Subscribe to Ground System Architectures Workshop RSS Feed    

GSAW 2017 Evening Session

Session 12A: Special GSAW/SPIN/INCOSE-LA Evening Event

Leads: Julie White and Bruce Arnheim, The Aerospace Corporation

Topic:  The Interplay Between Test and Training for System Readiness

Organizations often acquire systems that depend on different elements working together, where at least one element has humans-in-the-loop. Testing for these systems needs to address both formal testing of the elements as they are intended to work together and the successful demonstration that the humans have been trained properly to use the system elements for their intended purpose.  Military systems have a long history of performing operationally realistic testing and a commitment to having the various users of those systems trained for the use of these systems in anticipated conditions.  The push for more cost effective acquisition brings up the notion that there may be an opportunity for some savings by examining the intersection of system testing with the final phases of training for ground system acquisitions.

Pre-launch mission operations rehearsals have long been identified primarily as a training activity.  For the past few years discussions with development programs about performing “like you fly” system tests have led to some assertions that mission operations rehearsals essentially cover “like you fly” test objectives, so there is little need for a separate set of system tests.  However, to the best of our knowledge, there has been very little codification of what needs to be in a mission operations rehearsal for training purposes and how that can be leveraged to include recognizable test objectives.  At last year’s GSAW, we began to identify essential features of mission operations rehearsals and key distinctions between rehearsals and operationally realistic system tests. This session will recap that work and then focus on the intersections between these two domains.

The group will expand on several topics, including, but not limited to:

  1. A common lexicon for “operationally realistic” system tests and mission rehearsals.
  2. Derivation and decomposition of system requirements that can and should drive developers to implement mission rehearsals, and those that drive developers to implement “operationally realistic” system tests as a part of their system test development/planning.
  3. Costs, Schedule Drivers, and Risks that may be incurred or minimized by developers and acquirers by synergistically planning operationally realistic system testing and mission rehearsals.


5:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. Introductory Presentation with 2016 Recap
6:00 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. Goals for Session Presentation
6:30 p.m. Break
6:45 p.m. – 8:15 p.m. Facilitated Discussion
8:15 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. Wrap Up and Way Forward

Biographies of Session Chairs:
Bruce Arnheim is currently the Aerospace Corporation’s Test and Evaluation lead to the US Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC). In that capacity, he is responsible for policies, practices, training and assisting SMC test programs with planning, executing and fielding space systems.

Julie White is the Director of the System Integration and Test Office in the Engineering and Technology Group of the Aerospace Corporation. She is responsible for establishing this office as the keeper of system integration methods, functional / performance / “like you fly” tests, and internal /external guidance for integration and test.

Session 12B: EGS Standards

Lead: Alan Unell, The Aerospace Corporation

Using well-known non-proprietary standards allows the acquirers of space system ground stations to select the best software and hardware at any given moment to support the hosted missions and not be locked into any particular contractor. Some techniques that may be valuable in such ground stations are service-oriented frameworks, cloud-based techniques, and the use of enterprise service buses for communication.

SMC/AD has been working with industry and FFRDCs over the past year to identify standards to use used in the Enterprise Ground Services (EGS) project.

This evening session seeks to provide insight to the community on the standards identified so far and to capture this community’s experience to help put in place the best possible open standards, hardware, and software choices to keep that doorway of future flexibility open.

Session 12C: NOAA/NESDIS Ground Enterprise Architecture: Results, Lessons Learned, and Next Steps

Lead: Georg Contag, National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

NOAA’s National Environmental Satellite, Data, & Information Service (NESDIS) is dedicated to providing timely access to global environmental data from satellites & other sources to promote, protect, and enhance the Nation’s economy, security, environment, and quality of life.  Our vision is to be the world’s most comprehensive source and recognized authority for satellite products and environmental information.  NESDIS’ Office of Satellite Ground Services (OSGS) maintains two primary constellations of environmental satellites: geostationary and polar-orbiting.  OSGS’s mission is to sustain legacy ground systems, enable the next generation of satellite ground segments, and create & deploy a common Ground Enterprise Architecture for the future.

OSGS has developed the Enterprise Architecture (EA) for Ground Enterprise ARchitecture Services (GEARS) using The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF), Architecture Development Method (ADM). The baseline architecture effort will be completed in November 2016. The GEARS EA describes how the common services tie together the enterprise as well as the products and services that the enterprise delivers. This working group provides an overview of the end-to-end EA activities including EA planning, governance, and development. The working group also includes discussion on lessons learned and next steps in moving forward with the implementation of the GEARS EA, followed by a demo of the GEARS EA developed using MagicDraw, a popular tool for the development of EA.

Tentative schedule:

  • 5:30 PM to 5:40 PM: Introduction to OSGS and the GEARS Architecture
  • 5:40 PM to 5:55 PM: Concept of Operations
  • 5:55 PM to 6:10 PM: Business Architecture & Information Systems Architecture
  • 6:10 PM to 6:30 PM: Technology Architecture and Enterprise Requirements
  • 6:30 PM to 6:45 PM: Break
  • 6:45 PM to 7:00 PM: Transition and Sequencing Plan
  • 7:00 PM to 7:15 PM: EA Governance & Maturity
  • 7:15 PM to 7:45 PM: GEARS EA Demo using MagicDraw
  • 7:45 PM to 8:00 PM: Lessons Learned, Next Steps, Q&A.