An algorithm only has so much of an impact, the limit is engine performance. That fuel consumption is beyond any benefits from an algorithm. The fact is that the biggest challenge to ai in the high G environment is fuel burn

So your arguing that a human can manage fuel burn better than a computer and is your sole argeuemnt on why AI is insuperior in dog fighting

Also I must state that AI wiuld use deep learning

And literally simulate throusands of dog fights accounting for any variable the operator inputs

Even before it even flew

An algorithm even to maintain those speeds, even assuming a 10% augmentation in fuel use efficiency will not be able to overcome engine limitations.

When did I say a human will manage fuel use more efficiently, that is obviously not the case. I am saying engine limitations make any gains in high G performance irrelevant

And keep in mind while simulations are very accurate, they are not reality. They would be valuable in machine learning, but the true test would be in actual combat.

Why's that irrelevant when G performance dictates dogfighting performances by a huge margin. Sure in thr hypothetical scenario we're not assuming sustained Gs

Sure then we reach middle ground and we both wait for combat testing I guess

However I'm bought out that it'll be amazing

Generative Design in CAD when I deisgn rocket parts blew my mind, and Alpha Go a few years ago was a big head turner. Humans are like nothing compared to AI

I want our military

To implement more AI for the sake of national security

That sounds like a bad idea

I don’t trust modern AI

Because your range is shot. To sustain any high G sequence, the fuel burn to maintain the thrust required dictates the amount of time you can spend dogfighting in any scenario. Just to maintain the speed is ridiculously fuel intensive. I am saying that the fuel burn in which these maneuvers achieve destroys range and thus range is so compromised that any gains are negated by your resulting combat radius.

I’m not saying AI is useless, I see it as a great complementary force. But when it comes to replacement, the fine details from the darpa test paints a clear picture that AI is not at any stage to dogfight in the real world. They need real world testing. Bring the QF-16s and do a proper test

Even then, the simulation of bullets will not be completely accurate. Therefore, that test can be a proof of concept, but only combat will produce any results.

For sure and I agree with your conclusion. I am purley stating based on a assumption of the future

Going to drop as test vehicle from a UAV at a angle of around 20 degrees to see passive stability with grid fins

And how much restoration force they have

With some drop tests I did and CFD, it wa concluded that grid fins have too much bow shock

Found so research saying sweeping them helps decrease it at transonic speeds like the ones on a Falcon 9

So we'll see...

Lmk when rockets take off in Florida.. I can see them

I heard they're working on a rocket powered by astronaut farts

#facts

Kind of, but densified methane to be specific. It's not at KSC though. Its out at Boca Chica

Biggest flying boat ever build vs biggest flying boat ever designed

If we can use balloons to reach orbit, this would change everything about getting materials to orbit without an insane energy cost
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32082/we-talk-giant-boomerang-shaped-airships-space-and-phoenix-lights-with-jp-aerospaces-founder

How would they work once they reached the upper atmosphere though? Isn’t the air virtually nonexistent past a certain point?

@Yukon

Really nice 3D print job with the grid fins

@GoldKeyOboist isn't your pfp the rocket monument in Moscow?

yes

Fed-Ex 737 Nice. U Russian?

nah

Well why the potato in Russian and rocket monument in Moscow lol?

Yeah that's a good question