drone

Forced to defend against thousands of Iranian drone and missile attacks before and after the ceasefire in the now-paused U.S.-Israel war on Iran, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) appears to have taken a play from Russia and its war with Ukraine in an attempt to secure some of its energy facilities with massive metal ‘cope cages.’

An image posted on X by Israel’s I24 News outlet shows what it claims is caging around oil tanks near Dubai International Airport. In the far-right section of the photo, what appears to be a more complete metal enclosure of some of the fuel tanks can be seen, while in the foreground, construction looks to be taking place on caging for additional tanks.

This seems to be the first sighting of these structures in the UAE and across the Gulf Arab nations. It is unclear when construction on the structures began or how many of these barriers the UAE is building or plans to build. We have reached out to the UAE Embassy in Washington for more details.

As we have reported in the past, the idea behind these kinds of metal structures is to mitigate the damage caused by incoming munitions by creating a barrier between the point of weapon impact and the target. The caging depicted is not designed to protect against Iranian ballistic missiles, and even cruise missiles could be a challenge. These kinds of structures are made to help defend against one-way attack munitions, such as the Shahed-136, many of which Iran has launched against the UAE. They can also protect from near-field small suicide drone attacks, although these have not been a major issue in the UAE during this conflict.

As noted earlier, while these structures may be new to the UAE, it is not the first time metal caging and even mesh nets have been used to protect critical energy infrastructure. Russia has employed these measures on its oil storage facilities in attempts to protect them from repeated Ukrainian drone attacks for a number of years now.

You can see some of those defensive measures in the following images and videos.

Russia Puts Cope Cages on Oil Storage Tanks

Hours after hunkering down during Russia’s most intense Shahed-136 drone barrage of the war, the head of the country’s defense technology incubator spoke with us about the interceptor drones his country developed to defend against them.

Some of these small munitions cost about $1,000 a piece and can reach speeds of nearly 200 miles per hour. Some also have AI-assisted guidance. They have proven to be a far cheaper alternative to effectors like Patriot interceptors – costing more than $5 million a piece – and even far less advanced missiles for downing Shaheds, which have caused widespread destruction across Ukraine for years. In an hour-long interview, Brave1 CEO Andrii Hrytseniuk talked about how Ukraine developed Shahed interceptors, their effectiveness and the growing interest from the U.S. – which produced its own drone-killing interceptor that Ukraine has used – and other allies. He also spoke about Ukraine’s burgeoning uncrewed ground vehicle industry, which we will discuss in the second part of this interview.

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

In total, we have more than 150 Ukrainian companies who are producing interceptors. And these are interceptors of different architecture. Some are small rocket type first-person view (FPV) drones. In some cases, they resemble small planes. In some cases, they resemble big planes. Some of them are X wings, like a combination between FPV and fixed wing. We use different varieties in different regions and different conditions. 

Q: How do you determine which interceptors are right for the job?

A: As an example, in case the Shaheds are coming from the Black Sea, where we have Odessa and other cities on the coast, small interceptors are used only in the last kilometers. The planes are used like loitering munitions, flying for hours and when they find a Shahed, they destroy it.

We need some interceptors that are capable of flying for hours and for hundreds of kilometers. For some, we need just a small diameter zone of protection.

Q: Given the success you’ve had with interceptor drones, have the U.S. and allies in the Gulf reached out, considering the death and destruction caused by Shahed drones launched by Iran?

You can see video of one of those attacks below.

A: I am permanently discussing and we are involved in discussion of interceptors and the potential of interceptors. And of course, it’s one of the top priorities for all countries to build the capability to use interceptors.

Ukraine is able to produce more than 2,000 interceptors per day, and this is not a maximum per day, more than 2,000. And for us, this is not a threshold, not a limit. In the case of export contracts and procurements, we can do much more than 2,000 per day. As an example, during the terroristic attack of Russia, they used more than 1,300 Shaheds and this was just during the last 24 hours. So of course, we need to have a huge number of interceptors.

Q:  Did you use more than 1,000 interceptors to defend against them?

A: I will not share details of how many Shaheds were destroyed by interceptors or other types of weapons, but in total, we were able to hit 97% of all Shaheds. This is the public information from our air defense command.

The following video shows some of the aftermath of the recent Russian Shahed barrage.

Search and rescue operations are ongoing in Kyiv following a Russian strike on a residential apartment building.

As of now, five people have been killed by Russia, and more than 10 people remain missing.

Around 40 people were injured in the attack, while 28 have been rescued… pic.twitter.com/n7z2mB42lu

— MFA of Ukraine 🇺🇦 (@MFA_Ukraine) May 14, 2026

Q: So when the U.S. and allies ask for help, what do you tell them and what is the current status of exports? The last time I wrote about this issue, the law prevented exports.

A: Brave1 works with Ukrainian and international companies to build and test solutions. We are not deeply involved in export questions. So I cannot comment here, because I’m not aware of the current status.

Q: The U.S. sent its own interceptor drones, the Merops system, to Ukraine in 2024. It proved so effective that it was sent to the Middle East to protect U.S. assets during the now-paused war against Iran. How much, if anything, did Ukraine learn from it?

A: Most successful defense manufacturers learned from our military and Brave1 – both Ukrainian manufacturers, and Merops. Without the direct input of the Ukrainian military and experts, Merops would never have become such a high-performing system, as it is now.

Q: What can you tell me about the relationship between Ukraine and the U.S. and allies as a result of what’s taking place in the Middle East?

A: It’s extremely interesting, and a lot of questions are coming to us, and we are sharing our experience.

Q: Have you had direct conversations with the U.S. military?

A: We are working with the majority of our allied countries. We have calls, sessions, conferences where we are sharing our experience, and the results of Brave1 transforming and improving the Ukrainian defense industry. Everyone is interested. This is the magic that it’s possible to do in such a short period of time. Right now, in Brave1, we have more than 2,300 different Ukrainian companies that are building weapons. And when the war started, it was a majority of state run companies and a very small number of private companies, and right now there is a huge list of companies.

Ukraine’s $2,000 Drone Is Destroying Russia’s $50,000 Shaheds. And Everyone Wants It

Q: You told me that Ukraine has a wide variety of interceptor drones, from the small ones to the bigger ones. How many different kinds of interceptors do the U.S. and allies need to defend against what Iran was launching?

A: I believe that the minimum is 10.

Q: 10? Why?

A: It takes 10 different types of architecture. For us, it’s important to have more different products, because it creates competition between Ukrainian companies, and they are much quicker, building new innovations, and they run faster to get ahead of the competitors – of their rivals. Also, it’s important to have not only interceptors. Interceptors themselves do nothing. This is the combination of variety of technologies, radars, permanent control system, the navigation systems, the systems for remote control, because the soldiers operating them should be not on the front line. They need to be in shelters. So this is the variety of different sub technologies, and as a whole, this is the segment of drone-based aerial defense.

Q: Wild Hornets, for instance, claims its Sting interceptor can be operated by soldiers from 2,000 kilometers away. How common is that?

A: Right now our pilots are able to manage interceptors from any place in the world.

Wild Hornets 2,000 Km

Q: Could pilots at the Tampa, Florida headquarters of U.S. Central Command, which oversees American military efforts in the Middle East, operate interceptor drones?

A: Let’s imagine I’m sending my pilot to the U.S. on a business trip and something happens, and my pilot will be needed to manage interceptors. He will be able to do it from New York or California.

Q: Getting back to the 10 different kinds of interceptor drones the U.S. and allies need. What different kinds? What are the differences?

A: Interceptors against ISR drones. Interceptors against Shahed heavyweight kamikaze drones. Interceptors against decoys. Interceptors that are capable of flying extremely high. Interceptors that are capable of increasing their speed to catch jet kamikazes. Interceptors that can throttle very quickly. Interceptors that have a long flight time and can fly a long distance. So there are a variety of different interceptors.

Q: How do you use AI?

A: We have a very responsible attitude about the ethical aspects of AI. Human-in-the-loop sometimes is used, but mostly we use human-on-the-loop where it’s a synchronous usage of human to arm, disarm, to cancel decisions, but not the human-in-the-loop where we need to wait for the human decisions, because speed of decisions should be taken into account. The effective hitting of Shahed drones is much higher when the human is not in the loop, but on the loop.

Q: Has Ukraine learned any lessons watching the U.S. and its allies defend against Iranian Shahed drones?

A: That’s the best question from all my interviews, for the last period of time. I can tell this subjectively from myself, not a representative of Brave1 or the country. One of the main lessons is that you should never be sure that you are secure enough and your technologies are perfect, because you don’t know what is in the pocket of your enemy. And you always need to be ready for the worst case scenario and permanently improve the level of readiness to counteract or react to absolutely non-predictable different things. And the speed of your reaction is crucial.

You can see one such Iranian Shahed attack on U.S. forces in the following video.

Video footage filmed by an American servicemember of an Iranian one-way attack drone, likely a Shahed-136, nearly impacting a radar tower at a U.S. military base in the Middle East earlier this week, possibly located at Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait. pic.twitter.com/zsPyuFXK1c

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) March 8, 2026

Q: Is there anything in particular you’ve seen about the performance of Iranian drones against the U.S., Israel, the UAE and other countries that surprises you and that you need to develop new ways to defeat them?

A: No. As you know, there is a strong cooperation between Russia and Iran, and Iranian technologies appear to have been used on the battlefield by Russia, and I’m sure vice versa as well.

Q: Have you seen anything different about how Iran is using these drones?

A: I didn’t see anything different. The things that I saw were the same, but I’m not a military expert. We are focusing on technologies.

You can see Iran’s Shahed drone attack on the U.S. Navy’s facility in Bahrain on the opening day of the war below.

Q: What about Ukrainian companies? How closely are they watching this conflict, and when they talk to you, are they saying anything about what they’ve learned and can use to improve Ukrainian weapons?

A: Everyone would like to help. And because we see that Ukraine, this is the only country who knows – and proven for years – how to defend itself against Russian new technologies. And of course, for us, it’s very painful to see because we have this experience. We know what to do, but all these tens of millions [of] people are facing these problems, but we could help.

Q: In March, President Donald Trump said: ‘We don’t need their help in drone defense. We know more about drones than anybody. We have the best drones in the world, actually.’ What do you think about that?

A: I cannot comment.

Q: Would you say there was a difference in the level of interest from the U.S. and allies at the beginning of the war to now? 

A: Of course, absolutely different interest. Previously, it was almost zero interest. And right now, this is number one topic.

Q: What advice would you give to the U.S. about defeating Shaheds?

A: Number one is, do not believe that you have plenty of time, a lot of time for preparation. The time is gone. The second one is cost matters. And the expenses for defense should be less than the expenses of your enemy to attack you. Number three is permanently focus on asymmetrical solutions.

Q: Like what?

A: When Ukraine didn’t have enough air defense missiles, we invented interceptors (drones). When we had a lack of 155mm ammunition, we invented FPV drones. When we had a lack of helicopters, we invented drone bombers. We had a lack of naval fleet, so we invented naval drones. 

And we see that such tremendous change of new technologies on the battlefield posed a lot of different new innovations everywhere, and we are the Ukrainian government cluster that analyzes all military ideas of different industry players. We see that every month the number of ideas is increasing, nothing. This is just opening new doors to a new era of new technologies.

Q: Have interceptor drones been able to replace those fired by high-end systems like the Patriot air defense system and others?

A: No. It’s not about replacement. Interceptors will never replace Patriot. Patriot is a great technology, the best in the world missiles for protection against ballistic missiles, hypersonic missiles. But of course, it absolutely doesn’t make any sense to use it against Shaheds. It’s extremely expensive, extremely it is overkill.

In our next installment, Hrytseniuk talks about how Ukraine plans to meet President Volodymyr Zelensky’s directive to produce 50,000 uncrewed ground vehicles this year.

Contact the author: howard@TWZ.com

Finnish authorities scramble fighter jets; defence chief says false alarm but warns of potential repeats while Russian war persists.

Finland has stood down its defence forces after sounding an alarm over suspected drone activities in its airspace.

The authorities said on Friday that suspected drone activity above the Helsinki region no longer posed a threat and that the situation was ⁠returning to normal hours after launching an emergency response, including the launch of fighter jets and closure of the capital’s airport.

The alarm illustrates the tension stalking the region as Finland and the Baltic states eye Russian aggression and daily missile and drone attacks amid Moscow’s continued war on Ukraine.

The Helsinki City Rescue Department had warned the nearly 2 million inhabitants of Finland’s Uusimaa region to stay indoors starting about 4am local time (1:00 GMT), as fighter jets were scrambled. Helsinki’s airport was also closed for about three hours.

Later, President Alexander Stubb wrote on X that authorities had “demonstrated their readiness and capacity to react”, adding that the country was now facing “no direct military threat”.

Kimmo Kohvakka, director general for rescue services at the Ministry of the Interior, called the response a “precautionary measure” and said “daily life can continue.”

The incident arose amid growing concerns about regional spillover from the Ukraine war.

The Baltic states of ‌Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have reported a series of suspected Ukrainian drones headed for Russia entering their airspace, prompting domestic criticism over their ability to respond to military threats.

The situation has led to a full-blown government crisis in Latvia. Prime Minister Evika Silina resigned on Thursday after a coalition partner pulled support. The move followed the ousting of the defence minister after a drone crashed at a fuel storage facility.

In March, two drones crossed into Finnish territory and crashed after flying low over the sea and southeastern Finland.

Finnish authorities did not indicate the source of Friday’s drone activity.

However, defence forces operations chief Kari Nisula suggested that Finland had received information from Ukraine about drones potentially straying into the country, according to the Reuters news agency.

The military head added that there was no evidence that drones had entered Finland, but that such situations could happen again as long as Russia continues its war on Ukraine.

Prisoner swap

The incident in Finnish airspace unfolded as Ukraine maintained its drone attacks on Russian oil and energy infrastructure, and Kyiv continued counting the costs of a huge strike that killed two dozen people.

Russia’s Ministry of Defence said on Friday that its air defence systems shot down 355 Ukrainian drones targeting Moscow overnight, as well as the border regions of Belgorod, Bryansk and Kursk.

Among the targets was an oil refinery ⁠in the central city ⁠of Ryazan, about 200km (125 miles) southeast of Moscow, according to the commander of Ukraine’s drone forces.

The attack killed three people ⁠and wounded 12, regional Governor Pavel Malkov wrote on Telegram. Two high-rise apartment buildings were struck, he said, while debris fell on the grounds of an industrial enterprise.

Meanwhile in Kyiv, the death toll from a Russian barrage on an apartment building on Thursday rose to at least 24 people, including three children, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said. Forty-eight people were wounded.

Amid the ongoing violence, Russia and Ukraine have moved ahead with a prisoner swap that saw 205 POWs repatriated on each side ⁠on Friday. It was the first step of a swap that is planned to ultimately see 1,000 people on each side return home.

The two sides also conducted an exchange of those killed in the fighting, with Russia handing 526 bodies to Ukraine and receiving 41 in return. Both Kyiv and Moscow thanked the United Arab Emirates for mediating the swap.

Zelenskyy wrote on social media that most of the prisoners returned to Ukraine had been in Russian captivity since 2022.

“We will continue to fight for every single person who remains in captivity,” he said.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, the admiral in charge of U.S. military operations in the Middle East pushed back against claims that Iran still possesses a large number of missiles and launchers. He spoke as the White House said U.S. President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping discussed the ongoing Iranian closure of the Strait of Hormuz and hours after Iran seized another ship. 

Iran can “no longer threaten regional partners, or the United States, in ways that they were able to do before, across every domain,” the commander of U.S. Central Command, Admiral Brad Cooper, explained.

On Wednesday, The New York Times reported that the “Trump administration’s public portrayal of a shattered Iranian military is sharply at odds with what U.S. intelligence agencies are telling policymakers behind closed doors.”

The newspaper cited “classified assessments from early this month that show Iran has regained access to most of its missile sites, launchers and underground facilities.”

“Most alarming to some senior officials is evidence that Iran has restored operational access to 30 of the 33 missile sites it maintains along the Strait of Hormuz, which could threaten American warships and oil tankers transiting the narrow waterway,” the Times added. “Iran still fields about 70 percent of its mobile launchers across the country and has retained roughly 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile, according to the assessments. That stockpile encompasses both ballistic missiles, which can target other nations in the region, and a smaller supply of cruise missiles, which can be used against shorter-range targets on land or at sea.”

The Washington Post offered a similar assessment last week.

WaPo last week: “Iran retains about 75 percent of its prewar inventories of mobile launchers and about 70 percent of its prewar stockpiles of missiles” https://t.co/FpAhZQKPlG

— John Hudson (@John_Hudson) May 12, 2026

Cooper took issue with those figures when asked about them.

“I think it’s appropriate in this forum not to discuss specific intelligence assessments,” he responded. “What I would say, from my perspective, is the numbers that I’ve seen in open source are not accurate. I think what also is not taken into consideration, it’s more than just the numbers. It’s the command and control that’s been shattered. It’s a significant degradation and capability, and it’s the lack of any ability to then produce any missiles…on the back end.”

Cooper was further pressed on Iran’s ability to threaten shipping in the Strait of Hormuz because it still has missiles and fast boats and other assets.

“In each of those cases, their capabilities have been significantly degraded,” the admiral posited. “If I just use my own professional experience and 100 transits through the Strait of Hormuz, you would typically see 20 to 40 fast boats, and lately we’ve seen two or three. So the degradation means it’s been significant, but some residual capability does exist with respect to the threat that remains.”

CENTCOM forces recently sank about a half-dozen Iranian fast boats threatening ships in the Strait.

.@CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper: “[Iran’s] capability has been significantly degraded. If I just use my own professional experience, in 100 transits through the Strait of Hormuz, you would typically see 20-40 fast-boats; lately, we’ve seen two or three.” @centcomcdr pic.twitter.com/8pWaMFpKQ9

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) May 14, 2026

Though Cooper downplayed Iran’s current capabilities, he said Tehran posed significant new threats with its modern drones.

“The days of $35,000 drones that we saw in the last couple of years, particularly in the fight against the Houthis in Yemen, those days are behind us,” Cooper proffered. “Today we face an increased threat from drones that are highly sophisticated. They’re jet-powered. They have high-end sensors. They have electronic warfare…signals intelligence. So those days of using high value defenses to shoot down cheap targets are behind us.”

“Quite the contrary, what we have been doing lately is using our own low-cost one way attack drones, [to attack] Iran, making them use higher and more expensive weapons. So I can confidently tell you, we have flipped the cost curve in many ways. Always work to be done, but I like where we are in this regard.”

CENTCOM commander Adm. Brad Cooper says the U.S. has “flipped the cost curve” in drone warfare against Iran.

“The days of using high-value defenses to shoot down cheap targets are behind us.” pic.twitter.com/7iK4JKpL9N

— Kassy Akiva (@KassyAkiva) May 14, 2026

Cooper didn’t elaborate, but earlier in his testimony, he talked about the Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System (LUCAS) kamikaze drones that TWZ has written frequently about. CENTCOM first began using these weapons, reverse-engineered from Iranian Shahed-136 drones, to strike targets in Iran.

The War Zone has advocated for the procurement of this exact class of drone by the American military and today, Cooper once again backed up that assessment.

The LUCAS drones are “an additional capability that we’ve now employed against an adversary very effectively,” Cooper commented. He declined to provide further details. 

“Vis a vis Iran, I think I would just like to keep that in the classified setting,” he noted.

Cooper provided additional statistics about Epic Fury to the committee.

• “We destroyed or buried much of Iran’s ballistic missiles, launcher vehicles, and long-range attack drones with more than 450 strikes on ballistic missile storage and systems and roughly 800 strikes on Iran’s drone-launching units and storage. In the air domain, Iran’s air and air defense forces are functionally and operationally irrelevant.” 

• “Before OEF, the Iranian Air Force flew between 30 and 100 sorties each day. Today that number is zero. We destroyed or rendered non-mission-capable Iran’s fixed-wing airfields, hangars, fuel storage, and munitions stockpiles, and we knocked out 82 percent of its air defense missile systems along with the radar and command architecture that tied them together.”

• “At sea, we destroyed 161 vessels in total across 16 classes of warships, effectively crippling the regime’s ability to operate.”

SASC @CENTCOM Posture Hearing

Admiral Cooper:
“At sea, we destroyed 161 vessels in total across 16 classes of warships, effectively crippling the regime’s ability to operate. We eliminated more than 90 percent of Iran’s once-massive inventory of over 8,000 naval mines, with more… pic.twitter.com/VmBwR8KIlM

— Charlie B (@supbrow) May 14, 2026

• “We eliminated more than 90 percent of Iran’s once-massive inventory of over 8,000 naval mines, with more than 700 airstrikes on Iranian naval mine targets. In sum, Iran’s navy can no longer claim to be a maritime power, and it cannot project into the Gulf of Oman or the Indian Ocean. Iran retains nuisance capability – harassment, low-end drone and rocket attacks, and residual proxy support – but it no longer possesses the means to threaten major regional operations or to deter U.S. freedom of action in the air or maritime domains.”

• “The second-order effects of OEF are significant. More than 2,000 strikes against Iran’s command-and-control structures created leadership vacuums, paralysis, and internal confusion.” 

• “We have seen reporting of desertions, personnel shortages, and signs of regime desperation in their attempts to compel discipline through arrest and execution. Most importantly for the region’s future: Iran will be highly challenged to proliferate advanced weapons to Lebanese Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hamas, or the Iraqi militia groups. The supply chain from Tehran to the proxies has been broken.”

While Iran has clearly been battered by attacks from the U.S. and Israel, recent events show it can still inflict damage on its neighbors and shipping. As we previously reported, Tehran has repeatedly struck the United Arab Emirates (UAE) before and after the April 7 ceasefire. In previous coverage, we have pointed out how Iran has also attacked U.S. warships and commercial vessels they were helping guide through the Strait of Hormuz during the short-lived Project Freedom operation.

Hours before Cooper testified, “the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy seized the Honduras-flagged fishery research vessel Hui Chuan,” a maritime security official told us. “The Company Security Officer (CSO) reported that the vessel was taken by Iranian personnel while at anchor approximately 38nm northeast of Fujairah, UAE, at 05:45 UTC.”

The Hui Chuan was operating as a “floating armory” storing weapons for Chinese security firms who protect ships at sea from attack by pirates, the official told us. The ship is now “bound for Iranian territorial waters,” the UK’s Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) organization said.

The Honduras-flagged fishing research vessel Hui Chuan (IMO: 8316895), anchored off the UAE’s east coast, is believed to have been seized by the IRGC Navy.

The ship is reportedly operated by the Chinese private security company Sinoguards as a floating armory. pic.twitter.com/VlHpmkqFYw

— Egypt’s Intel Observer (@EGYOSINT) May 14, 2026

UPDATE: 8:06 PM EDT –

During an interview with NBC News, Rubio was asked what Trump asked Xi when it comes to Iran.

“He didn’t ask him for anything,” the secretary noted. “We’re not asking for China’s help. We don’t need their help… Our position is very clear: Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

NBC: “What exactly did President Trump ask President Xi for when it comes to Iran?”@SecRubio: “He didn’t ask him for anything. We’re not asking for China’s help. We don’t need their help… Our position is very clear: Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.” pic.twitter.com/Hn7f3aqiUp

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) May 14, 2026

In a post on his social media platform responding to Xi’s remarks that the U.S. is essentially a declining power, Trump responded that the Chinese leader was referring to America under Biden and that things are much better now.

More interesting, however, is a hint Trump dropped about the future with Iran.

Among the accomplishments he claimed on Truth Social was “the military decimation of Iran (to be continued!).” 

The House voted for a third time against acting as a check on President Trump’s military powers in Iran, even as a growing number of Republicans express concern about the prolonged conflict, CBS News reported. 

Thursday’s vote on a Democratic resolution to rein in Trump’s authority was 212-212, falling just short of a majority. Originally introduced on March 4, the measure as written would have directed the president to remove U.S. forces from hostilities within 30 days of the start of the war, which began on Feb. 28.

The U.S. House voted 212-212 on a War Powers Resolution to restrict military action against Iran. The measure failed, needing a majority to pass. pic.twitter.com/NcRDvUIFyA

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) May 14, 2026

UPDATES

In a readout of the meeting in Beijing between Trump and Xi, the White House noted that the topic of the Strait of Hormuz came up in discussions between the two leaders.

“The two sides agreed that the Strait of Hormuz must remain open to support the free flow of energy,” the White House posted on X. “President Xi also made clear China’s opposition to militarization of the Strait and any effort to charge a toll for its use, and he expressed interest in purchasing more American oil to reduce China’s reliance on the Strait in the future.”

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was among those accompanying Trump, highlighted Xi’s opposition to allowing Iran to impose tolls on ships transiting the Strait. 

“President Trump raised the issue of Iran with China and it was important,” said Rubio. “The Chinese side said they are not in favor of militarizing the Strait of Hormuz and are not in favor of a tolling system, and that’s our position.”

SECRETARY RUBIO: President Trump raised the issue of Iran with China and it was important.

The Chinese side said they are not in favor of militarizing the Strait of Hormuz and are not in favor of a tolling system, and that’s our position. pic.twitter.com/9JYpbvztd8

— Department of State (@StateDept) May 14, 2026

The much-longer Chinese readout of the meeting mentioned improving trade and a warning that the U.S. “must exercise the utmost prudence in handling the Taiwan question.”

However, there was no mention of Iran or the Strait of Hormuz.

While that doesn’t mean these issues weren’t discussed, readouts are messaging and this reflected the emphasis Beijing places on the paused war and its aftermath.

“The two heads of state exchanged views on major international and regional issues, including the situation in the Middle East, the Ukraine crisis, and the Korean Peninsula,” was about as close as the statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry came to addressing Iran.

Despite the Trump administration’s stance that China opposes allowing Iran to impose tolls on shipping, Beijing is paying for transits, the Guardian claims.

Tehran “says it has reached a deal with China that has already allowed a large number of oil tankers bound for China to go through the strait of Hormuz since Wednesday night, and this has been made possible by China agreeing to limited charging, undercutting US opposition to such moves,” the outlet reported. “The development suggests China has accepted Iran’s assertion that the shipping rules in the strait have changed, with reports suggesting the cost will be in the region of $1 per barrel.”

We cannot independently verify that and have reached out to the White House for details.

🇮🇷 🇨🇳 Iranian media reported on Thursday that naval forces had allowed a group of Chinese ships to pass through the strategic Strait of Hormuz since the night before. Iran has largely blocked shipping through the strait since the outbreak of war with the US and Israel ➡️… pic.twitter.com/PVjGJ0TY7t

— AFP News Agency (@AFP) May 14, 2026

Trump pushed back on claims that China is working to arm Iran.

“We discussed it,” he told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “I mean, when you say ‘support,’ they’re not fighting a war with us or anything. He said he’s not gonna give military equipment. That’s a big statement. He said that strongly. But at the same time he said they buy a lot of their oil there, and they’d like to keep doing that.”

HANNITY: Did you discuss China’s support for Iran with Xi?

TRUMP: We discussed it. Uhhhh. I mean, when you say ‘support,’ they’re not fighting a war with us or anything. He said he’s not gonna give military equipment. That’s a big statement. But at the same time he said they buy… pic.twitter.com/Lq677uoCfG

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 14, 2026

Trump’s claim that China told him it won’t give weapons to Iran followed The New York Times report that Beijing was working to ship arms to Tehran.

“Chinese companies have been discussing arms sales with Iran, plotting to send the weapons through other countries to mask the origins of the military aid,” the publication stated, citing U.S. officials.

The United States “has gathered intelligence that Chinese companies and Iranian officials have discussed the arms transfers,” the newspaper added. “It is not clear how many, if any, arms have been shipped or to what degree Chinese officials have approved the sales.”

Officials briefed on the intelligence “have reached different conclusions on whether the arms have already been sent to the third countries,” according to the Times. “But no Chinese weapons appear to have been used on the battlefield against U.S. or Israeli forces since they began their war against Iran in late February.”

The newspaper reported last month that U.S. intelligence agencies had obtained information showing that China may have transferred shoulder-fired man portable air defense systems (MANPADS) to Iran. Intelligence also showed that China was considering other shipments of the weaponry.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) on Wednesday pushed back on claims that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the heads of Mossad and Shin Bet visited the country during the now-paused war with Iran. The denial is a strong public rebuke amid a growing relationship between the two nations that has seen Israel supply the UAE with Iron Dome air defense batteries to protect against Iranian attacks.

“The United Arab Emirates denies reports circulating regarding an alleged visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the UAE or receiving any Israeli military delegations in the country,” the UAE Foreign Affairs Ministry posted on X Wednesday afternoon EDT. “The UAE reaffirms that its relations with Israel are public and conducted within the framework of the well-known and officially declared Abraham Accords, and are not based on non-transparent or unofficial arrangements. Accordingly, any claims regarding unannounced visits or undisclosed arrangements are entirely unfounded unless officially announced by the relevant authorities in the UAE.”

The ministry added that the “UAE calls on media outlets to exercise accuracy and professionalism, and to refrain from circulating unverified information or promoting misleading political narratives.”

UAE Denies Reports Regarding Visit by Israeli Prime Minister or Receiving Any Israeli Military Delegation pic.twitter.com/TRX9y5ZoVN

— MoFA وزارة الخارجية (@mofauae) May 13, 2026

Hours before the UAE announcement, Netanyahu’s office claimed the Israeli leader did travel to the Gulf Arab nation, confirming a CBS News report about the visit.

“In the midst of Operation ‘Roar of the Lion,’ Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a secret visit to the United Arab Emirates and met with the President of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed,” the office posted on X. “This visit led to a historic breakthrough in relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates.”

לשכת ראש הממשלה מאשרת כעת:

בעיצומו של מבצע ״שאגת הארי״, ראש הממשלה בנימין נתניהו ביקר בחשאי באיחוד האמירויות ונפגש עם נשיא איחוד האמירויות, השייח׳ מוחמד בן זאיד.

ביקור זה הביא לפריצת דרך היסטורית ביחסים בין ישראל לאיחוד האמירויות.

— ראש ממשלת ישראל (@IsraeliPM_heb) May 13, 2026

Israel’s N12 News chief political correspondent Amit Segal noted a “few striking details regarding the news of Netanyahu’s visit to the UAE.”

“A covert flight reportedly took place while Israeli airspace was fully shut—without leaks or detection,” he noted on X. “Sources suggest a deal was reached on an Iron Dome shipment” and “UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan has publicly hosted Israeli leaders like Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid—but not Benjamin Netanyahu. Until now, their contacts stayed behind closed doors.”

Bennet and Lapid visited the UAE in 2021, as Prime Minister and Foreign Minister respectively.

A few striking details regarding the new of Netanyahu’s visit to the UAE:

1. A covert flight reportedly took place while Israeli airspace was fully shut—without leaks or detection.

2. Sources suggest a deal was reached on an Iron Dome shipment.

3. UAE President Mohammed bin… https://t.co/An2kbqJrNC

— Amit Segal (@AmitSegal) May 13, 2026

The announcement from Netanyahu’s office followed media reports on Tuesday about the visit to the UAE of two other high-level Israeli officials.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Mossad chief David Barnea visited the UAE at least twice during Operation Roaring Lion to coordinate war efforts. Barnea reportedly flew to the UAE in March and April. In addition, Israeli media reported that Shin Bet chief David Zini also visited the UAE to coordinate security efforts.

Certainly not surprising given the Abraham Accords and the more recent Iron Dome battery and miltary deployment to UAE by Israel. But 2 back to back visits by a Mossad chief amid a war speaks volumes. Important read by @AnatPeled1 & @summer_said in @WSJ.https://t.co/i9BmyHNZ3p

— Behnam Ben Taleblu بهنام بن طالب لو (@therealBehnamBT) May 13, 2026

The back and forth over the potentially unprecedented wartime visit by three top Israeli officials to the UAE comes a day after U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee publicly confirmed that Israel sent the UAE an unspecified number of Iron Dome air defense batteries and troops to operate them. News of the deployment was first reported by Axios last month. Such an acknowledgement of direct Israeli military aid to an Arab nation is unusual in its own right.

🚨 WATCH: US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee officially confirms: Israel sent the United Arab Emirates an Iron Dome system and a team to operate it. This happened because there are exceptional relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, based on the Abraham Accords. pic.twitter.com/BgCkESt4Yl

— Raylan Givens (@JewishWarrior13) May 12, 2026

TWZ cannot independently verify any of the travel claims. However, Israel has historically been viewed as an enemy by the Arab world and direct cooperation in the form of a visit by its head of state could be considered controversial to say the least. At the same time, things have changed dramatically in the region over the last decade or so, with Arab countries warming to relations with Israel. This has been spurred by the major economic development the region has seen as well as, at least to a degree, a common foe — Iran.

Perhaps the UAE is trying to appeal to a domestic audience or, as Israel’s I24 News senior Middle East correspondent Ariel Oseran suggested on X, UAE is trying to distance itself from Netanyahu and his coalition, not Israel writ large. Maybe Netanyahu, for his own reasons, is trying to claim a level of relationship that doesn’t exist, however that seems unlikely.

We may never find out for sure.

It is highly unlikely that Israel’s PMO would issue a fake statement regarding Netanyahu visiting the UAE at such a sensitive time.

What is more likely is that Abu Dhabi is trying to publicly distance itself from Netanyahu on a personal level, a sentiment that I have personally… https://t.co/8laUSjOAc7

— Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) May 13, 2026

The Senate on Wednesday blocked the seventh Democratic attempt to prevent Trump from waging war on Iran. However, it was by the slimmest margin yet, indicating a growing unease in the legislature about the now-paused conflict.

The vote failed by a 49-50 margin, with all Democrats but John Fetterman of Pennsylvania supporting the measure. For the first time, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joined fellow Republican Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky in breaking with Trump and voting with Democrats. 

This was the first vote on the War Powers Resolution since Trump bypassed the 60-day deadline to seek congressional authorization for Operation Epic Fury last month. You can read more about that effort in our story about it here.

Meanwhile, as we noted yesterday, NBC News reported that the administration is considering changing the name of the operation to Sledgehammer should hostilities resume.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

A UN humanitarian convoy delivering aid to the city of Kherson was hit twice by drones, despite prior coordination with Ukrainian and Russian forces. No injuries were reported, and the UN has not attributed the attack to either side.

The U.S. Air Force has confirmed it has come up with a new set of requirements as it continues to look for a successor to its hard-working MQ-9 Reaper fleet. In contrast to the Reaper, the replacement aircraft is likely to be more flexible in terms of mission spectrum. At the same time, the service wants to use new manufacturing technologies to ensure that it can be built at scale and at a lower price point than the MQ-9. This would allow it to be bought in larger numbers and risked more freely in contested environments.

All this reflects the continued high utility placed on the MQ-9 fleet, as well as its considerable loss rates sustained against mid-tier and lower-tier adversaries. It also points away from filling the MQ-9’s role with a far more exquisite, costly, but more survivable asset, which seemed to have been the direction the Air Force was heading, at least in part, for many years now. With this in mind, this new direction appears to accept that many losses will occur in future combat scenarios and embraces that reality to leverage quantity over quality for whatever eventually takes over from the MQ-9.

Testifying before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Maj. Gen. Christopher Niemi, the acting head of Air Force Futures, said that a new requirements document for an MQ-9 replacement had been approved. Aviation Week was first to report the development.

The approval clears the path for the Air Force to begin a new acquisition process for an uncrewed aircraft system (UAS) that will assume the MQ-9’s role. A medium-altitude, long-endurance (MALE) system, the Reaper is primarily used for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) and strike missions.

Niemi told the Senate Armed Services Committee that improvements in technology since the MQ-9 was developed mean the service now considers it possible for a new drone to be “more flexible,” leaning upon open architectures.

At the same time, modern production methods mean the new drone will be easier and cheaper to produce “in mass numbers,” Niemi said. The result should be a drone that the Air Force can “use in a more attritable way.”

Interestingly, within the Air Force, there has in recent years been a shift away from the term attritable — meaning inexpensive enough to be willing to lose on high-risk missions while being capable enough to be relevant for those missions — to “affordable mass.” This is something TWZ previously highlighted was already happening back in 2021.

This change came about as a way of helping define the kinds of advanced drones that the Air Force is planning to acquire in the coming years, reflecting that their capabilities will necessarily come at a cost that will make them less than “attritable.”

Last month, the Air Force published a market survey notice, requesting information from industry on a new attritable ISR drone.

This notice included some key performance parameters for the drone, including a range of up to 932 miles and a 20-hour endurance. The attritable nature of the drone was reflected in a requirement for it to fly 100 missions with a “low-to-medium acquisition” cost.

The basic Reaper can fly for more than 20 hours unarmed, or more than 12 hours with weapons. In the case of the MQ-9B version, with an extended wingspan, flight endurance can be increased to more than 40 hours.

“Operators desire low-cost, fast-to-field, fast-to-deploy airborne ISR mass to increase mission flexibility and mission surging,” the market survey notice added.

The process of figuring out what to replace the Reaper with has been ongoing for many years now. However, the latest effort is noteworthy for its emphasis on a lower-cost, more attritable platform.

Back in 2020, the Air Force published a request for information for a program dubbed MQ-Next, also seeking an MQ-9 successor. This was focused on ISR and strike capabilities, but also stated a desire for reduced operating costs and greater persistence, survivability, and range.

By 2021, the Air Force was concentrating more on a family of systems — the so-called Next-Generation Multi-Role Unmanned Aerial System Family of Systems (Next-Gen Multi-Role UAS FoS) — including a growing emphasis on low-observable (stealth) technologies. The same year, the service said it was seeking a replacement for the MQ-9 that could possibly include defensive counter-air capabilities to protect high-value manned aircraft, such as tankers, as well as potentially fly red air aggressor missions. Fast forward to today, and it’s clear that these higher-performance air-to-air focused missions could be taken over, at least in part, by the current Collaborative Combat Aircraft program. As a result, whatever replaces the MQ-9 is unlikely to have such broad requirements.

The Next-Gen Multi-Role UAS FoS included scope for platforms that could be survivable and reusable, or ones that would be attritable or expendable. This was not a single platform solution, either. It would likely need to include a mix of systems.

The 2021 document also stipulated that the MQ-9’s successor should be tailored for Great Power Competition, pointing to a drone ecosystem suitable for the kinds of highly contested environments that would be encountered during a conflict with a peer rival such as China or Russia. At the same time, the solution was also intended to fly missions in more permissive environments, like the MQ-9.

Around this same time, the Air Force also said it wanted to leverage advances in development and manufacturing, meaning that smaller numbers of manned aircraft could be produced quickly to meet dynamically evolving threats. This reflected the Air Force’s “Digital Century Series” that was in vogue at that time, and which led to talk about “throwaway” technology and essentially “disposable” aircraft. Some of this appears to have made it into these new requirements, which stipulate that the aircraft needs to be able to fly just 100 missions.

Meanwhile, the latest statements from the service describe a drone with increased flexibility achieved through open architecture, rather than building bespoke batches of drones for particular requirements. Previous statements from the service outlined an aspiration to have its new drone capable of accommodating rapidly reconfigurable payloads, something that open architecture would expedite.

Above all else, the MQ-9 successor will still have to operate in contested environments.

In his testimony yesterday, Niemi presented a vision of a new drone, the design of which would stress being attritable, rather than survivable.

The Pentagon has long worked on the basis that a future conflict with a peer rival, and especially with China in the Pacific, would see it facing highly robust anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) scenarios. With that in mind, previous Reaper replacement studies had suggested that low observability would need to be incorporated into the design.

The latest thinking seems to reject that, or at least reorient the program toward a lower-cost platform of the kind that the Air Force would be able to field in mass, as well as to absorb the anticipated attrition in a high-end conflict. This does not preclude this airframe from featuring low-observable elements. In fact, it most likely will. But those would be more aggressively balanced against cost.

Concerns over the MQ-9’s vulnerability to air defenses have been ongoing for years now, although usually the nuances of this issue are not portrayed accurately in the media. Regardless, many MQ-9s were lost over Yemen, against a bottom-tier force. The war with Iran earlier this year underlined both the great utility and vulnerabilities of the platform. At least 24 Air Force Reapers were destroyed during the war, but these aircraft were pushed deep into Iran, loitered there for hours on end, and did some of the most important air-to-ground strike and surveillance work during the air campaign. While the Air Force says it plans to “buy back” some of the losses from that conflict, that will come with a hefty price tag, something that the service will want to avoid with its next ISR/strike drone. Furthermore, production of the MQ-9A model has now ended in favor of the MQ-9B.

The assumption that the MQ-9 replacement will be acquired in significant numbers is also noteworthy in terms of the current Air Force Reaper fleet, which includes more than 130 MQ-9As, according to Aviation Week.

What appears to be missing at this stage, or at least obscured, is an acquisition strategy for the new drones. As well as the aerial platforms, the MQ-9 successor will require suitable new ground control systems, sensors, and data exploitation technologies, all of which are compatible with open-architecture standards. These systems will also have to leverage the latest technologies to allow the drones to be more effective and more survivable over the battlefield.

Since MQ-Next, the U.S. drone landscape has changed considerably in terms of manufacturers. A few years ago, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and General Atomics would have been seen as the front-runners for the MQ-9 replacement. Now, there are more contenders, often with a founding focus on rapidly scaling up production at low cost. Still, these firms have much to prove, especially considering the risk in replacing an aircraft as important as the MQ-9. At the same time, in the more advanced drone space, the legacy defense “prime” contractors are also making major progress in leveraging new technologies to reduce production costs and migrating away from exquisite, very expensive drones as their default offerings.

Back in 2021, the Air Force was promoting a “Speed to Ramp” initiative for its MQ-Next, which would see the first iterations of this capability fielded before “the 2026/2027 timeframe.” Other solutions under the same effort would begin to be fielded “in the 2030 timeframe,” the Air Force said.

While the latter timeline might still be somewhat achievable, it will require a considerable effort and investment and, not least, the firming up of the requirements for exactly what the Air Force wants its MQ-9 replacement to look like.

What we do know is that, while the Reaper’s replacement might not be as survivable as once envisioned, it will certainly be tailored to the increasingly harsh realities of a conflict against an advanced peer-state adversary. 

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Northrop Grumman’s experimental XRQ-73 Series Hybrid Electric Propulsion AiRcraft Demonstration (SHEPARD) hybrid-electric drone has now taken to the skies. Newly released pictures show that the flying wing-type uncrewed aircraft’s design has also evolved since it first broke cover in 2024. A core goal of SHEPARD is to prove out high-efficiency and very quiet propulsion technology that could pave the way for new operational capabilities.

DARPA announced the XRQ-73 test flight, which was conducted in April from Edwards Air Force Base in California, in a press release today. The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) was also involved in the milestone event.

Scaled Composites, a ‘bleeding edge’ boutique aircraft design house and wholly-owned subsidiary of Northrop Grumman, has been heavily involved in the development of the XRQ-73. The drone evolved directly from the XRQ-72A, another Scaled Composites design developed for the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), which TWZ was first to report on in detail.

“This milestone is not just about a single flight,” Air Force Lt. Col. Clark McGehee, the SHEPARD program manager at DARPA, said in a statement. “The architecture proven by the XRQ-73 paves the way for new types of mission systems and delivered effects. We look forward to advancing this technology through the flight test program and delivering new capabilities for our warfighters.”

“This flight is a step forward in demonstrating the military utility of hybrid-electric propulsion,” DARPA’s press release adds. “Hybrid electric propulsion architectures will drive the development of revolutionary new aircraft designs by offering a combination of fuel efficiency, reduced emissions, and enhanced operational flexibility.”

“Developed to advance propulsion technologies for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Series Hybrid Electric Propulsion AiRcraft Demonstration (SHEPARD) program, the XRQ-73 advances next-generation propulsion for lightweight autonomous aircraft,” Northrop Grumman said in its own brief press release. “The XRQ-73’s innovative hybrid-electric propulsion system combines fuel efficiency, reduced emissions and enhanced operational flexibility – enabling new mission possibilities and supporting the evolution of new aircraft designs.”

DARPA had originally hoped to see the XRQ-73 make its maiden flight before the end of 2024, and what caused the subsequent delay is unknown. TWZ has reached out to DARPA for more information. What is clear is that the XRQ-73’s design has changed in notable ways since 2024.

Most immediately eye-catching is the addition of two vertical stabilizers, one on top of each wing. They are positioned near, but not at the very tips of the wings. It is possible that these might be removed as flight testing expands. The preceding XRQ-72A design also had vertical wingtip stabilizers.

In addition to the two large air intakes on top of the central section of the fuselage, there is now another, much smaller auxiliary dorsal intake in between. Details about the exact configuration of the drone’s hybrid propulsion system remain limited. There are also at least two new black-colored blade antennas on top of the fuselage.

A fairing with what appears to be a forward-facing camera system is also now present at the front of the center of the fuselage. This is likely intended to at least provide visual inputs for control and additional situational awareness during flight testing. The fairing also sits in between two additional rectangular ‘nostril’ intakes. We have noted in the past that they could help cool the hybrid powerplant and the aircraft’s electronics, or help provide additional clean airflow to the powerplant during takeoff and landing.

The XRQ-73’s design looks to be otherwise unchanged. A large, faceted fairing, very likely intended as a sensor enclosure, is notably still present below the central section of the fuselage. Test instrumentation and other systems could also be installed in that space to support the drone’s ongoing development.

DARPA has shared some other information about the design in the past, as TWZ has previously reported:

“No details about the XRQ-73’s expected performance appear to have been released so far, but DARPA says it is a Group 3 uncrewed aerial system (UAS) weighing approximately 1,250 pounds, which will include “operationally representative … mission systems.” By the U.S. military’s definitions, a Group 3 UAS weighs between 55 and 1,320, can fly at altitudes between 3,500 and 18,000 feet, and has a top speed of between 100 and 250 knots.

At 1,250 pounds, the XRQ-73 is set to be substantially larger than the XRQ-72A, the requirements for which called for a drone weighing between 300 and 400 pounds. The XRQ-72A also had a 30-foot wingspan, a length of 11.2 feet measured from the nose to the ends of the wingtips, and a height of four feet when including the vertical wingtip stabilizers, according to schematics The War Zone previously obtained via the Freedom of Information Act.“

What the future might now hold for the XRQ-73 is unclear. DARPA has previously talked about wanting to demonstrate a capability that could be operationalized relatively quickly with SHEPARD. The “RQ” intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) designation is a clear reflection of that, although the drone could be configured to perform other missions. Hybrid-electric propulsion offers inherent advantages when it comes to reducing infrared and acoustic signatures, and the XRQ-73’s overall design has low-observable characteristics that could help it evade detection by radar.

However, a cursory review of DARPA’s proposed Fiscal Year 2027 budget does not appear to show a request for new funding for this effort. It is possible that it has been reorganized and/or rebranded, or has otherwise evolved in scale and/or scope, which is not uncommon for DARPA projects.

Last May, AFRL also awarded General Atomics a contract for a very similar-sounding “hybrid-electric propulsion ducted fan next-generation intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance/strike unmanned aerial system,” or GHOST. That deal was valued at just over $99 million.

“We’ve been promising something impressive related to hybrid-electric propulsion, and now I can’t talk about it anymore,” C. Mark Brinkley, a spokesperson for General Atomics, told TWZ at that time when asked for more information. “That’s how it goes with these things. Contrary to what you see on the news, the revolution won’t be televised.”

Other relevant hybrid-electric development efforts could be ongoing in the classified realm.

If nothing else, DARPA’s announcement today does show that work has continued on the XRQ-73 since 2024, and that the evolved design has now reached flight test.

Update: 4:46 PM EST –

DARPA has confirmed to TWZ that XRQ-73 flight testing began in April.

“X-plane programs are designed to push the extreme limits of aerospace engineering, integrating entirely unproven concepts and revolutionary designs,” Air Force Lt. Col. Clark McGehee, the SHEPARD program manager, also told TWZ in response to a question about why the first flight timeline was delayed. “As with the XRQ-73, this effort involved resolving complex, unforeseen technical challenges during ground testing and integration.”

“DARPA will continue maturing the hybrid electric propulsion system through a short flight test campaign currently underway,” Lt. Col. McGehee added.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

A fragile ceasefire in the US-Israel war on Iran is coming under growing strain as several Gulf countries have reported drone attacks.

Qatar said on Sunday that a drone struck a cargo ship in Qatari waters, sparking a fire, while Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates said they repelled drone attacks.

Though no Gulf country reported casualties in the latest attacks, they have put pressure on the fragile ceasefire, which took effect on April 8.

Qatar’s Ministry of Defence said the freighter had been arriving in the country’s waters from the UAE capital, Abu Dhabi, and was hit by a drone northeast of the port of Mesaieed.

“The vessel continued its journey toward Mesaieed Port after the fire was brought under control,” the ministry said.

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said a bulk carrier reported being struck by an “unknown projectile”, and a small fire had been extinguished, but there were no casualties from the incident. “There is no reported environmental impact,” it said.

Kuwait’s Defence Ministry said a “number of hostile drones” were detected in the country’s airspace at dawn. In a post on X, a spokesperson said the drones were dealt with “in accordance with established procedures”, but did not specify where the drones were launched from.

The UAE Defence Ministry said two Iranian drones were intercepted.

“UAE air defence systems successfully engaged two UAVs launched from Iran,” the ministry said in a statement on X.

Ceasefire tested

The Trump administration has said the truce is still in effect, but a naval battle has been taking place in the Gulf region, with Iran restricting traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway through which a fifth of traded oil transited before the war, and the United States imposing a blockade of Iranian ports.

Several attacks have been reported on ships in the Gulf and the countries in the region over the past week.

On Friday, the US struck two Iranian oil tankers, saying they were trying to breach its blockade of Iran’s ports.

On Tuesday, the UAE said it came under attack from Iranian missiles and drones for the second day in a row. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), however, denied the claim.

The IRGC Navy on Sunday reiterated its warning that any attack on Iranian oil tankers or commercial vessels would be met with a “heavy assault” on one of the bases in the region used by US forces and enemy ships.

The spokesperson for the Iranian parliament’s foreign policy and security committee, Ebrahim Rezaei, said Tehran’s “restraint is over”.

“Any aggression against our vessels will be met with a heavy and decisive Iranian response against American vessels and bases,” Rezaei wrote on X.

“The clock is ticking against the Americans’ interests; it is to their benefit not to act foolishly and sink themselves deeper into the quagmire they have fallen into. The best course is to surrender and concede concessions. You must get used to the new regional order,” he added.

Talks to end the war

While the truce remains in effect, President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to resume the US bombardment if Iran does not accept a deal which includes reopening the Strait of Hormuz and rolling back its nuclear programme.

Iran is still mulling its response to a 14-point proposal by Washington, with Iranian frozen assets and war reparations among other main sticking points.

In a meeting with US Secretary of State Marc Rubio on Saturday, Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani pushed for all parties to respond to the ongoing mediation efforts and to reach an agreement for lasting peace.

Qatar’s prime minister also held a phone call with Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, the Qatari foreign ministry reported on Sunday.

Sheikh Mohammed told Araghchi that Iran’s use of the Strait of Hormuz as a “pressure card” would only deepen the crisis in the Gulf, and said all parties in the conflict should respond to mediation efforts to end the war.

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Tohid Assadi said when it comes to diplomatic engagement, it seems that the US and Iran want the content of any negotiations to remain private.

Meanwhile, there is a mixture of different sentiments among Iranian citizens, he noted.

“Since the early days of the war, people have gathered to show their sense of nationalism and support for the political establishment,” he said.

“But we also know that there is a sense of frustration, especially when it comes to soaring prices and economic difficulties,” he added.

At a meeting on the reconstruction after damage caused by the war, President Masoud Pezeshkian said negotiations with the US on ending the war do not mean Iran is surrendering.

“The goal is to realise the rights of the Iranian people and defend national interests with authority,” he said.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is asking for concepts for drones with a high degree of autonomous operation, as well as remotely-operated containerized systems to launch, recover, and otherwise support them. What DARPA is really interested in is a pairing that can be employed as part of a largely self-sustaining “autonomous constellation” capable of supporting networked swarms consisting of as many as 500 drones at once.

A “constellation” like the one described above, incorporating drones configured for a wide array of roles, including surveillance and reconnaissance and kinetic strike, could be readily deployed in contested areas, or even potentially positioned deep behind enemy lines. Ukraine’s Operation Spiderweb covert drone attacks on several Russian airbases last year, as well as Israel’s near-field attacks from within Iran during the opening phases of the 12 Day War, have already demonstrated the effectiveness of the kind of capability DARPA is seeking. TWZ has also highlighted the value that this kind of drone swarm launch capability would offer on land and at sea on several occasions in the past, including after the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) put out a very similar call for proposals earlier this year.

DARPA’s Tactical Technology Office (TTO) first put out its request for information for this containerized drone swarm capability back in April, but has updated the relevant contracting notice several times since then. The latest version was posted online yesterday. At least from what has been shared so far, DARPA has not yet given this project a name.

“Existing commercial, airborne Group 1-3 platforms are limited in endurance, payload capacity, and onboard electrical auxiliary power. When operated as constellations, they typically require substantial infrastructure and basing area [sic] for deployment and recovery. These constellations typically require human involvement to recover, recharge/refuel, and launch again, lacking full autonomy necessary to achieve sustained operations spanning days or longer,” the current version of the contracting notice explains. “The landscape of current platform technologies has broad limitations that require evolution to achieve high-endurance constellations consisting of drones with meaningful payload Size Weight, Power, and Cost (SWaP-C) staged from fully autonomous containers capable of complete mission-cycle management inclusive of launch, sustainment/swap-out, and recovery.”

The U.S. military breaks drones into five different categories. Collectively, drones in Groups 1 and 2 can have maximum weights of up to 55 pounds, fly up to altitudes of 3,500 feet, and have top speeds of up to 250 knots. Group 3 is a very broad middle tier that covers designs that weigh anywhere from 56 to 1,320 pounds and can get up to 18,000 feet, but again have speeds of 250 knots or less. Together, Groups 1 through 3 include a very wide range of drones from small quadcopters all the way up to long-range one-way attack munitions.

Given the aforementioned limitations, “DARPA has identified an exigent need for highly deployable, versatile-SWaP Group 1-3 platforms, operating in autonomous constellations that are stored within, deployed from, recovered in, and managed by a fully autonomous container, to support a variety of payloads and missions in GPS-denied environments,” the contracting notice adds. “Advancements in low-SWaP technologies enable constellations comprising a variety of novel payloads, each requiring dedicated power and weight, but capable of operating in synchrony across the constellation. Constellation populations may comprise up to 500 platforms (number may vary as a function of payload type). Each platform will be equipped with a subsystem or independent payload system with the potential to achieve high operational availability for the combined system over multiple-day periods.”

The notice leaves the requirements for the drones and the containerized launch and recovery systems relatively open-ended.

“Unmanned aerial vehicle (herein referred to as “drones”) in the Group 1-3 space with capabilities for fully autonomous launch, recovery, storage, organization, recharging/refueling, organization, internal logistics management, and pre/post-flight checkout. Proposed drone designs must form a mission-focused, collaborative constellation. Responses must be cognizant of long endurance drone constellations with high operational availability and constellation management,” per the notice. “Novel configurations that enable multi-day continuous operations with their corollary constellation management software (ideally with path optimization and collision deconfliction) and innovative configurations of autonomous container-based deployment solutions are of particular interest to DARPA.”

“Storage containers (herein referred to as “containers”) that provide fully autonomous drone storage, logistics management, launch, recovery, and recharge/refuel, while conforming to the intention of a standardized military container (e.g. Conex, 463L pallets, Tricon, ISU container, etc.),” the notice adds. “Innovative ideas and non-standard containers (e.g. suitcase-based distributed systems, box-based systems) will also be considered within the context of the presented approach, but solutions should be compatible with current military transport capabilities. It is envisioned that these containers shall be self-sufficient with consideration of energy storage, communication equipment, and compute capability.”

DARPA also says it has a tangential interest in a remotely operated “host platform” that could carry the containers to and from a designated area, from which the drones can then be launched and recovered. The contracting notice does not specify whether this would be an air, ground, or maritime platform, or some mixture thereof.

The video in the social media post below shows a launch system for quadcopter-type drones installed on an uncrewed ground vehicle, which the U.S. Army previously tested.

Perhaps most interestingly, DARPA’s contracting notice highlights existing drone-and-launcher combinations used for “preplanned lightshows and commercial activities,” though it also notes that these are not suitable for U.S. military use. Last year, TWZ pointed out how these exact kinds of developments in the commercial entertainment space underscore very real threats posed by more capable, weaponized swarms. That piece came after a Chinese firm, DAMODA, rolled out a containerized system capable of launching, recovering, and recharging thousands of small, electrically-powered quadcopter-type drones at the touch of a button.

China just dropped a new level of drone swarm tech | One-click auto-deploy of thousands | by DAMODA

As we wrote at that time:

It is worth reiterating that DAMODA’s Automated Drone Swarm Container System, at least as it exists now, is clearly designed for entertainment industry use first and foremost. Though the company’s drone light show routines are certainly visually impressive and often go viral on social media, they are pre-scripted and conducted in a very localized fashion. What the company is offering is not a drone swarm capable of performing various military-minded tasks in a highly autonomous manner at appreciable ranges from its launch point.

At the same time, large-scale drone light shows put on by DAMODA (and a growing number of other companies), do highlight, on a broad level, the already highly problematic threats posed by swarms. The new Automated Drone Swarm Container System underscores the additional danger of these same threats hiding in plain sight. The steady proliferation of advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning, especially when it comes to dynamic targeting, will only create additional challenges, as TWZ has explored in detail in this past feature.

This is not theoretical, either. As mentioned, in June [2025], Ukrainian forces launched multiple drone attacks on airbases across Russia with the help of covert launchers loaded on the back of unassuming civilian tractor-trailer trucks. This entire effort was dubbed Operation Spiderweb and took months of planning.

The global market space for containerized launch systems for drones and other payloads is already substantial and continues to grow. Firms in China have been particularly active in this regard, and developments in that country have often also been tied to work on swarming capabilities. Companies in the United States, as well as in Europe and elsewhere around the world, are also increasingly active in this arena.

中国电科陆空协同固定翼无人机“蜂群”系统

Modular Payload System: Launching from Land or Sea

In general, containerized weapon systems offer immense flexibility for employment in ground-based modes, including for rapid deployment to remote or austere locations, as well as on any ship with sufficient deck space. TWZ has previously laid out a very detailed case for why the U.S. Navy should arm its warships with containers loaded with swarms of drones, which you can find here.

Container-like launchers for drones, many of which are mounted on trucks, are also an increasingly common sight globally. Iran has been a particularly significant developer of such capabilities as part of its development of long-range kamikaze drones, as seen in the video below.

Баражуючий іранський боєприпас «Shahed 136»

However, most existing relevant containerized or container-like systems focus on launching payloads rather than recovering them, let alone getting them ready to be relaunched. To date, the latter capabilities have been more of an area of interest for commercial applications. Chinese firm DJI and other companies are increasingly offering container-like ‘docks’ for small commercial drones, though they are generally designed to host just one uncrewed aerial system at a time.

TWZ actually covered much of this already after the DIU announced it was hunting for a very similar-sounding Containerized Autonomous Drone Delivery System (CADDS) capability in February. The CADDS announcement, however, was focused purely on the launch-and-recovery components of the equation, as you can read more about here. How DIU’s effort might be related to what DARPA is exploring now is unknown.

In its call for CADDS proposals, DIU had also highlighted a new, more general emerging demand for more launch capacity to go along with a U.S.-military push to acquire and field hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of new drones, especially smaller types, in the next few years. This has all been spurred on by sweeping new guidance from the Pentagon rolled out last year, aimed at “unleashing U.S. Military drone dominance.” Though DARPA’s contracting notice does not touch on this directly, the capability it is describing would help address this broader question of how U.S. forces were actually employ all of these new uncrewed aerial systems.

Furthermore, as we wrote after DIU put out its call for CADDS proposals:

“Even in an overt operational context, readily deployable containerized systems capable of acting as hubs for drone operations across a broad area with limited manpower requirements could offer a major boost in capability and capacity. Ships, trucks, and aircraft, which could themselves be uncrewed, could be used to bring them to and from forward locations, even in remote areas. If they can support a ‘heterogeneous mix’ of uncrewed aerial systems, a single container could be used to support a wide array of mission requirements, including intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, electronic warfare, kinetic strikes, and/or communications signal relay.”

“An inherent benefit of a drone swarm, in general, is that each individual component does not have to be configured to perform all of the desired tasks. This creates additional flexibility and resilience to threats, since the loss of any particular drone does not necessarily preclude the swarm from continuing its assigned missions. There are tangential design and cost benefits for the drones themselves, since they can be configured to carry only the systems required for their particular mission demands.”

Army Aviation Launches Autonomous Pack Hunters

…

“Drone swarms are only set to become more capable as advancements in autonomy, especially automated target recognition, continue to progress, driven by parallel developments in artificial intelligence and machine learning, as you can read more about here. Future highly autonomous swarms will be able to execute various mission sets even more efficiently and in ways that compound challenges for defenders. Massed drone attacks with limited autonomy already have an inherent capacity to just overwhelm enemy defenses. In turn, electronic warfare systems and high-power microwave directed energy weapons have steadily emerged as some of the most capable options available to tackle swarms, but have their own limitations. Even powerful microwave systems have very short ranges and are directional in nature, and electronic warfare systems may simply not work at all against autonomous drones.”

It remains to be seen whether or not DARPA’s exploration of drone swarms and associated launch systems that could form future “autonomous constellations” leads to an operational capability. Still, this, together with DIU’s CADDS effort, shows clear interest within the U.S. military in making this a reality, if possible.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

A Russian drone strike has hit a kindergarten in Ukraine’s Sumy region, killing at least one person and injuring two others, Ukrainian officials said. The attack came as Kyiv accused Moscow of violating a unilateral ceasefire proposed by Ukraine amid competing truce announcements from both sides.

Shield AI revealed a revised planform configuration and new details about its extremely ambitious X-BAT jet-powered autonomous stealth ‘fighter’ drone at April’s Sea-Air-Space 2026 convention, as detailed by TWZ. At the event, I was able to speak at length with Armor Harris, the chief designer of X-BAT, who was keen to discuss the status of the project. You can read TWZ’s original deep dive exclusive interview with Harris that was published when X-BAT first emerged from the shadows last October here.

The tail-sitting X-BAT, designed to take off vertically and land the same way, is planned to start vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) testing before the end of this year. Harris explained how it is designed to fly combat missions under the control of the company’s Hivemind artificial intelligence “pilot” and how Shield AI has designed-in payload bays that are roughly the same size as those found on the F-35, which will enable it to carry many of the same weapons as the stealthy crewed fighter.

The X-BAT concept is aimed to disrupt not just the budding advanced autonomous drone marketplace, but parts of the fighter market too. So much hangs on the VTOL element that the airframe is designed around, so to say that a lot is riding on those tests is an understatement.

Here is the full interview from the show floor at Sea-Air-Space:

Meet The Man Behind The X-BAT Autonomous VTOL Fighter Drone

May 2 (Asia Today) — China has begun tightening regulations on its fast-growing drone industry, prompting concerns that the government may be undermining one of its most competitive global sectors.

Recent reports from Chinese media outlets, including the New Beijing News, indicate that China holds a commanding position in the global drone market, with an estimated market share of at least 70%. Industry leader DJI dominates both domestic and international markets, facing limited competition even as Taiwan makes inroads in Europe.

Despite this strong position, new regulations took effect Thursday in Beijing, effectively designating much of the capital as a no-drone zone. Under the new municipal ordinance on unmanned aerial vehicle management, the transport, sale, rental and operation of drones within the city have been broadly restricted.

The measures have already led to store closures. DJI flagship outlets in areas such as the 798 Art District in Beijing’s Chaoyang district have shut down, in some cases under pressure from authorities.

Officials say the move reflects growing concerns over national security and public safety, as drones are increasingly viewed as potential threats in sensitive areas. Beijing has previously imposed temporary flight bans on low, slow and small aerial objects during major political events, a policy that now appears to be expanding into a more permanent framework.

Analysts say the Beijing regulations could serve as a model for broader nationwide controls. If expanded, such measures may significantly weaken China’s dominance in the global drone industry and could even erode its competitive edge.

Industry insiders have expressed concern that excessive regulation could harm a key growth sector, with some privately warning that China risks damaging its own technological leadership.

— 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=20260502010000045

Ukrainian forces also strike two shadow fleet tankers near port of Novorossiysk, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says.

Ukrainian forces have launched a drone attack on the Russian Baltic Sea ⁠⁠port of Primorsk, the governor says, as Kyiv and Moscow accuse each other of killing civilians in overnight air raids.

There was no oil spill caused by Sunday’s attack on Primorsk, a major oil-exporting outlet, but it caused a fire in the town that was extinguished, Leningrad Governor Alexander Drozdenko said. More than 60 drones were downed overnight over the northwestern region, he added.

Primorsk, ‌‌one of Russia’s largest export gateways, has the capacity to handle one million barrels per day of oil.

It has been hit multiple times in recent months as Ukraine has stepped up attacks on Russian energy infrastructure and other targets and United States-brokered talks to end the Ukraine war have stalled.

Ukrainian ⁠⁠President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said his country’s forces also struck two shadow fleet tankers in waters at the ⁠⁠entrance to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossiysk.

“These tankers had been actively used to transport oil – not anymore,” Zelenskyy said on Telegram. “Ukraine’s long-range capabilities will continue to be developed comprehensively – at sea, in the ⁠⁠air, and on land.”

The two neighbours have been launching hundreds of explosive-packed drones at each other on a near-daily basis throughout the four-year war.

Other Russian regions also reported drone attacks on Saturday and Sunday. Moscow Governor Andrei Vorobyov ⁠⁠said on Saturday evening that a 77-year-old man ⁠⁠died in a village in a drone strike.

Sergei Sobyanin, the mayor of Moscow, said four drones were downed on their way to the Russian capital.

Vasily Anokhin, the governor ‌‌of the western region of Smolensk, said three people, including a child, were injured on Sunday in a drone attack on an apartment block.

Attacks in Ukraine

Russian drone strikes on Ukraine killed at least three people across the country, local officials said on Sunday.

Attacks on southern Ukraine’s Odesa region, home to key export terminals, killed two people, including a truck driver at a port, Governor Oleh Kiper said on social media.

“Enemy drones hit three residential buildings, and two more were damaged. … Facilities and equipment for the port infrastructure were also damaged,” he said.

Elsewhere, Russian strikes on the front-line region of Kherson in southern Ukraine also killed one person, officials said.

Russia fired 268 drones and one ballistic missile in the overnight attacks, Ukraine’s air force said.

In eastern Ukraine, Russian troops were ‌‌inching ‌‌towards the city of Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region, Ukraine’s top army official said on Saturday.

The attack, the second in a week, follows months of relative calm in the city after government forces regained control last year.

A drone strike carried out by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has killed five civilians in Khartoum, according to an NGO.

The attack, which Emergency Lawyers, an independent legal group supporting victims of human rights violations in Sudan, reported on Saturday, is the second to take place in the capital within a week. It follows months of relative calm in the city after government forces regained control last year.

The NGO said it holds the RSF fully responsible for the strike, accusing the group of breaching international humanitarian law.

Emergency Lawyers said the incident forms part of an ongoing pattern of attacks on civilians. Nearly 700 civilians were killed in drone strikes in the first three months of this year, according to UN figures.

‘Completely free’

On Tuesday, a drone struck a hospital in the Jebel Awliya area, around 40 kilometres (25 miles) south of central Khartoum, a security source and eyewitnesses told the AFP news agency. It was the first such attack in the area in months.

The Sudanese army, which now enjoys a solid grip in the north and east, launched a rapid counteroffensive last year that pushed the paramilitary forces out of the capital.

Following intense fighting around the capital last year, Sudan’s military government declared the Khartoum region “completely free” of RSF.

Since then, the RSF has largely concentrated on expanding its control in its stronghold in the western Darfur region and pushing into neighbouring areas, capturing valuable oil-producing assets.

Violence has also spread to southeastern Blue Nile state near the border with Ethiopia, raising fears of a more prolonged and fragmented conflict.

The RSF carried out a series of drone strikes on Khartoum last year, largely targeting military sites, power stations and water infrastructure.

In recent months, however, the capital has seen relative calm. More than 1.8 million displaced residents have returned, and the airport has resumed domestic flights. That said, much of the city remains without electricity or basic services.

The conflict between the Sudanese government and the RSF – a former ally – began in April 2023. Since then, around 14 million people have been displaced and two-thirds of the population are in urgent need of humanitarian support, according to the United Nations.

Four years ago, Robert Brovdi was more comfortable in auction houses like Christie’s than filthy trenches. A well-off grain dealer in those days, with a sideline as an art collector, fragments of his pre-war life survive in the paintings and sculptures by Ukrainian artists dotted around the bunker. They’re displayed beside missile casings and captured drones. He’s an ethnic Hungarian, from Uzhgorod in western Ukraine, and best known by his military call sign, Magyar. Clean-shaven before the war, he now wears a long ginger and grey-speckled beard.

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