I sat next to a Raytheon engineer 15 years ago on a transcontinental flight across the USA. He told me about their goal of transforming the modern battlefield with loiting swarms of drones with each being networked together and controlled by AI targeting systems, stealth wingman drone fighters carrying large quantiies of ordnance, and sub orbital weapons delivery systems capable of attacking the most remote locations on earth. Turns out the dude wasn't bullshiting.
Had a similar conversation in 1991 at the Port of Dammam, SA with a LTC DARPA engineer. He spent his Army career was spent on the MLRS's I was back loading un fired pods after the MLRS first combat use. He said then " I wish we could figure out a way for the MLRS sub-munitions to talk to each other and self-select targets". I am absolutely thrilled that our services are moving in this direction. We cut defense cost, minimize broken up young guys and crying moms. I'd bet that by 2045 we may even see robotic infantry troops( Think 3 0r 4 bots from the movie "Monsters of Man") lead by future human fire team leader. Let's defend our interest but be smart about our spending.
@@darrylweaver7462This is an interesting paradox I've been thinking about my whole life. At what point does robot on robot warfare just become a giant BattleBot episode without the risk to human life? Do we accept the outcome of what is essentially an elaborate video game to determine who wins wars?
@@darrylweaver7462, until non-nuclear EMP weapons get much better, then it's back to grunt, rifle, compass, ect. Don't get me wrong, I love the tech stuff, BUT, we shouldn't lose anymore of the capabilities we have, we've already lost more than enough.
Yeah, let me guess he told you all the classified shiiite. My uncle worked out there on their overhead gantry cranes. The guys behind the curtains told him crap as well & then laughed as if it was truthful.
@@Justme42yay Supremacy is higher than dominance. That’s why it is the official doctrine of the USAF and has been since after Vietnam. Not sure where the word “dominance” came from (and I see it often…) but this distinguished graduate from the USAF Air War College assures you that it is not doctrinal.
I am reminded of the WII story that a soldier was asked how they could tell whom they faced if they couldn't see them: "If we shoot and get back accurate, intermittent fire - they are British. If it's mass machine gun fire, they are German. If there is a pause, then you are hit by over-whelming, mass artillery, bombings, and mortars, they are American."
@@death_parade All 3 forces were on the same swath of the earth at the same time in the early days of WW2. Remember Monty failed to close the noose around the Germans while Patton encircled them?
@@hifinsword That was Americans and British fighting the Germans, no? I am asking about the nation that was fighting Germany, USA and UK at the same time in ww2.
Very reassuring to see America's military continuing to lead the world in the implementation of the most advanced systems and air platforms to not only overwhelm an enemy when necessary, but to intimidate them with unstoppable, inescapable and non-survivable consequences so they never consider initiating military conflict in the first place. New Sub.
Do you not realize other countries, like Russia, and not also developing are doing the same thing? Are you not aware that Russia is already using (and now mass producing) uncatachable hypersonic missiles in Ukraine while the US is still testing its version? Are you aware that Russia has missiles that can be launched from mainland Russia and hit anywhere on the globe? Are you not aware of the Russian subs keeping station off both American coasts (but in international waters)? Do you know how a dead man switch operates? Russia may take some nuclear hits, but America will have a bunch of non-usable American cities. Be aware that Russia, China, etc, do not publicize what their weapons are capable of or even what they are working on. Why does America not gamble their high tech weapons in Ukraine? The Russians are anxious to capture some samples.
@@adaeptzulander2928What are you even talking about? We haven't been attacked. And stop drooling down the front of your shirt. It makes you look more intelligent than you actually are.
Sorry Australia was in the lead of using mass swarms of drones to saturate a enemy defences and why built Ghost Bat to do this. why it has Australian designed drone swarm capabilities in it. why was designed to be cheap and expendable. Why USA has another Australian drone called DefendTex D40 in it's military is similar to switchblade but also has fully AI and AI drone swarm capability. Why Australia is ahead in combat drone AI while USA try it with a F16 Ghost Bat is in service next year fully with RAAF. Is even a VTOL Quad copter Australia has built as loyal wingman to Australian military helicopters now too. has same AI as Ghost Bat and same capabilities. also a submarine drone uses Ghost Bat AI too.
Thanks Alex, I’m a big fan of Rapid Dragon. I think with stealth missile and 3 to 4 times the current range, plus having a mould - not sure of the spelling? - would cause havoc with the enemy. A few years ago Taiwan was advised to use the hedgehog plan for defence. It is equally effective for attack. Ukraine is proving that right now. One from within one small bomb can destroy a multimillion dollar tank. I have always said in theory long range missiles fired from a WW2 bombers would be hugely effective because they would be out of range of the enemy. We could restore hundreds of Boeing jumbos from the Arizona graveyard to augment the C 130s for Rapid Dragon. The key thing is to massively build up the missile stocks right now.
Agreed. It watches like reading like an encyclopedia on the future of air combat systems, without actually having to do the effort of lifting the book and turning the pages AND still having all the pretty pictures;
Alex, I find your videos some of the most thoughtful and informative pieces on RU-vid. The depth and skill you bring makes understanding the present and future war fighters entertaining and informative, and gives me great ideas for novels that I write. You richly deserve the awards the industry has given you. 👍🏆
He is not that good at all Australia MQ28A Ghost Bat is made by Australian's at Boeing Australia even head engineer is Australian who also is a lead engineer at Phantomworks. the designer is Australian. The Ghost Bat will not just be a loyal wingman needing a pilot nearby to control it. it can and was made to perform mission fully autonomously on it's own and even in swarms of other AI drones as Australian company that built the ai is very good at drone swarm technology. some of his speech came straight out of the Boeing Australia video about Ghost Bat and how the Australian RAAF came up with what they wanted from a Australian defence company to build them this drone for their plan of future warfare.
Thanks Alex for your recent video on the concept to overwhelm enemy defences. You looked at Boeings/RAAF loyal wingman’s Ghostbat and Kratos’s Valkyrie but to my knowledge, you’ve never covered the General Atomic’s concept of Gambit and the four types of aircraft with supposedly around 70% commonality between the four types. This would make an interesting further look at another CCA that’s on the drawing board and where Gambit might further enhance available options to complicate the enemy’s plans.
He has never done anything on Australia Boeing Ghost Bat and this video he makes it out to be American.the AI does a lot of what he said USA want in the future, Also said these need a human pilot to accompany them Ghost Bat is so advanced it will be used by Australia RAAF on missions where no pilot will fly near it and do it completely autonomously and will do it in swarms of other drones all using it's AI drone swarm technology, it will also be used as a loyal wingman but not needed.. Australia is very good at drone swarm AI
How bad he is in journalism is American hypersonics were done with the help of Australia HACM HAWC all done during HIFIRE and SCIFIRE. even states this when you deep research it on the web. SCIFIRE stands for Southern Cross Integrated Flight Research Experiment joint USA Australia hypersonics programme.
All I picture is a couple of Privates in the Russian and Chinese military running down the hall yelling, Captain!! Captain !! You have to watch this, as they all watch Sandboxx News to get the one up on the US military lol
It's not like Sandboxx is getting classified info that's completely unknown to our adversaries. This is all public information. That means they probably already know about this even before we ever did or thought about it themselves.
I'm a little surprised you didn't talk about real use of the MALD in recent times with them being used by Ukraine instead of the hypothetical, and how it's aided them in their missile strikes.
It is interesting to note that all MIC aviation manufacturers have invested heavily in Large Format 3D Printing, advanced synthetic material manufacturing, fabrication, and construction. They also have invested in huge autoclaves for curing large carbon fiber (and other material) constructs. All of these are for use in rapid construction of platforms that require use of these materials. The advent of 3D CAD/CAM design and test software moving to prototype in more automated systems not requiring human occupancy engineering requirements should really get the construction time down.
Ender's Game really did a good job of depicting what future warfare might look like. And the movie was set in a very similar time as the present. Drone-swarm technology truly seems like 'the next phase' in the evolution of warfare. And then comes the evolution of counter-measures (EMP shockwave? Signal jamming? Mega-shotgun canons? Lol.).
Couldn't agree more, the definition of " infantry" is going to be a dude in a bunker or vehicle with a common picture of all the battlefield and controlling a drone swarm of basically everything just like gamers do
Excellent presentation. After a discussion about what weapons define the Russo/Ukraine war I stuck with drones. A few others were hesitant because the Bradley IFV has shown itself to be a necessity in the protection of transporting infantry, taking out minefields and taking out Russian tanks. That is why the Pentagon has suddenly taken the Bradley off the obsolete list and will be juiced up. However we all agreed that the sheer number of drones used in Ukraine and their constant evolution is beyond fascinating; we don't think Ukraine would still be in the fight without them. I'm the only historian in the group and I remember reading about drones in college while studying WW l and it felt surreal when I saw how many different drones purchased, donated and used by Ukraine and how the drones Ukraine has developed for particular purposes have done so well. My favorites are the Sea Babies because I think a slew of them will have the honor of taking out the Kerch Bridge but I am also betting that Ukraine has developed a small and fast long range drone air drone that has been striking targets in Russia. For me I think of the history of the drone and I can't help but think of the engineers that were dreaming about building drones that could fly on their own in the early 1900's either as practice targets, reconnaissance, or to attack unsuspecting ground forces. We always like to think that our generation is responsible for the idea of a weapon like the drone but they were building and experimenting with radio operated drones during WW l. Even the title Drones was coined around 1918. So now we have a massive variety of drones based on current needs and some in the pipeline for testing for future needs and the very real possibility that in future wars there will be less lives lost when we have drones to do the fighting. I had hoped for an end to war but humans are not built for that. I also need to add that I believe in the old phrase "If you want peace prepare for war."
Great content, Alex. My only worry with the new direction using drones, 'wingmen' and AI, is that we MUST be certain there is no possibility some of the components of these systems come from questionable or outright adversarial sources. So many times in recent history we have seen some manufacturers (either due to cost or availability) using chips and other electronic gear originating in China. There must be strict control and inspection of every unit before going into service.
This has already been realized by the semiconductor crisis. 90% of chips for DOD are supplied from Taiwan, so it's already happening and has been for a long time. It's just only recently come into focus
I got one for ya, did you know that our very "American" bank Chase Manhattan invested in the Nazi War effort? And that Ball Bearings during world war 1 & 2 were the pinnacle of military and manufacturing might? cool stuff.
@@Matthew-sp5kv That was my first thought too. Also, there's a big push to build even more semiconductor facilities in Texas. In Europe, the same thing is happening, with semiconductor facilities popping up in Ireland and elsewhere.
I was always fascinated by the use of drones in the Dune books. A machine that spews millions of tiny drones that attack human shapes and drills a hole through them.
Sci-Fi is always way ahead on things and ideas. It's almost as if the writer can see into the future. As crazy as things and technology in Sci-Fi may sound now-a-days, don't think that it can't ever happen. In fact, many things have happened. It's been said that there may be some kind of a library out there in the universe, that only certainly people can access or see. People like Einstein, DaVinci, Newton, just to name some of many.
Wanted the magazine, and all I could get is the APP. You are one knowledge dude! I am not an Engineer, my father was! In the 50's he worked at China Lake. He worked on the Sidewinder, the first one! He is actually on the RU-vid story of the Sidewinder. When I watched the video and if one blinked, you'd miss him. He is holding a gyroscope with the other hand, a slideruler. Just gave it to my son. I was conceived in Ridgecrest and born in LA so he could work on his PhD.....as you can see,I am very proud son
This is a heady vision you offer, sir, with potential for an exponential increase in air capabilities. Unfortunately, one understands that the obstacle here lies in the industrial capacity to produce such new equipment at volume. It's not like WWII, when manufacturers were able to rapidly reconfigure and retool existing production lines for quick turnaround times. One hears that such capacity no longer exists, and that years will be required before new factories can be built tp accommodate these plans?
There are many absolutely brilliant manufacturing engineers who could be enlisted to RAPIDLY build very efficient manufacturing facilities, and the USA is already moving to take back production of strategic items from China and other countries. We did it in WW II, and we can do it again! Not overnight, but RAPIDLY!
It still took years to build/retool those factories in WWII. Work started before Pearl (the US saw where things were headed, and was also producing materiel for others) and continued increasing through 1944. The critical limit is generally the ability to make the tooling for molds & dies and such. But that is becoming less of an issue. 3D printers and new CNC machines can create the tooling at a pace never seen before. Or they can make parts without the need for any tooling. Depends on the scale you want.
It sounds like you missed his entire point. The 'exponential increase in air capabilities' is made possible because you'd be augmenting the force with LOW-COST, EASY-TO-MANUFACTURE drones or munitions. And if you think it will take YEARS to build the manufacturing facilities to make CHEAP DRONES from LOW-COST/BASIC MATERIALS, you don't know much about modern manufacturing capabilities. We are SO FAR ahead of WW2 capabilities. You talk as if we've gone backwards or something.
Now will people in business and government understand that sovereign capability matters so that globalisation resulting in off shore manufacturing may be good short-term for shareholders but ultimately everything depends on effective deterrence. Having an economy that sees no value in sovereign capability is a strategic error.
This type of warfare is coming and not just for the Airforce but the Navy as well. The army will be a little further behind because of the "history" of infantry fighting but the low recruitment will force that issue. In the future it will be a few dozen techs programing systems with a few hundred mechanics getting them ready and 100 pilots controlling a few thousand combat systems. Sadly I don't think it can be stopped at this point and as every good sci-fi geek will tell ya "when you give a gun to a robot and it decides what's the target, that's all she wrote for humanity eventually" Glad am to old to see that day my self ....
There might be a long-duration middle ground for infantry and armor bots that are either decoys or remotely controlled. I imagine it could be decades before we get capable and autonomous equivalents to the T-800 Terminators like Arnold Schwarzenegger. It might be years or decades before we get bots that can walk in a way that looks human. However, we could probably field wheeled bots to replace armor tomorrow, and bots that have articulated armatures that look roughly humanoid from a distance could be used as decoys in the near future to fool surveillance and draw fire.
Randy, I too am kinda glad that I'm reaching the end of my free fall. I've often pondered the idea of if each generation has had the same thought when some new box of **** is introduced to the planet. Prayers out for future generations.
If its any comfort, when it comes to warfare, we've been trying to program people to become mindless robots for centuries. That's what training is. And we've long worried about what happens when those automatons get a mind of their own. We call it a coup or a mutiny depending on the level of violence & who it's directed at. But machines are an awful lot easier to predict & manage. After all, their programming doesn't change unless you let it. Not so with people. Their programs change every minute of every day. And retraining is super easy with a bot. Put a bit of time into writing some code, distribute it, and bam: everyboty is retrained. Now, think about how you would re-program a bunch of meat computers that have tried to overthrow the rightful government. It gets even harder if they're successful.
With every weapon system you develop you have to make sure you're ready for the enemy to copy it (I wonder who) and develop a reliable counter to your own systems.
War changes all the time. Greek wars used to have set piece battles where the kings would lead from the very front lines, the "losing side" would have only 5-10% casualties and battles would last a few hours. Imagine showing an ancient greek soldier stalingrad and being like "war never changes, hurr durr"... He would look at you like you had three heads.
It kind of reminds me of Vietnam. I can’t remember which replaced which when it came to sead but either the two seat Thunderchief replaced the super saber for the sead missions or the other way around due to losses. When you think about it now it makes sense to do what they’re thinking now.
Seems to me that quickly launching all of these air assets in order to coordinate a strike with the least amount of waste will be a significant challenge.
That footage of the F/A 18 releasing that “drone swarm” is over a decade old, maybe even two if I recall correctly… just imagine how that system has advanced.
14:40 It shouldn't be lost on anybody that any vehicle that can carry more then 300lbs can loft a W80 style (150KT) nuclear warhead, much like the B61.
Great video, Alex. I suspect that we're going to have to find ways to build 100,000 dollar planes if we're going to win in a future big conflict. They'll need to be able to roll these off assembly lines in quantities that would make a World War 2 production line blush. Same with tanks. The M4 Sherman was a great tank for mass production and shipping over an ocean. We need a modern M4 Sherman equivalent that we just turn on the production line and we're cranking them out in bulk packs. But that's just my opinion.
I've been saying that something in the breath of the light attack/light fighter. Something with an OK radar that can sling a couple GPS bombs, or pack 2x amraams and 2x sidewinders. Use those F15s and F35s and data link to saturate the sky with numbers. You'd also have a great airframe for CAS once you gain more control of an airspace and missile dispensers before hand. Keep it small. Fuel efficient. Lots of modular composite assemblies and whatever stealth coating is most affordable when its made.
This feels like the Vietnam mistake where we took guns off of fighters and expected missiles to do all the work. We know how that turned out. Now we will have millions of drones that become useless in the face of massive jamming and electronic warfare. And if we get a real war there will be a huge AI arms race, which of course will end with the robots killing humans on both sides.
Another outstanding, insightful and well researched video, my friend. Greatly enjoy the information. 👍🏻🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸👍🏻 Thank you and congratulations on the successful launching of your Sandbox Magazine. Best of fortunes in this endeavor, my friend. 👍🏻
Alex, this is the most encouraging and interesting video you have ever made. I am thrilled that the Air Force and Navy are looking to place thousands of drones and "spoofing missiles" in the skies, especially in the Western Pacific and the South China Sea. We all knew that China had the same strategy, and I have no doubt that America's military/industrial complex will STEP UP and build these important weapons of war, to bring us Air Superiority over our enemies in ANY theater. Very exciting! You are right to state that we cannot easily replace highly trained pilots and super-expensive stealth aircraft. As radar and other detection technologies improve, their effectiveness will be limited or even negated. But having a fleet of thousands of drones under human control or even pre-programmed or autonomous is the WAY TO GO! Great video, Alex!
We still pay ludicrous prices for hardware and parts. AH 64 has a valve that went from 70 dollars to over 700 because the suppliers are being bought up and half the budget auditors in the Pentagon have been laid off. Lots of cash swapping hands between retired upper ranks and politicians with rotating positions in defense firm boards. Profits and money laundering over patriotic duty to supply best for our soldiers.
Seems to me that we are still fixated on categorising aerial munitions. The lines between drones, cruise-missiles , loitering-munitions and high-speed missiles have become so blurred that they are disappearing. A “cruise missile” can be autonomous, human-directed, single-use or recoverable and with different roles, all according to the needs and priorities of the mission. They’ll be as flexible as the modern multi-role strike-fighter. This will probably make life interesting for journalists like Alex, as his audience will often was simple categorisations where none really exist 😂 , but if it were simple, we wouldn’t be watching these vids anyway. Simplifying complex issues is part of the art of communications.
Kratos had a booth at MCAS Miramar San Diego last week for the Air Show featuring the Blue Angles. I got to talk for a while with one of the exhibitor. The Launcher and aircraft looked top notch. It lands by parachute and airbags.
Kratos is way too small ...........what one needs is a drone with the range, payload, stealth and to take off and escort with an F-35 to be effective ....say the Ghost-Bat. Kratos if fitted out with required equipment is to small and reduced range compared to the F-35 but the Ghost-Bat is designed from the outset to escourt with the F-35 to the target and back.
It was speculated for a long time that aerial drone sWARmFARE was the future of warfare, by overwhelming defence batteries and posing too many targets for radar defence to track and engage them all.
Thanks Alex, great content. You said these systems are being designed to assist the modern war fighter not to replace the war fighter. However, I am thinking that replacement of the "war fighter" is likely a smaller incremental step than the step to develop these systems to "assist" the "war fighter". Similar to how we have gone from ChatGP2 to ChatGP3 to ChatGP4 in a relatively fast fashion, each successive step taking less time, but each step exponentially improving upon the prior step. Scary thought, but Terminator Skynet system seems to be the logical goal, although the military will give it some kind of euphemistic name like "Peace Keeper" or "Tranquility Program". Hey, maybe the machines can be programmed to be more humane and gentler and kinder rulers than the likes of Putin, Xi, and Kim.
As they iterate and US adversaries iterate humans in the loop during combat will be a liability, even if only because computers react about 10 000 times faster than humans. Humans will give the command to attack but this can be done from HQ.
So in the RC world there has been for a while smaller jet powered aircraft. These are hobbyist aircraft and quite fast and loud etc.. I've always looked at them and wondered if these would ever become a battlefield weapon but this also would need the ability to control over long distances. Now looking at something like MQ-9 and what it does around the world I can see these two marring up. Another hobbyist air craft are those massive drone displays that can make objects in the sky with thousands of drones operating together. I can totally see this as a way to overrun air defense to allow more important items to make it through.
Another good post, but I would temporize with the fact that the Chinese are copying US systems and in some cases improving on them. The MQ9 Reaper system which they have copied and improved is a rather frightening case in point.
My concern - as a completely uninformed civilian - has always been that China could win a conventional war against the US by simple attrition. I believe (based on no evidence whatsoever, I should add) that China might think that, no matter how much better US weapons are, they could eventually overwhelm them with superior numbers. If that is correct, then it wouldn't matter if China copied this technology, because the whole point is just to let China know that they can't just overwhelm the US with sheer numbers.
In addition to an AI copilot, could the pilot in the aircraft get assistance from a remote co-pilot in the same way that many surveillance drones are piloted remotely?
It's an interesting idea but I believe it would only be practical if the operator is nearby because distance inevitably creates lag which can impact the time between split second decision making and action on those decisions in real time.
While it is hilarious to see people's reactions to the "ai takeover" that will "inevitably occur" with all these autonomous weapons systems, even a tiny bit of research into how they actually work would dispell any such fears immediately.
Look at Australia MQ28A Ghost Bat it's AI is most advanced in the world can perform air to air and air to ground combat on it's own. Australia RAAF commander head of the programme said it can not go rogue and has a limit to this. somethinf=g like it hits a wall if ever tried to. something to do with run time assurance, it's AI checks it's programme to make sure it is going as is programmed to do.
There is a difference between an algorithm and a true artificial intelligence. The only time an autonomous weapons platform will take actions it's not supposed to take (and therefore 'take control' or maybe 'turn on its creators') is because either A: a software error or unintentional bug in the algorithm. B: an operator accidentally entered incorrect instructions. Both of these outcomes are easily fixable and will not result in the supposedly inevitable "ai takeover" of these various autonomous weapons platforms.
Imagine in ww2, if you had 50 targets, it probably took 1000 bombers with 40 bombs each. Now it could take 4 cargo planes to take out those 50 targets.
Thanks, Alex, for another informative and fascinating video. NOW, how about another on on our plans for defending against a swarm of such drones? I ask because China, Russia,, Iran, and North Korea aren't idiots and I'm sure are working on low-cost swarming weapons.
Trench warfare is a warfare that prove each side are equal in the battlefield. No one able to advance because the other will counter. So trench ware prove equality's between force's except one find a technological way to pass the enemy. That's why trench stop as soon as the British develop tank and the Germans couldn't stop it in world war 1
Or perhaps it is war that stays the same. To a large degree, the war in Ukraine resembles WWI because the belligerents have the same infrastructure and doctrine that they created 1914 to 1918. Similarly, the strategy and tactics of the US in the War for Independence are conceptually similar to the tactics of revolutionaries and terrorists in MENA and Vietnam against enemies they perceived as colonizers-such as guerrilla tactics and mobilizing civilian communities that are traditionally non-combatants. The implications are that the character of a war are defined at least as much by history as by theories of political or military power. But it also implies that the character of war changes over time-meaning Iran and Saudi Arabia would not act very similarly to Isis because their factors of production would be grafted into their military infrastructure. It also offers an explanation why the US is more mobile that Europe in global wars-especially in Europe. Although the US experimented in trench warfare during the Civil War, there was little need to do so in either world war because they did not seek to annex any of the territory it occupied. Hence why America’s invasion of Iraq was far more successful than its later occupation. Furthermore, innovations in Civil War tactics borrowed from Napoleon’s France-infantry mobility was emphasized by the commands of Sherman and Jackson. Altogether, this means studying the military history of each nation is paramount to predicting the character of their future wars. Understanding China’s innovations in Air and Naval combat is important for war planning. But equally are the Communists’ war histories during the Civil War and Korea. When their command structure breaks down, their decisions will conform to how they interpret centuries of their military history. Just as will America’s decisions, and just as has Ukraine and Russia’s.
@@Player2bloodwhat actual won the war in the end was a fresh American Expeditionary Force in the Meuse-Argonne campaign penetrating the Hindenburg Line cutting off the German double railway that allowed them to move forces up and down the line.
Why aren't we strapping drone launchers to all our land vehicles? You could literally mount a switchblade drone onto a tank. You get a loitering weapon system and recon tool. And you could immediately mount it to every tank Humvee etc
Because RPAs (there’s no such thing as a military drone) are assets above the tactical level of the individual soldier or vehicle crew. They follow the Commander’s intent up to two (and only two) levels above their own. Otherwise it’s anarchy - everybody thinks he’s a general. Do you understand that?
The US is postering for a possible conflict with China over Taiwan, because Taiwan is an island it would be primarily an air and naval war, as it wouldn't be possible to even get ground troops or even military aid to Taiwan unless China's airforce, navy and anti access area denial weapons are degraded or suppressed to a point where it would be safe for slow and vulnerable transport or cargo planes/ships to safely get there, so thats probably why the emphasis is on systems that can fly or at least be deployed by military aviation
Replicator just sounds like the end of the world doesn't it now. "The US called it the replicator project. The plan was to provide an army of flying drones artificial intelligence so they could numerically overwhelm any opponent while conducting sophisticated operations. We didn't expect them to turn against us"
Alex I love this channel! You are one of my go to sources for information and understanding. I’m wondering what you think of autonomous solar powered flying wings something akin to Helios that NASA flew decades ago. It is my understanding they can have a very low radar return. With zero fuel burn they can have a low IR return. The technology exists for them to fly 24/7 for months at a time. They provide real-time area intel and communications from 60,000+ feet on up to possibly 100,000 feet. They are relatively low cost. And they are a low hanging fruit compared to other technologies. How do you see these platforms working within a military of the future?
i like the idea of a relatively inexpensive force multiplier but with all the sensors available seems remote operators could and will do what a pilot on site could do with zero risk. warfare and interplanetary space flights fit the "robot" profile nicely. no life support necessary.
My mental trick is to just add about 50% to the miles to get to the KMs, then round up a bit. So if he says 2,500 miles, I'll think, "that's 2,500+(2,500/2)=3,750... let's call it 4,000". It's actually about 61% (1 US customary mile ~ 1.609 KMs), but my mental arithmetic is nowhere near good enough to do that calculation properly.
I'd like to know what contingency plans the US has for having our satellites disabled prior to or during the initial attack phase. All of this tech erased puts us in what position exactly during a war?
*ALEX PLEASE MAKE FOLLOW UP EPISODE ON THE FOLLOWING * My main concern is, Russia has a aim9 copy cat missile bc of an unexploded munition that flew back with their jet long ago…. So, what happens when we launch 50 MauldX or any other Advanced EW / decoy “attritable” drone and a few land harmlessly on their territory? Is the AI now theirs? Do the EW sensors & jammers now become useless bc they can counter them. Worse yet… can they copy and use them against us? Don’t get me wrong, I love the approach that we’re taking it’s definitely the future. I’m just concerned about our ability to leverage this capability b4 a potential adversary is able to copy & sling it rite back at us. I would hope there’s some self destruct component built in like an acid bath on the chip / electronics when a certain altitude is reached… Don’t know if you have those answers but I really am interested in how the industry plans to mitigate this contingency. We’ve already seen 🇷🇺 recover MAULDs that were mixed in with storm shadows strike packages that were launched in opening strikes of 🇺🇦 counteroffensive. So it’s obvious that the use of these systems will carry with them an acceptance of platform interception.
That was a hilarious image at 5:04 "...serious force multipliers, without having to multiply the forces themselves..." [image of military personnel saluting, LOL]
I disagree with the characterization WWII is a victory of technology over volume (or even vice versa). Although ultimately the far more technological Nazis was defeated by the vastly higher manufacturing capacity allies, numerous significant battles were decided both ways. The lesson for the US is that today its military force dominates both by incomparable superior technology by overwhelming numbers. The example of comparing the Chinese and American navies by volume isn't valid, there's no argument that the USN vastly outnumbers the PLAN in numbers of minimally effective warships, the PLAN has relatively few ships that can project power similar to the USN and could survive open hostilities.
