Experimentation of Complex, Adaptive Aerospace Mission Capabilities - An International Code of Best Practice for T&E & Experimentation – Spousal Family of Systems Parable Wing Commander Malcolm G. Tutty MEng, CPEng, FRAe. S, FIE(Aust) Uni. SA DASI Ph. D Candidate / HQSRG SO 1 TC – Air malcolm. tutty@defence. gov. au / www. maltutty. com – Use visitor / Maven 1 Si ego Certiorem Faciam, Mihi Tu Delendus Eris – the Greek Goddess of Chaos! Homer
The FICS & ‘FOC Effectors’ FICS – Fundamental Inputs to Capability FOC Effectors - Fundamental Outputs of Capability Driven by OCDs & Conops Results expected of the Conops. . . SIPOC Critical Operational/Technical Issues… Measures Of Effectiveness Measures Of Performance IV&V • Personnel • Organisation • Collective Training • Major Systems • Supplies • Facilities & Training Areas • Command & Management • User perspectives at all levels (Sqn/Wing/Group/HQs) need to be identified and argued for. . . Rate of Effort Preparedness – both readiness & sustainment Interoperability with other So. S? Question/Observation: How many Conops do you have/need, really? SETE 2011 Tutty Unclassified 2
Technology / Systems Readiness Levels 1 Basic principle observed and reported. Studies or initial investigations undertaken. 2 Technology concept and/or application formulated. Potential applications have been identified. 3 Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof of concept. R&D has been initiated, work towards validating the concept done. 4 Component and/or breadboard validation in lab environment. The basic elements of the system/ product have been integrated to show they will work. 5 Components and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment. A higher fidelity validation of the system/ product in a realistic environment. 6 System/sub-system model or prototype demonstration in a relevant and or realistic environment. 7 System prototype demonstration in operational environment. Prototype demonstrated. System prototype demonstration in operational environment ‘Productionisation’ can commence. 8 Actual system completed and mission qualified through test and demonstration. Actual system/ product has been successfully tested/ qualified. 9 Actual system proven through successful mission operations. Actual system/ product has been successfully fielded. SETE 2011 Tutty Unclassified 3
Complex Capability Management Model - Lust to Dust Methodology CAPABILITY IDENTIFIED CAPABILITY DEFINITION-ACQUISITION CONOPS / OCD REQT DEFN VEHICLE & SYSTEMS SPO(s) ACQN & SYST ENG (Acft-Msn Cap – EDP / Sim Survey) 0 INTRODUCTION INTO SERVICE CAPMGR ORD MET? Y/N 2 EXPERIMENT’N CAPABILITY MAINTAINED INTRO INTO SERVICE CONOPS REQT ACHIEVED & MAINTAINED 9 P W D 10 Follow-on OT&E(s) 1 7 Developmental T&E 3 ONGOING IN-SERVICE Tactics, Techniques & Procedures EXPERIMENTATION Qualification T&E 4 8 Acceptance T&E 5 Initial OT&E 6 LUST WOMB FISCAL REALITY! CLEARANCE REALITY! SETE 2011 Tutty CERTIFICATION Unclassified ADOLESCENCE MATURITY TOMB DUST 4
Proposed Case Studies • F-111 – AGM-142 Demo and DMO win/fail/win • P-3 MU 90 Light Weight Torpedo fail • P-3 EO/IR SSHD & TCDL win/win • Classic Hornet - JDAMER fail/win • Classic JDAM/JDAMER/JSOW wins • Tiger ARH AGM-114 Hellfire wins • Joint Fires (JTAC) and Danger Close impact wins and future criticality • Develop Spousal Fo. S Capability SETE 2011 Tutty Unclassified 5
Spousal Capability – a Fo. S parable! • The power to achieve a desired operational effect in a nominated environment, within a specified time, and to sustain that effect for a designated period. • Conops: To see, experience & change the world for the better (world peace / hunger / control (Pinky) solved) with a friend and lover until Death (Planned Withdrawal Date) with at least 2. 6 children & with an online availability of daily missions … FICS – Fundamental Inputs to Capability - Driven by Conops, of course! a. FOCS - Fundamental Outputs of Capability The Conops in User perspective. . . Personnel: sensuous & sultry wife & fun kids, Scenarios: ok be realistic now wider families. SIPOC: . . . b. Organisation: wife & family, decentralised Ro. E: key – average loving/sex / daily / weekly / parents. monthly / yearly for some SEs? c. Collective training: marriage, schools, Uni, entertainment, Swingers Club ? ? . Preparedness: readiness & sustainability? d. Major Systems: Home Ent, Cars, Computer COI/CTIs: could be interesting to get agreement Avatar LVC Sim, Guns, power, . . . on these… e. Supplies: Alcohol, Food Markets, Financial, MOE: Ops suitability & Effectiveness!, World contraception. . . Peace or World Hunger solved, kids in Uni/TAFE, f. Facilities and Training Areas: House, Bar, Govt stable Pop/social/economic betterment holiday home/caravan, shooting range. g. Support: social / financial / ETSA, Gas, water. MOP: Min 2 kids Max 4. . . Other Perf measures h. Command Management: Comms IV&V – should be interesting! essential (so I’m told), others? Interoperability with other So. S: hmm… SETE 2010 Tutty Unclassified 6
CAPABILITY IDENTIFIED CAPABILITY DEFINITION - ACQUISITION INTRODUCTION INTO SERVICE OUTCOME Female – Male configurations that meet operational suitability, effectiveness and preparedness criteria! Girls The Right ‘Capabilities’ Roa d ma p Boys CAPABILITY MAINTAINED To see, experience & change the world for the better (world peace/hunger/control (Pinky) solved) with a friend and lover until Death (the Planned Withdrawal Date) with at least 2. 6 children & with an online availability of daily missions … Traditionally seen as a System/So. S -> Fo. S, obviously LUST WOMB FISCAL REALITIES! CLEARANCE REALITIES! CERTIFICATION ADOLESCENCE TOMB DUST
Spousal Capability – a Fo. S parable! 2015 GOALS 2030 GOALS 2060 GOALS 2045 GOALS 2075 GOALS ? Fo. S - to achieve capability others are involved in the ‘mission’ – messy, complex, real ? Value of / How to experiment early with what you have – simulation & LVC, -> 2 nd Life / avatars ? Note that the Conops has more dimensions… Wife 1 Wife 2 Wife 3 Girlfriend 1 Girlfriend 2 Affairs! You Boyfriend 1 Husband 2 2000 2015 SCOPE/R&D/ORD . 1 /. 2 YOD DELIVERY 2030 2045 ACQUISITION - . 3 /. 4 A / IOT&E - . 5 /. 6 FOT&E / IOS - . 7 IN SERVICE - . 8 /. 9 2060 LINKS IOC 2075 Increment / Spiral / P 3 I PWD 2100
Spousal Capabilities - coming sometime soon… • Dear Tech Support, • I have upgraded from Boyfriend 5. 0 to Husband 1. 9 and I noticed a distinct slowdown in the overall system performance, particularly in the flower and jewellery applications, which operated flawlessly under Boyfriend 5. 0. • Husband 1. 9 uninstalled many other valuable programs, such as Romance 9. 5 and Personal Attention 6. 5, and then installed undesirable programs such as NEWS 5. 0, NOMONEY 3. 0 and FOOTBAL 4. 1, Conversation 8. 0 no longer runs, and Housecleaning 2. 6 simply crashes the system. • Please note that I have tried running Nagging 5. 3 to fix these problems, but to no avail. • What can I do? SETE 2011 Tutty Unclassified 9
IT Support’s Response • DEAR Madam, • First, keep in mind, Boyfriend 5. 0 is an Entertainment Package, while Husband 1. X is an operating system. Please enter command: ithoughtyoulovedme. Html and try to download Tears 6. 2 and do not forget to install the Guilt 3. 0 update. If that application works as designed, Husband 1. X should then automatically run the applications Jewellery 2. 0 and Flowers 3. 5. • However, overuse of the above application cause Husband 1. 0 to default to Silence 2. 5 or Beer 6. 1. Note that Beer 6. 1 is a very bad program that will download the Snoring Loudly Beta. • Whatever you do, DO NOT under any circumstances install Mother-In-Law 1. 0 (it runs a virus in the background that will eventually seize control of all your system resources) and DO NOT attempt to reinstall the Boyfriend 5. 0 program. These are unsupported applications and will crash Husband 1. 9. • In summary, Husband 1. 9 is a great, mature program, but it does have limited memory and cannot learn new applications quickly. You might also consider buying additional software to improve memory and performance. We recommend: Cooking 3. 0 and Good Looks 7. 7. SETE 2011 Tutty Unclassified 10
Warning A Flight Test Armament Engineer is a person who passes as an expert on the basis of being able to turn out, with prolific fortitude, indefinite strings of incomprehensible mathematical figures, calculated with micromatic precision from vague assumptions which are based on debatable figures taken from inconclusive data, carried out through forms of problematic accuracy by persons of doubtful reliability and questionable mentality about things designed to kill or negate targets and/or nonallies, for the avowed purpose of annoying and confounding a hopelessly befuddled group of key personnel and who may never read the damned reports anyway! SETE 2011 Tutty Unclassified 11
CAS & Experimentation 3 Levels of Abstraction Complex Adaptive - Cross Capability Engineered Integrated Mission Environment -Seeking understanding and adaptability of Fo. S Emergent properties at Buyers Risk! Complex & adaptive - Family of Systems ØLots of unknowns and unknowables ØMission Level PICs & ‘ilities’ proven (sic) Ø “FOS” ‘ilities’ are rare but WITH “Mission Expectations” -> adaptability? ØSOA / OSA predominate – but not common ØContinuous measurement of MS MOE/MOP Complex Acquisitions of FOS üSynchronisation üProven Config/Role/Environment (CRE) for EACH So. S in the Fo. S ü“Rub Points” & hence all ‘Key Interfaces’ are identified V&V & Implications v. QA v. Structured Expirmentation/T&E of Systems for Joint End-Effects v. Exp/T&E of So. S boundaries Sellers Risk v. Exp/T&E with Fo. S continuously - Buyers Risk üPICS Critical Complicated - Bounded ‘Systems Engineered’ Capabilities - Pick and maintain a model with agreed standards to measure and control system, or any So. S emergent properties, at Sellers Risk Complicated Systems of Systems ØFew unknowns ØBounded ‘Things’ with controlled connectivity ØEngagement ‘ilities’ & PICs specified & known but no “prescriptive” Mission Level MOE / MOP ØUsers need Training / TTPs developed on the new and/or unique Tools Typical Complicated Acquisitions üMinimal coordination üConfig/Role/Environment (CRE) ü‘Isolated’ with few connections üSub-systems can be simply acquired V&V & Implications v. QA v. Structured Exp/T&E to verify agreed ‘ilities’, Training & TTPs v. So. S – essentially Sellers Risk üPICS Important Simple - ‘Traditional’ Engineered Systems - Mature COTS & MOTS ‘Heaven / Nirvana’ at Buyers Risk Straightforward ‘Simple’ Standalone Systems ØNo Unknowns and No Unknowables! ØWe’re buying something ‘other’ s working system ØA Collection of Managed Things (ie. 5 apples & 3 bananas) ØNo ilities needed ØNo dedicated training needed (ie known by Users) Ø‘Metaphysics rules’ & all characteristics ‘thought to Simple Acquisitions üRare coordination V&V & Implications v. QA checks ’things’ from Contractor üCIOG & DSG space critical in Aust v. Buyer must be aware of any/all cross dependencies with COTS/MOTS support and updates üWhat are PICS? v. Systems – essentially Buyers Risk üBuy each ‘thing’ OTS Unclassified 12
JAIME CODEx ‘Tests’ TABLE 1. JAIME CODEx FRAMEWORK / TAXONOMY Draft v 0. 7 Sphere of Influence of Actor / Problems with compatibility are usually all about the interface(s) / / Co. BP has to be evidence based and have a ‘whole of life’, learning view. . . 4 D: Veh, Sensor, C 2, Shooter, EW, Ranges. . . Time -> Physical – Form and Fit Lab / Virtual & Constructive M&S Analysis – 0. -. - Live System Gnd Test - 1. -. - Live System Flt Test - 2. -. - Live In-service Exercise, Trng, R&M 3. -. - Fit of ‘Form’ -. -. 1 011 110 (Pre. Prod) 111 (101) 211 flexible struct on acft and store? 311 Loads -. -. 1 Scientific / Engineering / Technical Discipline 021 120(141) 121(131) 220(252) * 221 (200) 321 122 (152) 123 (152) 124 (154) 125 (153) 126 (155) 222 (221) 223 (222) 225 224 EW 226 (223) 127 227 327 130 (143) 131(142) 132 (120) 232 (210) 331 332 333 Sub-Discipline -. 1. - Physical – ‘Victim’ – Safety Structural & Environment -. 2. - Physical - ‘Victim’ – Safety Aerodynamics, Aeroelasticity, Captive Carriage, Flying /Handling Qualities & Aircraft Performance -. 3. - Physical ‘Victim’ – Safety Employment & Jettison -. 4. - SETE 2011 Tutty Vibrations -. -. 2 Aero-acoustic -. -. 3 EMC / EMI -. -. 4 HERO -. -. 5 Temperature -. -. 6 Noise (Aeroacoustics) -. -. 7 Aeroelasticity -. -. 1 Take-Off, Handling Qualities, (+ W&B) & Landing (+Carrier) -. -. 2 Perf’ and Drag -. -. 3 Endurance -. -. 4 Separation -. -. 1 Dispense -. -. 2 Gun Firing -. -. 3 Launch -. -. 4 Jettison -. -. 5 022 023 024 025 026 027 031 224 032 W&B (132) W&B 230 (251) * 231 (230 & 260) 033 133 (142 Update) 233 (240) ? ? 241 (271) (291 or 293? ) 242 (272) 243 (273) 244 (274) 245 (280) 323 324 325 326 234 vs 200 (253) * 140 (144) 141 (110) F’stream & Sep Coeff? 142 (162) 143 (161) 144 (144) 145 (144) 322 032 041 042 043 044 Unclassified 045 341 342 343 344 345 13
JAIME CODEx ‘Tests’ Information- Function – Comms – C 2 Intra. Networks -. -. 1 051 (Lab ? ) 151 (Acft) 251 351 052 152 (102) DT EW / EMC ? 352 153 DT 255 (292) OT 255 + (294) Function – Sensor Function, States, Modes of System Op/Delivery, Vehicle Level / -. -. 2 Role/Ballistics & OFP Function- Shooter Role Validation & Verification – In-range envelope Note needs to cover sensor, V&V C 2 and shooter. . . -. -. 3 ‘Source’ Mission Critical Rx & Tx ranges – 2 D / 3 D at Function – DE ? ? ? various security levels Other Mission ? ? ? -. 5. This is where most Range ? ? MOE/MOPs should come into play Ball 053 2 PGM 353 OT 0 PGMs 1 PGM 3 PGM 054 154 Y Y OT Y -1 061 161 261 361 -32 0632 1632 2632 3632 -33 0633 1633 N/A - -34 / Tacman 0634 1634 2634 3634 Msn Planning Tools 06 MPS ? 16 MPS ? DT & OT 256 ? 36 EBO Tools 06 EBO? 16 EBO? Operator – 1472 & NEO HF ? ? SOS -605 th SOS – 605 th ? FOS? FOS ? ? FTS ? ? RCS / Noise Signatures Cognitive – System Level Procedures V&V and Human Factors -. 6. - Social – ie pure So. S / focused on Fo. S & especially C 2 -. 7. - SETE 2011 Tutty Mission TBMCS. . . Unclassified 14
Скачать презентацию Experimentation of Complex Adaptive Aerospace Mission Capabilities —
57a1e542817869170d09f6d9c76122ea.ppt