SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 DCS Preliminary Design Review Sean C. Casey USRA Senior Scientist Lead Scientist.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Radiopharmaceutical Production
Advertisements

Proposal / Request For Proposal Proposal / Request For Proposal Initiation Control Planning Close-down Execution.
1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT ROLE OF KEY PERSONNEL Bernd Madauss International Space University Strasbourg February, 2011
0 Chicago, IL March 6 th, 2007 Use Case Requirements, Design and Standards Selection HITSP Use Case Requirements, Design and Standards Selection Date:
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center LRO SRR Project Management.
SOFIA DCS History and Overview Ian Gatley. SOFIA March DCS Preliminary Design Review2 The South Pole CARA Project: A DCS demonstration A data.
DCS Architecture Bob Krzaczek. Key Design Requirement Distilled from the DCS Mission statement and the results of the Conceptual Design Review (June 1999):
University of Wisconsin-Madison Space Science and Engineering Center (SSEC) 26 October 2005 SSEC/CIMSS Administrative Overview from Wenhua Wu, Tom Achtor.
GLAST LAT ProjectDOE/NASA Review of the GLAST/LAT Project, Aug. 14, 2001 Scott Williams 1 GLAST Large Area Telescope: Instrument Operations Center Scott.
NGAO System Design Phase System & Functional Requirements Documents NGAO Meeting #6 Peter Wizinowich April 25, 2007.
Slide 1 Sterling Software Peter Sharer Sterling Software.
Pertemuan Matakuliah: A0214/Audit Sistem Informasi Tahun: 2007.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services.
ESC/EN Engineering Process Compliance Procedures August 2002.
Internal Auditing and Outsourcing
05 December, 2002HDF & HDF-EOS Workshop VI1 SEEDS Standards Process Richard Ullman SEEDS Standards Formulation Team Lead
DCS Overview MCS/DCS Technical Interchange Meeting August, 2000.
SSSC 02/18/2010 P. Marcum Science Utilization Policies SOFIA SCIENCE UTILIZATION POLICIES Pamela M. Marcum SOFIA Project Scientist SSSC Feb 19, 2010.
VST: dome THE LIFE CYCLE OF MODERN TECHNOLOGICAL PROJECTS Ing. Davide Fierro THE LIFE CYCLE OF MODERN TECHNOLOGICAL PROJECTS.
Elements of a Data Management Plan Bill Michener University Libraries University of New Mexico Data Management Practices for.
Module N° 8 – SSP implementation plan. SSP – A structured approach Module 2 Basic safety management concepts Module 2 Basic safety management concepts.
Harvey Tananbaum Director Chandra X-ray Center Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics 13th HEAD Meeting April 8, 2013 Building International Space.
Strong9 Consulting Services, LLC 1 PMI - SVC I-80 Breakfast Roundtable Monthly Meeting Thursday, October 12, :00 am – 9:00 am.
ISM 5316 Week 3 Learning Objectives You should be able to: u Define and list issues and steps in Project Integration u List and describe the components.
ExOB Discussions on Development Test Center WRF ExOB Meeting U.S. Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C. 28 April 2006.
Safety Auditors Conference 2005 A Practical Approach…….
Integrated Data Cycle Systems Harvey E. Rhody Chester F. Carlson Center for Imaging Science.
B. Review Board Charter and ORR Success Criteria Muthu Jeganathan Project Manager, JPL.
MODULE B - PROCESS SUBMODULES B1.Organizational Structure B2.Standards Development: Roles and Responsibilities B3.Conformity Assessment: Roles and Responsibilities.
“From the Ground Up: Balancing the NSF Astronomy Program” Senior Review Major Recommendations November 2006 Implications for GSMT.
Get Your "Party" Started: Establishing a Successful Third-party Evaluation Martha Thurlow, Ph.D. & Vitaliy Shyyan, Ph.D.—National Center on Educational.
6/6/08NASA/USRA Management review- SETI TLR - 1 A New SOFIA Science Vision Charter, Progress, and Plans Tom Roellig.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services Last Revised 8/15/2011.
SSC SI Data Processing Pipeline Plans Tom Stephens USRA Information Systems Development Manager SSSC Meeting – Sept 29, 2009.
Response to ASAC Report of May 2004 Response to ASAC The Atacama Large Millimeter Array Tom Wilson and Al Wootten Science IPT.
Constellation Space Transportation Planning Office July 30, 2009.
1 Universities Space Research Association Introduction, Charter and Feedback Eric Becklin SSSC 18 Feb 2010.
7/17/08NASA/USRA Management review- Clocktower TLR - 1 A New SOFIA Science Vision Introduction and Schedule Progress Tom Roellig.
SOLUTION What kind of plan do we need? How will we know if the work is on track to be done? How quickly can we get this done? How long will this work take.
1 Proposal and Observation Handling Ravi Sankrit (User Support Scientist) SSSC May 11, 2011.
Planning for School Implementation. Choice Programs Requires both district and school level coordination roles The district office establishes guidelines,
On Site Review Process. 2 Overview of On Site Review Materials and Process.
August 2003 At A Glance The IRC is a platform independent, extensible, and adaptive framework that provides robust, interactive, and distributed control.
Dr. John MacCarthy UMBC CMSC 615 Fall, 2006
KEY PERSONNEL Dr. Bob Schutz, GLAS Science Team Leader Dr. Jay Zwally, ICESat Project Scientist, GLAS Team Member Mr. David Hancock, Science Software Development.
Fermi Users Group Meeting Goddard Space Flight Center, February 6, 2009C. Shrader, NASA/GSFC 1 Fermi Users Group FSSC News Chris Shrader, Fermi Science.
1 FLITECAM December 11, 2008 Ian McLean (Principal Investigator) UCLA Infrared Laboratory University of California, Los Angeles.
1 FLITECAM April 28, 2009 Ian McLean (Principal Investigator) UCLA Infrared Laboratory University of California, Los Angeles.
JWST Mission CDR Northrop Grumman Space Systems Redondo Beach (CA) April 10-16, 2010.
SRR and PDR Charter & Review Team Linda Pacini (GSFC) Review Chair.
1 Universities Space Research Association Martin Ruzek SSSC February 18, 2010 FIFI LS EOOP Extended Observing Opportunity Program Operating FIFI LS in.
September 10, FY 2003 Plans Bob Simmons. September 10, Introduction Overview of Project and Engineering Plans Project Plans Engineering Plans.
GLAST Science Support CenterAugust 10, 2004 Users’ Committee Meeting The Project Data Management Plan David Band – GSSC.
1 Universities Space Research Association Science Instrument Pipeline Requirements SSSC 2009 September 29 Erick Young Director SOFIA Science Mission Operat.
SwCDR (Peer) Review 1 UCB MAVEN Particles and Fields Flight Software Critical Design Review Peter R. Harvey.
Large Facilities Manual New Guidance on Cost Estimating and Analysis 2016 NSF Large Facilities Workshop Kevin Porter Large Facilities Advisor, LFO, NSF.
IV&V Facility 7/28/20041 IV&V in NASA Pre-Solicitation Conference/ Industry Day NASA IV&V FACILITY July 28, 2004.
Creation of the Archiving Component of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Template for International Missions IPDA MOU project members.
Planetary Science Decadal Survey David H. Smith Space Studies Board, National Research Council Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group Arlington,
Large Synoptic Survey Telescope
BSA 376 Competitive Success/snaptutorial.com
BSA 376 Education for Service/snaptutorial.com
BSA 376 Teaching Effectively-- snaptutorial.com
CLINICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM
Instrument PDR Summary of Objectives
MODULE B - PROCESS SUBMODULES B1. Organizational Structure
Preliminary Project Execution Plan
Radiopharmaceutical Production
Presentation transcript:

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 DCS Preliminary Design Review Sean C. Casey USRA Senior Scientist Lead Scientist for Science Support

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 DCS PDR Panel John Bieging, University of Arizona Keith Bryant, Raytheon Bob Hovde, USRA Jim Jackson (Chair), Boston University Deborah Levine, IPAC David Weintraub Vanderbilt University

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 Review Policy SOFIA science support review policy is to facilitate the development of world class instruments. The review policy is guided by past experiences of other ground based and space based facilities. The review board is responsible for making judgments and recommendations concerning the review content. The board chairman is responsible for supervising the review, mediating discussions, meeting the review objectives, and maximizing the value-added contribution of the review board. Following the review, the board meets to discuss findings, review and and assign RFAs, and prepare a draft report. The board rejects of adopts either in part of in-full all submitted RFAs from the review. The chairman prepares a final report of concerns and recommendations. The review board chairman prepared a final report of the review and delivers the report to the observatory directory within two weeks of the review. The final report is distributed to all the meeting attendees by the observatory director following receipt from the board chairman.

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 Statement of requirements Verification plans for compliance with requirements Design based on established practice –Components based on standards –Use of tested designs –COTS Major system design elements - modules, interactions, interfaces Design tradeoff considerations –Justification of chosen implementation –Relationship with established methods Discussion of key design details Outline of planned implementation process Major concerns and risks –Deferred Scope Open items and resolution plans Review Board PDR Charter

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 FSI Critical Design Review Charter Operational requirements and verification compliance Summary of major derived design specifications and constraints Major changes since PDR Interface details and status of agreements Selected design details Critical component status Selected manufacturing details and plans Configuration control plan (HW/SW Maintenance plans (HW/SW) Documentation status Breadboard and prototype test status and results Test plans for the deliverable units Operational features and constraints Spare provisions Support equipment requirements, provisions, and plans Schedule, budget, and flow plan status Major concerns, open items, and plans for resolution

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 SOFIA FSI Review Process Required of all SOFIA facility instruments –Independent review panel Review board submits recommendations to observatory director Director and Instrument PI derive agreement Science Support follows up on agreement

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 Request for Action Item Form Presenter:Section: Comments: Request for Action: Author:Date:

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 Technology Development aboard SOFIA Sean Casey USRA

SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy DCS PDR at RIT3/7/2000 As IUE/IPAC/ST ScI/EUV/CFA/etc. have shown: – The strength of the general investigator programs depend upon the strength and resources of the associated Observatory Science Centers – Science Centers must necessarily invoke different solutions for science instrument programs working at differing TR levels Astrophysics I II III Historical FTE Involvement: Principal Investigator Program “The Good Ol’e Boy’s Club” Observatory Support Science Center Personnel (IUE/IPAC/STSCI/CFA/SSMOC) General Investigator (GI) Program “The Broader Science Community” Support Proposals, Observ., Pipeline, Archives NASA Programs at TRL’s 1 – 9___ CETDP Missions IUE/IRAS/HST/ISO KAO Program (TRL 3.5-5) SOFIA Program (TRL 3.5-7) SOFIA FSI Program PI Program ’s DCS GI’s KAO ‘72-’ ’s Propose, Build, and Use Science Instruments Propose, and use science instruments and archives ’s 1990’s ’s KAO ‘72-’94 TRL SI Program PI’s Space Flight Programs (TRL-9) ? ? GI’s motion Technology Development FTEs