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-Thread: 103376,7e8cebf09cf80560
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin2!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!exi-transit.telstra.net!news.telstra.net!exi-spool.telstra.net!exi-reader.telstra.net!not-for-mail
From: "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: 
 <a8387564-0835-467d-a461-60a093c38133@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com><4d80b13f$0$43832$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
 <m239mnhzmb.fsf@pushface.org>
 <4d8200ce$0$43837$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
 <4d820f84$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Subject: Re: How would Ariane 5 have behaved if overflow checking were
 notturned off?
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:34:28 +1100
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Message-ID: <4d835402$0$43840$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 123.3.23.55
X-Trace: 1300452355 exi-reader.telstra.net 43840 123.3.23.55:1037
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:19271
Date: 2011-03-18T10:34:28+11:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Georg Bauhaus wrote in message <4d820f84$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>...
>On 17.03.11 13:39, robin wrote:
>> Simon Wright wrote in message ...
>
>>> Even if they had installed an exception handler, the only
>>> proper response would have been to shutdown this node and hand over to
>>> the alternate;
>>
>> No, the exception handler could have done something sensible,
>> such as using the maximum integer value, thus allowing the trajectory to continue.
>
>Does the report say so?

No, that's just a suggestion of mine.  However, see what the Report says:
"... the computers within the SRIs could have continued to provide
their best estimates of the required attitide information."

Provided that the two SRI computers remained switched on, the mission was safe.
Switching off "two still healthy critical units of equipment" guaranteed failure.