Slashdot Mirror


Future Fighters Won't Need Ejection Seats

Dr. Tom writes "The U.S. has deployed more than 11,000 military drones, up from fewer than 200 in 2002. They carry out a wide variety of missions while saving money and American lives. Within a generation they could replace most manned military aircraft, says John Pike, a defense expert at the think tank GlobalSecurity.org. Pike suspects that the F-35 Lightning II, now under development by Lockheed Martin, might be 'the last fighter with an ejector seat, and might get converted into a drone itself.' The weakest link is the pilot. A jet could pull 15 Gs, out-turning any conventional aircraft, except it would kill the pilot. Is it time to stop spending billions on obsolete aircraft?"

14 of 622 comments (clear)

  1. Hope no one hacks our entire Air Force one day by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nah, no one could ever do that.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:Hope no one hacks our entire Air Force one day by AvitarX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Half of those apply to current fighters with people too.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:Hope no one hacks our entire Air Force one day by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Especially with almost everything being "Made in China".

    3. Re:Hope no one hacks our entire Air Force one day by rtaylor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why send up one sophisticated aircraft when you could sent up 10,000 really dumb ones.

      Send up a cloud of drones with the expectation that 20% will be sacrificed for defence of the group.

      --
      Rod Taylor
  2. No by jjeffries · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People in the military need to be injured or killed in war, to remind everyone that it is fucking terrible and that no one should *want* to do it.

    1. Re:No by JDG1980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People in the military need to be injured or killed in war, to remind everyone that it is fucking terrible and that no one should *want* to do it.

      Automated drones are just the culmination of a decades-long trend in the U.S. towards enabling warfare by insulating the bulk of the population from its costs. During WWI and WWII, a universal draft meant that virtually every able-bodied man had to go to war, and those on the home front shared the sacrifice through work requirements, rationing, and higher taxes. In Vietnam, though, affluent Americans were able to avoid any impact of the war on their own families thanks to the college exemption from the draft. This meant that only the working classes bore the brunt of the war. And on the home front, life was far closer to normal than it was during the World Wars – the war was funded through deficit spending, not increased taxes, and there was no rationing. After Vietnam, the draft was ended, so even those Americans who didn't go to college would not be shipped off to the military unless they signed up. The result was that the first Iraq War met with very little opposition, since no one except volunteer soldiers was at any risk at all, and even then casualties were minimal. The longer campaigns in Afghanistan and in the second Iraq War led to additional backlash against the casualties among volunteer soldiers, hence the move to drones. Basically, the American political elites figured out that if Americans don't have to see American soldiers die in war, then they can do whatever they want overseas and no one will try to stop them.

  3. Re:There will always be a physological need by crazyjj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    once we can prove that they can not be taken over by an enemy

    Any system can be hacked. Having humans directly in the loop is the basic Wargames lesson.

    they could operate autonomously when conditions warrant

    And that is exactly what these drones should NEVER be allowed to do. And that's the basic Terminator lesson.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
  4. Better use of money and effort by ZorroXXX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is it time to stop spending billions on obsolete aircraft?

    It is time to stop spending billions on military weapons in general; sadly weapon is the world's largest trading goods. If all that money had been spent more wisely the world could have been a much safer and better place.

    --
    When you are sure of something, you probably are wrong (search for "Unskilled and Unaware of It").
  5. Re:lag by Crash24 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're assuming that the drones will never be autonomous in a situation that requires low latency. While a human pilot may have better ingenuity and unpredictability in a dogfight, he cannot physically react faster than a computer. Connect that computer to the right sensors, and you'll have a system ready to fly an airframe capable of doing turns that will turn any human pilot into red jelly.

  6. Re:There will always be a physological need by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any system can be hacked. Having humans directly in the loop is the basic Wargames lesson. ...
    And that is exactly what these drones should NEVER be allowed to do. And that's the basic Terminator lesson.

    Because our military should really be basing decisions on fictional movies.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  7. Re:There will always be a physological need by JDG1980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because our military should really be basing decisions on fictional movies.

    Well-written fiction often speaks to real-world concerns. George Orwell's 1984 was also fictional, but it was and is taken seriously as a cautionary tale, and rightly so.

    Sure, it's unlikely that an evil sentient computer will declare nuclear war on humanity, but one reason why the Terminator films are so popular is that they address real-world anxieties about how our lives are increasingly dominated by technology. It's perfectly reasonable to ask whether bad consequences could result from taking humans out of the loop, especially on military decisions.

  8. Autonomous jets may even survive laser weaponry by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine any conventional object up in the sky. A sitting duck for your laser, right? Even mach 10 is pretty much stationary compared to 3e8 m/s.

    But what if that autonomous drone is flying 2 feet off the ground using its inhumanly fast reaction time and 36g turning capability to fly at that altitude--i.e., it's below the horizon until it's right on top of your laser facility.

    Drones could survive battlefield lasers, maybe: piloted jets, not so much.

    --PM

  9. Re:strong point is the pilot by smash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You don't intentionally go up there to dogfight.

    A dogfight is what happens when two opposing forces merge, and the initial round of beyond visual range missiles don't kill everyone, which is relatively common - as both guys are in a game of chicken where they want to wait as long as posisble to launch so the missile has the maximum amount of energy for turning when it gets close so the fighter can't evade it, but they don't want the other guy to launch first. So typically they may launch pretty early and the missile has no energy left to turn by the time it gets to the other guy.

    As to why fighters are up there in the first place? To stop the other guys bombing you, and to protect your bombers and other assets, typically.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  10. Re:There will always be a physological need by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Aldous Huxley had it more right then George Orwell: distract the people with luxuries and short term goals, at the expense of long-term freedoms. That said, his dystopia was arguably not one: it wasn't like those who brooked changed were murdered or imprisoned or tortured - they were just discredited and lavished with benefits, but ultimately kept irrelevant.