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

291–300 of 357 posts

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

#291

Post by walrus01 »

bilalnpe wrote: post #213
ungreased0675 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps counterintuitively, the human is not the weak link when maneuverability is concerned. The airframe is. Pilots regularly fly right at the airframe limits, sometimes a little bit over.

Do they not bother designing airframes to withstand more because the human wouldn't survive it anyway?

Making the airframe even more rigid and capable of resisting extreme forces also makes the wings and fuselage and control surfaces much more heavy, so you end up in diminishing returns. Look at the 'final' revisions of the F16 sold for export that have had all sorts of pylons and conformal fuel tanks stuck onto them, compared to the original prototype. And that's just making it more heavy and laden down with stuff, not more capable of extreme maneuvers.

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

#292

Post by weezing »

ridgeguy wrote: post #256

It'll be interesting to see what happens when an AI-piloted F-16 flies for real against a human-piloted one. IIRC, the F-16 maximum maneuvering G-load is 9.5G, LBA (limited by airframe). Maybe that's the meatbag limit, not the airframe - possible to crank it up a bit? Certainly the various CCAs in current flight test will take much higher G loads. Several years ago, DoD flew an AI against a human in a simulation. In…

Are dogfights even a thing nowadays?

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

#293

Post by rwmj »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #275
rwmj wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What a silly statement to make. They'll just be replaced with AI. This is literally the plot of the Terminator

What The Terminator got wrong is each robot needs a human to take the legal blame when it goes wrong.

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

#294

Post by rwmj »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #255
rwmj wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I doubt it. Ask yourself: Why does the RQ-4 Global Hawk or MQ-9 Reaper require so much training to operate? The operators are well-paid, highly skilled officers.

It's a joke about human "safety drivers" acting as legal crumple zones for self-driving cars.

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

#295

Post by energy123 »

cloudie78 wrote: post #265

What’s the point of this useless exercise? Once you optimise for G forces, speed, cost, lethality - you end up with a missile. We have those already. And we know this already. Give it more fuel and maybe loitering capability. Something with a jet engine for cruising and a small rocket engine for terminal phase kill. I’ll have my 100mil now please and thank you.

F-16s are reusable missile trucks. F-35s are reusable missile trucks with a smaller capacity but with stealth and better telemetry.

Reusability is just common sense economics. A JDAM costs only $30k USD.

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

#296

Post by MrMember »

bigyabai wrote: post #194
yellow_lead wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Tesla method! Disengage shortly before a crash. Now the human is responsible for it.

The F-16 actually has the opposite, with Auto GCAS: https://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article8.html It's an interesting system, and does beg the question of how much autonomy should be forfeit if a human pilot is unresponsive or otherwise disabled.

Auto GCAS is a genius system. It only takes over past the point where it's physically possible for a human to react to a situation because that's the only system that fighter pilots would accept. It will not take control unless the plane would crash if it didn't.

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

#297

Post by redsocksfan45 »

laughing_man wrote: post #260
sandworm101 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither can a jet. An f16 can only sustain 9g for a few seconds even at full burn. That will not kill anyone. They won't be happy, but they will not be dead.

As I understand it, the 9g limit is software intended to keep the pilot alive. The jet can do more.

[dead]

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

#300

Post by toxik »

angry_octet wrote: post #205
wildzzz wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably a duplicate autopilot-like system that an AI controls. Flip a switch and controls revert back to the pilot. It may not even be a real switch, many planes disengage AP when you touch the controls. I doubt AI will be doing dogfighting anytime soon, this is likely just an AI following predetermined routes and maneuvers and making the choice on how to accomplish them. The great thing about computers is that they…

That is underestimating it. DARPA already showed dogfighting that can beat humans in simulation, and they may allow this do execute that. However, dogfighting isn't very interesting, all combat occurs BVR and in the RF/EW domain. Pilots are already spending most of their time thinking about epistemic problems: can I see my opponent, can they see me, how do I deceive, am I being deceived, how do I avoid being detected…

Well, they showed better performance if the AI had full state observation... Not very practical.
Post reply on HN