There are 2 theaters of war, one still continuing in Russia-Ukraine and on-hold Indo-Pak war that reaffirms the belief that traditional fighter planes are a thing of past.
Machines in various sectors have taken over and performed much better than humans.
Be it the first industrial revolution and every other technological lead made hence-forth.
Pre-2000's, top Chess grand-masters would more often than not would win against the best chess Engines.
Currently, there is not a single GM who would win against a run of the mill chess engine.
There are millions of jobs that were performed by humans in last 50 years that are now performed by machines at an efficiency humans can never match.
Self-driving cars now perform better than humans in all parameters.
The question is, are human controlled fighter places a better option than drones?
The negatives with human controlled fighter planes are multi-fold.
1. A lot of space, weight and technology goes to keep the human safe.
2. A lot more fuel is needed with a human inside
3. If we remove human component, a lot more weight in terms of arms can be added
4. no POW, ever. Meaning, risk of capture and humiliation is eradicated
5. Fighter planes are built to cater to human limitations, ALWAYS.
The only positive having a human in plane is that there would be a rational decisions
What combination of ai+remote+machines offer in terms of drones/pilot less planes
1. possibility of a higher performance than traditional human based response.
2. removes the limitation of having a human inside
3. more weapons added
4. numerous variations, you can go for very small planes called drones to twin engine planes carrying shit loads of weaponry
5. integration of ai is not a matter of if but when
6. no POW
Negative would be ensuring control..
One of the things noticed during recent indo-pak war was how conservative we were getting our birds in air. We were extra careful and used our AD to defend than get our birds in air.
This is possibly a lesson learnt from few years back on losing a place and having shot our own down during the fog of war.
That gives me credence that a pilot is always considered much more valuable than the machine. We spent a lot to ensure our pilots were safe and some of the technologies used to achieve this can be expanded and evolved.
Machines in various sectors have taken over and performed much better than humans.
Be it the first industrial revolution and every other technological lead made hence-forth.
Pre-2000's, top Chess grand-masters would more often than not would win against the best chess Engines.
Currently, there is not a single GM who would win against a run of the mill chess engine.
There are millions of jobs that were performed by humans in last 50 years that are now performed by machines at an efficiency humans can never match.
Self-driving cars now perform better than humans in all parameters.
The question is, are human controlled fighter places a better option than drones?
The negatives with human controlled fighter planes are multi-fold.
1. A lot of space, weight and technology goes to keep the human safe.
2. A lot more fuel is needed with a human inside
3. If we remove human component, a lot more weight in terms of arms can be added
4. no POW, ever. Meaning, risk of capture and humiliation is eradicated
5. Fighter planes are built to cater to human limitations, ALWAYS.
The only positive having a human in plane is that there would be a rational decisions
What combination of ai+remote+machines offer in terms of drones/pilot less planes
1. possibility of a higher performance than traditional human based response.
2. removes the limitation of having a human inside
3. more weapons added
4. numerous variations, you can go for very small planes called drones to twin engine planes carrying shit loads of weaponry
5. integration of ai is not a matter of if but when
6. no POW
Negative would be ensuring control..
One of the things noticed during recent indo-pak war was how conservative we were getting our birds in air. We were extra careful and used our AD to defend than get our birds in air.
This is possibly a lesson learnt from few years back on losing a place and having shot our own down during the fog of war.
That gives me credence that a pilot is always considered much more valuable than the machine. We spent a lot to ensure our pilots were safe and some of the technologies used to achieve this can be expanded and evolved.
