INTEGRATION EQUATION
testing can further be used to validate and evolve CAD and modeling-type tools.
With an initial provide tools
foundation in place to that will
enhance sys-
tem-level design, collaboration and decision-making, we are now turning our focus toward enabling Soldier-as- a-system-level integrated product and process development (IPPD) teams with these tools. IPPD has been a DOD best practice since the May 1995 secretary of defense memorandum directing the use of integrated product teams (IPTs).
IPTs have been the principal vehicle for product development within PEO Soldier since its inception in 2002. Our goal is to enable these teams to further enhance their product sets through true system- level descriptions and performance baselines at the Soldier level.
CONCLUSION Te recasting of the Soldier enterprise’s integration and configuration manage- ment process is an initial step in providing Soldiers and squads with overmatch capability in future operations. With system-level IPPD, enabled by a state-of- the-art collaborative design environment and analytics-based decision tools that consider Soldier, equipment,
mission
and task attributes, the Soldier enterprise will have improved insight into all of the problems of Soldier equipping.
Tis insight will be particularly valu-
able given the criticality of the Soldier-equipment interfaces on over- all system effectiveness and will enable the Soldier enterprise to make better equipping decisions in the near term. A logical future step is the fusion of a deeper, holistic understanding of human and equipment performance and characteristics into a seamless, dynamic package that enables Soldier-system-level
110 Army AL&T Magazine April–June 2014
QUICK-CHANGE TOOL
PEO Soldier used the Soldier Equipment Effectiveness environment, an application it developed to enable rapid visualization of equipment permutations, to create this exploded view of an equipped virtual Soldier. (Image by Nick Bradley, Office of Project Manager Soldier Warrior, PEO Soldier)
capability evaluation in a variety of operational environments.
For more information, contact Brian Raf- tery at
brian.w.raftery.civ@
mail.mil, or Karen Burke
civ@mail.mil.
at karen.m.burke12.
MR. BRIAN W. RAFTERY is currently a student at
the Dwight D. Eisenhower
School for National Security and Resource Strategy, Washington, DC. He holds an M.S. in mechanical engineering from Te Pennsylvania State University, an M.A. in procurement and acquisition manage- ment from Webster University, and a B.S. in mechanical engineering from the United States Military Academy at West Point. He is Level III certified in program
management and Level II certified in sys- tems engineering. He is a member of the U.S. Army Acquisition Corps (AAC).
MS. KAREN M. BURKE is the human systems integration and performance port- folio leader at RDECOM’s Natick Soldier Research, Development
and Engineering
Center. She holds an M.S. in engineering management from Western New England College and the Naval Postgraduate School, and a B.A. in research psychology from Framingham State College, where
she
minored in economics. She is graduating from the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center’s Competitive Development Group/ Army Acquisition Fellowship program this April. She is Level III certified in both pro- gram management and systems engineering and is a member of the AAC.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200
