Spaw Temp vs Tes Format

1. Compare the SPAW TEMP with the TES format found in the DAG. Does PART 3 of the TEMP contain all of the information required by the DAG?

Comparing part 3 of the TEMP to the TES format, I notice the TEMP is a bit vague or generalized where the TES was more specific in some areas. TEMP had more info in the Strategy Introduction and Frame work compared to TES. TES calls out Development Test Objectives and Operational Test Objectives and the use of Modeling and Simulations with roles and responsibilities. The TEMP spoke of Major Test Events and Modeling and Simulations that would be used but did not state who would be doing it. The TES also called out Test Limitations that was not spelled out in the TEMP.

1. Compare the SPAW TEMP with the TES format found in the DAG. Does Part 4 of the TEMP contain all the info required by the DAG?

The TES and the TEMP have the same required information called out with the same paragraph numbers. The TES called out for more detailed information such as personnel required to conduct testing, schedules for test target and expendables and such. The TES had more metric data to spell out compared to the TEMP. The TEMP was more generalized. Example under Test Support Equipment:

TEMP – At least one set of four battalion support vehicles.

TES – Identify test support, analysis equipment, and personnel required to conduct testing.

The TES is more specific where the TEMP is more generalized, like stating the minimum requirement.

1. Compare the TEMP to the CCD. List four specific performance attributes from the CDD where the planned Testing in part 3 of the TEMP is not sufficient to assess whether the performance attribute is met.

1. Firing Range. The TEMP says to evaluate maximum fire range and accuracy. It is missing the called out maximum range that it needs to meet. 34,ooo meters at a minimum with objective of 37,000 meters. Accuracy needs to be stated that a CEP of less than or equal to 40 meters....