European Defence Standards Reference System

Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

EDSTAR - European Defence Standards Reference System

EG09 — Armoured Land Vehicle Technology Best Practice Standard Recommendations

Brussels12-MAY-2015 Language: ENGLISH Secretariat: AFNOR

Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

Table of Contents

Page

0 LIST OF MEMBERER OF THE EDSTAR GROUP EG 09 5

1 INTRODUCTION 6 1.1 Standardisation framework highlights 6 1.2 Standardisation processes specific to Armoured Fighting Vehicles 6

2 REFERENCES AND TERMINOLOGY 8 2.1 Acronyms 8 2.2 Glossary and Terminology 10 2.3 Specific definitions from LAVOSAR (open systems networks) 13

3 SCOPE 15 3.1 Initial work references 15 3.2 Identification of vehicle systems 15 3.2.1 Horizontal Standards 15 3.2.2 Vertical Standards 15

4. RATIONALE FOR SELECTING A STANDARD/STANDARDS-LIKE DOCUMENT AS “BEST PRACTICE” 17 4.1. Adopted work process 17 4.2 Reduction Process and candidate Best Practice Standards Selection 17 4.3 Results 18 5 RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATION AND TAILORING OF A STANDARD 19 5.1 Test Tailoring 19 5.2 Control And Management Processes 19 5.3 Standards Recommended for Best Practices 19 5.3.1 Environmental Engineering 19 5.3.2 System Architecture 20 5.3.3 Safety 20 5.3.4 Survivability-Protection 21 5.3.5 Signature 22 5.3.6 Recoverability 22 5.4 Performance 23 5.4.2 Mobility 23 5.4.3 Transportability 24 5.5 Human 24 5.6 European legislation 25 5.7 Test and Evaluation 25 5.8 Electrical Components 26

6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE STANDARDISATION 27

3 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

6.1 Horizontal Systems 27 6.2 Vertical systems 27 6.3 Further areas of interest 28

7 CONCLUSIONS 29

ANNEX A List of Best Practice Standards references associated to the domain 30 and presented in EDSTAR ANNEX B Additional information reflecting the specificity of the approach 31 ANNEX C Integrated Logistic Support 32 ANNEX D Life Cycle Documentation 35 ANNEX E System Architecture Standards 36

4 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

List of members of the EDSTAR Expert Group EG09

Convenor: Mr GERHARD HUBRICHT - RHEINMETALL

Secretary: Mrs VERONIQUE DURANTON - AFNOR

Final Editing : Mr ROBERTO MATTEUCCI - IVECO Defence Vehicles

BIAGIONI luca.biagioni Mr LUCA OTO MELARA S.P.A (IT) @otomelara.it JÜRGEN BÖER juergen.boeer Mr VON ROLL SCHWEIZ AG CHRISTIAN (CH) @vonroll.com GERHARD RHEINMETALL WAFFE gerhard.hubricht Mr HUBRICHT (DE) MUNITION GmbH @rheinmetall.com KOPOLD hanskopold@ Mr HANS BAAINBW (DE) bundeswehr.org

MANTHEY KIDDE DEUGRA christian.manthey Mr CHRISTIAN BRANDSCHUTZ (DE) SYSTEME @utas.utc.com richard.mcmahon Mr RICHARD MC MAHON MBDA MISSILE SYSTEMS (UK) @mbda-systems.com

MATTEUCCI roberto-matteucci Mr ROBERTO IVECO – OTO MELARA (IT) @alice.it SCHLEIPPMANN christian.schleippmann Mr CHRISTIAN EDA (EU) @eda.europa.eu SCHOEPPNER KRAUSS- MAFFEI maximilian.schoeppner Mr MAXIMILIAN (DE) WEGMANN GMBH & CO @kmweg.de TOLONEN PATRIA LAND SYSTEMS henry.tolonen Mr HENRY (FI) OY @patria.fi WINTERWERBER Juergenwinterwerber Mr JÜRGEN BAAINBW K5.2 (DE) @bundeswehr.org YÜEKSEK Muege.Yueksek Mrs MÜGE DENIZ VON ROLL (CH) @vonroll.com

5 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

1. Introduction 1.1. Standardisation framework highlights Standards have since long been considered an indispensable instrument to improve design efficiency, optimize effectiveness, costs and interoperability and to enhance joint development and competitiveness through more transparent Defence Procurement Contracts. In 2001 the European Commission and WEAG1 requested the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) to develop an initiative to improve the efficiency and enhance the competitiveness of European Defence Industry. CEN BT/WG 125 was constituted with the aim to issue, by the end of 2005, an internet based European Handbook for Defence equipment Procurement standardisation (EHDP). In 2002 work on the EHDP started with the support of 19 sectorial Experts Groups (EGs) reporting to CEN Workshop 10 and the result did provide Defence Procurement Agencies and Industries with a preferential list of selected recommended best practice standards together with concise recommendations for an optimum use of those standards in a Defence Procurement. In 2004 The European Defence Agency (EDA) did replace WEAG as a forum for harmonisation of European Defence matters and following that, the evolving of the European Defence Policies, the increasing number of standards, the need for a more effective harmonisation and consolidation of European defence standardisation practices, lead the way, in June 2011, to the handing over the management of EHDP from CEN to EDA. The Handbook was renamed European Defence Standardization Reference system (EDSTAR), it was made more comprehensive and better supported through a Joint CEN- EDA Maintenance Committee (JMC). EDSTAR will endeavour to consolidate a common approach and an optimized utilization of civil and military standards, to provide final users with the right information for timely and quickly acquiring the best control in writing standards clauses for armament contracts and thus provide further drive towards best practices for developing faster, better and cheaper defence systems.

1.2. Standardisation processes specific to Armoured Fighting Vehicles The topic of harmonising standards for Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFVs) was addressed by CEN Workshop 10 in April 2007 through the Expert Group (EG) 9 "Armoured land vehicle technology”. An all comprehensive scope which resulted too optimistic for a one year effort. EG 9 therefore agreed to restrict its activity to locate, evaluate and propose standards which were primarily related to the test and evaluation of future Armoured Fighting Vehicles (tracked and wheeled), to identify gaps and to build on the work initiated by NATO in 2003 to update the AVTPs and ITOPs (taken on by ITESC in 2005 and continued by Germany in 2006). In the end approximately 500 standards were identified from 9 different European AFVs programs among which: NATO STANAGs and Allied Publications; Armoured Vehicle Test Procedures (AVTPs); International Test Operations Procedures (ITOPs); Civil EU Type Approval Standards; National Defence Standards; US Military Standards. Time limits however prevented to reach a consensus on the best practice Standards to be selected.

1 Western European Armaments Group, thus ministries of defence of Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom.

6 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

In the following years the newly created European Defence Agency (EDA) initiated a "Flagship Project" on armoured Fighting Vehicles with a view to reduce fragmentation and moving towards a common European AFV program. Within that context priority attention was directed to identifying European best practice standards for armoured land vehicles sub-systems and components in order to support the design of normalised future components and technologies and to enhance networks and stakeholder confidence for starting collaborations for the next generation of vehicles. On 4 April 2013 in the occasion of an EDA organized standardization conference on land vehicle systems a recommendation was made to establish the EDSTAR Expert Group 09 “Armoured Land Vehicle Systems”. The EDSTAR JMC endorsed the initiative and further recommended to include in the EG 09 scope the review of the final Report of Workshop 10 EG 9 and the identification of best practice standards on this technical domain. A group of experts (see paragraph 0) volunteered to support the initiative, and the first meeting of EG 09 took place on 25 June 2013 at CEN-CENELEC Management Centre, Brussels, Belgium.

7 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

2. References and Terminology 2.1. Acronyms

AAP Allied Administrative Publication NATO AECTP Allied Environmental Conditions and Test Publications NATO

AEP Allied Engineering Publications NATO

AFV Armoured Fighting Vehicle NATO

AMovP Allied Movement Publications NATO

ANSI American National Standards Institute NATO

APU Auxiliary Power Unit International ASD Aero Space and Defence Industries Association of Europe European AVTP Allied Vehicle Test Procedures NATO BNAE Bureau de Normalisation de l'Aéronautique et de l'Espace FR CAN Controller Area Network International CEN European Committee for Standardization European European Committee for Electro-technical CENELEC Standardisation European CEN CEN Technical Board/ Working Group “Standardization BT/WG for Defence Procurement” 125 European CEN CWA 15517 “European Handbook for Defence Workshop Procurement” 10 European COTS Commercial Off The Shelf International DEF UK Defence Standardization STAN European DDS Data Distribution Service International DoDAF Department of Defence Architecture Framework USA EDA European Defence Agency European EDSTAR European Defence Standards Reference System European EG Expert Group European

EG 9 EHDP Expert Group 9 “Armoured land vehicle European technology” EG 09 EDSTAR Expert Group 9 “Armoured Land Vehicle Systems”. European EG 20 EDSTAR Expert Group on System Architecture European EHDP European Handbook for Defence Procurement European

8 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

EIA Electronic Industries Alliance USA EN European Standards European EU European Union European HLA High Level Architecture International

HPM High Power Microwaves International

IDEA International Defence Enterprise Architecture International Specification IEC International Electro-technical Commission International

IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineer USA INCOSE International Council on Systems Engineering International

ISMS Information Security Management System International

ISO International Organization for Standardization International ITESC Information Technology Executive Steering Committee USA ITOP International Test Operations Procedures International IWP Interoperability Wire Protocol International JMC EDSTAR Joint Maintenance Committee European LAVOSA Open System Architecture Standardisation for Vehicle R Mission Systems International MOD Ministry of Defence International MODAF British Ministry of Defence Architecture Framework European MoD Ontological Data Exchange Model for architecture MODEM frameworks International MSG Materiel Standardization Group European International NAF NATO Architecture Framework International NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization NBC Nuclear, Biological and Chemical International NRMM NATO Reference Mobility Model International OCCAR Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation European International OMT Object Model Template International RTI Run-Time Infrastructure European SAE Society of Automotive Engineers International SDO Standardization Development Organisation International SE Systems Engineering International SE Sweden - Sverige

9 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

International SISO Simulation Interoperability Standards Organisation International SLCM System Life Cycle Management International SMS Service Management System STANAG NATO - Standardization Agreement NATO STTE Special Tools and Test Equipment International TEA Military Traffic Management Command’s Transportation Engineering Agency International TOGAF The Open Group Architecture Framework International TOP Test Operations Procedures US International TR Technical Report International TES Test and Support Committee International UGV Unmanned Ground Vehicle International UPDM Unified profile for DoDAF and MODAF International US United States of America International VDT Visual Display Terminal WEAG Western European Armaments Group European

2.2. Glossary and Terminology Working Group EG09 did not succeed in identifying a technical reference document which would provide an adequate and comprehensive set of definitions and nomenclature for Armoured Vehicle technology. Individual standards contained domain specific aspects but these definitions are not captured at a higher level. Reuse of definitions from published vocabularies related to heavy goods vehicles, road safety and earth moving equipment, is not appropriate due to the large number of terms adopted from Naval and Land based fortifications in the design of Armoured Vehicles. The benefit of formulating such a specific vocabulary might not be evident. However anecdotal evidence from one committee member suggests that where such a Weapon System vocabulary was adopted in his multi-national organisation, savings were immediately apparent arising from a reduction in the time spent in meetings re-defining and agreeing terminology. In a multi-national and multi-organisational environment, the benefits could be even more significant. EG09 recommends that the EDA or NATO consider the publication of a technical vocabulary for Armoured Vehicles. Review of the reference standards suggested by EG 16 failed to identify adequate definitions for the purpose of the EG 09 Study. The following definitions are provided to represent the interpretation of the EG 09 Experts in relation to the scope of this report and are offered for further analysis for follow on studies or for implementing further activity from the side of EG 16. The following terms have been selected being the most significant and fit for the purpose of the EG 09 study:

10 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

2.2.1. BEST PRACTICE (EDSTAR) - Standards which have been selected by consensus by industry and governmental agencies to be the best applicable standards for defence purposes. The selection procedure follows the recommendations of EDSTAR Guidance for Expert Groups on the selection of standards and the provision of associated recommendations, N 0049 June 2013. 2.2.2. HORIZONTAL STANDARDS (EG 16) - Standards focused on general and overarching standards with a maximum scope for use in Defence applications. 2.2.3. VERTICAL STANDARDS (EG 16) - Standards focused on terminology documents recommended by Experts Groups. 2.2.4. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING (ISO 14001) - Part of an organisation’s overall management system that includes organisational structure, planning activities, responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes and resources for developing, implementing, achieving, reviewing, and maintaining the environmental policy. The AECTPs covered by STANAG 4370 provide both information on the natural and induced environmental conditions to which defence materiel may be exposed and information on how to test materiel against the specified conditions (i.e. Physical, Induced, Climate, EMC, Mechanical) 2.2.5. SYSTEM SAFETY (FAA System Safety Handbook) - Freedom from those conditions that can cause death, injury, occupational illness, or damage to or loss of equipment or property, or damage to the environment. 2.2.6. SYSTEM SECURITY (Nato AAP 6) - condition achieved when designated information, materiel, personnel, activities and installations are protected against espionage, sabotage, subversion and terrorism, as well as against loss or unauthorized disclosure. 2.2.7. SURVIVABILITY - Capability of a system or organization to withstand a disaster or hostile environment, without significant impairment of its normal operations. 2.2.8. MOBILITY – The capability of a vehicle to vehicle/equipment to operate in its tactical environment.. The UK MoD’s definition of classes of military mobility is a simple expedient of classifying tactical performance in to 5 categories and facilitates a more direct and less subjective interpretation than that provided by individual vehicle manufacturers. 2.2.9. FORDING FLOTATION SNORKELLING - Combat support, requirements for the definition and specification of military vehicles when crossing water obstacles. 2.2.10. TRANSPORTABILITY (The Military Traffic Management Command's Transportation Engineering Agency TEA) - Transportability characteristics of military materiel to ensure equipment moves safely and efficiently by current or future transportation assets. (see also STANAG 2456, movements and transport documents and glossary of terms and definitions). 2.2.11. HUMAN - Engineering fit between a person and the used technology, Study of humans and their environments, include anthropometry, biomechanics, mechanical engineering, industrial engineering, industrial design, information design, kinesiology, physiology, cognitive psychology and industrial and organizational psychology. 2.2.12. EUROPEAN DIRECTIVES - For Armoured Fighting Vehicles that are to be operated on public roads within the European Union, conformity with the appropriate European legislation is mandatory as far as there are no exemptions made for military vehicles. EDSTAR database provides an overview on the extant European Legislation regarding road traffic. European Directives are in most cases implemented by the EU member states through appropriate national legislation (laws, ordinances and statutory provisions etc.). It is therefore absolutely necessary to review the relevant national implementation documents.

11 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

2.2.13. TEST AND EVALUATION (ASD S3000 L) - Design characteristic which allows the status (operable, inoperable, or degraded) of an item and the location of any fault/failures within the item to be confidently determined in a timely fashion. 2.2.14. TEST AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (T&SE) - Equipment (mobile or fixed) required supporting the operation and maintenance of an equipment. This includes associated multi-use end items, maintenance equipment, tools, metrology and calibration equipment, test equipment and automatic test equipment. All equipment (mobile or fixed) required supporting the operation and maintenance of a Defence System. This includes associated multi-use end items, tools, metrology, calibration equipment and test equipment. As part of this discipline equipment specific Special Tools and Test Equipment (STTE) must be considered. (JSP 886). AVTP-1 covers Testing Procedures in the following sections the various aspects of Vehicle testing:00 General Aspects; 01 Vehicle Build; 02 Maintainability; 03 Performance; 04 Protection; 05 Security from Protection; 06 Transportability; 07 Special Equipment; 08 Electrical System; 09 Ergonomics; 10 Environment. 2.2.15. RELIABILITY (ASD S3000L) - Duration or probability of failure free performance of a system under stated conditions, or the probability that an item can perform its intended function for a specified interval under stated conditions. 2.2.16. AVAILABILITY (MIL-STD-721) - Measure of the degree of a system which is in the operable and committable state at the start of mission when the mission is called for at an unknown random point in time. 2.2.17. MAINTAINABILITY (ASD S3000L) - Measure of the ability of an item to be retained in or restored to a specified condition, when maintenance is performed by personnel having specified skill levels, using prescribed procedures and resources, at each prescribed level maintenance and repair. 2.2.18. OBSOLESCENCE MANAGEMENT (OCCAR Obsolescence Guide) - Activity intended to minimise the impact of this loss of supply on a Programme through the identification, quantification and resolution of obsolescence and thereby achieve optimum cost-effectiveness. Obsolescence Management focuses on the system-wide application of risk Management and is applicable to the entire Programme life cycle, becoming an integral part of the design, development, production and In Service support phases of the Programme. Activities that are undertaken to mitigate the effects of obsolescence. Activities can include last-time buys, lifetime buys and obsolescence monitoring. 2.2.19. MATERIAL CONFIGURATION [MIL-HDBK-61A (SE) 7 February 2001] - Functional and physical characteristics of a materiel as described in its technical documentation and later achieved in the materiel. Comprising: - An agreed-to description of the attributes of a system, at a point in time, which serves as a basis for defining change. - An approved and released document or a set of documents, each of a specific revision; the purpose of which is to provide a defined basis for managing change. - The currently approved and released configuration documentation. - A released set of files comprising a software version and associated configuration documentation. 2.2.20. CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT [MIL-HDBK-61A (SE) 7 February 2001] - Management process for establishing and maintaining consistency of a system’s performance, functional, and physical attributes with its requirements, design and operational information throughout its life. Comprising: - Systematic process that ensures that changes to released configuration documentation are properly identified, documented, evaluated for impact, approved by an appropriate level of authority, incorporated, and verified. - The configuration management activity concerning: the systematic proposal, justification, evaluation, coordination, and disposition of proposed changes into the applicable configurations of a product; associated product information, and supporting and interfacing products and their associated product information.

12 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

2.2.21. THROUGH LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT (OCCAR CP 14-1) Approach of managing a Programme throughout its whole life cycle, in a sequential way. TLM is achieved by applying and integrating best practice management techniques in a coherent manner across all system aspects in order to deliver, sustain and dispose the required cost-effective defence system. 2.2.22. TRAINING [MIL-HDBK-29612- 4A 31 August 2001] - Specification and evaluation of the optimum combination of: instructional systems, education and on the job training required to develop the knowledge, skills and abilities needed by the available personnel to operate and maintain Defence Systems to the specified level of effectiveness under the full range of operating conditions. 2.2.23. TRAINING EQUIPMENT - Items used in the support of training, such as trainers, operational equipment, and other associated hardware. 2.2.24. TRAINING SYSTEM - Integrated combination of all elements (e.g. training material and equipment, personnel and support) necessary to conduct training.

2.3. Specific definitions from LAVOSAR (The EDA Study on Land Armoured Vehicles Open Systems Architecture) and STANAG 4478 “VERTICAL” Terminology, do offer some term worth considering for future best practice reference definitions: 2.3.1. LAVOSAR MILITARY LAND VEHICLE - Manned or unmanned mobile machine that performs a mission (surveillance, reconnaissance, combat, transport, etc.). It is subdivided into: a Vehicle Platform, a Vehicle Mission System, the Mounted User(s), and Stores Item(s). Each vehicle carries only one missions system at a time. The mission system might be changed by replacing, adding, or taking away one or several subsystems which will again build the single mission system. 2.3.2. TACTICAL LAND VEHICLE - military vehicle, whether designed primarily for military use or adapted from a commercial vehicle, which has specialised military characteristics to fit it for use by forces in the field in direct connection with, or in support of, combat operations or the training of troops for such. 2.3.3. VEHICLE PLATFORM - Platform for the mission system which comprises all primary automotive subsystems and controls (incl. passive protection) and which is approved for driving on public roads. 2.3.4. VEHICLE MISSION SYSTEM - vehicle equipment which is not needed for the primary automotive function, but is needed to perform a certain mission such as surveillance, reconnaissance, combat, communication, etc. 2.3.5. "Emergency Towing and Recovery” facilities for Tactical Land Vehicles STANAG 4478 2.3.6. CURB WEIGHT - Weight of the vehicle/trailer fully equipped and serviced for operation, including fuel, lubricants, coolant, vehicle tools and equipment, but without crew, personal equipment or payload. It is also known as net or tare weight. The parameter recorded is actually the mass of the vehicle. It is referred to as weight purely for historical reasons. 2.3.7. GROSS VEHICLE MASS - Mass of a vehicle, expressed in kilograms, fully equipped and serviced for operation, including the mass of the fuel, lubricants, coolant, vehicle tools and spares, crew, personal equipment and pay load. 2.3.8. PAYLOAD - Load (mass of cargo, equipment or passengers expressed in kilograms) which the vehicle is designed to transport under specified conditions of operation, in addition to its curb weight. 2.3.9. RECOVERY - Process of extricating a vehicle or equipment casualty from the place where it becomes disabled or defective and moving it to the first place where the crew can

13 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015 continue with their task, where repairs can be affected or from where the vehicle or equipment casualty can be back-loaded. 2.3.10. RECOVERY EYES/LUGS - Eyes or lugs used for emergency towing, recovery lifting for suspended tow and as winching attachments. 2.3.11. SUSPENDED TOW - Means of recovery by lifting the wheeled vehicle, with the wheeled vehicle suspended below the recovery beam using shackles or chains in order that the front or rear axle(s) are clear of the ground. 2.3.12. SUPPORTED TOW - means of recovery by lifting the wheeled vehicle from under the front or rear using suitable forks to support the wheeled vehicle above the recovery beam in order that the front or rear axle(s) are clear of the ground.

14 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

3. Scope 3.1. Initial work references  To deliver within one year a list of best practice standards on “Armoured Land Vehicle Systems”. which will be included in EDSTAR.  As a lessons learnt from the EG 09 in the year 2008, the complexity of this task will be reduced by limiting the best practice selection on specific components of a land vehicle system rather than covering the whole system.

3.2. Identification of Vehicle Systems In the initial stages of the EG 09 commitment the main task has been that to identify and agree on the most appropriate segmentation for Armoured Land Vehicle major system elements. The following list represents the shared view of the EG 09 Team. 3.2.1. Horizontal Standards  Environmental (cf. EG08)  Vehicle Architecture (Diagnostics, interface) (cf. EG20)  System Safety  Protection (Signature management, camouflage (cf. EG11), Fire protection, Armoured protection, active, passive, direct, indirect )  Recoverability  Performance (mobility, silent move, off road, electrical vehicles, ..)  Ergonomics, Human Factors, Human Machine Interfaces  Civilian road traffic regulations  Test and evaluation procedures  Electrical Component and Interfaces (cf. EG06)  Electromagnetic environment (cf. EG07)  Maintainability (Diagnostics)  Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGVs)  Transportability  Energy, power (cf. EG 3 & 13)

3.2.2. Vertical Standards / Technical Standards / Standards for specific components 3.2.2.1. Platform  Engine  Transmission  Fuel and fuel systems  Lights  Recovery  Electrical System  Batteries – (cf. EG04)  Auxiliary Power Units 3.2.2.2. Chassis System  Axles / Wheels / Tires  Running Gear / Tracks

15 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

 Suspension system  Braking System  Steering System  Hydraulic / Pneumatic Systems 3.2.2.3. Body electronic /Internal Installations (e.g. seats, brackets)  Optics / Optronics (for the platform)  Air condition / Heating System  Central Tire Inflation System  Intercom systems 3.2.2.4. Others  Deep Fording Equipment  Amphibious systems

16 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

4. Rationale for selecting a standard/standards-like document as “Best Practice” 4.1. Adopted work process Once the perimeter of the activity was identified and agreed, the activity of the Group developed along the following steps and actions:  Sharing of common references and terminology – The definitions applicable to Armoured Land Vehicles Systems were analysed and discussed. The agreed references and terminology have been recorded in chapter 2.  Identification of Standards - On the base of the scope set for the development of the analysis, each expert gathered from the respective company databases and other known sources of standards or standard-like documents potentially suitable for best practice selection.  Characterisation of each candidate document - in order to aggregate the identified documents under a coherent frame suitable for further detailed analysis, the group identified and agreed on specific criteria with respect to scope and domain and to relevance for " Armoured Land Vehicles Systems” and in particular to EDSTAR spreadsheet template version 2013.xls, Annex 2 to the EDSTAR ”Guidance for Expert Groups on the selection of standards and the provision of associated recommendations”

4.2. Reduction Process and candidate Best Practice Standards Selection EG 9 followed a general approach in line with previous EGs (typically EG08) based on a set of criteria agreed by the team experts and identified to best discriminate between similar standard options. The weighting between the criteria may differ according to the various areas of application in order to better respond to a general criteria od best fit for use. A typical case will be:  Civil and Defence Standards where any civil product test procedures are unlikely to fulfil in all requirements set by military environmental requirements. Specific environmental conditions occur are for example due to vibrations and shocks that arise when operating guns. Therefore, any civil test procedures will at best need to be supplemented by tests which unique original military requirements.

In the context of the reference criteria adopted for the reduction process EG 09 has taken in due consideration :

4.2.1. Target of standardisation identified by the European defence policy  Compatibility: Products, processes and services have to be appropriate for the common application under special defence conditions and have to fulfil the relevant requirements without causing unacceptable reciprocities;  Replace ability: The ability of a product, process or service to be used as substitute and to fulfil the same requirements;  Commonness: The application of the same principles, the same procedure or the same equipment.

4.2.2 Aims of standardisation of defence-related equipment and behaviours such as:  Improvement of the interoperability by standardised interfaces;  Reduction of the variety of supply articles by use of standardised components;

17 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

 Common supply logistics;  Avoidance of parallel efforts for research, development and testing of defence material.

4.2.3. Discrimination criteria for best practice selection  Technical innovation – does it include innovative approaches  Up-to-date techniques – cost effective facilities, technologies and methodologies  Reproducibility – would generate repeatable and trust-worthy results  Strength of reference – can suit applicability to diverse contract options  Interoperability – suitable for dual use and multi-function applications  Suitable for purpose – it achieves the objectives it has been set for  Disadvantages to European Industry – commercial, redesign, retesting …  Backward compatibilities – limits, disadvantages use of current equipment  Equivalence of standards – identity of basic procedures, and approaches

4.3. Results At the end of the selection process the standards selected for candidate best practice have been fully described in their components and technical elements following the required EDSTAR spreadsheet description. As anticipated the activity was developed along the selected documentation given in chapter 3 SCOPE – Paragraph 3.2 – Identification of Armoured Vehicles Systems. In the Horizontal Standards domain the availability of standards was quite satisfactory and with good options on which to identify convergence of support for best practices. In the Vertical Standards domain the issue was more complex due to proprietary and commercially sensitive elements, and this will constitute an area for further and more focalised future work. In the area of Ballistic Protections it was not possible to retrieve freely usable material. A further issue which emerged in the final review analysis has been the overlap of EDSTAR EG09 study with other Worksop 10 Expert Groups analysis. The approach adopted by the team, in coordination with EDSTAR JMC, has been that of retaining these standards in the description of the EG 09 report but to subdivide them in separate annexes in order to facilitate the work of JMC in reallocating them in the appropriate EDSTAR reference chapters. In synthesis : 4.3.1. Annex A gives the list of Best Practice Standards references associated to Armoured Vehicles Systems and proposed for insertion in EDSTAR; the column “Summary” provides the synthesis of the characteristic features proposed for best practice adoption. 4.3.2. Annex B “Additional information reflecting the specificity of the approach”, no relevant information has been identified by EDSTAR Expert Group EG09; 4.3.3. Annex C gives recommendations on Best Practice Standards related to Integrated Logistic Support. It is given for information only because it is under the competency of EDSTAR Expert Group EG13 "Life Cycle Project Management" and it is recommended for transfer for upgrade of that Expert Group; 4.3.4. Annex D gives recommendations on Best Practice Standards related to Life Cycle Documentation. It is given for information only because it is under the competency of EDSTAR Expert Group EG14 "Life Cycle Technical Documentation"; 4.3.5. Annex E gives recommendations on Best Practice Standards related to Armoured Vehicles System Architecture. It is given for information only

18 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

because it is under the competency of EDSTAR Expert Group EG20 "System Architecture";

5 Recommendations on application and tailoring of a standard

5.1 Test Tailoring The term “tailoring” is often used to mean the process by which test methods and The tailoring process has broader application to materiel development programmes. For the purpose of this report “tailoring” is also considered to encompass the optimisation or refinement of the environmental engineering task, to meet the specific needs of a particular materiel development programme. In particular their severities are adapted to improve the simulation of specific environmental conditions. “Tailoring” in this limited sense is an accepted environmental engineering process. Its development was stimulated by the realisation that conservative test methods and excessive test severities can result in increased materiel development costs with no compensating increase in materiel performance or reliability. 5.2. Control and Management Process The objectives of the control and management process should be adopted for any task control and management process and for that reason are recommended for implementation in order to ensure that:  concise and unambiguous requirements are defined;  a strategy is in place for undertaking the task;  the task is adequately controlled and managed;  a mechanism exists for demonstrating compliance with the requirements. These objectives are translated and developed to form the basic elements of the process and can be described as follows:  establish the requirements for the materiel;  formulate a strategy for demonstrating the adequacy of the materiel against the requirements;  define the tasks and the programme necessary to allow the strategy to be implemented;  undertake the defined tasks to the authorised work programme;  demonstrate, through assessment of the reported information generated by the tasks, that the materiel meets the requirements. 5.3. Standards recommended for Best Practice In the following paragraph the standards identified and recommended by the EG 09 as best practice are grouped for the most significative Armoured Vehicle System with some summary justification in support of their adoption. Detailed descriptions of each standard, as indicated in previous paragraph 4.3 are given in the ANNEX A. 5.3.1. Environmental engineering Best Practice Standards recommended by Expert Group 08 in the domain “Environmental Engineering” is applicable for all types of defence materiel. This also includes Armoured Fighting vehicles. Especially STANAG 4370 “Environmental Guidelines for Defence Materiel” together with the ALLIED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND TEST PUBLICATIONS (AECTPs) covered by this STANAG shall be the first choice when specifying environmental requirements for defence materiel.

19 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

 AECTP-100, ENVIRONMENTAL GUIDELINES FOR DEFENCE MATERIEL;  AECTP-200, ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS;  AECTP-230, CLIMATIC CONDITIONS;  AECTP-240, MECHANICAL CONDITIONS;  AECTP-250, ELECTRICAL AND ELECTROMAGNETIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS;  AECTP-300, CLIMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL TESTS;  AECTP-400, MECHANICAL ENVIRONMENTAL TESTS;  AECTP-500, ELECTROMAGNETIC ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS TEST AND VERIFICATION. The AECTPs do not only provide information on the natural and induced environmental conditions to which defence materiel may be exposed but they also provide information on how to test materiel against the specified conditions.

The best practice recommendations provided in the report of Expert Group 08 also includes matrices which provide comparative information on the content of AECTPs and in relation to other standards / standards-like documents in the area of environmental engineering (e.g. IEC, UK Def Stan and US Mil Stds).

5.3.2. System architecture At a certain level of design, the System Architecture is defined by the Systems Engineering team and expressed in a Product Breakdown Structure. This is project specific by definition and it would be wrong for the EG 09 Working Group to dictate a boilerplate set of text to describe a system scenario without some common context.

However a common level of system abstraction is being developed in support of the definition of Vehicle Electronic Architectures. The drive for modularity and reuse necessitates the development of a common understanding of the building blocks, plus the establishment of a shared interface definition for physical, logical and functional connections.

For ensuring the coherency of this subject with the activity currently carried out by the EDSTAR Expert Group EG20 "System Architecture", some recommendations given by EG09 under this paragraph have been transferred in Annex E of this report. They have been transmitted to EG20 for further evaluation by their experts with a view to be included in their final report for coherency of indexing according to the current EDSTAR Structure.

5.3.3. Safety System Safety is an important factor nowadays in the military applications. Safe operability of the troops in peacetime and in wartime conditions guarantee the troops efficiency, minimize collateral damage and allow them to concentrate on the mission.

The following safety standards were selected for best practices standards because of their good availability and wide consideration of safety from all angles. The standards have been used for many vehicle programs and they have been proven to be very useful.  MIL-STD 882E - This system safety standard practice is a key element of Systems Engineering (SE) that provides a standard, generic method for the identification, classification, and mitigation of hazards. This standard shall be the first choice for system safety standardization. It is widely known and used and even with its gaps on some areas still the best system safety standard available.  H SystSäk E 2011 - Swedish Armed Forces’ Handbook defines the grounds for the Swedish Armed Forces' system safety activities by specifying the principles for basic

20 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

risk management and the defining of requirements; it also specifies the appropriate roles, responsibilities and tasks from a lifespan perspective, and their interaction. This standard is a collection of different System Safety standards’ best Chapters and it is widely used in the Nordic countries even though it’s made for the Swedish Armed Forces as a National standard. It is recommended to be used in other regions also.  DEF STAN 00-56 Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems captures the requirements and guidance of the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence regarding the procurement, analysis, development and operation of safety-critical systems. This standard can be applied for example for the UK market if the MIL-STD 882E is not an option. The recommendations of EDSTAR Expert Group EG07 Final Report on EMC remain still valid from the Armoured Vehicles EG 09 point of view. The HPM (High Power Microwaves) standardization has presumably gone forward in three years but anything official is not yet available. 5.3.4. Survivability - Protection The Protection of an armoured vehicle is one of the key elements for its survivability. The EG 09 Working Group has considered several aspects of protection in order to compile a comprehensive set of standards. These aspects include not only chemical and nuclear protection but also signature management.

 NBC protection and counter surveillance The following standards have been deemed as best practices standards due to their large scopes and their prevalence:

 STANAG 4569 PROTECTION LEVELS FOR OCCUPANTS OF LOGISTIC AND LIGHT ARMOURED VEHICLES;  STANAG 4360, SPECIFICATION FOR PAINT SYSTEMS, RESISTANT TO CHEMICAL AGENTS AND DECONTAMINANTS, FOR THE PROTECTION OF LAND MILITARY EQUIPMENT;  STANAG 4381, BLACKOUT LIGHTING SYSTEMS FOR TACTICAL LAND VEHICLES;  STANAG 2451, ALLIED JOINT DOCTRINE FOR CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR DEFENCE - AJP-3.8 EDITION A; STANAG 4418, COUNTERSURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS;  STANAG 4316, COUNTERSURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE MAIN BATTLE TANKS - RADAR ASPECTS;  STANAG 4318, COUNTERSURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE MAIN BATTLE TANKS - ACOUSTIC ASPECTS;  STANAG 4319, COUNTERSURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE MAIN BATTLE TANKS - INFRARED/THERMAL ASPECTS;  Moreover, two more standards which are mentioned below have been considered complementary to the aforementioned ones:

 NIJ 0108.01, BALLISTIC RESISTANT PROTECTIVE MATERIALS;

 NATO AEP 7, EN-NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL (NBC) DEFENCE FACTORS IN THE DESIGN TESTING AND ACCEPTANCE OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT.

 Fire resistance Fire protection systems on armoured vehicles are required for the following areas:

21 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

 engine and APU / hydraulic compartments;  crew compartment;  external (including roof and underfloor area, air/ventilation inlets).

Fire resistance is another topic that stays crucial when it comes to building an armoured vehicle. However, there is no specific standard that is dedicated to this particular feature. Therefore, the EG09 working group has carefully selected a few standards from other domains that are the most suitable for the armoured vehicles:

 STANAG 4317, SPECIFICATION ON COMMON CHARACTERISTICS FOR FIRE DETECTION AND FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEMS FOR FUTURE MAIN BATTLE TANKS; NOTE Study draft STANAG 4317 edition 3 "Fire protection in armoured vehicles" is under development.

 EN 13501-1, FIRE CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS AND BUILDING ELEMENTS - PART 1: CLASSIFICATION USING DATA FROM REACTION TO FIRE TESTS;  EN 45545-2, RAILWAY APPLICATION – FIRE PROTECTION ON RAILWAY VEHICLES – PART 2 : REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE BEHAVIOUR OF MATERIALS AND COMPONENTS;  EN ISO 4589-1, PLASTICS-- DETERMINATION OF BURNING BEHAVIOUR BY OXYGEN INDEX - PART 1: GUIDANCE;  EN ISO 4589-2, PLASTICS - DETERMINATION OF BURNING BEHAVIOUR BY OXYGEN INDEX - PART 2: AMBIENT-TEMPERATURE TEST;  EN ISO 4589-3, PLASTICS -- DETERMINATION OF BURNING BEHAVIOUR BY OXYGEN INDEX -- PART 3: ELEVATED-TEMPERATURE TEST; These standards have been widely used for the evaluation of flammability, and fire resistance since they come near to the specifications for armoured vehicles. On the other hand, it is important to note that there are many others that are used for different structural parts of armoured vehicles. Nevertheless, EG09’s purpose is to determine the best practice standards. Hence, the group will only mention the primarily used ones in this report.

5.3.5. Signature  Signature is an important feature for Armoured Fighting Vehicles and it is normally limited to meet some specific counter surveillance requirements. Preference therefore shall be given to the following NATO STANAG, even though the content is restricted:  STANAG 4316, COUNTERSURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE MAIN BATTLE TANKS – RADAR ASPECTS;  STANAG 4318, COUNTERSURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE MAIN BATTLE TANKS – ACOUSTIC ASPECTS;  STANAG 4319, COUNTERSURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE MAIN BATTLE TANKS – INFRARED/THERMAL ASPECTS;  STANAG 4418, COUNTERSURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS.

5.3.6. Recoverability Recoverability is an important part of the overall aspect of interoperability on the battlefield. Preference therefore shall be given to the following NATO STANAG and related Allied Engineering Publications (AEP):

22 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

 STANAG 2375, BATTLEFIELD VEHICLE RECOVERY AND EVACUATION GUIDE - AEP-13;  STANAG 2399, BATTLEFIELD RECOVERY/EVACUATION OPERATIONS;  STANAG 2400, BATTLEFIELD VEHICLE RECOVERY - USERS HANDBOOK - AEP- 17(A);  STANAG 4478, EMERGENCY TOWING AND RECOVERY FACILITIES FOR TACTICAL LAND VEHICLES. NOTE STANAG 4478 has not been ratified by Germany. In Germany VG 95710-1; VG 95710-2 and VG 95710-3 are applied.

5.4. Performance 5.4.2. Mobility Mobility warfare has dominated military thinking in the past 100 years. Armoured Vehicles need higher levels of mobility than other military service platforms in order to sustain operational momentum without relying on combat support to provide access to difficult terrain. There is of course limits to what levels of mobility can be achieved within a given platform. The following standards set out levels of mobility performance that would enable either design goals to be set or for existing platforms to be compared on a common basis.  STANAG 2021, MILITARY LOAD CLASSIFICATION OF BRIDGES, FERRIES, RAFTS AND VEHICLES;

 STANAG 2805, FORDING AND FLOTATION REQUIREMENTS FOR COMBAT AND SUPPORT GROUND VEHICLES. These two standards implement requirements for the definition and specification of military vehicles when crossing water obstacles. With the exception of the UK implementation, these are the technology baseline that should be followed.  DEF STAN 23-06 Issue 4, TECHNOLOGY GUIDANCE FOR MILITARY LOGISTICS VEHICLES;  DEF STAN 23-07 Issue 2, DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR ARMOURED FIGHTING VEHICLES. Both DEF STANs have a number of different areas of applicability and are not just limited to the horizontal specification of military vehicles. Their suitability for best practice standards for mobility arises from the UK MoD’s definition of classes of military mobility. While the performance figures may need a review, the simple expedient of classifying mobility in to 5 categories facilitates a more direct and less subjective interpretation of military mobility. There is a slight issue in the UK’s use of Mean Maximum Pressure in the determination of mobility, especially as no reference is made to which one of three different equations for MMP was used to derive the figures, rather than the more useful metric of limiting Cone Index.

While the performance figures may need to be reviewed, the step of classifying mobility in to classes is highly recommended. This area of mobility classification could be a candidate for a formal NATO led codification of military mobility.

 DEF STAN 00-06 Issue 7, FORDING AND FLOTATION REQUIREMENTS FOR COMBAT AND SUPPORT GROUND VEHICLES. This is the UK specific implementation of Fording and Flotation requirements. This document would be called up in preference to STANAG 2805, and needs to be read alongside DEF STAN 23-06. It is worth noting that the UK does not specify requirements for snorkelling.

 NRMM Issue II, NATO REFERENCE MOBILITY MODEL.

23 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

This is not a standard but a reference model allowing mobility performance to be assessed over a defined characterized terrain. It is the current baseline and as such, no discussion on mobility would be complete without reference to it.

 FINABEL AGREEMENT NE A.20.A (20.A.5) The norm although not strictly pertaining to the domain of horizontal standards has been recalled in this section mainly for its importance in assuring mobility in a degraded state and as a reminder for future further developments in this domain(see chapter 6.2.e, f and h). To all effects, combat tyres, must in the event of the casing being punctured, be capable of allowing the mission to be continued for a determined period of time without having to be changed.

Used by many nations in Europe, is dated February 1997 and has not been updated in recent times. For the reasons indicated in the previous paragraph It has been included in this report and in ANNEX A.

5.4.3. Transportability Transportability too is an important interoperability aspect.

Preference shall therefore be given to the following NATO STANAG and related Allied Movement Publications (AMovP):  STANAG 2010, MILITARY LOAD CLASSIFICATION MARKINGS;  STANAG 2021, MILITARY LOAD CLASSIFICATION OF BRIDGES, FERRIES, RAFTS AND VEHICLES;  STANAG 2456, MOVEMENTS AND TRANSPORT DOCUMENTS AND GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND DEFINITIONS - AMovP-3(B);  STANAG 2468, TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE TRANSPORT OF MILITARY MATERIALS BY RAILROAD - AMovP-4;  STANAG 3548, TIE-DOWN FITTINGS ON AIR TRANSPORTED AND AIR- DROPPED EQUIPMENT AND CARGO CARRIED INTERNALLY BY FIXED WING AIRCRAFT;  STANAG 4062, SLING AND TIE-DOWN FACILITIES FOR LIFTING AND TYING DOWN MILITARY EQUIPMENT FOR MOVEMENT BY LAND AND SEA. Further guidance on transportability aspects regarding defence materiel is also provided by the following national defence standards:

 UK Defence Standard 00-3 Issue 4 INTERIM, DESIGN GUIDANCE FOR THE TRANSPORTABILITY OF EQUIPMENT;  US MIL-STD-1366E, TRANSPORTABILITY CRITERIA.

5.5. Human  MIL-STD-1472G, HUMAN ENGINEERING;  This US DoD developed standard is widely used and due to its penetration within the defence equipment market could be viewed as best practice. However it is prescriptive in view and offers up lowest common denominator solutions in several areas. This standard is not directly comparable to DEF STAN 00-250 without considering both MIL-STD-46855A and the higher level Human System Integration activities found in US DoD acquisition policy documents.

 DEF STAN 00-250 (All Parts), HUMAN FACTORS FOR DESIGNERS OF SYSTEMS;

24 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

 DEF STAN 00-25 Part 14, HUMAN FACTORS FOR DESIGNERS OF EQUIPMENT - MILITARY LAND VEHICLE DESIGN;  These UK developed standards adopt an assessment based approach to Human Engineering design resulting in a much more flexible solution, demonstrating progressive maturity and assurance. However, this approach requires more investment in terms of resources, but in theory leads to a better solution than pure application of requirements. Furthermore there are areas within the DEF STAN that are currently in conflict with each other and not necessarily well defined. The complete suite is currently under review, with revisions currently being made to streamline the standard and make it more suitable to contract suppliers against.  These standards are mandatory for procurement programmes in the UK. The next issue is anticipated in 2015.  While the MIL-STD set may be slightly better for procurement activities outside the UK, the position will have to be reviewed when the next iteration of DEF-STAN 00- 250 is issued.  EN ISO 9241 (All Parts), ERGONOMIC REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE WORK WITH VISUAL DISPLAY TERMINALS (VDTs);  As Ministries of Defence become more accountable to Health and Safety norms, and the tasks that service personnel carry out become more aligned with those of the wider public; Defence Customers will expect the workplace environment to conform to reasonable standards. As there is no equivalent workplace standard for service personnel, this standard suite must be read as best practice, to be tailored by the specifics of the service environment, for those areas which require office type work and the use of visual display terminals.

5.6. European Legislation  According to EN 16341”Selection of standards and standard-like documents for defence products and services – Order of preference” and DIRECTIVE 2009/81/EC, relevant laws, ordinances and statutory provisions have the highest priority when specifying defence materiel.  For Armoured Fighting Vehicles that are to be operated on public roads within the European Union, conformity with the appropriate European legislation is mandatory as far as there are no exemptions made for military vehicles.  The list of European Directives etc. that are included in the EDSTAR database provides an overview on the extant European Legislation regarding road traffic. When specifying requirements related to European Legislation – Road Traffic Regulations it must be considered that European Directives are in most cases implemented by the EU member states through appropriate national legislation (laws, ordinances and statutory provisions etc.). It is therefore absolutely necessary to review the relevant national implementation documents.

5.7. Test and Evaluation Following the order of preference given by EN 16341 and DIRECTIVE 2009/81/EC there are the primarily 3 types of standards / standards-like documents that shall be applied when specifying the requirements for the testing of Armoured Fighting Vehicles and their main components:  NATO STANAG;  ITOP (International Test Operations Procedures);  U.S. TOP (Test Operations Procedures).

25 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

5.7.1. NATO STANAG  STANAG 4370 and AECTPs covered by STANAG 4370, Environmental Guidelines for Defence Materiel;  As already mentioned under 4.1 "Environmental Engineering", the AECTPs covered by STANAG 4370 do not only provide information on the natural and induced environmental conditions to which defence materiel may be exposed but also information on how to test materiel against the specified conditions.

 STANAG 4357, ALLIED VEHICLE TESTING PROCEDURES (AVTPs);  STANAG 4357 is the cover document for AVTP-1 ALLIED VEHICLE TESTING PROCEDURES (AVTPs).  AVTP-1 is a more than 800 pages document that covers in the following sections the various aspects of Vehicle testing:  00 General Aspects;  01 Vehicle Build;  02 Maintainability;  03 Performance;  04 Protection;  05 Security from Protection;  06 Transportability;  07 Special Equipment;  08 Electrical System;  09 Ergonomics;  10 Environments.

Please note that besides the aforementioned aspects AVTP-1 also covers further aspects of vehicle testing (e.g. weapons and ammunition) which are not included in the scope of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09. A number of Tests described in AVTP-1 make cross-reference ("Equivalent") to International Test Operations Procedures (ITOP).

5.7.2. ITOP International Test Operations Procedures (ITOP) are agreements on standardized testing procedures that have been concluded by the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the United States of America. Enquiries for copies of ITOPs are to be addressed to the Ministries of Defence of one of the ITOP nations (DEU-FRA-GBR-USA). 5.7.3. U.S. TOP

Test Operations Procedures (TOP) is national U.S documents issued by the U.S. Department of Defence. Only in cases where neither NATO AVTPs nor ITOPs provide appropriate information on test procedures for a particular Armoured Fighting Vehicle aspect, U.S. TOPs may also be considered. 5.8. Electrical components

The recommendations of EDSTAR Expert Group EG06 Final Report on Electrical Interfaces remain still valid from the Armoured Vehicles EG09 point of view. However the report is missing some connector families, heat shrinkable products and interface sections that should be addressed. EG09 recommends an update on EG06 report.

26 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

6. Recommendations for Future Standardization The EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 developed its work on the base of the scope assigned, of the time allocated and availability of the experts who volunteered to support the effort.

6.1. Information in the horizontal systems domain and related standards was readily available and valid options could be identified. On the other hand, further research on the following areas either through the update of the original work done in the context of the EHDP Workshop 10 or through the constitution of new EDSTAR EGs, would certainly benefit completeness and update of reference best practices : a) Electromagnetic environment (cf. EG07) b) Maintainability (Diagnostics) c) Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGVs) d) Transportability e) Energy, power f) Mission systems; g) Weapon systems;

6.2. Information on standards in the area of vertical systems, on the contrary, is fragmented and not readily available due to commercial sensitiveness issues and proprietary developments. In this area a more structured action in developing or identifying best practice standards would certainly contribute to: I. Improve interoperability by standardised interfaces; II. Reduction of the variety of supply articles by use of standardised components; III. Common supply logistics; IV. Avoidance of parallel efforts in research, development and testing of defence material.

The priority areas for the identification of new standards should be identified especially in areas related to interoperability and “form-fit-function”: a) Engine of future vehicle systems; b) Ballistic protection c) Auxiliary power Units, Electrical generators and controllers d) Electrical Connector families, heat shrinkable products and interface sections EG09 recommends an update of EG06 report. e) Axels/wheels/tyres (the latter with particular emphasis to combat tires run-flat security ) f) Centralised Tyre Inflation Systems and sealing foams which would make it possible to dispense with fitting the vehicle with a spare wheel. g) Braking, Suspensions and steering systems h) The integration of the components of which at previous points e, f and g into a single harmonised, automatically and dynamically controlled subsystem (Intelligent System) for enhancing high stability and mobility in degraded situations and in different terrains. An issue which will ensure a step change in vehicle combat performance and security. i) High Power Microwaves (HPM) standardization. (activity is probably under way but anything official is not yet available).

27 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

6.3. Further areas of interest recommended for consolidating best practice standard solutions are: a) EDA and/or NATO publication of technical vocabulary for Armoured Vehicles. b) Obsolescence;

28 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

7. CONCLUSIONS This report has endeavoured to identify a basic selection of “best practice” standards which could support Armour Land Vehicle Systems and related activities with the objective to facilitate the acquisition and supply of defence systems. The consolidated work has been reported in the standard EDSTAR final Excel spreadsheet (ANNEX A) for ease of handling in connection with the transposition to the EDSTAR Best Practice collection of Standards. A certain number of overlaps have been found with previous EHDP Expert Groups and they have been dealt with, in agreement with EDSTAR JMC member, through specific Annexes which will facilitate the updating of the EDSTAR data base. The contribution of experts, after the initial phases of work, consolidated in a team of 12 experts, from 5 nations and from a wide representative of industrial sectors and Government offices. Further support was received from back home national networks and this whole set up has certainly contributed to a diversified and solid base which can be taken as a guarantee for significative and trustworthy results. A consistent collateral activity has been carried out in the initial phases of the study in trying to identify common references for domain segmentation, for terminology and for trying to identify common cross-national and cross-sector understanding. Commonly shared definitions and vocabulary have been identified among the participating members and included in the report. Further activity in this area is in any case strongly recommended in order to identify and standardise more widespread best practices. Specific priorities recommendations for future follow-on work are given in the previous chapter 6 and include options for both standards in domain-specific areas not covered in this report and standards supporting quality factors such as security, safety, standardised interfaces and components, common supply logistics. The main objective being that to improve interoperability of components and systems, avoidance of parallel efforts for research, development and testing of defence material and the reduction of variables in supply articles. As a final analysis the EG 09 team supported the following more general considerations and recommendations:  A considerable effort is spent at the beginning of the study for the participants to acquaint with the scope of the study, to reach a common understanding of the required effort, on terminology and in sharing the task. A more structured action upfront for better defining requirements and to calibrate the scope to the manpower available will certainly result in a more dynamic and expedite project development.  Internationally recognised standardisation experts are precious assets for their companies and have little time to spare. Consideration should be given to a more centralised management and coordination function, a more consistent component of virtual networking and the possibility to rely on well represented and structured national networks of experts.

----- END OF REPORT -----

29 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

ANNEX A

List of Best Practice Standards references associated to the domain and presented in EDSTAR

Annex A gives the list of Best Practice Standards references associated to Armoured Vehicles Systems and proposed for insertion in EDSTAR; the column “Comments” provides the synthesis of the characteristic features which lead the given standard to be proposed for best practice adoption by the Expert Group 09.

NOTE: The EXEL Spreadsheet EDSTAR EG09 FINAL REPORT ANNEX A can be downloaded by clicking on the following link:

EDSTAR EG09 FINAL REPORT-ANNEX A.xls

30 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

ANNEX B

Additional information reflecting the specificity of the approach

No relevant additional information has been identified by

EDSTAR Expert Group EG09;

31 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

ANNEX C

Integrated Logistic Support

1 General

This Annex C complements Annex A. It is given mainly for information because its content falls under the domain of competence of EDSTAR Expert Group EG13 "Life Cycle Project Management". Consequently, the inclusion of these standards in the EDSTAR data basis should fall under the responsibility of the above-mentioned EDSTAR Expert Group and should be implemented through the appropriate EDSTAR JMC Change Request Procedure.

2. Horizontal requirements  ARMP-1 (Edition 3), NATO REQUIREMENTS FOR RELIABILITY AND MAINTAINABILITY;  ASD 2000M ASD-S2000M, INTERNATIONAL SPECIFICATION FOR MATERIAL MANAGEMENT -INTEGRATED DATA PROCESSING FOR MILITARY EQUIPMENT V.4.0;  ASD 3000L, INTERNATIONAL PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION FOR LOGISTIC SUPPORT ANALYSIS (LSA) ISSUE 1;  DEF-STAN 0041 Rev 3, RELIABILITY AND MAINTAINABILITY GUIDE TO PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES;  DOD RAM-C MANUAL 2009, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RELIABILITY, AVAILABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND COST (RAM-C) RATIONALE REPORT MANUAL;  EIA-649-B, CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT STANDARD;  MIL-HDBK-61A(SE), MILITARY HANDBOOK CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE;  MIL-HDBK-470A, DESIGNING AND DEVELOPING MAINTAINABLE PRODUCTS AND SYSTEMS, VOLUME I AND VOLUME II;  MIL-HDBK-502, MIL-HDBK-502, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE HANDBOOK: ACQUISITION LOGISTICS;  MIL-HDBK-965, MILITARY HANDBOOK, ACQUISITION PRACTICES FOR PARTS MANAGEMENT;  MIL-STD-3018, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE STANDARD PRACTICE: PARTS MANAGEMENT;

32 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

 STANAG 4597, OBSOLESCENCE MANAGEMENT REVISION 1, 21-APRIL- 2005;  STANAG 4597 ED.02, OBSOLESCENCE MANAGEMENT;  STANAG 4159, NATO MATERIAL CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT;  IEC 62402 Ed.1, OBSOLESCENCE MANAGEMENT APPLICATION GUIDE;  ISO/IEC 12207, SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING- SOFTWARE LIFE CYCLE PROCESSES;  ISO IEC 15288:2008, SYSTEMS ENGINEERING- SYSTEM LIFE CYCLE PROCESSES;  ISO IEC TR 24748-1:2010, SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING- LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT OF GUIDE FOR LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT;  ISO IEC TR 24748-2:2011, SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING -- LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT -- PART 2: GUIDE TO THE APPLICATION OF ISO/IEC 15288 (SYSTEM LIFE CYCLE PROCESSES);  ISO IEC TR 24748-3:2011, SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING -- LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT -- PART 3: GUIDE TO THE APPLICATION OF ISO/IEC 12207 (SOFTWARE LIFE CYCLE PROCESSES);  OCCAR-EA ISS GUIDE, MANAGING PROGRAMMES DURING THE IN SERVICE SUPPORT PHASE;  OCCAR IP 26-10 Issue 2 20140925 OBSOLESCENCE MANAGEMENT ISSUE 2.

3. Reliability  MIL HDBK 338B, MILITARY HANDBOOK: ELECTRONIC RELIABILITY DESIGN HANDBOOK;  SAE JA 1000, RELIABILITY PROGRAM STANDARD;  S9081-AB-GIB-010-REV.1, RELIABILITY CENTERED MAINTENANCE HANDBOOK. 4. Maintainability  AIA/ASD S5000F Dft 01, SPECIFICATION FOR OPERATIONAL AND MAINTENANCE DATA FEEDBACK;  ARMP-6 Ed 3, ALLIED RELIABILITY AND MAINTENABILITY PUBLICATION- GUIDANCE FOR MANAGING IN SERVICE RELIABILITY AND MAINTENABILITY;  ASD S4000M - Dec. 2012, INTERNATIONAL SPECIFICATION FOR DEVELOPING SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS;  DEF-STAN 00-45, RELIABILITY CENTERED MAINTENANCE;  DEF-STAN 00-42 (Part5), RELIABILITY AND MAINTENABILITY ASSURANCE PART 5- IN SERVICE RELIABILITY DEMONSTRATION;  DoD-HDBK-791, MAINTAINABILITY DESIGN TECHNIQUES;  JSP 886 Vol.7, UK DEFENCE LOGISTICS SUPPORT CHAIN MANUAL VOL. 7 MOD POLICY ON SUPPORTABILITY ENGINEERING;  MIL-HDBK-472, MAINTAINABILITY PREDICTION;  SAE JA 1000, RELIABILITY PROGRAM STANDARD.

33 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

5. Training  MIL-HDBK 29612A, GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION OF TRAINING DATA PRODUCTS & SERVICES;  MIL-PRF-29612B, PERFORMANCES SPECIFICATION TRAINING DATA PRODUCTS. o Availability  ARMP-1 (Edition 3), NATO REQUIREMENTS FOR RELIABILITY AND MAINTAINABILITY.

NOTE: Further details on these standards are given in a separate EXEL sheet named EDSTAR EG09 FINAL REPORT ANNEX C. which can be downloaded by clicking on the following link:

EDSTAR EG09 FINAL REPORT-ANNEX C-ILC Horiztl Stans.xls

34 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

ANNEX D

Life Cycle Documentation

1. General

This Annex D complements Annex A. It is given mainly for information because its content falls under the domain of competence of EDSTAR Expert Group EG14 "Life Cycle Technical Documentation ".

Consequently, the inclusion of these standards in the EDSTAR data basis should fall under the responsibility of the above-mentioned EDSTAR Expert Group and should be implemented through the appropriate EDSTAR JMC Change Request Procedure.

2. Technical documentation

 AAP-48, NATO SYSTEM LIFE CYCLE TAGS AND PROCESSES;  ASD S1000D, INTERNATIONAL SPECIFICATION FOR TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS;  DEF-STAN 05-123 PART 5, TECHNICAL PROCEDURES FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF AIRCRAFT, WEAPONS AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS PART 5 – PRODUCTION PROCEDURES;  MIL-HDBK-1814, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE HANDBOOK: INTEGRATED DIAGNOSTICS [SUPERSEDING MIL-STD-1814];  MIL-STD-130, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE STANDARD PRACTICE IDENTIFICATION MARKING OF U.S. MILITARY PROPERTY.

NOTE: Further details on these standards are given in a separate EXEL sheet named EDSTAR EG09 FINAL REPORT ANNEX D. which can be downloaded by clicking on the following link:

EDSTAR EG09 FINAL REPORT-ANNEX D- Life Cycl Docmntn.xls

35 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

ANNEX E

System Architecture Standards

1. General

At a certain level of design, the System Architecture is defined by the Systems Engineering team and expressed in a Product Breakdown Structure. This is project specific by definition and it would be wrong for the EG 09 Working Group to dictate a boilerplate set of text to describe a system scenario without some common context. However a common level of system abstraction is being developed in support of the definition of Vehicle Electronic Architectures. The drive for modularity and reuse necessitates the development of a common understanding of the building blocks, plus the establishment of a shared interface definition for physical, logical and functional connections. In consideration of the coherence of this subject with the activity currently being carried out by the analogous EDSTAR Expert Group EG 20 "System Architecture", the considerations and recommendation by EG 09 under this heading, have been transmitted to EG 20 for further evaluations from their experts and to be included in their final report for coherence of indexing in the EDSTAR Structure.

2. DEF STAN 23-09 (Parts 0, 1, and 2) Issue 3 – Generic Vehicle Architecture. The UK MoD has taken the bold step of publishing its developing Generic Vehicle Architecture (GVA) standard early to cope both with an urgent need and lay the foundations for future development. While this standard is still maturing, and will undergo further development, it appears to be the most concise and more crucially, publicly available standard at this time. The US DoD has published a GVA standard at http://victory-standards.org/. However this is restricted to US DoD sponsored programmes and is therefore not publically available. Future iterations of this standard will include the definition of HUMS data and the specification of supporting infrastructure. Both these sections will significantly rationalize the development of generic components to support weapon system development. Another feature of GVA is that it forms part of a wider suite of generic architecture standards ranging from the soldier operating the vehicle to the base from which the vehicle operates. The public availability of this standard makes it the candidate for best practice in this area. This status needs to be reviewed in the event that NATO Land Group 2 ratifies the NATO GVA standard. 3. SAE J1939 201308 - Recommended Practice for a Serial Control and Communications Vehicle Network. This standard has been specifically developed for vehicle Serial Control and Communications; and has been applied to both heavy and off highway vehicles, as well as diesel engines. These three COTS equipment areas form the backbone of

36 Report of EDSTAR Expert Group EG09 Final to JMC 12 May 2015

hardware used in the Protected Mobility range of vehicles. It is extremely likely therefore that any future military vehicles will have at least one major component using this protocol. This protocol is also one of the preferred CAN protocols referred to in the GVA standard. While STANAG 4628 – Controller Area Network (CAN) Protocols for Military Applications lists a number of standards that might be applicable, the STANAG does not make a recommendation as to best practice or establish a preference for one protocol over another. STANAG 4628 does include a reference to J1939. The other protocols may be on a fighting vehicle but there are no guarantees that they will be present. Furthermore it is anticipated that the use of CAN bus between non- automotive components requiring a complex data exchange (e.g. commander’s display panel) will be gradually superseded in the next 5 years by the introduction of a data distribution system over Ethernet. CAN bus will remain in service for components for which the data exchange requirements are less demanding (e.g. traverse and elevation controls). J1939 is a best practice protocol because it will, in all probability, be present in the automotive components on the platform. 4. DDS API v1.2 – Data Distribution Service, DDSI v2.1 – DDS Interoperability Wire Protocol. These two protocols are extremely useful and adaptable, especially in situations where there are complex data exchanges between individual components. The protocol allows components to be designed with high levels of abstraction and reduces the dependency for the application layers to be aware of the underlying transport mechanisms. While it does impose a burden on the hardware development to incorporate suitable intercommunication mechanisms such as Ethernet; the flexibility this brings to architectural design will outweigh the additional hardware cost. DDS is a best practice protocol due to its public availability and open-ness.

NOTE: Further details on these standards are given in a separate EXEL sheet named EDSTAR EG09 FINAL REPORT ANNEX E. which can be downloaded by clicking on the following link:

EDSTAR EG09 FINAL REPORT-ANNEX E - System Arch.xls