@@CWLemoine Wow. The one question I had after Mover explained everything else - and Mover explains it here. If it wasn't for this channel I would have just seen the headlines and have really understood what happened. I think I am going to have to buy one of his books to say thank you.
@SymeonPhronema
4 жыл бұрын
@@James-sz5bi His books are awesome man. I highly recommend them.
@matthewsheeran
4 жыл бұрын
Shared video equipment in the office which as a result wont get contaminated or need constant cleaning.
@philipuwumarogie9796
4 жыл бұрын
@paul williams It would help if you simply clicked on the link CW posted and saw the actual explanation.. innit?
@heronsystemsinc.6849
4 жыл бұрын
Mover, the folks at Heron Systems here. Thank you for the thorough and honest review of our performance. You raise solid critiques about the advantages our AI had and how Banger was out of his best element. ADT was a chance to prove that AI could handle the tactical decision making in a semi-realistic environment . We're pushing it into a real flight environment next. Plan is to start with small scale drones (literally training the agent on this flight model now) and scale to representative fighter jets. We'll also incorporate a more realistic sim that models both sensors and weapons engagements with high fidelity. We'd love to chat if you and your followers want to learn a little more about this technology and where it is headed, including opportunities for simmers to take a shot at Falco.
@CWLemoine
4 жыл бұрын
Definitely something we can chat about. 👍
@lippertwe
4 жыл бұрын
Heron Systems Inc. not asking to be sarcastic or obnoxious. just wondering how this experiment is different than a typical player vs ai flight combat game from microsoft or dcs or anywhere else? flight combat games of player versus computer have been around for almost as long as video games themselves. and not arcade style ones but games that tried to have some realism.
@karlmeyer5383
4 жыл бұрын
Super classy answer. Would be very interested in some folks from the DCS community to take on the AI
@ajkramer35
4 жыл бұрын
I have to respect this response. I'd love a shot at this AI given some of the perfect SA removed.
@Joshua-xz7pm
4 жыл бұрын
I appreciate your honesty and willingness to interact with the community, and I believe there is value in constructive and honest feedback. If you want a sim pilot to give it a go, count me in and I may have some friends who will would join as well.
@rammphillips3002
4 жыл бұрын
Mover, no kiddin', this is one of the best videos you have ever made. And, as a former Navy fighter pilot, I couldn't agree more with your takeaways. When I was flying, all we used the Sim for was procedures, learning switch locations, etc. It's not bad to fly IFR approaches, also. Banger did the best he could but the deck was stacked from the git-go. I'm gonna go watch it again... Great job! Thank you!
@PhillipBirmingham
4 жыл бұрын
I haven't seen a lot of Mover's videos, but as a reinforcement learning (RL) developer (and sim pilot,) I agree. This is an interesting demonstration, but the omniscience concerning problem state, and the shortcuts taken in gunnery (since face shots are low probability, it takes a lot longer to train a pure RL agent to take them correctly -- that's what the developer meant by "sparse") definitely limit its applicability. That said, RL is scary in how it can learn rules we wouldn't even think of. I won't be surprised if, once the simulation approaches the real world, face-shooting becomes the norm.
@kyle857
4 жыл бұрын
I knew pilots and their advocates were going to claim that the deck was stacked against the human pilot from before the event. Thanks for proving me right.
@martinmartinez250
4 жыл бұрын
I agree with Mover. The test designers made a serious mistake in not simulating the sensors a real AI would be utilizing. I have designed real aircraft Fire Control Systems and programmed game engines and more recently worked on AI. This seems like a poorly planned demo where the human is given imperfect information while the AI is given an unrealistic perfect information. Not surprisingly the gamer with perfect information always wins.
@MistedMind
4 жыл бұрын
@@kyle857 Even the programmers admitted that. So what's your point?
@isodoubIet
4 жыл бұрын
@@martinmartinez250 " The test designers made a serious mistake in not simulating the sensors a real AI would be utilizing." The point is not to be super realistic. It's to make a simple first test with an easier problem.
@ConorChaos
4 жыл бұрын
"Trigger, show em' how it's done."
@constipatedparker5879
4 жыл бұрын
"That's right, Trigger. They're just machines. Don't show 'em any mercy."
@bombomos
4 жыл бұрын
"Stick with Trigger and you'll make it through."
@trigger5013
4 жыл бұрын
...
@Mobius118
4 жыл бұрын
Sup children
@reke9942
4 жыл бұрын
Wilco
@mastersheff37
4 жыл бұрын
Flawless victory... it's even the same font from Mortal Kombat.
@Real28
4 жыл бұрын
I came to make this comment. I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this. Means someone anticipated it and programmed that. Cheeky.
@eitleoir170
4 жыл бұрын
This is a case of, "maybe so sir.....but not today".
@Jester-uh9xg
4 жыл бұрын
@Benjamin McCann I think the only aspect of this that seems impossible ten years ago is having that VR headset
@markvincentcocjin
4 жыл бұрын
Tom Cruise lands jet as the enemy drone tries to lock in. Tom Runs as fast as his Tom Cruise legs can take him. Enemy AI is like: "WTF is that? Cannot compute..."
@markvincentcocjin
4 жыл бұрын
@Benjamin McCann Ten years from now, an F-35 launches a drone to dogfight another drone with energy weapons.
@Paul-hy6rp
4 жыл бұрын
Glad I watched your coverage on this dogfight, there has been a lot of rubbish spoken on this matter online and your video put it all in perspective, thanks for covering this. Fighter Pilots are going to be around for a long time to come.
@mwara2444
3 жыл бұрын
The whole point of AI other than saving pilots, is that you can do different flight characteristics when pilots don't have to undergo g-forces you can design planes differently. Remove the pilot in the g-force and you can create vehicles that can do some crazy stuff to get kills. The hard part is having an AI that can identify predict decide and execute, while maintaining awareness of everything going on around you. But if we ever need fighters in space AI is going to be extremely handy for extreme speeds and maneuverability. I must have develop sci-fi inertial dampeners The human brain is still the most complex computer on the planet.
@bobdillon1138
5 ай бұрын
Yes but not necessarily seated in air frames.
@btbarr16
4 жыл бұрын
The part where he mentioned not getting any feedback from the aircraft reminded me of something. Recently I was watching a NASCAR race where they were at a track, a road course, they've never been to and because of COVID there wasn't any practice/qualifying sessions before the race. Nascar teams have simulators for their drivers. A driver was being interviewed and asked how helpful a simulator is. Basically, the driver said that they're helpful for learning the track layout, but not much else since they can't feel what the car is doing underneath them and they don't include things like bumps, different smoothness levels of the asphalt, track temp, shifting weight of the car, vibrations from the brakes, and so on.
@afterburn2600
4 жыл бұрын
Let me fix the thumb for ya: *Former Cessna Pilot
@CWLemoine
4 жыл бұрын
ACKSHUALLY, for this subject matter it should be: Current DCS TOMCAT! Pilot
@maxwellclark6992
4 жыл бұрын
C.W. Lemoine TOMCATS
@hoilst
4 жыл бұрын
@@CWLemoine TOMCATS!
@scheldon2244
4 жыл бұрын
C.W. Lemoine TTTTOOOOMMMCCCCAAAATTTTSSSSS!!!!
@jerrybandy3827
4 жыл бұрын
I'm not a real TOMCATS! pilot but I play one on TV.
@nickbryan217
4 жыл бұрын
14 year Army Armor Officer, spent a lot of time in simulator both gunnery simulators (AGTS) and the Abrams Simulator (CCTT). You lose a lot of situational awareness in simulators. Simulators are great, but they are limited in what they can do to simulate the tactical environment. You often either feel like you’re looking at the world through the straw or you’re not hearing 3 dimensional. So if you hear gun fire it’s in stereo and you’d have no idea what direction it’s coming from. So you’re scanning, getting shot, and hopefully you pick up a visual signature or you’re just dead.
@HormigaZ
4 жыл бұрын
I don't want to sound out of place and I'm sure there's caveats to what I'll say but in gaming we are used to surround sound and the current virtual reality goggles are pretty damn impressive at recreating spaces in 3 dimensions too. I know from some former or current military pilots that often their simulators are objetively behind technologically than the some of the commercialy available ones we use, although we often can only work with old technology.
@nightofthunder5509
4 жыл бұрын
They are based on rules and rules can be broken or bent that is why you will always be faster than they are. Morpheous. Perfect example why and how bots can be beaten they dont have the ingenuity plus most air battles will be BVR anyway so this proves nothing even if the Ai won a dogfight
@kyle857
4 жыл бұрын
@@nightofthunder5509 The AI will be better BVR too.
@briantaylor8197
4 жыл бұрын
I agree. The simulator is much different.
@isodoubIet
4 жыл бұрын
@@nightofthunder5509 " plus most air battles will be BVR anyway " How are missiles guided?
@Pylon5Productions
4 жыл бұрын
“This is so sad, Alexa play Last of the Breed by Dos Gringos” “I’m sorry Mover, I cannot let you do that”
@ardentglazier2867
4 жыл бұрын
Neat work on the part of Heron Systems. Having worked DARPA and ONR (Office of Naval Research) projects for two decades, I'd agree with Mover. As Mover points out, the real world will have many factors beyond those included in the demo; the most acute one I think is the issue of doing machine learning (in the training phase) and real-time control over inaccurate or missing sensor data, particularly when the opponent is actively trying to deceive. Consider the issues of automated driving systems getting confused by nefarious people putting a bit of masking tape on Stop signs--which wouldn't bother attentive humans much at all. Good book on the general "AI vs humans" subject is Garry Kasparov, "Deep Thinking: Where Machine Intelligence Ends and Human Creativity Begins"
@Redmanticore
4 жыл бұрын
humans lost in game of Go, too, a few years ago, and the opponent was a #1 superstar as garry was on his golden days, and go is played even more than chess was. game of go needed even more creativity than chess. " Former Go champion beaten by DeepMind retires after declaring AI invincible " , there is a great documentary on it too, on youtube. garry is not an expert on the subject, so he cant write a book about it. an a.i. has a terrible way of advancing to more and more complex and understanding. what was last year is very old today.
@andrewhall2411
3 жыл бұрын
I see the bigger (scarier) issue being this... When we just produce jets as AI kamakazi vehicles designed to direct impact. Remove the design constraints for longevity, pilot life support, holding munitions (outside of maybe some missiles) when we don't care about the loss of a pilot (because there isn't one) and we don't care about loss of equipment (because it is designed to be disposable) then things get scary...
@dbrady1966
4 жыл бұрын
This reminds me of when the Air Force decided to build fighter planes without a Canon because missiles made them obsolete
@halcionkoenig243
4 жыл бұрын
Which was a spectacular success, which is why all planes after never needed guns ever again... until the F-35, which replaced both the A-10, and F-22! /s
@level5565
4 жыл бұрын
@@halcionkoenig243 wrong!!
@deniswitschi1859
4 жыл бұрын
@@halcionkoenig243 are you drunk?
@theboothy91
4 жыл бұрын
@@halcionkoenig243 but they all have guns..
@ClingyCrab
4 жыл бұрын
@Halcion Koenig Do you are have stupid
@lucasknighten4626
4 жыл бұрын
Great breakdown and analysis on the DARPA contest. Really appreciate your feedback.
@BuggSmasher
4 жыл бұрын
And we expected Skynet to deliver us pizzas. What fools we were!
@TheWatson83
4 жыл бұрын
Was waiting for Sarah Connor to bust into the guys room from Heron systems and start shooting while he was talking haha
@steak5599
4 жыл бұрын
If Skynet is real, who's side would you be fighting for? AI or Human?
@BuggSmasher
4 жыл бұрын
@@steak5599 I don't think a.i. will be in recruiting mode ! It'll be in "Uzi" or "40 watt range" mode ! You see, it was never really about John Connor, but more about an everyday retired fighter pilot "C.W. Lemoine" to lead the resistance. He's educating us about the dangers of ai right now, and right under the very nose of the enemy ! Man He's good !
@bryanbishop2377
4 жыл бұрын
Not to mention that a successful head on hit means probably flying through enemy aircraft parts...😉
@halcionkoenig243
4 жыл бұрын
Again, something the AI cannot account for, as it isn't capable of predicting the future... unlike humans. :)
@RogerJL
4 жыл бұрын
@@halcionkoenig243 Just give it negative feedback during training for doing that and it will avoid setups that leads to it.
@kaesees
4 жыл бұрын
Interesting commentary on high-aspect shots in RL BFM training. The RL French fighter pilot "Ate" was extremely aggressive and took a lot of high-aspect shots when BFMing against Growling Sidewinder in DCS. I wonder whether that was a French/US training difference, or Ate trying to exploit the characteristics of the delta-wing jet he was flying where he has a great first turn and a tougher time thereafter.
@FiveStar68
4 жыл бұрын
The age of fighter pilots will never end Mover!!! Like you said there always has to be two-way communication. ALWAYS!
@dampsok
4 жыл бұрын
Stripping the feeling of the aircraft must feel like you've lost actual bodily senses and abilities... It must be like forcing a blind man to paint, or a paraplegic to swim. I think Banger did well, even when he lost SA...
@phalcon23
4 жыл бұрын
I think a better analogy would be trying to walk while your leg is asleep
@calmterror
4 жыл бұрын
A better analogy is you know how to drive a car with feel but go into a car sim you lose the feel and becomes harder. Sims you lose so much feel.
@kyle857
4 жыл бұрын
You obviously have not flown a VR simulator.
@dampsok
4 жыл бұрын
I have. You cannot feel when the afterburners kick in... You cannot feel the slip of the aircraft in the air... DCS does what it can to replicate the cues that your body would feel by replicating it as shaking or as audio cues... but you cannot "feel" anything.
@isodoubIet
4 жыл бұрын
@@kyle857 I mean dude this is true even for a Cessna (try coordinating your turns in the air, now try it in the sim). You have to rely on the instruments a lot more in the sim.
@rshaart4810
4 жыл бұрын
So Heron seems to fly like anyone in a DCS dueling server, versus Banger who seems to be trying to fly the Sim like an actual pilot
@PhillipBirmingham
4 жыл бұрын
I think there's some validity in that. I expect an autonomous aircraft will be smaller and cheaper than a piloted fighter, and maybe stuff that real pilots wouldn't do (because they're suicidal) would become a good option for a robot plane.
@ChefofWar33
4 жыл бұрын
@@PhillipBirmingham Yep. You can make the AI plane half the size with the exact same payload of weapons, along with a better aero efficiency due to not having to accomodate a pilot and all of his controls and life support. Also, you can design a plane that pulls 30g's for 30 seconds without any issue. Doing this with a human at the helm would kill him very VERY quickly. Actually, they only thing preventing a F-22 raptor from doing 15g's for an unlimited amount of time is the pilot limiter. Nowadays, the only limit to a fighter jets performance is human physiology, not mechanical or aerodynamic.
@TornadoADV
4 жыл бұрын
@@ChefofWar33 Incorrect, the human body is about as resilient to G's as machines are. Taking the human out of a plane only saves space, the plane doesn't suddenly get to ignore physics.
@TornadoADV
4 жыл бұрын
@G S Fluid dynamics and center of gravity are the limiters here and they apply to organic and inorganic material equally. There are flight suits used in the Typhoon and Rafale that allow human pilots to sustain 6G+ much easier and longer, but the Typhoon and Rafale aren't suddenly able to pull heavier manuevers.
@hphp31416
4 жыл бұрын
@@ChefofWar33 missiles with solid fuel thrust vectoring rocket motor and 3 kg of payload can sustain 30G for 5 seconds at most, how to reach it with aircraft powered by jet engine with much worser thrust to weight while also carrying useful payload in tons?
@theegg-viator4707
4 жыл бұрын
Completely a missed opportunity for a DCS player to actually fight the AI and beat the shit outta it. Banger seemed clueless about how to fight the AI. 😸😸😸
@VisibilityFoggy
4 жыл бұрын
Someone suit up Growling Sidewinder.
@shepherdlavellen3301
4 жыл бұрын
DCS AI only knows how to go full vertical
@Anaximander29A
4 жыл бұрын
I guess the so called ai from DCS is nothing but a huge cascade of if-then-else statements with maybe a little help of simple neural networks. This "Heron" thing is very different. An AI like that can theoretically train against itself and fight perhaps thousands of dogfights per second to get better and better every increment. This is seriously some next level shit.
@StoneCoolds
4 жыл бұрын
@@Anaximander29A DCS AI knows 2 things go vertical, didnt work? Go 1 circle untill the human kills you xD, they are THE defenition of a Bot player hahahaha
@daszieher
4 жыл бұрын
@@Anaximander29A it will become interesting, when they include trigger management and ammo conservation.
@skipker
Жыл бұрын
I'm not sure why anybody commented negative. You are a teacher that always explains the events here in a way we non fighter pilots understand. Awesome job
@Antares2
4 жыл бұрын
Imagine if you made a tiny AI-controlled plane that instead of a gun had an explosive charge! And then it tried suicide ramming itself into (or at least close to) enemy planes and detonating? And because it's so small and AI's don't pass out, you could make it super maneuverable (like 30g or something) It could maybe use infrared or radar sensing to find its target! I know! We should call them "Air Intercept Missiles" ... or AIM for short. Almost feels familiar...
@nikolatasev4948
4 жыл бұрын
To be fair, the "AI" in most missiles is so basic that it does not deserve to be called intelligence at all. You can see it in DCS - missiles are leading the aircraft in all directions and thus ramming into the ground when the enemy dives for example. Lacking image recognition it can't tell apart flares/chaff and plane. A missile with a smart phone's worth of AI would be much deadlier than current ones. I'm not sure why this is not being developer further. I mean, it might be classified, but I don't think it is.
@Antares2
4 жыл бұрын
@@nikolatasev4948 Well, I am pretty sure that the newest types of anti-air missiles are significantly more advanced than in DCS. DCS is a game. A good game, but still a game. We know that AIM-9X has imaging IR and should be extremely difficult to spoof with a flare as it isn't simply looking for the brightest heat source, but rather recognizing the shape of the plane as a thermal image. This is also why modern missiles are far less likely to lock onto the sun and such as they did in the Vietnam war. But what kind of tech that goes into the newest models of AMRAAM is most likely top secret.
@alivewithpassion
4 жыл бұрын
@Antares they have that technology, for example look at cruise missiles or smart bombs. The guidance systems are on point and developing; the military has always and will always be on the cutting edge of technology.
@nikolatasev4948
4 жыл бұрын
@@alivewithpassion Cruise missiles have inertial and GPS guidance. "Smart" bombs are contracted to "dumb" bombs because they can correct their fall towards a target marked by GPS or laser marker. None of these is a dog-fighting AI like the one showed here.
@hippoace
4 жыл бұрын
@@Antares2 www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14344/heres-the-definitive-account-of-the-syrian-su-22-shoot-down-from-the-pilots-themselves Things will fail when least expected. The AIM-9X went stupid even from a 6 o clock launch.
@miatacollector
4 жыл бұрын
Plus a pilot with a swarm of heron driven uavs would definitely be a killer combination.
@luarbiasawaras8700
4 жыл бұрын
"Kill the mother ship first" will become number one strategy
@nespolo1597
4 жыл бұрын
Santai Sehat I don’t think heron needs a mother ship to survive if anything the mother ship will need heron to survive
@luarbiasawaras8700
4 жыл бұрын
@@nespolo1597 so the pilot more like a liability not an asset
@michajastrzebski4383
4 жыл бұрын
@@luarbiasawaras8700 might be hard if said mothership stays BVR in a stealthy aircraft
@ProdigyXI276
4 жыл бұрын
@@michajastrzebski4383 stealth would mean immune - other stealth aircraft can pose a threat to a "mothership"
@Deuce_Dufresne
4 жыл бұрын
I’d always shoot the other guy in the face, so to speak, when we did “cage matches” in the simulator. Definitely not applicable to the real world though like you talked about. I can vouch that Banger is an excellent fighter pilot 🇺🇸😎🥃
@mark-kf3md
4 жыл бұрын
Very interesting and detailed review. Nice to have a knowledgeable person point out the real life implications of the IA. Seems there are way too many advantages given to the AI that it would never have in the real world. I like the way you elucidate the advantages given and also included the video of the Heron representative explaining how they gave the AI these advantages and admitting that they are not present in a real life fight of this nature.
@tylermassey5431
4 жыл бұрын
18:15 The AI had perfect state information? That negates the entire presentation.
@carloscastanheiro2933
4 жыл бұрын
Your feedback analysis was amazing. Thank you Mover.
@Mich_Angel
4 жыл бұрын
Some really good points you make. IMO. This was like having two paintball team fight in a arena and one team know exactly where their opponent are at all time and the other team only if seen visual. Or like a election where one is already set with all information to win and the other not and have to get it as he proceed, it set a unwinnable situation against the one with all info. Kind off a pointless test IMO sure it show that Ai have evolved and can perform if all parameter is known, let it learn the parameter as it come in to a hostile situation and see how that go. But then we already seen unbeatable Ai in DCS if you push it to max and human pilot need to stick to the rule-book of engagement, so what's new about it, it really don't show anything. Except that combat flight simulator games are very fun.ha ha Great evaluation of the video Mover, thank you. CHEERS!
@ReflectedSimulations
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Some Interesting and valid points there.
@Altoar
4 жыл бұрын
Definitely agree with the points brought uo here. In addition though, the AI is missing the ability to assess in sooo many other factors that can spring up unexpectedly. Damage to the AI's aircraft affecting performance, for example. Don't even start on the more abstract decision making that pilots may have to make on things like "I'm not gonna use this armament right now even if it might be easier, because I'm probably going to need it later on in this sortie/mission/flight/whatever the correct term is.
@petitio_principii
2 жыл бұрын
It's only a matter of time until unbeatable AIs are developed, even without jets made with no regard to human pilots in terms of g forces and whatnot. Nearly all the imagined human superiority is not beyond the reach of AI, people used to imagine similar rationales when imagining AIs would never beat humans at chess. It's not really fundamentally different from chess, though, or non-ply games where AIs quickly learn to play in ways that humans never even imagined possible. The most significant constraints are in the sensory equipment, which isn't something that's inherently superior in humans/animals, it's a harder task than AI with a "granted" awareness (even if limited by that of conceivable current sensor equipment), definitely, but also just a matter of time.
@Aiur89
4 жыл бұрын
Love the content your making man. I may not know much about this stuff but your arguments are always within reason and a lot of fun to watch.
@stal2k
4 жыл бұрын
So in summary it's a great aimbot for faceshots :)
@basher1744
4 жыл бұрын
100% agree. As a DCS player, there are things i do in the sim that I would NEVER attempt in real life. High Aspect Gun shots is one of them. Safety is paramount. Thanks for explaining the tactics and I feel like you are the Paul Harvey of fighter pilots (yes, I am that old) by showing us the "rest of the story".
@ThomisticAmerican13FOX
4 жыл бұрын
@Basher, so true and it happens all the time, you say to yourself "yeah I would not have done that IRL, no way..." Sometimes I will fly and purposely try to avoid those unrealistic complete disregard for self and aircraft moves to make it a bit harder. "Sure I could pull hard here, expend all E and to try and get a snap kill gun shot, but in reality its too risky, its low probability kill and spends all the money in the bank, so I will try to extend the fight and manuever for a better shot."
@confuse3671
4 жыл бұрын
The AI had perfect information about the adversary - meaning the AI was feed exact position, course and speed. Its unclear if the shots even took into account bullet ballistics. The human pilot had to make estimates about what the other plane was doing based on simulation/animation. Bottom line, they created a game that is visually similar to real life but distinctly different. BTW, yes, if you feed a computer all the information, it can make high aspect angle shots. In real life, even an M-1 Abrams is only 90% effective first shot with laser range finders. In the AI vehicle control world, the trick is sensors. You need to understand what is going on outside the window.
@DavidWilliams-nq6fj
4 жыл бұрын
Really insightful comments. You have to be impressed, but acknowledge it for what it was. Nice job Mover.
@tsangarisjohn
4 жыл бұрын
Doug Masters would of kicked their butt... He had loads of real sim time!
@ericlawrence9729
4 жыл бұрын
Great context Mover I think you are spot on, would have loved to see how the AI would handle an aggressive maneuver like Colonel Boyd’s flat platting or squatting the jet to force an in close overshoot. Love the channel
@GriffMJ
4 жыл бұрын
.... put "GrowlingSidewinder" in the seat up against the AI and I bet that the AI loses by 4 to 1. 100% Sim Fighter pilot would destroy the AI.
@LtDogoop
4 жыл бұрын
Agreed
@toddie4usa1
4 жыл бұрын
Nope the AI will not lose because the AI is not limited
@nonamesplease6288
4 жыл бұрын
Growling Sidewinder did a few recent videos where he went up against a real Rafael pilot. The real pilot lost the first round or 2, but once he got the hang of DCS he owned GS. Check it out. So how much time did this pilot spend on the simulator?
@GriffMJ
4 жыл бұрын
@@nonamesplease6288 ..... yes up against "Ate" the French/Canadian Rafael Pilot (who was flying the Mirage). "Tim Davis" the ex-Tornado pilot flying the F5 sim for the first in DCS up against the ace AI was also great to watch (second flight). So give the real fighter pilot the hours etc.
@brian2e
4 жыл бұрын
No because "growlingsidewinder" wouldn't be able to show only the engagements he won
@Voke
4 жыл бұрын
Mover, Good SH*! Keep up the good work and putting out good content! Definitely enjoyed the reactions.
@jabbitt05
4 жыл бұрын
"Butt feel" Race drivers talk about the same thing with the lack of G in the sim.
@cirrusaddict2552
4 жыл бұрын
Mover - great video, loved your critique of the 5 engagements. You're spot on regarding flight simulation. I challenge anyone to perform a PPL checkride in a Cessna after practicing on a flight sim, let alone performing BFM in a tactical jet. Landings, slow flight, stalls, steep turns...all require the feel you are talking about. Sims are wonderful at teaching you instrument scan, not actual flying.
@DaveFMillard
4 жыл бұрын
Many years ago my step son bought me an hour in a 172.. he told the instructor pilot that I had never flown an airplane... only simulators. Long story short.. after the pre-flight chks he let me start it up, taxi out, take off fly around for 40 minutes and land. He never touched anything other than the mic. Next year he bought me another hour... I beg to differ with your statement.
@cirrusaddict2552
4 жыл бұрын
I'm glad to hear you enjoyed the discovery flight. I was referring to a checkride and an actual license
@Wes-xk6hl
4 жыл бұрын
I suppose I could see the day where an AI in real life could have full situational awareness by syncing with third party radars and whatever else fancy stuff but we're pretty far away from stuff like that. So that one thing alone makes this a ridiculously loaded test. What I see out of all this AI stuff is what u said. It's how we can make our guys better than they otherwise could be. For instance, the whole shooting accuracy thing is actually fairly easy and well within our reach with current technology. The day where our pilots are that accurate with guns only could easily be right around the corner. But they're still pulling the trigger and everything is the same.
@secretsquirrel8010
4 жыл бұрын
Radars are old school IMHO. Link an AI to satellites and you’re set. This is the future.
@MrMattumbo
4 жыл бұрын
I mean you can stick cameras all over a drone, the problem is having computer vision algorithms that can process that data and not only identify the target at close quarters but glean useful data from that like energy state, relative position and nose angle, etc.. then process that to extrapolate the enemy's future possible positions and devise its own counter moves with the aim of getting accurate gunshots. That huge amount of raw sensor data processing on top of decision making calculations for itself and the enemy is going to require some serious computing hardware and cutting edge machine learning algorithms if it's going to work in a real aircraft in real time. I think the human brain still wins for now, but the AI is on track to match it within our lifetime. Ultimately it will have to if frontline combat drones are going to be a thing, its too easy to jam drones that rely on external control/sensors. Boeing's loyal wingman drone gets around this by being close to the controlling aircraft and being more basic in its functions, pretty much just being a flying missile rack/decoy for the human plane. It's a long way off from winning dogfights or even just operating by itself.
@Wes-xk6hl
4 жыл бұрын
@@secretsquirrel8010 well u would have whoever is operating the radars identify which aircraft are hostile. And "radar" is just a generic term. Doesnt matter what the technology is (tho satellites are very likely not the answer). My point was simply that, with AI, it doesnt need to be a self contained system. It can be using data from all kinds of sources. But any kind of wireless link is a security threat and, like mover said, there has to be 2 way communication. U cant just give it the keys and say off u go do whatever and we wont know whether it's going well or not. No matter what, these things happen in phases. Everyone who said autonomous cars were just going to pop up and be the next thing are just as stupid as whoever is saying that will happen here. It will go through many phases of helping the current pilots before we see anything like that.
@nelno
4 жыл бұрын
@@MrMattumbo this is the other side of the coin that people rarely recognize. In most simulations, the sensory data you have is perfect, and an AI can exploit that to make perfect shots. To more closely model reality, the AI needs to be fed its sensory data through simulated sensors that have all of the same quirks and shortcomings of real sensors. The compute is available, though. A smart phone SoC several generations old has enough compute to visually identify and track hundreds to thousands of moving features while rendering entire VR scenes. But in a real world scenario there are many more variables, ranging from difficult to impossible to sense/predict, that need to be accounted for. The fact that this simulation only required the opponent to be in a cone to score a hit really makes it clear that this was a DARPA marketing event.
@nocare
4 жыл бұрын
Data from any source other than extremely close friendly aircraft would be too delayed to be useful in a dogfight. This sort of sensor fusion would be more useful in longer range missile engagements. Now getting the level of accuracy required from vision alone in bright daylight is probably not a hard problem to solve. In fact I bet today we have good enough machine vision systems to get the level of accuracy as depicted in the sim. The problem is what happens when you are low light, or there are clouds, flares are going off, some of the cameras may have been damaged in the last pass. It doesn't even take that much computing power because you just use low FOV high res cameras on a gimbal and track the target and use a lower res wide field of view cameras for augmentation. Most AI problems in modern days is solving edge cases. It's why autonomous driving still isn't full fledged. It can handle roughly 94-98% of driving scenarios as of last year. However since most humans can handle 99% of most scenarios its not better than use yet and thus has not replaced us yet.
@FlyShamu
4 жыл бұрын
Outstanding vid & discussion! Thanks Mover. Always a learning experience.
@dutchflats
4 жыл бұрын
Re: face-shot effectiveness, checkout Cunningham/Driscoll vs. Toon initial merge (F-4 v Mig-17) on 10 May,1972 over North Vietnam and the consequence it had on their fight.
@dutchflats
4 жыл бұрын
@, I've heard that as well, but not sure which story is the truth? I guess the point is, the Mig's face shot forced the F-4 onto the defensive twice before Cunningham was able to out think the guy whoever he was, kinda fire for effect.
@ti1ion
4 жыл бұрын
I don't know if you are exactly correct, but I love this story. It is one of my favorites. Together with a bunch of other first person narratives they go to show that life, and success/victory is often only possible with a healthy dose of luck (or fortune). This dogfight involving Cunnigham and Driscoll is one example of skill mixed with dumb luck. Listen again to Randy Cunningham tell this story in the "Dogfights" series and you will hear him chuckle at his stupidity. When they saw the MiG-17, Cunningham told Driscoll (and I am paraphrasing here) "I am going to scare the crap out of his guy. I am going to go right by his canopy." Cunnigham intentionally put his Phantom on a direct course for the MiG's nose in a game of chicken. It was only after tracers started flashing by the cockpit that Cunningham (with a chuckle) thought "oh, yeah, he has guns!" And in the "Dogfights" interview he also says he made a similar mistake again as they merged and went vertical. Discovery Channel has pulled the videos off KZitem, though, so the interview has to be watched somewhere else. So, the MiG's gun was not as important in the story as Cunningham's adrenaline fueled cockiness in the heat of battle.
@ti1ion
4 жыл бұрын
@ I wish. Watching them all on demand would be awesome. There is a much shorter version of the encounter on KZitem, from Cunningham here -- kzitem.info/news/bejne/0JuAsWGFnJRhgXY -- but it is not as good as his later interview for the "Dogfights" series.
@Carpythesharky
2 жыл бұрын
What you're talking about around the 17:00 minute mark is really insightful. It's like how F1 drivers aren't the fastest esports (Codemasters F1 20XX video game) drivers. Practice makes perfect, and F1 drivers aren't practicing to be the best at the sim. Keep it up Mover--love the videos. Been thinking about reserves or some way to help out at 28. No one has told me no so far!
@Baleur
4 жыл бұрын
7:40 wtf why didnt he shoot? Did he not see the jet? Im starting to think maybe this was an issue of having low resolution vr goggles? Sometimes he's flying almost as if he's blind and cant see the enemy AI..
@TheBarrettone
4 жыл бұрын
Wow, a genuinely balanced and informed video on the internet, good work. Zero sarcasm there btw, it's really nice to see.
@DD-sw1dd
4 жыл бұрын
Real fighter pilots need a DCS pilot to beat this AI? DCS/BMS Pilots: 🤩 “Push It To The Limit...” 🎶
@TexasGreed
4 жыл бұрын
I think some of them could beat it. There are some absolutely disgustingly good DCS pilots out there. Some of them can easily trade one for one in a head on at the least. I think the main advantage is DCS pilots are probably better at judging speed and distance in a simulator where as real pilots can't do that well without the physical cues of a real fighter.
@DD-sw1dd
4 жыл бұрын
Salamander Fry They definitely could. It’s a learned skill, and every real pilot I’ve seen in DCS are BMS initially struggles due to the lack of feel they are accustomed to. Meaning the skill transfer is nowhere near 1:1.
@heronsystemsinc.6849
4 жыл бұрын
@@TexasGreed Our hypothesis is that sim pilots will do better. We can't wait to see how Falco stacks up. Have you been training 24/7? Falco has. Good luck.
@anthonykaiser974
3 жыл бұрын
Regarding your closing comment about having a human decision-maker in the loop, when I was a LT at Field Artillery school in 1995, our old Battery Computer System (BCS) had a function called "Automatic to Pieces" coded ATP, that would allow calculated firing data to be sent to the guns without operator interaction. Our gunnery instructors (mine was a USMC Capt) referred to it as "Automatic to Prison."
@leekwan06
4 жыл бұрын
Heron AI’s style vaguely reminds me of Ate’s aggressiveness against growling sidewinder.
@lukas-ds3cm
4 жыл бұрын
Yeah this pilot seems (relatively) clueless compared to Ate and Growling
@TacticalEd
4 жыл бұрын
Give a Frenchman his delta wing pointy boi and he will attack relentlessly! Haha.
@VisibilityFoggy
4 жыл бұрын
So funny you said that. I was thinking the exact same thing. Ate went extremely aggressive, flying directly at the threat doing high aspect stuff out the gate. I wonder how he would've done against the AI, and if this gives us non-pilots a glimpse into any differences between how American and French pilots go into an engagement. (They obviously train together as NATO allies, but it'd be interesting to be a fly on the wall.)
@lamatoutroux5786
4 жыл бұрын
Ate did a review of heron vs banger on his channel, and he clearly doesn t fly like banger, like he criticizes every single move
@Nghilifa
4 жыл бұрын
@@lamatoutroux5786 It's easy to "talk the talk", as a frenchman we all know he'd have folded and surrendered outright if it were in the real world. 🤣
@paranagua1960
4 жыл бұрын
Very well covered Mover. Thank you for sharing your analysis.
@jimco5852
4 жыл бұрын
Oh. I see DARPA is back to play again.
@cato2k182
4 жыл бұрын
Implying that they ever left
@Mike-ry4mg
4 жыл бұрын
Thank you. You did not trigger me. I felt close to the same way as you.
@aramos3639
4 жыл бұрын
Great, they put a human pilot in a scenario he's not trained for or used to, in an aircraft that doesn't give the physical and audio cues of the real thing, against an AI that has the perfect ability to see everything, with no regard to the practical considerations that only come into play in combat in real physical aircraft It's almost like it's not a scientifically sound test
@cynicle
2 жыл бұрын
The outcomes they're testing for and the outcomes you're after are very different. This isn't for a media hype headline, this is development testing. The scenario successfully examined exactly the assets DARPA outlined in their papers.
@operator8014
4 жыл бұрын
So, this was literally a very aggressive video game AI stuffed into a flight simulator. Such wow.
@nopus1
4 жыл бұрын
In my naivity I presumed, that AI was real combat oriented (or, at least, real AI) and get its input from cameras and sensors. Just a game to aquire DOD money...
@hakadah
4 жыл бұрын
Spot on Review Mover. I couldn't agree more with your assessment.
@SogenOkami
4 жыл бұрын
The issue I have with AI, and I've seen this a lot with the deployment of bots in video games in the past few years, is that once you go at it with the mindset of playing the bot and not the game, the bots tend to fall apart really quickly. OMG 28:47 would trigger all the DCS Facebook nerds way too hard. lmao
@LetsKeepThePeace
4 жыл бұрын
100% agree.
@billcarlin7411
4 жыл бұрын
Mover, I'm a big fan and a man in my sixties. One thing I have had the joy to witness is the technology exponential curve. We must be careful not to believe something won't happen in a quicker amount of time than it has taken in the past. My guess is that the only thing holding these developers back is the speed in which they can process information. I had one of the first MS flight simulators when it came out back in the early eighties. Back then all you needed was a joy stick and a vivid imagination. You only stopped playing when you had to answer the phone in the other room. Now you can fly over your own house in a variety of aircraft. These AI guys seem to thrive on the "make them tell you no" mantra. Great video by the way.
@thekarmanline3748
4 жыл бұрын
Next week: “DARPA reveals their new Arsenal bird concept”
@unlovedone5639
3 жыл бұрын
Darpa hurting the american people
@charlesormond964
4 жыл бұрын
I agree with your assessments of this BFM situation, Mover 👍✈
@FirstDagger
4 жыл бұрын
21:40 ; Well F-35 has a 360° field of sensors with EODAS.
@HH60GDriver
4 жыл бұрын
I'm sure 60% of the time, it'll work every time... Just kidding, it's Lockheed, make that 20% of the time.
@すどにむ
4 жыл бұрын
Kind of but it’s multiple camera stitch so not 100% consistent or accurate
@MarianneD1952
4 жыл бұрын
Mover....made a donation to our Dear Lester!! Tried to make it a number that fits the helicopter. Hope he gets it!! Thanks for the link!! ♡♡♡
@rannors723
4 жыл бұрын
Awesome video! Thanks for the clear analysis!
@sox5131
4 жыл бұрын
Total situational awareness = the A.I. cheats.
@Ananamitron
4 жыл бұрын
Would not an A.I. in real life be able to do the same thing? Multiple cameras, melding with data from other intelligence sources such as an AWACs A.I. wouldn't have to limit their vision to two eyes facing forward. I don't think the "era of the fighter pilot" will end soon, but it will end eventually. Laser weapons will become more prevalent, and "gunpip" skills won't really be useful anymore. Instead, a computer will point the laser, fire it, and neutralize the enemy aircraft in seconds.
@regiondeltas
4 жыл бұрын
@@Ananamitron "Would not an A.I. in real life be able to do the same thing" - Nobody is saying an AI couldn't have access to lots of data, but it is fundamentally limited in real life - both in current technology terms, and in a pure fog of war sense. The AI in this test is given precise, trustable data 100% of the time in real time of the entire battlefield. There is no sensor or suite of sensors that can realistically achieve that. Even with your AWACS AI, it needs to be on station and is still limited by its sensors. Bearing in mind, in the world of said AI fighters the enemy is going to be doing all it can to deploy electronic counter measures - jamming, spoofing etc.
@killchicken123
4 жыл бұрын
What do you propose to even the odd? Put a box over AI and display exact 3D coordinate, velocity, acceleration, orientation and what not, every data the machine uses basically. It doesn't do much to human other than cluttering the interface because we can't incorporate that data into decision making even if we have those. They don't have budget for more complex and realistic scenario btw.
@regiondeltas
4 жыл бұрын
@@killchicken123 I mean, the obvious would be to only let the AI "see" what it would in real life. I.e., it can read data from the instruments and it can work visually. Imagine fighting an AI in a first person shooter that knew what you were doing, and where you were, every second. Of course it would win - it doesn't mean an AI powered robot would though
@Jason608
4 жыл бұрын
@@regiondeltas Take everything you said and apply it to the problem of a missile intercepting an aircraft. An AIM-120C may have imperfect information, and can be decoyed by flares and chaff. Yet somehow it manages to hit its target often enough while sailing through the air at mach 3. The AMRAAM has to know the target's speed, direction, aspect, and other parameters in order to calculate an intercept, all using a weak (relatively speaking) radar in its own nose for the terminal guidance phase. I can imagine an AI driven aircraft could do the same thing in a purpose-built craft with radar pointing in all directions. Just not in a stock F-16. And of course, it could be jammed and fooled with chaff, etc. just like a missile. But it wouldn't be useless, either, just like chaff and ECM isn't 100% effective against missiles all the time.
@WinchesterDelta1
4 жыл бұрын
Great video man. Well explained.
@WildBillKelso32
4 жыл бұрын
He almost seemed to be flying like he was told to lose. That’s my opinion and is not based on any facts. That last kill though. Just drawing lazy circles...🤔
@toddie4usa1
4 жыл бұрын
He was not told to lose
@Eddievargas1
4 жыл бұрын
The ai had all knowledge of the battle field not going of sensors
@WildBillKelso32
4 жыл бұрын
Eddie vargas so he was set up to lose so they could justify spending billions on this AI...
@dampsok
4 жыл бұрын
In DCS world, when I lose SA, sometimes my default state is to keep what I have and hope I can pick up the target again by making another circle. It is bad practice, but I can definitely see how a person could make that "Hold what you got" mentality
@WildBillKelso32
4 жыл бұрын
toddie4usa1 I said he seemed to be flying like that and that I had no proof. Were your present at this test?
@austinmunson5034
4 жыл бұрын
Was watching this last night thinking, now this is gonna be all over Mr. Lemoine's refrigerator door.
@barefootalien
4 жыл бұрын
Despite all the asymmetry in the simulator, I think the AI did an impressive job. Does it have more development to go? Sure, absolutely. On the other hand, the AI was also facing one key unrealistic disadvantage that nobody mentioned: the equipment it was flying. The AI was flying an F-16, making it a like vs. like fight. That isn't the case that's going to happen in the real world at all. When AI pilots are truly a thing, they'll be flying aircraft that do not have the same limitations as a human-piloted craft. There will be no need for a big raised canopy with good visible-light visibility from an interior perspective. There will be no arbitrary limit on maximum g-forces; just what the airframe itself can handle (which is already typically higher than a human pilot can sustain for long). It won't have the disadvantage of having to know how to set its neck, how to prepare for high-G maneuvers, how to keep the opponent in a limited arc of visual range. It'll be able to turn tighter. It'll be more aerodynamic (so better conservation of energy). It will almost certainly have 360°x360° sensor capabilities (though perhaps some higher-fidelity sensors in critical coverage arcs) that the pilot simply cannot have. Speaking as an aerospace engineer, it would be difficult for a lay-person to even fathom how different a purpose-built AI-piloted fighter would be from what we're using now. There would be no need for an asymmetrical performance envelope (positive-G maneuverability >> negative-G maneuverability). In fact, there'd be no need for the fighter to even have a dedicated dorsal or ventral side at all, aside from which side the landing gear sticks out of. Imagine fighting something that's smaller and sleeker than you, with better situational awareness than you, that can turn at completely arbitrary and vastly superior rates than you, in either direction at any time. Imagine trying to circle into a control position, and the enemy jet just suddenly completely reverses its turn. It doesn't need to roll over to do it; it just does it. It can do it at any speed, too, because it could use vectored thrust to a degree that would make you pass out in seconds. So yeah... the human pilot was at a significant disadvantage in this simulator, totally agreed, and the AI needing to conserve ammo and having simulated (or real) sensor data would totally change the game. On the other hand, the AI was also at a disadvantage compared to future reality because it had to fly the same human-limited equipment, and that would totally change the game, too. To get a real idea of the difference, next time they should run the simulation with simulated sensor inputs, but with the human flying an F-4 and the AI flying something like an F-22 or SU-30. Of course, that wouldn't be a "fair" test... but then again neither was this. Anyway, totally agree with you, Mover, that we're still decades away from AI fighters. More interesting to me is the possibility of a scenario like you described at the end... a mini-squadron of a human-piloted, full-scale fighter, with a couple of smaller AI drone 'wingmen' for tactical advantage could be very interesting and closer to being reality.
@julianrossi8460
4 жыл бұрын
Such a great in depth analysis, thanks for doing your research and presenting such a informed video
@FuegoJaguar
4 жыл бұрын
For me the fact that the AI has perfect knowledge of everything totally invalidates this test. It’s completely unrealistic and also SUPER important to the fight. Never mind the cone = damage. This is so skewed to the AI that this isn’t a test of AI vs human. It’s a test of this contractors ability to deliver on something with unrealistic constraints.
@Cecil97
4 жыл бұрын
its sort of like making an aimbot for a tank but in a game
@User-gs1dk
4 жыл бұрын
"For me the fact that the AI has perfect knowledge of everything totally invalidates this test." This. It's not just super important it's literally EVERYTHING. This test was essentially nothing more than a video game demo where the developers have cranked up the difficulty level to extreme. I'm not trying to be rude but I'm not even sure why this is considered impressive. There has been video game AI that has been perfectly capable of beating real world pilots, especially when they're not that experience on said sims, for a pretty long time. These AI tests only become interesting when the AI has to actually gather it's data in the real world using real world sensors.
@tysen_ellison
4 жыл бұрын
Very nice breakdown! Thanks Mover!
@Motoguy94
4 жыл бұрын
Wearing a mask for a video conference? Really guy? Game over man game over!
@roadhammer2380
4 жыл бұрын
He probably wears it in his car alone aswell soooooo!!! Lmfao
@angelhelp777
4 жыл бұрын
My parents were in their 40's when I was born and I grew up with a lot of love and old school discipline. My dad was a WWII vet. I believe these things influenced me to seek a career with a disciplined lifestyle. By 1968 I had my heart set on being a fighter pilot. In 1975, in my senior year of high school, an Air Force recruiter came to my school. By then I knew I wanted to fly an F-111 and asked about signing up. He saw I wore glasses and asked what my uncorrected vision was. When I said 20/800, his response was, "You want to fly a jet? Son, you couldn't even find the ground." Back then there was no laser surgery, so that was a "no" I could not find my way around. It kept me out of all other branches of the military also. I then checked into law enforcement, but again, without my glasses, my eyesight was too bad. I did however make it my goal in life to always thank veterans for their service, their sacrifice, and most of all, OUR FREEDOM. Life took me down another path and for the next 43 years and I have been blessed with a wonderful Godly wife and son. I retired a few years back to care for my wife who has had several long term illnesses for 30 years. I am currently working to get back in shape from too many years behind a computer screen. I never had the opportunity to fly in any type of military jet aircraft, but the only thing I have ever had on my bucket list was to get a ride in a jet fighter, preferably a F-111/Ardvark or Raven. I have no special connection to anyone in the military but was wondering if you could give me an idea of any way to get a ride in a jet fighter and also what physical qualifications would be required. I know fighters are not play-toys for fun, but you never know unless you ask. Where would I start if I wanted to get a ride, or is that kind of thing ever done as far as you know? Thank you for your service, your sacrifice, and most of all, OUR FREEDOM. I love ALL of your videos. God bless.
@R281
4 жыл бұрын
You can fly in older fighter jets. I flew in a P-51 mustang, but there was a jet available for more money. Just Google fly jets and your state. If you have the money, you can fly really high in a Mig-29 in Russia. They even let you take the stick.
@angelhelp777
4 жыл бұрын
@@ShadeAKAhayate I will continue to thank everyone I see in uniform who willingly serves our country. If you have a problem with that, then move to another country you like better. Even with its flaws I already live in the best country on earth.
@maxvonnitten4213
4 жыл бұрын
I hate this new trend of "this era is over" and bla bla bla. I heard and read a lot of people saying that. They said MBTs are obsolete because of new anti-tank systems, they said Aircraft Carriers are obsolete because of hypersonic missiles, now they're saying that pilots are not "enough" anymore because of drones. For the sake of God, stop that. All of that is just crap, because if there is one thing that we're good at is adapting, upgrading and evolving. Not only it was absolutely unrealistic due to the fact that there was no G-load limit (- 3/+ 9), but also that there were no weapons to actually simulate a fight. Not including gun dispersion, countermeasures, etc. Human pilots will always have a place in combat, the "tin man" can stay at his place. Oh and by the way, I read of people talking about "build a super-G limit jet" (like 25 or 30 G's) and similar stuff. There is one specific reason why we limit planes to a certain amount of G's and that is a structural and mechanical thing. No Jet can pull more than 13 G's without pulverizing itself.
@matthewellisor5835
4 жыл бұрын
I haven't seen Glock in years! Good dude. Thanks for the video. I'll have to give him a call. Greetings from SC!
@davelister9755
4 жыл бұрын
I have probably close to a thousand or more hours with AI in some competitive video games, and I feel like I can confidently say that AI doesn't think... it just does. NOW, there is a little bit of an exception with Neural Networking. In which case the AI can 'see' the ingame world eal world and with trial and error, solve the complexity of accomplishing a particular goal. However, what I've always found about 'good AI' is that it is just incredibly clutch in all regards to an inhuman level. As mentioned before, it doesn't really think, it just does. So when it comes to beating AI, and I am a candidate for beating this kind of BS AI in my particular craft, you literally just have to set traps. Throw a little bait out there, and if it takes it you get yourself position or something. I mean, translate that in any particular way that you will with air combat sims or what not have you. But it definitely does seem like in this example provided to us, the AI is programmed to just execute really well. It is kind of like seeing if a human can aim a long distance missile better than a computer, which is ridiculous. What you can do as said in this video is you can utilize the AI to help you become the better you by running it through analysis sims, and it might find situations that you missed during your exhibition flight. If at all, the AI will consider variables like airspeed, your angle, and altitude maybe in regards to your opponent's. But outside of that, it probably isn't really that great of a candidate for real life usage. Edit: Imagine a computer using Neural Networking trying trial and error to figure out real life dogfighting, and the massive budget costs of losing that many aircraft for insignificant gains. Until simulations are practically real in every aspect, there is absolutely no way Neural Networking would work without an unimaginable amount of spending. It could be possible however to create miniature AI Planes in real life that would go up and fight each other, but at that rate... you're talking years and years maybe even decades of training. Maybe even never, given how much technology must be advanced, and the limitations of future hardware.
@ipodhty
4 жыл бұрын
Yeah using video game ai when talking about irl ai doesn't work, since game ai is ment to represent how human's think and act. While if you want true combat ai it can do things that human's just can't compute. The amount of data it could store about possible enemy paths is insane compared to a human
@Redmanticore
4 жыл бұрын
"you're talking years and years maybe even decades of training. " funny you mentioned that, AI's are cheap to train to levels that are impossible for humans - parallelism across a server farm allows for MILLIONS of hours of flight time experience compressed into hours. when a human loses, he dies and we lose all that training and experience. when an AI dies, it loses only the vehicle. a normal videogame a.i. were always very limited. i am not sure it just Does anymore, watch a documentary on how a.i. deepmind defeated #1 Go player in asia, on youtube, called "alphago the movie"
@tanit
4 жыл бұрын
Just a heads up. JSBsim doesn't have graphics. It's a high fidelity 2d engine/host - the stuff happening under the hood is very high fidelity. It needs an "IG" (image generator) to render graphics. Can't tell what IG that is, might be VRSG.
@CWLemoine
4 жыл бұрын
It’s very potato-like.
@hughgreentree
4 жыл бұрын
"Good against remotes is one thing. Good against the living, that's something else." H. Solo.
@Suthriel
4 жыл бұрын
Unfortunately, H. Solo comes from an universe, where remotes/droids/AI are usually a failure in most combat situations, and i am not sure, if they are made this dumb on purpose - in-universe, or if it´s just bad writing. Would be more interesting, if the SW droids would at least be granted the fighting abilities from the drones from the movie Oblivion.
@jefsonb
4 жыл бұрын
Very good points! Regards from an older F-5 pilot!
@zayannajam6691
4 жыл бұрын
Elon Musk: They called me a mad man
@asphalt325
4 жыл бұрын
OK so should I live or not?
@williamrogers4114
4 жыл бұрын
You are spot on in your analysis of where ai is at right now and for quite a number of years hence.
@dberaupilot
4 жыл бұрын
Honestly don't really see the point of this experiment. How much time did the pilots have to get use to the simulation, I imagine not a lot. I'd also venture the average DCS player would wipe the floor with the AI "Heron", I hope a lot of money wasn't spent on this....
@theegg-viator4707
4 жыл бұрын
DBflyguy truth
@0280530
4 жыл бұрын
Excellent review Mover. AI will have a significant amount of influence in the future, but this was a demonstration that gamers would appreciate, not pilots.
@seatedliberty
4 жыл бұрын
Dogfighting is an art, and only a human being can be an artist.
@Antares2
4 жыл бұрын
Not really. If you have all the information, I am sure you can make an algorithm that always makes the best choice (kinda like those unbeatable chess computers). But the problem with real life fighter jet combat is that you DON'T have all the information. This AI could see through his own plane and always knew with millimeter precision where the enemy was, and how fast it was moving. With all that data, you don't need creativity or luck (or artistry), simply a calculation of how to maneuver to achieve your goal, which is to point your plane at the enemy. Also, the fact that this AI doesn't care if it crashes into its opponent and only has to point its plane directly at the enemy to score "hits"... well, it makes it fairly unrealistic. If you had set two of these up against each other, I have a strong feeling they would be doing head on jousting passes, colliding every time.
@TheMechanicalHermit
4 жыл бұрын
Two debatable statements.
@DoubleClutchProductions
4 жыл бұрын
Those head on shots reminds me of DCS when the cockpit turns red, dam aimbot is no joke.
@evanwochos451
4 жыл бұрын
The pilot didn't seem to try very hard, literally just went in circles and didn't even hit the AI once, but to be fair the AI was kinda OP and the Pilot had a VR headset.
@sonyarsld
4 жыл бұрын
Very good video, definitely puts things into perspective. Obviously an uneven fight in favor of the AI, the way it was set up. I would really like to see how Heron would cope against an instance of its own self, eg. if it would gradually learn to avoid merging etc.
@RevanBartus
4 жыл бұрын
Calling this a "perfect win" considering all the advantages AI had is embarrasing.
@Redmanticore
4 жыл бұрын
i mean in real life the a.i. still has certain advantages the human does not. also downfalls.
@raabaddler5802
4 жыл бұрын
very true but if it couldn't win all of them like this would it be worth even funding the next round of prototypes?
@mazbaird
4 жыл бұрын
Yeah the AI has the advantage of not passing out at over 10 Gs...Any aircraft that can make a 17 G turn against a 9G turn will win every time.
@GunniesLetsFlyVFR
4 жыл бұрын
Great perspective. Thanks Mover.
@LManonymous
4 жыл бұрын
AI only wins when in a program because the computer knows everything. Real life is not like that.
@tojassargaja2085
4 жыл бұрын
You can put sensors on a plane so it converts real life into a computer. If you put enough sensors it will know almost everything.
@kiko5573
4 жыл бұрын
alot of thing depend on technology these days. AI like alphaGo just a simple AI even this Falco one.
@razorfett147
4 жыл бұрын
@@tojassargaja2085 and what kind of sensor technology would that be? Radar? IR? Lots of GoPros? How many fighters flying today have that level of realtime 360° sensory tracking?? What you're inferring is Star Trek level sci-fi tech....tiny modules that can detect anything at large ranges, and can be affixed all over the airframe without significant compromise to aerodynamics, TtW, or fuel efficiency.
@kiko5573
4 жыл бұрын
@Black Fx nope, ai can do it way better, just today ai is not that advance yet, that what i want to say. Conclude ai is terrible by watch this fight from darpa is wrong. AI still wayy far from its full capability, Full/ super intelligent AI can train /think faster than human.
@tojassargaja2085
4 жыл бұрын
@@razorfett147Isnt dogfight shortrange?
@baronvonfaust
4 жыл бұрын
It's an older book now, but "Wired for War" by PW Singer goes over some of the implications for autonomous armed platforms, and in particular I bring it up because it discusses things like legal ramifications: if an autonomous platform engages a target erroneously, what happens afterward? If it shoots down an aircraft it wasn't supposed to, it can cause anything from unintentional deaths to outright warfare and war crimes. And if this happens who is accountable - the state, the CO, the software coder? These are really important questions when it comes to fully autonomous weapon systems. I hope this is interesting to some of you. Thanks for the videos CW, love the content and you discussed a little of the above at the end, just thought the book might be of interest. All the best.
@abe2571
4 жыл бұрын
Really. The guy is wearing a mask during a zoom meeting.
@lolembarrassing2758
4 жыл бұрын
embarrassing
@2xKTfc
4 жыл бұрын
Could be sitting in an office with a bunch of people. That's what we do at work when we don't have the big conference room available.
@chauschi
4 жыл бұрын
He’s going to need AI to program for him due to CO2 inhalation
@sinabastami
4 жыл бұрын
This was completely on point. Everything in it was true. The most important aspect from now on, as we will integrate and incorporate AI into warfare, is that decision making element of a human vs AI. That cannot be understated.
@MIGuy
4 жыл бұрын
"never ask a barber if you need a haircut"
@ZefferGaming
4 жыл бұрын
Where's Maverick when you need um? "Hit the brakes and he'll fly right by"!
@slow9573
4 жыл бұрын
Wearing a mask for a skype interview. Okie dokie. Edit: I really enjoyed Mover's analysis here and I think it's very reasonable. Related, sort of, was my civilian response a few years ago to people telling me that A.I. cars would be taking over the road. I had similar points that Mover is making here regarding jets. Empathy and Creativity are big things that an A.I. won't have pretty much ever. But what I AM excited about is maybe DCS and IL-2 will have better singleplayer A.I. opponents in a few years lol.
@DaveFMillard
4 жыл бұрын
I was scrolling ... looking for someone to comment on the goofball with the mask .. right on!
@nocare
4 жыл бұрын
There where other people in the room with him, you can occasionally see them in the reflection on the TV behind him.
@isodoubIet
4 жыл бұрын
"Empathy and Creativity are big things that an A.I. won't have pretty much ever. " Why?
@slow9573
4 жыл бұрын
isodoublet Would be a fun discussion that would require some refresher reading, but honestly I just don’t care to dig into it in KZitem comments
@nocare
4 жыл бұрын
Well its a simple answer. You can't claim that an AI cannot have empathy or creativity or any other human trait. That would be an argument from ignorance. Even if you think it unlikely thats diffrent from stating that; never ever even if humans work at it for a billion years will AI have those traits. On the flip side as a roboticist and writer of AIs I have seen AI with both empathy and creativity already. but I already accept that all human traits reside purly in the brain as functions of our neurons and if by chance you don't accept that then its a mute point.
@paperburn
4 жыл бұрын
Works as a Sin-eater and Marine Aviation Training Support (MATSS) I have to agree with the points you have brought up, all valid especially with a kill cone instead of real ballistic flight of the round
Пікірлер: 1,5 М.