august 2011 jsf brief

1FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY // REL TO USA, GBR MOD, ITA MOD, NLD MOD, TUR MND, CAN DND, AUS DOD, DNK MOD, and NOR MODDISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Systems Engineering Challenges Air Force Systems Engineering Conference

17 August 2011

C. Douglas EbersoleDirector of Engineering, F-35 Lightning II

Program

2DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Problem Statement

Identify systems engineering challenges to the execution of the F-35 program.

Identify means to mitigate negative impacts through effective systems engineering policy, practices and

people.


Outline

• Overview of F-35 Program• Systems Engineering Challenges/Mitigations• Workforce Management and Support• Final Thoughts


• Key Attributes:– Stealth– Integrated Avionics– A/G Munitions– Intraflight DL– Adv A/C Survivability

• General Features:– Single seat– Speed: 700 kts or 1.6M (630/1.6M STOVL)– Ceiling: 50,000 ft+– Engine: PW F135

• Sensors– Fully integrated open architecture system– A/G – A/A radar/SAR– Electro Optical A/G Targeting system– A/A IRST– Electronic Support Measures (ESM)– Short range EO spherical coverage

F-35 Characteristics

Three Variants: Max Commonality And Interoperability

Length: 51.4 ftWing Area: 460 ft2

Weight (Empty): 29,400 lbInternal Fuel: 18,200 lbRange: 600 + nm





CTOL(AF)

STOVL(BF)

CV(CF)


Derivatives and EnhancementsJSF SDD

1990 20351995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030ASTOVL

MRF

AX

JAST JSFCDP

LRIP

Full Rate Production

Performance Based Global Sustainment

ATA

NATF

System Development and Demonstration

Low Rate Initial Production

F-35 Program At Nexus of Planned Concurrency

F-35 PRECURSOR PROGRAMS:

Advanced Short Takeoff Vertical LandingMulti-Role FighterAdvanced Tactical Aircraft Naval Advanced Tactical FighterAdvanced AttackJoint Advanced Strike Technology / Concept Demonstration Phase

Eglin AFB ITC Operations

FMS


Systems Engineering “V” Pre-Milestone C

Trades

Trades

VerificationLinkage

ValidationLinkage

VerificationLinkage

VerificationLinkage

Integrated DT&E, LFT&E & EOAs Verify Performance

Compliance to Specs

Individual CIVerification

DT&E

Evolve CI FunctionalSpecs into Product

(Build to) Documentation& Verification Plan

System DT&E, OT&E, LFT&E

& OAs Verify System Functionality & Constraints

Compliance to Specs

Fabricate, Assemble,

CodeUpdate Constraints, &

Cost/Risk Drivers

Combined DT&E/OT&E/LFT&E

Demonstrate System toSpecified User Needs andEnvironmental Constraints

Develop System Functional Specs & Verification Plan toEvolve System Functional

Baseline

Evolve FunctionalPerformance Specs into

System Allocated Baseline

Interpret User Needs,

Refine SystemPerformance Specs &

Environmental Constraints



Trades

Trades

VerificationLinkage

ValidationLinkage

VerificationLinkage

VerificationLinkage


Compliance to Specs


DT&E





Compliance to Specs



Cost/Risk Drivers




Baseline






Challenge: Maintaining common air system level requirements across broad stakeholder base.Mitigation:JSF Executive Steering Board control of system level requirements.



Trades

Trades

VerificationLinkage

ValidationLinkage

VerificationLinkage

VerificationLinkage


Compliance to Specs


DT&E





Compliance to Specs



Cost/Risk Drivers




Baseline







Baseline

Interpret User Needs, Refine System

Performance Specs &Environmental Constraints

Challenge: Performance Based Acquisition broad definition of system level requirements.Mitigation:Definition of required functional attributes necessary via mission de-comp, use cases, active user engagement, other.

453 Shall Statements



Trades

Trades

VerificationLinkage

ValidationLinkage

VerificationLinkage

VerificationLinkage


Compliance to Specs


DT&E





Compliance to Specs



Cost/Risk Drivers




Baseline



Interpret User Needs, Refine System

Performance Specs &Environmental Constraints





Challenge:Government oversight of requirements of allocated baseline.Mitigation:Manage to risk. Taking active steps to recover control for identified risk areas.

Example: Helmet Mounted Display System3.2.1.1.1.3.7. The JSF Air System shall provide … and night vision target techniques, including visibility through aircraft structures to execute missions …

Gen II Helmet EODAS sensors HTS DMC-H Required specificity: Visual acuity as function of light conditions End to end system latency



Trades

Trades

VerificationLinkage

ValidationLinkage

VerificationLinkage

VerificationLinkage


Compliance to Specs


DT&E





Compliance to Specs



Cost/Risk Drivers




Baseline








Cost/Risk Drivers


DT&E

Challenge:Active management of program risk at lowest configuration item level.Mitigation:Access to program data artifacts, active TPM and risk management



Trades

Trades

VerificationLinkage

ValidationLinkage

VerificationLinkage

VerificationLinkage


Compliance to Specs


DT&E





Compliance to Specs



Cost/Risk Drivers




Baseline







Compliance to Specs



Compliance to Specs

Challenge:Concurrent development of multiple air system software builds. Drives close coordination across major system components (flight sciences, mission systems, ALIS, PHM, training systems). Stresses program resources. Mitigation:Broad investment in component and system level test and laboratory infrastructure. Tools to have program level sight picture of all components. Disciplined burndown of SDD success criteria.Example: F-35 Software Build Status

Success Criteria Burndown


F-35 Software Build-Up Status

As of 26 July 2011

REQSIT

SC

DEV

REQ

DEV

SIT

SC

On-board SW

Off-board SW

RequirementsREQ

System Integration & Test/ ReworkSITDevelopment Code &Unit TestDEV

Delivery (DD250/Production Readiness)DELSecurity Cert/Govt. AcceptanceSC

Complete

>=95% of Plan

90-95% of Plan

<90% of Plan

SW Phase for each

LRIP fleet release

Fill Level Denotes % CompleteColor Denotes Status to Plan

Software Phase Status against plan

REQ

SIT

SC

REQ

DEV

SIT

SC

REQSIT

SC

Legend Notes• On-board SW includes IPT: MS, VS, PHM Prime SW, Suppliers• Off-board SW includes IPT: OMS, ALIS, AIHM• Color codes based on IPT with lowest status against plan• Relative weighted across requirements, development, SI&T and

SW based on effort

REQ

DEV

SIT

Block 1A(Eglin Ready for Training)

Block 1B(Multi-Level Security,Full Block 1 Avionics)

Block 2A

Block 2B(SW Retrofit)

Block 3 Initial(Tech Refresh 2)

Block 3 Final(Full SDD war-fighting capability, SW Retrofit)

Supplier Dev: 89% Act vs. 92% PlanPrime Dev: 15% Act vs. 36% Plan

AIHM Dev: 39% vs. 47% PlanALIS Dev: 88% vs. 100% Plan

MS Integration: 83% Act vs. 95% Plan

DEV

REQ

DEV

SIT

DEL

REQ

DEV

SIT

DEL

REQ

DEV

SIT

DEL

REQ

DEV

SIT

DEL

REQ

DEV

SIT

DEL

REQ

DEV

SIT

DEL

REQ

DEV

SIT

DEL

DEV

MS Integration: 5% Act vs. 26% Plan

SC

GLOC CTE projecting Aug Start vs May Plan


1175 SCs to Be closed

In 2016 and Beyond



Trades

Trades

VerificationLinkage

ValidationLinkage

VerificationLinkage

VerificationLinkage


Compliance to Specs


DT&E





Compliance to Specs



Cost/Risk Drivers




Baseline







Demonstrate System toSpecified User Needs andEnvironmental ConstraintsChallenge:

LRIP production aircraft delivery concurrent to continued SDD execution. Mitigation:Clear definition of incremental system level performance to be delivered with each LRIP lot to execute user mission needs. Example: Block development plan.


Block Plan: Capabilities / Transition Plan

Includes Proposed “Accelerated” Block 2B Weapons (AF & CF)

NOTE: Block 2B and 3C Fleet Release timing under development (SDD Replan)

LRIP 1 LRIP2 LRIP3 LRIP4 LRIP5 LRIP6 LRIP 7 LRIP 8 +

1B 3C (3F)

Mission Capabilities

Initial TrainingMulti-Level Security

Full Warfighting / Export

Multi-ship Fusion, ORD Compliant

Altitude 40k 50kAirspeed 550 / 450 / -- 700 / 630 / 700

Mach 0.9 / 0.9 / -- 1.6AOA 18 50

G 5.5 / 4.5 / -- 9 / 7 / 7.5 2 AIM-120-C5/7 (A/B/C)2 JDAM (GBU-31) (A/C)

2 JDAM GBU-32 (B)2 GBU-12 Internal (A/B)

* Carriage/Employment Envelope Limited

2B / 3IFleet Release

40K

1.6 / 1.2 / 1.250

7 / 5.5 / 7.5

0.9 / 0.9 / 0.918

Initial Warfighting Basic CAS/Interdiction,

Initial A/A

Ready for TrainingBasic

Nav/Comm/Sensors

40k

0.9 / .8 / --18

5.0 / 4.5 / --

450 / 400 / -- 550 / 450 / 450 700 / 550 / 550

Full SDD WeaponsNo WeaponsWeapons

Enhanced TrainingBasic Mission SystemsInitial MADL, Link 16

40k

1A 2A

5.5 / 4.5 / 4.5

No WeaponsNo Weapons


A Bit About Personnel

CSAF Vector: "Improved acquisition performance begins with experienced professionals, using the right analytic tools and processes, all supported by transparent decision-making".

JSF DoE Challenge: Transition Engineering Community of Practice from one that “Reviews and Reports” to one

that “Engages and Influences”

• Current F-35 Engineering Workforce– 765 Engineers across numerous work sites representing 83 specific competencies

• Feb-Jun 11 we completed 100% audit of all spaces/75% of faces– Resulted in need to re-align workforce competencies and re-assign personnel– Committed to stand up FTW JPO engineering presence– Identified the requisite data and artifacts required for staff to meet expectations

• Transition of workforce to be accomplished throughout FY12


Closing Thoughts

• VADM Venlet’s commitment to program execution coming out of the N-M re-certification.– Realism in planning– Transparency in all we do– Program grounded in disciplined systems engineering

• It’s not hard … it’s not free … but it requires discipline and commitment

• For most—simply follow your SEP– Systems Engineering Technical Reviews critical

• Enables “gated” approach to program execution


Effective Use of SETR as Program Gates

august 2011 jsf brief

Documents

system allocated baseline

systems engineering vpre

integrated dt

combined dt

code update constraints

system dt

system level requirements

update constraints