Incident: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Grounded Due to Engine Turbine Blade Crack

Published Date: 2013-02-22

Postmortem Analysis
Timeline 1. The software failure incident of the crack in the engine turbine blade of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter happened on February 19, 2013, as reported in Article [17166, 17351].
System 1. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter engine turbine blade [17166, 17351]
Responsible Organization 1. The software failure incident in this case was caused by a crack in the engine turbine blade of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is a hardware issue rather than a software issue. The responsible entity for causing this incident would be the manufacturer of the engine turbine blade, United Technologies unit Pratt & Whitney [17166, 17351].
Impacted Organization 1. The U.S. Department of Defense [17166, 17351] 2. The U.S. military [17351]
Software Causes unknown
Non-software Causes 1. The failure incident was caused by a crack in an engine turbine blade of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, leading to the grounding of the entire fleet [17166, 17351]. 2. The crack in the turbine blade was discovered during routine inspection, indicating a manufacturing or material defect in the engine component [17166, 17351]. 3. The grounding was precautionary until a thorough evaluation and root cause analysis could be conducted by the manufacturer, Pratt & Whitney [17166, 17351]. 4. Previous incidents of engine-blade problems in 2008 and faulty fuel pump in 2010 and 2011 have also contributed to the ongoing issues with the F-35 program [17351].
Impacts 1. The entire fleet of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters was grounded multiple times due to engine-related issues, including a crack in the engine turbine blade [17166, 17351]. 2. The grounding affected F-35 testing in multiple locations and initial pilot training, causing significant delays in the program [17351]. 3. The grounding led to uncertainties about the fleet-wide impact of the turbine blade crack, prompting a thorough evaluation and root cause analysis by the manufacturer [17351]. 4. The grounding raised concerns about the potential impact on the frontline debut of the Joint Strike Fighter, which was initially expected in 2018 or 2019 [17351].
Preventions 1. Implementing more rigorous quality control measures during the manufacturing process to detect and prevent defects in engine components [17166, 17351]. 2. Conducting more frequent and thorough routine inspections of the engine components to identify potential issues before they lead to operational failures [17166, 17351]. 3. Enhancing the design and testing processes to ensure the reliability and durability of critical components like turbine blades in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter engines [17166, 17351].
Fixes 1. Conducting a thorough evaluation and root cause analysis of the cracked turbine blade in the engine by the manufacturer, Pratt & Whitney, to understand the specific cause of the issue [17166, 17351]. 2. Implementing any necessary design changes or improvements based on the findings of the investigation to prevent similar issues in the future [17166, 17351]. 3. Resuming flight operations of the F-35 fleet once the investigation is complete and any necessary corrective actions have been taken [17166, 17351].
References 1. The U.S. Department of Defense 2. Pentagon 3. United Technologies unit Pratt & Whitney 4. Program spokeswoman Kyra Hawn 5. Lockheed Martin

Software Taxonomy of Faults

Category Option Rationale
Recurring one_organization (a) The software failure incident having happened again at one_organization: The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program has experienced multiple software failure incidents within the same organization, the U.S. Department of Defense. The articles mention that the F-35 had engine-blade problems in 2008 [Article 17351], and more recently, in 2013, the entire fleet of F-35s was grounded due to a crack in the engine turbine blade [Article 17166]. These incidents indicate a recurring issue with the F-35 program within the U.S. Department of Defense. (b) The software failure incident having happened again at multiple_organization: There is no specific mention in the articles of the software failure incident happening again at other organizations or with their products and services.
Phase (Design/Operation) unknown (a) The software failure incident related to the design phase is not mentioned in the provided articles. Therefore, it is unknown if the failure was due to contributing factors introduced by system development, system updates, or procedures to operate or maintain the system. (b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is not explicitly mentioned in the articles. The reported incident is primarily focused on a crack in an engine turbine blade of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is a hardware issue rather than a software issue. Therefore, it is unknown if the failure was due to contributing factors introduced by the operation or misuse of the system.
Boundary (Internal/External) within_system The software failure incident related to the grounding of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter fleet was primarily within_system. The incident was caused by a crack in the engine turbine blade, which is an internal component of the aircraft's propulsion system. The crack was discovered during routine inspection [17166, 17351]. The investigation and analysis of the issue were focused on the engine itself and its manufacturer, Pratt & Whitney, indicating an internal system-related problem.
Nature (Human/Non-human) non-human_actions (a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions: - The software failure incident in this case was not due to non-human actions but rather a physical issue with the engine turbine blade, specifically a crack in the low-pressure turbine blade of the F-35's engine [17166, 17351]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions: - The software failure incident was not attributed to human actions but rather to a crack in the engine turbine blade discovered during routine inspection, leading to the grounding of the F-35 fleet [17166, 17351].
Dimension (Hardware/Software) hardware (a) The software failure incident in this case is related to hardware. The grounding of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter fleet was due to a crack in the engine turbine blade, which is a hardware issue. The crack was discovered during routine inspection, leading to the suspension of all F-35 flight operations until further investigation and evaluation [17166, 17351]. (b) There is no specific mention of a software-related failure incident in the provided articles.
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) non-malicious The software failure incident reported in the provided articles is related to a non-malicious cause. The incident involved a crack in the engine turbine blade of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which was discovered during routine inspection [17166, 17351]. The grounding of the entire fleet of F-35s was a precautionary measure taken until a thorough evaluation and root cause analysis could be conducted to understand the impact of the crack on the low-pressure turbine blade [17351]. The grounding was not attributed to any malicious intent but rather to ensure the safety and reliability of the aircraft.
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) unknown The articles do not mention any software failure incident related to poor decisions or accidental decisions.
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) accidental (a) The articles do not mention any software failure incident related to development incompetence. (b) The grounding of the U.S. military's entire fleet of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters was due to a crack in the engine of one jet, specifically a crack on a low-pressure turbine blade of an F135 engine [Article 17351]. This incident was accidental and not due to development incompetence.
Duration temporary The software failure incident related to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter grounding was temporary. The incident was caused by a crack in the engine turbine blade, leading to the suspension of all F-35 flight operations until the investigation was complete [17166, 17351]. The grounding was a precautionary measure taken until a thorough evaluation and root cause analysis of the issue could be conducted. This indicates that the failure was due to contributing factors introduced by certain circumstances (the crack in the turbine blade) but not all circumstances, making it a temporary software failure incident.
Behaviour other (a) crash: The software failure incident in this case does not involve a crash as the issue is related to a physical crack in an engine turbine blade, not a system losing state and failing to perform its intended functions [17166, 17351]. (b) omission: The software failure incident does not involve omission as the issue is not about the system omitting to perform its intended functions at an instance(s) [17166, 17351]. (c) timing: The software failure incident does not involve timing issues as the system is not performing its intended functions too late or too early [17166, 17351]. (d) value: The software failure incident does not involve the system performing its intended functions incorrectly [17166, 17351]. (e) byzantine: The software failure incident does not involve the system behaving erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions [17166, 17351]. (f) other: The software failure incident is related to a physical issue with the engine turbine blade, not a software-related behavior as described in the options (a) to (e) [17166, 17351].

IoT System Layer

Layer Option Rationale
Perception None None
Communication None None
Application None None

Other Details

Category Option Rationale
Consequence property, delay, non-human, theoretical_consequence (a) death: There is no mention of any deaths resulting from the software failure incident in the provided articles [17166, 17351]. (b) harm: There is no mention of physical harm to individuals resulting from the software failure incident in the provided articles [17166, 17351]. (c) basic: There is no mention of people's access to food or shelter being impacted due to the software failure incident in the provided articles [17166, 17351]. (d) property: The software failure incident did impact material goods in the form of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter fleet being grounded due to a crack in the engine turbine blade, causing delays in testing and training [17166, 17351]. (e) delay: The software failure incident caused delays in the testing and training of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter fleet due to the grounding of all aircraft until the issue was investigated and resolved [17166, 17351]. (f) non-human: The software failure incident impacted the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, which are non-human entities, by grounding the entire fleet for inspection and investigation [17166, 17351]. (g) no_consequence: There were observed consequences of the software failure incident, such as the grounding of the F-35 fleet and delays in testing, indicating that there were consequences [17166, 17351]. (h) theoretical_consequence: The articles mention potential consequences of the software failure incident, such as the impact on the low pressure turbine blade and the need for a thorough evaluation and root cause analysis, but these consequences were not fully realized at the time of reporting [17166, 17351]. (i) other: There are no other specific consequences mentioned in the articles beyond the grounding of the F-35 fleet and the delays in testing and training due to the software failure incident [17166, 17351].
Domain government (a) The failed system was intended to support the defense industry, specifically the U.S. Department of Defense's Joint Strike Fighter program, which includes the F-35 fighter jets [17166, 17351]. (l) The system failure incident is related to the government sector as it involves the grounding of the U.S. military's fleet of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, which are used for defense purposes [17166, 17351].

Sources

Back to List