Space Industry Commercialization: A Systems Engineering Evaluation of Alternatives.

摘要

The Constellation Program cancellation reversed the government and commercial space industry's roles and relationships by dedicating the majority of the federal funding and opportunities to the commercial space industry and left the government space industry in search of an approach to collaborate with the dominant organization, the commercial space industry service providers. The space industry government agencies, Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had realized that to gain resources in the new commercially oriented economic environment, they had to work together and possess the capabilities aligned with the National Space Policy's documented goals. Multi-organizational collaboration in space industry programs is challenging, as NASA, AFSPC, and commercial providers, follow different [1] enterprise architecture guidance such as the NASA systems engineering Handbook, MIL-STD-499 and "A Guide to the systems engineering Body of Knowledge" by the International Council on systems engineering [2] [3]. A solution to streamline their enterprise architecture documentation and meet National Space Policy goals is the Multi-User Architecture Maturity Model Methodology (MAM3), which offers a tailored systems engineering technique the government agencies and private companies can implement for the program's maturity level. In order to demonstrate the MAM3, a CubeSat motivated study was conducted partnering a commercial provider with a government agency. A survey of the commercial space industry service providers' capabilities was performed to select the private companies for the study. Using the survey results, the commercial space industry service providers were ranked using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) [4]. The AHP is a structured technique for making complex decisions for representing and quantifying its weights, relating those weights to overall goals, and evaluating alternative solutions [5] - [8]. The weights applied to each of the alternatives [9] and criteria (i.e. goals) were based on the National Space Policy focused survey administered to United States owned commercial space industry service providers.