From Wrenches to Workstations: How Former Mechanics Bring Real-World Accuracy to Technical Documentation

When technical documentation is written without the insight of someone who’s actually performed the work, small errors can creep in—errors that can cause frustration, downtime, or even safety hazards in the field.

At ONEIL, we believe accuracy starts with experience. That’s why many of our technical writers aren’t just writers—they’re former mechanics who’ve turned their hands-on know-how into a blueprint for better manuals, IETMs, and product support materials.

For our Department of Defense (DoD) customers, that means technical content built by people who understand the unique challenges military mechanics face every day.

Why Real-World Experience Matters in Technical Documentation
In much of the industry, technical documentation is authored by writers and engineers who rely heavily on third-party subject matter experts (SMEs) for mechanical insights. While these SMEs can provide valuable information, their input is often limited to short interviews or occasional reviews—leaving room for misunderstanding and assumptions.

At ONEIL, we take a different approach. Our technical writers are those subject matter experts. They’ve lived the work, used the tools, and made the repairs under real-world pressure. That means they can anticipate field realities others might miss and ensure every step, safety note, and tool call-out is accurate and relevant.

Bridging the Gap Between Field Reality and Technical Accuracy
Former mechanics—especially those with military backgrounds—bring a unique perspective that bridges engineering requirements with end-user needs. They understand:

• Motor Pool Workflow – How vehicles and equipment move through maintenance processes
• Tools and Equipment – What’s actually available and practical in the field
• Safety Protocols – Not just what’s in a regulation, but how they’re applied under operational conditions, and how difficult, complex, and dangerous jobs can be done safely

This direct, hands-on insight helps us create manuals that are not only technically correct, but also operationally realistic.

Q&A with Project Lead, Matt Jones, Former U.S. Army Mechanic

Background: Matt Jones served in the United States Army for 22 years as a mechanic, shop foreman, and motor sergeant, working on a variety of vehicles and equipment before becoming a technical writer and later transitioning into technical program management at ONEIL. His blend of military service and technical authoring expertise gives him a unique ability to create content that works for both compliance officials and front-line maintainers.

• Q1. From the Field to the Desk: How did your Army mechanic experience shape your approach to creating technical manuals?
  A: As a young Army “wrench,” I experienced working on equipment, often outside of my actual Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), with sub-standard technical manuals to support the equipment…or no manuals at all. I was lucky enough to grow up on a farm working on and fixing everything we had, so I went into the Army knowing how to wrench, but being presented with a complex piece of equipment with a technical manual that did not have the information I needed to quickly and accurately perform a repair has definitely forged how I approach writing. I learned the importance of accuracy. Later, as a Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) training young maintainers, I learned how different Soldiers’ life experiences can be and how vast and varying their knowledge base can be. This has enabled me to ensure the level of detail we present will be as clear and usable as possible to everyone, from the highly skilled, experienced technician-level user, to the newest, youngest private, who sometimes has little experience aside from their MOS school training, who is now presented with some crazy Army vehicle they have never seen before, while they are operating in a field environment: cold, hot, tired, wet, or hungry. Because I’ve been there, I want to be sure that young wrench has the information he or she needs to quickly, safely, and easily operate and maintain their equipment, so their unit can accomplish their mission.
• Q2. Motor Pool Insight: What are some details in a military motor pool environment that non-mechanics often overlook in documentation?
  A: When you use the term “motor pool,” some people might think of a nice paved concrete parking lot, an air-conditioned office, and a maintenance facility with all the latest and greatest hardware. In the Army, that’s hardly ever the case. Often your “motor pool” is a dusty, sandy, wet, snowy, or dirty spot under a camo net tucked into a wood line. With operating in those kinds of environments in mind, we’re able to tailor our documentation to what we know the Army maintainer will have at hand to support the mission. Sometimes we can’t tell you what kind of equipment to use to lift an engine out of a vehicle, because we don’t know what sort of lifting equipment that particular unit might have available, but we CAN tell you how to do it safely without endangering personnel or equipment. We write based on the tool sets available to Army maintainers…because we’ve used those tools. We know what comes in those tool sets. And we also know what is NOT in those tool sets. That can be the “make or break” moment for a task or procedure. If a maintainer in the field does not have the tools or equipment they need, they can’t very well perform a repair no matter how well it is documented in a technical manual. Our experience allows us to guide the customer into making recommendations to the DoD about how their equipment could be maintained by Army maintainers and also what is not feasible for a unit if they do not have the resources required to perform a repair.
• Q3. Safety by Experience: Can you share an example where your firsthand knowledge led to a critical safety improvement in a manual?
  A: Unfortunately, while I was enlisted, I saw a Soldier drop a heavy part and lose a finger due to not having the proper lifting equipment. At that time, in my opinion, we were not very well trained in lifting heavy, awkward components with lifting equipment like a material-handling crane on a wrecker. While we had a wrecker with a perfectly capable crane, the lifting chains we were using and the manner we were using them was totally inadequate for what we were doing. The manual didn’t show what to use or how to do it. That taught me that there is no reason that we can’t include that in a procedure: exactly what is the safest and easiest way to pick up that component and what you should use to do it. We’ve consistently received positive comments from our DoD customers about our ability to lead users through difficult procedures this way.
• Q4. Bridging the Gap: How do you ensure our manuals are usable for technicians in high-pressure situations?
  A: During our development process, we perform every procedure 100% hands-on with the tools available to the Army maintainers. I’d like to say we simulate the conditions they may face—driving rain, deep snow, desert heat—but that would be difficult! However, we do ensure the equipment conditions are the same as what the user will encounter. For example, if replacing the starter on a particular engine requires the engine to be removed from the equipment and supported on jack stands, that is exactly how we’ll do it. We’ll verify that the engine truly needs to be removed to access the starter. We’ll ensure the engine CAN be supported safely on the jack stands. We’ll ensure what we’re showing in the graphics accurately shows where the jack stands must be placed to safely support the engine. So, we’re cutting out any guess work on the part of the user in the field. If we tell you that THIS is the best way to perform something, rest assured we experimented to be sure that it IS the best way. We also speak the same language. We don’t get overly complicated. We use the words and structure the users are familiar with. Often, technical manuals “sound” like they’re written by engineers. Because they are. They’re not written by the same folks who have skinned their knuckles using them. They’re written by someone behind a desk in an office. That’s not how we do it. We go out and get dirty in our shop…then we go sit behind a desk in an office. We’re maintainers writing procedures for maintainers.

• Q5. The ONEIL Difference: Why does having former mechanics in these roles make such a big impact for our DoD customers?
  A: Having former mechanics, especially former military mechanics as technical writers creating manuals for our DoD customers comes down to one big theme: experience in the field. We’ve worked on similar types of equipment in the past. We’ve learned from those experiences. We can leverage that experience into our technical manuals to ensure we’re creating documentation that clearly, accurately, and safely guides the end user in the field, that young mechanic trying to do their best to support their unit and accomplish their mission.

The Tangible Benefits for DoD Customers
When our technical writers validate a procedure, they do it with the mindset of someone who’s been there—someone who knows that the wrong bolt torque or missing safety note could cost time, equipment, or even lives. This results in:

• Faster Validation Cycles – No delays waiting on external reviews
• Higher Accuracy – Fewer revisions after field testing
• Better Usability – Content that reads like it’s written by a peer, not a textbook author
• Increased Safety and Compliance – Based on proven operational knowledge

From the motor pool to the manual, ONEIL’s approach ensures that technical documentation isn’t just correct—it’s field-ready. By leveraging the expertise of former mechanics, especially Veterans with DoD backgrounds, we deliver content that technicians trust and commanders rely on.

If your organization needs technical manuals, IETMs, or training materials that are created by people who’ve actually done the work, connect with ONEIL today.

Related Resources

• ONEIL Workshop Facilities – Modern, fully equipped facilities for detailed analysis and documentation.
• Doing Business with ONEIL
• Technical Manual Development