Mike Wadzinski Director Quality, Safety and Mission Assuranceasq.org/asd/2019/04/quality-control/missile-defense... · 2019-04-17 · A standardized set of 14 Quality, Safety, and

Mike WadzinskiDirector

Quality, Safety and Mission Assurance

CQSDI

Approved for Public Release 17-MDA-9158 (27 April 17)

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

2

• Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

• QS Organization

• MDA Assurance Provisions (MAP) Rev B and Rev C

• Parts, Materials, and Processes (PMAP) Rev B, PM 86 and Rev C

• MDA Assurance Reps (MAR) Locations and Regional Plan

• FY 18 Assessment Summary and Pareto

• Significant Quality Trends

• “Made for MDA” Campaign

• Conclusions

Agenda


3

BLUF

• Why Quality is Important

• Every part and every process matters, and for that reason everyone, up and down the supplier chain, has a critically important job – to ensure the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) is of the highest quality. This is an imperative for the defense of the nation.

• The cost of a defect can be costly. When an interceptor or another part of the BMDS does not work, we cannot do our mission.


4

QS ORGANIZATION

Bus Ops (HSV)

QS

BMDSSafety Officers

(COS)

QSC

Parts, Materials &

Processes (HSV)

QSP

Mission Assurance(HSV)

QSABMDS Safety (HSV)

QSS

BMDS Quality(HSV)

QSQ

Safety & Occupational Health (HSV)

QSH

BMDS Sensors (HSV)

SNQ

Terminal High Altitude Area Defense

(HSV)

THQ

Israeli Cooperative Program (HSV)

IPQ

Ground-based Midcourse Program (HSV)

GMQ

C2BMC(HSV)

BCQ

Aegis BMD (DAHL)

ABQ

Targets & Countermeasures (HSV)

TCQ

Advanced Technologies (HSV)

DVQ

Advanced Technology, Directed

Energy & Sensor Technology (ALBQ)

DVLQ

LEGEND:MDA Civilian OGA Civilian

Matrix MiDAESS

Verification(TUC)

QSV

Chief Engineer(HSV)

QS

BMDS Assurance

Integration (COS)

QS Director (HSV)Mike Wadzinski

QS

Deputy Director(HSV)

QS

Fin Mgmt(HSV)

QS

QSI


5

MDA Assurance Provisions (MAP) Revision B• Approved 13 June 2014• Implementing on all new contracts; assessing existing contracts• A standardized set of 14 Quality, Safety, and Mission Assurance

provisions, requirements, and processes for missionand safety critical items:

MDA Assurance Provisions (MAP)3.1 Management3.2 Design and Development3.3 Software and Firmware3.4 Technical and Mission Assurance Reviews3.5 Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability3.6 Parts and Materials Control Program3.7 Integrated Test and Evaluation Program3.8 Test, Meas.,and Diagnostic Equip. & Stds.3.9 Interface Management3.10 Configuration Management3.11 Control of Nonconforming Items & Materials3.12 Fabrication and Quality3.13 Supplier Management3.14 Safety


6

• Goal is June 2019 Publication

• Primary focus will be to include new/updated SAE AS9100 requirements and new DoD directives for software assurance

• QS solicited industry input via MDA programs.

MAP Revision C


7

• Applicable Documents (References)Government and Commercial

• PMP Management Structure, Roles, and Responsibilities

PMP Board, PMP Control Board, PMAG

• PMP Requirement examplesElectrical, Electronic, and

Electromechanical (EEE) PartsMaterialsCorrosion PreventionProhibited Parts and MaterialsPMP Quality RequirementsCounterfeit PartsRadiation Hardness AssurancePMP QualificationCommercial Off the Shelf (COTS)

ManagementFailure Analysis Environmental ControlsHandlingPreservation, Packaging and Storage

Parts, Materials, and Processes (PMAP)Rev B

Appendices- Derating- Plastic Encapsulated - Microcircuit (PEM)- COTS- Radiation Hardness - Assurance- Prohibited PMP - PMAP Data Items- Corrosion - Prevention


8

• Parts, Material and Processes Requirements Verification• Program Managers will implement a PMP requirements

verification process for all MDA mission and safety critical hardware contracts.

• The PMP verification process will be based upon the program’s approved PMP plan and include a schedule of planed contractor-led onsite PMP baseline and maintenance verification assessment at subcontractor facilities.

• Emphasis on the following:• Proper handling and storage of moisture sensitive EEE parts and wire

• Appropriate derating of EEE parts

• Receiving inspections to ensure XRF to detect pure tin, gold plated

leads and PIND testing

• Proper assessment of product change notices (PCNs)

• Procurement from authorized sources

MDA Policy Memo 86


9

• Goal June 2019 publication• Collaborative effort with industry• Focus Areas

- Part selection- Parts age control - DPA- Lead free (pure tin)- Prohibition of copper wire bonds- Product Change Notices (PCNs) and Requalification- Advanced technology- Realigning requirements with MAP - Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) – Logic Devices - Radiation hardness- New category R for fixed radars Heritage appendix- COTS

PMAP Rev C


10

• Are located at critical manufacturing sites and integration facilities across the USA.

• Ensure MDA requirements are met at their location(s).• Provide independent, unfiltered technical and quality

assessments to MDA Senior Leadership. • Ensure industry best-practices are present at sites. • Share lessons learned across all MDA programs. • Assess lower-tier suppliers via the MAR Regional Plan.

MDA Assurance Representatives (MARs)


11

Vandenberg AFB

Aerojet RocketdyneSacramento, CA

Pacific ScientificHollister, CA

NGISChandler, AZ

Honeywell & Pac SciChandler, AZ

RaytheonTucson, AZ Ft. Greeley, AK

NGIS AvionicsSalt Lake City, UT

NGIS MotorsMagna, Clearfield and Promontory UT

MDIOCColorado Springs, CO Eagle Picher

Joplin, MO RaytheonWoburn and Andover

NGIS TargetsHuntsville, AL

Lockheed MartinCourtland, AL

Aerojet RocketdyneARCAOrlando & Cape Canaveral, FL Lockheed* Oldsmar, FL

Honeywell Clearwater, FL

Aerojet Rocketdyne /Lockheed / Raytheon*Camden, AK

West Region

East Region

Lockheed MartinMoorestown, NJ

NGISElkton, MD

Raytheon/BoeingHuntsville,AL

BAE*Nashua, NH

MDAHuntsville, AL

MDA/QS MAR LOCATIONS

Lockheed Matrin*Chelmsford, MA

L3 East*Bristol, PA

* Interim Coverage


12

Purpose: Expand the footprint of the current MARs to cover additional sites utilizing a regional approach to supplier management.

Background: Based on previous QS supplier assessments, many quality issues exist at lower tier suppliers. This plan was developed in Jan 2013 to provide visibility into the sub-tier supply chain, to identify similar issues and mitigate the risks.

• The MRP consists of small scale visits to suppliers (1or 2 MARs) that are conducted on a non-interference basis. Specified criteria are evaluated.

• MRP Phase I in 2014 covered 35 companies. • Phase II in Feb 2015 added 42 companies. • Phase III in Feb 2016 added 48 companies. • Phase IV in Mar 2017 added 20 companies.

• Companies selected based on complexity of hardware, critical function of hardware within the system, program requests, history of quality issues and production status.

MAR Regional Plan


13

FY18 Assessment Summary

Tier Duration Date Completed

# of Teams Notes

2/3 4 Days 10 Oct 2017 4 42 Findings – 40 Deficiencies; 2 Observations2 4 Days 20 Nov 2017 3 25 Findings – 21 Deficiencies; 4 Observations1 8 Days 18 Dec 2017 8 83 Findings – 78 Deficiencies; 5 Observations2 4 Days 16 Jan 2018 5 29 Findings – 29 Deficiencies

2/3 4 Days 5 Feb 2018 6 45 Findings – 39 Deficiencies; 6 Observations2/3 5 Days 26 Mar 2018 7 74 Findings – 64 Deficiencies; 10 Observations3 3 Days 14 May 2018 4 17 Findings – 16 Deficiencies; 1 Observation1 5 Days 11 Jun 2018 5 24 Findings – 21 Deficiencies; 3 Observations2 4 Days 9 Jul 2018 5 60 Findings – 59 Deficiencies; 1 Observation

FY18 Assessment Summary• 9 Locations • 399 Total Findings.

• 367 Deficiencies (92%), 32 Observations (8%)

Approved for Public Release 18-MDA-9539 (7 March 2018)

14

QS MAP Core Assessments FY18


15

Significant Quality Trends

• Not properly implementing “Test Like You Fly” • Software logic error and inadequate software testing on air-launched target

• Loss of target and “no test”• Target extraction software incorrectly aborted rocket motor ignition

• G-Switch failure• Failed test• Centrifuge did not adequately represent flight acceleration

• Arm-Fire Device• Failed test (potential contributor)• Ground testing different from flight use

• COTS issues

• PMP related failures

• Updated requirements in work – BOM, DPA, PCNs, Detailed Checklist

• Pure tin components, leads, and inadequate CCA conformal coating

• Tin whiskers induced electronics card failures


16

• Purpose• Ensure all MDA suppliers of safety and mission critical

components are aware that:• They are building products for MDA• The quality of their components are key to ensure safe and

reliable MDA systems• Program Supplier/Quality Days• Products

• Made for MDA Video – Updated Introduction by Lt Gen Greaves• Made for MDA Posters, Calendars, Badge Cards, Stickers

• Distribution• Direct Distribution via mail• MDA Website• Program Supplier/Quality Days• MAP/PMAP Training Events

“Made for MDA” Campaign


17

Made for MDA


18

• Quality is a requirement, not an option• MAP/PMAP provide guidance to suppliers on MDA Quality, Safety

and Mission Assurance requirements• MDA continues to update QSMA standards

• MARs increasing lower tier supplier assessments

• MDA Assessments finding more issues than they should

• Supply chain needs greater attention• MDA using “Made for MDA” Campaign, MAR Regional Plan and

Supplier Quality Days to reach lower into supply chain to emphasize quality

Conclusions


19

QS POC’s for MAP/PMAP

• Chris Miller - MAP - [email protected]

• Jonathon Ahlbin – PMAP – [email protected]

Questions?