Only One of Six Air Force F-35s Could Actually Take Off During Testing
Source: Fortune
Five of six Air Force F-35 fighter jets were unable to take off during a recent exercise due to software bugs that continue to hamstring the worlds most sophisticatedand most expensivewarplane.
During a mock deployment at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho, just one of the $100 million Lockheed Martin LMT -0.40% F-35s was able to boot its software successfully and get itself airborne during an exercise designed to test the readiness of the F-35, FlightGlobal reports. Nonetheless, the Air Force plans to declare its F-35s combat-ready later this year.
Details surrounding the failed exercise were disclosed earlier this week in written testimony presented to Congress by J. Michael Gilmore, the Pentagons chief weapons tester.
The Air Force attempted two alert launch procedures during the Mountain Home deployment, where multiple F-35A aircraft were preflighted and prepared for a rapid launch, but only one of the six aircraft was able to complete the alert launch sequence and successfully takeoff, Gilmore wrote. Problems during startup that required system or aircraft shutdowns and restarts a symptom of immature systems and softwareprevented the other alert launches from being completed.
<more>
Read more: http://fortune.com/2016/04/28/f-35-fails-testing-air-force/
Someone needs to be prosecuted for fraud...
yup
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)fred v
(271 posts)mpcamb
(2,870 posts)forest444
(5,902 posts)(unless, of course, you're one of the profiteers)
http://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/31/how-dods-15-trillion-f-35-broke-the-air-force.html
MADem
(135,425 posts)paleotn
(17,913 posts)that will be the eventual use for the Navy's variant.
Kip Humphrey
(4,753 posts)Just wondering...
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Yup,just defending Amurica.
elljay
(1,178 posts)just "defunding" Amurica.
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Just bleeding the beast.
elljay
(1,178 posts)msongs
(67,406 posts)Wilms
(26,795 posts)Thespian2
(2,741 posts)in this MIC boondoggle...too late to scrap the F-35...
MADem
(135,425 posts)CAN'T FIGHT.
The Burlington Bungle!
SunSeeker
(51,557 posts)He loves those sweet sweet MIC jobs. They mean votes back home. He wanted that F-35 so much that he was willing to defend a plane that explodes on the runway. Sanders has been defending the F-35 for years:
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/24583-bernie-sanders-doubles-down-on-f-35-support-days-after-runway-explosion
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)floriduck
(2,262 posts)paleotn
(17,913 posts)....ba dum boom.
SunSeeker
(51,557 posts)It sure beats us taxpayers paying for these flying death traps.
The Saudis bought F-15s. The F-15 is actually more expensive per-plane, and lacks the stealth characteristics of the F-35. In most other ways, however, the F-15 is superior. Payload, most importantly.
okasha
(11,573 posts)a better chance that s/he'll get the plane down without being killed by its bad engineering.
MisterFred
(525 posts)F-15s crash on a regular basis.
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)You sure this is the road you want to go down?
Mosby
(16,311 posts)A fighter jet should be able to take off without a "boot up". Who the fuck thought that was a good idea?
jmowreader
(50,557 posts)...that the same sorry bastard who thought building a fighter jet that needs a video camera pointed at the tail so you can see who's behind you (this is no shit - it's the only way to see out the back) was a good idea, is the sorry bastard who thought making a jet so dependent on its computers was a good idea.
MADem
(135,425 posts)brush
(53,778 posts)They'll just be sitting there, and sitting ducks btw, IF THERE COMPUTERS CAN'T BOOT UP!!!!
God, WTF.
And this is the dud they want to replace the A-10 also, one of its supposed multi-functions.
George II
(67,782 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)... once it was deemed it would be built, he worked to have it built in his state. You know, representing his consitituents and all that.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)Here is part of that article:
"So, while Bernie Sanders is saying we should cut military spending to fund free college for everyone, his defense of the F-35 means that despite everything else, Sanders is still just a politician. Sooner or later, the F-35 will eventually be replaced by something even more expensive, while the F-35 joins the thousands of other unused fighter jets in the boneyard. But rather than lying to people and saying the program is already a done deal and that theres nothing he can do, Sanders could stand by his principles and introduce an amendment in the next National Defense Authorization Act to strip the F-35 program of its funding. That remaining $700 billion could make college tuition-free for everyone for at least a decade."
Fighting to end wasteful military spending is honorable, wasting another $700 billion, or more, is not.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)This remark is just wrong: " while the F-35 joins the thousands of other unused fighter jets in the boneyard." The F-15s, F-16s, F-14s and some older F-18s are anything BUT "unused". In fact, A LOT of them are in the boneyard because they've reached the end of their useful lives. They were usede in the many conflicts we've poured money into as well as used to keep pilots proficient even when not in war zones. Planes wear out. They CAN be refurbished, but of course, the race for more and fantastic capabilities dictates developing new designs. I personally think those endeavors are a race down the toilet, but that's the thinking. And still - with that one quote I lifted - saying unused is just plane wrong.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)And who can forget Hillary's ardent stance against this boondoggle! I do trust she'll FORCE the bugs outta this thing by finding some conflict to employ it in.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Program. I wonder how many Lockheed Martin contributes to Sanders. He used to talk about auditing MIC's but now nothing about this anymore.
frylock
(34,825 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Hell, we could stage the collisions right over all those publicly funded stadiums!
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)Take off in an F-22 Strangler and die of hypoxia or sit on the runway in an F-35 Brood Hen and wait for the enemy to arrive.
jpak
(41,758 posts)Old Crow
(2,212 posts)You really made me guffaw with that. So funny!
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Billions and billions for the MIC.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Thanks Uncle Bernie
jpak
(41,758 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)n/t
harun
(11,348 posts)It's about the $$$.
underpants
(182,803 posts)Wow
ffr
(22,670 posts)and is working on a patch. The patch should be ready for upload before the Air Force certifies the F-35 fleet.
Between writing gaming code, patch code for Microsoft Windows 10 and this, the Air Force may have to wait a little longer. But his mom says he understands the serious nature of having airplanes that can take off and land on runways and should have working compiled code shortly after school lets out in May.
GreydeeThos
(958 posts)PJMcK
(22,037 posts)He farmed out the FBI gig to his little brother.
TeamPooka
(24,226 posts)TeddyR
(2,493 posts)But if it won't fly then that is a problem and someone needs to answer for it.
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Or Linux.
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)working again.
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)that you think they use commercially available software on military aircraft. You're an affirmation.
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)Nihil
(13,508 posts)jmowreader
(50,557 posts)Next question: Why in hell would you design a fighter plane that needs to be cold-booted every time you want to use it? Put an UPS in the plane that receives power from two sources: the airframe's electrical generator and a cord plugged into the wall. Power all the electronics off the UPS. Never turn them off.
reddread
(6,896 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)I was hoping this was regarding the test against the A-10 Warthog that's in the offing. Six A-10s could have reduced the 6 F-35s to rubble before they got airborn!
Old Crow
(2,212 posts)... and that would be the end of the test.
IDemo
(16,926 posts)They've been a familiar sight over Boise skies for a very long time and are currently deployed to the Middle East. It would have made for a convenient pairing of the two if timing had been a bit different. That's assuming the zillion dollar jets could get airborn..
Jopin Klobe
(779 posts)... it's performance is much, much better than our so-called "congressional leadership" ...
... and they are costing us trillions and our country ...
kacekwl
(7,017 posts)rebuild the decimated military by pouring more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ toward it.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)First off, I didn't build bombs, bullets, or body armor. I did research on high tech comm systems for DARPA.
My old company, which is the same scale as Lockheed, started caring much more about middle management than the engineers building their products. It doesn't surprise me that we cannot make a jet that can fly these days. Nearly every engineer worth their salt left for greener pastures in recent years.
PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)I saw these F35s flying regularly a few years back. I assumed they had things worked out.
How were they able to get that oddly shaped F-117 to fly using 1970's computers, but they have such a hard time getting all this to work?
jpak
(41,758 posts)The Marine Corps version is faring much better and will be deployed at sea next year.
https://news.usni.org/2016/04/25/marines-not-affected-by-f-35-radar-reset-software-glitch-fielding-still-on-track
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)with the billions of dollars they're throwing down the fraudulent military complex sewer?
Maybe they should be spending more time improving their ability to provide clean drinking water and decent jobs and less time on planes that will be obsolete in a few years anyway...
People are getting tired carrying around an plutocratic empire on their shoulders..
Turbineguy
(37,331 posts)lives will be saved if they don't work. Contractors will still make money, the whole system will continue to function right up to the point where they actually start killing people.
And the terrorists will be happy because we are bankrupting ourselves.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)malthaussen
(17,195 posts)Oneironaut
(5,495 posts)This is a classic scam move. Mess the job up and then only partially fix it, demanding more money each time.
I'm sure the US's new flying IPhone will hold up well against things that actually work. They realize that enemies shoot back, right?
Response to jpak (Original post)
Oneironaut This message was self-deleted by its author.