Think they'll be any good?
AI past generating porn and more advanced image recognition turns out to be pretty shiet.think the ai pilot is over hyped garbage desueven if china does it
>>65515920The names are 2000s edgy. Is this what it's gonna be like now the millenials can name things?
>>65515958>P-38 Lightning>TB2 Avenger>P-40 Warhawk>F6F Hellcat>SB2C Helldiverzoomers have millennial derangement syndrome
>>65515920>Think they'll be any good?they don't have to be stellar *individually*. What matters is that as a system they're more affordable than a proper crewed airframe. A 70% good system that you can afford en masse is better than a 100% good system that is irreplaceable and insufficient in numbers.
>>65515925you dont know shit about autonomous aircraft faggot
>>65515975Please, we all know that this is going to be a large-scale performance test in real world conditions, issues off all stripes will invariably pop up, and then we will be inundated with months, if not years, of demoralization posts from the asschapped usuals despite the entire point of tests and exercises to reveal and identify problems so they can be addressed.
>>65516017Hey. Stop bringing facts in to this.
>>65515958zoomzoom here hell yes i want to command the vengance and fury and wrath and rape
>>65516107I use my lightning II to command a wrath to rape your fagot!
>>65515920This reminds me of when Germans used suicide dogs to blow up tanks and it backfired because they were trained on their own tanks.
>>65516121I thought that was the Soviets.Unless they both attempted it which is really funny because dogs tracked the tank they were supposed to snuggle beside based on the scent of the fuel, and since they trained with their own tanks...
>>65516121Given Claude can tell Iranian targets apart. Maybe not?
>>65516121>n Germans used suicide dogsThat was the Soviets, anon.
I wouldnt be surpised at all if these things were in some part influenced by the Ace Combat 3 COFFIN system designs.
>>655159582000s edginess was based and never should have gone awayI fucking HATE genx irony that took over in the 2010s.
>>65516310OK old man
>>65515958I'll take that over naming them after motherfucking people any day. I weep for our ship names, because most of them are super gay.
>>65515958I'd love to hear your alternative.
>>65515975>Afford en masseCurrently it costs 30 million lol. Optimistically mass production halves that.>PayloadIt can carry 500lb. That's it. An F 18 can carry 16,000lb.
>>65516700Can carry 2000 lb it looks like
>None of these niggas saw Terminator.This is how it starts. These are the finder hurters, they will evolve into the hunter killers.
>>65516676There is nothing wrong with naming ships after pedophiles, bigot!
>>65516717Given how gay the world is now armageddon doesn't sound so bad.
>>65516691Not him but>PlanesBirds>HelicoptersTribes as is current custom>TankShift from Generals to Medal of Honor Recipients going forward. Generals are alright I guess, they've always been somewhat political.>ShipsIn degree of ship type: State > Geographical Feature > state capitals or counties > cities if necessary.
>>65516743Naming ships after cities is gay. At least for America. Cambridge, Loyal London, Rochefort, Ville de Paris, those are cool.
>>65515925AI is not just LLMs. An if statement can be AI
>>65516909Given that half of America's cities are namesakes of old world cities, that'll be the result anyway.
>>65515920Binkov said they're not as good for the use-case of a China conflict as anyone things, because of the basing and maintenance issue. We don't have enough space at airbases to give ourselves an instant 5x sortie rate, and all the extra drones will require maintenance. That means more mechanics and spare parts, which our logistics tail isn't ready for.
>>65516707Why the fuck would you have both bombs under 1 wing, instead of spreading them to both wings?
>low-cost and expandable UCAVToo slow to keep up with fighter jets and easily detectable by radar>stealthy and fast UCAVHigh production cost makes it unfeasible to be an expandable scoutMost of the UCAVs seen so far don't seem all that stealthy aren't they? Have the contractors publicly disclosed the unit prices for these UCAVs?
>>65517018>the russiashill said
>>65517019cause its just for display?
>>65515975>>65517025I thought the point of these wingman things were effectively extra weapon pods for the fighters they were acting orbital to? An appendage instead of a self-contained system.
>>65517018Heh, don't know if it's the lighting, the particular shade of paint used or the way the markings and decals are applied but that reminds me of an inflatable beach toy there. That gets round the spares issue, at least.
>>65516700Even before discounts for mass production, that's still 3 wingmen per F-35 and also no pilot needed which is further cost savings on the order of 10 million dollars or so.
>>65517079yes but they still have to be airworthy enough to actually fly alongside the manned aircraft they'll be escorting and also have enough legs to land if they dont get killed during the mission.
>>65516300I did always think that the YFQ-44 basically looked like you asked someone to design a sci-fi F-16. I think Coffin refits of real airframes are cooler though.
>>65517079It depends a lot on which air force you ask and which drone you ask them about. Some are basically eyeballing the idea of being an outright replacement for a manned fighter, others are designed to be additional combat mass that can be assigned to a fighter or tasked out by AEW&C or ground control.
>>65515920>Visegrád 24Acquire yourself some taste and self-respect. No dignity...
>>65517057He's still obviously right, though. Advanced drones increase logistical strain, and our airbases weren't made for drone spam warfare.
>>65517012Any other insipid insights you want to just pull out of your ass?
>>65515920>Think they'll be any good?Depend, can they help open the strait?
>>65515920Surprised that the larp that is Anduril managed to get this contract.
>>65515920>goodThe point, for the time being, is that somebody gets paid in top tax dollars.In the long term, >>65517018will have to be solved, they will also have to set up another layer of flight operators, trained along the lines of the soviet model of flight control.
>>65515965millennials are the ones who bitch the most about millennials.
>>65515925All it needs to be is more competent than your average Jeet pilot and it'll some tactical use.
>>65517378have some*
>>65517097Even if you assume generously the price halves, you'd need ~32 Fury's to carry the payload of 1 F-18. That's 480 million dollars.
>>65517342It's a huge piece of shit. It's clear an SV tech bro thinks he is the first guy to think of economies of scale, so selects the cheapest most numerous aircraft engine (the Cessna one). It turns out aerodynamics doesn't work like that, and you have to design the engine and airframe for the mission. For comparison, the F18 can carry 33% of its max weight in payload. The Fury can carry 10%. It's clearly underpowered as shit.
>>65517457If there's something we got plenty of, it's tech bros being rank engineers and scammers.Meaning AI is the ultimate tech bro technology.
>>65517441If you think these are meant to be a 1 to 1 replacement of manned fighters, you are a stupid nigger
>>65517117>t. Resident of stockholm, new york
>>65517441>hes still going with the 500lb payload metric he made up
>>65517561Not him but it definitely is a piece of shit. The FJ-44 engine it uses has 17kN of thrust and a thrust weight ratio of 5. The GE F414 has 130kN and a thrust weight rati of 10. So the Fury has about an eighth of the thrust, and more of its mass is taken up by the engine. The only way it could improve it's payload is if it has a very large lifting area/low loading. But it also has incredibly stubby wings. It cannot carry much more than a single engine Cessna (which also uses the same engine), which can carry about ~600lb.
>>65517645It can fly with 4 GBU-38s So no its not 600lbs its over 2000lbs
>>65517490So... What is it actually supposed to improve?
>>65517679Is there proof it can? The Cessna 172 has a max takeoff weight of about 2000lb too, and it has a much larger wing area. There is no plausible way the same engine could carry 3-5x more weight (assuming payload is 20%-30% of overall weight).
>>65517702The Fury is to be powered by a single Williams FJ44-4M turbofan engine producing 4,000 pounds-force (17.8 kN) of thrust and has a maximum gross takeoff weight of 5,000 pounds. It likely has the PhantomStrike radar which is extremly light ~100lbs and doesnt have cooling loops as its air cooled. It comes down to the curb weight of the FQ-44 as they have shown air to ground configurations with payloads between 1000-2000 pounds its probably got a empty weight just under 3000lbs
>>65517702>There is no plausible way the same engine could carry 3-5x more weightYou might actually be having a stroke
>>65517689https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12740
>>65517116The only thing advanced about them is the software, they are extremely simple machines, to Russia though they may as well be alien technology
>>65517905Who cares about a backwards shithole like Russia? What are they like to China?
>>65517018>BinkovThe guy who said Javelins wouldn't do shit against Russian tanks just before they invaded? Showing your profound retardation and inability to form opinions there anon.
>>65515925Most pilots flying hours these days use autopilot. It might as well be AI flying the plane instead.
