I would like to see the source on that. If you don't mind can you post the url?Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:On networking:
Actually in terms of networking, I think you might have to upgrade your knowledge and figures by a large number of manitudes. Already the US army has experimented with networking up to 2,000 micro drone buggies that they intend to launch from a mothership to overwhelm a house with tasers or tear gas as their subsitute for bloody FIBUA. It's one of their unmanned projects and I'll pass you the link once I can scrounge it up. The fact is, such networking is far from impossible.
To understand how, what you are suggesting is a top down network that has to share all the resources in between. Such a network is based on a model of how human organizations usually do things.
But the network model that has come up with to figure out how to network multiple units with little latency is the bottom up, or ant-colony approach. Where units are networked together in a form of collective intelligence, rather then centralized intelligence. This delocalized network model makes it possible to link up an indefinate number of units, coordinate and make them them do the stuff you want as a team.
The ant-colony approach that they are now look to. This also means that the network is incredibly robust, because it's intergity is decentralized. The only way to destroy this network is to kill every single one of the drones. Such a network requires minimal external computing power to support at all as the drones all provide to the overall coordination and network, like an ant colony. As a matter of fact, the more drones you have the better, because the overall oordination and ability of the network will increase. Of course, the disadvantage to this system is that you have less localized control over each individual, as compared to the computing extensive traditional model you suggested. But this is the network model defence planners intend to use for their future extensive drone networks, as it applies to the supernet of other sensors and units.
On dogfighting, I did not come up with that idea. One F-15 pilot said it pretty much himself during aerospace to sum up dogfighting.
"It's nothing like the stuff you see in the movies that you have to come up with complex plans to outfly your enemy. It's just basically a matter of pointing you aircraft in the right direction faster then he can, and shooting."
When asked on what that meant, it was that dogfighting was a brutally simple affair that usually only takes snap seconds to conclude, tatical thinking and human brain mumbo jumbo greatly absent. Get you nose right fast and blast him out before he can.
The ant colony idea is actually what makes the drones simply that drones and not AI.Ant colony works on the principal that each part of the network is feeding off each other.Like a human body.1 part fails and you're going to have a problem.Like simply taking out the brain the body becomes useless.Or taking out part of the body and the rest is at a disadvantage.If you have a 100 mini drones go into battle using a network that has a plan for every single 1 of those drones and then say 40% of them fail or the "network" fails you're going to have a problem.The units which cannot function properly and would not be able to improvise.That means AI is the thing that will take drone technology to where it can replace humans in that sense.But the problem is AI is currently to dumb,to slow or too big to be used.Not yet anyway it's going to take time.I hardly think you want me to give you a lesson in network or software programming so i made it short.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:On networking:
Actually in terms of networking, I think you might have to upgrade your knowledge and figures by a large number of manitudes. Already the US army has experimented with networking up to 2,000 micro drone buggies that they intend to launch from a mothership to overwhelm a house with tasers or tear gas as their subsitute for bloody FIBUA. It's one of their unmanned projects and I'll pass you the link once I can scrounge it up. The fact is, such networking is far from impossible.
To understand how, what you are suggesting is a top down network that has to share all the resources in between. Such a network is based on a model of how human organizations usually do things.
But the network model that has come up with to figure out how to network multiple units with little latency is the bottom up, or ant-colony approach. Where units are networked together in a form of collective intelligence, rather then centralized intelligence. This delocalized network model makes it possible to link up an indefinate number of units, coordinate and make them them do the stuff you want as a team.
The ant-colony approach that they are now look to. This also means that the network is incredibly robust, because it's intergity is decentralized. The only way to destroy this network is to kill every single one of the drones. Such a network requires minimal external computing power to support at all as the drones all provide to the overall coordination and network, like an ant colony. As a matter of fact, the more drones you have the better, because the overall oordination and ability of the network will increase. Of course, the disadvantage to this system is that you have less localized control over each individual, as compared to the computing extensive traditional model you suggested. But this is the network model defence planners intend to use for their future extensive drone networks, as it applies to the supernet of other sensors and units.
On dogfighting, I did not come up with that idea. One F-15 pilot said it pretty much himself during aerospace to sum up dogfighting.
"It's nothing like the stuff you see in the movies that you have to come up with complex plans to outfly your enemy. It's just basically a matter of pointing you aircraft in the right direction faster then he can, and shooting."
When asked on what that meant, it was that dogfighting was a brutally simple affair that usually only takes snap seconds to conclude, tatical thinking and human brain mumbo jumbo greatly absent. Get you nose right fast and blast him out before he can.
Try to imagine it in an american drawl, and you can see that it is hardly impossible.Originally posted by EXCO:One F-15 pilot? He must be in publicity mode. And if he said this - "tatical thinking and human brain mumbo jumbo greatly absent", I seriously doubt your source.
Erm, I think you don't understand the new model a bit at all, based on what you have said. The entire premise of this information sharing network is it's invulnerability and reduncancy to damage. When you kill a single ant, or even a large number of ants in the colony, the colony's overall C&C is hardly affected at all (as a matter of fact, the colony can actually be run and recover on one worker if need be). While if you de-liver a human, he's dead meat. That's the diff between the old and the new model.Originally posted by |-|05|:The ant colony idea is actually what makes the drones simply that drones and not AI.Ant colony works on the principal that each part of the network is feeding off each other.Like a human body.1 part fails and you're going to have a problem.Like simply taking out the brain the body becomes useless.Or taking out part of the body and the rest is at a disadvantage.If you have a 100 mini drones go into battle using a network that has a plan for every single 1 of those drones and then say 40% of them fail or the "network" fails you're going to have a problem.The units which cannot function properly and would not be able to improvise.That means AI is the thing that will take drone technology to where it can replace humans in that sense.But the problem is AI is currently to dumb,to slow or too big to be used.Not yet anyway it's going to take time.I hardly think you want me to give you a lesson in network or software programming so i made it short.
You do not understand at all.The sharing network is redundant and the robot hardy.But it makes not mention of being jam proof.The raido signal can be jammed/cancelled or the command station destroyed.Those are the 2 ways to take it out.A human can lose his command post and still carry out his mission and is jam proof.And when that happens they robots do not have AI to continue to complete the mission.When the technology comes along to put AI into that small platform then yes i'm very sure it would be alot more worth it then a human.Right now that machine is a recon machine.It is meant to go there and take a look.If contact is lost or it is destoryed then the area would be considered hostile.Thus it has fufilled it's mission.But if you were to lose contact while it is on say an ambush/attack mission then without contorl it is useless for it has no "brain" to complete it's mission.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Erm, I think you don't understand the new model a bit at all, based on what you have said. The entire premise of this information sharing network is it's invulnerability and reduncancy to damage. When you kill a single ant, or even a large number of ants in the colony, the colony's overall C&C is hardly affected at all (as a matter of fact, the colony can actually be run and recover on one worker if need be). While if you de-liver a human, he's dead meat. That's the diff between the old and the new model.
The only way to distrupt this network is two options:either you kill every drone in the network, or kill the guy giving the overall orders (in this case you have to nuke the Pentagon or something like that). Either ways, these are vulnerabilites that exist for all weapons systems, manned or not.