Warrior & SAE Media's C-UAS Hub Launch C-UAS Series By Kris Osborn, Warrior For several years now, senior Air Force weapons developers have been clear that the emerging NGAD 6th-generation stealth fighter program effort, now the famous F-47, will consist of a “family of systems” leveraging manned-unmanned teaming. Breakthroughs in command and control technology, networking, autonomy and mission systems have enabled a tactical circumstance wherein groups of unmanned systems can be operated from the cockpit of a manned aircraft, bringing new levels of air attack into the realm of possibility. What about the possibility of the host F-47 platform also being unmanned? Can the same operational capabilities be achieved? For years now, weapons developers have been refining new levels of autonomy, AI-enabled decision-making, unmanned-to-unmanned information sharing using unmanned platforms. Unmanned fighter jets were tested more than a decade ago, and new algorithms empowered [https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/lockheed-vs-boeing-the-battle-for-the-skies-in-the-ngad-fighter-program/vi-AA1AUNA2]by advanced AI can increasingly perform many functions faster and more efficiently than humans. Years ago, former Secretary of the Navy Ray Maybus generated much discussion when he said that the F-35 would likely be the last “manned” fighter ever to exist. Could he have been correct? Unmanned Fighter Jets There have over the years been many circumstances wherein an AI-enabled unmanned fighter jet was able to “outperform” a manned fighter in dogfighting [https://www.airandspaceforces.com/air-force-wargaming-chief-ngad/] and various combat maneuvers, yet does that mean human pilots are becoming obsolete? Not at all, as the Pentagon maintains a clear consensus that an optimal approach to airwar involves the blending of high-speed, AI-enabled computing with attributes unique to human decision making. Both are critical and indispensable to airwar success, but what if the human decision-making and input was kept at safe stand-off distances to perform command and control? Does that mean a forward operating stealthy unmanned fighter could successfully perform all the required missions? This would likely depend upon proximity range and the speed of information exchange, as the goal would be to enable “tip-of-the-spear” human and machine blended decision-making without needing to have human pilots in the line of fire. The Air Force has in recent years experimented with an enterprising [https://aviationweek.com/podcasts/check-6/podcast-ngad-ngas-down-ccas-are-inbound]way of approaching these questions, as the Air Force Research Lab flew a manned fighter jet empowered by an AI-copilot. The AI-capable copilot, called Artuu, was tasked with solving procedural functions, information analysis and certain kinds of problem solving in support of a human decision maker working in close coordination. Clearly, human decision-making progress can be streamlined and greatly assisted by the high-speed processing and information management capabilities of an AI-enabled copilot. This approach would seek to leverage the best of what is possible with both AI-capable computing and human decision-making. Human-Machine Interface However, if a human decision-maker and an AI system could be connected in milliseconds at great distances, there is no reason the manned-unmanned process could not be effective with a human located at safe stand-off distances. This would enable human command and control to take place in the necessary way, yet physically separated from a forward operating unmanned jet. Does a manned pilot need to be there in the cockpit to make all necessary decisions if data processing and transmission is so fast that it can happen across distances. There is a strong argument for the fact that the human-machine interface would need to happen in closer proximity to manage fast-changing battlefield dynamics and make rapid decisions as needed. There are certain attributes unique to human decision-making which arguably cannot be replicated by advanced computers. Mathematically-generated algorithms would seem ill suited to approximate many of the more subjective elements of human consciousness and decision-making such as intuition [https://www.defensenews.com/air/2025/02/20/ngad-engines-pass-key-design-reviews-prototype-work-underway/], emotion and ethical nuances. There is little question that an unmanned F-47 could be extremely effective and potentially succeed in executing many of the operations historically performed by humans, yet the question ultimately becomes one of proximity, command and control and data sharing. Could human-machine teaming be accomplished quickly and effectively without a human needing to be in the jet? That is the operative question, as there are many variables, scenarios of combat circumstances specific to fast-changing combat at the “tip of the spear” which would likely require a human to be physically in the jet.
