drone

People in the Russian city of Tuapse are worried about the toxic effects of a huge oil refinery fire that’s been burning for days after a Ukrainian drone attack. Al Jazeera’s Yulia Shapavalova is there.

April 23 (UPI) — As tensions simmer across the Taiwan Strait, Taiwan is quietly accelerating a shift toward drone-centric defense.

The nation is betting that swarms of low-cost, domestically produced systems can help offset the numerical and industrial advantages of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy and its expanding network of maritime auxiliaries.

This approach reflects a broader recalibration in Taipei — a move away from expensive, vulnerable platforms toward distributed, resilient and scalable capabilities designed to complicate any attempt at invasion or blockade.

At its core lies a simple calculation. In a high-intensity Indo-Pacific conflict, quantity, adaptability and survivability may matter more than traditional firepower.

From platforms to swarms

Taiwan’s embrace of drones is rooted in the concept of asymmetric warfare. Rather than matching China ship-for-ship or missile-for-missile, Taipei is investing in systems that can be mass-produced, dispersed and rapidly replaced.

“It’s not really about ‘swarms’ yet — it’s about mass. Large volumes of drones used in salvos to overwhelm defenses and increase the probability of a successful strike,” said Molly Campbell, analyst at the Center for a New American Security in Washington, D.C.

Government plans call for the procurement of up to 200,000 drones over the coming decade, spanning aerial, maritime and hybrid platforms in what officials describe as a whole-of-society approach to resilience.

These include a broad mix of air (UAV), surface (USV) and underwater (UUV) drones, designed to operate in contested littoral environments.

The objective is clear: saturate defenses, disrupt amphibious operations and raise the cost of any Chinese military action.

“What Taiwan is trying to do is shift from heavy, high-end defense platforms to a more dispersed and resilient model,” Simona Alba Grano, a senior fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute, told UPI.

In Taiwan’s case, where the goal is not to defeat China outright, but to make any invasion “extremely costly and uncertain,” such systems fit squarely within a broader denial strategy.

Lessons from Ukraine — with limits

Taiwan’s drone push has been influenced by Ukraine’s battlefield innovations, where low-cost unmanned systems have reshaped modern warfare.

Ukraine’s use of maritime drones in the Black Sea, striking high-value naval targets with relatively inexpensive systems, provides a compelling reference point. It has also highlighted the importance of rapid iteration, short development cycles and close integration between operators and industry.

Taiwanese companies have begun engaging with this ecosystem, supplying components and spare parts to Ukrainian operators and seeking to gain exposure to combat-driven innovation.

Yet, the analogy has limits.

The Taiwan Strait presents a far more demanding operational environment as it is wider, more exposed and subject to extreme weather conditions. Systems must operate over longer distances, carry heavier payloads and withstand harsher maritime conditions.

At the same time, Ukraine’s drone ecosystem is shaped by continuous battlefield validation, giving its manufacturers a level of operational credibility that remains difficult to replicate elsewhere.

Advances in unmanned systems, including long-range platforms and “mothership” concepts, also are eroding the Taiwan Strait’s traditional role as a natural buffer, increasing the tempo of gray-zone interactions.

Ukraine has demonstrated what is possible. Taiwan must now determine what is adaptable to its own operational environment.

Industrial ambition meets resistance

Taiwan’s challenge is no longer strategic clarity, but execution on the ground. The gap between planning and implementation, particularly in scaling capabilities and coordinating across agencies, now defines the island’s defense posture.

“Ukraine’s drone production is on a completely different scale. It’s nowhere near comparable to what Taiwan is currently able to produce, ” Campbell said.

Authorities have signaled openness to integrating foreign expertise, pursuing joint production and accelerating domestic manufacturing. Yet, progress has been uneven.

Industry insiders point to reluctance among local manufacturers to share market opportunities within a rapidly expanding defense budget. This has constrained collaboration both domestically and internationally, slowing efforts to build a more integrated ecosystem.

This dynamic is particularly visible in Taiwan’s interactions with Ukraine. Despite Kyiv’s operational experience and willingness to cooperate, Taiwanese firms have at times resisted incorporating Ukrainian know-how into their platforms, limiting co-development opportunities.

At the same time, Taiwanese companies have sought to market their own systems abroad, often with limited success in operationally mature environments. The result is a mismatch between industrial ambition and battlefield credibility in a highly competitive, experience-driven sector.

The fragmentation of Taiwan’s drone ecosystem comes at a critical moment, when speed, scale and integration are essential.

Cutting the China supply chain

Another pillar of Taiwan’s strategy is reducing reliance on Chinese components, long a structural vulnerability in the global drone industry.

“Taiwan is making a concerted effort to eliminate Chinese components from its drone supply chain to reduce dependence and mitigate security risks, said Ava Shen, an analyst at the Eurasia Group.

Taipei is working with international partners, particularly the United States, to develop a secure, China-free supply chain for unmanned systems. This effort is now backed by policy initiatives in Washington, where bipartisan legislation seeks to expand joint drone production and strengthen industrial resilience between the two partners.

The objective is not only to secure supply chains, but also to align production ecosystems in ways that enhance interoperability and long-term sustainability.

However, decoupling comes with trade-offs. Eliminating Chinese components increases production costs, extends timelines and complicates scaling. These constraints risk slowing deployment at a moment when speed is critical.

Meanwhile, China continues to expand its own unmanned capabilities, including drone swarms, electronic warfare systems and the conversion of legacy platforms into remotely operated assets. The scale of its industrial base and the integration of civilian and military sectors present a formidable challenge.

If Taiwan’s approach emphasizes agility and innovation, China’s rests on mass, coordination and systemic depth.

Southeast Asia as regional test bed

Beyond Taiwan, Southeast Asia, particularly along the South China Sea littoral, is emerging as a practical testing ground for unmanned systems.

The United States has expanded drone support to regional partners, providing intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms such as the ScanEagle, RQ-20 Puma and Skydio X10 UAVs to countries including the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia. These systems are primarily used to enhance maritime awareness in contested areas.

The Philippines, under sustained pressure from Beijing, has become a focal point. The United States has deployed MQ-9A Reaper for extended surveillance missions and introduced maritime drones, such as the Devil Ray T-38.

Together, these deployments are turning parts of Southeast Asia into a real-world environment for testing unmanned concepts short of conflict, particularly in maritime surveillance and denial.

China has also deployed uncrewed surface vehicles such as the Sea Wing and Wave Glider types, many of which have been lost or recovered by fishermen and coast guards, in the South China Sea as well as in the Java Sea, highlighting both the spread and the fragility of these systems in contested waters.

Deterrence, escalation and uncertainty

Drones offer Taiwan a pathway to strengthen deterrence by denial, increasing the cost, complexity and uncertainty of any military action. But they also introduce new risks.

The proliferation of low-cost systems may lower the threshold for escalation, especially in ambiguous encounters involving coast guard or maritime militia vessels. What begins as signaling or harassment could escalate more rapidly in an environment saturated with autonomous or semi-autonomous platforms.

Moreover, drone networks depend heavily on communications, data links and supply chains – all of which are vulnerable to disruption through cyber operations or electronic warfare.

Race against time

For Taiwan, the shift toward drone-centric defense is both an opportunity and a race against time.

Drones offer a scalable and cost-effective means of offsetting China’s advantages. But success depends on overcoming internal fragmentation, accelerating production and adapting technologies to local operational realities.

The central question is no longer whether drones will shape the balance in the Taiwan Strait, but whether Taiwan can scale and integrate them fast enough to make deterrence credible.

As China continues to refine its own capabilities, the balance in the Strait may increasingly hinge on a simple but decisive factor: which side can deploy, adapt and sustain unmanned systems at scale.

Plumes of black smoke were seen after Ukrainian drones targeted Russia’s Black Sea port of Tuapse. At least one person was killed. The strike was the second attack on the port in three days.

April 20 (UPI) — Iran said that it carried out drone strikes on Monday against U.S. military vessels blockading its ports after the U.S. Navy attacked an Iranian-flagged container ship in the Gulf of Oman.

The state-run Tasnim News Agency said the Iranian military “launched drone strikes toward several U.S. military vessels in the area” in retaliation for the boarding and seizure of the Touska on Sunday night while it was en route to Iran from China.

“We caution that the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will soon respond to and retaliate for this act of piracy and armed aggression by the US military,” Khatam al-Anbia Central Headquarters, the Iranian military’s central command, said in a statement

Khatam al-Anbia Central Headquarters said the Iranian Armed Forces had held off from delivering “a decisive response” to “blatant aggression by U.S. terrorist commandos” due to concerns for the safety of family members of the ship’s crew who were on board the Touska.

“Iran’s operational action was delayed in order to protect their lives and security, which were in constant danger,” the statement added.

The U.S. military did not immediately comment on Iran’s claim it conducted drone strikes.

However, U.S. Central Command posted video of the guided-missile destroyer USS Spruance warning the Touska to “vacate your engine room” because it was about to open fire and, some time later, night-vision footage of helicopter-borne U.S. Marines from USS Tripoli conducting an amphibious assault operation to take over the vessel.

CENTCOM said the Spruance intercepted Touska as it was steaming toward the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, issuing multiple warnings over a six hour period that it was in violation of the U.S. blockade. When it refused to stop, the Spruance fired several rounds from its 5-inch gun hitting the engine room and disabling the vessel.

U.S. Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit later boarded the vessel and took control of the vessel, which remains in U.S. custody.

CENTCOM said U.S. forces had ordered 25 commercial vessels to turn back, or return to an Iranian port, in the week since the United States implemented its blockade of Iranian ports on April 13.

However, Sunday was the first time that the U.S. military is known to have opened fire on merchant shipping since the war started Feb. 28.

The escalation came after a rollercoaster weekend that began with Tehran declaring that the Strait of Hormuz was fully open to all commercial shipping for the remainder of the 14-day cease-fire currently in place, which is due to expire on Wednesday.

The move was welcomed by the United States, but the administration of U.S. President Trump made it clear its blockade would remain in place. That prompted Tehran to accuse the United States of violating the cease-fire and by Saturday it declared the strait closed again and at least one tanker was fired on by two Iranian gunboats as it attempted to enter the sea lane.

The developments have cast doubt over peace talks, which are due to resume in Islamabad, Pakistan, later Monday or first thing Tuesday.

Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform that U.S. negotiators would arrive in the Pakistani capital on Monday night, with the White House later confirming that Vice President JD Vance would again head up the U.S. delegation, picking up from where he left off from in an initial round of talks on April 11 that failed to produce a breakthrough.

Tehran said Monday it had not yet decided whether it would attend.

“As of now, while I am speaking to you, we do not have a plan for the next round of negotiations, and no decision has been taken in this regard,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei said at a press conference in Tehran.

Referencing the ongoing U.S. blockade and seizure of the container ship, Baqaei accused the United States of actions that “are in no way indicative of seriousness in pursuing a diplomatic process.”

However, the comments do not mean Iran will not show in Islamabad.

The Iranian side only confirmed participation in the first round of negotiations at the last minute.

Global oil prices, which fell sharply on Friday after Iran said the Hormuz Strait was open, rose again over the weekend but were holding steady in late morning trade in London where Brent crude for June delivery contract was changing hands at $95.24 a barrel and West Texas Intermediate for May delivery was changing hands at $88.89 a barrel.

The U.S. Air Force has concluded what it describes as a “critical exercise” with Anduril’s YFQ-44 Fury ‘fighter drone’ prototype, flown out of the base that is the heart of flight testing, the legendary Edwards Air Force Base, California. The drills involved the Air Force’s Experimental Operations Unit and were intended to demonstrate how CCAs can be deployed and sustained in a contested environment. For the exercise, the YFQ-44A flew from Edwards back to Anduril’s Southern California test site.

As well as the Experimental Operations Unit (EOU), which falls under Air Combat Command (ACC), the exercise involved personnel from Air Force Materiel Command’s (AFMC) 412th Test Wing. This wing is headquartered at Edwards Air Force Base, and the squadrons attached to it are responsible for flight testing of virtually all the aircraft in the Air Force’s inventory.

Multiple sorties were flown — we have asked Air Combat Command for more details on exactly how many and their scope. The exercise took place last week, according to Anduril’s vice president of autonomous airpower, Mark Shushnar.

The YFQ-44 is one of two designs now being developed as part of the first phase, or Increment 1, of the Air Force’s CCA program. The other is General Atomics’ YFQ-42A Dark Merlin. We have reached out to Edwards to see whether the YFQ-42 was originally expected to take part in the exercise before its recent takeoff accident.

Imagery published by the Air Force shows a YFQ-44A carrying inert AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) on pylons under the wings, something that we first saw earlier this year, during captive-carry evaluations, as you can read about here. It should be noted that the Fury, at least as it exists now, does not have an internal munitions bay.

The primary function of the exercise was to explore the practicalities of what the Air Force calls the Warfighting Acquisition System. This framework is intended to speed the delivery of CCAs to operational units by enabling operators to get their hands on the drones earlier in the program. In this way, they can refine tactics and procedures before deliveries to the front line.

ACC has stressed in the past how it wants CCAs to operate seamlessly within the existing command structures and legal frameworks that govern all Air Force weapons systems.

“This experimental operations event was executed by EOU members from start to finish. Every sortie generated and flown was done with a warfighter, not an engineer or test pilot, kicking the tires and controlling the prototypes,” explained Lt. Col. Matthew Jensen, EOU commander. “We are learning by doing, at a speed and risk tolerance accepted by the USAF’s most senior leaders, to ensure CCA is ready to operate and win in the most demanding combat environments.”

Above all, the sorties stressed operational and logistical procedures for using CCAs in a contested environment. The issue of logistics is a critical one, including how CCAs will get to the area of operations and how they will be maintained in the field.

According to Shushnar, Anduril’s Menace-T command, control, communications, and compute (C4) solution was used as the main ground element for YFQ-44A flight operations during the exercise. “EOU operators used Menace-T’s ruggedized laptop to upload mission plans, initiate autonomous taxi and takeoff, task the aircraft while in flight, and manage post-flight data ingestion and checks,” he explained. “That enabled the EOU to conduct operations out of a simulated forward operating base, successfully launching, recovering, and turning YFQ-44A without the infrastructure of a large, established base.”

This is entirely in line with the Air Force’s drive toward short-notice and otherwise irregular deployments, often to remote, austere, or otherwise non-traditional locales. Agile Combat Employment (ACE) is the term the service currently uses to describe a set of concepts for distributed and disaggregated operations.

While the warfighters of the EOU were at Edwards to carry out the practical aspects of CCA employment, exploring tactics, techniques, and procedures, the 412th Test Wing, meanwhile, was on hand to gather data from the test events.

“By uniting the distinct test authorities of AFMC and the operational authorities of ACC, officials were able to fast-track the event, enabling groundbreaking, hands-on experimentation by operators at a uniquely early stage of development,” the Air Force explained in a media release.

“The collaboration we saw in this exercise is the cornerstone of our acquisition transformation. By embedding the operators from the EOU with our acquisition professionals, we create a tight feedback loop that lets us trade operational risk with acquisition risk in real-time,” said Col. Timothy Helfrich, portfolio acquisition executive for fighters and advanced aircraft. “This isn’t just a test; it’s a demonstration of how we are adopting a more agile process. An 85 percent solution in the hands of a warfighter today is infinitely better than a 100 percent solution that never arrives.”

The CCA program is viewed as a pathfinder for the Warfighting Acquisition System, and success with this could lead to the same approach being employed to get other systems into operational service much more quickly than in the past.

The Air Force has not yet determined whether it will procure one or both Increment 1 CCA designs at scale. Whichever option it selects is expected to become its first operational “fighter drones,” built to carry live munitions into combat alongside crewed aircraft.

CCAs will also extend the sensor coverage of the crewed fighters they accompany. More broadly, the Air Force views them as a way to add vital combat mass and unlock new tactical options, particularly in high-end conflicts against adversaries like China. Back in late 2024, Brig. Gen. Douglas “Beaker” Wickert, commander of the 412th Test Wing, told TWZ that, “[the-then Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall] “has been very clear that we are out of time, that our Air Force has never been older or smaller than it is right now, and that the People’s Liberation Army has been specifically designed to defeat us.”

“The investments we’re making right now in modernization and testing for the USAF are designed for success and aimed at changing Chairman Xi’s calculus about pushing back aggressively against the international rules-based order. What we are doing here and across USAF flight-testing is extremely consequential.”

Since then, Wickert has moved on to become Director of Air, Space and Cyberspace Operations at AFMC, but the test wing’s remit remains the same. Meanwhile, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force has doubled down on its rapid expansion, including many of its own CCA programs.

If all goes to plan, the completion of this recent exercise at Edwards could well be a key milestone in fielding a combat-ready force of CCAs and go some way toward realizing the Air Force’s ambition for a new capability that should extend the reach and the survivability of its crewed aircraft.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The U.S. Army is considering configuring at least a portion of its new MV-75A Cheyenne II tiltrotors to be able to refuel in flight using the probe-and-drogue method. This, in turn, has raised the question of how the service will ensure there is adequate tanker capacity to support that capability. Army officials and the MV-75A’s prime contractor, Bell, have both now pointed to a future where tanker drones like the U.S. Navy’s forthcoming MQ-25 Stingray could help extend the Cheyenne II’s reach.

Army Maj. Gen. Clair Gill discussed aerial refueling capability for the MV-75A, as well as other aspects of the Cheyenne II, during a talk yesterday at the Army Aviation Association of America’s (AAAA) 2026 Warfighting Summit, at which TWZ is in attendance. Gill is currently the service’s Program Acquisition Executive for Maneuver Air. The Army plans to replace a substantial portion of its H-60 Black Hawk helicopters with the MV-75A in the coming years.

“Our last chief used to talk to me all the time about aerial refueling. We think that’s something. Maybe we don’t get all of them [the MV-75As] configured for that, but they’ll have the capability,” the Army’s top aviation acquisition officer added. “For industry, I want you to think about how are we going to refuel ourselves, right? One of the challenges, even the Regiment will tell you, and make it top priority – their challenge isn’t you know how good they are on par, their challenge is getting somebody to give them the gas.”

The “Regiment” that Gill refers to here is the Army’s elite 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (SOAR), also commonly known as the Night Stalkers. The 160th is expecting to eventually receive a special operations-specific configuration of the MV-75, which will include in-flight refueling capability by default, as you can read more about here. Existing Night Stalker MH-60M Black Hawk and MH-47G Chinook special operations helicopters also have the ability to refuel in flight via probe-and-drogue. However, Army Black Hawks and Chinooks assigned to conventional units do not have this capability.

“The Navy’s got some pretty good unmanned ideas there if you want to kind of follow where we’re going,” Gill noted yesterday.

Gill did not specifically name Boeing’s MQ-25, but this is the only uncrewed tanker the Navy is currently pursuing, at least that we know about. Furthermore, Bell released a new computer-generated MV-75 promotional video yesterday around the AAAA conference, seen below, wherein a Cheyenne II is clearly depicted linking up with a Stingray, or an extremely similar-looking variant or derivative thereof.

Meet the Cheyenne II

The MQ-25 is in development now primarily as a carrier-based platform, but there is no reason why it could not also operate from bases on land. Boeing has itself previously presented a concept for an enlarged, land-based derivative of the design that could help meet future U.S. Air Force tanking needs.

The MQ-25 by itself promised to offer very long endurance and extreme range, which could make it attractive in the land-based role, as well as when operating from carriers. TWZ has previously explored how those capabilities open the door to the Stingray being utilized as much more than a tanker, as well.

Currently, the U.S. Air Force provides probe-and-drogue aerial refueling capacity using KC-135 and KC-46 tankers, as well as HC-130J Combat King II combat search and rescue aircraft and MC-130J Commando II special operations tanker/transports. The U.S. Marine Corps and Navy also have C-130 variants that can be employed as tankers, as well as transports. Navy carrier air wings currently rely on F/A-18F Super Hornet fighters carrying buddy refueling stores and drop tanks to provide organic aerial refueling support.

Shortfalls in aerial refueling capacity, even to meet peacetime demands, have been an increasingly concerning issue for years now. The Air Force just recently developed a system that allows A-10 Warthog attack jets to refuel via probe-and-drogue to create new operational flexibility for those aircraft, as you can read more about here. The A-10 was originally designed to refuel in flight using the boom method, which the Air Force prefers for fixed-wing aircraft.

On top of all this, the Army has no organic tanker capacity at present, at all. Furthermore, the formal division of roles and missions with the Air Force means that the service does not operate fleets of larger fixed-wing aircraft like the C-130 that could be readily adapted to this role. All of this would point to an uncrewed platform like MQ-25 as the most viable path to establishing an Army tanker force, which could also align better with its expeditionary air assault concepts of operations.

Army MV-75As could still make use of other tankers during joint operations, as well. There could be other organic air refueling options available to the service, too, including the possibility of adapting MV-75 itself to act as a buddy tanker.

The Army is separately advancing plans to acquire fleets of uncrewed aircraft capable of performing a variety of missions in close collaboration with the MV-75A and its existing fleets of crewed helicopters.

For the Army, demands for greater range and ability that cover those distances faster were key factors in the decision to acquire the MV-75A in the first place. The service sees these capabilities as particularly critical in the context of any future fight against China across the sprawling expanses of the Pacific.

“MV-75, as I mentioned, that’s our signature system,” Gen. Gill said yesterday. “Unmatched range, unmatched speed, unmatched mission flexibility.”

During a separate talk at the AAAA conference yesterday, Army Maj. Gen. David Gardner, head of the 101st Airborne Division, the service’s premier air assault formation, also highlighted a recent training exercise that included Marine Corps MV-22 Osprey tiltrotors. He said that was done specifically “to help our Division understand the operational reach that it will possess with the MV-75 Cheyenne.”

Units within the 101st are set to be the first to receive operational MV-75As, with or without aerial refueling capability. The Army had previously said that fielding would begin next year as part of a major acceleration of the program. However, it has now stepped back from any fixed timeline for the first flight of the Cheyenne, let alone when Bell will begin delivering production examples.

“It’s going to happen when it’s going to happen. So we are moving as fast as we can,” Gen. Gill told TWZ and other outlets ahead of the AAAA conference this week. “If I was king, and I had all the money in the world and all the engineers, and there were no limits, we probably would be able to do it in a matter of months.”

As an aside, integrating aerial refueling capability onto the MV-75A, and working to pair it with tanker drones like MQ-25, could make the Cheyenne II, or variants thereof, attractive to other potential operators. The Marine Corps is now early in the process of refining requirements for a successor to the MV-22. The Navy has also said it is leveraging work the Army has done on the MV-75A to inform its plans for a Future Vertical Lift-Maritime Strike (FVL-MS) family of systems to succeed its MH-60R and MH-60S Seahawks, as well as the MQ-8C Fire Scout drone helicopter. Bell has presented concepts for variations of its V-280 Valor tiltrotor, on which the MV-75A is based, optimized for supporting amphibious assault and other naval missions in the past.

As it stands now, the Army does not appear to have made a final decision on the extent to which it expects to integrate in-flight refueling capability in its future MV-75A fleet. That will have a direct impact on any pursuit of an organic tanker capability.

Still, the Army and Bell are already pointing to the MQ-25 as an example of what could be on the horizon to help further extend the reach of the Cheyenne II.

UPDATE: 5:08 PM EDT –

Maj. Gen. Clair Gill has now offered some additional comments on aerial refueling support for the MV-75A to TWZ and other outlets at a roundtable today on the sidelines of the AAAA conference.

“We’re also thinking creatively about if we put aerial refueling – which you’re gonna see on the SOCOM [U.S. Special Operations Command] variants – if we put that on a conventional variant, then how do we refuel it?” he explained. “So we’re thinking through, do we need to develop a requirement for aerial refueling for ourselves now that we have really enhanced our capability?”

“One of the things that our special operations aviators – one of their most challenging tasks is helicopter aerial refueling. A lot of times people say, you’re telling me the challenge is the training of that, because it’s a pretty hard task,” he added later on in response to a direct follow-up question on this topic from our Jamie Hunter, who also called attention to what was seen in Bell’s video. “And I would say yes, but it’s actually the asset, the availability [of the] asset, to do the training. And we don’t have those organic to the Army. So I think we need to solve our own problems, and think about how do we do our own, let’s call it logistical resupply in the air, of an MV-75. So that’s where that concept photo or video was pointing.”

“We don’t have a requirement written right now, but I’ve talked with Army leaders,” Gill also noted.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

AeroVironment has unveiled a new entrant in the rapidly evolving launched effects space, introducing the Mayhem 10 system as a further evolution of its combat-proven Switchblade family. While pitching Mayhem 10 toward U.S. Army requirements, the manufacturer anticipates considerable demand and has already started to develop a production line that will be able to push out as many as 2,000 examples of the vehicle annually. The price of a Mayhem 10 has not been disclosed.

Revealed yesterday at the Army Aviation Association of America’s Army Aviation Warfighting Summit in Nashville, Tennessee, the Mayhem 10 is intended to equip air, ground, and maritime platforms and to be capable of being rapidly deployed and reconfigured in the field.

Mayhem 10 Launched Effects | One System. Multiple Effects.

At its core, Mayhem 10 is an autonomous launched effects system with a heavy focus on modularity. Its payload architecture allows operators to swap between lethal and non-lethal configurations depending on mission needs. That includes intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), electronic warfare, communications relay, deception/decoy, and precision strike roles. As such, commanders can rely on a single platform that can pivot as conditions evolve.

According to company leadership, the focus is on compressing the sensor-to-shooter timeline while reducing risk to personnel and high-value assets. “Mayhem 10 sets a new standard for operational versatility and survivability on the modern battlefield,” said Wahid Nawabi, AeroVironment’s chairman, president, and CEO, emphasizing its ability to operate effectively even in heavily contested environments.

The system draws heavily on the lineage of AeroVironment’s Switchblade family, but is intended to push beyond traditional loitering munitions in terms of scale and flexibility. The Mayhem 10 name reflects the fact that it can carry a payload of up to 10 pounds. It has a range of roughly 62 miles and can remain airborne for up to 50 minutes. Notably, it is designed for rapid deployment, with assembly and launch said to be achievable in under five minutes.

Speaking to TWZ at the summit, Austin Johnson, AeroVironment’s business development director for U.S. Army programs, stressed that, while Mayhem is an evolution of Switchblade, “it’s not a Switchblade.”

A video showing the Switchblade 600 loitering munition being used in combat in Ukraine:

Ukraine’s Best Weapon? The Switchblade 600

“Mayhem is not just leave-the-tube, find-the-armor, kill-the-armor, kill-the-enemy. Mayhem is any mission, anywhere, anytime. So right now, we launch out of a Common Launch Tube. We can air and ground launch,” Johnson added.

Physically, the system incorporates a removable forward section — seen in the video embedded below — to speed up integration of new payloads. More than eight different payloads have been integrated so far, Johnson said. Its launcher is self-contained and adaptable, so it can be used by dismounted troops as well as from vehicles, aircraft, and other mobile platforms. In terms of aircraft, the same promotional video shows the Mayhem 10 being launched from tubes carried on the stub wings of an H-60 Black Hawk series helicopter.

Another difference with Switchblade is Mayhem 10’s use of rocket-assisted takeoff, rather than using a gas generator. This reflects the Army’s pivot toward rocket-assisted launch, the company told us.

Kevin Williams, the chief engineer for Mayhem, told TWZ another way in which Mayhem 10 differs from Switchblade.

“Mayhem 10 is highly optimized; this is purpose-built for the launched effects mission, as opposed to a Switchblade, which is very much purpose-built for a singular anti-tank, anti-armor mission,” Williams explained. “Modularity is at its very core.”

Thanks to its modular open systems approach (MOSA), Mayhem 10 can receive upgrades and have third-party payloads integrated without major redesign.

“The modularity is really the main point here,” Johnson said. “We held a payload conference about a year and a half ago. We brought multiple vendors in, from across the spectrum, with different payloads. We shared our ICD, our interface control document, and then they came back. We wanted to make this as open architecture as we could for the Army, and it shares a lot of that same open architecture design that we’ve already incorporated with our P550,” — AeroVironment’s autonomous Group 2 eVTOL uncrewed air system, which is already in service.

A video showing the AeroVironment P550 UAS:

AeroVironment’s P550 eVTOL: Rapid Deployment and Enhanced Situational Awareness

Among the payload options, Johnson brought attention to one that “effectively can act as a HARM missile, meaning that we can identify, detect, and kill an emitter.”

Williams described one real-life scenario in which the company ran a hackathon to prove the payload modularity. The result was payload designers getting access to the interface control model, which can even be done via QR code, to get a full understanding of electrical, mechanical, and data interfaces. In at least one instance, the resulting payload was then physically integrated within 90 minutes of the supplier showing up at the AeroVironment facility.

Meanwhile, operators interface with the system through AeroVironment’s Tomahawk Grip and the AV_Halo Command environment, which are optimized for networked and distributed operations.

Perhaps most significantly, the AV_Halo Command architecture allows Mayhem 10 to operate in collaborative swarms. By networking multiple systems together, units can expand coverage, saturate defenses, and execute coordinated effects across a wide area. Brian Young, the company’s senior vice president for loitering munitions, framed this as a shift in how combat power is generated, scaling effects without concentrating forces or increasing platform risk.

The @USArmy @usarmyrccto has selected Kinesis – part of our AV_Halo Command open, modular software ecosystem – as the lead command and control software for the Human-Machine Integrated Formations (HMIF) program. Kinesis will give warfighters a unified interface to field and… pic.twitter.com/04wxsGlPHJ

— AV (@aerovironment) October 20, 2025

“We can complete multiple missions in one swarm,” Johnson continued. “They can communicate with each other and complete it. They can jam the enemy with EW payloads. We have multiple kinetic payloads, so we can run a full mission profile with multiple Mayhems.”

On the autonomy side, Mayhem 10 leverages an AI-driven processor, which the manufacturer says ensures operations in denied or degraded environments. It is designed to have resilience against jamming, spoofing, and loss of traditional navigation signals. Secure positioning and communications are enabled through M-Code GPS and a Silvus datalink, while a MANET-based mesh network provides command-and-control connectivity at ranges of roughly 16-25 miles.

At this point, AeroVironment has conducted over 50 internally funded flight tests with Mayhem 10. These have included live ordnance, EW, and Link relay flight tests, with various payloads.

“We’re approaching TRL 8 [Technology Readiness Level 8, meaning it has been tested and flight qualified] with this system this summer and entering low-rate initial production later this year,” Williams explained.

Considering that the Army is yet to place a contract, that might seem like jumping the gun, but AeroVironment says they wanted to go fast, to have a reliable product ready for when the service started to look to buy them.

“We’re entering the competitions,” Williams said. “We wanted to go fast, reliably, though. We didn’t want to come in and have a lesser product. We’re delivering a weapon system, not an experimental system.”

Currently, the company is mainly using Mayhem 10 to target the U.S. Army’s Launched Effects-Short Range (LE-SR) program, but stresses that this is part of a new family of products, so additional variants will likely appear in the future.

Should the Army choose Mayhem 10, the company has already made preparations to ramp up production. While low-rate initial production is being handled at a production line in Simi Valley, California, the company is establishing a new manufacturing facility in Salt Lake City, Utah. This will have the capacity to scale production up to between 1,000 and 2,000 units annually.

Taken together, Mayhem 10 reflects a clear trajectory in modern warfare: smaller, smarter, and more networked systems that can be fielded quickly, easily adapted, and employed in large numbers to overwhelm an adversary. At the same time, it is entering the market that is fast becoming saturated with similar products, and there will be no shortage of rivals for future Army orders.

Jamie Hunter contributed to this story.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The U.S. Navy has finally confirmed that an MQ-4C Triton surveillance drone crashed back on April 9. The circumstances that led to the loss of the uncrewed aircraft remain unknown, but the incident has now been described as a mishap. The uncrewed aircraft had vanished unexpectedly from online flight tracking sites while flying over the Persian Gulf, but where exactly where it went down is unclear.

You can read more about what was already known about the fate of the MQ-4C in our initial reporting here.

Naval Safety Command’s latest publicly available mishap summary report, which appears to have been published today, includes the following brief entry:

“9 Apr 2026 (Location Withheld – OPSEC [Operational Security]) MQ-4C crashed, no injury to personnel.”

Not surprisingly, this is categorized as a Class A mishap, which is defined as one that causes more than $2 million in damages, results in one or more individuals dying or being permanently disabled, or any combination of the above. Navy budget documents last pegged the unit price of an MQ-4C at just over $238 million. As of 2025, the Navy had 20 of these drones in service in total, with plans to acquire seven more.

TWZ reached out to the Navy and CENTCOM for comment. The Navy directed us to contact CENTCOM, and the command declined to comment.

The MQ-4C was widely assumed to have gone down last week. Right before the flow of online tracking data stopped, a huge and sudden loss of altitude, from a typical cruising altitude of around 50,000 feet down to below 10,000 feet, was recorded. At the time, the drone looked to be heading back to its base at Naval Air Station Sigonella in Italy after completing a surveillance mission over the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz.

The drone’s transponder had also been broadcasting (or “squawking”) the code 7700, which is a general declaration of an in-flight emergency, at the time. However, as TWZ noted at the time, the code, by itself, does not provide details about the nature or severity of the emergency. There were also reports that the Triton had initially squawked 7400, a different code used to declare the drone had lost its connection with controllers on the ground.

As noted, where exactly the drone went down is not clear. It was last tracked flying in international airspace over the Persian Gulf in the direction of Iran, but there is no evidence it went down in that country.

It is also unknown what steps may have been taken, or still be underway, to recover the downed MQ-4C. Each one of the drones carries a powerful active electronically scanned array (AESA) multi-mode radar, electro-optical and infrared video cameras in a turret under the nose, and electronic support measures systems for collecting electronic intelligence passively. The Navy, in cooperation with prime contractor Northrop Grumman, has also been working to upgrade the signals intelligence suites on these drones in recent years.

If an adversary could recover any of these systems largely intact, it could represent a significant intelligence loss. Though there are no indications whatsoever that the MQ-4C went down due to hostile fire, recovery of the wreckage could still be of benefit for propaganda purposes, especially for Iran in the context of the latest conflict.

Iran did shoot down a Navy RQ-4 Broad Area Maritime Surveillance-Demonstrator (BAMS-D) drone while it was flying over the Gulf of Oman in 2019, and promptly put what remained of the uncrewed aircraft on display. The BAMS-D was a precursor to the MQ-4C. The Triton is derived from the core RQ-4 Global Hawk design, but is optimized for long-duration overwater missions.

As it prepares for a potential future fight in the Pacific, the Marines tell us they are watching the progress of a wing-in-ground effect (WIG) drone concept that recently had its first test flight as a scale model. Being pitched as “the first ever Unmanned Surface and Aerial Vehicle (USA-V),” the Regent Squire is designed to conduct ISR, logistics, and combat search and rescue (CSAR) tasks in contested areas, the company states. It is also being eyed for counter-narcotics operations and anti-submarine warfare operations.

The WIG drone uses a hydrofoil to get airborne and then cruise in the air at an altitude of about one wingspan above the water. These ground-effect flights are designed to take advantage of the cushion of thick air above the earth’s surface, providing a sweet spot of increased lift and reduced drag. In theory, this should provide the Squire with high-efficiency and relevant speed, all without needing to operate from a traditional runway.

Such over-the-water logistics, ISR and CSAR capabilities would be particularly valuable in a future conflict in the Pacific. A high-end fight with China would see U.S. forces greatly dispersed, including to more remote locations without well-established infrastructure, to reduce their own vulnerability to attack. Existing traditional airlift and sealift assets would be heavily tasked in general to support those distributed operations. In some circumstances, they could also be highly vulnerable to enemy attack.

The eight-engined USV-A recently had a test flight in Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island, according to the company. A video of the event shows a Squire scale model going through its three stages of flight, from floating to hydrofoiling through the water to taking to the air. In the video, the company states that the Squire was traveling at speeds of up to 40 knots. As it gained altitude, Squire’s two hydrofoils retracted. Two support boats were in pursuit as it became airborne for an unspecified distance.

Squire Seaglider Drone Flight Demonstration

According to the company, the Squire has a planned operational 50-pound payload with a range of up to 100 nautical miles at a top speed of about 80 knots.

“The internally mounted payload bay of the Squire model measures 14 inches in length, 12 inches in height, and 14 inches in width, providing a total internal payload volume of 2,400 cubic inches for logistics, ISR equipment, or mission-specific cargo,” the company told us. “We’re designing the payload interfaces so that a two-person crew with minimal specialized training can execute a reconfiguration as realities change and mission requirements adapt.”

The company claimed this USV-A concept “combines the speed and maneuverability of an aerial vehicle with the persistent presence and endurance of an unmanned surface vessel.”

Since the U.S. Coast Guard – the U.S. regulator for this type of vessel – cleared Squire for testing last year, the company said it “has been validating systems, controls, and operational envelopes step by step. Moving forward, Regent will continue to expand Squire performance, autonomy, and operational capabilities for mission-ready maritime operations.”

The Squire concept is one of several WIG craft that the U.S. military is considering to solve the problems of delivering troops and cargo quickly over vast bodies of water, while limiting their vulnerability to enemy weapon systems, the Marines told us.

The U.S. Marine Corps Warfighting Lab (MCWL) recently received additional funds “to continue our investigation into Hydrofoiling Wing-In-Ground (WIG) capabilities,” MCWL project manager Matthew Koch told us Monday morning. Last year, we reported on MCWL’s interest in another Regent WIG offering, a crewed variant called Viceroy, designed to carry 12 passengers or 3,500 pounds of cargo.

The U.S. military’s largest WIG program hit some serious headwinds before the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) killed it last year. This was the Liberty Lifter X-plane program. Its core goal was to produce a huge flying transport design that employs the WIG effect principle. You can read more about that program in our story here.

Announcing REGENT Defense

“Some 70% of programs don’t meet their metrics,” Stephen Winchell, director of DARPA, said at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Aerospace Summit. “The idea there was to be able to move cargo quickly and securely across a vast theater with a lot of logistical challenges, and honestly, the manufacturing and a lot of the other parts of the program that needed to come together — we ended up finding out that it was harder than we thought.”

DARPA also stated that “instead of building a demonstrator aircraft, DARPA is working with industry and DOD stakeholders to accelerate transition of what we’ve learned to encourage rapid fielding of platforms leveraging the technologies developed at DARPA,” regarding the Liberty Lifter’s cancellation.

As we previously explained, the WIG principle is not new, but, as with Liberty Lifter, military applications have not seen much success. The Soviet Union remains the most notable operator of military WIG designs, known in Russian as ekranoplans – a term now widely used as a catch-all for WIG designs – but even their service was limited. Efforts to revive military ekranoplans in Russia in recent years have so far not produced any operational types.

The video below shows the only Project 903 Lun class ekranoplan, a cruise missile-armed design, that the Soviet Union ever completed being moved in the Caspian Sea in 2020 as part of a plan to put it on display.

Буксировка ракетного экраноплана «Лунь» в Дербент

Last year, we got our first full look at China’s WIG craft, loosely similar in scale to what we have seen of their new amphibious flying boat, the AG600, which is intended to perform resupply, search and rescue, and other missions, especially over the South China Sea. Though we noted that this WIG aircraft appears ideally suited for similar applications in the littorals, the status of its testing and whether it will ever be fielded remains unclear.

The Squire still has a long way to go before becoming an official program of record. The company is planning to demonstrate it at Silent Swarm 26, a two-week showcase for new and emerging technologies and conduct a full size test later this summer, Koch told us. He added that he will offer more insights into MCWL’s interests pending the outcome of those events.

“If the technology proves out in Silent Swarm this July and full-size flight in early August, I will have a statement on how the Marines intend to use it in the Pacific,” he explained.

There also appears to be interest in Regent’s WIG efforts from the Pentagon. In February, War Secretary Pete Hegseth visited the company’s headquarters as part of his efforts to spur technological innovation.

“We want capabilities that are driving what we are fielding and not the way it’s always been done,” Hegseth said during the encounter. “If you are able to show that you can fill a gap quickly with something that wasn’t already otherwise envisioned, you’re talking to the right kind of commander there who is going to say, ‘Okay, I am going to use that here.’”

REGENT Briefs Secretary of War on Seaglider Defense Capabilities

We have reached out to the Pentagon to gauge Hegseth’s current interest in the Squire project and see if there was any follow up activity from that meeting.

While still in the nascent phases, the WIG concept continues to draw interest from the U.S. military, though it has only invested a small amount of money in these projects. Given the challenges presented by a potential conflict with China, we will continue to monitor the progress of these efforts and provide updates when warranted.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

As Israel continues its ground offensive into Lebanon, it appears that Hezbollah is increasing its first-person view (FPV) drone strikes on IDF armor and personnel. The uptick in these attacks is the latest example of how the use of the small, fast and easy to maneuver weapons has proliferated from the war in Ukraine to battlefields across the globe.

While the militant Lebanese group has used FPV drones against Israel since 2024, it has ramped up these attacks for a couple of different reasons, according to Ryan Brobst, Deputy Director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)’s Center on Military and Political Power.

“The IDF is currently operating further north with more troops than in previous operations, which increases the number and proximity of targets for Hezbollah to strike,” Brobst told us. In addition, there are indications that the Iranian proxy has followed additional lessons from the Ukraine war using fiber optic cables to guide the drones. As we have frequently reported, fiber optic cables mitigate the effect of electronic warfare efforts to jam radio signals as well as some of the limitations imposed by geographical features that can impede the line-of-sight radio connection between drone and operator.

“One additional consideration may be the rising availability of fiber optic drones,” Brobst explained. “Just to be clear, I am not certain the extent to which Hezbollah has switched to fiber optics vs radio, or that radio models are totally ineffective. But it seems quite unlikely Hezbollah had significant numbers of fiber optics in 2024, given that Russia and Ukraine were just starting to deploy them that year. They are much more available now.”

Several videos recorded by Hezbollah recently have emerged on social media claiming to show its use of fiber optic-controlled FPV drones.

One video claims to show a compilation of Hezbollah FPV strikes that hit two Merkava Mk.4 main battle tanks, a D9 Caterpillar armored bulldozer, and what appears to be a Namer heavy infantry fighting vehicle (IFV).

The extent of the damage is not fully clear from these videos. The feeds end as soon as the drone strikes the target. Unlike both Ukraine and Russia, it would appear that Hezbollah does not have additional drones flying overhead to record the aftermath of these attacks, at least in select instances.

Another video shows claimed fiber-optic controlled FPV drone strikes on the open hatch of a Merkava as well as on an Eitan Armored Personnel Carrier parked behind a building. Again, there is no clear indication of any damage to either vehicle.

In a scene also reminiscent of the fight in Ukraine, Hezbollah used a fiber-optic controlled FPV drone to fly into a building. This is a tactic that both Ukrainian and Russian troops regularly train on and a skill they repeatedly hone.

🇮🇷🇮🇱🇱🇧 In a similar vein, the fact that Israel operates many very heavily armoured vehicles incentivizes Hizballah to employ its armed “FPV” multirotor drones against IDF personnel, whether in the open or in inside structures. Note that armed “FPV” multirotor drones of the… https://t.co/j9fCoY6Y9g pic.twitter.com/dwwrzpHdnX

— Shahryar Pasandideh (@shahpas) April 6, 2026

While no cables are visible in the drones used in any of these videos, the lack of degradation in their video feeds, even as they approach low to the ground is a good indication of a fiber-optic connection.

It is difficult to know the full extent of Hezbollah’s use of FPV drones of any kind or what damage they are inflicting. Much of the evidence of the attacks, Brobst notes, comes from the release of Hezbollah videos.

“There is evidence that Hezbollah had used FPVs by at least 2024, but significantly fewer videos exist from that time period,” he explained. “If Hezbollah had conducted successful attacks previously, they would likely have been releasing videos of them for propaganda effect, as they are doing now.”

The following video shows one of those Hezbollah FPV drone attacks from September 2024.

🇮🇱🇱🇧 Hezbollah uses a FPV drone to hit an Israeli HMMWV in Jal al-Alam

If Hezbollah has adjusted to new tactics from the Ukraine war and has drones and operators at scale, Israel might be in big trouble … if they move.

Russian instructors in Lebanon would be not surprising. pic.twitter.com/q1RQguqYfg

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 11, 2024

Getting a full picture on the extent of the damage caused is difficult given the IDF’s strict censorship policies. 

“The IDF has not released hard numbers on this unfortunately,” Brobst stated.

While the IDF does not acknowledge these events, its operational updates for March 26 “include a reference to several soldiers of the 7th Brigade sustaining injuries, one of whom was killed,” FDD stated. “It is not clear whether these casualties were the result of a Hezbollah FPV attack, but their unit is an armored brigade known to operate Israel’s Merkava 4 tank.”

A senior IDF official told The War Zone these videos show Hezbollah using FPV drones “with accurate manual control and sensible targeting (top of vehicles, weak points), the clips do show genuine strike capability, and some hits are probably real.”

However, “the videos cannot prove actual damage to a Merkava Mark IV…Footage is selectively edited, so success rates are likely overstated.”

The bottom line, he added is that “FPVs are a credible and growing technical threat, but the clips are evidence of capability — not proof of consistent effectiveness or system failure.”

Israel does have some means of countering drone attacks on armor. In addition to fielding electronic warfare equipment designed to jam drone radio signals (which does not work against fiber optic FPVs), some Israeli military vehicles are equipped with the combat-proven Trophy active protection systems (APS). The system uses radar detect and trigger small hit-to-kill projectiles at incoming threats. It was built mainly to defeat anti-tank missiles and RPGs, but new upgrades of the system have counter-drone capabilities, as well. You can read more about this emerging feature set and its potential here. It is unclear if any of Israel’s armor in Lebanon have this newer active protection system enhancement or if upgrades to earlier systems can also provide some of this capability.

Trophy® APS – The land maneuver enabler

Israel is not alone in being with FPV drones fired by Iranian proxies. As we reported last month, FPV drones targeted a U.S. military Black Hawk helicopter and a critical air defense radar at an American base in Iraq. Khataib Hezbollah, a group separate from the similarly named Lebanese group, is suspected of being behind the attack. This was one of a number of FPV attacks in Arab countries where U.S. forces are based.

You can see one of the drones hit the Black Hawk in the following video.

An Iranian-backed militia carried out a successful FPV drone strike on Camp Victory in Iraq yesterday, successfully hitting multiple targets.

Seen here, one of the FPV attack munitions hits a parked UH-60 Black Hawk. pic.twitter.com/ngY8td9ONZ

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) March 25, 2026

The widespread use of FPV drones, both radio- and fiber-optic-controlled, has made maneuver warfare in Ukraine exceedingly difficult for either side. Meanwhile, both Russia and Ukraine have been making improvements to extend the range of their FPV drones, especially those controlled by fiber optic cables. This includes bigger spools allowing longer ranges as well as additions of things like wings to improve aerodynamics which also increases range. Both sides are also using a variety of drones as relays to increase the range of their radio-controlled drones.

You can see one example of a winged Ukrainian FPV drone in the video below.

Another Ukrainian variant of a winged FPP, this time recorded by the Russians on a mission armed with a PG-7 series warhead.
The intention is to dramatically increase the range of a standard FPV, and it is promising to be a very significant development in the small drone war. https://t.co/iVv6EyJq7B pic.twitter.com/sqYZEjcj7N

— Roy🇨🇦 (@GrandpaRoy2) April 8, 2026

At the moment, there is no indication that Israel has any plans to cease its invasion of southern Lebanon, which has emerged as a main sticking point in negotiations to end the war against Iran. On Thursday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that there was no ceasefire with Hezbollah.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

“Dear residents of the North, I am proud of you. You continue to stand firm.

I wish to inform you: There is no ceasefire in Lebanon. We are continuing to strike Hezbollah with full force, and we will not stop until we restore your security. pic.twitter.com/k2JeKXEMBQ

— Prime Minister of Israel (@IsraeliPM) April 9, 2026

How Hezbollah’s FPV capabilities will impact Israeli operations isn’t clear at this time, but if anything else, they are another sign of the proliferation of these capabilities and the challenges of defending against them.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The casualty rate for Russian soldiers in Ukraine increased to a new monthly high in March, according to Ukraine’s armed forces. They say drone production enabled a record number of strikes.

Ukraine tallied Russian casualties at 35,351 last month, with drones causing 96 per cent of them while artillery and small arms fire accounted for the rest. That casualty rate was a 29 per cent increase on February, said Ukraine’s commander in chief.

“These are clearly confirmed losses: we have video footage of each such strike in our system,” said Ukrainian Defence Minister Mykhailo Fedorov.

The losses are slightly above a previous record set in December, and appear to confirm Ukraine’s claim that Russian casualty rates are rising inexorably this year. Ukrainian Presidential Office Deputy Head Colonel Pavlo Palisa told RBC-Ukraine that Russia had suffered 316 casualties for every square kilometre it captured in the first three months of 2026, compared with 120 casualties per square kilometre last year.

Ukraine’s defence ministry said Russia has been unable to replace all of the losses since December. Russia aimed to recruit 409,000 contract soldiers this year, Ukraine’s armed forces said in January.

That means a daily average recruitment rate of 1,120. But Ukraine’s “I Want to Live” initiative, which provides communication channels for Russian soldiers wishing to surrender, said Russia recruited 940 troops a day in the first quarter.

If sustained, that meant Russian recruitment was on track for a 65,000-man shortfall this year. Ukraine now sees manpower shortages as a Russian strategic weakness it can exploit. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, set a goal of 50,000 Russian casualties a month in January, which he called the “optimal level” to ensure Russian forces weaken irrecoverably.

“We are confidently moving towards our strategic goal – 50,000+ eliminated occupiers per month,” said the Ukrainian defence ministry.

The territory Russia is capturing for its mounting losses is also in long-term decline, according to estimates by the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank. Russian forces captured an average of 5.5sq km a day this year, compared to 10.66sq km a day in the middle of last year and 14.9sq km a day at the end of 2024, said the ISW.

Zelenskyy said the stark reality of manpower weakness lay behind Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ceasefire demand that Ukraine hand over the heavily fortified quarter of the eastern Donetsk region it held last August.

“They believe that if we retreat, they won’t lose hundreds of thousands of people,” Zelenskyy told the Associated Press in an interview this week.

Drones are the key

Ukrainian officials credit drone production and training for their armed forces’ growing lethality. Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskii said the armed forces struck 151,207 targets in March using drones, a 50 per cent increase on February. That’s the result of 11,000 drone sorties a day.

“This is all a historical maximum,” Syrskii said.

Palisa said that’s because Ukraine’s drone manufacturing had managed to outpace Russia’s to achieve a 1.3:1 overall ratio in First Person View drones on the frontlines.

Other reports suggested Ukraine was raising drone production. Fedorov said Ukrainian interceptor drones shot down a record 33,000 Russian UAVs of various types in March – twice as many as in the previous month.

His deputy, Serhii “Flash” Beskrestnov said he was working with interceptor drone manufacturers to develop the next generation of interceptors capable of flying at 400-550km/h to counter the jet-powered Shahed drones to which Russia was gradually converting.

Fire Point, Ukraine’s biggest manufacturer of long-range drones used in the majority of strikes deep inside Russia, told Reuters that it had designed two ballistic missiles of 300km and 850km range, which were approaching the deployment stage.

The longer-range type is capable of reaching Moscow.

Ukraine gains defensive ‘strategic initiative’

Syrskii thinks that Ukraine’s forces, although still ceding small amounts of territory, have now gained “the strategic initiative” because they “do not allow Russian troops to resume a large-scale offensive.”

He said an increase in mid-range strikes against logistics, warehouses, command posts and oil depots 30-120 km into the Russian rear had been particularly effective in hamstringing Russian assaults – one of the top operational priorities.

Syrskii said on April 5 that fighting was most intense in Dnipropetrovsk, where Ukraine’s forces have recaptured eight settlements and 480sq km of territory.

Ukraine’s leadership has long believed that Russia harbours territorial ambitions to seize the Odesa and Mykolaiv regions to control Ukraine’s entire Black Sea coastline, and to carve out a buffer zone across northern Ukraine.

Palisa told RBK-Ukraine on April 8 that Russia also planned to create a southern buffer zone in Ukraine’s southwestern Vinnytsia region next to Moldova’s Russian-speaking territory of Transnistria.

That was the first time a Ukrainian official has suggested such an ambition. “I am 100 per cent convinced that the Russians want to completely occupy us,” Zelenskyy told the AP.

Video shows an explosion in the sky above Erbil, in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, in a suspected drone interception following reports of an unidentified aircraft flying over the city. Earlier, Kuwait reported a drone attack. The IRGC insists Iran has not launched anything during the ceasefire.

April 9 (Asia Today) — Drones have emerged as a game changer that is reshaping modern warfare, from the Russia-Ukraine war to the U.S.-Israel conflict with Iran in the Middle East.

Scenes of suicide drones costing only a few thousand dollars knocking out tanks worth millions have sent shockwaves through defense officials around the world. As South Korea’s defense industry sweeps global markets with tanks and self-propelled howitzers, a pressing question is coming into focus: How competitive is the country’s drone technology, and is it ready for the next war?

South Korea strong in hardware, weak in software

According to defense experts and military officials, South Korea’s drone platform design capability has already reached a world-class level. Large unmanned aircraft developed by Hanwha Aerospace and Korean Air, including medium-altitude unmanned aerial vehicles, have demonstrated strong global competitiveness.

But the picture looks very different beneath the surface.

Among smaller drone manufacturers, the localization rate for flight controllers and core software – the brains of the drone – remains low. In many cases, companies still modify and use Chinese-made Pixhawk systems despite persistent security concerns. In the supply chain as well, South Korea has been slow to reduce dependence on China for critical parts such as motors, gearboxes and communication modules, raising red flags over supply chain security.

Industry officials say government regulation remains another major obstacle. Complaints that “the technology exists, but there is no market” continue to spread through the sector. Strict testing requirements and rigid procurement procedures have created bottlenecks that keep civilian innovation from quickly turning into military capability.

A defense industry expert said drones that are domestic in name only could remain fully exposed to data theft or remote disablement in wartime. The expert said the localization of core components directly tied to security must be the top priority for South Korea’s drone industry.

South Korea’s drone sector is often described as having a strong information technology foundation, but facing an urgent need to localize critical parts and secure battlefield readiness. Experts say the next decisive turning points will be whether the country can localize motors and transmission systems and take the lead in standards for artificial intelligence-based autonomous flight.

North Korea’s asymmetric drone threat evolves with AI and swarming

While South Korea struggles to close those gaps, North Korea’s drone threat is rapidly evolving beyond simple surveillance.

Analysts say the unmanned aircraft recently unveiled by Pyongyang are advancing toward suicide attack capabilities and AI-based autonomous flight. One military expert, speaking on condition of anonymity, warned that North Korea is trying to overcome its weakness in hardware through three forms of low-cost, high-volume drone warfare backed by AI technology.

The first is the suicide drone, or kamikaze drone, which poses a severe threat in cost-effectiveness because a cheap drone can destroy military assets worth vastly more. The second is the swarm drone tactic, in which dozens of drones attack at the same time to overload radar and air defense networks. The third is the AI-equipped autonomous drone, which can ignore GPS jamming, recognize terrain on its own and press toward its target.

North Korea has also unveiled drones modeled after U.S. systems such as the Global Hawk and Reaper, emerging as a new source of threat. In peacetime, such aircraft could be used for surveillance of the Seoul metropolitan area and frontline units near the Demilitarized Zone. In wartime, they could become a serious asymmetric threat capable of striking mechanized ground forces through low-altitude penetration, even if South Korea and the United States secure control of the skies.

Unhappily for South Korea, the military’s shield against such threats remains in its infancy. Laser-based air defense weapons are being fielded, but experts say they are still not enough to completely stop ultra-small, low-flying drones.

Defense specialists and drone manufacturers say that if South Korea wants to rise as a true drone power, it must now place its bet on AI-based manned-unmanned teaming systems and anti-drone technology.

Modern warfare, they say, is now an age of evolutionary acquisition. Rather than waiting for a weapon to become 100% perfect, militaries must field systems that are 80% ready, learn from feedback and build them into something stronger. If enemy drones are using AI overhead to choose targets while South Korea remains tied down by regulation and dependence on Chinese-made parts, the outcome could become painfully clear.

Experts say the government and military must recognize that drone sovereignty is survival. They argue that a fast track must be opened so civilian innovation can cross immediately into military service before the gap becomes a battlefield liability.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260409010002881

For nearly four weeks now, a very stealthy high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) surveillance and reconnaissance drone commonly and unofficially referred to as the RQ-180, or an evolution thereof, has been seen flying around Larissa Air Base in Greece. New, remarkably detailed videos of the uncrewed aircraft that have recently spread on social media offer insights into its sensor package and other aspects of the design. Just yesterday, TWZ also published an in-depth feature exploring the likely role of the ‘RQ-180’ in the ongoing conflict in Iran and how it ties to a secret Cold War drone program that was, in many ways, its progenitor.

The very large and very stealthy flying wing-type drone was first spotted in the skies around Larissa Air Base, also known as Larissa National Airport, in the city of the same name in Greece, back on March 18. Local spotter Efthymios Siakaras shared two new video clips offering especially good views of the uncrewed aircraft in flight, one on Sunday and another on Monday, which our friends over at The Aviationist were first to report on. Similar to the stealthy RQ-170 Sentinel being dubbed the “Beast of Kandahar” after it was first spotted in Afghanistan in the late 2000s, many are now also calling this drone the “Lady of Larissa.”

🇺🇸🇬🇷 O drone de reconhecimento furtivo americano RQ-180, de uso secreto, foi avistado pela segunda vez ontem, pousando em Larissa, na Grécia.

Esta é a melhor imagem até o momento da aeronave altamente secreta e ainda não confirmada.

Acredita-se que os RQ-180 estejam… pic.twitter.com/40JuHKUpr2

— Leo Kasura (@LeoKasura) April 6, 2026

Of the features visible in the latest footage of the Lady of Larissa, the most notable are a pair of large electro-optical sensor apertures underneath its central fuselage, right behind the main landing gear bay. The two windows are noticeably angled to the left and right. Behind those transparencies would be a large multi-spectral sensor system that can look down to the ground below and out at long slant angles towards the horizon from the aircraft’s very high perch. By having one window on each side, the RQ-180 could run racetrack patterns some distance from its target while providing continuous coverage. If a sensor is housed under each window, it could collect intelligence over much larger swathes of terrain at any given time.

As TWZ has noted for years, the RQ-180 would, with near certainty, carry a powerful radar with ground moving target indicator (GMTI) and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) modes as its primary sensor, along with electronic intelligence collection capabilities. Optical camera systems were always another possibility, one that seems to have proven true now.

As we wrote just yesterday:

“At its most basic, GMTI allows battle managers to see the enemy’s ground movements in real-time and then quickly adapt their game plan to counter those enemy forces before they can ever attack, or even pose a threat to friendly forces. GMTI is also a critical capability for detecting changes in force posture, establishing patterns of enemy movements over time, and identifying new targets of interest. Modern GMTI products can also be looped into a ‘kill web’ for rapid targeting purposes.“

“Some of this is also achieved through the aforementioned SAR mode, which basically provides a satellite-like image of a target area using radar. It also has the ability to see some things optical systems cannot, and, like GMTI, it can work under nearly all atmospheric conditions, day or night. When paired with GMTI, SAR can be used to help positively identify targets, as well as gain better situational awareness about the targets being tracked.“

“Passive electronic intelligence collection that allows for radiofrequency-emitters to be quickly detected and geolocated via onboard antennas and interferometry-based computing is another part of the equation. Long-range optical sensors can also provide higher-fidelity intelligence and spot movements of infrared signatures over large areas. You can imagine how fusing all these capabilities together, combined with advanced networking, on a single platform could be incredibly potent. Basically, detecting a target or target group of interest, and then training advanced sensors on it to rapidly build up a high-quality understanding of what is going on and even to provide real-time targeting data to ‘shooters’ would be this aircraft’s bread and butter.“

The drone’s electro-optical system and radar, together with the rest of its sensor suite, could offer a secondary air-to-air surveillance capability, as well.

As an interesting aside, Scaled Composites’ Proteus high-altitude test aircraft has previously been seen flying with an extremely similar-looking sensor suite with an oddly angled aperture housing. The high-flying Proteus has a long history of being used to test and evaluate new sensors and other advanced capabilities. Scaled Composites is also a wholly-owned subsidiary of Northrop Grumman, widely understood to be the prime contractor behind the RQ-180.

When we saw pics of that EO aperture on Proteus years ago I said to Joe, “well that’s sure to be for the 180!” https://t.co/iGT83KX4JC

— Tyler Rogoway (@Aviation_Intel) April 6, 2026

In addition, the underside of the drone’s central fuselage, which is where the main array for the aforementioned radar would go, has a very pronounced bulge. This would house a rotating radar or a two-sided one so that the aircraft can scan the same area while traveling in either direction. Supplemental conformal arrays, or even load-bearing ones, could also be positioned all around the aircraft, along with communications antennas, electronic warfare gear, and electronic surveillance measures hardware.

The new views of the drone flying around Larissa underscore just how widely positioned its tricycle landing gear is, along with its very broad wingspan. As we’ve noted previously, a landing gear configuration like this allows for a large volume for payload and good stability on the ground.

It is worth pointing out that there looks to be a foreign object debris (FOD) deflector fitted around the wheel of the nose landing gear. In general, the radar absorbent coatings and the composite skins of stealthy aircraft are very sensitive. What might look to be relatively minor surface damage at a casual glance can have significant negative impacts when it comes to radar cross-section, which is critical for the aircraft’s mission effectiveness and survival. From what we can see, the drone will be sitting very low on its gear when on the ground. This only increases the potential for foreign objects to get kicked up and hit its belly during takeoff and landing. This is especially true for the low-hanging ventral bulge where sensor apertures are, right behind the nose gear. So, this debris guard makes total sense.

The nose gear strut also has what is called a trailing link or trailing arm, a feature designed to help smooth the impact of landing.

The trailing-link style nose landing gear otherwise has a two-wheel configuration very much in line with that of the B-21 Raider bomber, but in a scaled-down form. This is not all that much of a surprise, as the B-21 shares a general planform with the RQ-180. The Raider’s development was likely heavily influenced by the RQ-180, or a progenitor of the flying wing uncrewed aircraft we are seeing today.

The drone’s main landing gear looks extremely similar to what is found on F-15 fighters. Borrowing existing, proven components for experimental or low-production aircraft like this is a time-honored tradition. The use of an F-15’s main landing gear points to a high gross takeoff weight. The maximum takeoff weight of the latest F-15EX variant is 81,000 pounds, according to Boeing, and the F-15 has a much smaller, single nose wheel. For comparison, the high-flying Global Hawk drone’s maximum takeoff weight is 32,250 pounds, per the U.S. Air Force, and it has distinctly less robust landing gear to match.

At the same time, the Lady of Larissa would not necessarily need to make use of all of that capacity, or it could even have a bit higher gross weight, and various additional factors could have influenced the choice of landing gear. The overall design is likely to be light for its overall size to maximize range, endurance, and high-altitude performance. With its reconnaissance and surveillance mission sets, there would be no need for a payload bay structure to carry heavy weapons. This, along with the lack of any need to support a crew, would allow the aircraft to be absolutely packed with fuel.

While its similarities to the B-21 are glaring, the Lady of Larissa is even more optimized for high-altitude flight than the Raider, which itself is a step beyond in altitude performance over the B-2. You can read all about this in our past feature here. The drone’s overall massive flying wing shape and its very clean, laminar flow-like sculpting, along with wings that look designed to allow the RQ-180 to loiter at relatively extreme altitudes, support its penetrating, persistent reconnaissance mission set.

Furthermore, the most recent videos of the Lady of Larissa offer new looks at the control surfaces in action. Like what is found on the B-21 and Northrop’s preceding B-2 Spirit bomber, the drone has flaperons along the trailing edges of the wings and along its diamond-like empennage. There may also be a central variable geometry ‘beaver tail’ section, something also found on the B-2, but not on the B-21, although this could just be the inboard flaps being slightly extended.

Much remains to be learned about the drone’s design and capabilities, as well as why it is operating out of Greece and how long it has used Larissa as a forward base. Why such a sensitive asset continues to be seen flying in the middle of the day is also curious. After the highly exotic uncrewed aircraft was first spotted at Larissa, reports said that it had landed there after experiencing some kind of technical issue, though this remains unconfirmed. The drone could have diverted there after taking off for a mission from another operating location, even one potentially inside the United States. All that being said, as we’ve noted in the past, Larissa does look to have unique facilities that seem very well suited for hosting an aircraft like this, and that were only built in recent years.

It may be that it simply has no place to hide any longer, and more flexibility is being exercised as to when it can and can’t depart and land from wherever it’s operating from. This could also mean the Pentagon may be more willing to acknowledge its existence in the not-so-distant future.

As mentioned at the start of this story, TWZ just yesterday laid out a detailed case for why the RQ-180 would be very relevant for helping hunt Iranian mobile missile launchers. That is a mission set that likely evolved from work on a previous secret Cold War-era stealthy drone program called the Advanced Airborne Reconnaissance System (AARS), also known by the codename Quartz. There are many other roles it could execute in relation to Operation Epic Fury, as well.

Overall, we have gotten our best look at the so-called RQ-180. We now know it is capable of radio-frequency and electro-optical sensing, and we have a bit better idea of its overall size and mass. This is a very large unmanned system that is smaller in size than the B-21, but far larger than RQ-170. A very cursory guess supports a wingspan of something on the order of 130 feet or larger, but again, that is just a guess. This aircraft is clearly optimized to fly at least at Global Hawk altitudes (upwards of 60,000 feet) and possibly higher, approaching that of the U-2, giving it a huge line of sight to target areas. Being such an efficient-looking design and being so large with so much internal volume, it likely measures its endurance in days, not hours.

The videos of the RQ-180 operating in the daytime also come as China is moving forward with its own very large unmanned stealth flying wing designs.

If the war with Iran continues, we will probably be seeing more of the Lady of Larissa, with its shyness appearing to be waning just a bit.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Last month, images hit the internet showing a very stealthy, extremely long-endurance, very high-altitude intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance drone commonly (and unofficially) referred to as the RQ-180, or an evolution thereof, landing at a base in Greece. Many questions remain about the uncrewed aircraft and why it might be operating from Larissa Air Base.

However, as we noted in our initial reporting, the current conflict with Iran would be a very relevant fit for what the RQ-180 was likely designed to do. Furthermore, a secretive late Cold War-era drone program known as Quartz, intended to persistently monitor mobile nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles deep within the Soviet Union, offers a window into exactly why the RQ-180 could be in high demand in the Middle East now. There is no higher-priority standing mission for Operation Epic Fury at this time than finding and destroying Iranian launchers.

In many ways, the shadowy Quartz program from decades ago was a progenitor for what became a very large flying wing uncrewed aircraft that shares the planform of the B-21 (and the original B-2 design) and is likely at least part of the RQ-180’s origin story.

Strange arrival over Greece

To recap quickly, on March 18, local Greek news website onlarissa.gr first published pictures of what it misidentified as a B-2 bomber landing at Larissa Air Base, also known as Larissa National Airport. The base, which belongs to the Hellenic Air Force, but is also known to host U.S. Air Force MQ-9 Reaper drones, is situated in the city of the same name.

Onlarissa.gr outlet followed up its initial reporting by posting a video of the drone, seen below. Additional and increasingly more detailed imagery has subsequently emerged.

Το αμερικανικό βομβαρδιστικό Β-2 πάνω από τον ουρανό της Λάρισας

Per onlarissa.gr, the highly exotic aircraft had landed at Larissa after experiencing some kind of technical issue, citing unnamed sources. This remains unconfirmed, but it would explain why the drone touched down in broad daylight, rather than coming in under the cover of darkness. It could also have diverted there with an emergency, while operating out of another location, even one in the continental United States. It is worth noting that Larissa Air Base appears to have unique facilities built in recent years that seem to be very well suited for housing an aircraft like this.

TWZ previously reached out to U.S. Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) and the Pentagon for comment, but has not received any responses as of the time of writing. In a story published on March 24, Air & Space Forces Magazine said U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) also declined to comment.

Attention was also subsequently called to U.S. Air Force cargo planes having been tracked making unusual flights from Edwards Air Force Base in California to Larissa recently. One of those flights came on February 25, while another one occurred on March 9. A C-5M also flew to Larissa from Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma on February 25, according to Aviation Week. Whether there is any connection between these flights and the drone spotted at the base has not been confirmed at this time. Edwards is the Air Force’s main hub for aviation test and evaluation efforts, and flight testing of the RQ-180 was reportedly at least managed from there in the 2010s. The Air Force could also have moved other assets to Larissa via Edwards.

The shadowy state of the ‘RQ-180’

The current state of the RQ-180, or any designs that have evolved from it, on a programmatic level, is very murky. In addition to testing at Edwards, past reports have said that a unit at Beale Air Force Base in California began flying the drones operationally, at least on a limited level, by 2019. There has been talk of a large flying wing aircraft similar in configuration to the B-21 Raider bomber flying out of Plant 42 in Palmdale, also in California, under the cover of darkness for years.

There are very strong indications that a photograph that appeared on Instagram in October 2020 of an unmanned aircraft flying in the skies over California’s Mojave Desert near Edwards Air Force Base was the first sighting of an RQ-180. That picture also notably showed a drone with an overall white paint scheme. That aligned with a report from Aviation Week that the design had gained the nicknames “Great White Bat” and “Shikaka.” The latter of these is the name of a fictional sacred white bat that is at the center of the plot of the 1995 Jim Carrey comedy Ace Ventura 2. The drone seen recently flying over Larissa has an overall black or otherwise dark-colored paint job. TWZ has noted previously that an overall white/cream/light pastel color scheme could help the drone to hide better at high altitudes during the day, but that a dark scheme would be more relevant at night. It is very possible, if not probable, that multiple schemes have been tested for a drone expected to fly sorties lasting multiple days.

It has long been thought that the RQ-180 could be a much-discussed, more survivable replacement for the non-stealthy RQ-4 Global Hawk drone, the vast majority of which are now retired. At the same time, the U.S. Air Force, now together with the U.S. Space Force, has been engaged in a major effort to push more surveillance capabilities, including exactly some of what the RQ-180 is likely intended to do, into space. This has led to public force structure changes and deferrals of traditional airborne sensing capabilities, and could have resulted in the stealthy high altitude, long-endurance (HALE) drone program being scaled back.

There certainly has been no clear evidence, at Beale or anywhere else, of the establishment of the kind of infrastructure that one would associate with the RQ-180 reaching a more advanced operational state and serial production. It is possible that the drone could share facilities with the B-21 under the larger umbrella of the Long Range Strike (LRS) family of systems. The RQ-180 is very likely intended, in part, to work in concert with the Raider, and there may even be some commonality between the two aircraft. The RQ-180 and/or related designs very likely played a direct role in risk reduction efforts that helped sell the Long Range Strike-Bomber (LRS-B) concept, and possibly the win by Northrop Grumman of that contract.

B-21 Takeoff and Landing

So, where the RQ-180 stands in terms of its overall capacity and its future remains unclear, but they are clearly being used on operational sorties, at least in a limited manner.

Iranian missile threats persist

After more than five weeks of fighting, the conflict with Iran is still grinding on. Despite the United States and Israel having substantially degraded the ability of Iranian forces to launch retaliatory missile and drone strikes, they have not stopped entirely. Iran has been digging out underground missile bases struck by American and Israeli forces and getting them back into operation, sometimes within hours, The New York Times reported just last Friday, citing U.S. intelligence reports. That followed other reports stating that Iran still retains a vast arsenal of missiles and drones, as well as a significant number of launchers to fire them.

In recent weeks, publicly available data from multiple sources has, at times, shown relatively small, but noticeable upticks in Iran’s launches. There are also signs that more of those threats are evading interception, though whether this has translated to more damage and/or casualties from impacts is unclear.

When it comes to launchers, Iran has invested heavily over the years in road mobile designs for firing ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as drones. This includes types that can be hard to distinguish from normal civilian trucks, especially those used for launching short-range ballistic missiles.

✈️🎯60+ strike flights: The IAF completed additional waves of strikes in western Iran targeting the Iranian regime’s missile launchers, defense systems, and live-fire arrays. pic.twitter.com/I1rRLBJlUR

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) March 3, 2026

Iran also has extensive underground ‘missile cities’ and other hardened sites that launchers can sprint to and from, and even fire from within in some cases. Beyond the main missile storage and launch sites, Iranian authorities have clearly had plans to disperse these weapons across the country. Reports have said that more authority to employ them has been delegated to lower echelons of command to minimize the impacts of separate U.S. and Israeli strikes on command and control nodes, as well.

On top of all this, Iran still has longer-ranged ballistic missiles that it can fire from areas further to the east, where the volume of U.S. and Israeli strikes has only more recently begun to grow. What’s left of Iran’s air defenses, which presents a real threat, is therefore likely to be more intact in those regions. In general, many of Iran’s air defense systems are also road mobile and can pop-up suddenly. All of this creates challenges for finding and fixing Iran’s remaining launch capacity, let alone neutralizing it.

Three weeks of Operation Epic Fury.

The Joint Force owns the skies, but Tehran holds the Strait. Additional U.S. fighter aircraft and naval assets arrived in both theaters, and Marine expeditionary forces are en route.

8,000+ Iranian targets and 130+ ships struck, per CENTCOM. pic.twitter.com/Xk8XYs1sP2

— Ian Ellis (@ianellisjones) March 23, 2026

The Israeli Air Force has dropped over 16,000 bombs in Iran since the start of the war, in over 800 waves of strikes, the military says.

According to the IDF, over 10,000 separate strikes have been carried out on 4,000 targets. pic.twitter.com/gkU4rW4s8T

— Emanuel (Mannie) Fabian (@manniefabian) April 1, 2026

In this context, there is a clear need to be able to readily detect launchers, which can pop out suddenly and unexpectedly from cover, across vast areas. Known missile storage sites and launch areas around them also need to be persistently surveilled. The ability to find launchers faster opens up new options for striking them. Just tracking and recording their typical movements would also help further refine interdiction and intelligence-gathering strategies going forward.

As TWZ has previously explored in great depth, the RQ-180 is best understood as a very high-flying, very long-endurance, and very stealthy intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance platform that is capable of penetrating and persisting deep into enemy airspace. Its primary means of achieving that mission would be a radar with ground moving target indicator (GMTI) and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) capabilities, but radar would be just the primary component of a larger sensor package, which would likely include powerful electro-optical sensors and passive radiofrequency ones.

At its most basic, GMTI allows battle managers to see the enemy’s ground movements in real-time and then quickly adapt their game plan to counter those enemy forces before they can ever attack, or even pose a threat to friendly forces. GMTI is also a critical capability for detecting changes in force posture, establishing patterns of enemy movements over time, and identifying new targets of interest. Modern GMTI products can also be looped into a ‘kill web’ for rapid targeting purposes.

Some of this is also achieved through the aforementioned SAR mode, which basically provides a satellite-like image of a target area using radar. It also has the ability to see some things optical systems cannot, and, like GMTI, it can work under nearly all atmospheric conditions, day or night. When paired with GMTI, SAR can be used to help positively identify targets, as well as gain better situational awareness about the targets being tracked.

Passive electronic intelligence collection that allows for radiofrequency-emitters to be quickly detected and geolocated via onboard antennas and interferometry-based computing is another part of the equation. Long-range optical sensors can also provide higher-fidelity intelligence and spot movements of infrared signatures over large areas. You can imagine how fuzing all these capabilities together, combined with advanced networking, on a single platform could be incredibly potent. Basically, detecting a target or target group of interest, and then training advanced sensors on it to rapidly build up a high-quality understanding of what is going on and even to provide real-time targeting data to ‘shooters’ would be this aircraft’s bread and butter.

All of these are capabilities that would be ideally suited to the very high-priority task at hand of searching for Iranian launchers across the country’s vast terrain.

This all brings us back to Quartz and the very specific mission set that drove that program. Quartz is the best-known codename for a drone conceived as part of what was officially dubbed the Advanced Airborne Reconnaissance System, or AARS program.

The lead-up to Quartz

AARS/Quartz was itself born out of a succession of earlier developments. Proving that using a stealth platform to penetrate enemy air defenses and to stay over contested territory for hours on end while transmitting data collected without being detected is one of the biggest revolutions in warfare of the 20th Century. This capability was demonstrated on the tactical side at the dawn of stealth technology by Northrop’s Tacit Blue. That aircraft was developed as part of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) highly classified Battlefield Surveillance Aircraft-Experimental (BSAX) program, which began in the late 1970s. 

Tacit Blue notably served as a periphery risk reduction effort for the Advanced Technology Bomber (ATB) program that would result in the B-2. However, its reason for being was to show that a stealthy aircraft carrying a huge radar can penetrate enemy air defenses and loiter for prolonged periods of time, collecting GMTI radar data and other intelligence information.

The radar for BSAX was a low probability of intercept design that had come from Pave Mover, another DARPA effort. Pave Mover ultimately led to the non-stealthy and now-retired E-8 Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) aircraft, but offshoots of that radar technology did end up elsewhere, including on the B-2. Low probability of intercept/low probability of detection (LPI/LPD) radars and communications suites are now key tenets of stealth aircraft design, in general. Keeping signal emissions, which an enemy can use to spot and track threats, to a minimum is critical for low-observable (stealthy) aircraft designs. Pave Mover was also tied into DARPA’s Assault Breaker program, which focused on proving out various technologies to enable standoff targeting of enemy forces, especially large Soviet armored formations on the move, deep behind the front lines.

The famously ugly Tacit Blue, also nicknamed the “Whale,” produced results that were revolutionary, as you can read more about here. Even the most capable existing penetrating intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft available at the time, like the SR-71 Blackbird, could only take a snapshot in time of the enemy and its posture. Satellites were far more predictable and could only provide the same ‘moment in time’ intelligence, and in a much less flexible manner. Tacit Blue could watch for hours with the enemy not even knowing it was there.

This meant the quality of intelligence Tacit Blue was capable of collecting was of far greater value. Metaphorically speaking, the SR-71 was like documenting a wedding by loudly running through a crowd and snapping a few photos. Tacit Blue was like rolling hours of videotape at the same wedding by an invisible cameraman. It was an absolute game-changer. The information was also transmitted securely using a LPI data link in near-real-time so that it could be rapidly exploited, not once the aircraft returned to base.

A drone to hunt Soviet mobile ballistic missiles

AARS/Quartz can be seen as something of a strategic parallel to the more tactically-minded BSAX effort and the Tacit Blue demonstrator. It was conceived as a cooperative effort between the U.S. Air Force, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). NRO, the very existence of which was only declassified in 1992, is and has historically been responsible primarily for intelligence-gathering via satellite. However, it was also involved in ISR drone operations in the 1960s and 1970s.

In the 1980s, the Reagan Administration grew concerned about a gap in reconnaissance assets, in the air and in space, to persistently track and monitor Soviet mobile nuclear-armed intermediate-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

“As spy satellite systems came on line in the 1960s, they shared the same fundamental operational scheme as the SR-71. Both conducted reconnaissance with relative impunity but were so fast that they only provided episodic coverage. The Soviet system of fixed air bases, missile silos, and command centers of the Cold War’s first 30 years favored ‘fast pass’ reconnaissance, however, so its weaknesses were not evident until the strategic equation shifted in the late 1970s,” Thomas Ehrhard wrote in a monograph, titled Air Force UAVs: The Secret History, which the Mitchell Institute for Airpower Studies published in 2010. “Soviet mobile missiles (both nuclear and air-to-air) and the advance of aviation technology opened the door for a true loitering surveillance UAV called AARS.”

Ehrhard pointed to three missiles as particular drivers behind the AARS program. The first of these was the road-mobile RSD-10 Pioneer, known in the West as the SS-20 Saber, a nuclear-armed intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) with three warheads in a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) configuration. The SS-20 had an immensely destabilizing impact on the security environment in Europe. Its appearance was a central factor in the United States and the Soviet Union ultimately signing the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 1987.

Contemporary reports said that the Soviets were also looking into an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) based on the SS-20, which itself may have been the result of an abortive ICBM program. After the Soviet Union fell, Russia subsequently developed the RS-26 Rubezh, which it described as an ICBM, but many believed it to actually be an IRBM akin to the SS-20. The INF treaty ultimately collapsed in 2019, rendering the issue moot. Five years later, a new Russian intermediate-range missile, called Oreshnik, emerged after one was fired at Ukraine. The U.S. government has assessed Oreshnik to be based on the RS-26.

The other Soviet missiles that helped make the case for AARS/Quartz were two ICBMs, the rail-mobile RT-23 Molodets (SS-24 Scalpel) and the road-mobile RT-2PM/RS-12M Topol (SS-25 Sickle).

RT-23/SS-24 SCALPEL MOD 1 ICBM

RT-2PM/SS-25 SICKLE ICBM

In his 2010 monograph, Ehrhard describes the Reagan-era view of the resulting problem set as follows:

“The technological problem of holding these mobile missiles at risk, one that NATO had never solved with the SS-20, now became vastly more complex [with the inclusion of the SS-24 and SS-25]. U.S. forces had to constantly monitor their movement and electronic emissions, something neither fast-pass satellites, U-2s, nor the SR-71 could accomplish. The mission also entailed breaking the over two decade-long declaratory policy of not overflying the Soviet Union, a prospect the Reagan Administration apparently felt was worth the gain. To complicate matters further, they needed a platform that could track those missiles in a nuclear detonation environment while flying from remote bases in the continental US. Operating and receiving imagery from such a craft beyond line-of-sight using space relays would prove daunting. The political and design challenges loomed large, but in the end the Air Force/NRO/CIA consortium opted for a leap-ahead system.”

With all this in mind, AARS/Quartz was seen as a national imperative. The very long-endurance drone, penetrating deep into Soviet airspace, would be able to locate many of these threats, allowing them to be targeted during the opening throes of a potential apocalypse – something we will come back to later on.

By the mid-1980s, contracts were doled out to Lockheed and Boeing to develop what at the time could be seen as the most ambitious ‘silver bullet’ aerospace program of its time, albeit one that had very few eyes on it as it was deeply buried in the classified realm. Ehrhard writes:

“To accomplish the loitering surveillance mission, this UAV needed autonomous (i.e., not remote controlled), highly reliable flight controls, and a design capable of intercontinental ranges from bases in the US zone of the interior with extreme high altitude capability (long wingspan with sailplane-type lift and multi-engine propulsion to reach altitudes more than 70,000 feet). Moreover, it had to carry an array of high-resolution sensors, high-capacity satellite communications capabilities, and various antennas—all in a package that was stealthy to the point of being covert. The cost of developing each technology piece alone would be staggering, but integrating them presented an even greater challenge – thus the project became a magnet for the best and most starry-eyed technologists in the black world. As one CIA engineer said in an anonymous interview, this project was ‘the cat’s pajamas,’ and ‘the single most fun project I ever worked on’ because it stretched every conceivable technology area.”

Ehrhard does not elaborate on the expected sensor package, but an LPI/LPD radar with GMTI and SAR modes, as well as other sensors, would have been needed for a stealthy platform tasked with this mission set. As noted earlier, electronic emissions, which can be detected passively, were also seen at this time as a key way to spot and track mobile missile launchers.

A highly ambitious undertaking

By all indications, AARS/Quartz was seen as a very ambitious effort from the start, but one that could yield impressive capabilities needed to address a mission requirement critical to national security. It should be noted that the U.S. military was pursuing a host of advanced stealth aviation technology programs at around the same time. Many of the efforts would go on to produce real results, if they hadn’t already by the mid-1980s, and this is just based on what is known publicly. Northrop’s stealthy Tacit Blue demonstrator flew for the first time in 1982. Lockheed’s F-117 Nighthawk reached an initial operational capability the following year. The Advanced Technology Bomber (ATB) program that would lead to the B-2 was well underway by this time, too.

In the end, AARS/Quartz did not fare as well as many of its contemporaries, at least from what we know. The program ran through the end of the Reagan years and into the 1990s under the administration of President George H.W. Bush. It morphed and changed hands considerably from a smaller ‘bleeding-edge’ NRO-led program into one that was integrated into a new national unmanned aircraft strategy. This, in turn, caused its mission set to balloon as a maelstrom of stakeholders demanded many capabilities out of a single platform that was already beyond the available technology of the era.

Ehrhard’s 2010 monograph sums up just how bloated AARS became by the 1990s:

“[David A.] Kier[, NRO’s Deputy Director from 1997 to 2001] said the large version of AARS, which according to some reports had a wingspan of 250 feet, cost less than a B-2, but more than $1 billion a copy. Reportedly, the production plan called for only eight vehicles at a cost of $10 billion, each of the vehicles capable of an amazing 40 hours on station after flying to the area of interest.”

“Air Force officials were so leery of the UAV’s autonomous flight concept (no pilot had moment-to-moment control) that they reportedly insisted the flying prototype carry a pilot to handle in-flight anomalies and that the final design include a modular, two-place cockpit insert to make it optionally piloted. ‘By the time everyone got their wishes included,’ Kier said, ‘it [AARS] had to do everything but milk the cow and communicate with the world while doing it.’”

“With all of AARS’s leading-edge sensors and communications links, each of which posed substantial technical challenges in its own right, flight reliability quickly became the biggest design hurdle, according to Kier. The technologies were so secret, and the value of the payload and the air vehicle was so great that its loss over unfriendly territory was unthinkable. One defense official remarked, ‘If one had crashed, it would have been so classified we would have had to bomb it to ensure it was destroyed.’”

“Sailing along on the glut of black money in the late 1980s, AARS kept moving forward despite its continually expanding, problematic requirements list. As happened with [the] D-21 and Compass Arrow [drone programs] in the early 1970s, however, AARS was about to have its most vital mission curtailed.”

“The end of the Cold War brought the expensive program to a halt. An Air Force general familiar with the project said: ‘When AARS was invented, there was more money than they [the NRO] could spend. After the Cold War, the money went away and projects like that could not possibly survive.’ Like predators stalking a wounded animal, manned alternatives to AARS emerged. One proposal would put a sophisticated target acquisition system on the B-2 stealth bomber – the so-called RB-2 configuration. The proposal had value as a terminal tracking system, but the RB-2 lacked a method of off-board cueing to direct it to a search area.”

…

“As it turned out, none of the alternative programs made the cut, for not only was the Cold War officially over with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, but the venerable Strategic Air Command was disbanded in June 1992. With that move, AARS lost its primary military constituent and the AARS alliance began to crumble.”

“…The Air Force pulled funding on AARS, and it was terminated in December 1992 by the intelligence community hierarchy just as it was to enter full scale development. AARS was, in the final analysis, a misfit. It was a major aircraft program backed by a satellite organization (the NRO), and a risky unmanned surveillance platform slated for a combat pilot-led Air Force—hardly an edifice solid enough to survive the removal of its strategic underpinnings. No one organization provided focus or advocacy for the program. As a result, the “perfect” surveillance UAV faded away even as the ultimate Cold War satellite system, Milstar, and the equally exotic B-2 stealth bomber managed to survive, backed as they were by one service, and powerful sub-groups within that service, who were culturally and operationally attuned to those configurations.”

By 1990, Lockheed and Boeing are also said to have been directed to combine their previously separate work on AARS/Quartz.

Kier, who Ehrhard also identifies as the last AARS program manager, says the drone’s design ultimately evolved into something that “resembled a substantially scaled-up version of DARPA’s DarkStar.” Lockheed’s DarkStar, which eventually received the designation RQ-3, was a stealthy tailless design with an ovoid central fuselage and with very long, slender, and straight main wings. Boeing was also a major subcontractor for the RQ-3.

DarkStar was also referred to as “Tier III-minus,” a moniker that reflected the requirements for the drone, which were truncated compared to a planned Tier III type. Tier III was a more direct follow-on to AARS, but was already envisioned as a smaller and less capable, and one would imagine less expensive, uncrewed aircraft. There were also additional lower capability tiers, one of which ultimately led to the RQ-4 Global Hawk. Ehrhard says some members of Congress and of industry did attempt to drum up support for a true successor to AARS/Quartz, unofficially referred to as Tier IV, but without success.

With regard to the RQ-3, at least two flying examples were built, the first of which crashed in 1996 after suffering a control system malfunction. DarkStar had vanished completely from the public eye by 1999, but it has since emerged that a direct line can be traced between it and the stealthy RQ-170 Sentinel via another secretive drone called the X-44A, which TWZ was first to report on back in 2019.

When it comes to AARS/Quartz, the full scale and scope of what exactly came out of the hundreds of millions, and possibly billions, spent on the program over at least a decade, remains unclear. Clearly, major leaps were made in the critical communications, command and control, structural, and sensor technologies needed to make the system a reality. There are rumors that sub-scale risk-reduction test articles were flown, but details surrounding the program remain highly secretive. 

A mission requirement that rhymes

As we noted earlier, many questions remain about the RQ-180, as well as the overall status of that program. At the same time, fast forward some three decades or so from the end of AARS (and its immediate successors), and there are now echoes of the Cold War mission requirements that prompted that program, including in the current conflict with Iran.

The Iranian arsenal of conventionally-armed missiles is not anywhere near the same kind of threat as Soviet nuclear-tipped IRBMs and ICBMs. Still, they do present very real threats, especially for strikes on large critical infrastructure targets and as terror weapons when loaded with cluster munition payloads. The current conflict has demonstrated that strategy also puts immense strain on Israeli missile defenses, which could have broader ramifications, as you can read more about here. Iran’s short-range ballistic missiles offer additional flexibility against targets on land or at sea. In addition, it has been clear for years now that Iran is very willing to launch conventional ballistic missile attacks.

As already noted, the launchers for these missiles are mobile, and some are configured to look like typical civilian-style trucks at a casual glance. Some operate from hardened and underground bases. A number of those facilities were even built with ports that allow missiles to be fired from within, though it is unclear how extensively Iran has made use of that capability in the current conflict. These apertures have likely been repeatedly struck by the U.S. and Israel.

The underlying challenge of finding Iran’s ballistic missiles, and doing so with enough time to attempt to strike them before they launch, has clear similarities to the mission that drove AARS/Quartz. The Iranian case is perhaps more complex in certain respects, given the larger number of smaller missiles, many of which could be dispersed over a broad area. Still, the long-range weapons that threaten Israel are clearly the top priority and would be the easiest to spot for an asset like the RQ-180.

CENTCOM:

The Iranian regime is using mobile launchers to indiscriminately fire missiles in an attempt to inflict maximum harm across the region.

U.S. forces are hunting these threats down and without apology or hesitation, we are taking them out.pic.twitter.com/l4lxbTlAf4

— Clash Report (@clashreport) March 3, 2026

🚨 WATCH: CENTCOM releases footage of strikes on fortified missile bases in southern Iran. The first footage includes hits on tunnel entrances and on mobile and stationary launchers at the missile base in Hajjiabad, Iran. pic.twitter.com/wuoi5GEhqp

— Major Sammer Pal Toorr (Infantry Combat Veteran) (@samartoor3086) March 22, 2026

Iran is responding to external threats by releasing a new video showcasing one of its underground missile tunnel systems, packed with missile engines, mobile launchers, and a range of advanced weaponry. The footage prominently features the Paveh cruise missile, the Ghadr-380… pic.twitter.com/ILsdlrPtQy

— Basha باشا (@BashaReport) March 25, 2025

Furthermore, Iran’s air defenses have been significantly degraded after some five weeks of U.S. and Israeli strikes, on top of the losses during the 12 Day War last year, but threats remain. As noted, the northeastern end of the country has seen fewer strikes compared to other areas, overall. Total air supremacy over Iran has yet to be achieved.

This is not a hypothetical assessment either, as underscored by the recent loss of a U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle. In the ensuing efforts to recover the F-15E’s crew, an A-10 Warthog crashed after being hit by hostile fire and two rescue helicopters were also damaged. American forces deliberately destroyed additional aircraft – reportedly two MC-130J special operations tanker transports and four Little Bird helicopters – inside Iran to prevent the capture of sensitive material. This came after the MC-130Js had become disabled after touching down at an austere operating location during the final mission to retrieve the downed Strike Eagle’s Weapon System Officer.

Last month, a U.S. Air Force F-35A fighter also had to make an emergency landing after reportedly being hit by an Iranian surface-to-air missile. In addition to damage to the aircraft, there are reports that the pilot suffered shrapnel wounds, as well. There have been reports of other close calls since the conflict began.

Iran’s IRGC released a footage reportedly showing U.S. F-35 jet being hit over Iran.

Note that we can’t independently confirm the authenticity of the footage. pic.twitter.com/9N0ePd2LLf

— Clash Report (@clashreport) March 19, 2026

This is exactly the environment where a very high-flying, extremely long-endurance, and very stealthy drone, like the RQ-180, would be valuable, if not critical, to perform the aforementioned mission. The drone would simply fly outside the range of Iranian defenses if need be and likely fly nearly directly over most of them without fear of being shot down. From that perch, which could be far above where normal jet aircraft fly (60,000-70,000+ feet is possible) it would be able to monitor massive swathes of Iranian territory for movement of launchers and indications of launches, especially around known launch areas and storage sites.

It is also important to note here that much has changed in the past 20 years, let alone the past 40, which makes a successor to the AARS/Quartz concept more viable now, in general. Massive leaps have been made in every single relevant technological area. Examples include the fielding of operational semi-autonomous high-altitude, long-endurance drones, huge breakthroughs in composite structures and satellite data links, and the miniaturization of highly-powerful sensor systems. Just the available satellite bandwidth alone and the increases in onboard computing power were so far advanced by the mid-2000s already compared to the 1980s. Added to that now is the ability to crunch through all the data collected onboard using artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies, which further helps make use of the bandwidth available..

AARS/Quartz was never intended to exist in a vacuum. It was explicitly seen as a part of an ecosystem that also included the B-2 bomber (to strike the targets the drone found) and the Milstar communications satellite constellation (to help transmit relevant data). The B-2 and Milstar did enter service, although the former did so on a very truncated level due to post-Cold War drawdowns. The U.S. military has made further investments since then in advanced networking capabilities as part of integrated kill web architectures. The B-2 and other relevant capabilities that could directly tie in with the RQ-180 are being employed publicly in the current conflict with Iran. It is possible, if not highly plausible, that this integration has already existed for years, in part as a result of the development of the LRS family of systems.

There is a degree of precedent here already, with regard to Iran specifically, with the RQ-170 Sentinel. RQ-170s are understood to have conducted extensive flights over Iran in the 2000s and into the very early 2010s, particularly to provide persistent monitoring of nuclear sites. Those missions were thrust into the public eye in 2011, when an RQ-170 went down in Iran and was captured largely intact.

The fact that the Sentinel has been flying operationally for nearly two decades, at least, also just underscores the degree to which stealthy, persistent drone surveillance capabilities had already advanced decades ago. That being said, the RQ-170 is a medium-altitude platform that was developed as a more tactical-level asset for surveillance of smaller areas. It does not fulfill the continued requirements for something like the RQ-180, able to fly at much higher altitudes over far greater distances for much longer periods of time, while carrying huge sensors, and was never intended to do so.

It’s also worth noting here that any decision to employ a highly secretive and sensitive asset like the RQ-180 over Iran would still carry major risks. Stealth aircraft aren’t invisible or completely immune to threats, and accidents do happen. As noted earlier, a technical issue of some kind may well be the only reason why we got a clear look at the drone during the day at Larissa in Greece, to begin with. At the same time, there is something of a precedent for taking these kinds of risks with regard to Iran, specifically, even outside of the demands of open conflict. After the RQ-170 went down in Iran, it is very likely that Russia and China had opportunities to analyze the drone in detail. But the technologies in the RQ-170, and its very design, are understood to be far less exquisite than what would be found in the RQ-180.

But even as an RQ-180 would have an even more pressing use case against a peer competitor like China, which is drastically expanding its nuclear arsenal and has thousands of road-mobile ballistic missiles, risking such a sensitive asset over Iran is paired with the high stakes involved with this operation, especially in regard to Israel. Iran’s massive and rapidly growing number of long-range missiles were a stated reason Trump decided he had to act now. The administration has said that soon Iran would be able to oversaturate any defenses if action wasn’t taken. It is this same threat that would be a major factor in using such a prized asset for Epic Fury, to do whatever possible to limit the damage to Israel, and to America’s Arab allies as well.

When the secretive drone first emerged at Larissa, comparisons were also drawn to an Israeli design referred to as the RA-01. That uncrewed stealth aircraft has a roughly similar planform, but is a smaller overall design that likely falls between the RQ-170 and the RQ-180. It has been very active during the conflict, being seen in videos. It would be of no surprise if it were tasked with hunting Iranian missile launchers, as well.

It should be stressed that we still do not know for sure why the secretive drone is at Larissa and what operations it might have been conducting, or still is, from the Greek base. As mentioned at the start of this piece, U.S. authorities have, so far, declined to comment on the uncrewed aircraft’s presence there at all.

At the same time, its emergence does come at a time when the capabilities of the RQ-180, or an evolution thereof, would be in extremely high demand to support current operations over Iran, and specifically to address the urgent need to counter Iran’s long-range weapons, just as the progenitor of the concept was meant to do nearly four decades ago.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

President Lee Jae Myung on Monday expressed regret over drone flights by individuals into North Korea, saying that such behavior has caused unnecessary military tension with Pyongyang.

Lee made the remarks during a Cabinet meeting, after prosecutors last week indicted three individuals accused of flying drones into North Korea between September and January.

Those indicted include a graduate student in his 30s, an employee of the National Intelligence Service and a military officer.

“Although this was not an act by our government, I express regret to the North Korean side over the unnecessary military tension caused by such reckless behavior,” Lee said.

Lee has previously criticized the drone incursions on several occasions, but this marks the first time he has expressed regret directly to North Korea.

He said civilians are prohibited from engaging in unauthorized, private acts that could provoke North Korea, stressing that even when such actions are deemed necessary for national strategy, they must be handled with the utmost caution.

“It is deeply regrettable that individuals carried out such provocative acts toward North Korea on their own,” he said, calling such actions “unacceptable.”

Lee also addressed concerns among residents near border areas, noting that the incident had caused significant anxiety.

“We need to carefully consider who such actions are really meant to benefit,” he said, urging relevant ministries to revise regulations and take swift measures to prevent recurrences.

Amid a rapidly shifting global landscape, Lee emphasized the importance of Seoul’s responsible role in maintaining peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.

“We should closely monitor the changes in the harsh international order, which requires more responsible action to ensure peace on the Korean Peninsula,” he said.

Lee has extended an olive branch to resume dialogue with Pyongyang since taking office in June 2025, but North Korea has rebuffed those overtures, formally describing South Korea as the “most hostile state” in a parliamentary speech last month.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

Inside a hangar located near a motorway and a port, sleek fiberglass unmanned attack boats, resembling oversized canoes and painted naval grey, await engine fitting. These boats, initially built by Ukrainian special forces, have been effective in pushing the Russian Black Sea Fleet from nearby waters. If conflicts intensify in the Middle East between Israel and the U. S. and Iran, these British boats may be deployed. Such vessels are increasingly recognized as the future of naval warfare, as well as suitable for various offshore roles like search and rescue.

The manufacturing facility belongs to Kraken, a fast-expanding British defense company that has secured a contract to supply 20 small attack boats to Britain’s Royal Navy and has other agreements with U. S. Special Operations Command. Fueled by venture capital, similar companies globally are producing autonomous attack craft essential for potential conflicts, such as a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or NATO actions against Russia in the Baltic. Kraken offers various drones; the 8.5-meter Scout Medium is highly popular, though it hasn’t confirmed whether any of its boats have been used in the Middle East or Black Sea.

The U. S. military has deployed similar boats like the Global Autonomous Reconnaissance Craft in Gulf operations. U. S. Central Command has been testing unmanned vessels for years, while European nations have advanced their skills with NATO’s Task Force X-Baltic. These vessels, whether autonomous or remotely operated, can carry weapons and surveillance tools, showcasing the rapid evolution of naval warfare, as evidenced by Iranian attacks on commercial ships.

Heavy jamming in Ukraine and the Gulf has led to challenges in keeping remote human-piloted systems operational and has shifted focus towards developing autonomous systems that do not require a communication link. Reports indicate that there were several problems in last year’s tests of these autonomous systems, which is not surprising given the contested regions like the Black Sea and Baltic Sea. Currently, the British Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessel Lyme Bay is expected to load drones for potential mine clearance in the Gulf, but only when the conflict ends and it is safer to operate such craft.

If this mission proceeds, it would highlight the reduced number of functional warships in the UK’s financially constrained navy and showcase changes in military technology. However, experts do not believe that vessels built by companies like Kraken will completely replace traditional warships, despite the reminder from Trump’s “armada” of the significant power that traditional ships hold. Notably, U. S. commanders have deployed these vessels away from battle zones to reduce risks.

Kraken claims it can produce as many as 500 remote-controlled vessels within the current year, with plans to double that by 2027 through partnerships with shipyards in Germany and the Pacific region. Kraken’s founder, Mal Crease, aims to establish a leading maritime offshore systems manufacturer by applying his experiences from Formula One racing and high-performance offshore boats. He acknowledges the complexities of producing quality systems amid conflict while also striving to mass-produce boats in peaceful environments.

Kraken’s team utilizes modular construction to rapidly assemble a variety of vessels by hand, similar to how supercars are made, allowing for quick scale-up in production. However, uncertainties about military spending in the UK remain, with ongoing debates regarding the Defence Investment Plan and budget allocations between the prime minister and the Treasury.

A broader trend is evident as new defense firms such as Kraken and others emerge, differing from traditional defense contractors like Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems, which are known for long development times and high costs. Newer companies, some less than two years old, are more agile and focused on producing weapons systems quickly and affordably.

Many former military personnel are now working with these companies and engaging with clients in various countries, including Ukraine, which is both buying and manufacturing these systems. Reports suggest that missile supplies, like the Tomahawk and Patriot missiles, are dwindling, while drone manufacturers expect to produce hundreds of thousands or even millions of systems annually. Ukraine, in particular, has rapidly grasped the importance of these new technologies and has been sharing its expertise with nations in the Middle East. Conversely, Western nations outside the conflict have been slower to adapt, but some firms are already making swift advancements.

With information from Reuters

Videos show Palestinians in Gaza scrambling to extinguish a vehicle engulfed in flames in az-Zawayda after it was targeted by an Israeli drone. Israel has killed more than 700 people since the October 10 “ceasefire,” according to local officials.

Drone footage from Israel shows damage to a factory in Petah Tikva after debris from an intercepted Iranian missile struck the site. The attack comes as Israel says it continues to intercept incoming missiles, on the 35th day of the US-Israeli war on Iran.

WASHINGTON — President Trump signaled Wednesday that the United States is eyeing an offramp in its war with Iran, as he also raised the possibility of a major shift in U.S. alliances, including the potential withdrawal from NATO.

Trump indicated in a social media post that Iran’s president wanted a ceasefire, and that the United States would be open to doing so, if Iran agrees to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil shipping route that has been affected during the monthlong conflict.

“Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!” Trump wrote.

The remarks appeared to outline a possible diplomatic opening with Tehran, but hours later Iranian officials said that Trump’s claims about being close to a deal were “false and baseless” and that the waterway remained “firmly and decisively under the control” of the Islamic Republic’s forces.

“The strait will not be opened to the enemies of this nation through the ridiculous spectacle by the president of the United States,” the paramilitary Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps wrote in a statement.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Wednesday also wrote a public letter denouncing what he described as a “flood of distortions and manufactured narratives” about the war from the U.S., arguing that Iran is not a threat and had only defended itself against American aggression.

He called on the American people to “look beyond the machinery of disinformation” to reach their own conclusions about the war and its purpose.

“Is ‘America First’ truly among the priorities of the U.S. government today?” he wrote, echoing recent complaints from Trump’s own base about the president’s commitments to his campaign promises.

The dueling messages underscored the uncertainty about how much longer the conflict in the Middle East will last and whether the United States will be able to achieve its main goal of preventing Iran from ever producing a nuclear weapon.

Trump, who on Tuesday said he expects the U.S. will leave Iran within three weeks, was poised to address the nation Wednesday night about the war. The White House said the president’s address would formally outline the objectives of Operation Epic Fury, whose mission has at times been convoluted even as Trump administration officials maintain their explanations for waging the war have been “clear and unchanging.”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced Trump’s speech late Tuesday, after Trump downplayed remarks made by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth about Iran’s lingering military capabilities.

In the lead-up to those remarks, Trump told Reuters that he was looking to pull American forces from the region “quickly” with the possibility of returning to Iran periodically for “spot hits” when necessary.

The president, who said he believed the U.S. military is close to ensuring Iran loses its ability to possess a nuclear weapon in the future, did not seem too worried about Iran having highly enriched uranium in its stockpiles.

“That’s so far underground, I don’t care about that,” he told Reuters, adding that the U.S. military will be “watching it by satellite.”

Trump, however, remained focused on having Iran reopen the Strait of Hormuz, an oil route through which a fifth of the world’s oil flows.

He said this week that he may pull American forces from the region and leave other countries to deal with the hurdles of reopening the waterway. But on Wednesday, he seemed to walk back that stance, and said a key part of the ongoing negotiations hinged on Iran ending the de facto blockade on the strait.

It remains unclear whether Israel, which began bombing Iran alongside the U.S. on Feb. 28, would agree to the same terms as Trump and stop hostilities against Iran.

Talks about the potential end of the conflict led stocks to rise Tuesday, but it remains unclear whether higher food prices could persist for months or longer. It is also uncertain when U.S. gas prices — which jumped past an average of $4 a gallon this week for the time since 2022 — would go lower.

NATO becomes a factor in the war

As Trump considers pulling out of Iran, he is also weighing a withdrawal from NATO, telling Reuters that fellow member states’ lack of support during the war has him “absolutely” considering withdrawing from the security alliance, which was ratified by the Senate in 1949.

In an interview with Fox News on Tuesday night, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. is planning to “reexamine” its relationship with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and whether it makes sense to be part of a “one-way-street” alliance.

“Why are we in NATO?” Rubio said. “Why do we send trillions of dollars and have all of these Americans stationed in the region, if in our time of need, we are not going to be allowed to use those bases?”

Rubio’s comment marks a notable evolution from his position in Congress. As senator in 2023, Rubio helped spearhead legislation that said the president “shall not suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States” from NATO unless the Senate agrees by a two-thirds vote to do so.

On Wednesday, Rubio told CBS that he maintains Congress should play a role on whether the U.S. should withdraw from NATO. He added that he does not believe Trump “will remove us from NATO,” but he does believe the president will demand that NATO allies “do more.”

In a joint statement Wednesday, Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) said that the United States will remain in the treaty and that the Senate “will continue to support the alliance for the peace and protection it provides America, Europe and the World.”

Although Trump has previously threatened to end U.S. membership in NATO, his most recent remarks have put added pressure on European allies to revisit the terms of their relationship.

In a post on X, Finnish President Alexander Stubb said he had a “constructive discussion” with Trump on Wednesday about NATO.

“Problems are there to be resolved, pragmatically,” Stubb wrote.

Their conversation came after Trump and Hegseth complained that European countries have been hesitant to help the U.S. in its war against Iran. Just this week, Italy and Spain refused to allow U.S. warplanes from landing at their military bases before flying to the Middle East.

Britain’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, defended NATO on Wednesday, saying it was the “single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen” and, more broadly, said he would not cave to pressure to join the Iran war.

“Whatever the pressure on me and others, whatever the noise, I’m going to act in the British national interest in all the decisions that I make,” Starmer told reporters. “That’s why I’ve been absolutely clear that this is not our war, and we’re not going to get dragged into it.”

As diplomatic efforts continue, the Trump administration has increased its military presence in the Middle East, with thousands of U.S. troops arriving in the region as ground operations in the war remain an option.

The U.S. military buildup in the Mideast came as fighting continued to escalate in the Persian Gulf region on Wednesday.

Iran hit an oil tanker off Qatar’s coast, prompting the evacuation of 21 crew members. In Bahrain, there were alerts for incoming missiles, while Kuwait’s state-run news agency KUNA reported that a drone hit a fuel tank at Kuwait International Airport. Meanwhile, Jordan’s military intercepted a ballistic missile and two drones fired by Iran, and an airstrike in Tehran appeared to have hit the former U.S. Embassy compound.

Additionally, Israeli strikes killed at least five people on a Beirut neighborhood. Israel invaded southern Lebanon in March after the Iran-linked militant group Hezbollah began launching missiles into northern Israel.

This article includes reporting from the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — In his first formal address to the nation since launching a war on Iran more than a month ago, President Trump on Wednesday night repeated a familiar list of claimed successes — and brushed aside setbacks — while providing little clarity on a clear path to ending the conflict.

“We are going to finish the job, and we’re going to finish it very fast. We are getting very close,” the president said from the White House.

Trump said Iran is “no longer a threat,” yet spoke of potentially needing to escalate the conflict and increase bombings on Iran’s energy and oil infrastructure if it continues to fight back.

“If there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric generating plants, very hard and probably simultaneously,” he said. “We have not hit their oil, even though that’s the easiest target of all, because it would not give them even a small chance of survival or rebuilding. But we could hit it, and it would be gone, and there’s not a thing they could do about it.”

Trump earlier this week said he expects to pull American forces from Iran within three weeks, and emphasized that the United States does not have to be in the Middle East but that it is only there to “help our allies.”

In his speech, Trump did not lay out a specific timeline for an exit strategy, but said the the U.S. is “on track to complete all of America’s military objectives shortly, very shortly.”

“We are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We are going to bring them back to the Stone Ages, where they belong,” he said. “In the meantime, discussions are ongoing.”

He also repeated his assertions, made for weeks, that the U.S. has basically already defeated Iran and won the war, which he characterized as a “decisive, overwhelming victory.”

He also stressed that it is “very important that we keep this conflict in perspective,” before listing out — by month and day — the length of World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the Iraq War.

Prior to Wednesday night’s formal address, Trump had only spoken of the war — which U.S. and Israel launched against Iran on Feb. 28 — in less formal settings, during media gatherings and other public events.

The speech was a key messaging moment for the president, who, 33 days into the war, has struggled to clearly explain the scope and objectives of a conflict that has killed thousands of people in Iran and neighboring countries and disrupted global markets.

Trump repeatedly insisted that the U.S. is doing great, is “in great shape for the future,” and doesn’t need the oil that Iran has put a stranglehold on in the Strait of Hormuz, ignoring the clear effects of the war and those disruptions on the U.S., including on gas prices.

Those effects are already contributing to fractures within Trump’s base. Some have expressed frustration with the administration’s decision to enter a new conflict in the Middle East, concerns that could become a political liability for Republicans ahead of the high-stakes midterm elections in November.

In his remarks, Trump appeared to be speaking to those who have criticized him for deviating from his campaign promises by entering the war, saying he had promised to never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon “from the very first day” he announced his first presidential campaign in 2015.

Trump has repeatedly downplayed the economic pressure the war has placed on Americans, including rising gas prices, arguing that the short-term financial strain is necessary for national security. He has also promised that gas prices will “come tumbling down” when the conflict ends.

“Gas prices will rapidly come back down,” Trump repeated on Wednesday. “Stock prices will rapidly go back up. They haven’t come down very much. Frankly, they came down a little bit, but they’ve had some very good days.”

Trump appeared less energetic during his evening speech than during some of his previous daytime events, where he has consistently maintained an upbeat tone about the war, while offering inconsistent accounts of what his administration aimed to achieve, or how long and what it would take to meet those objectives.

Those inconsistencies were evident even hours ahead of the address. In an interview with Reuters, he said he was not concerned about the enriched uranium held by Tehran — a statement that appeared to undercut a central justification for the war.

“That’s so far underground, I don’t care about that,” Trump said, adding that the U.S. military will be “watching it by satellite.”

In public remarks ahead of the address, Trump said the war was launched to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, but also that the U.S. had completely obliterated Iran’s nuclear capabilities months prior, in separate attacks over the summer. He also said he was worried about Iran’s enriched uranium, wanted the U.S. to take it, and would even consider sending U.S. forces inside Iran to collect it.

There have also been mixed messages about the U.S.’s intentions for Iran’s leadership since Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed at the start of the conflict, leaving a leadership vacuum that was filled by his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, a 56-year-old hard-line cleric who Trump initially called an “unacceptable choice.”

As Iran’s clerical rulers maintained a firm grip on the country, Trump administration officials, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, argued that U.S. war objectives had “nothing to do” with Iran’s leadership. But Trump in recent days has repeatedly talked about how “regime change” was achieved.

On Wednesday, Trump said a deal remained within reach with Iran’s new leaders, who he called “less radical and much more reasonable.”

Hours before Trump was to deliver his speech, Rubio posted a video which he began by saying, “Many Americans are asking, ‘Why did the United States have to attack Iran now?’” — an apparent acknowledgment that Trump’s own answers to that question in recent days may have failed to resonate.

Rubio also pushed another rationale for the war that the administration has floated on and off for the past month — saying Iran was building up an arsenal of missiles and drones to shield its nuclear ambitions, and that the war was the “last best chance” for the U.S. to eliminate those weapons capabilities before it was too late.

“We were on the verge of an Iran that had so many missiles and so many drones that nobody could do anything about their nuclear weapons program in the future,” Rubio said. “That was an intolerable risk.”

Others also tried to frame the war narrative Wednesday.

Prior to Trump’s speech, Iran President Masoud Pezeshkian issued a public letter denouncing what he described as “a flood of distortions and manufactured narratives” from the U.S., and arguing Iran is not a threat and has only ever defended itself against U.S. aggression.

He called on the American people to “look beyond the machinery of misinformation” from the Trump administration and reach their own conclusions about the war and its purpose, at one point echoing a question also being asked by some in Trump’s base: “Is ‘America First’ truly among the priorities of the U.S. government today?”

He noted Iran was in the midst of nuclear negotiations with the U.S. when the U.S. attacked it “as a proxy for Israel,” and accused U.S. leaders of committing a “war crime” by targeting Iran’s energy and industrial facilities.

“Exactly which of the American people’s interests are truly being served by this war?” he asked.

Residents living near Erbil’s international airport in northern Iraq, say falling drone debris has damaged vehicles and properties amid the escalating war on Iran.