F-35 News. A note from a reader...

I got an interesting note from a reader of this blog and I thought I would share it....

Hi Sol,

I read an interesting article today on the F-35 software problems here: https://medium.com/war-is-boring/b6ae0dd4d0ee

For me, this was the first article that really touches on the main problem for the F-35. It isn't the hardware, it's the software. In fact, in the 21st century, most engineering problems are software related and not much to do with hardware.

The article made a misquotes the number of lines of code (LOC) for the F-35 at 8 million, but actually that's just for the battle management software. The total lines of code in the F-35 is approximately: 23 million.

To provide some quick related reference:
Space shuttle: 400K LOC
F-22 Raptor: 1.2 M LOC
Curiosity Rover: 5 M LOC
Boeing 787: 5.5 M LOC
F-35 Lightning II: 23 M LOC
Healthcare.gov: 400M LOC

Why is the F-35 software so much more complex than the F-22's? Mostly it's because of two features: Networking & Collaboration. But it's also due to poor code documentation, bureaucratic management, and multiple vendors. Ignoring whether those two features are useful, whenever these two words appear in a software development project, re-designs and delays occur. Go ask any software project managers with experience in government work and they will tell you the same thing.

But I think everybody knows which aircraft reigns supreme: the F-22. Simplicity really is the ultimate sophistication. The F-35 was born out of politics, its problems were compounded by politics, and its demise will be due to politics. Talk about a vicious cycle.

It was a mistake to close the F-22 assembly line. The correct choice should've been to produce more F-22s with cheaper materials (steel or aluminum vs composites) and sticking with the F/A-18 for carrier aviation until the F-22 could be naval-ized.



Volleyballer out

If the Volleyballer is even halfway right then my suspicion that we might never see this thing work as planned is spot on.

I can't wait for the "supporters" to attempt to refute this info.