capability

A key aspect of the Trump administration’s Golden Dome missile defense initiative is ensuring America’s ability to launch retaliatory nuclear strikes, the nominee to become the next head of U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) has stressed. This comes amid particular concerns within the halls of the U.S. government about the new deterrence challenges posed by China’s ongoing push to expand the scope and scale of its nuclear capabilities dramatically.

Navy Vice Adm. Richard Correll, who is currently deputy head of STRATCOM, testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week about his nomination to lead the command. Ahead of that hearing, he also submitted unclassified written answers to questions from members of the committee.

One of the questions posed to Correll asked how, if confirmed, he would expect to work with the central manager for the Golden Dome initiative, a post currently held by Space Force Gen. Mike Guetlein.

“Per Executive Order 14186, the Golden Dome for America (GDA) Direct Reporting Program Manager (DRPM) is responsible to ‘deliver a next-generation missile defense shield to defend its citizens and critical infrastructure against any foreign aerial attack on the U.S. homeland and guarantees a second-strike capability.’ If confirmed, I look forward to working with the GDA DRPM to ensure missile defense is effective against the developing and increasingly complex missile threats, to guarantee second-strike capability, and to strengthen strategic deterrence,” Correll wrote in response.

In deterrence parlance, a second-strike capability refers to a country’s credible ability to respond in kind to hostile nuclear attacks. This is considered essential to dissuading opponents from thinking they might be able to secure victory through even a massive opening salvo.

Helping to ensure America’s second-strike nuclear deterrent capability, as well as aiding in the defense specifically against enemy “countervalue” attacks, has been central to the plan for Golden Dome, which was originally called Iron Dome, since it was first announced in January. Countervalue nuclear strikes are ones expressly aimed at population centers, as opposed to counterforce strikes directed at military targets.

“Since the United States withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 and initiated development of limited homeland missile defense, official United States homeland missile defense policy has remained only to stay ahead of rogue-nation threats and accidental or unauthorized missile launches,” President Donald Trump wrote in his executive order on the new missile defense initiative in January. “Over the past 40 years, rather than lessening, the threat from next-generation strategic weapons has become more intense and complex with the development by peer and near-peer adversaries of next-generation delivery systems and their own homeland integrated air and missile defense capabilities.”

How exactly Golden Dome factors into the second strike equation is not entirely clear. The U.S. nuclear triad currently consists of nuclear-capable B-2 and B-52 bombers, silo-based Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), and Ohio class nuclear submarines loaded with Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missiles. At present, the Ohio class submarines provide the core of America’s second-strike capability, but are not directly threatened by the kinds of weapons that Golden Dome is meant to shield against while they are out on their regular deterrent patrols.

At the same time, there might be scenarios in which U.S. officials are concerned that the Ohios may no longer be entirely sufficient. A massive first strike that renders the air and ground legs of the triad moot, and also targets ballistic missile submarines still in port, would certainly put immense pressure on deployed submarines to carry out adequate retaliatory strikes with the warheads available to them. If multiple countries are involved, those demands would only be magnified. Threats to the submarines at sea, including ones we may not know about, as well as enemy missile defenses, something China has also been particularly active in developing, would also have to be factored in. Concerns about the potential destruction or compromise of nuclear command and control nodes, including through physical attacks or non-kinetic ones like cyber intrusions, would affect the overall calculus, too. Altogether, ensuring greater survivability of the other legs of the triad, where Golden Dome would be more relevant, might now be viewed as necessary.

Regardless, as noted, concerns about China’s ongoing nuclear build-up and the policy shifts that come along with it have been particularly significant factors in U.S. discussions about missile defense and deterrence in recent years. The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) just offered the first public look at elements of all three legs of its still very new strategic nuclear triad at a massive military parade in Beijing in September. In recent years, U.S. officials have been outspoken about massive assessed increases in Chinese nuclear warheads and delivery systems. This includes the construction of vast arrays of nuclear silos for intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), as well as the development and fielding of more and more advanced road-mobile ICBMs. China is now fielding air-launched nuclear-capable ballistic missiles and is growing the size and capabilities of its fleet of nuclear ballistic missile submarines, as well. Experts have also highlighted how China’s growing nuclear capabilities could point to plans for countervalue targeting.

“China’s ambitious expansion, modernization, and diversification of its nuclear forces has heightened the need for a fully modernized, flexible, full-spectrum strategic deterrence force. China remains focused on developing capabilities to dissuade, deter, or defeat third-party intervention in the Indo-Pacific region,” Correll wrote in response to a separate question ahead of his confirmation hearing last week. “We should continue to revise our plans and operations including integrating nuclear and non-nuclear capabilities in all domains across the spectrum of conflict. This will convey to China that the United States will not be deterred from defending our interests or those of our allies and partners, and should deterrence fail, having a combat ready force to achieve the President’s objectives.”

Correll’s written responses also highlighted concerns about Russia’s nuclear modernization efforts and growing nuclear threats presented by North Korea. He also touched on the current U.S. government position that there has been a worrisome increase in coordination between China, Russia, and North Korea, which presents additional challenges that extend beyond nuclear weapons.

“The Russian Federation continues to modernize and diversify its arsenal, further complicating deterrence. Regional actors, such as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) present additional threats,” he wrote. “More than nuclear, China and Russia maintain strategic non-nuclear capabilities that can cause catastrophic destruction. The major challenge facing USSTRATCOM is not just addressing each of these threat actors individually but addressing them comprehensively should their alignment result in coordinated aggression.”

It is important to stress that significant questions have been raised about the Golden Dome plans, including the feasibility of key elements, such as space-based anti-missile interceptors, and the immense costs expected to be involved. When any new operational Golden Dome capabilities might begin to enter service very much remains to be seen. Guetlein, the officer now in charge of the initiative, has described it as being “on the magnitude of the Manhattan Project,” which produced the very first nuclear weapons. 

There is also the question of whether work on Golden Dome might exacerbate the exact nuclear deterrence imbalances it is supposed to help address. In his written responses to the questions ahead of his confirmation hearing, Correll acknowledged the impact that U.S. missile defense developments over the past two decades have already had on China’s nuclear arsenal and deterrence policies.

“China believes these new capabilities offset existing U.S. and allies missile defense systems,” he wrote. This, in turn, “may affect their nuclear strike calculus, especially if state survival is at risk.”

Russian officials also regularly highlight countering U.S. missile defenses as a key driver behind their country’s efforts to expand and evolve its nuclear arsenal. Just last week, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin claimed that new tests of the Burevestnik cruise missile and the Poseidon torpedo, both of which are nuclear-powered and intended to be nuclear-armed, had been successfully carried out. The development of both of those weapons has been influenced by a desire to obviate missile defenses.

In terms of global nuclear deterrence policies, there is now the additional wrinkle of the possibility of the United States resuming critical-level weapons testing. Trump announced a still largely unclear shift in U.S. policy in this regard last week. The U.S. Department of Energy has pushed back on the potential for new tests involving the detonation of actual nuclear devices, but Trump has also talked about a need to match work being done by Russia and China. You can read more about the prospect of new full-up U.S. nuclear weapon testing here.

The United States has more Nuclear Weapons than any other country. This was accomplished, including a complete update and renovation of existing weapons, during my First Term in office. Because of the tremendous destructive power, I HATED to do it, but had no choice! Russia is…

— Commentary: Trump Truth Social Posts On X (@TrumpTruthOnX) October 30, 2025

American authorities have accused Russia in the past of violating its obligations under the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) with very low-yield tests and criticized China for a lack of transparency around its testing activities. Russian authorities say they are now looking into what it would take to resume open critical-level nuclear testing in response to Trump’s comments.

North Korea is the only country to have openly conducted critical-level nuclear tests in the 21st century, and there are fears now it could be gearing up for another one. It should be noted that the United States and other nuclear powers regularly conduct nuclear weapon testing that does not involve critical-level detonations.

For now, as underscored by Correll’s responses to the questions posed ahead of his recent confirmation hearing, concerns about the assuredness of America’s nuclear second-strike capability remain a key factor in the push ahead with Golden Dome.

Contact the author: [email protected]

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has demonstrated its ability to launch and recover aircraft from its first catapult-equipped aircraft carrier, the Fujian. Official imagery released by the PLAN today confirms that the new J-35 naval stealth fighters and KJ-600 airborne early warning and control aircraft are carrying out carrier trials, something that had not been seen until now. Meanwhile, we’ve also got a much better view of the J-15T single-seat carrier-based fighter launching and recovering aboard Fujian, having previously seen it in position for a catapult launch with its afterburners engaged. The sudden appearance of video of all three aircraft operating from the ship for the first time is something of a stunning revelation, one of many that has come this year from China’s air power portfolio.

The undated videos and photos showing flight operations aboard Fujian reveal examples of all three aircraft being prepared for catapult launch, taking off, and then making arrested recoveries. The aircraft are also shown in flight, including in formation with a J-15D series electronic warfare aircraft, and Fujian is shown from above, with the J-35, KJ-600, and J-15T arranged on its deck.

Fujian has been conducting sea trials since May 2024, and there have been growing signs that fixed-wing flight operations were underway. In August of this year, official imagery showed J-15s on the deck of the carrier and flying at low level above it. At that stage, however, there were no clear indications that the J-15 had actually taken off from and/or landed on Fujian.

An earlier video is shown below of J-15 activity aboard Fujian, but without presenting any carrier takeoffs or recoveries:

First-ever official footage of flight operations aboard China’s newest, soon-to-be commissioned aircraft carrier, CNS Fujian (18)

On the eve of the PLA’s 98th anniversary, PRC media released video showcasing another major milestone: integration tests between the electromagnetic… pic.twitter.com/wIrU4hxFi6

— Ian Ellis (@ianellisjones) July 31, 2025

While we don’t know how long these fixed-wing aircraft types have now been conducting flight operations aboard the carrier, revealing all three in action at once is something of a coup.

Of the three types, the J-15 family is a Chinese development of the Soviet-era Sukhoi Su-33 Flanker, with the T version being specifically developed for catapult launch. Earlier variants of the J-15, as well as the Su-33, were designed for use on short takeoff but assisted recovery (STOBAR) carriers with ‘ski jumps’ rather than catapults, like the PLAN’s first two flattops. The J-15T had previously been seen operating from these two earlier vessels, in which case it relies on the STOBAR mode. However, the addition of a catapult launch bar (and less visible additional structural modifications) means the T-model is very much optimized for Fujian, from which it will be able to launch at higher operating weights than in STOBAR mode.

The J-35 is the PLAN’s next-generation carrier fighter, a stealthy design that was intended to conduct catapult takeoff but assisted recovery (CATOBAR) operations from the outset. Developed from the land-based FC-31, there are also signs that the J-35, like the J-15T, might also eventually embark on the Liaoning and Shandong. Until now, however, it hadn’t been seen taking part in any kind of carrier operations, other than in the form of mock-ups.

As for the KJ-600, the size and performance of this aircraft mean that it’s only suitable for CATOBAR operations, restricting its use to Fujian and any follow-on carriers. At least three examples are seen on the deck of Fujian. This aircraft will fulfill the same role as the U.S. Navy’s E-2 Hawkeye, and, although not a direct copy, it is extremely similar both in size and overall design.

Also seen in the new imagery is the Z-9 helicopter, a license-produced variant of the Eurocopter (now Airbus Helicopters) AS365 Dauphin. Z-9s are also part of the air wings found on China’s STOBAR carriers, including for use as plane guards while fixed-wing aircraft are launching and recovering, and the type has been seen on the deck of Fujian, too, in the past.

Overall, testing Fujian’s abilities to launch and recover fixed-wing aircraft is a critical part of the path to operational service. However, it has added resonance since not only is the carrier fully homegrown, but so are the J-35 and KJ-600, the most important elements of its air wing, and they have not previously been to sea, at least in an operational capacity. The PLAN is therefore introducing to service a new carrier design and at least two new naval aircraft designs simultaneously, which is impressive by any measure.

Just as significant is the fact that Fujian is equipped with electromagnetically powered catapults, the testing of which first began in 2023 while the ship was still being fitted out.

In contrast to the U.S. Navy, which gathered decades of experience with steam-powered catapults, China opted for electromagnetic ones for its first CATOBAR carrier. It’s worth noting that the U.S. Navy’s USS Gerald R. Ford was the first carrier ever to get an aircraft into the air using what is also referred to as an electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS). However, it has not launched an F-35C so far, making the J-35 the first stealth jet to achieve this feat. Based on earlier predictions, the F-35C may not do the same for some years.

As we have discussed in the past, electromagnetic catapults offer several advantages, not least the fact that they can be more finely tuned to very different aircraft types, including ones that are larger and slower (like the KJ-600), or which are smaller and lighter, such as smaller drones. EMALS are also less mechanically complex than their predecessors, providing lower reset times that can help boost sortie-generation rate. On the other hand, the technology behind the electromagnetic catapults on USS Gerald R. Ford proved to be hard to master, causing issues for years before the U.S. Navy said it was able to mitigate them.

While the latest imagery from Fujian’s trials focuses on traditionally crewed fixed-wing airpower, it’s very likely that this carrier, and other aviation-capable PLAN ships, will eventually operate advanced uncrewed platforms. In this case, the capabilities offered by EMALS are particularly relevant. The PLAN is known to be working on advanced uncrewed combat air vehicles (UCAVs) and other types of drones that can be launched from carriers and big-deck amphibious warfare ships. Fujian will surely be no exception in this regard.

Videos provide a comparison of a STOBAR J-15 carrier launch and a CATOBAR J-15T launch from Fujian:

Whatever trials and tribulations the PLAN might have faced with its new homegrown carrier, its advanced electromagnetic catapults, and its new-look air wing, the Fujian project is indicative of a broader modernization drive within the service.

As well as increasingly advanced and powerful surface combatants and submarines, China is understood to be already working on its next CATOBAR carrier. Generally referred to as the Type 004, this may also be nuclear-powered.

The expanding PLAN carrier force also reflects growing strategic ambitions for the PLAN, as it pivots toward being able to take part in higher-end regional missions, such as intervention against Taiwan, as well as longer-range blue water operations in the Pacific and beyond.

For China, therefore, Fujian is much more than just a point of national and naval pride. With the carrier now expected to enter operational service by the end of this year, we will surely learn more about this landmark design for the PLAN, and the various aircraft that will serve aboard it.

Contact the author: [email protected]

A recent computer-generated video from Boeing includes MQ-28 Ghost Bat drones with apparent receptacles on top of their fuselages to allow for aerial refueling from boom-equipped tankers. Mid-air refueling capability would extend the MQ-28’s reach and on-station time, but would also add complexity and cost to the design.

Boeing released the video in question, seen below, last week. It is primarily intended to tout the ability of the company’s new F-15EX Eagle II fighter to act as an airborne drone controller, a role the two-seat jet is well-suited to, as TWZ has been highlighting for years now. Boeing is now reportedly actively pitching MQ-28 to Poland in combination with a possible purchase of F-15EXs.

The Ghost Bat was first developed by Boeing’s subsidiary in Australia for the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF), but other customers, including the U.S. Navy, could be on the horizon. The U.S. Air Force has also made use of at least one MQ-28 in the past to support advanced uncrewed aircraft and autonomy development efforts.

As seen in screen captures from Boeing video at the top of this story and below, the MQ-28s are depicted with panel lines and markings on top of their fuselage that are consistent with receptacles for receiving fuel in mid-air via the boom method. The markings, in particular, are virtually identical to those seen on F-22 Raptors and F-35A Joint Strike Fighters.

The full scenario shown in the video involves the crews of the F-15EXs using the Ghost Bats as additional sensor nodes to help find and target a hostile air defense system. One of the Eagle IIs then launches an AGM-84H/K Standoff Land Attack Missile-Expanded Response (SLAM-ER) cruise missile, another Boeing product, to destroy the target.

In addition, the video presents the MQ-28s as each carrying a pair of AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) internally and being equipped with various sensors, including an infrared search and track system (IRST). At least two of the RAAF’s initial batch of MQ-28s have been seen equipped with an IRST sensor in the nose. In general, IRST sensors provide a valuable alternative and/or companion to radars, particularly when it comes to spotting and tracking stealthy aircraft and missiles. IRSTs are also immune to electronic warfare attacks and operate passively, meaning they don’t send signals that can alert an opponent to the fact that they have been detected and are being tracked. Drones with IRST sensors offer valuable additional passive forward sensor nodes that can hunt for threats and pass data to other platforms. For the MQ-28 (and other CCA-like drones) this would primarily be their controlling platform, which will often be operating to the rear of their locations.

It is interesting to note that real MQ-28s have similar, if not identical panels on top of the fuselage, but do not appear to have ever been seen with any markings pointing to it being linked to an aerial refueling capability. Whether or not Boeing has ever previously mentioned even the possibility of an aerial refueling capability for the Ghost Bat is unclear.

In response to queries from TWZ for more information about what is seen in the recent video, a Boeing spokesperson told us that “all I can share is that the video is conceptual in nature.”

Aerial refueling capability would extend the MQ-28’s overall range, which Boeing has said in the past is at least 2,300 miles (3,700 kilometers) on a single tank of gas. The ability to refuel in mid-air would also allow the drone to remain on station longer after arriving in a designated operating area. The uncrewed aircraft could break off to refuel and then return to station, or move to a different part of the battlespace, all without having to return to base first, as well.

Since a drone does not have a pilot that needs to drink, eat, sleep, and go relieve itself, aerial refueling capability could allow for a significant degree of additional persistence depending on the assigned mission. Airborne control of the drones could also be passed between crewed platforms rotating in and out of an operating area. All of this would open up new operational possibilities, as well as expand the number of potential launch and/or recovery locations, for air-to-air refueling-capable MQ-28s.

Australia, in particular, is present with challenges when it comes to projecting crewed or uncrewed airpower just by virtue of its location within the sprawling Indo-Pacific region. The “tyranny of distance” is a common refrain when discussing military operations in the Pacific, in general.

The RAAF would at least have a basic capacity to gas-up future MQ-28s with aerial refueling receptacles via its boom-equipped Airbus A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transports (MRTT), which are locally designated as KC-30As. Airbus has also notably been working on improvements to the core MRTT design to enable the safe refueling of uncrewed aircraft via the boom method.

MQ-28s with aerial refueling receptacles could also be of interest to other air arms with boom-equipped tankers. U.S. Air Force officials have talked about aerial refueling capability in the past in the context of the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drone program. Air-to-air refueling is notably seen as one way to help balance range and performance requirements.

All of this, in turn, has raised questions about how much more complex and costly it might be to add this capability to any CCA-type design. It has also prompted discussions about how fielding large fleets of aerial refueling-capable drones might impact already strained tanker fleets. The Air Force has separately been exploring novel options for increasing its overall aerial refueling capacity, including boom-equipped buddy refueling stores small enough for tactical jets like the F-15 to carry. An uncrewed aircraft like the MQ-28 would sip relatively small amounts of fuel compared to a medium or heavy crewed fighter, as well.

It’s also worth remembering here that providing organic defense for increasingly vulnerable, but critical tankers and other support aircraft has long been a mission envisioned for the MQ-28, as well as various other ‘loyal wingman’ type drones. Uncrewed aircraft that can be refueled in flight could help increase the persistence of that defensive screen. In other words, tankers and surveillance aircraft can bring their own uncrewed combat air patrol with them and control them directly.

If Boeing can alter the MQ-28 design, specifically, for refueling via boom, the Ghost Bat might also be adaptable to receiving fuel in mid-air via the probe-and-drogue method. This would increase the total number of potential tankers that could refuel MQ-28s. Boeing has previously shown a render of a derivative of the MQ-25 Stingray tanker drone, which it is developing for the U.S. Navy, with a refueling probe. The Navy has expressed a “strong interest” in the Ghost Bat, or a variant or derivative thereof, potentially for future carrier-based use. Boeing has pitched a carrier-capable version of the design at least to the United Kingdom in the past.

It is important to remember here that extensive work has been done in the unclassified realm to develop the technologies necessary for the refueling of drones via crewed tankers using the boom-and-receptacle and probe-and-drogue methods, including various real-world demonstrations. Drones refueling other drones, as well as other crewed aircraft, using probe-and-drogue systems, has also already been proven out by Boeing (through the MQ-25 program) and others. The possibility has been raised in the past that the U.S. military has actually fielded uncrewed aircraft capable of recieving fuel in mid-air, at least on a limited level in the classified realm, but this remains unconfirmed.

Boeing has otherwise been betting big on the MQ-28, including with major investments to expand its capacity to produce the drones in Australia. The RAAF has already received eight Ghost Bats in a Block 1 prototype configuration, and Boeing is on contract to deliver at least three more improved Block 2 types that are seen as a pathway to an operational capability. Australian officials have openly discussed the possibility of acquiring further MQ-28 variants down the line.

Just last week, Boeing announced a number of RAAF testing milestones it says were achieved before the end of June, including “autonomous behaviors and mission execution,” “multi-ship operations to provide combat mass,” and “data fusion and sharing data between multiple MQ-28 aircraft and transmission of that data to a crewed platform.” Back in June, Boeing had already disclosed a successful demonstration of the ability of RAAF personnel aboard an E-7 Wedgetail airborne early warning and control aircraft to direct MQ-28s to engage an aerial threat. Once again, this could help pave the way for large support aircraft bringing along their own defensive drone patrols.

Boeing also said the MQ-28s built to date have now completed 150 hours of testing, with another 20,000+ hours of testing of the design in virtual environments.

“The RAAF set the task of proving the first four steps in the Air Combat chain for the MQ-28, and we have accomplished that sooner than anticipated,” Glen Ferguson, Boeing’s MQ-28 global program director, said in a statement today. “Completing this work early allows us to accelerate the next phases of development – engage and assess – with an air-to-air weapon shot planned for later this year or in early 2026.”

Exactly when the RAAF might begin flying MQ-28s in any configuration operationally is unclear. Australia’s National Security Committee is expected to make a decision about whether or not to proceed with additional Ghost Bat purchases before the end of the year, according to a report last week from Aviation Week.

Altogether, while the idea of an MQ-28 capable of being refueled in flight may just be a concept now, it could well prove to be an attractive addition to the still evolving Ghost Bat design.

Contact the author: [email protected]