Integrated logistics support data: Operational availability and lessons learned

Integrated logistics support (ILS) [1] data connects engineering, procurement, and maintenance across a system’s entire lifecycle. This article examines some of the key specifications, tools, and lessons learned in this sphere.

ILS data overview

ILS data are all logistical data that you need to operate and maintain your civilian or military system. Industry, armed forces, and NATO agencies use enterprise resources planning (ERP) software, which provides the integrated management of main business processes. It helps run core business processes in a single tool for departments such as engineering, finance, manufacturing, human resources, procurement, supply chain and others.

Industry, armed forces, and NATO agencies may use a product lifecycle management (PLM) tool: this is used to manage a product and its associated data through all stages of the product lifecycle. It includes data from requirements, documents, items, parts, products, engineering change orders, quality workflows, etc. Though primarily used by design and engineering teams working with computer-aided design (CAD) data, such a PLM tool can provide visibility into the product design process for all business stakeholders. Integrating ERP and PLM into a single software solution at company level would make sense – this approach has been implemented by some companies.

ILS data cover the data needed to field a system and its support system and to sustain them during the life cycle of the system.

It is important to be aware of the difference between ERP/engineering data on the one hand and ILS data on the other hand, since they have different purposes. Both data sets should describe the same system and both data sets are created on industry side to be used by industry and the customer, in accordance with the agreed maintenance concept.

 

Configuration data may refer to specific modules of equipment bought from a subcontractor and being identified as such to allow manufacturing. They may not have a part number & manufacturer code[2] that is being used in logistics.

Logistical data have a totally different purpose: they must provide all the necessary data to allow the system to be operated and to be maintained. They must of course be consistent among them and they must be representing the system described in the configuration data. Configuration and logistical data must be consistent among them. This is sometimes called DataBase Consistency (DBC).

The ASD S-Series of IPS specifications

The S-Series of IPS Specifications suite from AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD) and Aerospace Industries Association of America (AIA) covers the whole spectre of Integrated Product Support. The overarching document of this series is SX000i Issue 3.1. It is over 600 pages, but one should in first instance read the first chapters. Figure 19 from this document illustrates the interactions between the other specifications of this ASD series:

1. ASD S1000D: International specification for technical publications.
2. ASD S2000M: International specification for material management.
3. ASD S3000L: International procedure specification for logistics support analysis (LSA).
4. ASD S4000P: International specification for developing and continuously improving preventive maintenance.
5. ASD S5000F: International specification for in-service data feedback.
6. ASD S6000T: International specification for training analysis and design.

The most important feature of the S-Series is the Common Data Model described in ASD SX002D. It ensures data consistency among the ASD S-Series IPS Specifications.

Link to operational availability

When a new system enters service, the same recurring questions need to be answered, including, but not limited to:

• Which maintenance concept (preventive and corrective) to be applied? Who (Armed Forces or Industry) will do which level[3] at which location employing how many maintenance staff having which training and disposing of which support equipment and which test equipment?
• Which spares (range) and how many of each (scaling) need to be procured and where to stock them to meet the requested operational availability for the planned utilisation (for instance, 600 Flying Hours per year) at a minimum cost?
• What is the best possible maintenance organisation?
• What is the impact if the predicted MTBFs / repair Turn Around Times / Provisioning Lead Times have been too optimistic?
• What would be the impact of changes (either positive or negative) of the parameters mentioned above? This is sometimes called ‘sensitivity analysis’ or the ‘what if?’

Such questions can be answered in an optimal way by applying the system approach theory, which was first published in a RAND corporation publication in April 1964. Using system approach-based spares optimisation tools could lead to important (circa 20%, potentially even more) savings, while providing the same operational availability as the much more expensive previous item approach theory.

Lessons learned

• Data consistency is essential. Data consistency should be stated as a mandatory requirement in the request for proposal (RfP)/quotation and industry should be requested to prove this. Milestone payment(s) should be defined to guarantee data consistency in case a contract is granted.
• Logistics data should mandatorily have data formats compatible with the user ERP software and the LCM analytics logistics software.
• A logistics model reflecting the requested/proposed configuration (in line with the wanted maintenance concept) should be requested. This model should mandatorily be in the format of the logistical analytics software in use with the LCM manager on the user side.
• Item procurement prices[4], PLTs, applicable INCOTERMS, TAT, the reception cost and initial inspection cost of failed items to determine whether worth repairing or declaring it not economically repairable, should be in the logistics model and should be the prices and times to be used in a potential performance-based logistics (PBL) contract after selection – this should be a mandatory requirement.
• Necessary tooling in accordance with the maintenance concept should mandatorily be described in the ILS data set.
• Calibration requirements for such tooling should mandatorily be provided.

A means of compliance should be defined for each of the proposed mandatory requirements. The bids should not be considered if one or more of the abovementioned mandatory requirements are not met. All of the mandatory requirements should be linked to milestone payments if the contract is granted.

During contract negotiations there should be no reduction or weakening of ILS requirements for commercial or budgetary reasons.

In-service data capture at operational level is absolutely essential, especially now that artificial intelligence (AI) tools start to be used for analysis purposes. It should be used to improve the outputs of the analytics logistics model.

Conclusion

• Using system approach-based software allows determining an optimal spare parts list at minimum cost.
• Using system approach-based software allows potentially achieving the same operational availability at a substantial lower cost of the investment needed compared to item approach determined quantity for each individual item.
• Using system approach-based software allows users to optimise the yearly sustainment budget.
• The results of system approach-based software should be reviewed by maintenance experts before making decisions.
• Capturing real life in-service data is a
• AI tools should be used to analyse collected maintenance data.

The use of analytics logistics software is considered so important that their use has been made mandatory in 2024 by the UK Chief of Defence Logistics and Support. This is explained in the ‘Support Modelling and Analysis Framework’, published by the UK Strategic Command Defence Support in order to implement “Enhanced evidence based decision making to improve support to the front line”.

Guy Langenaeken

Author: Guy Langenaeken has an MSC in Engineering and has started a PhD at the University of Liège in Belgium. He has over two decades experience of working with data for the Integrated Logistics Support of Alouette II & III, A400M, NH90 and the NATO RQ-4D. He has headed the Codification Department in the Belgian National Codification Bureau (NCB) and been Belgian NCB representative to AC135 (Codification), as well as AC135’s representative in AC327 (Life Cycle Management). He currently works at the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) in Luxembourg and is a member of AC327 Working Group 3, which concentrates on Life Cycle Cost.

[1] Integrated Logistics Support (ILS), also called Integrated Lifecycle Support (ILS) in the NATO Guidance on Integrated Logistics Support for multinational armament programmes (ALP-10) or Integrated Product Support (IPS) in the ASD S-Series of IPS Specifications.

[2] The combination Part NumbeR (PNR) and ManuFacturer Code (MFC) is required to uniquely identify a specific part. A part number alone is not sufficient. The reference to an international ISO standard (for example, for screws) may neither be sufficient in case of specific regulations.

[3] Answering such questions as who will do what at which maintenance level and where at the most economical way can be answered through a Level Of Repair Analysis (LORA). This should be done initially but also at commonly agreed regular times during the in-service phase of systems.

[4] Preferably either Firm Fixed prices or Ceiling prices with a maximum percentage above the final Firm Fixed prices.