NFF – A VIEW FROM THE MOD AIR COMMUNITY

1. NFF – A VIEW FROM THE MOD AIR COMMUNITY Wing Commander Fergus Hawkins BEng MSc MSc CEng MIET RAF ETLS (Air) Log Network-Enabled Capability Programme

2. Presentation Title & Date

3. Agenda Fun With Numbers ! A look at some raw ‘Macro’ NFF data. (DATA REDACTED) Some basic interpretations. Possible lines of enquiry. Observations Regarding Business Environment. CLS & Availability Contracting. Financial Backdrop. Possible next Steps. Questions & Discussion.

4. FUN WITH NUMBERS !! • Caveats: • This is very raw data • Be careful about conclusions derived • Discretion please !

5. Key Observations From Data • For a given ac type, the NFF/FH rate tends to be consistent throughout the years, at the front line environment. • The problem affects all aircraft types, to the same order of magnitude. Difficult to make reasonable technology/manufacturer comparisons because of variance in operating environments, duty cycles, and reporting regimes. • In the LITS environment, over 25% of the NFFs are generated in the ‘Depth’ environment. What is happening to these assets that are not being fixed ? There is evidence of a slight improvement over the 5 years’ data. • The LITS fleets captured 10477 NFF arisings, in total, in 2012. • The Rotary Fleets have a typical 0.05 NFF/FH in FLC area. • The NFF in depth situation, for Rotary Fleets, appears to be deteriorating rapidly with an, apparent, 3 fold increase in NFF/FH rate over the 5 years. • The GOLDesp Fleets captured 6539 NFF arisings, in total, in 2012. • Combined Total across these fleets in 2012 is 17016 NFF arisings. This does not include data from Hawk Mks 1 &2, Tucano, Typhoon, C17, HS125, BAe 146 or weapons. • Limited data set indicates a 2:1 ratio for electrical vs mechanical NFFs. • Perhaps unexpectedly, Apache seems to indicate a 55:45 electrical/mechanical NFF split. So, cannot discount the mechanical environment in NFF domain.

6. The Business Environment We have seen something of the macro picture; this can have some value, but . . . Also important to get down to the business unit level. What is the situation for each platform in its usage context and support environment. What intervention strategies might be appropriate: Supply lines & levels Fleet sizes OSDs (e.g. Tornado , Sentinel) On site capability (e.g. Ships) Value of availability

7. Business Environment Continued NFF may be driven by different ‘aggravators’ for different fleets: Physically demanding – difficult to reproduce. Ageing effects – dry joints/weak connections. LRU ‘Roulette’. Spares supply situation. CLS & Availability Contracting Fragmentation of the supply chain. Visibility of whole problem obscured. Division of responsibilities. Issues over disclosures. Inertia across contractual boundaries. BUT primes should be incentivised to manage subs – provided they have the data and know what’s going on!

8. Business Environment Continued Across the public sector, and PTs in particular: Money for initiatives is very limited. Spend ‘little’ to save ‘a lot’ may still be viable. Rapid returns needed. Benefits Realization: ROI planning horizons seem to be shortening. Tech refreshes are increasingly frequent. Lessons from ‘sub-optimal’ design need to be fed back into the design process. Manufacturers are best placed to do this. Full Cost Appreciation: Mission not carried out – repeat performance needed. More resources needed to assure success. More assets held in the repair loop and distributed storage. Future sales blighted Other ILS assets require augmentation – trg/ GSE / people / accn etc

9. Possible Next Steps Acquire more data in promising areas Look for the low-hanging fruit. Look for the rogue LRUs that can be removed from the population. Could consider increasing fidelity of data capture, to board level? Is the maintenance construct still right ? Greater test & diagnosis capability at MOBs ? Better test sets in the right place with trained technicians. Developing the ‘capability’ : people & process & technology

10. QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION