Transcript Earth Systematic Missions Program Office Pre-Phase A Guidelines and Expectations Mary DiJoseph

Earth Systematic Missions Program
Office Pre-Phase A Guidelines and
Expectations
Mary DiJoseph
ESM Program
Deputy Technical
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Road to Key Decision Point (KDP) A
Roles and Responsibilities
Study guidelines
Earth Systematic Missions-Program Office
(ESM-PO) support and assistance
• NPR 7123 requirements for Mission Concept
Review (MCR)
• NPR 7120.5 requirements for KDP-A
• Mission Concept Study Report content
GSFC Earth Science Projects Division
Code 420
Associate Director/
Earth Systematic Missions
Program Manager
Gilberto Colon
Senior Scientist
Vacant
Secretary
Donna Mudd
ESM Performing
Centers
ARC: TBD
GSFC: David Mitchell
LaRC: Leila Vann
JPL: Diane Evans
Systems Safety & Mission
Assurance/300
Independent Technical
Authority/500
Procurement Manager
Steven Kramer
NOAA Projects
Gilberto Colon
– NOAA N’
– GOES N-P
Program Business Office
Program Business Manager
Jonathan Bryson
Deputy Program Business Manager
Kathy Shifflett
Program Support Manager
Katy Mikkelsen
PAO
Lynn Chandler
ESM Flight
Deputy Program Manager
ESM Operations &
Data Systems
Deputy Program Manager
David Mitchell
Vacant
–NPOESS IPO
–LDCM
–GPM
–Glory
–NPP
–ESMO
–ESDIS
– Ground Systems Capability
Draft- 4/4/08
__________________________
Signature /date
Advanced Studies & Strategic
Capability
Deputy Associate Director/ Technical
Mary DiJoseph
Mission Integration Manager
Paul Brandinger
System Engineer/590
Nick Speciale
Program Instrument Systems Mgr
Vacant
– SMAP (JPL)
– ICESat II (GSFC)
– CLARREO (LaRC)
– DesDynI (TBD)
– Decadal Survey studies
Role of the Earth Systematic Missions
Program Office in Decadal Survey
• All Decadal Survey Missions are directed missions and
will be managed by the Earth Systematic Missions
(ESM) Program office, housed at NASA Goddard Space
Flight Center (GSFC).
– This is former EOS Program Office renamed and re-envigorated for
the Decadal Survey
• Directed missions are managed by the implementing
Center (LaRC for CLARREO) with oversight and
assistance as needed or requested from ESM-PO
• EMS-PO develops performance standards and provides
independent assessments for all Decadal Survey
missions
• While housed at GSFC the ESM incorporates expertise
from across NASA
– In particular including science and instrument expertise from LaRC
and JPL
NASA’s Project Lifecycle
CLARREO
is here
Need to be
here by
October
2009
Road to KDP A: The Mission Study Process
•
•
•
Conduct studies and analyses to derive the Level 1 requirements (Science, engineering,
cost and schedule)
Complete an analysis of alternatives resulting in a conceptual design, and conduct Mission
Concept Review
Prepare for approval all documents required in NPR 7120.5D (NASA Space Flight Program
and Project Management Requirements)
Form Study Team
and Devel op Study
Plan
Mi ssion
N eeds and
Objectives
2
C onstrai nts and
Assumptions
1
Top-Level
Mi ssion
R equi rements
D efi nition
Identi fy and Pr iori ti ze
Key Desi gn Parameters
4
5
D evelop Concept
Eval uati on C riteri a
Iterate R eq uirements
Technolog y
Aval iabl e/
R isks
Acceptabl e
12
Str awman
System
C oncept( s)
Prel iminary
System
R equi rements
Flow Down
6
8
7
and Concepts
No
3
D evelop
Str awman EndTo–End Mi ssion
C oncept
No
Yes
Performance
Meets
R equi rements
No
Yes
11
R OM Costs
Wi thi n
Guidel ines
System
C ost/Per formance/
Mar gi ns
vs. R eq uirements
Eval uati ons
9
10
Yes
Final ize Concept and Develop Report
Peer Revi ew
13
PMR D – R efi ned and Val idated R eq uirements
R OM Costs
Str awman M issi on C oncept
Mi ssion
C oncept
R eview
14
15
6
Study Guidelines: the study process
Form Study Team
and Devel op Study
Plan
Mi ssion
N eeds and
Objectives
2
C onstrai nts and
Assumptions
1
Top-Level
Mi ssion
R equi rements
D efi nition
Identi fy and Pr iori ti ze
Key Desi gn Parameters
4
5
D evelop Concept
Eval uati on C riteri a
Iterate R eq uirements
Technolog y
Aval iabl e/
R isks
Acceptabl e
12
Str awman
System
C oncept( s)
Prel iminary
System
R equi rements
Flow Down
6
8
7
and Concepts
No
3
D evelop
Str awman EndTo–End Mi ssion
C oncept
No
Yes
Performance
Meets
R equi rements
No
Yes
11
R OM Costs
Wi thi n
Guidel ines
System
C ost/Per formance/
Mar gi ns
vs. R eq uirements
Eval uati ons
9
10
Yes
Final ize Concept and Develop Report
Peer Revi ew
13
PMR D – R efi ned and Val idated R eq uirements
R OM Costs
Str awman M issi on C oncept
Mi ssion
C oncept
R eview
14
15
Pre-Phase A is an iterative process. Crucial to conducting a successful study
is agreement on a set of realistic mission objectives and their flowdown to
science and measurement requirements that are documented in the
mission’s Level 1 Requirements.
Study Goals & Objectives
• Establish performance metrics, develop and document
the mission science requirements (Level 1
requirements), explore the full range of implementation
options, define an affordable project concept to meet
requirements specified in the Level 1’s, identify needed
technologies, and begin preliminary development of the
Project Plan.
• Define the best mission that fits within the allocated
resources and bring the mission to Phase A maturity.
Mission Study Teams should explore the optimum range
of cost, schedule, and capability that will maximize the
science/cost ratio across the entire Decadal Survey flight
program.
Study Guidelines: activities
• Investigate:
– Potential Partnerships with non-NASA organizations
– Instrument and mission design and development options,
including make/buy decisions and alternative mission operations
approaches
• Conduct trades:
– Science requirements, trying to identify the significant cost
vs. performance parameters
– Mission risk (looking for cost vs. reliability drivers)
– Technology
– Acquisition Strategy
– Mission operations approach
– Data Processing and distribution approach
– Access to space (launch vehicle selection; co manifest; etc)
Study Guidelines: study schedule
should include these activities
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Detailed mission concept definition
Sensitivity analyses (science measurement requirements and instrument performance parameters)
Cost estimates
Risk assessments
System impacts of new technology infusion
Concept validation
Mission trade space modeling
Study reports and archived models
Level 1 requirement definition
– Temporal and spatial resolution requirements.
– Measurement accuracy requirement as a function of spatial resolution.
– Effect of orbit selection on mission performance.
– Mission lifetime.
– Other science requirements achievable by potential instrument combinations that could extend the mission
applicability to other science questions.
– Measurement(s) to be made
– Science rationale (How measurements contribute to science question(s))
– Related measurements of complementary value
– Define roles for international partners
Define a baseline instrument concept, including the rationale and key instrument performance parameters
Identify alternative instrument concepts
Define a spacecraft concept, including key spacecraft performance parameters
Identify launch requirements
Identify Supporting R&A investments
Identify Specific cal/val requirements
Generate a detail cost estimate for instrument, Ground System, MO& DA, Science, Project Management, Systems
Engineering, and Flight Assurance. Parametric estimate for spacecraft.
Develop a detailed mission schedule (at least WBS Level 3 for instrument)
•
•
•
•
Roles & Responsibilities
Program Scientist (PS) – NASA HQ
– Establishes a Science Definition Team and produces relevant documentation.
– Assists the Program Executive (PE) in the establishment of a Technology Definition Team, if relevant.
– Solicits scientific investigations and prepares the Announcemetnt of Opportunity supported by the PE and Project
Scientist, with attention to how the mission relates to previous and subsequent planned missions.
Program Executive – NASA HQ
– Tracks studies to define mission feasibility and desirability
– Represents program interests on working groups to define missions and generate science plans
– Establishes working groups to determine the advanced technologies necessary to enable future missions.
– Maintains working relationships with NASA Center management, programs, and projects.
– Provides liaison with SOMD’s launch-vehicle provider organization.
– Acts as liaison between the study team and Office of External Affairs to initiate international agreements
Program Office – EMS-PO (GSFC)
– Supports NASA HQ in conducting mission studies to develop mission concepts and determine feasibility.
– Supports NASA HQ in new project start approval activities.
– Develops launch vehicle requirements and launch windows identifying potential timeframes when launches can take
place.
– Develops project performance metrics.
– Conducts trade studies to develop a viable project architecture that will be approved by SMD. This involves conductin
technical/cost/schedule tradeoffs.
– Ensures a Technology Plan is developed
Study Manager – Implementing Center (LaRC)
– Establish the study office and structure to direct and monitor study tasks/activities
– Initiate, support, and conduct concept studies consistent with direction and guidance from PS/PE-led working group
– Originates mission requirements
– Develop mission options, conduct trades, and develop cost estimates.
– Assess technical, schedule, and cost performance and identify risk mitigation activities
– Communicate study performance, issues and risks and present recovery plans
– Conduct readiness reviews leading to KDPs
Program Office Support Available to Study
and Science Teams
• Mission design studies with GSFC’s Integrated Mission Design
Center (IMDC) or JPL’s Team-X
• Access to specific discipline engineering as needed
• Operations and Ground System conceptual design with Earth
Science Data Information System (ESDIS) and Earth Science
Mission Operations (ESMO) Projects
• Launch Vehicle coordination and access to space through Launch
Services
• Additional systems engineering support
• Assistance with requirements analysis and derivation as needed
• Independent Cost Estimate with GSFC Resources Analysis Office
for consistency with other Decadal missions
NPR 7123 requirements for MCR
Mission Concept Review
Entrance Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Mission goals and objectives.
Analysis of alternative concepts to show at
least one is feasible.
Concept of operations.
Preliminary mission descope options.
Preliminary risk assessment, including
technologies and associated risk
management/mitigation strategies and options.
Conceptual test and evaluation strategy.
Preliminary technical plans to achieve next
phase.
Defined MOEs and MOPs.
Conceptual life-cycle support strategies
(logistics, manufacturing, and operation).
Success Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Mission objectives are clearly defined and stated and are
unambiguous and internally consistent.
The preliminary set of requirements satisfactorily provides a system
that will meet the mission objectives.
The mission is feasible. A solution has been identified that is
technically feasible. A rough cost estimate is within an acceptable
cost range.
The concept evaluation criteria to be used in candidate systems
evaluation have been identified and prioritized.
The need for the mission has been clearly identified.
The cost and schedule estimates are credible.
An updated technical search was done to identify existing assets or
products that could satisfy the mission or parts of the mission.
Technical planning is sufficient to proceed to the next phase.
Risk and mitigation strategies have been identified and are acceptable
based on technical risk assessments.
NPR 7120.5 Requirements
• Deliver the following products
– Draft Level 1 requirements document
– Preliminary Formulation Authorization
Document
– Mission Concept report
– Preliminary Integrated Baseline
Mission Concept Study Report content
1. Mission Architecture and System
Concept
2. Technology Maturity, Risk Assessment
and Risk Mitigation
3. Mission Acquisition Approach
4. Cost and Schedule