Resolved Question
If there are hiccups in a safety critical computerization job, would this likely be because of the following?
There were no factory test cases. Or, there were factory test cases but those factory test cases were not re-run during the set to work of the system.
There was no "user manual" which doubled as a "test document".
There was no "test document" which doubled as a "user manual".
If there was a "user manual", it didn't tell the "user" how to run existing automated tests.
Documentation was not produced by automated means.
Best Answer -

Sometimes the truth of certain inquiries is sitting right under your nose. Would it help if I suggested some highly unlikely alternatives?
1. A Video Game programmer was hired to code the Torpedo-tube Firing sequence.
2. Coffee spills burned out critical circuits in control boards and the resulting capsize was blamed on the software? Well, they'll never uncover the coffee stains in all that salt water!
3. During College, I used to go to the mainframe's Terminal room where 20 or 30 terminals were networked in hubs of twelve PC's per connection, and hit the Delete Key four times in a row so that all twelve computers would suddenly and inexplicably crash all simultaneously. Immediately after hitting the key the fourth time, I would suddenly stand up and cuss loudly as though I had just lost a huge amount of unsaved source code. "How was I supposed to know that your project was a life and death scenario?"
The lack of a "Test Document" which could have doubled as a "User Manual" is a logical-existence problem in the first trials. You see, "Test Documents" are usually the result of First-time trials and consequently, there will be no Test Documents in First Trials. After the First Trials, an application (or system of programs) will be changing so fast or have bugfixes so often that the Test Document will become outdated rather quickly, and as such is only reatined for historical purposes.
Source(s):
The Nope-Master has spoken.