Diminishing Manufacturing Sources (DMS)
Diminishing Manufacturing Sources (DMS), also known as parts obsolescence, represents one of the most critical challenges in aerospace and defense electronics sustainment. DMS occurs when electronic components, materials, or manufacturing processes required for system production or repair become unavailable or difficult to procure. This mismatch between the short commercial product lifecycles (typically 3-7 years) and the extended service lives of military and aerospace platforms (20-40+ years) creates inevitable obsolescence issues that can threaten system readiness and operational capability.
The impact of DMS extends far beyond simple parts unavailability. When critical components become obsolete, entire circuit boards may become unrepairable, systems cannot be manufactured to meet production requirements, depot maintenance operations lose repair capability, and modification programs encounter unexpected redesign costs. A single obsolete component can cascade into program delays, cost overruns, and reduced fleet readiness. Effective DMS management is therefore essential for maintaining the operational viability of long-lived defense systems.
Modern DMS management combines proactive monitoring and prediction, strategic mitigation approaches, engineering solutions, and lifecycle planning. Success requires close coordination among program offices, original equipment manufacturers, depot maintenance facilities, and supply chain partners. As electronics technology continues to advance at an accelerating pace, DMS management becomes increasingly sophisticated, leveraging data analytics, predictive modeling, and innovative engineering approaches to sustain aging platforms cost-effectively.
Understanding Obsolescence
Types of Obsolescence
Obsolescence manifests in several forms, each requiring different mitigation strategies. Component obsolescence occurs when specific electronic parts—integrated circuits, discrete components, or electromechanical devices—are discontinued by manufacturers. Technology obsolescence happens when entire classes of technology become outdated, such as the transition from through-hole to surface mount components or from bipolar to CMOS logic families. Manufacturing process obsolescence occurs when fabrication processes, assembly techniques, or test methods become unavailable, even if components theoretically remain available. Material obsolescence affects raw materials, substrates, or chemicals used in manufacturing. Understanding the type of obsolescence helps determine appropriate mitigation strategies.
Obsolescence Drivers
Multiple factors drive component obsolescence in the commercial electronics market. Technology advancement continually makes older components obsolete as manufacturers introduce new generations with improved performance, lower power consumption, or smaller form factors. Market demand shifts away from older technologies as commercial applications migrate to newer solutions, reducing production volumes to uneconomical levels. Manufacturing facility upgrades force discontinuation of older products when fabs transition to newer process nodes or equipment. Business decisions including company mergers, acquisitions, or market exits eliminate product lines. Environmental regulations such as RoHS compliance drive reformulation or discontinuation of products containing restricted materials. Supply chain consolidation reduces the diversity of available components as manufacturers rationalize product portfolios.
Obsolescence Lifecycle
Components typically progress through predictable lifecycle stages from introduction through obsolescence. The introduction phase brings new products to market with limited production and high costs. The growth phase sees increasing adoption, expanding production, and decreasing costs. The maturity phase represents peak availability with stable pricing and multiple distribution channels. The decline phase begins as newer alternatives emerge and manufacturers announce end-of-life plans. The obsolescence phase arrives when products become no longer available for new orders. Finally, the extinct phase occurs when all inventory is depleted. Understanding where components sit in this lifecycle enables proactive DMS management before obsolescence impacts programs.
Impact Assessment
When obsolescence occurs, programs must assess the impact across multiple dimensions. Technical impact includes analyzing which systems, configurations, or circuit boards are affected, understanding the criticality of the obsolete component to system function, and determining whether workarounds or alternatives exist. Schedule impact addresses how obsolescence affects production deliveries, depot repair timelines, or planned modifications. Cost impact encompasses the expense of mitigation approaches including lifetime buys, redesigns, or alternative procurement strategies. Readiness impact evaluates effects on fleet availability, spare parts inventory adequacy, and operational capability. Risk assessment considers the probability of future failures requiring unavailable parts and the consequences of unmitigated obsolescence.
Obsolescence Prediction and Monitoring
Proactive Monitoring
Effective DMS management begins with systematic monitoring of the electronics supply chain for obsolescence indicators. Commercial obsolescence monitoring services continuously scan manufacturer announcements, product change notifications, and end-of-life declarations, cross-referencing these against program bills of materials. These services provide early warning—typically 6-12 months before final availability—enabling proactive response. Programs supplement commercial services with direct monitoring of key manufacturers, participation in industry forums, and analysis of market trends. Monitoring extends beyond individual parts to include packaging options, grade levels, and quality conformance levels, as manufacturers may discontinue specific variants while maintaining others.
Predictive Analytics
Advanced programs employ predictive analytics to forecast obsolescence before manufacturers announce discontinuation. Predictive models analyze multiple factors including component age, manufacturer product strategy, market demand trends, technology generation, and analogous product lifecycles. Machine learning algorithms trained on historical obsolescence data identify patterns indicating impending obsolescence. Predictive scoring systems rank components by obsolescence risk, enabling prioritized attention to high-risk items. While predictions cannot eliminate obsolescence, they extend planning horizons, allowing programs to address issues before they become urgent. Prediction accuracy continues improving as more data becomes available and algorithms advance.
Bill of Materials Analysis
Comprehensive BOM analysis identifies obsolescence exposure across entire systems and fleets. Analysis includes cataloging all components used in systems, identifying single sources or sole-source components with no alternatives, determining which components are already mature or declining in their lifecycle, and mapping component usage across multiple programs to identify shared obsolescence risks. Detailed BOM analysis reveals where design decisions concentrated risk on specific components and helps prioritize monitoring and mitigation resources. Modern BOM analysis tools integrate with obsolescence monitoring services to provide continuous risk assessment as new obsolescence information emerges.
Technology Roadmapping
Understanding electronics industry technology roadmaps helps anticipate future obsolescence trends. Semiconductor roadmaps from organizations like SEMI and industry forums indicate when process nodes will transition, signaling obsolescence of components manufactured on older nodes. Technology evolution patterns in areas like memory, processors, and power devices help predict when current generations will face pressure. Monitoring commercial market adoption of new technologies indicates when older technologies will lose manufacturing volumes. Engagement with key manufacturers provides visibility into strategic product plans. This forward-looking perspective enables programs to plan technology insertions proactively rather than reactively responding to obsolescence crises.
Mitigation Strategies
Lifetime Buy
Lifetime buy—purchasing sufficient quantity of components to support system needs until end-of-life—represents a common first response to obsolescence. Effective lifetime buys require accurate demand forecasting considering production requirements, anticipated failure rates, depot repair needs, planned modifications, and potential life extensions. Procurement must occur before manufacturer final shipment dates, often under time pressure. Storage considerations include proper handling of moisture-sensitive devices, temperature-controlled storage for components with limited shelf life, and inventory management systems to prevent inadvertent use or loss. Financial analysis weighs purchase costs against storage costs and risks of over-procurement versus under-procurement. Lifetime buy works best for low-volume, stable systems with well-understood remaining life but becomes impractical for high-volume components or systems with uncertain futures.
Form Fit Function Replacement
Form Fit Function (FFF) replacement involves identifying alternative components that can substitute for obsolete parts without requiring circuit board redesign. True FFF replacements are drop-in substitutes matching the original part's pinout, electrical characteristics, timing, and mechanical dimensions. Finding FFF replacements requires careful analysis of datasheets, understanding subtle specification differences, and validation testing to ensure substitutes perform equivalently in the actual application. Challenges include finding replacements for highly specialized components, addressing manufacturing process differences that affect electrical characteristics, and qualifying replacements to military standards. Successful FFF replacement requires maintaining detailed technical documentation, coordinating with original equipment manufacturers, and systematic testing to verify compatibility. Even successful FFF replacements require configuration management to track the substitution across affected systems.
Emulation and Redesign
When FFF replacements are unavailable, emulation uses modern components to replicate obsolete part functionality. This may involve using programmable logic devices to emulate obsolete logic functions, modern microcontrollers to replace obsolete processors, or current-generation memory devices to substitute for obsolete memory types. Emulation often requires adapter boards or socket converters to match the physical interface of the original part. More extensive circuit board redesign becomes necessary when emulation is impractical, involving re-engineering circuits with current components, re-layout to accommodate different packages or pin configurations, and complete re-qualification testing. Redesign costs must be justified against alternatives, but it offers the advantage of using current components with assured long-term availability, improved performance, and reduced power consumption. Redesign programs may opportunistically incorporate technology refresh, addressing multiple obsolescence issues simultaneously.
Reverse Engineering
For critical components where no alternatives exist, reverse engineering may enable continued production. This involves detailed analysis of the obsolete component's structure, materials, and manufacturing process, followed by developing specifications for reproduction. Reverse engineering of integrated circuits is particularly challenging, requiring semiconductor analysis laboratories to decap packages, examine die structure, and reverse-engineer circuit functionality. While technically feasible, reverse engineering is expensive and time-consuming, typically justified only for critical components affecting high-value systems. Legal considerations include intellectual property rights, though defense programs may have government purpose rights enabling reverse engineering. The result may be a reproduced component manufactured by a specialty supplier or sufficient understanding to design a replacement using available technologies.
Alternate Sources
Alternative sourcing strategies explore obtaining obsolete components through channels beyond original manufacturers. The aftermarket provides components through distributors specializing in obsolete parts, component brokers who locate scarce inventory, and surplus dealers offering unsold inventory. Caution is essential as aftermarket sources carry risks of counterfeit components, recycled parts, or improperly stored inventory. Rigorous testing and authentication protocols are mandatory for defense applications. Authorized aftermarket programs where original manufacturers license production to continuation suppliers offer lower risk. International sources may maintain production of components no longer available domestically. Some programs establish partnerships with semiconductor foundries to produce small batches of obsolete components. All alternative sources require careful vetting, quality control, and authentication to ensure component reliability and authenticity.
Commercial Off-The-Shelf Substitution
Some programs respond to obsolescence by transitioning from specialized military-grade components to Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) parts with appropriate qualification and screening. While commercial components offer advantages of current technology, continuous availability, and lower cost, they require careful evaluation for military environments. Upscreening processes subject commercial parts to additional testing—temperature cycling, burn-in, electrical testing—to improve reliability to acceptable levels. Not all commercial components can meet military requirements, particularly for extreme environments or high-reliability applications. Programs must balance the benefits of COTS access against potential reliability reduction and increased testing costs. Success requires understanding the specific environmental and reliability requirements of each application.
Strategic Inventory Management
Strategic Spares
Strategic spares programs establish inventory specifically to address obsolescence risk before it impacts readiness. Unlike routine spare parts inventory optimized for known failure rates, strategic spares focus on components likely to become obsolete during system lifetime. Inventory levels balance the cost of purchasing and storing components against the risk of future unavailability. Analysis considers factors including the criticality of components to mission capability, probability and timeline of obsolescence, feasibility of alternative mitigation strategies, and budget constraints. Strategic spares programs require long-term funding commitment, as benefits accrue years in the future. Effective programs include periodic review to adjust inventory levels as circumstances change and disposition plans for excess inventory when systems retire or alternative mitigation strategies succeed.
Inventory Visibility
Comprehensive inventory visibility across the entire supply chain helps manage obsolescence by identifying existing inventory that can support needs when components become unavailable. This includes cataloging government-owned inventory in depots and warehouses, tracking contractor-held inventory including work-in-progress and finished goods, identifying inventory in the distribution channel, and knowing inventory held by other programs using the same components. Inventory visibility systems enable programs to locate and procure available stock before it becomes extinct. Sharing inventory information among programs using common components maximizes efficient use of available resources. Some organizations establish component repositories or virtual inventory clearinghouses to facilitate inventory sharing. Modern information systems with serialized item tracking and automated inventory management improve visibility and enable rapid response when obsolescence occurs.
Controlled Inventory
For components purchased via lifetime buy or strategic spares, proper inventory control ensures availability when needed. This requires secure storage facilities with environmental controls for temperature and humidity, moisture barrier bags and dessicant for moisture-sensitive components, electrostatic discharge protection for sensitive devices, and first-in-first-out rotation to use oldest inventory first. Tracking systems must record dates codes, lot codes, and traceability to manufacturer, storage conditions and durations, periodic inspection results, and usage to support demand forecasting. Periodic testing of stored components verifies viability, particularly for components approaching shelf-life limits. Organizations must balance centralized storage for economies of scale against distributed storage for rapid access. Inventory control extends to circuit boards and assemblies, not just individual components.
Cannibalization Management
When new components are unavailable, cannibalization—removing serviceable parts from unserviceable equipment for reuse—becomes a last resort. While generally undesirable due to the practice's inefficiency and the reduction in depot-level repairables, controlled cannibalization provides interim solutions for critical obsolescence issues. Effective cannibalization programs require tracking which units are designated as parts sources, ensuring cannibalized components receive proper testing before installation, documenting component removal and installation for traceability, and avoiding cascading readiness impacts where cannibalization reduces overall fleet availability. Some programs designate specific airframes or systems as authorized cannibalization sources. Cannibalization is best viewed as a bridge strategy while implementing longer-term solutions like redesign or technology refresh.
Technology Refresh and Redesign Programs
Planned Technology Insertion
Rather than reactively responding to individual obsolescence events, mature programs implement planned technology insertion—periodic upgrades that address multiple obsolescence issues while improving capability. Technology insertion programs occur on regular intervals (5-10 years) corresponding to major electronics generations. Each insertion phase evaluates obsolete and at-risk components across entire systems, designs updated circuits using current technology, incorporates capability improvements where feasible, and conducts consolidated qualification and testing. Planned insertion offers advantages over reactive approaches: economies of scale spreading development costs across multiple components, opportunity for performance improvements beyond simple replacement, and predictable schedules enabling budget planning. Successful technology insertion requires sustained funding, long-term planning, and acceptance that current designs will eventually require upgrade.
Open Systems Architecture
Open Systems Architecture (OSA) designs explicitly for future obsolescence by defining standard interfaces and using modular, upgradeable structures. Key OSA principles include separating hardware and software using well-defined interfaces, defining interfaces using published standards rather than proprietary protocols, modularizing designs so individual cards or modules can be upgraded independently, and minimizing dependencies between modules. When obsolescence occurs in OSA systems, affected modules can be redesigned without impacting other modules or requiring system-level re-qualification. OSA dramatically reduces obsolescence management costs and enables continuous technology refresh. Newer defense programs increasingly mandate OSA approaches. Retrofitting OSA principles into existing systems is challenging but may be feasible for major systems with long remaining life. OSA requires upfront investment in interface definition and disciplined configuration management but pays dividends throughout system lifetime.
Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA)
The Modular Open Systems Approach, mandated by policy for Department of Defense systems, extends OSA principles with specific implementation guidance. MOSA emphasizes breaking systems into discrete modules with defined functions, specifying standardized interfaces between modules, using open standards rather than proprietary interfaces where feasible, and enabling competitive procurement of modules from multiple sources. MOSA facilitates obsolescence management by enabling replacement of obsolete modules with functionally equivalent alternatives from any qualified source. The approach reduces vendor lock-in that can complicate obsolescence resolution. MOSA implementation requires careful upfront planning, selection of appropriate standards, and governance to maintain interface compliance. While originally focused on new programs, MOSA principles increasingly guide major modifications of existing systems, providing a pathway to improved obsolescence resilience.
Running Change Capability
Running change capability enables programs to quickly implement minor changes—including component substitutions—without extensive re-qualification. This requires documented equivalency criteria defining acceptable variations in component specifications, streamlined engineering change processes with delegated approval authority, focused testing protocols verifying critical parameters without complete re-qualification, and configuration management tracking implemented changes. Running change capability is particularly valuable for Form-Fit-Function replacements where functional equivalence is clear but strict qualification processes would impose excessive delay and cost. Implementation requires upfront investment in defining equivalency criteria and establishing processes, but enables rapid response to obsolescence. Care is needed to maintain safety and reliability standards while avoiding bureaucratic obstacles to necessary changes. Running change capabilities are most mature in depot-level repair operations where responsive maintenance is critical.
Sustainment Engineering
Technical Data and Documentation
Comprehensive technical data is essential for effective obsolescence management, enabling programs to identify alternatives, develop replacements, and understand system impacts. Critical documentation includes detailed schematics showing all components and interconnections, parts lists with complete part numbers and specifications, test procedures for verification and acceptance, design rationale explaining why specific components were selected, material specifications and process controls, and qualification test results. Government programs should ensure technical data packages are adequate to support future obsolescence resolution, ideally with data rights enabling competitive re-procurement or redesign. Many legacy systems suffer from incomplete documentation, requiring reverse engineering to recreate missing information. Modern programs increasingly emphasize digital technical data in accessible formats. Investment in maintaining and updating technical documentation pays dividends across the system lifecycle, particularly during obsolescence resolution.
Engineering Analysis Capabilities
Resolving obsolescence often requires detailed engineering analysis beyond routine parts substitution. Required capabilities include circuit analysis to evaluate component alternatives and predict system-level effects, thermal analysis for components with different power dissipation characteristics, signal integrity analysis when replacing high-speed components, reliability analysis to ensure alternatives meet lifetime requirements, and failure modes analysis for safety-critical applications. Programs must maintain or access engineering expertise in relevant disciplines. Original equipment manufacturers often possess detailed design knowledge, but government programs may need independent analysis capability for competitive alternatives or when original suppliers are unavailable. Some organizations establish centralized sustainment engineering teams supporting multiple programs. Analysis tools including circuit simulation, thermal modeling, and reliability prediction support informed decision-making about obsolescence mitigation approaches.
Test and Evaluation
Validating obsolescence solutions requires appropriate test and evaluation. Testing scope depends on the nature of the change: simple Form-Fit-Function replacements may require only functional and environmental testing, while redesigns demand comprehensive qualification. Test programs typically include component-level electrical testing verifying specifications, circuit board functional testing confirming proper operation, environmental testing including temperature, vibration, and humidity, electromagnetic compatibility testing, reliability testing such as accelerated life testing or burn-in, and system-level integration testing. Programs must balance test thoroughness against cost and schedule pressures, focusing on areas where substituted components differ from originals. Access to appropriate test facilities and equipment is essential. Some specialized testing—such as high-temperature electronics testing or radiation effects evaluation—requires dedicated facilities. Test data from one application may support qualification for similar applications, reducing redundant testing.
Qualification and Certification
Defense systems require formal qualification and certification processes to ensure safety, reliability, and performance. Obsolescence solutions must navigate these processes, which vary by system type and application. Airborne systems follow DO-160 environmental qualification and DO-178 software qualification. Space systems adhere to NASA or military space qualification requirements. Safety-critical systems require failure modes analysis and safety certification. Ruggedized systems must demonstrate compliance with relevant MIL-STD-810 environmental requirements. Qualification timelines—often 6-12 months or more—drive early obsolescence planning. Streamlined qualification processes for low-risk changes enable responsive obsolescence management without compromising safety. Some programs establish pre-qualified lists of acceptable component substitutions, enabling rapid implementation when obsolescence occurs. Risk-based qualification tailors testing rigor to the risk level of specific changes, focusing resources on higher-risk modifications.
Program Management and Planning
Diminishing Manufacturing Sources Management Plans
Formal DMSMS management plans establish systematic approaches to obsolescence for individual programs. Effective plans include roles and responsibilities for obsolescence management, processes for monitoring and prediction, criteria for initiating mitigation actions, analysis methods for evaluating mitigation alternatives, funding approaches including identification of obsolescence management budgets, metrics for measuring effectiveness, and integration with broader sustainment planning. Plans document decision-making frameworks guiding selection among mitigation options based on technical, cost, and schedule factors. Well-developed plans help programs respond proactively rather than reactively. Plans should be living documents, updated periodically as circumstances change. Senior leadership engagement ensures adequate priority and resources for obsolescence management. Industry standards and defense guidance provide templates for DMSMS management plans, which should be tailored to specific program circumstances.
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Obsolescence management decisions should be grounded in lifecycle cost analysis comparing alternatives over relevant timeframes. Analysis includes direct costs such as engineering for redesign or alternative qualification, procurement costs for lifetime buys or replacement components, testing and qualification expenses, and inventory storage costs. Indirect costs encompass schedule delays affecting program milestones, reduced readiness from parts unavailability, and increased maintenance costs from more frequent failures. Opportunity costs consider benefits foregone from delaying technology insertion or capability improvements. Cost analysis should extend across the remaining system lifetime, using appropriate discount rates for future costs. Sensitivity analysis addresses uncertainties in key assumptions like remaining service life or future failure rates. While cost is not the sole consideration—readiness and operational capability often dominate—lifecycle cost analysis ensures efficient resource allocation and helps justify necessary investments to leadership and oversight organizations.
Risk Management
Obsolescence introduces multiple risks requiring active management: technical risks that solutions may not perform equivalently to original components; schedule risks that obsolescence resolution may delay critical milestones; cost risks that mitigation may exceed budgets; readiness risks that parts unavailability may ground aircraft or delay maintenance; and counterfeit risks that alternative sourcing may introduce fraudulent components. Risk management processes identify specific obsolescence risks, assess probability and consequence, develop mitigation strategies, and track risk status. High-risk items warrant early attention and potentially more expensive but lower-risk mitigation approaches. Risk-based prioritization focuses limited resources on components most likely to cause operational impacts. Risk assessment should consider not just individual component obsolescence but also cumulative effects of multiple obsolescence events and interactions with other program risks. Effective risk management enables informed decision-making balancing competing priorities.
Funding Strategies
Obsolescence management requires sustained funding across system lifetimes. Funding sources include operations and maintenance accounts for depot-level obsolescence resolution, procurement appropriations for lifetime buys or strategic spares, and research and development for major redesigns or technology refresh. Programs should establish dedicated obsolescence management budgets rather than competing with other priorities for discretionary funds. Funding requirements are inherently uncertain—obsolescence timing is unpredictable, and mitigation costs vary widely by approach. Programs should maintain flexibility to respond to emergent issues while building contingency into budgets. Multi-year procurement authorities help manage large lifetime buys. Some organizations establish component repositories or obsolescence reserve funds pooling resources across programs. Budget justification materials should clearly articulate readiness impacts of inadequate obsolescence funding, helping secure necessary resources during budget deliberations.
Collaboration and Partnerships
Effective obsolescence management requires collaboration among diverse stakeholders. Original equipment manufacturers provide design knowledge and may offer obsolescence solutions. Component suppliers offer visibility into product plans and may provide long-term supply commitments. Depot maintenance facilities contribute operational perspective on parts usage and repair impacts. Industry consortia like the SD-22 GIDEP Obsolescence Management Committee share information and best practices. Academic and research organizations develop new obsolescence management methodologies. Government agencies including DMSMS centers of excellence provide tools and guidance. Programs using common components can pool resources for shared obsolescence resolution. International partnerships help address obsolescence in coalition systems. Active engagement with this ecosystem improves programs' ability to anticipate and address obsolescence. Information sharing—while navigating proprietary concerns—benefits all participants by increasing collective knowledge about obsolescence trends and solutions.
Counterfeit Prevention and Detection
Supply Chain Security
The risk of counterfeit components increases dramatically when sourcing obsolete parts outside established manufacturer channels. Counterfeit prevention begins with supply chain security: procuring from authorized distributors and manufacturers whenever possible, vetting alternative sources through rigorous supplier qualification, requiring certifications and traceability documentation, using trusted suppliers with established relationships, and avoiding high-risk sources like unverified online marketplaces. Defense supply chains increasingly implement anti-counterfeiting measures including secure packaging, authentication features, and blockchain traceability. Programs should establish clear policies defining acceptable sources and approval processes for alternative sourcing. When obsolete components must be procured from non-traditional sources, enhanced authentication testing is mandatory. Industry standards including AS5553 and AS6496 provide frameworks for counterfeit prevention.
Component Authentication
When procuring obsolete components from aftermarket sources, rigorous authentication testing verifies authenticity and quality. Visual inspection examines markings, package condition, and lead appearance for signs of remarking or recycling. X-ray imaging reveals internal die configuration and wire bonding. Decapsulation exposes the die for direct inspection and comparison to authentic samples. Electrical testing verifies functional operation and parametric specifications. Material analysis using scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy confirms material composition. Testing strategies should be risk-based, with more extensive testing for higher-value or more critical components. Specialized testing laboratories provide authentication services, though programs should understand testing limitations—some sophisticated counterfeits can pass certain tests. Authentication is not one-time; programs should implement statistical sampling of incoming components and maintain surveillance for emerging counterfeit techniques.
Standards and Best Practices
Multiple standards and guidelines address counterfeit prevention in defense electronics. AS5553 provides a comprehensive framework for counterfeit parts prevention, including supply chain controls, inspection and testing, and training requirements. AS6496 establishes requirements for suppliers to reduce counterfeit risk. SAE's G-19 committee develops authentication and test methods. GIDEP provides alerts about suspect counterfeit parts. Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) clause 252.246-7007 mandates contractor counterfeit prevention systems. These standards establish minimum requirements and best practices, helping organizations develop comprehensive counterfeit prevention programs. Compliance with relevant standards should be part of supplier qualification and contract requirements. Industry working groups continue developing new authentication techniques as counterfeiting becomes more sophisticated. Programs should stay current with evolving standards and best practices in this dynamic area.
Conclusion
Diminishing Manufacturing Sources represents a fundamental challenge for aerospace and defense electronics, arising from the mismatch between commercial electronics lifecycles and military system lifetimes. Effective DMS management requires comprehensive strategies combining proactive monitoring and prediction, diverse mitigation approaches, strategic inventory management, technology refresh planning, and sustained engineering support. Success depends on early attention to obsolescence rather than reactive crisis management, investment in monitoring and analysis capabilities, close collaboration among stakeholders, adequate sustained funding, and continuous process improvement based on lessons learned.
As electronics technology continues advancing rapidly, obsolescence management becomes increasingly sophisticated and essential. Programs that excel at DMSMS management maintain operational readiness, control costs, and preserve capability throughout system lifetimes. Those that neglect obsolescence face escalating crises, reduced readiness, and unsustainable costs. With proper attention and resources, obsolescence can be managed successfully, enabling defense systems to serve effectively for their intended lives despite the challenge of maintaining 30-year-old systems with 5-year-old electronics.