IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v13y2010i4p405-412.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unintended consequences of performance specifications for the reliability of military weapon systems

Author

Listed:
  • Edouard Kujawski

Abstract

The use of performance specifications became a key US Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition reform in the 1990s. Gone were the detailed military specifications for parts and materials selection, workmanship, derating, and fault tolerance. Maximum use was to be made of commercial specs. Reliability would be specified only in quantitative terms such as Mean‐Time‐To‐Failure (MTTF) and/or the reliability R(t). However, there are significant differences between commercial and military weapon systems whereby performance specifications might bring in significantly greater mission risk. Reliability data from 1996 to 2000 might be an indicator of negative unintended consequences of the cancellation of military specifications. The acquisition of successful military systems requires a mix of performance and prescriptive reliability requirements that depend on the application, technology maturity, and complexity. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng

Suggested Citation

  • Edouard Kujawski, 2010. "Unintended consequences of performance specifications for the reliability of military weapon systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 405-412, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:13:y:2010:i:4:p:405-412
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.20152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20152
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.20152?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Don Clausing & Daniel D. Frey, 2005. "Improving system reliability by failure‐mode avoidance including four concept design strategies," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 245-261, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Edouard Kujawski, 2016. "A Probabilistic Game‐Theoretic Method to Assess Deterrence and Defense Benefits of Security Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(6), pages 549-566, November.
    2. Yi‐Kuei Lin & Ping‐Chen Chang, 2012. "Evaluation of system reliability for a cloud computing system with imperfect nodes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 83-94, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Markus Hoppe & Avner Engel & Shalom Shachar, 2007. "SysTest: Improving the verification, validation, and testing process— Assessing six industrial pilot projects," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 323-347, December.
    2. Yi‐Kuei Lin & Ping‐Chen Chang, 2012. "Evaluation of system reliability for a cloud computing system with imperfect nodes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 83-94, March.
    3. Don P. Clausing & Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos, 2008. "Rationality in systems engineering: Beyond calculation or political action," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 309-328, December.
    4. A. Terry Bahill, 2012. "Diogenes, a process for identifying unintended consequences," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 287-306, September.
    5. Daniel Frey & Joseph Palladino & John Sullivan & Malvern Atherton, 2007. "Part count and design of robust systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(3), pages 203-221, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:13:y:2010:i:4:p:405-412. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.