Improved Modeling of Maintenance for Future Vertical Lift
Main Article Content
Research
Maintenance Free Operating Period, Limited Maintenance Operating Period, Future Vertical Lift
Abstract
The Future Vertical Lift (FVL) Cross Functional Team (CFT) required analysis on the sustainment performance of FVL aircraft operating in Multi-Domain Operations (MDO). A study from last year forecasted the sustainment performance of FVL’s Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) based upon historical performance of the enduring AH-64 Apache infused with emerging technologies. This study improved last year’s model by refining key assumptions. First, a Forward Maintenance Team in MDO conducted limited maintenance that was constrained by an austere environment. Second, the assumption of constant component failure rates was updated with increasing hazard rates to reflect fatigue in mechanical systems like the transmission and rotors. Third, technological risk was captured by accounting for the uncertainty associated with infused technologies based on the Technology Readiness Level. Finally, the historical failure rates of the enduring fleet of AH-64, UH-60, and CH-47 aircraft guided reliability forecasts for FARA increments over its life cycle.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
The copyediting stage is intended to improve the flow, clarity, grammar, wording, and formatting of the article. It represents the last chance for the author to make any substantial changes to the text because the next stage is restricted to typos and formatting corrections. The file to be copyedited is in Word or .rtf format and therefore can easily be edited as a word processing document. The set of instructions displayed here proposes two approaches to copyediting. One is based on Microsoft Word's Track Changes feature and requires that the copy editor, editor, and author have access to this program. A second system, which is software independent, has been borrowed, with permission, from the Harvard Educational Review. The journal editor is in a position to modify these instructions, so suggestions can be made to improve the process for this journal.
References
Bellocchio, Andrew. (2021). Maintenance Operating Periods in Multi-Domain Operations [Presentation]. 2021 U.S.-Canada IEA 1794 Exchange.
Boller, C., & Buderath, M. (2007). Fatigue in aerostructures - Where structural health monitoring can contribute to a complex subject. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 365(1851), 561–587. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2006.1924
Carpenter, R., Alexander, R., Jonas, P., & Smith, J. (2020). SORE 23 Report-Analysis of Materiel Availability and Operational Availability for Future Long Range Assault Aircraft Sore 23-Emerging Technologies to Augment Army Aviation Multi-Domain Operations. https://firepoint.info/
Carpenter, Robert. (2020). Analysis of Materiel Availability and Operational Availability for Future Long Range Assault Aircraft. FirePoint Innovations Center, Whichita, Kansas, 2020, 1–460.
Department of the Army. (2007). Attack Reconnaissance Helicopter Operations (FM 3-04.126).
https://irp.fas.org/doddir/army/fm3-04-126.pdf.
Department of Defense. (2010). Technology Readiness Levels in the Department of Defense (DoD). In Defense Acquisition Guidebook. DoD.
Farrington, Seth and The RAM Team. (2022). AH64, UH60, CH47 Maintenance ASAP Data. [Data Sets]. U.S. Army Futures Command, DEVCOM, SYSTEM READINESS DIRECTORATE, FCDD-AME-MR, REDSTONE ARSENAL, AL 35898-5000.
Jardine, Andrew and Tsang, Albert. (2013). Maintenance, Replacement, and Reliability: Theory and Applications. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Kirby, M. R. (2001). A Methodology for Technology Identification, Evaluation, and Selection in Conceptual and Prelimary Aircraft Design [Georgia Institute of Technology].
O’Connor, Patrick and Kleyner, Andre. (2012). Practical Reliability Engineering. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., West Sussex, UK.
Wang, K.S., Hsu, F.S., and Liu, P.P. (2002). Modeling the bathtub shape hazard rate function in terms of reliability. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 75(3), 397-406. ISSN 0951-8320, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(01)00124-7.
How to Cite
