\tNous avons peine \u00e0 suivre les mauvaises nouvelles concernant le JSF, dans tous les domaines possibles. Quand un ch\u00e2teau de cartes de ces dimensions himalayesques s’effondre, les d\u00e9bris volent dans tous les coins et de toutes les fa\u00e7ons<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tUne des grandes nouvelles de ces derniers jours a \u00e9t\u00e9 la publication du document annuel SAR (Special Acquisition Report<\/em>) du Pentagone, annon\u00e7ant que les co\u00fbts d’acquisition et de fonctionnement du programme (y compris l’op\u00e9rationnel) sur cinquante ann\u00e9es serait autour de $1.500 milliards au lieu de $1.000 milliards qui \u00e9tait jusqu’alors l’estimation admise. (Voir AOL.Defense<\/em>, du 30 mars 2012<\/a>.) Mais ces estimations sont peut-\u00eatre trop ambitieuses pour \u00eatre vraiment instructives, portant sur un demi-si\u00e8cle dont on ne sait ce qu’il donnera pour notre destin commun, alors, pour le JSF, d\u00e9j\u00e0 charg\u00e9 d’innombrables casseroles !… Ces estimations sont peut-\u00eatre m\u00eame compl\u00e8tement irr\u00e9elles, puisqu’elles prennent comme une r\u00e9f\u00e9rence de base que le JSF volera normalement, en mode op\u00e9rationnel.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tOr, c’est bien de ce point de vue que nous vient la nouvelle la plus importante, qui est une sorte d’aveu<\/strong>. C’est le g\u00e9n\u00e9ral Thompson, qui est adjoint au chef du JSF Program Office<\/em> (JPO) du Pentagone, qui l’a fait vendredi 30 mars devant des journalistes, ce qui est repris ici par Reuters, effectivement en date du 30 mars 2012<\/a>. Le g\u00e9n\u00e9ral Thompson, avec d’autres de fa\u00e7on implicite puisque le bruit commence \u00e0 se r\u00e9pandre que nous arrivons \u00e0 ce point critique, nous informe effectivement que le nud gordien du JSF c’est l’int\u00e9gration de son \u00e9norme architecture \u00e9lectronique. (Il s’agit des 22 millions de lignes code et tout ce qui va avec, dont nous parlions encore le 24 mars 2012<\/a>, effectivement comme le point de non retour de la catastrophe.) Et, pour la premi\u00e8re fois dans la bouche d’un officiel, appara\u00eet l’aveu indirect de la possibilit\u00e9 que cette d\u00e9marche n’aboutisse pas, et cela nous mettrait sur les genoux, K.O., vaincu, incapables de conduire le programme \u00e0 son terme, si l’on comprend bien<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abAir Force Major General John Thompson, the No. 2 official in charge of the huge multi-nation warplane development program, said the latest restructuring of the program had given officials enough resources and time to address future challenges. Both the hardware and the software issues that we’re addressing are all within the realm of being resolved, Thompson told reporters on Friday, noting that Pentagon plans to postpone orders for 179 for five years would allow more time for development before production shifts into high gear in 2019.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThompson said the program was also stepping up work on the 24 million lines of code needed to fly and operate the new warplane and associated ground-based equipment, such as simulators, Thompson said. The complexity there gives us pause, he said. We know we can go fix the mechanical engineering issues associated with structural problems. We’re very confident in that. But in terms of fusing together that many lines of code into actual warfighting capability,<\/em> we realize that could bring us to our knees if it doesn’t work.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe Defense Department singled out software development as one of its key concerns about the F-35 in Thursday’s report. The new fighter requires nearly 10 million lines of code on board the jet, to integrate the complex sensors, electronic warfare and onboard imagery equipment that will give it far more capability than earlier fighter jets. That is about twice as much software as used on the other stealthy fighter, the F-22.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbIn its latest report, the Pentagon said challenges with the integration of Block 1B and 2A software were slowing delivery of the next iteration. It said the latest restructuring had added a cushion if additional problems arose during the Block 2 and Block 3 development process. The program was also continuing work on mitigation strategies and trying to make more pro-active decisions about software development challenges, it said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe Pentagon’s chief weapons tester, Michael Gilmore, also raised concerns about F-35 software development in his annual report, noting that the program office had thus far approved use of just four of 28 needed models and simulations for the jet.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbLockheed concedes that its software development efforts are running about three months behind schedule, but says flight tests demonstrate that the software is working as developed. The company has invested an additional $150 million to build more laboratories to implement and test the software, and hired 200 additional software engineers, said Steve O’Bryan, vice president for business development. We recognize that it is a challenge and we’re putting resources toward it, he told Reuters on Thursday.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 3 avril 2012 \u00e0 14H56<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" L’aveu : le JSF sur les genoux… Nous avons peine \u00e0 suivre les mauvaises nouvelles concernant le JSF, dans tous les domaines possibles. Quand un ch\u00e2teau de cartes de ces dimensions himalayesques s’effondre, les d\u00e9bris volent dans tous les coins et de toutes les fa\u00e7ons Une des grandes nouvelles de ces derniers jours a \u00e9t\u00e9… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[5124,6410,3283,8208,250,14742,3474],"class_list":["post-74621","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-code","tag-electronique","tag-general","tag-jpo","tag-jsf","tag-lignes","tag-thompson"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74621","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=74621"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74621\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74621"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74621"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=74621"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}