NEWS

Israel and Iran may be seeking an off-ramp to keep the latest flare-up of fighting from boiling over to an extended conflict in the wake of strikes between the two nations on Sunday and Monday. The attacks marked the most serious challenge to the shaky ceasefire that went into effect on April 8. They took place despite President Donald Trump urging both sides to stand down to let the sputtering peace process move forward.

Meanwhile, adding to the tensions, the Houthi rebels of Yemen, an Iranian proxy group, have threatened to attack Israeli shipping in the Red Sea region in support of Iran. As we reported yesterday, they fired missiles at Israel on Sunday.

Both Israel and Iran said on Monday evening local time that they were ready to stop fighting.

“Israel has decided to stop its attacks on Iran,” Reuters reporter Phil Stewart stated on X, citing a source.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it was halting attacks on Israel but maintained the right to resume them if Jerusalem continued “to target Hezbollah in Lebanon,” Fox News reporter Trey Yingst reported.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed the decision to stop attacking Iran was made because “after we dealt a heavy blow to the terrorist regime in Tehran, it ceased its attacks on us. If the terrorist regime in Iran makes a mistake and attacks us again—we will respond with full force.”

در حال حاضر، آتش متوقف شده است، زیرا پس از اینکه ما به رژیم تروریستی در تهران ضربه محکم زدیم، حمله به ما را متوقف کرد.

اگر رژیم تروریستی در ایران اشتباه کند و دوباره به ما حمله کند – ما با قدرت پاسخ خواهیم داد.

نخست وزیر نتانیاهو:
🔸️شهروندان عزیز اسرائیل، یک سال پیش ما یک… pic.twitter.com/sk7sRwHNta

— اسرائیل به فارسی (@IsraelPersian) June 8, 2026

In a post on his social media platform, President Donald Trump said both sides “are looking to do an immediate CEASEFIRE! Final negotiations on ‘Peace’ are proceeding, subject to ignorance or stupidity getting in its way.”

The ongoing U.S. blockade of Iranian ports, however, “will remain in place, and in full force and effect, until a ‘Final Deal’ is reached,” Trump added. “Things should move quickly.”

“Both sides, Israel and Iran, are looking to do an immediate CEASEFIRE! Final negotiations on “Peace” are proceeding, subject to ignorance or stupidity getting in its way…” – President DONALD J. TRUMP pic.twitter.com/zLoFSZo3jZ

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) June 8, 2026

Earlier on Monday, Trump demanded that the two sides stop fighting.

“Israel and Iran must immediately stop ‘shooting,’” Trump insisted on Truth Social.

As we noted yesterday, the latest Israel-Iran fighting was sparked by Israeli bombing of Beirut on Sunday. Hours after that took place, Iran launched missiles at Israel and Israel fired back. Initially on Monday, Israeli leaders said they were expecting a conflict that would last for at least several days and that Iran has sufficient stocks of ballistic missiles to carry that out, according to the Israeli N12 News outlet.  

In addition, the IDF was preparing for more attacks from the Houthis and Hezbollah, N12 stated.

However, that analysis had apparently changed in recent hours.

Israel’s retaliatory strikes came despite Trump telling several reporters on Sunday that he was going to tell Netanyahu to hold his fire and that both sides had done enough to each other and should cease attacking. Those conversations pointed to either messaging to deceive Iran about a pending attack or further signs of strain between the two leaders.

Trump to Channel 13 News:
”I think Israel has responded enough, no need for more. We can achieve peace after 3,000 years.”

— Farzad Seifikaran (@FSeifikaran) June 7, 2026

Netanyahu’s push to attack Hezbollah in Lebanon had reportedly already earned a invective-laden rebuke from Trump.

“You’re fucking crazy,” Axios said Trump told the Israeli leader in a phone call last week. “You’d be in prison if it weren’t for me. I’m saving your ass. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this.”

After Israel struck Beirut on Sunday, Trump told Financial Times that Netanyahu would have no choice but to accept any deal the U.S. negotiates with Iran, because he “calls the shots.”

“He won’t have any choice,” Trump told the outlet in a telephone interview. “I call the shots. I call all the shots. He [Netanyahu] doesn’t call the shots.”

BREAKING: President Trump says Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will have “no choice” but to accept a US deal with Iran, because he “calls the shots,” per FT.

Details include:

1. “I call the shots. I call all the shots. He [Netanyahu] doesn’t call the shots,” Trump said

2.…

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) June 7, 2026

Despite Trump putting his foot down, overnight, “dozens of Israeli Air Force fighter jets struck nine Iranian air defense systems in western and central Iran, and this morning, the IAF struck three factories at a petrochemical complex in southwest Iran,” the Times of Israel reported. “The military says the strikes are only being carried out by Israel, but there is ‘full coordination’ with CENTCOM. Meanwhile, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir has spoken with his counterpart, CENTCOM chief Adm. Brad Cooper, three times, according to the military.”

U.S. forces “are assisting in intercepting incoming missiles,” I24 News Diplomatic Correspondent Amichai Stein reported on X. “So far, Iran has launched approximately 22–24 missiles, while the Houthis have fired two.”

An IDF official confirmed that to us, saying that “the Israeli strikes were fully coordinated with CENTCOM across multiple dimensions, including intelligence, defensive preparedness, and operational planning.”

CENTCOM declined to comment.

However, a U.S. official told TWZ that American forces “did not defend Israel with air defense against missiles and drones.”

IDF sources:

• The military is preparing for at least several days of combat.

• U.S. forces are assisting in intercepting incoming missiles.

• So far, Iran has launched approximately 22–24 missiles, while the Houthis have fired two.

— Amichai Stein (@AmichaiStein1) June 8, 2026

Earlier on Monday, Israel released video it says showed attacks on Iranian air defense systems.

🎥FIRST FOOTAGE: Watch IDF strikes targeting aerial defense systems in Iran, which housed missiles intended to target aircraft. pic.twitter.com/7pWhnOuSGV

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 8, 2026

That strike was part of a wave of attacks Israel carried out on Iranian air defenses across the country.

⭕️🛩️ STRUCK: The IDF completed a large-scale strike on strategic defense systems belonging to the Iranian terror regime.

Recently, defense systems were deployed across Iran to restore the regime’s capabilities degraded during Operation Roaring Lion. The strike led to the… pic.twitter.com/eEqV2QnXK3

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 8, 2026

Israel also claimed that among its targets were “infrastructure sites at the petrochemical complex in Mahshahr, in southwestern Iran.”

“These facilities were used by the armed forces of the Iranian terror regime to produce and export raw materials for weapons production,” the IDF posited. “The targeted infrastructure produced unique materials that serve as critical components for the development of ballistic missiles.”

🚨 confirmed. Among the 15 Targets IAF attacked is the Mahshahr Petrochemical Complex, officially known as the Petrochemical Special Economic Zone (PETZONE) in Bandar-e Mahshahr, Khuzestan Province. Right across the border from Kuwait !

This is Iran’s 2nd largest petrochemical… https://t.co/2JgcUZpSZ3 pic.twitter.com/qvQFWMcC6I

— Eyal Ofer אייל עופר (@Eyalo365) June 8, 2026

Video emerged online showing the Israeli airstrikes in Tehran.

For the first time since the April ceasefire, Israel and Iran have attacked each other. Israel carried out strikes on western and central Iran including the Iranian capital Tehran.

While Iran launched missiles at northern Israel and said it is the beginning of a week of attacks.… pic.twitter.com/SmcwFKMw14

— Channel 4 News (@Channel4News) June 8, 2026

The attacks sparked a warning from the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem.

“As a result of the current security situation in Israel, including Home Front Command alerts for multiple regions,” the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem is ordering “all U.S. government employees and their family members to shelter in place, and be prepared to move to a protected shelter in the event of a red alert, until further notice.”

As a result of the current security situation in Israel, including Home Front Command alerts for multiple regions, the U.S. Embassy has directed all U.S. government employees and their family members to shelter in place, and be prepared to move to a protected shelter in the event… pic.twitter.com/ohyK56GyNh

— U.S. Embassy Jerusalem (@usembassyjlm) June 8, 2026

Though both Israel and Iran say they are willing to stop fighting, tensions in the region remain high. We will continue to monitor the situation.

UPDATES

As we noted earlier in this story, the Houthi rebels of Yemen said they are banning Israeli ships from the Red Sea and took credit for missile attacks on Israel that took place on Sunday.

“We announce a complete ban on navigation for the enemy in the Red Sea, and any Zionist movements will be considered military targets for our forces,” said Brigadier General Yahya Sare’e, the Houthis’ spokesman. “We will confront escalation with escalation, and our operations will be escalating in line with the battle and our participation in the axis of jihad and resistance.”

“We affirm the right of our people and the free peoples of our nation to confront American-Israeli aggression,” he added. “We will not stand idly by in the face of the unjust siege on our people and the peoples of the axis of jihad and resistance.”

Sare’e also said the Houthis launched “a missile strike on sensitive targets of the Israeli enemy in occupied Jaffa, and achieving its objectives with precision, thanks to God.”

There were no reported injuries or damage from that attack.

Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthis announce that they launched a missile attack on Israel and declared a ban on Israeli shipping in the Red Sea.#Yemen pic.twitter.com/LYYPB7bibK

— Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) June 8, 2026

As we have previously reported, there have been major and relevant concerns that the Houthis could effectively shut down the Bab el-Mandeb (BAM) strait, a narrow stretch of water between Yemen and Djibouti. Doing so would choke off a flow of oil exports from Saudi Arabia to the east, exacerbating a huge spike in oil prices after Iran closed off the Strait of Hormuz to most shipping. Having both straits closed at once is something of a ‘sum of all fears’ scenario for the global energy marketplace.

A new Houthi offensive would be a major cudgel for Iran, because it would open a new front in the war and draw in U.S. military resources at a time when they are already heavily involved in the region. 

During the previous Houthi Red Sea campaign that stretched into early 2025, the U.S. and its allies deployed many warships, including the Eisenhower and Truman Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) to both defend against Houthi attacks and strike targets in Yemen. These operations resulted in a large expenditure of air defense munitions already under strain as Iran rained down missiles and drones across the Middle East.

You can see video from some of those encounters below.

Strikes on Iranian-backed Houthi Targets by USS Gravely, USS Carney, and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower

Iran, meanwhile, insists it is maintaining its control over the Strait of Hormuz.

“No vessel without Iran’s permission has the right to pass through the Strait of Hormuz Command vessel of the IRGC Navy,” the official Iranian Fars News Agency stated on X. “It is announced to all vessels that entry of any vessel from hostile countries into the Strait of Hormuz is prohibited and, if observed, they will immediately be targeted.”

CENTCOM says its forces once again disabled a ship trying to run the blockade. This time, the effort involved an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet from the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) firing “a precision munition into the ship’s engineering and steering spaces after the crew failed to comply with directions.”

The incident, involving the Palau-flagged M/T Marivex, took place as the unladen oil tanker transited international waters in the Gulf of Oman toward Iran, the command stated on X.

“Marivex is no longer sailing to Iran,” CENTCOM added.

This was the seventh ship trying to run the blockade that CENTCOM forces disabled, the command noted. In addition, it said it  “redirected 134 ships that complied, and allowed 42 vessels supporting humanitarian aid to pass since initiating the blockade on April 13.”

You can read more about how the other six ships were disabled in our story here.

According to a release from U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), the U.S. disabled an unladen oil tanker, the M/T Marivex, in the Gulf of Oman today. Per the release, a “precise munition” from an F/A-18 Super Hornet was fired into the engine and steering areas of the vessel when the… pic.twitter.com/qyW4WBhfLa

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) June 8, 2026

Given existing concerns that Iran has mined the Strait, “US allies will seek Trump’s approval for a Europe-led plan to demine the Strait of Hormuz at next week’s G7 summit in France,” Bloomberg News is reporting. “The UK and French-led mine-clearing mission is operationally ready and set to deploy in the days after any Iran deal. Securing a G7 endorsement of the mission is one of the main goals of the summit. European leaders see it as a way of showing the continent is stepping up to help the US after Trump’s fury it didn’t back his war.”

US allies will seek President Donald Trump’s approval for a Europe-led plan to demine the Strait of Hormuz at next week’s Group of Seven summit in France. https://t.co/Byy6mE94rh

— Bloomberg (@business) June 8, 2026

You can read more about what it takes to conduct demining operations in our exclusive interview with a former MH-53E pilot who carried out those operations, which you can read here.

My exclusive interview with a pilot who flew the behemoth MH-53E Sea Dragon helicopters on counter mine missions over the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz.https://t.co/C0tvO2sLKp

— Howard Altman (@haltman) June 5, 2026

Despite the renewed fighting, Iran’s president says his country has not abandoned diplomacy.

“Our priority is national security and the peace of our people. We will defend the rights of the nation with authority and will not retreat in the face of any threat,” Masoud Pezeshkian stated on X. “Diplomacy and defense are the two wings of national power; we have neither abandoned the field nor the negotiating table. God willing, with unity and rationality, Iran will emerge triumphant from this trial as well.”

اولویت ما امنیت ملی و آرامش مردم است. با اقتدار از حقوق ملت دفاع می‌کنیم و در برابر هیچ تهدیدی عقب‌نشینی نخواهیم کرد. دیپلماسی و دفاع دو بال قدرت ملی‌اند؛ نه میدان را ترک کرده‌ایم و نه میز مذاکره را. به امید خدا با وحدت و عقلانیت ایران از این آزمون نیز سربلند عبور خواهد کرد.

— Masoud Pezeshkian (@drpezeshkian) June 8, 2026

In a post on X, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-connected Tasnim news agency claims Iran fired a new jet-powered drone at Israel during its waves of attacks yesterday. The outlet provided no details about the weapon or any imagery of it in flight. TWZ cannot independently verify the claim.

Iran Utilized Newly Unveiled Jet-Powered Drone in Overnight Strikes on Israel

Iran employed a previously unseen jet-powered drone in its overnight attacks on Israel, according to Seyed Mohammad Taheri, a military analyst at Tasnim News Agency’s War Interpretation Desk. https://t.co/ATvBOUmiOZ pic.twitter.com/Z4SBHawMcz

— Tasnim News Agency (@Tasnimnews_EN) June 8, 2026

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

A novel kind of drone-based air defense system has been shown for the first time by German weapon manufacturer Diehl Defence. The Cobra 600, which has not previously been seen in public, combines a jet-powered drone platform with a missile rail armed with one of the company’s IRIS-T missiles, a weapon already used in short-range air defense systems and air-to-air applications. The new system immediately recalls recent Russian developments, which add short-range air defense missiles to its versions of the Shahed-136 long-range one-way attack drone, known locally as the Geran.

Cobra 600 is being presented at the ILA Berlin airshow, taking place this week in the German capital. The Cobra 600 is also known as the Airborne Launching and Attack System (AirLAS), and the program was launched last year.

The concept behind the Cobra 600 is that of a ‘missile taxi,’ in which the drone platform carries the IRIS-T missile over a considerable distance. All the while, the drone is meshed with a ground-based air defense system. Typically, this would be one of Diehl’s IRIS-T SLM or IRIS-T SLS systems. Of these, the IRIS-T SLS employs the same missile as the air-to-air variant — and therefore the same missile as the Cobra 600. The physical interface between the drone and the missile is a standard pylon as used on the Eurofighter jet.

As for the drone platform, this is provided by another German firm, the Polaris Raumflugzeuge aerospace start-up. It has a similar kind of efficient delta planform as the Shahed-136, with a modified flying-wing-like design. On the wingtips are mounted endplate vertical stabilizers. As displayed, the drone is powered by a pair of JetCat-P1000-PRO micro turbojet engines, each of which provides a maximum thrust of 20 pounds. However, the drone has intake ports for another two engines. It’s not clear if these are only intended to be fitted if heavier payloads are being carried, but it’s certainly a possibility. Concept artwork released by Polaris, as seen at the top of this story, shows a four-engine configuration, with the turbojets buried in the airframe and fed by much longer intakes, helping to shield them from detection.

Polaris Raumflugzeuge has already built a variety of drones in the same configuration, and the company eventually aims to scale this up to produce a spaceplane.

Drawing on its design heritage, the Cobra 600 drone has retractable wheeled tricycle landing gear, meaning that it can be reused in some scenarios. The drone therefore takes off and lands from runways, although it is also able to operate from suitable shorter airstrips, such as stretches of highway. It’s also intended to be cheap enough that commanders will also be willing to risk losing it in combat, or after it runs out of fuel.

The concept of operations has the Cobra 600 serving as an adjunct to a ground-based air defense system, extending its range considerably.

With the missile fitted, the Cobra 600 has a range of around 250 miles. This compares to around 25 miles for the ground-launched missile used in the IRIS-T SLM, or approximately eight miles for the missile used in the IRIS-T SLS.

As such, the Cobra 600 has the potential to turn the ground-based IRIS-T into something a little closer to a long-range surface-to-air missile, in terms of the distance it can cover. Of course, this is only true in terms of absolute range, with the speed and maneuverability of the drone being far inferior to a long-range missile. Unless the target is nearby, or the Cobra 600 has been pre-positioned based on known target vectors, the reaction time it offers is strictly limited. The missile itself is also able to tackle a more limited range of potential targets than a dedicated long-range surface-to-air missile, some of which offer an anti-ballistic missile capability, for example.

On the other hand, the Cobra 600 offers the distinct advantage of being able to loiter in a given area, waiting for threats to emerge, or to perform combat air patrols to screen certain sectors. It is best viewed as a forward-positioned additional launcher for the ground-based IRIS-T, and is also entirely reliant upon that system (or a similar one) for its effectiveness. At the same time, leveraging existing ground-based air defense systems as a force multiplier is a clear advantage. Another possible operational scenario would involve setting the Cobra 600s up as interceptors on a runway, sitting ready for launch on a runway to defend against lower-end threats.

In its current form, the Cobra 600 has no onboard sensors to detect targets other than the imaging infrared seeker head that’s integral to the standard IRIS-T missile.

In an operational scenario, a target for the Cobra 600 would be detected and identified by the ground-based air defense system to which it is ‘tethered.’ Connected via datalink, the ground-based system would vector the drone to the appropriate location. Using its own seeker, the IRIS-T would lock onto the target and be commanded to launch by the operator of the ground-based system. Of course, this presupposes that the datalink is not compromised by hostile interference or due to line-of-sight limitations, although SATCOM capability, like Starlink, would help keep redundant control over the drone beyond line-of-sight.

At this point, the mode of engagement is not dissimilar to the ground-based IRIS-T SLS, which features a lock-on-after-launch (LOAL) capability. This means it can fire missiles without first establishing the weapon’s lock on the target. After receiving target information in the form of three-dimensional coordinates, the missile uses inertial guidance during the initial stage of flight. Upon reaching the designated engagement altitude, its imaging infrared seeker activates and begins searching the predicted target area.

Diehl Experts | Ulrike Bartel | IRIS-T system | Diehl Defence

Another conceivable option would be to add some kind of sensor, such as an infrared camera, to the Cobra 600 drone platform, meaning that a ‘person in the loop’ could establish that the missile had locked onto the correct target.

A further option could be to ‘uncage’ the missile seeker and let it search across its field of view only when the Cobra 600 is in a designated ‘kill box,’ within which it would have authority to engage any target it acquires, reactively, and autonomously. Issues such as this clearly need to be addressed, based on combat requirements and ethical concerns.

As well as operating the Cobra 600 in conjunction with the IRIS-T SLM/SLS, it could also be integrated with other ground-based air defenses. According to Polaris, it could also be embedded with aircraft or in a maritime environment.

The Cobra 600 has already completed its first flight tests, with a dummy IRIS-T missile fitted. Currently, the development effort is mainly funded by the company, but there has also been investment from at least one interested nation.

With the IRIS-T SLM/SLS combat-proven in Ukraine, experiences from this conflict have almost certainly helped inform the development of the Cobra 600.

The war in Ukraine also provides an interesting parallel to the Cobra 600, in Russia’s missile-armed adaptations of its Shahed/Geran drones.

Russian developments have seen the fielding of these drones carrying either a single R-60 air-to-air missile, a much older and less capable equivalent to the IRIS-T, or man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).

According to Ukrainian accounts, as well as the rail-mounted missile on the top, these drones are equipped with a camera and a radio-frequency modem.

Russian forces are mounting Igla MANPADS on Shahed drones to target Ukrainian helicopters that intercept them. The drones carry a camera and radio modem, and the missile is launched remotely by an operator in Russian territory. pic.twitter.com/T5TKPHyhVu

— WarTranslated (@wartranslated) January 4, 2026

However, the concept of operations for the missile-armed Russian drones is very different. While it gives the drones a means to engage Ukrainian fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, it works more as a deterrent than as a genuinely useful tactical application. As we have noted in the past, the difficulty in obtaining a high degree of situational awareness and the limited agility of the drone raises questions about the effectiveness of these solutions. On the other hand, Russia has been working on a man-in-the-loop (MITL) control capability for the Shahed/Geran, which could potentially be used to operate the missile.

Considerably larger than the Shahed-136 design, the Cobra 600 will provide a higher performance delta overall. It is also jet-powered, and, with up to four engines, this would give more impressive response times and maneuverability than the Russian system.

It should be noted that there are other previous precedents for arming drones with air-to-air missiles. In at least one instance from 2002, a U.S. Air Force MQ-1 Predator drone fired a Stinger heat-seeking anti-air missile at an Iraqi MiG-25 Foxbat fighter that was trying to shoot it down, which can be seen in the video below.

Dogfight between MQ-1 Predator drone and Mig-25 Foxbat.mp4

The fast pace of development of the Cobra 600 reflects a growing need for ground-based air defenses more generally, after decades of neglect. There is also a need for less-expensive, less-exquisite solutions in this area, something that the Cobra 600 also addresses, with a price point that is significantly lower than a long-range surface-to-air missile (although with the various disadvantages outlined above). At the same time, the Cobra 600 may well end up being used against even lower-cost drones, for which the IRIS-T is still a very expensive solution.

The Cobra 600 reflects a broader shift in air defense thinking driven by the lessons of recent conflicts, particularly in Ukraine and the Middle East, where persistent drone threats, as well as cruise missiles, have exposed the limitations of traditional ground-based air defense architectures.

By combining the endurance and flexibility of a drone with the proven, off-the-shelf IRIS-T interceptor, the Cobra 600 offers a potentially cost-effective way to extend defensive coverage over greater distances and to put ‘shooters’ into contested areas that crewed systems would not be able to venture. While some questions remain about how the Cobra 600 would be integrated with existing operational doctrine, the concept highlights the growing demand for innovative, layered, and resilient air defenses as militaries seek to counter increasingly varied and numerous aerial threats.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

NASA is moving to hire a contractor to assess whether or not a Boeing 737-73W can meet its needs for a new reduced-gravity testbed aircraft. The use of planes modified for this role is now new, and they are often called “Vomit Comets” because of the extreme maneuvers they perform to simulate zero-G environments and the physical side effects this often induces. However, there’s an unusual twist here with the specific plane that NASA is now eyeing: it currently belongs to the U.S. Air Force and is part of a “classified military program.” There is a strong possibility that the aircraft in question is a mysterious 737 that the service acquired in 2020, and that has been the subject of much speculation as to its purpose ever since.

NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center posted a contracting notice yesterday justifying a planned sole-source contract to Denmar Technical Services, Inc. in relation to “Reduced Gravity Modification” of the 737-73W aircraft. Earlier this year, signs had already emerged that NASA might be in line to get a heavily modified and highly secretive 737 from the Air Force, designated the NT-43A and commonly referred to by the callsign RAT55. However, yesterday’s notice does not appear to refer to the NT-43A, long used as an airborne signature measurement platform and described in the past as the world’s most secretive 737, which is based on a much older 200-series airframe. We will come back to this later on.

What NASA wants now

“NASA requires Denmar Technical Services, Inc. to conduct a feasibility assessment to determine the Boeing 737-73W’s suitability to perform the NASA reduced gravity mission; modify the aircraft cabin, if required, to support reduced gravity operations; perform overdue maintenance and inspections, perform airworthiness restoration tasks, and paint the aircraft exterior with NASA identifiers,” the contracting notice NASA released yesterday explains.

The notice adds that the aircraft, if modified, would be used, at least most immediately, “for the Reduced Gravity Test Bed Project in support of the agency [sic] need for performing validation testing on Space Suits in support of the Artemis program.”

Artemis is NASA’s current effort to return U.S. astronauts to the lunar surface. The Artemis II mission, conducted in April, involved the first fly-by of the Moon by a crewed spacecraft since the end of the Apollo program in the early 1970s. However, the spacecraft did not touch down on the surface. The goal now is for a crewed lunar landing to come in 2028. RAT55 was notably used to support the launch of the Artemis II mission and the subsequent recovery of the capsule after its return to Earth.

Back in January, NASA had put out a separate contracting notice calling for information about new options to provide “parabolic flight services” to simulate “reduced gravity environments, including microgravity” for testing and scientific research purposes. The Florida-based Zero-G corporation is currently the primary provider of these services to NASA, using a retrofitted Boeing 727-200 dubbed ‘G-Force One.’ You can read more about NASA’s general use of Vomit Comets in the context of that notice here.

Total Weightless! What Happened on my Zero Gravity Flight?

The Boeing 737-73W under consideration to be turned into a Vomit Comet “is owned by the United States Air Force (USAF). Denmar Technical Services, Inc. has specialized knowledge of this Boeing 737-73W aircraft as they are currently contracted by the USAF to modify the aircraft under a classified military program,” the contracting notice NASA released yesterday adds. “NASA does not have a ‘need to know’ regarding the details of the current modifications being made under the USAF contract and therefore is unable to provide modification details to another contractor or provide another contractor with access to the aircraft. The USAF will transfer ownership of the aircraft to NASA upon completion of the closeout tasks.”

“Denmar Technical Services, Inc. is uniquely positioned to close out work under their existing obligations while performing the feasibility assessment, maintenance, and any modifications required under this action,” the notice continues. “Additionally, due to the constrained timeline for the NASA Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program’s space suit testing for Artemis, NASA requires the assessment and overdue maintenance to be performed immediately upon contract award and any subsequent aircraft modifications to be complete no later than October 1, 2026. The timeline can only be supported if this requirement is fulfilled concurrently with the USAF closeout tasks.”

Denmar is a small aviation firm headquartered in Reno, Nevada. At the time of writing, its website lists a wide array of specialized design, modification, flight testing, and other work among its portfolios. This includes “advanced customized mission system development” that “encompasses the design of unique airborne operator interfaces, specialized emitters and sensors, system integration, and post-mission analytics and processing.” The company also describes itself as the “Nation’s leading experts on IR [infrared] and RF [radiofrequency] survivability, signature modeling, [and] agile software development for analysis and real-world operational assessments.”

In line with all this, Denmar is understood to have been the prime contractor behind the extensive modifications to RAT55. In April, the Air Force confirmed to TWZ that the NT-43A was “being transitioned to start the next phase of its career,” as reflected by its involvement in the Artemis II mission, “after decades of flights supporting the Air Force in various roles.” The aircraft, which is understood to have long called the secretive and remote Tonopah Test Range Airport (TTR) in Nevada home, has been seen much more publicly since then.

However, as NASA’s recent contracting notice makes clear, the 737 it is now looking at as a potential Vomit Comet is a much newer 700-series model. TWZ has reached out to the Air Force and NASA for more information.

The curious case of N712JM

As mentioned, it is very possible, if not highly probable, that the 737 NASA is now considering turning into a Vomit Comet is one that the Air Force acquired in 2020, which TWZ explored in-depth at the time. That aircraft, which is a -73W model, is still officially on the U.S. civil register, with the registration code N712JM. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records show that the preceding owner of this aircraft was Denmar, which acquired it in 2019. The plane’s history before that is murky, with Boeing delivering it in 2013 to East West Bank via a trusteeship with Wells Fargo Bank, per the FAA’s records.

N712JM had drawn particular attention in 2020 not just because of its transfer to the Air Force, but also because it emerged at that time wearing a green protective coating and otherwise looking like it had just rolled off the production line. It also had some unusual external features that raised questions about its role, as we explored at the time.

In 2020, Jon Ostrower, long-time aviation journalist and editor-in-chief of The Air Current, told TWZ the following:

“This is definitely an airplane that never made it to a formal finish you’d expect from a commercial airplane. The green finish is a protective coating applied to fuselages during manufacturing to protect from scratches and other damage. It is dissolved during painting. You can also still see the manufacturing (line) number as well. That’s from its original trip down the assembly line. There’s also quite a bit of instrumentation visible with sensor wiring leading into the cabin through the passenger windows. This type of arrangement points to a flight test setup of some kind.”

In 2020, N712JM conducted many test flights in U.S. military ranges off the coast of Southern California, flying various flight profiles, some of them quite unusual. The aircraft flew those sorties from Santa Maria Airport in California, and used the callsign STING 38.

What the Air Force has been using N712JM for to date is unknown. Per FAA, the aircraft has been and continues to be registered to an address at Bolling Air Force Base (technically now part of Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling) in Washington, D.C., which looks to belong to the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO). The RCO has headed up multiple cutting-edge, high-priority programs over the years, including the development of the B-21 Raider stealth bomber and the X-37B reusable spaceplane. A 737-based platform could be configured to support an array of different research and development and test evaluation activities that would fall under the purview of RCO, as well as other stakeholders that this office might engage with.

There has also been some speculation over the years that N712JM might have transformed into an Air Force 737 with the serial number 21-0024, but this appears to still be unconfirmed. The 21-0024 serial has more recently become associated with other shadowy 737s tied to the U.S. military, which have civilian-style paint schemes and may also be on the U.S. civil register. One of them was notably spotted in 2025 at a U.S. forward operating location in El Salvador, sitting directly alongside an Air Force AC-130J Ghostrider gunship and a U.S. Navy P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol plane. This, in turn, raised questions about its involvement in the ongoing U.S. campaign of strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean and the Eastern Pacific Ocean, as TWZ previously explored in detail.

21-0024, for reference. When I spotted it, FR24 was indeed calling it N712JM, though ADSBx had the BuNo and a different hex. https://t.co/3WwV3kxBC4

— Volgowrath (@volgowrath) April 27, 2023

Sightings and flight tracking data have also pointed to N712JM being a resident at the Sierra Nevada Corporation’s (SNC) facility at Colorado Springs Airport, in the Colorado city of the same name, over the years. SNC is well known for highly specialized and unique aircraft modification work, especially for the U.S. military, but its exact connection to this 737 is unclear.

Interestingly, there have been several online flight tracking data ‘pings’ suggesting new activity related to N712JM at Colorado Springs Airport since at least February of this year. However, there do not appear to be any confirmed flights by the aircraft from there in that same timeframe. This airport notably sits adjacent to Peterson Space Force Base.

There is still a possibility that NASA could be looking at a different Air Force 737-73W for possible conversion into a Vomit Comet. As the contracting notice makes clear, the aircraft in question is currently in the classified realm. At the same time, this seems far less likely to be the case given everything that is known (and still unknown) about N712JM.

A separate question does exist now as to what effort the Air Force might be in the process of closing out that would allow it to transfer any classified 737 to NASA. TWZ has previously raised tangential questions about how the Air Force might fill the resulting gaps left by the highly-specialized RAT55 moving on to the next stage of its career. It is certainly interesting in its own right that NASA seems to be focused heavily at the moment on leveraging some of the most secretive 737s in existence today to support its much less sensitive needs.

More details may emerge if Denmar deems the “classified” Air Force 737 to be a suitable starting place to create a new Vomit Comet to support NASA’s reduced gravity training needs and the Artemis program.

Update: 3:45 PM EST –

In immediate response to our queries, NASA has directed us to an additional notice about the award of the sole-source contract, valued at $8.4 million, to Denmar Technical Services back on June 1.

“The contractor will modify a Boeing 737-700 aircraft to perform lunar-gravity parabolic flights to test NASA space equipment. Once modifications are complete, NASA Armstrong will own the aircraft and oversee aircraft operations out of NASA Johnson,” the notice says. “The aircraft will be used to validate astronaut lunar suits and associated crew systems required to support Artemis mission objectives. This can be done with the modified 737 aircraft in an operationally relevant, reduced-gravity environment prior to lunar mission execution.”

No mention is made here about the sourcing of the aircraft from the Air Force or its classified mission work, as outlined in the sole-source justification that was released yesterday.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The United States government has faced sharp criticism from immigration and human rights experts due to the ongoing visa-related complications and entry denials for athletes and officials participating in the FIFA World Cup.

The censure of US President Donald Trump’s administration grew after top Somali football referee Omar Artan, who was set to officiate in World Cup games, was denied entry into the country this week.

“Human rights organisations and advocacy groups have repeatedly raised concerns regarding immigration enforcement practices and treatment of migrant communities in the US,” international sports lawyer Khayran Noor told Al Jazeera last month.

Noor said that while these debates are “independent” of football, they inevitably become relevant when a country hosts one of the world’s largest international gatherings.

“The challenge is that major sporting events rely not only on logistics and security but also on atmosphere and perception.”

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk called for a “massive rethink” of US immigration policies, saying that he hoped issues around “racial profiling, around surveillance, around immigration enforcement are not going to affect this World Cup in the way that they have already done”.

Although Artan returned home on Wednesday to a hero’s welcome and sporting a positive attitude, the incident rehashed the conversation on geopolitics and racism being cloaked by US visa denials ahead of the 48-nation, 39-day tournament starting on Thursday.

Fans from several countries, including Morocco and Scotland, who spent thousands of dollars on flights, hotels and tickets for the most expensive World Cup in history, have also reported having their travel documents denied or revoked just days before they were due to travel.

Here’s a look at the athletes, officials and fans affected by US visa complications:

Omar Artan: Somalia

Artan, 34, was set to make history as the first Somali referee to officiate at a World Cup, but his dream debut ended at Miami airport where he was denied entry into the country and flown back to Istanbul, despite having a valid US visa and all required documents.

The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) confirmed to Al Jazeera on Monday that Artan was “determined to be inadmissible” to the country “due to vetting concerns”, despite having been listed as one of FIFA’s 52 World Cup referees.

Trump has targeted both Somalia and the Somali-American community with inflammatory rhetoric, at one time calling the community “garbage”, and has put Somalia on the US travel ban list.

Iranian World Cup squad and officials

Until last week, there was uncertainty over whether Iran’s football team would be granted visas by the US due to the ongoing US-Israel war on Iran, which has brought geopolitical tensions into the sports sphere.

The US awarded visas to all the players on Friday, just ⁠10 days before their first match, but several members of the ⁠support squad were denied visas, including “key managerial and administrative members,” according to the Iranian football federation.

Iran’s team, whose base camp was to originally be in Arizona, will be based in Tijuana, in neighbouring Mexico, throughout the tournament, despite playing their entire group stage on the US West Coast.

The team will be able to enter the US the day before each of their three World Cup matches, the DHS said on Tuesday.

Media reports over the weekend quoted the Iranian ambassador to Mexico, Abolfazl Pasandideh, as saying that Iran’s team would have to enter and leave the US on the same day as they were playing, raising questions about logistics and whether it would affect team performance.

Aymen Hussein: Iraq

Iraq striker Aymen Hussein was detained for nearly seven hours and his phone inspected at Chicago’s O’Hare airport before he was eventually allowed into the country.

“Why is America hosting the World Cup if it is so hostile to foreign nationals?” the 30-year-old said after the incident.

Meanwhile, national team photographer Talal Salah was held for more than 10 hours, underwent similar phone checks, and was ultimately denied entry into the US.

Woodensky Pierre: Haiti

Woodensky Pierre, the only member of Haiti’s national football team who lives in the Caribbean country, was granted a late visa by the US government to play in the World Cup.

Pierre had been training with local players in an upscale area of Haiti’s capital, Port-au-Prince, as he awaited the visa, which was a “great moment for him, a moment of happiness”, an official of the Haitian Football Federation had said.

The midfielder from Cite Soleil was unable to play in a friendly against New Zealand because his visa was not approved by US authorities until it was too late. He landed at Miami airport around half-time with Haitian football officials and hoped to catch the last part of the game.

Breel Embolo: Switzerland

Swiss forward Breel Embolo was unable to travel with his team due to a flagged visa, but eventually caught up with them after being cleared to enter the US.

The snag was linked to a previous conviction over an altercation in Basel in 2018. Embolo had been convicted of making threats five years later, which he chose not to appeal, but it left his fate to be decided at a meeting at the US Embassy in Bern, where he made his case and was cleared for travel.

Is FIFA obligated to ensure visas?

FIFA’s bidding rules in 2017 for nations wanting to host this World Cup stated that visa processing “must be applied in a non-discriminatory manner”, with the caveat it must not “adversely affect the national immigration and security standards”.

Sports lawyer Noor explained that states understandably retain sovereign responsibilities regarding border control and national security, but global sporting events often require exceptional frameworks.

“This is not about requiring states to abandon immigration laws or surrender sovereignty.

“Rather, it is about asking whether hosting the world’s largest sporting events also carries responsibilities around meaningful inclusion and access,” Noor said.

FIFA president Gianni Infantino has fended off concerns and criticism, saying the global football body’s executives are not “kings of the world” and cannot override government decisions.

Infantino, facing questions from the media on the eve of the World Cup on Wednesday, said that FIFA ⁠is focused on being a “sports organisation” and will not intervene in helping the US determine approvals for entry into the country.

“We try always to find solutions – always,” Infantino said at a news ⁠conference in Mexico City. “But then we need to respect that we are not the kings of the world who can rule over governments and police forces and I don’t know what. We are a sports organisation; we try to do our best ⁠with the means that we have.”

U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters today that in the wake of overnight attacks between the U.S. and Iran, strikes on Iran will continue. Meanwhile, Iranian officials say they are “reviewing” whether to continue peace talks after one of the most serious exchanges of fire between the two nations since the April 8 ceasefire.

The latest round of attacks and counterattacks touched off after U.S. Central Command launched three waves of strikes on targets in southern Iran in retaliation for what Trump said was Iran’s downing of an AH-64 Apache helicopter, reportedly by an Iranian Shahed drone. Iran denied attacking the Apache. You can read more about that incident here.

Tehran remains defiant amid US attacks, orders complete closure of Strait of Hormuz to all vessels.

Boeing has provided details of the latest iteration of its MQ-28 Ghost Bat collaborative combat aircraft (CCA). Already, the Ghost Bat was the most mature known CCA, but the enhanced version of the drone, the Block 3, has various new features. These include a larger wing and a pair of internal weapons bays, which means it can carry munitions without diminishing its low-observable characteristics.

The MQ-28 Block 3 was revealed today at the ILA Berlin airshow, taking place this week in the German capital. The unveiling was conducted by officials from both Boeing Australia and Germany’s Rheinmetall. The German firm is partnered with Boeing to offer the drone to the German military, as well as to tap into the potentially very lucrative European CCA market.

“This is the aircraft that we are offering to Germany,” MQ-28 Global Program Director, Glen Ferguson, said at the rollout. “This is the third iteration of design now, and we are on point to build out first [Block 3] aircraft next year.”

The previous Block 1 and Block 2 variants have completed more than 150 test sorties in Australia and the United States.

Australia has already acquired eight Block 1 MQ-28s, which are configured as pre-production prototypes.

The first nine Block 2 drones, now in production, are seen as a pathway to an operational capability, which is fully realized in the Block 3.

The Block 3 aircraft features a wing that is 25 percent larger, combined with a thrust increase from 10,000 pounds to 12,000 pounds. It’s not immediately clear how that thrust increase will be achieved, but coupled with greater wing area, it will confer an increased payload capability. This translates into an additional 2,000 pounds of fuel, stores, and mission payloads.

“That additional capacity gives operators freedom to balance payload and endurance to configure for the mission at hand, whether that means carrying extra fuel for longer-range operations, increasing weapons carriage, or any combination of both,” Ferguson said.

The latest iteration of the drone also adds beyond-line-of-sight (BLOS) control. Introduction of BLOS communication links means the MQ-28 can be operated at unlimited standoff distances, whether from a ground station, a naval vessel, or a crewed aircraft. With its range of over 2,000 nautical miles, adding BLOS to the drone also ensures that it can conduct independent operations when not controlled by a crewed aircraft, which was always envisioned as a potential role for Ghost Bat. Having a SATCOM option also opens up better resiliency for control in electronic warfare combat environments.

“Inclusion of features such as BLOS capability is a direct result of our learnings to date along with feedback from air forces as they understand more about the role and integration of CCAs into joint force operations,” Ferguson explained.

As for the critical internal weapons bays, these are added within each side of the slab-side fuselage, shown in a video released by Boeing.

Each bay can carry a single AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) or two Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) precision-guided munitions. These can comprise either the GBU-39/B SDB I or the GBU-53 SDB II, also known as StormBreaker. The Ghost Bat is the first CCA we have seen capable of carrying AIM-120s internally, a significant development in itself. The option for internal stores carriage is also a huge deal at this point, with Boeing having recently validated its radar cross-section (RCS), proving that the CCA is harder to detect and better able to operate in contested environments.

“The combination of a highly capable platform, stealth features and advanced autonomy provides unprecedented ability for air forces to extend their mission effectiveness and operational flexibility,” said Brad Thompson, director for Phantom Works Australia, after the completion of the RCS trials.

The drone also has provision for three external weapons stations. At least one of these has already been tested, during an end-to-end engagement in which a target drone was brought down by an AMRAAM. The air-to-air role is notably relevant since the drone is also envisaged as a force-protection asset, to defend airborne early warning aircraft and tankers, etc, as well as working with fighter aircraft. Combined with more thrust and larger wings, the external pylons would appear to open up the possibility of flying with as many as five AMRAAMs, and at least four, or with a mixed load of air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons.

For Block 3, Boeing is also known to be working on three or four alternative sensor payloads. Integration of these would be facilitated by the fact that the entire nose can be swapped out to accommodate different payloads.

Bringing the MQ-28 Block 3 from Australia to Berlin reflects the relationship between Boeing Australia and Rheinmetall and the fact that the German Air Force — the Luftwaffe — is being pitched to for its CCA requirement.

“At the moment, we are still in negotiations with the German government, but if they want to have the plane by 2029, my expectation is that by at least next year, we have to go into the final stage of negotiating the contract,” Rheinmetall CEO Armin Papperger told Breaking Defense.

In expectation of a German CCA requirement, the ILA Berlin airshow featured a heavy presence of combat drones.

Also making its public debut was a full-scale model of the Airbus U760 Ravenstorm, a combat drone designed to operate alongside fighter aircraft in air-to-air combat, strike missions, and electronic warfare roles. The new uncrewed aircraft is part of a revamped drone portfolio from the company, and you can read more about it here.

As well as Ravenstorm, Airbus is also offering a Europeanized version of the stealthy XQ-58A Valkyrie, which is apparently being pitched as a lower-cost aircraft and one that offers the option of runway-independent operations.

From the United States, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems presented a full-size model of a drone from its Gambit family, with the company also confirming that it has been in talks with Germany regarding its CCA requirements.

Meanwhile, German firm Helsing revealed a new version of its CA-1 Europa drone — which looks remarkably similar to Ghost Bat. The CA-1EA (for Electronic Attack) follows the CA-1KA (Kinetic Attack) and reflects the high priority Germany attaches to its need for a CCA to accompany its forthcoming Eurofighter EK electronic warfare jets, as well as other combat aircraft.

Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has confirmed that the United States is launching strikes on “key facilities” in Iran, framing the attacks as part of the ongoing negotiations for a permanent ceasefire.

Hegseth spoke to reporters on Wednesday in Tampa, Florida, as he left the headquarters for the US Central Command (CENTCOM), the military apparatus that oversees operations in the Middle East and parts of Asia.

His remarks echoed the escalating rhetoric of Republican President Donald Trump, who warned earlier that Iran would “have to pay the price” for taking too long with the negotiations.

“ CENTCOM — Central Command — will be busy tonight because President Trump said we will be hitting Iran hard, and we will be,” Hegseth said.

He explained that he had just reviewed the plans for Wednesday night’s attack with Admiral Bradley Cooper, CENTCOM’s commander.

“ Those strikes that’ll happen tonight will be strong. They will be clear,” said Hegseth, who then suggested they may continue into a second day. “If they have to happen tomorrow night, they will be strong, and they will be clear.”

CENTCOM followed Hegseth’s comments with a social media post, announcing “additional self-defence strikes” at 5:15pm US Eastern time (21:00 GMT).

“The strikes are in response to Iran’s unwarranted and continued aggression,” it wrote.

Within minutes of those comments, Iran’s IRNA media outlet reported explosions in Bandar Abbas, Qeshm, Gorgan and Hengam.

Wednesday’s attack will mark the second straight day of US attacks against Iran, fracturing the fragile truce struck on April 8.

The US has been at war with Iran since February 28, when the Trump administration joined Israel in an unprovoked attack on the country.

Both Israel and the US have argued that the attack was necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, though Tehran has long denied seeking one.

But the Trump administration has offered contradicting rationales for the war in the months since it began.

At one point, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested that the US acted “pre-emptively” because it “knew that there was going to be an Israeli action” and it wanted to head off retaliation. Rubio has since walked back those remarks.

Hegseth on Wednesday credited the upcoming strikes to frustration with Iran’s negotiating tactics.

“ As President Trump said, they’ve been tap-tap-tapping. You can see when someone’s trying to tap-tap-tap on a deal,” he said. “Instead, they’re going to have tap, tap, tap bombs dropping on key facilities in Iran from the United States of America.”

Since a temporary ceasefire was announced on April 8, much of the most intense fighting between the US and Iran has been paused.

But this week’s escalation began when an AH-64 Apache helicopter was downed near the Strait of Hormuz overnight on Monday.

Trump on Tuesday blamed Iran for the helicopter’s crash. Though no US service members were hurt, he said the US “must, of necessity, respond to this attack”.

In announcing a second round of attacks, Hegseth denied that the US sought to resume full-scale fighting. He instead framed the offensive as a means of kick-starting the stalled negotiations with Iran.

“That’s not because we want to restart anything we don’t have to restart,” Hegseth said of Wednesday night’s attack. “It’s because the War Department is prepared to set the terms to ensure that we get the kind of deal President Trump expects.”

The two sides have differed over issues like the fate of Iran’s nuclear programme and whether Iran would receive sanctions relief.

Trump has repeatedly threatened to attack Iran’s bridges and energy infrastructure, at one point warning that “a whole civilization will die” as a result of US attacks.

Those comments have prompted human rights concerns. Intentionally targeting civilian infrastructure can be considered a war crime, and critics compared Trump’s threats against Iranian “civilisation” to genocidal remarks.

Reporters confronted Hegseth with those concerns on Wednesday.

“You just mentioned you’re going to plan to hit them and strike them hard tonight,” one reporter asked. “If the response is in hitting bridges, electrical infrastructure, how would that not be a war crime, potentially targeting civilian infrastructure?”

Hegseth dismissed the question as “disingenuous” and accused the reporter of “impugning the motives” of the US military. But he did not rule out that civilian infrastructure would be struck as part of Wednesday’s attacks.

The first image in months of Gaza doctor Hussam Abu Safia has been released. He’s seen on a video call during his court hearing in Israeli court. His son recounts in an exclusive interview, the moment his family witnessed the images for the first time.

An Israeli strike on a vehicle in the southern Lebanese city of Sidon killed two people and sparked a fire that spread to nearby cars. Israel has continued to attack Lebanon despite a US-announced ceasefire on April 16.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson said overnight clashes in the Gulf between Tehran and Washington showed how Iran will respond to the enemy with strength and power.

Al Jazeera’s Marthe van der Wolf explains what’s new.

For the Islamic State (IS) and its West Africa Province (ISWAP), the third week of May 2026 began with a compound disaster and ended with a theology lesson. The group faced one of its most shocking moments, at least in West Africa or, more specifically, Nigeria. 

With its headquarters in Nigeria, ISWAP has been the most active wing of the Islamic State globally, claiming more attacks than any other IS province since its central operations in Iraq and Syria were largely overpowered. Following the call for its members to migrate to Africa, ISWAP has, in the past two years, temporarily overran Nigerian military installations, including at least one super camp. The group was enjoying relative success when a turning point came: one of its most important first-generation commanders was killed. 

The operation that killed Abu Bilal Al-Minuki between midnight and 4 a.m. on May 16 was described by the Nigerian military as “meticulously planned and highly complex”. It not only left the terrorist dead, but it also caused a crisis of morale that ISWAP’s propaganda machine would spend the following days trying to contain through a theological message. 

Ahmad Salkida, a leading conflict analyst who has been observing the situation since it emerged, described the killing of Al-Minuki as a “serious disruption” to the activities of ISWAP in the Lake Chad region.

Airstrikes and special forces raids followed. More people were killed, and confusion reportedly descended. The operations, according to some reports, may also have killed the likely successor to Al-Minuki, another terrorist commonly known as Ba Shuwa, opening a new and, perhaps, unplanned chapter in the insurgency.

By May 19, Nigeria’s Defence Headquarters reported that 175 ISWAP and Boko Haram militants had been killed since the joint offensive began. According to the report, at least 20 died in a single engagement. By the time Nigerian authorities stopped counting, the joint operation had become the most lethal week the group had faced in years.

The theology of a bloody week

Within that catastrophic week, the Islamic State released its Al-Naba newsletter with a pointed editorial. Although it did not mention Al-Minuki or the numerous fighters killed, the editorial retold a story of a battle that happened 14 centuries ago to boost the morale of a group in disarray.

Reports suggest there was internal suspicion, even before the death of Al-Minuki, that some fighters may have leaked information leading to his death, driven by internal discontent over the unequal treatment between foreign fighters who migrated to the ISWAP and the local fighters in Nigeria. However, the editorial tried to shift away from that and present the losses as a normal sacrifice. 

Everything in the editorial is deliberate. The piece opens on Talha ibn Ubaydullah, a companion of the Prophet Muhammad, at the Battle of Uhud. The selection is pointed in ways that any reader with a classical Islamic education would immediately recognise. 

Uhud was a near-disaster for early Muslims because of an internal division. It was a battle in which archers abandoned their positions, turning a momentary advantage into a rout that left dozens of companions dead and the Prophet himself wounded. 

What Islamic tradition preserved, and what the Al-Naba propaganda wanted to convey from that valley, however, was not only the memory of tactical failure but of individual men who placed their bodies between the Prophet and death – an important sacrifice for the existence of Islam. 

The editorial tells ISWAP fighters who have fallen into fear, confusion, or doubt after the loss of Al-Minuki and other fighters that a similar situation occurred during the Battle of Uhud. However, because the Prophet’s companions believed they were fighting for Islam, they did not see it as a problem.

In essence, the message is that they may ultimately be killed, suffer injuries, or even think they have already achieved victory and begin collecting spoils of war, only for circumstances to turn against them. Yet, regardless of whatever hardships or setbacks they face, they should not regard themselves as having lost, because they are fighting for their religion.

“Your role, O my mujahid brother, is to make your chest a sanctuary for the religion of Islam and guard it with your body,” the editorial reads. 

This is a recognisable pattern in IS editorial strategy. After senior commanders are killed, Al-Naba invokes early Islamic battles such as Badr, Uhud, and Khandaq as mirrors, casting present losses as the preconditions for eventual triumph. The rhetorical architecture is consistent and has appeared after every major command-level strike against the organisation. What changes each time is only the particular story pulled from the tradition.

In 2019, when Abubakar Al-Baghdadi, the former leader of Islamic State, died, Al-Naba compared the situation with that of early Muslims after the death of Prophet Muhammad, in which many of his companions fell into disbelief until they were calmed by the first caliph Abu Bakr As-Siddiq. Al-Naba issue 207 argued that if Islam could survive the death of the Prophet Muhammad, the Islamic State could also survive the death of Al-Baghdadi. 

The choice of Talha in the recent issue of Al-Naba, specifically after the death of Al-Minuki, adds a layer to the editorial. Talha survived Uhud and fought many more campaigns. The editorial addresses not only those who died but also those who lived through the week. The message to fighters still alive in the Lake Chad Basin, still holding ground, is legible between every sentence. 

“It is the duty of my mujahid brother to walk those same paths in defence of the religion of Islam, its honour, and its sovereignty,” the editorial says. 

The crisis of succession 

The theology in the Al-Naba editorial could steady nerves or explain deaths. It could also transform defeat into sacrifice. However, it could not answer the practical question now hanging over the movement: who would lead after Al-Minuki?

For years, ISWAP’s resilience has rested on its ability to survive leadership decapitation. Commanders and factional leaders have died, been assassinated, or removed. Yet the organisation endured because a pool of experienced first-generation figures remained available to absorb the shock. However, this time may be different.

A HumAngle analysis observed that Al-Minuki’s most likely successor was Ba Shuwa. However, he too may have been killed in the subsequent strikes; if confirmed, the movement would lose not only its most influential commander but also the man widely expected to replace him.

Al-Minuki belonged to a shrinking class of terrorists who entered the movement before the 2009 uprising transformed Boko Haram from a fringe extremist religious organisation into a regional insurgency. He embodied institutional memory, battlefield experience, and personal relationships that spanned multiple generations of fighters. 

Ba Shuwa, although younger in status within the movement, still belonged to that older ecosystem. Their simultaneous deaths would accelerate a transition that many inside ISWAP had anticipated but few expected to happen so suddenly. The names now circulating inside insurgent circles to replace Al-Minuki and Ba Shuwa show the scale of that transition.

Among the strongest contenders, as HumAngle gathered, is Abu Salem, a commander who grew up entirely within the insurgency’s wartime environment.  He reportedly combines military authority with religious credentials, a combination that carries considerable weight inside ISWAP’s hierarchy.

Another frequently mentioned figure is Bana Chingori, long regarded as a close associate of Ba Shuwa and an influential commander in his own right.

However, beneath the movement’s ideological claims lies a complex web of battalion loyalties, personal networks, ethnic affiliations, and historical rivalries. Fighters speak the language of the caliphate, but leadership legitimacy is often negotiated through social structures that long predate the insurgency itself. The question is not merely who is capable of leading, but who can command obedience across the various factions that make up the movement.

This is where the editorial in Al-Naba becomes more interesting. The Islamic State understands that leaders can be replaced. What is more difficult to replace is cohesion.

The editorial’s invocation of Uhud was not simply a sermon about perseverance. It was also an attempt to create continuity at a moment when continuity is under threat. By reminding fighters that early Muslims endured confusion after battlefield losses yet remained united, the editorial implicitly addresses the danger of fragmentation.

For nearly a decade, ISWAP distinguished itself from rival jihadist factions partly through its ability to maintain organisational discipline. While Boko Haram under Abubakar Shekau frequently splintered under pressure, ISWAP developed bureaucratic structures capable of surviving individual losses. The current transition will test those structures more severely than any succession crisis since the death of Abu Musab al-Barnawi and the removal of other senior figures from the Muhammad Yusuf generation. 

The paused migration 

Beyond the succession question lies another bigger development. ISWAP has announced that the flow of fighters migrating from Iraq and Syria to Nigeria has been effectively paused.

For years, the Islamic State’s call for migration to Africa was one of ISWAP’s most reliable sources of experienced foreign fighters. Foreign fighters who had trained and fought in the central theatre arrived in Lake Chad with tactical knowledge, ideological authority, and direct personal connections to IS central command. 

Al-Minuki himself was a product of that ecosystem. The suspension reflects the bigger issue that ISWAP is facing, in which local ISWAP members feel foreigners are given more priority in the insurgency, and they’re being relegated. This, according to some sources, was one of the reasons that opened a loophole that led to the intelligence leading to the killing of Al-Minuki. 

Al-Naba issue 550 addressed the question of migration indirectly. The editorial, titled “Africa Between Yesterday and Today”, spoke in the past tense about those who had already made the journey. “Those who came before you from Iraq walked this path,” the editorial told terrorists currently in Africa, “and they carried the weight of this religion on their shoulders.”

The joint US-Nigeria strike that killed Al-Minuki demonstrated a targeting capability that ISWAP had not previously faced at this intensity in the Lake Chad theatre. The use of American intelligence assets alongside Nigerian special forces created a surveillance environment that makes the movement of senior figures, especially those arriving from abroad,  significantly more dangerous than before. 

For IS central, sending experienced insurgents into a degraded environment risks losing irreplaceable assets to an adversary that has now demonstrated it can find and kill the most protected figures in the organisation. The pause in migration is both a strategic retreat and a rational response to changed targeting conditions.

The commanders now being discussed as replacements for Al-Minuki are men who grew up entirely inside the Nigerian insurgency. Whatever their capabilities, they appear to lack the cross-theatre experience and IS central relationships that figures as Al-Minuki carried. The migration pause has narrowed the field of who can credibly lead it.

Four Brazilian players and four members of their coaching staff were sent off during a dramatic encounter in Fortaleza.

Brazil were shown eight red cards during a chaotic 1-0 defeat to the United States women’s national team in a friendly in Fortaleza.

Brazilian coach Arthur Elias and three of his assistant coaches were sent off, while Bia Zaneratto and Tarciane were also dismissed. Two other players were shown red cards after the full-time whistle on Tuesday evening.

Sophia Wilson’s shot deflected off Isabela and snuck past Brazilian goalkeeper Lorena in the 63rd minute for the lone goal of the game before a crowd of more than 55,000 fans in northern Brazil. The hosts had no shots on goal, while the US had six.

Brazil manager Elias and several assistants were dismissed from the technical area during the second half.

Brazil then went down to nine in stoppage time after attacker Zaneratto was dismissed after picking up a second yellow card for pushing Emily Sonnett.

Moments later, her teammate, Tarciane, was shown a straight red for elbowing Wilson.

The chaos continued after the full-time whistle, with Brazil’s Kerolin and Ludmila both shown red cards for dissent.

It was the second of two matches in Brazil for the Americans, with the US losing 2-1 in the opener on Saturday in Sao Paulo.

Marta, a six-time FIFA World Player of the Year, was subbed into the match in the 80th minute, making her 212th appearance for Brazil.

Dudinha appeared to hurt her right knee in a collision with Sonnett in the 30th minute and was stretchered off the field in obvious pain. The 20-year-old forward, who plays for the San Diego Wave in the National Women’s Soccer League, returned to the bench in the second half on crutches.

The matches in Sao Paulo and Fortaleza were played at stadiums that will be used next June and July for the Women’s World Cup. The US will start their qualification campaign in November.

A U.S. Air Force KC-135 tanker appeared in the United Kingdom this weekend with a new antenna on top of the rear of the fuselage. The service has several efforts underway to improve the communications networking capabilities of all of its tankers and cargo planes, including ones that leverage Starshield, the government-focused cousin of SpaceX’s Starlink. This has become an especially critical priority for future survivability and effectiveness of the aging KC-135 fleet.

Aviation photographer Alessandro Ledda, who goes by Aerographist on Instagram, caught the KC-135 in question at RAF Mildenhall yesterday. The base is a major hub for U.S. Air Force operations in the United Kingdom. It has been utilized to support recent operations against Iran, as have other RAF facilities.

Ledda told TWZ that online flight tracking data says this particular KC-135 is serial number 63-7976, but that this might not be correct. The plane is largely devoid of markings, preventing easy confirmation. Two years ago, the Air Force’s Air Mobility Command (AMC) began removing serial numbers and other unique identifying markings from tankers and other aircraft as an operational security measure, as you can read more about here.

Ledda also told us that this is the first time he has seen a KC-135 with the new dorsal antenna, despite regularly photographing tankers of this type at Mildenhall. The base is home to the Air Force’s 100th Air Refueling Wing, which flies the KC-135, but is also a regular staging point for temporary deployments and a stop-over for aircraft just passing through.

A picture of the same antenna on top of a KC-135 had emerged online in April, but where and when it was taken are unclear. This may or may not be the same aircraft seen at Mildenhall this weekend. It is unknown how many Air Force KC-135s may have received this modification so far, and TWZ has reached out to the Air Force for more information. At the beginning of Fiscal Year 2026, the Air Force had 368 KC-135s in inventory, in total. At least a portion of that fleet is set to remain in service through 2050.

The antenna has a very roughly trapezoidal shape with a mostly flat top. There is a single small blade that sticks up at the rear, as well. The size and shape are broadly reflective of ‘hump’ style antennas associated with high-bandwidth satellite communications (SATCOM) suites seen on large military and commercial aircraft. In both pictures we have seen of this installation on the KC-135 so far, the new antenna is also mounted right behind a much smaller existing platter-shaped type typically used to support ultra-high-frequency SATCOM links.

Back in April, the possibility was raised that the new antenna for the KC-135 could be tied to Airlift/Tanker Open Mission Systems (ATOMS) and/or its successor, MAF NEXUS, both developed by the Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC). MAF here stands for Mobility Air Forces, a collective term for the Air Force’s tanker and airlifter fleets, and the personnel that support them.

ATOMS is “a Starshield-based BLOS [beyond line of sight] satcom system SNC has been installing on a handful of [KC]-135s, [C]-17s, [KC]-46s, [C]-130s. Saw a C-17 getting it last week in Dayton,” Aviation Week‘s Brian Everstine wrote on X, speaking generally, in a thread discussing the first picture of the new antenna for the KC-135 that had emerged. ATOMS is “now transforming to Air Mobility Commands [sic] ‘MAF Nexus.’”

As noted, Starshield is a more secure, government-centric offshoot of SpaceX’s Starlink space-based network. Starshield and Starlink have been in increasing use across the U.S. military on aircraft, as well as warships and in various contexts on the ground, for years now, as TWZ has explored on several occasions in the past.

The size and shape of the antenna on the KC-135 at Mildenhall is, broadly speaking, in line with commercial Starlink antennas used on airliners and other civilian aircraft.

“The SNC solution for ATOMS, originally provided as a Quick Reaction Capability (QRC) in just six months, delivers enhanced situational awareness through multidomain networking and datalink,” SNC had explained in a press release in August 2025. “The system’s ability to provide a Common Operating Picture improves data interpretation and bolsters decision advantage, strengthening AMC’s effectiveness by leveraging multiple communications paths and sensors to seamlessly share data.”

That release followed the conclusion of the Air Force’s Mobility Guardian 2025 exercise, in which ATOMS “played a pivotal role” by “demonstrating its ability to provide seamless data management and communications solutions on multiple aircraft platforms, including the C-17, KC-135, KC-46 and C-130, as well as numerous ground nodes.”

The Air Force’s 2027 Fiscal Year budget request highlights at least two other potentially relevant communications upgrade efforts for the service’s KC-135, specifically, which could also make use of Starlink/Starshield.

There is the “Hybrid SATCOM capability,” which involves “the employment of Multi-Band, Multi-Orbit SATCOM terminals to switch between different government and commercial constellations,” according to official budget documents. This is tied to another project called MAF Connectivity focused on developing a “path forward as the tanker needs to be able to connect to the Joint fight to close kill chains and logistics chains.”

For MAF Connectivity, “possible capabilities include, but are not limited to, intelligent gateways, antennas, radios, software updates, crew displays, and multiple aperture array housings,” the budget documents also note. An “increment 1 first prototype installation” was also scheduled to be completed in the second quarter of Fiscal Year 2026, which began on January 1 and ended on March 31.

The antenna could be part of a different effort, as well. The Air Force has fielded a number of roll-on/roll-off communications and networking suites for the KC-135 over the years, but in an ad hoc manner and on a relatively limited scale. Last year, the Air National Guard also announced the demonstration of a new communications and data-sharing node packaged inside a heavily modified underwing Multipoint Refueling System (MPRS) pod, but the extent to which that capability may now be available for operational use is unclear. KC-135 and KC-46 tankers use unmodified MPRS pods to transfer fuel to receivers via the probe-and-drogue method.

As an aside, a Boeing 757 called Trailblazer (N-number N473AP), which defense contractor L3Harris uses as a testbed, also recently emerged with a new elongated dorsal fairing. Trailblazer’s new addition is similar in some broad strokes, but also distinctly different from the antenna seen on the KC-135 at Mildenhall this weekend. One of L3Harris’ major business areas is satellite communications systems, including for the U.S. Air Force. TWZ has reached out to the company for more information about this development.

For years now, the Air Force has been trying to more deeply integrate new communications and networking capabilities onto the KC-135, as well as other tankers and aircraft across the MAF. Senior service officials have also described this as a gateway to enabling other new capabilities down the road, including ones to help better protect tankers and airlifters from future threats. TWZ has previously highlighted this as a path to airborne control for “loyal wingman” type drones and other uncrewed aerial systems, something the Air Force has already been experimenting with to differing degrees.

“I gotta keep modernizing the tanker force,” Air Force Lt. Gen. Rebecca Sonkiss told TWZ and others at a roundtable at the Air & Space Forces Association’s annual warfare symposium in February. “If I was going to parcel out the things we care about in that, though, it’s connectivity and survivability. So those are the things that we really care about in that effort.”

“There’s various ways to get after survivability,” she continued. “It starts with being connected so that you have battlespace awareness, and then it continues on to how do we protect those assets.”

Sonkiss’ official title is Deputy Commander of AMC. However, she has been serving as the interim head of the command since her predecessor, Gen. John Lamontagne, became Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force in January.

“The single biggest contributor to survivability in a big airplane is connectivity. The biggest contributor is not having a 12-hour-old Intel brief that you’re relying on to get you through the mission,” retired Air Force Gen. Michael “Mini” Minihan, who led AMC from October 2021 to November 2024, told TWZ in an interview in February, as well. “So real-world updates, real-time updates, just like our fighters and our bombers enjoy. Battle management that gets after maneuver and not just kill chain. Those things matter.”

“The reality is that the car I rented right now, driving from the airport to my hotel room, has more connectivity in it than the overwhelming majority of the mobility fleet. So connectivity matters,” he also told us at that time.

New communications and networking suites could enable AMC’s KC-135, as well as the rest of the command’s fleets, to serve as essential ‘translators’ between disparate networks and waveforms in the future. Providing a link between low probability of interception/low probability of detection (LPI/LPD) datalinks that stealthy aircraft use, such as the Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL) and Intra-Fighter Data Link (IFDL), and more general-purpose ones, would be especially valuable. IFDL is currently only found on the F-22 Raptor, while all variants of the F-35 fighter (and future B-21 Raider bombers) use MADL, and the two cannot ‘talk’ to each other directly, which has long created challenges. Upgraded tankers could serve as important parts of a beyond-line-of-sight mesh-like network that incorporates other kinds of line-of-sight links like Link16. In this way, they could help relay data to and from forward battle management and other command and control nodes, including ones in the air.

In addition, improved connectivity stands to provide additional operational and safety benefits across the MAF.

“According to the Air Force, the tankers’ ability to access tactical data links could increase mission success in contested environments by improving survivability, agility, and situational awareness for command-and-control elements and aircrews,” the Congressional Research Service (CRS) wrote in a report published in January. “The connectivity could provide aircrews with such information as potential threats, fuel availability, and safer landing sites. In addition, tanker aircraft could serve as a backup information conduit for other aircraft in a degraded communications environment.”

The points here have become a broader topic of discussion after two KC-135s collided over Iraq in March during the opening weeks of Operation Epic Fury against Iran. One of the aircraft crashed, killing all six onboard. The other tanker involved was able to land in Israel despite suffering severe damage. At the time of writing, the Air Force has not yet shared any official determinations as to the chain of events that led to that fatal incident.

The Delhi High Court grants bail to Kashmiri rights activist Khurram Parvez, jailed in India for nearly five years.

New Delhi, India — A prominent Kashmiri human rights activist who has been imprisoned for nearly five years has won a partial legal victory after being granted bail in a “terror funding” case, but remains in jail over a second case.

The Delhi High Court granted Khurram Parvez, 49, bail in a November 2021 case on Wednesday, according to legal website LiveLaw. However, he will remain in jail in a separate case from March 2023.

Parvez was first arrested about five years ago by India’s main counterterrorism law enforcement bureau, the National Investigation Agency (NIA), over accusations of “terror funding”, recruitment of rebels in Indian-administered Kashmir and mobilising protesters during a civilian uprising. The second case is also related to alleged “terror funding”.

International rights groups have widely condemned Parvez’s arrest and continued imprisonment.

His lawyer, Swati Khanna, said she hoped Parvez could be freed from jail soon if there was a “positive result” in the second case.

“We are hoping, in a month or two, he could be out,” she told reporters.

The trial has not begun in either of the cases – an issue highlighted by international rights organisations, which say the process becomes the punishment for political prisoners in India who have to wait years behind bars before even facing trial.

The conviction rate in the counterterror law, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), remains low at 5 percent nationally. It dips further, to less than 1 percent, when it comes to Indian-administered Kashmir.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist government has been criticised for persecuting dissent and criminalising expression in Kashmir, the country’s only Muslim-majority region.

“Khurram’s arrest proved to be the last nail in the coffin of any meaningful rights activism in Kashmir, one of the world’s most militarised zones,” said a political analyst based in Srinagar, Kashmir, who requested anonymity fearing repercussions from the authorities.

“This bail comes in a completely shallow, and nearly fictitious, trumped-up case after years in jail, and Khurram would still not walk free.”

Kashmir remains disputed between India, Pakistan, and China, which control parts of the region. Pakistan controls the northern and western portions – Azad Kashmir; and Gilgit and Baltistan. India controls the southern and southeastern parts – the Kashmir valley, including its biggest city, Srinagar; Jammu; and Ladakh. China controls the Aksai Chin area in the northeast.

The two neighbours have fought three major wars over Kashmir since the end of British colonial rule and their partition in 1947 led to the creation of Muslim-majority Pakistan and Hindu-majority India. Both countries continue to assert claims to the entire region of Kashmir.

The U.S. Air Force has confirmed that the VC-25B “Bridge” aircraft is now wearing its new (and controversial) red, white, and blue livery as it undergoes final preparations for its official delivery.

Aviation photographer Travis Ghormley shared the first picture of the modified Boeing 747-8i with its new paint scheme yesterday. It was taken the day before in Waco, Texas. The aircraft had been undergoing modification and flight testing at L3Harris’ facility in Greenville, also in Texas, as part of the conversion into its new role, since at least April, before subsequently moving to Waco to be painted. The jet, gifted to the Trump administration by the government of Qatar last year, is set to serve as an interim Air Force One aircraft ahead of the much-delayed arrival of two fully outfitted VC-25Bs from Boeing.

“The VC-25B Bridge aircraft has been painted and is going through final modifications,” an Air Force spokesperson told TWZ today when asked for more information about the aircraft’s current status. “I don’t have any additional details I can provide on delivery dates at this time.”

A press release the Air Force put out on May 1 said that the “VC-25B Bridge aircraft has officially completed modification and flight testing” and was “being painted.” We have confirmed that the completed modifications referred to here were on the contractor side, but the U.S. government still has additional modifications to make to the jet.

Ghormley’s picture does clearly show the jet wearing the same red, white, and blue scheme that has already been appearing on various Air Force and other U.S. government VVIP jets. The livery also includes a large American flag, depicted blowing in the wind, painted on both sides of the tail and “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” written on both sides of the fuselage. The paint job is virtually identical to what President Donald Trump had previously chosen for the future VC-25B Air Force Ones during his first term. President Joe Biden had previously reversed that decision, bringing back plans to paint the VC-25Bs in the iconic scheme that dates back to President John F. Kennedy’s administration.

The Bridge aircraft’s current location is also unclear. Video posted on social media yesterday, seen below, purported to be of the jet departing for its new home at Andrews Air Force Base just outside of Washington, D.C. This is where the two current VC-25A Air Force One jets, as well as a host of other Air Force VVIP aircraft, are based.

Online flight tracking data does show that another U.S. military Boeing 747-8i flew from Waco, Texas, to Andrews on June 7, using the callsign Crane 01. However, this callsign has been associated with an ex-Lufthansa 747 the Air Force has also acquired for use as a trainer in support of future Air Force One operations. This aircraft, which may now carry the serial number 25-3200, has been tracked multiple times flying between facilities in Texas and Andrews in recent months. There does not appear to be tracking data for the VC-25B Bridge jet, which may also now have the serial number 25-3300, but it could have made the trip without broadcasting on ADS-B.

Past reports have indicated that the Bridge aircraft could make its public debut on July 4, which this year is also wrapped up in additional celebrations of the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States. President Trump’s birthday (June 14) is also this weekend.

Otherwise, TWZ has previously laid out significant questions about the general feasibility of actually using the VC-25B Bridge aircraft in the Air Force One role, given the kinds of modifications that should be required for this demanding mission. Potential operational security concerns have been raised about using the gifted jet as a presidential aircraft, as well.

“L3Harris, known for its executive communications systems and services, was selected to undertake a complex modification of the bridge aircraft. L3Harris not only delivers secure, reliable and resilient communications for VC-25A and the executive airlift fleet but has extensive experience with self-protection and customization of VIP aircraft,” the Air Force wrote in the May 1 press release. “The accelerated timeline was further made possible by a mission-focused partnership with Boeing, who provided the necessary engineering data to support the required structural modifications.”

“Additionally, elite specialists from multiple government agencies developed advanced protocols to detect and-if necessary-neutralize potential technical hazards on previously owned aircraft,” it added. “Their rigorous approach on the Bridge aircraft has literally ‘written the book’ and set the benchmark for integrating used airframes into the secure military inventory.”

“Safety and security were at the forefront of this program. We deliberately minimized interior aesthetic modifications to focus on modifications for safety, security and mission execution. We assessed which requirements were necessary for an interim capability. We had greater flexibility in developing our mission requirements,” the Air Force also told TWZ directly at that time. “After safety and security, we focused on the mission communications systems.”

“We have made deliberate decisions such as the reduction of the number of airstairs, less chiller space, and exclusion of the Golden Eagle mission [to fly the remains of former presidents] to minimize structural modifications, while prioritizing modifications focused on safety, security and secure communications,” the service added.

Getting a new Air Force One aircraft of some kind into service on an accelerated timetable has long appeared to be a major goal for President Trump. The fully-equipped VC-25Bs from Boeing are years behind schedule. Last year, the Air Force announced that there had been some improvement on that front, but that it still did not expect to have the first of the two jets in hand until mid-2028, which would be just months before Trump is set to leave office.

What we do know for sure is that the VC-25B Bridge aircraft is now wearing Trump’s preferred red, white, and blue paint scheme ahead of its official rollout later this summer.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Airbus has pulled the wraps off the U760 Ravenstorm, a combat drone designed to operate alongside fighter aircraft in air-to-air combat, strike missions, and electronic warfare roles. The new uncrewed aircraft is part of a revamped drone portfolio from the company, which also includes a Europeanized version of the stealthy XQ-58A Valkyrie, a medium-altitude long-endurance (MALE) platform, various tactical solutions, counter-drone systems, as well as the U145 uncrewed helicopter that you can read more about here.

The timing of the announcement — and the unveiling of the Ravenstorm, in particular — is especially notable given the recent collapse of the Franco-German-led plan to build a crewed New Generation Fighter (NGF) aircraft, as part of the broader, pan-European Future Combat Air System (FCAS) initiative. You can read more about this development here.

On the eve of the ILA Berlin airshow, starting in the German capital tomorrow, Airbus showcased what it describes as “Europe’s most versatile drone portfolio.” The various products have been newly assigned a “U” prefix for uncrewed systems. This reflects the company’s policy of prefixing with an “A” for crewed fixed-wing aircraft, and an “H” for crewed helicopters.

“Whatever uncrewed or ‘drone’ capability our customers need to strengthen sovereign air power, we deliver,” said Mike Schoellhorn, CEO of Airbus Defence and Space, in a company press release. “Our portfolio ranges from rapid-response drone interceptors and various tactical drones, autonomous cargo helicopters to uncrewed fighter aircraft UCCAs (uncrewed collaborative combat aircraft) operating co-operatively with crewed fighter jets.”

“On the other side of the spectrum we have the Eurodrone, our very high payload and very long endurance ISTAR (intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance) platform,” Schoellhorn continued. “Airbus provides the entire envelope of uncrewed capabilities required for modern multi-domain warfare. All our systems come with open architectures and a European mission system compatible with the wider European and international defence ecosystem.”

The most significant new arrival in the “U”-product line is the Ravenstorm combat drone, or U760.

A 1:1 model of the Ravenstorm will be on display at ILA. The drone is approximately 43 feet long and has a wingspan of 33 feet. In terms of rough size and general appearance, the drone strongly recalls General Atomics’ YFQ-42A ‘fighter drone’ prototype, now flying under the first phase of the U.S. Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program. Like the U.S. drone, the Ravenstorm features a swept, mid-wing configuration optimized for stealth and maneuverability. It also has the same twin-tail configuration. Like the YFQ-42, the Ravenstorm has a dorsal inlet, although this is closer to that which appeared on the EADS Barracuda demonstrator that flew for the first time 20 years ago. The drone is clearly optimized with low-observable (stealthy) characteristics, although the inlet is notably large and lacks the trapezoidal shape found on the YFQ-42.

At the same time, it should be noted that, when it comes to combat drones in general, many of them take on a relatively familiar form driven by similar requirements.

Airbus describes the Ravenstorm as “the next evolution” in its “roadmap towards a scalable family of uncrewed collaborative combat aircraft.” It is not clear how many related designs might be planned, and in what kinds of sizes they may come, but the company has highlighted the kinds of missions they will be expected to fly. These include air-to-surface strikes using precision-guided munitions, air-to-air defense with long and medium-range air-to-air missiles, and electronic warfare for suppressing enemy air defenses. Further offensive counter-air missions will involve UCCAs providing non-kinetic jamming.

Ravenstorm will be available in the early 2030s, according to the manufacturer, which is, interestingly, offering the new design alongside a version of the XQ-58. In Airbus parlance, the Valkyrie is designated U740 and combines the Kratos-designed airframe with Airbus’ proprietary Multiplatform Autonomous Reconfigurable and Secure (MARS) Mission System.

For the U740, Airbus provides a notably precise planned date of service entry: 2029, with the German Air Force. This would appear to reflect a specific Luftwaffe requirement for a drone in this class, although it remains unclear if the Valkyrie has been formally selected by the German military. Airbus furthermore expects the U740 to be used in operational experimentation teamed with the Luftwaffe’s Eurofighter combat jet, including demonstrating initial air-to-ground capabilities.

Returning to MARS, this is Airbus’ sovereign mission system, consisting of an AI-supported software core to enable platform autonomy. The system is scalable so that it can be used across the entire Airbus drone portfolio. It is also planned for use on the U950 Eurodrone — the new designation for the Eurodrone MALE platform. This twin-turboprop drone is now in development for missions including ISTAR, early warning, and anti-submarine warfare, and is planned to make its first flight in 2029.

As for Airbus’s two-track approach to UCCAs — U740 Valkyrie and U760 Ravenstorm — the thinking behind the two offerings, also of broadly similar sizes, likely reflects different cost points. The Valkyrie was designed from the ground up as a lower-cost aircraft and is runway-independent in its original form (since then, Kratos has announced a version with wheeled landing gear and there also exists the ability to launch the Valkyrie from a wheeled launch trolley, if required). Meanwhile, the Ravenstorm appears to be a more capable and costly platform, making it a closer match to Increment 1, the first phase of the U.S. Air Force’s CCA program.

It could be that the company has already identified specific national or service requirements (such as the Valkyrie for the Luftwaffe) that it aims to capitalize on. There could also be a plan to use the Valkyrie more for operational experimentation of the UCCA concept before focusing more on the fully sovereign Ravenstorm, including potentially scaling it up or incorporating other significant airframe changes — like higher performance, larger payload, improved low-observable characteristics.

Also unclear is the status of Airbus’s stealthy Wingman, a CCA-like concept that was unveiled at the last ILA Berlin airshow in 2024. This was also presented in the form of a 1:1 model, with a length of 51 feet and a wingspan of 39 feet. The drone was planned to be powered by the same Eurojet EJ200 turbofan as the Eurofighter, providing a proven powerplant and useful commonality.

At the time, Airbus noted that the German Air Force had “expressed a clear need” for a drone that would be able to operate in conjunction with crewed fighters before the arrival in service of the NGF, which was then slated for some time in the 2040s.

Whether the Wingman has now been abandoned entirely is unclear, but the Luftwaffe still has a requirement for an uncrewed companion that can work alongside its forthcoming Eurofighter EK electronic warfare jets. This is a role for which Airbus is earmarking the Ravenstorm, in particular, although it should be noted that the U.S. Marine Corps is also focusing heavily on the electronic warfare mission for the Valkyrie drone.

All of these Airbus efforts are being informed by experience testing the Barracuda, work on which began in 2003, initially as a ‘black program.’ After six test campaigns, the Barracuda was retired.

The company will also be leveraging prior work from the Airbus Low Observable UAV Testbed (LOUT) program. A stealthy demonstrator, LOUT was not flown but was run by the company in strict secrecy until finally it was publicly disclosed in 2019, as you can read about here.

Undoubtedly, the significance of Airbus’s new-look drone roster, and above all the appearance of the U760 Ravenstorm alongside the U740 Valkyrie, is greater now that the FCAS program’s crewed New Generation Fighter is seemingly defunct.

It was always anticipated that the NGF would be operated as part of a wider ecosystem that also included CCA-like drones — what Airbus now refers to as UCCAs. Indeed, there were already efforts in place to start integrating combat drones with crewed fourth-generation-plus fighters like the Eurofighter and Rafale. Now that FCAS, or at least the NGF component of it, has been thwarted, Ravenstorm and Valkyrie offer a glimpse of where Europe’s combat aviation ambitions may be headed instead.

Collaborative combat aircraft like these emerged as a higher-mass, force-multiplying capability for current and future crewed fighters. In the interim, at least, the demise of the NGF means that these kinds of combat drones could be in even greater demand within Europe, where there is already a pressing need for larger tactical air combat fleets, while resources are limited. At the same time, CCA-like drones promise to make existing fourth- and fifth-generation fighters even more potent, further driving demand both in Europe and elsewhere.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Anti-immigration protesters have torched buildings and vehicles in the capital of Northern Ireland, a day after a knife attack was captured in a graphic video.

Hundreds of protesters, many of them masked, gathered at several locations across Belfast on Tuesday evening. A bus and several cars were set alight, while a building on the edge of the city centre caught fire and its residents had to be evacuated.

Police helicopters patrolled above the city, and shops closed early.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer described the initial knife attack, which took place in north Belfast late on Monday evening, as “sickening”.

The attack comes at a time of heightened tensions in the United Kingdom following the murder of a student who was handcuffed by police as he lay dying from stab wounds after his killer falsely alleged a racist attack.

It also follows repeated protests over immigration, with populist parties saying the UK’s asylum policy has allowed dangerous men into the country. There was anti-immigration rioting in Northern Ireland last year amid anger over an alleged sexual assault.

Immigration has become a highly charged political issue and has helped fuel the rise of the hard-right Reform UK and Restore Britain parties in opinion polls.

Northern Ireland’s political leaders and the region’s chief constable have urged people not to incite hate and fear or target particular communities.

Over the past several weeks, news began emerging about Ukraine’s use of modified, AI-enhanced kamikaze drones to target Russian cargo trucks, fuel tankers, railroad cars and even vessels as far as 150 miles behind the front lines. Dubbed the mid-range strike campaign by Kyiv, this effort is having a devastating effect on Russian logistics, cutting off key highways to Crimea, helping to halt Moscow’s gains and pave the way for Ukrainian advances.

To learn more about this campaign, we reached out to one of the soldiers leading this effort from the unit that created it. In an exclusive interview, an Unmanned Systems Department Officer for the First Corps Azov of the National Guard of Ukraine offered us unique insights into how the program began, how it’s going, where it is headed and how AI is helping to identify and hit targets deep behind the lines. It’s a capability we described in great detail — about how it was rapidly gestating and would arrive on the battlefield around now. The officer spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss operational details.

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

Q: Walk me through the genesis of the mid-range strike campaign.

A: I will first of all start with answering the question of why. So the reason why we are currently conducting this campaign is to hunt enemy logistics capabilities, and currently we have a lot of quite cheap assets that can strike enemy targets at quite a deep range. So the overall meaning, the overall sense of this campaign is to strike enemy concentrations of cargo in the places where this concentration is the highest and the protection of those enemy logistical assets is at the lowest level.

So, if we’re talking about enemy logistics very close to the front line, to the line of contact, we are mostly talking about a person with a backpack. Then, if we are moving deeper into the enemy controlled area, further from the front line, then we’re talking about cars. Then even deeper we’re talking about trucks. Even deeper we’re talking about long haulers with trailers, so a higher concentration of cargo. Even deeper into the enemy controlled area, we’re talking about the railroads, the trains that are carrying supplies. So the deeper we go from the line of contact, the higher is the concentration of enemy cargo.

The other part of answering this question is basically about how the enemy protects their logistical assets. So the deeper we go from the line of contact, not only is the distance larger, but also the areas that the enemy needs to protect. So just simple mathematical calculations show us that the distance of 50 kilometers deep from the line of contact is usually the most concentrated area the enemy has to defend against our strike assets. But if we go to the depths of 300 kilometers, then the areas that the enemy should protect are much larger, and it’s basically impossible to saturate that area with all the necessary protection assets that the enemy needs to strike down our drones.

The point I would like to make is that we conduct those strike operations at deeper ranges with basically the same assets that we use for the tactical depths, for example, at the depths of 50 kilometers. That means we do not increase the cost of our assets. We just introduced some technical modifications, and we can use the same assets to strike in the deep area.

How Ukraine Uses the US-made Hornet AI Strike Drone To Disrupt And Cut Russian Logistics Lines

Q: What drones are you using to carry out these attacks and how are you increasing the ranges?

A: Basically, we’re using fixed-wing kamikaze drones with some modifications in terms of communication systems. We’ve installed Starlink systems on those drones, and we have also introduced a number of modifications in terms of the engine of the drones – in terms of the overall propelling unit. And this allowed us to increase the range of the assets that we used previously for the range up to 50 kilometers, with some modifications for longer distances.

Q: What kinds of drones are you using?

A: Just the simple fixed-wing chemical drones, such as Hornet systems, such as the Darts systems, and also some other assets that, for now, we prefer not to mention.

Darts

Q: Can you provide additional details about the modifications you have made to these drones and what is their maximum range?

A: Well, I would say that these are quite technical things, and I wouldn’t want to disclose those, because I would want to avoid the situation where the enemy is going to do the same modifications.

Q: Are you reaching as far as 100 kilometers?

A: From what we can say now, we can cover distances of up to 250 kilometers, but as you might understand, with time we will cover longer and longer distances.

Q: Can you describe how these attacks work? Do you operate these as first-person view drones through a video feed? Do they have a terminal seeker? 

A: The process is really simple. So, for example, we select a section of the road, or the road as a whole and we distribute that road or the sections among our units. And I would like to mention that this is an all Ukrainian operation. It’s not a task for just one single unit, and basically each unit has its own area of responsibility and its own section of the road. 

And then we just send drones there in hunting mode, and I cannot disclose how this works from the standpoint of intelligence, but the overall principle is that the intelligence just gives us the priorities for the targets. For example, they say that you need to target this type of vehicle with these types of cargo.

And in terms of the targeting, I remember that you were also asking the question about how the targets are selected. For this we use both the AI tools and also the operator himself, so we’re using both methods for that.

Q: I want to get back to AI in a bit, but what area of operations do you cover?

A: Our area of interest and area of responsibility is related to all the roads that the enemy is using to bring in supplies to the area of operations of our corps, which is roughly in the area of the town of Dobropillia in eastern Ukraine, and for example, this may be the route from Rostov that goes to Mariupol and then goes to Donetsk, and this could be any other route that the enemy might use to bring military cargo to the area of operations of our corps.

Q: What were some of the more successful mid-range drone strike missions you carried out?

A: That’s basically an easy principle. When I said that we are hunting the enemy’s logistics, I mean that this is a daily process. This is a continuous process, and this is not about one standalone mission, when we fly somewhere, when we hit a target and the mission is over.

Last night, Ukraine expanded its mid-range strike campaign to the Sea of Azov, hitting at least 5 vessels carrying Russian cargo.

At least two of the cargo vessels were hit at the occupied ports of Berdyansk and Mariupol, as Ukrainian forces seek to cut off Russian logistics. pic.twitter.com/NoXeAO7Ca6

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 5, 2026

Q: How are these mid-range strikes on Russian logistics affecting their ability to fight?

A: This is causing shortages of fuel for the enemy. This was already commented on by our media, and also the media resources of the enemy, and now we understand that this is true, not only for Crimea, where there is a severe shortage of fuel now, but also this is true about the other Russian-controlled territories. And basically, when we are striking enemy logistical supplies of fuel, this affects the overall situation, because what is fuel? Fuel is basically the blood of war, which is necessary to fuel the generators that the enemy is using for the FPV operations. The fuel is used for the vehicles that basically bring in those FPVs to the combat zone.

I’d like to add an additional explanation of how this works. If we destroy a car that brings fuel to the line of contact, then we’re talking about destroying like two canisters, so that’s approximately 40 liters of fuel. But if we strike a fuel tank and a tank vehicle, which is bringing fuel to the overall area, so then we can talk about several tons of materials.

Gas stations across Russian-occupied Crimea are facing worsening fuel shortages, with long queues, rationing, and voucher-based distribution reported by residents. Some locals say fuel has become so scarce that it is treated as a luxury, while Moscow insists there is no cause for… pic.twitter.com/0LSYWEqiDH

— Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (@RFERL) June 5, 2026

Q: Is this setting the stage for a Ukrainian advance in the east or Zaporizhia?

A: I would say that blocking the logistical supplies to the Zaporizhia Oblast and also to Crimea is a byproduct of our attacks aimed at cutting enemy logistics to our area of operations. Because we’re targeting the roads that go through Mariupol, also to Crimea, to supply the Zaporizhia region, and as well our area of operations. But as for the most strategic aspect of this question of whether this might influence some counter-offensive capabilities of the Ukrainian Defense Forces, I think that is not the question within my scope of responsibility, because I’m an officer responsible for the UAS component of the corps, and I think that this is more of a question that should be directed to the general staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Ukraine 🇺🇦 continues to launch an important number of mid-range strike, targeting Russian 🇷🇺 logistics in occupied territories

Since early may, more than 270 trucks have been hit, together with multiple fuel depots and trains.

🧵THREAD🧵1/14 ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/YnisZf2kJ6

— Clément Molin (@clement_molin) June 4, 2026

Q: Tell me how you came to use the U.S.-made Hornet drones.

A: I would say that this is also a question that should be directed at one level up from my level. We get those drones, we deploy those drones, but the questions of how we get them and what are the specifics of their supply, this is not a question that I can answer.

Q: When did you start getting them?

A: We have been receiving these drones for almost a year.

Q: When you got the Hornet drones, were you given any instructions on what missions to accomplish with them or what targets to pursue?

A: I think that the principle thing to explain here is that the Hornet drone is a tactical level UAV system. It can be used at the maximum range of 50 kilometers – the maximum range of the basic configuration of this drone. The drones we are currently using are the modification of the Hornet drone, but the basic configuration of this drone is only a tactical-level UAV. This is why our mid-strike operations, which have started only recently, are using modified drones.

I think that it is important to add that these modifications are conducted by the units themselves.

The First Corps Azov of the National Guard of Ukraine maintains control over enemy logistics near Donetsk.

Strike UAV pilots are targeting Russian logistics deep in the operational rear. Drone units maintain constant surveillance and fire control over all supply routes around… pic.twitter.com/i4TYOWJBg4

— First Corps Azov of the National Guard of Ukraine (@azov_media) April 16, 2026

Q: When did you begin to make the modifications and was the mid-range strike concept something that Azov developed?

A: Yeah, I would say that basically that was Azov development. So the first tests of these new modifications started in early winter. After approximately a month of testing, we started combat deployment of those drones approximately in January or February of this year. And we use those new modifications to ensure our middle strike operations. In terms of the tactics, I would also like to say that Azov developed new tactics of the deployment of middle strike drones, because the previous tactics they were mostly concentrated on the use of very expensive assets, which are available in limited numbers, so the targeting cycle was different, which is why we needed to develop new tactics and change this targeting cycle.

Q: What systems were you using before that were so expensive?

A: Well I’m not really talking about some specific assets here. I’m mostly talking about the overall tactics and the targeting cycle. So, the tactics of middle strikes were developed for expensive assets that the Corps didn’t have at the moment. So, this is basically why we started developing our own assets that could ensure that we have those middle strike capabilities, and we can also engage targets at the operational level.

Magyar claims a reduction from 3,800 cargo journeys to 1,100 cargo journey (71.05%) along the E-58 Mariupol -Berdiansk – Melitopol – Simferopol highway in the past two weeks

He makes it clear that doesn’t mean they’ve destroyed 2,700 trucks, nor that they have total fire control… https://t.co/O3K2Iz53Xg pic.twitter.com/VTPn3ghZcD

— Ukraine Control Map (@UAControlMap) June 9, 2026

Q: When you added Starlink, did you have to seek permission from SpaceX to use their system for these weapons?

A: The first thing that I would like to say is that we do not use only Starlink. It is just one of the possible communication systems and communication solutions that we’re using. And the second thing that I would like to add is that all the international issues, international cooperation questions, are the issues that should be dealt with at the level of our ministries and at the level of our central government, so once again, this is not a question that I can answer.

Una parte vital de la efectividad de los drones Hornet con los que Ucrania está atacando las rutas logísticas rusas entre 80 y 120km del frente es la recopilacion de datos para que el algoritmo aprenda. Por eso algunos modelos llevan grandes terminales Starlink. https://t.co/yGePjoPo2K pic.twitter.com/iWu2bLrwq5

— Martin Tuitero (@TuiteroMartin) June 2, 2026

Q: Can you tell me what other communications systems you use?

A: No, this information is still secret, because none of those assets have been taken by the enemy, so the enemy doesn’t know yet that we’re using those. But I think that in some time we will be able to go public with those assets and tell more about what we use, apart from Starlink.

Q: Are you using Starlink and the other systems on the Darts drones as well, or just Hornet?

A: Yes, we are using Darts for those middle strike attacks. So, basically, the overall tactics of those mid-strike attacks with small UAV systems, it can use any fixed wing kamikaze drones with modifications which is why we are using Hornets, we are using Darts and also the other types of drones.

While the Ukrainian “Hornet” strike UAV is receiving a lot of attention recently, the “Darts” UAV remains a workhorse for mid-range strike.
It, too, has AI terminal targeting and control capabilities to defeat Russian jamming. https://t.co/cNcQytap1D pic.twitter.com/C8nYJ20Uer

— Roy🇨🇦 (@GrandpaRoy2) June 6, 2026

Q: Can you talk about the other types of drones? 

A: Unfortunately, no. The enemy has not yet got hold of those assets, and if one of them will be shot down, or if one of them will be captured by the enemy, then I think that we will be able to go public with those assets.

Q: Can you talk more about how you are using AI for the Hornets and Darts?

A: The AI is used for the so-called last-mile system. I’m talking about the terminal guidance here, and also the AI can also be used to identify the targets, especially when the drone is flying in the autonomous mode. It can recognize the type of the target and it can automatically engage the target. So all of these processes can happen without the involvement of the operator. This allows us to launch several drones at the same time, and this also allows us to ensure a higher level of coordination for those attacks.

I think that one of the examples of these attacks was captured by one of our videos that you might have seen when one fixed-wing drone is observing the target and the other drone is actually hitting it. 

1-й корпус НГУ «Азов» контролює ворожу логістику під Донецьком. Знищення російської техніки

Q: Is there a man in the loop or a man on the loop during the terminal phase of the attack or is it fully autonomous?

A: Since we are trying to control the whole process, usually it is the person who takes the final decision and actually makes this decision to strike the target, because we do not want to over rely on the artificial intelligence. If necessary, this whole process can also happen without human involvement, but as I have already mentioned, our policy is that the decision should be made exclusively by the operator.

Q: So this is man in the loop?

A: Yes, so technically men can be out of this loop, but in our case we involve humans in this system, so that’s man in the loop.

Visual look of Hornet UI. Not much new, can mark soldiers individually. Seems aiming is done by either by lock a target (red) or manually aiming by continusly clicking (green) https://t.co/d2LGtV2aON

— Tommy Lund (@TommyLundn) June 6, 2026

Q: Have the Russians developed countermeasures for this effort?

A: Since the overall intent was to go to the massive deployment of those drones against the enemy logistics at once, as for now, the enemy has not yet had enough time to adapt to these tactics of ours. And now they’re desperately trying to find some countermeasures to find some ways to react to this. 

They are putting on anti-drone nets deep into their controlled territory. They are placing people armed with shotguns every 50 meters of their critical roads, but basically, as for now, there is no Russian tactic that would be effective in protecting their logistics. I do not say that they will not come up with this tactic in a month or so, but as for now, they do not have an effective countermeasure for that.

The only thing that I would like to add is that we approximately know the direction in which the enemy is moving to ensure counter measures to this tactic of ours, and we already have countermeasures for their countermeasures.

The current Ukrainian superiority in mid-range drone warfare is a brilliant advantage that comes with an expiration date.

Failing to prepare for the day Russia matches this capability guarantees a catastrophic collapse of front line logistics for Ukraine.

Ukraine is rightfully… pic.twitter.com/RI1NWLNYUc

— Joni Askola (@joni_askola) June 8, 2026

Q: Is the AI enhancement helping to mitigate Russian jamming and electronic warfare measures?

A: Well, I would like to say that EW is not the only way to counter UAVs. So, in addition to EW assets, there are other counter drone methods. Nets can be used. Air observation posts can be used. The drones can be shot down with enemy interceptor drones, and also there are hundreds and hundreds of people armed with shotguns who can also try to shoot the drones down. So the EW systems are just a small part of this overall system of drone countermeasures, and it is a general misconception that all anti-drone efforts are from the EW system. I would say that EW accounts for approximately 10% of overall counter drone efforts.

The main idea of the use of the AI systems is not only to help operators to counter enemy drone countermeasures, but the AI also helps the operator with navigation, with orientation, with the identification of the targets. So this is a complex system that helps the operator with many tasks.

Here: strike by the Ukrainian-American “Hornet” drone on occupier positions. Two Russians confirmed as “gruz 200” (KIA).
Interestingly, the Russians call this drone “Martian-2” because its capabilities seem “out of this world” to them.

High Autonomy: Operates with AI (autonomous… pic.twitter.com/Ao0MAiCqUp

— Takeshi Kovacs (@PrzemekShura) May 12, 2026

Q: What are the lessons that the U.S. can learn from your mid-range drone strike campaign, given the importance of logistics everywhere.

A: Well, I would say that the main lesson that the U.S. can learn from our experience is that drones in their basic configuration, right out of the box, is not something that can work, and this is not something that can bring you the best results at once. This is why every unit should have their own drone laboratory that can reconfigure those drones and modify them, and I’m not only talking about reconfiguring tactical level drones to turn them into middle strike capacities. I’m talking about all warfare in general.

Assets become obsolete very quickly and in three months everything can change, starting from the navigation systems and ending with the control systems. For example, today the GPS signal works, in a month it doesn’t work anymore. Today we use this set of frequency ranges, and in a month all those frequency ranges are jammed by the enemy. So I’m saying this for you to understand that for example, if the U.S. government purchases Hornet drones for their units, then the units are going to have good tactical level drones. But if you want to squeeze all of the possible benefits from those drones, then you will need to modify the structure of your units and include the departments, include the sections that will deal with the modification and reconfiguration of those drones to ensure the most efficient results that can be achieved.

From what I see now, the U.S. is mostly just giving the unit some assets, but they are not thinking about re-configuring or repurposing those drones.

Q: Is there anything I haven’t asked you that you would like to address?

A: I think that we have covered all the topics. The only thing that I would like to add is that I would like your audience to see that Ukraine introduces new innovations that can basically change the battlefield, and this is why trying to forecast the outcome of the war based on the number of tanks or aircraft or bombs that would be incorrect, so the victory will belong to the side capable of adapting faster and not to the side that has more resources.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com