Guess they should have done some more debugging eh? : )
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,110035,00.asp
Printable View
Guess they should have done some more debugging eh? : )
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,110035,00.asp
lmao some scarry stuff
agreed. especially ones with break statements in the wrong place. but it happens.Quote:
Originally posted by RoD
lmao some scarry stuff
well its always the easiest part that gets messed up : )
:rolleyes:Quote:
25. Railway Signal Box Altona, Germany
(not enough memory)
any crashes? ;)
LOL! Shouldn't these kind of systems be heavily tested before sent as faar as Mars? :)Quote:
4. Mars Climate Orbiters, Loss
(Mixture of pounds and kilograms, 1999)
if(RocketIsFlying) {
if(RocketIsHappy)
HitCorrectTarget();
}
else
CrashInRandomCountry();
It makes sense to me. The aircrafts were probably flying too low. How can a missle be able to tell the difference from a missile, or another aircraft? They all give off heat. I don't think its a software issue, it must be personal error that nobody wants to admit to.
So while they are conducting a software investigation, it gives them time to cover it all up.
what about the human caused ones...i know they all are but, you guys remember that mars mission that, the software guys wrote code in imperial, and when they tried to fly it they used meters and it was all f'ed up
I heard that they did that and it crashed into mars, but I still think that there must be more to the story.
>>The aircrafts were probably flying too low. How can a missle be able to tell the difference from a missile, or another aircraft? They all give off heat. I don't think its a software issue, it must be personal error that nobody wants to admit to.
The planes fly at a set altitude.
The planes give off radio signals.
The planes have a four digit 'friend or foe' ID code.
a quote from CNN text at the bottom of the screen on Fri night.
"less than one percent of missiles fail to miss their targets"
are you talking about the patriot missile system or the tomahawk missile system? The most recent US missiles that have gone astray were the tomahawks, and they aren't used for shooting down airplanes AFAIK.
Ummm..........Patriots.
I thought this was clear enough.
"How can a missle be able to tell the difference from a missile, or another aircraft?"
As you say tommahawks are surface to surface.
If you missed that you probably missed the double negative in the CNN quote.
You know...
Maybe they should post the code here, and can help debugging it!:D
howdy,
the F-16 shot the patriot battery before it could launch a missle, i wonder why the Tornado dosent have that type of defense system on board??
M.R.
I think the Tornado pilots trusted that the Patriots operator would override the launch (seeing he was at the correct altitude, transmitting radio data and had the correct Friend/Foe code).
The US pilot took no chances after the Tornado incident, can't blame him after it locked on.
I saw that the US has stopped sending Tomahawks over Saudi Arabia and Turkey after some crashed there. The US recovery crews were attacked in Turkey by angry mobs.
The Brits are getting edgy.
The survivor of a friendly fire incident called the US pilot that straffed his vehicle a 'cowboy out to get his jollies'.
No reports of British friendly fire on US troops yet, as the survivor pointed out.
As far as we were concerned there is no fire that is 'friendly' (it all hurts if it hits you).
howdy,
i do find it odd that the Americans are the only ones that manage to shoot thier own buddies.Quote:
No reports of British friendly fire on US troops yet, as the survivor pointed out.
M.R.
An error that does not seem to be on the lists, but was a favourite among the lecturers at The Royal Aircraft Establishment in Farnborough concerned the F-16, (there are several F-16 stories there but I couldn't see this one).
Apparently bored one day, a pilot wondered if the superb new fly by wire systems would allow him to raise the aircrafts undercarriage, while it was sitting on the ground ... oh dear.
What's an undercarriage? If it is the wheels, then: LOL!Quote:
Originally posted by adrianxw
Apparently bored one day, a pilot wondered if the superb new fly by wire systems would allow him to raise the aircrafts undercarriage, while it was sitting on the ground ... oh dear.
The number of friendly fire incidents is appalling. Ok, humans make mistakes but we have sufficient technology to override those mistakes. The technology exists to determine the make of every jet in the world by it's cross-section as picked up on radar. There is also the technology to put a beacon inside a friendly aircraft that tranmits the appropriate identification. Why isn't this technology utilised to ensure that the Patriot can't be locked on to a coalition aircraft? Or even as a last resort, to have the Patriot recognise it's a friendly aircraft and self-detonate harmlessly away from everything.
The same goes for the A-10 and the Challenger 2 incidents. There should be a beacon in every piece of coalition hardware that transmits a signal to be picked up by every other piece of coalition hardware. With this signal it should then be made impossible for any friendly fire incidents to occur.
BTW, did anyone else read the account of the British soldier that survived the A-10 friendly fire incident? It was disgraceful. One of the trucks in the convoy had a big Union Jack flying and the A-10 still made two strafing passes. :rolleyes:
>>the F-16 shot the patriot battery before it could launch a missle, i wonder why the Tornado dosent have that type of defense system on board??<<
I didn't here of this incident, did the F-16 actually destroy the Patriot battery? If so, maybe the Tornado didn't have any weapons left. I don't know, just a thought. I agree, if I was the pilot I wouldn't hesitate in blowing it up too.
Nice thought, but no. What happens when the enemy gets a beacon?Quote:
Originally posted by minesweeper
The same goes for the A-10 and the Challenger 2 incidents. There should be a beacon in every piece of coalition hardware that transmits a signal to be picked up by every other piece of coalition hardware. With this signal it should then be made impossible for any friendly fire incidents to occur.
>>Nice thought, but no. What happens when the enemy gets a beacon?<<
Yeah ok, hadn't thought of that. But I am sure there must be ways of implementing this sort of thing. We can put a missile through any window of just about any house in the world. I refuse to believe there isn't a way to electronically differentiate between friendly and enemy forces without it being used against us.
>>What happens when the enemy gets a beacon?
One word: Encryption.
Of course, a tank commander might get a tad panicy if his radio signal stopped transmitting for some reason :(
>>There is also the technology to put a beacon inside a friendly aircraft that tranmits the appropriate identification. Why isn't this technology utilised to ensure that the Patriot can't be locked on to a coalition aircraft?<<
As I posted before, there is.
It is called the Friend Foe ID. A four digit code.
The patriot just ignored this signal and the other two system checks as I posted. (Patriots are also is not supposed to fire at aircraft flying in a set 'corridor' (heading and altitude) or those emitting radio signals.)
All these incidents happened while the patriot crew was taking cover (from artillery fire was the report).
>>did the F-16 actually destroy the Patriot battery?<<
No just the batteries radar dish thus blinding it.
>>> What's an undercarriage? If it is the wheels, then: LOL!
Yes, wheels.
...
The reports from the people in the A10 attack have been quite outspoken about the cavalier attitude of the A10 pilot. It really does seem odd that with all training on each others equipment these guys have been getting, a trained specialist tank buster pilot would not recognise and then shoot up Scimitar tanks, (not challengers), and trucks all clearly displaying the agreed markings and, as said, flying a bloody great British flag.
>>then shoot up Scimitar tanks, (not challengers)<<
Yeah, I meant the other incident. The A-10 didn't shoot Challengers but there was an incident maybe a week ago where one Challenger blew up another.
>>As I posted before, there is.
It is called the Friend Foe ID. A four digit code.
The patriot just ignored this signal and the other two system checks as I posted. (Patriots are also is not supposed to fire at aircraft flying in a set 'corridor' (heading and altitude) or those emitting radio signals.)
All these incidents happened while the patriot crew was taking cover (from artillery fire was the report).<<
Why is there the possibility of the Patriot ignoring the signal? There sholdn't be, simple as that.
>>> a week ago where one Challenger blew up another
Haven't seen that.