F-16 Source Code

"Gene Storey" wrote in message
news:NBxCb.1583$z74.1418@okepread03...
It was all in Ada, and you compiled all of your software on a DEC Alpha,
and
downloaded it into the firmware card, and plugged that back into the
radar.
There's something called a Security Classification Guide. While any one
or
two things might be unclassified, by tying them all together makes it
classified
at some level. There hasn't been much new in radar algorithms in the last
20 years. Everyone knows a lot about DSP, tracking, etc :-) Every Mig
I know of has an F-16 detector in its RHAW, ha. Stuff like PRF,
Frequency,
and algorithms actually used weren't published, which supposedly makes the
enemy have to work for it in their ESM gear. I'm sure the Soviets could
probably of told NATO more about the radar from just signal analysis, then
even Westinghouse engineers knew :-)


You might be right on some of the radar software, but there are probably a
dozen languages used on F-16's, mostly variants of Ada 83, Ada 94,
MIL-STD-1750A assembly, JOVIAL, C, and C++.

Some source code, expecially EW-oriented code, was not released.

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
...
I'm still trying to understand.

Does this mean that they gave you some of the code, and some object files.
In other words, did they give you some *.c files, but keep a few
things secret in the *.o files.

Bear in mind that software is used all over the place in a modern jet,
there's not simply a single computer that does everything. The company that
I work for does sonobuoy processors, crypto comms boxes, datalinks, etc. for
a number of US and UK aircraft programs. These products and their code is
the intellectual property of the company and is not releasable to the
customer. It's like any other embedded software product. Having said that,
often algorithms and research is done jointly with Universities or "customer
friend" organisations, such as QinetiQ (formerly DERA) in the UK, but it's
unusual for them to be given access to the product itself.

So basically, from my industry standpoint, we do not deliver source code to
the RAF, USAF, USMC or anybody else. Software Design Documents are
delievered, but the customers aren't interested in reverse engineering our
product. They have the budgets to come to us for enhancements or upgrades,
and they know we're the best suited to do the work which is why they came to
us in the first place. Plus copyright and patents are in place and protected
just as in the public sector.

Si

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 23:19:05 -0500, Charles Talleyrand wrote:

"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:emWBb.6458$US3.497@okepread03...
What!! I thought that the radar was the most top-secret portion of the
plane, and that the radar algorithms were a military secret. They hand it
out to graduate students??

Could you have gotten access to the flight control software? Could
the Belgian government?

Yes, the Belgium depot at Gosselies was heavily involved with the F-16
MLU (Mid-Life Upgrade).

Yes, all software that was meant to be changed over time is available to
several universities in their engineering schools. The highest classification
I saw was For Official Use Only, and not releasable to the public :-)
That included flight, engine and radar software.


I'm still trying to understand.

Does this mean that they gave you some of the code, and some object files.
In other words, did they give you some *.c files, but keep a few
things secret in the *.o files.

It was probably written in Ada.


--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

"Simon Robbins" wrote in message ...
The company that
I work for does sonobuoy processors, crypto comms boxes, datalinks, etc. for
a number of US and UK aircraft programs.





I've just always wondered.
What does a sonobouy cost. It seems one could use lots of them quicky,
and there is no recovery mechanism. How expensive is all this?

When you're trying to protect a ship that costs billions, then mere hundreds
of thousands a day is noise :-)

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote

I've just always wondered.
What does a sonobouy cost. It seems one could use lots of them quicky,
and there is no recovery mechanism. How expensive is all this?

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
...
I've just always wondered.
What does a sonobouy cost. It seems one could use lots of them quicky,
and there is no recovery mechanism. How expensive is all this?

Not sure that I would be allowed to divulge costs, but they're pretty cheap,
i.e. hundreds of pounds, rather than thousands. As a rule of thumb, active
buoys tend to cost more than passive, and generally speaking the greater the
number of hydrophones, the more expensive they are. But the greater cost is
I'm sure fielding the aircraft to drop and monitor them.

Si

"Simon Robbins" wrote:

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
...
I've just always wondered.
What does a sonobouy cost. It seems one could use lots of them quicky,
and there is no recovery mechanism. How expensive is all this?

Not sure that I would be allowed to divulge costs, but they're pretty cheap,
i.e. hundreds of pounds, rather than thousands. As a rule of thumb, active
buoys tend to cost more than passive, and generally speaking the greater the
number of hydrophones, the more expensive they are. But the greater cost is
I'm sure fielding the aircraft to drop and monitor them.

Si

By a very very long shot yes. Sonos are cheap, probably a couple
hundred dollars each, especially the passive ones. Just a cheaply
made audio board and a cheap low power VHF transmitter, about a
half watt of RF. A long (sometimes several hundred feet of cheap
twinlead wire, a salt-water battery, a ceramic transducer
(microphone) and a thin aluminum tube with a little four bladed
'prop' for descent stability. We used them by the thousand and
occasionally they'd become 'time expired' and they'd load maybe
40 or 50 on a local training flight and ask us to jettison them
over the ocean. I recall asking if I could save some for use in
the local Ham Radio Club and taking them apart for the little
transmitter. Great for 'Transmitter Hunts'

-Gord.

"I'm trying to get as old as I can,
and it must be working 'cause I'm
the oldest now that I've ever been"

Simon Robbins wrote:
"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
...
I've just always wondered.
What does a sonobouy cost. It seems one could use lots of them
quicky, and there is no recovery mechanism. How expensive is all
this?

Not sure that I would be allowed to divulge costs, but they're pretty
cheap, i.e. hundreds of pounds, rather than thousands. As a rule of
thumb, active buoys tend to cost more than passive, and generally
speaking the greater the number of hydrophones, the more expensive
they are. But the greater cost is I'm sure fielding the aircraft to
drop and monitor them.

In the US, you can find the contract award with numebrs and total contract
costs as public information. For example:

Sparton Defense Electronics, DeLeon Springs, Fla., is being awarded a
$7,136,416 firm-fixed-price contract for 6,303 AN/SSQ-62E sonobuoys and
associated data.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2..._ct075-03.html

That's a bit over a thousand dollars each (earlier contracts were similar,
in the range of $900 to $1300, usually). But the SSQ-62E is a directional
active (DICASS) buoy, about the most sophisticated type available.

Still, the cost has always been a concern and the Navy has made many efforts
to field cheaper buoys for initial searches. While it's attractive to
imagine laying patterns of buoys every hour or so in front of a convoy, the
sheer inventory needed for this is daunting. NATO could have run out very
fast in a notional WW3 Battle of the Atlantic.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

"Thomas Schoene" wrote:

Simon Robbins wrote:
"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
...
I've just always wondered.
What does a sonobouy cost. It seems one could use lots of them
quicky, and there is no recovery mechanism. How expensive is all
this?

Not sure that I would be allowed to divulge costs, but they're pretty
cheap, i.e. hundreds of pounds, rather than thousands. As a rule of
thumb, active buoys tend to cost more than passive, and generally
speaking the greater the number of hydrophones, the more expensive
they are. But the greater cost is I'm sure fielding the aircraft to
drop and monitor them.

In the US, you can find the contract award with numebrs and total contract
costs as public information. For example:

Sparton Defense Electronics, DeLeon Springs, Fla., is being awarded a
$7,136,416 firm-fixed-price contract for 6,303 AN/SSQ-62E sonobuoys and
associated data.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2..._ct075-03.html

That's a bit over a thousand dollars each (earlier contracts were similar,
in the range of $900 to $1300, usually). But the SSQ-62E is a directional
active (DICASS) buoy, about the most sophisticated type available.

Still, the cost has always been a concern and the Navy has made many efforts
to field cheaper buoys for initial searches. While it's attractive to
imagine laying patterns of buoys every hour or so in front of a convoy, the
sheer inventory needed for this is daunting. NATO could have run out very
fast in a notional WW3 Battle of the Atlantic.

These must be quite sophisticated directional buoys Thomas. While
I don't really know much about them I know that the simple
non-directional ones are considerably cheaper than that. If I
remember the type was AN/SSQ 517 and 518. they had (I think) a
selectable life of an hour (or so) or several hours. We turfed
them out at a great rate. A basic pattern was 9 buoys (that was
to get an idea of the targets direction then you extended the
pattern with one buoy then two buoys then one etc. Then when you
had a good reading on his direction you might try localizing him
with 'MAD' (using the 'stinger' on the tail of most ASW a/c) at
very low altitudes (~100 feet). these 'stingers' are part of the
'Magnetic Anomaly Detection' system which detect the changes in
the earth's magnetic field made by a large metal body (the
submarine)
--

-Gord.

Glenfiddich wrote:

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 04:54:25 GMT, "Gord Beaman" wrote:
"Thomas Schoene" wrote:
Simon Robbins wrote:
"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message...
What does a sonobouy cost. It seems one could use lots of them
quicky, and there is no recovery mechanism. How expensive is all
this?

Not sure that I would be allowed to divulge costs, but they're pretty
cheap, i.e. hundreds of pounds, rather than thousands. As a rule of
thumb, active buoys tend to cost more than passive, and generally
speaking the greater the number of hydrophones, the more expensive
they are. But the greater cost is I'm sure fielding the aircraft to
drop and monitor them.

In the US, you can find the contract award with numebrs and total contract
costs as public information. For example:

Sparton Defense Electronics, DeLeon Springs, Fla., is being awarded a
$7,136,416 firm-fixed-price contract for 6,303 AN/SSQ-62E sonobuoys and
associated data.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2..._ct075-03.html

That's a bit over a thousand dollars each (earlier contracts were similar,
in the range of $900 to $1300, usually). But the SSQ-62E is a directional
active (DICASS) buoy, about the most sophisticated type available.
...
These must be quite sophisticated directional buoys Thomas. While
I don't really know much about them I know that the simple
non-directional ones are considerably cheaper than that. If I
remember the type was AN/SSQ 517 and 518. they had (I think) a
selectable life of an hour (or so) or several hours. We turfed
them out at a great rate. A basic pattern was 9 buoys (that was
to get an idea of the targets direction then you extended the
pattern with one buoy then two buoys then one etc. Then when you
had a good reading on his direction you might try localizing him
with 'MAD' (using the 'stinger' on the tail of most ASW a/c) at
very low altitudes (~100 feet). these 'stingers' are part of the
'Magnetic Anomaly Detection' system which detect the changes in
the earth's magnetic field made by a large metal body (the
submarine)

Directional sonobuoys are more like helo dunking heads.
They need both a 'compass' and a directional sensor array - and
an active also needs a pinger.
That'll add a fair bit to the cost of a simple listening buoy.

More correctly you mean 'above the cost' of a simple listening
buoy I assume, and of course you're right.

Active buoys certainly would be very much more expensive. As I
pointed out, simple buoys are, well, simple.
--

-Gord.