Slashdot Mirror
Software Bug in F-35 Radar Causes Mid-Flight System Reboot
Reader Lisandro writes: The F-35 Fighter jet can't seem to catch a break. An advanced AN/APG-81 AESA F35 radar system has been found riddled with a software bug that causes it to degrade and stop working. The solution? Rebooting the system while in the air.
Major General Jeffrey Harrigian, director of the Air Force's F-35 integration office at the Pentagon, was quoted as saying "radar stability - the radar's ability to stay up and running. [...] What would happen is they'd get a signal that says either a radar degrade or a radar fail - "something that would force us to restart the radar." The issue was spotted in late 2015, and thankfully, it was caught during the testing period. The software version "3i" is affected. An update aimed to resolve the bug is expected to be delivered to the US Air Force by the end of March.
Major General Jeffrey Harrigian, director of the Air Force's F-35 integration office at the Pentagon, was quoted as saying "radar stability - the radar's ability to stay up and running. [...] What would happen is they'd get a signal that says either a radar degrade or a radar fail - "something that would force us to restart the radar." The issue was spotted in late 2015, and thankfully, it was caught during the testing period. The software version "3i" is affected. An update aimed to resolve the bug is expected to be delivered to the US Air Force by the end of March.
It should have been caught in testing, but of course someone wanted to save money and then it's testing that gets shaved first.
You mean like it says in TFS?
a formal proof for such a complex system is hideously, insanely ridiculously expensive. proper testing is sufficient. Yes a company could lose billions if their systems went offline as opposed to definitely spending billions to write verifiable software that will be out of date by the time they release it.
I'm sure it's a very serious bug but does it mean that the software is "riddled" with bugs? For all anyone knows it was an isolated issue that occurred in an atypical circumstance and was subsequently rectified. And it occurred during testing which is the reason that testing even exists as a thing - to find problems.
A solution would be new code. It sounds like the test pilots are doing a great job of you know, testing.
Third it's already been resolved. My dad worked on the Canadian Maritime Helicopter Project for years. During it the papers had an article talking about some snag that was hit and how horrible it was. I sent my dad the link and his response:
"Yeah that was my thing and 8 months ago, it was pointed out and in less than a day resolved."
Media exaggerating? Never...
It looks like the F35 is the perfect military industrial complex aircraft, forever requiring upgrades and bug fixes and not just from the US government from every government required to fork over 2% of GDP tribute payment to the US military industrial complex.
I'm not a fan of the F35 program, but this is still done in meatspace with aircraft as old as the B52.
The aircraft manufacturers are constantly pushing new hardware updates, new specs on how each bolt should be tightened, etc. Those don't come for free.
It is even possible that ongoing costs will be lower with something software-based rather than hardware. It turns out that way often.
I don't expect it to get cheaper, but if it doesn't it is in spite of software updates, not because of them.
Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
Because Russia invading a sovereign country is perfectly acceptable because they weren't doing what Russia wanted them to do. Of course, pointing to another country doing something kind of the same excuses what Russia is doing, it is all perfectly acceptable to annex the territory of another country.
Great Powers do it all the time. I don't expect it to change. But I do aim to point out the hypocrisy and/or naivete of anyone who thinks the US's foreign policy has altruistic motives or that the "Other Guys" are inherently evil.
Yeah, screw those other countries, China has a huge population, so they should just be able to steal territory that they have no valid claim to.
Might makes right. Just ask any sovereign nation that's been subject to a US invasion. As an aside, note that no nuclear-armed state has suffered a regime change at US hands. And yet Americans are surprised when antagonists pursue nuclear arms? As for "stealing territory they have no valid claim to"....the validity of their claim stems from their ability to enforce their will. Hence the fortification of their man-made islands. Also note that the US has progressed to a uniquely insidious alternative to directly "stealing" territory: the Petrodollar system. But it requires constant enforcement by the US, and controlling/manipulating central banks, financial institutions, and the exchange of oil are all aspects of this enforcement.
2000: Saddam was planning to switch sales of Iraqi oil from dollars to Euros. Within 3 years he was deposed.
2009: Gaddafi was doing his best to reconcile with the West. Unfortunately for him, he also planned a gold-and-oil-backed Libyan currency. He was dead within 3 years of shaking Obama's hand. And the "rebels" sure were quick to set up a Central Bank (less than 2 months into the civil war).
2012: Iran was planning to sell oil in exchange for gold. Despite having them bracketed with bases in both Afghanistan and Iraq, the US military was in no position to invade. So Iran instead found themselves promptly disconnected from global financial institutions: http://www.reuters.com/article...
2014: Ukraine has a revolution....and suddenly all the gold is missing from their central bank. Now they are stuck with fiat currency and IMF obligations. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/... Meanwhile, Russia and China are buying up gold like crazy ( http://www.mining.com/china-ru... ), and started their own alternative-IMF (the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank). Both have stated intentions to end the US's hegemonic influence. These are two nuclear-armed Great Powers that are closing the conventional military gap, and despite shaky economies, having been consistently moving to eliminate US dollar influence across their entire sphere of influence. Which, IMO, will eventually be a good thing for everyone, including the average (productive) American citizen.
Oh, let us ignore all the people Assad was murdering, and that a large percentage of the population wants him out of office.
If you have a problem with murderous heads of state that are unpopular, perhaps you should look a little closer to home before trying to solve other people's problems? https://theintercept.com/drone...
Lets just prop up that dictator because he is our friend and is nice to us.
Yes, the Russian relationship with Assad closely parallels the relationship the United States has with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. Ya know, the guys who are busy bombing the shit out of Yemen? These are also the same people who are VERY close ideologically to ISIS and al Qaeda....who we've spent the past 15 yea