Journals / Journal of Aviation / 2026 / Volume: 10 Issue: 3

Supportability-Driven Engineering BOM Structuring for S1000D-Based Aircraft Technical Publications

Mehmet Kılıç(Türk Havacılık ve Uzay Sanayii A.Ş.)0009-0000-3550-9542
Oktay Durmaz(Türk Havacılık ve Uzay Sanayii A.Ş.)0009-0003-4311-0031
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-10-25
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Further evaluation using multiple product structures, quantitative performance measures, and operational PLM/S1000D environments is needed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Engineering Bill of Materials (EBOM) structures in aerospace programs primarily represent a product’s functional and physical architecture, but may not adequately support S1000D-based technical publications, Integrated Logistic Support (ILS), and maintenance information.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This misalignment can create inconsistencies in Illustrated Parts Catalogues (IPC), complicate configuration management, and weaken lifecycle traceability.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Further evaluation using multiple product structures, quantitative performance measures, and operational PLM/S1000D environments is needed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:S1000D · Engineering Bill of Materials (BOM) · Supportability

Abstract

Engineering Bill of Materials (EBOM) structures in aerospace programs primarily represent a product’s functional and physical architecture, but may not adequately support S1000D-based technical publications, Integrated Logistic Support (ILS), and maintenance information. This misalignment can create inconsistencies in Illustrated Parts Catalogues (IPC), complicate configuration management, and weaken lifecycle traceability. This study proposes a supportability-driven EBOM architecture integrating Configuration Items (CIs), Design Solutions (DSs), maintainable items, and S1000D information structures. It incorporates maintenance boundaries, maintenance levels, and publication requirements into product structure definition and establishes traceable relationships between EBOM entities, S1000D Data Modules, and IPC structures. The architecture is assessed through a representative aerospace case study to examine feasibility and internal consistency. Explicitly representing an Organizational-Level Line Replaceable Unit (LRU) as an EBOM assembly node provides a structural basis for identifying maintainable items and mapping them to technical publication information. The study offers a proof-of-concept methodology for integrating engineering, configuration management, and technical publication activities. Further evaluation using multiple product structures, quantitative performance measures, and operational PLM/S1000D environments is needed.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kılıç, M., Durmaz, O. (2026). Supportability-Driven Engineering BOM Structuring for S1000D-Based Aircraft Technical Publications. Journal of Aviation, Volume: 10 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.30518/jav.1976996

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Ameri, F., & Dutta, D. (2005). Product lifecycle management: Closing the knowledge loops. Computer-Aided Design & Applications, 2(5), 577–590.
  2. Blanchard, B. S. (2004). Logistics engineering and management (6th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
  3. Blanchard, B. S., & Fabrycky, W. J. (2011). Systems engineering and analysis (5th ed.). Pearson.
  4. Estefan, J. A. (2008). Survey of model-based systems engineering (MBSE) methodologies (Rev. B, INCOSE-TD- 2007-003-02). International Council on Systems Engineering.
  5. Friedenthal, S., Moore, A., & Steiner, R. (2014). A practical guide to SysML: The systems modeling language (3rd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann.
  6. Grieves, M. (2006). Product lifecycle management: Driving the next generation of lean thinking. McGraw-Hill.
  7. Grieves, M., & Vickers, J. (2017). Digital twin: Mitigating unpredictable, undesirable emergent behavior in complex systems. In F.-J. Kahlen, S. Flumerfelt, & A. Alves (Eds.), Transdisciplinary perspectives on complex systems (pp. 85–113). Springer.
  8. INCOSE. (2023). INCOSE systems engineering handbook: A guide for system life cycle processes and activities (5th ed.). Wiley.
  9. International Organization for Standardization. (2021). ISO 16792:2021: Technical product documentation— Digital product definition data practices. https://www.iso.org/standard/76534.html
  10. International Organization for Standardization. (2024). ISO 10303-239:2024: Industrial automation systems and integration—Product data representation and exchange—Part 239: Application protocol: Product life cycle support. https://www.iso.org/standard/78832.html
  11. International Organization for Standardization. (2017). ISO 10007:2017: Quality management—Guidelines for configuration management. https://www.iso.org/standard/70400.html
  12. Madni, A. M., & Sievers, M. (2018). Model-based systems engineering: Motivation, current status, and research opportunities. Systems Engineering, 21(3), 172–190.
  13. S1000D International Steering Committee. (2026). S1000D: International specification for technical publications using a common source database (Issue 7). https://s1000d.org
  14. S3000L International Steering Committee. (2025). S3000L: International procedure specification for logistic support analysis. (Issue 3.0). https://s-series.org/s3000l
  15. SAE International. (2019). GEIA-STD-0007C: Logistics product data.
  16. Stark, J. (2015). Product lifecycle management: 21st century paradigm for product realisation (3rd ed.). Springer.
  17. U.S. Department of Defense. (1997). MIL-STD-1388-1A: Logistic support analysis. U.S. Department of Defense.
  18. U.S. Department of Defense. (2018). Digital engineering strategy. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. https://ac.cto.mil/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Digital-Engineering- Strategy_Approved_PrintVersion.pdf