Systems Integration for Project Constellation Letter Report (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Letter Report
Letter Report
Pages 1-20
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
, the committee assessed the relative merits of four major systems integration approaches that Project Constellation could use to move forward with human exploration of the solar system, beginning with a return to the Moon. The four approaches are as follows: · government serving as the systems integrator · one of Project Constellation's major hardware prime contractors serving as the systems integrator · an existing company (but not one of the Project Constellation prime contractors)
|
From page 2... ...
PROJECT CONSTELLATION DEFINED NASA's Office of Exploration Systems is implementing Project Constellation with a system-of-systems approach that encompasses all of the systems -- to include vehicles, equipment, processes, tools, facilities, staffing requirements, and others -- necessary for human exploration of the solar system. This includes robotic precursor missions to prepare the way for human exploration; crew transportation systems -- particularly development of a new crew exploration vehicle (CEV)
|
From page 3... ...
In particular, the committee believes that the Project Constellation systems integrator should have the domain knowledge and expertise to integrate all of the work being executed by the Development Programs Division, with the exception of the Hubble Space Telescope Rescue Service Mission. This scope would include the basic Project Constellation systems (Group A, above)
|
From page 4... ...
The assessments that follow do not necessarily apply to systems integration at other tiers, although, at Tiers 1 and 2, the systems integrator will have knowledge of, cognizance of, and influence on what is happening at Tier 3. CRITERIA The committee generated a list of 21 criteria that relate to the ability of a systems integrator to foster success with a complex space exploration project such as Project Constellation.
|
From page 5... ...
The support contractor would have a complete hardware exclusion. Systems integration, particularly at the Tier 1 level, will require a strong capability in both robotic and human spaceflight as well as the interaction of the two.
|
From page 6... ...
This could be an organization with few or no manufacturing capabilities, or a hardware vendor that agrees to forego the opportunity to bid on Project Constellation hardware procurements. Approach 3 Defined: Nonaerospace Company as Systems Integrator The systems integrator would be a large nonaerospace company with a complete hardware exclusion.
|
From page 7... ...
In particular, Table 1 (below) was prepared in a way that should help NASA management assess hybrid approaches based on the attributes of individual surrogate organizations.
|
From page 8... ...
an orga in time attract New to people, would built up- required.
|
From page 9... ...
- - in in delay pro built for adop be task hired New built up- critical. on rived be be 4.
|
From page 10... ...
in flight space Capabil robot been this past should been this past should managing Discipline ds not in im improve in not in in not in and flight but to improve in exploration to nee to space Center human Ability exists programs. Has able Has able LEVERAGE Performed robotic space Assessment a.
|
From page 11... ...
- of - vel limited ope space flexi fund New de leverage of base: tial sc tions, on problems.
|
From page 12... ...
it - - .
|
From page 13... ...
Center-centric Systems Integration The strengths and weaknesses of Approach 1a are summarized as follows: · Strengths: ability to maintain a strong commitment over decades broad technical expertise in robotic spacecraft continuity of expertise experience with managing industrial teams in-depth space experience international experience with companies and governments likely access to senior government officials no financial conflicts of interests not conflicted in management of requirements process · Weaknesses: erosion of human spaceflight development capability inability to compete well for talent on a salary basis leadership changes due to administration changes limited geographic political base little or no hardware manufacturing experience poor cost and schedule controls in human spaceflight
|
From page 14... ...
erosion of human spaceflight development capability inability to compete well for talent on a salary basis leadership changes due to administration changes limited experience with managing industrial teams limited geographic political base limited space experience little or no hardware manufacturing experience need to create new teams poor cost and schedule controls in human spaceflight Approach 2 Assessed: Large Aerospace Company as Systems Integrator Approach 2a. Large Aerospace Company with no Hardware Exclusion Approach 2a has a strong skill base from which to draw.
|
From page 15... ...
The strengths and weaknesses of Approach 2b are summarized as follows: · Strengths: ability to establish attractive employee compensation packages access to senior administration officials aerospace design and management tools in-depth space experience, including space hardware manufacturing experience international experience with companies and governments potentially large geographic political base relatively stable leadership systems integration management experience · Weaknesses: possibility that some prime contractors will elect not to assume this role because it would limit their ability to provide Project Constellation hardware possibility that teammates will resist being managed some difficulty in accessing information from some other contractors some possible conflicts of interest Approach 2c. Large Aerospace Company with a Complete Hardware Exclusion Approach 2c shares most of the strengths and weaknesses of Approach 2b.
|
From page 16... ...
The strengths and weaknesses of Approach 2c are summarized as follows: · Strengths: ability to establish attractive employee compensation packages access to senior administration officials aerospace design and management tools in-depth space experience, possibly including space hardware manufacturing experience international experience with companies and governments potentially large geographic political base relatively stable leadership systems integration management experience · Weaknesses: possibility that some prime contractors will be unable to assume this role because of ongoing contracts to provide Project Constellation hardware possibility that some prime contractors will elect not to assume this role because it would limit their ability to provide Project Constellation hardware Approach 3 Assessed: Nonaerospace Company as Systems Integrator Some nonaerospace companies have excellent tools, skills, and track records in the mechanics of systems integration, cost and schedule prediction and control, adoption and infusion of new external technologies, government relations, and salary flexibility. The expertise of some large nonaerospace companies could also directly contribute to the development and integration of large, complex surface systems and infrastructure, which will ultimately represent a large portion of the overall cost of Project Constellation.
|
From page 17... ...
political leadership (with the right leadership) total dedication · Weaknesses: difficulty of establishing and maintaining sufficient authority to control prime contractors need to establish a new organization and get up to speed quickly difficulty of developing a strong geographic spread lack of hardware manufacturing experience organizational inflexibility, since the company would have no other projects need to set up requisite analysis, simulation, and management tools ADDITIONAL SYSTEMS INTEGRATION CONSIDERATIONS The committee believes that certain basic factors are critical to the success of the systems integration function for Project Constellation, regardless of which approach is chosen.
|
From page 18... ...
NASA's human spaceflight systems engineering capability has eroded significantly as a result of declining engineering and development work, which has been replaced by operational responsibilities. Industry has a credible systems engineering capability, but it is being stressed by the need to modernize almost all national security space programs.
|
From page 19... ...
Government and industry have experienced similar problems in the procurement of national security space programs.5 Most recently there have been outstanding successes in robotic space exploration. The Apollo Program demonstrated the importance of a balanced allocation of functions (including systems integration)
|
From page 20... ...
NASA has initiated its own study of systems integration approaches that NASA and the Department of Defense have used in the past to develop advanced missiles, combat systems, aircraft, spacecraft, launch vehicles, and submarines.6 NASA should reflect upon the results of that study both as it selects an approach to systems integration for Project Constellation and as it improves the systems integration capability of the human spaceflight program. Project Constellation is an exciting concept and should serve to foster the continuation of the long tradition of NASA excellence.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.