ILMA Compoundings July 2017 - 26

Reduced Maintenance

Army currently handles field maintenance for equipment,
and then consider what changes in both areas could mean
for the lubricant industry.

Researching Solutions to a Problem

Photo by Lance Cpl. Micha Pierce

When looking at the DSL solution, one can draw a few
conclusions from the Army's decision. The most obvious is
that a specific condition and environment had an impact on
equipment, so the Army wanted to improve that equipment
to help overcome the problem.
In the military, a potential solution often leads to research
and development. If R&D is successful, then a purchase description (PD) might follow that describes in detail what the
military is looking for and what problems the military wants
the improved equipment to address. If the current weapon
of choice is malfunctioning because of a lack of lubrication,
the military can either try to fix it in the field (have soldiers
apply lubrication) or look for a purchasing solution based
on an R&D finding.
ILMA member companies with experience supplying
products to the military shared some insights about purchasing that illustrate how the military makes decisions. The
purchase is most often presented in regards to improved
performance related to a current problem or failure with existing equipment. One ILMA member company mentioned
that the "primary criteria for any application is ultimate
performance, driven by the severe service conditions that
military equipment is subject to."
In the case of DSL for weapons, this harsh environment
was the dust. The current weapons were not performing
to overcome this problem, so the Army sought a solution.
However, the solution was not to buy a completely new
weapon or have the soldier in the field apply more lubricant.

JULY 2017

| COMPOUNDINGS | ILMA.ORG

A second, more subtle conclusion about why the Army explored new lubricant technologies is that it wanted to reduce
the required maintenance. Evidence from the field was showing
that necessary maintenance was not always performed. The
military.com article cited previously mentions how the product malfunctioned "if cleaning procedures weren't followed."
One solution could have been to tell users to apply more
lubricant more often, but this would have cost more in
supplies and man hours and put a burden on the solder. A
February 2016 article by U.S. Army Research, Development
and Engineering Command (RDECOM) titled "Warfighter weapon maintenance made easier with new lubricant,"
quotes Doug Witkowski, a project officer at the Weapon
Software and Engineering Center:
"These extreme environments necessitated rigid adherence to
weapon maintenance schedules and had a tendency to degrade
weapon performance if scheduled maintenance lapsed. The
soldier knew that if this problem continued that operational
availability would be compromised and that the warfighter's
mission readiness would be impacted."
"Mission readiness" is another way of stressing the performance criteria the ILMA member company mentioned.
However, this is also related to what the company called "a
competing objective for the military." The other objective "is
to reduce operational costs, which includes cost of maintaining equipment." Although there will be purchasing costs
associated with a new product, there are also costs associated
with buying more lubricant and using man hours associated
with the necessary scheduled maintenance. If the scheduled
maintenance is not performed because it is not practical or
is too frequent, products will malfunction, leading to more
costs to replace them. Additionally, users in the field will
provide feedback that they need a solution other than additional maintenance to meet mission readiness.

Army Maintenance
The Army maintains its equipment and decides when
equipment will be maintained by a soldier. A Military Occupational Specialty, or MOS-specific, maintainer is often
responsible for equipment maintenance (refer to Army Regulation 611-1 and Army Pamphlet 611-21 for more details).
When a specific MOS maintains a piece of equipment, any
maintenance associated with the equipment must meet the
skillset of the MOS and be able to be performed in time to
meet mission readiness. However, there are options for the
Army if the maintenance required for equipment cannot be
performed in the field by an MOS-specific maintainer.
During my involvement with the logistics support for a
number of Army ground equipment programs (including
medium tactical vehicles (MTVs), generator sets and fuel
tanks), I have seen some of the maintenance options used.

http://www.ILMA.ORG

ILMA Compoundings July 2017

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of ILMA Compoundings July 2017