Will latest F-35 problems push Norway towards a European solution?

[gf0012-aust]

However, and this could also be the thing that causes LM some headaches(?) RNAF have specific requirements, and the question remains -- what if both a/c actually meet those requirements? Most people on this forum would say that one should then pick the one that exceeds the requirements the most, i.e. the "best" a/c. Some people (including many politicians) may argue that one should pick the cheapest a/c that meets the requirements, or use other criteria like "offsets" to pick a winner.

and yet the RNAF warfighters - the ones who actually are versed in the art of the air-war have made it pretty clear what they prefer.

we see similar PR behaviour in australia - politicians create colour and movement and ex military personnel with conflicts of interest - or grudges against the military (because they were sacked or in dispute) seek to let their own personal motive gain supremacy over those who actually do have access to the real performance data and the real simulation material.

none of the clowns who wax lyrical in the public arena about platform deficiencies have the remotest level of access to material - and they happily make it up to appeal to a captive audience thats all too willing to believe that the govt or the military is fundamentally being dishonest.

my view (albeit shakespearean) is a pox on the houses of political opportunists, nationalists and wannabe's who all seem to think that they have a level of expertise that their military professionals somehow don't have.

The arrogance of that behaviour is breathtaking.....

 

[JohanGrön]

I don't doubt it but the Gripen does not have a HMI lead over the Super Hornet. Certainly not in the league that the F-35 has over everything else. The Rafale has its own uniquely French approach to HMI which explains why no one else has brought it. Is it any better to the Super Hornet/Eurofighter/Gripen/etc... nope but it certainly looks different.

But what data processing does is fuse information and present it in a much simpler and more direct form. The Block II has the most advanced computer system flying (including over the F-22) and can do things to the sensor input of the various sensors that won't be seen until the F-35 is in service.

Frankly this is more important than mere presentation. If one aircraft is telling you that the threat is out there 60 seconds before the other aircraft then you have more than enough time to read it on a crappy display system (which isn't the issue anyway).

Very interesting info AG! So you contribute partly the lack of export customers of the Rafale to it's unique approach to HMI? I certainly have heard this of one or two French car models so it's very probable that they go for their own unique HMI in aircraft aswell.

Thanks aswell for the explanation of HMI and data processing in regard of Super Hornet, F-35 and F-22.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Very interesting info AG! So you contribute partly the lack of export customers of the Rafale to it's unique approach to HMI? I certainly have heard this of one or two French car models so it's very probable that they go for their own unique HMI in aircraft aswell.

The principle problem is the parity gap between the old and new platforms with respect to performance and price.

ie Mirage owners have been slow to move as they don't see the benefit in acquiring a capability disproportionate to what they purchased and what they'd need to spend.

 

[Grand Danois]

Think in Russian!

http://thinkinrussian.org/

US DARPA has developed thought control systems with feedback and everything... Its been for limb replacement for combat amputees. I'm not sure if there is any 'speed' advantage to be gained over arm and stick control but certainly going through the multi-mode functions of a modern cockpit it would help. Also to stop the Clint Eastwoodiski from stealing the thought control F-35 you need a chip in your brain to make it work.

How about growing brain cells in a petri dish and train them to act as AI?

It's the decision that takes time, the rest is muscle memory. So not that much advantage when compressing time.

And that's quite lucky if you bought a Swedish jet - imagine thinking in Swedish.

But wouldn't mind cute Swedish female voice alerts though...

 

[Dalregementet]

How about growing brain cells in a petri dish and train them to act as AI?

It's the decision that takes time, the rest is muscle memory. So not that much advantage when compressing time.

And that's quite lucky if you bought a Swedish jet - imagine thinking in Swedish.

But wouldn't mind cute Swedish female voice alerts though...

I can ask a female colleague of mine to record some to you. What alerts do you need and where do I send it

 

[Grand Danois]

I can ask a female colleague of mine to record some to you. What alerts do you need and where do I send it

Perhaps someone from this list would be more on the mark?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Swedish_female_singers

Is this the secret to Gripens MMI?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Very interesting info AG! So you contribute partly the lack of export customers of the Rafale to it's unique approach to HMI? I certainly have heard this of one or two French car models so it's very probable that they go for their own unique HMI in aircraft aswell.

Most current 'western' fighters have a cockpit display of three large colour screens ringed by buttons that are used to change the screen display. A range of buttons and controls on the stick and throttle provide control over what's going on in the displays (HOTAS). The Heads Up Display (HUD) provides important data and the pilot is trained to share time between heads up and heads down.

The Rafale has a collimated, multi-image head-level display to present a tactical picture. By collimated this means its designed to fill the bottom of the pilots field of view while looking forward and be in focus with the HUD display. Its a great look but completely different to everything most pilots are trained to do including on their Lead In Fighter Training (LIFT) aircraft. Further the two other displays on the Rafale are touch screen and the pilot has a chamois on the back of his glove to keep them working (ie cleaning the screens).

Its not significantly better or worse, just different. Since export fighter evaluations are flown by pilots familiar with the 'traditional' fighter layout they just say "pass", we'll buy the fundamentally similar capability (EF, Gripen, F-16, F/A-18) with a cockpit we all don't have to retrain to use.

 

[gf0012-aust]

It's the decision that takes time, the rest is muscle memory. So not that much advantage when compressing time.

Some of us attended LandWarefareConf last week and listened to an opening address by DARPAs Chief Scientist Dr Tony Tether

Dr Tether gave an example of a working experiment where brain waves of an amputee were managing a robotic arm over 1000km's away in real time. The footage was extra-ordinary.

I've only sat at one other Conference and been constantly riveted by what was on the tech horizon - the other was the Chief US Naval Scientist (NAVSEA) in Hawai'i who CTD'd a US hyper-speed torpedo some 25 years before it was announced by all and sundry that the "Skval" was the new ship killer. Unfort all his public papers were pulled from the public domain soon after 9/11

 

[gf0012-aust]

Its a great look but completely different to everything most pilots are trained to do including on their Lead In Fighter Training (LIFT) aircraft. Further the two other displays on the Rafale are touch screen and the pilot has a chamois on the back of his glove to keep them working (ie cleaning the screens).

Its not significantly better or worse, just different. Since export fighter evaluations are flown by pilots familiar with the 'traditional' fighter layout they just say "pass", we'll buy the fundamentally similar capability (EF, Gripen, F-16, F/A-18) with a cockpit we all don't have to retrain to use.

Funnily enough this was one of the significant discussions that we had at our table at the final Dinner at Land Warfare Conf. The 3 of the 5 largest military tech and development companies in the world had a pretty robust discussion how some platforms (and Rafale did come up in the chat) seemed to have ignored the Human Factors design element issues. ie as you say, the internal designs went against some of the fundamental elements that need to be considered for cockpit design etc....

Unfamiliarity issues in HF design means increased training costs, and it impacts upon cross training issues. Its one of the reasons why 8 years ago the USN went to common combat room designs for all their principle combat warships (incl subs) - and why that "look and feel" is also considered in allied navies vessels - ie so that unfamiliar staff can rapidly transition into a foreign asset with minimal downtime.

I'm sure the French can defend their position on this, but on a human factors issue, at a coalition and cross training issue - it's way off the reservation.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

How about growing brain cells in a petri dish and train them to act as AI?

It's the decision that takes time, the rest is muscle memory. So not that much advantage when compressing time.

And you don't need a grown brain for that, decision making in a fighter plane does not require creative thinking. A computer with the right programming will do it for you straight out of the box (no need for training).

They have proven themselves over and over again in operations (Autonomous UAVs) and experiments (DARPA X-45). All it will take is the first time UCAVs go up against manned fighters for the end of the pilot. Or the first time the lawyers successfully sue a pilot for bomb effects (and they are trying so hard). Until then but cockpits will keep being stuck into planes that could do without them.

 

[Grand Danois]

And you don't need a grown brain for that, decision making in a fighter plane does not require creative thinking. A computer with the right programming will do it for you straight out of the box (no need for training).

They have proven themselves over and over again in operations (Autonomous UAVs) and experiments (DARPA X-45). All it will take is the first time UCAVs go up against manned fighters for the end of the pilot. Or the first time the lawyers successfully sue a pilot for bomb effects (and they are trying so hard). Until then but cockpits will keep being stuck into planes that could do without them.

In practice you would program the brain through training. But I concede.

Another advantage of the UCAV is the diminished impact of fratricide in a2a combat making automated destruction so much easier on the conscience.

I'm not wholly convinced yet of full maturity for multirole/swing role in a complex environment, though.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I'm not wholly convinced yet of full maturity for multirole/swing role in a complex environment, though.

Then you should look at the DARPA X-45 trials. They pretty much did some of the most complex missions.

The best thing about a UCAV is its combat flying experience is cumulative across all platforms. The Northrop autonomous FCS software is based on over 80,000 hours of trials or 'training' before it is even loaded onto the aircraft. That's nine years of non-stop flying. UCAVs can handle complexity far greater than humans.

 

[Grand Danois]

UCAVs can handle complexity far greater than humans.

Not only at an information bandwidth level but also at an abstract level?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Not only at an information bandwidth level but also at an abstract level?

Abstract thought is not an issue in air combat! Pilots in a strike fighter over Baghdad don't discuss philosophy...

 

[Grand Danois]

Abstract thought is not an issue in air combat! Pilots in a strike fighter over Baghdad don't discuss philosophy...

Allright, what is abstract then? Being able to figure at that a specific pattern of deployment of objects & respective signatures (like a SAM site plus associates) indicate specific tactics and systems employed by the enemy? Or even further, how sensitive would "perception" of the decisionmaking SW be to variations?

Of course if the enemy stray too far in these types of deception they would be hamstringing themselves.

That being said, I'm sometimes surprised to find how well stuff that should be working at margins of fidelity actually work. Including human/automated operator comparisons.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

When it comes to recognising patterns computers out perform humans because they can process so many calculations in such a short time. With the right algorithims they can determine all sorts of things, which is why computers are used to determine where buried IEDs are located despite the planters covering their tracks.

 

[gf0012-aust]

When it comes to recognising patterns computers out perform humans because they can process so many calculations in such a short time. With the right algorithims they can determine all sorts of things, which is why computers are used to determine where buried IEDs are located despite the planters covering their tracks.

further examples - at a digital combat ewarfare level it's why AESA is superior to PESA across a number of critical "decision" making levels and why modern CBASS type torpedoes can kill "silent" subs in the shallows..

or as another example look at the design philosphy differences between BARS and AESA or a Krivak compared to an Arleigh Burke. (these are pretty oblique references, but the concept is the issue)

 

[Grand Danois]

I still think you're talking about how to deal with information at volumes, rather than the act of deciding upon same.

But I can't seem to make the counter argument. But will try.

If you have the signature of an IED ambush in your library, how flexible would it be if new tactics & weapons were employed by the ambushers?

 

[gf0012-aust]

If you have the signature of an IED ambush in your library, how flexible would it be if new tactics & weapons were employed by the ambushers?

perhaps using IED detection as an example is not the best thing to discuss in here (open forum) - but, needless to say, it is done already (as in dealing with emergent and evolutionary new IEDs) with new methods. IED's are a good example though as we've witnessed the transition from targeted technology responses, to the use of symbiotic systems solutions.

a UAV is the same, it depends on the programming, but using AI they can learn off patterned behaviour.

DARPA did a maze test with mice and electric sensors embedded in their heads. you could quite literally plug in an animals brain and use it as part of a search and seek system.

I think we've already moved from the mechanical to digital and digital is morphing into digital/nano. Frankenstinian in absolute terms - but do-able and demonstrable nonetheless

 

[JohanGrön]

Perhaps someone from this list would be more on the mark?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Swedish_female_singers

Is this the secret to Gripens MMI?

"Supersonic" as heard when Gripen passes mach 1, that's the recording I would like to have. Would make a great new mail notification wav