Achieving Supply Chain - midwestcityok.netmidwestcityok.net/tinkerandtheprimes/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/...Category mgt. Physical: Streamlined process Agility/responsive ... Future

448th Supply Chain Management Wing

Achieving Supply Chain

Resiliency…through Innovation

Mr. Frank Washburn

448 SCMW/CL

23 August 2017

B r e a k i n g B a r r i e r s … S i n c e 1 9 4 7

Overview

2

Responsive resilient supply chain (RRSC)

Innovation Center

Network capabilities (no bids, etc.)

Moving from a transactional supply chain to a more

organic/outcome-based supply chain (PBL)

Top 3 challenges


Geographically

Distributed Wing

3

Director

Mr. Frank Washburn

Senior IMA

Col Jerome McLin

Vice Director

Col Hilary Feaster

Commander

Col Paul Smith

Director

Ms. Lois Huizar

Hill AFB, UT Tinker AFB, OK

Commander

Col Robert Kielty

Robins AFB, GA

Director

Ms. Kim Herren

Financial Management

Ms. DeLana Aylor

Director of Staff

Ms. Lee Ann Washburn

Quality

Ms. Marjorie Trammell

Technical Director

Mr. Thomas Lamb

Logistics Support

Ms. Karen Allen

One Wing

~

Four Groups

~

Five Staff Offices

~

Three Different Time

Zones


Responsive Resilient Supply

Chain (RRSC) Capability

4

Designed to improve the supply chain of the future

“If it isn’t in the Strategy it isn’t in the Plan. If it isn’t in the

Plan it isn’t in the Program. If it isn’t in the Program it isn’t

in the President’s Budget (PB). If it isn’t in the PB…”

Target improvements in

‒ Agility

‒ Distribution

‒ Tech insertion

AF strategy and capability development relies

on smart application of technology, processes

and skills

Will influence near, mid, and far-term AF

strategy and resource allocation

‒ Integration

‒ Interoperation

‒ Vulnerabilities


Current RRSC Initiatives

5

Repair network integration

Advanced planning system

Future of organic supply

Supply chain risk management

Demand forecast accuracy

Additive manufacturing/

reverse engineering

Sub-system/weapon system

level working capital fund

performance-based logistics

Strategic sourcing

Sustaining engineering


Innovation Center

Integrate 448th equities into Innovation

Centers at all three complexes

Joint effort between engineering, supply

chain, and maintenance

Enable AFSC workforce to generate rapid,

innovative, & agile solutions

Insert advanced state-of-the-art

manufacturing technology

Maximize existing private best practices

with organic depot operations

6


Leveraging Network of

Alternate Sourcing Capabilities

7

Partner with industry to identify and resolve supply chain risk

Improve speed of reverse engineering, repair development

and additive manufacturing capabilities – shift from reactive to

pro-active mitigation

‒ Initiatives with non-DoD (DoE, academia) and DoD agencies

(AFRL, Navy, Army)

Enable rapid source solutions when no, limited, or non-responsive

sources exist

‒ Obsolescence management and source development

Apply Continuous Process Improvement (CPI) across enterprise

to meet “Art of the Possible” goals

‒ Standard processes, gated metrics, and benchmarking

Implement category management

‒ “Buying as one” – leverage spend/reduce duplication


The “Network”

8

Sourcing

Integration

Network

Triggers

High cost

Sole source

Long L/T

No bids

DMSMS

Supply risks

New tech

Outputs

Enablers: Cost reduction

Competition

Enterprise focus

Category mgt.

Physical: Streamlined process

Agility/responsive

Supportability

Centralized repository

of capabilities

Providers

Private Industry Organic Maintenance Interdepartmental AgencyAcademiaAFRL


Organic Supply Chain

Strategy Shift

Shifting strategy from traditional transactional supply chain to

outcome based approach using working capital funds

‒ KC-46, B-2, B-21, F-100, landing gear

Traditional sustainment PBL

“Fail and Fix” or “Fail and Replace” contractsFixed price, longer term contracting for war

fighter-relevant outcomes

More failures = increased revenue,increased profit

More failures = no added revenue,decreased profit

No incentive to improve reliability or take cost out of the sustainment value chain

Providers highly incentivized to increase reliability and take cost out of the sustainment

value chain

Transactional logistics is the baseline against which savings are measured

Significant savings versus baseline. Additional savings may be harvested at contract

renegotiation

From reliability, maintainability, and life-cycle price-to-the-Service perspectives, transactional

sustainment incentives provider behavior that is misaligned with service interests

From reliability, maintainability, and life-cycleprice-to-the-Service perspectives, Performance

Based Logistics incentivize provider behavior that is aligned with service interests

Strategy

Dynamics

Incentives

Savings

Bottom line

9


Traditional “Transactional”

Supply Chain

DoD Forecast requirements

Pay for each buy/repair

Assumes majority ofrisk for

‒ Right parts

‒ Right repairs

‒ Right time

‒ Right quantities

High risk

Contractor

“The more I sell, themore profit I make.”

Low risk

10


PBL Approach

DoD Pay for performance outcomes

‒ Aircraft availability

‒ Material availability

‒ Material reliability

‒ Ownership cost

‒ Mean down time

Shares risk for‒ Right parts

‒ Right repairs

‒ Right time

‒ Right quantities

Shared risk

Contractor

“The less I use, themore profit I make.”

Shared risk

11


Top 3 Challenges

Limited resiliency

Agility of commodity acquisition process

Risks and threats

12


Questions?


Advancing Special Operations, Common

Avionics, and Support Equipment Supply Chain

for the Future

Mr. Hugh Foskey

638 SCMG/DD

23 August 2017

638th Supply Chain Management Group


Overview

15

Who we are

Current challenges and innovative opportunities

Upcoming efforts

Future and beyond…achieving supply chain resiliency


638th Supply Chain Management

Group (Robins AFB, GA)

16

Buy Contract

Repair

Organic

Repair

$418M $1.7B $1.5BGlobal Hawk

Providing supply chain life cycle

sustainment support for:

Common avionics and

electronics warfare

Special operations forces/

personnel recovery

Support equipment, automatic

test systems and vehicles

Armament

New WorkloadFiscal Year 2017 – 2019 buy/repair

requirements


Operations & Maintenance

Support Equipment and Vehicles

17

Fiscal Year Buy ($M) Repair ($M)

FY16 $724.00 $159.00

FY17 $867.00 $174.00

FY18 $613.00 $232.00


Current Challenges and

Innovative Opportunities

Early engagement w/program offices for supply chain planning

‒ IPT to define source of supply assignment (SOSA) process

‒ Early partnership yields more effective supply chain

Greater definition in transition requirements

Diminishing SOR/SOS for obsolete EW, avionics, STE items

Qualification of new sources for legacy, highly specialized,

sealed microwave signal processing assemblies

Replacement of microwave tube-based transmitters with modern

technologies

Technologies to detect counterfeit integrated circuits

Major upgrade investment (LRU and SRU)

18


Upcoming Efforts

Major transitions

‒ Global Hawk platform

~600 reparable NSNs/200 support equipment NSNs

$42.5M supply chain budget

‒ CV-22 platform

~1300 reparable NSNs/300 support equipment NSNs

$170M supply chain budget

‒ C-5M (~60 NSNs)/C-130J (~140 peculiar NSNs)

‒ Possible 3PL type opportunity to manage qualification of new

sources for large number of aging/obsolete components

‒ Follow-on competition for 3PL SE contract

19


Future and Beyond…Achieving

Supply Chain Resiliency

Closer integration of program office, supply chain and industry

‒ Early partnerships enable AF ability to accelerate insertion of

new technologies and rapidly adjust repair capability/capacity

to ever-changing demands

Additive manufacturing; goal of print-on-demand end state

‒ Engineering-compliant parts at point-of-need

Global Hawk: possible opportunity integrator role to assist in

establishment of organic supply chain

‒ First step for 638 SCMG to developing a responsive and

resilient supply chain!


Contact Information

Air Force Sustainment Center Small Business Office – Robins Air

Force Base, GA

‒ Website: http://www.robins.af.mil/About-Us/Small-Business-

Office/

‒ Email: [email protected]

‒ Address: 50 Richard Ray Blvd, Bldg 205

Robins AFB, GA 31098

21


Questions?


Col Paul Smith

748 SCMG/CC

23 August 2017

Long-term Sustainment of the Nuclear

Enterprise, Landing Gear, Secondary Power,

ICBMs, and Space Systems


Overview

24

Who we are

Catalysts for innovation

Conclusion



Group (Hill AFB, UT)

25

Buy Contract

Repair

Organic

Repair

$587M $743M $1.66B

New Workload

APT T-XProviding supply chain life cycle


Aircraft structural and avionics

systems

Landing gear

Secondary power systems

Intercontinental ballistic missile

Space & command, control,

communications & intelligence

Fiscal Year 2017 – 2019 buy/repair

requirements


Catalysts for Innovation

26

Mature weapon systems…

…sometimes very, very

mature

AVERAGE WEAPON SYSTEM AGE AT RETIREMENT

System Projected

Retirement

Age at

Retirement

Minuteman III 2035 55

MILSTAR 2030 36

MUTES 2035 44

CRC 2035 49

GPS MCS 2035 40


Catalysts for Innovation (cont)

27

Castings and forgings present numerous supply chain challenges

‒ Limited / diminishing industrial base

‒ Highly specialized / limited quantities

‒ Can require extensive set-up / retooling

‒ Tech specifications sometimes difficult to meet



28

Obstacles to supportability to name a few:

‒ Diminishing original equipment manufacturers (OEM)

‒ Exhausted stockpile reserves / spares

‒ Obsolete parts (e.g., analog vs. digital)

‒ Legacy technology not compatible with existing infrastructure

Reengineering efforts in some cases are required to uphold

supportability to the field

Partnering to recreate specs, documents, technical data, and

hardware



29

A no-bid on a solicitation can cause a redirection / duplication of

acquisition strategy resulting in program implementation

‒ Negatively affects mission-critical capabilities

Pre-planning / communication between gov’t and industry prior to

request for proposal

‒ Reduces risk / helps to mitigate concerns

‒ Industry days and other outreach venues


Strategic, outcome-based contracts vs multiple transactional

instruments

Comprehensive packaging of a group of components and / or

systems requirements

Incentives for integrator / vendor to invest to increase reliability

and responsiveness

Outcome / readiness-based metrics & measures (e.g, availability)


30


Conclusion

31

Who we are

Catalysts for innovation

Conclusion

Points of contact


Contact Information

Air Force Sustainment Center Small Business Office – Hill Air Force

Base, UT

‒ Website: http://www.hill.af.mil/Home/Small-Business-Office/


‒ Address: 6038 Aspen Ave. Bldg 1289 Center

Hill AFB, UT 84056-5805

32


Questions?


Col Robert Kielty

848 SCMG/CC

23 August 2017

Sharing Requirements for Propulsion,

Accessories, Instruments and Bomber/Refueling

Structures


Col Robert Kielty

848 SCMG/CC

23 August 2017

Sharing Requirements for Propulsion,

Accessories, Instruments and Bomber/Refueling

Structures


Overview

36

Who we are (group overview)

Current challenges and innovative opportunities

Upcoming efforts

Future and beyond…achieving supply chain resiliency



Group (Tinker AFB, OK)

37

Providing supply chain life cycle


Propulsion

Instruments

Accessories

Structures

Buy Contract

Repair

Organic

Repair

$1.76B $1.58B $4.47B

New Workload

KC-46A

Fiscal Year 2017 – 2019 buy/repair

requirements




Planning and execution group common themes

‒ Legacy/aging weapons systems

‒ Manufacturing cold starts

‒ Obsolescence

‒ Diminishing Manufacturing Sources Material Shortages

(DMSMS)

‒ Vendor “no-bids”

38




Propulsion

‒ Industrial base for legacy systems

Cold starts, no bids, and obsolescence result in increased

contract award and production lead times

‒ Increasing sustainment costs

New failure modes, increased condemnations, more

extensive repairs

‒ Contracting challenges

Delays in award due to commerciality pricing request, late

to need proposals, TINA thresholds and requirements

‒ Recent successes

Refurb buys on F108; total savings to date $111M

Pacer phantom on F110; MICAPs decreased ~20K

39




Instruments

‒ Low volume buys or repairs results in no-bid

‒ Source of Repair (SOR) for sole-source items with limited

knowledge base

‒ Aging technology

‒ Parts obsolescence

‒ Limited/one-of-a-kind support equipment

Recent successes

‒ Cold spray technology to save CSD housing

‒ Multiple B-2 CSAG projects to support obsolete parts

40




Accessories

‒ Cold start for complex assemblies – heat exchangers

‒ Casting and forging sources – housings for gearboxes and

pumps

‒ Increased usage of aging hardware – Common Strategic Rotary

Launcher (CSRL) Power Drive Unit (PDU)

Recent successes

‒ Collaboration with Parker and MOOG in support of actuator cell

41


Structures

‒ Data mining

Need quantitative information for aircraft and fleet health

AF Form 202 - data compilation into one system for analysis

‒ Obsolescence

‒ Sources of supply diminishing

‒ Low quantity of parts ordered

‒ Environmental concerns

Recent successes

‒ KC-135 MIPR inflight refueling shroud

‒ B-1 tail radome

‒ ATCALS

42




Upcoming Efforts

Propulsion

‒ Continue to identify strategic contracting vehicles with OEMs

F100 Enterprise Remanufacture Contract (ERC)

DLA joint opportunities contract

Captains of Industry (COI)

‒ Logistics Requirement Development Process (LRDP) on F108

Working with OC-ALC, LP and ASD to apply aircraft

supportability process to engines

Instruments

‒ Develop long-term sustainment initiatives

Constant Speed Drive (CSD) PBL

Aeronautical Mobile-Satellite Service (AMSS) overhaul

Pursuing strategic contracts

43


Upcoming Efforts

Accessories

‒ B-2 sustainment

Estimating forecasted requirements to offset small fleet

dynamics

‒ Actuators

Partnering to improve supply chain posture

Increase DLA demand for piece parts

‒ Heat exchangers

Utilizing CSAG money to develop tech data packages

Assisting OC-ALC/CMXG in standing up organic capability

Structures

‒ Northrop Grumman multi-platform contract

44


Future and Beyond…Achieving

Supply Chain Resiliency

DMSMS to identify Obsolescence

Co-Forecasting (CoFo)

Additive Manufacturing Technologies

Establishing Public/Private Partnerships (PPP)

Reverse Engineering

Product Improvement Working Groups

Through enterprise-wide collaboration, we can meet the

challenges of Weapon System Support head on.

45


Contact Information

Air Force Sustainment Center Small Business Office – Tinker Air

Force Base, OK

‒ Website: http://www.afsc.af.mil/Units/SBO.aspx


‒ Address: 3001 Staff Drive Ste 1AG 85A

Tinker AFB, OK 73145-3009

46


Questions?

448th Supply Chain Management Wing

Ms. Julia Séas

429 SCMS/GUMD – SASPO

DSN 736-7373

[email protected]

Strategic Alternate Sourcing

Program Office (SASPO)


Outline

SASPO Mission Statement

SASPO Organization

SASPO Overview and Products

Air Force Technical Data and Qualification Process

SASPO Network

SASPO Events/Outreach

SASPO Website/POCs

Summary


SASPO Mission Statement

Serves as the 448 Supply Chain Management Wing (SCMW) focal

point for alternate sourcing efforts and diminishing

manufacturing sources and material shortages

Responsible for providing a strategic focus on qualifying and

developing alternate sources, developing and implementing

strategies for increased supportability and parts availability, and

leveraging opportunities for resolution of obsolescence issues

across the enterprise

50


Strategic Alternate SourcingProgram Office (SASPO)

51

Alternate Sourcing

Source Approval Requests (SARs)

Alternate Sourcing Strategies

Repair Development

Reverse Engineering

Marketing Strategies

Diminishing Manufacturing Sources &

Material Shortages

Predictive Tool

Analysis & Resolution

End of Life (EOL)

SASPO

Increase Supportability Increase Competition Increase Availability Reduce Costs

Centralized Cross-Functional Support Team with Targeted Results


Overview of Source Approval Requests

SASPO manages an Engineering Services Support Contract to

assist in qualifying current and new sources of supply and

repair for Air Force components

Working follow on contract – RFP release Fall 2017

Follow guidance and procedures from AFMCI 23-113

Source Approval Requests (SARs) provide the process and

documentation to become a qualified alternate source

Additional sources increases the acquisition competition and

increases system availability

Provides efficiencies in managing SARs

Current turnaround time is 30 days for an open solicitation and

60-90 days for others

Current Savings to date = $45.6M


SAR Data

195

170

293

76 75 82

6 12

41

121

83

145

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017

Received Approved Cond Appr Disapproved


Overview of CU/OH Program

Objective: Match AF requirements to industry availability of

commercially-used parts with a military application

Current Efforts

67 approved F108 items

60 added through SAR process

27 contracts awarded to date

Results: $113.7M saved to date; 267 days reduced PLT

Future Efforts

Currently working with TF33 team to support commercial

derivate parts

Increase approved items through SAR process

Reviewing criteria to be approved repair sources

54

FY17 Savings = $19M


Overview of RE/RD Program

Objective: Reduce Air Force supply chain costs/risks through

increased competitive sourcing strategies and Focus on creating

competition to improve affordability and supportability

Current Efforts

Continue to work with Requirement Owners to identify potential

RE candidates

Candidates are socialized during SASPO Industry Days

Review and Disseminate Whitepapers from Industry

Future Efforts

Focus efforts on No-Bid items and Low Usage Items

Supporting AoP by developing processes and efficiencies

55

50% of the 448 SCMW Spares Buys and 60% of Repairs are Sole Source


SASPO Products

RPOW Lists

Repair and Buy projected requirements

Target List

Only 1-2 sources of supply

The AF SHOULD own the data

FY18 - $24M, FY19 - $23M (Spring 2017)

Source Approval Requests submittals for approval

G Coded List

Full and Open Competition items

Covers all three locations (Ogden AFB, Tinker AFB, Warner

Robins AFB)

March and September Comp Cycle data


Qualification Opportunities

FY17 – FY19 Buy Projections

Buy SpendFY17 FY18 FY19 FY17-FY19

Qualify with Air Force (AMSC-C, K, M) $284M $264M $195M $743M

Full and Open Competition (AMSC-G) $11M $15M $20M $46M

Qualify or License with the OEM/Prime $588M $827M $588B $2.0B

Repair Spend FY17 FY18 FY19 FY17-FY19

Qualify with Air Force (RMSC-C & M) $383M $308M $374M $1.0B

Full and Open Competition (RMSC-G) $2M $2M $2M $6M

Qualify or License with OEM/Prime $518M $470M $485M $1.5B

Parts have not been screened $454M $469M $473M $1.4B

57

Based on Sep 16 Comp Cycle


Air Force Data Rights

Data Rights Drive the Air Force’s Ability to Qualify New Sources

Assigned by DoD activity to describe the results of a

technical review of a part

Air Force Personnel Evaluate the Air Force’s Data Rights

Position and Assigns an Acquisition Method Suffix Code

(AMSC) and Repair Method Suffix Code (RMSC)

These codes assists the AF in Establishing Qualification

Requirements and Candidates for Increasing Competition

through Alternate Sourcing

58


Acquisition Method Suffix Code

(AMSC)Qualify with the OEM or Prime

A Data Right Questionable

B Source Control

D GOV Data or Rights not Physically Available

HNo Sufficient, Accurate, or Legible Data to Purchase from Other than the Current

Source

N Manufacturing Requires Special Test a/o Ultra-Precision Quality

P Cannot Purchase Data Rights

Q No Adequate Data or Data Rights or Both

R No Data or Rights for Additional Sources

V Formal High Reliability

Z Commercial/Non-Developmental/Off-the-Shelf

59

Qualify with the Air Force

C Engineering Source Approval

K Approved Class 1 Castings and Similar Forgings SAE- AMS2175 (MIL-STD-2175)

M Master Tooling or Coordinated Tooling

No Qualification Required

G Full and Open Competition


How to Acquire Drawings

60

Submit “Request for

Engineering Data”

Form

Submit

Signed

“DD2345”

Submit to

[email protected]

LZPE –

Drawing

Office

Receive

RequestReview and

LoginReview

Data

Is Data

Complete and

Releasable?

Research

database

no

Complete

Request

yes

Release

Data

Submit to

[email protected]

Submit to

[email protected]

Submit “Letter” with

company information

Is Data

Available and

Releasable?

yes

no Request

Cancelled

Funding

Approved


How to Acquire Tech Orders

61

Submit

Signed

“DD2345”

Submit to

[email protected]

LZPT – Tech

Order OfficeReceive Request

for Unsolicited Bid

Forward to Technical

POC for evaluation

Is T.O.

Releasable?

Request

Approved

yes

Complete

Request

no

Forward request for

funding authorization

Submit to

[email protected]

Submit “Letter” with

company information

Release

Data via

AMRDEC

Is Distribution

letter A or C?

no

Disapproval

Justification

Provided

Close

Request Send Fee

Letter

Prepare Data

and send to

requestor


Air Force Qualification

Process

Research FedBizOps for Any Available Data

Look at SASPO website at Master Qualification

Requirement (QR) Listings

Request the QR and Engineering Data List (EDL) or

Repair Data List (RDL)

Procure the data from the Public Sales Office

Build a SAR Package IAW the QR and AFMCI 23-113

Submit Your SAR Package for Evaluation to the

Managing Organization

62

SASPO is here to help


The SASPO Network

Strategic initiative to optimize the 448th Supply Chain

Intent is to maximize and leverage existing resources within the

government and industry to support USAF requirements

Establish vehicles to expedite and reduce logistics footprint of

“executing” efforts

Mecca for market research depository

Sync existing industry capabilities with current and projected

requirements

Proactive system to support supply chain issues

No Bids, Obsolescence, Low Qtys, etc

Operationalization of the supply chain triggers with the

partnership of private industry and government agencies

ECD September 2019


SASPO Challenges

Overcoming Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material

Shortages (DMSMS) and Obsolescence issues

Qualification of Sources to support legacy and aging Weapon

Systems

Socialization of Requirements

Finding sources willing to focus on low quantity and/or

specialized technologies

Availability of Technical Data

Mostly Proprietary in nature

Cumbersome process


SASPO Events

Requirement Symposium(s) at all three ALCs

Tinker and the Prime – 21-23 August 2017

Focus on Defense – 21 June 2017

PEO/CEO – 23 March 2017

Industry Days

Held at all three ALCs

Provide overview of SASPO and opportunities within the

enterprise (No bids, Zero to One list, show and tell of AF

managed parts)

MRO America – 10-12 April 2018

Other


Alternate Sourcing POCs

Julia Séas, (405) 736-7373– [email protected]

Randy Harris, (405) 734-8358

–[email protected]

Myron Knight, (405) 734-7809


Michael Deaton, (405) 582-9712


http://www.tinker.af.mil/Home/429SCSSASPO.aspx

mailto:[email protected]





Why is SASPO Important?

SASPO is Enterprise focused and the Sourcing Solution program office

Liaison between USAF requirements and Private Industry

Objective is to Foster Competition and Develop Alternate Sources

Driving Better Quality SARs on the Right Items

Go to office for Technical Data questions

Continue to grow various programs (RE/RD, CUOH)

Looking for Candidates that Make Financial Sense

Looking for Candidates that have obsolescence issues/no sources

What Parts do You Think Would Fit Into this Program?

Check SASPO website periodically for information


Questions?


Achieving Supply Chain - midwestcityok.netmidwestcityok.net/tinkerandtheprimes/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/...Category mgt. Physical: Streamlined process Agility/responsive ... Future

Documents