The Army Sustainment Magazine: Your Source for Sustainment News

As a self-proclaimed professional bimonthly online publication, the Army Sustainment Magazine focuses on matters pertinent to United States Army personnel Elisa Gayle Ritter . Known formally as the Army Logistician, the publication serves as a briefing for sustainment war fighting capabilities. Vital information found within the articles includes the latest news and update about logistics, personnel services, medical logistics, and evacuation issues.

This month, the magazine is celebrating 60 years of advocating preventive vehicle and equipment maintenance. The practice is critical to ensuring army sustainment and equipment readiness for present-day military.

Unfortunately, due to budget cuts in the Department of Defense, the manpower and resources are feeling the effects. Some promote the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” strategy. Yet most army personnel believe in a proven maintenance plan, one that has 60 years of success. The Preventive Maintenance Checks and Services (PMCS) program has been in use since World War II. When funds deteriorate, implementing the PMCS is essential to the success of a well-oiled military machine.

Corrosion, Another Extended Expense Corrosion costs the Army $2 billion per year. The PMCS protocols, as referred to in the Army Sustainment Magazine article, state the goal as find, remove and prevent corrosion. If done effectively, the cost reduction can be profound.

In times of active duty, maintenance and operations can clash. Army sustainment is an indispensable factor for commanding officers. Commanders must always be able to trust the readiness of the equipment as well as the soldiers to ensure a successful campaign. The practice of these protocols allows risk management principles to be applied, thus reducing the lost of equipment, time and most importantly soldier’s lives.

Over the past 60 years, the Army’s attitude towards vehicle and equipment maintenance has changed greatly – in part due to War. World War II offered the attitude that equipment was to be used up, worn out and then replace. With the Korean War, the United States realized very quickly that the belief “use it up and then replace it” had no place in this war.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *