Software issues are common in jet fighter aviation. Here are two little known, but potentially deadly issues:<p>* 1986 F-16 Inversion when flying over the equator - <i></i><i>Flying the F-16 in simulation over the equator, the computer got confused and instantly flipped the plane over, killing the pilot [in simulation]. And since it can fly forever upside down, it would do so until it ran out of fuel.</i><i></i> Note: some claim this is a myth and to my knowledge, it has never been verified, but I tend to believe it could have happened. Source - <a href="http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/3.44.html" rel="nofollow">http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/3.44.html</a><p>* 2007 F-22 Complete systems failure over International Date Line - <i></i><i>At the international date line, all systems dumped and when I say all systems, I mean all systems, their navigation, part of their communications, their fuel systems. They were—they could have been in real trouble. They were with their fuel tankers. The tankers – they tried to reset their systems, couldn’t get them reset. The tankers brought them back to Hawaii by visual, line of sight flight.</i><i></i> Source - <a href="http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-squadron-shot-down-by-the-international-date-line-03087/" rel="nofollow">http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-squadron-shot-down-b...</a>
From wikipedia:<p><i>"Unlike previous aircraft, such as the F-22, all software for the F-35 is written in C++ for faster code development."</i><p>Seems that C++ is fulfilling its intended purpose nicely: <a href="http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/c++/I_did_it_for_you_all" rel="nofollow">http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/c++/I_did_it_for_you_all</a><p>Or perhaps Bjarne's real goal was to end all wars ;)<p>Edit: Oh, and it seems somebody has not read The Mythical Man Month:<p><i>"Because of this delay and the increased complexity of the jet's third and final software block, Lockheed Martin and the Defense Department have added additional resources to fielding Block III software"</i>
> The development of the jet's Block II software is 90 to 120 days behind schedule, according to the two-star general. Because of this delay and the increased complexity of the jet's third and final software block, Lockheed Martin and the Defense Department have added additional resources...<p>1. If you think you're 90 to 120 days behind schedule, you really have no idea how far you're behind schedule.<p>2. Somebody forgot Brook's law.
Check out Augustine's laws: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustines_laws" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustines_laws</a> . I believe he said software was a boon as all other ways to add expense to an aircraft eventually are limited by weight.
Jesus christ! $1.5 trillion... but... healthcare, education... NASA!<p>And... "ready to go to war by 2015"... guys, seriously... what war will it be? Is it an old one that is still going or an entirely new one that needs to be created to pay for this plane?<p>Sorry. Just ranting. No replies required.
> Comparing the troubled F-35 program to a massive aircraft carrier that two years ago "was gonna run aground," Bogdan said that F-35 program manager Vice Adm. David Venlet and his team, with Lockheed Martin and with the help of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, "has steered that ship...away from the shoals so it won't run aground."<p>This is a little interesting for me: I worked for Admiral David Venlet's brother, Rear Admiral Doug Venlet, back when he was the skipper of the USS Wadsworth. He was a very cool cat. Went on to carry "the football" for GW. Politics aside, that is a very unique job in the world. Two admirals out of one family. What was dinner like at that table?
Generals in charge of software projects. I worked at Microsoft, I know how well non-technical overseers manage projects.<p>> "We're gonna find things that we didn't know about and are gonna have to deal with them, but at least this scheduleis laid out to accommodate unexpected problems."<p>Bullshit- they played schedule chicken and got caught. It'll happen again.
I think the biggest problem is that it's the pentagon's flagship program, and it suffers from bureaucratic bloat, military-industrial complex crony-ism, and typical pentagon big-project feature creep.<p>Should have been a skunk-works project kept under wraps until as late as possible, a la the F-16...and even that project didn't survive without a little bloat.<p>Like some others have said, drones are probably the equivalent rebel project that the F-16 was back in its day...
I can't imagine how hard developing for this must be. Every bug could possibly kill people but the project still has to meet a deadline. Does anyone think it might be to early to integrate this much software into a fighter jet?
Most (all?) military fighter planes have had odd flight conditions where they would get into a fix that would kill the pilot, and it happened often enough. A large part of pilot training is avoiding those conditions.<p>Long before software.
"...Because of this delay and the increased complexity of the jet's third and final software block, Lockheed Martin and the Defense Department have added additional resources to fielding Block III software..."<p>Adding more people to a delayed software project, now where did I hear that before?<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month</a>
Try Go, just make sure to use 64bit memory ;-)
<a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3805302" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3805302</a>