and the abilities to (a) resolve targets (sensor aperture, interferometric baseline), (b) bring a greater number of weapon apertures to bear (exterior area) and (c) provide a greater amount of power to each weapon (internal volume) become paramount.
I dont see why (a) cant be done by UAVs just as well as by manned vehicles.
I can see why (b) and maybe also (c) might be problematic.
So far these new weapons systems are not in place yet, however. They are still in development. I have seen the laser weapons systems that are currently being tested. They are not going to fit into a small fighter jet either. Sure they might get smaller, but until then a lot of time will pass.
I dont think that the F22 can be easily adapted to fit laser based systems.
Other systems, maybe. Still none of them are operational. So this discussion is about the future, not the current.
As I said the advantage of the UAV is, that it will see the F22 before F22 sees it.
Is that how it works?
Yes, from what I read current UAVs have between two to 3 people in charge of them. Each person is taking care of a different set of subsystems. They can also rotate them in shifts which is nice. No need to pee into your flight jacket
doubt the hardware on a UAV is as low-end and unadapted as home/gaming PCs.
I dont. You would be surprised how much use the 486 found in the military. That is why export restrictions on that CPU were up for quite a while. I have a friend that was doing work for computer systems for an undisclosed Navy and their new subs. They were still using 486 based computers in their new subs then (and that was just 5 years ago). At that time I was running a Pentium D at my office.
Why are they using these CPUs? Because they are robust. They dont produce a lot of heat, e.g.. Also, since they are manufactured at a larger micron scale, they are less susceptible to EMPs and other issues mentioned earlier.
Now I am not saying that modern UAVs still use 486 CPUs, because honestly I dont know, but I am pretty sure that your modern day gaming workstation is no less capable than what the military uses in their high end systems.
I would also not underestimate the AI in games. The video game industry is a very big one, with comparably large margins and comparably low risk. It has been driving a lot of computer developments in the past decades. Game development programers are in no way different from military programers. If anything, they are better, because they most likely earn more.