Background

• Fiscal austerity throughout the Defense Department– Sequestration projects an annual shortfall of $55B per year through 2021

– Annual Navy budget reduction is $10-15B (~7.8%) per year

• Energy management is now an operational and strategic imperative

• Navy Task Force Energy established the Aviation Working Group to research and propose energy policies.

Reduce fuel consumption without impacting

combat readiness, tactical proficiency, or safety

Reduce fuel consumption without impacting

combat readiness, tactical proficiency, or safety2

Naval Aviation Enterprise

“We are operating in challenging fiscal and operational times, and we must take appropriate action now to ensure the current and future vitality of Naval Aviation. To successfully achieve our missions today and in the future, all Naval Aviation stakeholders must be in sync and focused on the common goals of advancing readiness while reducing costs.” 

Vice Admiral David Buss

Commander, Naval Air Forces

Commander, Naval Air Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet 

April 2013

3

Energy Consumption

• In 2010, the US burned 7.1B barrels of fuel, roughly 25% of the world demand. US Gov’t represents 2% of this.

• For every $1 rise in the price of petroleum, the Navy’s fuel bill increases by $31M per year

Primary focus is to reduce non-mission fuel burn. A 4% reduction is equivalent to 21 million gallons, or roughly $85M per year.

Primary focus is to reduce non-mission fuel burn. A 4% reduction is equivalent to 21 million gallons, or roughly $85M per year.

4

Naval Aviation Fuel Use• Annual fuel consumption in the Navy is nearly 600M gallons

55% of all Naval Aviation jet fuel is consumed by the F/A-18 Hornet55% of all Naval Aviation jet fuel is consumed by the F/A-18 Hornet

5

F/A 18 as a Customer• Time

– Aircraft maintenance costs $100 per minute

– Fuel burn costs $13 per minute (3.4 gpm)

• Aircraft Fuel Capacity– F/A-18C/D Hornet 1,800 gal

– F/A-18E/F Super Hornet 2,500 gal (28% larger)

6

Service System – Ground Operations

Two Refueling Methods

Hot Skids: Engines online Fuel Trucks: Engines offline

7

How is running a Naval Airfield like running a restaurant?

• Hungry customers want food

• Customers all want to eat at the same time

• Customers take different amount of time dining

• Hungry airplanes want fuel

• Pilots all want to land at the same time

• Planes take different amount of time refueling

8

What problems do Naval Airfields and restaurants share?

9

Queuing at high demand periods

What problems do Naval Airfields and restaurants share?

10

Excess capacity at low demand periods

Arrival patterns at a restaurant

11

Arrival Patterns at an Airfield

12

Demand Management Strategies

Shift demand to other periods

13

Managing Demand through Arrival Slots

14

Question: what are the benefits of a “reservation” arrival policy? • wait time• fuel burned

Discrete Event Simulation

Complexity

•Input from 2,600 flights in August 2012

•Avg of 107 flights per day (0800-1759)

•2 runways, 5 hangars, 16 squadrons

•Multiple post flight processes

Metrics

•Captured fuel consumed (gallons) & time from touchdown to shutdown (or launch)

•Experiments manipulated arrival patterns and ground turnaround time

Simio Simulation Software

•Commercial suite

•Assumed 250 annual fly days

•One replication = One 10-hour fly day representing ops between 0800-1759

15

Managing Demand through Arrival Slots

Worst Cases = 11

Most Likelys = 7

Recommendations = 4

16

Slot Management Results

42K gallonSavings

42K gallonSavings

17

Slot Management Results

$1.2 millionSavings

$1.2 millionSavings

18

Slot Management Results

Decrease of 36 seconds on average

Decrease of 36 seconds on average

19

Demand Management Strategies

Manage customers expectation for meal duration

20

Time between flights is scheduled a priori

Ground turnarounds of less than 60 minute requires hot skid refueling

Ground Turnaround (GT) Time

Wave 1Takeoff

Wave 1Landing

Airborne

GT > 60 minsTruck Refuel

Wave 2Takeoff

Wave 2Landing

GT < 60 minsHot Skid

Airborne

21

Hot Skid = Engines On = Burned Fuel = BadHot Skid = Engines On = Burned Fuel = Bad

Ground Turnaround (GT) Time

• Data showed 37% of all ground turnarounds were less than 60m

• Only one F/A-18 mission required ground turnaround less than 60m– Field Carrier Landing Practice (6.5%)

• We developed a few incremental options for the decision maker at 20%, 10%, and FCLP Only

22

Question: what are the benefits of restricting customer’s choices?

Ground Turnaround Results

188K gallonSavings

188K gallonSavings

23

Ground Turnaround Results

$6.0 millionSavings

$6.0 millionSavings

24

Ground Turnaround Results

Shaved over 2 minutes!

Shaved over 2 minutes!

25

Demand Management StrategiesAttract the right customers

Or

Know your customers

26

Transition Impacts to Fuel Consumption

• Over next 2 years, remaining legacy F/A-18’s transition to the newer F/A-18EF Super Hornet

• We compare current ground operations to those anticipate in 2016.– F/A-18C/D Hornet 1,800

gal

– F/A-18E/F Super Hornet 2,500 gal (28% larger)

27

Question: what happens when all our customers are hungrier?

Aircraft Transition Results

28

Aircraft Transition Results

29

Aircraft Transition Results

30

Potential Impact Across All Naval Aviation

• Assuming every flight successfully shaves 2 minutes from their post-flight ground processes…

31

$23.0M and 785K gallonsavoided across all Naval

Aviation

$23.0M and 785K gallonsavoided across all Naval

Aviation

Key Takeaways

• Decrease variation in aircraft arrivals during peak periods by establishing a culture of squadron collaboration at the type-wing level through slot management

• Promulgate a flight scheduling policy restricting ground turnaround time less than or equal to 60 minutes to 10 percent of all missions planned

• Traditional Demand Management techniques can be applied to conserve energy in complex service systems

32

More Fight – Less Fuel:Reducing Fuel Burn through Ground Process Improvement

QUESTIONS / COMMENTS

M. Dixon, PhD

U. Apte, PhD

R. Szechtman, PhD

C. Gerber, LCDR

J. Clark, LCDR