<p12018692>CE00967-6 Research Dissertation and Negotiated Final Project

August Patterson Student No: 12018692
1
RESEARCH DISSERTATION AND NEGOTIATED FINAL PROJECT
CE00967-6
August Patterson
Supervisor: Philip Edwards
Engineering Faculty, Staffordshire University
BEng(Hons) Engineering Management by Negotiated Study
January 2015,
10,338 Words

2
Abstract
This project proposes to introduce and implement the five Lean principles (Lean
enterprise institute, c.2009) to the current existing Bay Maintenance Procedure of
the External Rescue Hoist Hook. Lean has been chosen as the Quality Concept to be
applied and implemented to the Bay maintenance procedure of the External Rescue
Hoist Hook. The Lean methodology, once applied, is a commitment to achieve a
waste free operation by eliminating waste1, in all steps of product manufacture, and
continual improvement of current operating procedures, focussing on delivering the
final product to the customer. The selection of Lean as the chosen Quality concept
will be explained in greater detail in ‘Lean and the Evolution of Quality Concepts’.
Bicheno (2009) states that the Lean system, an extension of the Toyota production
system (TPS), is continually evolving therefore this journal will look to consolidate
and explore only traditional Lean concepts and principles.
When the Role Bay first took ownership of the Rescue hook it was agreed that a
rudimentary Bay maintenance procedure would be created using other Role Bay
asset procedures as a template, with a more specialised procedure drawn up later.
The plans for a new procedure never came to fruition until an investigation was
instituted to explain several incidents that caused a delay to the flying programme as
a result of the deficiency of serviceable Rescue Hooks. This will be explored in
greater detail in ‘External Rescue Hook Incidents’.
As mentioned in the proposal the overall “aim of this project is to undertake a
structured analysis of the current, albeit newly formed, Bay Maintenance Process of
the External Rescue Hook (Fig. 1) in order to apply a chosen quality concept/mantra
and tailor it to the customer’s perception of the final product value” (Patterson,
2013). As the first author, my recommendations aim to achieve a more efficient
procedure that reduces the time taken to generate serviceable Rescue hooks and
thus allow the Chinook fleet at RAF Oldham to respond with flexibility and
adaptability to the unpredictable nature of its national and international
commitments.
The current Bay maintenance procedure, and the new system, will be analysed and
evaluated and the results will be documented allowing for a comparison to be drawn
against a procedure post application and implementation of the Lean principles in
order to determine the pros and cons of the two systems.
1 Waste is defined in Lean terms as any activity which utilises resources but does not
add to the fit, form, or function of the service or product that is delivered to the
customer (Quality America, c.2013).

3
Acknowledgements
I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the following people
and companies whose experience and knowledge have contributed in producing this
project:
 Philip Edwards, Dissertation supervisor
 Flight Lieutenant Gopalakrishna, OIC Role Armament Safety Equipment Flight
(RASE), Royal Air Force Odiham
 Chief Technician Kearney, Chinook Engineering Development and
Investigation Team(ChEDIT), Royal Air Force Odiham
 Chief Technician Biereton, 18/27 Squadron Rectification Controller
 Sergeant Amyes, Role Bay Senior Supervisor
 Sergeant Williams, 18/27 Squadron Senior Supervisor
 Corporal Goodwin, Role Bay Supervisor, Royal Air Force Odiham
 Corporal Barnes, Logistics Squadron Supervisor, Royal Air Force Odiham
 Corporal James, R&D, Logistics Squadron Supervisor, Royal Air Force Odiham
 Senior Aircraftsman Technician Ash, Role Bay Technician, Royal Air Force
Odiham
 Senior Aircraftsman Technician Moloney, Role Bay Technician, Royal Air
Force Odiham
‘External Rescue Hoist Hook’ Fig. 1

4
Contents
Topic Page
Abstract 2
Acknowledgements 3
Table of Contents 4
 List of Figures 5
 List of Appendix 5
Introduction 6
Literature Review 8
External Rescue Hoist Hook Incidents 8
Lean and the Evolution of Quality Concepts 9
Identifying Value 12
Value Stream Analysis and Mapping 15
Create Flow 25
Establish Pull 32
Seek Perfection 34
Conclusion 37
Bibliography 38
Appendix 40

5
List of Figures
List of Appendix
Figures Title Page
1 External Rescue Hook 3
2 The Evolution of Quality Concepts 11
3
Current state value stream map for Rescue Hoist
Hook Bay maintenance procedure
17
4 VSM Key 18
5 Takt time 19
6 Breakdown of C/T 20
7 Future state value stream 22
8 Current state value stream divisions 25
9 Future state value stream divisions 26
10 Rescue Hoist Hook Cell 27
11 Toolkit 28
12 Rescue Hook Flow chart 29
13 Rescue Hook Supermarket 30
14 Process Control board 31
15 Downstream 32
16 Layout of Rescue Hook Cell 36
Appendix Title Page
1 Quality Control System Breakdown 40
2
Bay maintenance procedure for External Rescue
Hoist Hook
42
3 PDCA Template 43

6
Introduction
The main body of this project, after the introduction and the Evolution of Quality
concepts, will be divided into five sections. The first section will record the methods
utilised when implementing the first Lean principle ‘Identifying value’. There must be
no confusion in terms of the identification of value. This must always be gleaned
from the customer’s perspective and to move away from the conventional approach
of service suppliers concentrating on what they are able to deliver instead of what
the customer really wants (Quality America, c.2013). By determining and then
supplying what the customer (in this specific instance the 18/27 Squadron based at
RAF Odiham) wants, the Role Bay may be able to reduce or eliminate tasks that do
not add any value to the ideal final product.
An overview of the External Rescue Hoist Hook Bay maintenance procedure was
mentioned in depth during the project proposal and can be found in the Appendix.
The second section will explore and apply the principle of ‘Value Stream Analysis and
Mapping’ (VSA/M). This is the second of the five Lean principles, a method of
business process improvement through analysis and mapping of the beginning to the
end cycle of a product or, in this case, the External Rescue Hoist Hook (Bicheno,
2009). Interviews, discussions, and consultation with all stakeholders were arranged
to ensure that the optimum amount of relevant information within the maintenance
procedure is garnered. . A positive spin-off from the application of VSA/M is that the
managers and engineers understanding of the maintenance procedure, as a whole,
will increase. This will also enhance the understanding of the procedure allowing
accurate projections and identification of:
 Areas which can be improved on
 The reduction of maintenance times
 The complete and accurate mapping of the VSA enabling the elimination and
or reduction of the time taken to complete the Bay maintenance procedure.
The third section is dedicated to ‘Creating flow’, the third of the five Lean principles
and is centred on the reduction or elimination of product lead times. This section
analyses the areas identified in VSM, which require improvement. The solutions
include post analysis and made possible through the utilisation of certain Quality
tools, which are described in detail within this section.
‘Establishing Pull’ is the fourth of the five Lean principles and focuses on responding
to customer demands as quickly as possible without creating excess inventory
(Dager, 2013). This section examines the problems identified, in the first three Lean
principles, in greater detail and implements solutions in order to ‘Establish Pull’,
thereby bringing the theoretical future state value stream into reality. The aim of
this section is to facilitate the move from push-type manufacturing2 and toward the
2 The Push system is defined as a systemthat ensures stock is made in which
production is not based on actual demand (Quality America, c.2013).

7
Lean favoured pull-type manufacturing.3 The advantage of having a ‘pull’ type
system will be described within this section.
‘Seek Perfection’ is the last of five Lean principles however, it is not considered the
final step and actually perpetuates the Lean cycle until perfection is attained
(Bicheno, 2009). This is very beneficial to the Bay maintenance procedure because it
enables adaptability, which in turn allows for the evolution of its processes keeping it
current in todays ever changing environment.
3 The Pull system is defined as a system that ensures resources are used exclusively
for the production of a product in response to a demand, from a customer, for a
product or service. This results in Rescue Hook inventory cost reductions, incurred by
holding a large amount of inventory to account for customer variation in demand to
ensure delivery of product and the reduction in waste from manufacturing a product
that the market may not demand in the near future (Ballé & Ballé, 2005, p.19).

8
Literature Review
Investigation of this subject has involved research of military orders and procedures
along with communication with Chinook Engineering Development and Investigation
Team (CHEDIT) and a visit to the Joint Aircraft Delivery Test and Evaluation Unit
(JADTEU). The trip to JADTEU provided access to existing equipment specifications
and procedures currently used in order to carry out in depth maintenance on
components.
External Rescue Hoist Hook Incidents
An investigative team was formed to determine the reason why Rescue Hooks had
caused repeated slips and or delays to the flying programme at RAF Odiham. To
negate bias the team consisted of five personnel from various trade backgrounds
within RAF Odiham, who interviewed management of the Role Bay. Their findings
revealed that:
 Rescue Hooks that had been fitted to aircraft were found ‘technically’
unserviceable whilst Bay maintenance due for others varied from a day to a
few weeks. This is mentioned in greater detail in ‘Possible bottlenecks’ and a
solution formed in the section ‘Create flow, Visual Management’.
 Tools used to generate serviceable Rescue Hooks were borrowed from other
Production cells4 within the Role Bay. This is described in greater detail in the
section ‘5S’.
 A high amount of rescue hooks were classed as unserviceable with no
timescale as to when the relevant work would be carried out on them.
Personnel were under no schedule to work unserviceable Rescue Hooks and
simply carried out the task when instructed by management or when
squadrons required one. This problem is classed as ‘Fluctuations in demand’
and the solution is offered in ‘Establish Pull’.
In response to their findings the first author proposed the application of the Lean
Quality concept to the current Bay maintenance procedure of the Rescue Hook to
eliminate the negative aspects of their findings. Furthermore a new Lean procedure
would be proposed to reduce the time taken to produce serviceable Rescue Hooks.
This satisfied the investigative team but they insisted that the new procedure be
presented to them upon completion of the application and implementation of the
Quality concept.
Throughout this project solutions will be proposed, described, implemented and
evaluated in order to remove the problems that were found by the investigative
team.
4 Harris & Rother (2001) defined a cell “as an arrangement of people, machines,
materials, and methods with the processing steps placed right next to each other in
sequential order, through which parts are processed in a continuous flow”.

9
Lean and the Evolutionof Quality concepts
Lean was chosen as the Quality concept to be applied to the External Rescue Hoist
Hook. However, In order to accept the validity of this quality concept, its possible
benefits and application first be appreciated. This can be done by tracing the
“evolutionary “strides made in the pursuit of the ‘Quality’ for manufactured
products. It is for this reason that the Lean system was chosen as my preferred
concept for this assignment.
This quality evolution in the world of manufacture and production had taken
centuries to foment before the concepts, ideas and philosophies on quality and
standards were formalised. In those early days of manufacturing quality inspection
of the final product enabled the supervisor, or an individual of great personal skill to
make the decision on whether to accept or reject the work done. As the volume of
manufacturing grew together with the sophistication of products, greater skill was
required and more time was needed by inspectors to maintain product quality. This
led to appointment of full time inspectors. However some areas of concern emerged
and included:
• More technical problems occurred, requiring specialised skills, often not
possessed by production workers
• The necessity for inspectors to undergo training
• The promotion of skilled craftsman/workers created an exodus of skills leaving
behind less skilful workers to perform operational jobs
• Inspectors were ordered by management to accept defective goods/products to
meet the demand for goods
To alleviate these problems a separate department came into being. This was known
as the Quality Control Department, (QCD). The Chief Inspector, within this inspection
department, was deputy to the works manager and would report mainly to him. The
Chief Inspector would be responsible for not only product acceptance but also defect
prevention (DTI, n.d). This very rudimentary hierarchal structure served as the
foundation for modern day quality systems and whilst defect prevention has been at
the core, it has also been the catalyst, for the formalised approach to many quality
philosophies today.
 In the 1920’s Dr W. Shewart, the man credited with the development of the
application of statistical methods to the management of quality, made the
first modern control chart. This chart “demonstrated that variation in the
production process leads to variation in product” (BPIR, 2002). Therefore,
eliminating variation in the process leads to a good standard of end products.
However, there was little or no use of this until the late 1940’s where only a
few countries emulated this philosophy, notably Japan, where the next big
evolutionary quality control movement occurred.
• 1940’s: At the end of the 1940s Japan had an industrial system that was all

10
but totally destroyed along with having a reputation of the cheap replication
of products and an illiterate workforce. The Japanese recognised these
problems and with the implementation of Dr. Shewart’s work, developed by
other quality gurus such as Dr. W. Edwards Deming, they quickly set about
the rectification of these problems (DTI, n.d).
• 1950’s: By the early 1950’s quality management practises developed rapidly
in the Japanese manufacturing industry and became an integral part of
management and quality philosophy. By 1960 quality control had become a
national preoccupation.
• 1960’s – early 1970’s: The increase of imports to the USA and Europe was
down to the fact that the products imported were cheaper yet higher in
quality compared to its western manufactured counterparts’ who were yet to
modernise their quality approach (DTI, n.d).
It was during this time that the precursor of many modern day quality control and
quality philosophies was born. It was originally called the ‘Just-in-time production’
system (Wikipedia, 2013).
• 1980’s: The quality revolution moved slowly into the west and did not really
begin to take root until the early 1980’s and this was predominantly to
counter Japanese success. In most cases Total Quality Management (TQM)
was the focal point of the drive for quality (DTI, n.d). TQM “consists of
organisation-wide efforts to install and make permanent a climate in which
an organisation continuously improves its ability to deliver high-quality
products and services to customer” (Wikipedia, 2013).
The UK’s ‘Department of Trade and Industries, DTI, 1982 publication stated that
Britain’s world trade share was waning and there was a direct correlation to the
declining standard of living in the country. The DTI publication went on to state that
a countries reputation for quality was made up of the reputations and industrial
performances of its individual companies and products and services (DTI, n.d). The
launch of a national quality campaign along with the published British Standards (BS)
5750 in 1983 illustrated the importance for quality to industry - in order to survive,
and ultimately, remain competitive in the world marketplace (DTI, n.d).
Since then the International Standardisation Organisation, ISO, has become the
internationally recognised standard for quality management systems comprising a
number of standards that specify the requirements of documentation as well as the
maintenance of a quality system (DTI, n.d). It was also during this time that the ISO
was persuaded by the British government to adopt BS 5750 as an international
standard, and it became ISO 9000 (The Chartered Quality Institute, 2013).
Quality control and its philosophies have permeated all levels of manufacturing and
industry allowing for an organisation-wide structured approach to understanding not
only what customers need, but how to deliver them both consistently and accurately
within a budget and on time with as little waste as possible.

11
‘The Evolution of Quality Concepts’ Fig. 2
From the ‘Evolution of Quality’ timeline, and how the western industries were quick
to implement these quality concepts in order to compete with its Japanese
counterparts, one can surmise just how beneficial and instrumental these concepts
are.
Lean, as well as other quality system methodologies such as Lean Six Sigma, are
increasingly chosen as the route to quality implementation in both large and small
organisations (Shahbazi & Shaffie 2012, p.7). This is in large part due to the fact that
it has both staying power and is a proven process that continually produces
measurable financial results. A study by Hendricks and Singhal, titled ‘Empirical
Evidence from Firms That Have Won Quality Award’ (1997), as summarised and
listed below by Shahbazi & Shaffie (2012, pp. 7-8), illustrates how implementing
quality controls improves the bottom-line performance of companies.
• A 91% growth in operating revenue compared to 43%for the control group
• A 69% increase in sales compared to 32 %
• A 79 % increase in total assets compared to 37 %
• A 23 % increase in number of employees compared to 7 %
• An 8 % rise in return on sales compared to no improvement for the control group
• A 9 % improvement in return on assets compared to 6 %
This project will look to utilise Lean as the chosen Quality concept as it is the most
adaptable enabling one to tailor the tools to allow correct application to certain
situations in order to achieve the desired results.
A description of each of the Quality concepts as well as its aims and benefits can be
found in the Appendix.

12
Identifying Value
In this project Value is classed as what the customer identifies as the ideal final
product. The information from the customer necessitates a new procedure to be
created, standardised and utilised in order to carry out modifications that would
enable the organisation to realise the ideal final product. The Role Bay aims to
identify what it perceives as value whilst producing the ideal final result, however
ultimately it is the customer that determines value and waste. Therefore it is
necessary to conduct interviews with 18/27 Squadron, the customer to whom the
Role Bay strives to supply the demand, in order to glean as much information about
their perception of the ideal final product ensuring that we deliver what the
customer wants and not only what we can provide.
Lean considers any activity that does not contribute to value to the final product as
waste. Thereby reducing the amount of waste will increase the proportion relation
of value in the product.
Methodology
The methodology for the first Lean principle is fairly straightforward. The first author
is to glean as much information off the customer in order to ascertain what they
consider as value and thus achieve the ideal final result/product. Therefore it was
decided that a meeting was to be arranged between Role Bay personnel, the
Logistics Squadron5 and the 18/27 management.
Execution and Results
A meeting was held, in order to identify customer value and waste with regards to
the External Rescue Hoist Hook. This meeting was conducted in the Engineering wing
at RAF Odiham, between Role Bay personnel, management of 18/27 Squadron and
the Logistics Squadron. Asking specific questions, and using accrued experienced
gained in previous modules, about the current Rescue Hook and its perceived
deficiencies assisted in the identification of the customers’ perception of value as
being:
“Delivered a Rescue Hoist Hook that is indisputably serviceable, both physically
and electronically.”
A positive by product of the meeting was the identification of possible bottlenecks in
the Bay maintenance procedure and listed below.
5 It must be noted that whilst the Logistics Squadron is not the customer Squadron it
has been included in the meeting as all delivery and receipts of aircraft assets, and or
components, is done through the Receipts and Dispatch a section within the
Logistics Squadron.

13
Possible bottlenecks/problems encountered with the current operating procedures
 Serviceability of the Rescue Hoist Hook
In order for an External Rescue Hoist Hook to be made serviceable all
paperwork must be signed by the operative producing the component. MoD
aircraft documentation and its relevant internal paperwork is considered the
hard-copy of the paperwork to be completed where as LITS6, Logistical
Information Technology System, is the softcopy. Both must be completed in
order to correctly generate a serviceable Rescue Hook. LITS is a networked
system that allows RAF units access to a consolidated asset database (CADB).
Any data entered onto the system by units will immediately be sent to the
CADB allows all user units to access data in real time. It is imperative that all
LITS users validate the actual serviceability of an aircraft asset and that it
correlates to its LITS status so that maintenance and supply data remains
both accurate and current (Great Britain, Ministry of Defence, 2009, leaflet
38).
When completing LITS documentation this programme will prevent the
fitment of assets, and or components, deemed unserviceable. After
rectification or planned maintenance the relevant LITS paperwork must be
completed in order for LITS to recognise the asset, and or component, as
serviceable. Role Bay management were informed, during the meeting, that
some of the delivered Hooks were still deemed as LITS unserviceable. This
discovery was, more often than not, made after the fitment of the Hook to
the Rescue Hoist on the aircraft with cable run-out checks carried out (Great
Britain, Defence Council, 2nd Ed. 1997, pp. 7.8-10). This then necessitates the
removal of the Rescue Hoist Hook incurring severe time penalties, which in
turn delays flights and therefore adjustments to the flying programme must
be made.
The Role Bay are the only section/flight within the Royal Air Force that can
make Rescue hooks, and other specialist Role equipment, serviceable. This is
due to the special authorisations that Role Bay personnel hold. However
anyone can alter the serviceability status of an aircraft asset, and or
component, from serviceable to ‘unserviceable’ without the need of special
authorisations. The corrective actions will be discussed in the section ‘Create
Flow, Visual Management’.
 Rescue Hoist Hooks to be co-ordinated
As mentioned in the project proposal (see Appendix) Bay maintenance on
Rescue Hoist Hooks is carried out every 91 days/200 lifts or whichever comes
6 Logistical Information Technology system: LITS is an asset management computer-
based programme, which indicates all work pending/carried out and the
serviceability of both the aircraft and the assets held on board (AP108H-0204-9D).

14
first (Great Britain, Defence Council, 1997). It has been noted by subject
matter experts within the Role Bay that once the Bay maintenance was
completed and the hook was made serviceable, the job card was co-
ordinated via LITS. Once the LITS job card is co-ordinated the 91 day / 200 lift
bay maintenance life starts to decay. This created a problem, as Hooks may
not be issued for several weeks post LITS co-ordination. Therefore some
Hooks had minimal life, on LITS, when issued to squadron. This wastes time,
resources and manpower. However this is another issue that would of gone
unnoticed had this meeting not taken place. The solution will be discussed in
further detail during ‘Create Flow, Visual Management’.
Personnel taking part in the meeting also felt that the Role Bay would need to do
more in order to become more adaptable and respond accordingly, within the time
constraints, to generate Rescue Hooks:
1. In the event of an emergency or rapid response to an unforeseen
circumstance i.e. Syria Conflict, Natural disasters, etc. there must be
Rescue Hoist Hooks ready for issue from the Role Bay to the squadron.
2. Whilst also minimising the issue of Rescue Hooks that are unserviceable
i.e. the Rescue hooks must be defect free and ready for issue without
LITS compromising its serviceability. This has been mentioned previously
in ‘External Rescue Hoist Hook Incidents’.
This section not only identified value but also uncovered possible stagnation points
or bottlenecks to the VSA/M. Solutions and the ability to respond to different
scenarios will be proposed and implemented throughout this project.

15
Value StreamAnalysis and Mapping
The value stream represents the ‘beginning to end’ procedure that delivers the
Rescue Hook to the customer (Quality America, c.2013). VSA is the complete
analysing of the process, within the organisation, involved in jointly delivering the
ideal final product.). VSA will enable the Role Bay to identify where the procedure is
inefficient, whilst also increasing the understanding of the procedure within the
current personnel and ensuring that waste is kept to a minimum
VSA categorises product development tasks into three groups (Lean Thinking 2013);
i. Value added: Steps that create value for the customer
ii. Business-Value added: Steps that are required by one or more
required activities (including design, order processing, production and
delivery) but create no customer value.
iii. Non-Value added: Steps that create no customer value and are not a
required activity. These steps should be eliminated immediately.
Utilising this categorisation the focus group, mentioned later in ‘2. Create a current
state value stream map’, will be able to classify the product development tasks then
reduce or eliminate them in order to streamline the process.
Value Stream Mapping
Value stream mapping, VSM, is a tool developed by Toyota that depicts the
outcomes of the VSA. The simplification of a highly complex real time system into a
less complex two-dimensional format facilitates insight and understanding
(McManus, H & Millard, R, 2002). This is because the VSM will be able to identify,
through illustration, the ‘bottlenecks’ that prevent the Role Bay from producing
what the customer squadron needs by a simple diagram.
The two maps that will be created and analysed within this project are the: Current
State and Future State (Pereira, 2008). The input from personnel who work regularly
on the Rescue Hoist Hook, considered as ‘Subject matter experts’ (SME’s), as well as
squadron technicians and Bay management will assist predominantly in the creation
of the different Value Stream Maps. The purpose of VSA/M is to design the ‘future
state’ of the Rescue Hoist Hook process being evaluated, by establishing priorities for
Lean implementation both short and medium term (Bicheno, 2009). Prior to
mapping the aim and the scope must be established.
Aim of VSA/M
The aim of this section is to apply the value stream analysis and mapping of the Bay
maintenance procedure of the External Rescue Hoist Hook. The application of the
second Lean principle will enable the creation of the future, more ideal, state VSM.
This task will be carried out by Role Bay personnel between the periods of the 1st
June 2014 – 1st December 2014.

16
Scope
As mentioned in the project proposal, this project will be carried out using the
facilities at the Royal Air Force station RAF Odiham. More specifically within the
Engineering wing, sub unit the Role Bay.
The Value stream analysis will encompass everything from after the delivery of the
Rescue Hoist Hook from storage, in this case – ‘Technical Stores’ (department within
the Supply and Logistics squadron), to delivery of the product from the Role Bay to
18/27 squadron.
Methodology
The method utilised for the collation of information in this section, was promoted by
McManus & Millard (2002) in their paper ‘Value Stream Analysis and Mapping for
product development.’ By interviewing, holding discussions and participatory events
they were able to glean as much information off SME’s regarding the process and
possible solutions to any problems encountered. Therefore all VSA/M results were
collected in the same way, with members of the supply chain, personnel belonging
to the Role Bay and 18/27 squadron representatives.
A four-step method is employed to illustrate the VSA/M was promoted and
employed by Pereira (2008). This route was chosen because of the simplicity with
which a VSM can be created, describing a highly complex system in a less complex 2-
dimensional system, using four generic steps.
1. Identify and state the product family
The Rescue Hoist Hook value stream will be mapped and analysed within this
section.
2. Create a current state value stream map
Before planning the current value stream it was advantageous to walk through the
whole process from the beginning to the end. This will allow the first author a
greater understanding and therefore a more accurate future values state map.
The process was divided into two sections and discussed in depth with the focus
group.
I. Bay maintenance procedure of External Rescue Hoist Hook
II. Delivery of the External Rescue Hoist Hook to squadron
A discussion was held in order to analyse the External Rescue Hoist Hook. Role Bay
personnel, management and SME’s from squadron were invited to participate and
form part of the focus group. This enabled the creation and charting of the complete
current state value stream, by identifying the complete process from receipt of the
Rescue Hook to the Role Bay for maintenance, to supplying the customer with the
ideal final product. An added advantage of inviting personnel from each

17
management tier is that it enabled, at each juncture, an input from the various
hierarchal levels to ensure that possible solutions simultaneously satisfy the needs of
both the project and the team.
Before attending the discussion personnel of the focus group were tasked to write
down the complete process from receipt of Rescue Hoist Hook to the Role Bay and
to delivery of the final product to 18/27 squadron. This enabled the creation of the
current state VSM prior to the discussion as well as optimal use of the time allocated
for the discussion.
‘Current state value stream map for Rescue Hook Bay maintenance procedure’
Fig. 3
* It must be noted that the Supply and Logistics squadron, along with Engineering
Operations squadron have ownership of the delivery system in use and is considered
not part of the investigation remit as these procedures are sufficient and the
personnel who carry them out deemed as proficient. Therefore the project will only
evaluate and record information downstream of the delivery of the External Rescue
Hoist Hook.
To complete the current state VSM one must also find the Cycle and Takt times. The
Cycle time is the sum of the amount of time that all tasks associated with the Bay
maintenance of the External Rescue Hoist Hook require. Takt time represents the

18
rate of progression of products through all stages from raw material to customer.
These figures assist in identifying areas that require streamlining either through the
reduction and or elimination of waste or Business-value added/Non-value added
steps.
‘VSM Key’ Fig. 4
Cycle Times
All tasks associated with the Rescue Hoist Hook Bay maintenance is grouped under
one process with a Cycle Time, C/T, of 360 minutes. This time is an average figure
obtained from the last twenty Bay maintained Rescue Hooks.
A breakdown of the C/T is illustrated in Fig. 6.
The first yellow triangle I1, (Fig. 3) refers to the time taken to complete the task in
box 1 (Fig. 6), whilst I2 indicates the time taken to complete box 3.
The C/T is the time spent on an individual process. In the current state value stream
(Fig. 3) the C/T’s are entered below the processes. This allows the viewer to identify

19
exactly where the process flow bottlenecks or becomes stagnant and make decisions
on which ones can be reduced to lower overall cycle time.
‘Takt Time’ Fig. 5
Net Available Time Customer Demand
Customer
demand/day
1 Hook/day
Working shift/day 1 shift
Hours/shift 9 hours
Available time/shift 540 mins
Net available
time/day
420 mins/day
Break time/shift 60 mins
Customer
demand/day
1 Hook/day
Lunch time/shift 60 mins TAKT TIME = 420 mins/day
Planned
downtime/shift
0 mins
Net working
time/shift
420 mins
Net available
time/day
7 hours
Air Publication
The rectification and maintenance carried out on Rescue Hooks is done ‘in
accordance with’ (IAW) an Air Publication (AP), which will be mentioned throughout
the project. The AP108H-0204-5F, which Bay maintenance is carried out IAW, has
been refined and continually updated when required. Every task carried out on
military aircraft has a corresponding AP maintenance manual in which it is carried
out in accordance with. In order to carry out a full Bay maintenance on a Rescue
Hook it is legally required that the process is carried out IAW steps laid out in the AP,
of which there can be no omission. Therefore it was agreed that unless there is a
glaring deficiency to the AP maintenance procedure that requires an amendment, of
which none were found, the focus group would instead look at the paperwork and
procedures employed by Role bay personnel.
Explaining the Current State VSM
The Bay maintenance of the External Rescue Hoist Hook ensures that a Hook is
serviceable for 91days/200 lifts or whichever comes first (Great Britain, Defence
Council, 1997) meaning that the customer demand7 for this particular component is
7 For purposes of this project the value entered for customer demand is 1 Rescue
Hoist Hook per day. This figure is used because when 18/27 demands a Rescue Hook
they need to provide the Role Bay with a minimum notification period of 24 hours.

20
relatively low.
The Current State VSM illustrates the Bay maintenance of the Rescue Hook being
initiated electronically by 18/27 and alerts both the Technical Stores and the Role
Bay. A demand is made if a Rescue Hook is required through un-serviceability of
existing component assets on squadron, or through the deficiency of Rescue Hooks.
The unserviceable component is delivered through stores from 18/27 to the Role
Bay.
‘Breakdown of C/T’ Fig. 6
Time (minutes) Task
60
1. Read relevant APs, COSHH and risk
assessments. Tag out relevant tools and
don correct PPE.
350
2. Carry out bay maintenance IAW
AP108H-0204-5F on Rescue Hook.
80
3. Return all tools, complete paperwork,
Replenish Rescue Hook consumables 8
stock (if req.)
10
4. Tidy Rescue Hook work area of mess
created by maintenance procedure.
Operating procedures are carried out upon receipt of the Rescue Hook and in
accordance with Air publications, AP106B-0102-6 (Great Britain, Defence Council,
1997), and documented in Ministry of Defence (MoD) form 707B9. For safety reasons
it is a legal requirement that the team carrying out the Bay maintenance consists of,
at a minimum, a Junior Non-Commissioned Officer (JNCO) and a technician. The
current procedure that is carried out is as follows.
Current operating method
1. Rescue Hook is returned to the Bay unserviceable or due Bay maintenance.
2. JNCO will raise the job in the Bay card job book 700c on the MoD form 707A.
3. JNCO will task a technician to carry out work.
However, a problem arises when the squadron demands more than one Rescue
Hook in a 24-hour period. This is discussed in ‘Fluctuation in Rescue Hook demand’.
8 Rescue Hook consumables: Items, such as screws and hydraulic seals, which are
used in order to produce a Rescue Hook.
9 All work carried out is documented in the Bay job card logbook 700c, on the MoD
form A and 707B. These forms are the complete work carried out on the aircraft, to
remedy a specific fault raised by the rectification controller after debriefing the pilot
for flight faults (Great Britain, Ministry of Defence, 2009, leaflet 21).

21
4. Technician will carry out various examinations, and affect the necessary
preventative and/or corrective measures to produce a serviceable Rescue
Hook.
5. All work carried out on the aircraft asset will be documented by the
technician in the MoD form 707B and over-signed by the JNCO.
6. JNCO will close and co-ordinate MOD form 707B and update the Role Bay
database.
After Bay maintenance has been completed the Rescue Hook is delivered to the
Paint shop, by Receipts and dispatch (R&D)10, where it undergoes paint finish
restoration. However, this is considered a non-value added step as it does not affect
the customer value identified in the previous journal. This is discussed in the section
‘Removal of delivery of Rescue Hooks to Paint shop’.
PLT, VA/T, PCE and Takt time
Product Lead-Time (PLT) is defined as the accumulation of all inventory, wait times
and non-value added times. In this case PLT is the total time the Rescue Hook spends
at the paint shop. The yellow triangles, I1 and I2, were not added to the PLT as they
are processes that are embedded within the Bay maintenance procedure and need
to be carried out in order to make the Rescue Hoist Hooks serviceable. However they
are classed as Business value added. Whilst they are denoted by yellow inventory
symbols they will be treated differently, and will be examined the section ‘High
Inventory waiting times’.
Value Added Time (VA/T) is defined as the accumulation of time taken in the process
to add value to the product. VA/T is divided by the PLT to give you the Product Cycle
Efficiency (PCE). The greater the PCE value the more efficient the cycle. As a
yardstick a PCE value above 5% is outstanding (Pereira, 2008) however, this is
difficult to achieve without quality control systems such as Lean. This indicates that
the current Bay maintenance procedure PCE 1.13% needs to be improved.
Takt time was calculated as 420 minutes (mins) per day. The template used for
calculating Takt time is illustrated in Fig. 5.
3. Create a future state value stream map
It is desirable for the Total C/T to be below the Takt time as it validates that at the
current demand state the Role Bay would be able to meet its commitments.
However, if the demand were to increase such as a surge of rescue operations or
operational theatre deployments the Bay would struggle. Through analysis and the
application of possible solutions, post discussion, the first author was able to reduce
10 R&D carry out a majority of the delivery and receipts at RAF Odiham including
delivery of the Rescue Hoist Hook from the Bay to Paint shop and Paint shop to
18/27.

22
the individual business value added times and therefore the overall C/T. This is
mentioned in detail later, in the section ‘5S’.
‘Future state value stream’ Fig. 7
Explaining the Future State VSM
The differences from the current and future state VSM are
 A Role Bay Kan-Ban11 and Supermarket was added to the value stream. A
Supermarket will store finished products ready to issue out to 18/27. A
controlled amount of inventory ensures that the high prices associated by
holding a large amount of stock, to account for customer variation in
demand, is avoided. However, the PLT is considerably higher and PCE lower
to account for the stock that is now kept in the Role Bay Supermarket.
 R&D no longer delivers Rescue Hooks to paint. The reasons will become
apparent in ‘Removal of the delivery of Rescue Hooks to Paint shop’.
11 A Kan-Ban is a signalling device that gives authorisation and indication to Role bay
personnel to start producing another Rescue Hook (Bicheno, 2009).

23
4. Create an action plan
This step runs in conjunction with the next Lean principle ‘Create Flow’ and is aimed
at facilitating the transition from the current state VSM to the future state VSM.
Therefore the problems or ‘bottlenecks’, which have been discussed with the focus
group, will be categorised and listed below whilst the possible solutions presented in
‘Create Flow’. The categories to which the problems/bottlenecks fall into are (Lean
Thinking 2013):
a. Business-value added: Steps that are required by one or more
required activities (including design, order processing, production and
delivery) but create no customer value.
b. Non-value added: Steps that create no customer value and are not a
required activity. These steps should be eliminated immediately.
I. Removal of the delivery of Rescue Hooks to Paint shop (Non-value added
steps)
During discussions with the focus group personnel from R&D asked why the
Rescue Hooks needed to be sent to the Paint shop, as five years ago they
were only sent to Paint if the surface finish got to a point where it could
compromise the capability of the Rescue Hook. This prompted investigation
into the necessity of sending the Rescue Hooks to paint post-Bay
maintenance. Certain aircraft components held within the Role Bay require
surface restoration post Bay maintenance and it was assumed that the
Rescue Hook fit into this category. However, upon closer inspection of the
AP’s it was discovered that it wasn’t the case. Examining the history of the
Role Bay revealed that as the experienced engineers and technicians, within
the Role Bay, were posted to other units and replaced by less experienced
personnel a ‘culture norm’ or precedent was set for assets post Bay
maintenance.
Therefore the solution was to eliminate this step altogether from the Bay
maintenance process. However, if necessary the Rescue Hook can be sent to
Pain at a later more appropriate date and only to maintain the integrity of
the component.
II. High inventory waiting times (Business-value added steps)
The yellow triangle labelled ‘I1’ (in both Fig. 3 and Fig. 7) refers to box 1 in
‘Breakdown of C/T’ and represents reading the relevant AP’s, COSHH12 and
risk assessments, ‘tagging-out’13 appropriate tools from internal tool stores
12 COSHH: Control Of Substances Hazardous to Health
13 Tagging-out: Describes a stage of the tool system, utilised by the MoD, where
tools are ‘tagged’ out against personnel’s individual tallies to ensure all tools are
accounted for when not in Tool stores.

24
and donning the correct PPE14. ‘I2‘ refers to box 3 in the ‘Breakdown of C/T’
and represents the time taken to return all tools, complete paperwork and
replenish consumables stock (if required).
In order to reduce the overall C/T of the Rescue Hoist Hook Bay maintenance
procedure one must look at reducing the times for business value added
steps. The solution to this will be explored during ‘5S Problem of High
Inventory waiting times’.
III. Fluctuation in Rescue Hook demand (Problem identified)
In the past shortages have been caused due to the fluctuation in demand
from the customer due to unforeseen circumstances. At a push and during
very high emergency situations, there could possibly be two Rescue Hooks
generated within a day. However, this could lead to ‘short cuts’ of the
maintenance procedure that would in turn have a detrimental effect on the
component serviceability. Therefore a Supermarket was determined as the
solution to this problem, illustrated in the ‘Future state value stream’, and
explored in greater detail during ‘Establish Pull, Fluctuation in demand’.
14 PPE: Personal Protective Equipment.

25
Create Flow
In this project flow is defined as the movement of the Rescue Hook from the
beginning to end of the Bay maintenance procedure (Lacey, 2007). Much like a river
or stream, in order for there to be a continuous and uninterrupted flow there must
be no obstruction or bottlenecks. VSA/M has identified the bottlenecks and possible
areas for concern and this principle will facilitate the elimination and or reduction of
non-value added steps and Business-value added steps. Therefore the integrated
tool set, promoted by Bicheno (2007, pp. 68) will be utilised in conjunction within
this section in order to reduce overall product lead time creating flow:
1. 5S
2. Visual management
3. Standard of work
‘Current state value stream divisions’ Fig. 8
Methodology
As illustrated in Fig. 8, both the Current and Future state value stream maps will be
divided into two streams:
1. Upstream: This will refer to the Bay maintenance procedure
2. Downstream: This will refer to everything downstream of the Bay
maintenance procedure.

26
This will allow the first author a detailed analysis of the alterations to the procedures
and the creation of the future state value stream utilising the integrated tool set.
However it must be noted that the analysis of the downstream procedures will be
evaluated in the next lean principle ‘Establish Pull’.
‘Future state value stream divisions’ Fig. 9
Results through utilisation of the ‘Integrated tool set'
1. 5S
Sort (Seiri), Set in Order (Seiton) and Shine (Seiso)
The first, second and third step of the 5S system is to focus on; removing all
unnecessary items from the workplace; the efficiency of storage and location
methods and cleaning the workplace after clutter has been removed, respectively.
These three steps will be integrated into one, as the Rescue Hook has no operating
cell of its own. Maintenance of this component is usually carried out on any available
workbench, predominantly the External Rescue Hoist Cell, with tools scavenged from
other operating cells. However, this has negatively contributed to the overall C/T
taken to generate serviceable Rescue Hooks and the situation would be made worse
if there are already technicians and or engineers occupying all the available

27
workbenches. The creation of a Rescue Hoist Hook cell will ensure that all
rectification is carried out in one place with the added benefit of having specialist
tools stored within its respective cell. This would enable the reduction of the time
taken for Business value added steps and ensure that if maintenance needed to be
carried out on Rescue Hooks then it could be affected in its dedicated cell.
Utilising the experience of the focus group the first author was able to:
 List all the tools and equipment required to carry out Bay maintenance on
Rescue Hooks, which enabled the creation of a Rescue Hook toolkit (Fig. 11).
 Design a layout for an ideal Rescue Hook cell and illustrate the route taken by
the technician carrying out Bay maintenance ensuring that the distance
travelled by the technician, generating serviceable Rescue Hooks, is kept to a
minimum.
‘Rescue Hoist Hook cell’ Fig. 10
The third step, Shine, has a dual purpose. It ensures
 The workplace is free of clutter and therefore improves morale (5sStore,
2008)
 It also serves as a check on the serviceability of tools or equipment each time
it is cleaned.
Therefore Shine is incorporated in the ‘New operating procedure’ of the Bay
maintenance process.

28
‘Toolkit’ Fig. 11
Problem of ‘High Inventory waiting
times’
Whilst walking through the current
procedure, it was discovered that tools
needed to be borrowed from three
other operating cells in order to
generate serviceable Rescue Hooks.
Therefore the reduction of ‘I1’ was
made possible through the creation of
a dedicated Rescue Hook cell and its
own toolkit. This reduced the ‘I1’ from
60 minutes to 15 minutes.
Standardise (Seiketsu)
The implementation of the fourth step of 5S ensures that there will not be a slip in
working standards of the Rescue Hook cell. A chart to help track activities and define
responsibilities will be used when 5S is carried out weekly in the Rescue Hook cell.
This will also assist in ensuring that Rescue Hooks are not issued to 18/27 squadron
‘technically unserviceable’.
Sustain (Sustain)
The final step is to sustain the previous four steps in order to remain efficient and
streamlined. The Rescue Hoist Hook cell technician will participate with the rest of
the Role Bay personnel during training days, held weekly running throughout the
year, that have already been organised for other operating cells. This will ensure:
 The dissemination of knowledge through the participation and presentation
of cell procedure by the Rescue Hoist Hook cell technician in training days
 That the implemented changes will take root in Bay ‘norm’
 The elimination of the military perception of 5S being ‘a diversion from real
priorities’ or ‘tidying up for no reason’.
2. Visual Management
The aim of Visual management is to facilitate the move from ‘Mushroom
Management’15 to shared information and participation of the project team. Visual
Management is able to reduce workload and further Lean off a process by putting
charts and information on display (Bicheno, 2009).
15 Mushroom Management: An allusion to staff being treated like mushrooms, kept
in the dark with regards to decisions being made, ‘covered in dung’ and when big
enough they are canned, in this case -transferred or fired (Wikipedia 2013).

29
Below are a few of the problems, encountered previously, with solutions offered.
 Serviceability of the Rescue Hook
 Rescue Hoist Hooks to be co-ordinated
 High inventory waiting times16
These three problems, which were previously identified, were confronted
simultaneously with solutions formulated and used in conjunction.
Firstly, In order to eliminate or reduce the C/T of ‘I2‘ it was decided that the current
system would have to be scrutinised for its relevance. It was discovered that the
current system is an amalgamation of a new logistics system put in place and an
older system made obsolete at the end of 2009. The new system was bought in to
replace the older more time consuming system but never made it past the early
implementation stages. The current system is an electronic computer based
programme that works all logistics whilst printing a receipt for delivery.
The second solution was to display a Flow chart in the Rescue Hook cell (Fig. 12) for
the immediate actions to be taken upon completion of works carried out.
‘Rescue Hook Flow chart’ Fig. 12
This ensures that only paperwork to complete and sign is essential to the process
and legally required as stated in Great Britain, Ministry of Defence (2009,leaflet 5A).
The aim is to ensure that with another safeguard in place, the engineer and or
technician will not miss the step of issuing a LITS unserviceable asset.
The completion of the flow chart must be signed for on the aircraft 707B form. The
707B can only be co-ordinated and closed after the final work order entry for flow
chart completion and LITS update is signed for. However none of the maintenance
16 It must be noted that whilst the ‘I1’ C/T has been reduced through the
implementation of the 5S tool, has not yet been scrutinised. ‘I2‘ represents the time
taken to return all tools, complete paperwork and replenish consumables stock (if
required).

30
cards will be closed and co-ordinated until physical issue of the Rescue Hook to the
customer. As pictured below each Rescue Hook will have all its paperwork, complete
up to the point of issue, stored with it. This will ensure that the Hook will have
optimal usage in its very finite Bay maintenance life cycle of 91 days/200 lifts.
‘Rescue Hook Supermarket Fig. 13
Finally, the creation of a new operating procedure and a Process Control Board, PCB
which is to be displayed in the new Rescue Hook cell, ties in and consolidates all the
solutions. The PCB in the Rescue Hook cell is a physical representation of the state
of; Hooks in the Bay; Hooks issued to squadrons and Hooks that are out of area
(OOA) i.e. in operational theatre.
New operating procedure:
 Rescue Hoist Hook is returned to the Bay U/S or due Bay maintenance.
 JNCO 17will raise the job in the Bay card job book 700c on the MoD form 707A
(N/O/A).
 JNCO will task a technician to carry out work.
 Technician will update the process control board (PCB Fig. 9) prior to work.
 Technician will carry out various examinations, and affect the necessary
preventative and/or corrective measures to produce a serviceable Rescue
Hook.
 All work carried out on the Rescue Hook will be documented by the
technician in the MOD form 707B and over signed by the JNCO.
 Upon completion of works technician will update the process control board.
Carry out stock check on Rescue Hook consumables, order parts if required,
tidy up Rescue Hook cell and return all tools tagged out.
17 JNCO: Junior Non Commissioned Officer

31
 JNCO will sign all paperwork on MoD form 707B up to but not including the
co-ordination of the job-cards. The technician will update LITS and the Role
Bay database.
‘Process control board’ Fig. 14
Procedure on updating the PCB
- When the Rescue Hook is received the serviceability state is amended.
- Rescue Hook serial number, and work number obtained from 707A is
entered into work in progress box.
- Serviceability magnets are swapped over with tag work number to
indicate that the Rescue Hook is being worked on.
3. Standard work and Standard Operating Procedures
Standard work, a pillar of the Toyota production system, aims at “creating processes
and procedures that are repeatable, reliable and capable” (Bicheno, 2009, p.84). By
applying a standard operating procedure to Bay maintenance this should allow for
better evaluation with regards to a reduction of C/T through continual improvement.
The discussion held for the creation of the VSA/M with the focus group was highly
beneficial as this created an opportunity to write a new procedure which everyone,
management and tradesman, could agree upon. The New operating procedure, is
outlined and used in conjunction with the other solutions mentioned in ‘Visual
Management’ in order to ensure that problems identified previously, are eliminated.

32
EstablishPull
The Pull system is defined as a system that ensures resources are used exclusively
for the manufacture of a product in response to a demand from a customer. This
results in Rescue Hook inventory cost reductions, incurred by holding a large amount
of inventory to account for customer variation in demand to ensure delivery of
product and the reduction in waste from manufacturing a product that the market
may not demand in the near future (Ballé & Ballé, 2005, p.19).
Problems arising from VSA/M and areas of improvement
Work should be pulled through the Bay maintenance process rather than pushed.
Demand from downstream of the process should define the activity upstream
(Bicheno, 2007). The tools utilised to establish pull will be used in conjunction with
‘Visual Management’ part of the integrated tool set mentioned in the section ‘Create
Flow’. This will facilitate a smooth move from the conventional push manufacturing
toward the more favoured Lean pull manufacturing (Lacey, 2007).
A pull system regulates the flow of the Rescue Hook through the Bay maintenance
process by replacing only what has been delivered to 18/27 (Catalyst Connection,
2010). The following is a brief description of the areas of improvement and problems
arising from VSA/M that were described previously:
1. Fluctuation in demand:
This problem was made apparent post VSA/M. Shortages are caused due to
the fluctuation in demand from 18/27, which is due to the unpredictable
nature of national and international emergencies. As mentioned previously
the Role Bay would be able to produce two Rescue Hooks at any 24-hour
period however, a more permanent solution is desired.
‘Downstream’ Fig. 15
Results
A ‘First In First Out’ (FIFO) Supermarket and
Kan-Ban was created and placed in the Rescue
Hook cell in order to minimise the implications
that fluctuations in demand would have on
the value stream. The Supermarket is
downstream the Bay maintenance process
and is designed to hold six ready to issue
Rescue Hooks. FIFO refers to a system where
the first item that is placed in the supermarket
is the first item issued out when a demand is
received. This is desirable because the longer
a component stays in the Supermarket the
more the oils and lubricants, used during the

33
Bay maintenance procedure, are susceptible to degradation.
The reason why six Rescue Hooks are held in the supermarket is because at any one
time we have three aircraft ready to be deployed on operational commitments with
a possible two aircraft held for national service. Holding six Rescue Hooks in the Role
Bay Kan-Ban catered for the ‘worst-case’ scenario, scrambling for operations as well
as national emergencies, with one Rescue Hook spare.
A controlled amount of Kan-Ban inventory ensures that the high prices associated by
holding a large amount of stock to account for customer variation in demand is
avoided.

34
Seek Perfection
To seek perfection the Bay maintenance procedure of Rescue Hooks must
continually strive for improvement. The definition of Perfection is “having all the
required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible
to be” (Oxford dictionaries, n.d). In order for improvement to be pervasive it needs
to reach all hierarchal tiers of the Bay maintenance procedure from the upper
management levels of the sections involved to the shop floor producers. The
solutions formulated and implemented thus far have been minor but because of
that, and the gradual introduction of these amendments to current procedures, have
ensured that management, shop floor producers and external parties have accepted
it readily. Improvement and Sustainability tools, used in conjunction, ensure that the
Bay maintenance process will continually seek perfection.
Improvement: ‘Plan, Do, Check, Act’ (PDCA)
The tool that is to be used for improvement, after the initial implementation of Lean
to the Rescue Hook Bay maintenance process, is the ‘Plan, Do, Check, Act’ (PDCA).
PDCA offers a disciplined framework for the process of improvement when analysing
any procedure (Bicheno, 2009). Having a standardised approach to improvement is
beneficial in any organisation and more so it is very prevalent in the armed forces
where standard operating procedures or immediate action drills are established and
practised repeatedly to ensure that the correct actions are carried out on initial
contact thereby saving lives. This also guarantees, to some degree, that all actions
which are carried out are done almost as second nature due to the repetitiveness
with which it is practised. However, standard operating procedures are analysed
continually and amended, if required, to ensure they stay current with the ever-
changing environment in which they exist.
PDCA will ensure that all parties involved with the Bay maintenance procedure a
medium to propose amendments without having to hold time consuming
discussions or events to identify possible solutions. When PDCA is used in
conjunction with sustainability tools it promotes a move toward perfection.
The current PDCA used in the Rescue Hook cell is used by all other production cells
and can be found next to the cell PCB’s (please see Annex). The onus is on the
technician or engineer to propose improvements, with the incentive of lessening the
workload or creating a more efficient procedure should the proposal be accepted.
Sustainability
In order to sustain the amendments implemented to the current operating
procedures this project will utilise the sustainability model, aimed at self-assessing
key criteria for sustaining change, developed and produced in 2007 by the National
Health System (NHS) Institute for Innovation and Improvement (Bicheno, 2009). This
model was chosen as the standardised framework for achieving sustainability that as

35
it allows all relevant criteria’s to be met whilst also empowering the group or
individual with greater knowledge of the process under scrutiny.
The model has ten factors grouped into three areas:
1. Process
2. Organisation
3. Staff
As the aim of this project was to apply quality concepts to the Bay maintenance
procedure of External Rescue Hooks this section will look at the ‘Process group’,
which can be further sub divided into three categories:
1. Sustainability and tools
Bicheno (2009) states that large numbers of organisations fail to produce the
desired results from the direct and prescriptive application of Lean tools.
However, unfavourable results indicate that the procedural application of the
tools or the tools themselves require alteration and or modification to the
situation. The tools utilised in this project and demonstrated thus far, have
worked in a great number of situations because they have been adapted and
modified to ensure that they are relevant to the Bay maintenance of Rescue
Hooks. Furthermore in order to sustain and fully realise the expected gains
Role Bay personnel were educated, through training days, and the current
culture changed with minor amendments introduced gradually.
PDCA being the principle mechanism for a scientific approach indicates that
the Lean tools and techniques are treated as the hypotheses to be tested in
the situation. There needs to be an understanding, with all parties involved in
the Bay maintenance process, to allow for local factors which will influence
the successful application and sustainability of tools and techniques.
2. Sustainability and the Systems View
‘Systems thinking’ is a perception of the universe as a series of
interconnected hierarchies and interrelated wholes. The social and technical
interactions, within an organisational system, govern the output of the
system. Both aspects need to be considered for a new system to be
successful and sustainable. Dager (2013) and Bicheno (2009) compare
sustainability to natural eco systems and human organisations. Where
antibodies are created when change is generated, which automatically grow
to fight the change. Early identification of the anti-bodies is paramount.
This realisation indicates that the restraining forces must be decreased
before the driving force is increased. When possible solutions were being
discussed it was important that all relevant parties were included. This made
them aware, from the start, that there were going to be changes. However,
the solutions implemented were beneficial to all parties involved reducing

36
the resistance to change. To quote Frank Divine “If people help to plan the
battle, they are less likely to battle the plan” (Bicheno, 2009).
3. Sustainability of Kaizen Events
Kaizen “Japanese for ‘improvement’, or ‘change for the better’ refers to
philosophy or practices that focus upon continuous improvement of
processes in manufacturing, engineering, and business management” (Collins
English Dictionary, n.d).
‘Kaizen’ is the solutions implemented in order to improve the current Bay
maintenance procedure and realise the future state value stream. In order to
sustain the solutions implemented in previous journals Bicheno (2009) states
there must
Be a formal introduction of the changes to operating methods to Role Bay
personnel and relevant parties through training day packages, carried out
every first Monday of the month. The training day ensures that bad habits
picked up or the erosion of standards are eliminated whilst also informing
personnel of new operating procedures.
There must be time dedicated to housekeeping every day through the use of
5S. This was mentioned in the section ‘Create Flow’
‘Layout of Rescue Hook Cell’ Fig. 16

37
Conclusion
The objective of this report is to apply the Quality Concept (QC) to the existing Bay
maintenance procedure of the External Rescue Hoist Hook in response to the
findings of the Investigative Team, which determined the reasons why the Rescue
Hook was causing delays to the flying programme.
In order to remove the problems defined in the Team’s report an internal
examination of the Role Bay was conducted and determined that the recent
acquisition of the Rescue Hook warranted only a temporary and rudimentary Bay
maintenance procedure, with a plan to design a relevant and permanent alternative
to be created at a later time. However, this was never carried out.
In the light of this information, the Lean Quality Concept (LQC) was chosen as a
permanent procedure to enhance flexibility and adaptability of performance. The
LQC does not have a rigid infrastructure and can easily be adapted according to
changing needs and requirements
As the Lean principles and practices were applied more problems surfaced and led to
the conclusion that the existing maintenance Bay procedure was no longer relevant
to current needs and some of its practices were merely ‘papering over the cracks’.
The first Lean principle allowed the identification of value and the solutions offered
onwards from and including ‘Value Stream Analysis and Mapping’ were able to solve
more than one problem when used in conjunction, such as the integrated tool set
utilised to ‘Create Flow’. The successful implementation of the integrated tool set
(Bicheno, 2009), reduced the high inventory waiting times of the current state value
stream and assisted in creating the future state value stream. Whilst the penultimate
Lean principle ‘Establish Pull’, made it possible to achieve the future state value
stream. The final principle ‘Seek Perfection’ demonstrated that the sustainability of
improvements is paramount. In order for the process to continually seek perfection
there must first be improvements. In order for there to be continual improvements
there must be a recognised move to first sustain the improvements and then build
on them.
The presentation of this project, to the investigative team, satisfied the findings and
therefore the closure of the investigation. The investigative team as well as the focus
group agreed that the implementation of the LQC in this project has had a positive
and cumulative effect in cost, afforded more effective use of time, eliminated and
reduced waste, established higher customer satisfaction, provided better inventory
space, allowed planning for continuous improvement and significantly improved the
Base’s ability to react quickly and effectively in emergency situations.

38
Bibliography
5sStore. (2008) What is 5S. [Online] Available from:
http://www.the5sstore.com/whatis5s.html. [Accessed: 14 September 2014]
Ballé, F @ Ballé, M. (2005) The Gold Mine. [Adobe digital editions]. Cambridge, Lean
Enterprise Institute.
Bernstein, R & Sinocchi, M. (2012) Team Building Using Workforce. [Online] Aug
2012. Available from: http://Leaninsider.productivitypress.com/2012/08/team-
building-using-workforce.html”. [Accessed: 15July 2013]
Chartered Management Institute. (2013) Smart Objectives. [Online] Available from:
http://www.managers.org.uk. [Accessed 10 July 2014].
Bicheno, J. (2009) The Lean toolbox: The essential guide to Lean transformation. 4th
edition. Buckingham, PICSIE Books.
Catalyst Connection. (2010) Pull Systems. [Online] Available from:
http://catalystconnection.org/Continuous-improvement/lean-manufacturing-
consulting/pull-systems.aspx. [Accessed: 20 Oct 2014]
Dager, J. (2013) Business 901: Implementing Lean Marketing Systems. [Online]
Available from: http://business901.com/implementation/vsm-
registration/Lean/establish-pull/. [Accessed: 24Nov 2014].
Department of Trade and Industry. (n.d) The Evolution of Quality. [Online] Available
from:
http://www.businessballs.com/dtiresources/quality_management_history.pdf.
[Accessed 02 Nov 2014].
Great Britain. Defence Council. (1997) External Rescue hoist and Accessories’. DDAL.
(AP108H-0204-5F).
Great Britain. Ministry of Defence. (2009) Chinook HC – All Marks. L (DAP101C-0500-
2(R)1).
Harris, R & Rother, M. (2001) Creating Continuous Flow. Massachusetts: Lean
Enterprise Institute.
“kaizen”. (n.d.) Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged. (1991, 1994,
1998, 2000, 2003). [Online].
Available from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/kaizen. [Accessed: 6 July 2014]
Lacey, P. (2007) The importance of Flow in Lean. [Online]. 2007. Available from:
http://www.lean.org/library/creating_continuous_flow_introduction.pdf. [Accessed:
14 July 2014].
Lean enterprise institute. (c.2009) Principles of Lean. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.Lean.org/whatsLean/principles.cfm [Accessed 19 August 2014].

39
Lean Manufacturing Tools. (2011) The Waste of Inventory. [Online] Available from:
http://leanmanufacturingtools.org/106/waste-of-inventory-causes-symptoms-
examples-solutions/. [Accessed: 4 August 2014)
McManus, H & Millard, R. (2002) Value Stream Analysis and Mapping for
Development. International council of the aeronautical sciences. [Online] Available
from:
http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/7347/Value%20Stream%20Analysis
%20and%20Mapping.pdf [Accessed: 20 July 2014]
Patterson, A. (2013) Application of Lean to the Bay maintenance of Extended Range
Fuel Tanks. Unpublished.
Patterson, A. (2013) Research Dissertation and Negotiated Final Project Proposal.
Unpublished.
"Perfect". (n.d) Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. [Online] Available from:
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/perfect. [Accessed: 4 August 2014].
Quality America. (c.2013) Lean Six Sigma: Lean Thinking. [Online]. Available from:
https://qualityamerica.com/knowledgecenter/Leansixsigma/Lean_thinking.asp
[Accessed 21 August 2014].
Saliba, M & Fisher, C. (2000) Managing Customer Value. [Adobe digital editions].
Quality Progress.
Shahbazi, S. & Shaffie, S. (2012) Lean Six Sigma. [Adobe digital editions]. McGraw-Hill
Companies.
Wikipedia (2013) Mushroom Management. [Online]. Available from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushroom_management. [Accessed: 17 October
2014].
Wood, N. (2004) Customer Value: Applying the first principle of Lean. Journal of the
institute of Management Service. [Online] Available from:
http://www.littoralis.info/iom/secure/assets/iom20040701.949121_4125d7d1b131.
pdf [Accessed: 24th June 2014]

40
Appendix. 1 ‘Quality System Breakdown’
1. Just In Time: is a QC production/inventory strategy that companies employ to
improve a business return on investment by increasing efficiency by reducing in-
process inventory and its associated costs (Wikipedia, 2013). By receiving goods only
as they are needed in the production process they automatically reduce inventory
costs. The process implemented to only receive goods or materials of the right
quantity at the right time and at the right place will be discussed in Quality Tools and
Techniques.
2. Toyota Production System: The TPS was based on two concepts, the ‘Jidoka’ and
JIT. The Jidoka concept can be defined as the "automation with a human touch”
(Toyota, 2013). Jidoka means that a machine has enough artificial intelligence in its
programming to stop when a process is completed or a quality problem arises. This
enables operators to perform work on other machines or tend to other tasks that
increase productivity. The main objective of the TPS QC system is to design out
overburden, inconsistency and to eliminate waste. The TPS advances the JIT mantra,
of reducing in-process inventory, by designing a process capable of delivering the
required results smoothly, which eliminates or critically reduces inconsistency.
3. Lean: “Lean is a philosophy that is focused on shortening the timeline between
the customer request and delivery of the service by eliminating waste. This ensures
that every activity and process step adds value to the end product or service”
(Shahbazi & Shaffie 2012, p.16). The Lean methodology, once applied, is a
commitment to achieve a waste free operation by eliminating waste, in all steps of
product manufacture, and continual improvement of current operating procedures,
focussing on delivering the final product to the customer.

41
The dark blue arrow represents the relatively shorter evolution of Six Sigma QC.
4. Six Sigma: is a fact based and data driven QC that values defect prevention over
defect detection. Again all of these concepts are interlinked to the philosophies
written decades ago by the ‘founding fathers of quality management’. By reducing
variation and waste, thereby promoting a competitive advantage, Six Sigma drives
customer satisfaction and bottom line results (American Society of Quality).
5. Lean Six Sigma: Lean is an overall philosophy for continuous improvement, which
is based on the TPS whilst Six Sigma aims at defect prevention. The combination of
both resulting in the Lean Six Sigma QC, makes more sense as it requires the
elimination of as much waste as possible upfront before focusing on eliminating
variation through defects. For this reason this hybrid, of western and eastern
philosophy is increasingly chosen as the route to quality implementation in both
large and small organisations (Shahbazi & Shaffie 2012, p.7). This is in large part due
to the fact that it has both staying power and is a proven process that continually
produces measurable financial results. A study by Hendricks and Singhal, titled
‘Empirical Evidence from Firms That Have Won Quality Award’ (1997), as
summarised and listed below by Shahbazi & Shaffie (2012, pp. 7-8), illustrates how
implementing QC improves the bottom-line performance of companies.

42
Appendix. 2 ‘Bay Maintenance Procedure for External Rescue Hoist Hook’
The External Rescue Hook, also known as Hook and Bumper, is an aircraft asset that
is attached to the cable of the winch on the external Rescue hoist (Fig. A) of the Mk2
and Mk3 Chinook. It is primarily used to winch personnel and/or casualties in Rescue
operations.
The Bay maintenance is carried out on the Rescue Hook every 91days/200 lifts or
whichever comes first (Great Britain, Defence Council, 1997). The Bay maintenance
is carried out annually in accordance with the Air Publication AP108H-0204-5F.
‘Mark 4 Chinook fitted with an External Rescue Hoist’ Fig. A
After Bay maintenance has been carried out on the recue Hook the asset is issued
out to the customer with its own engineering log card, a hard copy of the aircraft
assets history, and tracked using the Logistical Information Technology system (LITS).
LITS is an asset management computer-based programme, which indicates all work
pending/carried out and the serviceability of both the aircraft and the assets held on
board. The date the Hook is due for Bay maintenance can be ascertained manually
using its log card, or through in-house databases which serve as reminders. Although
the in-house database is currently not used for the Bay maintenance of the Rescue
Hook, this could possibly be utilised to ensure that Hooks remain serviceable whilst
on aircraft and will be explored in greater detail within this project.
When the Hook becomes unserviceable, U/S, or due for Bay maintenance it is
returned to the station Role Bay. Upon receipt of the Hook, a qualified technician
will initiate the Bay maintenance procedure on the Rescue Hook. This encompasses
various examinations, as well as the necessary preventative and/or corrective
measures. This will ensure that when the Rescue Hook is made serviceable, it meets
the high standards specified by aviation requirements in a safe working environment

43
Appendix. 3 ‘PDCA Template’
Role Bay
Continual Improvement PDCA
Plan
Aim
Scope(including groupsaffected)
Hypothesis
Proposed solution
Do Explain the frameworkorprocessof solution
implementation and carry outthe proposed
solution.
Check
Observations
Reflection
Act
Adjust
Standardise
Template Key
Plan (Hypothesis, Propose countermeasures)
 The plan encompasses project scope, the aims, hypothesis, the groups
affected - whether internal or external (which need to be included when
presenting the proposed solution) and counter measures.
 A hypothesis is important because when it is reviewed later on in the process
it will help the individual understand the procedure to greater detail.
Identifying where the hypothesis deviated from real time situations will assist
the individual in making informed decisions in order to correct it, or to re
hypothesise in order to realise the aims of the project.
 The planning stage generally takes longer then the solution implementation
phase (Bicheno, 2009). This trend should be reflected in all planning stages as
the less time a solution needs to be fully implemented the less time required
for that process or procedure to be offline.

44
 Do (Try, Identify solutions)
This stage is about carrying out the solutions to the identified problems or
areas of improvement. The individual carrying out PDCA must have a
framework for the implementation of the proposed solutions.
 Check (Observe, Reflect, Learn)
This is the stage where you check to see if the hypothesised outcome has
come to fruition. This stage is critical to assisting the individual, who is
carrying out PDCA, in understanding the process to greater detail. If the
solutions implemented have not worked out as hypothesised questions are
raised placing the onus on the individual to answer these questions, which
gives him a greater understanding of the process.
 Act (Adjust or Standardise)
After discussions with management to ascertain if the proposed solutions will
be implemented communication to all relevant parties need to be made so
that the current procedures will be pervasive.

<p12018692>CE00967-6 Research Dissertation and Negotiated Final Project

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to <p12018692>CE00967-6 Research Dissertation and Negotiated Final Project

Similar to <p12018692>CE00967-6 Research Dissertation and Negotiated Final Project (20)

<p12018692>CE00967-6 Research Dissertation and Negotiated Final Project