This review evaluates the transition to SysML v2 in ESA's MBSE methodology, indicating both challenges and opportunities.
Heading toward DE and the goal to provide a common, freely accessible MBSE methodology for its member states, ESA has developed the ESA MBSE Methodology. Initially based on SysML v1, it has been applied in numerous space and non‐space projects. With the anticipated release of SysML v2, introducing substantial updates to the language and its application in SE, there is growing interest in assessing its impact. This paper investigates the potential benefits and challenges associated to this transition through a pilot SysML v2 implementation of the ESA MBSE Methodology. A structured approach was followed: identifying the major changes introduced by SysML v2 within the scope of the available tools, then employing an iterative process to map ESA MBSE Methodology concepts to SysML v2 elements. A SysML v2 language extension in textual notation was developed, and applied to a case study space mission. A comparison of the graphical notation diagrams generated in SysML v1 and v2 was also performed, leading into key insights of differences between the SysML v1 and v2 implementations. Notable differences are observed in the way definitions and usages can be exploited by the methodology, as well as how Functions can be implemented and used. This work provides a basis for further methodology refinement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Duroy et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: