Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Level of repair analysis

Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) is an analytical methodology employed in maintenance and logistics planning to determine the most cost-effective level at which a failed item or component in a complex system should be repaired, replaced, or discarded, balancing economic factors with operational readiness requirements.^[1] This process evaluates multiple repair options across different maintenance levels—typically organizational, intermediate, and depot—to minimize life-cycle costs while ensuring system availability.^[2] LORA integrates into broader systems engineering and product support activities, influencing equipment design, maintenance infrastructure, and resource allocation from the early acquisition phases through sustainment.^[1] The analysis considers noneconomic criteria first, such as discarding low-value items below a predefined cost threshold, followed by economic modeling to select the least-cost feasible option among repair paths.^[2] Key factors include the costs of parts, labor skills, tools, test equipment, and facilities, often applied in defense, aerospace, and industrial asset management contexts.^[1] Standardized guidelines underpin LORA practices, with SAE AS1390 defining the core activities as part of logistics product data development, and MIL-HDBK-1390 providing implementation guidance, including contract language and integration with overall support planning.^[1] Related standards like SAE TA-STD-0017 address product support analysis, ensuring LORA contributes to optimized sustainment solutions.^[1] By documenting repair decisions and resource needs, LORA supports the creation of efficient maintenance policies that enhance system reliability and reduce total ownership costs.^[2]

Overview

Definition and Purpose

Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) is an analytical methodology used in maintenance logistics to evaluate and determine the optimal location for repairing failed equipment items, deciding whether an item should be repaired at the organizational, intermediate, or depot level, replaced, or discarded, with the goal of minimizing life-cycle costs while satisfying operational readiness and performance requirements.^[1]^[2] This process applies economic models to assess total ownership costs alongside noneconomic criteria, such as policy constraints and supportability factors, ensuring decisions align with system sustainment needs.^[1]^[3] The primary purpose of LORA is to balance repair and maintenance costs, equipment downtime, and overall supportability in complex systems, including military hardware, aviation assets, and industrial machinery, thereby optimizing resource allocation across the product life cycle.^[1]^[2] By identifying the least-cost feasible alternatives, LORA influences equipment design and sustainment strategies, reducing total ownership costs without compromising mission reliability or availability thresholds.^[3]^[1] LORA integrates closely with Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) as a key component of Product Support Analysis, where its outputs inform the development of maintenance plans, supply support, technical data, and infrastructure requirements within the broader ILS framework.^[1]^[3] It also complements Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) by providing decision logic for selecting repair tasks and levels based on failure modes, ensuring maintenance strategies are both cost-effective and reliability-focused.^[3]^[1] The key outcomes of LORA include the assignment of specific repair levels to items, which optimizes total ownership cost by specifying required resources such as personnel skills, tools, test equipment, and facilities, ultimately producing a finalized support solution for the system.^[2]^[1] This results in enhanced system availability and reduced sustainment burdens across operational environments.^[3]

Historical Context

Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) emerged during the 1970s within U.S. military logistics as part of the Department of Defense's (DoD) push to enhance maintenance efficiency and operational readiness, driven by lessons from Vietnam War-era challenges. The conflict highlighted significant inefficiencies in supply chain management and equipment sustainment, including decentralized traffic control and fragmented maintenance operations that delayed repairs and increased costs.^[4] In response, the Joint Logistics Review Board, established in 1969, conducted a comprehensive review of worldwide logistics support during the Vietnam era, recommending streamlined maintenance structures and better integration of support functions to mitigate future vulnerabilities.^[5] These efforts laid the groundwork for formalized analytical tools like LORA, which was introduced in the 1970s alongside the initial version of MIL-STD-1388-1 for Logistics Support Analysis (LSA) in October 1973.^[6] Influenced by foundational developments in reliability engineering from the 1950s and 1960s, LORA incorporated principles of maintainability and life-cycle cost optimization to balance repair decisions with system performance.^[7] By the 1980s, LORA gained prominence in DoD acquisition frameworks, aligning with the establishment of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) in 1984, which emphasized cost-effective logistics in defense contracting.^[8] This period saw LORA's deeper integration into LSA processes through updates to MIL-STD-1388, such as the 1983 revision (MIL-STD-1388-1A), where it became a key task for evaluating repair alternatives and assigning source, maintenance, and recoverability (SMR) codes during system design and support planning.^[9] Key milestones in the 1990s included LORA's alignment with emerging performance-based logistics (PBL) strategies, which originated within the DoD in the 1990s and shifted focus toward outcome-driven sustainment contracts to reduce ownership costs while maintaining availability.^[10] This period also saw the 1993 issuance of MIL-STD-1390D for standardized LORA procedures. Post-2000 adaptations extended LORA beyond military applications into commercial sectors like aerospace, guided by SAE AS1390 standards that support systems engineering for repair optimization in civilian aviation programs.^[11] The methodology evolved from manual assessments to computer-aided tools in the 1980s, exemplified by the U.S. Army's Computerized Optimization Model for Predicting and Analyzing Support Structures (COMPASS), which automated cost-benefit analyses for repair level decisions across the logistics pipeline. In recent years, LORA standards have continued to evolve, with SAE AS1390 updated to version A in April 2023 and MIL-HDBK-1390 revised in September 2024 to provide current implementation guidance.^[12]^[11]

Repair Levels

Organizational Level Maintenance

Organizational level maintenance represents the lowest tier in the maintenance hierarchy within level of repair analysis (LORA), conducted by operating personnel at the point of use, such as field units in military operations or workshops in aviation settings, utilizing on-hand tools and parts to support day-to-day equipment operations.^[3]^[13] This level focuses on on-equipment or field-level tasks performed by the using unit to maintain systems in a mission-capable status, encompassing inspections, servicing, adjustments, and minor preventive or corrective actions without requiring specialized facilities or external resources.^[14]^[15] The scope of organizational level maintenance is limited to routine troubleshooting, fault detection, minor repairs, alignments, and component replacements that can be completed swiftly using unit-held capabilities, typically addressing straightforward issues to restore functionality without disassembly of complex assemblies.^[3]^[13] Activities include scheduled inspections, lubrication, servicing, fault isolation via built-in diagnostics, and basic repairs guided by maintenance manuals, all aimed at sustaining operational readiness through immediate, on-site interventions.^[13]^[3] Representative examples in aviation and military contexts involve battery replacements to ensure power supply integrity, lubrication of mechanical components to prevent wear, and simple electronic diagnostics for initial fault identification in aircraft or vehicles, allowing quick return to service without evacuation.^[13]^[16] This maintenance level offers advantages such as minimized equipment downtime and reduced transportation costs by enabling repairs at the operational site, thereby enhancing overall system availability and supporting cost-effective logistics.^[3] However, its limitations confine it to non-complex failures, as tasks exceeding unit skills, tools, or capacity must escalate to higher levels, preventing resolution of intricate issues on-site.^[13]^[3] In LORA, organizational level maintenance serves as a primary option evaluated for cost-effectiveness and resource alignment in repair decisions.^[3]

Intermediate Level Maintenance

Intermediate level maintenance represents a mid-tier repair activity in level of repair analysis (LORA), conducted at dedicated support facilities such as forward bases or regional depots, where more advanced tools, test equipment, and skilled technicians are required compared to organizational level tasks.^[17] This level addresses repairs that exceed the capabilities of on-site personnel but do not necessitate the full resources of centralized depots, often involving off-equipment work to restore functionality to removed components.^[18] It serves as an escalation point for issues unresolved at the organizational level, enhancing overall system readiness through targeted interventions.^[18] The scope of intermediate level maintenance encompasses fault isolation, module-level repairs, and calibrations for moderately complex systems, with durations varying based on complexity to balance operational speed and technical capability while involving limited supply chain dependencies.^[17] These activities require specialized resources, such as the Consolidated Automated Support System (CASS) for testing, and are performed in back-shop environments that balance operational speed with technical capability while involving limited supply chain dependencies.^[17] In LORA, this level is evaluated to optimize supportability, considering factors like cost, crew time, and equipment mass to determine the most efficient repair strategy for hardware items.^[19] Representative examples include the repair of radar components, such as the AN/APG-65 transmitter and receiver in F/A-18 aircraft, conducted at Aircraft Intermediate Maintenance Departments (AIMDs) using advanced diagnostics to isolate and fix faults.^[17] In space applications, intermediate maintenance might involve on-orbit replacement and repair of sub-orbital replaceable units (SRUs) within orbital replaceable units (ORUs), assessing removability and testability with available tools to support mission sustainment.^[19] For aviation programs like the F-35, it includes calibration and partial repairs of components to maintain fleet availability, often integrated into broader maintenance planning.^[20]

Depot-Level Maintenance

Depot-level maintenance constitutes the highest echelon of repair activities, encompassing complex repairs conducted in fixed facilities operated by the government or authorized contractors, supported by comprehensive engineering resources, specialized tools, and technical expertise.^[21]^[22] These facilities handle materiel maintenance that demands major overhauls, complete rebuilds, or upgrades of parts, assemblies, subassemblies, and end items, often beyond the scope of field operations.^[13] The scope of depot-level maintenance includes full disassembly of systems, in-depth refurbishment, and rigorous testing to restore functionality, typically spanning weeks to months depending on the item's complexity—for instance, an F-15 aircraft programmed depot maintenance (PDM) visit averaged 119.8 days in fiscal year 2006.^[23] This process addresses intricate failures, such as structural integrity issues or propulsion system degradation, that cannot be feasibly resolved at organizational or intermediate levels due to required infrastructure and skill sets.^[13]^[24] Prominent examples include the U.S. Air Force's Programmed Depot Maintenance (PDM) for aircraft, which involves scheduled inspections, defect corrections, and overhauls of airframes, engines, and avionics to maintain full serviceability, occurring at intervals like every six years for F-15s.^[25]^[26] In the naval domain, turbine rebuilds at shipyards exemplify this level, such as depot overhauls of LM2500 gas turbine modules for U.S. Navy vessels, performed by major repair facilities to ensure propulsion reliability.^[27]^[28] By focusing on comprehensive restoration, depot-level maintenance enhances long-term equipment reliability and operational readiness, though it necessitates extensive logistics for item transport to centralized sites, often involving government oversight to meet core capability requirements.^[21]^[24] Within Level of Repair Analysis (LORA), it serves as the default for high-cost, complex components where thorough refurbishment yields optimal lifecycle economics.^[1]

Analysis Process

Key Steps in Conducting LORA

The Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) process follows a structured, iterative framework to determine optimal repair strategies for system components, integrating with broader product support analysis activities. This procedural approach begins during the system design phase and continues through sustainment, ensuring alignment with acquisition and logistics standards such as MIL-HDBK-1390 and MIL-HDBK-502.^[29]^[1] The first step involves failure mode identification, typically conducted using Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) to catalog potential item failures and their impacts. FMECA, as outlined in SAE TA-STD-0017A, systematically identifies design weaknesses, critical items, and failure modes at the component level, providing the foundational data for subsequent LORA decisions.^[29]^[1]^[30] In the second step, data collection gathers quantitative and qualitative information on repair times, costs, and resources required at each potential repair level, including estimates of mean time to repair (MTTR). This includes compiling historical or projected data on labor, materials, and support infrastructure to support both economic and noneconomic evaluations.^[29]^[1] The third step evaluates alternatives to assign appropriate repair levels—such as organizational, intermediate, or depot—through methods like decision trees or scoring matrices. Noneconomic criteria first eliminate infeasible options, such as discarding low-value items, followed by comparative analysis to select the most viable repair paths among the defined levels.^[29]^[1]^[31] The fourth step focuses on validation and iteration via sensitivity analysis, which tests the robustness of decisions against uncertainties in input parameters like failure rates or resource availability. This ensures the selected repair levels remain optimal under varying conditions and allows for refinements based on emerging data.^[29]^[1] Overall, the LORA process is inherently iterative, commencing in the technology maturation and risk reduction (TMRR) phase, progressing through engineering and manufacturing development (EMD), production and deployment (P&D), and operations and support (O&S), with updates incorporating field performance data to maintain sustainment effectiveness. Recent DoD adoption of updated standards like SAE TA-STD-0017A (2024) emphasizes integration of LORA within comprehensive product support analysis.^[29]^[32]

Models and Methodologies

Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) employs a range of models and methodologies to determine optimal repair, discard, or replacement decisions for system components, balancing costs, times, and logistical constraints. Deterministic models form the foundation, typically relying on cost minimization frameworks to evaluate alternatives at organizational, intermediate, or depot levels. A seminal approach is the basic LORA algorithm, which computes cost-effectiveness ratios to compare options such as discarding a failed item versus repairing it at an intermediate level. If the ratio exceeds a threshold (often 1, indicating discard is more economical), the model recommends discard; otherwise, repair is favored. This deterministic method assumes fixed parameters for failure rates, repair times, and costs, enabling rapid computation for individual components but limiting handling of uncertainties.^[31] Advanced deterministic formulations extend this to multi-echelon, multi-indenture systems using integer programming or minimum cost flow models, optimizing decisions across the entire repair network. These models minimize total life-cycle costs by assigning repair locations while respecting capacity constraints and transportation logistics, often solved via linear programming solvers for scalability in large systems.^[33]^[34] For instance, the model aggregates costs for repair, transportation, and disposal across echelons, yielding globally optimal policies rather than component-wise decisions.^[35] Probabilistic methods address variability in inputs like failure rates, repair durations, and demand by incorporating stochastic elements, enhancing robustness for real-world applications. Monte Carlo simulations are widely adopted, generating thousands of scenarios from probability distributions (e.g., exponential for failures, lognormal for repair times) to estimate expected costs and risks under uncertainty.^[36] In LORA contexts, these simulations propagate uncertainties through the cost-effectiveness calculations, producing probabilistic outputs such as confidence intervals for total ownership costs or availability metrics.^[37] This approach is particularly valuable for high-reliability systems like military equipment, where input data from field tests exhibits significant variance.^[38] Software tools operationalize these models, providing user-friendly interfaces for data input, simulation, and optimization. The OPUS Suite, including its LORA-XT module, supports deterministic and probabilistic analyses through integrated optimization and simulation engines, enabling fleet-level evaluations with graphical outputs for decision visualization.^[39] SLICwave facilitates LORA by modeling supportability trade-offs, incorporating failure mode data to automate repair/discard recommendations aligned with MIL-STD standards.^[40] The U.S. Department of Defense's Logistics Composite Model (LCOM) serves as a discrete-event simulation tool for system-level LORA, employing Monte Carlo methods to assess maintenance policies under stochastic operational profiles, and is the approved model for Army applications.^[41] Hybrid approaches combine multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) with optimization techniques to incorporate non-monetary factors like mission criticality or environmental impact alongside costs. For example, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) within MCDA ranks alternatives, feeding weights into linear programming models for constrained optimization of repair levels.^[42] These methods yield Pareto-optimal solutions for multi-objective LORA, balancing cost, availability, and sustainability in complex scenarios such as joint spares provisioning.^[43]

Decision Factors

Economic and Cost Factors

Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) evaluates economic factors by breaking down costs into key elements that influence maintenance decisions across organizational, intermediate, and depot levels. Acquisition costs encompass initial procurement and setup expenses for items, while repair costs include direct labor, materials, and tooling required for restoration. Transportation costs account for moving failed items to repair facilities, and disposal costs cover end-of-life handling and environmental compliance. These elements contribute to the total ownership cost (TOC), which serves as the primary metric for assessing long-term financial viability in defense and industrial systems.^[1]^[44] Life-cycle cost (LCC) modeling integrates these elements to project total expenses over the system's operational lifespan, enabling optimized repair level assignments. LORA uses cost models to compare total support costs, including parts, labor, tools, test equipment, and facilities, across repair or discard alternatives to identify the least-cost feasible option.^[45]^[46] Cost-benefit analysis in LORA uses these models to set thresholds for level assignments based on predefined policies, such as discarding low-value items. Economies of scale in depot operations often favor higher-level repairs for high-value items due to specialized resources. Sensitivities to inflation adjust future costs using escalation factors, while discount rates (real rates of approximately 1.5-2.3% for 2025 per OMB Circular A-94 guidelines for constant-dollar flows) present-value future expenditures to reflect time value of money. Operational variability, such as failure rate fluctuations, can amplify these sensitivities in LCC projections.^[1]^[46]^[47]^[44]

Operational and Logistical Factors

Operational readiness is a primary non-financial consideration in Level of Repair Analysis (LORA), focusing on maintaining high system availability to meet mission requirements. Key metrics include Mission Capability (MiC), which measures the percentage of operational assets capable of performing assigned tasks, and Mean Down Time (MDT), the average time a system is unavailable due to failure and repair. Noneconomic criteria, such as safety and policy constraints, are evaluated first in LORA, followed by economic modeling to select repair levels that minimize MDT and support high operational readiness for critical systems, such as aircraft or weapon platforms, by balancing local repairs against delays from higher-level maintenance.^[48]^[29] Logistical support factors in LORA address supply chain efficiency and transportation challenges to ensure timely repairs without compromising operational tempo. Supply chain delays, often stemming from parts provisioning and inventory shortages, are evaluated to avoid extended MDT, with LORA recommending intermediate or depot levels when local stocks are insufficient. Transportation risks, including handling and transit times for reparable items, influence decisions toward discard or local repair for high-usage components to reduce pipeline delays. For instance, hazardous materials handling typically mandates depot-level repairs due to specialized facilities required for safe transport and storage, mitigating risks of exposure or contamination during shipment.^[29]^[49] Safety and technical risk assessments in LORA emphasize human factors and controlled environments to prevent accidents during maintenance. Organizational-level repairs may increase risks from limited technician training and tools, favoring depot-level for complex or high-risk tasks to ensure compliance with standards like MIL-STD-882E for system safety. Regulatory requirements, such as OSHA guidelines for hazardous operations or DoD instructions for classified items, often override other factors, dictating repair locations to maintain personnel safety and data security. Technical risks, including uncertain failure modes, are analyzed through sensitivity evaluations to avoid decisions that could degrade reliability.^[29]^[50] Environmental and policy influences shape LORA by incorporating sustainability and contractual obligations. Policies promoting green logistics may prioritize repair levels that reduce waste and emissions, such as favoring recycling-integrated depots over discards. In Performance-Based Logistics (PBL) agreements, LORA aligns repair decisions with performance metrics like availability thresholds, ensuring contractual compliance while supporting broader DoD sustainability goals.^[29]^[51]^[52]

Applications and Benefits

Real-World Applications

In military applications, the U.S. Department of Defense has employed Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program to optimize maintenance strategies. A comprehensive LORA was conducted, identifying numerous components suitable for intermediate-level repair rather than depot-level processing, thereby reducing dependency on centralized depots and alleviating backlogs while improving overall aircraft readiness and cost-effectiveness.^[53] This approach supports the program's sustainment goals by shifting a significant portion of repairs to forward-deployed intermediate facilities, enabling faster turnaround times for operational units.^[54] In the aerospace and aviation sector, LORA is used in sustainment planning for complex aircraft to optimize repairs across global fleets. By evaluating repair levels against logistical constraints and costs, it determines whether repairs should occur at organizational, intermediate, or depot levels, minimizing downtime for operators and ensuring compliance with aviation regulatory standards. This methodology has been particularly useful for managing advanced structures and propulsion systems, facilitating efficient support for diverse maintenance networks.^[55] Commercial and industrial sectors have adopted LORA for high-value assets. In the maritime domain, LORA guides ship propulsion maintenance; for instance, the U.S. Coast Guard's analysis of National Security Cutter engines recommends blended organic and contractor repairs to cut costs by up to 44% compared to full depot reliance, enhancing vessel availability without compromising safety.^[56] A notable case study from the U.S. Navy's aviation logistics involves LORA-driven shifts to intermediate-level repairs, which reduced depot workload demands and improved mission readiness metrics. The analysis yielded gains in aircraft availability rates and reduced turnaround times, informing broader fleet sustainment policies.^[57] Recent advancements in LORA include multi-objective mathematical models that incorporate lead times and multi-transportation modes to minimize both repair time and costs, enhancing applicability in dynamic logistics environments as of 2021.^[43]

Advantages and Limitations

Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) offers several key advantages in maintenance planning, particularly in optimizing resource allocation and reducing overall sustainment costs. By determining the most economical repair levels for system components, LORA minimizes life-cycle costs, with studies demonstrating potential savings of over 7% through refined modeling of repair networks and resource deployment.^[58] This approach also enhances operational readiness by ensuring efficient support structures that align maintenance capabilities with mission requirements, thereby improving system availability and reducing downtime.^[1] Furthermore, LORA supports scalable decision-making for complex systems, enabling proactive assignment of repair levels that streamline supply chain efficiency and mitigate obsolescence risks by anticipating component lifecycle needs.^[1] Despite these benefits, LORA has notable limitations that can impact its effectiveness. The methodology is highly data-dependent, requiring accurate inputs on costs, failure rates, and logistical factors; inaccurate data can lead to suboptimal repair decisions and inflated total ownership costs.^[1] Additionally, conducting a comprehensive LORA demands significant upfront effort, including detailed analysis of personnel skills, facilities, and equipment across multiple system indenture levels, which can be resource-intensive for large-scale programs.^[1] In dynamic environments characterized by rapid technological changes or shifting operational priorities, LORA models may struggle to adapt without frequent revisions, potentially resulting in outdated support strategies.^[59] To address these limitations, mitigation strategies such as regular updates to LORA models based on evolving data have been recommended in Department of Defense guidance.^[60] These approaches help maintain the relevance of repair level decisions over the system's lifecycle.

References

[1]
Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) | www.dau.edu
A LORA is an analytical methodology used to determine at what level of repair an item will be replaced, repaired, or discarded based on cost considerations.
[2]
Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) - AcqNotes
Jul 7, 2021 · LORA is an analytical methodology used to determine when an item will be replaced, repaired, or discarded based on cost considerations and operational ...
[3]
[PDF] the coast guard integrated logistics support (ils) manual - DoD
Mar 14, 2018 · Level Of Repair Analysis (LORA). LORA must be conducted in accordance with Level of Repair Analysis, MIL-. HDBK-1390. Early in the life cycle ...
[4]
Service Support in Vietnam: Transportation and Maintenance
Jan 2, 2003 · The lack of a centralized traffic management agency in South Vietnam during the early stages of the conflict contributed to an inefficient use ...
[5]
The Joint Logistics Review Board: A Study of Worldwide ... - Army.mil
Dec 19, 2024 · It was to document the logistics "lessons learned" from the Vietnam experience and analyze those that might have significant effect on future ...Missing: inefficiencies | Show results with:inefficiencies
[6]
DoD Journey from ILS to IPS - A Historical Retrospective - DAU
Aug 19, 2019 · MIL-STD-1388-1 Logistics Support Analysis (first issued in October 1973, updated in April 1983, cancelled in May 1997, and superseded by the ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[7]
Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) Engineering | www.dau.edu
R&M engineering influences system design to increase mission capability and availability, decrease logistics burden and cost, and reduce cost and schedule ...
[8]
[PDF] FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION
The FAR is the primary regulation for use by all executive agencies in their acquisition of supplies and services with appropriated funds.<|separator|>
[9]
[PDF] mil-std-1388-1a-logistic-support-analysis.pdf - NASA
Nov 17, 1984 · This standard implements the Logistic Support Analysis (LSA) guidelines and requirements established by Department of Defense (DOD) Instruction ...
[10]
[PDF] A Comparison of the Naval Air Systems Command Model III Method ...
Jun 12, 1992 · In the past 30 years Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) has been developed within the Department of Defense (DoD). The ...Missing: Vietnam War
[11]
MIL-HDBK-1390 - ASSIST-QuickSearch Document Details
The handbook offers implementation guidance on SAE AS1390, Level of Repair Analysis, activities as an integral part of the overall systems engineering process.<|control11|><|separator|>
[12]
Maintenance Levels | www.dau.edu
On-equipment or organizational maintenance is normally performed by an operating unit on a day-to-day basis to support operations of its assigned weapon systems ...
[13]
22 CFR § 120.45 - Maintenance levels. - Law.Cornell.Edu
(a) Organizational-level maintenance (or basic-level maintenance) is the first level of maintenance that can be performed on-equipment (directly on the ...Missing: logistics | Show results with:logistics
[14]
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/120.45
[15]
[PDF] THE NAVAL AVIATION MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (NAMP) - NAVAIR
Feb 1, 2021 · The Naval Aviation Maintenance Program (NAMP) is an overview of maintenance concepts, including O-level control, I-level production, and ...
[16]
[PDF] Comparative Analysis of Intermediate Level Maintenance Repair ...
Level of Repair Analysis ... INTERMEDIATE LEVEL MAINTENANCE REPAIR PROCESS ......................................39. 1. Aviation Support Division ...
[17]
None
### Summary of Intermediate Level Maintenance from TO 00-25-195
[18]
[PDF] nasa life cycle logistics support guidebook
Organizational-level maintenance and in-flight Intermediate-level maintenance are included in ... Is the Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) complete or is an ...
[19]
[PDF] F35 AIRCRAFT DOD and the Military Services Need to Reassess ...
Sep 21, 2023 · Level of Repair Analysis – Hardware/Software. •. Maintenance ... and organizational-level maintenance. We analyzed data from calendar.
[20]
Depot Level Maintenance | www.dau.edu
Depot-level maintenance can be thought of in terms of a capability consisting of skills, facilities and equipment required to perform specified maintenance ...
[21]
22 CFR 120.45 -- Maintenance levels. - eCFR
(c) Depot-level maintenance is third-level maintenance performed on- or off-equipment at or by a major repair facility, shipyard, or field team, each with ...
[22]
[PDF] Insights on Aircraft Programmed Depot Maintenance - RAND
Depot main- tenance involves challenging work, such as extensive aircraft disassembly, that is not done at aircraft home installations.
[23]
[PDF] The Depot-Level Maintenance of DoD's Combat Aircraft
Feb 3, 2018 · Since 1990, the most common interval between depot visits has been between 61 and 72 months. F- 15s have sometimes returned to a depot earlier, ...Missing: weeks | Show results with:weeks
[24]
Programmed Depot Maintenance PDM | www.dau.edu
Oct 1, 2025 · 00-25-4 Depot Maintenance of Aerospace Vehicles and Training Equipment, Programmed Depot Maintenance (PDM) is defined as the “inspection and ...
[25]
Insights on Aircraft Programmed Depot Maintenance - DTIC
This technical report describes the F-15 programmed depot maintenance PDM process as it was performed at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center WR-ALC in ...
[26]
TEI to provide maintenance to the LM2500 gas turbines of U.S. Navy ...
Mar 3, 2024 · TEI, Türkiye's leading engine company, will provide depot-level maintenance and overhaul services for the US Navy's LM2500 marine gas turbines.Missing: shipyard rebuilds
[27]
[PDF] NSIAD-90-144 Navy Maintenance: Cost Growth and Schedule ...
Jul 24, 1990 · The Navy spends over $4 billion a year to accomplish depot level main- tenance and modernization of Navy ships at public and private ship- yards ...Missing: rebuilds | Show results with:rebuilds
[28]
[PDF] DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE HANDBOOK - GMTBF
Jan 29, 2015 · This handbook provides guidance for the framework and descriptions governing the performance of Level of. Repair Analysis during a product's ...
[29]
(PDF) Level of repair analysis: a generic model - ResearchGate
A level of repair analysis (lora) determines for each component in the product (1) whether it should be discarded or repaired upon failure and (2) at which ...
[30]
(PDF) LEVEL OF REPAIR ANALYSIS INCLUDING FAILURE ...
LEVEL OF REPAIR ANALYSIS INCLUDING FAILURE ANALYSIS AND OPTIMAL LOCATION OF MAINTENANCE FACILITIES AND RESOURCES ... cost-effectiveness ratio as criterion, ...
[31]
An approximate approach for the joint problem of level of repair ...
Jul 24, 2012 · 2.1 Level of repair analysis. Barros (1998) proposes a multi-echelon, multi-indenture LORA model in which decisions are taken per echelon level.
[32]
Practical extensions to a minimum cost flow model for level of repair ...
Aug 9, 2025 · The level of repair analysis (LORA) gives answers to three questions that are posed when deciding on how to maintain capital goods: (1) ...
[33]
[PDF] An optimal approach for the joint problem of level of repair analysis ...
Jan 1, 2010 · The level of repair analysis (LORA) can be used to make the above-mentioned repair/discard decisions, which are input for the spare parts ...
[34]
(PDF) Level of Repair Analysis a Tool for Integrated Optimization
Nov 23, 2020 · Level of Repair Analysis a Tool for Integrated Optimization: A State of Art Review ... with use of Monte Carlo simulation based genetic ...
[35]
An exposition on solving the joint level of repair analysis-spares ...
Level of repair analysis (LORA) is often defined as the problem of ... The approach uses a Monte Carlo simulation to generate scenarios based on a ...
[36]
Mission-oriented determination of regional weapon maintenance ...
Jan 2, 2024 · ... level of repair analysis (LORA), and operation and maintenance task analysis. ... It was verified that the Monte Carlo simulation is ...Missing: probabilistic | Show results with:probabilistic
[37]
Optimize your Support with Opus Suite LORA-XT | Systecon Group
Explore Level of Repair Analysis (LORA), a critical methodology for determining the optimal repair, replacement, or disposal levels for equipment based on ...Missing: SLIC Expert Composite<|control11|><|separator|>
[38]
[PDF] Professional Development Conference
Sep 6, 2018 · as SLICwave, ISS's Product Supportability Analysis Software ... and Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) to government organizations and their.
[39]
Logistics Composite Model Analysis Toolkit (LCOM ATK) - DAU
It is a discrete-event simulation tool employing resource queuing, stochastic processes, and Monte Carlo methods. LCOM ATK has a long legacy of use supporting ...Missing: LORA OPUS SLIC Expert
[40]
[PDF] Exploring maintenance policy selection using the analytic hierarchy ...
Jan 1, 2014 · Belton and T. J. Stewart, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: an Integrated Approach. ... level of repair analysis and spare parts stocking.
[41]
https://www.dau.edu/tools/logistics-composite-model-analysis-toolkit-lcom-atk
[42]
[PDF] Life Cycle Costing: A Working Level Approach - DTIC
Level of Repair Analysis Model - A model that, for a given piece of equipment ... Equipment Cost Analysis," 1971. In the near future, input data may be ...
[43]
None
Summary of each segment:
[44]
Mean Downtime (MDT) | www.dau.edu
MDT is the average total downtime required to restore an asset to its full operational capabilities. MDT includes the time from reporting of an asset being ...
[45]
DoD Depot-Level Reparable Supply Chain Management - RAND
Jun 9, 2014 · Most DLRs have very low condemnation rates, with depot maintenance economically repairing them time and again through the life of the supported ...
[46]
[PDF] department of defense standard practice system safety
Jul 14, 2025 · 4. This system safety standard practice identifies the DoD approach for identifying hazards and assessing and mitigating associated risks ...
[47]
[PDF] Performance Based Logistics (PBL) Guidebook - DAU
This document is for Component Leadership, Program Executive Officers (PEO), Program Managers. (PM), Product Support Managers (PSM), Logistics Managers, ...Missing: 1990s | Show results with:1990s
[48]
A Novel Multi-objective Optimization Model for Level of Repair ...
Jul 31, 2021 · In the PBL approach, the supplier is responsible for the logistical support of the system while providing the required performance measures ...
[49]
None
Below is a merged summary of the Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) for the F-35 based on the provided segments from the 2019 Marine Corps Aviation Plan and related documents. To retain all information in a dense and comprehensive format, I will use a combination of narrative text and a table to organize key details efficiently. The response consolidates overlapping information, highlights discrepancies, and includes all relevant data and URLs.
[50]
Systecon North America & F-35 Sustainment Case Study | Opus ...
The US Navy uses the logistics optimization software Opus Suite from Systecon to reduce operation and maintenance costs in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program ...
[51]
AS1390A : Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) - SAE International
This document provides general requirements and descriptions of activities which, when performed in a logical and iterative nature, constitute the LORA process.<|control11|><|separator|>
[52]
None
Summary of each segment:
[53]
https://www.aviation.marines.mil/portals/11/2019%20avplan.pdf
[54]
A minimum cost flow model for level of repair analysis - ScienceDirect
In this paper, we show how the problem can be modelled as a minimum cost flow problem with side constraints.Missing: dependency environments
[55]
[PDF] Case Studies of Logistics Support Alternatives - DTIC
A Level-of-Repair Analysis (LORA) that includes such a shore. based AIMD is ... In dynamic environments with changing priorities and demands for stock ...
[56]
[PDF] Systems Engineering Guidebook - Mission Capabilities
artifacts, digital twins, models and simulations, etc., to support life ... maintenance concept, including the Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) and ...