You basically turn cargo aircraft into aircraft carriers.
With his VariEze and Long-EZ designs, which first flew in 1975 and 1979 respectively, Rutan is responsible for helping popularize both the canard configuration and the use of moldless composite construction in the homebuilt aircraft industry.
https://i.redd.it/4deoeuq9e4m21.png
Drones are the game's main theme and it's great.
See https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_s_Q5CI7p5M and https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f7Lu6LEQ0zo for inspiration. I doubt those landings were healthy for the pilot’s back, but for drones, and given half a century or so of technological development, this might work.
You might not even need the grappling hook. ‘Just’ stall the drone at a height of a few meters, and have it fall onto a relatively soft surface. Maybe add a small rocket to soften the landing.
We already have extremely fast autonomous vehicles specifically designed to take down fighters. They are called missiles. Modern missiles already do everything you are listing including cooperation.
As the main weapons of fighter drones will likely be missiles anyway, the drones will probably be mostly glorified missiles carriers allowing reusability of some of the most expensive avionics.
Usually, the hard problem for AI in military application is respecting the rules of engagement. I fully expect a human to still be in the loop for sometimes.
Why not keep drones around for surveillance, for communication, anti-personnel, anti-aircraft, anti-boat, anti-car, signal jammer, take out a cell tower, take out a high tension line, etc...
oh yeah, add contact tracing with an update :)
If you mean having a combination of different specialised drones doing different roles, one of them being carrying sofisticated ordnances to take out fighters then I agree.
If you mean having a multirole drone able to do everything (what would be an AI piloted F25) then I think it doesn't make a lick of sense. Fighters make little sense in modern warfare anyway. The cost/capability ratio just doesn't work especially considering they are only ever going to be used against considerably less advanced opponents as all the nations operating modern fighters could nuke each other.
Regarding AI, my personnal belief is that having a computer assisting a human piloting a group of drones is a more promising avenue than fully autonomous drones but I might be wrong.
That is the opposite from what I'm saying.
For example, all the current F planes are not specialized -- they are all termed multi-role fighters. They have all been treated as a platform and upgraded for more capabilities over time.
I think drones will follow the same path -- glomming on capabilities instead of becoming more specialized.
We will have multi-role drones.
Imagine a jet flying through a cloud of drones. Maybe most are destroyed. But some work their way into the internal systems, or perhaps into the cockpit itself, and do who knows what.
Drones phone home with location data of base for other ordinance, release biological warfare agents infecting an entire base (or worse), or spread from the infected jet to other vehicles and equipment doing untold billions in damage.
Also, poor animal.
Very easy to beat via even somewhat advanced radioelectronic warfare. Can't coordinate if you can't communicate. This is the Achilles heel of all these "advanced weapons systems" that look so great in the powerpoint slides but are only useful against enemies which don't have any weaponry built after mid-80s.
Of course any country not in on it will be far, far, far, far behind. The idea of a drone swarm based air force going up against a less capable foe seems overwhelmingly superior. I'm sure there will be a give and take as people figure out how to disrupt them better, but I also have no reason to think there won't be ways to compensate for a countermeasure after it's understood.
Or we could just, I dunno, stop having so many wars... but I'm kind of at the point where it's obvious enough that every major world power is working on it that I'm not sure what else the US can do.
Not building $1B fighters seems like a good decision all around if there's any other way... that just seems stupid, no offense intended to anyone working on it but it just seems unreasonable on the face of it if you can make hundreds of unmanned drones instead (or pay teachers more of course...).
How do you defeat a drone swarm using frequency agile communications over narrow beams with cheap equipment, such that it's asymmetric in cost?
https://www.voanews.com/europe/russian-mystery-weapon-claim-...