Crooked Bough News Round-up

— Amid Democratic turmoil, Senate passes yearlong funding stopgap with $892B for defense

 

at 3/14/25 4:41pm

The US Capitol. (Photo by Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images) WASHINGTON — The Senate approved a GOP-authored funding bill that will keep federal agencies funded until Sept. 30, with a $892.5 billion defense topline that slightly exceeds that of fiscal 2024. The full-year continuing resolution (CR) passed in a 54-46 vote largely along party lines, preventing a government shutdown before a midnight deadline. Ten Democrats voted with Republicans on an earlier procedural vote that allowed the bill to break filibuster. Unlike a typical CR, which keeps government funding at the previous year’s levels and does not allow the Pentagon to start new programs, the measure approved for FY25 includes a slight funding boost as well as provisions meant to give the Pentagon more flexibility. Namely, the bill: contains updated funding totals for Navy shipbuilding accounts, adding money for a third Arleigh Burke-class destroyer and additional ship-to-shore connectors, and cutting almost all funds for the Constellation-class frigate; allows the Pentagon to start new programs, provided they were funded in the draft FY25 defense appropriations bills approved by either the House or Senate; provides $8 billion in general transfer authority; and approves multi-year funding authority for CH-53K Heavy Lift helicopters, T408 engines, and USS Virginia Class submarines. Democrats had sought a monthlong CR that would have granted congressional appropriators more time to hammer out FY25 spending bills, and they have criticized the Republican-penned bill for handing President Donald Trump additional authorities to redirect funding to his own priorities. However, faced with a March 14 deadline, House and Senate Democrats failed to get on the same page. Though higher than FY24 levels, the CR passed today still falls under caps set for FY25 by Congress in the Fiscal Responsibility Act, with nondefense spending $15 billion under the limit and defense under by almost $3 billion. The House passed the bill Tuesday evening in a 217-213 vote that largely adhered to party lines. With a 218-214 split in the House, Speaker Mike Johnson could only afford to lose one GOP vote if all Democrats voted against the bill. House Democrat leadership whipped its members to oppose the bill, but in the end Johnson was successful in rounding up the numbers needed to get the bill across the line, with Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie as the lone GOP defector. The House adjourned for a weeklong recess on the heels of the successful vote, leaving Senate Democrats with a dilemma. Unlike the House, where a bill can pass via a simple majority, a funding bill moving through the Senate must first proceed through a “cloture vote” that requires 60 votes — meaning Senate Republicans were dependent on gaining the votes of at least eight Democrats to pass the bill.  While House Democrats urged their colleagues in the Senate to follow their lead and vote against the CR, some Senate Democrats expressed concern that shutting down the government would have a more negative impact on the country, including potentially empowering Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency to make greater cuts to the federal government. On Thursday night, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, took to the Senate floor to announce that he would vote for the continuing resolution, reversing course from the position he espoused on Wednesday. “For sure, the Republican bill is a terrible option … but I believe allowing Donald Trump to take much more power via a government shutdown is a much worse option,” he said. “Therefore, I will vote to keep the government open and not shut it down. Schumer’s decision set off a firestorm of criticism from many Senate Democrats, as well as House Democrats who overwhelmingly voted against the bill.  House Democratic leaders took the extraordinary step of leaving an ongoing retreat and returning to Capitol Hill to hold a news conference imploring Senate Democrats to hold the line against the bill. “We do not want to shut down the government, but we are not afraid of a government funding showdown,” said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-NY. “And we will win that showdown because we stand on the side of the American people.” Asked whether Schumer acquiesced to Republicans, Jeffries demurred, stating that was a question best left to the Senate and that the position of House Democrats is “very clear.” He declined to comment when asked whether the Senate needed new leadership and whether he retains confidence in Schumer. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., issued a statement calling the decision between the CR and a government shutdown a false choice, urging Democrats to fight back for a better way. Meanwhile, Trump, in a Friday morning post on Truth Social, lauded Schumer’s decision, stating that it “took ‘guts’ and courage!” Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, led the charge against the CR in the upper chamber, telling lawmakers in a floor speech this afternoon that they should follow her in voting against cloture and against the bill itself. Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House, she said in a speech on the Senate floor. If you refuse to put forward an offer that includes any Democratic input and you don’t get Democratic votes, that’s on Republicans.

[Category: Congress, Pentagon, 2025 defense appropriations, continuing resolution, Defense Budget 2026, Sen. Charles Schumer] [Link to media]

— Senate confirms billionaire financier Feinberg as Pentagon’s No. 2

 

at 3/14/25 12:27pm

Nominee for Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen A. Feinberg listens to the opening remarks of a Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington, D.C., Feb. 25, 2025. (DoD photo by U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Madelyn Keech) WASHINGTON — The Senate today confirmed billionaire financier Stephen Feinberg to be the Defense Department’s number two official, paving the way for the department to swear in the leader traditionally responsible for overseeing the Pentagons’ sprawling bureaucracy. Feinberg’s nomination was cleared in a 59-40 vote this afternoon. Feinberg is the third major Defense Department figure tapped by President Donald Trump to be confirmed by the Senate, following Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in January and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll last month.  A cofounder of private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, Feinberg told lawmakers during his Feb. 25 confirmation hearing that he had overseen the restructure of failing businesses and put them on the road to profitability — tactics he could apply to make the Pentagon leaner, more efficient and more financially accountable. He vowed to take a sharp look at acquisition reform, and indicated that he would be willing to cut legacy programs as the department looks to find 8 percent of its budget that it can redirect to top priorities. At the time, Democrats largely pressed Feinberg on how he would implement the Trump administration’s stated plan to eliminate 5 to 8 percent of the Pentagon’s civilian workforce, a query that Feinberg said he could not yet answer definitively, adding that “without some turnover, you can’t become an efficient organization.”  He also dodged questions about whether Russia invaded Ukraine, telling lawmakers, “I dont think some person whos not informed on this, not involved in discussions, should make statements public that could undermine what the president and the secretarys intent is.” As a businessman whose holdings have reportedly included defense firms such as Navistar Defense, DynCorp and Stratolaunch, Feinberg has largely stayed out of the spotlight.  During Trump’s first administration, he headed the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, which gives private citizens access to classified information so they can provide advice to the president about the inner workings of the Intelligence Community.  Despite some lawmakers’ frustrations with Feinberg’s answers to questions on Ukraine, civilian workforce cuts and overall spending, his nomination was generally uncontroversial. However, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., raised repeated concerns about potential conflict of interests such as his ties to Ligado Networks, which is currently suing the Departments of Defense and Commerce. 

[Category: Congress, Pentagon, Stephen Feinberg, Trump administration, Trump nominations] [Link to media]

— UK Royal Navy receives first autonomous mine countermeasures system

 

at 3/14/25 12:03pm

The Royal Navy has taken delivery of new autonomous mine countermeasures systems (Thales) BELFAST — The UK has announced the first delivery of an autonomous mine countermeasures system as part of a €430 million ($468 million) Organisation for Joint Armament Co-operation-led (OCCAR) Anglo-French naval cooperation program. In a statement today, the British MoD said that the Thales-made Maritime Mine Counter Measure (MMCM) systems are a new capability for the Royal Navy and comprise a 12-meter long Unmanned Surface Vessel (USV) dubbed ARIADNE, alongside off-board payloads and a Remote Command Centre (RCC). With this advanced technology, mines can be rapidly detected in a more cost-effective and safer manner than previously, greatly increasing operational tempo and eliminating the need for sailors to enter mine danger areas, noted London. It also outlined that the USV can be deployed from shore or a mothership to detect seabed mines in collaboration with the Thales-made Towed Synthetic Aperture Multiviews (TSAM) sonar system. Developments in sensor technology, data analytics, and machine learning have all significantly contributed to this innovation, allowing vessels to operate either fully autonomously or remote controlled by operators in a portable operations centre, added the MoD. Fitted with AI automatic target recognition, these vessels will filter and refine vast amounts of data allowing professional operators to speed up the process of classifying and neutralising mines. The UK alone has spent £184 million on the MMCM program, with the Royal Navy set to receive four systems overall by the end of the year. The MoD also revealed that French MMCM deliveries have also taken place. Deliveries are part of OCCARs MMCM Production Contract (Stage II) which follows on from an earlier Prototyping Phase (Stage 1), according to the organization. Alongside lead contractors Thales UK and Thales France, key subcontractors include Swedens Saab, Frances Exail Prototyping and US firm L3Harris. Thales UK will train Royal Navy personnel on the ARIADNE boat for a period before the service undertakes an operational evaluation of equipment and start to utilise MMCM to fulfil operational duties, added the UK MoD. According to the UKs procurement arm, Defence Equipment and Support, the Royal Navy is committed to a further three autonomous mine hunting systems — Wilton, Sweep and Seacat — as it looks to transition away from conventional ship-based methods. The Royal Navy plans to gradually phase out conventional crewed mine hunting vessels as additional autonomous systems are delivered over the next five years or so, said the UK MoD. Other navies are making similar strides to the UK, with the US Navy recently rolling out a series of contract awards to advance the mine countermeasures mission package, set to deploy on its Littoral Combat Ships.

[Category: Global, Naval Warfare, Drones, Europe, france, NATO, Navy, OCCAR, royal navy, Thales, UK] [Link to media]

— DIU picks four companies, including two Ukrainian teammates, for one-way drone prototypes

 

at 3/14/25 10:54am

A Ukrainian soldier launches a hand-held drone in 2015 (Petro Zadorzhnyy/AFP via Getty Images) WASHINGTON — Heeding a congressional directive, the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) has selected four companies to proceed with development of long-range, one-way drones capable of reaching their targets amid stiff electronic warfare interference, the office announced today.  The awards in the Artemis program went to US-based drone makers AeroVironment and Dragoon, as well as software firms Auterion and Swan, each of whom is partnered with one of two separate, unnamed Ukraininan drone producers, according to a DIU press release. Contract values were not disclosed.  True to the name of the Greek goddess of the hunt, Artemis aims to deliver a ground-launched prototype that can takeoff “quickly and expeditiously” and fly anywhere from 50 km (31.1 miles) to over 300 km at low altitudes.  Following a solicitation for bids posted just over four months ago, DIU moved quickly to sift through 165 proposals, carry out flight demonstrations and issue contracts, the DIU release says. According to Defense News, Artemis stems from a congressional item in the aid package passed for Ukraine last year. “We are excited about the non-traditional companies who are providing low-cost, adaptable, long-range, UAS platforms with the potential to maximize operational flexibility for the Joint force,” Trent Emeneker, DIU’s program manager for the effort, said in the agency’s release. “This was the intent of Congress’s direction to rethink how to get capabilities to the warfighter at speed and scale that can deliver much faster than traditional Programs of Record.” Emeneker told Defense News that two of the drones have a range of roughly 100 km while the other two can fly over 1,000 km. The smaller drones DIU is evaluating cost under $20,000 each, while the larger systems run closer to $70,000, the outlet reported. The “next step,” according to the DIU notice, is to complete prototyping and “demonstrate success” by May 2025, with the goal of having a “successful prototype” in hand by the end of this fiscal year.  Overall the Artemis effort aims to deliver a capability in dire need on the modern battlefield highlighted by the conflict in Ukraine, where drones have formed the tip of the spear of frontline fighting. As the war has dragged on, dense electronic warfare has disrupted the use of many systems, leading to interest in alternative navigational techniques, like terrain mapping, so that drones can avoid interference and dodge detection by emitting fewer signals that can be picked up by sensors. Operators additionally try to fly systems as low as possible, hugging the curvature of the earth, to avoid adversary radar.  When the solicitation for Artemis was announced, DIU also asked for systems that can carry a payload of at least 10 kg, with a goal of over 25 kg. The solicitation further asked for platforms that can incorporate third-party software and hardware systems in a “modular, warm-swappable manner,” and that “proprietary interfaces, message formatting, or hardware that require vendor-specific licensing are not permitted.”  “Project Artemis goals are directly tied to observations of current real world combat conditions as well as feedback from end users across the DoD on what capabilities may be needed in this space to face near peer threat capabilities around the world,” the DIU release says. Through the Artemis program, DIU and the Pentagon’s acquisition and sustainment office “are moving rapidly to provide an option for Services and Combatant Commands to choose from, delivered years in advance of current Program of Record timeframes.”

[Category: Air Warfare, Congress, Networks & Digital Warfare, Aerovironment, Air Force, cyber security, Defense Innovation Unit DIU, Drones, networks, technology, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— The Navy needs a 180-degree pivot: Embracing autonomy and AI for maritime dominance

 

at 3/14/25 8:17am

The unmanned surface vessel Mariner transits the Pacific Ocean during Integrated Battle Problem (IBP) 23.2, Sep. 7, 2023. IBP 23.2 is a Pacific Fleet exercise to test, develop and evaluate the integration of unmanned platforms into fleet operations to create warfighting advantages. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Jesse Monford) The United States Navy stands at a critical juncture, and as the global maritime landscape evolves, so too must our approach to maintaining naval supremacy. As it stands now, the navy is incapable of being active in three simultaneous theaters, lacks the depth in munitions, ships, and personnel for sustained combat operations, and struggles to produce the necessary warships, using outdated concepts from World War II and the Cold War. Which is to say, almost every part of the system is flawed. To address these challenges, the Navy must pivot away from large, costly platforms and embrace mass production and customizability. The service’s guiding philosophy should focus on autonomous systems, AI, cyber, electronic warfare, and distributed lethality, and include a cultural shift toward viewing software programmers as key partners for sailors. Unmanned surface and subsurface ships are at a similar development stage as unmanned aircraft were a decade ago. However, the maturity curve and adoption of drone ships will proceed much more rapidly than it has for comparable aircraft. This is due to two simple reasons: AI’s rapid development is providing a springboard that aerial drones a decade ago did not have, and sea drone production will benefit from the lessons learned from aerial drones. While manned vessels will never fully go away, the Navy should pivot away from its long held 355 ship target — which is proving unrealistic from a production standpoint anyway — and instead plan for tens of thousands of mostly smaller and relatively autonomous vessels, many of which will be tailored, specialized platforms for specific mission sets. With the White House announcing a wholesale overhaul of shipbuilding, this new direction will ensure that the United States become the global leaders for producing these new ships of the future, rather than investing in rebuilding the shipyards of the past. The Navy must also miniaturize its surface fleet. Swarms of smaller, modular vessels like patrol boats and gunboats should be deployed near coastlines, offering a deterrent and fast-response force without a major shipyard overhaul. These ships are cheaper to produce and deploy, particularly in contested or crowded areas. Thousands of drones, like the Orca, a large autonomous submarine designed for intelligence and mine hunting currently under development, could provide a persistent presence in contested waters. In addition, the era of manned Naval aircraft should end. Manned aircraft necessitate large aircraft carriers, which in turn require other ships for protection. Moving away from large ships to smaller, autonomous vessels is crucial. This shift will allow the Navy to leverage massive fleets of small and autonomous surface and subsurface drones, acting as force multipliers for surveillance, reconnaissance, and logistics support. Cancel F/A-XX, the Navy’s future sixth-generation air superiority fighter and invest that money into unmanned systems. Large numbers of aerial drones can enhance naval operations with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, extending the Navy’s eyes and ears without endangering its manned sea vessels. Combat operations in the Middle East and Europe show that swarming drones, specialized drones, and cheap, attritable drones that function as munitions dramatically reshape the battlefield. While longer ranges will require larger unmanned systems due to weight and power, systems designed to operate without a pilot will still be smaller than manned fighters. The current Navy continues to be locked in a mindset of scarcity. If the manufacturing base is mobilized and money is provided, the US Navy should set its sights on millions of drones per year, which over time will become larger and more sophisticated: The current manned aircraft fleet will not disappear overnight, but instead over 10 to 15 years as they age out. Similar to the ships, the production of drones at scale is much simpler than hand building Joint Strike Fighters, and challenging industry to produce them by the millions is possible. If we could produce over 300,000 aircraft during World War II, we should be able to mass produce a million drones today. What is certain, is that if we do not try, then we will not succeed. The Navys 180-degree pivot towards mass production, customization, and the integration of autonomous systems and AI is essential if the US is to maintain maritime dominance. By embracing these changes, the Navy can effectively counter emerging threats and ensure the free flow of goods and resources. Failing to fix our broken Navy is nonnegotiable. Fortunately, the change that is needed is affordable, and achievable. It is up to the Congress, which has the constitutional duty to provide and maintain a Navy, to supply the funding, flexibility, and moral support needed to make this fix. Retired US Army Maj. Gen. John G. Ferrari is a senior nonresident fellow at AEI. Ferrari previously served as a director of program analysis and evaluation for the service.

[Category: Naval Warfare, Opinion, artificial intelligence, Drones, electronic warfare (EW), Navy, Op-Ed Commentary, Unmanned Surface Vessels] [Link to media]

— Hegseth ‘disestablishing’ Office of Net Assessment, Pentagon’s strategic analysis specialists

 

at 3/13/25 4:08pm

Seal of the Pentagon on display at the Pentagon visitor center. (Photo by Trevor RaneyDigital Media Division) WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is disestablishing the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, a key office responsible for high-level strategic analysis, according to a memo obtained by Breaking Defense. The memo, dated today and signed by Hegseth, directs the Pentagon’s Performance Improvement Officer and Director of Administration and Management to reassign all civilian employees to other “mission critical positions” inside the department, while military personnel will return to their service to receive new billets. Simultaneously, the Pentagon’s top acquisition official is directed to “ensure that the necessary steps are taken” by department contracting authorities to terminate “all ONA contracts awarded for ONA and ONA-related requirements.” A number of DC think tanks and research organizations will likely be impacted by these cancelled contracts. However, it appears ONA will live on in some manner: The memo directs the deputy secretary of defense to provide a plan in 30 days to rebuild the office in a manner “consistent with [Hegseth’s] priorities.” The Pentagon did not directly return a request for comment. At roughly the time this story was published, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell sent out a brief public statement announcing the move, saying, This decision ensures that our resources are focused on the most pressing national security challenges while maintaining accountability and efficiency. The Department remains committed to conducting rigorous, forward-looking strategic assessments that directly inform defense planning and decision-making, the statement said. Founded in 1973, the Office of Net Assessment is sometimes referred to as the Pentagon’s internal think tank due to its role providing classified, long-term strategic-level studies on threats, trends, risks and opportunities that could shape the geopolitical environment 20 to 30 years in the future. Jim Baker, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, took over ONA in 2015 following the retirement of Andrew Marshall, its founding director who was often referred to as the “Pentagon’s Yoda.”  The Washington Post reported in 2015 that Baker’s appointment reflected then-Defense Secretary Ashton Carter’s interest in receiving assessments related to near-term threats as well as the long-term studies the office was known for. On Feb. 7, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, (R-Iowa), sent a letter to Hegseth questioning whether the office was still necessary and asking for information related to ONA’s production net assessments since 2007 and the last decade of contracts. “I remain concerned that ONA is not performing its mission for the taxpayer and has engaged in financial waste,” he wrote at the time.

[Category: Congress, Pentagon, Andrew Marshall, Office of Net Assessment, Pete Hegseth, Sen. Chuck Grassley] [Link to media]

— Hegseth orders ‘disestablishing’ of Office of Net Assessment

 

at 3/13/25 4:08pm

Seal of the Pentagon on display at the Pentagon visitor center. (Photo by Trevor RaneyDigital Media Division) WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered the disestablishing of the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, a key office responsible for high-level strategic analysis, according to a memo obtained by Breaking Defense. The memo, dated March 13 and signed by Hegseth, directs the Pentagon’s Performance Improvement Officer and Director of Administration and Management to reassign all civilian employees to other “mission critical positions” inside the department, while military personnel will return to their service to receive new billets. Simultaneously, the Pentagon’s top acquisition official is directed to “ensure that the necessary steps are taken” by department contracting authorities to terminate “all ONA contracts awarded for ONA and ONA-related requirements.” A number of DC think tanks and research organizations will likely be impacted by these cancelled contracts. However, it appears ONA will live on in some manner: the memo directs the deputy secretary of defense to provide a plan in 30 days to rebuild the office in a manner “consistent with [Hegseth’s] priorities.” The Pentagon did not directly return a request for comment. At roughly the time this story was published, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell sent out a public statement that said This decision ensures that our resources are focused on the most pressing national security challenges while maintaining accountability and efficiency. Founded in 1973, the Office of Net Assessment is sometimes referred to as the Pentagon’s internal think tank due to its role providing classified, long-term strategic-level studies on threats, trends, risks and opportunities that could shape the geopolitical environment 20 to 30 years in the future. Jim Baker, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, took over ONA in 2015 following the retirement of Andrew Marshall, its founding director who was often referred to as the “Pentagon’s Yoda.”  The Washington Post reported in 2015 that Baker’s appointment reflected then-Defense Secretary Ashton Carter’s interest in receiving assessments related to near-term threats as well as the long-term studies the office was known for. On Feb. 7, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, (R-Iowa), sent a letter to Hegseth questioning whether the office’s purpose was still necessary and asking for information related to ONA’s production net assessments since 2007 and the last decade of contracts. “I remain concerned that ONA is not performing its mission for the taxpayer and has engaged in financial waste,” he wrote.

[Category: Congress, Pentagon, Andrew Marshall, Office of Net Assessment, Pete Hegseth, Sen. Chuck Grassley] [Link to media]

— Who’s Who in Defense: Michael Waltz, National Security Advisor (NSA)

 

at 3/13/25 1:55pm

National Security Advisor (NSA) Michael Waltz   Responsibilities As the 29th U.S. National Security Advisor, Waltz is a key aide to President Donald Trump, advising him on national security issues and foreign policy. In his new role, Waltz leads the National Security Council, which is tasked with coordinating multiple federal agencies. Historically, the job of the NSA can be either high or low profile, but it demands quick pivots and cool-headed thinking under the threat of any volatilities. Perhaps the most well-known NSA remains Henry Kissinger, who left an indelible mark on U.S. foreign policy while serving under President Richard Nixon (1969 1976).   Quote “Iran will continue to stoke unrest because they want to destroy Israel. Making concession after concession to Iran is actually what is destabilizing the situation.”    Stated Priorities A strong proponent of the “America First foreign policy agenda,” set by the president.  A staunch supporter of Israel. Looking to overhaul the National Security Council, which includes reducing the number of career government personnel.  Expected to bring a more “hawk-like” position toward China. In the past, Waltz has expressed concerns over its “military buildup.”  Assume a more offensive stance in dealing with the U.S. southern border, calling the situation “untenable for our law enforcement personnel.”   Share any military support for Ukraine with equal assistance from Europe.    Political Career A three-term Republican congressman (2019 to 2025), Waltz succeeded Ron DeSantis for Floridas 6th congressional district. Chaired the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness for the 118th Congress. Resigned to assume the role of NSA. Served on the House Intelligence Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans during the 118th Congress, with Waltz calling India “the worlds largest democracy and an important strategic partner for the United States. Co-sponsored legislation in 2023 that called for military force against the cartels in Mexico, citing the high level of drugs flowing into the U.S.    Called for a boycott of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing over human rights issues.    Military Service The first Green Beret elected to Congress, Waltz served in the Army and National Guard for 27 years, retiring as colonel in the Army Special Forces. He was deployed to Afghanistan, the Middle East and Africa while on active duty (1996-2000), and served in the National Guard (2000-2025).    Business/Private Sector CEO and co-founder of defense contractor Metis Solutions (2010) that was purchased in 2020 by Pacific Architects and Engineers. Co-founded Askari Associates, an international consulting firm. Founded the Sumar Ghul Foundation, which cares for the families of fallen Afghan National Army soldiers. Senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Provided commentary on counter-terrorism and other issues for Fox News, CNN, BBC World News, PBS Frontline, and Voice of America. Authored the 2014 book, “Warrior Diplomat: A Green Beret’s Battles from Washington to Afghanistan, among others.   Public Service Prior to joining the private sector, Waltz worked in the Bush administration, serving as defense policy director for Secretaries of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Robert Gates. He also served as a counterterrorism advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney and helped create a funding and strategy for counternarcotics in Afghanistan and South Asia while working in the office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics.   Background   Early Years Michael George Glen Waltz was born in Boynton Beach, FL, on January 31, 1974, and was raised in Jacksonville by his mother. Both his father and grandfather were chiefs in the Navy. Education Graduated from Virginia Military Institute with a B.A degree in International Studies. Named an honor graduate.  Personal In 2021, Waltz married Julia Nesheiwat, an American academic and a former military intelligence officer. During the span of her career, she has held senior national security and economic policy positions under the administrations of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump, becoming his 10th Homeland Security Advisor in 2021. She and Waltz live in Boynton Beach.  Awards Waltz received four Bronze Stars while serving in the Special Forces during combat tours in Afghanistan, the Middle East, and Africa.

[Category: Pentagon, Mike Waltz, national security, National Security Advisor, nsa, Who’s Who 2025] [Link to media]

— NRO, MDA pulled out of annual DC Satellite conference due to travel restrictions

 

at 3/13/25 1:36pm

The DC Convention Center on Mt. Vernon Square, NW, hosted the Satellite 2025 conference this month. (Photo by Gerald Martineau/The The Washington Post via Getty Images) WASHINGTON — This weeks Satellite 2025/GovMilSpace show appears to be the latest defense conference impacted by the Trump administrations Feb. 26 executive order restricting non-essential travel by federal officials and the sweeping cost-cutting spree being spearheaded by Elon Musks Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Officials from the National Reconnaissance Office and the Missile Defense Agency had planned to exhibit, but cancelled last minute following the executive order, spokespeople confirmed to Breaking Defense. However, officials from other Pentagon-based agencies — including the Space Development Agency and the Defense Innovation Union — made scheduled appearances on stage, a reflection of the confusion that has swirled around what is and isnt allowed under the executive order. The National Reconnaissance Offices Directors Innovation Initiative, a research and development program aimed at leveraging commercial capabilities, canceled a planned exhibit prior to the satellite shows launch on March 10, an agency spokesperson confirmed. The office is housed at NRO headquarters in Chantilly, Va. The presence of NRO’s Directors Innovation Initiative at Satellite 2025 was curtailed in accordance with the latest Executive Order and DoD guidance regarding conference attendance and non-essential travel, the spokesperson said. Likewise, the Missile Defense Agencys Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer office, headquartered in Huntsville, Ala., also canceled its planned exhibit, with a spokesperson citing the DOGE-related ban on non-essential travel and freezes all use of federal credit cards, While not defense related, NASAs Space Communications and Navigation program office staffed an information booth for the first two days of the show, but abruptly shut it down on the third day. The program office is headquartered at the Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio but also has local support officials at NASAs Space Operations Directorate. A spokesperson from the NASA Space Communications and Navigation program did not respond by press time to a request for comment about the rationale for the booths closure. Its unclear if the NRO and MDA attendance was impacted at all by a March 5 memo [PDF], signed by Darin Selnick who is performing the duties of the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, which limits any charges above one dollar on government-issued civilian travel charge cards. In general, government agencies usually are required to pay an upfront fee to register an exhibit space at a trade show — although neither NRO nor MDA was able to confirm if that was the case for Satellite 2025/GovMilSpace. An official at Access Intelligence responsible for booking exhibitors at the show did not return a request for comment about the issue by press time. The non-existence of the NRO and MDA exhibits did not go unnoticed by satellite communications industry officials in attendance at the show, exacerbating fears about how future military trade shows could be affected. That the NRO office is local enough to not require travel costs but still pulled out may raise eyebrows. Attendance by Air Force and Space Force officials and military personnel at the annual Air & Space Forces Association (AFA) Warfare Symposium held March 3-5 in Colorado was sparse, due to travel restrictions imposed by the Department of the Air Force. Further, as first reported by Air & Space Forces Magazine, the Air Force Materiel Command’s Life Cycle Management Center has canceled its annual industry seminar, called Life Cycle Industry Days, planned for July 28-29 in Dayton, Ohio. The service cited the Feb. 26 executive order as driving the decision.

[Category: Pentagon, Space, Business & Industry, Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), missile defense agency, NASA, National Reconnaissance Office, Space Force] [Link to media]

— FCC launches new Council for National Security to counter threats from China

 

at 3/13/25 12:30pm

Telecommunication tower with mesh dots, glittering particles for wireless telecommunication technology (Getty images) WASHINGTON — Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr announced today the launch of the Council for National Security within the agency aimed at fending off foreign bad actors, particularly China.  “Today, the country faces a persistent and constant threat from foreign adversaries, particularly the CCP [Chinese Communist Party],” Carr said in a news release today. “These bad actors are always exploring ways to breach our networks, devices, and technology ecosystem. It is more important than ever that the FCC remain vigilant and protect Americans and American companies from these threats.”  The council will be headed by Adam Chan, a former associate at the Boyden Gray PLLC law firm, per the release.  Today’s announcement outlines three focus areas for the council. The first is to reduce the US’s dependencies on foreign adversaries regarding tech and telecommunications supply chains. Second is to “mitigate” the US’s vulnerabilities to surveillance, espionage and cyberattacks. Lastly, the council will “ensure” that the US outpaces China in its race to develop and deploy “critical technologies such as 5G, 6G, artificial intelligence, satellites and space, quantum, robotics, autonomous systems, and the internet of things. The FCC and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) are the two organizations responsible for setting US spectrum policy, and governing which users get access when to what bandwidths for what functions. The FCC regulates commercial spectrum usage while the NTIA is responsible for advocating for spectrum usage for military departments. The announcement comes against the background of a tug-of-war between commercial providers and the Defense Department over usage of key parts of the spectrum, specifically between the 1 GhZ (gigahertz) to 6 GHz range, which makes up the 3.1-3.45 and 3.5 GHz S-band — widely considered to be the “Goldilocks” zone of the spectrum. The DoD has contended that this part of the spectrum band is essential for its various satellite communications, radars and navigation systems. However, US and foreign commercial companies covet those frequencies for providing high-speed wireless service to civilian and military users alike. When it comes to the fight over the spectrum, John Sherman, former DoD chief information officer and now dean of the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University, previously told Breaking Defense that “it is a zero sum game for the DoD.  “There is finite spectrum, and the physics of the spectrum, about the desirability of the lower [3 GHz band] both for our target acquisition radars and for 5G, this makes it very difficult,” he said. Carr is viewed as someone who supports the commercial sector over DoD on the spectrum fight. While there are likely a multitude of reasons as to why Carr is making this move, including the recent attacks on the US telecommunications sector facilitated by Chinese threat actor Salt Typhoon, supporters of the Pentagon may look at todays news with a wary eye.

[Category: Networks & Digital Warfare, Pentagon, 5G, Brendan Carr, China, cyber security, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), networks, technology] [Link to media]

— New bill would create commission to investigate state of American shipbuilding

 

at 3/13/25 10:48am

The aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75), front, passes the aircraft carrier USS George H. W. Bush (CVN 77) as it departs Norfolk Naval Shipyard after completing a 10-month regularly scheduled extended carrier incremental availability. (US Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Steven Edgar) WASHINGTON — Three House lawmakers today introduced legislation to establish a congressional commission to “investigate the condition of the U.S. maritime industry and impediments to its growth.” The bill, dubbed the “Save Our Shipyards Act,” is co-sponsored by Reps. Mark Green, R-Tenn., Jen Kiggans, R-Va., and Don Davis, D-N.C. If passed into law, the bill would establish a “national commission on the maritime industrial base.” “With a laser focus on the needs of the American military, the commission will develop actionable policy recommendations to revitalize our maritime industrial base,” according to a statement from the lawmakers. The state of American shipbuilding was pushed into the spotlight last week when President Donald Trump announced during an address to Congress the establishment of a new White House office focused on the subject. Green is the chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security while Davis and Kiggans are both members on the House Armed Services Committee. Historically, legislation related to national security rarely receives standalone votes on the House floor. Rather, members submit their legislation as amendments to the annual defense policy bill. When asked about a path forward, a spokesman for Green told Breaking Defense, “With bipartisan support, and a broad recognition of this crisis on both sides of the aisle, we are exploring all options. This includes a standalone vote as well as an amendment to the must-pass NDAA.” Even if the legislation is passed, congressional committees occasionally face stumbling blocks in their early days from a somewhat unlikely source — the lawmakers who established them. Such was the fate of an independent commission that lawmakers established in 2022 to offer policy recommendations for the US Navy’s force structure. That commission severely lagged in starting its work due to some lawmakers failing to appoint their respective commissioners. Separately, Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., and other lawmakers have been touting their own shipbuilding-focused legislation, dubbed the “Ships For America Act.” That bill, among other things, would create a maritime czar inside the executive branch oversees shipbuilding issues that touch both the Pentagon and the Transportation Department. Notably, that legislation also had explicit support from former Rep. Mike Waltz, who is now Trump’s national security advisor. Valerie Insinna contributed to this story.

[Category: Congress, Naval Warfare, Don Davis, Jen Kiggans, Mark Green, Mike Waltz, Navy, shipbuilding] [Link to media]

— Don’t let ‘efficiency’ result in looser standards for defense contractors

 

at 3/13/25 9:55am

U.S. Army Reserve soldiers receive an overview of Washington D.C. as part of the 4th Annual Day with the Army Reserve May 25, 2016. The event was led by the Private Public Partnership office. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. 1st Class Marisol Walker) Christopher Kubasik — CEO of L3Harris Technologies, Inc. and Chairman of the Aerospace Industries Association — recently published an open letter to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), recommending the elimination of Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) in the name of efficiency. It’s a clever attempt to position a traditional defense contractor as an ally of new thinking, but it comes with a big caveat: Eradicating these standards would only promote more Pentagon waste. As Kubasik explains, Congress established Cost Accounting Standards to protect taxpayers from misallocated costs or unreasonable expenses in military contracts. This remains true today. CAS are a set of accounting principles used to price certain government contracts — specifically, what are known as “cost-based” contracts. These are contracts that are priced based on the actual or expected cost of performing the work. Without CAS, contractors could essentially charge the government whatever they want — regardless of actual costs incurred. Kubasik argues that Cost Accounting Standards are duplicative because contractors are already required to comply with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), suggesting that they “replace” CAS. But Cost Accounting Standards serve an entirely different purpose than GAAP. GAAP provides the basis for financial reporting at the highest level, the 30,000-foot view of a company’s financial performance, including its cash flows and profitability. GAAP are enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to protect investors — so that they have a full understanding of a company’s financial position, including assets and liabilities. GAAP exists to provide financial information about companies so that investors and creditors can make informed decisions before investing or extending credit to companies. The SEC does not concern itself with the minutiae of contract costing — or the process through which companies determine how to charge the government on cost-based government contracts. In fact, the government established Cost Accounting Standards in 1970 because the General Accounting Office (now known as the Government Accountability Office, an arm of Congress) concluded that GAAP were inadequate for determining how companies allocate costs to relevant government contracts. This reality has not changed, and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles are inappropriate for companies to use in determining the costs that should be charged to government contracts. In contrast, Cost Accounting Standards provide contractors with criteria to measure and assign costs to specific contracts. It outlines how to allocate costs between government contracts and non-Federal work — guidance that is still absent from GAAP. Cost Accounting Standards are also the mechanism through which the government recoups funds when contractors do not consistently apply established cost accounting practices, charging the government for unreasonable costs. The ability to recover taxpayer dollars improperly charged by contractors is vital to effective oversight, without which inefficient spending abounds. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles do not enable the government to recoup such costs. One need only confer with recent history to understand the importance of Cost Accounting Standards. In 2020 the Defense Contract Management Agency reported over $3.1 billion in CAS compliance issues in active litigation with contractors. That amount did not include informal disputes that had not yet ripened into litigation. Far from pesky red tape, the Cost Accounting Standards enable the government to hold contractors accountable for wasteful spending. So while Pentagon contractors may claim that they find CAS to be burdensome, they provide the government critical insight into the costs of performing a government contract. Without these standards, the government, on behalf of American taxpayers, would not be able to meaningfully challenge contractors when they engage in overcharging. Efficient spending requires contractor accountability. The Pentagon cannot monitor performance on military contracts without visibility into contractors’ cost expenditures. The government not only uses this cost information for current contracts, but also to price future contracts. Absent the cost information provided by Cost Accounting Standards, the government is at the mercy of contractors to provide accurate and complete contract cost information without accounting gimmicks. There is no doubt that the absence of these standards would result in increased contract costs. Without Cost Accounting Standards, the Pentagon loses much of its ability to hold contractors accountable for unreasonable expenses borne by the government, increasing military spending in both the short and long-term. Eliminating these standards would be irresponsible, resulting in potentially billions of dollars in wasteful spending at the expense of taxpayers. Julia Gledhill is a Research Associate for the National Security Reform Program at the Stimson Center. She focuses her research and writing on Pentagon spending, military contracting, and weapon acquisition.

[Category: Congress, Opinion, Pentagon, Business & Industry, Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Op-Ed Commentary] [Link to media]

— A nuclear Poland? Logistics, political challenges ahead of potential Warsaw deal

 

at 3/13/25 8:29am

A general view taken on March 7, 2025 shows MPs listening to the speech of Polands Prime Minister Donald Tusk on the situation in Ukraine at the plenary hall of Polands parliament in Warsaw. (WOJTEK RADWANSKI/AFP via Getty Images) WARSAW and WASHINGTON — Last week, Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk stood in front of the parliament and gave a speech on the state of European security. And in it, he made eyebrows all across the world raise up with a declaration that his government was open to joining up with a nuclear security effort proposed by Paris. “We must also look more boldly into the future when it comes to arms technology. We are seriously talking to the French about their idea of a nuclear umbrella over Europe,” Tusk said. “It is high time for Poland, using not only the resources it has, but also its own experience, experience on the battlefield, Ukrainian experience, to look more boldly at our possibilities concerning the most modern weapons. “At the moment — I say this with full responsibility — purchases of conventional weapons, the most traditional ones, are not enough.” It’s an extraordinary statement, but one that experts say should not be a full surprise, given Poland’s longstanding fears about Russia, its aggressiveness in rearming since the Ukraine invasion, and the clear signals from Washington that the NATO alliance may not be as iron clad as believed for decades. Artur Kacprzyk of the Polish Institute of International Affairs says the timing of Tusk’s comment reflects real world politics. “It is possible that a national nuclear option is being floated by the Polish government to convince the U.S. not to weaken security guarantees for Poland at the time when the Trump administration seeks a reset with Russia and indicated it would cut military presence in Europe,” Kacprzyk told Breaking Defense. “Poland’s history makes it very clear why they are concerned that the people they align with, and the people they rely on for protection from Russia, will abandon them,” Jon Wolfsthal, a former US government official now with the Federation of American Scientists, told Breaking Defense. Tusk’s comments are likely “a signal of concern — maybe to motivate the United States, but clearly designed to play on the French and perhaps the British. But I think it’s also an open, transparent signal for concern in trying to figure out how they protect themselves.” Added Marek Świerczyński, head of the security and international affairs desk at the Polityka Insight center for policy analysis based in Warsaw, “Tusks declaration that ‘Poland must reach for the most modern possibilities also related to nuclear weapons and modern unconventional weapons’ … must be recognized that it is the most far-reaching [nuclear statement] because it comes from the prime minister, in parliament and at a time of rebuilding the European security order. It doesnt appear the issue is going away anytime soon. On Thursday, Polish President Andrzej Duda, a political opponent of Tusk, called for the US to base nuclear weapons on Polish soil. But analysts tell Breaking Defense that the issue comes with major logistical, and geopolitical, hurdles. A Nuclear History In the early 1960s, the Polish Army was equipped with two Soviet nuclear-capable weapons, the 8K11 and 3R10 missiles. Due to their low accuracy, they could only be effectively used as carriers of 3N14 nuclear warheads. Twelve of the MiG-21PFM aircraft delivered to Poland were also adapted to carry nuclear weapons. In the mid-1960s, Polish-Soviet talks resulted in an agreement to build three nuclear weapons depots inside Poland, based on Soviet plans, each equipped with two nuclear weapons stores. According to initial plans, they were to store 178 nuclear warheads, which were to be carried by 8K11 and 3R10 missiles. Construction of the depots began in 1967 and was completed in January 1970. Then the depots were transferred to the Northern Group of Soviet Forces, which was to take care of the charges until the outbreak of war with NATO, in which case control was to be transferred to the Polish Army. According to disclosed data, in the mid-1980s they stored 14 500-kT warheads, 83 10-kT warheads, two 200-kT bombs, 24 15-kT bombs and 10 0.5-kT bombs. In 1991, Poland announced that they would remove the nuclear capable delivery systems from their weapons inventory. Still, questions inside Poland about whether it benefits them to have nuclear weapons in country has persisted. They only gained energy after the Ukraine invasion, when Poland launched a dramatic reinvention of its armed forces. Tusk’s statement isn’t even the first time a recent prime minister raised the issue: In June 2023, then-Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki declared his interest in hosting nuclear weapons under the NATO umbrella. But the push has new energy given the events of the last few weeks: the dramatic White House meeting between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the statements from European leaders that they can no longer rely on America as a partner, and Trump’s further statements that he may not feel obligated to protect NATO nations in case of a conflict. According to a Feb. 21 poll, 52.9 percent of surveyed Poles supported the idea of Poland having its own nuclear weapons, with 27.9 percent against. Support for the nuclear option is likely to increase if Poland’s security environment deteriorates further, especially if Russia scores a victory in its war against Ukraine, and the US reduces its military presence in Europe and commitment to NATO. Donald Tusk, the leader of Civic Platform (PO) opposition alliance, speaks during election convention in Katowice, Poland on October 12, 2023. This years parliamentary elections will be held in Poland on October 15th. (Photo by Beata Zawrzel/NurPhoto via Getty Images) What Could A Nuclear Poland Look Like? Analysts who spoke to Breaking Defense emphasized that Tusk’s statement was fairly broad, and details are fairly scant. Świerczyński noted that “we must first know what we are talking about, and unfortunately both President Emmanuel Macrons proposal and Prime Minister Donald Tusks statement do not make this task any easier.” At a base level, though, Świerczyński feels Tusk made a mistake even talking publicly about the concept. “It is not like partners, competitors or — most of all — enemies would look on idly at some hypothetical-theoretical ‘Polish nuclear program,’” he said. “In this sense, I am angry with the Prime Minister for talking about it at all, because these matters are so sensitive that it is better to talk about them as little as possible and do as much as possible — quietly, without bragging or even showing the effects, although this is difficult for a politician.” What a French nuclear umbrella for Poland would look like is unclear. A former defense official, speaking on background, told Breaking Defense that “In Europe, the United Kingdom and France, which possess relatively small nuclear arsenals, would be hard-pressed to replace the backstop provided by U.S. conventional and nuclear forces on behalf of the continent absent a different approach to requirements or costly changes in force diversity and size.” In theory, Wolfsthal said, “France has nuclear subs, so potentially those could be at the disposal of Europe, and if you put French troops on the border with Russia that means France is committed to protect those troops, and that’s a tripwire.” But, he emphasized, such a shift would require a radical posture change for France. As first reported by Breaking Defense, the F-35 was certified to carry and deploy the B61-12 tactical nuclear weapon in October 2023; Poland is currently in the process of procuring 32 of the stealth fighters, which will all be delivered by 2029. However, the F-35 isn’t qualified to carry any French nuclear weapons, so teaming up with Paris would likely require alternatives — whether bringing old Mirage 2000s back into service or having some of France’s limited nuclear-capable Rafales stationed inside the country. While Tusk did not rule out a domestic nuclear effort, Poland developing its own nuclear program is almost surely unrealistic, according to Kacprzyk, both for logistical and geopolitical reasons. “While Poland could perhaps produce first explosive nuclear devices within a few years of a determined effort, it would take much longer to obtain a credible nuclear arsenal,” he said. “Risks would be related to the detection of such a nuclear program by Russia and allies alike.” “While pursuing nuclear weapons, Poland would have to contend with the risk of Russia using force to prevent such a program from being successful,” Kacprzyk added. However, he noted that if Poland sees risk at being abandoned by the US, Warsaw would “be at high risk of Russian aggression anyway.” Added Wolfsthal, “If NATO’s in shambles and Poland says we need a nuke, wherever they build it, those become instant targets. It becomes very unstable and very volatile very quickly.” And how Poland’s allies might react is also unclear. In theory, Warsaw could face sanctions or isolation for violating the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), but realistically, Poland would be taking action in conjunction with other European nations. By acting jointly in the future, European countries could pool their knowledge, resources, and infrastructure and make it more difficult for Russia to try to forcibly prevent nuclear weapons programs” Kacprzyk observed. But the political fallout would be wide, said the former Pentagon official, because “a decision by even one of our democratic allies or partners to actually cross the nuclear weapons threshold is not something the NPT is likely to be able to survive.

[Category: Air Warfare, Global, Land Warfare, Air Force, Army, donald tusk, Europe, NATO, nuclear weapons, Poland] [Link to media]

— Iron Drone Raider is at the cutting edge of autonomous drone defense

 

at 3/13/25 7:24am

The array of counter unmanned aircraft systems (CUAS) in the global defense marketplace share a common limitation. Almost all of them require a human in the loop to be effective. Iron Drone Raider does not. It represents a new generation of autonomous defense in which detecting, classifying, and defeating hostile drones is executed more efficiently, more cheaply and more persistently than ever. The Iron Drone system comes from Ondas Autonomous Systems (Nasdaq: ONDS), a newly organized defense tech competitor in the drone defense space. The system leverages the Israeli expertise of Ondas subsidiary, Airobotics, in developing fully autonomous drone systems, and includes features that were integrated under the real-time pressure of combat. The Iron Drone system is provided in the USA by another Ondas subsidiary, American Robotics, which specializes in complex drone operations in military and civilian environments. Development of the Iron Drone system began in 2016 and accelerated following the start of the Hamas-Israel conflict in 2023. For much of the year that followed, scores of hostile drones were intercepted in the greater Tel Aviv area where Airobotics is located. The consistent round-the-clock threat of drone attacks and the need to take them down without collateral damage reinforced the Iron Drone Raider team’s conviction that an autonomous approach to CUAS is essential. “We saw that the traditional contractors in defense were having a hard time here in Israel to maintain the agility to keep up with combat. The enemy is very agile, industry is not,” says Meir Kliner, CEO of Airobotics and President of Ondas Autonomous Systems. As in Ukraine, the threat to populated areas in Israel from both long and short-range drones quickly mutated from remotely controlled, radio frequency (RF) linked UAVs to pre-programmed and autonomous air vehicles capable of navigating to and striking targets without command and control. Opportunities for drone detection and mitigation narrowed with correspondingly shorter interception timelines and increasing probability of collateral damage. The Iron Drone system is a response to these realities, a platform that offers persistently-aware, human-independent, reusable and low-collateral drone defense without relying on RF sensing for detection or defeat. Iron Drone Raider System Ready to Deploy 24/7. Agile, Autonomous & Modular The Raider drone is the core of the Iron Drone system. It is a high-performance interceptor unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) derived from high-speed racing drones. The eight-pound (4 kg), eight-rotor UAV can launch from the surface to intercept hostile rotary-wing or fixed-wing drones at ranges out to a few miles at drone racer speeds while carrying a 2.2-pound payload. The primary payload is a ballistic net which Raider uses to capture Class-1 UAS. The Raider interceptor is deployed from a ground-based box which can hold up to three Raiders to respond to multiple hostile drones. The system integrates adjacent ground-based radar engineered to detect and identify low-altitude drones at ranges out to several miles. Iron Drone can also leverage networked sensors to increase detection ranges. When an incoming drone is detected, the Raider launches from the box and rapidly flies to the target area using ground sensor guidance. It autonomously shifts to its own onboard micro-radar, thermal and optical sensor-based guidance once the threat is in close proximity. It then identifies the target using proprietary computer vision and artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities. Raider locks on to the target and dynamically maneuvers into position to fire its net at close range with the adversary drone. The net incapacitates the drone which falls to the ground. An optional net-parachute slows its descent to reduce impact risk over populated areas and preserves the hostile UAV for examination for intelligence or other purposes. Raider provides live video as the entire sequence unfolds autonomously, obviating the need for human-actuated launch and intercept control, significantly shortening response time. Following the interception, Raider returns to the launch site, lands in a predetermined place, is retrieved and undergoes simple maintenance. It is fitted with a new net or other payload, and placed back in its launch pod where it is recharged and ready for reuse. “We believe we have developed the most mature, robust and combat proven CUAS system currently in the defense market. The system presents next the level of drone autonomy, with no need for human intervention for detection, capable of maneuvering and intercepting small and medium drones no matter how they navigate,” Kliner says, adding that in addition to its instantaneous readiness, the Iron Drone system yields cost benefits from eliminating active remote pilots to lowering the training burden for system operators. “Within the box you have a couple drones. You just need to plug it into [24 volt] power and it works,” vice president of marketing, Eitan Rotberg, explains. “You don’t need to charge batteries, you don’t need to add the payload. The drones are ready to go and they’re well-trained.” A network of Iron Drone systems can be deployed to military bases, front-line operating areas/forward command posts, borders or to protect critical infrastructure. Small in size, they can travel with forces in the field on platforms from Humvees and helicopters to manned or autonomous maritime vessels. Already integrated with sensor and command-control systems from leading integrators, the Iron Drone Raider system is agnostic, ready to plug and play with new sensor and C2 system providers in as little two weeks. Its modularity extends to payloads with kinetic options for CUAS and other missions now in development. Raider components can also be sourced from multiple providers and can be Blue-UAS certified to meet U.S. requirements. “It’s pretty impressive what you can do with this drone,” Kliner affirms. “It opens a lot of options.”   Proven in Israel, Poised To Produce and Deploy in America As it gains combat experience and sees expanded production in Israel, the Iron Drone system is poised to expand to new markets. In the US, Ondas’ American Robotics expects to engage technology partners to support demand for defense and homeland security markets. Iron Drone’s flexibility has been recognized in the Middle East where a major military and a renowned defense contractor placed orders for the system in 2024. It is already operational and proving itself daily, generating feedback that goes directly to the Israeli developer, Airobotics. Eric Brock, chairman and CEO of Ondas Holdings (Nasdaq: ONDS), the parent company of Ondas Autonomous Systems, has guided the growth of Ondas’ drone business since it acquired American Robotics in 2021 and Airobotics in 2023. Ondas’ vision has been to perfect Iron Drone in Israel before introducing it to the U.S. defense market. “It was actually a blessing to develop this from the urgency of need, from combat pressure,” Brock reflects. “Now, as we’ve gone operational, we’re devoting resources to bring this technology to other markets.” In addition to Iron Drone, Ondas Autonomous Systems is providing an intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance (ISR) drone system called Optimus to the public safety, first-responder, defense and commercial security markets. The dual-use Optimus System operates with the same level of autonomy as Iron Drone while undertaking aerial monitoring, inspection and other missions, providing overhead awareness for public safety and critical infrastructure or for homeland security and military installations. Optimus is in-use in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates’ largest and most populated city, with its police force. In the US, Optimus has already undergone a multi-month trial with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation Aeronautics Division and is being demonstrated in a large Northeast US city for major public safety operators. The system was also recently ordered by an important utility on the East Coast to help monitor and secure its infrastructure. A major Middle Eastern military has likewise begun deploying Optimus to secure military bases and sensitive border locations. Ondas Autonomous Systems’ early success with Optimus represents a feature which very few other CUAS providers can leverage – parallel commercial and defense revenue streams. Moreover, Iron Drone Raider and Optimus are complimentary systems, offering militaries, governments and municipalities the opportunity to combine autonomous drone based awareness with autonomous counter-drone defense. Iron Drone Raider System in Flight Tracking Hostile Drone. Iron Drone Raider will be progressively introduced to the United States defense market throughout 2025, As part of the effort, American Robotics will deploy its Iron Drone Demonstration Team to showcase Iron Drone to DoD in upcoming CUAS evaluation exercises and to potential defense industry partners with which the modular system can form comprehensive, layered counter drone solutions. “We expect to have the Iron Drone Demo Team meeting with various U.S. customers in April,” Brock affirms. The team recently conducted a demonstration in Germany and more are planned. Ondas’ CEO affirms that as part of its outreach American Robotics looks forward to working with a variety of sensor and command-control providers in the US this year. In tandem with Optimus, American Robotics is in the process of establishing domestic Iron Drone production facilities and preparing to scale the system for the American market. As part of the process, it has adopted Palantir’s “Foundry” enterprise resource platform to organize its operations and build out its supplier network. Utilizing Foundry further expands the integration potential of Iron Drone across traditional and emerging industry primes and presages U.S. market partnerships which American Robotics plans to announce in 2025. Ondas Autonomous Systems also envisions a broader production ecosystem with sufficient capacity to produce hardware for other providers to meet the scale that the growing global counter-drone market valued at approximately $1.6 billion in 2023, projected to grow at a 27.8% CAGR to reach $14.9 billion by 2032 – will require. As the market expands, Ondas will continue to refine and diversify Iron Drone Raider, progressively improving its proprietary AI-based autonomy, organic navigation capability, and payload options. As Meir Kliner says, Iron Drone is the first of a new breed of smart CUAS solutions that effectively cut response times, cost, and command complexity. Iron Drone Raider is “the intelligent counter-UAS drone that can operate in denied environments with precision and accuracy”.

[Category: Air Warfare, Sponsored Post, Air Force, Army, autonomous, Counter UAS cUAS, Drones, Iron Dome, Iron Dome America, Ondas Autonomous Systems, Ondas Custom, Ondas Holdings, Presented by Ondas, sponsored content] [Link to media]

— Amid ceasefire talks, Baltic defense leaders worry: What will Putin do with his battle-hardened army?

 

at 3/13/25 5:27am

A Russian Il-76MD90A(E) large transport aircraft sits on display at Dubai Airshow 2023. (Tim Martin / Breaking Defense) BELFAST — In the days before a US- and Ukraine-endorsed ceasefire proposal was on the table, defense leaders from two other countries on the Russian border sounded the alarm that even if Russian President Vladimir Putin agrees to a deal, the reprieve may only allow Moscow to further consolidate its military and industrial might, and use it again in Ukraine or elsewhere. A lot will depend on what the peace talks deliver, but 500,000 Russian troops will be battle-hardened and unlikely to want to return to civilian life earning $100 a month, Hanno Pevkur, Estonias minister of defense told Breaking Defense. Likewise the Lithuanian minister of defense, Dovilė Šakalienė, recently warned that Russias aggressive investment in its military-industrial complex was not just meant for Ukraine, but for expansion plans that Putin is voicing himself. They are not fantasies; they are plans, she said. Both Pevkur, who spoke to Breaking Defense at the Munich Security Conference last month, and Šakalienė, who spoke to several reporters at the Lithuanian embassy earlier this month, cited Putins ambition to grow the military to 1.5 million troops, even as it loses thousands on the frontlines with Ukraine. That will include the standing up of new brigades and divisions close to Estonian and Finnish waters, Pevkur said. Russias force posture will be around 50,000 to 60,000 troops, said Pevkur. So we all understand that this is a totally different situation compared to today. Of course the risk assessment will go up, and we need to answer this with a very clear message higher defense spending, more troops on the ground. That investment will be necessary to match Russias own, Šakalienė said and added, Russias military capability is growing. Even whilst waging full-scale war in Ukraine, they are able to replenish their losses on the battlefield, she said. Their military industry capacity is growing, and the speed of production — both ammo and weapons — is growing. Chinese support is sufficient and consistent, and its very helpful in their military capability building. She said Russia is estimated to be spending some 40 percent of the federal budget, or around 9 percent of the countrys entire GPD on its military forces, though she acknowledged financial figures coming out of Moscow may be unreliable. But if theyre approximate, she said, thats more of an investment than Russia would need to maintain its war with Ukraine. Pevkur and Šakalienės comments echo those made last year by the chiefs of defense of several Baltic and Nordic nations in interviews with Breaking Defense, some of whom predicted NATO had a three-to-five year window to build up their militaries to deter Russia or, if necessary, defend against an attack. RELATED: Northern NATO defense chiefs see ever-closing window to prepare for Russia Alina Polyakova, president and CEO of the Center for European Policy Analysis, agreed that in any post-war era, Europe will be dealing with, [a] battle-tested Russian army, a battle-tested navy and air force, and one that is also equipped, perhaps not with the most sophisticated, exquisite weapons, but with mass capabilities in the automated space in particular, and Europe doesnt have any of this. Europe hasnt invested in drone capabilities, swarm capabilities in the air, in the sea and the ground, she said. In Pevkurs view, Europes readiness to prepare for a future Russian attack will be shaped by NATOs new capability targets, set to be announced in the summer, and the urgency with which member nations can rise to them. Supreme Allied Commander Europe Gen. Christopher Cavoli knows what is needed to defend the countries and to protect the people, he said. For politicians, it is an obligation to explain to its population, to people, why we need to spend more on defense. Again, when this war will be over in Ukraine, Russia will have hundreds of thousands of troops ready to fight today — not tomorrow, today. Polyakova said that there is an easy fix for Europe to gain a competitive edge over Russia, regarding drone or aircraft mass capabilities: greater industrial investment. If were talking about Europes ability to defend itself and deter what happens in the post-war [era], Russia is going to be far more capable and it takes a long time to build tanks, she explained. Instead, Europe can manufacture drones really quickly and not a lot of training is required, added Polyakova. This is what Europe should be investing in now, their capabilities in the automated, future force readiness space. Ukraine is in an incredible position to provide all those capabilities. They have the know-how and ability to build, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of drones that they could potentially, when theres peace and stability, export to every single NATO country. Last year Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov said the nation had produced over 1.5 million first-person-view drones in 2024 alone, according to the Kiev Independent.

[Category: Air Warfare, Global, Land Warfare, Air Force, Army, Estonia, Europe, Lithuania, NATO, Russia, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— Saildrone, Palantir partner to use AI to streamline USV manufacturing, operations

 

at 3/13/25 3:30am

Saildrone will deploy 20 of its Voyager USVs in support of 4th Fleets Operation Southern Spear. (Photo courtesy of Saildrone.) WASHINGTON — National security tech giant Palantir and unmanned maritime tech firm Saildrone today announced a strategic partnership focused on utilizing artificial intelligence to bolster Saildrones “manufacturing, supply chain, and fleet operations.” “Leveraging Palantir’s sophisticated manufacturing and AI tools will allow us to streamline manufacturing and radically enhance fleet capabilities,” said Richard Jenkins, Saildrone’s CEO. “While others make promises about tomorrows technology, we face complex global threats today. This partnership with Palantir ensures we deliver solutions today that outpace tomorrow’s threats.” Saildrone, a California-based company, has made a splash in recent years with the US Navy through its eponymously named, bright orange USVs which specialize in unclassified intelligence collection and data processing. Between the Navy and various civilian federal agencies, the company’s drones have been used for tracking narcotics trafficking, illegal fishing operations and compiling oceanographic data, among other things. The company in February announced it had begun a new iteration of operations in coordination with US 4th Fleet, dubbed “Southern Spear.” That operation will focus on using unmanned and autonomous vehicles to “support the detection and monitoring of illicit trafficking while learning lessons for other theaters,” according to a Navy officer overseeing the activities. The announcement also follows Palantir in December unveiling its Warp Speed initiative, a manufacturing operating system aimed at using AI to gain an advantage in dynamic production scheduling, engineering change management, automated visual inspection for quality, and more, according to a company statement. Anduril Industries, L3Harris, Panasonic Energy of North America (PENA), and Shield AI were all included in Palantirs initial cohort for the initiative. “We built Warp Speed to accelerate the organizations at the forefront of American reindustrialization — from the factory floor to the open ocean,” said Emily Nguyen, Palantir’s head of industrials. “Saildrone is delivering the future of maritime AI, and we are extremely proud to provide software that supports the sustained competitive advantage of their USVs. Palantir today is slated to host the sixth iteration of its artificial intelligence conference, dubbed AIPC. Investor’s Business Daily reported Palantir’s stock had climbed on Wednesday amid a “sudden gloom” for other AI stocks.

[Category: Naval Warfare, autonomy, Business & Industry, Navy, Palantir, Richard Jenkins, Saildrone, Unmanned] [Link to media]

— Shield AI names former Splunk CEO as new chief executive

 

at 3/12/25 2:10pm

The Shield AI logo is seen during defense industry exhibition in Kielce, Poland on September 3, 2024. (Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images) WASHINGTON — Shield AI has named former Splunk CEO Gary Steele as its new chief executive, with the autonomy firm’s co-founder Ryan Tseng stepping down and transitioning to the role of president. Steele, currently Cisco’s president for go-to-market, will take the reins at Shield AI on join its board of directors on May 13, the company announced today. With Tseng at the helm, Shield AI has grown from a small San Diego-based start up to one of the Pentagon’s so-called “defense tech unicorns,” the name given to nontraditional defense firms that have received Silicon Valley backing and a stream of Defense Department contracts. Tseng founded Shield AI in 2015 with his brother Brandon, a former Navy SEAL who is currently the company’s president. “Among my most important responsibilities has always been ensuring Shield AI is led by the absolute best person for the role,” Ryan Tseng said in a news release. “Over the past year, with the demand for autonomy solutions at scale and the growth of our aircraft business, it became unmistakably clear that Shield AI required a leader with not only deep software expertise but proven experience scaling technology organizations. Gary Steele is the best leader for the next chapter of our growth.” Shield AI’s product list includes Hivemind, an artificial intelligence system that can pilot drones, and the V-Bat drone, which it produces in Dallas after acquiring original manufacturer Martin UAV in 2021. The company also contributed software that allowed the modified F-16 known as the X-62A VISTA to fly under AI control as part of DARPA’s Air Combat Evolution program. Last week, Shield AI announced the completion of a $240 million F-1 strategic funding round, which raised the company’s valuation to $5.3 billion. While a relative newcomer to the defense industry, Steele spent more than 30 years as a leader in the technology sector, leading Splunk before its acquisition by Cisco for $28 billion in 2024. He was previously CEO of cybersecurity firm Proofpoint, taking the company to its initial public offering. “There is growing demand for advanced autonomy from defense industry leaders, and we also see an opportunity to expand beyond traditional defense applications to benefit larger commercial enterprises,” Steele said. “I am proud to join this team and help bring this tremendous opportunity to bear, in partnership with Ryan and Brandon.”

[Category: Networks & Digital Warfare, Pentagon, artificial intelligence, Business & Industry, cyber security, Drones, networks, Shield AI, Silicon Valley, technology] [Link to media]

— DAF seeks industry feedback to strengthen Platform One DevSecOps, cloud management

 

at 3/12/25 1:51pm

Members of the 56th Air and Space Communications Squadron at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam operate cyber systems using a Enhanced communications flyaway kit during the Global Information Dominance Experiment 3 and Architect Demonstration Evaluation 5 at Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center, Alpena, Michigan, July, 12, 2021. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Amy Picard) WASHINGTON — The Department of the Air Force is turning to industry to shore up Platform One, the software development program created by the Air Force and used DoD-wide to create, integrate and launch software. According to the solicitation posted today, the DAF is looking for vendors, technologies and system integrators to provide dual-use commercial products and/ or services for cloud management and infrastructure for the platform’s development, security and operations (DevSecOps). DevSecOps is a framework that incorporates security practices into all phases of the software development cycle.  “Ideal solutions should be effective for workloads operating across multiple AWS [Amazon Web Services] GovCloud accounts; however, preference will be given to solutions which are agnostic of cloud service providers,” the request for information states.  The RFI also states that industry solutions “at a minimum” should be capable of managing, sustaining and deploying distributions of Kubernetes — the open-source container arrangement platform that automates the deployment and management of containerized software, otherwise known as packages of software that contain all the files needed to run an application independently of other software components in any environment, according to Amazon Web Services. Further, solutions should be compatible with Platform One’s Big Bang, the DoD’s “trusted” open source DevSecOps platform which can cut the time it takes the department to approve software from years to 90 days utilizing authority to operate, or ATO, procedures, according to Platform One’s website.  “Product vendors should anticipate the need to include integration services within this effort either internally or in partnership with a systems integrator. System integrators without a vendor partnership will be considered if leveraging commercial and/or open-source tools in accordance with all applicable licenses,” the RFI reads.  This effort to bolster Platform One comes after the Pentagon has affirmed its commitment to accelerating software development, as seen in a memo signed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last week. As Breaking Defense previously reported, the memo directed the Pentagon to adopt the Software Acquisition Pathway (SWP), a streamlined method for procuring software programs bespoke to DoD requirements, as the preferred method for software development. Interested parties are to respond to the solicitation by March 31, per the RFI. 

[Category: All Domain, Networks & Digital Warfare, cyber security, devsecops, networks, Platform One, software acquisition, technology] [Link to media]

— DIU to start field testing quantum sensors in tough conditions

 

at 3/12/25 1:00pm

Air Force Research Laboratory scientists work on various technical platforms to accelerate quantum research and development of connected ultra-secure quantum communication to provide the best benefits to the Department of the Air Force and the warfighter. (US Air Force photo / Keith Lewis) WASHINGTON — While quantum computing hogs the hype — and the venture capital — military officers and officials increasingly see the biggest near-term possibilities in quantum sensors. Measuring the same kind of microscopic motion as atomic clocks, quantum magnetometers, gravitometers and more could help frontline forces navigate when GPS is jammed or hunt targets without conventional radar and sonar. But first, they have to work reliably outside the lab. To make that happen, the Pentagon’s outreach arm to Silicon Valley, the California-based Defense Innovation Unit, has just announced a slew of contracts to field test a dozen different quantum sensing systems. (This is similar to but separate from an ongoing DARPA effort to harden quantum sensors). The 18 vendors announced so far — another one or two might yet emerge from ongoing contract talks — include defense titans Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, established military-and-commercial players Honeywell and Leidos, upstart Anduril and a long list of smaller companies, many of them providing a single critical component to a larger team. “It’s a good mixture of traditional primes, non-traditional defense, as well as emerging and startups and small business,” said Air Force Lt. Col. Nick Estep, DIU’s portfolio manager for emerging capabilities, in an exclusive interview with Breaking Defense. Using its preferred Commercial Solutions Opening process, DIU issued its initial solicitation just 10 months ago in May, sorted through more than 70 proposals, and got the most promising firms on contract, with many already at work. “I would say roughly a dozen meaningful field tests are going to occur by the end of the fiscal year. Some of these will be on small autonomous systems; some will be on manned aircraft; some will be ground tests.” DIU calls its project Transition of Quantum Sensors (TQS) because it’s working closely with DoD Quantum Tech Director John Burke, the Air Force, Navy and potential military users with the intention to identify mature technology, ruggedize it, test it, fix the inevitable glitches and hand it over to procurement programs for real-world operational deployment. “Im a scientist by trade,” said Estep, an electrical engineering PhD who’s worked in both academia and the National Reconnaissance Office. “Our inclination is to optimize for as long as possible and build the best sensor you can possibly build in your lab. It may have had some amazing performance for like five seconds in the lab when everyone stopped and held their breath, [but for the military] you cant deploy with five grad students and expect ideal thermal, moisture, and environmental conditions.” Traditional Pentagon procurement tends to perfect technology in ideal conditions, only to discover practical problems when it first goes to the field. Far better, the DIU team believes, to put an 80 percent solution in the field ASAP and find those flaws, and fix them, early on. For any given quantum sensor, Estep explained, “we need to ruggedize it, integrate it with the controlling subsystems into a meaningful package, and answer: How would we deploy it? How are we going to show functionality? Because theres a lot of gremlins that pop out in that process. To do that, you have to learn a lot. Trial and error is inevitable with new technology, he said, so he’s not expecting the first test articles to perform like the final product. “These early field tests, were not expecting them to hit the end operational objectives right away,” Estep said. “Some of these I would expect to take several iterative cycles” over months or years. He emphasized, “we expect to have some pretty notable outcomes even in 2025.”

[Category: Air Warfare, Networks & Digital Warfare, Air Force, cyber security, Defense Innovation Unit DIU, networks, quantum sensing, technology] [Link to media]

— Additional defense funds in reconciliation bill ‘may not be enough’: SASC chairman

 

at 3/12/25 12:49pm

Vice Chief of Naval Operations Jim Kilby and other services vice chiefs provide testimony at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee-Subcommittee for Readiness of the Joint Force at the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C., May 16, 2024. (U.S. Navy photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist William Spears) WASHINGTON — With the Pentagon increasingly likely to be locked into a yearlong continuing resolution for the first time ever, the head of the Senate Armed Services Committee said today that Congress may need to beef up the amount of funding it is pursuing for defense through a parallel process known as budget reconciliation. The House on Tuesday passed a stopgap spending bill expiring on Sept. 30 that would provide $892.5 billion for defense in fiscal 2025 — slightly higher than FY24 levels but below the $895 billion permitted by the Fiscal Responsibility Act. And while that gap may not seem huge by Pentagon standards, SASC Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss. is seizing on it to make the case that even more money needs to be added during the reconciliation process. “The real flaw in in the CR that well be voting on later this week is that it doesnt provide enough money, regardless of the anomalies and the tiny plus ups here and there,” Wicker said during a SASC readiness subcommittee hearing today. “Based on what is in this continuing resolution, $150 billion in the reconciliation bill may not be enough, and Im hearing some comforting words from the administration, that they realize that too.” The House and Senate have each passed separate budget resolutions, kickstarting a path for Republicans to enact a laundry list of Trump administration funding priorities through a process called reconciliation, which allows the majority party with control of Congress to pass legislation without the threat of filibuster. The Senate budget resolution includes an additional $150 billion for defense, while the House version includes $100 billion. Wicker noted that the Trump administration has been aggressive in its goal of driving down government spending, adding that “we all want fiscal responsibility.” However, he said, an additional boost to reconciliation funding for defense may been needed to address threats from China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. Wicker, a defense hawk, has advocated for the United States to raise defense spending to 5 percent of its gross domestic production. Last year, as the committee’s top Republican, he pushed SASC to adopt an NDAA that would have supported a $923 billion defense topline (in conference, the House and Senate committees agreed on a lower funding level that would conform to FRA restrictions). In February, he told Breaking Defense that he hoped to secure a total $200 billion increase for defense in the budget reconciliation process, with funds to be used in FY25 and FY26. A continuing resolution is typically a stopgap that extends funding at prior-year levels for a short period of time. To try to mitigate negative impacts to the US military, the yearlong CR under consideration includes some additional funds — including $8 billion for US Central Command and US European Command, as well as plus-ups to certain shipbuilding programs. It also includes language meant to give the Pentagon additional flexibility, such as a provision that would allow the department to start certain new programs — a practice typically forbidden under a CR. While the House was able to pass the CR Tuesday evening in a mostly-party line vote, Senate Republicans will need support from a handful of Democrats in order to meet the 60 vote threshold that allows the Senate to proceed to a final vote on a bill. On the precipice of a March 14 deadline to pass a spending measure and avert a government shutdown, SASC members from both sides of the aisle groaned about the prospect of voting for a full-year CR. “From a readiness standpoint, none of us think this is helpful,” said Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, who leads the readiness subcommittee. “What would be worse, in my view, is a government shutdown.” Later in the hearing, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said he agreed with Sullivans statement but thinks a short-term CR would have been preferable than a full year measure. “Why do we have to accept, you know, half-assed over catastrophic?” he asked. A panel of the military services’ No. 2 officers told lawmakers that they were still working to understand the impact of the CR. Army Vice Chief of Staff James Mingus said the “degree and severity is unknown,” with much dependent on the specific language of the bill and whether it contains “anomalies,” or exceptions to CR-related funding restrictions. Vice Chief of Naval Operations Adm. James Kilby said the services’ readiness accounts “are most vulnerable under a CR or sequestration,” and that 11 ships are at risk for missing maintenance availabilities under a full year CR. For the Air Force, a yearlong CR without anomalies would have $4 billion impact to readiness, said Lt. Gen. Adrian Spain, the services’ deputy chief of staff for operations. Mingus and Kilby said the services would benefit from greater budget flexibility, specifically for items such as drones or counterdrone systems, that would allow them to obligate funding more quickly or transfer that money to other systems if threats changed. Gen. Christopher Mahoney, the assistant commandant of the Marine Corps, cautioned that, while anomalies and budget flexibility are helpful, there is only so much the Marine Corps could do with a smaller budget. “If there is only so much top line from which to flex … were going to rob from one account to pay for another,” he said.

[Category: Congress, Land Warfare, Naval Warfare, Pentagon, 2025 defense appropriations, Army, c, continuing resolution, Dan Sullivan, Defense Budget 2026, Navy, reconciliation, Roger Wicker, Senate Armed Services Committee, Tim Kaine] [Link to media]

— Awaiting Space Force certification, ULA says future missions could aim to baffle Chinese watcher sats

 

at 3/12/25 11:51am

ULA launches its Vulcan rocket on Oct. 4, 2024. (Screengrab via ULA livestream) WASHINGTON — United Launch Alliance (ULA) CEO Tory Bruno is positioning the Vulcan Centaur launch vehicle for future national security missions, including sneaking satellites past Chinese watching eyes, even as the company continues to wait for a Space Force decision on whether the rocket can be certified to carry todays payloads. Bruno told reporters today that Vulcan already is optimized for exotic orbits for the government and could provide services like directly injecting [a spacecraft] into geosynchronous orbit. At the same time, he added, ULA has a set of investments that are around extending the life of the upper stage, which would allow us to fly different kinds of trajectories There are other things we can do for them [the US government] that are useful in national security, I might even say confounding for Chinese threats in space, that are enabled by a longer lived upper stage. Such a fuel-heavy upper stage could be used in rapid, long-range maneuvering to outfox hostile satellites, Bruno explained. If I have longer duration, I can go to a different place. If I have longer duration, I can do unusual trajectories that would obfuscate where my destination is, which becomes a challenge for an adversary who wants to surveil or interfere with that spacecraft, he said. Then they have to either find it and or position a hostile asset next to it. When they have a plan to do that, its a big deal for an adversary because spacecraft cant carry very much propellant and still have useful payload. But before any of that can happen, the Space Force needs to give Vulcan Centaur the thumbs up to carry currently manifested payloads under the National Security Space Launch (NSSL) program. To do that, a launch provider needs to demonstrate two successful flights of its launch vehicle before receiving certification by the service to fly critical NSSL missions. While Vulcan first flight last January passed the certification tests, its second certification flight in October did not. That flight suffered an anomaly in one of the two solid rocket motors where we lost the nozzle, he explained, although the Vulcan nonetheless managed to achieve a perfect orbital insertion, Bruno said. So, that was all good, but I do prefer that all the parts of my rocket leaders stay attached where theyre supposed to be, Bruno added. ULAs investigation discovered that the problem was due to a manufacturing error, he said. We have isolated the root cause appropriate corrective actions, and those were qualified and confirmed in a full-scale static firing in Utah last month. So, we are back in continuing to fabricate hardware and at least initially, screening for what that root cause was, which was a manufacturing defect of one of the internal parts of the nozzle insulator, Bruno elaborated. A spokesperson for Northrop Grumman, which supplies the solid rocket motors for the Vulcan Center, declined to comment. Bruno said that ULA submitted the findings of the investigation to the Space Force about a month ago for review, noting that typically, its not a very long process. A spokesperson for Space Systems Command’s Assured Access to Space office told Breaking Defense today that a decision is still pending. We have been working with ULA very closely over the last several years to complete NSSL certification of their Vulcan system. The teams have made tremendous progress, and we are close to a decision, the spokesperson said. In November, ULA and the Space Force said that the two NSSL program launches manifested on Vulcan for launch last year, USSF-106 and USSF-87, were expected to lift off early this year after having been postponed due to the investigation of the second flight. A senior Space Force official said in January that the Space Force was “targeting mid-February” for being able to give the all clear to Vulcan, and noted that the service is planning 18 total launches under the current NSSL Phase 2 program: 11 on Vulcan and seven for SpaceX’s Falcon 9. While a recent report to Congress from the Air Force, first reported by Bloomberg, criticized ULAs overall performance as unsatisfactory and suggested that the Space Force may shift some of its planned Vulcan launches to SpaceX, Bruno punched back that the report was out of date and not accurate even at the time of its writing in January. I saw it before it was leaked, and I dont normally talk about improperly leaked reports, but Im going to make an exception this time. When that was written it was inaccurate. As we sit here today, it is certainly overtaken by events, he said.

[Category: Space, Asia, China, defensive counterspace operations, National Security Space Launch, Northrop Grumman, Space Force, Tory Bruno, United Launch Alliance, Vulcan rocket] [Link to media]

As of 3/16/25 10:27am. Last new 3/14/25 5:44pm.