Bauer.frank

www.nasa.gov

Commercial Crew Insight/Oversight Model

Recommendations

Frank H. Bauer

Project Management ChallengeFebruary 9-10, 2011

Overview

ObjectiveDevelop an insight/oversight model that will contribute to the safe flight and safe return of NASA crew members on commercial space vehicles

Co-LeadsWayne Hale/DAA SOMD-Strategic Partnerships

Frank Bauer/ESMD Chief Engineer

2

Approach

Survey different insight/oversight models (Human Space Flight, Launch Services Program, Robotic Spacecraft, COTS, Commercial)

Factor in results from Constellation Insight/Oversight study team and NESC Hybrid Team Model White Paper

Address Technical Authority Engagement, FAA engagement and review team requirements

Develop insight/oversight engagement strategy proposal Obtain feedback & advice on proposed strategy from

agency senior leaders, crew office, key stakeholders Vet final product through HSF Mission Directorates, OCE,

OSMA, OCHMO, Crew Office, CxP Insight/Oversight team, JSC Engineering

3

Insight and Oversight Definitions

Insight The capacity to discern the true nature of the project’s efforts to

design, develop, test and operate the vehicle system. It is NASA’s ability to penetrate into the commercial crew

provider’s processes and their vehicle design, development, test and operations in an effort to certify the vehicle for human spaceflight operations and to improve the safety of operations and mission success.

Oversight The watchful and responsible care and management of the

commercial crew development, test and operations efforts. This is accomplished through overseeing the performance of the provider’s vehicle design, development and test efforts and their ability to certify their vehicle for safe human transportation. As such, there are elements of oversight which will require government approval and/or direction.

4

Spectrum of Insight/Oversight Models

HumanSpaceflight

~1:10-1:4

Key: 1:XX represents the approximate government/industry headcount ratio

Launch ServicesProgram~1:17

Intense In/OversightLow/No In/Oversight

Scientific & Commercial Spacecraft--Contracted

~1:250-1:10

COTS & CRS

~1:80-1:20

Medium In/Oversight

Insight and Technical Engagement Overview

Insight Model Utilize technical expert engagement, and technical reach-back approach

similar to that used on the Launch Services Program, robotic spacecraft projects and COTS Advisory Team

Use NESC approach to temporarily bring in experts to resolve major issues and ramp down expertise when complete—results in a more efficient use of NASA’s technical resources

Government/industry partnership—must have Civil Servants on contractor floor• Facilitates much better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of vehicle

design, build, test & operations--in line with NASA insight on Mercury, Gemini and Apollo

In-depth government subsystem penetration which varies temporally and based on historic failure risk, contractor subsystem expertise, and design challenges • Core team follows design, development, test and verification• Assigns right experts at the right time• More experts assigned on challenging, high risk areas (e.g. abort systems,

etc)

6

Commercial CrewTemporal Insight Support Recommendation

7

MissionConceptReview

PreliminaryDesignReview

CriticalDesignReview

MateReview

Launch

InsightSupport

SustainingInsight

Key Decision Points

Problem Resolution Team Example

In addition to Sustaining Engineering Expertise, Cadre of Agency Experts Brought in at Key Decision Points to Thoroughly Review and Critique Design

Risk-Informed Subsystem Engagement

Based on perceived vehicle risk and historic failures, concentrate/augment insight in key areas:

Risk-informed Concentration Propulsion GN&C Avionics Software Electrical Crew Systems Separation Systems

Nominal Concentration (e.g. Power Thermal, Structures, Mission Operations, Ground

Operations, PRA Experts, ECLS, Suit)

8

These Experts and the Systems Engineering Team Comprise the Government Sustaining Insight Team

Operational ordnance

6%

Structures6%

Guidance and navigation systems

13%

Electrical systems9% Software and

computing systems9%

Pneumatics and hydraulics

3%

Propulsion54%

\

1980 -2007Worldwide Launch Failure CausesReference: FAA Launch Vehicle Failure Mode Database, May 2007

Clarifications

Contractors supporting government employees, program management, and programmatic administration personnel all book-kept under government side of insight/oversight models

Ramp-up and Ramp-down of agency experts to support key milestone reviews and problem resolution teams is an essential component of this model• Will require good coordination between program office and agency

institutional expert pool; work prioritization• NASA has many good examples of this approach working for Human

Spaceflight, Launch Services and Robotic Spacecraft• NESC represents the best example of this model working for NASA’s better

good Government lab independent testing not included at this time

9

Oversight Decision Strategy

Oversight Model NASA Oversight Decisions and Direction performed only when absolutely

necessary---discrete oversight vs. current near-continuous oversight Follow well defined and documented design rules and processes—(e.g.

GSFC Golden Rules, mandatory design and fabrication requirements) Requires Strong NASA Leadership that will implement discrete oversight

strategy—Project Manager, Chief Engineer, Chief Safety Officer & Systems Engineering

10

Government Oversight Models

11

MCR PDR CDR MateReview

Launch

Oversight Decisions & Direction

Lifecycle Timeline

Oversight Decisions and Direction Substantially Less and More Focused in Commercial Crew Model

Current (Near -Continuous) Oversight Model

Commercial Crew (Discrete) Oversight Model

Oversight Decisions & Direction

MCR PDR CDR MateReview

LaunchLifecycle Timeline

Development Production & Ops

Commercial Crew Program and Projects Government Insight/Oversight Teams

12

Commercial CrewProgram OfficeOversight Team

Project AInsight Team

Project BInsight Team

Project CInsight Team

Project DInsight Team

Role: Makes Government Oversight Decisions

Role: Expert Insight, Early Issue Identification & Oversight Recommendations

Government-CommercialInsight/Oversight Interactions

13

Commercial Crew Provider

Program OfficeOversight Team Discrete

Oversight Decisions &

Direction

ProjectInsight Team Penetration,

Collaboration, & Influence

InsightEmbedded

Team

Understanding &Oversight

Recommendations

Technical Authority Engagement

Technical Authorities, ISS Rep, Crew Office Rep and FAA Rep are embedded, matrixed from home organizations as the Systems Engineering Team leaders

Leadership roles include Chief Engineer (OCE TA), Chief Safety Officer (OSMA TA), Chief Health/Medical (OCHMO TA), ISS Rep (ensures ISS Safety and Requirements Compliance), Crew Office Rep (ensures crew safety, vehicle compatibility with crew, and crew training approach) and FAA Rep (ensures FAA requirements compliance)

Additional cadre of senior systems experts support systems engineering leadership team and perform SE oversight

TAs will work with Program and Agency to appropriately tailor 7120/7123 and NASA requirements and standards to support the commercial crew model

14

NASA Participation in Major Reviews

Civil Servant Sustaining Insight/Oversight Team, consisting of systems engineers, relevant subsystem experts, and cognizant FAA experts, serve as members of NASA Review Team (NRT)

NASA Review Team is augmented with other independent experts from NASA, FAA or industry as appropriate

Technical, Cost, Schedule presented to NASA Review Team at Key Decision Points, in-line with NPR 7120.5 and NPR 7123 requirements

NRT review products include key findings, concerns, actions and recommendations, similar to Key Decision Point (KDP) milestone decision products

NRT contract reach-in primarily limited to supporting major reviews, as compared to current, more continuous Standing Review Board (SRB) model

15

Insight/Oversight Model Recommendation

HumanSpaceflight

~1:10-1:4

Key: 1:XX represents the approximate government/industry headcount ratio

Launch ServicesProgram~1:17

Intense In/OversightLow/No In/Oversight

Scientific & Commercial Spacecraft--Contracted

~1:250-1:10

COTS & CRS

~1:80-1:20

Medium In/Oversight

Commercial Crew

Insight-Oversight

“Sweet Spot”

Summary

Overall Summary Examined NASA’s safety and mission reliability role in the commercial

spaceflight market and explored and recommended an insight/oversight model for commercial crew systems

Provides recommendations for the right balance of civil servant workforce insight/oversight that will contribute to the safe flight & return of NASA crew members on commercial vehicles

Key Message Recommendations represent a Huge Culture Shift in NASA’s development of

Human Spaceflight Vehicles Culture changes require outstanding, effective culture change leadership

within the commercial crew leadership team to move the agency on the right course

To be successful, team must simultaneously embrace criticality of safe, reliable flight and adopt insight/oversight changes necessary to accomplish in a commercial crew environment

Crucial for agency senior leadership to invest time---early and often—to guide and mentor the NASA commercial crew teams to be successful in this culture change endeavor. Culture change inertia can only be overcome through actively engaged senior leadership setting the proper course

17

Backup

Acknowledgements

Ralph Roe/NESC Alan Lindenmoyer/C3PO Geoff Yoder/ESMD Marc Timm/ESMD Mike Ryschkewitsch/OCE Bryan O’Connor/OSMA Engineering Management Board (EMB) and Safety and Mission

Assurance team members Mark Geyer and Mark Kirasich/Orion Project Kathy Leuders and Amy Stencil/ISS CRS Project CxP Insight/Oversight Assessment Subteam

19

Forward Work

1) NASA needs to develop a well defined decision authority with clearly defined roles and responsibilities (ESMD, SOMD, program, project, agency institution, other)

2) NASA Governance Model has potential for being an insight/oversight driver• Need to tailor NPR 7120/7123/8705.2 early in program formulation• Full complement of design, fabrication and test standards, processes and

requirements need to be defined and negotiated between the project and the institution

• Direct or Perceived role of Technical Authorities critical in option development

3) Certification of Flight Readiness Process a critical driver• CoFR signatories will require more or less insight depending on how this

process is structured.• Need to define CoFR process early-on to guide assignment of accountability• This should be a high priority effort• Factor in lessons learned from OSP

20

Forward Work (Continued)

4) Procurement must be structured to enable badge-less government “in-reach” by the insight team and strong financial incentives which shift mission success to the provider and their suppliers as an accountable deliverable

5) Crucial to identify clear goals, objectives, requirements, and vehicle operability (ground and flight operations) constraints early

6) Once the vendor is selected, the early identification of risks (cost, schedule, technical, safety) will drive oversight model FTE requirements

7) Development, prior to provider selection, of a compiled list of pre-declared independent analyses to be performed by the insight team and test verifications that will be reviewed by the insight team.

21