Aircraft Acquisition Conceptual Framework

The Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) has faced difficulties in achieving and sustaining at least 70% of its aircraft availability (Av) in order to support its operational requirements. The head start for this research is to discuss with a focus group (FG) which comprise of eight officers and one moderator and supported by observation on the field. The FG highlighted that the low Av was due to the ineffectiveness and inefficiency of the through life cycle support (TLCS) as a result of weaknesses in the acquisition conceptual framework (ACF). Three research questions were put forward; Q1: Why has the RMAF not achieved its aircraft Av as its desired objectives? Q2: How do the RMAF’s present acquisition practices given a significant impact to Av? And Q3: What is the recommended ACF to be used to ensure higher aircraft Av? The mix mode method (quantitative and qualitative) data collection was used. The literature review focused on critical success factors (CSFs) in terms of acquisition, terms and definition, and present practices in the Royal Malaysian Army (RMA), the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN), the Malaysian public sector, the Department of Defence of the United States of America (DoD USA), the Ministry of Defence of United Kingdom (MoD UK) and the Australian Defence Force (ADF). Based on the CSFs from the literature review, a preliminary ACF I was developed. The RMAF case study had focused on Type A, Type B, Type C and Type D aircraft. Data on aircraft status for FY 2011 to 2015 was gathered from the Air Support Command Headquarters (ASHQ). The survey was achieved through 16 self-administered structured questionnaires which are close-ended involving 120 out of 150 respondents from the Worker Group (WG). The interviewer collected qualitative data using 21 semi-structured questionnaires with open-ended answers on 20 respondents from the Management Group (MG). The survey and interview results were presented in a matrix table and categorized in accordance with themes and their relationships. Based on the results of the case study, the preliminary ACF I was modified to ACF II. Then, ACF II was validated by four experts who comprise of two senior officers and two senior managers from the aviation industry. After validation, the ACF II was modified to ACF III (final) and was proposed for implementation. Three project objectives were put forward. Objective 1: To identify the cause of low Av. Finding 1: Av for Type A, Type B, and Type C aircraft for FY 2011 to 2015 is approximately 43% (target ≥70% Av). The low Av is due to aircraft downtime waiting for spare parts at the RMAF’s facilities (AWP) 23.5% (target ≤10%), waiting for spare parts at the second line or contractor facilities (CONT) 25% (targeted ≤10%), and under work by RMAF Technicians (IWRK) 9% (within target ≤10%). Objective 2: To identify the RMAF’s present ACF and its significant impact to Av. Findings: 2: The weaknesses of CSF’s integration in the present ACF which is based on an ad-hoc basis have caused ineffective and inefficient TLCS, higher AWP and CONT, and low Av as highlighted in the problem statement. Objective 3: To propose the ACF for aircraft acquisition. Finding 3: The effectiveness and efficiency of the ACF proposal requires a holistic integration of CSFs which consist of: integrated logistics support, life cycle cost calculation, ecosystem for public-private participation in defence industry, explicit acquisition management framework, regulations, policy and procedures, acquisition operational process, performance measure, competency, and good governance. This ACF ensures aircraft TLCS, low AWP, low CONT, and the achievement of Av as per the RMAF’s desired objective. This study focuses on RMAF’s military aircraft. Hence, application of the study results on civil aviation aircraft or other sectors might be limited and requires further research.

The literature review highlights 9 CSFs in acquisition which consist of integrated logistics support (ILS), public-private participation (PPP), regulations and policy, acquisition management framework (AMF), acquisition operational process (AOP), performance measure (PM), life cycle cost (LCC), competency of personnel, and good governance. In addition, the literature reviewed highlighted 19 elements associated to acquisition which consist of performance based logistics (PBL), Safety & reliability centered maintenance (Safety & RCM), failure mode, effect and criticality analysis (FMECA), logistics support analysis (LSA), logistics support analysis record (LSAR), computer aided logistics support (CALS), reliability, availability and maintainability (RAM), TLCS, level of repair analysis (LORA). In parallel, acquisition also requires effective maintenance planning, technical data, manpower and personal, supply support, support & test equipment, computer resource support, facility, packaging handling storage and transportation (PHS&T) e.g. NATO standards, design interface and binding contracts. Furthermore, all agreements associated to acquisition have to be in the form of binding contracts. These CSFs have been practiced by DoD USA, MoD UK and ADF with differences in terms of in-house processes. Nevertheless, DoD USA, MoD UK and ADF use almost similar CSFs and elements associated to acquisition. This research plans to use these CSFs and elements associated to acquisition to develop its preliminary ACF I. Table 3 shows 9 CSFs and 19 elements associated to acquisition as suggested from the literature. To achieve certain level of knowledge. Terry et al. (2007) once highlighted that aircraft quality assurance need to have wide variety of functional disciplines expertise. According to Delano (1999), well-educated and highly competent personnel are importance for successful acquisition e.g. competency, innovation, computer based training etc.

Computer resource support
It includes the facilities, hardware, software, documentation, manpower, and personnel require to operate and support systems related to equipment e.g. central processor input output module (CPIOM) software for A400M aircraft, computerize maintenance management system, on-line technical support etc.

RAM
Reliability is the ability of item to perform a required function under stated condition for certain period of time i.e. Calculation of components mean time between failure. Fielding (1980) suggested the establishment of a National Aerospace Reliability Data Bank in UK.
Availability is system/product ready for task.
Maintainability: According to Pryor and M.B.E. (1964) deviation from reliability/unserviceable items require economy maintainability in order to put it back to available condition. 3. LCC is cost implications i.e. acquisition cost, in-service cost, disposal cost. Sokri (2014) defined LCC as an economic assessment that includes the operation and maintenance cost of systems over its life cycle. Case study Canadian Arcturus fleet, the results show that operation and maintenance costs approximately 70.81% of the overall life cycle cost. DoD USA also focus on LCC as instructed in Directive 5000.1-the Defence Acquisition System, and Instruction 5000.2 -Operation of the Defence Acquisition System.

RCM
A process in analyzing the functions and potential failures for aircraft/component. Mishra (2016) suggested the implementation of RCM by weighing all opportunities and threats for strategic decision.

PBL
One of performance measure. Other performance measure i.e. direct measurement, turn-around time repair etc. According to Glas et al. (2013), problem in increasing support cost for complex system i.e. aircraft can be addressed through PBL.

PPP
Ecosystem for public-private participation in aerospace defence industry e.g. ToT in offset program is agreement that exporter to ensure ToT and undertake activities in order to satisfy the importer requirements (Ianakiev, 2014). Alinaitwe and Ayesiga (2013) in case study in the construction industry in Uganda highlighted, successful PPP implementation require a competitive procurement process, a well organised private sector, competent personnel and good governance. In acquisition, DoD USA policy encourages early industry involvement (Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and FAR Part 15). Beaugency et al. (2015) studied different approaches on PPP. Case study on Airbus not outsourcing the development and production of flight control systems contrary to Boeing that work together with other vendors. The main objectives for both is cost reduction.

AMF
Explicit acquisition management framework with process and specific timeframe. Bowen (1996) in case study of RAAF Orion aircraft maintenance has proposed total quality management in maintenance, translated into a process, mapping, and measured to collect valuable data. Samaranayake et al. (2002) proposes effective control of project management and predict spare parts requirement to minimise aircraft downtime. According to Schwartz (2013), a milestone in acquisition management (DODI 5000.02, 2015) is required to oversee and manage acquisition programs. At each process, a program must meet specific DoD USA requirements before can proceed to the next phase of acquisition process.
6. AOP Explicit acquisition operational process. Worger et al. (2014) mentioned that, AOP would help reduce program development delays and cost overrun. At each acquisition process (AOP) it must meet DoD USA requirements before proceed to next acquisition process (Schwartz (2013) 7. Regulation & policy Supporting regulation and policy in acquisition. According to Worger et al. (2014) supporting policy can improve DoD' complex acquisition process.

A step-
A step-by- Step 1 (S focusing o objectives? What is th Step 2 (S2 of eight se practices in Step 3 (S3 a. b. c.

d. Mala
Step 4 (S4 ACF I. Step 5 (S5  Vol. 13, No. 4; studies to identify the lessons learnt, weaknesses and good practices. The research adopted the mixed mode method to collect quantitative and qualitative data (Starr, 2014;Davids, et al., 2013). Data collection was carried out using daily aircraft availability status taken from 2011 to 2015 along with other documentation such as regulations, directives, policies, procedures, and related publications available at the MoD library and observation of actual practices in the field (Glas et al., 2013;Cheung et al., (2012). This research employs a survey questionnaire for the worker group with ordered choices. Qualitative data collection from the management group was done through face-to-face interviews using semi-structured and open ended questionnaires (Bowyer and Davis, 2012). According to Burgess and Balakrishnan (2014) and Davids et al (2013), face-to-face interviews yield more precise answers than other techniques. The management group respondents were given a copy of the preliminary ACF I two days earlier (before the interview took place) to ensure that they have ample time to read. Respondents from the management group were asked to answer a questionnaire on the relevancy of the preliminary ACF I developed in step 4 in order to solicit suggestions for further improvement. Responses from the worker group and management group were recorded for analysis and presented in the matrix table.
Step 6 (S6): Data analysis: The Likert Scale was used to analyse the quantitative data obtained from the worker group. As for the management group, the interview recorded themes for analysis. Data analysis is shown in the next section.
Step 7 (S7): Modification of preliminary ACF I and development of ACF II (Cheung et al., 2012;Rutner et al., 2012;Abd Rahman Abdul Rahim and Baskh, 2003); and Yin, 1994) which was based on the results from data analysis and input from the case studies.
Step 8 (S8): Validation by experts. The modified ACF II was validated by two senior officers in the RMAF and two Senior Managers from Airod Technopower Sdn Bhd. Letters to invite the experts' validation were sent to these four validators.
Step 9 (S9): Develop ACF III (final): ACF II was modified based on input from experts and ACF III was proposed for implementation. This section proposes the final ACF III which integrates all critical success factors in acquisition for the implementation, while also giving some recommendations for further improvement.
Step 10 (S10): Conclusion and recommendation for future work. This section is primarily to answer the problem statement which is "why" and "how" the aircraft in the RMAF fleet have yet to achieve and sustain at least 70 % of availability (Av). Moreover, "what" is the recommended ACF which suits RMAF's requirements of ensuring higher aircraft Av? This paper focuses on military aircraft; hence the application of the study results on civil aviation or other areas might be limited and require further research.

Participant Characteristics
The surveys conducted on the WG had involved the RMAF's technical personnel ranging from the rank of Airmen to Warrant Officer, and the interviews with the MG involved officers ranked from Second Lieutenant to Brigadier General who had worked on the Type A, Type B, Type C, and Type D Aircraft.

Sampling Procedures
The research study adopted a group-administered survey (Bhattacherjie, 2012; Sekaran & Bougie, 2009;Maxim, 1999) where the WG has to answer sixteen (16) semi-structured questionnaires which are closed-ended with all-points-anchored response options. Face-to-face interviews were conducted on twenty (20) out of twenty (20) respondents from the MG. They had to answer twenty-one (21) semi-structured questionnaires with open-ended answers. Then, five people from the pilot team of the WG and five people from the MG were selected for pretesting, validating and trying these questionnaires. Based on the comments from the pilot team, the questionnaires were amended before the actual survey was made. The Likert Scale (Likert, 1932) was used in this project as shown in Table 5.  This study adopted the five-point scale with all-points-anchored response options (Chueng et al., 2010;Ellis, 1994;Likert, 1932) for the WG. The WG has to make a choice by circling the number 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 in the column that represents their feelings accorsing to its choice of either, "Strongly Agreed" (5), "Agree" (4), , all weather operations and etc) and is compatible to the local industry's capability. The acquisition frameworks used by the DoD USA, MoD UK, and ADF are not suitable for the RMAF because the Malaysian aviation industry still lags behind compared to those advance countries (Malaysia Defence Security Report Q4, 2011). Therefore, other frameworks are not suitable to the RMAF. In addition, integration among the 9 CSFs and 19 elements associated to acquisition in literature was unclear and is separately discussed in different topics. These are the knowledge gaps that this study hopes to fill. Preliminary finding from the focus group discussion, observation in the field and literature review found limited discussion of CSFs in acquisition, which is similar to the present practices in the Malaysian public sector, the RMA, and the RMN.

Results from Case Study
Based on the data collected from the RMAF ASHQ, the percentage of three aircraft's Av from year 2011 to 2015 (Type A, Type B, and Type C) is below the targeted 70% Av. The aircraft downtime is because AWP is approximately 23% and CONT is approximately 25%, which are higher than the targeted ≤10% for each downtime. Downtime due to IWRK is below 10% and is within the target limits. However, there was limited one year data available for Type D Aircraft with 90% Av, 5% AWP and 5% IWRK, since it had recently entered into service in Jan 2015.

Worker Group Survey Results
This section shows the measurement category, questionnaire, survey results and average of the survey results for the WG. Answers with higher degrees of agreement are on the right-hand side of the matrix in Table 6. Then, the results are summarized in Table 7.    Table 7 showed the survey results for category one: the effectiveness of ILS in RMAF present practice was measured. Approximately 117 out of 120 respondents (>97%) selected the answer either, "strongly agree" or "agree", "always", and "most of the time" which indicated the ineffectiveness of ILS in RMAF present practice (IE>97%). Less than 2% of respondent, was neutral and only 1% disagreed and strongly disagreed. For category two measured the effectiveness of PPP ecosystem in RMAF aerospace defence industry. The results showed that, approximately 113 out of 120 respondents (>94%) answered either, "strongly agree", "agree", which indicated ineffectiveness of present PPP ecosystem in RMAF aerospace defence industry (IE>94%). Less than 3% of respondent was neutral and approximately 4% disagreed and strongly disagreed. For category three, measured adequacy of regulation, policy and procedure in acquisition. The results showed approximately 102 out of 120 respondents (>85%) answered either, "strongly agree" or "agree", which indicated inadequacy (IA>85%) of regulation, policy and procedure in supporting the RMAF present acquisition process. Less than 12% of respondent was neutral and approximately 4% disagreed and strongly disagreed. For category 4, 5, 6, and 7 were not measured due to beyond WG responsibilities. For category eight, measured the competency of RMAF personnel involved in acquisition. The results showed approximately 112 out of 120 respondents (>93%) answered either, "strongly agreed" or "agreed", to indicate high competency of RMAF personnel. Less than 3% of respondent was neutral and approximately 5% disagreed and strongly disagreed with that statement. In the next section, the survey results for WG will be compared to interview results from MG.

Interview Results from Management Group
Durugbo and Erkoyuncu (2016) in a case study on mitigating uncertainty for industrial service operations had conducted a multi case study which is guided by research questions, coding process, data cleaning, close reading, categorization, overlapping coding and revision. They considered overlapping coding and encoded text, and also omission. For this project, ideas were adopted and questionnaires for the MG were divided into nine categories (based on the nine CSFs in acquisition) in order to make it measureable. Categories and sub-categories that have strong contingent effects in the acquisition and aircraft Av relationship are presented in Column (a) and defined in Column (b). Column (c) provides the questionnaires. Column (d) provides answers from the interviews. Column (e) provides the number of repetitive theme or words related to each category and sub-category. Column (f) provides information on the repetitive themes or words and the percentage from the total themes. Column (g) provides suggestions or recommendations received from respondents for further improvements. The survey results for the MG are shown in Table 8.  TOTAL THEME 60 GRAND TOTAL THEME 520 From Table 8, this project has adopted: There were 520 total themes, with 69 themes related to Cat 1: Effectiveness of ILS in RMAF Present Practice, 71 themes related to the effectiveness of the PPP ecosystem in the RMAF and the aerospace defence industry, 123 themes related to regulations and policy in RMAF's acquisition practices, 123 themes focusing on Cat 3: the effectiveness of AMF in the RMAF's current practices, 26 themes related to Cat 4: Effectiveness (E) of AMF in the RMAF's current practices, 25 themes focused on Cat 5: the effectiveness of AOP in RMAF's current practices, 43 themes related to Cat 6: Adequacy of performance measures, 51 themes focused on Cat 7: Effectiveness of LCC implementation in the RMAF, 52 themes related to Cat 8: competency of the RMAF personnel involved in the acquisition process, and 60 themes related to Cat 9: Measurement of governance in the RMAF's acquisition process.
Category One: 56 out of 69 themes (81.16%) showed the ineffectiveness (IE) of ILS in the RMAF's practices, while only 4/69 (5.797%) repetitive themes showed the effectiveness (E) of the ILS in the RMAF's practices and 9/69 (13.04%) themes were omitted as they are not related to the research. The respondents highlighted 56 repetitive themes as suggestions for further improvement of the ILS.
Category Two: 62 out of 71 themes (87.32%) indicated the ineffectiveness (IE) the of PPP ecosystem for the RMAF and the aerospace defence industry. Only 6/71 (8.45%) repetitive themes showed that PPP is effective (E) and 3/71 themes were omitted as they are not related to the research or have unclear clarification. The respondents highlighted 62 repetitive themes as suggestions to improve the PPP ecosystem for the RMAF and the aerospace defence industry.
Category Three: 112 out of 123 themes (91.06%) indicated the inadequacy (IA) of regulations, policy, and procedures related to the RMAF's current acquisition practices. Only 10/123 (8.13%) repetitive themes showed adequacy (A) and 1/123 theme was omitted as it is not related to the research and has unclear clarification. The respondents highlighted 112 themes (with some of the themes repetitively highlighted) as suggestions to improve regulation and policy, especially on aircraft spares manufacturing by the local industry.
Category Four: 23 out of 26 themes (88.46%) indicated ineffectiveness (IE) of the AMF due to the ad hoc basis of its implementation. Only 1/26 (3.85%) theme is effective (E) (ad hoc AMF) and 2/26 themes were omitted as they are not related to the research or have unclear clarification. The respondents highlighted 23 themes (with some of the themes repetitively highlighted) as recommendations to improve the AMF.
Category Five: 23 out of 25 themes (92%) indicated ineffectiveness (IE) of the AOP due to the unavailability of the ILS and PPP processes in the AOP. Only 2/25 (8%) themes showed effectiveness (E) of the present AOP, and no themes were omitted. The respondents highlighted 23 themes (with some of the themes repetitively One Complete Theme = A combination of answer (d) and recommendation by the respondent (g).
*Answers (d) without recommendation (g) require further clarification from respondents. ass.ccsenet.org Vol. 13, No. 4; highlighted) for improvements which are focused on the development of the ILS and PPP processes in the RMAF's AOP.
Category Six: 23 out of 26 themes (88.46%) indicated ineffectiveness (IE) of the AMF due to the unavailability of AMF. Only 1/26 (3.85%) theme showed the effectiveness (E) of ad hoc AMF and 2/26 themes were omitted as they are not related to the research or have unclear clarification. The respondents highlighted 23 themes (with some of the themes repetitively highlighted) as recommendations to improve the AMF.
Category Seven: 47 out of 51 themes (92.16%) indicated ineffectiveness (IE) of the LCC implementation. Only 2/51 (3.92%) themes showed the effectiveness (E) of its implementation and 2/51 (3.92%) themes were omitted as they are not related to the research. The respondents highlighted 47 themes (with some of the themes repetitively highlighted) as recommendations for further improvement.
Category Eight: 50 out of 52 themes (96.15%) indicated good competency of the RMAF personnel who are involved in the acquisition process. Only 2/52 (3.85%) themes requested improvements in terms of competency, and no themes were omitted. The respondents highlighted 50 themes (with some of the themes repetitively highlighted) as recommendations for further improvement.
Category Nine: 21 out of 60 themes (35%) indicated good governance in the RMAF's acquisition process. 22/60 (36.67%) themes needed improvement on governance, especially in areas outside the RMAF's jurisdiction while 17 themes were omitted as they are not related to the research study or have unclear clarification. The respondents highlighted 21 themes (with some of the themes repetitively highlighted) as recommendations for further improvement. The relation between the questionaires and survey results for the MG and the WG is shown in Table 9. Note. S/A = Strongly Agreed, A = Agreed, C=High competency, RI= required improvement, Cat = Category, Q=Question, G= Good governance. Table 9 shows the measurements for Category One: Effectiveness (E) of the ILS in the RMAF which are Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, Q10, Q14, Q15, and Q16, and these questions are related to the MG's interview questions (Q1, Q3, Q5). The results showed that more than 97% (>97%) of WG respondents had either "strongly agree" or "agree", "always", and "most of the time" ad answers, indicating that the ILS in the RMAF is ineffective. The results from the WG are similar to the MG with more than 81% out of 69 total themes indicating the ILS' ineffectiveness in the RMAF.
Measurements for Category Two: The effectiveness of the PPP ecosystem for the RMAF and aerospace defence industry was evaluated using Q7, Q8, Q11, and Q12 for the WG and these questions are related to Q8, Q11, and Q14 of the MG's interview questions. The results showed that more than 94% of the WG respondents had either "strongly agree" or "agree" that the PPP ecosystem for the RMAF and the aerospace defence industry was ineffective. Similar results were obtained from the MG with more than 87% of the themes out of 71 total themes indicating the ineffectiveness of the PPP ecosystem.
Measurements for Category Three: The adequacy of regulations, policy, and procedures related to acquisition was evaluated using Q5 and Q9 for the WG, and these questions are related to Q2, Q4, Q9, Q10, and Q15 for the MG. The results showed that more than 94% of the WG respondents had either "strongly agree" or "agree" for the inadequacy of regulations, policy, and procedures related to acquisition. Similar results were obtained from the MG with more than 91% out of 123 total themes indicating the inadequacy of regulations, policy, and procedures to support the RMAF's acquisition process. This part had focused more on regulations and policies in the local aircraft spares manufacturing industry.
Measurement for Category Four: The effectiveness of the acquisition management framework (AMF) in current RMAF practices was evaluated using only Q16 for the MG. The results showed that more than 88% out of the 26 themes indicated the AMF's ineffectiveness.
Measurement for Category Five: The effectiveness of the AOP in the RMAF's practices was only evaluated using Q18. 92% of out of 25 themes showed ineffectiveness of the AOP in the RMAF's practices.
Measurements for Category Six: The adequacy of performance measures used in the RMAF was evaluated using Q17 and Q19 for the MG. The results showed that more than 90% of the 43 themes indicated inadequacy of performance measures.
Measurements for Category Seven: The effectiveness of the LCC implementation in the RMAF was evaluated using Q6 and Q7 for the MG. The results showed that more than 92% out of 51 themes indicated the ineffectiveness of the LCC implementation.
Measurements for Category Eight: The competency of RMAF personnel in acquisition was evaluated using Q6 and Q13 for the WG, and these questions are related to Q12 and Q13 for the MG. The results showed that more than 93% of WG respondents had either "strongly agree" or "agree" that RMAF personnel with high competency are involved in the maintenance and acquisition process. Similar results from the MG showed that more than 96% out of 52 total themes indicated the high competency of RMAF personnel in the acquisition process.
Measurements for Category Nine: Governance in the acquisition process was evaluated using Q20 and Q21 for the MG. The results showed that 35% out of 60 themes indicated that the RMAF has practiced good governance in aircraft acquisition. However, more than 36% suggested improvement of governance. There were consistent themes mentioned by the MG which focused on the importance of good governance and competency in acquisition.

Case Study Results -Elements Associated to Acquisition
There are 6 elements associated to acquisition from the case study results: a. RMAF to develop and/or revise supporting regulations and policy: focus on spares manufacturing by the local industry, managing obsolescence, improving pre-delivery and final acceptance test (made available before aircraft enters into service), choosing a specific timeframe for aircraft mid -life review, smart partnerships with the industry, ILS, AOP and developing an explicit acquisition management framework. The AMF from MOF needs to be tailored to the RMAF's specific requirements and a checklist should be provided along with a timeframe for every action. The process owner is the MPOU-Project Team. It was also highlighted that all regulations and policies must be issued early in the acquisition stage and an agreement should be included as a binding contract.
b. Requirement of explicit PPP process flow & process owner: It was highlighted that the Defence Industry Department (DID) and MIGHT has proposed a PPP ecosystem to the MoF for approval. The owner of the PPP process flow is the MPOU office in collaboration with the engineering department (secretariat) which may advice the members of the working group (KK) Aero.
c. Avoid ad-hoc implementation: Repetitive suggestions from the case study to avoid ad-hoc acquisition process. Furthermore, the acquisition operational process (AOP) has to be in line with the National Defence The comparison is shown in Table 10.

Major Findings
There were three major findings: Conclusion 1: RMAF has not achieved and sustained at least 70% aircraft Av as its desired objective due to high aircraft downtime waiting for spares at RMAF facilities (AWP), and waiting for spares at second line or contractor facilities (CONT). The percentage of three aircraft Av from year 2011 to 2015: Type A, Type B and Type C is approximately 43% which is far from the targeted 70% Av. Aircraft downtime is due to AWP (23.5%) and CONT (25%) which exceed the target of 10% or below. Downtime due to in-work by technician (IWRK) is below 10% and within the target limits. As such, reducing or eliminating the AWP and CONT ensures higher aircraft availability. This answers Research Question One on why RMAF has not achieved and sustained at least 70% of aircraft availability.
Conclusion 2: Weaknesses in the RMAF's present acquisition conceptual framework (ACF) have caused ineffectiveness and inefficiency of through life cycle support (TLCS) and it has given a significant impact to aircraft Av in terms of higher aircraft downtime due to AWP and CONT. The weaknesses in the RMAF's present practices are related to the critical success factors (CSFs) in ACF. Hence, based on the literature review, observation in the field and case studies results, this research has identified CSFs in ACF. These CSFs are integrated logistics support (ILS), ecosystem for public-private participation (PPP) in aerospace defence industry, support regulations and policy related to aircraft acquisition, acquisition operational process (AOP), life cycle cost (LCC), performance measurement (PM), acquisition management framework (AMF), competency of the RMAF personnel involved in the acquisition process, and good governance. There are 30 elements associated to acquisition. The 19 elements taken from literature are performance based logistics (PBL), safety & reliability centered maintenance (Safety & RCM), failure mode, effect and criticality analysis (FMECA), logistics support analysis (LSA), logistics support analysis record (LSAR), computer aided logistics support (CALS), reliability, availability and maintainability (RAM), total life cycle support (TLCS), and level of repair analysis (LORA). In addition, the literature had also highlighted the importance of maintenance planning, technical data, manpower and personal, supply support, support and test equipment, computer resource support, facility, packaging handling storage and transportation (PHS&T) e.g. NATO standards PHS&T, design interface, and binding contracts. 6 elements from the case study results consist of: development/revision of regulations and policy in spares parts manufacture, obsolescence management, pre-delivery inspection (PDI), final acceptance test (FAT), mid -life review, smart partnership RMAF and industry, acquisition management framework (AMF), integrated logistics support (ILS), and acquisition operational process (AOP). Furthermore, acquisition requires explicit public-private participation process flow and process owner, to avoid ad-hoc implementation, preparedness: for ILS, transfer of technology (ToT) and innovation through offset program, high competency and advance technology maintenance repair and overhaul (MRO), and supported through explicit acquisition process and process owner. 5 elements from validation results consist of: explicit regulations and policy at national level for spare parts manufacture, obsolescence management, mid -life review, smart partnership and self-reliance Not clearly specify. Local industries capability relatively far behind if compared to the DoD USA, MoD UK, and ADF (Malaysia Defence Security Report Q4, 2011) Not clearly specify. Local industries capability was relatively far behind if compared to the DoD USA, MoD UK, and ADF (Malaysia Defence Security Report Q4, 2011) concept. Furthermore, the industry's early involvement in the acquisition process (concept phase) under the win-win situation concept, a fair chance for the industry to participate and do not focus only on five core companies, industry preparedness e.g. MRO acquire competencies through ToT in offset programs and priority given to local companies to participate rather than to OEM or overseas vendors. By successfully identifying the areas of improvement in the RMAF's present practices, this research finding has answered Research Question Two: How has the RMAF's present practices given a significant impact to aircraft availability. The areas of concern in the present ACF are as follows: a. The present ILS with ten principle elements and ten supporting elements in the RMAF is not organized and has limited applicability. It was on an ad hoc basis with an unclear process and process owner. b.
Even though the ecosystem for PPP in the aerospace defence industry is available, it is not organized with an unclear process and process owner, and is practiced on an ad hoc basis. There is limited PPP in aircraft maintenance activities with focus on the industry's core companies: Airod Sdn Bhd, Destini Prima Sdn Bhd, Sapura Sdn Bhd, ATSC Sdn Bhd, and Zetro Services Sdn Bhd. Other industry players have limited opportunity to contribute. c. RMAF does not have a specific AMF tailored to its specific requirements in-line with the local industry's capability. These findings were further supported by interview results with the management group.
d. There are unclear regulations at the national level focusing on spare parts manufacturing by the local industry along with the unavailability or inadequacy of policies to support the aircraft acquisition process. e. AOP is made available, but there is no process and unclear process owner for the ILS and PPP processes in the AOP. This situation has contributed to areas of concern in ILS and PPP for the aerospace defence industry throughout the acquisition process. f.
Performance measures are focused on aircraft availability during the operational phase rather than performance based logistics or performance based contract throughout the whole aircraft's life cycle.
g. There is limited discussion on LCC calculations. Normally, calculation of cost is limited to the cost of ownership with additional two to three years in-service support contract. Subsequent support is normally based on ad hoc basis.
h. Governance within the RMAF must be well disseminated and understood so that the acquisition process can be carried out efficiently.
Conclusion 3: The acquisition frameworks used by the DoD USA, MoD UK, and ADF are not suitable for the RMAF because they are supported by advanced technology industries compared to Malaysia where the aviation industry is still in the infant stage. The RMAF needs to have its own ACF to suit its unique military requirements (e.g. robust operations, risky flying areas and etc) and to be compatible to the local industry's capability in the present ecosystem. The present ACF in the RMAF is not organized as it is ad hoc with unclear process and process owner. It needs to be reorganized through integration with the identified 9 CSFs and 30 elements associated with acquisition as shown in Figure 5. Improvement in ACF through proper implementation can reduce aircraft downtime due to AWP and CONT. By successfully identifying the CSFs and integrating all of them in ACF III for implementation, this research finding has answered Research Question Three: What is the recommended acquisition conceptual framework that suits the RMAF and helps in ensuring high aircraft availability?

Research Contributions
The project under study is expected to close the gaps, provide a TLCS, deliver the following results and help in achieving and sustaining of at least 70% aircraft Av at all times: a. Successfully identify the cause of why the RMAF has not achieved aircraft availability as its desired objective.
b. Successfully identify the RMAF's present acquisition practices and its significant impact to aircraft availability.
c. Successfully propose an aircraft acquisition conceptual framework that suits the RMAF and helps in ensuring high aircraft availability

Recommendation for Future Work
This study had focused on military aircraft in the RMAF. Therefore, the application of study results on other ass.ccsenet.org Asian Social Science Vol. 13, No. 4; weapon systems, civil aviation aircraft or other sectors might be limited and require further research.

Summary
The RMAF has had difficulties in achieving and sustaining its aircraft Av as its desired objectives due to high aircraft downtime waiting for spares at the RMAF facilities and waiting for spares at the second line or contractor facilities. Weaknesses in the acquisition conceptual framework have caused ineffectiveness and inefficiency in the aircraft's through life cycle support and has given a significant impact to aircraft availability. An effective and efficient acquisition conceptual framework to suit the RMAF's unique requirements e.g. robust equipment was achieved through the integration of 9 critical success factors and 30 elements associated to acquisition. The 9 CSFs in acquisition consist of integrated logistics support, a healthy ecosystem for public-private participation in aerospace defence industry, a clear acquisition management framework, explicit regulations, policy and procedures (especially on spare manufacturing by local industries), a clear acquisition operational process, performance based logistics contract, and competency of personnel and good governance in acquisition process. Those CSFa ensure the aircraft Through Life Cycle Support, lower percentage of aircraft downtime, high percentage of availability as per the RMAF's desired objective. 30 elements associated to acquisition consist of PBL, RCM, FMECA, LSA, LSAR, CALS, RAM, TLCS, LORA, maintenance planning, technical data, manpower & personal, supply support, support & test equipment, computer resource support, facility, PHS&T, design interface and binding contract. All agreements must be in the form of binding contracts. The findings answered the problem statement of why the aircraft in the RMAF fleet has yet to achieve and sustain at least 70% of availability from the total aircraft in inventory. An effective acquisition conceptual framework ensures higher aircraft availability and helps in RMAF readiness to support the six basic principles of the Malaysian Defence Policy which are the capability for self-reliance, supporting the United Nations in peacekeeping, commitment to the Five Countries Defence Policy, steps taken on terrorism, defence diplomacy, and total defence in achieving the main objective to protect and defend the interests that are core to the country's sovereignty, territorial integrity and economic prosperity.