mission   requirements.   Readiness  assessment  is probably the most difficult task facing the SERT because it requires the ability to provide an up-to-the-minute status of the combat system capabilities and limitations. It  also  requires  the  ability  to  recommend  alternate combinations of equipment to meet mission needs. The SERT must know the results of all tests and, in addition, the  minute-to-minute  availability  of  the  combat  system, its  subsystems,  equipment,  and  all  support  functions, such  as  primary  power,  chilled  water,  dry  air,  and sound-powered telephones. Readiness assessment is directed toward four major missions: antiair warfare, antisubmarine   warfare   (ASW),   antisurface   ship warfare,  and  amphibious  warfare. Although   all   problems   with   equipment   are important,  the  existing  tactical  environment  can  modify their impact on a mission capability. For example, loss of  moving  target  indicator  capability  can  be  more important when the ship operates close to land masses than when it operates in the open sea. Materiel   readiness   assessment   should   be approached  from  the  functional  readiness  aspect  (how well it works) rather than the equipment up or down status aspect (whether or not it works) for the following reasons: l l l l Complex,  multifunction  electronic  equipment  is seldom  completely  down  and  less  frequently completely  up.  Normally,  one  or  more  functions are  in  various  states  of  degradation. The impact of a functional fault may be different for  each  mission’s  capability. The combat system’s complex design includes some  functional  redundancy. The test results and operational fault directories relate  problems  to  their  effect  on  system functions rather than to the basic operation of the affected  equipment. Readiness  assessment  uses  two  basic  types  of techniques,  quantitative  and  qualitative.  Quantitative techniques involve the extensive use of mathematics and reports  based  on  graphs  and  numbers.  Past  shipboard experience  has  shown  that  without  computer  support, quantitative  assessment  is  not  easily  managed.  Its numerical reporting lacks meaning or requires extensive explanation.  Qualitative  assessment  (an  application  of engineering analysis) is based on system knowledge, experience, and judgment; and normally is reported verbally. Qualitative assessments depend on the personal experience level of the users; therefore written guidance and  report  forms  are  needed.  The  impact  of  no-go conditions,  revealed  by  PMS  results,  must  be determined for each mission capability. After an assessment is made, each major function is assigned one of the following readiness criteria: 1. Fully combat-ready 2.  Substantially  combat-ready 3. Marginally combat-ready 4. Not combat-ready Fully  combat-ready  status  indicates  that  all equipments associated with that function are in the highest  state  of  readiness  with  respect  to  that  function. Substantially  combat-ready  indicates  that,  although all equipments may not be fully operational, redundancy permits  the  mission  to  be  continued,  with  a  high probability  of  success. Marginally  combat-ready  indicates  a  function  that can be performed, but with a much reduced probability of  success. Not  combat-ready  indicates  complete  loss  of function. These  readiness  criteria  provide  the  basis  for  a summary  report  of  readiness  in  each  mission  capability. The  mission  summary  report  (fig.  4-7)  should  be  supported by a combat system daily fault report (fig. 4-8) listing the subfunction  faults  of  the  day,  their  individual  impact, alternative  recommendations,  and  expected  time  of  repair. Materiel readiness does not end with successful completion  of  tests  and  scheduled  maintenance.  In addition to testing, other actions such as visual inspection for cleanliness, corrective maintenance, quality control, and complete integrity are a necessary part of SERT responsibilities. Also, having the commanding officer conduct  materiel  inspections,  assigning  SERT  personnel to inspection teams, and conducting random equipment inspections  without  prior  notice  can  provide  excellent results. Such inspections should be for electronic and mechanical  materiel  readiness  and  preservation.  The SERT representatives should also provide results of such inspections to appropriate authorities and provide follow up inspections to ensure that corrective action is taken. 4-15