force

Details are still coming in, but a B-52 bomber has crashed at Edwards Air Force Base in California.

The base’s official Facebook and X pages have posted the following statement:

“A United States Air Force B-52 Stratofortress crashed shortly after takeoff on the Edwards airfield at 11:20 a.m. Emergency crews immediately responded to the scene and the situation is ongoing. More information will be provided as it becomes available.”

From what we can see, the B-52 appears to have crashed on or at least very near the base’s main runway. Still images and video emerging now show a large fire with black smoke that can be seen from miles away.

News of the crash first emerged in a post on the unofficial Air Force amn/nco/snco Facebook group. That post said the aircraft in question was tail number 061, but this is currently unconfirmed. While its status is unclear, this particular B-52 was the first to receive a new AN/APQ-188 active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar, which is one part of a much larger modernization effort for the entire fleet of these bombers.

Did something just happen at Edwards Air Force Base? Currently seeing a large column coming from the base, cams are aligned with one of the runways.

Seems like these two are holding off as well. pic.twitter.com/3vec75KPH0

— DanielFireCopter (@DanielFireTruck) June 15, 2026

How many individuals were on board the B-52 when it went down, and their fate, are currently unknown. However, the bomber ejection seat configuration could have presented complications for escape depending on how soon after takeoff the incident occurred. The B-52 has crew positions that eject downward.

Prior to this crash, the Air Force had 76 B-52s in service.

Though the two incidents are unrelated, this is also the second crash of a U.S. military aircraft in three days. A U.S. Marine Corps F/A-18D Hornet assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 323 (VMFA-323) went down near Mount Rainier in Washington State on June 13. The two individuals in that jet were able to eject safely. The Hornet did start a wildfire after hitting the ground.

BREAKING – 🇺🇸 Footage showing a U.S. Marine Corps F/A-18 crashing into a hillside near Rimrock Lake, Wash., on Saturday. pic.twitter.com/yQ4O6UFZOl

— Technopolitik (@Technopolitik_) June 15, 2026

A US Navy F/A-18 crashed near Rimrock Lake, pilot ejected and walked out with medics according to reports. This is along the famous VR-1355 low level route in Washington State.

🎥509Media pic.twitter.com/UhKZyUCRF9

— Thenewarea51 (@thenewarea51) June 14, 2026

Update: 4:00 PM ET –

Fox News has now shared a video it says is of the aftermath of the crash, which shows a very large scorched area along the side of one of the runways at Edwards. There is no readily discernible wreckage, pointing to a total loss of the aircraft.

Update: 4:18 PM ET –

Edwards Air Force Base has shared a new update as of 12:48 PM PDT via its social media accounts. The full statement reads:

“The airfield has been closed, and all inbound aircraft are being diverted. All non-commercial visitor passes have been suspended until further notice to allow the installation to focus entirely on emergency response operations.”

Update- 12:48 PDT: The airfield has been closed, and all inbound aircraft are being diverted.

All non-commercial visitor passes have been suspended until further notice to allow the installation to focus entirely on emergency response operations.

— Edwards Air Force Base (@EdwardsAFB) June 15, 2026

We will continue to update this story as more information becomes available.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

June 13 (UPI) — Five Indian Air Force personnel are dead after a transport plane crashed during training in Assam, officials said Saturday.

“The Indian Air Force deeply regrets the loss of five personnel in the An-32 accident at Jorhat, Assam. Sqn Ldr Prashant Singh, Flt Lt Shubham Kumar, Sgt Jitendra Sharma, Agniveervayu Khemaram Kumawat and Agniveervayu Danish Alam made the supreme sacrifice in the line of duty. IAF extends its deepest condolences to the bereaved families and stands firmly with them in this hour of grief,” the Indian Air Force posted on X.

Assam is in the northeastern part of the country.

“Crash site management and initial enquiries are on at this time,” the Air Force said. It added that an investigation to find the cause of the crash is underway.

India’s air force operates a fleet of about 105 AN-32 aircraft, Al Jazeera reported.

NASA is moving to hire a contractor to assess whether or not a Boeing 737-73W can meet its needs for a new reduced-gravity testbed aircraft. The use of planes modified for this role is now new, and they are often called “Vomit Comets” because of the extreme maneuvers they perform to simulate zero-G environments and the physical side effects this often induces. However, there’s an unusual twist here with the specific plane that NASA is now eyeing: it currently belongs to the U.S. Air Force and is part of a “classified military program.” There is a strong possibility that the aircraft in question is a mysterious 737 that the service acquired in 2020, and that has been the subject of much speculation as to its purpose ever since.

NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center posted a contracting notice yesterday justifying a planned sole-source contract to Denmar Technical Services, Inc. in relation to “Reduced Gravity Modification” of the 737-73W aircraft. Earlier this year, signs had already emerged that NASA might be in line to get a heavily modified and highly secretive 737 from the Air Force, designated the NT-43A and commonly referred to by the callsign RAT55. However, yesterday’s notice does not appear to refer to the NT-43A, long used as an airborne signature measurement platform and described in the past as the world’s most secretive 737, which is based on a much older 200-series airframe. We will come back to this later on.

What NASA wants now

“NASA requires Denmar Technical Services, Inc. to conduct a feasibility assessment to determine the Boeing 737-73W’s suitability to perform the NASA reduced gravity mission; modify the aircraft cabin, if required, to support reduced gravity operations; perform overdue maintenance and inspections, perform airworthiness restoration tasks, and paint the aircraft exterior with NASA identifiers,” the contracting notice NASA released yesterday explains.

The notice adds that the aircraft, if modified, would be used, at least most immediately, “for the Reduced Gravity Test Bed Project in support of the agency [sic] need for performing validation testing on Space Suits in support of the Artemis program.”

Artemis is NASA’s current effort to return U.S. astronauts to the lunar surface. The Artemis II mission, conducted in April, involved the first fly-by of the Moon by a crewed spacecraft since the end of the Apollo program in the early 1970s. However, the spacecraft did not touch down on the surface. The goal now is for a crewed lunar landing to come in 2028. RAT55 was notably used to support the launch of the Artemis II mission and the subsequent recovery of the capsule after its return to Earth.

Back in January, NASA had put out a separate contracting notice calling for information about new options to provide “parabolic flight services” to simulate “reduced gravity environments, including microgravity” for testing and scientific research purposes. The Florida-based Zero-G corporation is currently the primary provider of these services to NASA, using a retrofitted Boeing 727-200 dubbed ‘G-Force One.’ You can read more about NASA’s general use of Vomit Comets in the context of that notice here.

Total Weightless! What Happened on my Zero Gravity Flight?

The Boeing 737-73W under consideration to be turned into a Vomit Comet “is owned by the United States Air Force (USAF). Denmar Technical Services, Inc. has specialized knowledge of this Boeing 737-73W aircraft as they are currently contracted by the USAF to modify the aircraft under a classified military program,” the contracting notice NASA released yesterday adds. “NASA does not have a ‘need to know’ regarding the details of the current modifications being made under the USAF contract and therefore is unable to provide modification details to another contractor or provide another contractor with access to the aircraft. The USAF will transfer ownership of the aircraft to NASA upon completion of the closeout tasks.”

“Denmar Technical Services, Inc. is uniquely positioned to close out work under their existing obligations while performing the feasibility assessment, maintenance, and any modifications required under this action,” the notice continues. “Additionally, due to the constrained timeline for the NASA Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program’s space suit testing for Artemis, NASA requires the assessment and overdue maintenance to be performed immediately upon contract award and any subsequent aircraft modifications to be complete no later than October 1, 2026. The timeline can only be supported if this requirement is fulfilled concurrently with the USAF closeout tasks.”

Denmar is a small aviation firm headquartered in Reno, Nevada. At the time of writing, its website lists a wide array of specialized design, modification, flight testing, and other work among its portfolios. This includes “advanced customized mission system development” that “encompasses the design of unique airborne operator interfaces, specialized emitters and sensors, system integration, and post-mission analytics and processing.” The company also describes itself as the “Nation’s leading experts on IR [infrared] and RF [radiofrequency] survivability, signature modeling, [and] agile software development for analysis and real-world operational assessments.”

In line with all this, Denmar is understood to have been the prime contractor behind the extensive modifications to RAT55. In April, the Air Force confirmed to TWZ that the NT-43A was “being transitioned to start the next phase of its career,” as reflected by its involvement in the Artemis II mission, “after decades of flights supporting the Air Force in various roles.” The aircraft, which is understood to have long called the secretive and remote Tonopah Test Range Airport (TTR) in Nevada home, has been seen much more publicly since then.

However, as NASA’s recent contracting notice makes clear, the 737 it is now looking at as a potential Vomit Comet is a much newer 700-series model. TWZ has reached out to the Air Force and NASA for more information.

The curious case of N712JM

As mentioned, it is very possible, if not highly probable, that the 737 NASA is now considering turning into a Vomit Comet is one that the Air Force acquired in 2020, which TWZ explored in-depth at the time. That aircraft, which is a -73W model, is still officially on the U.S. civil register, with the registration code N712JM. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records show that the preceding owner of this aircraft was Denmar, which acquired it in 2019. The plane’s history before that is murky, with Boeing delivering it in 2013 to East West Bank via a trusteeship with Wells Fargo Bank, per the FAA’s records.

N712JM had drawn particular attention in 2020 not just because of its transfer to the Air Force, but also because it emerged at that time wearing a green protective coating and otherwise looking like it had just rolled off the production line. It also had some unusual external features that raised questions about its role, as we explored at the time.

In 2020, Jon Ostrower, long-time aviation journalist and editor-in-chief of The Air Current, told TWZ the following:

“This is definitely an airplane that never made it to a formal finish you’d expect from a commercial airplane. The green finish is a protective coating applied to fuselages during manufacturing to protect from scratches and other damage. It is dissolved during painting. You can also still see the manufacturing (line) number as well. That’s from its original trip down the assembly line. There’s also quite a bit of instrumentation visible with sensor wiring leading into the cabin through the passenger windows. This type of arrangement points to a flight test setup of some kind.”

In 2020, N712JM conducted many test flights in U.S. military ranges off the coast of Southern California, flying various flight profiles, some of them quite unusual. The aircraft flew those sorties from Santa Maria Airport in California, and used the callsign STING 38.

What the Air Force has been using N712JM for to date is unknown. Per FAA, the aircraft has been and continues to be registered to an address at Bolling Air Force Base (technically now part of Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling) in Washington, D.C., which looks to belong to the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO). The RCO has headed up multiple cutting-edge, high-priority programs over the years, including the development of the B-21 Raider stealth bomber and the X-37B reusable spaceplane. A 737-based platform could be configured to support an array of different research and development and test evaluation activities that would fall under the purview of RCO, as well as other stakeholders that this office might engage with.

There has also been some speculation over the years that N712JM might have transformed into an Air Force 737 with the serial number 21-0024, but this appears to still be unconfirmed. The 21-0024 serial has more recently become associated with other shadowy 737s tied to the U.S. military, which have civilian-style paint schemes and may also be on the U.S. civil register. One of them was notably spotted in 2025 at a U.S. forward operating location in El Salvador, sitting directly alongside an Air Force AC-130J Ghostrider gunship and a U.S. Navy P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol plane. This, in turn, raised questions about its involvement in the ongoing U.S. campaign of strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean and the Eastern Pacific Ocean, as TWZ previously explored in detail.

21-0024, for reference. When I spotted it, FR24 was indeed calling it N712JM, though ADSBx had the BuNo and a different hex. https://t.co/3WwV3kxBC4

— Volgowrath (@volgowrath) April 27, 2023

Sightings and flight tracking data have also pointed to N712JM being a resident at the Sierra Nevada Corporation’s (SNC) facility at Colorado Springs Airport, in the Colorado city of the same name, over the years. SNC is well known for highly specialized and unique aircraft modification work, especially for the U.S. military, but its exact connection to this 737 is unclear.

Interestingly, there have been several online flight tracking data ‘pings’ suggesting new activity related to N712JM at Colorado Springs Airport since at least February of this year. However, there do not appear to be any confirmed flights by the aircraft from there in that same timeframe. This airport notably sits adjacent to Peterson Space Force Base.

There is still a possibility that NASA could be looking at a different Air Force 737-73W for possible conversion into a Vomit Comet. As the contracting notice makes clear, the aircraft in question is currently in the classified realm. At the same time, this seems far less likely to be the case given everything that is known (and still unknown) about N712JM.

A separate question does exist now as to what effort the Air Force might be in the process of closing out that would allow it to transfer any classified 737 to NASA. TWZ has previously raised tangential questions about how the Air Force might fill the resulting gaps left by the highly-specialized RAT55 moving on to the next stage of its career. It is certainly interesting in its own right that NASA seems to be focused heavily at the moment on leveraging some of the most secretive 737s in existence today to support its much less sensitive needs.

More details may emerge if Denmar deems the “classified” Air Force 737 to be a suitable starting place to create a new Vomit Comet to support NASA’s reduced gravity training needs and the Artemis program.

Update: 3:45 PM EST –

In immediate response to our queries, NASA has directed us to an additional notice about the award of the sole-source contract, valued at $8.4 million, to Denmar Technical Services back on June 1.

“The contractor will modify a Boeing 737-700 aircraft to perform lunar-gravity parabolic flights to test NASA space equipment. Once modifications are complete, NASA Armstrong will own the aircraft and oversee aircraft operations out of NASA Johnson,” the notice says. “The aircraft will be used to validate astronaut lunar suits and associated crew systems required to support Artemis mission objectives. This can be done with the modified 737 aircraft in an operationally relevant, reduced-gravity environment prior to lunar mission execution.”

No mention is made here about the sourcing of the aircraft from the Air Force or its classified mission work, as outlined in the sole-source justification that was released yesterday.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The U.S. Air Force has confirmed that the VC-25B “Bridge” aircraft is now wearing its new (and controversial) red, white, and blue livery as it undergoes final preparations for its official delivery.

Aviation photographer Travis Ghormley shared the first picture of the modified Boeing 747-8i with its new paint scheme yesterday. It was taken the day before in Waco, Texas. The aircraft had been undergoing modification and flight testing at L3Harris’ facility in Greenville, also in Texas, as part of the conversion into its new role, since at least April, before subsequently moving to Waco to be painted. The jet, gifted to the Trump administration by the government of Qatar last year, is set to serve as an interim Air Force One aircraft ahead of the much-delayed arrival of two fully outfitted VC-25Bs from Boeing.

“The VC-25B Bridge aircraft has been painted and is going through final modifications,” an Air Force spokesperson told TWZ today when asked for more information about the aircraft’s current status. “I don’t have any additional details I can provide on delivery dates at this time.”

A press release the Air Force put out on May 1 said that the “VC-25B Bridge aircraft has officially completed modification and flight testing” and was “being painted.” We have confirmed that the completed modifications referred to here were on the contractor side, but the U.S. government still has additional modifications to make to the jet.

Ghormley’s picture does clearly show the jet wearing the same red, white, and blue scheme that has already been appearing on various Air Force and other U.S. government VVIP jets. The livery also includes a large American flag, depicted blowing in the wind, painted on both sides of the tail and “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” written on both sides of the fuselage. The paint job is virtually identical to what President Donald Trump had previously chosen for the future VC-25B Air Force Ones during his first term. President Joe Biden had previously reversed that decision, bringing back plans to paint the VC-25Bs in the iconic scheme that dates back to President John F. Kennedy’s administration.

The Bridge aircraft’s current location is also unclear. Video posted on social media yesterday, seen below, purported to be of the jet departing for its new home at Andrews Air Force Base just outside of Washington, D.C. This is where the two current VC-25A Air Force One jets, as well as a host of other Air Force VVIP aircraft, are based.

Online flight tracking data does show that another U.S. military Boeing 747-8i flew from Waco, Texas, to Andrews on June 7, using the callsign Crane 01. However, this callsign has been associated with an ex-Lufthansa 747 the Air Force has also acquired for use as a trainer in support of future Air Force One operations. This aircraft, which may now carry the serial number 25-3200, has been tracked multiple times flying between facilities in Texas and Andrews in recent months. There does not appear to be tracking data for the VC-25B Bridge jet, which may also now have the serial number 25-3300, but it could have made the trip without broadcasting on ADS-B.

Past reports have indicated that the Bridge aircraft could make its public debut on July 4, which this year is also wrapped up in additional celebrations of the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States. President Trump’s birthday (June 14) is also this weekend.

Otherwise, TWZ has previously laid out significant questions about the general feasibility of actually using the VC-25B Bridge aircraft in the Air Force One role, given the kinds of modifications that should be required for this demanding mission. Potential operational security concerns have been raised about using the gifted jet as a presidential aircraft, as well.

“L3Harris, known for its executive communications systems and services, was selected to undertake a complex modification of the bridge aircraft. L3Harris not only delivers secure, reliable and resilient communications for VC-25A and the executive airlift fleet but has extensive experience with self-protection and customization of VIP aircraft,” the Air Force wrote in the May 1 press release. “The accelerated timeline was further made possible by a mission-focused partnership with Boeing, who provided the necessary engineering data to support the required structural modifications.”

“Additionally, elite specialists from multiple government agencies developed advanced protocols to detect and-if necessary-neutralize potential technical hazards on previously owned aircraft,” it added. “Their rigorous approach on the Bridge aircraft has literally ‘written the book’ and set the benchmark for integrating used airframes into the secure military inventory.”

“Safety and security were at the forefront of this program. We deliberately minimized interior aesthetic modifications to focus on modifications for safety, security and mission execution. We assessed which requirements were necessary for an interim capability. We had greater flexibility in developing our mission requirements,” the Air Force also told TWZ directly at that time. “After safety and security, we focused on the mission communications systems.”

“We have made deliberate decisions such as the reduction of the number of airstairs, less chiller space, and exclusion of the Golden Eagle mission [to fly the remains of former presidents] to minimize structural modifications, while prioritizing modifications focused on safety, security and secure communications,” the service added.

Getting a new Air Force One aircraft of some kind into service on an accelerated timetable has long appeared to be a major goal for President Trump. The fully-equipped VC-25Bs from Boeing are years behind schedule. Last year, the Air Force announced that there had been some improvement on that front, but that it still did not expect to have the first of the two jets in hand until mid-2028, which would be just months before Trump is set to leave office.

What we do know for sure is that the VC-25B Bridge aircraft is now wearing Trump’s preferred red, white, and blue paint scheme ahead of its official rollout later this summer.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Republicans in the United States Senate have renewed their push to pass a controversial $70bn immigration-enforcement funding bill, a top policy priority for President Donald Trump.

But the effort on Thursday faced a series of hurdles, with Democrats forcing votes on several amendments that highlighted controversies related to the Trump presidency.

The rapid-fire votes on the amendments were dubbed a “vote-a-rama“, and they are slated to include issues ranging from Trump’s White House ballroom to his tariff policies and the US-Israel war on Iran.

“Amendment after amendment, vote after vote, Republicans are going to have to answer to the American people,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said.

Early on, Republicans were forced to confront a topic that has dominated headlines in recent weeks: Trump’s proposed $1.776bn “anti-weaponisation” fund.

The fund has been controversial on both sides of the aisle, with critics calling it a slush fund for Trump’s allies.

Several Republicans indicated that the optics of such a fund could be politically catastrophic ahead of November’s midterm elections, and the Department of Justice has since backed away from the scheme.

But Trump himself has avoided saying whether the fund was dead, or just on hold.

It was created as part of a settlement following a lawsuit Trump filed against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), a part of his government, and it was designed to award payouts to alleged victims of politically motivated prosecution.

Senate Democrats have repeatedly called for such a fund to be banned outright, rather than relying on the Trump administration’s commitment not to revive it.

Nevertheless, on Thursday, Senate Republicans rejected the Democrats’ measure to permanently block the fund.

Republican Tom Tillis introduced a second amendment, which would have also banned the settlement fund. Instead, the legislation would have redirected the allocated funds to a separate anti-fraud fund within the Justice Department. That, too, was rejected.

Thursday’s votes on the “anti-weaponisation” fund were just the start of several rounds of voting on issues uncomfortable to the Republican Party.

Schumer, the top Democrat, signalled that other amendments would tackle another part of the IRS settlement: the permanent immunity from tax audits that Trump had secured for himself and his family.

Trump’s controversial immigration enforcement campaign and other issues were also scheduled to be taken up in the day’s amendments.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he was not sure whether Republicans would defeat every measure, with some members of the party showing an increasing willingness to stand up to Trump.

“I can’t predict how it comes out,” he said.

Immigration funding bill

The situation on Thursday was the result of a standoff between Democrats and Republicans over the Trump administration’s approach to immigration enforcement.

Democrats had pledged not to approve further funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), following the killing of two US citizens during immigration operations in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Republicans control 53 seats in the 100-seat chamber, short of the 60-vote threshold needed to overcome a filibuster.

They have instead been forced to pursue a lengthy procedural manoeuvre to bypass the filibuster, which has taken weeks.

The $70bn funding bill had been stalled by the Trump administration’s demand to include $1bn for security upgrades for Trump’s White House ballroom project.

The request came after the president had repeatedly said that no taxpayer dollars would go towards the project.

The security funding, which roiled several Republicans, was subsequently dropped before the voting started.

The Senate’s parliamentarian, an official who interprets the chamber’s rules, had previously ruled that adding ballroom funding to the $70bn bill would make it ineligible for the budget reconciliation process, which allows the passage of fiscal-related bills with a simple majority.

If Senate Republicans remain unified, they are expected to pass the funding bill late Thursday night or early Friday.

The Republican-controlled House of Representatives is expected to take up the bill shortly after.

Travel companies have been contacting people with holidays booked after change made

Jet2 passengers have been told that a key change is now ‘in force’ after some got in touch worried that an email they received could be a fake. Holiday travel companies have also been getting in touch with customers to tell them of the change.

Thousands of travellers have received emails notifying them that their holiday documents will be arriving later than originally expected. This has raised alarm bells among some customers who fear it could be a scam – particularly as Jet2 has recently been warning about numerous fake social media accounts being created in an attempt to defraud passengers.

Previously Jet2 sent all documents to travellers 28 days in advance of the break – however in 2026 this has changed with great uncertainty about the situation this summer with the Middle East conflict still not resolved. In a recent post on Facebook travel company Holiday Getaway said: “Just a quick update for customers travelling with Jet2. Holiday documents will now be available 14 days before departure to ensure you have the most up-to-date information for your trip. No action needed. Online check-in is still available from 28 days before travel.”

One passenger wrote on X: “@jet2tweets Hi, I’ve just received this email apparently from Jet2 saying I will now get my holiday documents 14 days before my holiday departure instead of 28, is this true or is it still 28, I’ve a feeling this was a spam email though.”

Another passenger added: “I had the same email. Flying on 25 May with jet2,” A traveller added: “Ive just had the same email !”

The email says: “Just so you know, following a change to when we send out the documents for your holiday, you’ll now receive your documents 14 days before departure, rather than 28 days as stated on your original booking confirmation. You don’t need to contact us or take any action – you’ll receive your documents 14 days before you travel. Have a lovely holiday!”

Responding on X, Jet2 confirmed it was a genuine message and explained: “Hi there, thanks for reaching out. Yes we can confirm that you will receive your documents 14 days before departure. Should you require any further assistance, then please feel free to send us a DM. “

Jet2 advice says: “At 10 weeks before departure we will take any outstanding balance payment and send a confirmation that the balance has been paid. At 14 days before departure, we will send you a final confirmation with your travel documents attached, consisting of your booking confirmation; your flight voucher; your accommodation voucher, your cruise voucher (where applicable) and your transfer or car hire voucher. We will also provide you with your ATOL Certificate. Please remember to print off all your vouchers as well as your booking confirmation and your ATOL Certificate where applicable.”

Jet2 has also explained why some flight schedules may change, and has moved to remind passengers of an action they must take during a 48-hour period. The major airline states in the Frequently Asked Questions section of its website that it “always aims to operate our flights at the scheduled time of departure”. However, Jet2 added: “Sometimes we may need to make changes or provide alternative carriers or aircraft and cannot always notify you of this in advance. We may also alter or remove the planned schedules as shown on your booking confirmation.”

The guidance notes that Jet2 does not wish to cause inconvenience to passengers, yet “unfortunately sometimes changes to scheduled flight times may be required for operational or technical reasons outside our control”. Jet2 confirmed that in such circumstances, travellers would be given as much advance warning as possible.

Passengers flying with Jet2 are encouraged to keep a close eye on their email and text message inboxes, as these are typically the methods used to get in touch should any changes arise. Jet2 added: “Please contact us if you change your email address or mobile number so we can update your details.

“From the Manage My Booking section on our website you can see your booking summary, request a further email confirmation or select a different email address.” Jet2 is also reminding travellers that they are obligated to review their flight summary within a 48-hour window prior to departure.

Jet2 said: “Please be aware that it is one of our Terms and Conditions that you re-check your flight summary 72 to 24 hours before departure.” The airline also continues to urge passengers to consult the “latest travel information” on its website at least 12 hours before take-off to ensure they remain fully informed.” Additional advice reads: “Please check this section of the website at least 12 hours before your flight for the latest flight information.

“We recommend arriving at the airport at least 2 hours before your scheduled departure time. Please remember – check-in desks close 40 minutes before this.”

Here’s TWZ’s weekly carrier tracker monitoring America’s flattop fleet, including Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) and Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), using publicly available open-source information. Given the carrier picture is largely unchanged compared to last week, this week’s tracker highlights the big-deck amphibious fleet.

Much of America’s fleet of nine amphibious assault ships is hard at work as the U.S. opts to replace the Iwo Jima ARG in Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) with a “sub-optimized” Littoral Combat Force (LCF). The LCF appears to be the first deployment that embodies the Navy’s new more flexible deployment strategy, which could have wider impacts across the fleet in the future. “It’s the way to have force multiplication, to punch bigger than yourself, and that’s done through tailored offsets,” Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle said at SNA earlier this year about the new tailored deployments concept. “That whole thing builds a way to present forces to allow me to do more with less.”

The 24th MEU, operating under the designation LCF-24, deployed to SOUTHCOM and replaced the Iwo Jima ARG. “Distinct from a standard Amphibious Ready Group/MEU deployment, LCF-24 is a purpose-built MAGTF engineered for distributed operations,” SOUTHCOM explained in a statement. The Marine Air-Ground Task Force, with more than 1,300 Marines and Sailors, will operate from both shore-based nodes and aboard Fort Lauderdale, and is certified to “execute a wide array of mission essential tasks, including but not limited to Quick Reaction Force operations such as embassy reinforcement and the tactical recovery of aircraft [and] personnel, while standing ready to support disaster relief activities.”

Victor Wembanyama produced an inspired performance as the San Antonio Spurs beat defending NBA champions the Oklahoma City Thunder 118-91 to set up a decisive game seven in the Western Conference Finals.

San Antonio coach Mitch Johnson had called on Wembanyama to score more than 20 points after a disappointing showing in game five, and the 22-year-old duly delivered.

Wembanyama finished with 28 points, 10 rebounds and three blocks as the Spurs dominated after taking an early lead to level the series at 3-3.

The Frenchman came out of the game with almost eight minutes remaining in the third quarter and midway through the Spurs scoring 20 consecutive points.

Johnson praised Wembanyama’s “passion and desire” and taking “responsibility” after his dominant display.

Stephon Castle finished with 17 points, nine assists and one turnover, while Dylan Harper added 18 points off the bench.

Thunder star Shai Gilgeous-Alexander could not replicate his 32-point outing in game five as he finished with 15 points and four assists after making only six of 18 shots.

It was Gilgeous-Alexander’s lowest scoring output since he scored 14 in game three of the 2025 Western Conference finals against the Minnesota Timberwolves.

The two-time NBA MVP is shooting just 37.9% from the floor in the series after making 51.4% of his field-goal attempts during the first two rounds of this year’s post-season.

“I’m not sure, to be honest,” Gilgeous-Alexander said when asked why he is struggling.

“A lot of the shots that I’m shooting, I shot plenty of times before. They feel good, and it’s not good.

“They [San Antonio] were the aggressors from start to finish. They played harder than us, hit more shots, were more aggressive, were in attack mode. We were on our heels.”

Whoever wins game seven in Oklahoma City on Saturday, 30 May (Sunday 01:00 BST), will face the New York Knicks in the NBA Finals.

With 18 examples of the OA-1K Skyraider II delivered to the U.S. Air Force’s Special Operations Command (AFSOC), the service is now looking forward to demonstrating the aircraft’s unique rapid-deployment capability later this year. AFSOC also says it plans to add laser-guided Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) rockets to the OA-1K’s armament options and is looking at boosting standoff capability in the form of Red Wolf mini cruise missiles. All of this comes at a time when the Pentagon is looking to cut back OA-1K numbers amid concerns surrounding its survivability and utility in a high-end fight, specifically with China, which stands today as the U.S. military’s pacing threat.

Lt. Col. Robert Wilson, chief of the AFSOC Armed Overwatch Requirements Branch, briefed journalists, including from TWZ, on the latest plans for the OA-1K ahead of the Special Operations Forces (SOF) Week, taking place from today in Tampa, Florida.

Beginning with an overview of the program, Lt. Col. Wilson stressed that the OA-1K — a militarized derivative of the popular Air Tractor AT-802 crop duster — is not viewed as a replacement for legacy platforms like U-28 (which he previously flew) or the MC-12. Instead, it is “a new, purpose-built solution for today’s complex environments.”

The thinking behind the Skyraider II reflects the transition from the Air Force’s focus on counter-terrorism operations in the post-9/11 period to a more complex threat picture. Now, the service has to be more prepared to fight against a much wider range of adversaries across the spectrum of conflict.

As Wilson explained, “the OA-1K represents a new era for AFSOC, with the flexibility to support not only counter-terrorism-like missions, but also crisis and contingency response, competition with more advanced adversaries, and even aspects of full-on conflict. To meet this wide range of mission sets, OA-1K is a multi-role capability platform that is essentially a Swiss Army knife of airborne capability.”

OA-1K Skyraider II Walk-Around Tour With Its Test Pilot

The OA-1K multi-role mission remit therefore covers close air support (CAS), armed intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), and precision strike.

At this point, Wilson explained, “we’re in the midst of production and delivery of aircraft, and we’re reaching a point where we are getting very close to demonstrating capabilities such as the weapons employment, the ability to provide ISR capability, so we’re kind of transitioning the program from what was previously developmental and conceptual to actually getting to the point where we’ll be looking to get into operational tests.”

To keep pace with changing threats, the Skyraider II has a modular design that provides flexibility for future upgrades, which could include expanded payloads, such as more advanced weapons, or more exquisite intelligence-collection capabilities.

Reflecting on the potential for future enhancements in terms of external sensors and other payloads, Wilson continued: “We really think of this as levers that can be manipulated with a combination of fuel, weapons, and exquisite capabilities that can be increased or decreased based on the mission set to most effectively apply the capability to whatever mission it’s going out to accomplish that day.”

The OA-1K is also expected to enhance overall ground-force lethality and situational awareness through its provision of modern datalinks for joint integration.

All of this is expected to come with a much lower price tag than would be the case for traditional crewed aircraft.

According to Wilson, the cost-effectiveness of the OA-1K translates to a cost per flying hour of roughly $2,500. For comparison, an F-16C/D costs roughly ten times this amount per hour to operate.

“The OA-1K is one of the most affordable AFSOC platforms, which then frees up higher-end assets that are more costly, for other mission sets around the world, and that dollar amount makes it roughly 50 percent more cost-effective than even an MQ-1, which is an unmanned platform, and it’s more cost-effective than armed platforms like the U-28,” Wilson added.

NB: Wilson subsequently clarified that he had misspoken and that the cost comparison was between the OA-1K and other crewed platforms, like the U-28.

In terms of fielding, AFSOC has taken possession of its 18th OA-1K and is expecting a handful more throughout the end of the fiscal year. The initial cadre of crews is still training at Will Rogers Air National Guard Base in Oklahoma, with plans to station the aircraft in the future at both Cannon Air Force Base in New Mexico and Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona.

The next step in standing up this capability will involve demonstrating the rapid deployment abilities of the OA-1K. This is something that was part of the original requirement but which is also seen as increasingly vital for SOF missions, which already demand a high level of expeditionary agility. The ability to rapidly disassemble and reassemble the Skyraider II would become even more important in a potential confrontation with China in the Indo-Pacific theater.

“With rapid disassembly and reassembly, OA-1K can be loaded into a mobility aircraft like a C-5 or C-17 for rapid worldwide deployment, supporting missions around the world at a moment’s notice, and importantly, we’re talking a matter of hours instead of days or weeks that it would have otherwise required to fly around the world wherever it needs to go,” Wilson explained.

To start with, AFSOC is looking at testing this deployment capability using larger transport aircraft, primarily to maximize the number of OA-1Ks that can be moved at once, although Wilson said the exact number that will fit in a C-5 or C-17 will be determined as part of the operational test process later this calendar year.

Once deployed, the OA-1K is expected to operate “from nearly anywhere,” including short dirt surfaces, grass strips, and unimproved runways. As such, it will give the Air Force a combination of rapid deployment and austere environment capability that it otherwise doesn’t possess.

As noted earlier, there have been repeated questions about the survivability and general utility of the OA-1K in more contested environments, something that TWZ has looked at in depth in the past. But Wilson is confident that its mix of capabilities means it can still be relevant, even when facing a high-end opponent.

“First, it complicates things for the adversary because you may not have the aircraft in predictable locations,” Wilson contended. “It ensures that armed overwatch is provided for the joint force to increase their own survivability, and finally, it also ensures the persistent presence of the capability at a low cost compared to other platforms, freeing up higher-end assets for other locations.”

All of this can be achieved with a relatively tiny logistics footprint, with only a handful of contract maintainers required, and the disassembly/reassembly process can be done safely even in austere environments. Each two-person aircrew is being trained in this process, which includes conducting functional check flights in these locations before the aircraft conducts its mission. The actual process of disassembly and reassembly takes just a matter of hours.

With traditional Air Force platforms, deployments can take days or weeks, not just in terms of physically having to fly the aircraft to wherever it needs to go around the world, but all the planning that’s necessary for the crews, ground support services, etc.

“We have demonstrated this capability by doing a timed disassembly and reassembly in a controlled environment in a hangar,” Wilson added. “We’ll next look to conduct the activity in an actual mobility aircraft during our operational test later this calendar year.” After that, AFSOC will look to conduct the rapid disassembly and reassembly of the Skyraider II as part of exercises, likely next year.

“Just like anything else, the more reps and sets that we accomplish, the more ready we will be whenever we need to conduct it operationally,” Wilson said.

While Wilson did not mention it by name, this mode of operating ties directly into broader Air Force plans for the Agile Combat Employment, or ACE, concept, which is designed to ensure that combat airpower can still be brought to bear in a timely way, even when conventional airbases are put out of action or otherwise held under threat — the kinds of conditions likely in a conflict with a near-peer competitor, like China or Russia. In fact, the OA-1K has a particular role to play in this sort of scenario, since it’s even questionable if more advanced platforms will be able to execute as envisioned in a major conflict under ‘ACE rules.’

Wilson is also confident that, even without recourse to these kinds of expeditionary basing tactics, the OA-1K offers a suitable degree of survivability for many different scenarios.

“We have a certain built-in survivability capability for the platform,” Wilson explained. “The contractor has built in cockpit and engine armor, for example, to ensure that it’s survivable, and it does have defensive systems. So I would say it does have a baseline level of defensibility and survivability, and then we are certainly working on, with funding, ensuring that it is modernized and equipped, not only for survivability, but for really any other capability for the platform as well, to ensure that it remains relevant for the future.”

As for that first operational deployment, that could occur “in the coming years,” provided that the program continues to mature as anticipated.

There are potential pitfalls ahead, not least the question about how many OA-1Ks the Air Force will eventually receive.

Wilson reiterated that the program of record still calls for 75 aircraft, but admitted that this could be a challenge to achieve. As it stands, the U.S. Special Operations Command, as the procurement agency for the OA-1K, has cut its planned purchase down to 53 airframes, citing resource constraints.

“As the capability sponsor, I would say less than 75 is not desirable,” Wilson noted. “Any decrement below that is essentially a result of resource constraints and budget limitations. We will continue advocating to ensure that we get closer and ultimately achieve that program of record, but as you can imagine, budget constraints that impact various programs have decreased the final fleet size to less than that currently.”

The prospect of a potentially smaller OA-1K fleet means that having the aircraft working alongside other platforms, including drones, may become more important. Already, however, AFSOC sees the value of crewed/uncrewed missions for the Skyraider II.

“The integration of manned and unmanned assets is something that we’re certainly looking at in terms of capability,” said.

When it comes to weapons capabilities, Wilson confirmed that APKWS laser-guided rockets are compatible with the OA-1K and are something that AFSOC wants to have as part of the ordnance options for the platform.

APKWS is quickly becoming a weapon of choice for a wide range of platforms, offering a low-cost, high-volume, precision weapon that is equally effective for both ground attack and counter-drone missions. APKWS was proven incredibly effective on light attack aircraft experiments that tangentially led to the procurement of the Skyraider II, working as the primary weapon for those aircraft. So it should come as no surprise that it will be integrated onto the Skyraider II. It’s actually somewhat surprising it isn’t already.

As far as the Red Wolf cruise missiles, Wilson was a little more circumspect. “That is certainly an area that we are looking to explore to allow for inclusion of that weapon into the planned set,” he said.

As we have explained in the past, adding Red Wolf, or a similar standoff weapon, to the OA-1K armory is one way of ensuring the aircraft can be more relevant and survivable, providing it with a true long-range strike capability.

Putting aside the Red Wolf, it is also somewhat surprising that so little weapons integration work appears to have been carried over from earlier iterations of the armed Air Tractor concept, since similar versions of this aircraft have been flying for years, including in combat.

The Air Force service sees the OA-1K as far more than a light attack aircraft and more as a modular platform that will be able to be configured for irregular warfare, armed overwatch, ISR, strike, and more. Clearly, by pushing its rapid-deployment capability, the service is seeking to underscore the relevance of the aircraft in the Pacific theater. Meanwhile, recent conflicts in the Middle East — where traditional airbases were pummelled by drone and missile attacks — have demonstrated that the Air Force still has a requirement to conduct combat operations in other, less-contested environments too.

Once the OA-1K starts demonstrating its rapid-deployment capability, AFSOC hopes that the aircraft will further demonstrate that it fills a niche that no other crewed Air Force platform currently can.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s grip on his party slipped on Thursday as anger boiled over among Senate Republicans about a growing list of issues.

In a striking display of defiance, GOP senators abruptly derailed plans to vote on legislation to fund Trump’s immigration crackdown amid deep disagreements over security funding for a White House ballroom and a $1.8-billion fund to pay people who claim to have been politically persecuted.

The discontent had been building for weeks. Many senators had grown frustrated over Trump’s decision to endorse candidates running against longtime Republican incumbents.

Others, worried about rising costs as a result from the war in Iran, had aired concerns ahead of the midterm elections. But the breaking point came when the Justice Department, with little warning, pushed to create what it termed the “anti-weaponization fund.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) acknowledged the concerns over the fund Thursday after a reportedly contentious private meeting about it between Senate Republicans and acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche. He also conceded midterm politics had added to the tension.

“It’s hard to divorce anything that happens here from what’s happening in the political atmosphere around us,” Thune told reporters. “You can’t disconnect those things.”

A day earlier, Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican who lost his primary race on Saturday to a Trump-backed challenger, expressed strong disagreement with the creation of the fund, which would be controlled by appointees without congressional oversight.

“People are concerned about paying their mortgage or rent, affording groceries and paying for gas, not putting together a $1.8 billion fund for the president and his allies to pay whomever they wish with no legal precedent or accountability,” Cassidy wrote on X. “If there needs to be a settlement, the administration should bring it to Congress to decide.”

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also had harsh criticism for the fund.

“So the nation’s top law enforcement official is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops? Utterly stupid, morally wrong — take your pick,” he said in a statement.

The discord was striking, partly because Republicans have largely steered clear of checking the president’s power, and Congress has been largely sidelined under the second Trump administration on the war in Iran and other issues.

“I don’t think the Republicans had any choice but to pull the plug until we come back in June, because they’re facing a bit of a mutiny within their conference,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) told The Times, saying he had heard that the meeting between Blanche and Republicans “didn’t go well.”

As tension simmered on the background, Trump seemed unbothered by the group of Republicans’ public rebellion against his agenda. When asked whether he was losing control of the Senate, he said he didn’t know.

“I only do what is right,” he told reporters in the Oval Office.

However, he expressed annoyance at lawmakers who would not support $1 billion in federal funding for security costs related to the ballroom project. He said the structure is being privately funded by him and other “great patriots.”

“We are making a gift to the United States,” Trump said. “This is being made as a gift from me and other people that are great patriots and spent a lot of money. We are building what will be the finest ballroom anywhere in the world.”

The $1 billion for security funding would be “very much a good expenditure,” he said. If Congress does not sign off on the money, Trump said the “White House won’t be a very secure place.”

Trump did not immediately comment on Thursday about the Senate’s delaying of the funding bill. The White House declined to comment on the matter.

Trump’s second-term actions have frequently tested the loyalty of Republican lawmakers, who have largely stayed in line. The settlement fund, with its ethical questions, appears to have crossed a line for some senators in a party that has traditionally opposed wasting taxpayer funds.

The money comes from the judgment fund, which is a Congress-approved ongoing appropriation that allows the Justice Department to settle cases and make payments.

Stephen Miller, a top aide to Trump, told reporters at the White House that the $1.8-billion settlement was “just a small measure of the justice” that many people are owed after being targeted by the federal government. Miller declined to say whether the White House was reaching out to senators to ease concerns about the fund.

Republicans in Congress decried the use of similar third-party settlements during the Obama administration, with House lawmakers repeatedly passing a bill aimed at stopping settlement slush funds, noted Molly Nixon, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

Though the Trump administration’s plan is novel because the settlement money isn’t going to a third party, the general concept has been offensive to Republicans in the past; the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee termed it an abuse in 2017.

“If you’re taking a consistent view, you’d be at least equally as opposed to this settlement,” Nixon said of Republican lawmakers.

That could be driving some of the opposition now, along with concerns about who is going to get the money and whether it could be distributed to people who wouldn’t have been able to make a successful case before a court of law, Nixon said.

“The fund is going to plaintiffs who were victims of lawfare or weaponization. … Those are pretty ambiguous terms. They’re sort of in the eye of the beholder,” Nixon said. “It’s pretty easy to see how this could very easily become a quiet political claims process.”

Police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot have already filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block the creation of the fund, arguing in part that it would compensate extremist convicted of committing violent crimes.

“The fund’s mere existence sends a clear and chilling message: those who enact violence in President Trump’s name will not just avoid punishment, they will be rewarded with riches,” the lawsuit says.

When Trump returned to office in January 2025, one of his first acts was pardoning or commuting the prison sentences of the 1,500 people who were charged in connection with the attack. Vice President JD Vance on Wednesday did not rule out that settlement money could go to those rioters, saying the money would be given out on a “case-by-case basis.”

Thune told reporters on Thursday that the Justice Department would have to come up with some guardrails to ease concerns among senators.

“We need to get some clarity,” he said.

Though the number of Republicans angry with Trump is significant enough to make or break legislation, the caucus appeared far from falling apart.

Senate Republicans blocked an attempt by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) on Thursday to pass a bill to prohibit federal funds from reaching Jan. 6 rioters, an attempt to prevent the fund from being used to compensate them.

“I’m encouraged hearing some of my Republican colleagues agreeing with me,” Padilla said on the Senate floor. “Let’s stand up for congressional oversight as a unified Senate.”

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) objected to Padilla’s bill, later writing on X: “PROUD to object today to Senator Padilla’s RIDICULOUS bill and stand up for ALL FREEDOM-LOVING AMERICANS.”

Schiff, who is working on an amendment that would target the fund, said other Republican colleagues he spoke to Wednesday evening were unhappy with the position Trump has put them in. He said Trump’s actions have helped underscore Democrats’ arguments against his party.

“All [it’s] doing is helping us make the case that the Republicans couldn’t care less about people’s cost of living … that there’s plenty of money for golden ballrooms for the president, there’s plenty of money for the president’s cronies, but there’s no money for the average family,” Schiff said.

Austria says that, for two days in a row, its fighters were sent to intercept U.S. military aircraft, at least two of which entered its airspace without authorization. According to the Austrian Ministry of Defense, the aircraft were U.S. Air Force PC-12 turboprops, almost certainly a reference to the U-28A Draco, which the Air Force Special Operations Command uses primarily for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR).

On Sunday and Monday this week, the Austrian Air Force scrambled Eurofighter Typhoons in response to the alleged flights in the neutral country’s airspace. This was confirmed by Austrian Ministry of Defense spokesperson Michael Bauer on X.

According to Bauer, the incident on May 10 saw the Austrian Air Force scramble two Eurofighters after a pair of “PC-12s” were detected flying without authorization in the Totes Gebirge region of Upper Austria. Once Austrian Eurofighters intercepted the aircraft, they are said to have turned back and returned to Munich, Germany.

The following day, at 12:31 p.m., two more Eurofighters scrambled in response to an overflight by two “PC-12s.” This was a so-called Priority A intercept, meaning the highest-priority response for the Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) force. On this occasion, however, Bauer said it was unclear whether the U.S. Air Force aircraft had the necessary clearances — in contrast to Sunday’s incident.

An official Austrian Ministry of Defense video shows a QRA scramble involving the Eurofighter:

Alarm für die Luftstreitkräfte

Austria retains clear guidance for the procedures of transiting its airspace, as detailed on this webpage.

“The matter is to be resolved through diplomatic channels,” Bauer added.

In general, there appears to have been something of a spike in U.S. military aircraft activity over the Alpine region in recent days.

According to reports in the Swiss media, a total of nine overflights by the U.S. Air Force have taken place over Switzerland over the past three days. All of these flights were authorized.

The U-28A is a militarized version of the Pilatus PC-12M single-engine turboprop and carries a variety of sensors, including electro-optical and signals intelligence (SIGINT) equipment. It can also perform light utility duties in a pinch, among other missions.

Not all of the Draco aircraft share the same configuration, with different iterations appearing over the years. It is known that most of these aircraft have a sensor turret with electro-optical and infrared cameras, as well as SIGINT systems to geo-locate and monitor hostile communications and other emitters. There are also reports that some of the aircraft may have a synthetic aperture radar imaging capability. 

AFSOC has also upgraded the U-28A to a configuration known publicly only as EQ+. This update includes a new sensor turret with a high-definition, multi-spectral imaging full-motion video camera, which also offers better standoff range, according to Pentagon budget documents. This allows the aircraft to fly at higher altitudes and operate further away from its target, reducing risks to the crew and allowing for more discreet surveillance.

The Draco also features an extensive communications and data-sharing suite. This allows them to transmit the information it gathers back to command centers for further exploitation or straight to personnel on the ground, all in near real-time. These capabilities give the Draco a robust overwatch capability for special operations forces on the ground.

The exact size of the current U-28A fleet is not entirely clear. In a report published in December 2023, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said that close to 40 U-28As remained in service.

In September 2024, the GAO confirmed to TWZ that it was conducting a classified review of SOCOM’s decision to divest the U-28As, as well as its King Air-based ISR aircraft, the latter of which are often referred to collectively as MC-12s.

Meanwhile, the Draco continues in service. Since its first combat deployment in June 2006, these unassuming aircraft have established themselves as an important component of U.S. counter-terrorism operations around the world.

For Austria, airspace policing is one of the core functions of its air force. Indeed, the country’s controversial Eurofighter fleet is dedicated to this mission, with no air-to-ground capability at all.

Sitting outside of NATO puts Austria in a somewhat unusual position as regards U.S. overflights, although it should be noted that permissions were also denied by alliance members during Operation Epic Fury, the campaign against Iran.

While the Pentagon hasn’t officially disclosed the use of the U-28A in Epic Fury, it would not be surprising, especially considering its ability to operate from small airports and forward operating bases with limited infrastructure. 

U.S. Air Force U-28A FARP Training

Meanwhile, there is also a precedent for unauthorized U.S. military overflights in Austrian airspace.

As we recounted in the past, in 2002, when the U.S. military was building up its forces in the Middle East ahead of a possible offensive against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, the Air Force attempted to sneak two F-117A Nighthawks through Austrian airspace.

On that occasion, the U.S. Air Force filed a flight plan for a KC-10A Extender tanker to fly through Austrian airspace, something that was easier to gain clearance for, since it was unarmed. In fact, two F-117s were neatly tucked under the wings of the big tanker in close formation during the flight.

Due to irregularities in the flight plan, two Austrian Air Force Saab Drakens were scrambled and soon identified the two F-117s. 

Imagery of the intercept was presented by the Austrian Minister of Defense during a meeting of the National Security Council and was presented as part of a diplomatic protest lodged at the U.S. Embassy in Vienna. 

A glance at the map reveals why the U.S. military regularly overflies Austria and Switzerland when routing from Germany to Italy or to the Middle East, to avoid long transits over France. Due to Austria’s geography, incursions typically only occur for a few minutes, especially where the flight time between German and Italian airspace is very short.

We have reached out to the U.S. Air Force for clarification on the incidents.

At the very least, the apparent incursions demonstrate that the U-28A remains very much in operational use and active around Europe, while underscoring the sometimes fraught nature of overflight agreements.

UPDATE: May 13, 7:00 AM EDT-

Austrian Ministry of Defense spokesperson Michael Bauer has provided more details of the Austrian Air Force scrambles that took place earlier this week.

According to Bauer, a flyover request was filed on May 10 for two U.S. Air Force PC-12s, flying from RAF Mildenhall, England, to Bucharest, Romania. Bauer continued:

“However, around 2:10 p.m., two other USAF aircraft approached Austrian airspace. At 2:21 p.m., an alarm scramble of Eurofighters was therefore triggered. The two USAF aircraft, however, turned away before entering Austrian airspace.”

On May 11, another U.S. Air Force flyover request was submitted and approved. As filed, two PC-12 aircraft flew over Austria. On this occasion, two Eurofighters monitored the flyover and verified that the flyover request matched the actual flight.

Meanwhile, Defense News has published the following statement provided by an official from U.S. European Command, relating to the May 10 incident:

“This flight took place after an administrative error in the overflight clearance paperwork was corrected. The United States continues to work closely with Austrian authorities on any questions regarding overflights and fully complies with Austrian laws and procedures.”

Contact the author: thomas@thwarzone.com

US Air Force footage showed the rescue of 11 people after a private plane from the Bahamas crashed into the Atlantic Ocean off Florida. Survivors were found in a life raft as a storm approached and were airlifted to hospital.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Four Memphis residents are suing U.S. and Tennessee officials, saying they have been harassed, arrested and physically mistreated for engaging in First Amendment protected activities by observing and recording law enforcement agents in their city.

A lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court targets the Memphis Safe Task Force, comprising agents from 13 federal agencies that President Trump ordered to the city to fight crime alongside Tennessee State Troopers and the Tennessee National Guard.

Since late September, hundreds of federal, state and local law enforcement personnel tied to the task force have made traffic stops, served warrants and searched for fugitives in the majority Black city of about 610,000 people. The lawsuit says the task force has conducted over 120,000 traffic stops.

“In the professed name of crime control, Task Force agents have stopped, menaced, and arrested Memphians engaging in routine, day-to-day activities,” the lawsuit states. “In response, Memphians encountering Task Force agents in public, including Plaintiffs, have stopped to gather information about and record Task Force activities.”

Emails from the Associated Press to the U.S. Department of Justice and a spokesperson for the task force were not returned on Wednesday morning.

Federal officials including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, former Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, have visited Memphis to praise the task force. Miller in October predicted the surge in law enforcement would make the city “safer than any of you could ever possibly imagine” and that “businesses and investment are going to pour in, and Memphis will be richer than ever before.”

The task force is part of a larger effort by Trump to use National Guard troops and surge federal law enforcement in cities, particularly ones controlled by Democrats. Following troop deployments in the District of Columbia and Los Angeles, he referred to Portland, Ore., as “war-ravaged” and threatened apocalyptic force in Chicago. Speaking last year to U.S. military leaders in Virginia, Trump proposed using cities as training grounds for the armed forces.

The lawsuit accuses task force agents of systematically retaliating against the four plaintiffs and other members of the public engaged in similar observations. It claims the threats and harassment are the “direct result of federal policy” that views observing federal agents performing their duties in public as a threat of harm to those agents. The lawsuit also claims that federal and state officials have failed to train their agents not to retaliate against citizens engaged in First Amendment protected activities.

The lawsuit asks the court to declare that retaliation against the plaintiffs for observing and recording law enforcement activity is unconstitutional and to prohibit the agents from further retaliation. It also targets a Tennessee law that requires observers to stand at least 25 feet away from law enforcement officers, if they are warned to do so, or face arrest. The suit asks the court to declare unconstitutional the use of the “Halo Law” against defendants who are not interfering with agents or impeding their duties.

Loller writes for the Associated Press.

CHONGQING, China — Three years ago, in the idyllic town of Woodside south of San Francisco, the United States and China held their first high-level talks on the dangers posed by artificial intelligence. President Xi Jinping and his longtime foreign minister appeared serious in their conviction that a channel should be a established between Beijing and Washington — a red phone for AI in case of emergencies.

They authorized a diplomatic effort that would begin in 2024 in Switzerland, only months before the U.S. presidential election. A large U.S. delegation arrived with high hopes that were abruptly dashed, according to four sources who attended the talks. The Chinese contingent dismissed American concerns over runaway AI as academic, almost theoretical, quickly turning the conversation to export controls seen in Beijing as yet another U.S. effort to hold China back.

“They naturally view any American diplomatic initiative involving limitations or restrictions of one flavor or another on a capability as being a trap,” Jake Sullivan, U.S. national security advisor under President Biden, said in an interview.

Despite the distrust — and Democrats losing the White House to Donald Trump — an accord was struck in November of that year in Peru, where both sides agreed to keep AI out of the command and control of nuclear weapons.

“It was a breaking of the seal that we could actually do something on AI,” Sullivan said. “In the transition, I told the incoming Trump team that they should really pick up that dialogue. But the Trump administration’s view was just far more laissez-faire, and they didn’t seem particularly interested in it.”

“That’s all changed in the past few weeks,” he added.

A Trump administration once eager to gun for technological supremacy is now, for the first time, reckoning with the power AI could unleash if left unchecked.

In a surprise reversal, quiet discussions have taken place ahead of President Trump’s state visit to China this week to explore reviving talks on an emergency channel, officials told The Times, prompted by shared alarm in Beijing and Washington over the debut of Mythos, Anthropic’s powerful new model.

One senior administration official told reporters Sunday that the White House was looking to create a channel of communication for AI like others that they have “in many areas that have intense focus with the U.S. and China.”

“I think what that channel of communication looks like, its formality and what that looks like, is yet to be determined,” the official said, “but we want to take this opportunity with the leaders meeting to open up a conversation. We should establish a channel of communication on that matter.”

Mythos’ capabilities are seen across the industry and government as those of an unprecedented cyberweapon, able to infiltrate and exploit digital communication systems — including government databases, financial institutions and healthcare programs — with untold consequences.

Whether an announcement will come to fruition this week is not yet clear. Any talks between the United States and China over AI regulations — designing some kind of arms control agreement governing the use of a technology that neither side fully understands or controls — will be fraught with suspicion, misunderstandings and risk, experts say.

“Right now, there is almost no support from U.S. policymakers to engage in formal discussions on AI governance with China,” said Aalok Mehta, director of the Wadhwani AI Center at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“The logic is that this is a winner-takes-all race,” Mehta said, “and that it’s imperative to accelerate AI progress to ensure that the United States wins that race.”

America in the lead

China would enter those discussions with a powerful argument, that U.S. leadership in AI — and the prevailing strategy of American AI companies — is propelling the world to a fraught frontier.

Every major U.S. player in the arena — OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, Microsoft and Meta Platforms — is racing to be the first to build a model capable of artificial general intelligence, or AGI, a threshold without a common definition, but that most agree will require a model to perform any intellectual human task.

The prevailing theory is that the first to achieve AGI will secure a prize that multiplies itself: a self-training, recursively improving intelligence, growing exponentially and leaving all competitors in its wake.

Chinese companies, by contrast, are following a state-sanctioned strategy focused on integrating AI into siloed industries and systems, training models to improve individual tasks and accelerate growth in a more tailored approach.

“The Chinese believe there is no single race, but multiple races,” said Scott Kennedy, senior advisor on Chinese business and economics at the Center for Strategic & International Studies. “The U.S. is focused on achieving AGI, while China is focused on diffusion and applications of AI into the rest of their economy — manufacturing, humanoid robotics, all aspects of the internet of things.”

China scholars, AI industry insiders and successive administrations have questioned Beijing’s strategic thinking and forthrightness.

“It’s so baked into the community here that AGI will have this transformative potential that people can’t believe China isn’t focused on this, as well,” said Matt Sheehan, a scholar of global technology issues at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace with a focus on China. “It says it’s focused on applications, but is that a fake out for an AGI program hidden in the mountains somewhere?”

But most insiders believe that Beijing’s guidance to Chinese companies reveals its true intentions.

“They are not as AGI-pilled as the United States is, and I think that remains the case today,” Sullivan said, “so they regarded a lot of the conversation in the U.S. around extreme frontier risk — misalignment and loss of control — as a bit abstract, and not really as relevant to how they saw AI diffusing in China.”

President Biden greets Chinese President Xi Jinping in Woodside, Calif., in 2023.

(Doug Mills / Pool Photo)

Although China’s progress has exceeded U.S. expectations — especially since DeepSeek released its model over a year ago — the state has focused computer power on specific applications rather than the broad strategy needed to develop more powerful models capable of advancing toward AGI.

“It’s not just chips. It’s money,” Sheehan added. “China’s leading companies are much more financially constrained than U.S. companies. There’s concern over a bubble here, but OpenAI is valued at something near $800 billion. Leading Chinese companies that have gone public are valued at $20 billion. There’s just an orders-of-magnitude gap in available financing.”

Still, some in the U.S. government fear China won’t need comparable computing power if it simply steals the technology wholesale.

Doing so isn’t simple. But last month, in a memo, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy accused Chinese actors of “industrial-scale campaigns to distill U.S. frontier AI systems,” in effect replicating the performance of the most advanced existing models “at a fraction of the cost.” The memo did not accuse Beijing of endorsing the activity.

In the process, the memo added, carefully constructed security protocols are deliberately stripped away.

China’s negotiating advantage

Whatever its strategic calculus may be, China would enter talks with the Trump administration trailing in the race — while disagreeing on the nature of the finish line.

AGI, in theory, could reach a stage of recursive self-improvement that results in a loss of human understanding or control. But if it is only the Americans, and not the Chinese, seeking to reach that threshold, then who is responsible to stop it?

Daniel Remler, who led AI policy at the State Department during the Biden administration and took part in the Geneva talks, cast doubt on Chinese claims of disinterest in AGI and ignorance of its risks. China falling behind in the race is no strategic design, he said.

“Chinese technologists are close observers of the U.S. AI ecosystem, and sometimes they say what they think,” Remler said. “Many were impressed by the [Mythos] model to the point of despair. Leaders in China’s top AI labs have been vocal in recent months, even before Mythos, about how compute-constrained they are at the frontier. Some have said they may never catch their American competitors.”

Talks at this point in the race could follow a familiar pattern in the recent history of U.S.-China diplomacy, in which Beijing claims it is behind the United States in development, ultimately securing a handicap and greater concessions at the negotiating table.

In other competitive domains — such as with China’s entry into the World Trade Organization and in cybersecurity negotiations between Beijing and the Obama administration — agreements were ultimately reached that Washington believes in hindsight disadvantaged American companies.

The Trump administration, Remler added, “needs to approach AI diplomacy with China with clear-eyed expectations anchored to our own national interests.”

Silicon Valley itself is divided over regulating AI. Anthropic, which was founded on concerns that other AI companies were failing to take safety and alignment concerns seriously, raised alarms over Mythos, its own model, to the Trump administration, a moment that has prompted reflection at the White House on the best path forward.

Spooked after meeting with leaders from America’s top banks over their vulnerabilities, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent internally advised U.S. government reviews of future model releases — a practice already underway in China, where the training parameters for models, known as “weights,” have been publicly released.

Even the suggestion of government oversight sparked backlash from Silicon Valley. Last week, the White House sent out a memo to reassure industry allies that submitting new models for federal review would be strictly voluntary.

If talks ultimately resume between Washington and Beijing on AI, experts believe the negotiations would be far more complex than those that resulted in arms control agreements governing nuclear weapons in the Cold War.

The superpowers would not only be discussing threats of instability to the global financial system, but also fears of proliferation — advanced AI tools getting into the hands of bad actors interested in using bio- or cyberweapons that could target both countries.

And they ultimately would have to decide whether to discuss regulating the integration of AI into the Chinese and U.S. militaries, an almost unfathomable goal between the world’s biggest adversaries, where trust is lowest and verification would be hardest.

Those in the industry who most fear what artificial superintelligence could bring have told the Trump administration that talks with China are an existential necessity.

Dario Amodei, the chief executive and co-founder of Anthropic, speaks at an event in New York in 2025.

(Michael M. Santiago / Getty Images)

But even within Anthropic, which has championed diplomacy, there are concerns that Beijing could exploit its current disadvantage to entangle American industry at the cusp of its crowning achievement.

Rather than pushing for a single sweeping agreement, industry insiders are advising the administration to pursue targeted deals with Beijing to mitigate specific risks, like the pact on nuclear command and control, two industry sources said.

In private, both Xi and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi seemed to understand that the gravity of the emerging technology before them required some form of cooperation, Sullivan said.

“At a conceptual level, I believe they had a conviction on that and authorized it,” Sullivan said, “but I believe their level of urgency was considerably lower than ours, and saw this as a longer-term process that would play out over time.”

“Their level of urgency and their stake in it has gone up,” he added.

WASHINGTON — Before being deployed to Los Angeles during anti-ICE protests last summer, U.S. Marines were given 12 rules for engaging with protesters, and Rule 1 was clear: Force “of any kind” was allowed only as a last resort.

If force were used, the rule stated, it “should be the minimum necessary to accomplish the mission.”

That detail is among 178 pages of federal documents released by the Marine Corps to the nonprofit watchdog group American Oversight through the Freedom of Information Act and shared exclusively with The Times.

The documents paint a thorough picture of how Marines prepared to deploy in Southern California, where they stood alongside National Guard members and agents with the Department of Homeland Security.

The documents also illuminate a glaring contrast between the training of Marines and that of immigration agents, who have been accused repeatedly of using unnecessary force against peaceful protesters, bystanders and immigrants during enforcement operations.

“Ironically, I would’ve felt much safer with Marine engagement than with DHS because of the depth of training,” said Ryan Schwank, a former instructor for Immigration and Customs Enforcement recruits at the ICE Academy within the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Georgia.

Schwank is a whistleblower who resigned in February after revealing that the Trump administration had slashed immigration officer training. After reviewing the documents obtained by American Oversight, he said the training given to Marines on crowd control was “significantly more in-depth and longer than training given to an ICE officer, even under the best of circumstances.”

An ICE agent walks through tear gas that was fired to push protesters back during a raid on Atlantic Boulevard in the city of Bell on June 20, 2025.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to questions and instead pointed to a February news release that said training has not been cut back and that new hires receive additional training after leaving the academy.

“ICE law enforcement officers are trained to use the minimum amount of force necessary to resolve dangerous situations to prioritize the safety of the public and our officers,” said Lauren Bis, a department spokesperson. “Officers are highly trained in de-escalation tactics and regularly receive ongoing use of force training.”

Schwank noted that the Marines and ICE officers came to Southern California with different objectives: As protectors of people and property, the Marines had a more limited, reactive mission, while ICE officers were charged with making arrests, a confrontational role.

“We’re giving [ICE officers] less training on it and fewer refreshers than the Marines are getting and yet we’re putting them in a situation where they’re taking the more confrontational actions to where they’re more likely to have to make split-second decisions,” Schwank said.

For most of history, he added, ICE agents detained people who were already in the custody of another law enforcement agency. He said ICE was never meant to act as riot police.

“The real fundamental problem isn’t ICE agents using force,” Schwank said. “It’s ICE agents using force in an environment they are not trained for.”

The training of Marines, and the lead-up to their deployment, is outlined in the documents reviewed by The Times.

On June 6, a commanding general emailed other generals to say that “national-level leadership” had directed Marines to assume an “alert posture” and be ready to support the Los Angeles Police Department, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and ICE officers who were already responding to civil unrest in downtown Los Angeles.

The Marines would safeguard federal facilities and thus “protect lives and property through the restoration of civil order,” the email said.

The Trump administration directed 4,200 California National Guard soldiers and 700 Marines to Southern California starting June 7.

Marines push back anti-ICE protesters in front of the Federal Building during a “No Kings Day” in downtown Los Angeles last June.

(Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times)

First, though, they needed to be trained.

The five-day course reviewed use-of-force policies, less-lethal weapons and handling of civil disturbances.

Overall, the 12 rules emphasized safety, urging Marines to be reasonable, to de-escalate tensions and to avoid confrontations with individuals who posed no threat.

Marines could use non-deadly force, if necessary, to control a situation or protect themselves or other federal personnel, and deadly force “only when all lesser means have failed.”

“Exercise due regard for the safety of innocent bystanders when using any type of force,” the rules state.

Schwank said there is no equivalent to the Marines course at Homeland Security. When he left the academy in February, he said, “there was no crowd control training, period.”

Crowd control was briefly added to the curriculum in 2021 for experienced law enforcement officers, he said, but it was later removed. ICE recruits may also have gotten lessons on crowd control after leaving the academy and joining their respective field offices, he said.

When Schwank left the agency, a six-hour class called “Public Order Public Safety” was in development for the 2026 curriculum, according to documents he provided to Congress. Homeland Security did not respond when asked if the class had started.

“I wouldn’t assume that any of the ICE officers on scene in L.A. had received any sort of actual crowd control class,” Schwank said. “They might have gotten a one-to-two-hour PowerPoint slideshow, but that would’ve been it.”

Marine Col. Beth R. Smith confirmed that the entire 2nd Battalion 7th Marines received academic and practical training before deploying to Los Angeles.

Managing civil disturbances has been an issue for Homeland Security since at least 2021, according to an audit conducted by the agency’s internal watchdog review of a 2020 deployment to Portland, Ore.

That year, President Trump mobilized federal power against the protests that spilled into Portland streets after the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer. Trump sent 755 Homeland Security agents to defend federal property in what would come to be seen as a dry run for much larger operations of his second term.

A protester damages a Waymo vehicle at Los Angeles Street and Arcadia Street in L.A. on June 8, 2025.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Nested on rooftops, agents launched chemical weapons against protesters. Ground forces fired less-lethal rounds at point-blank range and forced participants into unmarked vans without explanation.

The audit by the Homeland Security inspector general found that only seven of 63 officers reviewed had received any level of riot and crowd control training. Some officers told investigators that they needed additional training, and many “questioned their involvement in the operation” due to the lack of preparation.

”Without the necessary policies, training, and equipment, DHS will continue to face challenges securing Federal facilities during periods of civil disturbance that could result in injury, death, and liability,” the audit concluded.

As of spring 2025, Homeland Security records show, the department had not corrected the training failures flagged in the audit years earlier.

Schwank agreed that the concerns raised in the inspector general’s report were never addressed.

Liz Hempowicz, deputy executive director of American Oversight, said the Marine Corps’ emphasis on de-escalation and on using force only as a last resort stands in stark contrast to what happened on the ground in Los Angeles with immigration agents.

The practices outlined in the documents “differ from positions taken by senior DHS leadership, whose separate internal communications revealed a mindset that appeared far more encouraging of violence,” she said.

Internal Homeland Security emails also obtained by American Oversight revealed that the agency’s lead attorney said federal agents in Los Angeles should have “just started hitting the rioters and arresting everyone that couldn’t get away.”

“These records underscore that the difference between disciplined restraint and unnecessary harm can come down to the tone set at the top — and when that tone shifts toward hostility, the human cost can be devastating,” Hempowicz said.

Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a military research group, said that for Homeland Security, the issue is partly a training deficiency and partly a cultural shift against agent accountability.

“Trump talks about ‘the enemy within’ — this is what he’s talking about,” she said. “To some at DHS, the enemy within is all immigrants, it’s cartels — it’s also groups that are protesting the government.”

Conversely, the Marines’ documents emphasized personal liability and responsibility. For example, one page said that “if you either use more force than is necessary, or respond with DEADLY-force to a NON-deadly threat — You will likely lose your right to self-defense, and you will be viewed, under the law, as the ‘Aggressor.’”

Marines were told to immediately report anyone violating the 12 rules of engagement.

The high level of training for Marines shows that command considered the optics of military personnel harming or even killing civilians, Kavanagh said. But just because the deployment worked out last year doesn’t make it a good idea in the long run, she said.

Kavanagh, alongside Gov. Gavin Newsom, Mayor Karen Bass, and LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell, opposed the military deployments to Los Angeles last year, maintaining that Marines are trained for foreign combat, not domestic crowd control.

“I see these deployments as a recipe for disaster,” she said.

Schwank said ICE’s training touches on personal liability but not in as much depth. Last fall, Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, said ICE officers “have federal immunity in the conduct of your duties, and anybody who lays a hand on you or tries to stop you or tries to obstruct you is committing a felony.”

On the ground in Los Angeles, ICE agents and other local law enforcement fired a range of less-lethal weapons at protesters, such as pepper balls, hard foam rounds or canisters delivering flash-bang grenades and tear gas.

At a June 12 protest, a federal agent shoved freelance journalist Anna Sophia Moltke to the ground, causing sprains on her left arm and leg and deep scrapes to her hip and knee that have since scarred. She was carrying a camera, she said, and wore clear press credentials and a helmet that said “PRESS.”

“I remember distinctly there being no violence at all until police and ICE showed up,” she said. “We saw them firing rubber bullets into the crowd. People started running away. I was halfway turned around when they started rushing the crowd, and a tall, 6-foot-4 masked man used both hands to push me onto the concrete.”

Moltke said she recalled a large group of protesters gathered near the Marines stationed at the northern end of the detention center, just before police and ICE swept through and forced her to the ground. To her knowledge, she said the Marines remained at their post and didn’t participate in street skirmishes.

The U.S. Air Force said its new interim Air Force One jet, dubbed the VC-25B Bridge aircraft, has officially completed modifications and flight testing and is being painted in the red, white and blue livery sought by President Donald Trump. The extremely lavish 747-8i Boeing Business Jet (BBJ) – donated by Qatar to the U.S. last year for use by Trump – is set to serve in the Air Force One role while the White House awaits the delayed delivery from Boeing of two fully-outfitted VC-25B Air Force One aircraft. There are no plans to retire the VC-25As that currently serve as Air Force One until both full-up VC-25Bs are operational.

The Air Force said the VC-25B Bridge aircraft is on schedule to roll out in its new paint scheme and be delivered to the Presidential Airlift Group this summer. It is not clear when it will start flying Trump. The White House referred us to the Air Force for additional information.

The jet recently underwent flight testing in Texas, which you can see in the following photos that aviation photographer TT-33 operator was kind enough to share with us at the time.

The USAF now says that with the Boeing VC-25B deliveries delayed far past its initial 2024 target and VC-25A heavy maintenance cycles being extended, an interim capability became “an absolute imperative.” How accurate this claim actually is isn’t clear. Trump has been talking about an interim Air Force One aircraft for some time since deliveries of the new VC-25Bs were pushed back beyond his second term. We heard of no actual requirements originating for this capability from within the USAF prior to the new administration or far in advance of Trump’s deal with the Qataris to source the jet. Very early in the new administration, Elon Musk was even working to find out how to get Trump a new Air Force One as fast as possible, for instance.

The Air Force claimed that in February 2025, a dedicated task force launched a “full-court press” on the VC-25B Bridge program while simultaneously working to accelerate Boeing’s long-term VC-25B production.

Though questions were swirling about the legality and ethics of receiving the gifted plane, the Pentagon last May took delivery of the aircraft and said it would rapidly undertake the required modifications.

It’s one thing to have a donated ultra-luxury jet, but turning it into one safe and connected enough to carry a president is another story.

As TWZ has previously noted, converting any aircraft into one that is secure enough to transport the president is a complex undertaking. The aircraft needs to provide constant, secure communications, including what is needed to order a nuclear strike under extreme conditions. Historically, it also needs to be physically hardened both inside and out to withstand myriad threats, from the electromagnetic pulse of a nuclear weapon going off to incoming surface-to-air missiles to enemy intelligence-gathering efforts. To do this requires significant modifications right down to the aircraft’s outer structure. It is very unlikely, if not impossible, that this aircraft was hardened against EMPs in the timeframe required for fielding it.

The VC-25As are speckled with missile approach warning sensors and many laser countermeasures turrets (DIRCM). They also include the legacy Matador infrared countermeasure system above their jet engines and APU. This is in addition to other defensive features which are less visible and remain closely guarded secrets.

Common Infrared Countermeasures (CIRCM)

In previous coverage, we noted that at the very least, “this aircraft will have to feature some kind of DIRCM setup to repel shoulder-fired heat-seeking missiles, and modular units are available that can be attached in a canoe to the bottom of the aircraft. These systems, such as Elbit’s C-MUSIC or Northrop Grumman’s Guardian, are in service with foreign VVIP 747s, as well as commercial aircraft, including those flying for Israeli airline El Al. You can read all about these systems here. Still, while they offer far less defensive capacity compared to what is seen under the belly of a VC-25A, they would offer a significant layer of protection.” We still don’t see any evidence of the aircraft being modified with defensive countermeasures.

L3Harris, known for its communications systems and aircraft alterations, was selected to undertake the “complex modification of the bridge aircraft,” the Air Force explained. The company already delivers “secure, reliable and resilient communications” for VC-25A and the executive airlift fleet “but has extensive experience with self-protection and customization of VIP aircraft,” the Air Force added. “The accelerated timeline was further made possible by a mission-focused partnership with Boeing, who provided the necessary engineering data to support the required structural modifications.”

In addition, “elite specialists from multiple government agencies developed advanced protocols to detect and – if necessary – neutralize potential technical hazards on previously owned aircraft,” according to the Air Force. “Their rigorous approach on the Bridge aircraft has literally ‘written the book’ and set the benchmark for integrating used airframes into the secure military inventory.”

In response to our question about what modifications the jet received, the Air Force told us the following:

“Safety and security were at the forefront of this program. We deliberately minimized interior aesthetic modifications to focus on modifications for safety, security and mission execution. We assessed which requirements were necessary for an interim capability. We had greater flexibility in developing our mission requirements.

After safety and security, we focused on the mission communications systems.

We have made deliberate decisions such as the reduction of the number of airstairs, less chiller space, and exclusion of the Golden Eagle mission [to fly the remains of former presidents] to minimize structural modifications, while prioritizing modifications focused on safety, security and secure communications.”

We also asked whether this jet will be able to fly overseas and into higher-risk areas, but have not gotten a response. At this point, based on the limited info we have at this time, that seems unlikely. But if this is the case, the question then can be raised why the USAF is spending billions on two full-up Air Force One aircraft if standards have been so relaxed that this simpler aircraft can do all their missions? We will update this story with any pertinent details the USAF provides.

To help speed up the delivery process of this interim Air Force One jet, the Air Force said it “constructed an at-scale mockup of the interior, complete with virtual reality views, to enable early commissioning activities for White House staff.”

“Our commitment to providing the president with a secure, resilient and reliable airborne command post is unwavering,” said Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Ken Wilsbach. “The VC-25B Bridge program is a testament to the Air Force’s ability to innovate and rapidly evolve to ensure the continuity of our government under any conditions.”

The Air Force said the estimated delivery of Boeing’s VC-25Bs is now expected in 2028. If that holds up, then this ‘bridge’ aircraft will have served at most around two years until the first full-up VC-25B is delivered.

We will continue to follow developments in this program and provide updates when warranted.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The U.S. Air Force plans to fully retire its fleet of E-11A Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) aircraft in Fiscal Year 2028. The BACN jets provide highly specialized communications capabilities that allow for the rapid transfer of data between various aerial platforms, as well as forces on land and at sea, which you can read more about here. The Air Force more than doubled its fleet size in recent years, but now wants the mission to be taken over by space-based systems.

In their Posture Statement for Fiscal Year 2027, the Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach, and Space Force Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman state that the E-11A “will be fully divested” in FY2028.

In our previous coverage of the E-11A, we described the basic capabilities of the platform as follows:

The BACN payload is an extremely robust communications gateway that can rapidly send and receive data transmitted through various waveforms to and from a wide array of aerial platforms, as well as forces on the ground. In addition to being able to “translate” between various communications and data sharing systems, these aircraft have been vital communications relay nodes in Afghanistan, where the country’s mountainous terrain limits the reach of line-of-sight links.

In the short term, the capabilities provided by BACN will be bridged by the Hybrid SATCOM Terminal program. In a 2024 demonstration by Northrop Grumman, this type of satellite communications solution made use of commercial space Internet providers to establish a resilient multi-orbit, multi-constellation network.

The Posture Statement further adds that the Air Force is “executing a deliberate and balanced strategy for Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), Battle Management Command and Control (BMC2), and Airborne Moving Target Indicator (AMTI) capabilities to meet the intent of the National Defense Strategy.”

This strategy includes “a generational shift away from legacy systems” like the E-11A and “towards next-generation capabilities in both air and space.” This also calls for continued investment in the DAF Battle Network, which is described as “a key capability to fuse sensor data and remain resilient against all adversaries.”

The Air Force has previously described the DAF Battle Network as an “integrated system-of-systems connecting sensor, effector, and logistics systems enabling better situational awareness, faster operational decisions, and decisive direction to the force.”

Another option could be BACN-like solutions provided in podded form to various aircraft. Examples of these include the Smart Node Pod from Northrop Grumman, which is already in production.

Until recently, the Air Force seemed very much committed to its BACN fleet.

Back in 2021, the service confirmed it planned to acquire six more E-11As over the next five years; this would provide a total of nine BACN jets. This reflected the high demand for the fleet, which meant all of the existing operational examples had historically been forward deployed in Afghanistan, where one of them crashed after suffering an engine failure in 2020.

The BACN fleet has also conducted extensive operations in the Persian Gulf region, Central and South America, and elsewhere.

The E-11A has remained active in combat operations up to this day, including being deployed in support of Operation Epic Fury against Iran. It was also involved in the operation to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, an effort known as Absolute Resolve.

Another driver behind the force expansion was the Air Force’s retirement of four EQ-4B Global Hawk drones that were also equipped with the BACN communications package. These were later converted into the RangeHawk configuration to support hypersonic testing.

In 2022, the Air Force confirmed that the first of the additional six E-11As was now operating in the Middle East, having formally joined the 430th Expeditionary Electronic Combat Squadron at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia.

It’s worth noting that the Air Force’s three oldest E-11As are based on older Bombardier BD-700 and Global 6000 business jets, while the newer airframes are based on the Global 6500 bizjet.

The aircraft has also taken on additional functions, such as in 2021, when at least one E-11A was involved in a combined U.S.-UAE exercise focused on employing “multiple platforms… together to execute and refine tactics, techniques and procedures to counter Unmanned Aerial System threats,” according to the Air Force.

In the past, we’ve also noted how the value of the BACN platform extends beyond Afghanistan and the Middle East.

Its capabilities would be equally useful for supporting operations over the vast expanses of the Pacific, where the U.S. military is increasingly focused on preparing for a potential future high-end conflict with China. It would also be suited to working on NATO’s eastern flank, where U.S. allies have been expanding their force posture in recent years to help deter Russian aggression.

More generally, as a fixed-wing bizjet platform, the E-11A lacks the low-observability characteristics to survive in highly contested airspace, so it would need to operate from considerable standoff distances when confronted by the kinds of peer- and near-peer adversaries that they are intended to help defeat. This is undoubtedly part of the reason for the Air Force deciding to discard the BACN fleet. In the same way, it also gave up its E-8C Joint STARS without any direct replacement, driven by the concern that platforms of this kind will simply be too vulnerable in the future.

After all, both China and Russia are developing very long-range anti-air missiles expected to be optimized for high-value targets such as BACN. In addition, airborne ISR platforms will increasingly face sophisticated anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) networks before they even get to their operating areas. 

Furthermore, pushing the E-11A further away from the warfighter is a fundamental problem for its mission, especially when it comes to connecting to forces on the ground. BACN works as a bridge between forces using disparate radios and even the same radios, and is particularly valuable since units on the ground that are trying to communicate with other units or aircraft can be blocked by line of sight, especially in terrain. Regardless, the farther the E-11A flies away from its target area, the less it is capable of providing meaningful connectivity to the forces operating there, just due to the horizon.

Ultimately, the E-11A’s high-demand, low-density status may also have counted against it. Even after the Air Force decided to increase the fleet numbers, it remains a highly niche capability and one that comes at a lot of cost, with an extensive training, maintenance, and logistics burden needed to support it.

The Air Force’s ambition to migrate the BACN’s capabilities to space-based assets parallels, to some degree, its aim for its future airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) architecture. However, the service does at least still see a need for traditional crewed AEW&C aircraft, too. Partly this is due to the fact that the Air Force does not expect new space-based capabilities to be operational before, at best, the early 2030s. The service is seeing a similar shift with its ground moving-target indicator (GMTI) capabilities, which are being transferred from the now-retired E-8C JSTARS to a distributed network of space-based sensors to keep tabs on targets on land and at sea.

At this stage, it’s far from clear whether the terminals required for BACN’s successor have already been installed on aircraft, ships, and issued to ground units, and whether the system will be able to translate Link 16 and other waveforms.

Time will tell if space-based assets can take over the BACN’s role in what is a notably abbreviated timeframe.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

EDMONTON, Canada — Leon Draisaitl scored a pair of goals and Evan Bouchard chipped in with three assists as the Edmonton Oilers staved off elimination by beating the Ducks 4-1 on Tuesday night.

The Oilers now trail the best-of-seven Western Conference playoff series 3-2 with Game 6 on Thursday night at Honda Center.

Vasily Podkolzin and Zach Hyman also scored for the Oilers who had previously yielded six separate leads to slip away in the first four games of the series.

Connor McDavid and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins each had a pair of assists. Edmonton is now 18-3 when scoring first in a game when facing elimination.

Alex Killorn scored for the Ducks.

Connor Ingram made 29 stops for Edmonton, while Ville Husso recorded 10 saves for the Ducks after coming in to relieve Lukas Dostal, who gave up three goals on nine shots.

For the fifth straight game the Oilers struck first, scoring on the game’s first shot just 2:22 into the contest as Podkolzin beat Dostal high for his second of the postseason.

Edmonton took a 2-0 lead 8:33 into the opening period as a point shot was deflected twice, the second time through Dostal’s legs by Hyman.

The Oilers took a 3-0 lead just 1:14 later as Draisaitl tipped Bouchard’s point shot in for his second of the playoffs. That spelled an early end of the night for Dostal.

The Ducks got on the board on the power play 8:26 into the second period as Mason McTavish dropped it back to Killorn, who extended his points streak to four games with his third goal of the playoffs.

Edmonton responded with a power-play goal a couple of minutes later on a one-timer by Draisaitl, who tied Wayne Gretzky for the most postseason power-play goals in franchise history at 23.

Edmonton has played the most playoff games of any NHL team since 2022 with 80, two more than the Florida Panthers, who beat the Oilers in the last two Stanley Cup Finals before failing to qualify this season.

Playing in his 80th playoff game, Bouchard collected his 88th point, moving into a tie for third place for players through 80 games with Brian Leetch, behind only Bobby Orr (92) and Paul Coffey (92).

McDavid (63 points) passed Adam Oates for the second-most points in NHL history when trailing in a playoff series. Only Gretzky (80) has more.

Despite on-again, off-again negotiations, the United States has no other option but to pursue a diplomatic solution with Iran, argues Vali Nasr, professor of international affairs and Middle East studies at Johns Hopkins University.

Nasr tells host Steve Clemons that the US-Israel war on Iran has shown the limits of military force.

“You don’t go to the table to demand surrender. The other side is not going to surrender because they haven’t lost. So you have to cut a deal,” Nasr said, adding that Iran’s objective is to make sure the US and Israel understand that “war with Iran isn’t easy”.