Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States AI

AI Has Successfully Piloted a US F-16 Fighter Jet, DARPA Says (vice.com) 62

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
The US Department of Defense's research agency, DARPA, has announced that its AI algorithms can now control an actual F-16 in flight. The fighter aircraft that was first introduced in 1978 has now seemingly evolved into an autonomous plane. From a report: "In early December 2022, ACE algorithm developers uploaded their AI software into a specially modified F-16 test aircraft known as the X-62A or VISTA (Variable In-flight Simulator Test Aircraft), at the Air Force Test Pilot School (TPS) at Edwards Air Force Base, California, and flew multiple flights over several days," a press release by DARPA said. "The flights demonstrated that AI agents can control a full-scale fighter jet and provided invaluable live-flight data."

DARPA's Air Combat Evolution (ACE) program began in 2019 when the agency began to work on human-machine collaboration in dogfighting. It began testing out AI-powered flights in 2020 when the organization had what was called the AlphaDogfight Trials, a competition between different companies to see who could create the most advanced algorithm for an AI-powered aircraft. ACE is one of more than six hundred Department of Defense projects that are incorporating artificial intelligence into the nation's defense programs. In 2018, the government committed to spending up to $2 billion on AI investments in the next five years, and spent $2.58 billion on AI research and development in 2022 alone. Other AI defense projects include making robots and wearable technology, and intelligence gathering.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

AI Has Successfully Piloted a US F-16 Fighter Jet, DARPA Says More

AI Has Successfully Piloted a US F-16 Fighter Jet, DARPA Says

Comments Filter:

  • Would be interesting to see a mix (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2023 @11:50AM (#63292133)

    It could be really good to have a mix of manned and unmanned planes in aerial combat.

    For one thing it would be hard to tell what planes had real pilots in to shoot down.

    For another the human pilots could make calls we are not comfortable with AI making, like when to initiate combat.

    For another AI planes could manage much harder g-forces, so could potentially rush to save someone who had an enemy on the tail they could not shake, or manage some other crazy maneuver useful during battle.

    Going to be interesting to see how this develops!

    • Re:Would be interesting to see a mix (Score:5, Informative)

      by syn3rg ( 530741 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2023 @11:57AM (#63292157) Homepage
      Skynet smiles.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Would be better if they used different types of planes for the humans and bots.

      So much of the plane was designed to try to keep a human safe.

      Redesign it without the human and it'll be far faster, maneuverable, stealthy, etc.

      • Would be better if they used different types of planes for the humans and bots.

        I do agree with this and there are also performance envelopes that could be designed to handle vastly greater G-Forces...

        I think though there is still value in at least making the bot jet look just like a human jet, so an enemy cannot be sure what they are facing (until it pulls a 100g turn anyway).

        I admit that utility is probably greatly outweighed by benefits of not accommodating a human at all in design though.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gtall ( 79522 )

        X-47B UCAS is the Northrup-Grumman's plane that does just that. The inertia of Congress and the pilots in the Navy and the Air Force has been a royal pain in the tookus.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        You fiddle around with some cheap and plentiful test bed then when you've got things working and have proved the concept you think about designing a new aircraft from scratch.

    • call sign.
      is it tin man

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nomadic ( 141991 )

      "For one thing it would be hard to tell what planes had real pilots in to shoot down."

      I mean, would the other side care whether it was a human or AI? The point is to reduce their opponents' military capacity, not just kill people for the sake of killing.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by caseih ( 160668 )

        And maybe some day we'll be so advanced we don't actually have to go to all the expense and bother to fight anymore. But our luck we'll end up like on TOS "A Taste of Armageddon."

      • I mean, would the other side care whether it was a human or AI?

        You always want to take out the most intelligent component in a battlefield unit if possible...

        Now you can argue from there if that is the computer or the human fighter pilot.

    • But the reality is that our corporate overlords are now able to build fleets of autonomous fighting machines to better grind the boot on our faces.

    • "Loyal wingman" is one name for this concept.

      https://www.airforce-technolog... [airforce-technology.com]

      Even if the drones are not all that smart, they can act as "missile trucks" that or sensor platforms, all orchestrated from a high-situational-awareness tactical platform (the F35) which can then operate from a safer distance, with a lighter payload maximizing its stealth and loiter time.

      As for pulling lots of G's, that mainly comes down to the missile - which is of course an expendable AI drone by any reasonable definition.

      • Thanks, had not heard that term before Useful info, and the thought of using slaved AI controlled aircraft as missile trucks does sound very useful since as you say that's what you'd prefer to use anyway.

        I guess they could also be used to dispense a much wider and higher volume field of chaff to protect against incoming missiles.

    • If I understand the current military paradigm, you’ve watched too many movies and your perception is off.

      Top-level peer-to-peer dogfighting is nothing like top gun. In the real world, the two fighter jets approach each other, one detects the other a second or two earlier, even before they can see each other over the horizon. The first fighter to lock and get a modern missle launched usually wins. The main purpose of stealth is so that the US pilot gets the lock first. Countermeasures and the like

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        What really happens is that an airliner modified to carry a really big radar flies around detecting everything that moves for a thousand kilometres around. If it spots something it decides should get shot down, some fighters get tasked to taxi some missiles within range (200 km or so).

        • Is that how it currently works in first-world peer-to-peer? Or is that a strategy foroh say US vs. Iran?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

            Who knows? Nobody has fought a war among first rate peers since airborne radar became a thing. Both sides would have airborne radar and long range missiles, so unless one side has clear air dominance there aren't going to be flights of fighters surprising each other. Unless stealth is good enough to let the fighters get in range of the radar sentries.

  • Someone should make a movie or two about it

  • AI on commercial flights now (Score:5, Funny)

    by ac22 ( 7754550 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2023 @12:05PM (#63292191)

    I heard that United have been using an AI for some of its commercial flights in a Boeing 737 between LA and San Francisco. It's a very sophisticated computer algorithm that can actually control the speed and direction of the airplane without any intervention from the pilots.

    They've come up with a silly name for the AI - "autopilot", I believe.

    • Re:AI on commercial flights now (Score:5, Funny)

      by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2023 @12:08PM (#63292207)
      That IS a silly name! People will associate airplanes with crashing Teslas!

    • I mean, it beats the alternative:

      "The End of the All-Male, All-White Cockpit
      Airlines are struggling to find enough pilots and to diversify a profession that has been very resistant to change."

      https://www.nytimes.com/2022/0... [nytimes.com]

    • Underwhelming given all the hoopla that I recall as a kid around the F16 being "fly by wire" and whether or not the pilot was flying it at all.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I know you are joking, but the key difference here is that the AI makes decisions. Autopilot only follows strict logic, and when something unexpected happens they disengage and/or alert the pilot so that a decision can be made.

      Obviously not ideal for a warzone where decision making is basically the reason you sent a plane instead of a cruise missile.

  • The US military has never been shy about adopting (or adapting) toy technology to military purposes. Even fairly rinky-dink flying combat games have AI that has to be dumbed down so it doesn't slaughter the player consistently, and a microcontroller that costs less than a dollar coupled with a couple bucks in sensors is enough to control a fixed-wing drone through takeoff, flight, and landing. Aspect-tracking missiles have been around for decades, so that part of the problem is also well-solved. It just doesn't seem possible that this is really the first time this has been done, given that systems in place already handles what should be the hard part (tracking other aircraft.)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by EvilSS ( 557649 )
      First time for what? Flying a drone? Probably not, we know they working on autonomous or semi-autonomous drone platforms and have been for a while now. The first time one flew an existing airframe not designed around it? Maybe. First time one flew an F-16? Yea, probably.

      • First time for what? Flying a drone? Probably not, we know they working on autonomous or semi-autonomous drone platforms and have been for a while now. The first time one flew an existing airframe not designed around it? Maybe. First time one flew an F-16? Yea, probably.

        Not the first time for the F-16: F-16 zombie [boeing.com].

  • Comment removed (Score:3)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2023 @12:11PM (#63292219)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gtall ( 79522 )

      Which objects do you want them to chase? Thousands of balloons are launched every year just by American companies. Some balloons decide they'd rather go walkabout and as a result, the sky contains a fair number of them. And that's just the American ones. You seem like you understand the issue. Maybe you could tell the Air Force and the Navy which ones they should shot down. I'm sure they'd listen to you.

    • Think those balloons were having a mind of their own as well.

  • Terminator was not a film (Score:4, Interesting)

    by aepervius ( 535155 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2023 @12:25PM (#63292265)
    It was a documentary sent from the future toward the past to warn us :P. On a less tongue in cheek note : military is not the best known outfit to make ethical decision when it comes to weaponry.... The way I see more and more AI coming in play... Firstly I see the danger of something unexpected to happen... Then secondly I see the danger of concentration of power, if you don't need 1 million men to invade a country, but 100000 well trained AI directed by a few thousands. In addition remove the human from the equation and it is far FAR more likely such weapon will be used , as the PR/HUman local cost will be easier to sell to your voters, see the number of drone strike for example. In a way I am glad to be that old, 'cause I am betting in a few decades it will become very bad.

    • You can go even further back, at least to Star Trek Shatner era where there was the planet that just had a computer declare a city was hit by a virtual weapon without even needing real munitions.

      • Kirk didn't just teach us how to make a cannon out of a hollow log, vines, saltpeter, sulfur, charcoal, and diamonds, he also showed us how to outsmart computers!

        CK:"Scan the Excalibur for lifeforms"
        M5:"Scanning...life scans are negative."
        CK:"Because you MURDERED THEM! What is the penalty for murder?"
        M5:"The penalty for murder is death."
        CK:"And how will you carry out this penalty?"
        M5:"This.unit.must.........die.....BZZZZzzzzwrrp"

        He also outwitted the "Error! Error!" Nomad probe, and at least one more comp

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by vivian ( 156520 )

        Much like Star Trek, I would imagine that the pilot would instruct it to use "evasive plan Beta" or "Attack plan Gama" and the AI would fly according to some predetermined styles of manoeuvres for itself and any drones it is helping to command, that are more complex than mere recordings or fixed flight paths. It would probably also make sense to give it fire control within that context, rather than have to wait for a pilot to confirm every shot, unless commanded to stop.

        It's really not a lot different than

  • The first fully hands off automated carrier landing happened in 1985, flying the plane on a course or to a target to shoot is very much a simpler task.
    • Well that's an odd claim.. Hopefully the carrier is not maneuvering and deploying countermeasures or shooting at you.
  • // TODO #define AI
  • Hopefully, John Conner is working on his marksmanship skills.
  • A.I. successfully completes DARPA challenge in Atlas body.
  • AI systems can drive cars fairly decently - and flying a plane is much easier for electronics than driving car.

  • Ukraine wants 50 (Score:3)

    by crow ( 16139 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2023 @03:54PM (#63293147) Homepage Journal

    Ukraine would like 50 of these, please.

    I'm only half serious, but if they were ready for combat, they certainly would want them. Though I haven't heard them asking for Predator drones, which would be the closest comparison that I can think of. (They probably did ask quietly.) Of course, if we did send Predator drones, who is to say whether the controllers are Ukrainians or Americans? That might be one reason for not sending them.

    What this is more likely about is the next generation fighter project, which is said to likely end up with a pilot in one fighter with a group of drones flying along with him at his control. Of course, there will be a push to eliminate the piloted aircraft and just use the drones for everything.

  • The X-9 Ghost-fighter in Macross Plus was taken over by a corrupted AI.
  • Modern highly manoeverable fighters aren't directly human flyable and haven't been for years. They're built highly unstable with the pilot's stick instructions being translated into thousand of micro adjustments per second by the onboard control systems. A human is unable to fly them without this assist.
  • It's bound to crash.

Slashdot Top Deals

Programmers do it bit by bit.

Close