Don't fall for the Muskian BS circulating online. He's clueless about what fighter jets do. By the way, I did graduate with on countering drone swarms almost a decade ago. None of this is new information. It's just entering public consciousness now.
The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
- Thread starter WingsofFury
- Start date
Don't fall for the Muskian BS circulating online. He's clueless about what fighter jets do. By the way, I did graduate with on countering drone swarms almost a decade ago. None of this is new information. It's just entering public consciousness now.
- Reaction score
- 10,102
- Points
- 1,360
Even the US military is walking back from that. They are talking more about Uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft “quarterbacked” by crewed aircraft.
I saw a comment that “quarterbacking” is essentially a pilot-ego-friendly way of saying “being a TACCO or an Air Battle Manager”
Yes and no. There will be real ABM guided CCAs. For example, a large CCA swarm controlled by ABMs on a Wedgetail. And there will be MUMT (manned-unmanned teaming) where a 4-ship of F-35s becomes a 12-ship package with CCAs doing dedicated functions. From sweep to EA to buddy launches.
- Reaction score
- 19,096
- Points
- 1,280
Better than that - an AWACS is just a big flying radar. The F-35’s real advantage (aside from low observability) is sensor fusion.
Oh definitely. I saw the “quarterbacking” comment from a LM post with someone in the back of a fighter-sized aircraft, hence the joke.
I think MUMT is now termed Human-Machine Teaming (HMT) because it is broader than just manned and unmanned vehicles. But LM calls it “crewed-Uncrewed teaming” so it’s just literally whatever people want to call it now.
Not quite. At the end of the day there's only so much a small platform with one human onboard can do. It's not just the human constraint. The F-35 will be limited on processing power, bandwidth, etc. Especially in comparison to an actual AWACS.
CCAs working with an F-35 will probably end up being far more limited in what they do than CCAs basically operating autonomously with instruction from some control centre in the rear. I would guess the CCA roles for F-35 mutual support are basically escort and payload.
- Reaction score
- 10,102
- Points
- 1,360
When I said AWACS what I meant was a AEW&C at least a miniature version. The term that I missed was that Dimsum mentioned was "Sensor Fusion".
I am not an Air Force guy, just a dumb grunt but my little grunt brain at the time could definitely see the benefits of the F35 platform
I am not an Air Force guy, just a dumb grunt but my little grunt brain at the time could definitely see the benefits of the F35 platform
- Reaction score
- 22,339
- Points
- 1,360
It’s a node that will do 10% data collect, 85% data share/transfer and 5% kinetic effector (probably less tbh) in an edge-computing digital battle space…
MUMT is HAT (human autonomy teaming) now (egs. US ref, Canada ref), but totally agree the concepts where things are heading.
- Reaction score
- 1,742
- Points
- 1,140
- Reaction score
- 19,096
- Points
- 1,280
And people wonder why we can’t keep our acronyms straight.MUMT is HAT (human autonomy teaming) now (egs. US ref, Canada ref), but totally agree the concepts where things are heading.
- Reaction score
- 22,339
- Points
- 1,360
…and I didn’t even include the interposing HMT (human-machine teaming)…
- Reaction score
- 22,111
- Points
- 1,260
I talked to a few fighter pilots (currently flying desks at the Pentagon) and all of them seem to have different takes on what that all means.Even the US military is walking back from that. They are talking more about Uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft “quarterbacked” by crewed aircraft.
I saw a comment that “quarterbacking” is essentially a pilot-ego-friendly way of saying “being a TACCO or an Air Battle Manager”
Two seem to think it will go back to two seaters with the back seater being an ABM to work the “loyal” wingmates, while a few others seem to think that it will be a one seater and the pilot will do the controlling of the wing craft and AI/automation will do most of the flying work of the piloted aircraft.
Which to means that no one really knows what NGASF will be.
- Reaction score
- 10,102
- Points
- 1,360
AI is going to eventually operate everything with decision-making being done by a human operator.
Combat Management Systems on Ships already sort of work this way.
A threat (problem) is identified and a mitigation (solution) is generated by the system to solve the problem. The human merely clicks the button to accept the solution.
The problems are too big & complex for a person to solve on their own so the system will do all the number crunching and present the operator with options/responses.
- Reaction score
- 22,339
- Points
- 1,360
Nuance added.
I was just looking at the delivery schedule and average career lengths and what we did for other fleet inductions (which were a lot shorter). How exactly are you going to convert that many people while operating the current fleet over a 7 year delivery schedule? Which itself is over a year away from starting. Anybody who is a second tour captain or higher today would likely promote out or retire and not convert. There will be Majors and LCOLs who convert. But not that many. So if I had to guess overall, I would say half of those flying today will end up converting. If you have a different guess I'm happy to learn.
I would discount takes from anybody not involved in experimentation and doctrinal development. Recency bias is just way too high for everybody else.
Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,689
- Points
- 1,260
Not a bad question. Most Canadians think we have fighters aimlessly patrolling the Arctic 24/7, which makes the F-35 a horrible choice since it's single engine and can't survive.
Most Canadians are clueless about defence issues.
And you know who was the most skeptical about single engine operation? The US Navy. Engine failure coming off a catapult has higher risks and more immediate consequences than operating in the Arctic. Which is also why the US, Denmark, Sweden and Norway have no issues operating single engine Vipers and Gripens and now F-35s inside the Arctic circle.
armrdsoul77
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 449
- Points
- 930
On a side note the Lockheed M-21(relative of the SR-71) was designed (development started 1964)with an autonomous "drone" to be launched for photo reconnaissance.
en.m.wikipedia.org
Lockheed D-21 - Wikipedia
armrdsoul77
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 449
- Points
- 930
