Official Department of Defense Press Release: Marines w/ 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit perform post-flight maintenance on an AH-1Z Viper helicopter aboard the USS Anchorage U.S. Marine Corps is studying creation of a formalised aviation maintenance schoolhouse. Currently, each wing has its own processes. U.S. Marine Corps has begun "breaking down and tracking every dime" in Engineering & Logistics budget. "We've never had it to that level of fidelity, but we're doing that now.” We have great maintainers, but how do you make sure they stay? And how do you make more of them?"
Top 10 Predict "Digital Twin" Field Simulation Training Service Tool Replicate Real Time Decision Prep
The problem with mission “Digital Twin” Simulations is that most Marines really don’t know how to properly use simulation technology for it to be useful downrange. Several years ago we were given the assignment to find a way to help make Marines better problems solvers. After a couple years of back and forth discussions, the concept of innovation boot camp was set out.
Marine Corps Leaders are always searching for successful team-building exercises, frequently falling back on team sports or outside experts not in tune with the requirements of Marines. “Digital Twin” simulations offer an opportunity for team-based and cooperative play that can provide surprisingly innovative team-building tailor-made to be challenging, and more likely to encourage repeat play. Game Engines can help your team develop transferable skills—performing complex tasks while stressed, anticipatory planning, and communications among Marines.
The full potential of the digital twin concept is realised by using models to duplicate operation of complex assets in enough detail to fully understand their performance, even when facing never-before-seen conditions by duplicating operation of the asset incorporating wear or modifications into the simulation model.
The insights from sensors connected to the product or process are used to provide real-time boundary conditions for the digital twin. The digital twin results can be calibrated based on the operation of the actual asset. A digital twin virtual representation of a physical asset--.anything from a single control valve to a machine, a production line makes predictive maintenance possible.
The difference between a digital twin and a traditional model or simulation is that the digital twin is responsive—it receives information from sensors on the physical asset and changes as the asset changes to yield a real-time model of the asset and its performance by looking for inconsistencies or abnormal patterns and find problems that may not be easily identified through visual inspection or other traditional methods.
Digital twin isn't bound by the constraints of time so you can run simulations to predict how the asset will degrade based on factors like age, runtime, or exposure to operational conditions . Using the results of these simulations, technicians can predict how and when the asset is likely to fail, long before it actually does.
Digital twins aren’t a new concept, but their application throughout the product lifecycle is. smart manufacturers will leverage digital twins – and achieve a product-centric and model-based enterprise – across operations.
By creating a virtual representation of an asset in the field using lightweight model visualisation, and then capturing info from smart sensors embedded in the asset, you can gain a complete picture of real-world performance and operating conditions. You can also simulate that real-world scenario for predictive maintenance
Prospects for operational use of “Digital Twin” simulation will certainly change in the future, however, one thing the Marines could do is take advantage of new platform technology, and with virtual reality systems, you can actually build simulators for other field scenarios without having to get the physical equipment. Then you can go through troubleshooting and repair."
As usual, funding is an obstacle and without proper support from Top Brass, real world mission requirements are not going to get money to speed deployment of “Digital Twin” simulation systems. But as the technology develops, the cost/benefit situation begins to improve and push the Marines toward more simulation.. Right now, there’s a lot of reliance on team trainers. "They could do some things to expand their capacity."
1. Systems design: Design before you build with a visual, simulation approach.
2. Asset-based system of system design: Specify, publish, find, and reuse organisation simulation systems,
3. Product-line engineering: Design product platforms and variants quickly and efficiently, and make better trade-off decisions.
4. Systems model review: Improve product quality and model consistency through early design reviews within a systems modeling tool.
5. Systems model simulation: Validate complex behaviour earlier in the design life cycle, and establish predefined standards and best practice–based process.
6. Establish an open, flexible simulation system: Such a system is necessary to incorporate information sets from multiple engineering domains and quality control
7. Align combat engineering teams for better collaboration: Disconnected combat engineering teams across mechanical and electrical systems working in their own workgroups must collaborate as needed-- utility of systems-level view of products must be evaluated
8. Balance vitality and stability: Balancing vitality of innovation with reuse and predictive stability during establishment of an innovation platform for simulation and during product design and engineering.
9. Unify simulation connected systems optimisation: A single view of cross-domain system, product, and process is required for successful simulations
10. Incorporate quality with design and development: Achieving high level of product quality is why simulation virtually validates systems-level view. Assuring Incorporate/embed quality information from the early-stage design through subsequent product phases is key so simulations can more easily flow from system designs into product attributes.
Top 10 Work Order Sampling Examples for Assessing Quality of Logistics System Requirement Activities at Equipment Upgrade/Repair Job Sites
Equipment Upgrade/Repair Simulations based on Work Order Sampling Status Assessment enables Site Visit Executive to monitor dispatcher learning, behaviour & physical proficiency on jobs by establishing standards for evaluation of dispatchers based on observations of job site performance/progress designed to provide feedback to administrators so Advanced Logistics requirements can be authorised.
Work Order Sampling Observational Assessment helps Site Visit Executive make instructional decisions based on information about individual dispatch teams so better understanding of what content should be included in training materials is established. Specific expectations must be communicated about what dispatchers have to master and what concepts dispatchers are having difficulty learning so adjustments can be made to curriculum.
Appropriate status updates of Job Site performance means establishing types of work order status expected of dispatch teams is logical, suitable way to determine behaviour of activity being observed. For example, collecting work order samples for evaluation aimed at standards established by Site Visit Executive over period of time based on operational requirements is appropriate technique of establishing performance indicators to convey context of Logistics actions.
Job Site Status update programme standards can be used to collect work order observations on instructions with multiple execution steps. Being aware of transitions occurring on job site and writing dispatch team behaviour summaries across the top of the status update application, such as “fills out requirements impacting work order quality quickly and moves on to next task.”
We offer directed helicopter build services to Marine Corps, meeting ambitious project requirements. We have focused on presentations during “Industry Media Seminars” to meet several key areas of performance Marine Corps has identified, framing our goals to achieve increased mission success.We have outlined the skills we can offer Marine Corps at regular “Industry Media Seminars.” Our objectives include demonstrating the utility of our services designed for Marine Corps build projects.
We are improving acquisition processes by focusing on developing smarter solutions that provide more affordable, value-added logistics to Marines. We continue to look for opportunities during “Industry Media Seminars” to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of day-to-day operations, such as re-engineering processes related to improving demand planning, reducing purchasing lead times.
We have described at “Industry Media Seminars” four main areas of emphasis in building a comprehensive set of goals to be communicated to Marine Corps: 1) Helicopter Build Contract Specifications, 2) Project Quote Schedule Administration, 3) Fiscal Budget Conditions & 4) Daily Work Order Actions. Our Goals in meeting Marine Corps requirements for mission success are briefly outlined.
First, at “Industry Media Seminars” we communicate to Marine Corps ability to achieve end-to-end processing, tracking and verification of key mission work order requirements designed to kick-start & complete project quote schedules for critical equipment. We ensure accurate work order construction estimates & budgeting in organising qualified & quality mission builds via quote grouping techniques to identify the right contractors.
Second, we have demonstrated the ability to search & filter key project work orders, controlling who is authorised to access & review different types of equipment for build plans & correspondence. Key to assuring Marine Corps success in meeting goals based on increased mission specifications, one of the major strengths of build services we offered as solutions during “Industry Media Seminars” is accurate Scheduling of Project Milestones.
Third, we provide to Marine Corps mechanisms to process, approve & generate Updates/changes to work orders & invoices crucial to budget determination, providing equipment status updates during “Industry Media Seminars” throughout the build process so the cost basis of projects can be determined. The status of individual contracts, or contract quote groups can be checked to estimate costs required to complete projects.
Fourth, our services are designed with the means for Marine Corps to update work order activities used to keep track of daily build process events & equipment status details at “Industry Media Seminars” in order to keep the entire team in the loop with verification of accurate time & schedule issues critical to success of the project.
Our skills & experience in work order administration for build teams well-qualify us to take on the task of communicating during “Industry Media Seminars” the benefits to Marine Corps of committing to use our Media services for their on-site projects. We look forward to further discussions with Marine Corps decision-makers to better communicate the full scope of services we offer to Helicopter Build Work Orders.
Site Visit Executive has highlighted possibility that usually, in defining system requirements, there is tendency to cover areas related to performance as opposed to areas that are related to support. But this means emphasis is only placed on part of the system and not the whole system. It is essential to take into consideration the entire system when defining system requirements. Summaries detailing results from evaluation of established work order proficiency standards must consist of individualised narrative samples for each dispatcher team assessing the following skill types/levels:
1. Requirements/Prototyping: Specs established in a systematic way to ensure accuracy & completeness
2. Initial/Detail design: Precise, verified functions of design behaviour, or system characteristics/procedures determining satisfaction of provisions
3. Formal product integration: Specifically established functions, attributes, constraints, preferences & expectations of equipment products.
4. User status updates: Just as important to specify what system is not supposed to accomplish compared to what system is supposed to do when requirements are complete
5. Unit/Function testing: Constructed primarily to test the completeness, accuracy, clarity, & concise properties of requirements
6. Integration/System testing: Creation of dependable, embedded systems to interact with outside field-level operations
7. Field/Acceptance testing: Used on regular basis to determine if field levels will be satisfied with equipment product
8. Quality assurance: Quality preferences on desired condition are placed on attributes to be defined in addition to constraints
9. Installation/training: Operational deployment/distribution to include quantity of equipment product & location
10. Requirements/Design Rework: Revisit requirements & specifications to fix encountered problems
Department of Defense Officer Candidates request authorities to Establish Maintenance/Modernisation Centre for Navy Fleet Equipment Logistics, Sourcing, Service & Support
Officer Candidates specialising in providing Information support/services to Navy Maintenance/Modernisation Logistics Programmes have put together a large group of reports detailing services with the potential to transform Equipment Sourcing Techniques for Department of Defense Logistics Operations.
Our small staff is training to administer Sourcing services in the areas of work order schedule routing & installation of aviation/shipboard equipment systems for the fleet.
Our team is comprised of dispatch professionals who aim to assist the Navy with complete information systems & top-notch technical support solutions for meeting organisational requirements of equipment Sourcing processes.
Our potential for high-quality services ensures the best value possible for Department of Defense Logistics Operations due to low overhead, with marked dedication to provide Navy divisions with complete operational satisfaction in addressing complex logistics business processes.
Quick progress has been made in meeting the Sourcing & Logistics goals outlined in Navy briefings we have canvassed, resulting in steady & sustained growth in providing advanced skill sets for work order schedule dispatch.
Navy programmes require assistance in upgrading installation dispatch service systems to provide links between scattered divisions in pursuit of fleet equipment parts visibility in complex supply lines.
We stand ready to provide you with modernised process solutions tailored to suit new Sourcing & Logistics requirements stemming from Navy cost estimate deficits.
END-USER TRACK EQUIPMENT APPLICATION SERVICE DISPATCH REPORTS
Top 10 Training/Information Services:
1) Comprehensive dispatch services contributing to application & communication support
2) On-the-Job training in utilising unique Logistics procedure design
3) "Train the Trainer" work order schedule product demonstration seminars
4) Dispatcher assistance in accessing equipment part upgrade/repair requirements
5) Equipment Supply system cost integration
6) Administration of Sourcing Requirement Processes
7) Automated procurement interface design solutions
8) Application set-up technical support & system customisation
9) Supplier conference call connection episode testing capability
10) Help Desk availability for equipment upgrades 24/7
Automated Equipment upgrade/repair platform eliminates static, paper-based schedules for reporting of operational parameters, becoming mandatory practise across Fleet Types. We rewrite supply playbook & redefine playing field by promoting interval scheduling & situation-based, streamlined upgrade/repair operations by better forecasting critical work orders for equipment.
We schedule upgrade/replace operations based on last accomplished date. Monitoring work order periods schedules upgrade/repair activities in verified parts supply systems, accomplishing work in timely manner. Automatic alerts for administration of operations highlight overdue upgrade/repair requirements.
Scheduling rules & situations are driven by technical feedback for critical procedures, detecting any changes in periodic or situational equipment upgrade/repair & adjusts schedules accordingly.
Automatic schedule creation is based on applicable supplier situation checks on equipment condition states. Adjusted schedules are always up-to-date, allowing upgrade/repair technicians & supervisors to create accurate forecasts of work order hours, tools, parts, & test equipment requirements.
Inaccurate parts supply schedules are a thing of the past. Interactive & narrated dispatch lessons assign training events & track progress of upgrade/repair operations through consistent updates.
Up-to-date information systems demonstrate utility of performance-based testing. Platforms monitor which actions users perform & recommend applicable training. Training is assigned to users, tracking progress by dispatching master training view functions for mobile operations.
Content is modular in nature so administrators can quickly determine what training has been completed by each user. New & updated training circuits may be dispatched immediately upon becoming available. Quick deficiency notifications allow scheduling of corrective actions. Notifications are based off minimal input from user.
Operational upgrade/repair platforms gives users personalised to-do-lists, including items such as signing feedback reports, work orders with requirements to be performed by the user, or approvals of alerts, revisions & spot checks. Work order information is filtered based on the role users play in the planned Upgrade/replace system, permissions granted & administrative review. Users only see what they need to.
Equipment upgrade/replace action views are provided by platform so planned work orders can be tied to equipment condition, allowing users to add well-formed corrective actions into work orders. Simplified Task Dispatch tactics make it easy to see what users must accomplish in day-to-day operations.
In the past, users tailored work orders to equipment by physically drawing a line through printed procedures that didn’t apply. Now, platforms enable users to create repeatable, automatic line-out steps to create library of upgrade/repair procedures, accessible at any time for a specific piece of equipment.
Customised notes can be created for tools, parts & materials based on localised information like equipment lists, installation of record & serial numbers. The platform we propose stores all information required to reproduce upgrade/repair requirements at a moment’s notice.
Top 10 Site Visit Executive recommendations for Updated Dispatch of Equipment Supply Systems
1. Clearly define roles and responsibilities of Site Visit Executive to include oversight, enforcement & accountability of equipment supply programme
2. Design equipment track status update authority measures for each dispatch unit
3. Provide training to equipment supply dispatchers to reflect updated logistics systems operating procedures and business rules
4. Perform reconciliation of logistics systems, identify errors and inconsistencies
5. Establish plan of action and milestones for supply line corrections at specified dispatch intervals
6. Require Site Visit Executive to provide refresher training about update supply functions for dispatcher assignments
7. Determine effectiveness and feasibility of establishing dispatcher billet to provide stability and assist Logistics System performance
8. Assign Site Visit Executive oversight authority to ensure updated supply actions become established directives/instructions
9. Establish plan of action and milestones for accomplishing Supply Logistics actions recommended by Site Visit Executive
10. Make sure Logistics Systems provide for dispatch unit equipment asset visibility in supply lines
Dispatchers administer installation-only requirements to monitor equipment involved in upgrade/repair operation & contract quote determination. Installation will be able to carry out missions with condition/performance instance information stored during upgrade/repair operations & downloaded at a later date.
Installations must enact simple equipment contract quote systems, involving an on-board monitor of condition/performance instances. Although system instance alerts are not real-time in this case, areas for concern are marked & stand out when information is compiled. This can alert command as to when equipment issues involved in upgrade /repair operations require additional attention.
Making smart sourcing decisions for upgrade/repair operations can become extremely complex when current DoD process problem are considered:
Top 10 Department of Defense Logistics Limitations
1. Automated information systems for upgrade/repair operations consist of multiple integrated functional supplier modules to perform accounting, equipment cache status forecasting, purchasing, distribution & scheduling work orders lack internal controls.
2. Current contract quote systems are fragmented, functionally constraining, outdated technically & unable to support tracking of equipment item Location throughout its life span & across multiple supply lines using unique identifier codes.
3. Logistics systems cannot exchange information directly between services, instead operates through translation process lacking item lot & serial numbers, leading to sending/receiving process of sharing work order information that is yet to be completed .
4. Requisitions limited by outdated processes documenting instructions/exceptions detailing what lots of equipment should be pulled from upgrade/repair depots form the great majority of communication processes with suppliers.
5. Manual instructions increases processing time & lacks visibility b/c no confirmation requisition/order is received or completed. Work orders do not contain definition for “Total Asset Visibility” –defined as “access to complete & accurate information on item contract quotes & location in DoD Supply System”
6. Since different contract quote information exchange formats are used between installations, additional work order instructions must be issued for standardisation of upgrade/repair processes for uncompleted requisitions.
7. Manual processes are still used to check & make corrections to upgrade/repair depot item storage capacity are not clear, concise, consistent, accurate, up-to-date & accessible, resulting in overestimates, increasing cost & time required to transform & translate work order information on items appearing to be identical.
8. Current work order systems do not account for items shipped from upgrade/repair depots to other locations; items are dropped from contract quote records during transit w/o receipt confirmation from destination, resulting in accountability & visibility gaps.
9. Current contract quote systems lack capability for generating risk assessments of mission condition/performance metrics such as verification of accuracy rates comparing physical levels of items to presence of accountable supply line connection.
10. Information exchanged between services fails to differentiate between equipment items intended purpose on work orders & supplier details, assigning different lot numbers following upgrade/repair operations but keeping previous number on record, resulting in double counting.
After review of existing site visits, our dispatch team is pleased to announce the launch of a new automated equipment procurement platform to cover best practices, tips & information sharing techniques for helicopter component repair/upgrade services optimised for use by most rotorcraft operations.
This platform supplements existing DoD helicopter upgrade/replace instruction pages, functioning as modern & instructive resource for repair/upgrade technicians who utilise our platform to improve capacity for accurate procurement operations.
Our goal is to provide new procurement resources to helicopter operators seeking information on repair/upgrade operations for the fleet. After testing the platform, we determined this was the perfect medium to share dispatch techniques with equipment operators.
Since its inception, our procurement platform has advanced quality & integrity of helicopter repair/upgrade support & service. With our time & experience on air wings exceeding that of competing service provider Sites Visits, we are proud to say that we are experts in what we do.
Over a short period of time, we have undergone significant internal restructuring of our procurement divisions, expansion of equipment upgrade/repair capabilities, investment in spare parts & rotable assets, with strong emphasis on delivering maximum value to our existing & potential DoD air wing assignments.
Through recruitment of experienced dispatchers & technical procurement personnel, we have proven renewed depth of understanding about DoD operations/techniques within selected air wings, further enhancing an already technically sound group of dedicated service support dispatch team to improve results of procurement operations.
Combined with our extensive in-house reworks capabilities for procurement practices, including specialised equipment repair/upgrade services in conjunction with our ability to control quality, cost, & turn-around time extends & supports our value proposition for future Site Visits.
Before release of a formal Request for Proposal to build Weapons Systems, DoD must hold Industry Days to inform contractors about prototype technical requirements, acquisition goals and test/evaluation strategies, soliciting industry input for all weapons system prototype programmes and make sure communications between contractor and DoD are not limited as has often time been the case in past formal source selection process.
Prototype Test/Evaluation stakeholders must establish groundwork to achieve opportunity for free and open communications. In making deal. And emphasise the importance of prototype test/evaluation requirements such as use of test beds, virtual prototypes, incremental test/evaluation and fielding, having interoperable architectures and identification of specific ranges to resolve test/evaluation complexities and mitigate actual or anticipated risks to prototype programmes.
1. Use Prototype Test/Evaluation Strategy to emphasise importance of overall technical approach make system requirements available to industry, in accordance with DoD Component direction and guidance.
2. Discuss Prototype test/evaluation and any trade studies conducted during requirements generation process with emphasis to remain on resulting performance requirements and not on specifics alternatives.
3. Investigate potential prototype test/evaluation solutions responsive to requirements but DoD must avoid becoming fixated on certain solutions.
4. Be aware of situations in prototype construction where user is blinded with preference, acquisition team focuses on solution that works, and industry has exclusive solution it wants to sell.
5. Focus on establishing cost-effective prototype test/evaluation processes and events to generate technical and operational metrics so stakeholders make informed decisions.
6. Must have clear understanding of prototype system/subsystem requirements, encourage contractors to provide status updates of test/evaluation approach.
7. Address prototype test/evaluation strategies and how it was established to reinforce the importance of process/schedule valued by programme office
8. Provide for open one-on-one sessions to facilitate prototype construction but be careful to provide all contractors with equivalent information about requirements without giving away potential solutions offered by other vendors
9. Identify technical prototype areas of interest and encourage prospective vendors to provide information, insights, and suggestions to facilitate process transitions
10. Establish sound performance requirements and well-structured prototype test/evaluation approach and do not lose control of agenda and topics to industry
What Defence Experts are saying about our Equipment Tracker Application:
"Thanks to your Officer Staff for going above & beyond! Due to their diligence our work order routing system performance exceeds our expectations, is a valuable tool & we would recommend it to anyone. The cost quotes for equipment maintenance/modernisation are accurate & the service provided certainly is user friendly. Easy to use. Very simple. Even for our personnel remotely familiar w/ the application, we can set up scenario parameters & run new figures with it. The Tracking Calendar Schedule is good for planning & viewing current equipment status at a glance. Support is prompt w/ almost instant responses…."
"We have been totally transformed from a ‘reactive’ to ‘proactive’ organisation. Not only are the services provided superior in elements of design, its efficiency in routing information inputs for maintenance/modernisation tasks is superb & has virtually eliminated the downtime we had previously experienced with our work orders. The flexible reporting on the progress of our upgrade operations is incredible. We can "Slice & Dice" tasks & get everything we need out of the Equipment Tab. The consolidated functions beat all others we have tried….."
Automated Help Desk Audio Message Download
Top 10 Aircraft Upgrade/Repair Simulation Targets:
Several upgrades to many aircraft operations have been made over many years of service. As these airframes reach the end of their service life, they become increased logistics & maintenance burdens to the fleet.
Specific problems include multiple modifications that negatively affect payload & power capabilities—problems that are magnified by expeditionary missions. Modifications have also caused increased aircrew & maintainer workload.
The following enhancements have been identified as part of upgrade initiatives:
1. Improved mission capability
2. Increased performance & manoeuvre
3. Additional survivability features
4. Reduced pilot workload
5. Potential for growth
6. Operations at greater ranges w/ larger payloads
7. Command, control & communications interoperable
8. Expanded night & reduced visibility operations
9. Improved targeting sensors & weapons
10. Survivability enhancements
Repair Shop Success Dispatchers work in conjunction with suppliers for DoD buy Requirements in the field, to ensure the Repair Specialists has the best possible experience. This consists of the services, equipment specs, contracts and payments for the programme.
This position will lead a team of dispatchers responsible for the messaging, packaging, and delivery of our equipment specs to DoD.
You will also be responsible for bringing new equipment specs, features, and/or services to DoD, working closely with our equipment specs team and leading Repair Specialists research. This is a core role at the heart of all operations, from equipment specs generation to DoD buy requirements to be communicated to suppliers.
We are seeking a talented dispatcher candidate to focus on equipment supply lead generation and converting equipment supply leads into happy Repair Specialists! You will be responsible for understanding what activities increase Repair Specialists generation from our mobile application and using inbound dispatch tactics to add value through content, resources, and other calls-to-action. Your goal is to turn interested, qualified equipment supply leads into successful Repair Specialists
Top 10 Instructions for Equipment Repair Work Order Utilise Modern Application for Job Site Execution
We assign your scheduled maintenance requests to a single equipment, or add multiple equipment if needed. Your scheduled maintenance work requests are automatically generated in advance of their due date and are made available for assignment and review. You can even add reminders to main menu for important scheduled maintenance activities.
Either your organisation prefers highly automated rules-based system to get work order request into hands of a technician virtually automatically, or a more manual system where Help Desk Dispatchers make decisions about when and who handles a particular work order.
1. Create, receive and route application-based work requests: Work request is basic communication tool for reporting Job Site problem so action can be initiated to get it fixed.
2. Obtain approvals as part of workflow if necessary: Generate workflows to mirror organisation processes for getting work done.
3. Receive alerts on critical issues in workflow: Allow for prioritising work must to be done and ability to work orders.
4. View comprehensive list of work orders in process: Provide activity feeds, grids and reporting capability to see what work has yet to be completed and how long work in backlog.
5. Highlight overdue work, or sort work orders on place, space, asset or technician basis: Offers Job Site tools and reports so available information to keep the operations running smoothly.
6. Link related work orders: Being able to group work orders allows for more efficient assignment of work to be done.
7. Attach drawings and specs, etc.: See drawings, pages of repair manuals and other documents to speed up asset repair and maintenance process.
8. Define work order schedule: Schedule work to be done so field-levels can submit work requests or query requests to see when it will be done.
9. Create and update Task Schedule of pending work orders: Use task schedules to keep track of what work is being done and when.
10. Schedule proactive Jobs: Any work request can be made repetitive by filling out additional checks defining dates, times and frequency; add reminders.
Major Part of Dispatcher Daily Routine: Check Schedule Tickler Files for pending Fleet equipment Repair/Upgrade Jobs & Routing Cost, Location & Schedules of Spare Part Specs
Application displays quote elements require for sourcing & provide dispatch action change reporting for Work Orders when equip resource location identified
Application ensures Proper equip parts identified, Correct Work Order action codes used w/ dispatch transaction reviews & supplier/installation connection episodes to order correct parts
Application provides sourcing & maintenance schedules for dispatchers w/ means to plan, acquire, organise, direct, control & evaluate material equipment resources
Work Order Routing Application for DoD User-based Sourcing Ticket Scheduling: Supply Episode Connections meeting Equipment Maintenance/Modernisation Quote Requirements for Dispatchers at Multiple Installations
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers have investigated the administrative factors that make for an efficient & practical supply route procurement pipeline detailing work order requirements for Substitute Fleet Part Components utilised in Maintenance/modernisation operations. Metrics for asset condition & performance are applied to contract quote status for procurement aiming to deploy Fleet Parts supply route patterns for meeting work order force structure scenario requirements.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers submit, In this effort, the routing of Maintenance/modernisation work orders is scoped, risks & specific requirements for installation quote to meet supplier episodes identified, resources evaluated, quality factors prioritised & success factors defined.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers have concluded that DoD has bags of protocol but not much information! Here's a Work Order Quantum
manifesto for the more ambitious: Just Connect, Integrate, Adapt, Expand & Apply!
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers have taken Work Order Routing steps to ensure that the response provided to DoD installations for the sourcing of Fleet Parts is accurate. Consistent responses & follow-up on supplier episodes establishes credibility. Call handling template test scripts can be used to quote & standardise work orders for Maintenance/modernisation operations.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers break down DoD Work Orders for contract quotes & provide complete dispatch services designed to accomplish equipment maintenance/modernisation objectives. Examples are strategic, competitive, fiscal, technical & operational.
Top 10 Current DoD Contract Solicitations include:
1) Logistics & technical document services
2) Preparation test & inspect work item requirements
3) Quality & determination of capital impact & standard
4) Complete & deliver critical infrastructure assets
5) Determine survivability profile reports, gap, total, service life
6) Sustain unit service life costs & replace stove-piped system components
7) Address system reliability, maintenance & survival
8) Establish common configuration baseline
9) Procure auto asset services require design & integration
10) Require installation, logistics, maintenance, service life & tech.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers execute Daily substitute resource component sourcing ticket tables with reports for work order resolution & root cause determination by planning and scheduling orders & extracting work order information to meet supply line requests important for executing Maintenance/modernisation tasks. Work orders are released according to cost/price schedule determination in the contract procurement quote status update system in active state.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers ensure Supply Route service episode status are Tracked, documented & routed with purchase documents in work order authorisation systems. Validated and required supply line episode information is verified including Fleet service Life performance & condition, contract quote schedules, description of products, in addition to cost center assessments of equipment specifications. Design teams interface with force structure scenarios on capital budget account information, status of purchase orders, material deployment & supply line update sites.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers are Responsible for review & validation of contract procurement quote status & communicating issues during proposal, negotiation, execution and delivery of work orders for Maintenance/modernisation of critical equipment. Reviewed, drafted and revised supply route service status are quickly prepared to include installation requirements, addendums, change orders, annexes and modifications to contract procurement quote status update systems.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers teams work together to create Fleet equipment deployment programmes, processes and policies to mitigate risk & ensure accurate Repair/Upgrade Work Order routing for meeting the force structure requirements, including identification of any supply line episode discrepancies for escalation or resolution.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers distribute work orders for Fleet equipment status & deployment projects & test teams, Lead design of testing efforts, assist with application Support to resolve Maintenance/modernisation issues and Participate in supplier conference calls to determine proactive measures to ensure continuous quality improvements for important equipment support tasks. Test applications are established using best dispatch practise, developing test cases, writing test plans, providing and updating complete test scripts for work order completion.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers carry out assessments based on Detailed tracking of supply route service condition & performance based metrics for equipment status updates in order to incorporate rigor into equipment maintenance/modernisation work orders for future use. Current installation requests are developed & compared with existing system functions & Work Order requirements, determining testing priorities, addressing force structure scenarios for test case inclusion & recommending design concepts for interactions with suppliers.
Service Centre Help Desk Dispatchers teams Work within the timelines established for repair/deployment schedule turnaround times and generate validation documentation for supply line compliance in meeting Maintenance/modernisation requirements . Techniques include assisting and coordinating with installations tracking Fleet equipment deployment status schedule query reports with follow-up on new purchase tickets.
In short, Supply Line Work Order routing problems are remedied by smart design of substitute equipment part component sourcing tickets to create maintenance/modernisation solutions mitigating procurement process deficits by expediting scheduled purchase tickets for critical equipment.
Dispatcher service strategies integrate seamlessly with current equipment sourcing processes. Flexibility of DoD administration frameworks for supplier quotes incorporate/address all organisational objectives for upgrade/repair including automated work order technologies. Dispatcher services leverage experience, goals/vision of DoD divisions to identify & facilitate success of each sourcing project milestone. Organisational benefits of utilising dispatcher team services include:
1. Dispatchers reduce problems with work orders associated with current complex overall DoD requirements to provide level of detail necessary to construct quotes with very tight specifications. Dispatchers engage suppliers to accurately quote specific devices with exact features for equipment upgrade/repair implementations with end result being more efficient devices offering faster services to include more features.
2. Dispatchers enable reductions in sourcing timeframes, with concrete & measurable milestones providing for swift completion of specific work order tasks in equipment upgrade/repair simulations. Dispatcher utilisation of technology facilitating integration of supplier quotes completes transfer of bulk manual tasks currently employed by DoD typically required in sourcing projects, freeing administrators to focus more attention on larger organisational objectives.
3. Dispatcher quote experts utilise new sourcing technology to generate complete specific quotes from complex equipment upgrade/repair requirements framework currently required by DoD. Quotes are accepted from suppliers pre-approved by organisation.
4. Dispatcher complete work order assessment capabilities for all equipment condition metrics provides for immediate, complete determination of capabilities. DoD can compare terms/conditions of supplier quotes, equipment upgrade/repair configurations, and different surge contingency scenarios involving purchase & cost per specs.
5. Dispatchers design rock-solid work order technology to be utilised by installations to compile complete contracts incorporating all terms identified in supplier quotes to include in final equipment upgrade/repair simulation goals & any additional contract documentation per DoD requirements.
6. Dispatchers issue immediate guarantees of quote terms focused on receipt of defined answers to equipment upgrade/repair questions typically receiving general answers from DoD when it comes to completing work orders. Supplier responses are incorporated into final contract documents by clearly defining performance terms & conditions.
7. Dispatchers ensure complete DoD contract compliance in work orders with measurable performance terms/conditions to guarantee prompt responses in efforts to address equipment upgrade/repair issues & special attention from supplier groups to all quotes & operational mission sets.
8. Dispatchers mitigate cost to DoD of supplier proposals through carefully defined equipment upgrade/repair specifications, maximising procurement cost value & reducing sourcing project timeframes. Dispatcher service provides integrated process for quote creation & work order administration.
9. Dispatchers ensure work order creation & assessments of multiple equipment configurations & upgrade/repair costing scenarios, producing smart deals for DoD involving contracts by optimising supplier quote processes. Dispatchers establish measurable guarantees, increased utilisation of contract compliance, defining establishment of procurement goals & standards.
10. Dispatchers define devices utilised in equipment upgrade/repair simulations & automated work order system specifications to compile/deliver quotes so DoD gets good deals. Dispatchers provide process for assessments of supplier offers/response determining requirements for assistance in drafting specific contract language.
Deficits in DoD Contract Agent Behaviour & Protocol for Directed Spare Part Buys Critical to Mission Success
DoD equipment repair/upgrade contract agents did not identify & track correct spare parts unit prices, used inaccurate supplier authorisation procedures, did not utilise quote specialists for making cost-effective purchases b/c did not obtain best prices in sole-source contract scenarios, making assumption in contract terms that spare parts costs were trending up when calculating negotiation baselines for successful missions.
DoD equipment repair/upgrade contract agents did not comply with rules for undefinitised contract actions, did not utilise quote specialists to assess availability of spare parts, identify unallocable costs or justify escalation rates for multi-year contracts, were not concerned with competition or substitute spare part suppliers in sole-source contracting scenarios where contract terms require more attention to realise mission success.
DoD equipment repair/upgrade contract agents did not negotiate accurate spare part deals for successful missions, had problems with different units of issue while contractor switches items from buy to make at higher prices w/o justification for follow-on contracts with suppliers & also did not utilise quote specialists to evaluate or implement procedures assessing contract terms to effectively use sole-source contractor evaluation to break out & compete spare parts buys.
DoD equipment repair/upgrade contract agents did not employ appropriate buy techniques & ended up agreeing to purchase excess levels of spare parts at higher prices from suppliers at the expense of mission success, incorrectly applying commercial item definitions & higher price offsets to fit sourcing contract scenario b/c did not document contract terms & did not utilise quote specialists to escalate negotiations with under-performing sole-source contractors or obtain best available spare part prices & procure economic order quantities.
DoD equipment repair/upgrade contract agents did not utilise quote specialists to identify scenarios where contractor inappropriately charged unpriced spare parts to contract at increased unit price resulting from inadequate supplier oversight of sole-source billings, used invalid exceptions & incomplete contract terms assessments as basis for not obtaining certified cost/pricing information for spare parts critical to successful missions.
Although dispatch breakout screening and many logistics actions arising to effect breakout under a variety of situations can be a lengthy, time consuming process, Site Visit Executive has made explicit to DoD provisions for temporarily by-passing the breakout process to satisfy urgent mission requirements. Both the limited screening process for immediate buy requirements and an allowance for actually bypassing the process altogether must be provided for meeting immediate/urgent mission requirements of real-world, field-level scenarios.
1. At what logistics unit level is the replenishment spare parts breakout programme administered and why?
2. What are the published standard operating logistics procedures for spare partsbreakout programme?
3. What are logistics organisation requirements of work orders on replenishment spare parts breakout?
4. Which logistics dispatcher divisions are key players in the spare parts breakout decision-making process?
5. When/why was replenishment spare parts breakout first accomplished at logistics unit level?
6. What are the driving logistics goals behind suitability of spare parts breakout decision?
7. When in the acquisition logistics process is breakout of replenishment spare parts breakout accomplished?
8. When are logistics processes in part supported system service life spare parts breakout accomplished?
9. How do logistics teams utilise technical specs in replenishment spare parts breakout?
10. Are use of spare parts breakout decision-making models or logistics checklists utilised? If so, what are its key features?
Top 10 Tactic Justification Report Links:
1) What are the mission opportunities these tactics address?
2) What is the size of the mission space these tactics open up?
3) How will the results of tactics be exploited & disseminated?
4) What mission benefits will the tactics deliver and over what time schedule?
5) Has a viable mission space been identified by the tactics?
6) Is it clear that the tactics addresses mission dynamics?
7) Has the value of tactic output been quantified & how it will be disseminated?
8) Has the size of mission space for the tactics been supported by evidence?
9) Are the mission requirements realistic and addressable by the tactics?
10) Is it clear how mission plans will exploit the results of the tactics launch?
Specs Overflow DEMO MANUAL:
Treatment of Parts Supply Line Account Flashes: Implications for Installation Sourcing Ticket Schedules Organised by Dispatchers
Dispatchers have concluded that Route Tracker Application systems serve well in addressing operational constraints related to deployment of limited Fleet Components. Route Service Agreements require creation of fiscal & physical Specs Overflow Centres to document associated maintenance work orders from Sourcing Ticket Group Station viewpoints on the utility of Fleet Infrastructure Cost Invoices. Account flashes contribute Repair Reminder Sets for Route Design control of new sourcing ticket standards for Defence Parts Supply Line Connections dispatched according to requirements of established Quote Schedules. Techniques detailing the strength of connections between installations & parts supply lines have been designed to activate Structured Spec Overflow Centre procedures predicting fiscal assessments of Spare Parts Supply Line quality required for Fleet Maintenance work orders. Related issues include surge contingency scenario performance & condition, route service maturity & transparency, investments in Quote Schedule competitions, administrative dispatch concerns & resolution assignment key to determination of force structure portfolios at multiple installations. The Appendix to this report details the impact of account flashes on Spare Parts Supply Contract specifications.
Section I: Structured Spare Parts Dispatch Route Services
Section II: Part Upgrade Specs Overflow Centre Invoices
Section III: Dispatch Organisational Qualities & Priorities
Section IV: Costing Policies & Actions for Flash Sequence
Section V: Parts Supply Line System Control Mechanisms
Section VI: Automated Spare Parts Recall Tech
Section VII: Installation Spare Parts Transfer Flashes
Section VIII: Condition & Performance Measurement Risks
Section IX: Account Shockwave Flash Identification
Section X: Service Route Maintenance & Mobilisation
Since Equipment Repair/Upgrade Simulations like the one described in this report were designed for the purpose of training novice dispatchers, they must be given an opportunity to review their contracting strategies for schedule events after simulations so they can be debriefed by the Deputy on what might have gone wrong & where/how there is room for subsequent improvement to be built upon for the next mission requirement scenario. After the simulation, each novice dispatcher should review and itemise their contracting history, and also the contracting chart characterising his or her contracting strategy.
Although this particular Equipment Repair/Upgrade simulation appears to be trivial, establishing successful contracts & realising return on capital is a non-trivial task. Good contracting practise meeting mission requirements involves accurate reading of the equipment condition required to meet mission requirements, careful strategy execution & ability to adapt to unexpected changes in mission requirements. As established in previous reports, a controlled experiment can indeed help us to isolate important factors involved in contracting and identify solid dispatch patterns to employ for realisation of winning strategies.
Contracting Charts for dispatchers are composed of three important time series: 1) Expected contract price quotes to be generated by schedule design; 2) Observed contract price quotes; 3) Position balances of contract quotes.
In some equipment repair/upgrade simulations, many connections are obvious; e.g., the contracting chart for one of the best-performing novice dispatchers apparently follows the trend hinted at by both the schedule event disclosure & price of meeting mission requirements. In some other cases, completely wrong interpretations of schedule events could happen, and in the extreme case, some novice dispatchers might even choose enter into contract positions arbitrarily, disregarding important mission requirements trends.
While experienced dispatchers constitute the fundamental part of meeting mission requirements in this equipment repair/upgrade simulation, most “Operational Noise”, on the other hand, is generated by the speculation of novice dispatchers. In this simulation, we start by constructing a ‘classic novice strategy’ to establish goals of novice dispatchers in meeting mission requirements & proceed from that starting point. However, to prevent novice dispatchers from destroying important trends generated by both suppliers & end-users in mobile operations we will limit price range parameters, controlling how aggressive experienced dispatchers should be in combating “Operational Noise.”
In most of our equipment repair/upgrade simulations, we will simply set contract status increment parameters & after the price is randomly decided, novice dispatchers will choose to take extreme contract positions with equal probability.
Since novice dispatchers may be constrained by a given position status limit, our initial equipment repair/upgrade simulations will randomly decide how much remaining position status it would devote to the new contract. As speculators, novice dispatchers are required to exit all positions at the expiration of schedule events with automatic programming put in place to gradually exit position status determination when event ‘contract status return on capital’ schedule expiration draws near.
The multi-agent model we present is relatively general and can be used in a wide variety of mission requirement scenarios. As long as dispatchers can generate a list of schedule events that follow equipment repair/upgrade specifications, the Multi-agent model could then generate the desired mission requirements.
The challenge for dispatchers is clear: How do we know whether the generated contracting strategies are what should be expected from the designed mission requirements scenario? This is not a straightforward task since the scenario we plan to execute might not have real-world counterpart in mobile operations. Without benchmarking contract status, establishing credibility of equipment repair/upgrade simulations would not be easy. Of course, if the generated contracting strategies are lined up with mission requirements scenarios & carefully reviewed by dispatchers, we probably could create valid assessments qualitatively.
However, this technique would not be feasible if we plan for large-scale and frequent mission requirements determination overtaking supplier capacity. Therefore, we require a method that is both quantitative & automated. As a solution to the problem, dispatchers have deployed procedures for determining utility of event schedules:
1) Define the schedule event of interest and identify schedule event time series windows. In the case of simple mission requirements, the schedule event of interest & its occurrence is straightforward to define.
2) Measure ‘contract status return on capital’ over the schedule event window. Standard Contract status return on capital could be obtained by simply assuming constant mean return models. In the mission requirements setting, it refers to the mean price of equipment contracts from the beginning of the requirements determination horizon to just before the beginning of the schedule event window.
3) Define a null hypothesis and perform quantitative tests over multiple sample instances. For all events, the null hypothesis can be defined as ‘contract status return on capital’ = 0. As for the alternative hypothesis, it can be defined as ‘contract status return on capital’ > 0 for positive events, ‘contract status return on capital’ < 0 for negative events, & ‘contract status return on capital’ for neutral events-- or no event.
To validate that our multi-agent model indeed creates contracts designed to meet mission requirements in response to recent schedule events, dispatchers created a special mission requirements scenario with only one schedule event. For establishing successful contracts, we include defined levels of suppliers, end-users for mobile operations & no novice dispatcher to avoid introducing unnecessary noise into processes. To collect enough sample points, the same scenario is executed multiple times in sequential series.
Following the above procedures, we test the null hypothesis with several ‘contract status return on capital’ series. For both positive & negative cases, tests employed by dispatchers imply that strong negative ‘contract status return on capital’ are significant. For no-schedule event cases, our tests indicate that no ‘contract status return on capital’ is detected in the schedule event window.
Compared to the case of validating schedule event occurrence, validating the strength of schedule events is much more difficult. This is because the absolute level of response that should be triggered by schedule events cannot be determined in straightforward manner. Therefore, instead of trying to validate the absolute response strength, we choose to validate the relative response strengths. The objective of this is to ensure that higher impact levels indeed generate larger mission requirement responses when compared to events with lower levels.
To establish this, dispatchers simply performed comparisons between adjacent schedule event strength levels. With this validation, we are at least assured of the consistency in mission requirement responses throughout repair/upgrade simulations.
In this memo, we have presented the efforts of a brigade of dispatchers towards building an agent-based equipment repair/upgrade simulations based on novel models of contracting strategies. Mission Requirement scenarios will progress in subsequent reports though higher-level descriptions of user-defined schedule events.
Our primary goal in creating disparate schedule events is not to create new contract pricing models. Instead, we have focused on how to construct a highly realistic equipment repair/upgrade simulator to better define dispatcher behaviour in issuing contracts. The results of describing underpinnings of operational factors will be used to improve mission requirement scenario instincts of novice dispatchers.
Ultimately, our platform model for equipment repair/upgrade simulation might one day be used in benchmarking real interest of defence bosses in embracing important contracting standards as they begin to make mission requirements decisions on how to build solid event schedules with suppliers, on secure platforms designed to utilise new ability for us to monitor dispatcher activity.
Equipment Upgrade/Repair Event Platform Supply Route Quotes Designed for Force Structure Cases
In this report, force structure event-centered risk equipment repair platform for modifications powered by an automated framework is presented. The purpose of this platform is to properly train dispatchers. This simulation will progress as repair events impacting supplier capacity warrant.
Upon receiving notice of equipment repair events reported at multiple installations, dispatchers integrate assessments of supplier capacity predictions, adjust their views on installation requirements & act according to new quote schedules.
Equipment repair action at installations taken by dispatchers have been found to collectively shape force structure adjustment dynamics. We will present the underlying components that are employed for this exercise & discuss the practical significance of such a platform.
Supplier capacity risk assessment has changed from direct exchange services without quote consideration to advanced contracting arrangements according to schedule with dispatchers guaranteeing quotes.
Since the scope of equipment deployment is so wide & future platforms so intricate in design, dispatcher behaviour design has become much more important but also extremely challenging. What makes equipment repair so critical is real-world operations are behind all the quotes in any form.
Even though the volume in incoming quotes has overtaken capacity of supplier services, real-world quotes are still critical since the supply & demand balance of equipment & subsequent quotes are still the primary determinants behind force structure adjustment cases.
Key to understanding equipment infrastructure relation to force structure adjustments is the fact that, no matter how complex quotes are, they all need to closely reference services provided by suppliers. Quotes are influenced significantly by all the elements that link together supplier capacity for each side of installation demand signals.
For example, some of the many factors present in function of repair site disruption or schedule delay of equipment deployment will impact quotes dispatched to repair simulations. Other factors, like work order routing patterns, exert significant impacts force structure adjustment cases.
Therefore, to ensure successful dispatcher assessments of supplier risk in a particular force structure adjustment case, dispatchers need to be very familiar with real-world supplier capacity for different types of equipment. These requirements are the primary considerations in deciding what dispatcher training platforms will be subject to automation.
On the other hand, complex requirements probably also explain why fully automated quote scheduling not taken over dispatcher platforms yet. On some level, this is what motivates our design of equipment repair simulations.
We want to create work order space realistic enough so dispatchers can be effectively trained & document dispatcher behaviours in the face of complex supplier risk factors, with the ultimate goal of making automated platforms for equipment repair function just as dispatchers would in designing force structure adjustment cases.
Despite the fact that there is an incredible amount of literature in defence sectors that could, in principle, be applied to quote modeling for force structure adjustment cases, in the final analysis, we find them unsuitable for our purposes, since there is a fundamental lack of links between real-world equipment repair events & quote schedule dynamics.
To address this need, we have designed force structure event-centered risk assessment platforms for repair simulations at multiple installation in which events related to quote automation are detailed according to a series of user-defined events. By allowing events to be defined by dispatcher behaviour, we also grant ourselves the ability of creating force structure adjustment case details that are often overlooked but extremely important to mission success.
Stated conceptually, our principle goal is create platforms with constructive quote schedules to recruit, train & introduce dispatchers into equipment repair systems. When Installation events are announced for repair simulations, dispatchers will assess risk supplier capacity relations to force structure adjustment cases according to assigned team function. Subsequently, repair events & information will result in equipment deployment according to defined quote schedules.
Force structure dynamics at installations will be shaped by joint dispatcher actions for simulating equipment repair. As demonstrated in initial simulations we have designed, we have shown accurate quote schedules can be generated with fairly simple dispatcher training strategies.