The document summarizes the GOES-R program, which is a partnership between NOAA and NASA to develop the next generation of geostationary weather satellites. It describes how the program is structured with NASA leading the flight segment project and NOAA leading the ground segment project. It also discusses some of the challenges of the dual agency management approach, including different agency cultures and the need to clearly define roles and responsibilities through documents like a Memorandum of Understanding and Management Control Plan. The partnership aims to leverage the strengths of both agencies to successfully develop and operate the GOES-R series of satellites.

1. Combining Apples and Oranges to Make Juice:
NOAA/NASA Cooperation in GOES-R
Barbara Pfarr
GOES-R Program Systems Engineering Lead
PM Challenge
February 2009
1

2. Why the World Needs GOES
. . . Sustained Observations of the
Atmosphere, Oceans, Land and Sun
2

3. GOES Constellation
Primary Requirement: Continuity of Capability
N GOES-11 GOES-12
Subsatellite Equator 135° West 75° West
Point
22,300
M i
GOES-13
105° West
(Spare)
S
Two operational satellites and on-orbit spare
• GOES I-M (8-12)* series operational since 1994
– GOES-10 operational at 60º W in support of South America beginning December 2, 2006
– GOES-11 operational as GOES West beginning June 21, 2006
– GOES-12 operational as GOES East beginning April 1, 2003
• GOES N-P
– GOES-13 launched May 24, 2006, storage at 105º W, turned over to NOAA as of January 24, 2007
– GOES-O in storage; will launch no earlier than April 2009
– GOES-P in temporary ground storage ; will launch no earlier than December 2009
• GOES-R series will replace the GOES-N series no earlier than 2015
* Note: Satellites are labeled with letters on the ground and changed to numbers on-orbit
3

4. Continuity of GOES
Operational Satellite Program
Calendar Year As of January 5, 2009
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
GOES 10 Backup
GOES 11 GOES West
GOES 12 GOES East
GOES 13 On-orbit Spare
GOES O *
GOES P
GOES R
GOES S
Satellite is operational
beyond design life
* Launch currently projected for April 2009 On-orbit GOES storage
Operational
4

5. GOES-R Benefits: More than
Continuity
• Improved tropical cyclone forecasting will result in an increased ability to
protect property and to enable evacuation of individuals residing in the path
of the storm, while also reducing losses to the recreational boating
industry.
• Enhanced aviation forecasting results in decreased commercial aviation
delays and repair costs to aircraft due to volcanic ash.
• More accurate temperature forecasting contributes to improved energy
demand expectations and savings in the electricity and natural gas sectors.
• Enhanced forecasts will lead to more efficient irrigation of crops, resulting
in water and energy savings.
GOES-R Launch NET FY 2015
2 Satellites (GOES R & S), with unfunded
Program Architecture options for 2 (GOES T&U); 10 year operational
design life
Program Operational Life FY 2017 – FY 2028
Program Life-cycle FY 2009 President’s Budget $7.7 billion
5

6. GOES-West
137° West GOES-East
75° West
ta
Da t
a
l, da
o
ntr
co
ta
Direct &
Da
d
an
Readout mm
Co
Users
Command &
Remote
control, data
Backup Facility
NOAA
Satellite Operations
Facility
Suitland, MD
Command and Data Acquisition
Station Wallops, VA
GOES-R System Configuration
GOES-R
06/19/2008 v2 6 6
6

7. GOES-R Functional Overview
GOES East
GOES West
GOES-R Ground Segment
Functional Elements GOES-R Re-broadcast
Mission
Management
Product
Generation Product
Distribution
User
Community
Enterprise Management
Archive and Access
(CLASS*; ESPC*)
7

8. GOES-R Program Status
• Spacecraft Contract Awarded
• Ground segment procurement source selection underway
• CONOPS baselined
• Level 1 and Level 2 Requirements Documents baselined
• Management Control Plan baselined
• Systems Engineering Processes established:
– Requirements Management
– Configuration Management
– Risk Management
• Instrument development well underway
8

9. GOES-R Instruments
Instrument Function Contractor Status
Primary Instrument: Provides
Advanced Baseline CDR completed, engineering unit in
imagery of the Earth’s surface, ITT, Ft Wayne IN
Imager (ABI) development
atmosphere and ground cover
Lockheed Martin
Geostationary Lightning Detects the frequency and location Space Systems System definition review completed,
Mapper (GLM) of lightning activity Company, preliminary design started
Palo Alto CA
Assurance
Preliminary design review (PDR)
Space Environmental In- Technology
Monitors the space environment completed, component development
Situ Suite (SEISS) Corporation,
underway
Carlisle MA
Extreme Ultra Violet / Laboratory for
Provides real time measurement of Atmospheric and PDR completed, component
X-Ray Irradiance Sensor Space Physics development underway
solar activity
(EXIS) Boulder, CO
Observes the sun’s emissions and Lockheed Martin
Solar Ultra Violet Imager provides early detection and location Space Systems PDR completed, component
(SUVI) of flares Company, development underway
Palo Alto CA
Measures the magnitude and
To be procured as part of spacecraft
Magnetometer direction of the Earth’s magnetic Spacecraft Vendor
contract
field
9

10. Partnership born from Reality
• The unique GOES-R partnership is a recognition of two basic
realities:
– GOES-R is the largest acquisition ($7.672B) ever undertaken at the
Department of Commerce. NOAA provides 100% of the funding
• NOAA has considerable experience operating weather satellite systems, and
• NOAA has extensive experience developing user products from satellite
data, yet
• NOAA has no experience overseeing a system of this size and complexity
– NASA has the expertise and experience to procure the satellite
systems, with time-tested processes that have proven successful
• GOES-R’s unique structure provides NOAA with greater
management responsibility and oversight while leveraging NASA’s
experience procuring satellite systems
This briefing describes the unique GOES-R partnership between NOAA
and NASA and identifies challenges the dual agency management
system has created and how we are dealing with them -
combining apples and oranges to make juice!
10

11. GOES-R High Level Acquisition
Organizational Relationships
Secretary of Commerce
Milestone Decision Authority
Assistant Secretary for Administration
Acquisition Executive
Under Secretary
for Oceans and Atmosphere
Milestone Decision Authority (delegated from Secretary)
Deputy Under Secretary
for Oceans and Atmosphere
PMC Chair
Assistant Administrator
GSFC Deputy Assistant Administrator
CMC Deputy Assistant Administrator (Systems)
Office of Satellite and Information Services
GOES-R System Program Director
Flight Segment Ground Segment
Project Manager Project Manager
11

12. GOES-R
Acquisition Strategy Evolution
Independent NOAA Approved
Original Review Dec 2006
Nov 2004 Summer 2006
Program System Engineering
NASA Lead
One Single NOAA Participation
System Prime TO NASA processes
Space Ground
NOAA Contract Segment Segment
NASA Contracts NOAA Contracts
12

13. NOAA/NASA
Roles and Responsibilities Evolution
GOES-R
Function Legacy POES Legacy GOES
Flight Project Ground Segment Project
Requirements
NOAA NOAA NOAA NOAA
Authority
GSFC PMC, NASA HQ’s PMC, GSFC PMC and NASA
Oversight NOAA PMC HQ’s PMC
GSFC CMC and NOAA PMC GSFC CMC and NOAA PMC
Key Program
NOAA or DOC NOAA or DOC
Decisions (Milestones, NASA GSFC or HQS NASA GSFC or HQS
(depending on DOC decision) (depending on DOC decision)
Readiness Reviews)
NASA HQ: Science Mission NASA HQ: Science Mission
Source Selection NOAA DUS
Directorate or equivalent Directorate or equivalent NASA GSFC
Authority for Oceans and Atmosphere
(Delegated to GSFC Code 400) (Delegated to GSFC Code 400)
NASA GSFC
Fee Determining NASA GSFC Director of Flight Programs
NASA GSFC NOAA NESDIS AA
Official Director of Flight Programs (None for GOES N -- Firm Fixed Price
Contract with Boeing)
Contracting Officer NASA NASA NASA NOAA
Program Office NASA NASA Program/Project Office staffed Program/Project Office staffed
Composition (NOAA Retains Resident Office) (NOAA Retains Resident Office) with NOAA & NASA personnel with NOAA & NASA personnel
NASA
Launch services NASA
(For GOES N – Boeing)
NASA NASA
Satellite Operations NOAA NOAA NOAA NOAA
Ground Systems NOAA NOAA NOAA NOAA
13

14. Co-located NOAA/NASA
Program Office is key to
Organization Structure
The GOES-R Program, including NOAA civil servants, NASA civil
servants, and NOAA and NASA support contractors, is co-located
at Goddard Space Flight Center, Building 6
• Better coordination through daily contact between all elements of the
Program
• Provides easy access to GSFC experienced management for
satellite procurement
• Unique integrated leadership arrangement possible due to co-
location
14

15. Program Management Summary
NOAA
NOAA
Program Management
Council
NESDIS
System Program Director (SPD): NOAA GSFC
Program Scientist
Deputy SPD: NOAA Center Management
Lead: NOAA
Assistant SPD: NASA Council
Program Control Program Systems Engineering
Lead: NOAA Lead: NASA
Deputy: NOAA
Program Mission Assurance
Lead: NASA GSFC
Program Contracts
GOES-R Attorney Ground Lead: NOAA Code
Lead: DOC Flight Lead: NASA 400
Flight Project Ground Segment Project
Project Manager: NASA Project Manager: NOAA
Deputy: NOAA Deputy: NASA
Flight Project Contracts Ground Segment Project Contracts
Lead: NASA Lead: NOAA
15

16. GOES-R Program System
Engineering (PSE) – the Glue
Between the Projects
•Program System Engineering (PSE) team is responsible for End-to-End
systems integration, and planning, coordination, and adjudication of GOES-R
Program System Engineering functions
•To accomplish this responsibility, the PSE team will implement system
engineering functions and processes, tailored to the specific needs of the
GOES-R Program.
•NOAA-NESDIS
•GOES-R Program Office
Program Systems •Algorithm Working Group
Engineering Team •User Community
•GSFC AETD & Center
Management
Flight Project Ground Segment Project
Systems Systems
Engineering Team Engineering Team
16

17. Overarching Communications
• PSE Lead and Deputy are members of the Senior Management Team which
directly reports to the System Program Director (SPD)
• Program System Engineering (PSE) Lead is coordinating and chairing
coordination and planning meetings with the systems engineering team
– Weekly PSE team meeting
– Weekly Program/Project SE coordination meeting
– Monthly PSE Risk Board
– Monthly Program risk board
– Weekly Program Engineering Change Review Board (ECRB)
• Systems engineering team members also participate in the following project
meetings:
– Flight and Ground Project ECRBs
– Project Risk Management Boards
– Flight Instrument Design reviews and technical meetings
– Ground system design and peer reviews
– Weekly staff meetings, systems engineering meetings, steering group
meetings
17

18. Program Standard Processes
• All procured systems:
– Will provide traceability of Requirements Verification via DOORS tool in
DOORS database
– Verification matrices to be provided by vendor, approved by Projects and
Program
– Contractors’ proposed test plans to be based on Verification Matrices and
Government-specified schedules
– Flight/Ground Projects will oversee factory and site testing,
– including intra-segment interfaces
– PSE will maintain visibility in all system activities and interfaces
• Program-wide consistent Configuration Management (CM) Plans and
coordinated change review processes
• Program-wide Risk Management database with multiple levels for subsystems,
projects and program
• Program-wide Schedule management system will be developed and maintained
• Working groups for Program-wide efforts
– Will include PSE, Flight and Ground Projects, and
Contractors as required
18

19. Tailoring of SE to GOES-R
The Classic top-down System Engineering Process must be tailored to
address the GOES-R Program
• Because of the Long Lead time required for development of a GEO
Imager, the ABI instrument and other instruments’ designs were
started well in advance of the spacecraft procurement. Some
“bottom up” flow of requirements and capabilities must be carefully
woven into the overall system to minimize cost, schedule, and
performance impacts.
• Review and approval processes must accurately reflect
NOAA/NASA partnership strengths and responsibilities
• Continuity with current GOES operations and data must remain as
a top priority
• Decision to acquire two prime contractors, one for Ground and one
for Space brings forth some new risk considerations like
coordination of interfaces, synchronization of schedules, etc.
19

20. Critical Inter-Project
Dependencies being
monitored by PSE
• Delivery of the Level 1b processing algorithms from the five
instrument vendors for subsequent delivery to the Ground Project
contractor for operational implementation.
• Delivery of telemetry and command design information from the
satellite contractor to the ground contractor to support the design of
that portion of the ground segment
• Delivery of satellite simulators (from the spacecraft contractor) for
use by the ground segment contractor for development and testing.
• Readiness of the telemetry and command portion of the ground
segment sufficient to support compatibility testing during the S/C
Thermal-vacuum testing.
• Availability of the satellite to conduct end-to-end tests with the
ground segment.
20

21. Processes Affected by
Partnership
1. Program/Project Management
2. Technical and Management Reviews
3. Program Status Reporting
4. Approval to Enter Acquisition and Operations Phase
5. Configuration Control
6. Risk Management
7. Schedule Management
8. Requirements Management
9. System Integration
10. System Acceptance
More players require more buy-in
21

22. Challenge #1 –
Defining the Partnership
Defining the GOES-R partnership explicitly required defining the
responsibilities of each agency, the program office and each project
NASA and NOAA have fundamentally different cultures:
• NASA focuses more on proven processes while NOAA focuses more
on agility/flexibility to support users
• NASA focuses more on flight hardware with high reliability for first
time success while NOAA focuses more on evolving
science/operational product applications that can change over time.
• The different cultures lead to
– different sets of priorities
– different concepts of what represent success.
• Having the difference in cultures primarily located across the
important boundary that is Flight and Ground enhances the
challenge.
Required significant discussion, review, and revision until all parties
were in agreement
22

23. MOU and MCP Define Agency
Roles and Responsibilities
• Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) established
GOES-R as a NOAA led program with two projects–
signed June 15, 2007
– Spacecraft: NASA contract
– Ground Segment: NOAA Contract
– Recognized the strengths of each agency
• Management Control Plan written to implement MOU
– Requirements mirror NPR 7120 as much as possible
– Deviations from NPR 7120 when similar NOAA process is being
used instead
• i.e. NOAA independent cost estimating processes being
utilized
23

24. On a Dual Agency Program,
Documents Require Unique
Approvals
• Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) between NOAA and NASA
created GOES-R as a co-located
Program Office with Flight and
Ground Segment Projects.
Approved by:
– NOAA Deputy Under Secretary
– NASA Associate Administrator
• Management Control Plan (MCP)
written to implement MOU.
Approved by:
– NESDIS Director
– GSFC Director
24

25. Challenge #2 –
The Review Process
The GOES-R Review Process is defined in the System
Review Plan, coordinated with both agencies
– based on NASA standards and processes
– NASA and NOAA independent experts on review
panels with joint chairs
– NASA and NOAA approvals for program milestones
PSE worked with Goddard’s Systems Review Office to develop a
plan that met NASA requirements but tailored to GOES-R
25

26. Review Process
PDRR Acquisition and Operations
KDP Final Design System Assembly, Launch /
Disposal
I & Fabrication Integration & Test Operations
CITRB (DOC)
KDP KDP
IA II
(NOAA) Program PGR -III PGR -IV PGR -V
Baseline Mission Mission Handover
PMC (NOAA) Integration Readiness Review
I-PSR PMC Readiness Board (NESDIS)
I-PSR
(NOAA DUS) (NOAA DUS)
GSFC
C-GRR C-GRR MRR
C-GRR C-GRR C-GRR
C-GRR
ASM
PER-B PER-C PER -D PER -E PER -F
Concept Project Integration Launch End of
Design Baseline Readiness Readiness Mission
NESDIS (NESDIS) (NOAA DUS) (NESDIS) (NESDIS) (NESDIS)
FRR
PSR
SIR LRR
SCR SRR SDR PDR CDR MOR
FOR ORR SMSR PLAR
26

27. Challenge #3–
The Reporting Process
Multiple levels of both agencies require periodic
status reports
– Challenge to create reporting templates such that
tailoring for each report is minimized
Threshold reporting required at multiple levels
These requirements are documented in the Management Control Plan.
27

28. Status Reporting Requirements
Regular Reporting
Type of Reporting Dates Scheduled Reviewer
Senior Management Team (SMT) Weekly Weekly SPD or designee
GOES-R Personnel Management Group Monthly DSPD
GOES-R Engineering Review Board As required PSE or designee
GOES-R Monthly Program Review Monthly SPD or designee
NOAA Program Management Council (PMC) Monthly DUS/NOAA PMC
Deputy Center Director / GSFC Center Management
NASA GSFC Monthly Status Review (MSR) Monthly
Council (CMC)
NASA GSFC Pre-MSR Monthly GSFC Director of Flight Projects
DOC Quarterly Program Review Quarterly DOC CFO/ASA
NOAA and NASA Administrator meeting to assess status
Yearly or as necessary NOAA Administrator / NASA Administrator
and progress
NOAA/NESDIS Independent Review Team As required DUS/NESDIS designated
Standing Review Board As required NESDIS/GSFC designated
NESDIS Weekly Program Tag Up Weekly NESDIS DAAS
Program Monthly Status Report Monthly OMB
GSFC/NESDIS Tag Up Monthly NESDIS AA, GSFC Deputy Center Director, Technical
NESDIS Monthly Status Monthly NESDIS AA
Project Monthly Status Review Monthly Project Manager, SPD attends
Review of Award Fee Effectiveness Annual NOAA/NASA Findings reported to DOC
Senate:
oAppropriations Committee
oCommittee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Report to Congress Annually with President’s Budget,
House of Representatives:
Appropriations Committee & Committee on Science and
Technology
28

29. Threshold Reporting
Requirements
Threshold Reporting
Type of Reporting Threshold Required Report to:
5% over cost and
Department of Commerce Threshold
schedule of any program DOC ASA/CFO
on cost and schedule
element
NOAA Cost Threshold reporting
10% over cost as
requirement to Deputy Under DUS, NESDIS AA
determined by SPD
Secretary
Congressional Cost Threshold
20% over cost as Under Secretary for Oceans and
reporting requirement to Under
determined by SPD Atmosphere
Secretary
29

30. Challenge #4 –
Approval to Enter Acquisition and
Operations (A&O) Phase
Approval to Enter A&O Phase, which in our case included
permission to spend our money on our development
contracts, was a challenge due to:
• Many layers of review and approval
• Independent Review Team recommendations that drove
us to a conservative 80 percent budget solution
• Challenges reconciling NASA and NOAA independent
cost estimates
GOES-R received formal approval from the Department of Commerce to
enter the A&O Phase in December, 2007
30

31. Challenge #5–
Configuration Control
Dual-agency configuration control is a challenge on GOES-
R, particularly for the documents “owned” by NOAA, i.e.
the Level 1 Requirements and Management Control
Plan:
• All elements of the Program as well as both Agencies
need to be a part of the review cycle
• Must carefully control requirements yet still allow for
necessary changes
Required significant discussion, review, and revision until all parties
were in agreement – still being refined
31

32. Configuration Management
PMC staff PMC
Changes NO PMCBriefed
Prepares necessary documentation Member
PMC
/ DUS
Required? DUS signs
for PMC review/Approval Review
YES
NOSC staff NOSC NO NOSC
Changes
Prepares necessary documentation Member Chairs
NOSC
Required?
for NOSC review/Approval Review sign
YES
YES YES YES
Mod CCR Review SPD approves NO SPD approves SPD approves
CCB Chair
SPD
(SPD/PMs/PSE/Prog Scientist (GORWG Chair)) For release? NO For release? NO For release?
approves
CM makes CM makes CM makes
changes changes changes
YES NOAA
Owned
Doc?
NO
32

33. Challenge #6 –
Risk Management
The GOES-R Risk Management Process follows NASA and DOD requirements
as closely as possible while maintaining consistency with other NOAA
programs (NPOESS, etc)
• Characteristics of Integrated Risk Approach
– Multi-layer approach for risk management that allows cognizant projects,
segment organizations, contractors, teams, groups, and organizations to retain
authority and control over risks for their areas of responsibility while supporting
existing management and decision making processes.
– Program risks address technical, cost, and schedule impacts related to the:
• Successful design, development, fabrication/manufacture, integration, tests,
deployment and operations of the GOES-R system;
• Performance and reliability of the GOES-R Series End-to-End System.
• Activities and resources including staff, contractors, and facilities, at NOAA
and NASA, at other government agencies, developer organizations
– Comprehensive approach allows early identification of potential risks
Risk Management Plan baselined. Required discussion with other NOAA
programs to ensure consistency
33

34. Integrated Risk Management
Across the GOES-R Program
Spacecraft
Vendor RMB Observatory
Subsystem Systems Eng. Flight
RWGs & Integration Project
RMB
Instrument
Vendors Instruments Mission
RMBs Assurance
Elements
Integration
Program Program
End‐to‐End
Verif. & Valid. Integration RMB
RMB
End Product
Perf.
Program
Scientist
Working Systems
Groups Engineering
Ground Reporting &
Segment Coordination
IDTs/IPTs Segment
RWGs Devel. Project Prioritization &
RMB Resources
Risk‐Informed
AWG, OSD, Decision Making
Affiliated
OSDPD, etc.
Orgs.
Product Development & Projects & Integration Program
Vendors
34

35. Challenge #7 –
Schedule Management
Having 2 projects each with multiple contractors adds
complexity to the problem of developing and maintaining
an integrated Program Schedule
– Project Schedulers are integrating at Project Level
– Program scheduler hired to combine project schedules at
Program Level – at this point a manual effort
– PSE responsible for analyzing schedules for technical
inconsistencies and working out conflicts
– Program Schedule Management Plan being written
Developing an initial Program Schedule required significant discussion,
review, and revision until all parties were in agreement. GOES-R is still
developing its full integrated Program Schedule
35

36. GOES-R Program Integrated Master
Schedule
As of December 31, 2008
Fiscal Year FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16
Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
Det. of Readiness FRR Launch
KDP I to Congress KDPI IA SDR PDR KDP II CDR MOR SIR
7/12 8/12 ORR MRR Need Baseline
Program / System
12/07 10/08 5/09 12/09 9/10 1/10
1 9/11 7/12
8/12 6/14 11/14 12/14 4/15
Time Now --------- End-to-End Tests ---------
1 2 3 4
Testing / Dependencies
12/12 3/13 6/13 1/14 1/15
Begin LSTO
Competition ATP Pre-VOS
Launch Vehicle
6/11 6/12 10/14
Int. Bus Array/Yoke
CA SDR PDR CDR Begins Comp. CompletePER PSR
Spacecraft* Launch Vehicle Processing
12/08 4/09 4/10 4/11 4/12 8/12 1/13 4/13 S/C I&T 2/14 8/14
Early FIN
PTM Delta Req'd
CDR PTM TRR Re'q FIN CDR FIN
Notes:
Instrument - ABI (ITT)
2/07 5/09 3/10 4/10 7/11 6/12 ATP: Authority To Proceed
Early FIN
Req'd CA: Contract Award
PDR CDR FIN CDR: Critical Design Review
Instrument - SEISS DOT Data Operations Test
FRR: Flight Readiness Review
(ATC) 12/08 5/10 12/11 6/12 MRR: Mission Readiness Review
Early FIN
Req'd MOR: Mission Operations Review
SDR CA PDR CDR FIN MOT Mission Operations Test
Instrument - EXIS LSTO: Launch Services Task Order
PDR: Preliminary Design Review
(LASP) 3/07 11/08 11/09 2/12 6/12 PER: Pre-Environmental Review
Early FIN Pre-VOS: Pre-Vehicle On Stand
Req'd
CA PDR CDR FIN PSR: Pre-Ship Review
Instrument - SUVI PTM: ProtoType Model
SDR: System Definition Review
(LMSSC) 10/08 12/09 7/12 10/12 TRR: Test Readiness Review
Req'd
CA SDR 3/09 PDR CDR PTM Early FIN FIN *Actual dates pending IBR
Instrument - GLM
7/08 1/09 PDR
1/09 9/09 7/10 4/12 6/12
Launch
CA SDR PDR CDR Release MM Release 1 Release 2 Readiness
Ground Segment Launch Vehicle Processing
3/09 6/09 12/09 9/10 9/11 8/12 3/13 9/13 12/14
Initial Deliveries
2/10 11/10
L1 Algorithms - Flight Final Deliveries
12/10
4/12
Draft 80% Delivery 100% Delivery
Start Baseline
L2+ Algorithms - AWG
Draft 80% Delivery 100% Delivery
Baseline / Option 2 3/07 Option 2
9/08 9/09 9/10 9/11Facilities Complete
RBU Site Selection Antennas
10/08 Delivered
Facilities / Antennas 3/09 3/12 12/13
CA
Communications RBU White Paper Communications
Submitted to OCAO Complete
10/10 12/13
11/08
Start CA
Other GFP and I/Fs Complete
1/08 10/09 5/12
Start SDR
CLASS Upgrades Ready
3/07 6/09 12/12
Current Completed Milestone Major Milestone
FY09 Control
Milestone Milestone Completed During Deliverable Slip
Milestone
Current Period Milestone Development Construction Integration & Testing Margin
36

37. Challenge #8 –
Requirements Management
Defining GOES-R requirements was a dual-agency challenge: GOES-R
Requirements have come from both agencies
– Stakeholder requirements from NOAA
• Science Product requirements
• Operations requirements
• User interface requirements
• Continuity requirements
– Process requirements from NASA
• Spacecraft and Instrument design, development, integration
and test requirements
• Requirements from NOAA and NASA combined into single set of
requirements documents
ALL program elements using DOORS are part of a unified, multi-level
requirements database.
37

38. Requirements Document
Hierarchy and Approval Authority
Requirement Baseline Document Custodian & Reviewing Body Approving
Level Document Control Process Body
NOAA
Consolidated
Observing NOAA
Observational NOAA Observing
Systems NOSC Executive
Requirements Systems Council (NOSC)
Architecture Council (NEC)
List (CORL)
(NOSA)
GOES-R Level I NOSC,
Final: GOES-R Program
Level I Requirements NOAA PMC, NOAA DUS
Office (GPO)
Documents NESDIS AA/DAA
GOES-R NESDIS AA,
NESDIS AA/DAA
Level II Management GPO NASA/GSFC
NASA/GSFC PMC
Control Plan Center Director
Mission
GPO
Level IIa Requirements GPO GOES-R SPD
GORWG
Document
GOES-R
Level III GOES-R Projects GPO GOES-R SPD
Project Plans
Project Level
Interface
GOES-R Project
Level IIIa Documents and GOES-R Projects GPO
Managers
Functional
Specifications
38

39. Challenge #9 –
System Integration
Defining the responsibilities and full process for system integration is a
challenge in a dual-agency program:
• PSE is responsible for the overall integration of the GOES-R System
• The Flight Project is responsible for the integration of the
instruments, spacecraft, launch vehicle, and operation of the
spacecraft
• The Ground Project is responsible for the complete integration of the
ground system into operations, and all interfaces to the users
• Integration is a build-up process, from subsystems to systems to
projects and then to program
Defining System Integration is an on-going PSE challenge. Previous
GOES process is the starting point, modified for unique GOES-R
structure.
39

40. Challenge #10 –
System Acceptance
Defining the full process for System Acceptance is a unique
challenge:
• Contractors hand over to their projects for Government
Acceptance
• Program is integrated then Program Director hands
integrated system over to NOAA/Operations.
• Handover will be in stages – product validation will
require longer time than spacecraft operations
Defining System Acceptance is an ongoing PSE challenge.
40

41. Summary
• The Geostationary Observational Environment Satellites
(GOES)-R is a $7 billion system of satellites, sensors
and data processing and distribution systems being
developed by a unique dual-agency partnership.
• This brief discussed how the partnership was formed,
the unique challenges it faces and how Program
Systems Engineering Group is the glue that integrates
the Program as a whole.
41

42. The World Needs GOES
. . . And a joint NOAA/NASA partnership
is the best way to deliver it
42

43. Questions?
43