LEAN again
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LEAN again
I've been hearing many things about LEAN and have experienced it from the civvy standpoint as well as the mil. I refer back to an earlier post so would all those in a decision making position please sit down, shut the
F%C)( up and listen.
LEAN HAS NO PLACE IN MILTARY AVIATION. IF YOU WANT ADVICE ON HOW BEST TO FULFIL ALL TASKS ASK YOUR STAFF ON THE SHOP FLOOR.
One of the first principals of LEAN in so have your staff involved and not to use it as a cost cutting/manpower removal tool.
Awaits the bunfight with interest
F%C)( up and listen.
LEAN HAS NO PLACE IN MILTARY AVIATION. IF YOU WANT ADVICE ON HOW BEST TO FULFIL ALL TASKS ASK YOUR STAFF ON THE SHOP FLOOR.
One of the first principals of LEAN in so have your staff involved and not to use it as a cost cutting/manpower removal tool.
Awaits the bunfight with interest
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having been involved with 4 LEAN events now I am a big fan of LEAN.
It makes life more efficient, doesn't save money (my last event cost the pusser £15,000...and he paid up) and generally makes life more pleasant and bearable.
Being on a LEAN event is mindstakingly dull and the rapid improvement events are too rapid for my liking but once the new procedures are in place then the system works.....
A comment from a mid seniority Lieutenant following the last event was....
"This is much better, Why didn't we do this before?"
The only people I have heard complain about LEAN are those people who would rather spend time and energy complaining about a system and yet cant be bothered to improve it
If you are not happy with the way your unit does something then change it
It makes life more efficient, doesn't save money (my last event cost the pusser £15,000...and he paid up) and generally makes life more pleasant and bearable.
Being on a LEAN event is mindstakingly dull and the rapid improvement events are too rapid for my liking but once the new procedures are in place then the system works.....
A comment from a mid seniority Lieutenant following the last event was....
"This is much better, Why didn't we do this before?"
The only people I have heard complain about LEAN are those people who would rather spend time and energy complaining about a system and yet cant be bothered to improve it
If you are not happy with the way your unit does something then change it
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
If lean makes 'life more pleasant and bearable' what did you actually lean?
Did you retain the same manpower and produce the same end output more efficiently with less pressure and less waste?
In other words what leaned and at what cost?
Did you retain the same manpower and produce the same end output more efficiently with less pressure and less waste?
In other words what leaned and at what cost?
There's only one problem with Lean - you have to have people available to attend.
"You've got to attend a Lean meeting."
"But we're still flying."
"Yes, but you have to attend."
"I can't attend, I've not got enough staff."
"Yes, but that's what we're trying to resolve in the meeting."
"So can we stop flying so that we can attend?"
"No!"
"You've got to attend a Lean meeting."
"But we're still flying."
"Yes, but you have to attend."
"I can't attend, I've not got enough staff."
"Yes, but that's what we're trying to resolve in the meeting."
"So can we stop flying so that we can attend?"
"No!"
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Close to the Arctic Circle
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"So can we stop flying so that we can attend?"
"No!"
"No!"
Yes, but it would have to be a particularly cunning trick. A trick so cunning and so wily that....
Oh sorry, you wanted me to use reasoned argument and not smoke and mirrors. Damn!
Oh sorry, you wanted me to use reasoned argument and not smoke and mirrors. Damn!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, an example.
The Seaking HA Mk 4 lives and breathes in Yeovilton. Its rotables are manufactured at a factory in Yeovil - just 7 miles away. BUT once they are manufactured they are thrust onto a lorry and deposited at an RAF stores depot somewhere deep in Staffordshire - 200 miles away. When required by the Seaking fleet they are then shipped back onto another lorry and transported back a further 200 miles to Yeovilton, there ending their journey of over 400 miles when actually then only need to travel 7 miles.
Bring on LEAN...... the answer was to stop using Stafford and create a stores depot closer to the Seaking fleet.
Result.
The Seaking HA Mk 4 lives and breathes in Yeovilton. Its rotables are manufactured at a factory in Yeovil - just 7 miles away. BUT once they are manufactured they are thrust onto a lorry and deposited at an RAF stores depot somewhere deep in Staffordshire - 200 miles away. When required by the Seaking fleet they are then shipped back onto another lorry and transported back a further 200 miles to Yeovilton, there ending their journey of over 400 miles when actually then only need to travel 7 miles.
Bring on LEAN...... the answer was to stop using Stafford and create a stores depot closer to the Seaking fleet.
Result.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: EU Region 9 - apparently
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok, but ...
But are these spares only applicable to the cabs in use at VL? or do they have a use somewhere like on the SAR fleet in the far north, or SW?
It may be found that one persons lean is another 'customers' extended transpotation cost.
By the way, Stafford is being closed anyway so somewhere has to be found for all the kit we need, not necessarily what we have at the moment.
It may be found that one persons lean is another 'customers'
extended transpotation cost.By the way, Stafford is being closed anyway so somewhere has to be found for all the kit we need, not necessarily what we have at the moment.
Last edited by L1A2 discharged; 10th Jul 2007 at 20:23. Reason: spilling
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Well, an example.
The Seaking HA Mk 4 lives and breathes in Yeovilton. Its rotables are manufactured at a factory in Yeovil - just 7 miles away. BUT once they are manufactured they are thrust onto a lorry and deposited at an RAF stores depot somewhere deep in Staffordshire - 200 miles away. When required by the Seaking fleet they are then shipped back onto another lorry and transported back a further 200 miles to Yeovilton, there ending their journey of over 400 miles when actually then only need to travel 7 miles.
Bring on LEAN...... the answer was to stop using Stafford and create a stores depot closer to the Seaking fleet.
Result.
The Seaking HA Mk 4 lives and breathes in Yeovilton. Its rotables are manufactured at a factory in Yeovil - just 7 miles away. BUT once they are manufactured they are thrust onto a lorry and deposited at an RAF stores depot somewhere deep in Staffordshire - 200 miles away. When required by the Seaking fleet they are then shipped back onto another lorry and transported back a further 200 miles to Yeovilton, there ending their journey of over 400 miles when actually then only need to travel 7 miles.
Bring on LEAN...... the answer was to stop using Stafford and create a stores depot closer to the Seaking fleet.
Result.
I wanted to see if you came up with the following example - no names except that the wg cdr in charge was so enthused by his execution of this cunning plan.
The idea of shortening the supply chain, putting spares bins next to the job etc is certainly similar to moving spares from Stafford.
Then he looked at work flow. Whereas a team might be occupied for 3/4 of the working day, by altering working practises he could increase their work rate. Now here is the cunning plan. While in theory he could shed manpower to achieve the same output with less it removed and surge flex capability.
Not content with that he still had spare, if not surge, capacity so our master mind sent out for work. Work that St Athan was already established for. One result is that his men were now producing a much greater output, a real tribute to lean.
However the military is NOT supposed to work at 100% efficiency in peacetime. They are only supposed to work at 100% in wartime. Cut manning in peacetime and what do you have in war?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gents I am a big fan of LEAN if applied correctly and sytematically across the board going from your supplier (BWOS in the main) to your customer, Osama Da Bin Liner
It needs to be thought out very carefully and not used by some Fu**wit Rupert as a promotion tool.
Most Civvie LEAN consultants wouldn't understand the problems in mil Flying and would push the changes thru with Bullsh*t and bluster to justify their own existance.
My experience is about 40% of civvy places can be improved with little cost doing a mix of LEAN and 5S, the remaining 60% costs big bucks.
Their main problem is that the 40% has already been done by the blokes on the shopfloor looking for an easier and quieter life.........
Oh and most of the time JIT turns into JTFL if you don't have a little bit of fat at some point in the system,
If you have the fat don't rely on it day to day and when the midden hits the windmill you can scrape through.
If anyone is ever in plymouth way I would love to discus the stuff over a small drinky.
Mine's a Large Glenfiddich Solera
It needs to be thought out very carefully and not used by some Fu**wit Rupert as a promotion tool.
Most Civvie LEAN consultants wouldn't understand the problems in mil Flying and would push the changes thru with Bullsh*t and bluster to justify their own existance.
My experience is about 40% of civvy places can be improved with little cost doing a mix of LEAN and 5S, the remaining 60% costs big bucks.
Their main problem is that the 40% has already been done by the blokes on the shopfloor looking for an easier and quieter life.........
Oh and most of the time JIT turns into JTFL if you don't have a little bit of fat at some point in the system,
If you have the fat don't rely on it day to day and when the midden hits the windmill you can scrape through.
If anyone is ever in plymouth way I would love to discus the stuff over a small drinky.
Mine's a Large Glenfiddich Solera
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
C_S, indeed. One of our Chiefs, QA qualified, got a job with a local brewer. In short order he had changes introduced.
They made a speciality beer. If a pub out west ordered a keg or two it would be duly loaded on whatever was available and shipped the few hundred miles.
Aside from the cost of using an artic dray for two kegs it also meant the dray was out of normal use for more than a day. His solution? Hire in a small van for small orders, cheaper than buying a van and the fuel save would pay for the hire.
Now that was lean.
They made a speciality beer. If a pub out west ordered a keg or two it would be duly loaded on whatever was available and shipped the few hundred miles.
Aside from the cost of using an artic dray for two kegs it also meant the dray was out of normal use for more than a day. His solution? Hire in a small van for small orders, cheaper than buying a van and the fuel save would pay for the hire.
Now that was lean.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C-S
I suffered at first-hand the Lyneham Lean experience but I still maintain that Lean works and can be made to work in the first-line military environment. Problem is, Lean was used at Lyneham as justification to cut manpower (costs). This doesn't work. What Lean does well is make individual low-level process more efficient. Repeating on various process realises additional gains. Greater efficiency results in more productive work done per man-hour. The management can then decide if they want increased output or reduced costs (or longer tea-breaks, or time for sport, or guarding Bentley Priory etc). The Lean consultants themselves repeatedly stated that you Lean processes and you can't Lean an organisation (as was attempted at Lyneham).
Just because the RAF misused Lean as a smoke-screen to cover large-scale cuts and reorganisation does not mean the idea itself is flawed.
N Joe
I suffered at first-hand the Lyneham Lean experience but I still maintain that Lean works and can be made to work in the first-line military environment. Problem is, Lean was used at Lyneham as justification to cut manpower (costs). This doesn't work. What Lean does well is make individual low-level process more efficient. Repeating on various process realises additional gains. Greater efficiency results in more productive work done per man-hour. The management can then decide if they want increased output or reduced costs (or longer tea-breaks, or time for sport, or guarding Bentley Priory etc). The Lean consultants themselves repeatedly stated that you Lean processes and you can't Lean an organisation (as was attempted at Lyneham).
Just because the RAF misused Lean as a smoke-screen to cover large-scale cuts and reorganisation does not mean the idea itself is flawed.
N Joe
LEAN, I'm alright Jack.
Storage nearer Yeovilton - manned by 2 blokes
Storage nearer Lossiemouth - manned by two blokes
Storage nearer Wattisham - manned by two blokes
Storage nearer Chivenor - manned by two blokes
Storage nearer Leconfield - manned by two blokes
Storage nearer MPA - manned by two blokes
As we know, the object of LEAN is to get rid of manpower, so if we assume that the minimum manpower it takes to look after Seaking blades is two blokes, and VVHA wants to 'personalise' Seaking blade storage, using the above Seaking locations, that would mean that the SAME two blokes would have drive around the country to their Seaking blade storage areas, with a twice monthly trip to MPA, best VVHA only ever requires his cab to have a blade replacement snag every third Monday!.
Will cuts in Manpower at Yeovilton pay for the VVHA's proposed localised storage areas.?
Here's to LEAN and the ever increasing list of unserviceable aircraft awaiting manpower and spares.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't all those places have stores anyway??
could you not train a couple of guys with common sense on how to look after the blades??
Aren't the blades in transit containers??
and if so how much looking after do they require.
could you not train a couple of guys with common sense on how to look after the blades??
Aren't the blades in transit containers??
and if so how much looking after do they require.
If there is one one thing you should have all learned by now is that vecvec ALWAYs takes a contrary view. He has to. It is the only way he can keep his 'profile' in view. And keep his profile in view he must. Because he wouldn't get a job anywhere else with views like that.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The trouble is that Lean contradicts minimum stocking levels.
Under lean you have everything you need to hand. Under minimum stock levels low demand items are held centrally and issued forward JIT.
Now the old (very old pre-BEags) sqn stores had everything possibly needed in a cage, in the hangar. There was no centralised record system to tell you that the widget you needed was at Leuchars and could be at wattisham the next day. No need, you had one in the cage.
But of course this was expensive as the system needed one per sqn and not just one in the Command.
Under lean you have everything you need to hand. Under minimum stock levels low demand items are held centrally and issued forward JIT.
Now the old (very old pre-BEags) sqn stores had everything possibly needed in a cage, in the hangar. There was no centralised record system to tell you that the widget you needed was at Leuchars and could be at wattisham the next day. No need, you had one in the cage.
But of course this was expensive as the system needed one per sqn and not just one in the Command.
Originally Posted by wader2
The trouble is that Lean contradicts minimum stocking levels.
Under lean you have everything you need to hand. Under minimum stock levels low demand items are held centrally and issued forward JIT.
Now the old (very old pre-BEags) sqn stores had everything possibly needed in a cage, in the hangar. There was no centralised record system to tell you that the widget you needed was at Leuchars and could be at wattisham the next day. No need, you had one in the cage.
Under lean you have everything you need to hand. Under minimum stock levels low demand items are held centrally and issued forward JIT.
Now the old (very old pre-BEags) sqn stores had everything possibly needed in a cage, in the hangar. There was no centralised record system to tell you that the widget you needed was at Leuchars and could be at wattisham the next day. No need, you had one in the cage.
Lean, in my opinion, is a pretty good tool and incorporates a lot of common sense. Like all tools, however, it can be abused and can do more harm than good. The points earlier in the thread about getting all concerned involved at the planning events and, if necessary to get them there, to stop work to do so are very perceptive. If you don't you may well end up with a process perfectly optimised for you that buggers everyone else up and requires more effort over all (vide the principle of ZH875's point, even if I doubt the specific instance needs what he suggests). Finall (as I could go on about this for ages), a properly planned lean setup should provide scope for surge activity if that is likely to be necessary (ie in almost all military setups). Some of my bays have taken on a lot more work in terms of output but still have time to get guys off for sport and AT because various surge scenarios are planned into the setup. Come the surges, sport, AT and even leave may be binned for a while, but there will be scope to meet the required output. If things aren't working like that, don't blame lean, blame either the way it was (mis-)applied or the manpower savings targets it was (wrongly) being used to meet.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LEAN is for getting rid of manpower.....Hmmmmm.
The best example of LEAN working is to take a fomula 1 Pit team. 15 Blokes in oder to change 4 tyres and refuel a car and they manage it quickly and efficiently.....perfect LEAN.
The best example of LEAN working is to take a fomula 1 Pit team. 15 Blokes in oder to change 4 tyres and refuel a car and they manage it quickly and efficiently.....perfect LEAN.