“The successes experienced, including proving the ability of all three AUKUS navies to command-and-control vessels on the other side of the world in a tactically realistic scenario, show how close we are to realising our ambition of a genuine team of crewed and uncrewed systems, capable of operating and prevailing everywhere on the planet, from the seabed to space,” Royal Navy Director Develop James Parkin said in a statement.
I see where you’re coming from, but you’re overlooking a major flaw. While frequency hopping and AI might help, they aren’t foolproof. Jamming tech is evolving just as fast as countermeasures, and relying too much on remote links or automation is risky. AI is still far from perfect when it comes to complex, real-time decision-making in unpredictable environments. Also, keeping manned platforms “close by” sounds ideal in theory, but it adds another layer of vulnerability—those manned assets become prime targets. It’s not as simple as slapping AI on everything and hoping for the best.
It’s not where I’m coming from, I’m just repeating various means, methods, and technologies, that are currently being used, or are documented requirements for current nextgen programs, by the DoD.
Here’s just one example of an existing platform, with the technologies that you’re alleging can’t, or don’t, exist: Ghost Bat (MQ-28A)
And that’s just a single platform, within a much larger DoD program: Loyal Wingman.
Also, I never said it wasn’t a constant race with measures, countermeasures, and counter-counter measures. I was just simply keeping my comments short and to the point of the question asked.