RFAs from ISOC CDR
No. |
Section |
RFA Title |
Requestor |
Actionee |
ECD/Comments | Sent to Originator for Review | Submitted to Chairperson | Closed |
1 | 1 |
ISOC Documentation Tree |
E. Andrews | L. Bator | Response | 8/12/04 | 11/11/04 | 1/13/05 |
2 | 2 | Requirements Traceability Tool | E. Andrews |
B. Craig J. Martin |
Response | 8/27/04 | 9/7/04 | 1/13/05 |
3 | 3.1 | Add ISOC Architecture Diagram | E. Andrews | B. Craig | Response |
resubmitted 11/17/04 |
1/05/05 | 1/13/05 |
4 | 3.4 | ISOC Requirements & Testing (Overall) | E. Andrews | J. Martin | Response |
resubmitted 11/17/04 |
1/05/05 | 1/13/05 |
5 | 4.2 | SAA Handling Approach | N. Johnson | L. Bator | Response |
resubmitted 11/17/04 |
11/18/04 | 1/13/05 |
6 | 4.2 | Launch Critical Support Plan |
M. Rackley J. Leibee |
S. Culp | Response | 2/8/06 | 2/9/06 | 2/10/06 |
7 | 4.2 | Red/Yellow Limit Philosophy | J. Leibee | L. Bator | Response | |||
8 | 8 | SAS Verification Approach | M. Rackley | J. Martin | Response | 9/14/04 | 9/14/04 | 1/13/05 |
Recommendations from ISOC CDR
No. |
Section |
Recommendation Title |
Requestor |
Actionee |
ECD/Comments | Completed |
1 | 2 |
Handling Data Gaps |
M. Rackley | S. Culp | 8/13/04 | 8/10/04 |
2 | 2 | Requirements Verification Methods | E. Andrews | J. Martin | Changes completed | 8/9/04 |
3 | 2 | Handling LAT Alerts | M. Rackley | L. Bator | Answered at Ops TIM | 8/5/04 |
4 | 2 | Requirements Specification Tree Enhancements | M. Rackley | L. Bator | Handled by RFA (documentation tree) | 8/12/04 |
5 | 3.1 | Corrections to Interface Diagrams | M. Rackley | L. Bator | Corrections made | 8/9/04 |
6 | 3.3 | Transitioning SVAC I&T Tools to ISOC | M. Rackley | B. Craig | GSDR Presentation | 8/19/04 |
7 | 6 | SAS WBS/Subsystem Consistency | E. Andrews | J. Martin | 9/3/04 | |
8 | n/a | FSW Test Team - Selection Process | B. Atwood | B. Craig | Search underway | 8/20/04 |
RFAs from ISOC Peer Review
No. |
Section |
RFA Summary |
Requestor |
Actionee |
ECD/Comments | Sent to Originator for Review | Sent to Ground System Manager | Submitted to Chairpersons | Closed |
1.1 Overview |
Need ISOC Management Plan & Approach |
R. Schweiss |
W. Craig |
Response |
7/30/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | |
1.1 Overview |
Need overall functional block diagram illustrating the functional capabilities and data flow during various phases |
R. Schweiss |
L. Bator |
Response (updated to change SOG/LOF terminology 7/20/04) | 6/24/04 | 6/24/04 | 7/15/04 | 7/15/04 | |
1.1 Overview |
Risk Analysis |
R. Schweiss |
W. Craig |
Response | 6/4/04 | 6/8/04 | 6/9/04 | 6/9/04 | |
1.1 Overview |
Reschedule ISOC CDR |
M. Rackley/ |
D. Lung |
CDR scheduled for 8/4/04 | n/a | 6/4/04 | 6/9/04 | 6/9/04 | |
2.1 Requirements |
Level III requirements for the LOF and SOG are not complete |
M. Rackley |
L. Bator |
7/16/04 | 7/19/04 | 7/19/04 | 7/19/04 | ||
1.1 Overview |
Staffing plan and profile |
M. Rackley/ |
W. Craig/ |
Response | 7/26/04 | 7/26/04 | 7/26/04 | 7/26/04 | |
3.0 Ops Concept |
Define the ISOC reports for internal use and external use |
M. Rackley |
L. Bator |
Response | 7/27/04 | 7/28/04 | 7/28/04 | 7/28/04 | |
3.0 Ops Concept |
The ISOC does not yet know what system it is using to process Observatory HSK data or perform the commanding |
M. Rackley |
L. Bator |
Response | 6/24/04 | 6/24/04 | 6/24/04 | 6/24/04 | |
1.1 Overview |
Describe lesson learned & approach |
M. Rackley |
W. Craig |
Response | 6/4/04 | 6/4/04 | 6/9/04 | 6/9/04 | |
2.3 V&V |
ISOC verification does not involve early opportunities to validate/test using LAT instrument |
M. Rackley/ |
L. Bator |
Response | 7/30/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | |
3.0 Ops Concept |
Verify LAT modes |
M. Davis |
L. Bator |
Response | 8/03/04 | 8/05/04 | 8/05/04 | 8/10/04 | |
4.2 SW Maintenance |
Understand the number of writes to EEPROM |
C. Young |
L. Bator |
Response | 7/30/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | |
1.1 Overview |
ISOC detailed development schedule |
K. Lehtonen |
W. Craig |
Response | 7/30/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | |
4.3 Networking |
Enter a more formal agreement with SLAC management on required data storage and processing requirements |
N. Johnson |
W. Craig |
Response | 6/4/04 | 6/25/04 | 7/15/04 | 7/15/04 | |
1.1 Overview |
ISOC organization structure & communications |
N. Johnson |
J. Martin |
Response | 7/16/04 | 7/16/04 | 7/19/04 | 7/19/04 | |
2.3 Dev Approach |
Define mechanism for ISOC requirements being placed on I&T and SAS |
N. Johnson |
J. Martin |
Response | 7/16/04 | 7/16/04 | 7/19/04 | 7/19/04 | |
6.1 Gnd Ops SW |
Define LOF/SOG tools |
R. Corbet |
L. Bator |
Response | 8/02/04 | 8/03/04 | 8/03/04 | 8/03/04 | |
6.1 Gnd Ops SW |
Specify plans and requirements for automation of Ops software |
R. Corbet/ |
L. Bator |
8/02/04 | 8/03/04 | 8/03/04 | 8/03/04 | ||
6.1 Gnd Ops SW |
Specify plans and requirements for Ops SW to be of sufficient robustness |
R. Corbet |
S. Culp |
Response | 8/02/04 | 8/03/04 | 8/03/04 | 8/03/04 | |
1.1 Overview |
Specify what other ground system elements will be involved in LAT operations |
R. Corbet |
W. Craig |
Response | 7/27/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 | 8/02/04 |