Editor's Note: When to upgrade?

The recent report on the Columbia accident had an interesting, if small, section on test equipment.

Section 10.11, Test Equipment Upgrades, notes: "Visits to NASA facilities (both government and contractor operated, as well as contractor facilities) revealed the use of 1970s-era oscilloscopes and other analog equipment. Currently available equipment is digital, and in other venues, has proved to be less costly, easier to maintain, and more reliable and accurate."

The report goes on to recommend that NASA, "Asses NASA and contractor equipment to determine if an upgrade will provide the reliability and accuracy needed to maintain the Shuttle through 2020."

This report raises a question that has ramifications not only for the Shuttle program but also for many aerospace programs. When is it appropriate to upgrade the test equipment used to maintain a system?

I'm not going to contend that the older equipment that NASA and its contractors were using were not up to the job. Properly maintained, I see no reason why NASA should not use that equipment. But as the report points out, maintaining analog test equipment is often more expensive than maintaining newer digital equipment.

Upgrading can be expensive, but remember we're talking about long-lived projects. Payback for these projects need not be on the order of months, but rather years. And if, in the upgrade process, we improve the maintenance of these systems, thereby making them safer, then we all win.

Contact Dan Romanchik at editor@aatr.net.