Path to Mission Concept Review
1 / 17

Path to Mission Concept Review Michael J. Gazarik Deputy Director for Programs System Engineering Directorate NASA Lang - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Path to Mission Concept Review Michael J. Gazarik Deputy Director for Programs System Engineering Directorate NASA Langley Research Center October 23, 2008. Robert Reisse CLARREO Study Project Manger Contributors Michelle Garn, Paul Speth, Steve Hall. Outline.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Path to Mission Concept Review Michael J. Gazarik Deputy Director for Programs System Engineering Directorate NASA Lang' - ada

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Path to Mission Concept Review

Michael J. Gazarik

Deputy Director for Programs

System Engineering Directorate

NASA Langley Research Center

October 23, 2008

Robert Reisse

CLARREO Study Project Manger


Michelle Garn, Paul Speth, Steve Hall


  • Science and Engineering Interaction: Key to Mission Success

  • Purpose of a Mission Concept Review (MCR)

  • Required Products for a Successful MCR

  • Schedule of Activities leading to MCR

  • Integrated System Engineering Team

  • What we need from the Science Community

Clarreo desdyni

  • CLARREO & DESDynI are the next Decadal Survey missions to be addressed by the ESD

    • Both missions are directed science missions with individual budget lines. They are managed out of the Earth Systematic Missions (ESM) Program Office located at GSFC

  • The CLARREO mission is led by LaRC, with GSFC support

    • Draft level 1 requirements & initial international partnership discussions, Fall 2008

    • Initial mission concepts, Spring 2009,

    • Full technology readiness assessment, MCR October 2009

  • The DESDynI is led by JPL, with a significant GSFC contribution

    • Draft level 1 requirements & initial international partnership discussions, Fall 2008

    • Mission configuration down select, Spring 2009

    • Full technology readiness assessment, MCR October 2009

From Steve Volz, Associate Director, Flight Programs, NASA Earth Science Division

Nasa mission lifecycle
NASA Mission LifeCycle

  • Pre-Phase A: Concept Studies

    • MCR: Mission Concept Review

  • Phase A: Concept & Technology Development

    • SRR: System Requirements Review

  • Phase B: Preliminary Design

    • PDR: Preliminary Design Review

    • Technology Readiness Level should be at least 6

  • Phase C: Final Design

    • CDR: Critical Design Review

  • Phase D: Assembly, Integration & Test

  • Phase E: Operations

  • Phase F: Closeout

Mission concept review mcr
Mission Concept Review (MCR)

  • Related to Key Decision Point (KDP A) – used by NASA to decide if mission should move into Phase A (Formulation)

  • Our opportunity to advocate to Agency management and independent review board that mission is well formulated and defined – with rationale for key decisions

Roadmap to mission concept review mcr
Roadmap to Mission Concept Review (MCR)

Science Imperatives (Goals), Objectives, Questions

Objective: Establish a climate benchmark for testing/validation of climate models

Detailed Science Questions

Level 1 Requirements

From the objectives develop level 1 requirements.

CLARREO shall measure xx with an accuracy of xx and spatial resolution of xx, etc

MCR deliverable: Level 1 Requirements Document

Mission Requirements & Operational Concept

Develop mission requirements and a concept of operation for the mission from level

1 requirements.

MCR deliverable: Preliminary Mission Requirements Document

MCR deliverable: Preliminary Mission Operations Concept Document


Mission Design

Robust Baseline Mission Design. Include descope options, cost, & schedule

MCR deliverable: Mission Concept Report, Schedule, Cost Analysis


Technology Maturity, Risk Assessment & Mitigation

Assess technology maturity and develop a risk assessment & mitigation approach.

MCR deliverable: Technology Maturity, Risk Assessment & Mitigation Document

Initial concept



Mission Concept Review (MCR) – Must pass this review to move from the Pre-Phase A phase (i.e., Concept Studies) into Phase A (i.e., Concept and Technology Development)

Mcr deliverables
MCR Deliverables

Level 1 Requirements

Systems Drivers, strawman needed to start mission analysis

Preliminary Mission Requirements Document

Preliminary Mission Operations Concept Document

System Driven & Programmatic, mission analysis needed to develop these

Technology Maturity, Risk Assessment & Mitigation

Mission Acquisition Approach

Formulation Authorization Document (FAD) required to enter phase A

Cost Analysis Internal and External to Project

Work Breakdown Structure


Full Project Lifecycle Schedule

Detailed Phase A Schedule

Other documents required

Architecture & System Concept Report

Mission Concept Report

Institutional Capabilities

V&V draft for risk reduction

Draft Project Plan

Systems Engineering Management Plan

MCR Presentation Package

Draft Configuration Management Plan



WBS 1.0

Project Management

WBS 2.0

Systems Engineering

WBS 3.0

Safety & Mission Assurance

WBS 4.0


WBS 5.0


WBS 6.0


WBS 7.0

Mission Operations

WBS 8.0

Launch Systems

WBS 9.0

Ground Systems

WBS 10.0

Systems Integration and Test

WBS 11.0

Education & Public Outreach

WBS 3.1

Safety & Mission Assurance Mgmt

WBS 1.1

Project Mgmt

WBS 2.1


Devel. & Mgmt.

WBS 4.1

Science Mgmt

WBS 5.1

Payload Mgmt

WBS 6.1

Spacecraft Mgmt

WBS 7.1

Mission Operations Mgmt

WBS 8.1

Launch Mgmt

WBS 9.1

Ground Systems Mgmt

WBS 10.1

Payload to Spacecraft Integration

WBS 4.2

Science Team

WBS 5.2 Payload

System Engineering

WBS 6.2


WBS 7.2

Spacecraft Operations

WBS 9.2

Ground Stations

WBS 10.2

Spacecraft to Launch Vehicle Integration

WBS 8.2

Launch Vehicle

WBS 1.2

Business Mgmt

WBS 2,2

Risk Mgmt

WBS 3.2

System Safety

WBS 6.2.1

Spacecraft SE

WBS 4.3 Measure-ment Validation

WBS 7.3

Instrument Operations

WBS 8.2.1


WBS 1.3

Project Planning & Schedule Mgmt

WBS 3.3

Reliability Engineering

WBS 5.3


WBS 9.12.1

Spacecraft Commanding

WBS 2,3 Configura-tion Mgmt

WBS 6.2.2


WBS 8.2.2


WBS 7.4

Data Processing

WBS 4.4

Climate Modeling

WBS 3.4

EEE Parts Engineering

WBS 5.3.1

Solar Spectro-meter

WBS 1.4

Project Reviews

WBS 6.2.3


WBS 8.3

Launch Services

WBS 9.2.2

Data Relay

WBS 2.4

Trade Study Mgmt

WBS 3.5

Quality Assurance Engineering

WBS 4.5

Science Data Support

WBS 6.2.4


WBS 1.5


WBS 5.3.2

Far IR Spectro-meter

WBS 9.3




WBS 1.6


WBS 9.4

Ops Centers

WBS 2.5


WBS 3.6

Materials & Processes


WBS 4.6

Operational Support


Solar Arrays

WBS 5.3.3

GPS Instrument

WBS 2,6

Contamination Control


Charging & Distribution

WBS 3.7

Contamina-tion Control


WBS 4.7

Instrument Modeling

WBS 5.3.4

IR Spectro-meter

WBS 6.2.5


WBS 2.7 Materials & Processes

WBS 6.2.6


WBS 3.8

Software IV&V

WBS 6.2.9

Pyro/ Release

WBS 6.2.7

Attitude Control, etc.

WBS 3.9

Mission Operations



Attitude Control



WBS 6.2.8


CLARREO Systems Engineering Chart

Project Systems Engineer

Michelle Garn


John Rogers

SE Deliverables


Rick Walker

Flight Systems


Craig Jones

Mission Design &


Paul Speth

Payload Interface


Dave Johnson



Steve Hall

  • Requirements Management

  • Definition, flow down, tracking

  • Requirement mgt tool

  • Level 1 Requirements Doc

  • Mission Requirements Doc

  • Configuration Management

  • CM tool, processes, plan

  • Schedule Development

  • Project full life cycle

  • Detailed phase A plan

  • Science Trade Study Mgt

  • Tracking current studies

  • Identifying gaps

  • Technical Resource Mgt

  • Margins mgt

  • Technology Readiness

  • FAD

  • SEMP

  • Project Plan

  • Mission Acquisition Report

  • WBS

  • V&V

  • Mission Concept Development

  • Identifying trades

  • Initial analysis (small team)

  • Developing Engineering Data Request Matrix

  • Developing Engineering Trade Matrix

  • Cost Analysis

  • Sub-systems being staffed

  • Orbital Mechanics

  • Thermal

  • Comm & Data

  • Optical

  • Structural

  • Mechanical

  • Power

  • Avionics

  • Electronics

  • Software

  • S/C Interfaces

  • Propulsion

  • Requirements

  • Instrument requirements

  • Science baseline mission focused on inter-calibration

  • Science baseline mission focused on benchmarking

  • Demonstration mission

  • Ground Systems

  • Mission Operations

  • Developing traceability between on-going trade studies and mission parameter requirements

Monitor ICD Development & Control

Launch Vehicle Interface

Spacecraft Bus Interface

Mission Ops Interface

Ground Systems Interface



Solar Reflected Spectrometer

Near-IR to Mid-IR Spectrometer

Mid-IR to Far-IR Spectrometer

Defining engineering space mission trades
Defining Engineering Space: Mission Trades

  • Number of satellites and orbit selection

    • Benchmark and/or inter-calibration

    • Diurnal cycle and/or orbital overlap for inter-calibration

  • Instrument redundancy

  • Spacecraft pointing versus nadir only

  • Spectral range and resolution

  • Spatial and temporal sampling requirements

  • Footprint size

  • GPS requirements

  • Validation approach (i.e., aircraft, other satellites, balloons, redundant instruments)

  • Level of international partnering

  • Scope of mission (i.e., demonstration versus operational mission)

Mission trade space considerations
Mission Trade Space Considerations

Mission Lifetime

Benchmark, Inter-calibration

Or Hybrid

Spacecraft Instrument

Suite and Redundancy

Spacecraft Subsystem


Pointing requirement


Diurnal Sampling or

Orbital Overlap

Spacecraft Operations &

Mission Implementation

Number of spacecraft

On-orbit operation & duty cycle

Each variation of the top-level science implementation trades will flow into concurrent subsystem designs to characterize the overall trade space.

Array structure

Array articulation

Cell and Battery Sizing

CPU Throughput

Data storage

Instrument interfaces

Payload location / interfaces

Boom complexity

Meet thermal, viewing, and stiffness requirement

Fuel system config

Fuel and Engine trades

Tank sizing for max prop load

Attitude Mode

Stabilization Method

Component Sizing

Passive vs. Active

Payload Thermal Interfaces

Thermal Biasing

TLM/CMD Frequency

TLM/CMD Ground Support

Modulation/ Encoding

Define engineering space
Define Engineering Space

  • Parallel Engineering Path

    • Define engineering space while science studies are underway

      • Utilize System Analysis Tools and Integrated Design Tools to efficiently study multiple mission concepts

    • Engineering in parallel – develop concept and key trades to get cost by March 2009

    • Expect Level 1 Requirements by April 2009 – narrow the trade space

    • Conduct traditional integrated design sessions to refine mission until MCR

  • Generate cost and technical assessment of mission concepts to support results of science trade results expected in Spring 2009

    • Balance the equation

      • Add cost, risk, and feasibility to discussions of science objectives

      • Sampling discussion: cost of additional spacecraft and launch, launch vehicle options

      • Solar and Infrared on same spacecraft: TRL assessment, mass, launch vehicle, cost

      • Field of View: mass and cost impact of 13Km FOV vs. 100Km FOV,

      • Crosstrack scanning: mass, power, cost, performance of scanner

      • Instrument Redundancy: cost of additional instruments

    • Baseline a mission concept with respect to NASA Standards and Expectations

      • Certified Launch Vehicles

      • Parametric and Grassroots cost estimation

    • Develop descope options to baseline concept

  • Close cooperation with Earth Science Systematic Mission Program Office

    • Leverage lessons learned from SMAP and ICESAT-II

Healthy tension


Final Results

Prelim Results

Integrated systems engineering team
Integrated Systems Engineering Team

  • Complex mission

    • Climate is complex

    • Multiple instruments: solar, infrared, far-infrared and GPS

    • Not a process mission

    • Strong tie to standards and metrology

  • Realize Expertise in Climate Community

  • Consider Options that Reduce Mission Risk

    • Build a diverse and deep systems engineering team that encompasses instrumentation, on-ground calibration, on-orbit calibration, and level 1 processing

    • With consideration that some of the instruments and key subsystems will be selected through competitive process

What we need from science team
What We Need from Science Team

  • What Engineering Team needs from Science team

    • Need rationale for key mission drivers:

      • Orbit determination – which orbit and how many?

      • Instrumentation: Solar, infrared and GPS on same spacecraft?

      • Field of view: zonal, regional, or global; facilitate attribution; facilitate validation; facilitate cross-calibration and benchmark

      • Inter-calibration concept, radiance benchmark concept, or both?

      • Crosstrack: nadir view only sufficient?

      • Spectral resolution: not as much of a driver at this stage (assuming >0.5 cm-1)

      • Detector noise performance: identify technology drivers & cyrocooler impact

    • Level 1 Science requirements

    • Incorporate: “Better is the evil of good enough” philosophy

      • Aiming for 80% solution

    • Ability to form to a consensus

      • Willingness to compromise

      • Recognition that continued debate will likely delay mission

      • Do we have a team that is interested in the mission, even at the cost of their particular interest?

      • Will issues be discussed with rationale tied to the mission science goals?

    • Studies with a focused approach

      • Answer a question that drives mission parameter