Army Aviation S

1
ST Supporting the Soldier
Bruce Thompson Bruce.thompson_at_us.army.mil 757-878-
1818
Army Aviation ST for CBM 6.3 Program Planning
Charts 18 August 2008
2
Operations and Sustainment ST Roadmap
FY15
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
COLOR KEY
Prognostic Wear Prediction
SBIR
Congressional
HUMS for UAVs
6.2 Funding
Continuous Power Assurance
SBIR
Main and Tail Rotor Torque Measurement
6.3 Funding
Other
Structural Integrity Monitoring System
Program Goals 2010 2013 2016
Maintenance inspections/FH -25 -50
-65 Mean Time Between Removal 10 15
20 Maintenance labor/FH -8 -12
-15 False Removal Rate
3 Detection time before failure -- 10hr
25hr
FAA HUMS/Rotorcraft Damage Tolerance
Oil Debris Monitor/Oil Capture (Air Force)
Power Systems Health Management (Navy)
Avionics Prognostics (JSF)
Robust Bearing Life Sensor (Air Force)
Drive Systems Diagnostic/Prognostics (ARL)
ATO R.LG.2007.01 Prognostics and Diagnostics for
Operational Readiness (ARL)
NRTC/CRI CBM Efforts
CRI CBM Efforts
Operation Support Sustainment Technologies
Operation Support Sustainment Technologies
Operation Support Sustainment Technologies
6.2
ATO D.AMR.2008.09 Capability Based Operations
Sustainment Technologies Aviation
Capability-based Operations Sustainment
Technologies
Capability-based Operations Sustainment
Technologies
-50 Reduction in Inspections 15 MTBR -12
Reduction in Labor
-25 Reduction in Inspections 10 MTBR -8
Reduction in Labor
-65 MMH/FHR Insp 20 MTBR 25 FHR Prognosis
Maintenance Action
6.3
Current Future Forces
3
Capability-Based Operations Sustainment
Technologies (6.3, FY11-FY13)

• Purpose
• Predict mechanical and electrical component
  failure with sufficient fidelity to allow
  scheduling of maintenance
• Products
• Demonstrated set of prognostic technologies
  across six technical areas
• Integrated demonstration of prognostic algorithms
  
• System level fusion techniques
• Payoff
• Improved component time on wing
• Reduced workload inspections through improved
  prognostics
• Unscheduled maintenance to planned maintenance
  through prognostics
• Technologies applicable/transition to all
  aircraft
• Increased mission reliability
• Minimize secondary damage

Schedule Cost
Milestones FY11
FY12 FY13
Tech Areas in Priority Propulsion
Rotor/Dynamic Components Structures Drive
Systems Flight Controls/Hydraulics Electrical
Power/Wiring Rig Testing Integration/Flt
Testing
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
Army (M) 5.0 5.0 5.0
4
Capability-Based Operations Sustainment
Technologies (6.3, FY11-FY13)

• Program Objectives (without increase in safety of
  flight risk)
• Reduction Of Inspections and Maintenance Labor
• Expansion Of Serviceability Criteria
• Extension Of Life Or Time Between Overhaul
• Accurate Diagnosis and Prognosis of Remaining
  Useful Life With Sufficient Fidelity To Allow
  Scheduling Of Maintenance
• Demonstration Metrics (2013)
• 50 Reduction in Inspections/ Flight Hour
• 12 Reduction in Maintenance Labor/ Flight Hour
• 15 Increase in Component Mean Time Between
  Removals
• Detection Time Before Failure 10 Hours or
  Better for Flight Critical Components

5
6.3 BAA

• Demonstration is a 3 year effort (FY11-13).
• Proposal must present an integrated solution set
  relative to the program goals addressing all six
  technology areas (propulsion, structures,
  electrical power/wiring, rotors/dynamic
  components, drive systems, and flight
  controls/hydraulics).
• Demonstration testing at full-scale (anticipate
  testing of actual parts in a test stand will be
  sufficient to demonstrate technologies to TRL 6).
• No Government furnished data.
• Integrated with on-board data collection, data
  processing, and data storage device required.
• Available Government funding is 15M (5M in
  FY11, 5M in FY12, 5M in FY13).
• One step process for contracting (one proposal
  covering all).
• Estimated release of 6.3 BAA is mid-January 2010
  with award in late FY10 or FY11. Proposals due
  mid-April 2010.
• Cost share is anticipated.
• Teaming with industry partners is encouraged.
• Export-controlled items are expected to be
  involved.

6
6.3 BAA

• Proposal
• Technical Volume (90 Pages)
• Quantitative benefit analysis of proposed
  technologies relative to the 2013 metrics
• Ability to transition to Army aircraft (CH-47,
  UH-60, AH-64, ARH)
• Clear statement of program objectives
• Clear description of each technology proposed
  along with description of test methodology
• Clear description of how the technologies will be
  integrated into aircraft systems
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Program milestones and schedule
• Period of Performance is 36 months (33 technical
  and 3 for data)
• Description of key personnel, facilities, data
  sources and program management
• The Government desires, at a minimum, Government
  Purpose Rights
• Cost Volume
• Cost breakout by month, providing man-hours and
  monthly costs by task
• Equipment and material listings if applicable
• Individual technologies proposed must be priced
  as separate tasks
• Subcontractor proposals should be provided with
  prime contractors submission
• Deliverables