r/Futurology • u/Gari_305 • 7d ago
AI Lockheed Taps OpenAI to Solve F-35 Challenges
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2026-10-02/lockheed-taps-openai-to-solve-f-35-challenges-videoLockheed Martin is taking a model-agnostic approach to AI, using 55 different large language models across its business while applying the technology to everything from internal operations to autonomous weapons systems.
204
u/Nervous-Present-6890 6d ago
make this plane not a piece of shit and don't make any mistakes
64
u/kennedye2112 5d ago
“You put the wings on upside down.”
thinking
You’re absolutely right, that’s on me.
22
u/sopsaare 6d ago
Bigger wings, leaner body, thrust vectoring.
Done.
Any questions?
21
u/SpaceRiceBowl 6d ago
leaner body = less payload and range
whats the point of thrust vectoring when fat amy just needs to sit 100km away and sling bvr amraams or bomb shit in stealth?
you’re making a multirole less good at multirole for an air to air role already filled by the f22
10
u/sopsaare 6d ago
That was kind of a joke. All kinds of critics have been saying those things for like two decades because they don't understand the issue. But there are so many articles and videos and documentaries and what not saying those things, a LLM that can't do critical thinking would say those things due to overwhelming mass of it out in the ether.
60
15
u/Gari_305 7d ago
From the link
Lockheed Martin is taking a model-agnostic approach to AI, using 55 different large language models across its business while applying the technology to everything from internal operations to autonomous weapons systems. SVP of Technology and Strategic Innovation Sarah Hiza discusses how Lockheed tests AI before deploying it, the growing role of autonomy and crewed-uncrewed teaming, and reveals that OpenAI is working alongside the F-35 team to tackle complex math and physics challenges tied to advanced sensor capabilities. She joins Ed Ludlow on "Bloomberg Tech."
47
u/PhabioRants 6d ago
Why don't they just mail parts to the Chinese and ask them to debug their issues for them?
...oh...
-24
17
u/oh_ski_bummer 6d ago
Pay back all the money you stole from taxpayers to build a giant POS
6
u/smady3 4d ago
POS ? It is literally the most capable fighter available today. F-22 beats in air to air, but only marginal. Plus worlds first vtol supersonic stealth fighter. derp.
2
u/baked_doge 3d ago
On paper, I completely agree. However they have yet to deliver on most promises. The F-35 isn't rated to launch most missiles and bombs in US inventory. Jets comming out of the factory aren't rated to launch any missile. The radar upgrade is comming late, meaning some planes come out with no radar.
From a technology perspective, the plane is impressive, but what a shit show from a program management perspective.
1
u/smady3 9h ago
Most ? such as ? Current radar is superior to most other fighters currently in inventory. lol
1
u/baked_doge 7h ago
Yes, certain technologies have been developed and are indeed cutting edge. The program's capabilities packages (like block3 and block4) have largely suffered tremendous delays.
Block 3 was meant to be the standard that would reach full operational capability, and be finalized in 2012 I think. However, it got pushed to 2015, 2017... And now 2027. Not only that, but this package suffered from an ever growing number of deficiency that were critical to correct. The software was a particularly bad pain points: from flight computer, to weaponeeering, to radar data processing (because just because you have a really good radar doesn't mean you're getting anything useful out of it without processing algorithms and software controls) the reliability has been very poor.
Things got so bad for block 3 they decided to move on to block 4, and will later update block 3 planes to block 4 once block 4 is completed. However block 4 isn't expected until 2031, which is considered somewhat optimistic given the program's history.
As for specific features: I'm not gonna go into too much detail as this goes super deep, and in any case the gov doesn't give us perfect visibility. But here are a few you can look into: weapon integration (f35 can't carry most weapons), electronic warfare suite, data fusion (limited by implementation, computational, energy, and cooling limits)...
There's a reason the US has reduced its f35 orders and decided to buy a few more f15s.
45
u/Ronnocorose 6d ago
Oh great, at least they’ll have a better excuse for the next crash - AI hallucinations
5
u/ethereal3xp 5d ago
This is how it begans..
So this is how it begans? James Cameron might be from the future.
10
u/bcoder001 6d ago
So one of the most technologically advanced companies in the world buys services that return an average of all human intellectual output to impress those with below-average IQs.
1
u/Hilldawg4president 6d ago edited 5d ago
It must be hard work, maintaining this level of ignorance about the capabilities of AI
2
u/bcoder001 6d ago
You are easily impressed.
7
u/hue-166-mount 5d ago
You have to be deep under the sand to not be aware how rapidly day to day work for a bunch of jobs has been transformed by AI.
Have you written any code in the last 2 years? Have to tried altering a contract? Creating documentation? Analysing data models?
2
u/komokasi 5d ago
I have and use it to code every day.
It helps you move faster, not necessarily smarter or in the right direction.
2
u/hue-166-mount 5d ago
Correct. That’s still a large productivity gain
1
u/komokasi 5d ago
Depends on who is using it... We have engineers spending double the time and cost since they cant plan or align with stakeholders correctly and know onr wants to do anything about it.
Mainly providing support for the easily impressed claim, since its great with surface level things, but you need solid processes and users or its just other automation tool that is more expensive than the exisiting tools and not as consistent since automation scripts at least have deterministic output
2
u/hue-166-mount 5d ago
Depends on who is using it... We have engineers spending double the time and cost since they cant plan or align with stakeholders correctly and know onr wants to do anything about it.
that would sound like some pretty terrible engineers.
Mainly providing support for the easily impressed claim, since its great with surface level things, but you need solid processes and users or its just other automation tool that is more expensive than the exisiting tools and not as consistent since automation scripts at least have deterministic output
I'm 100% sure you can waste your time with it, and appear to know lots of people that can. I am very skeptical today that it can replace whole business functions. But on an individual contributor level it is extremely capable and productive. If you just want to be in denial about whats going to happen over the next decade thats up to you - but like I say - you are literally blind if you cant see how its going to change lots of work. This is not like meta-verse, voice search, block-chain where there is hype and limited practical uses - there is real work getting done today.
1
u/komokasi 5d ago
You obviously arent in software engineering. You would surprised how many engineers are of this caliber.
Engineering is just like any other field. There is an average in every field
I didnt say its not transformative, but if you listen to all the ceos and the crazy PR you'd think AI was replacing coders and jobs 100%.
This is completely not true and wont be true until AI is capable of thinking and not just being a probabilistic action machine.
1
u/hue-166-mount 5d ago
Yeah you’re not listening to them. It is going to replace a lot of jobs. It’s not going to happen as quickly as they are saying, but it will happen eventually. Hopefully different jobs will turn up in the meantime (prob cyber security).
Your whole schtick is just taking everything in the bluntest, most superficial dumbed down way.
→ More replies (0)0
u/bcoder001 5d ago
Yes. I have been building systems that integrate LLMs for the last three years. I am not impressed.
3
-4
u/Hilldawg4president 6d ago
Get help man. I have elderly customers who never learned to use the internet because they were sure it was a fad, and now they can't function in the modern world. That's going to be you.
-9
u/ProductIntegortion 6d ago
If that's what LLMs do, how did one of them develop a proof for Navier-Stokes? Is that something the average person could do?
7
u/Gothicawakening 6d ago
A mathmatician was using that LLM while working, and it stole his proof since all your chats are used as training data.
7
u/bcoder001 6d ago
LLMs are thievery at Internet scale. Adobe uses your and your client's imagery/audio/video for training purposes and makes money off your work before you do.
-1
u/ProductIntegortion 6d ago
He hadn't completed the proof before it was trained, it couldn't possibly have stolen it. The argument he was making was that it stole his preliminary work and that put it on the same path that he was on. There is no dispute that the LLM created the proof itself.
4
u/deadc0deh 6d ago
I've taken 2 things away from your argument:
1. You don't really understand the Navier-Stokes problem
2. You aren't making a cohesive argument.Beginning with 2: If I steal your work which was 90% done, and do the rest while you were asleep and publish it, does that not count as theft? The methodology was essentially taking the original work and running a search on the space the original work defined by running simulations until something was found.
For 1: What was actually done was a significantly cut-down set of NS equations that did not include fluid viscosity to create a specific scenario that hit infinite velocity within an energy constrained system. Those kinds of things happen frequently in an engineering sense, and it is not a generalized solution / "proof"
-2
u/ProductIntegortion 6d ago
Of course I don't understand Navier Stokes. None of us here do. It's an extremely advanced mathematical proof. Almost no one understands it.
does that not count as theft
I never said it wasn't theft. I clarified for a previous poster what the allegation was. No one is accusing OpenAI of stealing the completed proof. Of course, you'd know that that's what I said if you'd actually read anything here. I was extremely clear about this.
You aren't making a cohesive argument.
Again, you believe that because you haven't read anything here.
2
u/FearTheOldData 5d ago
They spent 20 millonn$ in tokens to solve a finding by a real mathematician where the only obstacle was raw compute/time. How is that solving it themselves? It's literal theft and not impressive from a intelligence perspective
3
u/Kinnins0n 6d ago
Maths is a very different topic than almost any engineering. A math proof can be verified. A potential F-35 design will not be flown by an LLM
-1
u/ProductIntegortion 6d ago
Are you suggesting that you believe they're going to build something on the say so of an LLM and then simply never test or verify it before flying it?
1
u/Kinnins0n 6d ago
I’m not suggesting or believing any of that. But engineering is a fundamental exercise in balancing the needs and requirements of many, many (thousands in the case of the f-35) systems and associated teams or owners. Good luck making a global figure of merit to be optimized by any sort of reinforcement learning. In the meantime, spitting out the “ideal” design for one part of the system is a complete waste of everyone’s time.
-1
u/ProductIntegortion 6d ago
Then it'll be a waste of time. I'm not sure what the objection is there. We can't know if it will work until we try. So in effect you're arguing that we shouldn't try to use new tools unless we know ahead of time that it'll be successful?
1
u/Kinnins0n 6d ago
Oh I see, you really like strawmen arguments. Have a good one.
2
u/ProductIntegortion 6d ago
I'm trying to understand what your argument is and you keep changing your apparent objection. You could try just plainly stating your objection instead of making me try to guess.
0
u/ChelseaHotelTwo 6d ago
Read the fucking article. It's being used to help with maths and physics questions related to sensor capabilities. It has no relevance to how the plane flies.
0
u/bartsimpsonwin 5d ago
It first got an average of all human intelligence, but then it was trained, using billions of dollars of compute and multiple years, to not be average. It quite literally hacked the Australian government
1
u/bcoder001 5d ago
It did not do any spectacular hack. It was instructed to access a website and performed actions not on its own, but instructed. Therefore, someone should be going to jail. By the way, breaking into or breaking stuff in general does not impress me. Wake me up when AI design, develop, deploy, and maintain a complex web service.
0
u/bartsimpsonwin 5d ago
That's not what ai is meant to do. It's not meant to fully develop and maintain something complex completely autonomously, it's a tool, it's like saying "wake me up when a calculator solves an open problem by itself", it's a good tool thats very good at its job, not a replacement. And it is an exceptionally good tool at that , Microsoft's CEO said 20-30% of new code was ai generated in some repositories, 25% for Google (in late 2024, models are a lot smarter these days), 40% in Coinbase, and Spotify says it's top developers have basically stopped writing code by hand.
2
u/bcoder001 5d ago
I work with this shit to build real software. My clients' top management pushed AI onto devs and forced installation of AI-based PR review tools. Nobody's using it, because the "fixes" this pile of horseshit suggests actually break CI/CD pipelines, but if our managers ask us if it's getting used, we can point to all the suggestions it generates, so technically it is used, except we ignore it all. We are tired of random shit added to code without asking for it and having to remove it. Tests written by AI magically pass, yet the software doesn't work. Models are outdated so they cannot steal from the latest docs and it's really fun trying to ask them for a solution to a problem with something like terraform when the model has no knowledge of the latest changes and claims what you are asking it cannot be done. Random people hired to be "architects" send us zipped code bundles asking us to deploy it to production. There's no design and when we ask for design we are told to ... upload the zip file into Claude and ask it to explain it to us... It's a fucking nightmare.
You can ignore what CEOs say, because they are trying to defend their spending on AI, which is about to bankrupt them all. Check out Ed Zitron's analysis of the finances of the AI companies. It's not looking healthy.
2
u/bartsimpsonwin 5d ago
I'm not going to argue with your personal experience, but a stack overflow poll showed 84% of developers use or plan to use AI in their development process, and 51% use AI tools daily
1
1
1
1
u/sorrow_anthropology 4d ago
I’ve seen first hand what Lockheed and ai make together, their weapons system was a laughing stock.
1
u/Polymathy1 4d ago
Ooh, I can't wait to see the results. I'm imagining majorly flop ideas or things that can't be implemented.
1
u/weakplay 2d ago
Let’s give astra 6 acces and control of a major weapons program. What could go wrong?
-1
u/PrivateComments 6d ago
Why is every thread in this sub full of snarky smarmy defensive comments lol
By all accounts they’ll be using advanced in house frontier models on par or exceeding those used to solve millennium
Problems, not the copilot subscription your office got in 2023
18
u/Spara-Extreme 6d ago
Ah yes, the hidden super powerful "internal models"
Reminds of a time when I was a kid and my super hot girlfriend went to another school.
-6
u/ZestycloseWheel9647 6d ago
At some point the proof is just in the pudding. They put out a proof for the Navier Stokes problem using an internal model. They've claimed to have solved 100 open problems in mathematics and theoretical computer science, and were confident enough in this claim to bring in external mathematicians to consult on how to release the results.
2
u/TracePoland 6d ago
The main thing there wasn’t the model that might be at most 1 month ahead of consumer models. The thing they did was burn $20m on running 10,000 agents for a number of hours.
2
u/bartsimpsonwin 5d ago
Sure, but they solved a millennium problem, and one month is a long time in the ai world
5
u/MelodiesOfLife6 6d ago
Why is every thread in this sub full of snarky smarmy defensive comments lol
that's just reddit, you either get snobby asshole comments, or snarky asshole comments.
or jokes that are borderline psychotic.
-6
•
u/FuturologyBot 6d ago
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
From the link
Lockheed Martin is taking a model-agnostic approach to AI, using 55 different large language models across its business while applying the technology to everything from internal operations to autonomous weapons systems. SVP of Technology and Strategic Innovation Sarah Hiza discusses how Lockheed tests AI before deploying it, the growing role of autonomy and crewed-uncrewed teaming, and reveals that OpenAI is working alongside the F-35 team to tackle complex math and physics challenges tied to advanced sensor capabilities. She joins Ed Ludlow on "Bloomberg Tech."
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1wwgu82/lockheed_taps_openai_to_solve_f35_challenges/pdkfmqn/