Slashdot Mirror


Software Bug Halts F-22 Flight

mgh02114 writes "The new US stealth fighter, the F-22 Raptor, was deployed for the first time to Asia earlier this month. On Feb. 11, twelve Raptors flying from Hawaii to Japan were forced to turn back when a software glitch crashed all of the F-22s' on-board computers as they crossed the international date line. The delay in arrival in Japan was previously reported, with rumors of problems with the software. CNN television, however, this morning reported that every fighter completely lost all navigation and communications when they crossed the international date line. They reportedly had to turn around and follow their tankers by visual contact back to Hawaii. According to the CNN story, if they had not been with their tankers, or the weather had been bad, this would have been serious. CNN has not put up anything on their website yet." The Peoples Daily of China reported on Feb. 17 that two Raptors had landed on Okinawa.

11 of 579 comments (clear)

  1. Real redundancy by chriss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As far as I remember the Space Shuttle not only has redundant computer systems, but also redundant software, i.e. the software has been developed twice to ensure that software bugs don't cause a catastrophe. I'd prefer to know that systems capable of carrying weapons which can kill hundreds of thousands of people were designed with the same safety in mind.

    1. Re:Real redundancy by spagetti_code · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, the space shuttle is not a good example.

      NASA do not fly the space shuttle during 31 Dec -> 1 Jan as
      they are not confident of what would happen. Better just
      to avoid the problem.

      That was one of the pressures to getting the Dec 2k6 flight off the ground.

    2. Re:Real redundancy by arivanov · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is a grain of truth in this one.

      During the Serbian wars NATO was scared shitless off all weather radars and shot at them without any second thoughts even if they were in neighbouring non-combatant countries. Both incidents when missiles hit buildings near Sofia (70km+ outside the Yugoslavian border) were actually firings at the Sofia Airport Gematronic radar system (the same kind some NATO country use).

      In addition to that Stealth works effectively only if your receiver is colocated with the transmitter. It is easily defeated by decoupling them. There is a host of technical problems in doing this, but nothing that cannot be solved with enough software analysis of the reflected signal. It is only a matter of time until all "rogue" countries possess the relevant signal processing tech to do that.

      So as far as AAA is concerned Stealth is a technology which is dead on arrival.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  2. Reminds me of the Bismarck by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Bismarck battleship had a bug also: when the main turrets would fire, the aiming radars would be disabled. That's no joke when you're in the midst of a battle and everyone of those large caliber shells counts. As I understand, the radars would be disabled by the vibrations of the turret cannons firing. Not a software bug, but bug nonetheless, and you do wonder how did this battleship pass testing.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  3. F16 Software had similar problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When F16s crossed the equator, the computer would roll the aircraft 180 degrees and fly inverted:

    http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/3.44.html

  4. READ: Get Ready For More by N8F8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I tried posting this on several sites but on March 11th, when the new daylight savingsregime kicks in for the first time there will probably be a lot of Java applications that will start having data issues because the latest Java version IS NOT BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE for several three character time codes that have bee removed. Several codes have been deprecated in a way that is not backwards compatible. I could be wrong about the severity, but for he last two weeks my software team has been dealing with this issue and the interaction between Oracle and Java.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
  5. Re:Don't worry by MSFanBoi2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually the whole story is a lot more exciting that 5 on 1...

    The 27th Fighter Squadron (8 F-22s) at Langley AFB, Virginia fought against 33 F-15Cs and didn't suffer a single loss. The F-15's again didn't even detect the F-22's until they were all locked and targeted.

    Then some months later during Exercise Northern Edge F-22's reached a 144-to-zero kill-to-loss ratio against F-15s, F-16s and F/A-18s. Only 12 of the F-22's accounted for nearly 50% of all kills for the Exercise.

  6. a bit of nit-picking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What you state about Airbus is absolutely correct but FADEC stands for Full Authority Digital Electronics Control but many seem to remember it as E = Engine, like you do. As far as the fly-by-wire system is concerned, I might add that it has already saved at least 300+ lives - an Emirates A340 attempted to rotate with insufficient airspeed at takeoff (but past V1 so they couldn't stop either) and the FBW system stepped in and throttled up (fortunately autothrottle was on so it was permitted to do so) and rotated as soon as the aircraft had sufficient speed to take off instead of just lift and stall (and consequently crash). Emirates training got a slap on the wrist by Airbus since the crew apparently had the attitude that if there's a problem, the computer will sort it out whilst the correct procedure is to either perform maneuvers properly manually or tell the computer what you want the aircraft to do and then monitor it - even though the computer can do a lot to correct crew errors, crews shouldn't perform poorly just because it can do that. I remember an article posted on airdisaster.com in which some first officer that wanted to remain anonymous (for obvious reasons) wrote that due to the software that outperforms any human pilot, many captains he had flown with had definitely ignored the rule that whilst you should let the autopilot land if weather conditions are extremely bad, you shouldn't force it to do so if you couldn't land in those conditions yourself too because how can you judge what the limits of the autopilot are (and how close to those it is) when it is already outperforming you? I wish Boeing adopted the same design philosophy now that they've finally switched to FBW too with the 777 - there's simply no justification to let a fly-by-wire aircraft stall due to pilot error when the system could easily be programmed to prevent it (not to mention detect better how close to stalling an aircraft is instead of just giving the pilot a list of stall speeds at certain configurations).

  7. not the only problem I read... by Bobzibub · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All complex systems have bugs that need to be ironed out....

    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IB10Ak05. html
    "Keys notes, however, that the electronic spectrum around Baghdad is polluted by the myriad jamming devices that coalition forces primarily employed to thwart remote detonations of the improvised explosive devices that have inflicted 70% of all US fatalities in that war." ...
    "The potential problem was discovered when the first F-22s were operating near US Navy ships off the Atlantic coast. Navy radars overwhelmed the F-22's automated sensors. Even now, larger, multi-station, purpose-built electronic-intelligence-gathering airplanes encounter difficulties around the Iraqi capital because of the extreme density of jamming devices."

  8. Re:Overflow by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    just as well it wasn't in the fire a [missile] flag byte ... or worse still, the ejector seat flag byte.
    Yeah... uh... you know, in the same way they simply do not and never would have the navigation system connected to the In-Flight Entertainment system in an airliner, likewise they would never slave the ejection system to anything other than the mechanical operation of that yellow handle between the pilot's knees.

    As for missiles? First, they fly unarmed on ferry missions because ammo is dead weight that reduces range; and second, even if they were armed, what do you really think would happen if an AMRAAM missile was free launched without being turned on, much less having had targeting info downloaded? Drop like a stone, it would, right into the pacific. Bloop. All gone.

    Say it's also a good thing water isn't flammable, otherwise fire trucks would show up to fires and only make the situation worse, right?
    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  9. F-16 had a similar bug by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Luckily they found it during simulations of the F-16. A bug in the fly-by-wire software caused the plane to think that it was upside-down whenever it crossed the equator. It would try to correct the problem immediately -- A maneuver that the plane could probably survive, but that would probably kill the pilot had it occured in real life.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.