Path to Mission Concept Review Michael J. Gazarik Deputy Director for Programs System Engineering Directorate NASA Langley Research Center October 23, 2008 Robert Reisse CLARREO Study Project Manger Contributors Michelle Garn, Paul Speth, Steve Hall

Outline Science and Engineering Interaction: Key to Mission Success Purpose of a Mission Concept Review (MCR) Required Products for a Successful MCR Schedule of Activities leading to MCR Integrated System Engineering Team What we need from the Science Community

CLARREO & DESDynI CLARREO & DESDynI are the next Decadal Survey missions to be addressed by the ESD Both missions are directed science missions with individual budget lines. They are managed out of the Earth Systematic Missions (ESM) Program Office located at GSFC The CLARREO mission is led by LaRC, with GSFC support Draft level 1 requirements & initial international partnership discussions, Fall 2008 Initial mission concepts, Spring 2009, Full technology readiness assessment, MCR October 2009 The DESDynI is led by JPL, with a significant GSFC contribution Mission configuration down select, Spring 2009 From Steve Volz, Associate Director, Flight Programs, NASA Earth Science Division

CALIPSO

NASA Mission LifeCycle Pre-Phase A: Concept Studies MCR: Mission Concept Review Phase A: Concept & Technology Development SRR: System Requirements Review Phase B: Preliminary Design PDR: Preliminary Design Review Technology Readiness Level should be at least 6 Phase C: Final Design CDR: Critical Design Review Phase D: Assembly, Integration & Test Phase E: Operations Phase F: Closeout

Mission Concept Review (MCR) Related to Key Decision Point (KDP A) – used by NASA to decide if mission should move into Phase A (Formulation) Our opportunity to advocate to Agency management and independent review board that mission is well formulated and defined – with rationale for key decisions

Roadmap to Mission Concept Review (MCR) Science Imperatives (Goals), Objectives, Questions Objective: Establish a climate benchmark for testing/validation of climate models Detailed Science Questions Level 1 Requirements From the objectives develop level 1 requirements. CLARREO shall measure xx with an accuracy of xx and spatial resolution of xx, etc MCR deliverable: Level 1 Requirements Document Mission Requirements & Operational Concept Develop mission requirements and a concept of operation for the mission from level 1 requirements. MCR deliverable: Preliminary Mission Requirements Document MCR deliverable: Preliminary Mission Operations Concept Document Iterate Mission Design Robust Baseline Mission Design. Include descope options, cost, & schedule MCR deliverable: Mission Concept Report, Schedule, Cost Analysis No Technology Maturity, Risk Assessment & Mitigation Assess technology maturity and develop a risk assessment & mitigation approach. MCR deliverable: Technology Maturity, Risk Assessment & Mitigation Document Initial concept complete? Yes Mission Concept Review (MCR) – Must pass this review to move from the Pre-Phase A phase (i.e., Concept Studies) into Phase A (i.e., Concept and Technology Development)

MCR Deliverables Level 1 Requirements Systems Drivers, strawman needed to start mission analysis Preliminary Mission Requirements Document Preliminary Mission Operations Concept Document System Driven & Programmatic, mission analysis needed to develop these Technology Maturity, Risk Assessment & Mitigation Mission Acquisition Approach Formulation Authorization Document (FAD) required to enter phase A Cost Analysis Internal and External to Project Work Breakdown Structure Schedule Full Project Lifecycle Schedule Detailed Phase A Schedule Other documents required Architecture & System Concept Report Mission Concept Report Institutional Capabilities V&V draft for risk reduction Draft Project Plan Systems Engineering Management Plan MCR Presentation Package Draft Configuration Management Plan

CLARREO Mission WBS WBS 1.0 WBS 2.0 WBS 3.0 WBS 4.0 WBS 5.0 WBS 6.0 Project Management WBS 2.0 Systems Engineering WBS 3.0 Safety & Mission Assurance WBS 4.0 Science WBS 5.0 Payload WBS 6.0 Spacecraft WBS 7.0 Mission Operations WBS 8.0 Launch Systems WBS 9.0 Ground Systems WBS 10.0 Systems Integration and Test WBS 11.0 Education & Public Outreach WBS 1.1 Project Mgmt WBS 2.1 Requiret’s Devel. & Mgmt. WBS 3.1 Safety & Mission Assurance Mgmt WBS 4.1 Science Mgmt WBS 5.1 Payload Mgmt WBS 6.1 Spacecraft Mgmt WBS 7.1 Mission Operations Mgmt WBS 8.1 Launch Mgmt WBS 9.1 Ground Systems Mgmt WBS 10.1 Payload to Spacecraft Integration WBS 4.2 Science Team WBS 1.2 Business Mgmt WBS 5.2 Payload System Engineering WBS 6.2 Spacecraft WBS 7.2 Spacecraft Operations WBS 8.2 Launch Vehicle WBS 9.2 Ground Stations WBS 10.2 Spacecraft to Launch Vehicle Integration WBS 2,2 Risk Mgmt WBS 3.2 System Safety WBS 6.2.1 Spacecraft SE WBS 4.3 Measure-ment Validation WBS 1.3 Project Planning & Schedule Mgmt WBS 7.3 Instrument Operations WBS 8.2.1 SE WBS 3.3 Reliability Engineering WBS 5.3 Payload WBS 9.12.1 Spacecraft Commanding WBS 2,3 Configura-tion Mgmt WBS 6.2.2 Structural WBS 8.2.2 Interfaces WBS 7.4 Data Processing WBS 3.4 EEE Parts Engineering WBS 4.4 Climate Modeling WBS 5.3.1 Solar Spectro-meter WBS 1.4 Project Reviews WBS 6.2.3 C&DH WBS 8.3 Launch Services WBS 9.2.2 Data Relay WBS 2.4 Trade Study Mgmt WBS 3.5 Quality Assurance Engineering WBS 1.5 Facilities WBS 4.5 Science Data Support WBS 5.3.2 Far IR Spectro-meter WBS 6.2.4 Power WBS 9.3 Communications WBS 6.2.4.1 Battery WBS 1.6 Travel WBS 2.5 Interfaces WBS 9.4 Ops Centers WBS 3.6 Materials & Processes Assurance WBS 4.6 Operational Support WBS 5.3.3 GPS Instrument WBS 6.2.4.2 Solar Arrays WBS 2,6 Contamination Control WBS 3.7 Contamina-tion Control Assurance WBS 6.2.4.3 Charging & Distribution WBS 4.7 Instrument Modeling WBS 5.3.4 IR Spectro-meter WBS 6.2.5 Thermal WBS 2.7 Materials & Processes WBS 3.8 Software IV&V WBS 6.2.6 Communications WBS 6.2.9 Pyro/ Release WBS 6.2.7 Attitude Control, etc. WBS 3.9 Mission Operations Assurance WBS 6.2.7.1 Attitude Control WBS 6.2.8 Interfaces WBS 6.2.7.2 Propulsion

CLARREO Systems Engineering Chart Project Systems Engineer Michelle Garn Consultant John Rogers SE Deliverables Management Rick Walker Flight Systems Integration Craig Jones Mission Design & Analysis Paul Speth Operational Concepts Steve Hall Payload Interface Management Dave Johnson Requirements Management Definition, flow down, tracking Requirement mgt tool Level 1 Requirements Doc Mission Requirements Doc Configuration Management CM tool, processes, plan Schedule Development Project full life cycle Detailed phase A plan Science Trade Study Mgt Tracking current studies Identifying gaps Technical Resource Mgt Margins mgt Technology Readiness FAD SEMP Project Plan Mission Acquisition Report WBS V&V Monitor ICD Development & Control Launch Vehicle Interface Spacecraft Bus Interface Mission Ops Interface Ground Systems Interface Software Mission Concept Development Identifying trades Initial analysis (small team) Developing Engineering Data Request Matrix Developing Engineering Trade Matrix Cost Analysis Sub-systems being staffed Orbital Mechanics Thermal Comm & Data Optical Structural Mechanical Power Avionics Electronics Software S/C Interfaces Propulsion Requirements Instrument requirements Science baseline mission focused on inter-calibration Science baseline mission focused on benchmarking Demonstration mission Ground Systems Mission Operations Developing traceability between on-going trade studies and mission parameter requirements GPS RO Solar Reflected Spectrometer Near-IR to Mid-IR Spectrometer Mid-IR to Far-IR Spectrometer 11

Defining Engineering Space: Mission Trades Number of satellites and orbit selection Benchmark and/or inter-calibration Diurnal cycle and/or orbital overlap for inter-calibration Instrument redundancy Spacecraft pointing versus nadir only Spectral range and resolution Spatial and temporal sampling requirements Footprint size GPS requirements Validation approach (i.e., aircraft, other satellites, balloons, redundant instruments) Level of international partnering Scope of mission (i.e., demonstration versus operational mission)

Mission Trade Space Considerations Mission Lifetime Benchmark, Inter-calibration Or Hybrid Spacecraft Instrument Suite and Redundancy Diurnal Sampling or Orbital Overlap Pointing requirement responsibility Spacecraft Subsystem Redundancy Number of spacecraft On-orbit operation & duty cycle Spacecraft Operations & Mission Implementation Each variation of the top-level science implementation trades will flow into concurrent subsystem designs to characterize the overall trade space. Attitude Mode Stabilization Method Component Sizing CPU Throughput Data storage Instrument interfaces TLM/CMD Frequency TLM/CMD Ground Support Modulation/ Encoding Passive vs. Active Payload Thermal Interfaces Thermal Biasing Array structure Array articulation Cell and Battery Sizing Payload location / interfaces Boom complexity Meet thermal, viewing, and stiffness requirement Fuel system config Fuel and Engine trades Tank sizing for max prop load

Define Engineering Space Parallel Engineering Path Define engineering space while science studies are underway Utilize System Analysis Tools and Integrated Design Tools to efficiently study multiple mission concepts Engineering in parallel – develop concept and key trades to get cost by March 2009 Expect Level 1 Requirements by April 2009 – narrow the trade space Conduct traditional integrated design sessions to refine mission until MCR Generate cost and technical assessment of mission concepts to support results of science trade results expected in Spring 2009 Balance the equation Add cost, risk, and feasibility to discussions of science objectives Sampling discussion: cost of additional spacecraft and launch, launch vehicle options Solar and Infrared on same spacecraft: TRL assessment, mass, launch vehicle, cost Field of View: mass and cost impact of 13Km FOV vs. 100Km FOV, Crosstrack scanning: mass, power, cost, performance of scanner Instrument Redundancy: cost of additional instruments Baseline a mission concept with respect to NASA Standards and Expectations Certified Launch Vehicles Parametric and Grassroots cost estimation Develop descope options to baseline concept Close cooperation with Earth Science Systematic Mission Program Office Leverage lessons learned from SMAP and ICESAT-II Healthy tension

Fix Prelim Results Final Results

Integrated Systems Engineering Team Complex mission Climate is complex Multiple instruments: solar, infrared, far-infrared and GPS Not a process mission Strong tie to standards and metrology Realize Expertise in Climate Community Consider Options that Reduce Mission Risk Build a diverse and deep systems engineering team that encompasses instrumentation, on-ground calibration, on-orbit calibration, and level 1 processing With consideration that some of the instruments and key subsystems will be selected through competitive process

What We Need from Science Team What Engineering Team needs from Science team Need rationale for key mission drivers: Orbit determination – which orbit and how many? Instrumentation: Solar, infrared and GPS on same spacecraft? Field of view: zonal, regional, or global; facilitate attribution; facilitate validation; facilitate cross-calibration and benchmark Inter-calibration concept, radiance benchmark concept, or both? Crosstrack: nadir view only sufficient? Spectral resolution: not as much of a driver at this stage (assuming >0.5 cm-1) Detector noise performance: identify technology drivers & cyrocooler impact Level 1 Science requirements Incorporate: “Better is the evil of good enough” philosophy Aiming for 80% solution Ability to form to a consensus Willingness to compromise Recognition that continued debate will likely delay mission Do we have a team that is interested in the mission, even at the cost of their particular interest? Will issues be discussed with rationale tied to the mission science goals? Studies with a focused approach Answer a question that drives mission parameter