Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Aerospace / Re: France and Germany to develop new european fighter jet
« Last post by mrmalaya on Today at 12:04:15 am »
Hmmm, so we are back to a slightly grumpy assertion that if it's not the F35 then it's not worth flying.

Did you know that the French defence hierarchy believe the Rafale to be good enough to stay in service until 2050? They have faith in their technology too, although I'm not sure it warrants that level of hubris either.
2
Ah, 'listicles' - they sound like a symptom of herpes and intellectually, they are.

http://www.90skidsonly.com/1136011/air-force-one-secrets-definitely-didnt-know/

From "No shit, Sherlock":

If a terrorist attack was to happen, the president could run the country from the skies due itís high tech communications.

Through "That's very... uninteresting":

Itís a well known fact that President Reagan was obsessed with jelly beans. There was always a jar in the oval office and he kept an impressive stock of them on AF1... George Herbert Walker Bush hated broccoli. So much so he banned the green vegetable on his plane.

Through "Yeah, right":

In 1959, CIA director Allen Dulles, invented cameras that fitted into the wheels of AF1. The cameras were so powerful they could read car license plates from 29,000 feet in the air.

To bullshit:

Air Force 1 can go way beyond the limits of an everyday commercial aircraft. The air crafts top speed is 1,126 MPH. While normal flights fly at 30,000 feet, AF1 goes to 45,100, an impressive 15,000 feet higher.
3
Military / Re: Standard SM-3 News & Dev.
« Last post by sferrin on Yesterday at 07:39:18 pm »
In combat, there will be sailors who are tired, have blurry vision, or are plain not up to the task.  The user interface has to be designed to make user tasks as close to idiot-poof as possible.  If it is possible to screw it up this badly in a test environment, which is almost certainly less stressful than actual combat, then it will be screwed up in real life as well. 

I don't know the specific issue here but AEGIS has a history or giving users data in non-intervention ways (see Vincennes) and I'll bet the interface contributed here.  And there's never enough time or effort put into user interface design, because it's unsexy compared to other measures of system performance.

Without knowing the specifics it's impossible to know.  (Right there with you on interface design.  As someone who's worked with many graphical programs over the years, I can appreciate a good interface versus a horrid one.)
4
Military / Re: Standard SM-3 News & Dev.
« Last post by starviking on Yesterday at 07:33:06 pm »
In combat, there will be sailors who are tired, have blurry vision, or are plain not up to the task.  The user interface has to be designed to make user tasks as close to idiot-poof as possible.  If it is possible to screw it up this badly in a test environment, which is almost certainly less stressful than actual combat, then it will be screwed up in real life as well. 

I don't know the specific issue here but AEGIS has a history or giving users data in non-intervention ways (see Vincennes) and I'll bet the interface contributed here.  And there's never enough time or effort put into user interface design, because it's unsexy compared to other measures of system performance.

Given the profile of a ballistic missile, it might be easier to virtually hard-wire the response. Perhaps give a "Ballistic Missile Engagement In Progress: Continue/Abort?" Message.
5
Aerospace / Re: France and Germany to develop new european fighter jet
« Last post by Airplane on Yesterday at 06:55:46 pm »
And we have to assume that all of the teen series fighters are even more antiquated, with the measuring stick apparently  being stealth only?

PCA in 13 years eh? Funny how that programme wont be effected by any form of delay and yet all others inevitably deliver years late - whether that's Typhoon, F35, or PAK-FA.

Anyway, whilst I'm glad the Typhoon gets you so excited, I think the general consensus is that although the F35 may replace things like the German Tornado or RAF T1 Typhoon, the French will replace their Rafale with a fighter (which wont be American) and the Germans likewise their Typhoon's.

Absolutely the teens are antiquated. What do you a call a flying radar reflector that cruises subsonically (doesn't even have speed to make up a little for not being LO) and laden with external fuel tanks? External weapons? Totally unequivocally reliant on jammer aircraft to reach a target? Even my illustrious Tomcat 21 if it had been built would be antiquated by today's standards. Yes, today's AAMs make the teens and the Europeans more effective than when they were fielded, but you know what? If the Piper I fly had 120s/meteors/9xs and was data linked to something with radar or had a good ir suite, it would be deadly as well.

Therein lies the heart of the -35. Awesome SA, awesome missiles, very low signatures, and adequate kinematics to preposition for missile release.

Honestly the only reason these planes are still relevant is because of the proliferation of other antiquated Russian equipment still flying. That's for A2A. For a2g versus a modern foes weapons,  they are dead meat. Honestly you could upgrade what's left of the flying Phantoms with aesa, slammers, 9xs and they could go toe to toe with today's teens and Europeans. I was there in the 80s when Phantoms were going against eagles and cats and the outcome was skewed to the teens, but it was still pilot versus pilot.

The page has turned. The last chapter has been written. Its a new ballgame. We are just waiting for all the new players to take to the field.

6
Military / Re: Standard SM-3 News & Dev.
« Last post by marauder2048 on Yesterday at 05:53:12 pm »
They really need to spend a lot more effort on human factors analysis and interface design, because this sort of mistake happens a lot more often than anyone wants to admit, and it can have major consequences.  I can think of one incident where bad AEGIS user interface design contributed to hundreds of deaths.

Perhaps they biased it in the other direction as a result of Iran Air i.e. made relabeling a hostile target with missile-in-flight to a friendly very easy
and tying it to an immediate command destruct.
7
Military / Re: Standard SM-3 News & Dev.
« Last post by TomS on Yesterday at 05:51:31 pm »
In combat, there will be sailors who are tired, have blurry vision, or are plain not up to the task.  The user interface has to be designed to make user tasks as close to idiot-poof as possible.  If it is possible to screw it up this badly in a test environment, which is almost certainly less stressful than actual combat, then it will be screwed up in real life as well. 

I don't know the specific issue here but AEGIS has a history or giving users data in non-intuitive ways (see Vincennes) and I'll bet the interface contributed here.  And there's never enough time or effort put into user interface design, because it's unsexy compared to other measures of system performance.
8
The Bar / Re: Nuclear Weapons - Discussion.
« Last post by bobbymike on Yesterday at 05:16:44 pm »
Latest Dept. of State New Start numbers

https://www.state.gov/t/avc/newstart/272337.htm

IIRC these are roughly the opposite from when the treaty was signed. We are down about 400 warheads and Russia is up around 400 warheads.

Russian strategic modernization is for a post New START world. All their new systems large MIRV potential combined with nuclear enterprise still capable of build 1000+ warheads/annum compared to our 15.
10
Military / Re: Standard SM-3 News & Dev.
« Last post by sferrin on Yesterday at 03:21:50 pm »
It's probably a more fundamental technology problem with the AEGIS user interface, which makes it hard to tell which track you're looking at.  If this sort of mistake is possible in a test environment, what's going to happen in a live environment where there might be actual friendly ballistic missiles flying around?  They really need to spend a lot more effort on human factors analysis and interface design, because this sort of mistake happens a lot more often than anyone wants to admit, and it can have major consequences.  I can think of one incident where bad AEGIS user interface design contributed to hundreds of deaths.

After 30 years in service I find it difficult to believe they wouldn't have encountered this issue (if it is one) before now and fixed it.  I'd be more worried about Joe Sailor just not being up to the task. 



Or having poor vision, or being overworked, or a plethora of other possibilities.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10