Air force is not so advanced

I work on an aircraft in the Air Force that scrounges spare parts (at least for the inside). on already exsiting systems. I do not know about the actual airframe parts tho more than likely it's scrounged from junkyards. The computers on the inside run mostly on Linux, with some using red hat, and very few running windows 2000. (the newest piece of equipment for me runs windows xp, but that is just one system). In my career field if you are one of the brightest they send you down to the "Det" to help design, build, and procure wire, cable, switches and such.

that last system that runs XP there are only 8 or so of with 4 of them being used overseas, 2 for backups out there, one being used on the testbed. (no clue where the others is)

i guess the point of this thread is for me to brag that i work with stuff like this, but the other part is to show all the people that the government with it's "super advanced technology" really isnt all that advanced.

imagine if you could, giving some people geek.com and newegg.com accounts, saying you have X amount of dollars to build the system, but it has to do this. that is how the airforce rolls.

the linux systems are like the $400 computers you buy at wallmart, while most of the red hat stuff, i'd like to bring home, throw on a windows emulator and use as my gaming system. It's the same stuff, but handcrafted by nerds.

The basic fact is that it takes a great length of time to design and build a new aircraft. Somewhere in that process the computers and software have to be developed and the design frozen so that the aircraft actually gets built. Therefore anything in service at any given time is much less capable than the latest version of a PC which takes far less time to design, develop and bring to the market.

With some aircraft taking around 15-20 years to bring from concept to 'in-service' it is not surprising that the electronic technology in them is way behind your PC.

This obviously affects everyone, so the term technology, in this respect, is a relative term used to compare the capabilities of various in-service types rather than to compare a fighter aircraft with a PC.

One of the effects of this is that aircraft are often designed in such a way that the computer hardware and software is done late in the process (and then often lags behind airframe), because the designers have to anticipate what computer technology will exist in 10 years time. Also this is the idea behind bringing aircraft to service without their full design capabilities (the Trache system), as it allows the use of later computer capabilities.

The Winged Wombat

It's the same in any modern government, some parts are running ancient hardware and have to coax it along every day, others have equipment beyond the bleeding edge.

At the end of the day, if it works, and you can do your job with it, why replace it?

On the other hand, an advanced research department is going to need access to the latest equipment in order to be able to do their job.

It's not rocket science.. all of the time

I hope you don't work on an A-10 or an old tanker, transport, utility aircraft. As others have said some systems will only get what's required to fulfill the mission other will have equipment that really is advanced. As long as the whole works well individual parts will not all be equal.

The International Space Station runs on 386's

double post

[edit on 5-8-2007 by Midav]

Originally posted by Midav
The International Space Station runs on 386's

That has to do with radiation hardening and not because they like saving money at the Apple store. The older the chips the bigger the wires inside. The bigger the wires and the less susceptible they are to damage from high energy particles flying about or electrostatic discharge.

They also use less power and can run almost all modern operating systems.

Jon

it's not a fighter, twas my dream but alas, college is not a poor mans place.....

these planes have been around since the '60s...it's updated every two years...the next version is due out next october or so....the coolest part..hehehe....is that it's going to be liquid cooled rather than forced air...
some systems they throw on there on there in between...just because it's needed or because it's really cool....while they do have several planned out ahead....i have only seen reused parts, from previous versions and shelled out parts from other stuff.....

the ISS uses the 386?...that was the first 32 bit processor right?

Originally posted by wenfieldsecret
the ISS uses the 386?...that was the first 32 bit processor right?

Far from it, it was the first x86 32bit processor, but it was beaten to market by the Bell BELLMAC-32A, Motorola 68020 and even Intel's iAPX 432..

just to clarify....it was built first, but not distributed first?...

i'm a youngen...so the computer battles that was the late 70's thru the 90's...isnt really my forte....alls i remember is switching from Mac, to PC in circa 4th grade

Originally posted by wenfieldsecret
just to clarify....it was built first, but not distributed first?...

i'm a youngen...so the computer battles that was the late 70's thru the 90's...isnt really my forte....alls i remember is switching from Mac, to PC in circa 4th grade

Nope, it was the first 32bit x86, but other systems used different architectures long before it

Speak for yourself....I am in the Air Force and I use a $5000 machine everyday with dual 24 inch monitors....

just because the government pays 5k for it doesnt mean it's really worth that much....

I'm sure money is saved where possible...although just food for thought, I remember when the air force had to dish out a beligerant amount of money to install soap holders in one of their model bombers in the mid 90's. It caused a big stirr up/ I could only immagine the price tag for upgrading ALL models for every aircraft in use today with new computers.

Thanks for the obvious

This site can explain it a lot more eloquently than I ever could:

www.dansdata.com...

Oh and they're Intel products... not Apple.

Originally posted by wenfieldsecret
just because the government pays 5k for it doesnt mean it's really worth that much....

LOL...normally I would agree with you, but I spec'd this one out myself and ordered it from Dell...

thanks Midav, i thought you were saying for the data they collect and things they observe and for daily life fun they were using the 386's... i only mentioned Mac to show you how recently i remember for the world of computers....and that the final blow in the great Computer Wars was the switching over from Mac's to PC's by public schools....i hope that clarify's that

PokeyJoe, the operator position (up to 20 on an aircraft) is prolly available for 400-600 bucks...with only a 1.2 proccesor, 512 of ram, some weak mother board, (unsure of make)...mounted in a customized HP "tower"..(it's hard to explain)...with dual screens as well...only the bottom screens are the cheap brand...and the top screens are cooler than cool...

and then there's others...which make my gaming computer look like a weak object...i have 2 gigs of ram with a 2.7 intel dual core, 512 Nvidia graphics card, an intel motherboard(part number i cant find yet) capable of up to 8 gigs of ram in 4 slots, serial ATA connected to my 500gb hdd...

but like i said earlier, it's like they gave a bunch of nerds credit cards (with some cap i dont know, but the total coast of the new system with aircraft expenses, is 195m) and asked them to build something that works like this.....

and the point is....it's all equipment that is available to joe schmoe, just used in ways that average joe wouldnt know how....and with a larger budget than joe schmoe would pay for....

p.s. i clarified the operator position and and how many, before i just said tower.

[edit on 7-8-2007 by wenfieldsecret]

Why use a more expensive computer than you have to?

aye, that's what they do.

i was just putting down the claims that the governments using "super advanced technology to spy on you" when infact they're using regular technology to do it......

i kid about the spying on you...there's a whole list of laws we have to follow...and we are not allowed to spy on:
1. any U.S. citizen, whether born here or Naturalized
2. Any corporation started in the U.S. not owned by a foriegn anything...
3. and some others that i cant remember...

if we break it, i've seen reduction in rank for knowledgable collection....and some other punishments for unknowingly...