$
resulting in a total savings of $2.5 mil- lion over three years.
Chapin and his team also implemented a VE program last year that saved more than $10 million and improved M-ATV safety. Te vehicles had encountered problems with the turret separating from the vehicle during a rollover or an event involving an improvised explosive device, resulting in severe or fatal injuries to gun- ners. A new solution—a redesigned slew bearing—improved the turret retention and survivability of the Objective Gunner Protection Kit. Te retrofitted turret with the redesigned slew bearing stays in place under as much as 32,000 pounds of force. Costing $1,640 less than the previous solution, the retrofit yielded $5.8 million in cost savings on the M-ATV, $4.4 mil- lion on MaxxPro vehicles, and roughly $1.5 million on the RG-31 variant.
Chapin was quick to note that “a lot of other people did the initial development and paperwork on that effort,” including colleagues Jerry Haggerty, Craig Schmehl, Todd Weimer and Brian Smerdon. “Tey worked on the slew bearing to help develop the design, test fixtures and pro- totype samples. I took over engineering of the kit when it was 95 percent developed and helped get it into production and iron out any production issues.”
Chapin is working with Mike Abee, logistics manager for the CPS team, to identify similar transactions. “I heard that the Marine Corps needed Neptune kits, for example, so we contacted them about sending them some of ours,” he said. “Tey save money by getting kits that we already have, and we cut costs since we don’t have to pay for storage.” Chapin and Abee are also working with managers of programs including the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle and the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles, to see if they
are interested in acquiring other surplus kits. “We’re looking not just across the services, but across all platforms,” he said.
What do you do, and why is it impor- tant to the Army or the warfighter?
We work at developing common solu- tions for the different MRAPs in order to provide the warfighter with the same kit adapted to the different vehicles. Te main benefit to warfighters is that they only need to learn how to use one kit, which is then applied to multiple variants. Te benefit to the Army is cost savings, since we are buy- ing a higher volume of one kit instead of small volumes of multiple kits. We’ve also been working with other services to com- bine kit orders, to get even higher volumes and drive the cost down further.
What’s the biggest challenge you face in your work?
Te biggest challenge for me, coming from the automotive industry, is the timeline for getting a design into production. Te MRAP program moves pretty quickly, but the funding and approval process is slower than I’m used to. It can be a struggle: We have a solution that we want to get into the hands of the war fighter, but often the contracting process and the paperwork make it difficult to get it there as quickly as we’d like. We try to be creative—pig- gybacking on other contracts, for example, or using urgent buys or J&As [justifica- tion and approval documentation]. For me, it was also a matter of learning who to contact—in finance, contracting and procurement. In the automotive field, that was all handled by one person.
During your career with the Army AL&T Workforce, what changes have you noticed that have impressed you the most? What change has surprised you the most, and why?
TACOM [the U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command, which encompasses TARDEC] is committed to providing training to keep the workforce up to date and technically savvy. I am most impressed with TACOM’s policy to help pay for master’s degree classes for its employees.
What has surprised me the most was how long the development cycle is for new pro- grams. I was used to a very streamlined development process in the automotive industry. Te MRAP program has signifi- cantly improved this development cycle, but lessons learned from this program need to be incorporated for future devel- opment programs. If we can’t provide what the warfighter needs, when he or she needs it, then we have failed our mission.
Acquisition has changed profoundly in many ways in the past 25 years. How do you see it changing in the future, or how would you like to see it change?
I would like to see some of the lessons learned from the automotive indus- try sector applied to the acquisition life cycle—for example,
the ability to
quickly and efficiently fund development programs, the speed at which product development occurs, and an increased focus on cost-saving initiatives to help save taxpayer dollars.
What’s the greatest satisfaction you have in being a part of the AL&T Workforce?
Most of the kits that I work on are safety- critical, meaning that they help improve safety or survivability for the warfighter. I am hopeful that some of the kits we have fielded on MRAP vehicles have helped protect warfighters
and perhaps even
saved their lives. —MS. SUSAN L. FOLLETT
ASC.ARMY.MIL 117
BBP 3.0
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184
