3 ms·

That comment confuses me slightly. NASA always has the ability to take over the controls of a spacecraft operating around the ISS, even remotely by command from

That comment confuses me slightly. NASA always has the ability to take over the controls of a spacecraft operating around the ISS, even remotely by command from the ISS itself. The software should certainly be able to handle this.

Animats 2y ago
Apparently not.[1] Although better sources for this are needed. [1] https://simpleflying.com/boeing-starliner-undocking-software-issue-nasa-astronaut-return/ https://simpleflying.com/boeing-starliner-undocking-software...
- TMWNN 2y ago
  Eric Berger—Ars Technica reporter who wrote the article SimpleFlying cited—initially reported that Starliner needs a software update that will take four weeks, and NASA (I believe Ken Bowersox) worded it in the penultimate media event as reverting back to the 2022 software, but we now understand from context that in this case that means reverting to the 2022 parameters; NASA was very specific about the software itself not having changed. The SLS[1] stans (as Berger described on Twitter) are now focusing on how parameter change != software update thus Berger was wrong all along. It'd be one thing if said changes took a day or two to do. But assuming that it is the four weeks Berger reported, that absolutely means that it is the same thing as "software needs replacing"/"functionality was removed". To the client, NASA in this case, it doesn't matter whether the weeks to implement a new feature is (one week of uploading parameters and three weeks to validate said parameters), or (3.5 weeks of uploading new software and 0.5 weeks of validating said new software). The end result is needing four weeks. [1] Space Launch System, intended to return the US to the moon. Cost: $24 billion and rising fast
  - Animats 2y ago
    Now the problem is that the Boeing space suits aren't compatible with the Space-X seats.[1] [1] https://futurism.com/stranded-astronauts-spacex-boeing-spacesuits-incompatible https://futurism.com/stranded-astronauts-spacex-boeing-space...
thanksgiving 2y ago
I am not a lawyer or a rocket scientist but the fact that at least ONE defect went undetected/unreported/mis categorized/something at launch makes me think now everything else that Boeing did here is suspect as well and you can't take Boeing for its word at all anymore. If I were a decision maker at NASA and I simply "trust" Boeing at its job and something goes wrong, I would likely end up fired at best.
dotnet00 2y ago
They can take control over the spacecraft, the issue seems to be that the software is configured to expect crew control to be available. So, say Starliner detects an anomaly at some point, it will disable automatic control and expect crew to take over manual controls. This might cause a problem when returning without crew, even if they might be able to override that remotely.
- HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
  The software currently loaded in Starliner is for manual flight. There is a different package that needs to be loaded (& verified) for autonomous flight, which seems to be what they are planning to do.
  - dotnet00 2y ago
    This is not entirely correct, after all, Starliner was attempting to dock autonomously before the thruster issues hit near the station. The software is configured for autonomous undock, but not autonomous fault handling (since if a crew is available, they're better for fault handling). The software update is to enable the autonomous fault handling that is needed when a crew is not available. "Essentially, what we're asking the team is to go back two years in time and resurrect the software parameters that are required to give automatic responses to breakouts near the ISS should we have a problem in close to ISS, which the software now allows them to do manually," Stich said. "The team is always updating these mission data loads as different things change." - https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/08/nasa-official-acknowledges-internal-disagreement-on-safety-of-starliner-return/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/08/nasa-official-acknowle...
    - HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
      That doesn't sound good! So the current "autonomous" capability isn't fully autonomous, and is less capable (at least in this near-ISS maneuvering regard) than what they had 2 years ago?!
      - 2y ago

Animats 2y ago

Apparently not.[1] Although better sources for this are needed. [1] https://simpleflying.com/boeing-starliner-undocking-software-issue-nasa-astronaut-return/ https://simpleflying.com/boeing-starliner-undocking-software...

TMWNN 2y ago
Eric Berger—Ars Technica reporter who wrote the article SimpleFlying cited—initially reported that Starliner needs a software update that will take four weeks, and NASA (I believe Ken Bowersox) worded it in the penultimate media event as reverting back to the 2022 software, but we now understand from context that in this case that means reverting to the 2022 parameters; NASA was very specific about the software itself not having changed. The SLS[1] stans (as Berger described on Twitter) are now focusing on how parameter change != software update thus Berger was wrong all along. It'd be one thing if said changes took a day or two to do. But assuming that it is the four weeks Berger reported, that absolutely means that it is the same thing as "software needs replacing"/"functionality was removed". To the client, NASA in this case, it doesn't matter whether the weeks to implement a new feature is (one week of uploading parameters and three weeks to validate said parameters), or (3.5 weeks of uploading new software and 0.5 weeks of validating said new software). The end result is needing four weeks. [1] Space Launch System, intended to return the US to the moon. Cost: $24 billion and rising fast
- Animats 2y ago
  Now the problem is that the Boeing space suits aren't compatible with the Space-X seats.[1] [1] https://futurism.com/stranded-astronauts-spacex-boeing-spacesuits-incompatible https://futurism.com/stranded-astronauts-spacex-boeing-space...

thanksgiving 2y ago

I am not a lawyer or a rocket scientist but the fact that at least ONE defect went undetected/unreported/mis categorized/something at launch makes me think now everything else that Boeing did here is suspect as well and you can't take Boeing for its word at all anymore. If I were a decision maker at NASA and I simply "trust" Boeing at its job and something goes wrong, I would likely end up fired at best.

dotnet00 2y ago

They can take control over the spacecraft, the issue seems to be that the software is configured to expect crew control to be available. So, say Starliner detects an anomaly at some point, it will disable automatic control and expect crew to take over manual controls. This might cause a problem when returning without crew, even if they might be able to override that remotely.

HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
The software currently loaded in Starliner is for manual flight. There is a different package that needs to be loaded (& verified) for autonomous flight, which seems to be what they are planning to do.
- dotnet00 2y ago
  This is not entirely correct, after all, Starliner was attempting to dock autonomously before the thruster issues hit near the station. The software is configured for autonomous undock, but not autonomous fault handling (since if a crew is available, they're better for fault handling). The software update is to enable the autonomous fault handling that is needed when a crew is not available. "Essentially, what we're asking the team is to go back two years in time and resurrect the software parameters that are required to give automatic responses to breakouts near the ISS should we have a problem in close to ISS, which the software now allows them to do manually," Stich said. "The team is always updating these mission data loads as different things change." - https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/08/nasa-official-acknowledges-internal-disagreement-on-safety-of-starliner-return/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/08/nasa-official-acknowle...
  - HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
    That doesn't sound good! So the current "autonomous" capability isn't fully autonomous, and is less capable (at least in this near-ISS maneuvering regard) than what they had 2 years ago?!
    - 2y ago