As part of that deal, “the ceasefire would be extended for a long period or the parties would agree on a permanent end to the war,” Axios posited. “According to the proposal, the nuclear negotiations would only start at a later stage, after the strait was open and the blockade lifted.”

The new proposal, passed to the United States by Pakistan, likely won’t earn the support of Trump, who has repeatedly demanded a final end to Iran’s nuclear program as part of an overall deal to reopen the Strait, lift the blockade, and make the ceasefire permanent.

“We have all the cards,” Trump told Fox News on Sunday. He also stated it is imperative the U.S. gets Iran’s enriched Uranium.

“These are sensitive diplomatic discussions and the U.S. will not negotiate through the press,” Assistant White House Press Secretary Olivia Wales told us Monday morning in response to our questions about the claimed Iranian offer. “As the President has said, the United States holds the cards and will only make a deal that puts the American people first, never allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

The claimed Iranian offer comes as diplomacy has stagnated. Late last week, Trump called off a trip to Pakistan by envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner after Iran signaled it wouldn’t meet with the U.S. delegation there.

In an interview with Fox News on Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco pushed back on Iran’s claim that it will reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“And what they mean by opening the Straits is, yes, the Straits are opened. As long as you coordinate with Iran, get our permission, or we’ll blow you up and you pay us,” Rubio stated. “That’s not opening the Straits. Those are international waterways. They cannot normalize, nor can we tolerate them trying to normalize a system in which the Iranians decide who gets to use an international waterway, and how much you have to pay them to use it.”

Iran’s armed forces would be the authority responsible for the Strait of Hormuz under the country’s proposed law for managing the waterway, a top official says.

Ebrahim Azizi, head of the national security commission in Iran’s parliament, tells state television that the armed forces are already in control of the Strait and are seeking to prohibit the passage of “hostile vessels.”

Azizi added that the proposed law states that financial gains from the strait should be paid in the local rial currency.

Clearly, Trump’s blockade aims to cripple Iran economically and pressure the regime into making a deal or face possibly years of economic ruin once their oil infrastructure degrades.

A satellite image emerged showing Iran, as of Sunday, still loading oil onto tankers at Kharg Island.

“So beware of talk about Tehran running out of onshore / floating storage in only a couple of days,” Bloomberg energy and commodities columnist Javier Blas said Monday on X. 

Blas’ observation about Kharg Island was in reference to a statement Trump made Sunday on Fox News signaling an interest in maintaining the blockade of Iranian ports. The president claimed that Iran’s oil infrastructure could “explode” in about three days because of mechanical issues exacerbated by that blockade.

“When you have, you know, lines of vast amounts of oil pouring through your system, if for any reason that line is closed because you can’t continue to put it into containers or ships, which has happened to them — they have no ships because of the blockade — what happens is that line explodes from within, both mechanically and in the earth,” Trump told Fox News’ “The Sunday Briefing.”

“It’s something that happens where it just explodes. And they say they only have about three days left before that happens. And when it explodes, you can never, regardless, you can never rebuild it the way it was.”

On that note, WSJ reports that China is looking to export oil to China via railway in order to circumvent the blockade, even though this is a far less efficient method:

UPDATES

An Iranian F-5 combat jet flew through U.S. air defenses and struck Camp Buehring in Kuwait during the first days of the war, NBC News reported. The attack happened despite the aircraft being heavily outclassed by opposing aircraft and air defenses and the infrastructure to operate Iranian fighters being heavily targeted during this conflict as well as the 12-Day War between Iran and Israel last June. 

The news about the F-5 was part of a larger story by NBC that claimed Iran caused billions of dollars in damage to U.S. military assets and bases in the Gulf region. The targets included runways, high-end radar systems, dozens of aircraft, warehouses, command headquarters, aircraft hangars and satellite communications infrastructure, much of it we have already reported.

As TWZ editor-in-chief Tyler Rogoway notes, U.S. Marine Corps F/A-18 C/D Hornets F/A-18C Hornets from the VMFA-312 “Checkerboards” that arrived in the Middle East will bring special capabilities to the fight, especially around the Strait of Hormuz, should it reignite.

“USMC F/A-18C/Ds pushed to the Middle East are extremely capable drone hunters,” he wrote on X. “Now significantly upgraded w/APG-79V4 AESA and APKWS air-to-air rockets. Good targeting pod etc. Marines better at dispersed ops. Expect them forward and working in counter air screen over gulf if needed. Good for hunting small boats too etc.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with Russian President Vladimir Putin today in St. Petersburg to discuss the war and efforts to end it. The meeting as a shaky ceasefire extension issued by U.S. President Donald Trump continues to hold despite Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz and an ongoing U.S. blockade of Iranian ports.

Araghchi “explained the diplomatic process of Pakistan’s mediation for the complete end of the imposed war and the establishment of peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and the Strait of Hormuz,” his Telegram channel noted. “He considered the continuation of America’s destructive habits, especially insistence on unreasonable demands, frequent changes in positions, threatening rhetoric, and continuous breaches of agreements as factors slowing down diplomatic progress.”

Putin, for his part, said he hopes that the Iranian people will get through “this difficult period of trials and that peace will come,” according to Russia’s official TASS news outlet.

Putin added that Moscow is ready to do everything in its power to ensure that peace in the Middle East “is achieved as quickly as possible.” He also stressed that Russia “intends to maintain” its strategic relations with Iran.

As we have frequently noted, Iran and Russia have close military and economic ties. Moscow has reportedly provided Iran with intelligence to help its targeting of U.S. assets in the Middle East while Iran provided Russia with Shahed-136 drones used during the war in Ukraine.

Referring to the U.S., German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said “an entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership, especially by these so-called Revolutionary Guards.”

“The Iranians are obviously very skilled ⁠at negotiating, or rather, very skilful at not negotiating, letting the Americans travel to Islamabad ​and then leave again without any result,” he added during a talk to students in the ​town of Marsberg.

Merz also said the Strait of Hormuz had been partially mined and added that he did not see what exit strategy the United States was pursuing in the war.

The number of ships transiting the Strait continues to drop amid the Iranian closure and U.S. blockade of Iranian ports. On Sunday, transit volume through the Strait of Hormuz fell to eight crossings — four inbound and four outbound, all AIS-visible (zero dark transits in either direction),” the maritime intelligence firm Windward reported Monday. “Inbound was led by Panama-flagged products tanker Deepblue (Iran-staged, High risk) via the Northern Corridor, with three small India/Comoros cargo dhows (MSV Al Shama, MSV Al K M Khwaja, Al Ahmed) routing through the Southern Corridor. Outbound traffic was uniformly Northern Corridor: high-risk Barbados bulker Kaia, moderate-risk bulker Kaiser (St K&N), Panama general-cargo Cstar Voyager, and Comoros aggregate carrier Arad 10.”

Gulf-wide presence of ships “rose to 920 vessels (an increase of 28 from the previous day), while dark activity events eased to 117 (a 5% reduction) — a small but constructive divergence between rising AIS-visible traffic and falling dark behavior,” Windward noted, adding that the list of ships in the Gulf region included 156 bulk carriers, 146 product tankers, 83 crude tankers, 62 container ships, 43 LNG/LPG carriers, and 38 chemical tankers.

A superyacht linked to sanctioned Russian billionaire Alexey Mordashov sailed through the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday, shipping data showed, according to Reuters. Nord is one of very few vessels to ​transit the blockaded shipping lane at the heart of the conflict.

“Nord – a ‌142-meter (465-foot) yacht worth over $500 million – left a Dubai marina at around 1400 GMT on Friday, crossed the strait on Saturday morning, and arrived in Muscat early on Sunday,” according to data on the ​MarineTraffic platform.

The status of the Tifani and Majestic X – two Iranian-linked oil tankers seized by the U.S. in the Indian Ocean last week – remains unclear.

Both appear to be crossing the Indian Ocean westbound in quite close proximity to one another, digital signals from the two carriers indicate, according to Bloomberg News.

“The US has given no formal indication of what it intends to do with either,” the outlet added. “They are still signaling the same destinations in Asia as they were when the interdictions happened, adding to the confusion about where they’re going now.”

Cape Town, at the southern tip of Africa, would be a standard waypoint for ships sailing onward to the U.S., Bloomberg noted. “Equally, they are heading in the direction of the UK-controlled Chagos archipelago, where there’s an American military base at Diego Garcia.”

We have reached out to the Coast Guard and Department of Justice for more details. The Coast Guard referred us to the Pentagon, which declined comment.

The downstream effects of the Strait closure are being increasingly felt in the U.S.

The average price of gasoline in the U.S. rose 7 cents over the last week and currently stands at $4.04 per gallon, according to new data released by GasBuddy, an app that tracks gas prices across parts of North America and Australia. 

While average gas prices have increased in 39 U.S. states since last week, average diesel prices declined across the country, said Patrick De Haan, a petroleum analyst at GasBuddy, told CBS News.

“However, that divergence may prove short-lived,” he said. “Oil prices have been climbing again as markets react to renewed geopolitical tensions and the cancellation of talks between the U.S. and Iran. As a result, gasoline prices are set to rise further this week, with diesel expected to follow.”

De Haan suggested the Great Lakes and Plains regions, as well as other inland states, could see average gas prices reach their highest points since 2022.

Texas shrimp boat captains told NBC News that the surge in diesel prices since the Iran war makes it almost impossible to turn a profit.

“The industry is going to disappear,” one of the captains told the network.

Israel sent the United Arab Emirates an Iron Dome air defense system with troops to operate it early in the war with Iran, Axios reported, citing two Israeli officials and one U.S. official.

“The military, security and intelligence cooperation between Israel and the UAE has reached new heights during the war,” the outlet added. “The unprecedented deployment of the Iron Dome system during the war was not previously made public.”

Dr Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to UAE President Sheikh Mohamed, said the Gulf’s containment strategy towards Iran had “failed miserably” and warned the country could pose a threat for decades to come.

The senior Emirati official said the “ferocity and recklessness” of Iranian aggression against its neighbors during the conflict had been unexpected, according to The National, an Abu Dhabi-based English language news outlet.

Gargash added that agreements were in place that U.S. military bases in the region would not be used to launch strikes against Iran and insisted Tehran had deliberately stoked confrontation.

“This folly, this ferocity, this indiscriminate attack, which we now see from the launch sites of the aggression, is clearly a premeditated attack,” Gargash proffered during the Gulf Creators event, held at Atlantis The Palm, in Dubai.

“This was a premeditated plan, not a decision made in 24 or 48 hours,” the advisor noted. “Iran’s attack on its Arab neighbors is a planned attack, part of a confrontation scenario devised by the Iranian planners, who built the necessary fortifications and armed themselves accordingly.”

Hezbollah drones continue to take a toll on Israeli forces in southern Lebanon. Video shot by an IDF soldier shows a Hezbollah one way attack munition striking just a few meters from an Owl helicopter that was dispatched to the incident where a sergeant was killed and five more soldiers were wounded by an explosive drone launched at them. We outlined this threat earlier this month in a story you can read here.

Hezbollah and Israel each escalated their attacks and accusations over the other side violating the ceasefire, according to the Jerusalem Post.

“Leading into Sunday, the first dispute between the sides following the April 17 ceasefire was that Israel said that the ceasefire only applied North of the Litani River, but not within southern Lebanon,” the newspaper noted. “The IDF already controlled southern Lebanon and wanted to continue to destroy Hezbollah’s weapons stored in nearby villages as well as kill the terror group’s fighters if they remained in that area and refused to surrender.”

Since the ceasefire, the IDF had killed over 40 Hezbollah fighters, but almost all in southern Lebanon, the Post stated.

In the broader scheme, Israel has also hoped to hold onto southern Lebanon for an extended period to help pressure Hezbollah into a process of disarming.

Hezbollah rejected the ceasefire worked out between Israel and Lebanon.

The Israeli Air Force said it has begun to attack infrastructure of the terrorist organization Hezbollah in the Beqaa Valley and in several areas in southern Lebanon.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post Prospects Dimming On Iran-U.S. Deal To Open Strait, End War appeared first on The War Zone.

A photo showing part of an AMRAAM missile body clearly marked with the AIM-120C-8 designation began to circulate online recently. According to available accounts, the wreckage was found in the aftermath of a Russian air attack on Dnipro in central Ukraine, during which the Ukrainian Armed Forces were active in defense of the city.

Previous imagery of Ukrainian F-16s had confirmed they were using some version of the AIM-120C, which can be identified on account of its cropped fins for internal carriage in the F-22 and F-35. This appears to be the first confirmation that the AIM-120C-8, specifically, has been supplied to Kyiv, in addition to earlier AIM-120A/B versions.

As we’ve discussed in the past, the AIM-120C offers some significant advantages over the earlier AIM-120A/B models.

In general, the ‘Charlie’ version offers a range of advanced capabilities that reflect the continuous development of both this specific sub-variant and the AIM-120 series overall. Even in its earliest sub-generation versions, the C-model features notable upgrades in terms of range, guidance, resistance to countermeasures, and other key areas.

Successive improvements reportedly introduced on the AIM-120C family include a new WDU-41/B warhead (AIM-120C-4), a new WPU-16/B propulsion section with a larger motor and electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM) upgrades (AIM-120C-5), and an updated proximity fuze (AIM-120C-6). Meanwhile, the AIM-120C-7 features further improved ECCM, an upgraded seeker, and a longer range.

The exact differences between the AIM-120C-8 and the AIM-120D are somewhat unclear, although the D-model, at least, is understood to feature two-way datalink with third-party targeting capabilities. The AIM-120D may also feature an active electronically scanned array (AESA) seeker, while the C-8 remains a mechanically scanned antenna. There have been previous suggestions that the AIM-120D is reserved for the U.S. military and its closest allies, while other international customers receive the AIM-120C-8.

It was an AIM-120D that was used for what the U.S. Air Force described as the “longest known” air-to-air missile shot, during a series of tests in airspace near Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, in the fall of 2024. The launch platform on that occasion was an F-22. This would fit with reports that the D-model features significantly greater range than earlier versions, although, once again, the precise differences between AIM-120C-8 and AIM-120D are unclear.

Both the AIM-120C-8 and the AIM-120D have also been further enhanced under the F3R program, developed for the U.S. Air Force. F3R stands for form, fit, function refresh, and is primarily intended to eke out more performance from the missile, as you can read more about here. It’s not clear if Ukraine’s AIM-120C-8s also benefit from the F3R improvements.

A recent promotional video from Raytheon includes footage of a separation launch of the latest-generation AMRAAM F3R from a U.S. Navy F/A-18F Super Hornet:

The plan was for the U.S. Air Force to begin to receive AMRAAMs incorporating F3R starting early 2023, as part of the Lot 33 production run. The U.S. AMRAAM program of record is expected to continue into around 2027 or 2028. As for the AIM-120C-8, these missiles are expected to remain in production for international partners long beyond 2030.

Regardless, the AIM-120C-8 offers Ukraine a notably long-range weapon.

While official performance figures are classified, it is generally assumed to be able to hit targets at a distance of between 75 and 100 miles. Of course, in practical applications, a whole range of factors impact a missile’s reach, above all, the energy and altitude state of the launching aircraft and the target.

In an air-to-air context, the weapon goes some way toward closing the gap with Russia’s R-37M missile, known to NATO as the AA-13 Axehead. According to the manufacturer, at least in its export form, the R-37M can defeat “some types” of aerial targets at a range of up to 124 miles. This likely refers to only larger, less agile, aircraft targets and is very much a “sales brochure figure,” with all the caveats that entails.

At this stage, we don’t know for sure whether the wreckage in Dnipro came from an air-launched AMRAAM, i.e., fired by an F-16, or if it was an effector from a ground-based NASAMS.

In the case of the F-16, the importance of the AMRAAM cannot be overstated. This was the first active-radar-guided air-to-air missile to be fielded by Ukraine. This is a class of weapons that the Ukrainian Air Force long campaigned for. One of its fighter pilots, the late Andrii Pilshchykov, better known by his callsign “Juice,” told TWZ back in 2022: “The lack of fire and forget missiles is the greatest problem for us.”

More recently, Ukrainian F-16s have had to rely more heavily on AMRAAMs. Earlier this year, reports emerged indicating that Ukraine had been left late last year with only “a handful” of U.S.-made AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles for its F-16s, after the supply of these short-range weapons dried up.

This left the F-16 pilots with AMRAAMs plus the jet’s internal 20mm M61 Vulcan cannon.

As we have discussed many times before, taking out slow-moving drones via another fixed-wing aircraft with guns can be very challenging and downright dangerous, especially for fast jets. AMRAAMs can be employed against drones and cruise missiles, too, but are more expensive weapons than the Sidewinders. Each AMRAAM costs around one million dollars.

To help plug the gap, Ukrainian F-16s have begun using laser-guided 70mm Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II (APKWS II) rockets. These rockets provide an extremely valuable, lower-cost option for engaging long-range kamikaze drones and subsonic cruise missiles. U.S. Air Force F-16s began using them in combat last year, as we were first to report.

While somewhat less likely, there’s also a possibility that the Dnipro wreckage came from an AIM-120C-8 fired by a NASAMS.

Deliveries of the first two Ukrainian NASAMS batteries were expedited after Russia’s large-scale missile and drone assault on major population centers in Ukraine in late 2022.

A video showing the Ukrainian NASAMS in action:

As we explored at the time, a critical advantage of NASAMS is the fact that it fires the exact same missiles used in air-to-air applications. It does not require a special AMRAAM variant or major modifications to existing missiles. In addition, it can fire other types of effectors, including the AMRAAM-ER, which is a hybrid of the AIM-120 and the RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM), and the infrared-homing AIM-9X Sidewinder and IRIS-T missiles. 

It might be expected that Ukrainian NASAMS is being fed with older AIM-120A/Bs, which, in the ground-launched application, are capable of engaging targets from relatively close ranges to up to roughly 20 miles away and from around 1,000 feet to 50,000 feet. These targets include everything from cruise missiles — which it is very good at engaging — to crewed aircraft and drones.

Another major factor behind the appearance of the AIM-120C-8 wreckage could be the indication that stocks of older (AIM-120A/B and earlier C-version) missiles have been depleted, leading to the inclusion of higher-end C variants. If so, this would increase the pressure on at least some of the foreign partners who are supporting Ukraine with weapons, particularly given the global imbalance between the supply and demand for munitions. The conflict in Iran is likely to intensify this strain, as the United States is reportedly delaying deliveries to customers to prioritize replenishing its own inventories.

As it stands, we now have confirmation that Ukraine is using what is almost certainly the most advanced and capable version of the AMRAAM that is available to all but the very closest U.S. military allies. As such, it should provide Ukraine with a particularly powerful tool in its ongoing battle against Russian air attacks.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Evidence Of Ukraine Using AIM-120C-8 Missiles Emerges appeared first on The War Zone.

At least one such test took place in the Soviet Union, however. On his X account, Sam Wise, an aviation analyst at Janes, brought our attention to footage that purportedly shows that test, or at least portions of it.

The test in question was especially notable in that it involved a free-fall tactical nuclear bomb that was delivered by a crewed fighter-bomber, specifically a Su-7 Fitter attack jet, in an end-to-end test.

Of those 2,000-plus nuclear tests, only a small fraction involved bombs dropped from aircraft of any kind — roughly 200 to 250 according to records compiled by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization. Those tests almost always involved bombers, aircraft with multiple engines, several crew members, and, often, dedicated to delivering nuclear weapons.

The vast majority of nuclear tests were conducted underground, at sea, or on land. In the latter case, the devices were typically detonated from an elevated position, either atop a tower or suspended from a balloon. This better replicated the conditions of a typical nuclear detonation, with the weapon engineered to explode in an air burst above the ground, for maximum effect.

One reason for the relative scarcity of air-dropped nuclear bomb tests was the Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963, which pushed testing underground.

At the same time, dropping a live nuclear weapon from a crewed aircraft brings additional risks for relatively little benefit.

At the beginning of the nuclear age, air-dropped tests were useful to prove that bombs could be delivered, but they were inefficient in terms of scientific measurement and riskier to conduct from a safety point of view. Dropping a nuclear device from an aircraft adds variables (altitude, speed, trajectory) that complicate measurements. If something goes wrong, you risk losing a plane, or worse, an accidental detonation or contamination spread.

Based on the available information, it appears that the U.S. military never tested a live tactical nuclear bomb dropped by a tactical combat jet, despite the very many platforms, both Air Force and Navy, that were cleared to carry them operationally.

It should be noted that the U.S. Air Force did detonate one tactical nuclear weapon after launch from a fighter. However, this involved an air-to-air rocket, the nuclear-tipped Genie, which was fired on this occasion from an F-89 interceptor, in 1957’s Operation Plumbbob John.

France does appear to have conducted a live test of an air-dropped tactical nuclear bomb, with an AN52 dropped from a Jaguar attack jet in August 1972, to help prove that weapon for service.

Returning to the Soviet Union, on August 27, 1962, pilot Lt. Col. A. I. Shein took off in a single-seat Su-7B, with a live 244N nuclear bomb carried on the centerline station below the fuselage. He then headed for the Semipalatinsk test site on the Soviet steppe. Also known as “The Polygon,” the Semipalatinsk range was the main test site for Soviet nuclear weapons. It is in the Abai Region, in what is now Kazakhstan.

Shein put the jet into a climb at an angle of around 45 degrees. This was an ‘over-the-shoulder’ toss maneuver, typical for fighter-bombers of this era. This involved the attacking aircraft pulling upward before releasing its bomb to compensate for the weapon’s gravity drop in flight. The result would put the weapon on the target, without the aircraft having to pass over it. Instead, the jet would complete a half roll and (hopefully) avoid the blast effects so it could escape. The launch maneuver sequence, as shown in the video, is apparently simulated, or at the least, heavily edited.

Shein later recalled:

“I take off, the excitement subsides, I enter the combat course, and make an approach. Everything is normal, I make an approach for a combat release, bring the aircraft into a nose-up attitude, and monitor the G-forces. After four seconds, I hear a signal, then a second, a short third, and I press the ‘release’ trigger. The green light goes out, indicating the release has been completed. The bomb’s release is felt by the shaking of the aircraft. I continue the nose-up attitude. For control, I note the release angle; it is almost constant and equal to 44–50 degrees. After passing the top point, I then descend at a 50-60 degree angle, perform a half-roll, increase engine speed and, consequently, aircraft speed, descend to the lowest possible altitude, and try to get as far and as quickly as possible from the target.”

This method required a bomb computer to calculate the release point. For the U.S. Air Force, this was the Low Altitude Bombing System, or LABS, while the Su-7 was fitted with the equivalent PBK-1 device, a separate box that was added to the left side of the instrument panel. In this context, PBK denoted Pritsel dliya Bombometaniya s Kabrirovaniya, or toss-bombing sight.

A video shows a U.S. Air Force B-47 bomber flying the LABS maneuver:

After release from the Su-7, the bomb exploded at an altitude of around 800 feet, at the coordinates of 50.4°N and 77.8°E. The detonation had a yield of 11 kilotons.

As for the Su-7, this was the Soviet Union’s first-generation supersonic attack jet. It was rapidly equipping fighter-bomber regiments, and nuclear strike would become one of its most important duties.

The streamlined 244N was the first mass-produced Soviet tactical nuclear bomb specifically intended for carriage by supersonic jets.

A photo showing the earlier, non-streamlined RDS-4 tactical free-fall bomb:

At this point, it should be noted that there is a possibility that the video shows not the 244N, but an IAB-500, a so-called ‘imitation bomb’ that replicated the shape, dimensions, weight and flight characteristics of the nuclear device. Filled with a mixture of liquid petroleum and white phosphorus, it also produced a large fireball that subsequently turned into a mushroom cloud.

With that in mind, the video could at least show portions of an IAB-500 test, although the location and the original voiceover point squarely to the 1962 Semipalatinsk test. The apparent installation of a camera pod below the Su-7’s wing, to record the detonation, also suggests a nuclear test rather than training.

Regardless, the 244N was successfully tested and was put into operational service in several variants, including with different yields up to a maximum of 30 kilotons. Most of these bombs were deployed by Soviet units stationed close to what would have been the front line in the event of a confrontation with NATO: in East Germany, Hungary, and Poland.

Starting in 1967, Western intelligence began to note training activities involving nuclear weapons at Soviet airbases in East Germany, including Su-7s taking part in LABS-type maneuvers.

In one of its reports from 1967, the U.S. Military Liaison Mission (USMLM) noted that its staff identified Su-7s from Grossenhain Air Base performing at least four LABS practice delivery runs on October 7 of that year.

“The aircraft passed over the airfield at approximately 2,000 feet, pulled up into vertical climb to 3,500 feet, pitched over, flew inverted for several seconds, then rolled over again departing to the west.”

Two days later, the USMLM reported “A very active program of local navigational, touch-and-go landings, LABS maneuvers, and possible range activity flown by Grossenhain-based Fitter and [two-seat Su-7] Moujik” aircraft.

Air-dropped tactical nuclear weapons still play a significant role in Russia’s military strategy, as evidenced by recent moves to station tactical devices in Belarus. Many Russian combat aircraft have variants capable of carrying nuclear bombs, and most Russian air-launched missiles weighing around 1,000 pounds have the option of a nuclear warhead.

Starting in the 1960s, the 244N was superseded by a modernized development of the same weapon, the 10-kiloton RN-24, as well as the one-kiloton RN-28. These were carried, among others, by the MiG-21 and Su-7.

These bombs were followed in the 1980s by the RN-40 and RN-41, carried by the MiG-23, MiG-27, MiG-29, Su-17, Su-24, and Su-27.

To this day, the IAB-500 also remains in use to train combat jet pilots in nuclear bomb delivery. Alongside it, although much less known, and barely ever seen, are tactical nuclear bombs, the descendants of the 244N that was proven in a unique test back in 1962.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Rare Video Appears To Show A Soviet Su-7 Jet Dropping A Nuclear Bomb appeared first on The War Zone.

The George H.W. Bush CSG arrived in U.S. 5th Fleet’s area of responsibility last week, becoming the third U.S. aircraft carrier operating in the Middle East. According to U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), this is the first time since the 2003 Iraq War that the U.S. has triple-carrier coverage in the region. Outside the Gulf of Oman, the Abraham Lincoln CSG and Tripoli ARG are operating in the Arabian Sea, supporting blockade measures. The Gerald R. Ford CSG remains on station in the northern Red Sea, satellite imagery shows.

Combined, the three flattops represent roughly 14 acres of sovereign U.S. territory that can be positioned anywhere around the world within weeks, and embark 27 squadrons of more than 200 aircraft. The nine guided-missile destroyers are equipped with 846 VLS tubes and loaded with a mix of offensive and defensive missiles. The undersea escorts – at least three, if not more, fast-attack subs – are not highlighted in the graphic below, but provide additional VLS capacity, among many other capabilities.

The Theodore Roosevelt CSG (TRCSG) is working up in U.S. 3rd Fleet AOR, a spokesperson told us. There are several notable aspects of the training, including integration with an Unmanned Surface Vessel Division (USVDIV) operating a medium USV (MDUSV) Seahawk, as well as the potential test of new Raytheon Coyote and Longbow Hellfire missile launchers, which TWZ first reported here. In February, Vice Adm. Brendan McLane told reporters that a medium drone would deploy alongside TRCSG later this year, Breaking Defense reported, and the Seahawk may be set to assume that role. There has been a flurry of naval drone activity off the California coast, including the NOMARS USX-1 Defiant, based on public AIS data from Marine Traffic. Roosevelt is at the leading edge of the Navy’s “tailored force pairing” concept – which could include integrating naval drones into CSG operations – and Seahawk appears to be the MDUSV selected to train and potentially deploy with the group.

USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (IKE) completed sea trials on April 24, the U.S. Navy announced, following a 15-month maintenance availability. “The extensive maintenance period included critical upgrades and repairs to the ship’s combat systems, propulsion plant, and habitability spaces, ensuring IKE’s ability to be fully mission capable and ready to support global maritime operations.” USS Carl Vinson is undergoing scheduled maintenance, according to photos released on April 21, while “remaining a combat-ready force dedicated to protecting and defending the United States.” USS Nimitz is participating in exercise Southern Seas, and was most recently off the coast of Chile. USS George Washington, forward-deployed to Japan and the only U.S. carrier stationed in the Indo-Pacific, is in port.

Four of America’s 11 carriers are currently in maintenance or have an availability scheduled this year. Three are deployed in the Middle East, one is forward-stationed in the Indo-Pacific, two are training, and one is at homeport. Delivery of the next Ford-class carrier, what will become the USS John F. Kennedy, is expected in 2027, unless there are additional delays or modifications to the program.

Note: Positions are general approximations. Non-deployed LHA/LHD amphibious warships are not shown.

Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@teamrecurrent.io

The post Carrier Tracker As of April 26, 2026 appeared first on The War Zone.

Airmen from the 386th Air Expeditionary Wing sit inside of a bunker during a base-wide exercise at an undisclosed location within the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, May 24, 2024. The exercise assessed the responsiveness of Airmen and first responders during a simulated attack. (U.S. Air Force photo) 

Also, a reminder:

Prime Directives!

• If you want to talk politics, do so respectfully and know that there’s always somebody that isn’t going to agree with you. 
• If you have political differences, hash it out respectfully, stick to the facts, and no childish name-calling or personal attacks of any kind. If you can’t handle yourself in that manner, then please, discuss virtually anything else.
• No drive-by garbage political memes. No conspiracy theory rants. Links to crackpot sites will be axed, too. Trolling and shitposting will not be tolerated. No obsessive behavior about other users. Just don’t interact with folks you don’t like. 
• Do not be a sucker and feed trolls! That’s as much on you as on them. Use the mute button if you don’t like what you see.  
• So unless you have something of quality to say, know how to treat people with respect, understand that everyone isn’t going to subscribe to your exact same worldview, and have come to terms with the reality that there is no perfect solution when it comes to moderation of a community like this, it’s probably best to just move on. 
• Finally, as always, report offenders, please. This doesn’t mean reporting people who don’t share your political views, but we really need your help in this regard.

The post Bunker Talk: Let’s Talk About All The Things We Did And Didn’t Cover This Week appeared first on The War Zone.

A day after President Donald Trump ordered U.S. forces to destroy Iranian ships laying mines in the Strait of Hormuz, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Friday said efforts to prevent mining are already underway.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) “has a variety of smaller Boston Whaler-size boats,” Air Force Gen. Dan Caine told reporters, including from The War Zone, during a Friday morning media briefing. “We have forces up there deterring and preventing them from continuing to [lay mines], and will continue to do so pursuant to the orders of the Secretary and the President.”

You can hear Caine’s comments on Iranian mining at the 23-minute mark in the following video.

Caine did not offer specifics about what assets are involved, when they arrived or what actions they have taken. The Pentagon and CENTCOM have declined to comment. A U.S. official, however, did provide us with some additional information.

“Iran likely placed some mines in or near the Strait at some point during the conflict,” the official told us, speaking anonymously to discuss operational details. “We’re not talking about a high volume. In fact, more than 95% of Iran’s naval mines were destroyed during Operation Epic Fury.”

U.S. forces “are actively addressing the matter using a combination of manned and unmanned capabilities to ensure passage through the Strait is safe.” The official declined to say if the U.S. is actively searching for mines already laid or provide further details. In our story yesterday, we spelled out what assets the Navy has for its surface fleet to conduct demining operations, though it remains unclear how many are in the region. You can read more about that here.

As we noted, the Independence class littoral combat ship USS Canberra is the only confirmed mine sweeper currently in CENTCOM, according to a post on the Pentagon’s image sharing site that shows the ship patrolling in the Arabian Sea.

As we have frequently reported, the IRGC has invested heavily in its fleet of small boats for decades. In addition to being armed with short-range anti-ship missiles, as well as artillery rockets and other weapons, they can also be used to lay naval mines. While the president claimed that 159 Iranian ships have been destroyed, the IRGC still has a large number of these small vessels.

War Secretary Pete Hegseth, also speaking at the briefing, said “reckless mining like that is a violation of the cease fire.” He declined to say how long it will take to clear the Strait of mines.

“We would not speculate on a timeline,” he proffered in response to a question about a Washington Post story claiming Congress was informed it could take up to six months to do so. “We feel confident in our ability, in the correct period of time, to clear any mines that we identify, and we encourage other countries to be a part of such an effort as well. But we’re tracking that very closely.”

It isn’t clear why these efforts to keep small boats from mining the Strait have not been persistent and ongoing from early in the conflict, but especially now that Iran professes control over the strategic waterway. However, Hegseth derided the IRGC as a fighting force.

“Iran’s battered military, the IRGC, specifically, has been reduced to a gang of pirates with a flag,” the secretary scowled.

UPDATES

Caine offered some new details about the three Iranian-linked ships the U.S. interdicted this week. Those efforts started Sunday with the Iranian-flagged cargo ship Touska, which was fired upon and later boarded.

At about 9 a.m. EDT on Sunday, the Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyer USS Spruance “disabled the Touska‘s engine by firing nine inert rounds from the destroyer’s Mk-45 5-inch gun precisely into the engine room and engine space on board the Touska,” he explained. Seven hours later, CENTCOM gave the command for Marines to fast-rope in from helicopters and “seize the shot,” Caine added.

China on Friday pushed back against Trump’s claim that the Touska contained a “gift from China perhaps.” The president made that claim earlier this week on CNBC.

“China rejects any assertion and speculation that lack factual evidence,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry responded. “Normal trade between countries should not be disrupted.”

The Touska was carrying “vital dialysis supplies and medical equipment,” Al Jazeera reported on X, citing the Iranian Red Crescent Society. The War Zone cannot independently verify that claim.

Caine also addressed the fate of two other Iranian-linked ships – the Tifani and the Majestic X – that were stopped in the Indian Ocean this week. The vessels and their crews “remain in U.S. custody, and we will continue to conduct similar maritime interdiction actions and activities in the Pacific and Indian Oceans against Iranian ships and vessels of the Dark Fleet,” Caine noted.

Jeanine Pirro, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said the Tifani and Majestic X each contained 1.9 million barrels of oil.

German shipping giant Hapag-Lloyd told us that one of its ships has recently transited the Strait of Hormuz.

“For security reasons, we will not comment on the timing or provide further details regarding this passage or on individual ships still in the Persian Gulf,” the company explained. “What we can tell you is that of the original six ships, we currently have four remaining in the Persian Gulf with approximately 100 seafarers.”

“The safety of our crews remains our highest priority,” Hapag-Lloyd’s spokesperson added. “We are in close contact with the vessels, local authorities and naval forces, and continue to monitor the situation closely. At this moment, it is not possible to predict any change of this situation.”

Overall, global trade intelligence firm Kpler’s Risk & Compliance tracker showed that transits through the Strait of Hormuz continue to be reduced.

Between April 22 and 23, “traffic remained low at 17 crossings of both commercial and non-commercial vessels, well below pre-crisis levels,” Kpler stated. “Ongoing monitoring provides critical insight into supply flows and potential disruption risks.” 

Oil output from Persian Gulf nations has been running 14.5 million barrels a day below pre-war levels this month, Bloomberg News reported, citing Goldman Sachs Group Inc., which estimated any resumption would take months.

The region-wide total is 57% lower than before the outbreak of the Iran war, analysts including Daan Struyven said in an April 23 note. A possible restoration would likely take “a few months,” a scenario based on a full-and-safe reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and no renewed strikes, according to Goldman Sachs.

Saudi Arabia has “achieved a huge boost in crude exports through its Red Sea terminals, but has yet to stabilize flows at its target level for the route,” Bloomberg also noted.

Shipments of crude to overseas destinations from Yanbu “have averaged about 4 million barrels a day in the first three weeks of April,” data compiled by the outlet show. “That’s about five times as much as Saudi Arabia exported on the route before the conflict in Iran started, but still only about 80% of Riyadh’s target.”

CENTCOM provided some additional context to the arrival yesterday of the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush into the region.

Joining the USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Gerald R Ford, it marks the first time since 2003 that there were three carriers in the area of responsibility since 2003. Combined, the three carrier strike groups have 200 aircraft, nine Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyers, and 15,000 sailors and Marines.

There may be some movement toward new talks to end the war. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed that the U.S. is sending a negotiating team to Pakistan where Iran’s foreign minister is already headed. The swiftly moving situation follows on the heels of previous diplomatic efforts that failed to end the 55-day-old conflict.

“I can confirm that Special Envoy Witkoff and Jared Kushner will be off to Pakistan again tomorrow morning to engage in talks, direct talks – intermediated by the Pakistanis who have been incredible friends and mediators throughout this entire process – with representatives of the Iranian delegation.”

“The Iranians want to talk,” Leavitt told reporters. “They want to talk in person. And so the president is, as I’ve said many, many times, to all of you, always willing to give diplomacy a chance. So Steve and Jared will be heading to Pakistan tomorrow to hear the Iranians out. We hope progress will be made, and we hope that positive developments will come from this meeting, and we will see that the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, will be waiting here in the United States for updates.”

Vice President JD Vance, she added, “is on standby and will be willing to dispatch to Pakistan if we feel it’s a necessary use of his time.”

CNN reported that Witkoff and Kushner will “participate in talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.”

The move to send a U.S. team to Pakistan follows Araghchi’s announcement earlier on Friday that he will head to Pakistan Friday night and then to Oman and Russia to “closely coordinate with our partners on bilateral matters and consult on regional developments.”

At the time of Araghchi’s announcement, it was believed that the Iranian delegation was not expected to speak with U.S. representatives, CNN reported, citing a U.S. source and Iranian state media. However, “the Pakistanis anticipate the meeting will lead to a second round of talks between the U.S. and Iran,” the cable network suggested. 

All this follows a second round of peace talks that failed to materialize this week after Iran declined to send negotiators to Islamabad. However, Trump extended the ceasefire to what has been reported to be sometime over this weekend. As we discussed yesterday, a large reason for Iran’s reluctance to talk may be a schism between hardliners in the IRGC and more moderate elements of the government like Araghchi. While Trump is pushing that narrative, Iranian officials are pushing back, claiming no such divide exists.

Another factor that may be contributing to Iran’s lack of a concrete response to U.S. demands may be the condition of its putative leader. A reporter from The New York Times said that Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei was so badly injured on the first day of Epic Fury that his face and lips are burned to the point where he has trouble speaking and that one of his legs may have been amputated.

Pakistan says Araghchi called its Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar today. 

“Both sides exchanged views on regional developments, the ceasefire, and ongoing diplomatic efforts being pursued by Islamabad in the context of US-Iran engagement,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry stated on X. Dar “underscored the importance of sustained dialogue and engagement to address outstanding issues, in order to advance regional peace and stability at the earliest. Araghchi appreciated Pakistan’s consistent and constructive facilitation role in this regard, and both leaders agreed to remain in close contact.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky returned to Saudi Arabia today, where he said he had a “very productive meeting with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud.”

“We appreciate our constructive cooperation,” Zelensky stated on X. “There is a strategic security arrangement that we are actively developing across three key areas. The first is the export of Ukrainian security expertise and capabilities in air defense. The second is energy cooperation, which makes Ukraine more resilient in this difficult time. The third is the area of food security. We are working together to strengthen our peoples and our partners. We have set tasks for our teams, and I expect their prompt and full implementation.”

Last month, Zelensky said he inked 10-year defense cooperation agreements with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar.

After suffering through intense Iranian missile and drone barrages, UAE presidential advisor Anwar Gargash said it will take a long time to reconcile with Tehran.

“You can’t be attacked with 2,800 missiles and drones then talk to me about trust,” he stated. “That will take ages and ages.”

An internal Pentagon email “outlines options for the United States to ​punish NATO allies it believes failed to support U.S. operations in the war with Iran, including suspending Spain from the alliance and reviewing the U.S. position on Britain’s claim to the Falkland Islands,” Reuters reported. It based the information on what it was told by a U.S. official.

“The policy options are detailed in a note expressing frustration at some allies’ perceived reluctance or refusal to grant the United States access, basing and overflight rights – known as ABO – for the Iran war,” the news outlet added, citing the anonymous official.

However, an alliance official told us that “NATO’s Founding Treaty does not foresee any provision for suspension of NATO membership, or expulsion.”

While Trump and CENTCOM say Iran’s ability to produce weapons has been destroyed during Epic Fury, Tehran says otherwise.

Iran’s Defense Ministry says “the Islamic Republic will continue producing military equipment and that it is fully prepared to meet the armed forces’ needs in all scenarios, including war and peacetime conditions,” Iran’s official Press TV news outlet claimed on X.

Kuwait’s Defense Ministry (MoD) said two northern border centers were struck by fiber-optic guided drones launched from Iraq.

The attack caused material damage, but no casualties, said MoD spokesman Colonel Saud Abdulaziz Al-Otaibi.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post U.S. Efforts To Prevent Iranian Mine Laying In Strait Of Hormuz Underway appeared first on The War Zone.

The video of the An-28 armed with interceptor drones was apparently first published by Ukrainian pilot and volunteer Tymur Fatkullin, who has previously documented other extemporized aviation initiatives, including using the six-barrel Gatling-type M134 Minigun to blast Russian drones out of the air.

In this new iteration, the An-28 has underwing hardpoints mounting two types of Ukrainian-made interceptor drones, the SkyFall P1-Sun and the Merops AS-3 Surveyor. Earlier this month, we wrote about how the Merops drones have been effectively used by the U.S. military to counter Iranian Shahed attacks in the Middle East.

Alongside the video, Fatkullin provided the following account:

“Aircraft-launched P1-Sun interceptor against hostile Shaheds. This method has already proven effective in real combat conditions. We have also tested several other interceptor drones during training flights. You could call it a cheap air-to-air missile.”

Fatkullin also added that, at this point, the An-28 has additionally brought down 222 Russian drones using gun armament.

As we have previously reported, Ukraine has been successfully using several locally produced drones to counter Russian Shaheds for some time now.

Both the P1-Sun and the AS-3 Surveyor are small, relatively inexpensive drones built specifically to zip through the skies and intercept long-range one-way attack drones.

In the case of the P1-Sun, this uses a modular, 3D-printed airframe, can operate at altitudes up to 16,400 feet (5,000 meters), and reach speeds of up to 280 miles per hour (450 km/h). This is sufficient to intercept jet-powered drones such as the Russian Geran-3, under some circumstances.

Meanwhile, the AS-3 Surveyor is a somewhat more expensive and more capable option, intended for use against higher-end threats. These interceptors can operate autonomously or be remotely piloted and are equipped with onboard sensors for target tracking. The interceptor carries an explosive warhead and destroys targets either through a direct collision or a proximity detonation.

A video shows the AS-3 Surveyor during a live-fire demonstration in Poland in November 2025:

According to the U.S. Army, a single example of the Merops-made drone costs around $15,000, with the potential to reduce this to between $3,000 and $5,000 if production is scaled up. This compares with the estimated cost of between $30,000 and $50,000 for a Shahed. Provided the interceptor drones are effective, the economic case is a very compelling one.

Having interceptor drones launched from aircraft provides a number of advantages. The An-28 is able to bring the interceptor drone closer to the target and to use its own sensors to help locate these. As we have reported in the past, the An-28 crew initially relies on air traffic controllers to guide them to the area where drones are known to be flying. One of the crew is a ‘camera operator,’ monitoring a feed from an infrared camera. Members of the crew are also provided with night-vision goggles (NVGs) for spotting the mainly nocturnal drones.

The turboprop also offers significant loiter time for standing anti-drone patrols, which can be set up as a screen where they are most advantageous. At the same time, having the drone launched from the air reduces the response time. Launching from height gives the interceptor drone additional altitude and range.

There is also the benefit of having a choice of weapons (different types of drones, guns, and potentially also rockets) to respond to various drone threats.

Furthermore, the An-28’s short takeoff and landing (STOL) capability makes it ideal for operating in and out of shorter and more austere airstrips, of the kind that Ukraine makes extensive use of in the conflict with Russia.

This threat is only set to grow. Russia, as we have previously noted, now manufactures Shahed/Geran drones at the rate of 2,000 per month and has announced plans to nearly triple that.

Already, interceptor drones have established themselves as a much more cost-effective option compared to surface-to-air missile interceptors like the Patriot system, and even cheaper, less advanced missiles when it comes to countering Shahed-type drones. Although these drones lack the payload and range of high-end munitions, they can be deployed in large numbers, allowing them to cover broad areas. This, in turn, helps preserve the limited supply of more sophisticated interceptors and reverses the unfavorable cost dynamic between targets and defensive systems. Even so, such solutions are most effective when integrated into a layered defense, particularly for protecting high-value sites and critical infrastructure.

The small size of interceptor drones also makes them suitable for arming lighter aircraft, crewed and uncrewed. Ukraine already makes use of ‘mothership’ drones, while helicopters and even gun-armed Yakovlev Yak-52 prop trainers, also used to hunt drones, could potentially carry them under their wings. Already, light aircraft and helicopters are said to be responsible for downing between 10 and 12 percent of all drones claimed by Ukrainian air defenses of all kinds.

It isn’t hard to see how this concept could be rapidly evolved and executed even more effectively and efficiently with better technology. For instance, having MQ-9 Reapers loaded with these drones and equipped with air-to-air radar would allow for a long-range, long-endurance picket aircraft of sorts. In the context of the war in the Middle East, parking these between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran, over the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, could go a long way to stopping incoming Shahed-136 and other one-way attack drones at a tiny fraction of the cost of surface-to-air missiles.

Arming crewed aircraft with interceptor drones is the latest expression of Ukraine’s fast-developing counter-drone arsenal. If it proves successful, we will likely see its wider adoption. After all, anything that helps change the calculus for Ukraine in the drone war is likely to be enthusiastically adopted.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Ukraine’s Drone-Hunting An-28 Turboprop Is Now Launching Interceptor Drones appeared first on The War Zone.

The Air Force currently uses a fleet of aging UH-1N Twin Huey helicopters based at Andrews Air Force Base (technically now part of Joint Base Andrews) to perform AFDW missions. The service had initially planned to replace them with new MH-139A Grey Wolf helicopters, but revealed last year it was considering using HH-60Ws for this role instead. The Air Force’s proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year, which was rolled out earlier this week, confirms that it is officially moving ahead with plans to supplant the UH-1Ns at Andrews with Jolly Green IIs. The service is still procuring and fielding MH-139s, primarily to help provide security around Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) silos.

“26 HH-60Ws will replace the UH-1Ns at Air Force District Washington (AFDW) to execute continuity of operations / continuity of government missions in the National Capital Region,” according to the Air Force budget documents. The term National Capital Region (NCR) refers to a larger area that surrounds Washington, D.C., proper.

The baseline HH-60W is a member of the extended H-60/S-70 Black Hawk family produced by Sikorsky, now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin. The Jolly Green II has a number of distinct features in line with its primary CSAR mission, including a nose-mounted radar, an in-flight refueling probe, and a main cabin with a configuration optimized for the recovery of personnel, including individuals who may be injured. It also has provisions for mounted machine guns for self-defense, as well as launchers for decoy flares and chaff. The first HH-60Ws began entering Air Force service in 2022.

The AFDW “modifications include possible removal of components including, but not limited to, the following: Rescue Team Seat, Isolated Personnel Litter, Gun System, Chaff/Flare Buckets, and Doors/Floor Armor,” per the Air Force’s latest budget request. “In addition, this effort may include, but not limited to, the following modifications to the baseline HH-60W: ARC 210 Gen 6 radios, Infrared Countermeasure (IRCM) system, and alternate seating arrangement.”

Mention here of an IRCM system is worth highlighting. The integration of a built-in infrared countermeasure system onto the HH-60W, in general, has been a particular point of interest for the Air Force for years now. Various IRCM system designs are available on the open market today, all of which are intended to provide added protection against heat-seeking anti-air missiles. For helicopters, these systems provide a particularly valuable extra layer of defense against threats posed by shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, also known as man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).

Earlier this month, the Air Force put out a contracting notice seeking information from contractors about their capacity to integrate either the Common Infrared Countermeasure (CIRCM) system or the AN/AAQ-45 Distributed Aperture Infrared Countermeasure (DAIRCM) system onto the HH-60W fleet. CIRCM is a U.S. Army-managed system now being installed on the service’s UH-60 Black Hawks, as well as other helicopter types within that service. The U.S. Navy manages the DAIRCM program, with those systems being integrated on a variety of helicopters across the U.S. military, including MH-60S Seahawks and VH-60Ns, the latter of which serve in the “Marine One” presidential airlift role. Northrop Grumman and Leonardo DRS are the prime contractors for CIRCM and DAIRM, respectively.

As TWZ has pointed out in the past, it has also been curious that HH-60Ws did not come with an IRCM capability from the start, given the explicit dangers the helicopters have been expected to face when performing CSAR missions. The AN/AAQ-45 system was even previously integrated into the Air Force’s older HH-60G Pave Hawks, which the Jolly Green IIs are replacing.

The risks HH-60Ws face when performing their primary mission were put on full display during the recent rescue efforts in Iran following the F-15E shoot-down. Questions have been raised in the past about the continued utility of traditional helicopters like the Jolly Green II in the CSAR role, broadly speaking, especially in potential future high-end fights, such as one between the United States and China in the Pacific. Air Force officials have said previously that they have been exploring alternatives for retrieving downed aircrew from deep within contested environments, but details about what that might consist of have remained limited.

A separate Air Force contracting notice put out earlier this month also provides additional details about the planned AFDW cabin configuration for the HH-60W.

“The AF [Air Force] will remove several components from the baseline 60W to allow for the installation of passenger seats for AFDW. Seating is required for 11 passengers,” that notice explains. “Seating must meet applicable crash and safety requirements including emergency egress.”

The “reconfiguration of [the] interior layout to accommodate [the] seating” will also be done in a way that allows for “preserving critical CSAR equipment (rescue hoist, defensive weapons, medical stations)” that the helicopters will still need for their new role.

Just in terms of general speed, range, and payload capacity, the HH-60W will offer a major boost in capability over the UH-1Ns that perform AFDW missions today. The Jolly Green IIs also offer advantages in this regard over the smaller and lighter MH-139s.

In addition, the Air Force has not indicated any plans to eliminate the HH-60W’s aerial refueling capability as part of the AFDW modifications. Neither the UH-1N nor the MH-139 is capable of being refueled in flight.

All of this could be particularly valuable during continuity of government taskings in the very busy and otherwise complex skies over the NCR. The airspace around Washington, D.C., is also the most densely defended and heavily monitored anywhere in the United States. This was all highlighted in the fatal mid-air collision involving an Army UH-60 Black Hawk and a PSA Airlines Bombardier CRJ700 regional jet in January 2025. The Black Hawk, assigned to a unit at Davison Army Airfield in Virginia, had been conducting a continuity of government training flight.

As TWZ wrote at the time:

The flights could come at any time, including in the dead of night, and, depending on the circumstances, might face a host of other complex environmental factors and other challenging conditions. Power outages could put additional emphasis on the need to use night vision goggles, which impose limits on situational awareness. Attacks involving nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons would prompt the need to wear other bulky protective gear. In the outright rush to evacuate key personnel, the airspace would be filled with large numbers of aircraft, as highlighted by large COG exercises the 12th Aviation Battalion regularly conducts involving dozens of its helicopters.

As is made clear here, Air Force HH-60Ws would not be the only helicopters zooming around the NCR during a continuity of government scenario, either. Marine Helicopter Squadron One (HMX-1), best known for operating helicopters in the Marine One role, would also be involved. Helicopters belonging to the U.S. Park Police, as well as various other law enforcement and civilian agencies, would also have a role to play. You can read more about this here.

As mentioned earlier, the AFDW mission set also includes performing more routine VIP airlift sorties on a daily basis.

There is a question of what modifying 26 HH-60Ws for the AFDW role might mean for the operational capacity of the rest of the CSAR-focused fleet. The Air Force’s 2027 Fiscal Year budget request does not show any plans to procure additional Jolly Green IIs to meet this new need in the nation’s capital. Years ago, the service already made the decision to scale back purchases of HH-60Ws, down from an original program of record for 113 of the helicopters. The total planned fleet size now looks to be 91, per the recently released budget documents. Without the acquisition of more Jolly Green IIs, this would mean that roughly 30 percent of the entire fleet is set to be re-roled away from the dedicated CSAR mission.

“It is more cost effective to modify previously procured HH-60Ws contained in back up inventory than to procure additional MH-139A aircraft,” an Air Force spokesperson had told Air & Space Forces Magazine last year when asked about the Air Force’s evolving plans for the AFDW mission set.

As it stands now, per the service’s latest budget request, the Air Force is looking to kick off formal development of the AFDW configuration for the HH-60W in Fiscal Year 2027, which begins on October 1 of this year. The goal is then to start refitting Jolly Green IIs for this role in the 2028 Fiscal Year.

Once modified, the specifically configured HH-60Ws will then begin taking over critical AFDW missions from the aging UH-1Ns at Andrews.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post HH-60W Combat Rescue Helicopters To Take On Doomsday Evacuation Role In The Nation’s Capital appeared first on The War Zone.

Spectre can also come loaded for bear for a multitude of missions, with space for an optional payload of two Lockheed Mk 70 vertical launching system (VLS) containers. These are capable of slinging everything from Tomahawk cruise missiles to long-range SM-6s air defense and surface strike missiles. Other potential payloads, according to Saildrone, include twin-line towed sonar arrays like the TB-29 and Lockheed’s Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM) Quad Launcher (JQL, pronounced jackal), which is in the process of being integrated on Saildrone’s smaller Surveyor platform. Total payload is two 40-foot containers, five 20-foot containers, or a configurable mixture of both.

The Navy’s work with far smaller Saildrone platforms dates to 2021. In the Middle East, the 33-foot Voyager, specializing in persistent surveillance, has been at the heart of testing and experimentation by the service’s Task Group 59, focused on unmanned capabilities and teaming.

In the U.S. 4th Fleet area of responsibility, which includes the Caribbean and Central and South America, solar-powered Voyagers have been the USV of choice for Operation Windward Stack. This is an effort to integrate uncrewed systems into the work of apprehending drug trafficking and illegal fishing.

The Spectre design, which was unveiled Monday at the Sea-Air-Space Exposition near Washington, D.C., at which TWZ was in attendance, is the result of two years of work. It precedes the Navy’s current competition for a family of Medium Unmanned Surface Vessels, which formally launched last month. However, company executives said they now plan to enter Spectre.

“We didn’t fit to that. We didn’t change our course,” Saildrone founder and CEO Richard Jenkins said. “Now it’s changed, MUSV … it actually fits perfectly. We meet 100% of all the specs.”

Spectre comes in two variants. One is the Silent Endurance variant with the trademark sail, or “wing.” The other is the Stealth Strike variant that relies totally on its more powerful internal propulsion. While the sail-equipped variant is more focused on anti-submarine warfare and surveillance, it too can be equipped with modular VLS cells or other “concealed payloads.” The Stealth Strike variant possesses “higher-speed” and is capable of “low observable missions,” according to the company.

Powered by a 5,000-horsepower Caterpillar diesel engine, the Stealth Strike variant is designed to cruise at around 25 knots, or just under 29 miles per hour. The 30 knot, or around 35-mile-per-hour, speed that the company cites as the maximum for Spectre is likely reserved for brief “sprints” that the Stealth Strike variant may execute during operations.

The Silent Endurance variant is optimized for “infinite endurance,” Jenkins said, with an electric engine that can maintain speeds of 12 knots, or about 14 miles per hour, or the signature wing, a 43-meter composite structure made by yacht racing team American Magic Services that can harness the wind for propulsion “without any engine at all.”

Tony Lengerich, vice president of Naval Programs at the United Kingdom-based Thales Defense and Security, which made the active sonar for Spectre, described the drones as a forward lookout presence for conventional Navy ships. 

“We’re looking forward to bringing that capability in active sonar … to the Navy fleet, particularly in the theater ASW context, where you really need a vessel that can take a sensor far out ahead of the battle group, if you will, loiter there, deploy the sensor and then move again,” he said. “That’s exactly what Saildrone brings to the table, and it’s exactly what we think the Navy needs.”

Paul Lemmo, vice president and general manager for sensors, effectors & mission systems (SEMS) at Lockheed Martin, called the drones a cost-effective way of “putting more players on the field.”

“The Chief of Naval Operations [Navy Adm. Daryl Caudle] has said it’s an important thing, so you’ve got more shooters on a fairly inexpensive platform instead of a multi-billion dollar destroyer,” he said.

From an ASW perspective, Lengerich said, the platform works for clearing and assessing “broad ocean areas” before moving a manned battle force in.  

“This provides that capability to take an active sonar source forward – ping, if you will, and then your shooters … pick up the ping and identify where you have an adversary in an area that you eventually want to move the force to. So we think of this as a theater asset, one that means far ahead of the force, both in time and space, and then advances the ability for the battle force to move in and be certain of what’s waiting for them.”

The unit price of Spectre is around $40 million, Jenkins said. That’s compared to about $7.5 million for the unarmed, much smaller 20-foot Surveyor.

The Navy has struggled to get its arms around what it wants out of its drone ships and how exactly they will integrate with the manned fleet. One of its earliest unmanned surface vessel test articles, Sea Hunter, was christened a decade ago. Navy officials announced earlier this year that Sea Hunter, a medium-sized USV, and its sister ship, Seahawk, would finally leave experimental status in 2026. One of these vessels, reportedly Seahawk, is expected to deploy this year with a carrier strike group. 

Last year, the Navy unveiled plans for a family of uncrewed Modular Surface Attack Craft (MASC), emphasizing containerized missile launchers and highly configurable payloads. The service replaced this strategy last month, however, with what it called a “marketplace” for MUSVs, giving would-be competitors a matter of weeks to submit proposals for mature vessels that could be fielded in Fiscal Year 2027. Core requirements were laid out for seakeeping, long range and endurance, and cargo capabilities, as you can read more about here. The need to be able to carry two forty-foot equivalent unit (FEU) containerized payloads is a key demand, though the Navy has not yet specified publicly what might go in them.

“Honestly, inside you could have a sensor, you could have repair equipment for ships,” Rebecca Gassler, the Navy’s Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Robotic and Autonomous Systems (PAE RAS), told TWZ and other outlets during a press call in March. “You could have any number of payloads inside those, and you basically are able to just swap them on.”

Navy officials have said they want 11 operational MUSVs by next year, and have projected that half the surface fleet will be uncrewed by 2045.

Saildrone has plans to demonstrate the ability of Surveyor to carry a JAGM launcher at the joint Rim of the Pacific exercise in July. Lemmo said the team plans to demonstrate the same capability on Spectre soon. The company says construction on Spectre is about to begin shortly, with sea trials for the first vessel set for early next year.

Contact the editor: Tyler@twz.com

The post Saildrone’s Missile-Toting Spectre Enters Navy’s Medium-Sized Unmanned Ship Competition appeared first on The War Zone.

All this activity is taking place as the prospect of peace talks remains unclear two days after Trump announced a ceasefire extension, which we will discuss later in this story.

“I have ordered the United States Navy to shoot and kill any boat, small boats though they may be (Their naval ships are ALL, 159 of them, at the bottom of the sea!), that is putting mines in the waters of the Strait of Hormuz,” Trump proclaimed on his social media site. “There is to be no hesitation. Additionally, our mine ‘sweepers’ are clearing the Strait right now. I am hereby ordering that activity to continue, but at a tripled up level!”

It should be noted that the IRGC has invested heavily in its fleet of small boats for decades as TWZ has explored in the past. In addition to being armed with short-range anti-ship missiles, as well as artillery rockets and other weapons, they can also be used to lay naval mines. While the president claimed that 159 Iranian ships have been destroyed, the IRGC still has a large number of these small vessels.

In a story yesterday, The Washington Post reported that the Pentagon told Congress it could take six months to fully clear the Strait of Hormuz of mines deployed by the Iranian military.

With three carrier strike groups, several destroyers and scores of land-based aircraft in the region, the U.S. is well-postured to take out Iranian boats if needed. Striking Iran’s Navy was a prime mission for Epic Fury, as Trump noted. However, it is not publicly known at the moment what assets are conducting the mine sweeping Trump claimed or what the current level is of that activity that he wants to triple. We’ve reached out to the White House and U.S. Central Command for more details.

While it is possible one or more of these vessels could be in the Strait, doing so would put them at a greater risk of attack from Iran’s remaining cache of land-based weapons like anti-ship missiles and drones, as well as what’s left of its flotilla of small boats and uncrewed surface vessels (USVs).

As we reported on April 13, a pair of Avenger class mine-hunters homeported in Japan were tracked sailing westward out of the Pacific Ocean, however, they are still a distance away from the Strait. USS Chief and USS Pioneer departed Colombo, Sri Lanka, yesterday following a two-day port call, public AIS data on MarineTraffic shows. They stopped transmitting AIS while steaming northwest at 10 knots toward the CENTCOM area of responsibility, although their final destination is unconfirmed.

The U.S. also has a trio of littoral combat ships (LCS) forward-deployed to U.S. 5th Fleet and configured for mine countermeasures missions. However, as we previously reported, those ships were redeployed from Bahrain ahead of the conflict, and two emerged unexpectedly in Southeast Asia last month. It remains unclear why the decision was made to send them to the other side of the globe amid the threat of Iran mining the Strait of Hormuz, but both were recently spotted sailing northbound in the Malacca Strait after weeks in Singapore.

The Santa Barbara left Singapore on April 16 and the Tulsa left on April 2.

USS Canberra is the only confirmed mine sweeper currently in CENTCOM, according to a post on the Pentagon’s image sharing site that shows the Independence class LCS patrolling in the Arabian Sea.

The arrival of Pioneer and Chief would increase mine sweepers from one to three, tripling the coverage, which aligns with Trump’s order. The other two LCSs, USS Tulsa and USS Santa Barbara, could also be nearby or on station in the Middle East to support the MCM mission.

The transit of the Chief is not without issues. A sailor assigned to the boat was medically evacuated to his home port after he was scratched by an Asian monkey while ashore in Thailand, Axios reported.

“The Navy reports the incident did not delay the USS Chief‘s mission and that the sailor is OK, but officials say the attack is a reminder that military missions face unexpected troubles and disruptions that are hard to war-game for,” the outlet added.

UPDATES

Our coverage for the day has concluded.

UPDATE: 6:31 PM EDT –

The IRGC Navy laid more mines in the Strait of Hormuz this week, Axios is reporting, citing a U.S. official and a source with knowledge of the issue.

The U.S. official told the outlet that the U.S. knows how many new mines Iran has deployed but declined to provide the number. 

“Before this apparent uptick, experts estimated that fewer than 100 mines had been deployed by Iran,” Axios added.

UPDATE: 6:07 PM EDT –

“U.S. military officials are developing new plans to target Iran’s capabilities in the Strait of Hormuz in the event the current ceasefire with Iran falls apart,” CNN is reporting. 

An additional option, according to the cable network, is targeting individual Iranian military leaders and other “obstructionists” U.S. officials believe are actively undermining negotiations.

UPDATE: 5:50 PM EDT-

The U.S. has burned through so many munitions in Iran that some administration officials increasingly assess that America couldn’t fully execute contingency plans to defend Taiwan from a Chinese invasion if it occurred in the near term, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing U.S. officials.

“The U.S. has fired more than 1,000 long-range Tomahawk missiles since the war with Iran began on Feb. 28, as well as 1,500 to 2,000 critical air-defense missiles, including Thaad, Patriot and Standard Missile interceptors, according to U.S. officials,” the publication added.

UPDATE: 5:34 PM EDT –

Trump announced that the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon will be extended for three weeks.

“The President of the United States, DONALD J. TRUMP, Vice President of the United States, JD Vance, Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, and Ambassador to Lebanon, Michel Issa, met today with High Ranking Representatives of Israel and Lebanon in the Oval Office,” Trump announced on Truth Social. “The Meeting went very well! The United States is going to work with Lebanon in order to help it protect itself from Hezbollah. The Ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon will be extended by THREE WEEKS. I look forward in the near future to hosting the Prime Minister of Israel, Bibi Netanyahu, and the President of Lebanon, Joseph Aoun. It was a Great Honor to be a participant at this very Historic Meeting!”

UPDATE: 5:15 PM EDT –

Hezbollah reportedly launched about five rockets at northern Israel. The IDF says its forces intercepted all the rockets. There were no reported injuries.

UPDATE: 5:09 PM EDT –

During an afternoon press conference on healthcare, Trump offered additional insight into his ongoing dealings with Iran.

Iran “came to us, and they said ‘we will agree to open the Strait,’ and all my people are happy,” Trump exclaimed. “Everybody was happy—except me. I said, wait a minute. If we open this Strait, that means they’re going to make $500 million a day. I don’t want them to make $500 million a day until they settle this thing, so I’m the one that kept it closed. We have total control of it. And it’ll open when they make a deal or something else happens.”

On the topic of who is in charge in Tehran, Trump said: “Iran wants to make a deal and we’ve been speaking to them, but they don’t even know who’s leading their country. They are in turmoil, so we thought we’d give them a little chance to get some of that resolved.”

As far as the military goals of Epic Fury, Trump said: “We’ve hit 78% of the targets that we’ve wanted to hit. If Iran doesn’t want to make a deal, then I’ll finish it up militarily with the other targets.”

Asked about the timeline of Epic Fury, Trump snapped that: “I don’t want to rush it; I want to take my time. We have plenty of time, and I want to get a great deal. I want to get a deal where our nation and the world are safe from lunatics with nuclear weapons.”

Queried about whether he would use a nuclear weapon against Iran, Trump retorted: “No. Why would a stupid question like that be asked? Why would l use a nuclear weapon when we’ve totally decimated Iran without it? A nuclear weapon should never be allowed to be used by anybody.”

Earlier this morning, the Pentagon announced an overnight “maritime interdiction and right-of-visit boarding of the sanctioned stateless vessel M/T Majestic X transporting oil from Iran, in the Indian Ocean within the INDOPACOM area of responsibility.”

“We will continue global maritime enforcement to disrupt illicit networks and interdict vessels providing material support to Iran, wherever they operate,” the Pentagon said, repeating a refrain it used earlier this week after the interdiction of the M/T Tifani in the Indian Ocean. “International waters cannot be used as a shield by sanctioned actors. The Department of War will continue to deny illicit actors and their vessels freedom of maneuver in the maritime domain.”

Video released by the Pentagon shows troops boarding MH-60S Seahawk helicopters then rappelling onto the ship and searching it. As in the case of the boarding of the Tifani, a U.S. Navy Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) vessel, which you can see in the background, provided support for this operation.

The Pentagon gave the ship’s name as Majestic X but the ship – IMO number 9198317- is also known as Phoenix, according to SeaTrade Maritime News. The open-source maritime tracking site MarineTraffic shows that the Guyana-flagged crude oil tanker is located about 200 miles east of Sri Lanka and some 2,000 miles southeast of Iran.

While MarineTraffic data indicates the vessel is currently moving southwest about 8 knots, its current disposition is unclear. The Pentagon declined to offer further information and we have reached out to the White House for additional details.

The fate of the Tifani, boarded on April 21, is now in the hands of the Department of Justice, the Pentagon told us. We reached out to them for more details.

CENTCOM said it has turned away 31 ships so far during the blockade of Iranian ports.

The command also announced that, as anticipated, the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush is now in the Indian Ocean part of its region. That brings the total carrier force to three for now, with the Abraham Lincoln and Gerald R. Ford already on station. However, the Ford, which has set a record for the longest deployment since the Vietnam War and has suffered issues ranging from a fire to leaky plumbing, is likely to depart the area soon.

Two days into the ceasefire extension declared by Trump, efforts to negotiate a peace deal remain murky.

Iranian officials have yet to commit to a new round of talks, which the president blames on schisms in its government between hardliners in the IRGC and more moderate elements.

“Iran is having a very hard time figuring out who their leader is!,” Trump exclaimed on Truth Social. “They just don’t know! The infighting is between the ‘Hardliners,’ who have been losing BADLY on the battlefield, and the ‘Moderates,’ who are not very moderate at all (but gaining respect!), is CRAZY!.”

Iranian officials have pushed back against the notion their government is fractured.

“In Iran, there are no radicals or moderates; we are all ‘Iranian’ and “revolutionary,” and with the iron unity of the nation and government, with complete obedience to the Supreme Leader of the Revolution, we will make the aggressor criminal regret his actions,” Speaker of the Iranian Parliament Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf stated on X. “One God, one leader, one nation, and one path; that path being the path to victory for Iran, dearer than life.”

However, at about the time Ghalibaf posted that, Israel’s N12 News outlet reported that Ghalibaf stepped down as a result of interference from the IRGC.

“The reason for the extreme step is his refusal to accept the growing intervention of IRGC generals – including prominent names such as Ahmed and Heidi and Abdullahian,” the outlet claimed in its unsourced story. “According to the information obtained by News 12, the generals penetrate into the decision-making processes and prevent Ghalibaf from providing the maneuver required to manage the negotiations.”

The War Zone cannot independently verify this.

Meanwhile, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said his country “is prepared to resume the war against Iran,” but needs permission from Trump.

“We are awaiting a green light from the United States — first and foremost to complete the elimination of the Khamenei family and to push Iran back into a dark age,” Katz added. “This time, the strike will be different and far more lethal, delivering devastating blows at the most sensitive points — ones that will shake and undermine its very foundations”.

In his Truth Social post about Iranian leadership, Trump added that the U.S. has “total control over the Strait of Hormuz. No ship can enter or leave without the approval of the United States Navy. It is ‘Sealed up Tight, until such time as Iran is able to make a DEAL!!!”

The Iranians, however, have a different take.

“We have control over this Strait,” Hamidreza Hajibabaei, the deputy speaker of Iran’s parliament, said Thursday, according to the semi-official Fars News Agency. Hajibabaei, speaking at a public gathering in the western city of Kuhdasht, added that the first revenues from Iran’s new tolls on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz have been deposited in the Iranian state central bank account.

“If the United States continues on its current course, no vessels will pass through the Strait of Hormuz,” Hajibabaei warned. “We are not engaged in negotiations — rather, we are making demands.”

“The amount collected from each ship depends on its cargo and level of risk they pose,” said Alireza Salimi, another member of the Iranian parliament, according to the IRGC-linked Tasnim News Agency.

“Iran determines how much and how these fees are collected, in other words, we determine the rules,” Salimi said. The War Zone cannot independently verify this claim.

Trump has previously threatened ships that pay tolls to Iran to use the Strait.

Lloyds List reports that the Houthi rebels of Yemen, an Iranian proxy, could institute their own tolls around the Bab al-Mandab region.

“Mechanisms have been discussed at senior leadership levels indicating Houthi ambition to control, and not merely disrupt, maritime traffic,” the outlet reported. “Conversations have been supported by Iranian involvement. But the militia is looking to act on its own terms.”

You can read more about what a Houthi intervention into the conflict would mean in our report about it here.

The maritime security environment across the Arabian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, and Strait of Hormuz “remains CRITICAL, driven by recent attack patterns, continued navigation interference, and persistent operational disruption, including impacts to port activity,” according to the latest update from the Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC). Despite the April 8 ceasefire, “commercial traffic remains limited, with constrained transits and continued routing uncertainty.”

With the Strait of Hormuz closed, the demand on transiting the Panama Canal has become so intense that one vessel carrying liquefied natural gas (LNG) paid $4 million to skip the line and avoid a wait that can take up to five days, according to AFP, citing an official report.

Oil isn’t the only commodity supply affected by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. According to the United Nations, one-third of global fertilizers are stalled in that body of water as well. 

“With planting seasons already underway, we have no time to lose,” the world organization noted. “This is not a matter of logistics or economics – it’s about saving lives. If we don’t act, a massive food crisis will hit the most vulnerable the hardest.”

Indian crew aboard two of the ships fired upon yesterday in the Strait of Hormuz by IRGC are safe, according to Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesman Randhir Jaiswal.

During the now-extended ceasefire with Iran, the U.S. continues to flow military assets to the Middle East.

Online flight trackers indicate that the first group of aerial refueling tankers supporting F/A-18C Hornets from the VMFA-312 “Checkerboards” are airborne from Lajes.

“The flight plans filed for the tankers indicate the jets are going straight into CENTCOM today,” according to open-source flight tracker DefenceGeek.

Israeli and Lebanese ambassadors are expected to convene again at the State Department on Thursday for a second round of meetings amid the latest conflagration in the Middle East, according to ABC News.

The first direct negotiations between the two states since 1993 “are intended as preparatory meetings to shape future talks on a deal to normalize ties between the countries,” the network noted. “Thursday’s meeting is expected to focus on extending a shaky ceasefire that has halted fighting between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia.”

Trump will host the event.

“The ambassador-level talks between Israel and Lebanon will now take place at the White House,” an official told us. “President Trump will greet the representatives upon their arrival.”

Despite the ongoing ceasefire, Israel is maintaining its positions in southern Lebanon and issued a new warning to residents there.

“We reiterate and warn that, out of concern for your safety and the safety of your family members, and until further notice, you are required not to move south of the line of the villages shown and their surroundings,” IDF spokesman Avichay Adraee stated on X. “Additionally, approaching the Litani River area, Wadi Salhani, and Salouqi is not permitted.”

Heading into a second round of rare direct talks with Israel, Lebanon is urging the Trump administration to pressure Israel to scale back its demands and end its military invasion of the country, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said in an interview with The Washington Post.

Salam said Lebanon could not sign any agreement that does not include a “full withdrawal” of Israeli forces.

“We cannot live with a so-called buffer zone,” he said, “an Israeli presence where Lebanese displaced people are not allowed to return, where destroyed villages and towns cannot be rebuilt.”

Israeli strikes killed one journalist and wounded another in southern Lebanon on Wednesday, The New York Times reported.

“The Lebanese Ministry of Public Health said the Israeli military had targeted the journalists in the town of Tayri, where they took shelter in a nearby house after an airstrike struck a vehicle in front of the car they were traveling in,” the newspaper noted. “About an hour and a half later, a second strike hit the house they were hiding in, according to a statement by a Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, which employed the journalist who was killed.”

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post Trump Puts Out Kill Order On Iran’s Small Boats (Updated) appeared first on The War Zone.

L3Harris told TWZ that the aircraft arrived at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, yesterday, after a check flight and a three-hour transit from Waco. The company says that it “completed extensive structural modifications” and delivered it ahead of schedule. The program was accelerated by using “advanced engineering techniques,” including 3D scanning and specialized installation tooling.

The company also confirmed that it partnered with Yulista on the modification work. According to its website, Yulista provides “integrated modernization, sustainment, readiness, and mission support for defense and aerospace customers.”

As we reported in the past, the 777-200ER was manufactured in 2003 and saw commercial service with Japan Airlines as JA704J (as seen in the tweet below) before going into storage in Southern California in 2020.

NASA bought the aircraft in December 2022, at a cost of less than $30 million. It underwent a first series of modifications at the NASA Langley Research Center before arriving at Waco in January 2025.

While L3Harris and Yulista handled major structural modifications, research station and wiring upgrades in the cabin are being performed by NASA and HII, better known as America’s largest shipbuilder.

As a flying laboratory, the 777 will be able to accommodate between 50 and 100 onboard operators, compared to the 45 researchers and flight crew that typically flew aboard the 1969-vintage DC-8. The 777 also offers a useful payload of 75,000 pounds, considerably more than the 30,000 pounds of scientific instruments and equipment that the Douglas jetliner could carry. The Boeing jet will conduct missions of up to 18 hours at a maximum altitude of 43,000 feet; DC-8 missions typically lasted between six and 10 hours.

While in Waco, the 777 underwent modifications, including the installation of dedicated research stations and extensive wiring. Wiring harnesses running through the fuselage are needed to allow the operators’ workstations to communicate with sensors such as LIDAR and infrared imaging spectrometers during flights.

Other changes included enlarged cabin windows and ports installed in the bottom of the fuselage to mount remote-sensing instruments. Meanwhile, the aircraft received new power, data, and communications systems and accommodation for instrument operators.

“Airborne missions at NASA use cutting-edge instruments to explore and understand our home planet,” explained Derek Rutovic, program manager for the Airborne Science Program at NASA Headquarters in Washington, in a press release. “The 777 will be the largest airborne research laboratory in our fleet, collecting data to improve life on our home planet and extend our knowledge of the Earth system as a whole.”

“I’m excited for what the 777 will bring,” added Kirsten Boogaard, the NASA 777 program manager at Langley and former deputy program manager of NASA’s DC-8. “Being part of that team, I got to see the impact up close. It gives us the ability to bring together more partners, more educational opportunities, and more instruments. That will make a real difference in the data we collect moving forward.”

The 777 is expected to fly its first science mission in January 2027. This will be part of the North American Upstream Feature-Resolving and Tropopause Uncertainty Reconnaissance Experiment (NURTURE), and will involve the aircraft studying high-impact winter weather events, including severe cold air outbreaks, wind, snow and ice storms, and hazardous seas. This will be an extensive mission, gathering data in North America, Europe, Greenland, and the Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans.

The NURTURE payload has been installed alongside the general modification work.

NASA’s DC-8 mission spectrum was broken down into four main categories: sensor development, satellite sensor verification, telemetry data retrieval, and optical tracking for space vehicle launch and re-entry, and research studies of the Earth’s surface and atmosphere.

According to a press release from L3Harris, the 777 will be used for gathering Earth science data. In response to our question about other mission sets, a NASA spokesperson confirmed that the 777 “will primarily be used for airborne science campaigns, but similar to the DC-8, it will support a variety of other mission requests as the aircraft is available.”

Broadly speaking, Earth sciences missions include using sensors aboard the aircraft to monitor all kinds of activities and phenomena on the surface of the globe, including studying polar ice fields and monitoring wildfires. Among the main tools used for this are remote sensing and gas sampling instruments.

The arrival of the 777 continues the modernization and rationalization of NASA’s test aircraft fleet. This has included the retirement of the DC-8 as well as the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy, or SOFIA, a kind of flying telescope housed in an adapted Boeing 747SP, in 2022.

NASA’s new flying laboratory is now set to serve as a highly capable successor to the DC-8, continuing its legacy of delivering critical data to federal and state agencies, U.S. academic institutions, and scientists worldwide. At the same time, it underscores the ongoing commitment to advancing the tools and expertise needed to tackle some of the most pressing and complex questions in Earth science.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post NASA’s 777 Flying Laboratory Touches Down At Langley appeared first on The War Zone.

The dangers drones pose, including to Navy warships, are not new. Still, the service’s experiences in recent years during operations in and around the Red Sea, as well as against Iran, have firmly driven home the critical need for more shipboard defenses against uncrewed aerial threats.

“Supplemental funding was provided to rapidly field CUAS [Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems] solutions for the Gerald R Ford Carrier Strike Group (CSG) which included the procurement of Longbow Hellfire launchers, Coyote launchers, and the installation/integration work,” according to a line item in the Navy’s 2027 Fiscal Year budget request, which the service rolled out in full earlier this week. “Funding was also provided to rapidly field CUAS solutions on the Theodore Roosevelt CSG to include Longbow Hellfire Launchers, Coyote launchers, and the installation/integration work.”

“FY2024 and FY2025 [Fiscal Years 2024 and 2025] funding utilized to rapidly field CUAS solutions for the Gerald R Ford Carrier Strike Group (CSG) and the Theodore Roosevelt CSG, which included the procurements of Longbow Hellfire launchers, procurements of Coyote launchers, installations, and integration work,” the newly released budget documents also note.

The same line item is present in the Navy’s proposed budget for the 2026 Fiscal Year, but makes no mention of the Hellfire or Coyote integration efforts. An early type of naval launcher for Coyote was first seen on Arleigh Burke class destroyers assigned to the Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group last year, and we will come back to developments on that front later on.

The Navy’s latest budget documents do not say which ships in the Gerald R. Ford and Theodore Roosevelt CSGs may have received the Longbow Hellfire launchers, or whether they are currently installed. TWZ has reached out to Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), as well as the Long Hellfire’s prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, for more information about this integration work and what it has entailed to date.

The millimeter-wave radar-guided Longbow Hellfire, which also carries the designation AGM-114L, has a demonstrated counter-drone capability, as well as the ability to strike targets on land or at sea. The Navy previously announced modifications to its Freedom class Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) to allow them to engage uncrewed aerial threats with AGM-114Ls fired from launchers specifically designed for those vessels. However, LCSs are not a component of a typical carrier strike group. On the surface, Navy carriers are usually escorted by a mix of Ticonderoga class cruisers and Arleigh Burke class destroyers.

In June 2025, Naval News did report that two Arleigh Burke class destroyers – the USS Jason Dunham and USS The Sullivans – had previously been involved in testing of various new capabilities, including Longbow Hellfire in the counter-drone role. Neither of those ships were assigned to the Gerald R. Ford or Theodore Roosevelt CSGs at that time. No specific details were available then about what the integration of AGM-114L had consisted of, either.

In March, Lockheed Martin did unveil a containerized Hellfire launcher called Grizzly, development of which started last year. At the time, the company said Grizzly could be adapted for shipboard use.

As an aside, the Navy has talked about a containerized counter-drone launcher able to hold up to 48 Hellfires as being a future armament option for its forthcoming FF(X) frigates. There has been no indication, though, that this is an operational capability now.

Lockheed Martin has also been developing a ship-based launch capability for its AGM-179 Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM), which is derived from the laser-guided AGM-114R variant of the Hellfire. For more than a year now, the company has been publicly displaying a model of an Arleigh Burke class destroyer fitted with six four-cell JAGM Quad Launchers (JQL; pronounced jackal). At the same time, there have been no signs so far that the Navy is actively moving to field those launchers on ships of this class.

Hellfire, in general, does have a long history at this point of being integrated onto a wide variety of platforms, including helicopters and ground vehicles. A tripod launcher even exists for laser-guided variants of the missile.

With all this in mind, it is not surprising that Longbow Hellfire in some configuration would be an attractive immediate option for the Navy to help bolster shipboard defenses against ever-growing drone threats.

As the Navy’s latest budget documents note, the service has also been working to add other counter-drone interceptors to its ships, such as the combat-proven Coyote. The USS Carl M. Levin, as well as the USS John Paul Jones, the USS Paul Hamilton, and the USS Decatur, have all now received new eight-cell Coyote launchers. All of those warships are currently assigned to the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group. This builds on the integration of the earlier four-cell launchers on at least two other ships in the class, the USS Bainbridge and the USS Winston S. Churchill.

“This is the first deployment of this launcher which increases the cell count from four to eight and provides increased marinization,” a Navy spokesperson told TWZ when asked for more information after Carl M. Levin emerged with the new Coyote capability. “We are working [on] plans for future carrier strike group deployments to install these and potentially other containerized launchers.”

“This is a non-permanent change; launchers can be removed after the completion of a deployment and transferred to other ships—accelerating the deployment of advanced capabilities throughout the Fleet,” that spokesperson added.

The Navy has previously confirmed plans to integrate Anduril’s Roadrunner-M counter-drone interceptors on additional surface warships. The service has also been working with the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) on the development of Roadrunner-M, as well as another interceptor called White Spike from Zone 5 Technologies, under a project called Counter Unmanned Aerial Systems – NEXT, or Counter-NEXT.

Navy plans for additional shipboard counter-drone capabilities go beyond physical interceptors, as well. Just this week, the service disclosed a live-fire test of a palletized version of the AeroVironment LOCUST laser counter-drone system onboard the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush. You can read more about that test, which occurred in October 2025, here.

Demand within the Navy, as well as the rest of the U.S. military, for an array of layered counter-drone capabilities is likely to remain high for the foreseeable future. As noted, these threats are not new and are continuing to expand in scale and scope, driven now in large part by advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Automated targeting and fully networked swarming capabilities are not only proliferating, but the barrier to entry, even for non-state actors, is low.

More launchers for counter-drone interceptors, whether they are loaded with Longbow Hellfires, Coyotes, or something else, are only likely to continue appearing on Navy warships as the service works to further address this threat.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Navy Rushing To Arm Carrier Strike Groups With Hellfire Missiles appeared first on The War Zone.

“Epic Fury has been a PhD course in logistics,” said Robert Hein, Director of Maritime Operations for the Navy’s Military Sealift Command (MSC), said during the Sea-Air-Space 2026 (SAS) exposition near Washington, D.C.  

“So traditionally, for 25 years, we’ve been at war in the Middle East and that war was effectively fought in the parking lot of a giant gas station,” Hein explained. “Iran has effectively shut down that gas station. So we’ve had to come up with really creative ways of, ‘how do we replenish the fleet?’”

The answer was shifting from having fleet oilers call on ports to executing at-sea replenishment of those oilers by using consolidated cargo operations (CONSOL) tankers – vessels leased by MSC that are specially equipped to offload fuel at sea. The concept isn’t new. After shifting away from using chartered ships to refuel oilers at sea in favor of conducting the transfers at port facilities, MSC reintroduced the CONSOL process in 2015, “as a way to utilize a flexible platform that allows MSC to operate worldwide in a variety of missions,” according to the Navy. Having a CONSOL tanker provide fuel to oilers means they don’t have to return to a port, reducing costs and increasing time on station to support the fleet. During a time of conflict, that can also mean less risk to the oiler, which is a critical asset that would be in very high demand.

The way the chartered tankers have been used in the Middle East during Epic Fury has taken this process to a new level.

The Navy created what Hein called a system of “tanker treadmills” at sea with “tankers cycling in and out” to replace the fixed infrastructure no longer available due to Iranian attacks.

“There are no more logistics hubs they’re going to,” Hein proffered. “All those nodes are now remaining at sea.”

In addition to the CONSOL tankers’ ability to refuel oilers at sea, “we’re putting an additional fuel delivery system on those tankers so they’ll be able to replenish destroyers and ships other than oilers,” Hein added. He did not provide details about what kind of system, however, the Navy has previously discussed developing what is called a Modular CONSOL Adapter Kit (MCAK).

“By installing it on the deck of a tanker, it can refuel other ships through the receiving ship’s fuel delivery hoses,” the Navy explained.

There are currently 15 CONSOL tankers available to the Navy worldwide. Rear Adm. Chris Stone, Director of Strategic Plans, Policy, Logistics and Warfighting Development for U.S. Transportation Command, said that’s not enough.

“If there’s one thing that I had the power to stroke a check on today, it would be to create more CONSOL tankers – those consolidated cargo replenishment at sea vessels,” he said at the same SAS panel. 

“We probably need something more than 15, because when there’s a crisis or a conflict around the world, the first thing that a geographic combatant commander asks TRANSCOM for is a CONSOL vessel, and we don’t have enough of them today without trade offs that create risk in other areas.”

“We’ve proven CONSOL capability during Operation Epic Fury,” Stone added. “We have a treadmill of vessels where one is on the front line, one is topping off, and they’re continually rotating to ensure that we’ve got support for the warfighter.”

CONSOL tankers, Stone posited, “are no longer supply ships. They’re not logistics ships. They’re force projection platforms that support our warfighters. They allow us to support the joint force and refuel them underway. It extends our operational reach and endurance, while reducing the reliance on predictable, vulnerable port visits. In less than two years, we’ve increased the capacity dramatically, and we’ll continue to do so.”

While a boon to the system, the CONSOL tankers are not without their issues. The main one being time. It takes about two hours for an oiler to refuel a destroyer, said Hein, while it takes about six hours for a tanker to get the job done.

“Unlike a quick trip to the gas pumps for a car, CONSOLing can take hours to complete,” the Navy noted in a story about the tankers. “This creates a unique set of challenges for the ships conducting the operations. CONSOLing is a dance between two ships. Each must maneuver alongside the other, and maintain a consistent speed and course. Because of their size, tanker maneuverability becomes a challenge.”

“We simply do not maneuver like the [oilers] do. They are graceful, gliding through the water,” said Capt. Michelle Laycock, Maersk Peary’s master. “There’s not a lot of ‘grace’ to a fully loaded tanker. We don’t glide, we plow through the water.”

The increased time and effort is worth it, Hein said.

“This is a capability that is needed that will help mitigate the lack of oilers right now,” Hein suggested. 

He wants to take the concept a step further.

“So while we can CONSOL for fuel, I’d like to get to a point where you CONSOL for food as well,” he stated. 

While CONSOL has provided a lifeline for vessels during Operation Epic Fury, its utility would be dramatically magnified during a war in the vast Pacific, one where ports at much farther distances would be under threat as would ships of all kinds over huge swathes of that theater. There have been consistent concerns about the size of the oiler fleet being a point of weakness for the Navy’s ability to project power in a near-peer conflict. Doubling-down on CONSOL and giving those vessels the ability to directly refuel surface combatants, carriers and amphibious warships could go a long way to buying down risk and fortifying operational planning.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post Iranian Attacks Change Way Navy Refuels Its Ships In Middle East appeared first on The War Zone.

These incidents came a day after U.S. forces boarded an Iran-linked oil tanker in the Indian Ocean and highlighted that regardless of diplomacy, shipping remains a target for both sides. Meanwhile, Iran made veiled threats against the telecommunications cables running under the Strait. All this is happening as Tehran says it won’t return to the bargaining table until the U.S. ends its blockade of Iranian ports. We’ll discuss that more later in this story.

The first attack in the Strait on Wednesday took place shortly before midnight EDT about 15 nautical miles northeast of Oman, according to UKMTO. 

“The Master of a Container Ship reported that the vessel was approached by 1 IRGC gun boat, no VHF challenge that then fired upon the vessel which has caused heavy damage to the bridge. No fires or environmental impact reported. All Crew reported safe.”

Nour News, a website affiliated with Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) opened fire on the Epaminodes, after it had “ignored the warnings of the Iranian armed forces,” the BBC reported.

Epaminodes is a Liberian-flagged container ship, according to MarineTraffic.com.

A second incident took place about three hours later eight nautical miles west of Iran, UKMTO stated. 

“A master of an outbound cargo ship reports having been fired upon and is now stopped in the water,” the organization explained in an alert. “Crew are safe and accounted for. There is no reported damage to the vessel. UKMTO is aware of high levels of activity in the SoH area and encourages vessels to report any suspicious activity.”

It is unclear at the moment which ship was attacked in that incident. UKTMO did not name the vessel. However, in addition to claiming they fired on the Epaminodes, Iranian officials say they also struck the Euphoria, which MarineTraffic said is a Panamanian-flagged container ship, and the MSC-Francesca, also a Panamanian-flagged container ship, according to MarineTraffic.

The Epaminodes and MSC-Francesca were also seized for “endangering maritime security by operating without the necessary permits and tampering with navigation systems,” the IRGC claimed, stating the vessels have been “directed to the coast of Iran.”

The disposition of the vessels and crews is not currently known. U.S. Central Command could not confirm any of these incidents.

A Sentinel-2 satellite image captured today shows what looks like a swarm of IRGCN fast attack craft sailing north of the strait of Hormuz near Kargan coast, according to open source investigator Mehdi H on X. 

The image shows what appears to be at least 33 boats. It is unclear if there is any connection between these craft and the shipping attacks. The IRGC has invested heavily in its fleet of small boats for decades as TWZ has explored in the past. Some of these vessels are armed with short-range anti-ship missiles, as well as artillery rockets and other weapons. They can also be used to lay naval mines. These fleets are extremely hard to find and fix, and do not need large ports to operate from. While CENTCOM says it has destroyed well over 150 Iranian ships, the IRGC still has many remaining small boats.

As we noted earlier in this story, in addition to attacking and capturing ships on the Strait, Iran pointed out the vulnerability of telecommunications cables running under it.

“The Strait of Hormuz is not only a crucial route for oil and gas transportation; this narrow waterway is also one of the most important internet chokepoints in the region and the world,” the IRGC-linked Tasnim news agency noted on Wednesday. “According to submarine network data, at least 7 main communication cables of the Persian Gulf countries pass through this route; while more than 97% of the world’s internet traffic is transferred via these fiber optic cables laid under the sea.”

“Cables such as FALCON, AAE‑1, TGN‑Gulf, and SEA‑ME‑WE connect a significant part of the region’s digital communication to major data centers in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia,” the outlet added. “These infrastructures are the backbone of data transfer, e-commerce, cloud services, and online communications in the Persian Gulf countries.”

“The concentration of many internet cables in a narrow passage makes the Strait of Hormuz a vulnerable point for the region’s digital economy,” Tasnim posited, calling it “a place where cables, after passing through the strait, connect to coastal landing nodes and major regional data centers.”

UPDATES

Our coverage for the day has concluded.

UPDATE: 7:56 PM EDT –

Though the fighting may be paused, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the economic pressure on Iran continues.

The aircraft carrier USS George H. W. Bush is set to arrive in the Middle East in about three to five days after sailing around the southern tip of Africa, Fox News Chief National Security Correspondent Jennifer Griffin stated on X.

The timing, she noted, coincides with Trump’s extending the ceasefire deadline by that same timeline.

The Washington Post reports that the Pentagon has told Congress it could take six months to fully clear the Strait of Hormuz of mines deployed by the Iranian military.

The publication added that any such operation is unlikely to be carried out until the U.S. war with Iran ends.

This “assessment that means the conflict’s economic impact could extend late into this year or beyond,” the newspaper added.

“The timeline — met with frustration by Democrats and Republicans alike, two of these people said — is the latest sign that gasoline and oil prices could remain elevated long after any peace deal is reached,” the Post noted.

Israel’s N12 News reported on X that Trump has given Iran a deadline of Sunday.

Two Israel Air Force technicians from Tel Nof Airbase, near Ashdod, will be charged with spying for Iran during Operation Roaring Lion, Israel’s public broadcaster KAN News reported on Wednesday.

“The two technicians, who worked on IAF F-15 fighter jets, handed over documentation of the engine diagrams, as well as photographs showing the face of a flight instructor, which is against military censorship rules, The Jerusalem Post reported.

“They were also asked to gather information about former IDF chief Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Herzi Halevi and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir,” the publication noted. “Authorities are considering whether to increase the charges on one of the technicians to treason, rather than the lower charge of espionage.”

The New York Post said Trump told them that another round of negotiations with Iran may take place later this week. At issue is the future of Iran’s highly enriched uranium, its supply of ballistic missiles, support of proxies like Hezbollah and the Houthis, and ultimate disposition of the Strait of Hormuz.

“‘Good news’ about a second round of talks between the US and Iran may be coming as soon as Friday,” the publication said Trump and Pakistani sources told it on Wednesday.

“Sources in Islamabad touted positive mediation efforts with Tehran, renewing the possibility of more peace talks within the next ‘36 to 72 hours,’” the newspaper added. “Asked about this possible breakthrough by The Post, Trump, in a text message, said: ‘It’s possible! President DJT.’”

Trump “plans to give the Iranians a limited timeframe to come up with a unified proposal to get diplomatic negotiations back on track,” CNN reported, citing two sources familiar with the internal discussions. “The administration does not want to indefinitely extend the ceasefire, the sources said, and does not want to give Iran time to drag out talks further.”

“Trump is willing to give another three to five days of ceasefire to allow the Iranians to get their shit together,” one U.S. source briefed on the matter told Axios. “It is not going to be open-ended.”

Trump’s negotiators “believe a deal to end the war and address what’s left of Iran’s nuclear program is still achievable,” the outlet added. “But they also worry they may not have anyone in Tehran empowered to say yes.”

Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei “is barely communicating,” Axios posited. “The IRGC generals now in control of the country and Iran’s civilian negotiators are openly at odds over strategy.”

“We saw that there is an absolute fracture inside Iran between the negotiators and the military — with neither side having access to the supreme leader, who is not responsive,” a U.S. official told the news organization.

Axios added that though Vice President JD Vance was all set to go to Pakistan for the second round of negotiations, he instead found himself waiting for the IRGC generals now in control of Iran to let parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Sayed Abbas Araghchi travel to Pakistan to meet him. However, while the Iranians appeared to have given Pakistani mediators the green light for talks, by Tuesday morning, that signal was gone, replaced by a demand that the U.S. lift its naval blockade.

As we have previously noted, Trump extended the ceasefire deadline yesterday, but gave no specific date for when fighting could resume. In a Truth Social post, he said he did so to give time for the fractured Iranian leadership to come up with a response to U.S. demands and that the ongoing blockade of Iranian ports would remain in effect.

His post came after Iranians refused to commit to peace talks tentatively scheduled to be held in Pakistan.

The official Iranian IRIB news outlet denied Tehran has taken any official position on Trump’s ceasefire extension or future negotiations.

The Iranians say the future of negotiations depends on the status of the ongoing blockade of its ports.

Iran’s UN Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani stated that Tehran is prepared to negotiate immediately after the United States ends its naval blockade, emphasizing that Washington must first halt its “ceasefire violations.”

He added that while Iran is prepared to negotiate, it is also prepared for war.

Citing data from the Vortexa cargo tracking group, Financial Times is reporting that “at least 34 tankers with links to Iran have bypassed the US blockade since it began.” 

CENTCOM, which on Tuesday said the US Navy had directed 28 vessels to turn back to Iranian ports since the blockade was enacted, told us the assertion that dozens of ships bypassed the blockade “is not true.”

The Pentagon on Wednesday pushed back on the assertion that the Iranian-linked oil tanker Tifani was seized by the U.S., however, it may be a matter of semantics.

As we reported yesterday, the vessel boarded by U.S. forces in the Indian Ocean and The Washington Post later said it was “seized” as the United States determines “next steps for the Tifani and its crew in the next couple of days.”

“Seized wouldn’t be accurate at this time,” a Pentagon official told us. “So the way it works is after interdiction the U.S. has 96 hours to determine next steps. That’s where the rest of the interagency comes in. It varies by ship and situation what the solution would be. At this point DoW’s finished its role with just the interdiction.”

“During that 96-hour period, State would make the determination it’s stateless and work through diplomatic channels on where to take it,” the official added. “DHS and Coast Guard could be the ones to escort it. DoE gets involved for the oil, treasury for the sanction, DoJ for the legal elements and warrant. It really is a large, complex coordination effort across the interagency.”

The exact current disposition of the vessel is unclear. We have reached out to the White House for more details.

With Iran partially reopening its airspace, the U.S. State Department stated that any U.S. citizens still in the country “should leave Iran now, monitor local media for updates, and consult with commercial carriers for additional information on flights out of Iran.”

Americans seeking to depart Iran “may also depart by land to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Türkiye, and Turkmenistan. U.S. citizens should not travel to Afghanistan, Iraq, or the Pakistan-Iran border area,” the warning added. “Be aware that the Iranian government may prevent U.S. citizens from departing or charge an ‘exit fee’ for departures from Iran. U.S.-Iranian dual nationals must exit Iran on Iranian passports.”

During the course of Epic Fury, the U.S. has run through a large amount of advanced munitions, CNN reported.

The list includes about 50% of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors, 50% of its Patriot interceptors, 45% of its Precision Strike Missiles, 30% of its Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise Missiles (TLAMs), 20% of its Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff (JDAM) munitions and 20% of its Standard Missiles (SM-3 and SM-6).

Given the expenditure of costly defensive munitions used to swat down much cheaper Iranian drones, the U.S. military has introduced Ukrainian counter-drone technology in recent weeks at a key U.S. air base in Saudi Arabia, Reuters reported, citing five people with ​knowledge of the matter.

These attacks have destroyed aircraft and buildings, and killed at least one service member.

“The deployment of a Ukrainian command-and-control platform called ‌Sky Map at Prince Sultan Air Base, which has not previously been reported,” is another sign of Ukrainian battlefield technological advances after more than four years of full-on war with Russia.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post Iran Ramps Up Attacks On Ships In The Strait Of Hormuz After Trump Ceasefire Extension (Updated) appeared first on The War Zone.

Editor’s note: As this story was being written, the Pentagon announced that the Secretary of the Navy “is departing the administration, effective immediately,” and that Undersecretary Hung Cao will take over as Acting Secretary of the Navy. No reason for the change in leadership was immediately given.

Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Daryl Caudle and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan both discussed the Trump class battleship, also known as the BBG(X), at separate roundtables on the sidelines of the Navy League’s Sea Air Space 2026 exposition this week. President Donald Trump had officially rolled out plans for the Trump class, the first of which is currently set to be named the USS Defiant, last December.

“I think it is a necessary element to the force,” and “I think it provides real flexibility to the force,” Secretary Phelan said about the BBG(X) effort at his roundtable.

From what the Navy has shared so far, the Trump class warships will displace approximately 35,000 tons, very roughly three times that of the newest Flight III subvariant of the Arleigh Burke class destroyer. They will also be between 840 and 880 feet long, have a beam (the widest point in the hull) between 105 and 115 feet, and be able to reach a top speed greater than 30 knots. The armament on each of the ships will include a mix of nuclear and conventional missiles, including hypersonic types, loaded into large vertical launch system (VLS) arrays. They will also have an electromagnetic railgun, a pair of traditional 5-inch naval guns, laser directed energy weapons, and various additional weapons for close-in defense.

Navy officials also provided additional details about the costs and production schedule associated with the Trump class during yesterday’s rollout of the service’s proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year. As it stands now, the Navy is looking to order the first of three of these large surface combatants in Fiscal Year 2028, at an estimated cost of $17 billion. The Navy is currently projecting it will spend $43.5 billion on the program, overall, across the next five years. As a point of comparison, the estimated total procurement costs of each of the next three Ford class aircraft carriers range from roughly $13 to $15 billion.

The $17 billion figure “is the early initial estimate. We’ll see where we really settle down as we get through that and start to rationalize some of the costs,” Secretary Phelan noted at his roundtable at Sea Air Space. “So, let’s see where we land on that first ship, and then what the economies of scale get us to as we move through it.”

The Navy has already started “talking to two different vendors” about actually building the Trump class warships, he added. “Then it’ll be a function of how we get through that design process with them, and then their capacity in their yards, what we think they can do. Because we’re looking to really get moving on this and lay the keel in [20]28.”

The Secretary of the Navy and CNO Caudle have made clear that the BBG(X) design is still in the very early stages of being formulated. The ships are also set to incorporate a host of advanced capabilities, many of which, such as the railgun and laser directed energy weapons, have yet to be fully proven out, despite years of relevant work the Navy has done already.

“The ship needs to be designed. So, I got to put money toward the research and design of it,” Adm. Caudle said during his roundtable at Sea Air Space. “It’s really the design and how much pull-through I can do from previous efforts, like things that we already have on Arleigh Burke and DDG(X) designs that were already in the works.”

The Navy has previously confirmed that BBG(X) is a direct successor to the DDG(X) next-generation destroyer program. The service has also said that the new large surface combatant addresses shortcomings that had emerged with the previously planned DDG(X) design, which we will come back to later on.

“So all that has to go into a form factor in which we’re fundamentally changing the capacity, [the] vertical capacity of it, [and] the electrical plant and electrical generation for future large-scale directed energy [weapons] and other munitions that require a lot of power, like railgun,” Caudle continued. “So all that’s being baked into that design. And, because we’re taking it so seriously, we want to make sure that we have the right resources applied to the design.”

One of the “mistakes that we’ve done before, quite frankly,” is “we’ve started to build before the design is mature enough,” the CNO added. “And we want to make sure that we’re at [sic] least a very, very high level – I won’t try to give a percentage, but you can think like 80% or more design – before the first weld is done.”

Caudle did not explicitly mention the Constellation class frigate, but the design of that ship was still being finalized as of April 2025, nearly five years after the initial contract award. Work had already begun on the lead ship at that time. This was all despite the Navy having explicitly chosen a derivative of an in-production frigate – Franco-Italian Fregata Europea Multi-Missione (FREMM) – specifically to help reduce risk and keep the program on track. Needless to say, that did not happen, as you can read more about here.

The Navy has also deliberately utilized a process known as “concurrency,” which entails starting production without having a validated design in place, on other shipbuilding projects. Concurrency has been presented in the past as a cost and time-saving measure, but has often produced exactly the opposite results. It has had notably negative impacts on the Navy’s newest operational aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford, and both classes of Littoral Combat Ships (LCS).

“Look, we were doing work on railguns. We kind of abandoned it. We do have some directed energy [weapons] we are testing out right now,” Secretary Phelan also pointed out in terms of work the Navy has already done to develop key capabilities for the Trump class. “These are all things we have to get better at and need to do. So I think it’s just making sure that we’ve got the design down in an appropriate fashion, pretty locked down, and then making some trade-offs as we decide where to build that ship, when, how.”

The Navy just disclosed earlier this year that it conducted at least one new round of live-fire testing utilizing a prototype electromagnetic railgun currently at the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) in New Mexico. In the early 2020s, the service had shelved work on that weapon, at least publicly, despite promising developments, citing technical hurdles.

Navy officials also continue to be very supportive of work on laser directed energy weapons, despite ongoing challenges with their development. The service is actively pursuing microwave directed energy weapons, as well.

At his roundtable at Sea Air Space this week, Phelan said that there are discussions ongoing about the possibility of the Trump class warships being nuclear-powered, though he said that was “unlikely” to be the case. Nuclear propulsion would have major impacts on the complexity and cost of the ships. Navy budget documents say the plan currently is for the BBG(X) to use a combined conventional propulsion system that includes diesel generators and gas turbines.

The Navy is also still fleshing out how it plans to employ the Trump class battleships operationally, which will also have impacts on the final design. This ties back into the aforementioned issues with DDG(X) that the service has cited in the past. The Navy has said it had previously arrived at a place with the next-generation destroyer program where it was considering building two subclasses with different armament configurations. This, in turn, had prompted questions about the limits that course of action would have imposed on the operational flexibility of the class as a whole.

“It’s something we’re trying to understand all the proper trade-offs, and then think about it as a Battleship Strike Group, Carrier Strike Group, how do they work in which different theaters,” Phelan said. “Look at how we’re deployed today, and ask yourself, how a ship like that, what it could do for us. If I had a ship like that today, I could park that off the coast of Venezuela, and I don’t need a ton of DDGs [Arleigh Burke class destroyers] to support it, and I can relieve some of the pressure on those.”

The Secretary’s comments here are in line with how the Navy’s latest budget request describes the current operational concept behind BBG(X).

“Adding capability at the highest end of the Golden Fleet high-low mix, the Battleship’s primary role is to deliver high-volume, long-range offensive fires and serve as a robust, survivable forward command and control platform. The expanded size and energy density of the new Battleship provide critical advantages for future naval warfare, offering a future-proof platform with distinct capabilities that enhance deterrence,” the line item for the program says. “Its advanced systems will enable true long-range strike with hypersonic weapons housed in new, larger vertical launch systems. Vastly increased power generation, managed by a sophisticated integrated power system with high-capacity energy storage, will support mission-critical directed energy weapons like high-output lasers and electromagnetic railguns, reducing reliance on costly single-use munitions.”

“Furthermore, its advanced naval gunfire offers cost-effective options for strike and defense, and its capacity to embark a fleet command staff enhances survivability by putting commanders closer to the fight. As a flexible command-and-control platform for both manned and unmanned platforms, the Battleship can lead a Surface Action Group, integrate with a Carrier Strike Group, or operate autonomously to secure critical sea lanes,” it continues. “To overcome the capacity limits of the Arleigh Burke class destroyer and the capability compromises of the previously planned DDG(X), the Battleship is designed specifically to accommodate these advanced weapon systems.”

TWZ has previously raised detailed questions about the actual ability of a warship like the Trump class design to conduct independent operations, as well as the general utility of employing it in this way. These questions are compounded by the Navy’s plans, at least right now, to only acquire a very small number of these ships, which can only be in one place at one time. They would also be top targets for adversaries in future conflicts. With the plan now to order the first of these ships in Fiscal Year 2028, the decision about whether to proceed at all could fall to a new administration, as well.

The service does not appear to have ever put out a firm target for how many of the smaller DDG(X)s it expected to buy, but there had been talk of acquiring between 30 and 50 of those ships in the coming decades.

There are also industrial base and affordability concerns around acquiring such an expensive class of new large surface combatants amid the Navy’s other shipbuilding priorities. Naval shipbuilding capacity, or lack thereof, in the United States has been of growing concern for years, especially when contrasted with China’s industrial might in this regard.

“What we’re looking at more is this distributed ship building in modular [sic; modules], and I think that is a way to tackle that issue,” Phelan said at his roundtable in response to a direct question about these issues. “We’re going to need to really improve our ability to build ships.”

With TWZ and other outlets at a separate event earlier this year, Adm. Caudle also touted the importance of a greater focus on modular shipbuilding methods, which are not new. At that time, CNO was talking about how that could be used to help accelerate work on new FF(X) frigates that the Navy is now looking to acquire in place of the abortive Constellation class.

“An innovative strategy is guiding the new Battleship’s design and construction, centered on a state-of-the-art digital workflow. This utilizes modern digital engineering, AI-enabled design, and advanced production practices to reduce cost and schedule risk. Adopting best practices from Korean and Japanese shipbuilding, the approach emphasizes high design maturity before construction begins, precision modular construction, and tight integration between design and production teams,” according to the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request. “This digital-first, modular approach allows for distributed construction across the industrial base, with U.S. shipyards focusing on final assembly and integration. The strategy is designed to stabilize the workforce, increase industrial resilience, and deliver the new capability more predictably and affordably.”

With the Navy now pushing to order its first Trump class battleship in Fiscal Year 2028, and insisting it won’t start work without a very firm design in place, more details about these warships are likely to continue to emerge in the coming months.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Everything New We Just Learned About The Trump Class Battleship Program appeared first on The War Zone.

Jamie Hunter of TWZ spoke about the RAACM-ER (RAACM pronounced ‘rack-em;’ ER for Extended Range) with Doug Denneny, founder, CEO, and owner at CoAspire.

First off, it’s worth looking at the original RAACM, a modular, low-cost cruise missile that leverages 3D printing to bring down cost and enable rapid production ramp-up.

“When we designed the original RAACM, we knew that it was going to be the size of a GBU-38,” Denneny said, referring to the 500-pound version of the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), which is 92.6 inches long and has a wingspan of 14 inches.

An official video promoting the original RAACM:

“When you go to that size, there are great reasons to do it, but it doesn’t go as far as a larger variant could do,” Denneny continued. “We really wanted to take everything we learned and now have an extended-range version. And what’s beautiful about the additive manufacturing that we use is that we can really optimize fuel tank volume, which means this can go very far.”

According to the manufacturer, the RAACM-ER has a range greater than 1,000 nautical miles.

This is especially remarkable considering the relatively compact size of the weapon. Indeed, when it comes to anti-ship missiles, the only weapon in the U.S. inventory that comes close is the BGM-109 Block V Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST). This can be launched from destroyers, submarines, and the U.S. Army’s Typhon system. Like the RAACM-ER, it is subsonic, but a single round costs $3.64 million, according to the Navy. While the RAACM-ER clearly has a degree of low observability, it is not to the same degree as on the MST.

Like RAACM, the extended-range model is designed for launch from aircraft, as well as from the ground and from naval vessels. For surface-launched applications, the RAACM-ER adds an additional rocket booster behind its turbojet, meaning it can be propelled out of its launch canister.

Despite the nomenclature, the RAACM-ER is a new design, rather than a modification of the RAACM.

Denneny explained: “Our engineers came to us and said, ‘Hey, if we’re going to make a bigger one, should we make it look just the same?’ I mentioned earlier that RAACM was made that shape just to ease integration. We’re an engineering company, so we said, ‘Let’s optimize fuel volume, let’s optimize survivability features, let’s optimize physics so that this thing can go as far as possible and take the sensors needed. That’s why it’s in this slightly different shape.”

The RAACM-ER is somewhat reminiscent of the AGM-158 Joint Air-To-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), in terms of appearance and capabilities, but Denneny is keen to avoid direct comparisons.

“Physics is physics,” he added. “When people look at shapes, they look similar, but just like an Airbus looks like a Boeing, but what they have different inside is really what matters, and that’s how we differ in many ways.”

In terms of sensors, the RAACM-ER is currently fitted with a GPS navigation system, suitable for air, ground, and surface launch.

“Both our RAACM and our RAACM-ER also have a long-wave infrared sensor in the nose,” Denneny continued, “so we have the opportunity to search and find targets as well.”

Unlike the JASSM and similar cruise missiles, however, the RAACM-ER, like the RAACM before it, is optimized for low cost.

For Denneny, “the most important thing is affordable mass. [This] means keeping the cost down, so that the nation and our allies can purchase these at scale. That’s number one. Number two is to use as many commercial off-the-shelf parts, so that we are not locked into a single supplier for anything. The final thing is to have something that can survive enemy countermeasures, and also hit the target, whether it’s stationary or moving. Those are the main requirements.”

When it comes to price point, CoAspire has optimized mass rather than the highest-end capabilities. This is a reflection not only of the sheer number of targets that the U.S. military and its allies would face in a potential conflict with China, but also the fact that a considerable proportion of missiles won’t make it to their targets anyway. Still, as recent conflicts have shown, the ability of lower-end drones, especially, to overwhelm adversary air defenses when fielded in large numbers is significant. After all, quantity has a quality all of its own.

Denneny confirmed that CoAspire plans to test-fly the RAACM-ER “very soon.”

The original RAACM has already undergone flight trials aboard a contractor-operated A-4. CoAspire is now under contract to the U.S. government for RAACM, and the weapon is in production at the company’s plant in Manassas, Virginia.

In the past, we’ve learned that both the Air Force and the Navy have funded work on the RAACM project. It has also been reported that CoAspire is one of two companies producing Extended Range Attack Missiles (ERAM) for Ukraine — this may well involve the RAACM or a related weapon.

As for the RAACM-ER, this was unveiled only a week after the Air Force launched market research for its Family of Affordable Mass Missiles — Beyond Adversary’s Reach (FAMM-BAR).

“The potential procurement objective is to produce an inventory for the [U.S.] Government and Foreign Military Sales. The expectation is that the annual production orders will range from 1,000 to 2,000 units per year for five years (procurement numbers will vary by year),” the Air Force says in the request for information.

The FAMM-BAR program lists five desired attributes for the potential weapon: a range of at least 1,000 nautical miles, a speed of at least 0.7 Mach, the option of palletized delivery from a cargo aircraft, the ability to receive midcourse navigation updates, and the manufacturing capacity to produce more than 1,000 rounds annually. The main target set for the weapon is “slow-moving maritime” vessels.

A video showing a demonstration of the Rapid Dragon air-launched palletized munitions concept, using surrogate weapons delivered from the cargo holds of a C-17A and an EC-130J:

This requirement reflects the growing focus on anti-surface warfare as the U.S. military plans for a high-end conflict in the Pacific, especially against China. The U.S. military is increasingly investing in a diverse mix of anti-ship capabilities, part of a broader strategic shift driven by China’s growing maritime power. At the same time, real-world operations have exposed how rapidly missile stockpiles can be depleted, intensifying concerns that sustaining the massive volumes of anti-ship fires required in a China conflict will demand significant expansion of U.S. production capacity and inventories.

At the same time, the RAACM-ER would be useful for striking static land targets during an Indo-Pacific war, too. With such a considerable range, the weapon will also be better able to deal with increasingly far-reaching air defenses, something that the Pentagon is increasingly concerned about, including the likelihood of enemy missiles that can target its aircraft at ranges as great as 1,000 miles.

It should be noted that there are already other FAMM programs underway, namely the FAMM-Palletized and FAMM-Lugged cruise missiles for the Air Force. However, these require ranges of 250-500 nautical miles.

At this point, the low-cost, long-range strike weapon field is becoming increasingly crowded. Other contenders include designs from Anduril, General Atomics, and Zone 5 Technologies. From the last of these companies, the Rusty Dagger recently underwent release tests from an Air Force F-16 as part of the FAMM-L effort.

Global Technical Systems is also pitching a cruise missile with a range of 1,200 nautical miles and an anti-ship warhead.

However, with the original RAACM already in production, and proven in flight tests, the new RAACM-ER looks well-positioned to go far — figuratively and literally — in the FAMM-BAR program.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post New Low-Cost Cruise Missile Features Tomahawk-Like Range appeared first on The War Zone.

The MH-60S is a versatile multi-mission, medium‑lift maritime helicopter that is designed for a broad range of missions, such as vertical replenishment (VERTREP) at sea, search‑and‑rescue, airborne mine countermeasures, anti‑surface warfare, and electronic warfare.

The U.S. Navy operates both the MH-60S and the MH-60R variants of the H-60 and the two share a common airframe, General Electric T700 powerplants and many avionics, enabling streamlined logistics, maintenance and training across the fleet while allowing each variant to be customized for distinct operational roles. The MH-60R is primarily configured for anti-submarine warfare (ASW) but it too has anti-surface warfare (ASuW) capabilities and has been used to shoot down drones.

The MH-60S features a modern glass cockpit, twin General Electric T700‑GE‑401C engines and a flexible, modular, mission‑systems suite that supports interchangeable payloads, internal fuel tanks, and advanced mission packages.

“Sikorsky is leveraging its global MH-60R and MH-60S Seahawk users to constantly iterate while we operate, ensuring the aircraft is mission ready and evolves. This commitment to production, sustainment and modernization enables the MH-60R to stay ahead of emerging threats and maintain its position as the premier global ASW platform,” the company commented to TWZ.

Check out the full MH-60S walk-around video below:

Contact the editor: Tyler@twz.com

The post U.S. Navy MH-60S Pilot Talks Multi-Mission Roles During Tour Of The Seahawk appeared first on The War Zone.

According to Breaking Defense, the Air Force’s fiscal 2027 budget, revealed yesterday, looks to buy another 24 F-15EXs at a cost of $3 billion, but this is just the start, according to the new plan. Ultimately, the service wants to more than double its previous Eagle II buy, which previously stood at 129 jets, with the total having fluctuated in recent years.

The new move is primarily a response to the need to “begin to recapitalize the aging F-15E fleet,” an Air Force spokesperson told Breaking Defense.

The plan will be supported by the Trump administration’s gargantuan defense budget for fiscal 2027, which requests approximately $1.5 trillion in total funding. You can read more about this development in our previous coverage of the budget, which includes munitions, missile defense, shipbuilding, and other programs, as well as aircraft. It’s important to note that this controversial proposal still has to pass through Congress, and some changes to it will be made, at the very least.

When the budget was first rolled out, it included funding sought for another 24 F-15EXs, but didn’t include details on the dramatic change to the planned total fleet size for the aircraft.

Now, the Air Force has made clear that it wants to keep the F-15EX production line open for longer, ensuring that it will receive both fifth-generation F-35As and F-15EXs — the latest iteration of the F-15 that first entered service with the Air Force in 1976. Ultimately, a third line will spin up once the sixth-generation F-47 combat jet enters series production. As for the F-35, these are still being bought in the latest budget request, and they also get a boost, but they are not currently being delivered with radar, as the Block 4 upgrade is in limbo.

Overall, the Air Force expects to see its budget increase by around a whopping 38 percent compared to fiscal 2026, to $338.8 billion. Of those funds, a significant proportion will go into procurement, driving this up by around 30 percent, although that covers all assets, and not just new fighters.

The budget also includes significant increases for weapon system sustainment and flying hours.

At the same time, the Air Force budget includes requests to retire a number of aging aircraft, something that the increased F-15EX numbers will help address.

In particular, for fiscal 2027, the Air Force wants to get rid of 20 F-15Es. These would be the oldest examples, which include the aircraft fitted with the less powerful Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 engines.

Of course, it remains possible that lawmakers will block such a move, although having more F-15EXs to replace these jets should make it a more acceptable proposal.

Additional F-15EXs mean more capability for the Air Force.

While the F-15EX will almost certainly take on a multirole mission once it’s more established in service, the air-to-air mission is currently the priority due to the Air National Guard getting the first of these jets. These units are tasked with the homeland air sovereignty mission, which focuses on intercepting aircraft and shooting down potential barrages of cruise missiles and, now, long-range one-way attack drones. As we have outlined in the past, the F-15EX is ideal for this role, especially, and a much more reasonable proposition for this mission than a more complex fifth-generation platform:

In the homeland defense role, which is the bread and butter of the F-15C/D ANG units, the F-15EX’s payload, range, open architecture, very advanced electronic surveillance and warfare suite, and overall adaptability will be of incredible use over many decades of service. You do not need a stealth fighter to do this mission. In fact, much of what is traded in terms of reliability, performance, and sustainment cost for low observability hinders the homeland defense mission. This includes raw kinematic performance. The F-15 can get places very fast when it needs to and still has fuel left over to do something once it is there, which is critical for quick reaction alert missions.

The customer also seems very happy with the jets.

In its 2025 annual report, the Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E) provided an absolutely glowing assessment of the F-15EX, as you can read about here.

In terms of the air-to-air mission set, the report noted:

“Against the level of threat tested, the F-15EX is operationally effective in all its air superiority roles, including defensive and offensive counter-air against surrogate fifth-generation adversary aircraft, as well as basic air-to-ground capability against the tested threats.”

The reference to the F-15EX’s effectiveness against fifth-generation threats is especially notable. While it’s unclear exactly what kinds of threats are being referred to, a fifth-generation fighter will typically have a low-observable design, advanced ‘sensor-fused’ avionics, and generally high performance, among other attributes. In fact, very much the kind of threat that the Air Force would expect to face in a potential conflict with China.

Once the F-15EX takes on more offensive missions, it becomes even more relevant, especially as an F-15E successor, including carrying outsized payloads, among them hypersonic missiles, over long distances, which would likely be critical in a conflict in the Pacific.

But even without these offensive attributes, the Eagle II offers capabilities that are unique in the Air Force.

The F-15EX can efficiently carry 12 AIM-120s today, but that number could be nearly doubled in the future. Smaller air-to-air weapons could expand the F-15EX’s air-to-air magazine depth, too. Laser-guided rockets, now established as an F-15E weapon, would be another obvious candidate to arm the F-15EX, especially for counter-drone work.

Using the F-15EX as an arsenal ship of sorts, especially when equipped with long-range missiles, in cooperation with its stealthy counterparts operating silently and forward, is a tactic, among others, we have long discussed. Equally compelling is the case for the two-seat Eagle II serving as a ‘drone controller’ for the Air Force’s forthcoming Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA).

Beyond all this, the F-15EX can carry a lot of payload over a long distance, to include traditional air-to-ground weapons. If the F-15EXs replace F-15Es, they will certainly have a focus on air-to-ground missions, as well.

Just as important as its capabilities and its proven airframe, the F-15EX promises to deliver a lot on the investment. The jets should provide lower operational and sustainment costs compared to both legacy and fifth-generation types, and over many decades.

In the past, Boeing told TWZ that the F-15EX has a 20,000-hour airframe service life. “This has been enabled by running a full-scale fatigue test long enough to show structure that is good beyond 20,000 hours, and structural redesigns purposely implemented by Boeing have addressed known fatigue-critical locations,” the company’s Rob Novotny explained. This is a major benefit of an extremely mature and evolved airframe. It will be able to serve for the better part of a century at common usage rates. When you amortize the unit cost over, in some cases, two and a half times the service life of most fast jets, it offers a very clear value proposition. The cost per flight hour is also well understood after decades of Eagle operations, including years of service of similar advanced variants.

This is not the first time that planned F-15EX numbers have been boosted, after dropping to a low of just 80 aircraft with the slashing of the procurement plan in 2023.

The program was then slated to grow from 98 aircraft to 129 in the Fiscal Year 2026 budget proposal.

That decision came only weeks after President Trump made the surprise announcement that the Michigan Air National Guard, which is losing its A-10 attack jets, will be reequipped with the F-15EX.

At that point, Portland, Fresno, New Orleans, and two squadrons at Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan, were slated to get the F-15EX. This plan would have required some 90 jets out of the 98-aircraft inventory. Adding Michigan, and based on those squadrons expanding to 21 jets, would require 126 aircraft. That would have left just three aircraft to satisfy test, evaluation, and training requirements.

Increasing the planned buy to 267 jets opens up the possibility of creating 13 squadrons of 21 jets, with three F-15EXs left over. Exactly what final balance the Air Force decides upon remains to be seen, but whichever way you look at it, it’s a major boon for the Combat Air Forces.

It seems almost inevitable that at least some of the additional F-15EXs will be used to replace aging F-15Es.

The possibility of swapping out F-15Es for F-15EXs is something we discussed back in 2020.

In an official Justification and Approval document at the time, the Air Force stated:

“The objective of this program is to rapidly develop, integrate, and field the F-15EX weapon system to refresh/replace aging F-15C/D aircraft. A decision to also refresh F-15E aircraft has not yet been made, but remains an option.”

After four losses in Operation Epic Fury, the relatively small 215-strong Strike Eagle fleet remains in high demand with an enduring commitment in the U.S. Central Command region that leverages many impressive niche capabilities. With just six frontline Strike Eagle squadrons, at least one is always deployed. The F-15E is also capable of delivering nuclear weapons and is the first jet certified to employ the newest variant of the B61 tactical nuclear bomb.

Replacing these critical jets is fast becoming a priority, and one that the F-15EX is uniquely suited to fulfill.

The F-15E shares similar cutting-edge technology as found in the F-15EX. It has been upgraded with the Raytheon AN/APG-82(V)1 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, the new Advanced Display Core Processor (ADCP) II, and it too is receiving the new Eagle Passive/Active Warning Survivability System, or EPAWSS, self-protection system.

With the F-15EX numbers outlined in its fiscal 2027 budget request, the Air Force would be well placed to replace a significant proportion of its Strike Eagle inventory.

As well as the F-15E, the Air Force needs to replace F-16s and A-10s. At least some of the planned retirements of these types could be covered by F-15EXs. Having the line healthy and warm could allow for more Eagle IIs to be bought to cover the F-15E fleet and some F-16 and A-10 retirements beyond the 267 F-15EXs currently planned. This may make even more sense as the F-16 ages and becomes more expensive to operate, in particular.

With the Air Force at large feeling the effects of years of underinvestment in new fighters, and with China presenting a massive pacing challenge, the Air National Guard is now pushing Congress to approve multiyear funding for the acquisition of between 72 and 100 new fighters each year. Again, the Eagle II could help meet this need, although there are limits to what the production line can support, especially with foreign orders.

It remains to be seen exactly how the jets will be fielded and, as noted earlier, Congress will have to approve this budget request for it to be signed into law.

As it stands, however, the F-15EX appears to be going from strength to strength, with the Air Force increasingly enthusiastic about the latest iteration of the iconic Eagle.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post F-15EX Buy Was Just Doubled By The USAF, Which Makes Perfect Sense appeared first on The War Zone.

Phelan talked about the carrier review yesterday at a roundtable on the sidelines of the Navy League’s Sea Air Space 2026 exposition. When asked, Phelan said that there was nothing in particular about the Ford class that prompted the Navy to take a new comprehensive look at the program and that the service is looking for ways to cut costs and be more efficient across the board.

A key question the review has been focused on is “are we getting the appropriate bang for our buck, i.e., how superior is the Ford [class] to the older Nimitz class, etc,” the Navy’s top civilian leader said. “To be honest, we’re reviewing every program, so it’s – carriers [are] just one of them.”

That being said, President Donald Trump has been a vocal critic of the Ford class, and its electromagnetic catapults (also known as the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, or EMALS) and weapons elevators in particular, which have faced serious reliability and maintenance issues. Last October, he pledged to sign an executive order that would compel the Navy to go back to using steam-powered catapults and hydraulic elevators on new aircraft carriers, which has yet to materialize. Two months later, in announcing plans for the Trump class “battleship,” the President also said that “we have the Ford class. We’re going to be upping that to a different class of aircraft carrier,” but did not elaborate.

Phelan’s comments yesterday about the ongoing review were prompted, in part, by a question about whether the Navy has actually been looking at acquiring a new class of aircraft carrier. There is no indication that this is the case currently. The service has explored alternatives to the Ford class, including smaller designs, on several occasions in the past decade or so.

“What I would say on the carriers is, we are looking at [CVN-]82 and [CVN-]83 to review the costs, the designs, the systems, to make sure that they make sense and they have all the systems and requirements that we want going forward,” Phelan explained. “I think it’s a prudent and practical thing for us to do, given the costs of them, as a percentage of the budget, and how we are thinking about the force design and our needs going forward.”

CVN-82 and CVN-83 are the hull numbers assigned to a pair of future Ford class aircraft carriers currently set to be named the USS William J. Clinton and the USS George W. Bush. Construction has not begun on either of those ships, and the Navy has not even awarded contracts yet to order them. The service is asking for advance funds to support the future procurement of CVN-82 in its newly released budget request for the 2027 Fiscal Year. The budget documents also still show plans to seek funding for CVN-83 in the coming years.

The USS Gerald R. Ford is the only member of its class currently in service. It is now in the midst of a marathon deployment that has lasted some 10 months already, the longest for any carrier since the Vietnam War. In its time at sea so far, the ship and its air wing took part in the mission to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, and more recently supported operations against Iran. Ford suffered a fire in March, underscoring concerns about strains on the ship and its crew, as you can read more about here.

There are three more Ford class carriers in various stages of being built. The second ship in the class, the future USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79), left port for the first time for initial sea trials in January and is set to be formally delivered to the Navy next year.

Kennedy and all subsequent ships in the class are already set to have notable differences from Ford, including AN/SPY-6(V)3 radars in place of the design’s original Dual Band Radar (DBR). The immensely troublesome DBR is just one of a laundry list of issues that Ford has had to contend with over the years. The Navy has been trying to leverage lessons learned from those experiences to streamline work going forward.

However, Kennedy, as well as the next two ships in the class after that, the future USS Enterprise (CVN-80) and USS Doris Miller (CVN-81), have all continued to suffer further delays. As of last year, the estimated total procurement costs for Kennedy, Enterprise, and Doris Miller were nearly $13.2 billion, almost $14.25 billion, and just over $15.2 billion, respectively, according to the Congressional Research Service.

This, in turn, has created complications for Navy plans to begin retiring Nimitz class carriers. In May, the service announced it was extending the USS Nimitz‘s service life into 2027, in line with the latest delivery schedule for Kennedy.

“So the President knows we’re reviewing it [the carrier plans], and want [sic] us to put in a review,” Phelan said. “And I think, like any businessman, he’s – okay, make sure you look at all these programs, understand the capabilities and what they’re doing.”

The Secretary of the Navy was asked what metrics the service might be looking at in order to assess the comparative capabilities of the Ford class and the preceding Nimitz class. Phelan was given, as an example, statements the Navy has made in the past about the new EMALS catapults offering improved sortie generation rates and reducing wear and tear on aircraft during launches.

“I think you’ll see the sortie rate come out and it will be eye-watering,” Navy Rear Adm. Ben Reynolds said just yesterday at the Pentagon during the rollout of the service’s proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year, according to USNI News. “The capability is just absolutely incredible.”

Reynolds is currently serving as Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Budget and Director of the Fiscal Management Division within the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations.

“So these are all things you’ve heard. These are all the same things I’ve heard,” Phelan said at the roundtable at Sea Air Space. “I go to the Ronald Reagan School of trust, but verify. That’s what I’m doing.”

“Trust me, we measure and monitor a lot of things in the Navy, including that – the airframes and how that works. So I think it’s a function of just understanding it, for example, is the sortie rate generation that much greater? And then what are the cost implications of this electric catapult, and did it really generate the savings?” Phelan continued. “You know, the Navy would like to say we’ve saved $5 billion in terms of savings in number [sic] of men and maintenance. I just need to check that back up, and that’s what I mean by that.”

“I think, like anything, it’s both understanding the cost-benefit analysis of it, because we really want to make sure we’ve got a good handle on the costs,” the Navy Secretary added. “I think one of the things we have to do a better job of in the Navy is kind of what I call total cost of ownership. So what does it really cost to sustain and maintain these things? I think we do a reasonable job at that, to be honest. But the infrastructure needs on these are also costs you have to understand going in.”

As Phelan noted, the Navy has been conducting reviews of major programs across the service. The Navy Secretary has also shown a willingness to curtail high-profile, but seriously underperforming efforts despite high sunk costs. Last November, the service axed the Constellation class frigate program, long touted as a major priority, but which had become mired in delays and at risk of ballooning costs. Earlier this month, the Navy finally abandoned plans to return the Los Angeles class attack submarine USS Boise to active service, closing out a more than 10-year-long saga that had already cost it $800 million.

Yesterday, Phelan was also asked whether the Ford class could be curtailed as a result of the ongoing review. The possibility of truncating the program has been raised in the past.

“It’s too early to say, but we will have carriers. So, carriers are an important component to [sic] the force, and we will need that,” the Navy Secretary said. “I think it’s more, how do we figure out – like, again, this comes back to every program we’re looking at. What can we do to cut costs? What can we do to make this more efficient? What can we do to make the design more simple [sic]? What are the areas where we think we can save or not save?”

Even just cancelling future orders for Ford class ships would have major downstream impacts, including on the shipbuilding industrial base and its many suppliers. At the same time, the Navy’s shipbuilding priorities also now include the Trump class “battleships,” the first of which may cost $17 billion, according to the latest official estimates. If that price point holds, these large surface combatants will be more expensive than a Ford class aircraft carrier.

“These are very important decisions to be made, and you’re locking into very big contracts and very big platforms that are going to be around for a long time. And so I just think we’re trying to make prudent decisions across everything,” he added. “I think what I found a little bit is, I have a lot of people who know how to do finance. I don’t have a lot of people who necessarily understand finance, understand incentives and deal structures, and that’s something we just need to fix.”

How the Navy’s plans for the Ford class, and aircraft carriers in general, may evolve going forward will likely become clearer after the current review is completed.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Ford Class Review Puts Navy’s Future Carrier Plans Into Question appeared first on The War Zone.

Leonardo DRS has adapted its range of ground-based Counter-UAS (C-UAS) systems for sea-based operations under the M-MEP project. The modular design, coupled with an open system architecture, allows for the integration of multiple kinetic and non-kinetic effectors, software-definable sensors, and communication packages. Leonardo DRS says this flexibility ensures that the M-MEPs remain platform-agnostic, capable of being configured across a range of small-to-large USVs of varying sizes from 14 feet in length. The C-UAS sensors and effectors are designed to complement existing naval capabilities.

The M-MEP system utilizes active and passive radars and electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) systems, with situational awareness facilitated through real-time data processing and threat assessment, enabling faster decision-making and response. Leonardo DRS says that M-MEP employs a range of non-kinetic electronic warfare systems for the active disruption and neutralization of UAS guidance systems, while integration of machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) is intended to help predict and mitigate emerging threats.

TWZ‘s Jamie Hunter spoke with Bo Mancuso from Leonardo DRS about the M-MEP program.

The post Leonardo DRS’s Plan To Counter Drones For The U.S. Navy appeared first on The War Zone.

Meanwhile, as the clock ticks down toward the end of a fragile ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, the future of peace negotiations remains very much uncertain, which we will discuss later in this story.

This afternoon, President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that he was extending the ceasefire deadline. You can read more about this later in the story.

“Overnight, U.S. forces conducted a right-of-visit, maritime interdiction and boarding of the stateless sanctioned M/T Tifani without incident in the INDOPACOM area of responsibility,” the Pentagon stated Tuesday morning on X.
“As we have made clear, we will pursue global maritime enforcement efforts to disrupt illicit networks and interdict sanctioned vessels providing material support to Iran—anywhere they operate. International waters are not a refuge for sanctioned vessels. The Department of War will continue to deny illicit actors and their vessels freedom of maneuver in the maritime domain.”

Video released by the Pentagon shows about two dozen armed troops boarding two MH-60S Seahawk helicopters on a U.S. Navy Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) ship. The video then cuts to the troops repelling onto the deck of the Tifani and searching that vessel.

The Pentagon did not say where the incident took place, however, according to MarineTraffic.com, the Tifani was last located yesterday in the Indian Ocean, about halfway between Sri Lanka and Indonesia and some 2,000 miles southeast of Iran.

The Pentagon told us that “multiple agencies” played a role in interdicting the ship. We have reached out for additional details.

Gregory Brew, Senior Analyst, Iran and Oil for Eurasia Group, stated on X that the Tifani departed from Iran’s Kharg Island on April 5 and that the ship appears to have continued sailing on after the boarding. We asked the Pentagon for more details about the ship’s disposition and they referred us to the White House, which sent us back to the Pentagon.

The ship was sanctioned under a 2018 executive order issued by President Donald Trump during his first term designed to counter Iranian malign activities and prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

UPDATES

Our coverage is now closed for the day.

UPDATE: 7:55 PM EDT –

U.S. military officials say forces are positioned for a potential return to combat at levels higher than at the start of the Iran war, CBS News reported, noting that multiple aircraft carriers, thousands of Marines and additional airpower are deployed across the region near the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranians don’t seem impressed with Trump’s ceasefire extension.

Trump gave the fractures in Iran’s leadership as a main reason for extending the ceasefire.

On X, Ariel Oseran, a reporter for Israel’s I24 news outlet, offered some insights into the fissures that exist.

UPDATE: 4:50 PM EDT –

Trump took to Truth Social to announce an “extended ceasefire” with Iran at the request of Pakistan, but is maintaining the blockade.

“Based on the fact that the Government of Iran is seriously fractured, not unexpectedly so and, upon the request of Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, of Pakistan, we have been asked to hold our Attack on the Country of Iran until such time as their leaders and representatives can come up with a unified proposal,” Trump wrote. “I have therefore directed our Military to continue the Blockade and, in all other respects, remain ready and able, and will therefore extend the Ceasefire until such time as their proposal is submitted, and discussions are concluded, one way or the other.”

UPDATE: 1:32 PM EDT –

Vance’s trip to Pakistan for a second round of negotiations with Iran has been put on hold after Tehran failed to respond to American positions, The New York Times reported, citing a U.S. official with direct knowledge of the situation. Iran, for its part, said it had not yet decided whether to resume talks with the United States.

Vance had been scheduled to depart Tuesday morning for the Pakistani capital, where talks were set to resume on Wednesday — the same day the fragile cease-fire between the United States and Iran is set to expire. Without an Iranian response, the official said, the diplomatic process is in effect paused, though the trip has not been canceled.

Meanwhile, the Houthis say they are prepared to resume fighting as they did when the Yemen-based Iranian proxies launched a campaign against Red Sea shipping in 2024.

“Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi says the Yemeni resistance movement will return to fighting if a fragile ceasefire that halted 40 days of American-Israeli aggression against Iran expires without an agreement to permanently end the war,” the Iranian Press TV news outlet reported on Telegram.

The status of peace talks in Pakistan remains murky. While Vice President JD Vance and other top officials are expected to leave for the negotiations today, Iranian officials have yet to officially commit. The main sticking points remain the future of Iran’s highly enriched uranium, the Strait of Hormuz, the status of its ballistic missile inventory and support for proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis of Yemen.

“A diplomatic source in Pakistan says no diplomatic delegation from Iran has been dispatched to Islamabad ‘so far,’” the official Iranian IRNA news agency stated on Tuesday. “In response to speculations about possible negotiations in Pakistan, a diplomatic source told IRNA on Tuesday that no delegation from Iran has arrived in the Pakistani capital.”

The source clarified that “neither official nor unofficial information has been received regarding any Iranian involvement in the negotiations in Islamabad.”

In a brief phone call, Trump told CNBC host Joe Kernan he thinks the U.S. is “going to end up with a great deal” with Iran to end the war, even as he said he does not expect to extend a ceasefire due to expire on Wednesday.

“I think they have no choice,” Trump said during an interview on CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” when asked what he expected to come out of a second round of peace negotiations with Iran. “We’ve taken out their navy, we’ve taken out their air force, we’ve taken out their leaders.”

The president added that he is ready to resume the conflict if a deal with Iran does not appear in the offing.

“Well, I expect to be bombing because I think that’s a better attitude to go in with – but we’re ready to go,” Trump answered when asked if he needs at least the prospect for a signed deal either today or tomorrow.

Trump also said “I don’t want to do that,” when asked if he would extend the ceasefire beyond tomorrow if talks with Iran appear promising.

Iran is banking on “market meltdowns” and domestic economic pressures to get Trump to back down on his demands, Fox News reporter Trey Yingst suggested Tuesday morning.

“Iran sees this as a game of endurance. They believe that time is on their side and that ultimately the domestic pressure, when it comes to energy markets and the stock market, will force President Trump to make a deal that’s in their favor,” he explained. “That is not the truth. That is not the reality…The president and his counterparts in Israel have the ability to continue this operation for months if they need to.”

Trump is “misleading” the world about “conditions on the ground,” Iran’s top military operational commander claimed.

“Holding the upper hand, the Armed Forces do not allow the lying and delusional president of the United States to exploit the situation or fabricate false narratives about conditions on the ground, particularly regarding the management and control of the Strait of Hormuz, during periods of silence in military confrontation,” proffered Major General Ali Abdollahi, commander of Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, which is responsible for coordinating operations between the country’s Army and the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC).

Abollahi added that the Armed Forces “will duly respond to any breach of commitments” by the “adversaries,” a reference to the U.S. firing on and seizing the Iranian cargo ship Touska on Sunday.

Though the status of the peace talks is unclear, Pakistan has emerged as a winner on the world stage. However, it is an unlikely mediator, The Washington Post notes.

“Pakistan does not formally recognize Israel, one of the key countries involved,” the Post posited. “It became a nuclear power in secret, as the U.S. and Israel have accused Iran of seeking to do. And it did not start off on the right foot with President Donald Trump, who in his first term said Pakistan had given Washington ‘nothing but lies and deceit.”

But over the past year, “a focused campaign to win Trump’s favor appears to have paid off,” the newspaper added. “For months, Pakistan’s leaders wooed the Trump administration with flashy deals and public praise.”

“We read him right,” said Mushahid Hussain Syed, the former chairman of the Pakistani Senate’s Defense Committee. He said Pakistan recognized Trump’s transactional approach to diplomacy early.

“We delivered, and we delivered big time,” Syed said. “We gave him the three C’s: crypto, critical minerals and counterterrorism.”

Recent events in and around the Strait of Hormuz – including the IRGC opening then closing the narrow body of water, its attack on several foreign vessels and the U.S. seizure of an Iranian cargo ship – are creating further instability in the world energy markets, according to global market intelligence firm Kpler.

Shipping giant Maersk is urging ships to avoid the region.

“Volatility persists in the situation,” the company stated. “In coordination with our security partners, we have assessed that as of now, transit through the Strait should be avoided. We will continue monitoring developments and provide updates as clarity improves.”

The International Maritime Organization is “working on an evacuation plan for hundreds of ships that have been stuck in the Persian Gulf since US and Israeli strikes on Iran began more than seven weeks ago,” Bloomberg News reports, citing Secretary General Arsenio Dominguez.

The plan can only be put into action when there are clear signs of de-escalation, Dominguez said on the sidelines of Singapore Maritime Week on Tuesday. The United Nations agency would also need to ascertain if mines had been laid in the strait before sending ships through, he said.

Around 800 ships remain stuck in the Persian Gulf after traffic through the Strait of Hormuz slowed to a trickle following the outbreak of the war. Tehran’s threats and attacks on vessels had made most shipowners too nervous to attempt a transit, although the Islamic Republic had been allowing some vessels that followed approved routes to exit, and demanding payment in some cases.

The U.S. blockade of Iranian ports on April 13 — aimed at depriving Iran of revenue for the war — has made the situation even more perilous.

Even if the war ended today and the Strait was reopened, it will likely take several months – and maybe even into next year – for U.S. domestic gasoline prices to drop back down to pre-war levels, Axios noted.

There is disagreement on this even in Washington. Energy Secretary Chris Wright told CNN Sunday that gas might not drop all the way down to the pre-war level — just under $3 per gallon — until next year. President Trump, for his part, appeared to contradict Wright in comments to The Hill Monday, seeing a faster drop.

However, researchers and analysts Axios interviewed “see slower price drops — pretty close to Wright’s prediction,” the outlet posited.

“Even in the most optimistic of these scenarios, in which flows through Hormuz recover quickly with no restrictions, U.S. retail gasoline prices are likely to face an uphill battle to return to pre-war levels until 2027,” Rob Smith, S&P Global director of refining and marketing, told Axios.

China is lowering domestic retail gasoline and diesel price caps, Reuters reported. This marks its first cut this year as global oil prices retreated from their peaks of the Iran war.

The price drop “will save a private car owner about $3.23 to fill a 50-litre tank of 92-octane gasoline,” the outlet noted. “High gasoline and diesel prices have sharply curbed retail consumption, leading to a surge in inventories at independent refineries and prompting widespread wholesale price cuts to clear stocks, Chinese consultancy Oilchem said.”

Iraqi militias backed by Iran launched dozens of explosive drones at Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states during more than five weeks of fighting, in what is becoming a shadowy war within a war pushing some of the world’s largest oil producers toward open conflict, according to The Wall Street Journal.

According to at least one Saudi assessment described by a person familiar with it, up to half of the nearly 1,000 drone attacks on the kingdom came from inside Iraq, the publication pointed out.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post Trump Extends Ceasefire Deadline (Updated) appeared first on The War Zone.

“From what we are tracking, the last known irrefutable instance of a Navy ship firing its deck gun at another ship was on April 18, 1988 during Operation Praying Mantis,” a U.S. Navy official told us, referring to a duel between the U.S. and Iranian navies in the Persian Gulf.

That’s when the Belknap class guided missile cruiser USS Wainwright, Knox class destroyer escort USS Bagley and the Oliver Hazard Perry class guided missile frigate USS Simpson all fired upon the Iranian Karman class fast attack ship IRIS Joshan.

In addition to launching anti-ship missiles at the Iranian ship, the Wainwright and Bagley engaged the Joshan with 5-inch deck guns while the Simpson used its 3-incher, the official noted. The three ships belonged to what was then known as Surface Action Group (SAG) Charlie.

Praying Mantis was part of the much larger Operation Ernest Will, which began in 1987 when Iraqi and Iranian forces increased attacks on merchant ships in the Persian Gulf during the latter stages of the Iran-Iraq War.

Ernest Will involved reflagging Kuwaiti oil tankers under the American banner, allowing them to be escorted by U.S. Navy ships. In July, 1987, during the first such escort, one of those ships struck a mine, setting off a chain reaction of events that led to Praying Mantis. That operation was in response to the Oliver Hazard Perry class guided missile frigate USS Samuel B. Roberts striking an Iranian mine.

The mine’s detonation against the Roberts “blew an immense hole in the ship’s hull,” according to a Navy history of the incident. “Ten Sailors from Samuel B. Roberts sustained severe injuries. Four were seriously burned. Commander Paul X. Rinn was hurt as well. The ship should have sunk, but thanks to an extraordinary damage control effort by all hands of an extremely well-trained crew, Samuel B. Roberts was kept afloat.”

“The U.S. response was fierce,” the Navy history continued. “Operation Praying Mantis was the largest of five major U.S. Navy surface actions since World War II. It was the first, and so far only, time the U.S. Navy has exchanged surface-to-surface missile fire with an enemy, and it resulted in the largest warship sunk by the U.S. Navy since WWII.”

At 10:48 a.m. local time, “an approaching Iranian frigate, Joshan, was identified,” according to Defense Media Network. “The Joshan ignored three warnings issued from the Wainwright, and launched a Harpoon missile that narrowly missed the cruiser.”

The vessels in the U.S. Navy’s surface action group returned fire with SM-1 and Harpoon missiles, heavily damaging the Joshan. The burning frigate was then sunk with gunfire.

The Joshan wasn’t the only Iranian asset hit that day.

“In the one-day operation, the U.S. Navy destroyed two Iranian surveillance platforms, sank two of their ships, and severely damaged another,” according to a Navy history of the event.

Praying Mantis helped change the course of events.

“Stung by its defeats, Iran decreased its attacks against merchant vessels after the US responses,” the Modern Warfare Institute at West Point noted.

While the Spruance attack on the Touska is the Navy’s first use of a deck gun on another ship since then, there are more differences than similarities between these engagements.

The Touska is an unarmed civilian cargo vessel that tried to evade the Navy’s blockade on Iranian ports. While the Spruance’s gun blew a hole in Touska’s engine room, the ship didn’t sink, but was instead boarded and seized. The vast majority of Iran’s navy has been destroyed during Epic Fury, leaving an array of small attack craft, but nothing the size of the Joshan still afloat.

You can see video of the Touska being hit with a 5-inch gun below:

Here is a file video of a Arleigh Burke class destroyer firing its 5-inch gun:

The Touska encounter didn’t seem to have the same effect on Iran as Praying Mantis. If anything, as we previously noted, for at least certain factions within the fragmented Iranian power structure, it hardened the resolve not to enter a second round of negotiations to end the war. Though Trump has extended the deadline for a ceasefire, Iran has yet to indicate it will return to the bargaining table.

Iran, calling the Touska incident an act of piracy, has demanded the return of the ship and its crew and has threatened retaliation. However that has yet to happen.

Regardless, now we know the last time the U.S. Navy has used one of its main deck guns against another ship in anger was 38 years ago.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post USS Spruance Blasting A Ship With Its Deck Gun Is A First In Nearly Four Decades appeared first on The War Zone.

The new details came when officials — J.J. Cummings and Armor Harris from Shield AI, and Steve Russell from GE Aerospace’s Edison Works — spoke with reporters, including The War Zone, at the Sea-Air-Space 2026 exposition near Washington, D.C.

Make sure to get up to speed on everything we previously knew about X-BAT in our exclusive feature from when the aircraft was unveiled, linked here, as well as its forthcoming flight testing here.

A major redesign

When we discussed the X-BAT in our in-depth coverage of the program in the past, the drone had a ‘cranked kite’ planform, which has now given way to a straight leading edge with a more dramatic sweep as part of a distinctive arrowhead-shaped profile. We saw the same on the Boeing X-45C Phantom Ray UCAV prototype, and it has since been adopted by the Chinese GJ-11 Sharp Sword, among others. This new configuration looks better optimized for higher-speed flight.

According to X-BAT’s chief designer, Armor Harris, “We’ve taken an iterative approach to development and made improvements to the design based on test data.”

Raiding the past to realize the future

Of all the new details we received about X-BAT, where the jet’s critical thrust vectoring capability will come from is perhaps the most intriguing. GE Aerospace says that the engine nozzle is the Axisymmetric Vectoring Exhaust Nozzle (AVEN), which comes from a specialized thrust-vectoring F-16 that was tested out of Edwards Air Force Base, California, back in the 1990s. The AVEN nozzle — taken direct from the warehouse, “Indiana Jones-style,” according to the officials — will be used for the initial testing.

Multirole platform: including tanker

Officials confirmed that the X-BAT can be operated as a tanker, making use of its two external hardpoints. Both of these are plumbed to the internal fuel tanks, so they can support ‘buddy’ refueling pods, which trail a hose and drogue.

The companies stress that aerial refueling tanker is “definitely not a primary mission,” but this option does reflect the multirole nature of the platform. Meanwhile, drone tankers are a growing area of interest for different U.S. military services, with efforts currently spearheaded by Boeing’s MQ-25 Stingray, although, since it is larger than the X-BAT, this would also offer much greater internal capacity.

For expeditionary operations, in particular, drone tankers are seen as a viable solution, although by no means the only one. X-BAT acting as a launch tanker could be especially of interest for tactical jets that require long runways. This would allow them to takeoff in short distances with heavy weapons loads and get fuel immediately from the X-BAT tanker before heading on their missions. X-BAT tankers could also act as unpredictable refueling platforms that are forward deployed for enroute combat aircraft, launching from virtually anywhere to refuel jets making their way from longer distances to their target areas. These are just some of the less traditional theoretical ways a tanker-configured X-BAT could be used.

Interestingly, based on the current concept of operations, Shield AI sees less interest in having the X-BAT take on fuel while airborne itself, although there is a “holding place” for a refueling probe in the nose, if required.

Overall, and beyond tanking, the X-BAT’s multirole capability implies “significant air-to-ground capability, maritime strike capability, and electronic warfare capability,” Shield AI says.

GE Aerospace F110 engine

Last year, TWZ broke the news that GE Aerospace was working with Shield AI on the powerplant side of the X-BAT, specifically its F110 turbofan, the same as used in many F-16s and F-15s. The choice of the F110 was driven by size and thrust requirements, including the demanding VTOL cycle that’s at the heart of the X-BAT concept.

Significant thrust is also a prerequisite of the X-BAT’s multirole capability, which Shield AI says sets it apart from other Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) and uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV) type drones now flying or in development.

As well as offering what Shield AI describes as the best power-to-weight ratio in its class, the F110 was selected for its fuel economy. The engine is also widely available. With roughly 3,400 in the world, several “certified pre-owned engines” have been obtained for the program, as well as new-build ones.

While the partnership between Shield AI and General Electric was announced relatively recently, they have been working together for longer, with “tremendous progress on adapting the F110 engine” made in the last six to 12 months, according to officials.

Payload and range

According to Shield AI, X-BAT is around twice the size of all the other CCAs that are on the market today, which allows it to have a pair of payload bays that are roughly the same size as those found on the F-35. This means that any store that fits in an F-35 can theoretically also be accommodated internally in an X-BAT. These presently include 2,000-pound-class weapons.

At the same time, the X-BAT “goes twice as far” as an F-35, meaning double the combat radius. The drone’s manufacturers give a combat radius figure of 1,000 nautical miles. In the past, Shield AI told TWZ that the drone would also have a maximum range of 2,000 nautical miles and a service ceiling of around 50,000 feet.

Of course, the aircraft’s weight is a major factor in providing range. Company officials say they are “not really doing anything super-novel on the design of the air vehicle” in terms of weight reduction. However, with no landing gear and no auxiliary power unit (X-BAT uses an external lithium-ion battery pack to start the engine), and with other items moved from the air vehicle to the trailer-based launch recovery vehicle, all of this helps make the drone lighter.

VTOL flight profile

For vertical takeoff, the F110 engine is put into afterburner to get the required thrust-to-weight ratio needed for takeoff, although the aircraft returns to land on military power (without afterburner).

Various modifications are needed to the F110 for use in a vertical takeoff application: as a tail-sitting aircraft, the X-BAT spends a lot of its time in this attitude. As such, the engine has been exposed to significant subscale and full-scale testing at GE Aerospace facilities. Shield AI says it plans to build the prototype aircraft at a facility in Frisco, Texas, this summer.

Interestingly, one important part of the tests so far has been to explore just how far the F110 can be throttled back for the delicate VTOL and transition phases. Previously, the limits were set by the cabin pressurization requirements of crewed aircraft: essentially, how much fan speed was needed to generate enough bleed air to pressurize the cabin for the pilot. Since the X-BAT is uncrewed, the F110 can be throttled back farther and operate in different regimes.

Thrust-vectoring nozzle

While the aforementioned AVEN nozzle will be used for the initial testing, the companies are meanwhile working on redesigning and updating the design and building more nozzles. The control system and software are also completely different from those used on the original AVEN and are tweaked to work with today’s F110.

“It actually has worked really well,” Steve Russell says of the nozzle. “We’ve done testing where we’ve reversed it, we’ve integrated it, we’ve run the control system … you put all those things together and put it into such a cool platform that’s really going to present a unique dilemma for our potential adversaries.”

So far, testing has shown that the rigors of VTOL actually result in less fatigue and vibration compared to a typical F-16 profile.

The current nozzle doesn’t have low-observable (LO) attributes, but that is something that will be introduced after prototype testing. There is also the possibility of the X-BAT vectoring its nozzle in forward flight to increase its agility. The companies stress that this capability will depend on customer requirements, but the nozzle will be fully vectorable across the flight regime.

The focus for now is more about actuation and integration of the F110 with the Shield AI airframe and flight control system. A key factor is mitigating against exhaust gas ingestion and ensuring the engine is fed with clean air during the transition phases of flight. However, this is not something the developers are overly concerned about, and the F110 is also judged particularly stall-resistant.

Air intakes and blast deflector

Shield AI’s air intake system is specifically engineered to handle these demanding phases of flight and includes an auxiliary inlet on the back of the aircraft. This is concealed beneath a panel when the aircraft is not in VTOL mode.

Just as important is the engine exhaust, especially when it comes to mitigating the risk of foreign object damage (FOD) and kicking up debris that could damage other assets on the ground during VTOL operations. This would be especially critical on the tight confines of a ship’s flight deck.

For the launch, a blast deflector built into the X-BAT’s custom trailer is designed to direct the exhaust plume away rather than recirculating it back to the engine. The fact that the aircraft is suspended relatively high in the air for takeoff means that the issue of rocks and other debris being kicked-up at the aircraft is reduced. The deflector also channels the blast in a known direction.

For the landing phase, the aircraft’s approach profile helps avoid FOD and exhaust gas ingestion. Instead of coming straight down to land, the X-BAT approaches the launch-recovery trailer from the side, makes contact with it, and then powers up into a latch that secures it. The aircraft also leans slightly into the incoming airstream to help ensure the intake is always being fed with cleaner air.

Open system architectures

With open system architectures baked into the design, it should also be easier to upgrade the X-BAT than previous aircraft, meaning it is getting “a lot closer to plug and play.” Shield AI talks about swapping in and swapping out different radiofrequency and infrared sensors for upgrades or potentially for different missions.

The companies remain generally tight-lipped about the electronic warfare (EW) packages that will be installed in the X-BAT. They did say that the EW gear will be unique to this aircraft and that they were able to leverage a lot of the sixth-generation systems that have been developed for the NGAD programs, in both their Air Force and Navy iterations.

Testing pathway

Looking in more detail at what comes next for the program, Shield AI and General Electric confirm that the first stage of testing is already underway, using the adapted F110 on GE Aerospace test stands. Step two will see the propulsion system integrated into the prototype aircraft. It will then be run horizontally and then vertically, while still attached to the launch-recovery trailer.

The next step will involve a very large crane, which will hold the aircraft vertically, with engine tests being run while the X-BAT is tethered for safety. This phase will see the propulsion system tested in proximity to the ground, in proximity to the launch and recovery trailer, and under different inlet conditions.

The final step will see the tether taken off, allowing the X-BAT to perform free flights. The aircraft will take off from the launch and recovery trailer, go up, come around, and reattach to it, all in vertical mode. If things go well, company officials say, this milestone will be targeted before the end of 2026.

In the process, Shield AI and General Electric are realistic about the possibility of mishaps in what is really groundbreaking technology. Company officials describe a “hardware-rich approach to test,” which means building several prototype test aircraft that will be pushed to the limit. They “fully expect to lose one in testing,” since the program is stressing the delivery of capability to the operators as quickly as possible. In this respect, zero failures mean the program is going too slow, the officials say.

Market prognosis

Shield AI and General Electric confirm that there is “tremendous interest internationally” in the X-BAT, across all regions.

Their business case rests on the X-BAT providing “fifth and sixth-gen type capabilities” at a price point much cheaper than an equivalent crewed combat jet. Part of the cost equation also relates to the VTOL flight mode, which means operators can “delete a lot of the lifecycle cost associated with having a conventional air force.” With no conventional airbase required, there is no need for expensive airbase defenses or hardened aircraft shelters. The concept of operations involves a much-reduced need for tanker support, since the X-BAT can be forward stationed and has a large combat radius. Of course, there is also no conventional pilot-training pipeline. Shield AI and General Electric officials describe the resulting air power employment, in life-cycle terms, as costing around a tenth that of an equivalent fifth or sixth-gen type.

Compared to those fifth/sixth-gen platforms, the lower cost of the X-BAT means that it doesn’t have to be as survivable. Shield AI and General Electric talk about the aim of having an aircraft that is “just survivable enough that you can do the mission.” Meanwhile, it should avoid the “exponential costs for incremental return” that are inevitable in other, more exquisite platforms. Instead, the companies are looking at the possibility of an operator buying 10 to 20 X-BATs for the price of something like a B-21. The Air Force previously specified an average unit cost of roughly $550 million for the B-21.

With this in mind, Shield AI is sizing a factory that will be able to produce 150 X-BATs annually, with employees working single shifts.

Clearly, the ambition of creating a vertical takeoff and landing ‘autonomous fighter’ that is capable of countering an adversary’s air defenses at a fraction of the price of a crewed platform is incredibly bold. Some would even call it outright far-fetched. Yet the comparisons to Space-X and how they disrupted the space access market by doing something many thought would not work — also a VTOL solution — also can’t be denied.

With testing of the X-BAT and its F110-based propulsion system now well underway, and first flights planned before the end of the year, we are getting closer to seeing whether this radical vision can actually be realized.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post X-BAT Autonomous VTOL ‘Fighter’ Looks Dramatically Different appeared first on The War Zone.

The idea of combining PAC-3 MSE and Aegis, as well as the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS), first emerged in 2023. Since then, TWZ has highlighted how this offers the Navy a valuable alternative source of anti-air interceptors, and maybe even eventually a replacement for the venerable Standard Missile-2 (SM-2).

Lockheed Martin announced it had received the PAC-3 MSE/Aegis integration contract, said to be a multi-million dollar deal, earlier today, around the Navy League’s annual Sea Air Space exposition, at which TWZ is in attendance. The Navy has separately shared more details about its PAC-3 MSE acquisition plans as part of the full rollout of the Pentagon’s budget request for Fiscal Year 2027, which also occurred today.

Per the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request, the service sees PAC-3 MSE integration with Aegis as providing an additional means of intercepting “a wide range of threats, including tactical ballistic missiles, air-breathing threats, cruise missiles, and unmanned aerial systems.” As mentioned, Arleigh Burke class destroyers make up the vast majority of American warships equipped with the Aegis Combat System today. There are also a steadily shrinking number of Ticonderoga class cruisers with this combat system.

PAC-3 MSE has been in full-scale production since 2018. Pairing it with Aegis “has been in the works, I probably think, close to 10 years,” Chandra Marshall, Vice President and General Manager of the Multi-Domain Combat Solutions business unit within Lockheed Martin’s Rotary and Mission Systems division, told our Jamie Hunter on the floor of Sea Air Space. She added that the goal now is for the Navy to achieve initial operational capability (IOC) with this combination in approximately 18 months, or by the end of 2027 if the clock starts now.

“So, there’s two pieces of it. So the PAC-3 missile, there’s a small update to it to be able to communicate with S-band radar. So, currently it communicates with X-band [radars]. So, now with this update, it will be able to communicate both with S and X-band,” Marshall explained. “And then we have to integrate PAC-3 as a missile type with the Aegis Combat System.”

“We have a very open architecture [with Aegis], so the way that we componentize everything, we feel like it’s a very short putt for the Aegis integration of the PAC-3 missile,” she added. “So, it’ll just be another missile in the inventory for the Navy to be able to diversify based on the threat.”

You can read more about the Aegis Combat System and how it has evolved to adopt a modular, open architecture approach, specifically to make it easier to add new capabilities and functionality, in this previous TWZ feature. Lockheed Martin has already demonstrated the ability of a modular and scalable version of the system, called the Virtualized Aegis Weapon System, to fire a PAC-3 MSE from a containerized Mk 41-based launcher on land.

No changes to the Mk 41 VLS – another Lockheed Martin product – are planned or required as part of the PAC-3 MSE integration. Work has been ongoing on adapting the interceptors into launch canisters, allowing them to slot right into existing Mk 41 cells. At just over 17 feet long, PAC-3 MSE should fit in shorter so-called tactical length versions of the Mk 41, as well as one with longer strike-length cells.

Lockheed Martin has said in the past that each canister will contain a single PAC-3 MSE missile. At around 11 inches wide, the PAC-3 MSE is just over half the maximum diameter available in a Mk 41 cell. This raises the question of whether future canisters could be designed to hold multiple interceptors, which would give ships valuable additional magazine depth.

From a capability standpoint, PAC-3 MSE is generally discussed in comparison to SM-2 surface-to-air missiles in the Navy’s arsenal today. In terms of missiles that can be fired via the Mk 41, SM-2 is a middle-tier anti-air capability that sits between shorter-range RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSM; which can also be quad-packed into a single cell) and upper-tier SM-6s and SM-3s. The SM-6 is a multi-purpose weapon that can also be employed against targets on land and at sea. SM-3s, of which there are multiple variants in service today, are specifically designed as anti-ballistic missile interceptors.

“A lot of places the Navy has said ‘I got red or yellow challenges that I can’t deal with.’ This missile does a really good job at that. When you marry them all together, it is very complimentary to SM-6,” Chris Mang, Vice President of Strategy & Business Development at Lockheed Martin’s Missiles and Fire Control, told TWZ at last year’s Sea Air Space conference. “You’d always want a layered defense, right? I’ll pick the longest shot I can get, but then at a certain point, MSE really starts to outperform in certain envelopes.”

For the Navy, PAC-3 MSE also presents important logistics, cost, and supply chain benefits. The latest conflict with Iran has only underscored now long-standing concerns about U.S. munition expenditure rates, especially when it comes to anti-air interceptors. A large-scale, high-end fight with a near-peer adversary like China would put much more pressure on munition stockpiles and the U.S. industrial base working to restock them. As such, it would be a boon for the Navy to have an additional stream of interceptors to arm its warships.

As noted, the Navy is already moving to buy hundreds of what documents currently refer to as the “PAC-3 MSE / Navy” missile, as well as launch canisters. The service’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request puts the unit cost for each missile at $4.05 million. The canister adds another $200,000 to the price tag. The Army’s Fiscal Year 2027 proposed budget says the unit cost for standard PAC-3 MSEs has risen now to $5.3 million. The exact reasons for the cost discrepancy between the Army and Navy versions are unclear.

“Both quantities and unit cost are estimates based on U.S. Army contract pricing. Both quantities and unit cost will adjust based on award of DoN CLINs [Department of Navy Contract Line Item Numbers] on ARMY contract in execution and final cost of the Navy components (radio, canister, etc),” per the Navy’s latest budget request.

At $4.05 million, the Navy’s PAC-3 MSEs will be slightly cheaper per missile than the Block IA version of the SM-6. The service’s latest budget request puts the unit cost of the latter missiles at $4.348 million. The cost of a current-generation Block IIICU variant of the SM-2 is unclear, given that they have often been procured as upgrades of existing Block IIICs rather than new-production missiles. Historically, the average price point for an SM-3 Block IIIC has been around $3.6 million.

“By leveraging the high-volume Army PAC-3 MSE production contract, the Navy achieves significant cost avoidance through economies of scale, as unit price decreases with larger quantities,” the Navy’s latest budget documents also note.

Lockheed Martin announced in January that it had reached an agreement with the U.S. government to ramp up annual PAC-3 MSE production, for domestic and foreign customers, from 600 to 2,000 missiles. Last week, the company received a contract to help further accelerate production of these missiles. This could all help drive down the unit cost of the missiles going forward, as well as speed up their delivery.

It is worth pointing out here that PAC-3 MSE’s performance in the Middle East, as well as in Ukraine in recent years, has also prompted a significant increase in demand from the U.S. Army, as well as foreign Patriot operators. The overall Patriot user base is also expanding.

Adding the Navy to the mix will add to that demand, even with the production ramp-up, and could add to already growing concerns about production backlogs now. Integrating PAC-3 with Aegis and the Mk 41 VLS could also spur additional interest from other navies globally that have ships with that combat system and/or launchers.

Reuters reported just last week that U.S. officials had informed allies and partners in Europe that deliveries of unspecified munitions could now be delayed due to American needs in relation to the war with Iran. When it comes to PAC-3 MSE, the budget documents the Army released today, at least, do not appear to show any changes to the delivery schedule for foreign customers.

Regardless of any of these issues, the Navy is now pushing full steam ahead on integrating PAC-3 MSE with Aegis and the Mk 41 VLS.

Jamie Hunter contributed to this story.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Patriot PAC-3 Missiles To Arm Navy Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers appeared first on The War Zone.

The modular payload and open architecture MQ-9B is designed to carry a huge range of systems that enable it to sense and observe things that come or go on land, sea, in the air, and even beneath the waves. The aircraft can also collect signals intelligence or take on a number of other roles by using many specialized payloads. This is in addition to the aircraft’s ability to strike targets of many kinds, with long-range weapon integration now planned.

The MQ-9B has the ability to deploy sonobuoys to listen for and track submarines – a highly valuable feature considering what lurks below the surface in increasingly strategic but remote areas, like deep in the Pacific and across the the frigid Arctic. General Atomics has flight-tested sonobuoy dispensing system (SDS) pods as part of a broader demonstration of anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capabilities for the SeaGuardian.

TWZ‘s Jamie Hunter spoke with Doug Hardison of General Atomics at the Sea-Air-Space 2026 trade event to get the low-down on how the company is progressing with the huge range of capabilities that SeaGuardian intends to bring to the table, and how teaming it with the P-8 presents an especially attractive opportunity.

The post MQ-9B SeaGuardian Ready For Teaming With P-8 Poseidon appeared first on The War Zone.

Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Daryl Caudle offered his latest comments on F/A-XX yesterday in response to a direct question from TWZ at a roundtable on the sidelines of the Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space 2026 exposition. The Pentagon had tried to put the Navy’s future fighter ambitions on hold last year, arguing that the U.S. industrial base did not have sufficient capacity to support work on two sixth-generation combat jets simultaneously. Boeing won the contract to build what is now called the F-47 for the U.S. Air Force in March 2025. Boeing is the only other company known to be in the running now for F/A-XX. Last year, it was reported that Lockheed Martin had been eliminated from the competition.

Late yesterday, Northrop Grumman also released a new computer-generated F/A-XX promotional video, seen below. You can read our analysis of what is seen therein here.

“We do expect the Department [of the Navy] to make an award selection in the third quarter,” Northrop Grumman’s Warden said during a routine earning call today in response to a direct question about Adm. Caudle’s remarks. “We are confident in our ability to deliver our solution to the Navy.”

She did not explicitly confirm or deny that the CNO had been referring to Northrop Grumman when he mentioned a contractor’s inability to meet the Navy’s schedule needs on F/A-XX.

“We and our suppliers are prepared to bring the workforce and infrastructure that’s needed to execute the program, and our track record on B-21 demonstrates that ability to deliver a complex aircraft on schedule,” Warden added. “Regarding the financials, we’d expect upside to the sales and earnings from our current guidance, if we are entrusted to build the F/A-XX, and it would be a top priority for our company to do so.”

Air Force officials, as well as members of Congress, regularly describe the B-21 Raider bomber as a model acquisition program that has been able to keep on schedule and budget despite at least some hurdles along the way. Earlier this year, Northrop Grumman reached an agreement with the Air Force to accelerate B-21 production.

It’s also worth remembering that Northrop Grumman withdrew in 2023 from the Air Force competition that would lead to the F-47. The company framed the decision at the time as a voluntary one.

“I’ll just say that, when I noted we have other opportunities we are pursuing, I won’t disclose at this point exactly what those are until a little more information comes out,” Warden, who was also CEO at that time, said when announcing the withdrawal, which was widely seen as a reference to F/A-XX. “You could assume that if we feel we’re well-positioned, and the government is appropriately balancing risk and reward, as I said that that would be a program we would pursue.”

Former top Air Force officials subsequently said that Northrop Grumman’s bid had been on the verge of getting cut.

As mentioned, industrial base capacity questions have swirled around F/A-XX. The Pentagon had tried to effectively shelve the Navy’s next-generation fighter program in its proposed budget for the 2026 Fiscal Year. At the time, a senior U.S. defense official explicitly said that the decision was “due to our belief that the industrial base can only handle going fast on one program at this time, and the presidential priority to go all in on F-47, and get that program right.”

Congress later intervened to appropriate some $1.69 billion in funding to keep F/A-XX moving ahead in the 2026 Fiscal Year.

“I will tell you, we, Northrop Grumman, are ready to execute F/A-XX,” Tom Jones, President of Northrop Grumman’s Aeronautics Systems sector, had also told TWZ and other outlets in response to a question about industrial base capacity in relation to the program back in December. “We’re looking to try and make sure that the customer community knows that we believe that we’re ready to go and we can execute it.”

Boeing Defense and Space CEO Steve Parker had also pushed back on the assertion that the U.S. industrial base could not support F-47 and F/A-XX at the same time last year. The company’s pitch for the Navy’s program appears to be a navalized adaptation of the F-47.

“The Air Force has got a lot of demand on the system. The Navy’s got a lot of demand,” Adm. Caudle had also said yesterday. “So there was, you know, a check twice, cut once, kind of mentality here on this decision. And now there, I think we’re all on the same page on the reason why the hard look needed to be done. I’m good with it.”

Questions about the overall future of F/A-XX do remain, despite clear support from top Navy leaders like Caudle and Congress. The Navy looks set to request just over $140 million for the program in Fiscal Year 2027. This is a very meager sum, especially for a program of this magnitude. In contrast, the Air Force is seeking $5 billion in additional funding for F-47. Billions of dollars have already been appropriated for the Air Force’s next-generation fighter effort.

The Pentagon and the individual services are rolling out more details about their annual budget proposals today, which could offer more insights into the plans now for F/A-XX in the coming years. Securing the contract to build the Navy’s next-generation fighter is still likely to be an important win for whichever company the service selects in the end.

UPDATE: 4/22/2026 –

The U.S. Navy has issued a statement regarding Adm. Caudle’s comments earlier this week, which is as follows:

“During a question-and-answer session at the Sea-Air-Space Exposition, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Daryl Caudle was asked about the Navy’s sixth-generation strike fighter program (F/A-XX). Adm. Caudle emphasized that the Navy’s priority is ensuring through due diligence the selected vendor can deliver the required capability on the timeline needed by the fleet while also considering broader industrial base capacity. Any reference to ‘a specific offeror’ was intended as a general anecdotal comment and was not directed at any vendors currently under consideration.”

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Northrop Defends Ability To Build F/A-XX 6th Gen Naval Fighters If Selected appeared first on The War Zone.

The Navy has shared three pictures of the LOCUST system onboard USS George H.W. Bush, seen at the top of this story and below. They were all taken on October 5, 2025, but released today. This coincides with the start of the Navy League’s annual Sea-Air-Space exposition, at which TWZ is in attendance.

The captions to each of the images include the following: “During the live-fire event, [the] LOCUST LWS [laser weapon system] effectively detected, tracked, engaged, and neutralized multiple unmanned aerial vehicles marking a milestone toward fielding operational directed energy capabilities.”

TWZ has reached out to the Navy for more information.

“The successful demonstration of its palletized LOCUST Laser Weapon System (LWS) aboard the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN-77) in October 2025″ was conducted “in collaboration with the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Army Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO),” according to a press release from AeroVironment.

“During the live-fire event, the Palletized High Energy Laser (P-HEL) system tracked, engaged, and neutralized multiple target drones – marking a major milestone toward fielding operational directed energy capabilities across all domains and platforms,” the release adds. “This achievement validates that the LOCUST LWS is truly platform-agnostic, seamlessly transitioning from fixed-site and land-based mobile platforms, such as the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) and Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV), to the dynamic and demanding environment of a maneuvering aircraft carrier.”

The central element of LOCUST is a laser directed energy weapon in a turret, which also includes built-in electro-optical and infrared video cameras for target acquisition and tracking. Tertiary sensors, including small-form-factor high-frequency radars and passive radio frequency signal detection systems, can also be used to cue the laser. The JLTV and ISV-based configurations mentioned in AeroVironment’s release both feature small radars.

LOCUST’s power rating is generally understood to be in the 20-kilowatt range at present. When it comes to laser directed energy weapons, this is at the lower end of the power spectrum, fully in line with a system intended to defeat smaller drones. LOCUST has also been demonstrated with a 26-kilowatt power rating, but how much more it could be scaled within the existing form factor is unclear.

As of December 2025, the U.S. Army was known to have taken delivery of palletized LOCUST systems, as well as ones mounted on JLTVs and ISVs. The Army has at least deployed the palletized versions overseas operationally in the past. One of the service’s LOCUST systems was also at the center of a widely criticized and controversial shutdown of airspace around El Paso, Texas, in February of this year, as you can read more about here. The system had been on loan to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at the time. Earlier this month, the Pentagon signed an agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regarding the continued use of anti-drone laser systems along the southern border with Mexico.

The U.S. Marine Corps has also moved to acquire JLTV-based LOCUST systems in the past. In addition to appearing to be the first instance of a laser-directed energy weapon going aboard a carrier, last year’s test aboard USS George H.W. Bush also looks to be the first known instance of the Navy even evaluating LOCUST for use on ships or in any other context.

Navy interest in using LOCUST to defend ships, especially very high-value ones like aircraft carriers, is not surprising. For years now, the service has been very active in pursuing shipboard laser and microwave directed energy weapons with a particular eye toward providing additional layers of counter-drone defense.

Experience gained in recent years from operations in and around the Red Sea, as well as against Iran, has only underscored the critical importance of bolstering the ability of U.S. warships to protect themselves against uncrewed aerial threats. The Navy has also been adding counter-drone systems that use physical interceptors as their effectors to a growing number of ships to help address this reality.

In general, lasers like LOCUST offer the promise of functionally unlimited magazine depth, which could be exceptionally valuable in the counter-drone role when faced with large volumes of incoming threats. The dangers that uncrewed aerial systems pose are only set to increase as artificial intelligence and machine learning-driven capabilities, including automated targeting and fully networked swarming, continue to improve while the barrier to entry steadily drops.

Palletized and containerized systems like the P-HEL version of LOCUST can also be employed with more flexibility on a wide variety of ships, as long as there is sufficient deck space and available power. The test aboard USS George H.W. Bush involved simply lashing the system to the flight deck. This also means the systems can be installed and/or removed more readily depending on mission requirements. The Navy also has a demand for counter-drone capability on land to protect key facilities and assets abroad and at home, where LOCUST would also be relevant.

At the same time, especially when it comes to employing lasers on ships, there are also potential pitfalls. As TWZ has previously written:

“A single laser can only engage one target at once. As the beam gets further away from the source, its power also drops, just as a result of it having to propagate through the atmosphere. This can be further compounded by the weather and other environmental factors like smoke and dust. More power is then needed to produce suitable effects at appreciable distances. Adaptive optics are used to help overcome atmospheric distortion to a degree. Altogether, laser directed energy weapons generally remain relatively short-range systems.”

“In addition, laser directed energy weapons, especially sensitive optics, present inherent reliability challenges for use in real-world military operations. Shipboard use adds rough sea states and saltwater exposure to the equation. There is also the matter of needing to keep everything properly cooled, which creates additional power generation and other demands.”

Over the years, the Navy has faced continued and significant hurdles in attempting to field operational laser weapon systems more broadly across its fleets. U.S. military officials have often sought to temper expectations, while also being open about their frustrations with the lack of greater progress, in recent years.

Still, the Navy, in particular, has persisted in its pursuit of these capabilities, given the benefits mentioned earlier. Lasers are set to be a particularly important component of the full arsenal aboard the future Trump class “battleships.”

“My thesis research at [the] Naval Post Graduate School was on directed energy and nuclear weapons,” Adm. Caudle told TWZ and other outlets at a roundtable back in January. “This is my goal, if it’s in line of sight of a ship, that the first solution that we’re using is directed energy.”

In particular, “point defense needs to shift to directed energy,” the admiral added, emphasizing that “it has an infinite magazine.”

“What that does for me is it improves my loadout optimization, so that my loadout, my payload volume is optimized for offensive weapons,” Caudle added at the time. Furthermore, “as you increase power, the actual ability to actually engage and keep power on target, and the effectiveness of a laser just goes up.”

Laser directed energy weapons with higher power ratings could potentially defend ships against other threats, including certain types of incoming missiles.

Whether or not the Navy decides to acquire and field LOCUST operationally on its ships, the service’s general demand for more counter-drone capabilities across the board does not look set to decrease any time soon.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Navy Fires Drone-Frying LOCUST Laser From Supercarrier USS George H.W. Bush appeared first on The War Zone.

The video clip, posted on Northrop Grumman’s X account this evening, as seen below, states: “We’re bringing tomorrow’s horizon into focus, faster, stronger, and ready when the warfighter needs it.”

What we see in the clip is the same general design we saw in the still image earlier, but much more of it. This includes a head-on shot, showing the aircraft’s stealthy and efficient tailless design and rear-set dorsal inlets, as well as its very broad nose and canopy.

The aircraft in the new stylized video clip has some interesting proportions. The size of the landing gear and especially the canopy give it something of a smaller overall appearance than what one would expect from a heavy sixth-generation naval fighter that will be stuffed with fuel and weapons. Of course, this could be due to the somewhat ‘cartoonish’ nature of this new glitzy clip, and how accurate this rendering is to the actual Northrop Grumman F/A-XX is still unknown. At the very least, some of the aircraft’s features (such as its inlets) will have been significantly changed for security issues pertaining to its sensitive design elements.

We also see the wings, which look like they have a bit of camber on the outer sections and possibly a bit of ‘crank’ too. We also see the wings folded in the first part of the clip.

What could be a weapons bay with its doors open is also visible in some of the angles seen in the clip. At first glance, this appeared to be for the jet’s very stout-looking landing gear, but they are curved inward. There are additional doors on the centerline, as well, pointing to two separate bays.

Overall, because of the size of the canopy, it is hard to tell if this is a single-seat or a two-crew aircraft. The canopy is so large in these renders that a side-by-side crew arrangement may even be possible, although that seems unlikely.

Once again, we don’t know how close this computer-generated model is to the real thing, but considering this aircraft will have to carry a sizable weapons load and have something approaching a combat radius of 1,000-miles, while still fitting well within the confines of a supercarrier, it should be firmly in the heavy fighter class.

Maybe Northrop Grumman will share more on its F/A-XX at the annual Sea-Air-Space convention in Washington this week, and we will be ready to report it from the scene if they do.

We have reached out to Northrop Grumman with questions, and we will update this post if we hear back.

Contact the author: Tyler@twz.com

The post F/A-XX Next Gen Naval Fighter Concept Video Emerges From Northrop Grumman appeared first on The War Zone.

Pakistan has cordoned off parts of Islamabad in anticipation of the pending talks. However, it remains unclear if Iran will send a delegation to meet the U.S. negotiating party of Vice President JD Vance, envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law. The meeting is tentatively set for Tuesday.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday insisted the talks are still on despite Iranian suggestions otherwise.

“We’re supposed to have the talks,” Trump told New York Post Monday morning in a brief interview, brushing aside doubts about whether negotiations would fall apart. “So I would assume at this point nobody’s playing games.”

Trump’s comment to the New York Post came after Iranians claimed they would not take part in any new talks.

“So far, we have no plans to participate in the next round of negotiations,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei told reporters on Monday. “The behavior of the United States does not indicate seriousness in pursuing a diplomatic process.”

Baghaei added that no decision has been made on how or when negotiations would resume. The Foreign Ministry spokesman also pushed back on Trump’s claims that Iran agreed to give up its highly enriched uranium (HEU).

“It is strictly off the agenda,” Baghaei proclaimed “Iran’s definitive stance is to keep all of its nuclear achievements on its own soil.”

A senior Iranian source told Reuters the continuation of the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports was undermining the prospect of peace talks, and that Tehran’s “defensive capabilities,” including ​its missile program, were not open to negotiation.

However, a Pakistani security source told the news outlet that Pakistan’s key mediator, Field Marshal Asim Munir, informed Trump that the ⁠blockade was an obstacle to talks, and that Trump had replied that he would consider the advice.

One big reason for confusion about Iran’s attendance at the Islamabad talks could be a growing schism between the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and more moderate elements of Iran’s current leadership. 

“There’s a power struggle underway in Iran—and even within the delegation that went to Islamabad for the first round of talks, which offered a sense of the country’s internal tensions,” according to The Economist. 

“Their arguments were so ferocious that Pakistani mediators are reported to have spent as much time refereeing among the Iranians as engaging the Americans.”

One visible sign of this power struggle may have come Saturday, when several ships were reportedly struck by the IRGC in the Strait of Hormuz. The IRGC could have been acting independently, however we don’t know for sure. Thawed relations with the U.S. run counter to the IRGC’s core mission and beliefs, but also could spell degradation in their power within Iran. The idea that the IRGC could end up taking control over Iran, at least to a degree, is a possible outcome TWZ highlighted before the war broke out.

Iran claims its reluctance to negotiate stems in large measure from U.S. Central Command’s interdiction of the Iranian-owned cargo ship M/V Touska on Sunday for what it says was a violation of the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports. CENTCOM said the Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer USS Spruance intercepted the vessel on Sunday as it transited the north Arabian Sea at 17 knots enroute to Bandar Abbas, Iran.

“After Touska’s crew failed to comply with repeated warnings over a six-hour period, Spruance directed the vessel to evacuate its engine room,” CENTCOM stated. “Spruance disabled Touska’s propulsion by firing several rounds from the destroyer’s 5-inch MK 45 Gun into Touska’s engine room. U.S. Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit later boarded the non-compliant vessel, which remains in U.S. custody.”

The ship had recently visited China, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Early Monday morning, CENTCOM released a video of Marines fast-roping aboard the Touska. The video shows an MH-60R Seahawk helicopter taking off from the Spruance. It cuts to a scene of Marines repelling from a Seahawk onto the deck of the ship.

CENTCOM on Monday had no update on how long the ship would be held, what cargo was discovered on board or the fate of the crew.

The command previously released video of the Spruance firing three rounds on the cargo ship from its Mk-45 gun. The projectiles have a range of up to 20 nautical miles and can be fired at a rate of between 16 and 20 rounds per minute.

While the Navy used the Mk-45 to take down Houthi drones in 2024, it’s unclear when a 5-inch gun was last used against another vessel. We have reached out to the Navy for more details.

Trump broke the news of the interdiction on his Truth Social site, saying the Spruance stopped the cargo ship, which was under Treasury Department sanctions, “by blowing a hole in the engineroom.”

Calling the incident “piracy,” Iran threatened to strike back.

“Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters warned that the country’s armed forces will soon give a retaliatory response to the terrorist US forces’ latest act of piracy in the Sea of Oman,” according to Iran’s official Press TV media outlet.

As of 2 p.m. EDT Monday, that response had yet to be delivered, though Iranian media on Sunday claimed it launched drone strikes at U.S. Navy warships.

Hours before the Touska incident, Trump renewed his threats against critical Iranian infrastructure.

“If the deal isn’t done, the deal that we made, then I’m going to take out their bridges and their power plants,” Trump told Fox News on Sunday morning. “If they don’t sign this thing, the whole country is going to get blown up.”

“We’re preparing to hit them harder than any country has ever been hit before because you cannot let them have a nuclear weapon,” Trump added.

UPDATES

Our coverage for the day has concluded.

UPDATE: 6:57 PM EDT –

Reporting from Islamabad, CNN International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson said that time is ticking away for the Iranians to commit to peace talks.

Robertson noted that Vance would have to leave Washington in the next 12 to 15 hours to make it in time for negotiations, giving Iran that much time to make a decision.

However, he said the mood in Islamabad is hopeful that Tehran will send a delegation.

UPDATE: 5:35 PM EDT –

In a post on X, Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said “Trump, by imposing a siege and violating the ceasefire, seeks to turn this negotiating table— in his own imagination— into a table of surrender or to justify renewed warmongering.”

“We do not accept negotiations under the shadow of threats, and in the past two weeks, we have prepared to reveal new cards on the battlefield,” he added.

CENTCOM released news images of its forces patrolling the Arabian Sea near the seized Iranian cargo ship Touska.

UPDATE 5:15 PM EDT –

A source close to the IRGC told Israel’s Channel 14 that“IRGC Commander Vahidi is taking a positive stance toward not continuing the negotiations. From his perspective, there is no need to rush into a deal. He believes Trump will eventually back down and does not believe his threats.”

Iran has reopened the Imam Khomeini and Mehrabad airports in the capital, Tehran, according to Al Jazeera. The airports were shut after weeks of war with the U.S. and Israel had brought air traffic to a halt.

“According to the ISNA news agency, the Civil Aviation Organization will also give the greenlight to reopen the airports of Urmia, Kermanshah, Abadan, Shiraz, Kerman, Rasht, Yazd, Zahedan, Gorgan and Birjand from Saturday,” the outlet reported.

Iran targeted the UAE with more than 2,800 missiles and drones, 90% of which were aimed at civilian infrastructure, according to the UAE’s embassy in the U.S.

UPDATE: 2:40 PM EDT –

In another Truth Social post, Trump proclaimed the situation in the Middle East is going well and that the blockade is costing Iran a half-billion dollars a day.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said his country won’t give in to U.S. demands.

“Adherence to commitments is the logic that justifies any kind of dialogue. In addition to the deep historical distrust in Iran toward the background of the U.S. government’s behavior and performance, the non-constructive and contradictory approach of U.S. officials in recent days carries a bitter message: they seek Iran’s surrender,” he stated on X. “The people of Iran will not bow to coercion.”

Meanwhile, “Hormuz transit drops to just three vessels, the lowest level since the blockade began,” according to the Windward maritime intelligence firm. “870 vessels remain in the Gulf, with continued caution and reduced movement. 7 VLCCs detected near Chabahar, indicating potential export shift east of Hormuz.”

“Iranian flows continue via deception, including dark activity and ship-to-ship transfers,” Windward added. “Dark activity remains stable at 140 events despite reduced overall traffic.”

Vessel attacks from April 18 “continue to suppress transit confidence and movement,” the company posited.

The State Department will host a new round of ambassador-level talks between Israel and Lebanon, Reuters reported.

Trump on Monday pushed back against assertions that he was goaded into war with Iran by Israel.

“Israel never talked me into the war with Iran, the results of Oct. 7th, added to my lifelong opinion that IRAN CAN NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON, did,” Trump stated on Truth Social. ”Just like the results in Venezuela, which the media doesn’t like talking about, the results in Iran will be amazing – And if Iran’s new leaders (Regime Change!) are smart, Iran can have a great and prosperous future!”

Since the U.S. imposed the blockade on April 13, it has turned away 27 ships trying to enter or exit Iranian ports, CENTCOM stated on X Monday morning.

In the wake of the Touska incident, Hapag-Lloyd tells us they are re-evaluating sailing through the area.

“We assess the new situation and the related risks very carefully,” a spokesperson told us. “We will only make the passage when we are convinced it’s safe enough to do so. Our top priority is the safety and security for our seafarers, the vessels and the cargo of our customers.”

The spokesperson added that “we have now 5 ships in the Persian Gulf, because the contract of one of our charter vessels expired.”

The company offered an optimistic view last week after Iran temporarily reopened the Strait, which it then closed again, blaming the blockade.

Chinese President Xi Jinping called for normal passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz to be maintained, Reuters reported. His comments came during a phone ​call on Monday with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman held ‌as Beijing steps up efforts to help end the Iran war.

China is the main customer for Iranian crude oil and derives much of its energy imports from the Middle East. The Iranian closure of the Strait and subsequent U.S. blockade on Iranian ports is having a negative impact in China.

UAE’s State Security Service exposed an Iranian-linked terror network and apprehended 27 suspects planning to “undermine national unity and destabilize the country by planning terrorist and sabotage attacks,” the Emirati State News Agency (WAM) reports.

When Trump learned that an F-15E was shot down over Iran, “he screamed at aides for hours,” according to The Wall Street Journal. “Trump demanded that the military go get them immediately. But the U.S. hadn’t been on the ground in Iran since the government overthrow that led to the hostage crisis, and they needed to figure out how to get into treacherous Iranian terrain and avoid Tehran’s own military.”

“Aides kept the president out of the room as they got minute-by-minute updates because they believed his impatience wouldn’t be helpful, instead updating him at meaningful moments,” the newspaper added, citing a senior administration official.

Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri said the United States is making an effort to extend a 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, Reuters reported on X, citing the pan-Arab Asharq al-Awsat media outlet.

Berri spoke to the newspaper after a meeting with the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon, Michel Issa.

Despite the ceasefire, Israel continues to strike Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon.

“Overnight, the IDF struck a loaded and ready-to-fire launcher in the area of Qalaouiye in southern Lebanon, north of the Forward Defense Line, in order to prevent a direct threat to the communities of northern Israel,” the IDF stated on Telegram.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post Iran Peace Talks Hanging By A Thread After Tumultuous Weekend Near The Strait (Updated) appeared first on The War Zone.

Marine officials discussed the service’s CCA plans and broader future aviation vision during a panel discussion at the Navy League’s Sea Air Space 2026 exhibition, at which TWZ is in attendance. The Corps’ CCA efforts currently fall under a program called Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Uncrewed Expeditionary Tactical Aircraft (MUX TACAIR). The MAGTF is the primary organizing concept around which the service deploys air and ground forces.

“So, with the MUX TACAIR effort, I think we’re meeting our testing goals. I would say that it’s on track,” Marine Col. Dan Weber, the Unmanned Aerial Systems Branch Head in the office of the Deputy Commandant for Aviation, said. “From a funding and demand power perspective, I think we’ve got great support. We’ve got good partners. We’ve got good relationships right now to keep that program on track, and I expect that we’re going to meet all of our milestones and goals.”

“From the F-35 side, the vision ultimately is we want the F-35 to be a quarterback with CCAs as attritable mass, as enablers to ensure the MAGTF can project power, the sensing, the lethality, [and] all of the intangibles that kind of go along with that,” Marine Col. Thomas Bolen, the Tactical Aviation (TACAIR) Branch Head, another one of the panelists, also said. “How we integrate with CCAs is going to be extremely important, and that will bridge us down the road to kind of the sixth-generation family of systems.”

One of the “main things in our portfolio that will be enduring and developing over the next couple years” is “man-unmanned teaming,” Marine Col. Richard Rusnok, head of the Cunningham Group, who was also on the panel, added. “We’re laying the foundation for that with our first foray into Collaborative Combat Aircraft, the MQ-58.”

The Cunningham Group, which also falls under the office of the Deputy Commandant for Aviation, is charged with plotting out the overarching future vision for Marine Corps aviation.

MQ-58 refers to Marine-specific variants of Kratos’ Valkyrie now in development. Last year, the Corps announced that it was transitioning what had originally been experimental work with a small fleet of XQ-58s into a full program of record to acquire an operational platform. Kratos has since partnered with Northrop Grumman to deliver these uncrewed aircraft.

Marine Valkyries will have built-in landing gear, unlike the original version of the drone, but will still be capable of making rocket-assisted takeoffs from static launchers. This means the uncrewed aircraft will retain a valuable degree of runway independence, but that there will also be tradeoffs, as TWZ has previously explored here.

In January, Kratos told TWZ it was hoping to see the first flight of a landing gear-equipped Valkyrie in early 2026, but there has been no official announcement yet of that milestone being reached. The Marine Corps’ unclassified 2026 Aviation Plan presents the MQ-58 as a capability arriving in the 2026 to 2030 timeframe.

The Marines have also said previously that they expect the MQ-58 to be just the first in a planned series of CCA “increments,” which might entail the future acquisition of completely different types of drones. The service has said in the past that MUX TACAIR, broadly speaking, “will enhance Marine Corps Aviation’s lethality and ability to support the Stand-in Force (SiF) by delivering air-to-ground, reconnaissance, and Electronic Warfare (EW) capabilities.”

The Corps has also already chosen to use General Atomics’ YFQ-42A Dark Merlin at least as a surrogate to test new autonomy technologies and other mission systems under the umbrella of the MUX TACAIR program. The YFQ-42A is also one of two drones under development as part of Increment 1 of the U.S. Air Force’s CCA program. Dark Merlins have been flying since August 2025, but General Atomics announced an indefinite pause in flight activities earlier this month after one of the drones suffered an accident on takeoff.

Speaking on the panel today, Col. Thomas Bolen did not elaborate on what the Marine Corps’ “sixth-generation family of systems” might consist of. However, Marine Lt. Gen. William Swan, the Deputy Commandant for Aviation, said his service was beginning to explore what it might want in a future sixth-generation crewed combat jet during a press roundtable last week, as first reported by Breaking Defense.

“Last year’s Av[iation] Plan didn’t have six-gen on there, and I made the team put it on, because we need to think about that,” Swan said at that time. “We’re not there yet. We’re fast following with the Air Force, right? They got the F-47. The Navy’s looking at F/A-XX, and they’re just starting on that. So we are going to watch.”

“We want to be an all Block 4 F-35 fleet, and that’s probably going to take another 10 years. So we’re probably five to 10 years away from ultimately making that decision. And we’ll see what they have, see what the threat looks like,” Swan continued. “I think right now, if you had to say, ‘hey, what is it going to look like?’, I think it’ll look a lot more like what the Navy’s doing, because we still fly off the carriers, we’re part of the Department of the Navy.”

“I don’t know that we’re going to get high-end, and that’s really not a Marine Corps mission; it’s the Air Force,” he added. “So I think if I had to – if you said, make a decision right now, it would be yes, some amount to augment the fifth-gen [F-35] force, and it would probably look something like the F/A-XX, or whatever the Navy ends up being [sic; acquiring].”

Lt. Gen. Swan, who served as the moderator for today’s panel at Sea Air Space, as well as Col. Bolen, again stressed the importance of the Block 4 upgrades for the F-35, including for future teaming with CCAs. The Block 4 effort has been mired in delays and cost growth, even after a revision in the fielding strategy last year to focus first on a truncated portion of the planned capability improvements. The full package for all three Joint Strike Fighter variants is eventually expected to include a new AN/APQ-85 radar and electronic warfare suite, replacements for the AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System (DAS) and Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS), and a host of other improvements. A particular point of concern now is that new production F-35s might soon start being delivered without any radars at all, as a result of issues tied to the development of the APG-85.

As the Marine’s top aviation officer noted last week, it could be 10 years before his service at least sees all of its F-35s fully upgraded to the Block 4 standard. That, in turn, could have serious impacts on the service’s broader plans to acquire and field new crewed and uncrewed aircraft.

Marine Corps interest in whatever the Navy chooses for F/A-XX could be an important factor for the future of that program, as well. In response to a question from TWZ at a roundtable on the sidelines of Sea Air Space this morning, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle said he is now hoping to see the selection of the winning design in the F/A-XX competition by August. The program has been in bureaucratic purgatory since the Pentagon moved to effectively shelve it indefinitely last year, with Congress subsequently intervening to keep it funded. How the Navy’s next-generation carrier-based fighter plans will proceed now still very much remains to be seen.

If nothing else, the vision the Marines have put forward today clearly frames Block 4 F-35s ‘quarterbacking’ fleets of CCAs as a key stepping stone to the service’s next-generation aviation capabilities.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post F-35s Quarterbacking Drones Seen As Gateway To USMC’s 6th Gen Fighter appeared first on The War Zone.

According to reports, UkrArmoTech has begun factory testing a prototype of the Skif, which has apparently been developed in direct response to the requirements of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, drawing from lessons learned since the full-scale Russian invasion in February 2022.

UkrArmoTech is among the leading developers and manufacturers of armored vehicles for the Ukrainian Armed Forces, but has, to date, focused on wheeled models such as the Desna, Gyurza, and Tisa. With that in mind, the Skif marks a new direction for the company.

“First and foremost, we relied on our contacts with the military, our understanding of their needs, and our experience with the use of wheeled vehicles on the battlefield,” UkrArmoTech CEO Hennadii Khirhii told the Ukrainian Defense Express website. “Active combat operations in Ukraine have demonstrated the need for a significant number of armored vehicles to ensure and maintain the mobility of units and formations of the Armed Forces and Defense Forces.”

The design of the Skif is heavily influenced by the U.S.-developed M113, a Cold War-era tracked APC, many hundreds of which have been supplied to Ukraine since February 2022.

Despite its age, it seems the M113 has been a success in Ukrainian hands, offering a useful combination of reliability, maintainability, troop-carrying capacity, and off-road mobility.

The designers of the Skif were therefore instructed to produce a vehicle that matched the M113’s mobility while improving on its levels of protection and firepower.

According to reports, the Skif makes use of off-the-shelf components and assemblies from foreign manufacturers involved in the production of armored vehicles that are “descendants” of the M113.

It’s unclear if this implies that the Skif uses components from Western manufacturers that have built the M113 and its derivatives, or if the Ukrainian vehicle employs parts from other Western-made APCs. Noteworthy is the fact that members of the broader M113 family have been built under license in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey, as well as several other countries outside Europe.

Reportedly, 60 percent of the vehicle’s components will initially be imported, and these will include the engine, transmission, suspension components, transfer case, and tracks. If production is launched, an increasing proportion of the components will be made locally.

In its basic form, the Skif is intended to transport soldiers from mechanized units across the battlefield and to provide them with fire support. As well as three crew (driver, commander, and gunner), located in the front section behind the power module, the Skif can accommodate eight soldiers in the rear troop compartment. The troops enter and exit via a rear ramp, as on the M113.

The prototype of the Skif has an aluminum hull, reportedly the first time this has been used on a Ukrainian combat vehicle. However, a series-production version will likely feature an armored steel. While steel offers better ballistic resistance and is easier to repair in the field, it comes with a significant weight penalty.

With the aluminum hull, the Skif weighs around 15 tons and is driven by a 360-horsepower diesel engine. The modular design means that different engines can be installed, for example, if more power is needed for a steel hull, or when fitted with heavier weapons.

In its basic form, the Skif has a Ukrainian-made remotely controlled combat module on the hull roof. This can be armed either with a 12.7mm or 14.5mm heavy machine gun paired with a 7.62mm auxiliary machine gun. As seen in the photos, the prototype does not currently have the combat module fitted.

Armor protection is in line with NATO STANAG 4569 Level 4 over the frontal section (withstanding, for example, 14.5mm machine gun fire, or a 155mm artillery projectile detonating at 25 meters), and Level 3 on the sides and rear (resistant to 7.62mm gunfire, or a 155mm artillery projectile detonating at 60 meters). Mine protection below the hull is rated at Levels 3a and 3b. The vehicle is expected to withstand the detonation of around 13 pounds of explosives under the hull or tracks.

It’s unclear what kinds of protection are provided against the threat of attack drones, but some type of electronic warfare gear is included; it would also be expected that the vehicle receives a purpose-designed ‘cope cage’ of the kind that has appeared on most Ukrainian and Russian combat vehicle types during the conflict. Otherwise, the Skif is equipped with communications, navigation, situational awareness, and fire-control systems of Ukrainian origin. A bank of smoke grenade launchers is fitted across the front of the hull on the Skif prototype.

The modular design means that the Skif can be adapted for other missions. These are likely to include vehicles equipped for command and control, reconnaissance, anti-armor, mortar carrier, medical evacuation, and more.

With the continued debate over wheeled versus tracked combat vehicles, it is interesting to note that Ukraine, after focusing on the local production of wheeled fighting vehicles, continues to see the necessity for tracked APCs. While heavier, more complex, and more costly, they are better able to deal with the brutal mud that is a feature of Ukrainian winters. They are also generally better in terms of armor protection.

For that reason, the aging M113 and the Soviet-era MT-LB remain popular choices for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

According to the Oryx open-source tracking group, since the start of the current conflict, more than 500 Ukrainian M113s and more than 150 MT-LBs have been confirmed destroyed or damaged. The actual figures are certainly higher, as Oryx only tallies losses that are confirmed with visual evidence.

Despite the need for a vehicle in this class, there remain significant challenges in getting it into production. Very likely, Ukraine will have to rely heavily on foreign funds and expertise if it is to put the Skif into quantity production. Should that prove realistic, Ukraine will likely also seek to sell the Skif to foreign customers, too.

Continued factory testing of the Skif prototype should provide a practical assessment of the new platform’s design maturity, including whether its mobility and running performance meet local requirements. Certainly, the new tracked APC is a bold venture for Ukraine’s war-ravaged industry, but it represents a class of vehicle for which there is a near-insatiable local demand.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Ukraine’s M113-Inspired Armored Personnel Carrier In Testing appeared first on The War Zone.

Amid this pivotal moment, SNC is leading a powerhouse team that has developed the only clean-sheet design in the running: the Freedom Trainer. Built specifically to address the Navy’s evolving carrierborne training needs, the Freedom Trainer aims to deliver modern capability at significantly reduced lifecycle cost.

SNC is partnering with Northrop Grumman, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc., and CAE, leveraging advanced production, manufacturing, and synthetic training expertise to create a comprehensive, integrated family of training systems. 

“SNC’s Team Freedom brings the agility of a disruptor and the reliability of our well-established defense partners to bear so that we can deliver what the Navy wants, on the aggressive timeline it set,” says Jon Piatt, executive vice president at SNC.

Why the Navy’s training model is changing

Core requirements for the T-45 replacement have shifted dramatically. Advances in automated carrier landing technologies and increasingly capable simulation environments have altered the Navy’s perspective on how student naval aviators should be trained. The service has already removed carrier qualifications from the T-45 syllabus, one of the most significant training changes in decades, and plans for UJTS could further reshape how training occurs ashore.

A major driver of this debate centers around Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP), the land-based surrogate for shipboard carrier landings. Traditionally performed to touchdown, these aggressive, un-flared landings, or “bouncing,” replicate the forces and precision required aboard the carrier. But for UJTS, the Navy has removed the requirement for FCLP-to-touchdown, instead calling only for FCLP-to-wave off.

This change dramatically broadens the aperture for competitors. Trainers designed for land-based operations can meet wave-off profiles without requiring the structural upgrades typical of Navy aircraft. But this also introduces concerns about the long-term impact on aviator proficiency, and whether foundational carrier skills can be taught effectively without actual touchdown repetition.

The FCLP equation and its implications for the fleet

FCLP has long been considered essential for preparing student naval aviators for the demands of carrier aviation. A Navy spokesperson reaffirmed to TWZ in August 2025 that “Field Carrier Landing Practice landings ashore are still required for graduation,” though did not specify whether touchdown was still necessary. 

Touchdown landings impose tremendous structural loads on an aircraft, particularly landing gear and associated components. Removing this requirement opens the competition to off-the-shelf trainers such as the T-7 Red Hawk, Korean-built TF-50N, and the Italian M-346N. These jets can perform FCLP-to-wave-off but not repeated unflared touchdowns without extensive structural reinforcement.

SNC argues that this shift elevates readiness and cost risk. “FCLP-to-touchdown is a tried and trusted method to train naval aviators,” says Derek Hess, vice president of strategy at SNC. “Not performing carrier qualification or FCLPs-to-touchdown  essentially defers that training to the fleet replacement squadrons with their 4th-, 5th-, and soon, 6th-generation fighters which would be a very expensive use of those precious assets.”

In other words: the Navy can remove the requirement, but the fleet will still pay the bill.

Why a clean-sheet matters

The Navy’s decision not to mandate touchdown capability fundamentally changes the nature of the competition. Legacy trainers can now be offered at lower upfront cost, but at the expense of performance characteristics essential to naval aviation.

SNC is blunt on this point: the Freedom Trainer is the only aircraft in the field that can perform FCLP-to-touchdown without major modification because it is purpose-built to meet Navy training standards. SNC believes this is the defining advantage of a true naval trainer.

Where its competitors adapt land-based jets for a naval training mission, the Freedom Trainer is engineered from inception for the pounding, the control margins, and the durability required for FCLPs-to-touchdown.

Clean-sheet means a whole new approach

The Freedom Trainer offers improvements over the T-45, while delivering dramatically lower lifecycle costs. Hess explains that lifecycle economics are central to SNC’s approach: only about 10 percent of lifecycle cost is tied to research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) and 30 percent for procurement, while roughly 60 percent stems from operations and sustainment.

“From a business perspective, you can pay more in the RDT&E phase and still dramatically reduce your lifecycle costs,” Hess says. “We’re employing a more businesslike approach to training that balances training costs holistically across the lifecycle of the aircraft.”

To achieve this, SNC leverages advanced digital engineering to reduce risk and ensure real-world fidelity. “Digital engineering has evolved significantly over the last 10 years,” Hess says, pointing to Northrop Grumman’s work on the B-21 Raider as a benchmark for its modeling environment.

The Freedom Trainer’s mission systems architecture is built using Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) and is delivered with full technical and data rights – ensuring the Navy retains long-term control and interoperability.

Designed for the mission: performance and durability

The aircraft’s design reflects a deliberate choice to provide representative fighter performance at dramatically lower cost. The Freedom Trainer’s design reflects a deliberate philosophy: deliver the handling qualities and durability of a fighter‑representative aircraft without imposing fighter‑level sustainment costs. Rather than itemizing features in a list, SNC emphasizes that the jet’s airframe, engines and performance envelope all work together to meet the Navy’s demanding syllabus.

At its core, the Freedom Trainer is built around a 16,000‑hour airframe that’s engineered to withstand up to 35,000 carrier‑style landings. This level of durability is essential for repetitive FCLP operations, especially un-flared touchdowns that impose loads far more intense than standard runway operations. By designing the structure from day one to accept these stresses, SNC ensures the aircraft can train pilots to full carrier‑representative standards while avoiding the costly structural fatigue associated with modifying older, land‑based designs.

Power comes from a pair of Williams FJ44‑4M engines, selected not only for reliability but also for their lower operating cost compared to legacy trainer engines. These efficient turbofans help reduce support burdens by an estimated 40 percent relative to the T‑45, while enabling longer sorties on less fuel than the competition.

Performance‑wise, the Freedom Trainer provides the maneuvering capabilities student naval aviators must master before transitioning to fleet aircraft. With a −3 to +8 G envelope and angles of attack (AoA) reaching up to 27 degrees, the aircraft exposes students to the high‑AoA handling characteristics relevant to modern 4th‑ and 5th‑generation fighters. Yet SNC deliberately designed the jet to avoid the transonic regime, which typically demands larger thrust margins and higher fuel consumption to accomplish the same training maneuvers. By staying sub‑transonic, the aircraft maintains fighter‑representative handling qualities while keeping lifecycle costs far below those of high‑performance jets.

“You don’t need a fighter to learn how to fly a fighter,” Hess notes. “You need a trainer engineered for Navy training missions that create graduates who are ready for FRS training and beyond.”

LVC: The synthetic backbone of modern training

Live, Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) training is now central to the Navy’s future training enterprise. The service intends to offload many carrier operations scenarios into synthetic environments as part of its modernization journey.

The Freedom Trainer’s LVC environment, developed with CAE, includes synthetic radar, targeting pods, and augmented reality tactical scenarios that replicate beyond visual range (BVR) and within visual range (WVR) engagements. Hess notes that many mission training functions can be downloaded from frontline squadrons, producing far more capable pilots at much lower cost. 

“Ultimately, flying 4th- and 5th-gen fighters with modern flight control systems isn’t hard these days,” Hess says. “The tough part is employing the aircraft. That’s where we excel with our LVC capabilities.”

Turning clean-sheet into reality: timeline and industrial base

The final RFP envisions Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) beginning with up to two contract awards in 2027, delivering four EMD aircraft followed by seven low-rate production jets beginning in 2032. The goal is initial operating capability in 2035.

Hess is confident SNC can meet the timeline. With a restructured Navy acquisition enterprise and strong industrial partners, the Freedom Team argues it is well positioned to deliver a future-focused foundation for Navy training.

“Our primary focus is to deliver a trainer that meets the demanding needs of naval aviation with zero compromise,” Hess says. “We believe the next-generation navy trainer must enable efficient sortie generation, evolve with technology, and strengthen the nation’s industrial base.”

The bottom line: improving training while reducing cost

SNC positions the Freedom Trainer as a solution that protects naval aviation’s most critical training standards while delivering significant lifecycle savings. The company argues that deferring essential skills like FCLP-to-touchdown to the fleet imposes an unnecessary cost and readiness burden.

“If aviators aren’t learning these key skills while they’re earning their Wings of Gold,” Hess says, “they will have to learn it in a much more complex, more expensive, and more scarce resource – frontline gray jet fleet fighters.”

A compelling candidate for the future fleet

The Navy’s next trainer will shape every aviator who enters the fleet for generations to come. The Freedom Trainer’s clean-sheet approach positions it as a contender capable of improving Naval training capabilities while reducing cost.

For a decision as consequential as UJTS, SNC’s argument is clear: choose a trainer designed for the Navy’s mission – not adapted to it.

The post SNC Gives Details Of Its Clean-Sheet Freedom Trainer Offering To The U.S. Navy appeared first on The War Zone.

​Check out our full tour of the aircraft and its weapons:

Contact the author: tyler@twz.com

The post The H-60 Black Hawk Gunship Evolves With New Wings And Weapons appeared first on The War Zone.

That’s according to Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Daryl Caudle, who spoke with reporters Monday at the Sea-Air-Space 2026 exposition near Washington, D.C. In response to a question from TWZ, Caudle acknowledged the uncertainty that has kept F/A-XX in a holding pattern, even as the Air Force’s future fighter, dubbed the F-47, has forged ahead. The current competitors for the F/A-XX are Boeing, which is also the F-47’s prime contractor, and Northrop Grumman.

“One of the challenges we’re seeing is, not only [are] our peer competitors improving their capability for anti-air, either air-to-air or surface-to-air, but the lower cost of entry of very capable weapons is also making more players on the field in which that level of stealth and technology is required,” Caudle, the Navy’s top officer, said. “So this is not about the need for a peer adversary. This is just having an aircraft that can operate with a level of uncertainty and with the acceptable level of risk.”

This is in line with arguments Caudle made in favor of moving ahead of F/A-XX in January, where he cited growing threats posed by smaller nation-state adversaries, including Iran, as well as non-state actors.

Today, Caudle again emphasized that he nevertheless had been “very vocal” on the need for a carrier-based next-generation fighter, and had expressed “many times” to Deputy Secretary of War Steve Feinberg that the service had to secure the aircraft. It’s important, Caudle said, for both the future carrier air wing and collaboration and planning with the MQ-25 Stingray, the Boeing-made carrier refueling drone set to reach initial operational capability later this year.

“It ties to our MQ-25 for stealth refueling. It ties to our reach. It ties to the work we’re doing for making the carrier air wing something that remains very effective into the future based on the range in which you can operate safely,” Caudle said. “So the need’s clearly there.”

While it was recently reported that the Navy, bolstered by funding from Congress for the new F/A-XX, planned to award a contract for the program by year end, Caudle said August was now the likely timeframe.

As noted, the Pentagon had moved to essentially shelve F/A-XX in its Fiscal Year 2026 budget request, with the Navy only requesting a relatively meager $74 million for the program. U.S. officials said at the time this decision had been driven largely by concerns about the ability of the U.S. industrial base to support work on two sixth-generation fighters, the other being the F-47, simultaneously.

Congress subsequently interceded, appropriating $1.69 billion for F/A-XX through a combination of regular spending bills and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. From a budgetary perspective, the Navy’s next-generation fighter program remains well behind the F-47, which has already received billions in funding and could be in line to get approximately $5 billion more in Fiscal Year 2027. The Navy only appears to be requesting an additional $140 million for its new carrier-based combat jet in the $1.5 trillion proposed defense budget for the next fiscal cycle.

“We’ve got a lot of airframes out there. We’ve got an F-35 program. We’ve got a F-47 program. You know, we’re still building the [F/A-18 Super Hornet] … there’s a lot of airplanes being built,” Adm. Caudle said today. “The Air Force has got a lot of demand on the system. The Navy’s got a lot of demand … One of the contractors who would make this plane for us is in a place where they really can’t deliver in the timeframe we need it. So there was, you know, a check twice, cut once, kind of mentality here on this decision. And now there, I think we’re all on the same page on the reason why the hard look needed to be done. I’m good with it.”

As noted, Boeing and Northrop Grumman are in competition to produce the F/A-XX, a program that first took shape as a Navy request for information in 2012. An earlier down-select reportedly eliminated Lockheed Martin in March 2025. Last August, Northrop Grumman released a rendering of its concept for the aircraft, showing a streamlined nose and landing gear on the front of a carrier with the tagline, “Project Power Anywhere.” Boeing’s concept, released the same month, drew visual comparisons to its F-47 Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter for the Air Force.

Citing classification, Adm. Caudle said today he couldn’t provide any information on design or payload details that give the Navy confidence in pursuing F/A-XX despite the adversary threats he mentioned. However, he suggested speed was increasingly essential to having a chance at maintaining overmatch.

“We monitor very closely, red-team that very hard, and assess that threat with a predicted trajectory of whether or not the existing designs we’ve seen will still overmatch that,” he said. “So I think we’re okay there, but we do know that our existing airframes could become vulnerable to some of those threats by the time [it’s fielded] … because it takes time to deliver that, that our existing airframes could be vulnerable to some of those threats, and we want to make sure the air wing of the future can still participate.”

Despite Caudle’s comments today, it should be remembered that this is not the first time that major progress on the Navy’s next-gen fighter has supposedly been imminent. Last October, Reuters reported the program had been greenlighted by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, with a contract expected to follow in short order. 

Aside from funding moves from Congress to ensure the survival of the F/A-XX program, no public steps have been taken to advance the program since.

Contact the editor: Tyler@twz.com

The post F/A-XX Stealth Fighter Selection To Finally Come By August: Navy’s Top Admiral appeared first on The War Zone.

The Gerald R. Ford CSG transited the Suez Canal southbound on April 16, the Associated Press reported on Friday, once again entering the Red Sea and U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility (AOR). The second CSG in the region, led by USS Abraham Lincoln, is operating in the northern Arabian Sea, enforcing the naval blockade of Iranian ports and coastal areas. The George H.W. Bush CSG is reportedly transiting around the Horn of Africa en route to the Middle East, according to USNI News, but TWZ has been unable to independently confirm via open sources. Following the arrival of USS George H.W. Bush, the U.S. will have three carriers positioned in the Middle East should the ceasefire fail and combat operations resume.

The Tripoli ARG is also supporting blockade measures, with the embarked 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) boarding and seizing Iranian-flagged M/V Touska on April 19 after USS Spruance fired multiple 5-inch rounds, targeting the engine room and disabling the vessel’s propulsion. “American forces issued multiple warnings and informed the Iranian-flagged vessel it was in violation of the U.S. blockade. After Touska’s crew failed to comply with repeated warnings over a six-hour period, Spruance directed the vessel to evacuate its engine room.” The second ARG-MEU tasked to CENTCOM, the Boxer ARG-11th MEU, is currently transiting through U.S. Indo-Pacific Command at an undisclosed location.

At a press conference on Thursday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine and CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper provided a detailed briefing on the opening hours of the blockade, which TWZ covered here, and shared unclassified slides of ship positions before and after implementation. Below is an animation visualizing the first 48 hours of the U.S. blockade, and confirmed Navy ships operating in the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean at the time.

“Since the blockade’s commencement, U.S. forces have directed 25 commercial vessels to turn around or return to an Iranian port,” CENTCOM said in the release. “In addition to this blockade, the joint force, through operations and activities in other areas of responsibility, like the Pacific Area of Responsibility, under the command of Adm. Paparo, will actively pursue any Iranian-flagged vessel or any vessel attempting to provide material support to Iran,” Gen. Caine added.

Back stateside, the Theodore Roosevelt CSG departed San Diego on April 15, according to local ship spotters. A U.S. 3rd Fleet spokesperson told TWZ the CSG is underway conducting routine operations and integrated training in the 3rd Fleet AOR and “remains ready to respond to crisis or contingency at any time.” Elements of the group were recently outfitted with a new Raytheon Coyote counter-UAS 8-cell launcher, which could be tested during upcoming training periods.

Note: Positions are general approximations. Non-deployed LHA/LHD amphibious warships are not shown.

Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@teamrecurrent.io

The post Carrier Tracker As of April 20, 2026 appeared first on The War Zone.

Bottom line: The JDAM-LR represents an advancement in more affordable standoff munitions, offering the U.S. Navy a versatile, cost-effective, and long-range strike option based on a highly proven family of precision weapons.

The U.S. Navy has demonstrated a new, powered derivative of the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) precision-guided weapon from its Super Hornet fighter, signaling a major leap forward in potentially delivering a cost-effective and versatile standoff strike capability to the Carrier Air Wing. The weapon, now known as the JDAM Long Range, or JDAM-LR, can be used to attack targets on land or at sea, effectively being a small cruise missile, and one that offers significantly greater range than even the unpowered JDAM Extended Range (JDAM-ER) series.

The trials in early April involved two test events at the Navy’s Point Mugu Sea Range, off the coast of California. During these, the weapon proved it could safely separate from a Super Hornet, integrate with existing interfaces, and execute a controlled, powered flight with precise navigation. In each demonstration, the weapons flew roughly 200 nautical miles before reaching their targets. Accuracy “within meters” was demonstrated, Boeing said.

The JDAM-LRs were launched from F/A-18Es and F/A-18Fs assigned to the Navy’s Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 31 (VX-31), the “Dust Devils,” a unit that has also made important contributions to the initial fielding of the AIM-174B air-launched version of the Standard Missile 6 (SM-6) as well as live-fire testing of the secretive AIM-260A long-range air-to-air missile.

“As Naval Air Forces in theater continue to rely heavily on JDAM systems, the program recognizes a critical need to provide the fleet with greater standoff range,” said Capt. Sarah Abbott, Precision Strike Weapons (PMA-201) program manager. “This new capability allows pilots to engage targets from significantly safer distances, maintaining a tactical advantage in contested environments.”

With these demonstrations successfully completed, the JDAM-LR team will now turn to the next phase of qualification, focusing on shipboard integration.

We have reached out to Boeing and the Navy on procurement plans, but the assignment of the GBU-75 designation suggests that a Pentagon order has already been made or is otherwise anticipated.

While by no means a new concept, Boeing originally announced that it was working on a powered derivative of JDAM back in mid-2024. At that point, it had already introduced the unpowered JDAM-ER, which mates the original weapon with a pop-out wing kit.

The JDAM-LR uses the same wing kit as the JDAM-ER, but also adds a 200-pound-thrust-class TDI-J85 turbine engine.

Meanwhile, the main guidance package is derived from the GPS-assisted inertial navigation system found on typical JDAMs, and a standard low-drag 500-pound-class bomb is its warhead.

In terms of range capability, a standard wingless JDAM can glide around 15 miles to its target, depending on the release altitude. With its pop-out wings, the JDAM-ER can hit targets up to 45 miles away. Boeing has said in the past that the JDAM-LR is expected to be able to reach targets at least 300 nautical miles away.

Like existing JDAMs, the JDAM-ER leverages a standardized bomb shape for its warhead, giving the design immediate versatility. A wide range of 500-pound-class bombs and other munitions already share this form factor, including specialized variants, intended to reduce the risk of collateral damage and air-dropped shallow-water anti-ship mines.

Boeing has said that any aircraft onto which the unpowered JDAM types have already been integrated should also be able to employ JDAM-LRs. However, full integration still requires testing to make sure the weapons can be safely released, hence the Super Hornet tests in April.

For the Navy, the maritime strike variant of the JDAM-LR, with a seeker system added to the nose, is especially relevant. We have reached out to Boeing for specific details of this seeker, but it may be related to the dual-mode seeker system for JDAM that has been tested by the U.S. Air Force. This combines a radar and imaging infrared (IIR) camera, specifically for the anti-ship role. You can read more about that project, known as Quicksink, here.

Also in a maritime context, JDAM-LR can be combined with the Quickstrike family of naval mines, allowing aircraft to seed naval minefields. TWZ has explained in depth in the past about the advantages of using JDAM-ERs with shallow-water naval mines as their warheads, and JDAM-LR allows the same effects to be provided at a significantly greater range.

The JDAM-LR has also been pitched as a possible air-launched decoy. In this configuration, its warhead would be replaced with an additional fuel tank designed to extend its range out to at least 700 miles. The decoy version is still listed in the Boeing product catalog.

Taken together, the JDAM-LR offers several notable advantages, beyond its long range. Chief among them is its built-in flexibility, allowing units in the field to rapidly adapt a standoff munition to the mission at hand, or even repurpose it as a decoy when needed.

Another key advantage lies in the ability to readily convert existing stockpiles of standard 500-pound-class bombs into relatively low-cost cruise missiles. Boeing, however, has not yet revealed an estimated unit cost for the JDAM-LR kit.

Each standard JDAM kit has historically cost between $20,000 and $30,000. A typical 500-pound-class low-drag bomb adds another few thousand dollars to that total. The unit cost of the TDI-J85 engine is unknown, but the Williams F107, a larger turbojet also used in various cruise missiles, has been priced at around $190,000 in the past. It’s possible that price could drop significantly if production was increased dramatically. Any additional seeker system or other features would add to the cost of the JDAM-LR. Nevertheless, the result will likely compare very favorably with, for example, a single AGM-158A Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), one of the U.S. Air Force’s go-to air-launched stand-off munitions, which comes with a price tag above $1 million.

On the other hand, the JDAM-LR still has a shorter range than many purpose-designed cruise missile types, such as the AGM-158 and its extended-range versions. Furthermore, the powered version of the JDAM is not stealthy, unlike the members of the AGM-158 family, among others.

Any future high-end conflict involving the U.S. military, and particularly a potential confrontation with China across the vast expanses of the Pacific, will likely involve the need to strike thousands of targets on both land and sea. Given the depth and sophistication of enemy air and maritime defenses, large quantities of standoff munitions would be essential to effectively engage many of those threats.

This creates significant pressure to sustain a continuous, timely, and cost-effective supply of such weapons at scale. In that context, a system like JDAM-LR could prove highly valuable by more rapidly expanding the overall inventory of available standoff munitions. Doing so would also help conserve higher-end systems like the AGM-158 and other cruise missiles for targets requiring greater range or survivability. Meanwhile, decoy-configured JDAM-LRs could further enhance effectiveness by confusing and misdirecting defending forces, improving the chances of other standoff weapons reaching their intended targets.

Commanders across the U.S. military recognize the need for lower-cost standoff munitions that still offer meaningful range. The Air Force, for example, has developed two new Extended Range Attack Munitions (ERAM) under a crash program. While the effort is first expected to provide Ukraine with a relatively low-cost standoff strike capability, it also reflects the Pentagon’s focus on rapidly developing and bringing into operational service new, less-expensive weapons that can be built at scale.

Ukraine’s combat experience with the JDAM-ER, in particular, also highlights the export potential of the JDAM-LR. As well as commonality with other members of the JDAM family, the JDAM-LR could provide foreign air forces with a cheaper and less complex precision air-launched standoff capability than weapons like the AGM-158, for example. These more exquisite weapons might, anyway, be out of reach due to operational security or escalatory concerns.

Altogether, the latest milestone for the JDAM-LR underscores the continued interest in lower-cost cruise missiles, especially those that offer flexibility for use against land-based and maritime targets. With that in mind, it will be interesting to see what the Navy’s procurement plans for the weapon look like.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Jet-Powered JDAM Tested From Navy Super Hornet appeared first on The War Zone.

The Spitfire in question, a two-seater, was painted blue to represent the first prototype, K5054. The original K5054 first flew on March 5, 1936, and was piloted by Capt. Joseph “Mutt” Summers. It took off from Eastleigh Aerodrome, now Southampton Airport.

Popular history records that Summers uttered the words “I don’t want anything touched” when he climbed down from the cockpit. If he did say those words, it was almost certainly an instruction to the ground crew to leave the plane as it was before he took it up for his next test sortie. But the legend stuck.

Regardless, so promising was the new fighter that the Air Ministry placed a production order less than three months later, with trials still incomplete.

Eventually, more than 20,000 production examples would be built, and the Spitfire would be considered among the best all-round fighters of World War II, in which it played a key role from start to finish. The Royal Air Force didn’t fly its last operational Spitfire sortie until 1954, in Malaya.

The blue Spitfire seen in the accompanying images is actually a Mk IX, BS410, which crashed in May 1943, was recovered and rebuilt in the 2000s, and was converted into a two-seater, allowing for a passenger. It is currently privately owned.

Starting on April 7, the K5054-lookalike Spitfire joined up in the air with a host of modern types.

For the first flight, the Royal Air Force’s most advanced fighter, the F-35B Lightning, flew in formation with the Spitfire. This came just a matter of weeks after British F-35Bs shot down their first enemy aircraft — hostile drones over Jordan, during the conflict in the Middle East.

The formation flight involved two frontline F-35Bs from RAF Marham and two preserved Spitfires.

The other Spitfire, a Mk Vb, AB910, also saw combat in World War II, including covering the D-Day landings in Normandy. It is now part of the storied Battle of Britain Memorial Flight (BBMF).

For the first leg of its flight, the K5054-lookalike Spitfire flew from its birthplace of Southampton Airport to RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire, still a major fighter hub.

While the Spitfire and F-35 could hardly be more different in terms of performance and technologies, both have served the Royal Air Force as its premier frontline fighter. Like its forebear, the F-35B is also now proven in aerial combat, albeit against drones.

On March 6 this year, the Royal Air Force announced that an F-35B pilot had carried out the aircraft’s first combat shootdown in British hands, intercepting and destroying two hostile drones during an operation over Jordan the same week.

“The pilot, flying alongside two Typhoons from RAF Akrotiri, detected the drones on radar and engaged them with two ASRAAM missiles,” the Royal Air Force said in its statement. The pilot, although assigned to No. 617 Squadron of the Royal Air Force, was serving with the Royal Navy, reflecting the joint nature of the U.K. F-35B force.

The incident followed a separate attack in which a small, low‑speed drone struck RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus after evading base defenses, which were subsequently much enhanced.

Flight two, out of RAF Coningsby, on April 8, saw the Spitfire fly alongside Royal Air Force Red Arrows Hawks and a Phenom T1 trainer.

The third flight, out of RAF Leuchars, on April 9, involved a Royal Air Force P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft.

Flight four, on April 10, brought the Spitfire to Scotland, where it flew out of RAF Lossiemouth with a pair of Royal Air Force Typhoon fighters.

Remaining in Scotland, the fifth flight, on April 13, out of Prestwick Airport, teamed the Spitfire with a Royal Air Force Hawk T2 trainer.

Flight six, on April 14, out of RAF Valley, Wales, involved the Spitfire and two current Royal Air Force training types: a Texan T1 turboprop and a Jupiter HT1 helicopter.

Flight seven, on April 15, out of MOD St Athan, provided a formation with two QinetiQ Pilatus PC-21 trainers.

Flight eight, on April 16, out of MOD St Mawgan, involved a Royal Air Force A400M transport.

For the ninth and final flight, on April 17, the Spitfire departed Exeter Airport and met up alongside the BBMF’s Dakota as it flew back to Southampton Airport.

While not unique, the Royal Air Force doesn’t regularly pair current and historic fighters for displays in the way the U.S. Air Force does with its Heritage Flight. This puts together formations of modern jets flying with fighters from the World War II, Korean War, and Vietnam War eras, such as the P-51 Mustang and F-86 Sabre.

This makes the series of Spitfire flights all the more special. On each of these flights, one lucky (and deep-pocketed) passenger was in the backseat of the Spitfire, having bid for the chance to do so. The money earned will go to support service-related charities.

For the rest of us, we can enjoy some of the spectacular imagery captured as this special Spitfire completed its countrywide odyssey.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Spitfire Completes Unique Formation Flights With Royal Air Force appeared first on The War Zone.

“There will be nothing in the world that we can’t touch with a combined range of HADES and what we can launch off of this thing,” Andrew Evans, Director of Strategy and Transformation with the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Army, or G-2, told TWZ and other outlets today. “I don’t think anybody’s safe in the future from a sensing perspective.”

Evans comments came at a roundtable with several Army officials about HADES on the sidelines of the Army Aviation Association of America’s (AAAA) 2026 Warfighting Summit.

To take a step back quickly, the Army selected the Bombardier Global 6500-based bid from the Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) as the winner of the HADES competition in 2024. Flight testing of the first ME-11B prototype is now slated to kick off this summer. The service is expecting to take formal delivery of that aircraft from SNC before the end of the year. Two other prototypes are currently in various stages of conversion.

Each HADES aircraft will have a built-in suite of sensors, as well as a robust array of communications systems to pass the data it collects along to other nodes in near-real-time. The Army says it is following an incremental approach to integrating systems with the initial trio of prototypes. The service is also using a modular open-systems approach to make it easier to add new and improved capabilities down the line.

Details about what sensors the baseline HADES configuration will have are limited, but we do know it will include a version of the Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar System-2B (ASARS-2B), something TWZ was first to report back in 2024. ASARS-2B was originally developed for the U.S. Air Force’s U-2 Dragon Lady spy planes, and it features synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imaging and ground moving target indicator (GMTI) modes, as you can read more about here.

For more than a year now, the Army has also been talking about launching very long-range so-called “launched effects” from the HADES aircraft. This term is a catch-all used to describe drones configured to perform a wide variety of missions that can be deployed from aircraft (fixed wing and rotary; crewed and uncrewed) in flight, as well as platforms on the ground or at sea. The process of converting Global 6500s into ME-11Bs includes integrating four underwing pylons, which the aircraft will be able to use to launch drones and carry podded sensor systems.

At the roundtable today, Evans offered a detailed explanation of how the Army arrived at this plan and what it expects to gain from the blend of capabilities in response to a question from our Jamie Hunter.

“So, someone’s going to eventually ask about survivability. It’s going to tie it all together in here,” Evans said. “We did the research. I’ll save you time on doing the research.”

“In 70 or 80 years, there would be 0.1% of the time when you wouldn’t be able to fly ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions] because you would be afraid of the threat, potentially, or the threat would be too high to fly,” he added. “That means that 99.9% of the time of a life of the system, it is a useful system for deterrence, for building pattern of life, target development, and so on and so forth. So we’re building a system that can be used for 99.9% of the useful life of the system.”

“So we’re, I think, wise in the approach, saying, all right, if there’s still that 0.1% of the time where you need to be resilient enough to survive in a situation, how do you do that? Well, how do you combine the best of both? Because there’s no one perfect solution, right?” he continued. “What’s really, really good for conflict is not very good for the 99% of the time you need it for campaigning [routine operations], and vice versa. So what we’ve determined strategically is that there’s a way to combine both of these things.”

This is where Evans says the air-launched drone capability comes in.

“We can have a useful asset for campaigning 99.9% of the time, but we can pair with it launch effects [for] when we aren’t going to put that capital system in harm’s way,” he said. “We’ve already engineered hard points into HADES to be able to receive these launch effects in the future. So once we mature the capabilities and determine which way forward we want – what type of launch effects, what type of performance we need out of these things – and we marry those two things up, now we have the best of both. We have something that’s supremely capable in campaigning and probably the best joint asset in the world at being able to do penetrative launch effects. And now you have a bit of a utopia.”

Furthermore, “we believe that in the role of HADES, there’s also an opportunity to be a bit of a quarterback of an ecosystem of sorts. So you can imagine how that might look,” Evans also noted. “That isn’t going to quarterback everybody’s assets, but the ones that have the most strategic importance and match that type of mission profile. There’s certainly a space for it to do that.”

In terms of the range of drones launched from HADES, the Army has put forward the 620-mile (1,000-kilometer) figure in the past. Speaking today, Evans alluded to even greater potential reach.

There are questions about the scale and scope of coverage that a single ME-11B will be able to achieve using “launched effects” type drones designed to be lower cost, and that will likely have a limited sensor payload. The concepts of operations the Army is putting forward for HADES point to a need for expendable designs, as well. These are drones that, in turn, are most effective when employed in large networked swarms to cover broad areas cooperatively. The ME-11B, at least as it is being presented now with its four underwing pylons, does not seem set to carry very large numbers of uncrewed aerial systems.

“This is important breakthrough technology. so I’m not going to reveal too much about what we’re discovering in this space,” Evans said. “But know that it’s going to change the game. It takes us from a sensing platform to a sensing and platform, and the ‘and,’ I’ll just let you use your imagination.”

Evans’ deliberately vague comments here might point to a broader airborne drone controller role in HADES’ future. ME-11B crews could potentially oversee larger and more capable drones, including Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) types now in development. CCAs or other heavier types would be able to carry bigger sensor suites and otherwise bring additional capabilities to the table, including the ability to provide close-in defense for HADES itself during missions.

Survivability has certainly been a hot topic of discussion around HADES since the Army first announced its intention to acquire a new fleet of business jet-based ISR aircraft. The service had highlighted growing concerns about the vulnerability of its now-retired fleets of turboprop ISR planes, which had provided key intelligence-gathering capacity globally for decades, tracing back to the Cold War. TWZ and others have repeatedly noted that these concerns are very real, especially in the context of a future high-end fight in the Pacific against China, but also apply to non-stealthy jets like the Global 6500.

For routine operations, the ME-11B does a major leap in capability over the turboprop ISR aircraft the Army previously operated, both in terms of its mission systems and its general performance. HADES can fly higher, faster, and farther, and do so while carrying a bigger sensor payload. Higher altitudes also offer greater fields of view for the aircraft’s sensors. The improved performance also translates to being able to get to and from operating areas more rapidly and the ability to remain on station longer. The underwing pylons will offer additional flexibility beyond the drone launch capability.

“The deployability of this platform, being able to fly 6,000 miles at 0.87 Mach, and go globally without the world will require the ability to rapidly change sensors,” Army Col. Joe Minor, the Capability Program Executive for Aviation within the office of the Program Acquisition Executive for Maneuver Air, also said at today’s roundtable at the AAAA conference. “With those hard points and cleared envelopes for pods, it gives us that ability to rapidly configure and update even more quickly than we could internally or within the canoe [fairing under the fuselage]. So those hard points being built in from the beginning is part of that [sic] building the right platform and air vehicle from the start, with the ability to integrate and evolve very quickly as you move forward.”

Using the Global 6500 as the underlying aircraft offers maintenance and other logistical benefits. This is an in-production aircraft with a significant global user base. This includes the U.S. Air Force, which operates a fleet of E-11A Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) aircraft based on this platform.

The Army says it has already been seeing an important boost in ISR capability with contractor-owned and operated ISR-configured business jets, including Global 6500-based types. The service has been utilizing those aircraft for eight years now as a transitional ‘bridge’ force to lead into the fielding of HADES.

Many of “our previous platforms were centered around the COIN [counterinsurgency] fight,” Army Col. Matt McGraw, head of the 116th Military Intelligence Brigade, the Army’s main aerial ISR unit, who was also at the roundtable today, said. “If you’re flying a platform operating full motion video [cameras], you’re tracking maybe one or two targets at most. A platform today, on these bridge aircraft with MTI and SAR, you’re tracking a couple 100 targets at the same time.”

There do continue to be significant questions about the true extent of what the Army’s ME-11Bs will be able to offer, in any context, given the expected size of the fleet. The Army currently plans to buy just six production HADES jets on top of the three prototypes. The service previously operated dozens of turboprop ISR aircraft.

“We work for the United States Army, on behalf of the United States Army. And so if the Army’s given direction to cap a fleet size based on budget pressure, and of the other things that we have to balance as an Army – like, if the Army only built ISR [aircraft], we build 1,000 of these things,” Evans said at the roundtable today. “But we don’t. We build a lot of things. And ISR is an enabler to [the] ground lethality that we deliver.”

“The Army’s got a tremendous amount of budget pressure. The Army has a top line that’s not keeping pace with inflation,” he added. “And so until our top line increases to support the world’s premier land force, then we’re going to be capped inside programs like HADES.”

As it stands now, the Army certainly looks to be hoping that even the small fleet of HADES will be able to punch well above its weight, thanks in no small part to the ability to launch very long-range drones from relative safety deep in hostile territory.

Jamie Hunter contributed to this story.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Air-Launched Drones Key To Keeping New Army Surveillance Jets Out Of Harms Way appeared first on The War Zone.

This week’s caption reads:

The Volcano Lair was the underground headquarters of the terrorist syndicate SPECTRE during the Bond film You Only Live Twice from 1967. 

Also, a reminder:

Prime Directives!

• If you want to talk politics, do so respectfully and know that there’s always somebody that isn’t going to agree with you. 
• If you have political differences, hash it out respectfully, stick to the facts, and no childish name-calling or personal attacks of any kind. If you can’t handle yourself in that manner, then please, discuss virtually anything else.
• No drive-by garbage political memes. No conspiracy theory rants. Links to crackpot sites will be axed, too. Trolling and shitposting will not be tolerated. No obsessive behavior about other users. Just don’t interact with folks you don’t like. 
• Do not be a sucker and feed trolls! That’s as much on you as on them. Use the mute button if you don’t like what you see.  
• So unless you have something of quality to say, know how to treat people with respect, understand that everyone isn’t going to subscribe to your exact same worldview, and have come to terms with the reality that there is no perfect solution when it comes to moderation of a community like this, it’s probably best to just move on. 
• Finally, as always, report offenders, please. This doesn’t mean reporting people who don’t share your political views, but we really need your help in this regard.

The post Bunker Talk: Let’s Talk About All The Things We Did And Didn’t Cover This Week appeared first on The War Zone.

Bottom line: The U.S. Air Force is testing a Qatari 747-8i as an interim Air Force One due to delays in Boeing's VC-25B deliveries. While modifications are underway, the jet's limited defensive capabilities and high conversion costs raise questions about its practicality and operational use.

The U.S. Air Force has begun test flights on an extremely lavish 747-8i Boeing Business Jet (BBJ) that Qatar donated to the U.S. last year for use by President Donald Trump. The jet, now dubbed VC-25B Bridge Aircraft, is set to serve in the Air Force One role while the White House awaits the extremely delayed delivery from Boeing of two fully-outfitted VC-25B Air Force One aircraft.

“I can confirm that the VC-25B Bridge Aircraft has begun flight test,” an Air Force spokesperson told The War Zone Friday afternoon. “We expect the aircraft will be delivered to the Presidential Airlift Group no later than summer 2026.”

Aviation Week was the first to report the news of the test flight.

The Air Force declined to provide additional information about the testing program, including when it began or how many flights have taken place. It also remains unclear when the 747-8i will conduct real VIP missions or if it will receive a new official designation. With questions swirling about the legality and ethics of a president receiving a gift plane, the Pentagon last May took delivery of the aircraft and said it would rapidly undertake the required modifications.

The jet, using the call sign VADER01, was spotted by flight trackers over Texas yesterday. It took off from Majors Field in Greenville, Texas, flew over Tulsa, Oklahoma, Amarillo and Abilene, Texas, before landing back at Majors Field. The airport is home to L3 Technologies, which is modifying the jet. The facility at Greenville is a hub for this exact kind of modification work on the Pentagon’s larger aircraft.

Video and photos taken by aviation photographers show that the aircraft was in a white base livery, though it will reportedly get Trump’s red, dark blue and white paint scheme. The aircraft was delivered from Qatar in its maroon, white and gray striped scheme originally.

Aviation photographer TT-33 operator was kind enough to share some images with us. The photos were captured as the aircraft was landing at Majors Field yesterday. You can see more of his work here.

The photos show remarkably few modifications to the VC-25B Bridge Aircraft’s communications system, which already had an extensive broadband satellite communications suite when Qatar handed it over. These additions include a handful of new aerials and what appear to be two UHF satcom ‘platter’ antennas.

As TWZ has previously noted, converting any aircraft into one that is secure and safe enough to transport the president is a complex undertaking. The aircraft needs to provide constant, secure communications, including what is needed to order a nuclear strike. Historically, it also needs to be physically hardened both inside and out to withstand myriad threats, from the electromagnetic pulse of a nuclear weapon going off to incoming surface-to-air missiles to enemy intelligence-gathering efforts. To do this requires significant modifications right down to the aircraft’s outer structure.

In this case, it is likely impossible for the jet to receive EMP hardening and, at least based on the limited photos available, we cannot find any clear additions that would indicate the installation of an integrated self defense suite of any kind. The VC-25As are speckled with missile approach warning sensors and many laser countermeasures turrets (DIRCM). They also include the legacy Matador infrared countermeasure system above their jet engines and APU. This is in addition to other defensive features which are less visible and remain closely guarded secrets.

At the very least, this aircraft will have to feature some kind of DIRCM setup to repel shoulder-fired heat-seeking missiles, and modular units are available that can be attached in a canoe to the bottom of the aircraft. These systems, such as Elbit’s C-MUSIC or Northrop Grumman’s Guardian, are in service with foreign VVIP 747s, as well as commercial aircraft, including those flying for Israeli airline El Al. You can read all about these systems here. Still, while they offer far less defensive capacity compared to what is seen under the belly of a VC-25A, they would offer a significant layer of protection.

It’s also possible a more elaborate and fully integrated defensive system could be installed in the coming weeks, but it’s hard to imagine this would allow the jet to enter service this summer.

Adding a further layer of complexity to the procurement and fielding process of any new presidential airlift aircraft, there are tight controls around sourcing spares for aircraft with this mission, and specific rules about vetting individual parts to protect against espionage and sabotage. Clearly many practices and requirements had to be relaxed in order to rush this ‘bridge’ aircraft into service.

There are also questions about where this jet could actually fly operationally. Without a fully specialized design meeting all the requirements for the traditional Air Force One mission, it will likely be limited to domestic use or other very low threat areas. Given all that, and its reported conversion price tag approaching $400 million, there are legitimate questions about why it is needed at all.

As we noted earlier in this story, the flight test of this aircraft came as Boeing is far behind in the process of converting two other 747-8is originally built as commercial airliners into new fully customized VC-25B Air Force One aircraft. This led to the emergence of Trump’s idea of procuring an ‘interim’ Air Force One.

On Friday, the Air Force told us that it “is collaborating with Boeing to implement acceleration initiatives and expect the first delivery of the VC-25B in mid-2028.” If this is the case, then this ‘bridge’ aircraft will have served at most around two years until the first full-up VC-25B is delivered.

We have reached out to Boeing for additional details.

While it is not yet known when the ‘bridge’ VC-25B will actually transport the president, we know there is great pressure to get it doing exactly that from the White House. Judging by its configuration so far, whatever possible appears to have been done to make that happen.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post Qatari 747-8i Gifted To Trump For Interim Air Force One Is Undergoing Test Flights appeared first on The War Zone.

All this comes as the U.S. and Iran appear closer to reaching a deal to end the war, which we will discuss in greater detail later in this story. The temporary ceasefire between the two countries ends April 21.

“In line with the ceasefire in Lebanon, the passage for all commercial vessels through Strait of Hormuz is declared completely open for the remaining period of ceasefire, on the coordinated route as already announced by Ports and Maritime Organization of the Islamic Rep. of Iran,” Sayyed Abbas Araghchi, the Iranian Foreign Minister, stated on X Friday morning.

That route is a narrow five-mile stretch between the islands of Qeshem and Larak, roughly 15 miles from the Iranian shoreline.

In a post on his Truth Social site, U.S. President Donald Trump hailed the decision but said it did not change the ongoing blockade.

“THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ IS COMPLETELY OPEN AND READY FOR BUSINESS AND FULL PASSAGE, BUT THE NAVAL BLOCKADE WILL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AS IT PERTAINS TO IRAN, ONLY, UNTIL SUCH TIME AS OUR TRANSACTION WITH IRAN IS 100% COMPLETE,” Trump stated. “THIS PROCESS SHOULD GO VERY QUICKLY IN THAT MOST OF THE POINTS ARE ALREADY NEGOTIATED.”

The president added that “Iran has agreed to never close the Strait of Hormuz again. It will no longer be used as a weapon against the World!” However, there was no immediate response from Tehran.

Regarding any peace deals, Trump said on his Truth Social network that the “U.S.A. will get all Nuclear ‘Dust,’ created by our great B2 Bombers – No money will exchange hands in any way, shape, or form.”

This was a reference to the Operation Midnight Hammer attack on Iranian nuclear facilities last year.  Iran is believed to have about 440.9 kg of uranium enriched up to 60% of the explosive uranium isotope, U-235 stored at these locations.

“This deal is in no way subject to Lebanon, either, but the USA will, separately, work with Lebanon, and deal with the Hezboolah situation in an appropriate manner. Israel will not be bombing Lebanon any longer,” Trump added.

It remains to be seen how this will play out. Iran’s state TV, citing a senior military official, highlighted that “only civilian vessels will be allowed to pass through the Strait of Hormuz via designated routes and with permission from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy.”

“The passage of military vessels through the strait remains prohibited,” it said.

Despite the closure, ships have still transited the strategic body of water through which about a fifth of the world’s oil and gas exports pass. Ship traffic through the Strait actually “increased from last month’s unusually low levels, with crossings rising and activity extending across a broader mix of vessel types and cargoes,” according to the global trade intelligence firm Kpler.

There is also still the issue of mines in the section of the Strait outside the Qeshem-Larak passage. Demining is one of the issues being discussed today in an international meeting being held in Paris, a French official told us. We’ll discuss this meeting in a little more detail later in this story.

Trump, however, claimed that “Iran, with the help of the U.S.A., has removed or is removing all sea mines!”

We have reached out to shippers and maritime analysis and security firms to get a clearer picture of what this decision means from their perspectives.

“This is good news,” a spokesman for Hapag-Lloyd told us. “There are still some open questions on our end, but they might be resolved within the next 24 hours. Top priority for the passage is safety and security for the seafarers, the vessel and the cargo of our customers. If all open issues are cleared (i.e. insurance coverage, clear orders of Iranian government/military about the exact sea corridor to be used and the sequence of ships leaving) we would prefer to pass the strait as soon as possible. Our crisis committee is in session and will try to resolve all open items with the relevant parties within the next 24-36 hours.”

The reopening of the Strait “marks a turn for global shipping, as it allows over 750 vessels previously trapped in the Middle East Gulf to begin clearing approximately $17 billion in stranded energy and dry bulk cargoes,” Kpler told us. “As of April 17, 2026, there are 862 vessels currently operating within the Mideast Gulf. The core of the backlog is composed of approximately 187 laden tankers carrying roughly 172 million barrels of crude and refined products, along with a specialized cluster of 15 LNG vessels that remain almost entirely stalled following the collapse of recent ceasefire talks.”

The Strait reopening and a looming new round of peace talks appears to have provided a boost to the world economy.

“Oil prices are falling by more than 10%, and Wall Street is rallying toward another record after Iran said the Strait of Hormuz is fully open, which would allow oil tankers to exit the Persian Gulf again and carry crude to customers worldwide,” The Associated Press reported. “The S&P 500 rallied 0.7% as U.S. stocks sprinted toward the finish of a third straight week of big gains. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 1%, and the Nasdaq composite added 1%.”

Stocks “have rallied more than 11% since late March on hopes that the United States and Iran can avoid a worst-case scenario for the global economy,” the wire service added.

UPDATES

Our coverage for the day has concluded.

UPDATE: 5:45 PM EDT–

Trump told CBS News that Iran has “agreed to everything,” and will work with the U.S. to remove its enriched uranium.

He insisted that doing so will not involve U.S. ground troops. But when asked who would retrieve it, he would only say “our people.”

“No. No troops,” he told the network. “We’ll go down and get it with them, and then we’ll take it. We’ll be getting it together because by that time, we’ll have an agreement and there’s no need for fighting when there’s an agreement. Nice right? That’s better. We would have done it the other way if we had to.”

The president said the material would then be brought to the U.S.

“Our people, together with the Iranians, are going to work together to go get it. And then we’ll take it to the United States,” he said.

UPDATE: 5:24 PM EDT –

Speaking to the White House press corps, Trump addressed questions about the peace process.

“We’ll see how it all turns out, but it should be good, some very good discussions, and hopefully that subject that you like to talk about will be very good,” he said. “And we’ve done a good job, but we’ll see … the talks are going on and going over the weekend, and a lot of good things are happening that includes Lebanon.”

Asked about differences with Iran on how all this is developing, Trump said: “If there are, I’m going to straighten it out. .. don’t think there’s too many significant differences.”

As for the blockade: “When the agreement is signed, the blockade ends,” he proclaimed.

Earlier on Friday, Iranian officials said they would close the Strait again if the blockade is not lifted.

UPDATE: 1:34 PM EDT –

Trump told Axios that U.S. and Iranian negotiators will probably meet this weekend, and he expects them to hammer out a final deal to end the war. The deal should come “in a day or two,” Axios reporter Barak Ravid added on X.

UPDATE: 1:28 PM EDT –

Trump told Reuters on Friday that the U.S. will work with Iran to recover its enriched uranium ​and bring it back to the United States.

“We’re going to get ‌it together. We’re going to go in with Iran, at a nice leisurely pace, and go down and start excavating with big machinery… We’ll bring it back to the United ​States,” Trump said during a phone interview.

UPDATE: 1:17 PM EDT –

Seyyed Mohammad Mehdi Tabatabaei, a spokesperson for Iran’s president, pushed back on Trump’s claim that Iran promised never to close the Strait again.

“The Twitter rhetoric and baseless statements of the enemy are aimed at stripping the Iranian nation of their sense of pride for the great victories they have achieved through their resolute defense,” he stated on X. “The conditional and limited reopening of a portion of the Strait of Hormuz is solely an Iranian initiative, one that creates responsibility and serves to test the firm commitments of the opposing side. If they renege on their promises, they will face dire consequences.”

UPDATE 12:51 PM EDT –

Iran considers the continuation of the U.S. blockade on its ports a ceasefire violation and would close the Strait of Hormuz again if the blockade is not lifted, the IRGC-affiliated Fars News reported citing an informed source close to the Supreme National Security Council.

We’ve reached out to the White House for comment.

With new talks potentially set to be held in Pakistan over the weekend, the U.S. and Iran are negotiating over a three-page plan to end the war, Axios reported Friday morning. One of the key elements under discussion is “that the U.S. would release $20 billion in frozen Iranian funds in return for Iran giving up its stockpile of enriched uranium,” the outlet noted, citing two U.S. officials and two additional sources briefed on the talks.

The Memo of Understanding (MoU) also states the two sides are negotiating over a “voluntary” moratorium on nuclear enrichment by Iran. It also deals with the Strait of Hormuz, “though the sources said there are still significant gaps on that issue,” Axios posited.

It’s unclear if the MOU refers to Iran’s ballistic missiles and its support for regional proxies.

“Trump is directly talking to the Iranians,” U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Fox News. 

“He is negotiating himself,” Graham proffered. “He was on the phone with the Iranians a couple of days ago, and it got rather sporty—to the point that Trump loudly told Iran what would happen if they keep playing games. He actually lost his voice. I’d hate to be the Iranian on the receiving end of that.”

Despite rising hopes that the war in Iran could soon end, the country’s deputy foreign minister on Friday rejected any call for a temporary ceasefire. Instead, Tehran is seeking a comprehensive end to conflict across the Middle East, Saeed Khatibzadeh told reporters today. That includes fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, currently paused on the first full day of a shaky 10-day ceasefire.

“We are not accepting any temporary ceasefire,” Khatibzadeh said on the sidelines of the Antalya Diplomacy Forum hosted by Turkey’s Foreign Affairs Ministry. Any end to the fighting must include all conflict zones “from Lebanon to the Red Sea,” he added, describing it as a “red line” for Iran.

The cycle of violence “should end here once and for all,” Khatibzadeh continued, according to Al Jazeera.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) said it is ready to resume fighting if needed.

The Army and the IRGC have their “finger on the trigger” and are “prepared to deliver a powerful, destructive, and regret-inducing response to any aggressive or criminal action by the US-Israeli enemy and their allies against the Iranian nation,” the IRGC said Friday.

As we noted earlier in this story, the leaders of nearly three dozen nations met – mostly virtually – at a conference in Paris today to discuss the future of the Strait of Hormuz.

Co-chaired by French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the conference on the Initiative for Maritime Navigation in the Strait of Hormuz looked at ways of protecting shipping after the fighting ends.

Starmer said the U.K. and France will lead a multinational mission to “protect freedom of navigation” in the Strait as soon as conditions permit. He added that the mission would be “strictly peaceful and defensive,” with the aim of reassuring commercial shipping and supporting mine clearance efforts.

Starmer invited other countries to join, saying that roughly a dozen countries had committed to contributing assets.

Kaja Kallas, European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, said leaders also discussed ensuring that Iran imposes no tolls on passage through the Strait.

“Any pay-for-passage scheme will set a dangerous precedent for global maritime routes,” she stated on X. “Iran has to abandon any plan to levy transit fees. Europe will play its part in restoring the free flow of energy and trade, once a ceasefire takes hold.”

Kallas added that the EU’s Aspides naval mission is already operating in the Red Sea “and can be quickly strengthened to protect shipping across the region. This could be the fastest way to provide support.”

Yesterday, a spokesman for Aspides told us that there were no changes in its mission.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The post Iran Reopens Strait Of Hormuz, U.S. Blockade Continues (Updated) appeared first on The War Zone.