3 ms·

Wow, that’s massive news. Could you share a link to your source please?

mrtksn 7y ago
Here: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pentagon-f35/f-35-logistics-system-to-be-reinvented-and-renamed-official-says-idUSKBN1ZE00D https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pentagon-f35/f-35-log...
- flatfilefan 7y ago
  Thanks! It would be interesting to know whether purchasing countries will get sole authority in flight package definition in contrast to the ALIS where it had to be signed off in US for every sortie afaik.
  - teruakohatu 7y ago
    The US military signs off on every flight?!?! Surely not, but if so sounds like a great business model.
    - positr0n 7y ago
      IIRC it was reported like that by some outlets several months ago but the truth is more like US DoD personnel had to sign some keys to get interop with friendly fighters... Communications or some other kind of data sharing, I forget.
      - GhettoMaestro 7y ago
        Tactical nets (keys) always must be loaded before ops.
      - p_l 7y ago
        No, that was for loading IFF keys for Austrian fighters, a completely unrelated issue. With F-35, the data packages necessary for operation in given theater are generated in one or two laboratories in USA, and so far there were no guarantees of anyone getting one of their own. In addition, ALIS was dependant on Lockheed-maintained servers in USA by design, something that made it problematic even for US forces as the amounts of data that had to be transferred were too big for ship-based units - and you needed to sync at least once a month to ensure the aircraft is capable of flying.
      - nwrk 7y ago
        Saw/read somewhere same.
    - flatfilefan 7y ago
      “Another scenario theorised by analysts involves the US Government using the F-35’s enabling systems to “punish” a non-cooperative ally, potentially by withdrawing software upgrades or feeding information that would ground the entire fleet.“ https://defence.nridigital.com/global_defence_technology_mar19/back_door_for_hackers_f-35_cyber_weaknesses_in_the_spotlight https://defence.nridigital.com/global_defence_technology_mar... There’s more. I just couldn’t find it quickly.
      - AdamJacobMuller 7y ago
        I don't see an issue with that. While I understand the need (and the benefit) for selling arms abroad, having the ability to defang them if they try to use them against us seems very useful and seems like it could even expand the countries we're willing to sell to. I think about this every time I hear about Iran flying F-14s
        guiriduro 7y ago
        Kind of defeats the market for your product though. Assuming the US govt is going to stay non-rogue for the lifetime of the product you are buying to defend yourself against all threats, might be a tough call.
        noir_lord 7y ago
        In fairness if the US went totally rogue their are few nations they couldn't wreck in short order outside of the ones with a credible ballistic missile program and nuclear warheads. In that hypothetical no-one wins. I'm sure there is an obscure plan for that somewhere in say the UK MoD filing cabinets. I know the US war gamed invading Canada as both a training exercise and contingency plan.
        dTal 7y ago
        Hopefully they've updated the obscure plan in the years since they gave away the entire carrier air fleet to the US marines, and ordered US F-35s to replace them. Assuming competence in the halls of the MoD these days seems to be naive.

Here: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pentagon-f35/f-35-logistics-system-to-be-reinvented-and-renamed-official-says-idUSKBN1ZE00D https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pentagon-f35/f-35-log...

flatfilefan 7y ago
Thanks! It would be interesting to know whether purchasing countries will get sole authority in flight package definition in contrast to the ALIS where it had to be signed off in US for every sortie afaik.
- teruakohatu 7y ago
  The US military signs off on every flight?!?! Surely not, but if so sounds like a great business model.
  - positr0n 7y ago
    IIRC it was reported like that by some outlets several months ago but the truth is more like US DoD personnel had to sign some keys to get interop with friendly fighters... Communications or some other kind of data sharing, I forget.
    - GhettoMaestro 7y ago
      Tactical nets (keys) always must be loaded before ops.
    - p_l 7y ago
      No, that was for loading IFF keys for Austrian fighters, a completely unrelated issue. With F-35, the data packages necessary for operation in given theater are generated in one or two laboratories in USA, and so far there were no guarantees of anyone getting one of their own. In addition, ALIS was dependant on Lockheed-maintained servers in USA by design, something that made it problematic even for US forces as the amounts of data that had to be transferred were too big for ship-based units - and you needed to sync at least once a month to ensure the aircraft is capable of flying.
    - nwrk 7y ago
      Saw/read somewhere same.
  - flatfilefan 7y ago
    “Another scenario theorised by analysts involves the US Government using the F-35’s enabling systems to “punish” a non-cooperative ally, potentially by withdrawing software upgrades or feeding information that would ground the entire fleet.“ https://defence.nridigital.com/global_defence_technology_mar19/back_door_for_hackers_f-35_cyber_weaknesses_in_the_spotlight https://defence.nridigital.com/global_defence_technology_mar... There’s more. I just couldn’t find it quickly.
    - AdamJacobMuller 7y ago
      I don't see an issue with that. While I understand the need (and the benefit) for selling arms abroad, having the ability to defang them if they try to use them against us seems very useful and seems like it could even expand the countries we're willing to sell to. I think about this every time I hear about Iran flying F-14s
      - guiriduro 7y ago
        Kind of defeats the market for your product though. Assuming the US govt is going to stay non-rogue for the lifetime of the product you are buying to defend yourself against all threats, might be a tough call.
        noir_lord 7y ago
        In fairness if the US went totally rogue their are few nations they couldn't wreck in short order outside of the ones with a credible ballistic missile program and nuclear warheads. In that hypothetical no-one wins. I'm sure there is an obscure plan for that somewhere in say the UK MoD filing cabinets. I know the US war gamed invading Canada as both a training exercise and contingency plan.
        dTal 7y ago
        Hopefully they've updated the obscure plan in the years since they gave away the entire carrier air fleet to the US marines, and ordered US F-35s to replace them. Assuming competence in the halls of the MoD these days seems to be naive.