Attachment_10.pdf

AFLCMC/WIU

SYSTEMS ENGINEERING PLAN (SEP)

VERSION 1.6

FOR THE

SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES/PERSONNEL RECOVERY

(SOF/PR) DIVISION

SUPPORTING POST-MILESTONE C

8 April 2014

LIMITED DISTRIBUTION: Distribution of this document is limited to DoD officials and specific designated representatives only. The AFLCMC/WIU SEP is available at the

AFLCMC/WIU SharePoint website through .mil computer access only. Reproduction of this document or its appendices without written permission of the AFLCMC/WIU System Program

Office (SPO) is prohibited. For additional information on reproduction or access to this document, contact: AFLCMC/WIU, 235 Byron St Suite 19A, Robins AFB, GA 31098-1670

AFLCMC/WIU

SYSTEMS ENGINEERING PLAN (SEP)

VERSION 1.6

FOR THE

SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES/PERSONNEL RECOVERY (SOF/PR)

DIVISION

SUPPORTING POST-MILESTONE C

8 April 2014

X

SCOTT P. VANDERSALL

Chief Engineer, SOF/PR Division

DWAYNE MARSHALL

Chief, SOF/PR Division

DOUGLAS E. ATKINSON, GS-15, DAF

Director of Engineering, ISR & SOF Division

Document History

The following is a history of updates made to this document. The Revision column contains the document version that was updated. The Effective Date column contains the date the update occurred. The Description column explains why the change was made.

Rev. Effective Date Description

1.0 30 Sep 2007 Initial SEP

1.1 31 Mar 2008 Added additional details on applicable engineering processes

1.2 31 Jan 2009 Added TH-1 and CV-22 descriptions and Sustainment

Support Activities, Updated Org Charts and process

POCS, Deleted Reference to MH-53, Added Program

Management Risk Section, Added MOU/MOA/SLA

Section, Deleted Reference to EC-130H Compass Call

1.3 28 Feb 2010 Completely revised to meet Deputy Assistant Secretary

(Science, Technology & Engineering) SEP requirements.

1.4 28 Feb 2011 Updated organizational charts to reflect new office symbols due to HQ AFMC realignment of ALC’s.

1.5 28 Feb 2012 Updated Master Modification Schedule and Paragraph 5.6

CPAB to reflect changes due to recission of AFI 21-105 and incorporation of AFI 20-114.

1.6 8 Apr 2014 Updated organizational charts to reflect new office symbols due to HQ AFMC 5-Center construct. Deleted references to CV-22 (Transferred to Navy), UH-1H/V

(Retired), and MC-130E (Retired). MC-130W MDS change to AC-130W.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Introduction

1.1 SOF/PR Systems Engineering Plan

1.1.1 SEP Purpose

1.1.2 SEP Development and Review

1.2 Program Description and Background

1.3 Post Milestone C - Ops and Sustainment

1.4 Associated Major Modification Activity

2 SOF/PR Enterprise

2.1 SOF/PR Division - System Program Director

2.1.1 Organization / Structure

2.2 Coordination

2.3 Integration with Contractors/External Organizations

3 Program Requirements

3.1 Technical Oversight Approach

3.2 Aircraft Availability Improvement Plan (AAIP)

3.3 Key Performance Parameters (KPP) and Measures of Effectiveness and Suitability

4 Technical Baseline Management

4.1 Technical Baseline Management Responsibility

4.2 Technical Baseline Control

4.2.1 Configuration Management

4.2.2 Configuration Baselines

4.2.3 Data Management

4.2.4 Engineering Change Proposals (ECP)

4.2.5 Configuration Audits

4.3 Certifications

4.3.1 Airworthiness

4.4 Risk Management

4.4.1 Operational Risk Management (ORM)

4.4.2 Program Risk Process

4.5 Weapon System Integrity Programs (WSIP)

4.5.1 Aircraft Structural Integrity Program (ASIP)

4.5.2 Mechanical Systems Integrity Program (MECSIP)

4.5.3 Avionics Integrity Program

4.5.4 Aircraft Information Program (AIP)

5 Technical Reviews

5.1 Material Improvement Program Review Board (MIPRB)

5.2 Program Management Review (PMR)

5.3 Product Improvement Working Group (PIWG)

5.4 System Safety Group (SSG)

5.5 Materiel Safety Task Group (MSTG)

5.6 Corrosion Prevention and Control

5.7 Cockpit Working Group (CPWG)

6 System Engineering Processes

6.1 Requirements

6.1.1 Engineering Technical Assistance Request (T.O. 00-25-107)

6.1.2 Depot Level Maintenance Activity Request (AFMC Form 202)

6.1.3 Specification/Standard Validity Confirmation (DLA Form 339)

6.1.4 Deficiency Reporting Investigation System (DRIS)

6.2 Test and Evaluation

6.2.1 Test Plans

6.2.2 Test Readiness Review (TRR)

6.2.3 Verification / Validation

6.2.4 The Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP)

7 Overarching Processes

7.1 Maintenance and Inspection Programs

7.1.1 Aircraft & Missiles Requirements Database (AMRD)

7.2 Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM)

7.3 Quality Assurance

7.3.1 Quality Assurance Program (QAP)

7.4 Software Maintenance

7.5 Sustaining Engineering (SE)

7.5.1 Sustaining Engineering Requirements Plan (SERP)

7.6 Source Qualification

7.6.1 First Article Testing (FAT) Process (AF Form 260)

7.6.2 Acquisition Method Code/Suffix Screening Analysis (AFMC Form 761)

7.6.3 Engineering Data List (EDL)

7.6.4 Contract Repair Screening Analysis Worksheet (AFMC Form 762)

7.6.5 Repair Data List AFMC Form 762A

7.6.6 Part Quality Requirements (AFMC Form 807)

7.7 Item Unique Identification (IUID)

7.8 Market Research

7.9 Continuous Process Improvement

7.9.1 AFSO21 Activities

7.9.2 Local Operating System

Appendix A: Acronyms

Appendix B: SOF/PR Division Managed MDS

List of Figures

Figure 1. AFLCMC/WIU Organization

Figure 2. AFLCMC/WIU Division Engineering

Figure 3. AFIRM Main Page

Figure 4. CM II Change Process

Figure 5. Change Management Flow

Figure 6. Airworthiness Certification Process

Figure 7. Risk Template

Figure 8. Risk Matrix

Figure 9. Process Improvement

List of Tables

Table 1. Areas of Responsibility

Table 2. Certifications

1 Introduction

1.1 SOF/PR Systems Engineering Plan

This Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) establishes the overall plan for how the AFLCMC/WIU, Special Operations Forces/Personnel Recovery (SOF/PR) Division, also known as the SOF/PR

System Program Office (SPO), will apply the systems engineering processes for SOF/PR aircraft systems over its lifecycle and focuses on post-Milestone C. It meets the requirement of

Department of Defense (DoD) Instruction 5000.2, Operation of the Defense Acquisition System, to establish a SEP for all DoD systems and the Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC) Commander

Policy Memo #04-024, 4 October 2004 that directs all ASC programs to implement sound systems engineering practices. This document meets the Air Force policy directive AFPD 63-

1\AFPD 20-1, Assurance of Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness (OSS&E).

The format and content of this SEP is based on Chapter 4 of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook and Systems Engineering Preparation Guide, Version 2.01, April 2008, as published by Deputy

Under Secretary of Defense (DUSD) Acquisition & Technology (A&T) SSE/ED. This document, in conjunction with individual upgrade/capability enhancement program SEPs

(provided as attachments), provides the overarching Government technical document governing the implementation of systems engineering activities for the SOF/PR SPO. For the purpose of this document, the SPO and AFLCMC/WIU Special Operations Forces/Personnel Recovery

(SOF/PR) Division are used interchangeably.

1.1.1 SEP Purpose

The purpose of the SEP is to identify and describe the broad spectrum of systems engineering policies, processes, and methods to be used during the system life cycle of the SOF/PR platforms and to assure their effective implementation. It describes the SE processes, from an enterprise standpoint, for sustainment, modernization, and integration support of the SOF/PR programs.

This document shall be used by all organizations as the baseline guidance for management of the technical aspects of any program affecting SOF/PR aircraft configuration.

1.1.2 SEP Development and Review

The SEP is an unclassified document developed and published by the Special Operations

Forces/Personnel Recovery (SOF/PR) Division (WIU) at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center

(WR-ALC). It is meant to supplement, not replace, other program documents. The SEP is a living document and as a result additions, deletions, and modifications will occur. At a minimum the Chief Engineer, will lead an annual review to consider changes resulting from normal program maturation. However, the Program Manager or Chief Engineer can direct an update to the SEP at any time. As Systems Engineering is an event-driven process, significant program changes shall require an update to the SEP (e.g., the major configuration change activities associated with the SOF/PR platforms), or as other program circumstances dictate. The following list designates the primary sources/event triggers that will generate an update to the

SEP:

New Program Direction (funding, requirement, technical issues, etc.)

Significant Change in Program Office Organization

Significant Change in Support Organizations

Significant Change in Program Office Processes

Any information provided is current as of the date of this document. Oversight for all SOF/PR platform activities are in continuous review for effectiveness by the Special Operations

Forces/Personnel Recovery (SOF/PR) Division Chief Engineer and lead engineers to determine if changes or refinements are required in systems engineering processes or procedures. When potential problems or deficiencies are identified, the Chief Engineer will initiate a review and subsequently incorporate any major/minor Air Vehicle (AV) specification requirement changes into the SOF/PR program. To assure the current procedures are being followed, this plan will have positive configuration identification, with both a date of issue and an issue number. Any release shall be accomplished under AFLCMC/WIU configuration control.

1.2 Program Description and Background

The mission of the Special Operations Forces/Personnel Recovery (SOF/PR) Division is to provide combat capabilities for Special Operations, Combat Search and Rescue, and Air Force

Rotary Wing Forces through superior acquisition, modification, and sustainment. Our personnel deliver best-value acquisition, sustainment, and contingency response capabilities through world-class leadership and cradle-to-grave management, which enable the warfighter to deliver desired effects any time and any place. The SOF/PR Division manages 337 aircraft and multiple

Mission Design Series (MDS) that are described in Appendix B.

Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) was established May 22, 1990, with headquarters at Hurlburt Field, Fla. AFSOC is one of nine major Air Force commands, and the

Air Force component of U.S. Special Operations Command, a unified command located at

MacDill Air Force Base, FL. AFSOC provides Air Force special operations forces for worldwide deployment and assignment to regional unified commands. AFSOC's unique capabilities include airborne radio and television broadcasts for psychological operations, as well as aviation foreign internal defense instructors to provide other governments military expertise for their internal development. The command's special tactics squadrons combine combat controllers, special operations weathermen and pararescuemen with other service Special

Operations Forces (SOF) to form versatile joint special operations teams. In 1990 a dedicated

System Program Office (SPO) was established at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center (WR-

ALC) to support the AFSOC mission. In 2003 the Personnel Recovery mission (PR) was added to the SPO.

Air Combat Command (ACC) with its headquarters at Langley Air Force Base, VA., is a major command created June 1, 1992 by combining its predecessors Strategic Air Command and

Tactical Air Command. ACC is the primary provider of air combat forces to America's warfighting commanders and is also responsible for PR operations. PR operations include combat rescue of downed aircrews using Night Vision Goggles (NVG), low-level formation, air refueling, and survivor recovery. Organizations assigned to the PR mission are responsible to rapidly mobilize, deploy and employ to provide combat and peacetime search and rescue in support of U.S. national security interests and support of the National Aeronautics & Space

Administration (NASA) space shuttle.

Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) a new MAJCOM stood up in August 2009, is responsible to provide combat-ready forces to conduct nuclear deterrence and global strike operations in support of the president and combatant commanders. As part of the reorganization under AFGSC, UH-1N's are located at the 90th Missile Wing, F.E. Warren AFB, Wyo., the

341st Missile Wing, Malmstrom AFB, Mont., and the 91st Missile Wing, Minot AFB, N.D.

The Air Force District of Washington (AFDW) was reactivated in 2005 to address three broad objectives: Align the Air Force command structure in the National Capital Region (NCR) on par with that of our sister services; improve Air Force support to the Joint Force Headquarters-NCR

(JFHQ-NCR); and, designate a single voice for Air Force cross-service issues in the NCR.

AFDW is a direct reporting unit to Headquarters Air Force, reporting to the Chief of Staff of the

Air Force. AFDW serves as the Air Force service component to JFHQ-NCR and the supporting command to Joint Task Force National Capital Region Medical (JTF CapMed). When the JHFQ-

NCR transitions to the Joint Task Force National Capital Region (JTF-NCR), the 320th Air

Expeditionary Wing (320 AEW) activates and becomes the Air Force component of JTF-NCR.

The Commander of AFDW serves as the Commander, 320 AEW. Air Force Mission Directive

13 delineates missions and assigned duties applicable to AFDW in both its worldwide Air Force service role and its JFHQ-NCR Air Force component role. AFDW is the parent command to two wings, one group, and two Ceremonial Elements. The 11th Wing at Andrews AFB, Md., provides emergency reaction rotary-wing airlift and base operating support to 60 tenant organizations.

The Special Operations Forces/Personnel Recovery (SOF/PR) Division Director’s strategy keys on providing the wide range of services and products required to keep the assigned weapon systems viable and allow the Major Commands (MAJCOMs) to accomplish their mission with minimal disruption. These include responding to customer requests for technical and engineering support, providing quality and timely aircraft maintenance, making the technical data available to maintain and operate the weapon system and assuring that parts are available when needed. To complement these sustainment activities, the SOF/PR System Program Office (SPO) has an ambitious acquisition effort to modify the aircraft to eliminate deficient systems and to incorporate new capabilities the customers have identified. The primary thrust of the SOF/PR support concept at this time is sustainment with the overall focus to minimize the total cost of ownership, increased commonality, and enhanced combat capability.

With the diversified missions of the SOF/PR aircraft platforms and numerous MDS’s supported by the SOF/PR Division, principal information pertaining to each MDS can be found in

Appendix B.

1.3 Post Milestone C - Ops and Sustainment

The SOF/PR Division supported MDS platforms have varying service lives with some being deployed in the late sixties to early seventies to some still in the acquisition and delivery mode.

Due to the vast differences in age, mission, and type airframe the issues applicable to the airframes are vastly different. The Single Manager (SM) and Integrated Product Team (IPT) for each platform supported by the SOF/PR Division are working a number of initiatives to increase system reliability and meet mission requirements as identified by each using command.

1.4 Associated Major Modification Activity

The listing below by platform represents the programs designed to improve, modernize, or enhance the current abilities and airframe performance or provide sustainability to support continued use and improve upon existing reliability and maintainability into the future.

AC-130H AC-130U AC-130W

HI Beam Phase II

M2MSA Server Upgrade

Chemical Toilet Replacement

IR Tubs/Rails (TRIP)

M2MSA Server Replacement

Bleed Air Duct Replacement

ECU/LWCP

APQ-180 Wiring Harness Replacement

Electronic System Test Set Replacement

Program (ESTS)

AAQ-26 Sensor Replacement w/MX-

15Di

LAIRCM

Formation Light Redesign

105mm Demo

Cargo Door Hoist

30mm Gun Boot Redesign

Advanced Boresight Equipment

Weight Reduction

Hellfire Wing Pylon Rewire

VHF Antenna Fuselage Cracking

Nose Landing Gear Turbulence Study

MC-130H MC-130P HC-130N/P

AN/APQ-170 SLEP/ECP-52

Light Weight Armor

OFP Software Block Cycle Change

(BCC) 5

Loadmaster Crashworthy Seats

MCARS Rapid Reconfiguration

NVIS Landing Light Panel/DMIS

Interconnect

External Tank Pylon

Installation of Third SATCOM

Antenna

Mode S

Upgrade AN/ARC-222 for 8.33

Channelization

SAMS-ESA

LAIRCM Uprgrade (NRE)

Comm Upgrades (8.33kHz)

DFA-730 Replacement

DAMA

Lightweight Airborne Recovery System

(LARS)

Comm Upgrades (8.33kHz)

DFA-730 Replacement

Emergency Locator Transmitter

ALQ-213 EW Suite

Loadmaster Crashworthy Seat

Digital Mapping Integration System-

Interface Unit

Aircrew Flight Equipment Storage Rack

Heavy Equipment Airdrop

Mode S

EO/IR Sensor Upgrade

Information Superiority

EC-130J HH-60 Hueys (UH-1N/TH-1H)

Ku Spread Spectrum

SME Frequency Converter &

Switch Panel Retrofit

AF Tactical Receiver System

SME Antenna Switching Panel

60Hz Power Distribution for Super

Js

60/90 KVA Gen Compatibility

W/MC-130J

Large Aircraft Infrared

Countermeasures (LAIRCM)

SME Intercom Connector

Relocation

Loadmaster Crashworthy Seats

Light Weight Paratroop Door Armor

SATCOM Voice (Super-Js)

LARS V12

SIP Modification

IAHHS

MFCD

IBASS

Mode S

APX-119 ID of Friend or Foe

Multi-Functional Operator’s Seats

AN/ARC-222 (SINCGARS)

Arctic Heat System

IVHMS Modification

GAU-21

Control DisplayUnit

Navigation System Upgrade

AAQ-29A FLIR

Mode 5 IFF

Armored Wing

L2G

PEDROS

UH-1N NVIS

UH-1N Floor Enhancement

Program

TH-1H Modification Program

UH-1N Helo Terrain Avoidance

Warning System (HTAWS)

TH-1H BLUM

UH-1N FE Seat Retrofit

Loads/Environmental Spectrum

Survey

Cryptographic Modernization

UH-1N M2AF Recap Program

2 SOF/PR Enterprise

The SOF/PR Enterprise has Integrated Product Teams responsible for each MDS Fleet. These

IPT’s provide the strategy for sustaining the SOF/PR Fleet. The SOF/PR Division Director and

IPT Leads have developed a strategy to manage the wide range of services and products required to keep the SOF fleet viable and allow the Major Commands (MAJCOMs) to accomplish their mission with minimal disruption. This strategy includes responding to customer requests for technical and engineering support, providing quality and timely aircraft maintenance, making the technical data available to maintain and operate the weapon system, assuring that parts are available when needed, while maintaining Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness

(OSS&E) and configuration control of each specific MDS. To complement these sustainment activities, the SOF/PR Division has an ambitious acquisition effort to modify the aircraft to eliminate deficient systems and to incorporate new capabilities the customers have identified.

The primary thrust of the SOF/PR fleet support concept at this time is sustainment with the overall focus on lower cost of ownership, increased commonality, and enhanced combat capability.

2.1 SOF/PR Division - System Program Director

The SOF/PR Division is located at WR-ALC and is the owner of this document. The SOF/PR

System Program Director (SPD) provides operational support for all SOF/PR aircraft to five major commands with 21 operating bases located worldwide supporting the SOF/PR mission.

Configuration control for the SOF/PR platforms are maintained via the systems engineering processes under the guidance of the SOF/PR Division Chief Engineer (CE) and this SEP.

Although multiple organizations may execute programs upgrading, modifying, or repairing the

SOF/PR aircraft, they are all integrated under the auspices of the SOF/PR Division.

Sustainment programs and other activities are implemented by the three Air Logistics Centers

(ALCs) according to their designated system/subsystem responsibilities. Although requirements for improvements may originate from anywhere in the SOF/PR Enterprise, they are reviewed and evaluated through the SOF/PR using the Aircraft & Missiles Requirements Database (AMRD) on an annual basis.

2.1.1 Organization / Structure

The SOF/PR Division is located at Robins AFB, GA and is a part of AFLCMC/WI.

The SOF/PR Division (Error! Reference source not found.) consist of six branches, with two eing SOF/PR assigned platform type specific and four managing functional areas. The Fixed

Wing Branch (AFLCMC/WIUA) provides sustainment support to special operations C-130 aircraft. The Rotary Wing Branch (AFLCMC/WIUB) manages sustainment activities for USAF rotary wing aircraft. The Financial Management Branch (AFLCMC/WIUF), Engineering

Branch (AFLCMC/WIUE), Contracting Branch (AFLCMC/WIUK), and the Integration &

Analysis Branch (AFLCMC/WIUL) provide support to the aircraft branches as well as the

SOF/PR SPM.

SOF/PR Division maintains full configuration management authority over the SOF/PR weapon systems at the top level. However, specific managerial control over all common C-130 subsystems is maintained by AFLCMC/WLN. TO 00-25-115, AFMC Program Management

Directives (PMDs) and the D086 Mission/Workload Assignment System database are all recognized by the SOF/PR Division Director as the governing documentation for managerial assignments within AFMC Centers. AFMC mission assignment policy directive 90-5 also lists the responsibilities of each center as decided by the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)

Commission. As a legacy system manager, the SOF/PR Division, in coordination with the Using

Commands, recognizes the management of these subsystems as having delegated responsibility to other SMs within the USAF or other DoD agencies.

WIU

SOF/PR & Rotary Wing Division

WIUA

Fixed Wing Branch

WIUB

Rotary Wing Branch

WIUE

Engineering Branch

WIUF

Finance Branch

WIKA

Contracting Branch

WIUL

Integration Branch

WIUAB

Mobility Section

WIUAA

Strike Section

WIUAC

Integration Section

WIUBB

Pavehawk Section

WIUBA

Huey Section

WIUEA

Avionics Section

WIUEB

Talon/Tanker

Section

WIUEC

HH-60G Section

WIUED

Huey Section

WIUEE

AC-130/EC-130J

Section

WIUEG

Tech Data Section

WIKAA

Fixed Wing Section

WIKAB

Rotary Wing Section

WIUAG

Sustainment Section

WIUAD

FW ES Section

WIULA

Support Section

WIULB

PMS Section

WIULC

Integration Section

WIUBD

Rotary ES Section

638th ASMG (AFSC)

411th SCMS

Figure 1. AFLCMC/WIU Organization

The SOF/PR Division, in conjunction with the Operating Commands and their users, will determine, document, track, and maintain positive control of all SOF/PR weapon system baselines called for by OSS&E. The SOF/PR Division also will use a disciplined engineering process to include the development of appropriate inspections and maintenance procedures throughout the operational life of the SOF/PR aircraft and the associated systems and components. The SPO is also responsible for establishing and defining relationships with other

Program Managers (PMs) and/or Material Group Managers (MGMs) that support or provide interfaces to the SOF/PR weapons systems. The Verification and Validation of operational procedures are required by the SPO to ensure all baseline requirements are met which enable the continued operation of the SOF/PR weapons systems throughout its life cycle.

The SOF/PR Division makes use of fielded performance data from Air Force maintenance data systems (Reliability and Maintainability Information System (REMIS), Integrated Maintenance

Data System (IMDS), Programmed Depot Maintenance Scheduling System (PDMSS)/(G097), Joint Deficiency Reporting Systems (JDRS), and the Air Force Safety Automated System

(AFSAS), to continuously evaluate system performance. The responsibility for selection criteria and recommendations to the Source Selection Authority (SSA) for maintenance, supply, and repair sources resides with the SOF/PR Division. The SPO accomplishes or obtains all required certifications supporting OSS&E for the SOF/PR weapons systems and provides an evaluation of potential Total Ownership Cost impacts to changes in the operational use of SOF/PR configurations, maintenance procedures, and parts substitutions. The Group also tracks and takes appropriate actions on mishap recommendations involving the SOF/PR platforms, to ensure all OSS&E requirements are satisfied.

The baseline requirements for the SOF/PR platforms do not always contain the appropriate capabilities for new missions. If this is the case, the MAJCOM may ask that a new requirement be established. To modify any SOF/PR platform for a new capability, the MAJCOM submits an

AF Form 1067. This form establishes parameters for the new capabilities. Other ways that new requirements are suggested are through forums such as the Product Improvement Working

Group (PIWG), Deficiency Reports (DR’s), T.O. 00-25-107s (request for engineering assistance), Mishap Investigations, etc.

2.1.1.1 Chief Engineer Responsibilities

The CE is the designated technical authority for the SOF/PR weapon systems or end item. The

CE is accountable and responsible for the compliance with OSS&E policy. The key objectives of the CE function for the weapon systems are as follows:

Provide the technical vision and planning to guide the weapon system product line development and the implementation and improvement of the structures/systems.

Ensure weapon system technical integrity through technical program execution and function as the single technical focal point for representation of the weapon system.

The CE recommends to the SM and Program Managers, as appropriate, the engineering skill mix, source and its deployment to ensure the weapon system sustainment. The CE’s role in boards/working groups will be further defined in Section 4.

2.1.1.2 Functional Lead Responsibilities

The engineering functional leads are organized (Error! Reference source not found.) in the

OF/PR Division Engineering Branch and assigned within two separate branches, AFLCMC/WIUA (Fixed Wing Branch) and AFLCMC/WIUB (Rotary Wing Branch). The branches include engineering personnel which support avionic & mechanical systems, and aircraft structures. These engineers are also responsible for supporting Programmed Depot

Maintenance (PDM) locations.

WIU

SOF/PR & Rotary Wing Division

WIUE

Engineering Branch

WIUEA

Avionics

WIUEB

MC-130H/P, HC-130N/P, AC-130W

WIUEC

HH-60G

WIUED

UH-1N, TH-1H

WIUEE

AC-130H/U/EC-130J

WIUEG

Tech Data Section

Figure 2. AFLCMC/WIU Division Engineering

2.1.1.3 Functional Missions

The functional mission of assigned engineering personnel for each squadron is described as follows:

AFLCMC/WIU Engineering Division. Provides assurance of OSS&E; certification of fleet airworthiness; configuration management; technical data; quality assurance; material improvement process; technology insertion; flight testing; and engineering/technical budgets.

2.1.1.3.1 Staffing

The WR-ALC Engineering Directorate (EN) is responsible for ensuring each of the Center’s

System Program Offices and Commodities Management Agencies are staffed with trained engineers. The SOF/PR Division uses the Sustainment/Acquisition Composite Model (SACOM) to validate required program office personnel positions. Outputs from the SACOM are used to

POM for personnel positions. The SOF/PR Division Chief Engineer maintains an engineering staffing plan. A list of all vacancies in the Division is maintained by the SOF/PR Division resource advisor. Monthly vacancy meetings are held with the Division Director to identify current and projected vacancies. Vacancies may be filled by reassignment, recruitment, or promotion. The Engineering Directorate (WR-ALC/EN) is responsible for recruiting engineers, and maintains a pool of candidates for selection and hiring by the Groups.

There are currently 50 engineering positions assigned to SOF/PR Division, including the Chief

Engineer. Seven of the positions are supervisory in nature. Four of the remaining 43 positions are military, the rest civilian. The four military engineers are Lieutenants or Captains in the

Electrical/Aerospace/Mechanical engineering career fields. 23 of the 39 remaining are YD-

0855-02 Electronics Engineers; 5 are YD-0830-02 Mechanical Engineers; and 11 are YD-0861-

02 Aerospace Engineers. There are five Subject Matter Expert positions: Aircraft Structural

Integrity Program (ASIP) Manager; Mechanical Systems Integrity Program (MECSIP) Manager;

radar; Communications - Navigation Systems Integration; and airframe corrosion. Most of these engineers participate in multiple Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) due to the small number of engineers available.

2.1.1.3.2 Skills

There are three basic skill sets within the Engineering Division: aerospace engineers, mechanical engineers, and electrical engineers. These primarily deal with airframe structure, mechanical systems, and avionics/diagnostics systems (including wiring). These skills include the ability to identify problems through testing or monitoring performance data; analyze problems to determine root cause, and develop innovative, economic solutions to problems for multi-faceted programs. The ability to communicate clearly and concisely with both technical and non-technical personnel through written and oral means is also necessary.

2.1.1.3.3 Training

Mandated by: AFI 36-401, AFMCI 36-201, AFMCPD 36-2

The process for training personnel is a joint effort undertaken by the training manager, supervisor, and employee. The duties of each individual are outlined below:

Training Manager

Responsible for pulling requirements from Electronic Technical Management System

(ETMS).

Responsible for notifying individuals of open slots with a valid requirement in ETMS.

Responsible for nominating students in ETMS after supervisor approval.

Responsible for tracking utilization and providing metrics to management.

Supervisor

Inputs/modifies training requirements for employees in ETMS.

Verifies availability of individuals requesting training classes and accepts responsibility for filling slots. Responds to the training manager with acceptance or declination.

Responsible for notifying employees to attend scheduled training.

In the event a student is unavailable due to mission need, the supervisor will provide a suitable replacement and notify training manager.

Employee

Responsible for attending all scheduled classes or notifying his/her supervisor immediately upon learning he/she is unable to attend the class for whatever reason.

Responsible for notifying class instructor upon arrival to class if he/she is a substitute for another scheduled attendee.

The process for training systems engineering personnel is outlined as follows:

During annual and/or periodic reviews, supervisors will input/modify training requirements for each of their employees. Supervisors will review training requirements of new personnel within 90 days of arrival.

Wing training managers receive class announcements, pull requirements from ETMS, send out notifications to employees with valid training requirements and request that employees obtain supervisor’s approval before accepting slot.

Supervisors prioritize, verify availability, and respond to wing training manager with approval/declination.

Wing training managers nominate students in ETMS and send out calendar invites with class date, time, and location.

Wing training managers update weekly training forecasts and no-show reports for the groups and wing staff and provide weekly no-show reports to the wing.

2.2 Coordination

One means by which coordination is maintained between the SM and any on-going development outside the group is participation in Integrated Product Teams (IPTs). IPTs are cross-functional teams that are formed for the specific purpose of delivering a product for an external or internal customer. Critical to the formation of a successful IPT are: (1) all functional disciplines influencing the product throughout its lifetime should be represented on the team; (2) a clear understanding of the team’s goals, responsibilities, and authority should be established among the business unit manager, program and functional managers, as well as the IPT; and (3) identification of resource requirements such as staffing, funding, and facilities. The above can be defined in a team charter which provides guidance.

IPT members have complementary skills and are committed to a common purpose, performance objectives, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. Members of an integrated product team represent technical, manufacturing, business, and support functions and organizations which are critical to developing, procuring and supporting the product. Having these functions represented concurrently permits teams to consider more and broader alternatives quickly, and in a broader context, enables faster and better decisions.

2.3 Integration with Contractors/External Organizations

For any design or development activity, to include modifications during sustainment, planned life cycle industry and AF/DoD, organization roles are identified. Program managers will document and update planned long-term organizational roles and functions for life cycle processes and design considerations, key requirements, applicable measures and incentives, and verification approach. The following Table 1 lists long-term organizational roles and functions for life cycle processes and design considerations, key requirements, applicable measures and incentives, and verification approach that must be considered for SOF/PR weapon system sustainment. This list will be addressed over the life cycle of each SOF/PR weapon system program to determine if additional items need to be added or if items need to be removed.

Table 1. Areas of Responsibility

Areas of Responsibility Primary OPR

Computer Resources/Software Engineering 402 SMXG, Robins AFB, GA (AFSC)

Critical Safety Items (CSI) AFLCMC/WIUE, Robins AFB, GA

Deployment/Fielding AFLCMC/WIUA/B, Robins AFB, GA

DMSMS/Obsolescence 411 SCMS, Robins AFB, GA (AFSC)

EMI/EMC/RF Management WR-ALC/GFEA, Robins AFB, GA

Environmental Safety & Occupational Health

(ESOH)

AFLCMC/WIUA/B, Robins AFB, GA

Human Systems Integration (HSI) 311 HSW, Brooks City Base, TX

Information Assurance (IA) AFLCMC/WIUE, Robins AFB, GA

Infrastructure & Facilities AFLCMC/WIUA/B, Robins AFB, GA

Integrated Diagnostics AFLCMC/WIUAH, Robins AFB, GA

Maintenance and Sustainment Engineering

Facilities

AFLCMC/WIUA/B, Robins AFB, GA

Areas of Responsibility Primary OPR

Manufacturing, Producibility, & Quality

Assurance

AFLCMC/WIUA/B, Robins AFB, GA

Packaging, Handling, Storage, & Transport

(PHS&T)

AFLCMC/WIUA/B, Robins AFB, GA

Reliability, Availability, Maintainability

(RAM)

411 SCMS, Robins AFB, GA

Specifications & Standards AFLCMC/WIUE, Robins AFB, GA

Standardizations (parts, materials, data/documents)

AFLCMC/WIUE Robins AFB, GA

Support Equipment AFLCMC/WNZ, Robins AFB, GA

Technology Maturity & Transition WR-ALC/ENEP, Robins AFB, GA

(AFSC)

Test, Measurement, & Handling Equipment AFLCMC/WNA, Robins AFB, GA

Total Ownership Cost (TOC) AFLCMC/WIUF, Robins AFB, GA

Training (Ops, Maintenance, ME/SE) &

Training Systems

AFLCMC/WNS, Hill AFB, UT

3 Program Requirements

The SOF/PR legacy fleet is operated, maintained and sustained under the typical legacy concepts. The MDS’s assigned responsibilities to the SPD are operated by ACC, AFSOC, AFSPC, AFRC, ANG, USAFE, and PACAF. Maintenance is performed at the Organizational level by personnel of those Commands; depot-level maintenance is performed organically by

AFMC at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center and under agreements with NAVAIR Depot

Cherry Point, NC; Corpus Christi Army Depot (CCAD) Corpus Christi, TX; USCG Aviation

Logistics Center Elizabeth City, NC, and under contract with Korean Airlines. Sustainment support is provided by AFMC (ALCs and the AFSC) and DLA.

3.1 Technical Oversight Approach

Technical oversight of the SOF/PR Fleet is maintained through continuous monitoring of system performance data, and comparing this to predicted or required performance. All members of the http://www.ccad.army.mil/ http://www.uscg.mil/hq/arsc/about.asp http://www.uscg.mil/hq/arsc/about.asp

SOF/PR team are stakeholders in the data collection process; however, the SOF/PR Division, ACC, AFSOC, AFSPC, AFRC, ANG, and AFSC are the primary entities involved.

The SOF/PR Aging Fleet Integrity and Reliability Management (AFIRM) database is an integrated data management and analysis tool that allows for SOF/PR engineering oversight of aircraft areas that could affect integrity or reliability. The database includes Aircraft Structural

Integrity program (ASIP) and Mechanical Systems Integrity Program (MECSIP) data as related to specific tail numbers, technical data, historical data, deficiency data, component reliability tracking, risk assessment tools, critical safety items, and a bulletin board for direct communication with the operating units. This database is used by engineering daily to monitor and analyze empirical data that could affect weapon system safety or availability. AFIRM usage data is populated from AF databases IMDS and REMIS. AFIRM is the primary repository for all ASIP and MECSIP service data that is used to monitor aircraft operability and is used daily by all engineering functionalities within SOF/PR Division. The primary users of AFIRM are the

ASIP and MECSIP managers, but it is used by the entire SOF/PR engineering community for its vast array of in-service data and engineering tools. A maintenance bulletin board is included to provide the operational units with a quick and direct route to engineering for routine questions.

The bulletin boards also provide a means to foster communication between field units. A screen capture of the AFIRM main interface page is seen below (Error! Reference source not found.).

Figure 3. AFIRM Main Page

The ASIP program continuously collects Individual Aircraft Tracking (IAT), Loads and

Environmental Spectra Survey (L/ESS), and in-service data (cracks, corrosion, etc.) for analyzing the health of the fleet. The data from these sources are used to update the Force

Structural Management Plan (FSMP). Changes to the FSMP are implemented through the PDM work specification via the Aircraft and Missile Requirements Database (AMRD) process, through inspection work cards, technical orders and through time compliance technical orders for special inspections and modifications. Critical structure is addressed through field and depot level inspections within each MDS maintenance program. Problems that are safety related are evaluated in accordance with ASC/EN Airworthiness Certification Circular No. 5, “Airworthiness Certification Risk Evaluation and Acceptance” and MIL-STD-882D, “Standard

Practice for System Safety”. Costs for major programs (e.g. aircraft modifications, inspections) are presented to the lead and using commands for funding approval. The ASIP process will be described more fully in Section 4.5.1.

The MECSIP program defines the basic force management actions required to transition the

SOF/PR platforms from the acquisition phase of the Mechanical System and Sub-systems

Integrity Program (MECSIP) to its sustainment phase. The purpose is to achieve and maintain system safety and operational reliability throughout the aircraft’s operational service life, and minimize total ownership cost. The costs associated with unscheduled maintenance are not tracked by AF systems, even though they are significant. The SOF/PR MECSIP recognizes these “hidden” costs and attempts to reduce or eliminate them. The principle source of data will be the weapon systems inherent Maintenance Data Collection (MDC) System, IMDS, along with other data sources accessible through the REMIS. The use of the synergistic aspects of MECSIP, Airline/Manufacture’s Maintenance Steering Group (MSG- 3), Guidelines for the Naval

Aviation Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Process and the SOF/PR MECSIP will ensure the best of all processes. The MECSIP program will be more fully described in Section 4.5.2.

3.2 Aircraft Availability Improvement Plan (AAIP)

The SPM is responsible for accomplishing the AAIP. The FY13 AAIP plan was developed through collaboration between the SOF/PR SPM and Lead Command/A4. The AAIP was approved by the LCMC/PEO and Lead MAJCOM/A4 and is used to support CAM, the CSAF

Weapons System Enterprise Reviews (WSER), and Product Support. The three previous year performance standards are the baseline used to develop the FY13 AAIP. AAIPs are reviewed and updated annually. AAIP is the basis for the Performance Execution portion of the CSAF WSER.

The SPM is required to report to HQ AFMC/A4U and Air Staff during the CSAF WSER on weapon system availability as it pertains to Performance Execution. Each weapon system is measured against the approved AAIP. The rates used to measure performance for the SOF/PR

Division aircraft availability goals for FY13 are approved at the AFLCMC/WI and

MAJCOM/A4 level. SOF/PR platform rates are as follow:

AC-130H MC-130H CSAR Tankers TH-1H

Standard 73.5% Standard 70.9% Standard 67.4% Standard 65.0%

Attainable 61.6% Attainable 53.9% Attainable 55.3% Attainable 65.0%

NMCB 2.1% NMCB 2.7% NMCB 5.3% NMCB 5.1%

NMCS 3.6% NMCS 4.5% NMCS 4.5% NMCS 2.6%

NMCM 15.1% NMCM 12.3% NMCM 19.3% NMCM 19.6%

Depot 15.7% Depot 25.0% Depot 13.2% Depot 5.9%

UPNR 1.8% UPNR 1.7% UPNR 2.4% UPNR 1.9%

AC-130U MC-130P HH-60G

Standard 76.4% Standard 56.4% Standard 59.4% Attainable 60.6% Attainable 54.8% Attainable 59.4%

NMCB 1.5% NMCB 5.6% NMCB 3.6%

NMCS 3.1% NMCS 8.4% NMCS 2.9%

NMCM 11.0% NMCM 20.0% NMCM 14.0%

Depot 21.4% Depot 5.2% Depot 18.9%

UPNR 2.4% UPNR 6.0% UPNR 1.3%

AC-130W EC-130J UH-1N

Standard 73.1% Standard 71.1% Standard 73.7% Attainable 66.5% Attainable 53.4% Attainable 73.7%

NMCB 1.3% NMCB 2.9% NMCB 4.0%

NMCS 3.0% NMCS 2.1% NMCS 2.7%

NMCM 8.7% NMCM 21.7% NMCM 7.7%

Depot 18.9% Depot 17.2% Depot 9.9%

UPNR 1.6% UPNR 2.9% UPNR 2.0%

Fleet Mission Capable (MC) rates are utilized as a subset to determine the overall fleet AA standard and readiness of each SOF/PR platform. Each MAJCOM operating the SOF/PR platforms utilizes an MC standard consistent with their operational requirements.

The MC Rate is used to describe operational readiness. There are three primary levels of readiness: Fully Mission Capable (FMC), Partially Mission Capable (PMC), and Non-Mission

Capable (NMC). The Air Force Mission Essential Subsystem List (MESL) defines what systems and subsystems must be operational for an aircraft to complete its assigned tasks. An aircraft is considered capable if it is classified as either FMC or PMC. FMC and PMC are used to determine the mission capable rate for the fleet.

MC rate is dependent upon maintainability, reliability, and supply supportability. If a part breaks, the failure is due to the reliability of the system and the MC rate decreases. If an aircraft cannot fly due to maintenance and/or supply, then this affects the MC rate. Finally, if a downed plane is waiting on supply to send the correct part, then supply is adding to the downtime of the aircraft.

Analysts use the Air Force mandated Logistics Installations and Mission Support Enterprise

View (LIMS-EV) to determine system performance in the respective AAIP categories. The bi-annual Chief of Staff of Staff Weapon System Report (CSAF WSR) presentation is developed utilizing the data extracted from this system. LIMS-EV calculates each weapon system AA rate by dividing the available hours by the possessed hours.

The AAIP includes initiatives to reach the Air Force standard for the weapon system.

Depot possessed category has been impacted by an aggressive modernization, modification, and

Unscheduled Depot Level Maintenance (UDLM) programs. Initiatives are outlined in the AAIP through the FYDP to improve depot possessed for each of the SOF/PR aircraft. There are very few unique AA initiatives specifically for SOF/PR C-130 aircraft. The majority of the initiatives are as a result of common fleet initiatives such as High Velocity Maintenance tenants, carbon brakes, NP2000 propellers, and digital fuel probes. The biggest impact on SOF/PR AA is due to center wing box replacements.

NMCM and NMCB offer the greatest potential to improve AA. Extensive ground time, in excess of 30 Days for scheduled maintenance has resulted in a significant decline in available aircraft to the “war fighter”.

The AAIP exists as a tool to facilitate effective planning, utilization and efficient delivery of

SOF/PR assets to the war fighter. The plan is designed as a guide and reference tool for development of present and future SOF/PR aircraft availability improvement and operational and support cost reduction initiatives.

Improving system reliability is another way AA can be effectively and efficiently increased.

Performance parameters characterize the SOF/PR aircraft within the context of performing its mission. These parameters are used to determine whether or not a particular system is meeting its design objectives.

3.3 Key Performance Parameters (KPP) and Measures of Effectiveness and Suitability

The requirements for individual SOF/PR MDS projects are contained in the various requirements documents established for each project. KPPs such as Net Ready and Sustainment will be addressed for each project in its Initial Capabilities Document (ICD), Capability Development

Document (CDD), Capability Production Document (CPD), Program SEP, or Program TEMP.

This list will be limited to critical measures that apply to capabilities essential to mission accomplishment and will focus on operational capabilities, not design specifications. The measures will be presented in a matrix format where practical.

The KPPs and KSAs for individual SOF/PR MDS’s projects are contained in the various requirements documents established for each project; however, each service was directed by

USD (AT&L) to establish target goals for “Life Cycle Sustainment Metrics” in his letter dated

Jul 31, 2008:

“Implementing life cycle management is a top priority for the

Department of Defense. To achieve that objective, DoD must seamlessly integrate its acquisition and life cycle sustainment policies. To that end, this memorandum establishes a strategy and provides direction to achieve the following: reinforce the implementation of mandatory life cycle sustainment metrics; align resources to achieve readiness levels; track performance throughout the life cycle; and implement performance-based life cycle product support strategies.”

In response to the USD (AT&L) direction, each SOF/PR MDS SPM in concert with their corresponding MAJCOM’s, and the Air Force AFSC, is developing the processes to define appropriate Life Cycle Sustainment Metrics with implementation across the weapon systems and to align the resources to improve fleet readiness levels and track associated changes. When the metrics are determined they will be included in the next update of the each MDS Fleet TEMP as overarching sustainment metrics.

4 Technical Baseline Management

4.1 Technical Baseline Management Responsibility

The SM is ultimately responsible for managing the technical baseline of the SOF/PR platforms.

The SM has delegated this down to the Chief Engineer as the Chair of the Configuration Control

Board and owner of the Configuration Change process.

4.2 Technical Baseline Control

4.2.1 Configuration Management

Mandated by: AFPD 63-1\AFPD 20-1

Operational safety, suitability, and effectiveness are associated with a specific system or end-item configuration. The specific configuration and its characteristics must be defined by engineering data at all times. Therefore, a robust configuration management process must be used to establish and preserve operational safety, suitability, and effectiveness baselines. The level of configuration control may vary from program-to-program based on acquisition and sustainment strategies (e.g., commercial items, contracts with Total System Performance

Responsibility (TSPR), etc.). All permanent and temporary configuration changes, as well as the use of non-conforming material, will be reviewed and approved prior to implementation or installation. Delegation of specific configuration management authority between organizations must be formally documented. This authority includes configuration management responsibility for supply, maintenance, user, and test initiated changes.

Configuration change management is a process for managing product configuration changes and variance. The purpose and benefits of the change management process include the following:

Enable change decisions to be based on knowledge of complete change impact

Limit changes to those which are necessary or offer significant benefit

Facilitate evaluation of cost, savings, and trade offs

Ensure customer interests are considered

Provide orderly communication of change information

Preserve configuration control at product interface

Maintain and control configuration baselines

Maintain consistency between product and documentation

Document and limit variances

Facilitate continued supportability of the product after change

Regardless of the type of product or phase of its life cycle, a change to a product is accomplished using a systematic, measurable change process (Error! Reference source not found.). The rocess includes identifying the need for a change, documenting change impact, evaluating and coordinating the proposed change, incorporating the approved change in the product and its related configuration documents, and verifying consistency of the product definition. In addition, the process also encompasses the identification, documentation, approval and implementation of variances (deviations or waivers) from configuration baseline requirements.

As a result of the establishment of OSS&E requirements, a formal process for developing and validating changes to the SOF/PR program has been developed. This process is provided in detail in RAFBI 63-104 but takes place over four phases: 1) Requirement Validation, 2)

Feasibility, Concept Exploration and Acquisition Planning, 3) Configuration Control Board

(CCB) Package Development, and 4) Configuration Control Board.

Figure 4. CM II Change Process

4.2.1.1 Configuration Status Accounting (CSA)

Effectiveness of configuration management is closely linked to the flow and availability of configuration information about the product.