Mission-critical decisions: DIY implementations vs. commercial software in aerospace systems

Aerospace is a high-risk, high-cost, high-regulation industry where failure isn’t an option. When you’re launching spacecraft and avionics systems that need to operate reliably under varying conditions for years and decades, every decision matters.

One of the most important decisions you’ll make is whether to build software in-house or source from a trusted vendor. This selection can make or break your mission success, especially when you’re racing to meet program deadlines and tight launch windows.

In this article, we’ll walk you through a practical framework for this strategic decision. You’ll learn the real-world trade-offs around cost, control, time-to-market, compliance, and long-term support so you can make an informed choice that supports your mission goals. 

What make vs. buy means in an aerospace context

While many industries face make vs. buy decisions, they’re especially critical in aerospace, where reliability, safety, and regulatory compliance are non-negotiable. These choices impact mission timelines, certification, and long-term system integrity in extreme environments.

In a space context, for example, where many applications rely on unmanaged NAND, a make vs. buy decision applies to embedded software like flash translation layers (FTLs), NAND technology modules (NTMs), high-integrity file systems, and secure communication stacks.

In these scenarios, you have two main options:

Building embedded software in-house

Building your own embedded software from scratch gives you more control but also more responsibility for risk and reliability. One defense customer we worked with had already spent over 1.5 years and over $1M (USD) developing their system when they realized it still wasn’t ready. That’s when they asked us to step in.

Developing onboard computer software for avionics systems is no small task. Flash media used in space is commonly unmanaged (“raw” flash) and must handle radiation, extreme temperatures, sudden power loss, and flash wear—all while ensuring data integrity.

You’ll need engineers with deep expertise in flash storage, time to test and iterate, resources for certification, and a long-term maintenance strategy.

Purchasing software from commercial specialists

Buying from a trusted vendor gives you access to pre-validated, space-grade software with proven reliability. These vendors have already solved the complex challenges of building fault-tolerant software for spacecraft and satellite systems and absorbed the development and quality control costs.

Let’s explore why more aerospace teams are choosing to work with commercial software.

Why licensing is often the smarter choice

Accelerate time to market

Commercial launch timelines are tighter than ever, especially in orbital missions. Missing your program deadline is a real risk when funding is tied to fixed timelines.

When you build in-house, it’s easy to underestimate development time. But designing a space-grade file system and flash memory management layer from scratch is one of the most complex and risk-prone tasks in embedded software engineering. We’ve seen teams spend months on a solution, only to hit unexpected data corruption or performance issues that put the mission at risk.

On the other hand, buying pre-validated, production-ready components can dramatically reduce lead time, research & development costs, certification efforts, and staffing overhead. This approach is particularly valuable for new space entrants and teams running agile programs.

For example, that same defense customer spent 18 months developing and certifying an encrypted networking stack. After switching to our software, they delivered in just eight weeks: almost an 85% reduction in time to market.

Get access to mature, proven technology

Concerns about vendor-developed software not being “space ready” are quickly becoming outdated. Commercial solutions like Tuxera FlashFX Tera now handle the complex challenges that used to require years of in-house development. You get advanced power-loss protection, bad block management, and error correction—all pre-validated and space-ready.

Flash memory software specialists like Tuxera bring deep expertise in radiation-hardened designs, flight-proven systems, and compliance with standards like DO-178C. We also test edge cases and corner cases you might never anticipate.

Take wear leveling, for example: to prevent flash failure and premature wear-out, writes must be distributed evenly across memory. We’ve got this covered, along with managing bad blocks in aging NAND, preserving data during unexpected power losses, and integrating error correction to support system health monitoring.

Instead of overengineering solutions or patching workarounds, you can simply drop well-documented, field-tested components straight into your system with minimal effort and testing.

Build flexible and scalable systems

Most missions aren’t one-offs. You need to adapt across platform variants and evolve your systems as innovations and new findings happen.

That’s why modern commercial solutions are increasingly modular and configurable. With easy-to-use APIs and plug-and-play design, you can quickly adapt to new use cases. No need to reinvent your storage solution each time the platform or mission requirement changes.

Whether you’re running VxWorks, INTEGRITY, FreeRTOS , or another RTOS for satellite systems, these commercial solutions handle the complexity, so you don’t have to.

Simplify certification and maintenance

Certification is one of the slowest parts of aerospace development. Getting just one part of your stack certified for DO-178C can take half a year or more.

reduce this burden by providing documentation, test artifacts, and tooling to speed up the process and ensure compliance. If something goes wrong, we take responsibility and provide ongoing support and maintenance.

We also support advanced features like secure OTA updates, enabling safe updates to telemetry or other subsystems post-launch.

When building in-house makes sense

In rare cases, building your own solution might be the right call:

• You’re using specialized hardware that doesn’t need to be reused
• You’re prototyping or experimenting
• The system is for internal testing, not production

Even then, the risks often outweigh any potential benefits. Most companies that start building embedded software in-house eventually switch to commercial solutions after running into performance, certification, or data integrity issues.

Make vs. buy: A quick comparison

Use this table to guide your decision:

Criteria	Build in-house	License commercial solutions
Time-to-market	Long (12–18+ months)	Short (weeks to few months)
Upfront R&D cost	High (requires specialized team, verification and validation efforts)	Lower (predictable licensing, pre-validated components)
System complexity	High control for custom architectures	Better for modular and interoperable designs
IP ownership	Complete ownership needed	Licensing allowed
Certification & standards	Requires internal verification and validation, tooling	Often comes pre-certified or cert-ready (DO-178C)
File system / FTL integration	Complex, requires deep NAND/NOR expertise	Pre-validated, and with features like wear leveling, ECC, and power robustness
Lifecycle and maintainability	Relies on internal knowledge and resources from the expert team	Vendor-backed support ensures stability, updates, and bug fixes
Engineering bandwidth	Requires significant internal investment	Frees team to focus on mission-specific work and innovation

Mission success requires teams to take a strategic approach: develop what sets your mission apart and buy proven technologies for everything else. Licensing specialized components like file systems and flash translation layers lets you focus your resources where they create the most value.

Choosing your vendor

When considering commercial solutions, you should also look beyond technical requirements. Ask vendors:

• Who else uses their software in space applications? Can they provide relevant references?
• How do they run their quality processes?
• What certifications do they offer for security and functional safety?

A reliable supplier will understand the aerospace industry and your unique pain points.

Final thoughts: Making your decision

There’s no one-size-fits-all answer to the make vs. buy question. But if you’re working with tight timelines, limited resources, and high reliability requirements, buying from a trusted vendor is the most strategic choice.

Licensing field-proven software lets you move faster, reduce risk, and free your engineering team to focus on mission-specific work and innovation. And if anything goes wrong, you’ll have a partner who’s accountable and ready to support you.

Want help choosing the right path for your team? Get in touch with our aerospace experts.