Sponsored by: Sponsored by: OR 680: Applications Seminar OR 680: Applications Seminar OR 680: Applications Seminar OR 680: Applications Seminar Spring 2007 Spring 2007 Joshua Joshua Icore Icore Mark Mark Icore Icore Capt Scott Sweeney Capt Scott Sweeney p p y y
1430 1430 Team Introductions and Agenda Team Introductions and Agenda J Icore J. Icore � � Slides 1-3 ◦ 1430-1440 Problem Statement, Background, and Context S. Sweeney � Slides 4-8 ◦ 1440 1450 1440-1450 A Approach and Analysis h d A l i M I M. Icore � Slides 9-15 ◦ 1450- Conclusions and The Way Forward J. Icore � Slides 16-22 ◦ 2
� IMMOC Study Team IMMOC St d T ◦ Joshua Icore, Team Lead ◦ Mark Icore ◦ Capt Scott Sweeney � Sponsor: ◦ Lockheed Martin Corporation L kh d M i C i Information Systems & Global Services Mission & Combat Support Systems � Mr. David Dumont � Sr. PM: Operations & Systems Evolution Support � Ms. Yolanda Lee � Project Engineer: Operations & Systems Evolution Support � Academic Advisor ◦ Dr. Kathryn Laskey Dr Kathryn Laskey 3
Similar Complex Systems � Complex systems require � Complex systems require significant maintenance set of activities ◦ Software, hardware training, logistics, etc � Most systems typically have their own maintenance stov stovepi stov stovepi epipe epipe Resources are only for that particular ◦ system No sharing between similar systems � 3-level hierarchy: Operational Site 3 level hierarchy: Operational Site, ◦ ◦ Depot, Factory Maintenance is often sized to ◦ PEOPLE/RES OPLE/RESOU OURC RCES ES accommodate worst case situations (i.e.. Murphy’s Law) Very costly and inefficient as ◦ resources are often underutilized FUN FUNDING Operations control maintenance ◦ activities Expensive! Expensive! Expensive! Expensive! ◦ CONTROL CONTROL 4
� Objective: Obj ti ◦ Reduce space-based system maintenance costs across common segments and improve maintenance execution � Goal: ◦ Create a framework for defining maintenance as service ◦ Create a system for providing maintenance to multiple y p g p space-based systems ◦ Analyze the mission requirements for the integrated maintenance mission system � Scope: ◦ Systems engineering effort focused on mission analysis � Top tier requirements � Top tier requirements � Objectives � Mission definitions 5
Similar Complex Systems � Consolidate maintenance C lid i elements to realize: ◦ increased efficiencies ◦ reduced system downtime ◦ reduced costs ◦ without degrading system performance . performance � The Integrated M i Maintenance Mission Mi i Operations Center PEOPLE/RES OPLE/RESOU OURC RCES ES ◦ Performs system Overwatch Overwatch tracking the operational status t ki th ti l t t of the maintenance mission FUNDING FUN ◦ Executes Command and Control Command and Control of maintenance components CONTROL CONTROL 6
� Overwatch: � Overwatch: Gather data from operational entities and presenting that information to stakeholders ◦ in some manner for the purposes of reporting Aggregate and disaggregate data enabling data examination at arbitrary detail ◦ Monitor all maintenance-relevant components at maintenance mission sites M it ll i t l t t t i t i i it ◦ Communications links Computing systems � Facility status Financial systems � Logistics systems Maintenance operation systems � Mechanical systems Personnel systems � Assemble the status data into a comprehensive picture (state of health) ◦ Collect pertinent metrics ◦ � Command and Control � Command and Control Direction of maintenance actions throughout the integrated maintenance system. ◦ Prioritize maintenance requirements across operational systems ◦ Execute and direct baseline changes ◦ Establish ad hoc and permanent logistics pathways Establish ad hoc and permanent logistics pathways ◦ ◦ Analyze metrics for capacity and availability planning ◦ Execute maintenance system optimization based on trend data ◦ 7
� Numerous Numerous challen challenges es to to consolidation consolidation Financial ncial ◦ Goo Good idea idea; I’m ; ; I’m not not payin p y p ing for g for it! it! � Political litical ◦ Whose district loses job? Whose distric loses job? � User Expectations User Expectations ◦ I want it the I want it they wa y y way I’m used to it! y y I’m used to it! � Control Control ◦ Good idea; put Goo idea; put me me in in charge! charge! � Se Secu curit rity ◦ Do you really need Do you really need to know? to know? � � Each problem needs to Each problem needs to be be address addressed in turn, and d in turn, and in in the context of the context of all all challen challenges challen challenges es es 8
Integrated Maintenance Evolution to an n-Tiered Multi-Site Extensions Chain to the Integrated Evolution of Multi Site Evolution of Multi-Site A A B B C C Maintenance Chain Maintenance Chain Maintenance Chains To Multi-Depot Chains A B 9
Lac Lack of Lac Lack of of Centralized of Cent Centralized Control Centralized ralized Control Control Prohibits Control Prohibits rohibits ohibits IMMOC-Directed Maintenance Action Rerouting Horizo Horizonta ntal Work Work Shifts Shifts and Mandates Escalation and Mandates Escalation IMMOC Command and Control Ac IMMOC Command and Control Across the ross the Maintenance System Maintenance System 10
11
� Probabilistic model of P b bili ti d l f maintenance actions relative to the operational state ◦ Operational perspective: maximize A (system remains ( y operational) ◦ Maintenance perspective: minimize 1-B (return to operations via site maintenance) ◦ Need to examine cost factor of E (vendor escalation) � Common frame of reference for study reference for study 12
13
14
15
Relative value of Overwatch and Command & Control in the integrating maintenance segments maintenance segments COTS/GOTS Lifecycle Costs Commercial and Government off the Shelf component lifecycle cost impacts Optimization Points Optimization factors Optimization factors regarding the integrated Facilities maintenance system Logistics Personnel Synergies of integrated maintenance Centralized implementation Cost Cross Disaster Knowledge Savings Training Recovery Base iMMOC SYNERGIES iMMOC SYNERGIES 16
� Overwatch does not justify the new system ◦ Does not allow for optimization ◦ Does not allow for dynamic maintenance � Command & Control provides the additional functionality to justify the system and enable synergies between components ◦ Dynamic maintenance scheduling based on priorities and cost 17
� COTS/GOTS software � COTS/GOTS software ◦ Defects are systemic and cannot be fixed or replaced with equivalent components q p � COTS/GOTS hardware ◦ Upgrades to firmware and drivers without notifying p rchasers purchasers � Maintenance and production cycle ◦ Outside the maintenance ◦ Outside the maintenance and production cycle of the operational and maintenance systems � Upgrades driven by Commercial and market forces, not Government Off the mission needs Shelf components leave the maintenance system i t t 18
Facil Facilities ties Logistics Logistics Personnel Personnel � Three variables for optimization ◦ Interdependent multi-attribute optimization problem ◦ Optimization of staff facilities or logistics requires awareness of political ◦ Optimization of staff, facilities, or logistics requires awareness of political factors, not easily quantifiable � Maintenance system behavior optimization geared towards service level delivery and scalability towards service level delivery and scalability 19
Centralized Cost Cross Disaster Knowledge Savings Training Recovery Base iMMOC SYNERGIES 20
� Engage in a study of COTS/GOTS costs � Engage in a study of COTS/GOTS costs � Develop a stochastic model ◦ Space-based system incident occurrence p y ◦ Personnel attrition in the maintenance chain ◦ Likelihood of problem or incident resolution at a particular level of the maintenance chain particular level of the maintenance chain � Also model: ◦ Communications infrastructure costs ◦ Computing resources C ti ◦ Integer optimization for the number of maintenance sites ◦ Suitability of locations for maintenance sites S b l f l f � Feasibility study of merging maintenance funding streams funding streams 21
� Lockheed Martin Corporation � Lockheed Martin Corporation Information Systems & Global Services Mission & Combat Support Systems ◦ Mr David Dumont - Sr PM: Operations & Systems Evolution Support ◦ Mr. David Dumont - Sr. PM: Operations & Systems Evolution Support ◦ Mr. Paul Packard - Chief Engineer, Operations & Systems Evolution Support ◦ Ms. Yolanda Lee - Project Engineer: Operations & Systems Evolution Support � George Mason University � George Mason University ◦ Dr. Kathryn Laskey ◦ SEOR Department � OR-680 Class � OR-680 Class � Friends, Family, and Pets � Hannah – who believed in us 22
23
Recommend
More recommend
