Read on Twitter
Overall I was impressed with the study.
We do a fair job on training to BFM in the Navy. The argument that the dogfight is dead is for another debate. /1 https://twitter.com/peterwsinger/status/1296540408084824064
We do a fair job on training to BFM in the Navy. The argument that the dogfight is dead is for another debate. /1 https://twitter.com/peterwsinger/status/1296540408084824064
BFM is a great trainer to understand your energy state in relation to the enemy and to exercise your situational awareness in a 3D space. You have to aggressively and quickly cue your weapons, assess the quality of your cueing, and determine if you should pull the trigger /2
all while at the same time preventing the enemy from doing the same. I have yet to meet a pilot who is above average at BFM, but isn't good at all other mission sets. /3
I think that sometimes we lose the forest through the trees for what we are trying to actually accomplish when we hit the merge: to get the first shot off. Quite often you complete an engagement, and your opponent is proud of the shots they took on the deck. /4
They don't realize that they were shot multiple times before reaching there. Its pretty hard to fight your best 1v1 when you are missing a wing or an engine.
But you cannot just put your lift vector on the other jet and pull and hope to win the fight. /5
But you cannot just put your lift vector on the other jet and pull and hope to win the fight. /5
That will solve about 75% of your problems, but the truly great BFM pilots are thinking two to three merges ahead. You have to be smoothly aggressive. Yank on the G's when required, but knowing how to preserve energy smartly and regain energy efficiently is the key. /6
In a tight fight, gaining a small amount of angles at each merge is how you end offensive on the deck. /7
So what did the AI really well? Forward quarter gun shots. That amount of closure requires intense concentration and refinement of pipper placement, while also trying to avoid hitting the other aircraft. /8
Forward quarter gun employment isn't allowed in training because of high midair potential. AI isn't worried about morting itself, and can accurately acquire a forward quarter gun shot. The fight was guns, but I am sure that AI could employ a valid AIM-9X quicker than I can. /9
Energy preservation. AI will always be able to fly the appropriate G or Alpha required to maintain the perfect energy package. A human has to dedicate a huge amount of brain space to make sure they are flying the aircraft correctly. /10
Especially a fly-by-wire aircraft where there isn't as much "feel" in how the aircraft is performing. I have to constantly check to make sure I am flying the correct alpha in a slow fight. /11
High performance turning. During one of the fights, the tow aircraft are in a prolonged 9G 2-circle fight on the deck. Humans cannot sustain that. AI doesn't have to focus on breathing and squeezing. /12
So yes, the human was fighting on the computer's terms. The computer had perfect information that it wouldn't necessarily have without a robust sensor package. ROE isn't a factor, blah blah. /13
But this shows some potential. As an example, having the AI supplement my weapons employment could be a powerful combination. /Fin
