air force f. integration and application of … · u consolidated data base functional...
TRANSCRIPT
AFHRL-TR-78-6( IIi)
AIR FORCE F. INTEGRATION AND APPLICATION OF
HUMAN RESOURCE TECHNOLOGIES INWEAPON SYSTEM DESIGN:
H! CONSOLIDATED DATA BASEU FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION
John C. Goclowski
A Gerard F. KingA Paul G. RoncoDYNAMICS RESEARCH CORPORATION
60 Concord StreetN Wilmington, Massachusetts 01887
William B. Askren
ADVANCED SYSTEMS DIVISIONR Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433l!< RE May 1978
S Interim Report for Period April 1977 - October 1977
r>:.-0C ) 0 Approved for public release. distribution unlimited.
U U DDCL R SEP 5 1978
S LABORATORY
AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMANDBROOKS AIR FORCE BASE,TEXAS 78235
I, , ~ C
NOTICE
When U.S. Government drawings, specifications, or other data are used for any purposeother than a definitely related Government procurement operation, the Governmentthereby incurs no responsibility nor any obligation whatsoever, and the fact that theGovernment may have formulated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said drawings,specifications, or other data is not to 'be regarded by implication or otherwise, as inany manner licensing the holder or any other person or corporation, or conveying anyrights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any patented invention that may inany way be related thereto.
This ntarim report was submitted by Dynamics Research Corporation, 60 Concord Street,Wilmington, Massachusetts 01887, under contract F33615-77-C-0016, project 1959, withAdvanced Systems Division, Air Force Human Resources Laboratory (AFSC), Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433. Dr. William B. Askren was the Work UnitScientist.
This report has been reviewed and cleared for open publication and/or public release bythe appropriate Office of Information (01) in accordance with AFR 190-17 andDoDD 5230.9. There is no objection to unlimited distribution of this report to thepublic at large, or by DDC to the National Technical Information Service (NTIS).
This technical report has been reviewed and is approved for publication.
GORDON A. ECKSTRAND, DirectorAdvanced Systems Division
DAN D. FULGHAM, Colonel, USAFCommander
UnclassifiedSE-CURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (Whnen Data Entered)
READ INSTRUCT1O)'(lbREPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING. 'IRM
I AFI) R6l) -JESSION No. 3 RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBI -t
4 TITL E (an ul~e LOCO"OnBT .I. 123LQ OVERED
.,IINTEGRATION AND.ALPPLICATION Or.UA / iltezn7 aMgtOUCE T)3CIINOLOGIES IN WEAPON SYSTE April 19'7 - October 1~977,
DE SIGN:,CONSOLf DATED DATK7BASE -rPMOMIHO-OR.-RrsPoRT-#4tJMBCR
/0J John C]Goclowski-, William nB.j1skrcnGerard r.I1(inS> -36577C6/ Paul G.ARonco,__________________
ARE & ORASHUITIUAES
60 Concord Street 65Wilmington, Massachusetts 01887 i6 59OO
I I CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 1:
IlIQ Air Force Illumian Rcsouces Laboratory (AFSC) May____________78___
Brooks Air Force Base, I exas 78235 13. NUMBER OF PAGES
14 MONITORING AGENCY NAME 8 ADDRESStil different-f or C,,ntgollung Office) 15 SECURITY CLASS. (of fllsa report)
Advanced Systems IDivision UnlssfeAir Force H uman Resources Laboratory ___- ______________
Wrighit -fatle rson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433 15 DECLASSIFICATION'DOWNGRADINGSCHEDULE
16 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)
Approved fo.- public reease, dlistributioni uninnited.
17 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered in Block 20, // different from Report)
$8 SUPPLEMENTARY MOTES
The coordinated humian resource technology (Cl111T) iiludles tlic five human rcsourkx technologies ofnmaiteniancemfanlpower modeling, instructional system development, job guide decjiin.system ownership costing andhuman resources in design trade-offs.
19 KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse side if necestary end Identify b) block number)
coordinated human resource technology life cycle costinigdesign option decision trees inenance mianpower modelinghuman resource in design tradeoffs; systemi ownership costing[ instructional systemn developmient task analysisjob guide development training (Over)
ZO ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse side If necessary and Identify by blo~ck nutmber)
_4The consolidated data base required to support the alpplitation of the courdinated human resouicc technology(Cl IRT) onl a weapon systemn acquisition programn is desribcd in thkis functional specificatton. Thle major categoriesof data stored in the consolidated data base relate to reliabillty , maintainability, maintenance manpower, operationsmanpower, training, and job guides for both niaintenallce and operations, anot system ownership costs. Thleconsolidated data base may also be used for operational and support planning after deployment. As developed forapplication, the consolidated data base is Unique to cacti weapon system. It expands in detail with time as theweapon System acquisition cycle progresses. The COnlsolidated data base is dynamic in nature representingalternatives being considered as well as baseline approatlhcs. It has, therefore beeii designed for frequent Update and-
DD I JA73 1473 EDITION OF I NOV 65 IS OBSOLETE UnclassifiedSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (i$7
ten Dote Entered)
UnclassifiedSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(Miohn Data Entoed)
Item 19 (Continued):
weapon System~ acquisition
Item 20 (Continued):
'expansion. Tins functional specification describes the c~ontent of the consolidated data base, and thc processes forupdating and expanding the data base.
AMCSSI'rtI for
WIAWUNCED D3W~SIFIATO ... ......
............ . . ............
DISMIUTION/AVAILABUTY CMf
PKg AVAIL and/or SPCK
Unclassified
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(WMon D~.Ia IEnterod)
SUMMARY
PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVE
The five human resource technologies (HRT) are maintenancemanpower modeling (MMM), instructional system development (ISD),job guide development (JGD), system ownership costing (SOC), and
human resources in design tradeoffs (HRDT). Traditionally, theyhave been applied individually at various times during the weaponsystem acquisition process. Although one intuitively recognizessimilarities in activities and data requirements among thesetechnologies, these similarities had never been confirmed, explored,or exploited. Furthermore, it appears that exploitation of these,similarities early in weapon system acquisition may allow humanresource considerations to affect design.
The Advanced Systems Division of the Air Force HumanResources Laboratory (AFHRL) has, therefore, initiated a two-phaseeffort to integrate and apply the five -RTs to the weapon systemacquisition process as the coordinated human resource technology(CHRT). This report is one of three which document the Phase Ieffort. The objective of this phase was twofold. One, to integrate anddevelop the interrelationships among the five technologies in order tocreate a totally-coordinated technology, CHRT, for applicationthroughout the acquisition process. Two, to specifically determinethe data input requirements and prepare a specification for aconsolidated data base (CDB) which will support the integration andapplication of the CHRT in a weapon system acquisition program.The objective of Phase II is to apply the results of this study to aweapon system acquisition program.
The specific objective of this report is to functionally specifythe CHRT consolidated data base (CDB) which is required to supportthe application of the coordinated human resource technology (CHRT)on a weapon system acquisition program. Since the consolidated database expands in time with the weapon system acquisition cycle, thisfunctional specification describes the processes for updating andexpanding this data base as well as establishing it. Each data base,
as developed, is unique to the weapon system it supports.
APPROA CH
The CHRT is a new technology based on the integration of fiveseparate human resource technologies: maintenance manpowermodeling (MMM), instructional system development (ISD), job guide
development (JGD), system ownership costing (SOC), and humanresources in design tradeoffs (IRDT). The development of C11RT isdes ribed in AIRL-TR-78-6(I), Coordination of I,'ive flumanResource Technologies. Additionally, the application process F'orCHRT consists of four activities:
1.. Development of a consolidated data base (CDB)2. Performance of an integrated requirements and task
analysis3. Preparation of instructional system and job guide
products4. Performance of impact analysis
The application process and these four activities are detailed inAFHRL-TR-78-6(II), Processes for the Coordinated Application ofFive Human Resource Technologies.
The approach taken in developing the consolidated data basefunctional specification was to perform an analysis of the content ofthe CHRT methodology and the four basic activities. The detailedsteps required to develop and maintain the consolidated data basewere identified as those required to provide the data necessary forthe accomplishment of activities 2, 3, and 4. The output data fromthese activities also becomes part of the CDB.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
This effort resulted in the specification of the consolidateddata base and a description of the detailed steps necessary for itsdevelopment and maintenance. The development of the consolidateddata base consists of many steps, most of which it is significant tonote are initial steps in the individual human resource technologies.Although these technologies have been integrated and will be appliedin a coordinated manner, they retain their distinct identities andobjectives. The coordinated application provides both additional andenhanced products.
Examples of some important steps in the consolidated database development drawn from MMM are equipment identification,the comparability analysis, and the definition of maintenance actionnetworks. Additionally the initial steps of HRDT which are develop-ment of the system design option decision tree, and the selection ofcritical subsystems are also part of the data base development. New
procedures, however, were devised as necessary, especially toimplement the interrelationships among the five technologies.
2
The major categories of data stored in the consolidated database relate to reliability, maintainability, maintenance manpower,operations manpower, training and job guides for both mainte-nance and operations, and system ownership cost.
3
PREFACE
The Advanced Systems Division of the Air Force HumanResources Laboratory has initiated project 1959, Advanced-Systemfor Human Resources Support of Weapon Systems Development, todemonstrate the technical feasibility of methodologies geared toreduce the system ownership cost of new weapon systems. TheAdvanced Medium STOL Transport (AMST) is being used as the testcase. Project 1959 is divided into the following four work units.
01 - Analysis of Resource Utilization of a Present OperationalSystem - Data related to human resource utilization and life cyclecosting (LCC) on a similar past weapon system (the C-130E) isgathered and presented. Availability of such data is determined.
02 - Integration and Application of Human ResourceTechnologies in Weapon System Design - A methodology for integratingthe five human resource technologies is developed and subsequently
demonstrated on the AMST. The technologies are maintenance man-power modeling, instructional system development, job guidedevelopment, system ownership costing, and human resources indesign trade-offs.
03 - Maintenance Personnel Availability Analysis - Thedevelopment of a technique to estimate the availability of humanresources over time and of procedures to align availability expecta-tions with requirements. AMST requirements data will be considered.
04 - Personnel Subsystem Test, Evaluation, and Validation -The test, evaluation, and validation of the results of the studiesconducted under work units 01, 02, and 03.
Although this total effort is presently directed towarddemonstration on a specific weapon system, it is expected that it willbe applicable to any system, military or non-military, and to majorsystem modifications as well.
This study which represents work unit 02 was performed undercontract F33615-77-C-0016 by the Systems Division of DynamicsResearch Corporation, 60 Concord Street, Wilmington, Massachusetts01887. Technical direction was provided by the Advanced SystemsDivision, Air Force Human Resources Laboratory (AFHRL), Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. Appreciatict is extended toDr. Gordon A. Eckstrand, Director of the Advanced Systems Divisionand Dr. Ross L. Morgan, Chief of the Personnel and Training
4
Requ.rements Branch for their contributions and c,'or:utic,nt.Major Duncan L. Dieterly was the project director .1d 1)r. \\ tlltlu1 IB.Askren was the work unit scientist on unit 02, Integration andApplication of Human Resource Technologies in Weapon SystemDesign.
Many individuals throughout the Department of Defense andindustry contributed their ideas and opinions to this effort. Of specialnote, however, were the members of the Advanced Systems DivisionAdvisory Team who contributed both in their specific areas ofexpertise and in the total development of CHRT. These individualsand their areas of expertise are Mr. Robert N. Deem, maintenancemanpower modeling; Dr. Garry A. Klein, instructional systemdevelopment; Dr. Donald L. Thomas, job guide development;Mr. Harry A. Baran, system ownership costing; Dr. William B.Askren, human resources in design trade-offs; and Dr. Lawrence E.Reed, consolidated data base. Major Robert J. Pucik of the AMSTProgram Office provided the interface with the AMST acquisitioneffort. Appreciation is also extended to Dr. John P. Foley, Jr., forsharing his view of job guide development and the instructionalsystem/job guide relationship.
This report, consisting of three volumes, is the product ofPhase I. The three volumes contain the rationale for integrating thehuman resources technologies and the methodology for applying themas CHRT. They show how CHRT can be used to influence design andthe selection of maintenance, operations, and support alternatives.The evolution of CHRT from elements of existing technologies isdiscussed. Additionally, specific descriptions are provided of theCDB, the integrated requirements and task analysis (IRTA), thedevelopment of ISD and JGD products, and the impact analysis whichallows the evaluation of alternative designs and the identification ofexcessive human resource utilization. The three volumes are:
Integration and Application of Human Resource Technologiesin Weapon System Design: Coordination of Five HumanResource Technologies for Application, AFHRL-TR-78-6,Vol. 1;
Integration and Application of Human Resource Technologiesin Weapon System Design: Processes for the CoordinatedApplication of the Five Human Resource Technologies,AFHRL-TR-78-6, Vol. II;
5
Integration and Application of Human Resource Technologiesin Weapon System Design: Consolidated Data Base FunctionalSpecification, AFHRL-TR-78-6, Vol. III.
The first volume initially describes the basic weapon systemacquisition process. It then discusses the human resource technologiesas presently applied and their interfaces with each other. Next thepotential for an expanded application of these technologies within theweapon system acquisition process is described. Finally, CHRT isdescribed as an integration of the human resource technology elementsand its proposed role in each acquisition phase is detailed.
The second volume describes the basic activities and associateddata inherent in the CHRT methodology. This'volume is a detailedexpansion of the first. The major processes of CHRT are defined asthe consolidated data base development, the integrated requirementsand task analysis, product development, and the impact analysis.
The third volume specifies the requirements for the consolida-ted data base which supports CHRT. It describes the input and outputdata, the associated sources, the processes, and the interfaces ofthe CDB with the major process of CHRT.
It should be noted, however, that this total report is theproduct of the development phase and represents the CHRT method-ology as conceived. The methodology will be demonstrated duringPhase II and this report updated to reflect the results of thedemonstration. The updated version therefore will describe a provenmethodology which can be practically applied during systemacquisition.
6
V14
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
1. SCOPE 91. 1 Purpose 91.2 Overview 91. 3 Application 10
2. REFERENCES 122.1 Documents 122.2 Abbreviations and Acronyms 132. 3 Definitions 13
3. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 143.1 Basic Guidance 143.2 Planning Guidance 143.3 Implementation Guidance 153.4 Principal Interactions 153.5 Weapon System Program Data 183.6 Types of Data Applicable to CHRT 183.7 CDB Content Overview 20
4. DETAILED REQUIREMENTS 224. 1 Structure 22
4.2 Format 224.3 Content 22
5. ON-EQUIPMENT DATA 375.1 General 375.2 Format 375.3 Content 37
6. COST DATA 386.1 General 386.2 SOC Model 386.3 Standard SOC Factor List 41
6.4 Unique SOC Factor List 417. DESIGN OPTION DECISION TREES 62
7.1 General 628. NOTES 64
8. 1 Abbreviations and Acronyms 648. 2 Definitions 658. 3 Bibliography 68
7
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page No.
3-1 Reference Data Examples 193-2 Baseline Data File 203-3 Data File/Applicability List 214-1 Maintenance Event Listing 244- 2 Maintenance Activity Listing 266-1 Standard and Unique SOC Data Elements 53
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Title
3-1 The CHRT Process (Conceptual and Validation Phase) 163-2 The CHRT Process (Full Scale Development Phase) 174-1 CDB Structure 234-2 Maintenance Event Matrix 254-3 Maintenance Activity Matrix 274-4 Task Condition Matrix 284-5 Personnel Availability Matrix 316-1 Hierarchy of Life Cycle Cost 396-2 The System Ownership Cost Model for CHRT 406-3 Support Equipment 426-4 Job Guides 436-5 LRU Spares 446-6 Aircrew 456-7 Fuel 466-8 Depot Repair 476-9 Facilities 486-10 Inventory Management 496-11 Technical Record Data 506-12 On-Off Equipment Maintenance 516-13 Personnel Training 527-1 Design Option Decision Tree Landing Gear Subsystem 63
[8
INTEGRATION AND APPLICATION OFHUMAN RESOURCE TECHNOLOGIES IN
WEAPON SYSTEM DESIGN:CONSOLIDATED DATA BASE FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION
Section 1
SCOPE
1.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this volume is to functionally specify theconsolidated data base (CDB) required to support the application ofthe coordinated human resource technology (CHRT) on a weaponsystem accuisition program. This CDB may also be used foroperational and supp ._t planning after deployment. As developed,the consolidated data base is unique to each weapon system. Itexpands in detail wit 1 time as the weapon system acquisition cycleprogresses. The CDJB is dynamic in nature representing alternativesbeing considered a;3 well as baseline approaches. It has, therefore,been designed for frequent update and expansion. This functionalspecification describes the processes for updating and expandingthis data base as well as establishing it.
1.2 OVERVIEW
The CHRT is a new technology based on the integration offive separate human resource technologies: maintenance manpowermodeling (MMM), instructional system development (ISD), job guidedevelopment (JGD), system ownership costing (SOC), and humanresources in design tradeoffs (HRDT). The development of CHRT isdescribed in AFHRL-TR-78-6(I). Coordination of Five HumanResource Technologies. Additionally, the application process forCHRT consists of four activities:
1. Development of a consolidated data base (CDB)2. Performance of an integrated requirements and task
. ranalysis3. Preparation of instructional system and job guide
4. Performance of impact analysis
The application process and these four activities are detailed inAFHRL-TR-78-6(II), Processes for the Coordinated Application ofFive Human Resource Technologies.L 9
The approach taken in developing this consolidated data basefunctional specification was to perform an analysis of the content ofthe CHRT methodology and the four basic activities. The detailedsteps required to develop and maintain the consolidated data basewere identified as those required to provide the data necessary forthe accomplishment of activities 2, 3, and 4. The output data fromthese activities also becomes part of the CDB.
This functional specification for the consolidated data basedescribes its format, content, and the detailed steps necessary forits development, update, and maintenance. The development of theconsolidated data base consists of many steps, most of which it issignificant to note are initial steps in the individual human resourcetechnologies. Although these technologies have been integrated andwill be applied in a coordinated manner, they retain their distinctidentities and objectives. The coordinated application provides bothadditional and enhanced products.
Examples of some important steps in the consolidated database development drawn from MMM are equipment identification, thecomparability analysis, and the definition of maintenance action net-works. Additionally, development of the system design optiondecision tree and the selection of critical subsystems are examplesof initial steps in HIIPDT which are included as part of data basedeployment. New procedures, however, were devised as necessary,especially to implement the interrelationships among the fivetechnologies.
The major categories of data stored in the consolidated database relate to reliability, maintainability, maintenance manpower,operations manpower, training and job guides for both maintenanceand operations, and sy-stem ownership cost. Much of this data isrequired by one or more technologies. Prior to CHRT, each of thefive technologies required its own data base. This procedure wasredundant and inefficient and often obscured or hindered the desiredinterface among the technologies. The consolidation of the data baserequirements results in a more efficient data handling technique andensures response of all five technologies to the same data set.
1.3 APPLICATION
This specification applies to any system/equipment acquisi-tion program, or major modification program, from the early stagesof the conceptual phase through deployment phase. It is intended thatthis specification be used by both contractor and Government
10
17,
a,
activities in implementing CtIRT and/or operational and supportplanning after deployment. As used in this specification, the term"contractor" includes any Government activity undertaking perfor-
mance of a task on which this standard is invoked.
At the present time this specification is functional in nature.It contains the concept and basic rationale for the CDB. It does not,however, contain the final details required to establish, maintain,update, and operate the CDB. These details will be finalized duringthe course of the CHRT demonstration from 15 October 1977 to15 May 1979.
[211
Section 2
REFERENCES
2.1 DOCUMENTS
The following documents form a part of this specification tothe extent specified herein.
Military Specifications
MIL-H-46855 Human Engineering Requirements for MilitarySystems, Equipment, and Facilities
Military Standards
MIL-STD-280 Definition of Item Levels, Item Exchangeability,Models, and Related Terms
MIL-STD-470 Maintainability Program Requirements (forSystems and Equipments)
MIL-STD-480 Configuration Control-Engineering Changes,Deviations, and Waivers
MIL-STD-680 Contractor Standardization Plans and ManagementMIL-STD-721 Definitions ot Effectiveness Terms for Reliability,
Maintainability, Human Factors, and SafetyMIL-STD-785 Reliability Program for Systems and Equipment
Development and ProductionMIL-STD-881 Work Breakdown Structures for Defense Material
ItemsMIL-STD-1388-1 Logistic Support AnalysisMIL-STD-1388-2 Logistic Support Analysis Data Element Definitions
Guides
DOD 4100.35-G Integrated Logistic Support Planning Guide forDoD Systems and Equipment: Requirements For
Other Publications
AFHRL-TR-78-*6(I) The Integration and Application of HumanResource Technologies in Weapon System Design:Coordination of Five Human ResourceTechnologies
AFHRL-TR-78-6(II) The Integration and Application of Human ResourceTechnologies in Weapon System Design: Processesfor the Coordinated Application of the Five HumanResource Technologies
12F .. .
A i'IIRL-TR-73-43(I) P'ully Proceduralized Job Performance Aids:l)raft Military Specification for Organizationaland Intermediate Maintenancec
Uset's H landbook Air Iorce Logistics Command Logistic SupportCost Model
TM 38-710 Integrated Logistic SupportNAVMAT P-4000 Implementation Guide for DoDAFP 800-7 Systems and Equipment
2.2 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
Abbreviations and acronyms are contained in Section [ of thisspecification.
2.3 DEFINITIONS
Definitions contained in Section 8 are key terms and are not tobe confused with definitions appearing in other documents. Definitionsin Military Standards 280, 480, 721, 881, 1388-1, and 1388-2 shallapply except when in conflict with those herein.
13
Section 3
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
3.1 BASIC GUIDANCE
The consolidated data base is the information source whichdirectly supports the CHRT process. A CDB shall be established andmaintained to support the application of CHRT during weapon systemacquisition and may be used for operational and support planning afterdeployment. It shall contain the files and data elements necessary for:the determination of the human resource considerations related tospecific designs and alternatives; the identification of designs andpolicies which create excessive HR demands, and the development ofthe instructional system development (ISD) and job guide development(JGD) products. The CDB shall also contain a system ownership cost(SOC) model and associated data which when coupled with the humanresource parameters will provide representative system ownershipcost predictions. The HR parameters determined through CHRT are:reliability (K), maintainability (M), maintenance manpowerrequirements, ISD/JGD scope and magnitude for maintenance, ISDscope and magnitude for operations, and operations manpowerrequirements.
The CDB shall initially be developed from historical andcomparative data, an d shall be updated with current acquisitioninformation as it becomes available. Application of CHRT through theCDB results in a systematic rather than intuitive consideration ofhuman resources in the design process. It also provides continuity ofmethod throughout the acquisition process.
3.2 PLANNING GUIDANCE
CHRT through its CDB can contribute significantly to thelogistic support analysis (LSA) of the integrated logistic supportprogram (ILSP). The CDB can provide much of the informationrequired to support the integrated logistics data file (ILDF) of theLSA. If the particular weapon system acquisition program does notcall for an ILDF, then CHRT and its CDB can stand alone. In eithercontext, CHRT results in more specific data derived through arational process. Through CHRT, these data becomes available earlierin the acquisition process than has been possible with existingtechniques.
14
3.3 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE
The AI"IRL-TR-78-6 reports entitled, "The Integration andApplication of Hluman Resource Technologies in Weapon SystemDesign"
* "I - Coordination of Five Human Resource Technologies"
0 "II - Processes for the Coordinated Application of theFive Human Resource Technologies"
shall be consulted for more detailed guidance concerning the applica-tion of CHRT. These reports may be supplemented with the IntegratedLogistic Support Implementation Guide for DOD Systems and Equip-ments and MIL-STD-1388-1. Both of these documents are furtheridentified in paragraph 2. 1 under other publications. The abovedocuments may also be consulted for additional background data onsystem ownership cost, maintenance manpower modeling, instructionalsystem development, job guide documentation, ILS interfaces, typicallogistic support models, and the LSA process. The CDB shall beimplemented in the initial stage of the conceptual phase and updatedand maintained throughout the system acquisition process as describedherein.
3.4 PRINCIPAL INTERACTIONS
The principal interactions of the CDB are within the CHRTprocess and are shown in the functional flow diagrams, Figures 4-1and 4-2. A detailed description is provided in AFHRL-78-6(II) and willnot be repeated here. These figures describe the CHRT process in theconceptual and validation phases and in the full scale developmentphase, respectively. All data on these figures are described withinellipses and are stored in the CDB. The elipses shown are the datawhich result from the CHRT activities. The principal interactionsof the CDB with the CHRT process occur as an output or input to theactivities within CHRT. These activities are:
• The CDB Development• The Integrated Requirements and Task Analysis* The ISD/JGD Product Development• The Impact Analysis
The most significant of these is the CDB development activitywhich encompasses many of the initial steps found in the individualhuman resource technologies.
15
r - - - - - - - - -- ---
M I
CL I
03 I I
I I-ol <
<l I
a 4 zcc3 0
I L
E b
Z2. sloll0
C, 1 0 --, I A -1 - -- - -- m - - - ,
j 4 11-j I1H -
16
I I II I I I II
ul
ol
I 5
0!
al 91 ~
I Iw
1 LJW
Ej
I Ij "
ol
Il iiu
o, A i ao
<1 1
LL
~ Ii
L . .. .. .. .. .. .. 0
'l w!w
II
-----.= ------ ,--. --.- .; , .. .
I 6 I "
0 loo is0
-I II
uIi 0.
Iu I
17
I 5
Interactions among CHRT, the CDB, design, maintenance,operations, support and cost must also be considered and mostimportantly coordinated throughout all phases of the weapon systemacquisition process. A continuous dialogue must be maintained betweenengineer, logistician, training representative, and human resourcetechnologist as an inherent and integral part of system development.
3.5 WEAPON SYSTEM PROGRAM DATA
The total data available on any specific weapon system programshall be defined as background data. It ranges from general approachesand policies to specific data element values, and provides the design,maintenance, operations, support, and cost information from whichthe CHRT CDB is constructed. For instance, system/subsystemdesign option decision trees must be developed, the maintenance man-power modeling data must be evolved and the status and availability oftraining personnel, facilities, etc., must be established. The specificdata element values required for the CDB are drawn and derived fromthis background data by the CDB development activity.
3.6 TYPES OF DATA APPLICABLE TO CHRT
Data applicable to the CHRT process are divided into fourtypes: background, reference, baseline, and current.
Background Data
Background data consist of all weapon system program data asdiscussed in paragraph 3. 5 and are retained as a supplement to theCDB.
Reference Data
Reference data applies to a reference weapon system. Thiscan be a similar weapon system or a hypothetical weapon system. Thehypothetical weapon system is comprised of similar systems, sub-systems, and line replaceable units (LRU) from various weaponsystems. The reference system is the one that the new acquisitionwill specifically replace and consequently must be shown to be lesscost effective in the long run. Reference data are compiled in theconceptual phase and retained as a supplement to the CDB. Referencedata would not be expected to change since it is normally derived fromoperations, performance, support, and cost information on existingsystems. The data include that shown in Table 3-1.
18
CJ
Table 3-1 REFERENCE DATA EXAMPLES
Operations Performance Support Cost
Operations Technical Technical HistoricalHistory Orders Orders Logistic Data
Contingency Production Maintenance AcquisitionPlans Specifications Data Collec- Data
Work Unit tion System GeneralCode Manuals Table of Accounting
Allowances Office RecordsIllustratedParts Break-downUnit Detail
_Listing
Baseline Data
Baseline data applies to the weapon system approved forfurther development at a Defense Systems Acquisition Review Council(DSARC) milestone. The baseliie data established upon completion ofa DSARC are not changed until completion of the next DSARC.
Therefore, this baseline established during the conceptual phase isretained throughout validation; the validation baseline throughout fullscale development; and so forth. There is no baseline for the con-ceptual phase. It is during this period that the first baseline, thevalidation phase baseline, is established. The specific baselines andthe background data from which they are drawn and derived are shownbelow in Table 3-2.
Current Data
Current data applies to the accepted weapon system con-figuration at any specific time between the baseline of each phase. Allmanipulation of alternatives is done with the current data. It is thecurrent data that are changed or expanded when an alternative designis selected.
19
Table 3-2 BASELINE DATA FILE
Baseline Data CategoryPhase Operations Performance !3upport Cost
Validation Generalized Design Integrated DSARCIOperational Approach LogisticRequirement Support
(ILS)Concept
Full Scale Operations System ILS Plan DSARC IIDevelopment Plan Specification
Production Operations System/ ILS DSARCIIIPlan Subsystem Program
SegmentSpecification
3.7 CDB CONTENT OVERVIEW
The CDB contains only baseline and current system data storedas data elements under specific data files. The contents of the CDBresult from actions within the four CHRT activities and normally pro-vide the input to one or more other actions within the same or anotherCHRT activity. The data elements, their units, format and derivationwill be discussed in the following sections. Table 3-3, however,presents an overview of the files contained in the CDB relative to theacquisition phase.
20
Table 3-3 DATA 1ILE/APPLICABILITY LIST
Data File C/V* FSD : "
Maintenance Event Data XMaintenance Activity Data XOn-Equipment Data
Maintenance XOperations X
Task/Condition DataMaintenance X XOperations X X
Personnel Availability CharacteristicsMaintenance X XOperations X X
Operations Task List XOperations Manpower Requirements X XSOC Model and Data X XAlternatives List X XDesign Option Decision Trees X XGeneral Task Data
Maintenance XOperations X
X Xlvrx x
Maintenance Manpower Requirements X XISD Scope & Magnitude
Maintenance X XOperations X X
JGD Scope & MagnitudeX XDetailed Task Data
Maintenance X XOperations x x
Training Product X XTech Data Product X xSOC Estimate X XImpact X XHigh Driver X XNew/Modified Data X X
* C / V- Conceptual/ Validation Phase,* FSD-Full Scale Development Phase
21
|!/
Section 4
DETAILED REQUIREMENTS
4.1 STRUCTURE
The CDB is structured into groups, subgroups, and files. Thegroups and subgroups simply allow for the consolidation of similardata. The files contain the data elements which may be values ordescriptors. The CHRT CDB structure is shown in Figure 4-1.
4.2 FORMAT
Although the details will not be complete until after thedemor.-tration of CHRT, the format of the files within the CDB and allapplicable algorithms and processes will be compatible with the CDC6600 computer. The CHRT CDB files have been listed in Table 3-3.With the exception of the design option decision trees (DODT), theSOC model and on-equipment data which will be treated in separatesections, all files are formatted as listings and matrices. Normally,all data files are cross-referenced by equipment to the LRTJ level.Alternative cross-references used are Air Force specialty codes andspecific tasks.
4.3 CONTENT
The content of the CDB will le defined and described below andrelated directly to the CDB structure. File format is either a listingor matrix as indicated by the file name.
Maintenance Data Group (Task) (1.1)
The maintenance data group consists of task, manpower, andcost subgroups and contains the files listed and described below.
Maintenance Event Matrix (1. 1. 1)
Maintenance events are defined and coded as indicated inTable 4-1. Maintenance event data are derived directly from thelogistic composite model (LCOM) maintenance action network andstored in matrix format. The maintenance events are qualified and/orquantified to the LRU level in, the matrices as probability of occurrence,task time, Air Force specialty code (AFSC), skill level required,maintenance crew size and necessary support equipment. The matrix
22
1.1.1 Maintenance Event Matrix1.1.2 Mainten--nce Activity Matrix
TASK 1.1.3 Task/Condition Matrix1.1.4 General Task Mitrox
MAINTNANCE1.1.5 Detailed Task List
1.2.1 Manpower Requirements ListFMANPOWER 1.2.2 Personnel Availability MatrixLV1.2.3 ISDIJGD Scope & Magnitude List
2. 2.12.1.1 Equipment ListEQUIMENT2.1.2 R List
EQUIPMENT 2.1.3 M ListDATA 2.1.4 On-Equipment Data (Maintenance)
2.1.5 On-Equipment Dtrta (Operations)
3.1.1 Operations Task List3.1 3.1.2 Task/Condition Matrix
TASK 3.1.3 General Task List3. 3.1.4 Detailed Task List
3.2.1 Manpower RequirementsMANPOWER 3.2.2 Personnel Availability Matrix
C 3.2.3 lSD/JGD Scope & Magnitude List
4 . 4 1 S Y T E M4.1.1 SO C M odelCOST DATA OWNERSHIP 4.1.2 Standard SOC Factor ListCOST 4.1.3 Unique SOC Factor List
5 .1 D S I G N5 .1 .1 D O O T z
OTHER 5.2.1 MnntananceOperations/Support
IMPACT6.1.1 HR Parameters Matrix
DECIION6.1.k~ SOC Estimate Matrix
6.2.1 HR Parameters ListHIGH DRIVERS 6.2.2 SOC Estimate List
GROUP SUBGROUP FILE
Figure 4-1 CDB STRUCTURE
23
format is shown in Figure 4-2. The cross-reference is equipment.These matrices are used in the MMM analysis with the R&M modelor LCOM and directly in deriving data for the task/condition matrix.
Table 4-1 MAINTENANCE EVENT LISTING
Code Maintenance Event
A setup support equipmentT troubleshoot on aircraft (A/C)C cannot duplicate (CND) on A/C1\4 minor repair on A/CR remove and replace (R&R)V verification of R or M eventsW bench check and repair in shopK bench check and CND in shopN not repairable this station (NRTS)H scheduled checks, inspections, or service
Maintenance Activity Matrix (1. 1.2)
Maintenance activities are defined and coded as indicated inTable 4-2. Maintenance activity data are derived directly from theAFLC D056 data system; run D056B5504, Detail Shop Actions forSelected Work Unit Codes; "how malfunctioned" data. Maintenanceactivities are quantified from the 11-month summary of maintenanceactions taken by the number of occurrences for each activity and totalhours per activity for both subsystem and LRU. The subsystems andLRUs selected are the same used to develop the maintenance eventdata. For convenience and compatibility with MMM data, similarmaintenance actions (this term is defined in any -06 Work Unit CodeManual) are grouped under the maintenance activities identified in themaintenance activity listing. The matrix format is shown in Figure 4-3.The cross-reference is equipment. These matrices are used in theISD/JGD analysis for maintenance and also directly in deriving datafor the task/condition matrix.
24
I z
ww0Izz
I
zz
ww
( v (to5
Table 4-2 MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY LISTING
Action
TakenCode Maintenance Activity
LOO Adjust/AlignJKO CalibrateVOO CleanRPQ Remove & ReplaceFOO RepairGOO Repair and/or Remove Main PartsYHO Troubleshoot Cannot Duplicate (CND)XOO Test/Inspect/Service Shop
Task/Condition IMatrix (1. 1. 3)
The task/condition matrix provides six categories of informa-tion for each piece of equipment for use in projecting ISD/JGD require-ments. This matrix is shown in Figure 4-4. The cross-reference isagain equipment. These six categories are type of maintenance, timeto train, information content, ISD/JGD status, criticality, and numberof components.
Type of maintenance includes the time (in hours) and theprobability of occurrence for both scheduled (S) and unscheduled (U)type maintenance. This information is presented for each maintenanceactivity to allow subjective judgements regarding behaviors. The dataare obtained from the maintenance activity matrix.
Time to train is used to estimate course length, content, andcost. Time-to-train is obtained from existing course data and ismeasured in terms of the lecture/lab hours spent in task-orientedtraining.
Content and cost of job guide documentation uses the informa-tion content entries for each maintenance activity. These entriesindicate the number of pages devoted in current manuals to the variousactivities and consequently can serve as one of the factors inestimating characteristics of the JGD products.
26
I&F
I.-.~
C",'
70/70w
< U. 6f/
72
C)
C%-LSx
LUWZz
U.U
LIL-
.0 0
0 z
"a
0h.~ 0 .
28
The ISD/JGD status is also indicated in the matrix in ternis ofwhether they (1) already exist in the task-oriented form, (2) needonly to be modified using existing manuals and task analyses, or (3)must be completely developed.
The criticality factor in the early phases of systems develop-ment is probably best indicated by the impact on operational readinessand the cost implications of resources consumed. Readiness is afunction of first the probable flight hours between maintenance actions,and then the probable time spent in flightline maintenance before theweapon system is returned to a ready-for-operation condition. Asuitable measure of resources consumed is the ratio of maintenancemanhours per flight hour.
The number of components that could be causing the mal-function or that have to be serviced, is a reasonable indicator ofdifficulty. If the number of components is great, expecially introubleshooting, proceduralized aids should be considered.
General Task Matrix (1. 1. 4)
The general task matrix replaces both the maintenance eventand maintenance activity matrices in the full scale development phase.The general task matrix provides the same data in the same format
as the maintenance event matrix and is used in the same manner. Itis derived from on-equipment data through the General Task Analysisfor maintenance.
Detailed Task List (1. 1.5)
The detailed task list for maintenance is derived from thedetailed task analysis during the full scale development phase. Thecontent and format of this data is not fully determined. See AFHRL-TR-78-6(II) for additional information.
Maintenance Data Group (Manpower) (1.2)
Manpower Requirements List (1.2. 1)
Maintenance manpower requirements are derived in the MMManalysis through either the LCOM simulation or the R&M model.This list presents maintenance manpower requirements in terms ofskills and skill levels and number of each required. The cross-reference is equipment and skills.
29
Personnel Availability Matrix (1. 2.2)
Maintenance personnel availability characteristics arepresented in the personnel availability matrix shown in Figure 4-5.Personnel requirements are obtained from the manpower requirementslist which identifies both the skills and skill levels needed. Backgrounddata are then predicted on the future availability of personnel withthese skills and skill levels. Development of these data is a CDBactivity. The data source is personnel files. With the PersonnelAvailability Model developed as part of Project 1959-003 (see Preface)or a similar model, one may obtain the data desired. Additionally,each characteristic may also be taken individually for a particularskill and level and a profile prepared for a specific time period. Thecross-reference for the personnel availability matrix is skills.
ISD/JGD Scope and Magnitude List (1. 2.3)
The ISD/JGD scope and magnitude list for maintenance isderived through the ISD/JGD analysis. During the conceptual andvalidation phases, the decision is based on comparable data. ISDscope is defined as the number of skills to be qualified by trainingand for which media will be required. ISD magnitude is time. It isderived for each skill from JGD degree of proceduralization andcomparable course length. JGD scope is defined as the number ofmajor subsystems, while magnitude is defined as content. It isderived over all subsystems. See AFI-IRL-TR-78-6(II) for adiscussion of degree of proceduralization and format rating. Thesesame definitions apply in full scale development to initially size theISD/JGD program. After that time, estimates are based on thecontractor developed training and tech data plan.
Equipment Data Group (Equipment) (2. 1)
The equipment data group consists of only one subgroup at thepresent time. There are, however, five separate files.
Equipment List (2. 1. 1)
The equipment list is established in the CDB as one of theinitial steps of MMM. This list is stored in the CDB as an indenturedlisting of the equipment configuration. It reflects the weapon systemdesign in the same manner as an equipment drawing tree would. Thislist is used as both a reference and cross-reference and will containthe following:
30
_CC
C1
<<-
w4.09 zz
w.
31
* ID to Work Unit Code for each subsystem and LRU* Weight per LRU* National stock number* AN nomenclature* Manufacturer's part number* # LRUs in a subsystem
Reliability (R) List (2. 1. 2)
The R list is derived within the MMM analysis through the R&IMmodel and is retained for each subsystem and LRU in terms of meanflight hours between maintenance actions (MFHBMA). The cross-reference is equipment and task.
Maintainability (M) List (2. 1. 3)
The M list is derived within the MMM analysis through the R&Mmodel and is retained for each subsystem and LRU in terms of meantime to repair per 1000 flight hours (MTTR/KFH).
On-Equipment Data (Maintenance and Operations) (2. 1. 4 & 2. 1. 5)
On-equipment data for maintenance and operations will beobtained early in the full scale development phase for use in the generaltask analysis. This will include an updated equipment listing and allavailable descriptive and test data. Further discussion of this file isprovided in Section 5.
Operations Data Group (Task) (3. 1)
The operations data group is very similar in content and use tothe maintenance data group. The source of the dia. however, is thesignificant difference. The operations data group consists of two sub-groups, task, and manpower. The files are described below. All arecross-referenced to crew position.
Operations Task List (3. 1. 1)
Operations task data accumulation is a CDB activity. The dataare provided in a listing and are cross-referenced to crew position.The source data from which the data are obtained consist of theGeneralized Operational Requirement (GOR) and information on theoperation and application of similar systems. The list includec
32
operational tasks such as landings and instrument operation and alsothe unique operations tasks peculiar to the specific weapon system.In the Advanced Medium Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL) Transport,for instance, assault landings and takeoffs are unique tasks. Theoperations task list is replaced with the general task data list in thefull scale development phase.
Task/Condition Matrix (3. 1. 2)
The task/condition matrix for operations is similar to thatused for maintenance except that unique operational activities areused in lieu of maintenance activities. Since training will be themethod used to acquire qualified personnel, and since studentpersonnel will have basically similar skills and levels, it is theseunique operational activities that will determine the scope of trainingand training media in relation to similar training courses.
General Task List (3. 1. 3)
The general task list provides the same data in the same
format as the operations task list and is used in the same manner.The general task list replaces the operations task list in the full scaledevelopment phase. It is derived from on-equipment data through thegeneral task analysis for operations.
Detailed Task List (3. 1. 4)
The detailed task data for operations are derived from thedetailed task analysis during the full scale development phase. Thecontent and format of these data are not fully determined. See AFHRL-TR-78-6(II) for additional information.
Operations Data Group (Manpower) (3.2)
Manpower Requirements (3. 2. 1)
Operations manpower requirements are derived as part of
the CDB development directly from the ROC and available operationsplans. The former would indicate crew positions while the latterwould indicate crew/aircraft ratio and numbers of aircraft.
[3
Personnel Availability Matrix (3. 2. 2)
Personnel availability characteristics arce presented in amatrix similar to that used tor maintenance. These characteristicsare also derived as part of the CDB development after a review of theoperations manpower requirements. The operations personnel datamust be obtained directly from Air Force personnel projections. Foroperations, the emiphasis iv" on retention and tCurnover in order to
adequately size tie weapon system training course and determine anypotential effect on basic operator training courses.
ISD/JGD Scope and Magnitude List (3. 2. 3)
The ISD]JGD scope and magnitude list for operations isderived through the ISD/JGD analysis. During the conceptual andvalidation phases, the decision is based on comparable data. ISDscope is defined as the number of skills to be qualified by trainingand for which media will be required. JGD scope for the operator(i. e., numbered type of aids) is determined through a judgementalprocess.
Cost Data Group (System Ownership Cost) (4. 1)
The cost data group consists of one subgroup, system owner-ship cost: this subgroup contains the model and associated datanecessary to provide a SOC estimate for any specific configuration.The files are described below and discussed in detail in Section 6.
SOC Model (4. 1. 1)
A system ownership cost model applicable to the weaponsystem being acquired shall be established with the CDB. The modelconsists of the components listed below:
* Support equipment0 job guides0 LRU spares* Aircrew* Fuel• Depot repair
Facilities
* Inventory management* Technical record data0 On-off equipment maintenance* Personnel training
Standard SOC Factors List (4. 1. 2)
This list contains cost and cost-related factors required forthe SOC model which can be obtained from standard governmentsources. See Section 6. 34
Unique SOC Factors List (4. 1. 3)
This list contains cost and cost-related factors required forthe SOC model which are unique to the weapon system being acquired.
See Section 6.
Alternative Data Group (5.)
This group identifies viable design, maintenance, operations,and support alternatives, and is separated into two subgroups, designand other, In the design group, points at which alternatives may orwill be considered are also identified. The files are described below.
Alternative Data (Design) (5. 1)
Design Option Decision Trees (5. 1. 1)
Design option decision trees are prepared as part of the CDBdevelopment activity on the system and selected subsystems. Theyare graphic in nature and not part of that portion of the CDB whichmay be computerized. DODTs are discussed in more detail inSection 7.
Alternative Data (Other) (5. 2)
Maintenance/Operations/Support Alternative List (5. 2. 1)
This is a list of viable alternatives prepared during CDBdevelopment. Consideration of any one or more of these options willrequire a reevaluation of CDB contents and reiteration of someprocesses. These alternatives are in the form of descriptors, e.g.,tow-man vs. three-man crew.
[Decision Data Group (6.)
The decision data group is the output of the CHRT process andconsists of two subgroups, impact and high drivers. Impact datarepresent the total HR and SOC estimate for any specific configura-tion. High driver data represent impact data screened for unaccept-
able HR or SOC estimates.
35
Decision Data (Impact) (6. 1)
lIR Parameters Matrix (6. 1. 1)
An 111 parameter matrix is prepared for all baseline con-figurations and current system(s) considered for DSARC presenta-tion. This matrix is prepared to the subsystem level. HR parametermatrices are also prepared to determine the relative effect of alldesign, maintenance, operations, or support alternatives considered.These matrices are prepared only to the depth of effect or level ofinterest, e.g., subsystem or system. This matrix is accomplishedby a statement of configuration which includes appropriate design,maintenance, operations, and support descriptors. The HR para-meters are presented as quantities and are listed below:
00 M
* Maintenance Manpower Requirements* ISD/JGD Scope and Magnitude for Maintenance* ISD Scope and Magnitude for Operations* Operations Manpower Requirements
SOC Estimate Matrix (6. 1. 2)
A SOC estimate matrix is prepared for each HR parameter inthe HR parameter matrix. This is in terms kcf annual cost.
Decision Data (High Drivers) (6. 2)
HR Parameters List (6.2. 1)
The HR parameters list results frorn a screening of the HRparameters matrices as they are evolved. The list reflects those HRparameters which are not acceptable or questionable. A notation ismade as to the configuration they apply to, the screening level, andto any action taken. The HR parameters are presented as quantities.
SOC Estimate List (6.2.2)
A SOC estimate is provided for each of the system owne --hipcost components.F; 36
Section 5
ON-EQUrPMENT DA rA
5.1 GENERAL
Within the equipment data group, two of .e files are: on-equip-ment data (maintenance) and on-equipment data (operations). Thesefiles are created for the CDB early in full scale development and areused in the general task analyses. At the present time oniy th e con-cept for these files exists which will be developed during thedemonstration phase of the study. This section will be updated as theconcept evolves.
5.2 FORMAT1 : On-equipment data will consist of both matrices and listings
supplemented with physical file data. This is appropriate, since it
will be used in judgemental processes, such as the general taskanalysis.
I 5. 3 CONTENT
Although the specifics must be defined, on-equipment data willcontain as a minimum:
* Detailed equipment listings, Specified reliability and maintainability values* Detailed support equipment listings* Equipment specifications. Test data
Additionally, information unique to either maintenance or operations1wil be retained with the appropriate file. On-equipment data must be
adequate for use in the general task analyses maintenancP action net-works for the MMM analysis, and the ISD/JGD decision.
37
I _
Section 6
COST DATA
6.1 GENERAL
System ownership cost is that portion of life cycle costs con-sisting of the support investment and operating and support costs.This is depicted in Figure 6-1. The addition of R&D and systemacquisition costs to system ownership cost, therefore, presents acomplete life cycle cost picture.
The CHRT cost data group consists of one subgroup, system
ownership cost which contains the following files:
• SOC model
0 Standard SOC factors list9 Unique SOC factors list
The SOC model is a series of weapon system dependent cost equationswhich can provide a SOC estimate to the subsystem level for any or allof the SOC components. The standard and unique SOC factors listseach provide numbers for the various data elements required for the
SOC equations.
6.2 SOC MODEL
The SOC model is summarized in Figure 6-2 and consists of11 equations as shown in Figures 6-3 through 6-13. These equationswere derived partially by modifying existing equations and partiallyby generating entirely new equations. In particular, use has been madeof the AFHRL and DRC work on the Digital Avionics InformationSystem (DAIS) Life Cycle Cost Study and the existing Air ForceLogistics Command (AFLC) Logistic Support Cost Model UsersHandbook, dated June 1975. The cost component title, equationdesignation, and chart location are described below.
Cost Nquation I,'igi reComponent Designation No.
1 Support Equipment CSE 6-22 Job Guides CJG 6-3
3 LRU Spares CLS 6-44 Aircrew CAC 6-55 Fuel CFL 6-66 Depot Repair CDR 6-7
38
x cS
Fi3l
FiC
I 0w
IA, ILL14>
*'L,AWAii=
39
00-0
+0+
aru
+ < Q
+U 0
0 1 zw+.~ 0
CJ')+ L U
z 0 I -z -w [zz 00 U. Z 0+ i< .
M 40
7 I,'acilities C'1 'A8 Inventory Management CiNI 6-99 Technical Record Data C'TR 6-10
10 On-Off Equipment Maintenance (CEM 6-l!11 Personnel Training 'PT 6-12
The SOC model must be reviewed for applicability to eachweapon system with which it is used. Where necessary it must betailored to fit a particular system. This is done in the conceptualphase. No further changes should be made to the model after it isinitially established unless absolutely necessary. The principaladvantagr, of the model, continuity throughout acquisition, and theability to perceive relative differences is more important thanabsolute accuracy.
The SOC model describes a process and is not a file. It isstored with the CDB and called upon when necessary. To provide acost estimate, the SOC model requires numerical data to satisfy eachdata element. Table 6-1 lists all data elements in the basic SOCequations, their units, the equations they are used in, qualifies themas standard or unique and will identify for the appropriate acquisitionphase the source of the numerical value.
6.3 STANDARD SOC FACTOR LIST
The base for these data elements consists of many standardGovernment sources such as pay and allowance tables, AFM 137-10,etc. The standard SOC factor list contains the cost and cost relateddata elements required to operate the SOC model. In many casesthese data elements themselves are the product of some sub-operation.The standard data elements are listed in Table 6-1 without an asterisk.Sub-operations will be detailed and sources not indicated will beidentified in the final report.
6.4 UNIQUE SOC FACTOR LIST
The base for these data elements consists of data unique to theweapon system being acquired such as operation plans, specifications,comparability analyses, etc, The unique SOC factor list contains thecost and cost related data elements required to operate the SOC model.
In many cases these data elements, also, are the product of somesub-operation. The unique data elements are listed in Table 6-1 withan asterisk preceeding them. Sub-operations will be detailed andsources not indicated will be identified in the final renort.
41
I
UAU
.2 I+ 0-
0 E
'or
0. J.0
It 0o -D
0. 0 ' 0
Pa s oa
aa I a+ c t U o2 .
c 0 04- -
E-.0aw
.2 E. 4- -
m fl o U 0-
A a 0Z-~~ .C 04-20
CL 0 0
a - 0
00
0 0.
.i w fl 8 a I
z m C. 2 Io c U
42
-cm
00
02 0
+0 .0
.00T9 N
.4-- 0 0*0 0 n .0
o -u I- m t .C C
:1. 0. 0
+ 0 c-5.
00
-C0cm+m co c.0
-L 0 c 0~CC CoL E w" E 00 C L
+~ 04 0m m
.0 2 cm~IL r
8~ C CO. C C.0 IL m ~ 0 0
E .0 - m 0 = C - :D g Cj q
.a o . ,.0 0
cc9 ~ )~ i:E0 0 C .0o 0C 02 41 54
2n ~ 4- C~0 C r.0 C
0 E cc. o 0 0CD CL ~CC CLL "I
2 .5 2 8Z' 00 EL zM.L U Z uLLL I Z E NC
L43
00CJ-
CLC
U..00
c to
xw.2 .
CC
CL CD, 01
-4 a* E 0 c- 0 2
E 0
-* CL 2C
.j U. L .
444-
<Vl
+ c c
c 6+
CL 0I>0
1 0 . -J.
.Z3 cc0 4 CLz
> c <ca C
17 -.
45a
t - -:t .... ... ..... . ..- . ....... . ..... ..------ -.-- . L : -
' -- - 5 --, .... .. .. .r- ' - ...
LL
LU.
0
0
o U
46
0
4 ---
cr 0
U.2 j
00
cc)6. ~ L
47. -
w
Li.
0U)
0t0
LL I.
CLC
r N C
ILL
(3 ~LLL
48
U. 4-
cr..
*6-
4- 0
+ C6
0-
CC
C2 Cr.Ia
49
Go 0I
+ -0 - L
cc C
T I
4-
E M.
0 +
E c.
C 2L
IL
rp ..
.2 L
2 I o0.. LL
~ EN
50
C4.
LL
0..2 E
a z0
o e
+L U. Uic
-Jo 5oi f4 a0
51w
T .- .--- ,-.---, - - - -~ . - - - -V-7~
LL
r.J
E U
ca
:1 I-
CL N >0
+5
rf.-Ei
(A
w
04 0
.)
C.)a
z
0
) < 4
o x
'A EC.&
0 A
.2 -;; XI 1j i L. #:lt -0E4.' 2, 0
0 -
4- I- 3 - j 0
53
lS
-ica 0
0.J*
(aU x
I-
.2Cu
L.
xxa. - - x| i . i
o ooo o4.-0 0
am a
5,-Cr.
-o-
w0
0 U
C.) 0
U5
LL.3
.
~x0
o3 c
0 .*
CO
U
F-0.0
E .L
ooolc
73 a uo C .c.,U.) u 6* U
w -5
li , I
[0
iC4
x x
U.-
0. x
00
.2 CC
a -L
o 0
00
CL I
U. 2- 5-. - 5 t
0 C56
0
UL
- I-x x
~x
o 0U
LL
0~0
C in
0
o cm
_o0 0
C 0
.. . E -
0
57
-6
C#0
cc 4
U
LLO
C.
LU.
U
ol x
C',L
w 00 4, 0
mC - 0 a 0 ?C.)
U.' E -
CC (A = a,z U. Z Z _j Z l. 10
58-
64
8!
C,
LU
0.r C aO(m x x 4
w -0
oL 2
LU
c 4.f7 _ ___ ____ ___ ___ ____ ___ ____ ___ ___ ____ ___ __0
C) __ __ __ __ ___ __ __ __ __ ___ __ __ __ ___0
cc Ag E
w 0
Ci C -~ - - C
ca 0 C-- :3 C
59
A.2
0.
-4
.2.
LU 30 1.
5cc
CC
U
~~00
0.4-
(4 '0Uc
cC46 0
A -u
E t: X C r- LZ* 0 C Iw z-CC". L
C-60
20
S LL.
> >
.- 61
Section 7
DESIGN OPTION DECISION TREES
7.1 GENERAL
Design option decision trees (DODT) are used as a method ofdocumenting a design to show where alternatives have been or will beconsidered. A sample DODT is shown in Figure 7-1 for a simplifiedlanding gear subsystem. Design option decision trees are preparedas part of the CDB development activity on the weapon system andmaintained to reflect the current design status. Design optiondecision trees are also prepared on selected subsystems. Subsystemsare selected on the basis of high hardware risk, human resourcedependency, or simply many potential alternatives. DODTs aregraphic in nature and will not normally be part of a computerized
data base although the technology to do so does exist. They willnormally be stored in a physical file.
As a current data source, DODTs will indicate where optionshave been identified and/or selected. With this knowledge one mayexercise the CHRT process to determine the effect of the various
design alternatives on human resources and cost. As an historicaldata source, DODTs may be used to trace trade-offs that have beenmade and record the various alternatives.
This section will be expanded as experience with DODTsincreases.
I6
: 62
C
.20
o0 0
0 u
ccO
.x 0 >
CA C
>4-0
wz
o 0>
a). co.u~ 2C z
D2'
63
Section 8
NOT IS
8. 1 ABBIEVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
The following abbreviations and acronyms are used with the CHRT.
A availabilityA/C aircraftAFHRL Air Force Human Resources LaboratoryAFSC Air Force specialty codeAMST Advanced Medium STOL TransportATIM annotated task identification matrixCDB consolidated data baseCND cannot duplicateCHRT coordinated human resource technologyDSARC Defense Systems Acquisition Review CouncilFOMM functionally organized maintenance manualsFPJPA fully proceduralized job performance aidsHRDT human resources in design tradeoffsILS integrated logistic supportILSP integrated logistic support planIRTA integrated requirements and task analysisISD instructional system developmentJGD job guide developmentJPA job performance aidLCC life cycle costLCOM logistic composite modelLSA logistic support analysisLSAR logistic support analysis recordM maintainabilityMFHBMA mean flight hours between maintenance actionsMMH/FH maintenance man hours/flight hourMMM maintenance manpower modelingMTTR mean time to repairNRTS not repairable this stationPTIM preliminary task identification matrixR reliabilityROC required operational capabilitySIMM symbolic integrated maintenance manualsSOC system ownership costSTOL short field takeoff and landing
64
8. 2 DI*;IE'INITIONS
The following definitions are applicable to CHRT.
algorithms - mathematical formulas and procedures, pre-programmedinto the system, which will translate data from base files and/or sub-files into data elements which quantify human resource requirementsand ownership cost.
baseline data - data which reflects the weapon system approved forfurther development at a DSARC milestone.
background data - all weapon system program data from which CDBdata is drawn.
behavior - any human action generally defined by a stimulus (cue) andresponse. A basic stimulus-organism-I esponse constituent of behaviorcomprising the smallest logically defineable set of perceptions,decisions, and responses required io complete a task. Involves, forexample, identifying a specific sigr-1 on a specific display, decidingon a single action, activating a specific control, and noting the feedbacksignals of response adequacy.
cue - a stimulus to a response. For example, a cue could consist of ameter reading, physical appearance, flashing light, etc. Responses tocues consist of such activities as turning a knob, setting a switch,reading a value on a display, etc. Often a response can be a cue for asucceeding response.
current data - data which reflects the updated and accepted weaponsystem configuration at any specific time between the baseline of eachphase.
data base - a grouping of base files by category (or defined set)representing all the basic data for a specific generation of equipment.
data element - a grouping of information and units which has a uniquemeaning and which may have subcategories (data items) of distinctunits or values.
data element definition - a niarrative definition of the data element insufficient detail to present a clear and complete understanding of theprecise data or element of information that the data element represents.
detailed task data - task statements to the level required to make thefinal ISD/JGD decision, to make tradeoffs within the instructionalsystem itself and finally to develop the products; course, media,performance measurement, and job guide documentation.
65
4
extended -11 file - the format used by the Logistics Composite Model(LCOM) to identify the maintenance tasks and the order in which theyare to be done, along with the time and resources needed to accomplisheach task.
file - a grouping of one type of input variable or a derived quantitythereof for a particular ID. All of the input data items are grouped fora comparable level (e. g., flightline, shop).
job - a group of tasks performed by a specific individual.
general task data - task statements to the level required to make abasic decision regarding manpower requirements and the applicability
of training courses, media, performance measurement and job guidesdocumentation (i. e., the ISD/JGD decision). For maintenance, thetask level would be to the LRU (e. g., repair LRU) but would notinclude development of the specific task statements that encompassedthe task.
line replaceable unit (LRU) - a combination of parts, subassemblies,and assemblies mounted together, normally capable of independentoperation in a variety of situations. An LRU is normally directlyaccessible and can be removed without prior disassembly of theequipment or group. (MIL-STD-280). The LRU is the first level ofassembly below the subsystem that is carried as a line item of supplyat the base level and is usually the highest level of assembly that isremoved and replaced, as a unit, on the flightline.
maintenance event - consists of one or more maintenance functions.These maintenance events are specifically symbolized and identifiedas:
A - setup support equipmentT - troubleshoot on aircraft (A/C)C - cannot duplicate (CND) on A/CM -minor repair on A/CR remove & replace (R&R)
V - verification of R or M eventsW - bench check and repair in shopK - bench check and CND in shopN - not repairable this station (NRTS)H - scheduled checks, inspections, or service
maintenance function - a behavioral term associated with a task.Specifically: adjust, align, calibrate, checkout, troubleshoot, clean,disassemble/assemble, inspect, lubricate, operate, remove/install,repair, service are maintenance functions (ref. AFHRL-TR-73-43(I)).
66
reference data - data which reflects a reference weapon system. Thereference system is the system(s) that the new acquisition willspecifically replace and consequently must be shown to be less cost/effective in the long run. Reference data is compiled in the conceptualphase and retained as a supplement to the CDB. It would not beexpected to change since it is normally derived from operations.performance, support, and cost information on existing systems. Insome cases there may be no reference system(s).
shop replaceable unit (SRU) - the SRU is a lower level assembly orsubassembly within an LRU normally formed together to perform aspecific function. An SRU is normally repaired or replaced only withinthe base (intermediate level) shops rather than on the flight line.
skill level - the fourth number within an AFSC identifying a level ofaptitude, training, experience, knowledge, skills, and responsibility.
subsystem - a set or combination of LRUs and/or assemblies generallyphysically separated when in operation connected together or used inassociation to perform an operational function within the system. It isthe level of equipment identified by three characters in the work unitcode structure (e. g., 7]B TACAN set) or as a four-digit ID number(e.g., AN/2 TACAN).
system - a major subset of a weapon system comprised of individualfunctional groupings and their integration within the weapon system(e.g., avionics, landing gear, electrical, etc.).
task - a composite of related activities (behaviors) performed by anindividual and directed toward accomplishing a specific amount ofwork within a specific work context. These activities usually occur intemporal proximity with the same displays and controls and have acommon purpose. Each task has a goal.
task analysis - an analytic process employed to determine the specificbehaviors required of a human component in a man-machine system. Itinvolves determining, usually on a time basis, the detailed performancerequired of men, the nature and extent of their interactions with themachine and the effects of environmental conditions and malfunctions.It is the breakdown of behaviors into simple elements of perceptions,decisions, memory storage, motor output, etc.
task statement - a statement of the behavioral elements (in action verbform), the cues, and equipment description involved in a task.
weapon system - a complete system including all equipment, relatedfacilities, material software, services, and personnel required for itsoperation and support to the degree that it can be considered a self-sufficient unit in its intended operational environment (AFSC DH1-1pg. 7, Sec.tion 25). 67
8.3 131131,10GIIA I'3 I Y
The following documents were utilized in the development of the CHRTprocess.
1. AFIT, School of Systems and Logistics, "Acquisition Logistics,Current Readings and Lesson Plans. " July 1977.
2. Air Force Manual 25-5. "Management Engineering Policies andProcedures." Washington, D. C. : Department of the Air Force,8 August 1973.
3. Air Force Manual 26-3. "Air Force Manpower Standards."Washington, D. C.: Department of the Air Force, 27 February1973.
4. Air Force Manual 50-2. "Instructional Systems Development."Washington, D. C.: Department of the Air Force, December1970.
5. Air Force Manual 66-1. "Maintenance Management Policy."
Washington, D. C. : Department of the Air Force, 1 August 1972.
6. Air Force Pamphlet 50-58. "Handbook for Designers of
Instructional Systems. " Washington, D. C. : Department of theAir Force, January 1974.
7. Air Force Regulation 173-7, "Formal Training Cost AnalysisReport, " HAF-ACM (A) 7108, Department of the Air Force,Washington, D. C.
8. Air Force Test and Evaluation Center, Cost of OwnershipHandbook, Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico.
9. Air Training Command, ATC Cost Factors Summa.r, RandolphAir Force Base, Texas. (For Official Use Only.)
10. Askren, William B., and Korkan, Kenneth D., Design OptionDecision Trees: A Method for Relating Human Resources Datato Design Alternatives. AFHRL-TR-7 1-52, December 1971,Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, AD741 768.
11. Askren, William B., "Human Resources and Personnel CostData in System Design Tradeoffs, " AFHRL-TR-73-46,October, 1973, paper presented at 1973 annual meeting of theAmerican Psychological Association, Wright-Patterson A 1B,Ohio, AD770 737.
L 68
12. Askren, William B., Korkan, Kenneth D., and Watts, George W.Human Resources Sensitivity to System Design TradeoffAlternatives, AFHRL-TR-73-21, November 1973, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio. AD776 775.
13. Askren, William B., and Korkan, Kenneth D., Design OptionDecision Tree: A Method foi' Systematic Analysis of DesignProblems and Integration of Human Factors Data, AFHRL-TR-75-9, July 1975, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, and Proceedings,Human Factors Society, 18th Annual Meeting, October 1974.
14. Arzigian, S., Methods and Problems and Computation ofEnlisted Personnel Costs, Naval Personnel Research andDevelopment Laboratory, February 1964, RS-64-16,(AD803 758).
15. Baran, H. A., Air Force Human Resources LaboratoryMilitary Personnel Costing Conference. Air Force HumanResources Laboratory, December 1974, AFHRL-TR-74-106,(AD A013 171).
16. Betague, N. S., Jr., Aircraft System Operating and Support
Costs: Guidelines for Analysis, Logistics Management Institute,March 1977.
17. Cream, B. W., "A Functional Integrated Systems Trainer forIndividual and Crew Coordination Training. " Proceedings of theFourth Annual Symposium or. Psychology in the Air Force, 1974.
18. Cream, B. W., Eggemeier, F. T., &Klein, G. A.,"Behavioral Data in the Design of Aircrew Training Devices."Proceedings of the Human Factors Society, 1975.
19. Czuchry, A., Glasier, J., Kistler, R., Bristol, M., Baran, H.,and Dieterly, D., Digital Avionics Information System (DAIS)Reliability and Maintainability Model, AFHRL-TR-78-2, 1978.
20. Department of Defense, "Life Cycle Costing Procurement Guide
(Interim), " LCC-1, July 1970, Washington D. C.
21. Department of Defense, "Casebook Life Cycle Costing in
Equipment Procurement," LCC-2, July 1970, Washington, D.C.
22. Department of Defense, "Life Cycle Costing Guide For SystemAcquisition (Interim), " LCC-3, to be published, Washington,D.C.
69
23. Department of Defense Directive 5000, 1, "Major SystemAcquisitions. " Department of Defense, Washington, D. C.18 July 1977
24. Department of Defense Directive 5000. 2, "Major SystemAcquisition Process, " Department of Defense, Washington,D.C., 18 January 1977.
25. Department of the Navy, "Annual Training Time and Cost forNavy Ratings and NECs," (FY 73 Edition). Bureau of NavalPersonnel, November 1972, NAVPERS-18660.
26. Department of the Navy, "Navy Military Manpower Billet CostData for Life Cycle Planning Purposes. " Personnel ResearchDivision, Bureau of Naval Personnel, April 1972,NAVPERS- 15163.
27. Drake, W. F., et al. Logistics Composite Model UscrsReference Guide. Air Force Logistics Command Report 70-1,AD703 328. Headquarters Air Force Logistics Command,January Jc70.
28. Eckstrand, Gordon A., Askren, William B., and Snyder,Melvin T. "Human Resources Engineering: A New Challenge,"Human Factors, 1967, 9(6), 517-520.
29. Fisher, G. H. "Cost Considerations in Systems Analysis"Rand Report, R-490-ASD, December 1970.
30. Foley, J. P., Jr., Task Analysis for Job Performance Aidsand Related Training. AFHRL-TR-72-73. Wright-PattersonAFB, OH: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, November
1973.
31. Foley, J. P., Jr., A Proposed Modified Technical OrderSystem and Its Impact on Maintenance, Personnel and Training.AFHRL-TR-75-82. Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio: Air ForceHuman Resources Laboratory, December 1972.
32. Foley, J. P., Jr., Some Key Problems Concerning the
Specification Development and Use of Task Identification andAnalysis, AFHRL-TR-76-57, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH,AFHIRL, July 1976.
33. Gay, R. M. and Nelson, G. R., Cost and Efficiency inMilitary Specialty Training, The Rand Corporation, January1974, P-5160.
70
34. Hicks, V. B., and Tetmeyer, D., Data Base Management
Programs. AFHRL-TR-74-97(IV). Wright-Patterson AFB, Ol:Advanced Systems Division, Air Force Human ResourcesLaboratory, December 1974.
35. Joyce, R. P., Chanzott, A. P., Mulligan, J. F., andMallory, W. -J., Fully Proceduralized Job Performance Aids:Volume I - Draft Military Specification for Organization andIntermediate Maintenance. AFHRL-TR-74-43(I), AD775 702.Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Air Force Human ResourcesLaboratory, December 1973.
36. Joyce, R. P., Chanzott, A. P., Mulligan, J. F., andMallory, W. J., Fully Proceduralized Job Performance Aids:
Volume II - Handbook for JPA Developers. AFHRL-TR-73-43(II).AD775 705. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Air Force HumanResources Laboratory, December 1973.
37. Joyce, R. P., Chenzott, A. P., Mulligan, J. F., andMallory, W. J., Fully Proceduralized Job Performance Aids:Volume HI - Handbook for JPA Managers and TrainingSpecialists. AFHRL-TR-73-43(III). AD775 706. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory,
December 1973.
38. Katz, I., "Project ABLE (Acquisition Based on Considerationof Logistic Effects), " Operations Analysis Report No. 8,
May 1969, Hq. Air Force Logistics Command.
39. Lintz, Larry M., Askren, William B., and Lott, Wayne J.,System Design Trade Studies: The Engineering Process and
Use of Human Resources Data, AFHRL-TR-71-24, June 1971,Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, AD732 201, and Human Factors,February 1975.
40. "Logistic Support Analyses, " MIL-STD-1388-1, 15 October
1973.
41. "Logistic Support Analysis Data Element Definitions,"MIL-STD-1388-2, 15 October 1973.
42. Maher, F. A., and York, M. L., Maintenance ManpowerManagement During Weapon System Development. AFHRL-TR-74-97(I). Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Advanced Systems
Division, Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, December1974.
71
43. "Manuals, Technical: General Style and Format Requirements,"MIL-M-3878-4.
44. "Manuals Technical: Front End Analysis, " MIL-M-6335(TM)1 May 1977.
45. "Manuals Technical: Operators, Preparation of, " MIL-M-
63036(TM), I-May 1976.
46. "Manuals Technical: Organizational Direct Support, and
General Support Maintenance (ITDT - Flow Chart), " MIL-M-63037(TM), 1 May 1977.
47. Military Airlift Command, "Required Operational Capability,AMST," ROC 9-75, 25 February 1977.
48. Moody, W. D., Nichols, S. R., and Tetmeyer, D.C.,Manpower Program, AFHRL-TR-74-97(V). Wright-PattersonAFB, OH: Advanced Systems Division, Air Force HumanResources Laboratory, 1975.
49. Mullen, P. A., and Joyce, R. P., Demonstration of FullyProceduralized Job Performance Aids and Matching Training.AFHRL-TR-74-69, AD A002 147. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH:
.Air Force Resources Laboratory, August 1974.
50. Nichols, S. R., Deem, R. N., Tetmeyer, D.C., MaintenanceData Analysis Programs. AFHRL-TR-74-97(III). Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Advanced Systems Division, Air Force
Human Resources Laboratory, 1975.
51. Tetmeyer, D. C., Estimating and Controlling ManpowerRequirements for New Systems: A Concept and Approach.AFHRL-TR-74-31, AD 778 838. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH.:Advanced Systems Division, Air Force Human ResourcesLaboratory, April 1974.
52. Serendipity, Inc., Project PIMO Final Report. TR-69-155,
Volume 1, AD 852 101. Space and Missile Systems Organization,Air Force Systems Command, Norton APB, CA, May 1969.
53. Stratton, A., "The Principles and Objectives of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, " The Aeronautical Journal of the RoyalAeronautical Society, Vol. 72, No. 685, january 1968,pp. 43-53.
54. Whalen, Gary V., and Askren, William B., Impact of DesignTrade Studies on System Human Resources, AFIIRL-TR-74-89,December 1974, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.L 72 rU S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICe. 197,S- t;'1-12:2