CRYING NEED OF QUALITY ASSURANCE IN DEFENCE EQUIPMENTS

CRYING NEED OF QUALITY ASSURANCE IN DEFENCE EQUIPMENTS         Irrespective of  the field in which an equipment is used, quality assurance becomes a key consideration for the manufacturer, maintainer and the user. While the manufacturer is concerned about the credibility  of the product – both in the short as well as in the long term […]

CRYING NEED OF QUALITY ASSURANCE IN DEFENCE EQUIPMENTS

        Irrespective of  the field in which an equipment is used, quality assurance becomes a key consideration for the manufacturer, maintainer and the user. While the manufacturer is concerned about the credibility  of the product – both in the short as well as in the long term  and the maintainer is concerned about the  optimum output of the product at all stages of the equipment’s life, the final buck stops at the user who is most affected in the triangular matrix of the manufacturer – maintainer and the user. The issue of quality becomes the most important for the defence equipments   as it not only affects the human lives adversely in case of failures but  it also becomes the main cause of adversial fallouts in the battlefield. There is no dispute about the need of quality assurance at all stages of the equipment’s life but it has to be worked upon to ensure that it meets the user’s requirement to the fullest.

      With technological advancements and  awareness of the best practices elsewhere, quality assurance is possible relatively more easily these days. This article will look at some of the challenges and come out with some suggestions to handle these challenges to ensure high degree of quality in the defence equipment domain. Unlike for the equipments in civil domain, norms for the defence equipments during peace and war may be at variance at certain times.

The Challenges

     Defence forces have always been concerned about the quality assuranceat all stages of the equipment life both during peace and war. With passage of time , it has been observed that this facet needs  more diligence to adopt the better models which will not only result in higher mission reliability but better and enhanced user satisfaction. Some of the ‘areas of concern’ are as under:

.Country Specific Norms. Indian defence equipment inventory has equipment from the different countries. In absence of universal quality standards, countries follow different quality norms in No of cases. Even when the country attains full indigenization after few decades, certain components may still be sourced from outside the country and therefore, this issue will persist unless all countries in the world adopt universal quality control norms in due course of time.

.Limited Role of Instruments/ Automation. There are various stages at which quality standards are checked/inspected including at the entry point at the maintainer’s premises as well as at the exit point irrespective of the level. While instruments/ gauges/ other tools are used to check the quality specifications but full automation including absence of ‘Built in Test Equipment’(BITE) in No of cases forces human intervention and thus resultant compromise on quality parameters due to manual limitation and inherent subjective approach.

.Geographically Dispersed Vendors. In large No of cases especially in advanced and large equipments, No of vendors contribute in someway or the other. These vendors are geographically dispersed significantly resulting in varying control on the quality checks. Such a situation results not only in the avoidable delays but also has significant adverse impact on the qualitative output as well.

.Absence of Robust Linear Checks. In absence of fully automated quality checks, the maintainers invariably execute MRO activities spread over multiple stages. Each stage must audit the quality output of the preceding stage as only then the highest standards of quality control can be ensured. Invariably, the system is not as robust as it should be, thus affecting the quality.

.Subjectivity of the Models Adopted for Quality Checks. There are various models  for quality assurance each having its strength and weaknesses. One of these models include mutual checks wherein one team checks the quality output of the other team and vice-versa. As against the mutual  reciprocal checks, the variation also includes the rotating checks. The other method includes each member of the skilled force is ISO qualified and in the process ensures quality in the portion  he or she works.  Another method relates to what is practiced in our defence forces and in that quality control is undertaken through DGQA , an organization external to the maintainers. A deliberate method suited to Indian eco-system has to be adopted, of course clubbed with comprehensive automation.

.Control and Vigilance. It is very important that no deviations beyond laid down tolerance be accepted except in the case of war that too in the cases where these don’t jeopardize the individual’s safety / operator’s safety. The seriousness needed is much more for the airborne or the waterborne systems/ platforms.

.Absense of Suitable HR. Quality assurance is key to mission reliable equipment in the defence forces and in turn, mission reliable equipments are key to winning the battles and ultimately the war.It is therefore essential that HR component not be reduced or compromised either in Nos or in skill sets. Investments in enhancing skill sets or in modernizing are the basis for highest Return on Investment(ROI).

.Unrealistic Goal Setting. While target setting is an essential aspect of the organizational functioning but at times, these tend towards compromising quality.

And these are not the only measures / shortfalls. There are many more aspects which hamper the quality assurance of the highest order. Even the miniscule reason has to be analysed and fixed to attain higher standards of quality control. It is now essential to highlight as to how the quality assurance can be enhanced in the defence forces. Some of these could be as under:

.Enhanced Operational Focus on Mission Reliable Equipment. The entire approach at the apex level as well as at each hierarchical level has to change towards the contribution made by the equipments in winning the wars. This will be evident from all the wars/ conflicts India participated or other contemporary conflicts the world over. Focus has to shift from the garage availability to mission reliable equipment availability. With the shift in focus, importance of quality assurance will automatically emerge and corrective measures will be taken where needed.

.Addressing the Raised Concerns. Eight major causes have been highlighted while doing the concern analysis above. There is an urgent need to address these concerns on priority and in totality  to enhance the quality threshold in the defence equipment.

.Realistic Approach. In the cases where human safety is  involved and 100 percent mission reliability is needed, the equipment acceptance could be classified as vital . No deviations are to be accepted. In case human safety is not involved and the equipment can still function reasonably, it could be considered essential and be under close supervision of maintainers. These aspects become more important under battlefield conditions where ideal spares and other wherewithal needed by the maintainers are not available and therefore, a ‘battlefield quality index’ could be thought of in such situations . For example, even if a non standard firing pin has to be used for firing the weapon without affecting the safety of the individual, it has to be accepted.

.Enhanced Automation. This is the key of quality assurance. Besides investing in latest test equipments and instruments, these must be automated to ensure the quality check of very highest order.

. Remote Diagnostics.  Institution of remote diagnostics will help to in bringing expert knowledge and solutions to geographically inaccessible as well dispersed locations. It needs to become a norm rather than an exception.

.High Precision Standards. The standards should have no or a very narrow band of deviations to be acceptable. These must be documented and must be measurable objectively. The results must be inserted into the equipment logbook.

. Third Party Checks.  In addition to automation, third party independent checks play a very important role in assuring quality. However, keeping a check on these entities is also needed at times .The concept of inspecting the inspectors is very relevant.

.Performance Based Quality Assurance.  Equipment should be subjected to 100 percent testing for its stated capability after random selection as only this model gives the required mission reliability.

.Comprehensive Quality Approach. When a particular equipment has to be put through ISO9110 or any other standards as applicable, each of its components/ spares must also meet the same standards or related standards of equal value.

.Battlefield Deviations. These should be accepted with relevant entries in the equipment logbooks if these don’t affect human safety adversely. Commanders/ maintainers must take these decisions under battlefield conditions.

There is a need that each stakeholder becomes conscious of the inescapable need of the quality assurance at all levels as only then an eco-system of mission reliable equipment will prevail which is key to winning the battles /war. The recommendations covered are the important ones  and by no standards , absolutely exhaustive. Once the mission reliable equipment is included as part of our battle winning strategy, everything else will fall in place including the quality assurance.

Note: The article has been crafted from a roundtable discussion at mrodigestforums.

Share via:

Ashok Kumar

Commissioned in AAD, switched to Gen Cadre. Commanded a fmn with resp – LAC . MD ECHS . Veteran -31 Oct21 three Masters and MPhil & PhD in Def studies. Def expert