Presentation on theme: "Systems Engineering: Its the Law! -1 INCOSE Space Coast Chapter April 2010 Systems Engineering: Its the Law! An Overview of the Defense Acquisition Management."— Presentation transcript:
Systems Engineering: Its the Law! -1 INCOSE Space Coast Chapter April 2010 Systems Engineering: Its the Law! An Overview of the Defense Acquisition Management System and Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) Geoff Draper Harris Government Communications Systems Division
Systems Engineering: Its the Law! -2 INCOSE Space Coast Chapter 7-Feb-14 Systems Engineering: Its the Law! Topics: Performance issues in Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs) –Summary of studies and reports Overview of the Defense Acquisition Management System –DoD policies and guidance –DODI Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (WSARA) Potential Implications to the Defense Industry References: P. L , Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of May 22, Defense Technical Memorandum, DTM Implementation of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of Dec DoDI , The Defense Acquisition Management System. Dec DoD Strategic Management Plan. July Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG), Chapter 4: Systems Engineering. https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=332951&lang=en-US Implementation of Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) of Mona Lush, OUSD (AT&L). Oct Acquisition%20Plenary/WSARA%20Implementation%20Lush.pdf DODI and WSARA Impacts on Early System s Engineering. Sharon Vannucci, OSD (AT&L) / DDRE. NDIA SE Conference, Oct 09. Weapon System Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) Mr. Nicholas Torelli, OUSD (AT&L) / DDRE. NDIA SE Div mtg, July %20Projects/August%2009%20Division%20Meeting/2009_08_06_SE- WSARA%20Brief%20to%20NDIA%20SED-final.pdf A Multi-Level Approach to Addressing SE Issues in Defense Programs. NDIA SE Division, June %20Projects/ %20Projects/
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July The Problem – Improving Program Performance through SE GAO T - Actions Needed to Overcome Long- standing Challenges with Weapon Systems Acquisition and Service Contract Management DODs major weapon systems programs continue to take longer to develop, cost more, and deliver fewer quantities and capabilities than originally planned. costs … of major defense acquisition programs increased 26 percent and development costs increased by 40 percent from first estimates programs … failed to deliver capabilities when promised often forcing warfighters to spend additional funds on maintaining legacy systems current programs experienced, on average, a 21-month delay in delivering initial capabilities to the warfighter NRC/USAF Study - Pre-Milestone A and Early-Phase Systems Engineering: A Retrospective Review and Benefits for Future Air Force Acquisition Attention to a few critical systems engineering processes and functions particularly during preparation for Milestones A and B is essential… …critically dependent on having experienced systems engineers with adequate knowledge of the domain… Decisions made prior to Milestone A should be supported by a rigorous systems analysis and systems engineering process involving teams of users, acquirers, and industry representatives. Numerous studies and reports document program performance issues and the role of effective systems engineering
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July Addressing SE Issues - Key Studies and Reports Study / ReportSummary Issues / Findings Pre-Milestone A and Early- Phase Systems Engineering [report] (NRC/USAF study)report Inexperienced leadership External interface complexity System complexity Incomplete/unstable reqts at MS B Reliance on immature technology Reliance on large amts of new SW NDIA Top 5 SE Issues (2006) [report, briefing]reportbriefing Inconsistent SE practices Insufficient SE early in life cycle Lack SE resources (qty, quality) Requirements not well-defined and managed Inadequate SE tools/environments NDIA Top SW Issues (2006) [report, briefing]reportbriefing SE decisions without SW involvement Ineffective SW life cycle plans Lack SW resources (qty, quality) SW verification: costly, ineffective Requirements impact on SW SW assurance (predictable, secure) COTS/NDI impacts Systemic Root Cause Analysis (SRCA) (2008) (publication 2009, pending) Unrealistic acq. strategies and plans Milestone decision gates, criteria Staffing shortfalls (quantity, skills, experience) Systems Engineering of Tactical Air Launched Systems: An Industry Examination (2008) [briefing]briefing (Air Armament Center, NDIA Gulf Coast Chapter) Incomplete design-to requirements Requirements creep, not stable Unplanned reqts verification effort Unplanned performance/design tests Configuration variation issues Component qualification test Weapon level integration tests Weapon level qualification tests Weapon flight testing Redesign for producibility/cost Field reliability, sustainability House Armed Services Panel on Defense Acq. Reform (final report, March 2010)final report Manage performance of acq. system Lacking good reqts process (JCIDS) Ad hoc acquisition of services Develop/incentivize acq. workforce Ineffective financial mgmt system Protect the industrial base (all sizes) Responsiveness of core acq system Details
5 Systemic Issues of Big A Acquisition Small a Acquisition Big A Acquisition* Resources (PPBE) Defense Acquisition System (DAS) Requirements (JCIDS) Synchronize JCIDS, DAS, and PPBE to deliver capabilities to Warfighters. Funding instability Insufficient resource trade space Budget not properly phased/magnitude to support planned development Immature technologies Inadequate systems engineering Inadequate requirements flow-down/ traceability/ decomposition Insufficient schedule trade space Inadequate implementation of Earned Value Management System Lack of time and assets for testing Lack of JROC-validated requirements document for basic program (ORD, CDD, CPD) Inadequate requirements for basic program and any increments Critical dependence on external programs with developmental issues Lack of inter- and intra-departmental stakeholder coordination and support Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (CJCSI-3170) Program, Planning, Budgeting, and Execution (DoD-7000, FMRs) Defense Acquisition System (DoDI-5000) *Systemic Issues of Nunn-McCurdy Class of 2007 Programs
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July Summary of Key SE Initiatives and Reports 2003 NDIA Top 5 SE Issues [1/03] DODI [5/03] NRC/USAF Study: Pre-MS A and Early SE [1/08] DODI updates [12/08] Systemic Root Cause Analysis (SRCA) [draft] PL (WSARA) [5/09] DTM Implementation of WSARA [12/09] Defense Acq Guide (DAG); Chap 4: SE [7/06] OSD policy, guidance, reviews: SEP; IMS; training; risk mgmt; PSRs NDIA Top SE Issues [7/06] NDIA Top SW Issues [9/06] 2010 QDR [2/10] House Armed Services Committee report [3/10] OSD WSARA report to Congress [3/10] Common program issues: -Poor program planning-Unrealistic estimates -Unstable requirements-Immature technology -Not following SE processes-Insufficient SE expertise -Ineffective reviews-Poor system reliability There is no shortage of sources confirming we have issues – How do government and industry collaborate to act upon solutions? NDIA Reports DoD policy and actions Other (Congress, studies, reviews) Other sources: Program Support Reviews (PSRs) Nunn-McCurdy breaches Congressional oversight Defense Science Board Other studies, reviews, reports
7 Chief among institutional challenges facing the Department is acquisition. Secretary of Defense Direction
8 The key to successful acquisition programs is getting things right from the start with sound systems engineering, cost estimating, and developmental testing early in the program cycle. The bill that we are introducing today will require the Department of Defense to take the steps needed to put major defense acquisition programs on a sound footing from the outset. If these changes are successfully implemented, they should help our acquisition programs avoid future cost overruns, schedule delays, and performance problems. – Senator Carl Levin, Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee The Weapon System Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 is an important step in efforts to reform the defense acquisition process. This legislation is needed to focus acquisition and procurement on emphasizing systems engineering; more effective upfront planning and management of technology risk; and growing the acquisition workforce to meet program objectives. – Senator John McCain, Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services Committee Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July P. L : Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) – May 2009 Key Elements of Legislation: Organizational Establishes Directorates for SE and DT&E as principal advisors Joint tracking of component and MDAP progress against plans and measurable criteria with annual reporting to Congress Independent cost estimation and cost analysis (Director, CAPE) Provide adequate trained staff for SE and development planning Conduct MDAP performance assessments and root cause analysis Role of SE across program lifecycle Developmental planning, lifecycle management, sustainability Ensure reliability, availability, maintainability (RAM) Mandates Measurable performance criteria in SE/DT&E plans Competitive prototypes for MDAPs; prime make/buy analyses System PDR before MS B, with formal MDA assessment Assessment of technical maturity and integration risk of critical technologies during Technology Development (TD) Technical and cost oversight Independent estimates, Problem Assessment Root Cause Analysis Technical analysis of cost/schedule breaches; presumed termination 7-Feb-147-Feb-147-Feb-14
Systems Engineering: Its the Law! -10 Engineering Week Feb-14
11 Competitive Prototyping Production & Deployment MS CMS B FRP DR CPD CDD Operations & Support MS A PDR PCDRA Technology Development Materiel Solution Analysis Key Acquisition Business Process Changes Engineering & Manufacturing Development Enhanced Emphasis on: Technology Maturity Systems Engineering Integrated Testing and Test Planning Manufacturing and Producibility Logistics and Sustainment Planning Re-structured EMD Phase Effective Contracting via Pre-Award Peer Reviews Increased Emphasis on Milestone A Mandatory for MDAPs with Technology Development Programs Mandatory for MDAPs with Technology Development Programs Likely for Most Programs Preliminary Design Review (PDR) before Milestone B to Enhance Understanding of Derived Requirements and Improve Cost Estimation When PDR is Conducted after Milestone B an MDA Post-PDR Assessment is Required PDR P-PDRA Materiel Development Decision – Mandatory Process Entry Point Post-Critical Design Review Assessment – A Mandatory Decision Point to Review Progress Configuration Steering Boards Established to Stabilize Requirements ICD MDD Competitive Prototyping X X
Systems Engineering: Its the Law! -12 INCOSE Space Coast Chapter 7-Feb-14
Systems Engineering: Its the Law! -13 INCOSE Space Coast Chapter 7-Feb-14
DoD DSS, vg 14 Version 1.1, Technology and Manufacturing Readiness Materiel Solution Analysis Engineering & Manufacturing Development PRODUCTION & DEPLOYMENT BCA OPERATIONS & SUPPORT Materiel Development Decision Post CDR Assessment FRP Decision Review TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT Analytical/ Experimental Critical Function/ Characteristi c Proof of Concept Component And/or Breadboard Validation In a Laboratory Environment System Prototype Demonstrate d In an Operational Environment Actual System Completed Qualified Through Test and Demonstratio n Actual System Mission Proven Through Successful Operations Capability to Produce Systems, Subsystems Or Components in a Production Representative Environment Full Rate Production Demonstrated. Lean Production Practices In Place Low Rate Production Demonstrated. Capability In Place for FRP Pilot Line Capability Demonstrated. Ready for LRIP Cost Model Updated To System Level Unit Cost Reduction Efforts Underway Engineering Cost Model Validated FRP Unit Cost Goals Met LRIP Cost Goals Met Learning Curve Validated Section 2366b of Title 10, United States Code, requires certification that: the technology in the program has been demonstrated in a relevant environment to enter Milestone B. [TRL 6] Technology Readiness Levels Defense Acquisition Guidebook para Manufacturing Readiness Levels Draft MRA Deskbook May 2008 IOCFOC Capability to produce Technology In Lab Environment. Manufacturing Risks Identified Manufacturing Cost Drivers Identified Manufacturing Feasibility Assessed. Concepts defined/ developed TRLs 1-3 MRL 4MRL 7MRL 8MRL 9MRL 10 MRLs 1-3 TRL 4TRL 7TRL 8TRL 9 Component And/or Breadboard Validation In a Relevant Environment Cost Model Constructed System/ Subsystem Model or Prototype Demonstrate d In a Relevant Environment Capability to Produce System/ Subsystem Prototypes Detailed Cost Analysis Complete Capability to Produce Prototype Components MRL 5MRL 6 TRL 5TRL 6
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July DoD Strategic Management Plan (7/09) Key acquisition-related excerpts GoalsMeasuresKey Initiatives Improve acquisition processes and execution to support warfighter reqts # of months to IOCAcquire systems through evolutionary acquisition Increase use of fixed price contracts% of contracts at MS B that are FP % of contracts at MS C that are FP Milestone decision reviews Increase % of MDAPs initiated with low technical risk # of MDAPs initiated in GFY % of MDAPs with technologies demonstrated in a relevant environment (i.e., TRL 6) Competitive prototyping PDR before MS B Independent Technical Readiness Assessments (TRA) Assess programs as directed in WSARA % of Problem Assessment Root Cause Analysis (PARCA) offices % of programs assessed Root cause analysis Ensure supportability, maintainability and costs are considered in lifecycle % programs meeting DoD sustainment metrics Establish sustainment metrics reporting (availability, reliability, TOC) Implement recommended next-gen sustainment strategies Focus R&D to address warfighting requirements % of completing demonstration programs transitioned per year Track programs transitioning with CY Review RDT&E funding for transition Sponsor technology leadership strategy outreach to industry, academia # of 2-day dialogues with academia technology leaders Understand investment drivers and strategies to sustain tech leadership Right-shape and re-balance the acquisition workforce - goal to grow by 20,000 positions by FY2015 % certification positions filled (annual) Annual increase in end-strength # contractor work-yr equiv in-sourced Grow the acquisition workforce Achieve 10,000 acquisition positions through in-sourcing
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July Whats Next? Areas of emphasis: Defense Strategy -Defense objectives, emerging threats Rebalancing the Force -Counterinsurgency, counterterrorism, WMD, cyber -U.S. force structure: sizing, shaping, evolution Defense workforce -Supporting troops, deployment -Recruiting, retention, development Strengthening relationships -U.S. defense posture, interagency, abroad Reforming How We Do Business -Rapid acquisition, security, how we buy, exports -Strengthening the industrial base -Strategic approach to climate and energy Defense Risk Management Framework -Operational, force management, institutional, future challenges, strategic, military, political A U.S. force prepared to conduct a wide variety of missions under a range of different circumstances.
Systems Engineering: Its the Law! -17 INCOSE Space Coast Chapter Summary DODI and WSARA are changing the game –Early life cycle planning (SEP) –Adherence to effective SE practices –Independent cost estimates –Competitive prototyping –Managed technology risks (TRL) –Increased emphasis on reliability and supportability (RAM) –Congressional reporting and oversight –More fixed priced contracts and evolutionary acquisition likely –Revitalization of DoD SE and acquisition workforce Questions? –Geoff Draper
Systems Engineering: Its the Law! -18 INCOSE Space Coast Chapter April 2010 Backup 7-Feb-147-Feb-147-Feb-14
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July Addressing SE Issues – Key NDIA Task Groups and Milestones 2003 NDIA Top 5 SE Issues 2006 NDIA Top 5 SE Issues NDIA Top SW Issues Defense Software Strategy Summit 2007 SE Effectiveness Survey 2008 Systemic Root Cause Analysis (SRCA) [draft] Industrial Committee on Program Mgmt (ICPM) SE of Tactical Air Launched Systems (Gulf Coast Chapter) (Air Armament Center) 2009 Top SE/SW Issues Update (planned) Industrial Committee on SE (ICSE) (planned) Government Studies/Reports (GAO, NRC, DCMA, etc.) Reviews (QDR, etc.) Program Support Reviews (PSRs) Congressional oversight (Nunn-McCurdy, McCain-Levin, …) Working Groups Conferences Forums There is no shortage of sources confirming we have issues – How do government and industry collaborate to act upon solutions? Common program issues: -Poor program planning-Unrealistic estimates -Unstable requirements-Immature technology -Not following SE processes-Insufficient SE expertise -Ineffective reviews-Poor system reliability
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July NRC Study – Pre-MS A and Early-Phase SE FindingsRecommendations Attention to a few critical systems engineering processes and functions particularly during preparation for Milestones A and B is essential to ensuring that Air Force acquisition programs deliver products on time and on budget. Require that Milestones A and B be treated as critical milestones in every acquisition program and that … the Pre-Milestone A/B Checklist … be used to judge successful completion. The creation of a robust systems engineering process is critically dependent on having experienced systems engineers with adequate knowledge of the domain relevant to a contemplated program. Assess needs for officers and civilians in the systems engineering field and evaluate whether either internal training programs … or external organizations are able to produce the required quality and quantity of systems engineers and systems engineering skills. … The government, FFRDCs, and industry all have important roles to play throughout the acquisition life cycle.… Source selection for system development and demonstration should not be made until after the work associated with Milestones A and B is complete. Decisions made prior to Milestone A should be supported by a rigorous systems analysis and systems engineering process involving teams of users, acquirers, and industry representatives. The Air Force used to have a development planning organization that applied pre-Milestone A systems engineering processes to a number of successful programs, but that organization was allowed to lapse. A development planning function should be established in the military departments to coordinate the concept development and refinement phase of all acquisition programs to ensure that the capabilities … as a whole are considered and that unifying strategies such as … interoperability are addressed. Reference: Pre-Milestone A and Early-Phase Systems Engineering: A Retrospective Review and Benefits for Future Air Force Acquisition.
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July NDIA Top 5 SE Issues NDIA SE Division (July 2006) IssuesRecommendations 1. Key systems engineering practices known to be effective are not consistently applied across all phases of the program life cycle. Ensure institutionalization of effective SE practices into program planning and execution 2. Insufficient systems engineering is applied early in the program life cycle, compromising the foundation for initial requirements and architecture development. Integrate engineering planning within the acquisition life cycle to ensure adequate time and effort for SE early in the program life cycle 3. Requirements are not always well-managed, including the effective translation from capabilities statements into executable requirements to achieve successful acquisition programs Emphasize the application of SE practices and resources to the capability definition process to address warfighter needs and translation into executable programs. 4. The quantity and quality of systems engineering expertise is insufficient to meet the demands of the government and the defense industry. Grow SE expertise through training, career incentives, and broadening systems thinking into other disciplines. 5. Collaborative environments, including SE tools, are inadequate to effectively execute SE at the joint capability, system of systems (SoS), and system levels. Strengthen and clarify policy and guidance regarding use of collaborative environments, models, simulations, and other automated tools. Reference: NDIA Top 5 Systems Engineering Issues Report. July NDIA Systems Engineering Division. [report, briefing]reportbriefing Provides an update and status from a previous task group report conducted in 2003.
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July Reference: NDIA Top Software Engineering Issues Report. Sep NDIA Systems Engineering Division. [report, briefing]reportbriefing NDIA Top Software Issues NDIA SE Division (Sept 2006) IssuesRecommendations 1. The impact of requirements upon software is not consistently quantified and managed in development or sustainment. Enforce effective software requirements development and management practices, including assessment of change impacts, for both the acquirer and the supplier organizations. 2. Fundamental system engineering decisions are made without full participation of software engineering Institutionalize the integration and participation of software engineering in all system engineering activities. 3. Software life-cycle planning and management by acquirers and suppliers is ineffective. Establish a culture of quantitative planning and management, using proven processes with collaborative decision-making across the software life cycle. 4. The quantity and quality of software engineering expertise is insufficient to meet the demands of government and the defense industry. Collaborate on innovative strategies to staff to appropriate levels, and to attract, develop, and retain qualified talent to meet current and future software engineering needs in government and industry. 5. Traditional software verification techniques are costly and ineffective for dealing with the scale and complexity of modern systems. Study current software verification practices in industry, and develop guidance and training to improve effectiveness in assuring product quality across the life cycle. 6. There is a failure to assure correct, predictable, safe, secure execution of complex software in distributed environments. Collaborate with industry to develop approaches, standards, and tools addressing system assurance issues throughout the acquisition life cycle and supply chain. 7. Inadequate attention is given to total lifecycle issues for COTS/NDI impacts on lifecycle cost and risk. Improve and expand guidelines for addressing total lifecycle COTS/NDI issues.
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July SRCA workshops and task group Based on PSR findings (44 programs) Tagged to core/systemic root causes Recommendation Area Problem StatementIndustry Actions* Implement Achievable Acquisition Strategy and Planning Acquisition strategies and plans are incomplete, ineffective and unrealistic, resulting in unachievable program expectations Require the government, prior to RFP release, to provide industry with govt. expectations and common understanding for IMP/IMS/risk management/business rhythms Enhance Gate Review Process Lack of timely process and adequately defined and enforceable criteria to assess program maturity at milestones and linkage to technical reviews Define criteria for trigger conditions Enhance Staff Capabilities Staffing shortfalls (numbers, skills, and experience) lead to adverse acquisition consequences specifically in the areas of requirements, planning, execution and expectations Develop and validate a representative staffing model for DoD based on industry that can be applied to the govt. given the current OSD acquisition guidance Develop a workload analysis to estimate the numbers and expertise needed in the acquisition workforce Broaden expertise to enhance cross-functional and domain knowledge and skills 95 preliminary recommendations 48 systemic issues 3 Recommendation Areas * Reference SRCA briefing for additional details and recommended government actions. Systemic Root Cause Analysis (SRCA) - Conducted , publication pending
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July Reference: Systems Engineering of Tactical Air-Launched Weapons: An Industry Examination. Air Armament Symposium, [briefing]briefing SE of Tactical Air Launched Weapons NDIA Gulf Coast Chapter (2008) SE DeficienciesRoot Causes Program Structure and Control Insufficient Maturity Of Design At Critical Decision Points Insufficient Testing And Analysis Planned To Achieve Maturity Late Integration Of Production Critical Processes And Controls Program Funding Profiles Not Structured For Improved Practices Requirements And Verification Lack Of Service Use Profile Leaves Interpretive Requirements Insufficient Mapping Of Requirements To Design Ineffective Maturation And Verification Planning Design Best PracticesInadequate Design Analysis - Fault Tree Analysis On All Subsystems During Design - Single Point Failure Analysis During Design Inadequate Maturation Analysis And Testing - COTS Integration - Design Margin And Sensitivity Development - Critical Manufacture And Assembly Process ID / Control Use Of Production Representative Configuration For Verification Risk Identification And Management Inadequate Relationship To Knowledge Of Design Supply Chain PracticesInconsistent Approaches To Design Characterization
(Version 1.0) Delete this box (from the slide master) after creating all of your slides. Stay inside this safe area for correct display. Addressing SE Issues in the Defense Industry July A Survey of Systems Engineering Effectiveness (2007) Joint NDIA/SEI survey of 46 programs correlating the effectiveness of SE processes with program performance. SE processes most strongly correlated with better program performance: Architecture Trade Studies Technical Solution IPT Capability Requirements Development and Management Report: documents/08.reports/08sr034.html Projects with better Systems Engineering Capabilities deliver better Project Performance (cost, schedule, functionality)
27 Materiel Solution Analysis Engineering and Manufacturing Development Production & Deployment Systems Acquisition FR5P Decision Review LRIP/IOT&E Post-CDR Assessment Technology Development (Program Initiation) Materiel Development Decision Pre-Systems Acquisition Operations & Support Sustainment ABC Warfighter and Sustainment Organization Perspective Defense Acquisition System Weighted Expenditures IOC Technology Development Engineering and Manufacturing Development Production & Deployment Systems Acquisition Operations & Support Sustainment FRP Decision Review FOC Post-CDR Assessment Pre-Systems Acquisition Materiel Solution Analysis Materiel Development Decision B A C Program Initiation LRIP/IOT&E DoDI Perspective 20-35% 65-80% 30+ YEARS Nominal Life Cycle Cost Distribution