The organisational structure / crew of a Naval Service vessel for the purpose of the Review can be sub divided into three branches, each with distinct duties and responsibilities. The three branches are as follows:
Operations Branch is concerned mainly with the navigational and operational functions of the vessel, in addition to personnel administration. As such, the Branch is excluded from the maintenance tasks as defined within this Review. The maintenance responsibilities reside within the Mechanical Engineering and Weapons Electrical Branches and their functions correspond in the main with those of their shore-based colleagues. The planning and coordinating of all maintenance activities on board each vessel rests with the MEO. The maintenance personnel on board each vessel are outlined in Table 4.2 below.
Table 4.2 Maintenance Personnel on each Naval Service Ship as June 2006
|
Marine Engineering Branch
|
Weapons Electrical
Branch
|
|
Vessel
|
Officers
|
NCOs
|
Enlisted Pers
|
Officers
|
NCOs
|
Enlisted Pers
|
Total
|
LE Eithne
|
2
|
10
|
9
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
24
|
LE Emer
|
1
|
9
|
8
|
|
1
|
|
19
|
LE Aoife
|
1
|
8
|
4
|
|
1
|
|
14
|
LE Aisling
|
1
|
9
|
3
|
|
1
|
|
14
|
LE Orla
|
1
|
7
|
6
|
|
1
|
|
15
|
LE Ciara
|
1
|
8
|
3
|
|
1
|
|
13
|
LE Niamh
|
1
|
7
|
5
|
|
2
|
|
15
|
LE Roisin
|
1
|
8
|
6
|
|
1
|
|
16
|
Total
|
9
|
66
|
44
|
1
|
9
|
1
|
130
| 4.2.1 Costs The total salary costs for maintenance personnel outlined above for 2006 was €5,600,744. The yearly costs throughout the period of the Review were relatively constant due to the fact that staff numbers and ranks remained consistent throughout. An analysis of ships maintenance personnel’s duties identified that 43.73% of staff time is attributable to watch keeping and other duties with the remainder being available for vessel maintenance activities. Assigning costs on this basis results in total payroll costs for ship’s maintenance staff of €3,151,523. The costs for each vessel are outlined in Table 4.3 below.
Table 4.3 Maintenance Personnel Costs for each Naval Service Ship 2006
Vessel
|
Total Cost
|
Cost of available time for maintenance
|
LE. Eithne
|
1,011,576
|
569,213
|
LE. Emer
|
786,386
|
442,499
|
LE. Aoife
|
604,594
|
340,205
|
LE. Aisling
|
611,939
|
344,326
|
LE. Orla
|
693,143
|
390,031
|
LE. Ciara
|
555,574
|
312,621
|
LE. Niamh
|
641,519
|
360,982
|
LE. Roisin
|
696,013
|
391,646
|
Total
|
€5,600,744
|
€3,151,523
|
The above costs relate to maintenance staff availability for maintenance and do not relate to the cost of personnel time actually engaged in maintenance. It was not possible to calculate personnel direct maintenance costs due to the fact there are no job cards or other method of recording maintenance personnel time when actually engaged in maintenance activity.
Activity
PPM conducted by the flotilla during patrols is based on the schedules set by MMS using the three maintenance management support systems, previously outlined in the Review. Patrols are generally of 21 days duration, with maintenance on board being dovetailed with the operational tempo of the ship. During patrols, the two maintenance branches carry out hourly, daily, weekly and monthly planned maintenance routines. Small to medium scale maintenance is carried out on ships’ main engines and generators, e.g. 100hrs, 500hrs, 1500hrs maintenance routines. This requires careful management of duty versus standby engines and engine rooms. Additionally, maintenance branches complete larger PPM routines with up to and including six monthly routines carried out on patrols. Maintenance routines greater than six months cannot be carried out, as it would involve taking equipment out of service for an extended timeframe. MEOs are required to make quarterly returns using the management support systems to MMS on the maintenance scheduled against maintenance completed.
The completion of maintenance schedules can be impeded by factors such as weather, the operational tempo of the ship and the complexity of problems that may be uncovered during PPM. Temporary unavailability of required maintenance inventory items can also impede the completion of certain maintenance tasks. PPM that is not completed during patrols is identified by maintenance management support systems and is completed between patrols when the ship is alongside or during periods of annual refits.
Maintenance branches also conduct UCM as the need arises and to this end are required to provide maintenance cover on a 24hr basis while the vessel is on patrol and alongside at the Naval Base.
Efficiency
Time spent on major maintenance routines undertaken by maintenance personnel in the flotilla is not currently recorded i.e. through the use of job cards or other methods. This presents two difficulties in attempting to identify if maintenance tasks performed by ships’ maintenance staff are efficient. Firstly, the output of maintenance personnel in the flotilla cannot be disaggregated into discrete maintenance tasks and secondly, costing is based on personnel availability to conduct maintenance and not on their actual time spent engaged in maintenance. Specific efforts were made to benchmark maintenance work carried out by maintenance personnel in the flotilla with standard times used by the USCG maintenance staff on board a similar class of ship to the LE Eithne for major service routines. However, this was not possible due to the reasons outlined above. It has therefore not been possible to assess the efficiency of maintenance staff in the flotilla.
Recommendations
It is anticipated that the implementation of the EAM module of the MIF will allow for the capture of personnel time spent on major maintenance routines.
The Steering Committee recommend, that major service routines are isolated and that standard times are introduced for each of these routines. Standard times can be identified for the major service routines by utilising manufacturers, USCG, and other suitable comparative data.
The Steering Committee also recommends that a formal system to monitor performance against standard times should be established.
It should be noted, as previously stated above, that there are external factors that impact on maintenance activities such as weather, the operational tempo of vessels and lead time for parts. These will make the use of standard times for comparative purposes less reliable initially than their use for shore-based units. However, in due course, the recording of time spent on jobs and the use of standard times will provide a bank of data that will allow for better measurement of the efficiency of maintenance tasks undertaken by personnel in the flotilla.
Share with your friends: |