NEWS

The Sunday Times leads on its interview with the Prime Minister, saying he vowed to fight and win the next general election. The paper describes Sir Keir Starmer as “defiant”, with Labour expecting to suffer heavy losses in elections next month. Separately, the paper notes, allies of the mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, are continuing efforts to secure him a route back to Parliament, potentially paving the way for a leadership challenge.

Heyerde “Seko” López is a Venezuelan artist and activist with experience in plastic arts, screen printing, photography, graphic design, and audiovisual production. For 13 years he has been a member of Fundación Nativa Crea, a grassroots organization from Guarenas, on the outskirts of Caracas, dedicated to social work and advancing popular power.

What is Fundación Nativa Crea and what does it do?

Fundación Nativa Crea is a sociocultural organization dedicated to bringing together communes, social movements, and individuals in the town of Guarenas. We organize a variety of activities in our territory, ranging from rescuing abandoned spaces and painting murals to offering free workshops on screen printing, music, theater, and circus in local communities and schools.

Nativa is also dedicated to grassroots communication through social media. We’re always doing digital and graphic design and recording in the community to make visible what people are doing. We work to forge the identity of our barrio, our working-class areas, and our communities, so that people can be the protagonists of the revolution we’re building and the path we’re traveling together.

We’re located in Plaza Bolívar in Guarenas, right next to City Hall, because we had the chance to speak with President Chávez and decided to occupy that space, which was a Corpoelec [state electricity company] substation that had been abandoned for 15 years. At the time, we identified 37 abandoned spaces in Guarenas, but that one stood out as the most visible and strategic. We surveyed the area, and the project was born.

How is Nativa’s work organized in practice, and how does it integrate with the local community and the people’s power organizations?

There are six of us now, but we coordinate with other people in the territory and in other parts of the country. We have a set of goals and an action plan. Each person takes on tasks based on their strengths. We have six production units, two of which are currently operational: the auto repair shop, where we fix cars and motorcycles, and the screen printing and communications workshop, where we make T-shirts. We have a brand called “Contestatarixs” to market prints of iconic figures and world-renowned fighters. The other four units are a cultural café that we will soon reopen, a community bakery, a recording studio, and a greenhouse. In fact, we plan to establish a greenhouse in every community council.

In total, there are 15 community councils in our territory, which make up the General José Félix Ribas Commune. Our organization belongs to the Pueblo Arriba Communal Council. In our sector, we’re going to start with a medicinal garden, as well as tomato and onion seeds, and coffee and cacao seedlings, to later coordinate with local farmers. We’re also considering a partnership to grow barley in the nearby campesino settlements and produce craft beer. Why not have a Venezuelan communal beer?

You mentioned the bakery and the café that closed down. What obstacles did they face?

The bakery and the café closed down due to the economic difficulties resulting from the US sanctions. For example, when wheat imports were restricted, it became very difficult for us to acquire the raw materials. Previously, it had been subsidized. Although we were part of a bakery coalition with other grassroots organizations, and we held numerous meetings and coordinated efforts with the government to defend community bakeries, it was not possible to maintain our operations. In Venezuela, wheat is controlled by the owners of the silos. We fought a tough battle between 2014 and 2017, but that coalition practically fell apart, and now only the large, capitalist bakeries remain. But we are creating the conditions to revive this productive unit. We want to build a communal economy. We are going to start creating the conditions, now with more criteria and the lessons learned over these years. After all these battles, I believe we have the necessary experience.

What are the main challenges Nativa has faced over the years?

The main challenge is staying true to our identity as a left-wing organization in the face of the imperialist blockade. Nativa Crea started out as a clothing brand and is now a social organization running a headquarters of 542 square meters. But the hardest part is sustaining ourselves over time. It’s one thing to have an idea, to design a project, and quite another to sustain it –to preserve the ideology, retain the members, and create conditions so that it’s a space where people aren’t exploited and can have free time to organize alongside the pueblo. 

We also knew that, as we asserted ourselves, we would deal some blows to the bourgeois state. Not all mayors, governors, or institutional leaders will want to relinquish their share of power and accept the consolidation of popular power or the communal state. In practice, we have seen that things are not as beautiful as they are in theory. Rather, they are riddled with contradictions. But we have the spirit to fight and move forward. Today, what we do is join forces with different organizations, communal councils, etc., to keep the project moving forward and to help them identify with it. Nativa has always been a space where people can meet, hold workshops, organize politically, and so on.

What would you highlight as Nativa’s main achievements over the years?

Our main achievement has been bringing together different people, from different communes, and ensuring that everyone understands we’re all fighting for the same cause: building the communal state. 

I believe our task is to demonstrate that popular power is the way forward. For example, eight years ago, using the surplus generated by the bakery, we were able to build a sports court. So, we showed that economic activity can take place under decent working conditions, serve the community, and generate a surplus to contribute to the territory where we live. Therefore, if we have productive units –which is what we insist on in the commune –we will be able to achieve autonomy, we will be able to make decisions in the territory, and we will be able to develop what the barrio needs.

Nativa, and you in particular, place a lot of emphasis on the cultural front, especially on graphic design. What is the vision behind this?

Through graphic arts, we shape our identity. Ever since we started creating prints, painting murals, taking photographs, and producing audiovisual works, we’ve always sought to reclaim Venezuelan identity. Not the identity sold to us about barrios in mainstream culture –the glorification of crime or the idea that people dress and speak a certain way. Every town has its identity, every city has its identity, every territory has its identity. So, through the arts, we try to capture that, what we experience, and in this way, people begin to recognize themselves, know where they come from, and also to appreciate things that are nationally, locally, and indigenously produced. It gives new value to their experiences, to what they consume, read, and so on.

You recently hosted an international brigade from Brazil’s Landless Workers’ Movement (MST). What was that exchange like, and how can that feedback help strengthen grassroots organizing?

The MST brought a large group that split into seven brigades spread across different parts of the country. We were assigned one as the representative from the central capital region. This experience has been very important, because we see that our brothers and sisters in Brazil are fighting for the same cause as us: against capitalism and imperialism, and for the unity of the Latin American peoples.

The Landless Workers’ Movement has been raising that banner of struggle –the fight for land and the construction of campesino settlements –for over 40 years. They have very advanced methods, and they are masters of organization and planning. In fact, they are advising us on the various productive units. They believe that we, Venezuelans, need to focus more on planning, sticking to schedules, fulfilling responsibilities, etc. The exchange has helped our communards hear the perspective of comrades from outside, with their experience and organizational skills. They have shared their insights with 10 communes here in Guarenas and are also getting to know the local projects that have been approved through popular consultations.

As someone with many years of experience in grassroots organizing, how do you view the relationship between constituted power (institutions) and constituent power? What is working, and what needs to change?

Chávez, and also our professor Manuel Sulbarán, always told us that we, the working-class people, are the only ones capable of bringing about change and progress in our own country through popular power. So, popular power must continue to develop these methods and strengthen our communes, making them active and productive, and demanding that the state or institutions transfer the responsibilities we can assume and the resources we need. 

For example, in the General José Félix Ribas Commune, the project that won last year’s consultation was focused on the youth to build a soccer field. There was a group pushing for it, but the US $10,000 allocated for the project wasn’t enough. That caused a lot of discontent and led some to think that popular consultations were useless. These are the issues we need to debate and politicize. We explained to them in an assembly that this is a megaproject that cannot be done with just $10,000, so it must be conceived in several phases. We have to keep our spirits up and continue participating.

The soccer field has been a good topic for debate and reflection, because it is also true that the commune has many priorities that are more important than a soccer field. Everything is needed, and sports play a fundamental role, but for example, if the sewer system is damaged, the community will likely prioritize fixing that. That’s why we need to plan and see which projects are proposed through which channels. If we do a better job of categorizing projects by scale and setting timelines, we’ll be able to strengthen our commune. 

But, to answer the question, institutions need to work with us, the pueblo, and understand the priorities of each territory. Perhaps it’s not best for the commune to choose building a sports field because that should be the responsibility of the Ministry of Sports. This ends up giving the commune a responsibility that it should not have to assume, or that it is not in a position to take on. Nor should we be taking on the project of repairing a school when we have a Ministry of Education and a Ministry of Public Works. Obviously, our communards will dedicate themselves to anything that improves the community’s life, but why should the commune burn its only chance to access funding for popular power on unfeasible projects that should, moreover, be the responsibility of the institutions? So we must also demand that those holding constituted power –the government and institutions –fulfill their responsibilities, so that we, as an organized people, can move forward with ours. Another challenge we face is that some people confuse the tasks of the party [PSUV] with the exercise of popular power, and as a result, they sometimes end up dragging the commune into areas that are not its responsibility.

Finally, how does Nativa interpret the current political situation, and what role should the organized people play?

January 3 was a grave moment, a call for reflection, just as the 2002 coup had been, when the people took to the streets to make history. The lesson is the same: the people must understand that only popular power will allow us to overcome this onslaught by the capitalist economic system and imperialist attacks.

Today we must organize ourselves once again, win over all those people who were fighting, or who are fighting out there but scattered. We have to unify the struggles, as President Chávez said at the time: it is very important that we know who we are, what we want to build, in order to move forward in consolidating the Bolivarian Revolution. And beyond Venezuela, we must understand ourselves as a bloc with our neighboring countries. 

For the youth, it is important not to abandon the banners of anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist struggle and to create our own methods. The past centuries’ revolutionary struggles of Germany and France will not apply here. It is not enough for us to simply “follow the ideas of Lenin, Mao, Che, or Fidel,” although we must certainly read and study them. Chávez put it very clearly: we are going to give birth to the 21st-century revolution; we are going to create it. We’ve only been at this for 20 years, developing different theoretical and political aspects, with different participants sometimes on different wavelengths. But we all know that we have a right to an anti-imperialist revolution that defends life on the planet.

The Navy’s top leadership says they are working hard to avoid serious issues that have plagued previous shipbuilding efforts when it comes to the Trump class “battleship” program. Senior officials have focused, in particular, on the need to have a very firm design before any work on the large surface combatants, the first of which could cost a whopping $17 billion, actually begins. A lack of a finalized design, along with repeated changes to it along the way, contributed heavily to the demise of the Constellation class frigate last year.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

After Iranian missile and drone barrages disrupted U.S. Navy’s logistics by destroying port infrastructure and putting ships at risk, the service turned to a fleet of specially equipped commercial vessels to deliver fuel to warships away from the danger zone. These vessels proved so effective that one top Navy official said this week that he wants to see more of them pressed into service.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

He wants to take the concept a step further.

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

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

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

Authorities in Cauca region demand ‘decisive’ government action after deadly explosion on Pan-American Highway.

At least seven people were killed, and 20 were wounded following a suspected explosive attack in the southwestern province of Cauca, Colombia, according to regional authorities.

Governor Octavio Guzman said that an explosive was detonated on the Pan-American Highway in the El Tunel sector of Cajibio on Saturday. He condemned what he called an “indiscriminate attack” against the civilian population.

“There are not sufficient words for the pain we feel,” Guzman said in a social media post, demanding a “decisive, sustained” response from the government against the “terrorist escalation”.

A video shared by the governor appeared to show the aftermath of the bombing, with ambulances on site and mangled vehicles and debris covering the road.

“Cauca cannot continue facing this barbarity alone,” he added, stating that other actions had also been carried out in El Tambo, Caloto, Popayan, Guachene, Mercaderes, and Miranda.

The deadly incident comes after a series of attacks on Friday, attributed to criminal groups formed by dissident members of the FARC rebel group, who split with the group following a landmark peace agreement with the government in 2016.

On Saturday, Minister of Defence Pedro Sanchez was convening a security council in Cali to assess the regional security situation when the latest attack occurred.

President Gustavo Petro responded to the deadly explosion by saying that powerful criminal groups are seeking to control the population through fear.

While details of the attack are still emerging, Petro appeared to blame a drug trafficker and FARC dissident leader known by the alias Ivan Mordisco.

“I want the maximum worldwide pursuit against this narco-terrorist group,” Petro said.

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s authorities and state media project that they are less interested than before the war in negotiations with the United States if they go beyond their accepted terms, as mediated talks failed to materialise in Pakistan.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met senior Pakistani officials in Islamabad on Saturday and left for Oman, to be later bound for Russia. The top diplomat, who was not joined by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf like in a previous round of negotiations earlier this month, said he was “yet to see if the US is truly serious about diplomacy”.

Envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner had been expected in Pakistan after the White House said Iran asked for a second round of direct negotiations, but US President Donald Trump cancelled the trip and said, “we have all the cards, they have none” while reiterating his claim about “infighting and confusion” among Iran’s leadership.

“If they want to talk, all they have to do is call!!!” Trump wrote in an online post, continuing to put the onus on Iran’s leadership.

Amid a state-imposed near-total internet shutdown in Iran, nearing two months, officials and the supporters of the Islamic Republic emphasise that they are united in opposing any concessions to Trump.

The US president said earlier this week he was in “no rush” to reach an agreement with Iranian leadership, whom he claimed, without evidence, were “fighting like cats and dogs” among themselves.

Since Trump highlighted the perceived fractures, military, security, judiciary and government authorities in Iran have been releasing synchronised messages with near-identical wording to proclaim absolute unity.

The messages, circulated through state media and even using similar graphics and fonts but with different colours, claim that everyone in the country is “revolutionary” and exercises “complete obedience” to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

The authorities also claim that more than 30 million people – a third of Iran’s total population – have registered in a state-run campaign to express readiness to “sacrifice” their lives if necessary, but they have not provided any documentation to prove this.

The Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Saturday afternoon that armed forces would retaliate against the US if it continues its “blockade, banditry and piracy” in Iran’s southern waters.

“We are prepared and determined to monitor the behaviour and movement of the enemies in the region and maintain management and control of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, and to inflict more severe damages on the American-Zionist enemies in case of another aggression,” read its statement.

The IRGC on Saturday took a state television presenter to broadcast near two vessels seized days earlier in the strait to report that Iran exercised “total control” over the waterway.

Iranian authorities continue to call on their supporters, including paramilitary forces, to take to the streets every night in order to maintain control.

In a rally in downtown Tehran on Friday night, Meysam Motiei, a prominent state-backed religious singer with links to the supreme leader’s office, told the crowds that anyone stuck in factional infighting during times of war “has not grown up yet”.

“If anyone from any group or faction, especially in the name of being a revolutionary, tries to disturb the unity of the people, they will get a slap in the face by the people,” he asserted.

But in ultraconservative Mashhad in northeast Iran, where a shrine considered holy for Shia Muslims is located along with powerful religious and economic foundations, some were still preaching aggressively against the possibility of former reformist and moderate leaders retaking power.

“They have instructed us to keep unity with incumbent officials, not these two people,” a speaker told a gathering crowd on Friday night in a clip shared by state-linked media, in reference to former President Hassan Rouhani and his foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif.

“We are not afraid of B-2s and B-52s; we are afraid of dishonourables who have no concern for the homeland. Wherever Trump makes a mess, Zarif comes and blabbers away,” he said, about the diplomat who led nuclear talks that led to a now-expired landmark accord with world powers in 2015.

Iran’s judiciary continues to execute dissidents, and on Saturday announced the hanging of Erfan Kiani, who was arrested during the nationwide protests in January when thousands were killed.

The judiciary described him as “Mossad’s hired knife-wielder” and said he was accused of destroying property, arson and more in downtown Tehran.

No nuclear talks?

Iranian state media reports indicate that the US naval blockade of Iran’s ports is undermining the ceasefire extended by Trump and allowing the more hardline voices in Tehran to come out on top.

The Tasnim and Fars news agencies, affiliated with the IRGC, argued against allowing any nuclear negotiations to take place with the US, even though Trump and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu started the war with the predominant goal of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran. Tehran has consistently stressed that its nuclear programme is peaceful, although some Iranian leaders have called for the development of a bomb.

“The negotiations with the US are strictly to end the war, and Iran does not consider the nuclear issue to be part of the talks,” Tasnim said, claiming that time was not on Washington’s side due to the tumult in global markets resulting from the war.

Khamenei has not directly commented on more negotiations, but Ali Khezrian, another representative of Tehran in the hardline-dominated parliament, told state media on Thursday that Khamenei was “opposed to any extension of negotiations” under threats from the US and Israel.

Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz earlier this week adopted Trump’s apocalyptic messaging, and said armed forces are awaiting a greenlight from the US to “return Iran to the age of darkness and stone by blowing up central energy and electricity facilities and crushing national economic infrastructure”.

There are currently three US aircraft carriers and their supporting vessels in the Middle East region, according to the US military, which marks the first time this has happened since the buildup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

But Mahmoud Nabavian, a senior black-turban cleric and hardline member of parliament who was a part of the large Iranian delegation in the first round of talks, said it was a “strategic mistake” to even include the nuclear issue.

He told state media that this allowed the US to raise demands like a 20-year suspension of enrichment, and shipping Iran’s buried high-enriched uranium abroad.

“From now on, entering any negotiations with the US is pure damage and has no interest for the Iranian nation,” he said earlier this week, adding that oil sales were providing the government with a “full hand”.

Mohammad Saeedi, the Friday prayer imam of ultraconservative Qom, located south of Tehran, said in reference to the US that it would be “meaningless and unfair to sit down behind the negotiating table with a symbol of corruption”.

Civilian infrastructure in danger

The government of relatively moderate President Masoud Pezeshkian has signalled concern about the potential impacts of systematic targeting of more civilian infrastructure, especially power plants, in case the war continues.

“We have a simple request from the people: to reduce their consumption of power and energy. For now, we have no need for these dear people to sacrifice their lives, but we need to control consumption,” the president said on Saturday. “They have hit our infrastructure and blockaded us, so the people become dissatisfied.”

Mohammad Allahdad, the head of Tavanir, the government-owned mother company for development and operation of Iran’s power grid, told state television that it would pay a reward to citizens who would report any theft and illegal use of electricity.

First Vice President Mohammadreza Aref said, “We will build Iran back more glorious” through unity after previous infrastructure attacks that hit oil and gas facilities, steel producers, petrochemical firms, aluminium factories, energy facilities, as well as airports, naval ports, bridges and railway networks.

The government reopened Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Airport for limited foreign-bound flights on Saturday, including those taking people to the Hajj pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia, despite the potential of war resuming.

Barcelona move 11 points clear of Real Madrid in the La Liga title race with five games to play.

Fermin Lopez and Marcus Rashford’s goals took Barcelona to the brink of the La Liga title with a 2-0 win at Getafe.

The defending champions moved 11 points clear of second-place Real Madrid, who drew at Real Betis on Friday to dent their hopes of finishing the season with a trophy.

Hansi Flick’s side can win their second consecutive Spanish title if they overcome Osasuna next weekend and Real Madrid fail to beat Espanyol.

“It’s not done, we have five more games, and we’re only focused on the next one,” Flick told reporters.

“We will celebrate when it’s time, but not now.”

Barcelona were without vital injured wingers Lamine Yamal and Raphinha, but still did enough to see off Jose Bordalas’s tricky side, sixth, in the Madrid suburbs.

“We were aware of what was going to happen here, we were going to have few chances, and I think we played well, competing well defensively and putting away the chances we had,” Lopez told Movistar.

“We know we’ve got a big advantage [in the title race], but even so, we can’t relax, I know it’s a cliche, but it’s the truth.”

Getafe set out to disrupt Barcelona’s rhythm with small fouls, and Barca struggled to create many clear opportunities.

Flick opted for Swedish winger Roony Bardghji in place of Yamal and chose Lopez on the left over Rashford.

Dani Olmo made the first with a neat dribble, speeding into Getafe territory, but pulled his shot wide of the far post.

Eventually, the hosts made the breakthrough just before half-time when Pedri played in Lopez.

Wearing a protective mask after hurting his face in a collision with Atletico Madrid goalkeeper Juan Musso during Barcelona’s Champions League quarterfinal elimination last week, Lopez stayed calm to slot home.

The midfielder imitated Yamal’s usual “304” celebration in tribute to the injured teenage star.

“The truth is he’s really important for us, it’s a shame that he can’t play any more, but the important thing is that he recovers well and is ready for the World Cup,” added Lopez.

With Getafe needing to come out of their shell to find an equaliser, Barca had more opportunities after the break.

David Soria saved from Olmo after he met Jules Kounde’s cross, and then the French defender headed a Joao Cancelo ball narrowly off-target.

Martin Satriano threatened for the hosts before Rashford, on loan from Manchester United, secured Barcelona’s triumph.

Robert Lewandowski sent the England international charging through on goal, and he slipped a low effort past Soria to help Barca put one hand on the trophy.

“Marcus, in the second half, he came on and used the space they gave us,” said Flick.

“I’m happy that we scored this goal for the team and also for him.”

Getafe goalkeeper Soria acknowledged Barca were clinical enough to clinch victory.

“They were very efficient, you give away two chances, and they score them both,” he said.

“It’s a shame to have gone in behind at half-time because it puts you in a difficult spot.”

Trump later suggests that next talks will be over phone, saying ‘If they want to talk, all they have to do is call!!!’

United States President Donald Trump has announced that his envoys would not be travelling to Pakistan for talks with Iranian officials after Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left the country.

The US president told news outlet Fox News that he had ordered Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to ditch plans to visit the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, for the possible talks, despite his earlier claims that Iran was “making an offer” aimed at resolving the two-month conflict.

“I said, ‘Nope, you’re not making an 18-hour flight to go there. We have all the cards. They can call us anytime they want, but you’re not going to be making any more 18-hour flights to sit around talking about nothing,” Trump said.

In any case, Araghchi had already departed Islamabad, the first destination of a three-leg tour including Oman and Russia. Iran’s state-run Press TV confirmed he left on Saturday after meeting Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar.

Posting on X, Araghchi said he had shared “Iran’s position concerning workable framework to permanently end the war on Iran” with Pakistani officials. “Have yet to see if the U.S. is truly serious about diplomacy,” he added.

Later, Trump appeared to say on social media that any future talks would be taking place over the phone. “If they want to talk, all they have to do is call!!!” he wrote, adding that nobody knew who was in charge in Iran and that there was “tremendous infighting and confusion within their ‘leadership’”.

Reporting from Washington, Al Jazeera’s Rosiland Jordan said Trump’s comments suggested that the US did not see “any yielding on the Iranians part”.

She said that his talk of holding “all the cards” appeared to allude to “the US naval blockade, as well as the ongoing presence of more than 50,000 troops in the region, ready to resume combat operations”.

The pressure to strike a deal to permanently end the war has mounted amid an ongoing standoff in the Strait of Hormuz, through which approximately one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments transit.

Iran’s powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said Saturday that they had no intention of ending their effective blocking of the waterway, which has thrown energy markets into turmoil, according to the news agency AFP.

Asked by US media outlet Axios whether the cancelled trip by his envoys meant a resumption of hostilities, Trump said: “No. It doesn’t mean that. We haven’t thought about it yet.”

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Araghchi had arrived in Muscat on Saturday for meetings with Omani officials. He is also expected to travel on to Russia to discuss efforts to end the war, which the United States and Israel began against Iran on February 28.

An Iranian delegation led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif in Islamabad. Iran outlined its proposal to Pakistani mediators as part of efforts to revive direct negotiations with the US.

Authors: Rahul Mishra & Harshit Prajapati

The US-Israel conflict with Iran dragged almost every country into a phase of energy insecurity. While Iran’s neighboring countries are directly affected by the armed conflict, immediate regions too have not remained insulated from the ongoing conflict. For India, the conflict has demonstrated the implications of getting caught in the crossfire of a conflict in its vicinity. Two particular incidents—the US sinking of the Iranian warship IRIS Dena in the waters off the coast of Sri Lanka (just 40 nautical miles away) and the reported firing of two ballistic missiles towards the joint UK-US base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean—serve as a grim reminder about a conflict spiraling in India’s maritime backyard in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).

For decades, the Indian Ocean region has remained largely peaceful, away from any direct impact of a conflict in a neighboring region or any major power conflict with a regional impact. The two above-mentioned incidents highlight the need for littoral states of the IOR to have a regional security mechanism to deal with any crisis in the region in a more cohesive and coordinated fashion. Being one of the major stakeholders in the region, it is incumbent upon India to foster meaningful and substantial cooperation with IOR littoral states through regional mechanisms such as the Colombo Security Conclave (CSC) and the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS). It would be a timely exercise to strive to move beyond non-traditional security cooperation mechanisms to protect the shared maritime space, especially during such conflicts.

The sinking of IRIS Dena in the IOR when it was returning to its home after participating in the International Fleet Review and multinational exercise MILAN, hosted by India, serves as a major strategic lesson to countries of the region. Since the International Fleet Reviews are an acknowledgement by the regional and global peers of the host country’s sovereignty and maritime supremacy in its neighborhood, the sinking of an Iranian warship does not augur well for India’s claim as a net security provider or preferred security partner in the IOR.

Additionally, Iran’s launch of two ballistic missiles, which failed to strike the designated target, towards the Diego Garcia base, reflects the risk of a distant war reaching India’s maritime backyard. The 2025 decolonization agreement between the UK and Mauritius enabled the transfer of the Chagos archipelago, including Diego Garcia Island, to Mauritius; however, the UK retained access to the Diego Garcia military base for 99 years. Thus, in the event of a conflict, Diego Garcia, as the joint UK-US base, may become a target, thereby drawing the war into the Indian maritime backyard. With the escalating conflict with Iran, Hezbollah, and the Houthi rebels, the possibility of repetition of such an incident cannot be ruled out.

During the Cold War, India and the IOR countries endeavored to halt the foreign military presence in the IOR, as illustrated by the UNGA Resolution 2832 of 1971, which sought to establish the Indian Ocean Zone of Peace (IOZOP). However, the regional countries failed to implement the declaration because of resistance from the major powers. In 2016, India attempted to revive implementation of the 1971 resolution but failed to garner significant attention from the IOR countries, putting aside any major power.

Rather than seeking IOZOP through restrictions on foreign military presence, India should strengthen its naval capabilities, especially its intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) platforms. Earlier, in 2018, India envisioned a 200-ship fleet by 2027; however, in 2026, the goal was revised to a 200-plus-ship fleet by 2035. Despite the induction of new platforms, this goal seems ambitious, as older platforms retire faster than new ones are inducted, especially given the constrained budget allocation to the Indian Navy.

A sizable portion of India’s submarine fleet is aging. The current force comprising Russian-origin Kilo-class submarines and German-origin Type 209 submarines has been in service for decades and is set to retire soon. Although the induction of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Aridhaman in April 2026 and Arighaat in August 2024 strengthened India’s nuclear triad, the pace of induction of conventional submarines remains lagging. Project 75I, aimed at developing advanced diesel-electric submarines, was originally set in motion in 2007; however, its deal with the manufacturer—a German firm—has yet to be signed.

Earlier, it was planned that India would expand its fleet of long-range maritime reconnaissance Boeing P-8I aircraft from 12 to 28. But then the plan to expand the fleet to 28 P-8I aircraft was reduced to 20-22 due to constrained spending. Additionally, the Indian Navy only possesses 15 MQ-9B high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) drones.

Therefore, if India needs to entrench its position as a preferred security partner in the IOR and realize its vision of Security and Growth for all in the Region (SAGAR)—upgraded to Mutual and Holistic Advancement for Security and Growth Across Regions (MAHASAGAR) in 2025—in the IOR, then it needs to support its normative framework with military capabilities.

Given India’s lack of naval capabilities—across all three mediums (air, surface, and undersea)—to conduct persistent surveillance of the enormous IOR (spanning more than 70 million square kilometers), India should collaborate with littoral countries to conduct surveillance in the IOR through regional mechanisms such as the CSC and the IONS. Presently, cooperation in these forums is largely limited to countering non-traditional security threats, such as piracy, trafficking, maritime disasters, etc. Challenges such as differing threat perceptions, disparity in naval capabilities, and a lack of regional consciousness hinder meaningful and substantial cooperation.

However, if the littoral countries of the IOR seek to avoid getting caught in the crossfire of a distant conflict, such as the present one, they need to move beyond non-traditional security cooperation to develop a common understanding of how to protect the shared maritime space in the IOR, especially during such conflicts. India, being the most militarily equipped country in the IOR, should take the lead in forging the collaborative efforts to conduct persistent surveillance in the IOR, as maritime wars do not respect geographical boundaries.

The U.S. Navy has shared details about what looks to be a previously undisclosed effort to rapidly arm ships in two carrier strike groups with radar-guided Longbow Hellfire missiles to protect against drones. This reflects a larger push to expand shipboard defenses against uncrewed aerial threats, which now includes four Arleigh Burke class destroyers sailing with new launchers to fire Coyote interceptors. TWZ was first to report on the appearance of one of these launchers on the USS Carl M. Levin, with Naval News subsequently sharing more information.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Zone 5 White Spike Counter UAS drone interceptor flight tests

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

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

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

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

NASA has received its new flying laboratory, the ex-commercial Boeing 777 airliner that had previously undergone modifications for its research mission in Waco, Texas. The research aircraft will become NASA’s largest platform, taking over from the agency’s now-retired Douglas DC-8, an aircraft that you can read about here.

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

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

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

JAL B777-346：JA8941
JAL B777-246ER：JA704J
12May2007 ITM/RJOO.
ワンワールド加盟を記念して登場したJALのスペシャルカラーのような派手な塗装の機体が再び出てくることを期待したいですね。#oneworld25 pic.twitter.com/B8n2VRa6U2

— ウィングエース (@WING_ACE) February 3, 2024

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com