Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 693 posts

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#651

Post by nradov »

mrtksn wrote: post #245
nradov wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense. AI can work well enough for striking certain known targets. But it is simply not capable of following complex rules of engagement or adapting to highly dynamic situations in real time. We are at least decades away from that capability in a general sense. What you see in movies is not reality. Sixth-generation tactical aircraft (the successors to the F-35) are likely to be optionally manned. They will be abl…

If you haven't notice, lately AI is pretty good at woking with information that never seen before.

Apparently you haven't been paying attention and don't understand the basics of AI technology. It is terrible at handling novel situations, especially in something as complex as tactical aviation.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#652

Post by actionfromafar »

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #543
actionfromafar wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For drones it makes sense. Drones could boot up with all config in RAM so as to be completely devoid of mission parameters once power is cut.

Sure. There's no way that in combat you could experience a temporary power loss. Nope, that could never happen.

If your drone has power loss during flight, I think you have other problems.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#653

Post by nradov »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #541
alistairSH wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same AI that gets confused when you stick a traffic cone on the hood? Yeah, I don't want that algorithm deciding who to bomb.

Self-driving cars are a much harder problem than anything airborne.

Wrong. Flying from point to point is easy. Following complex ROEs, using combined arms tactics, dealing with system failures, identifying valid targets, and employing weapons are all much harder problems than self-driving cars.

It's always hilarious to see the confidently incorrect comments by a bunch of ignorant software developers. The Dunning–Kruger effect is on full display here.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#654

Post by dragontamer »

hajile wrote: post #616
dragontamer wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If F-35 is at the MANPAD altitude then somebody (pilot) fucked greatly. F-35 in CAS role would never drop to MANPAD altitude and Shilka doesn't care about the plane stealthiness. *Multi-role* fighter. F35 has gun-pods and absolutely is expected to play some CAS role. Its not a dedicated CAS aircraft, no. Its not as good as other aircraft at the job (AC-130 has more loiter time, bigger guns, etc. etc.), but in a war…

> Stealth is the modern armor: if you can't be seen or can't be tracked, you can't be hit. Next gen weapons are going to make F-35 stealth irrelevant in a handful of years. F-35 is visible on low-frequency radar for hundreds of miles along with general heading and speed. Most missiles are using 30+ year old technology. Since then, the cellphone economies of scale in both R&D and manufacturing have made CMOS cameras b…

> Next gen weapons are going to make F-35 stealth irrelevant in a handful of years.

The Ukrainian war is being fought with T-55 tanks, originally produced in 1948. I think you're overestimating the speed of progress in practice. New weapons take time to mass, decades to gain relevance.

F35 making earlier weapons obsolete is a big enough deal on its own. All weapons discussed in this thread so far are basically irrelevant. Of course new weapons will come eventually, but its generally better to negate the current stockpile of weapons around the world (and force our enemies to research/build new weapons) rather than sending 40 year old A10s out there and pretending that we don't have any better tech ourselves.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#655

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

actionfromafar wrote: post #652
HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. There's no way that in combat you could experience a temporary power loss. Nope, that could never happen.

If your drone has power loss during flight, I think you have other problems.

Pay close attention to the word "temporary." In normal flight, it's not that unusual for flight instruments to have to be rebooted because of unexpected glitches.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#656

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

fragmede wrote: post #537
1attice wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I love about HN is that you can get from 'a plane went missing' to a thread that cites every plane loss since 1999 followed by a counterargument citing a downed MIG. Like, how the heck do you all know so much? The demographics of this site are unreal

It's the long tail of the Internet, but with humans' knowledge.

This encapsulates HN very well :-)

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#657

Post by outworlder »

comboy wrote: post #593
kube-system wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have transponders. But military airplanes can and sometimes do turn them off. When airplanes broadcast signals they can be detected. The military sometimes wishes to avoid this.

It could activate after ejection, certain acceleration pattern (i.e. crash) or could start broadcasting only after receiving very specific signal (one-time code) on a specific frequency. There are probably plenty more options, it doesn't seem like a hard problem from engineering standpoint.

Civilian aircraft, even 2 seaters, have had ELTs for decades. They are being replaced with better systems, but they were designed to do just that: broadcast a signal on a specific frequency after a crash.

Doubtful you want to broadcast the position of the latest generation stealth fighter, however.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#658

Post by comboy »

outworlder wrote: post #657
comboy wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could activate after ejection, certain acceleration pattern (i.e. crash) or could start broadcasting only after receiving very specific signal (one-time code) on a specific frequency. There are probably plenty more options, it doesn't seem like a hard problem from engineering standpoint.

Civilian aircraft, even 2 seaters, have had ELTs for decades. They are being replaced with better systems, but they were designed to do just that: broadcast a signal on a specific frequency after a crash. Doubtful you want to broadcast the position of the latest generation stealth fighter, however.

As mentioned, it can be silent until receiving specific signal. It can be single frequency it can be multiple, but if it's specific string of bytes or specific timing it's practically impossible to brute force when it's long enough, and when looking for the plane you can broadcast it with high intensity because it is only single use.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#659

Post by [deleted] »

izacus wrote: post #556
dheera wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't these aircraft get 10Hz GPS updates and send them to StarLink as they are going down? It's 2023 already.

Because they're stealth military planes and broadcasting it's exact position to Musk owned network is literally the primary thing it should NOT do.

[deleted]

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#660

Post by justsomehnguy »

dragontamer wrote: post #647
saiya-jin wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some automated AA guns (Oerlikon or Rheinmetall IIRC) who lock with combination of radar and visual, or just one of those. No locking missiles, just good old ammunition and 21st century computing power. Well not precisely, every round is primed to detonate at exact altitude/flight duration. Put a hundred rounds in few seconds (so 5-10k projectiles) on the sky where the plane will be in 3 seconds, they will…

You aren't going to get valid distance from a single platform like that. If you had a large scale integrated sensor network, then yes you can triangulate an F35 and track it. Except the F35 would switch to Wild Weasel mode and start shooting down your sensors (aka, SEAD missions) until it was safe to approach closely. -------- That's the thing, if the F35 is already in your face to take direct gunfire like that,bits…

> Except the F35 would switch to Wild Weasel mode and start shooting down your sensors

Ie not performing CAS. As stated near the start of the thread, nor AC-130 nor F-35 would perform CAS against anything more dangerous than a flipflop army with a complete lack of AA capabilities.

QED

Post reply on HN