Inter approach to_spaceprogmgmt

Project Management:Brazilian Experience

Himilcon de Castro Carvalho, AEB

Used with Permission

“Classic”Project Phasing

& PlanningECSS or ISO1 yr 2-3 yrs

Reality

decision mobilization peak launch & ops

1-2 yr 2-3 yr 4-6 yr

Activity or $$

Lack of:

BudgetHuman ResourcesInfrastructure

Reality

decision mobilization peak launch & ops

1-2 yr 2-3 yr 4-6 yr

Activity or $$

Lack of:

BudgetHuman ResourcesInfrastructure

Political talks

OK! Let's go

Gov't ChangesEconomical crisisChanges in priorities

Reality

decision mobilization peak launch & ops

1-2 yr 2-3 yr 4-6 yr

Activity or $$

Lack of:

BudgetHuman ResourcesInfrastructure

What was expected

Political talks

OK! Let's go!

Govn't ChangesEconomical crisisChanges in priorities

Project Organization

Project Office

Strong Matrix Structure (80' – 90')

Mech. Eng.

Electr.. Eng.

Ground Segment

AIT ...

Project Office = Management + Systems Engineering

QA, AIT, Ground Seg. completely dedicated to this single project

QA

Project Organization

Project Office 1

Weak Matrix Structure (90' – 00')

Project Office 2Project Office 3

Systems Eng.

Mech. Eng.

Electr.. Eng.

Ground Segment

AIT ...

Competition for project resources, human resources and budget

QA

Planning

ScopePlanning

ScopeDefinition WBS

Activity Definition

ActivityDuration

Activity Sequencing

ActivityResources

Risk Mgt.Plan

Risk Identification

Qualit.Risk An.

Quant.Risk An.

Risk Resp.Planning

ScheduleDevel.

Cost Estimating

CostBudgeting

HRPlanning

QualityPlanning

Comm.Planning

Plan Purch.& Acq.

PlanContracting

Planning

ScopePlanning

ScopeDefinition WBS

Activity Definition

ActivityDuration

Activity Sequencing

ActivityResources

Risk Mgt.Plan

Risk Identification

Qualit.Risk An.

Quant.Risk An.

Risk Resp.Planning

ScheduleDevel.

Cost Estimating

CostBudgeting

HRPlanning

QualityPlanning

Comm.Planning

Plan Purch.& Acq.

PlanContracting

“out of control” variables

“under relative control” variables

Planning

ScopePlanning

ScopeDefinition WBS

Activity Definition

ActivityDuration

Activity Sequencing

ActivityResources

Risk Mgt.Plan

Risk Identification

Qualit.Risk An.

Quant.Risk An.

Risk Resp.Planning

ScheduleDevel.

Cost Estimating

CostBudgeting

HRPlanning

QualityPlanning

Comm.Planning

Plan Purch.& Acq.

PlanContracting

“out of control” variables

“under relative control” variables

focusand

Impacts

PM under severe HR and Budget Restrictions

Low responsivity Schedules not used as actual management tool Small number of concurrent projects Low industry dynamics

Focus on WBS Focus on Activity Definition & Sequencing Focus on Quality/Verification Planning Special focus on Risk Planning

Thank you!

Himilcon de Castro CarvalhoDirector of Space Policy and Strategic InvestmentsBrazilian Space [email protected]

1

Mini-SARAn Imaging Radar on India’s Chandrayaan-1 Mission to the Moon

Paul D. SpudisMSR Principal Investigator

Lunar and Planetary InstituteHouston TX

[email protected]

www.spudislunarresources.com

NASA Program Management Challenge 2010February 2010

2

Origins

Waikaloa, Hawaii 2003Dr. Narendra Bhandari talk on proposed Chandrayaan-1

mission (not yet selected for flight)I approach him to fly radar; he encourages itAPL submits unsolicited letter proposalISRO decides on open competition for foreign payloads

(< 10 kg, < 100 W), Feb. 2004Submit formal proposal, April 2004Selected for flight, September 2004

3

Approval

Getting the money from NASATechnology interest from SOMD; exploration interest from ESMDTechnology development package developed and jointly funded

Getting approval from Dept. of StatePresent instrument concept/overview to DoS Dec. 2004Formal application for export license Jan. 2005State approval June 2005

Getting final approval from ISROTAA draft sent to ISRO in June 2005; no responseContinuous delay; demand for change of title of TAA documentTAA signed during May 2006 India visit by M. Griffin (NASA

Administrator)

4

Build and test

Mini-SAR (re-named Mini-RF) gets underway May 2005; instrument PDR Dec. 2005

Chandrayaan/MSR ICD draft written and approved Nov. 2005

Mini-SAR CDR Sept. 2006Chandrayaan-1 CDR May 2007Mini-SAR ship to APL; calibration

and test March-June 2007MSR ship to ISRO, August 2007I&T at ISAC, August 2007-July

2008

5

Getting Ready to Go

6

Launch and Mission

7

Some First Results

8

Moon Minerals and Particles

9

Mini-SAR Experiment Objectives

Map the deposits of both poles of the Moon (> 80° lat.) at optimum viewing angles (~40°) to characterize permanently dark areas and definitively determine their RF backscattering properties using both SAR and scatterometry

Complete the global map of the Moon by mapping dark regions in lunar polar areas

Characterize the physical nature of the polar regolith and surface

SAR mapping of other targets of opportunity as possible

Moon South PoleClementine 750 nm base map

10

Circular Polarization Ratio (CPR)

Ratio of received power in both right and left senses

Normal rocky planet surfaces = polarization inversion (receive opposite sense from that transmitted)

“Same sense” received indicates something unusual:

double- or even-multiple-bounce reflections

Volume scattering from RF-transparent material

High CPR (enhanced “same sense” reception) is common for fresh, rough (at wavelength scale) targets and water ice

11

MSR Coverage from First Mapping Cycle

12

PearyHermite

Rozhdestvensky

Plaskett

Main L

80˚ N

Sylvester

Haskin

Byrd

NansenWhipple

De Sitter

Lovelace

Gloja

84˚ N

88˚ N

90˚ W

180˚

90˚ E

0˚

13

North Polar CPR Map

14

A Tale of Two Scatterers

Main L

15

16

17

Peary

Hermite

Rozhdestvensky

Plaskett

Main L80˚ N

Sylvester

Haskin

Byrd

NansenWhipple

De Sitter

Lovelace

Gloja

84˚ N

88˚ N

90˚ W

180˚

90˚ E

0˚

18

Fresh craters

Anomalous craters

80˚ N

84˚ N

88˚ N

90˚ W

180˚

90˚ E

0˚

19

Water Equivalent Hydrogen (wt.%)

20

Summary

Mini-SAR successfully mapped about 90% of both polar areas; due to some operational issues, coverage is not contiguous

Calibration data from Earth and Moon have been acquired and partly processed; used to quantify radar response

Non-polar areas analyzed; results consistent with previous S-band radar mapping from Earth

Areas of high CPR have been identified:Some high CPR is clearly associated with surface roughness

(e.g., Main L ejecta blanket)Some deposits (e.g., near north pole on floor of Peary) show

high CPR and are restricted to the interior of craters; these features are in permanent darkness.

21

Some Lessons Learned

Sensitivities about ITARUS must recognize that foreign institutions may view

ITAR restrictions negatively

Foreign governments must realize that wording is not chosen by the flight partners

ITAR issues did not materially interfere with MSR build, test, and operation

ITAR compliance is simply an overhead lien that must be paid

22

Some Lessons Learned

Interactions with the pressOther governments may have different relationships

with press

Keep quiet and let your lead partner set the tone

“No comment” is a comment; it will not deter a determined reporter

Project Management Practicesfor Indian Space Vehicles

Dr. BN SureshDirector, Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology,

(Former Director, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre)Thiruvananthapuram, India.

Used with Permission

SLV-3

ASLV

PSLV

GSLV

GSLV Mk IIIMarch 2011

Launch Vehicle SLV ASLV PSLV GSLV GSLV Mk III

Lift-off weight (kg) 17 40 295 450 635

Payload (kg) 40 (LEO) 150 (LEO) 1800 (SSO) 2200 (GTO) 4000 (GTO)

ISRO Launch Vehicle Evolution

A Core Project team with overall responsibility

System Projects in new / critical areas

Distributed work environment (work centers all over India)

New technology development at ISRO units

Large scale facility build-up Launch complex, Propulsion systems development,

testing, Avionics systems and Vehicle level testing& mock ups etc.

Large scale industrial production

Motor cases, Light alloy structures & Propellant tanks Liquid / Cryo engine systems, Avionics system components, Propellants & chemicals, Sub assemblies integration etc.

Implementation of change & configuration control

Project DirectorAsso. Project Director

Project Directors

System Projects

Project Managers

for various systems

Matrix Management Structure

System ProjectsSystem

ProjectsSystem ProjectsSystem

ProjectsSystem Projects

Dy. Project Directors

Project Engineers

Dev

elop

men

t A

genc

ies

Management Structure (For Launch Vehicle Programmes)

Definition and implementation of project management plan & procedures.

Communication of project objectives and plans to all levels Mission specification & interfaces with users. Launch complex and tracking network interfaces. Vehicle systems definition and specifications. Stage engineering and interfaces control. Vehicle / stage level configuration control & change management Direct monitoring of progress in all key areas Speedy execution without compromising performance and

quality Programme management, cost/schedule monitoring and control. Organise project related reviews at micro and macro levels

Core Project ResponsibilitiesResponsibilities of the Core Project have been :

• Generated programme plans, system development plans, schedules & milestone plans.

Establishing Targets

• Monitored through weekly biweekly and monthly review meetings, progress reports.

Monitoring Performance

• Compared actual progress with expected performance.

ProgrammeAnalysis

• Identified solution options, implemented decisions & follow up of needed actions.

Management Reporting

Programme Control Cycle Used in Development

Project Review Meetings

Weekly review of project activity status

Project Executive Reviews (PEX) : Tier - 1

Monthly reviews for resolving technical / managerial issues

Reviews by Centre Director

Technical / managerial

Reviews by Project Management Boards (PMB) : Tier - 2

General guidelines, budget approvals, schedules, facility & manpower

Reviews by Project Management Council (PMC) : Tier - 3

Overall policy guidelines

Reviews by Chairman, ISRO

Technical / managerial

Techno- Managerial Review MechanismsManagement of Scope, Time & Cost without compromising Quality

Scope

Time

Quality

Cost

Nor

mal

ised

wor

k lo

ad

Time in years

Technical Review Milestones followed

System ConceptReview

SCR

Preliminary Design Review

PDRCritical Design Review

CDRTest

Readiness Review

TRRSystem

Readiness Review

SRR

System configuration. System /subsystem

specs.Manufacturing & test

facilities. Schedule & resource

projections

Technical adequacy of design approach

Firm up specs. for system / subsystems

Physical and functionalinterfaces definition.

Clearance for detailed design.

Approval of specs.and design.

Approval of baseline production

Firm up interfaces Firm up detailed test

plan

Detailed interface performance checks.

Certify system performance meetsrequirements

Finalise system configuration

Approval for system commissioning

SCR PDR CDR SRR

7

6-7 years

Objectives are closely tracked In all milestone reviews.

Objectives

Managing Technical Risks

Schedule Management

Quality management

Cost ManagementNew Technology

Development

Launch Vehicle Project

Management

Overall Management Approach

Managing Technical Risks

Identification of single point failure

Redundancy management for mission critical Avionics / Control systems

Vendor directory /Preferred part list

Well evolved part screening for electronic components

Process documents & QA / QC plans

Test & evaluation at different levels

Integrated system level checks

Detailed simulations at different levels

FMECA analysis /Fault tree analysis

The following procedures are strictly implemented.

Optimal sharing of resources between numerous operational and development programmes

The following methodologies are strictly implemented throughout the Project phase

Work Break down Structures (WBS)

Schedule analysis (PERT/CPM) & simulations

Identifying ‘limiting factors’

Anticipating criticalities

‘Feed forward’ control– Real time correction of plans

as work progresses, Work around plans

Fast tracking through Concurrent Engineering approach

Near critical paths & criticality index

Integrated Information network for faster communication

Time management

Project Schedule Management

Data Input

Analysis/Processing

Information/Output

For decision making For progress monitoring

Project Executives & Management Forums

Participating Agencies, Centre level Forums

By Project

From Work centres

To Management

Management Information System used

Quality Management

Quality Control

Quality Audit

Quality Assurance

Key processes and continuous Quality control during development and realisation of all launch vehicle subsytems are identified and carried out.

The Strict Quality Assurance is ensured by meticulously following the various steps given below. Approved specifications & design Qualified materials, Process reviews Inspection/Surveillance during production Stage clearances 3 tier non conformance management Batch testing for VOQ, Acceptance testing

The Quality Audit is given utmost importance Using appropriate equipments

Reference Standards

Monitoring of key characteristics

Maintenance of records & traceability

Verification through audits

Project Cost Management Cost Estimation and Control The costs of the resources needed to complete project activities including

infrastructure are worked out. More than 2000 line items with individual line item code for each launch

vehicle project are identified to define the clear cut responsibilities Methodologies adopted for cost control

Expenditure Control Methodologies Through Periodic management reviews Changes through department approved re-

appropriation procedures & approval cycles S-Curve analysis for schedule/cost

S Curve

Maximal use of available technologies, proven designs Planning for contingencies & cost escalations in the initial stage itself Standardization & stock piling standard parts in the beginning Design for manufacture (DFM) & concurrent engineering methodologies. Taking calculated risks - Realization of subsystems in numbers based on confidence

in design / analysis without waiting for test results Optimal hardware rotation plan for different test programme Optimal sequencing of number of tests & test durations ‘Make or buy’ decisions with focus on ‘comparative advantage’

GK Cryo(Russian)

Indigenous 7.5/ 9 ton Cryo engine (2008)

Indigenous 20 ton Cryo engine by 2010

Larger engines in future

One gigantic leap may lead to failure

Feasible size jumps

Initial level

Time

Lear

ning

leve

l Adopt available technologies or near term

technologies Step by step approach for new technology

development. Manageable learning steps. Identification of key improvement packages

in terms of performance, reliability & cost & provide thrust for development

Identification of key strategic areas for indigenization – e.g. Cryogenic technology strategic materials

Managing TechnologyDevelopments

Change Management

Control of intersystem interfaces has been the majorresponsibility of the project team.

The evolution and changes in the design are continuouslymonitored and the impacts assessed.

Traceability of changes, decisions and inputs are utilised toassess the impacts of a new change.

Design changes and requirements are closely monitored duringdevelopment and changes are meticulously catalogued.

Dissemination of the information across the system teams aredone expeditiously using management information tools.

Management of changes is given high priority to ensure thesuccess of operational launches.

• Launch vehicle• Space craft• Propellant servicing / Safety• Tracking & ground station• Logistics

Integrated Team Effort

• Mission Director• Vehicle Director• Satellite Director• Range Director

Campaign management

system

• Micro level scheduling on day to day & hourly basis

• Orchestrated effort for resource deployment

• More than 100 people involved per launch at different phases of time

Planning methodology

• Technical /progress reviews• Stage clearances• Authorization reviews for launch

Mission Readiness Review, Launch Authorization Board

Reviews

45 to 60 days activity at Sriharikota

Launch Campaign Management

Countdown

Source: Patrick Lencioni, The Five dysfunctions of a Team- A Leadership Fable; 2006

The Management Structure which is in vogue has been very effective .

The Programme Control Cycle and the Overall Management approach have been very efficient , leading to successful space launches.

Indian Space ia able to implement programmes with shoe string budget through effective Schedule and Cost controls.

Focus has always been on achievement of collective results.

Time tested review mechanisms have helped to achieve technical excellence.

Some of the key factors for the effective management of Indian Space Programme are: Engaging the teams into productive, constructive discussions around ideas and

issues Accepting and committing to decisions & plan of actions arrived at by the team. Each identified team member is accountable for delivery as per the decided

plans. Creative leadership, rewards and recognitions to the deserving team member/s

who make significant contributions.

Conclusions. (Success through Team effort)