NASA: Starliner Mission Failed Due to Software Bugs and Lack of Oversight

NASA has completed a thorough investigation into the failed Starliner mission late last year. The conclusion is that software errors and a lack of sufficient supervision have played an important role in this. The capsule failed to reach the ISS.

NASA says it has completed major investigations into the failed December 2019 unmanned Orbital Flight Test mission and continues preparations for another attempt to reach the ISS. That new flight will be referred to as Orbital Flight Test-2, for which no launch date has yet been set. Steve Stich, NASA’s Commercial Crew Program manager, did indicate that the launch is likely to take place in the later part of this year, Spaceflightnow writes based on his statements during a press conference. Kathy Lueders, previously part of the program and now the head of Human Exploration and Operations at NASA, indicated that progress is being made, but unlike Stich, she indicated that “flying with Boeing” will not take place until next year.

It concerns the completion of three investigations in which NASA and Boeing jointly looked at several problems and components. The latest investigation looked at a problem with periodic communications from space to Earth that was preventing the flight control team from monitoring and issuing commands to the Starliner during the mission. This issue could also lead to the impediment of reliable voice communication with potential future astronauts.

NASA previously reported on the two other abnormalities found during a test, which were previously devoted to two separate studies. That involved an issue with the Mission Elapsed Timer clock, where a code error caused Starliner to sync its clock with the missile before the final countdown had started. As a result, the capsule thought it was at a different point in the mission during the missile’s separation. The second issue concerned the Service Module Disposal Burn, which involved software errors that could affect other phases of the flight. Stich said it is vital that Boeing goes through the software recommendations, makes the appropriate adjustments and also tests the software.

A total of 80 recommendations have been drawn up, whereby NASA and Boeing say they are already well on their way with the necessary action plans. The full list with all the details is considered company sensitive information by NASA and will not be released, but in general NASA does provide some information. For example, there are 21 points that address the increased need for better testing of software and hardware integration, and there is, for example, a requirement for an assessment of all software requirements with multiple logic conditions. In addition, there are seven recommendations regarding updating the software code and errors related to the Mission Elapsed Timer and the Service Module Disposal Burn, along with the recommendation to make the antenna selection algorithm more robust.

During the press conference, NASA indicated that it did not adequately supervise Boeing’s software development phase for the Starliner capsule, The Register writes. That’s because the space agency was confident in Boeing’s “more traditional” engineering methods, and NASA thought it had a good grasp of Boeing’s process. During this phase, NASA focused more on SpaceX, the second player in the Commercial Crew Program, partly because the company used newer programming techniques. As a result, SpaceX’s code and programmers were monitored more than Boeing’s.

The Commercial Crew Program is a NASA program that awarded Boeing $4.2 billion and SpaceX $2.6 billion. Their task is to each devise their own way of launching astronauts to the ISS from American soil. Each company has developed its own capsule and method for this. SpaceX is now well ahead of Boeing, partly because the company managed to dock its Crew Dragon capsule to the ISS on May 31. With that, Elon Musk’s company managed to get Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley on the space station. Boeing has not yet performed a similar successful unmanned or manned flight.