How Indian IETM standard (JSG 0852) is better than European S1000D
- JSG 0852 is Indian standard and developed as per Indian defence context
- Importantly, S1000D is European defence standard where CSDB servers are many times out of India.
- When Indian defence has developed JSG 0852, then why to go for S1000D which is 4 times costlier and very complexed to use
- S1000D is only better for Commercial flight trainings only. It is not yet all suitable for Indian defence standard.
- Original and genuine CSDB suit costs around 3- 5 crores and many fake local CSDBs are available for 25 lakhs onwards which are not at all compatible with original genuine CSDB.
- If any S1000d projects are developed using Local CSDB then its just XML IETM but never genuine S1000D project
- If the vendor’s Project can be imported to standard CSDB then its genuine.
- In most cases, in India, Neither client knows anything about S1000D/CSDB not vendor knows anything about S1000D then how both will know what is right or what is wrong ?
- JSG 0852 is always safer and very economical and best suited for Indian context weather its shipbuilding or ARMY vehicles or Missiles or any defence IETMs
Key Features of Indian Standard IETM (JSG 0852)
- It is India’s Defence Standard: Joint Service Guide (JSG) 0852:
- The system uses a SQL database backend, and an IETM viewer (web-based or local) for navigation.
- The manual content / documents are converted into HTML / web-views; SQL DB helps in structuring and fast search etc.
- It has levels (Level 3, Level 4) of functionality, where more advanced features (interactive, database-driven, authoring, content management) are included at higher levels.
- More economical: lower cost of implementation compared to S1000D as claimed by Indian implementers.
- Training & manpower: Indian standard is claimed to have lower barrier in terms of required skill (HTML, basic JS etc.) in contrast with needing more XML-tagging expertise etc.
Key Aspects of S1000D
To understand why one might choose S1000D anyway, here are its strengths:
- It’s an international specification (developed by ASD, AIA etc.) used widely in aerospace, defence, maritime.
- Modular / reusable data: uses Data Modules (DMs), metadata, XML tags, so each unit of information is self-contained, version controlled.
- Common Source Data Base (CSDB): allows many vendors/OEMs to deliver content modules which can be stored centrally, reused, updated.
- Interoperability: because of the strict and well-defined metadata, coding, module structure, exchange among different systems/users is possible.
- Output flexibility: from the same modules, you can generate different deliverables (IETM, PDFs, printed manuals, web versions) with consistency.
Where Indian Standard (JSG 0852) May Be Better (in Indian / Local Context)
Given the features above, here are the ways in which Indian IETM standard might be better suited than S1000D for many Indian defence or local industry projects:
|
ADVANTAGE |
EXPLANATION |
|
Lower cost of implementation |
Less investment in specialized software (CSDB, XML authoring tools), licenses and specialized manpower. This makes Indian standard more affordable. |
|
Faster deployment |
Because the tooling and requirements are simpler (SQL + HTML viewer, basic authoring), rolling out IETM is easier and quicker. Less complexity in metadata definitions, XML schemas, etc. |
|
Lower skill / training threshold |
Personnel with basic web/HTML/SQL knowledge can manage, maintain, update content. S1000D requires more expertise in XML, schema, module metadata, complex authoring environments. |
|
Fits Indian infrastructural / procurement context |
Many OEMs, defence bidders, shipyards in India may not already have CSDB servers or standards for S1000D flow. Indian standard aligns with what is already more common or easier to adopt locally. |
Conclusion: When Indian Standard is "Better"
So, summarizing: Indian IETM (JSG 0852) is “better” when:
- Budget is constrained
- There is no need for frequent module sharing with foreign entities
- Training / manpower availability is limited in XML/S1000D pipelines
- The project/documentation size is High to moderate, or the lifecycle doesn’t demand high reuse or rigorous international interoperability
Here’s a comprehensive comparison chart between S1000D and Indian IETM Standard (JSG 0852) — designed in a way that you can
directly use it in presentations, tenders, or technical proposals (especially for defence, shipbuilding, or PSU projects).
Comparison: S1000D vs Indian IETM Standard (JSG 0852)
|
Parameter |
S1000D |
Indian IETM Standard (JSG 0852) |
|
|
Developed by ASD, AIA, ATA (Europe & NATO) – International specification for aerospace & defence documentation |
Developed by Indian Tri-Services (Army, Navy, Air Force) – Standardized as JSG 0852:2001 for Indian defence IETMs |
|
Core Technology |
XML-based modular documentation using Data Modules (DMs), managed via Common Source DataBase (CSDB) |
Database-driven (SQL/HTML/XML hybrid) system; documents linked through a central relational database and HTML viewer |
|
Purpose / Focus |
Designed for multi-national, multi-OEM interoperability and long-term document reuse |
Designed for national-level projects, where the focus is on interactive, user-friendly manuals for training and maintenance |
|
Implementation Cost |
High – requires XML editors, CSDB licenses, schema management, and specialized manpower |
Moderate/Low – built using standard web and database technologies (HTML, JavaScript, SQL) |
|
Manpower Skill Requirement |
Needs XML specialists, S1000D-authoring experts, CSDB administrators |
Can be managed by technical writers with basic HTML/database knowledge |
|
Learning Curve |
Steep – understanding of DMC structure, BREX, and schema validation required |
Simple – straightforward data linking and interface usage |
|
Authoring Process |
Highly modular; each topic is a standalone Data Module with metadata |
Structured as HTML topics or pages organized in a logical database hierarchy |
|
Ease of Use for End User |
End users often need specialized S1000D Viewer / IETP system |
Works easily through a browser-based or standalone viewer; user-friendly for troops and technicians |
|
Content Reuse / Configuration Control |
Limited – allows reuse of DMs across multiple platforms and configurations if the CSDB supplier is same. One CSDB does not support other CSDB modules |
Limited reuse – designed mainly for standalone systems or single configurations |
|
Interoperability |
High – can integrate across global systems and vendors |
???????? Moderate – suitable within Indian ecosystem, not globally interoperable |
|
Customization / UI Design |
Rigid – presentation defined by XML schemas and publication modules |
Flexible – UI and navigation can be customized (menus, search, multimedia integration) |
|
Multimedia Integration (2D/3D/Video) |
Possible but complex – needs integration through Data Module references |
Native support for audio, video, 2D/3D animations embedded directly |
|
Maintenance Overhead |
High – each revision requires revalidation, re-linking, and CSDB updates |
Low – revisions can be updated in database or HTML level directly |
|
Time to Develop and Deploy |
Long (due to structure, validation, and approval cycles) |
Fast (simple authoring and deployment process) |
|
Ideal Project Size |
Global OEM collaboration projects commercial flights |
Small to medium and big defence systems (ships, training systems, simulators, vehicles) |
|
Suitability for Indian Defence Projects |
Useful for projects involving foreign OEMs or export documentation |
Perfectly suited for indigenous systems and PSU projects |
|
Offline Functionality |
Possible but often requires viewer installation and setup |
Fully supports offline local-server or standalone deployment |
|
Language / Localization |
Primarily English-based; multi-language support complex |
Easy to integrate bilingual (English + Hindi/Regional) versions |
|
Standard Document Output |
XML-based IETP, PDF, HTML, print outputs |
HTML-based IETM, PDF integration possible |
|
Vendor Dependency |
High – dependent on specific toolchain vendors (CSDB providers) |
Low – can be developed using open technologies and custom-built solutions |
|
Lifecycle Cost |
High (due to tool upgrades, validation, and maintenance) |
Low (easier to maintain and update internally) |
|
Compliance / Governance |
NATO / ASD standard |
Indian Defence Standard (JSG 0852) |
|
Best Use Case |
International, complex, multi-partner programmes |
Domestic defence projects, shipbuilding, training, maintenance manuals |
|
Example Projects |
Boeing, Airbus, Eurofighter, BAE Systems |
Indian Navy IETMs, DRDO systems, Army simulators, PSU technical manuals |
Final Recommendation
- For Indian Defence, DRDO, Shipbuilding, and PSU projects,
➡ JSG 0852-based IETM (Level 4) is more practical, cost-efficient, and easier to maintain. - For multi-national platforms, exports, or collaborations involving global OEMs,
➡ S1000D remains the global — though with higher cost and complexity.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Frequently Asked Questions
S1000D vs JSG 0852 which is suitable for IETM?
- S1000D is a European standard and jSG 0852 is Indian defence standard
- S1000d uses XML and JSG uses sql database
- Many OEMS and shipyards think that S1000d is the latest standard. But it is not. JSG is also been used since 1995 onwards.
- If the shipyard does not have S1000D CSDB, then S1000D it is not at all any of use. It is just like html website.&
