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

a reply to: JimTSpock

And the F-35 isn't going to be in that role for a long time. IOC for the Marines might happen this year, but that still doesn't give a full weapons envelope. They won't be fully cleared on weapons until after 2019 anyway.

I think the point is not yes/no to having a gun on the airframe - it's why it's such a clusterf in the software. What else will be screwed up. What does it say about development? Having spent a good bit of my life in software development, I have to wonder how screwed up this whole thing might be.

a reply to: roadgravel

Because it's a lot easier to bring the software along slowly, in batches than all at once. This is the most complex coding ever put in an aircraft anywhere. By batching it you can develop the aircraft as the software is being done.

a reply to: APT1Yksnidnak

So that means that Canada still won't see any f-35's for another four to five years then? What a rip off. We spent hundreds of millions on these jets and we have nothing to show for it..

What a waist of tax payer money.

a reply to: Zaphod58

How many air to air gun kills since Vietnam (1975)? That's a tough one but the IAF has a few with their F-16s I think?

Since 1973, American and European (Western) made fighters have been engaged in air combat at least 154 times. Air battles have occurred from the Bekaa Valley and Gulf War to around the world during counter-guerrilla operations in Venezuela and Thailand. The Fighting Falcon has accumulated 72 air-to-air kills with no air-to-air losses except for one fratricide loss by the Pakistani Air Force when an AIM-9L switched-lock onto a wingman. Engagements and Kills were recorded throughout more than 30,000 world-wide air-to-air and air-to-ground combat sorties.

For western fighter on the overall, the 154 engagements resulted in at least 210 confirmed kills with two combat losses and four fratricides. Note that the 72 F-16 kills represents 47% of that number. The fourth fratricide just recently occurred between two Japanese F-15s when one downed his leader with an AIM-9L during a training mission. There were 23 x M-61 gun kills, 2 x 30mm gun kills, 45 x AIM-7 Sparrow kills from F-15, F-18, & F-14s, 3 x AIM-120 AMRAAM kills from the F-16 and 1 x unfortunate fratricide AIM-120 Kill by an F-15C on a Blackhawk Helicopter, and 127 x IR missile kills from all aircraft utilizing either AIM-9 Sidewinder, Magic 550, or Python missiles. There are 3 x AIM-54 Phoenix Kills recorded by the Iranian Air Fore F-14A's during the First Gulf War. There were also three kills from air-to-ground munitions (aircraft airborne) and one maneuvering suicide along with a bailout that was credited as a kill.

www.f-16.net...

According to the above, 23 M-61 gun air to air kills since '73.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I'm well versed in software development.

And americans are so free than no one can do a thing about the wasted $400bn spent so far because its a "National Secret" you see but a lot of jewish owned corporations are laughting all the way to the bank.

Time to remove Zionist control of the USA by force because talking is not working

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: JimTSpock

And the F-35 isn't going to be in that role for a long time. IOC for the Marines might happen this year, but that still doesn't give a full weapons envelope. They won't be fully cleared on weapons until after 2019 anyway.

So thats a 30 year project in total if the dates don't slip even more which makes its out of date by the time it goes into mass production and no one thinks it worth the price tag but our MPs are being forced to buy a few by deals done behind closed doors in Europe were bribes are used and blackmail if that does not work.

Nice excuse about the software and the NHS tried that one too after they had wasted £5bn in the UK and the software got thrown in the bin.

So thats a 30 year project in total if the dates don't slip even more

Thank goodness the country had a different system during world war 2. But then, it was a different time, different people, different values.

a reply to: snypwsd

They weren't going to anyway. It always takes a few years from contract to delivery.

Just put in a piece of wire from the trigger to the gun, problem solved. This is from RT news so it's most likely complete BS anyway.

a reply to: VirusGuard

And even Russian and Chinese programs take a decade or two to go from design to operational. Funny that's acceptable but this isn't.

a reply to: roadgravel

Then you should understand the complexity involved in code this size.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: roadgravel

Then you should understand the complexity involved in code this size.

Also means it doesn't take 4 years for that function either.

The MIC has learned how to get the most from their business dealings.

a reply to: roadgravel

And when you're dealing with some of the things they are it takes over a year. There are three different aircraft with different systems on board. That means different code.

The gun software is part of the block for 2019. There are at least two upgrades between now and then. It's fairly low priority.

To everybody saying the US should cancel the F-35, the US the it's allies NEED the F-35 badly. It brings so many capabilities to the table that the airplane's gun is an afterthought right now.

I bet the US are going to scrap the F-35 program after 500 units have been built. And they are going to use the same argument as they did for the F111.

And when you're dealing with some of the things they are it takes over a year. There are three different aircraft with different systems on board. That means different code.

And you know this because ... you have developed program code on projects?

People can believe what they want but there is a 99.99% chance the US government is being seen as a cash cow by the MIC. Nothing new there.

People are so naive.

a reply to: roadgravel

I know this because I know the F-35. There is some overlap but you're talking about writing huge amounts of code for three types of planes at the same time. And it's code for new systems that have never been installed on any aircraft before.

I'm far from naive so don't even trot that crap out.

You believe that all the software for the 3 planes is completely different? That would be very bad from a development or support point of view. But from a billing point of view, great.

Does a person need a completely different version of Windows on two computers because the display monitor or printers are different. No, just drivers for instance.