There's a master plan parameter for Planned purchase orders 'Use futures date as Requirement date'. In the old days (before 2012) I'm sure that if you didn't tick that option, and had a requirement within your purchase lead time, you got a planned purchae order with an order date in the past (and a futures message). That meant the the buyer had a simple way of identifying the planned purchase orders which required expediting - they simply sorted the planned purchase orders by order date.
But in AX 2012 I'm seeing that all planned purchase orders are created with today as the order date (even though I do not have that option ticked).
Is this by design - or this a bug?
In AX2012 the lead time is taken from the trade agreements of the primary vendor. If this is 0, the order date is today.
See also next link on technet.
Personally i'm not happy with this.. I would rather see if this field is filled, it would override the coverage, site specific and default order settings.
André Arnaud de Calavon | Microsoft Dynamics AX Solution architect | My blog | My company
This post is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect the opinion or view of my company, Microsoft, both its employees, or other MVPs.
Thanks, No it's not a lead time problem. I have the item setup with a 60 day lead time. So order date today, delivery date in July. But I've created a sales order demand in June expecting an order date in the past.
Pretty sure in AX2009 the order date was also today, you cannot turn back time sort of logic.
Steve Weaver | Dynamics AX Solution Architect - UK | My Blog
This forum post is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect the opinion or view of my employer, Microsoft, its employees, or other MVPs.
So I'm now sure that AX 2012 is different from AX 2009.
The question is why? Error or by design?
Sorry - was trying to give a better explanation, but my post got lost somehow.
Let's try again. I got back into AX2009 and setup an item with a 70 day purchase lead time. So a purchase order placed in May is received in July. Then I entered a sales order with a ship date in June. When I run master planning with 'Use Futures date as requirement date' ticked, I get a planned order with today's date as the order date and a delivery date in July. But when I run master planning with "use Futures date as requirement date" blank I get a planned purchase order with a requirement date of the sales order ship date and an order date in the past:
I prefer the logic of the current day, you cannot turn back time. I was looking back through many of my 2009 configurations to find my base starting point on all has been the use of future dates with it ticked so never saw it suggest a historical order date. Just tried it and it does indeed suggest I should have ordered it 3 weeks ago.
I would suggest it is by design, closing a logic that said you should have ordered it 3 weeks ago when physically the earliest you can order it is today. Any reason why telling you the earliest date possible to physically order it and pushing it out with an action message to reduce the time is an issue?
Well, I think it depends on the company/product.
I worked with a company where the raw material was wollen yarn being imported from China in shipping containers, it didn't matter what delivery date the customer requested, the purchase lead time was going to define the despatch date, so for them, using hte futures date as the delivery date made sense.
But I'm currently working with a customer with small, relatively high value, products. They set a 10 week purchase lead time for sea freight from their supplier- but if they need to expedite, they can use air freight. Now, it makes sense for the buyer to see the customer's requested ship date, because it's just simpler to review and process the planned purchase orders if they are presented with the 'real' requirement date and the order date in the past. And also there's just much less mental effort involved to work out which are the most overdue orders.
Hello Tim/Weaveriski, we have a similar situation where some times the requirement date falls short of the lead time (one item) - say lead time is 20 days for a component but have requirement date is 15 for the finished item. With "use future date as requirement date' ticked, AX propose a PO today for the item to arrive after 20 days. Off-course we can use action/future messages to identify items that are going to be delayed.
I am looking at an option where AX to propose PO based on the requirement date (i.e. instead of lead time, can Ax take the requirement date and propose a PO in this case so that the item can be ordered less than 20 (15 days) to meet the requirements date - which I believe AX can't do that - instead, from what I understand, either un-tick the "use future date" so AX can past date the PO and by looking at it, some one can place an expedited PO? Is this the way to go? Appreciate your feedback.
I agree with the dependency of company/product, but you are querying the impact on the delivery date and not the order date. In your scenario you still get the same because the requested date would show the buyer the "real" requirement date with an action message to advance "x" days to meet what the customer requires, whilst planning and all derived planning is met by what you can achieve as standard, if you were to firm the planned order and confirm the date as the customer date all other planning would slot in.
Patrick, in AX2012 there is no past date PO which is Tim's query on the change from AX2009. If you are using future dates you still get the action message to meet the customer requirement date, but by selecting the future date as requirement date it obeys your lead times and not the requirement, but still shows you it.
Thank you for clarifying this. This is how we set up AX currently where action suggest to advance the PO while future message shows the delay. Perfect.