DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report MARCH 2015 7 I Stephen P. Welby Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Systems Engineering The estimated cost of this report or study for th e Department of Defense is approximately $444,000 in Fiscal Years 201 4-20 15. This includes $3 12,000 in expenses and $ 132,000 in DoD labor. Generated on 20 15Mar21 I ReflD: 4-53F68EA DI STRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release.
Transcript
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Systems Engineering
FY 2014 Annual Report
MARCH 2015
7 I Stephen P. Welby Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
Systems Engineering
The estimated cost of this report or study for the Department of Defense is approximately $444,000 in Fiscal Years 201 4-20 15. This includes $3 12,000 in expenses and $ 132,000 in DoD labor.
Generated on 20 15Mar21 I ReflD: 4-53F68EA
DISTRIBUT ION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release.
Department of Defense Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Systems Engineering 3030 Defense Pentagon 3C167 Washington, DC 20301-3030 www.acq.osd.mil/se
2.1.1 Interim DoDI 5000.02 ............................................................................................................ 3 2.1.2 Reliability and Maintainability Engineering .......................................................................... 4 2.1.3 Systems Engineering in JCIDS .............................................................................................. 5 2.1.4 System Security Engineering ................................................................................................. 5 2.1.5 Additional Engineering Policy and Guidance ........................................................................ 7
2.2 Program Engagement and Oversight................................................................................................... 9 2.2.1 Development Planning ......................................................................................................... 13 2.2.2 Systems Engineering Plan .................................................................................................... 14 2.2.3 Program Protection Plan ...................................................................................................... 15 2.2.4 Systems Engineering Assessments ...................................................................................... 15 2.2.5 Systemic Root Cause Analysis ............................................................................................ 19 2.2.6 Defense Acquisition Executive Summary Reporting ......................................................... 20
3 DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS .................................................................... 23 3.1 Assessment Overview ....................................................................................................................... 23 3.2 Systems Engineering Strategy ........................................................................................................... 24 3.3 Development Planning and Early Systems Engineering .................................................................. 25 3.4 Reliability and Maintainability.......................................................................................................... 26 3.5 Systems Engineering in JCIDS ......................................................................................................... 27 3.6 Military Department-Identified Areas of Progress and Improvement .............................................. 28 3.7 Workforce Initiatives ....................................................................................................................... 29
3.7.1 Military Department Workforce Initiatives ......................................................................... 29 3.7.2 Systems Engineering Workforce Resourcing ...................................................................... 30 3.7.3 Total DoD Systems Engineering Workforce ....................................................................... 31
4 DASD(SE) PROGRAM ASSESSMENTS .................................................................................................. 35 4.1 DASD(SE) Assessments of Army Programs .................................................................................... 37
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 271 Figures Figure 2-1. FY 2014 DASD(SE) Program Engagements by Acquisition Phase ....................................... 12 Figure 2-2. FY 2014 DASD(SE) Assessments by Domain and Military Department ............................... 17 Figure 2-3. FY 2014 DASD(SE) Assessments by Acquisition Phase ....................................................... 17 Tables Table 2-1. FY 2014 DASD(SE) Program Engagement by Category ......................................................... 10 Table 2-2. FY 2014 Development Planning (Early Systems Engineering) ............................................... 13 Table 2-3. FY 2014 SEP Review and Approval Activity .......................................................................... 14 Table 2-4. FY 2014 DASD(SE) Systems Engineering Assessment Summary .......................................... 16 Table 3-1. Systems Engineering Workforce in the DoD Reported by Military Department Systems
Engineers and DASD(SE) ........................................................................................................ 32 Table 3-2. ontra te Systems Engineering Support to the Military Departments as
Reported by DoD to Congress .................................................................................................. 33
vDoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
This page intentionally blank.
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering (DASD(SE)) provides this
report in response to 10 U.S.C. 139b and section 102(b) of Pub. L. No. 111-23, as amended (set out
at 10 U.S.C. 2430 note) addressing the systems engineering capabilities of the Department of
Defense (DoD) and systems engineering activities relating to the Major Defense Acquisition
Programs (MDAP). This report includes:
• A discussion of the extent to which the MDAPs are fulfilling the objectives of their Systems
Engineering Plans (SEP).
• A discussion of the waivers of and deviations from requirements in SEPs that occurred during the
preceding year with respect to such programs; any concerns raised by such waivers or deviations;
and the actions that have been taken or are planned to be taken to address such concerns.
• An assessment of the organization and capabilities of the DoD for systems engineering and
development planning with respect to such programs.
• Any comments on such report that the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate.
The Department defines systems engineering (SE) as a methodical and disciplined approach for the
specification, design, development, realization, technical management, operation, and retirement of a
system. This report presents an overview of the Department’s FY 2014 systems engineering efforts
in implementing section 139(b) of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) of 2009,
as well as an overview of the Department’s systems engineering planning and focus areas for FY
2015. The Department continues to see strong evidence that robust systems engineering is a key
enabler of successful acquisition program execution throughout the Department.
Section 2 summarizes DASD(SE)’s efforts in the areas of policy and guidance, program engagement
and oversight, and systems engineering workforce management, all focused on improving the
Department’s systems engineering capability.
DASD(SE) contributed to a major update to DoD Instruction (DoDI) 5000.02, “Operation of the
Defense Acquisition System,” the Department’s primary acquisition policy document released in
interim form in early FY 2014. This revision of DoDI 5000.02 incorporates portions of previous
Directive-Type Memorandums (DTM) implementing WSARA, development planning, and
reliability and maintainability (R&M) engineering policy.
Section 2 also summarizes DASD(SE)’s continued engagement with the Joint Staff to ensure systems
engineering continues to inform requirements maturation. DASD(SE) worked closely on language
regarding the capability requirements process in the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development
System (JCIDS) to ensure it was consistent with DoDI 5000.02 and systems engineering
responsibilities under WSARA. DASD(SE), working with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence (USD(I)), the DoD Chief Information Officer, and the Military Departments, played a
key role in maturing system security engineering practices within the Department. DASD(SE) led
the formation of a new Joint Federated Assurance Center (JFAC) to fulfill the requirements of
1DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
section 937 of the FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to ensure security of DoD software and hardware.
Section 2 describes DASD(SE) efforts to mentor program offices during program formulation and restructuring, review acquisition documentation, and perform Program Support Assessments (PSA) for all MDAPs and Major Automated Information System (MAIS) programs as they approach major milestone decision points. DASD(SE) had no requests for waivers or deviations from approved SEPs in FY 2014.
DASD(SE) serves as the Functional Leader for the Engineering (ENG) and Production, Quality, and Manufacturing (PQM) acquisition workforce career fields. Section 2 contains an overview of changes being made to the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) curriculum to better support the engineering workforce. DASD(SE) is working to identify competency-based function-specific requirements to support implementation of a new Key Leadership Position (KLP) qualification process. Section 2 also identifies several initiatives under way to strengthen organic engineering capabilities in support of Better Buying Power effort 3.0 as well as supporting research projects being conducted as part of the DoD Systems Engineering Research Center’s (SERC) Human Capital Development Research Portfolio.
Section 3 contains an overview of the Military Departments’ systems engineering capability and capacity. Individual Military Department self-assessments are provided in appendices A through C. This section highlights the progress of the Military Departments in aligning their organizations to better enable effective systems engineering focused on achieving affordable programs and improving program oversight. Each Military Department continues to implement key provisions of the WSARA, including development planning and early systems engineering, R&M, and systems engineering support to the JCIDS and contracting.
The Military Departments, in partnership with DASD(SE), continued to make workforce development a priority for effective systems engineering through a diverse set of initiatives designed to attract and retain a qualified systems engineering workforce. The Army’s current systems engineering workforce projections indicate slight planned decline into FY 2016, with workforce size remaining level thereafter into FY 2019. The Navy and Air Force project slight declines through FY 2019.
Section 4 contains assessments of 46 MDAPs, MAIS programs, and special interest programs that were the focus of significant DASD(SE) activity in FY 2014. The assessments provide a status of program SEPs, Program Protection Plans (PPP), requirements, and measurable performance criteria. The assessments also summarize DASD(SE) involvement in program reviews.
The Military Departments’ FY 2014 achievements and FY 2015 plans captured in this report demonstrate a continued commitment to the provisions of WSARA focused on improving DoD systems engineering.
2 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
2 DASD(SE) ACTIVITIES
In FY 2014, DASD(SE) updated DoD systems engineering policy and guidance, provided technical
assessments and systems engineering support for MDAP and MAIS programs, and continued efforts
to grow and strengthen the Department’s engineering workforce.
As required by DoDI 5134.16, “Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering,”
DASD(SE) hosts the DoD Systems Engineering Forum, bringing together systems engineering
representatives from DoD and other Federal agencies responsible for developing complex systems.
These forums serve as a mechanism to coordinate systems engineering efforts and support the
exchange of lessons learned and best practices. Participants in FY 2014 included representatives
from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the DoD Components, the Department of
Homeland Security, Federal Aviation Administration, NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, and the Intelligence Community. In FY 2014, DASD(SE) held five forums with
emphasis on sharing best practices among Federal agencies, engineering workforce development, the
use of digital modeling in acquisition and engineering, system of systems (SoS) engineering, and the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) Better
Buying Power 3.0 focus on technological superiority and innovation.
2.1 Policy and Guidance
DASD(SE) oversees the implementation of existing policy and develops new policy and guidance to
improve systems engineering practices across the Department. DASD(SE) supported the
implementation of new and existing policy and guidance on the Defense Acquisition System, R&M,
counterfeit prevention, system security engineering, and systems engineering-related standards.
2.1.1 Interim DoDI 5000.02
On November 26, 2013, the Deputy Secretary of Defense released the interim DoDI 5000.02,
“Operation of the Defense Acquisition System.” DASD(SE) participated in the update and
implementation of the instruction, which provides systems engineering direction for acquisition
programs and reflects the USD(AT&L) Better Buying Power initiatives. The instruction incorporates
portions of DTM 09-02, “Implementation of Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) of
2009” (which established DASD(SE)); DTM 10-017, “Development Planning (Materiel
Development Decision (MDD) Review and Support Analysis of Alternatives (AoA))”; and
DTM 11-003, “Reliability Analysis, Planning, Tracking, and Reporting.” DASD(SE) significantly
revised the systems engineering enclosure (Enclosure 3) of the instruction.
Revisions to DoDI 5000.02 contain refined policies and procedures for development planning,
systems engineering trade-off analyses, technical risk and opportunity management, Technical
Performance Measures (TPM) and metrics, modeling and simulation, manufacturing and
producibility, software, R&M, program protection, open systems architecture, Insensitive Munitions,
design reviews (Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Critical Design Review (CDR)), and PSAs.
In the area of development planning, the updated policy includes a requirement to conduct early
systems engineering analysis and assessments to provide a strong technical foundation in support of
3DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ACTIVITIES
the MDD, during the Materiel Solution Analysis (MSA) phase, and for the Milestone A decision
point. The updated engineering enclosure also includes the requirement to use open systems
architecture design principles where feasible and cost-effective to support an open business model.
DoDI 5000.02 updates also address the SEP; technical reviews; configuration management;
corrosion prevention and control; environment, safety, and occupational health (ESOH); item unique
identification; and spectrum supportability. DASD(SE) significantly revised the section on the SEP
to emphasize effective management and control of the program’s overall technical approach to
balance system performance, life cycle cost, and risk in addressing Warfighter needs.
In addition, DASD(SE) incorporated program protection policy into the systems engineering
enclosure. Programs use system security engineering practices to guide and manage system security
risks associated with a program throughout its life cycle. Protection measures include hardware,
software, and information critical to the program. With respect to software, the updated enclosure
incudes a requirement for program managers to use automated software vulnerability analysis tools
to ensure remediation of software vulnerabilities.
DASD(SE) is updating the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) Chapter 4 on Systems
Engineering, which will provide the implementation guidance for the updated DoDI 5000.02. The
updated DAG will be released in 2015.
2.1.2 Reliability and Maintainability Engineering
DASD(SE) improved reliability analysis, planning, tracking, and reporting by institutionalizing
reliability planning methods and reporting requirements timed to key acquisition activities. In
collaboration with the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Materiel Readiness
(DASD(MR)) and the Joint Staff’s Logistics Directorate, J-4, DASD(SE) reviewed the then draft
Manual for the Operation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS).
DASD(SE) provided recommendations on the definitions of reliability and maintainability, improvements in the specification of maintainability attributes, and explanation regarding the
differences between mission and logistics reliability. In addition, DASD(SE) provided an update to
the Recommended Sustainment Metrics table by characterizing the materiel availability, operational
availability, and reliability parameters for different categories of weapon systems. The revised table
provides clear and concise guidance on specific parameters, including their definitions and formulas,
which different weapon systems should be using. DASD(SE) adjudicated the changes, which will be
included in the next revision of the JCIDS Manual with the Joint Staff’s Force Structure, Resources,
and Assessment Directorate, J-8, and other relevant stakeholders.
As stated in the interim DoDI 5000.02, programs are required to prepare an initial Reliability,
Availability, Maintainability, and Cost (RAM-C) Rationale Report in support of Milestone A and to
update the report for Milestones B and C. DASD(SE) is working to update the RAM-C Rationale
Report Manual, first published in 2009, to assist programs in developing the report. Among the
revisions, the update will include an annotated outline for practitioners to use. DASD(SE) expects to
release the revised manual in FY 2015.
4 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ACTIVITIES
Working with R&M Military Department leads, DASD(SE) initiated updates to 11 R&M Data Item
Descriptions (DID) that were either out of date or obsolete. These DIDs support the contractual
execution of effective R&M programs throughout the DoD. Leveraging Military Department
expertise and inputs, DASD(SE) developed an update schedule for the 11 DIDs based on their
criticality and impact to DoD programs. To date, DASD(SE) and the R&M Military Department
Leads have completed the review, revision, and upload of the four highest priority DIDs. DASD(SE)
plans to complete the revision of the remaining R&M DIDs in FY 2015.
2.1.3 Systems Engineering in JCIDS
DASD(SE) continued its engagement with the Joint Staff’s J-8 to promote greater awareness of
systems engineering principles during requirements maturation. DASD(SE) has worked proactively
to ensure that evolving policy for the JCIDS supports continuous interaction with the systems
engineering communities at necessary organizational levels.
In addition to the efforts described in Section 2.1.2 regarding reliability, DASD(SE) ensured the
capability requirements process in the JCIDS was aligned and consistent with the Defense
Acquisition System in the interim DoDI 5000.02 released in late 2013. Key elements synchronized
include the draft Capability Development Document (CDD) due before Milestone A, the validated
CDD used as a basis for PDR, and the role of the Configuration Steering Boards (CSB). DASD(SE)
participation in the development of JCIDS policy and guidance and in engagement with the programs
provides opportunities to define and improve best practices for integrating systems engineering into
requirements processes and implement them as the Department develops the requisite capabilities.
2.1.4 System Security Engineering
DASD(SE) led efforts to mature system security engineering practices within the Department,
including improvements in program protection policy and guidance, acquisition regulations, and
hardware and software assurance.
Program Protection Policy and Guidance. DASD(SE) developed guidance to complement recent
development and publication of foundational program protection requirements in several key
policies, including the interim DoDI 5000.02; DoDI 5200.39; and DoDI 5200.44, “Protection of
Mission Critical Functions to Achieve Trusted Systems and Networks (TSN).” DASD(SE) prepared
updates to the DAG Chapter 13 on Program Protection as well as the Program Protection Plan (PPP)
Outline and Guidance, both of which are expected to be published in FY 2015. DASD(SE)
published additional guidance materials for the acquisition community, including “Program
Protection Plan Evaluation Criteria, Version 1.1,” “Trusted Systems and Networks Analysis,” and
“Software Assurance Countermeasures in Program Protection.”
DASD(SE) led efforts to mature DoD practices to protect DoD systems and technology that are vital
to U.S. technological superiority. DASD(SE) and USD(I) revised DoDI 5200.39, “Critical Program
Information (CPI) Identification and Protection Within Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation.” This instruction will require programs to maintain the U.S. Warfighter technical
advantage and preserve operational effectiveness of DoD capabilities by identifying and protecting
critical program information. DASD(SE) and USD(I) also initiated a working group to develop an
5DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ACTIVITIES
implementing DoD Manual 5200.39 to provide procedures for identifying and protecting critical
program information. In addition, DASD(SE) led the development of DoD Directive 5200.JJE,
“Anti-Tamper.” When published, this directive will formalize the DoD Anti-Tamper program
governance structure and define the roles and responsibilities associated with identifying and
implementing the appropriate anti-tamper protections for critical program information. These key
policy initiatives support exportability goals outlined in USD(AT&L)’s Better Buying Power 2.0 and
the early design and implementation of Defense Exportability Features (DEF). Details on the DEF
Pilot Program and participating programs may be found in the FY 2014 USD(AT&L)/International
Cooperation report to Congress, Defense Exportability Features Pilot Program (classified).
Safeguarding Technical Information. DASD(SE) coordinated Department efforts to implement
actions directed in the Secretary of Defense October 10, 2013, memorandum, “Safeguarding
Unclassified Controlled Technical Information.” Among these efforts, DASD(SE) led, in
collaboration with the office of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy (DPAP), the final
coordination, publishing, and implementation of Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) clause 252.204-7012, “Safeguarding of Unclassified Controlled Technical Information.”
DASD(SE) also led the development of guidance to assist with implementing the clause. This clause
requires contractors to protect unclassified controlled technical information from cyber intrusions and
report cyber incidents that may have affected the Department’s unclassified controlled technical
information. DASD(SE) is looking for ways to improve the partnership between the acquisition
community and the intelligence community to perform comprehensive assessments of technical
information losses and determine consequences in order to inform requirements, acquisition,
programmatics, and strategic courses of action.
Joint Federated Assurance Center. The JFAC will establish a federation of software assurance and
hardware assurance capabilities to support acquisition program protection planning and execution.
DASD(SE) led the formation of a JFAC to fulfill requirements of section 937 (Joint Federated
Centers for Trusted Defense Systems for the Department of Defense) of the FY 2014 NDAA, which
directs the establishment of a joint federation of capabilities to ensure security of DoD software and
hardware.
The JFAC will support program offices across the life cycle by identifying and facilitating access to
Department software assurance and hardware assurance expertise and capabilities, policies, guidance,
requirements, best practices, contracting language, training, and testing support. In addition, the
JFAC will coordinate across the DoD research and development communities to develop and deploy
innovative and affordable vulnerability analysis, testing, and protection tools. Software and
hardware technical working groups, a multidisciplinary policy team, and a Senior Executive Steering
Committee have been established and have agreed on an organizational construct, initial operational
construct, and a charter. The JFAC is on track to achieve Initial Operational Capability (IOC) during
4th quarter FY 2015.
In response to a Senate Appropriations Committee tasking, DASD(SE) also published a report,
Department of Defense Assurance Microelectronics Policy, Senate Report 113-85, July 2014,
describing DoD progress toward implementing an assured microelectronics policy. The report
presents a Department-wide systems engineering approach for promoting hardware assurance
through the process of program protection planning. It includes an assessment of potential threats to
6 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ACTIVITIES
microelectronics and their supply chain vulnerabilities. The report also describes the
countermeasures being used to mitigate the risk of malicious acts occurring that might otherwise
undermine the trustworthiness of the microelectronics and the related microelectronic hardware used
in DoD weapon and information technology systems.
2.1.5 Additional Engineering Policy and Guidance
In 2014, DASD(SE) continued to develop and refine policy and guidance in counterfeit prevention,
safety, and systems engineering-related standards.
Counterfeit Prevention. DASD(SE) supported the implementation of the DoDI 4140.67, “DoD
Counterfeit Prevention Policy,” which addresses counterfeit materiel in the DoD supply chain.
DASD(SE) led the effort to incorporate counterfeit prevention design considerations in the DAG
Chapter 4. DASD(SE) acted as the principal point of contact for Government-Industry Data
Exchange Program (GIDEP), examining a series of policy and procedure options to expand GIDEP’s
usefulness and robustness in support of the defense and Federal global supply chains.
DASD(SE) was a primary contributor on the DoD and Federal Government teams that drafted a
series of regulations required under NDAA 2012 section 818 (Pub. L. 112-81): (1) “Detection and
Avoidance of Counterfeit Electronic Parts,” which provides guidance to prime contractors and their
supply chains (DFARS case 2012-D055); (2) “Higher Level Contract Quality Requirements” for
critical items procured under Cost Accounting Standard (CAS) covered contracts (FAR case 2012-
032); and (3) “Expanded Reporting of Nonconforming Items” to ensure known cases of
nonconforming items (including counterfeits) are communicated to the contracting officer and
throughout the industrial base, as appropriate, using GIDEP (FAR case 2013-002).
DASD(SE) also participated in a series of FAR and DFARS public meetings to gather industry
perspectives on these proposed regulations, which resulted in a fourth case, “Detection and
Avoidance of Counterfeit Electronics–Further Implementation,” which aims to address areas that
industry has identified as requiring further clarification or guidance (DFARS case 2014-D005).
Safety. DASD(SE) led efforts with the Military Departments’ system safety communities to conduct
collaborative weapon system safety reviews. On July 30, 2014, USD(AT&L) issued the manual
USD(AT&L) requires quarterly DAES assessments of MDAP and MAIS program performance.
Approximately one-third of the programs are reviewed each month of each quarter. The DAES
assessments are documented in the OSD Defense Acquisition Management Information Retrieval
(DAMIR) repository each month.
DASD(SE) assesses programs in five areas: Program Schedule, System Performance, Management,
Interoperability/Information Security, and Production. This equates to approximately 440
assessments each quarter. The exact number of assessments fluctuates as programs are continually
added or removed from the reporting list, and some areas within specific programs are exempt from
reporting. In FY 2014, DASD(SE) performed 1,705 assessments. OSD offices with oversight in
designated DAES assessment areas recommend programs for a more detailed DAES review by
USD(AT&L). DASD(SE) participated in the DAES review of 35 (24 MDAP and 11 MAIS)
programs in FY 2014.
2.3 Workforce
DASD(SE) is the Functional Leader for the ENG (Engineering) and PQM (Production, Quality, and
Manufacturing) acquisition workforce career fields and continues to ensure the Department’s
acquisition engineering workforce is trained, certified, and qualified to meet the Department’s
complex engineering requirements. As the Functional Leader, DASD(SE) provides career field
advocacy, oversight, and guidance to the defense acquisition workforce personnel responsible for
providing systems engineering, production, manufacturing, and quality expertise. In FY 2014,
DASD(SE) led and supported workforce development initiatives to improve the professionalism and
technical excellence of the acquisition engineering workforce.
2.3.1 DAWIA Career Fields
DASD(SE) oversees the DAU courses for the ENG and PQM career fields, ensuring the certification
standards are appropriate, technically accurate, and consistent with current policy and guidance.
DAU Curriculum. DASD(SE) collaborated with DAU to ensure the technical currency of the ENG
and PQM curriculum. This year, DASD(SE) updated the curriculums to reflect changes resulting
from the interim DoDI 5000.02, the updated DAG Chapter 4, the updated ENG and PQM
competency models, and Better Buying Power initiatives. During this curriculum update, the “SYS”
courses also will be renamed with an “ENG” nomenclature, to reflect the FY 2013 renaming of the
Systems Planning, Research, Development, and Engineering (SPRDE) career field to ENG. The
20 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ACTIVITIES
updated ENG courses will be fully deployed in FY 2015. DAU started updating the PQM courses
and will deploy them in FY 2015/FY 2016. The affected ENG and PQM courses are as follows:
• ENG 102, “Fundamentals of Systems Engineering,” replacing SYS 101
• ENG 204, “Applied Systems Engineering in Defense Acquisition, Part I,” replacing SYS 202
• ENG 205, “Applied Systems Engineering in Defense Acquisition, Part II,” replacing SYS 203
• ENG 301, “Leadership in Engineering Defense Systems,” replacing SYS 302
• PQM 101, “Production, Quality, and Manufacturing Fundamentals”
• PQM 201, “Intermediate Production, Quality, and Manufacturing”
• PQM 301, “Advanced Production, Quality, and Manufacturing”
In addition, DASD(SE) supports the development of specialty engineering training specific to
acquisition workforce members working in R&M engineering and program protection planning.
DASD(SE) is engaging with DAU in the following efforts:
After conducting an analysis of the R&M learning objectives within the Engineering functional area,
DASD(SE) determined the engineering community needed additional R&M engineering courseware
to address the requisite competencies. DAU, with technical support from the office of DASD(SE),
began updating CLE 301, “R&M Engineering,” and developing two new courses. The first new
course will guide students through the development process for a RAM-C Rationale Report.
A second new course, “Advanced R&M Topics,” is intended to provide R&M practitioners with in-
depth training on specific R&M areas such as R&M planning, design support, monitoring, technical
reviews, and test and evaluation.
Under the sponsorship of DASD(SE), DAU also began developing two new courses on program
protection. ENG 160, “Program Protection Planning Awareness,” will be a distance learning course
for the acquisition workforce to provide them with knowledge of system security engineering
principles and policies. The course will provide program protection awareness training on threats,
vulnerabilities, risks, cost-benefit risk trade-offs, and required mitigations for DoD systems. It will
also address supply chain risk management and the need for acquisition program protection
documents such as the PPP, Cybersecurity Strategy, and Anti-Tamper Plan.
ENG 260, “Program Protection Planning for Practitioners,” will provide system security engineering
workforce members with an opportunity to learn and apply protection planning processes through
guided exercises. Course exercises will be based on fictional but realistic acquisition programs with
several integrated systems. Students will carry out program protection planning for the protection of
CPI and mission-critical functions. Students will identify, prevent, and respond to program
protection threats and vulnerabilities across the acquisition life cycle. The course will provide
preferred practices and steps for integrating program protection with security specialties, including
cybersecurity, hardware assurance, software assurance, and anti-tamper.
21DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ACTIVITIES
2.3.2 Acquisition Workforce Initiatives
The ENG acquisition workforce continues to face the challenge that a large portion will be eligible to retire within 10 years; as of the end of FY 2014, 48.4 percent of the ENG acquisition workforce fall into this category. Furthermore, the ENG acquisition workforce in the mid-career range, which would be replacing this outgoing systems engineering and analyst experience, contains the smallest percentage of this workforce. To address this challenge, in FY 2014 DASD(SE) supported workforce development initiatives to build the capabilities and capacity of the ENG acquisition workforce.
In support of Better Buying Power initiatives, DASD(SE) collaborated with other acquisition career field functional leaders to develop and deploy a KLP (Key Leadership Position) qualification process. The DASD(SE) focus is to create a pool of candidates to potentially serve as Chief Engineers/Lead Systems Engineers (CE/LSE) on MDAPs and MAIS programs. In support of the KLP qualification process, DASD(SE) updated the CE/LSE competency-based functional-specific requirements to supplement the common cross-functional requirements issued by USD(AT&L). These functional-specific requirements are unique to the demands of a CE/LSE and provide depth to the cross-functional requirements. Personnel will be qualified through a joint board of Component functional executives called a Qualification Board.
DASD(SE) directed the SERC (Systems Engineering Research Center), as part of its Human Capital Portfolio, to conduct research to develop and improve the Department’s engineering workforce. The SERC conducted several projects in FY 2014:
• The Helix project is a multiyear longitudinal study designed to understand the systems engineering workforce to best leverage engineering talent.
• The Experience Accelerator project is investigating whether simulation technology can be used to effectively compress the learning time of a systems engineer as compared with learning naturally obtained on the job.
• The Systems Engineering Technical Leadership project is formulating three courses to provide technical leadership insights at the systems, business, and enterprise levels.
• The SEEK project began in the summer of 2014 and aims to support DAU instruction by developing case studies that capture systems engineering and acquisition lessons learned.
DASD(SE) will continue to advance these workforce development initiatives and explore new initiatives in collaboration with the Military Departments to maintain the capacity, capability, and competence of the Department’s engineering workforce.
22 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
3 DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
3.1 Assessment Overview
DASD(SE) requested that each Military Department (Army, Navy, and Air Force) submit a systems
engineering self-assessment to be included in this Systems Engineering Annual Report to Congress.
DASD(SE) asked each Department to describe its overall systems engineering strategy, to include
priorities, milestones and measures of success. The Military Departments were also asked to provide
an update of FY 2014 progress and FY 2015 plans to improve their organization’s systems
engineering capability, in accordance with the reporting requirements in Pub. L. 111-23, Title I,
section 102(b), as amended by Pub. L. 111-383, Title VIII, section 813(a):
The service acquisition executive of each military department and each Defense
Agency with responsibility for a major defense acquisition program shall develop
and implement plans to ensure the military department or Defense Agency
concerned has provided appropriate resources for…
(B) Development planning and systems engineering organizations with
adequate numbers of trained personnel in order to—
(i) support key requirements, acquisition, and budget decisions made for
each major defense acquisition program prior to Milestone A approval
and Milestone B approval through a rigorous systems analysis and
systems engineering process;
(ii) include a robust program for improving reliability, availability,
maintainability, and sustainability as an integral part of design and
development within the systems engineering master plan for each major
defense acquisition program; and
(iii) identify systems engineering requirements, including reliability,
availability, maintainability, and lifecycle management and sustainability
requirements, during the Joint Capabilities Integration Development
System process, and incorporate such systems engineering requirements
into contract requirements for each major defense acquisition program.
The Military Departments were asked to describe workforce development initiatives for their systems
engineering workforce and were asked to provide a discussion of additional authorities or resources
needed to attract, develop, retain, and reward systems engineers. Due to continued interest from
Congress in the size and capability of the systems engineering workforce, the Military Departments’
reporting includes civilian and military personnel, and contracted systems engineering support.
The Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force systems engineering self-assessments are
provided in their entirety in Appendices A though C, respectively. DASD(SE) used the self-
assessments and met with the systems engineering leadership of each Military Department to review
23DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
their organizations and capabilities and to identify needed changes or improvements to their
organizations’ capabilities and policies in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 139(b).
3.2 Systems Engineering Strategy
The Military Departments implemented changes to organizations, policies, and practices to improve
systems engineering in FY 2014. They demonstrated progress in meeting Department priorities and
fulfilling strategic objectives and milestones, highlighting systems engineering contributions to
achieving affordable programs, and improving program oversight.
The Department of the Army’s System of Systems Engineering and Integration (SoSE&I)
Directorate under the ASA(ALT), provided overarching management and oversight authority for SoS
engineering policies and processes. The SoSE&I Directorate executed Army-level systems
engineering in support of the acquisition process with emphasis on SoS engineering and integration,
cross-cutting capabilities (CCC), cyber defense, SoS-focused test and evaluation, and SoS capability
fielding. The SoSE&I Directorate made several significant accomplishments in FY 2014, including
the signed Common Operating Environment (COE) Execute Order, which assigned roles and
responsibilities for executing COE tasks, directed the annual publication of the COE Integrated
Systems Engineering Plan, and provided an Integrated Master Schedule. In addition, the Army PEOs
successfully implemented affordability efforts with certain programs, resulting in estimated savings
of up to $40 million over 5 years. For instance, PEO Simulation, Training and Instrumentation
(STRI) reduced the cost of producing and sustaining two independent simulators by using common
architectures and components for each training device, which also demonstrated improved resource
allocation, interoperability, acquisition cycle time, and synchronized training methodologies.
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation
(DASN(RDT&E)) continued to govern Naval Systems Command (SYSCOM) systems engineering
processes and established standard systems engineering processes across the Naval SYSCOMs in
FY 2014. The Navy’s Systems Engineering Streamlining Initiative reduced and eliminated
redundant and non-value-added Department of the Navy-required systems engineering-related
technical plans and activities where possible. For instance, the Navy delegated its Service approval
of the SEPs to the Naval SYSCOMs, consistent with Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5400.15
“Department of the Navy Research and Development, Acquisition, Associated Life-Cycle
Management, and Logistics Responsibilities and Accountability,” which assigned technical authority
to the SYSCOMs. The Navy achieved further progress in systems engineering-related policy by
updating and publishing the Engineering and Technical Authority policy and obtaining Naval
SYSCOM concurrences for the Technical Standards policy. In addition, the Navy made the
integration of critical specialty engineering analyses a key systems engineering focus area to identify
and assess risk across programs and formulate common mitigation strategies.
In FY 2014, the Air Force formally designated the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
(Science, Technology, and Engineering) (SAF/AQR) as the Air Force Chief Engineer and Technical
Authority; this was accomplished through an Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition
(SAF/AQ) memo to the Air Force PEOs that was integrated into the Headquarters Air Force Mission
Directive 1-10 and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 63-101/20-101, Integrated Life Cycle Management.
The Air Force also established a PEO Lead Systems Engineer Roundtable to periodically discuss
24 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
issues of interest, with the first two meetings focused on the Air Force Engineering Enterprise,
technical authority, and other items. In FY 2014, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of
Staff of the Air Force approved the 10-year Air Force Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan for
2014-2024, which provides the strategic vision and governance structure for the entire Air Force
Engineering Enterprise. In addition, SAF/AQ established “Own the Technical Baseline” (OTB) as a
priority to inform program decision making by having the appropriate knowledge of the technical
baseline with the appropriate level of technical expertise.
DASD(SE) recommends the Military Departments continue improving their systems engineering
capabilities by emphasizing systems engineering standard practices as codified in policy and
guidance. The interim DoDI 5000.02 emphasizes embedding systems engineering in program
planning and execution to support the entire system life cycle. A FY 2015 challenge for the Military
Departments will be their ability to execute strategies for improving technical capabilities in the
current resource-constrained environment.
3.3 Development Planning and Early Systems Engineering
In FY 2014, the Military Departments implemented development planning and early systems
engineering, and several of their acquisition organizations actively participated in the DASD(SE)-
chaired Development Planning Working Group. They were proactive in collaborating in the working
group to develop a process description for integrating science and technology efforts with associated
Warfighter/combat developer and acquisition community activities.
The Army’s SoSE&I organization continued to expand its engagements with PEO/PM early program
activities. In a step toward an enterprise systems engineering practice, RDECOM is developing a
systems engineering trade-off analysis methodology that enables the research and development
community to assess a large set of alternatives across competing objectives of performance, life cycle
costs, and development schedules. The emerging methodology is called the Decision Centric
Systems Engineering, formerly the Decision Model Based Systems Engineering. The Army’s
PEO/PM efforts to develop and implement a set of bottom-up initiatives (e.g., Soldier Modernization
Process, Independent Assessment Teams, etc.) should continue to progress to a more robust,
enterprise-level development planning capability.
In FY 2014, the Navy continued transforming its Naval Systems Engineering Guidebook (NSEG)
from a limited, hard copy format to an online interactive guide, improving it as a resource for
systems engineers. DASN(RDT&E) and the Naval Systems Engineering Stakeholders Group
collaborated during the launch of the online NSEG to better align it with early systems engineering
activities and critical specialty engineering policy and guidance.
The Air Force continued its efforts to streamline its systems engineering policy and updated Air
Force Policy Directive (AFPD) 16-10, Modeling and Simulation. Early technical planning is paying
off in several areas, such as spectrum certification. Of particular note in FY 2014 are Air Force
efficiencies identified through Cost versus Capability Analysis (CCA) on several pilot programs.
The Air Force successfully used the CCA process both before an ICD is validated and continually in
the MSA phase to identify affordable and viable military concepts and to estimate the life cycle costs
25DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
and operational effectiveness of potential concepts. These successes have led to the decision to
institutionalize the CCA practice throughout the Air Force.
DASD(SE) recommends the Military Departments continue their progress in implementing rigorous
systems engineering during the early acquisition phases. For instance, programs may consider using
their organic Government technical staff to conduct early design, development, and specification
work to create the solid technical foundation needed to further develop and acquire a materiel
capability.
3.4 Reliability and Maintainability
DTM 11-003, “Reliability Analysis, Planning, Tracking, and Reporting,” was incorporated into the
issuance of the interim DoDI 5000.02 in November 2013. The DoDI requires each Military
Department to formulate a comprehensive R&M program for all MDAPs, which includes mandatory
engineering activities as well as key systems engineering planning for R&M. In FY 2014, the
Military Departments, through acquisition policy, training, and workforce development activities,
continued to build on the progress made in revitalizing R&M engineering.
The Army continues active engagement with the R&M communities within the Service and the DoD.
This includes continuing to host an R&M Working Group that includes senior participants across the
Army to conduct R&M assessments of Army MDAPs and collect lessons learned. In addition, the
Army established a Reliability Systemic Working Group that supports the T&E Efficiencies Task
Force. In the area of workforce development, the Army continues to leverage the Specialty
Engineering Education and Training program (SE2T), which provides training on reliability, quality,
production, manufacturing, and T&E. The Army Center for Reliability Growth continues to support
Army R&M engineering activities in the areas of policy, guidance, standards, methods, tools, and
training. The Army also continued developing the Army R&M policy, AR 702-3, which has been
submitted for publication.
The Navy continues to require programs at all ACAT levels to document their R&M engineering
planning in their SEPs. DASN(RDT&E) R&M engineering staff worked with individual SYSCOMs
on R&M activities such as supporting the DAES reliability growth reporting. In addition, the Navy
serves as the preparing activity for most of the R&M DIDs (Data Item Descriptions) and is
collaborating with OSD and other Services to update the DIDs. For training needs, several legacy
R&M courses have been updated and continue to be deployed to SYSCOMs and Warfare Centers.
DASN(RDT&E) R&M is working with Naval programs that were established before the issuance of
the DTM 11-003 to ensure an effective failure reporting, analysis, and corrective action system
(FRACAS) process is in place.
The Air Force continues to implement R&M policy and guidance. With the issuance of the interim
DoDI 5000.02, the Air Force is updating its internal R&M policies such as AFI21-118, “Improving
Air and Space Equipment Reliability and Maintainability,” and AFI 63-101/20-101, “Integrated Life
Cycle Management.” Coupled with the policy update, the AF is also working to convert the Air
Force RAM Guidebook into an Air Force Pamphlet. In addition, the Air Force Life Cycle
Management Center (AFLCMC) continues to integrate R&M expertise across the Department
through its R&M Working Group, which provides a collaborative community of practice for R&M
26 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
leadership in the Air Force. To improve the R&M performance of Air Force acquisition programs,
AFLCMC initiated an annual R&M Programs Health Assessment aimed at providing insight on the
health of a program’s processes, products, and expertise. At the practitioner level, AFLCMC has
created Individual Development Plans to ensure that R&M trainees receive the appropriate
specialized education needed to support R&M requirements for Air Force acquisition programs.
Finally, the Air Force has implemented a Certification and Accreditation process for a standard suite
of software tools for R&M engineering.
DASD(SE) recognizes the steps that each Military Department has taken to reenergize the R&M
engineering discipline. Each Military Department continues to make strides in creating a network of
policies, practices, and tools to ensure R&M is considered upfront. DASD(SE) also recognizes that
the Military Departments must continue to engage strategically to ensure a workforce with adequate
capacity and capability will be in place to meet future acquisition demands.
3.5 Systems Engineering in JCIDS
During FY 2014, the Army made progress in establishing closer coordination among Army
communities involved with the JCIDS development process, overcoming challenges the Army
identified last year in applying systems engineering talent to JCIDS activities before Milestone A.
The SoSE&I organization established the Army Integrated Requirements Framework process to
provide a proof of concept to conduct analysis, provide findings regarding the commonality of
requirements across requirements documents, and describe a proposed Agile Requirements
Management Process to enable execution of SoS requirements. Ultimately this should allow the
Army to influence structure and development of requirements to match its strategies and SoS
objectives.
In FY 2014, the Department of the Navy SYSCOM systems engineers placed more emphasis on
architectures and mission engineering in order to provide the necessary technical expertise to
requirements developers early in the acquisition process. For example, NAVAIR created a Mission
Engineering and Analysis Department and an Enterprise Team to implement Integration and
Interoperability as an organizational element within the SYSCOM. NAVAIR believes an improved
mission-level understanding of systems integration design issues will facilitate the delivery of
Integrated Warfighting Capability at reduced cost.
The Air Force is continuing to strengthen its early systems engineering influence in JCIDS. For
instance, it revised AFI 10-601, “Operational Capability Requirements Development,” which ties the
Concept Characterization and Technical Description documents to AoA study planning. In FY 2014
SAF/AQR used a Pre-planning Team to review requirements documents for affordability and
technical feasibility in support of the Air Force Requirements Review Group. SAF/AQR also
sponsored the National Research Council’s Air Force Studies Board at the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct an independent review and assessment of the Air Force’s approach and
execution of development planning. (This report, “Development Planning: A Strategic Approach to
Future Air Force Capabilities,” was released in FY 2015.)
27DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
The interim DoDI 5000.02 issued in early FY 2014 encourages closer coordination among JCIDS,
systems engineering, and contract actions. DASD(SE) recommends continued effort by the Military
Departments to support the JCIDS process using their applied systems engineering talent.
3.6 Military Department-Identified Areas of Progress and Improvement
The Military Departments provided evidence of their progress against the areas of improvement from
their FY 2013 self-assessment and new areas where they chose to report their department’s improved
systems engineering capability. They identified and provided plans for addressing FY 2015 priority
areas to improve the systems engineering and development planning capability of their organization.
The Army’s FY 2014 focus areas for progress and improvement were the System of Systems
Engineering Management Plan (SoSEMP), Always On-On Demand (AO-OD), systems engineering
capability optimization, and other processes and tools for SoS. In FY 2014, the SoSEMP, which
documents the SoS engineering process and takes a product-centric approach by defining the output
of each SoS engineering process, was further refined and distributed for review. AO-OD was
integrated with the Joint Staff J6 Bold Quest 14.2 event, conducting an On-Demand Environment
Network and Net-Centric Systems Event 2014, which demonstrated substantial cost savings, cost
avoidance, and value-added possibilities, as the sheer size of the scenario would have been
prohibitively expensive otherwise. As part of the systems engineering capability optimization, the
Army performed the Network Capability Review (NCR) to support resourcing decisions within the
Mission Command Portfolio where NCR analysis determined a “good enough” tactical architecture
that will influence the specific configurations of future capability sets.
The Navy accomplished several major milestones in systems engineering streamlining and
improvement in FY 2014. DASN(RDT&E) established the SE CONNECTS forum, a continuous
communication forum among DASN(RDT&E), programs, systems engineers, and Naval Warfare
and Systems Center engineering to address new requirements, policy, guidance, and best practices.
Updates to the SETR checklist for several critical specialty engineering areas were published on the
Navy Systems Engineering Resource Center site for easy access and use by programs and systems
engineers. The Navy contributed to the development of DoD, Naval, systems engineering, and
configuration management military addenda for industrial systems engineering standards and
guidance.
The Air Force identified several areas of progress and improvement in FY 2014, including corrosion,
human systems integration (HSI), standardization, and ESOH. The Air Force released the new
Corrosion Strategic Plan to better align with the DoD corrosion strategy and to provide a roadmap for
continued success. In FY 2014, an additional nine high-performance team action plans for HSI were
completed, the AFLCMC established and filled a special advisor for HSI, and SAF/AQ published Air
Force Pamphlet 63-128 “Guide to Integrated Life Cycle Management” which includes a new chapter
on HSI. The Air Force continued to lead the three joint Service working groups developing non-
government standards for systems engineering, technical reviews and audits, and manufacturing
management. As part of ESOH efforts, the Air Force approved a Space and Missile Systems Center
(SMC) instruction for space debris mitigation and reporting, and developed a compliance roadmap
briefing to achieve full compliance with the National Space policy by 2020.
28 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
DASD(SE) commends the Military Departments on their continuing efforts to address planned areas
for improvement. The challenge for FY 2015 will be to sustain and complete efforts with
constrained resources.
3.7 Workforce Initiatives
Military Department Workforce Initiatives 3.7.1
The Army, Navy, and Air Force have remained focused on improving their systems engineering and
development planning workforces in FY 2014. Each Military Department has continued the use of
the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund (DAWDF) (10 U.S.C. 1705) as well as the
implementation of tools and methods such as competency models, internal training courses and
programs, and partnerships with universities to grow and enhance the systems engineering
workforce. This section provides a summary of the efforts taken by the Military Departments in
FY 2014 and a look forward into FY 2015.
In FY 2014, the Army focused on workforce development efforts to support its acquisition systems
engineering workforce. One such effort was the Army Materiel Command’s establishment of a
proponency office to facilitate improved communication with the systems engineering workforce
regarding the Army’s engineering workforce development and utilization strategy. The Army also
focused on providing educational and training opportunities to develop the capabilities and capacity
of its systems engineering workforce. In partnership with DAU, the Army has expanded its SE2T
(Specialty Engineering Education and Training) program by adding courses tailored to rebuild
competencies in key specialty engineering areas. Furthermore, the Army has maintained
relationships with a consortium of universities and entered its final year of partnership with the Naval
Postgraduate School (NPS). The Army continues to provide multiple rotational/developmental
assignments for the systems engineering workforce members to gain operational experience in
multiple organizations, and broaden their breadth of knowledge.
A wide range of Army PEO/PM efforts support recruitment, development, and retention of a
qualified and certified acquisition workforce. For example, PEO STRI took advantage of the
Acquisition Academy (A2) program to screen and recruit qualified candidates; to date, A2 has
successfully recruited 23 high-performing new engineering graduates and is experiencing an 83
percent retention rate for systems engineering positions. PEO Aviation partnered with the Aviation
and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center (AMRDEC) Systems Engineering
Division to rotate and transition engineering support to ensure matrixed systems engineers gain
exposure and proficiency across the product life cycle. In addition, PEO Aviation, PM Aviation
Systems continued the “Building the SE Bench” succession planning program, by using Chief
Engineers to mentor junior engineers.
The Navy remains focused on rebuilding its acquisition workforce. In FY 2014, the Navy continued
to support implementation of the USD(AT&L)’s KLP policy and oversee the SYSCOMs’
identification of a cadre of employees qualified for future KLP opportunities. In addition, to prepare
its technical workforce for leadership roles, DASN(RDT&E) sponsored students to participate in the
Joint Executive Engineering Management distance learning master’s degree program offered by the
29DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
NPS and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Educational Consortium for Product
Development Leadership in the 21st Century.
To support its larger systems engineering acquisition workforce, the Navy partnered with NPS and a
consortium of universities to offer programs for those seeking degrees as well as those looking to
increase their job-specific knowledge. The NPS Master of Science in Systems Engineering program
continued to provide advanced technical degrees for the Navy’s technical workforce. NPS also
offered a Lead Systems Integrator (LSI) certificate to prepare engineers to assume positions as LSIs.
In FY 2014, the Navy partnered with DAU to begin development of a “Critical Thinking for
Technical Leaders” course and also continued development of its Systems Engineering Career
Competency Model, which highlights an aggregate of the core technical and general knowledge,
skills, and abilities for systems engineers, to strengthen the technical workforce.
In FY 2014, the Air Force focused on recruitment, development, and retention initiatives to support
its acquisition workforce. The Air Force expanded its use of social media as part of branding and
enterprise recruiting strategies for acquiring talent. In addition, the Air Force used DAWDF funds to
support targeted retention incentives, civilian tuition assistance, and professional education courses at
the Air Force Institute of Technology. Under the oversight of the Engineering Enterprise Strategic
Plan working group, the Air Force developed a systems engineering skills taxonomy aligned with its
draft Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan Roadmap. The taxonomy was developed for the
engineering enterprise across the Air Force Materiel Command and Air Force Space Command.
The Air Force also focused on recruiting and developing its systems engineering workforce. Based
on an Air Force science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce study
completed in 2013, the Air Force emphasized hiring entry-level employees by supporting student
hire programs and expanding the application of Acquisition Personnel Demonstration Program
policies to a larger number of Air Force organizations. As a result, the Air Force found noticeable
improvements in the age distribution of the workforce under 40 years old. In addition, the Air Force
released Bright Horizons 2.0, an update to the SAF/AQ strategy for attracting and maintaining
employees for the STEM workforce.
Systems Engineering Workforce Resourcing 3.7.2
The Army has been able to make effective use of DAWDF to recruit, hire, train, develop, and retain
its acquisition workforce. The Navy reported that its budget is sufficient to support planned
programs, but it is losing systems engineering experience due to retirement. To mitigate the
challenges of losing retiring senior systems engineers, the Navy’s individual SYSCOMs are
streamlining processes, implementing workforce development tools, and mentoring systems
engineers. The Air Force reports that the long-term impacts of FY 2014 financial constraints are
inconclusive at this time; however, it believes stringent budget constraints may affect both succession
planning and retention. The Air Force is addressing these challenges through use of science,
mathematics, and research transformation (SMART) programs and continued use of DAWDF to
support workforce replenishment and knowledge transfer.
30 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
Total DoD Systems Engineering Workforce 3.7.3
Table 3-1 shows workforce data for each Military Department and DASD(SE), including the total
number of Government (civilian and military) acquisition-coded personnel in the ENG career field
for FY 2005 through FY 2014 and the planned growth of the personnel from FY 2015 through
FY 2019. The total number of ENG personnel is projected to be 37,321 by the end of FY 2019, a
decline of 181 since the end of FY 2013. Overall, the total ENG acquisition workforce in the
Military Departments decreased by 0.6 percent between FY 2013 and FY 2014.
The Army acquisition workforce assigned to ENG positions decreased from 9,374 in FY 2013 to
8,986 in FY 2014, a reduction of 388. The Army attributes this decrease to budgetary impacts and
reports that its entire acquisition workforce is experiencing a similar trend. ENG positions in the
Army are projected to decrease to 8,698 in FY 2015 and to 8,696 in FY 2016. Army ENG position
levels are projected to remain level thereafter into FY 2019.
The Navy acquisition workforce assigned to ENG positions increased from 19,589 in FY 2013 to
19,797 in FY 2014, an addition of 208, and this growth is projected to continue into FY 2015 due to
SYSCOM priorities and available funding. However, from FY 2016 to FY 2019, the Navy projects a
steady decline to 19,679 ENG personnel by the end of FY 2019. The Navy identified that this
decline in numbers is influenced by the challenges of hiring freezes and allocation of workforce
reductions. In previous reports, the Navy submissions projected higher ENG personnel numbers into
FY 2019.
The Air Force acquisition workforce assigned to ENG positions decreased from 8,518 in FY 2013 to
8,474 in FY 2014, a reduction of 44. The Air Force projects a continued decline into FY 2019,
resulting in 8,203 ENG personnel by the end of FY 2019. The Air Force attributes this decline to the
allocation of modest workforce reductions and reallocation of authorizations. In previous reports, the
Air Force submissions projected constant ENG personnel numbers into FY 2019.
31DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
DASD(SE) ASSESSMENTS OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
Table 3-1. Systems Engineering Workforce in the DoD Reported by Military Department Systems Engineers and DASD(SE)
Total Number of Civilian and Military Acquisition-ENG Personnel Fiscal Year
Table 3-2 summarizes the contracted systems engineering support delivered to the Military
Departments during FY 2013. This data was reported to Congress by DoD in an effort to improve
visibility into and accountability of contracted services in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2330a. The
DoD Inventory of Contracts for Services reflects input from the Military Departments.4
1 U.S. Navy numbers reflect Department of Navy, including both U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps.
U.S. Navy ENG personnel reflect employees on board at end of each fiscal year, including DAWDF-funded
employees. Source: Director, Acquisition Career Management (DACM) Management Information System (MIS).
U.S. Navy planned growth for FY15 is calculated here as the difference between projected end strength for FY15
and ENG personnel for FY14, which includes a small decrease from PB14 FY14 workforce requirements. The
remaining difference is made of small changes between program, budget, and execution cycles, and any personnel
vacancies at FY14 year-end.
U.S. Navy planned growth for FY16-19 is the difference in projected end strength from the previous fiscal year.
U.S. Navy projected end strength reflects workforce requirements plus planned DAWDF-funded workforce.
Sources: President’s Budget FY15 Exhibit 23 and Department of Navy DAWDF Hiring Plan.” 2 U.S. Army FY14 to 2019 total acquisition-ENG personnel numbers reported differ from October 2014 PB-23
Exhibit submission because the PB-23 reported numbers for the ENG and the S&T Manager acquisition career
fields combine, whereas the reported value above has been updated to include only the ENG career field. 3 U.S. Air Force planned growth and projected end strength numbers are based on FY16 PB-23 Acquisition and
Technology Workforce as of December 2014. 4 Source: Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy (DPAP) website
Table 3-2. Contracted Systems Engineering Support to the Military Departments
as Reported by DoD to Congress
Total Number of Non-Government Systems Engineering Support (FTE) Fiscal Year Year Ending US Army US Navy US Air Force
FY12 30-Sep-12 13,033 16,416 10,547
FY13 30-Sep-13 16,130 16,738 10,186
This summary reflects the latest information available as of publication of this annual report;
FY 2014 contracted services data will not be provided to Congress until mid-2015 in accordance with
the requirements of 10 U.S.C 235 and 2330a.
These numbers are based on product service codes and do not provide position-specific information
such as acquisition job functions that might confirm that these full-time equivalents (FTE) reflect
high-value systems engineering support. These numbers also may represent positions supporting
research and development, test and evaluation, or other areas. In addition, selection of product
service codes occurs locally at the individual contract level and may result in differing interpretation
of contract work content across the Military Departments and activities. Although contractors are
encouraged to parse contract task orders to reflect multiple functions (i.e., product service codes),
this requirement is enforced at the local contracting activity and program level.
These numbers represent the best available approximation of the actual contracted systems
engineering support level of effort. At this time, DASD(SE) does not have an estimate of the
projected systems engineering support.
5 Source: U.S. General Services Administration Office of Government-wide Policy, Federal Procurement Data
System Product and Service Codes Manual, August 2011 Edition (Effective Date: October 1, 2011), pp. 103, 217. 6 Both R414 and R421 were end-dated and merged into PSC R425; legacy data retained effective October 2011.
33DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
This page intentionally blank.
4 DASD(SE) PROGRAM ASSESSMENTS
e ollo ing se tions in lu e etaile assessments o 46 DA s A S programs an spe ial interest programs t at involve signi i ant systems engineering a tivity in FY 2014 e assessments are organi e y ilitary Department Army avy an Air For e ollo e y DoD
oint programs Assessments are as o 4t uarter FY 2014
35DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
is page intentionally lan
4.1 DASD(SE) Assessments of Army Programs
Assessments are as o 4t uarter FY 2014 is se tion in lu es summaries on t e ollo ing 11 programs
• ommon n rare ountermeasure R
• E ali ur 982E1 re ision Engagement ro e tiles
• roun om at e i le
• ui e ultiple aun Ro et System Alternative ar ea RS A
• ntegrate Fire rote tion apa ility n rement 2 nter ept F n 2
• ntegrate ersonnel an ay System Army n rement S A n
• mprove ur ine Engine rogram E
• oint a ti al Ra io System an el anpa an Small Form Fit RS S
• A R A van e apa ility 3 issile Segment En an ement A 3 SE
• ala in ntegrate anagement
• ar ig ter n ormation et or a ti al n rement 2 n 2
37DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
is page intentionally lan
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Common Infrared Countermeasure (CIRCM)
CIRCM Concept Northrop Grumman Design BAE Systems Design
Prime Contractor: ort rop rumman AE Systems ompetition Executive Summary: e R system repla es t e A van e reat n rare ountermeasure A R ui Rea tion apa ility it a more relia le lig ter eig t an upgra a le ountermeasure system apa le o meeting tri Servi e rotary ing an small i e ing
re uirements R is a pre S A A D program an as release an RF to a ar t e Engineering an anu a turing Development E D ontra t R en an es t e ost air ra t s a ility to survive maneuver an engage enemy or es in all environments supporting oint or e mission o e tives n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in a De ense E porta ility Features easi ility stu y o ot ven ors an t e Development RF Release oint DA e reliminary
Design Revie DR assessments on irme ot ontra tor esigns are eyon a DR level o maturity an t e program is rea y to egin E D at S in t e 3r uarter FY 2015 Mission and System Description: R is an Army program to evelop riti al surviva ility against urrent an uture in rare t reats ntegrate in a ost air ra t t e R provi es t e a ility to prevent mitigate a verse e e ts o missile atta s R provi es t e sole a uisition o uture laser ase ountermeasure systems or all rotary ing tilt rotor an small i e ing
air ra t a ross t e DoD R ill e integrate it a passive missile arning system an improve ountermeasures ispenser an a van e e pen a les e use o a o ular pen Systems Approa SA provi es le i ility to a apt to evolving te nology an t reats Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e R SE in De em er 2011 to
support S A e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e Army is up ating t e SE to support S in 3r uarter FY 2015
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in ay 2014 e System er orman e Spe i i ation is tra ea le to t e re uirements o t e R DD an its pre e essor A R
R is re uire to e a lig ter an more relia le system t an A R • Life Cycle Management e program is implementing SD A etter uying o er
initiatives y arrying t o ontra tors t roug S an t e program on u te an e onomi analysis to etermine t e possi ility o ontinuing t e ompetition eyon S e program is using SA esign to eep ey elements o t e pointer tra er laser an pro essor separate to allo ompetitive sele tion uring uture upgra es
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) DASD SE revie e t e ra t in April 2014 an t e program o i e up ate t e to in lu e appropriate language in t e E D RF statement
39DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y R
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o or e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e ra t e ill e revise to support S
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE per orme separate DR assessments or t e t o
ontra tors ompeting uring t e e nology aturation an Ris Re u tion RR p ase DASD SE assesse t e program as aving a ig li eli oo o a omplis ing its inten e mission it no reme ial a tion ne essary to a ieve t e per orman e re uirements in t e A
e program emonstrate an a van e level o maturity or a system at DR e ontra tors ave elivere 100 per ent o t e esign ra ings an ot ontra tors elivere post DR ar are to t e overnment or urt er testing or s ore DASD SE parti ipate in a R
E onomi Analysis Assessment ire te y SD A to provi e e ision ma ers it t e most e e tive R A uisition Strategy o n FY 2015 DASD SE ill on u t a rogram Support Assessment an provi e
re ommen ations to support t e S e ision in FY 2015 • Risk Assessment R is e e uting t e ris management program o umente in t e
approve SE ot ontra tors on u te tra e stu ies in t e areas o laser an pointer tra er te nology to re u e te ni al ris e program is managing ris s asso iate it De ense E porta ility Features system an integration eig t
• Performance e program as t ree s an t ree SAs e R program is on tra to meet t e s an SAs as ell as t e ra t e ni al er orman e easures
o umente in t e SE y t e FR e ision e s in t e SE are spe i i enoug to provi e meaning ul tra ing t roug system evelopment an ill e tailore to t e spe i i
esign sele te ot ontra tors ave e ee e t e e pe te level o esign or t is stage in t e program an ave provi e ive omplete sets ea o post DR prototypes to t e overnment or up oming System ntegration a oratory testing
• Schedule e program omplete a Development RF Release oint DA in une 2014 S A o urre in 2012 an S is s e ule or 3r uarter FY 2015 e program is on
tra to meet esta lis e s e ule t res ol s • Reliability e program is e e uting a relia ility gro t plan an system relia ility is on tra
to meet re uirements y t e FR e ision e DR assesse results o more t an 1 800 ours o system level a elerate li e testing ot ontra tors ma e orre tions t roug ar are so t are irm are or pro ess improvements ost DR prototypes ere use in a overnmenton u te relia ility emonstration test in FY 2014
• Software e program as a So t are Development lan an as met all so t are milestones ot ontra tor so t are uil s e ee t e RR p ase riteria at DR
• Manufacturing e program is on tra it manu a turing re uirements appropriate to t e program s urrent p ase anu a turing ris s are not e pe te sin e ea ontra tor as e perien e an e isting pro u tion lines or similar omponents an te nologies
• Integration o ontra tors are ompeting or a single a ar at S ot ontra tor esigns as assesse at DR a ress integration o t e R system it t e e isting an
planne upgra e to t e missile arning systems Conclusion: e R program remains in sour e sele tion an is on tra or a S in FY 2015 an t e o n sele tion to one ompetitor e DR assessments on irme ot ontra tor
esigns are eyon a DR level o maturity an t e program is rea y to egin t e E D p ase
40 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Excalibur M982E1 Precision Engagement Projectiles Prime Contractor: Rayt eon issile Systems Executive Summary: E ali ur is a 155 millimeter annon elivere pre ision artillery pro e tile E ali ur
is an Army A A program in t e ro u tion an Deployment D p ase an a ieve FR in une 2014 n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in a ysi al
on iguration Au it A e e utive revie E ali ur n rements n a 2 an are on tra an meeting all
program s Mission and System Description: e E ali ur artillery pro e tile is ire y S or es using t e
777A2 ig t eig t 155mm o it er 155 an t e 109A6 ala in o it er e 109A7 ala in ntegrate anagement o it er ill also ire t e E ali ur pro e tile en it is iel e
E ali ur provi es improve ire support t roug greatly in rease a ura y e S an inertial measurement unit gui e E ali ur as a re uirement or 10 meter a ura y at all ranges an o ers a signi i ant re u tion in ollateral amage over onventional pro e tiles e Army evelope an iel e E ali ur n a 1 in response to an urgent nee re uest in support o peration ra i
Free om n a 2 e ten s n a 1 s range o 24 ilometers to 35 ilometers n provi es in rease range improve relia ility an e rease in ost Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in ar 2013 e program
is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations • Requirements e R approve t e D in ovem er 2012 ey program re uirements
are reasona le an sta le Re uirements lo rom t e System er orman e Spe i i ation to t e ma or system su system spe i i ation to t e omponent spe i i ations
• Life Cycle Management E ali ur is pro e te to improve logisti sustaina ility y e reasing t e num er o roun s ne essary to e eat targets over onventional pro e tiles n
improves upon t is it in rease relia ility • Program Protection Plan (PPP) e Army A uisition E e utive approve t e in
une 2014 in support o t e FR e ision revie e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments e program on u te veri i ation events an a A E e utive
Revie in ar 2014 e revie in lu e First Arti le nspe tion results ro u t an ro ess eri i ations o t e su assem lies a ompre ensive ris assessment an a revie o
program management esign manu a turing uality an su ontra tor uality e program emonstrate t at t e E ali ur n pro u tion on iguration mat e t e pro u t aseline e ore t e FR e ision revie o DASD SE on u te uarterly DAES assessments in FY 2014 in t e areas o s e ule
per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion
41DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y E A R
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to assess t e n program s a ility to sustain its relia ility per orman e as it on u ts lot a eptan e testing t roug pro u tion
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting to t e ris management pro ess o umente in t e SE e program is on tra it ris mitigation a tivities
• Performance e n a pro e tile is iel e an as our s a ura y relia ility e e tiveness an net rea y e n pro e tile as t ose s it an in rease in t e relia ility plus a or range ot in rements are meeting t eir t res ol s e program is managing a ris or ol eat er per orman e over long ranges
• Schedule e program omplete an FR e ision revie in une 2014 6 mont s a ea o A s e ule t res ol e program met all De em er 2012 A t res ol s an is on tra to meet t e t res ol s esta lis e in t e une 2014 pro u tion A e program a ieve nitial
perational apa ility in uly 2014 a ea o its anuary 2015 A s e ule t res ol e program on u te Systems Engineering e ni al Revie s a or ing to t e s e ule
re le te in t e approve SE • Reliability n a a ieve 101 per ent o its t res ol relia ility re uirement e n
system a ieve 104 per ent o its t res ol relia ility re uirement in t e Fe ruary 2014 E n emonstrate an aggregate 104 per ent o t e relia ility t res ol re uirement
a ter ompleting E an t e irst t o lot a eptan e tests • Software e program approve release o operational lig t so t are in ar 2014 to
support FR ere are no ig priority trou le reports e program veri ie t e pro u tion so t are t roug integration per orman e ormal uali i ation an lig t testing e so t are
as een sta le it no anges sin e t e veri i ation o a inal esign ange to t e ase in 4t uarter FY 2012
• Manufacturing e E ali ur n a 2 program s irm i e pri e ontra t as a 543 million D e ort e inal lot t e last 346 o 3 357 total n a 2 pro e tiles omplete t e E ali ur
n a 2 FY 2010 pro u tion ontra t e program stoppe n pro u tion in ar 2014 to etermine t e root ause o an issue it t e ina vertent magneti ing o t e pro e tile s ar ea u e retainer plate o re or as re uire ut t e ven or ange t e ar ea pa ing
pro ess ro u tion resume in April 2014 E ali ur n passe ot 3 a eptan e testing an elivere 288 pro e tiles to t e overnment at t e en o August 2014
• Integration e n program met t e re uire levels o erti i ations or t e une 2014 FR e ision revie e program as memoran a o agreement an nter a e ontrol Do uments in
pla e it ey supporting programs e E ali ur pro e tile as e ternal inter a es it t e o it er t e propellant t e u e setter ire ontrol so t are an lo al ositioning System ntegration e orts or n are on tra e program re eive its Aut ority to perate in une
2014 e program re eive its System Sa ety erti i ation in April 2014 e E ali ur pro e tile as in orporate t e est availa le nsensitive unitions te nologies in or er to ma e t e item mu less sensitive t an stan ar munitions ese mitigations ave greatly re u e t e severity o rea tions a ross many o t e t reats in lu ing passing s ores or ast oo o an sympat eti rea tion n a ition t e program as an approve Ele tromagneti
Environmental E e ts limitation Conclusion: E ali ur n a 2 is iel e an meets all program s n 1 omplete FR e ision revie in FY 2014 an is meeting all program s
42 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Prime Contractor: eneral Dynami s an Systems
AE Systems ompetition Executive Summary: is an in remental approa to a uire a mo ern om at ve i le e Army o use t e irst in rement on a uiring an in antry ig ting ve i le F to repla e t e ra ley F e F program a ieve
S A in 4t uarter FY 2011 DASD SE parti ipate in t e program s reliminary Design Revie s DR an on u te a So t are Fo use Revie in FY 2014 in a ition to ot er relate a tivities ase on a or a ility onstraints an
no le ge gaine uring te ni al revie s an ris re u tion e orts DoD e i e not to on u t a S e ision in FY 2014 e Army is minimally ontinuing e nology aturation an Ris
Re u tion RR to preserve riti al engineering apa ilities in t e in ustrial ase an to a ress riti al te nology integration in oor ination it t e S ien e an e nology ommunity e
Army is o using e orts to ar a uture ig ting ve i le in FY 2019 or later Mission and System Description: e F as inten e to support oint or es a ross t e ull range o military operations in a i e range o terrain an environments t as inten e to
repla e t e ra ley 2A3 F in t e Armore riga e om at eam an to provi e mo ile re on igura le armore prote tion against a variety o t reats t in lu e t e potential or later en an ements to surviva ility an let ality or uture t reats an as inten e to provi e t e in antry s ua ig ly mo ile an prote te transport to e isive attle iel lo ations t as inten e to provi e ot estru tive ires against t reat armore ve i les an ire t ire support or t e s ua
uring ismounte assaults Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e RR SE in ar 2011 to
support S A e program i not up ate t e S A SE to a ount or program restru turing in FY 2013 ut e e ute pro esses o umente in t e approve SE e program as on tra to a ieve SE o e tives or RR ere are no approve aivers or eviations to t e SE
• Requirements e R approve t e nitial apa ilities Do ument in De em er 2010 e Army use a ra t DD at S A to gui e re uirements or system evelopment Some
ma or anges rom no le ge gaine in t e RR p ase ne essitate a program restru ture in FY 2013 to align t e per orman e spe i i ation to t e revise ra t DD an align t e DRs to t e up ate spe i i ation Final anges to t e DD rom R sta ing ere rea y to pro ee or R approval en DoD urtaile RR p ase a tivities
• Life Cycle Management e program a tively tra e pro e te system li e y le osts in t e RR p ase to support SD A etter uying o er initiatives ot RR p ase
ven ors a an average unit manu a turing ost re uirement to meet ile managing e ni al er orman e easures or mean time to repair operations an support ost an energy
e i ien y e DR on irme t e ven ors esign a tivities in lu e sustaina ility an maintaina ility onsi erations alan e it a or a ility as ell as open system ar ite ture
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) i not ave an approve ut ot RR p ase ontra tors evelope rogram rote tion mplementation lans ase on a ra t
43DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments e program on u te DRs an DASD SE on u te a So t are
Fo use Revie in FY 2014 DASD SE assesse allo ate aselines as in omplete at t e DR e program on u te ollo on te ni al revie s ompleting allo ate aselines a or
in ings rom t e So t are Fo use Revie ere ris s in so t are re uirements aseline so t are pro ess maturity an ore ast so t are s e ule e program manager on urre it t e ris s esta lis ing a aseline to in orm so t are reuse an a program restart
• Risk Assessment e program restru ture in FY 2013 re u e overall program ris y e ten ing t e RR p ase y 6 mont s an t e overall program s e ule y 18 mont s ot ontra tors a e ris re u tion assets su as automotive an turret to t e RR p ase to
re u e integration ris s in mo ility an let ality ese a tivities a t e potential to re u e overall program ris o ever ris s still remaine in relia ility gro t primary armament integration an so t are
• Performance e program as on tra to meet its nine propose s it some i enti ie ris Ris re u tion e orts in let ality an mo ility improve t e li eli oo o meeting t res ol re uirements ut ris remains it let ality an mo ility per orman e an t e relia ility SA until evelopment an testing o a ull up system prototype
• Schedule e program omplete a S A DA in uly 2011 e program a planne or S in 3r uarter FY 2014 a ter a FY 2013 program restru ture a e 6 mont s to t e RR
p ase ot RR ontra ts lose in une 2014 a ter DoD re u e un ing or FY 2015 an eyon t e program i not on u t a S DA e program pro e te t e irst pro u tion F elivery or testing 18 mont s later t an t e original plan e ore un ing re u tions
• Reliability Ea ontra tor provi e relia ility pro e tions at DR t at in i ate t e program s relia ility re uirements an esign approa ere easi le Ea ontra tor s pre i tions e ee e t e DD relia ility re uirement as ell as t e evelopmental goal esta lis e in t e per orman e spe i i ation or S o ompensate or any un ertainty in t e pre i tions ea ontra tor s allo ations preserve margin rom t e DD re uirements to re u e t e ris or omplian e
• Software ot ompeting ontra tors reporte progress on sour e lines o o e evelope uring t e RR p ase an asso iate pro lem reports DASD SE on u te an analysis o
so t are evelopment an ore ast t e program oul e at least 5 mont s over t e planne s e ule or t e Engineering an anu a turing Development p ase unless ea ontra tor ma e a ustments to improve e i ien y or re u e s ope ot ontra tors a resse DASD SEi enti ie so t are sa ety riti ality on erns rom FY 2013 i DASD SE veri ie it t e
DR an rogram anagement Revie s in FY 2014 • Manufacturing e program as on tra it manu a turing re uirements appropriate to t e
program s urrent p ase at t e DR ot ontra tors a manu a turing maturation plans to a ieve a epta le rea iness levels in 2014 it minimal pro u tion ris
• Integration ot ontra tors omplete integration o an automotive test rig to re u e esign an integration ris it engine rivetrain an suspension Ea omplete evelopment
an integration o ot er su system assets onsistent it ea ven or s uni ue ris s e ontra tors emonstrate ea o t e ris re u tion assets an satis ie overnment a eptan e or trans er to Army resear an evelopment agen ies or use in te nology en an ement
e orts or uture ve i le evelopment e program manage e ternal epen en ies it ot er programs an a memoran a o agreement it t e e ternal programs
Conclusion: e program omplete its initial RR p ase ontra ts a ar e ollo on ontra ts to minimally preserve t e in ustrial ase an is transitioning assets to Army resear an evelopment a tivities or ongoing om at ve i le RR e orts to ar a uture ig ting ve i le
44 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System–Alternative Warhead (GMLRS-AW) Prime Contractor: o ee artin
issiles an Fire ontrol Executive Summary: RS A is
esigne to repla e RS Dual urpose mprove onventional unitions D
servi e t e same target set at ompara le range an eliminate t e pro a ility o
ne plo e r nan e RSA is an Army A A program in t e Engineering an anu a turing Development E D p ase e program omplete S an entere E D in Fe ruary 2012 n FY 2014 t e program on u te an A uisition or ing ntegrate ro u t eam meeting among ot er engagements e program is on tra a ieve its planne S FR in FY 2015 Mission and System Description: RS provi es Fiel Artillery units it me ium to longrange ires ile supporting operational level or es RS A t e t ir in rement o RS is a pre ision stri e artillery ro et system to atta area an impre isely lo ate targets in all
eat er environments argets in lu e ounter ire air e ense omman an ontrol an ot er ig payo targets at all ept s o t e ta ti al attle iel e ro et uses a soli propellant an is ire rom t e 270A1 ultiple aun Ro et System an t e 142 ig o ility Artillery
Ro et System mo ile laun ve i les e ro et s nertial easuring nit it lo al ositioning System S assistan e gui es t e ro et to a spe i i point an elivers e e ts on a
target RS A atta s t e same target sets as t e D ro et ut eliminates t e ris o une plo e or nan e to satis y DoD poli y Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in ovem er 2011 e
program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is up ating t e SE or t e planne FY 2015 om ine S FR e ision revie
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in ovem er 2011 rogram re uirements are reasona le an sta le DD re uirements tra e to su system per orman e spe i i ations e initial pro u t aseline is esta lis e an onsists o pro u t ra ings item spe i i ations spe ial inspe tion e uipment an spe ial tooling e Army is revali ating t e DD as oppose to provi ing a D it t e R or t e 2015 S FR e ause t e system
emonstrate t res ol DD per orman e it no planne anges • Life Cycle Management e program o i e om ine t e FR e ision it t e S
e ision planne or ar 2015 e ause t e vast ma ority o RS A ro et pro u tion pro esses are ommon it t e RS nitary ro et is program ange a elerate nitial
perational apa ility y 6 mont s an resulte in less testing re uire to support t e program e program is leveraging RS nitary ar are ommonality to re u e re uire testing
an a s are pro u tion line to eliminate t e nee or a ormal R p ase • Program Protection Plan (PPP) E issiles an Spa e approve t e program s a reviate
in uly 2011 e program is eveloping a to support t e FY 2015 RS A S FR e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e a reviate
45DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y RS A
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE prepare our uarterly DAES assessments or t e
RS program in FY 2014 a ressing s e ule per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion e program provi e up ate SE a tivity ata to support assessments an on u te an integrate Army an SD pro u t team meeting o e program re ommen e removing ol Regions est enter R testing rom t e
RS A plan e ause o t e similarities et een it an previous RS in rements an e ause t e program on u te ol on itioning testing it A DASD SE re ommen e o umenting anges to t e pro u t aseline sin e t e 2007 RS nitary
R lig t test to support t e analysis or omitting t e R testing e program is e e uting t is re ommen ation
o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to parti ipate in t e system level anu a turing Rea iness Assessment or FR
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting t e ris management pro esses o umente in t e SE e program is on tra to retire a ris regar ing timely ompletion o t e ysi al
on iguration Au it A in early FY 2015 • Performance e RS A program as our s e program is on tra to meet t e
s t e SA an t e e ni al er orman e easures o umente in t e SE y t e FR e ision
• Schedule e program omplete a S e ision revie in Fe ruary 2012 e program is on tra to meet t e t res ol s esta lis e in t e A approve in Fe ruary 2012 e program is urrently planning a om ine S FR e ision revie in 2n uarter FY 2015 an is on tra to meet its A s e ule t res ol or S o Septem er 2015 e program on u te Systems Engineering e ni al Revie s in t e time rames re le te in t e approve SE
• Reliability e program is on tra to meet t e planne relia ility re uirement y FR e program o i e s uly 2014 s oring on eren e or t e evelopmental operational test D lig t test series resulte in a relia ility point estimate o 100 per ent 94 per ent lo er on i en e oun e ee ing t e planne relia ility o 91 3 per ent
• Software Ro et so t are esign an si e are sta le e program i enti ie an resolve a laun er an ire ontrol so t are s e ule ris e s e ule ris oul ave impa te t e sa ety release to start une 2014 D e program as omplete evelopment an veri i ation o t e operational lig t so t are e program so t are as no open so t are trou le reports ere are no issues it ro et or laun er so t are
• Manufacturing RS A is e e uting t e manu a turing gui an e in its SE e ontra tor s ippe RS A ro ets or E in August 2014 10 ays a ea o plan e
program omplete all 15 planne ro u tion ine eri i ations or t e ar ea e ro et line on lu e in une 2014 as planne e program pro e ts ompleting t e ar ea
A a tion items in early FY 2015 • Integration e RS A me ani al an ele tri al inter a es it t e ro et are t e same
as t ose or t e RS nitary ro et alrea y in pro u tion All RS A ar are an so t are inter a es are e ine y nter a e ontrol Do uments e alternative ar ea as
esigne to it it in t e i e imensions o t e RS ro et s ar ea spa e e A program urrently meets t o o si nsensitive unitions re uirements e Army pro e ts utting ompliant motors into pro u tion in FY 2017 e program is e e uting plans it
e ternal te ni al organi ations an programs as outline in t e approve SE an is on tra to omplete all ne essary memoran a o agreement a ea o t e FY 2015 S FR
Conclusion: e RS A program is on tra to a ieve S FR in FY 2015
46 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Indirect Fire Protection Capability, Increment 2–Intercept (IFPC Inc 2-I) Prime Contractor: o e etermine Executive Summary: F n 2 inten s to provi e a mo ile prote tion apa ility to e en riti al assets it in i e an semi i e lo ations
against unmanne air ra t systems AS ruise missiles an ro ets artillery an mortars RA e program is a pre DA in t e e nology aturation an Ris Re u tion
RR p ase e program a ieve S A in ar 2014 n FY 2014 DASD SE on u te an in epen ent ire ain analysis or t e an i ate
inter eptor to support t e S A e ision an parti ipate in an alternate inter eptor stu y DASD SE also parti ipate in t e initial RR p ase esign revie s ulminating in a System Fun tional Revie SFR in Septem er 2014 e F n 2 program is on tra to e e ute t e
RR p ase o evelopment Mission and System Description: F n 2 inten s to a uire tra engage an e eat AS
an RA e system ill provi e 360 egree prote tion an ill simultaneously engage t reats arriving rom i erent a imut s e program is using a lo a uisition approa
lo 1 ill onsist o one or more inter eptors evelopment o te ni al ire ontrol an a ulti ission aun er it an open ar ite ture t at ill allo or a variety o missiles
an a Sentinel ra ar so t are upgra e to support t e ounter AS an missions lo 2 ill evelop inter eptors sensors an te ni al ire ontrol to support t e ounter RA mission e F n 2 system ill use t e Army ntegrate Air an issile De ense A D omman an ontrol open systems ar ite ture
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e F n 2 SE in April 2014 to
support S A e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations o ever ollo on a tions to improve planning etails in t e approve SE remain open e
program ill up ate t e SE in FY 2015 to support t e S in FY 2016 • Requirements e F n 2 re uirements are ase on t e nitial apa ilities Do ument
or ntegrate nit ase an nstallation rote tion Dete t Assess an De en approve in to er 2009 e Army as evelope a DD or approval in 2015 e program
re uirements are reasona le an sta le it t e e eption o t e relia ility re uirement an t e program as esta lis e tra ea ility et een t e ra t DD an t e F n 2 System
er orman e Spe i i ation e program el a System Re uirements Revie SRR in Septem er 2014
• Life Cycle Management F n 2 inten s to leverage t e e isting support in rastru ture in lu ing t e li e y le pro esses or e isting inter eptor missiles e program plans to on u t a usiness ase analysis to re ine t e sustainment approa or t e planne FY 2016 S
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e e nology Development p ase in De em er 2013 A up ate ill e re uire to support t e S in FY 2016
47DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y F 2
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te an in epen ent ire ain analysis to esta lis
t e apa ility o t e sele te re eren e inter eptor A 9 lo 2 or t e ounter an ounter AS missions e analysis uanti ie t e apa ility an supporte t e S A e ision SD A ire te an alternate inter eptor stu y at S A an DASD SE or e it t e
program to ensure t e stu y emp asi e t e open ar ite ture apa ilities o t e an supporte t e lo 2 re uirements DASD SE parti ipate in t e program s FY 2014 esign revie s in lu ing an nitial Design Revie t e SRR an t e SFR to support t e FY 2015
DR assessment DASD SE also ill support t e te ni al meetings lea ing up to t e reliminary Design Revie in 2015
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program o umente in t e Ris anagement lan an SE e program is or ing to mitigate ris s in t e relia ility system timing allo ation an omponent elivery s e ule areas
• Performance e analyses presente y t e program at t e SRR in i ate t e esign ill meet t e eig t s an t ree SAs it t e e eption t at t e program is re uesting t e user reassess t e relia ility SA e program also presente its analysis t at t e e ni al
er orman e easures esta lis e in t e SE are eing met it t e e eption o relia ility
• Schedule e program a ieve S A in ar 2014 an on u te t e SRR an SFR in Septem er 2014 e program is on tra to e e ute all t e Systems Engineering e ni al Revie s as esta lis e in t e SE
• Reliability e program as a release RA Rationale Report estimate o ners ip osts an a ra t DD it sustainment re uirements operational availa ility an materiel availa ility an a relia ility SA Sin e t e to er 2013 DA t e program as etermine t at t e annot meet t e relia ility re uirement it t e planne program un ing FE su system re esign oul e re uire DASD SE ill or it t e program to evelop a relia ility gro t plan prior to S
• Software e program as implemente an Agile so t are evelopment pro ess e program plans t o engineering uil s an t o ormal uil s to support t e pre S engineering
emonstration e program estimates appro imately 300 000 e uivalent sour e lines o o e are nee e Four uil s are planne ollo ing S
• Manufacturing e program is eveloping t e initial prototype s at t e Aviation an issile Resear Development an Engineering enter A RDE to support t e engineering
emonstration e program is on u ting a ost ene it analysis on Engineering an anu a turing Development an ro u tion to support S e program ill leverage t e
e isting pro u tion apa ility or t e A 9 lo 2 as t e re eren e inter eptor missile or F n 2 lo 1 an plans no anges to t e A 9 lo 2 to support t e F n 2
system • Integration F n 2 leverages t e e isting A 9 lo 2 missile or t e inter eptor
an t e Army A D program or omman an ontrol DASD SE or e it ot programs to ensure t e F n 2 integration an per orman e re uirements ill e met e program
as esigne t e or an open ar ite ture to allo t e in orporation o uture missiles into t e aseline to support lo 2 re uirements an eyon e program in lu e an i ate missiles in t e alternate inter eptor stu y it i erent inter a e stan ar s to re ine t e open ar ite ture eatures o t e system
Conclusion: e F n 2 program is on tra to e e ute t e RR p ase o evelopment
48 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Integrated Personnel and Pay System–Army, Increment I (IPPS-A Inc I) Prime Contractor: ED onsulting Executive Summary: S A is a e ase
uman resour e system t at provi es integrate personnel an pay apa ilities an ompre ensive
uman resour e re or s or all Sol iers in ea Army omponent en omplete S A is pro e te
to e t e largest implementation o t e eopleSo t uman apital anagement ommer ial o t e
s el S pa age in t e orl it appro imately 1 1 million personnel e program is an A A A in t e Development an Fiel ing p ase eploye in t ree aves DASD SE parti ipate in t e riti al Design Revie DR in ovem er 2013 it an assessment i enti ying
esign e i ien ies t at re uire orre tion prior to so t are implementation e program a ieve S in Fe ruary 2014 an Full Deployment De ision FDD in April 2014 e program is on
tra to a ieve Full Deployment in 2n uarter FY 2015 Mission and System Description: S A is a A S program t at promotes an maintains e e tive military personnel management t ensures a urate an timely military personnel ata an
elivery o ene its are provi e to all Sol iers n ontrast to ustom evelope lega y systems S A uses t e eopleSo t uman apital anagement S pa age to provi e personnel an
pay apa ilities S A is e pe te to re u e errors an ill e ome t e aut oritative an ompre ensive sour e o Army personnel an pay in ormation e program ill provi e an
integrate multi omponent personnel an pay system t at streamlines uman resour es en an es t e e i ien y an a ura y o personnel an pay pro e ures an supports Sol iers an t eir amilies e tool ill e availa le 24 ours a ay an ill e a essi le to Sol iers uman
resour e pro essionals om atant omman ers personnel an pay managers an ot er aut ori e users t roug out t e Army Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e S SE in August 2014 e
program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations an is supporting t e iel ing o S A n
• Requirements DASD SE assesses t e program ill meet i enti ie re uirements nitially t e R approve t e DD in uly 2010 or De ense ntegrate ilitary uman Resour e System D RS Army re e ine t e re uirements i ere approve in ar 2011 y Army
1 e s approve y t e S A on iguration Steering oar in 2013 are net rea y ata a ura y an availa ility S A uses Detaile Fun tional on iguration Design
Do uments Detaile e ni al Design Do uments an nter a e Design Do uments or re uirements e omposition Sta e ol ers provi e spe i i ations on urren e at te ni al revie s i e System Re uirements an Fun tional Revie s Sta e ol ers tra e re uirements rom originating sour e t roug inal isposition eri i ation o re uirements is per orme
using progressive testing te ni ues
49DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y S A
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
• Life Cycle Management S A uses S pro u ts e tensively o re u e osts t e S A evaluates te ni ues an alternatives t at en ompass re uirements esign
analysis an revie a tivities to rive e e tive per orman e an ost results re u e evelopment y le time an improve supporta ility n a ition t e program ensures prote tion
o personally i enti ia le in ormation as part o system se urity essential in a uman apital management system
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e April 2014 SD A approve
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE le a system level DR assessment in ovem er 2013
DASD SE oun t is DR as in omplete ue to esign e i ien ies i e gaps e S A n program o i e per orme an au it to vali ate esign e i ien ies an t en ire te t e
system integrator to ta e orre tive a tion to omplete t e esign y April 30 2014 in time or FDD e program omplete t e esign y April 30 ena ling t e program o i e to pro ee
it so t are implementation an re eive its FDD • Risk Assessment e DR assessment i enti ie ris s in esign e i ien ies S A n is
e e uting its ris management program o umente in t e SE an is mitigating ris s asso iate it re uirements gro t missing ata an la o s ille personnel
• Performance S A n as met all t ree s or ave 1 e program is on tra to emonstrate all s an e ni al er orman e etri s y t e ave 3 Release Deployment
De ision in 1st uarter FY 2015 • Schedule e program omplete a S DA in Fe ruary 2014 an FDD in April 2014 t is
on tra to eploy t e inal ave in 1st uarter FY 2015 • Reliability S A relia ility re uirements are measure as mean time et een outages n
a ition S A as a re uirement or system availa ility e perational Assessment as not long enoug to measure availa ility e on iguration Steering oar approve partial
e erment o t e availa ility re uirement to n S imite Fiel ing De ision • Software S A n is a A S program uil ing t e oun ational ata ase to e use y t e
eopleSo t S so t are appli ation e S A so t are uality pro ile is tra e t roug monitoring system pro lem reports over time e program is on tra to omplete t e n
ave 3 ata ase an ul ill t e Full Deployment e it riteria • Deployment S A n aves 1 an 2 ave een eploye su ess ully e program is on
tra or eployment o ave 3 in 1st uarter FY 2015 • Integration emoran a o agreement ave een esta lis e it t e e ternal programs as
i enti ie in t e SE S A n omplete ata integration esta lis ing inter a es an t e un erlying pro esses re uire to populate ot oun ation an Sol ier ata ta les it in t e
eopleSo t ata ase or aves 1 an 2 Conclusion: S A n su ess ully eploye aves 1 an 2 as a result o its ommitment to orre ting t e esign e i ien ies i enti ie y DASD SE in t e DR e program is on tra to
a ieve Full Deployment in 2n uarter FY 2015
50 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
E 700 701D
Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP) Prime Contractor: o e etermine Executive Summary: e mprove ur ine Engine
E is a ne 3 000 s a t orsepo er S tur os a t engine t at ill repla e urrent 2 000 S E 700701D engines in Army 60 an A 64 eli opters e
E ill omply it t e si e onstraints o t e urrent engine at similar eig t an ill provi e signi i ant uel savings in rease range an en uran e an a po er en an ement e program is pursuing an alternate A uisition Strategy AS an e pe ts to e esignate an A A D program it S in FY 2018 DASD SE omplete a rogram Support Assessment in ar 2014 an provi e te ni al input to t e Analysis o Alternatives AoA Stu y A visory roup meetings an t e inal AoA Report e program as su ess ully leverage prior s ien e an te nology S e orts an on lu e a t oroug AoA e program is eveloping a revise AS t at est ena les t em to
a ress te ni al an integration allenges it in availa le resour es Mission and System Description: e E ill in orporate te nology a van es to ri ge apa ility gaps i enti ie in t e perational Energy nitial apa ilities Do ument an t e Army
Aviation apa ilities ase Assessment t ill meet operational re uirements orl i e it improve uel e i ien y e program ill uil on t e Army s A van e A or a le ur ine Engine AA E S e ort to emonstrate ull s ale engines t at ill re u e uel onsumption maintenan e osts an pro u tion osts ile in reasing S an engine esign li e Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) e program o i e su mitte a ra t SE e pe ting to enter
a uisition at S A e program is revising its AS to enter at S an t e SE ill e up ate to support t at milestone o aivers or eviations are e pe te
• Requirements e Army is preparing a ra t DD it ra t s an SAs e program as mappe planne re uirements into a Spe i i ation Development Do ument an a System
Re uirements Do ument an as in orporate omments rom t e Army s air ort iness erti i ation organi ation e program also as evelope a ra t er orman e or Statement
t at maps to t e re uirements an spe i i ation o uments • Life Cycle Management e program o e tives in lu e signi i ant re u tions in pro u tion
osts maintenan e osts an uel onsumption as ell as in rease engine esign li e e asis or omparison is t e urrently iel e engine e program an t e AoA stu y team uanti ie t e e pe te re u tions in li e y le osts y analy ing t e per orman e emonstrate y t e AA E engines an t e improvements t at an realisti ally e e pe te rom t e E
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program su mitte a omponent approve in April 2014 in anti ipation o a S A e program is revising its AS to enter at S i re uires an up ate to t e
51DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y E
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te a rogram Support Assessment in ar
2014 parti ipate in t e inal SD Stu y A visory roup meetings in ay 2014 an parti ipate in ee ly AoA Report revie s in ar April ay an une 2014 o e program implemente re ommen ations in t e areas o air ra t integration s e ule
an sta ing to re u e ris an is in orporating systems engineering e uities into program a tivities
o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to assist it S SE evelopment an to on u t regular Systems Engineering or ing ntegrate ro u t eam meetings
• Risk Assessment e program as on u te te nology manu a turing an integration rea iness assessments an as use t e results to evelop program ris s e program as mitigation plans to a ress ris s relate to ne te nologies an E integration into t e 60 an A 64 plat orms e program is using AA E emonstrations to uanti y ost s e ule an per orman e ris s evelop o ramps an assess program impli ations
• Performance E leverage AA E to esta lis realisti per orman e t res ol s to e in lu e in t e ra t DD S e orts vali ate ne te nologies an materials or t e E
e program inten s to a ar a reliminary Design Revie DR ontra t t at ill assess per orman e improvements an t e a ility to a ieve t e program re uirements prior to entering Engineering an anu a turing Development E D
• Schedule e stu y team omplete t e AoA in Septem er 2014 e program is revising its AS an is see ing an A uisition De ision emoran um to enter E D at S in FY 2018
e revise AS in lu es a ompetitive approa to omplete DR prior to t e S • Reliability e E relia ility program is o umente in t e ra t SE t e AS an t e
RA Rationale Report e program evelope a relia ility gro t planning urve or mean time et een essential maintenan e a tions t at ire tly in luen es t e operational availa ility
• Software e E ill in orporate a so t are intensive ull aut ority igital engine ontrol FADE t at ill e evelope y t e ontra tor s e program is eveloping a strategy or ata rig ts an prote tion o t e FADE so t are an ar are
• Manufacturing e program is pre sour e sele tion e program an AoA stu y team on u te an early manu a turing ris assessment at t e AoA Ris or s op an is usse
manu a turing tra es uring t e tra es stu y rimary an i ate ontra tors are proposing ne te nologies t at present some manu a turing ris e program is eveloping o ramps an analy ing t e impli ations o reali ing t e i enti ie ris s
• Integration e program as a lose or ing relations ip it 60 an A 64 sta e ol ers Air ra t mo i i ations ill e re uire to a ieve t e ull ene it o t e ne engines an integration ill remain a systems engineering at item as E evelopment moves or ar
Conclusion: E as su ess ully leverage prior S e orts an on lu e a t oroug AoA
e program is eveloping a revise AS t at est ena les t em to a ress te ni al an integration allenges it in availa le resour es
52 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Joint Tactical Radio System Handheld, Manpack, and Small Form Fit (JTRS HMS)
Prime Contractor: eneral Dynami s 4 Systems Executive Summary: RS S provi es a amily o ta ti al ra ios or mounte ismounte an spe iali e use e program is an A A D a ieve S in ay 2011 an is in R or Ri leman Ra io RR an
anpa Ra io n FY 2014 t e program on u te veri i ation a tivities an parti ipate in t e o ile ser e tive System S
perations ntegration or ing roup e SD A approve an up ate A uisition Strategy AS in ay 2014 an on u te a DAES revie in August 2014 among ot er revie s e
program reporte a signi i ant unn ur y s e ule an ost rea in FY 2014 As reporte in t e De em er 2014 Sele te A uisition Report SAR t e program as up ate t e pro urement strategy an no longer re le ts a
unn ur y ost rea Mission and Description: RS S evelops so t are e ine ra ios to meet ommuni ations re uirements or Sol iers an small plat orms RS S onsists o multiple orm a tors in lu ing t e RR an Ra io or Sol ier use an Small Form Fa tor ra ios or integration into ot er systems ese ra ios ost a sele tion o so t are e ine ave orms in lu ing t e Sol ier Ra io ave orm SR ltra ig Fre uen y Satellite ommuni ations ilitary Single annel
roun to Air Ra io System S ARS an S Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in ay 2011 to support S
an t e ro u tion an Deployment p ase e program s SE as no aivers or eviations an t e program is planning no up ate o ever t e program is not meeting t e o e tives o t e SE or t e Relia ility Availa ility an Developmental ro t esting program e ause t e Ra io as i i ulty meeting per orman e re uirements
• Requirements e R approve Ds or ot t e RR April 2011 an Ra io ay 2012 e Army up ate t e RR D in ar 2013 to a a net rea y re uirement or Se ret an elo en ryption During FY 2014 t e Army issue a ra t er orman e Re uirements Do ument RD or t e RR FR soli itation t at tra es to t e D e program
as sta le re uirements ut SD ire te t e program to revie ot operational an te ni al re uirements prior to releasing t e Ra io RF
• Life Cycle Management e program evelope ar are an so t are inter a es to ontrol osts t roug out t e pro u t li e y le e Army a e t e Se ret an elo en ryption
re uirement to RR to re u e t e nee or a separate orm a tor or its ett arrior program • Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e S in August 2012 e
program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te uarterly DAES assessments in FY 2014 an
parti ipate in ot t e August 2014 DAES revie an t e S in FY 2014 o Due to Ra io per orman e issues ASD A ire te t e program to revie user an system
per orman e re uirements an onsi er up ating t em e ore releasing an RF
53DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y RS S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o DASD SE on u te uarterly DAES assessments in t e areas o s e ule per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion
o n FY 2015 DASD SE pro e ts supporting ris mitigation a tivities or t e release o FR RF s or RR an Ra io an or S veri i ation
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting t e ris management pro ess o umente in t e SE e program i not ully emonstrate Ra io t res ol re uirements or relia ility
uring R an is resear ing ailure e inition riteria to ensure a urate apture o system relia ility ailures in uture tests R eliveries are on s e ule an t e program plans to a ress per orman e upgra es ris s an issues t roug FR ompetitions
• Performance RR met all our s an all ive SAs prior to t e D up ate t at ange t e net rea y t res ol y a ing Se ret en ryption e Ra io met t ree o its our
s in FY 2014 a ieving 90 per ent o its sustainment e Ra io is meeting one o t ree SAs verall relia ility SA in ings at Follo on perational est an Evaluation F E ere 78 per ent o t res ol an t e Army i enti ie Ra io suita ility issues
in lu ing attery li e eig t ommuni ation range an e essive eat rating t e Ra io not surviva le SR an S ARS ave orm SA range as met at overnment Development
est ut not at F E un er all on itions e program manager as ta en a tions to a ress per orman e an relia ility issues t roug environmental stress s reening an resolution o open
e i ien ies all ompletion rates R or t e Ra io using t e S ave orm ere less t an t e 88 per ent target an root auses are un er investigation
• Schedule e program reporte an FR t res ol s e ule rea e ee ing 4 years or Ra io an RR De isions ontri uting to t e rea in lu e anging t e AS or FR ra ios to a ull an open ompetition mo i ying t e pro urement s e ule an a usting RR re uirements
e ay 2014 AS ange up ate t e FR ates or RR to Fe ruary 2017 an Ra io to uly 2017 n t e Septem er 2014 SAR t e program pro e ts s e ule rea es or F E or
Ra io it S an Ra io iel ing it S primarily ue to anges in t e avy S s e ule e program prepare an up ate A an rogram Deviation Report to
re le t t ese elays • Reliability RR met relia ility per orman e re uirements e Ra io urrently is not meeting
t e availa ility or t e relia ility SA During F E t e Ra io met 90 per ent o its sustainment operational availa ility t res ol o 0 96 F E s oring ata in i ate t e point estimate or mean time et een essential un tion ailure is 78 per ent o t e relia ility SA t res ol o 477 ours ese are improvements over prior results
• Software So t are or RR is in sustainment Ra io evelopment is omplete an t e program is o using on ave orm per orman e y on u ting un tional testing o t e S
ave orm so t are to etermine root auses o t e poor R per orman e • Manufacturing Ra io an RR R pro u tion are a ea o plan an supporting Army
iel ing re uirements As o August 2014 t e overnment pro ure 19 327 R RRs an 5 326 R Ra ios RR as elivere all ra ios a ea o s e ule Ra io as elivere 74 per ent o planne R ra ios an is a ea o its elivery s e ule
• Integration Ra io an RR interopera ility erti i ations are on tra to meet t res ol user re uirements S integration it Ra io is not on s e ule an negatively impa ts t e ave orm SA
Conclusion: e program a a signi i ant unn ur y ost an s e ule rea in FY 2014
e program is ma ing R eliveries on s e ule an plans to a ress per orman e upgra es ris s an issues t roug FR ompetitions As reporte in t e De em er 2014 SAR t e program
as up ate t e pro urement strategy an no longer re le ts a unn ur y ost rea
Prime Contractor: o ee artin issiles an Fire ontrol Executive Summary: A 3 SE is t e ne t generation missile in t e A R amily to ounter t e evolving allisti missile t reat
A 3 SE is an A A D program in t e ro u tion an Deployment p ase e program a ieve S in ar 2014 n FY 2014 DASD SE on u te a rogram Support Assessment
SA in support o t e S e ision e program is on tra to meet t e missile spe i i re uirements ne essary to support t e integrate A R system Mission and System Description: e mission o t e A R system is to prote t or es an sele te geopoliti al assets rom missile atta aerial atta an surveillan e A R provi es prote tion against t eater allisti missiles an air t reats to riti al assets in t e orps an t e E elon A ove orps EA areas e A 3 SE missile represents t e ne t generation A R missile signi i antly e ten ing t e A R system apa ility in terms o inter eptor altitu e range propulsion let ality agility gui an e so t are an nsensitive
unitions improvements Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in anuary 2014 e
program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program as proven pro esses or eveloping an elivering A R missiles
• Requirements e R approve t e A R n rement n 2 D in anuary 2013 i e ine t e A R system re uirements an per orman e asso iate it pro u tion
an iel ing o t e A 3 SE missile an ot er A R system improvements e program as e ompose an allo ate A 3 SE spe i i re uirements rom t e D into a
A 3 SE missile spe i i ation A 3 SE re uires urt er A R system upgra es y t e FR e ision to ensure t e A 3 system meets ull D re uirements e
re uirements are reasona le an sta le an t e program o i e as on iguration ontrol o t e pro u t aseline
• Life Cycle Management e A 3 SE program is e e uting etter uying o er initiatives to ontrol osts t roug out t e pro u t li e y le a ieving savings y om ining missile pro u tion uantities it in rease Foreign ilitary Sales F S uantities e program omplete a pro u tion a iliti ation ontra t to in rease t e missile pro u tion rate 240 missiles per year an to support t e A R amily synergy an ost e e tiveness it ot er A R missile variants
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program prepare a ra t ro u tion an Deployment uring 1st uarter FY 2014 to support S e la e ey ontent a ressing
supply ain ris management e S A uisition De ision emoran um AD ire te t e program o i e to in orporate supply ain ris management analysis e
program o i e e pe ts to su mit t e or approval in FY 2015
55DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y A 3 SE
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te a SA in FY 2013 2014 on t e A 3 SE
program to support t e anuary 2014 S R e ision e SA oun t e program 1 as proven pro esses or eveloping an elivering A 3 SE missiles 2 is apa le o
meeting t e R manu a turing re uirements 3 is epen ent on ot er A R system upgra es in lu ing A R system ost Deployment uil 8 it a ra ar igital pro essor up ate to a ieve t e ull ene it o A 3 SE an meet t e A 3 SE per orman e
aseline an 4 as ris o limite relia ility gro t at FR e program a epte t e SA re ommen ations an t e S AD o umente t e re ommen ations to on u t t e System eri i ation Revie S R an esta lis minimum relia ility riteria or FR
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program o umente in t e Ris anagement lan an SE an is su ess ully mitigating t e te ni al ris s e program su ess ully mitigate a supplier uality management ris an is e e uting plans to retire t e attery supplier via ility ris in FY 2015
• Performance e program is on tra to emonstrate t e s y FR e S R is re uire prior to FR to erti y t at t e SE missile an t e A R system ul ill t e
A 3 n 2 D re uirements • Schedule e program omplete a S DA in anuary 2014 e A 3 SE i not
meet t e ar 2012 First nit E uippe F E A t res ol ue to uali i ation elays it t e gnition Sa ety Devi e SD an Soli Ro et otor as ell as an SD lig t ailure
re uiring re esign an repeat testing At t e anuary 2014 S DA t e program presente a revise s e ule it F E planne or 4t uarter FY 2015 42 mont s late A revise
ro u tion A is ue ollo ing A 3 SE FY 2014 R ontra t e initi ation • Reliability e program emonstrate per orman e an su i ient relia ility to enter R
ut it limite lig t tests to esta lis relia ility on i en e Relia ility on i en e is e pe te to gro t roug a itional su ess ul lig t tests e program ill nee to a ieve a
ig su ess rate in t e limite num er o a itional lig t test opportunities prior to FR to emonstrate t e FR minimum relia ility riteria esta lis e in t e S AD
• Software e program omplete so t are evelopment or A 3 SE e inal A 3 SE integrate ar are so t are on iguration as vali ate at t e SE 7 5 su ess ul
lig t inter ept in 2013 • Manufacturing e program is on tra it manu a turing or t e ro u tion an
Deployment R p ase e program esta lis e pro u tion metri s supporting t e SE e FY 2013 ro u tion Rea iness Assessment i enti ie managea le ris s in supplier
via ility an supplier uality • Integration A R re uires system upgra es to a ieve t e ull ene it o A 3 SE
an meet t e A 3 SE per orman e aseline in t e n 2 D s e A R system is moving to a omponenti e approa in lu ing A 3 SE apa ility or integration onto t e Army ntegrate Air an issile De ense attle omman System
Conclusion: e A 3 SE program is on tra to meet t e missile spe i i re uirements ne essary to support t e integrate A R system
56 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Paladin Integrated Management (PIM) Prime Contractor: AE Systems roun Systems Division Executive Summary: e program onsists o t o in ivi ual plat orms t e Sel ropelle
o it er S an t e arrier Ammunition ra e A e upgra es t e Army s urrent leet o S s an A s to a ress system
plat orm limitations sustainment allenges an o soles en e issues provi es in rease or e prote tion surviva ility mo ility gro t
margin an ommonality e program is an A A D an is in t e R p ase e program a ieve S in to er 2013 n FY 2014 t e program on u te t o so t are su system
riti al Design Revie s DR an mont ly ris revie oar meetings among ot er engagements e program ontinues to manage multiple on urrent R a tivities ut remains on tra or FR
Mission and System Description: provi es t e primary in ire t ire support or ull spe trum operations is planne to e employe as part o a ires attalion in t e Armore riga e
om at eam A an t e ires riga es e S is an aluminum armore ull tra e 155 millimeter annon e A supplies t e S it ammunition ot t e S an A in orporate a ne ly esigne ull a mo i ie ra ley ig ting ve i le F po er train an suspension system t e uture F tra a mo erni e 600 volt ele tri al system an a mi ro limati on itioning system e S in lu es an automate ire ontrol system Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in to er 2013 e
program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve SE
• Requirements e R approve t e 109 Family o e i les D in De em er 2011 e D ontains 10 s an 8 SAs or t e plat orms e D re uirements are reasona le an sta le e D re uirements tra e to t e per orman e spe i i ations
• Life Cycle Management e program is e e uting etter uying o er s oul ost pro u tion initiatives t roug e i ien ies in R so t are maintenan e an system te ni al support e program is planning or a relia ility in entive to en an e a or a ility uring
eployment an ost in entives in t e FR ontra t • Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in Septem er 2013 in
support o S e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments e program on u te t o so t are su system DRs one or t e
plat orm iagnosti s so t are an one or t e maintenan e evi e e program met entran e an e it riteria or t e iagnosti s so t are su system DR progress to s e ule e maintenan e evi e so t are su system DR reveale t at t e evelopment e ort as slig tly
e in plan ut a a reasona le e pe tation o re overing to support events lea ing to First ro u tion Delivery
57DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AR Y
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o e program intensi ie so t are tra ing management to a ress lagging maintenan e evi e so t are evelopment
o DASD SE on u te uarterly DAES assessments in FY 2014 in t e areas o s e ule per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion
o DASD SE supporte t e SD A DAES revie o t e program in August 2014 o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to monitor t e program s ysi al on iguration Au it
a tivities i starte in Septem er 2014 an are planne to on lu e in 4t uarter FY 2015
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting t e Ris anagement lan o umente in t e SE e program is mitigating ris s an issues relate to t e elements o net rea y so t are implementation o planne R esign logisti s emonstration an te ni al manual revie
• Performance eri i ation results in i ate t at meets 4 o 10 s an 7 o 8 SAs an is on tra to meet t e or e prote tion an surviva ility s y FR e program is mitigating ris s to t e net rea y in ormation assuran e an RS ra io integration an rate o ire s Data a ter FR is re uire to veri y t e t o availa ility s an t e o ners ip ost SA
• Schedule e program omplete a S DA in to er 2013 e program met all ar 2012 A s e ule t res ol s e program is managing ris s an issues to meet t res ol s esta lis e in t e ar 2014 A o using on t e riti al pat to t e De em er 2016 E A t res ol e program is on tra to meet t e Systems Engineering e ni al Revie s in t e SE
• Reliability e S an A are on tra to meet t e relia ility t res ol re uirements During ovem er 2013 evelopment testing t e S emonstrate 128 per ent o its planne relia ility gro t re uirement or mean time et een system a ort an t e A emonstrate 162 per ent o its planne relia ility in t e same test
• Software e program omplete evelopment uali i ation testing an starte Formal uali i ation esting e program on u te su system DRs or t e system iagnosti s
so t are an or t e e ternal so t are iagnosti s evi e ese su system DRs esta lis e a iagnosti s so t are pro u t aseline t at satis ies per orman e spe i i ation re uirements e
program a epte ee a resulting in improve esign options i enti i ation o metri s to improve so t are evelopment pra ti es an nearly returning to plan
• Manufacturing ransition to pro u tion is on tra e uil er trans erre t e Elgin la oma integration a ility to t e prime ontra tor in 2014 as s e ule e program is
e e uting t e manu a turing gui an e in t e approve SE an manu a turing plan e program is mitigating ris s on erning availa ility o Final Drive Sti eners an elays in First Arti le ests or line repla ea le units e irst ive plat orms elivere ill e a ility test ve i les e ause t e Final Drive Sti eners ere not manu a ture to stan ar
• Integration e program is on tra to omplete all re uire memoran a o agreement as outline in t e SE it in re uire timelines e program is e e uting integration an testing plans it e ternal te ni al organi ations an programs as outline in t e approve SE e program is managing ris s relate to in ormation assuran e an integration o RS ase ra ios
e S is e perien ing ompati ility issues it t e primer an t e propellant as are t e 109A6 an t e 777 o it ers en iring ma imum arges e program is or ing it
E Ammunition to a ieve a long term solution Conclusion: e program ontinues to manage multiple on urrent R a tivities ut remains on tra or FR
58 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Warfighter Information Network–Tactical, Increment 2 (WIN-T Inc 2) Prime Contractor: eneral Dynami s 4 Systems
D 4S Executive Summary: is t e Army s ig spee an ig apa ity ommuni ations net or n 2 a s mo ility to t e ta ti al net or ena ling mission omman on t e move an provi es t e ar ig ter it
satellite an terrestrial ommuni ations e program is an A A D a ieve nitial perational apa ility in August 2013 an is e e uting R Relia ility maintaina ility an omple ity issues i enti ie uring
ay 2013 Follo on perational est an Evaluation F E pre lu e an FR e ision in Septem er 2013 e Septem er 2013 R e ision re uire t e program to emonstrate resolution o t ese issues at anot er F E s e ule or 1st uarter FY 2015 n FY 2014 t e program evelope orre tive a tions on u ting logisti s an user emonstrations an ot er veri i ation a tivities Ris re u tion a tivities ere ongoing at t e en o FY 2014 Mission and System Description: n 2 provi es mo ile ta ti al net or ommuni ations rom maneuver ompanies attalions riga e om at teams an ivisions to t e operational portion
o t e lo al n ormation ri t supports limite olla oration an mission planning an ena les istri ution o in ormation via voi e ata an real time vi eo over groun to groun an groun to
satellite ommuni ations t apitali es on mature ommer ial o t e s el S overnment o t e s el te nologies n 2 in lu es several on iguration items in lu ing a ti al
ommuni ation o es oints o resen e o Sol ier et or E tensions S E e i le ireless a ages et or perations an Se urity enters S an a ti al
Relay o ers R Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e n 2 ro u tion an
Deployment p ase SE in August 2009 to support S e program plans no up ates e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations
• Requirements e R approve t e n 2 D in ovem er 2008 n a ition to approving relie rom t e or e prote tion t e R an Army ave sin e a uste re uirements t roug no le ge gaine uring R veri i ation At t e on iguration Steering
oar in Septem er 2014 t e Army ire te RAD to revie t e S E relia ility re uirement to align it up ate operational employment ata an utili ation rates in or er to re u e F E ris e program as an a e uate tra e o D re uirements to t e per orman e spe i i ation e Septem er 2013 R e ision ire te t e program to up ate t e Army ost osition an A su se uent ire tives y SD A provi e lari i ation to align t e o uments it revisions in uantities s e ule an per orman e parameters y 1st uarter FY 2015
• Life Cycle Management e program is promoting ompetition y provi ing Army stan ar an S pro u ts to D 4S as overnment urnis e e uipment t roug ompetitive a ar s
e program s goal is to re u e t e n 2 total program aseline y 362 million e program as initiate e orts to ontrol osts t roug out t e pro u t li e y le y implementing
regional ontra tor iel servi es an y imposing a 5 year ar are re res y le i provi e pro e te savings o 608 million an 47 million respe tively
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e n 2 in to er 2012 in support o t e FR DA e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te DAES uarterly assessments in t e areas o
s e ule per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion uring FY 2014 an assesse relia ility gro t plans orre tive a tions an veri i ation results to support t e 1st uarter FY 2015 F E e program emonstrate improvements t roug FY 2014 t oug it less t an 80 per ent on i en e in out omes or o an S E relia ility Relia ility t res ol s remain at ris going into F E DASD SE is planning a rogram Support Assessment in a or an e it DoD 5000 02 to support t e FR e ision revie s e ule in FY 2015
• Risk Assessment e program s Ris anagement lan is urrent ut management o relia ility ris s as aile to pro u e e pe te mitigation nee e or on i en e in F E su ess an t e Army a to onsi er re u ing t e S E relia ility SA metri
• Performance e program met all our an t o o our SA re uirements orre tive a tions or t e t o remaining SAs operational availa ility Ao an mean time to repair
R s o improvements ut evaluation o post F E test ata in i ates relia ility t res ol s remain at ris or o an S E
• Schedule e program i not re eive an FR e ision as s e ule in Septem er 2013 ue to relia ility maintaina ility an omple ity pro lems an misse t e ar 2014 A FR s e ule t res ol o resolve t is rea SD A ire te t e program to plan t e FR
e ision or 3r uarter FY 2015 an su mit a revise A or approval in 1st uarter FY 2015 • Reliability Due to relia ility an maintaina ility s ort alls t e program i not emonstrate
t e Ao an R SAs uring t e ay 2013 F E e program evelope an teste maintenan e relate orre tive a tions an a relia ility gro t plan e orre tive a tions or
R are e e uting to s e ule ile Ao orre tive a tions or o an S E are not meeting re uirements it on i en e
• Software n 2 so t are sustainment e orts are on tra as re le te in so t are metri s in rease relia ility an re u e tas omple ity
• Manufacturing e program as iel ing allenges rom pro u tion rea s ue to relia ility an omple ity s ort alls e program annot pro ure on iguration items until su ess ul ompletion o F E in 1st uarter FY 2015 ollo e y an A uisition De ision emoran um to aut ori e a itional pro urements e pro u tion rea ill a e t unit
iel ing urrently planne in 3r uarter FY 2016 anu a turing pro esses are sta le it no relia ility root auses assesse to manu a turing e program a ieve FR rates uring R
• Integration e program e e ute mitigating a tivities in lu ing integration it Stry er an oint ig t a ti al e i le esign ite papers ese a tivities re u e ris s t oug
pro u tion veri i ation testing i not provi e evi en e to support omplete integration it t e Stry er plat orm e Army ill assess Stry er integration uring F E
Conclusion: e program ma e progress in re u ing omple ity relia ility an maintaina ility ris s o ever relia ility an integration ris remains an arries into F E
60 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
4.2 DASD(SE) Assessments of Navy Programs
Assessments are as o 4t uarter FY 2014 is se tion in lu es summaries on t e ollo ing 17 programs
• Air an issile De ense Ra ar A DR
• onsoli ate A loat et or s an Enterprise Servi es A ES
• 53 eavy i t Repla ement eli opter
• 78 ERA D R F RD lass u lear Air ra t arrier
• DD 51 AR E R E lass ui e issile Destroyer
• oint re ision Approa an an ing System n rement 1A A S n 1A
• ittoral om at S ip S
• 4 riton nmanne Air ra t System AS
• 8 Fire S out nmanne Air ra t System AS
• o ile ser e tive System S
• e t eneration Enterprise et or n rement 1 E n 1
• lass Su marine Repla ement Repla ement
• 8A osei on
• Remote ine unting System R S
• S ip to S ore onne tor Amp i ious ra t SS
• nmanne arrier aun e Air orne Surveillan e an Stri e ASS
• 92A resi ential eli opter Fleet Repla ement
61DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
is page intentionally lan
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) Prime Contractor: Rayt eon ntegrate De ense Systems Executive Summary: A DR is t e avy s ne tgeneration ra ar system a ressing allisti missile
e ense D an air e ense AD apa ility gaps i enti ie in t e aritime Air an issile De ense o oint For es nitial apa ilities Do ument A D F D A DR is an A A D program in t e Engineering an
anu a turing Development E D p ase e program a ieve S in to er 2013 n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in t e program te ni al meetings lea ing up to t e So t are aseline Revie an t e System Delta reliminary Design Revie DR in August 2014 e A DR program is on tra it E D a tivities it so t are riven s e ule ris e program ill arry integration ris until systems engineering o t e ost om at system as mature Mission and System Description: A DR ill provi e simultaneous sensor support o D an AD missions it an illary support o sur a e ar are an anti su marine ar are missions e A DR suite onsists o an S an ra ar A DR S an an ra ar an a Ra ar Suite ontroller RS A DR S is a ne evelopment p ase array ra ar provi ing improve sensitivity or long
range ete tion an engagement o a van e t reats nitial s ip sets ill use t e A S 9 an ra ar urrently in pro u tion e RS provi es S an an ra ar resour e management
an inter a e to t e Aegis om at System S Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e A DR SE in ar 2013 to
support S e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations Rayt eon is using an Agile so t are evelopment pro ess an DASD SE supporte t e program to mo i y t e SE to align t e te ni al revie s it t e Agile evelopment pro ess
• Requirements e R approve t e A DR DD in ay 2013 e re uirements are reasona le an sta le e DD re uirements are tra ea le to t e A DR top level re uirements an t e ontra tor tra e t e A DR top level re uirements to t eir system spe i i ations an on iguration item spe i i ations
• Life Cycle Management A DR ill e supporte y t e same avy logisti s in rastru ture net or t at provi es pro u t support to urrent leet ra ars an DD 51 lass s ips e A DR esign in lu es ey eatures to improve ease o maintenan e an re u e sustainment osts an po er e i ien y re uirements to re u e po er onsumption ase on operations
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in ar 2013 to support t e FY 2013 S e program is ontinuing evelopment o an up ate to support t e FY 2015 riti al Design Revie DR
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in t e ar are Delta DR an System
Delta DR in FY 2014 an initiate a System DR assessment e DR esign as
63DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y A DR
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
in orporate lessons learne rom t e e nology Demonstration D p ase in lu ing per orman e relia ility an pro u i ility improvements o DASD SE parti ipate in t e So t are aseline Revie in August 2014 to esta lis t e
so t are aseline or t e DR assessment o DASD SE parti ipate in t e So t are uil Revie S R 1 in Septem er 2014 to support
t e DR assessment o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to omplete t e DR assessment a ter t e program loses t e
System Delta DR riti al a tions DASD SE also ill parti ipate in t e ar are DR t e System DR S R 2 an Developmental esting D 2 est Rea iness Revie
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program o umente in t e Ris anagement lan an SE e program is or ing to mitigate ris s in t e s ip integration allisti missile is rimination spe trum allo ation an so t are evelopment areas
• Performance e esign an per orman e analysis presente y t e ontra tor uring t e System Delta DR in i ate t at t e si s an nine SAs ill e a ieve uring t e E D p ase At ea Systems Engineering e ni al Revie t e ontra tor also presente t eir analysis t at t e urrent system esign meets t e e ni al er orman e easures esta lis e in t e SE
• Schedule e program a ieve S in to er 2013 on u te t e System Delta DR in August 2014 an is on tra to meet t e t res ol s esta lis e in t e to er 2013 A it ris to s e ule margins to omplete S e program is e e uting all Systems Engineering
e ni al Revie s per t e revise SE • Reliability e program is on tra to meet t e relia ility re uirements in t e A DR DD
e program ase t e relia ility gro t urve on mean time et een ailure o line repla ea le units DASD SE is or ing it t e program to mature t e relia ility gro t urve an to a ress em e e so t are relia ility
• Software e ontra tor estimate a so t are si e o 481 000 e e tive sour e lines o o e elivere in our uil s over a 32 mont so t are evelopment timeline using Agile so t are evelopment prin iples it in a 48 mont perio o per orman e or E D DASD SE
parametri analysis s o s t at t e ontra tor ill nee to per orm ell a ove average pro u tivity rates to omplete t is amount o so t are evelopment it in ost an s e ule
is presents s e ule ris or elivering ully un tional so t are uil s to support t e D 3 event planne to in orm t e S e ision
• Manufacturing e program is on tra it manu a turing re uirements appropriate or t is p ase o t e program e ontra tor is elivering omponents or t e ar are integration test a ility e ontra tor as in orporate lessons learne rom t e D p ase prototype into t e DR esigns to support t e manu a turing e ort or t e E D system an is pre i ting to meet
t e planne pro u tion yiel rates • Integration DASD SE previously i enti ie ris in t e integration o t e A DR s ip an
S e program is oor inating it asso iate program o i es an lea ing S inter a e an Ra ar S ip ntegration or ing roups per t e approve SE e program as i enti ie ris
it t e A DR to S inter a e evelopment s e ule to support t e so t are evelopment an as evelope a mitigation plan e initial s ip oar un tional arrangement as een e ine
e program as limite margin on allo ate eig t an is losely tra ing esign anges e program is or ing it ot er sta e ol ers to support emonstration o t e A DR to S inter a es to support t e planne FY 2017 R e ision
Conclusion: e A DR program is on tra it E D a tivities it so t are riven s e ule ris e program ill arry integration ris until t e systems engineering o t e ost om at system
as mature
64 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services (CANES) Prime Contractor: ort rop rumman n ormation Systems De ense Systems Division Executive Summary: A ES is an in ormation te nology system t at provi es se ure net or servi es or avy s ips an maritime operations enters e program is a avy A A A in t e ro u tion an Deployment p ase an is iel ing imite Deployment D systems e program a ieve S in FY 2013 n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in a A S riti al ange Revie R an a DAES revie to
assess t e program s progress to ar t e Full Deployment De ision FDD From t ese revie s t e SD A approve a ne A an iel ing plan
ase on in remental per orman e assessments DASD SE parti ipate in a eer Revie o t e pro u tion RF i le to a ontra t a ar in August 2014 an i is no un er protest DASD SE ontinues to parti ipate in t e program s system engineering an te ni al revie events to tra evelopment an iel ing o s ip systems an t e ne t so t are aseline Mission and System Description: A ES onsoli ates e isting a loat net or s an provi es a
ommon omputing Environment E t at supports net or operations in t e ta ti al omain e E ar ite ture s ales in on iguration to support avy s ips unit level or e level an
su marines an maritime operations enters For e level systems are integrate it A loat ore Servi es so t are to support a servi e oriente ar ite ture environment or oste appli ations
A ES operates a ross multiple se urity en laves an ill in rease relia ility se urity an interopera ility it ot er appli ations an servi es ile re u ing logisti s osts Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in August 2014 e
program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is e e uting systems engineering a tivities in lu ing an e pan e set o metri s to evelop an iel s ip systems an t e ne t so t are aseline
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in to er 2008 to support S n to er 2012 t e i e o t e ie o aval perations on irme re uirements ere reasona le an sta le to support S in De em er 2012 e DD in orms t e ar ite ture un tional an item spe i i ations or t e system ar ite ture an on iguration item stru ture i are part o t e e ni al Data a age in t e pro u tion RF As part o t e A S R t e i e
airman o t e oint ie s o Sta signe R emoran um 022 14 i vali ate all s an esignate t e A ES program essential to national se urity
• Life Cycle Management n er t e SD A etter uying o er initiative or ontrolling osts t roug out t e li e y le t e program is ontinuing its ompetitive ontra ting strategy to
re u e osts y 230 million over t e FYD e program also o ers a itional potential savings to ot er programs y provi ing t e net or in rastru ture t at osts t eir appli ations
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in une 2014 e program plans to up ate t e or t e FDD in FY 2015
65DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y A ES
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in a A S R a DAES revie an a
ase eer Revie o t e A ES pro u tion RF e R an t e DAES revie resulte rom t e program s rea o t e FDD ate i o urre primarily e ause o
anges to s ip availa ility s e ules ey in ings in lu e t e misalignment et een per orman e assessments an iel ing e isions an long installation times in initial s ips e program revise its iel ing plan to e ontingent on avora le per orman e assessments an as re u e installation times Fin ings rom t e eer Revie in lu e re ommen ations to strengt en sour e sele tion riteria to re u e t e ris o losing a protest avy a ar e t e ontra t in August 2014 t e ontra t is no un er protest
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its Ris anagement lan in lu ing onvening mont ly Ris Revie oar s to i enti y analy e an mitigate program ris s e program uses an enterprise ris management tool to stan ar i e ris assessment an reporting onsistent it
avy poli y an is or ing to mitigate ris s in t e integration an s e ule areas • Performance e program is on tra to emonstrate omplian e o unit level systems it
t e program s t ree s upon ompletion o nitial perational est an Evaluation E e pe te in early FY 2015 e program plans to emonstrate ull omplian e o or e level systems it t e 3 s 69 SAs an 10 e ni al er orman e easures y Follo on
perational est an Evaluation F E later in FY 2015 • Schedule e program is e e uting t e iel ing plan approve at t e DAES revie in ay
2014 it t e pro u tion a ar o August 2014 un er protest t e program may in ur a elay in iel ing a itional systems i t e protest is not resolve y De em er 2014 e program is on tra to a ieve t e initial A ES system or su marines in late FY 2015 an t e ne t so t are aseline in early FY 2016 e program s R A as approve in une 2014
• Reliability e program is on tra to meet t e ar are relia ility re uirement y t e FDD A ES e ee e t e mean time et een ailure t res ol in FY 2012 an ontinues to e ee
t e t res ol uring t e E e program plans to ontinue olle ting relia ility ata lea ing up to t e F E onsistent it t e ar are relia ility gro t urve in t e SE
• Software e A ES so t are aseline is ompose o ommer ial o t e s el S so t are omponents integrate it so t are s ripts e program tra s S so t are longevity times pro u t repla ement ounts an so t are pat ounts to assess so t are maturity an uses onsumption metri s or pro essing memory an storage to tra so t are si e an per orman e e program as iel e t e urrent so t are aseline an is on tra to
evelop an iel t e ne t so t are aseline in early FY 2016 • Deployment e program ontinues to iel systems in a or an e it t e iel ing plan
approve at t e DAES revie in ay 2014 e program as omplete 10 installations an as 15 more in progress o ever i t e protest o t e pro u tion a ar e ten s past De em er 2014 t ere is potential or elay in iel ing a itional systems
• Integration e A ES system integrates S net or omponents to provi e a plat orm or oste so t are appli ations to interoperate e program as a pro u tion aseline an is iel ing D systems in operational s ips e program is urrently integrating t e su marine on iguration an t e ne t system so t are aseline an uses Enterprise ro lem Reports to
tra e e ts a ross t e enterprise e program is on tra to iel t e su marine on iguration in late FY 2015 an t e ne t so t are aseline in early FY 2016
Conclusion: e program is or ing to resolve a protest o t e pro u tion a ar e ore De em er 2014 to allo or ontinue e e ution o t e approve iel ing plan lea ing up to t e FDD in FY 2015 DASD SE ontinues to parti ipate in t e program s system engineering an te ni al revie events to tra evelopment an iel ing o s ip systems an t e ne t so t are aseline
66 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
CH-53K Heavy Lift Replacement Helicopter Prime Contractor: Si ors y Air ra t orporation
Executive Summary: e 53 program ill provi e an improve S arine orps eavy li t apa ility e 53 is a uil ne evolutionary
up ate o t e 53E esign t at meets arine Airroun as For e verti al eavy li t re uirements eyon 2025 e program is an A A D in t e System
Development an Demonstration p ase e program a ieve S in De em er 2005 DASD SE maintaine ontinuous engagement it t e program in FY 2014 y parti ipating in a roun est e i le est Rea iness Revie RR an a DAES revie among ot ers e program is a ressing a verse test results t roug mitigation strategies an re esign ere nee e an minimi ing s e ule impa t ere pra ti al Mission and System Description: e 53 ill internally transport passengers litters argo an ve i les an in lu es provisions or eaponry For e ternal li t o argo t e 53 as t ree in epen ent argo oo s an is apa le o li ting t ree times t e apa ity o t e 53E un er
ig ot on itions e air ra t is a ual pilote multi engine eli opter in orporating t e latest verti al li t surviva ility an avioni s te nologies t is e uippe it a seven la e main rotor system a our la e ante tail rotor an t ree E38 1 tur os a t engines Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in De em er 2011 e
program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program ill up ate t e SE to support S in FY 2016
• Requirements e R approve t e perational Re uirements Do ument RD in ovem er 2005 A D ill e evelope to support S an ill re le t t e program s
apa ilities roa map e program re uirements are reasona le an sta le an t e program as ta en positive steps to prevent re uirements gro t e RD re uirements are tra e to t e ontra tor system spe i i ation as veri ie at t e riti al Design Revie e apa ilities
i meets mont ly serves as a on iguration Steering oar to a u i ate any i enti ie mission relate issues or anges to program re uirements
• Life Cycle Management – rogram etter uying o er initiatives in lu e implementing en an ements to ris an opportunity management y assigning a ollar amount to ris mitigation an opportunity a ievements esta lis ing pat s to support s oul ost a or a ility e e ution e 53 esign e orts ave in lu e an emp asis on esign or maintaina ility an relia ility t at s oul lea to improvements in rea iness an re u tions in support ost e
overnment a ar e a ontra t in uly 2014 to provi e engines as overnment urnis e e uipment or t e ne t our evelopment air ra t at a pro e te li e y le savings in e ess o
9 6 million ree o t e seven s relia ility logisti s ootprint an sortie generation rate are logisti s ase re le ting t e program s o us on t e total li e y le a or a ility
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) DASD SE approve t e in De em er 2011 as an atta ment to t e SE e program is up ating t e to support S
67DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y 53
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments – DASD SE on u te t ree Systems Engineering or ing
ntegrate ro u t eam SE meetings an parti ipate in a DAES revie t e RR a prime ontra tor program revie an mont ly meetings to evaluate te ni al
progress an ris e SE s assesse su system uali i ation ailures an asso iate mitigation plans an program impa ts o Su system uali i ation ailures transmission gears tail rotor rive s a t oil oolers an
ele tri al po er supply are eing mitigate via esign anges re uali i ation an a prioriti e retro it s e ule itigation a tivities are planne to minimi e impa t to t e pro u tion an lig t test s e ule
o n FY 2015 DASD SE ill assess su system uali i ation Engineering Development o el assem ly su ontra tor te ni al per orman e so t are release an veri i ation a tivities an ull system testing engines rotors y rauli s ele tri al o t e an ore to a test i ture an uring early lig t testing
• Risk Assessment e 53 program is e e uting t e ris issue an opportunity management pro ess o umente in t e SE e program is mitigating ris s in t e areas o su system uali i ation ailures a la o manu a turing pro ess maturity an asso iate impa ts to parts elivery ne essary to support lig t test e ni al ris s remain managea le
it appropriate mitigation strategies in pla e • Performance e program as 7 s an 24 e ni al er orman e easures e program
pre i ts it ill meet or e ee per orman e levels y FR Engine per orman e e ee e spe i i ation s a t orsepo er re uirements y almost 10 per ent in t e test ell
• Schedule e program omplete a S in De em er 2005 an S is s e ule or 4t uarter FY 2016 SD A approve a revise A uisition Strategy in 2012 an a revise
A in April 2013 a ter a series o rea es starting in 2009 e ne A s e ule is at ris ue to t e une pe te volume o uali i ation test ailures an manu a turing allenges
• Reliability e program is e e uting its approve relia ility gro t plan nitial ata olle tion as egun on t e an ill ontinue in lig t test urrent program analysis
pre i ts relia ility per orman e ill e ee t res ol re uirements y t e FR e ision • Software e program as 7 million so t are lines o o e 64 per ent reuse it 2 million
lines o ne evelopment So t are re uirements generation evelopment veri i ation an vali ation pro esses are mature an are eing e e ute a or ing to t e So t are Development
lan nstallation o irst lig t so t are on t e provi e early is overy o some lig t riti al issues all o i ave orre tions t at are on tra or elivery in 2n uarter FY 2015
to support irst lig t • Manufacturing e our Engineering Development o els are on tra to support t e
program s e ule e program as a strong o us on pro u i ility lean manu a turing mo eling an mo ulari ation e manu a turing e i ien ies reveale uring omponent level
uali i ation an veri i ation a tivities may re u e initial lig t test envelope an impa t R e gear o ousing su ontra tor ontinues to e perien e uality an t roug put allenges
• Integration e program s use o mature te nologies it e ine inter a es an an air ra t System ntegration a oratory ena le t e early integration an analysis o ey su systems
ere are no no n interopera ility ris s or issues Conclusion: e 53 program is on tra to meet all te ni al re uirements t roug its use o a ro ust set o metri s an te ni al pro esses to assess progress an o us management attention e program is a ressing a verse test results t roug mitigation strategies an re esign ere nee e an minimi ing s e ule impa t ere pra ti al
68 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
CVN 78 GERALD R. FORD Class Nuclear Aircraft Carrier Prime Contractor: untington ngalls n ustries Executive Summary: 78 is a avy A A D program t e lea s ip o t e F RD
lass e s ip ill e a le to em ar in e ess o 75 air ra t an its larger lig t e ill ena le more e i ient air ra t movement an laun ing apa ility t an its pre e essor t e lass arrier e program a ieve S in April
2004 an is urrently in t e Engineering an anu a turing Development E D p ase
pre S it S s e ule or FY 2015 DASD SE parti ipate in Relia ility ro t
or ing groups or t e evelopment o t e Ele tromagneti Air ra t aun System E A S an A van e Arresting ear AA e program as a resse many s e ule an pro u tion issues an is on tra to meet its goal or s ip
elivery in 2n uarter FY 2016 Mission and System Description: 78 s mission is to provi e re i le sustaina le in epen ent or ar presen e uring pea etime it out a ess to lan ases e s ip ill operate as t e ornerstone o a oint an or allie maritime e pe itionary or e in response to any risis an arry t e ar to t e enemy t roug oint multi mission o ensive operations e s ip an operate
an support air ra t in atta s on enemy or es as ore a loat or su merge ile remaining in epen ent o or ar ase lan a ilities e ne lig t e esign an islan relo ation allo s or more e i ient air ra t movement eapons loa ing re ueling an air ra t spotting i results in a 33 per ent improvement in t e air ra t sortie generation rate over previous lass air ra t arrier emonstrate per orman e
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e S SE in anuary 2007 e
program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve SE an is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is up ating t e SE or t e
78 program S 79 onstru tion a ar DA in FY 2015 an a ing an anne to a ress relia ility gro t
• Requirements e R approve t e perational Re uirements Do ument RD in une 2007 e esign re uirements are reasona le sta le an meet t e RD re uirements or its pro e te operational environment
• Life Cycle Management e program improve internal management pro esses y esta lis ing a ne program o i e in 2012 S 379 t at o uses solely on t e pro urement o ollo on ulls 79 an 80 e program ill ontinue to use a systems engineering
approa to rive a or a ility into 79 an 80 y implementing lessons learne in 78
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e rogram anagement i e evelope an approve t e prior to 2008 en revie an approval y t e appropriate ilestone De ision Aut ority as o i ie in DoD 5200 39 e program su se uently evelope a lan
69DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y 78
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o A tion an ilestones it an in remental approa to up ating t e o ument to support 78 program S 79 onstru tion a ar DA in FY 2015 in lu ing an A uisition
y er Se urity appen i Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in a Systems Engineering or ing
ntegrate ro u t eam to revie t e SE an systems engineering pra ti es DASD SE also omplete uarterly DAES assessments o t e program s e ule per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program as o umente in t e SE itigation a tivities a ress overall s ip ompletion s e ule ris an te ni al ris s asso iate it E A S AA an t e Dual an Ra ar any ris s asso iate it t e irst time operation o t ese ne systems an omponents ave een retire it t e lig t o an
initial operation o t e e uipment • Performance 78 interior ull an integral spa e onstru tion supporting ma or systems
remain on tra e program is using its planne se uen e o analyses mo eling an simulation to veri y meeting its 9 s an 19 SAs as o umente in t e SE
• Schedule e program as omplete S an is urrently in t e E D p ase it S planne or FY 2015 e 78 onstru tion s e ule as re ine ue to lea s ip te nology evelopment material pro urement an s ipyar onstru tion per orman e e program is on tra to eliver 78 in 2n uarter FY 2016 in a or an e it t e A
• Reliability e program is eveloping an anne to t e e isting S SE to a ress relia ility gro t urves t e evelopment o a Relia ility ro t lan an a ailure reporting analysis an orre tive a tion system or t e E A S an t e AA Relia ility availa ility an maintaina ility al ulations ill in lu e systems it operational availa ility an relia ility re uirements as e ine in t e program s RD
• Software e S ip Sel De ense System om at management system is in evelopment or t e 78 lass e om at System A on iguration is in evelopment to support t e goal o
open mo ular an interopera le om at management systems • Manufacturing – e program is on tra it its manu a turing re uirements or t e present
onstru tion p ase to eliver 78 in t e 2n uarter FY 2016 in a or an e it t e urrent A S ipyar manu a turing apa ilities an s e ules are in line it program o i e plans As o De em er 2014 overall s ip onstru tion is over 85 per ent omplete
• Integration – e program is a ering to initial system integration strategies o umente in t e SE e su ess ul installation o a inali e AA system an relate lig t e test events on oar s ip uring t e inal onstru tion p ase an sea trials pose t e greatest potential impa t a e ting post elivery air ra t operations
Conclusion: e 78 program re aseline its S an pro u tion s e ule in ar 2013 i s i te s ip s laun to ovem er 2013 an s ip elivery to 2n uarter o FY 2016 n
transitioning rom onstru tion to test entri e orts t e s ip uil er as ommen e turnover o omplete systems an ompartments to t e re over 34 a ea o ontra tual re uirements
an as egun retiring t e a log o in omplete or pa ages e s ip remains on tra to eliver in 2n uarter FY 2016
70 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
DDG 51 ARLEIGH BURKE Class Guided Missile Destroyer Prime Contractors: eneral Dynami s at ron or s untington ngalls n ustries
Executive Summary: DD 51 is a avy A A D multi mission estroyer in t e
perations an Support p ase DASD SE parti ipate in t e avy Flig t otal S ip Design Revie or e it t e e ni al Dire tor in riting t e program s irst SE or Flig t an elpe align its Ris
anagement lan it DoD gui an e S 400D is in t e early stages o e e uting Flig t o t e program Mission and System Description: e DD 51 is a multi mission gui e missile estroyer
esigne to operate o ensively an e ensively in epen ently or in arrier stri e groups S e pe itionary stri e groups ES an missile e ense a tion groups in multi t reat environments t at in lu e air sur a e an su sur a e t reats ese s ips ill respon to lo intensity on li t oastal an littoral o s ore ar are A s enarios as ell as open o ean on li t
provi ing po er pro e tion or ar national presen e an es ort operations at sea Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in ay 2014 e program is
e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve SE an is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is maintaining stri t on iguration management in t e in remental upgra es o t e restarte Flig t A pro u tion line an in t e parallel e ort to
evelop t e Flig t Developmental Engineering ange roposals E Flig t s ip su system reliminary Design Revie s DR an riti al Design Revie s DR an t e
ontra t Design DR are s e ule or FY 2015 to e e e ute using t e urrent SE • Requirements Forty ive Flig t A s ips ave or ill e uilt to t e perational
Re uirements Do ument RD signe in April 1994 R approve t e DD 51 Flig t DD in to er 2014 e re uirements or Flig t are reasona le an sta le an are eing
e e ute to ell esta lis e on iguration an ris management pro esses e Flig t DD re uirements are tra ea le to t e urrent te ni al aseline e arrangements mo eling stru tural analysis an istri ute systems analyses represent a ell alan e s ip esign avy on u te a otal S ip Design Revie in une 2014 an t e System Fun tional Revie in
to er 2014 e Flig t DR is planne or 4t uarter FY 2015 • Life Cycle Management e program is ta ing a vantage o t e ull me ani al an
ele tri al E a van es ma e y ot er s ip a uisition programs y a apting t e DD 1000 ele tri al generation an istri ution system an 78 ille ater e uipment re u ing t e overall logisti ootprint an training re uirements e ne ele trome ani al an or
in lasses eliminate t e e essive maintenan e re uire y t e previous y rauli esign n a ition t e program is or ing a ross pro u t lines it rogram E e utive i e ntegrate
ar are Systems E S to support t e o ular pen Systems Approa e program is e e uting stri t on iguration management to intro u e t ese anges into a Flig t s ip esign
71DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y DD 51
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
t at ill e a natural ollo on to t e evolving restarte Flig t A esign rat er t an a ing t e anges to a stati image o t e previously uilt Flig t A s ips is approa provi es
ontrolla le esign an pro u tion anges e esign team e pe ts to meet t e Flig t annual energy t e irst o t is lass to ave t at re uirement
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program oes not ave a approve y t e ilestone De ision Aut ority ut is planning to on u t an overar ing rogram rote tion lat orm riti ality analysis i ill prioriti e t e su systems t at ill e in Flig t ase on its
missions e riti ality analysis ill i enti y systems t at re uire t eir o n Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate it S 400D an SEA 05D in on u ting
a otal S ip Design Revie SDR in une e re uirements are e ine veri ia le an tra ea le rom t e DD to t e te ni al esign aseline e program as o umente an maintains on iguration ontrol or t e un tional aseline an its supporting analyses an is mitigating all no n ris s in a or an e it t e program s Ris anagement lan e SDR ul ille t e systems engineering un tion o t e avy s internal ate 4 an ate 5 revie s
e e ute e ore t e une 2014 DA to aut ori e release o t e RF to omplete t e Flig t E pa age e System Fun tional Revie t e ele tri al system DR an DR an t e
ontra t Design DR are s e ule or FY 2015 • Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program as o umente in
t e urrent SE an t e program Ris anagement lan e program is or ing to mitigate t e ris s asso iate it E upgra es nee e to support t e Air an issile De ense Ra ar A DR spa e eig t po er an ooling re uirements an is leveraging A DR veri i ation
a tivities to e e ute s ip system per orman e assessments • Performance e Flig t A meets all assigne re uirements e Flig t program e pe ts
to meet all re uirements y nitial perational est an Evaluation • Schedule e program omplete t e Flig t E DA in une 2014 e program met all
ay 2011 A t res ol s e most re ent A milestone as nitial perational apa ility o t e apa ility to laun Evolve SeaSparro issile in une 2004 e program is on tra to meet t e Flig t ontra t a ar DA in FY 2016 e ontrolling a tor is t e evelopment s e ule or A DR t e appropriate level o te ni al etail is not availa le t e Flig t ontra t mo i i ation ill e elaye until 2017
• Reliability Flig t A is urrently meeting all o its relia ility re uirements e avy is testing all Flig t ne ly esigne an mo i ie su systems to ensure t eir esigns support t e s ip s relia ility e program o i e ill esta lis a Flig t FRA AS ailure reporting analysis an orre tive a tion system or relia ility
• Software S ip spe i i so t are or DD 51 is limite to its Engineering ontrol System i is mature or Flig t A e DD 51 program o i e is leveraging Flig t A so t are or
Flig t an rom ot er programs t at ave provi e mo i ie ar are • Manufacturing ot s ipyar s e ules re le t a loss o learning asso iate it t e
pro u tion gap o ever ot yar s are or ing to ar re overing s e ule an are e pe te to s o improvement in FY 2015
• Integration e program s primary engineering e ort or Flig t is integrating t e A DR an supporting E systems is program is ompleting t e e ort in on un tion it E
S 1 0 an E S 2 0 an is on tra to meet t e urrent s e ule Conclusion: e DD 51 program ontinues to eliver s ips onsistent it t e Flig t A RD an is e pe te to o so in a or an e it t e Flig t DD
72 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Joint Precision Approach and Landing System, Increment 1A (JPALS Inc 1A) Prime Contractor: Rayt eon et or entri Systems Division Executive Summary: A S n 1A is an A A D program in t e e nology aturation an Ris
Re u tion p ase t at ill provi e a lo al ositioning System S ase pre ision
approa an lan ing apa ility or A Se uippe manne air ra t at sea e program e perien e a riti al unn ur y rea an as re erti ie in une 2014 DASD SE on irme t e root ause as not te ni al an
assesse t at t e te ni al plans an management pro esses are a e uate to support t e restru ture program E orts to omplete t e evelopment tra e stu ies an ris re u tion e orts are on tra to egin in FY 2015 Mission and System Description: e A S ill sa eguar t e uture pre ision approa an lan ing apa ility or any A S e uippe air ra t e g F 35 oint Stri e Fig ter an nmanne
arrier aun e Air orne Surveillan e an Stri e ASS uring operations at sea in virtually any eat er on ition e restru ture program ill provi e t e ontinue evelopment integration installation an test o sea ase A S on all large e s ips Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e n 1A SE in De em er 2007 to
support t e n 1A S in uly 2008 e program revie e up ate an revali ate t e SE as part o t e preparation or program Systems Engineering e ni al Revie s DASD SE provi e omments to support a planne 2014 SE revision e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e revise SE it out aivers or eviations e ne t SE up ate ill support t e FY 2016 S or t e restru ture A S program
• Requirements e R approve t e n 1A DD in ar 2007 it our s e program re uirements are reasona le an sta le e n 1A est Rea iness Revie in FY 2013 esta lis e t e tra ea ility o re uirements to system per orman e
• Life Cycle Management e n 1A riti al Design Revie DR in lu e t e li e y le support analysis as a esign onsi eration an ena le esign tra e o s e initial pro u t
aseline is 80 per ent ommer ial o t e s el it re u e manu a turing ris e remaining 20 per ent o t e omponents an assem lies in lu ing ne an mo i ie items ave omplete
esigns an preliminary anu a turing Rea iness Assessments e maintaina ility SA e ine as mean orre tive maintenan e time is on tra to meet re uirements
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e A S program manager approve t e n 1A in to er 2007 e ne t up ate ill support t e FY 2016 S or t e restru ture A S
program Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE supporte a Revie to assess t e A S te ni al
maturity an systems engineering pro esses e DASD SE assessment on irme t e
73DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y A S 1A
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
as not t e result o e i ien ies in engineering plans or e e ution DASD SE on lu e t at t e program systems engineering pro esses or ris management on iguration management re uirements an veri i ation are a e uate to support t e ompletion o t e restru ture program o DASD SE assesse ris e e ution as e ellent in ive areas o implementation o e program su ess ully leverages t e 24 e ni al er orman e easures in t e
SE to ontinually assess te ni al progress to plan o FY 2015 DASD SE engagements are ontingent on t e replan o t e program s e ule
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program o umente in t e SE e program is or ing to mitigate ris s in t e F 35 erti i ation F 35 ASS s e ule an en to en veri i ation areas
• Performance ase on a Fe ruary 2014 n 1A System eri i ation Revie S R li e event all our n 1A s an ive SAs remain on tra to omplete avy omman er perational
est an Evaluation For e etter o servation e n 1A omplete t e s ip oar portion o t e perational Assessment in De em er 2013 e ontra tor su ess ully omplete a proo o on ept emonstration o t e auto lan apa ility it 70 an s ree
pre ision approa es on oar 71 is emonstration greatly re u e t e ris or t e autolan apa ility or t e restru ture A S program
• Schedule rogram e e ution is on tra to egin in FY 2015 e ni al planning or t e A S program ill in lu e uarterly s e ule ris assessments to i enti y ig ris areas
impa ts an opportunities or mitigation e ntegrate aster S e ule is pre e isional • Reliability e system relia ility an maintaina ility riteria parameters are on tra it
orrespon ing s to e ee t e per orman e re uirement e A S operational relia ility re uirement e ine as mean time et een operational mission ailure is pro e te to meet t e t res ol re uirement
• Software e A S n 1A so t are is omplete an implemente to support t e Future so t are evelopment or a ollo on program is pen ing t e out ome o A S autolan ris re u tion an up ate to t e DD to support a FY 2016 S
• Manufacturing e n 1A program elivere all eig t Engineering Development o ule units an t e our Air e i le est it units on s e ule e A uisition De ision
emoran um e erre t e pro u tion p ase on n 1A to align it t e uture a uisition o t e auto lan apa ility or t e F 35 an ASS
• Integration e n 1A program omplete s ip oar integration on 77 e program re u e integration ris it t e use o t e upli ate string o s ip oar in rastru ture e uipment an net or in t e lan ing system test a ility an atu ent River aval Air Station
Derive re uirements or F 35 an ASS integration are pen ing ompletion o t e tra e stu ies
Conclusion: e A S ris re u tion e orts to support t e F 35 an ASS are on tra to
egin in FY 2015 DASD SE assesses t e program plans an pro esses as a e uate to support t e A S program
74 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014
Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Prime Contractors: • Free om ariant o ee artin arinette arine
S 1 23 o ulls • n epen en e ariant eneral Dynami s Austal SA
S 2 4 Austal SA S 6 24 even ulls • ission o ules ort rop rumman orporation
ntegrate Systems Executive Summary: S is a avy A A D ig spee om at vessel esigne or littoral operations e program is
in R e S ission o ules S a avy A A program provi es ission a age systems to give S its ar ig ting apa ility DASD SE parti ipate in an S in ept te ni al revie o use on s ip onstru tion an integration status an ris
e S program as 12 s ips un er onstru tion our s ips in pre pro u tion an ontinues to improve integration an e e tiveness it installe s or t e our s ips previously elivere an in Fleet servi e e S an S programs ave ormali e relations ips an pro esses to manage a omple system o systems t ere y elivering re uire apa ilities to t e leet nstalling t e s presents uni ue allenges ut t e program is managing ris s an elivering uantities as planne Mission and System Description: S is a mo ular o use mission ars ip esigne to meet Fleet re uirements in t e littoral region S onsists o t o istin t s ip esigns t e mono ull Free om variant an t e trimaran n epen en e variant e S ore systems provi e or s ip sel e ense navigation omman ontrol ommuni ations omputers an intelligen e 4 an ot er ar are an s ip ontrol apa ilities ommon to all mission areas S s provi e mo ular inter angea le apa ility in one o t ree primary mission areas mine ountermeasures sur a e ar are S an anti su marine ar are AS e S program pro ures an
eploys t e s t at are em ar e on t e S plat orm to provi e t ese apa ilities along it t e air ra t re an support e uipment t at orm t e omplete Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e S S SE in uly 2010
e S program as a Servi e approve SE up ate in une 2013 to support S e programs are ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE s it out aivers or eviations
• Requirements e R vali ate t e S Flig t 0 DD ate une 2008 i ontains re uirements or ot S an S e re uirements are reasona le an sta le e
avy is issuing p ase Ds t at elineate re uirements or ea S p ase A oint S S nter a e ontrol Do ument provi es etaile re uirements to install an ost
t e s • Life Cycle Management e S program see s to re u e overall li e y le osts n rease
automation ena les re u e operational manning e avy in rease t e ore re to 50 sailors per ull to support unanti ipate on oar maintenan e eman s an to ease re atigue
e ission a age Support Fa ility SF provi es on iguration management maintenan e an logisti support or t e S an AS s e SF olle ts
Independence Variant
Freedom Variant
75DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
maintenan e an operational metri s to in orm planning an upgra es e avy ontinues improving t e pro ess to s ap an re erti y s to minimi e uture li e y le osts
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e S program evelope a ra t or S an plans to evelop an up ate or t e FR DA revie AS RDA DAS RD E approve t e
S in une 2013 Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in an in ept te ni al revie or t e
om ine S an S programs as ire te y t e SD A e revie s allo e t e program managers to provi e a status up ate o t e integrate S an program an to
is uss te ni al ris s an issues as t e program matures e S pro u tion s e ule is sta ili ing at ot s ipyar s it in rease on i en e o uture s ip elivery e s provi e t e o use ar ig ting apa ility on ea s ip ost elivery installation an integration o
s on ea s ip ave een a allenge ut are e pe te to improve as more s are elivere o DASD SE also parti ipates in uarterly ission Systems S ip ntegration eam SS
meetings i a ress an resolve inter a e issues et een an it in t e S an s e program plans to resolve most integration issues it t e to support t e nitial
perational apa ility o S 2 in FY 2015 • Risk Assessment S an S programs ave i enti ie te ni al ris s in t e areas o
s o uali i ations ater ra t an ling integration an per orman e e programs are e e uting to t e ris management plans summari e in t eir SE s e ni al ris s asso iate
it t e evelopment o uture in rements espe ially t e long range sur a e to sur a e missile mo ule pose integration allenges asso iate it inserting ne apa ilities into t e
s E S esta lis e a oint or ing group it t e S S an Remote ine unting System program o i es to i enti y an mitigate ris s asso iate it
integration e programs ave esta lis e mitigation plans to retire all riti al te ni al ris s y FY 2017 in time to support veri i ation an eployment
• Performance S as emonstrate ive o 10 s an all 7 SAs t is planning to emonstrate t e remaining s y FY 2018 as assets e ome availa le e S
program plans to in rementally a ieve all t res ol s or an S s emonstrating ull apa ility all s met it n rement 4 in FY 2020 an S n rement 3 in FY 2017 e Deep olume Fo use ine unting presents t e greatest
allenge or t e e A A S 20A to e sonar an t e Air orne aser ine Dete tion System programs are e e uting preplanne pro u t improvements to en an e t eir apa ilities in t e ater olumn e S is on tra to meet per orman e re uirements it a ition o t e long range Sur a e to Sur a e issile at n rement 3 e avy is
evaluating t e esire apa ility to meet t e e ten e range SA in S n rement 4 e AS prototype as emonstrate a ig li eli oo o meeting all our AS s
• Schedule o ate t e S program as met all April 2011 A t res ol ates it t e e eption o S 2 nitial perational est an Evaluation E e S 2 E ill
e elaye y 14 mont s ue to availa ility o re uire assets e S program as met all une 2013 A t res ol ates an is on tra to meet remaining ates S ontinues to e perien e s ipyar elays ue to manpo er onstraints an re or issues o ever t e onstru tion s e ule at ot s ipyar s is sta ili ing as t e issues are eing a resse i ill allo more a urate s ip elivery estimates
• Reliability e S program pre i ts materiel relia ility to e 109 per ent o t e re uirement e program esta lis e a FRA AS ailure reporting analysis an orre tive a tion system to
i enti y root auses an initiate orre tive a tions e S program as a ompre ensive
76 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
relia ility availa ility an maintaina ility mo eling an analysis report or t e s e S program pre i ts t at all t ree types ill meet t eir availa ility an relia ility
re uirements • Software ig priority so t are e e ts e ist or multiple S s ip oar systems e
s ip uil er is resolving t e issues it in t e onstru tion ontra t an e pe ts to retire t e e e ts in 2015 to support t e ne t s e ule uil er s sea trials e S SE an t e
So t are anagement lan provi e metri s or all so t are evelope un er t e program igration o t e omputing environment E to a servi e oriente ar ite ture S A is
t e largest so t are evelopment e ort e S A ill provi e a ommon so t are ar ite ture aseline or all S an AS appli ation so t are AS t ill also a ilitate
S S integration e program ill eliver t e initial S A in rement it AS AS in FY 2015 it a itional so t are evelopment in FY 2016 to support E 2 0 e
program ill pro u e in remental so t are uil y les as s ange an mature over t e li e o t e program
• Manufacturing e a ar o t e lo uy ontra ts in rease t e uil rate at ea s ipyar rom one to t o s ips per year i initially allenge t e manu a turing apa ity o t e
s ipyar s a or availa ility an pro u tion e i ien y ere ma or ontri utors to elivery elays at ot s ipyar s Ea s ipyar as sin e a ieve signi i ant in reases in manpo er
Fa ility upgra es in rease manning an learning e i ien ies ave all ontri ute to sta ili ing t e ront en o t e S pro u tion y le e avy plans to a ept elivery o our s ips per year S is on tra or timely elivery o s to support s ip eployments
• Integration e ma or evelopment e orts involve t e integration o ar are an so t are or ea on ea s ip Future in rements or ea o t e an S a uni ue
mission systems to in lu e ater ra t an air ra t to ea s ip e SS artere y E S meets uarterly to resolve to S integration issues an ris s integration
la s at avy a ilities in anama ity F Da lgren A an e port R provi e a re ite an se ure integration an test a ilities to support in ivi ual evelopment n orporating t e ne yet to e evelope mission systems presents a itional uture integration ris s
Conclusion: e S program is in sta le R it 24 s ips aut ori e e S program as 12 s ips un er onstru tion our s ips in pre onstru tion an ill eliver our s ips t is year t o o ea variant installations i provi e o use ar ig ting apa ility or ea s ip present uni ue engineering an integration allenges e program ontinues to improve integration an per orman e t roug t e SS memoran a o un erstan ing it ey program o i es an oint or ing groups tas e it resolving esign issues
77DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
is page intentionally lan
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS)
Prime Contractor: ort rop rumman Aerospa e Systems Executive Summary: e riton ill provi e air orne persistent maritime intelligen e surveillan e an re onnaissan e SR to elp maintain t e ommon perational an a ti al
i ture in t e maritime attlespa e e program is an A A D in t e System Development an Demonstration SDD p ase e program a ieve
S in April 2008 DASD SE maintaine ontinuous engagement it t e program o i e in
FY 2014 y parti ipating in a program revie DA an a Flig t Rea iness Revie FRR or return to lig t among ot ers e program is on tra to meet an FY 2016 S e program as
emonstrate improve so t are evelopment an sa ety erti i ation pro esses an is mitigating ris in pro u i ility o t e tail an ing stru tures Mission and System Description: riton ill provi e persistent maritime SR ata olle tion an
issemination as ell as air orne ommuni ations relay apa ility to om atant omman ers E pe itionary Stri e roup omman ers arrier Stri e roup omman ers an ot er esignate
S an oint omman ers t ill operate in epen ently or it ot er assets to provi e a more e e tive an supporta le persistent maritime surveillan e apa ility Data olle te ill e transmitte to a variety o DoD intelligen e a tivities an no es e air ra t provi es 360 egree
ig resolution ig uality igital synt eti aperture ra ar imagery ele tro opti al in rare imagery an ommuni ations relay apa ility Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in anuary 2008 to support
S an t e Engineering an anu a turing Development p ase e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is revising t e SE to support a S in FY 2016
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in ay 2007 e program s revise A uisition Strategy as apture t e emerging re uirement to a some apa ility urrently provi e y t e E 3 t roug t e use o engineering anges to t e aseline program post nitial
perational apa ility Re uirements are reasona le an sta le e D is un er evelopment or S an ill apture t e ne E 3 mission re uirements DD re uirements are tra e to
t e ontra tor System Spe i i ation as veri ie at t e riti al Design Revie • Life Cycle Management o a ieve system a or a ility goals t e avy as re u e t e
num er o System Demonstration est Arti les SD A rom t ree to t o an e erre a ain perating ase ission ontrol System e program is in orporating De ense E porta ility
Features into t e riton esign to a ilitate Foreign ilitary Sales an re u e retro it ost • Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e S in ar 2006 e
program is up ating t e to support S to in lu e reassessing t e riti al program in ormation ompleting a ne vulnera ility assessment an applying lessons learne rom t e
lo al a program
79DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y 4 R
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in a program revie DA multiple Systems
Engineering or ing ntegrate ro u t eam SE meetings a A A R in pro ess per orman e veri i ation assessment an a FRR or return to lig t to evaluate te ni al progress an ris e program as emonstrate improve so t are evelopment an sa ety erti i ation pro esses an is mitigating ris in pro u i ility o t e tail an ing stru tures o e program implemente en an ements to its so t are pro esses i ave resulte in
improve so t are uality an so t are se urity e program re ine t e ntegrate aster S e ule S to improve transparen y an program e e ution visi ility
o n FY 2015 DASD SE ill on u t a rogram Support Assessment an multiple SE meetings to assist t e program in assessing an mitigating ris or entry into R
• Risk Assessment e program is on u ting ris management using t e Ris anagement ro ess as es ri e in t e SE e program is tra ing ris s in t e areas o tail an ing
manu a turing pro esses an ra ar maturation • Performance e program as 7 s 2 SAs an 25 e ni al er orman e easures
e program is on tra to meet all an SA t res ol s y t e FR e ision e program omplete initial envelope e pansion in ar 2014 e irst o t ree air ra t arrive at aval
Air Station atu ent River in Septem er 2014 emonstrating t e system en uran e an ata lin apa ilities ne essary to on u t urt er evelopmental testing a tivities
• Schedule e program is on tra to meet t e uly 2014 revise A s e ule e program on u te a S e ule Ris Assessment to vali ate t e revise ontra t S Ferry lig t events
to AS atu ent River slippe y almost 3 mont s ut t ere remains a e uate margin to S • Reliability e program is e e uting a relia ility gro t plan as o umente in t e SE an
system relia ility is pro e te to meet re uirements e program ill egin relia ility gro t reporting in FY 2015 an urrent program analysis pre i ts relia ility ill meet t res ol re uirements y t e FR e ision
• Software e program as appro imately 2 5 million e uivalent sour e lines o o e So t are evelopment issues le to t e A s e ule rea or S e program implemente a ne So t are Development lan a ing orre tion o e i ien y uil s e e t prioriti ation an a itional sa ety erti i ations e program as in rease ontra tor so t are sta ing an so t are au iting sin e Fe ruary 2014 ese program a tions ave resulte in improve so t are oversig t an orre tion o e e t turnaroun times
• Manufacturing e program is on tra to eliver t e t o SD As urrently in pro u tion ut t e ing supplier as pro ess non omplian e an uality issues resulting in a ig re e tion rate
i may put t e SD A elivery s e ule at ris e program o i e an t e prime ontra tor ave implemente orre tive a tions to improve t e supplier pro esses poli ies an training
• Integration e program as evelope nter a e Re uirements Spe i i ations et een t e riton system an 12 segments programs using an approve DoD Ar ite tural Frame or e
program ill in orporate net or e ommuni ations ar ite ture in alignment it t e lo al n ormation ri t roug t e Distri ute ommon roun Sur a e System avy an lo al omman an ontrol System aritime
Conclusion: e program is on tra or a S in FY 2016 an as emonstrate improve so t are evelopment an sa ety erti i ation pro esses e program is mitigating ris in pro u i ility o t e tail an ing stru tures
80 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
MQ-8 Fire Scout Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Prime Contractor: ort rop rumman Aerospa e Systems Executive Summary: Fire S out is an A A D program t at un er ent a riti al unn ur y rea erti i ation an restru ture in April 2014 e restru ture Fire S out previously alle A
AS program resulte in t o separate unmanne air ve i les 8 an 8 it t e larger mo el provi ing greater range en uran e an payloa apa ility e Fire S out system is ompose o t o to t ree unmanne air ve i les a ta ti al ontrol station a laun an re overy system a multi mission payloa an ommuni ations ata lin s A itional apa ilities in lu e as part o
t e restru ture are ra ar eapons an a itional payloa s DASD SE le a te ni al assessment o t e program to support t e
unn ur y erti i ation an program restru ture e DASD SE assessment i enti ie several systems engineering issues in t e areas o re uirements ris s e ule an te ni al aseline management i t e program must a ress to improve program e e ution Mission and System Description: e 8 Fire S out is a rotary ing verti al ta eo an lan ing unmanne air ra t system provi ing intelligen e surveillan e re onnaissan e target a uisition an ommuni ations relay apa ilities supporting littoral operations omman ers ill use t e system to olle t an pass in ormation an ata to support a num er o operational s enarios Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) e program as a avy approve SE signe in anuary
2007 e approve SE is no longer appli a le to t e restru ture program e program is up ating t e SE to re le t t e restru ture program as re uire y t e unn ur y erti i ation e ore t e ne t program milestone A revie o t e program s systems engineering
pro esses i enti ie several issues an orre tive a tions ne essary to improve systems engineering is ipline an program e e ution
• Requirements e R approve 2007 erti al a eo an an ing a ti al nmanne Aerial e i le A D mo i ie in 2009 i enti ies t e program re uirements e program is implementing a itional re uirements stemming rom t ree rgent perational
ee s statements via Rapi Deployment apa ility RD insertions E e uting to multiple re uirements o uments as le to re uirements insta ility in t e aseline evelopment program
e avy is up ating t e D to ully en ompass t e restru ture program re uirements in lu ing t e RD s e program oes not ave a single ompre ensive te ni al aseline t at tra es all re uirements to a system spe i i ation i in reases integration omple ity an ris
e program plans to on u t a te ni al revie to tra e t e revise D re uirements to a revise system spe i i ation an esta lis an overar ing te ni al aseline
• Life Cycle Management e program is ontrolling ost y pro uring ma or omponents an provi ing t em as overnment urnis e e uipment mprove system relia ility emonstrate uring multiple ilitary ser Assessments A s oul re u e total o ners ip ost
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program is eveloping a or a FY 2015 S
MQ-8B
MQ-8C
81DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y 8 F RE S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE le an assessment to evaluate t e program s systems
engineering pro esses an te ni al ris in support o t e unn ur y erti i ation e assessment i enti ie e i ien ies in t e areas o re uirements ris s e ule an te ni al
aseline management stemming rom t e on urrent e e ution o t e program o re or an t ree RD s DASD SE provi e re ommen ations or pro ess improvement i ere in lu e in t e SD A re erti i ation memo o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to on u t a rogram Support Assessment to support t e
program restru ture an S • Risk Assessment e program as een e e uting our separate ris management pro esses
or t e program o re or an t e t ree RD s e multiple ris pro esses limit t e program s a ility to analy e potential impa ts an oor inate mitigation plans a ross t e our evelopment a tivities e program plans to onsoli ate all ris management e orts into a single pro ess as part o t e program restru ture e program is mitigating ris s in t e area o so t are
evelopment an s ip oar integration • Performance e program as our s i enti ie in t e 2007 A D e program
as a le to emonstrate t ree o t e our s uring t e As on u te in FY 2014 e remaining t e automati laun re overy e pit re uirement is on tra or emonstration y t e FR e ision An up ate D in orporating all re uirements rom t e
program o re or an t e t ree RD s may intro u e a itional re uirements • Schedule e program is e e uting our on urrent ntegrate aster S e ules S or t e
program o re or an t e t ree RD s e our Ss are not integrate limiting t e program s a ility to assess inter epen en ies a ross t e our evelopment e orts e program is integrating t ese separate Ss into one o erent system o systems S e program
rea e t e A s e ule in ay 2012 e riti al unn ur y rea res in e t e 2007 S e ision e program plans to on u t a S e ision in FY 2015
• Reliability Fire S out emonstrate t e relia ility re uirements uring t e Septem er to er 2013 A e 8 system relia ility an maintaina ility e ee e t res ol re uirements
y 12 per ent an 30 per ent respe tively • Software Four on urrent so t are evelopment e orts ave reate issues it t e so t are
evelopment s e ule re uirements sta ility an so t are uality e program is eveloping an integrate So t are Development lan t at in orporates all aspe ts o t e restru ture program an a resses t e so t are issues
• Manufacturing e 8 pro u tion o 23 air rames is omplete e 8 air rame R is on tra it si air rames elivere e avy plans to a uire 21 a itional 8
air rames at a rate o t o per year ro urement o t e 8 ill not stress t e ontra tor s pro u tion or mo i i ation lines
• Integration e program as not esta lis e a system o systems te ni al aseline e program ill on u t a te ni al revie to esta lis a system o systems te ni al aseline t at meets t e re uirements i enti ie in t e up ate D e program is mitigating ris s it s ip oar integration o t e 8 air rame
Conclusion: e program must a ress issues it systems engineering pro esses in t e areas o re uirements ris s e ule an te ni al aseline management stemming rom t e on urrent e e ution o t e program o re or an t ree RD s e approval o t e revise D an t e esta lis ment o a system o systems te ni al aseline s oul improve uture program sta ility an mitigate te ni al ris
82 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Mobile User Objective System (MUOS) Prime Contractor: o ee artin Spa e Systems Executive Summary: S is a narro an ilitary Satellite
ommuni ations SA system t at supports a orl i e multi Servi e population o mo ile an i e site
terminal users in t e ultra ig re uen y F an provi ing in rease ommuni ations apa ilities to smaller terminals ile still supporting interopera ility to lega y terminals S is an A A D program in t e ro u tion an Deployment p ase
e program re eive uil Approval in 2008 n FY 2014 DASD SE on u te our DAES assessments an parti ipate in t o DAES revie s i a resse an A s e ule rea an elays in t e en to en E2E apa ility e program is on tra to meet all ut t e 3r satellite Rea y to S ip A t res ol milestones ut E2E apa ility lags e in satellite availa ility
ue to integration issues Mission and System Description: S a apts a ommer ial t ir generation 3 i e an
o e Division ultiple A ess D A ellular te nology it geosyn ronous satellites to provi e a ne an more apa le F SA system e onstellation ill provi e greater t an 10 times t e system apa ity o t e urrent F Follo n F onstellation S in lu es t e spa e segment a groun system an a ne ave orm or user terminals e spa e segment is ompose o a onstellation o our geosyn ronous satellites plus one on or it spare
e groun system in lu es t e groun transport net or management satellite ontrol an asso iate in rastru ture to ot ly t e satellites an manage user ommuni ations Ea S satellite also arries a lega y payloa similar to t at lo n on F F11 ese payloa s ill ontinue to support lega y terminals ile allo ing or a gra ual transition to t e S D A ave orm e ne D A ave orm is a So t are ommuni ations Ar ite ture ompliant
mo ulation te ni ue e irst S apa le terminal to use t e S D A ave orm is t e Army s an el anpa Small Form Fit S ra io A R 155 Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e S SE in August 2013 e
SE o uses on t e systems engineering pro esses an plans or system veri i ation ull eployment operations lo upgra es an sustainment t also a resses t e avy s role or
integrating E2E apa ility it S apa le terminals e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations
• Requirements e 2001 S perational Re uirements Do ument an a 2003 R emoran um provi e t e S re uirements e S er orman e Spe i i ation
represents t e program o i e e omposition o t ese re uirements S system re uirements are reasona le an sta le o ever E2E re uirements i in lu e t e user segment o not ormally e ist e program is using lega y E2E system per orman e as a per orman e goal
• Life Cycle Management e program ontinues to see opportunities to re u e li e y le osts su as lo ris test re u tions in pro u tion satellites an e e tively using prioriti e
a or a ility onsi erations in a ressing in ormation assuran e s ort alls in t e pro ess • Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program last revise t e in 2007
83DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te our uarterly DAES assessments in FY 2014
in t e areas o s e ule per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion DASD SE also supporte t o DAES revie s or t e S program a ressing t e A rea an integration issues e program is managing ris an issues it t e pro u tion an laun o t e satellites an E2E integration in oor ination it oint a ti al et or s an
a ti al Ra io R programs n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to on u t uarterly DAES assessments
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management programs as o umente in t e SE an Ris anagement lan At t e August DAES revie t e i enti ie t ree program level ris s relate to laun ve i le un ing s e ule margin an per orman e
• Performance e program is on tra to meet all seven s an System Attri utes y Full perational apa ility System level e ni al er orman e easures reporte at t e August 8 uarterly rogram Revie are at or a ove t res ol s e lega y payloa meets per orman e
re uirements an t e ne payloa as passe preliminary on or it testing esting it t e user terminal reveale s ort alls in E2E per orman e e program is or ing it its partners to resolve t e integration issues
• Schedule e program omplete a uil Approval DA in Fe ruary 2008 Sin e t en t e irst t o satellites ave laun e A ailure in t ermal va uum testing on spa e ve i le S 3
resulte in a 4 mont eviation to t e A 3r satellite Rea y to S ip milestone e laun se uen e as reor ere an S 4 ill e laun e as t e 3r satellite ere is no anti ipate ost in rease sin e t e satellite elivery is on a i e pri e in entive ee ontra t e program is
on tra to meet t e A 4t an 5t satellite milestones Formal veri i ation o t e D A apa ility slippe 18 mont s en initial on or it testing reveale issues among t e groun
system terminal an ave orm e evelopers are pursuing a ontra tor integration overnment ara teri ation e ort to improve ommuni ations relia ility rates
• Reliability e program as no system level relia ility re uirement e program is meeting its ey re uirement onstellation availa ility
• Software e S program as omplete so t are esign or ot t e spa e an groun segments pen ing potential orre tive a tions arising out o inal system testing
• Manufacturing e S program is mature System esign an manu a turing are omplete or t e irst t ree satellites t o o i are on or it an t e groun system onstru tion an e uipment installation at t ree o t e our groun sites is omplete e
program e e tively tra e a test ailure to a omponent manu a turing e e t i ill elay t e 3r satellite Reor ering t e satellite laun or er ol s t e slip to 4 mont s
• Integration e program i enti ie integration issues a e ting D A lin s uring on or it veri i ation a tivities A ter urt er investigation t e assesse t e all ompletion rate as insu i ient to support urt er veri i ation e orts or ing it t e ontra tor an
R t e program evelope an 18 mont re overy e ort to omplete integration o t e groun system ave orm an t e terminal as ell as time to on u t operational E2E testing
e e orts are urrently on tra to t e plan Conclusion: e S program is te ni ally mature an on tra to meet A t res ol s it t e e eption o 3r satellite rea y to s ip ate i is elaye 4 mont s eyon t e A t res ol E2E D A apa ility remains unavaila le ue to integration issues et een t e groun system ave orm an t e terminal e program is or ing it t e ave orm an terminal programs to inis integration
84 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Next Generation Enterprise Network, Increment 1 (NGEN Inc 1) Prime Contractor: e lett a ar Enterprise Servi es Executive Summary: E n 1 is t e irst in rement o t e a uisition program t at is t e ollo on to t e avy arine orps ntranet ontinuity o Servi es ontra t oS e program on u te a t ir overnment Rea iness Revie
RR an a om ine reliminary Design Revie riti al Design Revie DR DR in FY 2014 e program transitione rom t e S to t e
E ontra t on Septem er 30 Despite elays ause y t e ontra t protest in 2013 t e E n 1 program is on tra to rea Full ransition omplete F y t e en o 1st uarter 2015
Mission and System Description: E n 1 in lu es all servi es provi e y t e urrent provi er as o Septem er 30 2010 an ena les overnment rat er t an ontra tor o ners ip o t e p ysi al in rastru ture overnment omman an ontrol o t e environment an ontinue support o man ate y erse urity a tivities e transition to E oes not re uire any ne evelopment or eliver any ne operational apa ility E n 1 orms t e oun ation or t e Department o t e avy s uture aval et or ing Environment i ill e interopera le it an leverage ot er DoD provi e net entri enterprise servi es e net or provi es servi e to 400 000 es top an laptop omputers or 800 000 avy an arine en users in more t an 2 500 lo ations
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in anuary 2013 to support
S e program plans no up ates to t e SE e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations
• Requirements e ie o aval perations an t e omman ant o t e arine orps ointly approve t e E n 1 D in August 2012 e R aive approval o t e D
e E n 1 System Design Spe i i ation lo 1 n 1 version 3 1 ate ovem er 9 2009 as an e tension rom t e earlier E Re uirements Do ument version 1 5 t at supporte an t e E n 1 D e D as t o s e program ully transitione rom to t e E ontra t as o Septem er 30 2014 e program is meeting or e ee ing t e s
• Life Cycle Management e E program stru ture t e in e inite elivery in e inite uantity ontra t to allo a ustment o servi e level to meet a or a ility re uirements e avy minimi e t e ost o t e program y using a lo est pri e te ni ally a epta le sour e
sele tion to in entivi e lo er ost an en ourage t e ontra tor to re u e manpo er re uirements e avy pur ase overnment urpose Rig ts rom t e in um ent to a ilitate t is an uture ompetitions
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e E n 1 in to er 2014 in on un tion it t e Full ransition De ision e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e
NGEN
Naval Networking Environment(NNE) 2016
ONE-NET
MCEN
Coalition / NGO
CANES
GIG
TacticalSwitchin
g
Excepted Legacy Nets
CENTRIXS
85DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y E 1
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments n FY 2014 t e program on u te t e last o t ree overnment
Rea iness Revie s t at DASD SE assesse in a Fo use Revie e program ele te to on u t a om ine DR DR to re over s e ule rom t e ontra t protest ne DR DR
a tion item remaine open at t e en o FY 2014 servi e provi er elivery o t e te ni al aselines or revie y t e avy e ni al Aut ority o e program manager implemente re ommen ations relate to system se urity engineering
an supply ain ris management Su i ient planning an ris mitigation e orts are in lu e in t e E management an operational pro e ures e E program plans to ontinue it Systems Engineering or ing ntegrate ro u t eams an ot er Systems Engineering e ni al Revie events t roug 4t uarter FY 2015
o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to parti ipate in t e E systems engineering a tivities an t e rogram mplementation Revie
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting to t e ris management pro ess o umente in t e SE an t e E Ris anagement lan an is mitigating ris s in t e te ni al an program management areas
• Performance e E D as t o s an eig t SAs e program is meeting or e ee ing t e s an SAs e ni al per orman e parameters erive rom D re uirements are em e e in ontra t Servi e evel Re uirements S R e servi e provi er is meeting t e S Rs
• Schedule e E A S Annual Report riginal Estimate AR E or De em er 2013 aseline t e program e program is on tra to meet s e ule t res ol s an per orman e
assessments as re le te in t e E AR E E n 1 is a ontinuation o t e servi es previously provi e y t e an ontinuation o Servi es ontra t oS ontra ts e program a ieve nitial perational apa ility an Full perational apa ility F un er t e initial ontra t e program a elerate t e oS to E ontra t transition y 3 mont s to ompensate or t e time lost y t e ontra t protest
• Reliability e net or is operating at or a ove t res ol levels or 2 sustaina ility i esta lis es availa ility re uirements or user aut ori ation an net or availa ility e
net or availa ility is at 99 87 per ent e ee ing t e re uirement • Software E n 1 uses so t are operating on a ommer ial o t e s el S
in ormation te nology in rastru ture ommer ial tra ing an management tools are use or avy omman an ontrol ere is no ne so t are evelopment t roug F
• Deployment e E program uses S e uipment pro ure t roug DoD or Department o t e avy asi r ering Agreements e E n 1 net or as met F re uirements an is ully eploye to meet t e urrent user re uirements
• Integration e primary integration tas is t e transition rom t e ontra tor o ne an operate system to t e E overnment o ne operating mo el e E n 1 program ar ite ture as aseline at t e System eri i ation Revie in ovem er 2011 o ne evelopment is planne until eyon F e servi e provi er plans to omplete elivery o esign o umentation y t e en o 1st uarter FY 2015
Conclusion: e Department o t e avy omplete its transition o seats rom t e oS ontra t to t e E ontra t on Septem er 30 2014 e E program is on tra to a ieve
F in 1st uarter FY 2015
86 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
OHIO Class Submarine Replacement Prime Contractor: eneral Dynami s Ele tri oat Division Executive Summary: e Repla ement program a pre DA ill esign uil an sustain a repla ement or t e lass Fleet allisti issile Su marines SS
i ill retire at t e rate o one per year eginning in 2027 n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in a SD A DA meeting i o use on a or a ility te nology
evelopment engineering integration an ris Mission and System Description: e Repla ement program ill esign an onstru t a repla ement or t e lass SS s e program goals are to provi e an a or a le plat orm apa le o e e uting t e strategi mission ile remaining surviva le t roug 2080 e mission is
strategi eterren e t roug t e integration an eployment o t e R DE D5 E Strategi eapon System S S on a ne su marine lass t at satis ies t e DD attri utes approve y t e ie o aval perations
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in Septem er 2010 to
support S A An up ate is e pe te in FY 2015 to support t e Development RF Release De ision oint e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or
eviations • Requirements e program as a R approve nitial apa ilities Do ument e
approve t e Servi e DD in August 2012 e program plans to su mit an up ate lass Repla ement Su marine DD to t e R in ar 2015 it approval planne in
August 2015 e program as re ine t e re uirements in t e e ni al aturation an Ris Re u tion RR p ase an translate t e re uirements into A SEA ie Engineer SEA05 approve S ip Spe i i ations i ere in orme y ost tra es system on epts
an early stage omponent evelopment e program as re uirements asso iate it surviva ility stealt availa ility servi e li e an a or a ility
• Life Cycle Management e program is using a esign uil an sustain approa to systems engineering ile monitoring perations an Support s oul ost estimates A tivities in lu e esign or a or a ility an re u tion o total o ners ip ost initiatives a or esign initiatives in lu e t e elimination o a mi li e re ueling an t e evelopment o more relia le su systems to in rease operational availa ility et een planne epot maintenan e perio s
• Program Protection Plan (PPP e program is urrently eveloping a an is planning to su mit it to support t e Development RF Release De ision oint revie in FY 2016
Assessment • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE supporte a SD A DA in ovem er 2013
i o use on te nology evelopment engineering integration ris an a or a ility Design or a or a ility esign or supporta ility an s oul ost initiatives are on tra an em e e in all resear an evelopment a tivities
87DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y RE A E E
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
• Risk Assessment e program esta lis e a Ris anagement lan in ar 2009 an ontinues to i enti y tra an mitigate ris s t roug out all a ets o t e program e status o
program level ris s is revie e regularly t ese represent t e most signi i ant ris s to ar a ieving operational re uirements s e ule sustainment or a or a ility goals
• Performance e surviva ility stealt materiel availa ility an S S support s are allenging re uirements t at rive uni ue E s ip esign ara teristi s te nology
evelopment e orts an in rastru ture re uirements e program o i e is eveloping an maturing t e s ip esign e e uting te nology evelopment e orts an e ining a ilities re uire to onstru t an sustain t e Repla ement lass
• Schedule e program is in t e RR p ase an a ieve S A in anuary 2011 e program plans a Development RF Release De ision oint an S e ision revie in FY 2016 e program plans to start lea s ip onstru tion in FY 2021
• Reliability n Septem er 2014 t e avy issue a RA Rationale Report t at provi es t e rationale e in evelopment o Repla ement sustainment re uirements materiel availa ility operational availa ility materiel relia ility an operations an support ost along
it t eir un erlying assumptions an easi ility assessment o a ieving t eir t res ol values e RA Rationale Report supports S in FY 2016 an t e e e utive summary ill e
appen e to t e R DD planne or approval in August 2015 Relia ility lo iagrams an ailure mo e e e ts analyses are eing on u te to support ot on ept an etaile
esign • Software e re osting o S S so t are represents t e largest so t are evelopment e ort in
t e program arti ipating A uisition Resour e anagers AR ill e responsi le or all on ropulsion Ele troni Systems so t are
• Manufacturing e program is applying ompetitive prototyping to esign an uil t e ua pa e missile tu e ua pa an mo ular onstru tion pro ess ill re u e t e onstru tion s e ule an ost ompare it t e lega y lass su marine s ip uil ing
pro esses argeting ost re u tion as t e primary ene it t e program is applying esign ormanu a turing initiatives to re u e tou la or ours asso iate it s ip onstru tion
• Integration a or Area ntegration eams A are responsi le or overar ing te ni al oversig t an integration A s inter a e it a or Area eams to resolve issues it spatial arrangements an integration o ma or s ip su system mo ules System integration is on u te a ross stru tural mo ules an et een systems an su systems rogram E e utive i er Su marines esta lis e responsi ilities an agreements et een t e Repla ement
program an AR s to ensure integration an operation o all non propulsion systems o S S s ore test a ilities are un er onstru tion to mitigate missile laun ris an S S Repla ement integration ris ot a ilities are re uire to ensure t e program a ieves t e S S support
Conclusion: RR p ase engineering an integration esign a tivities o us on surviva ility sustainment S S support re u tion o te ni al ris an program a or a ility initiatives e program is on tra to provi e a mature esign at onstru tion start in FY 2021
88 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
P-8A Poseidon Prime Contractor: oeing De ense Spa e Se urity Executive Summary: e 8A osei on is an A A D program repla ing t e avy s 3 rion
e 8A is prin ipally an anti su marine ar are AS an anti sur a e ar are ASu plat orm
provi ing intelligen e surveillan e an re onnaissan e SR as a mem er o t e aritime
atrol an Re onnaissan e For e RF amily o systems n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in several rogram anagement Revie s to tra systems engineering e orts e program resolve riti al e i ien ies ena ling an FR e ision t o operational s ua ron eployments an a 2 mont early nitial perational apa ility n 2015 n rement n 2 apa ilities ill egin iel ing along it prototype evelopment o t e n 3 open ar ite ture
Mission and System Description: e 8A is a military variant o t e oeing 737 800 on iguration it t e a ition o uni ue 8A stru tures an systems e primary roles o t e 8A are persistent arme AS an ASu an to serve as an SR air ra t apa le o roa area
maritime an littoral operations e 8A program evolutionary systems approa aligns in remental a uisition an evelopment strategies it re uirements n 2 a tivities provi ing improvements su as i e area AS sear an ig altitu e AS eapon apa ilities are un er
ay an ill integrate mature te nologies via multiple Engineering ange roposals E n 3 ill eliver en an e net entri apa ilities su as a net ena le eapon via a ne open
ar ite ture e 8A is a mem er o t e RF amily o systems i in lu es t e 4 riton t e E 3 an t e a ti al perations enter
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in to er 2013 in support o
t e anuary 2014 FR e ision e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations
• Requirements e R vali ate t e 8A D or n 1 in une 2009 an vali ate apa ilities or n rements 2 an 3 in a une 2010 DD e 8A program as seven sta le
s emonstrate in t e 2014 Follo on perational est an Evaluation F E • Life Cycle Management e program ontinues to e pan its overnment urnis e
e uipment FE strategy to re u e ven or pass t roug osts ena ling a ievement o elot res ol aseline ost pro urement e program initiate evelopment o Anti amper lan templates or potential uture Foreign ilitary Sales in support o a De ense E porta ility Features pilot program ese templates ill re u e t e time an e pense re uire to reate ountry spe i i eatures an ill ontri ute to ommonality
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in ovem er 2013 in support o t e FR e ision e program is implementing measures to prote t riti al program in ormation an mitigate supply ain ris s e program ontinues to re ine its riti ality analysis in or er to ete t an mitigate any system vulnera ilities
89DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y 8A SE D
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE i not per orm any ormal assessments o t e program
in FY 2014 DASD SE i parti ipate in rogram anagement Revie s an on u te uarterly DAES assessments in t e areas o s e ule per orman e management
interopera ility an pro u tion o Systems an so t are engineering e orts ena le orre tions to most e i ien ies i enti ie
uring t e 2013 E System per orman e improve in SR sensor integration an imagery intelligen e issemination e program ontinues to or to improve per orman e o Ele troni Support easures an Synt eti Aperture Ra ar su systems
o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to parti ipate in n 3 systems engineering revie s as t e program initiates prototype evelopment o t e appli ations ase ar ite ture
• Risk Assessment e program ontinues to implement ris management pro esses in a or an e it t e up ate SE an t e to er 2009 Ris ssue an pportunity lan e program is or ing to mitigate supplier iminis e manu a turing sour e an a ousti s so t are evelopment ris s
• Performance e system is e ee ing leet e pe tations an ontinues to meet all seven s an t ree SAs e program met all o its e ni al er orman e easures it t e e eption o rea y alert status i is appro imately 25 se on s over its 1 our re uirement
• Schedule e program a ieve in ovem er 2013 a ea o its anuary 2014 t res ol ate e SD A approve an FR e ision in anuary 2014 e program as no met
all s e ule A t res ol s n 2 E a tivities are on s e ule or it in mont s o plan • Reliability e program ontinues to meet esta lis e relia ility re uirements emonstrating
more t an 250 per ent o its logisti s relia ility re uirement uring t e 2014 F E So t are i es an in rease sta ility ena le t e system to emonstrate improve mission relia ility
a ieving more t an 130 per ent o t e re uirement uring F E • Software e program retaine a su i ient num er o evelopment so t are engineers to i
so t are e e ts a e ting n 1 per orman e e urrent leet aseline so t are in support o t e a ieve ontains arpoon un tionality an orre tions to E e i ien ies As t e so t are as mature t e resolution o so t are e e ts an resulting in rease sta ility ontri ute to in rease so t are maturity relia ility an availa ility e so t are to
implement early ulti Stati A tive o erent A apa ility is on tra or in lusion in t e ne t so t are release no s e ule or 1st uarter FY 2015
• Manufacturing e program ontinues to eliver R air ra t on s e ule an is on tra to a ieve FR rates uality ontinues to improve as non on orman e reports oun uring t e most re ent si air ra t a eptan e inspe tions ave e rease 26 per ent rom t e irst 10 air ra t elivere S rap re or an repair osts also e rease 26 per ent
• Integration e program omplete t e integration o t e arpoon missile apa ility in 2014 n 2 e orts to integrate an eploy A roa area sear apa ilities in 2015 are on tra
e program inten s to a ar a ontra t in 2015 to egin integration o t e ig altitu e AS eapon apa ility as part o n 2 e orts Si teen o 17 erti i ations are omplete it t e inal
erti i ation e pe te in early 2015 Conclusion: Rigorous appli ations o systems engineering pra ti es ena le resolution o riti al
e i ien ies an FR e ision t o operational s ua ron eployments an a 2 mont early e program is on tra to egin elivery o n 2 apa ilities an to egin n 3 appli ations ase
ar ite ture prototype evelopment in 2015
90 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Remote Minehunting System (RMS) Prime Contractor: o ee artin n ersea Systems Executive Summary: e R S onsists o a semisu mersi le Remote ulti ission e i le R to ing an A A S 20A varia le ept sonar DS to
ete t lassi y lo ali e an i enti y mines in s allo an eep ater e R program A A D is in t e Engineering an anu a turing Development p ase o using on R relia ility improvements e
A A S 20A DS program A A is in t e pro u tion p ase an is o using on preplanne pro u tion improvement DASD SE assesse t e program s rea iness or S veri ie t e e ni al Data a age D an on u te a ysi al
on iguration Au it A e program is on tra to pro ee to R Mission and System Description: e R S is a ey omponent o t e ittoral om at S ip s
S ine ountermeasures ission a age t ena les S to prose ute a mine iel ile eeping S an t e sailor at a sa e stan o istan e e R S integrates t e R an
t e A A S 20A DS e R is an unmanne autonomous semi su mersi le ig en uran e lo visi ility system t at ill e operate an maintaine rom S e R to s t e A A S 20A mine unting sonar system or ete tion lassi i ation an lo ali ation o mineli e onta ts an i enti i ation o ottom mines e R provi es propulsion ele tri al po er ommuni ations an navigation or itsel an t e DS S ill on u t ata pro essing isplay
an re or ing an ill ommuni ate ta ti al mine re onnaissan e ata to ot er aval or es Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in ar 2014 e program
is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e SE supports S s e ule or FY 2015
• Requirements e R approve t e D in ar 2014 rogram re uirements are reasona le an sta le an orm t e asis o t e D inten e or t e pro urement o uture ve i les
• Life Cycle Management e SE es ri es t e sustainment s an t eir integration into t e esign pro ess e program as implemente esign anges to re u e li e y le osts y improving relia ility an maintaina ility mitigating o soles en e an esta lis ing uil sustain pro ess ontrols
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program evelope a ra t to support S DASD SE revie e t e ra t an provi e omments
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE veri ie t e D an A e D an A
a urately represente t e system it all esign anges i enti ie DASD SE on irme t e R S program inali e ot t e D an A prior to RF release or R v6 0 o DASD SE monitore t e relia ility gro t program t roug R v4 2 i e ee e
its minimum mean time et een operational mission ailures F re uirements
91DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y R S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
emonstrate uring ontra tor o s ore testing e program is implementing esign mo i i ations an improvements to t e e isting 10 ve i les to ring all on igurations up to R v6 0
o n FY 2015 DASD SE ill assess t e R S program to i enti y ris s an in orm t e SD A o t e program s rea iness or S
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management plan in a or an e it t e SE urrent program ris s in lu e R S operational availa ility long s ope re a uire an or lo ali ation to a le orrosion an integration it S Sea rame an ission o ules e
is a ressing an mitigating ris s • Performance e R v6 0 te ni al improvements along it t e A A S 20A
preplanne pro u t improvement put R S on tra to a ieving all seven s an t ree SAs y E in FY 2015 e A A S 20A preplanne pro u t improvement ill repla e t e or ar loo an si e loo sonar arrays to improve eep volume mine ete tion an image lassi i ation to a ieve t e sustaine area overage rate
• Schedule e omplete t e relia ility gro t program it R v4 2 e program omplete esign mo i i ations an improvements to t e D or implementation in R
v6 0 in FY 2014 e program release t e RF or 10 R 2 ve i les i in lu es t e v6 0 D in August 2014 R S is on tra to meet S planne or FY 2015 E planne in
FY 2015 ill use t e R S on igure it t e R v6 0 an t e A A S 20A preplanne pro u t improvement to e sensor pro u t aseline esign
• Reliability e program is on tra to meet its relia ility re uirements R v4 2 e ee e t e re uire 75 ours F uring o s ore operations e measure relia ility is su i ient or t e program to enter evelopment test an operational test on t e S
• Software e R so t are e e utes ve i le ontrol to e sonar ata pro essing alert generation DS ontrol mission tra e e ution an ata ommuni ation to S e an ontra tor veri ie t ese un tions e S ission a age Appli ation So t are provi es s ip oar ontrol pro essing an isplay an is integrate as a un tional segment o t e S ission a age omputing Environment e so t are evelopment is on tra omplete
• Manufacturing e program o i e i enti ie root auses o manu a turing e i ien ies at t e ontra tor s a ility suggesting anges in t e aseline esign an improvements in pro ess an uality ontrol at t e ontra tor s a ility e program in orporate t ese lessons learne into
per orman e ase spe i i ations an t e D or t e ompetitive pro urement o R 2 ve i les a ter S e 10 e isting R 1 ve i les ill e upgra e to t e v6 0 aseline esign
• Integration e program as re u e s ip oar integration ris s et een t e R S S ission o ules an ot S variants in t e aun an ling an Re overy System an in
s ip ra t ommuni ations e program is on tra to resolve integration issues prior to eployment o t e ission a age
Conclusion: e R S program improve ve i le per orman e an relia ility an is on tra to omplete S an pro ee to R 2 R pro u tion
92 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Ship-to-Shore Connector Amphibious Craft (SSC)
Prime Contractor: e tron Systems Executive Summary: e SS is a avy A A mo i ie repla ement or t e aging an ing ra t Air us ion A an ill operate rom amp i ious assault s ips to transport oint or es engage in operational maneuvers rom t e sea
F S SS provi es t e apa ility to transport eavy e uipment an om at rea y personnel over
lan ater ea sur ones mu an i e e program is in t e Engineering an anu a turing
Development p ase DASD SE parti ipate in su system esign revie s so t are esign revie s ar are esign revie s an t e ra t system riti al Design Revie DR to assess esign
maturity an ris e program is on tra to egin a ri ation a tivities in FY 2015 Mission and System Description: e SS ill provi e t e transport o oint or es engage in
F S SS provi es t e a ility or t e trans er o om at rea y personnel tra e an eele ve i les eavy e uipment an supplies to austere littoral a ess points as ore in various s enarios an environmental on itions e SS is t e un tional repla ement it ommonality to t e e isting A it note a van es in per orman e argo apa ity li t automation relia ility an maintaina ility e ra t is ompose o an aluminum ull stru ture an a le i le s irt surroun ing t e ottom o t e ra t it is riven y our gas tur ine engines
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SS SE in une 2012 e
program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e e tron Systems Engineering anagement lan aligns it t e program SE to gui e t e ontra tor s
evelopmental e orts syn roni e it t e a tivities an onsistent it avy systems engineering te ni al revie riteria
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in une 2010 e DD re uirements are reasona le an sta le e SS program as eig t s in lu ing t ose a ressing materiel availa ility payloa apa ity interopera ility it amp i ious an ell e s ips an inlan a essi ility e prime ontra tor is using a re uirements management tool to tra e all re uirements rom t e DD to t e system spe i i ation an into in ivi ual pro u t spe i i ations
• Life Cycle Management e is a ressing total o ners ip ost re u tions t roug ra t eig t management an maintenan e esign onsi erations e ontra tor as maintaine ra t
payloa an esign margins ile inali ing t e engineering esign Relia ility entere maintenan e as in luen e t e planne perio i ity o maintenan e an ease o a ess or su system an omponent maintenan e a tions
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in anuary 2012 e program is preparing an up ate or Servi e approval to support t e S revie in FY 2015
93DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y SS
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in su system esign revie s so t are an
ar are esign revie s an t e ra t system DR to assess esign maturity an ris SS evelopment is tra ing it t e program SE an A DASD SE assesse t e omman ontrol ommuni ations omputers an avigation 4 evelopment an etermine t at
t e su ontra tor ollo e its is ipline orporate pro esses i on orme to an e ee e t e program SE re uirements e su ontra tor use e ni al er orman e easures in e ining t e 4 ar ite ture t e allo ation o re uirements et een ar are an so t are an t e un er ay so t are generation veri i ation e orts DASD SE assesse t at t e ra t system DR as on u te in a or an e it t e SE an i enti ie t e a ility o t e esign to meet t e re uirements e DR a resse several esign anges t at re uire ompletion
e ore t e esign is rea y or manu a turing • Risk Management e program is e e uting a Ris anagement lan t at is integrate it
t e ontra tor s ris management pro ess to i enti y tra an mitigate ris Ris mitigation e orts or rivetrain integration main engine evelopment an 4 ontrol system
evelopment ontinue to re u e t e impa t o t e ris s • Performance ra t esign is e pe te to meet t e eig t s eig t SAs an s
i enti ie in t e SE e program reate a prototype o t e omman o ule layout onsole isplay s reens an ntegrate Flig t ontrol inter a es an su e te t e prototype to revie y
e perien e operators is revie resulte in anges to etter support ar ig ting on itions • Schedule e program a ieve S in une 2012 an S is s e ule or FY 2015 e
S replan in De em er 2013 provi e more realisti a tivity start ates an urations to allo t e program to e e tively manage or progress an avoi slipping t e irst ra t elivery ate
• Reliability e program is ollo ing a p ase ra t level relia ility gro t strategy System level relia ility emonstrations ill egin a ter elivery o t e irst ra t in FY 2017
e program ill use a lose loop FRA AS ailure reporting analysis an orre tive a tion system to o ument ailures an to etermine t e orre tive a tions
• Software e ma ority o so t are evelopment an integration is asso iate it t e 4 su system At t e 4 System DR t e program presente t e inal system ar ite ture re uirements allo ation et een ar are an so t are system sa ety analysis an uman system integration e so t are uil plan prioriti es evelopment omple ity an provi es t ree releases to support ra t integration an ris re u tion a tivities e e ine an is using so t are metri s to tra t e so t are evelopment e ort
• Manufacturing e ontra tor is on tra to omplete esign pro u ts in time or a ri ation o t e irst ra t an is mapping t e ra ing releases to etaile or pa ages an tooling re uirements e manu a turer as esta lis e ne pro u tion initiatives esigne to re u e onstru tion man ours y 3 per ent t roug pro u t mo el improvements ne a ri ation
te ni ues an automate assem ly pro esses promoting ra t uality • Integration e program is on tra to emonstrate in remental assem ly an veri i ation
uring t e a ri ation pro ess e program s System ntegration a provi es an environment or 4 ar are an so t are integration veri i ation e ore elivery to t e pro u tion line
So t are integration or uil 1 is un er ay an on s e ule
Conclusion: e SS program is e e uting to plan an is on tra to omplete etaile esign an egin ra t a ri ation in FY 2015
94 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) Prime Contractor: o e etermine Executive Summary: e ASS system ill provi e a
arrier ase persistent surveillan e an stri e apa ility e program is a pre DA prospe tive A A D an
a ieve a ateriel Development De ision DD in August 2011 e program omplete our preliminary esign ontra ts to in orm a limite ompetition ollo on ontra t to eliver t e air ve i le esign integration assem ly test an erti i ation veri i ation e overnment ill a t as t e lea
system integrator n FY 2014 DASD SE on u te reliminary Design Revie DR assessments or ea o our ontra tors DRs o t e Air e i le or t e Air Segment AS e DR assessments i enti ie ris s some o i ere ommon to all our
esigns an o umente t e li eli oo o ea ontra tor s esign to a ieve t e user e ine re uirements Mission and System Description: e ASS system is a arrier ase nmanne Air System
AS provi ing t e attle roup a persistent intelligen e surveillan e re onnaissan e SR targeting an limite stri e apa ility e system onsists o t ree segments t e AS t e Segment an t e ontrol System an onne tivity S Segment e program plans to in rease apa ility in rementally e a uisition approa o uses on provi ing a apa le unmanne SR Early perational apa ility E ile esta lis ing a te ni al an programmati oun ation to ena le apa ility gro t in lu ing surviva ility payloa s an re ueling
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) e program as a ra t SE i ill e approve to
support t e ne t S e ision e ra t SE ontains e ni al er orman e easures te ni al revie re uirements an as provi e to t e DR ontra tors as part o t e RF o
aivers or eviations are e pe te • Requirements e R approve t e nitial apa ilities Do ument in une 2011 an t e
avy approve a DD in anuary 2013 e program e ompose t e re uirements an provisions or apa ility gro t to an operational Air Segment er orman e Spe i i ation AS S an provi e t e spe i i ation to our ontra tors or t eir use in DRs e AS S as
mo i ie a ter its initial release to lari y re uirements A inal AS S to re le t t e approve set o program re uirements ill e in lu e in t e AS evelopment RF
• Life Cycle Management e De em er 2012 R emoran um emp asi e a or a ility as t e priority or t e program e DD esta lis e an a or a ility in i t e re urring ly a ay ost o t e air ve i les to on u t one 600 nauti al mile or it s all not e ee 150
million • Program Protection Plan (PPP) e is in evelopment e ill e su mitte or
approval to support t e ne t S e ision ey elements o system prote tion re uirements ere evaluate at t e te ni al revie s uring t e DR ontra ts
95DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y ASS
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te our DR assessments or t e AS esigns an
provi e input to t e program e nology Development Strategy to improve t e level o te ni al rigor an ris analysis to e omplete uring program evelopment DASD SE parti ipate in our ontra tor System Re uirements Revie s SRR 27 su system DRs an t e our AS system level DRs o e assessments on lu e t e ontra tor DRs ere omplete an not a reviate en
ompare it DRs on u te or ot er DA s onsistent it t e poli ies spe i ie in DoD 5000 02 Ris s ommon to ea esign ere i enti ie an t e li eli oo or t e AS to meet t e AS S re uirements as assesse
o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to support t e S e ision an DRs or t e AS an S segments DASD SE ill assess t e ris asso iate it any a itional or ne apa ility re uirements
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management pro ess in a or an e it its approve Ris anagement lan e program s initial ris assessment is ase on mar et resear in ustry input an lessons learne rom similar programs e program is mitigating ris in t e areas o system o systems integration t e oint re ision Approa an an ing System A S iel ing s e ule ommon ontrol Station evelopment s e ule an t e a ility to meet t e system re uirements it in t e u get Ris s i enti ie in t e AS DRs ill
e reevaluate or ea proposal or t e planne ollo on evelopment o t e AS • Performance e avy approve DD as si s an si SAs t at elineate total system
AS S per orman e e ra t SE as a set o s to i ea DR ontra tor may propose mo i i ations e program ill approve a inal set o s to monitor
te ni al per orman e to plan re i te an or emonstrate AS per orman e as evaluate an reporte in t e DR assessments
• Schedule e program omplete our ontra tor DRs in une 2014 e R re uirement to eliver a eploye apa ility in 4 to 5 years allo s or little or no margin or ne evelopment or signi i ant anges to e isting esigns AS s e ule ris is reporte in t e DR assessment
e uture s e ule ill e approve at t e ne t program S DA • Reliability e program use istori al an pre i tive relia ility an maintaina ility metri s to
in orm an estimate time on station mo el t at pre i ts per orman e o t e persisten e A set o relia ility re uirements ee t is mo el an are in lu e in t e AS S e avy approve
DD an ra t SE in lu e a itional suita ility relate relia ility re uirements an s • Software e t ree system segments ill leverage e isting so t are an also ill re uire ne
so t are evelopment So t are algorit ms rom t e AS D program ill e availa le to all ontra tors So t are evelopment ris is ontra tor epen ent an as assesse uring t e DRs ut all our ontra tors ere assesse as aving so t are s e ule ris
• Manufacturing e program assesse t e potential ontra tors as apa le o pro u ing t e air ve i le ase on t eir e perien e manu a turing iel e unmanne systems e program ill
ra on in ustrial apa ility rom ongoing DoD an ontra tor e orts • Integration e program must integrate t e t ree ma or segments an relies on more t an 20
in servi e eploye systems e program evelope nter a e Re uirements Spe i i ations et een t e air ra t an t e segments programs using an approve DoD Ar ite tural
Frame or ultiple ntegrate ro u t eams ill oor inate in ormation e ange re uirements an manage t e integration a tivities a ross t e AS an S segments
Conclusion: e ASS program omplete te ni al evaluation o our ontra tor preliminary
esigns e DR assessments i enti ie ris s some o i ere ommon to all our esigns an o umente t e li eli oo o ea ontra tor s esign to a ieve t e user e ine re uirements
96 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
VH-92A Presidential Helicopter Fleet Replacement Prime Contractor: Si ors y Air ra t orporation Executive Summary: 92A ormerly
ill provi e presi ential an e e utive level transport repla ing t e lega y leet o e e utive li t
eli opters e A A D program initiate t e Engineering an anu a turing Development p ase it a S in April 2014 e 92A program ill mo i y an in pro u tion Si ors y S92A air ra t an integrate a overnment e ine
ission ommuni ation System S DASD SE parti ipate in t e S riti al Design Revie DR an t e program System Re uirements Revie SRR among ot ers e program is on tra to omplete t e reliminary Design Revie DR in 4t uarter FY 2015 an as esta lis e a strong overnment in ustry team it an event ase evelopment p ilosop y Mission and System Description: e 92A mission is to transport t e resi ent i e
resi ent visiting ea s o state an ot er parties as ire te y t e ite ouse ilitary i e A single type mo el series air ra t ill repla e t e urrent om ination o 3D an 60 air ra t Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e 92A SE in Fe ruary 2013
e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e SE ontains a ro ust set o e ni al er orman e easures t e program ill use to tra
te ni al per orman e to plan t roug out system evelopment an integration • Requirements e R approve t e DD in anuary 2013 e avy revise t e DD
using lessons learne rom t e 71 to inali e an a or a le set o system re uirements A senior level a visory oar meets regularly to mitigate re uirements anges uring t e
evelopment pro ess e ontra tor is eveloping a er orman e ase Spe i i ation Design Des ription to meet t e overnment er orman e ase Spe i i ation i is tra e to t e DD
• Life Cycle Management e program is pursuing a est value approa an as presente a or a ility targets t at emonstrate signi i antly lo er pro urement an li e y le osts ompare it t e 71 e program inten s to a ieve t e lo er osts y leveraging t e ommer ial e e utive eli opter mar et an in servi e upgra es su as rypto mo erni ation
an analog ommuni ations improvements osts ere re u e y on u ting overnmente ine mission system evelopment an asso iate ris re u tion a tivities in a van e o t e
air ra t soli itation • Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in Fe ruary 2014 to support
S e program ill up ate t e it in 180 ays o ompleting t e DR to re le t plat orm spe i i an asso iate su system esign etails
97DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A Y 92A
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in t e S DR SD A preparations
or t e S e ision an t e program SRR o e SRR soli i ie overnment ontra tor roles an responsi ilities esta lis e goo
or ing relations ips an vali ate t e system re uirements e SRR team i enti ie a ris in t e area o maintaining t e Fe eral Aviation A ministration FAA air ort iness erti i ation t roug out t e integration pro ess
o n FY 2015 DASD SE ill parti ipate in t e program s System Fun tional Revie SFR an t e program DR DASD SE ill revie t e S e ule Ris Assessment rom t e ntegrate aseline Revie an ill on u t regular SE or ing ntegrate ro u t eam
meetings • Risk Assessment e program is e e uting t e ris management planning o umente in t e
approve SE e program is mitigating ris s in t e areas o su system integration air ort iness erti i ation ommer ial o t e s el e uipment supporta ility an eig t
management e program ill ontinue to re ine its ris mitigation strategies as it progresses t roug SFR an DR
• Performance e program as 10 s 29 SAs an 29 s e ontra tor is pro e ting to meet all system re uirements e pro urement o a mature in pro u tion air ra t provi es a
aseline or per orman e estimates A tual per orman e ill e measure an vali ate against 92A spe i i integration an esign mo i i ations t roug out t e te ni al revie pro ess
• Schedule e program omplete a S DA in April 2014 an a ar e a ontra t to Si ors y Air ra t in ay 2014 e program s e ule is reasona le an in lu es all appli a le te ni al revie s e program on u te an SRR in August 2014 an is on tra to omplete t e ne t A milestone a DR in FY 2015
• Reliability e program use t e mission s enarios in t e RA Rationale Report to etermine t e system relia ility re uirements an t e leet si e re uirements System relia ility
is eavily epen ent on t e S 92A aseline relia ility i e ee s esta lis e system level relia ility t res ol s e program ill not ma e esign anges to t e aseline air ra t su systems or relia ility gro t e ept or integration o t e ne su systems anges to t e system to gro relia ility ill e limite to t e ne or mo i ie su systems an omponents
• Software e SE e ines so t are ar ite ture priorities a resses inter a e ontrol re uirements an i enti ies appropriate metri s su as re uirements sta ility lines o o e memory usage an pro essor t roug put t at t e program ill use to manage so t are
evelopment e overnment S team is eveloping t e ma ority o t e so t are e S as 4 1 million estimate so t are lines o o e
• Manufacturing e ontra tor as an esta lis e air ra t pro u tion line an a mature supply ain elivering more t an 200 S 92A air ra t to ustomers orl i e
• Integration e program is using ell esta lis e pro esses to manage t e interrelations ips epen en ies an syn roni ation it omplementary systems it in t e e isting presi ential
transportation environment e program is managing ris asso iate it t e integration o overnment evelope systems ile maintaining t e FAA erti i ation
Conclusion: e program is on tra to omplete DR in 4t uarter FY 2015 an as esta lis e a strong overnment in ustry team it an event ase evelopment p ilosop y
98 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
4.3 DASD(SE) Assessments of Air Force Programs
Assessments are as o 4t uarter FY 2014 is se tion in lu es summaries on t e ollo ing 15 programs
• A van e E tremely ig Fre uen y AE F
• Air an Spa e perations enter eapon System n rement 10 2 A S n 10 2
• 2 De ensive anagement System o erni ation 2 D S
• 61 ail it Assem ly 61 A
• En an e olar System E S
• F 22A n rement 3 2 o erni ation F 22A n 3 2 o
• lo al ositioning System S Enterprise
• 60 om at Res ue eli opter
• ntegrate Strategi lanning an Analysis et or n rement 4 S A n 4
• oint Air to Sur a e Stan o issile E ten e Range ASS ER
• oint Spa e perations enter Sp ission System S
• 46 Aerial Re ueling an er 46A
• R 4 lo al a nmanne Air ra t System AS
• Small Diameter om n rement SD
• ree Dimensional E pe itionary ong Range Ra ar 3DE RR
99DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
is page intentionally lan
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) Prime Contractor: o ee artin Spa e Systems Executive Summary: AE F is an A A D oint servi e satellite ommuni ations system t at provi es glo al surviva le se ure prote te an am resistant ommuni ations or igpriority military groun sea an air assets AE F as een in FR sin e ay 2012 n FY 2013 t e AE F program su mitte a rogram Deviation Report i enti ying an nitial perational
apa ility s e ule rea ause y ission ontrol Segment S so t are elays n response SD re ommen e t e program omplete a So t are Fo use Revie SFR e ore approval o an up ate A e Assistant Se retary o De ense or A uisition aire t e SFR in FY 2014 e AE F program s o e it su ess ully i enti ie an mitigate t e root auses o t e elays an emonstrate on i en e in a ieving t e ate in t e up ate A SD A approve t e ne A in
FY 2014 an t e program is on tra to meet t e ate as ell as t e laun ates or AE F 5 an AE F 6 Mission and System Description: AE F s se ure surviva le ig ata rate ommuni ations allo t e ational Se urity oun il an om atant omman ers to ontrol t eir ta ti al an strategi or es at all levels o on li t AE F provi es riti al voi e an ata ommuni ations prote te against amming inter eption ete tion natural an nu lear e e ts at lo me ium e ten e ata rates su stantially in rease overage opportunities an more le i le planning options e AE F program as t ree international partners ana a t e et erlan s an t e
nite ing om AE F onsists o t ree segments t e Spa e Segment t e ission ontrol Segment an t e erminal Segment e Spa e Segment is ompose o t e AE F satellites e
ission ontrol Segment operates an ontrols an integrate onstellation o ilstar an AE F satellites an in lu es mission operations as ell as planning testing training an support elements
e erminal Segment in lu es groun i e groun mo ile man porta le transporta le air orne su marine an s ip orne on igurations Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) AE F is in ro u tion an Deployment an ontinues to
use t e SE ritten to support t e uil an perations p ases as approve y t e Air For e Servi e A uisition E e utive in uly 2009 e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE
it out aivers or eviations e Spa e an issile Systems enter S re uires annual revie s o SE s an or ar s any ma or up ates to SD or a itional revie an or approval
y DASD SE • Requirements e R approve t e AE F perational Re uirements Do ument in
to er 2000 AE F is in ro u tion an Deployment an its re uirements are sta le • Life Cycle Management AE F as implemente lo uy e isions to re u e in ivi ual
satellite osts an as provi e international partners it a ess to prote te ommuni ations resour es in e ange or inan ial parti ipation in program evelopment e S ill re uire uture so t are up ates or ontinue ontra tor support to orre t or ompensate or i enti ie e i ien ies prior to e laration o Full perational apa ility F
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program as an approve ate to er 6 2004
101DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E AE F
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in an SFR on t e AE F S so t are in
ar 2014 to ensure t e program oul e a le to a ieve t e re ommen e ate e ore SD A approve t e up ate A e SFR te ni al analyses an en mar ing o istori al in ormation vali ate t e revise A ate an resulte in approval o t e up ate
A AE F as maintaine t e ne s e ule an is on tra to e lare in a van e o t e A ate o De em er 2015 e AE F SFR i enti ie S operational e i ien ies t at ill re uire e tensive or aroun s an ontra tor support to esta lis an maintain
AE F ill nee to orre t t ese e i ien ies e ore e laration o F e SFR re ommen e an AE F agree to e ine t e re uirements an t e s e ule o events lea ing to F
• Risk Assessment e program o i e is e e uting t e ntegrate Ris anagement program as o umente in t e SE AE F lose its S so t are ris it t e on time start o ulti
Servi e perational est an Evaluation E o S n rement 7 n 7 an is on tra to omplete testing in time to e lare on or e ore t e De em er 2015A t res ol ate
• Performance AE F program veri ie t e system ill meet all ive s t roug re uirement sell o an t e su ess ul laun an operations o AE F 1 an 2 e evaluation o system per orman e uring E testing in FY 2014 2015 ill support S n 7 operational a eptan e an t e AE F system e laration in Y 2015
• Schedule n FY 2013 AE F su mitte a rogram Deviation Report i enti ying an s e ule rea ause y elays to t e evelopment o t e S so t are SD A approve t e up ate program A in FY 2014 a ter an SFR s o e t e program a i enti ie an mitigate t e auses o t e elays AE F is urrently on s e ule to e lare 6 mont s prior to t e ne A ate o De em er 2015 AE F 4 6 are urrently on s e ule to meet t eir FY 2017 FY 2018 an FY 2019 laun ates
• Reliability AE F is e e uting its relia ility an maintaina ility programs as o umente in t e SE A tual measure mission relia ility e ee s t e 97 per ent t res ol
• Software ast issues it t e evelopment o t e ission lanning Element E portion o t e AE F S n 5 so t are om ine it t e la o a lear mission planning operational on ept le AE F to move t e E so t are to n 7 ere it ontinue to ause elays an
eventually triggere a s e ule rea SD revie e t e su se uent rogram Deviation Report approve AE F s re overy plan an ire te an SFR e ore approval o a ne A DASD SE parti ipate in t e SFR in ar 2014 e ni al analyses an en mar ing o
istori al in ormation vali ate t e revise A ate an resulte in SD A approval o t e up ate A S ill re uire a itional so t are evelopment to mitigate operational
or aroun s an or ontra tor support prior to F ut AE F as not ully e ine t is e ort yet
• Manufacturing Deliveries o AE F 4 6 are urrently on s e ule to meet t eir FY 2017 FY 2018 an FY 2019 laun ates
• Integration AE F provi es or t e planning an operations un tionality or t e lega y ilstar system an is a ar ompati le it ilstar satellite rosslin s an ilstar terminals All t ree international partners ave signe memoran a o un erstan ing allo ating prote te ommuni ations resour es in e ange or inan ial parti ipation in program evelopment an
allo ing or Foreign ilitary Sales o international partner variants o AE F terminals Conclusion: e AE F program is on tra to a ieve on or e ore t e De em er 2015 ate
e ine in t e A AE F 4 6 are urrently on s e ule to meet t eir FY 2017 FY 2018 an FY 2019 laun ates respe tively
102 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Air and Space Operations Center–Weapon System, Increment 10.2 (AOC-WS Inc 10.2)
Prime Contractor: ort rop rumman n ormation Systems omman an ontrol Division Executive Summary: A S n 10 2 ill integrate more t an 40 t ir party mission appli ations into a netentri stru ture automating mission pro esses t roug
a single user inter a e e A A A program initiate Engineering an anu a turing Development E D a tivities in to er 2013 an omplete riti al Design Revie DR on s e ule in ar
2014 roug a DR assessment DASD SE assesse t e program is eveloping a via le ris mitigation approa an is rea y to omplete so t are evelopment an integration in preparation or system veri i ation Mission and System Description: A S is t e om ine an oint For e Air omponent
omman er s eapon system or planning e e uting an assessing t eater i e air operations A S n 10 2 esta lis es a ommon servi e oriente an stan ar s ase in rastru ture to integrate mission systems an servi es evelope y t ir party apa ility provi ers outsi e o t e A S program A S n 10 2 in rastru ture employs t e iel e A S n 10 1 ar are virtuali e appli ations an t in servers lients t ena les a ommon user inter a e
provi es mo ular appli ations it stan ar inter a es s are ata to support agile integration an rapi iel ing o uture apa ilities an in reases spee o omman Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in August 2013 in support o
S an ire te t e program to esta lis system per orman e measures not later t an 60 ays e ore DR n anuary 2014 t e program su mitte a revise e ni al er orman e easure
ta le it an a itional measuring t e time to per orm t e Fi ra arget pro ess e program is not ully implementing its relia ility an maintaina ility program as o umente in
t e approve SE la ing e ine riti al ailures an veri ia le relia ility values to ore ast system relia ility e program ill up ate t e SE in FY 2015 in support o S
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in to er 2006 an approve an up ate in De em er 2009 e re uirements are tra ea le t roug t e e ni al Re uirements Do ument an Release Spe i i ation to 45 su system esign o uments e program re u e re uirements an te ni al ris y in orporating user ee a uring t e e nology Development an E D p ases via mont ly emonstrations an ar ig ter assessments at t e on lusion o ea so t are uil
• Life Cycle Management e program su ess ully re u e ill ost estimates t roug eig t s oul ost initiatives saving FY 2014 3 4 million y eveloping alternative eployment options an using t e n 10 2 part tas trainer or n 10 2 training e program as i enti ie re u tion o total o ners ip ost R as a SA e ontra tor presente a met o ology at t e DR to a ress total o ners ip ost an re ommen e t e program o us on t o main ost rivers operations personnel an so t are li ensing
103DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E A S 10 2
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in anuary 2014 in support o S an t e program ill up ate t e in preparation or FY 2016 S
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te a DR assessment uring FY 2014 to support
FY 2016 S an etermine t e program is eveloping a via le ris mitigation approa an is rea y to omplete so t are evelopment an integration in preparation or system veri i ation DASD SE i enti ie ris s pertaining to an insu i iently e ine mission t rea automation
aseline per orman e measurement n ormation Assuran e erti i ation relia ility an maintaina ility an so t are e e t management e program a opte re ommen ations to
o ument re u e automation it t e user i enti y a itional per orman e measures lassi y riti al ailures an orrespon ing s oring riteria minimi e erti i ation e i ien ies an
rein or e so t are e e t management • Risk Assessment e program is e e uting ris management planning as o umente in t e
SE an is or ing to mitigate ris s asso iate it per orman e measurement n ormation Assuran e erti i ation relia ility an maintaina ility an so t are e e t management
• Performance e program is on tra to meet all our s an t o SAs y t e FY 2016 Full Deployment De ision FDD e program la s su i ient per orman e measures to assess system per orman e to plan e ore veri i ation
• Schedule e program omplete DR in ar 2014 an elaye its S y 4 mont s to ovem er 2015 ue to elaye a ievement o nterim Aut ority to est A an ine e tive
so t are e e t management progress DASD SE analysis at DR pre i te t e ontra tor un erestimate t e num er o e e ts an t e level o e ort to i t em e program a epte DASD SE re ommen ations to i enti y a ne system ris in t is area in rease its e e t estimate an apply a itional resour es to e e t urn o n
• Reliability e program is not ully implementing its relia ility an maintaina ility program as o umente in t e S approve SE la ing e ine riti al ailures an veri ia le relia ility
values use to ore ast system relia ility an measure attainment uring veri i ation an vali ation
• Software e program is eveloping appro imately 125 000 lines o integration o e or over 40 t ir party appli ations in ive so t are uil s e program s un erestimation ouple it a slo losure rate impa te t e program s rea iness or t e ovem er 2014 ontra tor test an
ill su se uently elay S y 4 mont s to ovem er 2015 • Deployment e program inali e its iel ing eployment plan in preparation or t e DR
e program is on tra to meet t e FY 2016 FDD • Integration e program re u e mission t rea automation to maintain evelopment
s e ule possi ly reating a user e pe tation gap uring vali ation ont ly prototype emonstrations provi e user insig ts on system inter a es an an s on user ee a
Conclusion: e A S n 10 2 program initiate E D a tivities in to er 2013 an omplete a DR on s e ule in ar 2014 roug a DR assessment DASD SE assesse
t at t e program is eveloping a via le ris mitigation approa an is rea y to omplete so t are evelopment an integration in preparation or system veri i ation
104 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
B-2 Defensive Management System Modernization (B-2 DMS-M) Prime Contractor: ort rop rumman Aerospa e Systems Executive Summary: e 2 D S is a program to repla e t e lega y D S re eivers antennas an isplay pro essors e program is a pre DA in t e
e nology aturation an Ris Re u tion RR p ase e program a ieve S A in 4t uarter FY 2011 DASD SE initiate a rogram Support Assessment
SA in Septem er 2014 an parti ipate in t e Septem er 2014 reliminary Design Revie DR DASD SE ill omplete t e SA an t e
DR assessment in FY 2015 e 2 D S program ontinues to progress an is e pe te to meet t e re uirements Mission and System Description: e 2 stealt om er is an all ing t o person re air ra t
it t in eapon ays e air ra t is a multi role lo o serva le om er apa le o elivering onventional an nu lear munitions it loa outs o 20 000 poun s or more e D S is a
prin ipal surviva ility ena ler or t e 2 e lega y D S reat Emitter o ator System E S ete ts i enti ies an lo ates enemy ra ar systems an a ilitates real time t reat avoi an e y
provi ing t reat arning an t reat situational a areness in ormation to t e air re via t e a ti al Situation Display e D S ill repla e E S an its asso iate antennas it a more urrent Ele troni Support easure su system to improve t reat ete tion e upgra e also ill provi e e pan e air ra t isplay pro essors to in rease situational a areness Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e S A SE in August 2011 t e
SE gui es te ni al planning an e e ution t roug RR e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is preparing a SE up ate to support S in 4t uarter FY 2015
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in April 2013 e overall re uirements are reasona le an sta le e Air For e is up ating t e DD in FY 2015 to support S an to in orporate lessons rom t e RR p ase e Septem er 2014 DR allo ate t e re uirements as tra e rom t e DD an 2 eapon System Spe i i ation to t e Su system Re uirements Do ument to t e Ar ite ture tem Spe i i ation an t e ro u t Spe i i ation
• Life Cycle Management e D S ill emp asi e relia ility in t e esign pro ess to re u e total o ners ip ost o a ieve SD A etter uying o er initiatives t e program is in lu ing relia ility maturity in entives in t e Engineering an anu a turing Development E D p ase ontra t
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e program oes not ave an approve ut is ra ting a to support t e 4t uarter FY 2015 S
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE initiate a SA in Septem er 2014 roug out t e
RR p ase t e program o us areas ave in lu e so t are evelopment su system integration an antenna maturation DASD SE ill omplete t e SA in FY 2015 an ill
105DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E 2 D S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
provi e re ommen ations to t e program o i e DASD SE parti ipate in t e Septem er 2014 DR an ill omplete t e DR assessment in FY 2015 e DR as ell on u te an ell
atten e ort rop rumman esta lis e t e allo ate aseline an su ess ully met esta lis e entran e an e it riteria
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting t e ris management program o umente in t e SE an t e 2 ommon Enterprise Ris ro ess ui e e program is mitigating ris s relate to integration it on urrent 2 upgra es so t are an antenna maturation e program is mitigating antenna maturation ris y measuring t e antenna ra ar signature antenna gain an t e voltage stan ing ave ratio o t e antenna signal transmission system in relevant test i tures
• Performance e program is pro e te to meet or e ee all 5 s an all 12 SAs • Schedule e program omplete a S A DA in August 2011 e program su ess ully
omplete t e DR in Septem er 2014 Fun ing re u tions ause t e program s e ule to slip elaying t e S DA y 15 mont s rom April 2014 to uly 2015 e nitial perational apa ility ate sli 24 mont s to FY 2021 e program o i e in orporate t e elay to S A y e ten ing t e RR e ort an moving several tas s rom E D into RR verall
t e revise s e ule provi es a itional s e ule realism ile re u ing s e ule ris to a ieving t e up ate e SD A ill esta lis an A at S
• Reliability e 2 D S DD ontains a relia ility SA e program e pe ts to a ieve t ese re uirements y e program presente a epta le relia ility allo ations at t e DR n a ition t e program s SE in lu es relia ility gro t planning to t e e pe te re uirement
an a resses plans to ensure t e ontra tor meets re uire relia ility • Software DASD SE is in t e pro ess o assessing so t are evelopment an pro esses as part
o t e SA DASD SE ill provi e t e results o t e assessment to t e program in FY 2015 At t e Septem er 2014 DR t e program allo ate t e re uirements to t e So t are Re uirement Spe i i ations e so t are metri s use on t e program are immature an to ate metri s olle tion as een ina e uate e program plans in rease emp asis it ormal metri s olle tion eginning it t e up oming evelopment so t are uil t e t ir o our
engineering uil s • Manufacturing e program ill leverage iel e systems or systems alrea y in evelopment
or t e Ele troni Support easure an Avioni s an rap i s ro essors t ere ore unusual or elevate manu a turing ris is not e pe te e SE re le ts program plans to assess manu a turing rea iness t roug out t e li e y le to in lu e uring all Systems Engineering
e ni al Revie s an in support o ma or milestones e program emonstrate a e uate maturity at t e Septem er 2014 DR
• Integration e program as i enti ie integration ris it e isting systems an on urrent 2 upgra es e 2 program o i e as esta lis e ris mitigations to a ress te ni al an
programmati allenges or e ample system level po er ooling onsi erations an e i ate D S test air ra t
Conclusion: e 2 D S program ontinues to progress to t e revise s e ule e program is pro e te to meet re uirements
106 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
B61 Tailkit Assembly (TKA) Prime Contractor: oeing De ense Spa e Se urity Executive Summary: e li e e tension o t e 61 12 61 ensures t e nite States an its allies ill ave nu lear eterren e options into t e uture e 61 ail it Assem ly A is an A A D program in t e irst o t o Engineering an
anu a turing Development E D p ases e program a ieve S in ovem er 2012 At t at time t e SD A approve a t o p ase E D program it
an option or t e se on p ase to in entivi e unit pri ing at or elo esign to unit ost goals e se on p ase egins a ter riti al Design Revie n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in t e
ovem er 2013 reliminary Design Revie DR an t e uly 2014 DR loseout e program as omplete preliminary esign i enti ie ris s evelope via le mitigation steps an emonstrates a ig li eli oo o a omplis ing its inten e mission
Mission and System Description: e A provi es eapon elivery a ura y to a ieve t e
esire operational e e ts o t e 61 e A ena les onsoli ation o multiple om assem ly A mo i i ations 3 4 7 10 into a single all up roun A R t e 61 12 re u ing t e num er o
li e e tension programs an li e y le osts or ot t e Department o De ense DoD an t e Department o Energy D E e goal o t e ual agen y 61 program is to e ten t e li e o t e
eapon ile mo erni ing it in t e e isting apa ilities as ire te y t e u lear eapons oun il in t e une 2008 as ing emoran um e A R onsists o t o ma or assem lies
t e A evelope an manage y D E an t e A evelope an manage y DoD Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in Septem er 2012 in support
o t e ovem er 2012 S DA e program is e e uting t e SE pro esses an ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations
• Requirements e R approve t e A S DD in Septem er 2012 e top level re uirements are reasona le an sta le e Air For e on iguration Steering oar revie e t e re uirements in Septem er 2014 it no anges e uly 2014 DR loseout omplete allo ation o t e re uirements as tra e rom t e DD to t e System Re uirements Do ument SRD an to t e oeing System er orman e Spe i i ation S S e A to A nter a e ontrol Do ument D an t e lat orm to Store D S D align it t e DD SRD
an t e S S an ere release an pla e un er on iguration ontrol in Fe ruary 2014 • Life Cycle Management e esign ta es e ten e servi e li e omponents into onsi eration
to allo t e program to meet A R servi e li e re uirements it out ostly an time onsuming re erti i ation n a ition esign to unit ost is on ontra t
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in August 2014 e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te a DR assessment in FY 2014 as re uire y
DoD 5000 02 DASD SE parti ipate in t e ovem er 2013 DR an uly 2014 DR loseout ot ere ell on u te an ell atten e At t e DR oeing a not omplete
so t are allo ations to t e So t are Re uirement Spe i i ations SRS an t e eapon
107DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E 61 A
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
ntegration Su roup a not release t e D an S D t ese issues prevente DR losure ese items ere omplete y t e DR loseout an oeing ormally esta lis e t e
allo ate aseline o DASD SE assessments are planne in FY 2015 • Risk Assessment e program is e e uting t e ris management program as o umente in
t e SE an Ris anagement lan e program is mitigating ris s relate to per orman e pro u tion s e ule an integration
• Performance e program is on tra to meet t ree o our s e program is mitigating an a ura y ris t roug up ate mo el assumptions simple esign anges remain an option is ris s oul e mitigate in FY 2015 en t e System 1 oint est Assem ly lig t is su ess ully omplete
• Schedule e program omplete S in ovem er 2012 e program plans to egin E D 2 in FY 2016 it S in FY 2018 e program is pro e te to meet all A s e ule t res ol s an all planne te ni al revie time rames in t e Septem er 2012 SE
• Reliability e program as a ompre ensive relia ility program an a ro ust relia ility gro t program i in lu es system an su system level gro t urves lanne relia ility metri s are a e uate to manage t e program e program is mitigating operational an storage relia ility ris s SAs t roug a elerate omponent an su system testing as ell as environmental testing e program as ontra t in entives or relia ility uring evelopmental test an plans to on u t uali i ation an uality testing in E D 2 n a ition t e program a e test assets to provi e a e uate relia ility on i en e
• Software e A So t are Development lan is a e uate As o t e uly 2014 DR loseout t e program as e ompose so t are re uirements to t e SRS an esta lis e e ine
so t are metri s So t are evelopment is resour e appropriately an is on s e ule • Manufacturing e program is e e uting to manu a turing gui an e in t e SE e A
pro u tion is ase on mature DA manu a turing pro esses e program omplete an initial manu a turing assessment in support o t e ovem er 2013 DR e program as e ine an ara teri e manu a turing pro esses an as o umente t e A manu a turing
approa e program is mitigating ris s relate to stringent sa e assem ly re uirements an pro u tion transition it lose San ia ational a oor ination
• Integration ntegration planning et een t e A an t e A as ell as et een t e 61 an t e t res ol an o e tive air ra t is su i ient to support E D a tivities e eapon ntegration Su roup release t e D an t e S D in Fe ruary 2014 ut t e nter a e ontrol or ing roup as more t an 60 a tion items to omplete y t e en o De em er 2014 e program is mitigating F 35 integration ris t roug t e use o environmental ata rom ot er
eapon integration a tivities an it e s it a overnment a ri ate lega y a apter e A program is e e uting to a une 2012 memoran um o un erstan ing it t e Air
For e u lear eapons enter t e D E ational u lear Se urity A ministration t e Air Armament enter an t e air ra t program o i es is ensures ea organi ation s responsi ilities are i enti ie it respe t to A R evelopment pro u tion an integration
Conclusion: n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in t e ovem er 2013 DR an t e uly 2014 DR loseout e program as omplete preliminary esign as i enti ie ris s evelope via le
ris mitigations an emonstrates a ig li eli oo o a omplis ing its inten e mission
108 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Enhanced Polar System (EPS) Prime Contractor: o prime ontra tor Executive Summary: e E S program is t e ne t generation o ommuni ations satellites to provi e overage in t e ort olar Region e program a ieve S in April 2014 an as
elegate to t e Air For e as an A A 1 program DASD SE on u te a reliminary Design Revie DR assessment an So t are Fo use Revie an parti ipate in t e E S
omman an lanning Segment A S riti al Design Revie DR an t e E S System DR
e program is on tra an is e e tively e e uting Engineering an anu a turing Development E D Mission and System Description: e mission o t e E S is to provi e ommuni ations overage to users in t e ort olar Region a ove 65 egrees latitu e e system onsists o t o satellites in ig in lination olniya or its using an E S payloa integrate on a ost satellite us E S payloa esign is ase on a simpli i ation o t e A van e E tremely ig Fre uen y AE F payloa an implements t e E ten e Data Rate DR ave orm e system uses a stan alone tool or ommuni ations net or planning evelope as part o t e A S A terrestrial gate ay provi es interopera ility or mi latitu e users t roug t e lo al n ormation ri is ar ite ture leverages a mature DR payloa to groun inter a e austere A S an gate ay ar ite tures t at leverage overnment o t e s el S an ommer ial o t e s el S
ar are an a ommon onne tion stan ar Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e E S SE in Fe ruary 2014 to
support S n a or an e it t e approval memo t e program up ate t e SE to in lu e relia ility gro t planning in une 2014 e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE
it out aivers or eviations e program o i e plans to on u t an annual SE up ate in to er 2015
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in 2006 o ever ue to ost issues t e groun segments ere o ns ope an t e DD as up ate an approve y t e AFR as no
s ere ange in 2011 e re uirements are mature an sta le At t e A S an System DR events t e program o i e emonstrate omplete allo ation an tra ea ility o t e
program re uirements into t e mature program aseline • Life Cycle Management e program on u te tra e o s to etermine a e i ate A S as
a more ost e e tive approa to t e o ns ope re uirements t an using t e AE F groun segment
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in April 2014 e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve
109DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E E S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments n FY 2014 DASD SE on u te an E S DR assessment an a
So t are Fo use Revie an also parti ipate in t e A S an System DR e DR assessment i enti ie ris in t e maturity o t e so t are ar ite ture an t e nee or a So t are Fo use Revie i as on u te in anuary 2014 prior to losing out t e DR assessment in Fe ruary 2014 e So t are Fo use Revie e amine progress in mitigating ris s i enti ie at t e DR e revie also e amine etails o t e So t are uil lan
evelopment s e ule an integration plan to evaluate t e propose E D aseline an A t res ol s e revie team etermine t e program su ess ully a resse t e so t are ris s raise at t e DR an soli i ie t e DR aseline At t e A S DR an System DR t e program emonstrate t eir initial pro u t aseline an margin against all re uirements At
S E S as elegate to t e Air For e i on u te t e DR assessment • Risk Assessment e program is e e uting ris management planning in a or an e it t e
program SE e program is or ing to mitigate ris s in t e areas o so t are maturity parts o soles en e an system integration
• Performance e program is on tra to meet all s SAs an e ni al er orman e easures o umente in t e E S SE e program s an s ere assesse at
t e E S System DR in August 2013 t e A S DR in April 2014 an t e System DR in uly 2014 it margin against all re uirements
• Schedule e program omplete a S DA in April 2014 e program is on tra to meet t e A s e ule t res ol s an as el all te ni al revie s on time ere is no S
• Reliability e SE esta lis es a relia ility gro t planning urve i is re le te in plans or so t are evelopment an maintenan e Relia ility pro e tions assesse at t e E S System DR s o e t e program is on tra to meet all relia ility re uirements it margin
• Software e latest program o i e estimate or t e A S so t are si e is appro imately 358 000 e uivalent sour e lines o o e ES During ris re u tion a tivities t e eveloper omplete 105 000 ES e parametri analysis o t e A S so t are e ort in i ates some
ris to omplete so t are pro u ts to support system integration events ut su i ient s e ule margin to maintain nitial perational apa ility Final perational apa ility in FY 2018
• Manufacturing e E S program relies on eritage AE F payloa ar are an so t are a oste satellite us an a om ination o S an S ar are or t e terrestrial gate ay
an A S e program as omplete ot payloa s an elivere t em to t e ost or integration an test
• Integration e overnment is t e system integrator e E S program as memoran a o agreement in pla e it all t e e ternal organi ations it i it as interrelations ips spe i ie in t e SE to in lu e t e payloa ost an t e avy s S A AR Systems enter e program o i e is parti ipating in all or ing groups ne essary to maintain a areness o issues a e ting E S program S items
Conclusion: e program is on tra an is e e tively e e uting E D
Prime Contractors: o ee artin Aeronauti s Executive Summary: e F 22A n 3 2 o is a
ar are an so t are upgra e or t e F 22A t e Air For e s a van e ta ti al ig ter air ra t n 3 2 is an A A D program in t e Engineering an
anu a turing Development p ase e program a ieve S in 3r uarter FY 2013 n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in t o n rement apa ility Revie s R among ot er a uisition meetings e program is urrently on tra to a ieve re uirements
o ever ey evelopment a tivities an asso iate veri i ation ill o ur in FY 2015 an early FY 2016
Mission and System Description: e F 22A is a i t generation single seat t in engine ig ter
esigne or air ominan e e lo o serva le ig ly maneuvera le super ruise F 22A in orporates a van e avioni s an surviva le irst ay an eyon air to groun apa ility n 3 2 ar are an so t are mo erni ation in lu es air to air missile upgra es A 120D A9 a itional ele troni prote tion geolo ation ata lin an stores management improvements
e program repla es sele te omputer pro essors to improve t roug put an margins Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in August 2012 e
program up ate t e SE in 4t uarter FY 2013 An up ate is e pe te in 2015 to support S in FY 2016 e program is meeting t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or
eviations • Requirements e R vali ate t e F 22A En an e lo al Stri e n 3 D in FY 2007
e aseline plat orm as 12 s e program is a ressing t e t ree remaining s it n 3 2A in FY 2015 ere ore n 3 2 as no spe i i s ut oes in lu e t e n 3 D SAs geolo ation an A 9 120D integration e n 3 2 re uirements are sta le an
reasona le e ontrols t e un tional aseline t roug a ontra tually in orporate ier 0 perational apa ility Des ription Do ument DD an a apa ility eri i ation lan
e ontra tor in turn erives etaile ier 1 to 5 evelopment spe i i ations rom t e DD an to orm t e esign aseline e Air For e is planning uture in rements to
a ress man ate sa ety navigation an se urity re uirements • Life Cycle Management ere is a ris to t e program s so t are sustaina ility ue to t e
ig ly integrate an lose system ar ite ture o t e F 22A Ris mitigation at t e enterprise level in lu es a eren e to a mo ular open systems ar ite ture roa map pro urement o ata rig ts an istri ute pro essing esigns en pra ti al
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in FY 2013 or S e program plans to su mit an up ate in 2015 to support S
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in ot o t e FY 2014 Rs t e se on an
t ir o si planne to assess prototype ar are an so t are rops to t e la e program is
111DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E F 22A 3 2 D
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
a t ir o t e ay t roug etaile apa ility o e tives re e essor program evelopment slips ave reate la availa ility allenges an present appro imately 6 mont s s e ule ris to ompletion o planne apa ility rops primarily ue to a uil up o so t are e e ts nee ing orre tion in su se uent rops DASD SE i not on u t any ormal te ni al revie
assessments in FY 2014 ut provi e uarterly DAES assessments in t e areas o s e ule per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion e program as ma e progress in a ressing FY 2012 rogram Support Revie re ommen ations
• Risk Assessment e program as o umente t e ris management pro ess in t e SE an in t e F 22 Ris an pportunity anagement lan ere are urrently nine te ni al ris s in t e areas o mission ata availa ility la s ort alls avioni s sta ility eapons mo els an veri i ation e e ution e program as mitigation plans an on u ts ris revie s mont ly to re u e pro a ility o o urren e ere are s e ule ris s resulting rom elays in pre e essor mo erni ation apa ilities n 3 2A an sustainment up ates p ate 5 e program pro e ts t e 3 2A Fleet Release in uly 2015 a elay o one year rom t e aseline ate n a ition t e
evelopment an integration s e ule o t e A 9 operational lig t so t are is a at item • Performance e remaining apa ility rops an lig t veri i ation ill not ommen e until
FY 2015 ut t e n 3 2 program is still on tra to meet all SAs ot er top level attri utes an t e e ni al er orman e easures re eren e in t e SE
• Schedule n 3 2 S o urre in ay 2013 e t res ol A ate or S is Septem er 2016 e program as s e ule margin to a sor evelopment elays rom t e
uil up o n 3 2 so t are pro lems an integration o n 3 2A an p ate 5 e orts • Reliability e program as a relia ility an maintaina ility program onsistent it
SD A poli y e esign is pro e te to meet n 3 2 relia ility re uirements • Software A ter R 2 t e program estimate n 3 2 evelopment re uires appro imately
750 000 ne air orne an groun e uivalent sour e lines o o e ES is in lu es appro imately 270 000 ES or t e En an e Stores anagement System omplete in FY 2013 e evelopment in orporates 10 istin t integrate ar are an so t are apa ility
rops to t e la an or lig t test it si Rs prior to t e inal System riti al Design Revie As o R 3 t e program as a omplis e only 75 per ent o t e e pe te so t are plan ue to veri i ation onstraints lo ing integrate testing ata s ort alls late prototype ar are
elays an more e e ts t an e pe te As a result t ere is uil up o remaining or te ni al e t e program as s i te t e orre tion o te ni al e t to later rops
• Manufacturing e program aseline is 143 n 3 2 retro it its or lo 30 35 air ra t plus 9 its or test air ra t e program omplete sa ety o lig t an ura ility li e testing on all seven early evelope prototype ar are omponents an t e program is on tra to omplete t e remain er o pro u tion uali i ation testing y t e en o evelopment in FY
2016 e SD A approve a van e pro urement A to mitigate elivery gaps rom ar are ris re u tion e orts o ever i an emerging A un ing issue ongressional ar s is not resolve R an iel ing may e elaye a year
• Integration n 3 2 as integration ris s or timely veri i ation o so t are an eapons integration DASD SE anti ipates t e program ill on u t integrate eapons laun es in a van e o S as re ommen e at S or a more event riven evelopment
Conclusion: e program ontinues to mitigate s e ule an te ni al ris s e program is urrently on tra to a ieve re uirements o ever ey evelopment a tivities an asso iate
veri i ation ill o ur in FY 2015 an early FY 2016
112 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Global Positioning System (GPS) Enterprise Prime Contractor: ultiple Executive Summary: e S Enterprise onsists o multiple DA s an pre DA s in
varying p ases o a uisition an evelopment DASD SE parti ipate in an A ER eep ive or t e S Enterprise in De em er 2013 E System Design Revie SDR an reliminary Design Revie DR events an a program revie in Septem er 2014 supporting t e FY 2015 A ER e program as e perien e evelopment
elays in ot t e an S programs i elay elivery o en an e apa ilities an
ontinue to rive onstellation sustainment ris Mission and System Description: e mission o S is to a uire eliver an sustain relia le position navigation an timing an nu lear etonation DE ete tion apa ilities to
S ar ig ters our allies an ivil users e S Enterprise as t ree segments spa e groun an user an omprises multiple DA s ea it signi i ant s ope an omple ity • e spa e segment provi es t e S spa e ve i les S satellites t at ma e up t e
onstellation is segment in lu es ive programs S A S R S R S F an S e irst t ree programs are in t e perations an Support p ase e S F satellites ro u tion an Deployment p ase are esigne y oeing an t e ne t generation
S satellites ro u tion an Deployment p ase are esigne y o ee artin is segment also provi es t e DE ete tion apa ilities
• e groun segment provi es t e ontrol system or t e satellites an in lu es t o programs t e urrent perational ontrol System S an t e e t eneration perational ontrol System S is urrently in t e perations an Support p ase is post S
• e user segment onsists o various re eiver an pro essor systems t at provi e S servi es to meet t e nee s o a roa user ase in air lan sea an spa e e ilitary S
ser E uipment E program is in t e e nology Development D p ase an is planning or a om ine S e ision in 2015
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e S Enterprise SE it
asso iate an S Anne es in August 2014 e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is preparing an up ate to t e E SE Anne to etail plans or engineering a tivities supporting t e revise E A uisition Strategy an plans to su mit t e anne or ormal revie in early FY 2015
• Requirements e R approve t e S DD in Fe ruary 2011 an t e E DD in uly 2014 e program re uirements are reasona le an sta le e program e ompose an allo ate t e S DD re uirements into separate DDs or t e groun segment an S spa e segment an t en lo e t ose re uirements into system spe i i ations or ea e E program as use D p ase prototyping su ess ully to in orm t e approve
DD an as up ate t e E system spe i i ation to align it t e approve DD
113DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
AIR FORCE – GPS ENTERPRISE
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
• Life Cycle Management – The program has been proactive in evaluating procurement options to
consider budget profiles, procurement quantities, and cost savings for the next Follow-on
Production Decision for GPS III satellites.
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) – USD(AT&L) approved the PPP in April 2014. The updated
PPP addresses recent policy changes. The program is executing the processes documented in the
approved PPP.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments - DASD(SE) participated in an AGER deep dive for the GPS
Enterprise in December 2013, MGUE SDR and PDR events, and a program review in September
2014 supporting the FY2015 AGER. o The deep dive found opportunities to accelerate the MGUE program based on progress and
successes in TD phase prototyping, continued challenges in resolving technical issues with
the first GPS III navigation payload, identification of options for alternative GPS III
procurement strategies, and continued delays in the OCX software development. o DASD(SE) participated in MGUE contractor SDR and PDR events conducted to demonstrate
readiness to move forward in preparation for a combined MS B/C decision in FY 2015. The
program met all PDR exit criteria. DASD(SE) will complete the full PDR assessment in
FY 2015.
o The pre-FY 2014 AGER program review found mature and stable MGUE designs, progress
in resolving GPS III navigation payload issues and delivering the first payload for
integration, and extended satellite life time estimates for the current constellation, which has
mitigated the risk of late delivery of the first GPS III satellite. However, a continued delay in
OCX delivery maintains near-term risk to constellation sustainment. The program is
continuing to refine mitigation options due to the OCX delay.
o DASD(SE) will conduct a Program Support Assessment in FY 2015 to support the MGUE
MS B/C.
• Risk Assessment – The Enterprise and segments are executing their risk management programs
in accordance with the approved SEP. The program office is working to mitigate risks to each
component program, particularly in the area of information assurance vulnerabilities,
constellation sustainment, and the fielding of an integrated M-code capability.
• Performance – The GPS III and OCX programs are on track to meet all eight KPPs and
associated KSAs and Technical Performance Measures (TPM). The MGUE contractors assessed
KPPs and TPMs at their SDR events in January-March 2014 and PDR events in August-
September 2014. The MGUE program is on track to meet all eight KPPs, KSAs, and associated
TPMs but has risk for meeting two anti-jam and precise tracking derived requirements. The
program has plans in place to mitigate these risks. • Schedule – The GPS III and OCX programs have both eroded program schedule margin,
breached APB schedule thresholds, and are in the process of completing Over Target Baseline
activities. The program will propose revised schedule thresholds in updated APB documents in
FY 2015. Poor systems engineering discipline has been the primary cause of delay on the OCX
program. Delays in development and production of the SV-01 mission data unit are the primary
cause of GPS III program delays. The GPS Enterprise is executing several initiatives to extend
the lifetime of the on-orbit IIR and IIR-M space vehicles, which has relieved some risk of
GPS III and OCX delays.
• Reliability – All GPS Enterprise segments are meeting their reliability requirements and
demonstrating reliability growth with significant margin. However, availability predictions for
the GPS constellation show risk in sustaining the constellation, due to aging on-orbit satellites
114 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E S E ER R SE
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
until is elivere an S satellites are availa le or laun e program o i e urrently pre i ts t at t e onstellation ill remain at or a ove t e re uire 24 satellites until t e irst S is availa le or laun o ever or surrogate apa ility is re uire to pla e
t e ne S satellites into servi e • Software is t e most so t are intensive segment o t e S Enterprise e program
ill eliver apa ility in t o lo s lo 1 is estimate at 1 241 000 e uivalent sour e lines o o e ES an lo 2 at 68 000 ES e program manages an tra s so t are metri s i ave i enti ie or eing e erre to later iterations ES gro t in ea iteration an a ig generation rate o so t are e i ien y reports ese metri s are primary in i ators o ontinue program s e ule slip i is primarily ause y poor systems engineering is ipline Due to t is s ort all t e program implemente a ree e on so t are o ing to resolve e isting gaps an ensure prere uisite etaile systems engineering arti a ts are omplete e ore pro ee ing it urt er so t are o ing
• Manufacturing e S program is re u ing manu a turing ris t roug t e use o t e S on Flig t Satellite est e S e S is a pat in er ve i le t at ill e
use as an early integration an veri i ation resour e i ill also re ine manu a turing pro esses in a van e o t e pro u tion o satellites S 01 to S 08 e program as een
elaye ue to esign an manu a turing issues asso iate it t e elivery o t e irst satellite navigation payloa ese manu a turing issues ave een resolve an t e payloa elivere or integration o ever t e program ill ontinue to arry ris t roug t e t ermal va uum
veri i ation a tivities • Integration e program as a e allenges in maintaining system integration an
minimi ing s e ule syn roni ation issues among its spa e groun an user segments Re ent assessments re ogni e t at a ross t e S Enterprise system integration pro ess an tools ave improve ere is some ris t at urrent E program inter a e stan ar s an resulting
esigns may not e rigorous enoug to a ount or all possi le E implementations in all possi le operating environments is on ern ill e etter un erstoo as ata rom a itional early integration a tivities is olle te
Conclusion: e program as e perien e evelopment elays in ot t e an S programs i elay elivery o en an e apa ilities an ontinue to rive onstellation sustainment ris rogress ma e in t e E te ni al aseline allo s or opportunities to a elerate E apa ility
115DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
is page intentionally lan
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
HH-60W Combat Rescue Helicopter Prime Contractor: Si ors y Air ra t orporation Executive Summary: e 60 program ormerly
R ill repla e t e Air For e s 60 ave a eli opter leet it 112 ne air ve i les plus training
systems an pro u t support as re uire or t e ersonnel Re overy R mission e program is an A A D in t e Engineering an anu a turing Development E D p ase
e program a ieve S in une 2014 a ter an e ten e perio o ina tivity ue to un ertainty in Air For e u get priorities DASD SE parti ipate in a SE revie an approval a Systems Engineering or ing ntegrate ro u t eam SE an
an t e S DA e program is in orporating soun systems engineering pra ti es into program an ontra tor a tivities to ensure e e tive program e e ution Mission and System Description: e primary mission o t e 60 is to re over isolate personnel rom ostile or enie territory 60 ill also e e ute umanitarian missions ivil sear an res ue isaster relie asualty me i al eva uation an non om atant eva uation operations e 60 is a ual pilote multi engine verti al ta eo an lan ing plat orm t at
ill provi e improve verti al li t apa ility along it en an e omman an ontrol ommuni ations te nology to meet Air For e R mission re uirements
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in ay 2014 supporting
S e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e SE ontains a ro ust set o e ni al er orman e easures i t e program ill use to tra te ni al per orman e to plan t roug out system evelopment an integration
• Requirements e R approve t e program DD in uly 2010 A uly 2012 R emoran um revali ate t e 6 s an lari ie 14 o t e 27 SA re uirements e System
Spe i i ation tra es to t e DD an as atta e to t e RF e ontra tor is eveloping a esign spe i i ation tra e to t e System Spe i i ation e A uisition Strategy AS limits t e
intro u tion o ne te nologies an o uses on t e integration o e isting systems into a proven air ve i le e 60 re uirements are reasona le an sta le
• Life Cycle Management e program AS a resses a or a ility an ost re u tion t roug t e pro urement o air ra t urrently in pro u tion t e integration o e isting systems an t e in orporation o a pro u tion a or a ility target in t e RF e program i enti ie s oul ost initiatives at S an ill provi e annual up ates
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) e Air For e approve t e in April 2014 in support o S e program is re uire to su mit an up ate to SD A or approval in
FY 2016 e program s RF ontaine language to implement program prote tion
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE reassesse in ings an re ommen ations ma e in t e
FY 2013 rogram Support Assessment t roug SE s DASD SE also provi e t e an DA it te ni al insig t to a irm t e lo ris approa to program an ontra t e e ution
117DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E 60
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o e program implemente re ommen e a tions in so t are evelopment eig t management on urren y an sta ing to re u e ris in E D an in orporate SE e uities into t e ontra t an program e e ution a tivities
o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to parti ipate in t e System Re uirements Revie SRR ill revie t e S e ule Ris Assessment rom t e ntegrate aseline Revie an ill on u t regular SE s
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program as o umente in t eir 2014 SE an Ris anagement lan e program is mitigating ris s it air ra t eig t sta ing on urren y o e ort an su system integration
• Performance e program as 6 s an 27 SAs e program as a ro ust set o 35 s i enti ie in t eir SE to tra per orman e to plan e pro urement o mature
in pro u tion systems signi i antly re u es per orman e ris normally present uring t e E D • Schedule e program omplete a S in une 2014 e program met all FY 2014 A
t res ol s an is on tra to meet t e remaining A t res ol s e program plans to on u t a SRR in FY 2015 an a reliminary Design Revie in FY 2016
• Reliability e relia ility an maintaina ility re uirements an engineering a tivities are realisti an a e uately e ine in ot t e SE an t e RA Rationale Report e
60 relia ility program as planne or a tailore o t e s el ase approa to relia ility esign an gro t e program as evelope preliminary relia ility gro t urves in lu e
in t e SE • Software e program i enti ie t e so t are evelopment s e ule as a riti al pat river
e program plans to implement an in remental so t are evelopment approa an in rease program o i e so t are sta ing ut t e omple ity o t e so t are evelopment e ort ill not
e ully un erstoo until t e SRR is omplete e program plans to implement a uantitative metri s tra ing pro ess to in orm progress to plan
• Manufacturing e program is on tra it manu a turing re uirements appropriate to t e program s urrent p ase ontra tor manu a turing pro esses an supply ains are mature
perational pro u tion lines e ist or t e air rame o pit an su systems it su i ient pro u tion apa ity to meet 60 re uirements
• Integration on urrent initial air ra t pro u tion an su system integration are t e most signi i ant integration ris e program plans to ensure lose management o t e pro u tion line to avoi anges t at oul result rom a late un erstan ing o integration re uirements or spa e eig t po er ooling iring an ele tromagneti s iel ing e ontra tor ill
evelop implement an maintain a Systems ntegration lan t at a resses t e system un tional on iguration an integration pro ess
Conclusion: e 60 program entere t e a uisition y le at S e program as ma e a
e i ate e ort to in orporate soun systems engineering pra ti es into program an ontra tor a tivities to ensure e e tive program e e ution
Prime Contractor: e overnment is t e lea integrator o ive largely in epen ent prime ontra tor so t are evelopment teams rom our
ven ors ei os 2 Systems Division o ee artin n ormation Systems an lo al Solutions
Division ort rop rumman n ormation Systems De ense e nologies Division an AE De ense Systems an Solutions Division Executive Summary: S A n 4 ill mo erni e strategi mission planning or air ve i les an missiles nu lear an onventional S A n 4
ill re u e t e planning an training time ill e easier or operators to use t an previous versions o t e system an ill allo or lo er sustainment osts a ross t e system li e y le e program is an A A A in t e Engineering an anu a turing Development p ase e program a ieve S in une 2014 n FY 2014
DASD SE parti ipate in t e system reliminary Design Revie DR a DR ry run an ea o t e ive su system DRs e program as esta lis e a mature te ni al aseline an is on tra to eliver its irst spiral Spiral 1 o apa ility y De em er 2015
Mission and System Description: S A is a system o systems t at provi es planning apa ilities to t e nite States Strategi omman SS RA in support o t eir ni ie omman
lan responsi ilities or strategi eterren e an glo al stri e S A omprises t o ma or elements t e ission lanning an Analysis System AS an t e lo al A aptive lanning
olla orative n ormation Environment A E e o e tive o S A n 4 is t e mo erni ation o t e AS element AS supports t e evelopment o oint Sta evel t roug
evel nu lear an onventional plans an options in support o ational an eater re uirements Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in une 2014 in support o
S e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program omplete ive Spiral 1 System Re uirements Revie s y 4t uarter FY 2014 an is pro ee ing it e orts to omplete ive su system riti al Design Revie s
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in ovem er 2013 e AS System Su system Spe i i ation an System Su system Design Des ription are aseline it reasona le uantitative measures e program as tra e 100 per ent o DD re uirements to t e system re uirements an as mappe t e re uirements to t e preliminary esign ngoing analysis in i ates t e esign ill meet t e re uirements
• Life Cycle Management e esign ollo s a mo ular an s ala le implementation onsistent it t e DoD pen Systems Ar ite ture SA ontra t ui e oo or rogram anagers e su system esigns a e uately a resse t e SA esign pra ti es o nonproprietary
so t are pro u ts an unlimite ata rig ts to promote re u e perations an Support ost an
119DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E S A 4
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
improve maintaina ility e program is on tra to meet t e ease o integration SA t e maintaina ility SA an t e ost o o ners ip SA
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e S in une 2014 Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te a rogram Support Assessment in on un tion
it t e re uire DR assessment in FY 2014 in support o t e une S e program DR an su system DRs in orme ot o t ese DASD SE revie s e on u te ive su system DRs in preparation or t e DR o e ie Engineer a epte DR re ommen ations in t e ollo ing areas in epen ent
DR air ris management system se urity an s e ule ris assessment o e overnment emonstrate t e a ility to plan an e e ute t e tas s to mo erni e
AS it a epta le ris s e re u e integration ris y esta lis ing a SS RA Systems ntegration Fa ility it orrespon ing governan e an
implementation etails in t e S A ntegration lan o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to ontinue to monitor t e program s e e ution to plan
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program o umente in t e SE an is or ing to mitigate ris s in t e lega y aseline anges multiple se urity erti i ation an so t are evelopment areas
• Performance A or ing to pre i te per orman e presente at t e DR results rom prototyping e orts an e ni al er orman e easures t e program is on tra to meet its 3 s an 10 SAs
• Schedule e program omplete a S DA in une 2014 an is on tra to meet t e t res ol s esta lis e in t e A approve in une 2014 e program is on tra or t e 4t uarter FY 2018 Full Deployment De ision FDD
• Reliability e approa or relia ility leverages so t are uality pra ti es an t e analysis o e i ien y reports e esta lis e a is ipline e e t management pro ess in lu ing e e t ensity e e t aging an e e t tren s
• Software e so t are evelopment e ort is a len o mo erni ation an ne evelopment e orts elivering more t an 2 million e uivalent sour e lines o o e ES in t ree spirals
arametri analysis pre i te ris to elivery o t e ull s ope y t e FDD in 2018 e Air For e Servi e ost osition in rease t e FY 2015 resi ent s u get y 19 million to mitigate t e s e ule ris
• Deployment e program is on tra or t e single site eployment to SS RA to support veri i ation an vali ation o urt er eployment is re uire to a ieve ull
eployment • Integration e program a ieve S in une 2014 an is on tra to emonstrate
interopera ility o Spiral 1 y De em er 2015 e results o t e DR on irme t e maturity o t e AS integration pro ess an t e omplian e y t e ive ven or teams Ea ven or a resse its integration a tivities onsistent it t e etaile S A ntegration lan
evelope y t e Conclusion: e program emonstrates a ig li eli oo o a omplis ing its inten e mission
e program a a su ess ul DR as esta lis e a mature te ni al aseline an is on tra or Spiral 1 elivery y De em er 2015
120 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile–Extended Range (JASSM-ER) Prime Contractor: Lockheed Martin, Missiles and Fire Control Executive Summary: The JASSM baseline is a highly survivable, long-range standoff missile designed to attack fixed and relocatable, highly valued targets. The JASSM-ER is an extended-range derivative of the baseline missile. The JASSM-ER was an ACAT ID until September 8, 2014, when the USD(AT&L) delegated the program to the Air Force as an ACAT IC. In FY 2014, DASD(SE) conducted an FRP decision review Program Support Assessment (PSA), finding the program ready for the FRP milestone decision. The program successfully completed the Air Force Review Board (AFRB) in September 2014, which recommended approval to enter FRP. Mission and System Description: The JASSM is a highly survivable, long-range standoff missile designed to attack fixed and relocatable, highly valued targets. JASSM, designated AGM-158A, is in FRP. JASSM-ER, designated AGM-158B, is a derivative of the baseline. The JASSM-ER adds a turbofan engine and fuel capacity within essentially the same outer mold line and low-observable design to maintain baseline capabilities while more than doubling the range. These missiles provide fighter and bomber aircraft with the capability to strike critical, high-value, heavily defended targets early in a campaign. Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) – DASD(SE) approved the SEP in August 2010 to guide
technical activity for the Production and Deployment phase. DASD(SE) received an update to this SEP in December 2013. The program is fulfilling the objectives of the SEP without waivers or deviations.
• Requirements – The JROC validated the CPD in April 2010. The requirements are reasonable and have been stable throughout the program.
• Life Cycle Management – The program will implement production initiatives related to cost reductions in test facilitation with a low-cost Common Test Instrument Kit (C-TIK) for both the JASSM and JASSM-ER. The C-TIK will provide a means to continue surveillance testing of the JASSM-ER, which was not previously feasible. The program also expects to benefit from Foreign Military Sales of the baseline missile.
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) – The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition) approved the PPP in September 2014. The program is executing the processes documented in the approved PPP.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments – DASD(SE) completed the FRP PSA in September 2014. DASD(SE)
commended (1) the program’s use of well-defined processes for evaluating and executing affordability programs; (2) Lockheed Martin’s (LM) use of a cooperative, state-sponsored personnel screening and training process; and (3) Williams’s use of Federal Aviation Administration-approved processes to produce the engine and continued attempt to stay ahead of
DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report 121
A R F R E ASS ER
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
in ustry in te nology an pra ti es e program a epte an is implementing manu a turing rea iness an manu a turing per orman e re ommen ations n FY 2015 DASD SE ill on u t uarterly DAES assessments in t e areas o s e ule per orman e management
interopera ility an pro u tion • Risk Assessment e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e De em er 2013
SE an une 2010 Ris anagement lan e program is urrently mitigating t ree ris s one regar ing A R S ASS Anti am S Re eiver Sele tive Availa ility Anti Spoo ing
o ule o soles en e an t o regar ing test uni ue ar are attery an est nstrumentation it
• Performance – e program emonstrate all 4 s an 11 SAs t roug veri i ation an vali ation in lu ing t e 2012 E ere 20 out o 21 test s ots ere su ess ul
• Schedule – e program met t e 1 Assets Availa le s e ule milestone in ar 2014 an omplete an AFR re ommen ing FR e program as no ot er A s e ule t res ol s
remaining • Reliability e program e ee e t e relia ility re uirement uring t e 2012 E e
ne t opportunity to evaluate ASS ER per orman e ill e uring t e ay an August 2015 eapon System Evaluation rograms
• Software e program s so t are as sta le t roug out t e evelopment as t e so t are is 95 per ent ommon it t e iel e ASS aseline
• Manufacturing e program as mitigating a pro u tion ris relate to t e engine lu e pump esign not e i iently supporting FR e program a ar e a alue Engineering ange roposal in Septem er 2014 it e pe tations o a ne lu e pump eing rea y or all up roun
assem ly in FY 2015 e program a epte an is implementing manu a turing rea iness an manu a turing per orman e SA re ommen ations
• Integration e ASS ER esign intro u e no ne inter a es e esign is 70 per ent ommon it t e ASS aseline e program as memoran a o agreement A it ive
air ra t programs 1 2 52 F 15E an F 16 t e Air For e ission lanning System program an t e lo al ositioning System Dire torate e program is e e uting t ese As
i ave een in pla e sin e 2003 ASS ER is urrently eing integrate on F 15E 2A an 52
Conclusion: n FY 2014 DASD SE on u te a SA in ing t e program rea y or FR
122 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC) Mission System (JMS) Prime Contractor: A t e S System rogram i e uses t e avy s Spa e an aval ar are S A AR Systems
enter as system integrator Executive Summary: S is a A A A program t at
elivers a spa e omman an ontrol 2 apa ility or t e omman er oint Fun tional omponent omman F or
Spa e as ell as spa e servi es to F Spa e an ot er users S n rement 1 n 1 a ieve nitial perational apa ility
in April 2013 an n 2 entere Engineering an anu a turing Development in une 2013 DASD SE parti ipate in t e n 2 System Revie SR in ay 2014 DASD SE assesses t e program as omplete t e riti al esign o Servi e a S 11 an emonstrates a ig li eli oo o a omplis ing t e te ni al aspe ts o its inten e mission as ell as satis ying all
s o ever ompleting n 2 e ore t e A t res ol ate is at ris Mission and System Description: S provi es t e in rastru ture ore servi es a spa e serDe ine perational i ture an mission servi es to support an ena le t e omman er F Spa e to a omplis t e spa e missions assigne y t e omman er S Strategi omman
ese missions in lu e spa e o e t i enti i ation spe trum ara teri ation laun an reentry e lu ing inter ontinental allisti missiles support to ontingen y operations an oint spa e
support S ill inter a e it lega y systems an ne sensors in lu ing t e Spa e Surveillan e et or Spa e e t enti i ation sensors a van e spa e surveillan e sensors ntelligen e ommunity ata an analysis systems satellite 2 missile arning an e ense asset management
systems spa e environmental systems an e ensive ounter spa e ontrol assets Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e n 1 S n 2 S SE in
Fe ruary 2013 e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program s Agile so t are evelopment approa elivers in remental apa ilities ase on prioriti e operational nee s t at leverage e isting te nology An up ate
SE approve y DASD SE ill e re uire to support n 2 S in FY 2016 • Requirements e R vali ate t e S DD in August 2012 e Air For e is using an
Agile so t are evelopment pro ess in i a Re uirements an lanning oun il R alan es u get s e ule an user priorities to allo ate re uirements to spe i i in rements an
S s e S systems engineering pro ess integrates its Agile evelopment environment it a tra itional top o n re uirement e omposition pro ess to evelop t e allo ate aseline Re uirements tra e rom t e approve DD to t e Fun tional Re uirements Do ument an
o n to t e n 2 Appli ations Re uirements Do ument is allo ation as remaine sta le o ever S may nee to e er some non ontent to maintain s e ule
• Life Cycle Management S as implemente a or a ility measures to re u e ost ompare it t e original 2010 program n epen ent ost Estimate ese e orts in lu e
ma imi ing use o e isting overnment evelope so t are an prototypes ma imi ing use o mature ommer ially availa le so t are un er i e pri e ontra ts e erring sele te non re uirements to uture in rements an leveraging overnment integration e pertise in lieu o a large integration ontra t e une 2013 A uisition De ision emoran um assigne a or a ility aps or ot a uisition an operations support osts
123DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E S
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in ay 2013 ere are no no n issues an no plans or an up ate until S
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in t e S SR in ay 2014 is SR
o use on S 11 esign te ni al ris s an pro e te per orman e DASD SE assesses t at t e program as omplete t e riti al esign o S 11 an emonstrates a ig li eli oo o a omplis ing t e te ni al aspe ts o its inten e mission o ever t e program as ris in a ieving t e n 2 Full Deployment De ision FDD y t e A t res ol ate o De em er 2016 e a epte t e re ommen ations to evelop prioriti e options an timelines or
e erring non apa ilities i may elp re u e t e li eli oo o a s e ule rea e ne t SR ill e in FY 2015
• Risk Assessment e program o i e is e e uting t e ris management program o umente in t e Ris anagement lan an in t e SE S is or ing to mitigate ris s relate to integrating ommer ial an overnment so t are y erse urity an migrating ata et een
i erent se urity lassi i ation levels • Performance S as met t o o ive s it n 1 an is on tra to meet t e remaining
t ree s it n 2 e program is meeting or e ee ing all e ni al er orman e easures i enti ie in t e SE
• Schedule So t are parametri analysis in i ates ris to t e a ievement o n 2 FDD y t e A t res ol ate o De em er 2016 is ris as a umulate ue to elays in t e ompletion o S 7 evelopment ause y t e a ition o in omplete n 1 or un ing uts
t at re u e manpo er an a larger t an e pe te num er o e i ien ies re uiring resolution on urrent S evelopment a tivities it limite manpo er ompoun t is ris e S
program is planning an n ro ess Revie it SD A ollo ing t e SR in FY 2015 • Reliability S as e ine numerous riti al perational Fun tions t at must e availa le
99 5 per ent o t e time it a mean time et een riti al ailures greater t an 2 000 ours a mean time to restore un tion less t an 10 ours an no outages greater t an 2 minutes t at prevent ompletion o t ese un tions reliminary relia ility analysis in i ates t at S n 2
it a omplete ual re un ant suite on iguration ill meet t ese re uirements n 1 urrently in operations at t e Sp is e ee ing t e relia ility measures
• Software S estimates t e n 2 so t are si e at appro imately 410 000 e uivalent sour e lines o o e S ontinuously tra s so t are evelopment an uality metri s S n 2 so t are evelopment as e perien e elays ausing in rease overlap o S evelopment an test e orts urt er in reasing t e ris to meeting t e A t res ol ates
• Deployment S n 2 ill eploy our S s o so t are to t e Sp ea provi ing uni ue apa ilities improving on or a ing to t e previous S s apa ilities e irst n 2 S S 7 ill rea perational A eptan e in 1st uarter FY 2015
• Integration S is a so t are integration program t at in orporates overnment evelope so t are an ommer ial o t e s el so t are into its servi e oriente ar ite ture in rastru ture roug t e SE e ine gating pro ess t e program s reens an i ate so t are e ore a epting it or integration as a S pro u t e program as in pla e or is eveloping
ne essary agreements it e ternal organi ations S is or ing losely it t e Spa e Fen e program o i e to re ine an e ten t e S Enterprise Data o el to ensure integration S n 2 ill support testing it t e Spa e Fen e program
Conclusion: e S program emonstrates a ig li eli oo o a omplis ing t e te ni al aspe ts o its inten e mission as ell as satis ying all s o ever ompleting n 2 e ore t e A t res ol ate is at ris
124 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
KC-46 Aerial Refueling Tanker (KC-46A)
Prime Contractor: oeing De ense Spa e Se urity Executive Summary: e 46A is a militari e version o t e oeing 767 2 ommer ial air ra t e ne aerial
re ueling tan er is an A A D program in t e Engineering an anu a turing Development E D p ase e program su ess ully omplete riti al Design
Revie DR in August 2013 n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in program or ing groups o use on systems engineering esign an veri i ation e program is on tra to a ieve all
s an SAs ut as e perien e elays in manu a turing t e irst our E D air ra t Mission and System Description: e 46 s primary mission is to provi e aerial re ueling support to t e Air For e avy arine orps an allie air ra t Se on ary missions in lu e emergen y aerial re ueling airli t ommuni ations gate ay aerome i al eva uation or ar area re ueling point om at sear an res ue an treaty omplian e Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in anuary 2012 e SE
gui es t e te ni al planning an e e ution uring t e E D p ase e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations an plans to up ate t e SE to support S in 4t uarter FY 2015
• Requirements e R approve t e DD or t e 135 Repla ement Air ra t in De em er 2006 e DD a resses air re ueling s ort alls an o uments spe i i apa ilities t e 46 program must provi e e program re uirements are reasona le an
sta le ere ave een no evel Engineering ange roposals to ate Re uirements are tra ea le to t e per orman e spe i i ation an or appropriate arti a ts in t e te ni al aseline DASD SE pro e ts t e program ill meet re uirements
• Life Cycle Management e 46 program is un ergoing an n epen ent ogisti s Assessment A an is on u ting a ro u t Support usiness ase Analysis in preparation or
S n a ition t e 46 program on u ts a ogisti s ealt Assessment uarterly ogisti s support elements are on tra to support E e program egan support
e uipment provisioning in 4t uarter FY 2014 later t an anti ipate an pro e ts to e on tra in 3r uarter FY 2016
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in De em er 2010 an t e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve An up ate is un er ay to support t e S e ision in 4t uarter FY 2015
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE on u te uarterly DAES assessments in FY 2014
assessing t e areas o s e ule per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion
125DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E 46A
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o n FY 2015 DASD SE is on u ting a S rogram Support Assessment to revie t e program s te ni al an materiel rea iness e assessment ill evaluate t e engineering an management pro esses an resour es availa le entering pro u tion
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting t e ris management program as e ine in t e SE an Ris anagement lan e program on u te an integrate ris assessment in April 2014 an is or ing to mitigate ris s in t e re ueling system maturity an uali i ation so t are integration lig t test resour es an s e ule ere is one program level issue t e integration o t e uel system an t e n oar nert as enerator System S e ontra tor re esigne omponents to a ress t e e i ien y an is evaluating t e anges in t e et uels la
• Performance e program as nine s an ive SAs e program is on tra to meet all re uirements y FR
• Schedule e program omplete DR in August 2013 Several ey events su as o er n an 767 2 irst lig t ere elaye y 4 to 6 mont s e ause o iring un le anges an asso iate or e program ill on u t a ompre ensive s e ule ris ealt assessment in 2n uarter FY 2015 a ter t e ontra tor ompletes t e replan o t e ntegrate aster S e ule
e ne t ey events are t e 767 2 an 46 irst lig ts pro e te to o ur in 1st an 3r uarter FY 2015 S is t e ne t A event an is planne to o ur y t e en o FY 2015
e program e pe ts to meet t e Re uire Assets Availa le A event y August 2017 • Reliability e 46A is ase on t e 767 ommer ial air ra t i as a emonstrate
ig relia ility e program is on tra to meet relia ility an maintaina ility re uirements mission apa le rate i rate rea rate an mission ompletion su ess pro a ility y FR
e program as an approve Relia ility an aintaina ility rogram lan • Software e program is eveloping 6 93 million so t are lines o o e S an in rease
o 14 6 per ent sin e t e DR o i ie o e e rease slig tly ile ne an reuse o e in rease y 931 000 S e in rease o e resi es primarily in t e Avioni s Flig t
anagement omputer an Aerial Re ueling anagement System ile un tionality as elivere slig tly e in plan e e t is overy is running a ove pro e tions tili ation o omputing resour es is it in re uire levels
• Manufacturing e manu a turing o t e irst our air ra t an our ooms is un er ay ey suppliers are allenge to meet original elivery ates potentially impa ting t e manu a turing
uil s e ule A iring un le anomaly ause several ey events o er n groun test est Rea iness Revie an irst lig t to e elaye y appro imately 6 mont s riginally
t e 767 2 provision reig ter variant to t e 46 irst lig t event as planne or une 2014 it is no s e ule or 1st uarter FY 2015 ate supplier eliveries are in ering t e air ra t manu a turing s e ule i as an impa t on t e E D air ra t elivery S e ule pressure is li ely to ontinue t roug out FY 2015
• Integration e program is testing su systems in t e ontra tor s System ntegration a s e ig er t an pro e te e e t is overy rate is re uiring a itional resour es to analy e i
an retest t e so t are e program is negotiating memoran a o agreement it t e Air For e avy an t e nite ing om to se ure t e re eiver air ra t 2A F 16 F A 18 A 8 orna o et re uire to veri y t e aerial re ueling apa ilities in lu ing an ling ualities
me ani al ompati ility an interopera ility
Conclusion: e program is on tra to a ieve t e re uire s an SAs e irst our E D air ra t ave e perien e initial integration issues a ing pressure to t e program s e ule as evi en e y a elay o several ey events y appro imately 6 mont s
126 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
RQ-4B Global Hawk Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Prime Contractor: ort rop rumman Aerospa e Systems Executive Summary: lo al a provi es all
eat er ay nig t intelligen e surveillan e an re onnaissan e apa ility e system onsists o an air ra t payloa ata lin s groun ontrol station an logisti s support pa ages e program is an A A D in t e ro u tion an Deployment p ase it all
systems on ontra t or elivery e program is ompleting a 2011 unn ur y re erti i ation pro ess to reenter t e ormal a uisition rame or it a S s e ule in FY 2015 n FY 2014 DASD SE supporte t e n ro ess
Revie R DA an numerous Systems Engineering SE or ing ntegrate rogram eams to up ate t e program SE e program plans implementation o uture apa ilities t roug separate in ivi ual A A programs as t e Air For e ontinues to e ine t e ontent o an a or a le mo erni ation program Mission and System Description: lo al a provi es ontinuous ig altitu e longen uran e i e area surveillan e apa ility in near real time lo al a operates in lo t reat permissive environments provi ing a variety o intelligen e apa ilities to support oint om atant or es or national aut orities in orl i e pea e risis an artime operations e lo al a
enterprise onsists primarily o lo 30 an 40 variants Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in uly 2011 e program is
ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program is revising t e SE to support a S DA in FY 2015
• Requirements e R approve t e lo al a re uirements in t e uly 2006 DD orming t e asis or t e program e program as generate t e lo 30 an 40 Ds to
re le t urrent system apa ilities an t ey are un ergoing t e R approval pro ess e Ds provi e a ieva le t res ol goals or sensor re uirements system relia ility net
rea iness groun station apa ilities an integration • Life Cycle Management o a ieve system a or a ility t e program eliminates re un an y
y tra ing planne an uture mo i i ations an en an ement e orts to vali ate lo al a re uirements e program is gaining urt er e i ien ies y uil ing strong partners ips
et een t e re uirements an a uisition ommunities an y utili ing mo ular open systems ar ite ture to more e e tively integrate groun ontrol an air ve i le segments
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in to er 2013 e program is e e uting t e pro ess o umente in t e approve
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE parti ipate in t e uly 2014 R DA i
emp asi e t e nee to esta lis a sta le set o program re uirements rom i urrent per orman e an uture evelopment a tivity oul e assesse e program as propose a set
127DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E R 4 A A
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o aseline program re uirements an a pro ess or a ing uture apa ility i ill e revie e at t e S DA in FY 2015 o n FY 2015 DASD SE ill support t e S DA an on u t SE or ing ntegrate
ro u t eam meetings as nee e • Risk Assessment e program is e e uting its ris management program as o umente in t e
SE an is mitigating ris s in t e areas o materiel s ortages an groun ontrol station interopera ility
• Performance e program as seven s eig t SAs an t o e ni al er orman e easures e D is eing sta e t roug t e R i mo i ies t e s an SAs to
align it aseline system per orman e e lo 40 system as een lying in t eater operationally sin e Septem er 2013 an is per orming e e tively in ire t support o om at operations lo al a ontinues to emonstrate its military utility aving lo n more t an 124 000 lig t ours o i 90 000 ave een in ire t support o overseas ontingen y operations
• Schedule e program omplete an R DA in uly 2014 in a van e o t e S DA s e ule or anuary 2015 e program is or ing to esta lis a ne s e ule aseline or
E an S t at oul res in t e 2011 unn ur y rea e program ill in orporate t is revise s e ule aseline into a ne A eing prepare or t e S e ision
• Reliability e program is meeting its relia ility re uirements e lo 40 Early perational apa ility as a ieve a mission e e tiveness rate an system availa ility rate o
95 per ent in Septem er 2014 e program is reporting materiel availa ility rates at 82 per ent in une 2014 e ee ing its overall materiel availa ility re uirement o 61 per ent
• Software e program as evelope more t an 4 million lines o o e resulting in ontinuous improvements to t e urrent evelopment pra ti es an re u e elays or elivery o
a e apa ilities A re u tion in t e num er o so t are uil s rom t ree to one per year as resulte in more sta le an stru ture so t are elivery or ot lo 30 an 40 air ra t
• Manufacturing e program is on tra it manu a turing re uirements an as iel e 18 o 21 lo 30 air ra t it t e t ree remaining on s e ule or a 2017 elivery e 11 lo 40 pro u tion air ra t ill omplete elivery in FY 2015 e prime ontra tor s manu a turing per orman e is a ove average a ter empla ing manu a turing ontrols o su ontra tors an suppliers
• Integration e program is or ing to ensure t e Air For e Distri ute ommon roun System D S an pro ess a van e ata emanating rom t e lo 40 air ra t e program is or ing to in orporate a or a le apa ility upgra es y in rementally eveloping ar are an so t are an ntegrate Fun tional apa ility F approa Ea F a s a ne level o apa ility to t e aseline program provi ing apa ility en an ements in managea le uil ing lo s
Conclusion: lo al a is elivering operational apa ility t roug a tailore A uisition Strategy t at mitigates te ni al ris y leveraging program restru turing an re aselining re uirements sta ili ation an systems engineering pro ess improvements e program plans t e implementation o uture apa ilities t roug separate in ivi ual A A programs as t e Air For e ontinues to e ine t e ontent o an a or a le mo erni ation program
128 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Small Diameter Bomb, Increment II (SDB II) Prime Contractor: Rayt eon issile Systems Executive Summary: e SD is a 250 poun lass gli e eapon esigne to atta moving an stationary targets in a verse eat er on itions SD is an A A D program in t e Engineering an
anu a turing Development p ase n FY 2014 DASD SE monitore system veri i ation results or in i ations o system per orman e an omplete t e
S rogram Support Assessment SA e SD is progressing to ar S o ever t e program is a year e in s e ule as a result o elays in all up roun A R uali i ation an time to orre t e i ien ies is overe in veri i ation Mission and System Description: e SD eapon as t ree prin ipal atta mo es normal laser illuminate an oor inate atta e eapon a resses t e ollo ing ar ig ter re uirements atta moving stationary an i e targets a verse eat er operations stan o range multiple ills per pass multiple or nan e arriage pre ision munitions apa ility re u e munitions ootprint in rease eapons e e tiveness minimi e potential or ollateral amage an re u e sus epti ility o munitions to ountermeasures e SD provi es a net or ena le
eapon apa ility via a ual mo e in 16 ltra ig Fre uen y eapon Data in Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e S SE in ay 2010 e
program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations e program su mitte a inal ra t S SE to DASD SE or revie in anuary 2014
• Requirements e R vali ate t e DD in uly 2009 For S t e program su mitte t e DD in lieu o a D as t e re uirements ere un ange e oint an Air For e re uirements sta s on urre it t is approa e une 2014 SA an t e August 2014
on iguration Steering oar on irme t e re uirements are reasona le an sta le All s an SAs a e uately tra e to t e System er orman e Spe i i ation esign spe i i ations an t e e ni al Data a age spe i i ations an ra ings
• Life Cycle Management e program ill implement pro u tion initiatives relate to ost re u tions in t e lig t termination telemetry an tra ing an ontrol a tuation systems e program ost may also ene it rom Foreign ilitary Sales SD is a De ense E porta ility Features DEF pilot program t ommen e a DEF stu y or system esign an evelopment in FY 2014
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e S in uly 2014 an t e program is e e uting t e pro esses in t e
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE omplete t e S SA in une 2014 per DoD
5000 02 DASD SE ommen e t e program s use o open ommuni ation it sta e ol ers a i e pri e in entive ee ontra t a 20 year arranty a strong pro ess or ontrolling esign
anges an a pro u tion relia ility in entive program
129DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E SD
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
o e program a epte t e SA re ommen ations 1 to revise t e ree lig t relia ility estimate to etter represent t e impa t o D ailures 2 to re u e s e ule ris y asing t e ntegrate aster S e ule on an in epen ent ris an on i en e assessment an 3 to
etermine et er more ata ill e nee e to veri y t e ntegrate Flig t Simulation FS o n FY 2015 DASD SE ill on u t uarterly DAES assessments in t e areas o s e ule
per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion • Risk Assessment e program is e e uting to t e ay 2010 SE e program is mitigating
one F 35 integration ris an one FS per orman e veri i ation ris • Performance e program is on tra to meet all 5 s 8 o 10 SAs an 8 o 11 e ni al
er orman e easures e s enario eapon e e tiveness S E an eapon e e tiveness E SA o ever may not e ully emonstrate until ot 3 or later ue to a epen en y on meeting an allo ate Free Flig t Relia ility FFR o 0 91 e emonstrate FFR is urrently 7 per ent elo t e gro t urve nee e to support t e S E an E
re uirements y E e program as mitigation plans in pla e • Schedule e program manager estimates S ill slip eyon t e A s e ule t res ol
o anuary 2014 to ar 2015 e S elay is a result o allenges in integrating parallel evelopment a tivities elays in uali i ation an time to orre t evelopmental test e i ien ies ulminating in a System eri i ation Revie s e ule slip y t e ontra tor
• Reliability e program is re uire to meet t e FFR SA o 0 91 y ot 5 ut is on tra to meet t e FFR y ot 3 e emonstrate per orman e an gro t pro e tions to ate o ever are 7 per ent elo t e relia ility nee e to meet t e S E an E SA y E
• Software SD so t are in lu es appro imately 380 000 sour e lines o o e a ross t ree omputer so t are on iguration items e program is eveloping so t are iteratively over si uil s uil 6 is in or e SA team note t e program la e e pe te so t are
engineering ept an re ommen e a ition o a overnment so t are lea i t e program as orre te
• Manufacturing e ay 2013 Air For e le anu a turing Rea iness Assessment in i ate all 68 pro u tion pro esses are mature Rayt eon an its suppliers ave esta lis e pilot pro u tion lines an emonstrate pro u tion pro esses using engineering assets n a ition Rayt eon as uilt 26 A R test assets on t e pro u tion line using e pe te ull rate pro esses an personnel e in ustrial ase as su i ient apa ity to support R
• Integration o e program parti ipates ully in t e et or Ena le eapons Steering roup to a ress
inter a e an integration on erns it omman an ontrol systems o systems e steering group onsists o mem ers rom net or ena le eapons an plat orm programs
o e program is e e uting to memoran a o agreement it t e F 15E F 35 an t e oint a ti al Air ontroller programs as ell as it t e Air For e ission lanning Division
t ese agreements ave een in pla e sin e 2007 o e program is on tra to omplete all erti i ations i enti ie in t e SE relating to
in ormation assuran e an net rea y o e program is mitigating one ris relate to t e F 35 evelopment elays an potential
impa ts asso iate it on urrent evelopment an t e program esigning t e SD to an F 35 ay environment i as yet to e ully ara teri e
Conclusion: e SD program is progressing to ar S o ever t e program is a year
e in s e ule ue to elays in A R uali i ation an time re uire to orre t e i ien ies is overe in veri i ation
130 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR) Prime Contractor: o e etermine Executive Summary: 3DE RR ill e t e prin ipal Air For e long range groun ase sensor or ete ting i enti ying tra ing an reporting aerial targets or t e oint For e Air
omponent omman er t roug t e eater Air ontrol System t ill repla e t e aging Air
For e A S 75 ra ar system i is in apa le o ete ting some urrent an emerging t reats an is e oming more i i ult an ostly to maintain e 3DE RR is an A A D t at ust entere t e Engineering an anu a turing Development E D p ase e program omplete ot t e pre E D revie an S DA t is year As o 4t uarter FY 2014 t e
program as not announ e sele tion o a prime ontra tor or E D e results o preliminary revie s an prototyping in i ate t e program is on tra Mission and System Description: e 3DE RR ill provi e t e Air For e ontrol an Reporting
enter R operators it a pre ise real time air pi ture o su i ient uality to isplay air a tivity an on u t positive ontrol o in ivi ual air ra t e 3DE RR ill e a transporta le eploya le system onsisting o a rotating antenna array assem ly on a pe estal Signal an ata pro essing ele troni s are ouse ot in t e rotating array assem ly an in t e pe estal An a itional s elter
ouses ommuni ations e uipment an a itional ata pro essing ar are an so t are An i enti i ation rien or oe system ill e an integral part o t e 3DE RR e 3DE RR may e ontrolle lo ally y operator maintainers or remotely y operators at t e R e system may e
po ere y overnment urnis e generators or gri po er Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in April 2014 to support
S an E D e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations an is positione to ontinue to o so en a prime ontra tor is sele te
• Requirements e R approve a revise DD in uly 2013 e ore t e pre E D revie an RF release t e program re uirements ave sin e remaine sta le e revise DD re uirements re le t t e results o tra e stu ies prototyping an t e preliminary esign pro ess
e program revise t e e ni al Re uirements Do ument RD to on orm to t e revise DD an in lu e t e RD it t e E D RF ontra tors are e pe te to mo i y t eir esign
spe i i ations i ere revie e uring t e reliminary Design Revie s DR to meet t e revise RD re uirements an su mit t em it t eir E D proposals e E D ontra tor is to e etermine pen ing ompletion o t e sour e sele tion pro ess an ontra t a ar e program re uirements are reasona le an sta le e re uirements le to a ra ar t at ill in lu e a ig po er an e i ient transmit an re eive apa ility it a van e igital eam orming to meet system re uirements
• Life Cycle Management e program o i e an t e e nology Development D p ase ontra tors on u te re uirements analyses y assessing t e per orman e o varie ra ar
ar ite tures in ive ey areas against osts to i enti y t e appropriate alan e o per orman e
131DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
A R F R E 3DE RR
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
an li e y le ost targets e 3DE RR is a De ense E porta ility Features DEF pilot program e ontra tors DRs in lu e an assessment o o DEF may e in lu e an t e impa t on ost an per orman e e program also omplete t ree parallel DEF stu ies uring t e D p ase t also in lu e DEF as a re uirement in its E D RF to on u t DEF esign an
evelopment • Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in ay 2014 Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE omplete a rogram Support Assessment in preparation
or t e pre E D revie an S DA e program ma e minor a ustments to t e program o umentation e ore t e pre E D revie as a result o t e assessment
• Risk Assessment e program ontinues to manage ris s as o umente in t e SE an Ris anagement lan e program plans to revise its ris assessment an mitigation plans ase on
t e sele te E D ontra tor • Performance A or ing to pre i te per orman e presente at t e DRs results rom
prototyping e orts an e ni al er orman e easures t e program is on tra to meet its si s an seven SAs
• Schedule e program as re ently entere t e E D p ase aving a ieve S in Septem er 2014 e program omplete DRs or ea o t ree ontra tors in une 2013 as planne in t e program s SE A pre E D revie as el in to er 2013 an t e S DA as el in Septem er 2014
• Reliability e program up ate t e relia ility re uirements in t e DD an RD in FY 2013 to align it t e RA Rationale
• Software e so t are evelopment in t e D p ase as omplete in FY 2013 DASD SE analy e t e D p ase ven ors estimate E D so t are evelopment e orts an provi e a
uantitative omparison o ompeting ven ors to t e program DASD SE assesse t e e e ts o s e ule ompression on t e E D so t are sta ing nee s an e e ts e program as not announ e a prime ontra tor so no ontra t or on so t are as een on u te in FY 2014
• Manufacturing e program o i e assesse ea ontra tor s manu a turing apa ilities an plans in on un tion it t e DRs ontra tors ave in i ate t at e isting a ilities an pro esses may e use or mu o t e manu a turing e orts e manu a turing assessments in i ate riti al te nology elements e g gallium nitri e a ase transmit re eive mo ules are mature an t at planne manu a turing apa ilities are mature or t is point in t e program
• Integration A ter t eir DR ea ontra tor emonstrate internal system integration as part o t e system prototype emonstration e program o i e as esta lis e or ing relations ips
it e ternal organi ations as nee e an plans to esta lis memoran a o agreement or t e E D p ase
Conclusion: e program is on tra to provi e a ra ar system t at ill meet t e user s operational re uirements
132 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
4.4 DASD(SE) Assessments of DoD Programs
Assessments are as o 4t uarter FY 2014 is se tion in lu es summaries on t e ollo ing t ree programs
• F 35 oint Stri e Fig ter Air ra t
• oint ig t a ti al e i le
• u li ey n rastru ture n rement 2 n 2
133DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
is page intentionally lan
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft
Prime Contractor: o ee artin Aeronauti s an ratt an itney ilitary Engines Division
Executive Summary: e F 35 is a t ree variant amily o multi role ig ter air ra t e F 35 is an
A A D program in t e System Development an Demonstration SDD p ase it on urrent R e program a ieve S re erti i ation in ar 2012 n 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in su system te ni al
revie s ris revie oar s an ro u tion Rea iness Revie s RR assesse so t are evelopment an reporte t e results to ongress an on u te an assessment o manu a turing ris to in orm t e
ilestone De ision Aut ority regar ing rea iness or in rease pro u tion rates e F 35 program ontinues to ma e progress ut many allenges remain
Mission and System Description: e F 35 program plans to evelop an iel an a or a le ommon amily o ne t generation multi role stri e air ra t or t e S Air For e avy arine orps an allies e t ree variants are t e Air For e onventional a eo an an ing
t e avy arrier ariant an t e arine orps S ort a eo an erti al an ing S Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e SE in De em er 2009 An up ate
in ovem er 2010 in lu e improvements in ris management e program is ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE it out aivers or eviations o ever t e SE la s a es ription o urrent te ni al pro esses s e ule an organi ation SD A e pe ts t e program to
su mit SE up ates to support Follo on Development an SDD S • Requirements e R approve t e S perational Re uirements Do ument RD in
April 2000 an t e oint rogram i e in orporate t e re uirements in t e oint Stri e Fig ter ontra t Spe i i ation S During a 2013 revie t e program rea irme t e S ontaine all RD re uirements rogram level re uirements are sta le
• Life Cycle Management e program as implemente multiple a or a ility initiatives investing an a itional 160 million to omplete SDD n 2014 t e program entere into a osts aring agreement it in ustry to reemp asi e s are osts e program esta lis e a ost ar room in t e to re u e perations an Support osts an to i enti y potential s oul ost savings
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in De em er 2010 e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve e program is or ing to a ress supply ain ris s an vulnera ilities or an up ate e pe te in 1st uarter FY 2015
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments – A SD A ire te revie o t e program s manu a turing
progress reveale a epta le ris to allo an in rease ramp rate in FY 2015 DASD SE parti ipate in su system te ni al revie s in lu ing several RRs DASD SE also le a ongressionally ire te 6 mont eep ive into F 35 so t are evelopment i on irme
135DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
D D F 35
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
so t are ontinues to present s e ule ris it estimates o 6 to 14 mont s o pressure to so t are elivery milestones
• Risk Assessment e program is e e uting a ris management program as o umente in t e Ris anagement lan As a result o on urren y t e program is simultaneously or ing to mitigate ris s in all p ases evelopment pro u tion an sustainment Ris mitigation plans are in pla e
• Performance e program is on tra to meet 8 o t e 10 s liste in t e RD e vali ity o t e mo eling assumptions is ampering emonstration o t e sortie generation rate S R an logisti ootprint s e program plans to reassess t e S R an logisti ootprint using operationally realisti groun rules an urrent esign attri utes Alt oug on tra t e S om at ra ius S per orman e an re overy s ave limite margins
• Schedule – e program omplete an nterim rogram Revie DA in to er 2013 e program is at ris or meeting some A t res ol s y up to 9 mont s ue to t e elays in so t are evelopment mentione previously For e ample DASD SE estimates in i ate t e
lo 3F Fleet Release t res ol o Fe ruary 2018 may slip 9 mont s an t e S FR e ision t res ol o to er 2019 may slip 4 mont s
• Reliability Relia ility per orman e to ate remains mi e a ross all variants it some metri s on tra an ot ers elo plan verall t e program is ontinuing to or to meet ey relia ility re uirements n 2014 t e program un e a relia ility improvement program it ontra t in entives to improve relia ility
• Software So t are evelopment ontinues as a primary s e ule ris ue largely to past per orman e in lu ing ina e uate SE an integration pra ti es e ongressionally ire te so t are revie team on u te so t are parametri an s e ule analyses to assess program progress e team estimate so t are elays o up to 14 mont s an re ommen e management improvements to re u e potential A impa ts o appro imately 9 mont s e team i enti ie
ey so t are ris s in lu ing la o sustainment planning use o so t are metri s an e e t resolution e program as a opte t e re ommen ations an ontinues to improve so t are
evelopment pro esses Sin e t e assessment t e lo 2 so t are as ontinue in lig t test it one or t o a itional lean up uil s still li ely lo 3i egan lig t tests in FY 2014 ut
is 3 to 5 mont s e in t e urrent s e ule e program is or ing to a elerate lo 3F evelopment y re u ing s e ule margins an implementing pro u tivity improvements
• Manufacturing DASD SE on u te an in epen ent assessment o manu a turing ris s asso iate it in rease pro u tion rates e assessment in i ate year over year improvement o ever mo erate ris remains ue to parts availa ility uality an ultimately air ra t eliveries Sin e t e assessment t e program as improve uality optimi ation o pro u tion se uen es a tory loor lo tooling inter angea ility repla ea ility an engineering ange management e program ontinues to e e ute ost re u tion initiatives
• Integration nteropera ility an n ormation Assuran e A erti i ations an veri i ation an la apa ities are at items A erti i ation is on t e riti al pat as t e program annot omplete interopera ility erti i ations until lo 3F apa ility is t roug veri i ation verall
veri i ation an la apa ity are stret e to support on urrent lo a tivity e program as implemente la an es top tool upgra es an e pe ts more e i ient veri i ation ile ontinuing to evaluate la apa ity options e program as esta lis e memoran a o agreement
an nter a e ontrol or ing roups it eapon program o i es as o umente in t e SE
Conclusion: e F 35 program is ma ing stea y progress ut many allenges remain So t are evelopment ontinues to e a top allenge an is a ma or program o us area
136 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) Prime Contractors: A eneral o ee
artin orporation s os De ense ompetition
Executive Summary: is a lig t tru inten e to in rease prote tion payloa an per orman e over t e ig o ility ultipurpose eele e i le e program is in t e Engineering an anu a turing Development E D p ase as an esta lis e initial pro u t aseline it sta le re uirements e program is managing an mitigating ris s lea ing to
S t roug re uirements up ates an plans or est alue ompetition in FY 2015 Mission and System Description: e is a oint Servi e Army an arine orps program t onsists o a amily o ve i les it ompanion trailers apa le o per orming multiple mission
roles ile provi ing prote te sustaine net or e mo ility or personnel an payloa s a ross t e ull range o military operations e in lu es t o variants it a ommon automotive
ve i le plat orm: a t o seat variant to satis y t e om at Support e i le S re uirement an a our seat variant to satis y t e om at a ti al e i le re uirement e t o seat S
variant as one ase ve i le plat orm t e tility S elter arrier e our seat variant as t o ase ve i le plat orms t e lose om at eapons arrier an t e eneral urpose ve i le
Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) DASD SE approve t e E D SE in une 2012
e program ontinues to ollo t e approve SE it t e e eption o ris management e program mo i ie ris onse uen e e initions a ter S to non stan ar ris e initions e revise e initions allo t e program to is ern et een primary an non primary s an to
etter manage resour es uring E D A e uate plans are in pla e to a ress te ni al an s e ule ris s A SE up ate is un er ay to support S planne or 4t uarter FY 2015 or entry into t e ro u tion an Deployment D p ase
• Requirements e R approve t e DD in anuary 2012 e D approval is e pe te in t e 1st uarter FY 2015 to support t e ne t p ase is D ent t roug a series o ive pre etermine event ase ata revie s alle no le ge oints t ree o i o urre uring FY 2014 rogram sta e ol ers use t e results o t ese s to re ine t e program s re uirements or t e D p ase Re uirements are reasona le an sta le
• Life Cycle Management e program s A uisition Strategy an re uirements are stru ture to in entivi e t e t ree E D p ase ontra tors to ontinue to a ust t eir ve i le esigns to stay
it in t e targete 255 000 average unit manu a turing ost an 399 000 average pro urement unit ost e u get Year 2012 Y12 targets also support A o e tives e program o i e evelope an perations an Support ost mo el to esta lis a ost target o 29 100
Y12 per year per ve i le e pe ts to release t e D p ase RF in 1st uarter FY 2015 an ma e a inal est value sele tion at S in 4t uarter FY 2015
• Program Protection Plan (PPP) SD A approve t e in August 2012 e program ontinues to ollo t e pro esses spe i ie in t e p ates to t e are un er ay to support S an R
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments e program on u te a ro u tion Rea iness Revie RR an
System eri i ation Revie S R or ea o t e t ree ontra tors DASD SE assesse t at all
AM General Lockheed Martin Oshkosh
137DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
D D
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
ontra tors emonstrate a e uate pro esses pro e ures pro u tion tooling an mo eling an simulation to support R eginning in 4t uarter FY 2015 DASD SE assesse t at t e program as veri ie ontra tor omplian e levels or t e re uirements n a ition o DASD SE engage in t e re uirements pro ess an Systems Engineering or ing
ntegrate ro u t eam SE meetings o DASD SE on u te uarterly DAES assessments in FY 2014 in t e areas o s e ule
per orman e management interopera ility an pro u tion • Risk Assessment e program eviate rom t e ris management pro ess o umente in t e
approve une 2012 SE y anging t e ris onse uen e e initions to non stan ar e initions e non stan ar e initions is ern et een primary an non primary s
ena ling etter management o resour es uring E D e program s ris revie oar as approve 39 ris s i t e program is managing itigation plans are in pla e to a ress t e program s ris s it some 4 omman ontrol ommuni ation an omputers integration ris s e erre until t e D p ase to align it maturity o t e integrate systems
• Performance Demonstrate E D per orman e uring evelopmental testing or ea o t e 22 prototypes per ven or in i ates t at t e s an SAs are a ieva le it in t e a or a ility ap Alt oug not every an SA as ully emonstrate uring E D testing t e assesses t e ris o t e inning ven or s a ility to ully emonstrate SA omplian e y t e operational test as lo e S Rs in August an Septem er 2014 veri ie omplian e levels o t e ompeting ontra tors e program is on tra to meet all e ni al er orman e easures y FR o e eeme a ar a le or t e ne t p ase ontra t t e inning ven or must laim omplian e or all s SAs
• Schedule e program entere t e E D p ase at S in August 2012 e program omplete RRs an S Rs in FY 2014 as s e ule is on tra to a ieve S in
4t uarter FY 2015 a ea o its t res ol o ovem er 2015 • Reliability e results rom evelopmental testing in FY 2014 in i ate t at t e DD t res ol
re uirement o 2 400 mean miles et een operational mission ailures is a ieva le t roug t e ompetitive A uisition Strategy or t e ne t p ase At t e une 5 t e emerging results
in i ate t at t e operational availa ility re uirement o t e sustaina ility is a ieva le it a epta le ris ase on emerging results rom relia ility testing t e program pro e ts
testing ill olle t su i ient per orman e ata to support o n sele t e program pro e ts t at relia ility gro t improvements an ot er orre tive a tions ill in rease t e li eli oo o a ieving t e relia ility SA t res ol i ill also improve sustaina ility
• Software Ea o t e ontra tors as emonstrate so t are maturity uring evelopmental testing in FY 2014 it some in ormation assuran e ris s i enti ie or uture orre tive a tions prior to erti i ation
• Manufacturing – e program omplete a RR or ea o t e t ree ompeting ontra tors in Septem er 2014 DASD SE assesse t at ea o t e t ree ontra tors emonstrate a e uate pro esses pro e ures pro u tion tooling an mo eling an simulation to support R in 4t uarter FY 2015
• Integration e program o i e monitors esign anges in E D to ensure proper integration o ontra tor an overnment urnis e e uipment t roug a series o mont ly ontra t elivera les e program manages 17 e ternal memoran a o agreement in a or an e it t e
approve SE Ea ven or as emonstrate t e appropriate level o integration t roug elivery o 22 prototypes i ave un ergone evelopmental testing in FY 2014
Conclusion: e program is on tra to meet S in 4t uarter FY 2015 a ea o its A t res ol o ovem er 2015 t as up ate re uirements t roug a pro ess an plans or a est value ompetition or an R ontra t a ar is li ely to meet all o its s y FR
138 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Public Key Infrastructure, Increment 2 (PKI Inc 2) Prime Contractor: eneral Dynami s 4 Systems Executive Summary: n 2 is inten e to ena le in ormation assuran e servi es on t e Se ret nternet roto ol Router et or S R et y
provi ing non orgea le an non angea le re entials on a ar are to en e program is an
A A A in t e ro u tion an Deployment p ase e program a ieve S in 2n uarter FY 2011 an as een eploye ut is e perien ing
i i ulties in e e ution n FY 2014 DASD SE parti ipate in a riti al ange Revie R an ot er revie s DASD SE provi e te ni al gui an e to assist t e program in restarting t e te ni al pro esses nee e to eploy t e program su ess ully n 2 ontinues to e perien e allenges ut is or ing to orm realisti program plans Mission and System Description: n 2 provi es a stan ar s ase representation o p ysi al i entity in an ele troni orm n 2 in orporates upgra es over previous i enti i ation systems to en an e t e on i entiality an integrity o t e ata s are a ross t e Department n 2 allo s ar ig ters to se urely a ess pro ess an store in ormation on t e S R et regar less o system organi ation or lo ation Systems Engineering Activities • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) e ational Se urity Agen y SA approve t e SE or
S in April 2011 During t e pro u tion an manu a turing p ase t e program as e perien e eviations an is not ul illing t e o e tives o t e SE e R etermine t at t e program as not per orming t e o umente SE pro esses e R senior o i ial
etermine t e program nee e to reesta lis t e SE pro esses an up ate t e SE or DASD SE approval y 1st uarter FY 2015 esta lis ing metri s to tra progress
• Requirements e R approve using t e DD it amen ments in lieu o a D in ay 2009 an revali ate t e re uirements o uments in ar 2014 e entity an rote tion
anagement Senior oor ination roup vette an a epte t e e ompose un tional re uirements e program uses t e un tional re uirements o ument an Servi e on ept o
perations S to gui e t e remaining system evelopment a tivities e re uirements are reasona le an sta le n 2 is in t e pro ess o urt er e omposing an o umenting t e re uirements in a System Su system Spe i i ation an a So t are Re uirements Spe i i ation
• Life Cycle Management e program as not ompletely a resse li e y le management re uirements e program as evelope t e un tional re uirements ut not t e system level re uirements e program as not etermine t e nee e orre tions to elp resolve t e 2013 F E eterminations o not operationally e e tive an not operationally suita le
• Program Protection Plan e DoD as t e ilestone De ision Aut ority approve t e in De em er 2013 e program is e e uting t e pro esses o umente in t e approve
139DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
D D 2
Data as of 4th quarter FY 2014.
Assessments • DASD(SE) Assessments DASD SE le t e te ni al management team uring t e R e
revie oun t at t e SE pro esses ere ina e uate an t e R senior o i ial re uire t e program to up ate its pro esses SD A in rease oversig t y on u ting ot a DAES revie an a ollo on eep ive it t e program e eep ive ig lig te t e i i ulties t e program ontinue to e perien e o e program is implementing re ommen ations to leverage t e SE e pertise at SA to a
te ni al rigor as it restarts its SE pro esses versig t organi ations in SD are provi ing a itional te ni al insig t an mentors ip
o e program is implementing a metri s rame or to provi e greater insig t into progress an system te ni al per orman e e program a epte t e re ommen ation to provi e regular up ates to sta e ol ers t roug out t e Department
o n FY 2015 DASD SE plans to atten t e release level te ni al revie s assess evelopment metri s an provi e mentors ip to improve ris management pro e ures
• Risk Assessment n 2 ris management pro esses are not mature enoug to i enti y root ause an reate a e uate mitigation plans e program as i enti ie ris in t e re uirements
an un ing S R et to en relia ility o en anagement System S sta ility an program integration areas
• Performance e program as our s e program as not ully emonstrate t e s an as not met t e availa ility An issue it sta ility o t e S is impa ting t e attainment o t e availa ility As a result t e program manager is onsi ering a ange to t e in rastru ture ar ite ture
• Schedule e program omplete a R in uly 2014 i postpone t e Full Deployment De ision until Septem er 2017 e program ontinues to struggle an as not omplete t e A uisition Strategy A or SE it in t e timelines set y t e riti al ange Report DASD SE ontinues to monitor t e program s e ule or on urren y an realism
• Reliability e program is not meeting t e re uirement or system availa ility e annual o ntime o t e system as 122 ours i is 14 times t e allo a le o ntime to meet t e
availa ility re uirement e S is e perien ing re uent ailovers rom t e primary to se on ary site e program as propose an ar ite ture re esign in a ition to ar are re res to orre t t e issue ut t e program as not in lu e t ese e orts in its overall planning
o en relia ility issues are egra ing t e user e perien e an in reasing t e manpo er ur en nee e to manage t e system e program is ra ting a to en relia ility improvement plan
• Software n 2 so t are is ma e up primarily o ommer ial o t e s el pro u ts i t e program is ustomi ing it a ons t at re uire program evelopment o appro imately 250 000 lines o o e e program is eveloping its so t are evelopment metri s
• Deployment n 2 is urrently eploye to more t an 400 000 users o ever t e Department a i i ulty meeting its timelines or onversion rom user name an pass or to
n 2 e a itional apa ility in uture evelopment e orts ill in rease t e s ale o t e system ut t e inal s ale o t e system is not yet etermine e un no n esign onsi eration egra es t e program s a ility to properly si e t e in rastru ture
• Integration e program is in t e pro ess o esta lis ing a lea integrator role or t e prime ontra tor ile maintaining overnment responsi ility or overall system integration e
program is e in s e ule in ompleting t e re uire memoran a o agreement an servi elevel agreements
Conclusion: e n 2 program ontinues to e perien e e e ution i i ulties e in rease re uen y o oversig t un tions ill assist t e program in orming its oun ational plans
140 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
5 CONCLUSION
The Department remains committed to growing our systems engineering capability through our focus on people, process, and appropriate policy. DASD(SE) continues to assess the impact of systems engineering as executed across MDAPs and MAIS programs. The Military Departments’ FY 2014 achievements and FY 2015 plans captured in this report demonstrate a continued commitment to the provisions of WSARA focused on improving DoD systems engineering.
Following submission of this FY 2014 report, we will deliver our next report in March 2017, covering FY 2015 and FY 2016 systems engineering accomplishments in accordance with the FY 2015 NDAA section 221, making the DoD Systems Engineering Annual Report a biennial requirement.
141DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
This page intentionally blank.
APPENDIX A
Department of the Army Systems Engineering Self-Assessment
This page intentionally blank.
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
Fiscal Year 2014 (FY14) Army Systems Engineering Self Assessment
6 February 2015
Advancing the State of Systems Engineering for the Army
ASA(ALT) System of Systems Engineering and Integration (SoSE&I)
145DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
This page intentionally blank.
146 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
iii
Contents
1.0 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING OVERVIEW .................................................................... 1 1.1 SERVICE-LEVEL SE STRATEGY ........................................................................................................................ 2
1.1.1 Objectives and Focus Areas ................................................................................................................... 2 1.1.2 SE Strategy Implementation ................................................................................................................... 4 1.1.3 SE Contributions to Program Affordability ........................................................................................... 5 1.1.4 Program Oversight ................................................................................................................................ 5
1.2 PRE-MILESTONES A AND B RIGOR ................................................................................................................... 6 1.2.1 Systems Engineering Plans (SEPs) ........................................................................................................ 6 1.2.2 Development Planning (DP) .................................................................................................................. 7 1.2.3 Decision Centric Systems Engineering (DCSE)..................................................................................... 7 1.2.4 Systems Architecting .............................................................................................................................. 8 1.2.5 Army Technology Maturation Initiative ................................................................................................. 8 1.2.6 FY14 PEO/PM Efforts ........................................................................................................................... 9 1.2.7 FY15 PEO/PM Efforts ......................................................................................................................... 10
1.3 RAM&S ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 1.3.1 Reliability and Maintainability Working Group (RMWG)................................................................... 10 1.3.2 T&E Efficiencies Task Force ............................................................................................................... 11 1.3.3 Energizing Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Community ...................................... 11 1.3.4 Condition Based Maintenance Plus (CBM+) ...................................................................................... 12 1.3.5 PEO Efforts .......................................................................................................................................... 12 1.3.6 FY15 Efforts ......................................................................................................................................... 13
1.4 SE DURING JCIDS AND CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................... 14 1.4.1 SE Contributions to JCIDS .................................................................................................................. 14 1.4.2 SE Concept-to-Product (C2P) End-to-End (E2E) Process .................................................................. 14 1.4.3 SE in Contract Requirements ............................................................................................................... 14
1.5 FY14 FOCUS AREA PROGRESS AND IMPROVEMENTS ..................................................................................... 16 1.5.1 System of Systems Engineering Management Plan (SoSEMP) ............................................................ 16 1.5.2 Always On-On Demand (AO-OD) ....................................................................................................... 16 1.5.3 SE Capability Optimization ................................................................................................................. 17
1.6 PROGRESS AND IMPROVEMENTS – PROCESSES AND TOOLS FOR SOS ............................................................. 17 1.6.1 SoS General Officer Steering Council (GOSC) ................................................................................... 18 1.6.2 Army Business Council (ABC) ............................................................................................................. 18 1.6.3 Integrated Architecture Task Force (IATF) ......................................................................................... 19 1.6.4 Army Integrated Requirements Framework (IRF) ............................................................................... 19 1.6.5 Army Geospatial Enterprise (AGE) ..................................................................................................... 19 1.6.6 Open System Architecture (OSA) ......................................................................................................... 20 1.6.7 VICTORY/FACE Architecture Standards ............................................................................................ 20 1.6.8 Common Operating Environment (COE)............................................................................................. 20 1.6.9 Agile Process ....................................................................................................................................... 22 1.6.10 Capability Set Management Board (CSMB), Capability Set Design Database (CSDD), and Capability Modernization Matrix (CMM) .......................................................................................................... 22 1.6.11 Basis of Issue (BOI) Feeder Data (FD) Driven Network Architecture ........................................... 22 1.6.12 Platform Integration and Analysis (PIA) ........................................................................................ 23 1.6.13 Capability Set (CS) Fielding ........................................................................................................... 23 1.6.14 Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) Update ............................................................................... 23
1.7 ADDITIONAL SE ACCOMPLISHMENTS ............................................................................................................ 24 1.7.1 Notable PEO/PM FY14 Accomplishments ........................................................................................... 24 1.7.2 Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM) SE Office ...................................... 24 1.7.3 Analysis on Extending the Army Network to Aviation ......................................................................... 25 1.7.4 Army Systems Engineering Forum (ASEF) .......................................................................................... 25 1.7.5 Program Protection Plan (PPP) Reviews ............................................................................................ 25 1.7.6 Support to Programs ............................................................................................................................ 25 1.7.7 Product Data and Data Rights Acquisition and Management ............................................................. 26 1.7.8 Cybersecurity ....................................................................................................................................... 26
147DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
iv
1.7.9 Joint Federated Assurance Center (JFAC) Support ............................................................................ 26 1.7.10 Value Engineering (VE) .................................................................................................................. 27 1.7.11 Business System Portfolio Management ......................................................................................... 27
2.0 ARMY SE WORKFORCE ............................................................................................ 27 2.1 WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES ..................................................................................................... 27
2.1.1 Key Leadership Positions (KLPs) ........................................................................................................ 27 2.1.2 Systems Engineering Research Center (SERC) Support ...................................................................... 28 2.1.3 Specialty Engineering Education and Training (SE2T) Program ....................................................... 28 2.1.4 Rotational Assignments ........................................................................................................................ 28 2.1.5 Recruitment and Training .................................................................................................................... 29 2.1.6 PEO Efforts .......................................................................................................................................... 29
2.2 WORKFORCE RESOURCING ............................................................................................................................ 30 2.2.1 Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund (DADWF) for Hiring .......................................... 30
2.3 IMPACT OF BUDGET CUTS .............................................................................................................................. 31 2.4 WORKFORCE POSITIONS IN THE ARMY........................................................................................................... 31
ACRONYM LIST ....................................................................................................................... 33
Table List
Table 2-1 Historical Section 852 Hires/Allocated ........................................................................ 30 Table 2-2 Number of Systems Engineering Personnel ................................................................. 32 Table 2-3 Planned Personnel Growth ........................................................................................... 32 Table 2-4 Number of Non-Government SE Support Personnel ................................................... 32
148 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
1
1.0 Systems Engineering Overview
The System of Systems Engineering and Integration (SoSE&I) Directorate is the Army’s focal
point for promoting and implementing effective Systems Engineering (SE) practices across the
department and ensuring a trained SE workforce is ready and available. The Executive Director,
SoSE&I serves as the overarching management and oversight authority for System of Systems
(SoS) engineering policies and processes for the Army, and works collaboratively with Program
Executive Offices (PEO) and Program Managers (PM) to synchronize SE processes, ensuring
common execution across the Army. In this role, the SoSE&I Directorate executes Army-level
SE in support of the acquisition process with a particular emphasis on SoS Engineering and
Integration, cross-cutting capabilities (CCC), Cyber Defense, SoS-focused Test and Evaluation
(T&E), and SoS capability fielding. The SoSE&I Directorate’s efforts are critical to supporting
the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT))
Army Acquisition Executive’s (AAE’s) responsibility for developing, fielding, and supporting a
broad-based set of systems that can be mixed and matched to achieve Army end-state objectives.
These end-state objectives are expressed in the Army Campaign Plan (ACP) and SoS
Engineering provides the means to ensure the right mix of systems are available at any given
point to achieve Army capability needs.
FY14 Progress and Shortfalls
The Army identified three SE implementation improvement focus areas in Fiscal Year 2014
(FY14):
1. System of Systems Engineering Management Plan (SoSEMP): The SoSE&I
Directorate developed a SoSEMP to guide SoS acquisition planning, roadmaps, and
decision making and socialized it with the Acquisition Community. The SoSEMP is still
in draft and the SoSE&I Directorate will work to publish it in FY15.
2. “ ‘Always On-On Demand (AO-OD)’ Business Capability Lifecycle ” Acquisition Effort: The SoSE&I Directorate implemented a Live, Virtual, Constructive-Distributed
test, evaluate, and integrate tactical systems into a tactically relevant, at-scale, SoS
environment.
3. Systems Engineering Capability Optimization: In conjunction with the Training and
Doctrine Command (TRADOC), the SoSE&I Directorate conducted the Network
Capability Review (NCR) to identify a “good enough” tactical architecture, reduce the
cost of equipping the Army’s tactical network, and minimize the impact to operational
capabilities.
The Army has also identified three focus areas to improve in FY15:
1. Cybersecurity: The ASA(ALT) Cyber Focal team within SOSE&I plans to expand and
increase communications with the cyberspace and materiel development communities by
re-organizing the existing ASA(ALT) Chief Information Officer (CIO) responsibilities
with the team that will be working new identified ASA(ALT) Cybersecurity function(s).
This will combine the mission of the two ASA(ALT) entities to improve coordination,
synchronization, and integration of Cyber programs, information assurance and
149DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
2
compliance, ASA(ALT) CIO governance, and Cybersecurity functions into one unified
team for the ASA(ALT).
2. Common Operating Environment (COE): The Army is executing the COE mandate by
establishing Common Foundation objectives and support standards, implementing the
Common Foundation across systems, and identifying opportunities to reduce costs.
3. System of System Engineering and Integration in support of Capability Set Fielding and Network Integration Evaluation (NIE): The SoSE&I Directorate will enhance
capability package development and fielding support, which will deliver greater network
capability to tactical units. The directorate will provide SE expertise to assist with
planning and executing the NIEs and help integrate, evaluate, and refine the Army’s
tactical network.
1.1 Service-Level SE Strategy
The Army SE strategy aligns overarching objectives with the ACP and the ASA(ALT) Strategic
goals. The mutual dependency between the Army’s operational, acquisition, and technical
communities highlights ASA(ALT)’s role as the focal point for effective materiel acquisition,
and the importance of effecting SoS engineering. The Army operational community,
spearheaded by the Deputy Chief of Staff G-3/5/7, provides capability needs and shortfalls, and
works with ASA(ALT) in concert with TRADOC and G-8 to determine which of the
needs/shortfalls are best filled by a materiel solution. Likewise, the Army Information
Technology (IT) community, led by the CIO/G-6, provides the technical standards needed to
ensure commonality across the network, enabling technical interoperability.
There is a clear distinction between the SoSE&I Directorate’s role in SE and that of the PEOs
and PMs. Whereas PEOs focus on the acquisition of a portfolio of related systems and PMs on
one or more specific systems, the SoSE&I Directorate takes a more strategic viewpoint that
aligns a broad scope of cross-PEO capabilities and Science and Technology (S&T) efforts
against Army capability objectives.
1.1.1 Objectives and Focus Areas
The SoSE&I Directorate’s approach centers on three key concepts of Army-level management:
acquisition planning, decision support, and risk/opportunity management. The SoSE&I
Directorate’s SE processes define procedures, products, and stakeholder interactions required to
implement these concepts to better achieve the objectives for the SoS across cost, performance,
and schedule.
These three processes are executed continuously and work within the Weapon System Review
(WSR) annual battle rhythm and the Capability Set (CS) Fielding process. The WSRs are the
primary means within the Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) to affect changes to a
program, especially as related to funding, so the result of the SoSE&I Directorate’s SE process is
a cohesive cross-portfolio view of SoS issues and risk related to the systems under review.
While the WSR battle rhythm provides a primary focus for engineering analysis, the T&E and
synchronized fielding processes follow the CS Fielding battle rhythm.
• Acquisition Planning: The ASA(ALT)/AAE, supported by the ASA(ALT) Principal
Military Deputy leads execution of the Army’s acquisition function and the acquisition
150 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
3
management system, to include providing oversight for the life-cycle management and
sustainment of Army weapons systems and equipment across the Acquire to Retire (A2R)
end-to-end (E2E) process. Specifically, the SoSE&I Directorate focuses on working with
the operational community to define the materiel solutions needed to achieve the goals of
the ACP.
• Decision Support: The SoSE&I Directorate is responsible for providing engineering and
technical research and analysis required by the ASA(ALT)/AAE and staff elements to
make defensible acquisition decisions based on technical merit. In this role, the SoSE&I
Directorate makes assessments and recommendations to the ASA(ALT)/AAE and staff
that span the life-cycle of acquisition programs, from concept development through
disposition.
• Risk/Opportunity Management: At the Army-level, effectively managing SoS efforts
is contingent on identifying, and then mitigating, the risks associated with realizing the
SoS objectives, as well as identifying opportunities to improve the performance of the
SoS against the objectives. These SoS-level risks are cross-portfolio risks that must be
avoided, accepted, or mitigated to achieve Army capability objectives for a specific
timeframe. Risk and opportunity management specifically assesses second- and third-
order affects of one program’s decision on other programs or on the engineering of the
SoS as a whole. The SoSE&I Directorate provides the ASA(ALT)/AAE an assessment
of managed risks that may affect multiple programs across one or more portfolios, or
risks relating to a CCC.
The complexity of the Army’s modern systems makes a strong SE capability important to ensure
the right systems are built and designed correctly, with minimal modifications. The Army
Acquisition SE Community applies SE best practices, ensuring the best value for the Warfighter
to support the ASA(ALT) strategic goals and ACP objectives and to equip the Army for the 21st
Century, by emphasizing the following focus areas and objectives:
• Early SE and a disciplined acquisition approach that improves early understanding of
requirements and technology, refines designs early, informs key decision points, and
reduces uncertainty before commitment to a specific program path.
• Continue to establish a Development Planning capability to instill greater rigor and
emphasize collaboration in new program initiatives, existing product improvements, and
SoS combination and trade assessments. Development Planning facilitates a
collaborative process to ensure the right programs are chosen and developed.
• Identify cost drivers, to include acquisition and life-cycle costs, to ensure cost estimates
identify characteristics that will inform decisions based on evaluation of cost versus
benefits.
• Improve reliability by emphasizing Reliability, Availability, Maintainability, and
Sustainability (RAM&S) best practices and tools.
• Implement the COE, which will unify software development across the Army and will be
developed around a Common Foundation approach supported by common interfaces and
standards implemented across the Army’s Computing Environments (CEs).
• Continue Army Cloud Development through the Army Cloud Working Group, focusing
on advancing IT efficiencies by establishing common standards.
151DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
4
• Identify Modeling & Simulation (M&S) tools and applications to support program and
Army leadership decisions across acquisition phases and to evaluate concepts, understand
cost, reduce uncertainty, and predict performance.
The Army Acquisition SE Community will develop and use the following fundamentals to meet
outlined objectives:
• Organization: Define essential functions, refine organization structures, and document
concept plans.
• Workforce: The Army Acquisition SE Community will strive to “build the bench,”
selecting and training personnel in hard engineering skills and appropriate soft skills.
• Strategic guidance: Develop necessary strategic guidance to communicate Army goals
and provide direction to the SE workforce.
• Community collaboration and sharing of best practices: Identify common and
systemic issues, formulate proposals, and socialize potential solutions through
community forums and promote the use of identified best practices.
• Identify common SE tools, methodologies, processes, and products that promote
efficiency across programs and architectures.
• Information Management: Build information sharing capabilities to ensure an
informed workforce and make key information easily available and searchable.
• Enforcement at the PEO Level: Stress the importance of SE, track progress, and
impose rigor and discipline into SE processes at the PEO level.
1.1.2 SE Strategy Implementation
To implement the Army SE Strategy in FY14, the SoSE&I Directorate focused on the following
initiatives:
• Establishing the SoS General Officer Steering Council (GOSC) to shape and synchronize
the development, production, and fielding of integrated materiel capabilities.
• Creating a SoSEMP that provides guidance on managing the development, design,
delivery, and configuration of the management process.
• Delivering strategic-level, SoS engineering/architectural analysis for current/future force
capabilities.
• Implementing the CS Fielding construct to deliver fully-integrated suites of networked
equipment.
• Developing a COE to converge the operating environment baselines.
• Utilizing NIEs to integrate and mature the Army’s tactical network.
• Establishing engineering policy, guides, best practices templates, and metrics to ensure
SoS discipline across the Army.
• Improving SE documentation review processes to improve quality through strict
adherence to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and Army policy and
guidance.
• Conducting program reviews to ensure compliance with established policy guidance,
architectures, and standards.
152 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
5
1.1.3 SE Contributions to Program Affordability
The Army has established affordability constraints, set at the Materiel Development Decision, to
inform requirements, design tradeoffs, procurement and sustainment costs estimates. Annual
Configuration Steering Boards (CSBs) look at the progress the Army has made to achieve
affordability and provide those results to the ASA(ALT)/AAE. In concert with the current fiscal
climate, PEOs also took steps in FY14 to contribute to cost effective programs without
sacrificing SE integrity of systems fielded to the Soldier. The PEOs/ PMs contributed to SE
affordability efforts by:
• PEO Ammunition’s Excalibur program kicked off a cost reduction opportunity program
that, to date, has identified potential cost savings by eliminating redundant testing and
improving personnel efficiency. In FY15, the Excalibur program will focus on
identifying cost savings in material and subcontractor costs.
• PEO Command, Control and Communications-Tactical (C3T) uses the Value
Management process across the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T)
environment to reduce duplicative software instances and leverage common servers to
increase memory, processor speed, and hard drive size.
• PEO Combat Support and Combat Service Support (CS&CSS), as part of the Joint Light
Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) program Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD)
phase, conducted the SE practice of knowledge point (KP) reviews to further refine
program requirements and identify trade items. A key cost control effort was the Cost
Informed Trade Analysis, which analyzed significant cost contributors against significant
capability and recommended approximately $50,000/vehicle of trades just prior to the
EMD phase.
• PEO Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors (IEW&S) implemented Long-Range
Investment Requirements Analysis (LIRA) to tie S&T investments and Program
Objective Memorandum (POM) strategies to user requirements, ensuring a single
consolidated sustainment contract.
• The PEO Missiles and Space (MS) Heliborne Fire and Forget missile program
implemented an Affordability Integrated Product Team (IPT) to identify potential
production improvements to achieve cost savings and reduce program risk. The
affordability process includes identifying candidate improvements, conducting business
case analyses to determine return on investment, working closely with stakeholders for
implementation, and qualifying products and processes, as applicable.
• PEO Simulation, Training and Instrumentation (STRI) reduced the cost of producing and
sustaining two independent simulators by using common architectures and components
for each training device. The commonality exercise demonstrated improved resource
allocation, interoperability, acquisition cycle time, and synchronized the training
methodologies. The estimated cost savings from FY14-19 is $40 million (M).
1.1.4 Program Oversight
The Army SE community executes program oversight in three ways: 1) from an SoS
perspective; 2) from a portfolio perspective, and 3) from a single system perspective. Each
perspective has a discrete set of SE processes, which together combine to form a multi-layered
oversight process designed to ensure each program meets its capability requirements and
153DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
6
integrates into the Army SoS as a whole. The SoSE&I Directorate supports the ASA(ALT)
headquarters (HQ) by providing cross-portfolio and CCC assessments to ensure a program
provides the SoS-level capabilities required. The PEOs execute this role though their portfolio
management processes, in which a set of closely related programs, such as the Army Integrated
Air and Missile Defense (AIAMD) programs within PEO MS, combine to provide a discrete set
of capabilities. In addition, PMs review Acquisition Category (ACAT) II and III programs
through Program Management Reviews, in accordance with Defense Acquisition University
(DAU)/Program Management Office (PMO) Processes.
Documentation is also integral to standardizing the oversight and management of ACAT II and
III programs. The PEO Aviation (AVN) system engineers use Systems Engineering Plans
(SEPs), Performance Work Statements, Risk Management Plans, and System Specifications to
support key decision points in the acquisition cycle. Any effort or modification that affects the
configuration of an aviation platform, whether through Program of Record (PoR) Milestone
Decisions, Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs), or modification work orders must utilize and
adhere to established SE processes outlined in the above documents. These processes define
specific work and documentation products that must be available at each major decision point
throughout the acquisition cycle.
Software tools are also used as part of program oversight. The PEO AVN utilizes the TopVue
software toolset to track and provide comments and approvals where applicable. SE oversight
also includes the use of various tools such as the contract data requirements list (CDRL)Vue,
Configuration Management (CM)Vue, RiskVue and SharePoint for program status and
oversight. CDRLVue is used to manage CDRL documents, while CMVue and RiskVue provide
the means to manage the product configuration and identified risks. SharePoint provides a
collaborative environment and in-house design applications for the PMO.
1.2 Pre-Milestones A and B Rigor
One of the major challenges the Department of Defense (DOD) acquisition community faces is
how to effectively translate operational needs into the identification of the best materiel
solutions. Historically, SE best practices have been employed mostly during the EMD phase of
the DOD Acquisition Model, more so than the Pre-Milestone A and Technology Maturation and
Risk Reduction (TMRR) phases. This is in spite of the well-established view that decisions
made early in the system life-cycle have a largely positive effect on total life-cycle cost,
effectiveness, and timeliness. The Army has committed to supporting SE activities during early
acquisition phases by increasing the SE support and rigor applied to programs through
Requirements Analysis, Test planning, CSBs, SoS engineering steering forums, and other efforts
identified in Sections 1.2-1.7 of this self assessment.
1.2.1 Systems Engineering Plans (SEPs)
The SoSE&I Directorate is participating in Pre-Milestone A activities by assisting PEO/PM
representatives with developing program SEPs. The SoSE&I Directorate, in conjunction with
the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Systems Engineering (DASD(SE))
Major Program Support office, offers information, training, and guidance to PEOs/PMs and
stakeholders with other delegation authorities on ACAT I, II and III program SEP development.
154 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
7
The SoSE&I Directorate also reviews SEPs to ensure compliance with the OSD SEP outline,
ASA(ALT)/AAE SEP policy, statutory and regulatory requirements, as well as verifying the SEP
establishes a clear and consistent SE technical approach to meet program objectives. The SEP
reviews have assisted programs in improving their SE rigor in areas including risk identification
and management.
1.2.2 Development Planning (DP)
The SE best practices developed to support Pre-Milestone A efforts also serve as good DP
practices. The SoSE&I Directorate and the PEOs/PMs implemented a number of activities and
tools in early SE phases that advanced the Army’s capabilities, which are described throughout
section 1.2.
1.2.2.1 Tool Development
A number of different tools and frameworks have been developed to facilitate DP, as well as
better SE throughout the life-cycle. These assist in performing functions ranging from enabling
collaboration among requirements and acquisition stakeholders, modeling system and SoS
performance, to the engineering required to determine system performance, cost, and risk, and
finally, in helping to choose among multiple materiel solutions.
• Modeling, Emulation, Simulation Tool for Analysis Software Development: Developed by the Communications-Electronics Center of the Research, Development and
Engineering Center (CERDEC), it is a common framework for tactical command,
control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
(C4ISR) network M&S that uses common data models and standardizes inputs/outputs so
commercial and government tools can leverage common data sets, improving
effectiveness and efficiency.
• Soldier SE Architecture: Developed by the RDECOM U.S. Army Natick Soldier,
Research, Development and Engineering Center (NSRDEC), it uses an analytical
decision-based model to optimize the Soldier as a System through synergy between the
Human Dimension, User Requirements, and Material Solutions.
• Enterprise Knowledge Repository: Developed by the Office of Business
Transformation, it is a suite of tools that the SoSE&I Directorate uses to capture,
organize, and integrate architecture data about Defense Business Systems (DBSs), and to
provide support for life-cycle management of model-based architectures for the Army’s
portfolio of business systems.
1.2.3 Decision Centric Systems Engineering (DCSE)
The Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM), in collaboration with
academia and industry, is developing an SE trade-off analysis methodology that enables the
Research and Development (R&D) community to assess a large set of alternatives across
competing objectives of performance, life-cycle costs, and development schedule. The emerging
methodology is being called the DCSE, formerly the Decision Model Based Systems
Engineering, and will explore trade-space as requirements and system design approaches are
being refined early in the acquisition process, as well as across all of the acquisition phases. The
DCSE’s data visualization and sensitivity analysis capability have strong explanatory power,
155DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
8
giving decision makers a robust understanding of the complex trade-space needed to inform
requirements and make fact-based decisions throughout the acquisition life-cycle.
It is currently being used as the governing process for the Small Arms Ammunition
Configuration study, an 81mm Mortar improvement S&T effort and a cluster munitions
replacement investigation.
1.2.4 Systems Architecting
The Systems Architecting competency has also been integral to providing Pre-Milestone A
support, utilizing operational and systems architecture tools and techniques in the early phases of
a PoR’s technology development efforts. Systems architectures are used to define the structure,
behavior, and temporal aspects of the technology/system under development. The Army
continues to promote the corporate use of Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) as a
methodology to develop systems engineering and architecture artifacts as it provides a
mechanism to structure and communicate key technical information in a purposeful way to
inform the decision making process. It also allows for requirements data to be traced directly to
design decisions and ensure all requirements are satisfied.
1.2.5 Army Technology Maturation Initiative
The Army Technology Maturation Initiative creates a strategic partnership between S&T and
acquisition, and facilitates the timely transition of high-payoff technologies to programs of
record at reduced cost and risk. This program provides a mechanism to improve the alignment
between S&T and acquisition and address the risk-reduction goals laid out by the Weapon
Systems Acquisition Reform Act and DOD Instruction 5000.02. Technology Maturation
Initiative activities are focused on maturing S&T products (goal Technology Readiness Level
(TRL) 7) to increase transition success; enable high-payoff, competitive prototyping earlier in
the acquisition life-cycle (prior to Milestone B); adopt acquisition rigor for mature S&T efforts;
inform materiel requirements to expedite capabilities to the Warfighter; and reduce technology
risks for acquisition PoRs.
Projects selected for Technology Maturation Initiative funding are co-sponsored by the S&T
developer and the receiving PM/ PEO to ensure that the effort is, and remains, aligned to the
PoR’s needs. Efforts must also be approved by the Executive Steering Group comprised of
senior representatives of ASA(ALT), Army G-3/5/7, and the Army G-8.
The Army initiated three Technology Maturation Initiative efforts in FY14:
• Assured Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) (FY14-17). This initiative
matures, integrates, and validates key enabling technologies for the Assured PNT PoR,
which will provide a secure, affordable, next-generation positioning and timing signal for
all Army systems. The Technology Maturation Initiative investment reduces PoR risk
and costs, and accelerates the Assured PNT Initial Operational Capability (IOC) by over
two years through the early initiation of the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction
Phases.
• Vehicular Integration for C4ISR/Electronic Warfare Interoperability (VICTORY) Enabled Company Transformation, (FY14-15). This initiative reduces programmatic
156 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
9
risks and non-recurring engineering/production costs that currently hinder the transition
of the VICTORY architecture and standards onto the U.S. Army’s Ground Vehicle
Platforms. Activities include the development, evaluation, testing and TRL 7
demonstration of VICTORY system designs and products on a set of ground vehicle
platforms. It will also transition a mature and productized open-source VICTORY
Adapter component for integration and evaluation in major vehicle systems. It provides
the basis for converting legacy platforms into VICTORY-ready platforms, positioning
them to support the integration of Army CSs at significantly reduced costs.
• Common Automatic Fire Extinguishing Systems (AFES), (FY14-15). This initiative
qualifies components and provides vehicle-level testing and validation of backward-
compatible, common AFES extinguishers for use across all Army ground and combat
vehicle platforms.
1.2.6 FY14 PEO/PM Efforts
The PEOs/PMs, in addition to developing SEPs, are employing SE best practices and
collaborating with internal and external partners to introduce greater SE rigor in both Pre-
Milestone A and B phases of the Acquisition life-cycle. In FY14, PEO Soldier utilized the
Soldier Modernization Process (SMP) to provide a forum for TRADOC, PMs, System of
Systems Integration, S&T Communities, and Army Staff to synchronize S&T requirements,
upcoming PoRs, and requirements development documents. The products developed by the
SMP serve as authoritative sources to inform Capability Portfolio Reviews, Soldier and Squad
Systems Reviews, and Long-range Investment Requirements Analysis (LIRA), ensuring
continuity across the S&T, financial, PoR, and requirements communities.
The PEO MS requires an independent assessment be conducted on all reviews. Technical
reviews are intended to assess the design maturity of a system, review program progress, and
authorize continued program development. An Independent Assessment Team (IAT) is led by
the PEO MS Chief Engineer or designee, with team members from outside the project office
selected by the PEO MS Chief Engineer. Members of the IAT verify that technical review entry
and exit criteria are established and met. Program risks are identified and mitigated to acceptable
levels, appropriate stakeholders are present and all review action items are dispositioned before
the weapon systems proceeds into the next phase of development. In FY14, the Chief Engineer’s
IAT conducted 11 reviews.
The PEO STRI has established an Engineering Standards and Process Board (ESPB) as an
oversight group for SE processes, guidance, and policy. The PEO STRI also utilizes the SE
Index, a SharePoint repository, to provide authoritative information for the acquisition life-cycle
using user-friendly interface. Collectively, the ESPB, the SE Index, and the issuance of
Engineering Instructions enable the establishment and implementation of SE policy, standards,
processes, and best practices across the PEO STRI.
Through collaboration with internal and external acquisition partners, the PEOs/PMs have been
able to expand the Army’s involvement in Pre-Milestone A and B activities, extending SE best
practices into all phases of the Acquisition life-cycle. During FY14, the Joint PEO (JPEO)
Chemical and Biological Defense (CBD) engaged the Services and the Joint Requirements
Office to finalize the Next Generation Diagnostics System Increment (Inc) 1 Capability
157DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF ARMY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
10
Development Document (CDD), ensuring the program will meet requirements and that changes
can occur early in the technical development phase, rather than at a more costly juncture in the
future.
To leverage PM efforts across the Army, the SoSE&I Directorate monitors the implementation
of both routine and innovative SE practices across the acquisition community, within industry,
and in other circles. Events such as the monthly Army Systems Engineering Forum (ASEF),
International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) conferences, and the National Defense
Industrial Association (NDIA) SE forum provide valuable insight into SE challenges and
successes, particularly when a PEO/PM has solved a challenging SE issue, has seen success, and
that success should be replicated across the community. As an example, Joint Program Manager
(JPM) Guardian devised an innovative way to define requirements for a system that integrates
multiple sensor feeds into a common operational display. This approach demonstrated the art of
the possible, which enabled PEO IEW&S to reuse these SE processes to support a new PoR that
will deliver this integrated display to the Warfighter.
1.2.7 FY15 PEO/PM Efforts
PEOs/PMs plan to continue creating, implementing, or improving the following areas in FY15:
• PEO STRI Engineering Standards and Process Board (ESPB) will improve SE activities
in Pre-Milestone A and B systems analysis and SE processes by adding more SE analysis
topics into the SE Index.
• JPEO CBD JPM Radiological and Nuclear Defense will target tools to improve
requirements traceability across programs, particularly when conducting parallel
requirements development and analysis processes.
• PEO MS staff is developing a Unified Profile for DOD Architecture Framework/Ministry
of Defence Architecture Framework Test Profile to capture the Model-based Systems
Engineering (MBSE) needs of the testing community. PEO MS is also actively
collaborating with Army Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering
Center (AMRDEC), the PMOs, and other PEOs to establish a community of interest for
MBSE across the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS).
1.3 RAM&S
In 2014, the Army remained committed to ensuring RAM&S was an integral part of design and
development. The Army realized improvements in design and development processes through
leading internal Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) working groups, and participating in
external DOD R&M working groups. These groups provided a focal point for RAM&S activity
within the Army and DOD, and leveraged individual organizations improvements and lessons
learned.
1.3.1 Reliability and Maintainability Working Group (RMWG)
The Army continues to operate a RMWG with senior-level participants across the acquisition
community. The RMWG performs detailed assessments of RAM&S efforts throughout the
acquisition life-cycle for Army Major Automated Information Systems (MAIS)/Major Defense
1 Progress and Plans for Improved Navy Department Systems Engineering Capability .............2
1.1 Service-Level Systems Engineering Strategy .......................................................................2
1.1.1 Improving SE .......................................................................................................................3
1.2 Pre-Milestone A and Pre-Milestone B Rigorous System Analysis and SE Process .............7
1.3 Reliability and Maintainability Engineering as an Integral Part of Design and Development .........................................................................................................................8
1.4 SE Requirements During the JCIDS Process and in Contract Requirements for each MDAP ...................................................................................................................................9
1.5 Service-Specific Identified Area(s) of Progress and Improvement ....................................11
1.5.1 Navy-Identified Areas of Progress and Improvement for FY14 .......................................12
2 Systems Engineering Workforce .............................................................................................14
2.1 Workforce Development Initiatives – Rebuilding the Acquisition Workforce ..................14
2.1.1 Hiring, Retaining, and Developing the Workforce ............................................................14
2.2 SE Workforce Resourcing...................................................................................................16
2.3 Department of the Navy SE Workforce ..............................................................................17
3 Summary of Navy Planned Areas for Improvement in FY15 .................................................19
Tables
Table 1. Total Number of Civilian and Military Acquisition ENG ..............................................17 Table 2. Projected End Strength in Civilian and Military Acquisition-Coded ENG ....................18 Table 3. Contracted Systems Engineering Support to the Military Departments as Reported by
DoD to Congress ...........................................................................................................18
188 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Department of Defense (DoD) Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering [DASD (SE)] is required to submit an annual report to Congress on the activities pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of Public law 111-23 section 139. DASD (SE) tasked ASN (RDA) to develop the Naval Systems Engineering (SE) portion of this annual report. This document responds to the DASD (SE) request.
The Department of the Navy (DON) has always emphasized engineering excellence as part of its acquisition program management strategy. Tenets of the DON SE effort are to: 1) strengthen technical expertise and foster engineering excellence on DON acquisition programs; 2) evaluate all SE processes and practices from the perspective of holding those with the right knowledge, technical authority, and expertise responsible for the SE effort; 3) ensure robust technical risk identification and mitigation are accomplished; and 4) ensure that cost effective Systems Engineering analyses and Technical Reviews (SETRs) are in place to support program success. DON SE policy and processes are aligned with the goals of the DoD and DON Better Buying Power initiatives.
DON has previously reported significant improvement in DON SE policy, guidance, workforce development, and program support. Over the past seven years, DON has placed much emphasis on the development of common cross-SYSCOM SE and risk management policy and guidance; institutionalization of SE processes; SE workforce development strategies and the establishment of rigorous qualifications and training for SE Technical Authorities; the integration of critical specialty engineering analyses as part of the SE effort; SE and critical specialty engineering tool development and training; the development of a central on-line SE tool repository; engagement of SE Technical Authorities (TAs) in the derivation of warfighter requirements into engineering requirements, specifications, and technical base lining efforts; improving strategies for technical risk identification and risk mitigation; and the establishment of SETR and Gate criteria.
This report identifies progress for the planned improvement areas that were identified in the DON FY13 SE assessment for FY. Specifically, this report addresses efforts in DON continuous process improvement in Naval SE capability to include: 1) DON SE strategy; 2) Pre-Milestone (MS) A and Pre-MS B rigorous systems analysis and SE process; 3) reliability, availability, maintainability, and sustainability, as an integral part of design and development; 4) provision of evidence of progress against the FY14 areas for improvement identified in the FY13 self-assessment; and 5) identification of plans for addressing FY15 priority areas to continue to improve SE and development planning capability of the DON.
Additionally, this report assesses the SE workforce to include: 1) a listing of workforce development initiatives where progress has been made in FY14 and plans for improvement in FY15, (2) identification of additional authorities or resources needed to meet the experience and technical expertise of SE in DON, and (3) a complete listing of Engineering (ENG)-coded military and government personnel.
189DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
2
1 Progress and Plans for Improved Navy Department Systems Engineering Capability
1.1 Service-Level Systems Engineering Strategy Engineering excellence is foundational to DON acquisition, in-service, and modernization programs. The DON strategy to deliver robust Systems Engineering (SE) capability is focused on the integration, standardization, and streamlining of SE and engineering policy, guidance, and processes to enhance mission effectiveness and reduce SE costs. DON SE goals and objectives to integrate, institutionalize, sustain, and improve SE capability have been established, and are focused on mission assurance, technical risk identification, mitigation, and technical risk management of Naval acquisition programs. Naval SE objectives and initiatives are cognizant of the need to reduce the cost of doing SE business. Integration of critical specialty engineering areas [e.g., reliability and maintainability (R&M), system security, information protection, system safety, open architectures, and interoperability of System of Systems (SoS)] into SE processes has been an important focus in FY14. All efforts to increase SE capability support four of ASN (RDA)’s Top Priorities:
• Get the requirements right • Make every dollar count • Perform to plan • Rebuild the acquisition workforce
In late FY13, DASN (RDT&E) initiated a Systems Engineering Streamlining Initiative (SESI) to evaluate current SE processes and identify efficiencies, while enhancing sound technical, engineering, safety, and security risk management strategies. Tenets of the SESI are to: 1) strengthen technical expertise and to foster engineering excellence on DON acquisition programs; 2) evaluate all SE processes and practices from the perspective of holding those with the right knowledge and technical authority and expertise responsible for the SE effort; 3) ensure the right planning, technical risk assessments, and related SE technical risk management processes are accomplished; and 4) ensure cost effective Systems Engineering analyses and Technical Reviews (SETRs) are in place to support program success.
SESI FY14 efforts have resulted in significant changes in the way SE business is conducted in DON. SECNAVINST 5000.2, Chapter 6, Systems Engineering, is being rewritten to better reflect DODI 5000.02 Interim changes. SECNAVINST 5400.15, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY (DON) RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, ASSOCIATED LIFE-CYCLE MANAGEMENT, AND LOGISTICS RESPONSIBILITIES AND ACCOUNTABILITY assigned Technical Authority (TA) in DON to the SYSCOM Commanders; therefore, DON is realigning DON signature authority (SA) for Systems Engineering Plans (SEPs). This action aligns responsibility for SEP development activities and review of quality and efficacy under the SYSCOM Commander’s TA responsibilities. Although
190 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
3
SEP approval is being delegated to the SYSCOM Commanders, Naval SYSCOM SE processes will continue to be governed by DASN (RDT&E). Other SESI recommendations focused system security in design, critical thinking curriculum development for technical leaders, mission engineering strategies. Redundant and non-value added DON-requirements, for SE-related technical plans and activities were addressed in FY14 as well. These plans, activities, and processes are being reduced and eliminated where possible. Cross-competency plans, [e.g., Test and Evaluation Management Plan (TEMP), Program Protection Plan (PPP), Acquisition Strategy Plan (AS) and Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP)] are being compared for redundant language during cross-competency reviews.
The SESI issue identification, review, and recommendation process is now established as a successful schema for continual process improvement in the DASN (RDT&E) Systems Engineering Office (SEO). Processes to review Capabilities Requirement and Risk Analyses are being established to achieve the SEO objectives and drive investments to SE improvement activities in the SEO office.
1.1.1 Improving SE Navy is proactively improving SE policy, guidance, processes, and support of Acquisition and In-Service programs’ technical risk identification, mitigation and management efforts. The following paragraphs highlight a few of the areas of focus in FY14.
Integration of SE Critical Specialty Engineering Areas
Program efforts to integrate and amalgamate risk related to critical specialty engineering areas such as corrosion, reliability, system safety, HSI, I&I, etc., is part of the SE technical risk identification and SETR processes. One example of the DON efforts to integrate specialty engineering requirements into SE process is a collaborative team approach between Navy SE Integration and Interoperability (I&I) activities and NOSSA which are underway to support DASN (RDT&E). This effort is required to identify safety risks associated with Fratricide (Intercept of Friend or Non-Hostile) in the effective execution of fleet missions. This effort documents safety review criteria and defines a process to integrate weapons safety engineering into Mission Engineering which assist in the identification of gaps in requirements, acquisition personnel, policy, and processes. The team is concentrating on integrating Mission Engineering, Systems Engineering, and Software Systems Safety Engineering into the VCNO’s I&I Activity and System of Systems (SoS) reviews using the standing Weapon System Explosives Safety Review Board (WSESRB) and its current processes.
In addition to the NOSSA effort, Mission Assurance Integrated Planning Teams (MA/IPTs) are in place on several DON programs. These MA/IPTs meet to identify and assess level risk across several critical specialty engineering areas to amalgamate the associated risk for programs. Once the risks are identified, the MA/IPT then strategized to identify required analyses and to formulate a common mitigation strategy to address risk across the set of engineering risk issues.
191DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
4
Standardization and Integration of SE Processes
The ongoing efforts of DASN (RDT&E) to establish standard SE processes across the Naval SYSCOMs, where possible, are coordinated with and supported by the Naval Systems Engineering Stakeholders’ Group (NSESG), a collaborative team of Naval SYSCOM Chief Engineers and DASN (RDT&E). The NSESG oversees development and implementation of Naval SYSCOM SE-level policy and guidance.
Navy has efforts in many areas of Systems Engineering [e.g., Technical Requirements Derivation and Architectures (TRD&A), System Designer (SD), System Analyst (SA), System Integrator (SI), Validation and Verification (VV), Process Engineer (PE), etc.]. In addition, Navy has a strong SE oversight and governance activity at DASN (RDT&E) and ongoing efforts in continuous process improvement activities related to the development and streamlining of SE and related area policy, guidance and procedures. A couple of examples of standard guidance, processes, and SE business improvements are provided here.
Naval Systems Engineering Guide
As stated in the FY13 report, initial steps were taken to critically transform the Naval Systems Engineering Guidebook (NSEG) from a limited, hard copy format to an online interactive Guide focused on providing quick reference for users developing SE products and linked to acquisition phases using SETR events as the anchor. In FY14, DASN (RDT&E) and the NSESG collaborated on the launch of an on-line implementation of NSEG aligned to current SE, acquisition, and critical specialty engineering policy and guidance. The NSEG is being linked to DoD policy and guidance documents and on-line tools, and addresses SYSCOM specific requirements, best practices, SE and critical specialty engineering tools currently in use in DON.
The NSEG is the first online interactive SE guide for DON. The design and development team is working closely with the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) to ensure a compatible implementation, so the Navy NSEG links seamlessly with the DAU SE site. SharePoint designers have begun developing an interactive, web-based capability that leverages the design of the Milestone Document Identification (MDID) tool sponsored by the DAU as well as existing SE policies and guidance across the DON SYSCOMs. The NSEG Team will continue spiral development of content and online infrastructure in FY15.
Technical Standards
The DON Standardization Officer (NDEPSO) and the NSESG Standards Working Group supported DoD standardization initiatives to re-invigorate standards for systems engineering, configuration management, corrosion control and human systems integration. DON is participating in, or leading the Defense Standardization Council chartered working groups to
192 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
5
engage non-governmental standards organizations to identify, create and adopt commercial standards, where applicable.
Information Dominance and SE
DON is aggressively pursuing a multi-faceted approach to warfighting that ensures our information superiority in future conflicts. Navy information dominance (ID) is defined as the operational advantage gained from fully integrating the Navy’s information capabilities, systems, and resources to optimize decision-making and maximize warfighting effects in the complex maritime environment of the 21st century. The U.S. Navy ID Roadmap of addresses near-term milestones for improving capabilities in: 1) assured command and control (C2); 2) battle space awareness; and 3) integrated fires.
Naval IT systems form the foundation for achieving the capability of ID, because they provide the medium for the transmission of information. Navy continues to refine the Executable Architecture Requirements Model (EXARM), which provides a SoS analytic framework to support fact-based decisions to support a SoS lifecycle. EXARM consists of four parts: people, processes, tools, and data.
Technology/Information Assurance
To support the Naval Information Dominance capability, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) and ASN (RDA) directed the NSESG to develop a cross-SYSCOM Information Technology/Information Assurance Technical Authority Board (IT/IA TAB). The IT/IA TAB reviews, adjudicates, and endorses IT/IA technical policies, processes, and standards to include technical standards and specifications, interface definitions, architectures, and certifications requirements.
Technology and Program Protection, Trusted Systems and Networks
OUSD (AT&L) SE Office and DoD Chief Information Officer (CIO) developed and published Defense Federal Acquisition Rule Supplement (DFARS) clause 252.204-7012, “Safeguarding Unclassified Controlled Technical Information,” to provide a set of minimum national standards and structures for protection of DoD unclassified controlled technical information resident on or transiting through contractors’ unclassified networks. Clause 252.204-7012 was implemented in November FY14. DASN (RDT&E) used the NSESG and the DASN (RDT&E) SE CONNECTS forum to advise SYSCOM SEs and the Naval SE community of PM and SE roles and responsibilities in system security engineering, identification of acquisition Critical Program Information (CPI), as well as program and information protection requirements.
DASN RDT&E is developing a Program Protection and System Engineering Toolkit that will provide resources for Program Managers and System Engineers to establish and build system
193DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
6
security throughout the life cycle and to focus on System Engineering application of program protection processes.
Agility
Naval SYSCOMs continue an aggressive Agile software development process, education, and implementation activity, which is being implemented by software-intensive programs. Agile educational training programs are being developed in conjunction with DAU to align SE processes and Agile processes.
Open Systems Architecture
In FY14, the Naval Acquisition Community completed the first year of its Open System Architecture (OSA) Strategy execution. A set of metrics was collected to baseline how OSA is being implemented across all ACAT and many non-ACAT programs. The Naval Open Systems Architecture Enterprise Team has stood up seven working groups who will establish new practices and guidance and, where necessary, recommend policies on implementing OSA. These working groups are: Technical Reference Frameworks, Affordable Design and Test, Rewards and Incentives, Open Business Models, Tools and Guides, Training, and Communication.
DASN RDT&E is also working with the Navy’s sister services through the DoD OSA and Data Rights Team to improve OSA implementation and to promote effective competition. Guidance was developed by this team and published in FY14 to provide acquisition practitioners with a better understanding of how to develop an IP Strategy.
DASN (RDT&E) has continued to aggressively implement OSA practices, including development of consensus-based standards, examining innovative sources of new ideas and directly supporting Navy and Marine Corps programs. For example, an OSA Implementation Guidebook for Program Managers is under development. The quarterly OSA Report to Congress chronicles this evolution. The Navy is beginning the process of harmonizing Systems Engineering activities with the Naval Open Systems Architecture strategy (https://acc.dau.mil/adl/en-US/695451/file/75899/OSABrochure.pdf). One of the key alignment points is to integrate the development of Technical Reference Frameworks being pursued by the OSA strategy with SE processes. The Navy is examining exemplar architectures for an evolution into a limited number of TRFs that will facilitate cross-platform enterprise reusability and product line engineering concepts. Those currently being investigated are the Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE), the Submarine Warfare Federated Tactical Systems (SWFTS), the Consolidated Afloat Network Enterprise Services (CANES) and others.
194 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
7
Noise Protection and Abatement
The Hazardous Noise Working Group Co-Chaired by DASN (RDT&E) and DASN (Safety) has concentrated on improving acquisition and research programs. The Working Group is emphasizing acquisition strategies for low noise source components and systems and identifying noise control opportunities early in the acquisition process. MIL-STD 1474E (draft) is the noise requirement and is undergoing final adjudication of public comments to update noise limit design criteria, calculation models, and limits of acceptable noise levels. Release is scheduled for November 2014. The standards are being incorporated into the re-write of OPNAV INST 5100.23 (Safety Ashore) to be used for facility noise assessment. Noise modeling and noise abatement materials are being utilized by PEO Carriers to abate flight operations noise for aircraft carriers. The Office of Naval Research (ONR) Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) program provides the basic research to address engineering and medical issues.
1.2 Pre-Milestone A and Pre-Milestone B Rigorous System Analysis and SE Process
In FY14, the Navy continued to support OSD AT&L development-planning process improvement efforts, to ensure the right requirements are defined as early as possible in the JCIDS process. The Navy supported the efforts of the DASD (SE) Development Planning Working Group (DPWG) to incorporate Science and Technology (S&T) and the warfighter into the SE processes that occur prior to the Materiel Development Decision (MDD). DASN (RDT&E), the Office of Naval Research (ONR), and the DON System Commands (SYSCOMs) actively participated in the DASD (SE) DPWG. FY14 efforts resulted in documentation of the process that integrates S&T efforts with acquisition efforts prior to a MDD.
SE support processes are being created to establish critical specialty engineering requirements prior to program initiation or milestone review to evaluate programs for statutory and regulatory systems. Highlights of these efforts are discussed in Section 1.4 of this report. These efforts help the requirements community to better understand the requirements generation process and support requirements transition to the material developer. Automated workflow processes and configuration management are in place and provide a mechanism for comment and review of new program requirements accepted by the SYSCOMs. Through assigned requirements transition leads, additional engineering studies are performed to analyze alternatives and evaluate the results through Alternative Systems Reviews leading to rigorous SETRs and repeatable processes.
Many examples of SE support processes exist across Naval SYSCOMs and Naval Warfare Systems Centers (NWSCs). In addition to the SE effort in JCIDs processes highlights in Section 1.4 of this report, the Framework Assessing Cost Technology (FACT) capability at MARCORSYSCOM, an example of a newly developed DON SE tool, is highlighted below.
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
8
Framework Assessing Cost Technology (FACT)
MARCORSYSCOM has developed FACT, a decision support toolset that integrates disparate data bases and facilitates collaborative analyses. FACT provides the platform to conduct dynamic risk and trade space analysis. (e.g., tradeoffs between performance vs costs related to acquisition and the lifecycle or between performance and reliability).The FACT tool provides trade space and cost analysis for senior Marine Corps leadership during development of proposed requirements and during acquisition and contracting strategy phases. FACT was applied during the development of the next generation ACV requirements in FY14. The tool was also instrumental in aiding MARCORSYSCOM in development of a systems engineering process to implement the Energy Key Performance Parameter for new acquisition efforts.
Ordnance Safety Considerations in Early Processes
Lessons learned from NOSSA’s deployment of safety engineers to support Central Command in Afghanistan and Iraq indicate that weapon systems are being used by multiple Services and the environments in which they are tested and evaluated need to be inclusive of the real world environments which they will be exposed. One example is the Navy electromagnetic environments for Army lead items. NOSSA provides system safety comments to ensure that system capabilities can be executed safely across lifecycle operations. NOSSA is also providing JCIDS review comments for Integration and Interoperability (I&I) safety to ensure that capabilities to avoid fratricide are included in architectures, and that the integrity of data transfers within an SoS context are considered.
1.3 Reliability and Maintainability Engineering as an Integral Part of Design and Development
In FY14, the Navy continued to develop and evolve processes to implement USD (AT&L)’s Reliability Analysis, Planning, Tracking, and Reporting requirements as per Interim DoD Instruction (DoDI) 5000.02, released in November 2013. R&M Engineering (R&ME) planning is summarized in the SEP document that is required by SECNAV Instruction for all ACAT levels.
Department-wide R&ME improvement is the focus of a combined effort with the DON R&ME lead, the SE community, and reliability engineering workforce. A DON R&ME working group and SYSCOM reliability engineering communities of practice meet regularly to work on standardizing R&ME processes, tools, and R&ME workforce development strategies. Results from those efforts include: an R&M appendix that is being prepared for the NSEG; an update to DoD and DON requirements of several legacy reliability engineering courses that had not been used for years; regular delivery of those courses to the SYSCOMs and Warfare Centers; procedural level guidance and standard work packages for reliability engineering; and deployment of R&M toolsets on the Naval Systems Engineering Resource Center (NSERC).
196 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
9
The Navy prepares nearly all of the R&ME Data Item Descriptions (DIDs). Several DIDs have been updated or created to provide uniform contracting data requirements for all of the DoD. Cross-functional cooperation with SE and sustainment leads is also increasing to the mutual benefit of the programs and the workforce.
All of the DON SYSCOMS are working to improve their R&ME effectiveness; some are further along than others. Each has different challenges based on their product areas, workforce skills and the extent to which they implemented previous acquisition reforms that transferred the responsibility for R&ME to the contractor.
The DON R&ME lead continually works with the SYSCOMs engineering and program staffs to increase the effectiveness of their reliability engineering efforts. Current support activities include: the rollout of the Defense Acquisition Executive Summary (DAES) reliability growth reporting that required individual assistance to meet the due dates, DAB and Gate Review preparations that required the coordination of various programs, and support and guidance to project offices to present platform level R&ME planning and an T&E strategy that is effectively articulated.
Naval programs that have been underway for years, sometimes more than a decade, continue to struggle with expectations of R&ME activity that was not required prior to issuance of the DTM 11-03. DON has a challenge in implementing the DoD R&ME processes, which are focused on the design effort, on DON programs that are primarily integrating hardware that is already designed (COTs and GOTS). To address this problem, DON R&ME lead is working with SYSCOMS and programs helping them implement an effective failure reporting, analysis, and corrective action system (FRACAS).
DON will continue to work in FY15 on the improvement of R&ME through the identification of existing training packages, common processes, procedural level guidance, policies, tools, and on the mentoring the R&ME workforce and SEs embedded within program offices.
1.4 SE Requirements During the JCIDS Process and in Contract Requirements for each MDAP
In FY14, the Navy continued to support development-planning processes, so that the right requirements are defined as early as possible in the JCIDS process. The Navy supported the efforts of the DASD (SE) DPWG to incorporate S&T and the Warfighter into the SE processes that occur prior to the MDD.
The DON SYSCOM SEs provide technical expertise to requirements developers early in the acquisition process and support mission thread analysis, functional analysis and the development of system views. In FY15, more emphasis will be placed on SE engagement in architecture development and on building a highly skilled mission engineering cadre.
197DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
10
DON SYSCOMS are initiating a Systems Engineering support process to evaluate programs for statutory and regulatory systems engineering requirements prior to program initiation or milestone review. This process will provide for risk-based tailoring of systems engineering requirements for new programs in accordance with the tenets of Better Buying Power.
MCSC has established a Requirements Transition Team (RTT) to coordinate with Headquarters, Marine Corps in the development of requirements. The RTT is tasked with certifying that only valid capability statements or requirements documents are accepted by MCSC for action. The RTT is also the coordinator for matters associated with building the Marine Corps Enterprise Integration Plan (MCEIP), which establishes capabilities-based priorities for each fiscal year and coordinates enterprise capability development and investment planning for the Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF) and supporting establishment. The RTT works closely with the requirements and test community and then integrates appropriate MCSC engineering analysis and support prior to delivery of the final requirements.
As stated earlier in this report, NAVSEA’s Naval Ordnance Safety and Security Activity (NOSSA) actively monitors JCIDS documentation in support of both the Deputy Director for Force Protection, Joint Staff (J8) and OPNAV N81 for review to ensure that the capabilities outlined in the documentation meet the Joint warfighting environments in which weapon systems are expected to operate.
NAVAIR engineering department has implemented a significant re-organization to support the creation of the Mission Engineering and Analysis Department and has created an Enterprise Team (ET) to implement Integration and Interoperability (I&I) as an organizational element in the SYSCOM. The ET is charged with the task of understanding mission-level requirements, in the context of system level Program of Record requirements. An improved Mission Level understanding of systems integration design issues will facilitate the delivery of Integrated Warfighting Capability at reduced cost.
The ET contains the necessary Systems Engineering, Analysis, Test, Evaluation and Logistics competencies to execute Technical Authority at the Mission Level. The ET will drive workforce requirements across the NAVAIR competency structure for Mission Level engineering expertise. Mission Level expertise will be utilized at both the Program of Record (POR) execution level of the organization, and in support of Requirements and Resource decision-making within the Department of the Navy.
The SE functions of the ET are focused on the necessary products used to govern the technical design of systems contributing to mission capabilities as called for in the Required Operational Capabilities / Projected Operational Environment (ROC/POE). The ET will focus on the interaction of People, Equipment and Training required to deliver both kinetic and non-kinetic effects.
198 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
11
Navy has also revised acquisition, SE and Acquisition Strategy policy and guidance to state that contracting officers shall incorporate the requirements of developing draft engineering and logistics planning documents in their acquisition planning for ACAT I, IA, II,III and IV programs prior to Request for Proposal (RFP) release.
1.5 DON Specific Identified Area(s) of Progress and Improvement
Throughout this report, Navy has established that it has a robust SE effort across all SYSCOMs and is improving policy, guidance, and processes led by the DASN (RDT&E) SE effort. Navy is addressing areas of SE capability, capacity, and readiness in a proactive, managed strategy and has made great strides in 2014. Further efforts for continuous process improvement and workforce development strategies to include investment in Critical Thinking for Technical Leaders curriculum and Systems Engineering Competency Model development are in place.
In FY14, the Navy has accomplished major milestones in SE streamlining and improvement. The following list highlights a few of the efforts in support of SE excellence:
• Initiated SE Streamlining and SE integration strategies for critical specialty engineering areas
• Stood up the DASN (RDT&E) SE CONNECTS forum, a continuous communication forum between DASN (RDT&E), programs, SEs and Naval Warfare and Systems Center engineers to address new requirements, policy, guidance and best practices
• Shared lessons learned across the SYSCOMs on the early development of DoDAF products in support of Pre-MS A analysis at the June 2014 meeting of the NSESG
• Engaged programs, security entities, and Systems Engineering across the SYSCOMS to build awareness of security and cyber requirements and to establish roles and responsibilities for SE, system security engineering, information assurance, and program protection planning.
• Continued development of the Naval Enterprise Architecture Repository (NEAR) and demonstrated the tools utility through “use cases”
• Conducted Mission Level Assessments and Evaluations (MLA&E) to support acquisition decisions by defining and making traceable SoS interdependencies, defining the Government trade space to be worked, and aligning material solution(s) with the required doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF) changes
• Emphasized government ownership of technical baselines and authoritative architectures
• Continued investment in SE and M&S tools and training • Established cross coordination practices with PM competency to improve value
perception of SE • Published updates to the SETR checklist for several critical specialty engineering
areas on the Navy Systems Engineering Resource Center site for easy access/use by programs and SEs
199DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
12
• Published contact information for Naval TAs on NSERC to promote cross-SYSCOM communication and collaboration and facilitate IPT planning
• Contributed to development of DoD, Naval, SE, and Configuration Management (CM) military addendums for industrial SE standards and guidance.
• Participated on Mil-Standard 882, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE STANDARD PRACTICE FOR SYSTEM SAFETY, and Mil-Standard 1474, Impulse Noise Hazard Prediction update teams
1.5.1 DON Identified Areas of Progress and Improvement for FY14 Navy identified several plans for FY14 in our FY13 report. The planned FY14 activities and status are provided here.
• FY14 Planned Action: DASN (RDT&E) will continue SESI efforts. The overall goal of the SESI is to identify efficiencies in current SE processes.
End of FY14 Status: Duplicative SE documents have been eliminated, thereby reducing administrative burden on DON Programs. SE processes have been streamlined and communications have been improved. Delegation of signature authority on SE documents was initiated with one DON SYSCOM and is expected to continue as SYSCOMs demonstrate proficiency and consistent quality in their SE documents and processes.
• FY14 Planned Action: The SESG will be revising the following policies to incorporate lessons learned from integrating SE efforts across the SYSCOMs :
• Technical Standards Policy for Naval SYSCOMs • Engineering and Technical Authority Policy for Naval SYSCOMs • Risk Management Policy for Naval SYSCOMs • Systems Engineering Policy for Naval SYSCOMs
End of FY14 Status: The following policies were reviewed and revised by the SESG in FY14:
• Technical Standards Policy for Naval SYSCOMs – SYSCOM concurrences complete • Engineering and Technical Authority Policy for Naval SYSCOMs – Updated and
published • Risk Management Policy for Naval SYSCOMs – In review and adjudication process • Systems Engineering Policy for Naval SYSCOMs – In draft process; to be reviewed
in FY15
• FY14 Planned Action: The Naval Systems Engineering Technology Review (SETR) Guidebook will be incrementally revised and web links to the I&I SETR criteria will be added to this Guidebook.
200 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
13
End of FY14 Status: Several critical specialty engineering area SETR criteria, to include I&I, have been published on NSERC. The NSEG design team is working issues to ensure these criteria are linked to the NSEG.
• FY14 Planned Action: DASN (RDT&E) R&ME staff will be working with SPAWAR on the Failure Reporting and Corrective Action System (FRACAS) process that is required throughout the life cycle. End of FY14 Status: Complete. Continuing improvement effort expected in FY15.
• FY14 Planned Action: SPAWAR will continue to examine development of Technical Warrant Holders (TWH) in light of emergent technologies and new product lines related to IT and IA, as well as its existing Command, Control, Communications, Computer, and Intelligence (C4I), Enterprise Information Systems, and Space Systems areas of SE development.
End of FY14 Status: An IT/IA Technical Advisory Board (TAB) has been stood up and is producing the policy, guidance, standards, and processes needed to manage evolving information systems and cybersecurity threats.
• FY14 Planned Action: The revised Naval System of Systems Engineering Guide (NSoSEG) will be issued. End of FY14 Status: The NSoSEG was revised and is currently pending DASN (RDT&E) review and approval.
• FY14 Planned Action: EXARM lessons learned will be available. End of FY14 Status: In FY14, EXARM was used to provide mission-based analyses for several N81 ID-focused studies and to develop ID inputs to the Integrated Capability Plans and Portfolio Health Assessments provided to N2N6 and N9I to address ID warfighting gaps.
• FY14 Planned Action: DON will become the DoD Executive Agent for the Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART) Program End of FY14 Status: DON has completed staffing and preparations for becoming the DoD Executive Agent for the SMART Program. Transition is in a holding pattern awaiting OSD delegation.
• FY14 Planned Action: DON will continue to participate in the Navy Acquisition Intern Program/ Navy Acquisition Development Program (NAIP/NADP), Science, Mathematics And Research for Transformation (SMART) Scholarship for Service Program, and Pathways programs.
201DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
14
End of FY14 Status: DON put a strategic focus on the SMART Cohort selection [the DASN (RDT&E) limited candidate selection to career fields critical to the department]. DON continued to participate in the NAIP/ NADP, SMART and Pathways programs.
• FY14 Planned Action: The SE Career Competency Model (SEECM) will be validated through the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) uniform guidelines. End of FY14 Status: Progress was made towards the SECCM being validated through Office of Personnel Management (OPM), however, the validation has not as yet been completed. Required actions and validation completion is on track for FY15.
• FY14 Planned Action: SYSCOMS will provide feedback on SECCM. End of FY14 Status: Complete.
• FY14 Planned Action: Key Leadership Position (KLP) Qualification Board project will be implemented to qualify personnel to fill mandatory ENG KLP. End of FY14 Status: DON continues to comply with OSD policy for Critical Acquisition Positions (CAPs) and KLPs. DASN (RDT&E) oversees the development and designation of ENG KLPs across the Naval enterprise in support of implementing USD (AT&L)’s KLP policy, and oversees SYSCOMs’ work to develop cadres of employees qualified for future KLP opportunities
2 Systems Engineering Workforce
2.1 Workforce Development Initiatives – Rebuilding the Acquisition Workforce
In support of ASN (RDA)’s priority of rebuilding the acquisition workforce, the FY 14 DON workforce development strategy centered on training, education, and certification. DASN (RDT&E) conducts yearly leadership development for the SE workforce through the Executive Leadership Development Program (ELDP); selects senior engineers to attend a 9-month Fellowship program sponsored by the MITRE Corporation; and sponsors a cohort of eight students, from across the Naval enterprise, to participate in the Joint Executive Engineering Management (SEM) distance learning master’s degree program offered by Naval Post Graduate School in partnership with Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Educational Consortium for Product Development Leadership in the 21st Century (PD21).
2.1.1 Hiring, Retaining, and Developing the Workforce DON workforce development includes hiring, retaining, and developing a world class technical workforce through educational consortia, scholarships, graduate outreach, internal specialized training activities, accelerated development programs, tuition assistance for advanced degrees,
202 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
15
monetary incentives, and rotational and career broadening assignments. Some specific examples include:
• NAIP/ NADP – This program is executed by the Director, Career Acquisition Management via the Naval Acquisition Career Center to hire and train the acquisition workforce. In FY 14, this program hired a total of 223 engineering (ENG) career field professionals; 197 entry level individuals and 26 associates.
• Science, Mathematics And Research for Transformation (SMART) Scholarship for Service Program – DON was expected to become the DoD Executive Agent for the SMART Program in FY 14, but this will now occur in FY15. For the FY14 SMART Cohort selection, DASN (RDT&E) prioritized career fields aligned with DONs Mission Critical Occupations and workforce priorities (nuclear engineering and cybersecurity related occupations) and provided guidance to sponsoring facilities on documenting their strategy to provide mentorship, track student academic process, and document student contributions to the workforce.. These actions will contribute to selecting the best candidates to feed the pipeline of DONs future scientists and engineers.
• Naval Innovative Science and Engineering (NISE) Program – This program implements Section 219 legislation and serves in part, to fund activities that improve the capacity of Naval laboratories to recruit, retain, and develop personnel with needed scientific and engineering expertise. This program includes several hundred projects, technical publications, and patent actions every year. NISE also enables advance degrees and provides technical training to scientists and engineers in the Naval laboratories.
In FY14, DON also continued to participate in the Pathways programs and continued to be engaged in outreach and educational initiatives in the areas of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) in grades K-12. Notable efforts include: Marine Corps Systems Command (MARCORSYSCOM) worked in conjunction with the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Dahlgren and ONR to host the 4th Annual Robotics Camp, where middle school students in the Quantico and San Diego areas learned about STEM fields of study; MARCORSYSCOM also participated in the nation’s largest Science & Engineering Festival at the Washington Convention Center in April 2014.
DON continues to comply with OSD policy for Critical Acquisition Positions (CAPs) and KLPs. DASN (RDT&E) oversees the development and designation of ENG KLPs across the Naval enterprise in support of implementing USD (AT&L)’s KLP policy, and oversees SYSCOMs’ work to develop cadres of employees qualified for future KLP opportunities.
Examples of Training Activities
DON continues SE training tailored to specific domains and product areas to improve knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) of workforce members using specific SE concepts and processes. For example, Standard Work Packages (SWP) and training courseware define the
203DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
16
work activity associated with the creation of a comprehensive SEP. As previously mentioned, several legacy RM&E courses that had not been used for years were updated to today’s references, requirements and toolsets and successfully delivered.
Examples of Educational Opportunities
DON workforce development continues to include many employees’ taking classes toward degrees at various colleges and universities according to local organizational needs. The Master of Science in Systems Engineering (MSSE) program from NPS continues to be an example of the technical advanced degrees available to DON’s technical workforce.
DON also continues to accommodate the development of employees who want to take graduate-level courses without pursuing a graduate degree, by offering graduate-level courses through partnerships with various educational institutions based on local organizational needs. NPS now offers a Lead Systems Integrator (LSI) certificate; this 4-course curriculum was designed to provide graduate-level courses to prepare engineers to assume positions as LSIs.
DASN (RDT&E) has also initiated development of a “Critical Thinking for Technical Leaders” curriculum. The curriculum consists of four 4-hour case-study mini courses to be delivered quarterly in 2015 and the first mini course is in final development. The Defense Acquisition University is supporting this initiative.
Systems Engineering Career Competency Model
The Naval Systems Engineering Career Competency Model (SECCM) is part of the DASN (RDT&E) strategic initiative to strengthen the technical workforce. In FY14, a subject matter expert (SME) team was formed with participants from across the Naval enterprise, to conduct a baseline review of the SECCM. This baseline review harmonized the model into a single and coherent model.
In FY14 the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) agreed to review the SECCM for validation under the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. The review will ensure that the most rigorous policies and standards governing human resources practices are met, enabling full use of the SECCM for all human resources functions. A Navy-led working group partnered with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), sister Services, and the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to assist in conducting the analysis. This validation is expected to be completed during the third and fourth quarters of FY15.
2.2 SE Workforce Resourcing
The President’s budget is sufficient to support planned programs. As systems engineers with over 30 years of experience retire, they are often replaced with systems engineers with less than 10 years of experience. This loss of experience and the growing inability to hire the next
204 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
17
generation of SEs inhibits the ability of SYSCOMs to maintain and sustain an experienced SE workforce. To work through these challenges in support of programs, SYSCOMS are streamlining processes and relationships, implementing workforce development tools, and mentoring younger SEs.
2.3 Department of the Navy SE Workforce
Table 1 depicts the total number of Civilians and Military Acquisition ENG Personnel. Table 2 provides the planned growth in civilian and military acquisition-coded ENG. The information contained in these tables is influenced by factors such as SYSCOMs priorities, available funding, sequestration, hiring freezes, and allocation of workforce reductions to meet OSD’s operating budget strategy over the FYs 2015-2019 Future Years Defense Program.
Table 1. Total Number of Civilian and Military Acquisition ENG
Fiscal Year Year Ending Navy*
FY05 30-Sep-05 16,886
FY06 30-Sep-06 16,688
FY07 30-Sep-07 16,804
FY08 30-Sep-08 16,576
FY09 30-Sep-09 18,085
FY10 30-Sep-10 19,270
FY11 30-Sep-11 19,325
FY12 30-Sep-12 19,498 FY13 30-Sep-13 19,589
FY 14 30-Sep-14 19,797 * US Navy and US Marine Corps personnel on board at end of year, including DAWDF-funded
employees. Source: Director Acquisition Career Management (DACM).
205DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
18
Table 2. Projected End Strength in Civilian and Military Acquisition-Coded ENG
Projected End Strength in Civilian and Military Acquisition-Coded ENG
* US Navy Projected End Strength reflects US Navy and US Marine Corps workforce requirements plus planned DAWDF-funded workforce. Sources: President’s Budget FY 15 Exhibit 23 and Department of Navy DAWDF Hiring Plan.
Table 3 summarizes the contracted systems engineering support delivered to the Navy during FY13. This data was reported to Congress by DoD in an effort to improve visibility into and accountability of contracted services in accordance with title 10, U.S.C, section 2330a. The Inventory of Contracts for Services reflects input from the Military Departments.1 The data was extracted from the Inventory of Contracts for Services database using the following Product Service Codes2, 3 to denote systems engineering effort.
R414 (Support- Professional: Systems Engineering Services)
Table 3. Contracted Systems Engineering Support to the Military Departments as Reported by DoD to Congress
Fiscal Year Year Ending US Navy4 FY12 30-Sep-12 16,416 FY13 30-Sep-13 16,738
1 Source: Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy (DPAP) website http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/cpic/cp/acquisition_of_services_policy.html. 2 Source: U.S. General Services Administration Office of Government-wide Policy, Federal Procurement Data System Product and Service Codes Manual, August 2011 Edition (Effective Date: October 1, 2011), pp. 103, 217. 3 Both R414 and R421 were end-dated and merged into PSC R425; legacy data retained effective October 2011. 4 US Navy FY13 contractor numbers reflect Derived Contractor FTEs calculated from labor factors provided by Army.
206 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX B: DEPARTMENT OF NAVY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
19
This summary reflects the latest information available as of publication of this Annual Report; FY14 contracted services data will not be provided to Congress until mid-2015 in accordance with the requirements of sections 235 and 2330a of title 10, U.S.C.
These numbers are based on product service codes and do not provide position-specific information such as acquisition job functions that might confirm that these Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) reflect high-value systems engineering support. These numbers may also represent positions supporting Research and Development, Test and Evaluation, or other areas. In addition, selection of product service codes occurs locally at the individual contract level and may result in differing interpretation of contract work content across the Military Departments and activities. Although contractors are encouraged to parse contract task orders to reflect multiple functions (i.e., product service codes), this requirement is enforced at the local contracting activity and program level. These numbers represent the best available approximation of the actual ontra te systems engineering support level o e ort.
3 Summary of Navy Planned Areas for Improvement in FY15 1. DASN (RDT&E) will continue ongoing efforts to maintain good order and discipline, and maintain appropriate governance and oversight of Naval SE efforts
• Continue to streamline internal DON SE policy, guidance and establish standard SE processes across the naval SYSCOMs, where possible
• Continue to build the needed SE and critical specialty engineering references, guidelines, policies, and analysis tools and make these available on-line. Implement the DON Systems Engineering online guide
• Integrate emergent DON SE references such as cross-SYSCOM SE, Risk Management, and TA policies and guidance
• DASN (RDT&E) will continue to govern a quality DON SE effort
2. DASN (RDT&E) will continue to deploy quality SE support for:
• Naval programs in the areas of mission thread analysis, integration and interoperability and architecture development
• Robust technical risk identification, mitigation, and management support
3. DASN (RDT&E) will continue to field a highly qualified and experienced technical workforce
• Continue development and deployment of Critical Thinking for Technical Leaders curriculum
• Complete validation of the SECCM to the uniform guidelines for employee selection • Continue the intake and development program for the engineering workforce,
working through the chain of command
207DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
This page intentionally blank.
APPENDIX C
Department of the Air Force Systems Engineering Self-Assessment
This page intentionally blank.
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
Headquarters United States Air Force
Department of Defense Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Prepared by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition)
1060 Air Force Pentagon
Washington DC 20330-1060
November 2014
211DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
ii
Table of Contents
1 Progress and Plans for Improved Service Systems Engineering Capability .......................... 1
1.1 Service-Level Systems Engineering Strategy .................................................................. 1 1.2 Pre-Milestone A and Pre-Milestone B Rigorous Systems Analysis and Systems Engineering Process (Pub. L. 111-23, title I, Sec. 102(b)(1)(B)(i)) ......................................... 10 1.3 Reliability, availability, maintainability, and sustainability as an integral part of design and development (Pub. L. 111-23, title I, Sec. 102(b)(1)(B)(ii)) ............................................. 13 1.4 Systems Engineering Requirements During the JCIDS Process and in Contract Requirements for each MDAP (Pub. L. 111-23, title I, Sec. 102(b)(1)(B)(iii)) ....................... 16 1.5 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Corrosion ............................................. 18 1.6 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Human Systems Integration ................ 20 1.7 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Standardization Program ..................... 21 1.8 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health (ESOH) Management ...................................................................... 23 1.9 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: System Security Engineering .............. 26 1.10 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Air Force Support for the OSD Defense Exportability Features (DEF) Initiative .................................................................................... 31
2 Systems Engineering Workforce ......................................................................................... 32 2.1 Workforce Development Initiatives ............................................................................... 32 2.2 SE Workforce Resourcing ............................................................................................. 34 2.3 Department of the Air Force SE Workforce .................................................................. 34
Table of Figures
Figure 1: Air Force Engineering Enterprise Governance Structure................................................ 2 Figure 2: Air Force Chief Engineer and the Program Execution Chain ......................................... 4 Figure 3: Technical Authority Lineage ........................................................................................... 6 Figure 4: OTB Key Attributes ........................................................................................................ 8 Figure 5: Annual Cost of Corrosion and Corrosion Share of Maintenance Curves ..................... 18
Table of Tables
Table 1: Systems Engineering Workforce in the DoD ................................................................. 35
Attachment
Air Force Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (2014-2024) ......................................................37
212 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
1
Air Force FY 2014 Systems Engineering Self-Assessments 1 Progress and Plans for Improved Service Systems Engineering Capability 1.1 Service-Level Systems Engineering Strategy
The U.S. Air Force (AF) FY 2014 Systems Engineering (SE) major strategy enhancements focused on three initiatives: Air Force (AF) Engineering Enterprise (EE), Technical Authority Implementation, and Own the Technical Baseline (OTB). These three initiatives, plus the work being done in reliability, availability, maintainability, and sustainability; Early Systems Engineering/Development Planning; corrosion control and prevention; human systems integration; standardization; environment, safety, and occupational health; system security engineering; and defense exportability all contribute to the Air Force efforts to achieve affordable programs, especially when considering life cycle costs. The Air Force EE chaired by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Science, Technology, and Engineering) (SAF/AQR) formalized a strategic vision to address the demands of a fast-changing warfighter environment. The underlying theme was that engineering in the Air Force must fully support the effort to plan, build, and sustain affordable warfighter systems. A crucial step to effectively handle the challenge posed by the current strategic environment was to codify the role of SAF/AQR as the Air Force Chief Engineer and Technical Authority. In parallel, SAF/AQ initiated OTB with a goal of the government becoming a more informed decision maker by obtaining the right data and information to establish, trade-off, verify, change, accept, and sustain functional capabilities, design characteristics, and quantified performance parameters. These three initiatives collectively address the demands of complex engineering systems over their life cycle. Air Force Engineering Enterprise (EE) The EE is defined as the network of interdependent engineers, scientists, and technical managers; processes; and supporting infrastructure providing Air Force mission capability by shaping requirements and providing technical leadership for research, development, test, manufacturing, deployment, sustainment, and disposal of Air Force systems and systems-of-systems. It includes members from Air Force Headquarters and the Implementing Commands, Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC). The EE reinforces the Air Force concept of a highly technical service built on a foundation of engineering discipline and expertise, as well as a culture of innovation, competency, and integrity. The Air Force EE established a governance
213DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
2
structure (see Figure 1) that provides leadership and guidance for the strategic planning process, as well as oversight and accountability of the implementation activities. It is composed of senior Air Force advisory and senior engineering leadership members who guide the actions necessary to achieve strategic priorities. There are three levels in this structure: 1) the Senior Advisory Council; 2) the EE Executive Council (EEEC) and; 3) the Priority Champions. The Senior Advisory Council, chaired by SAF/AQ includes the Executive Directors from AFMC and AFSPC, acts as a deliberative body that guides the Air Force engineering strategic approach, and provides executive perspective on budget, people, and resourcing. The EEEC is chaired by SAF/AQR and includes the directors from the engineering staffs of AFMC and AFSPC’s Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), as well as the Air Force Senior Leader (SL) for SE. The EEEC is the primary EE decision body and is responsible for implementing a comprehensive and actionable strategic planning approach. This strategic approach includes the core priorities for the transformation of the EE. Each priority is led by a general officer-level Priority Champion, who is responsible for developing goals, establishing goal teams, and leading the implementation process.
Figure 1: Air Force Engineering Enterprise Governance Structure
The attached ten year Air Force Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (2014-2024), signed by both the Secretary of the Air Force and Chief of Staff in the summer of 2014, documents a clear course for the future of the Air Force Engineering Enterprise. The
Senior Advisory Council
• Members: SAF/AQ, HQ AFMC/CA, HQ AFSPC/CA, • Advise & support the Engineering Enterprise (EE)
• Provides executive perspective on budget, people, resourcing • Serve as EE advocate outside of Engineering
EEEC
• Members: SAF/AQR, HQ AFMC/EN, SMC/EN, AF SE SL • Strategic Leadership for EE (supported by Core Team)
• Primary decision body • Actively directs & manages AF EE (Sets “Priorities” & approves goals)
EE Priority Champions
• Members: SES-Level Leaders from across EE • Operational Leadership for EE
• Develops/Executes roadmaps (to include goals, actions & metrics) • Manages Goal Teams tactical implementation
214 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
3
Strategic Plan describes how leadership will develop strategic direction down to actions and implementation and includes a description of the required planning documentation as well as the battle rhythm for all engineering strategic planning activities. The Strategic Plan spans ten years and will be revisited every four years to ensure alignment with Air Force, Department of Defense (DoD) and national strategic objectives. It contains the EE priorities established by the EEEC. To implement the priorities, an operational-level EE Roadmap, now in final stages of coordination for publication, describes the goals in greater detail and provides a high-level overview of the objectives. The roadmap spans four years and be revisited every two years to ensure alignment with the Strategic Plan. Finally, EE action plans when completed will describe the objectives in further detail and provide near-term, actionable tactics for achieving the objectives. The action plans will span two years and be revisited annually to ensure alignment with the Roadmap. The detailed tasks defined in each action plan will be the basis for measuring progress towards accomplishing the objectives, goals, priorities, and ultimately the EE mission. The four EE strategic priorities include: 1. Refine Air Force engineering enterprise governance, roles and responsibilities, and
supporting policy, 2. Enable high-quality engineering decisions and seamless communication, 3. Improve engineering rigor through technical information management and
standardization, and 4. Address engineering workforce issues, including core competencies, structure,
development, and assignments.
These four priorities, detailed in the EE Strategic Plan, seek to provide Program Managers (PMs) the technical competencies needed to execute successful development and sustainment programs. This is done by improving the engineering workforce available to Program Managers.
215DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
4
Technical Authority Implementation The Headquarters Air Force Mission Directive for SAF/AQ establishes SAF/AQR as: the Air Force Science and Technology (S&T) Executive; Air Force Chief Engineer and Technical Authority; Air Force Standardization Executive and; Functional Manager for the Scientist and Engineer (S&E) Career Field. As the Air Force Chief Engineer and Technical Authority, SAF/AQR has several responsibilities for technical oversight and support of Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs). SAF/AQR supports the program execution chain (see Figure 2) as the Air Force Chief Engineer by providing technical advice to the Service Acquisition Executive (SAE). This advice guides pre-acquisition investment decisions and continues throughout the program acquisition lifecycle.
Figure 2: Air Force Chief Engineer and the Program Execution Chain
A key means for providing this advice is meeting with Program Executive Officer (PEO) Lead Systems Engineers (LSEs) and Program Office LSEs to discuss technical issues prior to SAE-chaired reviews. SAF/AQR established a PEO LSE Roundtable to
PM PM LSE
PEO PEO LSE
SAE
Engineering Community
AF Chief Engineer
Technical Advice
Information Flow
Technical Support
Flow
DAE
Program Execution
Chain
Key
216 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
5
periodically discuss issues of interest and conducted two PEO LSE Roundtables in FY 2014. Topics included coordination and discussion on SE topics including the Air Force EE, technical authority, OTB, and other items. SAF/AQ revitalized SE oversight and support of programs by publishing a Memorandum in FY 2014 addressed to the PEOs, AFMC, and AFSPC primarily defining SAF/AQR’s role as the Air Force Chief Engineer and Technical Authority (see Figure 3). In that role, SAF/AQR has responsibility to provide: technical advice to the SAE for pre-acquisition investment decisions, at major milestones, and throughout the acquisition lifecycle; provide technical support to PEOs and PMs in the execution of successful acquisition programs; oversee Air Force EE policy and guidance; direct external technical assessments of programs, as needed; and engage Implementing Commands and Center-level engineering offices to support program reviews, technical reviews, and independent review teams. Specifically, SAF/AQR: 1. Meets with the PEO LSE, PM LSE, and representatives from the Center-level
engineering offices to discuss the technical status of a program prior to SAF/AQ-chaired meetings. These meetings typically include Air Force Review Boards, Configuration Steering Boards, and Acquisition Strategy Panels. This activity facilitates the exchange of technical information to support SAF/AQR's responsibility to provide technical advice to the SAE during program reviews.
2. Requires Center-level engineering offices support programs throughout the lifecycle and participate in the nine principal formal technical reviews for ACAT I, non-delegated ACAT II, and special interest programs (ACAT II and III programs as needed) and provide objective feedback to the PM, PEO, and SAF/AQR based on those technical reviews. This process is designed to provide SAF/AQR with ongoing insight into Program Office technical issues without imposing additional workload on Program Offices. This process avoids SAF/AQR having to routinely conduct external technical assessments of a program above and beyond the normal technical reviews conducted by each Program Office.
3. Directs external technical assessments only if technology maturity, manufacturing readiness, or other technical issues pose critical cost, schedule, or performance risks to a program. These assessments are designed to identify sources of technical risk; formulate handling/mitigation plans; collect objective feedback and provide results and recommendations to the PM, PEO, SAF/AQR, and Milestone Decision Authority (MDA). PMs support these assessments.
4. Supports the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)-chaired technical assessments such as Program Support Assessments (PSAs). On behalf of and when required by SAF/AQR, Center-level engineering offices will provide subject-matter experts to supplement OSD teams.
217DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
6
After publication of the memorandum, SAF/AQ integrated the contents of the Memorandum into AFI 63-101/20-101, Integrated Life Cycle Management, to institutionalize the changes.
Figure 3: Technical Authority Lineage
Technical execution and oversight of lower level ACAT programs, including Systems Engineering Plans (SEPs) and Technology Readiness Assessments (TRAs), is delegated to the PEO. In the field, the Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) engineering directorate fully implemented Cadre staff systems engineering support to programs. This practice, which dedicates engineering staff to each mission directorate (Global Positioning System, Space-Based Infrared System, etc.), has been formalized into agreements between the respective organizations, outlining their desired and expected staff support requirements. The existing agreements with the mission directorates have been upgraded to include lists of requirements from each ACAT program in the directorate. The intent is to ensure Center-level staff representation at key management and technical meetings in order to provide advice and reach-back to engineering specialty
218 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
7
subject matter experts (SMEs) to assist Program Offices in effectively and efficiently meeting their milestone and technical review requirements. SMC has drafted an implementation plan that further defines the framework for the Center-level SEP which includes roles, responsibilities, schedules, process updates, and a communications plan for ensuring expectations management across the stakeholder community, including SAF/AQ and DASD(SE). The Center-level SEP will document common processes and is intended to gain efficiencies and standardizations in SE planning and approaches across the Center. SMC has also stood up a dedicated Software Advisory Group, whose purpose is to ensure mission success by assisting Program Offices with software technical expertise on best practices, guidelines, policies, and standards. SMC has been leveraging the Aerospace (FFRDC) network to develop and maintain a program schedule and software issues database, which includes sharing lessons learned across programs that will enable transfer of historical knowledge to optimize planning, execution, and monitoring of software systems. The group plans to continue expanding its support to Program Offices while putting additional focus on addressing software policy and guidance shortfalls at the Center in the near term. In FY 2014, SMC launched an investigation on the efficacy of the current Operational Transition process. The objective of the initiative is to review and assess policy and application of operational transition processes and activities required to deploy and integrate system(s) or system increments into SMC programs and operational units. As a result, SMC successfully institutionalized several processes that foster improved practices to better prepare programs for successful operational transition. These include standardized DT&E/OT&E policies and improved materiel fielding planning and execution. Additionally, there is an on-going evaluation of the impact of operating concepts, requirements, and acquisition documentation to successful operational acceptance, and potential opportunities to improve synergy between the development and operational communities.
219DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
8
Own the Technical Baseline (OTB)
In FY 2014 the Air Force Service Acquisition Executive (SAE), SAF/AQ, established five (5) priorities. One of them--OTB, was assigned to SAF/AQR. OTB is the Air Force’s desire to apply technical baseline knowledge to be an informed decision maker. OTB has been socialized with the engineering community and Directors of Engineering (DOE) for all PEOs. FFRDC MITRE is assisting with OTB implementation. OTB will be piloted on a small set of programs early in the acquisition lifecycle and will baseline more established ACAT I programs OTB seeks to reverse the 1990s acquisition reform trend of deferring technical decision- making to the prime contractor in favor of a collaborative relationship in which the government owns the knowledge and is the decision maker. OTB’s goal is enabling the government to be a smart buyer of weapons systems. OTB requires that the government understand: acquisition program system design and interfaces; system models; performance data; data rights and open architectures; cost actuals and; technical risks and mitigations. OTB requires knowledge of the contractual technical baseline attributes (see Figure 4) that are owned by the government for a given program. OTB will require an appropriately sized organic workforce with sufficient knowledge to maintain control of the technical baseline augmented by a skilled network of FFRDCs and contractors with competencies across critical technical areas. SAF/AQ has tasked SAF/AQR to implement OTB.
Figure 4: OTB Key Attributes
OTB has two top level goals
1. Informed program decision-making through appropriate knowledge of the technical baseline to enable improved program performance.
2. Staff current & future programs with appropriate level of technical expertise. FY 2015 Objectives
1. Release of EE Roadmap 2. Release of the EE Action Plans 3. Publish AFI 63-101/20-101 IC-2 4 Provide initial OTB pilot and baseline results to AQ
220 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
9
Affordability Affordability is an emphasis of the Service Acquisition Executive (SAE) and is contained within his priority - “continue to get high priority programs right and keep on track.” The Air Force is focusing on Early Systems Engineering and Developmental Planning to structure programs early on, thereby ensure affordability. The process starts with the Early Systems Engineering analysis of mission requirements through SAF/AQR’s participation in the Air Force Requirements Review Group (AFRRG) (see Section 1.4). The potential solution space to meet the requirements is explored both economically and technically through the development of Concept Characterization and Technical Descriptions (CCTDs). The cost capability analysis is informed by sound engineering analysis that starts as early as the development of CCTDs and continues refinement through to the development of acquisition strategies. In addition, program managers and chief engineers continually emphasize affordability through early identification of risk, testing that stresses the importance of design of experiments, and the increased emphasis on designing reliable systems (see Section 1.3); preventing and controlling corrosion (see Section 1.5); integrating human factors (see Section 1.6); use of non-governmental engineering standards (see Section 1.7); eliminating environment, safety, and occupational health hazards or reducing the risks of mishaps when hazards cannot be eliminated (see Section 1.8); improving hardware and software assurance (see Section 1.9); and incorporating defense exportability features (see Section 1.10). All of which contributes to the development, testing, fielding, and sustainment of more economically supportable weapon systems. One of the key contributions to affordability these design considerations can make is avoidance of costly redesigns or other mitigations driven by problems encountered when trying to operate and maintain fielded systems. By effectively integrating these design considerations into the system development, potential issues (risks) can be identified, assessed, and eliminated or mitigated prior to fielding. Summary The majority of SAF/AQR’s SE initiatives evolved around the three main SE strategies: the Air Force Engineering Enterprise; Technical Authority implementation; and Own the Technical Baseline. Collectively, they address the dynamics of a fast-changing warfighter environment through insightful SE design and management addressing the complex and changing engineering environment.
221DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
10
1.2 Pre-Milestone A and Pre-Milestone B Rigorous Systems Analysis and Systems Engineering Process (Pub. L. 111-23, title I, Sec. 102(b)(1)(B)(i)) Policy Changes In its continuing efforts to streamline SE policy development, SAF/AQR established the engineering enterprise policy working group (EE PWG). The EE PWG provides the venue to champion engineering policy and guidance requirements produced from strategic leadership initiatives, policy studies (e.g., Rapid Improvement Events, Tiger Teams, Red Teams, etc.), and cross-organizational working groups. The EE PWG provides a framework to ensure continued improvement of Air Force SE policy and guidance while avoiding unnecessary policy proliferation and churn. The Air Force updated Air Force Policy Directive (AFPD) 16-10, Modeling and Simulation, to codify and align the responsibilities for the Air Force Three pillar Modeling and Simulation (M&S) governance structure. The three Air Force M&S pillars are life cycle management, analytics, and testing/training. AFPD 16-10 is in coordination and expected to be published by January 2015. Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) has actively engaged with Program Offices early in the Materiel Solution Analysis Phase, especially in the area of frequency selection. This is particularly important since choosing unallocated frequencies could result in major cost increases and schedule delays. Using the spectrum application tool EL-CID, along with early spectrum planning, SMC reduced by 50 percent, the time needed to obtain spectrum certification approval (DD-1491) from the National Telecommunications and Information Agency. SMC has also continued to support Better Buying Power initiatives that are focus on reducing costs and right-sizing mission assurance posture. Last year SMC released guidance on mission assurance tailoring, it is now being expanded to ground systems and demonstration/experimental projects; thereby ensuring engineers are equipped to handle the broad range of programs and projects that they will encounter. These efforts are intended to provide overarching guidance for space systems engineering and mission assurance requirements beginning at the earliest stages of acquisition, and are designed for government personnel. Modeling and Simulation SAF/AQR collaboration with DASD (SE) increased, through the Acquisition Modeling & Simulation Working Group which seeks to improve the application of M&S in acquisition management. These efforts include engaging with the acquisition community to highlight
222 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
11
focus on aspects of M&S in the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development (JCIDS) and Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPB&E) processes. The objective is to assess capabilities, reduce acquisition time, reduce risk, and decrease overall costs to Department of Defense. The Air Force worked in close collaboration with DASD (SE) developing the digital system model and its physics-based instantiation--the digital thread. It will support key decision points across the lifecycle by leveraging the current inventory of existing data, models, and algorithms. Reusing program data across the lifecycle, and across multiple programs, promotes affordability. The Air Force is actively developing strategic plans to develop repeatable processes and refined toolsets which follow the Cost versus Capability Analysis (CCA) methodology. SMC has initiated a working group to study the utility of Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) tools and applications for Space programs starting with a Technical Interchange Meeting bringing together government, FFRDCs, and select MBSE tool vendors. The goal is to reach agreement on: a common definition for MBSE; discuss corporate approaches and experiences and; pave a way-ahead for standard Center-wide selection and application processes during lifecycle system acquisition. Value-Added Decision Analysis - Cost Capability Analysis Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) provided Lessons Learned from working with six (6) SECAF-directed CCA pilot programs. The 300-page Lessons Learned report established the foundation for eight (8) Implementation Recommendations for institutionalizing the practice of CCA throughout the Air Force. The eight recommendations fell into the broad categories of: Timing and Decisions; Processes/Policy; Personnel; Tools and Training and; Industry Involvement. The Implementation Recommendations were approved by the Integrated Life-Cycle Management Executive Forum on 13 Jun 14 and several actions have been taken since then. Policy change recommendations have been submitted: proposed courses of action to better integrate requirements and acquisition decision-making have been shared; CCA training courses are being developed and; a standardized CCA process is being written. Furthermore, industry involvement with CCA has been added to Round 2 of “Bending the Cost Curve.” Many of the actions taken to implement CCA directly support BBP 3.0 initiatives such as Achieve Affordable Programs; Build Stronger Partnerships Between Acquisition, Requirements, and Intelligence Communities; Control Life Cycle Costs and; Incentivize Innovation in Industry and Government.
223DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
12
Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) SE Contributions SAF/AQR recognizes AFRL as an important contributor to rigorous system analysis and SE to reduce high-risk acquisition. AFRL develops and matures technology options for transition into Air Force weapon and support systems. Successful technology demonstrations and transition of those technologies is critical to the success of Air Force acquisition. AFRL leadership is addressing warfighter gaps means using a disciplined early-SE process, coupled with early Manufacturing Technology involvement, provides the foundation for programs to transition with requisite technical maturity. AFRL has Science and Technology (S&T) Chief Engineers (CEs), with strong SE background and program office experience, in each of the Technology Directorates. These AFRL S&T CEs ensure SE activities are incorporated in all major technology demonstration efforts. The AFRL Instruction 61-104, Science and Technology (S&T) Systems Engineering (SE), identifies provides streamlined SE process and best practices required of the AFRL technology programs. FY 2015 Objectives
1. AQR will continue to mature the digital thread concept. Pilot programs will be identified to participate and assist in defining the artifacts for digital thread.
2. AFMC will establish a CCA team at Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) and SMC.
3. AFMC will roll out CCA training curriculum. 4. AFMC will complete the standardized CCA process.
224 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
13
1.3 Reliability, availability, maintainability, and sustainability as an integral part of design and development (Pub. L. 111-23, title I, Sec. 102(b)(1)(B)(ii)) The Air Force has collaborated with DASD (SE), the other Defense Services, and the major organizations within the Air Force to ensure RAM is addressed holistically throughout the lifecycle of product or system as well as ensuring the proper visibility at every level of leadership. In doing so, the Air Force is ensuring the appropriate practices, processes, and policies are in place to guarantee long term sustainability of our current and future weapon systems. The Air Force continued to implement several initiatives as part of a Service-wide strategy to better equip the engineering workforce and improve the performance of RAM activities within Air Force acquisition programs. Activities include:
1. As part of its major reorganizations during FY 2014, the Air Force moved the
Secretariat office responsible for Logistics, SAF/IEL, from SAF/IE (Installations, Environment, and Logistics) to SAF/AQ (Acquisition) to become SAF/AQD. SAF/IE has been renamed Installations, Environment, and Energy to highlight the Air Force's efforts to ensure energy sustainability. Moving the SAF logistics lead into SAF/AQ will more effectively integrate all aspects of system lifecycle management, to include systems engineering. The Air Force’s Product Support Enterprise Vision (PSEV) identifies Product Support Engineering as a major capability. The PSEV requires key engineering specialists, such as Reliability, Maintainability, Quality, Manufacturing, etc., become involved early in the process of developing Air Force weapon systems to ensure affordability and sustainability throughout its useful life.
2. AFLCMC is using its annual R&M Programs Health Assessment to assess the
overall health of Air Force RAM programs. This assessment is provides insight to the health of a program’s processes, products and expertise. A separate survey provides the Program Office's Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) initiatives for risk-based Programmed Depot Maintenance strategies (i.e. Condition-Based Maintenance, maintenance scheduling from reliability based statistical failure distribution analysis, etc.). The R&M Program Health Assessment and RCM initiatives gap analyses are key in determining the focus of future strategic efforts related to Air Force RAM programs.
3. In order to better assess contractor analysis of RAM related requirements,
AFLCMC is improving its capabilities for independent assessment of concept weapon system mission effectiveness. AFLCMC’s Engineering Resilient Systems
225DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
14
task establishes methodology assessing how multiple different weapon system design attributes impact mission effectiveness for various missions. This is a first step in properly correlating RAM-related requirements and trade space during requirements development and will facilitate more precise RAM-related requirements definition in future contracts for MDAPs. AFLCMC plans to integrate this capability with already well developed methodologies for assessing cost and then expanding this capability to incorporate sustainability.
4. AFLCMC has created Individual Development Plans to ensure that R&M Trainees
receive the appropriate specialized education they need to support RAM requirements for Air Force programs. A small number of interns enter the R&M track each year and upon completion will be deployed to various Program Offices within the Center. These individuals work in small programs supported by Center experts and will progress to larger, more complex programs as skills mature. In addition, several candidates from other engineering disciplines have been selected to cross train into Reliability Engineering and will follow a similar path as the interns.
5. The Air Force expanded the Service-wide R&M Working Group to include SMEs
from Acquisition, Test & Evaluation, Maintenance, Policy, Analysis, and Academia. These SMEs work together to optimize Air Force policies and practices as they relate to current and future RAM initiatives. An online collaboration environment has been created to facilitate this collaboration and there are currently plans to open this site to the RAM community at large. AFLCMC’s Product Support Engineering Division hosts quarterly meetings with representatives from the R&M community to identify and address R&M issues.
6. SAF/AQR implemented the Certification & Accreditation process for a standard
suite of software tools to be used by Air Force R&M SMEs. This process enables Program Offices to acquire the tools needed to satisfy the planning and analysis requirements outlined in Directive Type Memorandum 11-003. Standardization of tools allows SMEs from multiple programs to collaborate on common activities, share lessons learned, and exchange expertise more freely. Several new R&M Tools have been certified and incorporated into the Air Force Evaluated Products List which allows users to purchase and utilize the tools they need.
7. The Air Force is reviewing current internal policies and guidance to ensure
consistency with new mandates from OSD. AF/A4L is still working the update to the RAM policy for fielded systems through a revision of AFI 21-118, Improving Air and Space Equipment Reliability and Maintainability. In addition, SAF/AQR
226 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
15
is working on updates to AFI 63-101/20-101, "Integrated Life Cycle Management" to improve RAM policy. The Air Force is also working to convert the Air Force RAM Guidebook to an Air Force Pamphlet.
8. AFLCMC Systems Analysis Division has enhanced the Logistics Composite
Model Toolkit (LCOM ATK) to better support decision-makers across the enterprise. LCOM ATK is the premier M&S tool for investigation of RAM issues and effects. Enhancements include direct calculation of system availability in direct support of mandated RAM reporting requirements. Additional enhancements underway include linking RAM metrics with affordability estimates to support a systematic and quantitative assessment methodology supporting design, development, test, and sustainment.
9. Using DAWDF funding provided by SAF/AQH, the Air Force Institute of
Technology continues to provide a series of courses training program managers, test managers, program office engineers and reliability subject matter experts in reliability and reliability growth to promote a proactive approach of designing reliability into the system up front as well as reliability growth planning, tracking and assessment methods and best practices.
SAF/AQR and Air Force R&M SMEs have worked with, and will continue to work with, a number of MDAPs to review and improve their requirements, planning, and contractual strategies for R&M-related activities and deliverables. AFLCMC/EZP has established an R&M Center of Excellence to more effectively assist Programs with R&M efforts thereby improving the standard of quality with acquired systems and services. FY 2015 Objectives
1. The Air Force will continue to leverage standards and guidance from both government and industry sources. The Air Force is exploring an update to GEIA-STD-0009, “Reliability Program Standard for Systems Design, Development, and Manufacturing,” which has not been updated since 2009. The Air Force is also involved with the development of AIAA 102.2.4,”Performance-Based FMECA”, which is intended to take the place of canceled MIL-STD-1629, “Procedures for Performing a Failure, Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis”.
2. The Air Force will continue its efforts to implement a common Information Technology and Knowledge Sharing infrastructure which includes data systems and analysis tools to ensure R&M Engineers have the best resources available for making informed decisions and tradeoffs. The Air Force has identified and approved commercial data products for use, and will seek funding to purchase
227DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
16
enterprise licenses. However, Program Offices will be able to purchase the licenses separately, until centralized funding can be obtained.
1.4 Systems Engineering Requirements During the JCIDS Process and in Contract
Requirements for each MDAP (Pub. L. 111-23, title I, Sec. 102(b)(1)(B)(iii)) Policy Changes Concept Characterization and Technical Descriptions (CCTDs) document the results of the early Air Force Systems Engineering analyses of the pre-program planning activities exploring alternative approaches to meeting warfighter needs. The primary FY 2013 Air Force policy concern regarding SE in the JCIDS process was the lack of a requirement for the CCTD documents to be inputs to Analysis of Alternative (AoA) study planning. The revision to AFI 10-601, "Operational Capability Requirements Development," published by the Air Force in November 2013, included that requirement. This change effectively eliminated the last of the Air Force Development Planning (DP) policy gaps. The AFMC "Request for Proposal (RFP) Technical Content" engineering guide published in 2013 addressed the SE requirements applicable to Non-Developmental Items (NDI). Pre-planning Team and the Air Force Requirements Review Group (AFRRG) In order to improve the affordability and technical feasibility of programs, it is essential that the requirements community and the acquisition community collaboratively develop potential solutions to operational capability needs. Air Force decision-makers must have objective technical assessments of the viability and risks associated with these potential solutions prior to making decisions to proceed. Air Force accomplishes this by having the SAF/AQRE Pre-planning Team participate in the AFFRG. The AFRRG is designed to inform the Air Force Requirements Oversight Council (AFROC) by reviewing all Air Force requirements documents and AoA concepts prior to their submittal to the AFROC for approval. Since 2013, the AFRRG has met regularly to help the AFROC avoid poorly defined and potentially unaffordable and/or unattainable requirements. The Pre-planning Team seeks to ensure a tight linkage between requirements, technology maturity, and accomplishment of sufficient early SE to inform cost and capability analyses to enable the AFRRG to accomplish this goal. The Pre-planning Team reviews all requirements documents for affordability and technical feasibility. In addition, the Pre-planning Team reviews the early developmental planning documents: CCTDs and AoA study plans. Often, the Pre-planning Team works
228 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
17
with Program Offices on potential acquisition strategies and program schedules in preparation for an AFRRG meeting. During 2014, the Pre-planning Team reviewed thirty-five (35) program documents and studies (i.e., Initial Concept Documents (ICD), CCTD, AoA study plan/guidance, Concept Development Documents (CDD) and Concept Production Documents (CDP)). These included: Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) Recapitalization, Ground-Based Strategic Deterrence (GBSD), Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) Follow-on, Military GPS User Equipment (MGUE), F-15 Eagle Passive/Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS), and Presidential Aircraft Recapitalization (PAR). Development Planning (DP) The Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA; Public Law 111-23) directed reinstatement of DP across the DoD. The Air Force DP effort includes both Early SE and Science & Technology (S&T) involvement in the Capabilities Planning Process. The SAF/AQRE Pre-planning Team leads the Early SE and SAF/AQRT leads the S&T support to the Capabilities Planning Process. As described above, the SAF/AQRE Pre-planning Team's activities are focused on support to the AFROC and AFFRG processes for reviewing and assessing programs in the Capabilities Planning Process. The Pre-planning Team supports new acquisition activities by providing DP guidance on SE's role in CCTDs, ICDs, AoA study plan/guidance, and CDDs. SAF/AQRT and the Air Force Research Laboratories (AFRL) are also actively engaged in Air Force DP activities. AFRL has representation at all levels of the Air Force DP governance structure. DP efforts approved through the governance structure include personnel from AFRL on execution teams providing technical expertise and ensuring S&T needs associated with an effort are properly identified and communicated. In order to assess the effectiveness of its DP Early SE and S&T activities, in FY 2014 SAF/AQR sponsored the Air Force Studies Board (AFSB) of the National Research Council of the National Academies of Science to conduct an independent review and assessment of the Air Force’s approach and execution of DP and to provide recommendations for improvement. The AFSB just recently published its report "Improving Effectiveness and Efficiency of U.S. Air Force Pre-Acquisition Development Planning." The Air Force is reviewing the findings and considering necessary process and policy changes necessary in FY 2015 to implement the report's recommendations on how the Air Force can improve its DP efforts.
229DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
18
SAF/AQH continues to provide DAWDF funding for the Air Force Institute of Technology Introduction to Developmental Planning Course developed as part of the Air Force’s renewal of DP activities. FY 2015 Objectives
1. AQR will continue to support the AFRRG and improve the process as needed. 2. AQR will take steps to improve DP after reviewing the AFSB report's
recommendations to determine how best to proceed with implementation.
1.5 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Corrosion Air Force efforts to reduce the effects of corrosion are starting to pay off. Rising corrosion costs from the previous decade have slowed and there is strong indication of a “bending of the cost curve.” Based on draft results of a study received from the Director of Corrosion Policy and Oversight (CPO) in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the corrosion share of aircraft maintenance costs that grew from 19.4% to 25% of total maintenance from FY 2006-FY 2010 has plateaued and may have even dropped slightly this year (see Figure 5).
Figure 5: Annual cost of corrosion and corrosion share of maintenance curves
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Corr
osio
n %
of M
X
Tota
l Cor
rosi
on C
ost (
$B)
Corrosion Cost and % of Maintenance
Total Corrosion Cost
($B)
Corrosion portion
of MX (%)
Note 1: costs figures are understated because they are not adjusted for inflation
Note 2: 10-30% scale on the "Corrosion % of MX" axis was chosen because the corrosion
fraction of maintenance will never reach zero.
230 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
19
The Air Force Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive (CCPE) attributes this positive trend to several synergistic effects:
• Increased enterprise-level engagement to improve awareness through the CPC Strategic Plan, emphasis on the CPC Annual Report, an active CPC Working Group, and other communication and outreach;
• Focused attention from MAJCOMs and weapon system managers and engineers on instructions, technical orders, Corrosion Prevention and Control Plans, Corrosion Prevention Advisory Boards, and Aircraft Structural Integrity Program reviews to energize CPC efforts; and
• Improved depot and field-level processes that increased wash cycles frequency for aircraft in severe corrosion environments, the application of Corrosion Preventative Compounds (CPCs), implementing gaskets, seals, and other barriers to reduce galvanic corrosion; and increased inspections for early detection of corrosion.
In 2014, the CCPE released a new Air Force Corrosion Strategic Plan to better align goals, objectives, and metrics with the DoD corrosion strategy and provide a roadmap for continued success. In addition, Air Force experts continue to collaborate with the other Services on several corrosion-related standardization documents. Finally, the Air Force CPC Working Group (CPCWG) gained momentum as a forum for corrosion collaboration, education, and community awareness. Research and development investments were also a key factor in addressing corrosion. Air Force Research Laboratory collaborated with public universities and other joint Service laboratories to further understanding of corrosion modeling, material science, coating performance, and the relation between accelerated lab test data and field data.
231DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
20
1.6 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Human Systems Integration As previously reported, in response to the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board’s recommendation from the F-22 Aircraft Oxygen Generation Quicklook Study, SAF/AQ, AFLCMC/CC, and AF/SG chartered a High Performance Team in 2012 to re-energize Air Force acquisition emphasis on Human Systems Integration (HSI). Twelve (12) of the action plans developed by this team are complete, one is expected to be completed in first quarter of FY 2015, and work continues on two others with longer implementation schedules. As a result of the action plans, the Air Force established and filled an O-6 billet, Special Advisor for Human Systems Integration, in the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) Engineering Directorate, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH. The incumbent will facilitate, collaborate, and coordinate expert HSI support for AFLCMC program offices. Additionally, the AFRL 711 Human Performance Wing (HPW) established relationships with key Program Executive Officers (PEOs) and Program Managers (PMs) and has placed HSI practitioners in key programs. The 711 HPW is also working to increase support earlier in Air Force acquisition programs. SAF/AQ published Air Force Pamphlet, AFPAM 63-128, “Guide to Integrated Life Cycle Management,” with a new chapter on HSI, as well as checklists and terms. The Air Force continues to improve and advocate for HSI by use of its partnership with joint, government, industry, and academic forums. The Joint HSI Standard Working Group, chartered by the Defense Standardization Council, is completing an Analysis of Alternatives for options to establish an HSI standard to improve the process of getting HSI on contract. The newly completed Air Force Institute of Technology Intermediate Human Systems Integration course, SYS 269, was validated (beta offering) in November 2013. SAF/AQH provided DAWDF funding to develop this course. The course was presented eight (8) times during FY 2014 and attended by a total of 92 students. The three-day course expanded HSI familiarity through interactive classroom instruction and hands-on exercises. Reviews of ACAT I Systems Engineering Plans continue to show improvement in HSI planning documentation.
232 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
21
1.7 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Standardization Program Air Force standardization activities in 2014 are a continuation of efforts initiated with DASD (SE) and the other Military Departments in mid-2010 through the Defense Standardization Program and Defense Standardization Council (DSC) to address a DoD need for SE standard practices that can be used as requirements documents on contracts to help ensure robust SE efforts on programs. Joint service working groups were formed to assess existing systems engineering technical documentation in the areas of SE, Technical Reviews and Audits (TR&A), configuration management (CM), Logistics Support Analysis (LSE), and Manufacturing. The Air Force continues as lead service for three: SE; TR&A, and Manufacturing. All three of these non-government standards are on-track to be published by end of calendar year 2014. Additionally, the Navy-led, Air Force-supported, CM nongovernment standard is also scheduled for 2014 publication. Air Force has also made considerable progress updating active, overage Defense Standardization Program documents; this activity has DSC interest. Our “percent complete” value ascended from 12 percent in January 2014, to 44 percent in September 2014. In field implementation activities, a joint SMC and Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) team has prepared a common standard technical process document that more tightly couples risk management activities, the conduct of Systems Engineering Technical Reviews, and an assessment of the consequences of incomplete technical review entry and exit criteria. The joint document is entering the coordination process to gain approval by the centers leadership. Upon approval, formal issuance is anticipated in by December 2014. SMC also continues to revise and update key standards used on space programs. For example, a significant update to the environmental test standard for space and launch vehicles was published in FY 2014. SMC-S-016, "Test Requirements for Launch, Upper Stage, and Space Vehicles," dated 5 Sep 14 serves as the current baseline for program test tailoring. SMC-S-016 is the culmination of numerous technical reviews with Government, FFRDC, and industry. It incorporates test lessons learned, options, and best practices based on acquisition program feedback and experience since the issue of MIL-STD-1540D, "Product Verification Requirements for Launch, Upper Stage, and Space Vehicles," dated 1999. If authorized through the appropriate approval authority, SMC will submit SMC-S-016 as MIL-STD-1540E to replace MIL-STD-1540D. SMC is in the final coordination process to publish an SMC Instruction on Configuration Management (CM) to institutionalize CM best practices and provide standardized
233DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
22
requirements for SMC ACAT I and II programs across the portfolio. SMC developed this instruction in accordance with the best practices described in the DAG (Defense Acquisition Guide), MIL-HDBK-61A;“Configuration Management Guidance,” and considered the current draft EIA-649 consensus standard on configuration management, currently in final balloting by the DSC or the DSP. Final coordination is taking place across the Center, and the document is expected to enter the publication process to achieve promulgation beginning in November 2014. SMC continues to review, interpret, update, and implement national, DoD, and Air Force spectrum policy, regulations, and standard practices. The SMC Spectrum Management Office (SMO) developed a Spectrum Operating Instruction. It outlines the SMO processes that enable an SMC program office to obtain spectrum support for a spectrum dependent system. SMC also provided training, instructions, and a template to assist a program office with its Spectrum Supportability Risk Assessment (SSRA). The SSRA captures regulatory, technical, and operational requirements for a spectrum dependent system throughout its acquisition life cycle. While performing an SSRA in FY 2014, a Program Office discovered a potential self-interference to its system’s multi-frequency configuration. As a result of this early discovery, they were able to make quick modifications, thus saving significant debugging and integration time. SMC has provided several training sessions on SSRAs at its quarterly working group meetings and has closely worked with Program Offices on their SSRAs. Currently, SMC is working with Air Force Spectrum Management Office to finalize the SSRA approval process for ACAT and non-ACAT programs.
234 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
23
1.8 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health (ESOH) Management SAF/AQR is the Air Force lead on the DoD Acquisition ESOH Integrated Product Team (IPT) chaired by the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment (DUSD (I&E)). This IPT is responsible for the ESOH content of DoDI 5000.02 and the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG). The IPT is also responsible for two Defense Acquisition University (DAU) courses, CLE009 "ESOH in Systems Engineering" and CLR030 "ESOH in JCIDS." The IPT updated both DAU courses in 2014. The IPT also maintains the ESOH content of the DAU's Acquisition Community Connection knowledge sharing website. The IPT is the DoD lead for MIL-STD-882E, "Standard Practice for System Safety," and represents the DoD with the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) for revisions and updates to National Aerospace Standard (NAS) 411, "Hazardous Materials Management Program." The Air Force plays a lead role for DUSD (I&E) in ensuring that the ESOH content in these documents is fully consistent with the current Acquisition Systems Engineering policy and guidance. For instance, the Air Force identified the opportunity to exploit the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) guidance to streamline the content of the SEP and the required Programmatic Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health Evaluation (PESHE) document while placing greater emphasis on ensuring ESOH decision making was data driven. The latest versions of the DoDI 5000.02 and DAG direct programs to place the ESOH management planning information in the SEP and the data generated by the analyses done in executing the planning in the PESHE. This avoids duplication of effort, ensures that ESOH planning is in place for the Technology Development and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase (in the Milestone A SEP), and that the data necessary to assess the efficacy of a program office's ESOH management is available for review at Milestones B and C. DoD published MIL-STD-882E in 2012 and it includes the optional Task 108, "Hazardous Materials Management Plan," that, if placed on contract, requires defense program offices and their contractors to prioritize efforts to eliminate or reduce hazardous material (HAZMAT) usage by establishing a formal list of HAZMAT that will be managed. The objective is to focus DoD and contractor resources on managing only those HAZMAT that have a reasonable likelihood of being utilized in the development, operations, and maintenance of a DoD system or that DoD needs to be aware of in the event of new information about the hazards associated with a material or when DoD is disposing of the system. The list is to be placed on contract with materials categorized as either “Prohibited,” “Restricted,” or “Tracked” with varying degrees of management required for each category. In 2013, the IPT worked with the AIA to completely revise
235DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
24
NAS 411 to align it with Task 108 and provide industry with detailed implementation guidance for Task 108. In addition, the IPT and AIA developed a supporting document, NAS 411-1, "Hazardous Materials Target List," that provides a proposed list of HAZMAT categorized as "Prohibited," "Restricted," or "Tracked" that DoD Program Offices and DoD Contractors can adopt for use or modify when managing HAZMAT in accordance with MIL-STD-882E, Task 108 or NAS 411. The IPT and AIA agreed upon seventy-seven (77) HAZMATs that should be either in the Prohibited or Restricted categories and AIA published both NAS 411 and 411-1 on 30 September 2013. In 2014 the IPT focused on preparing a proposed list of HAZMAT for the "Tracked" list in NAS 411-1. Beginning from a list of 1,007 HAZMATs compiled by various federal regulatory agencies, the IPT has down-selected to 379 materials that are relevant to DoD system development, operations, maintenance, or disposal. The AIA is currently reviewing the list with the goal of publishing an update to NAS 411-1 once the IPT and AIA reach agreement on the Tracked HAZMAT list. The IPT is also working with the AIA to ensure consistency of the MIL-STD-882E Task 108 and NAS 411 approaches with the new International Aerospace Environmental Group initiative, the Aerospace and Defense Industry Declarable Substances List (AD-DSL). International aerospace and defense industry corporations, their customers and regulators will benefit from AD-DSL because it will provide a standard and uniform method to communicate product material composition information and data. This is being done in response to the expanding international regulatory HAZMAT restrictions. The AD-DSL list of materials will include a form for providing the data to customers, an electronic data exchange format, and a governance process. SAF/AQR is the Government Liaison for the ESOH Committee of the National Defense and Industry Association (NDIA) Systems Engineering Division. Following several months of planning and coordination, SAF/AQR hosted an ESOH track including nine presentations at the 2013 NDIA SE Conference. The Committee also completed preparations for the ESOH track at the 2014 SE Conference. The 2014 track includes 11 ESOH presentations for the October 2014 NDIA Systems Engineering Conference. SAF/AQR also led the effort to develop the HSI and ESOH Handbook for Pre-Milestone A JCIDS and Systems Engineering Activities Handbook published in November 2013. The goal of the Handbook is to help HSI and ESOH practitioners provide appropriate inputs to JCIDS capabilities documents and AoA related activities. The Handbook focuses only on Post-CBA through MS A activities where HSI and ESOH practitioners can influence system capabilities performance criteria and help discriminate between alternative materiel solutions.
236 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
25
AFSPC SMC continued to review, interpret, and update national, DoD, and Air Force space debris mitigation policy, regulations, and standard practices. An SMC Instruction (SMCI) and directorate-level Operating Instruction were developed for space debris mitigation and reporting. The SMCI was approved in July 2014 and directs Program Managers for satellite Program Offices to work with launch providers to achieve total mission compliance with debris regulations. SMC developed instructions and templates to assist programs with the development of Space Debris Assessment Reports (SDARs). The SMC functional staff office engages with program offices early to ensure all analysis is complete and the SDAR package appropriately documents space debris hazards in accordance with national and Air Force policy. SDARs are required throughout the life cycle of the program as part of flight worthiness criteria. SMC developed a compliance roadmap briefing to present its plans to achieve full compliance with National Space Policy by 2020. This briefing was sent to SECDEF in the CY 2015 Exception to National Space Policy block request. SMC has incorporated SE standard procedures to perform trade-space assessment of launch vehicle design changes and mission design changes necessary to allow for compliant upper stage and satellite disposal. The first of these mission trades was used to make the WGS-8 mission compliant by releasing the spacecraft below its operational orbit so that upper stage disposal would be in compliance. The SMC Spectrum Management Office has implemented much of DoD and Air Force guidance regarding systems' use of the electromagnetic spectrum. As commercial demand for frequency spectrum increases and US regulatory agencies attempt to implement new federal government policies to make more spectrums available to commercial entities, spectrum is becoming an increasingly scarce and precious resource. Access to spectrum is subject to regulatory, operational, and technical constraints; all of these constraints affect technical solutions that result from applying the SE process. SMC has required space programs to document their current and proposed use of spectrum, subject to these types of constraints, in Spectrum Supportability Risk Assessments. Upon identification of spectrum supportability risks and the steps needed to mitigate them, SMC integrates these risks and mitigation steps into the SE process where technical solutions are identified, tracked, and managed at an enterprise level.
237DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
26
1.9 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: System Security Engineering (SSE)
SSE is the functional discipline within systems engineering that ensures security requirements are included in the engineering analysis with the results being captured in the Program Protection Plan (PPP). In FY 2014 the Air Force focused on several major initiatives in this new emphasis area. SAF/AQXA leads Air Force Integrated Weapon and Cyber Security Initiative for SAF/AQ. The core of this activity is the effort to integrate Cyber Security and Program Protection Planning, as well as the activities across other functional communities to improve resiliency and mission assurance. In support of this effort, SAF/AQ is working on the following initiatives. • Clarified implementation of the DFARS clause 252.204-7012 with DoD CIO and
SAF/AQC, Contracting, to ensure both the sufficiency and the protection of contractor data which may have been extracted as part of a data breach. The Air Force has implemented standard contracting methods to require an assessment of unclassified Critical Technical Information (uCTI) of breached contractor networks, in accordance with regulatory and statutory direction.
• Co-developed, with SAF/GCQ, a briefing on acquisition security and cybersecurity that was presented at a conference of the Air Force Legal Service, resulting in a critical understanding of legal complexities surrounding cybersecurity threats, attack surfaces, and means to both maintaining a technological advantage over the adversary and ensuring warfighter mission systems and networks are resilient.
• Identified need to begin outlining a significant update to Air Force Pamphlet 63-113, "Program Protection Planning for Life Cycle Management," during coordination with OSD on revisions to DoDI 5200.39, "Critical Program Information (CPI) Protection within the Department of Defense." The updated guidance will encompass not just traditional program protection, but also touch points and risk dependencies a Program Manager must consider when managing a program throughout the system lifecycle.
• Formalized Air Force processes supporting the Trusted Systems and Networks (TSN) initiatives. This includes the following activities.
o In support of DASD (SE), improved the proposed curriculum for two (2) Defense Acquisition University modules (ENG 160 and ENG 260) on Program Protection and TSN.
o Enhanced existing processes between acquisition and sustainment to reduce the risk of malicious insertion of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) components by tracking ICT components, testing of replacement parts, involving Defense Logistics Agency, and outlining requirements in core acquisition and sustainment documents.
238 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
27
o Updated direction to AFMC and AFSPC that will improve program submissions of DIA Threat Analysis Center (TAC) Requests for Information (RFI). Improvements included pushing responsibility for quality checks down to the MAJCOM staff, while keeping overall prioritization at the Air Force level;
o Made substantive contributions to the GAO Review of Trusted Defense Systems in response to House Report 113-446 in the FY 2015 NDAA.
• Investigated the utility and feasibility of a Life Cycle Security cost estimating tool. SAF/AQ completed a study to define a program protection planning cost estimating model, recognizing that costs have traditionally been spread throughout several program functional areas and therefore not easily accounted for or tracked within that program. While the task was complicated by the lack of available program protection-specific cost data, thereby limiting performance of data analytics, SAF/AQ was able to collect Subject Matter Expert estimates of program protection planning activities to determine Critical Program Information (CPI) and Critical Components (CC), but not the actual costs of implementing countermeasures. The study identified alternatives for addressing inputs/outputs for a cost model, including calculating the cost of performing analysis to determine CPI and CCs within program protection planning. It also provides recommendations that will help ensure program protection data is identified, collected, and reported within Government program offices and defense contractor facilities, and facilitate the development of improved methodologies for estimating program protection planning and implementation. Specific security cost areas considered included: Personnel Security, Physical Security, Software Assurance, Cybersecurity, Supply Chain Risk Management, Anti-Tamper, Foreign Disclosure/Agreements, Dial Down Functionality, Industrial Security, Operations Security, Training, Information Security, Transportation Management, and Communications Security. This, and future efforts, directly support SAF/AA’s plan to develop a “Cost of Security” cost-accounting model and the HAF/A4 “Cost of Logistics” effort that established the relationship between logistics costs incurred and aircraft availability.
• Supporting the SAF/CIO A6 transition from DoD Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP) to the Risk Management Framework (RMF) by codifying the alignment of RMF activities with the Acquisition Life Cycle. While SAF/CIO-A6 is leading the Air Force's transition to RMF, SAF/AQ is ensuring that program offices are postured to sufficiently support authorization decisions under this new process. The final goal will be to align authorization decision authority with the operational users of the system, in line with DoDI 8510.01, "Risk Management Framework for DoD Information Technology." Initial implementation is focused on revising AFI 33-210, "Air Force Certification and Accreditation Program," as well as adequately referencing this implementation in core acquisition policy. The resulting
239DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
28
policy demonstrates alignment of the RMF process with key events throughout the life cycle and will reinforce the draft OUSD (AT&L) Cybersecurity Implementation Guidebook for Acquisition Program Managers.
• Codifying the relationship between Service Development and Delivery Process and a tailored acquisition process for Defense Business System. SAF/CIO A6 published Air Force Manual (AFMAN) 33-402, "Service Development and Delivery Process," documenting the requirements process for Defense Business Systems. In response, SAF/AQ is staffing an AFMAN which establishes tailored acquisition processes to meet user requirements based on risk in order to rapidly deliver capability incrementally.
SAF/AQXA leads, with support from SAF/AQRE, the Air Force participation in the efforts to stand up a Joint Federated Assurance Center (JFAC). Essentially, the JFAC is a federation of Service Providers (SP) that Program Offices can contact for assistance. JFAC can also help ascertain if there is a DoD SP that can provide requested assistance. Interim DoDI 5000.02, "Operation of the Defense Acquisition System," and DoDI 5200.44, "Protection of Mission Critical Functions to Achieve Trusted Systems and Networks," require program offices to include software assurance (SwA) and hardware assurance (HwA) as part of program protection planning throughout the acquisition life cycle. In response to Section 937 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2014, DoD chartered the JFAC to support trusted defense system needs and ensure the security of software and hardware developed, acquired, maintained, and used by the Department. SAF/AQX is the Air Force representative to the JFAC Steering Committee, the executive body directing the DoD JFAC efforts. SAF/AQXA is the Air Force representative to the JFAC Advisory Working Group. SAF/AQXA and SAF/AQRE provide Air Force representatives to the Hardware Assurance (HwA) and the Software Assurance (SwA) Technical Working Groups (TWGs). The immediate goal is to achieve an FY 2015 JFAC Initial Operating Capability when there will be a JFAC Coordinating Center (CC) activated to facilitate support to DoD Acquisition Program Offices by a variety of HwA and SwA Service Providers (SPs). The Air Force has already sponsored two JFAC-related projects: The Air Force Institute of Technology is performing Career Field Training Gap Analysis aimed at identifying existing acquisition functional area training, sources, scope, and availability, in order to develop a framework for SwA training requirements as well as gaps and deficiencies. The second effort, managed by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center is developing a list of existing SwA capabilities and services available within the Air Force to support JFAC operations. In addition, Air Force supports the JFAC by developing, maintaining, and offering software and hardware vulnerability detection, analysis, and remediation
240 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
29
capabilities in support of programs and activities across the Military Departments, Defense Agencies, and other DoD organizations. This includes the following: • Collaboration across Science and Technology acquisition, Test and Evaluation, and
sustainment efforts to ensure that SwA and HwA capabilities and investments are effectively planned, executed, and coordinated.
• Advocating for existing and developing Air Force capabilities and contributions in HwA and SwA.
• Documenting how the Air Force is developing, adopting, and sustaining best practices and processes and applying them during the development, acquisition, and procurement of software and hardware.
• Providing Air Force HwA and SwA SP capabilities to other DoD users through the JFAC.
As part of the field implementation of the SwA and HwA improvement efforts, the AFSPC SMC continued to apply a robust PPP approach to all PEO Space programs with two ongoing initiatives. The first initiative is the development and implementation of a comprehensive PPP template addressing each protection tenet (e.g. Cyber threats, anti-tamper planning, etc.). The second initiative is a center-wide Threat Assessment Center reporting process that addresses the identification and validation of specific supply chain threats. These two initiatives have equipped program managers and security engineers with both guidance and tools to develop effective PPPs, including mitigation strategies. SMC also created a systems acquisition lifecycle protection tool for National Security Systems, which identifies required activities across the lifecycle that are required for program protection plans, security classification guides, information assurance compliance, and supply chain risk management strategies. SMC also created a Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) Integrated Planning Team to establish center-wide processes and procedures needed to comply with DoDI 5200.44. These processes and procedures will ensure that all SMC programs understand and implement SCRM practices. Initial work has been completed on the SCRM reporting and mitigation processes and procedures as well as initial integration with existing parts, material, and processes measures that may potentially mitigate the supply chain risk. Additionally, the infrastructure required to report SCRM issues to the community of interest has been identified. The SMC SCRM effort will also address building the processes and procedures necessary to implement SCRM practices throughout the lifecycle of SMC programs. SMC is developing a plan to implement Defensive Cyberspace Operations (DCO) in order to improve cybersecurity resiliency on space mission systems. Components of the implementation plan include a methodology to determine the cyberspace defensive gaps,
241DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
30
identification of industry and government services that are able to provide cyberspace defense and a plan to match space mission system DCO gaps with effective defensive services. The planning is coupled with guidance on how to implement DCO concepts throughout the acquisition lifecycle. SMC is developing a framework to collect, analyze and track metrics to provide situational awareness of the enterprise cybersecurity posture, and enterprise cybersecurity issues. Additional objectives of implementing the framework are to identify enterprise-level cybersecurity trends and investment opportunities, and provide actionable, prioritized recommendations to remedy cybersecurity issues. Implementation of the framework is scheduled to begin mid FY 2015. SMC developed transition guidance to assist space mission systems with the transition to the Risk Management Framework (RMF) for DoD Information Technology. The guide assists program offices in selecting National Institute of Standards and Technology security controls using the process documented in security categorization and control selection procedures for NSS systems. The guidance also references numerous other resources available to ease the transition to RMF including the RMF Knowledge Service and the Enterprise Mission Assurance Support Service. The AFMC Information/Program Protection Process Guide integrates processes (e.g., program protection planning, operations security, unit security program management) for managing risk of advanced technology from foreign collection, design vulnerability, or supply chain exploit/insertion. In addition, the guide streamlines coordination processes of required documentation, and provides points of contact to assist in the vulnerability analysis and risk mitigation strategies.
242 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
31
1.10 Area of Identified Progress and Improvement: Air Force Support for the OSD Defense Exportability Features (DEF) Initiative Since FY 2012, the Air Force has been supporting and tracking four MDAP programs participating in OSD’s DEF pilot program study. With activities ranging from feasibility studies to technical design work, these programs have provided valuable insight into the level of effort required to incorporate DEF initiatives as well as the benefits that can be achieved through exportability and international cooperation. In FY 2014, two programs completed their efforts to incorporate DEF into system designs: MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicle and AGM-158 Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM). Both of these programs completed the necessary work with funding from their respective international partners and did not require additional funds from the DEF program. Despite their funding independence, these programs continue to support the importance and value of the DEF pilot program study. MQ-9 will be submitting its closeout report by the end of FY 2015 to include a detailed description of required efforts, resources, and schedule, as well as the anticipated return on investment. JASSM, though completing DEF design initiatives on the baseline program, is now looking into options for extending its efforts into its next phase, the JASSM-ER program. The remaining two programs, Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB-II) and 3Dimension Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR), performed feasibility studies that focused on their respective technical abilities to achieve exportability, estimates of required resources, export market identification, and return on investment potential. SDB-II kicked off their study in September 2014 and is continuing with DEF resources through FY 2015. The 3DELRR program completed its study in FY 2014 and has included DEF design production within its current contract. With funding also provided by the DEF program, these efforts are set to begin in 2Q FY 2015.
243DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
32
2 Systems Engineering Workforce 2.1 Workforce Development Initiatives
Air Force SE workforce initiatives continued to support goals established by the Service Acquisition Executive (SAE) in the 2009 Air Force Acquisition Human Capital Strategic Plan as well as the goals set by OSD (AT&L) under Better Buying Power 2.0 to improve the professionalism of the total acquisition workforce. The judicious use of FY 2008 NDAA Section 852 DAWDF-funded employment incentives, such as student loan repayment and first duty station move, has enhanced the Air Force’s ability to attract highly qualified recent graduates and experienced journeymen. However, the Air Force continues to experience shortfalls in centralized force renewal hiring programs due to reductions in O&M funding. In response to this need, the Air Force developed a detailed plan for replenishment hiring using DAWDF. This would augment O&M funding to ensure sufficient numbers of recent graduates are hired as current employees advance, separate, or retire from the acquisition workforce. This plan also proposed to continue offering student internships potentially leading to future acquisition careers. An SE skills taxonomy was developed under the oversight of the Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan working group that is aligned with the draft Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan Roadmap. The taxonomy is developed to follow the OSD and OPM guidance on competencies for the engineering enterprise across the Centers in AFMC and AFSPC. In 2014, the Air Force expanded its use of social media as part of its branding and enterprise recruiting strategies for its acquisition workforce. Tailored to the unique challenges of each of its acquisition product, sustainment, and test locations, this DAWDF-funded effort included development and maintenance of recruiting websites, enterprise-wide advertising, and other recruitment materials and tools. In 2013, the Air Force completed the first study of the state of health of the civilian and military STEM workforce. In 2014, the Air Force updated this study and found noticeable improvements in the age distribution of the workforce under 40 years old. More emphasis was placed on hiring entry level employees by supporting student hire programs, and expanding the application of Acquisition Personnel Demonstration Program policies to a larger number of Air Force organizations. Following a detailed examination of the Air Force Laboratory Personnel Demonstration Project (Lab Demo) and the Civilian Acquisition Workforce Personnel Demonstration Project (Acq Demo), the Air Force began a concerted effort in 2014 to expand the adoption of the Acq Demo across the entire Air Force acquisition enterprise.
244 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
33
Also in 2014, the SecAF released the second generation of its Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math workforce strategy, Bright Horizons 2.0. It establishes objectives to ensure the vitality of the STEM workforce to 2018 and beyond. AFMC/EN and AFSPC/EN continue to provide a focused workforce development and assignment process across the Air Force to provide highly qualified and capable SEs to our customers and stakeholders as required. This effort includes consciously grooming our SE and DP workforce from the moment they are recruited throughout their entire career. Competency managers will orchestrate mentoring, succession planning, and development assignments of individuals to accomplish this goal using core competencies as the measure of success.
The Air Force will use DAWDF to provide targeted retention incentives (Student Loan Repayment, and Retention Allowances) as needed to preserve critical skills and expertise such as experienced Systems Engineers. In addition, the Air Force will use DAWDF resources to respond rapidly as training and development gaps are identified. For example, a new initiative will send several S&E civilians to the US Army Operations Research Systems Analysis Military Applications Course. DAWDF funding continues to support civilian Tuition Assistance, and continuing professional education courses at the Air Force Institute of Technology targeted at providing Systems Engineering with Specialty Engineering skills, such as Human Systems Integration, Developmental Planning, T&E, Technology Readiness Assessment, and Manufacturing Readiness Assessment. DAWDF funding is helping ensure the continued availability of assignment-specific and professional currency courses despite significant reductions in MAJCOM O&M budgets for training. DAWDF funding is also helping to make available civilian advanced degrees in STEM.
245DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
34
2.2 SE Workforce Resourcing Preliminary assessments of the hiring freeze, sequestration, and furloughs are being developed but the long-term impact of FY 2014 financial constraints on the SE workforce is inconclusive at this time. The initial indications are that total Air Force SE workforce separation rates remain below the rates for the total Air Force. The FY 2013 retention rate for engineers is the highest rate since FY 2009. Two possible explanations are offered. First, highly skilled engineers may require more time to search for and land the right job. Second, many engineers may be holding out for a VERA/VSIP buy-out. However, stringent constraints on O&M funding for new hires and supporting developmental PCS moves may adversely affect both succession planning and retention. Following extensive analysis in FY 2014, in FY 2015 the Air Force will begin to execute the expansion of KLPs to ACAT I functional lead positions, including Chief Engineers. The Air Force requires continuation of the DAWDF and Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART) programs to ensure effective execution of acquisition workforce improvement initiatives for recruiting, hiring, training, and retention to support knowledge transfer and workforce replenishment. The Air Force is exploring the potential of expanded Direct Hire Authority for members of the acquisition workforce, similar to that available for S&Es under Lab Demo.
246 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
35
2.3 Department of the Air Force SE Workforce
Table 1: Systems Engineering Workforce in the DoD
Reported for Military Department Systems Engineers and DASD(SE)
Total Number of Civilian and Military Acquisition Engineering Personnel
Fiscal Year
Year
Ending US Army US Navy
US Air
Force DASD(SE)
FY05 30-Sep-05 6,505
FY06 30-Sep-06 6,237
FY07 30-Sep-07 6,162
FY08 30-Sep-08 6,429
FY09 30-Sep-09 7,197
FY10 30-Sep-10 7,625
FY11 30-Sep-11 8,514
FY12 30-Sep-12 8,649
FY13 30-Sep-13 8,518
FY14 30-Sep-14 8,475
Planned Growth in Civilian and Military Engineering
Fiscal
Year
Year
Ending US Army US Navy US Air Force DASD(SE)
Planned
Growth
Projected
End
Strength
Planned
Growth
Projected
End
Strength
Planned
Growth
Projected
End
Strength
Planned
Growth
Projected
End
Strength
FY15 30-Sep-15 180 8,690
FY16 30-Sep-16 -48 8,642
FY17 30-Sep-17 -92 8,550
FY18 30-Sep-18 -88 8,462
FY19 30-Sep-19 -17 8,445
Total Number of Non-Government Systems Engineering Support Personnel (FTEs)
Fiscal Year
Year
Ending US Army US Navy
US Air
Force* DASD(SE)
FY12 30-Sep-12 10,547
FY13 30-Sep-13 10,186
*Obtained from summing DPAP codes R414, R421, and R425
247DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
APPENDIX C: DEPARTMENT OF AIR FORCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SELF-ASSESSMENT
36
ATTACHMENT
AIR FORCE ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE
STRATEGIC PLAN 2014-2024
248 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCEPage 1
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
FOREWORDTo fulfi ll its mission, it is imperative the United States Air Force successfully execute joint warfi ghter operations across the air, space, and cyberspace domains. Our support of these operations requires developing, fi elding, and sustaining weapon systems and equipment that provide tactical and strategic superiority to our warfi ghters across all three domains.
In the more than 60 years that have passed since the Air Force’s founding, our engineers and scientists continue to lead the world in the development of those cutting-edge weapon systems vital to the security of our nation and its allies. The ability of the Air Force to deliver superior weapon systems to the warfi ghter strengthens our sacred trust with national leadership and with our fellow citizens. Air Force technological achievements are based upon the ingenuity of our engineering and scientifi c workforce, which repeatedly unites with the operational community, industry, and academia to deliver game-changing systems, and systems-of-systems, while achieving a balance between cost, schedule, and performance.
Amid ever-changing threats and today’s fi scal realities, Air Force engineers and scientists continue to fulfi ll their duty to our nation and to the warfi ghter. Although our talents are strong, the sheer dynamics of the fast-changing global environment demand we harness the necessary tools and technologies to continue improving the way we execute our mission. With this strategic plan, a clear course is charted for the future of the Air Force Engineering Enterprise.
I approve this strategic plan as a guide for Air Force engineers and scientists and their leadership, as they continually push innovation to deliver affordable war-winning capabilities for future decades.
Deborah Lee James Mark A. Welsh IIISecretary of the Air Force General, USAF Chief of Staff
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCE Page 2
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThis Air Force Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan is designed to address the demands of a fast-changing warfi ghting environment by delivering a strategic vision and governance structure for the entire Air Force Engineering Enterprise (EE).
Since 1947, the Air Force has been a highly technical service, built on a foundation of engineering discipline and expertise, as well as a culture of innovation, competency, and integrity. As the options provided by technology have increased, the world’s political climate has become much more complex. When combined with budgetary pressures, this climate demands greater vigilance by the Air Force. The new Air Force engineering vision and mission established in this plan provides a guiding star for the engineering enterprise response to these challenges.
Vision: To be a focused engineering enterprise with a culture of discipline and agility that enables warfighter’s success.
Mission: Provide superior technical expertise to plan, acquire, and sustain dominant warfighting capability through an efficient, effective, and innovative engineering enterprise.
At the direction of the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF), the engineering enterprise has established a strategic governance structure to attain this vision. Through this governance structure, the Air Force engineering senior leadership has identifi ed four priorities for implementation across the enterprise:
Priority 1: Refine engineering enterprise governance, roles and responsibilities, and supporting policy
Priority 2: Enable high-quality engineering decisions and seamless communication
Priority 3: Improve engineering discipline through technical information management and standardization
Priority 4: Address engineering enterprise workforce issues, including core competencies, structure, development, and assignments
The vision, mission, and priorities outlined in this strategic plan, led by the strategic governance structure, provide a framework for what will be a relentless pursuit of engineering effi ciency and excellence.
*The EE does not include installation or medical support activities.
The Air Force Engineering Enterprise is the network of interdependent engineers, scientists, and technical managers; processes; and supporting infrastructure providing U.S. Air Force mission capability by shaping requirements and providing technical leadership for research, development, test, manufacturing, deployment, sustainment, and disposal of Air Force systems and systems-of-systems.*
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCEPage 3
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
TABLE OF CONTENTS1.0 STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT 4
2.0 OVERVIEW OF STRATEGIC PLANNING 5
2.1 Strategic Planning Model 5
2.2 Governance Structure 6
3.0 AIR FORCE ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE STRATEGY 7
3.1 Vision 7
3.2 Mission 7
3.3 Priorities 8
3.3.1 Refi ne Engineering Enterprise Governance, Roles and Responsibilities, and Supporting Policy 8
3.3.2 Enable High-Quality Engineering Decisions and Seamless Communication 9
3.3.3 Improve Engineering Discipline through Technical Information Management and Standardization 10
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
1.0 STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT
The capability of the United States to win wars hinges on its ability to sustain its technological edge over emerging, highly adaptable, asymmetric threats and to optimize services for joint operations. It must also possess the ability to authoritatively counter the host of nations pursuing the latest military capability, from roadside explosives to weapons of mass destruction.
This leads to a dramatic increase in system and system-of-systems complexity, creating an increasingly diffi cult and multifaceted engineering challenge. Additionally, our nation faces real fi scal challenges
that constrain the funding of future warfi ghting capabilities. Simultaneously, the Air Force is experiencing a loss of technical expertise in key areas as the workforce ages and fi scal realities hinder our ability to effectively recruit and retain engineers and scientists. The Air Force must continue its tradition of a solid and responsive engineering foundation by supporting a professional workforce that employs structured engineering practices with discipline and integrity to fi nd affordable and innovative solutions to warfi ghting challenges.
“Only through the efforts of Airmen who have led the way in integrating military capabilities across air, space, and cyberspace—even as their numbers have become signifi cantly smaller—has our nation maintained its airpower advantage.”
USAF Posture Statement 2013
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCEPage 5
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
2.0 OVERVIEW OF STRATEGIC PLANNING
The Air Force engineering leadership, consisting of the most senior engineering Air Force professionals, has developed an Air Force Engineering Enterprise strategic planning model and established a governance structure to address the challenges of our strategic environment. The strategic planning model defi nes how leadership will develop strategic direction down to actions and implementation. This includes a description of the required planning documentation as well as the frequency of relook/refresh for all engineering strategic planning activities. The Air Force EE governance structure provides leadership and guidance for the strategic planning process, as well as oversight and accountability of the implementation activities.
2.1 Strategic Planning Model
This strategic plan spans ten years and will be revisited every four years to ensure alignment with Air Force, Department of Defense (DoD), and national strategic objectives. The EE strategic planning model in Figure 1 illustrates the components of its strategic planning efforts.
The EE vision and mission serve as a guiding star
to the enterprise and provide a unifi ed direction for strategic planning. Taking the vision and mission into account, as well as the current state of Air Force engineering, the engineering leadership identifi ed priority areas for improvement that capture the heart of the enterprise’s strategic-level focus. These EE priorities and associated goals are documented in this plan.
To implement the priorities, an operational-level EE Roadmap will describe the goals in greater detail and provide a high-level overview of the objectives required to meet those goals. The Roadmap, signed by the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition (SAF/AQ), will span four years and be revisited every two years to ensure alignment with the strategic plan. Priority goals will describe how the EE priorities, mission, and vision will be realized.
Finally, EE action plans will describe the objectives in further detail and provide near-term, actionable tactics for achieving those objectives. The action plans, signed by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology and Engineering (SAF/AQR), will span two years and be revisited annually to ensure alignment with the Roadmap. The detailed tasks defi ned in each action plan will be the basis for measuring progress towards accomplishing the objectives, goals, priorities, and ultimately the EE vision.
Figure 1 – Air Force Engineering Enterprise Strategic Planning Model
Roadmap4-yr SAF/AQ plan2-yr relook/refresh
Ac on Plans 2-yr SAF/AQR plan 1-yr relook/refresh
Strategic Plan 2014 - 2024-- 10 - yr SecAF plan 4-yr relook/refresh
Vision
Mission
Priori es
Goals
Objec ves
Ac ons & Implementa on
• Iden fy future state “ Where is the engineering enterprise going?”
• Validate organiza onal purpose “ Why does the engineering enterprise exist?”
• Iden fy top ini a ves for next decade “ What priori es need to be accomplished?”
• De ne and priori ze broad direc on“ What does it look like when we get there?”
• Plan organizing goals and strategies“ How do we achieve goals, ac vi es, and schedules?”
• Execute and manage implementa on “Are our ac ons performance-based?”
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCE Page 6
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
Figure 2 – AF Engineering Enterprise Governance Structure
2.2 Governance Structure
The Air Force EE governance structure provides leadership and guidance for the strategic planning process, as well as oversight of, and accountability for, the implementation activities. It is composed of senior Air Force advisory members and senior engineering leadership members who guide the actions necessary to achieve the priorities. There are three levels in this structure shown in Figure 2: 1) the Senior Advisory Group, 2) the EE Executive Council (EEEC), and 3) the EE Priority Champions.
The Senior Advisory Group, which is chaired by SAF/AQ and includes the Air Force Materiel Command Executive Director (AFMC/CA), the Air Force Space Command Executive Director (AFSPC/CA), and the Air Force Chief Scientist (AF/ST), advises and supports the EEEC. The Senior Advisory Group acts as a deliberative body that guides the Air Force engineering strategic approach and provides executive perspective on budget, people, and resourcing.
The Air Force EEEC, chaired by SAF/AQR, is the primary
EE decision body and is responsible for implementing a comprehensive and actionable strategic planning approach. The EEEC also includes the AFMC Director of Engineering and Technical Management (AFMC/EN) and the Space and Missile System Center Director of Engineering (SMC/EN) as well as the Air Force Systems Engineering Senior Leader (AF SE SL). The EEEC is chartered to establish the EE priorities and develop the EE Roadmap, to include the goals which are necessary to achieve the priorities. It conducts annual reviews to assess the progress, execution, and effectiveness of the action plans.
Each priority is led by a general offi cer-level Priority Champion, who is responsible for developing goals, establishing goal teams, and working with commanders and supervisors to lead the implementation process. Each Priority Champion develops an action plan, ensuring it contains feasible and executable tactics for achieving its goals. The Priority Champions also ensure the action plans are aligned with the Roadmap and the overall EE strategic plan.
Figure 2
• Members: SAF/AQ, AFMC/CA, AFSPC/CA, AF/ST• Advise and support the Engineering Enterprise (EE)• Provides executive perspective on budget, people, resourcing• Serves as EE advocate outside of Engineering
• Members: SAF/AQR, AFMC/EN, SMC/EN, AF SE SL• Strategic Leadership for EE
• Primary decision body• Actively directs and manages AF EE• Develops EE Roadmap
• Members: General Officer-Level Leaders from across EE• Operational Leadership for EE
• Executes EE Roadmap• Develops EE Action Plans• Manages tactical implementation
SeniorAdvisory Group
EE ExecutiveCouncil
EE PriorityChampions
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCEPage 7
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
This governance structure provides leadership and guidance for the strategic planning process, as well as oversight and accountability of the implementation activities.
3.0 AIR FORCE ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE STRATEGY
The unifying theme at the foundation of this strategy is that engineering efforts in the Air Force must fully support the effort to plan, build, and sustain effective, affordable systems in support of the joint warfi ghter. The EE must add value to the Air Force by providing sound technical judgment and expertise from a highly skilled workforce. The implementation of this strategy is crucial to achieving Acquisition Excellence as called out in the Air Force Strategic Plan, October 2008.
The EE encompasses a wide array of expertise, knowledge, tools, processes, standards, practices, facilities, and analytical capabilities. This enterprise impacts the entire range of systems employed by the Air Force, including all of our aircraft, satellites, launch vehicles, command and control systems, cyber systems, weather systems, air defense systems, air traffi c control systems, force protection systems, armaments, nuclear weapons, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems, as well as the test systems, ancillary systems, IT systems, and the ground and support equipment that accompany them. The facilities and environment in which the Air Force EE operates, and its statutes and regulations, require great depth and breadth of knowledge. This complexity requires personnel with skills in all of
the technical, engineering, and scientifi c disciplines to include hardware; software; communications; environment, safety, and occupational health (ESOH); quality; and security.
Through disciplined implementation of the strategic planning model and governance structure defi ned in this plan, the engineering leadership has developed a new vision, mission, and supporting priorities to provide strategic focus and direction for the diverse engineering enterprise.
3.1 Vision
To be a focused engineering enterprise with a culture of discipline and agility that enables warfi ghter’s success.
3.2 Mission
Provide superior technical expertise to plan, acquire, and sustain dominant warfi ghting capability through an effi cient, effective, and innovative engineering enterprise.
The Air Force Engineering Enterprise is the network of interdependent engineers, scientists, and technical managers; processes; and supporting infrastructure providing U.S. Air Force mission capability by shaping requirements and providing technical leadership for research, development, test, manufacturing, deployment, sustainment, and disposal of Air Force systems and systems-of-systems.
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCE Page 8
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
3.3 Priorities
The Air Force EEEC, with the support of the senior advisory group and the engineering enterprise, has identifi ed these four priorities:
Priority 1: Refi ne engineering enterprise governance, roles and responsibilities, and supporting policy
Priority 2: Enable high-quality engineering decisions and seamless communication
Priority 3: Improve engineering discipline through technical information management and standardization
Priority 4: Address engineering enterprise workforce issues, including core competencies, structure, development, and assignments
The priorities focus the enterprise on achieving its stated vision. An explanation of each priority with the associated goals is provided in the following sections.
3.3.1 Refi ne Engineering Enterprise Governance, Roles and Responsibilities, and Supporting Policy
The EE must refi ne its roles and responsibilities, and its approach to executing those responsibilities, in order to operate within the current environment of reduced budgets, reduced manpower, new organizational constructs, and increased Congressional expectation to provide engineering confi dence in all weapon system engineering processes.
A crucial fi rst step in effectively handling the challenges posed by this strategic environment is to properly align the EE and reassess the roles and responsibilities of its members to respond to the increasingly complex
issues related to weapons systems in any phase of the lifecycle. In addition, the large number of engineers and scientists supporting air, space, and cyberspace (including research, pre-program planning, lifecycle management, operations, and support) must be equipped to implement the EE activities and enable successful acquisition and sustainment of those weapons systems.
A key element of this priority is to establish and codify the process by which Air Force EE policies are created. Establishing such a process will afford the enterprise’s leadership the opportunity to determine the most effi cient and least prescriptive method for implementing direction. It will also provide them the opportunity to comply with higher levels of direction using non-policy approaches. Overall, such a process will eliminate redundant or confl icting policy while reducing the internal workload of managing multiple levels of policy.
Goals:• Standardize roles and responsibilities of EE organizations and key positions. This will include revitalizing the Air Force Technical Authority process
“Innovation is what we’re all about—we always have been.”
General Mark A. WelshChief of Staff of the Air Force
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCEPage 9
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
to provide programs with unbiased, analytical overview and support. A functioning Technical Authority increases the value of the engineering perspective, keeps technical programmatics on track, and adds to program success at all levels.
• Focus and manage the EE portfolio of policy and process. This will include creating an engineering policy formulation process and policy architecture that effi ciently produces succinct, usable policy for the enterprise. Such policy will focus on the value-added insight required for increased program support.
3.3.2 Enable High-Quality Engineering Decisions and Seamless Communication
As the Air Force Chief Engineer, SAF/AQR provides timely and effective engineering insight to Air Force leadership, including the Service Acquisition Executive. While budgets are decreasing, the Air Force faces an increasing number of adversaries who are acquiring or developing the means to challenge it. Therefore, we must devote attention to comparing the benefi ts of increased operational effectiveness (that is, warfi ghter utility) with the costs of achieving new capabilities. Early systems engineering can help the Air Force optimize its investments and own the technical baseline to avoid pitfalls of latent cost, schedule, and performance issues. Most importantly,
care needs to be taken to evaluate enterprise solutions holistically, rather than continuing to promote stove-pipe approaches.
It is imperative that the EE infuse technical insight earlier into the requirements process by developing analytical tools capable of providing “trade space” analysis across a system’s lifecycle. The Air Force’s
current suite of analytic tools are narrowly focused and not well suited to large trade-space analysis. Also, these analytical approaches are sometimes defi cient in regards to operator-in-the-loop, cyber, command and control, acquisition intelligence, and system-of-system interactions. A systematic approach to analysis will be established that integrates technologies and operations, rather than relying on narrowly-focused performance evaluations that do not suffi ciently incorporate operational insights or enterprise optimization.
Additionally, the Air Force Engineering Enterprise needs to improve and expand upon its internal communications. The vast engineering enterprise spans research, development, test and evaluation, operations, and sustainment. However, these individual functions are often isolated from each other, both geographically and analytically. Various forums currently exist to enable cross-communication and information exchange to a limited degree, but they must be optimized. In addition, we must pursue and enforce the use of common tools and data where possible to aid in our collaboration initiatives.
The ability to collaborate across the enterprise will be a catalyst for signifi cant improvements in all engineering processes. Tremendous effi ciency is gained when concepts, data, models, alternatives, and technologies are readily exchanged across the engineering enterprise. Therefore, comprehensive enterprise communication is a key not only to innovation, but also to effectiveness in engineering efforts.
Goals:• Formalize role of engineering in the decision framework. This will include developing and
“Faced with compounding fi scal challenges, we must make prudent choices to ensure the Air Force continues to preserve our nation’s airpower advantage.”
USAF Posture Statement 2013
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCE Page 10
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
implementing a plan to shape requirements and enhance the corporate decision-making process by providing insightful engineering information throughout the established review process.
• Develop an analytical framework to support decisions. This will include executing pilot projects to demonstrate the merits of an enterprise-level analytical framework and data-brokerage capability providing technical insights using the decision framework.
• Establish a process for effectively communicating across the engineering enterprise. This will include developing and employing a concept of operations to improve collaboration and exchange of information both horizontally and vertically across the enterprise.
3.3.3 Improve Engineering Discipline through Technical Information Management and Standardization
One of the keys to effective lifecycle management is the ability to make knowledge-driven decisions. The engineering enterprise is particularly dependent on a vast array of technical data and information to perform day-to-day functions and enhance its knowledge base. However, the Air Force currently lacks an enterprise approach for obtaining, maintaining, and using this vital technical information. It must better manage and govern technical data to ensure its engineering enterprise is effectively supporting the delivery of critical warfi ghting capabilities.
The engineering enterprise workforce must have the capability to access and protect the technical information that will help engineers and scientists execute their program responsibilities. This information can include specifi cations, best practices, process guides, technical reports and orders,
drawings, parts lists, failure/performance data, and much more. Making quality engineering decisions also depends on having immediate access to these various forms of engineering data in a useful format. As Air Force systems become more complex, the tools and ability to search and assimilate these vast amounts of information into actionable decision material must also evolve. Our geographically diverse and dispersed engineering enterprise must also have the means to effectively collaborate. A common set of tools will enhance workforce portability from program to program, provide for consistent access to decision support tools, and better enable more disciplined use of technical information.
Specifi cations and standards are another essential component of the technical information used to ensure quality in development and sustainment operations. In this post-acquisition reform era, the Air Force must revitalize implementation of, and participation in, the Defense Standardization Program (DSP). The DSP is an important tool for enabling consistent application of best practices, implementation of interface standards, acquisition of parts that meet performance requirements, and creation of effi cient engineering activities across the lifecycle. It should be noted that standards managed within the DoD Information Technology Standards Registry have already been mandated and are managed through a joint committee.
“We now have the opportunity to create a consistent process with common tools …so if you move from base to base, or from program to program, you have some consistency in how we operate.”
Dr. David WalkerDeputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for
Science, Technology, and Engineering
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCEPage 11
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
Goals: • Revitalize and formalize management and use of technical data. This will include revitalizing and formalizing the management and use of Air Force technical data and information to improve the quality of engineering products and decisions.
• Develop a management plan for an Air Force portfolio of specifi cations and standards. This will include developing an implementation plan consistent with the DSP.
• Create an Air Force engineering knowledge management capability. This will include creating a web-enabled knowledge management capability that helps the engineering enterprise workforce to access and deposit information, while also fostering collaboration efforts.
The Air Force is a technologically-driven service that prides itself on the ability of its engineering enterprise workforce to meet the ever-increasing challenges of the 21st Century. Indeed, a key to the Air Force’s success is its technological superiority over any adversary. On the other hand, highly technical companies have their own challenges remaining competitive in their markets. In doing so, they will provide strong competition to the DoD in recruiting and retaining top engineering and scientist talent. Therefore, the Air Force must constantly invest in the development and retention of its EE workforce.
One of the most important issues facing the enterprise is addressing the core technical competencies
needed for the workforce of the future. This will be accomplished by establishing a common taxonomy for workforce needs. The taxonomy will help build a common framework at the center, command, and Air Force levels for allocating engineers and scientists and determining future manpower needs. Once the framework is established, and engineers and scientists are aligned to technical disciplines and competencies, the Air Force must ensure the framework is sustained and balanced. To accomplish this, the Scientist and Engineer functional manager, SAF/AQR, will oversee this core competency management framework/process using the Scientist and Engineer Advisory Council (SEAC) as the governing body. The workforce activities of this council will additionally leverage the efforts of groups such as the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Advisory Council (STEMAC) and the Air Force Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Workforce Strategic Roadmap (Bright Horizons) to ensure there are no duplication of efforts among them. Tools and processes will be employed to develop, recruit, educate, and train an effi ciently balanced workforce of program offi ce, maintenance, supply chain, and support offi ce engineers and scientists. For instance, a staffi ng deployment process would allow the development of specifi c career tracks for highly
“Recruiting and developing high quality, innovative Airmen who leverage technology to rethink military operations to achieve strategic objectives will remain a fundamental tenet of the United States Air Force.”
USAF Posture Statement 2013
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCE Page 12
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
skilled, experienced individuals as well as providing an agile workforce because engineers and scientists will be allowed to cross over into more than one technical discipline or core technical competency throughout their career. This will allow a more widely experienced and educated workforce to draw on for current and future Air Force needs.
Also, a process will be created to manage the technical careers of the engineering enterprise workforce and to identify resource requirements and sources to support career-broadening moves. An essential element of this process will be to construct an effi cient way to connect a manpower need, for example in a program offi ce, with the right technical competency, regardless of geographical location.
Finally, the EE will create a development path for promising individuals that ensures their development as leaders in the career fi eld. The Air Force needs a core set of technical experts and leaders who
can provide the very best technical advice for the acquisition, test, deployment, and sustainment of the world’s best air, space, and cyberspace systems.
Goals:• Develop and manage an Air Force EE core competencies taxonomy (to include specialty engineering disciplines). This will include developing an Air Force EE competency taxonomy to 1) increase Air Force leadership insight into all engineering enterprise workforce strengths, weaknesses, and gaps; and 2) increase effectiveness of all EE workforce hiring, development, and succession planning efforts, including education, training, mentorship, and experience.
• Refi ne Center staff workforce development responsibilities and defi ne structure for program offi ces. This will include standardizing workforce development core mission areas across AF Major Commands and Centers, standardizing critical position duty titles, and determining program-offi ce manpower requirements based on the unique complexity and workload drivers for each program offi ce.
• Focus workforce development and assignments to provide a highly qualifi ed and capable workforce. This will include preserving Air Force core technical competencies by performing competency gap assessments and managing critical skill development, career assignments, education, training, and succession planning for engineers and scientists.
INTEGRITY – SERVICE – EXCELLENCEPage 13
Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan (Distribution Unlimited)
4.0 Way Ahead
The Air Force Engineering Enterprise is comprised of a tremendous team of professionals providing a solid foundation of integrity, discipline, and innovation. With a shared motivation to increase its ability to provide technical advice and information at critical points in the lifecycle of weapon systems, the EE will help ensure the Air Force remains the best in the world.
This strategic plan charts the way forward for the enterprise to reach its desired end state of establishing a governance structure with clearly defi ned roles and responsibilities supportive of the acquisition process and anchored by integrated and executable policy; providing sound technical judgment to program managers and expert technical advice to decision
makers; delivering standardized engineering tools, processes, and technical information management practices to create consistency across all engineering functions throughout the lifecycle; and fostering a highly qualifi ed and capable engineering workforce of technical experts and leaders supported by a process that matures the very best into decision makers of the future.
The vision, mission, priorities, and goals outlined in this plan provide a framework for what will be a relentless pursuit of engineering effi ciency and excellence. The next step in this journey is to develop and implement the Roadmap and action plans which will guide Air Force engineers and scientists to achieve the vision of the engineering enterprise.
This page intentionally blank.
Acronyms ACAT Acquisition Category
ADM Acquisition Decision Memorandum
AFI Air Force Instruction
AFLCMC Air Force Life Cycle Management Center
AFMC Air Force Materiel Command
AoA Analysis of Alternatives
APB Acquisition Program Baseline
AS Acquisition Strategy
AS Air Segment
ASA(ALT) Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology
ASN(RDA) Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition
AT anti-tamper
AT&L Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
C4 command, control, communications, and computers
CCA Cost versus Capability Analysis
CCC cross-cutting capabilities
CCR call completion rate
CCR Critical Change Review
CDD
Capability Development Document
CDR Critical Design Review
CE chief engineer
CJCSI Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction
COE Common Operating Environment
COTS commercial off-the-shelf
CPD Capability Production Document
CPI critical program information
CSB Configuration Steering Board
DAB Defense Acquisition Board
265DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
ACRONYMS
DAES Defense Acquisition Executive Summary
DAG Defense Acquisition Guidebook
DAPS Defense Acquisition Program Support
DASD(SE) Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering
DASN(RDT&E) Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
DAU Defense Acquisition University
DAWDF Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund
DFARS Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement
DID Data Item Description
DoD Department of Defense
DoDI Department of Defense Instruction
DON Department of the Navy
DPAP Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy
DPWG Development Planning Working Group
DTM Directive-Type Memorandum
EMD Engineering and Manufacturing Development (phase)
ENG Engineering (career field)
ESLOC equivalent source lines of code; effective source lines of code
ESOH environment, safety, and occupational health
FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation
FDD Full Deployment Decision
FRP Full-Rate Production
FTE full-time equivalent
FY fiscal year
GFE Government-furnished equipment
GIDEP Government-Industry Data Exchange Program
GOTS Government off-the-shelf
HSI human systems integration
266 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
ACRONYMS
HwA hardware assurance
IA information assurance
ICD Initial Capabilities Document
ICD Interface Control Document
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
IIPT Integrating Integrated Product Team
IMS Integrated Master Schedule
IOC Initial Operational Capability
IOT&E Initial Operational Test and Evaluation
IPR In-Process Review
IPT Integrated Product Team
ISR intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
JCIDS Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System
JFAC Joint Federated Assurance Center
JROC Joint Requirements Oversight Council
KLP Key Leadership Position
KPP Key Performance Parameter
KSA Key System Attribute
LRIP Low-Rate Initial Production
LSE lead systems engineer
M&S modeling and simulation
MAIS Major Automated Information System
MDA Milestone Decision Authority
MDA Missile Defense Agency
MDAP Major Defense Acquisition Program
MDD Materiel Development Decision
MS milestone
MSA Materiel Solution Analysis (phase)
NAR Non-Advocate Review
267DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
ACRONYMS
NAVAIR
Naval Air Systems Command
NAVSEA Naval Sea Systems Command
NDAA National Defense Authorization Act
NDIA National Defense Industrial Association
NM Nunn-McCurdy
NPS Naval Postgraduate School
NSEG Naval System Engineering Guidebook
NSESG Naval Systems Engineering Stakeholders Group
O&S Operations and Support (phase)
OIPT Overarching Integrated Product Team
ORD Operational Requirements Document
OSA open systems architecture
OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense
P&D Production and Deployment (phase)
PARM participating acquisition resource manager
PDR Preliminary Design Review
PEO Program Executive Office
PM program manager
PMO Program Management Office
PPP Program Protection Plan
PQM Production, Quality, and Manufacturing
PRR Production Readiness Review
PSA Program Support Assessment
R&M reliability and maintainability
RAM reliability, availability, and maintainability
RAM rockets, artillery, and mortars
RAM-C reliability, availability, maintainability, and cost
RDT&E research, development, test, and evaluation
RFP request for proposal
268 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
ACRONYMS
S&T science and technology
SAF/AQ Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition
SAF/AQR Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Science, Technology, and Engineering)
SAG Senior Advisory Group
SAR Selected Acquisition Report
SDR System Design Review
SE systems engineering
SE WIPT Systems Engineering Working Integrated Product Team
SEP Systems Engineering Plan
SERC Systems Engineering Research Center
SESG Systems Engineering Stakeholders Group
SETR Systems Engineering Technical Review
SFR System Functional Review
SIPRNet Secret Internet Protocol Router Network
SLOC source lines of code; software lines of code
SMC Space and Missile Systems Center
SoS system of systems
SoSE&I System of Systems Engineering and Integration
SPAWAR Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command
SPRDE Systems Planning, Research, Development, and Engineering
SRCA systemic root cause analysis
SRR System Requirements Review
SSE system security engineering
STEM science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
STRI Simulation, Training and Instrumentation
SwA software assurance
SYSCOM Systems Command
T&E test and evaluation
TD Technology Development (phase)
269DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
ACRONYMS
TDP Technical Data Package
TDS Technology Development Strategy
TIM technical information meeting
TMRR Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (phase)
TPM Technical Performance Measure
TRA Technology Readiness Assessment
TRADOC Training and Doctrine Command
TRL Technology Readiness Level
TRR Test Readiness Review
TSN trusted systems and networks
TTCP The Technical Cooperation Program
UAS unmanned aircraft system
USD(AT&L) Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
USD(I) Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence
USSTRATCOM United States Strategic Command
WIPT Working Integrated Product Team
WSARA Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act
270 DoD Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
References
Air Force Corrosion Strategic Plan. 2014. Washington, D.C.: Air Force Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive (CCPE).
Air Force Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan 2014-2024. 2014. Washington, D.C.: Secretary of the Air Force and U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff.
Air Force Instruction (AFI) 10-601. 2013. “Operations: Capability Requirements Development.” Washington, D.C.: Secretary of the Air Force (November 6). http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a3_5/publication/afi10-601/afi10-601.pdf
Air Force Instruction (AFI) 21-118. Forthcoming. “Improving Air and Space Equipment Reliability and Maintainability.” Washington, D.C.: Secretary of the Air Force. http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a4_7/publication/afi21-118/afi21-118.pdf
Air Force Instruction (AFI) 63-101/20-101. Forthcoming. “Integrated Life Cycle Management.” Washington, D.C.: Secretary of the Air Force. http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/saf_aq/publication/afi63-101/afi63-101_20-101.pdf
Air Force Pamphlet (AFPAM) 63-128. 2014. “Integrated Life Cycle Management.” Washington, D.C.: Secretary of the Air Force/AQXA (July 10). http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/saf_aq/publication/afpam63-128/afpam63-128.pdf
Air Force Policy Directive 16-10. Forthcoming. “Modeling and Simulation.” Washington, D.C.: Secretary of the Air Force.
Army Regulation AR 70-1. 2012. “Army Acquisition Policy.” Washington, D.C.: Headquarters, Department of the Army (April 26). http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r70_1.pdf
Army Regulation AR 702-3. Forthcoming. “Army Materiel Systems Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability.” Washington, D.C.: Headquarters, Department of the Army.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI) 3170.01. Forthcoming. “Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System.” Washington, D.C.: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Committee on Improving the Effectiveness and Efficiency of U.S. Air Force Pre-Acquisition Development Planning; Air Force Studies Board; Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences; and National Research Council. 2014. Development Planning: A Strategic Approach to Future Air Force Capabilities. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Clause 252.204-7012. 2013. “Safeguarding of Unclassified Controlled Technical Information.” Washington, D.C.: Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy (November 18).
Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 5200.JJE. Forthcoming. “Anti-Tamper.” Washington, D.C.: Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 4140.67. 2013. “DoD Counterfeit Prevention Policy.” Washington, D.C.: Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (April 26). http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/414067p.pdf
Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 5000.02 (Interim). 2013. “Operation of the Defense Acquisition System.” Washington, D.C.: Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (November 26). http://www.acq.osd.mil/docs/DSD%205000.02_Memo+Doc.pdf
Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 5134.16. 2011. “Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering (DASD(SE)).” Washington, D.C.: Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (August 19). http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/513416p.pdf
Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 5200.39. Forthcoming. “Critical Program Information (CPI) Identification and Protection Within Research, Development, and Acquisition (RDA) Programs.” Washington, D.C.: USD(AT&L) and USD(I).
Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 5200.44. 2012. “Protection of Mission Critical Functions to Achieve Trusted Systems and Networks (TSN).” Washington, D.C.: DoD Chief Information Officer/Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (November 5). http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/520044p.pdf
Department of the Navy (DON) Systems Engineering Stakeholders Group (SESG). Forthcoming. Naval Systems Engineering Guidebook. Washington, D.C.: DON SESG.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering (DASD(SE)). Unpublished. Defense Acquisition Program Support (DAPS) Methodology. Version 3.2. Washington, D.C.: DASD(SE).
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering (DASD(SE)). 2012. “Program Protection.” Chapter 13 in Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG). Fort Belvoir, Va.: Defense Acquisition University. https://acc.dau.mil/dag13
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering (DASD(SE)). 2014a. “Program Protection Plan Evaluation Criteria, Version 1.1.” Washington, D.C.: DASD(SE). http://www.acq.osd.mil/se/docs/PPP-Evaluation-Criteria.pdf
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering (DASD(SE)). 2014b. “Software Assurance Countermeasures in Program Protection.” Washington, D.C.: DASD(SE). http://www.acq.osd.mil/se/docs/SwA-CM-in-PPP.pdf
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering (DASD(SE)) and Department of Defense Chief Information Officer (DoD CIO). 2014. “Trusted Systems and Networks Analysis.” Washington, D.C.: DASD(SE) and DoD CIO. http://www.acq.osd.mil/se/docs/Trusted-Systems-and-Networks-TSN-Analysis.pdf
ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288. 2008. “Systems and Software Engineering–System Life Cycle Processes.” Piscataway, N.J.: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)–Standards Association (SA). http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=43564
Program Protection Plan (PPP) Outline. 2011. Washington, D.C.: Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering. http://www.acq.osd.mil/se/docs/PPP-Outline-and-Guidance-v1-July2011.pdf
Public Law 111-23, 111th Cong. (May 22, 2009.) Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009.
Public Law 113-66, 113th Cong. (Dec 26, 2014.) National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014.
Risk Management Guide for DoD Acquisition. 2006. Version 1.0, 6th ed. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, Systems and Software Engineering (August). http://www.acq.osd.mil/se/docs/2006-RM-Guide-4Aug06-final-version.pdf
SECNAVINST 5400.15. 2011. “Department of the Navy Research and Development, Acquisition, Associated Life-Cycle Management, and Logistics Responsibilities and Accountability.” Washington, D.C.: Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition (December 2).
Secretary of Defense. 2013. “Safeguarding Unclassified Controlled Technical Information.” Memorandum (October 10). Washington, D.C.: Secretary of Defense.
Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) Outline. 2011. Washington, D.C.: Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering. http://www.acq.osd.mil/se/docs/PDUSD-Approved.SEP_Outline-04-20-2011.docx
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)). 2010. “Better Buying Power: Mandate for Restoring Affordability and Productivity in Defense Spending.” Memorandum (June 28). Washington, D.C.: USD(AT&L). http://www.acq.osd.mil/docs/USD(AT&L)_Memo_to_Acquisition_Professionals_June_28_2010.pdf
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)). 2011. “Should-Cost and Affordability.” Memorandum (August 24). Washington, D.C.: USD(AT&L). https://dap.dau.mil/policy/Lists/Policy%20Documents/Attachments/3301/ShouldCostAfford-24Aug11.pdf
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)). 2012. “Better Buying Power 2.0: Continuing the Pursuit for Greater Efficiency and Productivity in Defense Spending.” Memorandum (November 13). Washington, D.C.: USD(AT&L). http://acquisition.navy.mil/content/view/full/9632
Department of Defense Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Systems Engineering 3030 Defense Pentagon 3C167 Washington, DC 20301-3030 www.acq.osd.mil/se
