Eurofighter technical problems.

It looks like the F-22 isn't the only aircraft with teething problems. See:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040524222142.i5vufze7.html

Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this aircraft?

(Eric Moore) wrote in message m...
It looks like the F-22 isn't the only aircraft with teething problems. See:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040524222142.i5vufze7.html

Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this aircraft?

given time i'd say about 12 months. Its only a software fault right?
being that it will only screw up the jet if it flew into cloud .
Man all these prolems remind me of the time the RAF first put the
hunter into service

In article ,
(Prowlus) wrote:

(Eric Moore) wrote in message
m...
It looks like the F-22 isn't the only aircraft with teething
problems. See:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040524222142.i5vufze7.html

Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this aircraft?

given time i'd say about 12 months. Its only a software fault right?
being that it will only screw up the jet if it flew into cloud .

....or if flown "aggressively."

Yeah - I mean, how often would a modern fighter jet be flown through
clouds or "aggressively"?

As long as they keep it in slow turns on cloudless days, it's going to
be just fine.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

In article ,
(Prowlus) writes:
(Eric Moore) wrote in message m...
It looks like the F-22 isn't the only aircraft with teething problems. See:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040524222142.i5vufze7.html

Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this aircraft?

given time i'd say about 12 months.

Huh? That's like saying "If I were an Elk, I could wear it on my
watch-chain. If I had a watch-chain."

Its only a software fault right?

You're joking. How many lines of code? How many processes? How many
processors? What sort of integration tools?
If it were easy, they wouldn't have written the problem in in the
first place.

being that it will only screw up the jet if it flew into cloud .
Man all these prolems remind me of the time the RAF first put the
hunter into service

You mean fielding a fighter with such short range that if coulsn't
complete its designed point defence mission, or fire its weapons, and
with a powerplant that needed a complete redesign before it was
acceptable in service? (We won't get into the Great Airbrake Scandal.)
--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

On 24 May 2004 21:38:20 -0700, (Eric Moore)
wrote:

It looks like the F-22 isn't the only aircraft with teething problems. See:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040524222142.i5vufze7.html

Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this aircraft?


Years!!!.

"John Cook" wrote in message
...
Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this aircraft?

Years!!!.

As does any modern military aircraft. Software updates are an incremental
process on today's platforms. And just when one box is finally stable and
meets requirements, it's obsolete and unsupportable so they rip it out and
insert a new one, with it's own set of deficiencies and bugs.

Si

"Eric Moore" wrote in message
...
It looks like the F-22 isn't the only aircraft with teething problems.
See:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040524222142.i5vufze7.html

Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this aircraft?

Can't get the URL to work properly on my machine, but if its the report I
think it is, a lot of the issues have either gone away (were just arguing
over the phrases some release documents used) or are only as a result of the
so called independent assessors (who were funded by the MoD!!!) not really
liking the UK prime company. Funny how all four partner countries have the
same flight control software, yet only the UK are "unhappy" If they're that
unhappy with it, how come a pair of the RAF jets have just flown over my
house??

"Ian" wrote in message
...

"Eric Moore" wrote in message
...
It looks like the F-22 isn't the only aircraft with teething problems.
See:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040524222142.i5vufze7.html

Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this aircraft?

Can't get the URL to work properly on my machine, but if its the report I
think it is, a lot of the issues have either gone away (were just arguing
over the phrases some release documents used) or are only as a result of
the
so called independent assessors (who were funded by the MoD!!!) not really
liking the UK prime company. Funny how all four partner countries have the
same flight control software, yet only the UK are "unhappy" If they're
that
unhappy with it, how come a pair of the RAF jets have just flown over my
house??

That may be the case for most of the bugs cited by QinetiQ but some are
serious:

"Corruption" of the flight control computer system means that it could
suddenly switch from "in-flight" mode to "ground" mode in mid-air, leading
to "immediately catastrophic" results.

and

The cockpit flight information displays "frequently fail in flight", and
therefore, whenever a Eurofighter is taken into cloud or bad weather, it
should again be with two pilots.

sound quite serious, although I don't know how a second pilot will help in
the second case.

"Paul F Austin" wrote in message
...

"Ian" wrote in message
...

"Eric Moore" wrote in message
...
It looks like the F-22 isn't the only aircraft with teething problems.
See:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040524222142.i5vufze7.html

Anyone care to speculate on how long it will take de-bug this
aircraft?

Can't get the URL to work properly on my machine, but if its the report
I
think it is, a lot of the issues have either gone away (were just
arguing
over the phrases some release documents used) or are only as a result of
the
so called independent assessors (who were funded by the MoD!!!) not
really
liking the UK prime company. Funny how all four partner countries have
the
same flight control software, yet only the UK are "unhappy" If they're
that
unhappy with it, how come a pair of the RAF jets have just flown over my
house??

That may be the case for most of the bugs cited by QinetiQ but some are
serious:

"Corruption" of the flight control computer system means that it could
suddenly switch from "in-flight" mode to "ground" mode in mid-air, leading
to "immediately catastrophic" results.

and

The cockpit flight information displays "frequently fail in flight", and
therefore, whenever a Eurofighter is taken into cloud or bad weather, it
should again be with two pilots.

sound quite serious, although I don't know how a second pilot will help in
the second case.

The corruption of the FCC was never a real issue - it was more to do with
the way the testing was reported. Funny thing is, the tests that were
performed were to a QinetiQ spec. Funnily enough the spec was never
questioned by anybody outside BAe who had concerns that it wasn't the right
thing. As far as I know the "frequent" cockpit display failures means two
in a development fleet just over 10 years old. Suppose 1 every five years is
frequent! Hasn't stopped them flying the things from Warton where its
normally cloudy (although havent seen that many clouds over teh last few
weeks!)

On Tue, 25 May 2004 17:38:41 -0400, Paul F Austin wrote:

That may be the case for most of the bugs cited by QinetiQ but some are
serious:

"Corruption" of the flight control computer system means that it could
suddenly switch from "in-flight" mode to "ground" mode in mid-air, leading
to "immediately catastrophic" results.

and

The cockpit flight information displays "frequently fail in flight", and
therefore, whenever a Eurofighter is taken into cloud or bad weather, it
should again be with two pilots.

sound quite serious, although I don't know how a second pilot will help in
the second case.

The impression I get is that the fault is a software bug rather than
hardware corruption. It's not as if they're using a dodgy cheapo
hard disk to store it on!

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)