2 ms·
Remote control for what? That doesn't really help in the case of a serious mechanical failure. There are probably several more generations of crewed tactical a
by nradov 1y ago
Remote control for what? That doesn't really help in the case of a serious mechanical failure.
There are probably several more generations of crewed tactical aircraft left. Autonomous flight control software is decades away from being able to handle complex missions and remote piloting can only work when you have secure, reliable, high-bandwidth communication links. The concept of operations for the next few generations will rely on manned/unmanned teaming where drones are sent forward to do most of the fighting and the manned aircraft hang back slightly but still within line of sight to act as control nodes.
- RankingMember 1y ago> Remote control for what? That doesn't really help in the case of a serious mechanical failure. In my theoretical, the pilot would safely eject as he did here (or possibly before the touch-and-gos) and the remote control would come into play to try and belly land the plane without it simply becoming a fireball immediately after ejection.
- nradov 1y agoYour theoretical is stupid. The mishap aircraft was uncontrollable.
- RankingMember 1y agoIt clearly was controllable up until the last touch-and-go. The point is they could've attempted an actual landing with the pilot clear of the aircraft prior to it becoming completely uncontrollable had their been a remote option. It's about pilot safety.
- nradov 1y agoThat's silly. You're talking about spending years and billions of dollars developing a capability that might be used once every few years. It's not going to do anything to enhance pilot safety.