RHESSI and THEMIS
PI Mode Experience
Feb 1 2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
AGENDA
1:00 UCB Missions
R. Lin, UCB Director
1:15 RHESSI
R. Lin, PI, UCB
1:30 THEMIS
V. Angelopoulos, PI, UCB
1:45 PI Mode Experience
THEMIS & RHESSI
P. Harvey, PM, UCB
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
SPACE SCIENCES LABORATORY
Background
• Initiated in 1958 by Drs. Teller and Seaborg
• Multidisciplinary organization
• Connecting campus research to space efforts
• Facility opened in 1966
• New facilities added in 1998
Research Efforts Involving
• Balloons
• Sounding rockets
• Satellite instruments & science complements
• Complete satellites
• Mission & Science Operations
• Ground Station Operations
Agencies Involved
• NASA, NSF, NSBF, USAF, DOE
• ESA, ISAS, IKI, PSI, etc.
• $50M/yr (>90% NASA, <10% other.)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Facilities
• 55000 sq. ft. Office and Laboratory Space
• Employing 420 Scientists, Engineers, Staff
• On-Site Machine Shop
• Clean Room Facilities to Class 100
• Thermal Vacuum Facilities up to 3m diameter
• Spacecraft Integration Facility
• 4-story High Bay
• Radiation Sources Laboratory
• Mission Operations Centers
• Science Operations Centers
• 11 Meter S-Band Satellite Antenna
• Secure High Speed Communications to NASA
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Operational Flight Instruments
RHESSI
FAST
IMAGE FUV, WIC
GALEX detectors
CHIPS
Polar EFI
Wind 3DP
Cluster II EFW, CIS
Mars Global Surveyor ER
ROCSAT 2 - ISUAL
Ulysses LAN
FUSE detectors
SOHO UVCS & SUMER detectors
KITSAT SPEAR
Under Development
HUBBLE - COS
STEREO – IMPACT
THEMIS
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
SSL PERSONNEL
107 Scientific Researchers
133 Professional/Technical/Support Staff
150 Graduate and Undergarduate Students
SPACE PHYSICS RESEARCH GROUP (136 total personnel)
46 Scientific Researchers
25 involved in Magnetospheric Physics
46 Engineering & Technical Staff
37 Graduate & Undergraduate Students
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Operations Components
• Mission Operations Center
• Science Operations Center
• 11-meter S-Band Antenna with
X-band capability
• High Speed Communications to
NASA
Ground Network
• Network Security
• Autonomous Operations
Pass Supports
Orbit Determination & Tracking
Spacecraft Command & Control
Emergency Response System
Self Checking
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
FAST AURORAL SNAPSHOT
• Science Package
Electric Field Instruments
Particle Instruments
Electronics
• Mission Operations
• Science Operations
Launched on 21 Aug 1996
Mission Continuing through
2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Lunar Prospector
(1st competed Discovery Mission)
PI Dr. Alan Binder
Magnetometer/Electron Reflectometer Instrument
Dr. R. P. Lin
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Imager for Magnetopause-to-Aurora Global Exploration (IMAGE)
MIDEX
PI Dr James Burch SWRI
Far UltraViolet (FUV) Imager Instrument
Dr. Stephen Mende UCB-SSL
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RAMATY HIGH ENERGY SOLAR SPECTROSCOPIC IMAGER
RHESSI: A NASA Small Explorer (SMEX)
PI: Prof. Robert P. Lin UCB-SSL
• Project Management
• Spacecraft Bus
• Science Package
Imager
Spectrometer
Electronics
• Mission Operations
• Science Operations
• Ground Data Systems
Launched February 5, 2002
Mission continuing through 2006-7
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Cosmic Hot Interstellar Plasma Spectrometer (CHIPS)
A NASA University-Class Explorer (UNEX)
PI Dr. Mark Hurwitz UCB-SSL
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
TIME HISTORY OF EVENTS AND MACROSCALE INTERACTIONS DURING SUBSTORMS
THEMIS: A Middle Class Explorer (MIDEX#5)
PI: Dr. Vassilis Angelopoulos UCB-SSL
• Project Management
• Spacecraft Bus
• Science Package
• Mission Operations
• Science Operations
• Ground Data Systems
Launch: October 19, 2006
Nominal Lifetime: 2 years
Production Mode Development of
Flight Boards (Here: SST Front-End)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Overview
Dr. Robert P. Lin
Principal Investigator
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Prime Responsibilities
UC Berkeley (PI institution)
Germanium detectors & cryostat
Instrument electronics
Integration & Test
Ground station & MOC/SOC
GSFC
Grids, Cryocooler
PSI (Switzerland)
Telescope & aspect system
Spectrum Astro
Spacecraft
THEMIS & RHESSI
A1309.013
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Imager - Top View
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Imager - Side View
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Detectors and Cryostat
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: June 4, 2001
X-43A launch failure
Next Pegasus rocket launch delayed in X-43A aftermath
The High Energy Solar Spectroscopic Imager, or HESSI satellite, was
scheduled to rocket into space on Thursday aboard an air-launched Orbital
Sciences Pegasus XL booster.
RHESSI Orbit (~600 km altitude)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
23 July 2002 Flare
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: 23 July 2002 flare nuclear de-excitation lines (Smith et al. 2003)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: Oct 28, 2003 Nov 2, 2003
Energetic Particles at the Sun:
2.2 MeV line flux
4.4 MeV
2.2/4.4 ratio
>1380+-11
>91+-11
15.2
518+-8
35+-7
14.8
Power law index
Np (>30 MeV)
3.8
>7.2x1033
3.8
2.7x1033
Power law index (integrated fluence)
3.4
Np (>30 MeV)
1.8x1034
3.4
9.1x1032
Solar Energetic Particles at 1 AU:
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: Microflares from
Active Regions Krucker et al. 2002
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI as a Polarimeter (20 – 100 keV)
A small (3 cm diam by 3.5 cm high) cylinder of Be serves as a
Compton scattering element.
The Ge detectors measure the distribution of the scattered radiation.
The rotation of the spacecraft rotation provides an effective method
for fine sampling of the scatter distribution.
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
X4.8 Flare of 23-July-2002
20 - 40 keV Polarization
FLR2072301 : 20 - 40 keV
Counts
6000
4000
µ fit = 0.11
µ 100 - 0.55
2000
š ­ 20%
0
0°
60°
120°
180°
240°
300°
360°
Azimuthal Scatter Angle
Flare location : S13E72
THEMIS & RHESSI
 ≈ 20%
 ≈72° ± 5°
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI X-ray imaging
during HXR peak of 20
Jan 05 X7 flare:
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Mission Overview
Peter Harvey
Project Manager
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: Purpose and Team
RAMATY HIGH ENERGY SOLAR SPECTROSCOPIC IMAGER (RHESSI)
 Purpose
To understand particle acceleration and
explosive energy release in the magnetized plasmas at the Sun.
 Capabilities
•Will provide the first hard X-ray imaging spectroscopy of the Sun;
•Will provide the first high-resolution spectroscopy of solar -ray lines;
•Will provide the first Solar imaging above 100 keV;
•Will provide the first imaging of solar -ray lines.
 Collaborating Institutions
•University of California (UCB,UCLA)
•Goddard Space Flight Center
•Paul Scherrer Institute (Switzerland)
•Spectrum Astro Incorporated
•Lawrence Berkeley Nat’l Laboratory
•Jet Propulsion Laboratory
•Montana State University
•University of Alabama at Huntsville
•Nat’l Oceanic and Atmospheric Adm.(NOAA)
•Institute of Astronomy ETHZ in Switzerland
•University of Glasgow, Scotland,
•National Astronomical Observatory, Japan
•Observatoire de Paris-Meudon, France
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: MISSION PARAMETERS

Launch to Orbit
Orbit :
600 km Circular
Inclination: 38 degrees
Orbit Period: 96 minutes
S/C Attitude: Sun Pointed, Spin Stabilized
S/C Spin Rate: 12-15 rpm

Operations
Phases: Launch and Early Orbit Checkout (30 days)
Minimum Mission Operations (6 months)
Baseline Operations (18 months)
Crab Observations (1 week each July)
Anneal Period (1 week every 2 years)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: KEY PROGRAMMATIC ASPECTS
• PI Mode1
PI Team Provides Space, Ground and Data Analysis Segments
PI Team Provides Cost, Schedule, Performance Assurance Management
• Launch Vehicle
•Vehicle :
"SELVS II" ( Pegasus XL ) selected after HESSI CDR.
• Cost and Schedule Caps
Includes Spacecraft, Ground and Data Analysis (Phases A through E)
Launch no later than 3 years from Contract Start.
Project terminated if not launched on time or if cost to complete exceeds cap.
• Resulting Implementation Strategy
Design Using Off the Shelf Items as much as possible
Limit Optimization
Hold Wide Margins
[1] Not PI Mode as of 5/2000.
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: ORGANIZATION
Explorers Office
Frank Snow, Mission Mgr
KSC
Launch Vehicle
Management
U.C. Berkeley
Robert Lin, PI
Peter Harvey, Project Manager
Spectrum Astro
Spacecraft Bus
Paul Scherrer Institute
Imaging Systems
GSFC
Grid Processing, Cooler
Brian Dennis, co-I
DOE ( LBNL )
Detectors
vanBeek Consultancy
Grids
JPL
Grids
Montana State Univ
Ground Coordination
Ground Based
Observatories
Tecomet
Grids
OSC
Pegasus XL
SpaceWorks
Spacecraft Support
EG&G Ortec
Germanium Crystals
Hernandez Eng.
Safety
EMP / Allied Signal
Ground Antenna
THEMIS & RHESSI
JPL
Environmental Tests
HESSI Organization Chart
Major Subcontracts & Suppliers
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: WBS
HESSI Project
1. Management,
Science,
Systems Eng.
2. Spacecraft Bus
3. Instrument
Subsystems
4. Mission I&T
5. Ground
Systems
1.1 Management
Peter Harvey
2.1 Management
Rick Wanner
3.1 Imager
Alex Zehnder
4.1 Spacecraft I&T
Rick Sterling
5.1 SOC
Tim Quinn
1.2 Science
Dr. Robert Lin
2.2 Spacecraft Bus
John Jordan
3.2 Spectrometer
Paul Turin
4.2 Operations
Preparations
Chris Smith
5.2 MOC/Ground
Antenna and Site
Manfred Bester
1.3 Systems
Engineering
David Curtis
2.3 Bus I&T
Jeff Jackson
3.3 IDPU
David Curtis
HESSI Work Breakdown Structure
(Phase D2)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: SCHEDULE
SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT
Personnel Required : 1 FTE at Project Level; 1/2 FTE at S/C, 1/2 at GSFC, 1/2 at PSI.
Integrated at Project Level. All Project98.
1998
1999
2000
20
N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J
ID
1
Task Name
2
Concept Review
3
Pre-Preliminary Design Review
4
Preliminary Design Review
5
Confirmation Review
6
Critical Design Review
7
L-1 Year Review
8
Pre-Environmental Review
9
Recovery Review 1
10
Reconfirmation Assessment Review
11
ReConfirmation Readiness Review
12
Reconfirmation Review
13
Red Team Review I
10/24
14
Pre Environmental Review 2
10/30
15
Pre Ship Review
16
Red Team Review II
17
Phase A Concept
18
Phase B Design
19
Phase C Fabrication
20
Phase D Integration
21
Phase D Qual-to-Mishap
22
Phase D2 Recovery & ReIntegration
23
Phase D2 Qual (JPL)
24
Phase D2 Final Prep (VAFB 836)
25
Phase D2 LV Processing (VAFB 1555)
Requirements Review
THEMIS & RHESSI
12/15
2/2
6/24
7/29
8/17
11/19
6/18
2/29
4/4
5/16
6/29
8/4
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
95%
0
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS Overview
Dr. Vassilis Angelopoulos
Principal Investigator
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
TIME HISTORY OF EVENTS AND MACROSCALE
INTERACTIONS DURING SUBSTORMS (THEMIS)
Science Team
RESOLVING THE PHYSICS OF ONSET
AND EVOLUTION OF SUBSTORMS
Principal Investigator
Vassilis Angelopoulos, UCB
EPO Lead
Nahide Craig, UCB
Program Manager
Peter Harvey, UCB
Industrial Partner
SWALES Aerospace, Inc., Beltsville MD
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS: Science Goals
Primary:
“How do substorms operate?”
– One of the oldest and most important
questions in Geophysics
– A turning point in our understanding of the
dynamic magnetosphere
Aurora
Current disruption
Reconnection
First bonus science:
“What accelerates storm-time ‘killer’ electrons?”
– A significant contribution to space weather science
Second bonus science:
“What controls efficiency of solar wind – magnetosphere coupling?”
– Provides global context of
Solar Wind – Magnetosphere interaction
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Mission Elements
Probe conjunctions along Sun-Earth line recur once per 4 days over North America.
Ground based observatories completely
cover North American sector; can
determine auroral breakup within 1-5s …
… while THEMIS’s space-based probes
determine onset of Current Disruption and
Reconnection each within <10s.
: Ground Based Observatory
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS Mission Overview
Peter R. Harvey
Project Manager
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Instrument Payload
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Probe Bus Design
Power positive in all attitudes with
instruments off (launch, safe hold modes)
Passive thermal design using MLI and
thermostatically controlled heaters tolerant
of longest shadows (3 hours)
– Spin stabilized probes orbit within 13° of
ecliptic plane have inherently stable thermal
environment
S-Band communication system always in
view of earth every orbit at nominal
attitude. In view for greatest
part of orbit in any attitude
Passive spin stability achieved in all nominal
and off-nominal conditions
Monoprop blow down RCS (propulsion)
system is self balancing on orbit
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Launch Configuration
Dedicated launch
accommodated within
standard Delta 7925-10
vehicle configuration
and services
10’ Composite Fairing
required to
accommodate five
Probes on the Probe
Carrier in the “Wedding
Cake” configuration
PC stays attached to Delta
3rd stage after probe
dispense
Each probe dispense from
the PCA is coordinated
with but independent of
the other probes
No single probe anomaly
precludes dispense of
remaining probes
Standard Delta
10 ft. Fairing
Static Envelope
Probe Carrier Assembly
(PCA = 5 Probes +
Probe Carrier) on L/V
3712 PAF
Star 48 3rd
Stage
Probe Carrier Assembly (PCA) on Delta 3rd Stage
THEMIS Launch
Configuration
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Ground System Block Diagram
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Programmatic Overview
Programmatic Overview
– PI Mode
PI Team Provides Space, Ground, Data Segments
PI Team Provides Cost, Schedule, Performance Assurance
PI Team Provides Education/Public Outreach
– Cost and Schedule Caps
Single Cost Cap for the Mission
Launch no later than March 2007
– Performance Assurance
MIDEX Quality Requirements
 Implementation Strategy
Use Heritage Instrumentation
Coordinate Common Buy Parts
Keep Probe/Probe Carrier Simple and Robust
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
Explorers Office
Frank Snow, Mission Mgr
U.C. Berkeley
KSC
Vassilis Angelopoulos, PI
Peter Harvey, PM
Garrett Skrobot,
Mission Integ Mgr
Swales Aerospace
Mike Cully
U.Colo/LASP
Bob Ergun
TU-BS
Uli Auster
IWF
Werner Magnes
THEMIS & RHESSI
CETP
Alain Roux
B. De la Porte
GSFC/GNCD
Karen Richon
UCLA
Chris Russell
Univ of Calgary
Eric Donovan
Univ of Alberta
J. Samson
THEMIS Organization Chart
Subcontracts/Agreements
Phases BCD
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
THEMIS Project
1. Management,
Science,
Systems Eng.
2. Space
Segment
Development
1.1
Management
2.1 Instruments
1.2 Science
2.2 Spacecraft
1.3 Systems
Engineering
3. Ground
Segment
Development
3.1 Mission
Operations
Center
3.2 Science
Operations
Center
4. Mission Ops
& Data Analysis
5. Education &
Public Outreach
4.1 Mission
Operations
4.2 Data Analysis
3.3 Ground
Based
Observatories
THEMIS Work Breakdown
Structure
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
Management, Science and
Systems Engineering
Program
Management
Peter Harvey
Management Support
K. Harps
Finances
M. Larson
Purchasing
M. Giordano
Documentation
D. Meilhan
Scheduling
A. Shutkin
Administration
Facility Support
J. Cooks
Contracts
J. Keenan
Purchasing
G. Davis
Accounting
J. Williams
Travel
J. Jones
Personnel
UCB Sponsored Projects
D. Weldon
Contracting
Systems
Engineering
Science
V. Angelopoulos
Ellen Taylor
Electrical
Ellen Taylor
Mechanical /Thermal
Paul Turin
Chris Smith
EMC/ESC/MAG
Robert Snare (UCLA)
Quality & Safety
Ron Jackson
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
Parts
Jorg Fischer
THEMIS WBS 1.0
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
Instruments
Instrument
Data Processor
Unit (IDPU)
Electric Field
Instrument
(EFI)
Robert Abiad
Peter Berg
Heath Bersch
Dorothy Gordon
Frank Harvey
Selda Heavner
Jim Lewis
Jeanine Potts
Chris Scholz
Kathy Walden
Forrest Mozer
John Bonnell
Greg Delory
Art Hull
Bill Donakowski
Greg Dalton
Robert Duck
Mark Pankow
Dan Schickele
Stu Harris
Hilary Richard
LASP
Robert Ergun
Aref Nammari
Ken Stevens
Jim Westfall
ElectroStatic
Analyser
(ESA)
Charles Carlson
M. Marckwardt
Bill Elliott
Ron Herman
Solid State
Telescope
(SST)
Fluxgate
Mag
(FGM)
Robert Lin
Davin Larson
Ron Canario
Robert Lee
T. Moreau
TUBS/IWF
Uli Auster
K.H. Glassmeier
W. Magnes
Mag
Booms
Search Coil
Mag
(SCM)
CETP
Alain Roux
Bertran de la Porte
Olivier Le Contel
Christophe Coillot
Abdel Bouabdellah
Instrument
I&T
Rick Sterling
Hari Dharan
Y. Kim
Tien Tan
Bill Tyler
THEMIS WBS 2.1
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
Ground Segment
Mission Ops Science
Ops
(Mission Planning)
Manfred Bester
Mark Lewis
Tim Quinn
Sabine Frey
Tai Phan
John Bonnell
Laura Peticolas
GSFC/GCND
David Sibeck
Mark Beckman
Bob DeFazio
David Folta
Rick Harman
Ground Based
Observatories
All Sky
Imagers
Stephen Mende
Stu Harris
Steve Geller
Harald Frey
Ground
Magnetometers
Fielding
& Operation
(UC&UA)
UCLA
Chris Russell
Joe Means
Dave Pierce
UC
Eric Donovan
UA
J. Samson
THEMIS WBS 3
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Top Level Schedule (from PDR)
GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER
MISSION MGR. : FRANK SNOW
MILESTONES
THEMIS TOP LEVEL SCHEDULE
STATUS AS OF: 11/06/03
CY 2003
CY 2004
CY 2005
CY 2006
J F M AM J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O
PDR.
MAJOR REVIEWS
SRR.
1 IDPU DEVELOPMENT
CONF. REV (HQ)
11/12-14
1/15
DSG COMPL.
CDR.
4/06-07
BOX ETU
ASSY I&T
12/08
4/01 4/16
7/16
MCRR
12/08-09
IDPU ETU DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
2 EFI SPB / AXB DEVELOPMENT
1 23 4 5 6
FLT I&T COMPL
8/18
7/13 7/28 8/11
7/21 8/04
DSG COMPL..
3
4 5 6
1
2
FLT I&T COMPL
6/08 7/06 8/03 8/31 9/28 10/12
EFI SPB & AXB DESIGN, FAB, I&T
11/26
3 ESA DEVELOPMENT
2/12
1/22
4 SST DEVELOPMENT
2/27 3/05
ETU
DSG COMPL. FAB
4/30
PROBE CARRIER &
-BUS SLACK
MISSION SLACK --
FLT
ASSY 16
ETU ETU
H/W
DSG COMPL.. FAB TESTS FAB
ESA ETU DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
Slack Legend
INSTRUMENT SLACK --
ETU
TEST
1-6
FLT I&T COMPL
6/25
8/27
ETU
I&T
FLT 1-6 FAB
1
COMPL.
3/02
7/06
2 3 4
5 6
SST ETU DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
FLT I&T COMPL
12/16
5 FGM DEVELOPMENT
DSG COMPL.
FGM ETU DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
9/29
FGE ETU
ETU TEST
I&T (GERM.
)
12/29 1/26 2/23
ETU
PROC/FA
B
6 SCM DEVELOPMENT
ETU
FAB
DSG COMPL..
SCM EM DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
7 SCM/FGM BOOM DEVELOPMENT
SCM EM DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
8 FLIGHT PLATFORM & HARNESS
9 INSTRUMENT I&T
ETU & FLIGHT 1 - 5 INTEGRATION & TEST
INSTRUMENT DELIVERY TO SWALES
1/06
1/21
DSG
COMPL..
ETU
I&T
12/10
3/08
FLT 1-5
FGE
FAB &
TEST
8/06 8/24 9/28
11/02
9/10 10/15
FLT 1-2
5/31
3-5
FLT I&T COMPL
10/18
7/26
ETU
I&T
FLT 1-6
FAB
COMPL.
4/16
7/30
FAB HINGES
& TUBES
2-3
1
4-6
FLT I&T COMPL
9/24 10/25 11/30
1 2 34 5 6
FLT I&T COMPL
6/14
8/24 9/07 9/21
8/31 9/14 9/28
1 2 3 4 5 6
FLT HARNESS COMPL
8/03 8/31 9/28
8/17 9/14 10/12
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
ETU I&T
7/13
11/16 12/23 1/20
10/26 11/30 1/06
F5 SLACK (120 days)
F1 SLACK (95 days)
F1
10 PROBE CARRIER
PROBE CARRIER DESIGN, FAB, TEST
3/10
F1 SLACK (40 days)
F2
4/06
F3
F4 F5
6/06
5/04
5/04
F1
2/16
12 PROBE & INSTRUMENT I&T
13 PROBE CARRIER ASSY I & T
6/27
8/09
F2-3
F4 F5
6/24
PROBE F1 SLACK (60 days)
5/11
PROBE I&T with INSTRUMENTS
F5 SLACK (64 days)
9/28
I&T COMPLETE
11 SPACECRAFT PROBES
LONG LEAD PROCUREMENT,
SUBSYSTEM DESIGN, FAB & BUS I&T
6/29
DSG & PROCURE FAB COMPL..
9/15
PROBE
CARRIER SLACK
(60 days)
8/10
8/03
PROBE F5SLACK (40 days)
10/05
F1
F2-3 F4 F5
8/25
10/19 12/05
11/23
INTEGRATION & ENVIRINMENTAL TESTS
3/15
14 LAUNCH OPERATIONS
LAUNCH PROCESSING/LAUNCH
THEMIS & RHESSI
SHIP &
LAUNCH
PROCESSING
5/25
MISSION SLACK
(60 days)
8/21
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
PI Mode Experience
Peter R. Harvey
Project Manager
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Tasks
SSB Subcommittee Tasks
(1) examine and assess the selection process and objectives for PI-led
missions, including the balance between science objectives and cost and
management criteria,
(2) examine the roles, relationships, and authority among members of the
PI-team (e.g., PI, university, industry, field center) in past missions,
(3) identify lessons learned from the scientific and technical performance of
previous PI-led missions,
(4) investigate and analyze the factors contributing to cost overruns of
missions, including any requirements that are imposed on PI-led projects
during their development,
(5) identify opportunities for knowledge transfer to new PIs and sustained
technical management experience throughout the program, and
(6) identify lessons learned and recommend practices and incentives for
improving the overall conduct of future PI-led missions.
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Questions
SSB Subcommittee Questions
1.
Please list those problems and challenges that were distinct from a
program-led mission that you have faced/are facing in your effort to
accomplish your proposed PI-led project. What is the status of each or
what was the outcome?
2.
What were the responsibilities of the program manager, project
manager, and PI?
3.
Comments on communications and interactions among the PI, PM
(project manager), NASA, industry, and other key players?
4.
What aspects of the PI program do you think facilitated your work and
getting the mission done on time and on budget, and what do you
consider the most significant obstacles in achieving mission success?
5.
What changes would you make to the way PI-led missions are defined
and/or executed to improve them at the proposal, development, and/or
implementation phases;
6.
Please comment on lessons learned from your experience managing a
PI mission(s).
7.
Would you do it again, why or why not?
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q1. PI vs. PL mode:
Problems and Challenges
•
PI mode is cost-capped but PL mode is not operating under strict cost cap.
–
Problems and challenges same in both, but solutions are different
–
PI mode provides flexibility not available in PL mode; this helps both science and costs
RHESSI Examples
HESSI cryocooler challenging
PL mode view
PI mode view
Buy expensive ($$)
Buy many and test
Support with in-house development
JPL vibration table broke HESSI
Major overrun ($$)
SAI w/ UCB joint rebuilt
I&T at UCB
HESSI launch before solar max
When we can (sci)
Can do now: simplify spacecraft
HESSI Grids
Buy one and monitor ($$)
Parallel path
HESSI Operations expensive
OK, nominal ($$)
Build UCB antenna, use automation
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q1. PI vs. PL mode:
Problems and Challenges
THEMIS Examples
PL mode view
PI mode view
THEMIS SST too noisy
Relax requirements (SCI)
Develop in-house
THEMIS schedule risk
Delay launch ($$, SCI)
Change I&T venue (org-chart)
THEMIS mass growth
Send help ($$) or accept (sci) Instruments accommodate a new tank
THEMIS thermal/power
Restrict s/c attitudes (risk)
Instrument-bus personnel work together
THEMIS cost projection
OK, it was tough to do ($$)
Reorganize team to recover costs
IIRT reports to center
Natural
Driven not by cost/schedule but only risk
Authority over PM, PL, PI, and Science
Defies PI mode – and notion of cost cap
Extra reviews (ITA, Code500) Bring them on
THEMIS & RHESSI
Same as above
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q1. PI vs. PL mode:
Problem Status and Outcome
Status and Outcome:
All problems retired successfully due to flexibility of the PI mode, relative to PL mode
Notable positive attributes of PI mode (should be strengthened):
One contract and a clear line of authority to PI-PM allows team to:
•
Trade effectively between science, mission design, schedule and cost
•
Exercise parallel paths and implement at critical junctures
•
Re-organize team efficiently when in trouble
•
Work as a single-team with instruments accommodating spacecraft and vice-versa
Technically experienced PI institution ensures science goals are met at cost by having:
•
Good technical insight into mission elements and capability to determine risks early
•
Capability to line-up in-house or new partner solutions when critical to mission success
Notable risks of PI mode as implemented currently
Line of authority to PI-PM that goes with responsibility to stay on cost is threatened:
•
IIRT, AETD, Code 500, ITA (technical reviews) which have power over PI-PM
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. Responsibilities (Explorer AO)
AO-01-OSS-03 (Same for RHESSI and THEMIS)
•Explorer program:
•Designed to utilize streamlined and efficient management approaches
•Seeks PIs who commit to cost limits, control business and technical processes
•The responsibility for implementing a selected investigation rests with the Principal
Investigator (PI) and the investigation team, which will have a large degree of
freedom with which to accomplish its proposed objectives with appropriate NASA
oversight to ensure mission success.
•GSFC is responsible for NASA's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that Explorer
missions are achieved in compliance with the cost, schedule, performance,
reliability, and safety requirements committed to by the PI. GSFC's involvement in
this role may vary from mission to mission, depending on the implementing
organization and other programmatic considerations.
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. Responsibilities at THEMIS CSR
plan review, THEMIS selection (2003)
THEMIS selection letter
March 22, 2003.
From: AA for Space Science
To: THEMIS PI
“The Explorer Program Office, located at NASA
Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in
Greenbelt, Maryland, is responsible for overall
management of the Explorer program, while
explorer program definition and project selection
remain at NASA Headquarters. For your
investigation, project management is assigned to
the University of California at Berkeley as
outlined in your proposal. The project will be
required to regularly report status to the Explorer
Program Office and to the GSFC Program
Management Council (PMC).”
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. THEMIS Roles and Responsibilities
Responsibilities
Mission Manager (Frank Snow, GSFC)
•
•
•
•
Works with KSC for Launch Vehicle, Launch Services
Works with HQ for ODA and International Agreements, Status
Works with GSFC engineering for variety of support items
Works with JPL for Environmental Test Finances
Project Manager (Peter Harvey, UCB)
• Works with S/C Contractor
• Works with Instrument developers
• Works with Ground Based Observatory developers
• Works with Ground Station Developer (RHESSI)
Principal Investigators (Robert Lin, Vassilis Angelopoulos, UCB)
• Works with Science Team to define Measurement Requirements
• Works with Operations Team to define Mission Profile
• Works with Instrument Teams to detail capabilities
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. THEMIS proposed authority lines
Responsibility and
authority to conduct
investigation within
proposed resources.
Delegates daily
management to PM.
Reports to GSFC
(resource and science
margins) and HQ
(decisions that affect L1).
Sets Explorer Guidelines,
(based on GSFC practices),
reports to GPMC and HQ
Ensures adherence to margins,resources and
requirements committed to by PI (e.g., INST-001).
If margins are threatened, GSFC recommends
action, offers resources, takes on more active role
in technical decisions and resource management.
Review teams:
Peer, IIRT
Day-to-day program
management
for the PI, within
allocated resources.
Science/Technical
decisions involve
PI. Reports resource
trends and margins
to PI and Explorers
office.
IIRT (formal): Ensures, for MM, technical,
schedule and cost margins are met. Recommends
but does not enforce actions to PM.
An asset for both MM and PM.
Disposition of actions within PM authority.
Peer (informal): Ferrets out issues before they
become problems. Disposition within subsystem.
Ultimate closure of issues by PM.
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. Responsibilities
at THEMIS confirmation (May 4, 2004)
•
THEMIS Confirmation Letter,
May 4, 2004
From: AA for Space Science, Ed Weiler
To: GSFC Director, Al Diaz
“Based on the THEMIS project’s presentation on April 22, 2004, to the
Enterprise Program Management Council, I approve THEMIS to proceed into
mission implementation.
…
This is a cost-capped mission requiring tight control in order to maintain
cost and international schedule commitments for launch in October 2006. The
project in conjunction with the Explorer Program Office and GSFC’s
engineering directorate shall provide status on the development and conduct
schedule reviews of the spacecraft every 2 months. This oversight will serve to
facilitate early detection and correction of problems thereby improving
mission success.”
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. THEMIS actual authority lines
since confirmation (2004+)
HQ
GSFC
Director
GPMC
RAO
SMO office
GSFC Code 500
IIRT
Engr Review
Team
Explorers Office
MM, OM, other
ITA
UCB
PI, PM, MSE…
Peer
Review
Panel
Science, Resource, Cost
or Subsystem (Swales, Instr.)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. Line of authority evolution:
reason for PI mode change and effects
Reason for change:
GSFC is told by HQ that the it has responsibility for project success. Therefore,
it is natural that GSFC will assume the authority to ensure mission success,
treating THEMIS as any GSFC mission, implemented in accordance with its own
management practices and heritage.
Effects:
• Mitigation plans require review and approval if not proposed in CSR
• Organization changes take a long time to make and are perceived risky
• GSFC involved with subsystems
•Involvement often construed as direction
•GSFC a stake-holder in status quo, reluctance towards alternate paths
• GPMC using own PL-mode management practices and heritage
• Cost adherence no longer a priority (HQ picked mission!)
• Risk-adversity addressed thru formal review channels drives decisions
• Resources and trades discussed openly with subs, outside of PI sphere
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. Line of authority evolution:
day-to-day implementation
Practical Resolution:
• Constant, open, direct communications between PI-PM and Explorers office
• Amicable working relationship and capable team members
• Strong UCB ties with Explorers and GSFC allow efficient interaction
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. Line of authority evolution
risks and recommendations
Risks:
• Possible misunderstanding of sub-contractors
• Line of authority confused
• Top-down decisions may risk science
• Bottom-up decisions take long time to review and implement (inefficient)
• Management practices at UCB and GSFC different
• Who is committed to cost (PI, GSFC, both)? Unclear HQ guidance.
• Who is responsible for science adherence? Unclear HQ guidance.
Recommendation:
• Authority and responsibility must lie at the same place
• That place should be same for technical resources and science
• The appropriate place is where the science is conducted unless delegated
• PI flexibility to trade science, cost and technical resources depends on that
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q3. Communications
Obstacles to Work
Teaming Arrangements
 UCB was and is Prime on RHESSI and THEMIS.
 Spectrum Astro / Swales Aerospace are the Spacecraft Subcontractors
 In Both Projects, GSFC Generally Ignores Relationship between UCB and S/C
 GSFC Review Teams & Engineers Often Direct Effort at S/C Contractor
 S/C Contractor Uses This to Explain Cost Overruns
NASA GSFC
NASA GSFC
UCB
UCB
S/C
Contractor
S/C
Contractor
Contractual
Arrangement
THEMIS & RHESSI
Effective
Arrangement
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q3. Communications
Facilitators to Efficient Communications
How PI deals with current situation (I.e., effective PI mode arrangement)
 Recognize GSFC holds the contract and go with the flow
 Emphasize team-effort and strategic (as opposed to tactical) success
 Agree with s/c contractor and GSFC on “terms of engagement” (even if moot point)
 Information is key: obtain from both GSFC and subcontractors
 Extract information when not provided, utilize agreement above
 Open and honest communication between PI-PM and MM (parallel paths, costs, and outlook)
 Pick main battles where it matters: on technical and science issues
 Call out and tabulate out-of-scope items; insist only on heavy-hitters
 Recognize that Explorers Program is on the same boat, change is coming from further above !
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q4. PI Mode Aspects
Aspects Facilitating Work
Flexibility in implementing technical and organizational workarounds
• Full trade space at the disposal of science under cost
• Parallel paths available even though not called out at proposal
Direct Involvement of PI with Spacecraft & Instrument Developers
• Instruments Have Been Defined Well and Early
• Full Authority to Improve Spacecraft Design
Obstacles to Work
GPMC and Explorers office assuming more direct role in management
• Have different management style more in line with PL mode (not capped)
NASA IIRT
• Action Items Not Constrained by Cost or Schedule
ITAR
• NASA Declines to Provide Interface to State Dept for PI
• University Pressures Team to Steer Clear of ITAR required activities
• Project Has to Work Around ITAR Rules (Change Flow, Personnel, etc)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q5. PI Mode Improvements, #1
PI Mode Definition
•
Recognize that under GSFC management, PI mode under cost cap a challenge
• Mission Can Be PI Mode, or GSFC Mode (=PL Mode), but Not Both
• Unless GSFC is the proposing PI institution
•
HQ must take responsibility for PI mode mission selection. Not GSFC.
•
HQ must clarify that PI institution has the responsibility and authority:
• Authority and responsibility for both science and implementation must be
at same place, and this should be the place committed to deliver on cost
•
Place triggers for GSFC involvement in management
• If cost to complete or technical resources are threatened
•
GSFC should ensure commitments by PI institution are met
•
•
•
•
Ensures science and L1 commitments are on track
Informs HQ of progress and projections
Ensures processes and parts are in line with NASA expectations
A resource for PI institution to get back on track if problems arise
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q5. PI Mode Improvements, #2
Phase A
•Make Phase A Non-Competitive
•Allows Project to Develop Team Members
•Allows Team to Fully Explore (Detail) Cost Estimate
•HESSI Cost was Estimated Better than THEMIS
Implementation
•Give PI Authority over the Project
•Do not Change Rules-of-the-Road Mid-Course
•Remove IIRT or Have it Report to the PI
•Remove the Mission Signoff Requirement from GSFC
Development
•Discourage Developments During a Project
•Fund Development Efforts for Future Projects.
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q6. PI Mode Lessons
Lessons Learned
Technology Development
 Very High Risk to Depend Upon Development. Always Have a Descope Position.
 HESSI Developed a Backup Supplier of the 20 micron grids and Needed it.
 HESSI Developed a Backup Roll Angle Sensor and Needed it
 THEMIS Developed Backup Detectors and Needed them
 THEMIS Is Currently Developing Multiple Backup Systems
RECOMMENDATION : PI Team Should Substantially Fund Backups
Proposal Development
 HESSI was Proposed Multiple Times.
 Partner Selection Process Involved 7 Companies
 Selected a Small Growing Company Who Needed HESSI to Work.
 HESSI S/C partner performance was considered Very Good.
RECOMMENDATION : Select Partner Who Has a Huge Interest in Project Success
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q6. PI Mode Lessons
Lessons Learned
University Infrastructure
 Very Small, Independent Research Groups Attached to Dean
 Personnel Are Hired into Career Positions at Lower-than-Average Salary with Good
Benefits.
 Engineers are Motivated and Enthusiastic About Scientific Research.
 Typical Manager is a Willing Engineer
 No Centralized Training Program for Managers, Engineers, or Technicians
 Internal Cost and Schedule Practices Only.
 Minimal Subcontracting Work (SOW, RFP, Contracts, Termination Liability, Rate
Changes, Requirement Flow Downs, Monitoring Technical Progress, etc...)
RECOMMENDATION(s)
[1] Invest in Training Programs for Personnel.
[2] Investigate Supplemental Aerospace Support (e.g. Thermal, Contamination...)
[3] Hire Project Contracting Officer, Scheduler, Accountant
[4] Train Your Engineers to Be Subcontract Technical Monitors
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q7. The Future
Would You Do it Again?
Will there be more PI-Missions? Mission
• Yes; based upon their success
RHESSI
• Definitely cost effective
Cluster
• SMEX/MIDEX Provide Science IMAGE
results as well as large missions
ACE
TIMED
Do it Again?
Polar
• As Long as THEMIS gets on a
Voyager
chart like this one.
Ulysses
TRACE
FAST
Wind
Exodus
SAMPEX
Grade
8.8
8.5
7.2
7.2
7.1
6.8
6.7
6.3
5.9
5.9
4.7
3.8
3.7
PI Mode
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Src: SEC Senior Review (Aug 2003)
THEMIS & RHESSI
NRC Irvine 2/01/2005