CrossTalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering. Volume 20, Number 1
In August 2006, the 402nd Software Maintenance Group became a full-fledged member of the depot maintenance fraternity by subjecting itself to a Unit Compliance Inspection based on the same checklists as the aircraft, electronics, and commodities groups. In effect, we were breaking new ground we had...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Report |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | In August 2006, the 402nd Software Maintenance Group became a full-fledged member of the depot maintenance fraternity by subjecting itself to a Unit Compliance Inspection based on the same checklists as the aircraft, electronics, and commodities groups. In effect, we were breaking new ground we had always relied on the robustness of our Level 5 CMMI processes as a reason to be exempt from the standard Air Force maintenance instructions and checklists that our compatriots used. For our core business area (development and maintenance of operational flight programs and automatic test equipment software) that was definitely the case. Our work is centered on processes, not tasks. Our software engineers do not use work control documents nor do our technicians require special skills qualification. So what do we have in common, and why did we examine our compliance with policy and procedures that were developed for a hardware maintenance environment? The answer is simple: We use tools, equipment, material, and technical data just like everyone else. Air Force policy on tools is designed to both prevent foreign object damage and to reduce long term costs with better inventory control. Our software integration laboratories use equipment that requires periodic maintenance, calibration, and clear accountability. Material, whether bench stock, shop stock, or floating spares, is better managed when it is sorted, labeled, and regularly inventoried. Finally, technical data can never be accurate if it is not kept current and labeled appropriately. |
---|