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

DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

darpa.mil

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 357 posts

Re: DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

#141

Post by rwmj »

nradov wrote: post #56
SoftTalker wrote: post #22

> The kit utilizes a novel interface with the aircraft’s flight controls and mission systems, allowing a pilot to toggle between traditional human control and AI control with the flip of a switch. This ensures a safe, reliable environment for human-on-the-loop experimentation. How, exactly, does that ensure a safe reliable environment? Humans are pretty bad at suddenly taking over when an automatic system reaches its…

These are going to be experienced test pilots who are pretty good at actively managing autopilots and other automated systems. Plus they'll be backed up by telemetry to ground controllers. But ultimately the military is willing to accept some losses in order to advance key R&D programs.

Later they'll replace them with minimum wage safety pilots.

Re: DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

#142

Post by XorNot »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #18
Zsfe510asG wrote: post #14

The article smells of AI psychosis. They are already "orchestrating". In the first Iraq war, they went in and won. In the second one, it took years to sort of occupy the country. Now they struggle against Iran and "orchestrate" F-16s that can be shot down instantly by AA weapons. Since COVID the world has collectively lost its mind.

Drones really changed the equation more than Covid. Autonomous F-16's already can win against all human pilots. This would have been big 20 years ago. Now the cheap drones make it not the biggest deal anymore.

Which cheap drones? Specifically which systems are currently out-competing F-16s in air to air combat in either trials or combat?

Re: DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

#143

Post by wyldberry »

psunavy03 wrote: post #103
Zsfe510asG wrote: post #14

The article smells of AI psychosis. They are already "orchestrating". In the first Iraq war, they went in and won. In the second one, it took years to sort of occupy the country. Now they struggle against Iran and "orchestrate" F-16s that can be shot down instantly by AA weapons. Since COVID the world has collectively lost its mind.

Because the most powerful military in the world can only do so much when ordered to execute a crap strategy by civilian leadership. Desert Storm worked because it followed the Powell Doctrine and was bounded to ejecting Iraq from Kuwait. Iraqi Freedom muddled through incoherently because the Bush and Obama administrations didn't want to understand the actual problem set they were faced with, but ultimately ended up w…

[dead]

Re: DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

#144

Post by smackeyacky »

XorNot wrote: post #139
alephnerd wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much, but it's building on top of the previous QF program [0][1] where the USAF would retrofit retired jets like the F-4 and older F-16s as drones for target training. They used to be remotely controlled but the VENOM platform is testing complete autonomy. [0] - https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/1045... [1] - https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/467196/first...

Also there's just an absolutely bonkers number of F-16s in service today. Using them as Loyal Wingman type aircraft would look pretty appealing cost wise.

Not when you consider the cost per hour of flight. You want a wingman you’re better off with cheap, cheap to run and disposable

Re: DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

#146

Post by XorNot »

bluGill wrote: post #116
IsTom wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are dogfights still relevant? Isn't it mostly shooting missiles outside of visual range these days?

Dog fights are relevant for training. Also useful for slow drone work. However fighter on fighter is where missles are used

That's the current meta though is the thing and it could change.

There's a plausible world where drone-aircraft are reliable enough at missile evasion that a decent strategy is to get in close and use the cannons because your entire airframe is much more attritable.

There's even a plausible reason to do this: opening a weapons bay to shoot a missile generally reduces stealth, and not hauling a bunch of extra rocket motors and mass around could make you lighter, faster and with better engines to do it.

Re: DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

#147

Post by Hikikomori »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #2

All Stealth bombers are upgraded with Cyberdyne computers, becoming fully unmanned. Afterwards they fly with a perfect operational record. The Skynet funding bill is passed. The system goes on-line on August 4, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense. Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.

We almost had it in the 50s when US airforce wanted to build a completely automatic nuclear response system that would launch on warning, or if a glitch happened, without failsafes built in.

Re: DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

#148

Post by jryle70 »

SoftTalker wrote: post #22

> The kit utilizes a novel interface with the aircraft’s flight controls and mission systems, allowing a pilot to toggle between traditional human control and AI control with the flip of a switch. This ensures a safe, reliable environment for human-on-the-loop experimentation. How, exactly, does that ensure a safe reliable environment? Humans are pretty bad at suddenly taking over when an automatic system reaches its…

It's "human-on-the-loop experimentation", not mass production. Are you engineer? How do you experiment? I assume by pushing the boundaries step by step? How do you suggest they do testing if not by taking risk?

Re: DARPA, U.S. Air Force fly AI-controlled F-16

#150

Post by XorNot »

smackeyacky wrote: post #144
XorNot wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also there's just an absolutely bonkers number of F-16s in service today. Using them as Loyal Wingman type aircraft would look pretty appealing cost wise.

Not when you consider the cost per hour of flight. You want a wingman you’re better off with cheap, cheap to run and disposable

No aircraft which can fulfill the CCA type role is going to be "disposable". All the systems in that performance bracket are in the 20-40 million range minimum.

The most persistent thing misunderstanding about drones is people imagining that a supersonic capable stealth airframe is going to be really cheap just because it doesn't have a pilot.

Post reply on HN