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,885dab3998d28a4 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 107079,eca28648989efca9 X-Google-Attributes: gid107079,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,885dab3998d28a4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f74ae,eca28648989efca9 X-Google-Attributes: gidf74ae,public From: Byron Kauffman Subject: Re: Ariane 5 failure Date: 1996/09/25 Message-ID: <32492E5C.562@lmtas.lmco.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 185247078 references: <52a572$9kk@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <52amke$m9e@ys.ifremer.fr> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.math.num-analysis,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 5.4 sun4m) Date: 1996-09-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Michel OLAGNON wrote: > > May be the main reason for the lack of testing and care was > that the conversion exception could only occur after lift off, > and that that particular piece of program was of no use after > lift off. It was only kept running for 50 s in order to > speed up countdown restart in case of an interruption between > H0-9 and H0-5. > > Conclusion: Never compute values that are of no use when you can > avoid it ! > > >There's a case for a review of the programming language used. > > Michel > -- > | Michel OLAGNON email : Michel.Olagnon@ifremer.fr| > | IFREMER: Institut Francais de Recherches pour l'Exploitation de la Mer| Of course, Michel, you've got a great point, but let me give you some advice, assuming you haven't read this thread for the last few months (seems like years). Robin's whole point is that he firmly believes that the problem would not have occurred if PL/I had been used instead of Ada. Several EXTREMELY competent and experienced engineers who actually have written flight-control software have patiently, and in some cases (though I can't blame them) impatiently attempted to explain the situation - that this was a bad design/management decision combined with a fatal oversight in testing - to this poor student, but alas, to no avail. My advice, Michel - blow it off and don't let ++robin (or is it @@robin?) get to you, because "++robin" is actually an alias for John Cleese. He's gathering material for a sequel to "The Argument Sketch"... :-)