5 ms·
related question to all in the know, why aren't UCAVs Unmanned combat air vehicles a bigger thing? I know there's some experimentation going on, but technologic
by bobosha 4y ago
related question to all in the know, why aren't UCAVs Unmanned combat air vehicles a bigger thing? I know there's some experimentation going on, but technologically it doesn't appear to be a big leap to expect that. Is it the scary-perception issue?
- tomatotomato37 4y agoI guess because they are just being called missiles. Modern missiles are surprisingly capable devices, being able to autonomously maneuver, follow waypoints, and loiter before striking
- kerpotgh 4y ago[dead]
- antipaul 4y agoAren’t these called drones, and haven’t they been around a while? Predator drone entered service back in 1995 per Wikipedia, and it’s use only skyrocketed since (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc) There are other models like Reaper Turkey, Iran also seem to be big players here, among others
- hacoo 4y agoThere are no drones in service (that I know of) that are designed for air to air combat - they are designed to attack ground targets.
- rcme 4y agoIs air-to-air combat really a thing now? I was under the impression it was less important with advances in weapons guidance systems.
- dharmab 4y agoYes, US aircraft have been participating in air-to-air combat in Syria in recent years against manned and unmanned aircraft. In particular, the US military relies more on aircraft for air defense and air superiority while post-Soviet militaries rely more on surface to air missile systems.
- marcusverus 4y agoI've been wondering the same thing! Teaching an AI to fly an F-16 is like putting a motor in a horse-drawn carriage. Once you get it working, it should be clear that your vehicle's design was dictated by a number of old constraints which no longer apply, and a total redesign is in order.
- rcme 4y agoPutting a motor in a horse-drawn carriage would have been a pretty monumental leap in capability at the time horse-drawn carriages were commonly used.
- G4E 4y agoAnd that's exactly how the automobile was invented. Look for exemple at Delamarre-Deboutteville's car[0], one of the first. [0] https://all-andorra.com/fr/automobile-delamare-deboutteville-de-1884/ https://all-andorra.com/fr/automobile-delamare-deboutteville... (In french but a lot of picture)
- marcusverus 4y agoObviously. But folks weren't driving around in motorized carriages, complete with empty driving harness! They adapted the rest of the vehicle immediately, for obvious reasons. It would have been strange if they hadn't! Now, human fighter pilots are largely obsolete. We've known this was coming for decades, yet we have those AIs flying giant hulking planes that are designed to carry human beings around inside of them. My point is that this is just as ridiculous as driving a carriage with an empty harness!
- dharmab 4y agoThe short answer is expense; The US has two such programs in development (both called NGAD) and they're likely to be the most expensive aircraft ever developed by the Air Force and Navy. This 70 minute talk covers all of the current 6th generation fighter programs in development and a major running theme is extreme cost. https://youtu.be/RPrWm6fWuaM https://youtu.be/RPrWm6fWuaM
- greedo 4y agoNGAD "might" have a loyal wingman component but you can bet your 401K it'll be crewed.
- ianburrell 4y agoUCAV are a big thing but they don't look like sexy fighter jets. Most of them are smaller and slower like Predator or Bayraktar TB2 that Ukraine has been using. By not having pilot, they can spend a long time loitering and are cheaper. But they are super vulnerable to missiles and fighters.
- jki275 4y agoThey also don't make LTs into Generals. Politics is huge in the USAF.
- WeylandYutani 4y agoProbably because the last time the USAF was dogfighting regularly was in Korea during the 1950s. Air war has been ridiculously boring.