AI Wingmen
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 чер 2024
- Don’t miss our newsletter! That's where we drop weekly knowledge bombs to help you make sense of defense!
This exclusive episode discusses the Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program with the 2 companies selected to build the first platforms: Anduril and General Atomics.
We discuss what the companies have in common and how they both view that as one of their superpowers. We also explore the origins of the CCA program, the origins of the winning vehicle design, how the program structure is a model for innovation and more.
Though they won the hardware contracts, both companies have unique software and autonomy insights, so we also discussed software as the enabler and the integration challenges of bringing these ‘loyal wingmen’ into the force.
While there was a ton to agree on, they also shared unique and varying perspectives-something that you can only get when you have them in a discussion together. This is an episode you don’t want to miss!
For those interested in #military #nationaldefense #warfare #nationalsecurity #defense #nationaldefense #tech #technology #defensetech #army #navy #airforce #sofware #startup #innovation #drones #ai #autonomy #anduril #ga-asi #airplanes #airpower #airsuperority
Links
• Sign up for our amazing newsletter! www.themerge.co
• Support us on Patreon! / the_merge
• Mike Benitez (LinkedIn) / mike-benitez
• Anduril www.anduril.com
• General Atomics www.ga.com
• Diem Salmon - Vice President, Air Dominance and Strike at Anduril / diem-salmon-2a438b25
• Mike Atwood - Vice President, Advanced Programs at General Atomics / michael-atwood-5a1719a7
----
Follow us on...
• LinkedIn / themerge
• Instagram / merge_newsletter
• X x.com/MergeNewsletter
• Facebook / themergenews
• Website www.themerge.co
----
Show Notes
00:48 CCA intro
02:00 company intros
06:01 why the push for CCAs?
07:26 exploring the CCA space
09:09 origins of the winning designs
10:16 2 for 1 - win win
11:55 software
12:43 the software part is the hardest
14:33 the shift in trust in kill chains
15:01 Skyborg
15:40 trust and blending
16:25 delegation via trust or necessity
17:53 the need to get it into operators hands
18:47 DOTMLPF-P
19:11 teaming
19:44 starting simple
20:29 starting with complexity
22:09 iteration is the pathway
22:55 CCA program structure
26:56 capability efficiency vs resiliency
28:35 groundbreaking challenges
29:04 solving system-level optimization
31:13 culture change
31:36 F-16 Auto GCAS
32:50 MAGIC CARPET
34:14 composites for scale?
38:31 the future
41:27 closing thoughts
42:43 outro - Розваги
Inviting both competitors is ballsy but very interesting
No guts, no glory!
@@TheMergeMedia INB4 you frame it like an MSM news program interview...
Why can't we have just ONE competitor? Imagine the democracy in politics.
Extraordinarily professional interview with such informed representatives--nice going!
More of these interviews needed! Well done 👏
Spread the word and we'll keep climbing the mountain
Fascinating and informative. You have the best interviews. Pako. Thanks again.
Much appreciated, spread the word and feed the algo!
Just a phenomenal episode. The guests were professional and informative and the complementary questions from the host made for a smooth and very enjoyable listen.
❤❤
What's supposed to come of this, ultimately, is not aircraft, but instead nonlinear dynamical (potentially chaotic) systems of interacting agents. We don't have the mathematics required for prediction and control of such systems. We do know, loosely, to be on the lookout for unexpected "emergent behaviors" when the systems are scaled up. It seems to me, on general principles, that if you want the "loyal wingmen" to be generally capable, then you'll have to restrict the number of them, and that if you want them to be numerous, then you'll have to constrain their roles.
Fascinating and the implications for smaller allied air forces are enormous. I know the RAAF is investigating similar programs (Loyal Wingman) Hopefully the the RCAF and RAF get involved as well.
Cheers.
'1950-60's Century Series' but with drones 😎
Great segment - I would like to hear more about how these organizations plan to protect the intellectual property from our adversaries.
Sounds like GA is going traditional waterfall. Whereas Anduril is pushing for agile iterations, similar to SpaceX.
Great interview, very exciting!
Also in the age of AI image recognitions building very real decoy are very profitable
Thanks Vlad. I feel a little better after watching this; I’m similarly concerned. ❤
Time to grab that NGAD money now.
Very interesting segment! But it would help if you put the names and linkedin details of your guests in the show notes. Mike Atwood is pretty easy, but I am not even sure if you are pronouncing Zim/Xim/Zhim's name correctly.
Great callout. We updated the notes with names and Linkedin profiles. Thanks!
Very cool and interesting stuff. Thanks ❤️👍
Thanks for watching
That was epic. Thanks
A lot of buzz is going around about the potential cost and requirements of NGAD. Some are theorizing that maybe NGAD, while still a large, capable air superiority fighter, will come to have much more in common with how CCA is being produced than what the program had originally planned.
Yes, the are still at the stage of "vaguefying capabilities". The only sure thing is: it needs to be able to fly, and land on it's own power. everything else is up for debate.
@@Gunni1972 the biggest issue is the adaptive engines. That’s what’s gonna make the price skyrocket. If they went with a smaller, conventional engine they’d save a lot of money, or in their words, “. . .smaller. . .less complex”.
Smaller doesn’t mean less thrust, though. Adaptive engines are huge because they have that extra bypass for super efficient cruising. This will just be a suped up regular engine.
This means less endurance, and less versatility. The good thing is that it’s still going to be a large plane with a very large fuel capacity, so it won’t suffer from short legs, just not as long as it would have had.
Great Interview !!
Thank you!
In the 1990's, I said the next major symmetric war would be decided by whose engineers could build working systems the fastest, and who could mass-produce those systems.
There are many important themes ingrained in this video (product development, SW development, DOD procurement, public/private partnership, cultural adoption/resistance to new technology, future war fighting . . . and that the cognitively autonomous robots really are coming . . . just to name a few).
Maybe the most strategic theme I see here is: There is no way an autocratic/communist/socialist government would ever be able to match the speed/innovation/iterative learning/collaboration that the United States with its entrepreneurial free market system can muster when it has the will to do so - China could never pull off what they describe in this video.
Great insight
LOVE IT!!!!!! Bravo
❤❤
I wish the vision to do this within Canada and #DND and #RCAF. Canadian industry would love this. We have companies big and small that want to get sheer this type of stuff
I knew that you (John Travolta) are really into aircraft. I had no idea that you had a UA-cam channel. 😮😂
One thing I find terrifying is the ability of cargo planes to pallet launch missiles and how a drone would be able to tell the difference. If you can load old freight 747's with a bunch of rotary launchers for rolling out over 100 missiles..... How do ensure a drone does not grow a wild chain of logic and go after a "Suspected" launcher? I like the CCA's concept but there are issues with any that are shooting first based on data, and end up like that situation after the Boston bombing where a husband ammo reloader and wife into pressure cooking used the same online account.....
such great content and sounds like so much better of approach from the DoD!
What a DoDdle.
Are they trying to make the drone swarm killstreak from COD?
is this + b21 the reason why they are thinking of cutting NGAD?
No, the $ is the reason. B-21 builds itself. According to a solid A.I. source i totally trust.
What we really need to do is focus on the plug and play integration of any new platform across any service with a universal interface. Like MIDI (Musical Instrument Digital Interface) for weapon systems so that any new weapons system can be quickly adapted to any need by any service. As for how to field these new systems in combat, may i suggest studying the game of football. - Long time game theory nerd and military aviation geek. :)
Instead of "groundbreaking", shouldn't it be called "Airbraking"'? I mean, it will be the logistics arm of the air force. Every manned fighter gets a missile, fuel, EW/recce-truck. Each consumes, (you guessed it), fuel, maintenance time, and taxi time on the runway.
Now what if SHTF, and an Airfield is actually attacked.(DEFENSIVE CASE, because we're talking defence here) Do you:
A) Run for cover because it is a missile attack?
B) Stay where you are and launch interceptor missiles/planes with MANY missiles to shoot them down?
C) Wait until the fuel carrying drone has started that needs to fly ahead of schedule because the next Intercepting PLANE is much faster? Then the EW-Drone starts, to hide the intercepting plane once it is up there? Then the Missile drone starts (You already guess why) ahead of the plane. And THEN launch the Goddamned FIGHTER JET?
And the same shit goes in reverse once the plane comes back for rearming. "Can you go suckle some more out of the fuel drone? The EW and missile drone need to get off the landing strip before YOU can land". Oh and Congrats BTW, We're still here.
Guys, it's so harebrained, it makes me wanna cry.
One could have 3.8 times more firepower in the air by then. By simply launching 4 Ass kicking planes. Like F-15 EX's who are good at everything, except hiding. (But why hide, when the Enemy already knows where he fired at you)? "defensive case" remember?
Imagine that traffic on an aircraft carrier, with no alternative launch/landing option for hundreds/thousands of miles.
I mean i really like well engineered stuff. But these days, Marketing just outweighs EVERYTHING.
In step with these transformational war machines, an F-16 granddad like me would also wish to to remain abreast of some in-step evolution of civil-military ethics that would provide re-assuring parallel frameworks for their operational use. Today’s grandkids ask a lot of blunt but knowledgeable questions.
Agreed. Nothing should ever be destroyed or killed without Human approval and responsibility, and safeguards against mistakes must be built into the system.