[Pukin Dog]

In the early 60's technologists were certain that these new fangled missiles would remove dogfighting from Air to Air combat. The things were supposed to be so smart that a pilot could fire at a target, turn around and go home. You probably know how that turned out, right? The missiles proved ineffective, touchy, flaky, and almost worthless. The Navy started TopGun, while the Air Force continued on relying on the missiles and left Vietnam with a 1 to 1 kill ratio. The Navy raised theirs to 12 to 1 after going back to teaching advanced dogfighting skills to their pilots.

That lesson having been learned, It is going to be a very long time before you remove a man from the pilot seat. Technology will never replace judgment, guile and situational awareness to the point of becoming an advantage against a worthy adversary. Maybe you could use this technology for bombers and recce, but not likely in fighters for a very long time.

[gatorbait]

Technology will never replace judgment, guile and situational awareness to the point of becoming an advantage against a worthy adversary. Maybe you could use this technology for bombers and recce, but not likely in fighters for a very long time.

Your quote is spot on. Machines can be spoofed much more easily than an experienced human being.Think about the MacNamera Line as an example of this kind of wizardry gone awry.

I doubt anyone on the ground would be too thrilled with a robot flying close air support. I do think an armed drone is a great force multiplier and terific in areas that need deniability or ,frankly are worthwhile targets , but not worth the life of an aircrew.

[Poohbah]

I don't think you're going to have 100%-computer-flown fighters any time soon, but we will get to the point where hauling meatware around in the airplane, instead of leaving it in a trailer on the ground, is a tactical liability.

[JETDRVR]

Roger that Bro! Im all for the Mil aplication of the UAV , but about the Civi side.....I dunno

[Modernman]

That lesson having been learned, It is going to be a very long time before you remove a man from the pilot seat. Technology will never replace judgment, guile and situational awareness to the point of becoming an advantage against a worthy adversary

Oh, I certainly agree with that statement. What I'm trying to say (and doing a poor job of) is that the future of air combat probably consists of a guy sitting in a control station and flying a UAV remotely, rather than being in the cockpit. I don't think we'll see air combat conducted by artifical intelligencew in our lifetimes.

Would you agree with me that removing the frail human body from the equation (and the cockpit) would give us a major advantage over our potential enemies when it came to air combat?