FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1994
1994 - 1723.PDF
F-16 PRODUCTION At the peak in 1987, more than 280 F-16s rolled off the Lockheed (then General Dynamics) assem bly line in Fort Worth, Texas. Over the next two years, production will dip to around 50 a year. Traditionally, such a traumatic drop in output is accompanied by a dramatic rise in cost, but Lockheed has succeeded in reducing the F-16's price while slowing production to four a month. The proof lies in Lockheed's offer to deliver 100 new F-16s to the US Air Force over four years, from 1999 to 2002, at a firm flyaway unit price (in 1994 dollars) of $20 million — $3 million less than the unit price of the last F-16 now scheduled for delivery to the USAF in early 1997. The price reduction is the result of three years of efforts to improve quality, increase efficiency and reduce costs in the face of declining production rates. It is also the key to keeping the F-16 line open, by mak ing the aircraft attractive to export cus tomers and affordable to the USAF. Efforts began in mid-1992, when F-16 production was beset by quality problems. The result, says Jack Coffman, vice-presi dent process quality assurance at Lockheed Fort Worth, is "something unheard of in the industry" — a reversal of the trend of costs increasing as rates decline. "If quality and schedule are under con trol, cost is easy," he says. Quality mea sures are now beating those achieved in 1988, the F-16 line's best year, and empha sis is now on delivering "zero-defect" air craft. "For the first time, quality is green all across the board," Coffman says, referring to metrics used to grade F-16 quality. The cost of rectification has been halved, he says, as has the number of qual ity-rejection reports, indicating an improvement in process quality, he says. The number of unfinished parts with open quality problems has also been reduced dramatically. Quality problems have been tackled by full-time corrective-action teams — engi neers strategically located on the factory floor to solve problems identified by pro duction-line employees and to act on their ideas to improve quality and efficiency. The process is helping identify problems to be avoided in Lockheed/Boeing F-22 pro duction, he says. REDUCING OVERHEAD Subcontracting has been increased to reduce Lockheed's overhead costs. Work has been retained where there is a strategic or cost advantage, Coffman says, but oper ations such as machining, sheet-metal work and wire-harness assembly have been "outsourced" to specialist companies. Subcontracting results in lower over heads and better prices, he says, pointing out that 44% of the cost of machining and sheet-metal work is for indirect support and only 20% is for direct labour. The company has reduced its supplier base from 2,900 firms to 900, while increasing the number of parts bought in from an average of 5.2 million/month in 1993 to a peak of 10.9 million in January 1994. All subcontractors, including Lockheed's co-production partners, have had to adopt statistical process control. Quality teams have been located in the field to help suppliers. Coffman says that 99.8% of parts supplied go straight to stock without rejection —just 210 out of 4.2 mil lion parts received in May were rejected. Lockheed has also improved the quality of components it supplies to co-producers — with just 1.16 rejections per 1,000 compo nents or assemblies shipped, he says. Lockheed has established an "inspec tion by audit" programme at Fort Worth. This allows employees to self-inspect their work. The inspector then audits the employee, rather than inspecting each part. Coffman says that employees have responded well to this initiative, started in the fin-assembly area. Lockheed's unionised workforce has responded well to the changes, he says, including accepting the inevitable heavy layoffs. Charts posted in every production area lay out the timing and scale of the job cuts planned as delivery rate is reduced to four a month by January 1995. As the production rate has decreased, subassemblies previously made in separate work areas have been relocated with larger assemblies, and employees working on major assemblies now also work on the subassemblies. This has improved efficien cy by 15% and enabled the company to close down 60-90m of the F-16 line. Two years ago, it took 276 days to build an F-16. Today it takes 215. Coffman cites one time-saving example — a tool modifica tion to improve longeron location meant that seven days were taken out of centre- to forward-fuselage mating. Lockheed can now produce a standard-configuration F-16 in 24 months from start to delivery, he says. Lockheed has now launched the third phase of its re-appraisal of F-16 produc tion. Echoing the industry-wide "lean-air craft" initiative, this involves analysing all business processes, from contracting to product support, and eliminating unneces sary steps, Coffman says. m • • •: -• 'SE&S «& pAcyr • II ^^^ Production rates oj the F- ^^ J %^ W v j price has also come down. ( EFFICIENT ®p- Production rales oj the F-16 have fallen, hut the aircraft's price has also come down. Graham Warwick explains how Lockheed has keen akle to • A ""^L "T^"™1 ""^ achieve this seeming paradox I—^ I ^k I by means of rigorous J \ ^k monitoring of production. FLIGHT INTERNA TI0NAL 20 - 26 My, 1994 21
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
