ndia systems engineering division mission analysis committee meeting 20 april 2010 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
NDIA Systems Engineering Division Mission Analysis Committee Meeting 20 April 2010 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
NDIA Systems Engineering Division Mission Analysis Committee Meeting 20 April 2010

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 42

NDIA Systems Engineering Division Mission Analysis Committee Meeting 20 April 2010 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 132 Views
  • Uploaded on

NDIA Systems Engineering Division Mission Analysis Committee Meeting 20 April 2010. Agenda. Mission Analysis Committee Overview Early SE Development Planning DP Working Group Discussion Cost and Affordability in DP SoS Committee Collaboration DT&E Committee Collaboration.

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 'NDIA Systems Engineering Division Mission Analysis Committee Meeting 20 April 2010' - vidal


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
agenda
Agenda
  • Mission Analysis Committee Overview
  • Early SE Development Planning
  • DP Working Group Discussion
  • Cost and Affordability in DP
  • SoS Committee Collaboration
  • DT&E Committee Collaboration
mission analysis committee
Mission Analysis Committee
  • http://www.ndia.org/Divisions/Divisions/SystemsEngineering/Pages/Mission.aspx
mission analysis committee1
Mission Analysis Committee

Charter

To provide a forum where government, industry, and academia can share lessons learned, promote best practices, address issues, and advocate the role of Pre-Milestone A Mission Analysis in the Systems Engineering process. The primary purpose is determining successful strategies for incorporating mission analysis principles and their relationships to CONOPS, Mission Architecture, M&S, etc. to provide better Warfighter solutions.

ma committee 2010 initiatives
MA Committee - 2010 Initiatives
  • Institutionalize early Development Planning
    • Study Industry specific Early SE processes and identify best practices (Feb – Aug ‘10)
    • Create Early SE implementation framework (Oct ‘10)
    • Initial Outbrief at SE Conference (Oct ‘10)
    • Conduct Early SE Workshop (1st Qtr ‘11)
    • Issue Report on Best Practices (1st Qtr ‘11)
  • Support SoS Committee to identify tools and practices to support architecture level assessment of emerging capabilities in SoS initiatives
  • Maintain close collaboration with DT&E, SOS, and other committees
ma committee website
MA Committee Website
  • http://www.ndia.org/Divisions/Divisions/SystemsEngineering/Pages/Mission.aspx
2010 meeting schedule
2010 Meeting Schedule
  • Meetings in conjunction with SE Division Meetings
    • Monday, April 19th
      • General Dynamics, 1201 M St. SE
    • Wednesday, June 16th
      • Lockheed Martin, 2121 Crystal Drive
    • Wednesday, August 18th
      • General Dynamics, 1201 M St. SE
    • NDIA SE Conference, October 2010
    • NDIA SE Division Planning Meeting, December 2010
slide18

Development Planning Working Groupsponsored by theNDIA Systems Engineering Division(In conjunction with Aerospace Industries Association)19 April 2010

dp working group objectives
DP Working Group Objectives
  • Identify specific areas, activities and knowledge in the pre-milestone “A“ timeframe where industry engagement could inform early technical analysis and engineering for DoD Acquisition Programs.
  • Understand the available and potential mechanisms necessary to facilitate industry involvement in that early technical analysis and engineering.
  • Recognize the issues, limitations, and questions and formulate recommendations to foster industry involvement in early technical analysis and engineering.

Gain practical input from industry leaders to help shape Development Planning policy & guidance.

dp working group output
DP Working Group Output
  • A report will be provided to OSD DDR&E/SE identifying industry’s potential role to engage in early technical analysis and engineering for DoD Acquisition Programs, specifically addressing the following:
    • Identify how the government can engage with industry in early technical analysis and engineering
    • Identify the constraints the government and industry could face during engagements involving early technical analysis and engineering and suggested recommendations
    • Identify the mechanisms Government could use to engage with industry during early technical analysis and engineering
    • Identify the appropriate key characteristics of DoD Policy & Guidance needed to enable industry’s successful engagement in early technical analysis and engineering
dp working group specifics
DP Working Group Specifics
  • Expected to be 6 months in duration
  • Members will appointed and notified
  • Comprised of 60 – 75 individuals representing:
    • Industry
    • Government
    • Military
  • The NDIA SE Division will be soliciting broad advance input and will incorporate this data into the detailed discussions of the Working Group.
    • Allows all members of the SE Division (Government, Military, Industry, and Academia) to provide their perspectives
dp working group specifics1
DP Working Group Specifics
  • Potential candidates for the Working Group are asked to submit their name and qualifications to one of the points of contact listed on the last slide
    • Candidates should be knowledgeable in one or more of the objective areas previously listed
    • Other specific areas of interest include:
      • Military Development Planners/Development Labs
      • IRAD/S&T
      • T&E Communities
      • Legal/Contracting
points of contact
Points of Contact
  • For further information on the Working Group, please contact the following:
    • Mr. Bob Rassa, NDIA Systems Engineering Division (SED) Chair (RCRassa@Raytheon.com)
    • Mr. Mike Duffey, OUSD(DDR&E)SE, DP Working Group Government Co-chair (Michael.Duffey@osd.mil)
    • Mr. John Lohse, NDIA SED Mission Analysis Committee Chair, DP Working Group Industry Co-chair (jjlohse@Raytheon.com)
working groups
Working Groups

Three working groups with freedom to comment across the DP phase, but each asked to focus in a certain area

WG1 focus – Industry Support to Concept Development and Engineering (Pre-MDD) – Current and Desired

WG2 focus – Industry Support to Concept Evaluation and Refinement (Post-MDD) – Current and Desired

WG3 focus – Government mechanisms for industry engagement

WG1 and WG2 to be conducted simultaneously via breakout groups

WG3 will be conducted with the entire team following WG1 and WG2 debrief

working group 1 draft content
Working Group 1- Draft Content
  • Focus – Industry Support to Concept Development and Engineering (Pre-MDD) – Current and Desired
    • Requirements development
      • Understand operational needs
      • Anticipate future needs
      • Correlation with CBA
      • Correlation with Analytic Agenda
      • Correlation with CAPE
      • Mission Architecture development
    • Understand Strategic Risk
      • Prioritization of gaps (CAPE)
    • Technology awareness/readiness
      • Technology driven by advanced concepts
      • Maintain critical technology TRL assessments
      • Collaborative experimentation and development
    • MDD quality attributes (care-abouts)
      • TRL assessment
      • Critical KPPs
      • MOEs/MOPs/COIs
      • Budgeting
    • Etc.
  • What are the available tools, processes, and methodologies?
    • Mission Analysis
    • CONOPS/MUAs
    • Etc.

Source: Mr. Michael Duffey

Deputy Director, Development Planning

Office of the Director for Systems Analysis

Systems Engineering Directorate

Office of Director, Defense Research and Engineering

Development Planning

NDIA SE Division Meeting

February 17, 2010

working group 2 draft content
Working Group 2 - Draft Content
  • Focus – Industry Support to Concept Evaluation and Refinement (Post-MDD) – Current and Desired
    • AoA quality attributes
      • Critical KPPs
      • MOEs/MOPs/COIs
      • TRLs/MRLs - Technical risk
      • T&E input
      • “ilities”
    • Etc.
  • What are the available tools, processes, and methodologies?
    • Mission Analysis
    • CONOPS/MUAs
    • Mission Architecture
    • M&S
    • Etc.

Source: Mr. Michael Duffey

Deputy Director, Development Planning

Office of the Director for Systems Analysis

Systems Engineering Directorate

Office of Director, Defense Research and Engineering

Development Planning

NDIA SE Division Meeting

February 17, 2010

working group 3 draft content
Working Group 3 - Draft Content
  • Focus – Government mechanisms for industry engagement
    • RFIs
    • Pre-bidders Conferences
    • Study contracts
    • Etc.
considerations for wg1 and wg2
Considerations for WG1 and WG2

Source: Mr. Michael Duffey

Deputy Director, Development Planning

Office of the Director for Systems Analysis

Systems Engineering Directorate

Office of Director, Defense Research and Engineering

Development Planning

NDIA SE Division Meeting

February 17, 2010

- Need to ensure the workshop addresses these challenges

- Need to ensure the workshop identifies other challenges

28

considerations for wg1 and wg21
Considerations for WG1 and WG2

Make sure we get these questions answered. These could go into the questions we ask industry to brief on.

Source: Mr. Michael Duffey

Deputy Director, Development Planning

Office of the Director for Systems Analysis

Systems Engineering Directorate

Office of Director, Defense Research and Engineering

Development Planning

NDIA SE Division Meeting

February 17, 2010

29

slide30
Cost and Affordability in DP

Kishore Gragani Presentation

mission analysis committee2
Mission Analysis Committee

Committee Objectives

  • Understand the impact of the new DoD 5000.02, DAG, and CJCS 3170 on Pre-Milestone A (Early) SE
  • Understand the relationship of Mission Analysis, CONOPS, Mission Architecture, M&S, etc. in Early SE.
  • Define ways Industry can better support Early SE Development Planning
  • Evaluate and provide recommendations on Early SE policy and guidelines
  • Provide best practices for Early SE activities.
  • Strengthen the SE skill set for dealing with high level of abstraction in Early SE.
  • Related SE Committee and DOD Interfaces
  • Identify cross SE Committee Participation
    • DT&E Committee - Develop T&E Early SE Thread
    • SoS Committee - Elevate Early SE framework to Early SoS framework
    • HSI Committee – Develop process to ensure HSI operational relevance is properly identified
  • Identify linkage to other OSD Initiatives
    • DDR&E Imperatives
      • Prepare for Uncertain Future
      • Reduce MDAP cost, acquisition time, and risk

2009 Accomplishments

  • Stood up Mission Analysis Committee (Apr ’09)
  • Decomposed JCIDS exit criteria and AoA entrance criteria, and identified initial set of gaps. (Jun/Aug ’09)
  • Reviewed USAF Early SE process (Oct ’09)

2010 Initiatives

  • Study Service and Industry specific Early SE processes and identify best practices (Feb – Jun ‘10)
  • Create Early SE implementation framework (Aug ‘10)
  • Initial Outbrief at SE Conference (Oct ‘10)
  • Conduct Early SE Workshop (1st Qtr ‘11)
  • Issue Report on Best Practices (1st Qtr ‘11)
transition from icd to the aoa
Transition From ICD to the AoA

Integrated Defense Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics Life Cycle Management System

Initial Capabilities Document (ICD).• A document that describes the need for a materiel approach to a specific capability gap derived from an initial analysis of materiel approaches. The ICD defines the capability gap in terms of the functional area, the relevant range of military operations, desired effects, and time. It summarizes the results of the Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel, and Facilities (DOTMLPF) analysis and describes why non-materiel changes alone are not adequate to fully provide the capability. The ICD supports the Materiel Development Decision and Milestone A.

transition from icd to the aoa1
Transition From ICD to the AoA
  • ICD format and detailed content identified in the JCIDS Manual (Appendix A to Enclosure F)
    • No mention of MOEs, MOPs, COIs, etc.

ICD Format Listed in JCIDS Manual

transition from icd to the aoa2
Transition From ICD to the AoA

Integrated Defense Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics Life Cycle Management System

Materiel Solution Analysis Phase

AoA SE “V”

transition from icd to the aoa3
Transition From ICD to the AoA

Interim DAG 3.3.2

….At the Materiel Development Decision review, the Director, Program Analysis & Evaluation (DPA&E), or DoD Component equivalent, proposes study guidance for the AoA. The AoA study guidance is approved by the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA), and is provided to the lead DoD Component. Following approval of the AoA study guidance, the lead DoD Component prepares an AoA study plan that describes the technical approach and management of the AoA. A suggested template for the AoA study plan is provided in section 3.3.3. The study plan is coordinated with the MDA, and approved by the DPA&E, prior to the start of the AoA….

Interim DAG AoA Guidance

transition from icd to the aoa4
Transition From ICD to the AoA
  • Interim Defense Acquisition Guidebook, 3.3.3
  • ….A recommended outline for the AoA plan would resemble the following:
  • • Introduction <GB section 3.3.3.1>
    •  Background
    •  Purpose
    •  Scope
  • • Ground Rules <GB section 3.3.3.2>
    •  Scenarios
    •  Threats
    •  Environment
    •  Constraints and Assumptions
    •  Timeframe
    •  Excursions
  • • Alternatives <GB section 3.3.3.3>
    •  Description of Alternatives
    •  Nonviable Alternatives
    •  Operations Concepts
    •  Sustainment Concepts
  • • Determination of Effectiveness Measures <GB section 3.3.3.4>
    •  Mission Tasks
    •  Measures of Effectiveness
    •  Measures of Performance
  • Effectiveness Analysis <GB section 3.3.3.5>
    •  Effectiveness Methodology
    •  Models, Simulations, and Data
    •  Effectiveness Sensitivity Analysis
  • • Cost Analysis <GB section 3.3.3.6>
    •  Life-Cycle Cost Methodology
    •  Additional Total Ownership Cost Considerations (if applicable)
    •  Fully Burdened Cost of Delivered Energy (if applicable)
    •  Models and Data
    •  Cost Sensitivity and/or Risk Analysis
  • • Cost-Effectiveness Comparisons <GB section 3.3.3.7>
    •  Cost-Effectiveness Methodology
    •  Displays or Presentation Formats
    •  Criteria for Screening Alternatives
  • • Organization and Management <GB section 3.3.3.8>
    •  Study Team/Organization
    •  AoA Review Process
    •  Schedule

Need to map the ICD content to the AoA Plan content.

(Capability Requirements to MOEs/MOPs)

summary
Summary
  • MA Committee will support OSD DDR&E/SE
    • Industry Development Planning best practices
    • Identify emerging challenges in “uncertain future”
  • Identify Industry role in Development Planning
  • Meeting Schedule identified for remainder of 2010
slide42

Assessment

Early SE

Development

Planning

Requirements

Acquisition

Budgeting

Early SE Development Planning

  • Warfighter Requirements
  • Prioritization of Gaps
  • Defense Acquisition System
  • DoDI 5000.02
    • - Policy & Guidance
    • - MDAP Decision Authority
    • - AoA
  • Formulation of MOEs and MOPs
  • JCIDS Process
  • CJCSI 3170.01G
  • CBA
  • - DCR
  • - ICD
  • PPB&E
  • POM Formulation
  • FYDP
  • Appropriations