3 ms·

> Autonomous F-16's already can win against all human pilots. In a dogfight?

whartung 3mo ago
As I understand it, they done this in simulation, and the human pilots did not fare well. I don't know of the computer aircraft were able to fly beyond human limits (i.e. they don't black out) or not. If the computers can actually fly to what the airframe is capable of, they would have a distinct advantage over the human pilots.
- bloqs 3mo ago
  They did a small set of tests with one Pilot IIRC?
  - stackskipton 3mo ago
    I think they did it in simulation with several. In any case, dogfighting is commonly done because it's great training but in most cases, you expect most Air to Air combat being flinging missiles at each other.
    - budman1 3mo ago
      s/most/all/g
      - justsomehnguy 3mo ago
        Exactly.
- psunavy03 3mo ago
  The simulator is not the aircraft.
  - FrustratedMonky 3mo ago
    Simulator tech has come a long way. I wouldn't say a simulator invalidates the result.
  - bronco21016 3mo ago
    The first time an airline pilot flies a new aircraft type in the real world they fly it with a plane full of passengers. All the training up to that point is done in a simulator. Now that first flight is with an experienced training captain but the point is the simulator is good enough that the FAA has signed off on using that as the primary training device. It's been this way for at least 25 years.
    - pbhjpbhj 3mo ago
      Many of the crash reports from the likes of Mentor Pilot on YouTube call out insufficient type-experience as a cause of accidents. Sometimes it's "the same" type, but the manufacturers manipulated the situation, the changes mean unfamiliarity and that leads to deaths. Not giving pilots live training on new types is for financial reasons. It doesn't cause more deaths than the cost differential between training and compensation allow for.
    - budman1 3mo ago
      no airline will take the risk. they will have a check ride, with an instructor.
  - budman1 3mo ago
    with respect to assessing tactics, it is very close.
    - psunavy03 3mo ago
      With respect to assessing whether an AI-controlled aircraft using only available onboard sensors and datalinks can defeat a manned aircraft in BFM, it's not even in the same ZIP code. You've never flown BFM, have you? I have.
bwv848 3mo ago
[dead]
rolph 3mo ago
human pilots have physiological constraints that AI doesnt. onboard computers are not immune to G's but have a substantially higher threshold until physical mechanisms fail due to strain.
IshKebab 3mo ago
Is that hard to believe? It's got to be one of the easiest situations for AI to win in. You probably don't even need any fancy modern AI; I would have thought MPC would do most of the job.

As I understand it, they done this in simulation, and the human pilots did not fare well. I don't know of the computer aircraft were able to fly beyond human limits (i.e. they don't black out) or not. If the computers can actually fly to what the airframe is capable of, they would have a distinct advantage over the human pilots.

bloqs 3mo ago
They did a small set of tests with one Pilot IIRC?
- stackskipton 3mo ago
  I think they did it in simulation with several. In any case, dogfighting is commonly done because it's great training but in most cases, you expect most Air to Air combat being flinging missiles at each other.
  - budman1 3mo ago
    s/most/all/g
    - justsomehnguy 3mo ago
      Exactly.
psunavy03 3mo ago
The simulator is not the aircraft.
- FrustratedMonky 3mo ago
  Simulator tech has come a long way. I wouldn't say a simulator invalidates the result.
- bronco21016 3mo ago
  The first time an airline pilot flies a new aircraft type in the real world they fly it with a plane full of passengers. All the training up to that point is done in a simulator. Now that first flight is with an experienced training captain but the point is the simulator is good enough that the FAA has signed off on using that as the primary training device. It's been this way for at least 25 years.
  - pbhjpbhj 3mo ago
    Many of the crash reports from the likes of Mentor Pilot on YouTube call out insufficient type-experience as a cause of accidents. Sometimes it's "the same" type, but the manufacturers manipulated the situation, the changes mean unfamiliarity and that leads to deaths. Not giving pilots live training on new types is for financial reasons. It doesn't cause more deaths than the cost differential between training and compensation allow for.
  - budman1 3mo ago
    no airline will take the risk. they will have a check ride, with an instructor.
- budman1 3mo ago
  with respect to assessing tactics, it is very close.
  - psunavy03 3mo ago
    With respect to assessing whether an AI-controlled aircraft using only available onboard sensors and datalinks can defeat a manned aircraft in BFM, it's not even in the same ZIP code. You've never flown BFM, have you? I have.

bwv848 3mo ago

[dead]

rolph 3mo ago

human pilots have physiological constraints that AI doesnt. onboard computers are not immune to G's but have a substantially higher threshold until physical mechanisms fail due to strain.

IshKebab 3mo ago

Is that hard to believe? It's got to be one of the easiest situations for AI to win in. You probably don't even need any fancy modern AI; I would have thought MPC would do most of the job.