Future manned systems advanced avionics study

COTS+ was defined in this study as commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) products, ruggedized and militarized components, and COTS technology. This study cites the benefits of integrating COTS+ in space, postulates a COTS+ integration methodology, and develops requirements and an architecture to achieve integration. Developmental needs and concerns were identified throughout the study; these needs, concerns, and recommendations relative to their abatement are subsequently presented for further action and study. The COTS+ concept appears workable in part or in totality. No COTS+ technology gaps were identified; however, radiation tolerance was cited as a concern, and the deferred maintenance issue resurfaced. Further study is recommended to explore COTS+ cost-effectiveness, maintenance philosophy, needs, concerns, and utility metrics. The generation of a development plan to further investigate and integrate COTS+ technology is recommended. A COTS+ transitional integration program is recommended. Sponsoring and establishing technology maturation programs and COTS+ engineering and standards committees are deemed necessary and are recommended for furthering COTS+ integration in space

Tradespace and Affordability – Phase 1

One of the key elements of the SERC’s research strategy is transforming the practice of systems engineering – “SE Transformation.” The Grand Challenge goal for SE Transformation is to transform the DoD community’s current systems engineering and management methods, processes, and tools (MPTs) and practices away from sequential, single stovepipe system, hardware-first, outside-in, document-driven, point-solution, acquisition-oriented approaches; and toward concurrent, portfolio and enterprise-oriented, hardware-software-human engineered, balanced outside-in and inside-out, model-driven, set-based, full life cycle approaches.This material is based upon work supported, in whole or in part, by the U.S. Department of Defense through the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) under Contract H98230-08- D-0171 (Task Order 0031, RT 046).This material is based upon work supported, in whole or in part, by the U.S. Department of Defense through the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) under Contract H98230-08- D-0171 (Task Order 0031, RT 046)

Expanded Guidance for NASA Systems Engineering. Volume 2: Crosscutting Topics, Special Topics, and Appendices

Historically, most successful NASA projects have depended on effectively blending project management, systems engineering, and technical expertise among NASA, contractors, and third parties. Underlying these successes are a variety of agreements (e.g., contract, memorandum of understanding, grant, cooperative agreement) between NASA organizations or between NASA and other Government agencies, Government organizations, companies, universities, research laboratories, and so on. To simplify the discussions, the term "contract" is used to encompass these agreements. This section focuses on the NASA systems engineering activities pertinent to awarding a contract, managing contract performance, and completing a contract. In particular, NASA systems engineering interfaces to the procurement process are covered, since the NASA engineering technical team plays a key role in the development and evaluation of contract documentation. Contractors and third parties perform activities that supplement (or substitute for) the NASA project technical team accomplishment of the NASA common systems engineering technical process activities and requirements outlined in this guide. Since contractors might be involved in any part of the systems engineering life cycle, the NASA project technical team needs to know how to prepare for, allocate or perform, and implement surveillance of technical activities that are allocated to contractors

Standardization Roadmap for Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Version 1.0

This Standardization Roadmap for Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Version 1.0 (“roadmap”) represents the culmination of the UASSC’s work to identify existing standards and standards in development, assess gaps, and make recommendations for priority areas where there is a perceived need for additional standardization and/or pre-standardization R&D. The roadmap has examined 64 issue areas, identified a total of 60 gaps and corresponding recommendations across the topical areas of airworthiness; flight operations (both general concerns and application-specific ones including critical infrastructure inspections, commercial services, and public safety operations); and personnel training, qualifications, and certification. Of that total, 40 gaps/recommendations have been identified as high priority, 17 as medium priority, and 3 as low priority. A “gap” means no published standard or specification exists that covers the particular issue in question. In 36 cases, additional R&D is needed. The hope is that the roadmap will be broadly adopted by the standards community and that it will facilitate a more coherent and coordinated approach to the future development of standards for UAS. To that end, it is envisioned that the roadmap will be widely promoted and discussed over the course of the coming year, to assess progress on its implementation and to identify emerging issues that require further elaboration

RIGEX: Preliminary Design of a Rigidized Inflatable Get-Away-Special Experiment

As space structures grow in size and complexity, their weight and cost increase considerably. The use of inflatable and rigidizable structures offers drastic improvements in all areas of spacecraft design. The goal of this experiment is to verify and validate ground testing of inflation and rigidization methods for inflatable space structures. The Rigidized Inflatable Get-Away-Special Experiment is an autonomous, self-contained space shuttle experiment that will inflate and rigidize several structures. After inflation, the experiment will perform a structural analysis by exciting the rigidized structures and collecting vibration data. A systems engineering approach is utilized to make design decisions based on a total system and life-cycle perspective

Third International Symposium on Space Mission Operations and Ground Data Systems, part 2

Under the theme of 'Opportunities in Ground Data Systems for High Efficiency Operations of Space Missions,' the SpaceOps '94 symposium included presentations of more than 150 technical papers spanning five topic areas: Mission Management, Operations, Data Management, System Development, and Systems Engineering. The symposium papers focus on improvements in the efficiency, effectiveness, and quality of data acquisition, ground systems, and mission operations. New technology, methods, and human systems are discussed. Accomplishments are also reported in the application of information systems to improve data retrieval, reporting, and archiving; the management of human factors; the use of telescience and teleoperations; and the design and implementation of logistics support for mission operations. This volume covers expert systems, systems development tools and approaches, and systems engineering issues

Design Development Test and Evaluation (DDT and E) Considerations for Safe and Reliable Human Rated Spacecraft Systems

A team directed by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) collected methodologies for how best to develop safe and reliable human rated systems and how to identify the drivers that provide the basis for assessing safety and reliability. The team also identified techniques, methodologies, and best practices to assure that NASA can develop safe and reliable human rated systems. The results are drawn from a wide variety of resources, from experts involved with the space program since its inception to the best-practices espoused in contemporary engineering doctrine. This report focuses on safety and reliability considerations and does not duplicate or update any existing references. Neither does it intend to replace existing standards and policy

Standardization Roadmap for Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Version 2.0

This Standardization Roadmap for Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Version 2.0 (“roadmap”) is an update to version 1.0 of this document published in December 2018. It identifies existing standards and standards in development, assesses gaps, and makes recommendations for priority areas where there is a perceived need for additional standardization and/or pre-standardization R&D. The roadmap has examined 78 issue areas, identified a total of 71 open gaps and corresponding recommendations across the topical areas of airworthiness; flight operations (both general concerns and application-specific ones including critical infrastructure inspections, commercial services, and public safety operations); and personnel training, qualifications, and certification. Of that total, 47 gaps/recommendations have been identified as high priority, 21 as medium priority, and 3 as low priority. A “gap” means no published standard or specification exists that covers the particular issue in question. In 53 cases, additional R&D is needed. As with the earlier version of this document, the hope is that the roadmap will be broadly adopted by the standards community and that it will facilitate a more coherent and coordinated approach to the future development of standards for UAS. To that end, it is envisioned that the roadmap will continue to be promoted in the coming year. It is also envisioned that a mechanism may be established to assess progress on its implementation

Tradespace and Affordability – Phase 2

MOTIVATION AND CONTEXT: One of the key elements of the SERC’s research strategy is transforming the practice of systems engineering – “SE Transformation.” The Grand Challenge goal for SE Transformation is to transform the DoD community’s current systems engineering and management methods, processes, and tools (MPTs) and practices away from sequential, single stovepipe system, hardware-first, outside-in, document-driven, point-solution, acquisition-oriented approaches; and toward concurrent, portfolio and enterprise-oriented, hardware-software-human engineered, balanced outside-in and inside-out, model-driven, set-based, full life cycle approaches.This material is based upon work supported, in whole or in part, by the U.S. Department of Defense through the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) under Contract H98230-08- D-0171 (Task Order 0031, RT 046).This material is based upon work supported, in whole or in part, by the U.S. Department of Defense through the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) under Contract H98230-08- D-0171 (Task Order 0031, RT 046)