Long live the F/A -18

[Roudy]

Welcome to the new Air Force:

Supersonic Drones Can Outmaneuver Humans. So Why Do We Still Need Pilots? - Businessweek

The F-16 is familiar to airplane enthusiasts as the nimble American jet fighter, in service since the 1970s, with a nose like a heron with a severe underbite. Last week saw the maiden flight of the QF-16, which is just an F-16 with one modification: no pilot inside.

Drones are everywhere these days, from battlefields to toy stores and music videos, but most are slow, relatively underpowered, and valuable only because they can stay in the air for long periods of time or because they’re cheap. This QF-16, on the other hand, is a drone with an afterburner that can fly at one-and-a-half times the speed of sound. In its first test flight from Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida, the plane executed a barrel roll as well as a “split S”—a (very fun-sounding) move in which the plane flips over onto its back and then does half a loop so it ends up headed, right-way-up, in the opposite direction—before executing a perfect landing back at the base.

Six formerly mothballed F-16’s have been retrofitted into QF-16’s, according to Boeing (BA) spokesperson Michelle Shelhamer, and next week they’ll be flown—by actual pilots sitting inside them—to their new home at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico.

The US Navy is giving up on fighter pilots and turning to drones

The US Navy is planning to stop using crewed fighter jets in the coming years, according to Navy secretary Ray Mabus, turning instead to uncrewed aerial vehicles and drones to perform missions at sea, on land, and in the air. Speaking at the Sea-Air-Space 2015 conference on Wednesday, Mabus said that the currently used F-35 Lightning fighter "should be, and almost certainly will be, the last [crewed] strike fighter aircraft the Department of the Navy will ever buy or fly."

By moving away from crewed aircraft, Mabus said the Navy could develop new fighting craft without needing to factor in the pilot's safety, a process that extended the time and cost of projects. "Removing a human from the machine can open up room to experiment with more risk, improve systems faster, and get them to the fleet quicker." To push the drone agenda, Mabus said he planned to create a new office for uncrewed technology in the Navy and appoint a deputy assistant director to champion the technology.

 

[I amso IR]

Welcome to the new Air Force:

Supersonic Drones Can Outmaneuver Humans. So Why Do We Still Need Pilots? - Businessweek

The F-16 is familiar to airplane enthusiasts as the nimble American jet fighter, in service since the 1970s, with a nose like a heron with a severe underbite. Last week saw the maiden flight of the QF-16, which is just an F-16 with one modification: no pilot inside.

Drones are everywhere these days, from battlefields to toy stores and music videos, but most are slow, relatively underpowered, and valuable only because they can stay in the air for long periods of time or because they’re cheap. This QF-16, on the other hand, is a drone with an afterburner that can fly at one-and-a-half times the speed of sound. In its first test flight from Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida, the plane executed a barrel roll as well as a “split S”—a (very fun-sounding) move in which the plane flips over onto its back and then does half a loop so it ends up headed, right-way-up, in the opposite direction—before executing a perfect landing back at the base.

Six formerly mothballed F-16’s have been retrofitted into QF-16’s, according to Boeing (BA) spokesperson Michelle Shelhamer, and next week they’ll be flown—by actual pilots sitting inside them—to their new home at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico.

The US Navy is giving up on fighter pilots and turning to drones

The US Navy is planning to stop using crewed fighter jets in the coming years, according to Navy secretary Ray Mabus, turning instead to uncrewed aerial vehicles and drones to perform missions at sea, on land, and in the air. Speaking at the Sea-Air-Space 2015 conference on Wednesday, Mabus said that the currently used F-35 Lightning fighter "should be, and almost certainly will be, the last [crewed] strike fighter aircraft the Department of the Navy will ever buy or fly."

By moving away from crewed aircraft, Mabus said the Navy could develop new fighting craft without needing to factor in the pilot's safety, a process that extended the time and cost of projects. "Removing a human from the machine can open up room to experiment with more risk, improve systems faster, and get them to the fleet quicker." To push the drone agenda, Mabus said he planned to create a new office for uncrewed technology in the Navy and appoint a deputy assistant director to champion the technology.

I amso IR reponds:

You will not get an argument from me. However I would not write the obituary just yet. Drones are an excellent "force multiplier" but also face the same problem faced with people, reliability costs when the pilot or computer guiding it is 6000 miles away. An F16 or F35 used as a drone still requires a big investment from the git go and are not worth a damn with targets of opportunity. And they are, after all, nothing more than a cruise missile which looks like an airplane. If you are an AI advocate, good luck with that as the electronic M1A1 eyeball is a long way from reality. The on scene human factor will never be duplicated by a machine, thinking or dumb. The beauty of max G force is a gift in a sense, in that it levels the playing field for all involved. Also, performing an Immelmann turn, was used during WW1 and perfected by Max Immelmann, the first German Ace of WW1. He was born in 1886 I believe, don't quote me on that, and the Fokker Tri Wing was not quite supersonic but a good airplane at 90 mph or so.
Perhaps you should use your abilities devising a way to train pilots to fly upside down, head pointing down and performing flawless outside loops. That would keep the blood flowing down to the brain rather than the feet and hopefully eliminate the G force from aviation. Also an air to air missile which fires from the rear of the aircraft in the opposite direction of flight would be nice for the air to air combat phase when Ivan is on your six trying to lock you up. War is not hell, it is fun, don't you think? Sorry, my bad!

 

[ABikerSailor]

Welcome to the new Air Force:

Supersonic Drones Can Outmaneuver Humans. So Why Do We Still Need Pilots? - Businessweek

The F-16 is familiar to airplane enthusiasts as the nimble American jet fighter, in service since the 1970s, with a nose like a heron with a severe underbite. Last week saw the maiden flight of the QF-16, which is just an F-16 with one modification: no pilot inside.

Drones are everywhere these days, from battlefields to toy stores and music videos, but most are slow, relatively underpowered, and valuable only because they can stay in the air for long periods of time or because they’re cheap. This QF-16, on the other hand, is a drone with an afterburner that can fly at one-and-a-half times the speed of sound. In its first test flight from Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida, the plane executed a barrel roll as well as a “split S”—a (very fun-sounding) move in which the plane flips over onto its back and then does half a loop so it ends up headed, right-way-up, in the opposite direction—before executing a perfect landing back at the base.

Six formerly mothballed F-16’s have been retrofitted into QF-16’s, according to Boeing (BA) spokesperson Michelle Shelhamer, and next week they’ll be flown—by actual pilots sitting inside them—to their new home at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico.

The US Navy is giving up on fighter pilots and turning to drones

The US Navy is planning to stop using crewed fighter jets in the coming years, according to Navy secretary Ray Mabus, turning instead to uncrewed aerial vehicles and drones to perform missions at sea, on land, and in the air. Speaking at the Sea-Air-Space 2015 conference on Wednesday, Mabus said that the currently used F-35 Lightning fighter "should be, and almost certainly will be, the last [crewed] strike fighter aircraft the Department of the Navy will ever buy or fly."

By moving away from crewed aircraft, Mabus said the Navy could develop new fighting craft without needing to factor in the pilot's safety, a process that extended the time and cost of projects. "Removing a human from the machine can open up room to experiment with more risk, improve systems faster, and get them to the fleet quicker." To push the drone agenda, Mabus said he planned to create a new office for uncrewed technology in the Navy and appoint a deputy assistant director to champion the technology.

I amso IR reponds:

You will not get an argument from me. However I would not write the obituary just yet. Drones are an excellent "force multiplier" but also face the same problem faced with people, reliability costs when the pilot or computer guiding it is 6000 miles away. An F16 or F35 used as a drone still requires a big investment from the git go and are not worth a damn with targets of opportunity. And they are, after all, nothing more than a cruise missile which looks like an airplane. If you are an AI advocate, good luck with that as the electronic M1A1 eyeball is a long way from reality. The on scene human factor will never be duplicated by a machine, thinking or dumb. The beauty of max G force is a gift in a sense, in that it levels the playing field for all involved. Also, performing an Immelmann turn, was used during WW1 and perfected by Max Immelmann, the first German Ace of WW1. He was born in 1886 I believe, don't quote me on that, and the Fokker Tri Wing was not quite supersonic but a good airplane at 90 mph or so.
Perhaps you should use your abilities devising a way to train pilots to fly upside down, head pointing down and performing flawless outside loops. That would keep the blood flowing down to the brain rather than the feet and hopefully eliminate the G force from aviation. Also an air to air missile which fires from the rear of the aircraft in the opposite direction of flight would be nice for the air to air combat phase when Ivan is on your six trying to lock you up. War is not hell, it is fun, don't you think? Sorry, my bad!

You can't eliminate the G force in aviation. If you have all the blood going to your feet, it will cause you to black out. However, if you have all the blood going to your head, you will become incapacitated in what pilots call a "red out". Extreme turns either upside down or right side up will cause the pilot problems if it is experienced too long.

Drones don't have that problem. The only limit of G forces during maneuvers is what the airframe is capable of withstanding, and is not limited to what the pilot can bear. Additionally, drones can carry more ammo and fuel, because they don't have a third of the aircraft being taken up for life support systems and other things (like ejection systems) that will keep the pilot alive.

I don't think that manned aircraft will ever become obsolete, but they WILL become less and less as the drone tech gets better.

 

[Roudy]

And drones don't necessarily need to be operated from "6000 miles away". It can be an aircraft carrier or battleship nearby, or an airbase in a freindly country that is much closer.

Manned aircraft will not become obsolete but most of the manned missions will be replaced by unmanned very soon. Drones will soon be doing things that will blow your mind away. We are in the midst of an unmanned arms race as we speak.

 

[I amso IR]

And drones don't necessarily need to be operated from "6000 miles away". It can be an aircraft carrier or battleship nearby, or an airbase in a freindly country that is much closer.

Manned aircraft will not become obsolete but most of the manned missions will be replaced by unmanned very soon. Drones will soon be doing things that will blow your mind away. We are in the midst of an unmanned arms race as we speak.

I doubt nothing you write Roudy, I simply do not share your enthusiasm. Drones are nothing new, they have been used for many years now as the Trojan horse was quite some time ago and if not in actuality, the concept was. The capability and control on the other hand is recent and as you state improving rapidly. Not to the point of my amazement however. Logical progression if you will. In any event, please allow me the courtesy of not being wowed or in awe of the steps being made. Costs will rise as will requirements. The human factor will also increase as the drone will never have the ability to perform and select on it's own. The Fokker Tri Wing was in no way responsible for it's evolution into the F35 and in that sense, the F35 is as numb as the Fokker. Me personally, I am not impressed, but then I am not easily impressed, As far as AI goes, if man knew when to stop it might be of use, however that point will never be attained as there will always be someone irresponsible enough to know or care when to stop. Please forgive me, I am doing the best with what I have. Cheers.

 

[Roudy]

And drones don't necessarily need to be operated from "6000 miles away". It can be an aircraft carrier or battleship nearby, or an airbase in a freindly country that is much closer.

Manned aircraft will not become obsolete but most of the manned missions will be replaced by unmanned very soon. Drones will soon be doing things that will blow your mind away. We are in the midst of an unmanned arms race as we speak.

I doubt nothing you write Roudy, I simply do not share your enthusiasm. Drones are nothing new, they have been used for many years now as the Trojan horse was quite some time ago and if not in actuality, the concept was. The capability and control on the other hand is recent and as you state improving rapidly. Not to the point of my amazement however. Logical progression if you will. In any event, please allow me the courtesy of not being wowed or in awe of the steps being made. Costs will rise as will requirements. The human factor will also increase as the drone will never have the ability to perform and select on it's own. The Fokker Tri Wing was in no way responsible for it's evolution into the F35 and in that sense, the F35 is as numb as the Fokker. Me personally, I am not impressed, but then I am not easily impressed, As far as AI goes, if man knew when to stop it might be of use, however that point will never be attained as there will always be someone irresponsible enough to know or care when to stop. Please forgive me, I am doing the best with what I have. Cheers.

AI is not necessary with a drone, this is not The Terminator. We are simply talking about a pilot controlling the aircraft from the ground or on board a ship. The skills required to pilot a drone are no less than those of a fighter pilot, and as drones advance, they will be even harder. This is far better than the risk of loosing a pilot or having to negotiate for his / her life with the enemy. As unmanned fighter jets chalk up more and more successful missions, manned fighter jets will become a less appealing option. This is the future, we all have to embrace whether we like it or not.

 

[I amso IR]

And drones don't necessarily need to be operated from "6000 miles away". It can be an aircraft carrier or battleship nearby, or an airbase in a freindly country that is much closer.

Manned aircraft will not become obsolete but most of the manned missions will be replaced by unmanned very soon. Drones will soon be doing things that will blow your mind away. We are in the midst of an unmanned arms race as we speak.

I doubt nothing you write Roudy, I simply do not share your enthusiasm. Drones are nothing new, they have been used for many years now as the Trojan horse was quite some time ago and if not in actuality, the concept was. The capability and control on the other hand is recent and as you state improving rapidly. Not to the point of my amazement however. Logical progression if you will. In any event, please allow me the courtesy of not being wowed or in awe of the steps being made. Costs will rise as will requirements. The human factor will also increase as the drone will never have the ability to perform and select on it's own. The Fokker Tri Wing was in no way responsible for it's evolution into the F35 and in that sense, the F35 is as numb as the Fokker. Me personally, I am not impressed, but then I am not easily impressed, As far as AI goes, if man knew when to stop it might be of use, however that point will never be attained as there will always be someone irresponsible enough to know or care when to stop. Please forgive me, I am doing the best with what I have. Cheers.

AI is not necessary with a drone, this is not The Terminator. We are simply talking about a pilot controlling the aircraft from the ground or on board a ship. The skills required to pilot a drone are no less than those of a fighter pilot, and as drones advance, they will be even harder. This is far better than the risk of loosing a pilot or having to negotiate for his / her life with the enemy. As unmanned fighter jets chalk up more and more successful missions, manned fighter jets will become a less appealing option. This is the future, we all have to embrace whether we like it or not.

Once again, your comments are strong and I agree completely. I threw AI in as an aside since there is so much concern lately with a drone pilot shortage and the mental and physical stress associated with the job not to mention the boring aspects. As sure as shit stinks, some one at some point, and I am willing to state, probably already has, decided that AI would be great to incorporate into a drone, when it can be done and will do so. I presume that is well enough stated that you understand I am not stating that the drones today are aware of anything. As for Arnold doing his thing that is not even related to this conversation. Which by the way, points out exactly what I stated above, "if mankind knew when to stop, it might be of use". Anyhow, Roudy, I got your point(s) a couple times now, understand your point(s), do not completely accept your point(s) and never will. However, reality is just, and simply so, that. Now please accept my point(s) as I have accepted yours. The end result will not be altered one way or the other. If you cannot make that small contribution to this conversation then I feel for you. You are human after all, are you not? It is what it is! Have a wonderful Christmas, and yes I am not a progressive, just simply me. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, Roudy. Please feel free to write any time as I do appreciate your points of view and clarity of thought. Ta Ta. P.S. By the way, the thingy in the upper left corner of the page is a pic of my wife and self grazing high in the Rockies. Rocky mountain goats to be exact.

 

[RubberGloveSeduction]

Just the facts....your non stealthy low and slow bomb wagon is a death trap

Stuff like this is what you get when an armchair aviator reads blogs, forms an opinion, and ends up looking like a dumbass. Right Manonthestreet? Have some more crow....

Vicious cycle: F-35A continues 5th-gen tradition of bullying legacy aircraft

"Bashore and his wingmen at the 58th FS have been employing the capabilities of the F-35A, scoring as many as 27 kills in a single sortie, at Northern Lightning, a large force exercise where fifth and fourth generation aircraft engage in a contested, degraded environment. “I remember the first time I flew against (fifth-generation aircraft),” Bashore said. “It’s a change in mind set because you can’t target anything on your radar because it’s not there, and by the time you do potentially find something it’s too late and they have already shot you.

“It’s frustrating, but at the same time understanding that it’s our asset is invigorating and gives you a lot of hope for the future as far as how successful this platform is going to be.”
While sharing many similarities with the F-22, the F-35A’s main advantage is its robust suite of sensors that give it the ability to process and share information with other players in the battle space. These capabilities make the F-35A more lethal and survivable than any legacy aircraft, and eliminate any safe space for the enemy to hide.
“We took off out of Madison (to join the fight),” said Lt. Col. Bart Van Roo, 176th FS commander. “We went to our simulated air field out in the far part of the air space. As the two ship from the Northern half of the air space we turned hot, drove for about 30 seconds and we were dead, just like that. We never even saw (the F-35A).”

Sure sounds like a non-stealthy death trap to me, all these pilots saying they can't even see the F-35 before they are dead. Granted, they couldn't possibly know as much as Manonthestreet's vast military experience of reading blogs. Don't breed, dumbass.

Manonthestreet