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: 103376,707ffbf6ec9d1855
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer01.cox.net!cox.net!p01!dukeread06.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: David Emery <demery@cox.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Macintosh/20051201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: SBIRS, Ada and Ignorance
References: <20051222102521644-0600@news.airmail.net>
  	<hyCqf.5074$mj1.1275@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
   	<20051222152554655-0600@news.airmail.net>
  	<NhHqf.36784$dO2.21414@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>
 	<20051223110200413-0600@news.airmail.net>
 	<eneoq1p0jo46iktlreebnpihas50cbr75l@4ax.com>
 	<OKgrf.5742$mj1.1091@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <20051228202616693-0600@news.airmail.net>
In-Reply-To: <20051228202616693-0600@news.airmail.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <yPYsf.231078$0l5.219020@dukeread06>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:47:44 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.249.249.75
X-Complaints-To: abuse@cox.net
X-Trace: dukeread06 1135892830 24.249.249.75 (Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:47:10 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:47:10 EST
Organization: Cox Communications
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2397
Date: 2005-12-29T16:47:44-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Robert Love wrote:
> In <OKgrf.5742$mj1.1091@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net> Joseph 
> Vlietstra  wrote:
>> Some answers about the SBIRS program.
>> - The SBIRS program was plagued by poor initial systems engineering.
> 
> That much I suspected.  Thanks for your information.
> 
> 
>> Anyone claiming that Ada was the problem is either ignorant of the
>> circumstances or hoping to obscure the initial systems engineering
>> problems.  
> 
> I used Ignorance in my orginal thread title but I bet is is the latter 
> reason, LM officials looking for an easy scapegoat.  What goads me is 
> the USAF bought it hook, line and sinker.

In my experience, Ada was often blamed for bringing system engineering failures to light before the program was ready hear about it.  From a political perspective, being able to demonstrate an inconsistent design at PDR is NOT a good way to get the program through its next major government milestone.  

    dave