The US Air Force is going to digitize all data on the operation of its aircraft, the goal of the project is named

Representatives of the US Air Force command are working on a major project related to obtaining a full range of information about flights. The main goal of the project is to create a large array of information that would represent digitized data on flight parameters, the operation of certain units and assemblies, including avionics of airplanes, helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

According to the US Department of the Air Force, such work is being carried out in order to provide better and more timely maintenance of funds. aviation, the logistics of such a service.

It is noted that at the moment the department has registered a specific period or flight hours, after which it is necessary to send the plane (helicopter, UAV) for maintenance. At the same time, as they say in the American Air Force command, taking into account the operating time of, for example, a fighter, the conditions of its operation, its specific nature, are not taken into account.

For example, the use of aircraft in the Arctic region - in Alaska, where a special approach to aviation maintenance is given. Attention is also drawn to the operation of aircraft and helicopters in the Middle East. Now all this data, as well as information on the use of weapons, on flights in conditions of high or, conversely, extremely low humidity, it is planned to take into account and form an array of information about a specific aircraft.

The new program is being implemented by Xage Security in Palo Alto. At the same time, the US Air Force says that their first concern is the safety of this data. In particular, we are talking about the possibility of cyberattacks, as a result of which the entire database - up to information about the time of delivery of certain components - "can leak to the enemy." The manufacturer of the data digitization system declares that it is ready to ensure such safety.

Comments

[rocket757]

Accounting and order first of all ... if possible, of course.

[For example]

Connect auto payment for maintenance and spare parts to each aircraft.
Prohibit use with negative balance.

And complete order

[rocket757]

The desire to know everything, everything and always, often, ends in insanity ... will they avoid it or not, the question is?

[Alexander 3]

I don’t know about digitization, but our technicians had forms on which to work.

[NIKN]

Well, this is cool, according to the modern, Tesla car, if MOT has not passed, it will refuse to go, even if it is fully functional. In my opinion, they have an F-35, he orders spare parts for himself, it's cool for commerce, but for war .... Although in aviation this is the main thing for trouble-free work.

[voyaka uh]

"F-35, he orders spare parts for himself," ///
---
And this system gives most of the bugs and problems with the F-35.
Sensors that determine the degree of wear of the assembly often lie
and the plane orders parts for itself. And then (at autopsy) it turns out
that the node is in order, and you can still fly for thousands of hours.

[For example]

The doctor said to the morgue, then to the morgue.

On what basis does the technician determine that one can fly for thousands of hours?
By the eye?

The system has detected wear! It means time to change and pay.

You can't argue against the system!

The sensor cannot lie because it is a piece of iron.
To lie is the exclusive right of people.

Bought f35 - be kind enough to pay!
Otherwise use f16.

Here f16 will be digitized and you will pay for it!

You can't argue against the system!

[voyaka uh]

"By eye?" ///
----
Actually, "at autopsy" fluoroscopy is done, all sorts of ultrasounds.
As for a person.
And here are the sensors "by eye". And sometimes they are too suspicious.
Hence the extra requests for spare parts. Hence - strained logistics and
cost overruns. And Congress is unhappy.

[NIKN]

Quote: voyaka uh

And this system gives most of the bugs and problems with the F-35.

I suppose it's not just the sensors, the sensors don't even need to be calibrated now. All tolerances and nuances can be adjusted programmatically, but the programs for the F-35 are a separate item of income, I do not know for sure whether Israeli specialists are admitted to this holy of holies. The problem is solvable in principle and for Israel for sure. And America does not really need this, there are operators who are not happy, and there are corporations who are doing this. There is also a lobby in the government.

[voyaka uh]

"but the programs on the F-35 are a separate item of income," ///
---
Income has nothing to do with it. And the lobby has nothing to do with it.

F-35 software upgrades will be constant and continuous, it's like upgrades
an ordinary computer. This will be the case for ALL aircraft soon. F-35 - the first, that's unusual.
And the F-35 predictive system is the first of its kind. It is absent neither on the F-15, nor on the F-16, nor on the F-22.
And it still malfunctions.
Israel is engaged in adding weapons, situational awareness to software -
combat characteristics of the aircraft.
The F-35 flight control software has worked and is working perfectly from the very beginning.
And the Americans are engaged in the treatment of the prognostic system.
---
Lockheed is struggling to keep the F-35's high overhead costs down.
The company is being hit on the hat because of this. She is not up to the profits from software.
But there is a high demand for the plane, and the plant works 24 X 7,
producing 14-15 aircraft per month. On the limit.
And the suppliers of parts are at their limit. And spare parts for the produced 650 aircraft
lacks. And then there are "extra" spare parts from the prognostics system.

[3danimal]

Can't you see we're one step away from the uprising of the machines
Soon it will be necessary to persuade to fly, or to apologize for not flying together for a long time

[Alexander 3]

For trouble-free operation, their planes need to be monitored around, if our planes are in the air, do not start and stand in the parking lot.

[Prisoner]

And no hacker is scary. And here you sit and look around, no matter how something comes out or comes in.

[yehat2]

the firechild firm transferred all the digitized documentation on the latest designs of the f-22, f-35 and a number of others to China and was punished ... with fines of $ 3 million.

[Pavel57]

It's not very clear what's new here, maintenance on a state-of-the-art basis, or storing all data in the cloud?

[APASUS]

The manufacturer of the data digitization system declares that it is ready to ensure such safety.

Something I have big doubts. It is necessary to collect, transfer for analysis, transfer data for ordering parts and materials and immediately observe secrecy. Considering thousands of military suppliers and the logistics of civil contracts under the program

[Keeper]

Let them digitize. A couple of people are enough for them, you know who, and all their secrets are no longer secrets.

[ABC-schutze]

Today at the NVP, the military instructor told us ... THAT (or "planned regulations") of weapons and military equipment are assigned to TD (ED) taking into account the real resource of weapons and military equipment (or its individual units). The MINIMUM resource of weapons and military equipment is a manufacturer GUARANTEED indicator and is set in the TD taking into account the TOTAL MANUFACTURER GUARANTEED RANGE of operating conditions. In turn, for systems, assemblies or elements of weapons and military equipment there is such a concept as a variant of "climatic design", taking into account which weapons and military equipment is equipped, operated in certain climatic conditions. Everything, laid down by TD, guaranteed reliability characteristics of weapons and military equipment and their parts (reliability, safety, resource ...), are established during development and are confirmed in the process of acceptance tests. And then, they are SYSTEMATICALLY CONFIRMED, as by carrying out the so-called. "Periodic" tests by the manufacturer and a RELIABLE SET (it is assumed that it is just that ...) "statistics" on the actual failure-free operation (reliability) of AME and their parts in operation. When carrying out the modernization of weapons and military equipment or, say, one or another replacement of materials or components, FIRST, laid down by the manufacturer in the design documentation (TD), everything related to the "confirmation of reliability indicators" is carried out anew. With the adoption of an appropriate decision on further actions. So, as can be understood from the material of the article, there will be no "special harm" from the intention of the US Air Force command. But even special novelty, in the prospects of its practical use to reduce the operating costs of weapons and military equipment and increase the reliability of information about the actual operational characteristics of weapons and military equipment is not yet visible. However, given the fact that the decision-makers on the allocation of funding (Congress), as a rule, do not delve into such details and do not own them, the US Air Force can get their "cookies". The formation of a UNIFIED, GLOBAL base, however, is a considerable help to the command and operational services for the GLOBAL analysis of the situation. however, only in the case when all the infa for the formation and updating of this database is RELIABLE. That, sometimes, there is a far from "fact" ...

[iouris]

The military instructor, as a whole, correctly states. It should be borne in mind that different maintenance strategies are used: "by operating time (calendar dates)", "by condition" and "to failure". The leading trend is the transition to "state-of-the-art" exploitation. Of course, one would like to avoid the accumulation of excess property in the warehouses of operating organizations and minimize the cost of delivering spare parts and assemblies. In any case, to ensure the combat readiness and combat effectiveness of aviation units in the course of hostilities, it will be necessary to make predictive calculations. The initial data for forecasting the required spare parts are taken from the data on failures. The larger the amount of observation data, the more reliable the forecast estimates. At the level of the aviation unit, such forecasts are unreliable. At the level of large air forces (such as the US Air Force, NATO), it is possible to formalize and automate forecasts. In any case, there is no other data besides the data obtained from practice.

[ABC-schutze]

Correct development of strategies should not separate their technical side from the legal side. For sim, of those mentioned by you, only (minimum resource, or minimum time to failure) can be attributed to those guaranteed by the manufacturer. Orientation to the "state" you mentioned is the will of the FREE CHOICE of the operator (customer) planning to replenish, renew or modernize the AME fleet. The manufacturer in his TD (and guarantees) for the reliability of weapons and military equipment does not know such an assessment and is not responsible for it. Except when IT IS SPECIALLY SPECIFIED, at the stage of concluding a contract with the customer. WITH THE PRELIMINARY AGREEMENT of the methods (and criteria) of such an assessment. But who is against it? .. Is there money? .. Do you think, as a customer, that something needs to be changed or updated "as a matter of condition"? that this kind of replacement SHOULD NOT be reflected in the statistics collected and generalized by the MANUFACTURER of weapons and equipment and components on their reliability in operation. For, such replacements "as they are" ARE NOT IN ANY CONNECTED with non-observance or deterioration of the reliability characteristics of weapons and military equipment guaranteed by the MANUFACTURER in the TD. That is, infa about operational reliability "as per condition", without laying a legal basis for the MANUFACTURER in its foundation, can be considered by the MANUFACTURER, only as an additional reference material. Koimon may or may not use ...

[ABC-schutze]

By the way, an essential clarification ... Not the more "the amount of data", but the more "the amount of OBJECTIVE and RELIABLE data. And blessed are those who believe that these are only verbal reminiscences. And that everything is about failures and failures (or their absence)" is given up "or" down "by the operator and the manufacturer always objectively reflects the situation and the causal relationships that led to it ...

[iouris]

Quote: "... with the aim of providing better and more timely maintenance of aviation facilities, the logistics of such services." End of quote.
The goal is to maintain a predetermined level of combat readiness for US Air Force aviation units at minimal cost. This goal was formulated back in the 1950s. Given the global reach and scale of the US Air Force's operations, the goal has been largely achieved. At this technological stage, reserves for increasing efficiency will be used.
It should be noted that when formulating the tactical and technical requirements for promising aircraft, starting from the 1950s, the leading requirement is operational adaptability, i.e. adaptability to service and damage elimination directly in the troops.
This work was also carried out in the USSR Air Force. Thus, a systematic accounting, collection and analysis of data on malfunctions of aviation equipment was organized, which eventually came to NIIERAT (military unit 75360) and to the Ministry of Aviation Industry (MAP).

[ABC-schutze]

In the USSR, as the military instructor told us, this was done not only by the Air Force, but also by all other types of forces ... And the mentioned "predetermined level of combat readiness" is determined not only by the guaranteed performance characteristics of weapons and military equipment, but also by factors such as the level training of personnel (personnel) involved in the entire operation cycle (we do not equate this with the "life cycle"), appropriate planning, etc. The article deals with the "resource" (hours of work), which means, in the context of maintaining the level of combat readiness, precisely the indicators of the reliability of weapons and military equipment. Which, for some reason, according to the US Air Force command, must be "either clarified" or "corrected." The reasons are not known to us ... We can guess, on the subject, that the reliability indicators laid down by the manufacturer of weapons and military equipment in TD, according to the conditions of REAL operation, turned out to be "in need of adjustment" ...

[iouris]

In order to "correct" the "reliability indicators", a new technique should be developed and produced. It is theoretically possible to provide a "given level" of combat readiness, the question is - what will be the price? In the USSR, until 1985, the level of combat readiness of aircraft equipment was set at 90 or 95% for aviation units. In the United States, before the destruction of the USSR, the combat readiness of aircraft was maintained at a level not exceeding 70%, but by the early 1990s, the combat readiness level was maintained at not lower than 90%. Is it clear how this was achieved and why?
In the Russian Federation, in the mid-1990s, the level of combat readiness of aviation units was lowered to 25 ... 50%. This was not considered a problem.

[ABC-schutze]

It is not necessary to "produce a new one" ... Sometimes, for the CUSTOMER, it is quite enough OBJECTIVELY and RELIABLY to make sure that, according to the REAL results of the operation of the existing AME, the reliability characteristics laid down by the developer or manufacturer in the TD are SIGNIFICANTLY different from the REAL for the better or worse .. And demand their correction in the TD. But from the article it is not clear to us to what extent this factor is present ...

[sharp-lad]

Class! Found finance for digitization! And there are not enough spare parts.

[Synoid]

Quote: voyaka uh

"but the programs on the F-35 are a separate item of income," ///
---
Income has nothing to do with it. And the lobby has nothing to do with it.

F-35 software upgrades will be constant and continuous, it's like upgrades
an ordinary computer. This will be the case for ALL aircraft soon. F-35 - the first, that's unusual.
And the F-35 predictive system is the first of its kind. It is absent neither on the F-15, nor on the F-16, nor on the F-22.
And it still malfunctions.
Israel is engaged in adding weapons, situational awareness to software -
combat characteristics of the aircraft.
The F-35 flight control software has worked and is working perfectly from the very beginning.
And the Americans are engaged in the treatment of the prognostic system.
---
Lockheed is struggling to keep the F-35's high overhead costs down.
The company is being hit on the hat because of this. She is not up to the profits from software.
But there is a high demand for the plane, and the plant works 24 X 7,
producing 14-15 aircraft per month. On the limit.
And the suppliers of parts are at their limit. And spare parts for the produced 650 aircraft
lacks. And then there are "extra" spare parts from the prognostics system.

In my opinion, you are exaggerating Lohid's zeal to minimize maintenance. Spare parts are the manufacturer's greatest income, so no one will minimize maintenance. And the planes will distribute it anyway, "but they won't take the gas."

[Peaceful SEO]

So the job for Petrov and Boshirov is pecking :)