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: a07f3367d7,f096ebb5dcac664d
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ariane 5 Failure from 1996
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:39:46 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <d36p559mpt3i3vid4vevr9a4ritgbj0dae@4ax.com>
References: <ocle559uc4fu5roesre66ir69bqe9p4f03@4ax.com>
 <14e1cf5c-b053-49ec-83c8-d36b9afc49ab@p29g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
 <4n1f5510eum9c0b53rb1ui111rmgf23fgd@4ax.com>
 <bt2f55pt0m67ceaiesifrdp80ktsulpbdr@4ax.com>
 <2fc55a5a-02e6-4e3d-b172-fd0a0a37cd0e@k1g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
 <7qgh555mb9bdkkl0nvcf3f36ccsouvgcdh@4ax.com>
 <h3i508$1l7$2@news.eternal-september.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: RXEkuaSUwmKe0XIGFYSK7A.user.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.7.9
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MfBjDSrA7/cKPX6HfLf4vKCYPhk=
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7047
Date: 2009-07-14T15:39:46+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:33:44 +0000 (UTC), Nicholas Paul Collin
Gloucester <Colin_Paul_Gloster@ACM.org> wrote:

>On 2009-07-11, John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
>|"[..]                                                                  |
>|                                                                       |
>|Well, yes, but my understanding was that the requirements for Ariane 5 |
>|were defined, but no one bothered to spot that they were different to  |
>|Ariane 4 in terms of the intertial reference system operation hence    |
>|reuse of the Ariane 4 SRI as is was not appropriate."                  |
>|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>Another year, another time to bring <397A5CB4.AF5F6B8A@earthlink.net>
>by Robert I. Eachus timestamped 2000/07/23, archived at
>HTTP://groups.Google.com/group/comp.lang.eiffel/msg/414c1bfb4a374be2?dmode=source
>to someone's attention.

Thanks for that. That's something I don't ever remember having read.

>|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
>|"Funnily enough, I have personal experience of changing requirements   |
>|being ignored by a French person."                                     |
>|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|

>Ah, the U.K. and German proposals for SMART-1: within the mass
>requirement, in contrast to the French proposal which won despite
>using more mass than had been permitted.

No, much more personal than that :-)

>However, not only French people cheat or ignore requirements in
>European astronautics.

Of course.