Slashdot Mirror
Crowdfunded, Solar-powered Spacecraft Goes Silent
Last week saw the successful launch of the Planetary Society's LightSail spacecraft, the solar-powered satellite that runs Linux and was crowdfunded on Kickstarter. The spacecraft worked flawlessly for two days, but then fell silent, and the engineering team has been working hard on a fix ever since. They've pinpointed the problem: a software glitch. "Every 15 seconds, LightSail transmits a telemetry beacon packet. The software controlling the main system board writes corresponding information to a file called beacon.csv. If you're not familiar with CSV files, you can think of them as simplified spreadsheets—in fact, most can be opened with Microsoft Excel. As more beacons are transmitted, the file grows in size. When it reaches 32 megabytes—roughly the size of ten compressed music files—it can crash the flight system." Unfortunately, the only way to clear that CSV file is to reboot LightSail. It can be done remotely, but as anyone who deals with crashing computers understands, remote commands don't always work. The command has been sent a few dozen times already, but LightSail remains silent. The best hope may now be that the system spontaneously reboots on its own.
One report I read made it sound like they were aware of the bug for a while. It's possible that they had to launch with an old version of the software because the patch wasn't ready yet, and being a secondary payload on a launch you have no say whatsoever as to the launch date. They probably expected to be able to upload the patch after launch, but the log filled up faster than expected.
That being said, it is shoddy programming to blindly write to a log on a resource-constrained embedded platform (or any platform, really. Just especially so on something like this), so somebody definitely goofed. All I am saying is that it probably was caught by testing, but couldn't be fixed in time due to various constraints. It was a dumb move on the developer's part to not do enough diligence and to rely too heavily on QA in the first place.
Their current plan is to wait charged particles to affect electronics so that it forces a reboot.
Spacecraft are susceptible to charged particles zipping through deep space, many of which get trapped inside Earth’s magnetic field. If one of these particles strikes an electronics component in just the right way, it can cause a reboot. This is not an uncommon occurrence for CubeSats, or even larger spacecraft, for that matter. Cal Poly’s experience with CubeSats suggest most experience a reboot in the first three weeks; I spoke with another CubeSat team that rebooted after six.
No, csv sure as hell is NOT a Microsoft format.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with Microsoft, as much as you seem to want to blame them.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I wish people would stop thinking that hard drive manufacturers are the "source" of this so-called "problem". Digital communication speeds never used base 2, clock speeds didn't either.
People are simply stuck on terms like "Mebibyte" because they either don't want to accept the fact that mega is an SI prefix or because they don't like how the IEC units sound. Get over it.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Speaking as an engineer working on software that is on the Orion spacecraft, I can say that rigorous testing is budgeted into the project from the beginning because it helps to avoid most of the problems like this. The testing that goes on with flight software is orders of magnitude more than you find for a traditional commercial product. You have to. The consequences of failure are, obviously, a lot more significant.
That being said, it's impossible to catch every single possible bug, especially as systems get more and more complex. But there are strategies that help reduce your risk. For example, you don't just run off to kernel.org and throw the latest stable release on a board. You pick operating systems that are maybe a bit harder to use (i.e. limited in what they can do) but are far better suited to real-time embedded work. And you certainly don't blindly append to a file without verifying that you're not going to overflow your space. And you always have an automated recovery plan for any dynamically allocated space in the event of an overflow.
This kind of failure is caused by amateurs making amateur mistakes. It was caused by application programmers who don't understand the consequence of failure in a constrained environment where you can't just click a mouse to restart the program. It was caused by poor planning and a lack of understanding of the environment in which they were designing. This was caused by hiring coders instead of experienced engineers. It was caused by trying to do it cheap rather than spending the money to do it right. They got what they paid for.