From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 101deb,f96f757d5586710a X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,5ac12f5a60b1bfe X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,5ac12f5a60b1bfe X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: Ken Garlington Subject: Re: Ariane 5 - not an exception? Date: 1996/08/06 Message-ID: <32076F63.66FD@lmtas.lmco.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 172581132 references: <4t9vdg$jfb@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <31FE35BC.1A0D@sanders.lockheed.com> <4totv7$o9f@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <3200E43C.2AA9@lmtas.lmco.com> <839266234.26317.0@assen.demon.co.uk> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.pl1 x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K) Date: 1996-08-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: FYI - This week's Aviation Week and Space Technology has an editorial on the Ariane 5 accident. It pretty much reflects the final report, but makes a few points about the management culture of the Ariane 5 team (more interested in selling flights than designing in safety) and the possible complacency of a team that had several successful designs under their belt. I'm not familiar enough with the real situation at Arianespace and their subcontractors to say that the editorial is correct, but it makes for interesting reading. -- LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"