process during the initial development of the aircraft to identify the functions, func- tional failures, failure modes, and failure effects estimated at the time.
Based upon the FMECA process, periodic inspection programs were put in place to remediate estimated failure modes and effects. Temperature, pressure, and vibration sensors were installed for early warning of impending failure. Compo- nents that are tracked as Time Change or Retirement Change were based upon assumed usage rates, driving fatigue life expectations. Our scheduled mainte- nance inspection intervals are based upon condition monitoring and preventive maintenance practices to manage these failure modes.
Once established, these strategies are rarely revisited unless some significant event triggers a new FMECA. Catastrophic failure, mounting Quality Deficiency Reports, dwindling stockage levels in the wholesale system, and drastic, detrimental effects on operational readiness have been the traditional indicators that trigger a reevaluation. A more proactive approach is necessary to implement FM.
TASK-BASED MAINTENANCE Analyzing data is arduous and labor- intensive. Task-Based Maintenance (TBM) is a concept that will automate much of this process, integrating our Interactive Electronic Technical Manual (IETM) maintenance recording systems.
TBM will make the conduct of mainte- nance easier by presenting the maintainer with instructions in an interactive check- list. It will also enable the PMs to improve maintenance processes used on aircraft.
PEO Aviation’s implementation of TBM is under development. The Aviation Logistics Enterprise Platform will provide
digital logbook functionality while inte- grating various maintenance software applications, Ground Station Software, IETMs, the Maintenance Test Flight Cal- culator, and other software used on each platform. The Aviation Data Exploitation Capability will be the server at the unit that is used to gather, parse, and move data to the enterprise.
IMPROVING TIME ON WING The depot overhaul process and the data gathered there are critical components of FM. To understand the complete life cycle of a component, one must under- stand its autopsy. Until recently, there was no institutional process to gather critical failure data at the depot—data that are key to performing RAM and RCM analy- sis to identify reliability drivers.
The Reliability Improvement through Failure Identification and Reporting pro- gram (RIMFIRE) establishes this process. RIMFIRE performs over-the-shoulder tear-down evaluations during the overhaul and records critical failure information. Originally instituted for engines, it now includes dynamic, rotating components. These data are being integrated into the ASAP process to give the PMs a more complete picture of the components’ life and reliability issues.
At that point, there are three possible actions to keep components on the wing.
1. Adjust or improve the procedure (task, tools, training, etc.).
2. Adjust or improve the removal criteria or understanding of the criteria.
3. Remediate or eliminate the failure mode (through product improve- ments, engineering change proposals, and the like).
The majority—80 to 90 percent—of all time-tracked components never reach
CW5 ART GRIBENSK is the Aviation Maintenance Officer for PEO Aviation and is an AH-64D Apache Longbow Mainte- nance Test Pilot. He recently served as the Brigade Aviation Maintenance Officer for the 3rd Infantry Division. Gribensk is a member of the U.S. Army Acquisition Corps.
ASC.ARMY.MIL 73
their published thresholds for time between overhaul. We are finding that the FMECAs used to establish those times are not the failure modes driving remov- als. Once removed, these components are inducted into the depot overhaul process, where the failure mode data are lost. Subcomponents are replaced, and the component is repaired and put back into the wholesale supply system for issue.
Valuable data are lost in this process, including components’ high no-evidence- of-failure (NEOF) rates. RIMFIRE captures this information, and with this knowledge, the PMs can better optimize diagnostic procedures or criteria to reduce those NEOF rates and increase compo- nents’ time on wing, further reducing Soldiers’ burden and life-cycle costs.
CONCLUSION PEO Aviation’s implementation of an effective FM program, in coordination with our life-cycle management part- ners, the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Life Cycle Management Command, U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center, and other organizations will maximize efficiencies and synchronize efforts.
FM will enable the PMs to increase the effectiveness, maintainability, sup- portability, and cost-effectiveness of their programs while, most important, reducing the burden on our aviation maintenance personnel.
LOGISTICS
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180
