Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Murphy's Law Rules NASA

Posted by michael on from the cat-lands-butter-side-down dept.

3x37 writes "James Oberg, former long-time NASA operations employee, now journalist, wrote an MSNBC article about the reality of Murphy's Law at NASA. Interesting that the incident that sparked Murphy's Law over 50 years ago had a nearly identical cause as the Genesis probe failure. The conclusion: Human error is an inevitable input to any complex endeavor. Either you manage and design around it or fail. NASA management still often chooses the latter."

6 of 274 comments (clear)

  1. interesting but it's not really true by spacerodent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    while it's possible to always have a mistake, having people double check a project from the ground up will almost always find the problems. Nasa's current difficulties arise from scattered teams that all only check their parts rather than having fully qualified teams that go over the entire vehical. The fact that the whole thing is usually designed by committee and in several pieces then assembled at the last minute probally helps facilitate error. The Saturn V rockets and other technology we used to land on the moon had hte capability of being far less relyable than today's technology but we still managed to use them for years without error.

  2. Cost Effective by clinko · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's actually more cost effective to allow for failures. You build the same sat 5 times and if 4 fail in a cheaper launch situation, you still save money.

    From this article:

    "Swales engineers worked closely with Space Sciences Laboratory engineers and scientists to define a robust and cost-effective plan to build five satellites in a short period time."

  3. The problem with errors by RealityProphet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The problem with errors is that detecting all errors all the time is absolutely impossible. Think back to your intro theory cs class and to Turing Recognizability. Think halting problem. Now, reduce the problem of finding all errors to the halting problem:

    if (my_design_contains_any_errors) while(1);
    else exit;

    Feed this into a program that halts on all input and see what happens. You can't, because we know it is impossible for it to always return an answer. QED: errors are unavoidable. No need to sniff derisively in the direction of NASA's "middle management". Let's see if YOU can do a better job!

  4. John Galls Systemantics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Systems display antics. John Gall has written a great book which vastly expands on Murphys law which is called Systemantics - The Underground Text of Systems Lore. I cannot recommend this book enough. It contains some truths about the world around us that's blindingly obvious once you see it, but until then you're part of the problem. Systemantics applied to political systems is very enlightening. Too bad that the only people who think like this in politics are the selfish and egomanical Libertarians (yeah, yeah.. I know. Libertarianism is the new cool for the self styled nerd political wannabe).

    Here are some of the highlights:
    • 1. If anything can go wrong, it will. (see Murphy's law)
    • 2. Systems in general work poorly or not at all.
    • 3. Complicated systems seldom exceed five percent efficiency.
    • 4. In complex systems, malfunction and even total non-function may not be detectable for long periods (if ever).
    • 5. A system can fail in an infinite number of ways.
    • 6. Systems tend to grow, and as they grow, they encroach.
    • 7. As systems grow in complexity, they tend to oppose their stated function.
    • 8. As systems grow in size, they tend to lose basic functions.
    • 9. The larger the system, the less the variety in the product.
    • 10. The larger the system, the narrower and more specialized the interfaces between individual elements.
    • 11. Control of a system is exercised by the element with the greatest variety of behavioral responses.
    • 12. Loose systems last longer and work better.
    • 13. Complex systems exhibit complex and unexpected behaviors.
    • 14. Colossal systems foster colossal errors.
  5. KISS... by Kong99 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    A great engineer demonstrates his/her skill not by designing something terribly complex, but by designing the object that meets required specifications as SIMPLY as possible with as FEW unique parts as possible. That is GREAT engineering.

    However, with that being said I really do not believe Engineers are the problem at NASA. Bureaucracy is the enemy at NASA. NASA needs a complete top to bottom overhaul.

  6. Re:The Gimli Glider by dtmos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The jet liner to which you refer, I think, is the Gimli glider which, through a forehead-slapping number of independent goofs, ambiguities, and misunderstandings made by a frighteningly large number of people, ran out of fuel over Cananda in 1983.