Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AD-RI61 ?N REPORT OF THE JOINT INDUSTRY 00DO TASK FORC ON 1/3COMPUTER AIDED LOGISTIC.. (U) INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSEANALYSES ALEXANDRIA YR F R RIDDELL ET AL. JUN 95
UNC LASSIFIED IDA-R-25-YOL-4 IDA/NG-94-29449 P/G 15/5 N
EomhohmohhoiIloEhhhhhhhhhhhhl
li1.0 LAO~
III
111111.25 Jill14 111.
MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS- 1963- A
Copy 21 of 300 cnpies
AD-A161 7803
IDA REPORT R-285
REPORT OF THE JOINT INDUSTRY -DoD TASK FORCE ONCOMPUTER AIDED LOGISTIC SUPPORT (CALS)
Volume IV: Report of Information Requirements Subgroup
Frederick R. RiddellRichard A. Gunkel
George BeiserSiegfried Goldstein
Bruce LepistoEditors
June 1985-
Prepared forAssistant Secretary of Defense
Manpower, Installations and LogisticsTt"h i ni i~ ;'f. b..i ui ,ptovdfor Pa.bl": re-,- %-~I)*: INdistribution~ Is al~uited.
aINSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSESU 1801 N. Beauregard Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22311
ISO' o1 6 009~ 10A og No.HO8-44
The work reported in this document was conducted under contractMDA 903 84 C 0031 for the Department of Defense. The publicationof this IDA Report does not indicate endorsement by the Departmentof Defense, nor should the contents be construed as reflecting the
official position of that agency.
Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.
UNCLASSIFIEDSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE AO i 4 /
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
la. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION lb. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGSUNCLASSIFIED
2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3. DISTRIBUTION AVAILABILITY OF REPORT
Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
2b. DECLASSIFICATION'DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE
N/A
4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) S. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)IDA Report R-285
6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b. OFFICE SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION(if applicable)
Institute for Defense Analyses OUSDRE (DoD IDA Management Office)
6. ADDRESS (City. State. and ZIP Code) 7b ADDRESS (City. State. and ZIP Codel
1801 N Beauregard Street 1801 N Beauregard StreetAlexandria. VA 22311 Alexandria, VA 22311
Ba. NAME OF FUNDING, SPONSORING &b. OFFICE SYMBOL 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBERORGANIZATION (If app:licabie)
Assistant Secretary of Defense Man-power. Installations and Logistics MDA 903 84 C 0031
9c. ADDRESS )City, State. and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS
The PentagonWashington. D C 20301 PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNIT
ELEMENT NO. NO No. ACCESSION NO.T-3-192I
11. TITLE (Include Security Classification)REPORT OF THE JOINT INDUSTRY DOD TASK FORCE ON COMPUTER AIDED LOGISTIC SUPPORT (CALS) - Volume IV -Report of Information Requirements Subgroup
12. PERSONAL AUTHORIS)
Frederick R. Riddell, Richard A Gunkel. George Beiser. Siegfried Goldstein, Bruce Lepisto. Editors
* 13a. TYPE OF REPORT 13b. TIME COVERED 14. DATE OF REPORT (Year. Month. Dayl IS. PAGE COUNTFINAL F1985 June 194
:ROIM TO 19
16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION
17. COSATI CODES 1S. SUBJECT TERMS IContnue on reverse of necessary and identify by block number)
FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP Automated Technical Information
Digital Logistics Data. Weapon System Support Data, Automated SupportData. Computer-Aided Logistics Technical Manuals, Engineering SupportData, Maintenance and Supply Data. Training Manuals, Operation Manuals
19. ABSTRACT lContinue on reverse f necessary and identfy by block number)In April 1984 the Institute for Defense Analyses was directed by OSD to assemble a task force of senior industry and
government people to address the problems faced by DoD in attaining an ntegrated computer-aided logistics Supportsystem The task force was given a charter to "develop a strategy and a recommended master plan for computer-aided
(continued)
20 DISTRIBUTIONAVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21 ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONE] UNCLASSIFIED UNLIMITED E)SAME AS RPT [] OTIC USERS tNCLASSIFiED
22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b TELEPHONE (Include Area Code) 22c OFFICE SYMBOL
FORM
DD I JAN 73 1473 84 MARUNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered)
%
% - I.
UNCLASSIFIEDSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered)
Item # 19 (continued)
logistic support " The task force was formed and held an intensive series of meetings during the last half of 1984 duringwhich this report was prepared -
Volume I of the report gives a summary of the task force deliberations and lays out a recommended strategy andmaster plan that would, in five years, have in place all the elements needed for a complete computer-aided logistics
I support (CALS) system based on electronic data transfer Volumes II, 111, IV and V of the report were prepared by thesubgroups that were formed to examine different aspects of implementing a CALS system These volumes contain -
* detailed information that supports the recommendations made in the Summary, Volume I
-q
i.I
.4
JU
UNCLASSIFIEDSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE When Data Entered)
% %..
..................................................................
Ui =*~
- ~ ~~~ - .TV w.-.-.*-~-
IDA REPORT R-285
REPORT OF THE JOINT INDUSTRY - DoD TASK FORCE ONCOMPUTER AIDED LOGISTIC SUPPORT (CALS)
Volume IV: Report of Information Requirements Subgroup
Frederick R. RiddellRichard A. Gunkel
G e o rg e B e ise r A c c e s si on F o rSiegfried Goldstein AeIsIon ,or
Bruce Lepisto DTIC TAR
Editors Unanncu:ncedJust i I-; mt icr-_
a By.I[ DistrU;': -'7/
Avail"1 : v "odes
June 1985iDist
!F
IDA
INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSES
Contract MDA 903 84 C 0031Task T-3-192
-,* .-
J'J,..--.-, - . . . . . . .
7-
PREFACE
This report was prepared by the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) for the Office
of the Secretary of Defense, Manpower, Reserve Affairs and Logistics Under Contract
Number MDA 903 84 C 0031, Task Order T-3-192, "R&D Support to Improve Force
Readiness."
The issuance of the report answers the specific task to "...assemble a group of both
industry and government personnel...experienced in...computer-aided technologies for
automation of support procedures in order to examine issues.. .include(ing) the
subcontractor level, inventory management techniques, etc. At present these issues are
being addressed individually without apparent consideration of their interaction in meeting
the total DoD objective...to evolve a general plan for automated support of DoD operating
systems which addresses the problems of interaction between the different systems now in
use or evolving, and the various approaches being taken by DoD to address its readiness
problems."
a
S!
-i
CONTENTS
INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS................................................. I
A. Introduction................................................................... I
B. Methodology.................................................................. 2
1. Overview of Subgroup Actions............................................2
2. Specific Subgroup Actions................................................ 2
C. Discussion of Efforts .......................................................... 5
1. Summary of Information Requirements Action Items FromContractor's View.........................................................5
2. Data Structure ............................... ......................... 6
3. Universal Numbering System.............................................74. LSAR Data Interface...................................................... 7
I'5. Military Standards Relationships........................................... 9
D. Findings/Conclusions ........................................................ 10I . Contractor's Perspectives ................................................ 10
2. Data Structure .......................................................... 10
£3. Universal Numbering System.............................................I14. LSAR Data Interface.....................................................1I1
5. Military Standards Relationships ........................................ 11
E. Recommendations ........................................................... 11
I 1. Short Term Actions ...................................................... I1
2. Long Term Actions...................................................... 12
Appendices
A. LSAR DATA INTERFACE
B. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS UNDER CURRENT MIL STDS
C. UNIVERSAL NUMBERING SYSTEM
D. ILS DATA DELIVERABLES WHICH ARE CANDIDATES FOR DIGITALDELI VER IN NEUTRAL FORMAT
E. TWO VIEWS OF CALS EVOLUTION
F. SHARED DATA
iv
INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS
A. INTRODUCTION
It was determined very early in the CALS study that a precursor for any final
recommendations on the future of CALS was to be able to define the DoD requirements for
logistic information. These definitions would have to go beyond the traditional approach of
defining a data product to support a specific logistic function; it would need to get to the
basic information requirement behind that data product. In addition, any information
determined necessary for logistic support purposes should be related to equivalent data
used in design and manufacturing.
In trying to scope the effort to define information requirements, it became obvious'
that the-job divided neatly into two efforts. For the long term, information needed for
logistic support can be said to be inherent in product definition data; therefore, the long
term effort should be in assuring that interface standards for engineering, design,
manufacturing, and field operations are sufficient to provide basic information necessary to
plan and design the support system. In the short and mid-term, DoD and the Services must
5 ensure that the various mechanisms for acquiring data (currently by imposing various
Military Standards and Data Item Descriptions) are geared toward the acquisition of basic
information. To this end, the general approach that was chosen was to begin with today's
-- data requirements (since these contain the complete though potentially redundant
gI information requirement) and proceed to identify overlaps, breakdown to basic
requirements and recommend the short and mid-term actions to modernize the
requirements.
B. METHODOLOGY
1. Overview of Subgroup Actions
* Due to the compressed schedule for the CALS effort, the Information Requirements
Subgroup initiated several parallel actions. Although these actions were planned
separately, their products were all geared towards definition of the CALS information
requirements. The actions taken fall primarily into five categories:
' (1) Identification of products/data requirements levied on contractors;
.. .. ... .. .. ... ................. I.
(2) Evaluation of a structured versus a non-structured approach Lo datadelivery/utilization;
(3) Examination of the utility of a universal numbering system for dataexchange;
(4) Identification of data duplication between the LSAR and its referencedmilitary standards; and
(5) Relationship of military standards.
The first two categories document how we do business today, and what technology
techniques are being employed today to enhance our information handling capabilities and
to identify our directions for tomorrow with the associated issues.
-" The third category, Universal Numbering System, explored the increasing problem
of data exchange and the resulting need for a mechanism to overcome this problem.
Category 4 was a detailed analysis tracing the LSAR data elements to functional
areas, identifying duplication, and recommending opportunities for automation andreduction of duplicate data requirements.
Category 5 was in support of Category 4 in that it identified the relationships of the
logistic-oriented Military Standards to each other and to the Military Standards. This is
critical in defining potential new interfaces with the LSAR and for highlighting potential
R duplication areas that should be eliminated.
2. Specific Subgroup Actions
l Action #1
Using the MS-1388 as an example, explore and define the sources and uses of thedata and recommend changes/improvements (possibly t0 ,tl,t 2 ).
Action: Craig Hunter.Reports: Appendix A to this volume.
Assume availability of digitized data system for input and processing; what will beimpact when time for delivery of data is closer to user need? For example:
• closer to final configuration• fewer changes/updates required
• faster preparation and distribution of products (parts lists, manuals, handbooks,etc.).
2
" .o , .-. -.- .-. ,. • . .... . , . . . . . . . .
What are the specific opportunities and what do the Services and DoD agencies
need to do to take full advantage?
Action: Dan McDavid.
Action #3
Identify other areas where "MS-1388-1ike" documents may be required and
-recommend steps to develop. Two steps:
Action #3A
Identify current MIL STDs which generate significant reporting requirements (such
--" as MIL-STD-1388-2A, MIL-STD-965, etc.).
Action: Jim Dalgety.Reports: Appendix B to this volume.
Action #313
Identify requirement to recombine the above and/or create a new MIL STD or MIL
STDs defining data requirements for other disciplines in addition to logistics.
Action: All members (ongoing).
SAction #4
Develop a recommendation and supporting documentation to achieve a universal
numbering system for systems, subsystems and components (ala FINDER).
Action: Col. Hernandez.Reports: Appendix C to this volume.
%ction #5
Using the following statement of intent/capability, develop example datarequirement descriptions:
STATEMENT OF INTENT/CAPABILITYI
In order for agencies of the DoD and their contractors to makemaximum effective use of computer-generated logistics data, DoD shouldspecify the neutral format in which the data are delivered. This information(i.e., which neutral formats) is crucial to contractor decisions on whichform of automation to invest in. Careful selection of standard formats willenhance the ability of the DoD branches, contractors and subcontractors todeal with each other efficiently so as to make maximum use of the data
3
f."
- - Z .- - W
without expensive processing. Therefore, a review of the data deliverableswhich support/document the nine IILS elements to identify those which arecandidates/will be delivered in neutral format, will be accomplished.
Reports: Appendix D to this volume.
.'. Action #6
Another slice/view of the data requirements issue will be obtained by selecting two
M or three of the functions identified in the Architecture Group paper. The functions will be
selected on the basis of heavy interaction between DoD and ccntractors (e.g., supply
support and training). The data requirements for each of those functions will then be
-. described via a think-piece/white paper for the two extremes of data requirements.
Action #6A
A fully structured data requirement system, i.e., where specific data deliverables alaMIL-STD-1388 and other packages are identified and specified much as they are today,
except more clearly.
Action: Terry Granger.
An unstructured (ad hoc) system where a central or integrated distributed data baseis used in free form and each user can design and acquire the data that he needs on a
demand basis. Each of the extremes will be discussed from the point of view of its
attributes, advantages, disadvantages, issues, technology requirements, time frame in
*n system life cycle, etc., as well as its utility vis-a-vis each selected function.
Action: Col. Reynolds (Chair); Dick Gunkel.Reports: Appendix E to this volume.
Action #7
Finally, in order to describe how CALS might work if it met the intent/capability
outlined above, a paper on the B-lB will be developed.
Action: John Willis.Report: Appendix F to this volume.
4-.- 2
(
.'. , ,.'. ".,.. . . . . . . ...." .-,...' .. . . ............................................ '...."...,.....,....,.... . . ..- .- ...... ".. -. ,'- o. ,* S h.o. . 'o o. * .- . . . , -. * 4, h . ,, • € o, - a, ' . ' •' " . ''" ,° '- ,
.. Action3 #8
' In order to develop a weapon system view of CALS: Request that each Service
select a recent weapon system where data packages are being or recently have been
delivered. Then request that the following information/data be provided for three areas: (1)
Supply Support, (2) Training, (3) Technical Data. For each of the areas:oS.
1. Identify the CDRL deliverables.
2. For each deliverable:
- provide a description of the item;
- describe how the contractor developed the item (manual, automated, mix,unique/innovative approach).
- describe how (in what form) it was delivered, i.e., paper, magnetic tape,disk, TNS by phoneline, etc.;
• once in Government hands, describe how any or all of it was/is enteredinto a digital data system;
* using current/evolving technology, describe how we can greatly improvethe data development, delivery to the Government, and use by theGovernment.
All of the above actions were not targeted per se at a "CALS Data Base," but rather
at the identification of actions necessary to allow the DoD to evolve to such identification.
SC. DISCUSSION OF EFFORTS
I. Summary of Information Requirements Action ItemsFrom Contractor's View
* .Inputs from three major defense contractors were received. Each looked at specific
weapon system information requested by the government. One contractor focused on
Navy, one on Air Force and one covered both (see Appendix D). The inputs focused on
the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) and the specific MIL STDs and specifications
that describe/outline/specify the format and content of the required data. The inputs were
presented by functional area, i.e., support equipment, training, provisioning, etc.
The required data items were further reviewed for:
(1) Current degree of automation/digitization within their company.
(2) Their view of readiness of government to accept the data in digital format.
(3) Their view of the need/potential opportunities for digitizing the item.
(4) Potential legal and/or policy changes required to move to digital delivery.
- .
5.
The findings of all three companies were very similar. Although there are
*" differences in the level of automation, all were moving quickly to automation of theprocesses that develop the data elements which in turn comprise the data items delivered to
the government. Few of the company efforts started out being aimed at specific DID; they- quite naturally were aimed at internal, usually functional, organizations trying to speed or
improve their products. The companies generally agreed that they are ready to deliver
much of the data digitally, but the Services are not yet prepared. They also see excellent
opportunities for further productivity and quality improvements across the board. Finally,
they found very little legal or policy impediments but all agreed that the political/NIH, etc.,
issues were strong.
There are three interrelated papers exploring the aspects of the way we currently
handle data and projecting how we should handle data in the future.
The paper on shared data by John Willis (see Appendix F) emphasizes that the
government data requirements are presently forms-driven. This "form" format, so usefulin the paper environment, is far too inflexible in the electronic environment. In order to
take advantage of current computer technologies and get away from information systems
that serve organization-discrete user needs, the Air Force and Rockwell are developing anIntegrated Design Support System (IDS). IDS will be applied to the development of thelogistics data requirements of the B-1B bomber, The IDS program is designed to prove the
utility of non-traditional methods of data base management.
The paper on structured data by Terry Granger (see Appendix E) outlines some ofthe ways the Air Force handles data and some of the Air Force's ongoing automationefforts. The basic conclusion is that the Air Force is retaining the paper-based nature, i.e.,
forms format, in its data requirements. The inherent inflexibility of this format hindersefforts to develop data bases which reduce redundancies and foster information exchange.
The paper on unstructured data by Colonel Reynolds (see Appendix E) looks not atcurrent processes but at the weapon system development in light of data processing
technology as it is exploding in the 1980s. The intuitive conclusion is that moderncomputer-based design and manufacturing systems "halve the cost--with quantum increases
in designed reliability."
6
3. Universal Numbering System
Over the last ten years, both DoD and DoD contractors have invested in informationautomation. These efforts have largely stemmed from functional productivity demands andhave, today, evolved into a series of "functional foxholes" with little ability to cross-feed
- current data among these foxholes. As we look to the future, the interests of the "TotalEnterprise or Weapon System Program" must surface as the driving factor in integrating
these evolutionary efforts. The industrial world is rapidly moving towards central1
*' integrated data bases, data base management systems and on-line distributed access toinformation. There is a fundamental requirement to describe the routes in and out of theseinformation systems. Users, regardless of their corporate or government functionalinterests, must be provided the capability to perform their functional tasks efficiently and
* quickly as the "Enterprise or Weapon System Program" takes control of the informationsystem's architecture. Because previous investment in functional systems will not bescrapped, there is a need to tie routing in and out to a universal numbering system or datadictionary that will allow the functional manager to see what he wants, when he wants it
and to perform his immediate tasks without destroying huge investments in current datafiles, titles and coding.
This universal tie to existing data elements must be done in such a way that the* .working level employee will embrace, use and exploit the enormous benefits inherent in
having functional information accessible, current and relevant to his functional tasking and
responsibilities.
!
4. LSAR Data Interface
a. Purpose
The purpose of the LSAR data interface was to identify and define the data elementinterfaces between MIL-STD-1388-2A and other military standards and their associatedData Item Descriptions (DIDs), and, having identified the data element interfaces, to
analyze data element redundancies and document redundancies and areas of data deliverythat could result in automation opportunities.
(" 'NOTE: Central, in many cases, only as related to control. In fact many are physically decentralized.
7
i .' l ", -, i . . . ... . . . . ... ..+ + -. -' .' *
L
b. Appro~wach
The first step in the effort was to develop an LSAR data interface matrix that£defined the data element interfaces with the data in other military standards. The matrix
(see Appendix A) contains all of the LSAR data elements in MIL-STD-1388-2A, thesources for the data, whether or not the data element is the same, similar or genericallysimilar to data in one or more of 21 MIL-STDs reviewed, and whether or not the data
- element was delivered in one or more of 47 DIDs. The categories of similar and generically
similar data elements involved a degree of mathematical calculation or interpretation that isrequired to arrive at the data element. For example, the difference between failure factor
and maintenance replacement rate is a constant multiplier/divider of 100, while thedifference between failure rate and failure factor involves a more detailed mathematicalequation which also includes subjective factors for environment, pilferage, learning curve,
etc.
With the matrix completed it became evident that there were eight functional areas ofinterface with the LSAR data. These were defined as:
(1) supply support
(2) support equipment
5 (3) technical data
(4) transportability(5) packaging
(6) reliability
(7) maintainability
(8) manpower and training.
A more detailed analysis of the LSAR data interface within these areas was conducted with--a view toward identifying the degree of redundancy and therefore possible elimination of
documents and, secondly, automation opportunities. The details of this effort are containedin the appendices to this document. Finally, the automation opportunities were prioritized
in terms of short term and long term (i.e., near term) efforts that could be accomplished.
c. Analysis Results
While duplication/redundancy was found in all functional areas, the largest areas ofduplication were in reliability (i.e., MIL-STD-1629A), maintainability (i.e., MIL-STD-
r 470) and support equipment (i.e., MIL-STD-2097) with respect to MIL-STD-1388-2A.The resulting recommendations were as follows:
8
. . .
a. Eliminate MIL-STD-1629A by incorporating the analysis requirements intoMIL-STD-78S.
b. Eliminate the maintainability analysis requirements from MIL-STD-1629Aas it is covered by MIL-STD-470.
c. Eliminate MIL-STD-2097 and incorporate its analysis requirements intoMIL-STD-1388-1A.
Automation opportunities centered around the need to establish/enhance functionally
oriented "data bases" that would contain all weapon system data and serve as baselineinformation. These data would be used by the LSA activities along with engineering data
(i.e., CAD/CAD/CAM) to provide automated logistics outputs either as data delivered or
data accessed.
5. Military Standards Relationships
a. Purpose
The purpose of this task was to identify current military standards which generatesignificant data reporting requirements over and above the LSAR data interfacerelationships already addressed (see Appendix B).
b_*
The DoDISS was manually reviewed by standardization areas to identify MIL-
STDs with broad applicability. This resulted in the identification of 76 standards whichwere then grouped into 17 functional areas, defined as follows:
a. Nondestructive test
b. Test
c. Environmental test
d. Electromagnetic test
e. Quality control
f. Automated test
g. Certificationh. Configuration management
i. WBS
j. Finance
k. Drawings/bills of material
I. Standards
m. Maintainability
9
k-. -. - . . .. . .-.. . . . . .... .. . ... ... .. . . .
- -'--- .:- -
n. Reliability
o. Safety
p. Marking
q. Packaging.
Each area can be directly or indirectly related by the data requirements which each standard
generates.
j.S.
c. Analysis Results
Analysis of the data relationships among the 76 MIL-STDs is an area that still needs
to be addressed and is beyond the scope of the group. Such an analysis should include
identification of "key" elements that are common to all STDs. Such an effort could lead to
development of a substance-oriented data element dictionary that could be embodied in a
new version of MIL-STD-1388-2A.
.-
D. FINDINGS/CONCLUSIONS
1. Contractor's Perspectives
1. Although there are differences in the degree of automation currentlyachieved within industry, most Primes are moving rapidly towardautomating processes to deliver data to the government.
2. Industry assessments claim a current capability to deliver some digital datawhich the Military Services are not prepared to accept.
3. Automation of information handling will provide for across-the-board*1 productivity and quality improvements.
4. Legal and policy issues are minimal and are not considered an impediment.
2. Data Structure1. Even though transition to digitized data bases is occurring, the prevailing
mentality of information management remains in the paper medium.2. Information systems need to be data-driven rather than organization- or
application-driven.3. Logistics data can be expected to transition from information (the "what") to
acknowledge (the "how") in recognition of the capability of capture to anembedded knowledge base in the design and manufacture of a weaponssystem.
10
p.. ... -'.. ^.-f'- -. .. . . . .. . . . . .. .' .' b4.. S,.': -... , , .. . . '.. ¢,, - . -. - .". . -"{ -' .'.'." ., ., . " -- i i.,' Id :.* .... . .".' ' . ."" " . .. " % '.% % " *"." * "S' "
3. Universal Numbering System
1. Recent efforts in information automation have been driven by functionaldemands that have evolved into a series of "functional foxholes" with littlecross-feed capability.
2. User needs at all levels require rapid and effective routes into and out of datastored in the various data bases.
3. Because of the investment, existing functional systems will not be scrapped;there is a need for a universal numbering system or data dictionary to bridgethe "foxholes."
4. Any universal system developed must preserve the integrity of existing dataand must be user-friendly as defined by the functional user.
4. LSAR Data Interface
1. While duplication/redundancy exists in all functional areas, the mostsignificant areas of duplication occur among areas of reliability (MIL-STD-1529A), maintainability (MIL-ST-470) and support equipment (MIL-STD-2097) with respect to LSAR data requirements (MIL-STD-1388-2A).
2. Automation opportunities center around functionally oriented data bases thatwould contain weapon system data and serve as baseline data.
5. Military Standards Relationships
1. Analysis of data relationships among the 76 MIL-STDs which generatesignificant data reporting requirements is an area that needs to be addressed.Such a study is beyond the scope of the current effort.
* E. RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations of the Information Requirements Subgroup are focused intwo areas: the elimination of duplicate data requirements and their attendant military
specifications; and the establishment of Standard Informational needs by the Department ofDefense. To accomplish these end results, both short and long term actions are required.It must be stressed that these actions are not sequential actions, but parallel actions which
require coordination to assure a viable product.
I. Short Term Actions
1. Identify the interface between the LSAR and potential standard neutralformats (e.g., IGES, GKS, and GENCODE). The action should be basedupon IGIS 2.1 released in December 1984. Initial evaluation should becompleted by July 1985 (Army lead).
"" 11
- € N. ,,,-. , l,-"€ L m-,--dm ~ -. n. ., n .'u d . * ~ , .% ... .-v
2. Representatives of the logistic community should participate in thedesign/evolution of the neutral formats to assure that logistic informationalneeds are satisfied. This will be an ongoing task that should be initiatedimmediately (OSD lead).
, 3. Eliminate current data duplication between the LSAR and those MIL-STDscurrently referenced by MIL-STD-1368-2AA [e.g., MIL-STD-1629(FMECA) and MIL-STD 2073, preservation and packaging]. This includesthe exploitation of automation opportunities to streamline the data deliveryprocess. In addition, this action will require the elimination andconsolidation of current military standards. This should not be construed asa thrust to reorganize functions within the DoD, but rather to provide asingle recognized vehicle to present needed information. This overall effortwill require up to four years to complete. Appendix F contains the actualactions required, their priority, and proposed completion times (OSD lead).
2. Long Term Actions
1. Expand the short term action of 1(3) above to encompass those MIL-STDsassociated with the referenced standards. This will utilize the MIL-STDrelationship identified in Appendix B. Whereas action 1(3) will minimize
I' the addition of data elements to the LSAR, this action could result insignificant changes to the LSAR data system (OSD lead).
2. Establish the Standard Information needs of the Department of Defense.This includes establishment of: (a) a universal numbering (or equivalent)system to maintain an audit trail of information as it relates to itself and thehardware; (b) a DoD data element dictionary (or standard of specification)which identifies data nomenclature, definitions, field length/type, andidentifier.
12
Appendix A
LSAR DATA INTERFACE
A-i
7M---7 -
CONTENTS
Briefing on LSAR Data Interface....................................................A-3
LSAR Data Interface Analysis .................................................... A-10
-Automated ISAR Data Sheets .................................................... A-29
A-2
a--
a-j
UOU
I-.
CD,
-3
LaJJ
zu W i2m-
3c- < D Laj
le -m I.-
-j 0 - CD- % 0 0
W O Lj- 0(A0 uj = U;LiI
C O ' - - II- - -
X - -n 39 Co-n w
=J -JO fW WU U. 1
LII~U U -*.
C.. w C Q: I-CDLI
L1i -% 0i LU -i ClJ
LL 0D 2! CD - ~0 CoLU - ~ ~~LU - 1- -
I-- - . C/ 04:x~ C..) LUJ LU I-- L
LLJ ~~ ~ ~ ~ Ciw Li Uu ) L
d = L- J *
0 = >- 1-L-Co I
-) CD CD -i < < -j LU c
CC L=. w C/O <~ ..L
/.) Zr _j o Co - '
0 LL.) LU00 - .-
O J Co) L.) Co C) a) Li. (n-9-~~dl LUL- I 9 .
Co ME2 U- u- w (4)-*. - LU a. U. ') C O C
LaJ 9- 0 *02o2 LO. W.. Ii) LLJ C Lai)
oD LW. 00 = C
2
00
A-4
LLU
C)o
C/)tr- NN P- C/)
a- WN LUJ w co
00 Ne -t%. ~ 0 LLJ= I-c
0...4 co. ~ ~ - L 0- U0. C/ - -i
0o(0 C)
0 -
0~~ I u 4
U- 0 (. -c~
4z L I I 0A
000 0 dc-(
.4C I I C
0- 0 0.. a--4 0 -
(A Ow W
B- ~ 0. (4 A-5
Oct.
U.J
--
u (j
U Li &w
cc (Z C.C6LLU
w zl- i CL.
4z CL
(-3 LL LL. Wj
-% A-6
V-I
L&a
C-,i
LaL
L
Laj
LF. -n 04 I*I Ln CNi
LL.a 00 00
La -
LLa
LL 00
LaI. I ~ N.N
IA-
- C.41
LkJ
LLLJ
LLiJ
w L.I >
LiL L&J L
w I-CDLL .J >
1= LIJ w 0 >q ~ L 2 LL& J C )
L& 1 9: 0C -J ui
4r C.) I-
U- -w
0 V W >
LU w- 4c W-
C4 . -4 Cu I ) -
C - I > 0 4 I-LL I- U 1-. I-4 ~ L
- = I ui >-=LUu. -1 13. -
I- -- - LU
Z ~ I-~ ~ .J U.
- ~ a -u
- -0 /) A-8
>. Co
C,, qJ 0
N. LJ CD
L&J 1 - LL *C
CL I u~r LuJ
S Li.) 1= c-c
wL 2! 0 Lii
~ I-L) 0 )La. = J
U.. dc La.) U.WL LL- 0CD
LI. LL. (D oeC> C ) qc * 1.
- 4x q 2-~LL - 10I- N
LLJCd LLa.) I>. (A Li% La)L 0
C/) uiCC Ii ~-r U.J w I cNdc,)
~~0 Wcr.)~- Id
I. ~ ~ L&J (A
'= 0 X J2 C
CA. 4c w=
(D 2C 4c -
CD.
Ic
A-9
APPENDIX A
2. LSAR DATA INTERFACE ANALYSIS
PRIORITIZATION OF AUTOMATION OPPORTUNITIES
AREA PHASING PRIORITY PAGE
Supply Support S 1 A-10
Support Equipment S 2 A-13Recommendation Data
Technical Data (Process S 3 A-15
Automation)
Transportability S 4 A-17
Packaging Requirements S 5 A-18
Reliability L 1 A-20
Technical Data (Product L 2
Automation)
Maintainability L 3 A-23
Manpower & Training L 4 A-26
S - Short Term effort (1 year or less)
S. L - Long Term effort (1-4 years)
A--
.*...
LSAR INTERFACE AREA
SUBJECT: Supply Support
1. Interfacing Documents: MIL-STD-965, Parts Control ProgramMIL-STD-789C, Procurement Method
Coding of Replenishment Spare Parts
MIL-STD-1561B, ProvisioningProcedures, Uniform Department
of Defense
2. Interfacing DID's: DI-E-7027, Program Parts Selection List
DI-P-7128 Contractor TechnicalInformation
Coding of Replenishment Spare Parts.
DI-V-7002, Provisioning Parts List
DI-V-7003, Short Form Provisioning Parts List
DI-V-7004, Long Lead Time Items List
U DI-V-7005, Repairable Items List
DI-V-7006, Interim Support Items List
DI-V-7007, Design Change Notices
DI-V-7011, Post Conference List
* DI-V-7016, Provisioning and Other Procurement Screening
DI-V-7192, Provisioning Parts List Index
DI-V-7193, System Configuration Provisioning List
3. Analysis of Interface:
a. MIL-STD-965 identifies the requirement to develop a two
part list of general and limited application spares and repair
parts subdivided into categories of mechanical and electrical
items for review by the items proponent agency for parts control
and standardization. MIL-STD-789C defines the requirement to
develop and document contractor technical information regarding
selected parts for contractor furnished equipment in order to
A-11
expand competitive reprocurement possibilities for these items.
MIL-STD-1561B prescribes nine provisioning lists comprised of
specific categories of spare/repair parts. Eight of the nine
lists are deliverable in an identical format. In addition,
MIL-STD-1561B requires the contractor to perform provisioning
screening of support items through the Defense Logistics Services
Center (DLSC), as part of the support items standardization
OL effort. The various lists are used by the requiring authority to
accomplish provisioning. These requirements are applied
selectively on DoD procurement contracts, RFP's, RFQ's, IFB's
SOW's and Government in-house efforts for the development,
production and initial deployment of systems and equipments.
b. The resultant data required by these standards are also
contained in MIL-STD-1388-2A (LSAR data records H and Hi). In
addition, the Joint Service LSAR ADP system provides an
automation system for the support item data, the LSAR Parts
*Master File.
c. The paragraph 2 DID's call for the delivery of hardcopy
worksheets, listings or magnetic tape for categories of support
items. The DI-V-7000 series DID's are satisfied by using the
*data contained in the LSAR data base. The resultant outcome of
DI-E-7027 and DI-P-7128, e.g., PPSL and CTIC, AMC, AMSC, and the
basic part identifying information are also contained in the
"• LSAR.
" 4. Automation Opportunities
a. The Joint Service LSAR ADP system already provides the
capability to automate the provisioning lists. The DID's refer
specifically to the LSA-032/036/151 reports for data delivery or
reference number prescreening requirements.I
b. Automation of DLSC Screening results impacting the LSAR
can be accomplished as a means of providing the feedback loop to
the screening requirement.
c. Automation of the parts control program worksheet and
contractor technical information record could be accomplished
A-12
r" " " ".'", - . "." " - " -" - '.'" -'' -'' -'-"' " " ' ' - ' " ' "- , "- " . , " - - i-,,
with modifications to the LSAR. A skeletal or basic
worksheet/record can be developed based on the present contents of
the LSAR.
5. Document Redundancy: None.
.oA1
.r
r
Sa * *.** * 5. . .
LSAR INTERFACE AREA
SUBJECT: Support Equipment Recommendation Data (SERD)
1. Interfacing Documents: MIL-STD-2097 (proposed),
Requirements for Acquisition of End Items of Support Equipment
PM and Associated Integrated Logistics Support.
2. Interfacing DID: DI-S-3596A Support Equipment
Recommendation Data.
3. Interface Analysis/Description:
a. MIL-STD-2097 prescribes the procedure, terms, and
conditions governing the identification, selection, design,
approval, ordering, delivery, and logistic support of end items
of support equipment to support aeronautical systems and
equipment. Among the acquisition and logistic requirements
incorporated in this publication are greater emphasis on: (1)
time concepts related to the process, (2) management cost and
funding reports, (3) support equipment standardization, (4)
support equipment design changes and configuration control, (5)
critical item criteria, and (6) integrated logistic support. The
USERD required by this standard provides key narrative and
quantitative data used to propose and validate support equipment
needs. The total SERD is intended to support overall systems
management action regarding support equipment development,
acquisition, and optimum standardization within and among
systems.
b. MIL-STD-1388-2A Data Records B, E, and H contain the
same data elements that would result from requirements of MIL-
STD-2097. The Data Record B is used to capture the Mean Time
Between Failure (MTBF) and Inherent Availability. Data Record E
provides key narrative and quantitative data to validate support
equipment recommendations. Data Record H will capture all
provisioning related information.
A-14
I,
c. Data Item DI-S-3596A requires delivery of a Support
Equipment Recommendation Data document. The current Data Record
E is not automated, therefore, an automated SERD cannot be
produced from the LSAR. The data contained on Data Records B, E,
and H can be used to produce a manual document to satisfy the DID
requirements.
4. Automation Opportunities. The Joint Service LSAR ADP System
will, in the future, provide the capability to automate the
Support Equipment Recommendations Data. This automation will
significantly reduce the effort required to generate the SERD
document.
5. Document Redundancy. Data Item DI-S-3596A should be
modified to reference use of the LSAR data items to generate a
SERD document. MIL-STD-1388-2A contains all the data
requirements of MIL-STD-2097. The analysis requirements of MIL-
i STD-2097 can be included in MIL-STD-1388-2A, thereby eliminating
MIL-STD-2097.
A-15
p.... .- ... .. .. "-.. .'° .-.- ..-.- .. . .-.--.. ...-.... ... ........ .... ,....... ..... , -.....
.-.
L
LSAR INTERFACE AREA
U SUBJECT: Technical Data, Technical Manual/Technical Bulletin
Development
1. Interfacing Documents: MIL-STD-335, Repair Parts/
Special Tool List
MIL-M-63038B, Manuals, Technical
MIL-M-63036, Manuals, Operator
2. Interfacing DID's: DI-M-6152A, Manuals, Operation and Main-tenance Instruction, Maintenance
Training
DI-M-1517 Technical Manuals
I DI-M-3407C, Technical Orders
3. Interface Analysis/Description:
a. The interfacing documents establish format and content
m for technical manuals to include the individual lists and charts
contained therein.
b. MIL-STD-1388-2A, Data Records C, D, D1, H and Hi
contain the same data elements as those required by the
* interfacing documents in order to produce the necessary lists.
Specifically, the LSAR C, D1 and H records are used to satisfy
the MAC/TOOL List requirement. The D record captures the step-
by-step maintenance procedures to support the narrative
development effort. The H and HI provides the information to
satisfy the Repair parts/Special Tool List (RPSTL), Component of
End Items List (COEIL), Additional Authorization List (AAL),
Basic Issue Items List (BIIL) and Expendable Supplies andV°
Materials List (ESML). Information not contained in the DoD LSAR
includes table of content information, illustrations, and MAC
remarks information.
A-16
r
r - . % % o , - , . % . . . . - , . .•., , , . . • , . . . . . . . . . - . .
c. Seven DID's associated with the -2A LSAR reports were
established to satisfy the data requirements necessary to support
Pthe TM development effort.
LSA-004/020 MAC/TOOL List DI-L-7189
LSA-015 Task Narrative Master File DI-L-7159
LSA-030 Repair Parts/Special Tools List DI-L-7188
- LSA-040 Components of End Item List DI-L-7170
LSA-041 Basic Issue Items List DI-L-7171
LSA-042 Additional Authorization List DI-L-7172
LSA-043 Expendable Supplies and DI-L-7173
Material List
4. Automation Opportunities. The Joint Service LSAR already
provides the capability to automate the data required to producethe individual lists required as part of a Technical manual. In
addition, the maintenance procedures narrative is automated.
These products are currently provided to the Government as
hardcopy. Automation of the information would reduce the time
involved in the reformatting of the narrative LSAR data to a TM
format. Short term automation opportunities would be directed at
automation of the TM/TO development process from LSAR resulting
in hardcopy products. Long term automation opportunities would
[] involve automation of the TM/TO product itself as it is used by
the soldier in the field.
5. Document Redundancy. As the military standard and
specifications cited already cite the LSAR as providing source
data, there is little or no duplication between the documents in
-2A.
A-17
Ie
F-
LSAR INTERFACE AREA
SUBJECT: Transportability
1. Interfacing Documents: Non-identified.
2. Interfacing DID's: Non-identified.
3. Interfacing Analysis/Description: MIL-STD-1388-2A data can
be used to satisfy all Transportability Engineering
characteristics identified by the Military Traffic Management
Command (MTMC) for the establishment of transportability
requirements.r
4. Automation Opportunities: The LSAR Data Record J is
currently not automated, however, the LSAR ADP system does
provide the capability to automate the transportability
* information identified on the Data Record.
5. Document Redundancy: Non-identified.
A
I
S.°
A-18
[ **** ' t* * ~ . . .- t-Oo
LSAR INTERFACE AREA
SUBJECT: Packaging Requirements
1. Interfacing Documents: MIL-STD-2073-lA, Procedures for
Development and Application of Packaging Data. MIL-STD-2073-2A,
Packaging Requirements Code.
2. Interfacing DID's: None.
3. Analysis of Interface:
a. MIL-STD-2073-1A identifies the procedures for
development of packaging requirements for DoD materiel based on
physical/chemical characteristics, fragility, dimensions and
weight. It also provides the format to be used for the
preparation of packaging data. The packaging data element codes
and explanations are contained in MIL-STD-2073-2A.
b. Packaging data are documented on the LSAR data record H
I of MIL-STD-1388-2A. All packaging data elements identified by
MIL-STD-2073-1A/-2A are also contained in MIL-STD-1388-2A. In
addition, the Joint Service LSAR ADP system provides an
automation system for packaging data.
c. Two DID's were developed for delivery of packaging data
using MIL-STD-1388-2A. DI-L-7166, LSA-025, Packaging
Requirements Data Report, is in the identical format specified by
MIL-STD-2073-1A; DI-L-7167, LSA-026, Packaging Developmental Data
Report, provides the essential data to develop packaging
requirements data in-house.
r 4. Automation Opportunities. The Joint Service LSAR ADP system
already provides the capability to automate packaging
requirements and to deliver this data using the LSA-025 or LSA-
026 reports. Further automation may be obtained by delivery of
the LSA-025 in a magnetic tape or punched card medium.
A-19
................ . . . . .
5. Document Redundancy. None.
A-20
LSAR INTERFACE AREA
Subject: Reliability - Failure Modes, Effect and Criticality
Analysis (FMECA) Reliability Predictions
1. Interfacing Documents: MIL-STD-785B, Reliability Program
for Systems and Equipment Develop-
ment and Production
MIL-STD-1629A, Procedures for
Performing a FMECA
MIL-HDBK-217, Reliability Pre-
diction of Electronic Equipment
2. Interfacing DID's: DI-R-7085, FMECA Report
DI-R-7082, Reliability Prediction Report
3. Interface Analysis/Description:
a. MIL-STD-785B identifies the requirement for
a accomplishing a FMECA and reliability predictions selectively on
DoD contract definitized procurements, RFP's, SOW's, and
government in-house developments requiring reliability programs
for the development, production and initial deployment of systems
and equipment. Task 203, reliability predictions, is imposed toU
estimate the basic system reliability of the end item and to make
a determination of whether these reliability requirements can be
achieved with the proposed design. To accomplish this task
component (item) failure rates must be obtained using the
procedures contained in MIL-HDBK-217 or a procuring activity
approved procedure/data source. Task 04 of MIL-STD-785B
establishes the requirement for conduct of a FMECA in accordance
with MIL-STD-1629A. In turn, MIL-STD-1629A identifies four tasks
as follows:
A-21
• '.- .. ..........' ' ' ' ' ' ',... . . .-. ..,. .........-.......- '............ -'
(1) Task 101, Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
(2) Task 102, Criticality Analysis
(3) Task 103, FMECA Maintainability Analysis
(4) Task 104, Damage Mode and Effects Analysis.
b. The FMECA tasks result in the generation of data (both
narrative and numerical) that are documented on the LSAR data
records BI and B2 of MIL-STD-1388-2A. In addition, the Joint
Service LSAR ADP system provides an automation system for the
FMECA data (i.e., a FMECA data base). Contained on data record
B2 is the data element failure rate which is a necessary data
element for estimating the basic and system reliability of the
end item. Item reliability values to include end items are
documented on the B record. For the electronic components
failure rates would be developed using MIL-HDBK-217.
c. The paragraph 2 DID's calls for delivery of hardcopy
FMECA worksheets and for a hardcopy Reliability Prediction
Report. Each of these DID's could be satisfied by using the data
contained in the LSAR data base.
4. Automation Opportunities.
a. The Joint Service LSAR ADP system already provides the
capability to automate the FMECA results. As such, DI-R-7085
should be modified to allow delivery of the FMECA data in an
automated mode. Such an option would allow defense contractors
to develop the FMECA data using in-house automation techniques
(i.e., internal failure history files), thereby eliminating the
"stubby pencil" requirement currently imposed.
b. Automatioin of the FMECA data in the LSAR to include
failure rates would provide an automated file from which end item
basic and mission reliability predictions could be made. This
would not eliminate DI-R-7082. However, the analysis effort
could be translated into an automated reliability prediction
technique used by all defense contractors.
A-22
1.
: : . :.- .. :,:..: ...... :-..-. . .-- ....:. .,..--.:.... :...- .....-.. , ..- o-,...... ...-...... , .... ..-. ,.. .. :... .. ..... ...
r .7
c To aid defense contractors in the establishment of
component failure rates, automation of the MIL-HDBK-217 failure
.' rate data and procedures would provide a file that could be
interfaced with the LSAR data file for automatic posting of
- failure rate information. Once again, this would reduce the
analysis effort required (i.e., automation versus manual).
5. Document Redundancy. MIL-STD-1388-2A contains all the data
requirements of MIL-STD-1629A. The analysis requirements of
_ MIL-STD-1629A can be included in MIL-STD-785B, thereby
eliminating MIL-STD-1629A.
A-23
'°.
-.-. -. .
LSAR INTERFACE AREA
SUBJECT: Maintainability--Maintainability Predictions,
Maintainability Analysis
1. Interfacing Documents: MIL-STD-470A, Maintainability
Program for Systems Equipment:
MIL-HDBK-472, Maintainability Prediction
MIL-STD-1629A, FMECA
2. Interfacing DIDs: DI-R-7108, Maintainability Predictions
Report
DI-R-7109, Maintainability Analysis
Report
3. Interface Analysis/Description:
a. Task 203, Maintainability Predictions, and Task 205,
Maintainability Analysis contained in MIL-STD-470A, are both
oriented toward establishing maintainability parameters (i.e.,
mean-time-to-repair, maintenance man-hours, levels of repair,
fault detection probabilities, etc.) from the hardware design
that can then be used to determine whether or not the system
maintainability requirements have been met. Task 203 requires
the use of MIL-HDBK-472 and the prediction techniques contained
in this handbook unless a suitable substitute is approved. At
the heart of both tasks are the determination of system,
subsystem, assembly and subassembly maintainability parameters
for each level of maintenance and, when applicable, alternate
maintenance concepts. MIL-HDBK-472 contains four different
* procedures for accomplishing Task 203 which reuslts in the
prediction of corrective and preventive maintenance down-times
and man-hours. At the core of these procedures are the use of
task elements (i.e., malfunction verification, fault location,
part procurement, repair and malfunction test) that are used for
apportionment of time. Also interfacing with these tasks is the
A-24
.. , ~ ~ . ..- ....... .... ....... .. .. ,. .. ..... '...,.., ,'..,....,...'. % :.,-
MIL-STD-1629A Task 103, FMECA-Maintainability information which
specifies the requirement to identify failure detection means and
basic maintenance actions required to correct a fault.
b. MIL-STD-1388-2A Data Record B2 contains the same data
elements as Task 103 of MIL-STD-1629A. Data Records C, D, and D1
contain the same data elements that would result from Tasks 203
and 205 of MIL-STD-470A. In particular, Data Record D is used to
capture the narrative operator and maintenance instructions and
the predicted times (both elapsed and man-hours) to accomplish
each step of a task. From a maintainability prediction
standpoint, the narrative can be as simple as the task elements
identified in MIL-HDBK-472 and from a maintainability/maintenance
analysis standpoint, the narrative would be detailed enough to
support publication development. The amount of detail would be
rdirectly relatable to the maturity of the design effort.
c. Data Items DI-R-7108 and DI-R-7109 require delivery of a
maintainability prediction report and maintainability analysis
report, respectively. Neither data item addresses a specific
3 format nor do they specify the exact data to be delivered. As
such, a number of LSAR reports defined in MIL-STD-1388-2A
developed from the data elements on Data Records B2, C, D, and D1
could be used to satisfy these report requirements. Candidate
* LSAR Reports include:
LSA-003, Maintainability Summary (DI-L-7148)
LSA-015, Sequential Task Description (DI-L-7159)
LSA-053, Maintainability Summary - Level of Repair(DI-L-7177)
LSA-055, Failure Mode Detection Summary (DI-L-7179)
LSA-060, LSA Control Number Master File (i.e., DataRecords B2, C, D, and D1)
4. Automation Opportunities.
The Joint Service LSAR ADP System already provides the
capability to automate the maintainability prediction and
ranalysis results as well as the FMECA-maintainabilityinformation. To aid in the analysis process, automation
A-25
.......
of the MIL-HDBK-472 task elements and perhaps the procedures
themselves could significantly reduce the effort required to
generate the maintainability predication/analysis data.
5. Document Redundancy. MIL-STD-1629A and MIL-STD-470A contain
similar task requirements for maintainability information.
Elimination of Task 103 in MIL-STD-1629A would prevent
duplication of analysis efforts with MIL-STD-470A. In addition,
data items DI-R-7108 and 7109 should either be modified t..
reference use of the LSAR reports or deleted in their entirety in
favor of the LSAR report data items.
A
n
°
.
A-2
LSAR INTERFACE AREA
p SUBJECT: Manpower, Personnel and Training
1. Interfacing Documents: MIL-T-81821, Trainers, MaintenanceEquipment and Services GeneralSpecifications for.
2. Interfacing DID's: DI-H-7057 Human Engineering DesignApproach Document Maintainer
DI-H-7068 Task and Skill Analysis
Report
DI-H-7090 Training Path System
Documentation
DI-H-7091 Personnel PerformanceProfiles
DI-H-3258 Training Support Data
DI-H-6135A Reports Facilities -
Maintenance Training Equipment
DI-H-1300 Personnel and Training
Requirements
DI-H-7067 Training Course Proposal
DI-H-7069 Training Course CurriculumOutline
3. Interfacing Analysis/Description: MIL-STD-1388-2A data can
be used to satisfy four of the interfacing DID's completely and
provides the majority of data required for the remaining five
DID's. The shortfall betwen the MP&T community and the LSA
process resides in the level of narrative detail required. The
LSAR can accommodate the bulk of the detail required, however,
the LSA requirements generally lack adequate MP&T considerations
due to a lack of defined contractual interfaces.
.-
A- 27
- . * ','-" ". "• " '." " ., '.. " - "-" -- P ' - *. • -, . '. . '. ' , ".*.% .. *" -.
t.-
4. Areas for Automation. All of the interfacing DID's in
- paragraph 2 require delivery in a hardcopy format. LSAR Data
Records E, El, F and G are not presently the FY85 timeframe will
provide significant automation opportunities in the MP&T area.
Specifically, QQPRI information could be completely automated
from the LSAR data base resulting in automated rather than
hardcopy delivery. Automation of the basic MP&T data needed to
conduct the analysis would greatly aid the contractor's effort.
The MP&T data to be automated as a consolidated data base would
include a narrative description of all skill's, duties, their
training curriculum, and detailed man-hour data for each of the
systems the skills are required to maintain. Such a
consolidation data base would be provided to the defense
contractor as a baseline for the LSA effort of the new system.
The resulting LSAR data from the new system would then provide an
automated update to the consolidated data base. The last area of
automation is in the delivery of the facilities and maintenance
training equipment report which can be developed from the LSAR
data base. Modification of DI-H-6135A to allow for delivery of
this data in an automated mode would be required.
a5. Document Redundancy. The MIL-STD-1388-2A does not duplicate
the requirements as set forth in the DID's or MIl-T-81821.
A-28
V- -"
itHR
A&. VO 4xx X xk x x x k x x X x x x x
At
Nvv -'.4
E j El
A %
A-2
F:
elf oIttA
i ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sx x xxxxx _ xxxm-af '- .4 -
E - I
~x
,m, a- -.
mhih
MY 'AM W
I tell
I,0
"" A-30
be *#W.F
'",2.,:: -c,,c,¢%; .ik :,h'.h - - '.-... .--".,-.;,,[- .-'. -.-.-. :.-'.hve.-E-e-e-e.e.,.. .--A..-'JI:
x c
x
x x x x <-x *xx xx x x
xI
I'IA-~ A=d x x = 1 x x X
xv5-
4
44 a
~v Ei'a
A- 31
xh44~~ ~~~ x__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
xx xXaa~~~ ~~~ ___________________4x________x__R______________________
x__ HH x x H~xx xx xx x X X X 5c
SJ vL'-I H
n H HH
HH H H
~~rt7 ~ X ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ _____
- H H H HH HH HH HH HH H
-EI -L" w"a x x X
-a- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.0 -~. A" H HXX X xlx x x x x x X X XX
HHv 'Hl
HHH HH C;H HH H
VJ'jan fell H ;
ate. ___ H
V _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
NV~d AM
1 A- 4 4A
NA-3
.. . . . . . ..*. . . . . . .- . . . . . . - - . - - - - - . , -.
..
-4 1
tira. .m . 19 .5..<
315AflS v*
i>S - 3T __
m iilIIIIIIIiih5
-I,. *Sfl
R ..
: r"€":':"'''" "'t : ,-"€ -. , :,'"." ,' - 2 " ,-. . " " -"': ''" " """"""" " , '-"""-'.._ ' :"""""' """''""-' -,-.. .. .i"' """"".S . -r::"" ""'-"."V'-G....:
A"I4-.001 -Ill
Ioa =-IOI
'S4
01IE 1 _______________________________________
f , le
, lt-11
lnUS4a,
'Ic
A-3
off oft___I'-/
P _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
X
-~x x x~o x
my ' ftV
Id;14
I
**w~
M O 5.~
lo l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I144 fl1. 1 l fis.i tI M11
as ~A-35
- - L~~~Je& .. . -- - - - - --m
A -AWFW
S) U
f--
VM 0f
A-3
- ~2 V ) co to) C) l) Vl)
r.~f/ xr~ I. U
69x
a CJU~ x
p - x
Iwo
I - I 1v .I I I II
-4 :
A- 37
Ava
I ____________________________________________
t ®r
19 a,
INI
us
Z Lw
A- 38
.4S. ~ "A
FrU~ (fl ~ (I
-l ___________________________________
tAjxxx __ __ _ __ __ _ __ _
on 7-4 xx www
r;flz
5"'x
saw& AMIV
4N
WmpsW
w AMV
AM"f AV*
N -iiW
U~ 8 1;
14i
h! It =I -~ 1 11
I~~ ~ I-iPIIP1 'lfi iii 12 11:11 .1-*1.1.1111
A- 39
U-M
II btiJ 00 Y_ F
IZ
Smm
II W
wcog s
1',
A-40
ItI
cov(00 0- xxx xxx o E
La ) ) ) X V c
V) x x x In
Sw 0:!
r/ x U:.XK
III tvs
1#10;i
"vol w
--- Soil
A-4 A
A-4
-1 0A. I.
I a400 d
1.4l ai-Hi--.; i i
'a -~ ~ KMA-42
C, (5V~rw
V) U
a 04
-4 to - -)
to X )X>Ixx x x x x
II
A-
* .. . . . . . . . . % % . % * '.. .Pt~ % ,q ..
-d--. . -
r"- -I
,..~~~~~ x boCxx€I
V• LQ <€ xxc<xx - x
7114
a,,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-A
.c -/q -x -c)~ ,&
t n mn In,
11*1 coc i l21A -.
ois
A -44C')U)> < ...... C'Co<
' ~N /V S7",L, 1
,7A H a
- T l7
g ___.___Id ' a~n _____________________________-__________________
::':":" ,,~~~~~- fl, wa "-psoa-ss 1---. : ~t~ l l , " .i -".--:l
IIII
["a
.°°
A-4
.
*Y . -.
;Y,/ y
44 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _x
fl
Tqxxxxxx
px X< x>
wwrl/vi
Fu.AW- t I
It.
II xp 'Afw
AC4
H*il Fi~llm
*~ ~~~~~ -r'xx xx xx xx X-~----r--r xxxxxxxx--
x
-e-
A -
It'
A-4
it V1I XF xW X rr .. r - , r .-- --
Mc 1q747
4x'
lia m
AW0
c C, 'C,.-C,
A. _ _ _-_C
. C. r c & 0. C ' 0 C) Cr
. . .. .. C C. . -~ C C .O 0 C C.. N 2
A-4
Appendix B
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS UNDER CURRENT MIL STDS
*. - * . -. ° -. . . * . . -fi
L
TASK: Identify current MIL-STDs which generate significant
reporting requirements (such as MIL-STD 1388-2A, MIL-STD 965,
etc.)
LIMITATIONS: There is no centeralized recordkeeping of
either data requirements imposed contractually or the application
of MIL-STD on contracts. As a result, there is no mechanism to
differentiate the "popular" from the seldom used, other than to
review the subject matter and/or limited coordination status.
Time constraints prevented review of the scope and breadth of
each MIL-STD, and thus the analysis has been, by and large, an
uncritical acceptance of coordinated documents as relevant and
significant in this analysis. In similar fashion, there is no
recordkeeping of the use of Data Item Descriptions contractually,
I have arbitrarily discounted UDI-data items as being developed
and applied in limited circumstances, and not of broad or general
application. They can, of course, be used (provided they are
listed in the AMSDL) by anyone, just as anyone can impose a
limited coordniated MIL-STD.
It is also impossible to establish the amount or burden of
* recordkeeping imposed by a MIL-STD by counting the number of DIDs
referenced against the standard.p
ANALYSIS: The DoDISS was manually reviewed in the
Standardization Areas, which are procedurally-oriented, not
hardware-oriented, for fully-coordinated MIL-STDs that appeared
to have broad application in a cursory review of their title.
Having identified the standards, an attempt was made to group the
standards into logically related areas. The Standardization Area
assignments served as a starting point for this grouping, but as
can be seen, considerable liberty was taken in regrouping and
rationalizing associations. As an example, MIL-STD-789 and MIL-
STD-885 were grouped with Drawing Practices documents based on
r[ similarity of data requirements. This logical grouping needs
further work, perhaps on a "committee" basis to tap the xpertise
and faciliarities of a wide variety of functional areas.
B-2
..............................
RECOMMENDATION: A brief, cursory analysis was done on the
CMAN, or Configuration Management discipline. The review was to
develop and/or confirm the criteria for ranking the suitability of
MIL-STDs to the development of an integrated, disciplined, and
structured standard or related family of standards.The criteria proposed by this writer are listed below, and
the committee is free to evaluate the facility and effectiveness
of the approach. Several contractors have "automated AMSDLs,"
which were not available during this analysis. Grouping and
analysis of data requirements and taskings would be much
simplified by accessing their data bases.
CRITERIA:
1. Evaluate documents, or groups of documents that relate
to specific areas, to establish whether there is recognizable
program structure. This structure should be adaptable and
tailorable to any commodity or system complexity. this
formalized structure would be evidenced by:
a. Formal planning documents
b. Reports and analyses used at fixed milestones
for decision
c. Formal milestones
2. Evaluate data requirements for suitability to a
structured format that could be automated.
3. Evaluate program for common data elements that could
serve as "index" or "search key" for access/formatting data.
This index key could also provide relationship or cross
references to other functional areas. Examples of common data
elements might include:
V - NSN
- Part Number
- WPS identifier
- "FINDER" Number
B-3
r.°°*'.~*~ . ~ ~ - ~
- 4. Evaluate program structure, if any, for relationship or
mcorrespondence to other program areas, and to the development
cycle of the weapon system.
B-~4
*.i. * -0" .•
. * .•
- . .o"
NONDESTRUCTIVE ENVIRONTEST TE TEST
453 1345 810' 271 1519 mo 202
1875 ~7881257 8311264 1629 ELECTROMAG1265 ATEST139 46-
. 746 I 461SI \"462
. 826
Y AUTOMATED[ TEST
368 1309415 2076105
Q..9858
CERTIFICATION
S 3351595248
• -o
r
................................
.. . . . . .." . . . . .. . . . . . . . . * t
__R _MA lBS FINA 4CE
D-1000 481 eell 1260*'" 100 , 482 d . - ' 780 ' 1567
789 483863 49088s 1456339A
BILLOF
MATERIAL STANDARDS
5~295 680280 499
1556143
177135
p
I1"
. ..
.*-o*-*.*.*...*...--.~*...,.--
--
* .o d .....*-...- .* .. -**..*
"q-"W L -k- ..- T- 17 -~ Z" T it 4~
I MAINTAINABILITY RELIABILITY
2084 790-" 471- 217
470 2511543217756
- /SAFETY
882
MARKING PACKAGING
5 792 648130 2073196 " 1365187 1366802 7261559 647
S 842FED - 123
1291247
o--
[j.
CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW
PLANS
BASELINE,
FUNCTIONAL
ALLOCATED
PRODUCT
CHANGE DOCUMENTS
ECPs
DEVIATIONS AND WAIVERS
SPECIFICATION CHANGE NOTICES
CONFIGURATION STATUS ACCOUNTING
AJDIT, REVIEWS AND TESTS
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS REVIEW
SYSTEM DESIGN REVIEW
PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW
CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW
FORMAL QUALIFICATION REVIEW
FUNCTIONAL CONFIGURATION AUDITPHYSICAL CONFIGURATION AUDIT
L
B-8
LZ4
PLANNING DOCUMENTS
MIL-STD-483
DI-E-3108 Config. Mgmt. Plan
DI-E-5603 Physical Conf. Audit Plan
DI-E-2OL463 Plan, Installation & Integration
DI-T-30705 System Test PlanDI-T-30714 Master Test Plan/Program Test Plan
MIL-STD-1456
DI-E-1100 CM Plan
DI-E-2035 CM Plan
r MIL-STD_1521
UDI-E-25621 Plan, Configuration Audit
SSPI 41l30.2 Rcqmts for CM Plans
(Unnumbered) CM Plan
SAMSO STD 77-6 System Regmts Analysis for M-X
DI-S-30603 Test Planning Analysis Data
p* DI-S-30605 LSA Data
B-9
I.
SPECIFICATION DOCUMENTS
MIL-S-83490
DI-E-5390 - Configuration Item Spec
MIL-STD-490
DI-E-1104 Specifications
DI-E-3101 System Specification
DI-E-3102 Conf. Item Development Spec
DI-E-3103 Conf. Item Fabrication Spec
DI-E-3105 Inventory Item Spec
DI-E-3117 System Segment Spec
DI-E-3130 Process Spec
DI-E-3131 Material Spec
DI-E-3132 Conf. Item Product Function Spec
U-H-5593 Automated Data Systems Functional Description
DI-E-30131 Interface Control Document
DI-E-30132 Critical Item Fabrication Spec
DI-E-30141 Interface Specification
MIL-STD-483
DI-E-3101 Listed Above
DI-E-3104 Addendum Spec
DI-E-3105 Listed Above
DI-E-30110 Computer Program Product Spec
DI-E-30111 Computer Program Flow Charts
DI-E-30113 Computer Program Development Spec
DI-E-3119 Computer Program Development Spec
DI-E-3120 Computer Program Product Spec
DI-E-30130 Noncomplex Computer Program Spec
MIL-STD-961A
DI-S-7097 Military Spec
#.,
-- E-10
!A A
CHANGE DOCUMENTS
MIL-STD-I8 1
DI-E-2038 ECPs and Requests for Dev/Waiver
* DI-E-3129 Request for Deviation/Waiver
DI-E-14527 ECP
DI-E-5054 Engineering Changes, Deviations & Waiver
DI-E-5383 Engineering Changes, Deviations EAM Cards& Listings
MIL-STD-483
DI-E-3106 Specs Maintenance Document
r DI-E-3134 Spec Change NoticeDI-E-5031 ECPs, Deviations and Waivers
DI-E-5035 ECPs, Deviations and Waivers
DIE-A-302Q Contract Change Proposal
DI-E-3127 Advance Change Study Notice
MIL-STD-4~90
DI-E-1126 Notice of Revision/Spec Change Notice
IF DI-E-3128 ECPs
DI-E-313I Spec Change Notice (Computer Program)
DI-E-2143O Spec Revision Pages
*DI-E-23159 Changes to General Specs for Ships
- MIL-STD-14I56
DI-E-11143 Notification of Changes to Commercial Software
B-11
. * . .A
AUDITS AND REVIEWS AND TESTS
MIL-N-18307
DI-E-2000 MK/MQD Nomenclature Request
MIL-STD-4~83
DI-E-3107 Installation Completion Notification
DI-T-3703 Computer Program CM Test Plans
- DI-E-5Ll86 Certificate of Acceptance
MIL-STD-490
DI-E-2121 Certificate of Compliance
DI-T-37'14 Acceptance Test Procedures
U-T-5594 Test Analysis Report
-DI-T-30705 System Test Plan
DI-T-3071l Master Test Plan/Program Test Plan
3DI-T-30716 Computer Program Test Procedures
MIL-STD-1521
-DI-A-3029 Agenda, Reviews and conf. Audits
DI-E-3118 Minutes of Formal Reviews and Audits
-DI-T-3703 Computer Program CM Test Procedures
* DI-E-54I23 Design Review Data Package
-DI-A-7088 Conference Agenda
DI-A-7089 Conference Minutes
B-12
STATUS ACCOUNTING
MIL-STD-482
DI-E-1101 Conf. Status Accounting Records
DI-E-2039 Reports, Config. Status Account
DI-E-3133 CM Accounting Reports
DI-E-21473 Missile Configuration Report
DI-E-26361 Report, Ship Equipment Accounting
MIL-STD-483
DI-E-3122 Configuration Index
DI-E-3123 Change Status Report
DI-S-3581 Subsystem Design Analysis Report
1' DI-S-3582 Engineering Development Report
DI-E-30145 Computer Software Conf. Items
t313
r. . ; .. . . ? ... .' . .o. ' .,;. " ' ,..... . . " . " ,,.. . . .. .' . ' . ".,....., ' .....
.-w .b. , - .- .-- i - . o. -- ~ 4 - -o - -. - -o . o . J . - , -¢ r % ' - - . o . ° . -
I
Appendix C
UNIVERSAL NUMBERING SYSTEM
1C-
r": c-
I.
L
UNIVERSAL NUMBERING SYSTEM
PROBLEM STATEMENT: Enormous inefficiencies result from a lack of
compatability in the names that we assign to items. The roots of
the problem are interestingly contained in our good deeds of the
past. Data processing applications have generally progressed
within functional bounds, i.e., cost accounting, supply
maintenance and so forth. Outstanding results have accrued from
these applications within companies and the government. Similar
results have been envisioned and in some cases realized from
company to company and company to government. The essential
ingredient for such achievements is a set of common data
elements/definitions. In many cases it has literally taken years
to reqch agreements as to common terms and/or data elements
within functional areas wherein goals were at least similar.
Todays evolving computer and telecommunications technology offer
the potential for even more powerful results. It won't be easy!
Each functional area that has progressed to the point of a
standard set of data elements will resits going through that
trauma again, especially since the next set of gains fall outside
their area. These gains generally will cross current functional
lines and will have to have support at top level.
In addition, many military standards and military
specifications have required development of different and
independent data systems, component numbering systems and
numbering schemes. As a result, service and contractor functions
have created specialized data bases which deal with some weapon
systems but do not relate to one another. This creates
significant problems and increases the cost for users (services
and contractors) who could otherwise share common data.
TASK: Therefore, the task is to develop a recommendation with
support documentation for application of a universal numbering
[. system (ala Functionally INtegrated DEsignating and Referencing--
FINDER system).
C-2
..................................................
EXAMPLE: Cost accounting, maintainability and logistics support
analysis (LSA) groups of major prime contractor have independent
data bases which refer to the F-16 flight control computer by a
completely different number. Specifically, cost accounting uses
work breakdown structure (WBS) number 1340 while maintainability
people use work unit code (WUC) 14AAO and the LSA group uses LSA
control number (LSACN) 14F0005. Obviously, additional
contractual effort and funding is required to tie or integrate
these very important disciplines together.
SOLUTION: Specify by mil standard or specification a standard
numbering system which all functional disciplines use and upon
which they build their data bases. In the future, all users must
be able to use the technology available to create, store,
distribute and share technical information. Unified data bases,
build upon standard numbering schemes makes this goal more
achievable and certainly more affordable.
APPLICATION: Assuming all parties involved in the FXX
development, production and deployment decided to designate the
flight control computer, uniformily 2710C1 for example, and all
FXX data bases related information to that number; then many very
positive spinoff capabilities would exist. For example:
a. During production and prior to first aircraft
deployment, all failures and maintenance actions are accumulated
and available under a single number. The cost of production
should be lowered through more expeditious troubleshooting, repair
and redesign when required.
b. Assuming we change the service data system to use this
number instead of what it uses now, then failure, maintenance
actions and performance data can be "real time" fed into the
"unified data bases" and like the contractor experience data can
be easily assessed with a like reduction in-maintenance related
man hours and cost.
c. Using a data system like this helps lead us in to
U weapon system accountability via spare parts accountability.
Indication of sources, i.e., performance, MTBF, man hour
h.... -.. .............. ....7 ...... " ................ '
iI
expended, etc., are inherently available and management attention
to problem areas is expedited.
ACTION: The incorporation of a "FINDER like system will be just
as comprehensive as the embedded computer interface standard (MIL
STD 1553B and 1750A) as both have their roots in every area of a
weapon system including design, development, production and
MIT
deployment. L, STDs 1553B and 1750A were recently dictated by
DoD. A similar challenge was faced with the implementation of
ADA. We feel that the potential cost savings, simplification of
relational data systems, potential for elimination hundreds of
special purpose data systems, etc. warrant a special researcheffort to fully investigate the advisability of mandating such a
system now or in the future.
c-4
. . . . . . . . . . .
t,. . . ~ * . . . .
Appendix D
ILS DATA DELIVERABLES WHICH ARE CANDIDATESFOR DIGITAL DELIVERY IN NEUTRAL FORMAT
D- 1
CONTENTS
L.Logistic Support for USAF Programs ........................................................ D-3
Logistic Support for n a ms .......................Uo................................... D-9
Logistic Support Contract Analysis............................................... .D- 15
4.
It
D-2i r
ho
, ~=> ~-,
61-i41 C
op C
4 m 0
4A-
: I- z O
0 0 a a
c 4p (M4 z
31 a C "a *I a
aq A
C) C CL 0 U.
41% t - 4"
~e b = L 1 C
W C-. b. -L V C C' 06 4
%A 4K v 4 1 VGo C4 C0~~~~ .M 04 D
o1 o CL -6C. m C .C -
C; aU aC oa - L4) C C%( ) M 3% 2. W )r
0. ~ ~ ~ ~ 4.0 C. 'A %.. . Q. % o0
CA ~ ~ ~ ~ ' 41 CL4 -A WM 6.jQ( . )04
--0 2. C C 0 31 1-
Aw. IC IA 2 A C . =C
CVC~~~~~Q C4 E 1 4 ~ C' 4
10 00 V%'A 4 w w '' 44
C6C C C C.* l D 1C~'.
V 0I' *OC C 11C CC z' C16.Z wGw 0'41 m0 C- m~ . 4 C. C
-~~ C W1C ' w CC1 Is, ZU1 E.'1- ~ w = ~ -U ~ C 410 cU C U 41(/1 ~ 2 :: Z. ! C.1' 4* 1 - . ~ V C-
0- CU4 fe C 41 -C t C - C " 1-4-4- aU
4- 0'C
0'
O C
C CL 'AC a 0' .
C 6. CAL. 1C aU 'C-
CL1 DO!1 ' K3IcCxC C 11 C
~a'A wU' U41 D-3U U '
V .
e-j 41
KK
44
meCcz )-.4W
-c 0 at 4.= -c C
011
C -41c
%A A1 C c IV' &A fU41 V112
C~ CU
CLC' to, IV to. 41 '
o1 m~1C 41 wca V 6m4. V4i~4.2'A
404.
3 -
1, 4.C 4.4 a'E 4. a. CCw cc at41-%
*CC'U2W C413 '.
41'A41CCA aCC E4 cc C41
-~ V m.a 1.'C 4'. .-~C - .0 4. L U 41- C. CL IV U ~ . -
za -o C-0'0=. Al
416
40
--4) 41 4) 4 0
4 '
6.j.
416j
61 4
.0 01 0 a
0 do LA CLC
4. .6 M W; 0 1ac _ CL 41 =
1 ~ ~ 4.C -
z417
2- 1-
cig' 4' . IwO, o 4. .C I. C1 CIO C
vi 4C a , 0. &
C'W4'~f 'A4 - 44
0'1 C41
-7 0 06. 02 V' 44w C- CC k.0 * .'r-4
15~' s- %.q ~ca1j-0 6 0. - C -ui
1. CI
0~ 41q
n Ca. 01. 04' 1 .00' 0 a. I. 9L IA w4AM%
cl, w W 2 - 62=V -A VI (A
'90c cc 41.441,4
' '0 wo
D-5
%
=~~0. LA W4 'A. . ~ .
4A4
w -- = w =
(A .1 41
z = EU = C=a -0- 0 --
0= -.
;j~.- 0 m-,f
01 v1 il Z0 U 14 r L Cq
tm 4A 0 CLCA C 6 4 6
CL C %A w . e
to 0 to 'AE W41 4
-- C2 a4 C f1 c. k 4-
* ~~~ 24.' CPU.4 cc . 1E 4 6
CM W- CLu IA'a 0. %AC V' C. 06w-.4c 1--C 0 CL.. cC. 24
V, C %A EUL %41 W41E 4C.. zCk
4w 4. 4'. 4 4 . 3 4 C .E4
ca UV 24 011 .4EV .4 41 V
Ww C. 3 C4.V C 4.EC 4E 4
CL 3 CEL U .3. 4-C.4 4C ' V CEU #aCE fe0
- 0 '-i.. (m Go.' 0.' 41 -02 d2 3C o--JE U C -C U - . 4
IA~~~~~~4 40 aU. E 1. EC. EE 1
-~~~~~~q M.00 4 U-4 VU W -
z w1
-64
Lw
ozS
-
0 0 0 0w a C6,
A. CC .. u r- 6.z; '
w -" A w
6.- 2%0040r
21 1 41 441 6.
W4 4-. 41
In zZ .a 0C aC4
IM- 06m ;
= = CM 4,C -0
0 Me 0 0 0c 46 ( M' A 0 c 0
*l .. ' 92.i.6 z CLC 4.2
*0
6, C CL i. 0 -Jo
C C 41 I 1
4 t p - C 1 C .41 00 0'0
CL qu CE 0.C..
U.fe C C- 41- -
C~ A C. 0 C C
.5- 86 1.0 0J. V0 o u kA4 a-
ug .- 44 0 V
I- 44D-7
~41' 5 h. m
V 6
o 0 0 vi z
% WW 64IA 61
61%A GDGi DCG
Cdo4 GD6
4= -0 - )=-
44,0
CL ~ ~ ~ ~ V W ) o4
64 GD
- -0 0 -
CL~~' -W -d
- i re GD9w3-1 0= 6I-W -W C to- )a 4 mk
= 41 4- CL dc *, ( 6 I 6
-0 - 11C4 - - G 6A - 0 D 0. 4
c w~ E 1 4
0. C 0' 0' CC LzCk
m L. IV 0kA w .0 5 =
Q4 A 6 0m-"U 3,0 6AGD GD w-) C1a
C0. 41 v%4 V-
-G A CD a c I
C 0 .C IVA 'A -
.03OG 0 1 'A -=, ., wD 'A
=4 at 1GDo C DG GDC -4C,4- ~ ~ C 0L faU' a C O (J Q
-~~~~~~~4 - fQ4 C0 ~- 6DA ~ G- GD ~ 0' .'GDJ'A .0 .C'A -kD
-4 orC- 4,G , A -D -~- ~'AGD ' '~ ' 6GD GDC
*EA G' 1 0 c 6V
-39'
6 GD GD
C''A C -D-8
LOGISTIC SUPPORT FOR USN PROGRAMS
J. A. Palmer
Newport News Shipbuilding
August 214, 19841
V.
D-9
-077 -. - ' -- - -.
9. 4
IAa
183 S 0
vii
aa~
-C -
a S
420* .12
S S U 10
p%
3 L
IC.6
I I
.5 .8 4-
opO
- .
C6'
D-111
S . .=8 ~
I aII
....: -oa..i i- S a * C
~ 0. 3U6I ~ a 0
5 a. ~00 , a~. ae1*
- cc a. .. C'0.a s"
iS.;,,i--li-l ,i l mi 'i i ,, i / l l I .. . ..
W. ow W Ii71 -V. I
p56 .- ~ 2 .8c
0
- Ac
.2 - D - -1
I a0 .
II
-- S
I--
f'."•.". . 2." . - -'-'. i-:.'- i.-' N. . "- - -'-'- .I- . -U-''''.- '.G'''\-. .- ; -.-. '."> , _. -'.= , x 5. .- ' ._ :-
3 3
'A ~ I I i 1Ii~ S S SV
1a 0. -.
uv 0 aC 4 4
a 240'
0~4 1 S U E
-u L:2.0 'A 6
eo* Cc
* U -D-13
AD-R161 786 REPORT OF THE JOINT INDUSTRY - DOD TASK FORC ON 2i'3COMPUTER AIDED LOGISTIC.. (U) INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSEANALYSES ALEXANDRIA VA F R RIDDELL ET AL. JUN S5
UNCLASSIFIED IDA-R-285-YOL-4 IDA/HG-94-29449 F/O 15/5 NL
1111.0 ti 28 12.5
j.6
1.1 *~1.8
11111 125 111 .4 11.6
MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART
NAT$ONAL BUEAU. OF STM.OAV -963 -A
Ii~ii 5~1
S -
SR r~ 2
4
r S a
I&
aIit; -
*36 3 5
&
S
aS. -e
0.06. ~ 00*
~i ~U-j;nS * .~ -
- ~a u--u 0.~.~
~ - - -C 400.. 312.
* C*
a'1
4 i.~
I
~ 21
S
rp. -
.9 AD- 14
:.4~... ..
0 I.
z -
'erp
4-1
SL 0
O6 C E 0
• 0.m L.-
0 M vi' 0
--. . ' . 0
"'- := . C .C I,
."~~~~ j- LA j { =
0 0 . " " 4
C 0 0
.0..S . U " S, "..1{=
EU- 0.t --If .- € I ' '- 0 , '-- Oj 4a.' U
O LA M" V
0. - 3 - .
41 41 CGo
"0 A 4A0
> 004 i V 'A
.' 41 A0U' I
-- ClA- U6E
j j 0 M - a - . = r L.
• aC co 0 0
I-e 4wE ai -JC U 4zl =A. 0 mU , 3. m.
o j OL L. u1 'A,
41- V~ S. C 'A
. .- X
S. C3 fan 09 0 41~U l C
OC - 00 20 L. a 1 4 P . m L
06 L.4 UC 0 .0 4' AJIW
5- CL CL A a00 .~41 Li~ -0 * 4 I
C.c L- EU 0 .0o -'0 0 00 C C
.- . 0 U .L EC , U 0
U0C a IAO D-160
2) t- 0( N 0 N j C"-rL- G
A I A a
00 N
N I I I II I
cN C
V)
4) 0
Ct)
-4 4-
0 '. 2
V) Z, In O-
c( I. e.(N 0
a90 C 1 .. (a
-. 0 j wU -C 00 a Z
0 . 0 l V. C. L. t
M. C2 co 000 -
orU-~ . C O 000
C.4 0CL c 0 0 6 06 06 06
C L V 0. 0 VU 0 ) 0. 0. 0. 0.
D-17
0V 90 a CIO
I~~~4J 2 .QWJ4.
-~~~1 V 0 0, L.0 f.0 - u Vw . (D 5 C41gU A 4A wO fa L. 0 0~. L G '
-- 2= -3 1 C GoOC7% E &A Q - Z -0 (U0. 0r 0o .o *-36 -c
4j 4A .- &A A 00 0 . 0
C~ wj 4L) 0. U 0 4,~
t~ S. 6 L- G 0 GiC 0 -0.)z =4CE. U
4-C0 C "I =0U W4 X 0 C C Cu UCj4,4'U . .'iC C UP EU~ CU 00 =60 0~..EOE =
UG J'zJ CA - A &AU -GJ E'
C C
.04-
-C
00
0 0 & o
Cr -7 w i
C61 * ECU. 0C c oa CL 0
Ci wi 00 4
'A C7i C
C U 7 U% CEU 0 02 CiL
Z~cy 6.c, 6
.j CD 0 .'. Ci 0C C) U % 00 0 CD C C) ~ E 0 .
-EL 06%C n
w Uc
4.' C-
- 4 a . . rr w-r-v .
4- ' WC4.0 4
CD Q% . 'V % .. uiCL) .
4j .- Eu)U4
- b 0 4- 4" *0 0CA4 . . AL. 0 f* - 0eU' 0 Z; .0 04' u4'-C I.-
L~~~~ Lfl OEn E ,'o4w~'4 e': L~4) I. 40 . 4 _ -- .C J
do 00 0U - Q -'. EUI -. = li =
o. Gi. E E10 E
CAi EA-r ra *.
* ~ c ti-i (D w ,~4
v G cu 2. 0 020 4A ~~~ E0 E'~4
00
C C
CC
0200 -O.
41 6A Q. A
0.0 *j0.
aj 0. 'A wm LAu
C C/~ ~ -%Go Gi 0.40A 4. .21 1
>% 0. 0% L.
CA 0A I- LU.E
A 4, -t A .
C~C~ C .' 4'-
0 x 0 D
Eu 6n ~ viq 0q Z -W.'A~ ~~~~ Q ' .t'4
o C~ 4 4' 4 D-19
0
z Al
0 -1 ~u~i C6
- UW...4 W26
Ia.Z ~ ~ ~ ~ w a.- . 0 ta -Z -.
a ~ I tZj - Z4 I- w. 3 06
CL I- 0 *i I A. I I 9L
w Z
I
-D 2
o zo. Lii4' W .2. W -r 0 a-.
zL C6 U 0 Z0A n CM ACE f- 96 w z ~ 1
0 1. J0a Q f_)~ 4
Liig
k- z Nz --C9 I - 296 9 4 1 64
0- -1
wi Q- -
c. E- L 6 za
w A- -CZ Li La
4c. -. -C .
04 - Z i.- -
ua -C u-
I- c
0 z cc-~c~c
La
a. 4Z -21
w U3l ta x U~ z
a z4 96~ -4 ;
AC99- 96 aal 29-
Z4 m I..l 0 0 0 ;J)-. 0'CmgCal *ilO .~ U- w~ ~ 09 w P, - .gc CA"i la~Ci ~ ~ C~ a
w~45~ W w IT u 4c w - . wa g- 0t- -C5- Q w~CI L
4c 2
- A. L;Wi --
rz -asa
w A.~ -C0
z - E- M C64- LQ Ca - a
CD W - u,>- M" -Wan [- f- =
A ~2Ca445I I X a- ~ ~~a %A. 0aCA.
W6~i LN-I Claa :9 xCaA.
.~a.Ja~O ~aa~~a~U;a
oi
UU
D-2
a.~g o W a
Z 9a3 -Gk z 11 90-j ZAg J wz z a
- k- Z I-9
Wim .'IOac wot- La - c 049 E.-Ua. = I t8 - k * Ca: . I -0-U.c C6~. m 0U 9 ;E U0-;: ukz Z I -- JCL a~& sz 0 wwz;- zzo
L&~ -C -C
rLz W -L
9 I= 0
II. i- - z . a
Q6 z . w z . ~V. z~4~*?.
~- 9- W9~*/ - ~.CL. Z M La x -
-'~~ ~~ L16 2. g a . 0 I . I
A I ..
I P. 16ad
Z 9 i. Z-96a
SC--2 3 -
.77: IJ0
z -.
4Q6LG44ww -K C6
zzzz
91 cc~ N
z tr. 29 11
ZC 4.49 na
z 20. z n zAi
4D 0 4 7 7Z
W0 I - [- w - mE.0 0 . Ac 1 4 1- 94 fU0.. Wz .z - .; ._ ;. -<
Q.. 112 :j A.2 9L..: 4 112 x~1 w. 4 2n0 4 V.
~~~ 04 04 ;A. 4.Z . 0/ I
-~~~~~ 2w0 Loa I,--E- 4 . .2 0 - -.
.~ 0-- .)2ar w-4 LU -.-- - n = ~ ~ '
-3 0.121 2 . Th . .~ a Iz.12UZ~J Ia.-~
Do A .
2 112
0D-2
z .
0
Ln z
0r
,-; z .j 0 6zr Z-- c, c * z >w x z -z
4c - C1 0~ e".000 on - z.4 =- K -
cr VI a.1 Z. z .
Ix 0 c - *r.
- Z.... ~ ~ r- D-25
-a~Zo 4
0 C0Ca.6 C-2C6
Z w. kv L
z~ 9
cc ;.II F~ C
z A - - ccz c =0M
0 & I
'7 It: crL -o X-U, 1 0i;'
cm w~ - = Z
U,~ ~ 2cLA0Z-~ M--. Zw
-~ ~ ~~ x& -4 .. J 0 0~ 0 - 0 0
C6
I- o
- I.-
j ga . w" cu w w c
o WO lw-
0. 4 LD-26
U2 t- x .
Cal- n 4 Q0 -
-A u Q I- U3 W
-n Q W a me w I- IQ-
:16 CC2
a- L
ZU;
cc w~ z c j z z -Ci96 wa. z -C - 0 w
I- - z- 0 = -C O.Z cn~ 4
- La- fl- = ;~ z- 0 z 0A .J 0~ Q z~ 0.i 0 .a
-~b -o t- .- -o -~ = -o - ~ n~3~~~~Q -C aJ 1*. ZZ 4'~*0 22 Z~
WoWacc ~z C o 0 0 - 0 / ~ 0 Z ~ a~
a I I I IQ
a-r
0. C= La wa
- U
art
--
Go~
-1
D-27
g.I
oz
G0
- ~bZ
, -
X X
0 -3 tf--Z -C CN- -
a z Z - -.
=a = -- = - = =f 'n L
I- 4 Z1-WZW x
D3-28
-. ., ", - - .",'":".; ," '."- -".",. ,-" , "'"' .",2 d . ".,.'.'- C.- ", ... . ."-'-", ,,",, .,'. ,, .'."-".'. .
-~~~~t w~-IIIIIIli
z~ go-w IK CAo1 z
=O -zb0 Q- ZO a gw
-~ E--- a a-A
-C4 Z
.4 09 A. a 0 -
v,- Al0
I. X1- - [a.I- 0n mC :A V 4 = 6E -wm0 - - z -
f- 06
-C a~. z 0 4 4-I= -CA a. 4~96 E l- -
0 -- . -.-1. =4 -E *o-~e*- 6 == 1- 0 r--6~U C6 I-e MC ~
I-a
g 0 CC g
in In - A-~
z~aD-29
fr~~ 0 cca4~ K a
2a wI~ 4c La~ 916 -teI ... .. U 10 ' 0
r 0~~~ 011 f l.ON0a2~"
0 Ir.~1..E1.
C- 2-^ w -1
o. L9 CA
z ;16.
E- 0 (-- T 'W I (A I
(a i-' 4 0 ..1 111
CZ P-0 w' C A .'
(A~ :16 k; r-z 0 z W- ~ .- c. 0~ A
eLaZ UU 9.c6z 0
CW * t2-.Z 1414
LQ (A
ac ac. 0 t1.
La W w I- 0 f CA
W3 ccx;* In ~ u2)I-.W Z1CZ( 2CZ.1 ((A1 AW6 La1J&3
- (D- 30
4c I- 4 w .2 - 2 OZ4c 40 0- -4 .9LC4
0c W.U~ 0 Z-r
= -L-C 96~ a~-~0
06~ ~~ a 6 Cz w:z za A (Ao I..
mz zI-.! -m z I- I u.
VIa
z
4 I.
zz
I E I- z
C- 0 4
- V) - c nj zU
--w z w z z
16 U n Z U 11,ch V. 0 w4 Cm w
A. u~z01
Q. zA z6 0'
w z .0 z i
D--
2Q 0 "U.~
2V C9 9 z = .i .. -= .'DLa - In 0Z C za L" a.
u-) k- -4 LL z=a -z = W I- W- - ~ -m- La Z _
V) Ca0 C6 W La.-z <I- 2. ;U16J 0 w r uc
- k 0 . W ZX ag U C 96 -(-W. >C.c 0 1.-. ul= =f- U = C aaQ0 40 UUC4 I w
L& Lq g w~ za W C6)i < i- = =c z< 6Q - -c C4 -
.- M M= J K. aa
InC x Z2 ! -o 14~- -2z.J w 12, La.i a -C- 2 - -ft . ~ - z
t. a
0-C
~..4 ~C zC'
v-t t-*
w C.
W W6
Ca."
=0 -
I- d
*z z
ra n) a.1 ~J~o - ~ I 0 -p- La ..
I or= z a .
2D 32
. . .
0or--
4c
inW- I- %. N4 zZCA
V4 .'. ff-" Z 2IM -nZ.4 gw b-' 6-~ zC - .z
P. -z :E W 4 . 0 .E O -
04 Z 4 3
-34c:8 W C a i c -- L6Q0 3 0COw4C0aw.4k- c
-z
Q. L)QZ
co ad-U?
aaJ
Ln . -- W CC6 4 0j
at z
- 14414.3 * ~ 14
D-3-
ao C4 P4# P 4 P.6 , a -- .4
NO. S 4cW - a . a
N L c. L a. 0L.LM is 2 02 4- 0.. - 0 q-
<Cfl 0 'o 6 I8 rzI C -
WC , I t O at C L2 . 4 L
cc -4o -- -- -O - ~ &U
0. U 44 ~ - - a . C 0.C V5 In 4.- .4 6 0 . * 4-
I L 4 CL 5 0 0 * .- CL S 0 50 -It~6 6US h . 6a- 4 . t
St 040. ~at 0 01 0U a. 00. O '; .
St4 0.4 -- - 4 0, t
10 0I a1 a- 0C 0 U 5 - V- V- "aIt~' 0.b 0. S - L Go U 0.0 0.S 0.
- j ~j It r
,Lj0 4c -4
Q.J~ It4 "*
cr~I 0 0b
Is 0.0 0 0
0 113
It40 CL0.-0 aJ uIN4~ 4
x ua, .s, 40 . 1t1 41
I)- 4C C2 00 40 -Is 1t 100 Ut zUt 0 Is
114 -10
ICL I I C4 0
= -1 k" - C Il . i-I t- 4 = 4 C c C24
La 'Lt 10.0. C4 4 . C U U4 U
Is1 4W jo j4 wC 4 4 ~.41~ .LJ..JN w0. 0 A. 20WO 0 ~
af. Ii3 CC V 0 0 2 4..2Jrt Ct 54 44 r -IL -u SLwA
=0 .2 Litc Li5. ccM In 4 1 4.2 44 4-
* 4-K 14 0 C144 U 14 ta 4 t
I3 1 0. Mh. 4L0 v "P wu -10 cc0t.A ~ a 04C. C ~ l 0
It
Q aI 42 go 10
Utt4 ~ ~ ~ D 34 NN ~ i
OttON 4 0 e
No to * - @5 'a 'a wl 'a .0
ac . b.. 10 w CL Go 0 CL a 'o -. V
Ne 0 - . " 4 . - 0
0 Is t % -*.4 0
C3 0 'a 10 Q.4 h 2 0 ~
-a -- -r -0 -q ;' 4 2C 4W
N r *r a CL a- 00.L a0 . ~. 04
NT C c . 4rC
al C q~- C~ C - "E 004 C !'5
a.~~~. 1s amf04 .- 0.0
w Ziu ilo -. 6 <-- --0 'o <r CL a -@ UjX
LA 55N S-14 E .5. ~ s ~ 4
SCL - ~ .~- COa. N a. Gi' @5 N . 4 C
s g E C E C . Cr E C a CEL-S U
.5 ~ ~ ~ C C ca 0 a' 4 ars- a
0 *i Li .6
Li z x - c
S
C- -& 05 w'.
7; U. C. it
n0. - b 5C
W 5L 0 0 ; 0 0 4. I. 44
10 55 a 5'.
r4 C4
.5 -- C~U00
36 le. t- OO
I5. -a
-0 .Xa ~ 42 -00'
0 - 35 i
I.7
4. 0. 2 3~ C 0 2 us c
4 a &- - -' a Coo 0 *Isfn ,go -o-.-
ui IsS C. US U.S Im. a C a C0: =L Z. S qo CL a Na' .3
~~(.2I~I C0 a'C '00 0. S ' E
4N L4 ft I *4 L 0, lb C', LS S S 'to.cr '3cr'c4 4 2 '3 a. m V . .
a. a-U. aU U.C c' U. a U(0 6aqC' raCL go IV .0 % .0 CL C 0 ~ . .
'xr- IN .. i' CO -.- U -. -2 a.. I
it U S C U ' ' U - - . --C3 5 . ' 0S 05 - i' 2
Li ItN ( S ' ' li a . U U ' 4U
z cc iI - 5 -S~Li ui U w' r4N~. U' U U' 'U a.. - - S £
aC '= -: :: -4 4 -4 W;2 2N. La a' . - ' ' -9I-a a .a o N- ' U C '' '
le4 0' LiP9 00. 4~. Is0. .9 , -6 -M le
a. 0.u 1 -C L' LC
-CC -C -d - U, MNN ' -- PI.
w 3 x 3 cl j * CL V3 .XO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 CL -. a .a . .a .' 1 .a . a
S ' CP 16 %. 5 c-i 10 0 - s 0 aVo- C w Go 0L 0..,
4i 11.~~ 200 (C uCLm 0 C
-~ ~~ CLI a 0~U
UI 0 aZa ~ 3
C L
LA 0 U'0 %5 -UO.0.' 5 . S . lSa
al a'
w CL C
10 cc b Cc
to. - oO Co. CL U.a
:11 .
0. 11 Li U... a am I=
ot' 0 Cc P0 ccU ':1. C4 . Zn C 02
C3 -d -' Co 10 cc CDC-la C~O 04 Ina.
D- 36 SC
00 4 L4 4 00 0 a4 0 z0 a 2
GD46 owSG4 O 0 0 0
Go C L- U ov ft lb r
cz 40 CL 4. s 0.o -C Z.. -
~~. Cx I, CCL C 4 'C .L 4 C 0
4~~fl44 ~r '0~0.4 04 0. COL4
U Cc -1- U
.4 6444 -
oz =
-l a. '
a. Li 4 9
II---- 14 r~CL
.1 ... 0g 0. Q.0. m L .a. 0. 0
oG
01 G
(nL - ' 0 L4&w Z L. C W. IV4
LA4 401I0 I.. 0C4 03 0 ~ 403, 0- -
.32C C- .4 9 0.- 9Lj4 Li 0 . .
019 C -.. 9 C G 9 CamC
- C- - iC
. . . .
6 v 'a 0 0460~~t 4 1 -
a It Is 1 -0 .0 (
0~ '0 zL - 4~
~Cc cc- r- rd Cr InC~ d C . a
'6S :4 m aL 4 =L a ~ Z .= a - =L a
In, - -- 'o ..CL a -W CU C7- CU -rr CU t - U CU 4 "
cO Is .0 05 - .. -0 .05 -. 0
a 0 4ri c 3d I4 4 r 'DC'4 U.. 10C4 1 a' - -- 4. C14 10 1ca
v. U o C . 0 a - .0 c . Uq 0 ' Vt .c' .Z a 44c '-IC a UU 0C CL 'ah cc UU CLO v UL Is U-CrU. a'U O
or '91 -- a.I
z i -"'' -
-, ,' f
0. Go Oj 0
.. Zn 06
UU
CL Cr
-0 C Cm I
(n. -. 5. ..Q. It 0 .10 '0 . .
ca C 0o C Ca 5 'S a
4 0"~~~I 0 0 '0 5a~~~ c I 0
a ~ 1 I. doi a. a.U 0a- U C.X0 41 a 5 a. .
CID so. Li w 0. Li lqt.aO 2
= Q..0 C5.1
u.. -o C-C
M' U
- SDC38
Is .L a V
U - LW U r v. v~ 4 0. W 2
*a La *s C 2 0.0 0 W U W
O SEC*L.LL - 0 n
0LD Cv S &n 4 -0E Vrt c*U u z .c,- E4 a Wj LE * . .LC S
ofiW' : in. t - 1 a, ~ G C0"Z 411~ 11 4o EW 4E Ca 4 4
4 U 4
I) ~' -0 0L 4o 'n 4 W 4 . - 'oU Lit C 44. CL al 04L U .n -4 4C
"C' 2U 3. -w C%.C0' 3. . .4 .*
IsWC ~ 1 V' 'o C 4 .' T I -r oo-UL - 4-I. 3 CL =C3 C - - - - 4 3
W'COCE0' L4 C. 4= WO' 4~j ' U1 . C ~ . '.0
61 A1
-1 o a. CL 'L -n Q. a-'
z 44 .4 40 44 4 .L 4 . 40il ofla vu 0.. 0- 0'I C IL00
(cc ZI
a ki 0 0.
q aa " c .. Is C-J .u ~ o0 9-'U.. 1 0
X.4 ' -I W0 -0
0- ' 0 0 0.4 CO - -a
n 0. itic
0x CL I ud4 4
C S 10 112 u W ! t
a- C" <c La L 4a LU 44
CaW" C- 0.4 SC . I cto CC2-P.45- U -4
Li-al 0 C * ~ 4 ~ O' C 411., 0.
(fiG.~~~~ ICcE).O0 w u
1444." ~ ~ ~ ~ D 39 54 fl - a
* *0 c L .0
pi C- OC c 0Goh - o - NO N.
NC 4 Go 04 'mCO 3~ J
Na LUj0 . N o q~dp 16 N Go ad C' aC- .2 bix -. E Go C6 c 0 3 c
0 u m CL. -F'0. - 0 - .0 0 -
doN CE - -I ' . C .- .
0Z go c' a . 1s- J.0 0 a 0 Z
-0c ' c30 0a '1 0, Go cu' V Q. iS a
LiN 00 CL 0 In u Is >V 0.i. i 0v
....- a - .3C N )C U N0
-- '3 Lai -oo 0. 0 . '3 .. .' sccm -0 0 0. . N.0 >N 0 6 3 -a N
LV ' '- . - N - ".V -- , :: 0- .
o 0ZJ- a. IL" I
CD*
L Lt - CL CL -m CL , 0 0
w c E 'U 10 tU . .Lx wi c a .. a.,C
rL 0
> CL CLC.. C-60.-i La CAN.~.
.V ~ a ccC 0- 0. CCC Cm C
-~ La <"L - C. 0c
11 0. K C2 CL 0. 0LCa
q. 0 'am -1 ul a0
if 3c
-- cc C K O.K C-40-a
ii.f
00HIf - - -r 40 - -
*1 "0 a .12a VI11 - Lb2 1 0 a 0 6 0 o41 1 0 - a -u
to E 11 Is6 = 10 a0 - -f Z t -n CLZ CU LU !.54 2
m-a c a at a0 -0 ate CL IIca ct n ts o 4H 0 . 6 -1 .. 1 Go . -E - CL. 'm ~ .a0006'1 O
O U'0 a CL a, ECL III -L "a -Go~aH a -CLc s a C~ a - w~--asc a-Cel cm 4 61 In C t, cm 5 c . aItcC.
ar .. 2 't St 2r U2 9 -Crwc taC et un V ur tO a U tuo ar CL a
ai q0 CL Go -C0. C Ia -c- 1b a1 a a -V<c 0t 45 a -Is- CL 1 - C - 1 CL tm - C U C
541- . - u . b t - U . - a a uLa A ~ ' aC s '- N ' c '' ' -
It a-Sc--u ua a--q tf'a- . . ' s ' '
402 -- 42 4- 9 Co.~ b. tt u ac t a'. a' tur ut . a' Ut. a' t!CL-~ uW 6nw tcnc ttAiE tCInCLn IC .0 C ~ ~ OtU C 0u t a a
-ax --A
-~ r- . c
z 0 a
a 119 Is 0
Ui oL CL rr CL OCC
a3 3~ a' 0'0.- ' '' t S
-m :10 -- -w Ott r_ Is6
aL aa-1U004w C
- 1 I' 32 Uf t a 1rat av. 0cr Is c -
0 " .C 4 C LC -I. c a a
I' 1110 40 - C 6 t-aJ ct - L cc (A 4c LiL) CL
OWl. h0b 40 1. - -aUOit in U. 4 UCMCI -1 - o C C U O. t-
It: T 0 -r 2T 5-aIt EL 00' EL -- z~
II L- L 6~ a - 4IfIt UE M wE 2 S '4
'I .. ~ u L t. CUD-41
VI 2
A* U F V u
T4 C;
58 0 C* 0 V 0
ar a4 Cr4A
zW U 0 2U
w 4 W O 1" 1: 1-,~GIN i " - 4 "D ;
16 Is ov q 4 fe ow04 41z Z a- .C I,' Q. C U C,90 1
, Q. t . IsaCI L.U US >0 r C I z %'1 40 a', If u .
I4 Cl. 6. - Is- -LIx'" Lj C C -. .
*it 00 0 bI11 aJ = . .JU j .
J- '0 1 (4 C
L W 6 0 00 C L.~ ~ o-i - a - "' C
CO 04a 6f Q. C3a
i at C. w a4 CL O ILO a. Z C -. CC a 'a
O -j z. 2D N C 4 8 4 2
a~ 4 - C 00 40 U4 0..C-~ Lis - U.. 0.'-. ~ C J - E S 2 - 34
N C i4t' uU O-4.a 6. 4 ~ 4- C 40 A C C a
I~4II 400....& .OoD420 44 4 0 C.L
C6 6
c 0 c 0 c 00 0 0 4L, -*~o 6 4.
6. Lhis 6 4j6 so6.6 0
4=1 40Z 4, -
-ee N. a 'Q - C- C-CC- I
Do's 00 C..01 al
m4 m4 - M . m
114
.0 ..0 .0 0 w C0 . 0 .
0.~~~t 0. 0. 0 . . 0 0 .
~a.Z 6 - V) 6 . 6 3ag 00- j O 210~ 04 04 04 0f 00 0'
0. 4 U ' EU 4 UM4 4.0 w a.
6.0 6 6
z~~ .. IA C
0- 10 0. 1x ~~~~' C6 o - 060
~- -0 4 0 ~64D-4300
Z.J O.. ~ C 0 - ~ - * %
B.~~ 0. 0 0
u ach. . r. 6
cc 41 4 46L 6C 6
4 4 4 4w4
CO C6C O e t'
wa cc 00 CS w Iw 4 c c - O I
-. In Q In ge In J, m I
m C 4- - C- beZ6 t: i0 -o 41 '0
6 6. m 4c 4 A ac-W. 01 616 16 16 66 11) 6 6.
>4 I C C C 0 C C ~
c z= z~ S c ~ 0 zz u
@0&n
- a
0
0-A A A A A
0. . - 0. . 0 0D-44.
hd
w I
I.-- -2 . .. fC .1.to a " 0 .0 Cc
60*~. 0
ccJ ac 00 at 60
6. 6
- -l.
CGo .1 W 00 .0 .
Um T
r m b 6 2 4db 64
0. 0. 0 .0
6 CQ6A4c a
IC 0 6
~(. toU
c CL C CIc.
Z4 w 4. ft _ 2b C
o CD 0 00kQ k
~-. C I C -D-45-
a. 0
CL~
CLa - Z0.0 l. Q.
4i
0
0.
a. c
is
is 0
92 4 4
b. I. Ij
in 40966
aa04
cc 0z t
oD-4
ab N ., . "m I ..a ,
0 @ c, 0 a U
S0 6A a.. OG
Q aa~ W 16 12 v AW .m 02 - " I
qjaj~ I d- 03 6 6 ~ 1
U 0
SC . ! - - " x 2 . ...
-, U, M 1. 6 , P A
Q U. 416 6. * 6U ~ U ~ 6 0Lar b. IV0 6 -
6 4, go. U0 4,UW
1 00 4o 6d U- U6 cd U-l cV~ *.
z Ua 0 UW U0 a
z
Jd.- -- - --
0 0 C 00 0m
MW 0 6 -Z . bOf.~ 0.- 00 .8 2 be 0.6 cc ad
W; W "I I q
-- 0 . 0
zw
C 6-
La 6 Z.J2
OC
- D-47
0~~~ ?Af ou.I-
fa a
L. *- .. Aa J .1 aa 0)C L7
:0L . a l A . ~ Go 0
0 v 0 1 u " 6.- -.. - m
r. ~ ~ 6 ta 0 4 . 0%j41s- -- 3Cua t-. Zja a i C C 44 '
4.. 6. to z C4 m
.j 10 U 6~ b. a 6 A4J, 'a 0za4 0- Ide j U ~ a a &
-La
6.
La-
CL-
Sa
L to
.4.4
0C1
-4 -
-C I-A
a~ Z
,a aI a CWM0 C6 v v a o9
C, I #A 60 c w
40 0 Vi - A ~~@is 00 P% a .- A .
Qa~ t ~ 6 I A 4au 40 Vg 10-da 2
64i0 ! U. u JU. aiGa9 al 64 0
'A V 6 cl. 6 z. 1
C6 wa 4c- 0a~*wGaa 1 6al 4.a " 6a (fta~C
a-- ; aih.U 6 Z -
W 00
- r 6 .1 L4 to
IA-2
00w fo 0
w1
0 In
z:2oj ;a
- 1C
fr- 2~0C a. '~4I (naGa 6 .
U -~ Ei ~ 0-c Q6 U P.
40 4 6UGa
I- CA j) a (Ib
-C
2-D 0- -- 1%
10'~*~ 0) D-49
w
• I~n I,4
4j 1
ML,
. .. dA u =
C3 In Go m U
FA v .
010
[d U 4
1,6
C6f 0A 4
00
toidIV 6
06-(Ar.Q
CC
w **jQ A9
1* - 7 1. *7
~D-5
41L
.6 a *0aEU &- I 1.0
00 z0- -. 4.4.i.0
Go ~w m 'o. A 4 'o z0 4)41C aU CLl re L; L. 4 EE
US-z 4- 10 c 4
to 41 to. viW J E
c'~ w 111 -0 4)CL 4
WoC w 4.1 .4.0 .0 S.
Z0 -4.0 -4-0C~ 0 0 V w-6 S 04 . - 0' > CL. 4.
f- l .V z0 (d I.. -
0UEU00i v~* we- 4
CL 3 4 - Q .4) ~- j w . >% 00 .GE 4
1 *-P CD * 'G
-m w4) V 0. -. 00S~ 6J M) 0)Uicto 4~0 E Cr CM.IV I--u to
IM's - &A : Io- 4. 64 4 w QC
.) w V%~ C Ln W- Cto ~d) ~ ~ 0C- 00 Q. " S.
-a)4. 61 6*j 2 0! *SIE PC 4jI%- cu a'' %AU .4 ( 1 -9 &
UG) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 >.w/V 00 CLC U-E0~I 4). .
00 O0. .- 0- V 00. - CL0. M L
N CO 0 0.0. ca Q 04L C Og m4 t.. 0
-- 0. 4) to L.0 C.EU U J 0 C L0 M ZU E 4. 41J0E Fe -- z 0
.. 4j. 0 ~ / .-_) 0. 4._~ aki LM Sfl to 44 4.. LM0c 1 00Q
w- 5J 4)4 Go E0 o.4)0-
0. 41 4- UGJCE C ~ CE 4)jJ
.) .0 4JU Ii E Cf U a)40S
41 EU AtUC -4 EU. CE ON JJj i.,
- US %-~jV W% '0 0 . U0tCL0=> 0.., aC a 1%CC *4.E U
0)4 0. I)E0S '- L QJW 4-
V) 4. 4 -- 4J 4Fo~E %A - a -* 13 =
z )0.00 0-40 (D W . t- 4J EW C-
0 06 CL 4 U0aCCA) 4
A3 41 wOLS.4Z.ra C cc c v o ZCIo%
dc4 %A~ I .C.L .ea 0) A .. I
CO~~~~~a mC'O41%0 E4
4/
C.OELC .EU0U.0" .00%0 EU S.-O
410- S0USU~0Er. . 4 U0 SC 4)E
EU~ ~/%S EU)US 4)4D4I~. ,OCS~S O~S-
~ ~ V U-J 0~EU~JD-4
51
0 1
4fl41
00 41J41~
*c It L4.1LC~ 06 L
.0 O'a. 4 14 w41
41 4A. &A' 0
O~.0u4 IVL w 0
.. .' 04 1 via
-IL
L.0k4= -c
(30 0
- 00
0 .0 0 V
S~- -M*-
L . - J . - l
- C ~ ~ C C' '- .
C'.c .- L4 u
0 1.. D-52
.06
a'- U U C,~. 4) Lon Q CD a, % /
Li 4) % . 4)0 4(-~ ~ ~ I IA _ 5 (A U(A U
46 7 e -cc CoD - a.. -j CD -
cuu 0-
cu r- cu Wu fa Q 1.0CJ u 0s.
*~~~L.C 0e 4 .5 r
ea Q
L-1-
4L)
L*
4). C)>
LM5 4) - kA.=c
W.0'
0f *) w I 0 4ao V) 06 C LJ. 0E
C 4j 4) AUE ( G
Eu C- r- (.i.C~U
M4 0* 0. 4O i
CD L.. > L 4) teC 440 ) L.j = U C 10 ul I aC) oL - 0 4j....s. 4) s e .cr&
*j 4.5 = Eu v.-( & 1 0 14. 0. Eu4 0 L
oe 0. 0 .U. Eu 0.to
- )_j 4. 4)j
(D (A 0 .C L.
U., o4- 4.5 -- CL C) A4a IL 4
.0 4))Cif a,~*U1~ ~~~ W4i 04)~ -
kL iu EuI C L E
U.) 4).6 0
D-53
z z
0 0 oC
bd00 W *b 0 6db
0~ 00WC V uC V u~
E-. C9 40 it 00 cc V
0~0-
00 0
~~~~~- 1a C O 'C3u~
09 A~ 0 610 cc ~ ~ 666 go. u 0. Go0 6 0
A.~( .460 L) 0 00 0( O 04 0
U0 -4S -.4 o-4
c Sd a' a .4-4 -4 cr in 4
0 GoIa 1 u wU c
NI 06 41 4 0 0
.6 74 am aS Aj CL aS IL
WU 0l V W 00 41 41 6a~
W c a 0 -4 -4 -
Z 6 05 0a6 0-0 04 -.a A 0l as ow0ltW0colw CA
o~~~- -4 -40 4 1 0 (
-13 *I3 -13 12 1 1. 1~
415~ ~~~~ z1 I *0 4( 1 1
0 .46 D-541 4 ' '
pW 6
wJ 4u L.. 61 40 4.6 4.
- - - - - 1- -
tn 0 g
26.
0% 4o o o6 ozn o -
64J 00 6-- c ~ 6-J C& o
0- c- lu P.t jo .-o m.- b. -a .,0. - - 6, d
c > 8 a *0 C el 0)0 0 0
r6
c' V% coc (-c I
-& 91k ckn
.. , , , 0.6
' U U' U ,, U 1.-
-C .4 4c -c z -,c6
0D -5
• ' . - . " -U. * - " ","" , . , . *. ". - - . - • . "- - -". ". " - " . ". " . ". - ' " .- .". " . ' - '"""" ' * " " .*- " . *- .' .- .,.- .'.,,2 .- ]-" ." N .,, - .,' - '. .-.,-.-.'''.. ','..-""' '-,'.. ..' .""" ." .""'..", ", " "'" " ''- -'' "-,'. ""-- -"","", "., . ,-... .. . . .. . . -, mm,, ,m mm. ,s,-, ..-..a .,,s.. "a "-~nm muCa -
AuC - C C-
S-, w- ,
) Q) 0) Q) Q) IV W)4)
• .=~
,N. N N , N" N N >1 N ,,.
...
0>0 > 0> 0 > 0> 0 > 0 >
C14~~~4 04 CJr e NC
I-j
Z.-.
-0 0 0 06
0
A..."
0 6
-4-6
4-4 44-4
0 06
-9 W0 N -~ V, 4h
-C 0 ~ & 0h 21.~ 0 .) 0--
~ ~% h ) ~ ~ t.-. 4 U) ~ D -56U
99 C
Id.
0 -e -4 0 -
0~ N>. N>
-n Go CA~-I 0> I
- ~ D-57
6. 14 6..%
4>
0o 00 0
C6 6 61
11 1^ 41~
tn 1 u U, 41 0= b. N4 - N Id N ." -V)- 66 - ;wc 3 i 6 6
-I 0 0 01 010
.D-5
47 :'-7
4~: lo - 6
7:. N>. 6. Z-~c u ~ s~ > ~ ~ 6 6
>~ >-
-- 9 02 00. 00. 0C60 0. 0
Z 6 6 6. . a. a. 6.Lcu6
0 00 0 00 00 00 00to
LO ~0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0~ 0
go
ac 00 F
co I ~ I ~ I 0 C6 1
00
r4 0
II) -- Q 9 A -Ln 0.
11
a-i - - - ---9
uI
I.I
6. ,
- - -- --
L.i 6 . 6 6 666
4, 41 , 4, , .- , 4, -, -,
> >
- , 4, 4, , 4 , 4, ,
- N. N. N>. N> N> N> N>. N> 4 ->.N>
i'i
.9- .9- <9- .9.o
i f} - " " "- " " "
. 6 1. 6
z zo. 0:. 09 9- 0 0
-.. .-
" D-60
" - ., % - .. % . ,- , -- 6 . - - 6 . . .. .,° . 6.° o o . . . .4,.. . . % .
00 0- - -
I I II I II IV
40 . j 41e r
41 Q14CNo .C
1. - A5 Vz- 0 -41w 1 A 0 ON. C
0 c 0.0 c A1 0 -t
U~( V)l m VU0 4 .1491. 14 Z; .00169 0
%n 1 G~ 0-. 6J 6. 1N C. ' I6 V)0 1 ( a w ta1 0 C #t0 wC- 6E u 4- - 0. -SO M&O 4l4 C -Z
- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a 0O 9 z O ~ 10 0. 0 6 99 99- ] E 4
I- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l -e"0 4 9 0 9 9 -U 0 ~.. - 6 1
0. 0 -. 0 I 0 ~ 0I-* ~N~ EN.1~j~NL41 - 14 ~- -C 1.
- ~ ~ e e.4 0 r E F. . J I I m D ( 6. --
~~~~I 'In4 11 0 Itn -* . ' 'In 'In ( 4
*~~~~t tA~I 4 9 J 9 3 9 6 16 £ 6 .. 1 9 I
10416 IC I 441 I141D-0f~~-1, 4. 44
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6, w
qu
4 - .c c , OR - - - ,.
z im
==~b 16 =.. to., 0'- .
v -3 %W -d* - 6 " 6
cm -
.. 0. .. 6 . . ) . " U R.- cc - 4 - -c - In
ca w U) C 0 0A
• " 1:D-61
% !.& J= ly =[ --' ' - - •" ' ' -- . .'- - - -,. '-' ""..'s---- '."- -- "..'.". ".....5 ' .-.-, *- :'---""4" "
" m """""" ' " ""6"'' U" mrI d i li -i dh I" g """;"" """""""""""""""" '" """" "" " . .."'"" " ""' """ '"" % -, ' .....' " '
N N, :1, N.- - .. . - . . ..a
f. .
z ;>: M> ao0 0> 0> 0
960~ A > a. x0.~ IC
xI
b -0
vDr-62
' W. " ,".e - . .% . . - . . . . . . . . ..s. . " . " o • . .- - - -, - -. . ..
£; ;. ' I I I I.; . .--- :'-..':.-..-'.-:--:.--:v :':..-- . :::..:
66
N 14>
1. 6.
aM
c U
6. . -,
* - .-
.'- 0- .-t
I -C-. ?.,, l '( fCC4"
'- ,,. sf45'-
* . ,. i o >a -
:-I..
•- - -D-0
'"" D-6 3
.--
: ,." '" ," ." . .. - -,,-;-.. . . .'-.,.. ,, - ..' .- ..- ... ,..". . ,. .. , .. ,.. • . . . . .... , .. , ,,.-,-- , .' . - .-
Appendix E
TWO VIEWS OF CALS EVOLUTION
...... . .... .... ..
HV.
*CONTENTS
Traditional V iew .................................................................................... E-3
Fast-Paced V iew .................................................................................. E-13
M.
t
.iE-2
- ° -- I . . . I
- - -I II'IC *I.%X".~tV;;*v~ 1 ~i.
APPENDIX E
1. TRADITIONAL VIEW OF CALS EVOLUTION:
ATTITUDES, ORGANIZATIONS AND PROCEDURES MUST CHANGE
IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE CALS OBJECTIVES
1. Serious deficiencies exist in the capability of AFLC's
current systems to adequately support the USAF's wartime, as well
as peacetime, logistics readiness posture. Long range Logistics
Force Structure Management Systems (LFSMS) planning must
incorporate, in a logical fashion, near term and ongoing
modifications to data systems as well as provide guidance for the
development/enhancement of systems through the 1990's. As we
look toward the twenty-first centruy, Computer Aided Logistics
Support (CALS) shows primise of overcoming many of our
information problems inherent in using dissimilar information
sources/media.
The last thirty years have shown major changes in the
management techniques available to logisticians. These
3 techniques have revolutionized the practice of logistics
management and have brought forth the concept of "the science of
logistics." Central to the development and applications of this
science has been the availability of the computer. But as much s
Bthe computer has helped solve the logistics problems of the past
- so too does it represent the logistics challenges of the
future.
Currently, the requirements workload is manually tracked,
updated, maintained, summarized and recorded for timely effective
management. This involves a wide range of administrative and
support operations to facilitate the identification of
requirements and their integration into a total defensible force
structure for AFLC. These requirements include automatic data
processing, communications-electronics, command and control,
equipment, manpower and other command system specific logistics
needs. We believe that CALS, as a system concept, is a valid
approach toward resolving management information
,' exchange/manipulation problems.
E-3
..................... . ... ' . '... -' . '-
Paper based instructions on how to operate and maintain
systems have been constrained by the paper media to a rigid,
fixed format. Troubleshooting instructions were procedural
following a fixed sequence. The computer can handle the cross-
referencing relationships for rapid access to all parts of the
data base. This will permit multiple levels of detail and
presentation tailored to the skill of the user. The computer can
perform function such as schematic tracing and parts
identification, providing dynamic troubleshooting logic, and
update the data base with the results of each new use. The
distinction between test equipment, maintenance aids, and training
materials disappears. In the future it will be possible to have
a single device and inherent software that would perform
diagnostics, aiding, or training as needed. In some cases this
could even be embedded in the prime equipment.
During the acquisition cycle a massive amount of technical
information is generated. This information incident to design
producability and supportability is presently documented via paper
or microfiche. In its present form, it is extremely difficult to
integrate and read and very costly to maintain. The technology
to digitize this type of information is progressing very rapidly.
i There are already several programs wither being planned or
underway in AFSC and AFLC which deal with aspects of this issue.
It is imperative that we integrate these programs together, at
the very least from an informational perspecitve, to assure that
we are moving in the right direction and in a coordinated manner.
Organizations rus a substantial risk of failure if they look
to automation froma traditional point of view, i.e., only
automate what it is you have been doing. .Without a solid long-
range strategy and eye to eliminating the constraint that limited
past practices, one may very well be on the wrong road.
Findings of the Air Force Management Analysis Group (AFMAG)
on Spare Parts Acquisition, indicated that:
E-4
1. DoD directives force the Services to buy engineering
drawings and associated lists in the same manner as
K transient management data.
2. Contractor prepared drawings are seldom subjected to an
audit that would vigorously demonstrate their capability to
support breakout, competitive acquisition or to justify
proprietary rights claims. Physical Configuration Audit
(PCA) checks to see that the item produced, not that the
drawings can be used to produce the items.
3. Post Production Support (PPS) or Interim Contractor Support
(ICS) are not planned for, early on, in the acquisition
process. ICS usually ends with the prime contractor sole
source in a catch-up mode. Data Item Descriptions (DIDs)
r used to buy drawings are not conductive to producing a data
system to support PPS follow-on.
4. Provisioning exercises are forced and occur early under
unfavorable circumstances, normally with
a iinsufficient/incomplete drawings.
5. Drawings are required to be delivered in an obsoletestandard format (microfilm on aperature cards). Microfilm
" "* technology requires stringent drawing room practices no
g- longer in use by major contractors.
6. Present DoD Policy and procedures tend to
a. freeze a copy of the changeable documents, cut the
copy off from the parent data base, and then use
it in isolation from the design activity;
b. cause the procurement of insufficient and obsolete
drawings;
c. prevent AF from achieving self sufficiency;
S.d. have the contractor prepare drawings to match his
• **" internal needs without considering the future
needs of the AF.
E-5
'2. ) ~.'... . ....: . ...'.'."." .. . .. .. .. '. .. ... .. -. .. ... . . .. . . .. . ................ . ........-... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .,, * .' . ' * *..*.*. *..* **. > '' .. ."-.".'. ."...... - .. '*.'. '. ... ...,:...... ." ." .".".
The government currently receives dimensioned engineering
drawings on microfilm and undimensioned drawings on stable base
material. The Engineering Data Computer Assisted Retrieval System
(EDCARS) will enable the Air Force to receive engineering data in
an automated format directly from contractors, as long as their
system is compatible with EDCARS. EDCARS will also allow paper
- microfilm data to be digitized for storage and use by EDCARS.
Other services already have, or will have, similar automated
systems.
Contract management is a series of actions involving
engineering, cost analysis, security, and procurement management
expertise. Currently this process is accomplished manually but
lends itself to mechaniation and its currently being automated.
The Contracting Laboratory has been tasked with standardization[and implementation of the Automated Contract Preparations System
(ACPS), and the development ADP record formats in accordance with
Military Standard Contract Administration Procedures (MILSCAP)
formats pursuant to DoD 4105.63M, using Standardized ACPS. The
S establishment of logistics requirements for contracts involves
transposing logistics design goals and requirements into
contractual language for inclusion in solicitations and
subsequent contractual documents. The subprocess also involves an
assessment of the contractor(s) capability to comply with
contractual logistics requirements, the development of logistics
criteria for use in contractor selection, and the establishment
of appropriate liaison with the contractor(s) to ensure the
contractor's proper understanding of the logistics requirements
of the contract. Contract language for engineering data
acquisition that has been used in the past does not prevent
unforseen problems when a contractor uses Computer Aided Design
(CAD). If contractors use manual methods of design and resultant
documentation, and provide such data on paper or microfilm, the
Air Force can accept and use the data either using the current
E-6
manual method, or by using ECARS. Guidance is needed on how to
contract for delivery of incompatible CAD systems so that the
conversion to an acceptable medium does not lose content or
quality of information. Furthermore, until such a time that
EDCARS becomes operational, guidance is needed to allow
acquisition of engineering data in a useable format even when
contractors use CAD.
In the past when programs have acquired both Level 3 data
and acquisition (procurement) data packages IAW MIL-STD-885 and
DI-P-3472A, contractors have built the packages solely from the
Level 3 data. Further acquisitions will experience a continued
emphasis on the completeness of Level 3 data and its usefulness
and corresponding de-emphasis on the purchase of "reprocurement
packages".
r Mission analysis and conceptual planning begin before the
decision is made to develop and acquire a system; it is initiated
with the review and analysis of a documented statement of need
(SON), based upon known mission requirements, Stated requirements
Rare evaluated from a logistics perspective. As the program
progresses, board termed logistics constraints are established,
the logistics strategy for the support system is defined, and the
system operational concept is developed. These functions are
* accomplished manually. An example of a document is the Mission
Element Need Statement (MENS).
Current systems support is provided by the Project Equipping
. and Conversion Program (KOO5B) and the Aerospace Vehicle and
Flying Hour Program Management System (K0058) and which
respectively provide peacetime Air Force Programming data on
aircraft and missile equipage at unit level and programmed
aircraft inventory and flying hours. These data are essential for
material requirements and workload determination and subsequent
• "AFLC logistics resources (personnel, money, and materiel
programming actions). At the present, the integration of plans
E-7
.°.
=."- . L -', ".,'. .- . .. ......... ..... .. ... ..2..........L .... %''...•... .. -. ... - *. ..-. ... . ... . .. .-,-, . *,. - - ,.
and programs information into command resource aggregation is
largely manual.
Data for requirements computations are gathered either
manually or from automated data systems. Computation begins with
a determintion of the on-hand balance of assets in storage, in
transit or in repair, the assets installed or in use, and the
authorizations or allowances for inventory assets. Based on
inventory records, additional elements are considered and/or
computed through mathematical formulas to determine user supply
demands, the quantity of assets which are available for repair,
and those that must be condenmed or replaced. Requirements for
initial provisioning items entering the Air Force on new weapon
systems or support equipment are computed manually. In the near
term, the requirements process has been modified to improve the
existing baseline, and set the stage for long-range improvement
under the Requirements Data Bank (RDB) project. The RDB project
will transition the process from a series of individual
independent data systems to an integrated RDB.
The cost in personnel and materials, of maintaining military
systems, consumes a major portion of the total defense budget.
It is a natural corollary to assume that any increase in military
manpower efficiency results in multiple savings of time and
3money. One means of improving the logistics environment is
through genuine progress n optimizing the training environment.
Instructional System Development (ISD) provides a
systematic, but flexible decision making process for instructional
programs. It is used for planning, developing, and managing
instructional programs so people acquire the knowledge, skills,
and attitudes needed to do their Air Force jobs. The Air Force
has adopted a model with five broad steps to describe the ISD
process. These steps are:
a. analyze system requirements
b. define education and training requirements
E-8
..- ... '.............-.. ... .... ...
c. develop objectives and tests
d. plan, develop and validate instructions
e. conduct and evaluate instruction.
New instructional programs start during the conceptual
development stage of a new weapon or support system and continue
throughout the life cycle of the system.
PEvaluations of ISD have revealed two major porblem areas (1)
expansion of the ratio of curriculum development time to actual
classroom instruction, and (2) in practice, ISD's components are
often omitted or the relationship between components essential to
a truly derivative ISD process is not maintained.
To combat these problems, Lockheed Electronics Company's
Computer Aid for Insructional System Development (CAISD) project
is designed to provide substantial time reductions in development
steps that can be automated. Essentially, CAISD is an automated
system which incorporates a series of aids to help instructional
developers their work. The system consists of stored basic data
common to all courses, and it can adapt that data to a specific
course according to preprogrammed rules. The system also
provides built-in quality assurance as a result of an automated
building block concept of component development. CAISD hs
reduced curriculum development time and costs while assuring a
rigorous, exhaustive application of each step of the ISD process.
Another automated training system recently developed is the
Training Analysis Support Computer System (TASCS). It was
developed to speed up the training analysis and design process,
while maintaining the integrity of the ISD methodology. It is a
micro-computer based tool which aids the ISD designer through
automated assistance. TASCS accommodates the ISD-naive or
computer-naive user via interaction and automation oriented
toward the subject matter with little or no knowledge beyone task
expertise in the job being analyzed. TASCS is micro-computer
based system using inexpensive, widely accepted hardware and
software components.
E-9
........................................- j...e_~ eJ eS 't le.
r
The Advanced Systems Division of the Air Force Human
Resources Laboratory initiated a three-phase effort to integrate
and apply five human resource technologies to the weapon system
acquisition process as the Coordinated Human Resource Technology
(CHRT). The five technologies are human resourcces in design
trade-offs, maintenance manpower modeling, instructional system
development (training), job guide development (technical
manuals), and system ownership costing. The CHRT methodology
also included a consolidated data base (CDB) which services the
five integrated technologies. CHRT and CDB were applied to the
avionics and landing gear systems of the Advanced Medium STOL
Transport (AMST) using data projected for the minimum engineering
development phase.
The major categories of data stored in the consolidated data
r base (CDB) relate to reliability, maintainability, maintenance
manpower, operations manpower, training, and job guides for both
maintenance and operations, and system ownership costs. The CDB
is to be used for operatinal and support planning after
deployment. The CDB expands in detail with time as the weapon
system acquisiton cycle progresses. The consolidated data base
is dynamic in nature representing alternatives being considered as
well as baseline approaches. The CDB is designed for frequent
*update and expansion.
These are examples of what our training is currently
pursuing, separate but parallel paths. Although the data
available from LSAR is utilized in these systems it is not a
uniform appliction and there will continue to be a lot of manual
input/output using paper products.
Acquisition Logistics planning places empahsis on developing
plans that direct acquisition actions toward influencing design
for support, and developing plans that direct acquisition actions
towards influencing designing for support, and developing support
systems that are compatible with operational needs and AFLC
E-10
*.. . -. :..'-.' ."- . .. ........... .............. v.... .. .... .......... '. .. . v.... .......- ., '.....'...-... ..... .. ,..-....,.-....,. ,, ,.,.. .. -- ''" '--
management systems. These functions are; Integrated Logistics
Support Plan (ILSP), Program Management Plan (PMP), Test and
Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP), and Computer Resources Integrated
Support Plan (CRISP), accomplished manually.
The prime objective of logistics support analysis (LSA) and
the resulting data is the development, acquisition, and
sustaining of affordable systems and equipment which meet required
readiness levels. It is projected that the LSA/LSAR process will
eventually serve as the source of planning data for both design
and follow-on support activities. Within the LSA process, there
will be defined the engineering tasks that create the logistics
data, analysis, and tradeoffs associated with design and
development of the end item and its support system. An LSA data
element dictionary will be established that is both compatible
with the LSA task statements and the acquisition data requirements
of AFLC management systems. A logical extension will be the
establishment of direct links between the LSAR and AFLC data
management systems to fully automate the integration of logistics
* management planning.
Some of the ongoing and planning enhancements for LSA and
LSAR include the following:
a. development of LSAR extract routines to interface the
ULSA data file with Repair Level Analysis (RLA), Life
Cycle Support Cost, and Readiness models
b. development of a routine to generate internal data,
this will include records to automatically
generate/validate other data, such as provisioning
data, from reliability and maintainability analysis
c. development of a breakdown parts list utilizing the
r °parts master file and the LSA Control Numbers (LCN)
structure, regardless of the assignment method used;
the computer will assimilate from the file a list of
parts which constitutes an assembly.
E-11
Z!°2, L."-
The need for a compatible automated system among defense
commodity is quite evident. Currently there does not exist a
joint service plan for integration of these automated efforts.
Without such a plan, we will continue to purchase non-interactive
data bases and their accompanying hardware. As the CALS project
develops, the successful communication with compatible systems
appears quite achievable.
E
"* U
.- 12
V o.
m°"qb° • .................................."
APPENDIX E
2. FAST PACED VIEW OF CALS EVOLUTION: AN UNSTRUCTURED (AD HOC)
SYSTEM WILL EVOLVE WITH FREE FORM DEMAND BASED DATA SYSTEMS
Tasking: An unstructured (Ad Hoc) system where a central or
-- integrated distributed data base is used in free form where each
user can design and acquire the data that he needs on a demand
basis. Each of the extremes will be discussed from the point of
view of its attributes, advantanges, disadvantages, issues,
technology requirements, time frame in system life cycle, etc. as
well as its utility vis a vis each selected function.
This unstructured view of the weapon system data base
architecture attempt to look, not at current processes understood
by experienced designers, but at the w/s development process in
light of data processing technology as it is exploding in the
80's. It also attempts to project data processing technology
into the 21st century. It includes a view of the data base and
alco challenges contracting strategies that have evolved from the
realities of a different era. It takes as a basic premise that
weapon systems can be developed in HALF the time, HALF the cost
and with quantum increases in "designed in reliability".
The technologies:
a. Parallel processing vice serial
• b. On line archival media (optical disk or equal)
c. Distributed communications
d. Multi user, multi processor
e. Graphics
f. Multi level encryption protocols
g. CAD/CAM/CAE
h. Multi-machine translator protocols, i.e., GMManufacturing Automation Protocol (MAP)
i. Super micro processors
j. 100MHZ speeds
k. 100k baud rate switching devices
E-13
.''.- . *nnh * . . ' " " - ". .,- , ,
The strategies:
a. DoD demands total system responsibility
b. Distributed data base numbering architecture, i.e.,FINDER or equal
c. IR&D, CRAD and DoD labs use FINDER in laboratorytechnology development work
d. Total prime/sub tier integration a requirement
W e. DoD cost accounting procedures overhauled to trackdirect labor, overhead and material burden
f. DoD program managers interact with prime in developingsystem, i.e., drawing released authority
g. Database layered and segmented to deal with post
production support and spares breakout data visibility
h. DoD elects to leave database with prime as long as data
access service is satisfactory and meetspeacetime/wartime requirements.
Scenario: There is nothing that the DoD customer needs to
see and understand over and above what the developer and designer
see and do as a part of the development process. The whole
U process is a monolithic, indivisible continum of data processing
and decisions made based on the data visibility by contractor and
customer through interaction. Architecting and segmenting the
database to naturally feed the process with data needed for
* PDR/CDR and other decision points is the foundation of this
scenario.
Data Deliverables: Data deliverables changes to data
visibility timed to customer and contractor decision points in
the process. All technical information required to deploy and
operate/maintain a weapon system exists in some form in the
database. The trick is to identify those requirements and
provide for visibility of the data supporting the need at the
time the customer requires the data. This applies to a sectrum
E-14
.. . .. .. . . ...................... o.... ... ... -... % .--- , - .-.- ..- ,
from process information required to modify or manufacture a
part, through technical information required in some remote
p corner of the world. Included is anaysis data supporting design
decisions. Format and content of interogated data now becomes
the customers choice as to how he wants to retain visibility of
the data at point of use. For maintenance instructions, for
instance, he may elect a paper media, or optical disk download, or
elect to remain in an interogation mode based on his particular
need at the time. Also, actual tool cutting path and set up
procedures, tool selection, machine compatability and optimum
combinations of machine and cutting tool now becomes a matter of
distributed access as oposed to purchase of the information. As
new MANTECH processes such as thermoplastics come on the scene,
remanufacture or reprocurement alternatives will become viable
Falternatives to original manufacturing processes. As flexible
manufacturing cells and systems begin to proliferate through our
internal DoD depots and industry, alternatives to huge
investments to stock, store and control billions of dollars in
3 items begin to emerge to approch "Just in time" inventory
objectives for both the manufacture and support of weapon
systems.
* Prime Vendor Tier Relationships: The late 70s early 80s saw
the demise of the traditional "Primes". As distributed data
bases, multi level encryption protocols, and super micros entered
the scene, a bluring of traditional primes took place.
Contractor teaming along with constrained DoD markets caused
traditional primes to become active in the vendor tier to other
primes. For every prime contract the traditional primes were
awarded, there were 10 to 30 cases where the traditional prime
was now a supplier to another "prime". The question of vertical
integration became a major issue. It was simply too expensive to
vertically integrate all elements of a weapon ssystem design and
manufacture. However, as the new primes began to move major
E-15
1!
.5 . .* ' * * S**°
-7 7-W- -- ' N 7
portions of the design and manufacture out into the vendor tiers,
they also demanded that the vendors play on their resident
pCAD/CAM/CAE systems just as if they were vertically integrated
into the prime operation. The vst proliferation of CAD/CAM/CAE
systems that took place in the 70s gave way to communication
protocols developed by NBS, GM, DEC, IBM, and major DoD
traditional primes. The GM Manufacturing Automation Protocol
(MAP) became the "Freddie Laker" standard by shear weight of the
market place. It was there that DoD began to understand that "If
the prime can see it all through an integrated and distributed
data base, so can the customer". The philosophy became a major
source selection criteria in all weapon system development. From
this approach draconian cost cutting became a reality. Design
reviews that used to be expensive and time consuming now ere doneF "on the fly" without people traveling. Program managers began to
contract for drawing release authority at major points in the
design process. Provisioning data was bounced by the primes off
of distributed data bases containing preferred items BEFORE
3 provisioning conferences. What was left was new items and
contractor recommended unacceptable items to be debated as
proposed to the complete range of spares provisioning. There was
a fundamental understanding that modern computer based design and
* manufacturing systems could bring a weapon system on line in
"half the time - at half the cost - with quantum increases in
design reliability". These three issues became user requirements
and were fully supported in clear source selection criteria along
with the constant, performance.
E-16
-NA -!.
Appendix F
SHARED DATA
APPENDIX F
SHARED DATA - KEY TO ACHIEVING IMPROVED PRODUCTIVITY
THROUGH COMPUTER AIDED LOGISTIC SUPPORT
I. INTRODUCTION
The objective of this paper is to explore the aspects of
logistic support data requirements for an emerging weapons system
and to suggest a logical approach for transition from current
information support systems of today to shared data structured
systems of tomorrow.
The B-IB bomber was selected as a typical example of an
emerging weapons sytem for this discussion because of its position
in the development and deployment phase. Logistic data bases
that are currently being developed will support this weapon system
well into the next century. The current functional and
informational data models for these logistic data bases are
derived from a conceptual design study. This study, identified as
the Integrated Design Support System (IDS), is required for the
development of an advanced engineering support information system.
The conceptual study was funded by the U.S. Air Force Wright
Aeronautical Laboratory. The models developed under this study
were focused on sustaining engineering support to B-lB design,
manufacturing, depot and field support acitvities and are generic
to many emerging weapons systems.
2. THE PRESENT (AS IS) LOGISTIC SUPPORT DATA ENVIRONMENT
Considerable industry and government attention has been
focused on both the development and integration of automated
business systems and on the development of computer-aided
engineering systems. Little effort, however, has been applied to
the integration of computer-aided engineering systems or to the
design of systems to acquire, manage, and communicate graphical,
r alphanumeric, and textual data in various combinations. Research
and development work has been performed on generic data base
F-2
management technology under the IPAD*, ICAMm, and ATI programs,
but this technology has not been exploited on a broad level for
the development and deployment of major weapon systems.
A wide range of technical support activities provide product
technical data services from conceptual design through
manufacturing, weapons sytem operations, and product retirement.
_A top level schematic of organizational technical support
activities for the B-lB aircraft system development program is
shown in Figure 1. The diagram is intended to depict sustaining
engineering support activities that use engineering data directly
such as manufacturing material review, repair, depot repair and
design modifications. It should be noted that significant
secondary uses of technical support data are not shown in the
diagram such as training, maintenance provisioning, and
operations mission analysis.
*IPAD - Integrated Programs for Aerospace Vehicle Design - NASA
ICAM - Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing - USAF
ATI - Automated Technical Information - USAF
Current emphasis by both the government and industry is in
the development of organizational rather than data-driven
systems. In the development of a weapon system, the traditional
technical support data bases that are passed on to the
contracting agency are engineering drawings, specifications, and
technical orders for maintenance support. The remaining
technical data bases that reside with the contractor are
significant. An example of structural technical support data
bases for the B-lB is shown in Figure 2. It should be noted that
a majority of digital and graphic data bases are considered
private. These data bases are controlled by design and analysis
support organizations and are not maintained as official released
data.
There are a number of inplace and emerging logistic
informational systems both at contractor and government
j facilities. An example of key Rockwell and government logistic
systems that utilize or manipulate information is shown in
F-3
.- . ,
SIse
UJU
*z 0
CI
r liilia!far
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*~ WAD"L
RmfJ4Ivi~m caa~.vv
* Is 9d
"Be=i 73 I4)a9LU
M&MQMs nw"re~ muC~
£ TU
MOM = 3ftal Im*
"a ca
=-to 0
CI I 09c
,6GW a "c~u
w~l"OMnsw
2. E:4W~dW
M~InU.i Owt lrou~wi
CS319SV 3) 2ZIS 3 SVS Vj-VO 9-19--------------------------------------------------------------................----------
L
Figure 3. Todays technical support sytems are generally
hierarchical in nature, are transaction driven, and many operate
in a batch environment. Data reside in a heterogeneous computer
environment and are generally non-communicative between
dissimilar computer systems. Specific problems and issues with
todays heterogeneous logistic support information system
environment are discussed in the following paragraphs.
While technical computer innovations and data system
automation are progressing at an accelerated rate, integration
through shared data is progressing slowly.
Information systems have not been developed from a data-
r[ driven approach, but rather from an organizational or
application-driven approach. Present information systems serve
discrete user needs. Redundant product support data must be
maintained or recreated in many data bases.
Neutral data formats are being developed that address
n geometric and textual data communications between computers and
graphic terminals. Two such systems are IGES and GENCODE.
Development of these systems is currently evolving. Technology
that is currently lagging involves heterogeneous data control and
manipulation. This problem is partly due to the computer vendors
and the competitive nature of industry and government functional
organizations.
In the development of a weapon system, data are acquired in
the form of discrete CDRL's (Contract Data Requirements List).
Even though there is a determined relationship between many if
not all of the data deliverables, such as drawings,
specifications, and technical orders, the data are delivered to
government organizations and stored as separate data systems.
These information systems include paper, micro-fiche and magnetic
storage mediums. Even though transition to digitized data bases
* [is occurring, the prevailing mentality of information management
remains in the paper medium.
F-6
p ' -,-•o. " -, . o' " " Dq= b
, " ° "" . o . .
Rockwell Management and Data Systems
LDMS - Logistics Management Data System
LSDS - Logistics Support Data System
PIOMS - Provisioned Item Order Management System.
SEMIS - Support Equipment Management Information System
TOTS - Technical Order Tracking System
LIMS - Logistics Inventory Management System
ICSIS - Interim Contract Support Information System
MCC-ICS - Management Control Center Interim Contract Support
MCS Boeing - Management Control System
CETS - Contract Engineering Technical Support System
IDS - Integrated Design Support System
CITS - Central Integrated Test System Ground Processing System
EACN - Emergency Airborne Communications Network
US Air Force Management and Data Systems
* CAMS -Core Automated Maintenance System
OMS - Logistics Management System*i LOC - Logistics Operations Center
IMMS - Integrated Maintenance Management System comprising
MICAP, MDC, AWP, and AVISURS
CMS - Combat Maintenance System
WSMIS - Weapon System Management Information System
SAC - Strategic Air Command Operational Data
MICAP - Mission Capability System
MDC - Maintenance Data Collection
AWP - Awaiting Parts System
AVISURS - Aerospace Vehicle Inventory, Status and Utility
Reporting System
Figure 3.
SELECTED MAINTENANCE LOGISTICS SUPPORT DATA SYSTEMS
r CONTRACTOR AND GOVERNMENT
F- 7
Present government automated logistic technical data base
gdevelopment programs (EDCARS* - computer based drawings, and ATOS-
automated tech orders) do not address the aspects of shared data
* ii outside of their own application. Furthermore, government
logistic support organizations have not developed overall
strategies for dealing with new digitized design and analysis
data bases that are required for long term logistic support of
major weapon systems. Examples of such data bases are referenced
in Figure 3.
Current trends encouraged by the Air Force Logistics Command
to consider the logistic implications of a weapon system at
design time can be expected to continue. However, the attitude
of both the customer and the system designer must change for thisr Lo be the case. The customer (the Air Force in this instance)
must not only encourage the contractor to design supportability
into the system, but must also be ready to fund the additional
effort this requires. Once chartered by the conditions of the
1 contract, the system designer must be as creative and as
innovative as possible in anticipating the future requirements of
. -the weapon system, not only from the operational point of view,
but from the damage repair and maintenance point of view as well,
Ia not inconsequential challenge considering the complexity and
sophistication of today's weapons.
• .The computer offers the maximum opportunity to support the
system designer in accomplishing ambitious design goals.
Hardware manufacturers can be expected to de.livery increasingly
sophisticated tools for storage, computation and manipulation of
data. Trends in firming up programmed engineering design rules
*and processes by means of reducing them to PROMs and EPROMs and
offering this capability at the touch of a key will also
*] continue. Software houses will continue to provide the engineer
with an increasingly capable array of data base management
systems designed for more flexibility at less cost with more
reliability.
F-8
," .. *.v.,
"Where is the challenge, then?" one may ask. In a word, the
I challenge is in the data. The management of this critical asset
poses a challenge equal to the technology which conceived it. The
subtlety of the challenge is that few people intuitively
appreciate the magnitude and complexity of the data problem.
The system designer may perceive the major problem to be
addres'ed as a computational problem and only incidentally a data
problem. After all, shouldn't the data be regarded as a given?
From the individual designer point of view the data might be
regarded as something solely personal and individual, but a
moments reflection dispels this notion. The conventional view
has it that when the design data are firmed up, they can be
released and configuration management imposed on them. This has
worked reasonably well for the manufacturing and downstream
functions of the contractors and subcontractors before delivery
of the system to DoD, who must now service, maintain and repair
the system in an operational environment. Many years or even
decades later, after numerous repairs and modifications have been
implemented on the system, the original design data may have been
lost, the original manufacturer may no longer be in the same
business, and design assumptions and hypotheses may have to be
IL guessed at.
Will this situation suffice for the weapons systems of today
. as these systems age in operational service? The computer offers
the mechanism with its ability to store and manipulate vast
amounts of data with acceptable speed. Data, defined at the
. attribute class level, documented as supporting a particular
function in the data model, and available from a shared source on
a node of a heterogeneous network utilizing secure communications
seem to offer a necessary and required asset, one which is
lacking in todays logistics environment.
*EDCARS - Engineering Data Collection and Retrieval System (USAF)
ATOS - Automated Technical Order System - USAF
F -9
I,
1 '7
3. FUTURE (TO BE) LOGISTIC SUPPORT INFORMATION SYSTEMS
The "To Be" world addressed by the IDS system envisions a
scenario similar to the one described above, and work is starting
on the disciplining of the data. The current world seems to be
"forms" driven, there is a form for everything, and everything
has its form. Forms are a necessity in a paper environment. Howelse to assure the completeness of the data or their location in
the manual filing systems of yesterday (and, unfortunately of
today)? The electronic world can be forms independent and offer
flexibility undreamed of in a paper based media. But much needs
to be accomplished in the science (or art) of managing the data
world of tomorrow and it is just now being formulated. It
includes developing a listing of approved class words, key words
and modifiers -- in other words, classification and coding of
data. The use of this device will attempt to bring order in the
dictionary as attributes and entities are gathered across the
vast range of functional activities served by the (IDS) system.
The key to achieving future DoD productivity in weapon
system support is in the development of data-driven rather than
organizational-driven systems. Future logistic information
systems need to address the following issues:
. o Reconfiguration of contractor and DoD structure and
organizatinal policies
o User and application design "ad hoc" queries
o Total product support rather than individual CDRL's
o Heterogeneous data base managers on heterogeneous
" computers
, o Hardware-oriented data base machines
o Versatile generative combinations of data elements
o Effective classification and coding schemas
The development of computer-aided logistics support should
be an orderly, evolutionary process with appropriate DoD
component service policy guidance and successful resolution of
F-10
.................................. ...., -.-m . m . ... ... .......... ,... ...
key technical issues. The policy will be required to address
three key issues:
1. Commitment to a broad program architecture that will
permit development in a systematic manner.
. 2. The integration of developing data base management
technologies into rapidly maturing CAD/CAM/CAE
technologies.
3. The establishment of requirements for future weapon
system designs to support automated logistics data
collection activities necessary for emerging support
concepts.
Key technical issues must be addressed through the extension
of evolving information system concepts and, in some instances,
new concept developments. Influencing the standards environment
to achieve a compatible hierarchy of standards is necessary for
3 handling the full range of logistics data in digital format.
A key to the success of computer-aided logistics support is
the ability to develop an information model for logistics.
Today, each logistics data requirement is like looking at the
weapons through a know hole - not seeing the whole and not having
data relatable to other data. Data base concepts will be
required to accommodate both man/machine and machine/machine
users. Data storage has to be viable for the life of the weapons
system (30 years plus). The integration of data types (i.e.,
text, graphics, tables, math models, etc.) has to be achieved to
perserve information context. Information management concepts
for access and integrity control throughout a wide-spread network
of users will present a challenge.
Logistics data can be expected to transition from
information (the "what") to knowledge (the "how") in recognition
of the capability to capture an embedded knowledge base in thedesign and manufacture of a weapons system and in the
F-11
-
. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . .
deployment and operation of weapons systems. The embedded
knowledge will be more accessable as computer assistance becomes
inherent in the processes that build and operate future weapon
systems.
The first tangible product in computer-aided logistics
support is the deployment of a "kernel" logistics information
system. Such a system will require a concept for a logistics
data base. Once the "kernel" system is deployed, new analytical
-software will evolve for every element. This software will
provide capability beyond currently available tools as it
incorporates access to new data base resources.
Government systems will require upgrade to accept digital
r format logistics data. New contracting vehicles will be required
to define, specify and receive digital logistics products.
* . The above is at best only a glimpse into the new frontiers
that can be achieved through computer-aided logistic support. A
time phase road-map of capability with some key technical
demonstrations are shown in Figure 4. This is intended to show
general direction and is not a specific plan. What is described
in Figure 4 is a major undertaking involving coordination
L throughout DoD and the defense industry.
4. INTEGRATED DESIGN SUPPORT SYSTEM (IDS) TECHNOLOGY WEDGE
The U.S. Air Force Human Resources Laboratory (HRL) and a
I _coalition of USAF and technology subcontractors headed by
Rockwell International are currently developing and prototyping
and advanced information technology system called IDS.
The objective of the IDS program is to design, develop,
construct and demonstrate a prototype information management
system that will provide capability to efficiently capture,
manage, and distribute key digital technical data across the
entire life span of major Air Force Weapons systems (see Figure
5).
F-12
" .... "--'--................ -.......................... . . ." - ... :" -"".-' -"..,-:
EVOLUTIOCOMPUTER AIDI
DEVELOP INFORMATION MANAGEMENT CNET
ADP ANONCeEPTSor DEVELOP DEIGN IFL;
IINITIA y" a NM
ARCHITECTUR DEVELOP ANINFORMATION DEFINE A KNOWLEDGEBASED SYSTEM
IN dasigem sad uxamulaclure
~EC~R~, ODELFOR DGISICS DEFdINE CALS SYSTEM TAXONONINLE STANAD ENdVIROdMENT Arhicss Ciittatmadt btieg b
D Comatle rm y ofl~~t~ stnadsDV L PLOISTC W R s.d
INFLU e ENVRONENTDEVLO STATION CONCEPT LGSISWR ~lg~ a u
I-NE R T Teh e O rd ts . . Smart. lorm lai>
DBM/CAD!ACTIVITIES [DEVELOP DATA BASE CONCEPTS DSG
Accageadata known datla sture ESG CL DATA BASE
Presids strage W fte t wapsa sytmm iegration of data toposta.
owes/labefstm modais, t.)
SELECT CALS MECHAN12141-"tlt
FO R OVAUT OTE AIf DEEOlOMNIAINeOCETfDtIN PRTOA LGSISIMORAEPOVO NSTE DEVELOP_______ _ COMNCAIN CONCEPTSi DEIG OPRTINLOISIS
LOGISTICS DATA :::I>bln DAT COLmLad TIONSYaTEMSIDT COLLCTINrSYTEM
COLLECTION IN I Capacity Eftedat ctterporle ACAl EPO
WEAPON SYSTEMS $ads
41 POLICY 0 41 NEW CONCEPTS * *CONCEPT VALIDATION* *NEW RESODEMONSTRATIONS DEMONSTRATIONS DEMONSTR
I1 Digital logilstIcs products (PAN Std 131182A) 1. DaIU base composie nyst 1. Upterd/dtwmd
2. Individual tacliesieglas ha"n potential - Access cotlM 2. Pad CAL tuCALS appoicallt - a & ft Iatt aye. qelh
3. Standards - Adi t.rollsm- Merging of I655 and S10111 Coot - geitewof a chasg3esamor
4. Compeler asssnce to loitc su 2. Loplics work tutumprocesses I lnowildge bas ystem
5. CAS desbeen- Desige and MateutacterragS. Transpdrtablt bana e - Dopheymhal and Opwallma s"ptt
. N l r ae p a c k Vy S d t 4 . T o r - a y d a ts b a s s
7. Ilewub caac~ty5. Ofta oat systeom,S. Netek sacerty
12.14-84-1
Figure 4. EVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENT OF COMPUTER AID
F-13
*~~~~1 C70- 11, r w. -
* EVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENT OFIPUTER AIDED LOGISTICS SUPPORT (CALS)
DEVEOP ESIN IFLUNCEDEVELDP ANALYTICAL SOFTWARE: DEVELOP NEW METHODS OFDiEVEO DrErSGNLEC ALGORITHMS'~ -a Mieeaepaeai MAINTENANCE
System trade rolatrefistips Supl s prsee * Knowledge beund lastref syelon*Suppotly 'I- roepe okwte
T echniclda
*Packagleng. handling. stem"o transportatien_____________________________"40 Deinterimc
:FINE CAlS SYSTEM TAXONOMY Deg/OLA pelcyArchdtcr * ep.es.
*Fuectnall ecaufs FlesAWby
____________________________ ___________________________DEVELOP NEW FAMILY DOF
I >O PLANNING AND D:IAGNOSTIC
ACQUIRE AND DEPLOY CALS "KERNEL" UPGRADE GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS TOMODELS
LOGISTICS INFORMATION SYSTEM ACCEPT CALS DIGITAL DATA / *Dgta" andpet
* I ELET CLS ECHAIZAIONCONEPTDEVELOP NEW METHODS OF
* tae-l-d DD omstbdtyIDEVELOP CONTRACTING VEHICLES SUPle SUPOT o-kf* Atedaetty lec mrkFOR GENERATION OF =DIGITAL DATA -a-
* DEVELOP A CALS DEPLOYMENT STRATEGY * Oedingmsedeekatre
- Data capture- Dab retention
41 NEW RESOURCES * * NEW TOOLS 0 41 NEW FRONTIERSDEMONSTRATIONS
* 1~ Upward/dsmflm~rd eqelyMee cempaIbitY2, Par IMt -CALS type- system i inapites
Syste m qrtition
* 3 Beectmark demonstrations
COMPUTER AIDED LOGISTICS SUPPORT (CALS)
%RE: DEVELOP NEW METHODS OFMAINTENANCE
" lofter-octiv tech ordersa" K go4Q based lustrectiusi systemse
*Prognostic malot omocl4'
* -ansporItlon
0Substantial weapon systemmaintainability and reliabilityImprovement through designInfluence
DEVELOP NEW FAILY OFPLNIGAND DIAGNOSTIC
7YEMS TO MODELS)ATA- Kowlege ase Substantial improvements intSYSTMS O> DiitaldabsuptedDeD logistics support processes
and procedures *. . *
* DEVELOP NEW METHO0DS OFSUPPLY SUPPORT
* * Digital proctohmoft Packges* * Manotacoriag
PI 'or to- Robots
GOndomsot IOotOctufs
-. ~ 4 *NEW FRONTIERS -
% 44t!~~r I'r'
zujIA
UA so 0zL 4p e@
LU LAw
II
00
4L c A.O)
0
5 c E
zc 0.0 U)0
UuL0C INC A Q 12L
C E
LaZa. L
uF- 14
The major IDS program challenges and goals are summarized
below:
(1) To develop a prototype IDS system that will demonstrate
integration of state-of-the-art and emerging technology
to manage technical data in a heterogeneous computer
and functional environment (Figure 5).
(2) To develop engineering functional and information
models that provide complete understanding of data and
activity structure from conceptual design to product
retirement for a major, emerging military large
aircraft system.
(3) To construct, build, and demonstrate a flexible IDS
prototype system that can be rapidly expanded as new
technologies emerge in the areas of data base machines,
advanced design and analysis graphics, advanced
communications, and artificial intelligence.
(4) To assure that the system design reflects capability
for upward migration and portability.
(5) To develop the IDS concept in a production environment
that will provide a realistic test bed for requirements
definition, prototyping, initial build, and
demonstration.
(6) To structure the IDS design so as to facilitate
transition of the system from the research and
development and prototype stages into a production
system.
(7) To demonstrate and prototype IDS in a manner that will
provide the baseline for future technical information
management on all Air Force weapon systems.
(8) To formulate draft requirements to be used as a
baseline for establishing technical data requirements
for future Air Force Systems.
F-15
Rockwell is also involved with the Analytical Sciences
Corporation of Reading, Massachussetts in the initial phase of an
Air Force program to develop and implement a B-lB Logistics
Technical Support Center (TSC). This program will establish a
management and technical center for Air Force logistic support for
the B-IB weapon system. The center will also provide
operational/readiness status capability to the Air Logistics
Center (ALC) B-IB system manager and will provide technical
information support between contractor, depot, and operatinal
repair facilities.
The IDS will provide advanced data bsae management and
communications concepts in support of the TSC. Advanced
r prototypes of the IDS (Advanced Information Management Concepts)
and the Technical Support Center (advanced control and technical
communication concepts) are scheduled for fiscal 1986.
5. SUMMARY
The United States Air Force is stepping beyond traditional
methods of data base management in the IDS program. More powerful
microcomputers and data base machines, new data and information
* models, and the effective use of distributed data in a
heterogeneous environment are all part of this reserch effort.
IDS could well prove to be the data base solution that everyone
is looking for. If so, the signficance of IDS could be
tremendous, resulting in replacement of more standard data
structures and thereby reducing computer and storage costs and
providing networking between dissimilaar computer systems. Every
government agency, as well as all of industry, needs this
capability. The IDS program will prove the concepts workable in
a prototype system before transferring these developments to
production systems.
F-16
.4 . ...... ........................................................
DISTRIBUTION
IDA Report R-285
REPORT OF THE JOINT INDUSTRY-DoD TASK FORCE ONCOMPUTER-AIDED LOGISTIC SUPPORT (CALS)
Volume IV - Report of Information Requirements Subgroup
300 Copies
No. of
Department of Defense
Russell ShoreyDirector, Weapon Support, OASD(A&L)Room 2B322, The PentagonWashington, DC 20301
t Kurt Greene
Staff Director, Technology DivisionOASD(A&L)/DMSSO2 Skyline Place, Suite 14035203 Leesburg PikeFalls Church, VA 22041
Kurt MolholmAdministratorDefense Technical Information CenterBldg. 5, Cameron StationAlexandria, VA 22304-6145
IPJoseph ArcieriDeputy Director, DoD Weapon SupportImprovement and Analysis Office
1400 Two Skyline Place5203 Leesburg PikeFalls Church, VA 22041
Jim DalgetyTechnical Data DivisionDefense Materiel Specifications
and Standardization2 Skyline Place, Suite 14035203 Leesburg PikeFalls Church, VA 22041
DL- I
I
Dr. Charles BuffalanoDeputy Director for ResearchDefense Advanced Research Projects Agency1400 Wilson BoulevardA Arlington, VA 22209
Mr. John J. LaneDirector of Information SystemsASD(C31)Rm. 3E187, The PentagonWashington, DC 20301
D. Burton NewlinComputer Software and
Support, MCCRC1071211 South Fern StreetArlington, VA 22202
William T. PreskerTechnology Divisionr Defense Logistics AgencyRoom 3C442, Cameron StationAlexandria, VA 22314
Jack P. BartleyOASD, A&L/SSRoom 3B274, The PentagonWashington, DC 20301
Mr. Jack McDevittOASD(MI&L)SPMRm. 2C263, The PentagonWashington, DC 20301
Bruce Lepisto1400 Two Skyline Place5203 Leesburg PikeFalls Church, VA 22041
OSD/WHS/DIORATTN: Mrs. Karen Kirkbride1215 Jefferson Davis HighwaySuite 1204Arlington, VA 22202
DoD-IDA Management Office1801 N. Beauregard StreetAlexandria, VA 22311
Defense Technical Information Center 2Cameron StationAlexandria, VA 22304-6145
DL-2
[Vf .: .: .......? .? .. . .?... ........ *.. ...... *... . .. . .. . . . . . .... ~... .. ... . .. . - \.' ., . .... , ... ..-. - . . . .,*; , , ,.
- , ,,- ,,.,, d , - , Inl 'i ' I .. . , .. .. '1 . . . -i . ... .' .. . i * ' '
Department of the Army
Mr. Eric OrsiniDeputy Assistant Secretary
* of the Army (Logistics)Rm. 3E620, The PentagonWashington, DC 20310
Edwin GreinerAssistant Deputy for Materiel
Readiness, AMCRoom 10S065001 Eisenhower AvenueAlexandria, VA 22333-0001
Fred MichelDirector, Manufacturing TechnologyHQ AMC, ATITN: AMCMT5001 Eisenhower AvenueAlexandria, VA 22333-0001
r" Richard CallanHQ AMC, AMCRE-CRoom 5E085001 Eisenhower AvenueAlexandria, VA 22333-0001
* Mike DucodyHQ AMC, AMCRE-C5001 Eisenhower AvenueAlexandria, VA 22333-0001
John E. Holvoet* HQ AMC, AMCMT-S
Room 8N145001 Eisenhower AvenueAlexandria, VA 22333-0001
Dan McDavidHQ AMCAMCSC-PLD5001 Eisenhower AvenueAlexandria, VA 22333-0001
John PeerUSAMCMaterial Readiness Support ActivityATTN: AMXMD-ELLexington, KY 40511
r
DL-3
T........................
Z- .- __r
Howard RojewskiAMC - ALMSA210 N. Tucker BoulevardP. O. Box 1578St. Louis, MO 63188
LTC Steve TracyHQ U.S. ArmyDACS-DMP
MP Rm. 1C460, The PentagonWashington, DC 20310
LT GEN Benjamin F. Register, Jr.DCS/LogisticsDALO-ZARm. 3E560, The PentagonWashington, DC 20310
Robert FrenchAMMRC, DRZMR-M405 Arsenal StreetWatertown, Maine 02172
Commanding GeneralARDC(D)Dover, NJ 07801-5001
5 ATTN: SMCAR-RAAJim Bevelock
Ms. Jean LambConcepts and Doctrine
Division, 5E08p. Army Materiel Command AMCRE-C
5001 Eisenhower AvenueAlexandria, VA 22333
Department of the Navy
Emerson CaleDeputy Director for Logistics PlansChief of Naval OperationsRoom 4B546, The PentagonWashington, DC 20250
Dave SherinDirector, Logistics R&DNAVSUP 033Room 606, Crystal Mall 3Washington, DC 20376
DL-4
L% %
Ernest GlaubersonNC3, Room 6W44PMS 309
5! NAVSEAWashington, DC 20362-5100
Bill GorhamNAVSUP 033Room 606, Crystal Mall 3Washington, DC 20376
Mr. Frank SwoffordDirector, Aviation and Ordnance ProgramsDepartment of the Navy
*-.120 Crystal Plaza 52211 Jefferson Davis HighwayArlington, VA 22202
Albert S. J. Knight, IIComputer Integrated Engineering
Branch, Code 936Naval Ocean Systems CenterSan Diego, CA 92152-5000
Mr. Roland PiepenbinkNavy Surface Weapon System
Engineering StationS NAVSEA Data Support Activity/5H 13Port Hueneme, CA 93043
Mr. James GenovesePML 550511 Crystal Square 5Washington, DC 20376
Captain John F. Leahy, IIIPMS 3096W44 National Center 3Naval Sea Systems CommandWashington, DC 20362
Department of the Air Force
Tom BahanAFALC/CCXWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
Oscar GoldfarbDeputy for Supply and MaintenanceSAFAL - Room 4D865, The PentagonrWashington, DC 20250
DL-5
% %,
COL Donald C. TetmeyerAFHRIJLRBldg. 190, Area BWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
Nick BernsteinAFWAL/FIBRBuilding 45Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 15433
-. Neil ChristiansonAF/RDXM, Engineering Data StandardsRoom 4E317, The PentagonWashington, DC 20250
Mr. Gerald ShumakerAFWALJMLTCWright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
Terry GrangerAFALC/PTL
!" Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
COL Hondo HernandezAss't. DCS/Product Assurance
and Acquisition LogisticsHQ Air Force Systems CommandAndrews AFBWashington, DC 20330
Kenneth L. MorrisAFALC/PTAAWright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
Al Herner 1AFHRL/LRArea B, Bldg 190Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
MAJ John HullHQ/USAF/LE-RDWashington, DC 20330-5130
COL John ReynoldsHQ AFLC-MM/R
I Wright-Patterson AFBDayton, Ohio 45433
MAJ Gordon SprayAF/XOXIMRoom 4C1061, The Pentagon
(: Washington, DC 20330-5057
DL-6
. . ., ~~~~~~ ,.=-=, nti,,l~lm ,k hl mdlnlnik'.... ... -".........-'' -' " ..... "-
p.,
" CAPT Stephen StephensonAFWAL/FIBRWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
5COL Tom ManspergerHQ USAF/RDXMAcquisition Mangement Policy
-," Room 4D316, The PentagonWashington, DC 20330
Ms. Frieda W. KurtzHQ AFSC (PLEL)Andrews AFB, MD 20334-5000
COL Gene Tattini 3
HQ, Air Force SystemsCommand, PLX
Andrews AFB, MD 20334
Mr. Blaine FerchASD/ENEGTWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
Mr. Anthony CoppolaRADC/RBETGriffiss Air Force BaseNew York 13441-5700
u Mr. Robert AndersonAFALC/PTEWright-Patterson AFBDayton, Ohio 45433
COL Joe HermannAFALC/PTLWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
- MAJ GEN M. T. Smith
-- CMDR AFALCWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
Frank BorazAFWAIJMLTEWright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
* •LT COL William BecknerHQ USAF/LEXY
S-. Rm. 4B330, The Pentagon" " Washington, DC 20330-5190
Mr. William Bohaning
C" HQ AFLC/LMSWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
DL-7
1.
-,.. . . . ., .. . .. . .. , . . .. .. . ... ..-..-. . . . .. . . . .' .. -.-. '. :..... . .. , . : .. ,.. . ...... .
CAPT Paul ConditAF/HRLWright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
COL Robert FrankHQ AFLC/LMSWright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
Ms. Mary I. GraftonHQ USAF/LEXWRm. 4B333, The PentagonWashington, DC 20330-5190
Other Government Agencies
Mr. Bernard G. LazorchakJoint Committee on PrintingS- 151, The CapitolWashington, DC 20510
James H. BurrowsNational Bureau of StandardsTechnology BuildingRoom B 154Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Robert Hocken* National Bureau of Standards
Automated Production Technology DivisionMeteorology Bldg., Room B106Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Brad SmithNational Bureau of Standards
. Technology BuildingGaithersburg, MD 20899
Scott Bostic 2Defense Logistics Service CenterFederal Center74 N. WashingtonBattle Creek, MI 49017-3084
Private Industry
• Mr. Paul C. AtallahElectronic Data Systems CorporationEngineering Building, N2-CIS30200 Mound RoadWarren Michigan 48090-9010
DL-8
-', . '-. -. -."--'-'-.'. .:.-; "-.'.- 2 -. .a --*A I : .3.. '."--.- ,." "''2";",'-- -2 ''""." .'''' .. .""- ""
Mr. Richard C. BantaLogistics Systems DepartmentIntegrated Logistics Support DivisionWestinghouse Defense and Electronics Center1111 Schilling Road - MS 7906Hunt Valley, MD 21031
Ken BelcherAerojet Strategic Propulsion Co.Bldg. 1960-Z
.P P. 0. Box 15699CSacramento, CA 95813
Jerry CowanCowan and Associates12451 Zia CabezonSan Diego, CA 92129
Fran DeLauraMitre Corporation1820 Dolley Madison Blvd.
r McLean, VA 22102
Mark GeppsonHoneywell, Inc.Mail Stop MN 15-2694P. 0. Box 312Minneapolis, MN 55440
Laurie AndrewsP. 0. Box 19422Burbank, CA 91510
Michael Garverick*I International Business Services, Inc.
1090 Vermont Ave, N.W.Washington, DC 20005
James J. SikoraVice President, General SupportTest and EvaluationBDM Corporation1801 Randolph RoadAlbuquerque, NM 87106
Mr. Richard BiendenbenderEvaluation Research Corporation1755 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 800Arlington, VA 22202
L
DL-9
. ... ......... ... . . . ,. . . .-. .- . -.. € ..- . .- . .-. ..-.. ---- ., ... .. ,.. ..
Mr. E. B. BirchfieldChief Program Engineer,Computer Aided Design
McDonnell Aircraft CorporationO P.O. Box 516
St. Louis, MO 63166
David H. WilsonMIS IR-15Boeing Aerospace CompanyP. 0. Box 3999Seattle, WA 98124
Mr. Hal ResnickQUSOFT, Inc.Suite 2062755 Hartland RoadFalls Church, VA 22243
Mr. Lee RiversHughes AircraftBuilding A-I, M/S 4C617P. 0. Box 9399Long Beach, CA 90810-2399
Mr. H. I. StarrTRW Electronics and DefenseBuilding 119B, Room 4005One Space ParkRedondo Beach, CA 90278
Mr. Robert VermetteAmerican Management Systems12th Floor
iU 1777 North Kent StreetArlington, VA 22209
Mr. Michael LongAmerican Management Systems12th Floor1777 North Kent StreetArlington, VA 22209
Robert L. AnnettMarine Division (ML&H)Integrated Logistics SupportWestinghouse Electric CorporationP. 0. Box 499Sunnyvale, CA 94088
DL-10
[.
i-7
* Donald L. SeidenspinnerSystems Engineering, Integrated
Logistics SupportGrumman Aerospace CorporationBethpage, NY 11714
Doug DoerrIT Aerospace/Optical DivisionP. O. Box 3700
Ft. Wayne, IND 46801
John C. GebhardtVice President, Engineering andResearch
- InterCAD Corporation2525 Riva RoadAnnapolis, MD 21401
Thomas L. NondorfSenior Engineer, LogisticsMcDonnell Aircraft Company
U P.O. Box 516St. Louis, MO 63166
Richard GunkelIDA ConsultantPresident, BITE, Inc.
* 9254 Center StreetManassas, VA 22110
Mary A. KlementGroup Engineer, ILS EngineeringGeneral Dynamics
gl Convair DivisionP. 0. Box 85357San Diego, CA 92138
Richard AlweilDirector, Product Engineering and SupportHazeltine CorporationCuba Hill RoadGreenlawn, NY 11740
John BarkerS•-Director, Product Support
Boeing Aerospace CompanyP. 0. Box 3999, Mail Stop 82-09Seattle, WA 98124-2499
I-
i DL- 11
T
Jack N. BestCorporate Director, Productivity
Programs and PlansGeneral Dynamics CorporationPierre LaClede Building7733 Forsyth StreetSt. Louis, MO 63105
Howard ChambersPak Vice President, Logistics
Rockwell InternationalNorth American Aircraft Operations100 N. Sepulveda BoulevardDept. 101-ZT-12El Segundo, CA 90245
Harley CloudDirector of TechnologyIBM Federal System Division6600 Rockledge Driver Bethesda, MD 20817
Herman Correale 5Corporate Director, Product SupportMcDonnell Aircraft CompanyLambert FieldDept. 090, Building #1, Level 3P. 0. Box 516St. Louis, MO 63166
Darrell CoxRockwell InternationalNorth American Aircraft Operations201 North Douglas StreetDept. 118,011 -GC02El Segundo, California 90245
W. R. PhillipsVice President, EngineringNewport News Shipbulding and Dry Dock4101 Washington AvenueNewport News, VA 23607
Mike DeeterManager, Advanced LogisticsNorth American Aircraft OperationsRockwell International100 N. Sepulveda BoulevardEl Segundo, CA 90245
DL- 12
ADR6 N REPORT OF THE JOINT INDUSTRY - DOD TASK FOOC -ON - - 3/3CONPUTER AIDED LOGISTIC.. (U) INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSEANALYSES ALEXANDRIA VA F R RIDDELL ET AL. JUN 85
UNCLASSIFIED IDA-R-285-YOL-4 IDA/NG-84-25449 F/G 15/5 NL
Eu.....
q- - . . . .- r
1.0II'l.
IIIII ~ 1118HI-11.25 11.4 111.6
MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART
NATIONAL uf, rEAJ OF STAftOlNS 1 --
John Dutton 2Director, McAir IRMMcDonnell Aircraft CompanyDept. 52, Level 1, Room 3806951 N. HanleyHazelwood, MO 63042
* George FredericksManager, Logistics R&D EngineeringIBM Federal Systems DivisionMail Stop 864/5A581100 Frederick PikeGaithersburg, MD 20879
* James A. PalmerDirector, Engineering AdministrationNewport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock4101 Washington AvenueNewport News, VA 23607
Mark P. PittengerBoeing Aerospace Company20403 68th Avenue, SouthKent, WA 98032
John TierneyDirector, Logistics RequirementsGeneral Dynamics CorporationFort Worth DivisionP. 0. Box 748, Mail Zone 1835Fort Worth, TX 76101
John WillisI. Rockwell International
100 N. Sepulveda BoulevardDept. 115-GD-10El Segundo, CA 90245
John AndersonBoeing AerospaceP. 0. Box 3707, Mail Stop 03-80Seattle, WA 98124
George Beiser3001 N. Florida StreetArlington, VA 22207
Ray BournIBM Federal Systems DivisionMail Stop 102-0729500 Godwin DriveManassas, VA 22100
DL-13
1o.
" " 'o " ' "o " €' ,l" ,," ," ,, o" ,* " " ',"'"' .l "" ,. "" ."". ". "" ."". "- .- .- ". "- ." , "- -" "
* * °. .'..-- -. .- - • "*
Robert R. BrownHughes Aircraft Co.Bldg. E-1, Mail Stop A116
A P. 0. Box 9022000 E. El Segundo BoulevardEl Segundo, CA 90245
William E. FloranceEastman Kodak CompanyAdvanced Systems DivisionBldg. 601, Kodak ParkRochester, NY 14650
Gary L. Foreman6. . Senior Scientist, Advanced Program
Support LabHughes Aircraft Co.Bldg. 276/Mail Stop T42Canoga Park, CA 91304
Judson French, Jr.Program Manager, Advanced Development
Support SystemsWestinghouse Electric Corp.Mail Stop 70341111 Schilling RoadHunt Valley, MD 21031
Siegfried GoldsteinSiegfried Enterprises7 Dulittle StreetNorth Babylon, NY 11703
p Erich HausnerLockheed California Co.Dept. 72-78 90-3 A-1Burbank, CA 91520-7278
Fred HirtLitton/MellonicsSuite 8206490 L'Enfant Plaza East, SWWashington, DC 20024
Frank M. KrantzWestinghouse Electric Corp.P. 0. Box 1693, Mail Stop 4410Baltimore, MD 21203
W. D. LewisGeneral Dynamics CorporationDSD Headquarters12101 Woodcrest Executive DriveSt. Louis, MO 63141
DL-14
*. . . . . . . * *..
Fred MaceyDept. 63-11, Zone 333Lockheed Georgia Co.Marietta, GA 30063
Mark PalatchiDept. 63-11, Zone 333Lockheed Georgia Co.Marietta, GA 30063
William W. TunnicliffeGraphics Communications Association1730 N. Lynn Street, Suite 604Arlington, VA 22209
Warren MathewsCorporate Vice President for Product
EffectivenessHughes Aircraft Co.Bldg. C-A, Mail Stop B195
r 200 N. Sepulveda BoulevardEl Segundo, CA 90245
Bob GulcherVice President, Research and DevelopmentRockwell InternationalDept. 101-GB-08P. 0. Box 92098Los Angeles, CA 90009
Jack OsbornStructural Dynamics Research Corporation2000 Eastman DriveMilford, OH 45150
Patrick M. DallostaLogistics Engineering Associates, Inc.P. 0. Box 3357Annapolis, MD 21403
R. Thomas Moore, Jr., CPLVice President, OperationsLogistics Management Engineering, Inc.P. 0. Box 3318Annapolis, MD 21403
SYSCON Corporation1000 Thomas Jefferson St., N.W.Washington, DC 20007
ATTN: Pat MooreGeorgetown Division4th Floor
DL- 15
211 A,.
-. - - . .K n - Z 17F7 7 7 -
Jim StempleEDSCrystal Square 2~Suite 9121725 Jefferson Davis HighwayArlington, VA 22202
James D. MoroneyMidwest Manuals, Inc.1 West Interstate StreetBedford, OH 44146
J. William T. Smith 3Systems Management
-- Engineering Corporation1054 Cedar Ridge CourtAnnapolis, MD 21403
Dick FleesonConsultants and Designersr1725 Jefferson Davis Highway
- Plaza LevelArlington, VA 22202
Floyd HutzenbilerBDM Corporation10260 Old Columbia Road
* Columbia, MD 21046
Mr. Robert NemmersGeneral Electric Company12030 Sunset Hills RoadReston, VA 22090
Donald G. BuxtonAssistant Program Manager for
Integrated Logistics SupportTRW, Inc.7600 Colshire DriveMcLean, VA 22102
DL-16
LN
Institute for Defense Analyses1801 N. Beauregard StreetAlexandria, VA 22311
S. DeitchmanI
W. Schultis 1V. Utgoff IJ. Grotte 1
-~P. Goree 1F. Riddell 10C&D 137
DL-17
21"
FILMED
.DTIC
