This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as a public service of the RAND Corporation. 6 Jump down to document Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Project AIR FORCE View document details This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non- commercial use only. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents. Limited Electronic Distribution Rights For More Information CHILD POLICY CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS NATIONAL SECURITY POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SUBSTANCE ABUSE TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution Support RAND This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. +RISTIN&,YNCH*OHN'$REW $AVID'EORGE2OBERT34RIPP #2OBERT2OLL*R*AMES,EFTWICH 0REPAREDFORTHE5NITED3TATES!IR&ORCE !PPROVEDFORPUBLICRELEASEDISTRIBUTIONUNLIMITED 4HE!IR&ORCE #HIEFOF3TAFF ,OGISTICS2EVIEW )MPROVING7ING,EVEL,OGISTICS 5IF3"/%$PSQPSBUJPOJTBOPOQSPGJUSFTFBSDIPSHBOJ[BUJPOQSPWJEJOH PCKFDUJWFBOBMZTJT BOE FGGFDUJWF TPMVUJPOTUIBU BEESFTTUIF DIBMMFOHFT GBDJOH UIFQVCMJD BOE QSJWBUF TFDUPST BSPVOE UIF XPSME 3"/%T QVCMJDBUJPOTEPOPUOFDFTTBSJMZSFGMFDUUIFPQJOJPOTPGJUTSFTFBSDIDMJFOUT BOETQPOTPST  ¥ JTBSFHJTUFSFEUSBEFNBSL ª$PQZSJHIU3"/%$PSQPSBUJPO "MM SJHIUT SFTFSWFE /P QBSU PGUIJT CPPLNBZ CF SFQSPEVDFE JO BOZ GPSN CZ BOZ FMFDUSPOJD PSNFDIBOJDBM NFBOT JODMVEJOH QIPUPDPQZJOH SFDPSEJOH PS JOGPSNBUJPO TUPSBHF BOESFUSJFWBMXJUIPVU QFSNJTTJPO JO XSJUJOHGSPN3"/% 1VCMJTIFECZUIF3"/%$PSQPSBUJPO .BJO4USFFU10#PY4BOUB.POJDB$" 4PVUI)BZFT4USFFU"SMJOHUPO7" /PSUI$SBJH4USFFU4VJUF1JUUTCVSHI1" 3"/%63-IUUQXXXSBOEPSH 5PPSEFS3"/%EPDVNFOUTPSUPPCUBJOBEEJUJPOBMJOGPSNBUJPODPOUBDU %JTUSJCVUJPO4FSWJDFT5FMFQIPOF 'BY&NBJMPSEFS!SBOEPSH -JCSBSZPG$POHSFTT$BUBMPHJOHJO1VCMJDBUJPO%BUB 5IF"JS'PSDF$IJFGPG4UBGGMPHJTUJDTSFWJFXJNQSPWJOHXJOHMFWFMMPHJTUJDT  ,SJTUJO-ZODI   QDN   i.(w   *ODMVEFTCJCMJPHSBQIJDBMSFGFSFODFT   *4#/QCLBMLQBQFS   6OJUFE4UBUFT"JS'PSDF0QFSBUJPOBMSFBEJOFTT6OJUFE4UBUFT"JS'PSDF  4VQQMJFTBOETUPSFT"JSQMBOFT.JMJUBSZ6OJUFE4UBUFT.BJOUFOBODFBOESFQBJS*  -ZODI,SJTUJO**6OJUFE4UBUFT%FQUPGUIF"JS'PSDF$IJFGPG4UBGG  6("  hhED  5IF SFTFBSDI SFQPSUFEIFSFXBT TQPOTPSFECZ UIF6OJUFE 4UBUFT "JS 'PSDFVOEFS$POUSBDU'$'VSUIFSJOGPSNBUJPONBZCF PCUBJOFEGSPNUIF4USBUFHJD1MBOOJOH%JWJTJPO%JSFDUPSBUFPG1MBOT)R 64"' iii Preface This report describes a review conducted by the Air Force and the RAND Corporation called the Chief’s Logistics Review (CLR). Somewhat different from a typical RAND study, this was a joint ef- fort in which RAND acted as analytic advisor to the Air Force. This effort was directed, in October 1999, by Gen Michael E. Ryan, then Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF), to develop improvement options to mitigate logistics problems that had arisen in the 1990s. CLR was placed under the overall direction of Gen John W. Handy, then Deputy Chief of Staff, Installations and Logistics, who asked RAND to develop the analytic approach for the review, choosing RAND because of its previous research and the confidence of senior Air Force leaders. In response to ongoing concerns about declining readiness trends in aircraft maintenance, General Ryan directed CLR. In pro- viding guidance for the review, General Ryan emphasized looking at process and training deficiencies within existing organizations and directed that the study focus on identifying actions required to re- solve such deficiencies. This report provides background material on CLR and describes both the analytic approach (including RAND’s role in its development) and the results from this review of Air Force wing-level logistics processes. The background material covers both the initial phase of the study, in which the proposed improvements were determined, and the second phase of the study, in which the improvements were field tested. iv The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics This report also provides insights gained through the study that should be useful to future generations of logisticians, operators, and planners throughout the Department of Defense, particularly those in the Air Force, who struggle with the challenges of maintaining the most ready and capable aircraft fleet in the face of new threats and resource environments. It may prove useful to such personnel across the Department of Defense, as well. The research addressed in this report was conducted in the Re- source Management Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE. The Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff, Installations and Logistics, sponsored this project. RAND Project AIR FORCE RAND Project AIR FORCE (PAF), a division of the RAND Corporation, is the U.S. Air Force’s federally funded research and de- velopment center for studies and analyses. PAF provides the Air Force with independent analyses of policy alternatives affecting the devel- opment, employment, combat readiness, and support of current and future aerospace forces. Research is conducted in four programs: Aerospace Force Development; Manpower, Personnel, and Training; Resource Management; and Strategy and Doctrine. Additional information about PAF is available on our Web site at http://www.rand.org/paf. v Contents Preface iii Figures ix Tables xi Summary xv Acknowledgments xxiii Abbreviations and Acronyms xxvii CHAPTER ONE Introduction 1 CHAPTER TWO CLR Phase 1: Analytic Approach and Results 7 Analytic Approach 7 Targets of Opportunity 8 Analysis of MAJCOM Inputs 11 Classification of Improvements 13 CHAPTER THREE CLR Phase 2: Implementation Test Design and Analysis 19 Purpose and Initiatives of Near-Term Test 19 Test Design 20 Analysis Methodology 22 vi The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics CHAPTER FOUR Sortie Production and Fleet Health 27 Sortie Production/Fleet Health Balance (OG/LG Coordination) 28 MOC and Resource Coordination Process 31 Maintenance and Flying Scheduling 33 Maintenance Management (MDSA and QA) 39 Maintenance Corps Career Development (Enlisted/Officer) 43 Sortie Production and Fleet Health Recommendations and Conclusions 46 CHAPTER FIVE Materiel Management and Contingency Planning 53 Distribution Process Performance 54 Logistics Readiness Squadron Operations 60 Supply/Transportation Enlisted Career Development 69 Deployment Planning and Execution 74 Career Development Impacts for Officer, Civilian, and Enlisted Personnel 82 Materiel Management and Contingency Planning Recommendations and Conclusions 86 CHAPTER SIX CLR Summary Recommendations and Conclusions 93 Sortie Production and Fleet Health 93 Materiel Management and Contingency Planning 94 Epilogue 97 APPENDIX A. Study Targets of Opportunity 101 B. Monthly Report Metrics 105 C. Suggested Interviewee List Provided to Test Bases 109 D. Interview Question Sets 113 E. Reporting Metrics and Quantitative Analysis Results in Sortie Production/Fleet Health 123 Contents vii F. Detailed Interview Data For Sortie Production/Fleet Health 135 G. Maintenance Organizational Structure: A Historical Perspective 147 H. CLR General Officer and Grey Beard Participants 173 Bibliography 175 [...]... Installations and Logistics Air Force Logistics Management Agency Air Force Manual Air Force Materiel Command Air Force Regulation Air Force Reserve Command Air Force Specialty Code Air Force Special Operations Command Air Force Space Command Aerospace Ground Equipment Aircraft Generation Squadron Avionics Intermediate Shops xxvii xxviii The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics. .. policy • Standardize throughout the Air Force the alignment of Logistics Plans by placing them within the Logistics Group xx The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics For technical training and officer development, the approved initiatives were aimed at improving the skills and knowledge of the workforce: • Increase the availability of training managers • Standardize... Allied Force/ Operation Noble Anvil, the briefing illustrated declining readiness trends, degraded warfighting skills, and impaired Air and Space Expeditionary Force (AEF) implementation The view presented was one of declining readiness be- xv xvi The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics cause of lines of authority that were too fragmented to ensure proper control of aircraft... information and describes the analytic approach (including the RAND Corporation’s role in its development) and results of an Air Force review of wing-level logistics processes The review was conducted to develop improvement options to mitigate logistics support problems that had surfaced during the 1990s This study was directed by Gen Michael E Ryan, then Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF), in October... Allied Force/ Operation Noble Anvil, the briefing illustrated declining readiness trends, degraded warfighting skills, and impaired air and space expeditionary force (AEF) implementation The view presented was one of declining readiness caused by lines of authority 1 2 The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics being too fragmented to ensure proper control of aircraft... their command views to the meetings and video teleconferences In particular, we wish to thank the following people xxiii xxiv The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics from across the Air Force for their hard work and candid discussions: Col Hugh Robinson, Air Combat Command (ACC); Col Jim Russell, Col Carl Lewandowski, and Capt Kenneth Timko of Air Mobility Command... in the Distribution Flight 63 5.6 Impact of Restructuring Operations in the Readiness Flight 64 5.7 Impact of Restructuring Operations in the Management and Systems Flight 65 5.8 Impact of Restructuring Operations in the Traffic Management Flight 67 xi xii The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics 5.9 Impact of Restructuring Operations in the. .. of the Future, MR-1179-AF, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 2000 3 Although recommended by the MAJCOMs, General Ryan, CSAF during CLR Phase 1, was opposed to major organizational change or realignment In his opinion, there had been enough major reorganizations within the Air Force, and he did not want to make any further significant changes xviii The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving. .. named the Chief s Logistics Review (CLR) CLR was placed under the overall direction of Gen John W Handy, then Deputy Chief of Staff, Installations and Logistics (AF/IL) General Handy asked RAND to assist in conducting the study The arrangement was not typical of a RAND study; this was a joint effort in which RAND acted as an analytic advisor to the Air Force Previous RAND research and the confidence of. .. Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF) initiated a review of Air Force winglevel logistics processes This review, called the Chief s Logistics Review (CLR), was designed to target process and process-enabler shortfalls that limited the logistics community’s ability to meet increasing readiness demands This report presents background information and describes the analytic approach (including the RAND Corporation’s . opera- tions tempo, and evolving force employment concepts, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF) initiated a review of Air Force wing- level logistics. the Air Force, and he did not want to make any further significant changes. xviii The Air Force Chief of Staff Logistics Review: Improving Wing-Level Logistics The