As soon as Iran North Korea and much more significantly China started developing their own systems the INF treaty was dead. There would be no way the US would constrain itself where China was able to develop and deploy their own systems. But yes they used the pretext of Russian violations to justify their abjuration to the treaty.
US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
As soon as Iran North Korea and much more significantly China started developing their own systems the INF treaty was dead. There would be no way the US would constrain itself where China was able to develop and deploy their own systems. But yes they used the pretext of Russian violations to justify their abjuration to the treaty.
Are you saying that the Rules Based Order is a lie???
The US Army's 1st Multi-Domain Task Force(Pacific)
Basically a bunch of missiles, from the future ATACMS replacement (PrSM) to an intermediate range ballistic missile (LRHW) combined with intelligence, EW, cyber and sensors
Russia's latest fighter is supposedly able to fly back to base with an incapacitated pilot, and give hints on how to combat opposing aircraft, like choosing which aircraft to target, and which weapons to use. So I wonder how much more extra work it is to turn that into an autonomous combat aircraft.
The talk about the US adding more algorithms and coding hundreds of thousands of lines of code suggests there is little in this logic resembling AI though.
The talk about the US adding more algorithms and coding hundreds of thousands of lines of code suggests there is little in this logic resembling AI though.
This is already a feature that decade old Block 70 Vipers have.
So did the Su-35 which came out roughly around the same time.
Absolutely the future of aerial warfare.
I don't know, they specifically reference enforcement learning. I doubt they would talk about it unless it was playing some role in the program.
The most impressive thing is that the aircraft is capable of engaging in close combat aerial warfare. They still need a human pilot in the loop to take control incase something goes wrong, but I wonder how long before they feel safe testing it without a pilot present?
I'm interested to see them apply this to other scenarios or if it can be evolved into multi-mission capability. For example, the aircraft is going to perform a bombing mission, but detects an incoming enemy fighter aircraft and has to deal with that threat instead. Also, would need to determine if it could continue on with its primary objective afterwards.
