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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: ffc1e,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidffc1e,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,5da92b52f6784b63 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 107d55,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gid107d55,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: Ray McVay Subject: Re: Papers on the Ariane-5 crash and Design by Contract Date: 1997/03/18 Message-ID: <332F6411.4261@arlington.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 226619582 References: <332B5495.167EB0E7@eiffel.com> <332D113B.4A64@calfp.co.uk> <332DA14C.41C67EA6@eiffel.com> <332ef323.948774@news.demon.co.uk> Organization: SparkS Reply-To: bmcvay@arlington.net Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.programming.threads,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java.tech Date: 1997-03-18T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: John McCabe wrote: > > Bertrand Meyer wrote: > > >The real problem was that the assertion was not part of the software. > > No - the real problem was that the developers were _not_ provided with > Ariane 5 trajectory information which should have been used in the > analysis. > > Best Regards > John McCabe Finally! Thank you, sir. It was obvious from reading the report that was pointed out several months ago by a post in this newsgroup that this was a wonderful example of a failure WAY early in the lifecycle. It had nothing to do with design or construction and everything to do with a bogus specification. They were in effect designing a control system for a completely different rocket than the one in which the system was used!