Crooked Bough News Round-up

— Safeguarding federally funded innovation: Navigating the new era of research security

 

at 6/5/26 1:08pm

LIVE WEBINARDate: June 24, 2026Time: 2pm ET / 11am PT TITLE: Research security and the effort to protect federally funded innovationParticipants can earn 1 CPE credit As the Pentagon places new emphasis on the security of technical research, universities, government agencies, and other institutions are under greater pressure to protect basic and applied research from foreign exploitation. The challenge goes beyond traditional espionage and IP theft, reaching into grantmaking, international collaboration, disclosure practices, and the policies meant to keep government-funded innovation from flowing to potential adversaries.In this Breaking Defense webinar, we convene a panel of experts to examine how the US research security landscape is evolving, with an emphasis on new DoD policies and their implementation at the funder and grant recipient levels. The webinar will also explore how organizations are taking more risk-based approaches to their due diligence, from reviewing international collaboration footprints to identifying disclosure gaps and improving the use of additional open source and internal agency or research organization data. AGENDA: We’ll discuss the following: Why research security has emerged as a more urgent national security issue How foreign actors can exploit largely unclassified research environments DoDs recent policy and decision-making updates How funding agencies and universities are approaching research-security compliance What partner models, including Canadas, may suggest for US policy and practice LEARNING OBJECTIVES: The policy push to better protect basic and applied research The tension between academic openness and national security requirements How institutions assess collaboration, funding, and disclosure risks The difference between inadvertent omissions and more serious misconduct How research security programs can integrate data from multiple functions What a measured, risk-based approach looks like in practice 1 CPE credit eligibleField of Study: Business Management & OrganizationIn order to receive full credit, you must respond to all three polling questions asked during the live program. hbspt.forms.create({ portalId: '2097098', formId: 'fb39cab2-3167-4001-b966-109e7aea605e', target: '#hubspot-form-fb39cab2-3167-4001-b966-109e7aea605e', });

[Category: Networks & Digital Warfare, Business & Industry, cyber security, cybersecurity, defense industrial base, Federal Funding, government, Innovation, national security, networks, Pentagon, Research, research and development, Research Security, technology, Webinar]

— A message from Normandy, 82 years later

 

at 6/5/26 11:32am

There is a name on a cross in a sea of crosses on a hillside in Normandy. Each of those names was once on the lips of loved ones as they called out to ardent young men who had their whole lives in front of them. Their names echoed on the nearby cliffs and beaches below, shouted by their brothers in arms in a hellscape of terror as they stood together against a gale-force of  tyranny that had very nearly swept the world. The scene at the Omaha Beach landing that greeted 1st Lieutenant Jimmie Monteith Jr. and the 1st Infantry Division’s first wave assault was one of utter chaos and horror. Everything in the sequencing of the attack that could go wrong had gone worse. Unanticipated cloud cover blinded high-altitude allied bombers targeting the German defenses near the beach. Adolf Hitler’s “Atlantic Wall” of fortresses and bunkers stretching from Norway to the northern coast of Spain remained intact and deadly.  On Omaha a well-camouflaged lattice work of enemy pillboxes, bunkers and artillery positions were still dug into the steep bluffs, the Germans looking down on more than 200 yards of open beach through gun scopes. Stormy weather and an unexpectedly strong tidal current swept many of the landing craft off course, including those carrying tanks meant to offer cover and supporting fire to the landing party. Many of the tanks that made it to the beach on the first wave were quickly destroyed by German anti-tank guns.  As soon as the landing craft ramps dropped, their floors already awash in the vomit of seasick soldiers, whole squads were eviscerated by the concussive impact of machine gun fire. Others stumbled out of the boats and immediately sank to the bottom weighted down with heavy equipment and drowned. Nearly half of the men in some boats died before ever making it to Omaha Beach, and many of those who made it to the sand cowered behind cross-beamed tank barriers for precious cover, frozen in shock by the scene of carnage. Many of their friends lay shot or blown to bits at their feet. “So here we are, all seasick, ahead of everyone else, no bomb craters to get in, and heading straight into machine gun fire,” Private First Class John Robertson would later recall. “That was my definition of Hell.” Young Monteith understood that staying on the beach meant almost certain death, but charging ahead seemed suicidal. Yet he repeatedly exposed himself to withering fire to rally his men to assault across the open beach. He gathered the survivors who reached cover at the foot of the bluff and led them through minefields and up the hillside where they assaulted a German bunker and captured the critical high ground, opening a route to the bluff and unhinging the interlinked enemy defenses. Montieth perished in the assault and received a posthumous Medal of Honor for his courage and inspiring leadership when it was needed most. He was 26 years old.  Seven other US service members received the Congressional Medal of Honor, the nation’s highest award for valor, for their actions during the D-Day assault and Normandy campaign that followed. They include Private First Class Charles N. Deglopper, a glider infantryman with the 82nd Airborne Division, who even after suffering wounds advanced on a German unit firing his BAR machine gun in order to give his buddies time to withdraw from a bridge across the Merderet River, dying in the effort; Lt. Col. Robert G. Cole, 101st Airborne Division, drew his .45 pistol and led a successful bayonet charge to relieve members of his pinned-down battalion, and was killed months later; Sgt. Frank Peregory, of the National Guard’s 116th Infantry, attacked a German machine gun position with grenades and a bayonet, killing eight enemy soldiers and capturing 35 others, before being killed on June 14; Corporal John D. Kelley, 79th Division, singlehandedly attacked a German pillbox outside of the critical port of Cherbourg, taking it out on his third attempt, before being killed in action months later; and Brig. Gen. Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., assistant commander of the 4th Infantry Division and son of the 26th US President, who despite poor health submitted four requests to be allowed to land with the first wave assault on Utah Beach, where he exposed himself repeatedly to enemy fire to rally his men against the Germans. He died of a heart attack little over a month after D-Day.   Lt. Carlos C. Ogden, 79th Division, advanced on an enemy unit alone after it pinned down his company. Armed only with an M-1 rifle and hand grenades he captured a big German 88-mm gun and a machine gun despite being shot in the head. He survived the ordeal and ended the war as a major. Staff Sergeant Walter Ehlers, 1st Infantry Division, fought his way off Omaha Beach in the second wave, and later destroyed several German machine gun nests and carried a wounded fellow soldier to safety despite suffering his own serious wounds. Ehlers survived the war, but lost his brother Roland Ehlers who was killed on Omaha Beach on D-Day. Remarkably, the Normandy American Cemetery above Omaha Beach is the final resting place of 39 pairs of brothers, as well as a father and son, Col. Ollie Reed and Lt. Ollie Reed Jr. The eight Medals of Honor bestowed for actions during the D-Day campaign are meant to shine a light on extreme valor. I know from research on my own book “In the Company of Heroes: The Inspiring Stories of Medal of Honor Recipients from America’s Longest Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq,” that the nation’s highest award for valor serves most importantly as a spotlight illuminating episodes of collective courage under fire. Turn the prism on those narratives even a fraction and you will see reflected within thousands of other stories that culminated in a choice to overcome fear rather than take the safe way out, each a brush with eternity. Many ended with a white cross on the bluff above Omaha Beach. Nearly ten thousand U.S. war dead are interred at the Normandy American Cemetery, along with the names of roughly 1,500 others whose remains were never recovered. (James Kitfield) Gen. Omar Bradley, the US Army commander who directed the D-Day assault from the deck of the nearby cruiser Augusta, had it right when he later wrote that “every man who set foot on Omaha Beach that day was a hero.” That goes for the entire allied force that fought for three months in Normandy to pave the way for the liberation of Paris and the final reckoning with Adolf Hitler’s murderous Nazi regime in Berlin. They suffered staggering losses in those short few months that totaled more than 225,000 dead, wounded or missing. That number includes 134,000 Americans, 91,000 British, Canadians and Poles, and an estimated 18,000 French civilians killed during the Normandy campaign. Nearly ten thousand of the US war dead are interred at the Normandy American Cemetery, and the names of more than 1,500 others whose remains were never recovered are etched on a circular “Wall of the Unknown” under the inscription “Comrades in arms whose resting place is known only to God.” D-Day was a rare inflection point in history, an audacious and in many ways desperate gambit: an amphibious assault across storm foamed seas against an entrenched and battle-hardened foe, the brutal conquerors of the European continent. There would be no coming back from failure. If the allies were repulsed on June 6, 1944, the receding tide would carry the last best hope for democracy and self-rule back out to sea along with the blood of thousands that foamed the waters red that day. The German high command knew it too: “The first twenty-four hours of the invasion will be decisive,” Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, commander of the German defense, presciently declared before the attack. “The fate of Germany depends on the outcome. For the Allies as well as for Germany, it will be the longest day.” Yet that longest day determined much more than the immediate fate of two opposing armies. There was a far higher ideal that hung precariously in the balance, and both sides knew it in their souls: one side fought for conquest, the other for liberation. An inscription on the wall of the Normandy American Cemetery speaks to the essence of that contrast: “If ever proof were needed that we fought for a cause and not conquest, it could be found in these cemeteries,” noted the late Gen. Mark W. Clark, former Chairman of the American Battle Monuments Commission. “Here was our only conquest: All we asked…was enough soil in which to bury our gallant dead.” That was the inheritance those service members risked and sacrificed everything to pass down, the founding principal that US forces traveled under the banner of liberators against regimes of oppression. The trust in a powerful nation’s limited ambition that ideal engendered was bolstered by the post-World War II Marshall Plan for the reconstruction of Europe, including the defeated foes of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. It underwrote formation of NATO, the most successful military alliance in history. They were the foundation stones of the World America Built, one that has lasted more than eighty years and produced one of the most prosperous periods in human history, as well as the most peaceful among major powers. For all the terrible geopolitical mistakes and dead ends pursued by fallible leaders in Washington, D.C. over those decades, rarely did allies have serious reason to doubt fundamental American intentions. There can be no coming back from squandering that kind of inheritance.  Today the forces of empire lust and ultranationalism are loosed again upon Europe, with hundreds of thousands already killed in a brutal war of conquest. Another autocratic hegemon arises in the east to challenge our allies in the Indo-Pacific. War toxins have spread to poison the Middle East. Doubts have arisen about America’s intensions and trustworthiness that have not darkened allied counsels in over half a century. As you pass through the tunnel of the visitor’s center at the American Cemetery a woman’s voice intones from a speaker the name of each US service member who endured everything and gave their last full measure of devotion in the assault on Omaha Beach in the cause of freedom. Outside each of their names can be found on a sea of white crosses on a green hillside in Normandy.  Listen closely to the sound of “Taps” as it plays each day at the furling of the American flag on that bluff, and you can still hear their voices on the wind. They have important news to pass along. James Kitfield is the author of “In the Company of Heroes: Inspiring Stories from Medal of Honor Recipients in America’s Longest Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” and a three-time recipient of the Gerald R. Ford Award for Distinguished Reporting on National Defense.

[Category: Global, Opinion, D-Day, Medal of Honor, Normandy]

— Navy lifts price ceiling for new trainer jet

 

at 6/5/26 10:48am

WASHINGTON — After pushback from industry, the Navy has boosted the budget for developing a new training jet by roughly $900 million, the service confirmed to Breaking Defense. The Navy in March originally solicited bids for the Undergraduate Jet Training System with a ceiling of roughly $1.8 billion for the aircrafts engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase, a price cap that included up to seven low-rate initial production aircraft. But in May, the service raised the price ceiling to $2.7 billion, according to an updated request for proposals. “The Government updated the price cap to reflect a change in the program cost estimate due to new information received,” Naval Air Systems Command said in a statement to Breaking Defense.  Aviation Week, who previously reported the Navy is seeking to order up to 216 aircraft, first reported the price cap increase.  Several defense firms are competing for the new trainer jet, including Textron Aviation Defense, who is offering the Beechcraft M-346N as part of a partnership with Leonardo. A spokesperson for Textron said in a statement to Breaking Defense that the firm “remains focused on delivering a proven training solution in the Beechcraft M-346N that meets the Navy’s Undergraduate Jet Training System mission needs.” SNC, along with Northrop Grumman and General Atomics, is offering its Freedom Trainer. A spokesperson for SNC did not respond to a request for comment from Breaking Defense by press time. However, Jon Piatt, SNC executive vice president for ISR, aviation and security, previously raised concern about the programs original $1.8 billion budget in an interview with Breaking Defense. “I am a little bit surprised that for something this important, for the next generation of trainer, that the Navy would make a decision to put a cap on a development program that is already going to be hamstrung by budget constraints in the first two years of what has currently been budgeted,” Piatt told Breaking Defense in April. “It’s a big challenge. It could be a big obstacle.” Boeing has previously said it is competing for UJTS, but declined to comment and referred Breaking Defense to the Navy.  Meanwhile, Breaking Defense first reported in April that Lockheed Martin had exited the trainer jet competition after it was lined up to offer the TF-50N with Korea Aerospace Industries. When asked if the firm would reconsider entering the competition given the new price cap, a spokesperson for Lockheed Martin said: “We continually evaluate opportunities across our portfolio to ensure alignment with our customers missions and our business strategy. “We remain committed to providing the best capabilities to our U.S. military and global partners and will continue to engage with our customers to understand their evolving requirements,” the spokesperson said in a statement.  Michael Marrow contributed to this report. 

[Category: Air Warfare, Naval Warfare, Air Force, aviation, Boeing, Lockheed, Navy, SNC, Textron, Textron Aviation Defense]

— Under ‘Drone Dominance’ push, Pentagon begins receiving small drones

 

at 6/5/26 10:15am

WASHINGTON —The Pentagon has begun accepting small, one-way attack drones as part of its larger push to boost production and provide every squad with the weapon later this year, according to the programs website. In total, the Department of Defense has ordered a total of 20,000 small, first-person view (FPV) drones from 10 of the top 11 vendors that competed in its Gauntlet 1 competition, according to the Drone Dominance Leaderboard website. That figure is 10,000 shy of the previously predicted order figure, though the company in third place, Napatree, has not yet been awarded a deal. According to Leaderboard, Neros, which produces the Archer small quadcopter, is leading deliveries, having shipped all 2,400 of its ordered drones to the military with 1,040 of those accepted. The rest of the pack has now shipped a combined 560 drones to the Pentagon, all awaiting acceptance, while the remaining drones are in various states of production. Cheap, FPV-style drones have played a prominent role in the Ukrainian and Russian war, leaving a string of combat vehicles from both sides smoldering on the battlefield. As the US has gleaned lessons from that conflict, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a directive last summer to “unleash” the drone industrial base, and have every squad outfitted with the small, one-way attack drones by the end of fiscal 2026.“While global military drone production skyrocketed over the last three years, the previous administration deployed red tape,” Hegseth wrote in the Unleashing US Military Drone Dominance memo. “US units are not outfitted with the lethal small drones the modern battlefield requires.” The Pentagon is now moving out with a broader plan to spend roughly $1 billion purchasing drones within a two-year window. As part of that push, it hosted the initial “Gauntlet” competition consisting of 25 companies competing before ranking the top 11 vendors. Separately, the department tapped five additional companies as winners of a “lethality” challenge — Bravo Ordnance, Kela Defense, Kraken Kinetics, Mountain Horse and Northrop Grumman — to possibly provide payloads for Group 1 drones, those weighing 20 lbs. or less. Looking ahead, the department is planning to host a second Gauntlet event to find drones ideally suited for long-range strike and tactical assault in close quarters operations. So far, the department’s website said 49 companies have been asked to bring 79 “unique” drones to Camp Grayling, Mich., for a qualifier event. As the department moves out with its Gauntlet-style approach for evaluating various types of drones, the services are continuing to test and buy drones. Earlier this week, for example, the Army announced that it has awarded Griffon Aerospace with a $68 million deal to deliver an unspecified number of Outlaw Gen 3 drones by the end of March 2027 “in support” of the US war against Iran. While a company official declined to provide details about the Gen 3 design, the Outlaw Gen G2E is listed as a fixed-wing aircraft that is 8.7 ft. long with a 16ft. wingspan and can carry payloads between 20lbs. and 40 lbs. As for missions, the company lists the drone as ideal for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance operations. 

[Category: Air Warfare, Land Warfare, Pentagon, Air Force, Army, Drone Dominance Program, Drones, Gauntlet, griffon aerospace, Iran, Neros, Operation Epic Fury, Pete Hegseth, Ukraine]

— Lockheed Martin UK-led consortium unveils GBAD concept for NATO

 

at 6/5/26 9:19am

BRUSSELS — A Lockheed Martin UK-led consortium has unveiled a Ground-Based Air Defense (GBAD) concept for NATO, envisioned as a plug-and-play network that enables agnostic data sharing and interoperability among national assets dispersed across the alliance.  The proposal by the British branch of the American aerospace company, alongside Leonardo, MBDA, and Indra, is part of the second phase of NATO’s Modular GBAD program to counter aerial threats at very short- to medium-range. The overall project, led by the alliance Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA), was launched in 2023 with a value of roughly €20 million ($23.3 million). According to Richard Turner, business development manager for C2 and complex systems at Lockheed Martin UK, the envisioned common architecture capability would enable continuous coordination and integration of member states’ legacy systems and future assets. “There is no common thing currently, especially within GBAD, maybe apart from Link 16, that does connect the vast majority of NATO nations, where a nation with system A operating alongside another nation with system B can seamlessly operate and share data,” Turner told reporters Wednesday at a briefing here. Nations participating in the GBAD program include Romania, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia, Spain and the UK, with the US taking an observer role. These countries operate a mix of national air defense systems ranging from Patriot to SAMP/T, which are not always compatible during joint deployments.  While company representatives were tight-lipped about the exact technical details of their offering, they explained that a flexible, software-based system would allow participating member-nations to connect their different sensors to another nation’s command nodes, or individual systems. Ignacio Ojeda González-Posada, senior manager of business development for air defense at Spains Indra, argued for the need to build a mesh of high- and low-end sensors and effectors, similar to that proposed under the US’s Golden Dome missile defense initiative. He said Wednesday that the challenge is not so much integrating expensive assets such as the IRIS-T air defense system into a network — which is relatively easy — rather it is incorporating cheaper ones, such as small anti-drone systems or acoustic detectors, which often operate independently or do not feed into a common tactical picture. A Lengthy Process  The first phase of the program was completed throughout 2025 and focused on system architecture. During this period, NSPA awarded GBAD concept studies to five companies and consortia: Airbus, Aselsan, Lockheed Martin UK, Raytheon, and Thales LAS. After producing their blueprint, Lockheed, Raytheon, and Airbus were selected by the agency and the program’s participants to move forward into the second phase to address modularity. This new phase will last twelve months, during which the research will be developed in more detail, including sophisticated modelling to replicate connectivity. Announcing selection for the modularity phase in April, Lockheed Martin UK stated that the aim of joint collaboration is to use the team’s collective experience to provide the Modular GBAD participating Nations with proven and innovative solutions and technologies in support of NATO Modular GBAD capabilities. A third stage will follow, in which the most promising proposal will be chosen to advance to the integration of emerging technologies. A similar software system, dubbed Delta, is already employed by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. It has been described as the “digital brain” of the country’s military, integrating multi-domain equipment and data from drones, satellites, and launchers into a common network that serves as an interactive map for commanders. When asked whether the alliance is playing catch-up by only developing such a capability now, the company representatives pointed out that their proposal is somewhat different and that the industry does not set a country’s priorities.  “Delta is a fantastic and very good tool, but it is not a secret … Ukrainians are knocking down about 50% of their own drones before they cross the border because they are using cheaper effectors that are not fully integrated in their sensors. That’s one of the problems we want to tackle with this [GBAD concept],” González-Posada said. According to a recent report from Business Insider, friendly fire is one of the largest causes of equipment losses in Ukraine, where it has become increasingly difficult for forces to distinguish whether the enormous amount of drones are their own or those of their foes.

[Category: Air Warfare, Global, Air Force, Europe, GBAD, Golden Dome, Indra, Leonardo, Lockheed Martin, MBDA, NATO, Ukraine]

— DoD cyber strategy will set a ‘clear and specific vision’ for AI to enable the force: Official

 

at 6/5/26 8:34am

BALTIMORE — The forthcoming Department of Defense cyber strategy will set a course outlining the role artificial intelligence will play for the cyber force going forward, according to a senior official. “As were working on our new Department of War cyber strategy thats in development right now, we are going to set a very clear and specific vision for how we need to enable AI for this force,” Katie Sutton, assistant secretary of defense for cyber policy and principal cyber advisor, said here at the TechNet Cyber conference today. “We will also set out a very clear vision for this new operational partnership that were going to need to have with industry.” Sutton announced in congressional testimony in April that the department is working on an updated cyber strategy, the first since 2023. The White House released its cyber strategy for America in March. She added that while historically that strategy has tended to focus on the cyber community, the intent now is to focus it on the rest of the department, meaning its contents will apply to personnel and commanders in other domains. Sutton has made a point of integrating cyber across the department and into operations ensuring it is a core aspect of planning and consideration by all. Beyond the policy portion of her job, Sutton explained that as the principal cyber advisor, she has authority, direction and control over US Cyber Command and its enhanced budget authority to help drive AI adoption through its budget and aligning resources. Those are “really a very powerful combination of authorities that exist in my office, and allows us to really move at the speed that were going to need to, to address these threats, rather than to have different organizations coordinate,” she said. Lastly, that principal cyber advisor role allows her to coordinate across the department with other organizations such as the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Chief Data and AI Office and the office of the chief information officer so efforts aren’t duplicated.

[Category: Networks & Digital Warfare, AI, cyber security, Katie Sutton, networks, TechNet Cyber 2026, technology]

— HASC adopts FY27 defense policy bill, adds right to repair language

 

at 6/5/26 7:54am

WASHINGTON — The House Armed Services Committee pushed through its version of the fiscal 2027 defense policy bill early Friday morning, adopting new “right to repair” provisions and adding $500 million for a second destroyer. The panel adopted the FY27 National Defense Authorization Act in a 44-12 vote as the clock struck midnight, with Democrats making up all the of no votes. Over the 14-hour markup, HASC members debated more than 900 amendments on topics spanning the war with Iran, the official name of the Defense Department, and Kid Rock. While most measures either failed or succeeded on party lines, a “right to repair” amendment was one of the few points of the night where both Republicans and Democrats found common ground — while also being one of the most consequential moments for the defense industry. The measure, offered by a bipartisan duo of Reps. Maggie Goodlander, D-N.H., and Pat Harrigan, R-N.C., would enable the Defense Department to obtain government purpose rights by default for “any technical data, computer software, or computer software” unless the contractor provides evidence that it needs to retain more restrictive intellectual property rights. Senior Pentagon leaders such as Army Secretary Dan Driscoll have repeatedly made the case that they need additional authorities from Congress that undo the contractual restrictions that sometimes make it impossible for the military to repair its own equipment. “What our bipartisan amendment does is to clarify and to create a clear set of rules, a default rule that will help to resolve disputes before they arise, that will streamline these processes, cut red tape, and close loopholes that have mired our military in endless challenges in trying to do some of the most basic things that we should be empowering our service members to do,” Goodlander said. HASC Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., said that the amendment would force companies to choose between protecting their IP and working with the Department of Defense, pointing to a list of industry groups such as the Aerospace Industries Association and National Defense Industrial Association who have voiced concerns with the measure. “Many will choose to protect their IP,” he said. Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., said that while he is theoretically supportive of right to repair legislation, this particular amendment would give the government “carte blanche” in accessing a contractor’s intellectual property, with no protections that would restrict the government from turning it over to a third party. “This is going way farther than what we need to go to really pull this into where the government gets the IP that it needs,” he said. Harrigan countered that the many of the amendment’s provisions would simply force the Defense Department to use the tools already at its disposal to obtain government purpose rights, and that it carves out exemptions for commercial items. “This right to repair language in this amendment does not seize patents, it does not seize copyrights, it does not seize trade secrets. This private IP remains private,” Harrigan said. Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., argued that American servicemembers’ lives could be put at stake if they are forced to wait for contractors’ permission to fix critical equipment. “Im not going to stand here and pretend I can out argue a contractors lawyer on the finer points of intellectual property, but I dont need to, because the people who actually run this military have already told us what they need,” she said. After about a half hour of debate, lawmakers voted to adopt the amendment in a voice vote. More Money For Destroyers, ITEP Like last year, many of the amendments centered on weapons programs — including some large changes in funding — received no debate at all. Instead, HASC opted to approve them en masse in large packages of amendments approved during the subcommittee portion of the mark up. The Arleigh Burke-class destroyer was the biggest beneficiary, receiving a $500 million boost to help pay for a second ship in FY27. The amendment, from Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, would zap funds from submarine tenders, littoral combat ship modernization, and KC-46 tanker development in order to increase DDG-51 funds. RELATED: Amendment to eliminate funds for Trump-class battleship falters in HASC defense bill markup Another amendment, from Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., would add $50 million to the Army’s Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP), bringing the total up to $100 million. Hypersonic and counter-hypersonic testing was authorized to receive a $60 million increase over the levels initially spelled out in the HASC bill, with that funding transferred from the Navy’s account for unmanned surface vessels. Meanwhile, the Army would get an additional $62 million for autonomous resupply vessels through a reduction to KC-46 tanker development. There were also many amendments concerning the A-10 Warthog following the Air Force’s announcement this budget cycle that it plans to retain some A-10s until 2030. One amendment mandates that the Air Force stays true to its word to maintain the A-10 through 2030, while another provision would force the defense secretary to transfer A-10s retired by the Air Force to another service. An additional amendment requires the Air Force to develop “a competitive experimentation plan for autonomous and non-traditional capabilities relevant to the A-10 mission set to encourage autonomous replacement and modernization of the A-10, while also prioritizing participation of non-traditional defense firms.” Other provisions buried in the so-called “en bloc” amendment packages included: A requirement for the Pentagon to provide a quarterly report on munitions inventories; Authorization for the Missile Defense Agency “to develop and demonstrate an exoatmospheric interceptor capability to strengthen ballistic missile defense capacity and improve homeland defense architecture;” A prohibition from using funds authorized in the NDAA to purchase a warship from a foreign shipyard; A prohibition on retiring the E/A-18G Growler; A report on the Navy’s strategy to design and construct the BBG(X) battleship without interfering with existing nuclear-powered shipbuilding plans, specifically that of the Ford-class carrier; Briefings on low-cost air-to-air munitions for CCAs and transitioning F-35 sustainment to the military services by 2027; A brief by the Air Force on the feasibility, cost, timeline, and alternatives associated with restarting the C-17 production line; and A briefing on UH-60 modernization for the Army. No Freaking Difference Two of the most heated debates of the night centered around names. In a 29-27 party line vote, Republicans adopted an amendment from Rep. Ronny Jackson, R-Texas, that would formally rename the Defense Department as the “Department of War.” During remarks explaining his amendment, Jackson revealed a mock up of the department’s seal bearing the “Department of War” title. “I think once I present this, and now that you can see firsthand how beautiful it actually is, you will have no choice to vote for this amendment,” Jackson said. “Restoring the name Department of War sends an unmistakable signal to the world,” he said. “Potential adversaries like China, Russia, North Korea and Iran evaluate American resolve through both our capabilities and our messaging.” Washington Rep. Adam Smith, the committee’s ranking Democrat, was less than enthused. “I really think this is one of the dumbest things that has been done by this administration, and it doesnt make any sense, but practically speaking, it makes no freaking difference whatsoever,” he said. “The name itself strikes fear at the heart of our adversaries — I wish our adversaries were that stupid.” Another amendment, offered by Rep. Marilyn Strickland, D-Wash., sought to restore the names of bases made by a congressionally charted commission that in 2022 rebranded bases named for Confederate leaders. (Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reverted bases to the original Confederate names.) “My father fought in two wars, and he fought in a segregated army. So, when you talk about naming something after the Confederacy, youre disrespecting him and every black man who wore the uniform,” she said. “So, Im going to ask you one more time, who are we as a nation, and more importantly, who are you?” Lawmakers voted 29-27 in favor of Strickland’s amendment, with two Republicans joining Democrats. However, Democrat victories on amendments were scarce, with Republicans defeating measures that would have prohibited funds from being used for military operations in Iran or forced the Army to brief lawmakers on an incident where Apache helicopter pilots conducted a flyby of nu metal musician Kid Rock’s home. Republicans also toppled several amendments offered by Democrats that would strengthen protections for media organizations who cover the Pentagon and for the military publication Stars and Stripes. One amendment, offered by Jacobs, would have reversed press restrictions imposed by Hegseth, reinstating media credentials and allowing credentialed members of the press to have unescorted access to unclassified areas within the building. Another, offered by Goodlander, would prohibit the department from using FY27 funds to shut down media access to the Pentagon or impose credentialling requirements that would force journalists to gain department authorization to gather and release information. Although Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., joined Democrats to vote for the amendments adoption, both were defeated in a 27-28 vote.

[Category: Congress, Pentagon, 2027 NDAA, Adam Smith, DDG-51 Arleigh Burke, Defense Budget 2027, House Armed Services Commitee, Mike Rogers, right to repair]

— 3 things to know about delayed US arms sales to allies

 

at 6/5/26 6:34am

In this episode of The Pentagon Buzz, Pentagon reporter Ashley Roque outlines a growing list of concerns after a number of allies and partners have been told their expected weapons deliveries from the United States are being slowed down as the US prioritizes its own stocks. Subscribe to our Pentagon newsletter to get the latest information from the building delivered directly to you. hbspt.forms.create({ portalId: '2097098', formId: '2cf0ca25-5e60-4bbc-aed9-51e6f64c883a', target: '#hubspot-form-2cf0ca25-5e60-4bbc-aed9-51e6f64c883a', });

[Category: Global, Pentagon, arms exports, FMS. foreign military sales, Iran, Pentagon Buzz, Video]

— House passes Ukraine aid bill with new sanctions for Russia

 

at 6/4/26 7:30pm

WASHINGTON — In a rare moment of bipartisanship in the US Congress, the House tonight passed a package of Russian sanctions and military aid for Ukraine, with 18 Republicans voting to move the bill forward despite the Trump administration’s opposition for further funds for Ukraine. House members voted 226-195 to pass the Ukraine Support Act, which authorizes $8 billion in military finance loans to Ukraine and extends the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative through 2027. “Today’s bipartisan vote to pass the Ukraine Support Act demonstrates that the House stands with the Ukrainian people and that we will hold the criminal Russian regime accountable for its illegal war,” Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the sponsor of the bill, in a statement following the vote. “Now the Senate must follow suit, and work with our bipartisan group in the House to deliver the most comprehensive package possible to the President’s desk for his immediate signature.” Among the House Republicans who voted for the bill were several members of the House Armed Services Committee, including Reps. Joe Wilson of South Carolina, Mike Turner of Ohio, Don Bacon of Nebraska, Carlos Giminez of Florida and Jennifer Kiggans of Virginia. It also included Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, co-chair of the Congressional Ukraine Caucus, and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Emeritus Michael McCaul of Texas. The Ukraine Support Act, which was introduced last year, faced an unusual path to House passage, coming to the floor only once California Rep. Kevin Kiley, an Independent who typically votes with Republicans, became the 218th signature on a discharge petition that forced a vote on the bill. (Bacon and Fitzpatrick had previously also signed the petition.) “Tonight, the House faced a Churchill vs. Chamberlain moment. Stand on the side of freedom and democracy, or show weakness to an invading thug who wants to restore Russian domination over a free people. Tonight, we chose Churchill,” Bacon said in a statement after the vote. Fitzpatrick said in a statement that support of Ukraine is is a matter of American security, allied strength, and moral clarity. While bipartisan support for Ukraine in the Senate remains strong, it’s unclear whether Republican leadership will greenlight a vote on the House bill. Senate legislation that would levy new sanctions and tariffs on Russia remains in limbo, the Associated Press reported.

[Category: Congress, Europe, Russia, Ukraine]

— Cyber Innovation Warfare center will pair industry side-by-side with operators

 

at 6/4/26 12:51pm

BALTIMORE — US Cyber Command’s new Cyber Warfare Innovation Center will pair operators and members of industry side by side in order to drive faster capabilities and tactics, and bridge the so-called valley of death. For too long, prototypes developed by industry have withered in the so-called valley of death, failing to transition to operational use. We do not have the luxury of time anymore to let good technology sit on the shelf,” Katie Sutton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, said here at the TechNet Cyber conference today. “The Cyber Innovation Warfare Center, or the CWIC, will be our proving ground, a collaborative environment where operators and industry will sit side by side to test new concepts against realistic threats and operational scenarios.” CWIC is one of three enabling organizations under the so-called CYBERCOM 2.0 plan, the department’s push to improve how cyber forces are generated from the services to the command. The other two are a Cyber Talent Management Organization and an Advanced Cyber Training and Education Center. Sutton said the organization won’t be a traditional brick and mortar facility, but is more a concept for fostering better innovation. “The CWIC will bring our warfighters and industry developers into the same room to build and iterate together based on the real-world operator feedback, she said. By forging this direct link between those who build the tools and those who wield them, we ensure that our best innovations actually make it to the fight and onto the cyber battlefield. Speaking to Breaking Defense following her remarks, Sutton declined to offer exact specifics on CWICs stand up, noting it is not starting from scratch. Rather, the concept was already happening to a degree and now the department is trying to refocus, scale and grow it, with elements of the concept already operational. Sutton said the goal is for the center to feed tactics and requirements to the acquisition pipeline, known as the CYBERCOM J9, who will work to build and field them. “It brings in not just the ability to quickly interface with industry and do those prototypes and pilots to whats going to be most operationally relevant, but also, what are we going to have to do to really operationalize that tool,” she told Breaking Defense. “I talk a lot about the non-materiel aspects with these tools … A tool is not just going to make us do a task better, it may change how we fight, it may change what our TTPs are, what our doctrine is. Well have to identify what training we would need to support that tool. What kind of data? Are we going to need policy changes?” The CWIC won’t necessarily have the wherewithal to develop the capabilities, given it’s not a program office, Brig. Gen. Reid Novotny, Cyber Force Generation Lead at CYBERCOM, told Breaking Defense at the conference this week. It will feed those to the J9, instead. Officals said they want to a faster feedback loop to impact operations. The Cyber Innovation Worker Center under CYBERCOM 2.0 is intended to increase that partnership or bring those critical aspects much closer together, as close as possible, so that the innovation from the private sector directly impacts our war fighting capability as soon as possible, CMSgt Bryan Neumann, who most recently was the Senior Enlisted Advisor to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, at the conference today.

[Category: Networks & Digital Warfare, cyber security, CYBERCOM 2.0, Katie Sutton, networks, TechNet Cyber 2026, technology, US Cyber Command (CYBERCOM)]

— Amendment to eliminate funds for Trump-class battleship falters in HASC defense bill markup

 

at 6/4/26 12:34pm

WASHINGTON —  Republicans defeated an amendment to the fiscal 2027 defense policy bill that would have stripped $1 billion in funds for the Trump-class battleship during a House Armed Services Committee mark up of the bill today. The amendment, offered by HASC’s top Democrat Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, would have zeroed out advanced procurement funds for the BBG(X) but was defeated in a 2630 vote. Democratic Rep. Don Davis of North Carolina voted with Republicans. Citing the Congressional Budget Office’s projection that the lead Trump-class battleship could cost about $20 billion, Smith argued that the Navy should put that funding toward autonomous drone ships. “Whatever the number is [for the BBG(X) program], Im going to give you right one of the surest fire Kalshi bets you will ever have: Take the over,” he said. “Whatever they come up with the number, its going to wind up higher.” HASC Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., spoke against the amendment, stating that the battleship’s requirements were spawned out of the studies for a next-generation destroyer done by the Biden administration. “There has been a requirement for a large surface combatant for decades,” he said. “We currently lack a ship with enough space or power to support the combat systems we need for future conflicts like hypersonics and high being high energy lasers.” While Rogers was the only Republican to speak on behalf of the battleship, several Democrats took swipes at the program. Connecticut Rep. Joe Courtney, the top Democrat on the seapower and projection forces committee, said it doesn’t make sense to begin ordering parts and materials for a ship that does not have a design finalized. “The concept of the battleship was announced last December down at Mar-a-Lago, where, again, we didnt have any designs. We didnt have any studies in terms of analysis that normally go into starting a new class of any ship. What we did have was an AI-generated picture on a poster board,” he said. Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., called it a “boondoggle” and “the most expensive sitting duck in world history,” while Rep. Eugene Vindman, D-Va., said that the program would not be receiving the same support from Republicans if the ship was named the Obama-class. The battleship amendment was defeated as HASC took its first series of recorded votes on NDAA amendments. Debate on the bill is still ongoing, with a vote on final passage slated for late tonight or early Friday morning. During those votes, Republicans also toppled the only amendments so far that address the size of the defense budget and the war with Iran, both offered by Moulton. One would have lowered the NDAA topline by $150 billion, but was defeated in a 25-31 vote that saw Democrats Davis and Jared Golden of Maine vote with Republicans. The other would require the Defense Department to submit a breakdown of costs associated with the war in Iran, and was defeated in a 27-30 party line vote. Earlier in the hearing, HASC members passed multiple large packages of noncontroversial amendments, including several that impact the BBG(X) and other major Navy programs. The Arleigh Burke-class destroyer was the biggest beneficiary, receiving a $500 million boost to help pay for a second ship in FY27. The amendment, from Golden, would zap funds from submarine tenders, littoral combat ship modernization, and KC-46 tanker development in order to increase DDG-51 funds. However, that move is largely symbolic of congressional support for the destroyer program, as the NDAA only authorizes funding and it is unknown whether appropriators will follow suit. Another amendment passed in the so-called en bloc packages would require the Navy to provide a report on its strategy to design and construct the BBG(X) battleship without interfering with existing nuclear-powered shipbuilding plans, specifically that of the Ford-class carrier. “The committee is aware that the timelines for completion of the three Ford-class aircraft carriers currently under construction have experienced significant delays due to a variety of reasons including supply chain and workforce challenges,” the provision states. “The committee is concerned that these factors, coupled with a lack of physical shipbuilding capacity, could be further exacerbated by a new nuclear-powered surface vessel program and without careful planning could jeopardize Ford-class delivery.” A separate amendment would require a briefing on Golden Fleet, including the business case for BBG(X), the novel systems needed to build the battleship and their projected costs, and the impact of BBG(X) and other Golden Fleet vessels on legacy shipbuilding programs.

[Category: Congress, Naval Warfare, 2027 NDAA, Adam Smith, DDG-51 Arleigh Burke, Defense Budget 2027, House Armed Services Commitee, Joe Courtney, Mike Rogers, Navy, Trump-class battleship]

— Brazil plans to buy 20 more Gripen fighters

 

at 6/4/26 10:15am

STOCKHOLM — Brazilian Defense Minister José Múcio Monteiro Filho announced today that he wants to buy an additional 20 Gripen E jets, which would bring Brazil’s fleet to 56 fighters. The announcement came during a press conference today, wrapping up the minister’s four-day visit to Sweden. During a joint presser, Swedish Defense Minister Pål Jonson confirmed that negotiations are advancing on a deal to amend the existing Gripen agreement to add in additional jets, although both men stressed no deal has been reached.  Gen. Marcelo Kanitz Damasceno, the Brazilian air chief, told Breaking Defense on the sideline of the event that the need for extra jets was born from a serious look at Brazil’s air power. “Our staff studies signalized for us a [requirement] of between 50 and 60 fighter aircrafts, something like that, to maintain the sovereignty of our country. So we started from 36 [Gripen] to 56 [Gripen] or a little bit more than than 60 … Its a number that you can do well with,” Damasceno said. After Saab beat out the Boeing F/A-18 and Dassault Rafale in 2014, Brazil  ordered a total of 36 Gripen fighters: 28 single-seat Gripen E models and eight two-seat Gripen F variants. Eleven aircraft have been delivered to date. Final assembly of the single-seat Gripen E is carried out at Embraer’s facility in São Paulo, which remains the only Gripen production line outside Sweden. The first fully Brazilian-assembled Gripen E was rolled out there in March 2026. The Air Chief stressed that the contract signed in 2014 on the 36 jets gave an option for increasing by 25 percent. Now Stockholm and Brasilia are figuring out how to step up to 56 Gripens.  “So we started months ago the discussion with Saab and in the Sweden how to deal with, how can you use this 25 percent in this contract,” he said. The announcement comes just two days after Saab rolled out the first Gripen F two-seat fighter jet for the Brazilian Air Force during a ceremony at its facilities in Linköping, south of the Swedish capital. The Gripen F is essentially the same as the Gripen E but with an additional seat. Jonson said that all E-version aircraft for Brazil will probably be built locally. “That would be my expectation. This is, of course, a negotiation process taking place in the business to government agreement between Saab and Brazil, but what there is since last fall, there is a production site for the Gripen system in Brazil. So I think its natural that they use that one,” the Swedish defense minister told Breaking Defense. The additional Gripen Fs that Brazil ordered could also be built in Brazil, he said, “which is good for Sweden, because we have our hands full right now,” as the past ten months have marked a record period for the Gripen’s global footprint. Last week Stockholm and Kyiv announced Ukraine’s plan to acquire up to 20 new Gripen E/F jets, with Stockholm also donating 16 older C/D models. (The contract for the new jets is not yet signed).  Thailand has prevíosly ordered four E/Fs, and Colombia has signed for 17 aircraft last year,  with deliveries starting in 2026. Canada is also expected to announce if they will acquire a batch of Gripen in addition to American F-35’s.  These developments strengthen the Gripen’s footprint worldwide and support Sweden’s own transition to the more advanced E-variant. The Swedish Air Force received its first JAS 39 Gripen E last year – the lead aircraft of a 60-jet order – and deliveries are expected until 2030. The surge of interest in Gripen should be no surprise, Jonson said, given the state of the world.  “It comes at a time when theres a lot of countries right now investing into the defense capabilities, and having the Gripen system as a new fighter, and as a fighter that can also use an AI agent, causes a lot of interest around the Gripen system, in combination with its world-leading electronic warfare capabilities, and its low life cycle costs,” he said. “The [larger the] user club we have for the Gripen system, the better it is,” Jonson said. 

[Category: Air Warfare, Global, Air Force, Brazil, Europe, Gripen, Pål Jonson, SAAB]

— Pentagon’s Cyber Defense Command drafting plan to defend critical infrastructure

 

at 6/4/26 9:26am

BALTIMORE — The Pentagon’s newest cyber organization, the Defense Cyber Defense Command (DCDC), is working to build out a framework for how to respond to cyberattacks against critical infrastructure in the homeland, according to a military official. “Im currently assigned there to build out a [Joint Task Force Defense of Critical Infrastructure] framework and command and control footprint, because the most important thing, besides understanding the technology, the people, the processes, is whos in control, whos executing, whats the common rail amongst all the authorizations that we have between CISA, FBI, Coast Guard, Department of War writ large,” Col. Adolph Rodriguez, director of Defense Critical Infrastructure at the DCDC, said here at the TechNet Cyber conference Wednesday. DCDC, formerly the Joint Force Headquarters-DoD Information Network, was elevated to a sub-unified command under US Cyber Command in May 2025. “How do we continue to operate before, during, and after the attack,” Rodriguez said, articulating one of the problems theyre looking at. He explained the team is working to develop what he termed digital green zones, similar to the physical spaces set up in Iraq and Afghanistan, that will examine what exactly needs to be secured and what data leaders need to look for to ensure they know what good and bad data is. Defense of critical infrastructure has become a key priority in recent years given the importance of those systems not only to everyday civilian life — from power to water — but also to military installations. Chinese hackers dubbed Volt Typhoon have been found lurking in these systems in recent years, which intelligence and cyber officials say is to map networks in order to cause disruption, stymie and deter possible US response to a Beijing feint against Taiwan. What has particularly alarmed US officials about this, is the paradigm shift of Chinese threats moving from espionage and intellectual property theft to holding critical infrastructure at risk. A key way Rodriguez and his team plan to protect infrastructure is by applying existing and defined roles between civil, federal and defense teams, similar to how Northern Command operates with civil authorities over homeland defense. For instance, during a natural disaster or terrorist attack, there is no question regarding authorities or command and control lines between local, state and federal partners. But if there was a cyber attack, those distinctions are not yet there. “Why dont we build a cyber campaign plan thats enduring that we can utilize those NORTHCOM authorities with Cyber Command’s authorities, build out the sectors very similar to FEMA so this way we dont have to change any of the infrastructure and now execute that muscle memory of training, assessments, and then identify where the key infrastructure is,” he said.

[Category: Networks & Digital Warfare, critical infrastructure, cyber security, DCDC, networks, TechNet Cyber 2026, technology]

— A Navy carrier is about to deploy with a robot ship. Could it change the service forever?

 

at 6/4/26 8:50am

WASHINGTON — The aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt is gearing up for a deployment with a Seahawk medium unmanned surface vessel (MUSV) as part of its strike group for the first time — a key milestone signifying the transition of the unmanned system from an experimental to operational part of the fleet.  In fact, multiple experts told Breaking Defense that this deployment could lay the foundation for how the Navy develops its concept of operations (CONOPS) for integrating unmanned into the rest of the fleet, at a time when the Navy is still struggling to articulate how and when it will make autonomous vessels a core part of its arsenal.   “It is certainly a significant development,” said Bradley Martin, a retired Navy captain who is now a senior policy researcher at RAND. “Up to now, its all been a matter of testing, and the actual use in operational deployment is a major step. I think that what will happen as a result of this is, we won’t necessarily see immediately some big change in the way the fleet operates, but it will tell the fleet a lot about how to use this type of capability.” The Seahawk vessel is one of Leidos’ unmanned vessels. An upgraded design of the firm’s Sea Hunter autonomous vessel, the Seahawk supports anti-submarine warfare and maritime domain awareness, and stems from a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency initiative.  The Navy previously deployed four unmanned ships — including a Seahawk and a Sea Hunter — to the Western Pacific in 2023. But the announced upcoming deployment with the Theodore Roosevelt shows the Navy wants unmanned systems to supplement primary forces as the Navy develops new tailored force packages for specific mission sets and geographies, according to Bryan Clark, a retired submarine officer and a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.  “This is a regularly scheduled deployment by a full carrier strike group that shows MUSVs have progressed from science project to become part of the operational fleet,” Clark said.  While the Navy officially announced the deployment with the MUSV at the Sea Air Space exposition in April, the service did not respond to questions from Breaking Defense about when exactly the carrier strike group will get underway, how the deployment would guide the development of unmanned CONOPS, when the Navy plans to release an unmanned strategy, and what specific things the Navy wants to test while at sea. But the analysts largely agreed with a key point: Whatever is learned from this deployment will help the service set its approach to both the concept of operations (CONOPS) for unmanned vessels, and the acquisition strategy for procuring them.  “This is a really important, initial early step in terms of developing those CONOPS. The Navy isnt waiting around to develop a bunch of prototypes and just sort of leave them stateside,” said Stacie Pettyjohn, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “Theyre putting them out and integrating them with the crewed vessels immediately and allowing them to experiment and consider different ways of how they can work together.” The Seahawk medium displacement unmanned surface vessel launches from Naval Base Point Loma for the U.S. Pacific Fleet’s Unmanned Systems Integrated Battle Problem 21. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Thomas Gooley) Developing CONOPS  In February, the Navy’s top officer, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle, unveiled his “Fighting Instructions” framework. There, he laid out plans to utilize a “hedge force strategy” that seeks to capitalize on unmanned systems and create a range of tailored options that fall outside the traditional carrier strike group model where an aircraft carrier, a destroyer, and several other assets go out to sea together.  This coincides with the rest of the fleet facing increased strain amid extended deployments like the aircraft carrier Gerald R Ford’s 326-day period at sea — where it was one of three carrier strike groups operating in the Middle East concurrently for the first time since 2003. “One of the challenges that theyre trying to use the uncrewed systems for…is really to help with just sort of the shrinking force structure more broadly, and the fact that the fleet has been shrinking, continues to shrink, and cant meet the current demand, and is being operated at such a high tempo that theyre going to face challenges meeting all of their requirements going forward,” Pettyjohn said. Caudle’s “Fighting Instructions” issues some key tasks for the Navy to develop. Specifically, it orders the Navy to detail how fleet commanders and the joint force will integrate unmanned capabilities, known as robotic autonomous systems (RAS), into “service decisions like strategic laydown, dispersal, and global force management.” No model is in place yet for RAS capabilities, according to the guidance.  As a result, Caudle said in February he is facing an “unmanned dilemma” about how to organize RAS capabilities into the fleet. At the time, he said he was not ready to release an unmanned strategy as he and the rest of the Navy work together to figure out the command structure for employing unmanned systems fleetwide.  When asked about an unmanned strategy at the Sea Air Space Exposition in April, Caudle pointed to the Seahawk’s upcoming deployment with the Theodore Roosevelt. He also said the Navy is eying establishing a Warfighting Development Center (WDC) for RAS like the Navy already has for areas like aviation, and surface and mine warfighting. “We need to move these capabilities from individual units into composite mission sets, including contested logistics,” Caudle told reporters in April. “Using USVs to move food and parts — replenishing underways without risking humans — is a major use case.” Additionally, Caudle has previously floated setting up a RAS commander to oversee unmanned capabilities. Currently, RAS is now arranged by domain, like undersea, aviation and cyber, but a RAS commander could coordinate across the domains, according to Caudle.  While Martin, the senior policy researcher at RAND, said a RAS commander could serve as an advocate for these systems, the Navy must remain cautious that it doesn’t silo unmanned capabilities too much.  “It may be best to leave them with communities, so that all the communities have opportunity to work with these things and become familiar, as opposed to making yet another type commander where additional risk and additional coordination has to take place,” Martin said.  Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Daryl Caudle testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee on the Department of the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request and strategic vision, in Washington D.C., May 19, 2027. (U.S. Navy photo by Senior Chief Mass Communication Specialist Elliott Fabrizio). Meanwhile, Pettyjohn said that the Navy likely has already established some CONOPS for unmanned, and will develop more through this upcoming deployment — although whether those lessons learned are baked into official doctrine and dispersed throughout the fleet more broadly remains a question, considering there are so few prototypes currently in the fleet.  Regardless, Pettyjohn said the Navy is on the right track to develop the CONOPS and capabilities concurrently so that the service can identify different attributes that may be more or less important for future iterations.  “All of this should be sort of a living document that isnt going to remain static, because theyll develop some way of doing it, and itll work in one environment against one threat picture,” Pettyjohn said. “And then others will learn or youll face a more capable adversary, and it wont work as well there. So as technology changes, as adversaries adapt, and as we move along, these should continually be being updated and revised.” Meanwhile, lawmakers on the House Armed Services Committee want the Navy to verify to congressional defense committees that CONOPS for unmanned systems have already been developed ahead of accepting a USV, according to the chairman’s mark of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) released in May.  Likewise, the draft legislation includes a section that would require the secretary of the Navy to craft and execute a strategy for USV integration into the fleet and joint maritime operations.  Acquisition Influence The deployment could also factor into how the Navy chooses to move forward procuring new MUSVs, according to experts, as the service zeroes in on a new acquisition model it says aims to lay the foundation for obtaining other autonomous systems.  In an attempt to procure MUSVs faster, the Navy announced in March a new MUSV marketplace where industry could submit proposals. The marketplace replaced the Navy’s Modular Attack Surface Craft (MASC) program, in an effort to move past a prototype phase and instead, focus on production-ready, mission capable MUSV platforms already available. This shift to the marketplace approach veered away from narrow requirements into performance-based requirements, ultimately allowing more options for the warfighter, according to Michael Robbins, president and CEO at the Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International.  “Allowing for a more flexible approach to design and acquisition and integration is smart, because what a medium USV is required in CENTCOM might look a lot different than it does in INDOPACOM, which might look a lot different than it does in NORTHCOM or SOUTHCOM,” said Robbins, who is also an officer in the Navy Reserve.  The Navy announced in May that seven designs from the marketplace were selected to advance to the prototype testing phase, following the first iteration of what the service says is supposed to be a recurrent marketplace. Leidos, the Seahawk contractor, is one of the seven defense firms whose design was selected to advance. At-sea demonstrations are expected later this year, and the Navy said it plans to work alongside industry to have vessels available to lease or procure in fiscal year 2027.  The hull of HIIs new Romulus 190 unmanned surface vessel. (Photo courtesy of HII) According to Clark, the Theodore Roosevelt deployment could inform how the Navy chooses to proceed with acquiring these new vessels, depending on what is learned during the carrier’s time at sea. “I think the deployment could impact acquisition decisions, because the MUSV marketplace has an open-ended set of top-level requirements for some parameters like speed and endurance,” Clark said.  “But the deployment may show that endurance is a major challenge for MUSVs because they could need to be refueled more often than the other CSG ships, which would require more visits by vulnerable oilers, Clark said. Or the deployment could show that the MUSV can get by with a slower speed because it can operate far from the carrier and its escorts.”  Pettyjohn noted a big challenge the Navy and the other services are facing is determining how to acquire these systems, since their shelf life is significantly shorter than other, larger platforms.  “The Navys acquisition strategy — and even fleet plan — has been in such flux that I dare say, I am not sure how it will work,” Pettyjohn said. “But one would hope that they will learn from this and be able to decide whether this prototype is the one they want to go forward with, or in all likelihood, if theres some variation to this that they would want to make, and then hopefully be moving into production and buying an initial tranche of it.” Overall, Martin said he believes the deployment will inform the Navy on what it ought to be purchasing — and how quickly.  “I think how the deployment will be used is, if particularly useful things are identified in the process of deployment, that will affect whats bought in the near term,” Martin said. “So theres very much an effect on acquisition.” The TR Deployment: What To Expect With all that at stake, it’s not actually clear exactly what the Navy specifically wants to do with Seahawk on this deployment, though the service has previously said it wants MUSVs capable of multiple mission sets.  Clark said that the Seahawk will likely conduct intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) operations with the strike group, and perhaps electronic warfare missions. The MUSV sensor suite can provide many of the same ISR capabilities as a helicopter, according to Clark, but more persistently and at longer ranges, as well as with greater connectivity and communications bandwidth.  Additionally, the Navy will want to understand how the Seahawk integrates into a traditional carrier strike group — and assess how it can mitigate the vessel’s shortfalls, Clark said.  “For example, the Seahawk has very long endurance, so it could operate far from the carrier and provide a remote sensor platform,” Clark said. “But it isn’t as fast as the carrier, so the Navy needs to develop tactics that prevent it from being left behind if the carrier needs to make a faster transit.” Martin said that the Navy will likely test how exactly to employ the Seahawk, especially given that the vessel can carry a wide variety of payloads. While he noted that the Navy is likely not at the point where it would have the Seahawk deliver kinetic payloads yet, the service will probably assess how it could usefully carry weapons like missiles during this deployment.  The medium displacement unmanned surface vessels Seahawk, front, and Sea Hunter launch for the U.S. Pacific Fleet’s Unmanned Systems Integrated Battle Problem 21. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Thomas Gooley) Likewise, the Navy will be evaluating what types of command and control systems must be in place for it to function, as well as refueling and logistical challenges that can only be learned through working with an operational unit, Martin said.  “Theyll want to know how easily and reliably communicated with [it is], theyll want to know what is the appropriate stationing,” Martin said. “Is it best to have it in close? Is it best out over the horizon?” Pettyjohn said the Navy will likely evaluate during this deployment how the Seahawk could fare administering countermine warfare missions, especially given recent operations in the Middle East where naval forces conducted mine clearance missions in the Strait of Hormuz.  “Thats obviously a mission that the Navy has sort of neglected,” Pettyjohn said. “It typically looks to allies to fill, and has been looking to uncrewed assets. And given that this is something that could crop up in many areas of the world, it could be important if you could have, along with you, one of these smaller vessels that could be used to make sure that any sort of straits are clear, or do any emergent mine-sweeping, that would be really useful.” Although Martin said that unmanned systems probably won’t accompany carrier strike groups on every subsequent deployment following this initial one, it will serve as a model for future ones.  “I think ultimately we will see it being routine that unmanned systems deploy with carriers, with carrier strike groups and amphibious ready groups and that type of thing,” he said.  “Its a new capability, and its the product of a fairly rapid change in technology and will impose requirements that we havent identified yet,” Martin said. “So things like this deployment will help a lot with figuring out those seams, those places where there are issues.”

[Category: Naval Warfare, Adm. Daryl Caudle, Drones, featured, Leidos, MUSV, Navy, Sea Hunter, Seahawk, Unmanned, USS Theodore Roosevelt]

— How to boost defense aviation in an election year? Sen. Budd has a few ideas.

 

at 6/4/26 8:01am

As reconciliation funding plans move through Capitol Hill, Sen. Ted Budd, R-N.C., joins us for part two of his interview with Breaking Defenses Valerie Insinna. Budd, who is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, shares a few ways Congress can help reassure industry planners looking to forecast well beyond this years midterm election season. And in case you missed it, you can catch part one of Insinnas interview with the senator, here. hbspt.forms.create({ portalId: '2097098', formId: '1ae78672-6dbf-4528-ae72-18d629c6b1f4', target: '#hubspot-form-1ae78672-6dbf-4528-ae72-18d629c6b1f4', });

[Category: Congress, Pentagon, Air Force, aviation, Business & Industry, Congressional Roundup Video Series, Ted Budd, Video]

— Thales ramps up guided rocket production to address increased ME demand

 

at 6/4/26 7:07am

HERSTAL, Belgium — Thales Belgium has more than doubled its guided rocket production capacity in response to increased demand after the conflict in the Middle East, and company officials expect to produce annually 20K by 2028, a rough average of 100 guided rockets per day. “We are accelerating and changing the numbers. If we were talking together a few months back, before whats happening in the Middle East, in fact, the numbers were not in the same. We more than doubled the number, considering the situation at the moment in the Middle East,” Thomas Colinet Managing Director at Thales Belgium told Breaking Defense in an interview last week. He added that Thales is getting prepared “to support the Middle East in quantities, in mass production with cost-effective solution, thats key for us to be really in a structure of make to stock,” he said pointing that now Thales Belgium is “in a process of making to stock to be ready when all the requests will come.” During a media tour to Thales Belgium’s facilities in Herstal and Fort d’Evegnée where the company produces its 70 mm guided and unguided rockets, journalists saw the production lines that build the system, from chips and fuses to rocket head, eye and motor. A firing test of the guided rocket also took place during the tour. (Like other media outlets, Breaking Defense accepted travel and accommodation from Thales for the trip.) The 70 mm guided rocket is part of the Skydefender integrated air and missiles defense platform, a concept similar to Steel Dome’s concept in Turkey and Iron Dome’s concept in Israel. Thales officials told Breaking Defense during the tour that the rocket’s price is about one-tenth that of a higher-end missile, which makes it suitable for counter-drone missions. Alain Quevrin, Thales vice president and country director of Belgium & Luxembourg, said they are receiving requests from Gulf states for the weapons, which he said could be fired for both ground-to-air and air-to-air counter-drone missions. The 70 mm guided rocket follows a laser designator from the same platform it is launched from, whether a UAV or fighter jet or a ground vehicle, and it keeps track of the laser until it hits the target. Company officials told Breaking Defense that they are continuously upgrading the missile for precise targeting. A “key point [is] the interest for having European, non-US solution, in the Gulf, said Quevrin, who acknowledged that a willingness to produce locally will be vital to breaking into the lucrative regional market. The company is open for technology transfer in future stages of cooperation, and we are discussing with our local authorities in order to do that, which is more and more possible, so which is a good point for us.” “In the future, for sure, we are understanding that this kind of requirement [technology transfer] will be on the table, and by definition, we are ready to open the discussion regarding these specific requirements, because the local production is really key for a lot of countries, so yes, it is,” he said adding that such localization efforts require “authorization education and training.” Production of the weapons takes place at the historic Fort d’Evegnée, built to protect Belgium from German invasion in the nineteenth century. There, Breaking Defense saw more than 40 small rooms for production and assembly, with workers doing manual validation test on batches and sub-parts of the rocket. The fins are given particularly rigorous testing, the company said, as those are critical to making sure the rockets trajectory can be adjusted until landing on target. Testing of the rocket takes place between minus 46 degrees Celsius and plus 66 degrees Celsius, in order to validate operational capability in all weather conditions including the hot weather of the Middle East.

[Category: Global, Business & Industry, Counter UAS cUAS, Drones, Europe, guided rocket, lasers, localization, Middle East, testing, Thales]

— Air Force awards GE, Rolls-Royce for ‘medium thrust’ drone engines

 

at 6/3/26 1:31pm

WASHINGTON — The Air Force has picked GE Aerospace and Rolls-Royce to advance engine designs that could power future drones and potentially other aircraft, according to a service spokesperson. The two engine makers were selected for drones the Air Force dubs Medium Thrust Class Autonomous Collaborative Platforms, the spokesperson told Breaking Defense. In a May press release announcing the award, GE said its contract would complete preliminary design review for a new powerplant the company dubs the GE426 “We’ve proven we can rapidly move from concept to engine demonstration with the GEK800” — a smaller, lower-thrust engine GE developed with Kratos for drone and cruise missile applications — “and our focus now is on applying that process to the GE426 to ensure it provides the performance, affordability, and readiness the warfighter needs,” Steve Russell, vice president and general manager of Edison Works at GE, said in the release.   Asked about Rolls-Royce’s award, which has not been publicly announced, company executive Candice Bineyard in a statement to Breaking Defense today touted the firm’s “AE engine family” without specifying the powerplant in question. The AE 3007N engine, for example, is currently used on the Navy’s MQ-25 Stingray, which made its first flight in April.  “Autonomous aircraft represent a fundamental shift in how the U.S. Air Force will project combat airpower. By leveraging our advanced AE engine family, we can move quickly to deliver the performance, electrical power, and reliability our warfighters need for operational advantage in contested environments,” said Bineyard, director of business development and future programs for defense at Rolls-Royce.  The Air Force spokesperson said the contract for the GE426 was issued as a firm-fixed price deal using Other Transaction Authority under the service’s Propulsion Consortium Initiative 2.0 effort “to explore solutions beyond traditional manned aircraft standards.” The spokesperson did not immediately clarify whether Rolls-Royce’s contract is structured similarly, and did not disclose the dollar values of the awards for either vendor. Drones are an initial focus for the engine contracts, though “other platforms with similar propulsion characteristics may benefit” from the GE and Rolls-Royce powerplants, the Air Force spokesperson said. The Air Force has issued multiple contracts spanning a range of engine designs to expand its propulsion options for unmanned platforms, including drone wingmen dubbed Collaborative Combat Aircraft. Beyond drone applications, engines could be used to power other unmanned systems and weapons like cruise missiles. The second round of the Air Force’s ongoing Collaborative Combat Aircraft program is evaluating a wide variety of designs, spanning from cheaper to more exquisite concepts. However, House authorizers recently noted that the Air Force and Navy in the future may need drones “with sufficient range, speed, and electrical power to potentially self-deploy from the continental United States and conduct varied missions for geographic combatant commanders.” Those types of requirements, should they come to pass, would likely entail more expensive, higher-performance designs. 

[Category: Air Warfare, Air Force, collaborative combat aircraft, Drones, GE Aerospace, MQ-25 Stingray, Rolls-Royce]

— Marine Corps’ Harrier completes final flight following SOUTHCOM deployment

 

at 6/3/26 12:39pm

WASHINGTON — The Marine Corps’ AV-8B Harrier II completed its final flight today at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point in North Carolina as part of a sundown ceremony for the ground attack jet — concluding more than 40 years in service for the aircraft.  The Harriers retirement marks a significant milestone as the Marine Corps moves through its Tactical Aircraft Transition Plan, and fully adopts fifth-generation aircraft across the entire fleet.  Todays ceremony included a flyover featuring five Harriers. The ground attack jet has short takeoff and vertical landing capability. Despite the scheduled retirement, the aircraft have remained active even in their final weeks.  The Marine Corps’ last Harriers are part of Marine Attack Squadron 223 and were last deployed with the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU), which just concluded a 10-month deployment on Monday. During the deployment, the 22nd MEU supported operations in US Southern Command amid the Trump administration’s naval buildup there, leading up to Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro’s ouster in January. Marine Attack Squadron 223 returned to Cherry Point on May 20, and Marine and sailors assigned to the 22nd MEU started returning home on Monday, according to the service.  The Marine Corps revealed in its 2026 Aviation Plan released in February that the service would conduct a final flight for the aircraft in June, and said that efforts are underway to preserve the aircraft’s legacy in museums across the US.   “As the Harrier era concludes, its highly experienced aircrew and maintenance personnel are transitioning their skills to other platforms, primarily the F-35B, ensuring their expertise continues to benefit Marine Corps Aviation,” the Marine Corps’ aviation plan said.  The AV-8A Harrier first entered the Marine Corps in 1971, while the upgraded AV-8B Harrier II joined the service in 1985. The aircraft were capable of deploying and operating from carriers, as well as other “seagoing platforms,” expeditionary airfields, and remote tactical landing sites, according to Naval Air Systems Command. 

[Category: Air Warfare, Naval Warfare, Air Force, harrier, HarrierJumpJet, Marine Corps, marine expeditionary unit, Navy, SOUTHCOM]

— The biggest industry, training hurdles for making drone wingman a reality

 

at 6/3/26 11:27am

In this final edition of our series looking at the past, present and future of manned-unmanned teaming, we review how American defense firms and military trainers are evolving their methods and procedures to accommodate a world where drones are increasingly incorporated into multi-domain operations. Caitlin Lee of the RAND Corporation and JJ Gertler of the Teal Group join Breaking Defense Editor-in-Chief Aaron Mehta and Air Warfare Reporter Michael Marrow for a roundtable discussion on the recent history and possible future of closely partnering with drones in combat. To learn more, check out the first, second, and third videos in our series.

[Category: Air Warfare, Naval Warfare, Pentagon, Air Force, collaborative combat aircraft, Drones, Future Airpower Roundtable, Navy, technology, Video]

— Anduril teams with Elbit America for Army’s self-propelled howitzer competition 

 

at 6/3/26 10:41am

WASHINGTON — Anduril has joined the Elbit America team to provide the Sigma mobile tactical cannon for the Army’s self-propelled howitzer modernization program, the companies announced in a joint statement.   “We’re proud to team with Anduril to reduce network integration risk and accelerate fielding,” Luke Savoie, president and CEO of Elbit America, said in the Tuesday release. “Built in the U.S. with a fully domestic supply chain, SIGMA is a combat-proven system that provides the modernization and reliability the Army needs now.” Anduril joins the US subsidiary of Israeli company Elbit along with OshKosh Defense for the team’s offering for the highly anticipated competition. According to the release, Anduril will provide its command, control, computers, communications, cyber, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C5ISR) capabilities for Sigma and will integrate its artificial intelligence-driven Lattice software platform into the system. “On Team SIGMA, we’re providing expertise in software, edge compute and autonomy to deliver a connected, software-defined mobile artillery solution that will integrate seamlessly into existing Army Command and Control and fire control architectures,” Michael Roder, managing director at Anduril, said in the release.  While Anduril provides the C5ISR backbone for the vehicle, Elbit will provide the 155-mm, 52-caliber fully automated cannon and OshKosh will provide the 1010 vehicle. Further, an Elbit spokesperson told Breaking Defense at the annual AUSA Global Force summit in March that the Sigma is fully manufactured in Charleston, South Carolina.  In addition to the Elbit America team, the US subsidiary of Korean company Hanwha Defense will be submitting its K9 mobile howitzer for the competition; the US subsidiary of Italy’s Leonardo DRS and European land defense specialist KNDS will be offering their Caesar howitzer variant; and the US subsidiary of German company Rheinmetall is offering their howitzer as well.  British BAE Systems through its American subsidiary, which currently produces the Army’s M109A7 Paladin Integrated Management (PIM) program, is also competing, a company spokesperson confirmed to Breaking Defense today. The Army is aiming to award a contract for the new howitzers next month — a tight turnaround as it would come just 10 months after a request for information went out to industry in September. The competition as a whole was originally delayed by months to bring it in line with the Army Transformation Initiative. 

[Category: Land Warfare, Anduril, Army, Elbit, Mobile Tactical Cannon, self-propelled howitzer]

— Army, J-7 to test new sensor with high-altitude balloon in coming days

 

at 6/3/26 9:08am

WASHINGTON — The Army’s intelligence hub and the Joint Staff’s J-7 are set to test a new prototype system, dubbed Project Wallabee, comprising a sensor with autonomous target recognition (ATR) capabilities on top of a stratospheric high-altitude balloon in the coming days, a senior Army official told Breaking Defense Tuesday.  The exercise, in which the Armys G-2 is partnering with the J-7’s Warfighter Laboratory Incentive Fund program, is the first time the military is testing manufacturer Urban Skys high-altitude balloon with Applied Intuitions ATR software that controls and processes data from the small sensor. Andrew Evans, the director for the new Strategy & Transformation Office inside the G-2, said its been notoriously difficult to find sensors small enough to thrive on high-altitude platforms given the precarious nature of the stratosphere — which starts at about 60,000 ft. above the Earth’s surface and has harsh physical limitations caused by extreme weather and thinning air. “We discovered along the way that the maturity of sensors to operate in the stratosphere was simply not there,” Evans said. “We think mostly because the systems that fly or operate at those altitudes are very light, typically because theyre contending with low air density, and so they dont carry heavy payloads.”  He explained that the payloads that the Army has been investing in up until this point have been much heavier and require much more power, causing them to be ineffective in the stratosphere. As a result, he said the force needs something lighter and that can operate in the “vast temperature swings” in that part of the atmosphere.  “Wallabee is simply that. Its pairing some advancements that are happening with stratospheric balloons with advancements happening in miniaturizing sensors that can operate the stratosphere,” Evans said.  Further, Evans explained that the Army and the J-7 want to bolster capabilities in the stratosphere because the end goal is to combine ground, airborne, stratosphere and space-based sensors to create a “multi-layered, robust sensing ecosystem. “What we seek as intel professionals is to create as many sensors from as many different altitudes and sensing domains of ground, air and space as possible because we believe that creates some important dilemmas for adversaries,” Evans said. “If you only do things from the ground or only from space, youre giving your adversaries a lot of opportunities to counter your capabilities because they can then focus on countering exactly what youre doing.”  Specifically, he said, the multi-layered approach allows the force to provide early entry forces with the tools they need to find without relying on uncontested communications or exquisite space-based sensing systems.  The results from testing Wallabee will help inform future experimentations, Evans said, adding that it will be a “complementary” exercise to a large balloon swarm exercise that is slated for later this year. Originally, the swarm exercise was to take place in the Indo-Pacific theater, however, Evans told Breaking Defense at the annual AAAA conference earlier this year that it would be taking place some place else, but did not share where. Nonetheless, Evans said he’s hopeful that Wallabee will provide important lessons on such capabilities, especially as the Army and greater Defense Department focus on experimenting before heavily investing in a product or program.  “It allows you to learn early, especially if youre going to learn some things that are things you dont want to repeat; it allows you to learn that before you make enormous investments, and then learn that lesson after its too late,” Evans said.  “Were not yet ready to declare, you know, mission success here. What we are ready to declare is that we know we need to do this. We must do this. Its a domain we must exploit,” he added.  UPDATED 6/4/2026 at 1:42 ET to clarify that Applied Intuition makes the ATR software for the sensor used in Project Wallabee.  

[Category: Land Warfare, Space, Army, Army G-2, balloons, J-7, Space Force, stratosphere]

As of 6/5/26 8:00pm. Last new 6/5/26 2:23pm.