Chinese UCAV/CCA/Loyal Wingman (sensor, A2A and A2G) thread

99PLAAFBalloons

99PLAAFBalloons

New Member
Registered Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
Got this question bugging me for quite a while: Is a twin-seater fighter (especially 5th-gen ones) really mandatory for flying and managing loyal wingman UCAVs?

I believe we all know that the appearance of the twin-seater variant of the J-20, i.e. J-20S since late 2021 has brought the discussion in the direction of J-20S' (expected) capability to control and manage loyal wingman UCAVs. That is, one pilot is responsible for flying the J-20S, another is responsible for flying those UCAVs. This point is often quoted in mass media and military circle discussions as well.

Although, a twin-seater fighter itself certainly isn't a new concept - the US has also planned twin-seater variants for their F-22 and F-35, but both plans were eventually scrapped. We might never see twin-seater variants for the F-22 and F-35 either, considering that LockMart and others are already working on 6th-gen fighters.

Despite this, do we - or shall I say, should we - seriously expect that LockMart would never find solutions/ways that would allow their F-35s to fly and control loyal wingman UCAVs even with just one pilot onboard?

If achievable, wouldn't advancement in AI, computer processing and automation onboard renders having one more pilot onboard just to fly those UCAVs redundant?

Besides, I think that having the ability to fly loyal wingman UCAVs with only one pilot per fighter can also reduce the need for building more twin-seater variants of said fighter just to cater for the need of having fighters that can fly and control loyal wingman UCAVs, while the rest of the single-seater fighters cannot do so.

This allows pretty much as many of said fighters of the same model across the entire fleet to be able to be attached with loyal wingman UCAVs, instead of just certain ones of twin-seater variant that can only be available in certain locations at any given time?

Moreover, this also allows the flying and control task of loyal wingman UCAVs to be easily swappable and transferable between vastly more fighters of the same model on the battlefield when the need arises (such as in case the original manned fighter flying those drones got shot down/forced to return to base prematurely, etc). Flexibility and logistics certainly can benefit a lot from this too.

I do wonder - Can China's single-seater J-20A/Bs (and J-35/31s in the future) be capable of flying and controlling loyal wingman UCAVs in the future? If possible, how long until this can become a reality? Or do we have to wait until 6th-gen fighters to be equipped of such capabilities?
Click to expand...
Tempest and F-X, the precursors to GCAP, were IIRC both envisaged as single seaters so there's at least one active program out there that thinks it's fine to just run things through a pilot. Aside from @Atomicfrog's points, I think it's also sensible from a technology maturity perspective not to bet the farm on the information fusion and ML algos yet with what is already a new concept. A drone officer gives you the room to experiment with and refine the more ambitious visions of loyal wingmen employment (i.e. beyond trucks) in terms of heterogeneity and numbers whilst hedging the decision making side of things for now
 
A

Andy1974

Senior Member
Registered Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
Got this question bugging me for quite a while: Is a twin-seater fighter (especially 5th-gen ones) really mandatory for flying and managing loyal wingman UCAVs?

I believe we all know that the appearance of the twin-seater variant of the J-20, i.e. J-20S since late 2021 has brought the discussion in the direction of J-20S' (expected) capability to control and manage loyal wingman UCAVs. That is, one pilot is responsible for flying the J-20S, another is responsible for flying those UCAVs. This point is often quoted in mass media and military circle discussions as well.

Although, a twin-seater fighter itself certainly isn't a new concept - the US has also planned twin-seater variants for their F-22 and F-35, but both plans were eventually scrapped. We might never see twin-seater variants for the F-22 and F-35 either, considering that LockMart and others are already working on 6th-gen fighters.

Despite this, do we - or shall I say, should we - seriously expect that LockMart would never find solutions/ways that would allow their F-35s to fly and control loyal wingman UCAVs even with just one pilot onboard?

If achievable, wouldn't advancement in AI, computer processing and automation onboard renders having one more pilot onboard just to fly those UCAVs redundant?

Besides, I think that having the ability to fly loyal wingman UCAVs with only one pilot per fighter can also reduce the need for building more twin-seater variants of said fighter just to cater for the need of having fighters that can fly and control loyal wingman UCAVs, while the rest of the single-seater fighters cannot do so.

This allows pretty much as many of said fighters of the same model across the entire fleet to be able to be attached with loyal wingman UCAVs, instead of just certain ones of twin-seater variant that can only be available in certain locations at any given time?

Moreover, this also allows the flying and control task of loyal wingman UCAVs to be easily swappable and transferable between vastly more fighters of the same model on the battlefield when the need arises (such as in case the original manned fighter flying those drones got shot down/forced to return to base prematurely, etc). Flexibility and logistics certainly can benefit a lot from this too.

I do wonder - Can China's single-seater J-20A/Bs (and J-35/31s in the future) be capable of flying and controlling loyal wingman UCAVs in the future? If possible, how long until this can become a reality? Or do we have to wait until 6th-gen fighters to be equipped of such capabilities?
Click to expand...
Mass media always assumes that the 2 seats are for a pilot and the wingman commander. I think there is no need for the pilot now for 99% of the time because we often hear about how AI pilots are superior to humans in dogfighting etc.

If we accept that, then twin seaters actually have 2 wingmen commanders. Those 2 could manage an engagement better than the 1 in the opposing F35.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
Got this question bugging me for quite a while: Is a twin-seater fighter (especially 5th-gen ones) really mandatory for flying and managing loyal wingman UCAVs?
Click to expand...

No.



I believe we all know that the appearance of the twin-seater variant of the J-20, i.e. J-20S since late 2021 has brought the discussion in the direction of J-20S' (expected) capability to control and manage loyal wingman UCAVs. That is, one pilot is responsible for flying the J-20S, another is responsible for flying those UCAVs. This point is often quoted in mass media and military circle discussions as well.

Although, a twin-seater fighter itself certainly isn't a new concept - the US has also planned twin-seater variants for their F-22 and F-35, but both plans were eventually scrapped. We might never see twin-seater variants for the F-22 and F-35 either, considering that LockMart and others are already working on 6th-gen fighters.

Despite this, do we - or shall I say, should we - seriously expect that LockMart would never find solutions/ways that would allow their F-35s to fly and control loyal wingman UCAVs even with just one pilot onboard?

If achievable, wouldn't advancement in AI, computer processing and automation onboard renders having one more pilot onboard just to fly those UCAVs redundant?

Besides, I think that having the ability to fly loyal wingman UCAVs with only one pilot per fighter can also reduce the need for building more twin-seater variants of said fighter just to cater for the need of having fighters that can fly and control loyal wingman UCAVs, while the rest of the single-seater fighters cannot do so.

This allows pretty much as many of said fighters of the same model across the entire fleet to be able to be attached with loyal wingman UCAVs, instead of just certain ones of twin-seater variant that can only be available in certain locations at any given time?

Moreover, this also allows the flying and control task of loyal wingman UCAVs to be easily swappable and transferable between vastly more fighters of the same model on the battlefield when the need arises (such as in case the original manned fighter flying those drones got shot down/forced to return to base prematurely, etc). Flexibility and logistics certainly can benefit a lot from this too.

I do wonder - Can China's single-seater J-20A/Bs (and J-35/31s in the future) be capable of flying and controlling loyal wingman UCAVs in the future? If possible, how long until this can become a reality? Or do we have to wait until 6th-gen fighters to be equipped of such capabilities?
Click to expand...


I touched on this a few years ago when I wrote my piece about the expectant twin seat J-20 here:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The relevant section is:
"It is worth noting that in the above vision of J-20S, a single-seat J-20 would still be able to fulfill both the BM and UC mission to an extent. But having an second human copilot focusing entirely on those roles allows the pilot to also conduct their primary mission – whether it’s combat air patrol, strike, or otherwise. The benefit, then, is allowing the aircraft overall to perform the BM and UC mission much more effectively than a single-seat aircraft would in the same situation."

That I think should answer your question
 
D

drowingfish

Junior Member
Registered Member
see my question is, if twin seater J-20 is purported to control loyal wingman UAVs, then perhaps there is a possibility to also make similar upgrade to new J-16s?
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
drowingfish said:
see my question is, if twin seater J-20 is purported to control loyal wingman UAVs, then perhaps there is a possibility to also make similar upgrade to new J-16s?
Click to expand...

You can actually think a bit broader than that.

Technically, *any* manned aircraft (note, I said "manned aircraft" not "manned fighter aircraft") can be upgraded to control loyal wingman UAVs, the only question is whether it is worth it for a given aircraft or not.


In the case of J-16, or J-20A, or any other fighter, the question is how capable they already are in having the necessary datalinks and onboard computing to control UAVs or loyal wingmen, and how much if any upgrades are necessary for XYZ extent of capability.
 
T

tanino

New Member
Registered Member
99PLAAFBalloons said:
Tempest e FX, i precursori di GCAP, erano entrambi concepiti come monoposto da IIRC, quindi c'è almeno un programma attivo là fuori che pensa che sia giusto gestire le cose solo attraverso un pilota. A parte i punti di @Atomicfrog, penso che sia anche sensato dal punto di vista della maturità tecnologica non scommettere la fattoria sulla fusione delle informazioni e sugli algoritmi ML con quello che è già un nuovo concetto. Un ufficiale drone ti dà lo spazio per sperimentare e perfezionare le visioni più ambiziose dell'impiego di fedeli gregari (cioè al di là dei camion) in termini di eterogeneità e numeri, proteggendo per ora il lato decisionale delle cose
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top