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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,CP1252 X-Google-Thread: 103376,f039470e8f537101 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-25 08:47:48 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!border3.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!sccrnsc03.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3F215120.1040706@attbi.com> From: "Robert I. Eachus" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ariane5 FAQ References: <1058813341.841940@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1058816605.566685@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1058968422.225561@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3F200AD0.94F79098@adaworks.com> <7u9Ua.13412$634.10307@nwrdny03.gnilink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.31.71.243 X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-Trace: sccrnsc03 1059148067 66.31.71.243 (Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:47:47 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:47:47 GMT Organization: Comcast Online Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:47:47 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:40810 Date: 2003-07-25T15:47:47+00:00 List-Id: Hyman Rosen wrote: > The entire point of your FAQ is political correctness. > In this order, you are urgently campaigning that Ada, > Ada programmers, and technical people have absolutely > no blame in the Ariane 5 crash. This is true, and the findings of the report emphsize this. The failure was in the process that Arianespace set up, not in the work of any contractor, and certainly not in the work of any employee of those contractors. The process that Arianespace set up delegated requirements to individual subcontracts, which is fine. But there was no process for checking that changes in the subcontracts did not result in failure to test some requirements, or a final pre-launch validation that all requirements had been tested. The scope of one of the subcontracts was reduced, and as a result certain tests that were part of the original test plan did not get performed. However, Arianespace's project management process equated completion of all subcontracts with completion of all testing. As became obvious, this was not a good idea. > In order to do this > you make unsubstantiated claims which are designed to > appeal to the egos and biases of Ada programmers and > other technical people. This is not a very constructive comment. Alexander Kopilovitch is not writing a technical report, but an FAQ. It would be nice if those of us who have studied the disaster could trace every allegation in the FAQ to documentation. But those references don't really belong in the FAQ, other than as a "to learn more" URL. -- Robert I. Eachus �In an ally, considerations of house, clan, planet, race are insignificant beside two prime questions, which are: 1. Can he shoot? 2. Will he aim at your enemy?� -- from the Laiden novels by Sharon Lee and Steve Miller.