. .. ..

.i
. I

.
.%
., .. ..

i ..

. ...
...

LOGISTICS SUPPORTABILITY CONSIDERATIONS

DURING CONCEPTUAL AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN
DR. DANIEL P. SCHRAGE*
MR. STEPHEN A. MEYER**
Georgia"1nstitute of Technology
school. of Aerospace Engineering
Atlanta, GA
, .

Abst.ract ~

Big s.,:in afrcraft life cycle LCC GETS LOCKED IN EARLY

costs and
achieved
ion effectiveness can be
f' .logistic supportability DESIGN TO wGE
cosl TO
considerations .are .;adequately addressed
during conceptual and p,re'liminarydesign.
Logistic . Isuppoy*ability. &onsiderations
must be: sensitlied. and traa,ed off.,like
other quhntifiable design parameter?. With
current aircraft: design practices this has
been difficult.,..This.,paper will discuss
methods to addregs logistic supportability ... -
trade-offs; The .cpncept formulation effort
for the US .Army's .Light Helicopter
Experimental ( L F ) program will be used to
illustrate.these.. meth0d.s.
..
. '
I. .INTRODUCTION YEARS . '..
.. . CONCEPT
Review . of. ,fielded aircraft systems PD
have revealed .,that life cycle cost (LCC) DElAlL
gets locked,:' in early' in the design DEVELOPMENT
'4 process. This%.. trend is illustrated in PRODUCTION
Figure 1. up^ to .?OX of :life cycle cost is f--RDThE+
committed by ,the end. of the conceptual
design pliage:.:.Operations.and Support ( O h S ) ~PpAODUCrION
cost make ',:. up . t h e largest. percentage of Figure 1 +OPERATIONS -
total LCC and $9 accrued with ,the,fielding
of the aiicraft. . It is well recognized In recent years there has been
that logistics related costs are increased emphasis on integrated logistics
the dominant element of.O&S. expense Over support ( 1 ~ s ) and .logistics support
the life cycle of a modern weapon system. analysis (LSA). Reasons this emphasis.
Logistics supportability .considerations. have been the surprise supportability
therefore* must be addressed in the costs experienced on modern weapon systems
design process. Traditionally. aircratt.: ;.once , they were fielded. This has -been
logistics supportabi.lfty . hasn't' ;'b9e.n.: especially trbe on. systems which .ape
e&iminary.design engin9ers . ' ..
*%', seriously' considered ..
ailed design .or'.ftifl, scale. ,
103%
'

4
valopment ,. '(FSED), pha'se.
, this' poactice centered
that. one !could not decide
how to s,uppprt;..asystem until it"was well.
defined. ll+trated in
informat$ $-."the... system
exponenti %@ :<time..;.' Unfo
design fr crease& exponentialIy,,as-
illustraf _. ..makes,,. it.. difficult to
change t gn,. once.,FSED 'hias .. -been.., .
initiated. . . .-
- . ~ ~

... .

. .
*ProfessoF..... of::
Member . A m ..;a
*pace :Engineering,
I++ .Aircraft Design
' ~

. .. .
Technical. TIME INTO DESIGN PROCESS
. . somnii:t.tee. ' . ...
, . .
**Resear.ch:Engineer
\ .
Figyre. 2
.

1
 ....

technically soghisticated and software ...

?
- 1,' ~. ~
;,)
_, .>: .
,
~

intensive. A s a result, ILS and i S h

R o d U c t s Required For JVX I& plogram
requirements are
traditional
equal sartners with
engineering prerformance -
ITEM
-
NEEO ELASfDTIML

---
criteria i l nost recent ?SED requests for IY-4-I 3 n n Y r +'
proposals (RFP'S). Perhaps the 'JS Navy has R8?Ka- -
1 -,un
been pushing the hardest to insure ILS is .DyLsI-
-M*. ,IoIYIMII
part of the total acquisition strategy .u-uun.;;ho IY1-
yQ"u = ".'
. presented a: Kilestone I. ?igure 3 .-.
-.vi--? z - w m a:,
illustrates when the Navy proposed an ILS
acquisition strategy be established for
the JVX. now MV-22, program. They
NCDnUILM

u
- '\. ".--. --
--=A-
-IyD.Q.
.cI

-0DII.DI1SI.
u-w
3m-n

1M-
1
./r -!urn

When Is The ILS Acquisition

Strategy Established

"-'01 1 -mu'' I ,. . .-- F*g--4

I ,-,Lpz!zFl
y-' .._

:rz:;''.-.;-
>> 2.,;+.,s? .I - .-
- ~ " ._
design parameters anqd7..,l+i.i4;lable to trade

-
-swim them off againstshees.i?& riteria. For
.ID-.
n u-.IylmY
logistics supportabil&~:-;ciqpriderations

-
..auur*k&-w.pl. . o a u a U m u r W ~ this is a . . &=icult ,_,tffsk as most
.---cum . ' 3 ' .
parameters are X1ffiCukt;to quantify, let
..araa*lmuowr- * v . F y - o -
.-.-- . .
.--""--
,. .--uoY=--
.
alone sensitize;-.---''In
understanding and conyoua~~~&or.
"-addition, the
between
.--
.. .~ .
. - .?F=F. : : . 5 . . :

. . .... . ~
design engineers and 1ogist:hoians has n o t
been a natural process. In'Targe aerospace
organizations there '''."''''. a,se, layers of
,. management between. these tndividuals and
Figure, 3 ..~ ..
... _ _ in the weapon's life WiLyi3hey have been
~

.. . ~. on opposite ends of -&hP,=.-spectrum. The

emphasized that the ',"procurement. or remainder of this ~a~~q.,.y&&ettempt to
support is much more comp1icatea:than'the address how logistic ,,'wportability
procurement of the end item weapOn.~system, considerations can be a-;i:mrt of the
since support acquisition involves synthesis process. mmx
multiple contractual instruments, a n.;,,.:....
multiplicity of funding appropriations, 11. LOGISTICS SUPPORT CO~XDERATIONS
and numerous aovernmental orderina ,*47:, ."c,-%zr;,, . _ili~

activities. The mgjor principle espoused The need for effectiV@'Wid intensive
was the need to influence the hardware economical logistics suppamt:-.,isdictated
system' design. to 'assure ease of by today's funding-:Lrenswraints, the
maintenance at.:an affordfibl'ec o s t ; Other relative high cost of h?Yk technology
principles embraced by.the Navy were the items and its impact y:$p battlefield
need to complete ILS planning to assure effectiveness...,,,This ,. sup,p
schedule compliance, establish ''a core achieved by an opti blend of
logistics engineering data base, and to reliability, maintainabi
communicate : to industry. lv6a ::*.source . support and t,&eiqx~,i~pscu
':

selection the serious intent of the on aircraft d e s i g n , ~ , . , , ~ ~ ~ ~ Jprimary ~;~jhe

Department of :Defense (D0D):fhat the JVX drivers of logistics support c&t5 is
be life cycle affordable. The: :type Of --reliability. However, there is
products-they requiredAfor the preliminary which" cast ': t6+.agve165"%r:"
design (PD) . 3VX ILSc'proggam >and their . improved refiablllty:6Airs&~a3 th&'
anticipated costsr:.-'are!:given--inFigure 4 :
While- these products;i:will bi:benefLcia9 . illustrated
they:do not completely.?:ful€ill the need's0
reduction. in.stlfrport cbs+. CYfG
-
fni:..TFigaPe .?r5.
reductions in re the cbiW:'"ij€?i+ersbi@ 011
influence the -hardwznze*.'systemdesign.-df':-.life. cycSd-:.if;bst:. ' :ma&+: -&Ehi&&d-- by
descrkbe the me€hodoXogy for-daing.*t:I..'.-.-.'- redrrclngr -;the: Irbg~stLcsml~uP~art'~'~costs,
F . ...~ .
. , ...~
~ . -,-.: t. 6
I %
. - 1: .;:'..:
TO. haue the bi$eesi infi'uence:on the-?- Army.::a.ize?xif
e:?.. Log%**.& -isuppofic-+sterir"eX+G+s
t . 's~sfe~~'dia;:i4l%st~~.ted in
f q i ; us
design:. of :-:an aircraft system one :nlusF-.be . - Table a. .RE. ' a g ~ r o a = h : c d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e e r . ~ ~ ~ i s t . i c s
involved in the:smthes& process;~:aSrwel2 . .. cos-; woulif'rrbg: to em'&.
ct.F'-<+.pwer
'

as the-anaiysisprocess :: In synthesis?:. the;. required L*Uf "sugp-airf-;;^.ehe,eosf.:of -'spares,

problem:. is..: the.;deueiEpment ofr-thesystam: : the --rB$i%ncG:OR-- S&e%--&-en~,'?&d the
agai-wt--i the .designrrewir.emedrs, whereas :.'cost ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ e ~ e l o ~ ~ ~ ~ i S o P ~
in analysis; .the-system aSready:.exists;and' 1 ( PDSSfi--; :Th&e -fa< =$pfl&+;&z%-e%& .key
analytical :or experimenta3-[;methods "are to v;ieducinQ?L'&: In ,31?1-- seccj;on
empleyed :to m e a m e the -performwoe'-ofthe::c :. candidaC6.:s+st&s -- ?f* +@::-L= ft -./
systemi . To participate in $he :.sytheSis'. which 1: af&ecY--:&-te2abo?i;+'-~o%~he%' d=il'
' 'be
pro~ess~~on
.... .>..
mbte
-
be ;.able . to- sensifize.~~:discns~~.I.i:< ?€?.X ni:iae'.
. . .. . .. .-r <, . 'i'lf.=-'.:c .~
~ DliE
,.- . . . i .
..-
.- .I
. . 5:. **.--->-.- 33 6
. . . ....... -. . . .. .. . . . . ..
~~, .. ...- . ,2
,
:
. ..._I.
. -. :5' :%.T.\Z fs?:. ns-'.r ;

2 .-.
L
 depend on the mission subsystems whet
operating at night or durinq adverse
weather.
The greatest potential for
advancement of mission reliaSili.ty lies
with the development of a new aircraft
system that efficiently utilizes emerging
technologies. Advancements can . . be
approached' by considering . three
contributing factors: improvements in
inherent hardware reliability (typically
termed system reliability), improvements
in condition monitoring- ,:which will
decrease false maintenance and removal
actions, and by improvements in mission
equipment integration and design concept.
The third factor has the most merit with
the advent of advanced micro-electronic
concepts that enable a
reconfiguration/self-healing architecture
to be employed to allow.missian completion
in a somewhat degraded .mode.
..

The .nee@,,,.$@r,.,,agood ..!!ai.ntainabili ty

.
design practices ie commonly acaepted by
all aircrS.q acT+VSF&$ers, manufacturers,
and ,users. Good,...pahtainabil$.tx translates
into . reduced mailitenance downtime. and
hence incY8igea 'ai%raft availability and
decreased costs. The similarity between
maintainability and logistics
supportability *is'- obvious
' and
maintainability is often viewed as a
subset of-.,rnq.regeneral support concepts.
The anaJysis, of maintainability requires
both quant.itative. and qualitative
assessments. The :quantitative assessment
is concerned with such engineering
characteristics as equipment failure rates
requiring unscheduled maintenance actions
(MTBUMA), mean time between removals
(MTBR), maintenance::. manhours per flight
hour ( M M H / F H ) -and::;mean time .to repair
(MTTR). MMH/FH usuat3y includes all direct.
maintenance. scheduled and unscheduled. at
qumn the Aviation'Upit Maintenance level ( AVUM)
b l ~ IUK )I0
?(tmnf ~
. asmlunonmnr
and the Aviation Intermediate Maintenance
"
... .. . .. ' ~ level (AVIM,);, MTTR usually,includes only
.. unschednled maintenancei.at AVUM and.AVIM.. :
.. ~ . . f C *('!:;; . , . e~ &. - .:. ,

,:=.v!z: ?-."Tho:. qVatitatdve .factors that affect. '

. . . =~ .' :*: ,3sr.rl- .!3-.?.u-.r . - . : c + : . + Y maintai@bilitp .; r-adesign include . : '

reilability: .. accesrab$lity$modularization, .. inspeotion ' .

~

The. pjat?pns@$p,begween
and log6sf?cg,.su~lja~4abZllry::,i$ closely.. criteria SaBd requi.rements,human factors, -
coupled,rhe ',need,; f dnp;Sp,gsed. aircrafthe- testabilftyi :required.: ?support equipment,
productfy+ty"c& $,b transzated :anto za interchangeebi3ity;. and-.Ohe ability fer.
desired .'.. &qprQxem .:I a&ssion combat:.damage assesSmqit -and repair. ;The-
Qlia~ilft;.E,iS:Qedined-as the curnenk;.AsmyT: maintenance ,:concept ..is%a
3$Qrm,,a .~~issioIZ,:without.a~L.- three-level sgstam-. (AWM..;
AVIM and Depot) , -.I
mission ., . . a t ~ . e ~ t i n g ? - , f . 8 i i u ~ e ~ ? ~ ~ ~ A l t2hwhere
a u p h .modules
-, and line replaceable units
reliabil 8 :.i,mpprt,aa~.f@~eall. slissi~ma~ . ! (LRW!:s) ,are r.emaved aa-AVUM and applicable
&i,tiwl in a . .'repairs .will.:BCCUS. atr AV1M.:-$EachAVtIM2.-
:

0. uI?@er$..ttamd. the organbzation:~;will.: baver.. a'..:battle .damage

- assessment--capabifity~~,.,aircraft recovery :
teams, and necessaay-rassessment"and'repaiE.
kits$. The AV€M.-organtzation-.wi11; perform.. .: I

: LRU:?:ion. modu1eserepai.r'zwhen.-practical,
. operate :.!a....supply -aetivl.tp; and provide--.
:contact I: teams4or-eid .in comp3ex repapsi
~:pl~s~io.n.~~~~u~.~..~.~troub~e.eshooting, .: . quick-fix .. . actions, ';
sibfl duration. MJ~arr~i.rconer(rfled;~subst~tut-iop,' cannabii'izatian, -:
reliability also becomes extremely etc. They will also handle special test
critical when one considers the need to equipment when required. The potential to
deploy innovs?ioe sii;igort concepts bSyond available to . address ,t.his +. SyStPjT
the typicai three level concept. such as a integration problem.. . .They€ are % r e e
reduction to t w o level (AVI@:, Depot), can sessions at this meeti.ns disc;ss,Sx .?.ow
have treinendocs impact on logistics they might be applied.:.
, .; .. i :. . .
sugportability. ~

. . ... . . ..
A schematic-.'that. qan be: -.used ta w
111. THE DESIGN PROCESS address conceptual and prel.iminaI-y deslgn
is given in Pigure ..1. Commonly..this
Traditionally, the aircraft design diagram has been .used tq.repr:esenta i r
process has been sequential as illustrated vehicle design . . ,w.ith:. :..the . circle
in Figure 6 . While this process has worked representing . computer . .:siring and
well, there are mathematical and performance; .programs Ifha.t:generatep 0 i r . t
analytical tools available now to greatly design solutions is which FW! &e evaluated
improve this process. One problem with the againsr , Xdesigri .reguiremem+Gzy AvailqQle or
traditional.,process is the limitations on emerging technology..is. :wuaAly :input.as
the number of design parameters that can weight equation here reductions'canbe
be varied early in the design process and made to zcccoun or :d,ffecent ,.Ae\?elsof
the reliance on a senior design engineer technology. Par ric sizing and .design
to make all the critical decisions. When parameter sensitivities can be readily
the design parameters are small in number addressed -.using..t.hi.s methodology.. Also -
.and address principally the air.vehicle illustrated in FiguPe L7: is -*he handof.: of
performance criteria, such as maximum the point 'design : .solu%ienp.
airspeed, maneuver or endurance, the analysis. Traditional1g;i cost :-
traditional approach has worked well.,A addressed..acquisit
conceptual point design could:.-then be service . to .O.&S
passed on . to prelimlnary design.teams in argument was tha
structures, aerodynamics, stability and design .informati0
control, and . prcpulsion :to further accomplish a ..zcreai-table ;SXS and. L C C
synthesize .the conceptual configurat4on analysis. .Wfth ' .reaXizSTion :of the
and add the -:necessary details for criticality of .early.-.deqign c;dec&ions on
development.8 . . LCC, FiguPe l., .Cost modeling; armd.-snalysis
have taken .om'-irrcreaseB eernphasia. TO
Product Design Phases . include LCC and conSequential'l%?logistics
support considerations iinto sfh& synthesis
process r e q i r e s .a feedb@wloop$to the
design requifements*:block,n+.iaz Figure 7 .
This allows: -::iteraeons'. ::an logistics
support parameters similar-to thaseyitaking +
place between ' point sign :soIuMons and
design requiremen%s-s- ,. ..
ir.

THE PRELj#llNAv$&3
L.
...- ... . ... ~
..

,. .i

as .,traditio

4
alternht~iveisugport.system trades. Outputs responsibility of the Army materiel
include iTa.*iel.*
&<
I
provisioning, test and
""
developer and its purpose wzs to condzct a
measurement diigno'stic equipment (TMDE) technology assessment and provide data to
costs, and intermediate level operations the Army combat developer fo? their TCA.
and maintenance costs. The parameters Where possible. data was sensitizee anc!
include e factors for deploymer.t, equipment presented parametrically against cos:,
supply maintenance . and .test equipment. weight and performance criteria. To assess
'rlins are' possible with most logistics supportability considerations,
combinations of input factors. Other point design configurations for new
models : were -used . which accounted for rotorcraft concepts, as wel: as
spares consumption'andallowed s.imulation derivatives to existing aircraft, were
of what effect.:chinges to 'a stocka age^ level considered. New rotorcraft included the
affecting :':par.ameter. womld have on conventional helicopter, compound
inventory TBOsd:. . ' models 'i. :allowed helicopter, advancing blade concept (ABC),
computation. of'.:+Ae eosts.;of.throwaway and compound ABC. and tiltrotor. Derivative
repairable :.i.temS.' The J:effect of aircraft included variants of existing
part itiofling . b comporient could. also be Army helicopters: the AH-1 Cobra, AH-64
evaiuated;' :.' ... .. .. ,I . .
Apache, UH-1 Iroquois, U H - 6 0 BlackHawk and
the OH-58 Kiowa. To project advancements
Another very useful, cost model
'' in reliability, availability and
utiliz6d::was '?.'the:- Slide Rule Life Cycle maintainability (RAM)/Logistics (LOG) from
system '/SRS) the -SRS has been emerging technology a baseline was
s ' an aid'ta system, subsystem, conducted from RAM/LOG and Sample Data
.
:
y
4 dff&gners in making cost Collection .(SDC) data from the UH-BCA
estimates .i.-and-',:.~.ade-offs early in the BlackHawk and predictions .for the A H 4 4
design -.'.prrscess.!??The SRS 'consis*s of four Apache. The ~ composite baseline was
linked..programs implemented .' OH a Texas com?osed 'of UH-GOA ..aerial vehicle
1nstrumen.ts Tr59 5.. programmable calculator technology and AH-64A :.inission equipment
coupled -to a - 3E..PC-100A printer. Each package (MEP) :technology, In addition,
program is :appzapriate ,to !a different data from the OH-582 AHIP was used to
design :phase..*.and .aggregation level. The
~ incorporate the expected performance of
first est-imates the M f e cycle costs of a the current forward looking infrared
system -b.yzu.malihig.shpl~ying .as'sumptions (FLIR) and v'techqology. It is from this
about .itsZsubellements2.; the .second is used baseline that excursions were conducted to
design :. -of a single lowest predict improvements for an LHX aircraft
assembly;.the thhrd estimates in the 1990_timeframe, as well as the
system :.or subsystem::' ;-costs of its impacts incurred from the various
sub-elements :computed : -hr - .the second configurations and variants. The
program: and .:-the .f-ourthis a specialized technologies considered and their impact
program used to compute'.the achieved on the total LHX are discussed in
system confide References 2 and 3. Incorporation of the
Stock-OUt .at'.,..,#p technologies and support concepts will
such as these,. e increase mission capability and
most aircraft design engineers they effectiveness of the LHX and decrease OBS
provide a vehicle &e.., W.+uce logistics Cost by 30%: to 40%.
supportabili.ty . .-.con,sfdpratiogs during .a,
conceptual,and preli;minary-.design.
, .... '. Under Section I1 it was mentioned
that there. are four approaches which are
CONCEPT-FORMULATIONEFFORT the key to" reducing LCC. For the LHX
. . aircraft six candidate jystems were found
The "'LAX co#epv formuiation effort to significantly impact these four
has been o + . ~ - t l u t +s.t .'twa.yews..,l. approaches. The six candidate systems are
The LHX . g&@aamw.?+h&s+r $ B M . . r baeed- on standarctlzation-.:: & commonality (S&C.),
improving cin*olc*-&feoCiweness while"- maintenance,. L' manpower, self-deployab-ility
reducing LCC. The'envisionea capabilities and :sus.tainabill.ty;'embedded systems, and
for ac,complishing th'e&&8ieid&l goals are automatic test "equtpmen.r (ATE) and
Programsets (TBS:'s.).
emerging .. ... . . ..; ... .
capability. in
poration o f a . . . The trrms:':S&C are used-tu describe^.
forty perccnt the '..reductionih types of.:aircraft in .the
ugh*,.over the . inventory 'aha the. use. .6f common
eplace. While components, respectively, . which wduld
~

llenge to the, resu-lt from '''.:an,LXX. develdpment. The ..''

impacts 'of S&C on. a fleet of airtralt can
be ddvided Into-two'categories; tanglble . .
and intangible.'-The tangisle-benefIts.'are. ;
those. lyhich---are.' easily . quantifiable-in:'
terms . of costs.: :The intangible:benef5ts
are'. those whlch are-iiot",easilyquanflfied'-~'
but''.:X#,oald ,-p*bviae'. benefits.%:in*,t&rms'-bf
read&nes&, ski ."proficiency-, Past:
Deploymeat.,Softwaie'-Suppbrt (PDSS); ,et-=.
Cons.iderab%e-tangibbebeneflts worild-octur.

5.3:
 . . ,. . . :

in both the LHX development and production impact of ' Y w 6 l B v B ? maintenarirr

he
phases. Significant cost savings would be on a system can. be quantified ... thFough
realized during R&D by developinc a mathematical ana?ysis and co.6?;pu+e l
Scout/Attack (SCAT) aircraft and a Utility simulation. Some of the..-issires-invc;l'ved J:
variant with extensive commonality in this type of.analysis
..
'iric1,udet h e cost of W.#
dynamic components, mission equipment ATE, spare parts; ..aining,
package (MEP), etc., as opposed to transportation, personael pay '.. arle
developing three discrete mission designed allownace (P&A) and .test prograw Sets
aircraft or extensive modification of
three existing aircraft. The total number
of components as well as supporting
documentation which would require
development would be significantly characterist
reduced. An additional savings would partitioning and integrated diagnostics
result from a reduction in the cataloguing could actually Ancrease . iqi.t.ia1 spares
effort. It currently costs $1400 to requirements. .Thus ;..t~olev'+ "ma,i.ntenance
establish a single item in the Federal can only be effective if all the'critical
Supply System. The cost to complete the parameter.s are considered ... When .t>heyare
cataloguing effort on one aircraft the
' it was found that"^ for ..:he LHX the two
size and complexity of the LHX would level concept was cheaper by._35%. ''

exceed $20M. It is easy to see the impact . ....

of two or three dicrete aircraft designs. Another key area ,i-n.iower.i
costs and . , increasing
'

availability is .m?npqyer-.:
S&C would also result in a reduction system can .be made less. man?
in o&s Costs. The number of maintenance (lower MMH/FH) it-.';wiil?''.hlaG less
significant items used on a weapon system maintenance downtime--. a d
can be directly related to cost for item to operats (requb'.
management and stockage both at the personnel)^, Essentially,
wholesale and retail levels and ,costs to which affectep; tLw6":i
maintain publications and technical data. affect manpower.. Re1
Of particular importance in the case of influences MMH/E.?. Xf' . .. . . redqces. the
the LHX is the cost df maintaining and number of 'failures. aiidin't: of
implementing changes to system software. maintenance require%,d+c,_e .s:.. Rediicgions
S&C would enable the supporting commands in required manpoyei-? ~ 3 0 be '<ieKgd >~n two
to make more economical spa'res procurement ways. The first :my .@ .bX:the .elimination
e.g., a 10% average decrease in spares of personnel'., vrhich ..can be :@aati-fi e d in
unit cost would save more than S1.26B over terms of O&S' 'costs,., .,or. . .,- seconci way is
. . ,the. I w
a 20 year life cycle. A further reduction by 'freeing up', p e " o ~ l . = to. 'satisfy
might result from a more efficient manpower advantagFs .o.the,r are as^.. The
breakout program made possible because of total imp1ications of,vstmanp,owe.r 'reduction
the reduced number of items managed. The go beyond the"maintenancepersonnel P&A.
wholesale management of these parts would Indirect reductions would occur in support
also be less expensive. It currently costs personnel, training. cos;ts., ,etc. &or the
$ 5 3 5 per year to manage one item. Compared LXX, manpower critical (MACRIT) 'ad.justment
to the existing fleet which exhibits factors were utilized to compare.different
approximately 10% commonality, configurations against ,the basel.ine
~

introduction of the LXX with 70% aircraft. The ad,justment factors. were
commonality would lower the item based on the anticipated improvements in
management costs by $10M per year. These Reliabili.ty, Availability . and
are some of the tangible S&C benefits that Maintainability .(Rl$ - based :Ori,pr&ected
were sensitized during the ,LHX TOD and LBXtechnology. +.?;. ;5:...*:::2sc ; . .
-.%
:.

provided to the combat #eveloeer.for his

--
TOA,. . : .

;.
: ' '

Much emphasis today..hasbeen placed

.
..... .. . , . -.:.
be&; :,,w<th* ~'.a n 2degVf&c,at&on'
~ the
on^the possibilities for 1pwering.support .... . . . 'Ebe+e ;,,.. factor+:,.for
influencing f.wto;rs.. ....
costs fhrpugh innovative support Concepts. aircraft:,, :. . zqc,.. , , ~ , ~ # @ J i . @ ; ir
i: and
One area of interest is the,posslbility-@f mafntainabili.'kv. of ,.miss& .cdtical
cl;.^<w
'

reducing or eliminating.:: lntermediaFe compon&ts, ani:.,,speed.&&.i66 is

maintenance,.by going : to. two level a key factor. in . -..the..
. . prpbabiuty of
maintenance concept. The,,thrust of this;
maintenance. plan f s . . t o replace..lower cost
compoaente on.the aircraft and repair L&ge
Replac'eable Units , (LRU!s). ;.at Echelon ~

Above Corps .(EAC) -preferably=depot.Thi

concept is.attrav.tive+ several .reasons
I

primarily. the. elim

I tion. : Q € costfly,
sophisticated apd. .cqbersome:, automatic.'
test;:..eguipment :{ATE.).-a$AYIM, :-aswell:.as:
the.,.
,highly.skiSled.personnel pecessary..3to
maintain and" operate the ATE and to ma
repairs on the item under test.

.I

6'
ways: ,.by increasing the inherent based upon the planned aval1ahi:itp 0 5 ai
reliability of the components, or AN/USM 410 successor (ATSS) i.? the late
employing redund&t systems. Computer 1980's timeframe. A major issue f o r iI!Y cs
simulations aye .~ available which can whether an ATE station at AVIM is needed.
predict mis,sion affecting failures, spares There are many non-cost factors affectinr;
consumption and maintenance requirements. a move away from AVIM level ATE. Futlza
These were, utilized on the LHX and it battlefield concepts, such as Army 2 1 , are
became obvious that to maximize the incompatible with large and not mobile ATE
mission reliability for a self-deployment systems. In order to provide.for field
mission, the influence on design must be operation, extensive rigidization of
to improve the reliability of the mission existing ATE is required. ' F o r the
critical components~concentrating on those accelerated LHX program schedule another
which have been 'sh0.Ftd cause the most approach may be more feasible. Several
problems. .. . . . . other recent aircraft programs, such as
. . . , .
tfie Canadian F-18 and the Marine AV-8B.
The. .sust&ability "of Army aircraft utilize a small portable test set that
is a 'critical: factor- of successful through the system bus checks the Status
operation. in. 'the . future battlefield of various aircraft LRU diagnostics. The
environment.. The inaxSmum degree of purpose of this test set is to limi? the
sustainability, can bnly be achieved by an false "no-go's" (errors in the onboard
optimum blend ''. -'of reliability,
~
diagnostics) that occur. This approach
maintainability and lo-gistics support coupled with an active design for
concepts duricg .,design. The aspects of
~
testability could eliminate the need for
functional'. partitiSn3kg; reduction or intermediate level ATE. It was determined
elimination 'df. complSi test ,equipment,and that there.are advantages of waiting until
an accurate ,p+edic+ion"'+f requirements for the preplanned product improvement (P3I)
combat crifical 'spa,res, ' will reduce Not
'
and ILS maturity phases occur. By this
Mission "'Capa , SuEiply: ( W C S ) time and time many of the system LRU's that might
increase. the abbi-lfty..'of' AVIM and AVUM require TPS's will not be at a fixed
units. One-:py tyal '.supporY'conceptwhich configuration, and technological
is desi,raWle- ''fiom ' a sustainability opportunities in the automatic testing
, . .th$ -concept of' a throwaway fi.eld such as analog automatic test
: %e- most -1ikeJ.ycandidates generation may mature. The overiding
p t '. . are,, electronic concept in ATE for LXX is that design of
nomic"feasibi1ity of a the MEP should not be driven by targeting
cve<aFfl.ity. code is any particular ATE system, but rather
est, failure rate and designed for inherent testability. With an
active testability program, TPS efforts,
whether AVIM or depot will be greatly
aided. By limiting the number of different
processors much of the test design would
not have to be repeated. The usage of
commercial standards such as IEEE 488 and
Mil Std 1553 would allow for maximum
Tge . L q -&l" be :the first major utilization of updated commercial
Army system in wtiich the sdftware effort equipment.
may exceed the hardware effort. User
requirements such as automatic target
recognition require considerable software
in order to function properly. It is V. SUMMARY
:.. .
estimated that app ximately 500,000 lines
of source"'%ode wf have.. to be -developed.. .This..paperhas attempted to ill*xsfrat&
DoD has mandated the use of' -the .Ada-; how .'.logistics supportabflity
consideratidns can be addressed during
conceptual and preliminary design. It was.
emphasized that the synthesis process, not
the 'analysis ,process,is where logi'stics
supportability->Canhave the biggest impact
stem design and consequently..
-cycle , cost. The concept'
formulation effort for the LHX Program-was '
used to illustrate the.methodology..It was
found that ': tremendous opportunities exis.tt.
for' influencing-"thedesign of the LHX to5
lower 0 & s cost< It .?as- als
& S '"costs 'are extremely
'

design changes which-affect

or ,percentageof fa3se*indicati6ns. While'
LCC cost models- are. available,and.were
utilized durlng XH%concept fbrmula?ion,"
there . s
. a'pressing- neea.: to,closer couple-
conceptual.iiesign synthesis
. -cades.with LCC
upon intfrim, commeeiSX +qu%pment +fiH:AHf.p);;. moiiels.. . . . .r
. .
The i&er'i$' :&*ifus5sf .'t.he ? ~ ~ $ ' ' ~ .. 'T ~ . ~ ~ S
i. '
- . .. . . . ...
 , .. '-

1. Sckrage, D . ? . , "Tie L9X Preliminary

Design Jrocess". ?resented at the iith
European Rotorcraft Forua. Italy.
2. Shinn, R.A.. "Impact of Emerging
Technology on the Weight of Future
Rotorcraft", Presented a: the 40tS Annual
Forum of the American Helicopter Society.
Shinn. R.A.. Smith, R.L.,
3. Rogers, ; . P . ,
'"Advanced Technology Impact on LBX
Preliminarv Design", Presented at the 40th
Annual Forum of the American Helicopter
SocieTy.