[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Home]
4Archive logo
Another day, another F-35 problem
If images are not shown try to refresh the page. If you like this website, please disable any AdBlock software!

You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons

Thread replies: 51
Thread images: 14
File: f35b_hover-1.jpg (14 KB, 648x348) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
f35b_hover-1.jpg
14 KB, 648x348
>US military finds F-35 software is a buggy mess
>Tests jettisoned to protect schedule

>The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) remains the problem child of the US military, with some operational tests abandoned in 2014, and buggy software proving a headache.

>The US military's Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E) has released its latest annual report, and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter chapter describes the Department of Defense's efforts in trying to get the project back somewhere close to schedule.

>To avoid a cascading series of delays that would have stretched into 2016, the project abandoned an Operational Utility Evaluation (OUE) planned in April 2014 for the Marines' Block 2B configuration of the aircraft.


Am I reading this right? The software has bugs, so it limits flying time, so it limits testing, so they're reducing the number of tests it has to make to qualify?

That's like going "QA is identifying a lot of bugs. QA are a problem. Fire QA. There we go. No more bug reports.".

This'll end as well as it has gone so far - I wonder how many pilots will need to die from malfunctioning hardware and software for them to consider a different course of action.

I'm convinced that this plane is named F-35 because it will become fully operation by the end of 2035. So many damn showstoppers! Disaster.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/01/22/us_military_finds_f35_software_is_a_buggy_mess/
>>
I'm imagining some guy at the DoD calling the software writer and getting an Indian guy with horrible English skills on the line lol
>>
>>28730717
kek'd.

"Pranjeet, what is this shit??"
>>
File: Disqus.png (50 KB, 439x588) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Disqus.png
50 KB, 439x588
>>28730688

After hearing so much bullshit about the F-35 from people who genuinely believe that the US needs to start rolling out new Skyraiders I'm inclined to believe that somebody found a moth in the F-35's cockpit and the press ran with it as "BUG FOUND IN THE F-35: NEW AIRPLANE IS BUGGIEST SHIT EVER."
>>
Gashunk!
>>
anyone got that webm of the F-35 doing those stall maneuvers
>>
File: highalpha.webm (693 KB, 1280x720) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
highalpha.webm
693 KB, 1280x720
>>28732632
>>
File: 1453007570223.jpg (31 KB, 480x360) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1453007570223.jpg
31 KB, 480x360
>>28730688
inb4 the 50 cent shills show up
>>
>>28730688
Wow, who knew that software development was hard?
>>
>>28730688
>Am I reading this right? The software has bugs, so it limits flying time, so it limits testing, so they're reducing the number of tests it has to make to qualify?
There's easy things and hard things in the development program - IIRC, the majority of the tests they're removing are in weapons separation.

It's like if you're building a robot; you've tested how it walks and it walks pretty much like your simulations said it'd walk. The machine vision however isn't working as intended, so you decide to cut away testing that had it walking on 20 different types of carpet, and do more tests on the vision system.
>>
Just scrap the program and buy SAAB Gripens instead.
>>
>>28732969
> Just scrap the program and buy SAAB Gripens instead.
there was a report that came out few days ago suggesting just that.
>>
>>28734258

>Report

An article (filled with bizarre assumptions like "the Gripen is equal to the F-22 because they have a similar turning radius") written by some guy trying to promote his book is not a report.
>>
>early access fighter jets
>>
>>28732825
Just imagine what the Blue Angels/Thunderbirds will do with that.
>>
>>28732969
>Buy planes no better than new production F-16 Block 50/60
>>
>>28736202
It's fake, but I can dream right?
>>
>>28736202
They probably won't. The Hornet is capable of some pretty impressive high-AoA stuff as well, but they don't incorporate it into their routine.
>>
File: 1413079889044.webm (3 MB, 640x480) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1413079889044.webm
3 MB, 640x480
>>28732825
could be better.
>>
>>28732825
what is this ? and what's that smoke ?
>>
>>28736276

>>>/a/
>>
>>28738183
It's an F-35C conducting departure / high angle of attack testing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6XofdlfJ0k

That 'smoke' is just a contrail / condensation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrail#Condensation_from_engine_exhaust
>>
Impressive

Truly only idiots would copy a design so instinctively flawed. If America followed China's lead, then the F-35 would've been closer to the J-31 and a lot better, but it's copying China so they better pay royalty.
>>
File: neat.gif (25 KB, 247x200) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
neat.gif
25 KB, 247x200
>>28732825

Is he showing us a little trick he learned?
>>
>>28738183
CHEMTRAILS
>>
File: 1454116880086.jpg (85 KB, 1280x720) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1454116880086.jpg
85 KB, 1280x720
>>28738257
>The black smoke is just contrails, there is nothing to worry about
>>
>>28739356
>look at me as I demonstrate my faggotry
You clearly don't know how contrails work so please go back to what ever fud thread you crawled from.
>>
>C++ is so productive guys
>>
>>28730688
Flags on /k/ when
>>
>>28739459
Please do tell how that dark smoke is made from just water crystals, I'm intrigued.

And no, I'm not saying F-35 should be canceled just because its engine runs rich and smokes a bit at adverse intake conditions to keep the turbine from stalling.
>>
>>28732825

What's funny is how there is a video of the super shit PAK-FA doing much more impressive maneuvers on prototype engines.
>>
>>28739629

The PAK FA is an air superiority fighter. The F-35 is an all-purpose "workhorse" fighter. So much of the controversy is just based on people not understanding what the role of the F-35 is.
>>
>>28739653
Again with this silly "the awesome code is too heavy and that's why F-35 can't fly as well"-meme.
>>
>>28739653
>The PAK FA is an air superiority fighter.
>The PAK FA is
>is

The project is in the long grass. It is doubtful it will ever be dopted properly. They don't need it.
>>
>>28739479
>"Let's save money by hiring cheap C++ devs instead of those expensive ADA wizards"
>Everyone acts surprised when the code doesn't work
>>
>>28739629
Thrust vectoring nozzles are great for airshows.
>>
File: Like a boss.jpg (15 KB, 700x479) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Like a boss.jpg
15 KB, 700x479
>>28739732

As far as we can tell, the F-35 can legitimately fly pretty great. It has a ton of thrust behind it and it is phenomenally controllable even at extremely high angles of attack.

And it will only get better as more programming restraints are loosened as we get closer and closer to full-rate production in 2019.
>>
>>28740120
I'm wondering what the cost is to do that kind of thing.

Its not designed to get up close and personal post merge, but It would be neat to know what kind of stamina it would have pulling those kinds of moves, or if its pushing the engine to near full power and can only manage 10 minutes or so
>>
>>28740160
The A is a 9G fighter. That said, if the F-35 is fighting in the merge, AWACs, the other pilots, and that pilot fucked up hard.
>>
File: cloud.jpg (257 KB, 1940x1222) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
cloud.jpg
257 KB, 1940x1222
>>28739600
Storm clouds are all smoke from the government! You heard it here first!!!
>>
>>28739356
god damn... that's awful. imagine when the engine dies... whole plane is lost.
>>
>>28742099
>memeing this hard about 2-engine reliability
>>
>>28742099

>god damn... that's awful. imagine when the engine dies... whole plane is lost.

The pilot can just glide the plane to a landing.
>>
File: 1405444610056.png (222 KB, 600x453) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1405444610056.png
222 KB, 600x453
>>28742571
>jet fighters
>gliding
>>
>>28741787
>That said, if the F-35 is fighting in the merge, AWACs, the other pilots, and that pilot fucked up hard.
ROEs or exigent circumstances will make that happen sooner rather than later, and it doesn't mean they fucked up. Thankfully the F-35 is on par with F-18 in terms of maneuverability, if not better. At realistic combat loads, it's actually more maneuverable than F-18 or F-16.
>>
>>28742589
Put your dunce cap on
>>
>>28736241
>implying they won't revert to T-38s
>>
File: 1415823122153.jpg (32 KB, 517x572) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1415823122153.jpg
32 KB, 517x572
>>28742571
>F-35
>glide
>>
>>28743421
>Doesn't know what a lifting body is
>>
>>28730688
All softwares in modern fighters have bugs and quirks. It's just too many variables and different systems that needs to cooperate with different subsystems at different times under different circumstances. It's extremely complex and it never gets perfect.
>>
File: eots.webm (1 MB, 640x360) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
eots.webm
1 MB, 640x360
>>28742596
The most stringent ROE only calls for visual ID - something the F-35 can still do at BVR ranges - it'll be even better with Advanced EOTS.
Thread replies: 51
Thread images: 14
Thread DB ID: 478887



[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.