We have some information on our main About Page as well as an evolving Resources page with links to official DoD sites, standards bodies, and other information hubs.

MOSA is sticking around as a part of the Title 10 legal requirement on all weapon systems. However, the term “MOSA” is a fairly recent addition to the lexicon for something that has been growing as an area of interest and action in Defense for the past 20 years – as consolidation was increasing (fewer Defense Prime Contractors), the need for horizontal integration of common suppliers was creating the demand for Open Systems Architecture and Better Buying Power. Thus the roots of what we now call MOSA have been trending up for several decades. We now have legal requirements for it and, more importantly, success stories and GAO protest precedence showing execution against the principles. All this makes MOSA more than a fad.

MOSA stands for Modular Open Systems Approach. This term was codified in 2021 as part of the legal requirement for weapon system development and requires programs to have an “integrated business and technical strategy” that adopts a modular design. It is a key element of the Department of Defense’s Systems Engineering Modernization effort aimed at improving the affordability, flexibility, and interoperability of defense systems. MOSA emphasizes the use of open standards, modular design, and well-defined interfaces to enable competition, technology refresh, and easier system upgrades throughout the lifecycle. 

The benefits of MOSA include: 

• Reduced Costs: Increased competition and reuse of components can lead to significant cost savings. 

• Faster Technology Insertion: Modular design allows for easier upgrades and integration of new technologies. 

• Improved Interoperability: Systems built with MOSA principles can more easily integrate with other systems. 
  
• Increased Flexibility: Systems can be adapted to changing mission needs more easily. 

Implementing MOSA effectively involves a multi-step process: 

1. Define Stakeholder MOSA and Mission Needs: Clearly articulate the mission objectives and the desired MOSA benefits. 

2. Apply MOSA Tenants: Determine the required standards, reference architectures, interfaces, and modularity levels to achieve the desired benefits. 

3. Identify Derived MOSA Requirements: Translate stakeholder needs into specific, measurable requirements for the system. 

4. Develop the MOSA Implementation Strategy: Define the acquisition and technical approach for achieving MOSA compliance and benefits. 

5. Tailor Your MOSA Implementation Metrics: Select appropriate metrics to track progress against the MOSA implementation plan. 

6. Manage MOSA in Technical Baselines: Ensure that MOSA features are implemented and verified within the technical baselines. 
   
7. Measure Life Cycle Benefit Achievement: Continuously assess whether the implemented MOSA solution is delivering the expected benefits. 

MOSA metrics should be tailored to specific program needs and can be categorized as follows: 

• Continuous Iterative Development: Metrics like automated test coverage, burndown charts, and cumulative flow diagrams track progress in agile development environments. 

• Digital Engineering: Metrics assess the completeness and stability of the system architecture, model traceability, and the effectiveness of digital engineering tools. 

• Technical Risk Assessments: Metrics include technology readiness levels (TRLs), integration readiness levels (IRLs), reuse readiness levels (RRLs), manufacturing readiness levels (MRLs), and other risk assessment measures. 

• Business and Financial: Metrics evaluate cost and schedule performance, return on investment (ROI), life-cycle cost trends, and the effectiveness of competition strategies. 

• Operations and Support: Metrics monitor system performance, reliability, maintainability, availability, and support costs. 

MOSA Product Value refers to the degree to which a system meets stakeholder objectives through the application of MOSA principles. Key attributes considered in assessing MOSA Product Value include: 

• Optimized Modularity: The level of modularity that enables desired levels of competition, technology refresh, and flexibility. 

• Functionality/Component Reuse: The ability to reuse components to reduce development time and cost. 

• Performance: The system’s ability to meet performance requirements in its intended operational environment. 

• Dependability: The system’s reliability, maintainability, and availability. 

• Security: The system’s resistance to cyber and physical threats. 

• Business Value: The affordability of the MOSA solution and its contribution to meeting business objectives. 

While it has long been noted that there are TRL “gaps” in funding (e.g. RDT&E funding up to TRL 6, with procurement funding above TRL 7, often resulting in the “Valley of Death” in transition), it is key to note that MOSA applies to all stages of development, especially procurement (as it is legally required to be noted in the program Acquisition Strategy). This means any correlation between stages of development should not be used as an “excuse” for MOSA “readiness”. However, the idea that something can be proven to be reusable could benefit from the use of Reuse Readiness Levels (RRL). RRLs are a tool developed by NASA to assess the maturity and risk associated with reusing software components or systems. They consider factors such as documentation, extensibility, intellectual property rights, modularity, packaging, portability, standards compliance, support, and verification and validation. RRLs help programs make informed decisions about whether to reuse existing software assets, potentially saving time and cost. This is an area of active conversation.

MOSA promotes competition by: 

• Enabling modular contracting: Systems can be broken down into smaller components that can be competed separately. 

• Encouraging the use of open standards: Open standards allow multiple vendors to compete on a level playing field. 

• Facilitating technology insertion: Modular design allows new technologies to be inserted without requiring major system redesigns. 

The Army Aviation Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) navigated a competitive procurement with MOSA as the primary decision criteria. You can read the full GAO report here where the legal precedent is established that MOSA can be weighed with other factors as a key competitive decision criteria, even above price. Army Aviation has been engaged in a MOSA Transformation effort across all their programs, including an Architecture Collaboration Working Group and a a CRADA with the Vertical Lift Consortium.

We are also gathering success stories for publication on the MOSA Network site and with our partner organizations.

All three services participate in the annual MOSA Summit and also have emerging MOSA success stories. The Navy’s Consolidated Afloat Navy Enterprise System (CANES) and the Air Force’s Global Air Traffic Management (GATM) system are examples of successful MOSA implementations. These programs have demonstrated the benefits of MOSA in terms of enhanced competition, cost savings, and technology refresh.