> were left unprotected because it was thought that they were "physically limited or that there was a large margin of safety You didn't mention it, but IIRC wh

> were left unprotected because it was thought that they were "physically limited or that there was a large margin of safety You didn't mention it, but IIRC what made the overflow possible was the increased performance of Ariane 5. Such values couldn't physically be reached with Ariane 4. Now, the real irony is that indeed that computation and whole subsystem wasn't needed. It tells you something about removing unneeded parts. On the other hand, the aerospace sector is traditionally very conservative and reluctant to change things. Have a look at the superstition surrounding launch processes: http://stevenjohnfuchs.com/soyuzblue/yes-they-pee-on-the-tires/ http://stevenjohnfuchs.com/soyuzblue/yes-they-pee-on-the-tir... I can picture code being included whole for fear of breaking something by mistake.