Incident: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Structural Problems Impacting Lifespan.

Published Date: 2019-02-01

Postmortem Analysis
Timeline 1. The software failure incident involving the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, as reported in Article 80258, happened over a period of time leading up to the publication date of the article on February 1, 2019.
System 1. Computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS' [80258] 2. Software bugs [80258] 3. Technical glitches [80258] 4. Faulty eject system [80258] 5. Software causing pilot health concerns [80258]
Responsible Organization 1. Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, was responsible for causing the software failure incident [80258].
Impacted Organization 1. U.S. Marine Corps [80258] 2. Royal Air Force [80258]
Software Causes 1. Cybersecurity issues [80258] 2. Computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS' doesn't 'yet perform as intended' [80258]
Non-software Causes 1. Serious structural problems affecting the lifespan of the F-35B Joint Strike Fighters [80258] 2. Cybersecurity issues [80258] 3. 'Unacceptable' problems with the accuracy of guns fitted to the Air Force's A version of the plane [80258] 4. Computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS' not performing as intended [80258] 5. Maintenance personnel and pilots dealing with pervasive problems with data integrity and completeness on a daily basis [80258]
Impacts 1. Serious structural problems affecting the lifespan of the F-35B Joint Strike Fighters, leading to a reduced expected service life of just 2,100 flight hours instead of the intended 8,000 hours [80258]. 2. Cybersecurity issues were identified in all versions of the F-35 fighter jets [80258]. 3. Unacceptable problems with the accuracy of guns fitted to the Air Force's A version of the F-35 plane were reported [80258]. 4. The computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS' did not perform as intended, causing maintenance personnel and pilots to deal with pervasive problems related to data integrity and completeness on a daily basis [80258].
Preventions 1. Implementing thorough cybersecurity measures to prevent cybersecurity issues [80258]. 2. Conducting rigorous testing and quality assurance processes to identify and address flaws in the software [80258]. 3. Ensuring that the computerized maintenance tool, such as 'ALIS,' performs as intended to maintain data integrity and completeness [80258]. 4. Continuous monitoring and improvement of software performance and availability to fly training or combat missions [80258].
Fixes 1. Implementing planned modifications and fleet management of the early contract F-35B aircraft to ensure they meet the 8,000-hour service life requirement [80258]. 2. Resolving identified issues in partnership with the F-35 Joint Program Office or having an agreed path forward to resolution [80258].
References 1. Pentagon report 2. Bloomberg 3. Lockheed Martin 4. Defense Sec. Pat Shanahan 5. Test office director Robert Behler 6. The Drive 7. The Air Force 8. Luke Air Force Base personnel

Software Taxonomy of Faults

Category Option Rationale
Recurring unknown The articles do not mention any specific software failure incident happening again at the same organization or at multiple organizations. Therefore, the information related to the software failure incident recurrence is unknown.
Phase (Design/Operation) design, operation (a) The software failure incident related to the development phase can be attributed to design issues. The article mentions that the F-35 program has faced numerous delays, cost overruns, and setbacks, including software bugs, technical glitches, and even a faulty eject system [80258]. These issues indicate that there were contributing factors introduced during the design and development phases of the system that led to failures. (b) The software failure incident can also be linked to operation issues. The article reports that since May 2018, F-35 pilots have reported symptoms of hypoxia or oxygen deprivation during operation [80258]. This indicates that there were contributing factors introduced during the operation or misuse of the system that resulted in failures.
Boundary (Internal/External) within_system (a) within_system: The software failure incident related to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters is primarily within the system. The articles mention various issues with the F-35 software, such as cybersecurity issues, problems with the accuracy of guns, and issues with the computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS' not performing as intended [80258]. (b) outside_system: The articles do not provide information indicating that the software failure incident was primarily due to contributing factors originating from outside the system.
Nature (Human/Non-human) non-human_actions, human_actions (a) The software failure incident related to non-human actions in the F-35 program includes issues such as serious structural problems affecting the lifespan of the aircraft, cybersecurity issues, problems with the accuracy of guns, and issues with the computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS' not performing as intended [80258]. (b) On the other hand, the software failure incident related to human actions includes delays in the program, cost overruns, software bugs, technical glitches, and setbacks introduced by the engineers tasked with cutting weight off the aircraft model [80258].
Dimension (Hardware/Software) hardware (a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware: - The article mentions serious structural problems with the F-35B Joint Strike Fighters, which could cut their lifespan significantly [80258]. - The Pentagon report highlighted issues with the accuracy of guns fitted to the Air Force's A version of the plane, indicating hardware-related problems [80258]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to software: - The article does not specifically mention any software-related failures contributing to the issues with the F-35B Joint Strike Fighters. Therefore, there is no direct evidence of software-related failures in this incident.
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) non-malicious The software failure incident related to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters does not involve a malicious software failure incident. Instead, the issues reported in the articles are non-malicious in nature. The problems plaguing the F-35 include serious structural problems, cybersecurity issues, problems with the accuracy of guns, issues with the computerized maintenance tool ALIS, and pervasive problems with data integrity and completeness [80258]. These issues are related to design flaws, technical glitches, and operational challenges rather than intentional malicious actions.
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) unknown The articles do not provide information about a software failure incident related to poor_decisions or accidental_decisions.
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) accidental (a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence is not explicitly mentioned in the provided article. Therefore, there is no specific information available to indicate that the failure was due to a lack of professional competence by humans or the development organization. (b) The software failure incident related to accidental factors is evident in the article. The F-35 program has faced numerous delays, cost overruns, setbacks, and technical glitches, including an engine fire in 2014 that led to temporary grounding of the planes, software bugs, and even a faulty eject system that risked killing pilots who weighed less than 136 pounds [80258]. Additionally, since May 2018, F-35 pilots reported symptoms of hypoxia on five occasions, indicating concerns about pilot health and safety [80258]. These incidents point to software failures caused by accidental factors rather than intentional actions.
Duration unknown The software failure incident related to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters does not specifically mention any software-related issues that would fall under the categories of permanent or temporary failure. The reported problems mainly focus on serious structural issues, cybersecurity issues, problems with the accuracy of guns, and issues with the computerized maintenance tool ALIS. Therefore, the information provided does not directly address the duration of the software failure incident in terms of being permanent or temporary.
Behaviour value, other (a) crash: The articles do not specifically mention a software crash incident. (b) omission: The articles do not specifically mention a software omission incident. (c) timing: The articles do not specifically mention a software timing incident. (d) value: The articles mention cybersecurity issues and 'unacceptable' problems with the accuracy of guns fitted to the Air Force's A version of the plane, which could be considered as software failures related to value [80258]. (e) byzantine: The articles do not specifically mention a byzantine software failure incident. (f) other: The articles mention a computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS' that doesn't 'yet perform as intended' [80258]. This could be considered as a software failure related to other behavior.

IoT System Layer

Layer Option Rationale
Perception sensor, processing_unit, embedded_software The software failure incident related to the perception layer of the cyber physical system that failed can be summarized as follows: (a) sensor: The F-35 program faced various issues, including an engine fire in 2014, software bugs, technical glitches, and a faulty eject system that risked killing pilots who weighed less than 136 pounds [80258]. Additionally, since May 2018, F-35 pilots reported symptoms of hypoxia, or oxygen deprivation, on five occasions, leading to concerns about pilot health [80258]. (b) actuator: There is no specific mention of failures related to the actuator in the provided article. (c) processing_unit: The F-35 program experienced delays, cost overruns, and setbacks, including software bugs and technical glitches [80258]. (d) network_communication: There is no specific mention of failures related to network communication in the provided article. (e) embedded_software: The F-35 program faced issues with the computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS,' which didn't perform as intended, leading to maintenance personnel and pilots dealing with pervasive problems with data integrity and completeness on a daily basis [80258].
Communication unknown Unknown
Application FALSE The software failure incident related to the application layer of the cyber physical system that failed is not explicitly mentioned in the provided article. Therefore, it is unknown whether the failure was specifically related to the application layer as defined in the question.

Other Details

Category Option Rationale
Consequence non-human, other (a) death: People lost their lives due to the software failure - There is no mention of people losing their lives due to the software failure incident reported in the articles [80258]. (b) harm: People were physically harmed due to the software failure - There is no mention of people being physically harmed due to the software failure incident reported in the articles [80258]. (c) basic: People's access to food or shelter was impacted because of the software failure - There is no mention of people's access to food or shelter being impacted due to the software failure incident reported in the articles [80258]. (d) property: People's material goods, money, or data was impacted due to the software failure - The software failure incident related to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters did not directly impact people's material goods, money, or data [80258]. (e) delay: People had to postpone an activity due to the software failure - The software failure incident did not mention any specific activities being postponed due to the issues with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters [80258]. (f) non-human: Non-human entities were impacted due to the software failure - The software failure incident primarily affected the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters themselves, which are non-human entities [80258]. (g) no_consequence: There were no real observed consequences of the software failure - The software failure incident involving the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters did have observed consequences, such as serious structural problems affecting the lifespan of the aircraft and various flaws identified in different versions of the fighter [80258]. (h) theoretical_consequence: There were potential consequences discussed of the software failure that did not occur - The articles do not mention potential consequences discussed that did not occur as a result of the software failure incident [80258]. (i) other: Was there consequence(s) of the software failure not described in the (a to h) options? What is the other consequence(s)? - The consequences of the software failure incident primarily revolved around the impact on the expected lifespan, structural integrity, and operational capabilities of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, as well as issues related to cybersecurity, accuracy of weapons systems, and data integrity for maintenance personnel and pilots [80258].
Domain government (a) The failed system was intended to support the defense industry, specifically the U.S. Marine Corps' F-35B Joint Strike Fighters [80258]. The software failure incident involved serious structural problems, cybersecurity issues, and accuracy problems with the guns fitted to the Air Force's A version of the plane. Additionally, there were issues with the computerized maintenance tool known as 'ALIS' not performing as intended, leading to pervasive problems with data integrity and completeness for maintenance personnel and pilots [80258]. (l) The failed system was also related to the government industry, as the F-35 program is a defense project involving the U.S. military and the Pentagon [80258]. The software failure incident impacted the operational readiness and service life of the F-35 aircraft, which are crucial assets for national defense and military operations.

Sources

Back to List