Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air Force Pilot Will Battle AI In A Virtual F-16 Dogfight Next Week.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Air Force Pilot Will Battle AI In A Virtual F-16 Dogfight Next Week.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericteg.../#2b96e3af539c

    This was always going to happen. Could get interesting.
    Any metaphor will tear if stretched over too much reality.

    Questions about our site? See the FAQ.

  • #2
    Just how realistic could it be? AI requires a link to a controller. All one has to do is break that link to make it crash. Remember that incident where the Iranians caused one of our Drones to crash?

    Pruitt
    Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

    Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

    by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

    Comment


    • #3
      Apparently someone in Congress wants an expensive drone contract for his state, and the Navy and the Air Force want to get more money for "pilotless aircraft", or somebody watched Stealth too often!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
        Apparently someone in Congress wants an expensive drone contract for his state, and the Navy and the Air Force want to get more money for "pilotless aircraft", or somebody watched Stealth too often!

        I ve heared that new Top Gun movie will have same plot

        Comment


        • #5
          The big advantage for the AI is that can pull huge Gs, and it’s replaceable... the algorithms will improve and be uploaded into the next drone. Losing an experienced pilot will no longer be a factor.
          "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
          Ernest Hemingway.

          "The more I learn about people, The more I love my dog".
          Mark Twain.

          Comment


          • #6
            The human advantage is the ability to improvise on the fly, but is it enough?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              The human advantage is the ability to improvise on the fly, but is it enough?
              That’s true, but in a battle of attrition the AI may sway the outcome when the true costs become clearer. We found out in the Kosovo conflict that routine flight patterns were the coalitions undoing, so human unpredictability may hold AI in check for some time in the future.
              "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
              Ernest Hemingway.

              "The more I learn about people, The more I love my dog".
              Mark Twain.

              Comment


              • #8
                The big problem comes when careers and politics get involved. The second the AI does better than the pilots is the second the AI gets nerfed and brain dead. I've seen it with US Naval wargaming. Red (the bad guys) always loses. They are just there to be targets in a shooting gallery.

                You learn little from what amounts to a one-sided video game.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Logically you would mix up human piloting with artificial intelligence and leave the enemy in doubt, if possible.

                  I'd go as far as put a dummy pilot in AI cockpit
                  Lambert of Montaigu - Crusader.

                  Bolgios - Mercenary Game.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post
                    Logically you would mix up human piloting with artificial intelligence and leave the enemy in doubt, if possible.

                    I'd go as far as put a dummy pilot in AI cockpit
                    Evil and sneaky....I like it!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      AI Slays Top F-16 Pilot In DARPA Dogfight Simulation

                      "It's a giant leap," said DARPA's Justin (call sign "Glock") Mock.

                      By Theresa Hitchens on August 20, 2020 at 6:03 PM
                      ....
                      WASHINGTON: In a 5 to 0 sweep, an AI ‘pilot’ developed by Heron Systems beat one of the Air Force’s top F-16 fighter pilots in DARPA’s simulated aerial dogfight contest today.

                      “It’s a giant leap,” said DARPA’s Justin (call sign “Glock”) Mock, who served as a commentator on the trials.

                      AI still has a long way to go before the Air Force pilots would be ready to hand over the stick to an artificial intelligence during combat, DARPA officials said during today’s live broadcast of the AlphaDogfight trials. But the three-day trials show that AI systems can credibly maneuver an aircraft in a simple, one-on-one combat scenario and shoot its forward guns in a classic, WWII-style dogfight. On the other hand, they said, it was an impressive showing by an AI agent after only a year of development. (As I reported earlier this week, the program began back in September last year with eight teams developing their respective AIs.)

                      Heron, a small, female- and minority-owned company with offices in Maryland and Virginia, builds artificial intelligence agents, and is also a player in DARPA’s Gamebreaker effort to explore tactics for disrupting enemy strategies using real-world games as platforms. The company beat eight other teams, including one led by defense giant Lockheed Martin — which came in second in the AlphaDogfight “semi-finals” that pitted the AI pilots against each other this morning.
                      ....
                      https://breakingdefense.com/2020/08/...ht-simulation/
                      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch
                      “War is merely the continuation of politics by other means” - von Clausewitz
                      Present Current Events are the Future's History

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        This will only vindicate programs like Boeing’s Loyal Wingman.
                        "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                        Ernest Hemingway.

                        "The more I learn about people, The more I love my dog".
                        Mark Twain.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          From what I'm reading, the final round saw the two opponents fight it out in a program, the AI had 100% situational awareness while the pilot was wearing a VR set... no wonder the AI handed his ass on a plate, it wasn't a real world scenario. Once sensors allow a AI drone to "see" everything, then it will be better than what a human could ever achieve.

                          Last edited by Achtung Baby; 23 Aug 20, 03:19.
                          "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                          Ernest Hemingway.

                          "The more I learn about people, The more I love my dog".
                          Mark Twain.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            This is the best breakdown of the dogfight sim I've seen so far, and C. W. lemoine a former fighter pilot makes some very good points... more info about him here. https://www.cwlemoine.com/about/

                            "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                            Ernest Hemingway.

                            "The more I learn about people, The more I love my dog".
                            Mark Twain.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Navy F/A-18 Squadron Commander's Take On AI Repeatedly Beating Real Pilot In Dogfight

                              Everyone has an opinion when it comes to the stunning results of DARPA's AlphaDogfight trials, now hear what the skipper of a fighter squadron thinks.


                              By Commander Colin 'Farva' PriceAugust 24, 2020

                              [Select Excerpts];
                              ....

                              The recent 5 to 0 victory of an Artificial Intelligence (AI) pilot developed by Heron Systems over an Air Force F-16 human pilot does not have me scrambling to send out applications for a new job. However, I was impressed by the AlphaDogfight trials and recognize its value in determining where the military can capitalize on AI applications.

                              For most military aviators, it may be easy to scoff at the artificiality of the contest. I may have even mumbled, “Never would have happened to a Navy pilot…” Instead, I think it is important not to get wrapped too much around the axle about the rules of the contest and instead focus on a couple of details that really jumped out at me on the advantages an AI pilot would have over a human pilot.

                              For the contest setup, the argument about the death of the dogfight, or that there is no need for within visual range engagements anymore is a tired one. There was a pretty popular movie in the ‘80s about that very argument, so I am not going to rehash it here. The fact is we still constantly train to dogfight in the Navy, or as it is more commonly referred to 'Basic Fighter Maneuvers,' or BFM for short
                              ....
                              BFM is great airborne training for gaining an understanding of your energy state in relation to the enemy and to exercise your situational awareness in a three-dimensional space in a physically demanding environment. An aviator has to understand how to aggressively maneuver their aircraft while at the same time integrating their weapon systems to cue a weapon, assess the quality of the weapons track, and determine if the trigger should be pulled to employ the weapon. All at the same time, they must be preventing the enemy from accomplishing the same process. It is a dynamic and stressful environment that creates better fighter pilots. I have yet to meet a pilot who is an above-average BFM pilot, but struggles in other mission sets.
                              ....
                              There are multiple reasons why aircrew may find themselves at the merge with the enemy. But if they do end up at the merge, the goal is always the same: take the first shot to kill the enemy before they can shoot them.

                              This fact sometimes gets lost in training engagements. To maximize the training, the BFM fight will often be taken to a “logical conclusion.” Even though each aircraft may trade shots early in the fight, the two aircraft will keep fighting down to the hard deck till there is an obvious winner. Aircrew will come to the debrief patting themselves on the back for the gun footage they have of the other aircraft, but once the footage is played, they realize they absorbed the first shot well before their triumphant gun pipper placement. The real-world logical conclusion could have been very different if they were missing a wing or engine because of a missile impact.

                              The goal at the merge of achieving the first shot must be continually hammered home.

                              Still, the reality is that missiles do not always guide and fuze, thus we extend fights to teach aviators how to continue to survive or turn a defensive situation into an offensive one. The true sport of fighter jet aviators is a guns-only BFM engagement. A guns-only BFM engagement is a test of who can efficiently maximize their energy package and capitalize on each merge. Much like chess, truly great BFM pilots are thinking two to three merges ahead, not just reacting.
                              ....
                              In true gamesmanship fashion, the guns-only BFM engagement was the setting for the AlphaDogfight contest. So what jumped out at me about the engagements? Three main points. First was the aggressive use of accurate forward quarter gun employment. Second, was the AI’s efficient use of energy. Lastly was the AI’s ability to maintain high-performance turns.

                              During BFM engagements, we use training rules to keep aircrew and aircraft safe. An example of this is using a hard deck, which is usually 5,000 feet above the ground. Aircraft can fight down to this pretend ground level and if an aircraft goes below the hard deck, they are considered a “rocks kill” and the fight is ended. The 5,000 feet of separation from the actual ground provides a safety margin during training.

                              Another training rule is forward-quarter gunshots are prohibited. There is a high potential for a mid-air collision if aircraft are pointing at each other trying to employ their guns. Due to the lack of ability to train to forward-quarter gunshots, it is not in most aviators combat habit patterns approaching the merge to employ such a tactic. Even so, it would be a low probability shot.
                              ....
                              The second advantage of AI was its ability to maintain an efficient energy state and lift vector placement. BFM flights certainly instill aviators with confidence in flying their aircraft aggressively in all regimes of the flight envelope. However, in today’s prevalent fly-by-wire aircraft, there is less aircraft feel providing feedback to the pilot. It takes a consistent instrument scan to check the aircraft is at the correct G, airspeed, or angle-of-attack for the given situation.

                              Even proficient aviators have to use a percentage of their concentration (i.e. situation awareness) on not over-performing or under-performing the aircraft. AI could easily track this task and would most likely never bleed airspeed or altitude excessively, preserving vital potential and kinetic energy while also fine-tuning lift vector placement on the other aircraft to continue the fight if required.

                              Lastly is AI’s freedom from human physiological limitations. During the last engagement, both aircraft were in a prolonged two-circle fight at 9 Gs on the deck. A two-circle fight is also referred to as a 'rate fight.' The winner is the aircraft who can track its nose faster around the circle, which is directly proportional (disregarding other tools such as thrust vectoring) to the amount of Gs being pulled. More Gs means a faster turn rate. 9 Gs is extremely taxing on the body, which the pilot in the contest did not have to deal with, either. ....
                              ....
                              The truth is current aircraft have to be built to support the 'pile of human' sitting in it. The human will always be the limiting factor in the performance of an aircraft. I fight the jet differently now than I did as a junior officer when I was young and flexible. I have to fight differently. I know what my capabilities are to get a consistent and repeatable shot with the little bit of neck magic I have left to keep sight of the other aircraft. The fact that in the contest, the AI had perfect information at all times, and rules of engagement were not a factor, are not inconsequential details. I recognize that providing the amount of data and sensor fusion the AI would require to perform at the same level in a real aerial engagement (one that does not take place in cyberspace) is not a small undertaking and still a bit in the future. The rules of engagement discussion could fill up the syllabus for the entire semester of an ethics class, and will always be a touchy subject with regards to AI's involvement in war.

                              I am not an engineer, nor an ethics professor. Yet, as a pilot, I am intrigued. A computer model was able to react to the movements of a human pilot and effectively employ weapons. During the five engagements, the AI had 15 valid gun employments and the human pilot had zero. These results also hint at the AI’s ability to avoid being shot while effectively employing its own weapons.

                              An AI-enhanced weapon’s employment system in my aircraft? I am not ready for Skynet to become self-aware, but I am certainly ready to invite AI into the cockpit. Hell, I am only a voting member as far as the flight controls are concerned in the Super Hornet anyways. If I put a control input in that is not aerodynamically sound (i.e. could result in a departure from controlled flight), the flight control system will not move the control surface or will move a different surface to give me the movement I am requesting. Who is flying who?
                              .....
                              https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...=pocket-newtab
                              TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch
                              “War is merely the continuation of politics by other means” - von Clausewitz
                              Present Current Events are the Future's History

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X