3.1.2 Two Empirical Tests of Design Principles for Survivable System Architecture

Survivability, the ability of a system to minimize the impact of a finite-duration disturbance on value delivery, is increasingly recognized beyond military contexts as an enabler for maintaining system performance in the presence of dynamic disturbance environments. This paper attempts to validate a preliminary set of twelve general design principles for survivability through two empirical tests. Survivability features of the A-10A “Warthog” combat aircraft and UH-60A Blackhawk helicopter, two systems designed for reduced vulnerability, are inductively traced to an existing set of principles. Seven unique insights are derived from the analysis, and the design principles are revised to reflect the lessons learned. A new set of seventeen design principles are formalized: six aimed at reducing susceptibility and eleven aimed at reducing vulnerability. The paper concludes with propositions for future work for developing a theory of survivable system architecture and a discussion of the importance of empiricism in systems engineering.

[1]  Hugh McManus,et al.  A framework for understanding uncertainty and its mitigation and exploitation in complex systems , 2006, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[2]  Adam Michael Ross,et al.  Managing unarticulated value : changeability in multi-attribute tradespace exploration , 2006 .

[3]  Peter Neumann,et al.  Safeware: System Safety and Computers , 1995, SOEN.

[4]  D.H. Rhodes,et al.  Design Principles for Survivable System Architecture , 2007, 2007 1st Annual IEEE Systems Conference.

[5]  J. Frey.  The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist attacks upon the United States , 2004 .

[6]  Olivier L. de Weck,et al.  Staged Deployment of Communications Satellite Constellations in Low Earth Orbit , 2004, J. Aerosp. Comput. Inf. Commun..

[7]  Robert E. Ball,et al.  The Fundamentals of Aircraft Combat Survivability: Analysis and Design, 2nd Edition , 2003 .

[8]  Nicholas Walliman,et al.  Social research methods , 2006 .

[9]  Robert E. Ball,et al.  A History of the Survivability Design of Military Aircraft , 1995 .

[10]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Measuring the Value of Flexibility in Space Systems: A Six‐Element Framework , 2007, Syst. Eng..

[11]  Robert L. Wears,et al.  Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts , 2006, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[12]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Defining Survivability for Engineering Systems , 2007 .

[13]  Daniel D. Frey,et al.  Validation of design methods: lessons from medicine , 2006 .

[14]  chearings.  Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Strategic of the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, First Session, March 28, 2001 , 2002 .

[15]  Daniel D. Frey,et al.  Improving system reliability by failure‐mode avoidance including four concept design strategies , 2005, Syst. Eng..

[16]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Assessing Changeability in Aerospace Systems Architecting and Design Using Dynamic Multi-Attribute Tradespace Exploration , 2006 .

[17]  Peter G. Neumann,et al.  Practical Architectures for Survivable Systems and Networks , 1999 .

[18]  F. Osinga.  Science, Strategy and War: The Strategic Theory of John Boyd , 2006 .

[19]  Robert E. Ball,et al.  The fundamentals of aircraft combat survivability analysis and design , 1985 .

[20]  Ricardo Valerdi,et al.  Empirical research in systems engineering: challenges and opportunities of a new frontier , 2009, Syst. Eng..

[21]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Measuring the Value of Flexibility in Space Systems: A Six-Element Framework: Regular Papers , 2007 .

[22]  Armin P. Schulz,et al.  Design for changeability (DfC): Principles to enable changes in systems throughout their entire lifecycle , 2005, Syst. Eng..