7 ms·

What will be interesting is when we design a fighter that doesn't have to accommodate a person. Its size can likely shrink and its performance envelope can be c

by josho 4y ago

What will be interesting is when we design a fighter that doesn't have to accommodate a person. Its size can likely shrink and its performance envelope can be completely re-thought. E.g. Similar to the move from pets to cattle in computing. A jet fighter can very much be considered disposable and swap safety features for additional payloads. The squadron could first coordinate in a pattern far more sophisticated than what humans could achieve, then when the payloads are all deployed fighters revert to a kamikaze mission and crash into nearby infrastructure. The next war is going to be out of a sci-fi book.

moremetadata 4y ago
That's what this decade old fighter jet is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Taranis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Taranis One of the reasons for it being pilotless is it can fly moves/turns that create G forces no human pilots could stand with their jump suit. But you know, Taranis has all gone very quiet, slipping out of the public's memory.
- misterprime 4y ago
  This either slipped my mind or I missed it back then. I have this nagging suspicion that I did see this news back then. The "memory hole" efforts were successful, though. Thanks for the notice/reminder!
  - moremetadata 4y ago
    I think the internet is one giant behavioural and memory test, using search engines, various websites, news orgs to test people en-mass in secret but plain sight.
kibwen 4y ago
Yet another reason that the trillions of dollars spent on the F-35 have been wasted.
- daemoens 4y ago
  Being hidden for longer than your opponent is always going to be useful, regardless of whether a human or an AI is actually flying.
- ianburrell 4y ago
  Trillions haven’t been spent on F-35. Trillions will be spent on maintaining them. But drones cost money to buy and maintain. F-35 is probably why don’t do drones for a while since will have bought a ton of great fighters that will be good for decades.
- meepmorp 4y ago
  You leave Fat Amy out of this
- dralley 4y ago
  1) The performance envelope minimally relevant given the current state of missile technology. 2) Trillions haven't been spent on the F-35 as others have mentioned. Those numbers are outlays for the total of all R&D + procurement + maintenance for several decades + any specialized equipment needed for maintainence + some other things I can't remember off the top of my head 3) You're years behind the military on this. One of the ideas behind the F-35 is to be able to start integrating unmanned vehicles commanded by the F-35, and be a stepping stone for developing full manned-unmanned teaming for generation 6 fighters.
bannedbybros 4y ago
[dead]
adolph 4y ago
Another option with the No pilot model is that there isn’t a need to have a large capability revealing fleet flying around all the time. Everything is done small s ale or in software until go time arrives. This theory is in the latter part of Tyler Rogoway’s “The Alarming Case of the USAF’s Mysteriously Missing Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles” https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3889/the-alarming-case-of-the-usafs-mysteriously-missing-unmanned-combat-air-vehicles https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3889/the-alarming-case...
- ianburrell 4y ago
  I didn’t think about the military pilot shortage or not having to train drones.
linhns 4y ago
Would be the last war.
- IIAOPSW 4y ago
  That's what they said about the previous war.
- mgdlbp 4y ago
  Accidental reference to an uncannily relevant pair of short films (`Крепость`/`Fortress`, `Last day of war`) https://vimeo.com/67768281 https://vimeo.com/67768281 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiuVInSnTZs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiuVInSnTZs
scottLobster 4y ago
I'm thinking it'll be more of a hybrid model, where you'll have a human in a fighter jet with an accompanying drone swarm, where the fighter serves primarily as a missile truck/Command and Control system, with perhaps the potential for direct human intervention in certain scenarios. But I doubt pilots will be dog-fighting or doing their own bombing runs in the near future.
- ianburrell 4y ago
  I don’t think it will be swarm since there are size limits for drones to carry useful payload. The US is working on drones that would accompany fighters and provide extra ammo. They would also be useful for simple jobs like loitering and dropping smart bombs that US strategic bombers did a lot in Afghanistan. I doubt pilots will be dogfighting or doing bombing runs because those aren’t done any more.
- gopalv 4y ago
  > I'm thinking it'll be more of a hybrid model, where you'll have a human in a fighter jet with an accompanying drone swarm The "Loyal Wingman" project is already underway to build that, though not as a swarm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_MQ-28_Ghost_Bat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_MQ-28_Ghost_Bat India is doing the same thing with their CATS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Combat_Air_Teaming_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Combat_Air_Teaming_System
ianburrell 4y ago
I don’t know if there will be drone fighters. I think the idea is old thinking that can make a better dogfighter, but dog fighting is obsolete. The important question is would it be maneuverable enough to avoid anti-air missiles and it doesn’t sound like they would be. Other problem is that they won’t be cheap. High performance military aircraft are expensive. My guess is only get factor of two in cost. Also, there is size tradeoff with payload. Drone that can’t carry AMRAAM is useless. The purpose of fighters have changed. Missiles have taken over many of the roles. The roles that remain require intelligence. Both Ukraine and Russian fighters are not being used much because SAMs make things too dangerous. When they do, it is low level attacks that would be hard for drones. I think developing drone fighter AI would be hard. Recent AI advances have been more about generation than planning. We could do it but would be expensive; look at how much has been spent on self-driving. The basic things are simple but the important things are complicated. For example, drone could have intercepted and shot down balloon but couldn’t have inspected balloon or involved in planning. Finally, the US has pivoted from developing drone fighters to bomb truck. The idea would that accompany fighters and carry more ammo. It would be less maneuverable and simpler and use extra space for fuel and bombs. I think it is telling that multiple countries have tried drone fighters and none have gone for them.
vel0city 4y ago
I imagine they'll shrink a bit and look a little different than what we have now. I'm curious what percentage of most fighters space today are human support system versus payload capacity, fuel storage, maneuverability surfaces, engines, control systems, sensors, etc. And I also wonder what percentage of the costs per hour come from the pilot in the seat versus the maintenance of the aircraft and other operating costs. Carrying enough fuel to go some far distances and back takes up space. Missiles and bombs aren't always small. If you're carrying a lot of payload/fuel weight, you're going to need to have enough surface to generate enough lift, etc. If we're planning on these birds to run similar-ish kinds of activities, I don't know they'll be that radically different. But maybe the missions will be radically different. > A jet fighter can very much be considered disposable A jet fighter still usually costs a few million to acquire, before the cost of the pilot even come into the picture. Once again, if they're gonna be built to handle the same mission profiles, I don't know the acquisition cost is going to be radically different. Probably a bit cheaper, but what costs more the seat or the engine? The stick or the hydraulics that actually actuate the wings? I wonder what the real savings are to take the seat and life support out of the plane. Like if you made something like the F-35, but no seat and no life support and no fancy targeting helmet, what's the per-unit cost? Something tells me still probably a few million. It'll be a lot cheaper to lose one in the end not having a human in the seat, don't get me wrong, and I imagine there would be less hesitation to deploy them in riskier deployments since there's no human in the seat, but I don't know I'd use the term disposable to talk about a few million dollar piece of hardware.
jki275 4y ago
We already have those, they're called the Standard Missile.

by josho 4y ago

moremetadata 4y ago

That's what this decade old fighter jet is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Taranis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Taranis One of the reasons for it being pilotless is it can fly moves/turns that create G forces no human pilots could stand with their jump suit. But you know, Taranis has all gone very quiet, slipping out of the public's memory.

misterprime 4y ago
This either slipped my mind or I missed it back then. I have this nagging suspicion that I did see this news back then. The "memory hole" efforts were successful, though. Thanks for the notice/reminder!
- moremetadata 4y ago
  I think the internet is one giant behavioural and memory test, using search engines, various websites, news orgs to test people en-mass in secret but plain sight.

kibwen 4y ago

Yet another reason that the trillions of dollars spent on the F-35 have been wasted.

daemoens 4y ago
Being hidden for longer than your opponent is always going to be useful, regardless of whether a human or an AI is actually flying.
ianburrell 4y ago
Trillions haven’t been spent on F-35. Trillions will be spent on maintaining them. But drones cost money to buy and maintain. F-35 is probably why don’t do drones for a while since will have bought a ton of great fighters that will be good for decades.
meepmorp 4y ago
You leave Fat Amy out of this
dralley 4y ago
1) The performance envelope minimally relevant given the current state of missile technology. 2) Trillions haven't been spent on the F-35 as others have mentioned. Those numbers are outlays for the total of all R&D + procurement + maintenance for several decades + any specialized equipment needed for maintainence + some other things I can't remember off the top of my head 3) You're years behind the military on this. One of the ideas behind the F-35 is to be able to start integrating unmanned vehicles commanded by the F-35, and be a stepping stone for developing full manned-unmanned teaming for generation 6 fighters.

bannedbybros 4y ago

[dead]

adolph 4y ago

Another option with the No pilot model is that there isn’t a need to have a large capability revealing fleet flying around all the time. Everything is done small s ale or in software until go time arrives. This theory is in the latter part of Tyler Rogoway’s “The Alarming Case of the USAF’s Mysteriously Missing Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles” https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3889/the-alarming-case-of-the-usafs-mysteriously-missing-unmanned-combat-air-vehicles https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3889/the-alarming-case...

ianburrell 4y ago
I didn’t think about the military pilot shortage or not having to train drones.

linhns 4y ago

Would be the last war.

IIAOPSW 4y ago
That's what they said about the previous war.
mgdlbp 4y ago
Accidental reference to an uncannily relevant pair of short films (`Крепость`/`Fortress`, `Last day of war`) https://vimeo.com/67768281 https://vimeo.com/67768281 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiuVInSnTZs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiuVInSnTZs

scottLobster 4y ago

I'm thinking it'll be more of a hybrid model, where you'll have a human in a fighter jet with an accompanying drone swarm, where the fighter serves primarily as a missile truck/Command and Control system, with perhaps the potential for direct human intervention in certain scenarios. But I doubt pilots will be dog-fighting or doing their own bombing runs in the near future.

ianburrell 4y ago
I don’t think it will be swarm since there are size limits for drones to carry useful payload. The US is working on drones that would accompany fighters and provide extra ammo. They would also be useful for simple jobs like loitering and dropping smart bombs that US strategic bombers did a lot in Afghanistan. I doubt pilots will be dogfighting or doing bombing runs because those aren’t done any more.
gopalv 4y ago
> I'm thinking it'll be more of a hybrid model, where you'll have a human in a fighter jet with an accompanying drone swarm The "Loyal Wingman" project is already underway to build that, though not as a swarm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_MQ-28_Ghost_Bat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_MQ-28_Ghost_Bat India is doing the same thing with their CATS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Combat_Air_Teaming_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Combat_Air_Teaming_System

ianburrell 4y ago

I don’t know if there will be drone fighters. I think the idea is old thinking that can make a better dogfighter, but dog fighting is obsolete. The important question is would it be maneuverable enough to avoid anti-air missiles and it doesn’t sound like they would be. Other problem is that they won’t be cheap. High performance military aircraft are expensive. My guess is only get factor of two in cost. Also, there is size tradeoff with payload. Drone that can’t carry AMRAAM is useless. The purpose of fighters have changed. Missiles have taken over many of the roles. The roles that remain require intelligence. Both Ukraine and Russian fighters are not being used much because SAMs make things too dangerous. When they do, it is low level attacks that would be hard for drones. I think developing drone fighter AI would be hard. Recent AI advances have been more about generation than planning. We could do it but would be expensive; look at how much has been spent on self-driving. The basic things are simple but the important things are complicated. For example, drone could have intercepted and shot down balloon but couldn’t have inspected balloon or involved in planning. Finally, the US has pivoted from developing drone fighters to bomb truck. The idea would that accompany fighters and carry more ammo. It would be less maneuverable and simpler and use extra space for fuel and bombs. I think it is telling that multiple countries have tried drone fighters and none have gone for them.

vel0city 4y ago

I imagine they'll shrink a bit and look a little different than what we have now. I'm curious what percentage of most fighters space today are human support system versus payload capacity, fuel storage, maneuverability surfaces, engines, control systems, sensors, etc. And I also wonder what percentage of the costs per hour come from the pilot in the seat versus the maintenance of the aircraft and other operating costs. Carrying enough fuel to go some far distances and back takes up space. Missiles and bombs aren't always small. If you're carrying a lot of payload/fuel weight, you're going to need to have enough surface to generate enough lift, etc. If we're planning on these birds to run similar-ish kinds of activities, I don't know they'll be that radically different. But maybe the missions will be radically different. > A jet fighter can very much be considered disposable A jet fighter still usually costs a few million to acquire, before the cost of the pilot even come into the picture. Once again, if they're gonna be built to handle the same mission profiles, I don't know the acquisition cost is going to be radically different. Probably a bit cheaper, but what costs more the seat or the engine? The stick or the hydraulics that actually actuate the wings? I wonder what the real savings are to take the seat and life support out of the plane. Like if you made something like the F-35, but no seat and no life support and no fancy targeting helmet, what's the per-unit cost? Something tells me still probably a few million. It'll be a lot cheaper to lose one in the end not having a human in the seat, don't get me wrong, and I imagine there would be less hesitation to deploy them in riskier deployments since there's no human in the seat, but I don't know I'd use the term disposable to talk about a few million dollar piece of hardware.

jki275 4y ago

We already have those, they're called the Standard Missile.