F 
R

9 
- 
9 
6

---

Home | Update | Latest Issue | Gallery | FR Inside | Datafiles | FR 9/96

---

ARIANE 5 CRASH REVEALS NEGLECT

Afterwards, everyone knows better. This is especially true concerning the unsuccessful first launch of the Ariane 5 rocket on July 4 of this year. The investigating committee's report reveals drastic shortcomings in the program management. The European space agency ESA and the French space administration CNES must now answer critical questions. However, the report doesn't clearly answer the question of who is really responsible for the mistakes made.

The crash was caused by the computer program that calibrates the rocket's two inertial platforms prior to launch, and which continues to be active ñ unnecessarily ñ after the rocket lifts off (see article on page 41). According to the report, this program was simply taken over from the Ariane 4, but wasn't adequately tested for use with the larger and heavier Ariane 5.

Even experts don't understand why the important inertial and flight guidance system was not tested in a complete launch simulation. Even relatively simple tests would have easily revealed the software deficiency. According to the report, such tests had been planned. However, they were later on canceled by "all parties participating".

Looking at the investigation committee's recommendations, one can easily read strong criticism directed at the persons responsible for the program. It speaks for itself when the experts demand extensive test facilities and also ask for a simulation of entire procedures with the system hardware ñ something every layman would expect.

Furthermore, the report reveals dramatic deficiencies in Ariane 5's software. The authors of the report recommend the deactivation of unnecessary computer programs once the rocket lifts off. Also, the report asks for the set up of software working groups which are supported by independent expert and industry teams.

It's almost a frontal attack against the program responsibles when the investigation committee demands a higher degree of program transparency, as well as, clear responsibilities. Is this critique directed at the French domination in ESA and the Ariane program?

Insiders have long been complaining about the French domination ñ however, not without pointing out France's achievements for the European space industry. According to these criticisms, all decisions concerning programs are made in Paris while all program partners are pushed into the role of a mere supplier. Furthermore, that the French pragmatism often succeeded, resulting in the omission of extensive and costly tests, always hoping everything will go well: Laissez faire?

It looks very much as if the group of experts recognized this when looking for the cause of the crash. The program responsibles in Paris will not get around the committee's recommendations, since the trust in ESA and CNES has already be shattered by the Ariane 5 accident.

From page 4 of FLUG REVUE 9/96