Comments on: That Deaf, Dumb, and Blind Jet …

By: WR

WR — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:03:12 +0000

Mike S,
“You see what happens when you let the bright young men in the think tanks dictate military equipment specs. “
Make that the few inept young men in think tanks as truly bright young men in think thanks or elsewhere would not forget any essential specs. Please think before making a rash comment like that.

By: David

David — Fri, 11 May 2007 13:51:23 +0000

There has never been delivery of a new major military (or commercial) product like an airplane, helicopter, tank, ship, etc. that did not have some items to be improved, if not corrected. Actually, I am impressed that correction to the “millions of line of code” was accomplished in 48 hours. It is a little sad to see the world’s premier fighter — truly fifth generation — berated so heavily over an issue that could have had some consequences, but didn’t. In all mock fights to date, F-22 aircraft have not lost a single fight, to any kind or quantity of competitor(s). What I see is common in our society these days — blow off the overwhelming good of an item (or event)and look/dig for something to criticize. Such is obvious from the tone of questions in the article as well as many comments.

By: ashleyarmygirl

ashleyarmygirl — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:44:28 +0000

I LOVE THIS JET!!!!!!I WANT TO FLY IT WHEN I GO INTO THE MARINE CORPS!!!! I MISS HEREING THE SOUND OF IT WHEN I WATCH THE VIDEOS OF IT!!!!!!! THATS EXTREMLY CARZZZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!111

By: Kim

Kim — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:53:36 +0000

I used to write test equipment software and firmware to test Avionics Defense systems. This “coulda”, “shoulda” been tested thoroughly before the jet went into the air. This is a failure of their test team. They should have a simulation of those conditions for the software and embedded software to “experience.” Crossing such locations are known “events” for an avionics system.
In addition, I agree with one of the other responders. There should be a back up, such as an automatic navigational system that comes on– line (maybe something like the Chelton Flight System or something of that type that can be installed completely independent of the rest of the system.) Of course I’m not sure what system they already have for backup in this jet.

By: Karen Francis Henneberger

Karen Francis Henneberger — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 02:24:19 +0000

As far as I’m concerned, I would have stopped with the invention of the wheel, all we really need is a cart to haul our excess baggage around on
we have way to much excess baggage and a note on those Iron curtains in officials offices In Washington I think bright red velvet would be exquisite.

By: Mike S

Mike S — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 22:58:42 +0000

You see what happens when you let the bright young
men in the think tanks dictate military equipment specs. Mac and his young men (who had never been
in or near the military, let alone combat).….“airplanes don’t need machine guns, that style of fighting is over. The F-4 doesn’t need anything but rockets.” Sure.
Well, we let the little men in again and you get the high techy stuff that amazes and amuses them and an aircraft the you can’t fly without a computer. When will we learn?

By: mattrmsf

mattrmsf — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 22:32:53 +0000

Not quite as bad as when the Hawker Typhoon entered service in 1941. Six of the brand new, rushed into service planes engaged German Focke-Wulf’s over the channel. In the middle of the fighter, five of the six Typhoons’ tails fell off in a high g turn. Without ejection seats like they do today, the pilots never had a chance to get out against the tumbling effect.
Still, this Raptor biz seems weird. Anyone feel like they’re getting handed a bogus story from the higher ups?

By: Armchair Jet Jock

Armchair Jet Jock — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 21:23:30 +0000

From the article:
SHEPPERD: You got it. They are on a 12 to 15-hour flight from Hawaii to Okinawa, but all their systems dumped.
Hold On there pardner -
Hickam to Kadena comes up as 4040 nautical miles.
Max speed for a KC-10 is a hair over 600mph,
That comes out to 7 hours.
Using the public numbers, the f-22’s would have to refuel 5 times en route
If the F-22 could supercruise all the way, it would be only 3.5 hours.
By the way, it doesn’t look like there’s such a thing as drop-tanks for an F-22

By: Chuck

Chuck — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 20:10:57 +0000

I write ADA with my defence contractor. I find it odd that the situation was not tested in their SWIL testing.

By: Phred

Phred — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:05:34 +0000

Two million lines of hard real-time embedded code, this is not the stuff of trivial permutations but still, as one commenter said, they continued to fly despite the glitch. Our modern society is built on software–think about what we’re doing here commenting on a blog, this is 99% the result of software and 1% copper and silicon–your cool phone now has in excess of a million lines of code–and you still can’t get a signal. Setting up software test is likewise non-trivial and those who think this is funny ought to try accounting for all possible usage combinations for some trivial software based product…they might just find some humility.