this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
372 points (97.7% liked)
Technology
59312 readers
4597 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
AI has a already won in these confrontations
Surface To Air missile made human piloted aircraft obsolete.
All that's needed now are a bunch of missiles, plug into an AI program and let it run by itself.
Why would militaries invest in a billion dollar aircraft piloted by a highly trained aircraft pilot with years of training that cost millions of dollars that is probably paid millions over many years ..... when the pilot and his aircraft can be shot down by a $100,000 missile. If you can't do it with one missile, send three, four or ten, it's still cheaper than matching them with an aircraft and pilot.
Instead of investing in expensive aircraft and pilots, all a defending country can do is just spend the same amount of money and surround their country with anti aircraft missiles controlled by AI systems.
Are you not aware of stealth aircraft and evasive maneuvers? Not to mention that missiles won't necessarily down aircraft.
How do you deploy manned fighters against an aircraft you can't detect?
Edit: As to not downing the aircraft. That's irrelevant. It wouldn't matter if it's an air to air missile or ground to air...you just fire more.
I can buy thousands of rockets for the cost of a single F22 or F16.
Detect and target aren't the same thing. There's various Air Defense platforms that can detect stealth air craft but they lack the resolution necessary to target them. For targetting the launch platform has to be a lot closer.
Annnd were back to the Air Defense platforms being hideously expensive. Literally no one can afford enough of them to cover more than a tiny fraction of their air space.
Forget "thousands" of missiles any country larger than a Lichtenstein would to need to buy millions of them along with enough Ground Detection and Launch Stations to cover their entire border. Utterly and totally unaffordable.
Hurrah Liechtenstein, safest country on planet!
You understand you need all that equipment to get a manned fighter close enough to engage. At that point firing a barrage of smart missiles is still cheaper.
And what equipment would that be?
The big cost would be satellite and radar coverage. We have that already.
In short you are hideously naive.
Hell, it's not easy to shoot down non-stealth aircraft
The pilot evaded all six missiles while not being able to deploy any chaff/flare countermeasures.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Hell, it's not easy to shoot down non-stealth aircraft
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
There's also the extreme bottleneck of using a meat bag that dies if it maneuvers too fast or for too long. The limitations of aircraft are not their own strength or materials.