Running head: MARS CLIMATE ORBITER FAILURE REPORT 1

Written Assignment Week 6

Mars Climate Orbiter Failure Report: NASA Actions Underway

BUS 5116 Operations Management

Term 5, 2018-2019

University of the People

MARS CLIMATE ORBITER FAILURE REPORT: NASA ACTIONS UNDERWAY 2

Mars Climate Orbiter Failure Report: NASA Actions Underway

Mars Climate Orbiter

On December 11, 1998, NASA launched the Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO) to orbit the

planet Mars as the first interplanetary weather satellite (Knutson & Carmichael, 2000). However,

the mission failed and the Mars Climate Orbiter was lost. Due to this, NASA created the Mars

Climate Orbiter Mission Failure Investigation Board, also known as the “Board”, to determine

the cause of the failure.

Eight Contributing Factors to the Loss of Mars Climate Orbiter

The Board stated that the “root cause” of the loss of spacecraft was the failed translation

of English units into metric units in a segment of ground-based navigation-related mission

software (Isbell & Savage, 1999). However, the Board stated the following contributing factors

relative to the loss of the MCO (Isbell & Savage, 1999):

 Undetected errors of thruster firings within the ground-based computer.

 The operational navigation team was unfamiliar with the spacecraft.

 A final engine firing to raise the spacecraft’s trajectory to Mars was not performed.

 System engineering function did not adequately address the transition from development

to operations of the aircraft.

 Inadequate communications channels between project engineering groups.

 Inadequate peer review by independent experts about the work of the navigation team.

 Inadequate training of personnel in key areas such as the operation of the mission and

navigation characteristics.

 Inadequate verification and validation process of certain engineering requirements and

technical interfaces.
MARS CLIMATE ORBITER FAILURE REPORT: NASA ACTIONS UNDERWAY 3

Quality Approaches, Methods, and Tools to Mitigate the Eight Contributing Factors

The Board was able to determine the mistakes and deficiencies in the MCO Mission. To

mitigate these, the following quality approaches, methods, and tools may have been put in place:

Six Sigma. A data-driven problem-solving methodology, Six Sigma focuses on the

process variations with emphasis on continuous quality improvements to achieve a near

perfection defect-free 99.99966 percent of the time, allowing 3.4 defective features for every

million opportunities (White, 2018). The goal of implementing Six Sigma is to identify, mitigate,

and eliminate possible defects that are causing deficiencies by defining a sequence of steps for a

certain target (White, 2018).

DMAIC. A sub-methodology of Six Sigma, DMAIC represents five phases known as

Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control (White, 2018). With DMAIC, NASA could

identify the problem, project requirements, and ultimate goals and expectations (White, 2018).

The performance is then measured using the established data to determine defects and gather

metrics (White, 2018). The root cause of variations and defects is established by analyzing the

process and subsequently, improvements to the process are made to eliminate the root cause of

defects (White, 2018). Finally, the new process is controlled to avoid recurrence of the same

defects (White, 2018).

DMADV. Another sub-methodology of Six Sigma, DMADV, also known as the Design

for Six Sigma (DFSS), includes five stages Define, Measure, Analyze, Design, and Verify

(White, 2018). In DMADV, the goals are defined and measured according to a set of quality

requirements before translating into clear project goals (White, 2018). Next, multiple options are

analyzed to determine the total life cycle of the project, followed by designing of a process at a

high level before creating a detailed version that will become a prototype or standard to identify
MARS CLIMATE ORBITER FAILURE REPORT: NASA ACTIONS UNDERWAY 4

the errors and make the necessary modifications (White, 2018). Lastly, the final iteration of the

entire process is verified and approved by internal and external stakeholders. (White, 2018)

Considerations to Take in Implementing Six Sigma

Based on the factors that led to the loss of the MCO, major considerations should be

undertaken to implement the concepts of Six Sigma. First, all personnel must be on board,

properly trained, and evaluated before deployment, ensuring that all areas of the mission are

clearly understood. Second, all technical and mechanical systems, interface, hardware, software,

and operational equipment must be tested and verified, ensuring that no engine failure,

unsynchronized data, and incorrect measurement units will take place. Third, communication

channels should always be open to quickly address issues as they arise. Lastly, third party

experts’ evaluation and feedback must be gathered and integrated to ensure that all the personnel,

systems, and processes are in order.

In conclusion, had NASA implemented quality management approaches such as Sig

Sigma and its sub-methodologies, DMAIC and DMADV, the failure of the MCO mission could

have been mitigated. The defects could have been eliminated by determination of goals, possible

defects, and its root cause; careful measurement and analysis of processes; improvement and

verification of the new design and processes; and ensuring proper control thereof. For a group of

experts in NASA, the root cause of the failed MCO mission was very basic and could have been

mitigated should all the personnel have been properly trained and made familiarized with the

spacecraft and other key areas of the mission, the teams maintained open communication with

each other, and allowed adequate time to analyze, review, improve, and verify the systems and

processes prior to launching. Such quality management approaches are vital in the success of

every organization and its goals.

MARS CLIMATE ORBITER FAILURE REPORT: NASA ACTIONS UNDERWAY 5

References

Isbell, D. & Savage, D. (1999, November 10). Mars Climate Orbiter Failure Board releases

report, numerous NASA actions underway in response. Retrieved from

https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/news/mco991110.html

Knutson, C. & Carmichael, S. (2000, November 01). Safety first: Avoiding software mishaps.

Retrieved from https://www.embedded.com/design/safety-and-security/4399493/Safety-

First--Avoiding-Software-Mishaps

White, S. K. (2018, June 12). What is Six Sigma? Streamlining quality management. Retrieved

from https://www.cio.com/article/3237692/six-sigma-quality-management-

methodology.html