10 ms·

The F-35's $400k helmet

110 points by blueatlas 12y ago

curiously 12y ago
all I can say is holy crap. but wonder if this can translate into increased situational awareness or just more distractions
- klodolph 12y ago
  It may not matter, because it seems like the F-35 is designed to optimize the movement of money around the US, and it may turn out to be a very mediocre military aircraft with very nice electronics.
  - gaius 12y ago
    Similarly the British aircraft carriers are designed primarily to shovel money into the pockets of Gordon Brown's voters.
flyinglizard 12y ago
The nice thing about the public scrutiny of the F-35 program, is all this normally-classified capability information that's released out to the public to get them excited about the project. Such level of publicity of cutting edge weapon systems simply didn't exist a decade ago.
- th3iedkid 12y ago
  may be it isn't cutting edge anymore?
  - flyinglizard 12y ago
    It is cutting edge from an operational perspective. You normally want to keep the precise capabilities of weapon systems hidden from adversaries for as long as possible, as knowing these make countering the systems much easier - but not in the case of the F-35; testing information, development progress, flight envelope and technologies are routinely discussed.
    - iterationx 12y ago
      That and the plans were online and hacked by the Chinese as reported by Snowden. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/snowden-chinese-hackers-stole-f-35-fighter-jet-blueprints-article-1.2084888 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/snowden-chinese-hac...
- jonsen 12y ago
  It's a smoke screen. In the skunks they are doing a pilotless version.
  - fapjacks 12y ago
    Exactly. And probably one that can stay airborne for weeks or months and drop ordinance autonomously.
  - tsotha 12y ago
    I doubt that. To take advantage of a drone's capabilities you'd have to start from ground zero. Eventually they'll make a pilotless version the way they have pilotless F-16s. So the newer planes have something to shoot at.
knappador 12y ago
Wish there was a part of the airplane that wasn't $400k
- damon_c 12y ago
  There are probably very few parts on that plane that are cheaper than 400k.
  - tdicola 12y ago
    The pilot. I doubt fighter pilots make $400k/year. Maybe they need to ask for a raise...
    - 6d0debc071 12y ago
      Hmm, people are often more expensive than what you pay them. That's even true on civy-street, where you don't usually pay as large a propaganda costs when their employment is terminated.
    - rurounijones 12y ago
      Training a US fighter pilot costs 7 figures last I heard so they cost that to purchase, never mind maintenance fees :p
      - ckib16 12y ago
        Correct. The U.S. has many retention programs to try to keep pilots serving past their initial military commitments. There is a lot of money invested into them.
    - Tloewald 12y ago
      Pilots have been the most valuable component since WWI. The U.S. recognition of this and emphasis on rescuing downed pilots in the Pacific was a decisive advantage.
sschueller 12y ago
All this technology just to kill people. It is a sad world we live in.
- trhway 12y ago
  looking at the low tech - WWII style - war in Ukraine with a lot of civil population and property being hit, intentionally and unintentionally, i'd take high tech any time over it. For example when a full salvo (16) of unguided missiles (from "Uragan" system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-27_Uragan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-27_Uragan) with 100Kg cluster warheads rains over the center of large city (Donetsk) ... i wish that US give Ukraine high-precision weapons so those weapons would be used instead. In an interview one Russian tank gun operator was boasting "we had a good tank - it had night vision"! In 2015! He said 3 tanks out of their team's 12 were such "good" tanks (and it was regular Russian army unit, not a rebel one). Of course no laser guided, drones, or any "total battlefield awareness", etc... Just shoot whatever you see through that night vision (it was their actual order the night Ukraine forces were making their way out of Debaltsevo encirclement through the narrow bottleneck while Russian forces were shooting at them from good positions from both sides)
  - x4m 12y ago
    No modern Russain Federation tanks can be seen around Donetsk (like T-14 or at least T-90). No regular army either (except DPR army).
    - trhway 12y ago
      T-14 is still not in the army. Probably not even in the mass production yet. No T-90 has been sent to Ukraine. Modernized versions of T-72 is still in wide service with Russian army. Regular Russian army units (at the scale of several "battalion tactical groups", about 2000-3000 soldiers total) were sent to Ukraine in August 2014 - they stopped very successful Ukraine offensive by encircling significant forces near Illovaysk back then - and in January/February 2015 when they were primary force in encircling the Ukraine's forces near Debaltsevo. Combined battalion group (about 300-500) of platoons of special forces and paratroopers from various Russian units were performing major offensive in Donetsk airport in December. Officially the soldiers were "on vacation" (just happen to vacation with their guns and tanks in Ukraine). Unfortunately for wounded and killed in the January/February 2015 many of them were really put "on vacation" paperwork-wise and now they or their relatives have troubles trying to get the compensation money.
venomsnake 12y ago
> The F-35 Lightning II is one of the most complicated weapons systems ever developed, That is the opening sentence. And I will be surprised if it does not send chills down the spine of any person whose life will somehow depend on that airplane.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  Good news for those whose life depends on it's not functioning.
  - happyscrappy 12y ago
    If your life depends on this not functioning you probably have a very short lifespan.
    - PakG1 12y ago
      I believe he was talking about enemy targets.
      - unchocked 12y ago
        So was he.
trynumber9 12y ago
Coincidentally the same cost as the Eurofigher Typhoon's helmet: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/24/us-airshow-helmets-idUSTRE75N52A20110624 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/24/us-airshow-helmets... > Costing about 250,000 pounds ($400,100) apiece, the helmets will be deployed in all Typhoons, of which Eurofighter has delivered 278 to six air forces and has orders for 429 more.
- th3iedkid 12y ago
  Guess this explains why : >>"Things got so bad that in 2011 the Pentagon hired BAE Systems to build a back-up helmet in case the one in development couldn’t be rescued" Particularly why BAE for Typhoon already had it around the same time.
smegel 12y ago
> There was a latency in the video, which caused pilots motion sicknes Just visualizing this makes me feel sick. Imagine executing high-G maneuvers but seeing an image that doesn't correspond to what you feel...
- klodolph 12y ago
  Intuitively, the view already doesn't correspond to what you see, even if you're only a commercial pilot. That's why planes have attitude indicators.
  - Htsthbjig 12y ago
    It actually does most of the time, when the weather is fine. Planes have attitude indicators for when you can't see anything,e.g when you fly inside a cloud. But you don't need attitude indicators when you can see the horizon.
    - greedo 12y ago
      And modern warplanes fight in all-weather conditions as well as night ops on a normal routine basis. VFR isn't the norm for military aviation.
    - ckib16 12y ago
      Nice explanation. It can be hard to describe how pilots may or may not use certain cockpit displays depending on the situation. People tend to assume you are always using every indicator.
foo1423 12y ago
Lolz! Who does not recognize this article as complete propagandistic advertisement for a project completely over in time and budget that even fails competing with its competitors. Just besides that it's a weapon for killing people. Wake up.
- Ragnarork 12y ago
  That's still interesting technology-wise. I'm clearly not fond of military-related technology in principle, but that's an interesting piece of equipment nonetheless. What does the context change in this case? That it is (or not) a propagandistic advertisement doesn't change the fact that it's an interesting technology.
- briandear 12y ago
  Could you argue it's a weapon for saving people? Over 140 Christian students in Kenya were just massacred. An F-35 taking out the perpetrator's training camps could have save a bunch of innocent lives. One of the worst genocides in history (Rwanda) featured machetes being used to hack millions of people to death. How great would an F-35 been against the Nazis? How many millions of people could have been saved? Weapons aren't evil. Evil is what's evil. Burying one's head in the sand à la Chamberlain led to the extermination of millions. The Khymer Rouge had no advanced weaponry and slaughtered millions. In Gulf War I, 35,000 total deaths, in no small part because of smarter weapons. An entire country liberated from the Iraqis in just over a month. How would advanced weaponry have changed the game in wars across history? Even the Iraq war, which has been one of Anerica's longest has resulted in about 500,000 deaths. In the much shorter WWI it was 16 million deaths. High tech weapons save lives. Wars will always happen be it with machetes or spears or with billion dollar aircraft systems. A world without war would be nice, but there will always be evil in the hearts of men.
  - foo1423 12y ago
    Seriosly I don't believe in such buls... anymore. Save brave chrisian people. Sorry, but the US has killed and totured so many brave non christian people just for politics and power-- and if you talk about christians - do you remember what a brave christian does when he gets beaten? this world will not get better as long we don't unite and overcome ancient separation by nation or believe.
vacri 12y ago
Like the plane, the helmet is enormously expensive. The cost of each custom-made helmet is more than $400,000. They've come down in price. When I did my honours at a defence science base in '96, it was using a helmet obtained "second-hand and shop-soiled" for $600k - the helmet had a monocle that projected a HUD onto your retina. Apparently it was an Apache gunship pilot's helmet.
pi-err 12y ago
From the article: > a stealthy fighter jet years that is often called a flying computer because of its more than 8 million lines of code For all the critics, all the hate vs drones and leaner fighters and bombers, the F-35 _is_ an impressive engineering feat and a turning point, especially re:software. At some point, a "Snow Leopard" version of the F-35 will turn out as a very fine piece of equipment, only possibly without the initial cost benefits expectations. Also: most learnings will probably be lost because the project will not have a decisive cost/performance advantage despite its complexity. The plane won't have a successor. Hopefully we can hear at some point of contractors who worked on its systems.
- revelation 12y ago
  Huh? You can't boot any recent system without running code from software that totals many lines more than a mere 8 million. That they keep quoting it really just makes me scared for the people working there, their worth measured by the lines they contributed to the behemoth as dictated by people that started in the 70s and never did learn anything new.
  - tormeh 12y ago
    Yes, but not made in one go. It's sad that it's a giant piece of C++ fail, but you can't fault them for ambition.
- engi_nerd 12y ago
  There's nothing they can really say that isn't already made public.
furyg3 12y ago
It's a very 'agile' project. When will it be done? Don't ask! How much will it cost? Who knows! It's going to be awesome, though! But... you don't have to wait to see how powerful this weapons system is. The F-35 completely took out the Dutch government before one even rolled off the assembly line! Note to governments: when ordering your weapons systems it may be a good idea to get a cost-per-unit quote before signing.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  > Note to governments: when ordering your weapons systems it may be a good idea to get a cost-per-unit quote before signing. What makes you think they're unhappy about the outcome?
  - furyg3 12y ago
    Well considering parliament dissolved over the issue I can imagine there's a lot to be desired. However, like construction projects, the original politician/official get the credit for signing the contract and their successor actually has to deal with the terms.
    - hencq 12y ago
      I'm curious which government you think collapsed over the F-35. I can't think of any. Granted, there have been a lot of debates about the JSF program in Dutch politics, but unless I'm suffering from faulty memory none caused the government to collapse.
- angdis 12y ago
  A quote for something like this would be a waste of time. The "rules" are obviously different military hardware projects that have strategic significance: you either need it or you don't and if you have to ask "how much?", you can't afford it !
- rayiner 12y ago
  Defense systems go over-budget for the same reason software projects do--it's all custom and custom development is unpredictable. It's not like these companies can sell the U.S. stuff they had lying around having developed it for another customer. I used to do development for a DOD project. At the outset of the project, it's often not clear what you're trying to do will even work. It might not even be clear what you should be trying to do. It's an iterative process of the government telling the engineers what it wants, and the engineers going back to the government with what can be done. That's not the say that projects like the F-35 weren't badly managed. But even well-managed defense projects are unpredictable. The world just looks very different when you can't count on massive consumer volumes to amortize R&D. Imagine going to Apple and saying "we need you to develop the iPhone, and oh by the way we will order at most a few thousand of these. What'll be the unit cost?"
kriro 12y ago
For a defence company Lockheed Martin is actually a surprisingly good* player in the VR/AR community and they always have somewhat sane people at conferences etc. Interestingly they often mentioned fighter pilot helmets as the best state of the art AR technology but when asked about specifics the answer was usually..."classified, sorry" which I always thought was kind of sad. They were quite involved in the Virtual World project which is open sourced: https://github.com/virtual-world-framework/vwf https://github.com/virtual-world-framework/vwf *from my perspective as someone who thinks building weapons technology is pretty bad and something I'd never do personally
- ohitsdom 12y ago
  Per the article, the helmet isn't built by Lockheed, it's built by Rockwell Collins.
skeuomorf 12y ago
While the technology in this helmet may turn out to be pretty great, I still can't view the project as a whole (The F-35) as more than a failure. It's taken them a lot of time and money to develop a mediocre aircraft, here's Pierre Sprey's opinion on it (Designer of the F-16) "The F-35 was born of an exceptionally dumb piece of airforce PR spin" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw
- smackfu 12y ago
  http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/pierre-spreys-anti-f-35-diatribe-is-half-brilliant-and-1592445665 http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/pierre-spreys-anti-f-35-dia...
  - Goronmon 12y ago
    I love one of the comments to that article that basically says that the accuracy of Sprey's statements don't matter as long as he is right about the F-35 not being worth the money and time invested.
- JonFish85 12y ago
  You mean a project that has to try to be everything to everyone is a failure? Say it ain't so! This isn't a shot at you, by any means; it's more a shot at a government program that was destined to fail long before it started. You can't have a 4-wheeler ATV, a tank, a station wagon and an SUV built in the same frame. There are some overlaps, sure, but trying to satisfy each requirement leads to insane conflicts that really can't be remedied in a good way. Thus you get this cludgy, massively over budget product that satisfies no one. And on top of it all, nobody wants to be the politician that's responsible for losing 10,000 jobs for his district, so it lives on.
- josefresco 12y ago
  Former pilots, and aircraft engineers are typically very proud of their machines, relish a more simple time when the pilot mattered more, and won't hesitate to bash modern technology.
Altenuvian 12y ago
I'd love to hear John Carmacks' take on this. They had to solve very similar problems when developing this helmet: extremely low-latency head & eye-tracking, managing depth-of-field, integrating multiple input streams, providing non-distracting information overlays etc.
- supercoder 12y ago
  Yeah, I'd imagine Carmack can take some of the ideas from the solutions developed in this helmet.
drussell 12y ago
Whenever I see headlines like this I think back to Batman Begins when Lucius Fox says "Bean counters didn't think a soldier's life was worth 300 grand"
encoderer 12y ago
What i see here is an old cold-warrior concerned that this fighter jet is not going to be good at "dog fighting". Who, exactly, are we supposed to be dog fighting with in next 20 years?
- crusso 12y ago
  Sadly, perhaps Russia. http://news.yahoo.com/russian-ships-old-arctic-nato-set-alarms-bells-050008186.html http://news.yahoo.com/russian-ships-old-arctic-nato-set-alar...
- ckib16 12y ago
  Nobody knows. We usually cannot predict future conflicts very well. A number of people think Stealth increases the chance for WVR engagements (WVR = Within Visual Range, or dog fighting). I'm one of them. The U.S. has a bad history of predicting the end of WVR engagements (see Vietnam and the F-4 produced without internal guns). Air superiority is definitely not a thing that can be taken for granted. But many people do because the West has dominated the skies for many decades now.
puppetmaster3 12y ago
Congrats to the sales people, I'm impressed!
discardorama 12y ago
So each helmet is custom-made. If you lose the helment (or spill coffee on it or something), then you can't fly the plane anymore? A small thing like the helmet will ground a $200M airplane?
- Daviey 12y ago
  Traditional helmets also require a technician and adjustments with a tool. I am expecting this to be no different.
- njharman 12y ago
  There's this awesome thing called spare parts and backups. custom made != only works with one aircraft
  - discardorama 12y ago
    But custom-made means that the pilot can't fly, period. And without the pilot, the aircraft might as well be grounded?
Daviey 12y ago
Aero Glass does a much better job of explaining why augmented reality matters in aviation: https://vimeo.com/101826751 https://vimeo.com/101826751
dgudkov 12y ago
Even if F-35 fails it won't really be a failure, because all the R&D investment paved a way for a new generation of fighter jets. It's not a faster horse, it's a car.
fapjacks 12y ago
What a clusterfuck.

110 points by blueatlas 12y ago

all I can say is holy crap. but wonder if this can translate into increased situational awareness or just more distractions

klodolph 12y ago
It may not matter, because it seems like the F-35 is designed to optimize the movement of money around the US, and it may turn out to be a very mediocre military aircraft with very nice electronics.
- gaius 12y ago
  Similarly the British aircraft carriers are designed primarily to shovel money into the pockets of Gordon Brown's voters.

flyinglizard 12y ago

The nice thing about the public scrutiny of the F-35 program, is all this normally-classified capability information that's released out to the public to get them excited about the project. Such level of publicity of cutting edge weapon systems simply didn't exist a decade ago.

th3iedkid 12y ago
may be it isn't cutting edge anymore?
- flyinglizard 12y ago
  It is cutting edge from an operational perspective. You normally want to keep the precise capabilities of weapon systems hidden from adversaries for as long as possible, as knowing these make countering the systems much easier - but not in the case of the F-35; testing information, development progress, flight envelope and technologies are routinely discussed.
  - iterationx 12y ago
    That and the plans were online and hacked by the Chinese as reported by Snowden. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/snowden-chinese-hackers-stole-f-35-fighter-jet-blueprints-article-1.2084888 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/snowden-chinese-hac...
jonsen 12y ago
It's a smoke screen. In the skunks they are doing a pilotless version.
- fapjacks 12y ago
  Exactly. And probably one that can stay airborne for weeks or months and drop ordinance autonomously.
- tsotha 12y ago
  I doubt that. To take advantage of a drone's capabilities you'd have to start from ground zero. Eventually they'll make a pilotless version the way they have pilotless F-16s. So the newer planes have something to shoot at.

knappador 12y ago

Wish there was a part of the airplane that wasn't $400k

damon_c 12y ago
There are probably very few parts on that plane that are cheaper than 400k.
- tdicola 12y ago
  The pilot. I doubt fighter pilots make $400k/year. Maybe they need to ask for a raise...
  - 6d0debc071 12y ago
    Hmm, people are often more expensive than what you pay them. That's even true on civy-street, where you don't usually pay as large a propaganda costs when their employment is terminated.
  - rurounijones 12y ago
    Training a US fighter pilot costs 7 figures last I heard so they cost that to purchase, never mind maintenance fees :p
    - ckib16 12y ago
      Correct. The U.S. has many retention programs to try to keep pilots serving past their initial military commitments. There is a lot of money invested into them.
  - Tloewald 12y ago
    Pilots have been the most valuable component since WWI. The U.S. recognition of this and emphasis on rescuing downed pilots in the Pacific was a decisive advantage.

sschueller 12y ago

All this technology just to kill people. It is a sad world we live in.

trhway 12y ago
looking at the low tech - WWII style - war in Ukraine with a lot of civil population and property being hit, intentionally and unintentionally, i'd take high tech any time over it. For example when a full salvo (16) of unguided missiles (from "Uragan" system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-27_Uragan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-27_Uragan) with 100Kg cluster warheads rains over the center of large city (Donetsk) ... i wish that US give Ukraine high-precision weapons so those weapons would be used instead. In an interview one Russian tank gun operator was boasting "we had a good tank - it had night vision"! In 2015! He said 3 tanks out of their team's 12 were such "good" tanks (and it was regular Russian army unit, not a rebel one). Of course no laser guided, drones, or any "total battlefield awareness", etc... Just shoot whatever you see through that night vision (it was their actual order the night Ukraine forces were making their way out of Debaltsevo encirclement through the narrow bottleneck while Russian forces were shooting at them from good positions from both sides)
- x4m 12y ago
  No modern Russain Federation tanks can be seen around Donetsk (like T-14 or at least T-90). No regular army either (except DPR army).
  - trhway 12y ago
    T-14 is still not in the army. Probably not even in the mass production yet. No T-90 has been sent to Ukraine. Modernized versions of T-72 is still in wide service with Russian army. Regular Russian army units (at the scale of several "battalion tactical groups", about 2000-3000 soldiers total) were sent to Ukraine in August 2014 - they stopped very successful Ukraine offensive by encircling significant forces near Illovaysk back then - and in January/February 2015 when they were primary force in encircling the Ukraine's forces near Debaltsevo. Combined battalion group (about 300-500) of platoons of special forces and paratroopers from various Russian units were performing major offensive in Donetsk airport in December. Officially the soldiers were "on vacation" (just happen to vacation with their guns and tanks in Ukraine). Unfortunately for wounded and killed in the January/February 2015 many of them were really put "on vacation" paperwork-wise and now they or their relatives have troubles trying to get the compensation money.

venomsnake 12y ago

> The F-35 Lightning II is one of the most complicated weapons systems ever developed, That is the opening sentence. And I will be surprised if it does not send chills down the spine of any person whose life will somehow depend on that airplane.

jacquesm 12y ago
Good news for those whose life depends on it's not functioning.
- happyscrappy 12y ago
  If your life depends on this not functioning you probably have a very short lifespan.
  - PakG1 12y ago
    I believe he was talking about enemy targets.
    - unchocked 12y ago
      So was he.

trynumber9 12y ago

Coincidentally the same cost as the Eurofigher Typhoon's helmet: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/24/us-airshow-helmets-idUSTRE75N52A20110624 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/24/us-airshow-helmets... > Costing about 250,000 pounds ($400,100) apiece, the helmets will be deployed in all Typhoons, of which Eurofighter has delivered 278 to six air forces and has orders for 429 more.

th3iedkid 12y ago
Guess this explains why : >>"Things got so bad that in 2011 the Pentagon hired BAE Systems to build a back-up helmet in case the one in development couldn’t be rescued" Particularly why BAE for Typhoon already had it around the same time.

smegel 12y ago

> There was a latency in the video, which caused pilots motion sicknes Just visualizing this makes me feel sick. Imagine executing high-G maneuvers but seeing an image that doesn't correspond to what you feel...

klodolph 12y ago
Intuitively, the view already doesn't correspond to what you see, even if you're only a commercial pilot. That's why planes have attitude indicators.
- Htsthbjig 12y ago
  It actually does most of the time, when the weather is fine. Planes have attitude indicators for when you can't see anything,e.g when you fly inside a cloud. But you don't need attitude indicators when you can see the horizon.
  - greedo 12y ago
    And modern warplanes fight in all-weather conditions as well as night ops on a normal routine basis. VFR isn't the norm for military aviation.
  - ckib16 12y ago
    Nice explanation. It can be hard to describe how pilots may or may not use certain cockpit displays depending on the situation. People tend to assume you are always using every indicator.

foo1423 12y ago

Lolz! Who does not recognize this article as complete propagandistic advertisement for a project completely over in time and budget that even fails competing with its competitors. Just besides that it's a weapon for killing people. Wake up.

Ragnarork 12y ago
That's still interesting technology-wise. I'm clearly not fond of military-related technology in principle, but that's an interesting piece of equipment nonetheless. What does the context change in this case? That it is (or not) a propagandistic advertisement doesn't change the fact that it's an interesting technology.
briandear 12y ago
Could you argue it's a weapon for saving people? Over 140 Christian students in Kenya were just massacred. An F-35 taking out the perpetrator's training camps could have save a bunch of innocent lives. One of the worst genocides in history (Rwanda) featured machetes being used to hack millions of people to death. How great would an F-35 been against the Nazis? How many millions of people could have been saved? Weapons aren't evil. Evil is what's evil. Burying one's head in the sand à la Chamberlain led to the extermination of millions. The Khymer Rouge had no advanced weaponry and slaughtered millions. In Gulf War I, 35,000 total deaths, in no small part because of smarter weapons. An entire country liberated from the Iraqis in just over a month. How would advanced weaponry have changed the game in wars across history? Even the Iraq war, which has been one of Anerica's longest has resulted in about 500,000 deaths. In the much shorter WWI it was 16 million deaths. High tech weapons save lives. Wars will always happen be it with machetes or spears or with billion dollar aircraft systems. A world without war would be nice, but there will always be evil in the hearts of men.
- foo1423 12y ago
  Seriosly I don't believe in such buls... anymore. Save brave chrisian people. Sorry, but the US has killed and totured so many brave non christian people just for politics and power-- and if you talk about christians - do you remember what a brave christian does when he gets beaten? this world will not get better as long we don't unite and overcome ancient separation by nation or believe.

vacri 12y ago

Like the plane, the helmet is enormously expensive. The cost of each custom-made helmet is more than $400,000. They've come down in price. When I did my honours at a defence science base in '96, it was using a helmet obtained "second-hand and shop-soiled" for $600k - the helmet had a monocle that projected a HUD onto your retina. Apparently it was an Apache gunship pilot's helmet.

pi-err 12y ago

From the article: > a stealthy fighter jet years that is often called a flying computer because of its more than 8 million lines of code For all the critics, all the hate vs drones and leaner fighters and bombers, the F-35 _is_ an impressive engineering feat and a turning point, especially re:software. At some point, a "Snow Leopard" version of the F-35 will turn out as a very fine piece of equipment, only possibly without the initial cost benefits expectations. Also: most learnings will probably be lost because the project will not have a decisive cost/performance advantage despite its complexity. The plane won't have a successor. Hopefully we can hear at some point of contractors who worked on its systems.

revelation 12y ago
Huh? You can't boot any recent system without running code from software that totals many lines more than a mere 8 million. That they keep quoting it really just makes me scared for the people working there, their worth measured by the lines they contributed to the behemoth as dictated by people that started in the 70s and never did learn anything new.
- tormeh 12y ago
  Yes, but not made in one go. It's sad that it's a giant piece of C++ fail, but you can't fault them for ambition.
engi_nerd 12y ago
There's nothing they can really say that isn't already made public.

furyg3 12y ago

It's a very 'agile' project. When will it be done? Don't ask! How much will it cost? Who knows! It's going to be awesome, though! But... you don't have to wait to see how powerful this weapons system is. The F-35 completely took out the Dutch government before one even rolled off the assembly line! Note to governments: when ordering your weapons systems it may be a good idea to get a cost-per-unit quote before signing.

jacquesm 12y ago
> Note to governments: when ordering your weapons systems it may be a good idea to get a cost-per-unit quote before signing. What makes you think they're unhappy about the outcome?
- furyg3 12y ago
  Well considering parliament dissolved over the issue I can imagine there's a lot to be desired. However, like construction projects, the original politician/official get the credit for signing the contract and their successor actually has to deal with the terms.
  - hencq 12y ago
    I'm curious which government you think collapsed over the F-35. I can't think of any. Granted, there have been a lot of debates about the JSF program in Dutch politics, but unless I'm suffering from faulty memory none caused the government to collapse.
angdis 12y ago
A quote for something like this would be a waste of time. The "rules" are obviously different military hardware projects that have strategic significance: you either need it or you don't and if you have to ask "how much?", you can't afford it !
rayiner 12y ago
Defense systems go over-budget for the same reason software projects do--it's all custom and custom development is unpredictable. It's not like these companies can sell the U.S. stuff they had lying around having developed it for another customer. I used to do development for a DOD project. At the outset of the project, it's often not clear what you're trying to do will even work. It might not even be clear what you should be trying to do. It's an iterative process of the government telling the engineers what it wants, and the engineers going back to the government with what can be done. That's not the say that projects like the F-35 weren't badly managed. But even well-managed defense projects are unpredictable. The world just looks very different when you can't count on massive consumer volumes to amortize R&D. Imagine going to Apple and saying "we need you to develop the iPhone, and oh by the way we will order at most a few thousand of these. What'll be the unit cost?"

kriro 12y ago

For a defence company Lockheed Martin is actually a surprisingly good* player in the VR/AR community and they always have somewhat sane people at conferences etc. Interestingly they often mentioned fighter pilot helmets as the best state of the art AR technology but when asked about specifics the answer was usually..."classified, sorry" which I always thought was kind of sad. They were quite involved in the Virtual World project which is open sourced: https://github.com/virtual-world-framework/vwf https://github.com/virtual-world-framework/vwf *from my perspective as someone who thinks building weapons technology is pretty bad and something I'd never do personally

ohitsdom 12y ago
Per the article, the helmet isn't built by Lockheed, it's built by Rockwell Collins.

skeuomorf 12y ago

While the technology in this helmet may turn out to be pretty great, I still can't view the project as a whole (The F-35) as more than a failure. It's taken them a lot of time and money to develop a mediocre aircraft, here's Pierre Sprey's opinion on it (Designer of the F-16) "The F-35 was born of an exceptionally dumb piece of airforce PR spin" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw

smackfu 12y ago
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/pierre-spreys-anti-f-35-diatribe-is-half-brilliant-and-1592445665 http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/pierre-spreys-anti-f-35-dia...
- Goronmon 12y ago
  I love one of the comments to that article that basically says that the accuracy of Sprey's statements don't matter as long as he is right about the F-35 not being worth the money and time invested.
JonFish85 12y ago
You mean a project that has to try to be everything to everyone is a failure? Say it ain't so! This isn't a shot at you, by any means; it's more a shot at a government program that was destined to fail long before it started. You can't have a 4-wheeler ATV, a tank, a station wagon and an SUV built in the same frame. There are some overlaps, sure, but trying to satisfy each requirement leads to insane conflicts that really can't be remedied in a good way. Thus you get this cludgy, massively over budget product that satisfies no one. And on top of it all, nobody wants to be the politician that's responsible for losing 10,000 jobs for his district, so it lives on.
josefresco 12y ago
Former pilots, and aircraft engineers are typically very proud of their machines, relish a more simple time when the pilot mattered more, and won't hesitate to bash modern technology.

Altenuvian 12y ago

I'd love to hear John Carmacks' take on this. They had to solve very similar problems when developing this helmet: extremely low-latency head & eye-tracking, managing depth-of-field, integrating multiple input streams, providing non-distracting information overlays etc.

supercoder 12y ago
Yeah, I'd imagine Carmack can take some of the ideas from the solutions developed in this helmet.

drussell 12y ago

Whenever I see headlines like this I think back to Batman Begins when Lucius Fox says "Bean counters didn't think a soldier's life was worth 300 grand"

encoderer 12y ago

What i see here is an old cold-warrior concerned that this fighter jet is not going to be good at "dog fighting". Who, exactly, are we supposed to be dog fighting with in next 20 years?

crusso 12y ago
Sadly, perhaps Russia. http://news.yahoo.com/russian-ships-old-arctic-nato-set-alarms-bells-050008186.html http://news.yahoo.com/russian-ships-old-arctic-nato-set-alar...
ckib16 12y ago
Nobody knows. We usually cannot predict future conflicts very well. A number of people think Stealth increases the chance for WVR engagements (WVR = Within Visual Range, or dog fighting). I'm one of them. The U.S. has a bad history of predicting the end of WVR engagements (see Vietnam and the F-4 produced without internal guns). Air superiority is definitely not a thing that can be taken for granted. But many people do because the West has dominated the skies for many decades now.

puppetmaster3 12y ago

Congrats to the sales people, I'm impressed!

discardorama 12y ago

So each helmet is custom-made. If you lose the helment (or spill coffee on it or something), then you can't fly the plane anymore? A small thing like the helmet will ground a $200M airplane?

Daviey 12y ago
Traditional helmets also require a technician and adjustments with a tool. I am expecting this to be no different.
njharman 12y ago
There's this awesome thing called spare parts and backups. custom made != only works with one aircraft
- discardorama 12y ago
  But custom-made means that the pilot can't fly, period. And without the pilot, the aircraft might as well be grounded?

Daviey 12y ago

Aero Glass does a much better job of explaining why augmented reality matters in aviation: https://vimeo.com/101826751 https://vimeo.com/101826751

dgudkov 12y ago

Even if F-35 fails it won't really be a failure, because all the R&D investment paved a way for a new generation of fighter jets. It's not a faster horse, it's a car.

fapjacks 12y ago

What a clusterfuck.