somewhere, PukinDog is laughing...
Posted on 02/14/2014 4:28:52 PM PST by ilovesarah2012
The $397 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program suffers from such severe software problems that aircraft could not conduct operational missions today, the Pentagon’s chief tester said in his annual report to Congress, which was released to the public yesterday.
Contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. develops the F-35 software in three blocks. The first is designed to support training, followed by a second block for initial combat operations. The final block for full combat operations is expected in 2019, 23 years after the Pentagon signed the contract to acquire just under 2,500 of the aircraft for all four services.
The report from J. Michael Gilmore, director of operational test and evaluation for Defense, said Lockheed Martin delivered an incremental version of the Block 2 F-35 software for installation on the Air Force F-35A variant and the Marine Corps F-35B vertical takeoff aircraft in early 2013, but that software was far from complete.
(Excerpt) Read more at defenseone.com ...
Thats video game footage....
That’s not real. It’s a video capture from Battlefield 2.
We should stop throwing more and more money down this bottomless pit.
Kill it. Kill it now, kill it good and hard, and be done with it.
I’m on the record here at FR as having promised you all that the costs of this white elephant would go through the roof. It was inevitable merely as an engineering project - never mind the issue of being a fighter, or being a defense project for allied nations, etc. The engineering aspects of this project make it 100% certain that it will be an expensive failure.
And the F-23.
Sure fooled me and my friend that sent it to me - thanks......
somewhere, PukinDog is laughing...
We are so scr**ed.
I hear what you're saying; from my POV though it seems that design is what's skimped on in "the industry" -- granted, I've never been involved in a safety-critical codebase such as aviation, but there seems to be a lot of we don't have time to do it right, we need to do it quick
mentality that seems to discourage up-front planning. (Indeed, it seems to discourage using the right-tool-for-the-job and encouraging a "sledgehammer"/continuous-debugging method of development and discourage training.)
I'm very impressed/excited about the new Ada 2012 standard which lets you do something like this:
-- SSN format: ###-##-####
Subtype Social_Security_Number is String(1..11)
with Dynamic_Predicate =>
(for all Index in Social_Security_Number'Range =>
(case Index is
when 4|7 => Social_Security_Number(Index) = '-',
when others => Social_Security_Number(Index) in '0'..'9'
)
);
go stale.
Nobody wanted the P-51 when if first (A model) came out . The D model finally achieved what we wanted
I wonder how many new requirements were made while the software was being developed. I’ve seen government jobs go really bad because some idiots decided to stay abreast of the cutting edge far after the fact. The only way to really do it is to start anew each time, but the same idiots don’t understand that so they aid and abet the company in taking lots of money for a crappy product.
It’s one thing to have a crappy healthcare website, it’s another to have a crappy F-35.
for every P-51 there is an XF-85
You’ll want to make sure you use assertions enabled; the new design-by-contract aspects use the assertion mechanism.
I typically use “-O3 -gnat12 -gnato -fstack-check -gnatE -gnata” as my switches.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.