5 ms·
Not sure if the article was edited before you posted, but the author covers this. There is a human in the loop. The swarm sends all its data to the ground stati
by nwallin 7y ago
Not sure if the article was edited before you posted, but the author covers this. There is a human in the loop. The swarm sends all its data to the ground station, where a human gives go/no-go.
There thing that is automated is the first phase threat identification and the generation and execution of the attack plan, not the threat verification or decision to execute. Which is fine IMO.
- ohazi 7y agoThey say that this is possible, but they're cagey about what they expect the default to be.
- Spooky23 7y agoThat's always in the narrative to make you feel better. If the military gave a shit decisions about attack plans, we wouldn't have missiles. With a plane-sized stealth drone, you can use inertia/gyro guidance to eliminate the GPS risk. Seems silly to build a stealth aircraft that has to transmit and receive instructions. Where do vehicles like this fit? You have long-range cruise missiles, cheap, long loitering drones with hellfire missiles, manned aircraft, and these unmanned fighter-jet class devices already. A weapon like this wouldn't have super-long loitering time, but would be potentially more stealthy and more disposable than a manned aircraft. It's pretty obvious why it's secret... it's an air-defense buster, strike platform against a nation-state (vs. rabble), delivery truck for special bombs, etc or a nuclear weapon delivery truck.
- JackFr 7y ago> It's pretty obvious why it's secret... it's an air-defense buster, strike platform against a nation-state (vs. rabble), delivery truck for special bombs, etc or a nuclear weapon delivery truck. This
- nradov 7y agoInertial guidance isn't accurate enough for that type of mission. The practical alternatives to GPS are terrain matching or stellar navigation.