Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Implications of UAV Endurance on Effective Time on Station (ETOS) and Cost per ETOS Hour 26-29 July, 2016 Tom Collipi Technical Fellow Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Agenda ETOS Defined Tool Overview Scenario Baseline Results Mission Duration Trade Space Mission Duration Trade Study Results Excursion  Modification of Pre- and Post-Flight Time Conclusions Note: Notional Aircraft Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability and Cost Data Used To Illustrate Our Methodology Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 ETOS Definition Source: Venn Diagram inspired by Chris Marchefsky of NAVAIR Effective Time On Station (ETOS) is the percentage of planned calendar time that an aircraft is actually on station and effective Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

ETOS Calculation Technique Post- flt & Maint. Pre-flt Ingress Egress Asset 1 1 2 Coverage 4 5 Ready 1 2 Coverage 4 5 Asset 2 1 2 Coverage Ready 4 5 1 2 Coverage Asset 3 Ready 1 2 Cov. 4 5 Failure Coverage Coverage* Cov. X Total Time * Coverage Requires: Operational Aircraft Operational Ground Station Fully Manned Ground Station T=0 Post-flt & Maintenance Egress Pre-flt 1 Ingress Coverage* (3) 4 2 5 ETOS is Calculated In Accordance With NGC Patent No: US 7,436,295 B2 5 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Tool Overview: Model for Aircraft Availability Forecasting (MAAF) 6 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

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: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

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: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

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: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Typical Platform MESL – Repair Actions Data Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 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: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Output Example: Summary Page Operational & Availability Performance Maintenance And Supply Job Summary Cost of Sustaining Performance Operations & Support Costs Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Scenario 31 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Scenario: 90 Day 24/7 Persistent Surveillance Coverage Note: Notional Aircraft Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability and Cost Data Used To Illustrate the Methodology 2 Aircraft Models Analyzed Gawker R&M attributes: Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF): 15.4 FH Mean Time Between Critical Failure (MTBCF): 30 FH Mean Time To Repair (MTTR): 1.24 Hrs Gawker Mod1 R&M attributes: Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF): 15.4 FH Mean Time Between Critical Failure (MTBCF): 60 FH Mean Time To Repair (MTTR): 1.24 Hrs Single Forward Operating Location (FOL) with 1 to 5 aircraft Orbit 1 hour from FOL 2 hour pre-flight and 2 hour post-flight turn around inspections Aircraft have 24 hour mission endurance 422 Line Items 875 Total Items Note: Aircraft Attrition Not Considered (100% of Aborts Return to Base) Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Baseline Results 33 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Baseline Results Gawker 30 Hr MTBCF Gawker Mod1 60 Hr MTBCF # of Aircraft: ETOS: $/ETOS: 1 66.84% $7,037.30 70.28% $6,788.38 2 88.34% $6,709.49 93.02% $6,493.70 3 90.61% $7,018.49 95.17% $6,768.29 4 90.73% $7,420.84 95.3% $7,091.28 5 90.674% $7,761.0 95.3% $7,487.85 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Baseline Results (Continued) 3 Aircraft Provides Most Effective ETOS Coverage Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Baseline Results (Continued) Unit Level Manpower Largest Contributor to Cost As Aircraft Quantity Increase Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Mission Duration Trade Space 37 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Modeling and Simulation Trade Space Number of Platforms (A/C, UAV, GS) Number of Locations Operational Dials Mission Schedule / Priority Duty Day / Personnel Limitations Maximum Sortie Duration (6 to 24hrs) Time to Orbit (1 to 3 hrs) System Utilization Support Resources Initial Investment Costs Results: Operational Performance ETOS RAM-C Metrics: Material Availability Operational Availability Ownership Costs MAAF Simulation Sustainment Dials Reliability Maintainability Support Concept Number of Personnel Manpower Productivity Phase / Sch Maint. Cycle Range & Depth of Spares Number & Type of Facilities Component Reorder Time Depot Throughput for Repairs Range & Depth of Support Equipment Reparable Equipment Turnaround Time Sustainment Costs $/FH or $/Yr Cost Knobs Public/ Private Work Share Supplier Work Share Labor Rates Overhead / Fee Structure O&S Parametric Values Sustainment Dials Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Mission Duration Trade Space 3 Aircraft Deployment Maximum Sortie Duration: varied from 6 to 24 hours Sortie duration drives probability of abort Sortie duration drives requirement to launch replacement aircraft Time to Orbit: varied from 1 to 3 hours Time to Orbit drives time on station Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Mission Duration Trade Study Results 42 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

1 Hour Time To Station 8 Hour Duration (6 Hours on Station) is Knee of The Curve: ETOS Falls Off After That Point Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

1 Hour Time To Station (Continued) Longer Mission Duration Results in Lower Cost per ETOS Hour Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Time To Station Implications Longer Time To Station Results In More Flight Hours and Less ETOS Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Time To Station vs. $/ETOS Longer Time To Station Results in Higher Cost per ETOS Hour Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Excursion  Modification of Pre- and Post-Flight Time 47 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Excursion  Modification of Pre- and Post-Flight Time When an aircraft aborts, the ability to launch a replacement aircraft is driven by: Availability of ready aircraft Time to Pre-flight the aircraft An excursion was performed to assess the impact of reducing preflight time (while maintaining same total mission processing task time) Alternatives 4 hr preflight 0 hr post flight 3 hr preflight 1hr post flight 2 hr preflight 2 hr post flight Baseline 1 hr preflight 3 hr post flight 0 hr preflight 4 hr post flight Assumptions 3 Gawker Aircraft (30 hour MTBCF) 1 hour to station Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Excursion Results Shorter Preflight Results in Significantly More ETOS Shorter Preflight Results in More Flight Hours Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Excursion Results (Continued) Shorter Preflight Results in Reduced Cost per ETOS Hour Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Excursion Results (Continued) Solid Line = 30hr MTBCF Dotted Line = 60hr MTBCF Decrease Pre-Flight vs. Increase Reliability Decrease Pre-Flight vs. Increase Duration More Cost Efficient To Reduce Pre-Flight Time Than to: Increase Sortie Duration or Increase MTBCF Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Pre-Flight Time Phenomenology Key Assumptions: Aircraft Ready to begin Pre-Flight 1 Hour to Station Pre-Flight Time Includes Ground Checkout and Mission Load Time Which Could Make “0” Hour Pre-Flight Time Impossible to Achieve Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Conclusions 53 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Conclusions Effective Time On Station (ETOS)Tenets: Higher Reliability Results in Higher ETOS Longer Endurance Tends to increase ETOS Results in Lower Cost per ETOS Hour Longer Time to Station Results in More Flight Hours Lower ETOS Higher Cost per ETOS Hour Shorter Pre-Flight Time Results in Significantly More ETOS Reduced Cost per ETOS Hour Obvious Findings: Higher Reliability, Longer Endurance & Shorter Time Station Better Surprising Finding: Shorter Pre-Flight Time Significantly Increases ETOS Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Conclusions (Continued) During System Development Care should be taken to establish the Design Reference Mission (DRM) Foundation for the analytical assessment of Spec requirements Usually turn around time is specified Not generally broken out between Pre- Flight and Post Flight times Mission planning / ground station preparation is a Pre-Flight driver for current UAVs Once Fielded Prior to deployment, modeling should be performed to optimize ETOS performance Resources to be deployed Time to station Nominal Sortie Duration More Cost Efficient To Reduce Pre-Flight Time Than to: Increase Sortie Duration or Increase MTBCF Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16 Questions? 56 Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16

Gawker Parametric Cost Data Return Approved for Public Release: NG16-1008, 6/8/16