Enabling Support Solutions in the Defence Environment

  • Christopher J. Hockley
  • Adam T. Zagorecki
  • Laura J. Lacey
Part of the Decision Engineering book series (DECENGIN)


Health and Usage Monitoring Systems (HUMS), Reliability Centred Maintenance (RCM), Condition Based Maintenance (CBM) and Prognostic Health Management (PHM) are enablers for engineering and support planning and are not being exploited to their full potential in the military environment. This chapter explores the nature of the techniques and the challenges for their adoption in the military environment. It shows that there is a connection not only between engineering solutions that involve one or more of these techniques which aim to provide effective support solutions, but that there is also a compelling case for their adoption to improve operational availability to benefit both the user and those who provide support solutions. The chapter first reviews the nature of failure and the consequential need for maintenance. It then reviews the techniques of RCM and CBM before looking at the processes of HUMS and PHM. Operational availability and its constituent parts and enablers are not commonly understood by either the user community or the support solution provider. Consequently HUMS and Prognostics are not yet generally recognised as being able to improve operational availability and make support solutions more effective. The benefits of RCM and CBM on in-service equipments are likewise not being exploited fully.


Condition Monitoring Preventive Maintenance Predictive Maintenance Military Equipment Support Solution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Air Transport Association, ATA operator/manufacturer scheduled maintenance development (MSG-3) Revision 2. (ATA Publications, 1993)Google Scholar
  2. A. Bayoumi, N. Goodman, R. Shah, L. Eisner, L. Grant, J. Keller, Conditioned-based maintenance at USC—Part IV: Examination and cost-benefit analysis of the CBM Process. The american helicopter society specialists’ meeting on condition based maintenance, Feb 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. British Army, Kit! Magazine [Online] Available from: Accessed 19 Mar 2010
  4. Condition Based Maintenance in the Air Domain Workshop, Discussion during the workshop at RAF Wyton, 12 Mar 2008Google Scholar
  5. J. Cook, Reducing military helicopter maintenance through prognostics, IEEE Aerospace Conference 2007Google Scholar
  6. Department of Defense, DoD Instruction 4151.22. Condition based maintenance plus (CBM +) for materiel maintenance, DTD 2, Dec 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. Department of Defense, Defense acquisition guidebook. [Online] Available at: Accessed 30 Nov 2009 (2004)
  8. Department of Defense, DoD Instruction 5000.02. [Online] Available at: Accessed 30 Nov 2009 (2008)
  9. S. Driver, M. Robinson E. Moses, H. Azzam, J. Cook, P. Knight, The UK MOD EUCAMS strategy and the FUMS developments. IEEE Aerospace Conference 2007Google Scholar
  10. T. Ewbank, CBM in the air domain. [presentation] health and usage monitoring, condition-based maintenance and prognostics symposium. Shrivenham, April (2008)Google Scholar
  11. A. Jardine, L. Daming, D. Banjevic, A review on machinery diagnostics and prognostics implementing condition based maintenance. Mech Sys Signal Process 20, 1483–1510 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ministry of Defence (MoD), Air Publication AP 100C-22—Procedures for developing preventive maintenance, 3rd edn, Apr (1999)Google Scholar
  13. Ministry of Defence (MoD), Defence standard 00-45 using reliability centred maintenance to manage engineering failures. Part 3, Guidance on the Application of Reliability Centred Maintenance, Issue 1, Apr (2006)Google Scholar
  14. Ministry of Defence (MoD), Joint service publication JSP 817—condition monitoring condition based maintenance policy (2007)Google Scholar
  15. J. Moubray, Reliability-centered maintenance, 2nd edition edn. (Industrial Press, New York, 2005)Google Scholar
  16. Society of Automotive Engineers, SAE standard JA1001: Software Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (SFMECA) Guide (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited  2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher J. Hockley
    • 1
  • Adam T. Zagorecki
    • 1
  • Laura J. Lacey
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Engineering Systems and Management, Defence Academy of the UKCranfield UniversityShrivenhamUK

Personalised recommendations