PWS_STRESS_20_June_2011.pdf

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

For the:

T-38 Stress Reports Update

Phase VI: T-38 Stress Reports Review and Continued Updating Activities

20 June 2011

Prepared by:

Michael P. Blinn

OO-ALC/GHMEJ

(801) 586-3047 michael. blinn@hill.af.mil

OGDEN AIR LOGISTICS CENTER

AIRCRAFT SUSTAINMENT GROUP

ENGINEERING DIVISION

STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY AND ANALYSIS SECTION

HILL AIR FORCE BASE, UTAH 84056

mailto:linn@hill.af.mil

PI!.KFORMANCE WORK STATEMEN'l

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page LIST OF TABLES " , " ii RECORD OF REVISIONS " " " " " iii

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES " " " " 1

1.1 Scope " " , " " " " 1

2.0 SERVICE SUMMARy "" "" " 2

3.0 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY AND SERVICES " 2

3.1 Modification Drawings, Finite Element Models, and Reports Provided " 2

3.2 Security and Access to Government Facilities and Equipment.. " 2

4.0 GENERAL lNFORMA TION " " " 3

4.1 General Requirements 3

4.2 Technical Objectives and Goals " " " .4

4.2.1 Multi-Phased Approach " " " .4

4.3 Specific Requirements " 5

4.3.1 Contractor Services " " 5

4.3 .1.1 T-38 Stress Reports Update - Phase V " 5

4.3 .1.2 Data Compatibility " 6

4.3.1.3 Data Analysis " " " " " 6

4.3. I .4 Data Documentation " " 6

4.3 .1.5 Formal Evaluations 6

4.3 .1.6 Contractor Travel 6

4.3.2 Integrated Management Support " 7

4.3.3 Management System Requirements 7

4.3.4 Reliability Program " 7

4.3.5 Maintainability Program " " " " 7

5.0 APPENDICES AND AIT ACHMENTS " " " " " 8

5.1 Applicable Documents " " " " 8

5.1.1 Document Availability and Delivery , , 8

5.2 Applicable CDRLs , " 8

5.2.1 CDRL List. " " " , " 8

5.2.2 Contractor Reporting 8

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIA TrONS 9

AIT ACHMENT ONE: LIST OF APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS AI-I

AIT ACHMENT TWO: APPLICABLE CDRLS A2-1

T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI Last Rev. Date: 20 June 2011

Pl!.rtFORMANCE WORK STATEMEN'l

LIST OF TABLES

Page Table 1- Service Summary (SS) for Phase VI of the T-38 Stress Reports Update .3 Table 2 - CDRL List for the T-38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI A2-I ii T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI Last Rev. Date: 20 June 20 II

PRt<FORMANCE WORK STATEMENl

RECORD OF REVISIONS

REV DATE PAGE(S) SECTION REASON FOR REVISIONAFFECTED AFFECTED

- 20 Jun 11 n/a n/a Original PWS date of release.

iii T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI Last Rev. Date: 20 June 201 1

PEKFORMANCE WORK STATEMENl

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES:

The following Performance Work Statement (PWS) provides a description of the required contractor services in support of the T-38 Aircraft Structural Integrity Program (ASIP), T-38 Integrity Analysis Section (GHMEJ), T-38 Mature and Proven Aircraft Branch (GHMM) , Air Education and Training Command (AETC), and other T-38 related commands.

This contractual effort is limited to Phase VI of an effort that was first articulated in a document entitled: "T-38 Stress Reports Review and Continued Updating Activities." In the spirit of the continued improvement of the stress reports - too large an effort to address in only two or three phases - the engineering efforts outlined in the PWS are binding towards meeting the Phase VI requirements. Additional follow-on efforts (e.g., Phase VII), if discussed, are merely mentioned to depict the T-38 sPa's overall program scheme. This continuity-focused approach ensures that current efforts are considered by the contractor to facilitate integration towards required follow-on efforts and/or options.

It should be noted that Phase VI, in and of itself, is of value to the overall T-38 Stress Reports Update program for the purpose of continuing the framework of the overall T-38 sustainment efforts, regardless whatever future efforts are accomplished.

1.1 Scope:

This PWS specifies the Phase VI tasks towards continued evaluation and updating of the T-38 stress reports, as originally published by the Northrop Grumman Corporation (formally Northrop Aircraft, Inc.). As part of the original design, Northrop developed a number of stress reports, providing the rationale, background data (e.g., geometry and material allowables), assumptions, calculations, and margins of safety required for designing key structural components of the T-38 aircraft. For example, Northrop's NAI 57-55, "T-38 Wing Stress Analysis," and NAI 57-57, "T- 38 Fuselage Stress Analysis, Vol. I through III," are the key stress reports that were part of the original aircraft design, but are still referenced today (see Ref. 12 and 13, Attachment One).

However, due to the change in the T-38's configuration and usage over the past 40-plus years, the validity and applicability of these reports are somewhat suspect, and need to be reviewed for validity and applicability.

In direct support of the stress reports update, and as a logical first step, the Northrop Grumman Corporation is now completing their seventh phase of a contracted effort to develop an integrated fuselage and wing structure finite element model (FEM) of the T-38 aircraft. The main focus of the T-38 FEM program has been to develop an updated (and fully usable) fuselage model, then integrate the fuselage FEM with the newly revised wing FEMs (i.e, for the -29 and -33 wings).

This FEM effort also includes a complete sections property review of the T-38C configuration aircraft, another vital element for a review of the T-38 stress reports. The T-38 FEM is now fully functional - but will always remain a work in progress - and it is intended to be a key stress analysis tool for use in reevaluating the stress reports for the T-38 structure. It should be noted that the aforementioned FEM is most applicable to the T-38C model aircraft, the latest configuration of the T-38 aircraft.

T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

PEKFORMANCE WORK STATEMENl

For the requirements as outlined in this PWS, tasking includes the associated program management, engineering, and technical support needed for this program. It should be noted that the complete T-38 stress reports updates will use an assumed multi-phased approach as follows:

Phase I - preliminary T-38 stress reports evaluation and program planning (FY 06); Phase II - T- 38 stress reports review (for validity) and revision (FY 07); Phases III through VI - continued T- 38 stress reports review (for validity) and revisions (FY 08-11); and Phase VII - T-38 stress reports final review, revisions, and reporting (TBD). Additional phases (e.g., Phases VII and VIII) are at the discretion of the Government; any move towards these later phases will be discussed with the contractor as a logical outcome of their T-38 stress reports evaluation at the conclusion of Phase VI.

2.0 SERVICE SUMMARY:

Table I describes the Service Summary for the tasks as outlined in this PWS. Most of the efforts as described in this PWS will be engineering services and program management related.

3.0 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY AND SERVICES:

3.1 Modification Drawings, Finite Element Models, and Reports Provided:

3.1.1 T-38C Modification Drawings: The Government will provide the contractor with all the required T-38C modification drawings; in particular, those that were not previously delivered in any other T-38 engineering effort that the contractor is involved with. The intention here is for the contractor to have all the required configuration baseline data readily available, assisting in the evaluation of the stress reports.

3.1.2 T-38 Finite Element Models: The Government will provide the contractor with all the available T-38 FEMs, as applicable, and especially those not previously delivered to the contractor under any other T-38 engineering effort.

3.1.3 Reports: The Government will provide the contractor with all the necessary Government Technical Orders (TOs), Time Compliant Technical Orders (TCTOs), and contractor reports, required to accomplish the tasks as detailed in this PWS (see also Ref. 7, Attachment One).

3.2 Security and Access to Government Facilities and Equipment:

3.2.1 Security Clearance: The efforts required for this task are UNCLASSIFIED and will not require Contractor personnel to obtain a security clearance. Contractor personnel shall abide by all Air Force rules, procedures, and standard of conduct. Contractors requiring access to Air Force Automated information Systems (AIS) shall have background investigations and security awareness training completed prior to the start of contract performance. When the period of performance is complete and/or the contractor personnel leave work on this project, they will return all access cards and base identification badges within five days.

2 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

PEKFORMANCE WORK 8TATEMENl

Table 1- Service Summary (8S) for Phase VI of the T-38 Stress Reports Updates

Performance Objectives PWS Performance Threshold

Reference (Minimum Acceptable) Engineering Technical 4.3.1.1 through For engineering analyses (or assessments or Activities: Contractor to provide 4.3.1.6; 4.3.4.1, studies): All actions accomplished as required with support engineering analyses, 4.3.5.1 no more than one disapproval by the Government assessments, and research towards for technical discrepancies per technical report. Any the "next generation" T-38 stress necessary corrections must be made within 30 days reports' development and of Government notification" to the Performance preliminary revision. Threshold column/Engineering Technical Activities row of the Service Summary.

Computer Modeling Activities: 43.1.2,4.3.1.3, Contractor to work towards having all additional T- Contractor to provide any 4.3.1.6, 4.3.4.1, 38 FEMs 95% error free and 100%compatible with additional finite element modeling, 4.3.5.1 the computer systems at Hill AFB.

analysis, and associated engineering activities to use the validated and functional T-38 FEM in support of the T-38 stress reports evaluation. The contractor to assist in the compatibility of the contractor model (FEM) to the Government system, also addressing Government related technical questions that support their rnodelino activities.

Technical Documentation: 4.3.1.1 through 95% of revisions are error free in the final product.

Contractor to generate timely, error 4.3.1.6; 4.3.2.1, Preliminary documentation of the reports to be 90% free reporting and documentation; 4.3.2.2,5.2.1, eITor free.

includes activities as quarterly 5.2.2 reporting, meeting minutes, and the final Phase VI report.

3.2.2 Access to Government Facilities: Access to Government facilities is limited. Therefore, the contractor shall coordinate the need, time, and personnel requiring access to Government facilities with the Government Program Manager (PM), at least one week prior to need. The Government PM or designated representative will coordinate between the contractor and base personnel as required.

3.2,3 Access to Government Equipment: The Government PM will assist the contractor in obtaining the necessary clearance for access to Government equipment, as the program dictates.

4.0 GENERAL INFORMATION:

4.1 General Requirements:

This program is intended to satisfy the requirements of the T-38 ASIP Mgr. and the T-38 Integrity Analysis Section (GHMEJ). Although this program is related more to static strength

3 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

PEKFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

stress analyses, there is an associated element of durability and damage tolerance involved, especially when related to aircraft loading. As such, and as a reference only, general requirements for the USAF's Aircraft Structural Integrity Program (ASIP) are given in Air Force Instruction 63-1001 and Air Force Policy Directive 63-10 (see Refs. 1 and 2, Attachment One).

In addition, ASIP is detailed in Mil-STD-1530C (see Ref. 5, Attachment One).

4.2 Technical Objectives and Goals:

Since the USAF took possession of its first T-38 "Talon" in 1961, this weapon system has undergone significant structural modifications to meet the demands of training four decades (and more) worth of pilots. As such, and to meet these continued training demands, the current engineering objective for the T-38 fleet is to extend the weapon system's life (utility) out to 2020 (and possibly beyond). To meet the continually increasing life extension goals for the T-38 fleet, significant aircraft structural changes have historically been undertaken, such as replacing parts with improved substitutes (e.g., the -29 wing is an improvement over the -27 wing), major modification programs (e.g., a steel dorsal longeron replacement, new bulkheads, and the inclusion of auxiliary air intakes), and depot economy task activities.

In addition to T-38 structural life extension efforts, and to meet the training needs for each generation of new pilots, the student pilot's training syllabus is continuously being restructured, often resulting in much more severe loading induced on the T-38 airframe. For example, the current Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals (IFF) usage (syllabus) is thought to be significantly more damaging to the aircraft structure than the earlier Lead-in Fighter (LIF) usage. Coupled with the changing aircraft configuration, due to the aforementioned modifications, there is an associated change in the internal loads, mass distribution, and stresses in the T-38 fuselage and wing structure, thereby raising concern as to the applicability of earlier stress analyses for use on the current configuration T-38.

As previously discussed, and to address these stress analyses related issues, the first step in the re-evaluation of the T-38's stress reports requires an updated, comprehensive FEM. Using the completed and validated T-38 FEM, in tandem with realistic T-38 flight loads data (now available) and the section properties data, the contractor shall have the necessary engineering information to fully review the dated T-38 stress reports. In addition, and as a second step, safety critical structural items that have recently been identified, in a 2005 program, need further scrutiny from more updated and refined stress analyses (see Ref. 24, Attachment One). This review and updating activity of the T-38 stress reports has a direct tie-in with aircraft system safety, and will ensure the continued structural integrity of the T-38 fleet for decades to come.

4.2.1 Multi-Phased Approach:

The first phase of the T-38 stress reports updating dealt with what the contractor determines to be the most logical, and value-added to the Government, course of action for this program. In general, the contractor performed the necessary research and preliminary analyses to then present to the Government their proposed "way ahead." Having been approved by the Government, this

4 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

Pl,«FORMANCE WORK STATEMEN'l plan now directs the spirit ofthe contracted efforts for the various succeeding phases (as required by the Government), The purpose of the sixth phase of this program is to continue evaluating and analyzing specific cases from the T-38 stress reports, particularly building on the T-38 fuselage, wing, and empennage, Thus, the contractor shall carry on with their updating of the T-38's stress reports, In addition, the contractor shall consolidate all prior reports completed during Phases II-V with the report for Phase VI. Due to the amount of pages this will entail, a proposed volume breakdown shall be proposed to the Government for approval. Once approved, these volumes will contain all stress report update analyses in one report (analyses completed during Phases II-VI), The complete T-38 FEM, section properties review, flight loads data (e,g" Nz and Ny), and safety critical structural items identification should be well understood and documented by the second phase, so the more detailed stress analysis work shall be accomplished immediately (and in earnest) during this sixth phase,

4.3 Specific Requirements:

4.3.1 Contractor Services: The contractor shall provide the appropriate engineering, program management, and technical services as required for this PWS. Limited travel will be required to meet the goals of this effort.

4.3.1.1 T-38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI: In Phase I, the contractor was tasked to evaluate all existing T-38 stress reports, then determine a strategy for how best to review then update these works. Continuing from the Phase I and II efforts, and being mindful of other related activities, such as Northrop report NOR 05-104, "Identification of T-38 Safety Critical Structural Components" (see Ref. 24, Attachment One), the contractor shall build upon the updating activities from all phases (in particular, the recent Phase III, IV, and V analyses). For example, and as was discussed in the Phase I PWS (see Ref. 10, Attachment One), there are at least 50-plus critical structural components that needed to be re-evaluated in terms of their revised (updated) static strength "Margins of Safety" (MaS). Some of these components remain to be evaluated, with the intention being that in each phase the contractor build upon the earlier phases' body of knowledge.

As such, the contractor shall consider the following "notional" approach to their Phase VI efforts:

I. Following the plan delivered as part of Phase I (see Ref. 10, Attachment One), the contractor shall diligently work towards analyzing and documenting those key structural items that need consideration.

2. As a guideline for the engineering activities, approximately 80% of the analysis effort is to be devoted to primary structure; the remaining effort (approximately 20%) will focus on the secondary structure. The Service Summary, outlined in Table I, provides additional clarification as to the engineering performance measurements.

3. Data documentation and reporting are covered in Para. 4.3.1.4 and 4.3.1.5, respectively.

5 T38 Stress Repons Update - Phase VI

PE;KFORMANCE WORK STATEMEN1

4.3.1.2 Data Compatibility: To support the review and updating of the T-38 stress reports, all contractor FEMIFEA work shall be fully compatible and usable when loaded onto GHMEJ's FEMIFEA assets. At the present time, T-38 Integrity Analysis Section (GHMEJ) has MSC PATRAN 2008 (Rl), MSC NASTRAN 2008 (RI), and a MSFT Windows based operating system.

4.3.1.3 Data Analysis: In support of the T-38 stress reports update, data modeling and analysis techniques for the T-38 FEM are fully addressed in NOR 09-100A, September 2010 revision, and the initial requirements are also detailed in the Phase I SOW (see Refs. 23 and 7, Attachment One, respectively). In addition, the Phase II and III FEM SOWs, as well as the Phase I SOW for updating the stress reports, are also good resources to review (see Refs. 8 to 10, Attachment One, respectively). All reporting of the data analysis shall be according to the guidelines of the Service Summary (see Table I) and Para. 5.2.2 of this PWS (CDRL A039 and A047, Attachment Two).

Support calculations for the analysis updates are required for the Phase VI work. These support analyses include, but are not limited to, some of the following: FEAs (runs), loads development, strain gage validation, and classical hand calculations.

4.3.1.4 Data Documentation: Data required for updating the T-38 stress analysis reports, such as support FEAs and classical hand calculations, shall be documented by the contractor for all activities in Phase VI (see also comments from Para. 4.3.1.3). One report is required for Phase VI: "T-38 Stress Reports Update" (CDRL A047, Attachment Two). Guidelines for reporting are further identified in Table I, the Service Delivery Summary.

4.3.1.5 Formal Evaluations: The following formal evaluations are to be supported by the Contractor:

I) Preliminary Program Review: A preliminary program review for the contractor to present their refined "way ahead" for Phase VI, and further discuss the anticipated challenges with the tasks as described in this PWS, shall be held no later than two months ARO contract award. The contractor shall provide a PPT document as part of the first quarterly report (CDRL A039, Attachment Two).

2) Final Program Review: A final review to present the [mal results and discuss the outcomes of the T-38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI shall be held at the conclusion of the program.

The contractor shall provide a PPT document as part of the last quarterly report (CDRL A039, Attachment Two).

4.3.1.6 Contractor Travel: The following are the contractor travel requirements:

I) Preliminary Program Review Trip: The contractor is authorized one trip for a maximum three people (minimum one engineer) for up to three days to Hill AFS, Utah, to present their approach to developing the document "T-38 Stress Reports Update: Phase V Analyses," and further discuss the program's anticipated challenges.

6 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

P~t<FORMANCE WORK STATEMEN"l

2) Final Program Review Trip: The contractor is authorized one trip for a maximum three people (minimum one engineer) for up to three days to Hill AFB, Utah, to present the "T-38 Stress Reports Update: Phase VI Analyses," and discuss the program's anticipated efforts for Phase VII. Activities shall include working with Hill AFB engineers on the T-38 FEM (e.g., as related to the stress reports), reviewing and understanding the T-38 engineers' requirements, and ensuring compatibility of the contractor and Government modeling systems.

3) Miscellaneous Program Support Trips: The contractor is authorized two miscellaneous trips for a maximum two people each trip (minimum one engineer), for up to five days (each trip) to any of the following locations: I) Hill AFB, VT; 2) Randolph AFB, TX; or 3) Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), San Antonio, IX. These trips are intended to provide the contractor flexibility in supporting the T-38 stress reports updates and/or associated FEM activities; as such, there are no fmn requirements. Miscellaneous trips shall be reported in the quarterly reports (CDRL A039, Attachment Two).

4.3.2 Integrated Management Support:

4.3.2.1 Contractor Program Manager: For all tasks required by this PWS, the contractor shall identify and maintain a program manager (PM). The program manager shall have a defined and direct line of authority and responsibility over all aspects of the work effort. The contractor's work progress, status and any corrective action shall be documented (CDRL A039, Attachment Two).

4.3.2.2 Contractor Interim Reporting: The contractor shall submit monthly progress and management reports and quarterly technical status reports (to include what analyses have been completed during Phase VI and those currently in work) on the program's progress, as detailed in this PWS (CDRL A039, Attachment Two). Reports shall be relatively error free and technically correct, as per the guidelines of Table I.

4.3.3 Management Systems Requirements:

Management systems requirements are to be provided by the contractor.

4.3.4 Reliability Program:

4.3.4.1 FEM and Stress Analysis Reliability: Additional T-38 FEMs, used in support of the stress report updates, shall be validated using the full aircraft FEM. The tolerance for validation of additional FEMs is intended to be ±5 percent, with any values outside of this tolerance subject to final Government approval. Using these FEA resulis, the stress report calculations will be subject to these same values. See Table I for additional guidelines on FEM reliability.

4.3.5 Maintainability Program:

4.3.5.1 FEM and Stress Analysis Maintainability: The contractor is responsible for operating, validating, verifying, and maintaining the additional FEMs (used for stress analysis updates) and

7 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

PEt<FORMANCE WORK STATEMENl the associated documentation. This includes retammg current and Government compatible versions of the software used for FEMIFEA activities. Reporting and documentation (i.e., of analyses and calculations) is further addressed in Para. 4.3.1.3 and 4.3.1.4. (see also Table I for additional guidelines).

4.3.5.2 Continuation of Essential DoD Contractor Services During Crisis: The contractor is responsible for ensuring provisions are in place to continue to provide the essential services of this program in times of crisis. The contractor shall work with the Government to defme those essential services, with these services defined in the first quarterly report (CDRL A039, Attachment Two).

5.0 APPENDICES AND ATT ACHMENTS:

5.1 Applicable Documents:

5.1.1 Document Availability and Delivery: If the Government deems appropriate, the contractor may use other applicable documents. Also, the contractor shall request necessary documents from the Government, as required. In turn, the Government shall supply all required TOs and TCTOs for the contractor to perform the tasks of this PWS.

5.2 Applicable CDRLs:

5.2.1 CDRL List: The deliverable products (CDRL list) for this PWS are presented in Table 2 (see Attachment Two). Any T-38 stress reports related files, including support FEM and/or FEA documentation (CDRLs A039 and A047, Attachment Two), shall be compatible with the most recent version software as discussed in Para. 4.3.1.2 (Data Compatibility), and fully compatible with the computer systems used by GHMEJ (see also Table I).

Note: See DD Form 1423 for further details.

5.2.2 Contractor Reporting: The contractor shall submit reports in accordance with the DIDs specified in DD form 1423 (CDRLs A039 and A047, Attachment Two) with the following stipulations. Tables, figures, drawings, etc. shall be placed immediately following their reference in the main body of the text (i.e. same page if possible or on the next page). Reports shall be submitted in a hard cover 3-ring binder. This will facilitate the report revision by allowing addition/replacement of individual pages without having to submit a completely new report. An electronic copy (of the number required in the DD Form 1423) of the final report shall be submitted in both Microsoft Word for Windows and Adobe Acrobat (.pdt) format to the T-38 ASIP Manager at OO-ALC/GHMEJ.

8 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI Last Rev. Date: 20 June 20 ii

ACStrSeq

ACSG

AETC

AF

AFB

AirStats

ARO

ASIMIS

ASIP

DoD

DTA

FEA

FEM

FMM

FCL

FLDR

FS

IATP

lAW

IFF

IMIS

ISIDR

Mgr.

MOS

MSC/NASTRAN

MSFT

NGC

NOR

OEM

OO-ALC

Para.

PBESC

PWS

PM

QA

Ref.

PEKFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

- Aircraft Stress Sequence Program

- Aircraft Sustainment Group

- Air Education and Training Command

- Air Force

- Air Force Base

- flight loads post-processing software

- after receipt of order

- Aircraft Structural Integrity Monitoring Information System

(Tinker AFB, OK)

- Aircraft Structural Integrity Program

- Department of the Defense

- damage tolerance analysis

- finite element analysis

- finite element model

- fine mesh model (finite element)

- fatigue critical location

- flight loads data recorder

- Fuselage Station

- Individual Aircraft Tracking Program

- in accordance with

- Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals

- Integrated Maintenance Information System (Boeing, St. Louis)

- Instrumentation System/Installation Description Report

- Manager

- Margin of Safety (Note: Often shown as simply M.S.)

- finite element computer program maintained by the MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation

- Microsoft

- Northrop Grumman Corporation

- Northrop

- Original Equipment Manufacturer

- Ogden Air Logistics Center

- paragraph

- Performance Based Engineering Services Contract

- Performance Work Statement

- Program Manager

- Quality Assurance

- reference

9 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

Sect.

SS

SIN

SPM

SPO

SUPT

SwRI

TBD

TCTO

TO

USAF

WS

PEt<FORMANCE WORK STATEMENl

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (CONT)

- section

- Service Summary

- serial number

- System Program Manager

- System Program Office

- Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training

- Southwest Research Institute

- to be determined

- Time Compliant Technical Order

- Technical Order

- United States Air Force

- Wing Station

10 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

Pl-rtFORMANCE WORK STATEMEN'l

ATTACHMENT ONE: LIST OF APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

Department of Defense (DoD) Specifications:

I) Air Force Instruction 63-1001, "Aircraft Structural Integrity Program," I November 1997.

2) Air Force Policy Directive 63-10, "Aircraft Structural Integrity," I November 1997.

Department of Defense (DoD) Standards:

3) MIL-HDBK-5E, "Metallic Materials and Elements for Aerospace Vehicle Structures," June 1987.

4) MIL-STD-152IB, "Technical Reviews and Audits for Systems, Equipment, and Computer Software," (Canceled 10 APR 1995).

5) MIL-STD-1530C, "Aircraft Structural Integrity Program," November 2005.

6) MIL-STD-1840B, "Automated Interchange of Technical Information."

Other DoD Documents:

7) Statement of Work, "T-38 Fuselage Finite Model (Aft ofFS 284) - Phase I: Background Information and Preliminary FEM Development," 23 February 2004.

8) Performance Based Statement of Work, "Phase II: T-38 Idealized FEM Development and Preliminary Integration," 16 June 2005.

9) Performance Based Statement of Work, "Phase III: T-38 FEM Validation and Final Reporting," 28 October 2005.

10)Statement of Work, "Phase I: T-38 Stress Reports Review, Program Planning, and Preliminary Updating Activities, Rev. A," 21 March 2006.

Other Publications:

11)NAI 57-41, "T-38 Basic Loads."

12)NAI 57-55, "T-38 Wing Stress Analysis," November 1966.

13)NAI 57-57, "T-38 Fuselage Stress Analysis, Vol. I through III," 1959-60.

14)NAI 57-58, "T-38 Vertical Tail Section Properties and Stress Analysis," August 1958.

15) NAI 57-59, "T-38 Horizontal Tail Section Properties and Stress Analysis," January 1963.

16)NOR 63-94, "T-38A Stress Analysis of Class I Castings."

17)NOR 67-90, "F-5/T-38A Stress Analysis of Aluminum Forgings."

18)NOR 78-115, "T-38A Aircraft Improved Wing Structure Internal Load Distribution and

Stress Analysis."

19)NOR 99-105, "T-38 Wing Life Improvement Program Phase II, Stress Analysis Report."

20)NOR 99-107, "T-38 Wing Life Improvement Program Phase II, -33 Finite Element

Model Description and Internal Loads Report," May 2005.

21)NOR 00-101, "T-38 Wing Life Improvement Program Phase III, Durability and Damage

Tolerance Analysis," June 2000.

Al-l T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI Last Rev. Date: 20 June 201 I

Pb.d'ORMANCE WORK STATEMENt

22)NOR 02-101, "T-38 Wing Life Improvement Program Phase V, Loads Application Report."

23) NOR 04-100, "T-38 Finite Element Analysis - T-38 Fuselage Program Plan," November 2004 (revised April 2005).

24) NOR 05-104, "Identification of T-38 Safety Critical Structural Components," September 2005.

25) SwRl 06-5898, "AETC T-38 SUPT Maneuver and Stress Spectra," May 1994.

26) SwRl 06-6611, "T-38 Forward Fuselage Stress Analysis, NASTRAN Idealization

Report," June 1997.

27) SwRl 06-6611, "T-38 Forward Fuselage Stress Analysis, NASTRAN Validation Report,"

November 1997.

28) SwRl 06-6723, "AETC T-38 IFF Maneuver and Stress Spectra," May 1997.

29) SwRl 06-7278, "Revised T-38 Durability and Damage Tolerance Update Ground Rules

Report," December 1998.

30) SwRI 18-11896, T-38 DADTA Update - Ground Rules Report," September 2006.

31) SwRI 18-8353, "T-38 Wing Stress Analysis Idealization Report," June 2000.

32) SwRlI8-8353, ''1-38 Wing Stress Analysis Validation Report," June 2000.

33) SwRlI8-1334, "T-38 SUPT/IFF Coupon Analysis Results," March 2001.

34) SwRlI8-8674, "T-38 Longeron Splice Fine Mesh Model Integration."

Note: If the Government deems appropriate, the contractor may use other applicable documents.

AI-2 T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI

Pl,nf10RMANCE WORK STATEMEN'.

ATTACHMENT TWO: APPLICABLE CDRLS

Table 2 - CDRL List for the T-38 Stress Reports Update - Phase V

PWS Paral!:raph CDRL CDRL Description DID 4.3.1.3.,4.3.1.5,4.3.1.6, A039 Contractor's Progress, Status and DI-MGMT-80227 4.3.2.1,4.3.2.2, Mgt Reports 4.3.5.2,5.2.1,5.2.2 4.3.1.3.,4.3.1.4,5.2.1, A047 Scientific and Technical Reports: DI-MISC-80711A

5.2.2 - T-38 Stress Reports Update

A2-] T38 Stress Reports Update - Phase VI