Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorWood, Frank R. "Chip"
dc.contributor.authorBarnes, Wesley
dc.contributor.authorKoop, Matthew
dc.contributor.authorChris, Miranda
dc.contributor.authorWitt, Michael
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-27T15:04:08Z
dc.date.available2012-06-27T15:04:08Z
dc.date.issued2009-03
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10945/7054
dc.descriptionEMBA Project Reporten_US
dc.description.abstractEXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This project was completed by the Resource Management Solutions Group, on behalf of the Commander, Helicopter Sea Combat Wing Atlantic (CHSCWL), and facilitated through the Naval Postgraduate School Executive MBA program. The purpose is to collect and analyze data pertaining to current scheduling challenges for helicopter pilot deck landing qualifications (DLQs). The data is used to compare three potential courses of action (COAs) and provide a recommendation for a COA to pursue based on the lowest cost alternative that meets operational requirements. This study focuses on the MH-60S helicopter squadrons assigned to CHSCWL. Sortie data was gathered from the Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron Two and interview data collected from various Norfolk-based MH-60S squadrons was incorporated as well. This project focuses primarily on two areas of interest: alleviating the DLQ scheduling challenges experienced between CHSCWL and the United States Second Fleet (C2F) and finding the most cost effective solution that also meets the operational requirements of the Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS), Fleet squadrons, and ships assigned to C2F. Our analysis examines three possible courses of action: COA 1: Continue to conduct DLQ events using the current process of utilizing fleet ships already underway for training COA 2: Dedicate a C2F duty ship with sole responsibility of conducting DLQ events for a specified period of time during its duty rotation COA 3: Award a civilian company a contract to utilize a Helicopter Landing Trainer (HLT) to conduct DLQ events in the Chesapeake Bay or James River The results show all three COAs are capable of meeting DLQ requests; however, COA 3 provides the best solution for two main reasons. A Helicopter Landing Trainer allows for the highest level of operational readiness and minimizes the scheduling difficulties that have been experienced with DLQ requirements. Additionally, using a cost comparison, COA 3 proves to be the least costly alternative. The decision to utilize an HLT would potentially yield an annual savings of nearly $1.0 million.en_US
dc.description.urihttp://archive.org/details/helicopterdeckla109457054
dc.publisherMonterey, California. Naval Postgraduate Schoolen_US
dc.titleHelicopter Deck Landing Qualifications (DLQs): A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Comparative Alternativesen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.departmentBusiness Administration
etd.thesisdegree.nameExecutive Master of Business Administration en_US
etd.thesisdegree.levelMastersen_US
etd.thesisdegree.disciplineExecutive Business Administrationen_US
etd.thesisdegree.grantorNaval Postgraduate Schoolen_US
dc.description.distributionstatementApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited.


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record