drones for dogfights?

Absolutely yes, though it probably wouldn't make sense to have it be operated by a human operator to the same extent current UAVs are, it would have to be able to make split second autonomous decisions.

>>35119681
I think automating drones for dogfighting would be incredibly hard considering that humans are to unpredictable to have pre selected responses to. Also there isn't that much data (I assume) of dogfighting for a self learning a.i.. Let's just say that I wouldn't want to be the engineer tasked with automating flight combat.

>>35119729
pls note that I'm not an expert and could just be talking out of my ass.

>>35119681
are modern uavs autonomous? I thought that was only like an autopilot feature, and the pilots take over for the important stuff.

>>35119882
Predators, Reapers etc are autopilots, with a human supervising.

>>35119729
>the chad AI pilot and the virgin human pilot
>he hasn't heard of ALPHA

It's possible. Machine learning was barely even touched, in fact, so there's a lot of room for further improvement.

Air combat isn't unpredictable when you're an AI. It's a couple partial differential equations - for an AI, easier than ground combat.

File: aNdYmn4.jpg (40KB, 500x484px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x484px

>>35119966
>machine learning was barely even touched
damn... we suck that bad huh

>>35119633
If the x47b is capable of landing on a carrier autonomously, then most likely there are already drones capable of autonomous a2a
perhaps UCLASS will have that capability

File: c_5_galaxy_us_air_force-wide.jpg (188KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1920x1200px

>modern aircraft

>dogfighting

Choose one. Modern fighters are able to engage enemy aircraft via missiles at a range where the other aircraft lies well beyond the horizon. Unless somebody invents a practical counter against missiles effective enough to render them obsolete while simultaneously being unable to directly harm other aircraft outside of dogfighitng range, dogfights just won't happen between any modern aircraft.

>>35120550
>Modern fighters are able to engage enemy fourth generation aircraft

FTFY

>>35119633
>using UCAVs for dogfights

Bad idea, on every level.

1) input delay, there is a lag between when a controller gives an order to the drone and when it actually executes it, this is find if you're just doing recon or hitting something with a AGM but not that great for situations where you need to be maneuvering like crazy.

2) Automated option, this is what the Military won't do, not because of moral reasons, but because its fucking retarded. Software glitches already fuck up a modern fighter, that impacting the targeting of a autonomous UCAV is worse. Imagine an IFF failure, with AMRAAMs, and no human to say "gee I think that formation was friendly a second ago"

3) Hacked/blacked. Literally the worst, your drone fleet getting used against you. Legitimately a concern for every single AF that's considered using UCAVs for front-line duty.

>>35120578
I could just be acting Autistic but what exactly is your point? Are you saying that dogfighting isn't a form of engagment?

The predator drone used to carry stinger missiles but as far as I know they have been removed for being ineffective. (Drone is slow, Stinger is a shory rang IR missile, etc) There's currently no need for a unmanned air to air fighter hence why drones usually focus on air to ground combat and surveillance.

>>35119633

>drones could be used for anti aircraft combat roles?

Just make them as cheap as you can and put as many as you can in the air with AA missiles.

Assume they're going to get shot down and make air combat into a numbers game.

>>35120638
That's not gonna work, either they won't have a radar thus be cheap and be unable to engage in BVR and be practice targets fo the enemy or have a radar with BVR capabilities and still suffer due to slower speeds assuming you want a cheap drone.

File: ace-combat-6-13.jpg (121KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1280x720px

is this an ace combat thread?