| Recurring |
unknown |
The articles do not provide information about a software failure incident happening again at either the same organization (Northrop Grumman) or at multiple organizations. Therefore, the information related to these options is unknown. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, unknown |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase is evident in the incident involving the Zuma satellite launch. The failure was attributed to a modified payload adapter provided by Northrop Grumman, which had to be adjusted for the Zuma satellite. Despite working during testing on Earth, the adapter failed to operate properly in the microgravity environment of space, leading to the loss of the satellite [70155].
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is not explicitly mentioned in the provided article. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident related to the Zuma satellite launch appears to be primarily within the system. The failure was attributed to a modified payload adapter provided by Northrop Grumman, which failed to operate properly in the microgravity environment of space despite working during testing on Earth [70155]. This indicates that the contributing factor leading to the failure originated from within the system itself. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in this case was not directly related to non-human actions but rather to a hardware issue. The failure was attributed to a modified payload adapter provided by Northrop Grumman, which failed to operate properly in the microgravity environment of space, leading to the loss of the satellite [70155].
(b) The failure in this incident was due to contributing factors introduced by human actions, specifically the modification of the payload adapter by Northrop Grumman to accommodate the sensitive spy satellite. The modified adapter, which worked on Earth but failed in space, was identified as the cause of the failure [70155]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware |
(a) The software failure incident related to hardware:
- The failure of the super secretive US government satellite to reach orbit was attributed to a payload adapter modified by Northrop Grumman, a hardware component, which failed to operate properly in the microgravity environment of space [70155].
(b) The software failure incident related to software:
- The incident did not directly involve software failure but rather a hardware component, the payload adapter, which was modified by Northrop Grumman and failed to function correctly in space [70155]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Zuma satellite launch does not appear to be malicious. The failure was attributed to a payload adapter modified by Northrop Grumman to accommodate the sensitive spy satellite, which failed to operate properly in the microgravity environment of space [70155]. There is no indication in the article that the failure was due to any malicious intent to harm the system. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
unknown |
The software failure incident related to the loss of the Zuma satellite does not directly involve software failure. The incident was attributed to a payload adapter issue modified by Northrop Grumman, which failed to operate properly in the microgravity environment of space [70155]. Therefore, the incident does not fall under the categories of poor_decisions or accidental_decisions related to software failure. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
accidental |
(a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence is not explicitly mentioned in the provided article [70155].
(b) The software failure incident related to an accidental failure is hinted at in the article. The failure of the super secretive US government satellite to reach orbit was attributed to a modified payload adapter provided by Northrop Grumman. The adapter, which had to be modified for the specific satellite, worked on Earth but failed in the microgravity environment of space, leading to the satellite not separating properly from the rocket's upper stage [70155]. This failure appears to be accidental rather than intentional. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident related to the Zuma satellite launch can be categorized as a temporary failure. The incident was attributed to a specific contributing factor, which was the modified payload adapter provided by Northrop Grumman. The adapter, although tested successfully on Earth, failed to operate properly in the microgravity environment of space, leading to the loss of the satellite [70155]. |
| Behaviour |
omission, value, other |
(a) crash: The incident described in the article does not involve a crash of the software system. It is more related to a hardware failure, specifically the failure of a payload adapter to properly separate the satellite from the rocket's upper stage, leading to the loss of the satellite [70155].
(b) omission: The failure of the payload adapter, as modified by Northrop Grumman, resulted in the omission of the intended function of separating the satellite from the Falcon 9 rocket's upper stage. Despite being tested on Earth, the adapter failed to operate properly in the microgravity environment of space, leading to the loss of the satellite [70155].
(c) timing: The incident does not involve a timing failure where the system performed its intended functions either too late or too early. The issue was more related to the failure of the payload adapter to operate properly in space, leading to the loss of the satellite [70155].
(d) value: The failure of the payload adapter provided by Northrop Grumman resulted in the system performing its intended function incorrectly, as it failed to properly separate the satellite from the Falcon 9 rocket's upper stage, ultimately leading to the loss of the satellite [70155].
(e) byzantine: The incident does not exhibit a byzantine behavior where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. The failure was more straightforward, attributed to the malfunction of the payload adapter in space [70155].
(f) other: The behavior of the software failure incident in this case can be categorized as a hardware failure rather than a software failure. The issue stemmed from the modified payload adapter's failure to separate the satellite from the rocket's upper stage, leading to the loss of the satellite [70155]. |