TL;DR SE Newsletter – Jan 2025

The BLUF without the fluff:

US DoD releases Mission Architecture Style Guide  

A guide that reportedly informs practitioners how to apply the Mission Engineering Guide released earlier in 2023. Perhaps next year we’ll see a guide on the guide on the guide. There’s plenty of recursion in SE and these guys are recursively a step ahead of everybody else. 

OMG 15% discount on United Architecture Framework exams ends Feb 15th 

Following on the success of SysML exams helping to proliferate SysML will it work for UAF? Are we seeing the dawn of architecture frameworks in the civilian space? Or is it a cynical drive to boost OMG coffers? Watching this space, and your wallet, with interest. 

1000 lb. debris falls from the sky in Kenya 

The Kenya Space Agency’s lost and found received a boost with a 1000 lb. ring landing in some guy’s backyard. Supposedly from an Ariane SYLDA 2008-034C but hotly denied by ESA. This brings to mind there is another possibility to realize Retirement in the system life-cycle: Refurbishment, Re-use, Recycle – make way for Re-Burn-Up-In-Atmosphere.  

Chinese Advanced Fighter J36 raises eyebrows 

Some commentators were impressed by the skin covering hinges lines – I wasn’t too impressed with the missile bay being open whilst the landing gear was deployed but then what do I know. I do know that there is nothing worse than a lost opportunity so I’ve no doubt global military aviation manufacturers will be playing the violin for more investment. The positive feedback loop to this system dynamic continues. 

Elon Musk pours cold water over the Artemis Program 

Musk says the moon is a distraction and we should go straight for Mars. Actually it’s not a new argument (made by R Zubrin a few years ago) as it is more fuel efficient but if exo-planet colonization is the goal then I think there’s an interest to the lower risk by have a working solution for the Moon before we look to Mars. Clearly either approach have vastly different architectures and though we shouldn’t buy the argument of sunk costs NASA (remember them?) should choose an architecture based on how it advances the mission. 

Modelica releases System Structure and Parameterization 2.0 standard 

SSP 2.0 supports FMI 3.0, Modelica components, enhancing co-simulation, architecture exchange, and interoperability. It also integrates virtual ECUs and Digital Twins, making it ideal for advanced cyber-physical systems. Now you finally have a chance for your model to talk to another model – that’s if it isn’t walled off by a tool. 

Ukraine develop the Trembita Cruise Missile 

Coming to a bike shop near you. The Trembita is multiple factors lower cost to make than a conventional cruise missile. Makes me think that the major primes have painted themselves in a corner if your grandpa can make a missile on a shoe-string budget. Bigger, better, and more features don’t mean much if somebody can achieve the objective with a good-enough solution at a fraction of the cost. Different ranges and capabilities but I foresee that the lion share of missions needing long ranges strikes will be fulfilled by lower cost missiles. 

Fiber-optics on Drones 

I had a double take when I read this at first: the idea is that the operator controls the drone with a fiber-optic instead by radio frequencies. No RF, no jamming but no doubt the trade-off is on maneuverability and range. Again, fiber-optics open up an interesting architectural choice to UAV design.  

The Plug 

  1. The first cohort on the INCOSE SE Handbook v5 just passed the 1/3 mark and the team is going strong. 
  2. Registration for the next study group is open – starting March 24th for 1 session per week instead of 2. 
  3. Registration is open for a SysML training course – tailored for people who want to take the OCSMP Model User and Model Builder Fundamental exam. 
  4. Check out the SE Blog on FitzgeraldSystems.com for in-depth articles on SE. 
  5. Join me on Bluesky: @fitzgeraldsystems.bsky.social

Did you like this newsletter? Did you hate it? Let me know by filling this 1 min survey: Microsoft Forms 

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *