Lockheed's F-22 Raptor Gets Zapped by International Date Line

DailyTech LLC ^ | February 26, 2007 | Brandon Hill

[narby]

If the enemy was able to knock out all operating satellites in the area of operations how well would the F22 hold up?

Not being able to acquire GPS sats is different from a software bug induced crash. No GPS maping system launches with GPS sats being recieved, it takes at least a few seconds, or maybe a minute or two, so I seriously doubt the lack of GPS would kill the thing entirely.

Oh. They would also start the aircraft in shelters on occasion, where GPS would never penetrate, so obviously it would run systems without it.

[narby]

You do what for a living?

yeah yeah yeah. Operating keyboard before engaging brain....

[I'm always screwing up lat/lon (have to think of that book "Longitude" to keep them straight) but where did I come up with +-190???]

[CougarGA7]

Its a good thing they didn't cross the international date line at midnight at the start of the millennium, the plane would have blown up.

Thats the thing with software. For systems like this the code gets so large that even with all the white box testing and review, things can get overlooked. Unfortunately in this case the black box testing can prove to be fatal.

It is real fortunate that they had good weather and a tanker to guide them home.

[narby]

Although now I see other replies which doubt this really ever happened.

For a fact all the F-22s returned, and news reports the day after it happened said it was a "software issue". I saw some blogs by military types talking about the "date line" issue before the story hit the media, so I wouldn't doubt it happened.

If this did happen, it would be exactly the kind of thing the military would *not* publicize. Not only because of the embarrassment, but also to prevent tipping off the world about our weaknesses. I saw a video when I was in the Air Force 25 years ago that gave a very similar scenario as a reason why even apparently trivial information can tip off the bad guys about major components of our capability, and thus these "little" things are often classified.

[JRios1968]

At least give out a Tard ping! lolz

[lowbridge]

Get a new job. I worked with that company (those companies) for years and they were always first class.

Yeah, if you work for them. When they took over my facility, my contract came with it much to their irritation. I am not a Lockheed employee, hence they treat me like dirt. (They have been caught telling little white lies about me to my employers. Too bad for Lockheed I had witnesses which consisted of their very own employees)

[lowbridge]

I'd rather not go into specific details. Suffice to say that they took over my facility, and when they did that, my outside contract came with it, much to their irritation. I am not a Lockheed employee, hence they treat me like dirt. They have stabbed me in the back.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Apparently Lockheed needs to teach the systems guys a new phrase..."Code Review".

What percentage of errors are found in code review? If it's more than 10% then code reviews are worthwhile. With millions of lines of code errors, will get through. The more subtle, the harder they are to find. That's why the only acceptable means of validation is thorough real world testing.

Nature sides with the hidden flaw.

[ChadGore]

[Robert A Cook PE]

Nah.

Jest remember that Magellan took the long way around to cross the international date line.... 8<)

[CarryaBigStick]

...As to why local time would be used for anything on such a system, I don't know, but Windows does base some things off local midnight...

The F-22 uses Windows!?...Oh, nooooooo, we're all dooooooomed!!

[xarmydog]

I was curious to that also.What would happen if an electromagnetic pulse were to hit.Common sense dictates some type of backup system should or would be in place it would seem.Ah,that confusing common sense thing again.My bad!

[Beckwith]

Ha, ha, ha, code review?

If you find idiosyncrasies and logic flaws in a code review -- it's too late.

Settle back for 20 years of software maintenance.

Maintenance: Putting the stuff in that the up-front geniuses missed.

[agent_delta]

LOL!!!

[Steve Van Doorn]

Thanks, I am wondering in general how dependent our military is on satellites today.

”Not being able to acquire GPS sats is different from a software bug induced crash. No GPS maping system launches with GPS sats being recieved, it takes at least a few seconds, or maybe a minute or two, so I seriously doubt the lack of GPS would kill the thing entirely.”

I understand it is different but wouldn’t the end result be similar without a satellite to give them the information they need, many of their systems would be un-operational.

Would the plane be able to hold up in a dog fight basically could they even find their targets without a satellite? I would assume being a stealth aircraft they wouldn’t want to use on-board radar.

I would suspect in about 10 years (give or take a few years) taking out satellites will not be a difficult task by China and Russia given they both have the capability today.

Thanks again

[bpjam]

I don't mind 'doubting the veracity' of something but I'll be damned if I'm going to 'don't the varsity'! Unless I'm stuned, of course. (if this isn't funny yet, search for 'stuned' on FR)

[Robert A Cook PE]

I see it definitely possible:

One group gets a "pure" timing signal from the satellite (since these things don't fly in a tunnel (.... THINKING: What will happen when they have to park them under bomb-proof shelters in caves, then be ready to launch quickly?) so the other software and control people use that satellite signal to coordinate the weapons systems, - which gets radar, display, flight control and sensors all tied in one loop.

Hanging by a thread of a single timing signal. And, usually, you WANT only one timing signal when flying by wire at 2x speed of sound.

But when that signal gets a hiccup... The flight controls and displays and radar gets the same hiccup.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

If you find idiosyncrasies and logic flaws in a code review -- it's too late.

I don't think so. Code reviews are valuable when a number of people can bring their experiences to bear. The idea is that it's best to find problems early... cheaper and easier to fix.

I forget the statistics, but I think something like one in four lines of code have an initial bug.

Unit testing catches most of them.

Integration testing the majority of remainder.

Acceptance testing some more.

Operational test and evaluation, a tiny few more.

The on rushing ground reveals the ones you've missed.

[Steve Van Doorn]

I am sorry, I am not talking about a hiccup. I am asking about how dependent our military is on satellites today. In a ‘what if’ scenario.

[Old Professer]

The Lacrosse Stripper (does she have a name?) is good reason why you 'don't the varsity', I guess.