1AD-R13 37 TRAINING DEVELOPMENT UNDER LOGISTICS SUPPORT ANALYSIS I'

(U) SYSTENS AND APPLIED SCIENCES COR FAIRBORN ONC N STATEN ET AL. APR as AFHL-T-G9-43

UNCLnfSSIF E 8 F3361-4C615-4C EF/O 519 NL

EIMMhhhMMhhmhlMMMhMhEEMhEEEI

.NOMN...E@n

i1a8

111111- 25 111111.~4 11111J1.6

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHAR1jRF AU i TANflARDS 1963-A

- w qw

AFHRL -TP-87-43

AIR FORCE f ~ TRAINING DEVELOPMENT UN~DER LOGISTICS SUPPORT ANALYSIS

m U Carroll M. Staten

Systems and Applied Sciences Corporation

m 2875 Presidential Drive. Suite 300A Fairborn, Ohio 45324-6269

N Edward Boyle*

LOGISTICS AND HUMAN FACTORSDV ION

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433-6503

RE April 1988

S ~Final Technical Paper for Period February - Noemer 1966

0U Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

RC_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

ES LABORATORY

AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMANDBROOKS AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS 78235-5601

88 4 4 0~40

NOTICE

When Government drawings, specifications, or other data are used for anypurpose other than in connection with a definitely Government-relatedprocurement, the United States Government incurs no responsibility or anyobligation whatsoever. The fact that the Government may have formulated orin any way supplied the said drawings, specifications, or other data, isnot to be regarded by implication, or otherwise in any manner construed, as

licensing the holder, or any other person or corporation; or as conveyingany rights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any patented

invention that may in any way be related thereto.

The Public Affairs Office has reviewed this paper, and it is releasable to

the National Technical Information Service, where it will be available tothe general public, including foreign nationals.

This paper has been reviewed and is approved for publication.

JOHN IANNIContract Monitor

BERTRAM W. CREAM, Technical DirectorLogistics and Human Factors Division

DONALD C. TETHEYER, Colonel, USAFChief, Logistics and Human Factors Division

1a

UnclassifiedSEC~L'tY CL SSIFICAION OF THISM PKn 91C/ S

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Lor AOW# O 0-08Is REPOT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION lbI RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS'Unclassified DSRBTO AALBLT PRPRa. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3 ITiuiNA ILSIYOFRPT

2b DECl ASSIFICATION 'DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

4 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) 5 MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

AFHRL-TP-87-43

* 68. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION b OFFICE SYMBOL 7a NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATIONSystems 'and Applied Sciences (if applicabje) Logistics and Human Factors Division

Corporation (SASC) [6C. ADDRESS (City, Stote, and ZIPCodv) 7b ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Co01e)2875 Presidential Drive, Suite 300 Air Force Human Resources LaboratoryFairborn, Ohio 4S324-6269 Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Ohio 45433-6503

11a NAME OF FUNDING /SPONSORING 8 b OFFICE SYMBOL 9 PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBERORGANIZATION [(if applicable)

Air Force Human Resources Laboratory HO AFHRL F3361 5-84-C-0061

I ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 10 SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERSPROGRAM IPROJECT ITASK LWORK UNIT

Brooks Air Force Base, Texas 78235-560 ELEMENT NO INO. NO CESSION NO

63106F 2940 04 r 01ItI TITLE (Icude SecuritY CIaSuifica6on)

Training Development Under Logistics Support Analysis

12 P ERSONAL AUTHOR(j)Staten, C.M.; Boyle, E.

13a. TYPE OF REPORT 1t3b, TIME COVERED 114. DATE OF REPORT (Yea,M~nh Day) 115. PAGE COUNTFinal I FROM F 8 TO NOV 96 April 1988 I92

16 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION

f 17. COSATI CODES 16 SUBJECT TERMS (Contin"e on revers if ones" and 4Mwi~ by block numberFIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP front-end analysis integrated logistics support

as 0 full-scale development logistics support analysisis 05s instructional system development (CeNtI"u

19. ABSTRACT (Contu on revers I f #eC*eua&W anidertey by block nA~ef

X This technical paper explores the development of training requirements based on the use of logistics support Ianalysis (ISA) procedures and logistics support analysis record data. It examines system program offices' andother organizations' training development and LSA methods in light of the overall effort to develop and maintainthe training development plan used during acquisition. It also focuses on the existing procedres followed by AirForce personnel in performing instructional system developiment analyses for defining maintenance training

*programs, and looks at selected contractor training development products. The paper includes information on theunified data base 0401), as an imroved, fully automated on-line interactive LSM information system, andevaluates its potential for training developmet purposes. .- ~

20. DISTRIBUTION I AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

MUNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED C3 SAME AS RPT C3 OTic USERS Unclassified22a NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b. TELEPHONE (Incle A#*# Code) 22c. OFFICE SYMBOLNancy J. Allin, Chief. STINFO Office I AFHRL/TSK 111111

DO Form 1473. JUN 66 Previous ediftns are obsolete. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Of THIS PAGE

UnclassifiedI

WWWW V' .WU W r JWJN & MPli. V zrP "W 117r ., A

Item 18 (Concluded),

logistics support analysis recordmanpower, personnel, and trainingmaintenance trainingprogram managementsystem program officetest and evaluationtraining developmenttraining development planunified data baseweapon systbm acquisition

WVNV'VW%:I

AFHIL Technical Paper 87-43 April 1988

TRAINING DEVELOPMENT UND)ER LOGISTICS SUPPORT ANALYSIS

Carroll N. Staten

System and Applied Sciences Corporation2675 Presidential Drive, Suite 300

Fairborn, Ohio 45324-6269

Edward Boyle

LOGISTICS ANDf NOWA FACTORS DIVISIONWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433-4503

Reviewed by

Lt Col Joseph Col mnChief, Acquisition Logistics Branch

Submtitted for publication by

Bertram W. Crem, Technical DirectorLogistics and Hima Factors Division

This publication is primerily a working paper. It is published solely to docimet work performed.

SUMMARY

The design and development of the Unified Data Base (UDB) for use inacquisition logistics entailed development of software for a fully automated,on-line, interactive Logistics Support Analysis Record (LSAR) informationsystem. In addition, the potential usefulness of LSAR in training developmentand training application of the UDB (UDB2000) was investigated.

This technical paper documents the examination of developing trainingrequirements based on the use of LSAR data and LSAR procedures to performtraining planning and development needs as they arise in the Air Force. A two-fold review process was used to assess the present methods and data elementsused in training development. First, a review was made of the LogisticsSupport Analysis process, completeness of LSAR and LSAR data elements, and thepresent process of training development. Secondly, the 3306 Test andEvaluation Squadron (TES), Edwards AFB, California, conducted a review andevaluation of LSAR and the application of the UDB. Recommendations areprovided for improved training development procedures, including the use ofthe LSAR and UDB2000.

AooSssion For

NTIS GRA&IDTIC TAB 0Unannounced 0Justificatio

Distributionl/_____AvallabilitY Code

i...Tvail and/or

Dist Special

Flv*%-,%%) I -r

PREFACE

This technical paper was prepared by Systems and Applied Sciences Corpo-ration (SASC), 2875 Presidential Drive, Fairborn Ohio, under Air ForceContract No. F33615-84-C-0061. Mr. Richard Diehl was the Project Leader, andMr. Carroll H. Staten was the Principal Investigator. The Air Force HumanResources Laboratory (AFHRL), Logistics and Human Factors Division AcquisitionLogistics Branch, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, was the sponsor.Captain Everton Wallace vas the Program Manager.

SASC, under contract with AFHRL, developed the Unified Data Base (UDB),as an automated Logistics Support Analysis Record (LSAR) system to satisfy therequirements of the Logistics Support Analysis (LSA) process as defined byMIL-STD-1388-lA and the data elements defined by NIL-STD-1388-2A. In thisreview, SASC was to identify a functional area requiring a more thoroughexamination of additional LSA requirements. Training development under LSAwas selected for additional study and for recommendations for correctingdeficiencies. This technical paper focuses on training requirements,usefulness of LSAR data, and applications of iDB in training requirementsdetermination.

I, I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors also vish to acknowledge the assistance and cooperation ofthe many individuals who contributed information and/or critiques to thispaper.

Ms. Janet L. Peasant AFHRL/LRA Wright-Patterson AFBLt Col Duane Johnson 3306TES/CC Edwards AFBCMS Jackie Clark 3306TES Edwards AFBMSG Gary Buchanan 3306TES Edwards AFBMSG Michael McMullen 3306TES Edwards APBLt Col Robert Hovlett ASD/TTGT (ATC) Wright-Patterson AFBCapt Steve Wilkerson ASD/TTGT (ATC) Wright-Patterson AFBLt Col Greg Sutton ASD/ALXS/ALH Wright-Patterson AFBSMS James Bush ASD/ALH Wright-Patterson AFBMaj Andrew Courtice ASD/YWB (SIMSPO) Wright-Patterson AFBCapt Mike McGovern ASD/AFHE (C-5B SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBiLt James R. Ayers ASD/AFHM (C-5B SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBLt Col Joe Burch ASD/AFWAA (C-17 SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBMr. Mike Miller ASD/AFWLR (C-17 SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBCapt Mike McCreary ASD/BILRX (B-lB SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBCapt John Reeder ASD/BILHT (B-lB SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBCapt William McKinney ASD/TAFL (F-15 SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBLt Chris Palermo ASD/TAFL (P-15 SPO) Wright-Patterson APBCapt Mike Coover ASD/YPLA (P-16 SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBMr. Chuck Conley ASD/YPLI (F-16 SPO) Wright-Patterson AFBMs. Jean Rahilly AFALC/ERL Wright-Patterson AFBMr. Marto Ramirez AFALC/ERL Wright-Patterson AFBMs. Wendy Campbell AFHRL/LRG Wright-Patterson AFBLt Col John Kidd ASD/ENET Wright-Patterson AFBMr. Dick Heintzman ASD/ENET Wright-Patterson AFBMr. Robert Hankins ISS Clemson, SCMr. Chauncey Smith ISS Clemson, SCMr. Allan Murton McDonnell Aircraft Co. St. Louis, NOMr. Dave McChrystal MRSA Lexington, KY

III!

iii I

It

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

I. INTRODUCTION. .. ........... ................ 11.1 Background and Objectives .. ............. ..... 11.2 Logistic Support Analysis .. ............. ..... 11.3 Data Documentation .. ...... ................. 21.4 Tasks and Data Tailoring. .. ............ ...... 31.5 Automated Data System - Unified Data Base. ....... .... 41.6 Summary. ....... .............. ....... 5

II. LSA/LSAR AND USAF TRAINING DEVELOPMENT. .. .............. 52.1 General. ....... .............. ....... 52.2 Methodology. ...... ............... ..... 62.3 Training Requirements - The Process. ....... ....... 62.4 Instructional Systems Development Process. ....... .... 82.5 Logistic Support Analysis Process .. .............. 102.6 LSAR Data .. ............ .............. 122.7 Data Element Definitions .. ...... ............. 122.8 LSAR Data Records .. ............. ........ 142.9 LSAR Reports. .. ............. ........... 16

III. STUDY REVIEW AND FINDINGS. ....... ............... 163.1 Approach. .. ............. ............. 163.2 Models/Methods in Use. ...... ............... 183.3 Interface of Organizations .. ....... ........... 183.4 Case Study of F-15 Training Development .. ........... 223.5 Contract Training Development. ....... .......... 263.6 Standard Contract Data Items .. ...... ........... 323.7 Usefulness of LSAR for Training Development .. ......... 403.8 Automating the Process .. ...... .............. 473.9 Adaptability of UDB2000 for Training Development .. .......493.10 New Data Elements/Items. ....... ............. 493.11 New UDS Data Screens/Output Reports .. ............. 533.12 Revision to MIL-STD-1388-2A ... ....... .......... 53

IV. CONCLUSIONS .. ............ ................ 534.1 Automating Training Requirements Processes. .. ......... 534.2 Availability of Information. ....... ........... 544.3 Organizational/Front-End Analysis Influence .. ......... 564.4 Military Standard Guidance .. ...... ............ 574.5 Data Elements/Items. ...................... 574.6 Manpover, Personnel, and Training (Mfl) Directorate........754.7 Recommendations .. ............. .......... 75

V. REFERENCES. .. ............. ............... 77

VI. GLOSSARY OFTERS ANDACRONYMS .. ........ ............ 78

v

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE

1 Model ISD Time-Line ....... .................... ... 112 LSAR Data Flov for MPT ..... ................... ... 173 ISD Model ....... .. ......................... .... 194 Training Development in Acquisition ... ............ ... 235 ISD Training Analysis - Present Procedure . ......... ... 276 LSAR Tailoring ....... ....................... ..... 337 Data Item Description (DID) Relationships to the LSAR . . 348 LSAR Input to Report Matrix .... ................ .... 359 LSAR Data Selection Sheet ..... ................. .... 3610 DID to LSAR Record Relationships ... .............. .... 3811 DID to LSAR Report Relationships ..... .............. 3912 Data Record D Operation and Maintenance Task Analysis • • . 4113 Data Record Dl Personnel and Support Equipment . ....... . 4214 Data Record C Operation and Maintenance Task Summary . . . . 4415 Data Record E Support Equipment or Training Material Descrip-

tion and Justification ........ .. .................... 4516 Data Record G Skill Evaluation and Justification .. ...... 4617 LSAR for Training Development in Acquisition .... ........ 4818 Automated Training Requirements Process .. .......... ... 55

vi

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

1 Training-Related Data Element for ISD ..... ......... 50

2 Training-Related Data Information (IIL-STD-1388-2A andUDB2000). ...... .............. ........ 58

3 Supplemental Data Elements (UDB2000). ...... ........ 72

vii'

I. INTRODUCTION I1.1 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A. The design and development of the Unified Data Base (UDB) forAcquisition Logistics project will develop an automated on-lineLogistics Support Analysis Record (LSAR) for use by contractors andGovernment personnel. A subtask of this project was to study thepotential usefulness of LSAR in training development and trainingapplications of the UDB (UDB2000).

B. The LSA process, as defined by MIL-STD-1388-1A, and the LSAR process,as defined by MIL-STD-13882A, were evaluated for the purpose of in-creasing the effectiveness of Logistics Support Analysis (LSA) ininfluencing weapon system supportability. Based upon the UDB2000capability to fully automate the LSAR process, it was determined thata functional LSA user area should be identified for a more thoroughexamination of additional LSA requirements. The functional areaselected was to be an area which lacked the information, dataanalysis methodology, or documentation to influence supportability ona timely basis. This technical paper thus focuses on the area oftraining requirements in relation to the usefulness of LSAR data andapplications of UDB2000.

C. Training requirements were examined based upon the ability of LSARdata and LSAR procedures to fulfill training planning and developmentneeds as they arise in the Air Force. The Air Training Command's(ATC) 3306 Test and Evaluation Squadron (TES) was made a part of thestudy effort since its mission is to plan for system maintenancetraining during system acquisition/test and evaluation. The 3306 TESuses the Instructional System Development (ISD) process as theprimary tool in training development. The 3306 TES assisted in thereview and evaluation of current use and adequacy of MIL-STD-1388-1Aand MIL-STD-1388-2A, and the adaptability of the UDB.

1.2 LOGISTICS SUPPORT ANALYSIS

A. Logistics Support Analysis (LSA), as defined in MIL-STD-1388-lA, isthe selective application of scientific and engineering effortsundertaken during the acquisition process, as part of the systemengineering and design process, to assist in complying with support-ability and other Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) objectives. TheLSA process applies to all system and acquisition programs, majormodification programs, and research and development projectsthroughout all phases of the system/equipment life cycle. LSA shouldbring together all the design and support concepts needed to meetoperational requirements through examining how functions will beperformed meeting technical requirements, and considering systemengineering trade-offs.

B. The analysis process provides general support requirements anddescriptions of tasks which permit flexibility in tailoring to meetprogram objectives as determined by the System Program Office (SPO).

1

This tailoring process can occur only vhen the "requiring authority"(usually the Government) requires that these specific tasks be doneand that all essential information relevant to implementation beprovided by the "performing activity" (usually a contractor). Theprocess is applied in accordance vith MIL-STD-1388-lA, vhich providesa basis for the selection of tasks to be included in the contractStatement of Work (SOW). It is intended that this systematic andcomprehensive analysis be conducted on an iterative basis. The levelof detail and timing of task performance should be consistent vithprogram schedules and milestones.

C. In addition, the tailoring process prescribes the use of other LSAdocumentation on tasks performed in previous program phases, othersystem engineering program requirements and logistics related DataItem Descriptions (DID) included in the solicitation document. Thisaccumulation of documentation vill provide an audit trail ofsupportability and supportability-related design analyses and deci-sions, and will form the basis for actions and documents related tomanpower and personnel requirements, resource allocation, trainingprograms, maintenance planning, provisioning, funding, and otherlogistics support resource requirements.

D. The bringing together of the design and support concepts, of course,lies vith the program manager. It is through SPO emphasis duringsystem engineering that LSA can be applied to influence design andsupportability. An example could be maintainability, vhich duringthe design phase incorporates accessibility, interchangeability,standardization, etc., and affects panel design, spares, technicalmanuals and corresponding personnel/training needs.

1.3 DATA DOCUMENTATION

A. Data documentation under the LSA process can be considered unique, asit is to be accomplished on an iterative basis through all phases ofthe system or equipment life cycle vith the goal of satisfying thesupport analysis objectives. The documentation is to consist of alldata resulting from the analysis tasks and serves as the primarysource of validated, integrated design related supportability datapertaining to acquisition programs. Here lies one of the key issuesvith LSA and LSA documentation: Successful use of the standarddepends upon the quality and completeness of the documentation. Asdefined in the standard: "LSA documentation shall be developed andmaintained, commensurate vith design, support, and operationalconcept development, and shall be updated to reflect changes oravailability of better information based on testing, configurationchanges, operational concept changes, and support concept changesduring the acquisition process." Documentation vhich is complete,accurate, and up-to-date, provides a suitable basis for necessaryactions and docuentation for manpover and personnel requirements,training programs, and other requirements previously stated.

B. This documentation process is performed using the Logistics SupportAnalysis Record (LSAR), vhich requires the use of many relateddocuments from vhich appropriate data/codes can be obtained. The

2

LSAR data are to serve as the integrated logistics support technicaldatabase applicable to all materiel acquisition programs. To thisend, a standard Joint Service LSAR Automated Data Processing (ADP)system for automation of LSAR data has been developed. This systemgenerates the LSAR master files described in MIL-STD-1388-2A. TheLSAR data, vhether collected through automation or manually, formsthe necessary database.

1.4 TASKS AND DATA TAILORING

A. The LSA process objectives are established by program life-cyclephases and involve five general taskings as outlined in sections ofthe standard. These tasking sections provide the general purpose ofeach section, the individual tasks contained in each section, and thegeneral purpose of each task and subtask. The sections provide fordetailed analysis in the folloving areas:

Section 100 Program Planning and ControlSection 200 Hission and Support System DefinitionSection 300 Preparation and Evaluation of AlternativesSection 400 Determination of Logistics Support Resource

RequirementsSection 500 Supportability Assessment

B. Individual tasks are divided into four parts: purpose, task descrip-tion, task input, and task output. The purpose states the generalreason for performing the task; the task description is comprised ofdetailed subtasks. The task input identifies the general informationrequired to define the scope of each task and to perform each task.The task output identifies the expected results.

C. The requiring authority uses HIL-STD-1388-1A in the selection oftasks for inclusion in the SOV and establishes the LSA documentationrequirements based upon the elements identified in the tasks.Applicable DIDs that describe the data to be generated by thecontractor are shorw in Table III of the standard. The DIDs aredesigned to provide a maximm range of data, but they can be tailoredfor individual programs. The folloving DIDs apply to selected majortasks:

Task DID No. Title

101 DI-L-7114 LSA Strategy Report102 DI-L-7017A LSA Plan201 DI-S-7115 Use Study Report203 DI-S-7116 Comparative Analysis Report204 DI-S-7117 Technological Opportunities Report402 DI-S-7118 Early Fielding Analysis Report403 DI-S-7119 Post Production Support Plan501 DI-S-7120 Supportability Assessment Plan601 DI-S-7121 Supportability Assessment Report

3

+sM7VUV4wIZV

X F.X -P

D. Although LSA is to be initiated during the early phases of the lifecycle, it is not until the Demonstration and Validation (DEN/VAL)phase that definitive tailoring begins. The analysis and docu-mentation include equipment operation and maintenance levels dovn tosubsystems and associated subassemblies and parts. At this point,system design and material support can still be influenced by theSPOs through contractual specifications.

E. Selection of some LSA tasks vill result in data vhich are to be inputdirectly into the LSAR. HIL-STD-1388-2A, Table II provides a list ofthose LSA tasks and subtasks vhich relate directly to the LSAR datarecords. The recording of the data elements is accomplished usingthe LSAR Data Selection Sheets (DD Forms 1949-1). The data selectionsheets provide the requiring authority vith a means for identifyingto the performing activity the required LSAR data elements to be com-pleted. Preparation of DD Form 1949-1 should be a result of the LSARtailoring process. Thus, the preparation and maintenance of LSARdata are directly related to the hardvare and softvare design of anend item. The requiring authority is in fact responsible for speci-fying the equipment indenture level and the level of maintenance forvhich the LSAR data will be prepared and maintained.

F. The LSAR provides a structured, standardized, yet flexible approachto the documentation and use of the data required to effectivelyaccomplish LSA tasks.

1.5 AUTOMATED DATA SYSTEM - UNIFIED DATA BASE

A. The Logistics and Human Factors Division of the Air Force HumanResources Laboratory sponsored the development of the "UDB forAcquisition Logistics (UDB2000)." The UDB2000 is an advanceddatabase management system that permits on-line interactive entry,retrieval, and analysis of LSAR information.

B. The UDS softvare is a poverful and sophisticated tool that integratesLSA-related information from various functional ILS areas. Thisintegration provides users of the system vith a central repository ofrelated information intended to serve all functional LSA areas. TheUDB2000 is fully compatible vith the military standard requirementsand provides enhancements beyond the standard. The system affordson-line data sheets/report screens and real-tim calculations. The

0 UDS2000 uses the Integrated Data Management System (IDMS) and theIntegrated Data Dictionary (IDD). Thus, the capability exists tomaintain relationships among data elements in the database and alsoprovide a centralized dictionary in vhich to define and link togetherdata elements, records, and files. Data are stored only once but arelinked to all possible applications.

C. NIL-STI)-1388-2A provides a Data Element Dictionary (DB1)) for the

LSAR, and information for interpreting and using the LSAR. Thedictionary contains all the data elements, acronyms, andabbreviations that appear on the LSAR data records. The dictionaryis incorporated fully into the UDB2000.

4

1.6 SUMMARY

The overview provides insight to the LSA process and its applicationwithin the Department of Defense and civilian contractor community. The goalof MIL-STD-1388-1A is to institute a single, uniform approach for use by theMilitary Services in conducting those activities which will:

Ensure supportability requrirements become an integral part of systemrequirements and design;define support requirements that are optimally related to systemdesign and to each other;define the required support during the operational phase; andresult in high-quality data products.

II. LSA/LSAR AND USAF TRAINING DEVELOPMENT

2.1 GENERAL

A. The LSA/LSAR processes described in MIL-STD-1388-1A andMIL-STD-1388-2A were evaluated for adequacy, effectiveness, vi-ability, and applicability in training development. A review wasconducted of the models/methodologies used by training functionalmanagers to determine the extent of their application within SPOs.

B. The study focused on:

(1) Reviewing MIL-STD-1388-1A and MIL-STD-1388-2A for adequacy andcompleteness with respect to USAF training development needs.

(2) Evaluating the LSA process and completeness of the data elementsin terms of their ability to meet training requirements.

(3) Identifying any new methods, procedures, or models which couldimprove training development in terms of effectiveness andtimeliness.

(4) Evaluating the degree to which training information needs aresatisfied by the current UDB and the UDB data elements.

(5) Identifying preliminary on-line data entry screens and outputreports which appear to meet requirements for training informa-tion.

C. Based upon the above examinations where appropriate, recommendationswere made concerning the automation of additional data elements forinclusion within the UDB2000; a means to incorporate additional dataelements to existing on-line data entry screens; additionalon-line query screens or output report formats to support generalinformation requests;and specifications for changed or additional LSAtasking.

5

2.2 METHODOLOGY

A twofold review process vas used to assess the current methods and dataelements used in training development. First, Systems and Applied SciencesCorporation (SASC) reviewed the LSA process, completeness of LSAR and LSARdata elements, and the present process of training requirement development.Second, the 3306 Test and Evaluation Squadron (TES) conducted a reviev andevaluation of current use and adequacy of NIL-STD-1388-lA and MIL-STD-1388-2A,and the adaptability of UDB2000, for training development application. Theresults were analyzed to determine how well the current LSAR and UDBdevelopment satisfied data requirements for ISD in particular. The findings ofthe 3306 TES and the above reviev are included in this paper.

2.3 TRAINING REOUIREMENTS - THE PROCESS

A. Early determination of training requirements has long been a goal ofAir Force planners. It was not until 1973 that the Air Force Chief ofStaff directed the application of the ISD process to all nev weaponsystems or major modifications under acquisition. To meet thisobjective, the Air Training Command (ATC), in 1973, performed an ISDpilot study on the B-1 aircraft pneudraulic system vhich determinedthat (a) test and evaluation maintenance data could be used for ISD,and (b) ISD could be used during acquisition to identify systemmaintenance training requirements and develop technical trainingmaterial. Based on the results of the study, the 3306th TES vasformed in May 1975, vith the mission to support ATC's role in systemacquisition, test, and evaluation through planning for system mainte-nance training, and identifying technical training material using theISD process. The 3306 TES consists of a small cadre of experiencedISD subject-matter specialists located primarily at Edvards AFB,California. Their involvement vith nev systems usually begins on orabout the time a prototype aircraft is sent to Edvards AFB for testand evaluation by the Air Force Operational Test and EvaluationCenter (AFOTEC). At times, the 3306 TBS also hosts ISD teams forsystems not yet to the prototype state. In either case, individualsare assigned to an ISD team primarily based on their presentassignment as technical instructors and their future assignment asinstructors at Field Training Detachments (FTDs) for the operationalunits; hovever, they may be dravn from the technical school, FTDunits, the using command, or other resources as necessary.

B. Training planning is a continuous process, and training developmentfollovs the same course as the development of the systems it willsupport. The process begins vhen Air Force Headquarters issues aProgram Management Directive (PMD) directing the acquisition processthrough an established or to-be-established SPO. The PHD outlinesresponsibilities and general management objectives. Headquarters ATCappoints a single-point manager in the Directorate of Acquisition tomanage its participation in the early stages of a veapon system.Also, ATC assigns a Responsible Test Agency (RTA), such as the 3306TBS. Thus, ATC is involved in planning training support for a nevsystem from the inception of the system through the end of its opera-tional life. ATC tasking includes defining training concepts,identifying training and training resource requirements, and

6

developing and implementing plans to meet the requirements. In thiseffort, a Test Participation Plan is developed in sufficient depth toensure comprehensive management and application of the ISD process.

C. This process leads to creating a qualified ISD team trained in ISDprocedures and knowledgeable in associated directives, technicalorders, and military standards. The ISD team compiles an initial database of system maintenance requirements obtained from the followingsources:

(1) Using Command(2) Contractor(3) System Program Office(4) Test Force(5) Field Training Group(6) Other

D. This effort starts the analysis of the databas. for identifyingtraining requirements. ATC also reviews the Statement of OperationalNeed (SON) to ensure training considerations include the system'soperational and support concepts. The using command is responsiblefor establishing the maintenance concept.

E. Once the data are collected and the maintenance concept established,the ISD team begins the ISD analysis using a 14-step adaptation ofthe standard Air Force ISD model. As necessary, ATC provides trainingspecialists to the SPO to ensure that training development occurs incoordination with system development. The process is one of develop-ing training programs in response to requirements identified by theSPO and the major using command.

F. The ATC Training Advisory Office to the Aeronautical Systems Division(ASD), Air Force Systems Command, plays an important role in definingthe training requirements for the many SPOs. Although this officehas limited manning, Training Support Managers are assigned to eachASD program. The level of effort will vary depending upon theprogram development stage. Initial effort could be high at the onsetof planning and the subsequent program documentation development.The Advisory Office assists the SPO as a member of the TrainingPlanning Team (TPT) and in the development and coordination of theTraining Development Plan (TDP) under the guidance of APR 50-8,Policy and Guidance for Instructional System Development (ISD).

G. The level of effort is directly related to the SPO emphasis ontraining-related issues. The ATC Advisory Office and their TrainingSupport Managers stand ready to guide and/or work any training issuesthroughout the program life cycle. The following list shows thoseareas in which ATC assists the SPO in training planning foracquisition programs:

(1) Establishing a TPT and developing a TDP.

(2) Using the TDP as a basis for inputs to manpower, personnel, andtraining sections of the Program Management Plan (PMP), Inte-

7

grated Logistics Support Plan (ILSP), baseline, and otherprogram decision documents.

(3) Ensuring a training equipment Source Selection Evaluation Boardis conducted in-house or by the prime contractor. ATC contri-butes source selection criteria/standards.

(4) Initiating a Training Planning Information Document by contractto identify training and training equipment recommendations asoutlined in DI-H-7066.

(5) Participating in Training Requirements Recommendation RevievMeetings.

(6) Budgeting special training requirements.

H. The above planning and action areas are performed vith and throughthe assistance of the ATC Training Support Manager assigned to yorkvith the acquisition program.

I. The result is a training program vhich should ensure that maintenancepersonnel are qualified to perform their assigned duties. Thecompleted training packages and training equipment vill permittraining to be performed by instructors of contractor schools, ATCresident technical schools, mobile training teams (MTs), andunit-level technicians.

2.4 INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

A. Since this paper concerns LSA, UDB2000, and training, it is appro-priate to briefly describe the ISD procedures as applied by the 3306TES. The 3306 TES currently uses a specially adapted version of ISDfor the development of maintenance training and training equipmentfor ney veapon systems, as described in the 3306 Procedural Handbook(January 1985). Their version of the Air Force five-step ISD model isdivided into 14 procedural steps:

STEP 1 Identify System Maintenance Requirements

- gather data and identify all the duties and tasks related tothe weapon system under development or modification.

STEP 2 Identify Characteristics of the Target Population

- analyze vhat students already knov and vhat they are able to donov.

STEP 3 Determine Training Requirements

- determine vhat training requirements are needed for the knovnstudent population.

IeA, Mk -.

STEP 4 Determine Types of Technical Training Materials Required

- identify general classes of training media.

STEP 5 Develop Instructional Strategies

- sequence the tasks into logical lessons and blocks of

instruction.

STEP 6 Identify Fidelity Requirements of Hardware Components

- determine the degree of realism required of each component tobe included in the hardware trainer.

STEP 7 Select Instructional Features for Hardware Media

- identify features needed for hardware training if actualequipment will not be used.

STEP 8 Prepare an ISD-Derived Training Equipment Specification

- specify the numbers and type of trainers required, functionalcapabilities, component fidelity, and instructional features.

STEP 9 Identify Method of Instruction

- select the methods of instruction needed to accomplish eachtraining requirement.

STEP 10 Prepare Course Control Documents

- prepare course/specialty training standards, course charts,plans of instruction, and other course documents.

STEP 11 Prepare Instructional Materials and Tests

- prepare all course materials and tests

STEP 12 Validate Instruction

- conduct a dry run of the entire training course

STEPS 13 and 14 Conduct and Evaluate Training

- continuing reevaluation during the life of the course isconducted by instructors and supervisors assigned to thetechnical training school or field training detachments.

B. ISD provides a systems approach for planning, developing, andmanaging a training program in support of a veapon system. Thepurpose here is not to expound on the process but to briefly high-light the relationship betveen this step-by-step procedure andLSA/LSAR. In this regard, Step 1 is of primary concern, since mostoften little or no hard data are available on the veapon system (or

91

major modification) in this early stage of the ISD process. Thus, insome cases, it is necessary for the 3306 TES to visit contractorfacilities to compile the initial database. This entails time, money,and in-depth intervievs vith contractor engineers and technicians.

C. At this point, it is appropriate to shov the "Model ISD Time-Line"used for planning purposes and usually applied vhen the first articledelivery date, the Initial Operating Capability (IOC), is forecasted.Normally, 53 months are required to put trained maintenance personnelin place by first article delivery date (see Figure 1). In essence, aperiod in excess of 4 years is planned to more or less coincide viththe system test and evaluation cycle.

D. The first 3 months of an ISD effort alloy for selection of personnelresources and the collection of available data. The folloving 9months are used to analyze the data for Technical Training Material(TTM) recommendations. In turn, the requirements are revieved byHeadquarters ATC in the Training Requirements Recommendation RevievMeeting (TRRRN). Although not a formal ISD step, the approved TRRNIpackage provides the SPO vith those TTM items requiring funding andprocurement action.

E. It is important to note that the vhole process could be less thaneffective if adequate data, both in quantity and quality, cannot beobtained in the early stage. LSAR under MIL-STD-1388-2A becomes avital data source if applied during the Integrated Logistics SupportPlanning, the LSA, and the ISD efforts.

2.5 LOGISTICS SUPPORT ANALYSIS PROCESS

A. The LSA process can be divided into tvo parts: (a) the analysis ofsupportability, and (b) the assessment and verification of support-ability. The first part starts at system level vithin the design andoperational concepts and, after processing through the variousanalysis considerations, moves to a lover level of indenture. Subse-quent lover-level analyses then define the logistics support re-sources requirements through the integrated analysis of operator andmaintenance functions and tasks; these analyses address taskfrequencies, task times, personnel and skill requirements, supplysupport, and other needs. The second part concerns the system orequipment life cycle performance and adjustments thereto.

B. KIL-STD-1388-2A outlines LSA requirements down to the subtask level,since this level of detail is needed to adapt them to specificacquisition programs and specific phases. The level of detailselected and the timing of task performance should be tailored toeach system or equipment. The military standard provides a generaltailoring decision logic tree to be folloved in task selection.

C. In essence, a productive but cost-effective LSA effort mustconcentrate available resources on those activities vhich are mostbeneficial. This calls for selection of those tasks and subtasksvhich can be adjusted based on considerations listed inKIL-STD-1388-2A. These considerations consist of:

10

w wsix"

aca

P-4

b-4 Lfn

4 1

z 4c

(1) Amount of design freedom(2) Time phasing adjustments (fast track programs)(3) Work already done(4) Data availability and relevancy(5) Time and resource availability(6) Policy directive information needs(7) Desired tasks not in the standard(8) Procurement considerations

These factors are discussed in detail vithin the military standardand will be discussed only in part here.

D. Work already done, data availability and relevancy, and procurementconsiderations all play a key role in the use of LSAR for trainingrequirements. The collection process at best must take advantage ofpast experience and historical data. Available databases must bereviewed for relevancy, and the SPO must decide and specify the LSAtasks for contractor or Government performance. Thus, the requestfor proposal (RFP) becomes the key to what LSA data the trainingfunction can expect, and what degree of importance the SPO places onneeded documentation. The LSAR is, in fact, a subset of LSAdocumentation, and delivery of LSAR data should be specified in thecontract data requirements list (CDRL, DD Form 1423).

E. MIL-STD-1388-2A prescribes the use of LSAR data selection sheets (DOForm 1949-1) as the means of identifying the required LSAR dataelements. Preparation of the data sheets is the result of the LSARtailoring process discussed above.

2.6 LSAR DATA

LSAR data are usually prepared by the contractor. However as previouslystated, the 3306 TES has assisted in specific data development at contractor'sfacilities. In any event, the LSAR data are directly related to the hardwareand software design of the end item being procured. The LSAR data may beprepared and maintained manually or by data automation, or by a combination ofmethods. Use of an automated ADP system requires validation by the Joint-Service office at HRSA. Currently, a Joint-Service LSAR ADP system may be usedfor LSAR data, or the Services say use their own unique systems for internalprocessing of LSAR data.

2.7 DATA RLEMU DEFINITIONS

To provide a better understanding of the LSAR process, the folloving de-finitions are supplied. These definitions all relate to data elements thatappear on the LSAR data records. The LSAI data elments are standard, asprescribed by the military standard. A supplemental listing of Data Elementswas prepared during UD32000 development.

12

(1) Data Element:

Technical data required to support an integrated logisticsupport program. These data are standardized using LSAR dataelement definitions.

(2) Data Element Definition (DED):

A narrative definition of the Data Element in sufficient detailto present a clear and complete understanding of the precisedata or element of information that the data element represents.

(3) Data Element Definition (DED) Number:

A sequentially assigned number given to each data element in thedictionary for use in locating and referencing the elementthroughout the dictionary and data entry instructions (see NIL-STD-1388-2A, Appendix A).

(4) Data Element Title:

The noun phrase name used to identify the data element. Suffi-cient adjectives/mo-d ifiers are used vith the noun name to ensuretitle uniqueness.

(5) Data Item:

One of a set of descriptive items of information or values thatapplies to a data element (e.g., the data element "Skill LevelCode" contains the data items "Basic," "Intermediate," and"Advanced").

(6) Data Code:

One or more alphabetical, numerical, or special characters thatrepresent data items that are to be entered in a field on anLSAR data record; e.g.,

Data Element - "Update Code"Data Items - "A" - addition; "C" - change;

"D" - deletion

(7) Data Item Description (DID):

A form (DD Form 1664) used to define and describe the datarequired to be furnished by the contractor (provided to contrac-tors for identification of each data item listed on the CDRL);e.g.,

DI-H-3258A "Training Support Data LSAR Application" use B,D, D1, E, El and G data records.

13

2.8 LSAR DATA RECORDS

A. At present, the series of LSAR data records contained in MIL-STD-1388-2A consists of records A through J. The LSAR is a standardizedprocess for systematically recording, storing, processing, and dis-playing system and equipment analysis data. Input data are preparedby the performing activity in accordance vith the standard. Notethat all LSAR data refer to individual "end items" of equipment vhichare referenced by work unit codes and nomenclature. The follovingLSAR data records are part of the Joint-Service LSAR ADP system:

(1) A Record Operation and Maintenance Requirements(2) *B Record Item Reliability (R) and Maintainability (M) Charac-

teristics(3) B1 Record Failure Modes and Effects Analysis(4) B2 Record Criticality and Maintainability Analysis(5) *C Record Operation and Maintenance Task Summary(6) *D Record Operation and Maintenance Task Analysis(7) *D1 Record Personnel and Support Requirements(8) *E and El Support Equipment or Training Material Description

Record and Justification(9) E2 Record Unit Under Test Description and Justification(10) F Record Facility Description and Justification(11) *G Record Skill Evaluation and Justification(12) H Record Support Items Identification(13) HI Record Support Items Identification (Application-Related)(14) J Record Transportability Engineering Characteristics

* Has implications for training development requirements

B. Source documentation is usually done by the prime contractor accord-ing to NIL-STD-1388-2A, and any rqvised input data record formats ordata element definitions must be approved by the requiring authorityduring contract negotiation. In this manner, LSAR data are generatedas a result of the analysis tasks outlined in NIL-STD-1388-1A. LSARdata become the ILS technical database to support material acquisi-tion progras.

C. The folloving descriptions are abstracted, in part, from the militarystandard in order to highlight the purpose of selected individualdata records:

(1) Data Record A: "Operation and Maintenance Requirements." Pre-pared for the system and for each subsystem for vhich sainte-nance requirements are to be imposed; it is also prepared forGovernment-furnished equipment. The record documents systemmaintenance requirements and further documents the allocation ofthose requirements to lover indenture repairables. Record A dataare provided by the Government activity and may be included inthe solicitation.

(2) Data Record B: "Item Reliability (R) and Maintainability (M)Characteristics." This record describes the functions of theend item, outlines the maintenance concept to be utilized for

14

'p 1f

b 1- - ., -V - - W VR -I .%; - -

design and support planning purposes, and identifies any designconditions such as fail-safe requirements and/or environmentalor nuclear hardness considerations imposed upon the system. Therecord summarizes the reliability, maintainability, and relatedavailability characteristics of the item resulting from thefailure modes and effects, criticality, and maintainabilityanalyses documented on the B1 and B2 Data Records. A separate Brecord is prepared for the system, for each subsystem containedin the system, and for each lover level for that subsystem untilthe lowest reparable item has been documented. The degree ofbreakdown shall be specified by the requiring authority.

(3) Data Record C: "Operation and Maintenance Task Summary." TheOperation and Maintenance Task Summary record is used toconsolidate the operations and maintenance tasks identified foreach reparable assembly and indicates necessary support require-ments (e.g., facilities, training equipment, tools, and supportequipment). Detailed analyses of the tasks identified on the CRecords are provided on the D Records. C Data Records arecompleted to the same indenture level as the B Data Records.

(4) Data Record D: "Operation and Maintenance Task Analysis." The DData Record provides a detailed step-by-step narrative descrip-tion of how tasks identified on the C Record are to be perform-ed, the specific Air Force specialty (AFS) and skill levelrecommended, and applicable task times (manhours and elapsedtime). Data on the D Record provide information necessary forthe development of technical publications and personnelrequirements. The D Record data vili be initiated duringdetailed system/equipment design. For all operational andmaintenance-level tasks, specific requirements for the comple-tion of the D Record, hardware items, and indenture levels willbe as specified by the requiring authority. D Data Records arecompleted for each task documented on Data Record C.

(5) Data Record Dl: "Personnel and Support Requirements." The D1Data Record provides recommended training, personnel, supportequipment, and supply support requirements necessary for theaccomplishment of the individual tasks described on Data RecordD. During the detailed system/equipment design, the data recordwill be initiated for each task identified on Data Record C.Man-hours and elapsed time are also recorded on the Data RecordDl.

(6) Data Record B: "Support Equipment or Training Material Descrip-tion and Justification." Unless othervise specified, this datarecord is structured to consolidate the pertinent informationrelated to existing or new support/test equipment or trainingmaterial. The £ Data Record serves as identification of andjustification for all hardware and software elements required toconduct off-line test.

15

2.9 LSAR REPORTS

A. A large number of reports are available through the Joint-ServiceLSAR ADP program and will also be available using the UDB2000 system.These reports comprise one of the principal benefits of the LSA/LSARprocess and should be of much use to the training communities. Someexamples of reports deemed helpful in training development, and theirrelated DIDs, are listed below. Additional DIDs for trainingpurposes are listed in paragraph 3.5(J) of this report.

Reportnumber Report title DID number

LSA-001 Direct Annual Maintenance Man-hours by Skill DI-L-7146

Specialty Code and Level of Maintenance

LSA-002 Personnel and Skill Summary DI-L-7147

LSA-Ol Requirements for Special Training Device DI-L-7155

LSA-014 Training Task List DI-L-7158

LSA-015 Sequential Task Description DI-ILSS-80115

LSA-022 Referenced Task List DI-L-7163

LSA-075 LSAR Manpover Personnel Integration DI-ILSS-80290(MANPRINT) Summary

B. The Training Task List report, vhich lists tasks by Air Forcespecialty code (AFSC), is used exclusively for training purposes.The report can be used to recommend tasks for training and provide abasis for recommending training locations.

C. To shov the relationships among the LSAR data records, the LSARreports, and Data Item Descriptions, a flov diagram is presented asFigure 2. This diagram depicts the use of selected LSAR records,containing data elements vhich are formatted in numbered LSARreports. These reports contain key information for the manpover,personnel, and training (NIT) community.

D. Ne reports are being developed as a result of Service recommenda-tions to the Joint Service LSA Vorking Group, vhich is chaired by theArmy Materiel Readiness Support Activity (MRSA) at Lexington,Kentucky.

III. STUDY RUVIEW AND FINDINGS

3.1 APPROACH

A. The study effort encompassed a thorough examination of the available

methods for determining training needs and training models, and other

16

a ~ ~ ~ ~ w. -- - - -' rw np.~J~~

RECORDS REPORTS DID

A,;, 050 THRU 01li-5 HUMAN ENGINEERING

Cp~ 00 THRU ICQ I- )07 PPJPOWER, PERSONNEL AND015 TRAINING ANALYSIS REPORT

CA 19 DI-LSS-80 TRAINING REQUJIREM4ENTS

SKILL CONSTRAINTS

Figure 2. LSAR Data Flow for Nfl

17

11 1 WF

methods and procedures used within the training area In systemacquisition. An assessment was made of the standard contract dataitems referenced by MIL-STD-1388-2A used in training development. Inaddition to a literature review, this process involved discussionsvith various offices which included SPOs, ASD, Air Force AcquisitionLogistics Center (AFALC), ATC, and selected contractors. Also, anevaluation was conducted at our request by the 3306 TES. The reviewalso focused on the ISD process and the application of the UDB fortraining during system acquisition.

B. Useful and supplemental data elements in the military standard werereviewed; and data elements required to produce any new LSAR datarecords for training requirements were to be defined. An evaluationof the procedures for handling the data within the UDB2000 was made.

3.2 MODELS/METHODS IN USE

A. ISD is the required process for developing Air Force training, asdefined in AFR 50-8. It is a model of five broad steps that will beused for decision making regarding education and training programsneeded for a new weapon or support system. The requirement, then,must start during the conceptual development stage and continuethroughout the life of the system. The process also calls forresponsible offices to match anticipated instructional requirementswith needs and thus develop budget proposals for instructionalprograms. An interface between the Planning, Programming andBudgeting System (PPBS) and the ISD process to fulfill theserequirements is also needed.

B. In addition to the applicability of ISD for acquisition programs, AFR50-8 also mandates the process for:

(1) Air Force educational programs (i.e., professional development,management, and leadership courses).

(2) Existing education and training programs.

(3) Training associated with an Air Force specialty or system (e.g.,OJT, correspondence training, and aircrev training).

C. The 3306 TES has developed a 14-step adaptation of the Air Force five5-step ISD model. Their procedure provides an orderly process forplanning and developing training and training equipment requirements.A comparison of the 3306 TES model to the Air Force model is shown inFigure 3.

3.3 INTERFACE OF ORGANIZATIONS

A. A number of organizations interact in the acquisition process. TheProgram Manager (PM) in the SPO is the key individual, beingresponsible for the overall management and ensuring of communicationand coordination of goals among all participants. SPO managementcoordinates the activities of the using major command (KAJCOH), Air

18 AM 111111 ' 1 m

0 wj

z 0 ) C wCO

2J Z <UZ

a- M < 1 J MLLCLc -iw

0 0 s Mm zo~o zzz0 0 Q zCOwz

cv cz LZ2 O zLL-LL~ 0 0

w w

w I- >. z cn ojW z Z< bn >uj ouw Lic uI-iC a- a2 w $4(IC

0' CL . IUC

w-

I- - - I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ C_ _ _ _ _ _ r

CY 0 19

Force Logistics Command (AFLC), AFALC, AFOTEC, and ATC. The PM isresponsible for consolidating and issuing all documentation, toinclude the Program Review Package (PRP), Integrated LogisticsSupport Plan (ILSP), and the Integrated Support Plan (ISP). The SPOalso has the overall responsibility for carrying out the trainingdevelopment program necessary to support its acquisition program.

B. Although the SPO handles the day-to-day management of the weaponsystem and its support elements to include the procurement ofmaintenance training devices, the Simulator SPO (SIMSPO) currentlymanages the development and acquisition of aircrev training devices.A working agreement is usually reached between the tuo SPOs to definethe specific tasks and responsibilities of each. Thus, the SINSPOassumes a role somewhat parallel to the weapon SPO in that theactivities of cost, schedule, budget, inputs to RFP, etc., must becompleted along with the weapon system schedule. In essence, theSIMSPO role has been to develop and ensure delivery of the neededaircrev training devices.

C. The interface continues with the selection of the Deputy ProgramManager for Logistics (DPHL) or the Integrated Logistics SupportManager (ILSH) for the development and use of the ILSP. For aless-than-major acquisition program, the ISLM performs a similar roleto that of the DPML. The ILSP, when developed, sets the stage for amanageable program that will integrate program planning, engineering.,design, test and evaluation, production, and, finally, operation ofthe system. Support for training development is provided to the SPOby AFALC in the form of requirements review for the SOW and RFP.Thus, AFALC revievs program documentation to ensure that trainingconsiderations are included along with manpower and personnelrequirements in contractor taskings.

D. The using HAJCOM is tied to the process in that it provides qualifiedpersonnel needed to support the ILS planning through implementationof policies and procedures. The using command must also provide andupdate the operational and maintenance concepts as the acquisitionprogram moves along. Their involvement in the training developmenteffort begins with their recommendations of AFSCs and the tasks to beapplied. In some cases (e.g., a major program), the using commandmay assign an analyst to work temporarily with the SPO on trainingdevelopment. Hovever, this is the exception; usually a SPO member isassigned this duty.

Although ATC is involved in planning of training support for a newveapon system from the initial SOV through the end of the system'soperational life, the SPO is responsible for and initiates trainingdevelopment planning. This is accomplished through the establishmentof the TNT and the subsequent creation of a TDP. The SPO focal pointusually chairs the TNT meetings. These meetings are attended by amulticommand staff of people who have the responsibility for planningthe training requirements for the life of the weapon system. The planshould address all the training needs, schedules, AFSCs, issues, etc.for a total training program. The plan is prepared under the provi-sions of AFR 50-8 and AIR 50-11, usually concurrently with the system

20

design reviev or shortly after Full-Scale Development (FSD) begins.Thus, the TDP is currently not a timely document in the acquisitionprocess. Development of the TDP is a very important event. ATC mayprovide trained specialists to the SPO as management deems necessary,and as is consistent vith the role and evaluation of the ATC TrainingAdvisory Office at the AFSC Division level.

HO ATC is a key organization in the development of maintenancetraining, and they must ensure the establishment of policy and direc-tives to this end. Maintenance training system development is usuallyassigned to one of the Technical Training Centers (TTCs) or to theTES. HO ATC also manages the efforts of Field Training Detachment(FTD) personnel regarding course instruction and use of the trainingdevices. The TTC has the responsibility of planning, instructorstaffing, and curriculum development of their respective residentmaintenance training courses. In addition, they may be tasked toassist in the ISD process and in the training system development anddesign revievs. TTC personnel must also be involved vith the usingMAJCOM's maintenance and training personnel to gain an understandingof the veapon system maintenance concept in use.

E. The Air Force has recognized the need for increased emphasis on MPTrequirements earlier in the veapon system acquisition process.Tovard this end, an MPT Directorate has been established vithin theAeronautical Systems Division, Deputy for Acquisition Logistics(ASD/AL). Better analysis and integration of MPT requirements vithinthe program offices are anticipated. This directorate will serve anextremely important role in formalizing all MPT activities vithin theSPOs. At present, training requirements development lacks the neededdirection to ensure that all necessary events are planned for andcontrolled. Individual SPOs are not alvays consistent or thorough intheir efforts to ensure that needed training and training devices areavailable in time to meet IOC. This is said not to fault any individ-uals or managers but rather, to point out the previous lack of acentral responsible body vith the resources needed to enhance andensure a compatible effort vithin the program office.

The nev MfT Directorate vill develop this needed capability. HPTanalysts vill be available to advise, assist, and provide suchservices and/or information as technical information, analyticalmodels, and information systems. In addition, maximum use can bemade of existing methods and models; for example LSA, LSAR recordsand reports, and Logistics Composite Model (LCOH) and other modelproducts can become established media for all program offices. It isimportant to note here, that the purpose of HPT analysis andintegration is to quantify NPT impacts on individual veapon systems,both current and planned. Thus, a means exists for adopting nevprocedures or systems from vhich individual SPOs have benefited invorking vith their prime contractors or subcontractors. An exampleis the McDonnell Aircraft Company's CLASS system for providing LSARrecords and data. The F-152 and C-17 SPOs vere able to establishterminal hook-up vith McDonnell Aircraft Company and McDonnellDouglas Corporation to enhance the receipt of needed data elements.

21

F ~~~~~ ~~ I.r-r 0-XV - U-U WVU1 '02 *N'7K -~ W. X.7. V~. Pr." w, --. . 6 .~-V - .. ..

NPT personnel viii have visibility across programs, and the capa-bility to support SPO objectives, especially during initial or highvorkload events, such as front-end analysis, SOV and RFP preparation,and program reviev. The MPT Directorate vill have the follovingresponsibilities:

Ensuring MPT analysis and integration along vith system devel-opment in acquisition programs.

Establishing a structured process for accomplishment of MPTtasks on acquisition programs, including application of uni-form procedures and standards for NPT analysis and integra-tion.

Establishing an HPT decision support system vhich includeslife-cycle cost and cost-effectiveness data bases and models.

Ensuring that program management responsibility transfer andplanning for fielding of the system address MPT.

Establishing a process to ensure that program revievs includeassessment of NPT issues and concerns.

Finally, the HPT Directorate vill work on developing a contractuallanguage that vill ensure that HPr requirements are thoroughlyincluded and evaluated in the source selection process.

In effect, the nevest member of the interfacing organizations willprovide increased emphasis and direction upon the integration of HPTelements into the veapon system acquisition process. This is animportant development for ensuring that the training, planning,requirements analysis, and training equipment development and produc-tion are effectively planned, coordinated, and funded for each new orplanned system.

F. Figure 4 provides a graphic representation of the organizationalinterfaces. The lines linking organizations involved in trainingdevelopment need not be considered limiting in terms of communicationand coordination. Also, it should be noted that though the PH hasmanagement responsibility for ISD application, it is the responsi-bility of the 3306 TES or contractor to apply the ISD process.

3.4 CASE STUDY OF F-15 TRAINING DEVELOPMENT

A. The process of an ISD effort changes over the life of a veaponsystem. An example is the F-15 aircraft, vhose initial ISD vas doneby test and evaluation personnel and selected FTD instructors usingan elementary ISD process current at that time. This ISD teamidentified the courses required to maintain the F-15, and those Type1 training courses specified by the team and the initial test team atEdvards AfB. This effort provided the FTD courses necessary toestablish an in-house capability to train F-15 maintenance personnel.During this same period, the ISD process also identified the neededmaintenance training devices.

22

AUUEWZXN~~~~YW WW-W bi1WINw-, WtNNW W717r ip w. W-v mr,- - - ~ rU ~ J~P

CC

06

-i C7

49'3

C

CL.0

CD 4)

.p >

6 o-4

.P4)

04

.........

..... ...

23

B. In the following years, as the F-15 evolved and new courses wererequired, the ISD was performed by the FTD responsible for developingthe courses. In this manner, ISD responsibility shifted from testand evaluation personnel to field training personnel and finally tothe appropriate TTC responsible for teaching the resident course.

C. The current TDP, Annex 1 F-15E, does not require a ney ISD processsince the E-model is a derivative of the basic aircraft. Thus,current maintenance training courses are to be reviewed and updatedto reflect changes required by the new configuration. AircraftMaintenance Training (ANT) and Mechanical Trainers (i.e., hardvaresystem trainers and systems equipment groups) are to be provided.These will be developed based upon the LSAR data and Task Analysisperformed under contract in compliance with MIL-STD-1388-2A. Underdirection of the SPO, training development will include:

Aircraft Maintenance Trainers - computer-controlled simulationsystems that provide organizational-level training on specifiedprocedures for fault isolation, adjustment, and remove andreplace maintenance actions.

Mechanical Trainers - hands-on training devices using actualaircraft hardvare and ground support equipment to train mainte-nance personnel in a controlled environment. They will be usedto teach system operation, component location, troubleshooting,rigging, and remove and replace procedures.

Type 1 Maintenance Training - Type 1 training is formal trainingconducted by contractors under AFR 50-9 and can be conducted atthe contractor's location or at an Air Force Base. Projectedtraining includes courses for:

AFSC 326x6 Integrated Avionics Attack Control Systems3-week course

AFSC 326x7 Integrated Avionics Instrument and FlightControl Systems 2-veek course

AFSC 326x8 Integrated Avionics, Communications, Naviga-tion, and Penetration Aids Systems

3-week course

AFSC 42371 Aircraft Environmental Systema 1-veek course

AFSC 43171 Tactical Aircraft Maintenance 8-day course

AFSC 46270 Aircraft Armament Systems 3-week course

D. It is appropriate to briefly mention training equipment acquisition.The needed maintenance training equipment includes the aircraftmaintenance trainers, mechanical trainers, and other devices used forin-residence training and for mobile training given at base level.Requirement identification is the responsibility of ATC, and, vhen

24

knovn, is provided to the SPO for funding action. After equipmentdelivery to ATC, the program responsibility is transferred to theproper Air Logistics Center (ALC). The ALC provides logistics sup-port for the equipment in terms of funding and procuring replen-ishment spares and repair parts, and also through the provisioningfor initial spares, repair parts and support equipment in time tomeet training milestones.

E. Under the basic F-15 TDP, ASD and the SPO provide overall managementfor the acquisition and integration of the training requirements.Planning and control are accomplished through the TPT, vho estab-lishes and maintains program training goals. Training plan progressis revieved at quarterly ILS Management Team revievs conducted by theSPO. Any program redirections are evaluated in terms of trainingrequirement impact. ATC is responsible for a major part of theoverall training acquisition as the basic P-15 TDP states that ATCVill:

Identify the training devices and participate in TPT decisions.

Conduct and manage the maintenance ISD analysis to provideneeded information to ASD and the user command.

Act as the sole procurement activity for all Type I, formalcontractor training.

Participate in specification revievs, RFP preparation, sourceselection, preliminary and critical design revievs, acceptancetesting, technical order revievs and verifications, and main-tainability demonstrations.

Provide formal Air Force maintenance training.

F. Training development in acquisition is an approach to provide for acomplete training system, including the needed trainers, trainingdevices and technical materials required to conduct all training.The F-15 TDP and the associated F-15 annex plans are viable doc-uments outlining the training concept and training responsibilities.This is a result of the combination of the individual planningefforts of all the interfacing organizations.

G. Although these plans point to the use of the ISD process in trainingdevelopment, they make no reference to the application of LSAR dataunder NIL-STD-1388-2A. Training planning should include the require-sent for LSA tasking and the subsequent LSAR tailoring process. Thismay veil be contained in the ILSP; hovever, the Statement of Opera-tional Need, Program Management Directive, maintenance concept,schedules, etc. must relate to training development in the form ofdata requirements. In that the LSARdata are directly tied to the enditem being procured, so lies the need for proper selection of dataelements. The TD? should be expanded to capture, as a minimum, thoseDIDs for training data required to be furnished by the contractors.

25

3.5 CONTRACT TRAINING DEVELOPMENT

A. Vhether determination of training needs is done in-house or bycontract, training requirements are always determined through ananalysis of tasks necessary to complete a job action. Tasks, then,must be stated in terms of what students must be able to accomplishas a direct result of the training experience. This action forms thebasic starting point in developing training courses and equipmenttraining devices.

B. The present investigation identified three approaches to training

development currently in use.

Use of a generic approach based on similar program tasks, steps,and skills/knovledge listings.

Contractual development of tasks, steps, and skills/knowledgebased on engineering data, with tailoring by training special-ists.

In-house development by trained ISD personnel of task, steps,and skills/knovledge based upon generic listings, LSAR data, orother contractor furnished data.

It should be noted that seldom are any of these databases complete.Thus, subject-matter specialists (SMSs) must work vith contractordesign personnel, engineering drawings, available LSAR data, andother existing technical data to develop the tasks and subtasks (seeFigure 5).

C. The B-lB SPO initiated a contract to develop an analysis of thenecessary weapons release system and veapons loading trainingrequired at the organizational level to meet the goals of the B-1Barmament system technical training program. Contractor analysts begantheir effort by defining the basic jobs and duties anticipated on theB-1B aircraft for AFSC 46210, Armament System Technician. Theydeveloped a Job list which contained nearly 500 tasks in the tvo jobareas of weapons loader and release system technician. They vorkedwith Air Force SMSs to complete an initial task list. The analystsexamined all tasks; grouped them by common elements of skills,components, etc.; and made recommendations under an establishedtraining concept. This training concept centered around the deliveryof the training, the philosophy about the training structure (e.g.,instructional goals, objectives, integration of media and traininghardware, etc.), and the training environment.

D. The analysis process vas also based on the concepts in AH 50-2 and

AFP 50-58 as expanded and modified by the AFHRL Maintenance TrainerDesign and Acquisition Bandbook of ISD Procedures for Design andDocumentation. A computer application was used to control and managethe process and gained the benefits of:

26

LitK

4p

MF 9- AXON DUTIES LISTED BYSM XPRECEIETIYBro AFSC AS RELATED TO 1

THE VEAPON SYSTEM

DATA NAY BE NECESARY ToCTION USE ALL SOURCES

ENGIEERIG/ I ORAUTOMATION KIMGDESIN SMILA LSA AADOPTED BY SOMEDATAFROGAMSCONTRACTORS

A LAMR-INTENSIVE,LISTTASOHANDS-ON PROCEDURE

AUTOMATION KIMGAELYH TA93 ADOPTED BY SOME

SIWSIUTAU5 ONThACTORS

Figure S. ISD Training Analysis -Present Procedure (Page 1)

27I

6'lf-DVW.v~d,~ VV-

COMMENTS

MIL-STOLSAR TAILORING PROCESS13"-2A(SEE FIGURE 3-4)

RECOD CARWEC 010 0mwmm EDATA INPUT By

CARM ON CRT

AM J1TIFICATION DATA SMS AREOFTEN NOT COMPLETE

ON ARIE TOO LATE

REOR 0

KOME OF AUTOWATIONVARIES AON CONTRACTORS.

a, GELIVERABIES NAY NOT BETINELY.

AA

*T T(PPAU1)

Figure S. LSAR Input to ISD (Page 2)

28

I

SUS3ECT-NATTERSPCIA.ISTS COMMENTS

OR CONTRACTOR

SELECTMAY BY NECESSARYMETHODSTa USE ALL SOURCES

REVIV SNILA REIEV almA LAM-INTENSIVE.

SYSTNS CNTRATOR ANDS-ON PltOCEDURE.

DOCUMNTS OCUMNTS NTERIEVSDATA BASES AREOFTEN NOT CONPLETE.

TO (MK 1)

Figure S. Other Data Input to ISD (Page 3)

I

29,

,w -!

Reduction in analysis time,

Tracking of relationships of tasks, steps/activities, andskills/knovledge,

Ease of formatting results,

Separating of hardvare from non-hardware tasks, and

Developing the training device requirements.

E. This process yielded a training device requirement or requiredtraining system description for each task or task grouping, andserved to provide the initial design of the needed training device.The final design was completed through a review by the contractor andAir Force SHEs and managers.

F. The decision on training requirements under the above process orother ISD processes is not based on a model, but upon the collectivejudgment of technicians,-analysts, and managers.

G. MIL-STD-1379B also provides guidance for training course developmentunder contractual agreement. The development process requires thecontractor to use an ISD event-sequencing method. Further, thestandard explicitly requires that a training conference be heldwithin 60 days after contract start date. It is intended that thecontractor present a detailed training program plan using LSAR data,engineering drawings, and other available data to define and supportthe training outline. This review serves both Government andcontract personnel as a means to refine and agree upon detailedtraining requirements. Formal minutes are prepared by the contractorto record all decisions and agreements.

H. Appendix A of the standard lists applicable DIDs for training datawhich may be placed on CDRLs as needed. This standard is not intendedto duplicate other efforts, as data developed under other contractrequirements should be utilized to fulfill needs.

I. The Manpover, Personnel and Training Analysis Report, DI-ILSS-80077,illustrates the use of data directly from LSAR for training purposes.Under a total LSAR program, data elements, including codes anddefinitions, should be available to complete this report. For thoseacquisition programs not on contract for a total LSA program,generation of data vill be limited to those elements of data uniqueto the DID. The standard also states that duplicate effort is prohib-ited for the development of data applicable to two or more DIDs.DI-ILSS-80077 is designed to show the technical tasks performed byoperator and maintenance personnel, job descriptions, and manpowerrequirements necessary for the proper operation, maintenance, andrepair of system and equipment. The report lists skills needed,frequency of task performance, time required to perform tasks,personnel requirements, and location and description of task steps.This DID should be applied to Development/Production-phase contracts.

30

Completion of the DID will provide the program office detail withinthe folloving areas:

System and equipment introduction and description, providinginformation relevant to the operational and maintenanceconcepts.

Job task analysis summary, providing a description of each taskneeded to operate and maintain the system and equipment, and therelated personnel data requirements.

Job training task list, providing a breakout of the taskbehavioral elements, conditions under which the tasks must beperformed, task performance standards, and tasks for whichtraining is to be provided.

Manpower planning data, providing the number of personnelrequired to operate and maintain the system and equipment.

Manpover summary, listing the operator and maintenance quantita-tire manpover requirements, by personnel specialties and skilllevels required to perform the tasks at all levels except depot.

Job training analysis matrix, listing the subsystems/equipmentswhich comprise the system, the tasks to be performed, and theknowledge required to perform the tasks.

Training analysis summary, providing the learning objectives andthe skills and knowledge required to perform the tasks.

J. The following data requirements may be placed on contract as neededby the SPO:

Data Requirement DID No. *Nev DID

Training and Training Equipment Plan DI-H-7066 DI-ILSS-80076Training Courses Proposal DI-8-7067Task Skill Analysis Report DI-8-7068 **DI-ILSS-8077Training Courses/Curriculum Outline DI-H-7069Instructor/Lesson Guides-Training Courses DI-H-7070Student's Training Course Guide DI-0-7071Audiovisual Aids, Master Reproducibles DI-B-7072

and Reviev Copies for TrainingEquipment and Training Courses

Audiovisual Aids Index for Training DI-0-7073Equipment and Training Courses

Tests for Measurement of Student DI-B-7074Achievement

Student and Training Course Evaluation DI-H-7075Forms

Instructors Utilization Handbook for DI-H-7076Simulation Equipment

On-the-Job Training Handbook DI-H-7077Technical Hands-on-Training System DI-B-7076

31

Data Requirement DID No. *New DID

Conference Agenda DI-H-7088Conference Minutes DI-A-7089Training Path System Documentation DI-H-7090 DI-ILSS-80079Personnel Performance Profiles DI-H-7901 DI-ILSS-80078Curriculum and Instructional Media DI-H-7092

MaterialsFactory Training Curriculum Materials DI-H-7093LSA-075, LSAR Manpower, Personnel DI-ILSS-80290

Integration (MANPRINT) Summary

* New DIDs approved December 10, 1985.

** Title is Manpower, Personnel and Training Analysis Report.

3.6 STANDARD CONTRACT DATA ITEMS

A. An applied LSA tailoring strategy, which identifies task outputs andprojects task requirements for succeeding program phases, is shown inthe ILS Plan. Normally, any interfaces betveen the LSA program andother system engineering analysis are also described in the plan.Thus, both engineering and ILS functional element requirements andanalysis can be used for DID selection purposes. Technical dataneeded to support an ILS program are standardized and listed on theLSAR data records per the contractual agreements. As previouslyindicated, the initial step involves selection of the analysis tasksand the subsequent flow of data onto the LSAR record for purposes ofrecording, storing, and processing (see Figure 6). This collectionof data or LSA documentation may equal that developed and documentedIn the system engineering/design process. Changes in programconcepts, requirements, or schedules should be incorporated as theyoccur. Even though system engineering/design data are available atthe contractor facility, the responsible program office should ensurethe completion of Data Record A based on the tasks of MIL-STD-1388-lAand so specify this requirement in the solicitation.

B. The DIDs can be reviewed to match the data element requirements; thatis, the relationship between the LSAR records and associated DID canbe examined in detail, down to the needed data elements. Table IV ofMIL-STD-1388-2A provides a listing of the more common DIDs. As anexample, Figure 7 makes a comparison between LSAR and two of these

DIDs: DI-i-7057, Human Engineering Design Approach Document Main-tainer, and DI-H-7068, Task and Skill Analysis Report. In addition, adetermination as to whether LSAR reports can be used to satisfy a DIDmay be made by looking at NIL-STD-1388-2A, Figure 90, which shows theinput data elements required for the reports (see Figure 8). Thisreviev process will provide the specific data elements and LSARrecords. Based on this review, the DD Form 1949-1, LSAR Data Selec-tion Sheet, can be compiled to make up the total LSAR data require-ments. See Figure 9 for an example of the selection sheet.

C. To be useful In the training development effort, LSAR data must alsobe timely. It is important that the SPO establish schedule comple-tion dates for the data products that utilize LSAR data. NIL-STD-

32

SLECTION OfNIL-TS-II&IAANALYSIS TASKS

ND-ST6-130&-M MM131SELCT

Fiur 6.w ELEENT Taloin

330

LSA INU

u 2

'a~ rC z - . 4-we

C - - *e-r,.f,~--<

.. 100

.3:-2-~4C-C.W * J

-44)

'U 0

*I - *13; ~ CAS5

.4- .c o£ 6= -4 W.

@4-

-9 0 O

P:1

CL,

34 ~

111111 H I M 11111

I IIII ai 301IfS

-,a M44 £umn wnW

ww 9191040- O~ll 4 464 0 4410 4 4 40 44 4 40

dm m um 841401 4 944 0040 1 410 419140104 09 I

on Ot 4MWW41R1 AWoan glamem smigfwv

man Ap anan u wv-

nom =m wim m imet In..

earn w, mmuln' m

* - ("OMPM ulm M su"UNOW~niw.

wmw~~~~~~ mIfea e""q

35 I

PART i Jo.ADoe

___LSAR DATA SELECTION SHEETE1oa#I-)a98

iQKOATA, ELCM(NT NAME QEOu'REO

LSAR OATA RECORD A01 L~ OGISTIC St.'PONT ANALYSIS CONTRO~L NUMISIX (Aai o ComnJof *Corda)_______0' 1 0il Ak TIRMATE SA4 CONTROL. NUMBER Coot (AP0.03 10 C= 10-et A 0

MftIrd5 noded)

0'-I3 lot ENO ITEM ACRONYM coot________

0' a tie IEAvICE OESIGN*TOR coot

Cli S Il 1106oAL sumL C009 904 MANUSACTUR101%

01.6 0111 DILAWNG CLASSIPDCAT6ION01 ? 411 SERIAL. MNMSSE (119lCTiv'TY__________

036 a 126 USAKI 0#0 coot

136 OPTION I___________________________________

1)6 OPTION I _____________________________________

SIG OPTION I __________________________________

@3.9 US *SOA tE Coot JAep~q tC&Tpfe flt enO3______

02.3 $36 USAhlE ONE CooE03. Is$ ITEM NAME@3.4 1 73 ITEM IES$GNtATOR Cool@3S 9119 CONVERSIO wACOR04.3 213 wSANUpACnTforS PART NuMIS111

04-4 i3n PEM011A VPLY cooE FOR MAMWISACTURER11fs_______@44S 999 ORAV#EG 1101,00111

@4-6 In P606441. IEPftV CoEl FOR MANLIPACTURKERSw4. 145 WOR UNIT OE I fTEOCAI. MANJAL. PUCTIONAI. GRO~ C011

31.3 214 AM~ACTLWUVS PART NWMOE OVIERFLO0@54 100 ORLAWUG MIMIERA OVERBLOW@6... M3 NNA OPERATING RE[QWIREMNT3@6.4.4j8 244 MEAVENT 0ASE@69 29 OHMER 14IOII REUWREMENT SNOE10CATOR106.30 021 *AI.f MIMSE OF MSSIONW11t @111 ANIMAL. OWING DAVI@6.32 1234 MEAN MUON 01.11ATION1@16.33 244 MEASURMENT 8AS@6.34 254 RM O tTRANIPM~@6.3 499 TOTAL. SYSTM SUFFOBT011IS _____

W6.7 M4 NMMSE 0 OPERATIN LOCATIONS@7.3 51 CAMS SEUEom G Wot07.4 246 MOWAUM ACCOPT*8I. VALL07-4A. 231 MEAN T"M NYWEEN111 PAIRES@7-46 236 M TIME SETWEN MAINTENANCE ACTIONS______@7-dC 344, 1MEASUEMIENT BAS10 740 243 MSEAN TIME TO REPAIR@7.6 all NM ACTIVE MANTENANC COWNIwM07-1 @39 11131 01ERATIONAl. CADA6NJTY

JA U31 MREAN TME NrIWEN FAILURES?-.11 *36 ME1AN IME NTIEN MAINTENANCE ACTIONS

07-SC A" MEASUMNT 1S1l7.50 ado MEAN TMAN TO REAIN______

07.1 I39 Alt"N AC1V4 MAINTENANCE OOWN44TIME________@6.3 Its MIM f*M TO PAAPIN

@6.1 Ila PMINtf AVAKASSIUfT

@6.1 233 OPAniONAL "AAI.TY

@64 @lls AOMNISTRATIVE ANO LOGISTIC DELAYTIM 1 1010111A~ Rqwww ftf automated pmu.A

00 Form (Figu.EdRe re~s" Pan I. Page I

1388-2A recommends that the required delivery dates for DIDdeliverables be established along with the solicitation package.From this, then, the delivery dates for the LSAR data records can bedetermined. On several acquisition programs, the LSAR came too late.The B-lB and T-46 are two recent examples. In one case, the 3306 TEScould not meet their ISD schedules because of having to wait onprojected LSAR data because the contractor was using the engineeringand related data sources. Deliverable LSAR data have in many casesbeen included as part of a single data package due upon completion ofthe effort. These are factors which contribute to LSAR data arrivinglate for the ISD process. Quoting in part from Appendix E, Figure 6,LSAR Tailoring MIL-STD-1388-2A, "scheduling completion of LSAR datamust take into account interim product delivery dates, final productdelivery dates, and schedule updates to final products. Each of thesedates will impact the range of LSAR data required, the depth of datarequired (i.e., the hardware indenture levels and maintenance levelsspecified), and the number of updates to the LSAR data required. TheLSAR completion schedule must then be coordinated with relatedprogram schedules (i.e., drawing release) to ensure availability ofdata for LSAR development." Tables V and VI of the standard providea means to plan delivery dates or completion dates for each datarecord and for LSAR reports through careful selection of the DIDsdelivery dates. Figure 10 shows DID to LSAR Record relationships;Figure 11 shows DID to LSAR Report relationships.

D. Finally, the deliverable LSAR data must be in a usable form. For the

purposes of ISD, it must be in printed format or in a form whichpermits manipulation of the data. Ideally, an automated LSAR system,such as the UDB2000, provides the greatest ability to produce tailor-ed products, respond quickly to on-line demand, and rapidly accessreports/summaries. Again, reflecting on the B-1B program effort,LSAR data were delivered in disc format for use in ISD. However, thedata records/reports could not be generated from the disc as a resultof various equipment-related problems. Unfortunately delivery of thedisc product represented a final, one-step, contractual package.

E. The UDB2000, using the Integrated Data Management System (IDMS) andthe Integrated Data Dictionary (IDD), maintains the relationshipsamong the data elements in the database and also provides acentralized dictionary in which to define and link together dataelements, records, and files. The system has the database logicallypartitioned by end item, by contractor, and by agency. It affordsthe LSA analyst an on-line capability to access the status of theLSAR and to ensure that data relationships are properly establishedand maintained. Further, the system provides real-time calculation ofnumerous data elements. Elements are calculated at the time screensare displayed, ensuring that the calculations are based on thecurrent values of the input variables. These real-time calculationsprovide for automatic entry of data that is dependent on other datain the system. As stated earlier, the data sheets and screens usedin the UDS2000 system follow the main divisions of the data recordsof MIL-STD-1388-2A.

37

DatacodData

ta or

It emDescrivtio A B B B2 C D Dl E El E2 F GH Hl J

H~~~ wx -7 e 0m -L - 01 - I-

DI-M-152A@0 0. 0.DI-S-6169 10- - - --1- - - - - -

DT-S-61749 i -0 A 0 0 0 0 0J

fl j A70A @000

flT-V-Fh1Rfl -

flT...-. 11A 0 0

_____-L- - - -- - - --- -- :: 0 1

~-~QQK "S.j00---------------- ------------------------------------------------

________ 0

0___0 0 e

nTLV.q2.. 0 11 1

-% 0 0nT-q-10S4A Z-

--1-I A - .----Figur 1~O10. 0oLA eor eainhp

Source:ZMIL-STA 20 Jul 198 an Noic 1, 14 Ferur 198

_ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -38

Lot * SA00

LSA C- 01IVL a r-0 0 14"'1onPORT 00 00 00 0 00 '"-'

DID

DI-L-1421A---------------flT-M-1 C;17 - - !. . ± ...

fT-R--I~4QA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-n T- -1- 1 An

DI-V-6180IDIV-61---------

- ~ -;DT-V-701A --- S-

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D11 -V - 7 10110-9-

DI-H-70S1* *--

- -l -H -705

DT-H-7.62. 0..0 1 0* 0 -S. SOnfi

DI-H-7095--------------- -a

nT-L -1 .... - - - - - - - - - -

Figure 11. DID to LSAR Report Relationships

Source: MIL-STD-1388-2A, 20 July 1984 and Notice 1, 14 February 1986

39

J M WII 1A WW!VmMEm11WaV

3.7 USEFULNESS OF LSAR FOR TRAINING DEVELOPMENT

A. The data recorded through the LSAR process become the basis fortranslating data into usable training courses and devices. Atpresent, ISD or a form of ISD is used to transform LSAR task datainto a job task listing relating tasks, skills, and knowledge levelsfor training purposes. ISD processes are used by both the Air Forceand contractors.

B. An ISD approach used by the McDonnell Aircraft Company to developa three-volume F-15E Task and Skills Analysis Report illustrates atailored procedure for the application of LSAR to training develop-ment. These volumes consisted of:

Volume I: Task Inventory. This volume specified the tasks,skills, and knovledges required for satisfactory job perform-ance. These, in turn, form the basic criteria used in deter-mining training media, course sequencing, and objective format-ting. The tasks, skills, and knovledges are developed bysubject-matter experts, complemented by their instructionaldesigns, based on engineering and vendor technical data, LSAdata, and prior experience on similar weapon systems.

Volume II: Skills and Knowledge. This volume listed the skillsand knowledge required to accomplish each task identified inVolume I. Also shown is the required training, such asentry-level behavior, study lessons, and hands-on-training.The development process provides a chronological listing oftasks, supporting skills and knowledge, task source, supportmaterial, and training required by duty area.

Volume III: Training Analysis Summary. This volume listedsuggested lesson topics, individually, in the form of a final or"Terminal" objective supported by the "Enabling" objectives andthe associated skills and knowledge requirements. The lesson iscarried to a sub-level sufficient to satisfy job performancerequirements.

C. The MIL-STD-1388-2A data records are designed to provide a logicalapproach to documenting maintenance task analysis and identifying theassociated skills needed to perform the tasks. Data Record D,Operation and Haintenance Analysis (Figure 12) provides a means torecord tasks in a sequential manner to the desired maintenance levelsidentified by the requiring authority. Block 5, Sequential TaskDescription, serves to document narratively in a step-by-step manner,all subtasks and task elements needed to perform the task undercontractor engineering and design analysis. The tasks should bedocumented in sufficient detail, and so sequenced, to avoid anytechnically incorrect or missing procedures. The military standardclearly states the degree of documentation required on Data Record D.

D. Data Record Dl, Personnel and Support Requirements (Figure 13), is afurther refinement of needs in the analysis process. This recordidentifies personnel, training, support equipment and supply support

40

11388-1A1 13W-241rsTjA

TASK3012. 4LSA 015 SEQUENTIAL TASKTASK 1.2.4 DATA RECORD OESCRIPTIONTASK 401.2.1 0

TASK RFERENCELSA - 021 LIST

RFEECEDLSA - 022 TASK LIST

Provides: Speciflo Skill Specialty Requirements - Each Stop of Analysis

Initiated: Started During D&Y Phase; Applied Dmring Full Scale Developmnt (7D)

Data Source: LSA Subtasks 301.2.4 and 401.2.1

Output: LSA - 015 Sequential Task Description

LSA - 021 Task Referenced List

LSA - 022 Referenced Task List

Purpose: Prepare Draft Maintenance Publications, Review end Control Rteferene Task List

Figure 12. Data Record D Operation and Maintenance Task Analysis

41

K 160Z : '1V a 10 KZ g 1

9f5"4MM------T--- -OVf1.WN .TOV..TRI TsM. 77ft ft

INIL

586-IA

LSA 001 0DI. ANNUAL MAINT. N.H.

TASK 401.2.1 DATA RECORD BY AF SPECIALTY CODE

LSA - 003 - 006_ PE0NMEL AND SKILL

- 005- LSA - 002 S5MMMY

- 007

TRAINII TASKLSA - 014 LIST

Provides: Training, Personmel, Support Equipment, and Supply Support to

AccoplsLh Each Task Shomn en the 0 Resord

Initiated: When LSA Task 401 is Init ated

Data Source: LSA Subtak 401.2.1

Output: LSA - 001 Direct Annual Maintnance Man-Nours by Skill Specialty Code

LSA - 002 Personnel and Skill Sumary

LUA - 014 Training Task List

Purpose: EstablLah SwAs for Training Roena tiLono

0Other LSAR Repots AvaLlable

Figure 13. Data Record D1 Personnel and Support Equipment

42

requirements for the tasks listed on the D Record and the C Record(Figure 14). It is important to note that the LSAR process, throughthe system engineering and design, provides the information needed todetermine training requirements. It is incumbent upon the programoffices to state their LSAR requirements in contractual agreements.This is necessary whether training is to be developed in-house or by

contract. The Dl Record data elements include Skill-Level Code, Skill iSpecialty (or Air Force specialty), Skill Specialty Evaluation Code,and number of personnel needed per specialty.

E. Data Record E, Support Equipment or Training Material Description andJustification (Figure 15), lists information related to peculiarsupport and test equipment, test sets, and training materialrequirements of the system. Tasks described on C and D Data Recordswhich show use of support or test equipment or require trainingequipment should be shown on separate E Data Records. Data Record Eprovides a more detailed description and justification which can beused to document support equipment for contracting purposes. Therecord is normally prepared during FSD.

F. The LSAR also includes the Data Record G, Skill Evaluation andJustification (Figure 16), which describes and justifies new ormodified personnel skills required to support the weapon system andassociated equipment. This is a continuation of the Data Record Dlanalysis which listed the new or modified skill requirements. The GRecord is designed to provide information such as:

Duty position requiring new or revised skill

Air Force Specialty from which personnel can be obtained

Test score

Rank/date/civilian grade

Skill specialty code assigned new duty position

Task codes (described on Data Records C and D)

Physical and mental requirements

Educational qualifications: academic subjects, specializedsubjects, specialized degrees and licenses, etc.

Additional training requirements

Justification

G. DD Form 1949-1, previously discussed, correlates directly with thedata records. Properly used, this form is a working document whichwill ensure the training elements are developed by the performingauthority.

43

I

NIL NIL6l -1ASTm

TASK REQUIREMENTS FORTASK 301.2.4 * DATA RCORD LSAIECZA S o0 I

TASK 401.2.1 -C

OTHER OUTPUTS

LSA 004 -017

-.020

Provides: Requiremnts for Training Equipsent

Initiated: During the eantratLon and Validation (DWV) Phase

Data Souro: LSA Subtesks 301.2.4 nd 401.2.1

Output: L-SA-IL1 Requirements for Special Training Device*

Purpose: Identitfy Nw or Modified Support Requiznts

*Other LSM RPea Available

Figure 14. Data Record C Operation and Maintenance Task Sumary

44

I

NILE

TASK 401.2.3DAARCO

Provides: Information an Peculiar Suppertl Test Equipmnt and Trainingmaterial Requirements of the System

Initiated: During 750 Phase

Data Source: LSA Subtask 401.2.3 with Inputs fVim 303.2.6, 303.2. and

Training Specialist@

output: None. *E Record Is manally Prepared; Included in LSAR Package

Purpose: Supplemets Reports Genterated By C and 01 Oats

*This Record Is Autmwa ted in the IS

Figure 15. Data Record E Support Equipment or TrainingMaterial Description and Justification

L1102101111111

110110' 1 1 1 111WINNOII[N

1

4

NI

I: [1388-1A I 1346-2A1

TASK 401 .2.3 DATA RECORD NONE

TASK 401.2.4 -

Provides: DescriptJ.on and 3ustifteation for New or Modified Skills

Initiated: During FSO Phase

Data Source: LSA Subtasks 401.2.3 and 401.2.4

Output: Mons. 0 Record Is Manually Prepared; Included In LSMA Package

Purpoe: Bale for Reoamendlng a Task for Training

*This Record Is Autitamted In the UO02000

Figure 16. Data Record G Skill Evaluation and Justification

46

H. The proper selection of LSAR data elements will enhance the trainingdevelopment effort. The SPO, through the Training Planning Team, musttake advantage of the procedures prescribed within MIL-STD-1388-IAand -1388-2A. Although procedures and functional duties vary amongthe many separate Program Offices, the LSAR person should be includedin all planning efforts involving training development. The flow ofLSAR documentation into training development is shown in Figure 17.

I. During this review, it was noted that LSA analysis did not alwayscoincide with training development requirements but rather, followeda separate path coinciding with hardware development and otherProgram Office requirements. In addition, the determination forperforming LSA and LSAR analysis was tied to the maturity of theweapon system (e.g., the newer development effort of C-17 versus themore established programs, such as F-16 and F-15). Another considera-tion for the older programs was the cost/benefits. To request acomplete system LSA late in the life cycle of the weapon system wouldnot be cost effective; however, an application of LSA on modificationsand engineering change proposals could be most beneficial.

J. Each Program Office is responsible for setting LSA requirements.However, each office has its own finely drawn doctrine, uniquecapabilities within assigned personnel, and particular operating-technical requirements, all of which can influence trainingdevelopment. It is important that training be afforded the sameconsideration as the other functional areas (engineering, logistics,financial control, test, and evaluation) and that a full-timespecialist be located in the SPO. At present, this is not always thecase.

3.8 AUTOMATING THE PROCESS

A. Our findings noted that decisions on training and training devicesare not based on models but upon rational and considered judgments bythe individuals who are best suited to make such assessments.However, such assessments require a structured process or procedureleading to the final objectives of determining training requirements-- all within Air Force concepts and Government standards, to includeapplicable data item descriptions. The process must be complete anddone in a manner that is linear and interrelated. When Air Forceconcepts and a form of ISD procedures were applied in the B-1Beffort by a contractor, a systematic and structured analysis approachresulted. The goal was to have SMSs in one working session, break downeach task to identify:

All steps and activities needed to perform the task;

all skills and knovledge for performance of each step/activity;

hands-on training required for each skill/knowledge;

all other types of tasks not requiring hardware;

47

CUMNTRACTOR

EMXWIUN

II48A

all training device requirements; and

all training media.

B. At this same time, it was necessary to have computer applicationavailable to control and manage the analysis effort. The automatedprocess that was used served to track and format data at the timetask analysis was conducted. This process saved time, permittedimmediate use of the data for analysis and, under a company program,formatted the data for hands-on training and training devicerequirements.

C. Application of such a procedure, either by in-house Air Forcepersonnel or by contractor firms, could greatly enhance thedevelopment of training requirements in a considerably shorter timeperiod. Using an automated system with a database management program,training requirements can be listed, commonality analyses betweentasks can be identified, selected data can be formatted and printed,and training concepts can be developed to meet future acquisitionprogram needs. ISD personnel and program office training personnelcould well assess their expectations for training courses andtraining devices, since the systematic and structured analysis bySHE/SHS using contractor engineering and LSAR data would provide arealistic data base and identify the necessary training descriptions..

3.9 ADAPTABILITY OF UDB2000 FOR TRAINING DEVELOPMENT

In their evaluation of the UDB2000 software, the 3306 TES focused on thecontent of MIL-STD-1388-2A and the UDB2000 data screens. The 3306 TES foundthat the UDB data screens provide "quick and easy" access to all informationnecessary for the ISD process. They believe that with nominal training, ISDanalysts could perform training development with considerable savings in time,manpower, and money for the data collection process. Of course, LSAR datawould still have to be made available in sufficient quantity to realize theadvantages of the UDB2000.

3.10 NEW DATA ELEMENTS/ITEMS

A. The 3306 TES identified 53 LSAR data elements useful for ISDpurposes. Included are those data elements used for indexingpurposes, such as the Alternate LSA Control Number, cardblock ofA01-2, shown on LSA reports 015 and 060 (see Table 1). These dataelements can be collected by reviewing 12 LSARs, six LSAR reports, or28 UDB2000 data screens.

B. One new data element recommended specifically for training develop-ment was a narrative entry to describe Student Target Population fora weapon system under development or major modification. As aminimum, the new data element should include the Skill Specialty Code(i.e. AFSC), Skill-Level Code (3, 5, 7, or 9), prerequisite educationand training, previous weapon system experience, and securityclearance requirements.

49

Table 1.Training-Related Data Elements

for ISD

Related Card- LSAData Element DED Block

1. Additional Skill Requirement: Skill Requiring 010 G04-5 075a New or Revised Skill Code

2. Additional Skills and Special Training Re- 011 E16-5 070quirements

3. Additional Training Requirements 013 G07-5 075

4. Alternate LSA Control Number 023 AO1-2 015060

5. Articles Requiring Support 031.1 E09-4 070

6. Description and Function 086.1 E19-5 070

7. Duty Position Requiring a New or Revised 101 G02-4 075Skill

8. Educational Qualifications 103 G06-5 075

9. End Item Acronym Code 106 AO1-3 060061

10. Failure/Damage Effects 120 B14-6 060

11. Failure Detection Method 121 B15-6 060

12. Failure Mode and Cause/Damage Mode 126 B13-6 060

13. Failure Mode Indicator 128 Bll thru 060B18-3

14. Functional Analysis 145.1 E17-5 070

15. Hazardous Maintenance Procedures Code 155 C06-10 060

16. Item Function 179 B08-4 060

17. Item Name 181 A03-3 060D07-8 015911-3 070H01-9 061

18. Justification 183 B20-5 ---G08-5 ---

50

-ir Yr - I, ~ - - W1 Jr

I

Table 1 (Continued)Training-Related Data Elements

for ISD

Related Card- LSAData Element DED Block Report

19. LSA Control Number 197 AOI-1 014015060061075

20. Maintenance Concept 204 B10-4 060

21. Manufacturer's Part Number 213 A04-3 060

22. Manufacturer's Part Number Overflow 214 A05-3 060

23. Mean Elapsed Time 220 D06-5 015

24. Mean Time Between Failures 235 B07-4 060

25. Mean Time Between Maintenance Actions 236 B07-5 060

26. Mean Time to Repair 241 B07-13 060

27. National Stock Number and Related Data 259 E05-3 070H02-5 061

28. Performance Standards 313 D06-7H 014

29. Person Identifier 316 D02-7 015

30. Physical and Mental Requirements 319 G05-5 075

31. Qualitative and Quantitative Maintain- 348 B09-4 060ability Requirements

32. Quantity Per Task 354 D07-9 060

33. Reference Number 372 01-1 061

34. Referenced Task 376 D03-7 015

35. Security Clearance 399 G02-7 ---

36. Sequence Insertion Line Number 403 D02-3 015

37. Sequence Line Number 406 D02-2 015

38. Sequential Task Description 410 D02-5 015

39. Skill Level Code 422 All-7 060

Table 1 (Concluded)Training-Related Data Elements

for ISD

Related Card- LSA

Data Element DED Block Report

40. Skill Specialty Code (SSC) 423 A11-6 060D04-4 015

41. SSC Assigned Nev Duty Position 424 G01-3 075

42. Skill Specialty From Which Personnel Can 434 G02-5 ---Be Obtained

43. Source, Maintenance and Recoverability 436 H11-7 061

44. Support Equipment Full Item Name 455.1 E13-3 070

45. Support Equipment Recommendation Data (SERD) 458 E02-3 070Number

46. Support Item Sequence Code 460 D07-4 060

47. Task Code 467 C06-3 015.060

48. Task Condition 468 DO6-7G 014

49. Task Frequency 470 C06-4 015060

50. Task Identification 472 C06-6 015060

51. Task Identification Code 473 C06-7 015

060

52. Unit of Measure 524 D07-10 060

53. Work Unit Code/Technical Manual Functional 545 A04-7 015Group Code 060

Source: 3306 TES Letter, Subject: UDB2000 Study, 30 October 1986,Attachment 1

52

%7VT -. r-m VVV , -C .

C. The data element Training Rationale, covered by DED 503, was cited ashaving eight codes to justify training requirements recommendations. The 3306TES recommended a change to a narrative entry or adopting the use of dataelement, Justification, covered by DED 183. It was further recommended thatthe data element Justification be added to LSAR reports 070 and 075 to supporttraining recommendations.

3.11 NEW UDB DATA SCREENS/OUTPUT REPORTS

The 3306 TES also identified the need for new screens, designed especial-ly for training-related data. Presently, the UDB2000 has 28 data screens thatcontain information/data elements needed for the ISD process. Although accessto these screens was found to be easily accomplished by the training analysts,additional research time is needed by the 3306 TES to fully define and con-struct additional screens that could enhance training development. Further,the squadron believes that the UDB screens developed to date could be an assetto other LSA users and acquisition-related organizations.

3.12 REVISION TO MIL-STD-1388-2A

A. To better define the student target population, a data elementdescriptor (DED) should be established to do so. As noted, the newdata element should include the skill specialty code (AFSC), skill-level code, prerequisite education/training, previous weapon systemexperience, and security clearance. The DED should be structured tocapture a narrative summary of this type of information. At present,DED 434, Skill Specialty From Which Personnel Can Be Obtained,provides a specialty code; however, it does not define previousweapon system experience, education and training, or prerequisiteskills and knowledge information.

B. Training Rationale, DED 503, should be examined for change to anarrative entry or be replaced by Justification, DED 183. AlthoughDEC 503 has eight codes to justify training requirements, anarrative-type entry would allow training analysts the latitude todescibe their decision logic. The 3306 TES also recommended that theJustification information be added to LSAR 070 and 075 reports tosupport training recommendations.

IV. CONCLUSIONS

4.1 AUTOMATING TRAINING REQUIREMENTS PROCESSES

A. The weapon system acquisition process must be analyzed in terms ofboth systems design and training system design. The training systemdesign process can begin earlier through the use of mission areaanalysis and comparability analysis, which include all the pertinentdocuments leading up to the development phase. Training systems, inturn, can be further examined as to the subsystem functional require-ments and the task data necessary for operational and maintenancepurposes. Data to support this analysis come primarily from the

53

contractors involved and the SPO, their design engineers andlogistics specialists. Although the process currently is conducted byin-house Air Force technicians and a number of contractor agencies,it is limited in scope and depth by the degree of automation, theavailability of data, and the qualifications/training of subject-matter specialists/experts.

B. Task analysis and associated task information gathering is a majoreffort of the overall training systems development program performedby the SPO and ATC. Engineering and design data must be made avail-able through contractor deliverables according to MIL-STD-1388-2A,usually in the form of LSAR and DID deliverables. The deliverablesshould also be timely and incremented for analysis beginning early inthe acquisition process. For those systems where design is not finalor complete, consideration should be given to generic task analysisusing comparability data from a predecessor system as input.

C. Automation of LSAR data, vith on-line capability for use by the SPOand ISD analysts would produce a more direct and timely informationlink, and also afford training and/or MPT analysts an earlier startin task list development as the new system equipment lists surface.From the task lists begins the identification of subtasks or substepsrequired to perform the task. This lover-level description willdefine the actions related to each specific task and the systems/equipments on which the action is to be performed. SMSs can list allconditions relevant to the steps and substeps of the tasks, (e.g.,special tools, equipment conditions, and safety measures). LSARsshould be revieved in sufficient detail to capture all such informa-tion and data elements.

D. Following the listing and description of all steps and substeps, thenecessary skills/knovledge must be determined by the subject-matterexperts. This may be accomplished using a format (forms) or promptprocedure to ensure all knowledge and skill requirements are madeknown. The application of a data base system method similar to thatused for the B-1B can format the data for needed outputs. Acommonality analysis would provide information on like data as totasks, steps, substeps, skills, knowledge, training requirements, andtraining systems, as well as the recall or manipulation of otherselected data.

E. Automation of training requirements data would permit earlierprocessing of information to identify needed training courses, media,hardware, and training locations by the SPO and ATC (see Figure 18).

4.2 AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION

A. Information, or lack of information, influences training and trainingequipment development, in that there continues to be a difference intime-phasing of events between training systems development andweapon system acquisition. Some of this difference can be attributedto the many coordinating and involved offices, and in part to a latefinalization in design and/or operational and maintenance concepts.Regardless of the underlying causes, the SPO must lead the management

54

IJ IANALYSIS

USE DESIGN, ENGINEERING

DATA AS AVAILABLE

S AUTOMATED LSAR DATA ANDILORING OTIER DATA PER CONTR,. 'T

*A EVIVVRIFICATION OF

TASK LISTINGS DATA BY SUILECT-NATTER

SPEIALISTS (IS)

STEPS/ IDENTIFY TO SELECTED LEVEL.

SUB-STEPS REVIE FOR COMPLETENESS

An ACCURACY or SMS6

TA BASE INPT TO DATA USE

REQUIR FO EACH TASK AND

STEPS. 1ECO ALL PERTINENT

SKI.LSI IWO OR MO~n. USE LSR

KNOLED K.IcN. PERfI 3Y SNSSAMION C I O ITU-ASSISTED

TNIl To DATA US

TRAIDO ASUIAN S NON-UIOWARREQUIRENETS TASKS. MEDIA SELECIONS.

OUTPUT TRAINING DEVICE REIUIEEEIT.

TRAINING LOCATION (TYPE OF

TRAXMM)

Figure 18. Automated Training Requirements Process

55

effort in the actual acquiring of the training and maintenancetraining devices.

B. If information is not available, SMSs will make necessary assumptionsin order to complete the ISD and the documentation for starting thetraining equipment acquisition. This is often an initial or "get-started" effort, vith the goal of meeting schedules and having neededtraining programs on board before or by IOC. It is reasonable tobelieve that any new program not fully committed to a method ofoperation, maintenance concept, or design agreement would continueto distract the training development process.

C. Another area that impacts training development is the defining of thetrainee population. The user KAJCOM, in addition to stating themaintenance concept, should also define the trainee population interms of education and training qualifications and the AFSCs andskill levels needed. This often turns out to be a minimum-effortresult,or a difficult task, in the sense that MAJCOMs do not alwayshave the personnel or experience to adequately define traineepopulation. This, in turn, impacts the ISD process in that trainingis built around the anticipated need for nev skills and knowledgerequirements. Therefore, a need for careful judgement by SMSs isrequired today as in the past.

D. Another factor of concern is deliverable task data for the task andskill analysis effort which is basic to completing an ISD. Thepresent investigation showed that the data come late, usually afterMilestone II or the DEM/VAL phase, and in some cases are notfurnished through MIL-STD-1388-2A LSAR. In essence, a weapon systemin a prototype phase will lack the maturity to produce completelyusable or valid data.

E. Until FEA can be developed in a manner to satisfy training-relatedinformation needs, ISD teams, whether Air Force or contractor, mustcontinue to work with the SPO, program contractors, MAJCON, etc. todevelop training and training equipment requirements.

4.3 ORGANIZATIONAL/FRONT-END ANALYSIS INFLUENCE

A. Training must be given adequate, early consideration as part of thefront-end analysis. As tools to aid FEA (such as the HPT SystemsModel) are further refined and accepted into the acquisitioncommunity, the system managers must provide increased authority tothe Training and LSA project officers. Historically, training hasbeen vieved as only one of many ILS elements, often without thebenefit of an experienced person assigned to manage the trainingprogram. This tends to downplay the importance of training systemdevelopment as part of the weapon system design effort.

B. It should be noted that front-end analysis begins at the system levelin the Concept Exploration phase (CE) and proceeds tovard a moredetailed level in DEM/VAL phase. Thus, vith earlier HP? influences,the specifications for maintenance and aircrev training devices couldbe developed in the DEM/VAL phase versus the present method of

56

delaying ISD until full-scale development. Further, it must beremembered that conceptual data formed during FEA are continuallyrefined, influencing instructional design and finally, trainingmethods and media development. If properly directed, FEA data willprovide input into LSA/LSAR, and subsequently provide data for theISD documentation.

C. Influencing the design process under a strongly supported FEA %necessitates the timely flow of tailored data from the primecontractor to the SPO. Thus, the training and LSA managers must haveproperly specified their needs in the CDRLs for the CE and DEM/VALphases and have had sufficient authority to interface with thecontractor engineers, LSAR personnel, and SPO users of the data.

4.4 MILITARY STANDARD GUIDANCE

MIL-STD-1388-lA guidance was found to be adequate. The Military Standardprovides an LSA tailoring strategy for identifying necessary tasks to meetsystem program objectives. The guidance is stated at a level of detail andwith time-phasing that should permit proper planning of logistics elements toinclude training programs and requirements. The standard is applicable toboth contractor and Government activities. The Military Standard "Foreword"states, in part, "Increasing awareness that supportability factors, such asmanpower and personnel skills, are a critical element in system effectivenesshas necessitated early support analyses, the establishment of system con-straints, design goals, thresholds and criteria in these areas, and thepursuit of design, operational and support approaches which optimize lifecycle costs and the resources required to operate and maintain systems. Thisstandard was prepared to identify these early analysis requirements and fostertheir cost effective application during system acquisitions." As such, LSAguidance is designed to assist Program Offices but allows for flexibility andadaptation to specific programs.

4.5 DATA ELEMENTS/ITEMS

A. The LSAR system, IIIL-STD-1388-2A, contains the data elements and dataitems useful in training development. Table 2 lists those data ele-ments considered to be useful within acquisition for training devel-opment purposes in general. The table lists the LSAR data record,card number and block, and the applicable LSA report numbers. Lower-level data items are included where applicable. The corresponding UDBscreens/sheets are shown for reference under the UDB2000 system. Inaddition, the 3306 TES identified 53 LSAR data elements needed forISD purposes during their review. These 53 data elements are listedin Table 1.

B. Also, during development of the UDB, additional data elements usefulfor Air Force purposes were identified within logistics; some mayhave future application for training purposes. Table 3 lists thesedata elements by noun, purpose, and the UDB screen/sheet location.

571

W W

~GIn In4.. In

o .4l . ~ .0.

4000-4--~%

GD 00 r4 %

0. z enITT4 .4%00 0 -4 0 0 0

0.0 $ -C '-4 '-I no

00 0v -0

4.'4

t. LD

F-4 C w

0.-04 2 L.1

wi C4

.9.'-4 U0GDG@3

u 0L) " 60

e i,. ins 1'* 4.GD(A~~~. 9 ".0@ " 3 .

wu w P-41-4. 0 m..ZZ I93.041'"

w ftIt cn u1 CA~fU~f

4 N % *00%0e;

4 58N~*

M n

no - - cccc c

,-

0w 0

0Cd

LO0 0o 0o nog

41-0 0 000

0 1.

0 0 0 a fa

C4 C

"a a caa 1.. 4 s 0 .

.0 a

id c .d" t 0 60116

416 " b'P

6' 4 6' 6 ' 4

a@v 6' 1 0

9' I9

goon w mm m 0 cc on go

gal 9.40

V00 0

6 '0

04 L

ad.

I~41

0) -"41 414.

>4 to4 4. 0(.4 I 14.54 La r

0 .0 0 -

a .4.

41' bol I go v w.

&j pq La W o w 14 Lao

"4 V4 -4- D 4 -

C60

r-4 c a

"0 c 41 C

cn U fa3 4Cm fa t I I C1 bC13

l r,- I - I I

wi I

0

1.4

toU

0 pq C.)C.

c "

V). 6U fAA44U - 00 -t o L -1a wcM'laM--Vf g u4) >: or

tv ~ f~bU 40 ZE0A. zb~ 0 401 C 00Z00-

&j 0 41 z 4 laU 00f #(PUc P. 1aC AttE= t ' a 41 3 aD c I w 6 v 0 1 0Jo A 40 -C 4 a 04a W -I

a . It ~ Li cV1 e CS8m I n"%

V-4~AUU 9 41 4 WU0 q 449E.4 C4 e Une e n

*00

461

Pfm -% 7%K' r - -. -W -.r -,'N P w -W~ rWW'rw SF X~J~f. ~~ ~J2 ~

3.0 SI

CA w.go u

(IC

-4C-

0

w V

.06 U

S 4

0

U.. 00 c 4. 1~~& Mi~. W .

C4 .. ~~ 1.4 w 4~ 4wUmUjF. LAV W

%a 0% V4

ad r Cd

-ap

no

U6

cl; 00 .1

9-0d -4- a 4C

00

0Z % %0 %a ID

Q 0 0-*~N 0Gila UO

000 000

- .4 -N 0 4

Cn

oz 0 0 0 '0 '0

-U. 0 0: D. 0Wr -r L) 4I

fil % w~ V-4

4. U

10 C

N4 COL -

04C Cd 4A ~ ( LI63

C 4a0

1-4 m

v , '0 u

0)

OZ 40 0 r-0 N - 4.0 00 0 . 67

f-4 C.) 94 a M.)0 W

i Li - -

"%-4

in04

C.) 9) 4

I 0 W

N~~~~4 u 4 ~ 4 a L(1 -0.

0~~6 '4. Q.E4 I -- l Go 40 ia 4

64.

N, in 1.

C L44 Go~ ... 04 c 'D0C.

0~~~ 0 a0~ ~ b ~ .

0 0 0 0

1--4

L I 0 'C. 0

@J .1 %% 0 %0 % 0 00 100

L 4 - .4 N -0 -4 .4 '.09-0 0 InN 00

40

fa0

-to14 .4 4 454 z 4 a 49 g "

c

o1 (441V V) Ad

w 0 o 1 crV-. 4- se *j[6 c b

A0 60 to'- -P4 in a c@3 0~ W4 13 03 fuI

0 4 '.1Z4 t.4.4 -0 Id40

cn FA w4 (-. m 0 I- a- ww 0f-

0 ~ ~ ~ ( %DC c 24 ccen

W(1 eq %a C4 10 .aa 4

"4 -4,-( ad E'0 9. (N-40( u'V- ut at M- c - 4

1 1 I: vd c Id 0& Jji- .4. 04 bi4' 4to ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0. 00r1 -. ) 23 -4 *c

1 410f-4 P-4 v -4 F-11 AO Ad(4

44 &3dU m -W IW g I~ (of a

6SI

-wwz~rr,'~ V~WJ~~ N ~VV'VT vw W- X 1 wN~wfp r F T WR .Wu lir V.. W-dP-d W~rXF U.I FW N r -. ' P.w vAw r uF

"0 W

00

CL %

oz0

oo 0

4-

go

0C.4 ( G

1210 s M4 .u4 ~ I . ~ . c

'9 Jaa h s0* GD (U.G

0 1110 v 2co om LAA 40 %" :0$aP4c~"a a GD LIM -.4I~.~

OGD81O 92 23 U * S 0l ld 40 : .

- 4 i A S A uA .4 0 ad4 a Q5e - 4 "(U~ 1 Jd M W.41Wd U 41"4'., 40d

tp I -I0 6~ iiG &i .3i 5.5" UW4 P p P4 W4w

0-0

ada- 4 Ad4

a 4U

66

10

CA

4W4

O "o 0d 0c0 a 0

00

aL

41

-S.0- - v

W 0 sa 0 Va l-)&5 ORL a:0 V 4r4 V4. 4 4 ..1 ' 4.4-F 04

-2 - a -q -M a 4II

4W~4 a'a I9.6'a

~%Ad 0 "1 4 '44 0-4

q~ co' in4 .'. in

.r w-4

0% 4- P-W an -P4 in

4 r-44 *

4W-

P-4 V 4

ua 4 a-)

I~ UZ %oh1111j 67

Vi-4

Aa1U I co

00

CfLd 0

(U z *( 4 1 -4 .-4

wa ca C cab2 ~ JC

W, W J A ~ *

-W

w -4 0 00 0bi C.C9 ~Li

Dal

j; .0 041'IM

41 C

'a01 0 'a aP 1U 1 4

ad r4'0V)( U" - 4 P

Ii 91 t.00

ada

Li' -4 Y-4 "-"4. -M d' f-V mI~ 56

0

4 c 4 C4 1;

68

A do-A

InI

400

C4 "4-tI

"4

0z toJ -44 .,q C 11"0.0 0.r - L l..

0 U 8 - 8 P 8% 0 KJ"4-4 -4 U%. b

U) ul0 4 4 0. D u -F4 W W '0W 1 1U) 0 V. C.) C.0 C.4 $4 I 6 0 0 a 0'-0) 4- a&U1' 44

1 4; V % " -M.-A ".EU 4 .U~. 1. 0 *4441"4 &0 4 *.W P4 * "0 w0 UI &j , 4 UO1 .%

t4o2 "" I'4 to~4 U44 0 v VEaUi t

IW CJ 04 *O14 W@ ) *Eq EU 4v9'a~~~ 9. .4e .@ E' ,4 * ' 4 0 0 "4 "M IL

0 0

to I -4 EU-4cEU 9M a an"

-,4 -4

EDZ - to

60" "4.0 ~ a.4

FD4 "44EUI" "-I

to "4 4 W -4'61 > 00 :p ia

69

V-V7 K ,1o. VNVII N ,T.

0m 0-* ILLd

oz

U0

CLC

-4 -- -4

&D. Li AS4.Ea j v-4 ccU .~~i ) h

cm U

.5 1- 14 m L

ig A-N i0 b M'4 'm U) - 4 sw 0 U mi

41 be

41 0 -AzV- .

I n La: z 6

flu a)" : o0 040

I Ad

0 1; , V-

a

o Or0n

o4 c Ip

-C0 t

s-0

o zv, V

ad~

40

I41 'O 4

00 8O C4

V0 M 4.,

61 0 C

V0Go~ ul %& d0 eG* W 0 m 91 V4 bi i

0

711

*~ *C4

~~41 -4 ..0 in Co n 0 o 0 c%0 Cd c

461

Un 4. 41 44 4IVa 1 004 Wr. ~ L r. U 41 w41 - -

41 0 c 0 0 Wa0. 0 0 U-4 pq40 . t 4 4 .,4 " , 41 .' 41.0 c0 Q0 0 0 0- Lif Go A IUUU d0

41v10. 0. 41 40 0 C WCL A.d. do 44 44 0. w1.~i.- 44Go 41 -4 v 41 '-w tSi V-4 -4 -4 r4 va4 -4 40 41~ 44 -4 ad~U~ ad Imm0.id a-4 -4 e4 P-4 4 d~ -4 adCd4 00 0 0 CA M2 2 -4.4 0 00 *- 0 41

U2 L)) ho bo u ~ .. ~ u bo bo4 boW~ to ( .- qUUUU b 01

W ciwu H -4 E aIa1 -4(UZ o44 to 4.a' v v 4( 4.' t 4w1I-.. Ei V) E f - - - IA V

0. w 0 43c3 0 Zib -i 410 41 0 3c Z W4 a) %4 C) 0 0 Li ".4 -4 -. -. 0. 4 41)

in 204 enLin0V- T W % C 0 4 C4 In %D

34541 _ 8 * 8 - . - .41 404 C C. C,4 C4 C"U-4 co - 0 0 0 cc C c

922

-~~ ~ I A 1 -%411 0 Lr~i. 4 V " " w 3*i -

49 No 0 6404 4 0 o2ai 00 V0 ". U

64 wa~ i'~ U 0* ~ - F- "'LiM41lo' U2 = * 40 C6 4.

Ad 14 A.4 443s "4 1* 0 4111 54 44

U.90 f ~ 4 0.4 41441 0

sa*4 . w .0 . .0 r *- 30 "4 Wuo - M~ -~4'

fj .04 64a~~

40 + -J. i,-, -'4' ~ -- ,--

C.q 4-4 . .o4d. 4 "4 - c

-4 -* 4- *04 -4 *4 - CC 4 O CC *.- Go4- c

0"4. 0.U0 L). 4.#0 .).r.cJ~ t -c~4 c cm c a

40 40 0 a 0 0O(v -40 *...-.* .4444 M4 -400 00 to )0 -4 a#0 0 0

-. 4 ."

4.' d-.4. .. 14. ". 4.4. 4.1 4.4a

&W 0 WED wE GD EDE 6D IV 41 LD W 0- u vW 04 G 04 WED Vd ad ad D

40 I-% I-I 4)~ wi~ r-4 0i~ .,i L. dr4 %

0D C 4 4 '4 w-4 -14 -4. -4 .14

.~4 . c'~ 04 = 0 '0O -4- -4

to 0. 0 4. 0w" ot

rWI 0 0 4 COl M. tn 41 0 - -4 .. 4 r-4 P..4 Q -4 .. 4 -4 ..-40fI ~-4 P L JW C --4 -.4 -4 -.4 to 04e4 ., .4

E-40 > .4 E- 4 04.4u VO~ DbL .0.> . . - P. D. 0 D. > >

LW ~ 00 F-4 .. 4. .. LW-C- . -C 4c

W- " fn , 0 % D C4e n ek D0co 0 cc cc 0 0-C. 00 00 bb 4 C.J, n J3 J2cn U2 to ' J2 ~ .03 4, 42I nI A t wt , 0 I

404

.44 2 4

4-I wGD-I a

C.) 4 0 0 00 020 0 000 00 00 IIwD 1i 31 SI P- r4 iP

4.0 la .0:hb 0 40

P-U P- U0 4.

40-t 1- A 00 A Dr. "4 vcul 1 c6

41 M 4 0 14 VC * -.4 A q

4.0W jL I U 14 9. -- 4

gn~ ~ z.~ CcP zI%.0 I W L LW @. 4 C

u, .0' ".6 "q z 6 9 f k

o D' O 0 CL-" ' p-4-4

"0 4d1 &.i) &0 w0. I0 .@0~~w " , e EDW

313 AL LW 11C 4 w i *"4W It ED aD 0a

en Ma f" en .,.e . .0- -0 .0 It

73 Z~ i @@

GD.0 S~ UNMI

60

4,40 en c LL.-4 4 0% 0 c %4nq4 oe

- * 0

>, :p. >4~ 0 0l to 0 -4 Cv.4

-1 a V Wc4.# 41 0 -c m0 04 0 0 D

toW4 to to V O4 M ~ 4 wLiW Wv1 M - tow-m L Wz. ... o. VWWW. W ~ 1.~ 0 =0 wU 0d

I'l j ZZ0 4-o~ U cn U I-4' I41 0 %"4>0 UCJ 0 0o * 0.=E0-4-b U0 94 0in -

0. 41o4 0.0M0 v. 0. 4''. 4.-cJ~ 041W4. w w J WImm 0.0 M,1(4 Z14 M.-i~~~l~~~ C41 W .8"4

0 0 0 6- U W.iU-OL 0.. Li"to u~ u u 00 " bo 4.0.4 bo mU.Oa 0 aF10 W CI 41 .10Lc~~ou~

'&- cJ. .. 4 4 04 44di &IP .- I Im 0 v 0rn W r.0 m 4wa ur 0 QW -4..w, w

444 2UU U 0 r 0 0I .4'-

0 -40

0 to t cW 0 0q 0 0.4 -4 .0 4 0 . '- 4 r_ .0 L 4 0 w w

w 00 Wm Wm 41414 Li r4 cn~,14~144 II w

-a m~ o4uo1 - 4McQwvf c

4 V1

4. '0 v0' 0 C-4 enI E~Ln co % o0v4 C4J m IT ul' %0 .0 000 00000000a 0

-4-

.0 W' 4

41 U1Li 4-d (A Lto 4 0 U0. -44

C, C) ff~l -4 #.4Li 0 "C41

0~. ~zMg-4 41 to im4

31 U &a 6(0 ca vW 4' 0

at &a O~l P.4 ul 441 C U rLI -4 .4 40 Wi r,

4 Li34 o44 'a *1V 3 0r4U

.0~~- Li s

0. eel I1 &,w~ tv @4 4'9 W4 L Ml o $

e - -W i i A iALA inLinAin L A i

74

4.6 MANPOWER, PERSONNEL, AND TRAINING (MPT) DIRECTORATE

A. The recently established ASD/ALH Directorate should become a vitalelement in the integration of MPT issues in the acquisition cycle.The basic purpose of MPT analysis, which is to quantify impacts onboth current and planned weapon systems and to develop alternativeMPT utilization concepts and system designs to optimize theeffectiveness of our forces, can be more fully realized as theDirectorate expands its involvement vithin the acquisition community.In this effort, ALH will be focusing on improvements in maintenanceand support of MPT issues and reflecting upon the concerns andplanning efforts of the using commands, supporting commands, andprogram offices.

B. Under the Directorate's concept of operations, the development ofdatabases and analytical techniques for MIT considerations in thedesign process will unfold. ALH should also aid the SPO in

establishing an MIT baseline and handling impacts caused by design,operations, or maintenance concept changes. Policy review anddevelopment will be a key role of this office, and management mustconsolidate present MIT efforts and serve as the final clearing houseon all matters of lFT direction and issues.

C. The Directorate should eventually provide MPT expertise to theProgram Offices and advise, assist, and provide information, models,and methodologies to support all aspects of MIT planning. In thismanner, the SPOs should be able to compare, project, and assessvarious design options and operational and maintenance trade-offs fortheir relative impacts on MFT and life-cycle costs. This capability,

when formalized, should also help eliminate costly changes inplanning, programming, and funding of MPT resources due to incompletefront-end analysis.

4.7 RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Manpower, personnel, and training should be given adequate considera-tion as part of the front-end analysis, with PEA applied early in theConcept Exploration (CE) and Demonstration (DEM/VAL) phases.

B. lPT or training requirements should be afforded the same level ofinterest as the systems engineering during the acquisition process.Training managers must have sufficient authority to influence MPTrequirements for training system design.

C. Design data requirements should be placed on contract for Nflpurposes early in the CE and DEM/VAL phases, through selectedlistings on the CDRLs and the tailoring of data item descriptions(DIDs). The Training Development Plan should be expanded to includethose DIDs required for training data, and updated as necessary afterprogram reviews.

D. Program reviews and other plannng meetings should be attended by allPT- and LSA-involved members on a regular basis. Reves, planningmeetings, working groups, and briefings should be coordinated eforts

75

-- whether conducted by the SPO, SIMSPO, ATC, or the contractor -- inan effort to keep the flow of information and data on a continuous,parallel course.

E. Interfaces should be established and maintained during acquisitionphases between the SPO training and LSA managers, SIMSPO MPTmanagers, and prime contractor training system and LSA managers.

F. Automated LSAR systems should be adopted, with on-line capabilityfrom the contractor to the SPO and Responsible Test Agency for ISD.

G. SPO training and LSA managers should be scheduled to attend, as a

minimum, the following courses:

Air Force MFT Systems Model Course (conducted by Booz, Allen,Hamilton, Inc., for the SIMSPO).

LSA/LSAR Course (conducted by AFALC/ERL)

H. A new data element descriptor (DED) should be established for Student

Target Population, to permit a narrative summary and listing for

skill-level code, skill specialty code, prerequisite education and

training, previous weapon system experience, and security clearance.

I. DED 503 (Training Rationale) should be examined for change to *anarrative entry to justify training requirements or be replaced byDED 183 (Justification). In addition, this type of information shouldbe examined for inclusion in LSAR reports 070 and 075.

76

PUFj-~xK- W'J WV-VWC VN PVI% 11V NI Urv K ' -. -1 . V . T 'tN VP z- - - -

V. REFERENCES

1. Department of the Air Force. (1984, October). Air Force LogisticsCommand (AFR 23-2). Washington, DC: Author.

2. Department of the Air Force. (1981, January). Airman Classification(AFR 39-1). Washington, DC: Author.

3. Department of the Air Force (1978, July). Handbook for Designers ofInstructional Systems (AFP 50-58). Washington, DC: Author,

4. Department of the Air Force. (1984, December). Human Factors Engineering(AFR 800-15). Washington, DC: Author.

5. Department of the Air Force. (1986, July). Instructional SystemsDevelopment (AFR 50-2).Washington, DC: Author.

6. Department of the Air Force. (1980, February). Integrated LogisticSupport (ILS) Program (AFR 800-8). Washington, DC: Autor.

7. Department of the Air Force. (1984, August). Management of TrainingSystems (AFR 50-11).Washington, DC: Author.

8. Department of the Air Force. (1984, August). Policy and Guidance forInstructional Systems Development (ISD) (AFR 50-8). Washington, DC:Author.

9. Department of the Air Force. (1985, January). Procedural Handbook.Edvards AFB, CA: 3306 Test and Evaluation Squadron (ATC).

10. Department of the Air Force. (1981, July). Special Training (AFR 50-9).Washington, DC: Author.

11. Department of the Air Force. (1985, May). Statement of Operational Need(SON) (AFR 57-1).Washington, DC: Author.

12. Hannaman, D. L., Freeble, L. A., &Miller, G. G. (1978, August). Descrip-tion of the Air Force maintenance training device acquisition andutilization processes (AFHRL-TR-78-28, AD-A059 743). Lowry AFB, CO:Technical Training Division, Air Force Human Resources Laboratory.

13. Hritz, R., & Purifoy, G., Jr. (1982, February). Maintenance trainingsimulator design and acquisition: ISD - derived training equipmentdesign (AFHRL-TP-81-52, AD-AII0871). Lorry AFB, CO: Logistics andTechniical Training Division, Air Force Human Resources Laboratory.

14. Purifoy, G. R., Jr., & Benson, E. W. (1979, November). Maintenancetraining simulators design and acquisition: Summary of currentprocedures (AFBRL-TR-79-23, AD-A079 636). Lovry AFB, CO: TechnicalTraining Division, Air Force Human Resources Laboratory.

77

VI. GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS

AFALC Air Force Acquisition Logistics Center

AFB Air Force Base

AFHRL Air Force Human Resources Laboratory

AFLC Air Force Logistics CommandAFS Air Force Specialty

AFSC Air Force Specialty Code

ALC Air Logistics Center

AMT Aircraft Maintenance Training

AFOTEC Air Force Operational. Test and Evaluation Center

ASD Aeronautical Systems Division

ATC Air Training Command

CDRL Contract Data Requirements List

CE Concept Exploration

DED Data Element Dictionary

DEM/VAL Demonstration/Validation

DID Data Item Description

DPML Deputy Program Manager for Logistics

FEA Front-End Analysis

FSD Full-Scale Development

FTD Field Training Detachment

ICS Interim Contractor Support

IDD Integrated Data Dictionary

IDMS Integrated Data Management System

ILS Integrated Logistics Support

ILSP Integrated Logistics Support Plan

IOC Initial Operational Capability

78

ISD Instructional System Development

ISLN Integrated Logistics Support Hanager

LCN Logistics Support Analysis Control Number

LSA Logistic Support Analysis

LSAR Logistics Support Analysis Record

LT Lanpoer, Personnel, and Training

NRSA Material Readiness Support Activity (Army)

MTT Mobtle Traning Team

NHA Next Higher Assembly

PLISN Provisioning List Item Sequence Number

PM Program Lanager

PMD Program Management Directive

PMP Program Management Plan

PPBS Programming, and Budgeting System

PRP Program Reve m Package

RFP Request for Proposal

R&P Reliability and antanability

RTA Responsible Test Agency

SASC Systems and Applied Sciences Corporation

SHE Subject-atter Expert

SMS Subject-Matter Specialist

SPO System Program Office

SON Statement of Operational Need

SOW Statement of Work

TDP Training Development Plan

TES Test and Evaluation Squadron

TRRRM Training Requirements Recommendation Reviev Meeting

79

TIES Task Identification and Evaluation System

TTC Technical Training Center

UDB Unified Data Base

WBS Work Breakdovn StructureH-P AFB Wright-Patterson Air Force Base

:1

U

IIII

80 1

iv u. ~

9 0

9.

/ ~

0

~MX~0

S

I'w W W W V V V V V V V V V S