Accelerating Flight Readiness

Written by Karen E. Thuermer

“HVM will make each of the Air Force Integrated Life Cycle Management and Product Support Strategy intents possible for more effective control over weapon system support, increased flexibility to respond to operational needs, optimized use of program dollars and proactive satisfaction of legislative requirements,” explained JoAnne Rumple, Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) spokesperson.

What makes HVM different from other Air Force lean practices is its culmination of Lean, Six Sigma, and change management principles. These involve productive and quality enhancement tools that include significant customer involvement. “HVM takes the inactive across the organization,” commented Brian Keeling, corporate account manager/ master sensei, Simpler Consulting. This company specializes in these principals that will help push Warner-Robins Air Logistics Center (ALC), one of the service’s three major depots for heavy maintenance, to a new level of engagement.

“We are starting the first validation of our process changes,” revealed Keeling. If the test period goes well, HVM could likely expand to the Ogden and Tinker depots, other weapon systems, and possibly across the AF inventory and to other services.

Overall, the HVM program has three goals: to better understand the condition of the aircraft before it gets to the maintenance depot, to implement AFSO 21 standards in the daily work of the mechanics, and to have a mechanic-centric focus so that everything is there through full tasking.

“But the focus is really aircraft availability,” said Keeling.

DEPOT TRANSFORMATION

The Air Force has been implementing lean maintenance practices since 1996–1997. The command has already achieved success in implementing initiatives for depot maintenance transformation, initiatives that have successfully transitioned AFMC from a “push” to a “pull” response capability to meet customer demands. As a result, at Oklahoma City ALC the average number of flow days for the B-1B was 172 in FY05. Upon implementation of CCPM (Critical Chain Path Management) in FY06 and FY07, the average number of flow days was reduced approximately 20 percent to 141 days. In addition, the B-1B available hour cost for FY05 was $3,129.46; for FY06, $3,414.62; and for FY07, $2,933.84.

At Ogden ALC, the F-16 and C-130 squadrons’ combined direct product actual hours were 1.8 million in FY07, and personnel equivalents were 1,264. Upon implementation of a lean, cellular World Class Aircraft Maintenance Operations, in FY08 the combined direct product actual hours were 1.6 million, and personnel equivalents were 1,171. In addition, flow day reductions resulted in a cost avoidance of $4.5 million.

Further, at Warner-Robins ALC, the annual direct labor cost for cargo aircraft functional testing was $37.861 million in FY05. Upon implementation of a continuous functional test line and ramp that allow any type of cargo aircraft to be run up on any spot, the annual direct labor cost was $35.641 million in FY07, a 6 percent decrease. In addition, the extra ramp capacity enabled acceptance of additional cargo aircraft workload.

“Going lean is the process of being lean.” Keeling stated. “It’s a very hard process to switch over to.” That’s because process improvements are usually done within individual organizations.

“When you look at an initiative that goes across entire processes from acquisition to aircraft retirement, every process affects another process,” he said. “Going lean requires a great deal of coordination and talking to each other.”

Doug Keene, HVM product eam lead at Warner-Robins ALC, expressed how mechanics, themselves, were responsible for getting their own tools or waiting for the appropriate tools to do their job.

“It took mechanics approximately 340 flow days to get the work done,” he said. “But by implementing lean practices, flow days were reduced to 240. The clerical chain project management days were reduced to 170 flow days, and the number of aircraft on station was reduced from 14 to seven.”

CHANGING DEPOT CULTURE

While initial lean practices worked well to change the Air Force depot’s culture, commercial airlines were meanwhile turning their aircraft around in just 40 to 45 days. “The Air Force needed to figure out a way to increase maintenance velocity in making dramatic changes in aircraft availability,” Keene said.

Consequently, in fiscal year 2007 Major General Tom Owen, then Warner-Robins ALC commander, asked his wing commanders to present ideas for a 10-year outlook. “The acting deputy commander for the 402nd Maintenance Wing presented a paper titled ‘High Velocity Maintenance’ that outlined an idea to move aircraft through depot faster by increasing man-hours per day,” recalled Rumple.

In May 2007, Owen established a steering group and subsequent high performance team (HPT) to develop the HVM concept. The team was built from various disciplines across the center: experts in maintenance requirements, funding, manpower, consumables, tooling, support equipment, engineering, facilities and information technology. The Air Force customer was a member of the steering group and the team.

The HVM approach was briefed to a team of senior officials, industry experts and academia in August and November 2007. Since then, the HPT has been identifying transformational events and projects required to implement an HVM proof-of-concept prototype. C-130, B-1 and F-16 fleets were identified as platforms for the effort.

Several command planning meetings were held to immerse the ALC leads and co-leads in all aspects of HVM. Command participants identified process variability drivers, such as policies, culture, metrics and technical orders, which affect HVM implementation.

“They also developed a program management review schedule and reporting means that will be used to review task completion/status, revise the HVM concept and share lessons learned,” Rumple said. “In addition, the Headquarters Air Force Material Command Directorate of Logistics is completing a command governance structure, charter, AFSO21 reporting construct and information technology management plan.”

TRANSFORMING MATERIAL SUPPORT

Whereby most organic depot repair processes are derived from AFMC instructions, under HVM each instruction (e.g., AFMC Instruction 21-156, Operational Workloading, Planning and Scheduling Control) is receiving an in-depth review for alignment with HVM.

“We expect to have concrete examples, e.g., HVM tenet, governing policy, change summary, and implementation schedule, no later than August 2009,” revealed Rumple.

Key to HVM is the transformation of material support. Currently, one of the problems surrounding the depot maintenance process is the fact that depot mechanics work in a job shop environment.

After a C-130 arrives at the depot, technicians are required to obtain technical data and all parts and tools needed to support their work. They then must wait until all items arrive. On top of this is a “must-fix-now” mentality that gives technicians little time to determine if a repair or part replacement can be deferred until the aircraft’s next maintenance cycle. While many technicians wander around looking for parts and tools, George Ireland, Jacobs Technology site manager at Warner-Robins ALC, commented that under HVM the mechanic is akin to a surgeon where everything is at his or her fingertips. Jacobs Technology is looking at aircraft maintenance flow and how this can be achieved with the most efficiency through a contractor facility.

“If technicians are expected to do a lot more on an aircraft, they need to have similar processes as the commercial airlines,” Ireland said. “If the Air Force wants to turn out more man-hours on an airplane, there needs to be a road map as to how to make this happen.” To do this, individual job processes need to be evaluated to determine the smartest way to do processes, and certain airplane parts need to be examined and changed based on failure rates.

“We look to see what special tooling the technician might need,” Ireland stated. “Parts and technical data need to be there in a kit so that when the technician shows up for work, he knows what to do. This is a giant leap forward in the way of doing business today.”

Jacobs Technology is currently at the planning stage in determining this tool kit. “We are working on the details on how to park orders, get the kits together, position them, and decide how to pick up the residual once the job is done,” Ireland said. “As a contractor bringing expertise from working in the Air Force, we now can hone in on exactly what we need to do. If we want to work on just the fuselage, we don’t have to work on the wing.”

With HVM providing a very strong forecast for parts that will be used on aircraft, maintenance processes are also moving toward modular design. “Strong forecasts bring a high level of confidence,” he said.

MECHANICS CENTRAL TO HVM

“When you look at an initiative that goes across entire processes from acquisition to aircraft retirement, every process affects another process,” he said. “Going lean requires a great deal of coordination and talking to each other.”

Doug Keene, HVM product eam lead at Warner-Robins ALC, expressed how mechanics, themselves, were responsible for getting their own tools or waiting for the appropriate tools to do their job. “It took mechanics approximately 340 flow days to get the work done,” he said. “But by implementing lean practices, flow days were reduced to 240. The clerical chain project management days were reduced to 170 flow days, and the number of aircraft on station was reduced from 14 to seven.”

CHANGING DEPOT CULTURE

While initial lean practices worked well to change the Air Force depot’s culture, commercial airlines were meanwhile turning their aircraft around in just 40 to 45 days. “The Air Force needed to figure out a way to increase maintenance velocity in making dramatic changes in aircraft availability,” Keene said.

Consequently, in fiscal year 2007 Major General Tom Owen, then Warner-Robins ALC commander, asked his wing commanders to present ideas for a 10-year outlook.

“The acting deputy commander for the 402nd Maintenance Wing presented a paper titled ‘High Velocity Maintenance’ that outlined an idea to move aircraft through depot faster by increasing man-hours per day,” recalled Rumple.

In May 2007, Owen established a steering group and subsequent high performance team (HPT) to develop the HVM concept. The team was built from various disciplines across the center: experts in maintenance requirements, funding, manpower, consumables, tooling, support equipment, engineering, facilities and information technology. The Air Force customer was a member of the steering group and the team.

The HVM approach was briefed to a team of senior officials, industry experts and academia in August and November 2007. Since then, the HPT has been identifying transformational events and projects required to implement an HVM proof-of-concept prototype. C-130, B-1 and F-16 fleets were identified as platforms for the effort.

Several command planning meetings were held to immerse the ALC leads and co-leads in all aspects of HVM. Command participants identified process variability drivers, such as policies, culture, metrics and technical orders, which affect HVM implementation. “They also developed a program management review schedule and reporting means that will be used to review task completion/status, revise the HVM concept and share lessons learned,” Rumple said. “In addition, the Headquarters Air Force Material Command Directorate of Logistics is completing a command governance structure, charter, AFSO21 reporting construct and information technology management plan.”

TRANSFORMING MATERIAL SUPPORT

Whereby most organic depot repair processes are derived from AFMC instructions, under HVM each instruction (e.g., AFMC Instruction 21-156, Operational Workloading, Planning and Scheduling Control) is receiving an in-depth review for alignment with HVM.

“We expect to have concrete examples, e.g., HVM tenet, governing policy, change summary, and implementation schedule, no later than August 2009,” revealed Rumple.

Key to HVM is the transformation of material support. Currently, one of the problems surrounding the depot maintenance process is the fact that depot mechanics work in a job shop environment.

After a C-130 arrives at the depot, technicians are required to obtain technical data and all parts and tools needed to support their work. They then must wait until all items arrive. On top of this is a “must-fix-now” mentality that gives technicians little time to determine if a repair or part replacement can be deferred until the aircraft’s next maintenance cycle. While many technicians wander around looking for parts and tools, George Ireland, Jacobs Technology site manager at Warner-Robins ALC, commented that under HVM the mechanic is akin to a surgeon where everything is at his or her fingertips. Jacobs Technology is looking at aircraft maintenance flow and how this can be achieved with the most efficiency through a contractor facility.

“If technicians are expected to do a lot more on an aircraft, they need to have similar processes as the commercial airlines,” Ireland said. “If the Air Force wants to turn out more man-hours on an airplane, there needs to be a road map as to how to make this happen.” To do this, individual job processes need to be evaluated to determine the smartest way to do processes, and certain airplane parts need to be examined and changed based on failure rates.

“We look to see what special tooling the technician might need,” Ireland stated. “Parts and technical data need to be there in a kit so that when the technician shows up for work, he knows what to do. This is a giant leap forward in the way of doing business today.”

Jacobs Technology is currently at the planning stage in determining this tool kit. “We are working on the details on how to park orders, get the kits together, position them, and decide how to pick up the residual once the job is done,” Ireland said. “As a contractor bringing expertise from working in the Air Force, we now can hone in on exactly what we need to do. If we want to work on just the fuselage, we don’t have to work on the wing.”

With HVM providing a very strong forecast for parts that will be used on aircraft, maintenance processes are also moving toward modular design. “Strong forecasts bring a high level of confidence,” he said.

MECHANICS CENTRAL TO HVM

Also a key enabler for technicians will be Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals (IETMs). Boeing is creating IETMs, a tool that Michael Beck, C-130 HVM project lead, Boeing Global Services and Support at Fort Walton Beach, Fla., described as putting the mechanic at the center of HVM effort so that all resources meet the technician at the point of work.

“The IETM is the repository for C-130 technical manuals and work cards,” Beck explained. “When these guides are loaded Also a key enabler for technicians will be Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals (IETMs). Boeing is creating IETMs, a tool that Michael Beck, C-130 HVM project lead, Boeing Global Services and Support at Fort Walton Beach, Fla., described as putting the mechanic at the center of HVM effort so that all resources meet the technician at the point of work. “The IETM is the repository for C-130 technical manuals and work cards,” Beck explained. “When these guides are loaded on to an electronic tool [e-tool] the technician has the entire aircraft technical manual library at their disposal.”

When the technician is in the center of the depot maintenance process, all resources are pre-positioned at the point of need/use. To do this the Visual Work Card in the IETM flags each of the needs to perform the work card task. This provides the list of items needed at the aircraft at a certain time and place.

“Equipment/part/tool expeditors can deliver this equipment to the aircraft just prior to need,” Beck explained. As a result the technician arrives to the work location with pre-position parts, tools, equipment, consumables and HAZMAT ready for use. HVM will also reduce most inventory percentages and cushion the variability in demand rates.

Under HVM, inspection work card sets are generated for C-130s by tail number. “The list of inspections due is matched to the configuration of the specific aircraft. Therefore, only work cards applicable to that aircraft are pulled from the IETM database,” Beck explained. “The IETM displays only the data necessary based on the configuration of each aircraft by tail number.”

Additionally, part and equipment categories are flagged within the IETM. When the depot pulls all the work cards associated with an MDS/tailnumber/depot cycle, flagged items can be tallied by category. This allows planners to see the aircraft parts, expendables, tools, support equipment, HAZMAT, and individual protective equipment required to perform each operation.

“This visibility will give planners a closer to actual picture of the needs for each depot effort,” Beck added.

This process upgrades the old system of programming depot maintenance using historical averages. It provides knowledgebased decision-making and planning based on the known outstanding maintenance actions through shared maintenance data and known aircraft configuration data stored in the IETM.

AFMC expects to have concrete examples— e.g., HVM tenet, governing policy, change summary, and implementation schedule—also no later than December 2009.

“Current depot parts procurement procedures are based on historical averages,” Beck said. “HVM concepts replace historical averages with more predictable estimates based on material required to perform a task.”

When discussing depot maintenance, the HVM concept synchronizes depot maintenance to fielded aircraft via the maintenance data collection system via the IETM. When maintenance is held for depot, the action is passed to the owning depot notifying them of pending maintenance.

“The IETM will capture data noted during inspections and will feed the data to maintenance data collection systems,” Beck said. Once in the Air Force MDC system, the depot can pull this data from REMIS. From this point the status of maintenance for each aircraft is known by the depot. The depot can, therefore, predict maintenance activities for each aircraft by tail number, preparing for their arrival to depot as early as 18 months out.

In spares acquisitions, HVM is less affected than a non-HVM environment. “Though the requirement for spares-acquisition lead times will not diminish, under the HVM concept aircraft will be seen and inspected more frequently, which will allow the Air Force to better understand the condition of the aircraft and get those long lead time items on order to arrive at the right time during the followon HVM cycle,” Rumble explained.

MINIMIZING VARIABILITY

While AFMC re-engineering depot repair owners have always been held accountable for continuous process improvement, like industry leaders, Air Force officials contend that HVM will assist in making even more improvements.

Consequently, by understanding aircraft conditions more thoroughly, mechanics can better establish daily standard work routines.

“This makes it easier for suppliers to see what mechanics will need in completing a task,” Keene said. “It also saves time waiting for parts and over expenditures on unneeded parts ordering.”

As a logical next step in Lean, HVM will help minimize the variability in product and process by catching trends in performance and wear and tear earlier in the cycles, driving out unknowns and creating more confidence in distribution from DLA and parts centers.

“What is known per individual aircraft means that lead times in acquisition are opened up to avoid parts availability issues since maintenance teams will know 18 months ahead what is needed and will have it ready when the aircraft hits the ground,” Keene said.

For example, C-130s, composed of four 18-month maintenance cycles, come to the Warner-Robins ALC every five years. “While the aircraft is here, a look-ahead is also conducted on parts of the aircraft that are slated to be done in the next 18-month cycle,” Keene said. “Information related to this work is fed back to the supply folks to give them a heads up as to what will be needed in the next maintenance cycle.” “The challenge is to determine that 18 months is the right cycle time for the Air Force,” he said. “Using examples from the commercial airlines in tasking HVM, the Air Force will measure variables such as aircraft age, manpower, mission need to determine the best time cycle. ♦

Back to Top