Reliability, function, and purpose: Lessons from WWII tanks for industrial equipment

Welcome to Maintenance Mindset, our editors’ takes on things going on in the worlds of manufacturing and asset management that deserve some extra attention. This will appear regularly in the Member’s Only section of the site. This week's column features guest contributor Michael D. Holloway, President of 5th Order Industry.

Key takeaways

• Reliability First: Design and select equipment with uptime, maintainability, and repairability as primary goals.
• System Integration: Consider how equipment interacts with the rest of the process, workforce, and logistics, not just its peak metrics.
• Purpose Alignment: Always measure success against strategic outcomes, not just technical brilliance.

Reliability engineering extends beyond the machine itself. It encompasses how design choices, operating conditions, and support systems align with the intended function and ultimate purpose of equipment. 

As a child, I was fascinated with military tanks, especially the tanks of WWII. My father fought in the European theater and had opinions on many things about the war including the equipment. By the time I turned 8 years old, I had built models every tank used in the war, and by 10 years old I had begun a serious examination into the specifications and performance of each. I remember my father telling me that a machine can have amazing engineering in terms of performance, but if it can’t stay running, it’s no more than a hunk of scrap metal. Today, as I look back over 40 years crawling around industrial facilities, I hark back to those words.

A useful comparison can be drawn between WWII tanks and modern industrial machinery. Tanks were not just combat vehicles; they were engineered systems embedded within logistics, doctrine, and strategy. The main part of this article focuses on ways that industrial equipment similarly is not just a collection of specifications but a functional element in a larger production ecosystem. And if you’re interested in military history, an extended sidebar is included that compares makes and models of close to a dozen U.S., English, German, and Russian tanks.

Reliability: Engineering for uptime

German tanks such as the Panther and Tiger were marvels of engineering. They combined superior firepower, heavy armor, and advanced optics. Yet, their mechanical complexity led to frequent breakdowns. Spare parts were scarce, maintenance demanded specialized skills, and fuel consumption was excessive. In combat, many Panthers and Tigers failed not from enemy fire but from their own unreliability.

This mirrors industrial machinery that prioritizes peak performance at the expense of uptime. A high-speed turbine, robotic assembly unit, or advanced chemical reactor may perform exceptionally under test conditions, yet constant failures, difficult repairs, and long lead times for components make them liabilities in production. Reliability-centered engineering values uptime and maintainability as much as raw capability.

The American Sherman and Soviet T-34, while less technically sophisticated, achieved superior reliability. Both were rugged, simple to repair, and designed with standardized components. Crews could restore them quickly in the field, ensuring high operational readiness. In industry, such design philosophy translates into equipment that is easy to maintain, forgiving in variable conditions, and compatible with standardized parts. The result is more time production and less time waiting on service.

Function: Integration into a system

The function of a tank was never independent; it was defined by its place in combined arms doctrine. German heavy tanks were optimized for one-on-one duels, but they could not always perform in broader operational contexts. Allied tanks, though individually weaker, were built to integrate with air power, infantry, and artillery. Their true function was to support maneuver warfare and sustain offensive momentum.

Industrial equipment functions in a similar systemic context. A machine is only as valuable as its role in the process line. An advanced piece of equipment that cannot integrate with existing utilities, workforce capabilities, or supply chains undermines the whole system. Conversely, equipment that slots seamlessly into the production network, even with lower peak output, can deliver higher net efficiency. Function must therefore be measured by operational fit, not isolated performance metrics.

Purpose: Strategic objectives

The purpose of tanks was not simply to destroy other tanks, but to enable victory in campaigns. For the Allies, the purpose of the Sherman and T-34 was clear: field enough tanks, keep them operational, and use them to support infantry advances and strategic offensives. Perfection in technical superiority was sacrificed for alignment with the larger purpose of winning the war.

In industry, the purpose of equipment extends beyond hitting technical specifications. The true purpose is to contribute to strategic goals: cost-effective production, safety, energy efficiency, sustainability, and competitiveness. A machine that dazzles with specifications but undermines profitability or availability is no more valuable than a Tiger tank that never reaches the battlefield.

Applied lessons for engineers

WWII demonstrated that reliability and systemic alignment outweighed raw performance. German tanks like the Tiger represented engineering perfection in isolation but strategic failure in practice. Allied tanks like the Sherman and T-34 were less glamorous but perfectly aligned with their function and purpose.

The same principle holds in industrial practice. Reliability engineering must extend into functional integration and purposeful design. Equipment must not only work; it must fit the system and serve the mission. In both war and industry, victory belongs not to the most powerful machine, but to the machine that is reliable, functional, and aligned with its true purpose.

1. Reliability First: Design and select equipment with uptime, maintainability, and repairability as primary goals.
2. System Integration: Consider how equipment interacts with the rest of the process, workforce, and logistics, not just its peak metrics.
3. Purpose Alignment: Always measure success against strategic outcomes, not just technical brilliance. The best design is the one that fulfills its broader purpose.