search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
ARMY AL&T


(LCLV) parachute. Since fielding, the LCC, LCHV, and LCLV have gone from being alternative items to essen- tially supplanting the legacy equipment. This achievement can be attributed in part to the ability of the Integrated Logistics Supply Center (ILSC) to provide intensive item management of LCADS items, but also because of the exceptional advantages the ILSC offers to Soldiers.


One of the key and easily measurable advantages for the LCADS program is, of course, cost. LCADS, when com- pared to legacy systems, has achieved a 50-percent cost reduction by using a simplified design that decreases manu- facturing expense. Additionally, it uses economical geotextiles (polypropylene) for its canopy fabric.


Part of the Army requirement for LCADS was the need for the parachutes to be prepacked by the manufacturer. Moreover, all LCADS products are regarded as one-time-use, expendable items. This was a major paradigm shift for the Army, as the Army doctrine now allows Soldiers to abandon the LCLV at the drop zone or FOB to be repurposed as shelters and other building materials.


Further Improvements Although the LCADS is a robust capabil- ity, the U.S. Army’s Logistics Innovation Agency (LIA) recognized an opportunity to improve upon it. The LIA partnered with the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development, and Engineering Center to develop and rapidly field a Low-Cost Low-Altitude (LCLA) capa- bility. The LCLA uses a scaled down LCADS parachute to create tactics and procedures that allow ultra-low drop alti- tudes. These low-altitude drops (150–300 feet above ground level) increased both aircraft survivability and drop accuracy.


Since transitioning to PM FSS as part of LCADS, LCLA has achieved Type Classification and Full-Rate Production approval, allowing it to continue down


LCLA bundles are more size-appropriate for the platoon-sized teams conducting patrols or embedded in Afghan villages. (U.S. Army photo by SGT Gary Hawkins.)


The entire LCADS family of items has proven to be an operational and cost-effective solution to the aerial resupply challenges faced by U.S. forces in OEF.


the path of becoming fully institution- alized as part of joint airdrop doctrine. To that end, the U.S. Transportation Command and U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command have endorsed a priority effort to expand the LCLA capability with focus on two primary areas: increasing payload weights of the LCLA bundles and qualifying the system on the U.S. Air Force (USAF) C-130 fleet of aircraft.


The maximum an LCLA bundle can weigh is 1,000 pounds. The C-130 uses floor space on the ramp to con- duct the LCLA airdrop while leaving the entire cargo compartment floor for other mission use. This allows the C-130 to conduct multiple objectives in a single sortie. The LCLA bundles are also more size appropriate for the platoon-sized teams conducting patrols or embedded in Afghan villages. The C-130 opens the door for more night airdrop to troops in need of emergency resupply as well.


The entire LCADS family of items has proven to be an operational and cost-effective solution to the aerial resupply challenges faced by U.S. forces in OEF. PM FSS takes pride in the integrated product team effort that has carried the program to its current operational success. This level of success will be held as the standard while we pursue program enhancements during the continuous product improvement process to further simplify resupply for our combat forces.


SCOTT MARTIN is the PM FSS Project Leader for the LCADS pro- gram. He served on active duty as an Air Force Loadmaster, gaining 22 years of operational experience before his employment in the Army’s acquisition workforce. Martin is Level II certified in program management.


JULY –SEPTEMBER 2010


55


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