An Roinn Cosanta Óglaigh na hÉireann Department of Defence Defence Forces
Download 496.54 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- 5.3 Benchmarking
5.2 Maintenance Management FunctionChapter 3 outlined the management structures and Chapter 4 described some of the difficulties that have been identified with the existing processes in place to manage the maintenance function. These included the use of three different management systems for data retrieval, and the unavailability of appropriate data to allow for detailed analysis of time spent on maintenance tasks. Where job cards are completed, they reflect a series of aggregated maintenance activities against an overall time. It was not possible to isolate expenditure on maintenance on a ship-by-ship basis. Furthermore, once the annual maintenance plan had been discussed and agreed with the stakeholders (involving multiple meetings on a ship-by-ship basis), OC MENDY retained executive responsibility for and control over the delivery of the maintenance requirements. This was a legacy issue as he did not have authority over all the elements of the maintenance resource. There were also difficulties with the management of maintenance inventory. Multiple units requisition parts for refits rather than this task being co-ordinated centrally. In totality, these complications have hindered the effective management of the maintenance function. In order to improve management effectiveness, a new model encompassing a re-configuration of the responsibilities for maintenance, in conjunction with a project centred approach, is outlined at the conclusion of this chapter. This new model has been informed by the lessons learned from analysis of other organisations, as outlined below. 5.3 BenchmarkingIn examining the efficiency and effectiveness of Naval Service vessel maintenance, the Review Group decided to benchmark costs and systems with an appropriate comparative body. The USCG was identified as a good comparator to benchmark all aspects of the maintenance on the LE Eithne against a similar class of vessel used by the USCG. The maintenance management systems used by the USCG across their fleet were examined to benchmark Naval Service systems. Arklow Shipping, an Irish commercial shipping company was used to identify possible alternate methods of maintenance and maintenance management systems. 5.3.1 United States Coastguard (USCG) Following 9/11, the USCG moved from the responsibility of the Department of Transport to the Department of Homeland Security. The USCG is focused primarily on effectiveness, measured in patrol days, rather than efficiency. They are mission oriented, hence their maintenance is mission centred. The USCG maintenance structure has three levels reporting to the Officer Commanding each vessel or the Maintenance and Logistics Command (MLC) as appropriate. Structure
Scheduling Maintenance schedules are based on equipment manufacturer’s recommendations, generally accepted elapsed time methods for scantlings and structure, and CBM. Each Medium Endurance Cutter (similar class of vessel to the LE Eithne) is scheduled for 185 patrol days each year. A Preventative Maintenance Schedule is created for each cutter. These schedules are then used to plan the availability of all cutters for patrols and maintenance. The cutters have dock maintenance every two years and are in dry dock every four years. The planning horizon for all maintenance is between one and two years in advance. In order to maximise the efficiency and effectiveness of scheduled maintenance, the USCG have developed a method of project managing major refits. It should be noted that both the structure and size of the USCG dictates that long lead-times are used in the planning of refits. Ship refits are generally more comprehensive than those undertaken by the Naval Service and it can take up to one year to complete a dry docking / Depot Maintenance Refit for each cutter. In view of the size of the Naval Service fleet and the scale of work undertaken during annual refits, such lengthy lead-times would not be required. However, the USCG principle of using a team to project manage a programme of work is still applicable and could be adapted to the Naval Service needs. Acquisition Team One of the examples of best management practice to emerge from the USCG was the use of an Acquisition Team (A-Team). The Acquisition Team process is a collective term that denotes all actions between the designation of the A-Team and the completion of the project. The A-Team process has proved to reduce problems encountered during ship availabilities. By having all interested parties involved in the Acquisition Team process, fewer chances of mistakes or omissions can occur. The acquisition strategy and process being used at the USCG helps ensure thorough preparation as ships enter either dry-dock or dock side repair and maintenance efforts. The process consists of a team drawn from all the required disciplines involved in cutter maintenance and the overall availability scheduling process. The A-Team is responsible for the efficient planning, solicitation, award and execution of the projects and does not disband until the maintenance projects have been successfully completed. The team consists of the type desk manager (team chairman), an engineering specifications writer, contracting personnel, administrative personnel, logistics support personnel and the port engineer from a Naval Engineering Support Unit (NESU). Other ad-hoc members are added to the A-Team as required. Members may join or withdraw as expertise is required, and may serve on several different A-Teams simultaneously. The A-Team process involves at least four meetings during the course of the acquisition process (see Figure 5.1) with milestones tracked during weekly coordination meetings attended by all branches. Figure 5.1 Acquisition Team Process 
At the conclusion of the project, feedback is solicited from all A-Team members, lessons learned are reviewed for each particular project and ways to improve the entire process for future work are identified. By members focussing on a common goal, the A-Team makes a significant contribution in keeping projects on schedule and within budget. Funding Maintenance funding is allocated to each cutter on a yearly estimate, pooled and then used as required. Some funds are retained on board to be allocated by the Officer Commanding, with the remainder retained ashore by the MLC. This pooling of financial resources did not appear to be based on any definitive methodology, nor indeed did the calculation of the initial estimate allocated to each vessel. Each cutter must then pay for all maintenance to be carried out, whether it is carried out in the Coast Guard Yard or by civilian contractors. The IT system in place to manage USCG maintenance quantifies the cost of civilian staff, inventory and contracted work to each vessel. However, as is the case with the Naval Service, the system does not quantify the maintenance costs of uniformed personnel. 5.3.2 Arklow Shipping Established since 1966, Arklow Shipping specialises in the dry bulk trade, with management teams based in Arklow and Rotterdam. Arklow Shipping currently operates a fleet of 30 ships carrying cargo within Europe on short voyages of generally between two and four days. Members of the Review Group met with a representative from Arklow Shipping to explore the approach to maintenance management in a private sector context. The main driver for maintenance planning in this company is to comply with maintenance requirements as stipulated in shipping regulations and classification standards. In addition, Arklow Shipping tries to keep the vessels operating 360+ days of the year. Maintenance is planned to fit in with the ship’s operational schedule so that routine maintenance can be accommodated without losing any operational capacity. Structure
The majority of vessel maintenance is carried out on board in so far as is possible. Each ship has an engineer officer, supported by the ship’s crew. In addition there is a two man support team and five engineer superintendents based in Arklow who are on call as required to discuss problems with a ship’s engineer and organise the delivery of parts or services to the port of call. The majority of maintenance work, apart from dry docking, is carried out where possible by the ship’s crew, both at sea and while the ship is in port off loading and loading cargo. In the case of services that are outside the capability of the ship’s engineer, Arklow Shipping retain a list of reliable contractors in the main operating ports who can be called upon to carry out maintenance at an agreed price. Arklow Shipping uses a Dublin dry dock for their docking / refits, and makes the most of time spent in dry dock by carrying out engine maintenance at the same time. Scheduling Arklow Shipping has been very successful in managing to dovetail maintenance with the operational tempo of their fleet. Major maintenance is undertaken in ‘small packages’ with the primary objective being to coordinate maintenance with the periods the ships are in port off loading and loading cargo. Funding The costs for ship maintenance are estimated in a budgetary process each year based on the planned maintenance activities (parts and services). Costs are allocated on a ship-by-ship basis and the budget is checked every three to four months where the engineer superintendent will justify expenditure. This system provides for detailed monitoring and control of maintenance costs. The key lessons learned from this private sector company are being studied carefully to determine their practicability for the Naval Service and are reflected in the following recommendations. Download 496.54 Kb. Share with your friends:
|