We performed a market survey analysis to identify reasonable replacement candidates for the medium family of trailers, to include the Oshkosh Truck Corporation (OTC) Medium Trailer Concept Demonstrator and to provide recommendations for possible trade-offs to reduce the unit costs. This task is in concert with improving the efficiency of USMC Transportation Systems with specific emphasis on the utility and mobility of the Medium Fleet and is consistent with the Marine Corps’ 21st Century vision.

The objective of this Medium Fleet Trailer Market Survey analysis was to identify the performance and cost implications of the current research and development Medium Fleet Trailer Concept Demonstrator and possible options for a replacement to the current family of medium fleet trailers. We were asked to identify potential Medium Fleet Trailer Replacement (MFTR) candidates, a detailed matrix capturing performance of candidate systems, the “notional MFTR” baseline specifications, unit cost for each alternative, major cost drivers, a trade-off analysis, and a Logical Decision for Windows (LDW) analysis applicable to all candidate alternatives. This information was used to assist the Government with the development of the appropriate acquisition strategy for the MFTR, augment subsequent AoA, and serve as initial input for estimating future POM initiatives.

Our Approach/Solution – The study was subdivided into three parts. We began Part I of the study by establishing an engineering interface with OTC. We then identified and analyzed the OTC MFTR Concept Demonstrator performance parameters. Following this analysis, we established a format for the analysis aimed at capturing the cost of stated performance requirements. We analyzed the OTC MFTR Concept Demonstrator performance parameters as related to reliability, payload, and MTVR interoperability. We then assisted the Government with the development and issuance of a Request For Information (RFI) Sources Sought. Finally, we established the M105 trailer interface to include the identification and analysis of M105 trailer performance specifications, and to analytically demonstrate the differences between the M105 trailer and the OTC MFTR Concept Demonstrator.

In Part II of the study, we performed a market survey to identify other reasonable replacement candidates for the medium family of trailers. We developed a matrix identifying potential candidates/respondents and their physical and performance characteristics as delineated in the MTVR Operational Requirements Document (ORD). We also identified key characteristics for alternate trailer candidates not currently identified as a performance parameter in the ORD (e.g., payload capacity (weight and square feet), payload interface, and associated on/off-road parameters such as speed, stability, and interoperability with MTVR).

For Part III of the study, we identified the unit cost for each alternative candidate and any adjustments based upon economic order quantity. We identified major cost drivers of all alternative trailers. We also recommended possible trade-offs to reduce trailer unit cost as applied to all alternatives. We performed a trade-off analysis to capture key characteristics. Lastly, we performed a LDW analysis based on Government provided weighted factors.

Results and Benefits – We evaluated a total of 11 systems using the desired performance specifications that became known as “Notional MFTR” using the MTVR ORD as a reference. The specifications for the notional MFTR were stated in terms of payload capacity range, a pintle load not-to-exceed range, cargo deck square footage minimal square feet range, highway speed range, gravel road speed range, and cross-country speed range. In an attempt to validate and possibly reinforce the technical/engineering analysis, we performed an LDW analysis using eight weighted factors provided by the Government following a Jacobs-led collaborative session. The LDW clearly recommended a range of trailer choices and identified those that were within 1% of the baseline specifications.

FABS | IT | LOGWORLD | MOBIS | PES | Lab Testing

© 2007 Jacobs. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use.