Automated Software for Crewed Spacecraft—Bridging the Gap from Sci Fi to Reality

Abstract

With a voice command or a few taps on the console, the spacecraft pivots on a dime at high velocity and gently docks to an orbiting space platform. This is the image most people have of the complex software computations and integrated hardware performance necessary for a spacecraft to successfully perform an automated launch, rendezvous, and docking. Today’s reality is that while computer operations are advancing rapidly, science fiction over-simplifies and over-sells current capabilities. This paper discusses the integration of spacecraft computer automation into the operation of one of the United States’ new Commercial Crew vehicles—the Boeing CST-100 Starliner. Lessons learned by the Boeing Mission Operations team, a unique private–public partnership with NASA, from conceptual design through real-time operation of the first test flight will be discussed along with evolution of the system to prepare for the second uncrewed test flight. Focus will center on how operations have learned to use the automated software to their advantage while also knowing how to adjust the automation in response to spacecraft anomalies. One goal of advanced spacecraft automation is the ability to reduce both the crew workload and the ground control footprint while at the same time increasing spacecraft and mission flexibility. Historically, crewed spacecraft required many operators on the ground to use a plethora of tools to compute nominal and contingency mission trajectories. Moving those sophisticated software tools to being onboard the vehicle can reduce the need for such complex ground support. Given that today’s spacecraft software is not yet as capable or as flexible in all circumstances as the computers depicted in movies, there is usually a trade-off between software automation cost and the flexibility of that software resulting in compromises between what is performed on the spacecraft and what is left to onboard crew or ground control. An additional challenge discussed in this paper is the added complexity when the system is still evolving in a developmental program. For missions that go beyond the Moon, software that autonomously controls nearly every aspect of a crewed mission will become a necessity, given the long-time delays between the spacecraft and Earth’s ground control teams. The lessons learned by Boeing and its Mission Operations team, through the design and implementation of Starliner’s hardware and software automation, will be able to inform future public and private spacecraft design. As the technologies and capabilities evolve, incorporating lessons learned in successful low Earth orbit commercial crew vehicle missions, spacecraft designs will continue to improve and be able to better enable safe execution of human missions to the Moon and beyond.

Appendix

Acronyms/Abbreviations

CCP:

Commercial Crew Program

CCDev:

Commercial Crew Development

CONOPS:

Concept of Operations

UTC:

Coordinated Universal Time

CFT:

Crewed Flight Test

EDS:

Emergency Detection System

FDIR:

Fault/Failure Detection, Isolation, and Recovery

FAO:

Flight Activities Officer

FOD:

Flight Operations Directorate

GPS:

Global Positioning System

KOS:

Keep Out Sphere

IRT:

Independent Review Team

ISS:

International Space Station

OFT:

Orbital Flight Test

OFT-2:

Orbital Flight Test-2

OI:

Orbital Insertion

OMA:

COrbital Maneuvering and Abort Control

MDV:

Manual Delta Velocity

MCC:

Mission Control Center

MET:

Mission Elapsed Time

MO:

Mission Operations

RSAA:

Reimbursable Space Act Agreement

SCIF:

Sequence Command Input File

TDRSS:

Tracking Data and Relay Satellite System

TSIL:

Training Simulation Integration Laboratory

ULA:

United Launch Alliance

Vis-STAR:

Vision-based Software for Track, Attitude, and Ranging