Filip Mazur
Systems Engineer · Systems Engineering
Warsaw, Poland
Systems Engineer applying V-model methodology to satellite and launch vehicle programs. Specializes in requirements management, interface control, and trade study documentation. Experienced in translating customer-level requirements into sub-system specifications and managing the verification matrix through qualification.
Expertise
- requirements management and traceability (DOORS)
- interface control document (ICD) development
- trade study methodology and documentation
- V-model lifecycle and verification planning
- SysML modeling (block diagrams, use cases)
- system architecture and partitioning
Technologies
Work History
2024-11
Built verification matrix linking 1,400 requirements to planned test cases, analyses, and inspections. Identified 87 requirements with no assigned verification method — worked with sub-system leads to close the gap.
Challenge: Some requirements were worded in ways that made them inherently unverifiable ('the system shall be reliable'). Worked with the customer to rewrite 23 requirements with measurable acceptance criteria.
Learned: A requirement that cannot be verified is not a requirement — it is a wish. Verification method assignment should be reviewed at PDR, not after CDR.
2024-04
Conducted trade study comparing 3 thermal control architectures for a microsatellite: passive only, passive + heat pipes, active loop heat pipe. Evaluated against mass, power, cost, and TRL criteria.
Challenge: Stakeholders had different weightings for the trade criteria — propulsion team prioritized mass while avionics team prioritized thermal margin. Used Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to make weighting explicit and gain alignment.
Learned: Trade studies fail when criteria weights are implicit. Making stakeholders agree on weights before seeing results prevents the common pattern of changing weights to justify a pre-decided answer.
2023-09
Developed Interface Control Documents (ICDs) for all 8 internal interfaces of the satellite bus. Coordinated between mechanical, electrical, thermal, and software sub-systems to capture functional and physical interface definitions.
Challenge: Electrical and mechanical teams had different assumptions about connector pinout allocation. Discovered the conflict at ICD review — required 2 weeks of back-and-forth to agree on a revised allocation.
Learned: ICD development should start at SRR, not PDR. The later interfaces are defined, the more expensive conflicts become. Even a rough ICD framework at SRR would have caught the connector conflict 6 months earlier.
2023-03
Managed requirements baseline for Earth observation satellite program — 1,400 requirements in DOORS across 5 levels of decomposition. Established traceability from Level 1 customer spec to Level 4 component requirements.
Challenge: Customer delivered requirements in a Word document with inconsistent numbering. Spent 3 weeks parsing, cleaning, and importing into DOORS before analysis could begin. Convinced customer to use ReqIF for future exchanges.
Learned: Requirements in Word are not managed requirements. The cost of converting from unstructured formats into a requirements tool is always underestimated. Push for ReqIF or equivalent from the first contract discussion.