this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
91 points (98.9% liked)

technology

23635 readers
241 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LupineTroubles@hexbear.net 63 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I am sure China is making breakneck speed innovation in defense industry but these studies and accompanying research is often just a way to present China as an existential military threat to US to get more funding to military-industrial complex. It's just manufacturing consent for absurd amount of money that goes to institutions like DARPA let alone the total amount of money spent on all the defense projects like F-35 and whatever the new F-47 will be.

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This title is just calling the report by NUDT a study. The NUDT is the National University of Defence Technology which is a nationally owned institution under the Central Military Commission.

So in short, this is from China itself not from US think tanks.

[–] Sleve_McDichael@hexbear.net 16 points 1 day ago

Real the-podcast heads knew just from the title

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean if these studies continue justifying the US wasting billions on useless tech that's a win too.

[–] TheFinalCapitalist@hexbear.net 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

we've come up with a brilliant new weapon, exploding toilets. using our commercial connections we will sell various chinese institutions these exploding toilets and use them to take out key political targets

[–] naom3@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day ago

That’s actually what isreal did with the pagers

[–] Grownbravy@hexbear.net 26 points 1 day ago

"quick, we have to end the program that provides schools with hot water in order to compete!"

[–] SacredExcrement@hexbear.net 24 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

How can this be?

Anyway, time to spend 457.2 trillion to replace the F35 that still doesn't work properly with the F47, which will be built by the aerospace corporation that brought you such things as aircraft doors falling off, assassination of key witnesses in cases regarding negligent QA practices, and airliners which were difficult to control

[–] fox@hexbear.net 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

F35 is multirole, F47 is air supremacy. Different uses. Gotta get that multi-plane grift going instead of having just one money hole

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 21 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Drones have a pretty big advantage over piloted aircraft in stealth terms because of their small size, the whole next generation of aircraft will be built around them.

Honestly it seems like the countries that skipped fifth gen fighters got the best deal here. Even China's newest ones are probably going to have a very short life cycle, and lmao rip the f-35 is going to cost two or more trillion dollars and accomplish nothing.

[–] egg1918@hexbear.net 11 points 1 day ago

and accomplish nothing.

Hey now, they could still decapitate a couple more pilots

[–] Belly_Beanis@hexbear.net 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm surprised militaries are still working on piloted aircraft. It seems to me the era of dogfights between aces is over. Missile technology has gotten advanced to the point where having a pilot inside aircraft is a liability. Drones can carry larger payloads while being smaller, faster, and cheaper.

If the current war in Ukraine is any indication, most aircraft are being shot down by surface to air missiles or by drones. There are still fighters being downed by other fighters, but this seems to be the minority.

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 11 points 1 day ago

Aircraft aren't being shot down by drones in Ukraine, at most one way attack drones have taken out a few helicopters in flight. Fighters fly to high or fast to be taken out by drones. Drones and loitering munitions take out fighter aircraft that are parked on the ground. Fighter aircraft are still very important, a big part of the reason why Ukraine's air force can't operate freely, even at high altitude beyond the range of Russian ground based air defence, is Russian fighters lobbing air to air missiles at them from 200km away. At one stage, Russia was firing 6-8 R-37M missiles a day at Ukrainian aircraft. This capability led to attrition of the Ukrainian Air Force to the point F-16 deliveries were necessary. Yeah there aren't that many, if any, dogfights anymore with this kind of BVR capabilitiy.

Ground based air defence is playing the biggest part in area denial to enemy fighters. Russian aircraft are reduced to lobbing standoff weapons like glide bombs from high altitude outside of the range of Ukrainian ground based air defence. Ukrainian fighters can't even do that due to the Russian Air Force, they have to perform low altitude, terrain masking flights to fire munitions at Russian ground positions. Fighters still play an important role and can't be replaced by drones yet. Iran has a massive drone and missile arsenal, yet they still want modern fighter jets.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 day ago

They can also be more manoeuvrable since the pilot tends to be the limiting factor given that human body can't sustain high gs.

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Are military aircraft size determined by the pilot? I figured it would be proportional to the ordinance they're carrying.

[–] da_gay_pussy_eatah@hexbear.net 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not having to accommodate a pilot necessarily means it can be smaller.

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the cockpit on modern fighter jets is so tiny though

[–] fox@hexbear.net 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You don't need to accommodate for stuff like the pilot passing out from g forces if there's just a computer flying the thing. This can also extend the operational window past however long a human can stay awake, so you can get aircraft that are more maneuverable, faster, with longer ranges.

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

To add, the weight of the human isn't much, but the weight of the chair; safety equipment for the human; the extra metal needed to make space for the human, the chair, and the safety equipment; the extra distance for equipment to steer/handle from the pilots seat as opposed to a distributed system all add up to sooooo much space and weight.

Also you can put fuel in the center (you usually don't cuz a human is sitting there) and that changes so much about the mechanics of the wings and the control system capabilities. The limiting factor was humans, but the next limiting factor disappears with the humans in the form of limited distribution patterns of fuel weight/less room to shift fuel during flight phases for different manoeuvres

[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago

Brain drain

[–] EndMilkInCrisps@hexbear.net 18 points 1 day ago
[–] mrodri89@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago

Ah the ole department that cant pass audits but they get the most of our tax revenue that increases each year.

And they still cant compete with China.

Maybe throw more money at them Congress, you love doing that.

[–] BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 14 points 1 day ago

For the United States, this development underscores the need for accelerated innovation and collaboration between defense agencies and private sectors. The DARPA X-65 program, while still in its early stages, represents a critical step in maintaining competitiveness in the field of aerial warfare. This race for supremacy in drone technology highlights the broader geopolitical contest between China and the United States, with implications extending beyond military applications to areas such as intelligence gathering and surveillance.

Weird take from the "Sustainability Times"

[–] TheFinalCapitalist@hexbear.net 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s important to note that DARPA’s technology is still in the early development phase. Comparisons between the two technologies may not fully reflect the final outcomes.

This level of cope is off the charts

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago

"Oh damn, you guys haven't even produced anything?"

[–] Civility@hexbear.net 9 points 1 day ago
[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago