Maintenance Steering Group 3 (MSG-3)

Scott Vandersall 730 ACSG Chief Engineer

9 Nov 2006

Overview
MSG-3 What is it?
Objectives / Methodology
Decision Logic

Maintenance Philosophy Differences Structural & Systems Inherent Reliability Hierarchical Maintenance

Industry Trends /Success Benefits

Realized Benefits

Work Cards Implementation MSG-3 Supply Parts Identification

C-5 MSG-3
Why: Recommendations from a C-5 General Officer Steering Group to Improve Aircraft Availability
Transition from fly-to-fail philosophy

What: Develop and Catalog Scheduled C-5 Inspection and Maintenance Requirements Along With Scheduled Intervals and Rationale for Each Task. How: Using Scheduled Maintenance Program Development Approach Described in Air Transportation Associations MSG-3 Decision Logic Document.

MSG-3 Program
MSG-3 or RCM? RCM is the philosophy MSG-3 is the methodology used to execute the philosophy Improve Reliability and Aircraft Availability Maximize MC Rates Minimize NMCS and NMCM Rates Reduce Maintenance Costs Eliminate unnecessary maintenance tasks Extend the interval(s) of maintenance tasks Improve efficiency of maintenance tasks (standardizes work) Ensures Operational Safety, Suitability, & Effectiveness Enabler for Air Force Smart Operations 21 (AFSO21) and Condition Based Maintenance Plus (CBM+)

LEAN Overall Maintenance Program

eLog21 Goal C-5 Aircraft Availability

Percent Available Aircraft Available

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

eLog21 Goal 64.1%

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 126.5 121.7 113.5 112.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 111.0 67.2 60.1 51.6 53.1 49.4 45.5 44.6 44.9 45.4 46 46.3 48.8 49.6 52 42.9 41.7 40.8 40.4 37.5 37.8 53.1 53.9 56.8 59.9 62.9 65.8 67

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

TAI Avail % Avail AAIP Goal Standard Ops

Hierarchical Maintenance Program

8 Yr Tasks

4 Yr Tasks

Inspection intensity is typically increased as the task is elevated hierarchically

16 Month Tasks 4 Month Tasks Pre-Flight, Thru-flight, & BPO Tasks

All lower level core tasks are accomplished during the next higher level check Intervals based on 1996/97 Inspection Interval Integrity Program (I3P) Study

Change in Maintenance Program Methodology

Current (Lagging)
Parts Driven: React upon parts failure Decision logic changes per engineer and per situation Maintenance task built for each interval independent of task content in other intervals Stovepipe review and approval of the maintenance program based on field or PDM maintenance Fleet Wide Planning: Inspections and fixes are most often applied through the entire fleet Vs. Vs.

MSG-3 (Leading)
Systems Driven: Monitor each aircraft for degree of degradation Proven structured decision logic used by all engineers

Vs.

Hierarchical maintenance tasks: higher level intervals satisfy the requirements of lower level intervals
Enterprise review and approval with a single team responsible for the entire maintenance program (both field and PDM) Performance Based Planning: Each tail is monitored and maintenance requirements tailored for each

Vs.

Vs.

Benefits
Maximizes aircraft availability
Major Tenet of Aircraft Availability Improvement Plan (AAIP) Extended inspection intervals frees up assets

Safeguards inherent safety and reliability Ensures Operational Safety, Suitability, & Effectiveness Reduces Costs / Cost Avoidance Creates program credibility and instills confidence by involving all stakeholders Integrates all levels of maintenance activity Outcome has logic that is defensible at all levels of scrutiny Assures that all areas of the aircraft are thoroughly covered and have the proper level of inspection

Realized Benefits
Slat Inspections Issues During Depot Functional Check Flights MSG-3 Checklist Developed, Approved and Implemented by Engineering
-70-0462 39 Slat Discrepancies Prior to Mar 05 PDM Input / Nov 05 Output -87-0040 14 Slat Discrepancies Prior to Aug 05 PDM Input / Jan 06 Output Parts Requirements to Support MSG-3 Checklist Identified Requirements Provided to CSW for Entering into the File Maintenance Computations

BEFORE MSG-3
SORTIES

70-0462 107

87-0040 230

TOTAL 327

AFTER MSG-3
SORTIES FLYING HRS SLAT PROBLEMS

70-0462 110 410.4 1

87-0040 116 665.4 0

TOTAL 226 1075.8 1

FLYING HRS
SLAT PROBLEMS

367.9
39

1381.0
14

1748.9
53

Provide Quick Hits for problem areas for current program until MSG3 implementation

Commercial Based Workcards

Current process with -6 Workcards
Process with Commercial Based Workcards

Implementation Overview

MSG-3 Supply Parts Identification Overview

MSG-3 Supply Parts Identification Stock Listed Parts Sources of Supply Stock Listed Parts By Work Unit Code (WUC) Not Stock Listed (NSL) Parts By WUC

MSG-3 Supply Parts Identification

3,949 Parts Identified 3,609 Parts Stock Listed 3,563 Parts with Sources of Supply 46 Parts Coded Local Manufacture
340 Parts Not Stock Listed (NSL) 311 Supply Source to be Determined 29 NSL Parts Coded Local Manufacture

MSG-3 Supply Parts Identification

Stock Listed Parts

STOCK LISTED ITEMS SOURCES OF SUPPLY

SUPPLY SOURCES DLA/GSA
Robins

Total Parts
2743 485

Percent
77% 13%

Tinker Ogden
Other

158 112
111

4% 3%
3%

Stock Listed Parts by Work Unit Code (WUC)

WUC
11 12 13 Airframe Cockpit & Fuselage Landing Gear

System

Total Parts 750

201 277

14
23 24

Flight Controls
Turbofan Power Plant Auxiliary Power Plant

504
256 112

41

Air Conditioning

195

Stock Listed Parts by WUC(Cont.)

WUC
42 44 45

System
Electrical Power Supply Lighting System Hydraulic & Pneumatic

Total Parts 109

165 154

46
47 49

Fuel System
Oxygen System Misc. Utilities

343
45 82

51

Instruments

81

Stock Listed Parts by WUC (Cont.)

WUC
52 55

System
Auto Pilot Malfunction Analysis & Recording

Total Parts 40
74 19 16 11 19 29

59 61 62 63 64

Flight Mgmt System/GPS HF Communications VHF Communications UHF Communications Interphone

Stock Listed Parts by WUC (Cont.)

WUC
65 66 68 IFF Emergency Communications AFSATCOM

System

Total Parts 4
13 5

69
71 72

Misc. Communication Equip

Radio Navigation Radar Navigation

3
27 39

76

Electronic Countermeasures

14

Stock Listed Parts by WUC (Cont.)

WUC
91 97

System
Emergency Equipment Explosive Devices & Comp

Total Parts 20
2

Totals

3609

Not-Stock Listed Parts

(In Work Listing Posted on Requirements Symposium Web Site)

Not Stock Listed Parts by WUC

WUC 11 Airframe System Total Parts 87

12 13
14 23 24 41

Cockpit & Fuselage Landing Gear

Flight Controls Turbofan Power Plant Auxiliary Power Plant Air Conditioning

49 4
67 6 14 3

Not Stock Listed Parts by WUC (Cont.)

WUC
42 44 45

System
Electrical Power Supply Lighting System Hydraulic & Pneumatic

Total Parts 13
5 5

46
47 49

Fuel System
Oxygen System Misc. Utilities

21
1 13

51

Instruments

Not Stock Listed Parts by WUC - (Cont.)

WUC
52 55 59 62 Auto Pilot Malfunction Analysis & Recording Flight Mgmt System/GPS VHF Communications

System

Total Parts 3
4 1 3

63
64

UHF Communications
Interphone

1
2

Not Stock Listed Parts by WUC (Cont.)

WUC
68 91

System
AFSATCOM Emergency Equipment Totals

Total Parts 2
6 311

SUMMARY
Full Air Staff Commitment to MSG-3 3,949 Parts Identified 3,609 Parts Stock Listed 340 Part Not Stock Listed 77% of the Parts DLA Source of Supply 13% of the Parts WR-ALC (Robins) List Provided for the Not Stock Listed Parts

Questions?

Back-up Slides

Maintain Structural Inherent Reliability

CHECK INTERVAL

1
Deterioration

Structural Inherent Reliability (Design Strength)

Upgrade
Restore

Limit Of Acceptable Deterioration

SAFETY BOUNDARY

Not necessary to find every defect in a zone at every check. Program provides multiple opportunities to detect degradation prior to reaching the limit of acceptable deterioration. Repairs restore structure to original Inherent Reliability. Upgrades are necessary when deterioration rate is excessive.

Maintain System Inherent Reliability

CHECK INTERVAL
Original System Design IR Deteriorated System IR

1
Deterioration

4
Component Replacement

Upgrade REV

Limit Of Acceptable Deterioration

SAFETY BOUNDARY
Normally system component replacements will not restore system Inherent Reliability back to original design level

Reliability Enhancement Visit (REV) restores deteriorated system to its original design level
System upgrade increases inherent reliability above original design level

Realized Benefits cont..

88 Total Forced Structural Maintenance Plan Items Not Inspected
FSMP TASK ITEM DESCRIPTION

FF7 & FF7B FF16 FF28 & FF28B (B model = FS 484 only) FF33 & FF33B CF8 & CF8B AF1B AF4 & AF4B

Fuselage Side Panel Frames, FS 544 to FS 1024 Contour Box Beam Backup Fittings FS 310 through FS 465

Forward Ramp Lock Hooks at FS 454 and FS 484 Forward Fuselage Upper Lobe Skin From FS 416 To FS 581 Upper Lobe Frame Flange at FS 1744 Longeron and Doubler Above Aft Personnel Door at FS 1844 AFT Personnel Door Frames and Internal Support Beams

C-5 Program Status

INSPECTION CURRENT INSPECTION INTERVAL

PROPOSED POST MSG-3 INSPECTION INTERVAL

A/C

Pre-Flight

Prior to first flight of the day

Prior to first flight of the day

All

Thru-Flight

Prior to take-off at intermediate stop Every 105 days

Prior to take-off at intermediate stop

All

Home Station

Every 120 days Every 16 months (480 days) Every 48 months (1460 days) 8 Years (96 months)

All

Minor Isochronal

Every 14 months (420 days)

All

Major Isochronal

Every 28 months (840 days)

All

PDM (C-5A) PDM (C-5C) PDM (C-5B)

60 months 60 months 84 months

All

Specific ACI Special Inspection In conjunction w/ PDM As specified

Specific

Is the MLG Wheel a Maintenance Significant Item (MSI)

Could failure affect SAFETY (on the ground or in flight), including safety/emergency systems or equipment? Could failure have significant ECONOMIC impact? Could failure have significant OPERATIONAL impact? Could failure be UNDETECTABLE or not likely to be detected by the operating crew during normal duties?

No

No

One or more Yes answers will lead to further analysis

Yes

No

All No would lead to no further analysis

Level 1 Analysis
Is the functional failure EVIDENT to the operating crew during the performance of normal duties? Evident Failure

Yes

Yes

No

Hidden Failure

Does the functional failure or secondary damage resulting from the functional failure have a DIRECT adverse EFFECT on operating SAFETY?

No

No

Does the combination of a hidden functional failure and one additional failure of a system related or backup function have an adverse EFFECT on operating SAFETY?

Yes

Does the functional failure have DIRECT adverse EFFECT on operating CAPABILITY?

Level 2 Analysis
Evident Safety Maintenance tasks and intervals required to assure safe operation

Yes
Evident Operational Servicing Task at Pre/Post Flight Restoration task at Major ISO GVI task at ISO Discard at PDM

Yes

Yes

No

No
Hidden Safety Maintenance tasks and intervals required to assure availability necessary to avoid multiple failures effects Hidden Non-Safety Maintenance tasks and intervals desirable to assure the availability to avoid the economic effects of multiple failures

Evident Economic Maintenance tasks and intervals desirable if cost is less than repair cost of failure

Current Status of C-5 Program

Enhanced Zonal Analyses & Research
Completed Approximately 400 Wiring Tasks

Structural Analyses and Task Consolidation

In Review (ECD: Nov 06) Intervals Predicated on Structural Tasks

Systems Analyses - Completed Systems Task Consolidation - Completed Parts Supportability Analysis by System
In Progress (ECD: Aug 07)

Commercial Best Practice Work Cards (ECD: Jun 08) Providing Quick Hits for problem areas for current program until MSG3 implementation

Example of Industry Success

Pre MSG-3 Post MSG-3

Check Light Heavy Major

Interval (Months) 18 36 108

Flow Days 16 40 50 96.8%

Man Hours 12,000 30,000 37,500

Flow Days 7 30 40 98.5%

Man Hours 5,250 25,000 30,000

Reliability

Man-hours based on average available 750 man-hours per day Goal reduce maintenance costs and maintain Pre MSG-3 reliability Outcome reduced maintenance costs and increased reliability Great reduction in Light Checks due to incorporating enhanced zonal programproper time to find, proper time to fix

Industry Inspection Program Trends

Reliability-Based MSG-3 Program

Hours

Traditional Program

Time

Pay-off cheaper to maintain a more reliable aircraft Data Provided by Delta Tiger Team Consultant

Implementation
FY10 Implementation General Officer Approval Required
AF/A4, AFMC, AMC, ANG, AFRES, AETC

Phased Approach Obstacles

Culture Regulations/Policy
Commercial Based Work Cards / Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals (IETMs)

MRRB/Funding Part Supportability Technical Manuals IETMS Manpower / Rates /Skill Mix

MSG-3 Implementation Risks

High-Red Med-Yellow Low-Green

Element

Mitigations
MSG-3 tasks are well analyzed, changes to existing work packages could be significant MSG-3 parts identification completed. Individual parts supportability analyses being conducted. High priority requirements provided to CSW for immediate inclusion in file maintenance computations. OPR established to ensure parts are supportable without funding constraints. Identifying new requirements. No current impact on program execution. No new skills required. 730th ACSSS will review MSG-3 maintenance program manpower requirements with MAJCOMs to ensure field manpower cuts support new skill mix for the new program. No change in PDM skill mix; must insure right number of personnel are available to support new program.

Maintenance Planning

Supply Support

Support and Test Equipment

Manpower and Personnel

Training and Training Devices

Technical Data
Computer Resource Support Facilities Policy

Significant changes to Technical Orders are in development

IETMS implementation is critical for the development of commercial based work cards. Currently reviewing IETMS options from different contractors to identify the best solution.

Funding

Until parts, manpower, support equipment and work package content is identified extent of funding is unknown

Enterprise Coordination Maintenance Culture Implementation Schedule Culture change consists of two elements. Initial and sustainment. Each has to succeed for change to take place and maintain. Failure of either issue can drive the risks up. A well coordinate program with progress tracking will assure success. MRRB approval is key to FY10 start date

Conclusion
Implementation will:
Decrease frequency, not number of Inspections Create a more detailed inspection Increase Planned Work Package Decrease Unplanned Work Standardize work Increase Aircraft Availability Require parts commitment Need support from Logistics community

MSG-3 Supply Parts Identification Local Manufacture Parts

Stock Listed Not Stock Listed

Local Manufacture Parts Stock Listed by WUC

WUC 11 12 Airframe Cockpit & Fuselage System Total Parts 14 6

14
23

Flight Controls
Turbofan Power Plant

1
2

24
41

Auxiliary Power Plant

Air Conditioning

1
1

Local Manufacture Parts Stock Listed by WUC

WUC 45 46 49 66 System Hydraulic & Pneumatic Fuel System Misc. Utilities Emergency Communications Totals Total Parts 5 14 1 1 46

Local Manufacture Parts Not Stock Listed by WUC

WUC
14 23 51

System
Flight Controls Turbofan Power Plant Instruments

Total Parts 12 16 1 29

Totals