F-22 Raptors' systems crash mid-flight over Pacific

Lockheed's shiny new F-22 Raptor stealth fighters may have owned a few war games, but crossing the International Date Line left them as helpless as a carrot in a rabbit trap, with multiple system crashes causing an emergency detour en route from Hawaii to Okinawa, Japan. Communication, fuel subsystems, and navigation systems were rendered useless and repeated "reboots" were of no help. Luckily, the fleet had clear skies and refueling tankers to guide them back to Hawaii. If they had separated from the tankers, "they would have turned around and probably could have found the Hawaiian Islands. But if the weather had been bad on approach, there could have been real trouble," states Retired Air Force Major General Don Shepperd. The voyage suffered a two-day delay on account of the system failures -- "a computer glitch in the millions of lines of code, somebody made an error in a couple lines of the code and everything goes." What should have been a showy parade of $125+ million super fighters quickly turned to disaster for Lockheed who would've had a lot of explaining to do, had this happened during combat.

[Via Slashdot]

[nial @ Feb 27th 2007 8:37AM]

Or $125+ million. But that's just a rounding error in that budget.

[Larry Ellison @ Feb 27th 2007 8:38AM]

"$1.25+ million super fighters"

That seems very cheap. If it's correct, I'll take 2 of them please.

[Judd @ Feb 27th 2007 8:39AM]

Yeah, I was about to say, a raptor costs $125 million: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22

[Rick P @ Feb 27th 2007 8:41AM]

$1.25 Million for an F22? That sounds like a typo to me.

http://www.djrickp.com

[Wonderboy @ Feb 27th 2007 8:51AM]

You know, it would be really nice if at least one of those people who left comments would be astute enough to pick up on that monetary typo, I mean really...

Oh wait.

[n.p. @ Feb 27th 2007 9:06AM]

shiny new? you gotta be kidding me.

[RC @ Feb 27th 2007 9:18AM]

If you feel the need to make a pointless repetitive comment about the typo, please just write "Ditto" in the comment field.
Thank you.

[fred @ Feb 27th 2007 9:22AM]

Hey did you guys notice that there's a typo? "$1.25+ million super fighters" I mean come on, really!?! I think you meant to say "Supper Fighter"

[Jason @ Feb 27th 2007 9:23AM]

F-22 program has cost Americans $70 Billion so far.

So if you're an American, they've cost YOU $233.33.

There are ~51 in service, so that's about $1.3 BILLION each.

Plus the opportunity cost.

[UIGuy @ Feb 27th 2007 9:27AM]

Yup. Need to purchase some more so we can bring the cost/unit into line...

(I love playing "manager")

[Vince D @ Feb 27th 2007 1:48PM]

The program cost includes the planes, the weapons, the avionics, the support systems, and the ongoing service and parts program. Apparently Lockheed price their products the "HP Way", i.e., the supplies and support are where the real money is at. All for an aircraft that was originally designed to counteract the imminent threat from Soviet MIG fighters...err...and that now has only F-14s and F-16s to worry about as adversaries (see Lockheed's sales to Iran, legal until 1980). DUUUHHHHHHH taxpayers!!

[tbalas @ Apr 21st 2007 2:25PM]

Would you rather be learning Arabic?

[tchiseen @ Feb 27th 2007 9:53AM]

ah, yes, at $125 mil they are a tid bit pricey, but compared to the f18 or f15, it's just about performance for money.

having said that, these planes are basically for show. of the thousands of casualties in recent wars, very few have been dealt by air-air supremacy type aircraft. the us likes to talk up their purchases of these new aircraft, and downplay their other purchases - old f15s and f16s from other countries - israel for example. the us buys these old decom aircraft a few years after Lockheed sells them, simply so noone else can get them. a raptor would PWN an eagle, but why bother when you can just throw money at it and win total air supremacy the peaceful way? oh the tangled web

[John Doe @ Feb 27th 2007 6:25PM]

tchiseen,
Grow a clue. Obviously the F-22 isn't intended to go after Iraqi insurgence. they are designed to counter whatever the Chinese are working on. If you think they aren't developing their own next gen fighters somewhere you are dangerously delusional.
I'm not a warmongerer. In point of fact I hate war. But I'm not stupid enough to not see the benefit in having a military that is outfit with the best hardware possible. I’m not talking about a cold war escalation either. But the simple fact is technology progresses and as it does so should the wares used by the military. Quite honestly our technology is really one of the few advantages the US has. From a purely #’s standpoint we are pretty damn weak.

[John Doe @ Feb 27th 2007 6:26PM]

tchiseen,
Grow a clue. Obviously the F-22 isn't intended to go after Iraqi insurgence. they are designed to counter whatever the Chinese are working on. If you think they aren't developing their own next gen fighters somewhere you are dangerously delusional.
I'm not a warmongerer. In point of fact I hate war. But I'm not stupid enough to not see the benefit in having a military that is outfit with the best hardware possible. I’m not talking about a cold war escalation either. But the simple fact is technology progresses and as it does so should the wares used by the military. Quite honestly our technology is really one of the few advantages the US has. From a purely #’s standpoint we are pretty damn weak.

[Grammar freak @ Feb 27th 2007 9:56AM]

F-22s are so badass, I wish the Falcon 4 guys would make a sweet F-22 sim. (Or I wish I could get Jetfighter II to run on Vista)

[Scabies @ Feb 27th 2007 10:20AM]

Holy crap, JFII. How old school can you get? That game had the F23 concept as well, right? JSF was a pretty sweet sim that had the X32 and X35, but more importantly had pimp music. It would seem, however, that both worthy flight-sims and bearable MechWarrior series games have died, which cuts out my two favorite genres.
...I dont imagine you have a copy of JFII?

[JM @ Feb 27th 2007 10:24AM]

BREAKING NEWS!!!

F-22 squadron experiences problems over pacific, tragically forced back to Hawaii for two days…

Wow, I bet that has never happened before.

[TNP @ Feb 27th 2007 7:35PM]

"F-22 squadron experiences problems over pacific, tragically forced back to Hawaii for two days…"

Yeah, but they were over the dateline, so it's only one day...
Or would it be three days...
Is it daylight savings in western Australia, or...

I'll get back to you.

[StalkerZERO @ Feb 27th 2007 10:50AM]

See, thats what you get for letting Microsoft design your military grade OS for your fighter jet. ;)

[Garry @ Feb 27th 2007 11:45AM]

@StalkerZERO:

1) predictable
2) stale

Time for a new repertoire.

[CRASHLOCK @ Feb 27th 2007 10:53AM]

Are these Jets running Windoze??

[Lee Gibson @ Feb 27th 2007 10:53AM]

OK, a problem with an aircraft that does not result in the loss of the aircraft is pretty much not news. Sorry.

If it's still flyable, that's why there are pilots in these things...to keep it together until they can get back to Hawaii.

Fortunately, it sounds like the flight controls were still in good shape, which is very good...without those systems, the F22 couldn't keep the pointy end into the wind.

[RickDom @ Feb 27th 2007 10:57AM]

Dude, just pick up a copy of the F-22 game for Genisis. It's sweet!

[CRASHLOCK @ Feb 27th 2007 11:08AM]

They MUST be running Windoze - HAHAHA

[Andy @ Feb 27th 2007 11:29AM]

Huh, you would think that they would be more careful by now. Allegedly, early in the development cycle of the F-16 the fly-by-wire software would flip the plane upside-down if it flew over the equator. Fortunately, they caught that nasty little bug in the simulations before an actual plane ever flew.

[Brad C @ Feb 27th 2007 12:31PM]

Are you serious? Hahaha I laugh now but if I was a pilot I think that would have scared the crap out of me!

[StalkerZERO @ Feb 28th 2007 11:52PM]

I know I know.

But someone had to say it. :)

[jared @ Feb 27th 2007 12:00PM]

you misspelled 'pwn3d'

[Todd @ Feb 27th 2007 12:17PM]

This is inaccurate - Lockheed did NOT write the software. BEA in England wrote it after being awarded the contract to do so by the Defense Department as a "cost cutting measure".

Flame BEA, not Lockheed.

[supes @ Feb 27th 2007 12:26PM]

one word: Cylons.

[Rocket Punch @ Feb 27th 2007 12:48PM]

I swear if they take that cell processor and the blueray out, it will only cost half of that.

[Rick Lyon @ Feb 27th 2007 1:46PM]

Blue screen of death? How long did it take to shut down and reboot?

[KnightmareCS @ Feb 27th 2007 10:23PM]

Iranian F-14s? Those aren't operational dude.

[Ryan @ Feb 27th 2007 1:59PM]

Actually, these jets run a custom OS written in LISP, of all things. I dated the daughter of their project manager about 8 years ago, and they were having problems with the software back then too.

[Ken @ Feb 28th 2007 9:52AM]

From my understanding, LISP is currently used on pretty much all satellites currently in orbit. It's also the language of choice for AI. Yeah it's no the super neato object oriented language we like to run games on, but it's adapting logic is what makes it powerful.

[Rick Lyon @ Feb 27th 2007 2:01PM]

Blue screen of death? How long did it take to shut down and reboot?

[J.Ho @ Feb 27th 2007 3:57PM]

It's interesting that Engadget chronicled a computer glitch on a routine USAF flight. What's not surprising at all is to see how little the commenters here know about anything beyond how to hard reset an iPod. The bottom line is that the F/A-22 is the most sophisticated and intricate aircraft ever devised. The same style of punditry knocked previous aerospace programs for such aircraft as the B-52, B-1, B-2, TFX, LFW (F-16) and others.

The knowledge that is gained from engineering, producing and operating advanced weapons not only protect our interests, but they boost our economy. Hell, Raytheon's accidental discovery during research on a military program led to the invention of the microwave oven. Federal, state & local tax revenue from microwave ovens alone probably could have paid for the Apollo moon program 100 times over. GPS in your car? It wasn't Toyota that came up with that.

We do indeed need to order more F/A-22s so costs will come in line. Same for the F-35. And there are indeed current and future military threats that need these aircraft to address them.

[Vince D @ Feb 28th 2007 11:06AM]

Dude, whatever. If a little theft from taxpayers is good, then more is better seems to be your mantra. It isn't about the technology or the cost, it's about (mis)allocation of resources. The government simply as no idea how much money it should spend, nor a clue on what to spend it on. It is the socialist problem of having no rational basis for economic calculation that Ludwig von Mises expressed so eloquently. And the industrial part of the military-industrial complex is only too happy to tell them what they should be buying.

And whoever talked about countering whatever the Chinese are building - what are you smoking, dude? Why would they ever even THINK of attacking their biggest debtor and trading partner? It would be cutting their own throats, and anyone who tells you differently is insane.

[thetinguy @ Feb 27th 2007 6:56PM]

The F-22 is by the greatest Fighter made of all time. During a recent set of war games called Excercise Northern Edge, the F-22 achieved a kill-to-loss ratio of 144-to-zero. They fought aganist F-15's, F-16's, and F/A-18's. Although there were only 12 F-22's in the exceresise they generated 49% of the kills. The F-22 can destroy anything in the sky right now.

[Dirtyfrappuccino @ Feb 28th 2007 4:59AM]

I dont know that anyone outside of the Iranian Airforce could make that statement. We sold them 80 Airframes. a Batch of 30, then a batch of 50. And yes no spare parts for 30 years, but they could have cannibalized parts from others. there "might" be a few Iranian Tomcats still flying, and lets not forget, that jet had the AWG-9 radar, Lock up and fire on 6 targets, and track 24 more. And do it all at 100 miles away. Im sure the F-22 can kick it's arse hands down, and without even trying, but to assume that they have none flying is a mistake IMHO.

Re: the article at hand: it always amazes me that we outsorce the building of our frontline aircraft and weapons systems to the lowest bidder, and then expect that there wont be any issues. Growing pains of the airframe i guess. I would say that it is a testament of the skill and prowess of this country, and of the pilots; that they stayed up in the air. I've heard that without the computer, the F-22 is similar to the B-2 and the F-117. Wobbley and a little unstable. That it needs the micro adjustments from the computer for stable, predictable flight.

[Billy T @ Feb 28th 2007 7:48AM]

" I dated the daughter of their project manager about 8 years ago, and they were having problems with the software back then too."

Ryan, that must have been a dull date if you talked about software problems in her Dad's company!!

[J.Ho @ Feb 28th 2007 11:33AM]

Theft from the taxpayers?? Wow ... Vince, you have it all figured out. Actually, you're dead wrong. In the end it IS about the technology/knowledge. This is part of the reason we are far more developed than the rest of the universe. As much as you may hate that fact, it's the truth. Hell, you should run the state department to since you know exactly what the future actions of country as unstable, large and diverse as China are going to be. Maybe Engadget should write a post on this awesome crystal ball you have. License it to Apple too. Call it the iGlobe.

[Vince D @ Feb 28th 2007 12:02PM]

No need to get nasty. I have a few questions - who produces the goods and earns the money - the individual, or the government? Who is the one who should decide how that money is to be spent, the individual or the government? Don't you believe in markets?

As far as my crystal ball goes, on international events, a kindly old cynic once told me "follow the money". China gets lots of money from us. Therefore, it would be suicidal of them to do anything to affect that. That isn't ESP, that's logic. Betting against that is betting a lot of money against some very long odds.

[J.Ho @ Feb 28th 2007 1:28PM]

Me? Nasty? I wasn't the one accusing other posters of being drug users. As for China, yeah, they are playing their role in the global economy, but don't fool yourself by thinking they are perfectly happy in taking the back seat to the west on every single front.

Have you heard of the Chinese advanced fighter project Jianjiji-12 (aka XXJ)? It's is anticipated to be in same class as US F-22 fighter and is scheduled to enter service in 2013-2015. They also have a new strategic bomber in the works as well as new, more accurate ICBMs. I guess they are just doing all that for show.

Yes, follow the money. As much money as China makes off us, they want ten times more and have the national will to do what it takes to be the ones who dictate world economy. The US was Nazi Germany's biggest benefactor. I guess money isn't everything.

[Vince D @ Feb 28th 2007 3:17PM]

To restate: Lockheed Martin conned the US government into spending $70 billion and change (to date) on a "weapons system" that (according to the logic of some here) could have crashed into the ocean on the way to shoot / bomb China due to a computer glitch. It's funny and tragic at the same time, unless you are China (in which case it's probably amusing) or a US taxpayer, in which case it is drop-dead incomprehensible.

[J.Ho @ Feb 28th 2007 3:32PM]

Is it your position that the US government should have never chosen the Lockheed/Boeing F/A-22 over the Northrop/McDG YF-23 or that they should have never started the ATF program in the first place?

[Vince D @ Feb 28th 2007 9:53PM]

Neither one, the F-22 and the JSF are useless, just as Gabe said. Made redundant by the end of the Cold War, they are programs in search of a mission. Rather than increase US security on net, they will simply serve as a spur to China (or India, or Pakistan, or whoever) to ratchet up their own wasteful military programs to keep up. Worse, they cost BILLIONS of dollars that the US taxpayer needs to keep just to stay even with (government-caused) inflation, and they apparently aren't even very good value for the money. Worse yet, once the military purchases a new fighter, the manufacturer sells the older planes to every willing customer, setting up a situation where, to maintain superiority, a new program is initiated and purchased. Just as the adversaries of F-22 pilots will likely be flying the discarded F-14 and F-16, the JSF jocks will be fighting "obsolete" F/A-18s, F-117s, and F-22s. This is NUTS, we all pay for this insanity and the weapons-makers clean up, see: http://www.libertyguys.org/home/detail.asp?ArtID=1509

[gabe @ Feb 28th 2007 4:50PM]

too bad they are useless , i mean whats the point of making new jets every other year when we have some that still get the job done, which is basically drop bombs cause there has not been any dog fighting since Vietnam

[Matt Hadder @ Mar 1st 2007 12:56AM]

Vince D
You hit the nail on the head repeatedly with your last post.
"they are programs in search of a mission"

Plus, the bad-old game of war between superpowers was made obsolete by nuclear arms.
China will not attack us. Why would they ruin their biggest market and throw away the huge financial debt we owe them in trade for getting hit or nuked themselves?

Fighter planes, subs, missile defense systems... for what? Do terrorists have underwater or supersonic or camels now?

Where is the action? On the ground. Troops are being killed, supersonic fighters aren't being shot down. If anything troops need advanced/useful equipment arms and armor... not another hightech piece of bling for bragging rights.

Even if we had the f-ing Death Star it wouldn't help troops on the ground or prevent 1 terrorist attack.

This jet is a relic of cold war mentality & industry; its a sledgehammer when we need a screwdriver.