J-10 Thread IV

[Deino]

to admit, IMO this is just a regular J-10B.

 

[Franklin]

Hi I have a question for learned members and that’s is when can we see HMDS and related missiles with
Chinese fighters specially j10 as we are seeing j10c flying out and b versions of j11 and j16 alas no HMDS
So is there anything going on to come out soon or something not working
Some details from the senior members will be appreciated
As my thoughts are it’s not a big deal for China to take out something related to the query
Thank you

This is a photo of a Chinese HMS system. It looks like the helmet of a J-10 pilot. Maybe we don't see HMS on J-10 pilots helmets is because they only mount those things when practising dogfighting. China has developed the PL-10 missile that is comparable to the AIM-9X. It will only make sense to have that kind of a missile if you also have a HMS system.

 

[defenceman]

This is a photo of a Chinese HMS system. It looks like the helmet of a J-10 pilot. Maybe we don't see HMS on J-10 pilots helmets is because they only mount those things when practising dogfighting. China has developed the PL-10 missile that is comparable to the AIM-9X. It will only make sense to have that kind of a missile if you also have a HMS system.

Hi Franklin thanks for your reply with a picture also
Thank you

 

[plawolf]

This is a photo of a Chinese HMS system. It looks like the helmet of a J-10 pilot. Maybe we don't see HMS on J-10 pilots helmets is because they only mount those things when practising dogfighting. China has developed the PL-10 missile that is comparable to the AIM-9X. It will only make sense to have that kind of a missile if you also have a HMS system.

That is the Su27 HMS, or a direct copy of it. Looks like they didn’t even bother trying to update it, which makes sense since they are hard at work on modern HMDs.

It is cheap, light and gets the job done. But it’s hardly something to show off with, which is, IMO, why we don’t see it in any of the news clips.

 

[Franklin]

That is the Su27 HMS, or a direct copy of it. Looks like they didn’t even bother trying to update it, which makes sense since they are hard at work on modern HMDs.

It is cheap, light and gets the job done. But it’s hardly something to show off with, which is, IMO, why we don’t see it in any of the news clips.

Maybe because its cheap, light and gets the job done that China is in no hurry to replace the current system. China is perfectly able to produce something similar to the JHMCS that's now standard in the USAF. But that would add to the cost. Money that can be used elsewhere. And its adds weight to the helmet that could potentially be detrimental to the pilots health. Its a cost benefit analysis. And they probably feel that the current system from that standpoint is still the best.

I doubt it is the same system as those on the SU-27 that China bought in the early 90's. I'm pretty sure they have improved on the system over the years. And maybe its better than anything the Russians have now since China has a far more advanced electronics industry than Russia.

 

[plawolf]

Maybe because its cheap, light and gets the job done that China is in no hurry to replace the current system. China is perfectly able to produce something similar to the JHMCS that's now standard in the USAF. But that would add to the cost. Money that can be used elsewhere. And its adds weight to the helmet that could potentially be detrimental to the pilots health. Its a cost benefit analysis. And they probably feel that the current system from that standpoint is still the best.

I doubt it is the same system as those on the SU-27 that China bought in the early 90's. I'm pretty sure they have improved on the system over the years. And maybe its better than anything the Russians have now since China has a far more advanced electronics industry than Russia.

Mostly agree, but I don’t think it’s s cost issue, they are equipping Z10s with them after all. But I think the main issue is weight.

Previously, I think Chinese HMD projects were low investment and low priority, with their primary aim of keeping up with the competition, but that were never going to get widely fielded unless WWIII looked about to break out.

A key factor would have been that advanced HMD doesn’t really add all that much compare to a bare bones HMS for everything up to 4th gens.

But with the sensors and data fusion 5th gens like the J20 could potentially bring to the table, it’s a completely different set of equations.

A key feature that would completely re-write the book on WVR combat is if the EODS sensors could be married with image recognition software (think facial recognition software, which China is pretty advanced in) and HMDs to allow pilots to track all aircraft, both friendly and hostile, at all times. Forget the looking through the floor LockMart sales pitch, that’s just barely scratching the surface of what is possible.

Video games have already worked out the best uses and user interfaces for how this sort of data could be best presented to a pilot on their HMD, for example, in the form of coloured pips and arrows at the edge of his peripheral vision showing the general distribution and traveling direction of aircraft.

If you add AI into the mix, which could network with the AI of friendly aircraft in the fight, and you could get all sorts of cool and interesting options; like suggested flight paths where you and your wingman could work together to bring a chasing hostile neatly into the waiting crosshairs of the wingman without letting the hostile realise what is happening until it’s too late; you could get automatic target prioritisation, where the AI picks out the most pressing target, for example, if that target is projected to line up a shot on you or a friendly shortly without intervention.

Networked, AI could assign each plane in the fight a target to make sure everyone has the best chance of bagging a kill; that the enemy does not for easy shots on you, and that two or more friendlies are not all going after the same target.

 

[Tiberium]

Mostly agree, but I don’t think it’s s cost issue, they are equipping Z10s with them after all. But I think the main issue is weight.

Previously, I think Chinese HMD projects were low investment and low priority, with their primary aim of keeping up with the competition, but that were never going to get widely fielded unless WWIII looked about to break out.

A key factor would have been that advanced HMD doesn’t really add all that much compare to a bare bones HMS for everything up to 4th gens.

But with the sensors and data fusion 5th gens like the J20 could potentially bring to the table, it’s a completely different set of equations.

A key feature that would completely re-write the book on WVR combat is if the EODS sensors could be married with image recognition software (think facial recognition software, which China is pretty advanced in) and HMDs to allow pilots to track all aircraft, both friendly and hostile, at all times. Forget the looking through the floor LockMart sales pitch, that’s just barely scratching the surface of what is possible.

Video games have already worked out the best uses and user interfaces for how this sort of data could be best presented to a pilot on their HMD, for example, in the form of coloured pips and arrows at the edge of his peripheral vision showing the general distribution and traveling direction of aircraft.

If you add AI into the mix, which could network with the AI of friendly aircraft in the fight, and you could get all sorts of cool and interesting options; like suggested flight paths where you and your wingman could work together to bring a chasing hostile neatly into the waiting crosshairs of the wingman without letting the hostile realise what is happening until it’s too late; you could get automatic target prioritisation, where the AI picks out the most pressing target, for example, if that target is projected to line up a shot on you or a friendly shortly without intervention.

Networked, AI could assign each plane in the fight a target to make sure everyone has the best chance of bagging a kill; that the enemy does not for easy shots on you, and that two or more friendlies are not all going after the same target.

Already happened.

And more advanced: there is a research suggested that neural network AI can beat human pilot in simulated dogfight very easily. I don't remember the exact parameter, the whole AI is running on a Raspberry Pi system(dirt cheap, can buy on $100 in the market), and their agility is seriously limited(Highest G is 2g).

Soon we will see human is not needed in the A2A combat.

 

[plawolf]

Already happened.

And more advanced: there is a research suggested that neural network AI can beat human pilot in simulated dogfight very easily. I don't remember the exact parameter, the whole AI is running on a Raspberry Pi system(dirt cheap, can buy on $100 in the market), and their agility is seriously limited(Highest G is 2g).

Soon we will see human is not needed in the A2A combat.

I think I remember the study you are mentioning, but I don’t remember it being quite so cut and dried, and there were important caveats. But it’s been a while since I read that, and I am struggling to remember the details (which, to me at least, says the study wasn’t all that game changing as otherwise it would have had a more lasting impression).

I am more conservative and traditional in that I think there will still be a role for human pilots in air combat for a good length of time yet.

It may well be that soon all new fighters will get AI combat assistants, but they will mostly give the pilot a range of options while the pilot decides which, if any, to execute.

That will probably be the path of least resistance to get air combat AI mainstream and accepted. With those pilots more willing to trust their AIs doing better in exercises and so rising faster through that ranks.

But I think it will probably take a generation at least, for pilots who have learnt to value and trust their combat AIs through personal experience, to rise to be in a position to make high level strategic command decisions before an Air Force seriously considers ditching manned combat aircraft altogether.

Although from a security POV, I am not at all convinced taking the man out of the loop is the wises thing to do with weapons systems.

Leaving aside the Terminator possibility, a more likely and just as devastating possibility is hacking.

It is entirely possible for an adversary to potentially hack your new combat drones and either disable them, or ever turn them against you.

With a pilot in the cockpit with a hard kill switch for the AI, you have a near foolproof safeguard that does not happen.

 

[Tiberium]

I think I remember the study you are mentioning, but I don’t remember it being quite so cut and dried, and there were important caveats. But it’s been a while since I read that, and I am struggling to remember the details (which, to me at least, says the study wasn’t all that game changing as otherwise it would have had a more lasting impression).

I am more conservative and traditional in that I think there will still be a role for human pilots in air combat for a good length of time yet.

It may well be that soon all new fighters will get AI combat assistants, but they will mostly give the pilot a range of options while the pilot decides which, if any, to execute.

That will probably be the path of least resistance to get air combat AI mainstream and accepted. With those pilots more willing to trust their AIs doing better in exercises and so rising faster through that ranks.

But I think it will probably take a generation at least, for pilots who have learnt to value and trust their combat AIs through personal experience, to rise to be in a position to make high level strategic command decisions before an Air Force seriously considers ditching manned combat aircraft altogether.

Although from a security POV, I am not at all convinced taking the man out of the loop is the wises thing to do with weapons systems.

Leaving aside the Terminator possibility, a more likely and just as devastating possibility is hacking.

It is entirely possible for an adversary to potentially hack your new combat drones and either disable them, or ever turn them against you.

With a pilot in the cockpit with a hard kill switch for the AI, you have a near foolproof safeguard that does not happen.

Actually agree that.

I believe the real reason to put a person in the combat situation is to make decisions when the info is limited. After the decision, the execution can be done by machine. It's similar to why we need to put a general on AWACS.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Already happened.

And more advanced: there is a research suggested that neural network AI can beat human pilot in simulated dogfight very easily. I don't remember the exact parameter, the whole AI is running on a Raspberry Pi system(dirt cheap, can buy on $100 in the market), and their agility is seriously limited(Highest G is 2g).

Soon we will see human is not needed in the A2A combat.

NO, we won't Bro, sorry your info is terminally flawed,, the AI is not agility limited by physics at 2 G's, but by lack of "gray matter"!