations involving groups of contract quotes. Techniques & technologies of the three major branches of dispatch operations include: equipment component control, common work order communications & Logistics Rules and Procedures—all underscoring the goals of logistics reporting redundancy & other measures to ensure efficient service route processes.
The report contains examples of service route track sharing operations & describes progress in creation of common work order requirements for action to date. A surge-based mission scenario case illustrates project viability & incremental steps to move beyond rigid temporal separation presented as evidence of dispatcher progress in service route track sharing operations. Concrete actions are proposed to help dispatchers develop shared supply route track operations for equipment deployment based on upgrade/replace condition indices.
The report suggests ways to increase the interest & potential of shared-track systems including lists of potential candidates & preferred equipment conditions for common work order demonstration projects. Efforts should highlight advantages &disadvantages of shared-track system models to broaden supply route service & and practical economic appeal along with assessments of the barriers & obstacles encountered in equipment contract grouping techniques to adoption of the shared-track concept.
Dispatch control systems must be designed from the outset with concurrent common work orders in mind, allowing dispatchers to account for high supply route service stop rates directives with design factors detailing appropriate stop lengths & signal aspects. Equipment components must be considered as one part of an integrated contract quote grouping system of dispatch controls, training, rules & procedures. Whatever dispatch technology forms the basis of the shared-track operation, it should provide some common work order capacity for meeting growth in upgrade/repair simulation events.
By using existing shared supply route track systems to initiate pilot programmes for concurrent operations, a shared-track demonstration project without temporal separation could be useful in several respects, including realisation of dispatcher experience in common work order design & system implementation. Shared supply route service system feasibility must be demonstrated & cost/benefit streams of shared-track implementation demonstrated for surge operations. Results of a demonstration will serve to offer the potential for relief from significant common work order operating constraints on current temporally-separated supply route service track operations.
Although primary interest lies in true shared-use operation of supply route tracking & equipment infrastructure, dispatcher teams reviewed parallel operations on adjacent tracks & operations on same track with temporal frequency separation to establish characteristic operating categories & parameters for surge operations. Contract grouping categories are confined chiefly to specific supply route track lines & different equipment component type & size density routes were assessed instead of relying on purely volume considerations & corridors where risk assessment & crisis mitigation would be extremely difficult for dispatchers.
Automated contract quote grouping systems for integrated surge operation contingency scenario corridors have encouraged dispatchers to work with installation receipt stakeholders involved in sourcing equipment on supply route lines sharing equipment components & infrastructure, creating operational value for surge operations that would not be possible without cooperatively sharing scarce logistics system resources.
Busy dispatchers have provided common work orders in line with supply service route templates to guide planning of surge operations through specific steps. Unique, practical common work order cases can be built by substituting appropriate spatial installation considerations & local variables related to uniquely situated installations. However, while common work order cases are required to justify an equipment upgrade/repair simulation project based on condition indices, it is not sufficient. The case for operational security must also be made.
Dispatchers indicate shared supply route track scenarios for service route techniques & equipment upgrade/repair schedule frequency insertions may reduce the capital costs implicit in new contract grouping system designed to satisfy requirements for equipment upgrade/repair simulations based on condition indices when compared to a new separate system for surge contingency scenarios. Concurrent shared supply route track for meeting new missions provides mechanisms to offer higher levels of route service for mobile units, while keeping capital costs in check to satisfy political stakeholders.
Key issues for shared supply route track operations include compatibility of equipment upgrade/repair schedules based on condition indices with the dispatch control system creating contract quote groups at the central station. Equipment component types & sizes used on supply route branch lines can function in a dedicated surge operational capacity & be fit with upgrade/repair frequency for contract quote signal grouping apparatus developed between installations by common work orders.
Dispatch control systems ensure meeting installation spatial requirements for disparate local positions between different equipment component types & sizes. Deployment controls on board route service tracking requirements must be programmed differently to factor in common work order braking rates & operating speeds when equipment upgrade/repair simulations based on condition indices could occupy two or more track blocks for surge contingency scenarios.
In this example, congruent results of economic & security common work order cases are integral to concluding shared supply route track projects are feasible for defined surge contingency scenarios. Positive indications include but are not limited to capital cost structure terms, Conclusions identifying proposed shared track route service have different drivers with respect to operational security & economic factors than separate/parallel stand-alone system of different equipment component types & sizes sharing a corridor with upgrade/repair simulation schedules based on evaluation of condition indices.
Dispatchers determined supply route service modifications are likely required & achievable in future operations for unanticipated surge contingency scenarios, along side automated system control features based on new technology with presence of verifiable dispatch practises can be readily deployed for future modes of upgrade/repair simulations based on evaluation of equipment condition indices. Dispatchers have performed calculations detailing reasonable cost/benefit ratios justifying investments in concrete metrics for improvement in centralised dispatch control centres charged with grouping contract specifications.
Incremental changes to contract procurement quote grouping systems employed for administration of supply route service between installations connecting via common work orders have been validated by real-world mobile operational cases for surge contingency scenarios. Techniques were deemed acceptable to dispatch operators in both scope & degree of efficacy. Progress made by current operating systems offers both guidance & confidence to prospective user-based protocols for equipment upgrade/repair simulations precipitated by evaluations of condition indices.
In this report, future growth of shared supply route track operations to meet equipment upgrade/repair simulations based on route condition indices is contingent upon shared-track service routes being economically viable & achievable without sacrificing requirements of operation overload from different types & sizes of equipment components tasked with meeting requirements of surge contingency scenarios. Future technical advances must detail more advanced common work order cases likely to enhance appeal of considering shared-track route service.
The following recommendations for DoD to conduct future investigation & action will support progress for present operations & missions being planned or considered by busy dispatch operators. At minimum, common work order demonstration projects should encourage funding & oversight for creation, evaluation, testing & documentation of models, methods & procedures to expand concurrent track sharing in service routes & involve political stakeholders. Detailed evaluations of requirements for specific types & sizes of equipment component upgrade/repair simulations must be detailed for real-world mobile operations to meet future surge contingency scenarios.
In conclusion, DoD contract grouping demonstration projects must provide for design, deployment & testing to recommend preferred approaches to creation of future common work orders designed to report on actual costs & derived benefits of extending concurrent shared-track supply route operations of the force. Template common work order creation detailing risks involved in tasking equipment upgrade/replace scheduling techniques based on condition indices must be adapted to specific candidate supply route line segments under consideration by DoD.
The methodology employed for the dispatch of this report used limited operational tactics set for purely illustrative purposes. Expanding upon this report by applying conclusions to real-world mobile systems could validate & calibrate common work order models & quantify benefits to forces, enabling installations to meet requirements of surge contingency scenarios. Described techniques will be suitable for transferring advances in equipment upgrade/repair simulation scheduling based on condition indices evaluation to other prospective contract grouping systems at DoD.
1. Cost Impacts:
Successes include performance requirements & review to baseline design to report earned value to achieve cost accountability. Life of programme strategy executed to achieve cost savings by leveraging qualification testing. Fundamental updates are issued & expected to be adopted coming at cost problems & time consumption to integrate into finished product. Changes in standardised requirements undo/override customised capabilities create need to operate cross-programme & cross-functional aspects in addition to detailed impact assessments.
2. Fiscal Requirements:
Programme cuts, contracting issues, design misinterpretations & testing issues can set back timelines of work effort. Funding for requirements changes is rare & must account for process improvements across system partners. Direction of Funding priorities & single administration structure must drive common services. Implementing tailored procurement to accelerate product delivery to user with minimal risk is currently pre-decisional & not yet an approved strategy. Contracting strategy requires tailoring required documents for proposal review/contract decision, initially limiting supplier for task orders for follow-on efforts to advance project
3. Contract Information:
Improving contract reliability requirements in the context of complex product is currently not tied to operationally relevant timeframe would result in more confidence in programme success. Procurement actions underway with proposal received, working through contract award issues in order to stay on schedule. Product functions as form-fit-function replacements are where they need to be from reliable, build & affordability perspective. Gaining consensus on how to maximise information available to inform scope of operational testing is work in progress.
4. Product Prototypes:
Breaking out products into separate programmes provides clarity to unit cost, schedule & performance parameters, keeping investment decisions at appropriate decision-making levels. Adding product orders helps keep costs down & when product orders decrease, supplier base is challenged. Deep dives are required to evaluate opportunities to break out parts of build line. Establishing system requirements, function & allocated baselines are important part of programme progression. Prototyping & test activity provides information to inform system design process & risk reduction to support fielding of critical capabilities. Innovative, streamlined & agile procurement approach delivers operational capability driven by technology from prototype.
5. Testing Capability:
Programme schedule risk due to budget reductions & compressed test timelines to meet requirements. Schedule & budget to not allow for significant correction of testing deficiencies Tailored milestone documentation finding appropriate balance of value-added efforts, statuary compliance & oversight mechanisms useful to ability to execute mission. New procurement approaches utilise reviews focusing on affordability & cost/capability trade-offs, representing good model to leverage for future programmes. Deficiency Reviews align prioritisation of trouble reports with potential to pose risks to measures of effectiveness or suitability & correct cost/schedule parameters.
6. Schedule Events:
Schedule margins help to balance discovery driving delays with opportunity to accelerate, putting emphasis on applying execution standards. Insight into system build costs involving poor quality, indirect costs & schedule helps establish best incentive arrangements for contracts. Reducing build times & costs to meet delivery needs sets baseline for future lots, benefiting from economic orders of quantity & breakout of components. Cost drivers of maintenance are identified using business case reviews to identify optimum sources of product repair. Transparent, events-based approaches enable decisions to move forward based more on technical readiness compared to schedule, avoiding compromise of performance requirements.
7. Process Quality:
Reviews conducted to identify areas where urgency drove delivery of systems prior to completing testing information contributing to reliability issues, demonstration of operating life & improve quality of process. Programme opportunities for supplier competition include all builds, operation of fielded product, system engineering & test support. Monitoring of cost, schedule & performance highlights funding shifts, disruption due to unplanned activities.
8. Build Reviews:
Build process improvements are tempered by inefficiencies impacting execution & costs when build quantities ramp up. Without bundling, requirements can be levied on programme without funding, causing planned capabilities to become out of scope. Concerns in review process & approval of procurement milestones & contracting documents include serial processes, documentation prior to decision point & duration of reviews.
9. Contract Structure:
Complex coordination & maturation of processes executed in fixed price contract structures introduces risk of using preferred control approach. Programme Schedule experiences cost growth because of prototype build cost underestimation & complex information assurance requirements. Requirements are reasonably allocated between platforms to maximise performance & minimise costs of programme.
10. Phase Targets:
Expiration of funding creates periodic carryover situation without deliberate rephasing resulting in disbursement rates below target goals, causing deferred requirements. Programme incorporates of remedies for initial approach errors, imprecise contract language, process information associated with deliverables & incomplete metrics definitions
1. Integrate Mission Requirements & Product Support: Translation of system logistics requirements into aircraft sustainment product support strategy delivers accurate representation of equipment condition state & presentation of contract requirements to dispatchers. Action is incorporated into doctrine in form of optimised operational readiness at affordable, best value costs according to adherence to scheduled supplier task orders for procurement.
2. Form Product Support Administration: Formation of integrated Product Support Administration Teams includes dispatch user requirements for designing logistics mechanisms & implementing aircraft product support. Equipment Condition State Information System Register enables assessments of Service Life duration, serving as prerequisite for sustainment contract payment processing & receipt of procurement reports for supplier groups to maintain readiness.
3. Baseline Product Support System: Baselining of logistics operations involves collection of equipment condition state information sources to assess supplier capability & aircraft product support decisions. Techniques include inclusion of inputs from Product Support Administration Teams to involve dispatchers with Procurement Programme Baselines in terms of contract assistance & certification so suppliers can offer cost-effective, quality solution to meet mission readiness requirements for sustainment operations.
4. Establish Product Support Performance Outcomes: Process of identifying & refining mission-critical aircraft product support performance & cost outcomes for dispatchers to determine how contract success will be measured in terms of advances in logistics operations. Improvements in process of supplier identification include all specified top-level equipment condition state systems evaluating performance, sustainment activity reliability, availability details to promote readiness w/ costing metrics & procurement system attributes.
5. Measure Business Case & Product Support Value: Expanded cost/benefit determination w/ intent of determining best value procurement solutions for aircraft product support is critical to maintaining readiness. Dispatchers build Supplier Business cases to assess each logistics stage & weigh total long-term Service Life costs for mission-designed equipment condition state documentation against total benefits. Beneficial contract solutions are arrived at when mark-ups include consideration of best support systems, sub-systems or component levels, assessment of sustainment workload allocation strategies & responsibility assignment for equipment condition source risk mitigation.
6. Determine Product Support Integration Methods: Determination of aircraft product support is acquired from Service Providers using outcome & transaction-based performance-based mix for sustainment activities. Logistics & best value evaluation techniques of promoting accurate procurement factors line up w/ Product Support Integration tools shaping dispatcher integration of supplier sources defined within scope of product support arrangements to include contracts, agreement & service level factors to achieve documented results. Project Action Teams designate responsibility for Product Support Integration by ensuring delivery of specified outcomes for required evaluation of equipment condition states, critical for ensuring readiness.
7. Identify Product Support Providers: Determination & selection of best value procurement mix promotes readiness for sources of sustainment providers performing aircraft product support functions. Best value selection is based on capabilities, equipment condition state capacities, determining efficiency & effectiveness of logistics actions by dispatcher application of contract value assessments & discretionary decisions for multiple levels of tiered supplier support.
8. Assess/Refine Fiscal Enablers for Product Support: Identification of range, type & scope of fiscal incentives for suppliers impacting readiness & remedies of logistics activities for inclusion in aircraft product support agreements motivates optimal procurement behaviour for achieving best performance & cost outcomes. Consistent terms, conditions & objectives of Product Support Arrangements Incentives include dispatcher determination of award fee, award term, incentive fee, shared savings & positive past performance ratings. Remedies for deficits in equipment condition states include requiring product support providers to perform sustainment service at agreed upon cost, adherence to established prices, exercising best option year or contract cancelations & deficient past performance ratings.
9. Adjust Product Support Agreements: Establishment & refinement of implemented Aircraft Product Support Arrangements e.g., contract, Service Level agreement & dispatcher action to assign & delineate sustainment roles, responsibilities, resourcing & reciprocal product support establish unique supplier business cases. Factors include logistics mechanisms of notification for procurement issues involving changes in readiness dependent on assessment outcomes for critical equipment condition states.
10. Implement and Assess Product Support Terms & Conditions: Implementation & assessment of aircraft product support includes updates to Service Life Sustainment plans for conducting recommendations based on Logistics Assessments & continuous, ongoing determination of Product Support effectiveness. Contract factors leading to getting Good terms on deals w/ suppliers include smart use of established procurement oversight mechanisms driving utilisation of equipment condition state decisions & dispatcher actions to review, modify or revise readiness strategies & product support arrangements.
In this report, force structure event-centered risk equipment repair platform for modifications powered by an automated framework is presented. The purpose of this platform is to properly train dispatchers. This simulation will progress as repair events impacting supplier capacity warrant.
Upon receiving notice of equipment repair events reported at multiple installations, dispatchers integrate assessments of supplier capacity predictions, adjust their views on installation requirements & act according to new quote schedules.
Equipment repair action at installations taken by dispatchers have been found to collectively shape force structure adjustment dynamics. We will present the underlying components that are employed for this exercise & discuss the practical significance of such a platform.
Supplier capacity risk assessment has changed from direct exchange services without quote consideration to advanced contracting arrangements according to schedule with dispatchers guaranteeing quotes.
Since the scope of equipment deployment is so wide & future platforms so intricate in design, dispatcher behaviour design has become much more important but also extremely challenging. What makes equipment repair so critical is real-world operations are behind all the quotes in any form.
Even though the volume in incoming quotes has overtaken capacity of supplier services, real-world quotes are still critical since the supply & demand balance of equipment & subsequent quotes are still the primary determinants behind force structure adjustment cases.
Key to understanding equipment infrastructure relation to force structure adjustments is the fact that, no matter how complex quotes are, they all need to closely reference services provided by suppliers. Quotes are influenced significantly by all the elements that link together supplier capacity for each side of installation demand signals.
For example, some of the many factors present in function of repair site disruption or schedule delay of equipment deployment will impact quotes dispatched to repair simulations. Other factors, like work order routing patterns, exert significant impacts force structure adjustment cases.
Therefore, to ensure successful dispatcher assessments of supplier risk in a particular force structure adjustment case, dispatchers need to be very familiar with real-world supplier capacity for different types of equipment. These requirements are the primary considerations in deciding what dispatcher training platforms will be subject to automation.
On the other hand, complex requirements probably also explain why fully automated quote scheduling not taken over dispatcher platforms yet. On some level, this is what motivates our design of equipment repair simulations.
We want to create work order space realistic enough so dispatchers can be effectively trained & document dispatcher behaviours in the face of complex supplier risk factors, with the ultimate goal of making automated platforms for equipment repair function just as dispatchers would in designing force structure adjustment cases.
Despite the fact that there is an incredible amount of literature in defence sectors that could, in principle, be applied to quote modeling for force structure adjustment cases, in the final analysis, we find them unsuitable for our purposes, since there is a fundamental lack of links between real-world equipment repair events & quote schedule dynamics.
To address this need, we have designed force structure event-centered risk assessment platforms for repair simulations at multiple installation in which events related to quote automation are detailed according to a series of user-defined events. By allowing events to be defined by dispatcher behaviour, we also grant ourselves the ability of creating force structure adjustment case details that are often overlooked but extremely important to mission success.
Stated conceptually, our principle goal is create platforms with constructive quote schedules to recruit, train & introduce dispatchers into equipment repair systems. When Installation events are announced for repair simulations, dispatchers will assess risk supplier capacity relations to force structure adjustment cases according to assigned team function. Subsequently, repair events & information will result in equipment deployment according to defined quote schedules.
Force structure dynamics at installations will be shaped by joint dispatcher actions for simulating equipment repair. As demonstrated in initial simulations we have designed, we have shown accurate quote schedules can be generated with fairly simple dispatcher training strategies.