| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 62
Review of the Space Communications Program of Nasas Space Operations Mission Directorate
9
Operations Integration Program Element
INTRODUCTION
The operations integration program element is charged with the task of managing communications activities for human spaceflight. This role requires the operations integration team to coordinate with the Space Shuttle program, the International Space Station program, and the contractors that serve them. Assets engaged in providing these communications services include the Space Network, Ground Network, the Air Force Satellite Control Network (AFSCN), NASA Integrated Services Network (NISN), and the Eastern Range. The primary end users reside at Johnson Space Center and Kennedy Space Center; however, voice, television, and other data are disseminated to other users through NISN. A budget of $3 million is dedicated to operations integration. Support is included in this budget for four full-time-equivalent civil service employees and four work-year-equivalent contractors.
The larger mission of managing communications activities for human spaceflight is broken down into the following distinct subtasks:1
Overseeing the combined efforts of a distributed set of contractors who must work together seamlessly to support a common mission;
Coordinating with, and planning among, a wide range of entities, including domestic and international, distributed and center-based, and government and contractor;
Managing requirements between the Mission Control Center and the various components of the space communications infrastructure; and
Reviewing and certifying the readiness of communications-related hardware, software, and personnel for human spaceflight.
The operations integration element also leads development activities to enhance or create capabilities relevant to human spaceflight.
FORMULATION OF THE PROGRAM PLAN
The goals, objectives, and deliverables of the operations integration program element are integral to and dependent on several other programs, projects, and centers. The Space Communications Office (SCO) does not currently have a formal program plan in place—although one is planned for release in the future—and the committee has based its assessment on relevant global NASA documents as well as less formal documentation. The following subsections first discuss the activities for which the operations integration program element is responsible. The assessment regarding the formulation of the program then follows.
Contractor Oversight Activities
Many of the resources that facilitate the communications capabilities required for human spaceflight are managed as contracted services. The total budget associated with these contracts is in excess of $2 billion over 5 years. The execution of these large contracts is managed by four NASA centers: Goddard Space Flight Center, Johnson Space Center, Kennedy Space Center, and Marshall Space Flight Center. Operations integration dedicates a portion of its budget—which is in totality $15 million over the same 5-year period—to overseeing specific aspects of these contracts that impact communications for human spaceflight. Prior to 2003, NASA managed these resources through a centralized contract, the Consolidated Space Operations Contract (CSOC). In 2003, this single contract was replaced by the current set of distributed contracts. This change occurred because NASA administration felt that the centralized structure provided by CSOC was too inflexible to accommodate necessary changes, was “not consistent with the dynamic
OCR for page 63
Review of the Space Communications Program of Nasas Space Operations Mission Directorate
characteristics of NASA’s mission requirements,” and was “inefficient due to an overly centralized process resulting in non-optimal customer response.”2
Goddard Space Flight Center manages the Near Earth Network Services (NENS) contract, valued at roughly $785 million over 5 years. Through this contract, Honeywell Technology Solutions, Incorporated, provides administration, operations, and technical support to NASA’s Space Network and Ground Network. Honeywell also manages eight major subcontractors and provides technical and management services in support of tracking and data-acquisition operations at several facilities.3 It also manages the Flight Dynamics Facility at GSFC.
Kennedy Space Center (KSC) manages the Kennedy Information and Communications Services (KICS) contract, through which the Central Data and Switching Center is funded. The prime contractor, InDyne, Inc., has a contract valued at approximately $190 million over 5 years. InDyne provides communications services at KSC in support of the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station Programs. InDyne also provides business engineering logistics, facilities management, and hardware and software integration and development for voice, video, and data communications for KSC.4
Johnson Space Center (JSC) manages the Mission Support Operations Contract (MSOC), which funds Lockheed Martin Space Operations Company to provide supporting elements of the Space Shuttle and International Space Station Mission Control Centers. This includes support for the JSC Space Operations Mission and Data Services. MSOC provides ground system services for JSC’s Emergency Operations Center and the Electronic System Test Laboratory, which includes space communications integration. The total contract, extending from October 2003 through September 2006, is valued at approximately $246 million.5,6
Finally, the Marshall Space Flight Center manages the Unified NASA Information Technology Services (UNITeS) contract that funds the NASA Integrated Services Network. Science Applications International Corporation, the prime contractor, is responsible for the Integrated Financial Management Program and NASA’s wide area network, information technology (IT) security, and digital television. The total value of the contract is approximately $826 million over 5 years.7
At the highest level, the success of Operations Integration in effectively overseeing relevant aspects of these contracts is demonstrated by the successful maintenance of communications capabilities required to support human spaceflight. Lower-level performance metrics are also generated by each prime contractor for the assets they manage. For example, under the NENS contract, Honeywell reports availability and reliability metrics for the Space and Ground Networks. This feedback is then reported up the NASA management structure through monthly status reports and to the NASA headquarters management through program status reports. Deviation from standards of excellence in these metrics alerts senior management to potential risk, and additional scrutiny is applied when it is deemed necessary.8
Coordinator and Planning Activities
The Network Operations Integration Team (NOIT) is responsible for coordinating with and planning between international partners, communications assets (the Space Network, Ground Network, and NASA Integrated Services Network) and the Space Shuttle and International Space Station Control Centers. The MSOC (Lockheed Martin) covers supporting elements of the Space Shuttle and International Space Station Control Centers at JSC. The Space Flight Operations Contract (United Space Alliance) covers vehicle processing and flight control elements that occur at JSC and KSC. The NOIT interacts with both contracts, interfacing on a technical level with Space Flight Operations Contract mission managers, MSOC support elements, and resources from other NASA centers (GSFC and MSFC, in particular) to “ensure common awareness of pending development activity as well as Integrated Networks and Communications mission support readiness issues across these contracts.”9 These interactions are shown notionally in Figure 9.1.
The NOIT is composed of senior-level staff members with extensive experience in mission operations, integration, and requirements management. The Manager of Space Communications Operations Integration heads the NOIT. The individual currently filling this role has 40 years of experience at NASA, dating back to the Apollo/Lunar Module program. Although most NOIT members are highly experienced, the team also draws on expertise from the NASA centers and strives to maintain a team with the variety of skills and experience levels needed to ensure that the vital coordination and planning capabilities that they provide will continue to be available in the future.
Requirements Management Activities
Missions involving human spaceflight demand that more stringent communications requirements be levied on the supporting elements than do unmanned programs. Operations Integration plays a critical role in defining these requirements for the Space Shuttle and International Space Station programs through their respective program requirements documents. The requirements-definition process is also currently underway for Exploration programs. These include an array of requirements levied on the Crew Exploration Vehicle, Crew Launch Vehicle, cargo elements, and Lunar Surface Access Module.
Readiness Assurance Activities
Engineering and operations reviews by SCO personnel are an essential component of the system NASA uses to
OCR for page 64
Review of the Space Communications Program of Nasas Space Operations Mission Directorate
FIGURE 9.1 The Network Operations Integration Team interfaces between program elements, mission managers, and NASA centers.
maintain the communications capabilities necessary for human spaceflight. These reviews include daily and weekly Integrated Operations teleconferences between centers as well as preliminary and critical design reviews for newly developed or updated pieces of the communications infrastructure. The Automated Support Requirements System management team and Network Support Group also provide oversight and readiness assurance reviews. NISN’s readiness is verified in both forums and quarterly reviews. The space communications program is also evaluated as a whole through status reports and status reviews. Finally, the NASA chief engineer uses a system of independent technical authority to provide an unbiased assessment of project, program, and mission readiness. These experts, designated as technical warrant holders for their areas of expertise, also address disputed engineering issues.
In preparation for launch and mission support, SCO personnel conduct a series of structured readiness reviews. These reviews include an operations readiness review, a stage operations readiness review, a flight readiness review at JSC, a launch readiness review at KSC, and an agency-wide flight readiness review. This process culminates in submission of a certificate of flight projects directorate networks readiness, indicating that all of the communications network elements are ready to support the mission. Figure 9.2 illustrates how many different assets must be brought to bear to support a mission involving human spaceflight.10 The formal readiness review process is designed to make sure that each of these network elements will fulfill its role in the mission at hand.
Development Activities
Although the operations integration program element’s primary role involves coordinating and managing specific activities related to human spaceflight, the program sometimes uses its unique position to sponsor development activities when a significant agency-wide benefit is apparent. The intercenter nature of operations integration gives it the perspective and the means to implement changes to the communications infrastructure for the greater good of all users.
An example of such a development activity is an effort currently underway to develop a command generation capability for KSC and implement it in KSC’s Launch Control Center. Historically, KSC has relied on JSC’s Mission Control Center and legacy command equipment at the Merritt Island Launch Annex (MILA) tracking station. It is in NASA’s interest to reduce the complexity of the MILA hardware. If this can be accomplished, it may be possible to commercialize the facility in the future, resulting in long-term cost savings. This command capability is also projected to be of benefit to several future Exploration programs. Finally,
OCR for page 65
Review of the Space Communications Program of Nasas Space Operations Mission Directorate
FIGURE 9.2 Interaction among the elements involved in NASA’s operations integration support. SOURCE: Gary Morse, NASA, “Operations Integration,” briefing to the NRC Committee to Review NASA’s Space Communications Committee, Washington, D.C., January 26, 2006, p. 4.
incorporation at the Launch Control Center provides KSC with a more robust, stand-alone prelaunch test capability. This project is being implemented through the KICS contract at KSC and is slated for completion in FY 2006.
RELATED ASSESSMENT
The goals and objectives of the operations integration program element are well understood, but they are not documented in a formal program plan. NASA Procedures and Guidelines document NPG 7120.511 refers to several of the types of activities that operations integration is responsible for, such as requirements and risk management (e.g., flight readiness certification). However, NPG 7120.5 discusses program-related activities only in general terms; it does not assign objectives and goals specifically to operations integration. The Support Requirements System Management Plan12 (JSC 27379) and the Automated Support Requirements Handbook13 (GP-60-3) include details on the processes and procedures governing requirements management. Highly qualified and experienced individuals make up the operations integration team, and they are tightly coupled to the senior management of the space communications program. Despite the fact that goals and objectives are not logged in a single, formal document, these senior participants clearly understand their mission and know how to manage available resources to accomplish it.
Senior NASA leadership understands the critical importance of maintaining communications for human spaceflight. This is evident in the assignment of such senior staff to this program element. The authority granted to the operations integration team to intervene on behalf of flight readiness is another indication of the confidence that NASA has in the team. Lives depend on the activities that they oversee and the decisions that they make.
Some of the deliverables that operations integration provides are concrete and well documented, but others are less so. Examples of the former include the team’s contributions to the Space Shuttle program and International Space Station program requirements documents. Other deliverables such as contract oversight generally contribute to the overall mission of communications for human spaceflight, but they are necessarily delivered as a single, concrete product. Senior NASA leadership reviews the performance of the operations integration team, and, in the end, successful maintenance of communications for missions involving human spaceflight is the ultimate indicator that operations integration is delivering.
The senior staff members involved in operations integration have demonstrated that they know how to provide the expected services using the resources available to them.
OCR for page 66
Review of the Space Communications Program of Nasas Space Operations Mission Directorate
To a large extent, they also dictate the program activities that they will use to meet those end goals. Decision points and down-selects have little relevance to the mission that operations integration is designed to perform.
The mission that operations integration performs is difficult to break down into specific short-term deliverables and metrics. Each mission that is successfully prepared for, certified, and executed serves as further acknowledgment that the operations integration program element continues to succeed in meeting its customers’ needs. Development activities have traditional schedules and metrics associated with them. However, it is more difficult to apply similar standards to the requirements development, contract oversight, and coordination activities that make up the vast majority of the operations integrations mission.
Operations integration’s overarching responsibilities are ongoing as long as human spaceflight continues. The primary goal, maintaining communications for those missions, is not only appropriate but also essential. As noted previously, the personnel assigned to operations integration have a tremendous amount of expertise and experience. They represent an irreplaceable resource. To plan for the future, operations integration recruits talented individuals from within the NASA centers and grooms them for increasingly responsible roles. The skills that these personnel need are well understood by SCO management. The facilities and equipment used to enable the communications capabilities that operations integration oversees are funded through center-managed contracts. The subsets of related facilities and equipment that fall under the SCO are discussed in Chapters 2 and 3 of this report.
Connections to the Broader Community
Operations integration’s mission is unique to NASA, in part because the program element’s role is required owing to the distributed, center-based management of SCO assets. Another aspect that is specific to NASA is the driver for the program element: human spaceflight. The work of others in the field (e.g., high-reliability terrestrial communications network design) bears little relevance to operations integration due to stark differences in the operational environments and the consequences associated with a service outage. The vast majority of the associated resources are contracted, not provided in-house. It is impressive that operations integration is able to coordinate and oversee such expansive contractual activities with the limited resources available to it.
Methodology
As mentioned at the outset of this chapter, there is not a formal program plan in place for the SCO. Operations integration’s mission requires it to perform system-level assessments every time it certifies readiness for human spaceflight. The sterling track record that operations integration has in terms of communications reliability serves as validation for its risk management approach. Its mission is centered on risk mitigation. The activities described above all contribute—some directly and some indirectly—to the program’s effort to reduce the risk of human spaceflight.
Overall Capabilities
The operations integration program element team members do a remarkable job in both defining and meeting the requirements related to communications assurance for human spaceflight, especially given the limited resources at their disposal. Their responsibilities are extremely broad in scope. The success that NASA has enjoyed in terms of maintaining communications on missions involving human spaceflight can be credited to the efforts of a select team of individuals who are exceedingly well qualified and capable of exerting their influence across a broad range of functional organizations. Their influence is particularly critical in light of the fact that the contractors who perform the tasks required for communications for human spaceflight report to their respective NASA centers, not to operations integration. Despite a rather complex contractor-management scheme and an indirect reporting structure for the contractors it oversees, operations integration has been extremely successful in meeting the needs of its customers and maintaining an outstanding record of accomplishment.
FINDINGS
Reliance on Individuals’ Skills and Expertise
Finding: NASA missions that involve human spaceflight rely heavily on the skills and influence of several highly experienced individuals to manage their communications activities and provide readiness assurance.
The possible unavailability of a few key personnel represents a significant risk to NASA’s ability to maintain an outstanding record in terms of communications for human spaceflight. It is doubtful that a less experienced team could meet the current high level of performance without dedication of significant additional resources. Operations integration actively recruits and trains new team members. Unfortunately, no amount of training can make up for the decades of experience that will be lost if a few key individuals depart.
Complex Reporting Structure
Finding: NASA’s center-based contract structure makes it critical for operations integration team members to be both highly experienced and widely respected across many organizations within NASA.
OCR for page 67
Review of the Space Communications Program of Nasas Space Operations Mission Directorate
The personnel responsible for the assets and activities engaged to facilitate communications for human spaceflight do not report directly to operations integration. The efficacy of the operations integration team therefore depends on their ability to identify and motivate key personnel across a wide range of functional organizations. Regardless of the specific reporting structure, critical activities such as flight readiness assurance will always require the involvement of highly skilled and experienced team members.
Outstanding Level of Customer Satisfaction Achieved
Finding: The individuals responsible for managing and executing the operations integrations program element do an excellent job in the eyes of their customers, the Space Shuttle and International Space Station programs.
This finding is based on a site visit made by panel members to JSC. During that visit, the International Space Station and Space Shuttle program managers both gave resoundingly positive reviews of the work performed by the members of the operations integration program element. Interaction with these customer representatives at JSC convinced panel members that an outstanding level of customer satisfaction is achieved.
NOTES
1. Morse, Gary, “Operations Integration,” briefing to the NRC Committee to Review NASA’s Space Communications Program, Washington, D.C., January 26, 2006.
2. Costrell, James, NASA Deputy Assistant Associate Administrator, personal communication, February 23, 2006.
3. Feinberg, A., and E. Thompson, NASA Awards NENS Contract to Honeywell Technology Solutions, NASA Press Release, October 9, 2003, available at http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2003/oct/HQ_c03jj_near_earth_network.html.
4. Feinberg, A., First Contract in SMCDS Solicitation Awarded to InDyne, Inc., NASA Press Release, September 17, 2003, available at http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2003/sep/HQ_ c03ff_indyne_contract.html.
5. Beutel, A., and K. Humphries, NASA Awards Mission Support Operations Contract, NASA Press Release, September 29, 2003, available at http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2003/sep/HQ_c03hh_mission_ops_cntrt.html.
6. Beutel, A., and K. Humphries, NASA Exercises Lockheed Martin Mission Support Contract Option, NASA Press Release, July 3, 2006, available at http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2004/jul/HQ_c04c_lockheed_contract.html.
7. Mathews, M., NASA Awards Technology Services Contract to SAIC, NASA Press Release, December 23, 2003, available at http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2003/dec/HQ_c03ww_saic_tech_services.html.
8. Morse, Gary, NASA Johnson Space Center Space Operations Services Manager, personal communication, February 22, 2006.
9. Morse, Gary, NASA Johnson Space Center Space Operations Services Manager, personal communication, February 22, 2006.
10. Morse, Gary, “Operations Integration,” briefing to the NRC Committee to Review NASA’s Space Communications Committee, Washington, D.C., January 26, 2006.
11. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), NASA Procedures and Guidelines NPG7120.5B, November 21, 2002.
12. NASA, Support Requirements System Management Plan, document number JSC-27379, December 1997.
13. NASA, Automated Support Requirements System Handbook, Kennedy Space Center General Procedures, Document Number GP-60-3, December 9, 2004.
OCR for page 68
Review of the Space Communications Program of Nasas Space Operations Mission Directorate
This page intentionally left blank.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
alerting satellite
Items in cart [4]
