F/a-22 Software better now?.

[John Cook]

Hi

I just heard the F/A-22 is getting 10.8 hours before software
problems, this is almost double the requirement for IOE&T, the major
blue screen problem hasn't happened in over 1000 hours of flight.

Anyone have a proper link to this story, or any other background.

Cheers
John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

[John Cook]

Just found it...

Here :-
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_aerospacedaily_story.jsp?id=news/vic05034.xml

"F/A-22's Software Stability 'No Longer An Issue,' USAF Says
By Marc Selinger
05/03/2004 10:47:29 AM


U.S. Air Force officials are declaring victory in their battle to fix
a major technical problem with the F/A-22 Raptor: avionics software
instability.

"Software stability [is] no longer an issue," the Air Force said in a
graphic displayed at an April 30 press briefing.

Air Force acquisition chief Marvin Sambur told reporters that the
Lockheed Martin-built F/A-22 is achieving an average of 10.8 hours
between avionics software problems, more than double the five-hour
requirement that Congress said the program must meet before it could
begin its initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E).

A complete restart of the avionics system, which occurred an average
of every 1.4 hours a little over a year ago, has not happened in over
1,000 flight hours.

"That's pretty impressive," Sambur said.

The software improvements helped clear the way for the F/A-22 to begin
IOT&E April 29 at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. (DAILY, April 30).
The test phase is expected to last until mid-September and pave the
way for a decision in January 2005 on whether to shift from low-rate
to full-rate production.

IOT&E is expected to be more rigorous than testing to date. For
instance, besides countering larger groups of legacy fighters, as was
done in pre-IOT&E testing, F/A-22s also will have to simultaneously
defend other aircraft or attack targets.

Although IOT&E will focus on the F/A-22's air-to-air capabilities, the
follow-up operational test and evaluation, scheduled for the summer of
2005, will test the Raptor's ability to drop satellite-guided Joint
Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) while flying at subsonic speeds.
Further air-to-ground capabilities are to be demonstrated after the
F/A-22 achieves its initial operational capability (IOC), which is
scheduled for December 2005.

Sambur said that any problems that arise in IOT&E will be "pretty
minor" and are unlikely to cause a significant delay in the program.

Lt. Col. Jeffrey Harrigian, who commands a squadron at Tyndall Air
Force Base, Fla., that will train F/A-22 pilots, said the Raptor has
proven it can outmaneuver and see farther than the F-15 Eagle it is
designed to replace, even though the F-15 has 104 kills and no losses
in real-life aerial combat.

The F/A-22 "is the fighter pilot's dream," Harrigian told reporters.
"There's just no match when comparing the Raptor to the Eagle."

The Air Force plans to spend about $42 billion to buy 277 F/A-22s,
though it will have to buy fewer than that if it cannot eventually
persuade members of Congress to remove a $36.8 billion production cost
cap.

"They originally put the cap in place to make sure that we got our act
in place," Sambur said. "And I think we'll prove to them that we do
have our act in place."



Cheers
John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

[John Cook]

They also mention its problems are solve in this...


"Panel may cut F/A-22 request

By Dave Montgomery

Star-Telegram Washington Bureau


WASHINGTON - The Senate Armed Services Committee may consider scaling
back President Bush's proposal for 24 more F/A-22 Raptors next year as
cost-conscious lawmakers begin shaping defense spending for the 2005
fiscal year.

The Senate panel will begin closed-door deliberations today and is
expected to release its version of a 2005 defense budget later in the
week. The House Armed Services Committee is expected to draft its
budget recommendations next week.

Lawmakers are facing hard choices as they juggle the burgeoning costs
of big-ticket weapons systems and maintaining U.S. forces in
Afghanistan and Iraq. Lockheed Martin's F/A-22 and F-35 joint strike
fighter, both plagued by rising costs and schedule delays, have become
leading targets for budget-cutters.

Sen. John Warner, R-Va., committee chairman, will push to reduce the
number of F/A-22s that the Air Force plans to purchase next year,
according to Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., a leading House supporter of
the aircraft.

Bush is asking Congress for $4.15 billion to purchase 24 F/A-22s,
which are partially built by Lockheed Martin workers in Fort Worth.
Warner may insist on cutting at least two planes to shave more than
$280 million from the president's request, Gingrey said.

Committee members are not permitted to discuss their deliberations
publicly, and a spokesman for Warner declined to confirm Gingrey's
account.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the committee, would not
discuss details, but he confirmed that the panel is considering cuts
in the F/A-22 program. "I'm going to make sure that doesn't happen,"
Cornyn said.

Lockheed Martin spokesman Greg Caires said that reducing next year's
purchase would disrupt the production schedule, erode suppliers'
confidence and drive up costs over the life of the $71 billion
program. "Nothing good comes from making changes to the production
schedule," Caires said.

The Air Force began developing the twin-engine warplane in 1986 as a
replacement for the F-15. The service had hoped to buy 750 airplanes,
but cost overruns have shrunk the likely purchase to 218.

Although Air Force officials have expressed confidence that they have
overcome the cost and development problems, congressional critics say
the program may no longer be affordable. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a
senior member of the Armed Services Committee, has suggested scrapping
the aircraft to increase the U.S. troop presence in Iraq.

Asked Tuesday whether he believes that the program should be canceled
or curtailed, McCain said: "I think we need to get the costs under
control. Otherwise it should be."

Rep. Kay Granger, R-Fort Worth, whose district includes Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics, acknowledged that some lawmakers are taking a hard
look at both the F/A-22 and the joint strike fighter with the start of
budget discussions. She is among more than 60 House members who have
written to House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., to
plead that both aircraft programs be left intact.

Granger said she would oppose any cuts and will fight for
congressional approval of the president's recommendations."

Cheers


John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

[Ed Rasimus]

On Wed, 05 May 2004 21:21:43 +1000, John Cook >
wrote:

>Hi
>
>I just heard the F/A-22 is getting 10.8 hours before software
>problems, this is almost double the requirement for IOE&T, the major
>blue screen problem hasn't happened in over 1000 hours of flight.
>
>Anyone have a proper link to this story, or any other background.

For "other background", I spent several hours this last weekend in
one-on-one conversation with an old fighter pilot friend who is now
part of the Lockheed team. He's on F-35, but interfaces with the
Raptor side of the house.

His descriptions of the technology of the -22 was sufficient to water
this old fighter driver's eyes. Totally transparent integration of
multi-source data; prioritization of threat and target info to
minimize pilot overload; and probably the most impressive thing I've
ever heard of (unclassified) a system of helmet mounted sight and
fuselage mounted optical sensors that offers the pilot an view of the
space around him unobstructed by his own airframe! Seamless transfer
from sensor to sensor so that as you turn, the next available camera
offers the view. Look to your wing and see right through it at what is
below. Cool stuff!


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

[Scott Ferrin]

On Wed, 05 May 2004 08:36:25 -0600, Ed Rasimus
> wrote:

>On Wed, 05 May 2004 21:21:43 +1000, John Cook >
>wrote:
>
>>Hi
>>
>>I just heard the F/A-22 is getting 10.8 hours before software
>>problems, this is almost double the requirement for IOE&T, the major
>>blue screen problem hasn't happened in over 1000 hours of flight.
>>
>>Anyone have a proper link to this story, or any other background.
>
>For "other background", I spent several hours this last weekend in
>one-on-one conversation with an old fighter pilot friend who is now
>part of the Lockheed team. He's on F-35, but interfaces with the
>Raptor side of the house.
>
>His descriptions of the technology of the -22 was sufficient to water
>this old fighter driver's eyes. Totally transparent integration of
>multi-source data; prioritization of threat and target info to
>minimize pilot overload; and probably the most impressive thing I've
>ever heard of (unclassified) a system of helmet mounted sight and
>fuselage mounted optical sensors that offers the pilot an view of the
>space around him unobstructed by his own airframe! Seamless transfer
>from sensor to sensor so that as you turn, the next available camera
>offers the view. Look to your wing and see right through it at what is
>below. Cool stuff!

The optical thing is on the F35. (Kinda sounds like you were saying
it's on the F-22 too). I saw a news clip or Nova thing or something
where a Lockheed guy was showing that off. There's also some photos
floating around the net of an F-35 mockup at the Edwards airshow I
believe. It had half-dozen or so little windows for the system
scattered about the aircraft. It would be nice if the F-22 had that
system too but I've never noticed that it does.

[Jeb Hoge]

Scott Ferrin > wrote in message >...
> On Wed, 05 May 2004 08:36:25 -0600, Ed Rasimus
> > wrote:

> >For "other background", I spent several hours this last weekend in
> >one-on-one conversation with an old fighter pilot friend who is now
> >part of the Lockheed team. He's on F-35, but interfaces with the
> >Raptor side of the house.
> >
> >His descriptions of the technology of the -22 was sufficient to water
> >this old fighter driver's eyes. Totally transparent integration of
> >multi-source data; prioritization of threat and target info to
> >minimize pilot overload; and probably the most impressive thing I've
> >ever heard of (unclassified) a system of helmet mounted sight and
> >fuselage mounted optical sensors that offers the pilot an view of the
> >space around him unobstructed by his own airframe! Seamless transfer
> >from sensor to sensor so that as you turn, the next available camera
> >offers the view. Look to your wing and see right through it at what is
> >below. Cool stuff!
>
> The optical thing is on the F35. (Kinda sounds like you were saying
> it's on the F-22 too). I saw a news clip or Nova thing or something
> where a Lockheed guy was showing that off. There's also some photos
> floating around the net of an F-35 mockup at the Edwards airshow I
> believe. It had half-dozen or so little windows for the system
> scattered about the aircraft. It would be nice if the F-22 had that
> system too but I've never noticed that it does.

Hmm...if I see my neighbor soon, I'll ask him about that. Sounds
neat. And it's nice to find a thread about the F-22 that hasn't
already been Tarvered.

[Paul F Austin]

"Jeb Hoge" > wrote in message
om...
> Scott Ferrin > wrote in message
>...
> > On Wed, 05 May 2004 08:36:25 -0600, Ed Rasimus
> > > wrote:
>
> > >For "other background", I spent several hours this last weekend in
> > >one-on-one conversation with an old fighter pilot friend who is now
> > >part of the Lockheed team. He's on F-35, but interfaces with the
> > >Raptor side of the house.
> > >
> > >His descriptions of the technology of the -22 was sufficient to water
> > >this old fighter driver's eyes. Totally transparent integration of
> > >multi-source data; prioritization of threat and target info to
> > >minimize pilot overload; and probably the most impressive thing I've
> > >ever heard of (unclassified) a system of helmet mounted sight and
> > >fuselage mounted optical sensors that offers the pilot an view of the
> > >space around him unobstructed by his own airframe! Seamless transfer
> > >from sensor to sensor so that as you turn, the next available camera
> > >offers the view. Look to your wing and see right through it at what is
> > >below. Cool stuff!
> >
> > The optical thing is on the F35. (Kinda sounds like you were saying
> > it's on the F-22 too). I saw a news clip or Nova thing or something
> > where a Lockheed guy was showing that off. There's also some photos
> > floating around the net of an F-35 mockup at the Edwards airshow I
> > believe. It had half-dozen or so little windows for the system
> > scattered about the aircraft. It would be nice if the F-22 had that
> > system too but I've never noticed that it does.
>
> Hmm...if I see my neighbor soon, I'll ask him about that. Sounds
> neat. And it's nice to find a thread about the F-22 that hasn't
> already been Tarvered.

What you are looking for (on the F-35) is the Distributed Aperature System
(DAS) by Northrop Grumman. Indigo Systems makes the actual cameras.

[Scott Ferrin]

On Thu, 6 May 2004 19:29:56 -0400, "Paul F Austin"
> wrote:

>
>"Jeb Hoge" > wrote in message
om...
>> Scott Ferrin > wrote in message
>...
>> > On Wed, 05 May 2004 08:36:25 -0600, Ed Rasimus
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> > >For "other background", I spent several hours this last weekend in
>> > >one-on-one conversation with an old fighter pilot friend who is now
>> > >part of the Lockheed team. He's on F-35, but interfaces with the
>> > >Raptor side of the house.
>> > >
>> > >His descriptions of the technology of the -22 was sufficient to water
>> > >this old fighter driver's eyes. Totally transparent integration of
>> > >multi-source data; prioritization of threat and target info to
>> > >minimize pilot overload; and probably the most impressive thing I've
>> > >ever heard of (unclassified) a system of helmet mounted sight and
>> > >fuselage mounted optical sensors that offers the pilot an view of the
>> > >space around him unobstructed by his own airframe! Seamless transfer
>> > >from sensor to sensor so that as you turn, the next available camera
>> > >offers the view. Look to your wing and see right through it at what is
>> > >below. Cool stuff!
>> >
>> > The optical thing is on the F35. (Kinda sounds like you were saying
>> > it's on the F-22 too). I saw a news clip or Nova thing or something
>> > where a Lockheed guy was showing that off. There's also some photos
>> > floating around the net of an F-35 mockup at the Edwards airshow I
>> > believe. It had half-dozen or so little windows for the system
>> > scattered about the aircraft. It would be nice if the F-22 had that
>> > system too but I've never noticed that it does.
>>
>> Hmm...if I see my neighbor soon, I'll ask him about that. Sounds
>> neat. And it's nice to find a thread about the F-22 that hasn't
>> already been Tarvered.
>
>What you are looking for (on the F-35) is the Distributed Aperature System
>(DAS) by Northrop Grumman. Indigo Systems makes the actual cameras.
>


How does ths compare to a conventional system (other than FOV)? Is
each camera the equivalent of a LANTIRN? How about the designation
system? Does it have one?

[Paul F Austin]

"Scott Ferrin" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 6 May 2004 19:29:56 -0400, "Paul F Austin"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Jeb Hoge" > wrote in message
> om...
> >> Scott Ferrin > wrote in message
> >...
> >> > On Wed, 05 May 2004 08:36:25 -0600, Ed Rasimus
> >> > > wrote:
> >>
> >> > >For "other background", I spent several hours this last weekend in
> >> > >one-on-one conversation with an old fighter pilot friend who is now
> >> > >part of the Lockheed team. He's on F-35, but interfaces with the
> >> > >Raptor side of the house.
> >> > >
> >> > >His descriptions of the technology of the -22 was sufficient to
water
> >> > >this old fighter driver's eyes. Totally transparent integration of
> >> > >multi-source data; prioritization of threat and target info to
> >> > >minimize pilot overload; and probably the most impressive thing I've
> >> > >ever heard of (unclassified) a system of helmet mounted sight and
> >> > >fuselage mounted optical sensors that offers the pilot an view of
the
> >> > >space around him unobstructed by his own airframe! Seamless transfer
> >> > >from sensor to sensor so that as you turn, the next available camera
> >> > >offers the view. Look to your wing and see right through it at what
is
> >> > >below. Cool stuff!
> >> >
> >> > The optical thing is on the F35. (Kinda sounds like you were saying
> >> > it's on the F-22 too). I saw a news clip or Nova thing or something
> >> > where a Lockheed guy was showing that off. There's also some photos
> >> > floating around the net of an F-35 mockup at the Edwards airshow I
> >> > believe. It had half-dozen or so little windows for the system
> >> > scattered about the aircraft. It would be nice if the F-22 had that
> >> > system too but I've never noticed that it does.
> >>
> >> Hmm...if I see my neighbor soon, I'll ask him about that. Sounds
> >> neat. And it's nice to find a thread about the F-22 that hasn't
> >> already been Tarvered.
> >
> >What you are looking for (on the F-35) is the Distributed Aperature
System
> >(DAS) by Northrop Grumman. Indigo Systems makes the actual cameras.
> >
>
>
> How does ths compare to a conventional system (other than FOV)? Is
> each camera the equivalent of a LANTIRN? How about the designation
> system? Does it have one?

As I recollect from an article in AvWeek, the F-35 has a seperate
designator/FLIR that looks out through a sapphire window in the airframe.
The DAS cameras are IR and lack the resolution of e.g. LANTIRN but give a 4
pi steradian effective field of regard. If the pilot can crane his neck far
enough, he can look in any direction, regardless of what piece of airframe
is in the way. I have a recollection but no more than that which says that
the DAS cameras are there primarily as part of the missile alarm and warning
system.