Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

SpaceUp HOU 11 - Common Architecture T-5

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
Well, my name is Wayne Haufler I am formerly with Boeing. Four months ago. Unemployed at the moment. But I just thought, two days ago, that this might be the perfect venue to share my dream. I had an idea and I like to see it come to fruition. Most of my 27 year career has been on the Space Shuttle program some on the Space Station. Unfortunately I do not -- I'm not really an insider. I don't know what's going on exactly I'm somewhat knowledgeable but somewhat naive of the development of future spacecraft. My idealistic vision, and I'll grant you it's a little bit idealistic is a proposal for future spacecraft. I know there are several barriers and objections to this but it's still something hopefully worthwhile. It's something that my Master's Degree in System Engineering has taught me if anything has taught me, is that the keys to a project's success is an upfront design of excellent architecture. It's very important. It's important to spend the time and money on getting it right. Unfortunately the wrong way, unfortunately too often, you don't spend enough time and money on the overall architecture. And schedule pressures drive to develop as soon as possible. The attitude is we can't afford to do it right. We've got to get it done. One such architecture done right that I discovered is something called Boeing's Bold Stroke, which is a reusable Open System Aircraft Avionics Software Architecture and a component library and construction kit It's what my master's application -- my Master's Paper was about that. The applicability of that for spacecraft. They were using it for military aircraft. But this Boeing's Bold Stroke was developed as a common framework for a product line of avionics software or operational flight programs across multiple manned military fighter aircraft platforms. I was wondering how applicable that might be for space possibly. The advantages there is that it's highly reusable and there's commonality across the projects and it has proven to be very cost effective. I think there are other advantages to having commonality. Of course another example would be the Future Combat System and the System of Systems Common Operating Environment [SoSCOE]. And the idea there is that every single element within the weapons system, the vehicle, the idea there was to have a common core that would allow them to be more inter-operable. Yes. A common operating system for inter-operability. What more, what we want with a family of space elements out there even though they're from different manufacturers, different contractors, even different nations perhaps. But, right, Unfortunately warfare is a very different problem domain. But there are commonalities which we can take advantages of. Space exploration and that's what my paper sort of explored, the commonalities between these two domains. Also, the idea is that these Network Centric Operations or any Network Centric Operations. And I've heard, I don't know if it's true or not, a custom, trimmed [garbled] will be used or considered for space. Now the proposals is to have a common architectural framework and a construction kit with pluggable components. That's all software we're talking about. For a product line of avionics software to go in every single space vehicle. Every element for a variety of future exploration spacecraft possibly based on Bold Stroke. But I know there's intellectual property issues there. Manned, unmanned, launchers, satellites, space bases, surface bases, surface rovers robots. I know this is probably ideal, it's probably too late for this idea to take fruition but there are inevitable schedule and cost pressures which lead to poorly designed architectures. I'm trying to say let's get around that. I'm trying to not let that happen. Unfortunately a number of craft elements are not quite at a critical mass for that to have much of a benefit. The rule of thumb is that if you have three that is sharing a core of software you'll have a payback there. Unfortunately there is no central controlling organization except NASA. But that's ... I don't know if we can say that, anymore. With commercial space there's a lot more parties involved. There's only one hope I would think if enough stakeholders catch this vision and want the benefits, perhaps a new, multi-party, central authority or somehow a service with representatives from all the stakeholders could come together for the common architecture that we use and allow for - enable - multi-interoperability among the space craft and there are all kinds of benefits from that. Thank you. [applause] Question: So it's a paper? I mean this is a paper you've written up? Wayne: Yes. The paper itself was specific to Bold Stroke and considering how, from what I could gather of Bold Stroke, and study of Bold Stroke, how applicable that architecture that was designed for the military aircraft could be applicable to civilian space exploration craft. Question: Does it address, like, security concerns? Wayne: No. Unfortunately not as much. There is some of that, but I think the melding of Bold Stroke and SoSCOE? SoSCOE would address that very well I think. I think that would be a good approach.

Video Details

Duration: 5 minutes and 42 seconds
Country: United States
Language: English
Genre: None
Views: 67
Posted by: spacevidcast on Feb 12, 2011

SpaceUp HOU 11 - Common Architecture T-5

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub to translate this video.