MIL-PRF-83282 Hydraulic Fluid, Fire Resistant, Synthetic Hydrocarbon Base, Aircraft
for use in the temperature range of -40° to +205°C. This hydraulic fluid is identified by NATO Code Number H-537.
This specification covers the requirements for a synthetic hydrocarbon-base hydraulic fluid.
The hydraulic fluid covered by this specification is intended for use from -40°to +205°C in automatic pilots, shock absorbers, air compressor gear boxes, brakes, flap-control mechanisms, missile hydraulic servo-controlled systems and other hydraulic systems using synthetic sealing material. This fluid may be stored in areas ranging in temperature from -40°to +50°C
MIL-SPEC, military specification, military standard (MIL-STD) is a United States Defense standard used to describe a product that meets specific performance and manufacturing standards for equipment and chemicals.
Other non-defense government organizations, technical organizations and industry may also use military specifications are not just limited to The Department of Defense, as other government organizations and Industry use them as well.
Here is a Q&A from the Department of Defense:
What is a performance spec?
A. A performance specification states requirements in terms of the required results with criteria for verifying compliance, but without stating the methods for achieving the required results. A performance specification defines the functional requirements for the item, the environment in which it must operate, and interface and interchangeability characteristics.
Q. What guidance have we given on how to write a performance specification?
A. Writing performance specifications is not a new concept. We have been teaching how to write performance requirements for years at our specification training course. It has received extra emphasis in our training on how to write Commercial Item Descriptions. What is new is that we are now designating documents as "performance specifications."
Q. If you have a performance spec that is MILSPEC, is a waiver needed?
Q. Is it possible for a general specification to be designated as performance and its associated specification sheets to be designated as detail?
A. No. Since a general specification must be used together with a specification sheet, the fact that the specification sheet is detail requires the general specification also to be designated as detail.
Q. Within the same family of specification sheets, is it possible for some to be designated as detail and others to be performance?
A. Generally, no. The decision whether to convert a family of specification sheets to performance specifications must be consistent across-the-board. In some cases, however, the number of specification sheets that must be converted to performance specifications may be very large, making it difficult to convert all of them at one time. In this situation, there may be a temporary blend of detail and performance specification sheets within the same document number series. This situation is acceptable as long as the goal is to convert all of them to performance specifications.
Q. Can a performance spec ever cite a detail spec as a requirement?
A. The citing of a detail spec as a requirement does not automatically mean that a spec is not performance, but it is a strong indicator that as spec may not be performance. Performance specs should not cite any detail spec as a requirement if it demands a specific design solution. But performance specs may cite a detail spec if it relates to a physical or operational interface requirement.
For example, it would be permissible to have a requirement in a performance engine specification that required the engine to operate with specific substances, such as lubricating oil or fuel, which conform to detail specs. The requirement that the engine be able to operate on a specific type of fuel is an operational interface requirement and does not dictate the specific design of the engine. However, it would not be permissible in a performance spec to require the engine be made of certain materials or that the various engine components conform to detail specs since such requirements would dictate specific design solutions instead of stating the performance expected.
Q. I'm writing a spec that describes a "kit."
Should it be a detail (MIL-DTL-) or a performance (MIL-PRF-) specification?
A. In general, the answer is that it will likely be a detail specification; however, there can be exceptions. A spec for a kit describes a collection of related items, such as adapters, couplings, bags, tools, attachments, or accessories. A kit may contain items for installing, testing, or starting up a system or piece of equipment; it may be provided to equip an existing system for specific functions; or it may be used to adapt equipment to meet new or specialized conditions. If the spec writer were careful to write all of the requirements for the kit's contents in terms of form, fit, function, and interfaces, and to cite only performance-type documents, the resulting spec would support a MIL-PRF designation. As is frequently the case, however, if one or more of the kit's components are described using a specific design solution, Technical Data Package, MIL-DTL type spec, or a non-government standard that contains detail design requirements, the kit spec must be designated as a MIL-DTL. The spec writer needs to keep in mind that all of the requirements for all of the kits' components must be stated in performance terms in order to produce a MIL-PRF.