Let's see how these tests go:
Air Force researchers are designing an autonomous aircraft that can take down a manned plane in air-to-air combat, with the goal of pitting the two against each other in July 2021. ...
AFRL’s project echoes the debate revived earlier this year about whether an autonomous fighter could successfully challenge one with a human in the cockpit, sparked by billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk’s comments at an Air Force Association conference in February.
“The [F-35] competitor should be a drone fighter plane that’s remote controlled by a human, but with its maneuvers augmented by autonomy,” Musk tweeted. “The F-35 would have no chance against it.”
I'm assuming that at some point F-35s over their service life will see AI replace pilots.
Even if robotic fighters will never be as good as piloted fighters, in an aerial war of attrition, the robot planes will have the edge because they can be built and programmed faster than pilots can be trained to high levels of skill.
Still, if the issue is about a robot plane being able to outmaneuver a piloted plane, doesn't the F-35 bypass that framing altogether (quoting an article in that post)?
Rather than entering a turning fight at the merge, the F-35 barrels through and takes an over-the-shoulder defensive shot. As a Northrop Grumman video puts it, "maneuvering is irrelevant".
The edge in combat would have to be something other than in maneuver. And in those other areas, wouldn't a pilot have AI enhancements, too?
I just don't know if AI will replace pilots or make them more effective than pure AI fighters.
And as an aside, would robotic planes in battles with piloted planes dispense with traditional air-to-air hard-kill missiles in favor of beam weapons or area weapons that explode to kill or mortally injure pilots while hardened robot planes survive?
