mark
Defense News
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/23/26 12:22pm
Despite U.S. President Donald Trump’s nostalgia for old-fashioned steam catapults, the U.S. Navy appears to be sticking with electromagnetics for its newest class of aircraft carriers. The Navy recently awarded contracts for the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, or EMALS, which uses electrically generated magnetic fields to launch aircraft from Ford-class carriers.Kato Engineering announced a $49.3 million contract this week to support the energy storage subsystem of EMALS. The Navy also published a sources sought notice on Wednesday, seeking vendors to supply components such as EMALS recirculation pumps. The Navy maintains that electromagnetic catapults provide smoother acceleration, can be adjusted to launch various types of aircraft such as drones, can be reset for faster launches and require less maintenance and personnel. China, meanwhile, is equipping its new Fujian-class carriers with electromagnetic catapults. Trump resurrected the steam catapult versus EMALS conversation in August, when he ordered the Navy to replace EMALS with the older system on the USS Doris Miller, the next Ford-class carrier under construction. In an August memo, Trump pointed at a Navy that has suffered from “a series of shipbuilding setbacks stemming from overly complex designs and iterative design change procedures, which have resulted in cost growth, delays, and cancellations.” The president suggested mandating that the Navy submit “a plan on the required measures to replace the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System and Advanced Weapons Elevators with steam and hydraulic systems for the construction of CVN-81 [USS Doris Miller], including timelines and resourcing requirements.” The White House’s order baffled naval experts. The Navy has not ordered a steam catapult in 20 years, with the last order placed for the USS George H. W. Bush, commissioned in 2009 as the final Nimitz-class carrier. Finding a manufacturer for steam catapults, and then redesigning Ford-class carriers to accept them, would likely require sweeping manufacturing overhauls at considerable expense, critics of the order said. Despite their planned phasing out, steam catapults are a proven technology. They were developed by Britain in the 1950s to replace the hydraulic catapults of World War II-era carriers and were later copied by the U.S. “The decision was made in April 1952 that the steam catapult would probably be the most satisfactory type for a service catapult,” noted a 1954 article in the U.S. Naval Institute magazine Proceedings. “Arrangements were made for the manufac­turing rights to the British catapult. British drawings were obtained and redrawn to U. S. standards and modified to fit U.S. naval requirements.” Manufactured for 21st century carriers, EMALS “is designed to expand the operational capability of Ford-class carriers, providing the Navy with capability for launching all current and future carrier air wing platforms – lightweight unmanned to heavy strike fighters.The rapid evolution of unmanned aircraft, which may soon become the backbone of carrier air wings, will likely require a more sophisticated launch system. Recent contracts suggest the U.S. Navy is planning accordingly.

[Category: / MilTech] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/23/26 9:38am
On Oct. 1, the Air Force will eliminate all 10 civilian positions at the China Aerospace Studies Institute, the Air University center that publishes unclassified research on the People’s Liberation Army’s air, space and missile forces. Its director said the move will effectively end the institute, even as the service says CASI’s mission will continue.“As a part of the ongoing civilian restructure within Air Education and Training Command, civilian positions will no longer be assigned to China Aerospace Studies Institute (CASI),” an Air Force spokesperson said in a statement to Defense News on Tuesday. “The CASI mission continues, with the organization leveraging assigned military service members to accomplish its objectives.”Civilians affected by the restructuring will stay in their current positions until further notice and will be evaluated for reassignment, the spokesperson said.CASI Director Brendan Mulvaney described the fallout differently. All of the institute’s civilian billets are being eliminated, “effectively ending CASI,” he said Tuesday. No military positions are affected, he said, noting the institute has two master sergeant billets and a deputy position that has remained unfilled for over a year.Asked how the cut would impact the institute’s research, Mulvaney said, “All of the research has always been done by the civilian personnel.”According to Mulvaney, the decision was made by the previous Air University commander and forwarded by AETC under a requirement to cut civilian jobs across the Department of the Air Force. The quota originated with the Air Force’s manpower and reserve affairs office, he said.The cut “had nothing to do with CASI’s mission,” Mulvaney said, but due to the fact that the institute does not produce professional military education students, which is Air University’s primary mission. Asked whether another organization would take on CASI’s China aerospace research, Mulvaney said, “Nothing has been identified.” It is also unknown whether CASI’s reports, translations and course materials will remain publicly available, or whether its website will remain online, he said.The cuts became public Monday, when a note from a CASI civilian circulated on social media. The employee wrote that every CASI civilian position would be unfunded as of Oct. 1 and that the staff would become “surplus federal employees,” a federal personnel term for workers whose positions are being eliminated. The note described CASI’s future as “uncertain,” adding that “CASI punched above its weight given our small team and budget.”Will Yale, a Navy surface warfare officer who posted the note on X, wrote that it was “extremely unfortunate and regrettable” that the Department of the Air Force “has decided to shutter” CASI. He described the institute as one of the most prominent in its field and wrote that it had “measurably increased knowledge about the PLA” inside the U.S. government and outside it.Andrew Erickson, a Naval War College professor and CASI associate, noted that the news is “specific to CASI only.” Mulvaney said the action does not affect the Navy’s China Maritime Studies Institute, the Army War College’s China Landpower Studies Center or the Marine Corps War College’s China Warfighting Initiative.CASI was established in 2017 and formally chartered on June 15, 2021, by then-Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. The charter tasked the institute with studying “everything that flies” in China, calling CASI the Air Force’s leading center for the study of China and its aerospace capabilities. It has offices at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, and Fort McNair in Washington.The institute’s research was unclassified by design, according to its charter, which directed CASI to use publicly available native-language sources and publish its findings. CASI translated PLA textbooks and doctrine, published reference primers and ran a free three-day PLA Fundamentals course that required no security clearance. Its biennial CASI Conference, held in May at National Defense University, drew more than 250 attendees and featured the release of the fifth edition of its “PLA Aerospace Power” primer, CASI said. In 2025, nearly 80,000 people visited CASI’s website and downloaded more than 50,000 reports, according to the institute. The site remains live and posted a new paper on Sept. 21, “From Vision to Vigilance: How Beijing’s Space-Science Roadmap Builds a Real-Time Kill Web.”CASI had already lost staff a year ago. In an October 2025 quarterly update, the institute said a Defense Department efficiency drive had eliminated its director of education and education program manager positions as the Department of the Air Force was “reorganizing, inactivating, and realigning organizations.” CASI said things were “in flux” and it would provide a status update once it knew more.Ryan Fedasiuk, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, called the move “a devastating loss for the analytic community” and an “incomprehensible decision.”The Air Force said CASI’s mission will continue, with military members carrying on the work Mulvaney said civilians have always done.

[Category: Air Warfare] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/23/26 9:25am
Greenland’s government and residents expressed relief that a military pact with the United States and Denmark may end anxiety over President Donald Trump’s threats to seize their Arctic island, but many remain distrustful of Washington.“I am incredibly relieved and think the outcome is very sensible. We can be satisfied,” Naaja Nathanielsen, a Greenlandic MP in the Danish parliament, told Reuters.Parliament speaker Kim Kielsen urged households to raise the Greenlandic flag on Wednesday. Activist and influencer Orla Joelsen encouraged residents in the capital, Nuuk, to show up at the airport to welcome the prime minister and foreign minister back from New York, where they struck the deal. New US basesThe agreement allows the U.S. to expand its military presence on Greenland, reopening Cold War-era bases in the settlements of Narsarsuaq and Mestersvig, with a prospect of renewed spending and employment potential. But it stopped short of Trump’s unsettling previous demand that the U.S. annex Greenland to head off the growing Arctic presence of Russia and China.“There has previously been a significant American presence in Greenland, so this is nothing new,” added Nathanielsen. “However, in light of the unrest over the past few years, there is likely greater scepticism in Greenland, and consequently, work needs to be done to reassure the local population.” The U.S. first built military bases in Greenland during World War II. During the Cold War, it maintained 17 military installations and more than 10,000 personnel to monitor Soviet forces. Today, only Pituffik Space Base remains, with some 150 U.S. military personnel. Residents dividedPitanguaq Mikissen, 69, a retired ship assistant, said the potential reopening of some old U.S. bases gave greater security to the territory’s 57,000 people.But not all residents were happy. “I think that Trump is really good at creating a lot of worry and a lot of fear,” said Jensia Dam-Davidsen, 40, a voice and choir teacher. “It (the deal) seems wrong in every way — especially now that Denmark has expanded their military presence here.”Denmark has significantly increased its own military footprint in Greenland since Trump’s threats peaked in January, deploying additional troops, boosting Arctic defence spending and hosting allies under military exercises. Malene Vahl Rasmussen, mayor of Kujalleq municipality in southern Greenland, where the U.S. is looking to reopen the Narsasuaq military base, said that under the agreement, U.S. military expansion must respect the Greenlandic way of life to protect hunting and fishing.“You can’t simply say, ‘OK, we’ve signed this, so now we trust you again’. Trust really needs to be rebuilt within that partnership,” she told Reuters. Some Greenlanders worry that expanded military activity — including increased aircraft and vessel movement — could disrupt hunting and fishing grounds that communities rely on for a living, though the agreement states such activity must respect Greenlandic society and traditional ways of life.

[Category: / Europe] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/23/26 7:56am
VIENNA — German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius told reporters after a Bundestag defense committee hearing on Wednesday that lawmakers had shown “much agreement” on his ministry’s record 2027 budget request, even as he pushed back against criticism that Germany is buying too much legacy hardware rather than new technology.Pistorius is asking parliament to approve nearly €140 billion ($160 billion) for defense next year, combining €109.7 billion from the core ministry budget — a 32.7% increase over 2026 — with roughly €30 billion drawn from the expiring Sondervermögen Bundeswehr, a special off-budget fund created in 2022 following Russia’s attack on Ukraine.The committee session Wednesday was part of ongoing scrutiny before the Bundestag’s final vote, expected in the chamber’s third reading on Nov. 27, following a reconciliation session in the budget committee on November 12.Speaking after the closed-door meeting, Pistorius rejected accusations — raised by some lawmakers and commentators — that the procurement plan favors old technology over modernization. He pointed to the Leopard 2A8 tank as a “high-tech” system rather than legacy equipment, and announced that the ministry will launch its first-ever dedicated funding program for civilian universities and research institutes working on defense-relevant technologies, including artificial intelligence and unmanned systems.On the Franco-German Main Ground Combat System, Pistorius acknowledged that the program’s original design may not survive in its current form. A day earlier, Germany and France had published a joint announcement that the project would be transitioned to pursuing “platform-independent technology” rather than a main battle tank. Pistorius said Berlin and Paris would need to agree “in the coming weeks” on shifting toward “a different, restructured project” given a threat environment he described as markedly changed from four or five years ago. The joint next-generation tank concept traces back all the way to 2012.Despite unified opposition from the right-wing AfD, the Greens and far-left Die Linke — who call the spending plan fiscally reckless or insufficiently transparent — the governing coalition holds the votes needed to pass the budget.

[Category: / Europe] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/23/26 7:15am
PARIS — Demand for sovereign satellite capabilities is growing in Europe as governments seek greater control over access to relevant infrastructure.The push comes after restrictions by the United States on satellite access in Ukraine and the Middle East over the past two years underscored the risk of dependence, executives and policy makers said at an industry conference here last week.“Sovereignty” was a recurring theme at the World Space Business Week, held from Sept. 14 to 17 in Paris, and the two-day Space Defense & Security Summit side event.U.S. firms touted their ability to build satellites in Europe or operate free from International Traffic in Arms Regulations, while European companies highlighted their ability to provide local clients with complete satellite systems.“The drive to sovereignty, we all have customers that want to go there,” said Noam Segal, the chief executive officer of Israeli firm ImageSat International, or ISI. “Any of the defense customers we are dealing with can find themselves in a geopolitical situation in which one of the suppliers will not be able to deliver. I think this is the driver.”The war in Ukraine has highlighted both the importance of satellite data on the modern battlefield and the reliance of Western militaries on U.S. suppliers for critical space capabilities. Restrictions on Starlink access in Ukraine, a halt in U.S. intelligence sharing with Ukraine in March 2025 and imagery restrictions over the Middle East in 2026 are pushing European countries to seek sovereign alternatives.The lesson from Ukraine has been to show how critical space has become for defense, as well as “the importance of indeed not being reliant on solutions you don’t control,” said Guillaume de la Brosse, head of the defense policy and innovation unit at the European Commission, the European Union’s executive arm.He said there is a “clear imperative” to accelerate development of sovereign space-based capabilities in Europe, meaning a minimum backbone of public assets owned by either the EU or member states, and an EU-based industry able to provide sovereign services “that we can control all the time.”“Sovereignty very much matters, this is what we’ve learned from Ukraine,” De la Brosse said. “That does not preclude the fact that we need cooperation, whatever happens, but that as a pre-requirement has sovereignty. It’s good to cut dependencies where we need to cut dependencies, and that’s very much the agenda of the upcoming years.”Recent history showed space sovereignty is the only ultimate guarantee of having the freedom to “assess and act when conflict breaks out,” said Jean-Baptiste Paing, a deputy director at France’s Directorate General for Armament whose responsibilities include intelligence and space operations. He cited the difficulty obtaining commercial satellite communications over Afghanistan and, more recently, access to commercial imaging during the various crises in the Middle East.The emergence of New Space, the shift from a government-dominated to a private space industry that has cut the cost of launchers and satellites, is allowing European governments to establish space sovereignty even with relatively limited budgets, executives said.The number of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance satellites for defense purposes, “a key priority for most nations,” is expected to increase more than fourfold through to 2035, according to industry consultancy Novaspace, which organized the conferences.New Space provides “an incredible opportunity” for countries that didn’t have a space industry to develop their own sovereign capabilities, said Vincent Dedieu, the CEO of Sodern, a unit of France’s ArianeGroup. He said Sodern has been working with countries such as Poland, Bulgaria and Finland, which are taking advantage of New Space to catch up in both defense and commercial space.The fact that customers are now able to own space assets at a “completely different cost point” from the past means the push for sovereign capabilities “is a strong trend that’s going to be there for the future,” according to Segal at ISI.There is a “seismic shift” in how industry and governments deal with space capabilities, said Julia Gottfriedsen, chief technology officer at German thermal-imaging startup Constellr. She cited the example of Germany buying data from ICEYE and Rheinmetall for its brigade in Lithuania, through a service-level agreement that shifted the risk for data supply to the companies.“So this is pretty modern and new, while in parallel, of course, the governments are also looking into procuring their own infrastructure,” Gottfriedsen said.Executives at U.S.-based geospatial intelligence firms such as Planet Labs, BlackSky and Vantor all noted that their satellites can be delivered ITAR-free, with several highlighting their European presence or ability to manufacture their satellites outside the Untied States.HawkEye 360 CEO John Serafini said partnerships with Italy’s Leonardo and Czechia’s ERA and having a Luxembourg subsidiary means he’s confident that “even as a U.S. company,” the firm can meet the requirement of European militaries “regardless of how those customers want the sovereignty delivered to them.”Planet Labs cut the ribbon on a new facility in Berlin this week, and co-Founder and Chief Strategy Officer Robbie Schingler said the company’s first German-built Pelican satellite is set to come off the production line by the end of the year and sent into orbit on a German-built Isar Aerospace rocket launched from Norway “sometime early next year.”Meanwhile, Finland’s ICEYE is taking sovereignty “to a whole different level” to fulfill a German order for a 40-satellite constellation, setting up a manufacturing site in western Germany controlled by a German-owned entity and keeping the entire supply chain within the country, according to CEO Rafal Modrzewski. That does require a sufficiently large order to justify the investment, he said.For European customers that own and operate a smaller number of ICEYE satellites, such as Sweden, Finland, Poland and the Netherlands, the company is now offering a software layer that allows countries to “federate their assets at the tactical level” and borrow each other’s capabilities to cover areas of interest, Modrzewski said.One element of sovereignty is assurance and control, another is choice, said Schingler at Planet Labs. The federation approach allows countries to network their systems for an ad hoc mission, “and that choice also gives a lot of sovereignty,” he said.The European Commission is pushing for international cooperation to remain the way of doing things in space, including through discussions with NATO about space security, even if “that cooperation is very much challenged, and there is a need for Europeans to do much more, investing in their freedom of action,” De la Brosse said.He said that as EU members invest heavily in space, one challenge is to avoid “renationalization of space policies,” and the commission is using the EU budget to provide an incentive to member states to coordinate investments and pool space resources rather than develop constellations without taking other member states into account.Germany’s plan to invest a “massive” €35 billion in sovereign military space capabilities by 2030 may raise concern among some EU members that the country will “fly solo,” but the investment is a legitimate sovereign choice, said Paing at the DGA.“I cannot speak for sovereignty myself without recognizing the same capacity in other countries, and I think it should be seen more as a model to follow for others rather than something to be afraid of,” Paing said. “That being said, I believe that this investment should nevertheless be put at the service of building a stronger Europe.”Sovereignty also includes the ability to get satellites into orbit, executives said, with several remarking on the scarcity of launch slots. Nicolas Lefort, the head of new markets at MBDA, said France’s Toutatis project to bring a maneuverable satellite into low-Earth orbit is still waiting for a launcher.François Lombard, the head of connected intelligence at Airbus Defence and Space, said he’s optimistic about new European players offering launchers capable of carrying one-ton payloads into LEO, citing a recent successful launch by Germany’s Isar Aerospace, as well as ArianeGroup’s MaiaSpace coming to the market “pretty soon.”“In that case, European alternatives, which is good,” Lombard said. “There are a few satellites we cannot launch from other continents, so it’s important that we have also the sovereign access to space for this class of satellites in a competitive manner.”

[Category: / Europe] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/23/26 6:58am
COLOGNE, Germany — German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has lobbied U.S. defense leaders to allow the production of PAC-3 MSE interceptor missiles in Germany, arguing an additional production site would help alleviate a glaring shortfall in the global supply chain for the vital air-defense weapons.Pistorius’ comments in Berlin on Wednesday offer more details about an agreement struck with his U.S. counterpart, Pete Hegseth, at the Pentagon last week. The German defense minister said the spirit of that accord reflects Berlin’s willingness to manufacture all elements of the Patriot value chain — PAC-2 and PAC-3 interceptors, launchers and all — in Germany, plus whatever other American weaponry is in short supply among allies.Germany’s MBDA already makes PAC-2 interceptors, a Raytheon product. The more advanced, and more expensive, PAC-3 MSE interceptors, on the other hand, are made by Lockheed Martin, which has a longstanding cooperation agreement in Germany with Rheinmetall, including in the missile sector.Whether PAC-3 production in Germany or elsewhere in Europe will come to pass is largely a matter of the U.S. government and Lockheed Martin playing along. Details would likely also depend on the scope of work happening abroad.The performance characteristics of Patriot interceptors are a closely guarded secret, as that information could allow adversaries to build countermeasures into their attack missiles. There is also a business decision wrapped up in the export of Patriot production, as the equipment has been a decades-old cash cow for the manufacturers and the U.S. government alike.Ukrainian leaders said in July they were promised by U.S. President Donald Trump that they would be able to make Patriot interceptors under license in Ukraine, though the details of that arrangement remain unclear.Patriot interceptors are a key defense against Russian missiles that have been battering Ukrainian cities.

[Category: / Europe] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 12:55pm
Navy destroyers are concentrated in the Middle East as U.S. forces conduct operations against Iran, according to U.S. Central Command — a move that puts renewed operational demands on a fleet that has experienced prolonged maintenance periods.As of Sept. 14, two Navy guided-missile destroyers were operating in the Red Sea and another 13 were in the Arabian Sea, according to the U.S. Naval Institute’s fleet tracker, which uses both Navy and public data. The demand facing the class has been significant, even before the start of the Iran war. The USS Carney spent 235 days deployed from September 2023 to May 2024 and conducted 51 engagements against Houthi-launched weapons, according to the Navy. The campaign demonstrated what operations around one of those chokepoints can demand from destroyers.When USS Carney returned in May 2024, then-Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti told the crew that the last time the Navy had directly engaged an enemy to that degree was during World War II.The renewed demand for destroyers in the Middle East comes as the Navy’s maintenance system has struggled to keep the fleet on schedule.U.S. Fleet Forces Command declined to discuss its current destroyer readiness posture, current operations or potential effects on future deployment schedules, citing operational-security and classification guidelines. The command also declined to provide historical aggregate data on destroyer operational tempo.According to a December 2025 Congressional Budget Office analysis of Navy maintenance data, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer overhauls that began between 2011 and 2024 took an average of 26% longer than the Navy’s final schedules estimated. The 225 DDG-51 overhauls CBO analyzed also required 8% more labor than scheduled.CBO projected that DDG-51 destroyers will spend an average of more than nine years, or about 27% of their planned service lives, in maintenance. That is more than twice the roughly four years envisioned in the Navy’s 2012 class maintenance plans.The federal budget agency identified several factors contributing to longer maintenance periods, including the aging fleet, postponed maintenance, late inspections and contract awards, unexpected additional work, delays in parts and materials and modernization work. The average age of the DDG-51 fleet rose from 10 years in 2011 to 20 years in 2024.The Government Accountability Office has found broader problems across the Navy’s conventional surface fleet.In a January 2025 review, GAO found that the Navy requested nearly $24.9 billion for combat-surface-ship maintenance from fiscal 2020 through 2023 and reported that nearly $25.9 billion was appropriated. The Navy reported obligating 99.7% of that funding by the end of fiscal 2023. Yet, GAO found that the service continued to face shortages of spare parts, insufficient qualified maintenance personnel and a continuing need to defer maintenance.CBO’s analysis covers maintenance events beginning in 2011 and points to longstanding factors, including the age of the destroyer fleet and postponed work.

[Category: Naval] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 12:15pm
The Royal Navy successfully launched a U.S. Navy Mk 48 Heavyweight Torpedo from a British Excalibur uncrewed underwater vehicle, or UUV, marking a significant step toward allied operational fleets of uncrewed vehicles.The successful Sept. 13 launch at the British Underwater Test & Evaluation Centre in Scotland highlights a major operational achievement for AUKUS Pillar 2 — a multilateral agreement between the U.S., U.K. and Australia to enable Uncrewed Undersea Vehicle payload systems that can be used across each country’s UUVs, according to the May 2026 agreement. While still just a proof of concept, the successful test, according to the Navy press release, “validated the mechanical, electrical, and software integration of a U.S. kinetic payload onto an allied autonomous vessel, proving that allied forces can rapidly achieve weapon interchangeability.”The allied cooperation and testing marks “a historic first for allied undersea warfare,” said Adm. Daryl Caudle, Chief of Naval Operations. “Proving that we can seamlessly launch a U.S. heavyweight torpedo from a Royal Navy autonomous underwater vehicle validates our shared vision for true interchangeability. By integrating weapons, payloads, and mission architectures across allied platforms, we are increasing the flexibility, scale, and combat power of our combined forces and ensuring they are ready to meet the strategic demands of tomorrow.”The latest version of the Mk 48, the MOD 7, a result of a Joint Development Program with the Royal Australian Navy, is optimized for both “traditional and emerging missions, according to the Navy, while the Excalibur, unveiled in May 2025, is the Royal Navy’s first uncrewed submarine.From video of the event, it appears that the Mk 48 torpedo was placed under the nearly 40-foot British submersible and launched from a cradle attached to the hull of the UUV. The Mk 48 torpedo, the U.S. Navy’s standard heavyweight torpedo, stands at 19 feet long with a 21-inch diameter. According to the U.K.’s Navy Lookout, “Excalibur has no torpedo tubes, but a large central payload bay with doors at the top and bottom. However, the Mk 48 torpedo… is too long to fit in the standard central payload bay.” With close coordination between the two navies, it is conceivable that future UUVs will deploy sophisticated weapon launch arrangements suitable for both British and American-made technologies. The successful deployment of the heavyweight torpedo is just the first step under AUKUS Pillar 2. This proof of concept is just the first step, however, as the U.S. and Royal Navy continue an aggressive “follow-on acceleration with Project CUTLASS” that will utilize the Anduril Dive-XL platform and tackle “advanced payload integration data, command and control architectures, and tactical employment scenarios to further mature uncrewed undersea capabilities,” per the release.

[Category: Naval] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 12:09pm
ROME — The F-35B fighter can take off on a very short runway, hover in the air and land vertically, but the Italian navy is about to find out whether it can also outrace a Ferrari.In an unusual race planned next month at the Navy’s air base at Grottaglie in southern Italy, one of its F-35Bs will go head-to-head with a Ferrari SF90 to see which has the punchier acceleration.“We are used to getting a result, but this will be tough,” said Fabio Barone, who will be behind the wheel of the SF90 after claiming seven speed records in a Ferrari.A Navy spokesman confirmed the race would go ahead.The first race on Oct. 11 will be over 500 meters on an aluminum runway used by the F-35Bs at Grottaglie for landing. At the end of the course the F-35B will take off.Barone said the car will normally accelerate from zero to 100 km/h in 2.8 seconds, but with special engine tuning it will do it in 2.6 seconds.That will allow the car to reach 330 km/h over the 500 meters and complete the course in 8-9 seconds.“With that acceleration, I will face 2.2g, meaning 140kg of pressure,” he said.“The F35B will make a slower start but has more power,” he added.A second race, on asphalt and aluminium, will be run over 2.8 km. After 500 meters the F-35B will take over and complete the race in flight atan altitude of about 20 metres.Barone, 54, said the car and the aircraft will race together on one 35 meter wide runway, meaning there will be just 15 meters between them.“We will be very close,” he said. “The challenge will be driving over the aluminium plates, which will create vibration,” he added.Asked why exactly he was keen to race against a jet fighter, Barone said, “Everyone can race against another car, and this is a chance to put on a show. Additionally, Michael Schumacher did it,” he said.In 2003, the former Formula One driver drove a Ferrari Formula One car in races with an Italian Air Force Eurofighter at Italy’s Grosseto air base - an event which drew a crowd of 50,000.The Eurofighter won 900- and 1,200–meter races without taking off. Schumacher however won a 600-meter race, accelerating from the starting line to reach 294 km/h and complete the course in 9.6 seconds, beating the Eurofighter by two-tenths of a second.Barone previously worked with the Italian Navy when he drove a Ferrari last year along the flight deck of the Navy’s new Trieste carrier vessel, reaching 164 km/h over about 200 meters before slamming on the brakes to avoid flying off the end of the ship.

[Category: / Europe] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 10:43am
When a U.S. Army helicopter went down near the Strait of Hormuz in June, an unmanned U.S. Navy vessel went looking for the crew.The Corsair, operated by U.S. 5th Fleet’s Task Force 59, helped recover two U.S. service members. A month later, three Corsairs were used for something entirely different: striking a submarine and ship maintenance facility at the Bandar Abbas naval base in Iran, marking the “first time American forces have employed sea drones in combat operations,” CENTCOM confirmed.The two missions illustrate how quickly unmanned systems have moved from experimentation and exercises into the demands of an active war.A U.S. official told Military Times that American forces are now using unmanned systems “on, above, and below [the sea],” in support of military objectives and said they have been effective, particularly in reducing risk to U.S. forces personnel.Joshua Tallis, director of Ally and Partner Security Affairs at the Center for Naval Analyses, or CNA, said real-world use of uncrewed systems gives the Navy an “unrivaled opportunity” to learn how to command and deploy robotic systems and refine their deployment, employment and sustainment.Deployment of unmanned systemsThe Navy began Task Force 59 in 2021 to accelerate the integration of unmanned systems and artificial intelligence into operations across the Middle East. The task force used unmanned platforms to expand maritime awareness and work alongside crewed ships and aircraft.In a 2022 exercise, unmanned vessels identified training targets and relayed information to command centers ashore, while the Navy said the additional sensors could help position crewed ships to respond more rapidly.By 2024, the service had established Task Group 59.1 to focus on the operational deployment of unmanned systems teamed with manned operators. Task Force 59 personnel participated in more than 30 exercises and operations under its previous commander, according to the Navy.The Navy’s February 2026 Fighting Instructions lay out specific roles for unmanned platforms. Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle described medium unmanned surface vessels as designed for “scouting, screening, and striking,” while identifying unmanned underwater vehicles for water-space denial, survey and mine warfare. The 2026 guidance also calls for attritable, easily replenishable unmanned surface vessels as part of the fleet’s force design.That Navy effort is now unfolding alongside a separate CENTCOM push to put unmanned systems directly into combat.CENTCOM has already begun building a combat-focused unmanned force. In December 2025, the command established Task Force Scorpion Strike as the military’s first dedicated one-way attack drone squadron in the Middle East. The task force employed low-cost one-way attack drones during Operation Epic Fury. At the same time, CENTCOM used unmanned attack vessels during the July strikes on Iranian port facilities, according to the command.In August, CENTCOM announced plans for Task Force Falcon Strike, a multinational, multidomain attack-drone task force that will use one-way attack drones from above, on and below the sea. CENTCOM said Falcon Strike would expand attack-drone capabilities across the Middle East with regional partners.The Fighting Instructions also envision unmanned and manned units operating with varying degrees of independence. Caudle said the Navy will use “Delegated Autonomy Levels” to define “what a unit manned or unmanned can do independently,” based in part on its ability to sense the battlespace, synthesize what matters and deliver effects without waiting for higher headquarters.Combat risksCombat puts additional demands on unmanned systems, including maintaining communications, operating for extended periods, navigating contested waters and remaining useful when an adversary is actively trying to interfere with them.The systems are no longer being judged only in an exercise environment. They are being judged in real time by what happens when an adversary is working to stop them.Despite the opportunities provided by deploying uncrewed systems in the current conflict, Tallis cautioned against drawing broad conclusions from it. The public examples from the war, he said, should be viewed as “an iterative learning moment, not a fully formed vision of the future fight.”Cost is one unresolved issue. Open-source estimates put a Corsair at about $1.1 million, Tallis said. That raises a broader question about what it means for an unmanned system to be considered “attritable,” “consumable” or “expendable.”The war has also exposed the risks that come with putting unmanned systems into contested waters.In September, Iran said it had captured an Anduril Dive-LD autonomous underwater vehicle that had malfunctioned while surveying regional waters. CENTCOM said the vehicle was an older model that did not collect sensitive data or carry classified sonar or radar equipment.More recently, CENTCOM said two Iranian boats attempted to take possession of a U.S. Saildrone unmanned surface vessel operating in the Strait of Hormuz. U.S. forces destroyed the boats, according to the command.According to Tallis, there is an unanswered question of how much risk the military should accept when deploying uncrewed systems, including how to determine when a system has delivered enough value to justify its loss. Many unmanned systems are cheaper than crewed platforms, he said, but “not, per se, cheap.”Tallis said unmanned systems remain particularly well suited to surveillance, consistent with their use by the U.S. over the past two decades. But there is not yet enough evidence to demonstrate a meaningful change in the use of unmanned surface vessels for strike. Search-and-rescue missions could also require platforms to be positioned across a theater to provide quick reaction times, something Tallis said does not yet appear to be widely fielded.

[Category: Unmanned] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 10:23am
An F-16 fighter jet assigned to the US air base Spangdahlem in western Germany crashed on Tuesday, the U.S. military said, adding that one pilot had ejected safely and was receiving medical treatment.The cause of the incident is under investigation, the military said in a statement, with emergency response personnel at the scene of the crash.Germany’s air traffic control authority, in a separate statement, said a total of four F-16s had been taking part in a training exercise.“Two were still in the training area, while two were returning to Spangdahlem Air Base. One of these two jets is believed to have crashed while on approach,” it said, adding the remaining F-16s had landed at the US Air Force base in Ramstein.

[Category: Air Warfare] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 9:18am
MANILA, Philippines — As Washington presses South Korea to contribute to securing the Strait of Hormuz, experts said Seoul is facing a military capacity dilemma, as forces could get stretched amid escalating threats from North Korea.The worry comes as Washington exerts pressure on South Korea to support U.S. operations in the Strait of Hormuz, where the war with Iran is choking worldwide oil supplies, even while North Korean threats escalate.The South Korean Army reported that the North had fired two ballistic missiles on Sunday and earlier this month launched a 5,000-ton guided missile destroyer in the Pacific.The security environment in East Asia raises a military allocation concern, especially since South Korean officials mentioned sending a “practical contribution” to U.S. efforts in the Middle East.“If such [U.S.] requests become recurrent, Seoul could face trade-offs between extra-regional missions and deterrence around the Korean Peninsula,” Ju Hyung Kim, president of Security Management Institute, a Seoul-based defense think tank, told Defense News.Last week, President Lee Jae Myeong had drawn the line and said there would be “no deployment to a war.”The government may instead extend the activities of the Cheonghae Unit, a naval task force group stationed in the Sea of Aden for counter-piracy operations.The Cheonghae Unit is a small maritime task group that includes a KDX-II destroyer, a maritime helicopter, as well as Marines, naval special forces and support personnel.The Cheonghae may be the “least burdensome option,” Kim said, and would allow the Lee government to skirt the domestic political costs of a troop deployment and provide a military contribution.While the range of operations could extend from Somalia to the Middle East, an expert based in Seoul told Defense News on condition of anonymity that the unit’s role will be limited to protecting South Korean ships and conducting humanitarian assistance activities.“I don’t see the possibility of upgrade or recalibration … given the current security situation in the region,” the expert said.Either way, the Cheonghae detachment would be navigating rough waters. Esmaeil Baqaei, spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, warned on Sept. 7 that any foreign military involvement in the strait could face serious consequences.Iranian academic Mohammad Marandi said that Tehran could regard South Korea as an enemy and target Korean economic and military assets across the Persian Gulf if Seoul joined a U.S.-led effort to secure the Strait of Hormuz.The warnings had escalated anxieties in Seoul, where the deployment question remains a point of contention.If South Korean personnel or assets are targeted, Lee would be pressured to either “escalate by deploying combat forces or to scale back to contain domestic backlash and protect his political standing,” Kim said.“Seoul would need to define the mission, geographical scope, rules of engagement and command arrangements very carefully, while also managing external expectations about what a ‘practical contribution’ actually entails,” Kim said.The government had begun to assess contribution requirements, which experts said are evident in an earlier recon mission to the United Arab Emirates to examine the Al Dhafra Air Base and Jebel Ali Port.Findings from the trip have not been made public. But a successive mission to Bahrain, which hosts the U.S. Fifth Fleet, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command and the multinational Combined Maritime Forces, “could involve examining basing, logistics, intelligence-sharing, maritime-domain awareness and coordination with multinational forces,” Kim said.The Cheonghae Unit may be enough to appease Washington for now, especially after Seoul committed a $20 billion investment in an energy project in Texas, Kim said.But the larger challenge is the precedent it might create: President Donald Trump might expect additional contributions as the conflict in the Middle East continues.And Kim said force allocation will become a graver concern if alliance commitments take South Korean assets far from the peninsula for a prolonged period of time.“A P-8A deployed to the Gulf, for example, cannot simultaneously perform maritime-surveillance or anti- submarine missions around the Korean Peninsula,” he said.“So the key question is not simply whether the Cheonghae Unit is sufficient now, but whether it becomes the beginning of recurring U.S. expectations for South Korean deployments beyond Northeast Asia,” Kim said.

[Category: / Asia Pacific] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 9:04am
The U.S. Army awarded Lockheed Martin a $1.2 billion contract for its short-range ballistic missiles.The indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract covers initial production and future orders of Increment 2 of the Precision Strike Missile, or PrSM, according to a Lockheed Martin announcement.“This award marks an important step in delivering PrSM Increment 2 to the warfighter,” Dave Griser, Lockheed Martin vice president for precision fires, said in the announcement. “We’re ready to move from flight testing into production and provide the Army with an expanded long-range precision fires capability.”PrSM is intended to replace the Army Tactical Missile System, first fielded in the early 1990s. It has a range of about 500 kilometers, versus about 300 kilometers for the ATACMS. PrSM can be launched from the M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System and the M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System.PrSM Increment 2 features a multimode seeker that can lock on to moving targets on land. It can also hit ships moving at sea, giving land-based launchers a maritime strike capability.Lockheed Martin is currently conducting flight testing of the new PrSM version.“PrSM Increment 2 completed its first flight test in March and its second flight test in August — obtaining critical data during flight, launching from a HIMARS, deploying protective covers and engaging the target,” the manufacturer said.More PrSM Increment 2 flight tests are scheduled for 2027.PrSM recently made its controversial combat debut in the Iran war. Analysts believe a PrSM missile, which sprays a cloud of pellets, killed dozens of civilians in the Iranian city of Lamerd on Feb. 28, the first day of U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran. U.S. Central Command has denied the accusation.The U.S. military faces a desperate shortage of strike and air defense missiles after expending vast numbers in Iran. This reportedly includes a lack of PrSM weapons.The new contract builds on the Department of Defense’s broader investment in ballistic missiles, according to Lockheed Martin.“Lockheed Martin is expanding capacity to quadruple PrSM production while continuing to develop additional PrSM increments,” the company said.

[Category: Industry] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 7:03am
COPENHAGEN/WASHINGTON — The U.S. plans to re-establish a Cold War-era military base in southern Greenland and set up another on the east coast, now used by the Danish dog sled patrol, under a deal to be signed with Denmark and Greenland on Tuesday, according to three people familiar with the matter.The sites are Narsarsuaq, whose population has dwindled to a few dozen people since the U.S. closed its Bluie West One military base in the 1950s, and Mestersvig, a military outpost used by the Sirius Dog Sled Patrol, a Danish special forces unit, said two of the people.Denmark, Greenland and the United States are expected to sign their new agreement at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City at 10:30 a.m. ET (1430 GMT) on Tuesday.The text of the agreement has not been made public and the three people familiar with the deal, speaking on condition of anonymity, said its details will not be finalized until it is signed.The governments of Denmark and Greenland did not immediately respond to a request by Reuters for comment.A White House spokesperson declined to comment on the details of the agreement, repeating an earlier statement that its signing on Tuesday would “secure and defend the security of Greenland and the United States.”Denmark says the agreement puts Arctic security under the watch of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the military defense alliance, rather than leaving it solely to the U.S. and Denmark.The deal follows months of pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump, who has long said he wants the U.S. to control Greenland and has at times refused to rule out military or economic force to acquire the semi-autonomous Danish territory. The idea has been rejected by an overwhelming majority of Greenlanders, polling shows.Trump’s threats, which peaked in January, triggered a diplomatic crisis within NATO and pushed Denmark and Greenland into negotiations with Washington aimed at defusing the pressure.During the Cold War, the US maintained 17 military installations and more than 10,000 personnel in Greenland. Today only Pituffik Space Base remains, with some 150 U.S. military personnel.

[Category: / Europe] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/22/26 4:30am
The United States is largely defenseless against Russian and Chinese aerial attacks. This is a major strategic problem in today’s era of massed drone and missile warfare—and no one is clearly in charge of solving it.President Trump’s February 2025 executive order, “The Iron Dome for America” (later rebranded as Golden Dome), directed the Department of Defense to protect U.S. citizens and infrastructure from all forms of aerial attack. The department took a first step toward assigning responsibility for a U.S. air and missile defense architecture by standing up the Golden Dome office. But critical elements of any near-term defensive shield remain outside its control: namely, the U.S. air and missile defense systems that have proven their worth on Ukrainian and Middle Eastern battlefields.The Aegis system, for example, is a U.S. Navy program—though its ballistic missile defense component is funded by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA). Patriot interceptors, in turn, belong to the Army. Theater High Altitude Aerial Defense (THAAD) batteries and the Ground Based Midcourse Defense System (GMDS) are developed by the MDA but operated and maintained by the Army. U.S. Northern Command is responsible for U.S. air surveillance but relies heavily on radars belonging to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) — and so on.Iran war has cost $38 billion, depleted two-thirds of US missile interceptors, CBO saysThe Golden Dome director’s position in the Defense Department hierarchy — reporting directly to the Deputy Secretary of Defense — reflects the urgency of the task. But it does not convey any actual authority to direct the decisions of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Transportation secretaries.Diffusion of responsibility is a recipe for failure.For Golden Dome to work, the Defense Department must draw on lessons from some of its most successful Cold War innovations — specifically, the organizational innovations that made its game-changing technologies and operational concepts possible. Admiral Hyman Rickover, perhaps the leading exemplar of Cold War innovation, took nuclear propulsion from the blackboard to the fleet in just five years.To quote Rickover: “Unless you can point your finger at the one person who is responsible when something goes wrong, then you have never had anyone really responsible.” Golden Dome fails this test, precisely because — according to the Defense Department itself — it is a “team effort” in which “we’re going to need all the services and agencies that do this kind of work to step up.”Rickover took the opposite approach. If something was critical to the Navy’s nuclear propulsion program, he established de facto (and often de jure) control over it. For example, he successfully co-opted the Cabinet-level Atomic Energy Commission. Established in 1947 to oversee all U.S. nuclear matters, the AEC was a potential bureaucratic roadblock. At Rickover’s prompting, therefore, the Navy issued him orders to “report for duty with the Division of Reactor Development” in the AEC (and to the Navy for “additional duty”).With one foot in the Navy and the other in the AEC, Rickover became the central U.S. authority for nuclear propulsion. This allowed him to coordinate the activities of two separate executive departments, often by proposing an action from one department and then convincing the other to approve it. His dual office, Naval Reactors, remains part of both the Navy and the Department of Energy (successor to the AEC) to this day.The Rickover approach is not how the Pentagon normally does business. “I can assure you,” Rickover told Congress in 1979, “that having one individual responsible for a total program is a unique concept within the Department of Defense.” But Rickover made it his business to acquire unchallenged authority over all areas that concerned “his” reactors.The Secretary of Defense must likewise assign total responsibility for Golden Dome, with autonomy and authority to match. This will entail taking the requisite authorities from their normal stewards and re-delegating them to the Golden Dome director.For example, ballistic missile defense responsibility is currently bifurcated between Golden Dome and the Missile Defense Agency. MDA should be moved under Golden Dome. Similarly, airspace surveillance operations and modernization are divided between DoD and the FAA, with the latter contributing the lion’s share. The Golden Dome director must have a Rickover-like dual assignment in the FAA. And if homeland defense is indeed an urgent priority, DoD should take a hard look at whether the Aegis and Patriot programs should be moved under Golden Dome as well.This process will be challenging, but far from impossible. And while Rickover’s nuclear power program is one of the most remarkable Cold War innovations, other success stories such as General Bernard Schriever’s Atlas ICBM and Undersecretary of Defense William Perry’s F-117 stealth fighter applied the same core insight: comprehensive organizational authority is just as important as any technological or industrial-base factor. DoD must heed this lesson if Golden Dome is to succeed.Thane Clare is a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

[Category: Opinion] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/21/26 3:12pm
A Nevada Air Force Base was picked to house General Atomics’ FQ-42, a week after the U.S. Air Force dubbed the Collaborative Combat Aircraft as Vengeance.On Friday, a new FQ-42 Vengeance aircraft was delivered to Creech Air Force Base, according to a Monday company release, and will continue regular test and evaluation operations to experiment with the new jet.“Every week, the Air Force is pushing forward with new and more impressive accomplishments using Vengeance. It’s amazing to think of how far this program has come in such a short amount of time,” Vice President of Advanced Programs Mike Atwood said in the release.The announcement follows two months after Creech conducted an Agile Combat Employment exercise using Anduril’s FQ-44 Fury, allowing airmen to carry out sorties and build foundational tactics and procedures that will mold how CCA are integrated into the force. Anduril has yet to announce which Air Force base will house Fury.Vengeance, which has an internal weapons bay and other low observability and boosted survivability features, flew alongside F-35 and F-15E Strike Eagles in preparation for collaborative control operations with manned aircraft, per the statement.Recently, Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink revealed that the service expects to have at least 500 autonomous aircraft in service by 2032, with them meant to perform many of the same missions manned fighters complete currently. “By then, our special operators will have the ability to employ thousands of autonomous one-way attack systems, and we will have autonomous fighters like the Collaborative Combat Aircraft,” Meink said during last week’s keynote address at the Air & Space Forces Association’s 2026 Air, Space & Cyber Conference.General Atomics said the company completed a new “low-observable paint facility” aimed at supporting CCA production with increased manufacturing space, and the company is on track to deliver six aircraft per month.Vengeance’s production is underway on General Atomics’ dime as “government funding plans mature,” per the statement, in an effort to prevent delays in delivery. The service’s fiscal 2027 request included $996.5 million in procurement funding for the CCA program. It also requests $150 million in advanced procurement for the following fiscal year and $1.37 billion in continued research and development. The total program request is $2.37 billion.

[Category: / MilTech] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/21/26 8:22am
Twenty-six days after the Pentagon’s deadline for defense companies to propose faster weapons production, the Defense Department has not publicly disclosed how many companies responded or what production timelines they offered.Deputy Defense Secretary Steve Feinberg gave industry leaders until Aug. 26 to submit plans for “significantly faster, more aggressive delivery schedules and/or increased production for critical capabilities,” according to his Aug. 5 memo.Feinberg directed companies to identify ways to accelerate production and delivery, propose capital investments and facility expansions and explain how the Pentagon could enable higher production. The memo identified 16 critical programs under consideration for accelerated production or increased procurement. The responses were intended to inform the department’s fiscal 2028 budget request. The request came as the use of U.S. weapons during the Iran war put pressure on stocks of air-defense interceptors and other precision munitions. U.S. inventories of Patriot interceptors had fallen from about 2,330 before the war to between 759 and 827 by the end of July, according to a Center for Strategic and International Studies analysis. THAAD stocks had fallen from 452 to between 234 and 278. CSIS estimated production timelines of about 42 months for PAC-3 MSE interceptors and 53 months for THAAD interceptors.The Pentagon did not respond to questions about how many companies responded to Feinberg’s request or whether the department had accepted or funded any of the proposals.General Dynamics also declined to discuss its communications with the department.“We are not able to comment on our communications with the Department of War,” a General Dynamics spokesman said.Lockheed Martin, a major supplier of U.S. missile-defense systems, did not provide a specific production timeline in response to questions from Military Times.“We continue to have dialogue with the U.S. government to deliver what the department is asking of us and our team is pushing to do even more, faster,” a Lockheed Martin spokesman said. “We’re making significant investments in our workforce, infrastructure and production capacity and working with key suppliers to accelerate delivery of the critical capabilities that strengthen America’s Arsenal of Freedom.”Lockheed separately announced Thursday that it had received its first PAC-3 MSE housing components from GM Defense, 22 days after the companies signed a production contract. The company said the components, which can traditionally take months or years to produce, were manufactured using GM’s casting and machining capabilities.Lockheed said it is investing $8 billion to $9 billion to expand munitions production, including new buildings, facility expansions and thousands of jobs at more than 20 U.S. sites. The company also said planned expansions will increase its munitions production and warehousing space by nearly 50%.The company did not say whether those investments were submitted as part of Feinberg’s Aug. 5 request.New agreementsThe Pentagon was already using framework agreements and contracts to accelerate production before Feinberg’s deadline. On July 27, the department announced seven-year framework agreements intended to boost production of propulsion components for PAC-3 MSE and THAAD interceptors. L3Harris said its PAC-3 agreement would nearly triple production of certain propulsion products, while its THAAD agreement was intended to quadruple production of key propulsion components.On Aug. 3, the defense department, in cooperation with Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin, announced two framework agreements to expand production capacity for critical PAC-3 and THAAD interceptor components. The agreements were intended to support the department’s goals of tripling PAC-3 production capacity and quadrupling THAAD production capacity.On Aug. 14, DoD announced two separate framework agreements with Boeing and RTX to increase production of components for SM-3 Block IB and SM-3 Block IIA interceptors. On Aug. 17, the Pentagon announced a $22.9 billion Navy contract with RTX to accelerate production of Tomahawk missiles.On Aug. 31, five days after the industry deadline, the Pentagon announced additional seven-year multiyear procurement agreements with Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics designed to increase production quantities and accelerate delivery schedules for critical missile subcomponents supporting PAC-3 MSE and THAAD. The Pentagon separately identified production goals of tripling PAC-3 MSE production capacity and quadrupling THAAD production capacity, with funding subject to annual appropriations from Congress.The public announcements did not identify those agreements as resulting from companies’ responses to Feinberg’s Aug. 5 request.What remains unclear is whether the 21-day exercise changed what the Pentagon plans to buy, how quickly it expects industry to deliver it or what additional funding and infrastructure the department will seek in its fiscal 2028 budget request.

[Category: Pentagon] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/21/26 8:11am
The United States is watching China’s presence in its Arctic zone “very closely” amid concerns regarding the security of the U.S. homeland, a senior U.S. Arctic military official said.So far in 2026, four Chinese research vessels have conducted work offshore in the U.S. Arctic, compared to a total of five in 2025, Rear Adm. Bob Little, commander of the U.S. Coast Guard’s Arctic District, told Reuters.The Chinese ships sailed in the maritime zones off the U.S. state of Alaska, including the Aleutian Islands, into the Bering Strait and as far north as the North Pole, he said during a visit to Oslo to speak at a conference on Arctic security. “Where I have responsibility, interest and concern is when they are operating in and around U.S. sovereign space,” said Little.“So inside of our exclusive economic zones, or over our extended continental shelf, we certainly have a security concern. And so those are the types of activities that we see that we’re watching very closely.” The ships remained in international waters but had not notified the U.S. of their presence in advance through diplomatic channels, as would be the usual practice. “When we challenge them and query them as to the purpose of their activities, their response typically is either ‘we are conducting operations in international waters’ or ‘we are conducting scientific research,’” he said. CONCERNS The concern is two-fold. One is that China may be involved in scientific research focused on the mineral exploitation of the seabed in an area that belongs to the U.S., Little said. The other is that these vessels conduct activity that might “provide [the Chinese] with a military advantage or pose a security threat to the United States,” said Little, whose area of operations is nearly as vast as Europe.China, which calls itself a “near-Arctic” state and wants to create a “Polar Silk Road” in the Arctic, has stepped up its presence in the polar region in recent years, sometimes in joint operations with Russia and sometimes alone. While in Norway, Little discussed with international colleagues how they were dealing with similar activities by Russian research vessels.“Whether it’s the Barents (Sea) or the Baltic (Sea), it’s easy to find examples of hybrid threats and activities,” he said. “So I certainly watch that very carefully, because it’s the same nation-state that’s my neighbor on the western side of the Arctic,” he said, referring to Russia. Moscow denies that its research vessels conduct illegal activity or that it poses any threat to U.S. interests.

[Category: / Asia Pacific] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/21/26 7:27am
After overseeing a purge of Pentagon advisory committees last year, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is adding a new one to the list, focused on homeland security and defense.Announced in the Federal Register Sept. 11, the Homeland Defense Board aims to fill a gap Hegseth sees in providing military guidance to homeland security missions.“The specific, integrated advice required by the SecWar regarding the military’s mission of defense of the Homeland and Homeland security cooperation is not available from any other Federal advisory committee, government agency, or alternative source,” establishing documents state.“Department of war” and “secretary of war” are the Trump administration’s preferred monikers for the Defense Department and its head. Legislation to legally change the agency name is pending in Congress.“While other agencies and departments operate within specific mission or geographic areas, their advisory mechanisms are statutorily constrained to their respective non-military domains,” the panel’s establishing documents add. “Relying solely on internal DoW staff or contracted studies is also insufficient, as it fails to provide the consensus-based, independent, and external peer review required at the highest levels of strategic decision-making.”The board is to consist of up to 20 members, including the secretary of defense, who will serve as chair; the assistant secretary of defense for Homeland Defense and Americas Security Affairs as vice chair; and the deputy assistant secretaries of defense for Homeland Defense and Defense Continuity and Mission Assurance.Also on the board will be one civilian and one field- or mid-grade officer from each military branch and “such other members as the SecWar or the Deputy Secretary of War may appoint or designate,” establishing documents state.Asked for comment, an official said the Pentagon had “nothing to provide” about the new board’s creation.The advisory board is the first of its kind for the Pentagon focused on homeland security, and the announcement argues that no other agency’s board can fill the need that defense leaders now see. The Department of Homeland Security’s Homeland Security Advisory Council cannot fill the role because it focuses on civilian law enforcement and “lacks the mandate to advise on Title 10 or Title 32 [domestic troop] deployments” and military-specific crises, it states.It also finds the Department of State’s International Security Advisory Board, with its focus on diplomacy and arms control, “underequipped” to deliver strategies for military campaign plans in the Americas.“Over the past 10 years, rather than lessening, the threat from peer, near-peer, and rogue-state adversaries, in addition to non-state actors and hostile asymmetric activities, has become more intense and complex,” justifying documents continue. “The DoW provides for the common defense of American citizens and the Homeland by deploying and maintaining the premier warfighting force across the globe to provide a multi-domain, layered defense … In an era where peer and near-peer adversaries are actively projecting economic, cyber, and military power into the Western Hemisphere, the HDB will provide critical, independent assessments of the DoW’s hemispheric defensive posture and domestic security preparedness.”The large-scale deployment of National Guard troops to U.S. cities to support law enforcement; the ongoing deployment of troops to the southern border; and the aggressive move into drug interdiction missions traditionally executed by the U.S. Coast Guard have all blurred the lines between the mission sets of the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security. The establishing memo suggests the new board will create a bridge between the two that didn’t previously exist.“The [Homeland Defense Board] will … provide the SecWar advice and recommendations necessary for strategic oversight for multi-theater security cooperation and multi-domain actions, validating that DoW resource investments and allocations are successfully countering foreign influence, disrupting transnational criminal networks, and building robust partner-nation military capabilities,” it states. “Finally, the HDB’s advice and recommendations will serve an essential function by bridging the gap between the military and domestic Homeland security agencies to secure the defense critical infrastructure, vital transport networks and logistics nodes and the defense industrial base. Without this advisory body, the DoW risks strategic blind spots in its primary mission to protect the Homeland.”According to the General Services Administration, there are now roughly 40 federal advisory committees serving the Pentagon. In March 2025, shortly after taking office, Hegseth dismissed all members of existing boards to conduct a “zero-based review” of their necessity and contribution to “warrior ethos.” Among boards terminated at the review’s conclusion were the 75-year-old Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services and the Defense Advisory Committee for the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct.

[Category: Pentagon] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/21/26 3:52am
COPENHAGEN — Denmark, Greenland and the United States are set to sign a deal on Greenland’s security on Tuesday, an agreement Denmark says will put Arctic security under NATO’s watch rather than leaving it solely to Washington and Copenhagen.The agreement, expected to be signed at the UN General Assembly in New York on Tuesday, has not been made public, though President Donald Trump says it grants the U.S. “permanent control.” Denmark and Greenland have not commented on Trump’s claim but said the deal will benefit the Arctic island and respect its sovereignty.The deal follows months of pressure from Trump, who has said the United States should control Greenland and at times refused to rule out using military or economic force to acquire the semi-autonomous Danish territory. His threats, which peaked in January, triggered a diplomatic crisis within NATO and pushed Denmark and Greenland into negotiations with Washington aimed at defusing the pressure.“It (the agreement) will be in a form where responsibility for security in the Arctic is not only Danish or American,” Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen told national broadcaster TV2 on Sunday. He added that to a large extent “it would be NATO that looks after the Arctic”.‘Security, stability and cooperation’A NATO spokesperson said on Saturday that the alliance welcomed the agreement, which would “help advance security, stability and cooperation in this vital region.”Rasmussen, who travelled to New York overnight, declined to discuss the contents of the agreement.“But we have said from the start that we are open to accommodating the United States’ legitimate security interests,” Rasmussen told Danish news agency Ritzau on Monday.Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Friday the agreement gives the United States “permanent control over security, and all other needs, in Greenland,” and that no U.S. adversary could have a base or military presence there without Washington’s written approval. Denmark has not responded to Trump’s claim, though Copenhagen has earlier acknowledged it underinvested in Greenland’s defense for decades and has pledged to expand its military presence on the island, including more NATO troops.Key details have not been made public, including whether the deal amends the 1951 defense agreement that is the legal basis for the U.S. presence in Greenland. Greenland’s government has sought to reassure the public about the deal.Erik Jensen, an opposition lawmaker in Greenland, wrote on Facebook that he had read the draft agreement: “I feel reassured and am not worried,” he said, adding that the island’s foreign minister was handling the work well.

[Category: / Europe] [Link to media]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 9/18/26 11:44am
The U.S. Department of State said on Thursday it had approved the potential sale of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, as the kingdom is drawn deeper into war in the Middle East.A sale would mark a significant policy shift from the U.S., potentially altering the balance of military power in the Middle East and testing Washington’s definition of maintaining its ally Israel’s “qualitative military edge.” Saudi Arabia made a direct appeal for the jets in early 2025 to U.S. President Donald Trump and has long been interested in Lockheed Martin’s fighter.The estimated $24.3 billion sale, which still needs congressional approval, would include 48 of the military aircraft and 49 Pratt & Whitney engines along with communications equipment, spare parts and other support items, the State Department said.Washington weighs weapons sales to the Middle East in a way that ensures Israel maintains a “qualitative military edge”, effectively guaranteeing that Israel gets more advanced U.S. weapons than regional Arab states. The Saudi embassy in Washington welcomed the proposed sale, describing it as a further step in defense cooperation between the two countries.“The proposed F-35 sale reflects the strength and enduring nature of the Saudi-U.S. strategic partnership and the continued advancement of our defense cooperation,” the embassy said on X.The F-35, built with stealth technology that allows it to evade enemy detection, is considered the world’s most advanced fighter jet. Israel has operated the aircraft for a decade, building multiple squadrons, and remains the only Middle Eastern country to possess the system.Saudi Arabia, the largest customer for U.S. arms, has sought the fighter for years as it looks to modernize its air force and counter regional threats, particularly from Iran. The kingdom’s renewed push for what would constitute two squadrons comes as the Trump administration has signaled openness to deepening defense cooperation with Riyadh. The Saudi Air Force flies a mix of fighter aircraft including Boeing F-15s, European Tornados and Typhoons.The F-35 issue has also been intertwined with broader diplomatic efforts. The administration of former U.S. President Joe Biden previously explored providing F-35s to Saudi Arabia as part of a comprehensive deal that would have included Riyadh normalizing relations with Israel, though those efforts ultimately stalled.Trump has made arms sales to Saudi Arabia a priority since returning to office. In 2025, the United States agreed to sell the kingdom an arms package worth nearly $142 billion, which the White House called “the largest defense cooperation agreement” Washington has ever done.Congressional scrutiny could pose challenges to any F-35 sale. Lawmakers previously questioned arms deals with Riyadh following the 2018 murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and some members of Congress remain wary of deepening military cooperation with the kingdom.Saudi Arabia is pursuing ambitious economic and military modernization plans under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030 agenda. It has sought to diversify its defense partnerships while maintaining its decades-long security relationship with Washington.

[Category: / MilTech] [Link to media]

As of 9/23/26 2:39pm. Last new 9/23/26 12:58pm.

Next feed in category: Defense Breaking