DARP Workshop
Download
1 / 9

DARP Workshop System of Systems Safety Cases Parallel Session 18 th & 19 th April 2007 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 156 Views
  • Uploaded on

DARP Workshop System of Systems Safety Cases Parallel Session 18 th & 19 th April 2007. Ringmaster / Professional Passenger…. Dr Dai Morris Director Analysis, Experimentation & Simulation, UK MoD. Background. MoD CSA’s DSAC NEC Architecture Workshop

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

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'DARP Workshop System of Systems Safety Cases Parallel Session 18 th & 19 th April 2007' - edolie


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

DARP WorkshopSystem of Systems Safety CasesParallel Session 18th & 19th April 2007

Ringmaster / Professional Passenger….

Dr Dai Morris

Director Analysis, Experimentation & Simulation, UK MoD


Background
Background

  • MoD CSA’s DSAC NEC Architecture Workshop

    • Noted safety assessment is an integral part of the ‘NEC solution’

    • Asked DAES ‘to form a view of how to develop a Safety Case for the wider [NEC] system of systems’

  • The Challenge Set:

    • What is currently being done by others that we can utilise now?

      • Or needs to be better utilised now

    • What problems are currently being considered for fixing by others in the near future?

      • And how do we remain engaged

    • What is left to be done?

      • With compelling reasons why MoD should undertake this?

    • How do we (I?) disseminate and progress findings


Agenda
Agenda

  • ‘Background Reading

    • Summary Intro

    • Some ‘starter for 10’ questions

    • NECTISE Presentation by Tim Kelly, University of York

    • Failure Analysis Presentation by Paul Caseley, DSTL

  • Focus on

    • Who in MoD should own the NEC Safety issue

    • If we can’t do a SoS Safety Case, what ‘next best’

    • What is different between NEC SoS and other SoS


Nectise presentation summary
NECTISE Presentation Summary

  • (Words directly from Tim Kelly, University of York)

  • Reality = Platform safety cases will be produced separately (at different times, by different organisations)

  • Need an acceptance process that considers (better) the possible operational context(s)

  • Need to certify ‘safe’ collaborations ahead of time

  • Focus on equipment safety cases must be broadened for SoS

    • E.g. arguments of safe (operational) use (operational doctrine) essential


Conclusions 1
Conclusions (1)

  • What is different between NEC SoS and other SoS

    • NEC SoS lacks a clear boundary definition?

      • Unlike, perhaps, a Carrier Group

    • More dynamic and less stable?

      • Nodes reconfiguring ‘on the fly’

    • Tempo

      • Potential rapid feedback and emergence of behaviour

    • A whole new class of possibilities for emergent behaviour


The sos safety case domain
The SoS safety case ‘domain’

Now?

Incremental Certification

Level of planned change in systems / components of SoS

Level of ad-hoc / non-engineered immediate federation of system components & boundary uncertainty

Need for a new approach to safety management to generate a ‘case for safety’


Conclusions 2
Conclusions (2)

  • Who (in MoD?) should own the NEC Safety issue

    • Distributed Problem

      • DE&S for equipment; FLC for training…

    • Pose CBM (NEC) Management Board the question?

      • Need a single integrating point

        • Responsible for interfaces and interstitial issues

        • With additional specific responsibilities for each DLoD owner

      • May assist the security problem as well?


Conclusions 3
Conclusions (3)

  • If we can’t do a SoS Safety Case, what's ‘next best’

    • Do we have a regulator?

    • Don’t yet have an owner?

    • But do have a need to discharge (and demonstrate that we are discharging) our duty of care responsibility

  • “Safety Management System” to focus on:

    • Predictive

      • Defining, managing and scrutiny of safety arguments

      • But any resulting “Safety Case” may not look ‘traditional’

        • Process, organisation based argument?

      • ‘Traffic Light’ process not unlike wider command assessment of risk

        • Scenario based concept?

    • ‘In process’

      • Real time monitoring of Provenance of Data

      • In live ops as well as training / mission rehearsal

    • Identifying lessons

      • Ensure the capture of all relevant (emergent) behaviour

      • Provenance of Data also important here



  • ad