optimizing the total system · 2016. 1. 15. · joint ipt! market systems! engineering! sub-systems...
TRANSCRIPT
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 1
Optimizing the Total System
Professor Derek K Hitchins
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 2
Systems engineering Principles • Systems engineering is, essentially, a problem solving
methodology, e.g., – “The art and science of creating optimal system solutions to
complex problems”
• The proper application of systems engineering observes three fundamental system tenets: – Holistic—encompass the whole issue or problem – Organismic—all parts interact to behave as a unified whole – Synthetic—bring parts together under a single, overarching
CONOPS and architecture • No Cartesian reduction - it contradicts the first two tenets
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 3
Issue
Identify differences betweenReal and Ideal World
Verify
PotentialImprovements
Identify problemsymptoms
Group problem symptomsinto problem themes
Model problem themes(Ideal World)
Generate options to resolve Issue
Generate criteriafor an ideal solution
Synthesize, prove & deploy preferredsolution option(s)
ReferenceModels
Conceive optimal solution
Redo to address
unresolved problems
Systems Engineering
Paradigm
• functional • physical • behavioral
Address all problem components to avoid (Forrester’s) Counter-intuitive response
Use tools and methods to accommodate complexity
Ensure solution completeness— if any solution exists
Logical, consistent, but not necessarily culturally acceptable
Avoid reduction to maintain solution system coherence
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 4
SE & Defence Acquisition • Smart Procurement /Acquisition appears to be neither
holistic nor organismic • System of Systems appears to be “bottom-up-
integration” – Dangerously incorrect method of joining systems – cause of many disasters in the past
• Prima facie, Defence Acquisition not consistent with systems engineering in UK or US – UK and US both effectively failed to introduce Japanese-
style lean commercial SE, COTS, etc… – …as required by Lord Robertson in UK, 1996/7 – …and by US Administration c.1995(?)
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 5
…taking a fresh look…
…but, is it already too late…?
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 6
Product/sub-system Engineering
Project System Engineering
Business System Engineering
Industry System Engineering
Socio-Economic Systems Engineering
The 5-Layer Systems Engineering Model • International Commonwealth. Social,
economic, political and defence interactions.
• National Wealth Creation, the Nation’s Engine. (Japan operates at this level)
• Industrial Wealth Creation. Many Businesses make an industry
• Corporate Wealth Creation. (The West operates at this level.)
• Technology Artefacts. To some the only “real” systems engineering. Many Products (can) make a system
1
2
3
4
5
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 7
SE at Levels 4 & 5 • Contemporary “SE” in US & UK aimed exclusively at Levels
1 & 2: – Purpose: to engineer technological artefacts/systems – Employs questionable heuristics – Underwritten neither by theory nor science – Wholly inappropriate for application at Levels 4 & 5
• Levels 4 & 5 SE: – Purpose: to conceive/design/ optimize/develop/create:
• socio-technical systems, socio-political systems, organizational systems, national/global industries, pipeline systems, national/ international defence…
• …and people systems—but not technological systems
• Surprise 1: Level 1 & 2 engineering heuristics don’t work too well at Levels 3 & 4
• Surprise 2: there is a scientific Systems Methodology (SM) that works at any level
• Let’s do some Systems Analysis
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 8
Partssupply
Conceive
Design
Develop
Prove
AssembleProduce
Partssupply Sales Market
Conceive
Design
Develop
Prove
AssembleProduce
First Tier Supplier Lead Business
Second Tier Supplier
ProjectSystemsEngineering
ProjectSystemsEngineering
ManufacturingSystems Engineering
ManufacturingSystems Engineering
Supply Chain Systems Engineering
Joint IPT
Market Systems Engineering
Sub-systems Engineering
Hydraulics, pneumatics, radar, communications, electrics, engines, weapons, avionics, instruments, information, cockpit…systems engineering
Inside Industry Systems Engineering
Dissatisfaction
Marketpull, money
Companypull, money
Supplierpull, money
Innovation
FailuresRepairs
Spares,skills,data
Marketpull, money
•!multi-sourcing•!reconfiguration
•!source and market!replacement•!multi-sourcing•!reconfiguration
Lean Volume Supply System
• Material flows clockwise • Money flows anticlockwise
Rate of innovation key to material and money flow rates
Japanese, Agile
Suppliers
Resources
Company
Market
Marketobsolescence
Scrapping
Recycling
Responseto demand
Parts ondemand
Resourceson demand
Extraction
• Circle becomes progressively leaner, more efficient and more effective over time using Kaizen
Suppliers
Resources
Company
Scrapping
Recycling
Suppliers
Resources
Company
Market
Scrapping
RecyclingMarket
obsolescence
• Competitive Evolution!• Progressive quality improvement!• Progressive cost reduction!
• Constructive competition is between Supply Circles,
• Not between Companies in a Supply Circle—that’s self-destructive!
Supply Chain Competition
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 11
Total System Acquisition (TSA) Closure • To gain closure we must
include the consumer— rate of consumption determines the rate of supply by ALVSS
• ALVSS needs to operate continuously, else collapse
• Commercially, innovation renders goods obsolescent – Creates market pull
• Defence obliged to acquire like a commercial consumer, but of defence products
• Defence no longer major customer c.f. commerce
• …so, economy of scale may dictate combined commercial/defence ALVSS
Agile Lean Volume Supply System
DefenceMarket
CommercialMarket
Defence Operations
Recycling
Commercial operat ions
Continualinnovation
MarketPull
Recycling
Continualreplacement
ContinualInnovation
Defence market pull
Continualupgrade
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 12
Demand
InService
First TierSupplierFirst TierSupplier
RawMaterialsSupply
RawMaterialsSupply
SecondTier
Supplier
SecondTier
SupplierLead
Contractor
First TierSuppliers
SecondTier
Suppliers
DefenseMarket
Recycling
RawMaterialsSupply
Money
Material
Operation
Test &Evaluation
Obsolescence
Upgrades & Variants
Innovation
Lean Volume Supply SystemLean Volume Supply System
LeadContractor
Competing LVSS
Level 4 Defence SE— Total System Acquisition & Operation Continuum
The two circles synchronize Each drives the other Each supports and enables the other They form one, organismic system…
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 13
Level 5 Defence SE—Overview
Test
Buy "off the shelf"
Operational Use
UpgradeVariant
Replacement
Test
Buy "off the shelf"
Operational Use
UpgradeVariant
Replacement
Test
Buy "off the shelf"
Operational Use
UpgradeVariant
Replacement
UpgradeVariant
Replacement
• Wealth Creation in Europe • reduced public spending • reduced taxation • Socio-economic stability – within Europe + between customer countries • Balance to US industrial dominance • International Political Stability
Lead Company
Resources
Extraction
Recycler
Market
First TierSupplierFirst TierSupplier
Second TierSupplierSecond TierSupplierSecond TierSupplier
Third TierSupplierThird TierSupplierThird TierSupplierThird TierSupplier
Lead Company
Resources
Extraction
Recycler
Lean, VolumeSupply Circle
Lean, VolumeSupply Circle Market
First TierSupplierFirst TierSupplier
Second TierSupplierSecond Tier
SupplierSecond Tier
Supplier
Third TierSupplierThird TierSupplierThird TierSupplierThird TierSupplier
European Leads Global Enterprises Customer countries
Military CustomersMilitary Customers
Synchronized Spin Rates
Circles “mesh” like gears
Spin rates driven by defence spending
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 14
Smart Acquisition Vs. TSA Smart Acquisition Factor Total Systems Acquisition
Customer pays Development Cost Industry pays Customer Development Risk Industry
Trust paper promise Customer mode Try before buy Customer Financial Exposure Industry
Prevents supply circles Competition Between supply circles Phased, controlled, slow Development Cycle Commercial, fast, expert
10-20 years Time to market 12-48 months Excluded due to long cycle? COTS Products Included
Customer suppressed! Innovation Industry inspired High (low throughput) Production Cost Low, getting lower (Kaizen) Outmoded at delivery Design currency Contemporary
Periodic, take out of service? Upgrades Continual, by industry in-service Tight, software intensive Systems coupling Loose for continual upgrade
Periodically improved in service Performance Continually improved in service Moderate; 10-20 years Lifetime Long; c.30-60 years
Integrated Project Team IPT Integrated Product Team 30/500 IPT Size 5/6
Control design & manufacture IPT Purpose Serve customer, better, faster, cheaper
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 15
Defence Capability Acquisition …moving up one hierarchy level… …make the capability bespoke…
…with the platforms being COTS… Now, that would be Smart…
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 16
Procuring Defence Capabilities • Procuring complete defence capabilities:
– Allows whole capability to be one system… – …essential with network centric/enabled solutions
• Allows correct synthesis under overarching CONOPS and architecture for capability – this opens door wide to COTS – avoids “bottom-up” disasters
• Operational networks enable cooperation: capability becomes organismic = unified whole
• …and procuring a whole capability to address a whole problem is holistic
• Consistent with fundamental systems engineering principles
Acquiring Capability
Set Goal Defence Capabilities
Synthesize Alternative Force Structures Synthesize Alternative Force Structures Synthesize Alternative Force Structures
Establish Doctrine, Strategies, and CONOPS
Select “Optimal” Force Structure
Foreign policy National security
Defence capability goal
Force representations - current
- potential Structure options
Target structure
Formal policies Socio-political analysis
Effectiveness criteria
Identify Suitable Components in Market Identify Suitable Components in Market Identify Suitable Components in Market Components options Market intelligence
Select Optimal Components Target components Contribution criteria
Test & Evaluate Contribution to Capability Component contribution Component shortlist
Integrate into Structure Achieved capability
Buy “off shelf” Funding Acquisitions
PROCESS INPUT OUTPUT
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 18
SM Example: Doctrine, Strategy & CONOPS
Command
LoadAircraft
Launch Arrive in Area
InsertForce
Alert
Formatewith Cadre
Cadre defends
Locate incursors
Identifyincursors
Reconnoitre
Engage
• UAVs• satellite
• psy-ops• non-lethal• anti-armour• lethal
Neutralize
Repair,replenish
ReservesInsertresources/
collect returnsBase repair
BaseLogistics
Intelligence
UN
Extract Force
• cadre remains
• Global capability, US MLF 2010, open plains, desert and tundra… • Note continuity of operations: once started, continues until all “incursors” neutralized • This CLM may be simulated, using a non-linear dynamic modelling tool, to investigate:
• Time delays • logistics • Effects of operations on reserves, maintenance, and vice versa • Results of simulation may invoke changes to CONOPS • Final CONOPS defines functional capabilities and architectures for whole force…
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 20
SM: Network-enabled CONOPS
PatrolDeploy raptors
Reconnoitre
Detect
Locate
Raptors deploy
Dragonflies
Gather Intel
Examine
Report
Identify
Decide action Allocatetargets
Form RASP
Deploy armedraptors
Engage
Dragonfliesobserve, report
Neutralizetargets
Raptors deploy
Dragonflies
Refuel
Rearm
Rejoin
CONOPS presumes that the group, or SWARM, employs network-centric cooperative tactics, with mutually-shared Recognized Air and Surface Picture, plus cooperative automatic target detection, identification, assessment, and target allocation.
Air Transport deploys LTEs LTEs deploy raptors Raptors deploy dragonflies…
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 21
Design Optimization • Designs may be optimized
using cumulative selection • The diagram shows a
method of optimization called “ratcheting”
• First the design in right hand part is frozen
• Design in the left creates offspring, each slightly dissimilar to the parent
• The best performing offspring then breeds
• The two sides swap, and the process repeats…
OffspringFighter
Generation
OffspringFighter
Generation
Offspringfighter
generation
"Seed"fighter
Many-on-manycombat
simulation
Selectedfighter
Enemythreat
Stable?
Current fighter
Stable?
Selectedenemythreat
Many-on-manycombat
simulation
"Seed"threat
OffspringFighter
Generation
OffspringFighter
Generation
Offspringthreat
generation
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 22
SM: Exploring Dynamic Interchanges • Two systems engaged in an operational environment • Each is supported, and its behavior influenced, by
supporting functions…
Form
Behavior
MissionManagement
ResourceManagement
ViabilityManagement
Environment
LogisticsSystem
ProcurementSystemSuppliers
Form Behavior
MissionManagement
ResourceManagement
ViabilityManagement
LogisticsSystem
ProcurementSystem
SuppliersMaintenance
Maintenance
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 23
Synergy
Worldmodels
Formationcontrol
Sensor systems
POL, weapon, spares reserves
Communicationsystems
Weapon systems
Tacitknowledge
CognitionNature
Belief system Training
Ethics andmorals
DoctrineMotivation
Experience
MissionManagement
Missionmanagement
BehaviourBehavior
Form Form
ViabilityManagement
Viabilitymanagement
ResourcemanagementResource
management
Acquire
Store
Distribute
Convert
Discard excess/waste
Homeostasis
Maintenance
Evolution
Constraint
Stimulation
Resourceenvironment
Operationalenvironment
Behavioral archetypes
Transportsystems AcquireAcquire
Synergy = cooperation and coordination between parts to produce desired external effects
Survival = avodiance of detection + self-defence + damage tolerance
Maintenance = detection, location, excision, replacement, and disposal of defective parts
Homeostasis = maintenance of internal environment appropriate to effective subsystems operations
Evolution = accommodation, adaptation, advance
R.A.S.P.
Decision making
Assess situation
Identify threats and
opportunitiesInitiate action
Decisionmode
Generate optionsin sequence
Simulatementally
Y
N
Review allconstraints
Select preferred
option
Recognition-primed decisions
Naive decisions
Monitor
ExecuteInitiate action
Behaviorselection
Generateall options
Survival
Battledamagedisplays
Resourcesdisplays
Formationdisplays
9-Feb-14 2004©DKHitchins 24
Conclusions 1. Design whole defence acquisition system along commercial lines - using
provable, science-based Systems Methodology 2. Establish a transitional program to move from present bureaucratized
approach towards target acquisition system design… 3. Trial commercial-style acquisition of just one full defence capability:
• free industry to conceive, design, develop, construct, deliver and… • support in service…
4. For trial, customer-user states only: • requisite capability, CONOPS, architecture, timescales, budget—not solution
5. Industry keeps 50% of any price undercuts, but pays for any overprice… 6. …and payments happen after 1 year of successful capability deployment • Customer-user has nothing to do with any requirements, build standards,
COTS or bespoke, progress control, management - nothing! • Customer-user has everything to do with post delivery operational tests,
trials and validations—i.e., thorough “try-before-buy” • That way, we might just achieve really Smart Acquisition…