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: 5
7
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 01:54 AM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

It's not completely unique, as I've said repeatedly. The base flight and sensor systems are the same. There are huge differences beyond those.

So enlighten us then. How long would it take you to write triple redundant code, for three aircraft with radically different systems covering 8 million lines of code, probably half of which is required to be unique per type.




posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: James1982

Because it uses a CCIP system to target lead, plus compensate for vibration, aircraft speed, G forces, systems to raise the gun into firing position, etc. It's not just a matter of "pull the trigger and it shoots".



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: James1982

It's not just the actual firing of the gun that the code is for, but all the supporting aspects of employing the gun as a weapon. For example, when the pilot selects the gun for use, different targeting displays come up depending on if it's going to be used in a dogfight or for a gun run on the ground. Information will pop up on the HUD(helmet display in this case). Then when the pilot actually pulls the trigger the plane has to open the door, pop out the gun, and actually fire rounds all in the span of milliseconds. All of this is controlled by the computer.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 11:49 AM
link   
No it's the VSTOL which is completely different.

The F-4 was a good Navy & AF plane.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

The C has some huge differences in software too. When the landing system is engaged, the stick controls flaps and IIRC throttle settings, as well as interfacing with the carrier landing system.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   
what kind of gun are we talking here



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: deadlyliquidx

GAU-22/A four barrel Gatling gun.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58




GAU-22/A four barrel Gatling gun.


That is one scary gun...




posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 02:26 PM
link   
And anyone interested in the Gun itself and how it works with the F-35...

www.dtic.mil...

Enjoy...

Here is another one...

www.dtic.mil...
edit on 5-1-2015 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Here is a PDF by Lloyd Huff and George Novak of Lockheed Martin on Performance-Based Software Sustainment for the F-35.


Maintaining maximum commonality of this software across all variants and versions is key to achieving program affordability goals



posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

And they CAN'T achieve anywhere near 100% commonality. It's not possible with the differences.



posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Of course not a 100%. never claimed it was or should be.

I am just showing that much of the code is the same, shared by the variants. It makes perfect sense from the software point of view and cost, just as LM stated.

Nothing wrong with that, in fact, it is the better way for it to be done.



posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

And where has anyone said it doesn't have commonality? I've said several times the basic software is the same, but there are huge differences between the three that have resulted in the time it takes to develop the full version being extended.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   
I know im late to the party, and i skipped a few pages so it may be asked already, but since when do you need a gun to support CAS missions? Granted its a nice capability, especially on the A-10, but B-1's and B-52's have been performing CAS missions for the last decade in Afghanistan and they dont have a gun. Just a bunch of precision guided bombs to rain terror on people. Just a thought...



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: boomer135

That's exactly the point I brought up too. It's nice to have, and it's handy for close contact situations, but it's not entirely necessary.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join