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,87f6968ed41c9df1 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: john@assen.demon.co.uk (John McCabe) Subject: Re: Multiple reasons for failure of Ariane 5 (was: Re: Ariane 5 - not an exception?) Date: 1996/09/20 Message-ID: <843241991.26525.0@assen.demon.co.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 184222789 x-nntp-posting-host: assen.demon.co.uk references: <4vjea6$gj7@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <32217BC4.3583@lmtas.lmco.com> <3222E997.5EEC@lmtas.lmco.com> <505omb$a0c@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.pl1 Date: 1996-09-20T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dorfman@netcom.com (Merlin Dorfman) wrote: > I haven't been reading this newsgroup recently, so this question may >already have been discussed. > From what I have read (e.g., the current Aviation Week), the Ariane >problem would have been disclosed by running a simulation of the launch >trajectory, either software-only (in a stand-alone computer) or hardware >in the loop. The failure would occur every time in such a simulation. > I am quite sure that the Atlas, Titan, Shuttle, etc. launches >are subject to such a full simulation. I find it hard to believe that >Ariane does not do this. Can anyone enlighten me as to whether such >simulations are not run, or why they did not disclose the problem? It is incredibly difficult to believe, but its true. The full report (the address of which is mentioned somewhere else in this thread) mentions that the trajectory information wasn't even provided in the requirements or rather, that it was agreed not to include it! Best Regards John McCabe