The Raptor looks pretty close to a velocity XL kitplane.

ACM is simple, he who can pull ,the hardest on the pole at the merge usually wins.

As Hoser said, pull the stick till the rio pukes and the rivits pop.
Trade energy for position, any day of the week.

AI can pull much harder, won't black out, so assuming it has been built with a higher structural G limit (easy since no cockpit needed, no life support, no ejection seats), at that point the AI has the clear advantage. If properly designed.

I would think Large force 12vs48 .. The AI has the advantage as well.. SA is key for such encounters.. and a computer is much better at 3D Spacial tracking..
Processing power is easy these days
It just needs the sensors to do it..

F14 had a second pair of eyes to look around..
AI can have 20-100 extra eyes.. all around.
It can seamlessly combine all the inputs, from each AI plane and process it all as Big Data. Employ best tactics as a hive.

1v1 ACM is like chess, thinking ahead.. working out a solution that brings your weapons on the other guy..

any vs many is playing many chess games at once..
Human pilots can talk to one another, but in the heat of battle.. it's unpredictable. talking is a poor way to transfer SA.. 2vs2 ok, 4vs4.. hoomins need to split it up..
12vs48?? not a chance, no matter what side the hoomins are on

AI brings in the Data link.. hive mind.. forgettabit with humans in such environment.It's a crap shoot... but not for AI.

AI learns by what it has seen before - Right? Think about how many more variations there are in an LFE type environment.

"Hoomins" don't communicate via voice anymore. We're not out there flying F-4s and F-8s...

Can I ask what your experience is? It sounds as though you believe yourself to be an expert, which you could be... I'd just like to know your experience and whether its more akin to having been a instructor pilot in a fighter or a flight sim geek.

Several have suggested that the developer of the Raptor should mount his Audi-based drive train on a Velocity airframe for testing.
Likewise, he should mount a known engine like the Continental IO-550 on the Raptor airframe to test its aerodynamics.

Gotta admire the guy, but an unproven airframe with an unproven engine is a daunting challenge.

He is doing this through the eyes of his coding background. Start with every feature, then fix bugs as they arise.
Typical aviation is to prove the aerodynamics first. Then we can consider adding pressurization and air conditioning after we know it flies well.

I'm not an expert, but well read.
Just repeating what the top scorer of Aimval Aceval said (USN Joe Hoser Satrapa)

He was speaking about dogfights.. guns.. no missiles, no off bore sight AimX stuff..
Just ACM with guns..

Whoever pulls the most G at the merge gets his guns on the other guy.

Whoever is G limited, airframe or hoomin G tolerance is going to get waxed in 1v1
Hoser was so good, that the Navy Agressors (sent there by Topgun) called over Hawk Monroe, to help come up with tactics to beat the Navy Tomcats.
Hoser was unorthodox and played every trick in the book , and a bunch that weren't in any book.
Tomcat on paper was no match for the Eagle, but that didn't stop Hoser, he had the highest kill ratio of everybody there.
Hawk went over for the weekend.. But even he had a tough time with Hoser in the Tomcat. It's said that Hoser and Hawk were the best at ACM at the time.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y4CHjwF-rHM" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QQvhGAuVSpk" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-r9-gP_cbao" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

https://img.over-blog-kiwi.com/0/64/...2_final212.jpg

Hoser died last year, he was quite the character.. google his name..

I would think the hoomins pilots in a 2v2 will still communicate what they are doing with their wingman.. or a 4v4.. They have discrete channels for just that.
Not everything happens with datalink.. that's nice for long range, but in ACM, it's going all over the place.. how would you then not communicate with voice?? It's the easiest and quickest way to tell your wingmain he's got a missile coming or an enemy maneuvering on his six. I mean, there's no telekinetic interface like Clint Eastwood had in that Firefox movie.. and it's easier to say bogey on yer six, about to shoot, break left now.. then to type it on a keypad, right?



I'm not that much of a Sim geek as I read everything there is to read.
I do dabble in DCS, but not fanatical. The kids in DCS have way more time to train, and I have the attention span of a chipmunk.. i get bored easily with games.


And speaking of DCS.. I'm sure the military has a similar simulation, but much better.. AI can learn from simulation as well..
The above video on the Drive shows that... AI can learn Day and Night..
it never gets tired. Never gets bored.. you can pitch it scenario after scenario and it will learn each time.
Big Data will kick in and they will only have to validate and correct with some actual flights ...

And unlike hoomin pilots.. the AI doesn't do it's time and then rotates into civilian life.
It's knowledge isn't lost if in a training hop it crashes in the ground
It doesn't retire, doesn't grow old , sick, or scared.

The performance improvement will be very fast.
DCS AI at the moment, it's not there yet.. 1v1 it's not pushing hard enough to be a problem
And obviously it's supposed to be realistic and fun.. Nobody would play DCS if the AI was impossible to beat.

But what if Real AI is plugged in to the online DCS fights??? playing incognito.. learning each time against human sim pilots??
I'm sure Darpa is very much on top of that game

Hoser at some point retired
but when morale and stuff was bad , somebody said Bring Hoser back.. and the SecNav got involved to negotiate Hoser back into the service..

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6aILfg1KRcg" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

No, it is not whoever pulls the most G at the merge will get his guns on the other guy. All aircraft are energy limited when max performing. Pull too hard and you're slow and out of options. There is a very fine line depending on what type of fight you're pushing.

I'm fully aware of whom Hoser is, thanks for the tip.

Copy. Happy that you're read everything there is to read and now feel qualified to debate and "teach" someone with actual experience.

I'll leave you to it, sounds like you've got it all figured out killer. Glad we've got people like you out there to help keep us straight. Cheers.

It's all mostly political posturing these days.

Human pilot brains don't function at 9-12Gs and nothing will fix that.
Any and all senors can be disrupted by multiple means. Even pre-installed to trigger from early infiltration. Flying blind is just that.

Gen5 fighters will do the trick but they have to be close enough to the target.
Aircraft carriers are slow and massive targets for excoset type anti-ship pew-pew from a base.
Or just a plain old flu. "Oops we did that?"

Any base or military structure is vulnerable to human infiltration, electronic sabotage, and now hardened nano-bot swarms which might release incapacitating agents.
Or from satellite-based laser or missiles.
Or just mandatory low-IQ hires without morals willing to destroy their own country...

And satellites are vulnerable to other satellites or ground-based missiles.
No vertical F-15 needed.

But, of course, a hyper-sonic stealth nuclear cruise missile takes out everything.

Forward guns in dogfights would actually be ancient history if it ever gets that close.

360 coverage (weapons forward back side top and bottom) with computer tracking should be able to handle anything.
Take any sturdy WW1 biplane and equip it with the right accessories.

Why so sensitive, I'm not pretending to be anything i'm not


It's an internet forum , surely I can have a say or opinion bout something?
And sure I might get something wrong. And you can correct me on that.

Did I call you names or attack you in any way? no.
Did i call you a nobody?

I'm well aware that you can't just pull till you are dead in the water.
It was an simplification that Hoser made, not me.. It's assumed that enough energy is maintained so follow up from the advantageous position is possible.

Do you disagree then , that the pilot who manages the best initial turn (which implies pulling the most G) has the best chance to put his guns on? surely not.

I'm guessing computers would have that 99.99% figured out by now..

I played IL-2 (WW2 fighter game) extensively.

My two favorite tricks when the enemy was on my tail were:
1). Barrel rolls/cut throttle/flaps/recover. Shoot his ass with blips if within range or thatch weave. Spiral dive if any others present while at near stall. Or get speed and climb and re-set the engagement. Being wary of frontal weaponry differentials of course. Other engagements below made for easy targets.

2). Escape at ground level. Keeping speed and turning into their path threw off aim. Cut throttle dive and yaw did the same in the non-carburated ones. I escaped 9 ME109s that way with no friendlies around for half and hour. They chased me all the way to my airport AA cover which couldn't hit a damn thing

3). If the dumb game AI was at least anywhere near human-level coordination, I would have been toast.

technically no commercial/public flight sim uses real "AI" they use some kind of programmed simulated pilot/control, but it doesn't really learn/evolve.. Which makes online against other humans so much harder and challenging...

I'm trying not to be a dick but the bottom line is you're hypothesizing about things you have absolutely zero experience in. What was that line in Goodwill Hunting? Something about reading about the Sistene Chappel?

Bottom line, how was the AI getting its information? Eyeballs? Or did it know the exact parameters that the human pilot was flying? I'd imagine the latter...

How do you think that compares to the actual pilot who was flying a garbage simulator using only his eyes for his information?

Nice post. Sim guys talking about that about which they know little. The principles are fine, sorta like braking an F1 car. The reality....well sheet.

Deliberate Spiral Dives!!! If the Hun won't kill you, the spiral dives will.

How WAS the AI getting?? i don't know I didn't comment on the specific video ! I barely watched it.

My comment was on the future, on how they WILLmake all the drones datalink up
And all their sensors combined WILL work together in a hive mind.

Nobody has experience in that yet. But it's coming.

Tell me what is wrong with that statement ?? do you not think interlinked , hive mind drones as Air to Air will be much more capable then individual pilots working together to fight a dynamic fight?



1v1 might still be somewhat equal in equal air-frames , the video even shows it.. they ended up in similar circle fights as real pilots do (that's in short what i saw, i didn't watch all of it)
Identical planes with identical loadout.. both flown to the same edge of their flight characteristics.. if neither makes a mistake or runs out of fuel. they will go in circles forever

but it won't be the case for 2v2 , it will be 2² v 2
or 4²v4
or 16²v16

hell, they might even interlink with the missiles they shoot and use those sensors as well.
The drones with hive mind will beat the humans every time. No contest

Compare a 2v2 with human pilots.. and they'll usually split off in a dual1v1..
The first winner can then help his lead or wingman..

a drone 2v2 humans..
The AI will be constantly aware of all aspects of both enemies.. and can at all times use both drones to maybe even switch from one fight to the other
Humans might pull that off in a 2v2..if both pilots have a very good training together and communicate better then their human opponents. It's been done.

but not in a 4v4 and defo not with more then that... our mind cannot multitask like that. human 4v4 outcome will always be less predictable
We cannot process such a dynamic battlefield SA to the degree a drone can
We cannot communicate efficient enough
Nor can we predict all the variables and pick an overall strategy for all combined (which will included deciding a sacrifice of individual components, drones have no ego or fear of dying)
or adjust the tactics fast enough to the ever changing dynamics as the many vs many fight evolves.

At best as an example we have the NVA circle defence, but that's not a very dynamic fight.. and it's been obsoleted by Missile tech

Add to that that drones will be much less G limited due to being smaller, compact, lighter.. no pilots or life support ...
and they will be unbeatable in Air to Air to humans. It will take drones to take out drones.



Combining the drones makes em more effective to the nth force.
Humans working together can never achieve such efficiency.. the more humans you put together, the less effective and flexible they are at combining their efforts.

The more you combine, the less their individual qualities can be applied.

I'm sure you'll agree ? I don't need to be a fighter pilot to realize that.

Just look at the initial Arc Light B52 missions.. how they ran into trouble just getting all those bombers refueled at the same time..
They lost 2 B52s on the first mission..
They didn't have the flexibility because of the large numbers they all had to work within the limitations of the plan
The Bombers had to be at the right place at the right time, the tankers had to be on the right place at the right time
One group was ahead of schedule .. and had to do a 360 and ended up hitting another b52 at 180 degrees..
(avoidable if SAC hadn't used parallel refueling tracks at 25 miles, which is exactly the turning radius of a B52 loaded up with iron bombs)
In any case, grouping humans makes us less flexible/dynamic/effective (and generally lowers the average IQ quite a bit below the combined individual IQ average)
For drones interlinked, hive mind, it's the opposite











I'm not even a SIM guy..I'm an IT guy, I'm not commenting on whatever there is in Sims today, or that video of the drones simulating 1v1
As i mentioned I occasionally play DCS, but i'm far from a fanatic.. I spend waaaay more time reading then I playing DCS
This is not about sims.. it's about AI.

'm talking about the future, how drones will operate.. how they will learn, how they can work together more efficiently in groups then humans can...

Ryan,

Cool list of aircraft in your sig. Got to know quite a few F18 pilots while planning the air defense for the 2010 Olympics. Here is me, my son and wife getting our private tours airside at CYVR just prior to the 2010 games.

Hard to imagine that boy is 6'2" now, the wife is still the same 5'0" lol



http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1598936890.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1598936890.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1598936890.jpg