Last of the Grumman cats....

[artik]

All are pretty planes, but the problem is not their looks.
Here is what Giora Epstein had to say about the F-16 (07:10):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ESF4RObYB3M#t=429
I remember him saying the exact same thing already some 25 years ago.

He is not wrong. I feel the same thing about cars. My old cars were like pets - I cared about them like they were animals, they had character. My current one is a Toyota and the worst thing I can say about it is that there is nothing wrong with it.

See your point. Indeed. However as you can see it hadn't started with F-22/F-35. But as you quoted F-16 was already that way.

In any case I assume, the modern fighters are still far more romantic than Toyota. Finally some stuff makes things simpler like no need to manually control the mixture is quite a nice thing...

[GScholz]

The same arguments have been used by pilots going all the way back to the original fighter...



Some day in the not so distant future, a commander in a bunker, warship or command aircraft somewhere will be informed by a computer that the enemy has been detected and can be engaged. The commander will then release the computer to go fight this enemy as it deems best, launching its UCAVs and other unmanned assets and fighting a war with minimal human interference. Human flight will be limited to transport and recreational/sporting purposes.

[bozon]

The same arguments have been used by pilots going all the way back to the original fighter...

(Image removed from quote.)

Some day in the not so distant future, a commander in a bunker, warship or command aircraft somewhere will be informed by a computer that the enemy has been detected and can be engaged. The commander will then release the computer to go fight this enemy as it deems best, launching its UCAVs and other unmanned assets and fighting a war with minimal human interference. Human flight will be limited to transport and recreational/sporting purposes.

That would be great if machines could do all the fighting with other machines, leaving us humans free to chill out and smoke pot.

[GScholz]

Sure... Until one side runs out of machines to defend themselves, and then the enemy machines starts predating upon them.

Well... that's already a reality.

[Shifty]

I sure do miss the Grumman Tomcat... Last and greatest of the cats...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n81pIulraxY

There was always something about the Tomcat. I always thought she was the most beautiful of that generation of American fighter Planes.  Out of the F-14 F-15 F-16 and F-18 it was the F-14 I was always most excited to see flying and I was an Air Force puke. 

[GScholz]

 

[wpeters]

The same arguments have been used by pilots going all the way back to the original fighter...

(Image removed from quote.)

Some day in the not so distant future, a commander in a bunker, warship or command aircraft somewhere will be informed by a computer that the enemy has been detected and can be engaged. The commander will then release the computer to go fight this enemy as it deems best, launching its UCAVs and other unmanned assets and fighting a war with minimal human interference. Human flight will be limited to transport and recreational/sporting purposes.

That wont end the war.   To win a war History has proven the losing side will have to lose half or more of it population. Fighting with drones will not fix the problem. Do YOU REALLY THINK THAT some A******e  in some goverment is going to back down just because all there robots were shot down.  It has been proven many times in history that artificial intelligence does not make up for real intelligence.  

Another example of what I am talking about is when the Air Force said that there would be no need for guns in Dogfights anymore. Well the F4 Phantom was  created with no gun. The next thing they know is that they are on the 6 of mig with no way to shoot them down. ( IF was in those Migs Iwould been scared SH****ss until I realized they had no gun.. . Then probable laughed till I cried.)

My point is Robot will never ever replace human pilots. Reason is that there is no way to make up for Human Intelligence.  Artificial intelligence will never cut it.  There are to many reasons why they need to keep a warm body in the cockpit of the fighter

[GScholz]

The human decision making can be done remotely if needed.

This is five years old already: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1pr683SYFk

[Muzzy]

I don't know how can you romanticize a pig with small wings

As an FM2 fan I sincerely hope you understand that there's a stubby hard to kill exception to that statement 

[wpeters]

The human decision making can be done remotely if needed.

This is five years old already: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1pr683SYFk

Just wait till a drone gets hacked. It is not a question if it will get hacked, just when.  Then see what happens.

If a terrorist(i.e Chinese)  could hack a drone with Helfires on think of the political ramification.  Congress will be have a cow. That day will be worse than nuke dropped on Washington .

[GScholz]

Not going to happen with autonomous systems. You will no more be able to "hack" an autonomous UCAV than you're able to "hack" a cruise missile today. If you have the right codes you may be able to order it to abort or change its mission, but never to engage targets its on-board systems identify as friendly. It's not like these things will be flying around with open WiFi and Bluetooth giving access to its core programming. That only happens in the movies... Experience shows that autonomous computer systems are much harder to compromise than system involving humans. "Social engineering" is the most successful hacking method these days... Simply asking an unsuspecting human for the log-in credentials. A human pilot can be fooled by a convincing radio transmission. A computer cannot.

[wpeters]

Not going to happen with autonomous systems. You will no more be able to "hack" an autonomous UCAV than you're able to "hack" a cruise missile today. If you have the right codes you may be able to order it to abort or change its mission, but never to engage targets its on-board systems identify as friendly. It's not like these things will be flying around with open WiFi and Bluetooth giving access to its core programming. That only happens in the movies... Experience shows that autonomous computer systems are much harder to compromise than system involving humans. "Social engineering" is the most successful hacking method these days... Simply asking an unsuspecting human for the log-in credentials. A human pilot can be fooled by a convincing radio transmission. A computer cannot.

Is that computer software wrote by a human. Also is it connected to a satelitte.

[morfiend]

  Everyone knows the best thing about the F14 is it's "Cruise",they dont call it a "Tom" cat for nothing..... 


  Sorry Mace I couldnt resist!





   

[Tank-Ace]

Is that computer software wrote by a human. Also is it connected to a satelitte.

Should we also be worried about Skynet? I ask because you're obviously an expert in this field  .

[TOMCAT21]

Tell me about it Wide. Thats the main reason I left the Navy and went to the Army.  I worked on the Tomcats for 8 years and when I found out they were being decommissioned, I decided to switch branches. It kind of sucked. My dad spent 21 years out of his 40 at Grumman as an engineer on the F-14 so I was groomed to work on it.  I have hours of video of the air power demo's done by the F-14 from my days on carriers. One of my fondest memories about the F-14 was at an airshow at NAS Oceana  ( where I was stationed ). My mom and I could not find my dad anywhere so we put our heads together and we wandered over to the F-14 static display and there was my dad surrounded by Tomcat pilots answering their questions about it........ thought I would share that.