Professional Systems Engineer

1. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
Test Plan
for the
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle
(EFV)
Version 1
11/1/2011
_____________________________ __________________________________
Test Engineer, Julius Ulit Date Test Engineer, Ahmed S. Aqhtani Date
__________________________________ ________________________________________
Test Manager, Chris LeBlance Date Systems Program Manager, Thomas Hoyt Date
__________________________________ ________________________________________
Program Manager, Jane Doe Date Program Executive Officer, John Doe Date

2. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
ii
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Test Purpose & Objectives........................................................................................... 1
1.2 Test Concept.................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Method Of Accomplishment........................................................................................ 1
2 TEST PLAN SUMMARY.................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Test Schedule................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Test Management & Organization.............................................................................. 3
2.3 Responsibilities & Support .......................................................................................... 3
2.3.1 Marine Corp Operational Test and Evaluation Agency (MCOTEA) ................. 4
2.3.2 EFV Operational Test & Verification Working Group (OTVWG)..................... 4
2.3.3 HULA EFV Integrated Product Team (IPT)......................................................... 4
2.3.4 Test & Integration Working Group (TIWG)......................................................... 4
2.3.4.1 Participating Test Organizations (PTOs)....................................................... 4
2.4 Personnel & Training ................................................................................................... 4
2.5 Required Test Reports.................................................................................................. 5
2.5.1 Problem/Deficiency Reporting................................................................................. 5
3 Test Considerations .............................................................................................................. 6
3.1 Safety.............................................................................................................................. 6
3.2 Security .......................................................................................................................... 6
3.3 Environmental............................................................................................................... 6
3.4 Significant Limitations ................................................................................................. 7
APPENDIX A - TEST DATA REQUIREMENTS & COLLECTION PLAN.................... A-1

3. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Test Purpose & Objectives
The purpose of this detailed test plan is to evaluate the operational performance of the United
States Marine Corps (USMC) Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV), Advanced Amphibious
Assault Vehicle (AAAV) under its intended environment.
The objectives are to validate the supported operational requirements detailed in the Test &
Evaluation Master Plan, Section 1.4 and supported system/subsystems that are secondary to
mission accomplishment.
1.2 Test Concept
Table 1.1 EFV TEST CONCEPT
System/Subsystem Test Concept
Engine Performance Stand-alone and complete system prototypes,
MTU Ka-524 Turbo Diesel Engine testing for
Military standards or equivalent
Armor Ceramic/Composite Temperature, Ballistic and Explosive Shock
Chassis Temperature, Drip Proof and Vibration
NBC Safety Measures Equipment, Space Optimization and MOPP
Level Training
Armament Dryfires and Livefires (Hull/Turret and
optional arms) at an open range with dummy
and real OPFOR targets non-occupied
Communications* EMI, Temperature, Sand & Dust and Live
Radio exercises under multiple conditions
Software** Operating system verification & validation by
early & limited users via customer and
developers throughout entire OT&E phase
Support Hardware MWWU, Thermal Viewing (Field Night
Operations), GPS Maritime and Land
Exercises
*Radio conditions include UHF/VHF, SATCOM and LOS antennas
**Software is controlled and monitored by a single crew member which includes the following
functions: Targeting, GPS and mobile workstation tasks.
1.3 Method Of Accomplishment
The EFV will be tested into subsystem modules shown in Table 1.1 such that it can be validated
for stand-alone operational acceptance/confidence and then as a complete system via prototype
deliverable(s). The subsystems will each have a specific dedicated test event in the Operational
Test & Evaluation phase that must each be accepted by the Program Executive Officer before the
Initial Operational Test (IOT) event can be realized with a complete prototype. The USMC T&E
Commander will be the final approving authority for IOT evaluation.

4. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
2
2 TEST PLAN SUMMARY
2.1 Test Schedule
The following milestones defined in the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) identify the start and completion dates of Operational Test
and Evaluation. This schedule may change and will be managed via the IMS.
Figure 2.1. Test Schedule Gantt Chart
ID Task Name
1 Operational Test and Evaluation
2 Force Development Test (FDT)
3 Early User Test (EUT)
4 Environmental Qualification Test (EQT)
5 MOE 1.2: Ability to Support Over the Horizon Amphibious Assault Concept
6 MOE 1.3: Ability to Support Maritime and Terrestrial Comabat Operations
7 MOE 3.1: Survive Maritime Combat Operations
8 MOE 3.2: Survive Terrestrial Combat Operations
9 Limited User Test
10 Initial Operational Test
11 MOE 1.1: Ability to be transported by means of land, sea or air transport
12 MOE 1.2: Ability to support the over the horizon amphibious assault concept
13 MOE 1.3: Ability to support maritime and terrestrial combat operations
14 MOS 2.1: Reliability
15 MOS 2.2: Corrective maintenance time
16 MOS 2.3: Operational Availability
17 MOE 3.1: Survive Maritime combat operations
18 MOE 3.2: Survive terrestrial combat operations
19 MOE 3.3: Combat enhancement
20 Live Fire T&E
21 Production Prove Out Test - Ballistic Hull & Turret
22 Live Fire test
23 MOE 1: Survive Maritime Combat Operations
24 MOE 2: Survive Terrestrial Combat Operations
25 MOE 3.3: Combat Enhancement
Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4
2012 2013 2014 2015

5. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
3
2.2 Test Management & Organization
A successful T&E program necessitates an effective test team organization. Figure 2-1 shows the
Marine Corp Operational Test and Evaluation Agency (MCOTEA) Operational Test & Verification
Working Group (OTVWG).
Figure 2-1 Operational Test & Verification Working Group (OTVWG)
Test Manager
Test & Integration
Working Group
(TIWG)
Naval Air Warfare
Center Weapons
Division (NAWCWPNS)
Mountain Warfare
Training Center
(MWTC)
HULA EFV IPT
Operational Test
and Evaluation
Group
Participating Test
Organizations
(PTOs)
Camp Pendleton
2.3 Responsibilities & Support
TABLE 2.1- EFV T&E MANAGEMENT BREAKDOWN
Member Role
LTCDR Johnny B. Good U.S.M.C. Operational T&E Commander
John Doe Program Director
Jane Doe Program Manager
Thomas Hoyt Systems Program Manager
Chris LeBlance Test Manager
Julius Ulit Test Engineer
Ahmed Aqhtani Test Engineer

6. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
4
2.3.1 Marine Corp Operational Test and Evaluation Agency (MCOTEA)
The Marine Corp Operational Test and Evaluation Agency (MCOTEA) is the lead service for all
operational test activities. MCOTEA has the overall responsibility for managing the EFV OT&E
program. MCOTEA, serving in that capacity, will leads and coordinate all OT aspects across the
various services.
2.3.2 EFV Operational Test & Verification Working Group (OTVWG)
The EFV OTVWG is responsible for planning, managing, and implementing all EFV OT&E
activities. It is comprised of members from the Operational T&E Group, the TIWG, and the
PTOs.
2.3.3 HULA EFV Integrated Product Team (IPT)
The HULA EFV IPT is the responsible organization for management of the EFV development
program. The HULA EFV IPT oversees all cost and schedule aspects of the EFV developmental
program.
2.3.4 Test & Integration Working Group (TIWG)
The TIWG is responsible for planning, managing, and implementing all EFV DT&E activities. It
is comprised of members from the Test and Verification functional, the EFV IPT, and the Marine
Corp Operational Test and Evaluation Agency (MCOTEA). The TIWG is the interface between
the developmental test community and the operational test community.
2.3.4.1 Participating Test Organizations (PTOs)
The PTOs are responsible for planning and supporting test activities during the EFV OT&E
activities. The PTOs will provide the test ranges for EFV survivability, lethality and
maneuverability testing. The PTOs are Camp Pendleton, the Mountain Warfare Training Center
(MWTC) and the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWPNS).
2.4 Personnel & Training
The following personnel will be required to implement the EFV T&V program:
 Program Manager: The Program Manager is responsible for the overall management of
the test program.
 Test Manager: The Test Manager is responsible for managing tasks assigned to the test
engineers as well as answering questions. The Test Manager has the primary
responsibility for test preparation and execution of all test activities. He shall have the
resources, responsibility, authority, and freedom to ensure objective evaluation and test of
the EFV.

7. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
5
 Test Engineers: Test engineers will assist the Test Conductor in performing the formal
and dry run tests. The Test engineer is responsible for assembling verifiable
requirements into automated or manual tests, reporting and recording defects.
 Quality Engineering: The Quality Engineer will monitor the formal test and authenticate
the results.
Mission Oriented Protective Posture (MOPP) training and training on the operation of the EFV
and the EFV’s weapons systems will be required in order to accomplish OT&E.
2.5 Required Test Reports
Test Reports will be developed for each test that is performed. Data collected during the conduct
of the test will be impounded by the Quality team. Subsequent test reports will be approved by
the Quality team. The test team will produce and present a OT&E Test Report (OTTR) after all
test results have been analyzed. The OTTR shall include all test data collected, analyses
performed and conclusions reached. Test Equipment nomenclatures, models, serial numbers and
calibration data will also be included in the OTTR. The OTTR will be submitted NLT 90 days
after completion of all testing.
2.5.1 Problem/Deficiency Reporting
Problems and failures of hardware and software under test during verification and qualification
will be documented and handled using the Failure Reporting, Analysis, and Corrective Action
System (FRACAS). The following will be captured Implementation of FRACAS will include:
 Any problem or failure with verification or qualification hardware and software will be
documented on a FRACAS report form (may be electronic or paper). This will include
failure to meet requirements.
 Disposition of the problem/failure will be accomplished and documented on the
FRACAS form. Disposition provides the fix (correction) to the specific problem with the
test article (or cause of the problem if not the article).
 A FRACAS report is closed after disposition, correction, and corrective action are
accomplished and the review board approves. Major modification will require approval
before testing resumes. Final test procedures including the redlines will be submitted
once testing is completed.

8. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
6
3 Test Considerations
3.1 Safety
HULA will focus on several aspects of the system safety process, using MIL-STD-882D, “DoD
Standard Practice for System Safety” for guidance. Our focus will be on a systematic approach to
hazard analysis, risk assessment, and risk management in order to eliminate or reduce risk to
acceptable levels. Our test plans will require clear definition of our system safety approach, as
well as focused and clear documentation with risk analysis as a central consideration. All hazards
need to be defined, tested, and tracked to closure.
3.2 Security
HULA will focus on minimizing or containing defense system vulnerabilities to known or
unknown security threats towards the EFV using MIL-STD-1785, “System Security Engineering
Program Management Requirements. A thorough security analysis will be conducted to identify
life cycle threats/vulnerabilities and concentrate on defense system susceptibilities such as
damage, compromise or destruction. The following task requirements will be realized by
HULA:
Threat Definition and Analysis: Identifies the anticipated adversaries (i.e. tanks, anti-tank
personnel, Opposing Forces (OPFOR) Close Air Support (CAS)), their skills, capabilities and
size.
Technology Assessments of Communications Security (COMSEC): The EFV communications
systems support controlled cryptographic material (CCM) that is vital mission operations and
national security. HULA will test the necessary subsystems responsible for communication
vulnerabilities
3.3 Environmental
HULA uses the MIL-STD-810G, “Environmental Engineering Considerations and Laboratory
Tests” as our standard for its Environmental testing and MIL-STD-461F, “Requirement for the
control of Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Characteristics of Subsystems and Equipment” for
Electrical Compatibility testing. The EFV is designed to withstand numerous environmental and
EMI testing conditions. In particular, we will use the test methods outlined in “Part Two –
Laboratory Test Methods” of the MIL-STD-810G and EMI requirements of MIL-STD-461F in
relationship to Naval applications to design a series of tests to withstand the following:
 Temperature Shock
 Explosive Shock
 Vibration
 Drip-Proof/Rain
 Humidty

9. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
7
 Salt Fog
 Sand and Dust
 Immersion
 Ballistics
 EMI
These main categories of environmental testing are common elements under which we expect the
EFV to operate. Therefore, we will create a series of tests that meet the environmental test
requirements. For example, the Salt Fog testing detailed in Method 509.5 will be an important
test series that will give us data on the effectiveness of the protective coatings and finishes on
materials. This will include a series of laboratory tests that focus on the corrosion effects,
electrical effects, and physical effects of salt deposits on the finishes of the EFV. These tests and
others created with the parameters of the 810G standard will give us a baseline for environmental
testing.
3.4 Significant Limitations
Given the full access to the testing facilities that our customer has given us, we do not expect any
significant limitations to be a factor in these tests.

10. Test Plan EFV Version 1
11/1/2011
A-1
APPENDIX A – TEST DATA REQUIREMENTS AND COLLECTION PLAN
The following table will specify the test data requirements and method of collection of the EFV:
Requirement Description Method
Marititme
Performance
Maximum speed in water Full prototype in maritime,
speed analysis
Road/Off-Road
Performance
Maximum speed on paved road
AND desert terrain
Full prototype in land, speed
analysis
MK-44 Cannon
Accuracy
Live fire exercise to test the
robustness of the turret and safety of
the crew after firing
Live fire range consisting of
dummy targets
7.62 Machine Gun
Accuracy
Live fire exercise to test the
accuracy of the machine gun
mounted to the hull
Live fire range consisting of
dummy targets
Ballistics Armor analysis Broad spectrum analysis of the
Ceramic/Composite under
bullet fire or minor explosives
Explosive Shock Categorized Heavyweight Shock for
Grade A acceptance criteria
Shock testing from major
explosives such as a depth
charge or land mine
Vibration Hull and chassis to withstand
normal vibrations from the engine
and terrain
Random Vibration across the
frequency spectrum required
Drip-proof/Rain EFV must remain drip-proof during
rain and deployment from ship
Time it takes for water to enter
inside EFV
Humidity EFV and subsystems will maintain
full operation at Relative Humidity
of at least 90%
Special Humidity chamber to
facilitate EFV
Salt Fog Robustness of the hull and chassis
in maritime operations
Unknown
EMI Electromagnetic Compatibility of all
Hardware/Software Subsystems
EMI facility to test
requirements and evaluate,
pertaining only to electrical
subsystems
MOPP Easily accessible to the crew upon
NBC attack
Live crew to be timed inside the
EFV for dressing
COMSEC Communications Security handling Radio exercises to mock
combat operational
communications
Burn-In Test Full operation under a given period
of time continuously
Analyzing and logging all
equipment for operation greater
than 24 hours
Immersion EFV must float Drop that sucker in the ocean!