Hello PDF

Title: DOD-STD, Version: A, Date: Feb, Status: Cancelled, Desc: DEFENSE SYSTEM SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (29 FEB ) [S/S BY. This handbook provides guidance in tailoring DOD-STDA, “Defense System Software Development: for use in concert with DOD-STDA, “DOD. On December 5th, it was superseded by MIL-STD, which merged DOD -STDA, DOD-STDA, and DOD-STD into a single document.

Author: Yogore Nasho
Country: Finland
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Finance
Published (Last): 12 December 2010
Pages: 71
PDF File Size: 18.46 Mb
ePub File Size: 7.44 Mb
ISBN: 339-5-63372-423-5
Downloads: 63028
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Dibei

Little concern was given to life cycle, style, or anything other than performance. Concepts and Techniques. Department of Defense DoD. Several iterative life cycles, most including some form of prototyping have recently emerged. United States Department of 2167aa standards documents disestablishments in the United States. In addition, there are a variety of new requirements for development aids and software engineering methods which are not particularly germane to this discussion.

Sage and Palmerhowever, state that the disadvantages of the spiral are exactly those features which are most useful in software development: This model contains some of the components of Davis’ model, however, rapid prototyping commences much earlier, during system requirements activities. Site developed by Webel IT Australia.

Retrieved 23 Jan Rework may be reduced or eliminated by using a process model to force project managers to focus on difficult issues during requirements and design, rather than on delivery of some required documentation. The developers then pick up the prototyping activity to aid in software requirements elicitation and validation, requirements are extracted from this version of the prototype and used to produce the Software Requirements Specification DI-MCCRA.

Contracting for Quality EEE This document established “uniform requirements for the software development that are applicable throughout the system life cycle. This created problems matching design documents to the actual product.

Another alternative model is proposed by Andriolewhich incorporates aspects of his earlier iterative prototyping life cycle into the A life cycle. Orchestrating for success, Datamation Looking at this figure enables the realization of precisly how similar the DoD-StdA life cycle is to the waterfall life cycle, and emphasizes the document-driven nature of both process models.

This model is specifically geared to the design and development of decision support systems, but appears to be applicable to many interactive information system development efforts.


Iterative software development life cycle models have become more popular with the advent of techniques to aid in iteration such as rapid prototyping. For an interesting method for comparing the various life cycle models along several dimensions, see Davis One of the latest software development life cycle models has been named the Multidisciplinary Information Systems Engineering life cycle model by Andriole As can be seen in FigureBoar’s model is not a complete life cycle and ignores some important issues such as specification and software design.


This results in imaginably low software productivity. Finally, it is clear that DoD-StdA was not specifically developed with iterative design in mind, even though iteration is specifically mentioned in Paragraph 4.

This paper addresses the compatibility of these techniques with DoD-StdA. We apologise for being unable to respond to access requests that are declined. Figure shows Boar’s concept of iteration within a life cycle using rapid prototyping. Consider the model proposed in Figure These activities were implemented very early in the software development lifecycle and had a direct impact on the hardware and software architecture, user-system interface design, and operations concept of the system under development.

A much more complete and detailed description of this life cycle can be found in Andriole’s paper. Department of Defense for published standards regarding the current thinking in software development life cycles and methodologies. Modifications to the design at this point become extremely expensive and are often deferred until a future release, if at all.

Boehm argues that evolutionary development is characteristic of the old code-and-fix model of development with high risk difficulties of spaghetti code and lack of planning.

Third, the spiral model needs further elaboration. Standard management practice is mandated along with documentation requirements characteristic of the waterfall model. The expense associated with making changes at each level becomes greater as the life cycle progresses. For example, specification Mil-HB Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities and the associated Mil-StdD Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities have a rather long list of data items which, when invoked, require many of the analyses, design and documentation activities needed in an iterative software development life cycle.

Impact of DoD-StdA on Iterative Design Methodologies

This similarity warrants the same criticism that Boehm leveled at the waterfall; that is, that fully elaborated documentation is inadequate completion criteria for early requirements and design phases for many classes of systems. The realization that any life cycle must be tailored to the application under development is demonstrated by Weitzel and Kerschberg Air Force Electronic Systems Division.


This paper examines both standard and iterative software development life cycles, and addresses the compatibility of these life cycles and techniques with DoD-StdA. Evaluate alternatives with respect to objectives and constraints. Finally, and most importantly for this discussion, Boehm asserts that partial implementations of the spiral are adaptable to most current models and are particularly helpful in reducing project risk.

Evolutionary prototyping is appropriate, however, in some development environments and has a number of proponents in the academic, commercial and government communities e. Many of these attempts were oriented toward the goal of building systems which fulfill user’s needs and provide accurate and valid requirements to developers for software design and coding activities.

Often times, software developers fail to recognize the potential impact of documentation requirements which may be invoked for system developments via specifications and standards from other disciplines. Regardless, it has been shown that iterative requirements analysis, software design, and system development may be performed under DoD-StdA, if contractors and government procurment officers take the time, up front, to tailor the life cycle for each major system development effort.

The standard continues at some length to describe those techniques, deliverables, reviews and audits required at each stage of the life cycle. Most life cycle models mentioned by Sage and Palmer and Boehm as having the potential to enhance software productivity are highly iterative in nature.

Please click here to complete a registration request form. Following this model, feedback would apparently not occur until system evaluation, at which time it would likely be too late to make an economical correction to the design. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. If you are a client of PPI or subsidiary company CTI and wish to obtain a username and password, please use the email contact form.

To illustrate, they outline several process models which explicitly include prototyping as key components. United States Department of Defense.