On some properties of a reliability growth planning model

DoD Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 11-003-Reliability Analysis, Planning, Tracking, and Reporting, March 21, 2011 [1], applies to all major DoD developmental acquisition programs. This DTM requires that reliability growth curves (RGC) for such programs be included in the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) at Milestone A, and be updated in the Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) beginning at Milestone B. The RGC is to “reflect the reliability growth strategy and be employed to plan, illustrate, and report reliability growth.” Additionally, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (ASA(ALT)) issued a Memorandum dated June 26, 2011[2], addressing the subject “Improving the Reliability of U.S. Army Materiel Systems.” This document states that “Program Managers (PMs) of all Acquisition Category I (ACAT I) systems and for ACAT II systems where the sponsor has determined reliability to be an attribute of operational importance shall place reliability growth planning curves in the SEP, TEMP, and Engineering and Manufacturing (EMD) contracts and ensure that U.S. Army systems are resourced to accomplish this requirement.” The ASA(ALT) document stipulates that “Reliability growth planning is quantified and reflected through a reliability growth planning curve using the Planning Model based on Projection Methodology (PM2).” The document also states “Where warranted by unique system characteristics, the Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC), in consultation with the Project Manager (PM), may specify an alternative reliability growth planning method.”