2013 AviationWeek Program% Excellence Award...

2013 Aviation Week Program Excellence Award Submission

MK54 Torpedo

Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems/MK54 Torpedo

1

I. Program Overview Organization Name/Program Name:

Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems/ MK54 Torpedo

Program Leader Name/ Position/Contact information – E-mail, Phone

Craig Ladenberger & Betty Jester 360-394-3413 (Craig); 401-832-2303 (Betty) [email protected]; [email protected] P.O. Box 500; Keyport, WA 98345 (Craig); NUWC Division Newport; 1176 Howell St (Bldg 1171-3/Rm P3-7); Newport, RI 02841 (Betty)

Customer: Organization/Name/Position Contact information –

US Navy/ NAVSEA PMS404 RDML (Sel) Tom Kearney Undersea Weapons Program Manager 202-781-4149 [email protected]

Program Category System Level Production Program Background: What is this program all about? (No more than one page). Describe: The overarching

need for this program

History of the program

The product that is created by this program

Scope of work – original & updated

Expected deliverables

Current status of the program

Need: In today’s changing high-tech world, new, more potent threats are

emerging. Slow, quiet, diesel submarines, for example, are now operating in shallow-water, littoral areas. As a result, lightweight torpedoes designed to defeat high-speed, nuclear-powered submarines in open-ocean environments are no longer sufficient.

To be successful, warfighters need a lightweight torpedo capable of delivering a devastating blow to submarine threats in both deep and shallow water — and in various acoustic environments. That torpedo is the U.S. Navy’s MK54.

Co-developed and manufactured by Raytheon and the U.S. Navy, the MK54 is the next generation anti-submarine warfare weapon deployed from a surface ship, helicopter or fixed wing aircraft to track, classify and attack underwater targets. The MK54 is designed for both deep water and littoral environments, making it the only lightweight torpedo capable of striking any target in the world’s oceans, regardless of water depth.

Besides the significant need within the U.S. Navy, the MK54 is exportable to numerous allied nations. Product:

The MK54 utilizes combined capabilities from the MK46 and MK50 lightweight and MK48 heavyweight torpedoes. It uses sophisticated processing algorithms to analyze the information, edit out false targets or countermeasures, and then pursue identified threats. The MK54 program leverages the most modern torpedo technologies from the MK50 and MK48 ADCAP (advanced capability) programs. It also utilizes the proven MK 46 warhead and propulsion subsystems. The result is a low-cost weapon that meets all performance requirements for littoral warfare.

Raytheon is the Navy’s sole production supplier for MK54 hardware. With an established infrastructure and experienced workforce co-located with the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC) in Keyport, Wash., Raytheon works directly with the Navy to meet the lightweight torpedo requirements of U.S. and allied fleets.


2

Scope of work: Raytheon’s contract includes upgrade of Government Furnished

Material provided Arrays and Transmitters from residual MK50 Torpedoes, production of Processor Group Assemblies (PGAs) and Control Group Assemblies (CGAs) and procurement of Fuel Tanks and numerous engine components to upgrade the MK46 Afterbody into a MK54 configuration. NUWC was responsible for assembly of the MK54 Afterbody, integration of all components into a MK54 Final Assembly, in-water testing on instrumented and open ocean test ranges, and assembly and deployment of the MK54 with warhead. Expected deliverables:

Raytheon delivered MK54 Forebody and Afterbody upgrade Kits plus numerous spares and test sets. NUWC was responsible for deployment of MK54 Torpedoes. History:

After a successful Engineering Development Model/Low Rate Initial Production phase, the MK 54 entered production with design changes intended to reduce the overall cost by 60 percent. Initial production of this version identified significant design and process issues that were not encountered in the previous testing. As a result of implementing the corrections to these issues, the delivery schedule realized a significant impact, delaying MK 54 delivery to the U.S. Navy fleet by more than two years.

In early 2011, the Pentagon considered cancelling the program. However, the prevalent threat necessitated deployment of the MK54 torpedo as soon as possible. PMS404 Program Manager Capt. Tom Kearney requested that Raytheon lead an effort to revitalize the program and set up a cross-functional, cross-organizational team. Current Status:

By instituting a new collaborative process, based on the Naval Aviation Product Enterprise team model, Raytheon was able to tackle the challenges, implement corrective actions and meet its commitments. Key to this success, the company partnered with the Navy customer to find innovative and affordable solutions, refining requirements and leveraging subject matter experts. Using Raytheon Six Sigma (R6s) techniques, the Torpedo Enterprise team developed a common Single Aligning Metric (SAM) goal of delivering all USN MK54 Torpedoes to the fleet by December 2012 and created four projects to achieve the SAM goal.

Raytheon Six Sigma (R6s) Blitz techniques were employed to identify a path to a Ready for Issue (RFI) decision by May 31, 2011. The combined industry-government MK 54 enterprise team first met on April 6, 2011.

The R6s business tool is a fact/data-based process that utilizes a six-step methodology for continual process improvement. It starts with a “burning platform,” which in the case of the MK54 was, “no


3

MK 54 torpedoes in the fleet.” The six R6s steps are: Visualize — “Imagine the Future;” Commit — “Commit to Change;” Prioritize — “Determine Improvement Priorities;” Characterize — “Define Existing Process and Plan Improvements;” Improve —– “Design and Implement Improvements;” and Achieve — “Celebrate Achievements, Build for Tomorrow.”

The team easily identified the Visualize, Commit and Prioritize steps: If fleet needs were not met, the warfighter would not have a way to defend against the threat.

The first morning of the R6s two-day blitz was significant, highlighting varied concepts of defining the customer. For example: • Raytheon was working to contractual requirements and reported to

the program office, PMS404. • NUWC Newport (NPT) is the technical direction authority and

was concerned with ensuring that Raytheon’s technical and process challenges were fully solved.

• NUWC Keyport (KPT) is the Navy’s Intermediate Maintenance Activity (IMA) that receives Raytheon’s newly built hardware for acceptance testing prior to building up warshot and exercise torpedoes for the fleet to test.

• The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) is responsible for ensuring that Raytheon is fully compliant with the requirements of the contract.

• And N86 controlled the budget. After four hours of engaged – and often animated - discussion, the

team aligned and defined the warfighter as the ultimate customer. During the R6s blitz, the team used process mapping to document

the entire production process from Raytheon’s material procurement to fleet delivery from NUWCKPT. Members then identified four major projects (and a number of “go-do” projects) that would facilitate improvements in Raytheon’s delivery consistency and verify performance prior to delivery to fleet. The four projects were: 1. First Pass Yield (FPY) improvement . 2. Configuration baseline lockdown and control. 3. Early identification of potential failures. 4. IMA fault isolation process improvement.

As a result, the projects:: 1) achieved 40-percent improvement in First Pass Yield at Raytheon; 2) eliminated hardware retrofits by establishing an Enterprise Configuration Control Board to prioritize design change cut-in points; 3) saved approximately one month of schedule by running some customer confidence testing in parallel with Raytheon production, and; 4) reduced failure analysis processing time by 30 days. This was accomplished by establishing a Raytheon quick response team to assist NUWCKPT in fault isolation in the IMA and early NUWCNPT review of Raytheon failure reports.

As the yield improvement projects started to show benefits,


4

II. Value Creation = 20 Points Value: What is the value, competitive positioning, advantage, and return created by this program to your:

• Customers – National interests, warfighter

• Company – Strength, bottom line, and shareholders

• Scientific/technical value (particularly for R&D programs)

• Excellence and Uniqueness:

Customer – The MK54 Torpedo was developed for the U.S. Navy and its allies to improve shallow water threat detection, which reduces operational and maintenance costs. Utilizing the MK46 engine, the MK54 provides Allied Forces with the ability to inexpensively upgrade over 20,000 torpedoes in worldwide inventory. Company – Torpedoes have been an enterprise business for Raytheon since the 1960s. The MK54 alone has the ability to generate sales over the next 15 years. Scientific/technical – The MK54 Torpedo has taken the technology from the MK46 and MK50 Torpedo programs and provides an upgraded path to incorporate today’s digital technologies, along with improvements that meet the ever-changing threat environment that the MK54 Torpedo must meet. Excellence and uniqueness – The MK54 Torpedo program is unique in that it is a hybrid of the previous two versions of the U.S. Navy’s lightweight torpedo, the MK46 and MK50. The MK54 has taken the technologies of these very different torpedoes and melded them into today’s premier lightweight torpedo. The MK46 was developed in the 1960’s and encapsulated analog technology, while the MK 50 was developed in the 1980’s using advanced propulsion technology and homing improvements. The MK54 brought together the best of the previous generation torpedo attributes, along with a digital upgrade to create the premier lightweight torpedo.

III. Organizational, Processes/Best Practices: (How Do You Do Things) = 30 Points

Strategic: Opportunity Management -

As stated in the background section above, the MK54 PMS404 Program Manager, Capt. Tom Kearney, requested that Raytheon lead an effort to revitalize the program to prevent cancelation. Raytheon

Raytheon began to deliver early to contract and was able to give internal program direction that if test equipment became a bottleneck, any Returned Goods had priority over new production. For the first nine months, meeting SAM requirements took until the final week of the month. As the team improved the balancing of priorities, product flow from Raytheon, through NUWCKPT to the fleet smoothed out, meeting weekly vs. monthly goals in March 2012. Working as a team, the Single Aligning Metric of quality torpedoes delivered to the Fleet was met on December 17, 2012.

The government-industry MK54 Enterprise Team highlights the value of collaboration, transparency and collective focus on a common, achievable goal and, as a result, received the Naval Sea Systems Command Team Excellence Award for the 3rd & 4th Quarters 2012.


5

Describe how your program has identified its operational and business opportunity, and manages this opportunity throughout the program’s life cycle.

instituted a new collaborative process, based on the Naval Aviation Product Enterprise team model, and was able to tackle the challenges, implement corrective actions and meet its commitments. Key to this success, the company partnered with the Navy customer to find innovative and affordable solutions, refining requirements and leveraging subject matter experts. Using Raytheon Six Sigma (R6s) techniques, the Torpedo Enterprise team developed a common Single Aligning Metric (SAM) goal of delivering all USN MK54 Torpedoes to the fleet by December 2012 and created four projects to achieve the SAM goal. The SAM was effectively used throughout the program’s life-cycle to manage this process.

Strategic: Strategic Supply Chain Integration and Cost Effectiveness Management: - Describe how your program is integrating its supply chain to assure visibility and adapting long-term cost effectiveness up and down the supply chain.

The MK54 program has a supplier base with products and services valued in excess of $34 million annually. The suppliers are located within the United States and United Kingdom. Management of the supply chain has been instrumental in the success of the program. Visibility into supply chain activities begins with a standard set of metrics, including order placement, receipts, and actual cost compared to those submitted as bid. This is augmented with standard processes for “buy better” and corporate-wide agreements with many suppliers to leverage the power of Raytheon for lower costs. In certain areas, specific teaming arrangements were pursued to foster a potential longer-term relationship advantageous to both Raytheon and our suppliers.

Strategic: Operational Integration and Systems Engineering – Describe the challenges faced by your program in terms of integrating the system into its operational environment and its impact on systems engineering planning a

The MK54 program early on experienced a number of integration and performance issues from insufficient design verification and validation. The end result was experiencing failures in production with a design related root cause. This resulted in a number of goods that were returned and the problem greatly impacted MK54 deliveries to the fleet. Raytheon and the U.S. Navy established a collaborative process to systematically troubleshoot the issue, identify a solution, implement the solution and fully verify and validate all aspects of the change, both through land-based and sea-based testing. This process successfully resolved these issues in the most time-effective manner to get MK54 fleet deliveries on track and predictable.

Operational: Planning, Monitoring and Controlling - Describe your planning and resource allocation processes. How do you monitor and review your program’s progress and make corrections to keep

Raytheon has standard processes for program status progress reviews documented in our trademarked Integrated Product Development System (IPDS). IPDS defines a series of 11 gates as the product or system evolves from initial concepts through preliminary design, critical design, production and test readiness to contract closeout. We maintain an Integrated Master Schedules (IMS), including key U.S. Navy milestones. Weekly earned value reviews are conducted among the Cost Account Managers to monitor and maintain progress of the control accounts.

Operational: Supply Chain and Logistics Management -

The MK54 program had more than $34 million annually of material provided by suppliers located in the United States and United Kingdom. The Supply Chain director is a member of the program


6

- What processes, tools and relationship-building methods have you used to develop, refine and improve supply chain and stakeholder integration?

leadership team and is integral to program execution and the development of required cost positions for new program scope. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems conducts annual supplier conferences that include program briefs from senior Navy leadership describing the program status and the program growth potential. This level of supplier integration serves to incentivize the supplier base to continue to lend support to the program in the interest of work scope.

Operational: System Integration, Testing & Reviews - Describe the activities and processes used to succeed in your system integration, and testing. How did you conduct system design and technical reviews?

The MK54 Program uses a requirements database to not only decompose the requirements, but also to link the requirements to test methods and conduct. Each level of integration is defined in the database to ensure that the requirements are both physically and affordably verifiable. Design and technical reviews are performed in accordance with the Raytheon IPDS. IPDS provides design review criteria and templates for review conduct at a series of gates. Additionally, our program uses walk-up reviews, called Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM), for the pre-integration of the customer and other stakeholders including suppliers. The TIMs reduce surprises and gaps uncovered at the more formal design reviews.

Operational: Risk / Opportunity Management Describe the processes used to identify both risks and opportunity and to assure potential for both is addressed effectively

The Raytheon risk and opportunity process and tools are incorporated within our IPDS process. Monthly reviews are conducted at the IPT level and the R&Os subsequently presented to the program manager. The risk and opportunity identification process was initiated during the early program phases with interviews conducted at the lowest level. Mitigation tasks (risks) and capture tasks (opportunity) are included in the IPT integrated master schedules and tracked using standard earned value practices ensuring progress and status emphasis.

Team Leadership: Team Culture and Motivation Describe how you created your team spirit and culture, and accomplished entire team integration and

We created MK54 vision, strategy, goals and values (VSGV) early in the program. The VSGV is augmented by a set of team members who emphasize living these values. Periodic meetings are conducted with the program manager to celebrate our successes and identify the program’s progress. Monitors and whiteboards are placed within our MK54 work areas to acknowledge both program and individual accomplishments. The monitors identify when important milestones are achieved and when significant deliveries are made with team celebratory photos.

Team Leadership: Lessons Learned and Knowledge

Lessons learned are shared during regular staff meetings and documented in a database and shared with other programs and the company.

Team Leadership: Leadership Development How do you develop team’s skills and build future leaders.

The MK54 program requires leaders to demonstrate dexterity in numerous disciplines, and customer engagement. Raytheon program managers are certified by the Program Management Excellence organization through a combination of classes and hands-on experience at various levels for the program organization. Raytheon also offers formal leadership training and the program manager is


7

empowered to recommend team members. Best (& Next) Practices: Identify your program’s specific Best Practices that you believe are unique, and could be shared with others and become industry’s Next Practices.

Several Best Practices were identified: 1. Complete Verification & Validation Testing prior to build of any hardware. This prevents out of phase design issues surfacing during production (a major cost driver with product recalls, problem resolution and schedule slippage). 2. A robust first article acceptance process is critical to success in production. This includes all business functions fully engaged in the process both internally and at critical suppliers; It is necessary to have complete review and validation of the Technical Documentation Package against the Manufacturing Documentation Package and step-by-step walk through of the manufacturing and testing processes; It is critical to drive all factory failures to root cause prior to commencing full scale production. 3. Complete physical configuration auditing is needed to make sure any configuration issues are completely resolved prior to production start. 4. Regular use of R6S blitzes uncovers and corrects issues quickly and efficiently and identifies opportunities Begin with end in mind.

IV. Adapting to Complexity: (How do you Deal with your Program’s Unique Complexities

= 20 Points Identify the Program’s Market Uncertainty level – How new is your product to your market and users, based on the definitions below. Then describe how you deal and address this specific uncertainty: - Derivative – an improvement of an existing product/system. - Platform – a new

generation in an existing product line.

- New to the Market – a product or system adopted from another market

- New to the World - breakthrough product, never seen before

The MK54 Torpedo is a derivative product of the MK46 and MK50 torpedoes to meet shallow water threats. It is comprised of the propulsion system and warhead of the MK46 torpedo and the digital electronics and array nose assembly of the MK50 torpedo. It can be deployed from ships, fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft. The MK54 torpedo attained Initial Operating Capability (IOC) in August 2004. The MK 54 Mod 0 Lightweight Torpedo integrates existing torpedo hardware with state-of-the-art commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) digital signal-processing technology in the guidance and control section in an expandable open architecture. MK54 Sonar/Transmitter is upgraded from technology produced for the MK50 program re-processed out of the Government inventory for the MK54 application. The Warhead System consists of the MK 103 Mod 1 Warhead and the MK 20 Mod 0 Exploder. The Warhead System has been deployed on U.S. Navy ships, aircraft and helicopters for more than 26 years. The Navy has effectively managed a dwindling backlog of existing assets through use of repair contracts, upgrade contracts and issuance of proposals for current configuration, new-build production hardware to be delivered just as the remaining inventory has been converted to fill existing requirements. The program has endured technical and budget challenges and threat changes and overcome these by addressing technical, cost and schedule and performance issues, ultimately delivering a weapon


8

with outstanding performance that is flexible and can readily be upgraded to meet changing threats.

Identify the Program’s Technological Uncertainty using the definitions below. Then describe how you deal and address this uncertainty: - Low-tech: application

of mature, well-established technology

- Medium Technology: existing technology modified to meet new design requirements

- High-Technology: recently developed new technology

- Super High-

Technology: non-existing technology that needs to be developed during the program.

The MK 54 Mod 0 Lightweight Torpedo integrates existing torpedo hardware and software from the MK46, MK50 and MK48 torpedo programs with state-of-the-art commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) digital signal-processing technology. It incorporates an advanced guidance and control (G&C) section employing COTS processing technologies and tactical software improvements to significantly increase shallow water counter-countermeasure capability at reduced lifecycle costs. The existing hardware and software features coupled with the advanced digital signal-processing technology would classify this as a medium-technology system. The latest hardware and software features were introduced in a design spiral. MK54 P2U design resulted from Technical Instructions trade study effort with Joint Raytheon and Navy participation. Subsequently, a Joint System Concept Review was held in December 2004, where requirements were captured and reviewed. Next, a Joint System Design Review was held in February 2005, where the design concept was captured and reviewed. The goal of the design spiral was to simplify the design (examples: FAI hybrid, power subsystems), fix producibility issues with CCAs that were causing low yields, drive testing to lower levels in the assembly, achieve higher yields, and provide functional card test capability at suppliers. At the same time, testability was addressed through updated test interfaces (changed connectors for reliability), development of automated test platforms to reduce test time and implementation of the configuration-unique signals. Environmental requirements were updated, changing from system level environmental test requirements to measured box level exposures for vibration. To address the risk involved with the design upgrades, four units were built as POM torpedoes — for the government to perform an evaluation and acceptance testing series to detect issues prior to the startup of production. During the introduction of the initial P2U design upgrade the uncertainty was not assessed properly. As a result, the design phase of the program experienced delays that encroached on the Proof of Manufacturing and test period of the program. Due to schedule constraints on the program, the decision was made to begin production while testing was still underway on POM units. To the program’s credit, lessons learned were developed and adopted, which resulted in a much higher level of planning and integration of activities between Raytheon and the Government.

Identify the level of your System Complexity using the definitions

The MK 54 is an assembly. It is a hybrid surface-ship and air-launched anti-submarine weapon featuring an upgraded MK50 torpedo's sonar sub-assembly section, an upgraded MK46 torpedo’s


9

below. Then explain how you are dealing with this level of complexity:

propulsion system, new Control Group electronics, new Processor Group electronics and an explosive train. The MK 54 can be deployed from a surface ship, helicopter or fixed wing aircraft to track, classify and attack underwater targets. It uses processing algorithms to analyze the information, edit out false targets or countermeasures, and then pursue identified threats.

Identify the Pace and Urgency of your team’s effort using the definitions below. Then describe how you deal with the program’s pace requirements: - Regular timing – no

specific time pressures. Fast/Competitive – time to market is important for competitiveness.

- Time Critical – there is an absolute and critical-to-success deadline.

- Blitz – there is a crisis element driving the need for immediate response

The pace and urgency of the team’s effort depended on the stage of the program, the level of difficulty of the phase and the number of issues encountered. The pace ranged from regular timing of scheduled routine tasks with adequate float to blitz-level urgency. MK54 deliveries are time critical. They support system-level integration and testing at the IMA, followed by acceptance testing of the torpedoes, including range test activities, which involve complex logistics and planning. The program team utilized a variety of techniques to manage the torpedo hardware manufacturing, integration, and Navy system level testing activities. They included: • Blitz type activity to address specific time-critical issues.

• Development of a long-range Single Aligning Metric goal for delivery of torpedoes to the fleet, which became the program drumbeat. • Development of an Integrated Raytheon/Navy master phasing schedule. • Tiger Team working meetings were conducted at the team and management level, frequently on a daily basis to ensure communication and coordination was maintained to ensure tasks stayed on schedule during periods of peak activity. • Raytheon/Navy Leadership meetings were held weekly with senior management to assess the schedule, resolve conflicts and discuss resource issues the team faced.

Other Complexities & Uncertainties - Describe other complexities and unknown factors faced by this program and how you addressed them.

The complexity and uncertainties involved final certification of design upgrades and changes at the torpedo level — sometimes well after test and delivery of the sub-assembly electronics. This also impacted the cost/schedule and necessitated addressing issues identified at that stage of the design. Jointly, Raytheon and the Navy addressed this challenge by implementing a more rigorous prototype and land-based regression testing approach very early in the design process.

V. Metrics (How do you Measure Program’s Performance) = 30 Points


10

Customer - How do you measure the impact of

Our customer satisfaction was measured almost instantaneously since customers are on the team and participate in weekly customer leadership meetings and quarterly senior level customer reviews. The SAM gave the real-time look of the project that was required in the successful execution. The metric described the need for when the MK54 was required at the end user, along with actual delivery of the product.

Performance - How do you measure your program’s performance in traditional terms such as schedule, budget, requirements, and business results?

The program maintains traditional earned value metrics for schedule performance and cost performance. We have established requirements definition metrics and productivity metrics to measure ourselves. We also have standard metrics for software growth and software development productivity. These metrics are maintained and disclosed at our monthly program reviews. Business results are defined in terms of annual operating performance sales, bookings, profit and cash. These metrics are also reported monthly to all levels of the Raytheon Company.

Preparing the Future - How do you measure and assess the long-term contribution of your program to the corporation/organization?

This project was dominated by near-term requirements of the single aligning metric (SAM), which required that the torpedoes be completed by December 2012. The team was focused on that metric every day, but as a business, we also needed to focus on the long term. We have five-year plans, and we measure ourselves against those plans. The five-year plans identify growth and where investments are required for growth of the business, along with the metrics that measure the effectiveness of our investments.

Team - How do you measure and assess the impact of your program on your team development and employee satisfaction?

The measurement and the assessment of the SAM occurred every week with a team review to the customer on the successes and setbacks within the project. Weekly reviews with the customer allowed the team to get the needed support, adjust the schedule based on customer events and direct feedback on the team’s performance.

Unique Metrics - We do not use any unique metrics, but have enhanced the metric analysis by looking for long-term, six-month and current trends. Business metrics are decomposed to cumulative, six-month and current-month performance.

2013 AviationWeek Program% Excellence Award...

Documents

Transcript of 2013 AviationWeek Program% Excellence Award...