| |
 LEESA LAFFERRE-THOMAS
| 33 | 4/25/2018 12:13 PM | Please take a few minutes to introduce yourself to the community: what are your interests, your expertise that you'd be willing to share with the community, your questions that need answered?
| JAMIE SUTER | 5/8/2023 12:56 PM | | Yes | Ask the Community | 26.8315121744984 | 14 | | | | | | | | | |
| |
BRIAN MANNY
| 3 | 10/6/2022 3:19 PM | RE: OPNAVINST 3000.12B & Operational Availability Handbook
Greetings All -
Updated Ao instruction for DoN. The specifics moved into Operational Availability Handbook. Cant find this handbook on either RDAIS or anywhere on https://www.secnav.navy.mil.
Does anyone have-- or can point me in right direction?
Many thanks.
v/r
BSM
| Roman Komninos | 5/2/2023 1:45 PM | | No | Ask the Community | 107.065594176008 | 2 | | 1/25/2013 1:59 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
dau0313655073
| 0 | 4/25/2023 1:27 PM | Where can I get a Hi Res file of the Logistics Elements so I can make a poster of it
| | 4/25/2023 1:27 PM | | No | Ask the Community | 0 | | | 4/25/2023 1:24 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
dau0313665522
| 5 | 3/29/2023 2:49 PM | Hello All,
A brief question. In the early or so 2000s, there was a wall chart like the current acquisition wall chart with multiple functional area swim lanes. Back when (aging myself) there was a similar chart with only logistics requirements and their relationship to each other, including predecessors and successors, and aligned with the acquisition phases they occurred in. I have lost my historical file copy and would greatly appreciate if anyone remembers it and could provide me a digital copy if possible. If you have one to spare, I would take a hard copy too.
Thanx much in advance.
Ron
| WILLIAM KOBREN | 4/20/2023 8:18 AM | | No | General | 115.932022184598 | | | 5/8/2022 12:34 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
BRIAN KNOBLOCK
| 3 | 8/16/2022 3:40 PM | Recently took over position as program DAPML and I'm new to much of the work. Our LCSP is incredibly out of date in several areas, especially when it comes to updates related to PSAs. I realize that the LCSP doesn't require approved updates at every turn, but being a living document, waiting to update it with relevant information only at specific intervals is obviously not an effective system. Currently working on a plan to incorporate a working copy that updates as information becomes available. Looking for ideas that have worked on other programs that prompt team members / stakeholders to provide inputs as the become relevant
| dau0313610138 | 8/17/2022 3:28 PM | | No | Ask the Community | 104.461968573871 | | | 8/16/2022 1:12 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
WILLIAM KOBREN
| 0 | 6/14/2022 10:21 AM | | | 6/14/2022 10:21 AM | | No | Ask the Community | 0 | | | 10/27/2004 7:49 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
RICHARD GARTMAYER
| 0 | 4/20/2021 2:12 PM | Are there requirements to update any Product Support program documents after a system is in service? I presume that the LCSP might be a candidate if the PS strategy has changed. The only specific reference I can find is in NAVSO P3562 (Logistics Assessments), which only cites the PESHE: "... continually updated and maintained throughout the progression of a program or project, from concept to disposal."
| | 4/20/2021 2:12 PM | | No | Ask the Community | 0 | | | 11/8/2017 11:19 AM | | | | | | | |
| |
WILLIAM KOBREN
| 0 | 2/15/2021 10:36 AM | The Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition), currently Performing the Duties of the Undersecretary of
Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment [USD (A&S)] announced the winners
of the annual PSM of the year awards in a newly issued February 10, 2021 memo
entitled “2020 Secretary of Defense Product Support Manager (PSM) Award
Winner Selections”. Congrats to both of this year's winners!
| | 2/15/2021 10:36 AM | | No | Share an Idea | 0 | | | 10/27/2004 7:49 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
LISA STRUTZ
| 4 | 3/24/2020 2:57 PM | What is the difference between the PESHE and the EHA? Do contractors write both? Does the government get to review these? | WILLIAM KOBREN | 4/21/2020 5:41 PM | | No | Ask the Community | 60.8767780048963 | 2 | | 2/13/2020 10:57 AM | | | | | | | |
| |
JILL GARCIA
| 3 | 5/21/2018 7:55 AM | What governing documentation defines Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) Management as obsolete? Background: I'm presently reviewing SECNAV INST 5400.15D, DON Research, Development, Acquisition, and Associated Life-Cycle and Logistics Management policy and I would like to know if the terminology of logistics management / ILS management should be replaced with Integrated Product Support and Product Support Management respectively.
| WILLIAM KOBREN | 2/13/2020 9:51 AM | 46 | No | Ask the Community | 27.1707499030714 | 5 | | 10/12/2004 6:10 PM | | 1 | MARK OLDHAM | | | | |
| |
WILLIAM KOBREN
| 0 | 1/15/2020 8:31 AM | The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued an important new report at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-20-151 entitled "GAO-20-151 Defense Acquisitions: Senior Leaders Should Emphasize Key Practices to Improve Weapon System Reliability". This is a must-read for all DoD product support managers and life cycle logistics professionals. According to the GAO, "the commercial companies GAO reviewed proactively address reliability. They strive to identify reliability issues at the component level early in the development process to avoid expensive rework after producing an entire system. GAO found these companies focus on the following key practices: - Leveraging reliability engineers early and often
- Establishing realistic reliability requirements
- Emphasizing reliability with their suppliers
- Employing reliability engineering activities to improve a system's design throughout development
GAO found that the seven Department of Defense (DOD) acquisition programs it reviewed did not consistently adhere to these key practices. These programs often prioritized schedule and cost over incorporating the key reliability practices, and these systems generally were not as reliable as promised. The GAO went on to state "…DOD has taken steps to accelerate weapon system development, and decision-making authority has been delegated to the military services. In an environment emphasizing speed, without senior leadership focus on a broader range of key reliability practices, DOD runs the risk of delivering less reliable systems than promised to the warfighter and spending more than anticipated on rework and maintenance of major weapon systems." The GAO also recommended that: "…the Secretaries of the Air Force, Army, and Navy highlight the importance of three key reliability practices: leveraging reliability engineers, establishing realistic reliability requirements, and employing reliability engineering activities to improve a system's design throughout development.
| | 1/15/2020 8:31 AM | | No | Ask the Community | 56.3740751345529 | 2 | | 10/27/2004 7:49 PM | | 2 | JILL GARCIA JEROME JOHNSTON | | | | |
| |
WILLIAM KOBREN
| 0 | 1/15/2020 8:27 AM | Wanted to let the DoD life cycle logistics and product support manager community know that the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Product Support last month updated the DoD Product Support Manager (PSM) Guidebook. While the majority of the updates were administrative in nature, focused on fixing broken hyperlinks and updating terminology, the most significant content change was the replacement of the former “Computer Resources” Integrated Product Support (IPS) Element as the redesigned “Information Technology Systems Continuous Support” IPS Element in Appendix A (in both Table 11 and Paragraph A.12) and elsewhere in the document.
Your DAU colleagues have in-turn posted a NextGen-enabled updated December 2019 version of the DoD Product Support Manager (PSM) Guidebook on both our DAU Tools site and also from our Integrated Product Support Guidebook Suite.
Encourage you to take a look at this new “Information Technology Systems Continuous Support” IPS Element, as it differs from the former “Computer Resources” element in a number of different ways in areas such as software, program protection planning, cybersecurity, and Information Technology Service Management (ITSM), among others.
| | 1/15/2020 8:27 AM | | No | Ask the Community | 56.373951870664 | 2 | | 10/27/2004 7:49 PM | | 2 | JILL GARCIA JEROME JOHNSTON | | | | |
| |
LEESA LAFFERRE-THOMAS
| 3 | 10/1/2018 2:06 PM | Be sure to check out the FY19 DAWIA certification requirements for Life Cycle Logistics: https://www.dau.mil/cop/log/Pages/Topics/LOG%20Certification%20Requirements.aspx One substantive change from FY18 was the
addition of CLE 068 to Level II certification training requirements. Please check it out and post any questions or comments here. | WILLIAM KOBREN | 11/30/2018 4:41 PM | | No | Share an Idea | 33.7086780646112 | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
CAROLYN JENKINS
| 0 | 10/12/2018 2:38 PM | Does anyone know of any tips/tools in this new system similar to the ones in the old system? Example: By clicking Print, then Control F, we could search key words when taking the quizzes and tests.
| | 10/12/2018 2:38 PM | | No | Ask the Community | 0 | | | 10/12/2018 1:52 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
Colonel J. T. Larson
| 0 | 10/12/2018 12:24 AM | When integrating off the shelf electronics into non-weapons systems design what has been the most effective contractual method to assure long tern sustainability and modernization? What level of PARM and prime contractor coordination should be specified and when does acquisition cost become operational costs?
| | 10/12/2018 12:24 AM | | No | Ask the Community | 0 | | | 10/12/2018 12:09 AM | | | | | | | |
| |
WILLIAM KOBREN
| 0 | 9/17/2018 5:18 PM | | | 9/17/2018 5:18 PM | | No | Share an Idea | 0 | | | 10/27/2004 7:49 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
WILLIAM KOBREN
| 0 | 9/17/2018 5:14 PM | | | 9/17/2018 5:14 PM | | No | Share an Idea | 0 | | | 10/27/2004 7:49 PM | | | | | | | |
| |
TONYA GUY-GREEN
| 1 | 8/22/2018 2:10 PM | What responsibilities does the Logistics community have with regard to GFP provided to contractors?
| CAROLYN MIDDLETON | 9/4/2018 4:45 PM | | No | Ask the Community | 31.4358260981031 | 3 | | 8/22/2018 2:07 PM | | 2 | JILL GARCIA GREG SMART | | | | |
| |
JOHN SULLIVAN
| 0 | 7/11/2018 11:34 AM | Supply Chain Risk is not the same as Supply Chain Cybersecurity. When looking at studies of military and commercial Supply Chain risk, Cybersecurity is not the leading concern. There is much more to Supply Chain Risk than Cybersecurity (see article here). A Supply Chain, especially with our aging systems, has a higher risk in dealing with Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS). Data integrity, in the form of incorrect data populating our information systems, is a concern. The data integrity risk is not from a hacker changing component data, but from authorized personnel incorrectly entering data. We make mistakes. Our Supply Chain also faces risk from weather events, counterfeit parts and labor issues. These typically convert from a risk to an issue with little warning. Combine this with our leaning of Supply Chains, and now you can face a significant challenge. Therefore mitigation planning must be in place to control, avoid, assume or transfer the risk. This mitigation planning must be focused on what is most likely and has the greatest consequence. Analyze your Supply Chain. Understand the greatest risks. Build your mitigation plans for those risks. Don't blindly assume Cybersecurity is the same as Supply Chain risk.
| | 7/11/2018 11:34 AM | | No | Share an Idea | 28.4273078703704 | 1 | | 7/11/2018 11:34 AM | | 1 | DAVID BILLS | | | | |
| |
KARREN CARRUTHERS
| 0 | 5/29/2018 6:45 AM | I am researching how both Battle Spares and Forward Based Spares are managed and what determines if it is a spare. Trying to find out information on both Battle Spares and Forward Based Spares; it seems the terminology has changed over the years as well as where information can be found ie. instructions (P-485) and policies. Could you assist me to help identify who manages, what is a requirement to be a spare and what instructions or policies provide information? We
highly encourage comments, examples, disagreement, positive feedback and continued discussion. | | 5/29/2018 6:45 AM | | No | Ask the Community | 0 | | | | | | | | | | |
