Ground evidence has limits
Laboratory testing cannot reproduce every interaction between software, hardware, operations and the orbital environment.
In-orbit validation-as-a-service
Space software should not require an entire space programme to prove it works.
FlightLab manages the path from a frozen software build to controlled in-orbit execution—and delivers traceable evidence for the next technical, commercial or procurement decision.
One contract. One campaign. One decision-ready body of evidence.
Campaign / FL-01 Evidence chain active
- 01Signed buildFrozen
- 02Ground twinMatched
- 03Orbital runControlled
- 04CorrelationTraceable
- 05Evidence dossierDecision-ready
FlightLab converts orbital access into inspectable evidence.
The flight-evidence gap
Your software may work. The buyer still sees mission risk.
Simulation can demonstrate algorithmic performance. It cannot fully reproduce communications blackouts, constrained resources, orbital environmental effects and unscripted anomalies.
Dedicated missions are inefficient
A single software workload should not require an entire satellite programme.
Responsibility is fragmented
Multiple suppliers provide mission components, but nobody owns the final evidence question.
Procurement remains cautious
Without inspectable flight results, capable suppliers can stall at adoption gates.
“The customer does not need more compute. It needs credible proof.”Define your evidence requirement
Why orbit
Some mission behaviour only becomes visible in the mission environment.
In-orbit testing complements, rather than replaces, mission-specific environmental qualification and assurance.
Intermittent communications
Real blackouts reveal whether software can continue safely without continuous ground control.
Bounded resources
Actual compute, memory, storage, power and duty-cycle limits expose operational trade-offs.
Unscripted anomalies
Real missions reveal recovery behaviour that controlled scripts may not anticipate.
Environmental effects
Orbital conditions provide evidence unavailable from conventional laboratory execution alone.
Buyer legibility
A traceable orbital result is easier to inspect than an unsupported heritage claim.
From build to evidence
One managed campaign. Five controlled stages.
Every result remains connected to one build, one configuration and one operating context.
- 01
Define
Freeze the build. Agree success criteria, resource limits, test vectors and permitted claims.
- 02
Baseline
Run the approved build on matched ground hardware with repeatable cases and injected faults.
- 03
Fly
Execute the workload in an isolated, monitored orbital window following mission acceptance.
- 04
Compare
Correlate ground and flight results across performance, resources, anomalies and recovery.
- 05
Prove
Deliver signed configuration records, methods, results, limitations and recommendations.
The flight evidence package
The mission ends with evidence your stakeholders can inspect.
FlightLab does not deliver an unsupported “flight-proven” label. It delivers the configuration, methods and results required for informed technical and commercial decisions.
Test configuration
Signed software version, dependency freeze, hardware profile and allocated resource envelope.
Methods
Ground procedures, fault-injection cases, test vectors and expected-output boundaries.
Results
Performance, compute utilisation, memory use, timing and environmental correlation.
Anomaly record
Observed events, operational context, software response and recovery behaviour.
Deviations
A clear account of what the campaign did not test and where evidence remains limited.
Executive proof pack
Approved language, diagrams and results for bids, diligence rooms and programme reviews.
Initial workloads
Validate software where flight evidence changes a decision.
FlightLab begins with bounded workloads that produce clear, measurable evidence.
Autonomy
Decision latency, degraded-mode behaviour, fault response and recovery.
SDA processing
Throughput, determinism, resource use and anomaly handling.
Onboard AI
Inference latency, output stability, compute utilisation and memory demand.
Data triage
Downlink avoided, information retained and processing time.
Middleware
Messaging, isolation, restart behaviour and resource management.
Scientific autonomy
Experiment orchestration, anomaly detection and selective downlink.
Mission-one boundary
The first campaign is intended for bounded, non-operational workloads using approved or synthetic inputs. Every workload remains subject to technical, safety, cybersecurity, classification and export review.
Start on the ground
Begin with a Flight Readiness Sprint.
Before reserving orbital capacity, determine whether the workload, evidence requirement and commercial trigger justify a flight campaign.
US$20kindicative Sprint price
- Workload and dependency assessment
- Preliminary resource envelope
- Ground-to-orbit evidence plan
- Mission acceptance gap analysis
- Flight, defer or no-go recommendation
Built for the decision authority
One assurance layer. Distinct commercial paths.
01Space softwareGenerate evidence without creating a mission organisation.02Defence & governmentBuild repeatable commercial technology-maturation pathways.03Primes & integratorsAssess third-party software before accepting mission risk.04Flight partnersReceive bounded, documented, ground-accepted workloads.
The next controlled step
Do not build an entire space mission to answer one software question.
Start with a bounded workload, a defined evidence requirement and a clear decision trigger.