Comments on: SASC Hearing Preview; Call to Boost Systems Engineering

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 00:33:38 +0000

Yep. “Oh, this is the second satellite you’ve done? Therefore it should be 2x as capable and 1/2 the price…”

By: Gnshpdude

Gnshpdude — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 22:15:52 +0000

A robust SE process is critical to any program as it lays out what the requirement is and how it will be verified. It is that simple. I have been on both sides of the fence as a costumer and contracter and I can tell you many of today aquaisition officers don’t understand a thing about requirements creep etc. They invariably end up wanting something for nothing.

By: scotty410

scotty410 — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:29:37 +0000

The old 4 step milestone system was the result of abuses and failures in the RDT&E, pre production and production process. It was wisely developed as a result of past acquisition snafus and the fact that many Program Managers felt their careers depended on getting advance funding and getting the program fielded, no matter what. So they often try to hide failed test results, while trying to fix things in the next phase of development…and sometimes it just doe not happen.

What was the name of the vertical take off and landing plane/helicoptor…

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:11:27 +0000

Navybrat: Also, in the early days of spaceflight, requirements creep was somewhat stifled by the fact that we didn’t KNOW what we COULD do. Now that we know what we can do, there’s always that tendency to ask for everything–plus a little bit more.

By: Navybrat111

Navybrat111 — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:45:36 +0000

the application of SE to concept development will have an adverse on the acquisition life cycle by causing additional reviews and endless quibbling over whether this concept plus this is better than this concept plus that. A better approach overall would be to fund the acquisition life cycle completely thru initial procurement, allowing managers and developers the freedom to produce a product which meets specifications. they will have to do this only will the funds available and not a slush fund that keeps getting refilled even when the product is bad. Of course, they will have to prove the product thru testing and if the system doesn’t work, then everyone gets penalized.Many of the original space programs worked because developers were given the freedom to freelance ideas and produce a low cost product. today, it will take about twice as much money to Appollo back on the Moon even though we have done it before because of the additional criteria put on the management team before the product gets off the ground. If you modify 5000 once again the system will become so clogged with reviews that it will 10 yrs to produce even the simplest of items.(As an example, try to engineer a dog whistle.)