US Air Force secretary so confident in AI-controlled F-16s, he'll fly in one
- Reference: 1712790912
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/04/10/usaf_ai_f16_tests/
- Source link:
Last week the USAF [1]delivered three F-16 fighters to Eglin Air Force Base, for conversion to full AI control as part of the Viper Experimentation and Next-gen Operations Model (VENOM) autonomous test bed program.
Speaking on Tuesday at a defense meeting of the US Senate Appropriations Committee, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall reported the program was making strong progress and that he will be a test non-pilot in one of the aircraft – with some backup, of course.
[2]
"I'm going to take a ride in an autonomously flown F-16 later this year," Kendall [3]testified . "There will be a pilot with me who will just be watching, as I will be, as the autonomous technology works, and hopefully, neither he nor I will be needed to fly the airplane."
[4]
[5]
Kendall praised the progress of the Air Force's automation program, of which VENOM is a part. The research arm of the military, DARPA, has worked on this for over five years, and in 2023 the Air Force [6]asked for around $6 billionto build a fleet of advanced drones after demonstrating that an F-16 [7]could fly using software alone.
[8]Wow, so they actually let AI fly an F-16 fighter jet
[9]Air Force colonel 'misspoke' when he said an AI-drone 'killed' its human operator
[10]China aims to pair J-20 stealth fighter with 'loyal wingman' battle drone
[11]US military pulls the trigger, uses AI to target air strikes
To be clear, the next conflict involving the US won't see autonomous F-16s in action. They are purely a testbed for developing software for the next generation of drones. And the software's already pretty good – four years ago an AI model [12]beat Air Force pilots 5-0 in an F-16 flight simulator. Real-life Mavericks (yes, we know he's Navy) may be heading for extinction, but not today.
"It's important to understand the 'human-on-the-loop' aspect of this type of testing, meaning that a pilot will be involved in the autonomy in real time and maintain the ability to start and stop specific algorithms," explained lieutenant colonel Joe Gagnon, commander of the 85th Test and Evaluation Squadron. "There will never be a time where the VENOM aircraft will solely 'fly by itself' without a human component."
[13]
Relax pilot, you still have a job – Click to enlarge. Source: USAF/David Shelikoff
The end goal is what the Air Force calls "Collaborative Combat Aircraft" – aka your drone buddy who's fun to fly with. The USAF envisages a future in which fighters and bombers can fly with AI-powered sentry drones that can handle enemies, relay communications, and run interference to a target.
It's an idea whose time has come – at least in military minds. The UK had its Project Mosquito drones until the project was canceled and replaced with a cheaper solution, and Australia is trialing Boeing's MQ-28 Ghost Bat for use in the skies Down Under. China is developing a " [14]loyal wingman " drone that seems well advanced, and is causing Kendall concern.
"The Department of the Air Force is in a race for technological superiority against a well-resourced strategic competitor," he [15]argued [PDF] regarding China in the Senate hearings.
[16]
"The United States is now facing a competitor with national purchasing power that exceeds our own – a challenge we have never faced in modern times. The PLA is actively developing and expanding capabilities to challenge strategic stability, attack our critical space systems, and defeat our ability to project power – especially air power." ®
Get our [17]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3728795/f-16s-arrive-to-be-modified-for-autonomous-testing/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZhdgXWNYAFNNiIQjz-E5WQAAAAw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.airandspaceforces.com/kendall-autonomous-f-16-cca-technology/
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZhdgXWNYAFNNiIQjz-E5WQAAAAw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZhdgXWNYAFNNiIQjz-E5WQAAAAw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/29/us_airforce_drones/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/14/ai_air_force_f16/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/14/ai_air_force_f16/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/05/us_air_force_colonel_admits/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2023/04/03/china_loyal_wingman_drone_plan/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/27/us_military_maven_ai_used/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2020/08/21/ai_beats_f16_pilot/
[13] https://regmedia.co.uk/2024/04/10/f16.jpg
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2023/04/03/china_loyal_wingman_drone_plan/
[15] https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/download_testimony16.pdf
[16] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZhdgXWNYAFNNiIQjz-E5WQAAAAw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[17] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Loyal Wingman, Dog & Dynamite
As down as I am on self-driving cars and trucks, the Airbus model of computer assistance/control, and anything I'm riding in being drive/fly-by-wire, I think this would be a very useful development .. if I were flying in a combat situation, I'd want one or more autonomous outriders.
The development of such outriders will be costly, in human lives, as well as treasure. Consider this scenario: outrider off on a recce, picks up an enemy heat-seeking missile. Outrider jinks and janks, keeps the missile at bay (no human pilot == outrider can stand much-higher G forces). Human pilot on the mothership, unaware of this, issues a recall order to the outrider. Outrider responds, missile "in tow". Outrider (and enemy heat-seeking missile) near the mothership, and the missile, detecting the much-stronger heat signature of the human-piloted mothership, targets the mothership. Scratch one human pilot and one mothership, much as in the "dog and dynamite" urban legend (idiot goes ice-fishing, fuses and lights a stick of dynamite to blow a hole in the ice and kill the fish, throws the lit dynamite stick ... and his dog retrieves it and brings it back to him).
More such potential mishap scenarios for motherships/outriders exist than I can think of, and that the design team (and people above them in the command chain) can think of, either.
To take the aviation simile all the way: take-offs and landings, as well as taxiing is done by hand, as a general rule. As long as verbal instructions are given, someone human responds. Automation takes over once the filed flight plan route is reached.
Or should be - there have now been studies by FAA, ICAO and the rest of the alphabet soup on increasing over-reliance on automation/autopilot and decline of piloting skills, but I digress.And yes, there are auto-land systems for things like CAT III, etc. Without naming countries or airlines, some of the jet jocks have airmanship skills that leaves them at a loss when the brown stuff is hitting your turbofan intakes.
The point and analogy being that, driving in dense city traffic, the driver has controls; once you're on the freeway, let the automation take over.
Here in Australia you can flunk your instrument proficiency check by over-relying on the a/p, but you are definitely allowed and expected to use it to assist with single-pilot IFR. It's a fine line.
F-14
If they were doing this with the venerable F-14 Tomcat, then, we'd have
Tomcat, Topgun, Top Cat
The F-16 is however the right development platform for this, with it being fly-by-wire already
No so confident!
With a pilot as backup of course: VENOM is still emerging tech
No very brave either.
Flying a jet fighter through a wide open sky is significantly less complex an AI problem than piloting a car though a city street with people walking, cyclists and other cars.
This is why I'm sure self-driving cars are decades away, there are a lot of steps along the way that don't exist. We don't even have semi trucks that are self-driving only on freeways yet, and there is a lot of money in that.