THEMIS Pre-Confirm 02/04/040 Final Inputs Pre-Confirmation Review February 4, 2004 Probe & Probe Carrier Program Management Director of Civil and Commercial

THEMIS Pre-Confirm 02/04/04 1

Final InputsPre-Confirmation Review

February 4, 2004

Final InputsPre-Confirmation Review

February 4, 2004

Probe & Probe Carrier Program ManagementProbe & Probe Carrier Program Management

Director of Civil and Commercial SpaceMichael Cully

Manager of Finance and PlanningPurshina Patel


Program Management Agenda

Program Management Agenda

Probe & Probe Carrier Schedules THEMIS Major Milestone Schedule Mission Level Critical Path Analysis Critical Path Analysis Drill Down Cost Proposal Development Summary Cost Management at Swales Phase B Cost Performance


Probe & Probe Carrier Schedules

Probe & Probe Carrier Schedules

Probe & Probe Carrier Schedule is driven by Long Lead Procurements:

1) Structures, Thermal, Harness (Swales Manufacturing Beltsville)

2) Propellant Tanks (ARDE under contract - FFP)

3) RCS with Swales Structures (AEROJET under contract - FFP)

4) Transponder (L3-Com under contract - FFP)

5) Digital Sun Sensor (ST-5/ADCOLE under contract - FFP)

6) Bus Avionics Unit (BAU) Single Board Computer (General Dynamics <GDDS> under contract)

7) BAU Power Control Electronics (Swales Design/GDDS manufacture)

8) BAU SMEX/TRIANA Comp Card (Swales Design/GDDS manufacture)

9) Battery (Proposals being evaluated, FFP award mid February)

10) Solar Arrays with Swales substrates (RFPs on street award late February)

11) Probe Carrier Separation System (Swales Manufacturing Beltsville) Probe 1 is completed first and is the trail blazer for Probes 2 – 5 Baseline is 12 weeks of schedule contingency (60 working days) between Probe 1 Delivery and the start of

Probe I&T Subsequent Probe builds have 40 Days (8 weeks) of schedule contingency for each set of builds The “A” Team consists of the full complement of the I&T Team. The “A” team builds Probe 1 and then

partitions into two Teams to build Probes 2 & 3 in parallel. A residual of the “A” team (Team 1) continues on with the environmental testing of Probes.

Following completion of Probes 2 & 3 they are handed off to A Team for environmental testing. Teams 2 & 3 are assigned to complete Probes 4 & 5.

Probe Carrier is built in parallel by a separate Mechanical Team and links up with Probes at test facility. The Probe Carrier has 40 Days of schedule contingency.

Schedule contingency at back end of program has been lumped into a full 60 days (4W +4W +4W) based on direction from GSFC


Major Milestone Schedule #1Major Milestone Schedule #1

General Assumptions– Five day work week with 8 hrs per, shift planned for nominal flow

• Exception - TV/TB testing and major moves

– I&T Team A is composed of teams 1-3 in order to cross train for Probe 2-5 I&T– Weekends & additional shifts can be used to make up schedule due to late

deliveries anomalies prior to mission I&T


Summary Schedule with Team Assignments for I&TSummary Schedule with

Team Assignments for I&T

CONTINGENCY 40 DAYS

Launch SiteOps (A)

P1 Procure,Fabrication &SubsystemIntegration

Probe CarrierAssy Test (A)

Probe toProbe Carrier

Assy (A)





Launch

Contingency~60 Days (A)

CONTINGENCY 40 DAYS

P2 InstrumentIntg & Test

(2)

P2 BusIntegration (2)


(3)


CONTINGENCY 40 DAYS


(2)


CONTINGENCY 40 DAYS


(3)


CONTINGENCY 60 DAYS


(1)

P1 BusIntegration

(A)

P1 ThermalTesting (1)

P1 Post T/V Contingency

(Mission Sims)

P2/3 Post T/V

Contingency

(MissionSims)

(X) Red characters represent team assignments

DUAL THERMAL VACUUM

Authorization to

Proceed

Pre-ConfirmReview

MissionPDR / Conf

Asnt

Probe &ProbeCarrierPDR

Confirm @HQ

Probe &ProbeCarrierCDR

MissionCDR

DUAL THERMAL VACUUM



P5 ThermalTesting (A)

P4 ThermalTesting (A)

Alt

erna

te w

/ o D

ates



Potential earlier

delivery of Instruments

allows earlier start

of I&T

Bus integration contingencies

Currently working day to day scheduling flow with UCB

Potential earlier

delivery of Instruments

allows earlier start of

Instrument I&T

Bus integration contingencies

Working day to day scheduling flow with UCB



Probe Carrier contingency is in parallel with Probe schedule contingency

Probe #1 has significant slack at end of I&T

Unused slack will be utilized for mission simulations (based on resource availability)


Mission Level Critical PathMission Level Critical Path

Probe #1 is off critical path since it is completed significantly earlier than Probes 2-5.


Critical Path Analysis Drill Down

Critical Path Analysis Drill Down

Current critical path at Probe level– Base panel composite structure delivery to RCS vendor (P1 late January ‘05)

• Subsequently drives availability of base panel for BAU, Battery & Transponder integration

– Overall structure deliveries are driven by thermal cycling & strength testing of each Probe prior to delivery to I&T

Probe Carrier is off the critical path– Built in parallel with Probes 1 – 5– Separation System is part of the Probe Carrier and is decoupled from the Probes until late in the

test program.– Separation System has extensive test program of prototype (2004) with early check fit with

Probes– Has adequate schedule contingency

Flight software is off critical path – Using commercial processor boards at Hammers (2003) and Swales FLATSAT (2004) – Processor Board Engineering Development Unit planned for mid 2004

Mitigation Strategies– BAU EDU can be used to start Probe Bus I&T– BUS simulator supplied to UCB for IDPU interface testing– IDPU simulator is supplied to Swales for Probe I&T– Base panel simulators to be used for RCS integration start– Propellant Tanks for Probe 1 are delivered to Swales for fit check with Probe structure prior to

shipment to RCS vendor– High fidelity Probe model (Phase A type) is planned for mid 2004 for I&T work flow and Harness

build up


Cost Management @ SwalesCost Management @ Swales

General Tracking of Costs– Subsystem Leads responsible for monitoring all labor and material charges

• Charge numbers are opened at the fifth WBS level

– PM and Subsystem Leads review weekly spending via on-line reports• Incurred cost data available weekly

– Major subcontracts are Firm Fixed Price with $ Milestones consistent with SOW (exception to Hammers)

– Contractors working via purchase order or cost-reimbursement, • invoice bi- monthly • PM sign off required prior to processing

Phase B - Budgets versus actual spending worked at summary level Phase C/D – Swales internal Performance Measurement System

– Budget Cost Work Schedule (BCWS) developed in Open Plan for each major subsystem

– Budget Cost Work Performed (BCWP) calculated by statusing of Open Plan– Actual Cost Worked Performed (ACWP) compared to BCWS & BCWP to assess

performance– Estimates To Complete (ETC) initiated if WBS elements projected to be > 10% of

Budget At Completion (ITD + ETC)


Probe & Probe CarrierCost Basis of EstimatesProbe & Probe Carrier

Cost Basis of EstimatesBasis of Estimate

Non-recurring / Hardware / Recurring

Component

Comparison / Analogy

Detail Engineering / Grassroots

Parametric (Aerospace

Model)Comment

2.2 Swales Flight Segment Elements2.2.1 Swales Systems Management2.2.1.1 Project Management NA Primary Secondary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.1.2 Systems Engineering NA Primary Secondary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.1.3 Launch Vehicle Interface NA Primary Secondary EO-1, FUSE, and MAP2.2.1.4 Logistics and Planning NA Primary Secondary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.1.5 Design Reviews NA Primary Secondary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.1.6 Quality Assurance Yes* Primary Secondary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.2 Probe Bus (Spacecraft Bus) 2.2.2.1 GN&C Systems

2.2.2.1.1 Attitude Control Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE, Vendor Quotes2.2.2.1.2 Reaction Control Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE, Vendor Quotes

2.2.2.2 S/C Electrical and Avionics Systems2.2.2.2.1 Electrical Systems Engineering Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1, SMEX-Lite, FUSE2.2.2.2.2 Avionics Systems Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1, SMEX-Lite, FUSE, Vendor Quotes2.2.2.2.3 Flight Software Yes* Secondary Primary Subcontract Priced2.2.2.2.4 Power Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1, PCE Development, Vendor Quotes2.2.2.2.5 Harness Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 2.2.2.2.6 Communications Systems Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1, Vendor Quotes

2.2.2.3 Mechanical Systems Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1, Commercial Space2.2.2.4 Thermal Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1, MAP2.2.3 Probe (Satellite) Integration & Test

Swales Flight Segment Elements WBS

* Note: Yes indicates that this WBS element has lower level WBS elements, which include NRE, hardware, and RE items.

* Note: Yes indicates that this WBS element has lower level WBS elements, which include NRE, hardware, and RE items.

Primary = Represents primary means of pricing.

Primary = Represents primary means of pricing.

Secondary = Represents secondary means of pricing.Secondary = Represents secondary means of pricing.

Cost Reserves held by UCB, Swales proposal excluded cost reserves

Parametric Model Assessment based on Aerospace modelParametric Model Assessment based on Aerospace model


Basis of Estimate

2.2.3 Probe (Satellite) Integration & Test2.2.3.1 Probe (S/C) Bus Integration & Test

2.2.3.1.1 Core Team Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.3.1.2 Subsystem Qual. Tests Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.3.1.3 Spacecraft Tests Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.3.1.4 EGSE and Functional Test System Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.3.1.5 Probe MGSE Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.3.1.6 Propulsion GSE Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE

2.2.3.2 Core Team Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.3.3 Satellite Environmental Tests Yes* Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE, Facility Quotes2.2.4 Probe Carrier2.2.4.1 GN&C Systems NA Secondary Primary2.2.4.2 Electrical Systems

2.2.4.2.1 Electrical Systems Engineering NA Secondary Primary2.2.4.2.2 Harness NA Secondary Primary EO-1 and FUSE

2.2.4.3 Mechanical Systems NA Secondary Primary Commercial Space, Vendor Quotes2.2.4.4 Thermal NA Secondary Primary2.2.4.5 Probe Carrier Integration & Test

2.2.4.5.1 Core Team NA Secondary Primary2.2.4.5.2 Probe Carrier Subsystem Qual. Tests NA Secondary Primary2.2.4.5.3 Probe Carrier Tests NA Secondary Primary2.2.4.5.4 Probe Carrier EGSE NA Secondary Primary

2.2.5 Flight Spares2.2.6 Mission Integration & Test2.2.6.1 I&T Management NA Primary Secondary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.6.2 Core Team NA Secodnary Primary EO-1 and FUSE2.2.6.3 Mission Environmental Tests NA Secodnary Primary EO-1 and FUSE, Facility Quotes2.2.6.4 Mission Unique GSE

2.2.6.4.1 Probe Carrier MGSE NA Secondary Primary EO-12.2.7 Launch Site Processing Mission Items NA Primary Secondary EO-1, FUSE, and MAP

Basis of Estimate

Non-recurring / Hardware / Recurring

Component

Comparison / Analogy

Detail Engineering / Grassroots

Parametric (Aerospace

Model)Comment

2.2 Swales Flight Segment Elements

Swales Flight Segment Elements WBS

Cost Reserves held by UCB, Swales proposal excluded cost reserves

Probe & Probe CarrierCost Basis of EstimatesProbe & Probe Carrier

Cost Basis of Estimates


Phase B Burn Rate(Inception To Date 12/31/03)

Phase B Burn Rate(Inception To Date 12/31/03)

Exceptional labor performance against Cost Proposal– Slower start up in staffing in some areas (Electrical

Engineering)– On average we are using a more experienced staff than

originally proposed resulting in design labor efficiencies– Recent labor levels (December & January) are consistent

with cost proposal labor levels essentially reaching full staffing

– Current labor savings will be used to buy down risk in phase C/D

PHASE BProposed vs Incurred Labor Hours

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Sep-03 Oct-03 Nov-03 Dec-03

Incurred

Proposed

Item Incurred ProposedHours 26927 34518 -7591 -21.99%Total Cost ($K) $3,871 $5,126 -$1,255 -24.49%

Delta

Summary Against Contract Value PercentageITD Hrs vs Contract Total 14.21%ITD Labor Hrs vs Contract Total 14.14%ITD $ Spent vs Contract Total 10.56%

Subcontract/Materials Plan– Spend rate is behind plan due to assumptions

made in cost proposal on Milestone Payment plans for FFP contracts

– Generally there is a lag of 30 – 45 days from assumed incurred cost (plan) versus actual billing

– Awarded FFP contracts (Tanks, RCS, Transponder) are in line with Phase A estimates


Pre-Confirmation ReviewFebruary 4, 2004

Pre-Confirmation ReviewFebruary 4, 2004

Probe & Probe Carrier Program ManagementProbe & Probe Carrier Program Management

Backup Slides

RAO Assessment


RAO Probe Subsystem Cost Assessment

RAO Probe Subsystem Cost Assessment

In general Non Recurring (NRE) comparison is in acceptable range (RAO 10% higher)– Percent Difference at Subsystem Level defined as:

• {RAO}/{Swales Grass Roots BOE}) Largest discrepancy is in Recurring (RE) element:

– Structures @ 104% (RAO > than Swales Grass Roots)• Analysis of Recurring effort indicates that RAO estimate is higher than Swales

Grass Roots BOE. This represents nearly 43% (5 Probes x $730K or $3.65M) of total dollar value of difference between RAO and Swales for all cost elements.

• Swales believes that our Grass Roots BOE is representative of the work to be performed:

– Based on Swales Commercial Space manufacturing of structures (we do this for a living every day on a volume & cost constrained basis)

– All work performed in house at Swales Beltsville facility at industry competitive rates– Tolerances and materials used on structure are average for Space structures and are

not “Optical Bench” class– Majority of panels are cut from larger pre formed panels therefore reducing cycle

times– Tooling is less complex due to the method above and is spread over multiple builds– No Mechanisms on Probe Bus which is typically included in historical Mechanical

Cost at Completion numbers (Separation System costs are captured under Probe Carrier WBS)


RAO Probe Subsystem Cost Assessment Con’t

RAO Probe Subsystem Cost Assessment Con’t

Largest discrepancy is in Recurring (RE) element:– Power @ 73% (RAO > than Swales Grass Roots)

• Analysis of Recurring effort indicates that RAO estimate is higher than Swales Grass Roots BOE. This represents nearly 20% (5 Probes x $340K or $1.7M) of total dollar value of difference between RAO and Swales for all cost elements.

– Majority of RE is in Battery & Solar Array costs (will be negotiated as FFP)– Lithium-Ion Battery & Solar Array costs are based on Phase A FFP quotes from

industry– Typically the Lithium-Ion batteries have lower per unit costs than industry standard – Solar Array substrate costs are included in structures WBS

C&DH @ 17% (RAO > than Swales Grass Roots)– Swales Cost Proposal assumed CFE Processor board and therefore was not priced

by Swales. If this was priced and included in the cost proposal RAO and Swales grass roots estimate would have been better aligned

Probe Carrier/Separation System indicates RAO estimate (lower bound) is in line with revised Swales estimate. Increase in estimate was due to higher costs for Separation System development and materials. (This was one of the several factors which drove Swales to develop the Separation System in-house)

Documents

THEMIS Pre-Confirm 02/04/040 Final Inputs Pre-Confirmation Review February 4, 2004 Probe & Probe Carrier Program Management Director of Civil and Commercial