Effective Mission Management on Expendable Launch Systems - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Effective Mission Management on Expendable Launch Systems PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 109322-ZDc1Z


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Effective Mission Management on Expendable Launch Systems


Mission Management is a complex and diverse set of tasks and functions ... This paper integrates and utilizes a blend of the best United States Department ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:28
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 35
Provided by: aiaa


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Effective Mission Management on Expendable Launch Systems

Effective Mission Management on Expendable Launch
  • SpaceOps 2006
  • Rome, Italy
  • 19-23 June 2006

John L. Buzzatto Scitor Corporation
  • Introduction
  • Building an Effective Mission Management Program
  • Phased Mission Management Execution
  • Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • Summation and Final Thoughts

  • Mission Management is a complex and diverse set
    of tasks and functions integrating all the
    elements of the launch vehicle,
    satellite/payload, ground, and mission
  • This paper integrates and utilizes a blend of the
    best United States Department of Defense
    (DoD)/National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)
    Mission Management practices
  • The end product will be a generic set of
    activities that could be tailored for Mission
    Management of any near earth/interplanetary space
  • The overall Mission Management Program will be
    developed using the National Security Space (NSS)
    Acquisition Policy 03-01 milestones as benchmarks
    planning and executing the mission management
    program functions

  • The program begins during the concept
    exploration phase and evolves during each program
    phase efforts bridge connect activities
    during each successive phase
  • Approaches and methodology needed are similar for
    manned or unmanned, earth orbit or beyond
    differences lie in level of detail required
    needed to satisfy interface requirements
  • The bible for this effort is the overall
    comprehensive mission management plan that lays
    out the roadmap and includes sections on
    entry/exit criteria for each phase, expected
    resources needed, initial budget estimates, and
    projected schedule milestones
  • The mission management process is the glue
    conscience of the program that incrementally
    builds confidence and reduces risk in the system
    interfaces as the program matures
  • This mission management effort is truly a
    program within a program that employs sound
    management principals to meet programmatic goals
    and enhance success

Building and Effective Mission Management Program
  • Mission Management is defined as a program
    element that has management responsibility of all
    the interfaces between the launch vehicle (LV),
    ground, and satellite (SV) /payload systems from
    program inception through mission operations
  • This all-encompassing function is a major part of
    both the launch and satellite/payload program
    offices since it must meet and satisfy both the
    launch vehicle and satellite/payload requirements
  • Air Force programs split this function between
    the LV and SV programs
  • NRO has chartered a single organization to manage
    both the LV /SV interfaces
  • The approach for this manuscript builds upon both
    approaches and increases the scope and
    responsibilities of the MMP
  • A comprehensive mission management plan is
    developed that lays out the management structure,
    processes, tasks, resources, and budget started
    pre-acquisition phase and evolves over time

Building and Effective Mission Management Program
  • The Mission Management Plan is a sole source
    document for managing and controlling all the
    program elements that flow from the SV/payload to
    the launch and ground systems. It is
  • Class I document placed on the SV, launch, and
    ground systems contracts with interdependencies
  • Umbrella instrument for mediating and resolving
    conflicts between the multiple agencies with
    separate contracts
  • Five main sections organizational roles
    responsibilities, acquisition/contract
    strategies, resource allocations for the various
    tasks, key schedule milestones that must be
    accomplished by the Key Decision Points (KDPs)
  • Budget process includes a bottoms up process
    that realistically estimates the efforts needed
    and includes an additional 10 reserve to
    mitigate known/unknown risks early in the program
  • It includes all the key program documents that
    pertain to the mission interface
  • Mission Management Team (MMT) is the responsible

Building an Effective Mission Management Program
NSS Acquisition Policy Milestones Functions
Building and Effective Mission Management Program
  • The second critical piece of the MMP is the
    contract arrangements utilized between the launch
    vehicle, SV/payload, and ground systems elements
  • Initial activity that defines the interface and
    accomplishes mission trades is extremely dynamic
    and cannot be managed in a vacuum
  • Flexible and timely in meeting the challenges as
    the systems design evolves and architectural
    trades are made
  • Historically, the most effective Mission
    Management contract structure type has been the
    cost-plus, award fee (CPAF) contract
  • Provides the contractors a mechanism for working
    closely together to identify corrective actions
    and resolve significant issues early
  • A structured management organization is
    encouraged to meet the challenges of the complex
    interface between systems
  • The contractors are rewarded by use of the award
    fee process for their ability to maintain cost,
    schedule, and technical baselines

Building and Effective Mission Management Program
  • The contract content includes interface tasks
    analyses, technology insertion, mission design,
    mission unique development/test, verification,
    mission readiness, mission operations, and
    special activities
  • The magnitude of what gets included depends on
    whether a first time mission, recurring, similar
    to past missions, science or national security
  • Long-lead hardware procurement
  • Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) should permit
    easy turn on of new tasks to allow the contractor
    to meet requirements with innovative, cost
    effective solutions
  • Can be in a single contract or multiple contracts
    based on the number of contractors utilized
  • Special CLINs for program management
    responsibilities including systems integration
    and engineering (SIE) practices
  • Includes independent verification activities
    including tool development

Building an Effective Mission Management Program
Building and Effective Mission Management Program
  • The last piece of the MMP is a structured
    hierarchy of interface documentation
  • Interface requirements documents (for every
  • System Engineering Plan (SEMP) and Risk
    Management Plan (RMP) that need to be rigorously
    applied across the interface for both flight and
    ground systems
  • Mission design and technical requirements
    documents allow early planning of mission
    variables and help anchor the critical technical
    parameters for meticulously tracking through the
    life cycle
  • Other mission assurance documents (e.g. mission
    readiness, verification, and
  • Special requirements security, safety, and

Phased Mission Management Execution
  • The MMP structure is simplified into four phases
  • Concept exploration/development
  • Launch /satellite vehicle hardware development
  • Launch service which goes through launch
  • On orbit mission operations
  • Each phase has unique activities that support
    building confidence incrementally for the mission
    interface between launch and satellite systems
    and satellite to mission ground station to
    minimize risk early in the process
  • These efforts require discipline and constant
    management attention due to the length of time
    (6-9 years) needed to bring satellites
    payloads from concept to launch
  • Each phase includes a thorough systems review
    process and a robust lessons learned program

Phased Mission Management Execution
Phased Mission Management Execution
  • The concept exploration/development accomplishes
  • Concept trades to meet operational requirements,
    new technologies, and architectural needs
  • All the necessary mission interface trades should
    be accomplished by the completion of this phase
  • Ground infrastructure requirements and initial
    interfaces need defined
  • Initial identification of potential launch
    systems occurs through analysis of performance,
    volume, and other mission sensitivities
  • Identifying launch hardware and ground systems
    upgrades/new development early during the concept
    exploration/development phase is critical so cost
    and schedule impacts can be factored into the
    program costs
  • The MMT supports the goal of this phase to have
    all interfaces defined, documented, and capable
    of selecting the most compatible SV/payload design

Phased Mission Management Execution
  • The second phase is when LV/SV payload
    development designs become hardware
  • Hardware design matures and the contractors
    prepare for the detailed reviews SRR, PDR, and
    CDR for their systems
  • In parallel, the MMT uses the design data to
    construct a preliminary mission definition, begin
    early analyses and mission unique design work for
    presentation during the hardware design reviews
  • The MMT leads the interface and risk management
    efforts by controlling requirements creep and
    leading the development of viable options to
    mitigate significant risk areas -- the honest
  • The MMT must control the interface between the LV
    and SV/payload communities and have the authority
    to recommend options that minimize impacts to all

Phased Mission Management Execution
  • The MMT needs to lead a concise decision process
    that minimizes the time allocated for design
    through the development and launch service phases
  • Seven guiding management principals (with
    comments one) from Applied Physics Lab (APL)
    and tailored to the particular program
  • Limit the schedule from start to launch (allocate
    the proper amount of time so design doesnt go on
    forever and drive cost and schedule)
  • Establish a small, experienced technical team
    (MMT scoped based on schedule technical
  • Design the SV, LV, and ground interfaces to cost
    (based on understanding both mission requirements
    and derived mission requirements)
  • Use the lead engineer method for each subsystem
    (this is my approach for the MMT minimizes
    documentation and provides ownership of the

Phased Mission Management Execution
  • Design in reliability and redundancy at the
    outset (my approach for the MMT to have a
    rigorous management attention from the beginning
    of development)
  • Integrate the product assurance engineer into the
    program (my approach is that this is mission
    assurance and part of the MMT responsibility)
  • Assign a single agency manager to interface with
    the development team (my approach is this single
    organization, MMT, interfaces with all the
    development teams and is contracted and
    independent of each)
  • Added an 8th the interface organization, MMT,
    must have the contract leverage teeth to make
    the management decision process work
  • MMT plans executes a Mission Integration
    Readiness Review (MIRR) for the mission
    interfaces -- focus is on requirements flow
    down/traceability, preliminary analyses results,
    mission unique hardware and initial operations

Phased Mission Management Execution
  • The third phase is the launch service phase where
    all the elements come together
  • Final mission integration, which takes from 1-2
    years, is a comprehensive endeavor that includes
  • Final verification loads cycle
  • Mission trajectory analysis
  • Final mission targeting
  • Launch placards/constraints
  • Other engineering analyses for verifying launch
    and ascent environments for the specific mission
  • The MMTs management of these tasks and data
    transfer are critical to final mission
    certification and timely resolution of
    discrepancies in the results ensures defined
    criteria exists and tracks need dates

Phased Mission Management Execution
  • A delta MIRR should occur to review the changes
    from the initial review and assess readiness to
    proceed into launch and on orbit activities
  • A formalized mission management working group
    structure by functional area is the most common
    approach for managing the technical interface and
    maintaining configuration control
  • The makeup of the MMT working groups is a
    composition of tiered management and technical
    expertise with representatives from the multiple
    interface communities
  • One key aspect is the systems engineering risk
    tracking function that covers all the mission
    interfaces started during the concept
    exploration phase

Phased Mission Management Execution
  • The MMT focuses on
  • Ensuring system compatibility with all interfaces
  • Functional requirements are satisfied
  • Tracing functional performance requirements
    through each interface specification
  • Completing verification of each requirement
  • Identifying lessons learned for future
  • The MMT follows all LV/SV production and test
    schedules, including critical path activities to
    hardware shipment to the launch base
  • The MMT follows final processing, verification,
    and integrated test of the LV/SV systems to
    ensure compliance with all interface
    requirements, including those for ground systems
  • After launch, the mission management focus shifts
    from interface management responsibilities to
    meeting on-orbit SV/payload checkout and mission
    operations from the Mission Control Center

Phased Mission Management Execution
Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • The key point here is that the physical,
    analytical, and functional interfaces between the
    launch and satellite systems must have a champion
    who ensures total compatibility and compliance
    with all mission requirements
  • The MMT has several key roles in support of
    independent reviews
  • Lead the independent review of interfaces that
    are new or cant be easily verified
    accomplished incrementally from concept
    exploration/development phase and completed as
    part of certification
  • The other critical role is ensuring an
    independent review of all the mission interfaces
    is successfully accomplished
  • The MMT should have contract responsibility for
    managing the external IVV process that carefully
    checks the critical analytical analyses performed
    by the LV and SV/payload community

Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • External IVV has historically been difficult to
    scope and manage with many different
    organizations responsible for different pieces of
    the mission With MMT management,
  • it increases the independence of the results and
    allows a more integrated assessment of all
    independent analyses on both sides of the
    interface and mission
  • It allows early selection of a contractor team in
    the LV/SV development phase to enable tool and
    process development to occur prior to the start
    of early mission integration
  • The MMT should also be responsible for chartering
    and managing the Independent Review Team (IRT)
    that becomes a second or third set of eyes for
    assessing risk on the LV, LV/SV interface, ground
    segment, and SV/payload elements
  • The team has a small number of senior experts
    (reach back) and subject matter experts (SME)
    that focus on significant mission risks that
    include first time mission items

Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • The IRT begins during the LV/SV development phase
    and continues through mission certification
  • The team makeup changes with the initial focus on
    design adequacy, mission assumptions, and
    non-recurring development activities
  • This effort also includes qualification testing
    and preliminary analyses results
  • The second focus occurs during the launch service
    phase with emphasis on non-conformances, test
    failures, and review of final mission analyses
    and ends with mission certification

Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • The first piece of the mission readiness process
    is the pre-launch rehearsals for the launch and
    MCC and related ground segments
  • The MMT plans and leads the execution of major
    milestones during the mission readiness process.
    This includes
  • pre-launch rehearsals for the launch and MCC and
    other related ground segments
  • The multi-step process that begins with
    individual training, team training for the
    launch, ground, and satellite/payload groups, and
    finally integrated team rehearsals
  • It begins during LV/SV development at the
    individual training level with material
    development and individual training plans
  • During the launch service phase team and
    integrated training become critical for
    validating pre-launch and early mission
    operations capabilities

Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • The number of pre-launch rehearsals required
    varies with mission complexity and number of
    organizations participating
  • The ground segment, MCC, has its own set of
    training and rehearsals since in most cases they
    are already supporting other missions on a daily
    basis and must plan around these activities
  • The MMT is key to ensuring all events are
    scripted with realistic scenarios (pre-launch and
    during the mission phase) that stress the teams
    and practice execution of mission procedures and
  • information flow and decision-making processes
    are thoroughly scrutinized
  • the MMT captures lessons learned and incorporates
    changes into follow on events

Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • The second piece of the readiness process is the
    reviews held at key program milestones
  • The early readiness activities are tied to the
    design review process and acquisition milestones
    criteria that are accomplished during the
    pre-acquisition and systems acquisition phases
  • Prior to the LV/SV CDR milestone the MMT plans
    and leads the initial MIRR to accomplish the
    following topics
  • Baseline the LV/SV interface requirements
    (highlight requirements that are still not agreed
  • Trace each requirement through verification
    approach (mission verification matrix)
  • Review preliminary analyses results/issues
  • Status mission design to date
  • Review mission unique hardware and software
    development progress

Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • Status mission documentation (e.g. Concept of
    Operations, MOP, Launch Constraints Document
    (LCD), etc)
  • Mission ground systems development (includes MCC
    ground stations)
  • Mission integration milestones
  • Mission training rehearsals
  • Integrated LV/SV payload launch base processing
    and testing
  • Special mission requirements (i.e. safety,
    security, transportation, etc.)
  • Significant mission risks
  • The results of this review become the mission
    baseline prior to beginning the launch service
    mission integration tasks that finalize all the
    mission parameters

Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
  • The MMT plans and supports the incremental
    readiness process that occurs during the LV/SV
    development and launch service phases
  • The mission readiness reviews are specific to the
    launch service phase and lead up to mission
  • The reviews are a blend of LV/SV hardware
    software, mission integration, ground segment
    (MCC), and launch base readiness
  • occur at appropriate readiness milestones prior
    to launch
  • ensure readiness for launch and mission

Independent Reviews Readiness Execution
Summation and Final Thoughts
  • A comprehensive and consistent mission management
    effort through the mission life cycle is
    mandatory for maximizing the success of any
    complex space mission
  • The Mission Management Program outlined in this
    paper is a model for ensuring a standard,
    synergistic approach for interface management is
    utilized based on years of heritage experience
  • A similar approach can be applied to both near
    earth and beyond missions

  • Documents
  • 1 Space Launch Broad Area Review (BAR) Final
    Report, October 1999
  • 2 Independent Assessment team (IAT) on Mission
    Success Briefing, 24 March 2000
  • 3 Boeing Mission Assurance Review (MAR) Briefing,
    24 March 2000
  • Proceedings
  • 4 Satellite Failure Causes Communications
    Blackout, Justin Ray, Spaceflight Now, 20 August
  • 5 A Successful Strategy for Satellite
    Development and test, Bill Tosney and Steve
    Pavlica, Crosslink, Fall 2005
  • 6 Commercial Communications Satellite Bus
    Reliability Analysis, Frost Sullivan, August
About PowerShow.com