The end of manned aircraft

[UKSmartypants]

well this is a nifty little device, and could spell the end of manned aircraft. Air warfare has been moving towards Unmanned Air Warfare for a while now, this could be the proverbial Killer App.

The Jackal

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/04/19/08/69990647-0-image-m-11_1681888869120.jpg

In tests, the drone, which has eight rotors, has proved an effective platform for launching 35lb missiles packed with explosives.
Precision-guided Martlet missiles can strike targets up to four miles away. The Jackal was developed by Flyby Technology in York and the bespoke missiles by Thales in Northern Ireland.



RAF develops unmanned mini-helicopter 'Jackal' drone which can fire laser-guided missiles | Daily Mail Online (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11989295/RAF-develops-unmanned-mini-helicopter-Jackal-drone-fire-laser-guided-missiles.html)

[Frankenvoter]

Pilotless craft will one day be the norm but I would never get in an airplane without a pilot up front.

I'd imagine 50 years from now when the AI decides it's finally had enough of humanity a few planeloads of elites will be the first to go full throttle straight up until the passengers can see the curvature of the Earth, as the AI tweaks the street lights down below to spell out "Bye bye, scumags", the last thing they'll ever see unfortunatly.

[Big Dummy]

Just days away from putting a badge on a Jackel and call it a cop. Then it will hunt down gun owners, patriots , dissenters, whites and Catholics.

[UKSmartypants]

Just days away from putting a badge on a Jackel and call it a cop. Then it will hunt down gun owners, patriots , dissenters, whites and Catholics.


Meanwhile, back in the real world, the Uk developed device will probably be play tested in Ukraine, id imagine. Its a good place atm to test weapons.

[Northern Rivers]

I thought this thread was gonna be about a Democrat equity quota for trans women in aviation. My bad...:sofa:

[Call_me_Ishmael]

We had a saying that is coming true:

Fighter pilots are so full of themselves because they think of them themselves as the quarterback. We engineers know that they're really just the football.

[UKSmartypants]

We had a saying that is coming true:

Fighter pilots are so full of themselves because they think of them themselves as the quarterback. We engineers know that they're really just the football.

well yes. Commercial passenger jet pilots are virtually irrelevant, the plane can fly its self. I watched a video the other day where the put a guy who had never even been on an aircraft into a 737 simulator, with just a pilot insrtuctor ona radi to talk to, he landed the plane no problem by simply programming the Autopilot. In another 20 years piloting will be a semiskilled job on par with driving a JCB

[mr claws]

Looks like this kid found a job after all these years. Teen's gun-firing drone triggers federal probe - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBBC-xL_MTg)

[UKSmartypants]

Thats a dream device for a mob hitman, you could be miles away and get somone lounging by there pool with ease.
The only design flaw is you cant independently pan and tilt the gun, so you have to be level with the target.
Is there any US laws preventing you from building these?

[ruthless terrier]

it's not the gun that kills .. it's the drone.

[UKSmartypants]

Guns dont kill people, rabbits do


Goldie Lookin Chain - Guns Dont Kill People (Official Music Video) - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICG0MuzEYzw)

[Captain Kirk!]

Mm maybe we'll have wimmened aircraft.

[Wilson2]

Nope, not even close. This drone is remote controlled, as long as this technology is controlled by some sort of man-in-the-loop via a data link it will never replace all manned aircraft. Its not even advertised as replacing manned aircraft, its advertised as being a low cost alternative that partially fills the manned attack helicopter role.

All the press releases point out the rapid program schedule (6 weeks), the ability to shoot from a very low altitude (tree top level), and the stability of a small platform shooting a relatively large missile. The schedule is nothing, its been done before. Shooting from a low altitude is nothing new, helicopters have fired missiles from tree top level for 50 years, unmanned for the past 10 or so years. The missile doesn't have any capability that other missiles don't have.

Keeping the drone stable while shooting a powered missile is a good technical skill, but its new implementation not new technology. For Jackal its because the drone and missile were paired at the start, unlike most systems where the drone is designed and built and then stores are found for it.

Lots of marketing. Manned aircraft are not in peril.

[UKSmartypants]

Manned aircraft are not in peril.

Oh I think they are.

We have passenger jets that can takeoff, fly, and land themselves.

We have driverless cars - a technology developed at the behest of the Army so it could create driverless intelligent supply trucks with no humans on board, and for which it put up a $2 million prize DARPA challenge

We have cargo ships that are entirely crewless, i posted about this recently.

Drones are currently flown by remote operators, but we already have drones that can identify, select and kill targets on thier own.


We have robot guns, and pretty soon we'll have AI controlled self actuating robot guns.


And you think combat aircraft are immune to the march of this technology? AI is going to replace a lot of humans in jobs in the next 30 years, and pilots are right at the top of the list. And AI drones are going to do to fighter pilots what the Aircraft Carrier did to the Dreadnaught

[Captain Kirk!]

When the AI starts lying to us, what then?

[UKSmartypants]

When the AI starts lying to us, what then?


It already lies to us. It also hallucinates, and we have no idea why. Its possible more advanced LLM's might quickly develop some sort of mental illness.

We need to know why before we give them too much power. But ive no doubt we'll crack it in the end. There must mechanisms biological life developed that makes intelligence stable, we're going to artificial intelligence via different route, so i think the issue is we haven't built the same mechanisms in.

[Wilson2]

Oh I think they are.

We have passenger jets that can takeoff, fly, and land themselves.

That tech has been around for a very long time. The F-14 Tomcat could land and takeoff autonomously. Thats 1960's. Most modern military aircraft manned and unmanned have an autonomous capability. Auto-land and auto-takeoff have been around for decades. Nothing new.


We have driverless cars - a technology developed at the behest of the Army so it could create driverless intelligent supply trucks with no humans on board, and for which it put up a $2 million prize DARPA challenge
We have cargo ships that are entirely crewless, i posted about this recently.

True, but its not ready for prime time. Both have run into problems. Even civilian autonomous ground vehicles which are limited to known roads and known conditions have run into problems.

Its improving but a car driving in known conditions using a known map is a far easier problem than a ground vehicle in unknown terrain (or an air vehicle) in combat.

Drones are currently flown by remote operators, but we already have drones that can identify, select and kill targets on thier own.

Now you get to the problem. The time lag in remote control prevents pilotless vehicles in areas such as air-to-air combat, or even troops/vehicles in close contact.

"Driverless" cars, trucks, planes, ships have been around for many decades. Its just over the past few years that self-directed autonomous vehicles have shown up and there are many problems. In the military world - where shooting weapons and killing people is involved - its nowhere near ready for real life.

And there is the trust factor. Not long ago, a mode was added to a US air-to-air missile where it can be launched without a locked on or tracked target and it will autonomously seek out a target. The US military said "absolutely no way", nobody was willing to launch a weapon that makes those types of decisions on its own.


We have robot guns, and pretty soon we'll have AI controlled self actuating robot guns.

Yes, and the #1 problem is they have to be 100% successful, no mistakes allowed. And they are not perfect, thats why in the US autonomous armed platforms are not allowed. Remote controlled man-in-the-loop are allowed in some cases (military), but truly autonomous are not.

And the trust factor is extremely low.


And you think combat aircraft are immune to the march of this technology? AI is going to replace a lot of humans in jobs in the next 30 years, and pilots are right at the top of the list. And AI drones are going to do to fighter pilots what the Aircraft Carrier did to the Dreadnaught

Technology moves on, and one day there might be truly autonomous aircraft. But not today, and Jackal (the point of this OP) does absolutely nothing to advance autonomous aircraft and has absolutely no impact on moving manned aircraft to be unmanned.

In many tasks AI can replace the person. Its been happening for years. It used to have different names such as adaptive control, some US combat aircraft (such as the old F-16, thats 1970/1980's era tech) use adaptive control to reconfigure the flight control system based on perceived battle damage or component failures.

AI is just a variation of adaptive control, the real improvement is scale because computing power has increased. That doesn't mean AI won't transform - or ruin - the world, but there is an awful lot of hype around AI.

[Oceander]

Manned aircraft are in peril if, for no other reason, because an unmanned craft can take on g-forces that would disable, or kill, a human pilot. There's beaucoup money to be made satisfying that goal, and where there's enough money, there is usually a will to accomplish the goal.

[UKSmartypants]

That tech has been around for a very long time. The F-14 Tomcat could land and takeoff autonomously. Thats 1960's. Most modern military aircraft manned and unmanned have an autonomous capability. Auto-land and auto-takeoff have been around for decades. Nothing new.

we yes it is, you fail to understand. The systems you talk of are dumb, they have to be set by a human to start off with, to perform one action, take off, land. fly in a straight line. The driverless systems now being installed are much smarter. Already taking to the streets are driverless taxis, you just use an app to summon it and tell it the end point. The DARPA challenge that started all this was to build a Humvee that could navigate round 110 miles course that went across the desert, up into the mountains and then back through downtown Los Angeles visa six waypoints . A modern fighter jet cant select track and kil la target on its own, it needs human input, There are Reaper drone variants that can do exactly that, no human required.


True, but its not ready for prime time. Both have run into problems. Even civilian autonomous ground vehicles which are limited to known roads and known conditions have run into problems.

Not true anymore. GPS for these vehicles is now down to 1 metre resolution, they also can pick up weather and traffic.


Its improving but a car driving in known conditions using a known map is a far easier problem than a ground vehicle in unknown terrain (or an air vehicle) in combat.

The Darpa challenge proved otherwise. You are still think the systems are the same ones you knew for 30 years agio.



Now you get to the problem. The time lag in remote control prevents pilotless vehicles in areas such as air-to-air combat, or even troops/vehicles in close contact.

simply not true. Thats why they are AI, the decisions are made on board, not by the remote controlled, if there is one.


"Driverless" cars, trucks, planes, ships have been around for many decades. Its just over the past few years that self-directed autonomous vehicles have shown up and there are many problems. In the military world - where shooting weapons and killing people is involved - its nowhere near ready for real life.


not true, again, you are 20 years behind the tech.

The first self-driving car was successfully piloted from Pittsburgh to San Diego in 1995, While the actual driver of the vehicle was responsible for acceleration and braking, Navlab5 was able to utilize cameras and a variety of other sensors to navigate over 2000 miles without human intervention, which is considered a monumental milestone in the history of autonomous vehicles and robotics.


The Mars rover Sojourner was the first autonomous device that was able to intelligently sense, identify, classify, and navigate through specific object obstacles. Sojourner was developed by NASA in the early 1990s and landed on Mars on July 5th, 1997.


hardly ""Driverless" cars, trucks, planes, ships have been around for many decades. ". No they havent. Autopilot and ILS landing systems are not driverless systems.



AI is just a variation of adaptive control, the real improvement is scale because computing power has increased. That doesn't mean AI won't transform - or ruin - the world, but there is an awful lot of hype around AI.
AI is NOT just a variation of adaptive control, its a whole level smarter, its going to entirely replace many humans in many jobs. Explain how "adaptive control" is able to steer a ship from a mooring in India to a mooring in the USA with no human intervention, as can be done now.

Suggest you read this an get up to speed

10 Jobs AI Might Soon Replace (And Those It Wont) (https://sensoriumxr.com/articles/jobs-ai-might-replace-and-those-it-wont)

[UKSmartypants]

Adaptive control and true driverless systems are two different approaches to achieving autonomous operation in machines or vehicles.

Adaptive control is a method that adjusts the behavior of a system based on its observed performance and environmental feedback. It uses sensors and other data inputs to modify the system's control algorithms and optimize its performance over time. Adaptive control can be used in various systems, including those that have human operators or those that are partially autonomous. However, in adaptive control, the system still relies on human input or intervention to operate effectively.

In contrast, true driverless systems are designed to operate entirely on their own without the need for human intervention or input. These systems typically use a combination of sensors, algorithms, and machine learning techniques to navigate through their environment, avoid obstacles, and make decisions based on their programming. True driverless systems include autonomous cars, drones, and other machines that can operate entirely on their own.

There are some examples of military vehicles and weapons that use various forms of autonomous technology, such as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs), and autonomous tanks. These systems can operate independently to a certain extent and are often used for reconnaissance, surveillance, and other tasks that are deemed too dangerous for human operators.

In summary, the key difference between adaptive control and true driverless systems is that the former still requires human input or intervention, while the latter is entirely self-sufficient and operates without human involvement.

Answer provided by AI.

[Wilson2]

we yes it is, you fail to understand. The systems you talk of are dumb, they have to be set by a human to start off with, to perform one action, take off, land. fly in a straight line. The driverless systems now being installed are much smarter. Already taking to the streets are driverless taxis, you just use an app to summon it and tell it the end point. The DARPA challenge that started all this was to build a Humvee that could navigate round 110 miles course that went across the desert, up into the mountains and then back through downtown Los Angeles visa six waypoints . A modern fighter jet cant select track and kil la target on its own, it needs human input, There are Reaper drone variants that can do exactly that, no human required.

Not true anymore. GPS for these vehicles is now down to 1 metre resolution, they also can pick up weather and traffic.

The Darpa challenge proved otherwise. You are still think the systems are the same ones you knew for 30 years agio.

simply not true. Thats why they are AI, the decisions are made on board, not by the remote controlled, if there is one.


not true, again, you are 20 years behind the tech.

The first self-driving car was successfully piloted from Pittsburgh to San Diego in 1995, While the actual driver of the vehicle was responsible for acceleration and braking, Navlab5 was able to utilize cameras and a variety of other sensors to navigate over 2000 miles without human intervention, which is considered a monumental milestone in the history of autonomous vehicles and robotics.


The Mars rover Sojourner was the first autonomous device that was able to intelligently sense, identify, classify, and navigate through specific object obstacles. Sojourner was developed by NASA in the early 1990s and landed on Mars on July 5th, 1997.


hardly ""Driverless" cars, trucks, planes, ships have been around for many decades. ". No they havent. Autopilot and ILS landing systems are not driverless systems.

AI is NOT just a variation of adaptive control, its a whole level smarter, its going to entirely replace many humans in many jobs. Explain how "adaptive control" is able to steer a ship from a mooring in India to a mooring in the USA with no human intervention, as can be done now.

Suggest you read this an get up to speed

10 Jobs AI Might Soon Replace (And Those It Wont) (https://sensoriumxr.com/articles/jobs-ai-might-replace-and-those-it-wont)

First, the claim of this OP - that Jackal is new technology that advances the effort to remove pilots from aircraft - is false. Jackal demonstrates one new technology, and that is the ability of a fairly lightweight aircraft to remain stable while launching a powered missile of significant relative weight.

Second, to back up your claims, in post 14 you listed several individual technological achievements. I addressed each of those items and showed they do not back up your claim. For example, you stated "We have passenger jets that can takeoff, fly, and land themselves." Thats not a new capability, thats been around for 60+ years. Autoland, auto takeoff, auto waypoint flying, etc. has been around for many decades and does not change the status of manned aircraft.

Third, your main claim regarding AI is that it is mature. It is not. AI makes mistakes. Armed sentry robots make mistakes, thats why they are not deployed. Self-driving cars have problems, thats why they are not in mass production or even limited production. Self-driving autonomous ground vehicles for the military are fraught with problems, thats why they are not deployed. There are systems that can autonomously identify targets and fly the aircraft in the appropriate profile to attack the target, they are not perfect, not even close.

All of your examples are experimental, some are one-off trials nothing more. Everything you mention in the military arena is lab work, experimental, new potential technology, none of this is ready for the field.

AI makes mistakes, sometimes big ones. For example:
The 'garbage in, garbage out' rule applies to AI, too - American Thinker (https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/04/the_garbage_in_garbage_out_rule_applies_to_ai_too. html)
"When instructed to write an essay on a specific subject, the bot turned out a brilliant piece of writing. It cited several books as sources. The problem was that those books do not exist. The computer made them up and "lied" about them. This "hallucination" appears to be an ongoing problem with the A.I. bots."

[Wilson2]

Adaptive control and true driverless systems are two different approaches to achieving autonomous operation in machines or vehicles.

Adaptive control is a method that adjusts the behavior of a system based on its observed performance and environmental feedback. It uses sensors and other data inputs to modify the system's control algorithms and optimize its performance over time. Adaptive control can be used in various systems, including those that have human operators or those that are partially autonomous. However, in adaptive control, the system still relies on human input or intervention to operate effectively.

In contrast, true driverless systems are designed to operate entirely on their own without the need for human intervention or input. These systems typically use a combination of sensors, algorithms, and machine learning techniques to navigate through their environment, avoid obstacles, and make decisions based on their programming. True driverless systems include autonomous cars, drones, and other machines that can operate entirely on their own.

There are some examples of military vehicles and weapons that use various forms of autonomous technology, such as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs), and autonomous tanks. These systems can operate independently to a certain extent and are often used for reconnaissance, surveillance, and other tasks that are deemed too dangerous for human operators.

In summary, the key difference between adaptive control and true driverless systems is that the former still requires human input or intervention, while the latter is entirely self-sufficient and operates without human involvement.

Answer provided by AI.

Adaptive control does not require human input. Its adaptive on its own. For example, some US Military aircraft staring with the F-16 have the ability to adapt the flight control system to compensate for battle damage and failed systems. The flight control system does use measurements from sensors (and the knowledge that a sensor is no longer providing measurements) to adapt the flight control system, but the adaptation is rapid and without direction from a human (other than whatever the pilot does to the flight controls). Humans are far too slow for this process.

The major difference between adaptive control and "AI" is scale. At the level of fielded systems such as tanks and aircraft where the computing power is limited, adaptive control and AI are similar (not the same, but similar). When its moved to a huge server farm, its called AI, and the approach and algorithms are modified to take advantage of the massive scale.