US to withhold F-35 fighter software codes
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: England
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US to withhold F-35 fighter software codes
Looks like the USA is not going to supply source codes for F35 software to anyone:
EXCLUSIVE-US to withhold F-35 fighter software codes - Forbes.com
"That includes everybody," he said, acknowledging this was not entirely popular among core partners -- Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway.
"Nobody's happy with it completely. but everybody's satisfied and understands," he said of withholding the code from partners and Israel, which also has sought the technology transfer as part of a possible purchase of up to 75 F-35s
Good to know where we stand..........
OP
EXCLUSIVE-US to withhold F-35 fighter software codes - Forbes.com
"That includes everybody," he said, acknowledging this was not entirely popular among core partners -- Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway.
"Nobody's happy with it completely. but everybody's satisfied and understands," he said of withholding the code from partners and Israel, which also has sought the technology transfer as part of a possible purchase of up to 75 F-35s
Good to know where we stand..........
OP
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
I won't bother going back and digging them out, but successive SecDefs have stated that access to the codes was a prerequisite for a UK purchase.
No codes - no UK F-35 buy.
I wonder if the government will stick by that or now back down?
No codes - no UK F-35 buy.
I wonder if the government will stick by that or now back down?
More bang for your buck
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 82
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even more reason to stop the extradition of the guy who hacked into the Pentagon's computer, we need him to hack the source code.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old Gordo could be rubbing his hands here. An excellent excuse to duck out of the purchase saving squillions. he then decides there's no need for a carrier with no aircraft, another few squillion. No people required to man the non-existent kit, even more savings.
Of course, I could be wrong.
Of course, I could be wrong.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sussex, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quick question - without the opportunity to examine the source code, would it be possible to confirm airworthiness of the aircraft before entry into service?
TN
p.s. Green Granite
TN
p.s. Green Granite
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In the middle of the sea
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not the first time that they have done this - good to see what 'Special Relationship' really means. Blair really did make the UK Americas' lap dog
Britain has been Americas' lap dog before Blair was even born!
Even with access to source code proving software correctness is almost impossible. It certainly isn't cheap in terms of man hours or money.
History has shown that software bugs will exist in almost all non-trivial code regardless of how much testing is implemented.
History's Worst Software Bugs
I'm surprised the Airbus A320 crash at the French airshow didn't make the list but there are plenty of air and space examples in there.
Edit: Fixed the link
History has shown that software bugs will exist in almost all non-trivial code regardless of how much testing is implemented.
History's Worst Software Bugs
I'm surprised the Airbus A320 crash at the French airshow didn't make the list but there are plenty of air and space examples in there.
Edit: Fixed the link
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sussex, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can the MOD just take the manufacturers word for it? Are they allowed to?
TN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meanwhile Australia has just confirmed their order of the JSF will go ahead despite U.S. officials saying they will keep secret the sensitive software codes to be used in the radar-evading fighter, limiting the ability of investor
countries to maintain and upgrade the fighters without U.S. involvement.
The single-engine F-35 can switch quickly between air-to-ground and
air-to-air missions while still flying -- tricks heavily dependent on its 8
million lines of onboard software code.
(Australian news article).
countries to maintain and upgrade the fighters without U.S. involvement.
The single-engine F-35 can switch quickly between air-to-ground and
air-to-air missions while still flying -- tricks heavily dependent on its 8
million lines of onboard software code.
(Australian news article).
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The single-engine F-35 can switch quickly between air-to-ground and
air-to-air missions while still flying -- tricks heavily dependent on its 8
million lines of onboard software code
air-to-air missions while still flying -- tricks heavily dependent on its 8
million lines of onboard software code
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buster Hyman wrote:
<<Big deal! China probably has it already... >>
You hit the nail on the head, I think – trouble happened with another aircraft with the latest advanced avionics (can't remember off the top of my head just now – could have been an F16 or F18 variant?) - Israel supplied the software to China.
The USA can hardly give such software to some friendlies and not Israel, can it? Hence the new stuff can't go to anyone.
<<Big deal! China probably has it already... >>
You hit the nail on the head, I think – trouble happened with another aircraft with the latest advanced avionics (can't remember off the top of my head just now – could have been an F16 or F18 variant?) - Israel supplied the software to China.
The USA can hardly give such software to some friendlies and not Israel, can it? Hence the new stuff can't go to anyone.