drone

The U.S. Air Force has formally designated Northrop Grumman’s Project Talon drone as the YFQ-48A and described it as a “strong contender” to be part of its future Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) fleets. This follows news that the service has handed contracts to nine companies to refine a wide array of designs under Increment 2 of its CCA program. Northrop Grumman, together with its subsidiary Scaled Composites, only lifted the lid on Project Talon earlier this month, as you can read more about in our initial report here.

YFQ-48A is the third ‘fighter drone’ designation the U.S. military has now applied to a CCA-type design. The service announced in March that the drones General Atomics and Anduril have been developing under Increment 1 of the CCA program had received the designations YFQ-42A and YFQ-44A, respectively. However, the Project Talon design is not part of Increment 1, as we will come back to later on.

“The MDS designation highlights the ongoing partnership between the Air Force and Northrop Grumman and acknowledges the continued progress of the YFQ-48A as a strong contender in the CCA program,” according to an official Air Force release.

“We are encouraged by Northrop Grumman’s continued investment in developing advanced semi-autonomous capabilities,” Air Force Brig. Gen. Jason Voorheis, the service’s Program Executive Officer for Fighters and Advanced Aircraft, said in a statement. “Their approach aligns with our strategy to foster competition, drive industry innovation, and deliver cutting-edge technology at speed and scale.”

“Northrop Grumman’s commitment to innovation, low-cost manufacturing, and calculated risk-taking aligns perfectly with the CCA acquisition strategy and the Secretary of War’s Acquisition Transformation Strategy,” Air Force Col. Timothy Helfrich, Director of the Agile Development Office, also said. “Project Talon is a testament to their ability to push boundaries and experiment with new technologies, ultimately advancing solutions that could enhance the future of airpower.”

While details about the Project Talon drone itself remain limited, Northrop Grumman has made clear that it is based on lessons learned from its losing entry in the Increment 1 competition. The company has said that its Increment 1 design was at the higher end of the performance and capability spectrum, and had a price to match. Talon, by extension, has been described as “cheaper and better” and “significantly different” from the Increment 1 offering, and a first flight is now targeted for late next year. You can learn more about what TWZ has been able to glean so far here.

Project Talon is here. This next-gen autonomous aircraft is made to adapt fast.

➡️ Modular by design
➡️ Mission-ready
➡️ Built for the challenges ahead pic.twitter.com/6UOhLSBHKn

— Northrop Grumman (@northropgrumman) December 4, 2025

“Northrop Grumman remains in a vendor pool that can compete for future efforts, including the Increment 1 production contract and subsequent increments,” an Air Force spokesperson told TWZ when asked about the current relationship of Northrop Grumman and Project Talon to the CCA program.

“As the Air Force continues to advance the CCA program, the ongoing collaboration with Northrop Grumman and the defense and aerospace industry will ensure that the Air Force remains at the forefront of airpower innovation,” the Air Force’s release today also noted. “These types of partnerships will help the Air Force meet the challenges of an increasingly complex and competitive global security environment while maintaining the technological superiority necessary to prevail in future conflicts. “

TWZ has also reached out to Northrop Grumman. Northrop Grumman and Scaled Composites have also previously said that Project Talon, which has been described so far as a demonstrator effort, is not explicitly aimed at a particular contract opportunity, such as the Air Force CCA program’s Increment 2.

As mentioned, the Air Force has separately confirmed that nine companies have now received initial concept refinement contracts under the CCA program’s Increment 2, which were all awarded earlier this month. The service is presently declining to name any of those companies, one of which could be Northrop Grumman. An Air Force spokesperson told TWZ that the vendor details are currently “protected by enhanced security measures.”

“These designs [being refined under Increment 2 now] represent a broad spectrum, ranging from more affordable, attritable concepts to higher-end, more exquisite designs,” that same spokesperson also told TWZ. “This variety ensures that the program explores different approaches, optimizing for cost-effectiveness while maintaining the flexibility and capabilities necessary to enhance operational effectiveness.”

That the Air Force is again considering a mix of lower and higher-end designs for Increment 2 is a notable development. The service had indicated previously that it would focus heavily on less exquisite and cheaper designs for the second tranche of CCA drones based on its experience with Increment 1. It’s also worth remembering here that Increment 2 has also long been expected to include foreign participation, which would have impacts on the requirements. In October, the Netherlands announced it had formally joined the Air Force’s CCA program.

The U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Navy also have their own CCA programs, which are formally intertwined with the Air Force’s effort, including in the development of common command and control and autonomy architectures. However, the Marines and Navy have been pursuing specific airframe designs to meet their respective needs independently. The Marine Corps is moving to field an operational version of Kratos’ XQ-58A Valkyrie drone following extensive testing with that design. The Navy has four companies under contract now for conceptual aircraft carrier-based CCA designs.

“The next competitive contract award will occur after the Concept Refinement Phase, as the Air Force evaluates the technical and operational merits of the submitted designs for prototyping,” the Air Force spokesperson added. “Increment 2 will be structured similarly to Increment 1, where more than one awardee may be selected for prototyping. This approach allows for competitive development and ensures that the Air Force can evaluate various solutions before selecting the final designs to move into production.”

“For CCA Increment 2, following concept refinement, the Air Force will proceed with prototyping, with plans for a future competitive award leading to production awards,” they continued. “The specific timeline for these milestones will depend on the results from Concept Refinement and the vendor’s performance during testing.”

Many questions remain about the Air Force’s CCA plans, including exactly how many drones the service is set to acquire under Increment 1, and whether that initial fleet will be all YFQ-42As or YFQ-44As, or a mix of both. The Air Force, Marine Corps, and Navy are all still very much refining their core concepts of operations for future CCA fleets, including deployed, launched, recovered, supported, and otherwise operated on a day-to-day peacetime basis, let alone employing them tactically.

In the meantime, the Air Force is clearly pushing with the development of additional CCA types, including Northrop Grumman’s and Scaled Composites’ Project Talon design. With Increment 2 now underway, more insights into the new field of CCA competitors may begin to emerge.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

In a significant escalation of the ‘tanker war’ between Russia and Ukraine, which has so far played out mainly in the Black Sea, Ukrainian aerial drones have struck a tanker belonging to Russia’s so-called ‘shadow fleet’ in the Mediterranean. The latest incident comes after a tit-for-tat series of attacks, and a warning earlier this month from Russian President Vladimir Putin that he would “cut Ukraine off from the sea” in response to Kyiv stepping up its campaign against Russian commercial shipping. 

A source from within the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), the government’s main internal security agency, told TWZ that “a new, unprecedented special operation” was carried out “more than 2,000 kilometers” (1,243 miles) from Ukrainian territory.

The target was the Oman-flagged crude oil tanker Qendil, empty at the time of the attack and sailing from the Indian port of Jamnagar, where it had been unloaded on December 1.

“Accordingly, this attack did not pose any threat to the ecological situation in the region,” the SBU said.

Before unloading, the tanker had left Russia’s Black Sea port of Novorossiysk on November 4, sailing through the Bosphorus and Mediterranean, then passing the Suez Canal en route to India. The vessel was built in 2006 and has a capacity of 115,338 deadweight tonnes.

According to Lloyd’s List Intelligence vessel tracking, the attack likely occurred when the tanker was heading west in the Mediterranean between Malta and Crete, which would put it around 930 miles from Ukraine. According to AIS data, the vessel made a U-turn immediately before midnight and then turned toward the east, for unknown reasons, changing its destination to Port Said in Egypt.

The SBU explained that aerial drones were used as part of a “multi-stage” operation that was conducted by forces from its Special Group “Alpha.” The same group was responsible for yesterday’s aerial drone attack on Belbek Air Base in Crimea, which you can read more about here.

The SBU shared a video with us that purports to show the attack on the tanker. Here, munitions can be seen dropped onto the deck from a hexacopter-type aerial drone, indicating a short-range attack, with ‘bomber drones’ likely having been launched from a nearby vessel. The launch of these drones from a neighboring country would only be possible if the target was half a dozen or so miles off the coast.

The SBU claims that the tanker “suffered critical damage and cannot be used for its intended purpose.” The video evidence suggests that damage was inflicted on the tanker’s topside infrastructure, although it’s unclear how severe this was.

“Russia used this tanker to circumvent sanctions and earn money that went to the war against Ukraine,” the agency added in a statement. “Therefore, from the point of view of international law and the laws and customs of war, this is an absolutely legitimate target for the SBU. The enemy must understand that Ukraine will not stop and will strike it anywhere in the world, wherever it may be.”

In a statement, the security firm Vanguard said that the attack reflected “a stark expansion of Ukraine’s use of uncrewed aerial systems against maritime assets associated with Russia’s sanctioned oil export network.”

The EU and the United Kingdom sanction Qendil, since it is considered part of the shadow fleet, a term for vessels used by Russia (as well as by Iran and Venezuela) to evade sanctions with deceptive practices. These include changing flags and complex chains of ownership, often using shell companies.

It might not be a coincidence that the attack took place on the day of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s annual end-of-year press conference. During this, Putin said that Russia would respond to recent Ukrainian attacks on shadow fleet tankers.

Since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia has relied heavily on the shadow fleet, estimated to number more than 1,000 ships, to circumvent sanctions and export crude oil, bringing much-needed revenue.

Putin said today that Russia would “definitely respond” to Ukraine’s campaign against its shadow fleet. “Ultimately, this will not lead to the expected result,” he said. “It will not disrupt any supplies, but will only create additional threats,” Putin added.

Ukraine has previously used drone strikes to target Russian shadow tankers in the Black Sea.

As we have previously reported, Ukraine carried out three attacks on Russian-connected oil tankers in the Black Sea in late November and early December. This campaign has drawn a response in kind from Russia, using a Shahed-type drone, as you can read about here.

Ukraine’s SBU security service says its Sea Baby naval drones today struck another Russian “shadow fleet” tanker in the Black Sea.

Video from an SBU source purports to show the oil tanker “Dashan” being hit by the attack drone and explosions in the stern area. “The vessel,… pic.twitter.com/mtfBqYe1gQ

— Christopher Miller (@ChristopherJM) December 10, 2025

However, the first confirmed Ukrainian strike on a Russian-linked vessel this far from the Black Sea theater is a significant development. It is highly likely that the clandestine anti-ship war waged between Iran and Israel — something we have reported on for years now —likely provided a template for this.

The ability to use short-range drones to prosecute attacks in the Mediterranean indicates that vessels could be under threat elsewhere in European waters or even beyond. Beyond that, we could see Ukraine start to use longer-range systems, including one-way attack drones equipped with Starlink terminals, in the future.

Regardless, this development not only makes it potentially harder for Russia to export oil but also means that other commercial shipping will have to be aware of the increasing risks and potentially take measures to enhance their protection.

While the attack on Qendil appears to be the first of its kind in the Mediterranean, a further geographical expansion of Kyiv’s campaign against the Russian shadow fleet should not be ruled out.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The U.S. Navy personnel in the Middle East have test-launched a Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System (LUCAS) long-range kamikaze drone from the Independence class Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) USS Santa Barbara. Described as a first-of-its-kind achievement, this comes two weeks after the U.S. military announced it had established Task Force Scorpion Strike (TFSS) in the region, armed with the LUCAS drones from SpektreWorks. Being able to employ the one-way attack drones from the sea, as well as from sites on land, opens the door to new operational possibilities on top of what was already a major new addition to the U.S. military’s long-range strike arsenal.

TWZ has previously explored in great depth the arguments for arming Navy ships with various types of uncrewed aerial systems to provide additional layers of defense, as well as enhanced strike, electronic warfare, intelligence-gathering, and networking capabilities, which you can find here. Just earlier this year, we also laid out a detailed case for why America’s armed forces should be heavily investing in rapidly-producible long-range kamikaze drones — Shahed-136 clones primarily — just like LUCAS, as you can read here.

Personnel from U.S. Naval Forces Central Command’s (NAVCENT) Task Force 59 conducted the rocket-assisted launch of the LUCAS drone from the stern flight deck of the USS Santa Barbara on December 16, according to an official release. The ship was operating in the Arabian Gulf, more commonly known as the Persian Gulf, at the time. Established in 2021, Task Force 59 has been leading efforts to expand the Navy’s operational use of uncrewed platforms, as well as new artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities, in the Middle East. The LUCAS drone itself had been provided by TFSS, which falls under the auspices of U.S. Special Operations Command Central (SOCCENT), the regional headquarters for special operations activities under U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM).

The official release from NAVCENT does not provide specific details about capabilities demonstrated during the test, such as how far the LUCAS drone flew, how it was controlled or directed, and whether it hit a mock target of some kind at sea or on land at the end of its flight.

TWZ reached out to CENTCOM, which declined to provide more granular information. We have also reached out to NAVCENT and SpektreWorks.

General details about the LUCAS drones the U.S. military now has deployed in the Middle East remain limited. It is known that SpektreWorks directly reverse-engineered the design from Iran’s Shahed-136, and initially with an eye toward its use as a threat-representative target for training and test purposes. At some 10 feet long and with a wingspan of around eight feet, LUCAS is slightly smaller than the Iranian drone. SpektreWorks has also publicly provided specifications for the related target drone, called the FLM 136, which has roughly half the range and payload capacity as the Shahed-136. However, it is unclear whether this reflects the capabilities found on operationalized configurations. LUCAS is also said to have a unit cost of around $35,000.

Iran and its regional proxies have employed a growing number of variants and derivatives of the Shahed-136 design in recent years, including in attacks on targets in Israel and on ships sailing in and around the Red Sea. Russia also now produces its own still-expanding array of Shahed-136-based drones domestically, which it regularly employs in attacks on Ukrainian cities, as well as forces around the front lines.

The video below includes a montage of clips from Iranian state media showing Shahed-136s being employed during an exercise.

Баражуючий іранський боєприпас «Shahed 136»

Pictures of the LUCAS drones the U.S. military has released so far show a modular, reconnaissance design that could also be used for surveillance and reconnaissance missions, as well as in the decoy role. As TWZ has previously written:

“We see two variants of LUCAS. One is not of particular note, it seems geared to strike the static targets we have become accustomed to for this type of weapon. The other features two very interesting details. It has what appears to be a gimbaled camera system mounted on its nose and, most importantly, a miniature beyond-line-of-sight satellite datalink mounted on its spine. This is a major development that would allow these weapons to not only be controlled dynamically after launch at great distances, but also to hit moving targets and targets of opportunity.”

“In addition, this capability would help enable swarm tactics, where the drones work to attack targets cooperatively with their progress monitored and altered in real-time by human operators, regardless of whether they have the satellite terminal or not. This is made possible by providing simpler, lighter line-of-sight datalinks on the drones equipped with warheads only, which then connect line-of-sight to the drone carrying the satellite communications terminal, acting as a force-multiplying networking hub. This also means you can have many simple drones paired with a much smaller number of more costly ones equipped with cameras and networking equipment, but achieve the same overall effect as if they all had the more advanced capabilities. This modularity which is ‘greater than the sum of its parts’ is a central tenet of emerging drone warfare TWZ highlighted a decade ago.“

…

“Seeing as swarms can be tailored to various objectives, with mixing and matching BLOS networking enabled units with strikers, and placing them in real time to minimize risk and maximize effect, America’s Shaheds should be significantly more survivable and effective. The ability to work together, reacting to their environment, and leverage real-time intelligence gathered by the full gamut of U.S. and allied assets, are even larger advantages. This is in addition to pairing them with combined arms tactics, from electronic warfare to kinetic strikes, to ensure they get to their target areas. Even if some die to air defenses, that can be viewed as a win, depending on what engages them. Consuming costly and finite effectors is a feature, not a bug, for these relatively cheap weapons, as you can read all about in our larger feature.“

All of this is further magnified by the ability to employ LUCAS drones from any ship with sufficient deck space, as well as launchers on land, which could be semi-fixed or mobile. This is something TWZ highlighted explicitly in our past feature on the prospect of integrating drone swarms onto Navy ships.

Observations for years now of how Iran and its proxies, as well as Russia, have been employing variants and derivatives of the Shahed-136 have underscored their ability to be sent along often circuitous routes to attack targets from unexpected vectors. Even without the addition of more dynamic targeting and fully networked swarming capabilities, this creates immense challenges for defenders. This is only further compounded by the breadth of areas targeted simultaneously and the sheer volume of drones that can be launched in mass barrages, owing in large part to their relatively low cost.

Iran has also notably fielded a number of one-off sea base-like ships with aviation and other capabilities, including the ability to launch long-range kamikaze drones, as well as cruise and ballistic missiles. Iranian forces have also made use of commercial vessels modified as covert motherships to coordinate attacks, including by regional proxies, and to gather intelligence.

U.S. officials have themselves been quick to highlight the new operational capabilities LUCAS offers, especially in light of the newly announced test launch from the USS Santa Barbara.

“A cutting-edge, low-cost attack drone asset, launched from a naval vessel that can sail and operate wherever international law allows, is a tremendous new capability to employ in the region,” Navy Capt. Timothy Hawkins, CENTCOM’s top spokesperson, told TWZ.

“U.S. Navy forces in the Middle East are advancing warfighting capability in new ways, bringing more striking power from the sea and setting conditions for using innovation as a deterrent,” Navy Adm. Brad Cooper, commander of CENTCOM, also said in a statement.

“This first successful launch of LUCAS from a naval vessel marks a significant milestone in rapidly delivering affordable and effective unmanned capabilities to the warfighter,” Vice Adm. Curt Renshaw, commander of NAVCENT and U.S. Fifth Fleet, added in his own statement accompanying the official release. “This achievement demonstrates the power of innovation and joint collaboration in this critical region.”

“This platform will undoubtedly enhance regional maritime security and deterrence,” Renshaw added.

Conducting the test in the Arabian Gulf also underscores previous statements from CENTCOM about how the deployment of LUCAS in the Middle East specifically offers a new way to challenge Iran.

“We are now at a point where not only are we building them in mass, but we have already based them in [the] Middle East for the first time,” a U.S. official told TWZ earlier this month when the establishment of TFSS was announced. “In essence, we are able to flip the script on Iran.”

As we mentioned at the time, the benefits that kamikaze drones like LUCAS offer to U.S. forces also extend well beyond the Middle East. Separate U.S. Marine Corps testing of LUCAS drones at the U.S. Army’s Yuma Proving Ground (YPG) in Arizona points to plans to field long-range kamikaze drones more broadly across America’s armed forces.

As an aside, using an Independence class LCS for the recent maritime LUCAS test launch highlights another potential mission for these ships, as well as the Navy’s Freedom class LCSs. Both types of LCS have chronically underdelivered for the Navy, and the service has spent considerable energy searching for ways to get more operational utility out of the vessels. Last year, then-Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro announced plans to arm “many” Independence and Freedom class LCSs with new containerized missile launchers as a new way to boost their firepower, as you can read more about here. Giving these ships the ability to launch waves of low-cost, long-range kamikaze drones would be another way to approach this goal.

In general, the market space for Shahed-136-like long-range one-way attack drones is already growing in the United States, with Griffon Aerospace having also been pitching its own design called the MQM-172 Arrowhead to America’s armed forces. This is a trend that has also been emerging elsewhere globally, especially in China, where multiple Shahed-esque designs have appeared in recent years. Russia is also said to be helping North Korea set up its own domestic capacity to produce Shahed-136s, or derivatives thereof, in exchange for Pyongyang’s help in fighting Ukraine.

Whatever plans the rest of the U.S. military may have now for drones like LUCAS, the recent at-sea test launch from the USS Santa Barbara shows that American forces in the Middle East are already working to expand their ability to employ this already important new capability at least in that region.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

A key Russian airbase in occupied Crimea has been targeted by a Ukrainian drone strike, according to Ukraine. Authorities in Kyiv claim that drones hit a MiG-31BM Foxhound interceptor, as well as elements of an S-400 air defense system, at Belbek Air Base, near Sevastopol.

The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), the government’s main internal security agency, reported that a successful drone strike operation was carried out overnight by forces from its Special Group “Alpha.” Russian officials, including the governor of Sevastopol, claim that the attack was repelled with 11 drones downed and resulted in no damage.

The SBU has published a series of video stills showing the attack, with footage taken from the perspective of the long-range one-way attack drones heading toward their targets. Based on the imagery, the drones could well be the same fiber-optic types that have been launched from Ukrainian drone boats.

Further videos were posted to social media by residents of Crimea, showing explosions and attempts by Russian troops to shoot down the drones. At this point, it should be noted that, without the full videos of the strikes, we cannot be sure whether the drones detonated or the degree of damage they might have caused.

According to the SBU, damage was recorded to a MiG-31, a 92N6 (NATO reporting name Grave Stone) long-range multifunction radar that is part of the S-400 system, two Nebo-SVU long-range surveillance radars, and a Pantsir-S2 surface-to-air missile system.

Ukraine claims that the targeted MiG-31 was carrying a full combat load, although the available video reveals that it carries no armament under its wings. Potentially, it carries air-to-air missiles below the fuselage, but the forward-mounted examples are also not visible. While it looks like a real aircraft rather than a decoy, it remains possible that it may have been a non-operational example. However, recent satellite imagery assessed by TWZ shows a MiG-31 sporadically at the base in recent weeks, sometimes sitting out in the open.

It’s worth noting, too, that the reported 92N6 system (seen below) was covered with camouflage and/or anti-drone netting, making its positive identification harder. It could also have been a 96L6 (Cheese Board) all-altitude detection radar, also associated with the S-400 air defense system.

As to the estimated value of these items of equipment, the SBU put a figure of $30-50 million on the MiG-31, depending on configuration and armament, $30 million on the 92N6, $60-100 million for each of the Nebo-SVUs, and $12 million for the Pantsir-S2.

“The SBU continues its effective work to destroy air defense systems in Crimea that cover important military and logistical facilities of the occupiers,” the agency said in a statement on its Telegram channel. “The elimination of components of this echeloned system significantly weakens the enemy’s defense and military capabilities in the Crimean direction.”

Belbek plays a key role in Russia’s war in Ukraine and, as such, has been targeted by Ukraine in the past.

The significance of the airbase, in particular, lies in the fact that its aircraft and air defenses help extend coverage deeper into Ukraine, as well as providing critical screening for the nearby Russian naval base at Sevastopol, and also extend this coverage far out into the Black Sea.

Belbek Air Base was used by Ukraine before Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. Today, it is home to the 38th Fighter Aviation Regiment (38 IAP, in Russian nomenclature), a unit that you can read more about here. When Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Belbek received an influx of additional combat aircraft deployed from units in Russia. These have included examples of the Su-30SM and Su-35S, as well as Su-34 Fullback strike fighters, and MiG-31s.

MiG-31s, together with the very long-range air-to-air missiles they carry, have been a particular threat to the Ukrainian Air Force.

In October 2022, during take-off from Belbek, a MiG-31BM departed the runway, crashed, and was completely burned out. The navigator/weapons system officer ejected successfully from the rear cockpit, while the pilot was killed.

The airbase’s value means that it has received new hardened aircraft shelters and additional construction to help shield aircraft from drone attacks and other indirect fire. This is part of a broader push by the Russian military to improve physical defenses at multiple airfields following the launch of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Notably, the MiG-31 was targeted while standing in the open, unprotected. Its twin cockpit canopies were open, suggesting it was being prepared for a sortie or had recently returned from one.

As well as previous drone attacks, Ukrainian forces have employed U.S.-supplied Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) short-range ballistic missiles with cluster munition warheads against the base, with a notably destructive ATACMS barrage in May of last year. That attack resulted in two MiG-31s being burnt out, confirmed in post-strike satellite imagery. Since then, however, the use of hardened aircraft shelters at Belbek will have made the resident aircraft less vulnerable to the effects of ATACMS armed with cluster munitions, in particular.

The Russian Aerospace Forces began the current conflict with around 130 MiG-31s in active service, a small number of them adapted to carry Kinzhal aero-ballistic missiles. The two aircraft destroyed previously at Belbek are the only confirmed combat losses, though thast ight change when more details of the latest drone strike become available.

Russian MiG-31 Downs Ukrainian Su-25 from high altitude

The same attack on Belbek in May 2024 saw the Russians lose elements of an S-300 or S-400 air defense system, including what looked to be another 92N6 radar.

The targeting of Belbek again overnight, which Ukraine claims caused significant damage to prized air defense assets, shows that Ukraine is continuing to apply pressure on Russian forces in Crimea and is using a variety of weapons to achieve this.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Satellite imagery is now available showing the aftermath of a Ukrainian attack yesterday on a Russian Navy Improved Kilo class diesel-electric submarine in the Black Sea naval stronghold of Novorossiysk. The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) claimed that this was the first attack against a Russian vessel using an uncrewed underwater vehicle (UUV). The operation could also mark the historic first successful use of a UUV as an anti-ship weapon, but the actual level of damage inflicted on the submarine remains unclear. Readers can first get up to date on the attack in our initial reporting here.

TWZ obtained satellite images of where the attack occurred in Novorossiysk from Vantor (formerly Maxar Technologies). Additional imagery from Planet Labs has also been circulating online.

The satellite imagery confirms that the UUV — named by the SBU as a Sub Sea Baby, a previously unknown type — detonated off the stern of the submarine, which was at a pier in the port of Novorossiysk. A substantial chunk of the pier itself was destroyed in the attack. This all aligns with video footage shot during the attack from a position on the ground nearby, which the SBU released yesterday.

The post-strike imagery shows that the Improved Kilo class submarine, also known as a Project 636.3 Varshavyanka class type, is in the same position as it was before the attack. Two other submarines that were moored nearby when the attack occured have moved. Other submarines and ships are still in the moorings, including on the outside edge of the damaged pier.

Some of the imagery available now suggests that the submarine that was attacked may now be sitting lower in the water, but that can’t be readily confirmed. Any damage below the waterline would also not be visible in the images. At the same time, there are also no clear signs of any emergency measures having been taken to keep it afloat, or to contain the leakage of oil or other potentially hazardous fluids, as one might expect to see if the damage was severe.

Based on the estimated length of what is visible of the submarine, some observers have noted that the epicenter of the explosion looks to have been less than 65 feet from the stern. The size and configuration of the Sub Sea Baby’s warhead, as well as other details about the UUV and its capabilities, remain scant.

Satellite imagery shows the aftermath of a strike by a Sea Baby underwater drone against a submarine pier in the port of Novorossiysk.

According to the image, the strike occurred approximately 20 meters from the stern of a Project 636 Varshavyanka-class submarine, which remains… https://t.co/SVecegvkeD pic.twitter.com/fxOicR5AAW

— OSINTWarfare (@OSINTWarfare) December 16, 2025

To note, the stern section of Kilo-class submarine remains submerged so presumably it was even closer than 20 meters.

Highly probable that at least the propelled end got affected in a kinetic way.

(satellite imagery I’ve used is not recent and used for illustration purposes… https://t.co/fwO0UldAZs pic.twitter.com/qxNHs2AEQf

— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (@Archer83Able) December 16, 2025

It’s also worth noting that wider views of the port of Novorossiysk following the attack show four Project 636 submarines still present. There is nothing definitive to indicate that the targeted boat might have been replaced by another to conceal the extent of the damage.

Satellite reveals that four Kilo-class submarines are docked at the Novorossisk port in Russia. One of them appears to have a slightly different waterline compared to the other three. Ukraine claimed that its underwater UV launched an attack on the area via Mizarvision #OSINT pic.twitter.com/k1DLtOcloL

— GEOINT (@lobsterlarryliu) December 16, 2025

For its part, the Russian Ministry of Defense had unsurprisingly denied that any damage was inflicted on the submarine or to any personnel at the port. The ministry has released a video that it claims shows the undamaged boat, but does not offer a view of the stern end. The background is also heavily censored. Even so, it does still reveal what looks like piles of broken concrete debris left on the pier after the explosion, which was clearly visible in the SBU’s video of the attack, as well as in the satellite imagery available now.

The press service of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, which operates the submarine, also denies any damage to its vessels. This is also consistent with reports from various Russian naval monitoring channels on social media, but clear corroborating evidence has yet to emerge.

Overall, at this stage, we still cannot say with any authority what degree of damage, if any, the submarine may have actually sustained.

On the other hand, the attack does show Ukraine was at least able to slip a UUV into a heavily defended harbor, in daylight, and detonate its warhead only a few dozen or so feet away from a prized Russian submarine worth, according to the SBU, around $400 million.

At least one Ukrainian UUV was therefore notably able to penetrate past barriers erected at the mouth of the port, intended specifically to protect the vessels within. It’s worth noting, however, that the defensive barriers Russia has already built around ports were primarily put there in response to Ukraine’s uncrewed surface vessel (USV) campaign. This underscores the significance of the use of a UUV in this attack, as another example of the steady adaptation of weapons systems and tactics in response to countermeasures that has become a particular hallmark of the conflict in Ukraine.

With that in mind, Russia is likely to introduce new countermeasures against this particular mode of attack, one which Ukraine has spent some time developing.

The results of yesterday’s attack, while inconclusive for now, will likely spur further such developments in Ukraine, as well. Before SBU targeted the submarine in Novorossiysk, Ukraine had unveiled a UUV dubbed Marichka, designed to launch kamikaze attacks against ships and maritime infrastructure. At least one other Ukrainian UUV, known as Toloka, has previously been disclosed. It’s unclear if either of these has any relationship to the Sub Sea Baby.

Video of the Toloka UUV:

Автономний підводний дрон TOLOKA

Furthermore, the attack confirms that the Black Sea Fleet is very much still a prime target for Ukraine. This applies especially to the submarines like the Project 636 types and corvettes that are able to launch Kalibr long-range cruise missiles. These weapons have been regularly used in Russia’s nightly barrages launched against targets across Ukraine.

Already, Ukrainian naval actions had forced the Black Sea Fleet to retreat from bases on the occupied Crimean Peninsula to Novorossiysk. Attacks in Crimea were also prosecuted against another Improved Kilo class submarine. In September 2023, the Rostov-on-Don was severely damaged during a combined missile and USV attack on Sevastopol. Ukraine later claimed it was destroyed.

At the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Black Sea Fleet had a total of six Project 636 submarines available.

Other navies around the world will likely have watched yesterday’s attack with interest.

As well as the United States, China and many other nations are developing their own UUVs for missions like this one.

UUVs are able to attack vessels and other targets at long distances and can be launched from submarines and motherships, further extending their range. They can also be used for surveillance and mine laying, among other duties. You can read more about these vessels in various TWZ stories here.

Ultimately, whether or not the Russian submarine was damaged, the attack has demonstrated once again that the war in Ukraine is a crucible for the development of new military technologies, especially uncrewed ones.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

We have got what could be our first look at China’s CH-7 stealthy flying-wing drone in flight. While it’s no longer the biggest Chinese drone of this configuration, it’s still of impressive size and, as we have noted in the past, appears to be tailored for intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance (ISR), as well as possibly a secondary strike role.

Video and stills released by Chinese state media today show the drone, for the first time, being prepared for flight, taking off, and landing. The video includes air-to-air footage of the CH-7 and, overall, the suggestion is that Beijing is making a notable effort to promote the progress of this program, especially in contrast to other, far more secretive flying wing drone programs.

It’s also notable that the CH-7 appears to have made its first flight from Pucheng Airport in Shaanxi province, which also saw the recent maiden flight of the Jiutian heavyweight jet-powered ‘mothership drone,’ which you can read more about here. The Pucheng facility is operated by the China Flight Test Establishment (CFTE), underscoring its growing importance as a drone ‘center of excellence.’

The CH-7 seen in the new imagery retains the yellow-colored coat of primer that was seen in video and stills of the drone on the ground, released by Chinese state media earlier this year. Yellow primer is frequently seen on Chinese aircraft during their test phase. The drone also has air data probes on the leading edges of the wing and nose, again consistent with it being a prototype or perhaps a pre-production machine. Overall, the CH-7 has a ‘cranked-kite’ planform, of the kind that we have seen on various other Chinese drones. There are also various measures to reduce the radar and infrared signature, including a slot-like low-observable platypus engine exhaust, with the nozzle fully concealed from most angles of view, and serrated edges on doors and panels.

Interestingly, the attachment points previously seen on the upper surfaces of the rear of the drone have been removed in the new official imagery. It seems these were used to mount vertical tail surfaces.

Unofficial imagery, captured from an observer on the ground, suggests that the CH-7 was initially flight-tested with outward-canted tailfins, presumably to ensure stability during initial sorties, or otherwise to test an alternative aerodynamic configuration.

Compared to the previous imagery, we now also get to see some other details of the CH-7, including a distinctive small teardrop-shaped fairing mounted below the fuselage. This enclosure is very likely an air-to-ground datalink used for line-of-sight control of the drone and is a common feature on larger drones, including the U.S. MQ-9 Reaper. This very unstealthy feature would be removed for most operational uses once the aircraft has entered service.

We now have a much better look at the series of antennas that runs in a line along the spine, flanked by two air scoops. There are also two prominent blade aerials, above and below the fuselage. Below the fuselage, immediately behind the nose landing gear, there appears to be a large radio frequency sensor aperture, and there could also be space for conformal arrays under the inner wings.

As we presumed, the previous prominent gaps inboard of the trailing-edge flaps, where the wing meets the blended body section, were a temporary configuration and have now been filled.

The CH-7 was previously assumed to have an internal payload bay. That is not immediately obvious in the new imagery, but there is a suggestion of a notably long and slender bay immediately inboard of the main landing gear on the right-hand side, presumably with a similar bay on the left-hand side, too. If these are indeed for weapons, then they would be able to accommodate smaller stores only. This could point to a secondary strike role, but that seems somewhat less than likely at this point.

The CH-7 has already gone through several different iterations since it was first revealed, as a full-scale mockup in 2018, with the design being progressively adapted. Earlier changes included a less sharply swept wing compared to at least one early model, as well as an apparent growth in overall size.

The CH-7 (or Caihong-7, meaning Rainbow-7) has been developed by the state-owned China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC), specifically by its 11th Research Institute. A high-altitude, long-endurance drone, it is generally understood to be optimized for penetrating into or very near hostile airspace. It achieves this through a combination of a low-observable (stealth) design and flying at high altitudes, leading it to operate for extended periods of time without being successfully engaged.

Published specifications for the CH-7 include a length of 10 meters (33 feet), a maximum takeoff weight of 10,000 kilograms (22,000 pounds), a maximum speed of 926 km/h (575 mph), and an endurance of up to 15 hours. Bearing in mind the various design changes, these figures should be considered very much as provisional.

Earlier this year, Chinese state-owned media reported that the CH-7 had completed testing and was scheduled to complete development in 2024. This would imply it had also completed the flight-test program by this date, which remains possible, and the new imagery may actually date back a year or so.

Regardless of the timeline, the CH-7 is a fascinating program.

It represents one part of China’s accelerated efforts to develop low-observable, long-endurance drones, and there is a general expectation that, once in service, it will be used for both ISR and as a UCAV. Official statements from Beijing claim that, as well as bringing back critical intelligence, the CH-7 should also be able to strike strategic targets.

When it was unveiled, the CH-7 was described as a high-altitude, long-endurance stealth combat drone. Its chief designer, Shi Wen, said the aircraft would be able to “fly long hours, scout, and strike the target when necessary.”

It should be noted, however, that the latest imagery doesn’t provide definitive evidence of an extensive internal payload capacity, which might throw some doubt on the strike role, at least as a primary mission.

Even if the CH-7 ends up being exclusively an ISR platform, it remains highly relevant within China’s growing portfolio of stealthy drones, especially since it is apparently tailored to penetrate into or very near hostile airspace at high altitudes. Flying ISR missions with this profile would be especially relevant for China in a naval context, with the drone potentially roaming far out into the Pacific, monitoring the movements of enemy ships and providing targeting data for ground-based long-range missiles, for example, as well as anti-ship missiles launched from warships and bombers. Other theaters of operation in which a drone of this kind would be valuable include around the islands of the South China Sea and along the border with India.

Furthermore, it seems that the CH-7 will be offered for export. This hypothesis might also be supported by the unusually open nature of the imagery that’s been released of the drone so far.

If the CH-7 were to be offered for foreign customers, it would come with advanced capabilities that no other country is currently pitching on the arms market. It would also come without the various restrictions that limit the sale of high-end U.S. and other Western defense products.

Not only is the United States not currently able to offer for export a stealthy long-endurance surveillance drone or UCAV, but it’s also possible that no uncrewed platform of this class is even under development in that country — the still-mysterious RQ-180 may have fit in this category, but its current status is unknown. The stark contrast between the U.S. and Chinese approaches to very stealthy uncrewed aircraft for independent strike missions is something that we have addressed before in this feature of ours.

At this point, we should remember that we don’t know exactly how far the development of the CH-7 has progressed and when it might end up being ready for service with China, let alone with export customers. It remains possible that they might have to wait for a downgraded or otherwise sanitized version of the drone.

Since the first appearance of the CH-7, two other, far larger high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) drones have emerged from China. There are, meanwhile, also several medium-sized flying-wing surveillance drones and multirole UCAV types, one of which appears to be already in operational service. All of this emphasizes just how much effort and investment China is currently putting into flying-wing-type drones, not to mention diverse other kinds of uncrewed aerial vehicles.

Nevertheless, the CH-7 program remains very much one to watch. Provided it fulfills its promise, it could provide China with a multirole low-observable drone family that could also be offered for export. For now, the CH-7 stands as more evidence of the huge strides that China is making in terms of drone technology, and the particular focus being placed on stealthy uncrewed aircraft.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com