Ministry of Defence

Defence Standard

00-43 (Part 1)/Issue 1 29 January 1993

RELIABILITY AND MAINTAINABILITY

ASSURANCE ACTIVITY

PART 1: IN-SERVICE RELIABILITY

DEMONSTRATIONS
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

AMENDMENTS ISSUED SINCE PUBLICATION

AMD NO DATE OF TEXT AFFECTED SIGNATURE &

ISSUE DATE

Revision Note

Historical Record

Arrangement of Defence Standard 00-43

Part 1 - In-Service Reliability Demonstrations
Part 2 - Maintainability Demonstrations
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

RELIABILITY AND MAINTAINABILITY

ASSURANCE ACTIVITY
PART 1: IN-SERVICE RELIABILITY DEMONSTRATIONS
PREFACE

i Defence Standard 00-43, Parts 1 and 2 describe two types of

demonstration:
(a) in-Service reliability demonstrations (ISRDs);

(b) maintainability demonstrations (MDs).

ii ISRDs are covered in Part 1 and MDs in Part 2. Part 1 covers the
purpose, rationale and procedures for ISRDs. Part 2 covers maintainability
demonstrations, some of which may occur before the equipment is accepted
into Service.
iii Many of the planning activities described in the two Parts will be
combined for projects on which both reliability and maintainability are to
be demonstrated as part of the procurement strategy.
iv This Part of the Standard was prepared by the Committee for Defence
Equipment Reliability and Maintainability (CODERM).
v This Standard has been agreed by the authorities concerned with its use
and shall be incorporated whenever relevant in all future designs,
contracts, orders etc and whenever practicable by amendment to those
already in existence. If any difficulty arises which prevents application
of the Defence Standard, the Directorate of Standardization shall be
informed so that a remedy may be sought.
vi Any enquiries regarding this Standard in relation to an invitation to
tender or a contract in which it is incorporated are to be addressed to the
responsible technical or supervising authority named in the invitation to
tender or contract.
vii This Standard has been devised for the use of the Crown and its
contractors in the execution of contracts for the Crown. The Crown hereby
excludes all liability (other than liability for death or personal injury)
whatsoever and howsoever arising (including, but without limitation,
negligence on the part of the Crown its servants or agents) for any loss or
damage however caused where the Standard is used for any other purpose.

1
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

CONTENTS PAGE

Preface 1

Section One. General

0 Introduction 4
1 Scope 4
2 WARNING 4
3 Related Documents 4
4 Definitions 6

Section Two. Considerations

5 Aim 7
6 Background 7
7 Benefits 9
8 Constraints 9

Section Three. Management

9 General 11
10 Responsibilities 11

Section Four. Contractual Application

11 Invitation to Tender (ITT) 14
12 Contractual Agreement 14
13 Multiple Contractors 14
14 Purchaser and Contractor Risks 14
15 Corrective Action 15

Section Five. ISRDs, Trials and Other Test Methods

16 General 16
17 Pre-Delivery Trials of Production Equipment 16
18 Peacetime Usage 16
19 Combination with Other Methods 16

Section Six. Demonstration Plans

20 General 18
21 Statistical Plans 18
22 Confidence Statements 18
23 Selection of Samples 18

Section Seven. Detailed Guidance on Demonstration Plans

24 Fault Definition 19
25 Faults, Failures, Defects, Incidents and Sentencing 19
26 No Fault Found (NFF) Items 19
27 Secondary Failures 20
28 Items Under Test 20
29 Timing 20
30 Exclusions 21

2
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

CONTENTS (Contd) PAGE

Section Seven (Contd)

31 Environment 21
32 Support Equipment 21
33 Adjustments 21
34 Scheduled Servicing 21
35 Special Servicing Instructions or Checks 21
36 Built-in-Test (BIT) 22
37 Software 22
38 Fault Tracking 22
39 Component Handling 22
40 Spares 23
41 Preparatory Work 23
42 Effect on User 23

Section Eight. Data Classification and Analysis

43 Precedents 24
44 Analysis 24
45 Data Gathering 24
46 Documentation 24
47 Recording Procedure 24

Annex A Reliability Panel Activity for an ISRD A-1

Annex B Outline Demonstration Directive B-1
Annex C Type of Information to be Recorded During an ISRD C-1

3
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

RELIABILITY AND MAINTAINABILITY

ASSURANCE ACTIVITY
PART 1: IN-SERVICE RELIABILITY DEMONSTRATIONS

Section One. General

0 Introduction
The sections in this Part of the Defence Standard describe the purpose,
rationale and procedures for in-Service reliability demonstrations (ISRDs).
The purpose of an ISRD is to demonstrate compliance with specified
reliability requirements of an equipment or system. An ISRD is a final
test to provide motivation and incentive to the contractor to ensure that
the reliability programme is vigorously pursued. It supplements rather
than replaces other activities in the reliability programme. However, an
ISRD will not be appropriate for the purchase of every system, platform or
equipment. Experience from completed ISRDs has shown the need for detailed
guidance for both MOD and industry.
1 Scope
1.1 This Part of the Defence Standard is a guidance document whose purpose
is to inform MOD project staff on the requirements for an ISRD and how
these should be formulated, and to industry on the implications if an ISRD
is to be part of a contract. Consequently, it will not be appropriate to
call up this Defence Standard in contracts; rather a directive based on
this Part of the Standard will become part of the contract.
1.2 This Part of the Defence Standard describes the factors that a project
manager should consider before deciding whether to include an ISRD as part
of his procurement strategy. It provides guidance on the actions to be
taken for ISRDs at the specification, invitation to tender (ITT) and final
contract stages. Guidance is given on preparation of the demonstration
directive and the conduct of the demonstration. The requirements of a
demonstration will vary between equipments and between Services, and this
Defence Standard provides general guidelines and direction so that common
procedures can be applied wherever possible.
2 WARNING
This Standard calls for the use of substances and/or procedures that may be
injurious to health if adequate precautions are not taken. It refers only
to technical suitability and in no way absolves the designer, the producer,
the supplier or the user from statutory and all other legal obligations
relating to health and safety at any stage of manufacture or use.
3 Related Documents
3.1 The following documents and publications are referred to, or are
relevant to this Part of the Standard:
Def Stan 00-40 Reliability and Maintainability
Part 1 (ARMP-1): Management Responsibilities and Requirements
for Programmed and Plans

4
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

3.1 (Contd)
Def Stan 00-40 (Contd)
Part 2 (ARMP-2): General Application Guidance on the Use of
Part 1 (ARMP-1)
Part 6 (ARMP-6): In-Service R&M
Def Stan 00-41 Reliability and Maintainability
MOD Practices and Procedures
Def Stan 00-44 Reliability and Maintainability
Data Collection and Classification
Part 1: Maintenance Data and Defect Reporting in The
Royal Navy, The Army and The Royal Air Force
Part 2: Data Classification and Incident Sentencing -
General
3.2 The Services and MOD(PE) have additional related Standards or guidance
documents, at a more detailed level, for the preparation of specifications,
plans and directives, as follows:
(a) Naval Engineering Standard (NES) 1016 - Requirement for the In-Service
Collection and Analysis of ARM Trial Data for Naval Systems.
(b) Army HQ DGEME Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) Number 3210 - Formal
Assessment of Equipment Reliability in Service.
(c) MGO Instruction 3.21 - The Achievement of Reliability and
Maintainability.
3.3 Reference in this Part of the Standard to any related document means
in any invitation to tender or contract the edition and all amendments
current at the date of such tender or contract unless a specific edition is
indicated.

DOCUMENT SOURCE

Defence Standard (Def Stan) Directorate of Standardization

Kentigern House
65 Brown Street
GLASGOW G2 8EX

Army HQ DGEME SOP ES21b

HQ QMG
Monxton Road
ANDOVER SP11 8HT

MGO Instruction MGO Sec 3

Room 2184
MOD Main Building
Whitehall
LONDON SW1A 2HB

5
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

3.3 (Contd)

DOCUMENT SOURCE

Naval Engineering Standard (NES) Procurement Executive, MOD

Sea Systems Controllerate
Foxhill
BATH 5AB

4 Definitions
4.1 For the purpose of this Defence Standard the definitions given in the
text and in Def Stan 00-40 (Part 1) (ARMP-1) apply, together with the
following:
4.1.1 In-Service Reliability Demonstration (ISRD). An ISRD is the
demonstration of the reliability achievement using production standard
equipment under agreed in-Service environmental, operational, usage and
support conditions.
NOTE: Production standard equipment is taken to include equipment of
uniform build standard or having differences in build standard which are
agreed not to affect the R&M characteristics of the equipment or system
being demonstrated.
4.1.2 Fault, failure, defect. It is acknowledged that each of the
Services uses the terms "fault", "failure" and "defect" in different ways.
For the purposes of this document "fault", meaning the condition, is used
to encompass the other terms. It is essential that an actual ISRD uses the
terms defined in the contract specification.

6
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

Section Two. Considerations

5 Aim
The aim of an ISRD is to demonstrate the reliability achieved by an
equipment against the requirements specified in the contract using
production standard equipment under agreed in-Service conditions. Within
the MOD a secondary aim is to provide evidence of the achievement to
management and to the user.
6 Background
6.1 This section describes general factors which the sponsor and the
Project Manager should consider. Consultation should take place between
the Project Manager, his contracts advisers, the equipment manager or
integrated logistic support (ILS) manager, the Operation Requirements (OR)
staff and industry. Within the MOD such consultation will usually take
place within the Concept Panel/ Panel A (see 10.2). Controllerate and
Service R&M specialist branches should always be consulted at an early
stage.
6.2 Although all three Services collect and analyse reliability data from
in-Service equipment, it is recognized that there are gaps in this data
base and that it is not, in general, capable of providing an accurate
measure of an equipment’s in-Service reliability. Thus, whilst the
in-Service data collection systems, which are described in Def Stan 00-44
Part 1, may on occasions be capable of establishing compliance with
specified levels of reliability, they are generally unsuitable for this
purpose. To overcome this shortcoming, a dedicated ISRD will provide a
detailed evaluation of an equipment’s reliability when used under realistic
in-Service conditions and will provide clear evidence whether the specified
levels of reliability have been achieved by production standard equipment.
A well constituted ISRD is an effective method of measuring this
achievement and, if linked to payment arrangements, can provide significant
motivation to the contractor throughout the project.
6.3 It is unlikely that an ISRD would be the sole contractual provision
for assuring reliability. An ISRD should be seen as complementary to other
contractual provisions for assuring R&M such as interim milestone payments,
incentives, warranties and fixed price contractor logistic support; for
each project the Project Manager should consider the full range of options.
In the case of off-the-shelf (OTS) procurement, evidence of previous
achievement should be considered during tender evaluation. It may be that
an OTS product has an in-Service history or has already been subjected to
an ISRD. Such history should be evaluated carefully to establish whether
the reliability levels achieved are representative or whether the extra
assurance of a further ISRD is necessary and can be justified on cost
grounds.
6.4 An ISRD does not replace any of the activities in a reliability
programme. Key programme activities such as reliability growth testing
(RGT), reliability qualification testing and production reliability
acceptance testing (PRAT) may be appropriate irrespective of whether an
ISRD is planned. The ISRD should be seen as a final test to establish that
the contractual requirements have been met and a means of motivating the
contractor to achieve these requirements through a comprehensive and
vigorous reliability programme. An ISRD defers final acceptance of the

7
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

6.4 (Contd)
equipment until achievement of the contractual reliability requirements
have been verified under Service conditions. Nevertheless, passing the
ISRD shall not be regarded as diminishing the legal rights of the MOD if
the quipment subsequently proves to be unreliable.
6.5 An ISRD needs to be tailored to meet the requirements and limitations
of each equipment. It will also depend on the ability of the user to
provide the in-Service resources and environment for the demonstration.
For example, an artillery gun would need a special demonstration using
ammunition fired from a sample number of guns over an agreed number of
battlefield days whereas the RAF may be able to demonstrate the achievement
of R&M requirements for an aircraft by recording and monitoring faults over
a large number of routine training sorties. Ships and their weapon systems
may require a combination of the two. This Part of the Defence Standard
identifies the common principles.
6.6 An ISRD is a measurement of achievement and therefore shall not be
considered an extension of reliability growth tests (RGTs) or other such
development activities. The embodiment of modifications during the ISRD,
whilst being beneficial in particular circumstances (see clause 19) poses
difficulties in management and analysis. The aim should be to maintain a
uniform standard of equipment under the demonstration and modifications
should not, in principle, be incorporated during the demonstration period.
6.7 The actions to be taken following demonstration failure and, where
appropriate, the consequences of requirements being surpassed, shall be
clearly stated in the contract. An ISRD will not be effective without such
linkage. Appropriate linking would typically be a continued commitment for
further engineering action by the contractor at his expense to achieve the
required reliability or the withholding of specifically linked interim
payments. Such engineering action might be the investigation of faults,
the design and proving of modifications and their fleet embodiment.
Similarly an additional incentive payment might be made for exceeding
specific levels of reliability if this had been offered and areed as part
of the contract.
6.8 The decision in principle to undertake an ISRD will be made as early
as possible and certainly before issue of the invitation to tender (ITT).
It is essential that all the factors which influence cost and contractual
risk are specified in the ITT and are subsequently made binding in the
contract. Outline details of the ISRD need therefore to be specified in
the ITT. Full details of the ISRD should then be agreed for issue as part
of the contract if it is to provide the required motivation to ensure
achievement of required reliability. A list of the vital actions and
milestones for the preparation of an ISRD is included at annex A, grouped
under activity for the Reliability Panels.
6.9 The cost of mounting the demonstration will often fall to the Service
as well as the MOD(PE) and needs to be funded in a timely fashion. Where
large amounts of consumables such as ordnance, missiles and fuels are
involved, these costs can be considerable.
6.10 Selection of environmental, operational and usage conditions is of
prime importance to the relevance of the ISRD result. They should reflect
those in the specification and should not be exceeded. However, it may not

8
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

6.10 (Contd)
always be possible for the purposes of the ISRD, to generate in-Service
conditions which reflect precisely those stated in the contract. In such
cases it may be necessary to define a series of trials which, collectively,
represent appropriate conditions to the satisfaction of all parties. The
key element is that the ISRD uses production standard equipments operated
by Service personnel after delivery to the Service and under defined
conditions which, within the agreed limitations, most accurately reflect
its specified use.
6.11 The procedures for an ISRD contained in this Defence Standard apply
equally to any demonstration in which it is required to provide evidence of
reliability achievement and to demonstrate reliability on production
equipment outside the controlled environment of the factory or laboratory.
7 Benefits
7.1 Provided that the contract conditions and remedies are clearly
specified, and the required support is provided, an ISRD can offer many
benefits. These include the following.
7.1.1 An ISRD fulfils the requirement of the Project Manager to provide
evidence of achievement relative to the contract requirement. It also
provides the baseline against which the continuing operational capability
can be assessed.
7.1.2 An ISRD extends the contractual influence and provides motivation
for the achievement of reliability throughout development and into
production.
7.1.3 An ISRD provides clear evidence upon which to base contractual
action.
7.1.4 An ISRD provides a clear and early indication of reliability
achievement in the operational environment.
7.1.5 An ISRD provides assurance of the reliability of production standard
equipment.
7.1.6 A successful ISRD will provide the contractor with firm evidence of
the reliability of his equipment which may be beneficial in promoting
further orders from other purchasers.
7.1.7 An ISRD collects high quality in-Service data which can be used to
update the life cycle cost (LCC) estimates and the logistic support
analysis (LSA) work.
8 Constraints
8.1 An ISRD introduces a number of potential constraints. These can be
minimized by careful and early planning to address the following aspects.
8.1.1 An ISRD requires effort in both resources and time from MOD(PE) and
the user; it may also be disruptive to planned tasks, duties and
programmes. In some cases there will be considerable impact on the user’s
resources and it is essential that the user participates at an early stage
of the planning.

9
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

8.1.2 Some representative operational and environmental conditions may

need to be varied or simulated. Where deviations from the specified
conditions are necessary, these shall be clearly stated in the contract
together with any anticipated affect on the results.
8.1.3 Costs may be large, particularly where dedicated live firing of
ordnance is required. Nevertheless it is an MOD management objective to
improve reliability and measure its achievement; funds will therefore need
to be made available once the requirements are identified by the Concept
Panel/Panel A.

10
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

Section Three. Management

9 General
9.1 An ISRD will involve three principal agencies: the MOD, the user and
the contractor. Each will have responsibility for implementing specific
elements of the ISRD and it is therefore essential that overall management
is coordinated. Concept Panels/Panels A and Project Panels/Panel B will,
where formed, assist in the coordination of these management requirements.
9.2 The ISRD directive will be the primary managerial document relating to
the conduct of the demonstration. To be fully effective, the ISRD
directive needs to provide the detail necessary to:
(a) identify all managerial responsibilities;
(b) identify all facilities necessary, including funding and personnel,
together with the timescales for their implementation;
(c) identify the procedures for conduct of the ISRD;
(d) identify all relevant contractual requirements and definitions,
amplified as necessary with detailed guidance on their interpretation.
9.3 Many terms and conditions of the ISRD will affect cost and risk to the
contractor and his equipment suppliers. It follows, therefore, that the
issuing of an outline ISRD directive as part of the ITT is essential. Any
amendments to the ISRD directive that affects risk or cost need to be
agreed before contract award and the final directive needs to form part of
the contract. Any subsequent amendments should be confined to matters of
administration or management not affecting cost or risk.
9.4 Logistics. The logistic needs of some demonstrations will be
considerable and may include ammunition, fuel, firing ranges, specialist
facilities and associated manpower. The assessment of the logistic needs
and their organization should be made at the earliest possible time by the
Project Manager since some resources, such as firing ranges, may need to be
allocated several years in advance. An ISRD may also affect long term
planning of training, exercises and deployments by the user.
9.5 Directive. A suggested format for the ISRD directive is at annex B
and includes some detailed guidance on the content of the paragraphs to be
included. Those responsible for drafting the ISRD directive are cautioned
against copying paragraphs verbatim.
10 Responsibilities
10.1 The remainder of this section outlines the managerial
responsibilities of the main agencies involved with an ISRD.
10.2 MOD. MOD will have overall responsibility for the ISRD through the
following agencies.
10.2.1 Reliability panels. In most projects, MOD will form a
Concept Panel/Panel A to formulate the reliability requirements. Later, a
Project Panel/Panel B will be formed to monitor the fulfilment of those
requirements. A general guide describing ISRD related actions which fall

11
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

10.2.1 (Contd)
to each panel is given at annex A. Such panels will coordinate the
management described within this section and allocated to a particular
organization.
10.2.2 Project Manager (PM). The PM is responsible for overall management
of the ISRD and is responsible for issue of the ISRD directive. The PM
will normally appoint a demonstration coordinator who will be a member of
the reliability panels. The PM will convene a regular review meeting,
perhaps as part of the reliability panel meeting, to monitor progress of
the ISRD.
10.2.3 Demonstration coordinator. The demonstration coordinator is
responsible for liaison with the user and contractor, and for coordination
of all necessary facilities prior to and during the demonstration. He will
be responsible for provision of all MOD manpower and resources to support
the ISRD. He will report to the PM on a regular basis and will refer any
unresolved disputes regarding categorizing (or sentencing) incidents to the
PM. He will coordinate a final report at the end of the demonstration and
submit it to the MOD(PE) PM. The report will be used to determine the
basis of contractual compliance.

10.2.4 Assessment team. An assessment team will be formed by MOD

consisting of MOD and/or Service staff and contractor representatives. The
team should be formed 3–6 months before the demonstration in order to
complete pre-ISRD training and familiarization. MOD and Service staff will
be functionally controlled by the demonstration coordinator. The
contractor representatives will be responsible to their Company. The
assessment team will be responsible for monitoring and sentencing all
appropriate arisings, and such additional tasking as may be agreed. The
team will report regularly to the demonstration coordinator and to the
contractor and will refer unresolved disputes regarding sentencing to the
demonstration coordinator.
10.3 User. The user is responsible for in-Service operation and support
of the equipment during the ISRD. The term user includes Service Command
staff and the Operating Unit. In particular, the user will be responsible
for making available to the assessment team all relevant Service data
relating to the operation and support of the equipment. The user will be
responsible for promptly investigating all fault arisings in accordance
with the agreed maintenance policy (eg first and second line) and any
additional policies agreed for the ISRD. All results will be made
available to the assessment team.
10.3.1 Service manager. An ISRD service manager should be nominated to
act as the focal point to coordinate the user’s planning and implementation
of the ISRD. The service manager will be responsible for providing the
agreed Service manpower, resources and special procedures for the ISRD.
10.3.2 Liaison officer. A liaison officer at the Demonstration Unit
should be appointed to liaise with the assessment team and demonstration
coordinator.
10.4 Contractor. Only prime contractors have responsibility to the PM for
implementing the ISRD. However, with the agreement of the PM, the prime
contractor may request the attendance of sub-contractors to advise and
support particular aspects of the demonstration without prejudice. The

12
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

10.3 (Contd)
prime contractor is responsible for providing to the assessment team all
relevant contractor data, including sub-contractor data, relating to the
operating and support of the equipment. The prime contractor will also be
responsible for prompt investigation of all fault arisings as defined by
the maintenance policy (eg fourth line) and any additional policies agreed
for the ISRD.

13
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

Section Four. Contractual Application

11 Invitation to Tender (ITT)
In order to include an ISRD as part of a contract, the intention to have an
ISRD needs to be declared with the ITT; there are essential elements and
information which shall be included in the ITT and which may considerably
affect the responses from contractors. A draft demonstration directive
should be included in the ITT to enable contractors to include, with their
responses to the ITT, their plans for dealing with the ISRD.
12 Contractual Agreement
It is important to define carefully in the contract the scope or boundaries
of the system or equipment being subjected to the ISRD. In many cases this
will be more easily specified by noting the exceptions or exclusions. The
demonstration directive needs to be included in the contract and it is
essential that the R&M clauses in the specification and contract, including
the demonstration directive, are accurate, comprehensive, unambiguous and
consistent with each other. The specification needs to include the details
of exclusions and clarifications which are expanded in the guidance given
in section seven of this Part of the Defence Standard. The contract needs
to cover the complete conduct of the demonstration and conditions should
not be added later, as amendments to the directive, that will either
invalidate or undermine the contract. Where amendments are unavoidable
they should be very carefully considered before implementation.
13 Multiple Contractors
Instances may occur where a prime contractor does not have the
responsibility for the overall reliability achievement of a large
integrated system. For example a ship is a complex weapon system
comprising a number of sub-systems and equipment whose reliability is the
responsibility of the respective equipment PMs and their individual
contractors or sub-contractors. Special arrangements will then be
necessary to complete an ISRD satisfactorily and to manage the allocation
and investigation of faults which will almost certainly cross several
contractor boundaries. These arrangements may include:

(a) additional resources for fault investigations and sentencing;

(b) procedures for fault investigation where multiple contractors are
involved;
(c) arrangements for further sub-system ISRDs or integrated system
reliability demonstrations;
(d) the need to gather data at a more detailed level than the system
reliability may require.
14 Purchaser and Contractor Risks
The parameters of the ISRD need to be clearly set out in both the contract
and the demonstration directive, and the areas of risk for both purchaser
and contractor should be identifiable. The parameters for the ISRD and its
associated definitions, for example for incident, fault, attributable and
non-attributable failure, need to be compatible with the specification,

14
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

14 (Contd)
the R&M programme and the demonstration plan. The statistical risks shall
be evaluated as part of the demonstration plan and the confidence levels
associated with the particular demonstration established. This subject is
considered further in section six.
15 Corrective Action
15.1 Modifications. During a lengthy ISRD, for example on an aircraft,
there may be a need to incorporate modifications for operational or safety
reasons. The effect of such modifications on the rest of the system need
to be considered and methods agreed to attribute any effects, good or bad,
in the overall results. The consequential effect of such modifications
need also to be considered. Specific modifications to improve reliability
during the ISRD will not normally be allowed since this will complicate the
analysis of the actual reliability levels of the equipment in the delivered
state. The aim of the ISRD is to establish the actual achievement of
reliability, not how much better certain modifications might make such
levels.
15.2 Reliability improvements. Nevertheless for some lengthy ISRDs it
will be likely that reliability improvement modifications will be proposed
and possibly available during the period of the ISRD. Some might be simple
and quick to incorporate. Each should be evaluated and if agreement can be
reached on how the embodiment will affect the analysis and results of the
ISRD then a rapid assessment, approval and embodiment procedure should be
available to incorporate such modifications into the equipments concerned.
Liability for the subsequent embodiment of any reliability modifications
needs to be stated in the specification and contract. Any such
modifications should be subject to an agreed method and period of
validation. Such validation should be based on the maximum evidence
available within the demonstration but, where project constraints apply,
validation might be gained by an extension to the demonstration, based on a
multiple of the previously observed mean time, or cycles or rounds etc,
between faults of the failure mode affected by the modification.
Alternatively, a limited demonstration on the immediately affected system
could be considered at the end of the ISRD. It is advisable that the
effectiveness of proposed modifications should be thoroughly proven by
testing on test-rigs, trials equipment, or by prototypes prior to being
authorized for incorporation with equipment taking part in the ISRD. For
short ISRDs, lasting only weeks or a few months, reliability improvements
cannot be allowed as they would cause considerable complications.

15.3 Delayed repair. In some circumstances during the ISRD it may be

expedient to delay repair of a fault which does not affect the overall
serviceability of the system. Repair might jeopardize an already tight
timescale for the ISRD and deferment of the repair might be a sensible
course of action. Care needs to be taken that such action does not
precipitate further faults or degradation of associated systems or
equipments. Provision for such action should be included in the ISRD
directive.

15
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

Section Five. ISRDs Trials and Other Test Methods

16 General
There will be projects for which a full demonstration of reliability under
representative in-Service conditions may be neither practical nor
necessary, but for which some alternative demonstration may be required.
In such cases the guidance given in this Standard should nevertheless be
followed to the maximum extent possible and it should be noted that the
further the demonstration environment and usage are away from that
specified as the in-Service conditions, the less likely it is that the
assessed reliability will represent that achieved in-Service.
17 Pre-Delivery Trials of Production Equipment
In some cases, it is the practice to demonstrate reliability during a
pre-delivery trial of production equipment. An example of this is for some
vehicles where reliability is demonstrated during test-track trials carried
out by the intended user. Such trials should use the principles and
procedures of an ISRD for the reliability assessment elements but would
need to address any applicable differences between the trial environment
and the in-Service environment. Furthermore, the effects of the duration
of the trial on the accuracy of the assessment needs to be carefully
considered.
18 Peacetime Usage
Peacetime usage may be proposed as an alternative to replicating the
specified usage environment. Clearly, before peacetime usage can be
accepted as enabling a representative measure of reliability, the
similarity between the peacetime and specified environments needs to be
confirmed. However, the similarity often exists, for instance with
aircraft and electronic equipment, and extended peacetime use may satisfy
ISRD conditions. In such cases, special care should be taken to address
data collection and validation over the comparatively long timescale of a
peacetime usage demonstration. Data collection procedures will probably
require augmentation. In addition, particular attention should be paid to
factors such as the effect on reliability of the pattern of usage including
periods of storage, configuration control, maintenance procedures, and the
need to prevent use of the equipment outside its specified usage
boundaries. In addition, the timescale needs to be chosen to balance the
conflicting priorities of an early result, which would provide feedback to
influence ongoing production and demonstration accuracy which demands a
long timescale.
19 Combination with Other Methods
19.1 Demonstration of reliability may require combination of data from a
number of trials. This Part of the Standard does not attempt to provide
any mathematical rules for combination of such data. Nevertheless, where
an in–Service element is included in a wider demonstration plan, those
in-Service elements should follow ISRD guidelines.
19.2 Expensive one-shot devices, such as missiles, may have components
tested non-destructively and in isolation, for instance using production
reliability acceptance testing (PRAT) (Def Stan 00-40 Pts 1 and 2 and
Def Stan 00-41 refer). Additionally, some destructive testing of parts of
the system may be completed on a sample basis. In-Service tests of the

16
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

19.2 (Contd)
whole system, inevitably to destruction, can be costly and are often
impractical; such tests may not generate sufficient data for reliability
demonstration purposes. Nevertheless, in-Service firing trials do provide
valuable additional data on system integration and overall reliability and,
consequently, data from such trials should be used to the maximum.
19.3 In some cases, where the required environment cannot otherwise be
reproduced, limited use of testing on a specified rig or specialized test
facility may be necessary. However, due consideration needs to be given to
the limitations of such tests and always recognizing that they are only
simulating the conditions and usage expected in-Service. Care should be
taken to ensure that any interface problems are addressed if the test is
being carried out on only part of a weapon system.

17
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

Section Six. Demonstration Plans

20 General
In the early stages of planning an ISRD, the reliability to be achieved may
be expressed as a quantified value together with the statistical confidence
to which it is to be demonstrated. Figures for sample size, duration and
acceptance criteria may not be possible to quantify precisely at the ITT
stage, but indicative values should always be given. However, the final
ISRD directive needs to contain agreed and precise figures for inclusion in
the contract. The duration is likely to be a compromise between low
figures for economy of time and cost, and high figures for greater
statistical confidence. The higher the reliability to be demonstrated the
greater will be the duration for a given level of confidence. Specialist
R&M advice is always to be sought on the statistical aspects.
21 Statistical Plans
ISRD plans may be either fixed length or sequential. Fixed length
demonstrations are commonly used for ISRDs because the parameters, such as
duration, acceptance criteria and statistical risk (or confidence, see
clause 22) are-most readily understood. A fixed duration (missions, hours,
km etc) helps planning of resources such as manpower and test facilities.
A sequential demonstration plan, on the other hand, allows early
termination if reliability is significantly high or low, thus saving on
resources (Def Stan 00–41 provides further guidance on statistical plans).
MOD and the contractor need to agree the basis of the statistical
interpretations.
22 Confidence Statements
In any reliability demonstration, there are statistical risks to both
contractor and purchaser of "good" equipment failing the demonstration and
"bad" equipment passing. The risks of these undesirable conditions are
termed the contractor’s and purchaser’s risks respectively. These risks
will be taken into account in setting the duration and acceptance criteria.
The purchaser’s risk would be quoted against a reliability related to, and
ideally equal to, the requirement. The contractor’s risk would be quoted
against a higher reliability, related to the level of reliability for which
the contractor will design in order to ensure a good chance of passing the
demonstration and for which, ideally, he has tendered. The values to be
used in the ISRD need to be agreed before award of contract. Care need
also be taken not to specify these reliability and confidence levels at
values which would require a demonstration of larger numbers than the MOD
is prepared to fund or a longer test than programme timescales will allow.
23 Selection of Samples
Limitations on which particular production samples may be included within
the ISRD should be kept to a minimum. Ideally, any delivered production
item may be selected provided it is representative of the standard which
will continue to be used in-Service. Where the production standard varies
(eg production is batched), samples should be drawn from all standards
available at the time of the ISRD.

18
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

Section Seven. Detailed Guidance on Demonstration Plans

24 Fault Definition
Definition of attributable and non-attributable faults is probably the
single most important area of concern. Careful consideration of all
eventualities and the specification of unambiguous criteria is most
important. Reference to the definitions in the original specifications
will be the starting point and no divergence from these definitions and
parameters can be made except for agreed points of clarification.
25 Faults, Failures, Defects, Incidents and Sentencing
The use of the terminology of "faults", "failures" and "defects" need to be
clearly defined. Incidents may not always lead to a fault or defect.
Small faults such as filament replacements and screw replacements need to
be defined as either counting or not counting towards the overall level of
reliability depending on operational and logistic impact. Reference to the
original reliability requirement in the specification will be necessary so
that consistency is maintained. Furthermore, reference to any agreements
achieved during development which have affected the categorization of small
faults should be made. Faults which are rectified by adjustment need also
to be adequately defined. Where they are caused by design, such as the
positioning of micro-switches, they need to be counted; similarly where
poor manufacture or initial setting has caused the need for subsequent
adjustments, then these need also to be counted. Only in cases where
in-Service rectification or maintenance activity causes the requirement for
later adjustment should there be an exception. However, if rectification
tasks result from errors in documentation provided by the contractor, then
until the documentation faults are corrected, the incidents should be
counted. Failures caused by human error in operation or maintenance are
generally non-attributable. However, if the same human error persists then
consideration needs to be given as to whether the fault should be
attributable in particular circumstances and whether any redesign is
warranted. Full records of why each non-attributable fault is so
classified needs to be maintained. Sentencing of all incidents should be
conducted by the assessment team and only where they cannot agree should
the PM be asked to arbitrate at a regular review meeting.
26 No Fault Found (NFF) Items
Equipment users may experience symptoms which appear to indicate a fault
but which, upon investigation, cannot be reproduced and the equipment
passes all relevant diagnostic tests. Such arisings are termed
"no-faults-found". In general, all arisings which indicate a fault are
attributable until proven otherwise but the following should be observed
and clarified for each ISRD:
(a) The depth of investigation which is necessary to prove or disprove the
existence of a fault should be specified.
(b) Once a fault is confirmed and isolated to a particular equipment, in
controlled conditions using agreed test procedures, it would be
inappropriate subsequently to discount that fault if a later depth of
maintenance could no longer reproduce it.

19
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

26 (Contd)
(c) A fault, which is indicated on several occasions within a single
equipment but has not been isolated or rectified, (eg an intermittent
fault, perhaps transferred between host systems by transfer of the
identified equipment) should neither be discounted nor counted as multiple
faults. The preferred option (except perhaps in the case of software) is
to count the fault as a single attributable "undefined" fault pending
further evidence; only final confirmation and isolation of the fault would
provide the necessary evidence to prove or disprove whether a fault is
attributable.
(d) Software related faults will repeat themselves, whenever identical
circumstances are met, until corrected. Each ISRD must specify whether
repeated identical symptoms, attributed to software, are counted as a
single fault or as multiple faults. The advantage of multiple counting is
that it more closely follows the operational effect; this is the preferred
option.
27 Secondary Failures
The definition of secondary failures (such as the failure of a pump due to
an actuator seal failure) needs to be carefully worded to preclude loose
interpretation. An example definition is:
A secondary failure is an event which is caused directly by a fault in
another component or system and is non-attributable except where in-built
protection or warning devices should have prevented the event.
28 Items Under Test
The exact numbers of equipments under test should be specified together
with any selection criteria or consideration of samples from different
batches. Complications may occur with differing modification or build
standards of particular batches and this may lead to disagreements on
reliability levels between differing batches. Nevertheless, it is
important to demonstrate a representative selection of several batches
accepting any penalty of a longer more drawn out ISRD. The sample size
itself needs to be carefully chosen to ensure that results obtained will be
representative for all the batches. For some equipment, such as those
fitted on board ships, the small in-Service population makes this
difficult. Additionally the point at which the equipments are selected
during the production process will also be important.
29 Timing
The timing of an ISRD affects the contractor’s risk. Where a new equipment
design is subject to an ISRD immediately upon first delivery there is a
significant risk that early production problems and user inexperience will
affect the result. Therefore, it may be appropriate to allow in–Service
operation to stabilize for an agreed period before commencing the ISRD. On
the other hand, delay in commencing the ISRD may reduce the subsequent
opportunity to embody improvements, identified as necessary during the
ISRD, into later production items. Individual projects need to determine
the extent, if any, of such settling-in but this period is to be consistent
with other statements regarding contractual timing of achievement, such as

20
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

29 (Contd)
"reliability shall be achieved at first entry to Service". On the other
hand, to defer final payment for too long may be unacceptable to some
contractors. The procedures to be adopted during any settling-in period
should be declared and should include identification and embodiment of
improvements and modifications. Only when any settling-in period is
concluded will the period of stable configuration (no further
modifications) apply as required at clause 15.
30 Exclusions
Any exclusions need to be defined in the contract but should be kept to an
absolute minimum and will address any artificialities imposed during the
ISRD and any constraints likely to be experienced.
31 Environment
The environment for the ISRD needs to be representative of that which was
specified originally. Consideration needs to be given to how much of the
environment, if any, needs to be simulated and the effect of the simulation
in making the demonstration unrepresentative.
32 Support Equipment
The quantities and standards of all support equipment (eg tools, test
equipment, servicing equipment, handling equipment and technical
documentation, including Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)) needs to be
defined.
33 Adjustments
Some servicing or maintenance activity can be defined as adjustment and the
principles for sentencing incidents involving adjustment, and circumstances
in which they are attributable , needs to be clearly laid down.
34 Scheduled Servicing
Routine scheduled servicing tasks will not be counted but faults found
during these activities, which in all other respects fall within the
attributable criteria, will be counted. Faults which can be attributed to
poor scheduled servicing, or induced by scheduled servicing, will not count
unless attributable to unsatisfactory documentation. The agencies
responsible for routine servicing should be specified in the directive with
any instructions for recording faults or defects found during the
servicing.
35 Special Servicing Instructions or Checks
The application of any special servicing instructions or checks will not be
counted as attributable arisings; however, any fault found during such
inspections will be counted.

21
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

36 Built-In-Test (BIT)
The existence of BIT and its effect on overall reliability should be
specified. The failure of BIT itself may also have a serious and
cumulative effect on reliability and the number of incidents. Furthermore,
the inherent effectiveness of BIT to identify faults is subject to an
overall confidence level and reliability in itself. Suitable provision,
therefore, needs to be made to account for, or to discount, BIT errors and
BIT induced faults.
37 Software
Errors in software can produce equipments or systems that do not work as
they should. Generally, software errors can be rectified so that under
identical conditions they will not reoccur. Nevertheless, for every
software error found there may be others which will not be found due to the
time constraints on sample size. It is policy that software errors are
always counted as faults against the system and will therefore be
attributable in the ISRD until they are corrected. Software errors are
also to be reported separately such that their effect on the reliability of
each system or equipment can be assessed.
38 Fault Tracking
Detailed arrangements need to be made for the repair of faulty items.
Adequate tracking procedures and comprehensive fault reports will be
required. Such reports will be required quickly and special handling
procedures may be needed. It is essential that investigation of faults is
undertaken quickly whether it is by in-Service repair organizations or by
the contractor or sub–contractor.
39 Component Handling
39.1 Components removed for whatever reason, and particularly those
removed as faulty, will need special identification. Equipment labels
overstamped with "Equipment X Reliability Demonstration" will assist with
tracking and identification. The assessment team will have to monitor each
component and agree from the paperwork whether the fault is attributable or
not. Depending on the number of components and the repair agencies
involved it may be practical - for the demonstration only - to have the
faults investigated at a single appropriate repair centre. Consideration
should be given in such circumstances to special handling and monitoring by
MOD(PE)QA staff. The contractor should be entitled to be represented at
any in-Service repair centre; similarly MOD(PE) should be represented at
any contractor’s facility. All evidence of component faults should be
retained until the end of the demonstration and the fulfillment of all
contractual arrangements.
39.2 For ships undergoing ISRDs at sea, investigation of faults by a
repair centre ashore may cause unacceptable delay and such constraints need
to be recognized. However, the advantages of a common standard of
investigation and the ability to have a full investigation ashore, with all
interested parties present, provides the most effective basis for
investigation.

22
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

39.3 Disposal of components and the necessity for contractor visibility of

removed components needs to be addressed and balanced against the
requirements of the Service. Components may be required by the Project
Manager to allocate appropriate contractor or sub-contractor responsibility
without detracting from the continuation of the ISRD.
40 Spares
The spares support for ISRD activity should be provided over and above the
normal DEFCON 82 or Advance Order List (AOL) provision. Such action is
essential and will prevent items being lost into the "investigation loop"
thereby reducing repair pools.
41 Preparatory Work
Preparatory work for the ISRD itself will be required with both the user
and the contractor. Early discussions with both will ensure that all
actions are complete or in hand for the start of the ISRD.
42 Effect on User
The ISRD will place a considerable load on the user and all efforts need to
be made to minimize the effects and any disruption to other tasks.

23
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

Section Eight. Data Classification and Analysis

43 Precedents
In any reliability programme the fault criteria needs to be agreed prior to
contract. However, at this early stage the final configuration of the
equipment, and any impact on reliability, may not be fully understood.
During design and development further clarification of the fault criteria
is therefore possible and due regard of such precedents need to be taken
into account. Therefore, it may be necessary, before the start of the
ISRD, to amend the demonstration directive and fault criteria previously
agreed.
44 Analysis
The analysis of the result for contractual purposes should be
straightforward if all the rules have been clearly established at the
outset. It is important to consider the data which may be of value to the
contractor or the in-Service manager should corrective action be needed.
In cases where the demonstration was not conducted in accordance with the
plan (sometimes for very good reasons) reliability specialist advice should
be sought to determine the best method of analysis or the need to repeat
any aspects as appropriate.
45 Data Gathering
Consideration needs to be given to the scope and detail of the data
required during the demonstration. Special data gathering procedures
should be considered and whether there is a need for automated data
gathering of any kind. Some demonstrations may benefit from the use of
specialist pieces of equipment such as data gathering units (DGUs), which
may be hand-held, for the input of the required data. DGUs can speed up
the collection and analysis of the data particularly if the assessment team
are not required at the equipment site permanently (eg for shipborne
demonstrations).
46 Documentation
For some ISRDs existing documentation may provide the necessary information
but in most instances extra information, such as operating conditions, time
and temperatures, will be required. This requirement means that additional
documentation will need to be raised for the assessment team. All
incidents, whether attributable or not, are to be recorded. In many field
situations the documentation and data may have to be forwarded to the
assessment team and this should be done as quickly as possible. The
complete data, once they are available to the assessment team, are then to
be evaluated by them, typically within three days. Any disputes not able
to be resolved by both parties of the assessment team are then to be passed
to the demonstration coordinator for resolution.
47 Recording Procedure
In most cases, other than single installations where few faults are
expected, the use of automated data processing (ADP) methods will be
extremely advantageous. If ADP is used, ideally a file should be
maintained for each equipment in the sample. Relevant additional
information is to be added where available or as it occurs. Any relevant
maintenance, servicing data or records are also to be added as necessary.

24
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

47 (Contd)
For each planned mission, battlefield day or period of operation,
additional information will need to be recorded either by the user or
preferably by the assessment team. For instance, it may be highly relevant
to record data not normally recorded such as weather conditions; recording
of such data should not adversely affect the normal operation by the user.
When faults arise the assessment team will either need to track the
relevant maintenance card, to extract from it further information, or
arrange for the relevant information to be made available or recorded.
Examples of the type of information required to establish comprehensive
records are at annex C.

25
Blank Page
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX A

Reliability Panel Activity for an ISRD

A.1 Whilst the following list is given under relevant panel activity each
project may organize its panel activity in different ways.
A.2 Panel A/Concept Panel Activity

(a) consider benefits/constraints;

(b) evaluate all types of contractual conditions;
(c) consultation with PM, OR sponsor, ILS manager, Contracts Branch and
industry;
(d) consultation with specialist R&M cell;
(e) discussion with user - who? how? where? and when? Resources required
and impact on user;
(f) environmental difficulties, operational or usage problems, need for
artificial conditions;

(g) arrange for support services and facilities even though ISRD is years
away;
(h) agree with contracts staff the procedures for ISRD milestone payments
and for withholding payments for any non-achievement;

(j) agree draft ISRD directive to issue with ITT;

(k) tender assessment.
A.3 Panel B/Project Panel Activity
(a) appoint demonstration coordinator;
(b) finalize directive;
(c) agree contract including specific conditions, incentives and withholds
for ISRD;
(d) arrange resources and prepare plan to ensure everything in place at
suitable time before needed;
(e) personnel training and involvement in any pre-delivery trials or
tests;
(f) agree and arrange details of fault component handling and
investigation.
A.4 Panel C/In-Service Activity
(a) use ISRD final report and MOD(PE) Project Manager’s demonstration
review as the baseline for subsequent in-Service R&M monitoring;

A-1
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX A (Concluded)

A.4 (Contd)
(b) advice on any significant deterioration in R&M performance from the
ISRD baseline, particularly with respect to original specification;
(c) monitoring the effect of modifications on R&M performance.

A-2
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B

Outline Demonstration Directive

B.1 The following outline demonstration directive is only one suggested
way of laying down the necessary authoritative statements. There is no
particular format and each project should adapt it or tailor it to suit
particular needs.
B.2 Some paragraphs give a suggested form of words (in plain text), but
others simply give guidance on the range and scope of the content required
(emboldened).
C A U T I O N
B.3 Users of this documents are cautioned against copying paragraphs
verbatim. Each project will be different and will require thought to
ensure statements are appropriate, relevant and necessary.

B-1
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Continued)

IN-SERVICE
EQUIPMENT XX MK 1 RELIABILITY & MAINTAINABILITY
DEMONSTRATION DIRECTIVE
References:
A. ...............................
B. ...............................
INTRODUCTION
1. Reference should be made to any general contract condition such as
part of the contract price being withheld until satisfaction of the ISRD.
References A, B etc will detail the published contract, specification and
Defence Standard 00-43 and each reference should be elaborated in this
paragraph.
2. A short summary should be provided of what reliability requirements
are to be demonstrated and how this will be done.
3. A statement of who will conduct the demonstration and where it will be
held is required together with any general caveats. The designation of the
units involved may be made specifically or generally as "the Demonstration
Unit".
4. A statement should be included to the effect that "the demonstration
shall not, except with agreement of the demonstration unit, cause any
disruption to the fulfilment of peacetime training or maintenance tasks".
The specification of definitions used should be included here by reference
to an Annex.
AIM
5. A clear and concise aim of the directive is given, eg The aim of this
directive is to define and explain the procedures which are to be used for
conducting the equipment XX Mk 1 R&M In-Service Reliability Demonstration.

GENERAL
6. The in-Service achievement will be assessed using data recorded under
normal RAF/Army/RN regulations on Forms . . . . . . (or as otherwise specified),
using approved maintenance procedures, tools and equipment and with the
maintenance undertaken by trained personnel (including civilian tradesmen
employed by the Service, or others as specified, eg suitably qualified
aircrew).
7. The level of reliability to be demonstrated will determine the overall
duration of the demonstration. A settling-in period of XXXX hrs/miles etc
in RAF/Army/RN service will be accumulated, during which time, experience
will be gained in equipment operation and maintenance, before the main
Reliability Demonstration of XXXX hours/miles etc will be commenced.
During the settling-in period training and trial-runs will be undertaken
and demonstration procedures validated.

B-2
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Continued)

ADMINISTRATION
8. The constitution of an assessment team will be covered together with
appointment of the Demonstration Coordinator if necessary.
Responsibilities and authority vested in the coordinator and the team
should be briefly covered. A statement of who is responsible for manning
the posts should be stated.
9. The timetable for the demonstration should be expanded together with
arrangements for selection and formation of the team.
10. Any special arrangements for financial support should be identified
together with identification of assistance from in-Service Units and
organizations. Details and arrangements for the provision of particular
administration support should be listed, eg office space, power supplies,
furniture, telephones, fax, typing support, photocopying facilities,
stationery, computer support and consumables, protective clothing,
stopwatches.
11. Further details should be given for each item where necessary. For
example, the computer support should be specified to include suitable
software for sorting the data and presenting reports, ie database,
wordprocessing, spreadsheet, graphics and desk-top publishing.
12. A statement is required to allow the assessment team free access to
all relevant equipment and records in both the Service and, subject to
contract limitations, the contractor and sub-contractor.
13. The Service personnel on the assessment team shall be administratively
controlled by ABC (eg Senior Unit Engineer) and XYZ, (eg Service Equipment
Manager) who will act as the interface between them and the Demonstration
Director or Project Manager.
14. The contractor’s staff on the assessment team shall be
administratively and functionally controlled by the Product Support Manager
of X-Y-Z Company Limited, who will act as the interface between them and
ABC, (para 13).
15. It may be necessary to state that the team shall be fully manned
during and for a particular period after the demonstration. There will be
a need for the preparation of a final report and possibly other
post–demonstration duties.
ASSESSMENT TEAM TASKING
16. The assessment team’s primary task is to plan, monitor and record the
data from the R&M demonstration. In addition, however, the team shall:
a. Provide representation on the MOD Project Panel.
b. Investigate R&M actions arising from entry to service conference.
c. Make recommendations for improvements to maintenance procedures,
publications etc.

B-3
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Continued)

17. Additional tasks as directed by the Project Manager or demonstration

coordinator should be listed provided that the demonstration is not
adversely affected.
18. Any exclusions for involvement by the team in unit training or
exercise should be noted.
PRE-DEMONSTRATION TRIAL
19. Before the demonstration is conducted a trial should be arranged for a
set period to evaluate the procedures to be used in the demonstration. The
scope and depth of this trial shall be specified and should be
representative.
20. The use of identical procedures needs to be stressed. A report should
be published by the team which identifies the notional results against all
the specification R&M requirements and highlighting any shortcomings in
procedures which require solution before commencement of the main
demonstration.
RELIABILITY DEMONSTRATION
21. The numerical reliability requirements to be demonstrated shall be
stated:
a ..................
b...............
c. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22. Direction is to be given for the team to investigate all defects or
faults ensuring that the diagnosis recorded is correct. This
responsibility must extend to all lines of servicing. Direction to the MOD
Project Manager and to the contractor, is to be given to ensure full and
free access to the technical information required by the team as relevant
to the demonstration. It may be necessary to state that every effort
should be made by the MOD Project Manager and the contractor to limit any
adverse effects of any pre-existing contractual condition on such data
requirements.
VENUE & TIMING
23. Specify the starting criteria in terms of dates and times. The venue
or venues should be specified.
24. Details of the length or duration should be stated. If necessary a
later stop point might be noted if necessary to agree the efficiency of any
modifications.
25. The population of equipments at the Demonstration Unit and venue is to
be specified. All equipments that have been accepted into Service should
be available for inclusion in the population.
26. It may be necessary to note that if certain equipments are detached
from the unit for operational reasons they are still to be retained in the
demonstration population and the provisions of the directive still apply.
B-4
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Continued)

27. Any procedures should be stated for dealing with an equipment which
for any reason has to be removed from the demonstration, including
procedures for re–admittance.
28. Procedures for dealing and counting on equipment undergoing periodic
or scheduled maintenance activity until it finishes that period of
maintenance should be specified. Defects or faults found are still to be
counted to the demonstration.

EQUIPMENT AND RESOURCES

29. The standard and quantities of both main and support equipments should
be specified and any considerations for GFE or Company Furnished Equipment
(CFE) included.
SENTENCING DATA
30. The clear definition of a fault or defect is vitally important.
Rather than try to provide a single definition one way is to provide full
information on incidents and exclusions allowed. All incidents together
with any corrective maintenance activity will result in a fault or-defect
and together with the corrective maintenance action, are to be recorded on
Forms X, Y and Z. All incidents are attributable to the demonstration
except where proven to be in the following categories:
a. Faults in the GFE listed in the procurement specification.
Equipment listed as CFE shall be attributable.
b. Secondary faults directly caused by a fault in other component or
system except where in-built protection or warning devices have
prevent such an event.
c. No fault could be found at any depth of subsequent servicing.
Notwithstanding this exclusion, if the fault symptoms are reported
more than once on the same equipment without fault or defect
confirmation or rectification, a cross-reference link shall be entered
in the demonstration computer database and a single attributable fault
shall be assumed and counted against the first arising, unless and
until other evidence is available.
d. Proven misuse or operator error except where such error is the
result of incorrect information supplied by the contractor.
e. External impact or natural hazard except where the design
specification includes protection against such hazard.
f. Operation outside agreed limitations as described in the
specification and contract.
g. Minor faults or defects, taking less than (eg 5) minutes to
rectify, to an agreed exclusion list. The exclusion list shall be
published by the Project Manager or Demonstration Coordinator together
with any resultant modification to the requirements specified in
para 21 of this Directive.
h. Scheduled maintenance. However faults or defects found during
scheduled maintenance shall be attributable unless excluded elsewhere.
B-5
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Continued)

i. Replacement of lifed items operated beyond their agreed life

recommendation or limit.
k. Faults or defects which are rectified by adjustment shall be
attributable unless excluded elsewhere. Subsequent adjustments
necessary to achieve successful operation are not attributable.
l. Faults or defects identified prior to the commencement of the
demonstration, or during operation of the equipment outside the
demonstration (para 27), and recorded as "acceptable to be deferred
for rectification", shall not be attributable. Similar recording of
an "acceptable deferred defect or fault " during the demonstration but
not able to be rectified during the demonstration period will be
recorded as attributable unless it can be proved to be excluded.
31. The user may, for operational reasons, require to fit temporary
modifications which may not be fleet embodied or to an agreed or approved
standard. These modifications will not invalidate the demonstration.
However, the extent of the effect of these modifications on the reliability
of the equipment is to be assessed by the assessment team and any fault or
defect arising on the modified items or caused by them are to be
discounted.
MAINTAINABILITY DEMONSTRATION
32. The Maintainability Demonstration details may be specified at this
point in the Directive if the demonstration of maintainability is part of
the contract. The detail of the content of these paragraphs is contained
in Annex B to Part 2 of Defence Standard 00-43 (which will be issued after
Part 1).
NOTE: Paragraphs 32-52 reserved for use if necessary.
GENERAL RECORDING
53. Details of all the incidents, attributable or not, that occur during
the demonstration shall be recorded on MOD Forms X, Y and Z. Copies of the
forms shall be taken and retained by the assessment team. The forms
required are included at Annexes.
54. Identifying details of each form and subsequent investigations,
including the following, shall be entered on the computer database:
a. Equipment reference number.
b. Running hours or usage, eg hours, distance, rounds fired etc.
c. Climatic or environmental conditions.
d. Description of fault or defect.
e. Effect on mission.
f. Action taken.

g. System identification.

B-6
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Continued)

h. Part No and Serial No of removed or replaced item(s).

i. Elapsed time data if applicable for removed and refitted
component.

j. Man-hours recorded for repair (maintainability reasons).

k. Man-hours, if amended for demonstration purposes (maintainability
reasons).
l. Results of further investigation.
m. Decisions on sentencing: attributable, non-attributable, pending
further investigation, modification discount (non-attributable),
attributable (modification pending), transferred to deferred log.
n. Narrative justification for sentencing decision.
o. Other information.

p. Cross-reference to other related documents or equipments.

q. Activity or operation code.

55. Entries in the demonstration computer database against items k, l, m
and n above shall not be erased but new information may be added.
56. Total equipment operating hours for the demonstration population are
to be recorded on the database daily.

SENTENCING
57. All faults and defects are to be assessed by the assessment team.
Using the definitions and exclusions given in this Directive together with
any prescribed publications such as JSP . . . . . , the team using its best
judgement will sentence each incident as being "attributable".
"non-attributable" or defer sentencing as "pending further investigation"
or "transferred to deferred log". In long demonstrations, modifications
may have to be allowed in some circumstances and will need information in
the Directive. Faults or defects which are otherwise attributable but have
a modification embodied which is agreed to prevent such faults or defects,
shall be sentenced as "modification discount (non-attributable)".
Sentencing must be a continuous activity. Faults or defects against which
an unproven modification is pending but which are otherwise attributable
will remain so until their effectiveness and integration is confirmed,
agreed and costs of embodiment apportioned. For administrative purposes
they may be grouped together as "attributable modification pending".
58. Where unanimous agreement cannot be reached between assessment team
members, the appropriate details will be considered for arbitration by the
MOD Project Manager and the contractor’s project support manager.

B-7
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Continued)

59. If, notwithstanding the definitions, exclusions and procedures

contained in the Directive, other arisings occur which need additional
interpretation, then clarification shall be published under the joint
signature of the MOD PE Project Manager and the contractor’s project
support manager. This clarification will then be applied to the
Demonstration as though contained in this Directive.
60. Any incident sentenced as "pending" or "transferred" shall be resolved
by [one month] after the end of the demonstration as “attributable” or
"non-attributable" based on the best evidence available at that time. In
the absence of any contradictory evidence, all such arisings shall be
sentenced as "attributable".
MODIFICATIONS
61. In general modifications during the demonstrations are not to be
allowed (Section 4, para 15 of this Defence Standard). For long
demonstrations where modifications are allowed, a clarification statement
might be included here. For instance - the contract allows modifications
to be proposed and, subject to agreement by the MOD(PE) Project Manager,
embodied to improve the maintainability and thereby achieve reductions in
in-Service costs and improvement in operational availability. However,
agreement and embodiment of such modifications will be allowed only in well
justified circumstances and will require clear proof of effectiveness to
the MOD(PE) Project Manager’s satisfaction and agreement on apportionment
of the funding of embodiment costs.
62. Previous occurrences of failures may be discounted from the
demonstration after the efficacy of the modifications is proven to the
satisfaction of the MOD(PE) Project Manager. Such proof will include a
significant period (include definition of period if possible) of in-Service
operation. If this cannot be achieved within the specified demonstration
period then the period may be extended at no cost to the MOD, as necessary
for the equipment concerned.
63. Modifications which significantly reduce (include definition if
possible) the occurrence without totally eliminating the fault or defect,
shall, when proven to the satisfaction of the MOD(PE) Project Manager or
demonstration coordinator, have an amended fault or defect rate applied as
if applying to the whole demonstration period.
64. Modifications, including those to publications, tools and support
equipment which improve maintainability may similarly have the maintenance
effort of previous arisings re-assessed. A revised man-hour rate (etc)
will be agreed and retrospectively applied.
65. Any modifications accepted by the MOD(PE) Project Manager shall be
incorporated at no cost to the MOD into all equipment supplied under the
contract and, where appropriate, into all spares holdings, publications,
tools and support equipment.
66. Other Modifications. Any modifications embodied for safety or
operational reasons should be noted as being essential. However the effect
of these modifications on the R&M Demonstration results shall be assessed
and, if required by the MOD(PE) and contractor, an adjustment may be made
to the R&M results.

B-8
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Continued)

COMPONENT HANDLING

67. All unserviceable components removed from the equipment shall be

returned to a dedicated store. This shall apply to all items including
small, normally disposable items.
68. All unserviceable equipment needs to be identified according to
specified practical Service arrangements. Labels should be affixed and
overstamped with "Equipment ABC Reliability Demonstration". The label must
be affixed to the component at all times. A copy of the label shall be
provided and retained by the assessment team. Any special reporting forms
(eg for serious defects) are to be similarly overstamped.
69. Components within the Augmented Logistic Support (ALS) System. For
equipments subjects to ALS, the central store is to be detailed as
responsible for coordination and tracking of investigations on defective
components. The assessment team is to monitor closely the components
passing into the ALS store in order to reach agreement on diagnosis. Items
classified by the ALS store filter as defective or requiring further
investigation shall be considered defective pending any contradictory
evidence provided by the contractor.
70. Components not subject to ALS Repair. All components are to be
returned to the ALS store for record purposes. The assessment team shall,
for components not subject to ALS repair, monitor and track their progress
to different levels of repair. Any special handling methods to effect this
are to be specified here together with the need for copies of paperwork to
be provided to the assessment team.
TRAINING
71. Training for the assessment team members must be specified here
together with training needs to have been effected well in advance of the
start of the demonstration.
72. Any need for the contractor to provide an equipment and/or a training
course for members of the team must be specified. Special requirements for
the course such as training on all systems and fault diagnosis should be
specified.
73. The MOD(PE) Project Manager shall arrange a course for the
demonstration team in basic reliability theory and techniques.
74. The MOD(PE) Project Manager shall arrange other relevant courses
specified here (eg computer courses).
75. Funding and arrangements for payment for specified training will be
noted.
REVIEW MEETINGS

76. Regular Review Meetings shall be held by the MOD(PE) Project Manager
and attended by the assessment team, the host unit, the service equipment
manager, the contractor (and others as specified here). Frequency and
place should be noted together with noting the MOD(PE) Project Manager’s
responsibility to chair and provide a secretary for the meeting.

B-9
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX B (Concluded)

77. The Review Meeting will review progress of the demonstration and, in
particular, shall consider any incidents with disputed or unclear
sentencing together with any modification proposals with R&M implications.
REPORTS
78. Regular reports shall be prepared and published by the assessment team
throughout the demonstration and preliminary activities. Frequency and
timing of reports should be specified together with their content. A
listing may be given here of subjects to be covered. For instance:
a. A summary of all incidents giving the sentencing classification
and rectification man–hours.
b. Current values of achieved R&M using the data so far collected and
quoted against the requirement originally specified.
c. Details and proposed solutions to any observed problems.
d. Plan of future activity.
e. Summary of any other team activity.
79. A final report shall be published within (X) months of the end of the
demonstration. The report is submitted and received by the MOD(PE) Project
Manager and the contractor and be used as a basis for agreement of
contractual compliance.
80. The MOD(PE) Project Manager will publish a Demonstration Review,
drawing as necessary on the Final Team Report, the experience of all
participants and any related activities. Strengths and weaknesses will be
covered by way of recommendations to future projects and central staffs.
The review shall have no contractual significance but a timescale for
publication should be noted.

SUMMARY
81. It may be useful to provide a short summary of the most important
points of the arrangements for the demonstration. For example, where, when
and how, and noting the final report which will form the basis for evidence
of contractual compliance. A summary of the likely remedies, in the event
of failing the demonstration, should be included (cross–reference should be
made to the appropriate clause in the contract).

B-10
 DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX C

Type of Information to be Recorded During an ISRD

C.1 Different equipments and types of ISRD will have differing needs for
data to be recorded.
C.2 Each piece of equipment being demonstrated should be allocated its own
computer file. Basic historic and reference information on each equipment
will be required as follows:

(a) serial numbers and identifiers;

(b) maintenance and servicing records to date;
(c) usage and counts already achieved;
(d) relevant modification state.
C.3 For each demonstrated mission, battlefield day or operating session
the following types of information may be required:
(a) battlefield day serial number, mission profile and type or designation
of session;

(b) role or programme;

(c) duration;
(d) climatic and environmental conditions;
(e) reported faults found between mission or since last part of
demonstration;
(f) details of those faults not confirmed.
C.4 For all faults found during the demonstration, comprehensive data will
be required. Examples of the type of information likely to be required by
the assessment team, which will allow them to properly collate the results,
are as follows:
(a) originator reference number or serial number of work;
(b) date and time;
(c) equipment serial number;
(d) usage;
(e) reported symptom of fault;
(f) affected system;

(g) faulty item description if known;

(h) faulty item part number and serial number;

C-1
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1
ANNEX C (Concluded)

C.4 (Contd)
(i) faulty item elapsed time indicator (ETI) reading or usage meter;

(j) replacement item part number and serial number;

(k) replacement ETI or usage meter reading;

(l) installed position/zone/circuit reference;

(m) fault details;
(n) when/how found;
(o) mission effect or effect on system;

(p) safety effect;

(q) other information as specified by the demonstration coordinator.

C-2
DEF STAN 00-43 (PART 1)/1

© Crown Copyright 1993 This Standard may be fully reproduced

except for sale purposes. The
Published by and obtainable from: following conditions must be observed:
Ministry of Defence 1 The Royal Coat of Arms and the
Directorate of Standardization publishing imprint are to be
Kentigern House omitted.
65 Brown Street 2 The following statement is to be
GLASGOW G2 8EX inserted on the cover:
'Crown Copyright. Reprinted by
Tel No: 041-248 7890 (name of organization) with the
permission of Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office.'
Requests for commercial reproduction
should be addressed to MOD Stan 1,
Kentigern House, 65 Brown Street,
Glasgow G2 8EX

The following Defence Standard file reference relates to the work on this
Standard D/D Stan/350/02/12.
Contract Requirements
When Defence Standards are incorporated into contracts users are
responsible for their correct application and for complying with contract
requirements.
Revision of Defence Standards
Defence Standards are revised when necessary by the issue either of
amendments or of revised editions. It is important that users of Defence
Standards should ascertain that they are in possession of the latest
amendments or editions. Information on all Defence Standards is contained
in Def Stan 00-00 (Part 3) Section 4, Index of Standards for Defence
Procurement - Defence Standards Index published annually and supplemented
periodically by Standards in Defence News. Any person who, when-making use
of a Defence Standard encounters an inaccuracy or ambiguity is requested to
notify the Directorate of Standardization without delay in order that the
matter may be investigated and appropriate action taken.

92/60005