Analysis of Factors Behind Failure to Achieve Mission 1 and Measures to Increase the Probability of Success
First written in FY2024-Q1. 8 of 11 entries say "Advanced", first in FY2024. Latest entry: FY2026.
No other company in this theme has enough history to compare yet.
- FY2026AdvancedAnnual report
「As broader improvement measures relating to Mission 2’s failure to achieve a soft landing, an “Improvement Task Force” comprising external experts, including specialists from JAXA, NASA and ESA, was established. A comprehensive analysis and review was conducted using the CAST method, a causal analysis based on systems theory. The Improvement Task Force reported “7 recommendations” across 3 levels: the operational level, including the introduction of terrain-relative navigation (TRN) and use of remaining fuel during landing operations; the system development level, including improvements to the vendor selection process, increased testing resources, and the design and verification of fault detection, isolation and recovery (FDIR); and the management decision-making level, including cooperation with partners and strengthening the Company’s risk management approach.」
The analysis by the external-expert improvement task force was completed, and 7 recommendations spanning operations, system development and management decision-making were received. The implementation policy for specific improvements to subsequent missions has also been determined. - FY2026-H1AdvancedAnnual report
「For Mission 3 onward, a sensor with a proven track record of stable operation on previous lunar missions will be adopted in place of the laser rangefinder, and image-based navigation technology will also be installed as a backup for altitude measurement. In addition, as a broader set of enhancement measures, an “Improvement Task Force” including external experts has been launched, and several review meetings have already been held. Technical support from the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) is also progressing with the participation of members involved in the JAXA and Institute of Space and Astronautical Science (ISAS) project for the Smart Lander for Investigating Moon (SLIM).」
Based on the cause of Mission 2’s failure, concrete measures are being advanced, including an alternative sensor, image-based navigation, an improvement task force comprising external experts, and technical support from JAXA and ISAS personnel. - FY2025AdvancedAnnual report
「The cause of the failure to achieve Success 9 was identified as a hardware malfunction in the laser rangefinder, which was the technical cause of the failure to land, and future improvements will be clarified to increase the probability of success from Mission 3 onward.」
The hardware malfunction in the laser rangefinder was identified as the technical cause of Mission 2’s failure to land. - FY2024AdvancedAnnual report
「The hardware of the lander to be used for Mission 2 is essentially the same as that used for Mission 1, but improvements addressing the software problems that caused the failure to achieve a soft landing have been incorporated using valuable demonstration data obtained through Mission 1.」
The cause of Mission 1’s failure was identified as a software problem, and improvements were incorporated into the Mission 2 lander. - FY2024-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「In addition, subsequent analysis verified the causes of the failure to achieve Success 9 and clarified future improvements to increase the probability of success from Mission 2 onward.」
The analysis of the reasons for Mission 1’s failure and application of improvements to subsequent missions were reiterated. - FY2024-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「Subsequent analysis verified the causes of the failure to achieve Success 9 and clarified future improvements to increase the probability of success from Mission 2 onward.」
Analysis of the reasons for Mission 1’s failure and application of improvements to subsequent missions continue. - FY2024-Q1First statedAnnual report
「Subsequent analysis verified the causes of the failure to achieve Success 9 and clarified future improvements to increase the probability of success from Mission 2 onward.」
First introduced as a measure to analyze the results of Mission 1 and apply them to improvements in subsequent missions.