digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at gizmodo.com

F-22 Raptor Airframes Falling Apart Due to Bad Glue

gizmodo.com — According to a just-released Air Combat Command report, 30 of the F-22A Raptors delivered by Lockheed Martin use "inadequate adhesive" in their airframes. That means two things in plain language: bad glue and BIG trouble.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Berkana, on 03/29/2008, -34/+45We are spending far too much money beefing up defenses that are not going to be challenged in future wars. What air force in the world would even try to face us in combat? Meanwhile, our cyber-defenses are woefully inadequate. The thing about warfare is that your opponent will always try to hit you where it hurts you the most while costing them the least, with plausible deniability as a bonus if possible. And in future conflicts, our weak spot is our information infrastructure. We've spent far too much on these planes, which will probably never see combat to any extent comparable to their capabilities because they will be superseded by unmanned combat craft, which we're also developing, while daily our info-structure is being subverted by foreign hackers, most notably from China. What a stinking travesty.
    • sfacets, on 03/29/2008, -21/+12If you continue being jackasses, the rest of the world might come to their senses.
    • capecodcarl, on 03/29/2008, -27/+4We'll see who has the last laugh when the Al Qaeda air force bombs YOUR city into oblivion because we had inadequate air superiority in the United States military.
      • staticneuron, on 03/29/2008, -2/+8lol..... I heard the Al Qaeda air force has been giving the palestine airforce some extra planes as well. So both the USA and israel would be in trouble.
      • sv650touring, on 03/29/2008, -4/+7There is no level of sarcasm high enough to not require a /sarcasm tag on digg.
      • RobotCitizen, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1My sarc-meter is usually pretty good, but I missed it this time. Sorry for the digg-down.
    • inigomntoya, on 03/29/2008, -10/+21The Soviet Air Forced regularly flies over Alaska. Would you have them make it all the way to central Missouri?
      • bromac, on 03/29/2008, -4/+17The Soviets?

        By the way, they regularly fly 2 miles into US airspace, not into the middle of Alaska. They'd never make it that far: Elmendorf is a major air force base and is too big of a target, it's definitely not undefended. Thanks for the Red scare though.
      • plaunie, on 03/29/2008, -1/+6inigomntoya: this may help:
        http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Idiots-Twentieth-Ce ...
      • Lunarbunny, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8Sorry to break it to you but the Soviet Union collapsed nearly 2 decades ago.
        • Ademan, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1...or did they? oh wait, yeah, they did...
          But he is right to a degree, russia has been acting pretty creepy lately...
          • Lunarbunny, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2Eh, pretty much all of Russia's "incursions" are dick-waving.
        • bonds, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1No......NO!!!!!!!!! You don't mean that!!!
      • Berkana, on 03/30/2008, -0/+31) The "soviet air force" doesn't exist anymore
        2) for every one time one of their planes flies over our airspace, Chinese hackers break into US servers hundreds of times, and Chinese malware infects hundreds of US computers.

        I'm not saying that we ditch the airforce; I'm saying we rethink our spending priorities according to our vulnerabilities.
    • Ellipsys, on 03/29/2008, -0/+12Actually, USAF CyberCommand is developing quite nicely. Their General-in-command even took questions from /. , answering them with the minimal amount of BS he could do so and still keep his job. So they know that China is an issue, as do the CIA, DIA, NSA and DARPA.
      • Berkana, on 03/30/2008, -0/+2The problem isn't that; the problem is the pervasive lack of security everywhere else. Microsoft and Apple need to have a summit with the CyberCommand and harden their software, and best practices need to be implemented on a wide-spread basis.
      • Fergy, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1I think those old men should get the memo that nobody uses 'Cyber' anymore :)
    • emitemirp, on 03/29/2008, -0/+16Well the very same Air Force that you demean is actually building a new CyberSpace command to do exactly that! So do a little research before making assumptions. Please see http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123030505 for the announcement. Right now it is building the infrastructure and by October this year it will be a full fledged command of the Air Force.
      • EarlOfLade, on 03/29/2008, -6/+5Which is exactly the moment they will begin to read all your internet communications without warrants, just like NSA and several others are already doing.

        Welcome to USA, where laws are for show and a dictator is elected for 4 years at a time!
        • nospinhere, on 03/29/2008, -2/+2Did you call 1-800-WAA-WAAA with that frivolous complaint?
      • Berkana, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1I know we have a CyberSpace command; I've seen the ads. What I'm talking about is spending priorities.

        How much do we spend on air power? How much do we spend on infosec? Which one is a greater vulnerability? We have not been spending our efforts and money in proportion to our vulnerabilities. That's what I'm saying.
    • Bkaufman, on 03/29/2008, -10/+2Chinese Hackers >>>>>>>>>> American Hackers
      • Ellipsys, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8Untrue. The thing is, there is some supporting evidence that they are government sponsored and immune to prosecution. Trust me, if some FBI agent walked into Defcon and said "Okay, all of you guys can now do whatever the hell you want. We're not going to press charges, we're not going to hand you over to foreign government, just do a few things for us and you can have whatever fun you like. Oh, and a handful of you we'll employ, give you a bunch of secrets and you'll get rich working for us directly" the disparity between supposedly elite Chinese hackers and those from other countries would vanish quickly.
      • prophetpimp, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Meh. The Chinese Hackers in CnC Zero hour were Pansies.
        Jarmen >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chinese Hacker.
    • dcollins, on 03/29/2008, -3/+8Buried for getting up on your soapbox. This article has nothing to do with what you're talking about.
    • OffPiste, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3"cyber-defenses are woefully inadequate"

      Right.......Exactly how many times have SIPR or the high side been compromised? Who cares about NIPR?
    • S1ngular1ty1, on 03/29/2008, -0/+7Ist of all, the airframe isn't falling apart. A coating of radar absorbing material fell off. Entirely different problem and much less dramatic than the Gizmodo article makes it out to be.

      "There's a reason we now know this bit of F-22A arcana. On November 1, a small patch of LO material sheared off the inlet for the right engine on takeoff. The material was sucked into the engine, causing more than $1.2 million in damage."
      • Lunarbunny, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Strange, they went back to glue-on sections for the F-22? I thought they liked the spray-on system that they use on the B-2 better.
        • nospinhere, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Different decades, different technology.
          • Lunarbunny, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Well the thing is that they used a glue-on RAM system for the F-117 but it caused maintenance headaches because sections would have to be pulled off to access internals, then new pieces would have to be fit and glued. The B-2 instead just gets the RAM scraped off, maintenance is done, then a system made just for the B-2 sprays on new RAM.
    • ryanknapper, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2"What air force in the world would even try to face us in combat?"
      They aren't afraid to engage us because we spend too little on our air defense.
      • Berkana, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1They would have been afraid to engage us back when we were stocked with F15's; we then went and upgraded to the tune of many billions of dollars to a fleet of weapons designed to fight the Soviet Union if it were to have survived and kept up its pace of advancement. That didn't happen, so now, perhaps we should reconsider the cost of continued pursuit of airforce aircraft upgrades. You're falling for a fallacy of a false dichotomy: it's not as if the only two options are to spend as much as we are right now, or to spend too little. We can spend just enough, and we vastly overshot that.
  • c130commnav, on 03/29/2008, -9/+19Being an aircraft maintainer for the USAF this isn't much of a surprise. It is amazing how much money we spend on things, and yet they turn out to be complete crap.
    • Gorgamel, on 03/29/2008, -5/+1Crap. nevermind. I dont know how to delete a comment.
      • dtd00d, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1We'll bury it for you. But next time be more creative ;)
    • KaJuN4, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1How does the saying go again? Millions of parts all supplied by the lowest bidder.
  • mwrl, on 03/29/2008, -4/+49Old Old Old Old The problem was addressed months ago.
    • afx1, on 03/29/2008, -0/+19i remember that, elmer's stock shot up that month
    • maxthreepwood, on 03/29/2008, -3/+1No, this is not old. The report was released this week. It's new.
      • 1gunners4, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1They'd fix the problem before they'd report it, especially about a jet that isn't technically supposed to be flying combat missions as of yet.
        • tightscrummy, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1And some joker on digg named "mwrl" would know about this?
    • finalcloud33, on 03/29/2008, -0/+5Yup old and fixed.... I work at Lockheed Martin Owego New York an I have read all about it in corporate news.
    • dysonlu, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3And smartass Gizmodo says it spells "big trouble". LOL. They like rehashing the tidbits of stories from other sources but are too lazy to check the dates of the actual events.
  • drifter, on 03/29/2008, -12/+6Yet Lockheed cries when the government doesn't give them a contract. This just makes it more evident that made in America doesn't necessarily mean better.

    They should lose their contract and any others especially if it is proven this was due to being cheap or not properly testing the aircrafts.
    • KillaJazzBass, on 03/29/2008, -0/+9I think you mean Boeing..
      • drifter, on 03/29/2008, -2/+2So just because Boeing recently got upset that means Lockheed has never lost a contract and never gotten pissed? Do some research Lockheed has complained before too.
    • unreg, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Lockheed took it in the nuts big time when the KH satellite programs went to Boeing. Surprisingly Boeing managed to ***** it up to such an extent that it was given back to Lockheed.
  • RegalGSX, on 03/29/2008, -1/+16Should have been more liberal with the Elmers.
    • heavyd14, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4They need more magic putty, or whatever that Billy Mays stuff is called.
      • h4mx0r, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3And if they order now, they get a second tube of that Billy May stuff too!
      • spyd3rweb, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Imagine if a consumer product for $19.95 outperforms some $1 billion dollar government contract glue they're using.
        • ShnowDoggie, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1Get real. Try and build a plane that can evade radar, outrun your voice, turn almost on a dime, and so on. This is (or maybe was) a big deal. But 1.2 million damage on one of those fighter planes is not a show stopper. Hopefully just a learning experience.
    • jgzman, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1No, more liberal means the terrorists win!
  • adh3isive, on 03/29/2008, -3/+24Should have used me instead.
  • animus, on 03/29/2008, -31/+1does lockheed know theres a new thing called welding which is much better than glue?
    • larthallor, on 03/29/2008, -3/+37Ever try welding carbon fiber?
      • linagee, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4I tried it and it didn't work. That's why we used glue + rivets. :)
      • EchoAlpha, on 03/29/2008, -2/+10I once had someone ask me if we were going to be welding aluminum to polycarbonate plastic, and he was dead serious. I died a little inside that day.
      • mkaufman, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1actually, it's possible
        You only have to use a thermoplastic matrix material.
    • killerofkiller, on 03/29/2008, -0/+9your post makes me cry
      • OffPiste, on 03/29/2008, -5/+1Your inability to see his sarcasm makes ALL of us cry.
    • S1ngular1ty1, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8That's it folks. Problem solved by animus. We'll just weld the fibers together. Animus, are you sure you don't already work for the company who makes the F-22 ?
      • EarlOfLade, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2He suggested welding but was shot down and was made responsible for the glue. Toys R'Us ran out of supply pretty quickly!
  • Aooogah, on 03/29/2008, -16/+10What do you expect from Lockheed? These are the same morons that wound up destroying that Mars probe because they used Imperial measurement instead of metric.
    • FireStrife, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5Are you serious, Lockheed has made great aircrafts. Stupid things happen.
    • Aooogah, on 03/29/2008, -4/+6Don't believe me?
      http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric. ...
    • sirlancelot88, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Nobody is doubting that the Mars Climate Orbiter tragedy happened. But FireStrife is right; Lockheed has made excellent products. Using Imperial measurements has been a status quo common practice in the aerospace industry every since its conception.
  • keltin, on 03/29/2008, -12/+19Berk, I think you're wrong in your presumption and analysis.
    Newer planes are (were) needed, but using something like a Stealth Skin requires using newer technologies. It's not a step forward, it is warp speed ahead. You can't expect a head to head confrontation with anyone in the near future except China. In less than 10 years they'll be strong enough with aircraft, subs and missiles, to successfully coerce Taiwan back into their orbit. So your premise sucks.
    What we really need, is good humint systems, cyber systems (good mark on that one, Berk) and using some of that Super Glue to reattach a backbone into the Leftists of the country (Code Pink, DailyKox, Huffington, CNN, Democratic Party). Not telling your enemies you want to 'pull back to the borders' is one of the best things that group could do.
    • deuceswilde, on 03/29/2008, -4/+3People significantly overestimate China's military capability. It's certainly a country to watch but they can't even build turbofan engines for their fighters on their own yet. If coercion was all that was needed to get Taiwan back in line then they certainly have enough missiles and ground forces right now to do the job several times, yet Taiwan is not coerced (thanks to US backing).
      I really think we need to still develop these technologies, but then spending billions to actually put it into action when it's not needed is wasteful when there are other issues that need addressing.
      • jakeson2, on 03/29/2008, -2/+5Maybe if Hillary gets elected she can give that tech to the Chinese for some campaign money, just as Bill gave the Chinese army missile tech for campaign cash in 1994. I for one expect our money to build the Chinese into an armed force to challenge the US in would supremacy because we buy so much from Wal Mart. Further, I expect the liberals to applaud that fact, now, before, and after it happens.
      • keltin, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2Yes, we've usually kept the technological rating of the Chinese quite low, because they were. Heck, it wasn't until the laste 1990's that they got good enough information to be able to revamp their targeting on their ICBMs to be able to go from about a CEP of 1 mile to about 50 m now.
        Two things to take into account: The numbers of each of their weapons systems will continue building to an incredibly large number of weapons on the ground. When you reach a certain point in war gaming, the quality is overcome by quantity. That was our concern facing the Russians in the armour standoff of Warsaw Pact v. Nato. At the same time, Russia was scared white that they might have to face the Chinese (in the 90's) across the Amur River and the Siberian Far East...cause the Chinese had unholy large numbers of relatively low tech weapons that would've overwhelmed the Russkis.
        Now, since we DO buy so much crap at Wal-Mart's et.al., n about 10 years the quality of the rest of the Chinese weaponolgy is going to be two generations improved, in quality if not quantity.
    • charlietuna, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3I'm probably left of you politically, but that was the first clearly thought out post I have seen on this subject in a month. I think humint is the biggest challenge, and the US is so addicted to satellites and crypto analysis that we are losing our ability to determine the intent of potential enemies. Without humint we are left with a presumption of intent thus increasing the likelihood of preemptive strikes which do little to enhance our security while diminishing our influence in the global community.
      • keltin, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Well, Charlile, you hit the ten ring on that comment on humint. Once the techno nerds started getting hold of the intell money at NSA, CIA and DIA, they just let the humint handlers retire without anyone putting newbies in their place to carry on. You are absolutely right (or Left, that's okay, too) that the limits of sifting the electrons in the ether is very limiting. Humint needs to be increased by a factor of ten.
    • JulyZerg, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1There's a reply button for a reason, you know... And saying "get rid of the non-war loving population would be a bad idea, I think. They do more for you than you think. Not everyone's willing to join the army, even if it does receive far too much funding - all it's doing is bombing Iraq, and when they find a country with more oil, they'll bomb it too.
      • klbclem, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1Its not the military's (or the army as you singled out) fault, they don't make decisions...however the government that we collectedly elected does.
  • chrisaug18, on 03/29/2008, -4/+3Well your not going to get any sympathy from me
    • osbjmg, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1This is the last time *****; the word you're looking for is YOU'RE.
  • Angus5, on 03/29/2008, -21/+1Must have been made by Microsoft
    • SonicRush, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8Yeah, they've had so many problems with their adhesives, it's amazing people still buy Windows....
    • WindReaver, on 03/30/2008, -1/+2Are you kidding? Microsoft used a glue so strong that Windows and Internet Explorer could not ever be separated again!
  • sfacets, on 03/29/2008, -2/+5How slow is Gizmondo atm? Geez, 10 minutes to load text and links...
  • NSResponder, on 03/29/2008, -10/+4What's ridiculous is continuing to build manned fighter aircraft. The performance limit is the acceleration the pilot can take without dying of a stroke.

    -jcr
    • unreg, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2There is always going to be a need for a man in the cockpit for certain flight situations. The use of unmanned aircraft in reducing the exposure (and expense) of our pilots is a great asset.
  • kdoyle55, on 03/29/2008, -17/+5Im surprised none of the retards on digg have made this connection ....

    "ZOMG...Bush ordered the bad glue just like he ordered 9/11....America sucks...***** Cheney too.....and oh yeah im a ***** idiot"

    lol
  • dreamlayers, on 03/29/2008, -3/+25Inaccurate sensationalist blogspam from Gizmodo! They say they got it from:
    http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008 ...
    There, I read that the low observable (radar absorbing) material is glued on with bad glue. This doesn't mean that the plane falls apart like the picture, it means that small patches of material fall off the surface.
    • S1ngular1ty1, on 03/29/2008, -0/+5Never trust what you read on blogs. They usually don't even understand what they are reporting.
    • passedoutghost, on 03/30/2008, -0/+0Yeah, but when enough small parts fall off the surface wouldn't that give away it's radar signature? I remember the F117 having radar absorbing paint, so I assume the F22 has the same tech unless I'm mistaken?
  • hcuar, on 03/29/2008, -1/+4I guess a dab... won't do ya.
  • uziko, on 03/29/2008, -1/+6they should have used superglue
  • ssn697, on 03/29/2008, -2/+7I wonder who sniffed this out...
  • pond70, on 03/29/2008, -2/+10duct-tape ... like come on !
    • linagee, on 03/29/2008, -10/+1duct-tape is nothing more on glue on plastic backing. (and does a very poor job at actually sealing ducts)
    • MikeFallopian, on 03/29/2008, -1/+0Aircraft mechanics call it "100 mph tape", get with the program.
      • BossKey, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2too bad this plane goes a lot faster than that!
        • S1ngular1ty1, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1So there is no mach 2 duct tape ?
    • kajoob, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1I guess the guy in the $140million jet fighter is gonna use duct tape? COME ON!
    • keltin, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2It's all a matter of timing. Duct tape would've worked as a wonderful fixit for the WWI biplanes and all. And, yes, I did see it on a patch about a half foot square on a trainer once (no, I wasn't in WWI).
    • dtd00d, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1I think there's been an upgrade to EB Green:
      http://lubbers-line.blogspot.com/2006/03/eb-green- ...
  • rowlodge, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2a little tacky glue will fix that.
  • dhVyse, on 03/29/2008, -0/+20So re-glue it....
    • linagee, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2You'll also have to take the rivets out / plane apart. Very expensive. (Not saying that isn't what they might end up doing.)
      • S1ngular1ty1, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5It isn't the airframe that is falling apart. Just a coating on the exterior surfaces that is coming off.
  • nycmac247, on 03/29/2008, -5/+3this is what happens when we don't support our military!!
    /sarc
  • Procure, on 03/29/2008, -1/+66"YOU FAIL ME YET AGAIN, STARSCREAM!"
  • uncoveror, on 03/29/2008, -16/+1Planes glued together? The Nazis tried that at the end of WWII when they were losing and desperate. Why is a nation spending enough every year on weapons to feed the world for eternity using such a stupid construction technique?
    • Jawoodyablowme, on 03/29/2008, -0/+6Because technology improved dramatically in the last 68 years. And when it comes to carbon fiber and the resin airframes, nothing beats "glue".
    • dinostabOMG, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8Because they don't have you as lead designer for their aircraft. Christ, if you know everything why don't you go do something about it?
    • unreg, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4Howard Hughes constructed one of the worlds largest and most impressive aircraft ever using wood and glue. The British Mosquito bomber, one of the fast and most agile aircraft of WW2 was constructed of wood and glue. Glue has significant advantages over other techniques such as rivets or welding, including but not limited to: Elimination of stress risers, elimination of heat induced deformation and higher strength.
    • jseres, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1I didn't know less than 5% of the total budget of the Department of Defense could feed the world forever, and keep in mind we still spend almost 10% more of the GDP on Health and Human services compared to Military Spending. Also just a quick question, have you ever built a plane before? I'm pretty sure welding carbon fiber isn't as effective as gluing it, but that's just what they taught me in chemistry class, don't take my word for it.
    • S1ngular1ty1, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Haha, you sir are an idiot. Most new jets extensively use glue to hold the airframe together. I guess you never heard of composites before?
  • MrWhite7, on 03/29/2008, -5/+3Somebody shoulda gone with Boeing...
    • tricks574, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Lockheed > Boeing. Plus, Boeing's submission for that plane was half-assed, if that plane *the tanker* was half the plane the Northrup one was, they would have gotten the contract.
    • mrpither, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2Boeing builds the fuselage of the F-22.
      And cries like a little baby when they aren't handed contracts they don't deserve to win.
    • erkokite, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1The F-22 is a joint Lockheed/Boeing project. The YF-23 that competed for the contract with the F-22 was made by Northrop Grumman.
  • adml_shake, on 03/29/2008, -0/+9Bet some Gorilla glue would have held...
  • bradleyland, on 03/29/2008, -1/+7Wonder what kind of warranty they get for their ~$140 million.
    • Disgod, on 03/29/2008, -0/+0None, that's why all military contracts are cost plus
    • bonds, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1They have to mail the planes in for repair.
  • ThatEvilGuy, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=iBzyaspqhy0&feature= ...
  • slave1, on 03/29/2008, -1/+8must be some fake glue from china
    • slippy4twenty, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2nahhhh it was from china, but the lead in the glue decreased effectiveness.
  • KillaJazzBass, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2I feel bad for the maintainers on that bird, those crew chiefs better get out the exacto knifes and some form 22s for the T.O revision.
  • gplpark92, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3need more poxy
  • chanop, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1I figured they'd use duct tape, opposed to glue
  • cadmiumpaint, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8so its like a really really really expensive model kit?
    • Jawoodyablowme, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1Yeah. All the assemblers open up the drums and stand around and sniff it. It's not the glue: the workers are just high.
  • Vytorious, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4Actually, industrial adhesive is very strong, usually stronger than the materials it is bonding. This seems like a manufacturing error. Wonder who is going to tell the pilot?
  • OffPiste, on 03/29/2008, -9/+3We can't get a Democrat in the white-house quick enough. When will the insanity end?
    • bstew22, on 03/29/2008, -2/+4eff you.
    • abran1984, on 03/29/2008, -2/+3Obama will personally check every plane before it's given the green light for war missions.

      Obama 08!
    • Jawoodyablowme, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1When we get a third party in the Whitehouse. Both the republicans and democrats are selling out the American people to special interests. Obama wont be any different.
    • 1timeuser, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1 What the hell does that have to do with glue and airplanes?
  • marx2k, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1Unfortunately the budget for Airplane Glue went towards shell casings and toilet seats. DAMN!
    • unreg, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Probably bought the glue from the same ass-clown who furnished the Army with shoddy ammunition.
  • gigasquid, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5It wasn't Chinese glue by any chance? Funny thought: defeat of the great American superpower via Chinese-made imported crap. Lead paint in kids toys, contaminated heparin blood products, toxic ingredients in food products.
  • Aokitsune, on 03/29/2008, -3/+0I understand that some weapons development is important- but the US still spends more on 'defense' than any other country combined. Why do we need a shiny new aircraft every few years? The F-22 has impressive capabilities, but they're going to roll out the F-35 in 2011- the previous plane will probably have more than enough fight left in it to outclass anything any foreign power could muster- assuming any structural problems are corrected.
    The military-industrial complex compels the government to continuously build weapons in an unnecessary one-nation arms race for the sake of superiority. In reality, all we need is a design that works really well- the A10 "Warthog" was first deployed in 1978 and is scheduled to continue service until at least 2028- why don't modern aircraft have a lifetime as long as that?
    • proliance, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2The F-35 is replacing the F-14 and eventually the FA-18 (the A-6 was never replaced) in the Navy, the AV-8 for the Marines, and the F-16 for the Air Force. The F-35 is also being sold overseas to several other countries. It will turn out to be a good deal for the military due to the cost savings of replacing more than one aircraft.

      The F-22 is replacing the F-15 as an air superiority fighter. The Eagle will go down in history as one of the greatest fighters ever, but it's worn out. The F-35 doesn't have the legs to replace a long range fighter
  • Masticity, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1I've heard about this magical adhesive. Its a tape, and its gorilla glue. ITS GORILLA TAPE!!!
  • tricks574, on 03/29/2008, -2/+0I'm most surprised by the presence of glue in an airplane............one would think that in something that experiences so much stress you would have put like, a few rivets or something in there, or welds, idk, maybe they use glue because it offers some sort of flexibility?
  • madoc62, on 03/29/2008, -0/+7Folks,
    Wow, talk about gullible! A six or seven line bit of spew on Gizmodo and y'all go into conniptions. No details, no context, no "reporting" just a drive-by bit of gossip about an incident which happened back in November of last year and which Lockheed has already fixed.
    How about exercising a degree of critical thinking for a change instead of simply accepting as The TRUTH whatever you're being spoonfed?
    The first things I thought of when I read that bit on gizmodo was where are the details? Was it a part of the airframe? Was the failed adhesive a manufacturing defect? A particular bad batch? Was the incident something which affects the entire design of the aircraft or just that particular one? Was it a human error induced thing? That is, did Airman Joe Snuffy screw things up when he applied the adhesive to the part originally? You know, stuff like some real world questions about the details that gizmodo couldn't be bothered providing.
    • 1timeuser, on 03/29/2008, -1/+3It is not gizmondo's responsibility to write a serious article and it is not digg's responsibility to take any article seriously. I think by now everyone knows that people who think they are having serious and important discussions on digg are kidding themselves. Especially in the political discussions. I highly recommend getting grease monkey and digg washer along with auto blurrier and just making it not display political topics on digg. This is supposed to be a tech news site... not the Obama and Ron Paul news site.
  • 0crabby0, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2Balsa wood
  • cheez124, on 03/29/2008, -4/+1Glue? we are holding together million dollar jets with glue?
  • RyeBrye, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2From the article it sources:
    "There's a reason we now know this bit of F-22A arcana. On November 1, a small patch of LO material sheared off the inlet for the right engine on takeoff. The material was sucked into the engine, causing more than $1.2 million in damage."

    I wonder what kind of warranty these planes have. If a piece of LO sheared off in my car and caused $1.2 million in damage, you better believe I'd be taking it back to the dealer!
    • Disgod, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Nope, the US military has to pay for it all, it's how the contracts work. The contractor can just charge the military for the fix. It's called a "Cost - Plus" Contract.
  • vdog, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4Personally, I'm more worried about it's lack of side-airbags and stability control.
  • archerOFloaf, on 03/29/2008, -1/+9ALRIGHT IM GOING TO EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU.

    My qualifications to do so is the fact that I served in air force at Holloman AFB and worked on the stealth fighter (F117) (black triangle). The glue that holds the plane together isn't failing, its the glue that holds on the RAM (radar absorbent material). I'm not going to explain what RAM is made of because its classified and to tell you the truth I don't know (MARS wasn't my job). The f117 is a pretty slow plane and ram still blows off (sometimes). The F22 hauls ass and has same thing going on, only worse. They are not going to have to tear apart the plane. This isn't a huge deal. They will fix it. They always do.
    • snotrokit, on 03/29/2008, -1/+3Yes they do don't they. Good post, well explained for a sensitive subject. Dugg
    • skews13, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1if it's anything like single ply roofing systems,any place on the membrane that is not perfectly clean,and rolled out,won't bond,and an airpocket forms.
  • snotrokit, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1why does this not surprise me. I just love government contracts.
  • deadbaby, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1Just go to the HomeDepot and buy some Gorilla Glue. Problem solved.
  • morel42, on 03/29/2008, -0/+5
    While I absolutely love the new fighters we're putting out, and i'm sure this problem isn't as major as people made it out to be.. What does concern me is the sheer amount of support and maintence that our new generation of warfare machines require. High technologies that are dependant on mechanics who understand the pure basics of what they are repairing.
    During local wars with a massive support system in place, we are masters of the sky.

    But what happens when/if we find outselves in a long drawnout dirty gritty global war with streched supply lines, shortages of high tech parts and qualified personel, Everything needs batteries and hard to manufacture parts.

    How do you repair a F22 in the middle of a friggin Jungle? Fighters rely on AWAC support and GPS systems for full functonality. Pilots take 10 times longer to train in order to use these fighters as opposed to pervious wartime..

    But I'm really not worried about china. They have a long way to go to before even approaching our military capability. Plus they have natural resource problems, enviromental problems, and their society is still mostly stuck in the serfdom days, other then major city populations, and a small but growing generation of westernized young people..

    Now, 30 years from now? If they haven't totally destroyed their ecosystem, that's another story. You can steal all the technology you want, but you're have to internalize and incorporate that technology into your military completely. China is still a long way from doing that.

    Plus, remember, Nobody invaded Russia when it was falling apart, and were militarly knocked down several notches.... Why? Their nukes still worked perfectly fine. .:)
  • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Did they get the glue from the same kid who sold them all that rotting ammunition the other day?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.