DDG 1000 Program Mission System Integration Aviation Week Program Excellence Award Submission

Transcription

1 DDG 1000 Program Mission System Integration 2011 Aviation Week Program Excellence Award Submission

2 I. Program Overview Organization Name/Program Name: Program Leader Name/ Position/Contact information , Phone Customer: Organization/Name/Position Contact information , Phone Program Category Program Background: What is this program all about? (No more than one page). Describe: The overarching need for this program History of the program The product that is created by this program Scope of work original & updated Expected deliverables Current status of the program Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems/DDG1000 Program William Marcley/VP and Program Manager Office US Navy/ NAVSEA PMS 500/ Capt. James Downey DDG 1000 Ship Class Program Manager Office System level Production/Sustainment program or project Need: The DDG 1000 Class Destroyer is the next-generation Navy combatant, designed as a replacement for the aging Aegisclass destroyers. It is a game changer for the U.S. Navy, delivering dominant multimission warfighting capability. It is stealth-enabled with next-generation survivability. It provides the Navy with significantly lower operating costs through extensive automation and reduced manning and is poised to defeat nextgeneration threats. Raytheon and its subcontractors and suppliers are challenged to deliver the warfighting combat system to this transformational platform within shrinking Defense Department budgets and the recent decision of the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) to truncate the program to three globally deployable ships. The DDG 1000 combat system is a system of systems integrating 11 major subsystems enabling the warfighters to control and fight the ship. Product: Raytheon is the system integrator and one of four prime contractors to the U.S. Navy to provide systems to the DDG 1000-Class program. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works Division and Huntington Ingalls Industries are collaborating to deliver the platform and associated ship systems. BAE is providing the large and small gun systems. Raytheon is delivering the entire ship s combat system made up of the ship s computing environment, ship and engineering control, missile launcher system, sonar, dual band radar, external communications, identification friend or foe, electro optical and infrared system, decoys and command and control. Each of these individual systems are themselves major developmental programs valued at greater than $50 million, with some greater than $200 million. Scope of work: Design, development and production of an integrated suite of combat system software and mission system equipment aligned with a concurrent ship design and construction evolution at the shipyards. Contract scope includes complete mission system equipment suites and full combat system software. 1

3 Expected deliverables: Two ship sets of mission equipment and associated software suite supporting builder s trials and delivery of the ship to the Navy. History: The DDG 1000 program has evolved through the past 12 to 13 years from the initial Phase I and II DD-21 program and the DD(X) program to the current detail design and production DDG 1000 program. DDG 1000 was envisioned as the destroyer for the 21 st century, with initial plans for 32 Ships. Budget pressures and a change in Navy shipbuilding plans have led to a truncation of the program to three globally deployable ships within the current future years defense program. The reduction in size led to a technical breach of the Nunn McCurdy Act in 2010 and was followed by a re-certification of the program to Congress in that year. The detail design contract was awarded to Raytheon in 2005 followed by a production contract for the combat systems for the first two ships in Contract award for the third combat system with capability enhancements for all three ships and associated spiral software development is expected within the next year. Current Status: The past three years have been the most complex in the evolution of the program. It has seen completion of all combat system equipment designs, release of the fifth and largest of six planned software builds, and delivery of a significant portion of the equipment for the first two ships against a backdrop of serious programmatic funding issues, a Nunn McCurdy breach, and an evolving affordability program that must be balanced against warfighting imperatives. Modifications to equipment designs to support further affordability initiatives are also ongoing. Completion of major hardware deliveries is expected in Software deliveries will complete in Support to ship production and activation will extend into The program events noted above, challenged the program, and Marcley s leadership, to identify cost saving measures to fit the reduced funding allocations to the program in the current budget year and subsequent years. In the face of these substantial budget stresses, lack of CNO support, reduced staffing and the business implications for bookings, sales and profit, Marcley has steadied the ship and is delivering hardware systems more than 1,100 hardware items to date and producing software more than 5.5 million source lines of code meeting program-level schedules and budget constraints. There are more than 1,000 employees at Raytheon and its subcontractors. 2

4 II. Value Creation = 20 Points Value: What is the value, competitive positioning, advantage, and return created by this program to your: Customers National interests, war fighter Company Strength, bottom line, and shareholders Scientific/technical value (particularly for R&D programs) Excellence and Uniqueness: What makes this program unique? Why should this program be awarded the Program Excellence Award? Customer - The DDG 1000 Class Destroyer is designed and developed to be a game changer for the U.S. Navy. It delivers dominant multimission warfighting capability. It is stealthenabled with next-generation survivability and can operate autonomously in the littorals while delivering marine fire support unavailable on any other platform. It provides the Navy with reduced operating costs and substantially reduced manning requirements with a significantly higher payload. It is expandable for future threats, and its all-electric drive gives it growth capability for new missions such as directed energy weapons and missile defense. Company This has been an enterprise program for the company. The initial Phase I/II award was in 1998 for $105 million, Phase III in 2002 for $1.3B, and Phase IV in 2005 for $5.4B. There is an additional $2 B to $3B through initial deployment of the ship class for completion of the first three ships extending into This is followed by the franchise opportunity of supporting the evolution of the ship class over its 35+ year lifespan. Execution of the contract has been exemplary for a program of this size, and profits and shareholder return due to incentive and award fees have been significant. Scientific/technical The DDG 1000 program designed and developed and is producing new technologies for the total ship computing environment, peripheral vertical launch system, electro-optic/infrared system, external communications suite, dual band radar, hull form, advanced gun system, and propulsion system. Excellence and uniqueness The DDG 1000 program is unique in Navy shipbuilding for concurrently developing a new hull form, ship class, and combat system as an integrated development activity. Raytheon has been performing to cost and schedule on a $5.4B contract for more than six years without sacrificing mission capability. The program is executing in three countries (Canada, England and the US) under six different Raytheon business entities at 17 different Raytheon facilities supported by 10 major subcontractors and 2,000 suppliers. This is the largest Navy ship program ever undertaken and the largest program for the Raytheon Company. The technologies are so challenging the Navy restructured their procurement strategy in 2002/2003 from a DD 21 approach of design, development and production of 21 ship systems, to the DD(X) Program requiring 11 engineering development models (EDM) before awarding a detail design and integration (DDI) 3

5 contract. Long-term effective management of a complex DoD program without loss of cost, schedule and technical controls during significant programmatic upheaval is a compelling case for a program excellence award. III. Organizational, Processes/Best Practices: (How Do You Do Things) = 30 Points Strategic: Opportunity Management - Describe how your program has identified its operational and business opportunity, and manages this opportunity throughout the program s life cycle. Strategic: Strategic Supply Chain Integration and Cost Effectiveness Management: - Describe how your program is integrating its supply chain to assure visibility and adapting long-term cost effectiveness up and down the supply chain. Suppliers from Across the Country Strategic: Operational Integration and Systems Engineering Describe the challenges faced by your program in terms of integrating the system into its operational environment and its impact on systems engineering Raytheon, with Northrop Grumman, responded to a Phase I/II competitive request for proposal with awards to two teams. Phase II culminated in a downselect competitive selection for Phase III to the DD(X) gold team, where Northrop Grumman was the prime and Raytheon the combat system integrator. During Phase IV negotiations, Raytheon managed program relationships with the Navy to secure its own prime contract as a sole source for the completion of combat system detail design and production of two ship systems. Despite Navy budgetary issues on program completion, we worked with the Navy to define an initial Ship 3 contract award for advanced procurement of material and are now partnered with the Navy for defining an affordable path forward for follow-on Ship 3 production completion. The DDG 1000 program has a broad supplier base with more than 1,900 suppliers with products and services valued in excess of $1.8B. The suppliers are located in most US states and the UK and Canada. Management of the supply chain has been instrumental in the success of the program. Visibility into supply chain activities begins with a standard set of metrics including order placement, receipts, actual cost compared to as bid. This is augmented with standard processes for buy better and corporate-wide agreements with many suppliers to leverage the power of Raytheon for lower costs. Additionally, a strategic view of the products and services being developed under the Zumwalt program was compared to Raytheon longterm business goals in the broader defense industry. In certain areas, specific teaming arrangements were pursued to foster a potential longer term relationship advantageous to both Raytheon and our suppliers. Concurrent development of combat system and ship platform designs presented major challenges in interface and integration management. In more traditional combat system development programs, the platform operational environment is a known quantity and the principal integration challenge is to ensure the combat system can operate within the existing constraints of the platform. On the Zumwalt program, both designs evolved concurrently with the challenge to the prime contractors to 4

6 planning and management. Operational: Planning, Monitoring, and Controlling - Describe your planning and resource allocation processes. How do you monitor and review your program s progress and make corrections to keep the program on track? Operational: Supply Chain and Logistics Management -- What processes, tools and relationship-building methods have you used to develop, refine and improve supply chain and stakeholder integration? Please indicate also methods used to analyze/factfind regarding supplier proposals. This is one of the most imperative needs of our industry please provide specific details and data that assisted you in gauging the effectiveness. Operational: System Integration, Testing & Reviews - Describe the activities and processes used to succeed in your system integration, and testing. How did you conduct system design and technical utilize the degrees of freedom this provided to optimize designs across the combat system and the ship. A primary goal for all contractors was to provide early interface definition to each other in sufficient detail to allow each contractor to proceed in early concept definition but avoid over constraining interface definition to allow optimization of system design during detail design. Raytheon has standard processes for program status progress reviews documented in our trademarked Integrated Product Development System (IPDS). IPDS defines a series of 11 gates as the product or system evolves from initial concepts through preliminary design, critical design, production and test readiness to contract closeout. We integrate 266 Integrated Master Schedules (IMS) files across 7 teams with over 300,000 schedules lines. The integration is performed in a master data system and one integrated IMS is delivered to the Navy. Weekly earned value reviews are selectively conducted among the 251 Cost Account Managers to monitor and maintain progress of the more than 5000 control accounts. The DDG 1000 Program has over $1.8B of material provided by suppliers located in 45 states and internationally. The Supply Chain director is a member of the program leadership team and is integral to program execution and the development of required cost positions for new program scope. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems conducts annual supplier conferences in Washington, D.C., which include program briefs from senior Navy leadership describing the program status and the program growth potential. This level of supplier integration serves to incentivize the supplier base to continue to lend their support to the program in the interest of future work scope. Raytheon applies a standard process of cost and pricing analysis (CAPA) for the evaluation of supplier as prescribed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation. The DDG 1000 CAPA process integrates an engineering review for the labor content, supply chain for material quotes, and finance for rates and factors. The DDG 1000 Program uses a requirements database to not only decompose the requirements, but also to link the requirements to test methods and conduct. Each level of integration is defined in the database to ensure that the requirements are both physically and affordably verifiable. We established a separate system integration team for logical and physical integration and a separate system test team for formal verification of requirements. The system integration 5

7 reviews? Operational: Risk / Opportunity Management Describe the processes used to identify both risks and opportunity and to assure potential for both is addressed effectively Please indicate any forward-leaning processes to support. Team Leadership: Team Culture and Motivation Describe how you created your team spirit and culture, and accomplished entire team integration and individual team member motivation. Team Leadership: Lessons Learned and Knowledge Management Describe how you collect lessons learned and best practices, and how they are shared with your team and company to improve performance. Also how are you and test teams partner with the performing integrated product teams (IPT) to define integration requirements, approaches and testing. Design and technical reviews are performed in accordance with the Raytheon IPDS. IPDS provides design review criteria and templates for review conduct at a series of gates. Additionally, our program uses walk-up reviews, called Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM), for the pre-integration of the customer and other stakeholders. The TIMs reduce surprises and gaps uncovered at the more formal design reviews. The Navy incorporated the Raytheon R&O process for the management of program level risks across all the DDG 1000 prime contractors. Raytheon conducted risk training and provided the tool set that was converted to a web based tool for the use of the entire industry team. The Raytheon risk and opportunity process and tools are incorporated within our IPDS process. Monthly reviews are conducted at the IPT level and the R&Os subsequently presented to the program manager. The risk and opportunity identification process was initiated during the early program phases with interviews conducted at the lowest level. Mitigation tasks (risks) and capture tasks (opportunity) are included in the IPT integrated master schedules and tracked using standard earned value practices ensuring progress and status emphasis. We created DDG 1000 vision, strategy, goals and values (VSGV) early in the program. The VSGV is augmented by a set of team rules and IPT handbooks emphasizing living these values. Quarterly town meetings are conducted, with the program manager traveling to sites across the country to celebrate our successes and identify the progress of the program. Monitors are placed within our DDG 1000 work areas to acknowledge both program and individual accomplishments. The monitors identify when important milestones are achieved and when significant deliveries are made with team celebratory photos. We also include photos and progress information from the shipyard as ship construction progresses. Lessons learned are shared during the weekly staff meetings and documented in a corporate database. Expertise and knowledge is evidenced by the retention of key program personnel. The DDG 1000 program is very large and has provided significant growth opportunities, relieving the necessity for key personnel to migrate to other programs for promotions and technical challenges. 6

8 capturing expertise and knowledge to assure availability over the life of the program? Team Leadership: Leadership Development How do you develop team s skills and build future leaders Best (& Next) Practices: Identify your program s specific Best Practices that you believe are unique, and could be shared with others and become industry s Next Practices. The DDG 100 program is a franchise program for Raytheon. This very large program has provided the opportunity for strategic rotations and the development of leadership talent. The program requires leaders to demonstrate dexterity in numerous disciplines, and the program exercises those many disciplines at varying levels of the organization. Raytheon also offers a series of formal leadership training and the program manager is empowered to recommend team members for increasing levels of formal training. The DDG 1000 program has integrated the combat system integrator with the shipbuilder. This integration during the concept development and detail design process has resulted in a greater level of integration than has ever been experienced on a shipbuilding program. Our combat system emphasis on affordability, and cost as an independent variable (CAIV) are best practices. We have conducted 6 sigma blitzes, and CAIV Tiger Teams using our CAIV tools and practices to reduce program costs by over $150M. The level of documentation in the requirements database and the integrated toolset for architectural definition, system design and system models are unprecedented. The requirements DOORS database is linked to our architectural tools and our software use case development tools. Requirements are linked up and down the entire specification set and the database includes attributes for verification level and completion. IV. Adapting to Complexity: (How do you Deal with your Program s Unique Complexities = 20 Points Identify the Program s The DDG 1000 Ship System is new to the world. The DDG 1000 Market Uncertainty ship design is a new and unique wavepiercing hull form with level How new is your integrated propulsion electric power generation, and a composite product to your market material deckhouse. The combat and missions systems utilize a total and users, based on the ship computing environment that integrates an advanced radar definitions below. Then system, a unique peripheral vertical launching system, an unmanned describe how you deal external communications suite, a custom electro optic/infrared and address this specific (EO/IR) system, a newly developed advanced gun system, and state uncertainty: of the art sonar systems with unprecedented levels of stealth and - Derivative an automation. The level of integration, automation and warfighting improvement of an capability will make the DDG 1000 the finest ship in the Fleet. existing product/system. The program has endured administration changes and threat changes - Platform a new in an era of difficult DoD funding conditions. The program evolved generation in an from Surface Combatant for the 21 st century (SC21) in the 1990s 7

9 existing product line. - New to the Market a product or system adopted from another market - New to the World - breakthrough product, never seen before Identify the Program s Technological Uncertainty using the definitions below. Then describe how you deal and address this uncertainty: - Low-tech: application of mature, wellestablished technology - Medium Technology: existing technology modified to meet new design requirements - High-Technology: recently developed new technology - Super High- Technology: nonexisting technology that needs to be developed during the program. Identify the level of your System Complexity using the definitions below. Then explain how you are dealing with this level of complexity: - An Assembly performing a single function. - A Sub-system fitting within a larger system. - A System a a family of ships including destroyer, cruisers, littoral combat ships and aircraft carriers to a destroyer class, DD21, as the AEGIS replacement. The initial plan for 32 ships was reduced to an 11-ship class. With the administration change in 2000, the program changed to DD(X) and a seven-ship class. As we were executing the program, the program received formal designation of DDG 1000 and subsequently reduced to a three-ship class. The program s unique challenge is retaining support for the program without having a ship in the water. The DDG 1000 integrated high-technology solutions as defined above in the 11new systems. This is by far the greatest quantity of new high technology ever attempted in a single Navy program. The integration of the shipbuilder with Raytheon for platform and combat system integration has served to markedly reduce the program risk. The uncertainties of this new platform were initially addressed through a series of EDMs addressing critical technology areas. These were done in parallel with a total ship system design phase integrating all these concepts into a cohesive platform. This was followed by a detail design phase that used an incremental software approach implementing successive levels of software capability in a series of three major releases to be followed by spiral capability that will be addressed in future phases. In parallel, equipment detail designs evolved from their EDM designs through a rigorous design and test process leading to formal sell-off of each deliverable system to the Navy. To minimize shipboard integration efforts, initial landbased integration tests are underway using the Raytheon-developed engineering control system software and hardware with the ship propulsion system at the Philadelphia Land Based Test Site. The DDG 1000 program will establish a new standard for ship system functional and physical integration and new technology. The DDG 1000 is an array of systems, better characterized as a large, complex array of large, complex systems. As noted above, the level of integration of the combat system is unprecedented. The integration of the combat system with the platform is unprecedented. Programmatically, this complexity was dealt with at several levels. Initially, a common work breakdown structure was established, driven by the various functions necessary to deploy a fighting ship. An overarching system engineering board with oversight of all system design issues, comprised of Navy and industry, is used to ensure that the total system integrity is maintained. Within the Raytheon prime contract, IPTs were put in place to align to the subsystem functional requirements. Coordination across these teams and with the overarching engineering board was assigned to a separate 8

10 collection of subsystems performing multiple functions. - An Array a System of Systems ; a widely dispersed collection of systems serving a common mission. Identify the Pace and Urgency of your team s effort using the definitions below. Then describe how you deal with the program s pace requirements: - Regular timing no specific time pressures. Fast/Competitive time to market is important for competitiveness. - Time Critical there is an absolute and critical-to-success deadline. - Blitz there is a crisis element driving the need for immediate response Other Complexities & Uncertainties - Describe other complexities and unknown factors faced by this program and how you addressed them. cross-product system engineering IPT. Integration across product teams and with the ship platform was assigned to another cross product team to insure close supervision of critical interdependencies at the system and platform level. A final cross product team was established to have oversight of all formal test activities to insure independent corroboration of compliance with design goals. The DDG 1000 combat system deliveries are time-critical. Our products are primarily installed during ship construction and must be completed in phase with shipbuilding activities. They must be delivered at the in-yard need dates or the program will encounter significant costs due to delays in the ship building program. Meeting the program design milestones was also critical to keep the program successful with requisite support in DoD and Congress. Slip-ups in the development schedule would have jeopardized the program s sustainability. Compliance with ship construction schedules is dealt with at several levels. A joint ship integration team made up of Navy, Raytheon, and the shipbuilder meets weekly to align product deliveries to the most current shipyard schedules. A comprehensive master schedule, which lists every deliverable item linked to critical path dependencies, is maintained and monitored weekly. In the early design and drawing release phases, plans were developed for every drawing release and tracked weekly to assure consistency with the master plan. Within the last few years, significant budget pressures within the Navy led to a re-evaluation of the cost benefits of the new Zumwalt class versus continuing with production of enhanced variants of previous less capable ship classes. A determination was made by the CNO that the Navy s short-term needs would be better served by restarting production on the DDG 51 Class and paying for a larger number of these ships by curtailing the Zumwalt ship class to three ships. The lack of program support from the CNO was a surprise and a disappointment. It has obviously had a significant adverse impact on the program and required a lot of energy from the entire team and the company leadership to sustain a three-ship program. This was further complicated by the reduction in class size causing a technical breach of the Nunn McCurdy act, requiring a re-certification of the program to Congress. We have fostered a vigorous exchange of views on the technical merits and cost benefit assessment of the 9

11 Zumwalt platform versus other Navy platforms and engaged our congressional representatives, teammates and suppliers to help us sustain the program. We have partnered with the Navy DDG 1000 program leadership to find innovative ways to apply CAIV techniques to reduce the cost of the program and allow the program to deploy sufficient ships to demonstrate its superiority as a warfighting platform. Raytheon s execution performance has been nearly flawless, aiding our cause. V. Metrics (How do you Measure Program s Performance) = 30 Points Customer - How do you measure the impact of your program on your customer and your customer s satisfaction? Include a description of your metrics, as well as numerical evidence. Performance - How do you measure your program s performance in traditional terms such as schedule, budget, requirements, and business results? Preparing the Future - How do you measure and assess the long-term contribution of your program to the corporation/organization? Team - How do you measure and assess the impact of your program on your team development and employee satisfaction? Unique Metrics - Describe any unique metrics you are using to measure your program s progress and how do you focus it for outstanding success. Our customer satisfaction is formally documented in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). The CPARS ratings for the program are blue, or outstanding. We are also assessed award fee for the program and our award fee assessments have been consistently in the outstanding range. The program maintains traditional earned value metrics for schedule performance and cost performance. We have established metrics for requirements definition and productivity metrics to measure ourselves. We also have standard metrics for software growth and software development productivity. These metrics are maintained and reported at our monthly program reviews. Business results are defined in terms of annual operating performance sales, bookings, profit and cash. These metrics are also reported monthly to all levels of the Raytheon Company. We have established five-year plans, and we measure ourselves against those plans the same as our annual operating plan. The fiveyear plans include the definition of growth for the program, new pursuits and the business metrics associated with growth or new wins. Quarterly program town meetings are conducted, followed by a formal survey process to the entire team. Survey results are maintained and used to adjust the interaction to the team and to define topics for subsequent town meetings. The Raytheon business sector also conducts formal surveys of all employees, with results and metrics passed back to the individual programs. We do not use any unique metrics, but have enhanced the metric analysis by looking for long term, six-month and current trends. Business metrics are decomposed to cumulative, six-month, and current-month performance. The DDG 1000 program is so large, and has been performing for so long, that cumulative metrics could mask current trends. 10