Re: How would Ariane 5 have behaved if overflow checking were not turned off?

["Vinzent Hoefler" <0439279208b62c95f1880bf0f8776eeb@t-domaingrabbing.de>]

robin wrote:

> Stephen Leake wrote in message <82d3lsvqw7.fsf@stephe-leake.org>...
>>
>> Ariane 5 is a bigger rocket; it has bigger accelerations.
>
> It does?  The Report doesn't say anything about that.
> What it *does* say is that the horizontal velocity was greater
> in Ariane 5 than Ariane 4.
> That doesn't mean that the acceleration upwards was greater.

It *does* say it on page 12:

|p) Ariane 5 has a high initial acceleration [...] which leads to a
|   build-up of horizontal velocity which is five times more rapid
|   than for Ariane 4. The higher horizontal velocity [...] generated,
|   within the 40-second timeframe, the excessive value which caused
|   the inertial system computers to cease operation.

"build-up of horizontal velocity [...] five times more rapid"
"higher horizontal velocity [...] within the 40-second timeframe"

I read that as "the acceleration is bigger". But maybe I remember
my physics classes wrong and there are other ways to reach a higher
velocity within the same time than just by increasing the acceleration.

And for the "bigger rocket", you can simply compare the thrust data:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_4>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5>

You might notice some minor differences in the numbers. ;)


Vinzent.

-- 
A C program is like a fast dance on a newly waxed dance floor by people carrying
razors.
   --  Waldi Ravens