It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

‘Software disaster’: Pentagon never even planned F-35’s gun to shoot until 2019

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:28 AM
link   
There is more to the story than what is being said, are we suppose to believe the gun wasn't tested during the testing phase?

The guy in the article is claiming that the USAF wants the A-10 replaced but from what Ive been told and read the AF wants the Hog around for awhile longer. Dogs and ponies playing in smoke with mirrors, its more likely that some classified stuff isn't working right. You know that's what they get for not doing the right thing and stuffing in a Vulcan cannon from the beginning.




posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:33 AM
link   
oh please. even if this were true; the contractor support team can load a patch in to all craft in a given facility in about an hour or two. The software for my radar was constantly being fielded software revisions and that was in the bad old days of tape cassette drives that were twice the thickness of old 8 track cassettes. The only way this might even be half way true is if it was firmware in non eraseable ROMs. even then ROMs (hello! EPROM have been around forever and superseded by Flash memory) can be extracted or whole circuit boards removed and replaced.
edit on 4-1-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Lockheed Martin apparently couldn't be bothered to write in code to connect the JSF's trigger to its gun. Air Force officials say that Lockheed Martin is telling them that it's going to take another four full years -- until 2019 -- to integrate the seemingly simple code into its web.

...

In other words, it would seem that by digitizing what was once a simple mechanical function, it appears that Lockheed Martin has warped simple machine gun trigger pulling into a decade-and-a-half development process.

But the failure grows even more bizarre, when you consider that Lockheed has working code for a nearly identical machine gun in use in other planes designed. That's right -- if the report is to be believed -- Lockheed Martin reportedly is claiming to needs more than 15+ years of coding to port the logic to fire a fixed machine gun cannon with one less barrel and a slightly different firing rate.

Daily Tech Link

edit on 1/4/2015 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: StratosFear
There is more to the story than what is being said, are we suppose to believe the gun wasn't tested during the testing phase?

The guy in the article is claiming that the USAF wants the A-10 replaced but from what Ive been told and read the AF wants the Hog around for awhile longer. Dogs and ponies playing in smoke with mirrors, its more likely that some classified stuff isn't working right. You know that's what they get for not doing the right thing and stuffing in a Vulcan cannon from the beginning.


Thats because nothing has surpassed the A10 in the CAS role. it's a specialist at throwing down utter battlefield destruction and mayhem. The critics want a multirole craft to take over the mission (really they don't even like CAS) but multirole craft usually suck at everything; erm i meant CAS.
edit on 4-1-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   
also that's probably 15 man years, which with computer support and a team can be done in a few weeks.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   
double post. please delete.

edit on 4-1-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Russia Today gives Conspiracy-Believers the kind of information they want to hear.
They are also owned and controlled by the state.
This story should raise an eyebrow, but until the story is verified by let's call it a more reputable source, I will hold off on judgement.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Here you go a good article discussing Mr. Sprey and his comments made...


Pierre Sprey's Anti-F-35 Diatribe Is Half Brilliant And Half Bull#


foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com...

It also seems he had a problem with the F-15 also...


Sprey's idea that the F-15 Eagle is a big turkey stuffed with frivolous things like a "big radar" and two engines is laughable.


Same source as above.


edit on 4-1-2015 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
An Applause to anyone who can tell us how many gun kills there have been anywhere in the world since the end of Vietnam.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   
If those in fear of the United States military want to believe we are a paper tiger, then let them if it helps them sleep better at night. They would be well acquainted with the machinery if the time to use it ever came.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Wasn't one made by an F-15 during the gulf war against a Mig? Thats the only one I know of if I'm not mistaken.

ETA: Looked it up, turns out the F-15 took out a parked jet

edit on 4-1-2015 by doompornjunkie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Zero.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   
If guns are not viable, why is the money spent on them. Never mind, I know the answer.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


An a-10 took out a helo in the gulf war with its canon.

I remember a female pilot in the 80's did also, maybe in Ethiopia.

And I think Israel did a few in the six day war.

But very few have been done with cannon.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
I'm sure if they really wanted to, they could empty out a fuel pod, stuff in a Vulcan cannon and a good few thousand rounds of ammunition for good measure.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

Because the lesson was learned in Vietnam that sometimes they are necessary. Many times an F-4 pilot got into a mess because his missiles failed and he had no gun for backup.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: grumpy64

I'm from Australia and in my youth I distinctly remember the controversy over updating our Airforce with the F-111. It seems we learnt nothing as we ordered the F35. Dont know much but a quick google search showed this



www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-01/australias-first...fighter.../5781094
Sep 30, 2014 - The first of Australia's F-35 Joint Strike Fighters has made its inaugural flight in the US where manufacturer Lockheed Martin's chief test pilot ...


Dont know if weapons testing was part of the show or not....
edit on 4-1-2015 by TheConstruKctionofLight because: spelling



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: stormcell

Fuel pod on an F-35? Might as well paint in bright red and hang a disco ball from it.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Weapons testing doesn't come until much later.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Agree about the fighter gun, it's a weapon of last resort for air to air and most pilots would bug out rather than enter a dogfight using only the gun.
But Falcons and Hornets were using their 20mm for ground strafing in Iraq and Afghanistan for close air support I saw somewhere.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join