Selecting the Best Technical Alternative Science and technology (S&T) play a critical role in protecting our nation from terrorist attacks and natural disasters, as well as recovering from those catastrophic events should they occur. You may print the Selecting the Best Technical Alternative lesson or save it for future reference Page 1 of 20
Objectives Upon completion of this lesson, you should be able to: Determine the applicability of science and technology elements to the acquisition of a system Identify the factors to consider when conducting an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA), such as operational requirements, life cycle costs, risks, and technical readiness levels Page 2 of 20
Science and Technology in the Analyze/Select Phase In the Analyze/Select Phase, science and technology significantly impact the selection of the acquisition approach. D Page 3 of 20 Graphic showing the acquisition lifecycle framework, with an arrow pointing at the Analyze/Select Phase. The Need Phase is when "we define the problem." The next phase is Analyze/Select, when "we identify the alternatives and resource requirements." Next is the Obtain Phase, when "we develop and evaluate capabilities." The final phase is Produce/Deploy/Support/Dispose, when "we produce and maintain those capabilities."
Types of S&T Research There are two types of S&T research activities in the Analyze/Select Phase of the ALF: Basic research Applied research Page 4 of 20
Technology Readiness Levels When discussing basic, or applied research, it is important to understand TRLs, and how they are used to measure the maturity of a certain technology. D Select the image to view an enlargement Select the D-link to read a detailed explanation of the graphic Page 5 of 20 An image of a thermometer representing how technology readiness levels are measured from levels 1 through 9, with descriptions of each level to the right of the thermometer, and labels of how the levels overlap appearing on the left side. Basic technology research occurs during TRL 1 and 2. Level 1 is when basic principles are observed and reported, and level 2 is when the technology concept and/or application is formulated. Research to prove feasibility occurs during TRL 2 and 3. Level 3 is when the analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of-concept is developed. Technology development occurs during TRL 3, 4, and 5. Level 4 is when component and/or breadboard validation in a laboratory environment occurs, and level 5 is when component and/or breadboard validation in a relevant environment occurs. Technology demonstration occurs during TRL 5 and 6. Level 6 is when system/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment occurs. System/Subsystem development occurs during TRL 6, 7, and 8. Level 7 is when system prototype demonstration in an operational environment occurs and level 8 is when the actual system is completed and mission qualified through test and demonstration. System test launch and operations occurs during TRL 8 and 9. Level 9 is when the actual system is successful through missionproven operational capabilities.
Technology Readiness Levels (continued) The use of TRLs is not mandatory at DHS, but it is considered a best practice. Program managers (PMs), and acquisition personnel use TRLs to determine the maturity of a technology before they consider using it in an acquisition program. You may recall from an earlier lesson that technologies that are TRL 5 and below may be considered in the Analyze/Select Phase, but may not proceed beyond acquisition decision event 2A (ADE-2A). At ADE-2A, the Acquisition Decision Authority (ADA) ensures that: Key technologies applied to the acquisition have been demonstrated in a relevant environment (TRL 6) Key technologies demonstrate a high likelihood of accomplishing the mission Key technologies are affordable when considering per unit cost and total acquisition cost If a given technology is not sufficiently mature (TRL 5 and below), the PM should choose an alternate solution or wait until the technology has evolved to an acceptable level of risk, in order to avoid wasting time and resources on an alternative that has the risk of not reaching the desired threshold before ADE-2A. Page 6 of 20
Basic Research Basic research involves innovation and discovery aimed at increasing knowledge and understanding in scientific fields. It includes discovering phenomena and scientific principles that can be considered for DHS application. This type of research is usually conducted at an academic laboratory or other research facility. Basic research normally takes longer than applied research. This is because you generally cannot rush innovative thinking or discovery of revolutionary scientific concepts. The technology maturity for basic research ranges between TRLs 1-3, on a scale of 1-9. The higher the TRL number, the more mature the technology, and the less technical risk to the program. A PM may select a technical alternative that is at this stage, but it will not proceed beyond ADE-2A. Basic research does not enter the Obtain Phase of the Acquisition Lifecycle Framework (ALF). Page 7 of 20
Basic Research: Example MIT Labs is researching the capability to look inside structures from the outside. This requires a technique that can penetrate structures and still be able to resolve what it sees inside. An additional issue is depth of penetration to allow for layered visualization. Some possible uses for such technology might be search and rescue missions following an earthquake, building searches for personnel and materials, and examination of structural integrity of buildings. This ranks at TRL 2 because this research has not resulted in the development of any hardware, but has a well-formulated concept for application. Page 8 of 20
Applied Research Applied research involves applying basic research findings to real-world problems in order to generate and test new technologies with potential utility to DHS. Applied research: Translates promising technology into solutions for broadly defined DHS challenges Includes studies and possibly sophisticated subsystems Establishes the feasibility and practicality of a proposed solution In applied research, the technology maturity ranges between TRLs 4-6 on a scale of 1-9, with TRLs 7-9 being advanced technology development. A technology that is still at the applied research stage may be considered as a viable alternative, but will only enter the Obtain Phase if it is rated TRL 6. Example: The Hummingbird Unmanned Rotorcraft completed its first prototype test flight with a new ground surveillance radar. The radar needs some adjustment in order to be ready for border surveillance. Since the radar is not currently capable of meeting the critical operational issue (COI), applied research will assist in adding that capability. The radar subsystem is rated TRL 5. Page 9 of 20
Critical Operational Issues COIs are the operational effectiveness and operational suitability issues (not characteristics, parameters, or thresholds) that must be examined in operational testing and evaluation (OT&E) to evaluate/assess the system's potential to provide the desired capability. A COI is typically phrased as a question that must be answered in order to properly evaluate the operational effectiveness or operational suitability of a system. For example, will the radar system be capable of discriminating man-sized objects in look-down mode from an altitude of 2000 feet? Page 10 of 20
Performance Tradeoffs Performance trade-offs are made in the "trade space" between thresholds and objectives established in the operational requirements document (ORD). These trade-offs should be made with the active participation of key stakeholders, especially the user. Although most costs are incurred towards the end of the life cycle, the greatest opportunity to influence those costs occurs early in the ALF, during the Need Phase, the Analyze/Select Phase, and the Obtain Phase, when the program s technology is developed. D Page 11 of 20 Curved line graph displaying notional trend of program life cycle cost over Time. The Y-axis represents money and the X-axis represents time. The ALF is displayed beneath the X-Axis. Program costs are represented by a bell curve (skewed to the right) indicating that costs increase over time, rising during the Need Phase, Analyze/Select Phase, and Obtain Phase, peaking during the Produce/Deploy/Support/Dispose Phase, then falling to zero. A curved line indicates that earlier in the life cycle you have a better opportunity to influence total life cycle costs, with influence ending at the end of the Obtain Phase.
Knowledge Review Protective Devices, Inc. has found a more effective way to detect explosive material in containers using low-powered lasers. What type of research is this? A. Basic Research B. Applied Research Correct! Laser-powered detection technology using lasers has been developed and is ready to be adapted for use for in finding explosives in specific containers. Page 12 of 20
Selecting the Best Alternative - Scenario US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has a requirement to conduct border surveillance along the Texas/Mexico border 24 hours a day in all weather conditions. CBP needs to extend the range of their patrol and begin fielding this capability within the next three years. The projected target cost for this program over the next 12 years is $8B. Numerous studies have been performed and multiple alternatives were considered. The alternatives have been distilled to the four (shown below), each with differing features. Select each alternative below for a description. Blimp UAV Roving Patrol Satellite Page 13 of 20 The blimp leverages technology already explored by the Department of Defense (DoD), and also by other countries. Further development and testing is needed to tailor current capability for DHS use. Logistics for long-term support of numerous blimps could present a challenge. The blimp could be ready with sufficient units for initial operating capability (IOC) in three years. The unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) leverages technology that is widely used in DoD. Some development and testing is needed to take military assets and modify them for DHS use, particularly in communications and payload areas. The UAV could be ready with first units available for IOC in two years. Using roving patrols is a solid, well-known approach. Equipment and manpower exist, but a tailored concept of operations (CONOPS) would need to be developed and tested. Facilities currently exist for outfitting patrols with new imaging camera equipment along the specified US borders. Roving patrols could be ready with sufficient equipment and manpower trained for IOC in six months. The satellite leverages proven technology used by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), DoD, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Satellites are expensive, since each one must be custom-engineered and hand-built. They are very complex and therefore, high-risk. The satellite could be ready for IOC in four years.
Factors to Consider when Selecting the Best Alternative When selecting the best alternative for an identified program, it is essential to take into consideration the following; Technology readiness level: How does the alternative rank on the TRL scale compared to others? Associated risks: What are the risks associated with integrating this alternative? Are they low, moderate, or high? Cost and schedule trade-offs: What adjustments will need to take place, when, and how best to execute them? Initial operational capability (IOC) date expected: When will it be ready for trial? Adequate funding: It is important to ensure that there are adequate funds available and the funds are programmed in the Future Years Homeland Security Program (FYHSP). The program must not only stay within its overall budget, each phase of the ALF may not exceed the budgeted amount for that phase. The following funds have been programmed for this effort: $1.5 B for Research & Development (R&D) Obtain Phase $2.0 B for Capital Investment (CI) Produce/Deploy/Support/Dispose Phase $4.5 B for Operating Costs (OC) Produce/Deploy/Support/Dispose Phase Page 14 of 20
Determine Life Cycle Costs The costs for each of the four alternatives, along with their TRL, are shown on the table below. The total life cycle cost (LCC) for each of the alternatives is shown on the last column. LCC was calculated by adding the cost of each phase. The Need Phase and the Analyze/Select Phase cost the same for each alternative ($10M). Alternative TRL Need Phase & Analyze/ Select Phase Obtain Phase Support/Dispose Phase Costs Over Ten Years Total LCC R&D CI OC Blimp TRL 4 $10M $1.5B $2B $4B $7.501B UAV TRL 7 $10M $1B $2B $4.5B $7.501B Roving Patrols w/imaging Cameras TRL 8 $10M $5M $2B $6B $8.015B Satellite TRL 3 $10M $5B $1.5B $1B $7.501B From this table, you see the total LCC is the same, and within target, for three of the choices. When you determine that multiple alternatives are within budget, you must then factor in risks, TRLs, and IOC to further narrow down the choices. Page 15 of 20
Weighing Risks and Other Considerations The table now shows IOCs and TRLs, for each alternative. Note that alternatives with low TRLs tend to have high risk, and alternatives with high TRLs tend to have low risks. The table also shows a recap of the total life cycle cost for each alternative. Alternative IOC Possible TRL Need Phase & Analyze/ Select Phase Obtain Phase Support/Dispose Phase Costs Over Ten Years Total LCC R&D CI OC Blimp 3 yrs. TRL 4 Moderate Risk $10M $1.5B $2B $4B $7.501B UAV 2 yrs. TRL 7 Low Risk $10M $1B $2B $4.5B $7.501B Roving Patrols w/imaging Cameras 6 mos. TRL 8 Low Risk $10M $5M $2B $6B $8.015B Satellite 4 yrs. TRL 3 High Risk $10M $5B $1.5B $1B $7.501B Page 16 of 20
Weighing Risk and Other Considerations (continued) Since three of the alternatives fall within the overall target budget of $8B, the program office will perform an analysis of various performance, cost, and schedule tradeoffs while taking into consideration the overall associated risks. Below is a recap of the funds that have been programmed for this effort: $1.5 B for Research & Development (R&D) Obtain Phase $2.0 B for Capital Investment (CI) Produce/Deploy/Support/Dispose Phase $4.5 B for Operating Costs (OC) Produce/Deploy/Support/Dispose Phase Considering the data above, the cost of each phase, the total LCC, and the IOC presented in the previous table, for each alternative, decide how you would rate the risk between low, moderate, or high risk; and then move on to the next page to review the average responses. Page 17 of 20
Weighing Risk and Other Considerations (continued) Select each button to reveal a response. Blimp UAV Roving Patrol Satellite Page 18 of 20 The blimp is projected to use the entire $1.5B programmed for R&D, and $500M less than allocated for investment and operating costs. While there are sufficient funds programmed to meet the requirement, there is moderate to high schedule risk. The IOC date is expected within 3 years, which meets the user's need, but if things go wrong, the program will not have time to recover. Also, TRL 4 is rated as a moderate technical risk; therefore, the overall risk associated with selecting the Blimp is moderate. The UAV is projected to use $500M less than programmed for R&D, and the entire $6.5B allocated for investment and operating cost. There are definitely sufficient funds programmed to meet the requirement. The IOC date is expected within 2 years, and at TRL 7, if things go wrong, the program should have about a year to recover and still deliver the technology on time. The overall risk associated with selecting the UAV is low. The roving patrol is projected to use $1B less than allocated for R&D, but $8B for the Produce/Deploy/Support/Dispose Phase, which is $1.5B over the funds programmed for this effort. Even at TRL 8 and an IOC date expected within 6 months, this effort has sufficient funds for R&D and investment, but insufficient funds for operating costs; therefore, the overall risk associated with selecting the roving patrol is high. The satellite is projected to use $5B for R&D cost, which is $3.5B over the allocated funds for R&D, but only $2.5B for capital investment and operating costs. Overall, they are within the $8B target budget for the entire effort, but at TRL 3 and an IOC date expected within 4 years, not only is there high technical risk, but the technology will not be ready by the time the user needs it; therefore, the overall risk associated with selecting the satellite is high.
Analysis of Alternatives Considering the factors stated in the previous slide, which alternative would you recommend? Select your choice from one of the buttons below. Blimp UAV Roving Patrol Satellite Page 19 of 20 Blimp This is not the best choice. Although the blimp fits within the expected budget, at TRL 4, the blimp has moderate technical risk and moderate to high schedule risk. If anything goes wrong, the program may not be able to meet the user s IOC date. Select another alternative to see how it was rated. UAV Excellent choice. This alternative fits within the projected budget, stands at TRL 7, has low to moderate budget risk, and should be available well before the user requires it. Even if things go wrong, the program has ample time to recover and still meet the IOC date. Select another alternative to see how it was rated. Roving Patrol This is not the best choice. This alternative is low risk since it uses little advanced technology. It is also available within six months, which is a significant advantage over the other alternatives. It has the lowest development costs by far. However, it is very manpower intensive, and it exceeds the projected budget for operating costs, and the overall budget for the entire effort. Select another alternative to see how it was rated.
Satellite This is not the best choice. The satellite will not be ready by the time the user needs it. At TRL 3, there is high technical risk, and there are not enough R&D funds programmed to carry out the Obtain Phase. Select another alternative to see how it was rated.
Summary Science and technology (S&T) offer program managers opportunities to deliver capability in new and better ways; however, immature technology carries risks that must be weighed against proven methods. In systems acquisition, science and technology evolve from initial study of the physical world to the insertion of technology into systems that perform in the field. This evolution can be tracked in a series of increments or technology readiness levels (TRLs) that reflect technological maturity. In the beginning, basic research (at TRL 1-3) provides scientific innovation and knowledge, and applied research (at TRL 4-6) "applies" basic research findings to solve realworld problems. Subsequent levels (TRL 7-9) demonstrate the technology in actual systems. Selecting the best technical alternative requires making trade-offs among cost, schedule, performance capability, technical maturity, and risk. By holding cost as an independent variable, cost objectives are set and held constant while performance trade-offs are made in the "trade space" between threshold and objective parameters. The best time to reduce the total life cycle cost is early in the system acquisition process before development gets underway. You may print the Selecting the Best Technical Alternative lesson or save it for future reference. Page 20 of 20