by RADM J.E. “Pappy” Boyington Jr., USN
Chief of Naval Air Training and Commander, Navy Region South
We in Naval Aviation are blessed with the finest young men and women that this country has to offer. Intelligent and highly motivated toward serving their nation while wearing the “Wings of Gold,” it is incumbent upon all of us to ensure that these young heroes continue to receive the very finest training and equipment possible.
Over the past few years, our focus has been on near-term readiness, primarily reducing the time to train within Naval Aviation. The excessive pools and lengthy training track resulted in a shortfall in meeting fleet requirements and longer-than-programmed first sea tours. This situation had a direct negative effect on individual career progression and fleet readiness. To fix this near-term readiness issue, we went outside the Navy and brought in a successful business-consulting firm that specializes in production processes.
The result of this effort was the Naval Aviation Pilot Production Improvement program (NAPPI). This process reduced the time to train by 35 percent, increased the number of winged ensigns by 110 percent and produced aviators to fleet requirements — a real success story for Naval Aviation! This was the beginning of a series of successful “Best Business Practices” and processes that have become an essential part of our training transformation; a transformation that has taken on many of the attributes of successful manufacturing organizations.
Much like Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), the efficiencies in production come from visibility and feedback throughout the process. It is easy to answer the question, “How is your system performing?” You can do this anecdotally, but it is much tougher to answer the follow-up question “How do you know?” To truly answer that question requires quantifiable, measurable data. In production, it is critical that you maintain visibility of your product. We have done this by not only developing a clear set of definable, measurable metrics, but have linked them through a single database, the Navy Integrated Training Resources Administration System (NITRAS).
The numerous legacy information management systems we support continue to be cumbersome. This year we will transition those four systems to a single training information management system (TIMS) for all our programs. This will provide single-point tracking of our Naval Aviators from “street to fleet.” With this system in place, we can “close the books” at the end of each day. The net result will provide the commander with an essential tool for managing his process based on near real-time information. This system will enable better management of the quantity, timing and quality of our aviator production.
The organizational structure that is tasked with execution of this process is aligned under the Chief of Naval Air Training with the mission and responsibility of “street to fleet” aviator production. It is a standing functional Task Force providing Naval Aviation with single-process ownership that includes the fleet replacement squadrons reporting in a Tactical Control-for-training relationship.
Clearly, we in Naval Aviation training are not mechanically producing widgets. We are producing warriors, the finest in the world, and that will always be our focus. However, from a pure business sense, certain parallels can be drawn and are useful when dealing with production.
All of these and more have a direct application to the training production process.
We recently eliminated the biographical index from the Aviation Selection Test Battery (ASTB). The elimination of this irrelevant index effectively increased the number of qualified applicants by more than 40 percent without reducing the quality of the student.
We have leveled the playing field for the initial entry students by outsourcing some very basic flying skills before entry into the formal flight program. This Introductory Flight Screening (IFS) provides each student with 25 hours of flight time and ground school administered by local FAA-certified flight schools. Preliminary results indicate a significant reduction in flight attrites and drop on request (DORs). This program will be in full swing by the end of FY ’03 and includes all accession sources.
We have transitioned to a qualitative grading structure that allows a student to work on specific areas while still progressing through the syllabus. The Multi-Service Pilot Training System (MPTS) insures a measurable minimum level of proficiency for the student in each phase of training. This not only gives us a better tool to insure uniformity and reduce rework, but also provides the metrics to support syllabus adjustments and efficiencies.
We are ensuring a more consistent time to train by transitioning from tracking individual student progress to class flow or batch processing. This demands more rigor in scheduling, allows for better alignment between phases and FRS start dates while generating a group dynamic that reduces attrition and provides a better framework for the mentoring process.
In addition to class flow, we will be transitioning to a revised syllabus that combines primary and intermediate training and moves the pipeline selection point to the right. This change will provide additional dynamic 3D maneuvering experience and seasoning before the advanced phase of training.
We are defining a quality metric for each phase of training throughout the continuum. The metrics used (such as Signal Of Difficulty rates in the FRS) will enable us to not only monitor the quality of the existing training but give us measurable feedback on syllabus/process changes.
If one is going to produce precision products, one must have quality tools. For us that means modernization of our aircraft and simulators. Over the past two years we, along with NAVAIR and OPNAV, have developed a road map for this modernization — CNATRA 21. It is a fiscally responsible prioritization of requirements to address future readiness issues of the 21st century. It leverages existing commercial off-the-shelf technology to update existing aircraft, particularly our civilian variants such as the TH-57 and T-44 aircraft. It also supports most economical buy rates and multi-year procurement for new aircraft such as the T-45C and T-6.
We are transitioning from an individual aircraft system application to a multi-aircraft “system of systems” approach that we will apply to the Naval Flight Officer training modernization program. This will be the first opportunity to truly revolutionize our training by linking the T-6 and the T-39 replacement (T-XX) together with the ground-based simulation and modern emulation and stimulation radar applications to develop a total-system training support program.
CNATRA 21 is more than a hardware road map; it is the total support plan for the next several decades. Underpinning the training system hardware are the facilities road map (defining the long-term infrastructure requirements) and the contract logistics road map. While the hardware and facilities are developed, the CLS road map is under construction this fiscal year. CNATRA transitioned to all-contractor support for our training systems almost 20 years ago. This resulted in significant savings in manpower and increased aircraft availability. This change means that 80 percent of my budget is directly linked to these contracts, therefore effectively fixed. It is in this area where even small percentages in savings can have a great impact on our operating budget. The CLS road map leverages re-compete opportunities and best business/contracting practices (consolidation, incentives and contract structure) to provide us with the best value while continuing to ensure that the contractor receives a fair profit. An essential element in successfully executing this phase of the road map has been the Naval Air Systems Command consolidation of all the Training Command programs under one Naval Air Systems Command program manager, PMA-273. As I said, training aviators is very much a business, and the health of our contractor support is critical to our success. We are truly one team.
The NAPP process subtlety but profoundly changed the way we look at our execution process. No longer can we afford to underfund our annual operational budget. We have transitioned from a budget-based to a requirements-based process with the metrics in place to support the system. This year is the first we have met fleet requirements and filled all the FRS seats. Thanks to good business processes, we produced more aviators in less time and at less cost per aviator than at any time in recent history. We know the fleet requirements, we know the demands, and we have the quantifiable data to support the cost of training.
However, the process is fragile and very sensitive to execution-year shortfalls. Underfunding immediately shifts the system back to a budget-based system with the development of pools and increased time to train. This transition is rapid and proportionate to the amount of reduction and, with our lack of significant surge capability, the system is slow to recover even when funding is restored. This is a result of a mismatch in “placing the order” with an 18–24 month lead time and an annual-based budget cycle. The bottom line is that the success of business processes applications is only as good as the long-term commitment of the organization to support it.
As the Chief of Naval Aviation Training, I have been charged as the “keeper of the cloth” in maintaining the long-standing quality of our Naval Aviators — a task that requires a significant investment by our Navy. It will continue to be incumbent upon us to improve the quality of our product with increased efficiencies and reduced cost. This can only be done by carefully integrating the best commercial practices with requirements unique to military service. After all, our product is unique. We produce an “Air Warrior” capable of striking our enemy anywhere, any time — and winning. As our CNO has stated on several occasions, “When all is said and done, our business is to rubble stuff” — and from where I sit, business is good.
Ed. Note: RADM Boyington, a native of Pensacola, Florida, entered military aviation as an Army warrant officer pilot and was designated a Naval Aviator in December 1973. Serving as a maritime patrol aviator in several squadrons, he has commanded VP-50, CTF-72, CTF-57, Patrol Wing One, Iceland Defense Force, Patrol Reconnaissance Force Atlantic and Mine Warfare Command. A graduate of Navy Test Pilot School, Boyington has accumulated more than 8,000 hours in more than 70 types of aircraft. He has flown more than 600 armed combat missions in Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, Bosnia and Kosovo. Promoted to Flag rank in September 1997, Boyington became Chief of Naval Air Training in October 2000.