Mission Overview THEMIS Mission Overview Peter R Harvey

Mission Overview THEMIS Mission Overview Peter R. Harvey Project Manager Space Sciences Laboratory University of California, Berkeley THEMIS SRR MO-1 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Agenda AGENDA Primary Goals Mission Parameters Organizations Personnel WBS Processes Concept Schedule Cost THEMIS SRR MO-2 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

SRR Goals SRR GOALS Validate the Mission Requirements Documentation Comprehensive : Do the requirements span the breadth of the effort? Complete: Are there omissions in the requirements? Correct: Are the requirements stated correctly? Consistent: Do the requirements conflict anywhere? Coordinated: Are the requirements allocated to subsystems properly? Verifiable: Are the requirements testable? Necessary: Are any requirements redundant or unnecessary? Promote Project-Wide Understanding of the Requirements Understood: Do subsystems understand their requirements ? Achievable: Are the subsystem requirements practical? THEMIS SRR MO-3 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Mission Overview Mission Parameters – Launch Vehicle: Injection: Date: Delta II, Eastern Range 1. 1 x 12 Re, 9 degrees inclination August 2006 (+/- 2 months) – Space Segment Spacecraft: Orbit Period(s): Orientation: 5 Spinning probes with fuel for orbit/attitude adjust 1, 2 and 4 days Ecliptic normal – Ground Segment Observatories: 20 Northern stations for Imaging and Mag Field – Operations Phases: Lifetime: THEMIS SRR L&EO (2 mo), Tail Science, Flank Magnetopause, Dayside, Eclipse, Deorbit 2 years MO-4 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Programmatic Aspects Programmatic Overview – PI Mode PI Team Provides Space, Ground, Data Segments PI Team Provides Cost, Schedule, Performance Assurance PI Team Provides Education/Public Outreach – Cost and Schedule Caps Single Cost Cap for the Mission Launch no later than March 2007 – Performance Assurance GSFC-410 -MIDEX-001 C (Nov 28, 1997) GSFC-410 -MIDEX-003 A (June 25, 2002) GSFC-311 -INST-001 (Aug 1996) Ø Implementation Strategy Use Heritage Instrumentation Coordinate Common Buy Parts Keep Probe/Probe Carrier Simple and Robust THEMIS SRR MO-5 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Organization Explorers Office Mission Mgr U. C. Berkeley KSC Vassilis Angelopoulos, PI Peter Harvey, PM Mission Integ Mgr Swales Aerospace Mike Cully U. Colo/LASP Bob Ergun TU-BS Uli Auster CETP Bertrand de la Porte ESTEC Philippe Escoubet GSFC/GNCD Karen Richon IWF Werner Magnes THEMIS SRR UCLA Joe Means Univ of Calgary Eric Donovan Univ of Alberta J. Samson THEMIS Organization Chart Subcontracts/Agreements Phases BCD MO-6 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Organizations THEMIS SRR MO-7 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Key Personnel THEMIS SRR MO-8 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Processes Management Responsibilities Staffing and Facilities, Training and Certification Subcontract Generation and Tracking Schedule Generation and Tracking (*) Budget Generation and Tracking Cost. v. Schedule Compliance Risk Identification, Risk Tracking, Risk Actions (*) Descope Identification, Cost Evaluation, Descope Actions Trade Studies Identification, Evaluation, Change Implementation Action Item Generation, Distribution and Tracking Technical & Financial Report Generation * : Crucial Elements in a Constellation Project THEMIS SRR MO-9 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

WBS THEMIS Project 1. Management, Science, Systems Eng. 2. Space Segment Development 3. Ground Segment Development 1. 1 Management 2. 1 Instruments 3. 1 Mission Operations Center 4. 1 Mission Operations 1. 2 Science 2. 2 Spacecraft 3. 2 Science Operations Center 4. 2 Data Analysis 1. 3 Systems Engineering 4. Mission Ops & Data Analysis 5. Education & Public Outreach 3. 3 Ground Based Observatories THEMIS Work Breakdown Structure THEMIS SRR MO-10 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Processes Systems Engineering Responsibilities Requirements Identification and Formalization Design Coordination, Studies (FTA, FMEA, etc) Technical Review Coordination, Informal and Formal ICD Generation Configuration Control Verification Plan Development Design Compliance Operations Plan Development Action Item Management Weekly telecons on S/C bus, Instrumentation, Ground Systems Periodic On-site meetings * : Crucial Elements in a Constellation Project THEMIS SRR MO-11 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Processes Performance Assurance Responsibilities Assurance Requirements Identification Implementation Plan Subcontractor Assurance Plan Reviews System Safety Support Supplier On-Site Inspections of Facilities and Procedures Parts and Materials Research, Selection Parts Qualification, Procurement incl. Common Buy Program Verification Planning Inspections and Test Verifications Failure Report Management Weekly telecons on S/C bus, Instrumentation, Ground Systems Periodic On-site meetings * : Crucial Elements in a Constellation Project THEMIS SRR MO-12 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Processes Risk Management UCB/Swales Management Taking Lowest Risk Approach Overall – Assessments Generated by Knowledgeable Engineering – Tradeoffs Discussed with PI for Disposition Top Phase A Actions Taken to Retire Risk – Simplified Probe Carrier, Launch Sequence – Simplified Probe Maneuvering, Safing – Scheduled Early Testing to Detect Design Flaws – Dropped New Technology HCI and Micro-Gyro Top Phase B Trades – Changing Probe CPU from 80 C 196 to Coldfire (GSFC recommendation) – Developed a Possible Larger Tank Configuration – Switched from PDFE to Amptek design of SST electronics Ø Improved Margins and Performance and/or Lowered Risk THEMIS SRR MO-13 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Processes Likelihood Level Consequence Level Likelihood of Risk Occurrence 1 Extremely Remote 2 Unlikely 3 Possible 4 Likely 5 Highly Likely Technical Performance Impact Schedule Impact 1 Minimal or none 2 Some margin reduction Additional resources required to meet need date 3 Significant margin reduction Minor slip in need date 5 to 7% A few science objectives not met but mission science still valid overall 4 No margin remaining Major slip in key milestone 7 to 10% Some science objectives not met 5 Below requirement Unrecoverable Project delay >10% Most or all mission science objectives not met THEMIS SRR MO-14 Cost Impact Science/Mission Impact Minimal or none <5% Minimal or none Science objectives impacted or degraded, but science still valid UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Processes Risk Analysis 20 5 X 5 Risk Matrix THEMIS SRR MO-15 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Concept Essentials for Development & Operation of a Constellation – – Control Mass & Power Minimize Design Flaws Emphasize Automated Testing and Appropriate GSE Simple and Robust to Operate. • Leave Complexity on the Ground. • Minimize On-Orbit Computation (Similar to Lunar Prospector, ST-5) • Use Ground System Computation (Similar to FAST, HESSI) THEMIS SRR MO-16 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Concept Control of Mass & Power Prior Mission Performance Shows Good Compliance Margins Held by Management, Trended Monthly No Changes in Mass/Power since CSR Allocations Made to the Subsystem Level (inc Contingency) THEMIS SRR MO-17 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Concept Minimizing Design Flaws Good Communications Between Developers – Phase A Developments Used Telecom and Email – Phase B Will Expand Use of Face-to-face Engineering Model Tests – Plan Includes EM Probe & Instrumentation I/F Testing – Early Identification of Interface Issues – Early Benefit of Operations Experience & Data Flow Tests Parts Control – Common-Buy Parts Program – Minimize Number of Different Part Types to Limit ALERT Risk – Maximize Confidence Level in the Parts We Have THEMIS SRR MO-18 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Schedule Development and Maintenance Bottom Up Development • • • Followed Concept Development Developers Generated Detailed Schedules Each Schedule has >30 -40 Items Iterated to Understand Schedules Did Not Optimize Across Schedules Generated a Final Master Schedule Maintenance • • • Developers Report to Sub-schedule Monthly Project Scheduler Updates Master Provides Status to Project Management Non-Compliances Get Management Attention Workarounds include Work Reduction, Addition Support, Re. Organization THEMIS SRR MO-19 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Schedule Key Features Instrument Development • • EM Instrument I/F Testing with EM Probe I/F Integrate Instrument Complement at UCB Prior to S/C Integration Instrument Complement F 1 Tested First Followed by Pairs Added Some Facilities for Qualifying Instruments in Parallel Spacecraft Development • Integration and Test of Probe 1 Completed Prior to Probes 2 -5 • Sufficient Manpower and Equipment for Parallel I&T Ground Development • Development and Deployment of some GBOs 2 Winters Ahead THEMIS SRR MO-20 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Resources Resource Planning Personnel – Similar to HESSI, Staffing Significantly from Internal and External Sources – Internal: Offloaded CHIPS Development Personnel – External: UC Personnel Hiring within Bay Area Facilities – Space Physics Research Group is the Largest Group at SSL – Clean Rooms for ESA, SST and Instrument I&T are in SPRG Allocation – Centralized Parts Storage in Flight Parts Storage Room (Unique Sensor Parts in Labs) Test Equipment – IDPU has 2 GSE Setups Planned – Sensor GSEs Are Generally a Mixture of Redundant & Special Purpose Equipment THEMIS SRR MO-21 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Resources THEMIS SRR MO-22 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Resources Other SSL Project Resource Requirements STEREO project is in Conflict SNAP and MMS Will Help with Offload THEMIS SRR MO-23 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Cost Development and Maintenance Bottom Up Development • • Followed Schedule Development Developers Submitted Detailed Requirements Generated Level 3 Budgets by Month Iterated with Developers to Understand Costs Removed Overlapping Efforts between WBS Generated a Final Master Cost Generated Comparison Data from Prior Projects Reviewed and Approved by THEMIS Board of Directors, SPO, UCOP Budget Maintenance • • UCB Financial Data & Subcontractor Reports Matched to Budget Project Management Comparison of Cost v Schedule Non-Compliances Get Management Attention Workarounds include Work Reduction, Addition Support, Re. Organization THEMIS SRR MO-24 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Cost Key Features Instrument Development • Integrate & Test at UCB Using Mostly Existing Facilities • Simplified Instrument Interfacing • Automated Instrument Testing at S/C Lowers Extended Travel Efforts Spacecraft Development • • Simplified Probe Carrier Design Relaxed Probe Attitude Requirements and Simplified Design Complexity Left on the Ground Use of Existing Environmental Facilities at GSFC or Md Facilities Ground Development • Leverage HESSI & FAST Operations • Incorporate GSFC/GNCD Software and Expertise • Utilization of Existing UCB ground station THEMIS SRR MO-25 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Changes since CSR Key Features Space Development • • • Probe Tanks: Increased Diameter Caused Redesign of EFI SPB Probe CPU : Change from UCB-provided 80 C 196 processor card INST CPU: UCB considering 8085 (HESSI), 80 C 196 (STEREO) INST SST : Switched from PDFE to Amptek design INST SST : Radiation Shielding for Detector Space-to-Ground Development • COMM: Exploiting L 3 Com XPNDR to go from 0. 4 to 1. 0 Mbps Ground • GBO : Simplifying communications using Iridium THEMIS SRR MO-26 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Summary Leverage Experience in Similar Projects PI mode projects, Small Spacecraft, End-to-End Proven Processes Management, Systems Engineering, Quality Assurance, Risk Simple and Robust Constellation Concept Simplified Launch Sequence, Fail-safe, Orbit Adjustment Comprehensive Schedule Sufficient Time for Testing & Problems Detailed and Verified Cost Estimates Comprehensive, Verified to Models, Good Past Performance Avoid Developments No New Technology Required THEMIS SRR MO-27 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Mission Overview THEMIS Probe and Probe Carrier Michael Cully P&PC Manager Swales Aerospace THEMIS SRR MO-28 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

P&PC Project Management AGENDA Swales Organization Risk Mitigation THEMIS Cost Basis FUSE Primary Instrument Structure SCONCE Secondary Payload Adapter For Delta II EO-1 Spacecraft During ALI Instrument Integration and Alignment THEMIS SRR ISS Two Tier CCHP Radiator MO-29 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

P&PC Organization/Staff THEMIS SRR MO-30 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Risk Mitigations THEMIS SRR MO-31 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003

Cost/Schedule Probe & Probe Carrier • • Mission Requirements & Instrument Interfaces well defined by UCB Detail WBS generated for Probe & Probe Carrier. Work well defined by Subsystem Leads and priced down to 5 th level based on recent programs – NRE & RE well defined – Comparison/Analogy – EO 1, FUSE & MAP – Detail Engineering/Grassroots Long Lead items have been identified and Major subsystem/components rely on hard quotes from prominent Industry suppliers Detail Mission Schedule developed & iterated with subsystem Leads in order to time phase costing Probe Carrier & Probe Structures costing relies heavily on Swales experience on Commercial Aerospace programs. GSFC Testing facility costs for Mission integration based on quotes from Mantech Following completion of detail costing an assessment was performed using Parametric techniques based on Aerospace Corporation Small Satellite Cost Model (SSCM 98). Results correlate between Swales detail costing and SSCM within 10%. See detail in Swales Cost Proposal! THEMIS SRR MO-32 UCB, July 8 -9, 2003