[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Home]
4chanarchives logo
Only 1 in 6 F-35's can actually fly
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.

You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons

Thread replies: 16
Thread images: 8
File: 42215-F10-38664PR-hi.jpg (68 KB, 640x512) Image search: [Google]
42215-F10-38664PR-hi.jpg
68 KB, 640x512
http://fortune.com/2016/04/28/f-35-fails-testing-air-force/

>During a mock deployment at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho, just one of the $100 million Lockheed Martin LMT -0.15% F-35s was able to boot its software successfully and get itself airborne during an exercise designed to test the readiness of the F-35, FlightGlobal reports. Nonetheless, the Air Force plans to declare its F-35s combat-ready later this year.

>“The Air Force attempted two alert launch procedures during the Mountain Home deployment, where multiple F-35A aircraft were preflighted and prepared for a rapid launch, but only one of the six aircraft was able to complete the alert launch sequence and successfully takeoff,” Gilmore wrote. “Problems during startup that required system or aircraft shutdowns and restarts – a symptom of immature systems and software–prevented the other alert launches from being completed.”

>It’s not the only recent example of “immature systems and software” stalling progress on the $400 billion F-35 program. Aside from reports of glitches affecting both the onboard and ground-based software that drive the F-35—including bugs in the F-35’s radar software that requires periodic in-air radar reboots and maintenance software problems that could potentially ground the entire fleet—Gilmore detailed another recent example in which F-35s had to abort their test mission due to software stability issues.
>>
>>29785190
Hi Solomon, you are curiously selective with which articles you mention.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/2016/04/26/f-35-chief-software-bugs-no-longer-threat-ioc/83553372/
>>
File: 1448510932641.jpg (6 KB, 250x250) Image search: [Google]
1448510932641.jpg
6 KB, 250x250
>>29785254

>The problems are totally fixed
>But still only 1 in 6 can fly
>>
File: 1414712458774.png (4 MB, 1632x1837) Image search: [Google]
1414712458774.png
4 MB, 1632x1837
>a plane in developement is still in developement
>>
File: 1456969553433.jpg (117 KB, 1440x1080) Image search: [Google]
1456969553433.jpg
117 KB, 1440x1080
>>29785328

>A plane which was supposed to be introduced in 2010
>>
File: 1395805587686.jpg (43 KB, 255x233) Image search: [Google]
1395805587686.jpg
43 KB, 255x233
>>29785345
It wasn't.
>>
File: 1393384680870.jpg (27 KB, 540x720) Image search: [Google]
1393384680870.jpg
27 KB, 540x720
>>29785190
LOCKMARK SHILLS BTFO ONCE AGAIN

USAF ON SUCIDE WATCH
>>
File: Kelsey-Grammer[1].png (109 KB, 270x270) Image search: [Google]
Kelsey-Grammer[1].png
109 KB, 270x270
We've been here before.
>>
>>29785290
Tell us when that happened so you can put in context.
>>
>>29785440
An HBO comedy with no factual basis?
>>
>fatnics itt
>>
>>29785510
Was it stage 3 that was bartering?
>>
>Sergeant what are you doing?
>I'm emailing the media to tell them how the New Weapon Project is going, sir.
>You do realize our enemies read those articles don't you, Sergeant?
>W-what should we do then, sir?
>Tell them the New Weapon is completely FUBAR and that we struggle every day to get out of testing phase. Then they'll start under-estimating us.
>But wouldn't that make the Citizenry lose faith in our abilities, sir?

>Please, no citizen is stupid enough to believe that a military would publicize every single fuck-up on a project and not hide anything.
>Right?

Fuck you people are morons.
>>
>>29785290
Hasn't been rolled out to the fleet yet.

Also, >>29785190 the title is wrong; 1 in 6 could do an alert launch. The other 5 could take off, but needed some extra time to reboot systems, which is far less of a problem on the new version of the software.
>>
File: excuseme.gif (3 MB, 480x270) Image search: [Google]
excuseme.gif
3 MB, 480x270
>>29785190
>$400 billion F-35 program

goddamn.
>>
>>29786723
Over about 30 years of production; about $100 billion has been spent so far on ~230 jets + R&D.
Thread replies: 16
Thread images: 8

banner
banner
[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at [email protected] with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.
DMCA Content Takedown via dmca.com
All images are hosted on imgur.com, send takedown notices to them.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.