Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17 A Simulation-Based Approach to Assess the Implications of Enemy Action on Operational Performance 18–21July, 2017 Tom Collipi Technical Fellow Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems Distribution Statement A. This presentation/paper is unclassified, approved for public release, distribution unlimited, and is exempt from U.S. export licensing and other export approvals under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR 120 et seq.) Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Agenda Tool Overview Scenario Baseline Results Conclusions Note: Notional Aircraft Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability and Cost Data Used To Illustrate the Methodology Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Model For Asset Availability Forecasting (MAAF) An Object-oriented, Simulation Modeling Application Intended To Help Designers, Analysts And Planners Conduct Rapid Analyses Of A Variety Of Logistics Problems, Including: Predicting Weapon System Availability Under Various Operational Scenarios Allocating Logistics Resources Based On Mission Requirements Impact Of Maintenance And Operational Policies On Aircraft Availability And Resources Assessment Of R&M Improvements On Weapon System Availability And Logistics Resource Requirements Sizing Units, Readiness Spares Packages (RSPs), Etc. Analyzing The Impact Of Force Structure Changes Impact of Primary Aircraft Inventory vs. Backup Aircraft Inventory Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

MAAF Object Oriented Framework MESL* Missions Required Repair Resources LOCATION A/C 1 GS 1 EQUIPMENT A location may possess PLATFORMS PEOPLE FACILITIES Spares SE Operations Maintenance that include Hangars Ramps Crew Chiefs Avionics Aircrews MAAF Supports the Rapid Configuration of Scenarios to Simultaneously Assess Mission and Support Requirements * Minimum Essential Subsystem List Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

MAAF Modeling and Simulation Construct Direct Support NRE Costs Quantity & Type of Missions Quantity & Type of Bases. Quantity & Type of Platforms Quantity & Type of Support Resources NRE and Sustainment Costs Cost Data Direct Support Recurring Costs Fleet Ops (SGR, Sch Eff.) CAPE (CAIG) O&S Costs Aircraft Hvy Maint. Operational Requirements Availability (Mat. Avail, MC Rate) Sch. Maint. Scheduled Maint (O/H) Supply Support Utilization O&S Data Output (Excel) LSA (Eagle) Task Analysis (Excel) Model for Asset Availability Forecasting Manpower Utilization SE & Facilities Utilization Reliability Predictions (Relex, Excel) R&M Input (Excel) Support System Definition R&M (from Simulation) R&M Output (Excel) Spares Analysis (VMETRIC) Spares / Consum. Input (Excel) Repair / Supply Depots Levels of Maint. Facility Capability Cost Data Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Typical Platform MESL – Repair Actions Data Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Modeling of the Supply System Lateral Supplier Key Depot Repair Unserviceable LRU Unserviceable SRU Request LRU Serviceable LRU Serviceable SRU Open / Closed Gate Platform Base Supply Depot Re-procure I Level Nesting Allowed Re-procurement Request MAAF Models Both the Wholesale And Retail Levels of Supply Support Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17 Aircraft Daily Status Daily MC Rate Aircraft Status (In Heavy Maintenance) MAAF Calculates Availability By Tail Number On A Minute by Minute / Day by Day Basis Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Output Example: Summary Page Operational & Availability Performance Maintenance And Supply Job Summary Cost of Sustaining Performance Operations & Support Costs Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Scenario 28

Scenario: Peace Time – Surge Modeling Mongoose R&M attributes: Mean Flight Hours Between Failure (MFHBF): ~1.5 FH Mean Flight Hours Abort (MFHBA): ~60 FH Mean Time To Repair (MTTR): ~1.3 Hrs One operating location 36 aircraft Peace Time Operations 250 Flight Hours Per Aircraft per Year 10 Sorties per day with an average sortie duration of 2.5 hours Surge Operations Day 1 to 7: 72 Sorties per day (SGR = 2.0) Day 8 to 15: 54 Sorties per day (SGR = 1.5) Day 16 to 30: 36 Sorties per day (SGR = 1.0) Day 31 to 60: 18 Sorties per day (SGR = 0.5) 417 Line Items 870 Total Items Notes: SGR = Sortie Generation Rate Sortie Duration = 1.0 FH Day 1 to 60 SGR = 0.93 Note: Notional Aircraft Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability and Effects of Enemy Action Used To Illustrate Our Methodology Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Modeling Approach Analysis Shows Impact of Increasing of Enemy Action Aircrew Simplifying Assumptions No Aircrew limitations No Readiness Spare Package/Risk Kit No Cannibalization Peace Time 180 Days Surge 60 Days Surge w/no effects Runway Interdiction Supply Interdiction Flight Line Attack Air Combat Losses Air Combat Damage + Analysis Stages  180 Day Peace Time Period Randomizes Support Posture At The Beginning Of The Surge Period – - Aircraft in PDM - Aircraft In Maintenance - Spares Inventory / Shortfall Analysis Shows Impact of Increasing of Enemy Action Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17 Enemy Action Effects Surge with no enemy effects  Baseline Runway Interdiction Runway shut down: surge days 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 Supply Interdiction Base Supply shut down: surge days 7-8, 12-13, 17-18, 23-24, 28-29 Flight Line Attack Aircraft losses: surge day 5 - 2 A/C, day 10 - 1 A/C, day 20 - 1 A/C, day 30 - 1 A/C Air Combat Damage 20% probability per sortie Air Combat Losses 0.5% probability per sortie ABDR* Occur % 2.5 hrs 5% 5.0 hrs 25% 7.5 hrs 25% 10.0 hrs 15% 12.5 hrs 10% 15.0 hrs 8% 17.5 hrs 7% 20.0 hrs 5% * ABDR = Aircraft Battle Damage Repair Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Baseline – Surge With No Enemy Action 32

Baseline Results Schedule Effectiveness = 92.2%; Departure Reliability = 93.65% MC Rate = 39.47%; Achieved SGR = 0.90 Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Baseline Launch and MC Rate Performance Scheduled Sorties Launched Sorties Planned SGR = 2.0 Sch. Eff. = 96.1% Planned SGR = 1.5 Sch. Eff. = 91.1% MC Rate Planned SGR = 1.0 Sch. Eff. = 82.9% Planned Sch. Eff. SGR = 0.5 98.8% Cancelled Sorties Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Baseline Aircraft Daily Status Achieved Flight Schedule Outstrips Available Support Resources (Spares) 180 Days 60 Days Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17 Impact of Enemy Action Runway Interdiction  Supply Interdiction Flight Line Attack Air Combat Damage Air Combat Losses Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Runway Interdiction Effect – Runway shut down: day 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 Forced Runway Shutdown During Peak SGR Periods Allows Support System To “Recover” As MC Rate Increases From 39.47% to 58.86% Schedule Effectiveness = 84.1%; Departure Reliability = 89.97% MC Rate = 58.86%; Achieved SGR = 0.812 Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Runway And Supply Interdiction Added Effect – Base Supply shut down days 7-8, 12-13, 17-18, 23-24, 28-29 Periodic Base Supply Shutdowns Have Minimum Effect Reduced Missions Launched & Flight Hours Results in Slight Increase To MC Rate Schedule Effectiveness = 83.9%; Departure Reliability = 89.86% MC Rate = 59.99%; Achieved SGR = 0.81 Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Runway, Supply Interdiction & Flight Line Attack Added Effect – Aircraft losses: day 5 - 2 A/C, day 10 - 1 A/C, day 20 - 1 A/C, day 30 - 1 A/C 5 Aircraft Lost During the 60 Days Results in Slight Decrease To Key Performance Metrics Achieved SGR Increases As Less Aircraft Are Attempted To Fly Planned Schedule Schedule Effectiveness = 83.3%; Departure Reliability = 89.51% MC Rate = 58.91%; Achieved SGR = 0.812 Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Runway, Supply Interdiction, Flight Line Attack & ABDR ABDR= Aircraft Battle Damage Repair Added Effect – 20% Chance Per Sortie, Causes Abort w/ Mean Repair Time of 9.4 Hours Large Increase In Aborted Sorties: From ~29 to 355 5.8% Reduction in Flight Hours Schedule Effectiveness = 82.8%; Departure Reliability = 85.36% MC Rate = 58.93%; Achieved SGR = 0.811 Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Runway, Supply Interdiction, Flight Line Attack, ABDR & Air Combat Loss ABDR= Aircraft Battle Damage Repair Added Effect – 0.5% Chance Per Sortie, Causes Aircraft To Be Attrited 8 Additional Aircraft Lost During the 60 Days Results in Decrease To Key Performance Metrics Achieved SGR Increases As Less Aircraft Are Attempting To Fly Planned Schedule Schedule Effectiveness = 80.7%; Departure Reliability = 84.17% MC Rate = 55.66%; Achieved SGR = 1.056 Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Mission Capable Rate Summary MC Rate Does Not Appear To Be A Driver Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Aircraft In Repair and NMC Surge SGR Can Quickly Burn Through Available Spares Breaks In Supply Seem to Have Limited Effect No Fly Days Allow Maintenance To “Catch up” ABDR Can Account For A Significant Portion of Active Repair Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Flight Operations Summary Close Correlation Between Schedule Effectiveness & Hours Flown Achieved SGR / Utilization Rate Increases As Aircraft are Lost Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Conclusions

Conclusions Sustainment typically models Peace Time Ops Wartime/Surge efforts tend to focus on deployment footprint Tools, like MAAF, can simulate the effects of enemy action on operations such as Airbase & Supply Interdiction Aircraft Lost to Ground Attack Aircraft Battle Damage Repair Air Combat Losses This can be expanded to show the impact of the loss of aircrew and maintainer Personnel Understanding which measures of merit are important is critical for Wartime/Surge Analysis and Optimization Comprehensive Ops and Support Modeling, (Including Effects Of Enemy Actions) Adds Significant Understanding Of The Weapon System’s Capability During Times of Crisis Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Questions? 47

Gawker Parametric Cost Data Return Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17

Effect of Aircrew Quantity on Surge Performance Return MAAF Aircrew Policies In 1997 the USN performed a surge exercise from a CVN where in 4 days, they generated 771 strike sorties and put 1,336 bombs on target. According to Center for Naval Analyses (CNA) Report CRM 98-111 based on this exercise the limits to “Firepower capacity” were: Availability of tanking assets Availability of aircrew Loading of Ordinance Conduct of non-flying tasks by aircrew Time preparing for and debriefing a mission Mongoose Aircrew: 1 Pilot Pilot Ratio varied from 0.5 and 2.0 Surge Sortie Performance Pilot Ratio 0.75- 2.0 (27 to 72 Pilots) 0.5 Pilot Ratio (18 Pilots) If Pilot Ratio Greater Than 0.75, Then Aircrew Quantity Is Not A Ops Driver Approved for public release; NG17-0794, 5/1/17