NEWS

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is set to spend $233 million to defeat candidates in this fall’s congressional midterm elections who speak out against the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, warned US Senator Bernie Sanders, Anadolu reports.

The top pro-Israel lobbying firm in the US “plans to spend $233 million to defeat candidates who dare to speak out against Netanyahu’s extremist government,” Sanders said on US social media platform X on Friday.

“They spent $33 million to defeat Abdul El-Sayed in the Michigan primary. They lost. They are going to keep losing,” he said.

El-Sayed, the Democratic candidate in this year’s senatorial race in the state of Michigan, strongly opposes unconditional US military aid for Israel and has criticized the Netanyahu government’s policies in both Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

READ: Former Israeli premier accuses Netanyahu of preparing ground for war that could delay elections

Sanders added: “NO MORE U.S. MILITARY AID FOR ISRAEL.”

In the Nov. 3 US congressional midterms, polls show Democrats broadly favored to win the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate.

As the US electorate’s view of Israel has soured, especially in light of the genocide in Gaza, many Democrats running for office this year have taken a harder line against the policies of the Netanyahu government and what many see as its efforts to displace Palestinians and frustrate any hope for peace in the Middle East.

READ: US senator urges Congress to cut off funding for Iran war

After the Pivdennyi Bridge was attacked, passengers described how dust from a blast wave entered their carriage through the ventilation system.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Putin had decided that there were “no rules now” when attacking Ukraine.

In an interview with the Financial Times, he said: “The Russians have failed to occupy us. So now they are carrying out massive attacks and mass killings.”

He added: “They want to destroy our bridges… our data centres, the internet, mobile networks, hospitals, kindergartens, schools, universities – everything. They want people to flee their cities.”

Putin on Thursday insisted that Russia’s attacks on Ukrainian economic targets were a direct response to Ukraine’s strikes on Russia’s oil refineries and its ships in the Black Sea.

“Now from every direction we’re receiving calls ‘let’s stop’. But they started it,” Putin said after a wide-ranging speech at the Valdai foreign policy forum.

The Kremlin leader admitted Kyiv had “got some results” from its refinery attacks and Russia had lost about 1% of its GDP. Ukraine maintains it began attacking Russian oil infrastructure because it helps the Kremlin finance the war.

Russia has targeted Ukrainian energy infrastructure, ramping up attacks every winter since Putin launched a full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Germany is moving ahead with plans to give its unusually large F125 frigates a medium-range air-defense capability, helping address one of the most conspicuous weaknesses of a four-ship class that has long attracted attention for having relatively little combat power for its size.

Diehl Defense and Germany’s Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment, Information Technology and In-Service Support (BAAINBw) have signed a contract to adapt and develop the IRIS-T SLM surface-to-air missile system for operational use aboard the German Navy’s F125 frigates. Under the agreement, Diehl will build prototypes and conduct comprehensive test firings intended to validate the system’s integration and performance within the existing F125 architecture. Each frigate will be fitted with two new launchers, each capable of holding 16 missiles, for a total of 32.

“The aim is to make the system mission-capable on the German Navy’s F125 frigates,” Diehl said in today’s announcement. The company described the prototype construction and test-firing phase as necessary to ensure “the seamless integration and maximum performance” of IRIS-T SLM within the frigate’s existing architecture.

The program has moved notably quickly, reflecting the urgency of the requirement.

Germany began examining the feasibility of integrating IRIS-T SLM with the F125 in 2024, with BAAINBw and Diehl studying the technical risks and requirements of adapting the normally land-based system for shipboard use. That effort led to the development of a navalized demonstrator in 2025. In October of that year, the F125 frigate Baden-Württemberg took part in a German Navy Maritime Firing Exercise off Andøya, Norway, carrying an experimental anti-air warfare module based on IRIS-T SLM. Diehl says the module went from concept to firing in less than 10 months and met all established test and evaluation objectives.

The Bundeswehr subsequently reported that Baden-Württemberg fired three live IRIS-T SLM missiles during the exercise. The ship’s radar supplied target data to the missile system, demonstrating the basic integration between the F125’s sensors and the navalized air defense architecture.

The exercise established that the concept could work at sea; the contract signed now is intended to turn that demonstration into a qualified fleet capability.

The German parliament’s Budget Committee approved the adaptation effort on September 23, with the German Defense Ministry describing it as a means of expanding the F125’s self-defense capabilities in response to the current air threat. The ministry also pointed to IRIS-T SLM’s combat experience in Ukraine.

The effort needs to be seen in the context of why the F125 has been such a controversial warship in the first place.

As TWZ examined in 2017, the F125 is a roughly 7,200-ton, 490-foot warship with an unusually small core crew and a concept of operations centered on long-duration deployments, stabilization missions, crisis management, conflict prevention, and international intervention rather than high-end fleet combat. The class was designed to spend long periods away from Germany and operate with relatively modest manpower requirements.

But its armament does not remotely match the size and sophistication of the hull. A completed, the ships were equipped with eight RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missiles, a 127mm gun, remotely operated guns and, for close-quarters air defense, two RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launchers. The F125 has no medium- or long-range surface-to-air missile capability and no organic sonar or dedicated anti-submarine warfare weapon system.

At the same time, the TRS-4D/NR radar and other sensors can see far beyond the engagement envelope of the close-in air-defense weapons, but there is little the ship itself can do with that information against an aircraft or incoming missile at medium range.

Nearly a decade later, IRIS-T SLM is emerging as an answer to at least part of that problem.

Even with IRIS-T SLM, the F125 is well short of being an air warfare destroyer. It also still lacks an organic anti-submarine warfare capability or the kind of large vertical-launch missile battery found on Germany’s F124 frigates.

However, it does fill a gap between the F125’s originl short-range defenses and the capabilities of other ships or aircraft operating around it.

IRIS-T SLM is designed as a medium-range surface-to-air system, with an engagement range of around 25 miles and an altitude envelope of approximately 65,000 feet. As shown in the 2025 demonstration, the F125’s radar can feed information directly into the missile system, exploiting the ship’s existing sensor capabilities.

IRIS-T SLM (Medium Range Ground-Based Air Defence)

Rather than rely heavily on escorts for protection against airborne threats outside the short range of RAM, an IRIS-T-equipped F125 could at least contribute to its own medium-range air defense. Recent operations in the Middle East hve underscored the importance of this in contested maritime environments.

It also gives the ships a more useful role in a task group. The threat environment has changed substantially since the F125’s original concept was drafted. Cruise missiles, drones, loitering munitions, and increasingly sophisticated aircraft mean that even ships operating away from a major naval war can face threats well beyond the range of their existing close-in defenses.

In November 2024, Germany confirmed that the F125 frigate Baden-Württemberg, returning from an Indo-Pacific deployment, would avoid the Red Sea and sail around Africa because of the Houthi missile and drone threat. The German Defense Ministry explicitly cited the ship’s limited air defense capability and its inability to provide an effective air-defense umbrella for itself or its accompanying replenishment ship.

Ironically, the F125’s large hull, extensive electrical power, sophisticated radar, substantial aviation facilities, long endurance and relatively spacious mission areas were always supposed to provide room for a flexible approach to future missions. Yet the class’s original weight and integration constraints made adding major weapons difficult, a concern TWZ also highlighted in 2017.

IRIS-T SLM offers Germany a way to add a meaningful capability without undertaking the much more invasive redesign associated with installing a conventional vertical-launch system. The 2025 demonstration used an AAW module mounted on the ship’s deck rather than a conventional VLS installation, and today’s program is focused on adapting the system to the F125 architecture.

Once IRIS-T SLM is installed, the F125 will still be an unusual frigate. It is enormous by the standards of its mission, optimized for endurance, and lacks some of the weapons traditionally associated with a high-end surface combatant. But it will bring more to a contested fight.

The program should give the class a credible medium-range air-defense role, and provide Germany with a way to get considerably more utility out of four ships whose original design philosophy was always somewhat controversial.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

A Flydubai co-pilot accused of attacking the captain of a flight bound for Israel has been identified as an Omani national previously barred from flying in his home country over concerns about alleged extremist views, according to media reports.

There has been no official confirmation of the pilot’s identity or his beliefs.

The United Arab Emirates on Saturday described Wednesday’s incident on board Flight FZ1073 as an attempted “terrorist operation”, saying the co-pilot attacked Captain Smit Machchhar, an Indian national, with an emergency axe and attempted to take control of the aircraft.

But investigators are still working to establish the motive and whether anyone else was connected to the attack, which has raised concerns about pilot vetting and aviation security.

Here is what we know:

What do we know about the accused pilot?

The co-pilot suspected of attacking the captain of the Dubai-Tel Aviv flight carrying 174 people has been identified as Hamam al-Hammami, an Omani national, three people with knowledge of the situation, including a Gulf diplomat and a Western diplomat, told AP news agency.

All spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to speak to the media. The Gulf diplomat said investigations are under way to establish whether he acted as a “lone wolf or had any connection with any extremist groups”.

US media outlet CNN, quoting a source and an Israeli official, reported that al-Hammami is an Omani citizen who was born in the UAE to a Syrian mother and spent several years in the Emirates.

Questions have emerged about his previous aviation career and whether warning signs had been raised before he joined the Dubai-based low-cost carrier.

The Wall Street Journal, quoting unnamed sources, reported on Friday that Omani authorities had previously barred the accused co-pilot from flying in the country because of concerns that he had held extremist views.

Nevertheless, it remains unclear what those alleged views were or whether Oman informed other countries or airlines about its concerns.

CNN separately quoted a regional diplomatic source as saying that al-Hammami had been removed from flight training over similar concerns and was subsequently reassigned to another position.

The US-based network also reported that a LinkedIn profile bearing al-Hammami’s name said he had spent seven years at Oman Air before leaving in February 2025. The profile said he joined Royal Air Maroc in June 2025 and left in January 2026.

What happened on flight FZ1073?

At 7:05am (03:05 GMT) on Wednesday, Flight FZ1073 departed Dubai for Tel Aviv, climbing to 34,000ft (more than 10,000 metres), according to Flightradar24. A little more than two hours later, it suddenly began to descend, plunging before rising and then descending again.

Flight-tracking data showed the plane plunging more than 17,000 feet in about two minutes, before climbing and descending again.

Meanwhile, a fight had begun in the cockpit between the two pilots. The co-pilot had attacked the Indian captain of the plane, Smit Machchhar, by stabbing him.

Machchhar later described finding himself seriously wounded on the cockpit floor as the aircraft descended.

“When I was down, I could feel that the aircraft was plummeting, and I knew this is the last chance to do something,” he told Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi from a hospital in Abu Dhabi.

“I knew that the aircraft was going down … I had fallen to the ground. I told myself that the door is right there, just open it. I managed to do it and people entered,” he said.

Passengers and crew members entered the cabin and overpowered the co-pilot. The aircraft eventually levelled out at about 15,000 feet. Its transponder was subsequently switched to code 7500, signalling unlawful interference.

Two reserve pilots who were on board took control of the jet and landed it in Tabuk, northwestern Saudi Arabia. The plane landed safely at 9:45am (06:45 GMT) local time. Saudi authorities said both pilots were taken to hospital. They were later transferred to Abu Dhabi after being medically cleared.

What has the UAE said about the attack?

UAE Attorney General Hamad Saif al-Shamsi said on Saturday that investigators had determined that the co-pilot had begun carrying out what he described as a “terrorist act”.

According to al-Shamsi, the co-pilot attacked the captain inside the cockpit using the aircraft’s emergency crash axe and “attempted to take control of the aircraft’s controls”.

A crash axe is a tool kept in a cockpit to help pilots cut through the plane in emergencies.

On Thursday, al-Shamsi had ordered investigators to determine whether the incident was connected to “terrorist activity or intent” or involved prior planning or direction.

The UAE has not yet publicly established a motive or announced whether investigators believe al-Hammami acted alone.

UAE presidential adviser Anwar Gargash on Saturday said that the latest ‘terrorist’ attack is new warning that region’s fight against extremism is not over.

“This underscores the importance of the UAE’s early and firm stance: no tolerance for extremism and no leniency towards its rhetoric. Security begins with confronting hatred and drying up the sources of extremism,” he posted on X

What is the latest in the investigation?

Abu Dhabi is now leading the investigation, with prosecutors examining the circumstances of the attack, its motive and any possible connections to others.

Previously, al-Shamsi said UAE judicial authorities have jurisdiction over the incident because the aircraft is registered in the UAE and flies under its flag, adding that UAE law applies to crimes committed on board “even if they occur outside the country’s territory”.

On Saturday, al-Shamsi said investigators are working “to uncover all the circumstances of the incident, its motives, and related connections, in addition to completing technical examinations and examining physical and digital evidence”.

The final results will be announced as soon as the necessary procedures are completed, he said.

Meanwhile, Flydubai flights to Israel remain ⁠suspended amid the investigations.

Government forces close a key crossing connecting Houthi-held al-Houban to government-held Taiz city.

Yemen’s internationally recognised government forces have carried out nearly 500 military operations, killing or wounding 1,540 Houthi rebels in the past 24 hours, according to the army.

Warplanes, drones, artillery, missiles and rocket launchers were used to target Houthi positions in various parts of Yemen, military spokesman Colonel Majed Abdullah al-Nazili said on Friday evening.

Most of the casualties came in the governorate of Taiz where the operations halted the Houthi advance, al-Nazili said. The government-held city of Taiz has become a focal point of the renewed fighting.

The army spokesman did not mention any casualties among government forces.

Key border crossing closed

On Saturday, the army’s media official Ammar al-Sami’i told Al Jazeera that the government had closed the al-Houban crossing in Taiz.

The crossing had previously been closed for nine years and was later reopened to civilians in 2024 for “humanitarian reasons”, Sami’i said, as the road is one of Yemen’s most important connections between territory held by the opposing sides. It connects Houthi-held al-Houban to government-held Taiz city.

Sami’i said security reasons are behind the closure, following an attempt by the Houthis to infiltrate Taiz via the road, attacks in the vicinity and a general military buildup.

A fragile truce struck between the government and the Houthis in 2022 collapsed in July this year, and fighting in Yemen has escalated significantly since then.

In mid-September, the Houthis swept across parts of western Yemen, seizing the port city of Mocha and key strategic islands in the Bab al-Mandeb strait.

Since then, anti-Houthi forces have largely stabilised the front lines.

Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced since the fighting restarted.

Yemen has been embroiled in civil war since the Houthis seized the capital of Sanaa in 2014, forcing the internationally recognised government to retreat to Aden.

Portadown, Northern Ireland – When the summer holidays arrived, Chris Nelson worried about his mother.

At night, he lay awake waiting for her to return. During the day, he rang family members to ask if she was safe. There were threats and letters through the door.

“I was afraid to leave the house,” he told Al Jazeera.

His mother, Rosemary Nelson, was a lawyer representing the Catholic residents opposing the Protestant Orange Order parade along Portadown’s Garvaghy Road in Northern Ireland in the late 1990s.

Every July, as marching season approached, there was a standoff.

Orangemen sought to return from Drumcree church along what they regarded as their traditional route. Residents opposed the passage of the anti-Catholic organisation through a majority Catholic street. In some years, police forced the parade through. In later years, it was blocked.

Rosemary would spend summer evenings alongside the residents on Garvaghy Road. Before leaving home each evening, she told her son that she was going to look after families and make sure their children were okay. She compared them to his friends at primary school.

“She was a big believer in helping the underdog,” said Chris, now 39. “She did a lot of work for free.”

His mother helped people from both sides of the community. When work allowed, the family went to Bundoran, across the border, and for a day the fear would pass.

But one night, during a standoff in 1997 when the state police force, the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), used batons to clear Catholic locals from the road, “she was beaten by the police”, said Chris. “She was spat on”, bruised and bloodied.

“That was very traumatic. I was always thinking something was going to happen to my mum.”

On a Monday in March 1999, nearly a year after the Good Friday Agreement brought an end to the conflict, Rosemary drove away from her home in Lurgan.

As she braked at a nearby junction, a bomb beneath her car exploded. Her eight-year-old daughter, Sarah, was at primary school nearby and heard the blast. The family had spent the previous weekend in Bundoran together.

Chris, 11 at the time, and his older brother were away on a school ski trip when they received a phone call with the news of her death.

“That was hard”, he said, his voice tailing off.

A legacy of loss

Nearly three decades later, another standoff has recast these childhood memories into fears for the next generation, with a renewed attempt by the Protestant Orange Order to march through the Catholic neighbourhood, threatening to unravel a fragile peace.

The Troubles began in the late 1960s as protests by Catholics against discrimination were met by repression and violence. Republican paramilitaries fought for a united Ireland as loyalists and the army battled to preserve British rule, in a conflict that killed more than 3,500 people.

The 1998 Good Friday Agreement established a framework for peace and power-sharing.

Under the agreement, the people of Portadown have lived in relative peace for the past 28 years.

But this was suddenly unsettled by a last-minute decision by the High Court to allow the march. In response, Catholic residents blocked the road. Many camped out as Orange men gathered at the top of the road, awaiting police permission to pass – an image of division that never truly left.

Many of the Garvaghy Road residents are now parents, and fear what their children might inherit from a dispute they hoped had been left behind.

Paul O’Connor, of the Pat Finucane Centre human rights group in Northern Ireland, said Rosemary Nelson is among 21 people whose deaths were linked to the Drumcree dispute.

Many are still being investigated, with families continuing to seek justice and pressing for public inquiries amid concerns about collusion between the British state and loyalist paramilitaries, many of which were members of the Orange Order.

“These murders encompass LVF (Loyal Volunteer Force) killings at that time, and are all linked to the Drumcree disputes. They were responsible for many of the killings around the Mid Ulster area at that time. They were trying to destabilise the peace process, with many riots spreading around, including into Derry,” O’Connor told Al Jazeera.

He worked with Rosemary Nelson and is now seeking a public inquiry into the murder of Sean Brown, another Drumcree-linked case, he believes. The 61-year-old father of six from Bellaghy, County Derry, was abducted and murdered in May 1997.

The following year, the three Quinn brothers – Richard, 10, Mark, nine, and Jason, eight – died after loyalists petrol-bombed their home in Ballymoney, County Antrim, as they slept. Their deaths, during the unrest surrounding Drumcree, brought widespread calls for the Orange Order to end its standoff.

Fear and loathing in Mid Ulster

In Portadown town centre, a Union flag flies among plinths dedicated to the Ulster Defence Regiment, a locally recruited unit of the British army and the Ulster Covenant – a document signed when nearly 500,000 people opposed a form of self-government for Ireland in 1912.

Around the corner, in the Edgarstown housing estate, Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) flags hang from lampposts, and the kerbs are painted red, white and blue, alongside a mural of a Rangers FC badge.

The area is one of the heartlands of unionism. The Orange Order was founded in 1795 in the village of Loughgall, a few miles from Drumcree.

The Orangemen say they have marched the route through Garvaghy Road since 1807. The parade has been blocked from Garvaghy Road since 1998, but the Orangemen have continued submitting requests to march.

The latest Parades Commission decision permitted 35 men to walk without music. Since then, Orangemen have repeatedly approached the police line before returning to the church.

Irish nationalists have criticised the police assessment underpinning the decision to allow the march, while unionists have denounced police for failing to forcibly remove protesters blocking the route.

Al Jazeera contacted the three main unionist parties – the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), the Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) and the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) – for comment but received no response.

Addressing around 200 supporters in Portadown, loyalist activist Jamie Bryson described protesters as “an unlawful snarling mob”.

He has called for the First Minister, Sinn Fein’s Michelle O’Neill, and police Chief Constable Jon Boutcher to resign, and demands that the Orange men must be allowed to walk the Garvaghy Road.

O’Neill has faced criticism for standing beside the protesters.

At Drumcree Church, the Orangemen were not marching, but sitting down drinking tea and eating crisps. Around six men, one wearing his sash, huddled under a gazebo in the cold.

“We are waiting patiently for the chief constable to apply the law of the land,” Nigel Dawson, the Portadown Orange Order district master, told Al Jazeera.

“Portadown District has never in its history stopped a parade down the road to have a confrontation with its neighbours, ever. So I don’t know where the fear and trepidation comes from.”

Another Orangeman, who requested anonymity, added: “We are determined to get home after Sunday service … We just want to go home.”

Around a mile further down the Garvaghy Road, Irish folk band the Mary Wallopers performed to hundreds of residents and supporters.

Children danced and slid down the embankment, as parents watched from above. Palestine and Ireland flags flew in the wind.

Linda O’Neill, 51, a Garvaghy Road resident, told Al Jazeera the scene would have been unimaginable 30 years ago.

“It was horrendous growing up as a teenager. We stayed in our own community. We didn’t access the town centre … This community was a ghetto. And that was deliberate.”

Another resident, Ciaran O Ferghail, remembered summers spent surrounded by British forces.

“This community was turned into a war zone. There were tanks and British Army everywhere, thousands of RUC. This community was completely under siege every summer, by the Orange Order, the British military, the RUC and loyalist paramilitaries. We were surrounded on every road and in every direction.”

O’Neill said the confrontation changed as residents began asserting their rights.

In 1995, hundreds sat down on Garvaghy Road to block the parade. The ensuing violent standoff between security forces and Orangemen and their loyalist supporters ended in a compromise allowing the march through. Residents say they understood it would be the last.

But the following summer, the parade returned. Police initially blocked it, then reversed course after five days of widespread loyalist attacks. Officers forced residents off the road and beat them, sparking riots in Catholic communities.

In 1997, security forces sealed off the Catholic neighbourhood before dawn and allowed the parade through at midday amid loyalist threats to kill Catholics if it was stopped. Nationalist protests and violence followed. From 1998, the march was banned from Garvaghy Road. But for residents, summers remained marked by the army’s steel barricades until 2000.

Lessons from the past

Chris Nelson, almost 40, is around the same age his mother was when she was killed.

The Garvaghy Road protests mark the first time he has chosen to speak publicly about his mother.

He went on to study law at university, but says his life would have followed a different trajectory if she were still here.

The public inquiry into his mother’s death found no evidence that state security agencies had “directly facilitated” her murder, but it “could not exclude the possibility” that individual members of those agencies had helped the perpetrators.

The inquiry brought the past back repeatedly as he tried to get on with his life. But seeing photographs of families linking arms on Garvaghy Road brought back unavoidable memories of his mother.

“If she were here, that’s where she would be,” he said, “standing with the people of the Garvaghy Road”.

While there has been no violence in Portadown, in Derry’s Waterside, two recent nights of disorder saw petrol bombs and masonry thrown at police. Officers described the crowd on the second night as mostly young people.

The renewed attempt to bring the Orange Order parade through Garvaghy Road risks leaving its mark on children on both sides. With some schools closed, Chris Nelson worries about parents having to explain to their kids what is happening.

“Children don’t forget things“, he said. “They absorb everything.”

He remembers how it felt waiting for his mother each night, and how that worry followed him through the summer holidays. He wants something different for the children growing up now.

“Children shouldn’t grow up knowing the difference between Catholic and Protestant.

“It isn’t something that should be brought into the mind of a child.”

When it comes to the future of Tail 844, the SR-71 Blackbird that mysteriously disappeared from NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center, few people have more insights than Tim Conners. When he worked at NASA in the 1990s, Conners was the lead propulsion engineer for the agency’s Blackbird program. He worked extensively on 844 and has an intimate knowledge of what made the iconic aircraft tick. Now, he brings an insider perspective on NASA’s secretive work to get the Blackbird back in the air and speculates on what it would take to do so, as well as the famed jet’s possible flight test role for the agency after 27 years of dormancy.

Late last month, we wrote about how satellite imagery taken over Armstrong showed that Tail 844 had been missing since at least May. The revelation was first made by Steve Trimble, Aviation Week‘s defense editor and friend of TWZ. It came after NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman cryptically teased plans for a new high- and fast-flying X-plane with a silhouette of an aircraft that immediately drew comparisons to the Blackbird. Trimble reported just this week that NASA had been talking to ex-SR-71 program personnel about coming back to work on the aircraft. This confluence of events has led to rampant speculation about whether NASA was planning to resurrect the Blackbird and for what purpose?

In an exclusive interview with TWZ, Conners, now technical director for advanced weapons systems at Tiberius Aerospace, gave us his take on NASA’s Blackbird revelations and insights into what NASA is working on and how far along they are in the process.

Some of the questions and answers have been slightly edited for clarity.

Q: Tell me about your background with the SR-71 program. How did it begin? How long did it last? And what did you do?

A: So that basically fell in my lap when I was an engineer at NASA’s Dryden [Flight Research Center] back in the early ’90s when NASA took delivery of three of the airframes when the Air Force was retiring the fleet. So NASA got two A models and a trainer. Obviously, tail number 844, which is NASA’s designation, is the one that’s getting all of the attention right now. But those came to Dryden in the early ’90s. 

By luck of the draw, I was in the propulsion group. We were short-staffed for a number of reasons, and they needed an engineer on Blackbird. And I had been with NASA for about three or four years at that point, and I got tapped to prepare the NASA side of the mission for the upcoming research flights. So I had a few years to get familiar. That was a part-time job, by the way. I also owned the F-15 fleet at NASA as a propulsion engineer, and that was occupying a lot of my time, but it did give me an adequate amount of time to get familiar with the way that the airplane operated, at least from the propulsion standpoint. And then we began doing research missions in ’96. I left NASA in ’98, but I was able to support the program through two years of flight testing and all the years of preparation for those two years.

Q: Tell me more about your role with the Blackbirds.

A: I was lead propulsion engineer on the NASA side. So what NASA would do is they would assign disciplinary leads across from their industry and government counterparts. So Dryden’s disciplinary leads, their job was basically to make sure that any experimental packages were integrated safely with the airframe, and that we could execute the proposed test missions safely and successfully. I owned propulsion and I also owned performance. So if you recall the Lockheed Linear Aerospike rocket engine activity, that package weighed 20,000 to 25,000 pounds and was mounted externally on the back of the SR-71. That was a drag issue, obviously. So part of my role was to make sure that we could actually accelerate through the transonic drag rise with that package and get out to the target test conditions. 

Q: There is a tremendous amount of interest in seeing the Blackbird fly again. The biggest question seems to be why? What kinds of experiments or research would an SR-71 provide that couldn’t be done more effectively with a modern aircraft, rocket or unmanned vehicle? Can you walk us through some of the reasons NASA would like to see it in the skies again?

A: Yeah, that’s a question that everybody’s been asking. Why? I’m speculating, although I do have a good feel for where this is going. So bear with me. 

They probably are not going to do this for — or trying to do this — for aerodynamic reasons. You can do CFD [computational fluid dynamics]-based modeling in this speed regime all day long and very accurately in this day and age. It does not take a lot of time or money to do that. What you cannot do is an accurate representation of a new type of engine integrated into a high-speed airframe. You can do the conceptual modeling of it. Of course, it’s difficult to get the final installed answer, especially if it involves an engine that operates at long duration. That is where I think they’re going with this. I believe that they’re developing basically a high-speed engine test bed. That would make the most sense to me.

Q: That’s something you couldn’t do with a more modern aircraft or rocket or unmanned vehicle?

A: That’s a good question. But you know, probably two-thirds of that battle is just developing the airframe. It does depend on the size of the engine that you’re after. 

Obviously, if this were a Williams engine or that size class, you could get by with probably a bespoke drone to do your testing. That wouldn’t be that expensive. If your goal is to test something that’s man-rated or very large, like a J58-size engine, what better way to do it than use an airframe that’s already proven to fly at that speed?

Q: Were you asked to join a team at NASA tasked with getting a jet back in the air? Who else was asked, and what kind of team were they building?

A: I did not receive an offer. There was a tongue-in-cheek text that I got earlier in the year that said, ‘Hey, Conners, how would you like to help get the Blackbirds flying again?’ And that was from somebody who was positioned with inside information. That is where I first heard of this. This was back in spring, but nobody formally reached out to me.

I believe that the only one that’s been tagged so far, as far as a retiree, was Mike Relja. Mike was a crew chief on the Blackbird, and that makes sense that they would potentially want to pull on him. But there was no formal offer, and I tell you what: If somebody approached me to work it, I don’t think I could turn them down.

Q: Do you know where the idea for this project came from and who is in charge?

A: I don’t have an answer. I’d love to know as well.

Q: What can you tell me about this effort? What are the latest developments in this project that you know of?

A: So what I’m hearing is that they’re looking at doing power-on testing fairly soon. That’s pretty big. So of course that’s not engine power on. That’s external power applied to the airframe, seeing which systems still live, which ones don’t, and then moving from there. So that would be an expected first step. 

It’s an encouraging step. That means NASA would have gotten beyond cracking open all the bays, inspecting the interior, making sure that the thing at least passes visual inspection for airworthiness from that standpoint. 

Q: Have they actually gotten any systems working?

A: No, they’ve done the visual inspection, actually, putting electrons on the airframe. [To get systems working] would be the next step, but it is forthcoming, from what I understand.

Q: What is the timeline?

A: That’s supposed to happen within the next couple weeks.

Q: Really? Where is this work taking place?

A: That I do not know for sure. Although I assume it’s happening at [NASA’s] Armstrong [Flight Research Center].

Q: So what is going to happen?

A: That’s a good question. Let me tell you about what I heard more recently, and then you can begin to connect the dots. JP-7. People ask about the fuel. I think it’s pretty well known that NASA had a huge amount of JP-7 stockpiled that they received from the Air Force back in the early ’90s. So much that it was in a dedicated tank, like one of the giant jet fuel tanks at Edwards Air Force Base. You know, the tanks up on the ridge.

From what I understand, that supply unfortunately was discarded about 20 years ago, and JP-7 is a unique fuel. Obviously, low volatility. When I poked at what might be the way forward there, it didn’t sound like that was a showstopper. I got the impression that there’s been dialogue underway with refineries for a replacement or a surrogate that would work. So I went from being deflated, hearing that the fuel was gone, to being encouraged that potentially there was a surrogate workaround.

But that led to the question regarding the engines themselves, so the feedback there was more discouraging in that it looks like the engines are indeed unserviceable. I don’t believe that is based on an actual attempt to run them. It is based on inspection. Probably no surprise. They’ve sat idle, you know, for 27 years. That is what led to questions going back and forth regarding how the airframe would be powered. And that’s what led into where, if you connect the dots, that’s where the airframe would be used as an engine test bed. 

So different engines, they would have to be high-Mach bypass systems. We can speculate on which engine company might be developing those systems, but yeah, I don’t want to give it too much away because I don’t want us to lose the inside information that we got.

Q: Are they working on a completely different engine to power Blackbird?

A: I don’t know that for sure. I think if the J58s are not an option for powering the Blackbird, you either button it back up and walk away from it, or you go bring in engines that are already under development that we’re not privy to at this point in time. But there’s no other option. So what are we going to use? It’s not like we can slap in F100s or F110s. They’re not going to cut it.

The Pratt & Whitney J58 – The Engine of the SR-71 Blackbird

Q: Obviously, restoring an aircraft sitting out in the elements for years into one able to withstand the rigors of Mach 3 flight is one hell of an undertaking. In your mind, what are the biggest hurdles to this endeavor?

A: Number one would be the engines for sure. Number two would be anything that’s made of elastomerics. Plastics, wiring. Covering connectors. All that stuff degrades and oxidizes with time. You can imagine what frayed wiring and broken wiring insulation – what kind of havoc that would create. What Blackbird has going for it is that all those casings and connectors were built for the rigor of sustained Mach 3.2 flight for an hour, an hour plus, so they are not going to deteriorate quickly. The question is: Have they deteriorated in 27 years? So, if the answer is not a significant amount, then we’ve probably addressed one of the biggest questions – other than the engines – regarding reviving the airplane. 

Q: Do you think NASA is going to attempt to just fly Tail 844 largely in its original configuration, or will they deeply modify it or build something new based on it?

A: Completely unknown. They definitely have the ability to modify the airframe, right? They did it before in the ’90s to carry the Linear Aerospike package. That was a huge undertaking on the airframe itself. They did it successfully. Armstrong still has a pretty deep bench in that area, so if they wanted to take on modifying the titanium structure, I think they could do it. 

But it’s a good question. Again, that would probably point to aerodynamic studies, and if it were me and my dollar as a taxpayer, I would lean on computational studies to get those answers. That’s what I tend to do in my day job is forego testing in lieu of computational when it involves external aero, but it’s when you do the integrated propulsion in this speed regime, that’s really when you need test data from the actual operating conditions. 

Q: As opposed to digital modeling?

A: Yes. For instance, say the aerodynamic databases for Blackbird are gone, which they might be. I know there are simple aerodynamic models that still exist, but like a true high-fidelity model that would go into a piloted simulator, that could probably be regenerated fairly quickly. Probably on the order of months computationally in this day and age. So I think simulation capability could be stood up in fairly short order. That, of course, will be foundational for the pilot training task.

Q: We’ll talk more about pilot training later, but first I want to ask about modernization. If NASA were to inject modernized features into the SR-71, what would you like to see? And what makes the most sense in terms of material science, avionics, propulsion and so on?

A: I’m not a materials expert. I think it would be really interesting to see how the airframe could be optimized using adaptive flight control capabilities. So, if the flight control system could be digitized, I think that would lead to some very interesting in-flight experiments. I doubt that that would be. I could be wrong, but if the goal is to get the airframe back up as a propulsion test bed, you don’t need to cut out the hydromechanical flight control system and replace it with a digital one. 

That all said, what I would like to see is what we talked about a few minutes ago, and that’s basically modern high-speed engine technology. So what could be done? The J58s were low operating pressure ratio systems. What could be done with a modern, digitally controlled, multistream, high-Mach engine, I think, would be truly trailblazing. 

One of the reasons why there’s interest in this speed regime, it was neglected for a number of years. The focus was on hypersonics. If you proposed anything going back, say, 15 years in the Mach 3.5 speed regime, it was ignored. The glitz and glamor was on hypersonics. Hypersonics is great tactically for certain scenarios, but the weaknesses of hypersonics are now becoming apparent. 

And as far as countermeasures, hypersonics still has a place. Don’t get me wrong, but every system cannot be hypersonic from an affordability standpoint. So, now you’ve seen it over the last, say, five years. A lot of systems are coming back on the scene that operate in the Mach 2 to Mach 4 regime, and there’s a reason they’re all fitting in there, right? You stay below the speed limit that requires more exotic metallics. You stay in the titanium regime. You can fly, of course, up to [Mach] 3.5 with brief excursions up to about [Mach] 4, so that is tactically relevant against a lot of military targets and defensive systems. So here it is. You know we now have a potential flying test bed that can carry engines in the J58 size class.

The Mighty J58 – The SR-71’s Secret Powerhouse

Q: How much could a project like this cost, and is it really economically feasible? How long do you think it could take?

A: I’ve been thinking that over, and I think it depends on who does it. I don’t want to disparage my former government brethren. I had great respect for the folks at NASA when I worked with them, but one of the reasons why I left the agency is because it was becoming so risk-averse. That was adding bloat to everything. And what we used to do quickly, we no longer could do quickly or cheaply at what was Dryden Flight Research Center, so that is what concerns me. 

If NASA could operate with the agility that it had, if Dryden/Armstrong could operate with the agility it had 30 years ago, they could do this work in probably a few years. I would say again, it would depend on what exactly they need to do to the airframe. If it’s to resurrect the airframe and bolt in new engines using existing interface hardpoints, that would go much, much more quickly than doing extensive airframe modifications.

Q: Given that 844 has been sitting idle since 1999, what would be the very first thing you would want to inspect or test before even considering putting it back in the air?

A: Exactly what I’m hearing the rumor is that they’re doing this. What is the condition of all the components in the airplane that are flowing electrons? Because if the entire airframe is shorted out, you know how it is. 

If you have a car where you’ve hooked up the battery cables backwards – I had a car once where somebody jumped in and did that. It ruined the car because I was chasing shorts constantly, constantly breaking down in the months that followed because the wiring was compromised, melted, bubbled all over the vehicle. And then it would get wet. You get shorts. That, I believe, is what one of the objectives of power-on testing is. To make sure continuity still exists, reliable continuity throughout the airframe. So that’s exactly the first step. 

I would say the second would be hydraulics. That vehicle is hydromechanical. So what is the state of the actuators and whatnot?

Q: And you said that work is taking place now?

A: It’s certainly being inspected. That was one of the reasons why they pulled it off of the display pad at Armstrong. But that work has been going on for a couple of months, and it certainly seems that there was at least reason to be encouraged and to go forward with this next step. Otherwise, they would have just towed it back to the parking spot.

Q: And the next step is testing the systems?

A: That is correct.

Q: We touched on this a little before, but how realistic is it to get an SR-71’s J58 engines operational again after nearly three decades of inactivity? What would worry you most about those engines? How many are left?

A: Well, that’s a good point. As far as [engines] that are readily available, there are several that are at the [Air Force Flight Test (AFFT) Museum at Edwards AFB]. I believe they’ve been stored outside. But if you consider all the museums around the world with Blackbirds on display, almost all of them have installed J58s, and there’s usually one sitting alongside the airframe on display, so there are plenty of engines. Whether or not they’re serviceable, that of course is the question. 

But probably the biggest problem with an engine – well, there are several with a gas turbine that sits unmoved for decades – it’s going to be that you’re going to flatten the bearings. Probably not visible to the eye, but rotating turbo machinery doesn’t like flats on the bearings. So for obvious vibration reasons, you got that. And you’ve got the seals. Seals are going to crack. Trapped fuel is going to turn to gunk and clog up lines. That engine was all hydromechanical, of course, or no digital controls on that because of the heat involved. So fuel hydraulics played a big role in that engine. 

There is likely a lot of goo in those lines. I believe that’s why they’ve essentially been written off as unserviceable. I was discouraged because one of the questions I asked that I didn’t get an answer to was: Did anybody try to run the engines or pull them apart? But I don’t even know if the instructions exist to unstack a J58 at this point. I’m sure it could be figured out with the right people, but you know how it is. Pulling something apart is a lot easier than putting it back together. 

Q: So there’s no manual for that anymore?

A: I don’t know if there’s a manual specific to that. Like I told Steve [Trimble] at Aviation Week, there certainly are operating manuals. You’ve probably seen the pilot’s manual for the SR-71A. It’s a beauty. There are a lot of copies online. You can get PDFs of those. They are very well-written, huge manuals. I know prints exist for the airplane. Those were in the keeping of the Edwards Museum. I believe those have been handed back over to NASA. So, it’s not like there’s a complete dearth of information.

When I was at NASA, I was the person who received everything that Pratt & Whitney had left on the J58s when the Air Force decommissioned the program, and that information was in two or three smallish boxes and consisted of hard copy code printout or printout of numerical data, along with some magnetic reels of code. It was not much. And I was told at the time the only reason I received that information was somebody missed it when the Air Force gave the destruct notice. It was under somebody’s desk, so it was not much in the way of knowledge transfer, unfortunately.

Q: What did you do with all that?

A: I left it behind in 1998 when I left NASA.

Q: What happened to it?

A: I have no idea. Hopefully, somebody scanned it. But again, that was J58 info, right? So if they’re going with a new engine, they’ll have the full digital models for those new systems. And I do believe that recreating the aerodynamic database, including inlet performance, that kind of data can all be regenerated fairly quickly with computational tools.

Q: We touched on this a little bit before, but how difficult would it be to reproduce the JP-7 fuel that powered the Blackbird? It would need designated tankers too, correct? 

A: So that was one of the questions I asked is whether or not that formulation exists still. The answer I got back was that essentially a refinery should be able to recreate a suitable surrogate. If you think about it, JP-7 was unique in that it had a very low volatility characteristic. 

What I’ve learned about Jet A from some of the ramjet work that I’ve been doing is that it has a ridiculously low volatility too, of course, by design. So I don’t know that JP-7 is that far apart from the chemical characteristics of a Jet A-class fuel, JP-8-type fuel. JP-8 was a significant change from JP-4, so the Air Force was using JP-4 in their fleet, and then moved to JP-8 to be consistent in the ’90s with the Navy with their formulations. That’s a lower volatility fuel, and at NASA we had to recharacterize the flight performance of all of our jets with JP-8, but it worked fine. 

We were concerned about operability – that we were going to have flameouts and engine relight and flight relay problems. Those did not materialize, so I don’t want to oversimplify it, but I am thinking that you might be able to take an existing Jet A and with the right additives knock down the volatility to a level that’s safe for flying in the Blackbird. 

Q: What would need to happen to have aerial refueling jets be able to handle fuel for the Blackbird?

A: There were dedicated JP-7 tankers for the Blackbird. I don’t know if they can take an existing system and flush it. It would depend on the formulation, right? JP-7 was notorious for its unseemly characteristics. It was toxic. 

I had a shirt that got dripped on when I was standing under the wing of the Blackbird once, and I had to throw it out. I could not get the stink out of that shirt from the JP-7. It was a weird fuel. So if you can get one that’s more aligned with the fuels used in the service, then I don’t believe that’s going to be a showstopper as far as tanker support, but you do know tanker support is going to be required for that airplane. 

Q: You said the JP-7 fuel stank. What did it smell like?

A: I just remember it turning my stomach. Like I kept smelling something as the day went on, and I reached over and saw a stain on my shoulder. I don’t recall what happened the rest of the day, but I just remember being repulsed by the odor and then not being able to get it out when I washed the shirt. 

Q: Beyond the fuel, the SR-71 depended on a huge ecosystem of specialized equipment, fluids, personnel and procedures. Which parts of that infrastructure would be hardest to recreate today?

A: That was something that Mike Relja pointed out when he talked to Steve Trimble. That’s a good one. You probably heard that the J58s were started with a start cart that was basically a bank of Buick 12-cylinder engines, all next to each other. It’s a beautiful-sounding system, but very unique. But what is starting, you know, other than you’re either doing a power takeoff via shaft, or you’re using compressed air. It depends on what the engine demands. So I think the start cart development would be fairly straightforward. 

But there is a lot of specialized equipment, like Mike pointed out, the wings when they’re split up, they are held in place by a specific scaffolding. The way the engines were craned out of the wing required special equipment. Pulling the inlet spike off that required a special cradle. Those are not insurmountable, but you don’t want to wait till the last minute to realize you need unique equipment. So it’s all got to be taken into consideration.

Q: Could existing SR-71s in museums realistically be used as sources of spare parts for 844, or would cannibalizing those aircraft create more problems than it solves? Were those airframes left structurally intact? 

A: I believe that was the agreement with the Blackbirds. If a museum were to put one on display, there was a certain expectation regarding care and maintenance. Not so much maintenance, but care and preservation. If you think about it, many of them are under [a] roof in climate-controlled facilities. I know several of them that are preserved like that, including one here in Tucson. That, of course, is the best place for preserving anything with elastomerics and plastic. So I think it’s encouraging that so many of them have been so well cared for. Again, it’s going to come down to which components, regardless of whether or not they’re indoor or outdoor, which components are going to fail first, and I believe that’s the exercise NASA is looking at. 

Then you’ve got to start beating down, chasing supply chain sources for some of this, and you know the nightmare that’s out there with supply chain and aerospace. So it’s not going to be an easy task. I don’t want to act like it is. I don’t think it’s insurmountable though.

Q: So these aircraft can be used as sources of spare parts?

A: Sure, absolutely.

Q: Is anyone with a Blackbird already contributing parts?

A: I know that the Edwards Air Museum is contributing what they can as far as spares and prints. I don’t know who else, although I believe the second NASA SR-71A went to the Evergreen Aviation & Space Museum in Oregon. I would expect them to be in the loop. 

(TWZ reached out to the Evergreen to find out what, if anything, it is contributing to this effort.)

Q: How difficult will it be for modern test pilots to fly Tail 844, or whatever aircraft is created from this project? What would actually be the hardest part of training a pilot to fly the aircraft today? Do you think they will convert it into an unmanned configuration?

A: Well, that would be a difficult airplane to convert to unmanned, unless it went with a digital backbone, and like I said, I think that would be an enormous undertaking. It’s not unheard of. NASA, along with McDonnell Douglas, converted a couple of F-15s to all-digital backbones before the F-15E program began. It can be done. It’s just expensive. It’s not easy. 

But the piloting task starts with a good simulator, right? The piloting task is absolutely a big deal. I saw it firsthand at Dryden. That said, it took a couple years, probably two. I would say that’s about right for the Dryden pilots, who are pretty good at what they do, to learn to fly the Blackbird safely, and that was with the use of the two-seat trainer, which we’re not going to have this time.

So I think the key to this happening is getting a digital sim together very quickly, and it wouldn’t surprise me if NASA has begun this process already. Getting that together, plus getting the former pilots who are still with us in the seat to make sure that it aligns with what they recall as far as the unique features of the airplane. 

I have 100 hours of stick time on the Air Force Blackbird simulator. I’m not a pilot, but I used to pre-fly the maneuvers for the pilots and NASA on the high-drag missions, so I’m familiar with the way the airplane flies up and away, and it is a bear to fly. It is not easy. So training is not insurmountable. Like I said, it takes a good, high-fidelity sim. NASA is expert at building those kinds of simulators, modular simulators quickly. In this day and age, we should be able to put a high-fidelity sim together fairly quickly for training. 

If you recall, the cockpit is an analog nightmare on a Blackbird. Breakers everywhere. Dials everywhere. I doubt that somebody suggested that we go with an all-digital cockpit. That would be so much work to do. But if we go for it with just a pure analog cockpit that we used previously, that’s going to require a lot of familiarity. I do believe that the training systems might still exist for that. It would just be for that airplane. It would just be getting them all cobbled back together.

SR-71 Cockpit Checkout

Q: What made the Blackbird so difficult to fly?

A: It’s a low-G airframe, so you got to baby it. It’s easy to get an angle of attack out of range. And then with those chined surfaces, it’s easy to get a pitch-up with the airplane. That’s how I always managed to wreck it in the sim. I would let alpha get away from me.

Q: Do you know if any of the pilots have been recalled for this effort to get this thing flying again?

A: No, I don’t know.

Q: It has been close to 70 years since the A-12 Oxcart first flew. There had to have been other high-speed aircraft that at least came and went in the classified test environment. Considering all the work in hypersonics today, it isn’t hard to believe new platforms exist. Why would the SR-71 still have relevance here, and why not use one of those aircraft instead, if they exist? If they do, is it because the SR-71 is declassified? 

A: Yeah, that could very well be what we’re looking at here. I’ve had friends ask that question this week. We were talking about the SR-72. Where is that at? I don’t know. I know people who went to work on it years ago. I’ve never heard anything since. So it could be that that’s so deep black that there’s no way that platform could be used as a test asset. So I think it’s precisely what you said. The Blackbird’s no longer classified, and that it’s possible that the engines that might be used in Blackbird wouldn’t be classified either.

Q: Would any of those engines be applicable for this SR-71 reboot?

A: Certainly.

Q: Do you know if they exist anywhere?

A: No. But from what was leaked or hinted at regarding the size of the vehicle, it would seem that whatever was the power plant for that aircraft, it would be about the right size.

Q: What do you think generally about the renaissance of sorts in high-speed aerospace capabilities in recent years?

A: I worked on HAWC [Hypersonic Airbreathing Weapon Concept] at Raytheon, which became HACM [Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile]. One of the systems that I helped design was the inlet isolator used on HACM, which is not operational yet, but it will be. But it’s an air breather by Raytheon. That gave me a lot of exposure to the level of exquisite technology that’s required to field a system like that.

It is expensive. It’s difficult. Supply chain is a challenge. There’s a reason why they cost what they do per unit. So you see the push to develop lower-cost hypersonic systems like Castelion’s Blackbeard [lower-cost hypersonic missile]. It’s not an air breather. So I think it’s an easier problem than what we dealt with at Raytheon with an air breather. But nevertheless, it’s impressive that they’ve gotten a price point down to what they’ve gotten, so you see that happening in hypersonics. 

You’re kind of stuck in the same block of speed, but the price is dropping. And then meanwhile, you’ve got this massive group of munitions that are setting up camp in a Mach 2 to Mach 4 speed regime for reasons I mentioned. Those are running much cheaper per shot and per effect, which is why that’s happening. So that you give up something on survivability by pulling down into that speed range, but the price point allows you to volley at such a level that you overwhelm the defensive systems.

Q: If an SR-71 took to the skies again, would it not be one of the highest-profile aviation moments in a generation? It would certainly capture the imagination of many young and old. What do you think about the social aspect of all this?

A: I have yet to find anybody who isn’t excited by the prospect. Certainly, everybody within aviation thinks it’s cool. Some of my family who don’t know much about airplanes – they all think it’s cool. Everybody thinks it’s just super. That said, everybody also wonders why we’re doing it. But what’s funny is everybody still says, ‘Let’s do it anyway because it’s such an iconic airplane, beautiful airplane, an inspiration.’ Hopefully, there would be a good reason to spend the money. But I think even if it’s a bad reason, everybody wants it to take to the skies again.

Q: If you were a betting man, Tim, what would you say are the odds of this thing flying again?

A: I would give it a 25% chance.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The volume of munitions expended in the course of U.S. operations against Iran this year has been and continues to be a hot topic of discussion, and there has been relatively little official data provided on this front. However, now we know that the F/A-18F Super Hornets of the U.S. Navy’s Strike Fighter Squadron 41 (VFA-41), the “Black Aces,” launched 421 missiles and bombs during their time supporting Operation Epic Fury.

This new insight into VFA-41’s role in the conflict with Iran comes from a photo of a large board listing the squadron’s weapons expenditures during Epic Fury, via Jeff Rojas, who goes by the handle @jro_photography on Instagram. Rojas also shared pictures recently taken of VFA-41’s Super Hornets. The Black Aces were one of the squadrons assigned to the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, which has been on a marathon deployment since last year. The carrier only left the Middle East region last month and is now set to formally return home to San Diego, California, within days. Per the Pentagon’s official timeline, Operation Epic Fury began on February 28 and concluded on May 5, though U.S. forces have continued to conduct strikes on Iran, on and off, since then.

The complete tally of munitions employed as shown on the board, broken down by type, from greatest to fewest, is as follows:

The total cost of all of these munitions, using available data from U.S. military budget documents, is very roughly $43,646,000, at least. Unit costs fluctuate regularly due to a variety of factors. Furthermore, the exact price tag for different JDAMs can be somewhat difficult to calculate given how the individual components are budgeted.

The JDAM is really a family of kits that turn standard unguided ‘iron bombs,’ which can vary significantly in the kinds of effects they are designed to produce, into warheads for precision-guided munitions. This is exemplified by the (V)2 and (V)4 subvariants of the GBU-31/B mentioned here, which are built using standard high-explosive and bunker-buster bombs, respectively. No specific subvariants of the GBU-32, GBU-38, or GBU-54 were mentioned in the information provided. Standard JDAMs can also only be employed against static target coordinates. The LJDAM kits add a laser guidance component (akin to what is found on Paveway-series bombs) that enables strikes against moving targets.

No specific version of AGM-154 is mentioned, either, but the C and C-1 types, which have multi-stage bunker-busting warheads, are the only ones understood to be in service today. Remaining A variants, which were loaded with 145 small bomblets, were removed from U.S. service in 2008 as a result of new guidelines on cluster munitions issued under President George W. Bush. A planned AGM-154B, which would have contained six “smart” Sensor Fuzed Munition bomblets, was never produced. You can read more about the full JSOW family here.

We do not know exactly what targets any of these munitions were employed against. However, a picture that Jeff Rojas grabbed of one of VFA-41’s Super Hornets, seen toward the top of this story and in part below, shows a very interesting broken submarine kill marking, with the added text “Sub Buster.” The jet also has a number of more typical bomb-shaped kill marks.

Iranian naval vessels, including the country’s Russian-made Kilo class and other submarines, were top priority targets during Epic Fury. The U.S. military has previously confirmed that air-launched AGM-114 Hellfire laser-guided missiles (likely fired from MQ-9 Reaper drones) and ground-launched Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) short-range ballistic missiles were employed against submarines, specifically.

The video montage in the social media post below includes a clip, starting at 0:13 in the runtime, of a Hellfire missile hitting what looks to be a Ghadir class diesel-electric midget submarine in port.

U.S. forces are degrading the Iranian regime’s ability to project power at sea and harass international shipping. For years, Iranian forces have threatened freedom of navigation in waters essential to American, regional and global security and prosperity. pic.twitter.com/gIBN02mowh

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 10, 2026

Bunker-busting JDAMs are also known to have been key munitions employed during strikes on targets in Iran during Epic Fury. TWZ previously called explicit attention to the employment of JSOW in the opening phases of the operation, as well. Navy strike fighter squadrons made significant use of SLAM-ERs in strikes against Iranian-backed Houthi militants in Yemen last year, too.

It is extremely likely that the AIM-9Xs and AIM-120s were fired at Iranian drones, though they could have been launched at incoming cruise missiles, as well. At the time of writing, there are no known or reported instances of U.S. military jets engaging crewed Iranian aircraft in the course of the conflict to date. In 2024, the Navy carried out a crash program that increased the total number of AIM-9Xs that F/A-18E/Fs could carry per sortie, specifically in response to Houthi drone threats. Super Hornets loaded with nine air-to-air missiles are now referred to as “Murder Hornets.”

Notably absent in VFA-41’s tally is any mention of 70mm laser-guided Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II (APKWS II) rockets. Air-to-air optimized versions of the APKWS II are now part of the arsenal available to U.S. Air Force F-16C Vipers, F-15E Strike Eagles, and A-10 Warthogs, and have become the service’s go-to aerial weapon for engaging drones. In February, the U.S. Marine Corps disclosed that it was working to integrate this capability onto its legacy F/A-18C/D Hornets. Whether the Navy has any such plans for the Super Hornet is unclear.

It is also important to remember that this is a discussion of the munitions expended by just one Navy strike fighter squadron. Lincoln‘s air wing includes four strike squadrons, three with Super Hornets and one with F-35Cs, as well as units flying other types of aircraft and helicopters. The carrier was just one part of a much larger array of air, naval, and ground forces that participated in Operation Epic Fury and subsequent operations against Iran. For additional context, consider that the entire Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group, including its entire air wing and escorting ships, fired off 770 munitions in total, by the official count, during very active combat operations in and around the Red Sea between November 2023 and June 2024.

All of this speaks to the larger matter of how many munitions the U.S. military has expended in the course of operations against Iran this year, which is now fueling concerns about the sufficiency of remaining stockpiles and what it will take to replenish them.

As such, the tally of munitions launched from VFA-41 Super Hornets offers a very interesting view into that squadron’s contributions to Operation Epic Fury, as well as the full scale and scope of the conflict with Iran.

Special thanks again to Jeff Rojas for sharing the details about VFA-41’s participation in Operation Epic Fury and his pictures with us.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Welcome to Bunker Talk. This is a weekend open discussion post for the best commenting crew on the net, in which we can chat about all the stuff that went on this week that we didn’t cover. We can also talk about the stuff we did or whatever else grabs your interest. In other words, it’s an off-topic thread.

This week’s caption reads:

NANTWICH, ENGLAND – MAY 24: The BBC broadcasting studio inside the former RAF Hack Green secret nuclear bunker on May 24, 2023 in Nantwich, England. Hack Green played a central role in the defence of Britain for almost sixty years. It was chosen during WW2 to protect the land between Birmingham and Liverpool from hostile attack and as a location for the new RADAR equipment. The bunker went on to be used for shelter and protection during the Cold War. As relations between East and West thawed many of the UK’s nuclear bunkers were sold off. The Secret Bunker is now privately owned by the Siebert family and is run as a museum trust. (Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)

PRIME DIRECTIVES:

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

BREAKINGBREAKING,

No warning given before Israeli deadly strike hit Rimal area, one of Gaza City’s most densely populated neighborhoods.

An Israeli air attack on a residential apartment in western Gaza City has killed at least five people and severely wounded at least six others, according to medical staff at al-Shifa Hospital.

The strike hit the al-Asala building in the Remal neighbourhood early on Saturday without prior warning, according to Al Jazeera’s Hani al-Shaer, reporting from Khan Younis.

Remal is one of Gaza City’s most crowded residential areas, home to thousands of displaced people sheltering in makeshift camps across the neighbourhood.

Al-Shaer said the attack came in the middle of the night, when residents were asleep.

“We heard fighter jets getting louder, then three strikes followed, hitting the apartment and killing those inside,” he said.

The strike penetrated the targeted apartment and tore through the floors below, causing further destruction throughout the multi-storey building.

Fires burned for at least an hour before Palestinian Civil Defence crews managed to put them out.

Al-Shaer described the scene as “horrific”, with people buried under the rubble as they slept.

Civil defence crews were still searching the site for missing people and bodies, he said, as Israeli drones continued flying over the area and fighter jets were heard flying low across the Strip.

Al-Shifa Hospital said the dead included four women, among them an elderly Christian woman and her daughter.

The six wounded were taken to al-Shifa Hospital for treatment.

In-depth study also says the royal house made huge profits from the Dutch colonial policies in past centuries.

A historical study has found that the Dutch royal house benefited from the country’s colonial policies in past centuries and helped the slave trade to survive.

The in-depth study, commissioned by King Willem-Alexander and conducted by Leiden University, showed the House of Orange-Nassau “actively supported Dutch colonialism for centuries, but only rarely determined colonial policy”, according to the university’s statement, published on Friday.

“The involvement of the House of Orange-Nassau was wholehearted and without any real reservations,” Dutch historians and human rights experts concluded after a three-year study looking at the period from 1600 to the present.

“The research leaves us in no doubt that the House of Orange shares responsibility for the survival over the centuries of the Dutch slave trade and slavery,” the study said, noting that most of the rulers showed no objections to slavery.

King Willem-Alexander said on Friday he was personally affected by the “explicit” conclusions of the study.

“It is a painful and confronting conclusion. A conclusion that affects me, even though I am three generations removed,” Willem-Alexander said in a speech at the presentation of the research.

“We know the effects of colonialism and slavery are still being felt today. Discrimination and economic exploitation unfortunately happen every day,” he added.

The study also showed that the royal family at times profited substantially from the colonial system, mostly from trade in the Dutch East Indies, modern-day Indonesia.

In the 19th century, for instance, profits accumulated to about $650m in modern terms, the researchers said.

On the other hand, the royal family earned “almost nothing” from the slave trade, the research showed.

Apologies without reparations

The Dutch monarch, who in 2023 apologised for his ancestors’ lack of action against slavery, highlighted their lack of “counter-current leadership” in the face of colonialism.

The House of Orange has ruled the Netherlands since the late 16th century, first as “stadtholders” who presided over the republic, and later as the royal house when the Netherlands became a monarchy.

For most of this time, the Dutch ruled over vast colonies in Southeast Asia and the Caribbean, including what is now Indonesia and Suriname.

The findings could stir up the debate around reparations in the Netherlands. The Dutch government apologised in 2022 after acknowledging the Dutch state bore responsibility for transatlantic slavery. King Willem-Alexander apologised the following year.

The government at the time ruled out reparations, instead creating a 200 million euro ($238m) fund for social initiatives, which anti-racism campaigners have dismissed as insufficient.

The National Institute for the Dutch Slavery Past and Heritage (NiNsee) lauded the king for commissioning the study but said it should lead to a next phase.

“Research impacts society when the new insights into the past contribute to awareness, dialogue, corrections and additions to our national history in the school curriculum and the conversation about responsibility and reparatory justice,” NiNsee director Bianca Groen Gallant said.

The Dutch played a major role in the global slave trade from the 17th century until the Netherlands abolished slavery in the second half of the 19th century.

A ballistic missile is fired from the North Korean port city of Wonsan, South Korean military says.

South Korea’s military says North Korea has fired at least one ballistic missile towards the sea off its east coast.

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said on Saturday morning that its northern neighbour fired a ballistic missile from the port city of Wonsan on the eastern shore of the Korean Peninsula.

The South Korean military raised an alert for further launches.

Japan issued an emergency alert on Saturday, saying: “North Korea has launched a suspected ballistic missile.”

The launch came a day after Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, ridiculed South Korean demands for the North to apologise over landmine blasts that South Korea and the US-led United Nations Command said were caused by North Korean mines planted south of the Military Demarcation Line.

The blasts seriously injured three South Korean soldiers on a reconnaissance mission inside the 4km-wide (2.5-mile) border zone that stretches across the Korean Peninsula.

South Korea has also called on the North to halt recent efforts to fortify its border, including the installation of mines and anti-tank barriers.

Kim Yo Jong dismissed Seoul’s demands as “utterly pathetic”, saying the North intends to permanently cut ties with the South.

Saturday’s launch was the latest in a series of North Korean military displays in recent weeks, including tests of a purported hypersonic missile system, live-fire exercises and the commissioning of a new warship.

Caracas, October 1, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuela joined the United States, Israel, and allies in shunning a high-level UN meeting commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Durban Declaration.

The event took place on Monday at the UN headquarters in New York to celebrate the landmark anti-colonial and anti-racist declaration and programme of action adopted at the Durban Conference in 2001.

“48 UN Member States refused to participate in the UN’s shameful High-Level Meeting commemorating the 25th anniversary of the notorious anti-Western, antisemitic Durban Conference,” US ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz wrote on X. “We thank all Member States who joined the United States in rejecting Durban’s poisonous legacy.”

Waltz posted the flags of the 48 countries that reportedly boycotted Monday’s event. Venezuela joined Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, and Paraguay, countries with US-aligned right-wing governments, as the only Latin American countries not to take part. All African and Caribbean countries participated with the exception of South Sudan.

Israel likewise lobbied countries not to attend the event, with ambassador Danny Danon insisting that “the UN must bury Durban’s toxic legacy.”

In his opening remarks at Monday’s meeting, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action a “global blueprint for racial justice and equality.”

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez told delegates present that “intolerance and supremacist ideologies” are on the rise in Global North countries.

“The wealthiest nations, which benefited from centuries of conquest, colonization, and the transatlantic slave trade, refuse to acknowledge their historical responsibilities,” he said. “Some even opposed this Assembly’s recognition of the slave trade as a crime against humanity, the gravest in history.”

The World Conference against Racism (WCAR), held in Durban, South Africa, from August 31 to September 8, 2001, aimed to establish global strategies against racism, xenophobia, and other forms of intolerance. The US, European countries, and Israel decried draft articles condemning colonialism and the slave trade, as well as declaring Zionism as a form of racism.

Though the language was watered down and non-committal on issues such as reparations, the US and Israeli delegations withdrew from the conference in protest against the final declaration’s references to Israel and proceeded to boycott subsequent gatherings held every five years.

The Venezuelan government did not comment on its decision to join Washington and Tel Aviv in opposing the latest anti-racist meeting. 

Former President Hugo Chávez strongly endorsed the original Durban conference and its final resolution. He was likewise a firm backer of Pan-African unity and the Palestinian cause, having severed ties with Israel in 2009 and fiercely denounced the US ally for genocide. His stance was maintained by his successor Nicolás Maduro, who endorsed South Africa’s activation of the Genocide Convention against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2024. Over their quarter century in power, both administrations also forged closer diplomatic and political-cultural ties with the African continent and approved landmark anti-racial discrimination legislation. 

Back at the 20th anniversary commemoration of the Durban Declaration in 2021, then-Venezuelan Foreign Minister Félix Plasencia stated that the text’s “principles and motivations remain more relevant than ever.” Plasencia was reappointed to the post by Acting President Delcy Rodríguez in July.

Rodríguez’s latest decision to diplomatically support Washington and Tel Aviv marks another significant milestone in Caracas’ foreign policy realignment since the January 3 US military strikes and kidnapping of Maduro.

Venezuela re-launched ties with Israel, first accepting a diplomatic and military mission in the wake of the June 24 double earthquake and later announcing further “technical cooperation” and the reestablishment of consular services.

Orthodox Rabbi Isaac Cohen stated in a September interview that Venezuela and Israel are going through a “dating period” that will lead to a “marriage” in the form of a full diplomatic normalization and reopening of embassies.

Caracas further engaged with Tel Aviv by accepting a reported medicine donation from Israel that was financed by Momentum Solutions, a logistics company run by prominent Zionist entrepreneurs Walter and Stephen Arbib.

Venezuelan Health Minister Carlos Alvarado received the donated supplies on Tuesday at the Tiferet synagogue in Caracas alongside Cohen and other representatives from the Venezuelan Jewish community.

Alvarado, who posed for pictures alongside the Israeli flag, claimed that the medicines would address needs in the country’s hospitals. He offered no details on the shipment’s contents.

Edited by Lucas Koerner in Philadelphia, USA.

EXPLAINER

Heavyweights England play away to Croatia, with captain Harry Kane going up against veteran Luka Modric.

Who: Croatia vs England
What: UEFA Nations League 2026-27, Group A3 match
Where: Rujevica Stadium, Rijeka, Croatia
When: Saturday, October 3, at 6pm local time (16:00 GMT)
How to follow: Al Jazeera Sport will bring you all the build-up and live updates from 13:00 GMT

Action in the Nations League continues this weekend with a matchday three tie between Croatia and England.

With a win and a defeat each, Croatia and England have both made a mixed start to this year’s competition.

Drawn in a group alongside the reigning world champions Spain and minnows Czechia, Croatia and England find themselves in an interesting yet challenging pool.

Captain Harry Kane has led from the front for the Three Lions, excelling in front of goal alongside winger Anthony Gordon, while Luka Modric continues to defy age, still playing a vital role in Croatia’s midfield even at 41.

Al Jazeera breaks down everything ahead of Croatia vs England:

What is the UEFA Nations League?

The UEFA Nations League was founded in 2018 to reduce the number of meaningless friendlies and give nations competitive matches against top-ranked teams.

In this competition, countries from across Europe participate in a league structure which features promotion and relegation.

How have Croatia and England played in the Nations League?

Both Croatia and England have won once and lost once.

Croatia started their Nations League campaign with a 2-1 win over Czechia in Prague before losing 4-1 to world champions Spain in Seville.

England, on the other hand, fell 3-2 to Spain in their campaign opener in London before beating a 10-man Czechia side 2-0 in Prague.

When did Croatia and England last meet?

They last met at the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

England beat Croatia 4-2 in a World Cup group game on June 17 in Arlington, Texas. Captain Harry Kane scored a brace, while Marcus Rashford and Jude Bellingham scored a goal apiece.

Croatia vs England: Head-to-head

• Matches: 12
• Croatia wins: 3
• England wins: 7
• Draws: 2

Croatia vs England: Form guide

(Last five games, latest results first)

Croatia: L-W-L-W-W

England: W-L-W-L-W

Who are the top players to watch?

Luka Modric and Ivan Perisic (Croatia): The evergreen Modric, very much the heartbeat of the Croatian midfield even at 41 years old, scored the opening goal in their away win in Czechia. Time and again, the captain has pulled the strings in the middle of the park, proving age is just a number. His fellow experienced teammate, Perisic, is also chipping in style, bagging back-to-back assists.

Harry Kane and Anthony Gordon (England): The script for England has looked the same in the last two games: Gordon opens the scoring, and Kane follows suit. While that wasn’t enough to beat the mighty Spain, it did the job against Czechia. Can this dynamic duo strike again? The numbers swing in their favour – Gordon has five assists already for Barcelona this season, while Kane has scored six times for Bayern Munich.

Team news and predicted lineups

Croatia

Centre-back Martin Erlic is out injured until mid-October, and right-back Josip Juranovic is sidelined with illness.

Probable Croatia XI: Dominik Livakovic; Josip Stanisic, Luka Vuskovic, Josko Gvardiol, Ivan Perisic; Luka Modric, Mateo Kovacic; Luka Sucic, Petar Sucic, Franjo Ivanovic; Dion Beljo

England

England are without left-back Nico O’Reilly, who withdrew from the squad with injury.

Probable England XI: James Trafford; Trent Alexander-Arnold, Trevoh Chalobah, Marc Guehi, Lewis Hall; Elliot Anderson, Miles Lewis-Skelly; Bukayo Saka, Morgan Rogers, Anthony Gordon; Harry Kane

Croatia vs England: TV channel, livestreaming

• Croatia: gol
• United Kingdom: ITV1
• United States: FOX Sports, FuboTV, ViX
• India: Sony Sports Network
• Middle East and North Africa: beIN SPORTS
• South Africa: DStv Stream

You can find your regional broadcaster on UEFA’s official broadcaster listing.

Italy’s Alessandro Bastoni cancels out Michael Olise’s opener for France in 1-1 UEFA Nations League draw in Saint-Denis.

Michael Olise scored another superb goal but France were held to a 1-1 draw by Italy on Friday in Zinedine Zidane’s first home game since being appointed coach of Les Bleus.

Four days after coming off the bench to score a stunning solo effort to give France a 1-0 win in Belgium, Bayern Munich star Olise again showcased his spectacular talent by smashing a shot in off the crossbar from a free kick early in the second half.

However, Inter Milan defender Alessandro Bastoni equalised for Italy midway through the second half to prevent Zidane from making it three wins out of three in charge of his country.

France, who had defender Dayot Upamecano sent off late on, lead UEFA Nations League Group A1 with seven points, with Belgium just behind on six points after a 3-0 win over Turkiye.

France and Belgium meet on Monday in their last match of this two-week international window. Italy have four points before hosting Turkiye next.

Zidane was the focus of attention as his home debut, before a packed crowd of 77,118 at the Stade de France just outside Paris, came against the same opponents as in his final game as a player.

The now 54-year-old icon and former Ballon d’Or winner never played again after being sent off for an infamous headbutt on Marco Materazzi in the 2006 World Cup final in Berlin, which Italy won on penalties.

It was a first appearance for the former Real Madrid playmaker at France’s national stadium since he played in a friendly against Mexico in May 2006, winning his 100th cap in the process.

Beyond the spotlight on his past, Zidane is trying to stamp his mark on the France team in this Nations League campaign, with one eye on the next major tournament, Euro 2028.

He was again without captain Kylian Mbappe here with the Real striker having returned to his club after suffering a knee injury while scoring the winner in Turkiye last week.

Olise returned to the starting lineup in one of six changes from the Belgium game, but new faces Jeremy Jacquet, the Liverpool defender, and Como midfielder Lucas Da Cunha again played.

Italy are rebuilding under Roberto Mancini, who has returned for a second spell as coach of a nation who have failed to qualify for the last three World Cups.

They will be the happier of the two teams with the draw in this game, although they had goalkeeper and captain Gianluigi Donnarumma to thank for keeping them in it with a host of saves in the second half.

Moise Kean should have given Italy an early lead after a sweeping move, only for his disappointing finish to be saved by Mike Maignan.

Davide Frattesi also came close in the first half while Kean had a goal disallowed for offside, as an Olise cross that landed on the bar was as close as France came.

The hosts turned up the volume after the break and Donnarumma saved from Desire Doue, Ousmane Dembele and Olise before the latter crashed in the opener on 55 minutes when Rayan Cherki laid off a dead ball.

However, Bastoni caught Da Cunha in possession just outside the France box and was left with an easy finish to pull the visitors level.

Donnarumma, formerly of Paris Saint-Germain, then produced more magic to save from Adrien Rabiot and twice from Eduardo Camavinga, before Upamecano walked for a second yellow on 85 minutes.

Two Iranian nationals have been charged with terror offences over an alleged plot to target the Jewish community in Manchester ahead of Yom Kippur, Counter Terrorism Policing has said.

Rahman Salehi, 35, and Salam Ahmadyan, 36, are accused of preparing to commit an act of terrorism or assisting another to commit an act of terrorism on or before 20 September.

The duo were arrested in the Northern Quarter area of the city, when thousands of British Jews were in synagogues.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the news two Iranian men have been charged over an alleged plot in the Manchester area would be “deeply distressing” to the Jewish community and added “both suspects arrived by small boat several years ago”.

The men are due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Saturday.

Israel’s top court has overturned an election panel’s ban on Arab parties contesting parliamentary elections this month, saying the decision had not met the legal requirements for excluding them, according to Israeli media.

The Supreme Court justices ruled unanimously on Friday to undo the Central Elections Committee’s disqualification of the country’s two main Arab-majority political lists – Ra’am, also called the United Arab List, and the Joint List, which is an alliance of Hadash, Ta’al and Balad.

The decision keeps Palestinian citizens of Israel, who make up about 20 percent of the population, in the race after critics accused the committee of double standards ahead of the October 27 Knesset vote.

The court also voted 7-2 to reinstate Ofer Cassif, a sitting Jewish member of the Knesset from the Arab-Jewish Hadash party and an outspoken critic of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, media reports said.

The two dissenting justices said Cassif backs “armed struggle against the state of Israel”, which is grounds for his disqualification.

In September, the elections committee voted to disqualify the Joint List and Ra’am as parties, as well as Cassif and Sami Abu Shehadeh, head of the Balad party, as individuals.

Balad leader withdraws

The Supreme Court has nearly always overruled the committee when it votes to ban candidates.

However, at a hearing on Thursday, Supreme Court President Yitzhak Amit told Abu Shehadeh that a majority of the nine justices favoured disqualifying him from the election.

They gave him until Friday to withdraw, saying that if he did not, he would be disqualified, according to the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation.

Abu Shehadeh withdrew from the election after that.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, a far-right ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, led the push to bar him over an article written after the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023. Abu Shehadeh described the attack as “an important historical event” in the piece, but denies supporting it.

Balad said in a statement that a court-ordered removal, rather than a voluntary one, would have had “grave consequences for the country’s political and parliamentary life” as it would set a precedent around the removal of Arab candidates.

Double standards

The Ra’am party made history after the 2021 election, becoming the first Arab party to join an Israeli government when it took part in a disparate coalition that briefly removed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from power. Most Palestinian citizens of Israel had stayed out of coalition politics until then.

In this election, Ra’am is also fielding a Jewish Zionist candidate for the first time, Yoav Segalovitz, who won popularity in Arab communities for his work to curb crime as deputy minister for internal security.

The election committee’s September vote drew accusations of a double standard, as Palestinian-led parties faced exclusion while parties led by far-right ministers, some of whom have been sanctioned internationally, stayed on the ballot.

Speaking to Al Jazeera on Friday, Abu Shehadeh said he withdrew because he “didn’t have any other choices”.

Although the Supreme Court has restored the Arab parties to the ballot, Abu Shehadeh said the reversal did not make the original disqualifications acceptable.

“In the end, what happened yesterday was a historical catastrophe for democracy, or the very narrow margins of democracy in the State of Israel,” he said. “I was disqualified because I think differently, because I have a different narrative on how to read history, the present, and the future in the place that we live today.”

New York Governor Kathy Hochul has said the woman at the centre of the Cornell University rape case was “failed” at “every turn”.

The woman, known as Jane Doe in legal documents, alleges she was drugged and raped by several men at a fraternity house in 2024.

The case was investigated at the time but no charges were laid. It recently reopened after the woman filed a civil lawsuit last month that thrust the allegations into the national spotlight.

At a news conference on Friday, Hochul said she was “deeply disturbed” by how the investigation was handled. She has now appointed New York Attorney General Letitia James to lead the case.

This appointment was made after Hochul said she “lost faith” in the local prosecutor’s ability to oversee the investigation.

Expressing outrage that local prosecutors did not interview the accuser themselves, Hochul on Friday said: “This young woman had already endured something that is utterly unspeakable, and then at every turn she was failed by people and institutions with an obligation to protect her.”

She has also vowed to close a “loophole” that prevents prosecutors from pursuing rape charges in cases when the victim has voluntarily consumed drugs or alcohol. Jane Doe is believed to have voluntarily taken drugs and alcohol on the night of the alleged gang rape.

“If someone is too intoxicated to consent it should not matter if they chose to use drugs or alcohol,” said Hochul, adding: “Voluntary intoxication is not a licence for gang rape.”

James, who is the state’s chief legal officer, appeared alongside Hochul at Friday’s news conference, pledging to “lead a process guided by the facts and the law”.

She said her office would interview witnesses and pursue prosecutions if warranted.

District Attorney Matthew Van Houten, who previously led the investigation, has defended his office’s previous decision not to file charges in the case, arguing they were not given enough evidence to meet the legal threshold.

Van Houten said much of the information released in recent weeks about the case was not passed to his office.

In a statement on Friday, he said he supported James’ investigation, adding: “It has become clear that we were not provided the full picture by the university.”

Cornell has said it provided evidence to the district attorney’s office from its own investigation, including a Snapchat group chat in which fraternity members discussed a “free” sexual encounter with Doe on the night of the alleged assault.

Job growth in the United States slowed in September, falling short of economists’ expectations as the unemployment rate rose in the final jobs report before the consequential midterm elections.

The US economy added 29,000 jobs in September, according to the Labor Department’s report released on Friday, far below economists’ expectations. Dow Jones had forecast 84,000 jobs, while economists polled by Reuters said they expected 90,000 job additions.

The unemployment rate also rose by 0.1 percentage point, from 4.1 percent to 4.2 percent.

The healthcare sector led the gains, accounting for the majority of new jobs. The industry added 17,000 jobs, marking a slowdown from an average of 33,000 jobs per month over the past year. Construction added 11,000 jobs, while manufacturing added 9,000.

Financial activities, which include sectors such as commercial banking and insurance, shed 7,000 jobs.

Most other sectors were largely unchanged, including retail, oil and gas extraction, and leisure and hospitality.

“Today’s disappointing report shows the labour market is grinding to a halt, marked by slow hiring and declining real wages that leave workers with very little leverage,” Kyle Moore, chief economist at the think tank The Century Foundation, said in remarks provided to Al Jazeera.

Previous jobs reports were also revised downward. July was revised from an initial gain of 21,000 jobs to a loss of 10,000 jobs. August was revised down by 29,000 jobs, from 162,000 to 133,000.

Wages grew by 3 percent, marking the slowest annual wage increase in five years.

Friday’s jobs report caps a week of weakening economic data before the consequential midterm election on November 3.

According to an AP-NORC poll released on Thursday, 61 percent of Americans polled said the US economy is worse off now than when Trump took office in January 2025.

“When businesses are barely hiring and raises aren’t keeping up with rising prices, it’s a stalled economy – and working families are stuck in it,” Breyon Williams, chief economist for Groundwork Collaborative, an economic policy think tank, said in a statement.

Trump has been trying to change the narrative on the slumping economy. On Monday, he said in a Truth Social post that “The United States has the BEST Employment Numbers in HISTORY.”

Stalling growth

On Tuesday, the US Labor Department released the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS report, which showed little change, suggesting what economists call a low-hire, low-fire environment. That means those who have jobs are generally not leaving for new ones, while employers are maintaining the status quo rather than expanding.

On the other hand, ADP’s private payroll report, released on Wednesday, showed that 90,000 jobs were created across the private sector. The sheer number of layoffs fell, too, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas. The report, released Thursday, showed that employers cut more than 43,000 jobs in September, marking an 18 percent decline in layoffs from August.

Friday’s jobs report comes before the Federal Reserve’s final policy decision before the midterm election. During its two-day policy meeting on October 27-28, the central bank will decide whether to raise, cut or maintain interest rates.

The odds increasingly suggest the Fed will hold rates steady in the 3.75-4.00 percent range, according to CME FedWatch, a tool that tracks the likelihood of monetary policy decisions. The FedWatch tool indicates there is currently a 77.3 percent chance that rates will hold steady, up from 35.8 percent this time last week.

US markets are trending upward on the heels of the report. The tech-heavy Nasdaq is up 1.5 percent, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 0.6 percent and the S&P 500 is up 1.1 percent in midday trading.

The price of gold, which is largely considered a safe investment during times of economic uncertainty, rose 1.1 percent to $4,223.49 amid the jobs report.