Here Site Visit Executive provides updated Logistics guidance for equipment product support capacity/utilisation dispatch of DoD field-level activities perform maintenance of military materiel. Guidance is applicable to use by all activities and organisations of DoD components responsible for the determination and reporting of capacity/utilisation information for product support activities to perform field-level maintenance.

Site Visit Executive must exercise operational control over repair work spaces to report capacity/utilisation for dispatchers deploying, or detached, from maintenance activities to an off-site installation e.g., field-site detachments. Capacity for field teams, etc., will be reported by dispatch to outline reporting criteria for DoD Logistics Components so establishment and retention of essential field-level maintenance capability is monitor/support as outlined by Site Visit Executive.

Field-level force readiness structure of Navy Fleets remains as big Logistics challenge and sometimes conflicted because fleet specification and maintenance capacity rest with multiple product support providers. Navy to consider revisit of aircraft specification process to increase standardisation of Fleet. Insufficient standardisation can have negative impact on maintenance mechanics productivity, tracking of parts locations and aircraft acquisition costs.

Upon receiving notice of equipment repair events reported at field-level installations, dispatchers integrate assessments of product support provider capacity predictions, adjust views on Logistics requirements by consensus & act according to new quote schedules so service priority order is established: i.e., first come, first served.

Key to understanding equipment infrastructure relation to force readiness structure adjustments is the fact that, no matter how complex quotes are, they all need to closely reference product support services. Quotes are influenced significantly by all the Logistics elements that link together product support provider capacity to meet field-level demand signals.

For example, some of the many Logistics 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 readiness structure adjustment cases.

To ensure successful dispatcher assessments of product support risk in a particular force structure adjustment Logistics case, dispatchers need to be very familiar with real-world product support provider capacity for different types of equipment.

Field-level maintenance activities and physical capacities established or retained within DoD Logistics Components are to be kept to the minimum necessary to ensure a ready, controlled source of dispatch technical competence and resources to meet military requirements. Dispatch activities are to remain in place to provide Logistics Support for surge contingency scenario actions in with accurate schedule quotes.

Site Visit Executive has set goal to create Logistics platforms with constructive quote schedules to recruit, train & introduce dispatchers into equipment repair systems. When field-level events are announced for repair simulations, dispatchers will assess product support provider capacity relation to force readiness structure adjustment cases according to assigned team function. Subsequently, repair events & Logistics information will result in equipment deployment according to defined quote schedules.

Clearly defined decision-making authorities between Logistics administration groups and Product Support Shop must be established to determine what required for operations such as additional reserve equipment in case of communication breakdown. Repair Shops must consolidate communications with mechanic/install and dispatch centre, coordinate Field-Level Contacts and Parts Stock Ratings and promote importance of Performance/Standardisation Metrics.

Site Visit Executive has set several goals to be reached include improved communication between dispatchers coordinating with product support providers to speed up Logistics process, carry out additional training on how to best utilise equipment information system to produce reports, and more collaboration between field-level installations to resolve and solve issues such as faster, location accurate delivery of parts type/quantity.

When asked to provide comments on how Repair Service Capacity is related to provision of solutions for field-level equipment users and/or make better use of existing equipment, Logistics Teams cited Logistics Work Rig set-up status updates more frequently than any other area needing improvement.

DoD Logistics Components will establish specific qualifications for dispatchers assigned responsibility for measuring field-level maintenance capacity/utilisation. Product support provider activities responsible for dispatch of maintenance capacity/utilisation will ensure only qualified dispatchers are assigned to perform duties to include maintenance capacity/utilisation and establish direct mechanic labour hours on Logistics Work Rigs as the basic unit of dispatch function to enable evaluation of capacity, and utilisation metrics for organisations, activities, and build/repair shops with varied product mixes.

If mechanic productivity increases or the number of work shifts increase, then fewer Logistics Work Rigs would be required than otherwise so capacity of Job Site increases.

Conversely, more Logistics Work Rigs would be needed and Job Site capacity would be reduced if the fleet service life is pushed beyond original limits or greater share of work were attempted to be done in-house.

Also, if Logistics Work Rig functions were to change, i.e. Work Rigs were switched from capitalisation work to maintenance/repair work, there is big impact on Job Site capacity.

Expressing capacity in direct labour hours provides an indication of relative size/levels of utilisation with potential to aggregate and enable definition of higher-level indicators. Logistics Indexes are defined as composite metrics used to characterise different dispatch status update sets.

As Logistics Indexes are aggregated, the significance of metrics may decrease. While indexes are important considerations in making decisions about product support provider capacity or capital investment decisions, such decisions must be made as a result of smart assessments of workloads, job site infrastructure, and resources involved.

In this report, force readiness structure event-centered risk equipment repair platform for modifications powered by an automated Logistics framework is presented. The purpose of this platform is to properly train dispatchers. This simulation will progress as repair events impacting product support provider capacity warrant.

1. Dispatch Availability Factor:

Percentage of single-shift work period that work positions can be used to accomplish direct productive work. This factor may include reductions for dispatch and/or equipment non-availability such as calibration and/or maintenance and/or repairs of real materiel and shop equipment, utility failure, unscheduled job site closures, and equipment installation and/or rearrangement. Logistics Bottlenecks are process in dispatch flow that restricts the ability to achieve full, single-shift utilisation of other processes either preceding or following the bottleneck.

2. Dispatch Core Capability:

Dispatchers, equipment, and job site infrastructure to be designated as effective and timely response to a mobilisation, mission contingency situations, and other Logistics scenario requirements. Field-level maintenance for the designated weapon systems and other military equipment is the primary workload assigned in dispatcher billets to support core product support capabilities.

3. Dispatch Workload Sustain:

Dispatch workload, expressed in direct labour hours assigned to DoD maintenance activities is essential to core Logistics capability for specified weapon systems, end items, and components. Core-sustaining workload ensures technical competence while preserving the surge capacity and reconstitution capabilities necessary to fully support strategic and contingency plans

4. Dispatch Field-Level Assistance:

The Logistics processes of materiel maintenance or repair involving overhaul, upgrading, rebuilding, testing, inspection, and reclamation of weapons systems, equipment end items, parts, components, assemblies, and subassemblies include installation of parts or components for modifications, and dispatch technical assistance to operational units and other activities.

5. Dispatch Capacity Endurance:

Maintenance shops are sometimes located at, or within job site infrastructure dedicated to performing field-level maintenance and under the operational control of dispatch facilitation of maintenance Logistics Performance. Typically work is accomplished in mobile/fixed shops, or by field teams, using more extensive shop job site infrastructure, equipment, and dispatchers with technical skills matched to appropriate echelons of maintenance.

6. Dispatch Shop Support Functions:

Modern Repair shops coordinate Logistics supervision, engineering, product support control, administrative functions, central or general storage, quality assurance, materials testing, etc. This includes covered and uncovered areas that are used for work space, shop parts storage areas, dispatch inspect/assess teams, etc.

7. Dispatch Product Mix:

Combination of unique dispatcher workloads are usually related to major systems, subsystems, components, stock classes, or items. Repair Job Site Logistics Categories entail grouping of shop capacities in terms of the types of weapons systems, equipment, or commodities that are repaired or otherwise supported.

8. Dispatch Time Period Source:

Maintenance support is expressed in direct labour hours, by period --past periods are actual direct labour hours produced; current and future periods are direct labour hours projected to be produced, including dispatch quality assurance assessment all sources i.e., Logistics Operations, Weapons Systems Procurement, and Research Testing and Evaluation appropriations, working capital fund, and reimbursables such as interest from other Services.

9. Dispatch Work Position:

Designated amount of job site infrastructure space and equipment is occupied by single direct product support worker to accomplish Logistics tasks assigned by dispatchers on full-time basis. Work positions sometimes include more than one location if dispatchers include other locations to accomplish the assigned tasks.

10. Dispatch Work Station:

Determination of equipment and/or process location order sequence requires separate dispatch assessment of work flow and function during the product support capacity/utilisation Logistics Index assessment. It will consist of one or more work positions as established by capacity criteria of Logistics Index factor determination.

Contract with Product Support Logistics Providers describe level of performance the provider must deliver to meet warfighters requirement. The term “contract” is used here in a generic sense. It may be a traditional contract, a performance work statement, a statement of objectives, or status update.

Description performance levels are expressed in terms of measurable outcomes rather than prescriptive methods. The contract also describes how the outcome will be measured and evaluated, and the payment that will be linked to successful performance. The provider has considerable latitude to determine how to meet the performance objectives and quality levels spelled out by DoD, ie focuses on “what,” and the provider focuses on “how.”

1. Performance requirements that define the work in measurable, mission-related terms

2. Performance standards i.e., quality, quantity, timeliness tied to performance requirements

3. Quality assurance plan describes how contractor performance is measured against the performance standards

4. Determine if acquisition is either critical to mission accomplishment or requires large expenditures of funds

5. Make sure positive and negative incentives tied to the quality assurance plan measurements.

6. Focus on specific work outcomes and ensure measurable to greatest extent practicable.

7. Contractor performance quality assurance assessments focus on outcomes not contractor processes.

8. Focus on insight of contractor performance, not oversight.

9. Incentives motivate contractor to achieve high-quality performance levels consistent with economic efficiency.

10. Ensure incentives are effective reflect value both to DoD and to contractor

Top 10 Attributes Characterise Weapons System Product Support Mission Scenario Context

Product support is defined as a package of logistics support functions necessary to maintain the readiness and operational capability of a system or subsystem. It is an integral part of the weapon system support strategy required to write status updates as part of acquisition strategy.

The Package of Logistics Support Functions includes administration of materiel, distribution, technical refresh, maintenance, training, configuration/engineering support, repair parts allotments & reliability growth.

Site Visit Executive is responsible for laying out and executing strategic blueprint for logistics process so every part of the package is connected and contributing to the warfighters mission capability.

DoD policy requires product support strategy be updated periodically during product Service Life with greater frequency dependent on pace of technology. Site Visit Executive must balance multiple objectives in designing strategy to achieve operational effectiveness while maintaining affordability.

1. Warfighter relationships are based on performance outcomes such as flying hours or mission availability of equipment

2. Integrated supply lines focus on system readiness and warfighter support

3. Supply Lines responsive to the unique requirements of military services

4. Best-value product support providers selected from DoD partnerships

5. Mission support space maintains long-term competitive pressures on providers

6. Secure, integrated information systems across providers enable supply line complete full asset visibility

7. Continuous improvement of weapon system support

8. Reduction in operating costs by dedicated investments

9. Effective integration of transport weapon system support

10. Ensure transparent to warfighter provides total combat logistics capability

Top 10 Test & Evaluation Steps Utilise Weapons System Reliability Metrics Required for Operations

Weapons systems test & evaluation processes as the principal methods of ensuring achievement of user performance requirements to provide verification and validation of the systems engineering processes to build confidence design solution is on track to satisfy the desired capabilities.

Rigorous component and sub-system test evaluation enables performance capability and reliability improvements to be designed into the system early. Test/Evaluation events should advance to robust, system-level and system-of-systems level assessments, to ensure that the system has matured to a point where it can be built to specifications, and ultimately meet operational deployment requirements.

Systems are tested under condition of intended use where two primary metrics are critical: operational effectiveness and suitability.

Operational effectiveness is the overall degree of mission accomplishment of a system when used by field-level units or expected for operational deployment of the system considering organisation, doctrine, survivability, tactics, vulnerability, and adversarial conditions.

Operational suitability is the degree to which a system can be satisfactorily placed in field use, with consideration given to reliability, availability, compatibility, transportability, interoperability, surge usage rates, maintainability, user behaviour, logistics supportability, update records and training requirements.

From support status update perspectives, weapons systems test/evaluation combine to provide metrics for both performance in terms of reliability and maintainability, and the effectiveness of the product support infrastructure and sustainment resources.

1. Establish a reliability growth or improvement strategy

2. Incorporate reliability growth potential estimates

3. Use reliability metrics to ensure growth is on track to achieve requirements.

4. Establish testing phase entrance criteria

5. Ensure reliability growth estimate stated in progress report

6. Track reliability growth estimates through system-level test until threshold is reached.

7. Ensure reliability growth estimate assumptions based on realistic system engineer inputs

8. Review adequacy of requirements to determine if achievable

9. Update reliability growth estimates if necessary

10. Ensure enough test time is resourced to support evaluation of reliability requirements

Top 10 Equipment Reliable, Available Maintain Engineering Process Problems

Too Little effort was expended determining weapons system capacity to be Reliable, Available Maintain and not much Testing was conducted at the component/system level. Testing time was limited, and sample sizes were too small.

Component stress testing frequently fell short of practical utility or not conducted. Proper accelerated service life testing was not often accomplished. Adequate Reliability Programme Plans that should be designed to provide Roadmaps to achieve realisation of reliability programme objectives and requirements were not fully implemented.

1. Failure to design-in reliability early in the maturation process.

2. Inadequate lower level testing at component or subcomponent level.

3. Reliance on predictions instead of conducting engineering design assess

4. Lack of reliability improvement incentives for Service Life Expenditures

5. Inadequate planning for reliability and mission readiness

6. Ineffective implementation of Reliability Tasks in improving reliability.

7. Failure to give adequate priority to the importance of Integrated Diagnostics design influence

8. Unanticipated complex information technology integration issues

9. Lack of adequate design maturation efforts during system integration.

10. Failure to anticipate design integration problems with increment design approaches

Top 10 Logistics Support Functions Define Product Support Maintain Readiness/Capable

Product support is defined as package of logistics support functions necessary to maintain the readiness and operational capability of a system or subsystem. It is an integral part of the weapons system support strategy, which is a part of the acquisition strategy. Support and engineering activities must be integrated to deliver an effective and affordable product support package. The package of logistics support functions comprises:

1.      Materiel team establish

2.      Transit/distribution

3.      Info tech refresh

4.      Maintenance coordinate

5.      Field-level training

6.      Catalogue/configuration

7.      Engineering support

8.      Repair parts administration

9.      In-service failure reporting

10.  Reliability growth.

1. Dispatcher Oversight of Total Asset Visibility

Provides timely and accurate tracking information on the location, movement, status, and identity of units, personnel, equipment, materiel, and supplies. act upon asset tags improve overall logistics performance goal to transforming supply line enabled by automatic identification technology device nodes provide integrated info capture and transfer from origin to destination across operational range

2. Dispatcher Directs Transit Interface

Automated support necessary to provides the integrated transportation info and systems necessary to accomplish transit planning, command and control, and in-transit visibility across the range of military operations for deployment, and distribution capability. make decisions based on actionable info integrates Business System with transit network to achieve required enterprise architecture compliance and desired end state to provide a timely and accurate logistics process

3. Dispatcher Assess Equipment Condition

Condition code used by field units or contractor support to indicate the physical condition of materiel considered and reported as to requirements and allowances and/or to be worked on and possibly redistributed.

4. Dispatcher Coordinate Working Group

Strategic working group chartered as an advisory and information-sharing team intended to coordinate, prioritise and facilitate decision-making and address equipment shortfalls list of combat, combat support, and combat Service support equipment authorised/required for operating forces preparing to conduct, conducting, or returning from contingency operations.

5. Dispatcher generate force requirements

System designed to provide integrated and deployed Automated Information System to support strategic force movements within a mandated time frame provides rapid force list creation and interface provides the foundation for ops Planning and Execution System includes joint operation planning policies, procedures, and reporting structures supported by communications to monitor, plan, and execute mobilisation, deployment, sustainment, and redeployment requirement tracking activities

6. Dispatcher Removal of Equipment

Equipment that was removed from a garrison location activity to support field operations results in shortfall that cannot be addressed from remaining inventory equipment is essential for activity to achieve field training objectives, mission readiness, or both prior to deploying planning and execution in field exchanges information with services and joint logistics, movement and distribution systems.

7. Dispatcher Utilise Reset Playbook

Equipment Reset Playbook informs logistics process of the methods by which equipment will be retrograded, allocated and distribute of equipment to operating forces upon redeployment and retrograde instructs embarkation/ logistics teams on where each equipment item will go and provides key information on transfer of forces and materiel to support another operational requirements or return personnel, equipment, and materiel to demobilisation stations
for reintegration and/or out-processing.

8. Dispatcher Assure Item Supply

Listed Items under this category are furnished by the supply system when end item is issued to be transferred with the during redistribution or other changes of custody designed to function as record keeping of loaded unit, stock/forecast supply system functions provided to unit to facilitate physical implement requirements and performance measures receiving, issuing, and accounting for material

9. Dispatcher Address Total Force Structure

Authoritative source for force structure automated work request flow capabilities across enterprise business and field-level mission areas planning and decision support within integrated field unit support decision processes and reporting requirements identifies new capabilities, improvements to existing capabilities, and elimination of redundant or unneeded capabilities capture both current needs and future needs by assessment/experiment

10. Dispatchers Identify Supply Account

Authorise supply account maintained and administered by property control team direct items not issued with the end item during initial provisioning and subsequent fielding using unit, not to exceed the stated quantity, must requisition items in this category possible to hold less than stated quantity if the item does not meet reported criteria

Top 10 Questions Highlight Utility of Real-Time Logistics Reporting of Supply Line Performance

1. Are Logistics Metrics given strategic priority to directly control behaviour and supply line performance?

2. Have limited number of key measurements been established to keep supply line objectives on track?

3. Are labour-intensive measurements that at first seem relevant of little practical use?

4. Are wrong measures being picked and leaving out important ones could lead to lower supply line performance?

5. Are supply line based drivers only effective on after-the-fact measures, like customer loss or fiscal performance?

6. What is total cost of getting product availability to the point of consumption to include materiel stocks and transit?

7. Is supplier responsible for the fact that products have poor
availability for field-level use?

8. Is supplier responsible for transit operations of downstream customers paying for pick up products on location?

9. Is upstream component parts supplier responsible for the fact that order could not be produced due to lack of supplier part?

10. Is supplier responsible for on-time delivery to customer after transit order?

Top 10 Reset includes actions restore unit equipment to combat capability levels required for future mission.

There are three components to reset:

Repair – The restoration of an item to serviceable condition through correction of a specific failure or unserviceable condition.

Recapitalisation – Extending the equipment’s useful life by returning it to near zero mile/zero hour condition with either original performance specifications or upgraded performance specifications.

Replacement – Acquisition of new equipment to replace battle losses, washouts, obsolete equipment, and equipment deployed and left in theater but needed for critical missions.

Each helicopter is inspected from nose to tail. Combat damage and crash damage are asssessed for repair, airframe interior and exterior are cleaned to remove the sand. RESET inspections are performed of the following helicopter components:

1.      Corrosion and crack repairs are performed on each airframe and its component parts

2.      Auxiliary Power Unit the intermediate gearbox, and tail rotor gearbox assembly are each removed for inspection.

3.      The tail pylon assembly is inspected. The antennas and landing lights are removed for inspection, All flight controls are disassembled to remove sand and debris.

4.      Rotor blades are removed and inspected, rotor hub and main rotor head is inspected for sand intrusion and corrosion.

5.      The airframe is inspected for cracks, corrosion, loose fasteners, and dents, The valves are inspected for pumps and starters connected to engine,  The oil cooler is inspected.

6.      All bearings are inspected for sand entrapment, Hydraulics are inspected and cleaned to remove sand and debris.

7.      Main rotor blade expandable pins are inspected for cleanliness, nickel abrasion strips are inspected for wear, The tail rotor blades are inspected inside the tip cap for sand and debris.

8.      The main module gearbox housing is inspected for damage to the paint system, The swashplate grease shield is inspected for debonding, The swashplate uniball is inspected for sand entrapment.

9.      All wire bundles and cannon plugs are inspected for sand entrapment and corrosion, The lower console control heads are inspected for sand intrusion.

10.  Following repairs and inspection, the airframe interior receives application of
corrosion preventive compounds. All cleaned and repaired components are reinstalled.

Top 10 Logistics Initiatives Create Product Support Tech Enhance Field Agent Mission Support

1. Ensure Logistics Resources/capabilities support expanded operations Improve installation integrate/perform

2. Design Logistics retail strategy to optimise use targets of supply line performance factors

3. Build Contingency Acquisition Support team to full operational Logistics capability and begin operations.

4. Design Logistics Distribution Centre with reverse Logistics capability by evaluating execution results

5. Communicate actively with Logistics executives officers to determine means of strategic service life support provision

6. Revise performance metrics with key stakeholders to accurately align Logistics team performance with mission priorities.

7. Achieve progress in deliver Logistics functionality to design/prioritise updated cost estimate business processes

8. Institute future assessment Logistics capability conduct timely mission readiness reviews provide and sustainment support

9. Use Logistics process portfolio/tools to streamline product stock levels to improving field-level support under fiscal constraints

10. Continue progress build Logistics programme with emphasis on workforce plan/train of product support subject matter experts

Top 10 Logistics Workforce Transition Phase Acquisition to Sustainment Translate Perform Require into Product Support

1. Clearly Define Acquisition Logistics Skills

2. Build Product Design Influence Support

3. Establish Product Sustainment/Support System

4. Schedule product support system Test/Evaluate

5. Deploy system to include support infrastructure

6. Update/Implement Service Life Sustainment Plan

7. Maintain readiness & Provide field user support

8. Modify and upgrade product system capabilities

9. Revalidate Result of Business Case Assessment

10. Execute Performance Based Logistics Tech


Let's make sure we are on the same page as it relates to supplier performance logistics metrics. Make sure to define objectives such as improving business process to include methods/systems used to collect and provide info on rate or rank of logistics suppliers on a continuous basis. Many organisations use the term “scorecard” to describe the report to convey supplier performance information

If you are not tracking supplier metrics today, we strongly encourage you to implement tracking these core metrics listed above today. It’s common knowledge that metrics assessments combined with expertise can truly allow you to affect change in your organisation. This is not change for change sake, but rather change to improve your business and impact your bottom line.

1. Tracking your supplier metrics allows you to view operational performance over time

2. Establish guidelines so you know how to optimise your logistics and supplier processes

3. Tracking core metrics allows you to identify problem areas and fix them with technical info and experience.

4. It also allows you to compare results to other suppliers by use of benchmarking.

5. Certain metrics are widely accepted other metrics may need to be customised for your particular logistics business model.

6. Measurements alone are not the solution to your evaluation problems

7. Solutions are direct result of corrective actions you take to improve quality of metrics

8. Success comes from using logistics metrics to track outcomes of your process/system improvement efforts.

9. Tracking supplier metrics means your teams must be responsible for achieving agreed upon targets

10. Good outcomes require you to adopt, encourage & support process changes so accurate metrics are established

Top 10 Questions Produce General Metrics to be Considered by Maintenance Organisation.

Planning/scheduling are major influence on Maintenance metrics. Consider the simple metric of "schedule compliance" as an example. If Site Visit Executive has not correctly identified materials/parts, or incorrectly estimated the hours required for the job, it may be very difficult to complete the number of jobs that are scheduled. If the schedules are not coordinated and work cannot be completed in the scheduled window, schedule compliance may be impacted.

You should be pulling samples of completed work orders off the pile periodically. Gather the planner scheduler, supervisor, technicians & storeroom to provide examples and walk the jobs. When you get to where the work occurred, you should be stepping through metric type items to determine the process effectiveness.

The primary goal is to determine if the business processes worked, but you can also determine performance issues or the need for training, as examples. At this point, you may be trying to pull together everything you have read and are considering adding to your suite of metrics to bring better focus to your planning and scheduling activities.

When selecting metrics, focus on the behaviours you are trying to drive and keep numbers within reason so you are not looped into to much time spent on assessments. Strike a balance since the decision-making process should be driven by leading measures taking over lagging metrics. Remember, leading metrics are the ones you can realistically get your arms around, while the lagging metrics tell you the result of how well you did your job.

The product always follows the process. If your system is not working, don't blame the people, blame the system. To that end, ask the following questions to get your maintenance operations on track.

1. Are your metrics headed in a downward spiral, not improving?

2. How do you plan to identify the problems or root causes?

3. Do you know the behaviours the metrics are driving?

4. Where is your plan to evaluate if the processes are working?

5. Did the plan/schedule people estimate the job duration correctly?

6. Did you coordinate processes to get the right parts staged/kitted?

7. Did operations have the equipment ready based on the schedule?

8. Did the job get completed before the due date?

9. Was any follow-up work required?

10. Was the work order completed and closed in a timely fashion?

Top 10 Key Supply Line Administration Contribute Client Risk/Uncertainty Mitigation

1. Product Design Agents: Helping clients create innovative products with exceptional user experiences

2. Supply Line Configuration: Helping clients keep resources upgraded/connected

3. Field Customer Value: Helping clients directly assess suppliers conduct direct firsthand surveys

4. Equipment Inventory control: Helping clients track items with system to include any type of quantifiable product

5. Production sourcing: Helping Clients execute strategies to optimise different buyer‐supplier relationships

6. Supply contracts: Helping Clients state terms/conditions for making exclusive product build deal

7. Distribution strategies: Helping Clients transfer product effectively to consumers/end users

8. Outsourcing Location: Helping Clients choose starting point for moment in decision-making process

9. Information technology: Helping clients establish overall high-level plan consist of objectives/tactics

10. System User Monitor: Helping Clients specify types of performance/availability system display

Top 10 List Summary of Sections regarding Commercial Items Department of Defense Actions

DoD Acquisition rules discuss contract incentives in terms of cost, performance, and delivery. But GAO categorised incentives according to their intended outcomes. So cost incentives were defined to be those targeting cost-related outcomes, technical performance incentives as those targeting quality-related outcomes, and schedule incentives as those targeting schedule-related outcomes—including making deliveries, providing services, and meeting milestones in accordance with the time frames laid out in the contract.

1. Ensure DoD procurement officials conduct or obtain market research to support a price reasonableness determination for commercial items contained in a bid or offer.

2. Allows offerors to submit information or assessment reports related to the value of a commercial item for use by the DoD
contracting officer in making a price reasonableness determination.

3. Expands the scope of the centralised capability commercial item determination information, to assist DoD in making commercial item determinations, conducting market research, and performing price reasonableness assessments.

4. Ensure that DoD uses commercial standards instead of military standards and specifications, unless no practical alternative exists to meet user needs, in which case waiver to use a military specification may be approved to define an exact design solution when there is no acceptable commercial standard, or when it is not cost effective.

5. DoD is required to encourage contractors to propose commercial standards that meet the intent of military standards and specifications and is required to partner with contractors to develop commercial standards to replace military standards and specifications where feasible.

6. Establishes a preference for certain commercial services by providing that DoD cannot enter into a contract above threshold for non-commercial services unless a written determination is made by specified high-level officials, such as the service acquisition executive, that no commercial services are suitable to meet DoD needs.

7. DoD cannot enter into a contract for some services above the simplified acquisition threshold unless exists written determination that no commercial services are suitable to meet the agency’s needs. Requires items purchased by a contractor for use in the performance of multiple contracts be treated as a commercial item.

8. Require services provided to DoD by a business unit of non-traditional defense contractor be treated as commercial items if they are priced using a similar method to develop commercial pricing and are provided to assist commercial customers.

9. Provides DoD the authority to carry out defense commercial solutions opening pilot program under which innovative commercial items can be acquired, such as technologies and services, through the competitive selection of proposals via peer review under a general solicitation.

10. Requires DoD to enter into contract with an independent entity to conduct a review of contractual flow-down provisions related to major defense acquisition programs on contractors, including, among other things, determining the effect, if any, of these provisions on the participation rate of commercial item contractors.

Top 10 Helicopter Avionics System Upgrades Provided By Maintenance/Repair & Overhaul Service Centres

Administration of helicopter aviation maintenance, repair & overhaul service centres continues to support requirements of Marine Corps operators worldwide with its “Hot, High & Heavy” upgrade & modernisation programmes. Service Centres created to provide cost-effective means for enhancing performance of enduring aircraft platforms, with upgrades designed to set up operators with portfolio of technical solutions to customise mission-critical aircraft to specific requirements.

1. Upgrade to tailboom with two parallel stall strips/strakes, re-shaped vertical fin, upgraded upper longerons/skins

2. Upgrade to main rotor transmission, hub, swashplate assembly, stabiliser and blades

3. Upgrade to main and tail rotor drive shaft and couplings

4. Upgrade to tail rotor, tail rotor gearbox and push-pull tube control system

5. Upgrade to airframe, including lift beam, main beam, cross tube tunnel

6. Upgrade to complete tip to tail refurbishment of all wiring include transmission harnesses

7. Upgrade to power turbine engine made up of two rotating assemblies mechanically free of each other

8. Upgrade to Instrument panel modifications & glass cockpit avionics suites

9. Upgrade to menu-driven interface on color touchscreen display shows moving map, airways and approaches.

10. Upgrade to transponder display features include flight time, count-up and count-down timers, plus current pressure altitude readout

We have identified Equipment upgrade/repair simulation process rules defining what information is to be routed and to what installation DoD has tasked for missions. For example, dispatchers can set up rules defining enabling conditions instances work orders must meet before equipment upgrade/repair simulation processes advance automated work order prompts to the next tracking activity in the logistics process. Also, rules governing installation receipts of priority approval requests must be based on key commitment criteria.

Dispatchers have promoted use of logistics account flash routing rules for supply lines to split traffic up according to any Equipment Spec required in order to perform the kind of work orders present in upgrade/repair simulation Requests. Scheduling such a routing solution is only way DoD dispatchers can possibly cope w/ administration of multiple applications, per installation instructions.

Dispatchers can review logistics information about the specific DoD mission tasks associated w/ the supply line, resource requirements, and so on. For example, dispatchers can route summary & detail status information for work orders by installation.

If someone told you that the technology underpinning Bitcoin will likely revolutionise much of the way we do business in the next ten years, you might shrug it off. Navy would like to tell you it’s just the beginning, and that it might also revolutionise Naval 3-D Printing, fiscal business processes, and the entire discipline of logistics, and that’s only scratching the surface.

A blockchain is a shared, distributed, secure supply line connection monitor that every participant on service routes can share, but that no one entity control. In other words, a blockchain is a supply line connection monitor that stores work order routing records. The routing intersection is shared by group of service route supplier participants, all of whom can submit new records for inclusion.

However, those records are only added to the supply line connection monitor based on the agreement, or consensus, of a majority of the supplier group. Additionally, once the records are entered, they can never be changed or erased. In sum, blockchains record and secure route dispatch information in such a way that is becomes the group's agreed-upon record of important contract terms and enabling conditions.

Smart contracts can be instantly/securely sent and received reducing exposure/delays in back office dispatching. As an example, oversight of Purchase Requests could be securely implemented with greater transparency and also potential battlefield applications messaging system could be leveraged during instances in which troops are attempt to communicate back to HQ using secure, efficient and timely logistics system.

Aircraft Readiness Blockchain offers all parties in entire supply line to update and share routing assets across the system. All aircraft parts are tracked through the design/service life of the aircraft and smart contracts are used to facilitate maintenance and repair of damaged parts keep track of their aircraft part suppliers as part of the quality assurance processes. Before Blockchain, outdated maintenance repair and operations systems used to track the parts operated in vertically separated units with limited communication potential, posing challenges in tracking and providing a unified, single source of readiness associated with each part.

As a general example, we consider a contract awarded to a prime contractor for the production of a complex electronic system. The prime contractor will have subcontractors, and subcontractors to subcontractors. Upon approval to start work, the prime and subcontractors will be assigned intersections on common  blockchain route to influence quality of service Every value-adding activity by the prime or by a sub will be required to be annotated as events on the blockchain – such events could be the build, testing, or delivery of a component.

Route Service will only be rendered from a prime to a subcontractor, or a subcontractor to another subcontractor, when the value-adding activity is annotated by dispatchers in a timely and accurate manner on the blockchain with the effect not only of ensuring accurate recordkeeping, but also encouraging timely subcontractor service. In this manner, the supply line connection monitor for even a single spare part component can be fully mapped out via service sequence of large number of subcontractors involved in the build process.

DoD programmes have begun enacting improvements in mission requirement definition but seem to be only partway toward the route-based concepts assigned by the application design. It is still necessary for dispatchers to do a great deal of work to administer individual logistics devices. Application designers would like to see something that advances at least one more level on the Supply Line.

Dispatchers can set up equipment categorisation series by creating sequentially constrained sourcing subroutines so one logistics process calls another on the supply line. This procedure is especially useful to DoD operations when dispatchers need to reuse spare parts-specific components within other processes.

For example, the initial equipment upgrade/repair simulation process for work orders determines the logistics account flash type of the work order & calls other processes utilised by DoD that are based on account flashes, such as the process to determine the work order type. The essence of the blockchain solution to supply line connection security monitor is the unification of all the transactional activities that constitute a supply line intersection into a single work space so that visibility of routing intersection transactions can be improved.

Blockchain is an emerging technology for decentralised and transactional supply line connection monitor sharing across a large group of supplier intersections. It enables new forms of distributed supply line connection  monitor architectures, where agreement on shared states can be established without trusting a central integration point. A major difficulty for architects designing applications based on blockchain is that the technology has many configurations and variants. Since blockchains are at an early stage, there are limited number of product support success stories or reliable technology evaluation available to compare different blockchains.

The potential of blockchain technology lies in exploiting and extending supply line connection monitor. The technology can connect suppliers that were not previously connected, enable new forms of collaboration and create new opportunities for interaction. In logistics, blockchain has the potential to transform and disrupt processes by documenting, validating and securing each intersection event in the supply line connection monitor. Promising applications of blockchain already exist in logistics and many other applications and supplier models will emerge as the technology matures.

Imagine what logistics processes are required DoD force structure scenario containing multiple installation routers & sourcing ticket intersections. Dispatchers should be able to define a single set of rules for permitted traffic, denied traffic, permitted/denied sources & destination.

Product traceability and Logistics process automation through smart contracts represent some of the most promising blockchain implementations for supply line connection monitor. However, these applications need different enabling conditions in terms of large-scale implementation by supplier dispatch events and the time-frame for this implementation is also expected to differ from case to case.

In the future blockchain routing applications may have the potential to be able to parse information into subsets & distribute logistics information to the automated attendant designated by DoD. Dispatchers should not have to examine each sourcing ticket intersection individually.

Built-in supplier incentives to assure the security of every transaction and asset in the blockchain allows routing technology at intersections to be used not only for transactions, but as a product registry system for recording, tracking and monitoring all assets across multiple value suppliers. This secure information can range from information about parts or contract work-in-progress such as product specifications and purchase orders.

Because blockchain is based on shared consensus among different suppliers, the information on the blockchain is reliable. Over time, suppliers build up a reputation on the blockchain which demonstrates their credibility to one another. Furthermore, because trust can be established by the supply line connections, third party monitor of routing intersections between two suppliers will no longer be necessary.

In order to establish sufficient trust to become involved in a blockchain supply line connection monitor, the motives and goals of the involved suppliers must be clear. The reputation of the participants becomes transparent and grows over time. It is important that suppliers in the routing market space can trust each other in order to share information and increase efficiency in shared processes.

Routes define the path along which equipment upgrade/repair processes move a work order. Depending on installation logistics requirements submitted by DoD, routes can be relatively simple & sequential, or increasingly complex, with joins or splits, parallel routing, iterative routing, loops and so on.

The route tracker application uses scripted enabling condition evaluations determining the next logistics activity based on information dispatchers set up in spare parts-specific attribute structures, such as work order status & DoD recipient rules determining account flash routing to installations.

As with routes, dispatchers determine the complexity of rules according to the requirements of installations. For example, DoD logistics considerations can set up work orders to progress to the next step only when predefined supply line threshold values have been met.

Blockchains enable the creation of intelligent, embedded and trusted programme supply line connection monitor, letting suppliers build terms, conditions and other logistics parameters  into contracts and other transactions. It allows suppliers to automatically monitor agreed upon value figures, delivery times and other enabling conditions, and automatically negotiate and complete transactions in real time. This impacts cost/benefit of  work orders, maximises efficiency and allows for multiple avenues leading to supply line connection monitor.

It also opens the door for machine-to-machine transaction capabilities enable the transformation of a traditional supply line connection, where work order transactions and contracts must be maintained by each dispatcher interaction with suppliers. With blockchain technology, all transactional elements are stored on decentralised supply line connection monitor by multiple suppliers.

Dispatchers can review, approve, or reject work orders. After a work order is created, route tracker applications send logistics account flashes to notify DoD installations responsible for reviewing & approving the work order. When dispatchers approve a work order, the route tracker application then sends an account flash to the next installation on the work order approval route.

During the work order approval process, the route tracker application generates logistics report records for DoD user-based approvals & rejections that have been composed upon comparison to template work orders run with supplier capacity plans.

If work orders are rejected, the route tracker application sends logistics account flash back to the originator of the work order. Reminder Sets provided to DoD divisions trigger Scheduling Equipment Workbench programme functions reviewing account flashes & provide the ability to cross-reference spare parts-specific components.

If dispatchers must reject a work order DoD has proposed after initially approving it, the route tracker application creates logistics report records for the rejection & stores the original approval record for supply line connection review. Supply line report records are used to review spare parts-specific information & schedules about the work orders that dispatchers group into routing specifications. By projecting supply line connection events onto a common monitor, dispatchers will have a homogeneous, detailed, and real-time graph of work orders and supplier relationships, but also a large baseline contract grouping of typical supply line connection monitor as well.

With such graphs, the full power of routing error detection methods from machine learning and artificial intelligence can be brought to bear on the scale of the problem. This may speed the time-to-detection of supply connection disruption, and even deter some attempts outright, as the probability of non-detection  is diminished.

As supply line connection monitor graphs are constructed for all components that comprise a device, and all devices that comprise systems, a uniform supply line connection monitor is constructed for the entire item resolvable to any level of precision required for dispatcher review.

The sourcing ticket intersections, routers & switches designed for DoD must be viewed as one logistics device. If a single intersection is in a portion of the supply line connection that never sees a given range of traffic, then it doesn't need the applicable rules & dispatchers at Sourcing ticket Station should figure that out & not push the issue as an absolute requirement for Logistics simulations.

There are significant limitations to a blockchain-based approach to supply line connection security, and we do not propose it as a fully comprehensive solution by itself. The fundamental problems not addressed directly by the blockchain are twofold. First, the blockchain solution is optimised toward assessing transactions rather than behaviour of dispatchers, whatever their affiliation.

Second, the blockchain only provides an economical and secure supply line connection monitor for measurements, but for supply line connection review to be useful, there must still be a critical density and volume of high-quality measurements of intersecting events.

While the blockchain will provide an economical, secure, and uniform supply line connection monitor to record such events, the forensics enabled by the blockchain are ideally suited to identifying enterprise-level behavioral patterns and relationships.

Blockchain solutions will not entirely substitute for sound vetting procedures and supply line connection activity monitoring. In addition, even for supplier-level work order dispatch to be effective, the physical spaces constituting supply line connection intersection must be instrumented with a density and distribution of required sensors.

The difficulty of adoption can be split into technical and functional concerns. Experts in the field of blockchain technology are predicting continuous routing trial and error processes of single-use applications that will lead to uncertainty among suppliers to invest in security measures for connection intersections.

Single-use applications are likely to be deployed initially. Over time, paradigm shifts of innovation will occur; a radical innovation, in the form of a single-use application or an extended version of a single-use application, will replace outdated applications. However, more operational capacity is required to implement the blockchain technology on a very large scale. Currently, suppliers want to participate in the blockchain due to the huge hype, but in some cases, alternative and simpler technologies will be more feasible and appropriate.

The deployment of such sensors at scale is a nontrivial problem in its own right. We anticipate that any broadly effective solution to the supply line connection security problem will require a combination of approaches of which the blockchain will be one of many parts.

Most DoD rules established in the future must be designed to be utilised in determining how equipment upgrade/repair simulations can be depicted in sequence episodes. For example, routers in one spatial domain will never see another supply line connection logistics account flash. It doesn't need to have all the rules about these devices. We have designed  Logistics Flow Chart sequence with steps to follow for accurate determination of Sourcing Ticket parameters influencing equipment Upgrade/Repair Simulation outcomes.

Our intention is to present the performance and behaviour of dispatchers engaged in the blockchain process modification with a view toward obtaining detailed pictures of the representative process of that occurs. While performance was an important part of tactic evaluation, our emphasis in this product demonstration report is mainly focused on examination of process behaviour during dispatch activity.

1. Many installations have not received the same route service reports at the same time under previous Blockchain programmes.

2. Automating some aspects of Blockchain collection and work order generation means more timely and operationally relevant reports

3. Enable Blockchain monitor of route service and evaluate fiscal constraints, internal dispatch communications and route service metrics and measures availability

4. Ensure Blockchain representation of route service design standards, and work order risk functions

5. Communication of objective goals and future Blockchain achievements required for meeting work order requirements meet equipment deployment challenges.

6. Convenience of route service when installation communications over Blockchain system are consistently available.

7. Availability of Blockchain capacity—at what installation is the route service agreement provided

8. Make sure Blockchain allows for different types/sizes of part components to gain access to multiple installation

8. Temporal availability of Blockchain system--when and at what cost is the route service agreement provided?

9. Information availability in Blockchain--does the installation know how to utilise the route service agreement for different types/sizes of part components?

10. Evaluate work order generation trends & assess the impact of Blockchain policy and other organisational changes

11. Ensure Blockchain architecture at multiple installations has required capacity to participate in the contract terms determination process.

12. Generate Blockchain stakeholder acceptance and linkage to installation-directed contract procurement tech base.

13. Design Blockchain system to provide clear, reliable & credible work order generation flexibility for determination of route service indices

14. Make Blockchain deliver realistic and timely route service agreement goals and targets & integration into dispatch signal decision-making.

15. Measures of Blockchain security--What are the perceptions involved in installation contacts,

16. Assess degree of potential Blockchain security risks to installations during transit?

17. Route service maintenance goals and objectives to be present in Blockchain system for different types/sizes of part components.

18. Identify dispatch programme constraints internal to Blockchain & select consensus performance measures

19. Test, implement and integrate Update/Review Blockchain report performance/monitor results into decision-making

20. Establish a schedule for regular performance reporting of Blockchain system

21. Consider how Blockchain system requirements determine monitor and reporting of supply line performance

22. Monitor Blockchain system performance at agreed upon intervals.

23. Establish results-based Blockchain system performance measure report format,

24. Design preferred Blockchain approach for supplier connection  result integration

25. Consider the desired frequency of Blockchain system evaluation

26. Compare Blockchain performance results to the goals set for each measure

27. For measures not meeting Blockchain goals, identify action items for improving performance

28. For measures consistently exceeding Blockchain goals, consider increasing work order targets,

29. Provide Blockchain resources required to ensure work order decision is fiscally sound.

30. Mechanisms embedded in Blockchain must be in place for advance equipment deployment trips

31. Be aware when designing Blockchain systems that chedules for contract procurement quotes can change quickly,

32. Dispatching demand-responsive Blockchain services is more labor-intensive for work order generation than for fixed-route services.

33. Blockchain contact with installations and confirmation of equipment pick-ups requires dispatchers participation levels optimised to fixed-route service,

34. Demand-responsive supply scenarios via installation route service agreements requires more intensive Blockchain constraints than fixed-route service

35. Blockchain functions of  route service provides the potential and requirements to assess system performance within scope function

36. Blockchain categories of performance measures, including their uses, typical supply line connection requirements & typical reporting intervals,

37. Different types/sizes of part components require unique Blockchain enabling conditions, performance  measures & range of use guidelines

38. Potential Blockchain sources of supply line information for evaluating requirements for use of particular metrics and measures

39. Blockchain guidance on application of performance-based work order standards.

40. Number of measures to be reported by Blockchain—too many will overwhelm dispatchers, while too few may not present a complete picture

41. Amount of detail to be provided in Blockchain systems—general metrics/measures will be easier for dispatchers to calculate and present

42. More detailed metrics/measures will incorporate greater number of factors influencing operational outcomes of Blockchain,

43. Determine if kinds of comparisons to be made in Blockchain are evaluated only internally or compared with other installations?

44. The intended audience— some dispatchers will be more familiar with Blockchain transit factors addressing trade-offs than others,

45. Blockchain models representing part deployment plans are used to forecast growth of installation investments in contract procurement terms

46. New or expanded dispatch capacity for executing Blockchain processes will affect work order generation patterns/demands on operational outcomes

47. Outputs from Blockchain model characteristics can be used to calculate metrics/measures for part type/size mobility,

48. Blockchain system facilitates parts type/size deployment trips result from surge-based contingency scenarios.

49. Blockchain accessibility to  part component type/size delivery contracts established at  multiple installations,

50. Blockchain should be designed to feature temporal modes of supply line connection service reservation periods for applicable intersections

Weapons Systems Product Design is an issue of information processing in which the information that characterises requirements for product to be converted into knowledge about a product. One of the challenges designers deal with in product design is a lack of detailed information. At start of design process, less is known about the design problem at hand.

Establishing field agents for product/process design creates agent-based tools to construct market places among members of a distributed design team to coordinate set-based design of a discrete build product. Designers of components are empowerd to "Buy" and "Sell" desired characteristics engineers are motivated to assume.

Here we describe the entities interacting in the market space and outline the market space required to make trade-off decisions on each characteristic of a design. Agents representing each component "Buy" and "Sell" units of these characteristics. A component that needs more latitude in a given characteristic, i.e. more weight can purchase increments of that characteristic from another component, but may need to sell another characteristic to raise resources for this purchase.

Set-based approaches focus on keeping design space as open as possible for as long as possible and fully explore design space comprise sets of design options. Design work to be continuous or mentioned one by one as discrete design options depending on the level of specific designs to not be considered alone.

More realistically set of options to remain in design space and considered feasible. Instead of specifying single design before all constraints are known, design decisions are postponed until the Last Responsible Moment-- point at which failing to make the decision eliminates an alternative.

Most design processes are characterised by generic core stages to include establishing requirement, creation of task order, concept design, detailed design and implementation phase. The design process progresses through these stages in repeat fashion.

At each stage, product design exists within a distinct level of the available information termed ‘design state’ As information passes through the stages, it is punctuated by process decisions aimed at eventual final state where it represents the design solution. 

 Processes starts with large design alternatives covering broad design spaces to converge to possible design by eliminating weakest alternatives rather than choosing one “best” alternative.

The functional view drives most designs, since it distinguishes the disciplines in which engineers are trained and in support of available design tools. Conflicts arise when different teams disagree on the relation between the characteristics of their own functional pieces and the characteristics of the entire product.

Some conflicts are within the design team: How much of a mechanism's total power budget should be available to the sensor circuitry, and how much to the actuator? Others face design off against other build functions: How should we balance the functional desirability of an unusual machined shape against the increased expense of creating that shape?

During progression of design process, information about design problem and knowledge of the associated design space is increased. This allows for fundamental understanding of the design space guide designers towards realisation of solutions.

Set-based design approach reduces the cost of taking back a decision earlier made; so there is more room to improve the concept while designing it. Cost of repeat action is minimised by not only reducing number of repeat actions but also substantially improving repeat time. In some cases, dependencies models between characteristics may help designers estimate their relative costs, but when models do not exist, prices set in the marketplace define the coupling among characteristics.

Designer seeks to embed a set of functions e.g., optical, electromechanical, control in an object not at time present but occurs as result of the preparation with specified characteristics e.g., weight, complexity, materials, power consumption, physical size.

It is easy to represent how much a mechanism weighs or how much power it consumes, but there is not disciplined way to trade off weight and power consumption against one another. The more characteristics involved in a design compromise, the more difficult the trade-off becomes since solutions are available only in specialised/limited field expertise niches.

In current practice trade-offs are sometimes supported by processes such as quality function deployment or resolved politically, rather than in a way that optimises the overall build design The problem is compounded when design teams are distributed across different job divisions.

The design process progression at any point is dependent on the information generated in the earlier phases as well as the decision making that has preceded the stage. Bad decision making events in later phases of project process do not have much impact on cost and are far less time-consuming than if these would have been made in beginning.

1. All functional engineering design divisions identify solution space independent of others

2. Communication between engineering divisions is based on Design Spaces – Not on Single Ideas

3. Design remains functional after variations in its solution space

4. Determine if Design still fits the solution space after some time

5. Create Designs that work regardless of what the rest of the team decides to do

6. Consider multiple concepts in parallel – create prototypes and eliminate those not working out

7. Each concept is assessed from reasons why concept is/not still feasible also impact of problem in overall product

8. Overlap of feasible design spaces of different sub systems will directly translate into acceptable solutions

9. Taking late decisions means more importance given to decision and more effort should be spent

10. Solutions to meet customer requirements based on avoiding parts not equal so agreement with any party involved in process

Top 10 Equipment Product Support Job Site Services Case Study Objectives

To meet Marine Corps objectives, we commissioned this case study to not only optimise current equipment product support Job Site operations and enhance dedication to Field-Level Troops product support services, but also provide Marine Corps with the tools, templates and real world strategies so Marines have capacity to sustain these improvements into the future.

We established the following Job Site scope areas, which framed the objectives of this Case Study:

1. Optimise allocation of Job Site product support resources, including oversight of routine, peak & specialty work orders

2. Design product support programmes for field level unit outreach at Job Sites, including mission-driven reporting & surveys

3. Propose product support approach for receipt of individualised Job Site service level work orders with field-level units

4. Maximise "wrench turning" produce at Job Sites, including product support programmes for continued training, incentives & performance

5. Establish core product support Job Site services, specialised services evaluation & changing conditions.

6. Enhance Job Site performance metrics, including key product support performance indicators, techniques & reporting

7. Provide framework for evaluating the Job Site costs/ benefits of expanded product support services to existing or new troop units

8. Conduct Job Site space requirements assessment, addressing barriers to efficient product support operations.

9. Optimise Job Site operations, including product support policies, procedures & performance requirements for on-hand stock parts/tools

10. Evaluate Job Site product support work order rate-setting systems and recommend adjustments to rate setting & replacement planning

Top 10 Equipment Maintenance Unit Division Structure List Appropriated Tasks

1. Field level maintenance is generally characterised by on-near system maintenance, often utilising line replaceable units & component replacement using tools and test equipment found in the field-level organisation not limited to simply "remove and replace" actions but also allows for repair of components or end items on-near system.

2. Field-level maintenance includes adjustment, alignment, service, applying approved field-level work orders, fault/failure diagnoses, battle damage assessment, repair, and recovery to always repair and return to the user include maintenance actions able to be performed by operators.

3. Crew maintenance is responsibility of using organisation formally trained operators/crews from proponent on specific system to perform maintenance on its assigned equipment, tasks consist of inspecting, servicing, lubricating, adjusting, replacing minor components and assemblies as authorised by allocation chart using basic issue items and onboard spares.

4. Operator/maintainer system specialists for example, signal, military intelligence, or a manoeuvre unit receive functional individulised training from proponent on diagnosing/troubleshoot problems focus on system performance/ integrity identify, isolate &trace problems to on-board spares deficits correct crew training deficiencies.

5. Maintainer maintenance accomplished on a component, accessory, assembly, subassembly, plugin unit, or other portion either on system or after it is removed by trained maintainer remove and replace authority indicates complete repair is possible return items to user after work order performed at this level.

6. Sustainment-level maintenance generally characterised by “off system” component repair or end item repair and return to the supply system, or by exception, back to the owning unit performed by activity function to be employed at any point in integrated logistics chain.

7. Sustainment level intent to perform commodity-oriented repairs on all supported items return to standard providing consistent/measureable level of reliability execute maintenance actions support force & supply system not able to be performed at field-level maintenance unit.

8. Exceptions made to when in-house sustainment level maintenance activities may conduct maintenance and return items to using unit but also may be performed by contract agreement comprised of below depot sustainment.

9. Below depot sustainment level maintenance assign to component, accessory, assembly, subassembly, plug-in unit, or other portion generally after it is removed from system. The remove and replace authority indicates complete repair is possible at below depot level return items to supply system also applies to end item repair and return to the supply system.

10. Depot level maintenance accomplished on end items or component, accessory, assembly, subassembly, plug-in unit, either on the system or after it is removed define remove and replace authority indicates complete repair is possible at depot level return items to supply system, or by exception directly to using unit after maintenance is performed

Top 10 Construct Tool Focus on Innovate/Maintain Tech in Application of Military Strategies

1. Construct R&D portfolio for advances in force structure utility, derived from an overall national security to be utilised as roadmap for R&D progress; maintain DoD military superiority; Conduct a top down review of capabilities to ensure smart equipment, and investments

2. Conduct concerted effort to examine application in DoD of corporate investment decision models and maintain diversified portfolio with potential payoffs, and do not allow any single tech area to dominate spend unless demo evidence focus is warranted

3. Make DoD commit to sustained levels of commercial item buying standards and streamline practices/processes; traditional standards not to use certified pricing/cost estimates; establish authorities for R&D and production programs in designated product areas, Expand models for accessing tech capable of being transitioned to the war fighter.

4. Require DoD components take into account requirements for competition and participation by non-traditional vendors in shaping long-term acquisition strategies include streamlining of requirements for major systems and tracking functions test compliance with contract standards.

5. Expand application of venture capital in defense markets, providing for funds that would, in coordination with DoD, make equity investments to consider successful vendors to market transition of innovative concepts to the war fighter.

6. Enact series of measures to reward risk-taking and facilitate transition of tech application to War Fighter requirements; Integrate promising new concepts; eliminate conflict between units with specialised DoD objectives and other R&D divisions; scale up activities and better leverage resources and incentivise collaboration with war fighters.

7. Create prototyping fund and set aside significant portion as on ramp for commercial technologies and firms, using competition as appropriate; establish DoD processes to ensure focused decisions determine if tech delivery to the war fighter is accelerated; Require focused consideration of technology insertion at all major milestones on ongoing acquisition programmes.

8. Design new defense systems and implement with open architecture except when contrary to DoD interests to be subject to override by acquisition executive; add new evaluation metrics for commercial tech proposals and use of open architecture and require vendors provide detailed response to past performance inquiries.

9. Implement incentives and evaluation metrics to enhance critical aspects of vendors participation in accessing and transitioning commercial technology require submit plans in response to requests made by DoD; adopt policy in favour of commercial item authorities/approaches in areas where commercial capability is better value with exceptions subject to review/approval

10. Promote enhanced S&T activity by vendors and encourage greater spending in order to bring levels in line with historic and comparable defense market norms established DoD interactions; require investment in force of the future not short-term incremental reactions; provide top-level guidance in key areas of vendor investment; override short-term customer pressures usually shape efforts

Top 10 Questions Direct Incorporation of Set-Based Design into Weapons System Acquisition Phase Processes

Here we consider how DoD acquisition process can leverage Set-based Design techniques to deliver more affordable systems to the fleet faster, focusing on definition of core Set-based Design principles to gain insight into appropriate uses and implementation processes.

Key objective is to determine how to tailor an acquisition strategy to incorporate elements of Set-based Design to mitigate cost growth and scheduling delays due to changing requirements and design instability.

DoD contracting agents are critical components of efforts to execute its missions. But leadership has taken narrow view of contracting operations. By primarily focusing on ensuring contracting agents are obligating funding before it expires, in effect promoting “use or lose” perspective and does not emphasise efficient/effective contracting operations.

Senior leaders responsible for contracting are not systematically assessing the timeliness of contract awards, cost savings attributable to contracting activities, or the quality of contractors’ products/services. Additionally, they are not identifying whether they have large enough workforce to meet contracting needs of the Services.

As a result, leadership does not have the critical information necessary to determine if DoD contracting enterprise has capacity needed to operate under complex, real-world scenarios.
We provide guidance on what aspects of the acquisition space would allow for such an approach, by reporting on the following Questions:

1. Can you provide description of advances in Set-based Design and its major principles/characteristics?

2. How do you plan on jump starting an exploration of Set-based Design implementations in field-level sectors?

3. Can you give brief description of how Set-based Design fits into established acquisition guidelines?

4. How would you Identify system types to result in good candidates for Set-based Design application?

5. Can you exclude some system type scenarios where Set-based Design would not be recommended?

6. Can you recommend implementation practices/processes within acquisition phase instructions for use of Set-based Design?

7. How would you define Set-based Design and what about it provides potential benefits to acquisition system?

8. How would you identity factors making particular acquisition programmes good candidate for applying Set-based Design approach?

9. Can you describe effects of Set-based Design on overall system costs and risks in support of acquisition?

10. How would you promote revision of instructions/processes to
facilitate use of Set-based Design principles in acquisition programme activities?

Top 10 Questions Highlight Requirement for Supply Action Groups to Assess Critical Operational Frameworks

DoD procurement groups are biased toward contract life phase milestones. Business units and indirect procurement staff focus on the budget, while engineering groups work with direct procurement staff regarding strategic supply choices made during product service life, asset design, project planning, and field-level engagement.

Progressive supply organisations don’t operate these silos independently. Instead they engage with stakeholders across all of these phases to optimise supply/spend outcomes through combination of processes.

Truly strategic aspects of supply line assessments will occur not only within these phases, but also on the edges where they intersect. Top level business group frameworks integrate other areas such as strategic sourcing and lover level supplier action groups.

1. Can supply base meet demand, set targets and broader strategy?

2. What are spend drivers during each phase?

3. How/where to best measure/mitigate supply risks?

4. How good is performance of supply line, spend category?

5. How to monitor/align performance across functional levels?

6. What capabilities and factors are driving performance?

7. What opportunities/risks are prioritised by information type used for assessments ?

8. How to close performance/capability gaps?

9. Where to simplify, standardise & consolidate?

10. Are realised operational gains holding the line?

Top 10 Benefits of Weapon Systems Prototype Innovation to Acquisition Programme Performance

1. Prototyping effort benefits were worth the cost, provided a positive return on business case investment include customer needs are valid and can best be met with advancement of chosen concept to be produced with existing resources, such as time, money, and available technology.

2. Prototyping provided programmes with information on technology maturity, feasibility of the design concepts, potential costs, and on achievement of planned performance requirements assist in injecting realism into business cases.

3. Prototyping demonstrated key technologies or proposed design solutions to determine if riskier, cutting edge design was feasible. Without prototyping, programmes would not have had sufficient information to be confident in riskier option-- contractor would not have proposed it without opportunity to provide functional demo.

4. Prototyping informed programmes understanding of prices to validate business case cost estimates. During prototyping process, contractors select vendors, ensure productive communications with suppliers, purchase materiel, and build full system version or parts of the system to provide information on potential costs.

5. Prototyping increased cost information available to programmes leading to cost reductions and competitive prototyping incentivised contractors to determine cost drivers in order to be more competitive in next phase.

6. Prototyping made programmes better understand requirements to make performance trade-offs meeting cost targets.for example to determine if different versions of system were best suited to meet unique requirements.

7. Prototyping provided programmes means to improve system performance, for example, collect information support operational success during prototype testing set stage to improve target classification and identify potential reliability issues early in process.

8. Prototyping changed perception of subsystem materiel utility based on information about wear/tear during prototype testing-- prototypes served as test assets during system project milestones or used to continue demo efforts.

9. Prototyping approaches to competition generated additional benefits to enable more favourable business terms using competition to result in service life cost savings and reduce operation/support expenditures over life of programmes.

10. Prototyping with competition reduced likelihood that contractors would team up in the next phase so prospect of only one proposal is diminished. In other cases, competition improved quality of systems contractors to introduce/continue cutting edge designs to remain competitive in next phase of programmes using existing capital for prototyping efforts.

Top 10 Field-level Unit Survey Recommend Improve Work Order Capacity of Repair Shop Status Updates

Operation of Navy Fleets is complicated and sometimes conflicted because fleet specification, replacement & maintenance rest with multiple organisations.

Navy to consider revisit aircraft specification process to increase standardisation of Fleet. Insufficient standardisation can have negative impact on maintenance mechanics productivity, tracking of parts locations and aircraft acquisition costs.

When asked to provide comments on how Repair Service Capacity is related to provision of solutions for field-level equipment users and/or make better use of existing equipment, Troops again cited Work Rig set-up status updates more frequently than any other area needing improvement.

If mechanic productivity increases or the number of work shifts increase, then fewer Work Rigs would be required than otherwise so capacity of Job Ste increases.

Conversely, more Work Rigs would be needed and Job Ste capacity would be reduced if the fleet service life is pushed beyond original limits or greater share of work were attempted to be done in-house.

Also, if Work Rig functions were to change, i.e. Work Rigs were switched from capitalisation work to maintenance/repair work, there is big impact on Job Site capacity.

1. Better understanding of service priority order: i.e., first come, first served or other protocol.

2. Improved communication between dispatchers coordinating with vendor and end users to speed up process.

3. Additional training on how to best utilise equipment information system to produce reports.

4. More collaboration between field-level installations to resolve and solve issues.

5. Faster, Location accurate delivery of parts type/quantity

6. Clearly defined decision-making authorities between administration and Shop determine what required for operations

7. Additional reserve field-level equipment in case of communication breakdown

8. Consolidate communications technicians, installers and dispatch centre

9. Coordinate Customer Contacts and Parts Stock Ratings

10. Performance/Standardisation Measurement.

Top 10 Authorisation Conditions for Unit/Organisation Repair Part Designate Mobile Mission to Consider Supply Factors

In order to ensure Marine Corps units can independently sustain successful operations for brief periods, Site Visit Executive must establish and maintain limited quantities of supplies. Shop supply listings and maintenance-related supplies of common items must be combined as directed for custody of individual element stocks, along with overall listing of repair parts assets in accordance with supply.

Product support dispatchers must maintain shop supply listings and supplies must be made accessible within minutes of the supply requirements under co-located conditions apply equally applicable to distribution/allowances updates. Bench stocks must be available in all maintenance operations and parts needed to complete repairs not available from shop supply listings will follow issue priority designator consistent with maintenance priority.

Site Visit Executive must ensure supply dispatchers are fully cross trained with backups available from other elements in the organisation as necessary with no inhibition of mission due to unexpected absences or losses. Dispatchers must conduct status updates from equipment inspections/fault corrections, including work orders referred to support maintenance that could not be immediately corrected.

When dispatchers discover equipment faults that cannot be worked off by the operator, must make status updates describing fault to include both uncorrected faults and parts ordered so Site Visit Executive is alerted as to current condition of the equipment. When crew operator identifies a non-mission capable fault unit Site Visit Executive must be notified immediately to verify item and initiate repair actions.

Dispatchers must compare requests for issue or turn-in against records of stock quantities reflecting mission demand rates and parts are issued in accordance with unit assigned priorities. If stock is not available, due-out status to the unit is established and requirement is passed on to next supply level. Dispatchers must periodically provide status updates on open requests to all supported units for example, daily supply status updates and parts received updates.

Controlled exchange is the removal of serviceable components from unserviceable, economically repairable end items for immediate reuse to restore like items to mission capable condition. Controlled exchange is authorised only when:

1. Required components are not available from the source of supply within the timeframe reflected by the issue priority designator and valid requisition is submitted to replace the unserviceable item.

2. Maintenance effort required to restore all of unserviceable reparable material involved within authorisation and the capability of the unit performing the controlled exchange.

3. End item from which the serviceable component is removed is classified not mission- capable supply.

4. Repair instructions contain requirement for known serviceable component to be temporarily used/exchanged while trouble shooting.

5. End item is protected from degradation to an uneconomically reparable condition.

6. Unserviceable component is retained and tagged with end item serviceable item originated

7. Organisation performing the controlled exchange takes prompt action so issue requisition for incoming part to restore the unserviceable equipment to mission-capable condition.

8. Controlled exchange is the only means reasonably available to eliminate an adverse effect on the operational readiness of the unit.

9. Indicated by issue priority designator on maintenance request to modify controlled exchange conditions as necessary for mobile missions.

10. Controlled exchange is not authorised on mobile operational readiness assets when Site Visit Executive has not formally released materiel under investigation.

Top 10 Part Component Item Order Quote Scheduling Consider Supply Line Route Groups

Scheduling is communications tool facilitate balance customer demands with your ability to fulfill that demand. Provides schedule date and warehouse that will fulfill customers request.

If item check is enabled, then supply will be consumed from pool of available supply for that item. If an item does not have Check enabled, then supply will not be consumed.

Schedule order lines with multiple routed to locations, warehouses, request dates, promise dates, schedule dates, and inventory details.

With Routing Sets, you can specify which lines on an order must be grouped together. To manually schedule an order enter item info and schedule an entire order, configuration or a set of lines using multi-select capability of Tool.

Auto Schedule from the Tools Menu Auto Schedule check box Auto Schedule through profile option value setting Auto Schedule through use of order types.

Tools allow you to quote order lines as you enter them or in batch mode with automated application of discounts. Tool offers discounts from single source instead of working with products from multiple vendors.

1. Apply discounts by percentage, lump sum or amount.

2. Substitute/Modify new defined quote

3. Specify order line quotes contained in lists

4. Set service item quote at % serviceable item.

5. Quote entire order and adjust auto using discounts

6. Override standard discounts and quotes enter reason

7. Choose lowest discount/ Freeze status of quote

8. Assign only certain types of adjust to line.

9. Determine routing quotes as separate component

10. Schedule quotes as of specific date.

Top 10 Case Studies Detail Operation Condition Scenarios at Job Sites Require Site Visit Executive Attention

Site Visit Executive has recognised requirements for improvement in Job Site productivity to be realised through innovation/application of proper equipment at all levels of materiel handling. Job Site Case Studies have been formulated with the objective to provide personnel with an introduction to type examples of handling problems encountered on daily basis at Job Sites.

Even while these Case Studies are very brief, they illustrate some commonly encountered
operational and equipment oriented problems. You are encouraged to design solutions for each of these cases to be used as points of discussion or assigned in groups as problems to solve.

In several Case Study situations we have presented, the full problem is not clearly defined and you are challenged to solve whatever problems are apparent to you after studying the case. We are confident this approach will induce competition between problem-solving groups, an essential element of Training Processes.

1. Job Site is in the business of modifying and repairing critical aircraft assembly. Due to mechanism complete assembly must be removed using lift equipment from the aircraft. Once detached, assembly is moved to a location adjacent to site of repair. Because lift equipment is also used for other jobs, many scheduled operations must be delayed.

2. Job Site operates centrally located storeroom in their repair complex. Every afternoon each specialty craft foreman writes separate orders for requisition of common use items required for next work on the line. Each shift, workers go to the storeroom to pick up the filled order. Time is unproductive causing problems leading to efforts to reduce transit times between sites.

3. Job Site faces inventory rotation problem. This difficulty stems from the fact that some supplies must be used prior to a stated expiration date. Upon receipt, a new shipment of these perishable items must be stacked beneath the boxes that are currently in inventory. A substantial amount of time is consumed in restacking the items according to their expiration dates. Job Site wants reduction in multiple instances of handling.

4. Job Site produces smaller sized replacement item packaged in separate small containers that are in turn packed into a larger carton for transit. The packing operation for this unit is in different area from where packages are sorted according to transit line. After sorting, all packages are routed to spot where they await pick up by the assigned truck line. By disregarding labour requirements in model, solutions have been proposed to improve efficiency of package movement.

5. Job Site uses reusable boxes to ship custom length items, but recently unit cost of a shipping box has soared to unsustainable levels. In addition, box maintenance has gone up so reusability has turned into a cost trap. Extra transit runs truck runs are being employed to recover the returnable boxes since on return trips the trucks are needed to pick up raw stock.

6. Job Site storage area is presently filled to capacity with thousands of items. Finished goods inventory is expected to increase by same ratio as increased production capability that has recently been enacted. New techniques have been proposed for increasing the storage area to accommodate expected increase in finished goods inventory.

7. Job Site currently moves pallet loaded with production items to transit dock for loading. Due to increased production purchase of several new trucks are required as well as an increase in labour levels. Operators are seriously considering increasing pallet load capacity, but it is unclear if new equipment is required for new scenario.

8. Job Site has sub-contracted production of critical part for aircraft. The details contained in the contract calls for the furnishing of the material, labour, and storage of the finished part component until conditions of requisition order is determined.

9. Job Site specialises in transporting packaged part components and is currently experiencing difficulty in moving loads of parts items from transit vehicle with large capacity into smaller fleet and period of operations is constant. Mechanism of moving materiel to open area in the warehouse requires backing out of the load entering and picking up the load form the other direction. This operation is repeated for each pallet load. The present load patterns in transit vehicles cannot be changed, calling for determination of time to place pallet into new location.

10. Job Site is faced with problems stemming from mess in the receiving areas involving empty shipping containers. Examination of receiving operations is indicative of scenario when a large shipment of materiel is received and items are removed from their shipping cartons and placed on racks. The empty cartons and packing materials are left on the floor. Periodically, when workers are immobilised due to the mess subcontractors are called in to crush & stack the excess containers.
You have to fight with the fleet you have now. There is no other option; it is a necessity. Our Goal is to do that better and to lay the groundwork for the future fleet by focusing upon availability of assets. We have identified two principal Questions. First, how do we get our availability rates higher? Second, how do we get ships to the fight more effectively and more often? The essential assets required to fight and win are not going to make much difference sitting in Job Site Drydocks. We can provide for enhanced deterrence through enhanced availability. They are not going deter anybody if they are not available and capable of deploying successfully.

We have put a major effort in getting much greater availability from many of our ships, and the ways we have done so will shape our approach, our expectations and our template for the operation of the new ship classes. We have seen a dramatic improvement in our upgrade and maintenance programmes. For example, out maintenance engineering planning programme is already doing a better job of predicting the maintenance needs of specific ship hulls and should continue getting more accurate over the next few years.

We put as much effort into infrastructure design as we did into combat readiness, which is about numbers today. We want to shape infrastructure that is all about availability of assets required for mission success, and not just readiness determined with metrics with low design quality. Getting the right infrastructure to generate fleet innovation on a sustained basis is what is crucial for mission success. We are strongly promoting continuous build processes.

We have established technical foundation instructions that look at each class of ship and, based on where a hull is in its service life and what type of maintenance availability it is approaching, outlines what type of work the ship is likely to need. Instructions for each individual hull and monitors of deferred maintenance are active, in addition to other things engineering teams need to know about that particular ship.

The job sites at the Yards have created learning centers to help new hires become proficient at their trades faster so cases of schedule delays and cost increases due to workforce challenges will be less of a budgeting problem going forward. We want the trainers there, as well, so that when we’re maintaining one part of the system, it’s the same people in the same building maintaining those things that will allow us to make future decisions about outdated operations and training requirements. We want these teams sitting next to each other and learning together.

Once all the ships have been through a docking availability, where they are more thoroughly taken apart and inspected, we will have a very clear idea of the state of each ship and what to expect for future maintenance periods. We anticipate the problem of work package growth will be reduced in the future but it will probably never completely go away. There is always something that will surprise us when you take a pump off of a foundation that you couldn’t see before and then that foundation is in full decline.

The good news is that we anticipate work growth when drafting plans for future years out, and they generally can stay within that margin. Where we see growth today is still on ships that have not gone through that process, that docking process, and really getting into the tanks and understanding what those conditions are. It is a constantly improving process with the goal to know exactly what the condition of the ship is so we can properly plan for it, order the materiel and be able to do the work on schedule and on time.

We have initiated periodic meetings with each shipyard commander to get an update on progress of the ships and to find ways to empower the yards to do what it takes to deliver the ships on-time or early. It’s important to get quick updates on where they are, where they’re having challenges, and then where can headquarters can provide help in terms of, is our input required in getting materiel, is our assistance necessary to clear some technical issues that need to be adjudicated before testing is resumed.. So that’s all begun to contribute to success of operations.

There are things we can do up at headquarters to advance quality of operations, if it’s a technical issue we can give them additional technical resources. We can provide some focused effort from the headquarters; if our chief engineer sitting there with the shipyard commander when an issue is brought up, it cuts through the normal layers that these things have to get through. It has fostered key ingredients for the future fleet, most importantly that time matters, and there must always be a sense of urgency since ships need to get back to the fight as soon as possible.

We cannot overstate enough the importance of periodic reviews because we aren’t about to claim we are the reason these things have gotten better, but review do in fact provide the shipyard commanders with an additional level of a sense of urgency, that we have established a mechanism to get headquarters’ attention; that headquarters is there to support each worker at the yard; that if they’ve come up against a roadblock that they’re having a problem getting solved, then we can muster some resources to get the issue solved probably more quickly than they can get the problem fixed in the normal way. We want to create better supervisors at the Deckplate, and initiatives are being put in place to train new hires more quickly so it is possible to start contributing to the workload even before they’re qualified to work on the ship.

Many availabilities experiencing problems, on the other hand, are much more complex. The biggest factor is that many availabilities take much longer than anticipated, not due to unexpected maintenance work but rather because modernisation work suddenly started driving schedules. Modernisation, in the past, has generally not been a driver for schedule in availabilities – they mostly have been specific to particular parts of the ship, or particular machinery, or some capability like that.

We’re now getting into modernisation that really takes the ship apart completely. The scope and duration of some systems installation are now understood to some degree, but often times we will not know until between that budget process and the beginning of the year. We have shifted some of the money over to help address all those challenges – though ultimately the shortfall is about the same size now as it was at the beginning of the fiscal year.

The fact that the deficit hasn’t shrunk much over the last period isn’t for lack of trying, though. We had begun awarding firm fixed-priced contracts for surface ships instead of the old multi-ship/multi-option setup. Preliminary observations shows costs are coming down, freeing up money to spend on other emerging ship maintenance work. But sometimes we find ourselves facing a big unplanned bill in the fiscal year when ships return from a deployment that was not only extended for a significant period but was also essentially the second in a back-to-back deployment with only bare-bones maintenance work in between.

We have been warning Congress for years that extended deployments have led to more severe maintenance problems when ships can finally go into an availability. Insufficient time and funding have led to partial completions of the work in some cases, which then creates bigger problems down the road – for example, tank inspections get skipped and then we have to deal with major corrosion issues later on.

What we’re seeing now with the actual testing of equipment prior to the availability, the additional work the ships are tasked with over the course of deployment, we’re seeing a lot more work now coming into that package. The consequences are manifested in an availability that will be much bigger than we anticipated.

So as we grow the size of the workforce and we go look at all the ship work we have on the plate, We’re trying to get out in front far enough in advance so we can go to the fleet commanders, telling them don’t have the capacity at the naval shipyards, and then we can go talk to outside vendors earlier than we’ve typically done before. If you look at the list of ships out there, there are several cases where looking into the future we may have to go to outside vendors earlier than we’ve done today.

In some years, Pentagon-level reprogramming can take money from other Service acquisition programmes, but most of the time we cannot get money from the other services for the year to cover shortfalls. Due to funding shortfalls, we have reduced contract support levels, intermediate level repairs, and ability to provide after-hours support in specific areas. Although extensive efforts have been expended to limit adverse impact to the ships undergoing maintenance, fiscal realities have forced us into these actions.

Specifically, we are forced to stop engineering support to include tank and void inspections, infrared surveys, underway vibration analysis and surface ship availability work certifications. Reduction in parts procurement means a stop to all major diesel work, surface ship torpedo tube repairs and refurbishment, air compressor overhauls, communication receiver and transmitter repairs, and repairs to electronic warfare and anti-ship missile decoy systems. When supplies of on hand materiel run out, repairs to additional systems will be impacted.

Delaying maintenance periods, pressing them into the next fiscal year with the budget currently under consideration not being optimal, affects even the smallest number of ships, impacting the final decision on how to deal with the operations and maintenance shortfall. We do not want to embark on a path that partially accomplishes all availabilities across the entire fleet. That is a dangerous practice that rapidly builds maintenance and capability backlogs that are difficult to recover. Indeed, we are still digging out from that sort of policy implemented more than a decade ago that is difficult to recover from

The fleet takes on operational risk when it has less than full operations and maintenance funding, meaning acceptance of less readiness across the whole of the Fleet, less capacity to surge in crisis, or perhaps living with reduced readiness in our ships that would keep them from reaching the end of their service lives. In any case, recovering from these situations will cost us more in time and money in the future, limiting utility of the Force.

Question #1:

How do you fight with the fleet you have and prepare at the same time for tomorrow’s fleet, especially when you have several new programmes in the pipeline?

Question #2:

How do you execute initial steps to a successful maintenance availability like proper planning, determining what people and materiel will be needed at each step along the way?

Question #3:

By learning how to ramp up availability with today’s fleet, are you preparing solid templates for future operations?

Question #4:

Several months before the availability starts, do you commit to having a resource plan --in other words, these are the people you need, when you’re going to need them, so you can finish on time?

Question #5:

Isn’t one broad aspect of changes you are responsible for clearly setting out solid goals for build/upgrade the Fleet of the 21st Century?

Question #6:

Isn’t it important for you to have periodic calls with each shipyard commanders to get updates on progress and find ways to empower the yards to do what it takes to deliver on-time?

Question #7:

How important in your view is building a new shipyard training infrastructure to support a 21st century combat force?

Question #8:

If you have work backlog, how do you plan to move availabilities around so you have workers with the capacity to do work?

Question #9:

Overtime is one of must important factors to adjust, but isn’t it difficult for you to fine-tune how many man-days of work get accomplished without taking major workforce shortages into account?

Question #10:

So it is apparent your focus is on advanced planning, the growth in the workforce, worker-efficiency initiatives and more—how do you plan to achieve success in these areas?

Marine Corps upgrade/repair tasks performed by Troops in field preserve operational conditions/reliability of equipment, comprise most critical of all building blocks in product support  systems. Upgrade/repair teams will achieve success when organisation sustains mission critical equipment with operational readiness rates at required levels while achieving Maintenance Standards for assigned/attached equipment.

Equipment  maintenance standards are determined by using equipment preventive maintenance inspection/service found in product support instructions. Nonstandard equipment maintenance standards are determined by using equipment visual checks to make sure equipment can perform what it was designed to do.
Site Visit Executive emphasis and commitment strengthens probability of success of any task, mission, or course of action. Maintenance tasks require effective leadership to get the job done in accordance with policy and in best manner possible. Here we provide checklist designed with the purpose of adding organisational  maintenance structure to Troops leadership skill sets.

Site Visit Executive must be able to answer yes to the following questions to ensure field maintenance
operations achieve mission requirements. Positive answers to these questions will serve as benchmarks/metrics for product support success.

1.       Are Troops aware of  mission tasks are required to achieve Maintenance Standards for assigned and attached equipment?

2.       Do Troops provide feedback on how well mission is being accomplished?

3.       Do Troops have appropriate training/resourcing to execute assigned missions/tasks?

4.       Have Troops integrated administrative Logistics activities to provide maintenance/supply assistance as required?

5.       Do Troops use maintenance enablers & automated information systems assist operations to report maintenance actions?

6.       Do Troops promptly return unserviceable reparable items via retrograde channels or to designated source of repair?

7.       Does Site Visit Executive have technical resources to supervise Troops and inspect equipment? If not, what is required corrective action?

8.       Have Troops given Site Visit Executive access to motor pool or equipment storage area inquired about maintenance operations?

9.       Is there positive ownership relationship between Troops and their equipment include test, measurement, & diagnostic equipment monitoring training?

10.    Do Troops completely understand maintenance system within organisation and comply with requirements to accomplish tasks & objectives?

Top 10 Guidebook Dispatch Authorities & Principles Sustain Assigned Equipment Upgrade/Repair Foundation

1.        Introduce overview of  equipment upgrade/repair standard, mission objectives, benchmarks, performance metrics test Site Visit Executive dispatch assistance

2.       Define key dispatch duties & describe equipment upgrade/repair organisation function

3.       Discuss upgrade/repair operations dispatch structure so achieve rapid return of equipment to the user.

4.       Outline upgrade/repair Procedures to  guide dispatch execution of work processes & provide access to technical references

5.       Describe importance of preventive maintenance checks/services include listing  provide dispatch procedures

6.        Identify dispatch enablers and programmes most critical to the success of upgrade/repair operations focus on field-level maintenance.

7.        Establish equipment reset subset dispatch process for field and sustainment maintenance within  force pool readiness strategies

8.       Format pre-deployment dispatch training equipment pre-position at selected installations to support replicate units required to accomplish mission.

9.       Promote dispatch facilitation of maintenance/sustainment for  technical non-standard equipment define performance requirements

10.    Create dispatch procedures/checklists for maintenance programme not prohibit or replace equipment evaluation/inspection conducted at discretion of Site Visit Executive

Top 10 Long Term Equipment Upgrade/Repair Work Order Planning Recommendations

Navy weapons system programme recommendations depend on long term projections of fleet size and composition, projected Navy work order infrastructure appropriations requiring more and/or different types of Fleet Components, and any other changes that will change either the number or configuration of mobile equipment.

These work order issues are best addressed with creation of long term strategic Job Site plan to include such steps as:

1. Forecast future fleet size/mix and service level work order requirements

2. Compare existing parts stock supply capacities to projected future work orders

3. Estimate work order dependence on future space requirements based on Job Site Layout standards

4. Create future utilisation goals for Service conditions to accurate identify current work order problems

5. Predict Job Site personnel organisational work order requirements

6. Estimate gaps between existing fiscal resources and projected work order requirements

7. Implement Plans to serve as base upon future work order objectives can be built

8. Construct alternative work order implement of physical/operational plans to meet future requirements

9. Conduct economic service life assessment to rank each work order alternative

10. After considering external factors, identify best work order alternative course of action

Top 10 Site Visit Executive recommendations for Updated Dispatch of Equipment Supply Systems

1. Clearly define roles and responsibilities of Site Visit Executive to include oversight, enforcement & accountability of equipment supply programme

2. Design equipment track status update authority measures for each dispatch unit

3. Provide training to equipment supply dispatchers to reflect updated logistics systems operating procedures and business rules

4. Perform reconciliation of logistics systems, identify errors and inconsistencies

5. Establish plan of action and milestones for supply line corrections at specified dispatch intervals

6. Require Site Visit Executive to provide refresher training about update supply functions for dispatcher assignments

7. Determine effectiveness and feasibility of establishing dispatcher billet to provide stability and assist Logistics System performance

8. Assign Site Visit Executive oversight authority to ensure updated supply actions become established directives/instructions

9. Establish plan of action and milestones for accomplishing Supply Logistics actions recommended by Site Visit Executive

10. Make sure Logistics Systems provide for dispatch unit equipment asset visibility in supply lines

Top 10 Steps Make Service Level Deal With Fleet Services Customers

1. Obtain general guidance from Site Visit Executive

2. Meet with customer obtain detailed requirements

3. Identify services to be provided, assess protocols/priorities

4. Identify performance metrics to be measured

5. Identify responsibilities of customer

6. Issue preliminary agreement for customer review

7. Evaluate impact on existing fleet services operations

8. Create goals for meeting new operational requirements

9. Refine/finalise objectives for service level agreement

10. Implement plan to deliver customer service.

Modernised applications designed to facilitate success of Spare parts supply systems play an important role in achieving desired availability of fleet equipment components for meeting work orders at optimum cost to mission. Installations should shoot for fiscally sound, deployment-oriented & integrated technology. Dispatchers have recognised non-availability of spare parts supply at installations when required for repairs, contributing to much of total downtime.

Cost effective and timely provision of high quality repair parts and supplies to upgrade/repair workers is a key element in the overall provision of fleet maintenance services. The organisation and staffing of the parts supply function, the procurement of parts, parts stock utilisation/control each have a large effect on the overall success of field-level missions, and a corresponding effect on the efficiency and cost effectiveness of fleet maintenance services.

Unique work order problems faced by installations in controlling spare parts integration are characterised by elements of supply uncertainty as to when a part is required & also the quantity of upgrade/repair requirements b/c failure of a fleet equipment component due to overuse cannot be predicted accurately. Spare parts are not readily available from many suppliers since they are not fast moving items. Original suppliers deploy spares in most cases.

Individual purchase orders typically are used to procure parts that are not carried in inventory or available from a local supplier under contract purchase agreement. While they offer maximum flexibility in sourcing parts, utilisation usually is limited to the purchase of infrequent used specialty parts due to administrative effort, cost and time delays involved in their issuance and the inability to capture volume discounts through piecemeal buying.

Well-designed contracts & purchase agreements enable organisation to reduce administrative effort and time delays associated with procuring parts; to monitor and control parts purchases; to simplify fiscal appropriation for such purchases; and to secure discounts associated with buying from particular suppliers in volume. In short, they can reduce both the direct and indirect costs of buying parts and other fleet maintenance-related commodities.

Each installation must proceed systematically & establish an effective spare parts information integration system. Supplier connection codification policy helps to minimise duplication of spare parts stocking & aids in establishment of solid work order process to facilitate integration of spare parts control systems.

Optimal organisation and staffing of the parts supply function varies considerably with the size and complexity of the maintenance operation, and decisions regarding procurement and stock investment. Adequate staffing in terms of tasks assigned is critical success factor, as is designing a parts organisation that is suitable in scope of responsibility to the scope of the maintenance operation as a whole.

Dispatchers have introduced new supplier connection models to incorporate auto system design integration, phasing out stove-piped information desks in order to integrate work orders, and spares for outdated transmission models are not readily available. These factors are significant in cases of sourced fleet components since equipment design changes move at different speeds at multiple installations.

The identification of the types of parts required to support maintenance and repair activities involves assessing key attributes and indicators of parts requirements, including types, quantities, and timing of parts usage; parts and parts supplier performance; and parts accessibility and waiting tolerances.

Auto system integration must be carried out on the basis of different characteristics of spare parts techniques to establish good work order policy such as monitor of consumption value period, mission criticality, supplier lead time, unit cost & schedule frequency of use. Installations must direct ambition efforts on integration & establishment of suitable policies for selective supplier control, focusing efforts on real-world mobile operation problem areas.

Cost of spare parts is significant portion of the total impact of upgrade/repair activity at installations. Upgrade/repair systems face non-availability of spare parts supply to meet deployment requirements w/ fiscal costs of fleet equipment components being classified as locked up capital, signifies vital importance of automated spare parts system integration for installation work orders.

For sourcing expensive spare parts, it is essential to recognise useful life for equipment is extended by appropriate applications of reconditioning & upgrade/repair techniques. Installation work order efforts must be made to integrate spare parts in view of difficult sourcing processes. Installation establishment of spare parts supplier register banks goes very long way in reducing the total cost of holding expensive spare parts in stock.

Parts Stock control involves the tracking and physical control of parts from the point of receipt through consumption. This process is important for controlling stock levels of items, with direct effect on the cost of carrying parts stocks. Control of physical access, and methods employed to replenish and disperse these items ensure that parts consumption is accounted for properly.

Quantity & variety of spare parts to be integrated into new supplier connection models are often times too large, making close auto system control more & more tedious. Also, there exist tendencies for work order transitions from sourcing stages of fleet equipment components to spare parts use stages. As such, requisitions for spare parts at increased number than actually required results in accumulation at installations.

Good auto system controls will help to integrate supplier policies involved in sourcing procedures & achieve optimum levels of spare part cache control for work orders. In addition, installations must optimise replacement policies for selected spare parts with increased down time costs. Installations must identify required spare parts and carry out supplier connection exercises for integrating optimum replacement policies.

Procedures for establishing, monitoring, renewing, and circumventing contracts must be designed to maximise vendor performance, minimise administrative effort, and facilitate maintenance organisations flexibility to procure a part by other means when contract suppliers cannot satisfactorily meet its needs.

For different installations, it is imperative to establish spare parts supplier register banks & suitable integrated information system for spare part supply exchange. Automated applications for processing of spare parts information & operation of effective spare parts control systems will assist installations with scheduling of upgrade/repair job work orders.

Determining proper parts stock size/composition requires applied attention to several interrelated factors, including cost trade-offs between volume and individual purchases of specific commodities; trade-offs between inventory carrying and parts delivery costs; and trade-offs between parts availability and delivery times and waiting tolerances of particular fleet users and equipment types.

Objectives of spare parts system integration include ensuring spare parts are readily available from suppliers for upgrade/repair of fleet components as & when required at optimum cost. Also, there exist absolute work order requirements for spare parts to be of high quality in order to meet the requirements of subsequent deployment to meet mission requirements.

Finally, work order reviews have established results indicating spare parts consumption rates for some installations are very high, while other installations experience lower consumption & varied deployment patterns, highlighting the utility of building systematic spare parts integration with supplier connection models.

Effective parts supply processes allow mechanics to focus directly on maintaining and repairing fleet, by putting parts in their hands with a minimum of disruption to maintenance activities, reducing repair turn-around time/costs and creating advances in mechanic productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness.

Multiple actions following from establishment of supplier connection episodes are required to ensure that spare parts system integration is effective to meet mission requirements of installations. Mandates for systematic actions in building integrated spare parts systems are as follows:

1. Use assessment technique of stock items to segregate low moving parts so true inventory turnover rate can be identified.

2. Begin kitting parts for preventive maintenance and other scheduled work where it is feasible.

3. Review existing stocks to ensure that the correct parts and quantities are being stocked, to increase the turns per period and reduce total inventory on hand.

4. Identify parts required for predictive maintenance and establish timeline for adding items to stock.

5. Start planning preventative maintenance and other definable work in advance and utilise schedule for part kitting.

6. Collect metrics for performance measures such as parts accuracy/variance rate and stock out rate.

7. Identify parts for stock at the time of new equipment delivery to include items immediately needed, and items for predictive maintenance in the future.

8. Make help screens available while in the system to improve understanding of parts issues/procedures.

9. Clarify duties and reporting structure for parts control personnel

10 Conduct study to determine parts quantity/type on hand may be possible to cost-effectively reduce inventory to level provide for immediate use and reliance on supplier stocks