7 ms·

Software issues are common in jet fighter aviation. Here are two little known, but potentially deadly issues: * 1986 F-16 Inversion when flying over the equato

by 16s 14y ago

Software issues are common in jet fighter aviation. Here are two little known, but potentially deadly issues: * 1986 F-16 Inversion when flying over the equator - Flying the F-16 in simulation over the equator, the computer got confused and instantly flipped the plane over, killing the pilot [in simulation]. And since it can fly forever upside down, it would do so until it ran out of fuel. Note: some claim this is a myth and to my knowledge, it has never been verified, but I tend to believe it could have happened. Source - http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/3.44.html http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/3.44.html * 2007 F-22 Complete systems failure over International Date Line - At the international date line, all systems dumped and when I say all systems, I mean all systems, their navigation, part of their communications, their fuel systems. They were—they could have been in real trouble. They were with their fuel tankers. The tankers – they tried to reset their systems, couldn’t get them reset. The tankers brought them back to Hawaii by visual, line of sight flight. Source - http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-squadron-shot-down-by-the-international-date-line-03087/ http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-squadron-shot-down-b...

petitmiam 14y ago
My lecturer for 'Software Testing' at uni used to bring up that first issue. He was a total ball-breaker with assignments and exams, but you knew it was for a good reason.
majormajor 14y ago
The first one, if it's real, confuses me: how does the plane turning upside down kill the pilot?
- noonespecial 14y ago
  Fighter planes are very different than any other craft "driven" by people. They are so fast and so strong that if you give the stick a good yank while flying one, the forces involved will kill you (unless of course good fly-by-wire software knows your limits and intervenes). Its not at all far fetched to assume if the plane suddenly rolled at its maximum rate that it would pull the pilot's spine apart.
  - WildUtah 14y ago
    Which points to the real problem with the F35 and all next generation fighter planes. It's not software, relationships, rivalries, cost, or maintenance. It's obsolescence. By the time there's a full wing of F-35s in regular service, there will be drones capable of routinely shooting them down. The advantage of not needing to coddle a pilot and having all possible G-forces available will make even cheap drones distributed by corrupt Chinese or Russian backchannels superior to the best fighter jets in the world within ten years. And a whole wing of such drones will soon come cheaper than a single F35. Obama should do the same to the F-35 as he did to the F-22 and cancel it before it wastes more money.
    - noonespecial 14y ago
      Such drones have existed for some time now. They are colloquially known as "surface to air missiles".
      - InclinedPlane 14y ago
        The logistics of aerial domination are pretty much the same whether you're talking drones or piloted craft. If you are the attacker you use ECM and missile/bomb bombardment to take out the radar/SAM stations. Meanwhile, you try to destroy as much of the enemy's airplanes on the ground as possible. If you have superiority in the air you take advantage of it, destroying every enemy thing that flies whether it is piloted by a crew or not. The biggest advantage that drones have is a tactical one. And perhaps a manufacturing/logistical one if they can be produced in greater numbers, though at present that is not the case. Tactics only apply if there is a logistical balance sufficient to allow for a roughly even battlefield.
        Daniel_Newby 14y ago
        The biggest advantage of drones is you get to reuse the pilot. The second biggest advantage is you get to use a team instead of one pilot.
- DrStalker 14y ago
  An F-16 can turn fast enough to make the pilot black out of suffer severe injuries; one of the things the software does is restrict G-forces to acceptable levels. As potentially terrible as this bug was I've never seen any indication of where in the development life cycle it happened; it could have happened early on when it wasn't meant to be working yet (i.e.: working enough to fly, but with no handling of edge conditions worked on) or it could have happened in final testing of a release candidate.
MichaelGG 14y ago
What kind of codepath causes systems to die when crossing the date line? Shouldn't all times be in UTC, and certainly any change of timezone is a display-only issue? What would be the point of using local timezones for any "systems" type stuff?
- ktizo 14y ago
  My guess would be that the problem isn't time, but rather the code dealing with the position of the plane in longitude as it crosses over. Perhaps it spat out an unexpected negative, or even something undefined.
  - don_draper 14y ago
    I would think more than half the code for these types of systems is exception handling.
anovikov 14y ago
There have been a very similar but actually happening lock-up of all systems of F-16 and same with soviet Su-24 when flying below zero altitude. Designers haven't looked at the map to find out there are plenty of places with ground much below sea level, and it happened for Israeli F-16 near Dead Sea, and for soviet Su-24 near Caspian Sea, when they tried low-level flight.

by 16s 14y ago

petitmiam 14y ago

My lecturer for 'Software Testing' at uni used to bring up that first issue. He was a total ball-breaker with assignments and exams, but you knew it was for a good reason.

majormajor 14y ago

The first one, if it's real, confuses me: how does the plane turning upside down kill the pilot?

noonespecial 14y ago
Fighter planes are very different than any other craft "driven" by people. They are so fast and so strong that if you give the stick a good yank while flying one, the forces involved will kill you (unless of course good fly-by-wire software knows your limits and intervenes). Its not at all far fetched to assume if the plane suddenly rolled at its maximum rate that it would pull the pilot's spine apart.
- WildUtah 14y ago
  Which points to the real problem with the F35 and all next generation fighter planes. It's not software, relationships, rivalries, cost, or maintenance. It's obsolescence. By the time there's a full wing of F-35s in regular service, there will be drones capable of routinely shooting them down. The advantage of not needing to coddle a pilot and having all possible G-forces available will make even cheap drones distributed by corrupt Chinese or Russian backchannels superior to the best fighter jets in the world within ten years. And a whole wing of such drones will soon come cheaper than a single F35. Obama should do the same to the F-35 as he did to the F-22 and cancel it before it wastes more money.
  - noonespecial 14y ago
    Such drones have existed for some time now. They are colloquially known as "surface to air missiles".
    - InclinedPlane 14y ago
      The logistics of aerial domination are pretty much the same whether you're talking drones or piloted craft. If you are the attacker you use ECM and missile/bomb bombardment to take out the radar/SAM stations. Meanwhile, you try to destroy as much of the enemy's airplanes on the ground as possible. If you have superiority in the air you take advantage of it, destroying every enemy thing that flies whether it is piloted by a crew or not. The biggest advantage that drones have is a tactical one. And perhaps a manufacturing/logistical one if they can be produced in greater numbers, though at present that is not the case. Tactics only apply if there is a logistical balance sufficient to allow for a roughly even battlefield.
      - Daniel_Newby 14y ago
        The biggest advantage of drones is you get to reuse the pilot. The second biggest advantage is you get to use a team instead of one pilot.
DrStalker 14y ago
An F-16 can turn fast enough to make the pilot black out of suffer severe injuries; one of the things the software does is restrict G-forces to acceptable levels. As potentially terrible as this bug was I've never seen any indication of where in the development life cycle it happened; it could have happened early on when it wasn't meant to be working yet (i.e.: working enough to fly, but with no handling of edge conditions worked on) or it could have happened in final testing of a release candidate.

MichaelGG 14y ago

What kind of codepath causes systems to die when crossing the date line? Shouldn't all times be in UTC, and certainly any change of timezone is a display-only issue? What would be the point of using local timezones for any "systems" type stuff?

ktizo 14y ago
My guess would be that the problem isn't time, but rather the code dealing with the position of the plane in longitude as it crosses over. Perhaps it spat out an unexpected negative, or even something undefined.
- don_draper 14y ago
  I would think more than half the code for these types of systems is exception handling.

anovikov 14y ago

There have been a very similar but actually happening lock-up of all systems of F-16 and same with soviet Su-24 when flying below zero altitude. Designers haven't looked at the map to find out there are plenty of places with ground much below sea level, and it happened for Israeli F-16 near Dead Sea, and for soviet Su-24 near Caspian Sea, when they tried low-level flight.