Transcript NDIA SE Division Development Planning Working Group/Mission Analysis Committee Meeting 13 February 2013 Agenda • • • • • • Introduction MA Committee Overview NDIA Systems Engineering Conference MA Committee 2013 Task Plan MA Committee.

NDIA SE Division
Development Planning Working
Group/Mission Analysis Committee
Meeting
13 February 2013
1
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction
MA Committee Overview
NDIA Systems Engineering Conference
MA Committee 2013 Task Plan
MA Committee 2013 Tasks and Discussion
Final Comments and Adjourn
2
NDIA SE Division Organization
3
DPWG/Mission Analysis Committee
• Tentative Meeting Dates for 2012 in the
Washington, DC area
– Wednesday, February 13 (today)
– Wednesday, April 17
– Wednesday, June 19
– Wednesday, August 21
• NDIA SE Conference
– October 28 – 31 in Arlington, VA
4
MA Committee Website
• The MA Committee website has been
updated
– Includes all meetings since the inception of
the committee and support documentation
• NDIA.org
– Divisions
• Systems Engineering Division
–Mission Analysis
5
NDIA Systems Engineering Conference
• October 28 – 31, 2013
• Hyatt Regency Crystal City
• Arlington, VA
• Early Systems Engineering
Track
– Abstracts due May 31, 2013
– http://application.ndia.org/
abstracts/4870
6
Mission Analysis Committee - 2013 Task Plan
Projects Working Group
Proposed 2013 Tasks:
Deliverables/Products
• Support NDIA SED DPWG activities
 Complete S&T/IRAD Final Report
 OCI Discussion Forum
 ASD R&E Defense Marketplace
Innovation Engagement WG
 Lab Engagement WG
• Pre-MDD Architecture Tradespace
• Pre-Milestone A Program Protection Planning
• Final report on the Integration of S&T/IRAD to
support Development Planning
• Final report Addendums following 2013 followon WGs/Forums
Schedule / Resources
Issues / Concerns:
• Working Groups/Forums
 ASD R&E Defense Marketplace Innovation
Engagement WG – April ‘13
 OCI Discussion Forum – June ‘13
 Lab Engagement WG – August ‘13
• Diminishing number of contributing committee
members
• Inadequate resources to work both DPWG and
assigned committee efforts
• Reports
 Complete S&T/IRAD Final Report –
February ’13
Addendums – 60 days after WG/Forum
Completion
DPWG Workshop Action Items
Action
Action
Team
Action
Lead
Status
1. Generate the DPWG Workshop Formal Report
NDIA
Lohse
2. Address the Issue of OCI (as a barrier to collaboration)
NDIA
Rosenbluth
Roedler
Identifying “genuine” OCI
requirements and key language
3. Address the Issue of IP (as a barrier to collaboration)
NDIA
Rosenbluth
Roedler
DPWG Industry team collecting
Industry input
4. Improve and Communicate the Systems Engineering
Process in the Development Planning Timeframe
(including SE as a part of S&T/IR&D)
NDIA
Lohse
Applying NDIA DPWG Development
Planning Analytics Table
5. Identify Methods to Better Leverage Tactical and
Strategic S&T/IR&D in Development Planning
NDIA
Lohse
Guise
Initial efforts in work
6. Identify Methods of Collaboration and Communication
Mechanisms
NDIA/Gov’t
Lohse
Guise
AFRL
Partnering with AFRL for 2013
continued efforts
7. Provide Suggestions for Improving the 6.1/6.2
Investment Strategy
NDIA/Gov’t
Lohse
OASD R&E
Partnering with OASD R&E for 2013
continued efforts
8. Collaborate Across Government and NDIA DPWGs
NDIA/Gov’t
Lohse
Michealson
Sedmak
Partnering with the Gov’t DPWG for
2013 continued efforts
Draft report in work
All Efforts To Be Coordinated Across Government and Industry
OCI Discussion Forum
• Hold discussion forum with OSD and
Service acquisition agents to understand
their respective Organization Conflict of
Interest (OCI) perspectives
9
April 19, 2010
NDIA DPWG Action List
ASD R&E Defense Marketplace Innovation Engagement WG
•
Action: Provide Suggestions for Improving the 6.1/6.2 Investment Strategy
•
•
Action Lead: John Lohse and Gov’t S&T Representative (OASD R&E)
Objectives:
– Increase Industry involvement in the MURI (Multidisciplinary University Research
Initiative) process
•
•
•
Enable Industry to be a submitter of 6.1 topics as an input to the Gov’t S&T planning effort
Provide methods of facilitation (e.g. NDIA SE Division forums, Industry days, etc.)
Understand the 6.1/6.2 funding model
– Increase Industry awareness and use of Defense Innovation Marketplace
•
Provide methods of communication (e.g. NDIA SE Division meeting and conference briefings)
– Identify methods/framework for increased Industry involvement with universities in the
Gov’t 6.1 to 6.2 environment to expedite the technology maturation timeline
•
This was a statement made that earlier Industry involvement would help expedite tech
maturity. It seems to be a big change to the S&T funding process. Some comments:
–
–
–
Is this something we want to pursue?
Is more “alignment” sufficient, or do we really want “involvement”?
If there is something that prevents us from doing this, we can just state that in our formal report.
– Include connections to UARCs and the SERC (Request from Mr. Nic Torelli who
suggested involving Mr. Scott Lucero in this effort.)
•
Method:
– Joint Industry/Gov’t Working Group comprised of Industry and Gov’t S&T
representatives to meet the above objectives
– Due date: TBD
NDIA DPWG Action List
Lab Engagement WG
•
Action: Identify Methods of Collaboration and Communication
Mechanisms
•
•
Action Leaders: John Lohse, Garry Roedler, and Louisa Guise
Objectives:
–
Identify methods of collaboration
•
•
Investigate and report on the concept of having mission focused consortiums (collaborative
mission analysis)
Understand and report on the USAF Model for Industry engagement
–
–
–
Identify better methods to communicate collaboration opportunities
•
Identify communication opportunities and work with the Gov’t to implement them
–
•
•
Specific opportunities currently exist with AFRL and Defense Marketplace Innovation (under Mr.
Kurjanowicz)
Determine methods to “push” the communication to the right audience
–
Need to define the “correct” audience and then define the methods to push the communication. This may
tie into the AFRL action above.
Use Industry Associations to help get the word out
–
•
Form a joint team to work with AFRL to mature collaboration and publicize their model
Address the timing of information exchange to support IR&D planning cycles
Identify appropriate Industry associations and develop an implementation plan. This may tie into the
AFRL action above.
Methods:
– Joint NDIA/AFRL/Government DPWG collaborative engagement to meet the above
objectives
– Due Date: TBD
11
Pre-MDD Architecture Tradespace
Pre-MDD
Enablers and Analytics
Phase
Mission Capability
Needs Analysis
Enablers
Threat Intelligence
Scenario Databases and Development
(e.g. Integrated Security Constructs)
Mission Task Breakdown
Service Task Lists
Joint Capability Areas
Mission Architecture
Concept of Employment (existing)
Wargaming Activities
Government Documentation
(e.g. QDR, NSS, NDS, NMS, Joint and Service
Pubs,
UONs, Risk Assessments, etc)
Military Exercises and Experimentation
Warfighting Lessons Learned
Analytics
Identify the Problem
Threat Set Definition
Political Impact
(e.g. DIME - Diplomatic, Information, Military, Economic)
Mission Capability Needs
Measures of Effectiveness
Performance Standards and Conditions
Current State and Programmed State of Capability
Mission Capability Gaps
Red Team Assessments
Stakeholder Analysis
Identify/Reduce Potential Candidate Solutions
Pre-MDD
Capability Solution
Analysis
Mission Capability Needs
Mission Capability Gaps
Measures of Effectiveness
Current State of Technology
Technology Roadmaps
SoS Architecture
Rules of Engagement
Concept of Operations
Planning and Budgeting
DOTMLPF Assessment
Concept Feasibility Assessment
Solution Space Constraints
Technology Needs Assessment
Technology Gaps Assessment
Technology Realism Assessment
Solution Boundaries
Key/Critical Measures (i.e. MoPs, COIs, KPPs, KSAs)
Concept of Employment (per candidate)
Affordability Analysis
Service Budget Portfolio Analysis
Cost, Schedule, Risk Assessment
Tradespace Analysis
Solution Capability Assessment (per candidate)
Red Team Assessments
Stakeholder Analysis
Pre-MDD
Activities
Phase
Mission Capability
Needs Analysis
Pre-MDD
Capability Solution
Analysis
Activities
Analysis of Future Threats, Strategy, & Needs
Identify threats
Identify range of missions/mission areas/use cases
Identify strategic/political interests
Identify mission areas of interest
Advanced Concept Engineering
Define representative scenarios (including operating environments and conditions)
Understand current Mission Architecture
Identify Mission Measures of Efectiveness (MOEs)
Solicit advanced concepts from S&T Base
Solicit advanced concepts from Industry
Capability Analysis & Gap Identifiction
Identify current capabilities (of mission area(s) of interest)
Identify current Concepts of Employment (ConEMPs)
Evaluate current capabilties based on MOEs
Identify capability gaps
Rank gaps relative to the importance to the mission and the severity of the gap
Bound the Solution Space
Perform or incorporate JCIDS DOTMLPF Study (Verify need for a materiel solution)
Understand current SoS Architecture
Identify conceptual solution space constraints (physical, doctrinal, technology, schedule, and budget)
Provide a timeline projection for the availability of critical needs
Define/bound the conceptual solution space
Identify Mission Measures of Peformance (MOPs) and Critical Operating Issues (COIs)
Solution Identification
Explore potential technologies from S&T and Industry Base (e.g. JCTDs, CRADAs, CRAD, IRAD, etc.)
Identify "potential" conceptual solution candidates (including disruptive and late blooming technologies)
Provide technology assessment of conceptual solution space (current vs future, practical vs plausible, TRL, MRL, etc.)
Understand technology, cost, and schedule realism
Downselect conceptual solution candidates
Generate ConEmps for each candidate
Integrate ConEmps into SoS Architecture for each candidate (i.e. system integration assessment)
Evaluate conceptual solution candidates against "programmatics" (e.g. cost, schedule, risk, etc.)
Evaluate conceptual solution candidates against the MOPs (i.e. how well does the solution meet performance requirements?)
Evaluate conceptual solution candidates against capability gaps using MOEs (i.e. how well does the solution concept fill the gap?)
Evaluate conceptual solution candidates for compliance to the "ilities"
Rank the conceptual solution candidates
Write a "draft" Initial Capabilties Document
Influence the writing of the AoA Study Guidance
Techniques, Methodologies, and Tools
BOGSAT
Back of the Envelope
Spreadsheet analysis
Math Models
First Principal Analysis
Monte Carlo Analysis
Analytic Hierarch Process (AHP)
Discrete Event Simulation
Architecture (DoDAF, Zachman, etc.)
Concept of Employment (ConEmp)
M&S: EADSIM, ESAMS, STORM, SUPPRESSOR,
etc.
BOGSAT
Spreadsheet analysis
Math Models
First Principal Analysis
Monte Carlo Analysis
Analytic Hierarch Process (AHP)
Discrete Event Simulation
Architecture (DoDAF, Zachman, etc.)
Concept of Employment (ConEmp)
Constrained Opitimization Framework
3DoF to 6DoF Simulations
M&S: EADSIM, ESAMS, STORM, SUPPRESSOR,
etc.
Pre-Milestone A
Program Protection Planning (PPP)
• Identify PPP Enablers, Analytics, and
Activities in the Pre-Milestone A timeframe
– Defense Acquisition Guidebook 13.14.2.
Systems Security Engineering (SSE) Process
(page 1150)
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE
MDD
MSA
A
TECH DEV
B
EMD
C
PRODUCTION
O&S
SSE
SwA
SCRM
IA
AT
OPSEC
15
New Business
And
Adjourn
16