THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 1 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 THEMIS Confirmation Assessment Project Overview Peter R. Harvey University of California - Berkeley

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 2 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Overview Project Assessment Organization –Structure & Team Composition, Roles and Responsibilities –Work Breakdown Structure, Key Personnel Management Processes –Management, Systems Engineering, Performance Assurance, IV&V –Communications Scheduling –Development, Maintenance, Key Features, Performance Metrics Resources –Labor, Facilities Cost –Development, Maintenance, Key Features, Changes, Metrics –Modeling, Descopes, Incentives –Past Performance, Phase A/B Performance Risk –Plans, Top Level Risks, Risk Retirements Summary

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 3 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Organization Top Level Organization Chart Explorers Office Frank Snow, Mission Mgr Explorers Office Frank Snow, Mission Mgr U.Colo/LASP Bob Ergun U.Colo/LASP Bob Ergun TU-BS Uli Auster TU-BS Uli Auster Swales Aerospace Mike Cully Swales Aerospace Mike Cully THEMIS Organization Chart Subcontracts/Agreements Phases BCD U.C. Berkeley Vassilis Angelopoulos, PI Peter Harvey, PM U.C. Berkeley Vassilis Angelopoulos, PI Peter Harvey, PM KSC Tammy Harrington, Mission Integ Mgr KSC Tammy Harrington, Mission Integ Mgr CETP Alain Roux CETP Alain Roux GSFC/GNCD Karen Richon GSFC/GNCD Karen Richon UCLA Chris Russell UCLA Chris Russell Univ of Calgary Eric Donovan Univ of Calgary Eric Donovan Univ of Alberta J. Samson Univ of Alberta J. Samson IWF Werner Magnes IWF Werner Magnes

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 4 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Organization Organizational Roles and Responsibilities

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 5 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Organization THEMIS Project 1.1 Management 1.2 Science 1.3 Systems Engineering 1.3 Systems Engineering 2. Space Segment Development 2. Space Segment Development 3. Ground Segment Development 3. Ground Segment Development 4. Mission Ops & Data Analysis 4. Mission Ops & Data Analysis 5. Education & Public Outreach 3.1 Mission Operations Center 3.2 Science Operations Center 3.3 Ground Based Observatories 3.3 Ground Based Observatories 4.1 Mission Operations 4.2 Data Analysis 1. Management, Science, Systems Eng. 1. Management, Science, Systems Eng. 2.1 Instruments 2.2 Spacecraft THEMIS Work Breakdown Structure Work Breakdown Structure

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 6 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Organization Management, Science and Systems Engineering Management Support K. HarpsFinances M. LarsonPurchasing M. GiordanoDocumentation D. MeilhanScheduling A. ShutkinAdministration Management Support K. HarpsFinances M. LarsonPurchasing M. GiordanoDocumentation D. MeilhanScheduling A. ShutkinAdministration UCB Sponsored Projects D. WeldonContracting UCB Sponsored Projects D. WeldonContracting Systems Engineering Ellen Taylor Systems Engineering Ellen Taylor Science V. Angelopoulos Science V. Angelopoulos Science Support Bonnell, John Carlson, Chuck Delory, Gregory Frey, Harald Hull, Art Larson, Davin Lin, Robert Mende, Steven Moreau, Thomas Mozer, Forrest Parks, George Peticolas, Laura Phan, Tai Temerin, Michael Science Support Bonnell, John Carlson, Chuck Delory, Gregory Frey, Harald Hull, Art Larson, Davin Lin, Robert Mende, Steven Moreau, Thomas Mozer, Forrest Parks, George Peticolas, Laura Phan, Tai Temerin, Michael Program Management Peter Harvey Program Management Peter Harvey Electrical Ellen Taylor Electrical Ellen Taylor Mechanical /Thermal Paul Turin Chris Smith Mechanical /Thermal Paul Turin Chris Smith EMC/ESC/MAG Robert Snare (UCLA) EMC/ESC/MAG Robert Snare (UCLA) THEMIS WBS 1.0 Facility Support J. CooksContracts J. KeenanPurchasing G. DavisAccounting J. WilliamsTravel J. JonesPersonnel Facility Support J. CooksContracts J. KeenanPurchasing G. DavisAccounting J. WilliamsTravel J. JonesPersonnel Quality & Safety Ron Jackson Quality & Safety Ron Jackson Parts Jorg Fischer Parts Jorg Fischer Management, Systems Engineering, Science

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 7 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Organization Instruments Electric Field Instrument (EFI) Electric Field Instrument (EFI) ElectroStatic Analyser (ESA) ElectroStatic Analyser (ESA) Solid State Telescope (SST) Solid State Telescope (SST) Instrument I&T Rick Sterling Instrument I&T Rick Sterling Instrument Data Processor Unit (IDPU) Instrument Data Processor Unit (IDPU) THEMIS WBS 2.1 Fluxgate Mag (FGM) Fluxgate Mag (FGM) Search Coil Mag (SCM) Search Coil Mag (SCM) Forrest Mozer John Bonnell Greg Delory Art Hull Bill Donakowski Greg Dalton Robert Duck Mark Pankow Dan Schickele Stu Harris Hilary Richard Forrest Mozer John Bonnell Greg Delory Art Hull Bill Donakowski Greg Dalton Robert Duck Mark Pankow Dan Schickele Stu Harris Hilary Richard Robert Abiad Peter Berg Heath Bersch Dorothy Gordon Frank Harvey Selda Heavner Jim Lewis Jeanine Potts Chris Scholz Kathy Walden Robert Abiad Peter Berg Heath Bersch Dorothy Gordon Frank Harvey Selda Heavner Jim Lewis Jeanine Potts Chris Scholz Kathy Walden Charles Carlson M. Marckwardt Bill Elliott Ron Herman Charles Carlson M. Marckwardt Bill Elliott Ron Herman Robert Lin Davin Larson Ron Canario Robert Lee T. Moreau Robert Lin Davin Larson Ron Canario Robert Lee T. Moreau Hari Dharan Y. Kim Tien Tan Bill Tyler Hari Dharan Y. Kim Tien Tan Bill Tyler TUBS/IWF Uli Auster K.H. Glassmeier W. Magnes TUBS/IWF Uli Auster K.H. Glassmeier W. Magnes CETP Alain Roux Bertran de la Porte Olivier Le Contel Christophe Coillot Abdel Bouabdellah CETP Alain Roux Bertran de la Porte Olivier Le Contel Christophe Coillot Abdel Bouabdellah LASP Robert Ergun Aref Nammari Ken Stevens Jim Westfall LASP Robert Ergun Aref Nammari Ken Stevens Jim Westfall Mag Booms Mag Booms Instrument Development

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 8 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Organization Ground Segment Mission Ops Science Ops (Mission Planning) Mission Ops Science Ops (Mission Planning) THEMIS WBS 3 Ground Based Observatories Manfred Bester Mark Lewis Tim Quinn Sabine Frey Tai Phan John Bonnell Laura Peticolas Manfred Bester Mark Lewis Tim Quinn Sabine Frey Tai Phan John Bonnell Laura Peticolas Stephen Mende Stu Harris Steve Geller Harald Frey Stephen Mende Stu Harris Steve Geller Harald Frey UCLA Chris Russell Joe Means Dave Pierce UCLA Chris Russell Joe Means Dave Pierce All Sky Imagers All Sky Imagers Ground Magnetometers Fielding & Operation (UC&UA) Fielding & Operation (UC&UA) UC Eric Donovan UC Eric Donovan GSFC/GCND David Sibeck Mark Beckman Bob DeFazio David Folta Rick Harman GSFC/GCND David Sibeck Mark Beckman Bob DeFazio David Folta Rick Harman UA J. Samson UA J. Samson Ground Systems Development

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 9 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Key Personnel Experience of Key Personnel

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 10 UCB, November 12-14, 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

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 11 UCB, November 12-14, 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

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 12 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Processes Performance Assurance Responsibilities  Assurance Requirements Identification  Performance Assurance 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

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 13 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Processes Independent Verification and Validation Extensive Internal Review of Essential Software Bus Avionics Unit: Telecom, Bus Control, Minimal Autonomy IDPU : Instrument Control, Data Storage, Calculations Operations: ReUse of GSFC-supplied software Self Assessment using IV&V Metrics Loss of One Probe Yielded Consequence of Insignificant-Marginal Small Software Size Yielded Likelihood of Information Provided to IV&V for Cost Estimate/Concurrence Cost Assumptions Full IV&V Funding Included in Budget Assume IV&V Works with Available Documentation and Schedule MOU for Initial Assessment is in Place

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 14 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Processes Team Communications Day-to-Day List Server FTP sites for documents Conferencing Weekly Meetings/Telecons Status of Space & Ground Eng Change Notices Cost and Schedule Risks Monthly Meetings and Reports Comprehensive Report Integrating All Internal Status All Development Team Leads Provide Narratives Swales Narrative, Long-Lead and Milestone Schedules, Costs Integrated Reports Available on the THEMIS website

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 15 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Schedule Schedule Management Bottom Up Development Followed Concept Developer-Generated Schedule Maintenance Developers Report to Their Schedule Weekly 3 Full-Time Schedulers at Mission, Project and Probe Levels Provides Status to Project Management & Mission Manager Critical Path Analyses are Provided in the Next Section

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 16 UCB, November 12-14, 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 F1 Tested First Followed by Pairs All Instrument Complements are Complete before S/C I&T Begins Instrument I&T Team Will Be Focusing Upon S/C I&T Added Some Facilities for Qualifying Instruments in Parallel Spacecraft Development Integration and Test of Probe1 Completed Prior to Probes 2-5 Sufficient Manpower and Equipment for Parallel I&T Ground Development Development and Deployment of 5 GBOs 2 in 1Q05 Development and Deployment of all 20 GBO’s in 1Q06

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 17 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Schedule Relevant Prior Schedule Performance FAST Instruments (EFI, ESA, MAG, IDPU) Hopped in Front of SWAS Delivered Complement on Time POLAR / CLUSTER I & II (EFI) Polar EFI Delivered 8 months ahead of time Cluster EFW I & II Delivered > 45 Flight Units to WEC in time. HESSI (Management, IDPU) Phase B to JPL Environmental Tests (Est. 23 mo, Act mo) Re-Confirmation to VAFB Delivery (Est. 6 mo, Act 6.3 mo) EO-1 (S/C Management) S/C Bus (w Hyperion) delivered 6/99 on time Swap with IMAGE, Red Team directives, ALERT, etc Delayed 11m

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 18 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Schedule Metrics Milestone Comparisons to HESSI Sufficient Definition Task Count ~ 1425 Slack Instruments have 4-8 months slack to Earliest I&T with Probes Instruments have 6-9 months slack to Expected I&T with Probes Integrated Probes/Probe Carrier have 3 months to LV Integration

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 19 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Resources

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 20 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Resources SSL Projects STEREO Personnel Not Available; MMS Now Starting Up SNAP and MMS Projects Will Help Offload Personnel

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 21 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Resources Facilities Chamber Availability at UCB/SSL Numerous Tanks of Varying Sizes & Types One New Chamber Needed for THEMIS One Calibration Chamber Needs Parts TV Plan Design 2 Component-Level TV Cycles 6 Instrument Level TV Cycles Chamber Usage During Relevant Performance Periods

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 22 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Cost Management 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, ReOrganization

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 23 UCB, November 12-14, 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 Ground Development Leverage HESSI & FAST Operations Incorporate GSFC/GNCD Software and Expertise

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 24 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Cost Changes from Proposal Growth in Management, Systems Engineering Compared to HESSI Actual Costs Scaled to Development Task Now Matches within 0.2% Growth in Probe/Probe Carrier/LV Most Probe/PC Activity Directly Accountable to Risk Retirements Modest Growth (5.6%) in Defining Specific Suppliers, Spares, etc.

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 25 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Cost Reasonableness THEMIS Phase B/C/D Costs Compare Well to HESSI Actual Costs THEMIS Instruments Require Less Development than HESSI THEMIS Phase E Mission Operations Suitably Larger Handling 5 Probes Instead of 1; Cost Estimated at 3x

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 26 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Instrument Mass.v. Cost Modeling Categorized Each Component by its Complexity Computed Mass of Flight & Spare Units Grass Roots Budget is 6% Over Model So Budget is Sufficient High TRLs from 6.75 to 7.5

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 27 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Available Descope Options Modest Requirements Allow Flexibility in Instrumentation Power, Mass, Cost Savings are Available

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 28 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Incentive Plan (UCB-Swales Contract tbd) 2% for Probes/Probe Carrier Delivery on Time 2% for Probes On-Orbit Performance –Delta-V, Communication, Power, Thermal Requirements met Each is $750K Paid Only if Reserve is Available Balance of Schedule and Performance Exactly as Used on HESSI Rationale On Schedule Delivery Incentive Compares to ~ 20 day Program Delay On-Orbit Performance Helps Keep Focus on Quality and Support in L&EO Used Successfully on HESSI Industry Standard Practice

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 29 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Performance Relevant Prior Cost Performance POLAR / CLUSTER I & II (EFI) Polar EFI Delivered at 37% Under Budget Cluster EFW I Delivered 40% Under Budget. Cluster EFW II Was Built using Reserve from EFW I HESSI (Management, IDPU) Completed Spacecraft & Ground Systems at 8% Under Budget Re-Built Spacecraft 39% Under Budget EO-1 (S/C Management) S/C Bus Delivered on Fixed Price NASA Directed Additional Effort –Safe Hold & GPS (GFE) changes –Hyperion Addition –Launch Delays (IMAGE Swap) –WARP (GFE) Rework –Red Team Directed Risk Mitigations HESSI UCB Actual Cost v Plan

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 30 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Performance Phase A/B Cost Performance v Budget Average Compliance Between 3-6% below budget (Red v Blue)

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 31 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Performance Phase A/B Cost Performance by WBS

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 32 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Cost Performance Phase A/B Cost Performance by WBS

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 33 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Risk Risk Management UCB/Swales Management Taking Lowest Risk Approach Overall Assessments Generated by Knowledgeable Engineering Tradeoffs Discussed with PI in Weekly Telecons Risk Management Plan Status Swales Risk Management Plan in place UCB/SSL Mission Operations RMP in place THEMIS Project RMP in development –GSFC-UCB meeting scheduled Dec 9-10

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 34 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Risk Programmatic Risks Probe Development Cost Largest Development Effort (2.5x instrumentation) Limited options for Suppliers Given Low Mass/Power Reqmts  Counting on Swales/GSFC/UCB Experience in Small S/C  UCB FOT Involvement Could Help Lower I&T Costs Instrument Schedule Historically Instrumenters Are Understaffed at Start and Play Catch Up Heritage Often Means You Can’t Get the Parts Anymore  Project Management Direct Involvement in Staffing (30 FTE of 35 planned)  Coordinate Parts Early (Currently Revision 20) Design Flaws Components Qualified Prior to Probe1 I&T – Could Be 6 Wrong  ETU Probe-to-Instrument Interface Testing Prior to Flight Build Up

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 35 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Risk Technical Risks Top Phase A Retirements 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 Retirements to Reduce Risk (in Instruments) Added Redundant Actuators on Mag and AXBs Implemented Independent Power & Signals to Sensors Arranged Axially Independent Power in EFI Defined Fault Tolerant Signals between IDPU and BAU Relocated SST Electronics into IDPU for Radiation Protection See Probe presentation for more risk reductions

THEMIS Mission PDR/CAR 36 UCB, November 12-14, 2003 Summary Proven Processes are In Place Management, Systems Engineering, Quality Assurance Cost is Reasonable Compares to Prior Missions, On-Budget thru Phases A/B Schedule is Consistent with Previous Projects HESSI, Polar, Cluster Risks are Being Actively Addressed by Project Historically Successful in Risk Management, Actively Retiring Risks