4 ms·

Seriously, isn't this to be expected? I know a lot of people have a massive hate boner for the f-35 because they read a lot of shitty war blogs but for a bunch

by s_m_t 11y ago

Seriously, isn't this to be expected? I know a lot of people have a massive hate boner for the f-35 because they read a lot of shitty war blogs but for a bunch of coders to act incredulous towards this information is absolutely ridiculous. How many bugs have any of you introduced and fixed in the past week?

solipsism 11y ago
Most of us are working on things that are several orders of magnitude less likely to get someone killed than the F-35 radar code. The goal for safety-critical embedded flight code is 0 hard reboots mid-flight. Is that controversial, in your opinion? Edit: "standard for safety-critical embedded flight" was a bad word choice and wasn't what I meant. s/standard/goal
- icegreentea 11y ago
  They found a bug in testing and are fixing it. That's literally why you test critical code, in case you didn't get it right.
  - solipsism 11y ago
    I realize this. But bugs are sometimes worth talking about. Many people feel that a bug requiring a hard reboot mid-flight in a 5th generation fighter, a problem apparently not able to be overcome through multiple generations of fighters, is worth talking about. If you, or the original complainer, disagree, you're free to not participate in the conversation, but complaining about the rest of us talking about this bug is annoying. Quoting from Boeing: The F-35 has the most robust communications suite of any fighter aircraft built, to date. Components include the AESA radar, EOTS targeting system, Distributed Aperture System (DAS), Helmet Mounted Display (HMD), and the Communications, Navigation and Identification (CNI) Avionics. If by robust they mean "you can go 8 hours instead of 4 hours between hard reboots", I think that's worth talking about.
- mynameisvlad 11y ago
  As per hackuser's comment above, the mean time between reboots on most mature fighters is 8 hours, while the F-35 is 4 hours, so the standard is clearly not 0 hard reboots.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
Its not the war blogs, its the general anti-US sentiment that liberal sites tend to lean towards. But when Russia or China launch some shitshack new weapons system, suddenly everyone is applauding. Thankfully, this stuff is easy to ignore. I grew up hearing how the F-16 was a nightmare and then later the F-22. The loudmouth knee-jerk anti-US types have long been discredited. Making weapons system is difficult and having an open-ish process in a democracy where milestones and delays are publicised should be a net positive, but it just gives the nutters more ammunition to whine on the internet. Autocratic states dont have this problem as everything is secret and dissent leads to being served up polonium tea or sent to a "re-education" camp. Frankly, this forum isn't mature enough to discuess the US weapons systems because the upvoted commentary will be overly critical hit pieces bordering on propaganda or "whataboutism." No one actually wants to discuss the tech here, how difficult this kind of tech is, the long tail of military technology, etc. This is going to be a very impressive plane and one China, Iran, and Russia absolutely do not want to see in the air.
- Mikeb85 11y ago
  While Chinese defence tech is still quite far behind, Russian tech has always outperformed western expectations. Most often when we see Russian systems in a theatre of war, it's 30-40 year old, poorly maintained systems in the hands of poorly trained pilots/soldiers. I don't recall US pilots ever even going up against 80's generation planes like the MiG-29 or Su-27... Every time Russian technology, in the hands of competent people, is put on display, it does very well (witness the performance of Indian Su-30s in various wargames, and modern Russian planes in Georgia/Syria). And of course, being in tech, I'd have thought you'd have come across a few Russian programmers/engineers - for the most part they're all pretty damn awesome.
  - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
    Well, we certainly have seen an F-14 go against a MiG-23. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e3Fu2zeido https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e3Fu2zeido Anything more modern would probably have led to WWIII. I think the rest of your comment is confirmation bias: this ethnic group/nationality is good/bad depending on where you sit on the old racism spectrum. Its also worth mentioning that a lot of the advances of the SU were due to subjugating 15 independent states, usually via military means, and suddenly having a lot of more talent on tap. Often, non-Russian slavs didn't get credit for Soviet innovations due to horrific politics of communism and the Soviets system in general. So crediting "Russians" for many of these innovations is ahistoric and propagandist. The constant applause surrounding the SU is fairly amusing. If they were so great, why aren't they around today? If Russia is so chock full of greatness why is it running a falling apart economy and have degenerated into a kleptocratic petrostate that makes most middle east dictatorships look progressive and economically sound? I get it, you don't like the US and the EU, but you'd have to be crazy to appreciate the SU and Russia if your complaints are focused on the US not being "Bernie Sanders" enough for you. >Every time Russian technology, in the hands of competent people, is put on display, it does very well Well, when your targets are Ukranian women and children, yes, the casualty rate is impressive, but that's far from a real military engagement against another nation state. We have yet to see these arms tested against a proper western foe, and for good reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Ukrainian_crisis#Total_deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Ukrainian_cr...

by s_m_t 11y ago

solipsism 11y ago

Most of us are working on things that are several orders of magnitude less likely to get someone killed than the F-35 radar code. The goal for safety-critical embedded flight code is 0 hard reboots mid-flight. Is that controversial, in your opinion? Edit: "standard for safety-critical embedded flight" was a bad word choice and wasn't what I meant. s/standard/goal

icegreentea 11y ago
They found a bug in testing and are fixing it. That's literally why you test critical code, in case you didn't get it right.
- solipsism 11y ago
  I realize this. But bugs are sometimes worth talking about. Many people feel that a bug requiring a hard reboot mid-flight in a 5th generation fighter, a problem apparently not able to be overcome through multiple generations of fighters, is worth talking about. If you, or the original complainer, disagree, you're free to not participate in the conversation, but complaining about the rest of us talking about this bug is annoying. Quoting from Boeing: The F-35 has the most robust communications suite of any fighter aircraft built, to date. Components include the AESA radar, EOTS targeting system, Distributed Aperture System (DAS), Helmet Mounted Display (HMD), and the Communications, Navigation and Identification (CNI) Avionics. If by robust they mean "you can go 8 hours instead of 4 hours between hard reboots", I think that's worth talking about.
mynameisvlad 11y ago
As per hackuser's comment above, the mean time between reboots on most mature fighters is 8 hours, while the F-35 is 4 hours, so the standard is clearly not 0 hard reboots.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

Its not the war blogs, its the general anti-US sentiment that liberal sites tend to lean towards. But when Russia or China launch some shitshack new weapons system, suddenly everyone is applauding. Thankfully, this stuff is easy to ignore. I grew up hearing how the F-16 was a nightmare and then later the F-22. The loudmouth knee-jerk anti-US types have long been discredited. Making weapons system is difficult and having an open-ish process in a democracy where milestones and delays are publicised should be a net positive, but it just gives the nutters more ammunition to whine on the internet. Autocratic states dont have this problem as everything is secret and dissent leads to being served up polonium tea or sent to a "re-education" camp. Frankly, this forum isn't mature enough to discuess the US weapons systems because the upvoted commentary will be overly critical hit pieces bordering on propaganda or "whataboutism." No one actually wants to discuss the tech here, how difficult this kind of tech is, the long tail of military technology, etc. This is going to be a very impressive plane and one China, Iran, and Russia absolutely do not want to see in the air.

Mikeb85 11y ago
While Chinese defence tech is still quite far behind, Russian tech has always outperformed western expectations. Most often when we see Russian systems in a theatre of war, it's 30-40 year old, poorly maintained systems in the hands of poorly trained pilots/soldiers. I don't recall US pilots ever even going up against 80's generation planes like the MiG-29 or Su-27... Every time Russian technology, in the hands of competent people, is put on display, it does very well (witness the performance of Indian Su-30s in various wargames, and modern Russian planes in Georgia/Syria). And of course, being in tech, I'd have thought you'd have come across a few Russian programmers/engineers - for the most part they're all pretty damn awesome.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  Well, we certainly have seen an F-14 go against a MiG-23. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e3Fu2zeido https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e3Fu2zeido Anything more modern would probably have led to WWIII. I think the rest of your comment is confirmation bias: this ethnic group/nationality is good/bad depending on where you sit on the old racism spectrum. Its also worth mentioning that a lot of the advances of the SU were due to subjugating 15 independent states, usually via military means, and suddenly having a lot of more talent on tap. Often, non-Russian slavs didn't get credit for Soviet innovations due to horrific politics of communism and the Soviets system in general. So crediting "Russians" for many of these innovations is ahistoric and propagandist. The constant applause surrounding the SU is fairly amusing. If they were so great, why aren't they around today? If Russia is so chock full of greatness why is it running a falling apart economy and have degenerated into a kleptocratic petrostate that makes most middle east dictatorships look progressive and economically sound? I get it, you don't like the US and the EU, but you'd have to be crazy to appreciate the SU and Russia if your complaints are focused on the US not being "Bernie Sanders" enough for you. >Every time Russian technology, in the hands of competent people, is put on display, it does very well Well, when your targets are Ukranian women and children, yes, the casualty rate is impressive, but that's far from a real military engagement against another nation state. We have yet to see these arms tested against a proper western foe, and for good reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Ukrainian_crisis#Total_deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Ukrainian_cr...