The Mission Assurance Guide recognizes six core mission assurance processes executed through a combination of tasks and technical approaches that can be adjusted in focus and intensity to reflect program needs and constraints.
Requirements analysis and validation entails the rigorous review of formally specified user requirements and their consistency with formally or informally stated user needs and expectations. It begins by independently tracing requirements to top-level documents such as the capabilities description and concepts of operations. The resulting allocated system requirements are reviewed to ensure they are valid and can be verified using the methods selected. Models and simulations of expected system performance are generated to verify mission effectiveness, and performance attributes are quantified and compared with baseline tests. Models and simulations are validated by examining their development requirements, design and architecture, assumptions and constraints, input data, the operating characteristics of the targeted system, comparison benchmarks, and the correlation to actual or predicted performance. Cost and schedule may also be independently evaluated to ensure that realistic targets are being used and that adequate reserves exist to handle unforeseen problems. It is also important to verify that adequate staff, schedule, and funds are allocated to mission assurance.
Design assurance is a set of planning, analysis, and inspection activities to assess whether the evolving designs can produce a system that will perform as intended over all operating conditions and throughout its design life. Design assurance has several main objectives. The first is to verify traceability and compliance of proposed design elements to the requirements baseline and user needs. Next, space, launch, and ground segment designs are examined for accuracy and completeness. Design audits search for common problems or potential ones introduced by new technologies, and independent analyses validate the broad range of relevant design parameters such as dynamic loads and clearances, structural margins, thermal protection, link margins, power margins, and control stability. Production feasibility must also be verified. The producibility review ensures that what is produced is a valid interpretation of the design and manufacturing drawings and that the product can be reliably reproduced and integrated with the system. Design assurance also verifies that the finished system can be tested and maintained.
Manufacturing assurance seeks to ensure that the planned manufacturing processes are repeatable and reliable and can produce the system as designed. Manufacturing assessment actually begins in the concept design phase, when the manufacturing plan and process map should be generated to help understand and optimize the production workflow. Similarly, early producibility assessments help ensure that the most appropriate manufacturing techniques will be applied. Manufacturing processes must be qualified to instill confidence that design changes can be accommodated without adverse effect. They must also be monitored and controlled to ensure that the produced hardware matches appropriate qualified units. Periodic analyses are conducted of manufacturing methods, processes, techniques, equipment, and materials. Advances in manufacturing technology are reviewed to encourage the use of the latest and most efficient manufacturing technology.
Integration, testing, and evaluation is a broad process intended to verify that assembled components meet requirements individually and as part of the finished system. Most hardware integration tasks are formally planned and performed by contractor personnel; but the program office must ensure that the appropriate testing is properly planned, performed, witnessed, documented, and confirmed. Testing specialists must evaluate the formal test program and provide guidance based on best practices, standards, and lessons learned. They must periodically assess the overall test program as well as specific test results and the resolution of test failures. Informal tests can also be conducted to clarify design decisions or to investigate problems discovered during formal testing. Contractor-provided evidence of compliance to specifications must be closely scrutinized. A careful review should identify issues with the proposed test, integration, and verification plans, explore alternatives to testing, and evaluate the risk of deviating from applicable standards or best practices. Testing specialists must confirm that the test regimen is realistic and that the requirements can be objectively verified.
Operational readiness encompasses all activities required to transport, receive, accept, store, handle, deploy, configure, field-test, and operate launch and space vehicles and supporting ground systems. Major milestones include review of factory acceptance testing, preshipment reviews, commencement of launch base operations, system activation, preflight review of flight operations, postlaunch analysis, and commencement of on-orbit operations. Mission assurance here includes verification that operational procedures are consistent with overall system integrity and safety goals and validation that these procedures will achieve the desired results. Specific efforts include tasks that assess the feasibility of operational requirements, design adequacy relative to operational needs, site activation planning and execution, personnel proficiency, and operations. Initial planning must ensure that infrastructure requirements are clearly identified, including certification of training devices, rehearsal tools, and simulators. For ground systems, site activation and transition plans must accommodate lengthy installation, checkout, and testing cycles. As the operational procedures are defined, the operational readiness plan should identify the verification points that will eventually support the flightworthiness certification.
Mission assurance reviews and audits are the most visible manifestation of independent technical analysis. They facilitate understanding of the interfaces and composite performance of a system while synchronizing government and contractor expectations. There are three types: technical reviews, audits, and readiness reviews. Technical reviews investigate the status and performance of units, subsystems, and systems to uncover potential problems and recommend steps to resolve them. These include the production capability review, integrated baseline reviews, system requirements reviews, system design reviews, preliminary design review, critical design review, test readiness review, formal qualification review, production readiness reviews, system verification reviews, and hardware reviews. Audits are independent inspections of each configuration item or process to ensure that functional characteristics and physical attributes comply with relevant specifications, standards, and concepts of operations. These include functional configuration audits, physical configuration audits, preliminary design audits, and critical design audits. Readiness reviews serve as formal checkpoints to approve transition to operational status. These include independent readiness reviews, mission readiness reviews, preshipment reviews, flight readiness reviews, launch readiness reviews, and postflight reviews.