Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jandrewrogers 768 days ago
Yes and no. In principle you could engineer something to support higher Gs but that is not a critical part of the performance envelope in modern combat and it comes at the cost of heavier weight and reduced weapons capacity. Since modern aerial combat is sensor-driven, you'd be better off with a lighter and less maneuverable airframe and larger weapon capacity. You can see this with the recent evolution of combat aircraft being converted into "missile trucks" with massive weapon stores that unavoidably hamper agility.
1 comments

Bomb trucks is what better sensors/networking enabled. Perfromant AI piloting can enable other tactics, i.e. high performance, high G UAVs with great energetics and endurance can feasibly out evade anti air missiles to bruce force through IAMDs at scale. Sensors would matters less if hardware can't intercept because targetting performance envelop without meatbag limits is harder. Being able to detect =/= being able to effectively engage. Not saying AI pilots have impunity, rather it shifts balance towards offense, i.e. instead of taking 2 missiles to have 95% probability of kill, now need 10 missiles, aka all of a sudden the entire structure/feasibility/economics of all sorts of air defense stops making sense. Imagine mutual air superiority in AI vs AI fighters because it's just too wasteful / impractical to shoot each other down, so everyone goes strait for support nodes on land... or carrier aviation. Imagine a carrier group with DDGs, and air wing designed to deter 100 human pilots now being penetrated/overwhelmed by 20.
Pretty sure you just described Ace Combat 7 UAVs