x - Mari-Tech

T‐701-G – Managing Complex Projects – A VICTORIA Class Extended
Docking Work Period (EDWP) Naval Perspective
Derek Hughes. CD2, PEng, FIMarEST, PMP
Submarine Class Manager,
Royal Canadian Navy
Biography
Cdr Derek Hughes is the Class Desk Submarine Manager in DMEPM (SM) SM 5, Ottawa, Canada. Prior to joining the
section, he served as the Submarine Liaison Officer in Abbey Wood, Bristol, UK within the SUBIPT for the Royal Navy
and as the Diesel Development Officer in MPSIPT for the Royal Navy. He received his MSc in Marine Engineering from
University College London in 1999. Cdr Hughes previously served in the submarine HMCS ONONDAGA and as the
Marine Systems Engineering Officer of the Canadian Patrol Frigate HMCS ST JOHNS.
Description
The Canadian Navy currently operates the Victoria Class Submarines (VCS).
The worldwide travel and varied
environments that the submarines are accustomed to tend to present numerous challenges. The continued support for
the technically complex platform has required increasingly stringent marine industry consideration due to the QA and
Material Certification requirements of the class.
The interaction with industry and the partnering of technological
advancements will ensure the supportability of the class for the next 20 years.
The primary objective is to discuss the VICTORIA Class EDWP, VICTORIA Class Submarine support, monitoring,
evaluation, development and support to the VCS platform. The secondary objective of the paper is to discuss the longterm support plan for the third level support of the Victoria class in support of a safe, fully combat capable Naval platform.
The paper will address the support program as outlined in the Extended Docking Work Period (EDWP) as it relates to
Project management, Records Support Services, Engineering Support Services, Material and Logistics and Maintenance
Support Services. The paper will discuss the ongoing sustainment of the Victoria Class Submarine platform and its
dependence on the interaction of a technically competent team interacting with a host of marine system specialists within
the Canadian Navy and industry.
The 2013 Ottawa Marine Technical Symposium – “Building a Stronger Foundation for the Marine Technical Community”
Managing Complex Projects – A VICTORIA
Class Extended Docking Work Period
(EDWP) Naval Perspective
Presentation to OTMS
Cdr Derek Hughes, DMEPM – SM 5
21 February 2013
T-701-G
Derek Hughes
Managing Complex Projects - A
VICTORIA Class Extended Docking
Work Period (EDWP) Naval
Perspective
The VICTORIA Class
Submarines (Clip)
AIM:
To present the Class
perspective for the
VICTORIA Class
Submarines (VCS).
Outline
• History
• The Class Plan… getting the job
done!
• EDWP Challenges
– Early;
– Current;
• Successes!!
• Lessons Learnt
• PM Take Aways
Brief History of Submarines in Canada
• 1914-20: CC1 & CC2
• 1914-1918: H-Class building at Canadian Vickers
Ltd in Montreal
• 1918-21: H-14 & H-15 (transferred from RN)
• 1954-65: A-Class in Halifax (RN 6th S/M Sqn)
• 1961-68 HMCS Grilse
• 1968-76 HMCS Rainbow
• 1962: 3 Oberon Class (from UK)
– 1965-98 Ojibwa
– 1967-99 Onondaga
– 1968-2000 Okanagan
• 1998: 4 Upholder Class (from UK)
Comparison of
OBERON & VICTORIA
Class Submarines
SUBMARINE CHARACTERISTICS
OBERON
2030 tons
2410 tons
295 ft / 90 m
> 500 ft / 150 m
12 knots
17 knots
9000 nm @ 12 knots
2 diesels/ 2 motors/ 2 shafts
65
6 forward
20
CHARACTERISTIC
Displacement (Surfaced)
Displacement (Dived)
Length
Diving Depth
Speed (Surfaced)
Speed (Dived)
Range
Propulsion
Complement
Torpedo Tubes
Torpedoes
Source: Janes’ Fighting Ships
UPHOLDER
2168 tons
2455 tons
231 ft / 70 m
> 650 ft / 200 m
12 knots
20 knots
8000 nm @ 8 knots
2 diesels/ 1 motor/ 1 shaft
49
6 forward
18
History of Canadian Submarines
Victoria Class (4 in Class)
2000
1999
Oberon Class (3 in Class)
1974
Grilse & Rainbow
1967
1961
1947
1945
‘H’ Class (2 in Class)
IX C Type (2 in Class)
1922
1919
1920
Note: H-Class built at Vickers in Montréal
1914
CC1 & CC2
Oberon vs Victoria
Mat Cert - Quality Assurance Requirements
Oberon Class
QA Req’ments
Victoria Class
x
SUBSAFE Program
√
Safe-to-Dive Certificate
Material Certification
√
x
Licensing for Sea
√
x
1st Level Systems
√
x
QA Live Files
√
Relatively few existed
Non-Conformances
√
x
Formal Audits
√
Transition Phase
CHI Incident
Boats Accepted
Oct ‘00
Oct ‘01
Feb ‘03
Oct ‘04
Initial Ops Capability
for Class achieved
Last Oberon
decommissioned
1999
2001
2003
2004
Reactivation
Canadianization*
* - does not include CHI
2006
2008
VIC EDWP
WSR EDWP
VISSC in
contract
A challenging start for Canada…
Logistic Cost of Ownership &
Gap developed
Parent Navy Responsibilities
between
not well understood
O-boats & VIC
Integrated
Project
Delays
3 Oberons  4 Victoria
Logistic
Support
Issues
Acquired a one-off
class of submarines
(preserved for 4+ yrs)
Little experience
New Safety Regime
within Canada
for Class
PM Transition Challenges
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Technologically advanced platform
Lay-up & Reactivation Issues
Technical Issues
Developing a new SUBSAFE Culture
Canadianization of UK Documentation & Processes
Material Provisioning
Two coast submarine operations
Initiatives
SubMOAR
Overview - SubMOAR
(Submarine Maintenance Opcycle Avail rere-Alignment )
18 months
4.5 years
Operations
EDWP
Operations
EDWP
ID
6 years
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
SSDR
OPS
AMP
VISSC
OPS
SWP
SMP
34 weeks
VICTORIA InIn-Service Support Contract
Navy Responsibility
Contractor Responsibility
Record Support
Class Management
EDWP
Engineering Support
Materiel and
Logistics
Maintenance
Support
Design Agent
Functions
Sub SA
Phase 1 Deliverable –
New 6 Year OPCYCLE
ID
6 years
EDWP
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
SSDR
SMP
OPS
AMP
OPS
SWP
34 weeks
7 week SWP + 1 week SMP
2 week (notional) AMP to be scheduled as required within ops period
26 week ops period
12 week ID notionally sched at end of cycle 4 or 5 (tbc by phase 2) based on opsked and material requirements. ID cycle to be
lengthened by 4 weeks.
Cycle 7 has no SWP
Cycle dates are fixed but within the cycle SWPs can be moved. Never more than 8 months between SWP
Materiel Certification Flexibility – one contingency cycle exists (cycle 8). SSDR valid to end of cycle 8, PM exists for cycle 8
Work Package
• Initial concept was “Essential Defects and Extended Docking” (EDED).
In a few cases “REFIT” is appropriate primarily in the areas of all the
Weapons Handling and Discharge Systems (WHDS), approx 15%
• The levels of the work packages were also influenced by the following
factors:
– First of class work to be performed;
– Unfamiliarity with platform and systems;
– Stringent MATCERT criteria;
– Need a baseline for rest of class; and
– Risk adversity.
Key Project
Assumptions
• All Material & Specialized Tools and Test Equipment
(SPTATE) will be available as reqd;
• FMF and Sub-Contract resources will be available as
planned;
• Design Authority turn-around of Deviations and Waivers
within 48 hours;
• Class Desk approval of Arisings within 48 hours;
• Plan will be predicated on 2 shifts per day, five days per
week. Graveyard (1st) shift will be utilized to de-conflict
work.
Risks
• Timely identification and delivery of material with correct
documentation;
• Steep learning curve for FMF on a new platform;
• Unique challenge of integration of Contractor and FMF
workforce;
• WHDS/SSE contract, working closely with LCMMs; and
• Arisings are estimated at 35-40% where typically we have
seen 40% in surface fleet DWP and refits.
VIC Project Challenges
•
•
•
•
•
Materials;
Managing all the contracts (35% of the actual work)
Engineering Issues;
Documentation Management for Mat Cert;
Test Forms are duration intensive in many cases and
not always manpower intensive;
• Arisings;
FMF Cape Breton
• DND Strategic asset
• 1200 employees (120 of which are military)
– Engineering Section (150 People), Production Section (800 People)
– Business Section, Quality Management
– HR Section, Corporate Services Section
– VIC EDWP Project (up to 250 people)
• VIC EDWP used up to 1/3 of output capacity
• Under contract with DGMEPM to complete the VIC EDWP
• Unit is set up to mainly deal with 1st and 2nd level maintenance, not
3rd level maintenance
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
VIC EDWP Concepts
Dedicated Project Team
Dedicated Production, Planning, Engineering, Materials, Quality and Contracts team
Contracting “whole specifications” to outside industry (originally went with 18 Specs
to VSL)
Use of Primavera and a project management tool
First use of MASIS (now DRMIS) for major 3rd level naval activity
Development of WIP program for total internal control and tracking of materials
Use of WINSETS for submarine system lock out protection
Manned EDWP with VICTORIA’s crew
Deviated from a master materials list (could not keep up on changing material pictur
Weapons work would be under another contractor with FMF CB production staff
working as sub-contractor labour.
Zone Production concept transitioning back to system concept upon completion
21
VIC EDWP Work
PM Technical Challenges
Space
constraints
Finishing the
job
Control Room ActivitiesAXP removal
Search Periscope
Attack Periscope
Obsolescence
Sonar Systems
VIC and WSR EDWPs Experience
Leverage
CHI EDWP
•
•
•
•
•
•
Specification Maturity;
Material identification and ordering;
Work Package appreciation;
Overall Planning;
Tools (Primavera, MS Project);
Limitations of Learning – will not be able to capture
all lessons learned in conducting the work.
WSR (Halifax, NS)
WSR - Mar 08
Key Lesson’s Learned
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Work package defined 12 months prior to execution phase;
Specifications grouped to proper parent systems;
Mature material lists with each specifications;
Proper identification and pre-staging of materials prior to execution
phase;
Value of dedicated production resources and project management
team;
Need for a robust “project management” planning tool;
Need to do “Pre-EDWP” surveys to reduce arisings and scope creep;
Need for high levels of engineering support; and
Systems approach works better for ease of scheduling and cost.
Key Lesson’s Learned
• Culture change (West) for true 3rd level activity which results in
longer delays in implementing changes
• Contracting out only smaller portions of specs or common work vice
“whole specifications” Both have pro’s and con’s
• “Up Rev” or specifications and master material list as required
• Systems or specifications approach to the work package
• Demand placed on the logistics team much higher (use to 1st and 2nd
levels of maintenance)
• Impact of obsolescence and need for local suppliers
• Need to get parts into the Repair Loop early and R&O contracts well
established
Project Successes!!
• Start of First EDWP for VCS!!
• First true Materiel Picture_Lessons Learnt;
• Resolution of several class Engineering
Issues;
• Significant PM work for FMFCB
(teamwork);
• Quality Submarine skill set development;
Project Challenges!!
• Materials remained a challenge!!
• Engineering Issues ongoing
• Focus on Project Plan Development to
complete the EDWP
• Management of Production and Engineering
progress across the platform
• Around the corner (contracts, equipment
delivery to plan, arisings, paperboat, etc..)
CHI under VISSC (CLIP)
Moving on in Project Management CORNER BROOK
PM Take Aways
• Communication
– A daily occurrence in many formats
• Team Work
– Treat all with respect and appreciate their contributions
• EVM
– It is a tool to indicate progress, use it effectively
• Performance Tracking
– A must to brief success or failure
• Knowledge Transfer
– Its the future and skills matter in this specialized work
The only thing that ever really
frightened me during the war
was the U-boat peril
Winston Churchill
The Future …
HMCS VICTORIA IN Action –
RIMPAC 2012 (CLIP)
Questions ?
Cdr Derek Hughes,
DGMEPM(SM) 5