OFRP For SNA Public Version Final - 15jan

Optimizing The Fleet Response Plan
ADM Bill Gortney

15 January 2014
United States Fleet Forces
United States Pacific Fleet
Readiness Kill Chain

Past, Present, Way Ahead
Governance / C2 Drives integration & synchronization vertically across weapons systems & horizontally across the readiness lifecycle
Means
Personnel Equipment Supplies Training Ordnance Networks Installations Community Industry Elected Leaders RESOURCE / POLICY ACCESS / PROCURE PREINTRO
Ways
FRTP
MAINT BASIC INTEGRATED
Ends Assess
DEPLOY & SUSTAIN
Surface Weapon System Aviation Submarines C4ISR/CYBER NECC OP/TAC HQs Common Actions Synchronized Training Full Weapon System Ops
Everyone is part of the Readiness Kill Chain Everyone needs to know their place and role in the Readiness Kill Chain Means and Ways must support the Ends our Deployability / Sustainment model, the FRP
United States Fleet Forces United States Pacific Fleet
As of 08MAY13
What is RKC?
The Readiness Kill Chain (RKC) is a way to break down institutional barriers, increase understanding of readiness production, ensure a common understanding of Navy readiness on the same page, and ensure that policies, resources, and products deliver the right capability and readiness for mission requirements.
Specifically, RKC is a repeatable methodology to identify readiness production barriers and root causes, followed by development of effective strategies and solutions to remove these barriers. These processes result in complete assessment and presentation for decisions used to improve forward deployed readiness and resolve barriers in an informed and cost effective manner.
O-FRP is one example of implementation of the RKC. O-FRP uses the RKC approach to analyze various stages of the processes for training, inspections, parts, maintenance and manning to achieve desired end states.
3
CNO Guidance
WARFIGHTING
FIRST
We will deliver credible capability for deterrence, sea control, and power projection to deter or contain conflict and fight and win wars.
Operate forward at strategic maritime crossroads; Sustain our fleet capability through effective maintenance, timely modernization, and sustained production of proven ships and aircraft. . We must ensure todays force is ready for its assigned missions. Maintaining ships and aircraft to their expected service lives is an essential contribution to fleet capacity
OPERATE FORWARD
We will operationalize the Sailing Directions through the Optimized Fleet Response Plan using the Readiness Kill Chain (RKC)
BE
READY
We developed the Optimized Fleet Response Plan to establish a more manning-balanced and sustainable cycle
- CNO Position Report: 2013, p 3

4
CNOs Tenets
The CNOs tenets as outlined in his Sailing directions and reinforced in the Navigation Plan are clear. The Readiness Kill Chain approach provides us a holistic construct, or methodology, to ensure the Fleet is focused on warfighting forward and ready to conduct missions assigned and O-FRP is the answer to how we balance those priorities.
What is O-FRP?
The Optimized Fleet Response Plan (O-FRP) has been developed to enhance the stability and predictability for our Sailors and families by aligning carrier strike group assets to a new 36 month training and deployment cycle. Beginning in fiscal year 15, all required maintenance, training, evaluations and a single eight-month deployment will be efficiently scheduled throughout the cycle in such a manner to drive down costs and increase overall fleet readiness.
Under this plan, we will streamline the inspection and evaluation process and ensure that we are able to maintain a level of surge capacity.
O-FRP reduces time at sea and increases home port tempo from 49% to 68% for our Sailors over the 36 month period. Initially focused on Carrier Strike Groups, O-FRP will ultimately be designed for all U.S Navy assets from the ARG/MEU to submarines and expeditionary forces.
6
Fleet Response Plan Problem Statement

We have lost predictability
For Sailors, families, industrial base Readiness producers, and readiness consumers Length does not accommodate maintenance and training or maximize operational availability Misaligned CSG / DESRON Chains of Command Manning levels not aligned to the phases of FRP
Maintenance and modernization

Not executing on time / budget Requires better synchronization Underfunded spares accounts Unconstrained inspection process Lack of standardized Operational /Tactical HQ academic, synthetic, and live training
7
Potential Drivers to Readiness Production

C2
C3
HST CSG
JUL10 SEP13
C4
C5
Traditional Fleet FRP
Cost Driver Schedule Driven FRP Inefficiency
C2
C2
NIM CSG
C3 FEB11 SEP13 C3
IKE CSG
FEB11 SEP13
C4
C4
C5
C5
Cost Driver Maintenance and Schedule Driven FRP Inefficiency

Model Readiness Actual profile
Cost Driver Maintenance Driven FRP Inefficiency

Anticipated profile
Understanding Potential Drivers to Readiness Production Slide

The previous slide graphically depicts inefficiencies. The solid blue line represents our readiness model and the dashed line is reality for these three Strike Groups. Each of these three profiles is unique and our generic profile is not reliably predictive of the investment of our means and ways in this process. IKE CSG faced maintenance challenges which delayed her work-ups and deployment and then she conducted a second deployment after a short homeport visit. HST CSG trained up and then delayed due to a change in presence requirements we banked her readiness during this delay. NIM CSG was a combination of both maintenance and schedule delays. Comparing a generic planning FRP profile to these CSGs profiles highlights the need to find a model that is more predictable and reliable in the planning process and ensures that we conserve scarce resources and money. O-FRP establishes a framework to develop a predictive model that will drive each CSG to look and execute a more similar FRP profile.
9
O-FRP Predecessor: Enhanced Carrier Presence

DepSecDef-driven concept to generate 3.0-4.0 CSG Ao
7-7-7 plan (Deploy/Dwell/Deploy) 49 percent Homeport Time Deployments are 39 percent of the FRP length ECP Frame work:
Provides a predictable FRP cycle Extends/synchs CVN/CVW/SC FRP cycles to 36 months Fixes CSG composition: Ships/aircraft/staffs remain aligned thru entire FRP cycle Generates fully ready forces, trained to a single MCO certification standard Establishes a stable and predictable maintenance plan Maintenance interval remains constant
ECP concept ended Jan 13 due to sequester/POM fiscal limits
10
Managed Wholeness
The following series of slides describe progress achieved in our effort to manage Fleet wholeness across the Readiness Kill Chain (RKC) through the Optimized-Fleet Response Plan (O-FRP). Managed Wholeness, is a term USFF coined to describe how we are leading our forces through the tough fiscal turbulence expected over the coming years.
11
Current Fiscal Environment

Weve started FY 14 under a Continuing Resolution Amendment at reduced funding levels. Additionally, we are constrained by our current manpower levels and force structure. As a result, we have to carefully manage the wholeness of the Fleet with innovative cost saving measures that optimize readiness at the reduced funding levels.
12
Optimized Fleet Response Plan (O-FRP)

Retains ECP framework / capacity with reduced global Ao (~2.0)
36 month FRP
Single 8-month deployment Starts with HST CSG in Nov 2014
Enables delivery of:

Fixed CSG Composition
Aligned and stabilized CSG manning throughout the FRP

Stable maintenance plan Improved quality of work and enhanced quality of life Embedded Electromagnetic Spectrum Maneuver Warfare and Naval Integrated Fire Control Counter Air Forces trained to a single certification standard
13
Optimized FRP
Lines of Effort
Operational & Tactical HQs (USFF / CPF N7)
Advanced Training (USFF / CPF N7)

Unit Training (TYCOMs)
Lines of Effort
Inspections (USFF/CPF N43) Parts (USFF / CPF N41 OPNAV N8/N9) Maintenance/ Modernization (NAVSEA / NAVAIR USFF / CPF ) Manning/ Individual Training (OPNAV N1 /USFF) CSG Alignment (USFF / CPF N3) FRP Length (USFF / CPF OPNAV N3)
14
FRP Length
Maximum CSG Operational Availability (Ao)

ECP
Length Homeport Tempo D / FRP 7/7/7 0.49 0.39
O-FRP
8 0.68 0.22
36 month FRP
Supply-based; surge capacity dependent upon funding Maximum forward presence with available capacity and funding Predictable, yet adaptable
Able to meet FY14-16 with 2.0 CVN and 27 SC (includes 9+4 FDNF)
PREDICTABLE ADAPTABLE For the sunk cost of maintenance & training, maximize Ao, with a clean chain of command, and an acceptable PERSTEMPO
15
What is AO?
AO is Operational Availability. Basically, this is the time a platform is employable. This does not take into consideration OPTEMPO and PERSTEMPO. The formula is the cycle length minus maintenance and training. For example, in the 36-month O-FRP cycle, there are approximately 6 months maintenance and 6 training. Therefore, AO is approximately 24 months. AO = [ Cycle length (maintenance time and training time)] AO = 36-(6+6) = 24 This does not mean that a Carrier Strike Group will be deployed for the entire Operational Availability. Under O-FRP, deployment lengths are metered by Service Quality of Life factors. AO is simply a measure of when a platform is employable, and is used for planning both for rotational deployment and to determine surge capacity should a National emergency arise.
16
FRP Length
36 month FRP cycle becomes the foundation upon which we generate CSGs ready for deployment and provides maximum Ao for CSG presence/funding level. Under a sustainable O-FRP, a single 8 month deployment generates a deployed to FRP ratio (D/FRP) of 0.22 (or in other terms 5 CVNs can generate 1.0 global presence) with the ability to go to 0.38 (or 3 CVNs to generate a 1.0 presence) should resources ever become available. These CSGs will be composed of 7-8, vice current 3-4, surface combatants who will be aligned under a single DESRON and will aggregate for training and certification. Surface combatants deployment dates may vary slightly due to maintaining Global Force Management Allocation Plan (GFMAP) adjudicated presence requirements: Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD), SCAN EAGLE, and FIRE SCOUT.
17
CSG Alignment
Problem: CSG and Destroyer Squadron Misalignment
Operational Control (OPCON) and Administrative Control (ADCON) Chain of Command and FITREPS DESRON Commanders do not deploy with their assigned SC CSGs deploy with SC from multiple squadrons Multiple Independent deployer CERTEX events required Advanced training produces lesser qualification (MSO vs. MCO) DESRON SC FRP cycles not in alignment Capability mismatch with CSG
Solution:
Fixed CSG Composition
C2 Aligned with FRP cycle OPCON aligned with deployment cycle SC schedules more predictable BMD integrated within CSG Surface combatant CMP aligned with CVN Cost effective, Major Combat Operations Independent deployers
Iterative changes will be required in out years to complete

18
CSG Alignment
When examining DESRON alignments in conjunction with O-FRP, we saw an opportunity to fix numerous discrepancies, such as wholesale surface combatant swap outs between CSG multiple deployments as well as integrating BMD capability into CSGs. O-FRP aligns surface combatant and CVN/CVW cycles to optimize resources required to achieve deployment certification. Simple administrative alignment near term achieves 90% DESRON alignment. 21 of 29 moves have been mapped out for TYCOM execution to support 4 CSGs. USFF is changing DESRON assignments so that all CRUDES will be aligned to their CSGs starting with the GHWB CSG for their FEB 2014 deployment. Ownership alignment also allows ISICs to begin transmitting Commanders intent to assigned units early operational and professional expectations.
19
Manning Wholeness
Personnel readiness standard
92/95/1 minimum deployment manning levels Take risk in non-deployed units and post deployment surge
100.0%
Actions to achieve wholeness

Recruit/Access to meet demand Manage Street to Fleet supply chain Fund the Individuals Accounts Define and prioritize critical operational shore duty billets
95.0% 90.0% 85.0%
80.0%
Manage and sustain wholeness

Report and manage individual PERSTEMPO Incentivize and retain quality sailors Manage FIT/FILL risk ashore Established PERS-454 to streamline LIMDU process
Fit
Fill
Fit Forecast
Fill Forecast
Fit Threshold
20
FIT/FILL/CRITICAL NEC
In the previous slide, we used 92/95/1 as our endstate. This is also known as FIT / FILL / Critical NEC The first number is FIT
This indicates that a commanding officer will have 92 percent of sailors authorized with the right skill sets
The second number is FILL

This number indicates that at least 95 percent of the required manning is on board
The third and final number indicates that there is at least 1 sailor on board that has the qualifications for every critical Navy Enlisted Classification (NEC)
21
Manning
The Fleet continues to face a fit/fill below the standard of 90/90/1 with an upward in trend of cross decks and diverts needed to maintain that standard. After a TYCOM RKC review and a USFF N1 led Navy-wide working group, a CNO approved POAM was developed to increase the personnel readiness target, set actions to achieve wholeness and manage and sustain the gains. OPNAV N1 was given the lead to execute the POAM.
22
HST CSG Manning to O-FRP

HST FILL / FIT
Achievementof92% Fitand95%Fill
100% 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60%
RCN Fill Threshold RCN Fill RCN Fill Proj RCN Fit Threshold RCN Fit RCN Fit Proj NEC Fit NEC Fit Proj Crit NEC Fit Crit NEC Fit Proj BBD QofA
Maintenance
Basic
Integrated
Sus
Avail
BBD P4 Proj
COGNOS Data Source : Nov 5, 2013
HST CSG SJA Fill (Payband)

FILL THRESHOLD
102%
HST CSG SJA Fit (Payband)

Unit
Curre nt M onth Re quire d BBD QoA M anning (Ne w Actions to M e tric 92% (bas e d Unde r on Curre nt Re vie w ) M onth) 90 87 85 86 85 86 82 82 87 89 89 89 83 89 87 84 40 1 20 7 17 6 23 23 1 12 0 6 9 7 1 7 180
SUP FILL
JNY FILL
APP FILL
102%
FIT THRESHOLD
SUP FIT
JNY FIT
APP FIT
RCN Fill %
RCN Fit %
NEC Fit %
Crit NEC Fit %
CVN 75 H.S. TRUM A N
92% 90% 90% 90% 89% 94% 85% 85% 104% 90% 94% 90% 88% 89% 94% 96%
90% 90% 85% 89% 86% 90% 83% 83% 91% 86% 92% 89% 85% 87% 91% 89% Total
70% 53% 73% 71% 73% 67% 65% 65% 45% 75% 64% 80% 72% 80% 81% 60%
70% 53% 73% 71% 73% 67% 65% 65% 45% 75% 64% 80% 72% 80% 81% 60%
97%
97%
COM CA RSTRKGRU 1 0 CG 72 VELLA GULF
92%
92%
CG 61M ONTEREY CG 56 SA N JA CINTO DDG 80 ROOSEVELT
87%
87%
DDG 87 M A SON DDG 94 NITZE
82%
82%
CVW 3 VFA 32 VFA 37
77%
Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14
77%
Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14
VFA 1 05 VA W 1 26 VA Q 1 30 HSC 7 HSM 74
M a n n i n g
Di stri bution
A c t i o n s
Unplanned
40
20 0 Nov-13 Dec- 13 Ja n-14 Feb-14 Ma r- 14 Apr-14 Ma y-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14
TBD
23
Maintenance & Modernization

CNO Availability schedules are set:
Aligned with CRUDES assignment to CSGs Stable, predictable and integrated maintenance and modernization plan Proper availability planning Allowance for timely port loading adjustments Integrated with assessments Aligns Surface Ship Class Maintenance Plan to 36 months to match CVNs
Modernization improvements:
Interoperable and aligned CSG/ARG C5I capabilities Integrated SOVT test to include all associated supporting systems
Improved aircraft inventory management to fully support training plan Adjust SFRM to 36 month FRP
Stable, Predictable, Integrated Maintenance & Modernization that aligns and synchronizes CSG capabilities
24
Maintenance & Modernization

Turning to maintenance and using the kill chain As is / To be construct, we found that maintenance was impacted by changes in schedules and funding, and is constrained by port loading. Thumb-rule used by maintenance providers is that costs go up by 3x for work packages changes through mid-availability and as much as 8X for changes in work packages from mid-to-late availability. So, this is a significant cost driver. We also found that modernization is not aligned to the group and that there is significant variance in combat systems. For instance, in the 62 ship Arleigh Burke Class, there are 42 different configurations of only 8 major C4I systems. Clearly, an interoperability challenge. Configuration variance reduction is one element that will improve maintenance and modernization execution. Providing a stable and predictable FRP length with clear ownership alignment to a particular CSG would alleviate many of these challenges.
25
Maintenance & Modernization RKC Analysis

Commanders Intent
Use a Readiness Kill Chain approach Analyze the various stages of the end to end process
Ship/Submarine Maintenance and Modernization:

NAVSEA lead Drive Work Package development and Planning effort to be done earlier Integrate Class Maintenance Plan requirements with Modernization
Aircraft Depot Maintenance

- NAVAIR lead
26
Surface Spares Wholeness

Spares availability critical to readiness Stagnant/downward trends in key indicators drove action to get right parts on the shelves Outfitting Spares
Additional $51M added to outfitting spares accounts May13; minimal spares backlog Outfitting spares funding green across Future Year Defense Plan
Fleet Shipboard Spares

Significant investments in AEGIS/BMD spares FY10-13 COSAL updates every 2 months since July 2012 Additional $21M investment in surface spares end of Fiscal Year 2013
Ship Construction Spares

$14.6M added back to LPD-25 & LHA-6 programs end of Fiscal Year 2013
Coordinated Shipboard Allowance List (COSAL) effectiveness improving and expected to continue
27
Inspections
= Independent Inspections As-Is
PRESENT: 466 inspections
INSURV MI / MCMA
MI
MCMA
Maintenance
Basic
Integrated
Deployment
To-Be FUTURE:
INSPECTION PERIOD I
INSPECTION PERIOD III INSPECTION PERIOD II
CNO designated USFF as Executive Agent for Fleet Assessment: - Oversee changes to Inspections, Certifications, Assessment and Visits events - Approval authority for new or expanded requirements - Standardize Assessment Criteria - Maximize training value - Develop enduring process for continual review - Lead senior advisory group to CNO on ICAV matters
28
28
Inspections
This diagram approaches inspection and assessment processes in the As is: at top and To be on the bottom of the chart. The curves represent a generic readiness curve and are sub divided horizontally by phase. Our Fleet Action Working Group found that there are 466 different inspections, certifications, assists and visits scattered across the FRP. Some of these are time based, some are conditions based and others are policy or law. Many are, frankly, outdated. Developing an assessment and inspection continuum across the FRP will:
Optimize external assessment and inspection events to eliminate redundancy Optimize assessment timing within the FRP Standardize assessment and inspection requirements Standardize expectations to minimize impacts to ships force personnel
Develop institutionalized process for continuous adjudication of future inspections within the FRP.
29
Creating a Smarter INSURV

Reduced from 5 days to 3 days
Commences on Tuesday vice Monday to reduce burden on crew
Improved Operational Risk Management

Ships do not get underway before 0700 to enhance safety Ship leadership afforded crew rest through improved scheduling of events and elimination of redundant and out dated requirements
Linked to Readiness Events

Accepts TYCOM TSRA PMS data as INSURV data. This makes INSURV even shorter (3 days or less)
Analyzes more data over broader period of time

Collects TYCOM mid-cycle assessment data as INSURV data. This increases the amount of data used to identify maintenance and readiness trends
30
EA For Fleet Assessments

IPR 25 SEP 13
17 JAN 14
18 OCT 13
PHASE ONE FAWG

DELIVERABLES
1. 2. AS-IS ICAV LIST CMP PROPOSED ICAV CHANGES COMPLETE PROPOSED TO-BE STATE COMPLETE ICAV CHARTER DRAFTED RESOURCES
PHASE TWO TYCOM/SYSCOM REVIEWS

DELIVERABLES
1. 2. 3. EA FOR ICAV DESIGNATED COMPLETE REFINE/CONCUR WITH ICAV CONCEPT - COMPLETE COMMENT/CONCUR WITH ICAV CHANGES STAKEHOLDERS REVIEWING CHARTER All AIRFOR AND SURFOR ICAVs TIED TO FOUR PHASES IN FRP COMPLETE AIRFOR AND SURFOR IDENTIFIED ICAVS TO COMBINE - COMPLETE LINKAGE INSTRUCTION DRAFTED AND TESTED ON JET BLAST DEFLECTORS (JBDs) COMPLETE SUBLANT JOINED FAWG
ECD 14 FEB 14
PHASE THREE FLEET CDR REVIEW

DELIVERABLES
1. SIGN CHARTER TYCOMS HAVE REVIEWED WITH ONLY MINOR CHANGES DESIGNATE CICAVA CONTAINED WITHIN CHARTER STANDUP CICAVA RESOURCE CICAVA INSURV MESSAGE INSURV HAS ACTION TO LEAD LINKAGE ESTABLISHMENT BETWEEN TYCOM AND INSURV INSPECTIONS
ECD 1 OCT 14
3.
4. 5.
PHASE FOUR CENTRAL ICAV AUTHORITY (CICAVA)

DELIVERABLES
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. DRAFT AND SIGN ICAV INSTRUCTION ASSUME DUTIES FROM FAWG PRIORITIZE ICAV CHANGES DEVELOP ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY SURFACE SHIP INSURV INSPECTIONS REDUCED TO 3.5 DAYS APR 2014
4.
2.
PHASE FIVE STEADY STATE

DELIVERABLES
1. CICAVA ACTS AS THE GATEKEEPER TO SYNCHRONIZE ALL ICAV EVENTS CICAVA EXTENDS PROCESS TO OTHER FRPDRIVEN ENTITIES
5.
6.
3. 4. 5. 6.
2.
7.
CICAVA MAKES CHANGES

DELETE, MOVE CONSOLIDATE, AND OPTIMIZE ICAV EVENTS (MOVE FROM AS-IS TO TO-BE)
DELIVERABLES
BLUE COMPLETED RED NOT COMPLETED
31
O-FRP Training
Carrier, air-wing, and all surface combatants training aligned ALL units trained to one standard People and equipment ready for training at the end of maintenance Basic unit training
Retains training time entitlement Integrates inspection, certification, and continuous maintenance requirements
24 Weeks
CRUDES
CVN CVW
TIER 1 - Mobility
READ-6 / CMAV WCC
TIER 2 - Unit Tactical Non Skid TSTA A-G ARP
TYCOM Tasking
A-A ARP
Advanced unit and integrated group training

Standardized Group Sail More efficient training schedule Standardized training Fleet-wide
14 Weeks
CRUDES
CVN CVW
Group Sail TSTA / FEP
Academic Synthetic CVW FALLON Live
32
Operational Level to Tactical Level Headquarter Alignment

Aligned and standardized Navy warfighting staffs from operational to tactical level
Functions based on Mission Essential Tasks aligned from Combatant to Tactical Commander Personnel assigned with right skill sets to meet HQ fit Interoperable systems between Operational and Tactical Level HQ Standardized and codified staff training and exercise program
Alignment
Combatant Commander
CTG
NCC
CTF
CSG, CVW, DESRON, PHIBRON
Standardization
Optimized Fleet Response Plan will provide aligned and standardized Operational and Tactical Level Headquarters
33
Headquarters Alignment
Both tactical and operational (TL / OL) staffs have 2 main focus areas:
Support commanders decision cycle, and assure subordinate success
Key elements in the kill chain are Tactical and Operational Level staffs. TL HQs need to be functionally aligned to OL HQs. Achieving this requires standardized tactical staff academic training. Revised Strike Group Tactical Training Continuum (SGTTC) codifies individual training for tactical staffs.
Standardizes training by billet
Includes CSG CDR, CVW, DESRON, ESG, PHIBRON, TACRON, Warfare CDRS, and staffs Sets individual requirements for pipeline and Fleet training
34
Optimized FRP
Lines of Effort
OL/TL HQs (USFF / CPF N7) Advanced Training (USFF / CPF N7)
HST IOC MAY 14 GHWB IOC AUG 13 TR IOC SEP 13
GHWB
VIN HST
TR
Unit Training (TYCOMs)
HST HST
GHWB GHWB VIN
VIN
Lines of Effort
Inspections (USFF/CPF N43) Parts (USFF / CPF N41 OPNAV N8/N9) Maintenance/ Modernization (USFF / CPF N43/N6) Manning/ Individual Training (USFF / OPNAV N1)
HST
GHWB HST
VIN GHWB
TR VIN
CSG Alignment (USFF / CPF N3)

FRP Length (USFF/CPF OPNAV N43)
HST / GHWB / TR by MSG AUG 13
Foundation to O-FRP
----------
CVN/CVW There Now
----------
SC w/HST 35
First O-FRP CSG: TRUMAN

Starts with maintenance cycle in Nov 14. CRUDES will be aligned by HST CSG FRP start (NOV 2014), pending rework of class maintenance plans by NAVSEA. Inspections begin approximately 1 month prior to Basic training phase Manning is aligned to Basic training phase to gain efficiency in training audience participating in all of work-ups Integrated training occurs in Nov 15 CSG alignment has already started by message in Aug 13 for HST / GHWB / and TR. The first CSG to be aligned for deployment will be GHWB in Feb 14. HST CSG staff will receive pipeline and fleet training for OL/TL alignment in May 14.
36
Follow On Carrier Strike Groups

The other CSGs officially enter O-FRP at the maintenance phase: GHWB May 14, VIN Jul 15, TR Dec 15 Where able, we have instituted elements of O-FRP as early as possible. GHWB conducted elements of Integrated training by conducting a new GRP Sail event. TR is conducting increased integrated training b/c of NIFC-CA. CSG alignment for HST / GHWB / TR is de facto complete after the first ADCON shift message in August 13 (CCSGs already briefing their to be units at update briefs)
37
Readiness Kill Chain

Navy-Wide Approach to Managing Wholeness
Governance / C2 Drives integration & synchronization vertically across weapons systems & horizontally across the readiness lifecycle
Means
Personnel Equipment Supplies Training Ordnance Networks Installations Community Industry Elected Leaders RESOURCE / POLICY ACCESS / PROCURE PREINTRO
Ways
FRP
MAINT BASIC INTEGRATED
Ends
Assess
DEPLOY & SUSTAIN
1. Cost to Own..
Managing Wholeness
2. O-FRP..
OL/TL HQs. Advanced Training........................................................................................................... Unit Training.... Inspections... Parts.. Maintenance... Manning. CSG Alignment FRP Length.
3. Surge Capacity.....
It takes everyone to manage Fleet wholeness across the Readiness Kill Chain
38
Optimized FRP
Take Aways
Operational & Tactical HQs Advanced Training Unit Training
Standardize & align NCC, CSG and Warfare CDR training tracks Combine JTFX / C2X; standardize Group Sail; NIFC-CA & EMMW ISIC-led, CSG-wide aggregated training with a predictable schedule Consolidate to specific inspection periods aligned to the FRP RKC methodology to ensure spares are available when needed Stable, predicable, synchronized execution of Maint & Modernization Sea Centric Manning; Incentivize and Retain Quality Sailors C2 aligned with FRP cycle 36 Month Fleetwide introduction begins with TRUMAN CSG in Nov 2014
39
Lines of Effort
Inspections
Parts Maintenance/ Modernization Manning/ Individual Training CSG Alignment FRP Length
UNCLASSIFIED
40

OFRP For SNA Public Version Final - 15jan

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

OFRP For SNA Public Version Final - 15jan

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Optimizing The Fleet Response Plan

ADM Bill Gortney

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

Readiness Kill Chain

- CNO Position Report: 2013, p 3

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

Fleet Response Plan Problem Statement

Maintenance and modernization

Potential Drivers to Readiness Production

Traditional Fleet FRP

Cost Driver Schedule Driven FRP Inefficiency

Cost Driver Maintenance and Schedule Driven FRP Inefficiency

Cost Driver Maintenance Driven FRP Inefficiency

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

Understanding Potential Drivers to Readiness Production Slide

O-FRP Predecessor: Enhanced Carrier Presence

ECP concept ended Jan 13 due to sequester/POM fiscal limits

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

Current Fiscal Environment

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

Optimized Fleet Response Plan (O-FRP)

Enables delivery of:

Aligned and stabilized CSG manning throughout the FRP

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

Operational & Tactical HQs (USFF / CPF N7)

Advanced Training (USFF / CPF N7)

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

Iterative changes will be required in out years to complete

Actions to achieve wholeness

95.0% 90.0% 85.0%

Manage and sustain wholeness

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

The second number is FILL

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

United States Fleet Forces

United States Pacific Fleet

HST CSG Manning to O-FRP

100% 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60%

COGNOS Data Source : Nov 5, 2013

HST CSG SJA Fill (Payband)

HST CSG SJA Fit (Payband)

Crit NEC Fit %

CVN 75 H.S. TRUM A N

COM CA RSTRKGRU 1 0 CG 72 VELLA GULF

CG 61M ONTEREY CG 56 SA N JA CINTO DDG 80 ROOSEVELT

DDG 87 M A SON DDG 94 NITZE

CVW 3 VFA 32 VFA 37

VFA 1 05 VA W 1 26 VA Q 1 30 HSC 7 HSM 74