Cost

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass is once again dealing with blowback for being out of town when a massive fire ignited.

The fire at a cold storage facility in Boyle Heights began burning Wednesday, hours after Bass departed for the dedication of the Barack Obama Presidential Center in Chicago.

Since arriving back in Los Angeles around 6 p.m. Thursday, Bass has been to the scene of the fire numerous times, declared a local emergency, hosted five press conferences, met with local leaders and families affected by the fire, and distributed masks and air purifiers.

But her quick return and public appearances have not stopped some from drawing parallels to last year’s Palisades fire. Bass was in Ghana on a diplomatic trip when the deadly inferno spread amid extraordinarily high Santa Ana winds that forecasters had warned about for days.

While the scale of the destruction in Boyle Heights doesn’t compare to the 12 lives and thousands of homes lost in the Palisades fire, Angelenos are having flashbacks as toxic smoke hovers over parts of the region.

Bass, who is running for reelection, said in an interview that she rarely travels and always worries about what could happen when she does — whether it’s a fire or a big car accident. She also said she chose Chief Jaime Moore to lead the Los Angeles Fire Department because she trusts him to handle a crisis like this fire.

“I was in Chicago three hours away, and I was there 24 hours,” Bass said, noting that she was in constant communication with the chief during her brief trip.

Bass’ handling of the Palisades fire, beginning with her absence from the city, has had a long-lasting, negative impact on voters’ opinions of her, with polls repeatedly showing high unfavorability ratings.

A May poll by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, which was co-sponsored by The Times, found that 57% of likely Los Angeles voters had unfavorable views of Bass, while 35% had favorable views.

Bass, who served in Congress for more than a decade, was designated by then-President Biden to be part of his official delegation to attend the inauguration of Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama. She was captured in photos at an embassy cocktail party in Accra as the Palisades fire exploded Jan. 7, 2025.

Last week, there was no warning that anything was amiss when she left the city. But any echoes of the Palisades fire could damage Bass’ image as she campaigns against City Councilmember Nithya Raman in the November runoff election.

“We’re talking about a fire, and she’s out of town, so it completely and totally reinforces that narrative of January 2025, and that’s not helpful,” said Fernando Guerra, director of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University.

Guerra said while Bass can do much of her job from another city for a day, a mayor is often faulted for not being front and center during an emergency.

“With today’s tech and instant communication, is it really that different that she’s in Chicago making calls than at City Hall?” he said. “But it has always been the case for executives that, symbolically, it is their job to be at the point of the crisis to assure those that are impacted directly, and the city as a whole, that they have the situation under control.”

Guerra said it didn’t help that Kevin Marchetti, the owner of the cold storage facility operating in the burning building, contributed the maximum, $1,800, to Bass’ reelection campaign last year.

Raman declined to comment on Bass’ handling of the Boyle Heights fire.

The blaze ignited Wednesday at the nearly 500,000-square-foot cold storage facility run by a company called Lineage, beginning on the roof, which caused a partial collapse and moved the flames into the building, where 85 million pounds of food are stored.

Firefighters have been battling the flames for seven days now, and smoke has made air dangerous to breathe in neighborhoods across the Los Angeles region.

Bass’ absence from the city soon caught the eye of right-wingers, with Spencer Pratt, who ran against her in the nonpartisan primary election, and Steve Hilton, who is running for governor, among those critiquing her.

“I don’t know what’s wrong with Karen Bass that she seems to keep leaving the city every time something happens,” Hilton said at a Monday press conference in Boyle Heights.

Pratt, who lost his house in the Palisades fire and came in third in the primary, drew the comparison directly.

“Karen was sipping cocktails in Chicago when the Boyle Heights Fire erupted, just as she was sipping cocktails in Ghana when our Palisades Fire erupted. I warned you all … what happened to us will happen to all of LA,” he posted on X on Sunday.

As she flew back to L.A. from Ghana, Bass repeatedly reminded her staff that she could make calls from the military flight, her text messages showed. But during one call or Zoom with her staffers, she had technical problems, texting, “I am listening don’t know why you can’t [hear] me.”

During the Palisades fire, then-Fire Chief Kristin Crowley publicly accused city leaders of failing to give her department the resources it needed. Bass ultimately removed Crowley from her post over her handling of the fire.

Moore, the new chief, has appeared to be in lockstep with the mayor during the Boyle Heights fire, saying she has been an active partner.

About 30 minutes after the fire began, Moore was on the scene. Ten minutes after he arrived, he was on the phone with Bass, he said.

Over the next day, while Bass was in Chicago, Moore estimated that they spoke six times over the phone.

Moore said her absence was a non-issue.

“Until Mayor Bass goes through our 20-week drill tower, and she learns to fight a fire and she can stand next to me on a hose line, I don’t need her in this city,” Moore told The Times on Tuesday.

“She’s our mayor. She was doing exactly what she needed to do,” he added. “She answered the phone. She provided me exactly what I needed, and that was, ‘Whatever you need to do, you do it.’”

Yes, you should visit Mexico City. Don’t overthink it and don’t delay. Despite excessive tourism and rising gentrification fears, the seething capital of Mexico — 25 million souls strong — remains a top-tier international destination for any committed food lover. And the intensity of its dining scene seems to be only growing.

Sure, a wave of privileged remote workers oozing dollars and euros may have dampened the vibe for Mexico City natives, leading to protests. The post-pandemic issues of housing displacement and rising costs for locals are serious challenges that political leaders must address. Yet time and again, on every visit, the resiliency and passion that original defeños have for their gastronomical paradise proves to be boundless.

Use these handy dining guides for all of your summer travel, near and far.

I have traveled to Mexico City regularly since 2002 and lived there for nearly a decade. I won’t feel slighted if you prefer the dining advice of current residents, or from any of the numerous local dining guides online. But one thing about me, I have an aversion to hype, and tend to avoid the city’s contemporaneous food magnets where the ratio of foreigners to locals is too out of whack. (No, the Michelin-starred taqueria was never extraordinarily better than any others in its bracket.) Where my native friends go, I go.

Here are highlights of my top, top, top recommendations from my L.A. Times restaurant guides on Mexico City, plus a few more favorites. My goal here is to distill down your options for a concentrated, food-centric visit, from nostalgic jewels beloved by hardscrabble chilangos to the celebrated shrines of high-end chefs reaping the bounties of the Valley of Mexico.

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has told senators it needs roughly $80 billion, mostly to cover the cost of the U.S. war against Iran, adding to what is already a sizable military spending boost being sought by President Trump.

Meanwhile, the Senate for the first time approved a war powers resolution Tuesday seeking to block U.S. military action against Iran, as lawmakers warily watch President Trump’s efforts to resolve a conflict that the administration launched on its own and now needs Congress to fund.

It was the 10th time the Senate has tried to stop the war, and the outcome, on a vote of 50-48, was a stunning turnaround from past efforts. Although the resolution is largely symbolic, and does not fully carry the force of law, it reflects the growing concerns from a number of Republican lawmakers in the House and Senate over the war and the deal Trump struck with Iran to end it. The House approved the resolution earlier this month.

The White House Office of Management and Budget has yet to make a formal request to Congress for more money for the war. But Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has been making the rounds on Capitol Hill, including Monday evening. A top deputy Defense secretary told senators about the Iran funding request last week, according to two people familiar with the situation but not authorized to discuss it publicly.

The Wall Street Journal first reported on the developments.

The push for billions of dollars in Iran war funding comes at a fraught political moment. Lawmakers are not only skeptical of the deal Trump struck with Iran to bring an end to the war, but also wary of next steps. The White House has requested a remarkable $1.5 trillion for the Pentagon — a nearly 50% increase over the current fiscal year’s funding levels.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he’s expecting a supplemental spending request from the administration for the war, and when it arrives, “we’ll work through it and see where the votes are.”

“We need to make sure we’re doing everything we can to replenish, resupply a lot our munitions that have been depleted — not only just with what’s happening with Iran, but prior to that,” said Thune (R-S.D.).

Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg spoke to several senators about the proposal in calls last week and he notified congressional committees that the $80-billion request had been sent to the Office of Management and Budget. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

However, the funding package will almost certainly run into trouble from lawmakers who refuse to support Trump’s decision to go to war and are reluctant to give the Pentagon more money at a time of high costs of living for Americans at home.

“You’re spending families’ hard-earned tax dollars on a war that many strongly oppose,” Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington told Hegseth in a hearing last month.

In addition to the Iran funding, Republicans hope to secure about $1.1 trillion through the regular appropriations process, which typically requires support from both parties for approval. Then, they hope to secure an additional $350 billion through a mostly party-line vote later this summer.

The amount being sought by the Pentagon is far higher than the $29-billion estimate of war costs that Hegseth gave Congress during his testimony last month. The bulk of that amount was related to replacing munitions and repairing equipment but also included operational costs to keep forces deployed. That estimate did not include the cost to repair or rebuild U.S. military sites damaged in the region.

It’s also far lower than the initial $200 billion the Pentagon floated as the costs at the start of the war. An early estimate put the cost of the first week of the war at $11.3 billion.

Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii, a member of Democratic party leadership, said he expects the actual price tag could be much higher than the $80 billion being proposed.

Schatz said he hasn’t done any counting of Democrats about whether there is support for an Iran-focused bill, “but I haven’t found anyone who wants to do this.”

But Republican Sen. Jim Banks of Indiana said, “To me it’s less about the war, it’s more about the stockpiles.”

Banks said, “I would sell it to my state as an investment in our defense industrial base, reshoring defense production to Indiana.”

Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said funding for an Iran supplemental can’t be done in isolation. It has to be done after lawmakers from both parties have agreed to a total spending amount for both defense and non-defense programs, “then the rest of this would follow pretty quickly,” Reed said.

And Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota, a member of the Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, said he has been working with the administration to broaden the package to include funds for disaster aid for California, Hawaii and other states hard hit by fires and weather problems, as well as agricultural aid for farmers.

“I think that’s the kind of combination that could pass,” Hoeven said.

Hegseth declined to answer questions from reporters late Monday as he strode around the Capitol.

But on the issue of the cost of the war, Hegseth responded rhetorically during a Senate hearing last month, asking, “What is the cost of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon?”

He acknowledged the president’s decision to confront the threat of a nuclear Iran “comes with cost — and we recognize that.”

Freking and Mascaro write for the Associated Press. AP writers Konstantin Toropin and Ben Finley contributed to this report.

A travel journalist who travelled to Italy said they were nearly caught out by a rule introduced in the city of Venice to improve cleanliness

A travel journalist who visited Venice said they nearly lost £86 after breaking a rule they didn’t know about. Joey Handler, a travel journalist, spent six days in Italy travelling around the iconic European country, visiting various popular cities en route.

However, in one of their latest pieces, they admitted they had five regrets from their time in Italy which formed part of a two week trip around Europe.

Reflecting on the trip, back in October 2022, the Joey touched on how at one point in Venice they were stopped by the authorities for doing an act they thought was innocuous.

Joey said the incident occurred after she had completed a walking tour and went for some lunch. Eventually, after passing full restaurant after full restaurant she said she cut her losses and bought an ice cream before deciding to sit down.

However, it was the sitting down that was the problem. The Business Insider journalist explained: “I eventually cut my losses and stood in line for gelato before sitting on a shaded step to enjoy it.

“As I was about to take my first bite, the nearby authorities waved their hands up and down at me — a gesture I could only take to mean ‘get up’. And there I was, committing an etiquette violation that, according to the City of Venice, may result in a fine of 100 to 200 euros.”

As well as being informed by the local authorities about the rule, tourists and others can also be informed by the local government website. On this rule, they said: “Do not consume food and drink sitting on the ground, do not sit or lie down on banks and foundations, monuments, bridges, steps, puteals and high-water walkways

“Fine: 100 to 200 euros DASPO – Urban banning order (offenders will be immediately banned from the place where the offence was committed).”

This means that offenders could be fined anywhere between £86.74 and £173.48 if they’re caught. On why such rules, which include not swimming in the canals, dumping rubbish, walking around in a swimsuit, feeding pigeons and seagulls, not cycling, and not bivouacking in public areas, are in place, the local authority say is to preserve the environment.

They explained: “Current regulations enforced by the Venice City Council Municipal Police forbid certain behaviour, in order to preserve urban cleanliness and landscape, and also for reasons of safety and public hygiene.

“The violation of such regulations involves the application of administrative fines – from €25 to €500.”

This isn’t the only charge people can face if they travel to Venice with tourists als facing an entrance fee which was introduced in 2024 by the city. This fee is around €5 (£4.34) and originally applied on peak days between April and July before being expanded.

However, the new mayor of Venice Simone Venturini, has talked about the possibility of increasing this to €50 (£43.37). He told Corrier della Sera: “If today it ranges from €5 to €10, my proposal is to increase it to €30 to €50.”

Whilst move was in part a reaction to the sheer number of tourists, opponents have warned it risks not being true to the city itself. Former mayor Massimo Cacciari went further and called for the scheme to be removed altogether: “There is no other city in Italy or Europe where you have to enter with a ticket, as though it was a museum.

“It is barbarous, uncivilised and, in my opinion, against the constitution. It is simply obscene. I thought that Venturini would be more intelligent than his predecessor and would scrap the fee.”

Sipping coffee in a grand square at one of Europe’s oldest cafe’s, Lucy Williamson discovers a Mediterranean escape that manages to be a city break, beach holiday, and history lesson all at once

A spa day in the UK can easily set you back £150 before you’ve even ordered lunch. So when I found myself sipping coffee in a grand Maltese square at one of Europe’s oldest cafes, watching the morning sun bounce off honey-coloured limestone buildings after a £40 flight from London, I couldn’t help feeling I’d stumbled across one of Europe’s best-value city breaks.

Malta has long been a favourite with British travellers. Yet somehow it still feels slightly overlooked when conversations turn to weekend escapes. People talk about Lisbon, Barcelona and Rome. Meanwhile, sitting in the middle of the Mediterranean, Malta quietly enjoys more than 300 days of sunshine a year; making it one of the sunniest in Europe.

I spent three days there for a spontaneous solo trip and quickly realised Malta has cracked something many destinations haven’t. It manages to be a city break, a beach break and a history lesson all at once, without requiring military-grade holiday planning.

The first thing working in Malta’s favour is its size. This is not a destination where you’ll spend half your holiday staring at Google Maps, wondering whether the slightly disappointing mural is really worth a 45-minute metro journey and an existential crisis in the heat. Most places are close together. The capital city, Valletta, is wonderfully walkable.

Do you have a travel story to share? Email webtravel@reachplc.com

Things to do

If you stay in neighbouring Sliema, as I did at the Preluna Hotel (about £200 for two nights, includes its own beach club) accommodation is often cheaper than inside the capital itself. And the short ferry across to Valetta costs just a few euros. It glides over the water toward a city that looks like an enormous sandcastle built by a giant child who grew up to become an architect.

Many of the highlights cost nothing. The Upper Barrakka Gardens offer some of the finest views in the Mediterranean. Down below, crowds gather for the Saluting Battery (every day at 12pm and 4pm) where cannons are still fired in a tradition dating back centuries. Men in historical uniforms are responsible for the blasts which are to let everyone know what time it is. I loved it, but it seems an incredibly loud and dramatic alternative to just looking at your phone.

Jokes aside, it is an impressive tradition, although you only need to forget it’s happening once to understand why locals still flinch.

You also cannot miss the staggering Baroque interior of St John’s Co-Cathedral (€15 for adults) a church so violently covered in 24-carat gold leaf that it looks like the inside of a divine Ferrero Rocher.

Elsewhere, the city’s streets themselves do much of the heavy lifting. Ornate balconies lean over narrow lanes while laundry flutters overhead on washing lines. It is a deeply moving reminder that even though Valletta was built by the Knights of St John to defend European civilization from the Ottoman Empire, your romantic view of a historic fortress city is occasionally interrupted by a pair of massive beige knickers blowing in the wind.

Locals treat the sea like a public swimming pool that happens to have excellent views. Rocky platforms replace sand. Towels appear. People jump straight into the Mediterranean without the usual British negotiation involving sunbeds, parasols and passive aggressive towel placement.

No one seems to be running a system. It works anyway.

British nostalgia with better weather

Malta occasionally feels like Britain left something behind and never quite bothered to come back for it.

The island was part of the British Empire for more than 150 years, and the influence is still visible in ways that feel slightly surreal. English is an official language. Red phone boxes still stand in corners like they are waiting for a call that will never come.

I wandered into the local branch of Marks and Spencer to check on the progress of British civilization. I can confirm they did not have any picky bits in the Malta store; the traditional British tapas. But they did have tinnies – the traditional fuel for a British explorer. A Monsoon sits nearby. Even a copy of that day’s Daily Mirror at the local newsagent’s.

Where to eat

That blend of influences extends to the food scene. Malta borrows happily from Italy, North Africa and Britain, creating a character all of its own.

One street that perfectly captures the atmosphere is St Lucia Street. By day, it’s an attractive stepped lane. By night, it transforms into one of Valletta’s most buzzy dining spots, with tables cascading down the stone steps like a very tasty avalanche. I spent my second evening at Taste nursing an Aperol Spritz and a plate of rigatoni, which seemed to accidentally on purpose precede a huge tiramisu (€25 bill).

One of Europe’s oldest cafes

For a deeper glimpse into Malta’s past, I found myself at Caffe Cordina, one of Europe’s oldest cafés and one of Valletta’s most enduring institutions.

You will have to resist the temptation to just wander into the air-conditioned void of Starbucks just down the road for some whipped cream and regret. Keep walking, because you will be rewarded with an establishment that has spent nearly two centuries serving Maltese society.

The family’s story began in 1837, when their ancestors arrived from Italy and sold nougat from a donkey cart. They eventually opened a small shop that was destroyed by a German bomb during the Second World War. Yet, as the current owner, Luca Cordina, told me, that bomb was ironically “the best thing that ever happened to us”. It forced his grandfather, Cesare, to take out a bank loan, pivot, and establish the café in its current Valletta location in 1944.

It was a massive gamble. “My grandfather’s friends actually questioned him about the decision, calling him crazy,” Luca explained, noting that the bustling square we see today was little more than a garden at the time. But Cesare believed in the location when very few people did. His response to the doubters was simple: “When the sun rises, it warms everyone”.

That warmth has since attracted a staggering mix of patrons, hosting everyone from Queen Elizabeth II and King Charles to the 1984 Italian national football team. The café inspires just as much loyalty from its staff as its customers, with one employee noted to still be working the floor at 76 years old.

I had a coffee and a traditional ricotta pastizzi (€5.70 bill) and watched the world go by – stunning.

‘The Silent City’

My other favourite lunch spot was in Mdina, the former capital and one of the most atmospheric places on the island.

Game of Thrones fans will recognise parts of it immediately. Everyone else will spend the visit walking past groups who are absolutely certain they are standing exactly where something important happened and are more than willing to explain it in detail whether you asked or not.

It is known as the Silent City because it is incredibly quiet, which is a nice change from London, where the soundtrack is the incessant beeping of a stolen Lime bike.

That wonderful silence was much enjoyed on the roof terrace of the family-run cafe – Fontanella Tea Garden – which is built into the city wall and offers one of the best panoramic views around (Pizza + coffee came to €19).

Mdina is completely enclosed within ancient walls to stop medieval enemies from entering, though it seems they let any old person in these days – especially if you are wearing shorts and carrying a bottle of Fanta Lemon.

The verdict

Three days felt about right. Long enough to see Valletta, Mdina and the coastline without rushing. Short enough that it never drifted into routine. May was an ideal time to go – still warm, not baking, and a little quieter.

Malta works best for couples or solo travellers (like me on this occasion!) who like variety without effort. You get history, sea swims, good food and a walkable city without needing to plan your day around transport logistics or opening times.

Flights from London can be found for around £40 one way. I flew from Luton and returned to Gatwick using Avios points via British Airways, which made the trip back feel particularly smug.

By the time I got home, I’d spent less than many people pay for a day wrapped in a fluffy robe somewhere in the Home Counties.

The cost

• Flight from London to Malta (one-way): £40
• Preluna Hotel, Sliema (2 nights): £200
• St John’s Co-Cathedral entry: €15
• Dinner at Taste (Aperol Spritz, rigatoni, tiramisu): €25
• Coffee and ricotta pastizzi at Caffe Cordina: €5.70
• Pizza and coffee at Fontanella Tea Garden: €19
• Sliema–Valletta ferry: €5
• Return flight: Not included (paid using Avios points via British Airways) – would have been about £80

Approximate combined total: ~£295

Follow Lucy’s travels on TikTok and Instagram.

A travel and food content creator called George Kimm has shared his experience of taking an overnight sleeper train from London to Cornwall – but the price left people shocked

Cornwall is widely regarded as one of the most breathtaking counties in the UK, boasting golden sandy beaches, a spectacular sweeping coastline, world-class surfing spots and jaw-dropping clifftop scenery. And it’s not just locals who are smitten with this South West gem — visitors from across the country regularly make the journey down.

One such traveller is George Kimm, a UK-based travel and food content creator. George made the trip from London to Cornwall aboard an overnight sleeper train, documenting his experience on Instagram. He hopped on the Great Western Railway (GWR) Night Riviera, which departs from London Paddington and pulls into Penzance the following morning, with the entire journey clocking in at just over eight hours.

The travel enthusiast gave his candid verdict on the experience, though one particular detail caught his Instagram followers off guard — the price. George booked a “very cosy” solo cabin, which came equipped with a single bed, a table that doubled up as a sink, a wardrobe and handy storage space beneath the bed, which he described as “very useful”. GWR also provided a selection of amenities, including soap.

George did point out that the toilets are located outside the cabins. However, aside from that, the train operator “really had thought of everything else”.

The London-based creator went on to say: “Before we left London Paddington I had a look in the onboard bar where you can sit down, relax. They also provide free tea and coffee with biscuits and when it comes to going to sleep, I actually had a really good experience.”

After getting settled and having a look around, George watched the train depart the station before heading off to bed. He revealed that he relished the sounds and motion of the train, as they lulled him off to sleep.

When George stirred the following morning, he tucked into breakfast, which came as part of his cabin fare. He opted for a cup of tea and a sausage bap, noting that it was “very delicious”.

The travel enthusiast added: “And it was so lovely to have my breakfast whilst watching the countryside whizz by.”

He wrapped up his Instagram reel by revealing what his trip and cabin had set him back, saying: “My ticket cost £119 and an additional £149 for the cabin.” George reckoned it was “such a cool experience” nodding off in London and coming round in Cornwall. He believed it was “honestly so worth it” and something he’d gladly repeat.

One commenter observed: “£75 return to Paris, just saying.” George responded: “Totally get it. This was a bucket list trip.” Another remarked: “Looks fun but the price is insane.”

A third astonished viewer queried: “Omg… how much?” Someone else went as far as branding the price “criminal.”

Despite the hefty price tag, some viewers still managed to see the bright side, with one commenting: “This looks like a great experience but it’s very costly for a return journey. I guess the benefit is both journeys are during the night so you aren’t losing out on any holiday time.”

A second chimed in: “Would love to do this!! Honestly would see the cost as part of the holiday, so special.”

For those travelling with Great Western Railway’s Night Riviera service, an airline-style seat is available at no additional cost when booking a ticket, with prices for a private cabin starting from £49 per person.

Robert decided to leave the UK after spending over £3,000 a month just to get by – and he loves his new life

A Brit has ditched life in the UK to live well for just £800 a month – and he’s loving it. Now he drinks £2 pints on the beach and saves thousands on bills.

Robert Hoadley decided to up sticks after realising he was stuck in a cycle of working long hours just to cover rising costs. The 45-year-old had barely travelled and spent years grafting in construction before deciding enough was enough.

Now he’s living more than 6,000 miles away in Chiang Mai, Thailand, to work as a content creator, and says life couldn’t be more different. “I felt like I was just working to cover bills with no real freedom,” Robert, from Portsmouth, said.

“The cost of living in the UK kept going up, and I wanted a different lifestyle – less stress and more control of my time. I got to a point where I didn’t want to wait until retirement to actually start living life, so I decided to take the leap, sell everything I owned, and move out here.

“It’s definitely been a big change, but the lifestyle and day-to-day life here feels a lot better.” Since relocating in 2025, Robert has been working online, creating content about the cost of living and relocating abroad.

He’s currently building various online income streams so he can work remotely. His social media platform, Sea Turkey Adventures, already boasts over 6,000 followers with some of his clips racking up over 200,000 views.

Robert says he’s happier, more active and finally enjoying a proper work-life balance. And despite pints costing just £2, he insists he’s actually drinking less – although the one thing he misses most about UK is the sarcastic sense of humour.

Robert said: “I enjoyed going out in the UK, but these days it’s more balanced. I drink socially now rather than out of habit. There are more lifestyle options here like gyms, cafés, pools and being outdoors. I’m much more focused on health and routine now. I wake up earlier, train regularly, spend more time outdoors, and I’m more conscious of how I spend my time and money.

“In the evenings I’m nearly always out doing something social, even if it’s just meeting people for food or coffee rather than drinking.” The UK’s cost-of-living crunch was a major factor behind his move. Robert says he was spending more than £3,000 a month back home but now lives comfortably on just £800.

‘Money goes so far abroad’

He said: “That’s the biggest difference – you’re not constantly under financial pressure. A lot of people don’t realise how far your money can go abroad, and how different life can feel when you’re not constantly stressed about bills. I did look at other countries, but Thailand just made sense – good food, friendly people, strong expat community, and you can live well here for a fraction of UK costs.”

He also says the slower pace of life has made a huge difference. He said: “In the UK, people can seem stressed, the weather can be grey for long periods, and it often feels like everyone is rushing through life. Here, the climate is better, the people are generally more relaxed, and there’s a friendlier vibe overall. A lot of people are either on holiday or choosing to be here, so the energy feels more positive.

“It just suits me more at this stage of life.” But it’s not all perfect – and Robert admits he still misses some things from home. He added: “I miss friends and family, obviously. Also the humour – that UK sarcasm and banter is hard to replace. I miss certain foods and the traditional pub atmosphere. Every country has things you appreciate once you leave.”

THE Traitors star Diane Carson has revealed she suffered a nasty fall on holiday that resulted in a £280 trip to the dentist.

The keen runner, 65, is on holiday in Lisbon with her son and his girlfriend, Rima.

While exploring the sunny Portuguese city, Diane came a cropper on a jog and it needed a pricey resolution.

She shared a video of her happily bounding through a park before the accident and wrote over the top: “Today’s amazing run — before the £280 worth of dental treatment.”

In the caption she gave more detail, explaining she had two scraped knees, a staved thumb, a severely swollen lip and two chipped teeth; one was so far back she couldn’t close her mouth.

Showing true grit, she completed another 1.5miles after the incident to finish her route.

READ MORE ON THE TRAITORS

end of the road

The Traitors star reveals hit show will end next week after 7 years

new gig

Richard Osman lands new ITV show from team behind Traitors after quitting BBC rival

She wrote: “My tooth was masterfully maneuvered back into place and treatment completed with an orthodontic wire.”

Her followers were quick to comment, wishing her well and praising her strength for returning to exercise so soon after the accident.

One wrote: “Yikes! Not sure I would have carried on after that…”

Diane replied: “I’m a tad bloody minded – matching my face this morning!”

Another said: “Ouch!!!! But obviously finish the run! hope you’re ok.”

The reality star responded: “I’ll live, thank u. Tooth mightn’t though!”

In another exchange, a fan posted: “Poor you! Sounds painful… hope it doesn’t impede the rose enjoyment.”

Diane said: “Rarely impeded – even if I have to use a straw to accommodate a swollen mouth!!!”

The previous day, the retired teacher shared a picture with her son Ross, with whom she appeared in The Traitors with.

She wrote: “Lovely meeting up with Ross and Rima and what a great holiday destination – Lisbon!”

“Plenty of sunshine, running, exploring, shopping, Padel AND the discovery of natural wines! We arrived just in time for the start of Festas de Lisboa – so lots of craic!”

The series two pair were responsible for one of the series’ biggest twists and were both a big hit with viewers.

Their co-stars had no idea they were related until Ross delivered the news after being eliminated at the round table in episode 10.

His parting words were: “I am a Faithful… oh wait, no, I’m a Traitor. But I was a Faithful for most of it. And I do have one more secret… Diane is my mum.”

The incredible lift ascends 153 metres (502 feet) in under a minute

Some of the world’s most jaw-dropping lifts can be found in luxury hotels, including the highest outdoor lift in Europe, nestled in Lucerne, Switzerland. The Bürgenstock Resort is home to the remarkable Hammetschwand lift, offering stunning views of Lake Lucerne.

The Hammetschwand lift was built between 1900 and 1905 by pioneering hotelier Franz Josef Bucher, at a cost of 500,000 Swiss francs (around £470,000). It remains the quickest route up to the viewpoint, climbing 153 metres (502 feet) in under a minute.

Those planning a visit should bear in mind that to reach the foot of the lift, you’ll need to walk the breathtaking Felsenweg cliff path.

It is estimated that over 40,000 people use the Hammetschwand lift annually, and around 200 to 250 riders per day.

On Tripadvisor, one visitor advised choosing “the perfect sunny day to enjoy the view.” They went on to say: “This is a fantastic view, the elevator is just too quick, but still worth a visit.”

Another said: “You do the Burgenstock track to the lift and it is already by itself stunning!!! Nobody talks about it. It’s a hidden gem in Switzerland!

“Then you arrive at that special spit where the lakes of the four cantons connect, and it’s breathtaking. A bit ahead, there’s the lift and the adventure to one of the most beautiful views ever. It’s easy, it’s accessible, it’s unbelievably beautiful. I will do it again.”

Among other remarkable examples is the Hotel Santa Caterina’s lift in Amalfi, Italy, which boasts breathtaking views. Carved into the rugged cliffside, the glass-fronted elevator takes guests down to the exclusive Beach Club and the hotel’s Italian seafood restaurant.

In Greece, the Corfu Holiday Palace features a stunning lift that transports guests down the cliffside to the beach in just moments, treating them to gorgeous views across the bay while providing far easier access to the white sands below.

The Luxor Hotel in Las Vegas, United States, is home to one of the most iconic lifts on the planet. Given the hotel’s striking pyramid shape, the lifts travel between floors at a diagonal 39-degree angle, treating guests to a spectacular outlook over the atrium as they make their way to one of the hotel’s 4,407 rooms.

Travel insurance for Turkey has jumped almost 50 per cent in just a year, according to new data

Five European and Mediterranean destinations including some hotspots much loved by British tourists have been named as having seen big rises in insurance costs, directly caused by the Middle East crisis. Travel insurance for Turkey has jumped 46% in just a year, according to new data analysing 5,000 policies across popular destinations near conflict zones.

There is no sign of the Middle East conflict calming down – today Iran fired ballistic missiles and drones towards Bahrain and Kuwait, Bahrain’s government said, adding that they were intercepted.

Bahrain’s government called on Tehran to immediately cease attacks on Gulf neighbours that it deemed a “serious escalation”. Iran’s Foreign Ministry said the US early Saturday attacked surveillance facilities on Qeshm Island and near Sirik that it said were used to protect borders and “ensure the security of navigation in international waters”.

The latest exchange of fire came as the Trump administration pressed Iran to make a deal to end the war that has strained the global economy and threatened a hunger crisis in some of the world’s most vulnerable countries.

The US military earlier said it shot down several Iranian missiles and drones launched towards the Strait of Hormuz and Gulf Arab allies, and struck some of the Islamic Republic’s coastal surveillance radar sites in response.

It has had a big impact on the region with some popular destinations seeing big rises in premiums. Quotezone travel insurance expert Helen Rolph warned travellers not to assume last year’s prices still apply and urges holidaymakers to compare policies carefully, buy cover as soon as they book, and check Foreign Office advice before travelling.

Industry experts compared 5,000 travel insurance premiums across five popular tourist destinations close to conflict zones, revealing which countries have seen the biggest price increases over the past year.

Prices in Turkey have been affected the most despite it traditionally being considered one of the most popular and cost-effective destinations for UK holidaymakers over recent years.

Standard travel insurance premiums to the country have jumped from £40.56 in early 2025 to £59.19 just a year later – a rise of 46% or almost £20 per trip – which may be due to the fact it shares a border with Iran.

Holidaymakers travelling to Bulgaria are also seeing a sharp rise with prices up 19%, possibly down to its proximity to Ukraine.

Premiums for Cyprus have increased by 6%, Egypt by 4% and Poland by 8%. To gather the data, popular holiday destinations for British tourists were cross-referenced with countries geographically close to conflict zones, namely Ukraine and Iran, creating a dataset of major holiday hotspots in relative proximity to areas of geopolitical tension.

Insurers regularly reassess risk when global tensions rise, particularly in destinations close to areas where travel complications might become more likely.

Destinations situated close to areas experiencing heightened tensions – such as Iran and Ukraine – could see premiums shift as insurers reassess the likelihood of travel disruption, delays or emergency evacuation should issues escalate.

Helen Rolph, travel insurance expert at Quotezone.co.uk said: “Travel insurance prices change constantly as insurers respond to global events, the number of claims made and healthcare costs.

“Even if a destination remains popular despite its proximity to ongoing conflict, premiums can rise when the wider region becomes more uncertain.

“Travellers and holidaymakers shouldn’t assume last year’s prices will still apply and make sure they’re comparing policies carefully rather than opting for the cheapest option, as cover can vary significantly.

“It’s also sensible to arrange insurance as soon as a trip is booked, check government travel advice before departure, and ensure any medical conditions are fully declared.

“Travel disruption insurance can also be useful as it covers a wider range of issues while travelling but it’s important to remember that travel insurance won’t provide cover if the foreign office advises against travel to that region and most travel insurance policies won’t cover war related incidents. It’s crucial for holidaymakers to check what is and isn’t covered on their policy and add any extras or specialised cover they might need.”

Travel Insurance Premiums

Country // Average 2025 // Average 2026 // Average Price Change // % Change

Turkey £40.56 £59.19 £18.63 46%

Bulgaria £32.70 £38.82 £6.11 19%

Poland £10.50 £11.32 £0.82 8%

Cyprus £43.21 £45.80 £2.59 6%

Egypt £68.52 £71.30 £2.78 4%

WASHINGTON — The U.S. military is waiting for clarity from the Pentagon following President Trump’s back-and-forth on troop levels in Europe, upending the lives of military personnel and potentially costing taxpayers millions of dollars, two U.S. defense officials told the Associated Press.

NATO allies were bewildered in May when Trump said he would send 5,000 U.S. troops to Poland just weeks after ordering the same number pulled from Europe, following a spat with Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz over the Iran war. The Trump administration says troop reductions in Europe have long been planned and coordinated with allies.

The Republican president announced on social media two weeks ago that he was sending troops to Poland — the same day the Pentagon had officially ordered the cancellation of a rotation of soldiers heading there, one of the defense officials said.

The unit’s equipment was already on the way. Sending it cost the military $32 million, said U.S. Transportation Command, the military agency largely responsible for moving troops and gear across the globe.

The abrupt changes are forcing the military to “retroactively engineer” a policy in line with the president’s latest pronouncement, the official said. Both officials were briefed on the decisions and, along with others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters.

The uncertainty is not only rattling European allies worried about the message being sent to Russia, but it also risks hurting morale among American troops — some of whom had their rotations canceled shortly before departure — and comes as the Army budget is already strained.

Changes to troop deployments to Poland add up

The rotational deployment to Poland of 4,000 troops from the Army’s 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, based in Fort Hood, Texas, was canceled in a memo sent to the military at the beginning of May. European allies found out mid-month.

Some of those troops were told shortly before traveling not to get on a flight to Poland, while those who had been sent ahead — initially around 1,000 troops — are still waiting for confirmation they are being sent back, a U.S. military official said.

The military also is still waiting for details from the Pentagon on how to satisfy Trump’s order to send 5,000 troops to Poland, that official said. The working assumption is that they will come from units already in Europe, rather than an additional deployment from the U.S., the official said.

U.S. Transportation Command had chartered a ship to take the team’s equipment from Texas to Poland and transport a departing unit’s gear back to America. The incoming team’s portion of the cost was $32 million, including chartering the ship and loading and unloading the gear.

Because the ship was chartered to take one unit to Europe and bring another back, it is hard to say if that amount would have been saved had the decision to halt the deployment been made before the new team had already begun moving overseas.

However, the military official said the unscheduled move of personnel and equipment back from Europe is most likely not a cost the Pentagon budgeted for and would be an additional expense.

Total costs of canceling the rotation are hard to quantify because of many factors, said Joe Costa, a former senior Pentagon official who now focuses on challenges faced by the U.S. military as director of the Atlantic Council’s Forward Defense program.

They most likely stem from returning equipment and troops sent ahead of the deployment and would probably be on the low end of the rotation’s overall cost, Costa said. The greater impact is on the readiness of troops who were trained for one mission and may be deployed on another, he said.

U.S. military contracts with private companies to transport troops and equipment contain cancellation clauses that often add extra fees if a deployment is called off, said John Deni, a senior nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council who has studied such costs.

“The question is what additional costs were incurred by deciding to send them back prematurely, changing the arrangements, changing the plan?” said Deni, a former U.S. military advisor and planner who focused on forces in Europe.

It is not clear if the Pentagon can recoup those costs or those associated with moving the unit to Europe. The Defense Department did not answer questions about the costs of changing the deployment plans, and the White House referred a request for comment to the department.

Pentagon officials have repeatedly said they planned to lower troop levels to have Europe shoulder more of its own defense and that the decision was part of a “comprehensive, multilayered process.”

Last month’s memo also led to the cancellation of a deployment to Germany of a battalion trained in firing long-range rockets and missiles.

Pulling troops stationed in Germany would be more expensive

When Trump first threatened to remove 5,000 troops from Europe, Pentagon officials initially suggested pulling back the 2nd Cavalry Regiment, which is based permanently in Germany, the defense official said.

Instead, officials decided to cancel the rotation of the other unit to Poland. Then Trump threw that plan into confusion as well.

Pulling the troops stationed in Germany could cost in the low billions because there is no dedicated space and infrastructure in the U.S. to accommodate them and their families, Costa said.

“The other option is basically breaking up the unit,” Costa said. “They move the equipment in different places. They move the people to different places. That carries significant readiness costs because now you’re artificially jamming pieces of units into places where they don’t necessarily belong.”

Pulling or pausing deployments also can hurt morale among soldiers and families because they plan for them months and years in advance, Deni said. The uncertainty can be disruptive.

“That’s often the last thing you want to do to military families,” Deni said.

It is still unclear what will happen to U.S. troops stationed in Europe, the two officials said. Options include moving military units assigned to Germany to Poland, but that could take several years and cost more, the military official said.

Troop changes happen during an Army budget shortfall

The moves come as the Army is facing a budget shortfall, which the service’s top uniformed officer, Gen. Christopher LaNeve, recently acknowledged to Congress.

Estimates put the deficit somewhere between $2 billion and $6 billion, according to an Army official who also spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive defense matters. One impact has been cutting training courses for soldiers nationwide, which ABC News earlier reported.

In a statement, the Army said it has issued guidance to its commands to “make tough and sound resource decisions that optimize and prioritize resources toward their most critical requirements, to include major training and readiness events.”

The Army official also noted that the service has been tasked with missions like the National Guard deployment in Washington, a bolstered presence along the U.S.-Mexico border and its part in the Iran war — all of which have strained its budget.

The Department of Homeland Security expects to reimburse the Army for its role in the border mission.

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll told lawmakers at a May 15 hearing that he was “optimistic” there would progress on those payments “within a week or two.” But to date, the Army has not been reimbursed.

“We want those backfilled payments,” Driscoll said then.

The U.S. military in Europe also is scaling back support for non-combat related training and ruthlessly prioritizing critical functions, the military official said.

Burrows, Finley and Toropin write for the Associated Press. Burrows reported from London.

One savvy traveller has found an alternative way to jet off abroad that not only saves money, but also allows her to visit a plethora of destinations throughout the year

A woman has remarkably been able to visit seven countries in a year for less than £2,000.

Flights can be notoriously expensive, especially to those sought-after destinations. Even flights that are just for a few hours can quickly cost hundreds of pounds, leaving holidaymakers questioning their getaway to Europe.

Yet, that wasn’t going to stop Helen Dalling, 55, from travelling last year. Instead, she looked for alternative ways to travel that not only saved money but also ticked off a plethora of holiday destinations.

In a bid to travel as much as possible and to keep costs considerably low, Helen, from Milton Keynes, swapped longer getaways for short escapes. Some were extreme day trips flying to and from the destination within 24 hours, while others offered an overnight stay.

“I’ve always loved travelling, but as I’m getting older and I’ve got kids and I work full-time, I thought ‘I’m not going to see enough countries in the world’,” Helen told creatorzine.com. “‘If I don’t start going to see a few of them, I need to do them quick and cheap’. That’s really why I started doing it.”

While it’s certainly a little more hectic than a week-long beach getaway, the change in travel meant that the 55-year-old was able to visit seven countries last year for around £1,600. This included the costs of flights, airport parking, hotels, sightseeing, food and drink, and spending money.

In 2025, Helen travelled to Paris, Budapest, Alicante, Malaga, Split, Prague, Amsterdam, and Geneva twice. It varied how long she would stay in each destination, from just a few hours to an overnight stay.

“I went to seven brand new countries”, Helen said. “That’s what I really wanted to do, I thought, ‘I’ve never been to Hungary, so let’s go to Budapest’.”

To help keep costs as low as possible, Helen regularly looks out for deals from different airlines that fly from her nearest airport, London Luton. “When I went to Paris, I was basically just browsing on New Year’s Day, not doing much else, and I spotted that you could get a flight to Paris for £13, one way and £12 the other”, she revealed. “I just booked it – and then when I told a friend, she booked it too and came with me.”

Helen continued: “The Budapest flights were about £8.99 each way; you can’t even get them that cheap anymore. I’ve done others that were £15-£20 return; I just book them – when I see the price, I just go for it.”

While she sometimes travels solo, it’s often a great chance to catch up with friends on an extreme day trip. “Instead of going to London for lunch, let’s go somewhere for the day,” Helen said.

“I did Geneva twice last year, but the second one I did at Christmas was with a real old friend of mine who is really into her food. So we went and did a foodie trip to the Christmas markets in Geneva and just went for the day – she’d never done one.

“Everybody that I’ve done one with has said ‘Oh my God, that was amazing’. I’ve got a bit of a queue of people wanting to go as well, but only so much money.”

After visiting seven countries last year, Budapest, which cost £191 for an overnight stay, stood out for Helen. “We just fell in love with Budapest,” she said. “Every time we did something else afterwards, I just said to my friend, ‘It’s not Budapest, though, is it? It’s not Budapest.’

“It was February when we did that, but the sky was blue, and we had the best time.

“It was super cheap, and everything just worked.” She added: “It was so lush. We were just sitting in these massive pools of boiling hot water with the cold air on our skin, just going, ‘This is amazing.'”

Following her extreme trips last year, Helen is determined to do the same this year. She’s already travelled to Palma in Mallorca with a friend for under £120, spent the night in Lithuania, and ventured to Albania for the day.

She confessed: “I’m always buzzing after a day trip. I would definitely do it again, it’s a great way to visit countries you’d never visit by going on one holiday a year.

“Last year I visited seven new countries, and it’s liberating.”

Price breakdown of Helen’s 2025 trips

• Paris – £139 (extreme day trip)
• Budapest – £191 (overnight)
• Alicante – £62 (extreme day trip)
• Malaga – £118 (extreme day trip)
• Geneva – £182 (extreme day trip)
• Split – £315 (overnight)
• Prague – £165.11 (overnight)
• Amsterdam – £290 (overnight)
• Geneva – £138 (extreme day trip)

Total – £1,600.11

Do you have a travel story to share? Email webtravel@reachplc.com

Tests of Ukraine’s new FP-7.X missile could pave the way to a cheaper and more plentiful, albeit far less capable, alternative to the U.S.-made Patriot air defense system effectors. A recent uptick in Russian missile and drone attacks against Ukraine, combined with a critical shortage of Patriot interceptors, underscores the need for more robust air defenses, especially with anti-ballistic missile capabilities. The development parallels a similar program in the United States, which seeks a drastically lower-cost interceptor for the Patriot system.

A video showing a test launch of an FP-7.X missile was published yesterday by its manufacturer, Fire Point, also responsible for the FP-5 Flamingo cruise missile and a series of long-range one-way attack drones. Fire Point’s chief technology officer Iryna Terekh described the depicted test as a “fully controlled maneuvering flight” conducted “just the other day.” The pink-painted missile recalls the early Flamingoes, and now seems to have been adopted as something of a company trademark.

The FP-7.X missile is planned as the stepping-stone toward the productionized Freyja missile, which is primarily intended to provide Ukraine with its first homegrown anti-ballistic missile defense system. While ballistic missile threats are being prioritized here, the system would be equally able to defend against a variety of crewed aircraft threats, as well as drones and cruise missiles.

“No matter how unrealistic and ambitious this goal may sound today, we are exerting all possible and impossible efforts to make it a reality as soon as possible, so that Ukraine can close its skies on its own,” Terekh wrote.

Back in April, Fire Point’s co-founder and chief designer Denys Shtilierman told Reuters that the company was aiming to develop an anti-ballistic missile with a unit cost of less than $1 million.

“If we can decrease it to less than $1 million, it will be … a game changer in air defense solutions,” Shtilierman said. “We plan to intercept the first ballistic missile at the end of 2027,” he added, apparently referring to the aim to field the Freyja system by that date.

This compares to a unit price of approximately $5.3 million for each example of the most modern and highly capable PAC-3 MSE variant, which is one of the types provided to Ukraine. This figure comes from the Army’s latest proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year. This is up from a historical average of around $4 million for each one of these missiles. These munitions also take years of lead time to produce, meaning that managing limited stocks is a big challenge.

Fire Point has developed the FP-7.X missile on the basis of the previous FP-7 surface-to-surface ballistic missile, a weapon with a range of around 124 miles, and a warhead of approximately 331 pounds. Deriving an anti-ballistic missile from a ballistic missile is an unusual move, but Fire Point will hope that the commonality should accelerate the process.

As it stands, Ukraine’s anti-ballistic missile capabilities are strictly limited. It relies heavily upon the Patriot, batteries and components of which have been provided by Germany, the Netherlands, and the United States.

When the Patriot began to arrive in 2023, it provided Ukraine with an enhanced long-range, high-altitude engagement capability that was previously only offered, to a lesser degree, by Ukraine’s S-300s, with their depleting stocks of missiles. Importantly, the Patriot also brought an anti-ballistic missile capability, something that was previously only provided by the small number of Ukrainian S-300V1 systems, and even those don’t come anywhere close to the Patriot in this regard.

And another S-300V engagement, released as part of the same video.

From what I have seen, these are the third and fourth Ukrainian S-300V engagement videos released since the start of the war. pic.twitter.com/wPHnYbCQKP

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) February 9, 2025

Providing somewhat similar capabilities to the Patriot is the SAMP/T, a joint Franco-Italian SAM system, which has also been supplied to Ukraine, but only in limited numbers. Overall, the SAMP/T is limited simply by the fact that it is produced in relatively small numbers.

As for the Patriot, this has claimed notable successes and high-profile victims in Ukrainian hands. However, as Russia has adapted its ballistic missiles, specifically adding enhanced maneuvering capabilities, the effectiveness of the U.S.-made system has been reduced.

According to Shtilierman, the Patriot system often requires two or three air defence missiles, each costing several million ​dollars, to bring down a ballistic projectile. This is a mismatch that Fire Point also hopes to address with the Freyja.

It is notable that the U.S. Army is currently also pressing defense contractors to come up with proposals for a new interceptor for the Patriot system with a unit cost under $1 million, as you can read more about here. Whether by design or coincidence, U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Frank Lozano, the Army’s Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Fires (PAE Fires), included a rendering of the FP-7.X in a recent LinkedIn post, as seen below, to illustrate a notional low-cost interceptor.

hahah look at that! Good find!

— Tyler Rogoway (@Aviation_Intel) May 18, 2026

The latest development comes as Ukraine’s political and military leaders continue to warn about critical shortcomings in the country’s air defense capabilities. As well as expending the missiles it already has, the United States has reportedly suspended further Patriot deliveries to Ukraine because of concerns over the state of its own stockpile.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly urged U.S. President Donald Trump and members of Congress to provide additional missiles for its Patriot systems, warning that Ukraine faces a severe air defense shortfall.

We were receiving PAC-3 missiles from our partners in certain quantities, but later that monthly volume was cut several times over. It wasn’t due to a lack of funding, but because of the war in the Middle East. This affected different types of weapons. Whatever we could, we… pic.twitter.com/qwPFydwAzC

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) June 3, 2026

Yesterday, Zelensky said that Ukrainian officials have one week to finalize outstanding legal, financial, and technical issues related to the purchase of additional Patriot systems.

Zelensky said that a political agreement to buy the systems has already been reached, but the process has stalled.

Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States, Olha Stefanishyna, added that Kyiv is prepared to finance additional Patriot systems and interceptor missiles if Washington agrees to deliver them.

Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Oleksandr Syrsky also recently pointed to Ukraine’s lack of sufficient modern air defense systems and interceptor missiles.

Clearly, continued Russian missile and drone strikes are putting a heavy strain on Ukraine’s air defenses.

Plugging the gaps with the Freyja system would make a lot of sense, providing a locally developed and manufactured solution to the problem, provided that the technical hurdles can be overcome.

Even so, the deadline of the end of 2027 is very ambitious for such a project.

With that in mind, Ukraine is also looking to foreign support for the Freyja program.

Earlier this year, Fire Point confirmed it was in talks to get European and Middle Eastern companies onboard the program. With various nations struggling to meet their air defense needs amid the demands of the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, investing here could also bring dividends.

Shtilierman told Reuters in April that he was awaiting government approval for an investment in Fire Point by a Middle Eastern conglomerate, which would provide a major boost to Freyja and other programs, including longer-reaching ballistic missiles.

In terms of European companies, Shtilierman mentioned his interest in collaborating on radar, missile target-seeking, and communications systems. He named Hensoldt, Saab, and Thales as potential suppliers of radar solutions, an area where Fire Point lacks expertise.

Fire Point has also previously described the Freyja interceptor being fitted with an infrared imaging seeker for the terminal phase, as well as a semi-active radar homing seeker from Diehl Defence of Germany.

Few details are available about the launch system, other than reports of a lightweight, mobile launcher of domestic origin.

Globally, there is a clear demand for alternatives to the increasingly hard-to-source Patriot, especially for anti-ballistic missile defense.

A video shows a PAC-2 in a test against a Lance ballistic missile:

MIM-104C Patriot PAC-2 vs. Lance TBM

Ukraine’s combination of battlefield experience, rapid innovation, and low-cost defense technologies could put it in a good position to fill the gap. Even if the Freyja ends up with a significantly lower kill rate per missile than the Patriot, if it is far cheaper, that would be less of a problem.

At the same time, it remains unclear if Fire Point is able to fulfil the promises it has made in terms of output. In the past, the company has said it aims to build at least seven of its Flamingo cruise missiles per day, for a total of 2,555 built annually. To reach this target, the firm might need to call upon foreign partnerships to help expand its production capacity. The same would likely be the case for Freyja. By way of comparison, in 2024, Lockheed Martin produced more than 500 PAC-3 MSEs, with a plan to increase this to 600 in 2025.

A video of the Flamingo cruise missile in action:

Випробувальний пуск ракети “Фламінго”

One unknown factor in this is the possibility that Ukraine and/or NATO allies in Europe might obtain additional licenses for local production of Patriot missiles. Zelensky wants Patriot production in Ukraine and has said he has been discussing it with the United States. Still, while these might address the production capacity issues for the weapons, it would still be a more expensive solution than what Fire Point is proposing and it would take years to realize any output.

For now, the FP-7.X appears to be an early-stage technology demonstrator, and turning it into the operational Freyja interceptor by 2027 will require overcoming massive technical and logistical hurdles — as well as holding off Russian air attacks in the meantime.

However, the program reflects a broader trend in Ukraine’s wartime defense sector: rapidly developing indigenous capabilities to fill critical gaps left by limited and/or unreliable foreign supplies. If Fire Point can translate its ambitions into a viable anti-ballistic missile system, Ukraine could gain not only a more sustainable means of defending its skies, but also a potentially attractive export alternative in a global market increasingly hungry for affordable air defense solutions.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The cost to connect each of the U.S. military’s Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System (LUCAS) one-way attack drones to space-based networks has risen from $5,000 to $25,000 a month, according to a new report. This is said to be the result of a switch from using the commercial Starlink network to its more secure government-focused cousin Starshield, which SpaceX demanded after extensive use of LUCAS drones in the latest conflict with Iran. The Pentagon has pushed back on the story, but it still highlights how critical SpaceX’s networks and other space services have become across the U.S. government, which TWZ has previously explored in detail.

Reuters first reported on the price increase to connect the datalinks on LUCAS drones to SpaceX’s space-based networks earlier today. The story cites anonymous sources, as well as Pentagon documents the outlet says it reviewed. This follows the recent announcement that the Pentagon is working to make LUCAS more autonomous with new artificial intelligence (AI) driven swarming capabilities, which could impact future connectivity demands.

Produced by SpektreWorks, LUCAS was developed in close cooperation with the U.S. military. It is a reverse-engineered clone of the Iranian-designed Shahed-136 and has a unit cost of around $35,000. The American drone already comes in multiple variations, and there is a related target drone design for use in training and test and evaluation activities. Versions fitted with miniature beyond-line-of-sight satellite datalinks, allowing for dynamic control and for their progress to be otherwise monitored after launch, have been a fixture in official pictures of LUCAS drones in the Middle East.

In the video in the social media post below, the satellite communications terminal can be seen hanging from a cord on a LUCAS drone said to have been recovered largely intact in Iraq.

The U.S. military announced it had begun fielding LUCAS drones operationally last December with a special operations-led task force in the Middle East. LUCAS’s official combat debut came in the opening wave of strikes on Iran on February 28. U.S. Navy Adm. Brad Cooper, head of U.S. Central Command, subsequently described the one-way attackers as an “indispensable” component of that operation, dubbed Epic Fury.

What we know about SpaceX’s reported upcharge for LUCAS

“Within weeks of the United States launching its bombing campaign, SpaceX executives met Pentagon officials and argued ​the military had been paying about $5,000 for connection per terminal while effectively using a higher tier of service worth closer to $25,000,” according to Reuters. “SpaceX argued the ⁠LUCAS drones were operating under conditions that aligned more closely with its aviation tier subscription rather than a lower priced land or mobility service. Pentagon officials argued that the $25,000 price tag – a monthly fee – was designed for aircraft, not kamikaze drones that used Starlink connection for a matter of minutes ​or hours.”

“The Pentagon, which was ramping up strikes on Iran, ultimately agreed to pay SpaceX’s proposed price increase,” Reuters‘ report added.

The story also said this reflected broader “tensions” between the Pentagon and SpaceX that have been growing recently over Starlink fees.

“The Fake News media has the story wrong, again,” top Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell subsequently wrote in a post on X. “The claims in this article are simply not based in reality and do not reflect the close, effective collaboration between our teams.”

When reached for comment by TWZ earlier today before Parnell’s post, the Pentagon did not directly address Reuters‘ report.

“The Department of War is committed to fostering a competitive environment for commercial satellite communications and is conducting comprehensive market research to continuously monitor commercial offerings that align with government requirements,” a Pentagon official told us. “We are actively engaging with industry to identify innovative solutions and new entrants, ensuring acquisitions are inclusive of a diverse range of capable vendors.”

“The Commercial Satellite Communications Office is working on additional options with other proliferated low earth orbit partners as part of its strategy to leverage the unprecedented capabilities provided by the commercial SATCOM industry,” that same official added. “The U.S. Space Force is operating in accordance with the terms and conditions of its contracts.”

TWZ has also reached out to SpaceX for more information.

“It is a violation of commercial Starlink terms of service to use the terminal for weapon systems. This applies to all users and is shut down when discovered,” Elon Musk, who is the founder and CEO of SpaceX among his other endeavors, had written on X on March 1 in response to a post about LUCAS making use of Starlink. “There is a separate network called Starshield, which is operated by the US government. This is not under SpaceX control.”

SpaceX’s networks and the LUCAS cost equation

Though described as a “monthly fee,” Reuters‘ report indicates that the U.S. military pays the $25,000 only once to employ a LUCAS drone. As the piece points out, the Pentagon reportedly argued that it should get to pay the lower $5,000 rate because it was only using the network to support LUCAS in timeframes measured in “minutes ​or hours.” This is also in line with Reuters describing the added cost as effectively approaching doubling the LUCAS drone’s $35,000 unit price.

The entire point of these one-way-attack drones is to offer a lower-cost complement to traditional exquisite long-range strike munitions. The Tomahawk cruise missile, the unit cost of a current-generation version of which is generally said to be in the $2 to $2.5 million range, is often used as a point of comparison, although they are far from equal in many ways. The underlying argument for LUCAS also relies on the drone being relatively cheap and easy to produce, as well as employ in large volumes. TWZ laid all of this out in a detailed case for the Pentagon acquiring exactly these kinds of drones in mass, which we published just three months before LUCAS was confirmed to be in operational service.

A combined price tag of some $60,000 (the unit cost plus one month’s fee to connect to Starshield, as reported by Reuters) would still be far less expensive than the cost of a single Tomahawk. Using Starlink/Starshield terminals to begin with, beyond their connectivity advantages, offers the benefit of miniaturized high-bandwidth hardware that is being produced at a commercial scale.

Plans to make LUCAS more autonomous through the addition of new swarming capabilities could affect future network connectivity requirements for the drones. This will be enabled by the integration of Shield AI’s Hivemind autonomy software, as you can read more about here.

Shield AI flies Hivemind AI Pilot on 6th Aircraft

As TWZ recently wrote:

“For the time being, the U.S. military demands a human operator is ‘in or on the loop’ for kinetic or otherwise potentially deadly actions, as opposed to letting autonomous weapons choose what targets to attack on their own without any extra authorization. While less controversial morally, this can also be a tactical hindrance, slowing the swarm’s potential and adding complexity and vulnerabilities to its operations. The debate around this choice will only get more heated as adversaries bypass this elected restriction in order to get an upper hand in future combat scenarios.”

“As we pointed out in our initial reporting on LUCAS’s emergence, the fact that some of the LUCAS drones already include miniature SATCOM terminals is very noteworthy. After all, ‘human in the loop’ swarming would not be possible without this form of communications at the beyond line-of-sight ranges these drones fly. At the same time, an entire swarm can be controlled in this manner, even if just a handful are equipped with SATCOM terminals. While a swarm can be mesh networked within line-of-sight, it has to relay all the important information back to an operator. By using some of the drones as SATCOM relay nodes, the entire swarm can be controlled remotely from most places on the planet.”

“Regardless, the Hivemind AI pilot will allow appropriately equipped LUCAS drones to perceive their environment, make decisions, and act autonomously without continuous human input. Unlike conventional autopilots tied to fixed flight paths, Hivemind is designed to dynamically adjust mission plans, react to unforeseen conditions, avoid obstacles, and carry out complex tasks with minimal operator oversight.”

An increase in fees to connect individual SATCOM terminals to SpaceX’s networks, as well as cost savings on hardware, might further push the Pentagon toward a hub-and-spoke mesh-like networking arrangement like the one described above. LUCAS drones could also be employed in other contexts where satellite connectivity throughout the course of a mission might not be required, including if used essentially as fire-and-forget missiles aimed at fixed target coordinates. A SATCOM terminal would not be necessary at all for this kind of mission set, although it would be beneficial.

There is also a question about the total bandwidth that might be required to support swarms of LUCAS drones. From Reuters‘ reporting today, the increased load on its networks was a central factor in SpaceX’s demands for higher fees after strikes on Iran began. That being said, as already mentioned, Starlink/Starshield terminals are already designed with relatively high bandwidth use in mind.

These same considerations will apply to current and future programs that rely heavily on SpaceX’s satellite communications networks.

Dependence on SpaceX and U.S. national security

Specific cost figures aside, the LUCAS drone’s reliance on Starlink/Starshield underscores SpaceX’s dominance in the satellite communications market globally. It also highlights how essential the company’s space-based networks have already become for the U.S. military. TWZ explored this reality in detail amid open feuding between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk last year. The relationship between Trump and Musk has since rebounded, with the latter accompanying the President on his recent state visit to China.

Reuters reported today that there are some 10,000 satellites in SpaceX’s constellation supporting Starlink and Starshield, and that this represents more than 60 percent of all satellites currently in orbit. The company’s space-based networks, far and away, dominate the commercial satellite communications space globally. Offerings from competitors like OneWeb and Amazon Leo are more limited in scale and scope.

Watch SpaceX deploy Starlink satellites into space

This is reflected in the U.S. government’s ever-growing use of Starlink/Starshield on aircraft, ships, and in settings on land. This includes integration on some very high-value assets, including the U.S. Marine Corps’ VH-92 Patriot presidential helicopters and U.S. Navy aircraft carriers. There has also been a steadily growing push to use these networks to support tactical operations, as now highlighted by the link to LUCAS. The U.S. military had first demonstrated the ability to use Starlink to transmit targeting data years ago.

The U.S. government’s increasing use of Starlink/Starshield has already prompted operational security questions, even just in the context of supporting day-to-day peacetime operations, as you can read more about here. Starshield is designed to be more secure to help address these concerns for government customers.

At the same time, heavy use of Starlink on both sides of the conflict in Ukraine, including as a means of guiding one-way attackers in the air and at sea, has further underscored potential risks associated with the use of the networks in tactical scenarios. SpaceX and CEO Musk have faced particularly significant criticism in the past over limiting some Ukrainian use of the network. Actions SpaceX took earlier this year to block unregistered Starlink terminals also had major consequences for Russian forces, which were sent scrambling to find alternatives to fill the massive resulting communications gaps.

What SpaceX might have been prepared to do if the Pentagon did not agree to pay increased fees to support LUCAS is unknown. We also do not know what kind of protections are currently baked into U.S. contracts with SpaceX to prevent government users from being suddenly disconnected without warning. Regardless, as noted earlier, the Pentagon could deploy LUCAS swarms with just a handful of drones equipped with terminals to relay the critical info needed to control the rest of the formation, and LUCAS can still be used as a fire-and-forget weapon without any beyond line-of-sight connectivity, although this would greatly curtail its flexibility and, in some cases, its efficacy.

As the Pentagon official noted to TWZ today, there is a push to explore commercial alternatives to Starlink/Starshield and promote further competition in this space. At the same time, part of the attractiveness of Starlink/Starshield for the U.S. government has been the relatively low costs and other benefits associated with leveraging such well-established networks, as well as the knowledge base that comes along with that pedigree. Just today, the U.S. Space Force announced it had finalized a new Other Transaction Authority (OTA) agreement with SpaceX, valued at $2.29 billion, for work on the Space Data Network (SDN) Backbone program. The SDN is tied to work on new space-based sensing and targeting capabilities, particularly for missile defense, which could now feed into the Golden Dome initiative.

Beyond satellite communications, SpaceX is reportedly also now a critical player in U.S. military efforts to increasingly move air and ground moving target indicator (AMTI/GMTI) tasks into orbit.

On top of all this, SpaceX is also by far the top provider of space launch services globally, as well as other space-related services, including for the U.S. government. The core elements of Golden Dome, including the sustainment of planned batteries of space-based interceptors, require reliable, routine access to space at a frequency that only SpaceX can provide within budget constraints.

SpaceX looks set to remain a dominant force in this market space worldwide for the foreseeable future, and it continues to expand its presence, driven heavily by commercial demand. The company’s government contracts, though substantial, only account for around a fifth of its annual revenue, according to Reuters.

Despite the Pentagon’s response to the particulars of Reuters’ story today, being so heavily reliant on one provider for critical technologies still raises important questions not just for LUCAS, but for other efforts across the U.S. military that rely on robust and secure satellite communications connectivity.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

For thieves looking to strip Los Angeles for parts, copper has become a fast-moving currency.

The problem has become so persistent that the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is now asking for its own armed police force to protect vulnerable utility equipment, street lighting and critical infrastructure, insisting that the department’s contracted and unarmed security guards aren’t cutting it.

“They lack the authority to detain or arrest suspects, intervene in crimes in progress, conduct searches, or carry firearms for enforcement purposes,” according to a May 21 report from the city agency. “Delays hinder timely intervention, reduce investigative effectiveness, and contribute to repeat victimization of LADWP facilities.”

Under DWP’s current “observe and report” security model, an officer who sees someone cutting a fence or stripping copper from a transformer has little authority apart from yelling a warning or making a 911 call, according to the department report.

The proposal asks for 20 to 50 sworn officers to start, hired over a five-year period, along with support staff. If approved, the force would give the agency’s officers the authority to carry a firearm, make arrests and investigate thefts. The plan was scheduled to be discussed Thursday by the City Council.

The push comes as citywide service requests for streetlight repairs have surged over the last several years.

L.A.’s historic streetlights outside the Bureau of Street Lighting near Virgil Avenue and Santa Monica Boulevard.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

The city logged 14,328 electronic streetlight service requests in 2018, according to data from the Bureau of Street Lighting. Requests have tripled since then, reaching an all-time high of 46,079 in 2024, the last full year of available data.

Mayor Karen Bass’ office said in March that copper thefts are a leading cause of streetlight outages. Repairs have been backlogged for months.

Prices for the metal are at an all-time high, driven by major supply disruptions in Indonesia and Chile, and soaring demand from artificial intelligence data centers and electric grid infrastructure. Thieves typically exchange the metal for cash at recycling centers, where it can fetch up to $5.30 per pound. The City Council last year approved a program offering up to $5,000 for information in metal and wire theft cases.

Theft losses alone exceed $1 million annually, according to DWP.

Establishing a new police force would require changing the city charter, meaning voters will have a say come the November midterm elections. Authorities will also need to obtain state legislative approval for the plan.

Officials said rolling out the police department would cost $9.7 million over three years, plus up to $6 million annually to pay for staffing. They maintain those costs are less than the $46 million combined DWP spends each year on private security contractors and unarmed staff security.

On Hill Street in downtown L.A., streetlights have been targeted by thieves and vandals.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

Any cost overflows would be paid for by DWP customers.

Timothy O’Connor, executive director for the Los Angeles Office of Public Accountability, a spending watchdog, said his office is not convinced that the agency could minimize long-term cost creep, or that the new force would offset enough costs to justify the program. The proposed force of a few dozen officers, he said, would be too small to get the job done.

“Theft losses at DWP are real and are increasing. However, eliminating these losses is not enough to offset the proposed costs,” he said. “Furthermore, DWP will be unable to fully eliminate theft given the diffuse nature of the DWP system.”

But O’Connor also said the department is faced with real security risks like those posed by drone attacks or terrorism threats, which he said “appear to justify the proposal at some level.”

In February, a man shot himself after he drove his car through the perimeter fence of a power substation while carrying explosives and several firearms. Dubbing the incident an attempted terrorist attack, officials said the episode could have caused catastrophic infrastructure damage.

David Levitus, executive director of the advocacy group LA Forward, said he was surprised to learn of the proposal so late in Los Angeles’ ongoing charter reform process, which his organization has monitored closely.

“The fact that this is being dumped in late May — what’s the rush?” Levitus said. “I think we really need to be wary of creating new police departments in general, but especially without a clear case and clear constraints and accountability mechanisms.”

If you’re heading off on a staycation or a day trip this summer, beware of hidden costs on UK toll roads

Those setting off on a staycation or enjoyable day out should bear in mind that their journey might come with some unexpected expenses. There are multiple toll roads scattered across the UK, with some potentially costing over £15 for a return journey.

Branded the UK’s priciest motorway, the M6 in the Midlands, which stretches over 230 miles, can set drivers back more than £10 for a return trip – while not a massive sum, it could quickly chip away at your lunch money or similar. The M6 Toll, the 27-mile route between Cannock and Coleshill, cost £900million to build.

Northgate Vehicle Hire, a commercial vehicle leasing specialist supporting businesses nationwide, has flagged that the M6 and other toll roads are alerting travellers to these concealed expenses.

Discussing the M6, they note that for a standard family car, a return journey runs to approximately £10.50.

Meanwhile, those behind the wheel of a heavy goods vehicle could face a bill of £20.20 for just a single journey, while a motorhome costs £19.20 one-way.

The M6 connects drivers to major tourist destinations during the summer months, including Drayton Manor Resort, and reportedly saw 45,749 vehicles per day in 2025.

Spencer Davi, Sales and Marketing Director at Northgate Vehicle Hire, offered some insight on toll roads: “Toll charges are a real consideration, especially for those making regular cross-border trips.

“What surprised us most about this research is how much variation there is across roads within the UK.”

However, while the M6 may hold the title of the most expensive motorway and toll road, experts have warned that there is another UK route that will set drivers back considerably more.

Specialists at Northgate Vehicle Hire revealed that the London Congestion Charge is in fact the UK’s most expensive crossing for cars.

Costing drivers £15.00, the crossing is a key route for anyone planning a trip to the capital this summer, with the charge applicable to drivers entering the Congestion Charge Zone between 7am – 6pm Monday to Friday, and 12pm to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays, and bank holidays.

The UK’s most expensive toll roads for cars

1. London Congestion Charge, London – £15.00
2. M6, Midlands – £10.50
3. Durham Road User Charge Zone, Durham – £5
4. Mersey Tunnels – Queensway: Liverpool – Birkenhead and Mersey Tunnels – Kingsway: Liverpool – Wallasey – £4.60

For those considering a staycation this year, it’s well worth doing your homework on your route beforehand, as some roads can come with a surprisingly hefty price tag.

As someone who is “not the best person with bugs and stuff,” Stephanie Bernaba never imagined herself becoming an outdoorsy mom.

But the mother of three is getting more daring as gas prices and other travel costs make vacations more expensive. Bernaba, 47, has been steering her family toward local beaches, bike rides and hiking trails near their home in coastal Rhode Island instead of the faraway trips they once took.

“I’ve been trying to do more of that because one, it’s quality time. Two, it’s fresh air. And three, we’re not spending an arm and a leg,” she said.

That kind of calibration is shaping the summer travel season, which gets its traditional start in the U.S. with the long Memorial Day holiday weekend. Higher fuel prices resulting from the Iran war and other inflationary pressures are making most forms of travel costlier as people in many parts of the world form their plans.

The U.S. Travel Assn. expects annual travel spending to grow by a modest 1% this year, powered largely by domestic leisure travel despite the FIFA World Cup giving soccer fans from other countries a reason to visit the U.S. Airfares have climbed around the world along with the price of jet fuel as the war constrains global oil supplies.

Sticking closer to home may not cushion the sticker shock. The nonprofit Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimated Americans would collectively spend an extra $3.5 billion on gasoline over the holiday weekend. The average price for a gallon of regular gas in the U.S. was $4.56 on Thursday compared to $3.18 a year ago, according to the motor club AAA.

Other travel expenses have gone up too. The latest consumer price index showed airfares were 20.7% higher in April from a year earlier, the cost of intracity transit, such as buses and subways, rose 5.6%, lodging cost 4.3% more, and eating out got 3.6% pricier.

Changing travel patterns

Despite elevated prices, industry forecasts suggest Americans still want to get away, even if it means replacing long trips with long weekends, choosing destinations closer to home and finding ways to cut costs by cooking meals or using buses and trains instead of driving.

AAA predicted that 45 million U.S. residents would travel at least 50 miles from home between Thursday and Monday. The Transportation Security Administration said it expects to screen 18.3 million passengers from Thursday to next Wednesday.

Many households are planning summer vacations but making tradeoffs such as shorter trips or cheaper lodging, according to Bank of America analysts. Mastercard said in a recent report that consumers appeared increasingly focused on value and were adjusting their destinations and timing instead of not going away at all.

“Generally, it’s certainly more of a demand reshuffling than a demand softening,” David Tinsley, a senior economist at Bank of America Institute, said.

For the Bernaba family, that has meant trading a big vacation for a shorter trip nearby this summer. Their scaled-back itinerary still is pricey: more than $400 for a ferry to Martha’s Vineyard for their car and passengers, and about $800 a night for each of the two hotel rooms the family of five needs.

Another family that had planned to join them backed out after seeing the price tag.

“The pinch is being felt all the way around,” Bernaba said.

Analysts have increasingly described travel spending as “K-shaped,” with higher-income households continuing to spend while lower-income families pull back or opt out entirely. Bank of America said lower-income households were significantly more likely to report having no summer travel plans this year.

Travelers are confronting other stressors besides cost.

Airlines around the world have canceled flights and trimmed routes to save on fuel and operating costs, leaving passengers with fewer options. Recent U.S. government shutdowns — which caused major flight disruptions and long security lines — are likely still fresh in travelers’ minds. The conflict in the Middle East and broader geopolitical tensions add another layer of concern, especially for those considering trips abroad.

The various factors impacting travel right now have made planning trips more mentally taxing and may be pushing people toward simpler and more accessible vacations that feel easier to manage, said Marta Soligo, a tourism sociologist at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

“The keyword here is unpredictability,” Soligo said. “Tourists don’t like unpredictability.”

Quality over quantity

Jim Wang, a personal finance blogger who lives in Maryland with his wife and four children, said his family’s original plan to travel to Spain to see a full solar eclipse in August began to unravel once they looked at the logistics.

Beyond thousands of dollars in airfare, the trip would have required multiple connecting flights, plus a car rental to reach northern Spain, where the path of totality is expected to pass.

“It’s like, ‘Oh, I don’t know if I want to see the eclipse that much,’” Wang said.

Instead, Wang’s family plans to head this summer to the Lake Tahoe area straddling California and Nevada, where they can stay at a relative’s cabin for free, hike and enjoy a slower pace with limited cellphone service. His wife’s parents and sister expect to join them.

“We’re still going to travel. It’ll just be different,” Wang said. “The vacations are no longer as grand for the adults. But for our kids, it’s still exciting.”

Nancy McGehee, a Virginia Tech hospitality professor who studies consumer behavior, said travelers are increasingly focusing more on the “why than the where” when it comes to vacations.

“What we’re seeing is people are saying, ‘All right, we can’t do that big splashy trip we wanted to do, but what else can we do?’” McGehee said. “It’s more quality over quantity that we’re seeing people go for.”

Back in Rhode Island, Bernaba has accepted that travel may look different for her family for a while.

“I think that’s probably why my mind has gone to doing more nature-y things,” she said. “Let’s learn how to use the earth to enjoy ourselves because that’s not going to cost as much money.”

Yamat writes for the Associated Press.

California and a coalition of other Democratic-led states are suing the Trump administration over new limits on federal borrowing by aspiring nurses, physician’s assistants, therapists, social workers, mental health practitioners and other healthcare workers, arguing the changes will further reduce a struggling but vital workforce.

“This case is about protecting access to education, protecting our healthcare workforce, and protecting patients who rely on these providers every single day,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said during a virtual news conference Tuesday. “The Trump administration is going out of its way to make it harder and more expensive for students to pursue the advanced degrees necessary to serve their communities and pursue meaningful careers that allow them to support themselves and their families.”

Bonta said the new limits on loans sought by nursing and other healthcare students — which the U.S. Department of Education initiated in response to Republicans passing broader student loan caps as part of last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act — was an illegal overreach by the agency that was “deeply shortsighted” and went beyond the scope of the legislation.

“Congress can act,” he said. “But what the Department of Education can’t do is — contrary to law and in an arbitrary and capricious way and in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act — redefine what a professional student is.”

In response to the litigation, Trump administration officials defended the new rules, saying they will help student borrowers in the long run by driving down schooling costs at universities nationwide and preventing them from taking on too much debt.

“After decades of unchecked student loan borrowing that gave schools no reason to control costs, these commonsense loan caps — created by Congress — are already incentivizing colleges and universities to lower tuition,” Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said in a statement to The Times.

Kent said Bonta and his fellow Democratic litigants “are more concerned about institutions’ bottom-line [than] American students and families’ ability to access affordable postsecondary education.” As one example of institutions responding to loan caps by lowering costs, Kent pointed to UC Irvine reducing the costs of its master’s in business programs by up to 38% to keep them below a federal loan cap for such programs.

The One Big Beautiful Bill, passed by Congress in July 2025, placed new limits on student loans, which could previously be sought for the full cost of such degrees. Starting this July, applicants categorized as “graduate students” will be capped at borrowing $20,500 per year and $100,000 in total, while applicants categorized as “professional students” will be allowed to borrow up to $50,000 annually and $200,000 in total.

On May 1, the U.S. Department of Education issued a new rule defining the “professional student” category as including those pursuing degrees to become doctors, pharmacists, dentists, veterinarians, lawyers, various medical specialists, pastors and other religious academics, and excluding those pursuing nursing and other advanced healthcare degrees.

In announcing the change, Kent said it would “simplify our complex student loan repayment system and better align higher education with workforce needs,” “drive a sea change in higher education by holding universities accountable for outcomes and putting significant downward pressure on the cost of tuition,” and “benefit borrowers who will no longer be pushed into insurmountable debt to finance degrees that do not pay off.”

Others fiercely disagreed, including healthcare industry leaders who also had objected to the rule change during a public comment period. Some said the changes would simply increase student reliance on less favorable, private-sector loans.

The American Assn. of Colleges of Nursing, in a statement, said it and its members were “angered by the Department of Education’s failure to support the nursing profession as the demand for patient care services rises.”

Nearly 150 members of Congress — including more than a dozen Republicans — wrote a letter the day after the rule was promulgated expressing “disappointment” over the exclusion of post-baccalaureate nursing degrees.

“At a time when our nation is facing a health care shortage, especially in primary care, now is not the time to cut off the student pipeline to these programs,” the lawmakers argued.

Rachel Zaentz, a spokesperson for the University of California, which is not party to the lawsuit but operates a vast network of public health programs, said in a statement Tuesday that UC “strongly opposed” the administration’s new caps on federal loans for nurses and other health professionals, which she said “will be felt most strongly by lower-income graduate students.”

“UC will continue to do all we can to ensure that cost is not a barrier for anyone who wants to pursue higher education, and we will continue to advocate with our federal partners for the programs and policies that make this possible,” Zaentz said.

Bonta rejected the administration’s argument that the new caps would help students pursuing a dream of a medical career avoid taking on too much debt — calling it “tone deaf.” He said those students are already “struggling with all costs right now” thanks to the Trump administration’s tariffs, war in Iran and lax approach to regulating monopolies and other big business.

He also rejected the idea that the new loan caps would force institutions to reduce costs for students, calling that “wishful thinking.”

The lawsuit is the 68th filed by Bonta’s office against the second Trump administration. Joining Bonta in the lawsuit — which was filed in the U.S. District Court in Maryland — were the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, as well as the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania.

Times staff writer Jaweed Kaleem contributed to this report.

It could cost nearly $1.2 trillion to develop, field, and operate a new missile defense shield like the one the Trump administration proposes to establish under its Golden Dome initiative, according to a new estimate. Deploying and sustaining a constellation of 7,800 space-based anti-missile interceptors accounts for more than 60 percent of that projected price tag. This puts a particular spotlight on the potential costs of what is arguably viewed as the most critical and controversial aspect of the Golden Dome plan. At the same time, even with this grand investment, the ability of the space-based interceptor layer would only be able to engage 10 targets simultaneously, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

CBO released a detailed cost estimate of what it described as a notional “National Missile Defense System” yesterday. CBO’s $1.191 trillion figure covers various expenses over a 20-year timeframe. This is more than double the projected price tag that CBO had put forward last year. President Trump first announced plans for a new national missile defense architecture in January 2025. The initiative was originally dubbed Iron Dome before being renamed Golden Dome.

“The analysis is based on the objectives laid out in the President’s executive order titled ‘The Iron Dome for America.’ The Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) implementation of that order – an initiative now called the Golden Dome for America (GDA) – is in the early stages,” CBO’s latest estimate explains up front. “Although documents from DoD’s budget request for the 2027 fiscal year provide five-year projections of funding plans for GDA, details about what and how many systems will be deployed – the ‘objective architecture’ – have not been released, making it impossible to estimate the long-term cost of the GDA system being contemplated by DoD. In the absence of specific plans for GDA’s objective architecture, CBO has estimated the cost of a notional NMD architecture based on the defensive systems and capabilities that are called for in the executive order.”

“DoD’s stated cost appears to cover a shorter time frame than CBO’s analysis and may reflect a different scope of activities and budget categories. Even so, that stated cost is far lower than CBO’s estimate for a notional NMD architecture consistent with the ‘Iron Dome” executive order,” CBO’s assessment adds. “That difference suggests either that GDA’s objective architecture is more limited than CBO’s notional NMD system or that DoD expects significant funding from other accounts to contribute to GDA (or both). For example, procurement of interceptors might be funded directly through the services’ missile procurement accounts instead of the GDA fund.”

For its part, the Trump administration has most recently pegged the price tag for Golden Dome’s “objective architecture” at approximately $185 billion. Last year, President Trump himself had put forward a $175 billion figure, which he said would include systems to be fielded “in less than three years.” TWZ has noted on several occasions now that the administration’s estimates may just cover a portion of the planned Golden Dome architecture, which could easily cost hundreds of billions in total to field and operate.

CBO’s analysis is broken into six main elements – the space-based interceptor constellation, upper wide-area surface sites, lower wide-area surface sites, regional sectors, self-defense for four existing surface sites, and a space satellite constellation for tracking targets – as well as a collection of miscellaneous ancillary costs. The surface site and regional sector categories primarily consist of costs associated with expanding on existing land and sea-based anti-missile interceptor and sensor capabilities, such as Aegis Ashore, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, and the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI).

An all-new constellation of 7,800 space-based interceptors is, by far, the largest single component of CBO’s projection. This capability is estimated to cost $723 billion to acquire, and then another $1 billion annually to operate and maintain ($20 billion over 20 years), for a total of $743 billion. This is 60 percent of the total estimated $1.191 trillion price tag, and 70 percent of the projected acquisition costs.

CBO provides a detailed breakdown of how it arrived at these figures.

“The average cost per SBI [space-based interceptor] satellite would be $22 million. That average is for the initial 7,800 SBIs as well as the nearly 1,600 SBIs that would be needed each year thereafter because of the satellites’ short five-year service life. The need to periodically replace SBIs means that the acquisition costs would be spread over the life of the system,” according to the cost assessment. “The total is based on a cost of $500 per kilogram to launch the SBIs into orbit. Although that launch cost is lower than typical launch costs today, it is thought to be achievable using the new generation of heavy-lift rockets, such as the Space-X [sic] Starship, that are being developed. Even lower launch costs may be realized in the future, but that could have only a limited effect on total costs for the SBI layer because, even at $500 per kilogram, launch costs account for less than 5 percent of the total.”

“Both the very large number of SBIs needed to engage just 10 targets simultaneously and the SBIs’ short service life are the result of how the satellites move in orbit. To be close enough to reach their targets within the three to five minutes available in the boost phase, SBIs must be in LEO at altitudes of roughly 300 to 500 kilometers,” it continues. “However, the characteristics of satellite motion in LEO affect the size of constellations meant to provide continuous coverage over specific locations on Earth. (For boost-phase SBIs, “coverage” is relative to an ICBM’s [intercontinental ballistic missile] launch location, not the location of the ICBM’s target.)”

“Satellites in LEO cannot be fixed over specific points on Earth; they orbit in a band centered on the equator and bounded equally north and south by their orbital inclination (usually measured in degrees of latitude). Therefore, constellations of many SBIs are needed to ensure that a sufficient number (20, for example, if two shots are needed against 10 ICBMs) are always close enough to potential launch locations to reach targets during the boost phase,” the assessment adds. “The total number of satellites in a constellation depends mainly on the speed of the interceptors, how quickly they can be launched, the number of simultaneous targets the system needs to handle, and the latitudes to be covered.”

“Because atmospheric drag at the altitudes at which SBIs would orbit causes their orbits to decay over time, each satellite would need to be replaced roughly every 5 years. (By contrast, the service life of surface-based interceptors can be 20 years or more, and surface-based interceptors can be maintained and upgraded during that time.),” CBO also says. “For CBO’s notional constellation, roughly 30,000 satellites would be needed to keep 7,800 in orbit for 20 years.”

All this being said, CBO’s notional space-based interceptor architecture is still predicated only on defeating a relatively limited strike (a single wave of 10 ICBMs) from “a regional adversary,” a term typically used to describe countries like North Korea and Iran. The Trump administration has indicated in the past that Golden Dome is intended to defend against a much broader array of threats, including from peer adversaries like Russia and China.

Furthermore, CBO points out that its cost estimate does not include additional space-based interceptors designed to engage missiles during the mid-course portion of their flight, which are also being explored now as part of the Golden Dome plan.

“Although the notional NMD system analyzed by CBO would be far more capable than defenses the United States fields today, it would not be an impenetrable shield or be able to fully counter a large attack of the sort that Russia or China might be able to launch,” the latest cost estimate also stresses. “As a result, the strategic consequences of deploying an NMD system with the capacity considered here are unclear because they hinge on an adversary’s perception of the defense’s capability and how that adversary chose [sic] to respond.”

“Such a deployment could prompt regional adversaries to increase their inventories of long-range missiles (nuclear or conventional) or to pursue more effective countermeasures to improve their chances of penetrating the NMD system,” the assessment notes. “Peer or near-peer adversaries could overwhelm CBO’s notional NMD system with salvoes of many missiles in a large-scale attack with their current nuclear forces, although they still might choose to increase their arsenals of long-range missiles (both nuclear and conventional) to ensure they maintain that capability.”

With this in mind, “DoD could opt to build a national missile defense system that was smaller or larger than (or altogether different from) CBO’s notional system. A larger system designed to handle a full-scale Russian ICBM attack, for example, could include more space-based interceptors or more NGIs at the three upper wide-area surface layer sites,” it also cautions. “It could also include more interceptors at lower levels. A smaller system, by contrast, might be able to engage fewer missiles or protect fewer areas. The total number of regional sectors in CBO’s notional system is based on providing some terminal coverage to the entire country as suggested by the language in the ‘Iron Dome’ executive order.”

As mentioned, putting interceptors in space has been one of, if not the highest profile aspect of the stated Iron Dome/Golden Dome plan from the very start. Space-based weapons were also a central element of the Reagan-era Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), which was directly referenced in the original executive order outlining the new missile defense initiative. Infamously dubbed “Star Wars” by its critics, SDI never came close to achieving its ambitious goals. Its planned anti-missile capabilities in orbit were especially hampered by technical challenges and high costs.

The U.S. Space Force is already leading a new SBI program, with a stated goal of demonstrating a relevant capability integrated into the larger Golden Dome architecture by 2028. Space Force has already awarded deals with a combined value of $3.2 billion to 12 companies for SBI-related work. Several firms, including Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Anduril, have already announced work on prototype interceptor designs.

The Northrop Grumman video below includes a computer-generated clip depicting a space-based interceptor engaging a target outside the Earth’s atmosphere, starting at 0:13 in the runtime.

Northrop Grumman Third Quarter 2025 Highlights

Over the past year and a half or so, U.S. military officials have voiced particular support for the space-based component of Golden Dome, saying that advances in relevant technologies in the decades since SDI make it a more viable concept today. They have also downplayed the costs, as well as the geopolitical ramifications of further weaponizing space, as necessary to defend Americans against growing missile threats.

“I think there’s a lot of technical challenges,” Chief of Space Operations Gen. Chance Saltzman said during a live interview as part of Defense One‘s State of Defense 2025: Air Force and Space Force virtual conference last year. “I am so impressed by the innovative spirit of the American space industry. I’m pretty convinced that we will be able to technically solve those challenges.”

“Depends on where you sit, right, you know? But to say that it’s the responsibility for the U.S. government to protect its citizens from emerging threats makes perfect sense to me,” he added at that time when asked about the potentially destabilizing impacts of Golden Dome. “And we clearly see a country like the PRC [People’s Republic of China] investing heavily in these kinds of threats, whether it’s hypersonic [weapons], whether it’s threats from space. And so now it’s time for the U.S. government to step up to the responsibilities to protect American citizens from those threats.”

“We’re basically responding to a warfighting domain where our adversaries have already put interceptors in space, and we want to make sure that we rebalance that in terms of deterrence,” Saltzman said more recently in response to a question from our Howard Altman at a roundtable on the sidelines of the Air & Space Forces Association’s (AFA) annual Warfare Symposium in February.

“Interceptors by definition refer to a handful of well-acknowledged capabilities that other countries have, like ground and air-launched anti-satellite missiles or capabilities like the SJ-21, which has a grappling arm,” a Space Force spokesperson later clarified to TWZ when asked for further details about the “interceptors in space” Saltzman had mentioned.

This all highlights the very real prospect of actual fighting in space during future conflicts, something the U.S. military is increasingly preparing for, as you can read about more here. What would be necessary to protect 7,800 anti-missile interceptors in orbit, as well as critical associated space-based sensors and communications constellations, could easily add to Golden Dome’s total cost.

As CBO makes clear in its latest assessment, much is still unknown publicly about the actual scale and scope of Golden Dome, and what it might therefore cost in the end. At the same time, space-based interceptors are a very real part of the planned architecture, with work underway now to develop those capabilities.

The concept that CBO has outlined already involves an extreme expenditure of money and resources, all for a capability it still assesses to be useful only against relatively limited barrages from rogue states. Those are threats that could well be addressed using far less expensive surface-based systems, though not ones that can intercept targets in their boost phase.

As underscored now by CBO’s latest cost projection, a relevant constellation of interceptors in space remains likely to be the most costly and complex aspect of Golden Dome, if it comes to fruition at all.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Picking the wildest fantasy promoted by President Trump as a basis for public policy is increasingly challenging — is it his yarn about schoolchildren being secretly abducted from their classrooms and given sex-changing operations? The notion that the vaccines given to children are like “a vat, like a big glass, of stuff pumped into their bodies?”

Here’s one that has disrupted the economics of renewable energy generation and will cost Americans billions of dollars: It’s Trump’s “completely weird war on wind power in the United States,” based on a sheaf of “fact-free arguments.”

That judgment comes from Steven Cohen, a climate policy expert at Columbia University, who points out that wind already accounts for 10.5% of U.S. energy generation, that it’s destined to continue growing — and that most of it is generated today in red states such as Texas, Oklahoma, Iowa and Kansas.

There is no question that Trump’s weird war against wind is full blown. On the day of his second inauguration, he issued an executive order shutting down all new permits for offshore wind farms and ordered the Interior Department to review existing permits.

A federal judge in Massachusetts blocked the executive order in December, and his orders suspending work on existing offshore wind projects have been halted by other federal judges. The Trump administration has blocked or delayed as many as 165 wind projects on private land, citing “national security” concerns, according to the American Clean Power Assn.

Most recently, Trump has reached agreements with offshore wind firms in which the government will pay them a combined $2 billion to abandon their U.S. projects.

At some level, this crusade resembles Trump’s misguided effort to revive the American coal industry, which is on the glide path to inevitable extinction. In that case, Trump is waging an explicitly partisan and ideological battle. “We’re ending Joe Biden’s war on beautiful, clean coal,” he declared last April.

Trump’s anti-wind program is part of his campaign to dismantle U.S. renewables policy because of its roots in the Biden administration.

Additionally, multiple commentators conjecture that his hostility to wind originated in 2011, when he groused that an offshore wind farm would be visible from one of his golf courses in Scotland. He sued to thwart the “ugly” project, and lost.

But Trump has mustered other arguments against wind, on- and offshore, none of which holds water.

During a cabinet meeting in July 2025, he called wind “a very expensive form of energy.” In fact, on average it’s cheaper than natural gas, coal and nuclear generation. Perhaps more important, the cost has been coming down sharply as technology improves and the sector reaches critical mass: falling to eight cents from 21 cents per kilowatt-hour from 2010 to 2024 for offshore projects, and to 3.4 cents from 11.3 cents for land-based wind farms over the same period.

Trump blamed wind turbines for mass killing whales and birds. Neither assertion is correct.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a federal agency, says “there are no known links between large whale deaths and ongoing offshore wind activities.”

The Audubon Society reported in January that although wind turbines can present hazards to birds, “developers can effectively manage these risks without significantly increasing project costs.” The biggest risks to birds come from the climate: “Two-thirds of North American birds are at increasing risk of extinction from global temperature rise,” the society reported — a threat that wind power can ameliorate.

Trump spokeswoman Taylor Rogers didn’t respond to my questions about the derivation of his anti-wind stance, but told me by email only that “President Trump has been clear: hard-earned taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be wasted on unreliable and costly wind farms that pose serious threats to our national security. Instead, we should be strengthening and expanding our infrastructure that produces reliable, affordable, and secure energy like natural gas plants.”

That brings us to the recent deals with offshore wind developers. The largest single deal, signed in March, was with the French firm TotalEnergies, which is to receive approximately $1 billion from the federal government to abandon all of its U.S. offshore wind projects and invest instead in oil and gas projects, including a liquefied natural gas export facility in Texas.

In his March 23 announcement of the deal, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum called offshore wind “one of the most expensive, unreliable, environmentally disruptive, and subsidy-dependent schemes ever forced on American ratepayers and taxpayers.”

This is what Huck Finn would call a “stretcher,” given the decades of subsidies spooned out to the oil and gas industry, reaching more than $30 billion a year in federal and state tax credits, indulgent regulation of pollution and low-cost access to federal lands. Indeed, the investment firm Lazard recently reported that renewables, including wind, are a cost-competitive form of generation even without subsidies. (Lazard’s calculation is of the “levelized cost of energy,” meaning the average cost over a generating plant’s lifetime.)

TotalEnergies fell into lockstep with the Interior Department in its own announcement, explaining its willingness to renounce U.S. offshore wind power because “offshore wind developments in the United States, unlike those in Europe, are costly,” echoing the agency’s position that “the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest.” Never mind that one factor that makes U.S. offshore wind development costly compared with Europe is the Trump administration’s opposition.

The government subsequently reached an agreement to pay the French company Ocean Winds $885 million to walk away from two offshore wind projects, including one in the waters off California. Ocean Winds described the deal as one driven chiefly by economics, but hinted at pressure from the White House.

“We welcome the opportunity to engage constructively with the administration on this agreement and acknowledge the clarity they have provided with this decision and deal,” Michael Brown, the chief executive of Ocean Winds North America, said when the deal was announced last month. “Our priority remains disciplined capital allocation and delivering reliable energy solutions that create long-term value for ratepayers, partners, and shareholders.”

The TotalEnergies deal, which the government has described as a “refund” of money the firm paid for its offshore leades, raised the hackles of congressional Democrats, who assert that it violates the law and constitution in multiple ways.

“We will hold you accountable for this billion-dollar ripoff,” Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee and Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael), ranking member of the House Committee on Natural Resources, warned TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné in an April 29 letter.

Among other infirmities Raskin and Huffman alleged, the government’s national security rationale for canceling offshore wind leases looks “fabricated”; the payout violates the statutory formula for compensation for canceled leases; the money is to come from a fund designed only to pay court-ordered judgments and settlements of lawsuits, which don’t exist in this case; and includes a provision preventing the deal from being reviewed by a court.

The last of those provisions would have to be authorized by Congress, the letter states, asking for documents and a response from the company by Wednesday. Committee spokespersons weren’t available to say whether they received a response from TotalEnergies, and the company didn’t respond to my request for comment. I received no response from the Department of the Interior.

The California Energy Commission has opened an investigation into the Ocean Winds deal.

“The Trump Administration is recklessly spending billions of taxpayer dollars on backroom deals that would turn back the clock on innovation” CEC Chair David Hochschild said. “Taxpayer dollars should be used to build a sustainable energy future, not to pay to make projects disappear.”

What’s especially wasteful about Trump’s crusade against wind power is that it’s almost certain to be time-limited.

It’s hardly debatable that renewables such as solar and wind will be our principal sources of energy in the future; holding back the clock achieves nothing but injecting uncertainty into investment decisions that need to be made now, at a time when the price of oil is on the upswing thanks to Trump’s Iran adventure and Europe and China are racing to transition away from fossil fuels, while the U.S. remains becalmed by ideology.

“In the long run, fossil fuels will be used for petrochemicals and not for burning,” Cohen told me. “Fifty years from now, people are going to be amazed that we burned these rare, useful hydrocarbons for fuel, when the sun was just sitting up there providing an essentially infinite source of energy.”

The holidaymaker revealed how he enjoyed a week-long holiday at a budget price

A social media user has wowed travel fans after sharing how much he spent on a week’s holiday in Mexico. The holidaymaker explained his bargain travel hack in a TikTok post shared under the username @Byseyi.

In the viral video, Byseyi revealed he spent £360 per person on a last-minute holiday to Mexico. He said: “So this is one travel tip that I don’t really hear that many people talk about. And this is actually how me and my wife travelled to Mexico for a week for around £360 per person, and that’s flights and accommodation.”

The TikTok creator claims: “So if you’re able to travel last-minute, go and look at TUI’s last-minute flight deals on the flight section of their website. Because what happens is they’re trying to get rid of some of these last-minute flights and not have empty seats going. So we ended up booking a flight for two people to go to Cancun, Mexico, for £538 for both of us.

“Managed to find some good accommodation in Tulum that was cheap for £185. And even right now, if you go on the website, you’ll see a flight to the Dominican Republic for £384 if you’re able to travel in the month of May.

“So it’s really just for those people, maybe you had a holiday that got cancelled and you’re trying to plan a new thing, or you have the flexibility to just travel last minute. So it doesn’t apply to everyone, but for those that it can work for, you can get something good for cheap.”

The video gained over 115k views and 14k likes on TikTok. Replying to the video, a viewer said: “Thanks for reminding me being fully remote is a win.” A second comment read: “A digital nomads dream lol …let me go check out TUI.” A third social media user wrote: “Yep! TUI got me to Aruba for £196 return, directttt! best!”

Someone else shared: “I always like these deals but they don’t work for people who like to explore more than one city in a country. But I think it’s great when you are simply looking for anywhere to go to.”

Another response said: “How close to the departure date did you book?” The travel lover replied: “Booked on the 23rd of Feb, flew out 3rd of March.”

Passengers looking for last-minute flights can browse deals on TUI’s website, where there’s a section dedicated to cheap flights. Customers can filter their search by departure date, with options ranging from within seven days to three months. Alternatively, customers planning further ahead can refine their search by month.

Chris Logan, Commercial Director at TUI UK and Ireland, said: “If you’ve got a bit of flexibility, our last-minute flight deals can be a brilliant way to grab a great-value getaway. Flying from over 20 airports across the UK, making it easy to pick a date, pack a bag and set off from a nearby airport. There’s a great choice of destinations on offer too – from European favourites like Spain and Greece, to long-haul escapes across the Caribbean, including Mexico, the Dominican Republic and Jamaica, as well as Florida.

“These direct flights include 10kg of hand luggage as standard, with the option to add more, upgrade for extra space or enjoy a more premium travel experience. It’s always worth checking back – you might find something that gets you away sooner than you think.”