Your system is ready for the market. Is it ready for defence?
Defence spending is rising. More countries are investing, more budgets are being released, and more tenders are being issued. Companies in advanced electronics, drones, aerospace, and optical systems see an opportunity: their technology is already proven. R&D has worked for years, the design is frozen, the first units are built. Then, almost in passing: “Oh right, if we want to offer this to Defence, we’ll need an ILS package available. Let’s add that if we don’t have it yet.”
And that is precisely the problem. ILS is not an afterthought or an administrative obligation you sort out afterward. It should have started three years ago.
A defence product is not a commercial product with a camouflage print
Products with primarily civilian use but also military applications are called dual-use products: sensor technology, optical systems, drones, advanced electronics. The interest from defence is logical: proven technology, shorter development time, lower costs.
You can’t simply copy a product from the commercial market to defence. Defence doesn’t buy a standalone product: it buys an operational capability that must remain deployable for twenty to twenty-five years. Those requirements go beyond day-one performance: maintenance, availability in the field, and user safety. This is precisely where Integrated Logistic Support (ILS) is decisive, and precisely where companies making the step to defence leave the most points on the table.
Go directly to
Compliant on paper, non-compliant in practice
ILS that starts after the design can only describe what exists. It can no longer change anything. Maintenance-unfriendly choices have already been made. Components are not standardized. The accessibility of critical parts was never incorporated into the design. Reliability, availability, and maintainability are not embedded in the design and not tailored to how the system is actually used in the field.
The result: the documentation becomes compliant, but the system simply isn’t good enough for defence use. And that gap, between compliant on paper and truly suitable for defence, is increasingly determining the outcome of a tender.
The forgotten user in the design process
Outside of defence, ILS is not a standard concept. R&D teams optimize for functionality and cost. No one asks during the design phase: "How does a technician replace this component in the field, in the dark, under time pressure?"
In defence, that’s not an exception. That is the standard use case.
The concrete consequences of ILS that starts too late:
- Maintenance-unfriendly design choices can no longer be reversed
- Accessibility of critical components was never incorporated into the design
- Spare parts are not standardized
- Documentation and analyses describe the system after the fact, but can no longer improve it
Why this pattern occurs so often in companies with dual-use products
Commercial companies think in product development cycles. Version 1.0, 2.0, 3.0: a new cycle every few years. Defence thinks in decades. The system procured today must still be operational in 2045. Maintained by technicians who may never have worked on it before. In circumstances you can’t foresee today. That is precisely why the configuration of a defence system must be sharply documented and must not change without authorization, because an undocumented modification means maintenance procedures no longer hold and the system comes to a standstill.
ILS is not a standard part of process thinking in commercial product development. As a result, it only surfaces when it’s too late: after the design. The system already exists. The choices have already been made. ILS can now only document them.
What integrating ILS early concretely delivers
- Better maintainability
- Lower lifecycle costs
- A system meeting operational reality of defence
When ILS analyses feed into design decisions instead of merely documenting them, the result changes fundamentally. Better maintainability. Lower lifecycle costs. And a system that demonstrably meets the operational reality of defence, not just on paper.
Integrating ILS early means, among other things:
- Incorporating maintainability as a design criterion, not as an afterthought
- Validating component choices for long-term availability and replacebility
- Building an ILS baseline that is reusable for every subsequent tender
- Minimizing the risk of redesign and costly adjustments after the fact
At every design review, ask one question: "How will this be used and maintained in the field, and by whom?" If no one knows the answer, that is the signal.
ILS pays off outside of defence too
ILS thinking - structured thinking about maintainability, availability, and lifecycle support - also has commercial value. A product designed with maintainability as a criterion costs less to maintain, provides a stronger basis for aftermarket revenue, and makes it easier to persuade customers based on total cost of ownership rather than purchase price alone.
Moreover, structured ILS documentation preserves knowledge that would otherwise be lost when experienced people leave.
The nuance: commercial markets have shorter product cycles and customers who plan less far ahead, which means a full ILS package is not always proportionate. But the underlying principles, lifecycle thinking, maintainability as a design input, structured documentation, also generate returns outside of defence.
The best moment was at the first design choice. The second-best moment is now.
Starting ILS early is not a luxury, it’s a design choice. Those who start now build a reusable baseline for every tender and reduce the risk of rejection because the technology was sound but the underpinning wasn’t.
Those who wait only document what already exists. And that is rarely enough.
Frequently asked questions about ILS in the design phase
Want to discuss your ILS challenge?
Contact our Team Manager ILS Okke Pieters. He's happy to help you get the most out of ILS for your business.
About the author
Okke Pieters
Team Manager ILS
About the author
Okke Pieters
Team Manager ILS
I am Okke Pieters, Team Manager ILS at Etteplan. In various roles, I have closely experienced what it takes to set up and implement Integrated Logistic Support, as well as where things often go wrong in practice. In my current role, I work with organizations that want to enter the defense market, aim to use ILS as a distinctive competitive advantage, or are seeking the right balance between technology and support. Interested in Integrated Logistic Support? I regularly share insights and practical experiences. Follow me on LinkedIn or reach out to me for a meaningful conversation about your situation if you want to know more about ILS.
Maybe you find this interesting as well
Why ILS is about systems
