the u s army manprint program l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
The U.S. Army MANPRINT Program PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
The U.S. Army MANPRINT Program

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 24

The U.S. Army MANPRINT Program - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 398 Views
  • Uploaded on

The U.S. Army MANPRINT Program. Dr. Michael Drillings Acting Director, MANPRINT Directorate Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 Voice: 703-95-6761; Fax: 703-695-6997 michael.drillings@hqda.army.mil. MANPRINT UPDATE. AGENDA The state of Army MANPRINT Where we are Where we are going.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'The U.S. Army MANPRINT Program' - oshin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
the u s army manprint program

The U.S. Army MANPRINT Program

Dr. Michael Drillings

Acting Director, MANPRINT Directorate

Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1

Voice: 703-95-6761; Fax: 703-695-6997

michael.drillings@hqda.army.mil

manprint update
MANPRINT UPDATE

AGENDA

The state of Army MANPRINT

  • Where we are
  • Where we are going
what is manprint

The Full Range of:

Manpower

Human Factors

Engineering

Personnel Capabilities

Health Hazards

Training

Soldier

Survivability

System Safety

What is MANPRINT?

MANPRINT

Integrates

The Entire System’s

Life Cycle:

Research, Development,

Acquisition, Training and

Operations

Throughout

MANPRINT is the Army’s implementation of

DoD Human Systems Integration (HSI) Program

manprint practitioners acat i programs

Total Army Personnel Command

Force Integration Division

Human Research & Engineering Directorate

Soldier

Survivability

Human Factors

Engineering

MANPRINT Practitioners(ACAT I Programs)

MANPRINT Directorate

(HQ DA, DCS G1)

Army Safety Center

System Safety

Manpower

Personnel

Center for Health Promotion & Preventive Medicine

Health Hazards

Training

Survivability/ Lethality Analysis Directorate

why manprint
Why MANPRINT?

MANPRINT results in systems that:

  • Perform better
  • Use less manpower
  • Use less expensive personnel
  • Consider training issues early
  • Are safer for the user
  • Have less life-cycle cost
manprint design influence on comanche

Split-torque transmission reduces

repair/replace times

Easily removable

main rotor blades

Mission Equipment Package rack

orientation and module location

One piece engine cowl allows greater

access to engine and auxiliaries

o o o

o o o

o o o

MANPRINT Design Influence on Comanche

Dual point folding tail

Tail rotor

configuration

eliminates

personnel

hazards

Cockpit

configuration

Accessibility to LRUs

Weapons loading/access

Crew protection

EOTADS promotes

easy access to TGS

and nose components

Portable

Maintenance

Aid

Initial Required Program Buy -

Life Cycle Cost avoidance > $3.29B

Source: MANPRINT/Human Systems Integration Influence on Comanche Design & Development Program, St. Louis, MO: The Analytic Sciences Corp., January 1995

comanche tool kit
Comanche Tool Kit
  • The tool box for the T-53 series helicopter turbine engine (Huey & Iroquois) had 134 different tools.
  • The tool KIT for the T-800 for the Comanche has SIX tools instead of 134
    • Tools are inexpensive & commercially

available

  • Results
    • Fewer tools
    • Less burden on the supply system
    • Less training and inventory time
    • Increased combat readiness
where we are
Where We Are
  • We work for the DCS, G-1
  • We are in the MANPRINT Directorate
  • We have input, through the G-1, to materiel development meetings (ASARCs, AROCs; RRCs; ASRs; GOSCs)
  • We have input to the Requirement’s process
  • MANPRINT Assessment is an integral part of acquisition
  • We have a staff of 4

G

G

A

G

G

A

A

where we are cont
Where We Are (cont.)
  • Through the WIPTs, the domains are involved in solving problems
  • We rely on several other labs and agencies to help us
  • PMs do MANPRINT
    • Their primary job is to produce a system meeting KPPs for a specific price and on a specific schedule
    • MANPRINT is not a KPP (key performance parameter)

G

A

A

where we are going
Where We Are Going
  • Life under a new DoD 5000
  • Continued improvement in tools
    • Through research
  • Better MANPRINT education and training for Acquisition Corps
  • New acquisition approaches
    • Spiral development
      • Incremental system improvement
    • Capability based acquisition
      • Use best available technology
  • Waived systems

G

A

A

A

A

where we are going cont
Where We Are Going (Cont.)
  • Robotic and semi-autonomous systems
  • Joint interest
  • Cognitive engineering
    • Example

A

A

G

cognitive engineering
Cognitive Engineering

Human Factors Engineering principles must be considered an integral part of the system engineering process. To achieve that, the physical, cognitive, and decision-making requirements needed by the crew and maintainers to perform required tasks must be determined.

cognitive engineering13
Cognitive Engineering

Human Factors Engineering principles must be considered an integral part of the system engineering process. To achieve that, the physical, cognitive, and decision-making requirements needed by the crew and maintainers to perform required tasks must be determined.

This information will be the basis for determining relevant design characteristics, performance standards, performance and decision aids, task structure, potential workload, crew configuration, and training requirements.

where we are going cont14
Where We Are Going (Cont.)

Better Business Processes

  • VISIONS database
  • More efficient transmission of information
  • More uniform requirements’ language

Better Technical Substance

  • Better funding of R&D
  • Better prediction of human performance
  • Integration of MANPRINT domains

Better communication

  • Joint training program
  • Community of practice web site
  • Beginnings of true joint cooperation to serve the common interest

A

A

A

manprint in the system acquisition process ar 602 2 1 june 2001
MANPRINT in the System Acquisition Process - AR 602-2 (1 June 2001)
  • Combat Developers
    • Include MANPRINT considerations in documents (MNS, AoA, ORD, CAPSTONE rqmts document, critical operational issues and criteria (COIC)
    • Ensure MANPRINT is represented on all Integrated Concept Teams (ICTs)
  • Program Executive Officers (PEOs)
    • Include responsibility for funding and executing MANPRINT program in PM charters
    • Rate assigned PM execution of MANPRINT responsibilities
    • Monitor PM and contractor execution of MANPRINT requirements
  • Program/Project/Product Managers (PMs)
    • Implement proactive MANPRINT program for all systems managed
    • Include MANPRINT considerations as explicit part of source selection
    • Incorporate MANPRINT provisions in system contracts and specs
    • Charter MANPRINT WIPT or include MANPRINT in appropriate IPT
    • Resolve MANPRINT issues before each milestone decision review
    • Crosswalk MANPRINT performance parameters from ORD to RFP to TEMP
    • Provide resources and funding for MANPRINT program implementation
the bottom line
The Bottom Line
  • SOLDIERS will be using the equipment developed to perform missions and to defend their lives.
  • Equipment designed with the soldier in mind is :
    • Easier to use, employ, and operate
    • Easier to maintain and sustain
    • More effective
    • Safer
    • More efficient
    • More cost effective
    • Less likely to require redesign

We must equip the soldier, not man the equipment!

summary
Summary
  • MANPRINT will continue to be required by regulation (although less emphatically)
  • MANPRINT is smart business
    • Improved design
    • Reduced life cycle costs
    • Reduced risk to soldiers
  • www.manprint.army.mil
how to have a successful manprint program combat developers
How to have a Successful MANPRINT Program -- Combat Developers
  • Include MANPRINT representative(s) on Integrated Concept Team (ICT)
    • Establish MANPRINT plan of action
    • Identify and document MANPRINT issues/concerns
  • Include soldier & unit (MANPRINT) considerations in requirements documentation
    • MANPRINT/HSI specifically addressed in para 5e of ORD
    • Critical MANPRINT considerations meeting definition of Key Performance Parameters should be addressed in para 4 of ORD
  • Transfer documentation of MANPRINT issues to PM
    • Track as Common Data Elements (CDEs)
    • Ensure seamless MANPRINT consideration in system design efforts
how to have a successful manprint program materiel developers
How to have a Successful MANPRINT Program -- Materiel Developers
  • Include MANPRINT considerations in program planning & execution
    • Include MANPRINT considerations in acquisition strategy
    • Incorporate MANPRINT requirements in solicitation(s) and source selection(s)
      • In Comanche source selection, 17% of score centered on MANPRINT considerations
    • Provide resources for MANPRINT program implementation
  • Make MANPRINT part of your Integrated Product Team (IPT)
    • Where appropriate, charter a MANPRINT Working IPT
    • Establish MANPRINT plan of action and milestones
    • Track MANPRINT issues/concerns with domain SME’s
  • Require the Contractor to have a MANPRINT Program
    • Track and document MANPRINT issues via CDEs, SMMP, or similar mechanism
  • Include MANPRINT issues in test & evaluation planning
    • Crosswalk MANPRINT performance parameters, objectives and thresholds from the ORD to the RFP to the TEMP
how we influence the process
How We Influence the Process
  • Combat developer states requirements
    • FCS example
  • Milestone Decisions
    • WIPTs
    • IPTs
  • MANPRINT Assessments
  • Test and Evaluation
cognitive engineering21
Cognitive Engineering

Human Factors Engineering principles must be considered an integral part of the system engineering process. To achieve that, the physical, cognitive, and decision-making requirements needed by the crew and maintainers to perform required tasks must be determined. This information will be the basis for determining relevant design characteristics, performance standards, performance and decision aids, task structure, potential workload, crew configuration, and training requirements. The system shall:

  • Conform to sound HFE design processes.
  • Minimize physical and cognitive workload and task complexity for the target audience.
  • Emphasize the use of automation to aid or replace the performance of complex tasks.
  • Optimize crew/team communication through integration of controls and displays.
  • Employ appropriate soldier-centered interfaces to enable effective supervision/control/teaming between manned and unmanned systems
domain definitions
Domain Definitions

MANPOWER - number of military and civilian personnel required and potentially available to operate, maintain, sustain and provide training for systems

PERSONAL CAPABILITIES - cognitive and physical capabilities required to train, operate, maintain and sustain material and information systems

TRAINING - instruction, education, OJT, or unit training required to provide personnel and units with their essential job skills, knowledge, values and attitudes.

HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING - integration of characteristics into system definition, design, development and evaluation to optimize human-machine performance

SYSTEM SAFETY - design and operating characteristics of a system that minimize the human or machine errors or failures that cause accidents

HEALTH HAZARDS - design and operating characteristics of a system that create significant risks of bodily injury or death; “threats” include: loud noise, chemical and biological substances, extreme temperatures, and radiation energy.

SOLDIER SURVIVABILITY - characteristics of system that can reduce fratricide, detectability, and probability of attack, as well as minimizing system damage, personal injury, and cognitive and physical fatigue

additional examples
Additional Examples

Lightweight Towed Howitzer

(XM777)

Apache Longbow

Joint PM estimates $6.2M cost avoidance due to MANPRINT efforts

(Potential rework costs)

Cost avoidance = $16.8M over life cycle of fleet

Fox NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle

  • Initial design reduced crew from 4 to 3 but performance was unacceptable
  • Simple design change resulted in predicted performance improvements(reduced workload, reduced soldier risk)
  • Re-designed system validated with minimum testing
  • Performance now acceptable
  • $2-4M saved in program costs
  • Saved $15M in MPT over 7 years (3 vs. 4 crew)
  • MANPRINT investment: $60K!
some lessons learned
Some “Lessons Learned”

Source: Reverse Engineering: Human Factors, Manpower, Personnel, and Training in the Weapon System Acquisition Process, ARI Tech Report 659, January 1995

Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS)

Stinger

  • Requirements and system assessments were addressed in terms of machine, not man-machine system performance
  • Complex engagement sequence created significant training and operational problems
  • Ground clearance rqmts to avoid back blast & debris resulted in serious limits on elevation or use by tallest soldiers (98th percentile)
  • Lower mental category soldiers could not meet required single engagement kill probability rqmts
  • Maintenance issues led to:
    • Creation of new MOS (27M) for direct support maintenance relatively late in system development
    • Increased manpower demands beyond initial planning
    • Need for a maintenance training device to be delivered two years after IOC

UH-60A Blackhawk

M1 Fault Detection & Isolation Subsystem

  • Assessments of RAM during testing permitted exclusion of soldier-produced failures, resulting in unrealistically high estimates of performance
  • MOS’s selected as organizational mechanics were lower in mental aptitude than either M1 tank crewmen or general population of soldiers
  • Failure to operationally define rqmts for missions (e.g., nap-of-the-earth & night flying) led to incomplete testing
  • MOS67T (Blackhawk repairer) manpower was underestimated by 21 to 600%, necessitating recruitment efforts to obtain required personnel and a significant training “surge” at Fort Eustis
  • M1 Simplified Test Equipment was so unwieldy, difficult to transport, and difficult to connect to the tank that it actually discouraged its use
  • As early as DT/OT II, maintainers showed limited understanding of system functions, inability to identify basic faults, and limited facility in using technical manuals