Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy.
Sikorsky unveiled a new incarnation of its Armed Black Hawk helicopter at the Army Aviation Warfighting Summit in Nashville last week. TWZ’s Jamie Hunter spoke with Sikorsky’s Matt Isaacson about how this expands mission sets and provides greater flexibility for the Black Hawk, while minimizing the need for separate types with an air arm’s H-60/S-70 fleet.
Check out our full tour of the aircraft and its weapons:
The H-60 Black Hawk Gunship Evolves With New Wings And Weapons
TWZ got a personal tour of a U.S. Army UH-60M Black Hawk utility helicopter by its pilot during the Dubai Air Show in November 2025. Sikorsky has built more than 5,000 examples of the Hawk family of helicopters for 36 nations worldwide. Together they’ve racked up more than 15 million flight hours, including five million in combat.
The UH-60M Black Hawk has a maximum gross weight of 22,000 pounds (9,979 kg) and can transport 12 fully-equipped troops (seated). The variant has also been missionized for various roles, including for U.S. special forces as the MH-60M.
Whether used by the National Guard to respond to disasters, delivering humanitarian aid across Europe, supporting relief operations in the Philippines, battling wildfires in the Firehawk version, or hoisting stranded hikers, the Black Hawk is a truly versatile multi-mission helicopter.
Sikorsky’s Black Hawk modernization efforts will enable more power, greater payload and extended range while reducing fuel consumption.
Furthermore, with a digital Modular Open-System Approach and autonomy for unmanned operations in its new U-Hawk variant, the Black Hawk will be able to support fast capability integration and enhanced survivability through uncrewed battlefield operations.
Check out the full walk-around video below:
U.S. Army UH-60M Black Hawk Tour And Mission Brief With Its Pilots
Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy.
L3Harris is pushing its modular Wolf Pack family of “launched effects vehicles” for the U.S. Army, including to equip its H-60 Black Hawk series and AH-64 Apache helicopters, with an eye on the specific demands of a future conflict in the Pacific. The family of vehicles includes the Red Wolf, configured for long-range precision strikes against targets on land or at sea, and the Green Wolf fitted with an electronic warfare payload. Overall, these are part of a wider drive toward fielding modular, relatively cheap, and small systems that increasingly blur the line between uncrewed aerial systems, especially longer-range kamikaze drones, and cruise missiles, as well as decoys.
Readers can refer to our previous coverage of the Wolf Pack family, and it is also worth noting that the company is under contract with the U.S. Marine Corps to deliver the related PASM, the Precision Attack Strike Munition.
At the Army Aviation Association of America’s Army Aviation Warfighting Summit in Nashville, Tennessee, this week, TWZ caught up with Brad Reeves, the director of strategy and requirements for the Agile Development Group at L3Harris, to talk about the company’s vision for the Wolf family with the Army.
A rendering of the Red Wolf launched effects vehicle. L3Harris L3Harris
TWZ: What is the primary driver behind the Wolf family, and how is it relevant to the Army’s rotary-wing fleets?
Brad Reeves: The Department of War has a heavy emphasis on the Pacific and a conflict over there. Mass is an issue. We have a lot of exquisite weapons today, but the numbers are not maybe as high as we might hope for a conflict over there. So, they’re trying to solve that problem. Affordable mass has kind of become the buzzword, which basically means, “hey, how do we get capability that we can buy in quantity without breaking the bank?” And so, with that, the Department of War, actually Secretary Hegseth, issued a memo on April 30 of last year. And one of the things he called out specifically was launched effects, the urgency to get that fielded beginning this year. So, that’s a high-emphasis item for those guys.
A U.S. Army UH-60M Black Hawk. U.S. Air Force photo
Launched effects are really meant to be an affordable mass solution for the Army. But the real story behind this is what we call our Wolf Pack family of systems, and our offering and the capability it brings. And the story here is it’s very capable, but it’s what it does for the Army and for Army aviation. So it’s transforming Army aviation, and it’s addressing platforms that lack some relevancy today in the fight. Black Hawks, Apaches, etc, have a very short-range capability, relatively speaking, when you’re talking about the Pacific, and you have the tyranny of distance and anti-access/area-denial threats. It’s a much harder challenge than what we’ve dealt with in the decades since those aircraft were first invented.
Now we’re basically bringing relevancy to those platforms. We’re transforming from a weapons-effectiveness range and lethality range of single-digit kilometers, maybe up to a dozen kilometers, and we’re now extending that to hundreds of kilometers. We’re taking what before was a single-mission aircraft that’s supporting the Army; it’s doing close combat attack missions for Army soldiers on the ground, and is basically specific to that single service. And we’re now expanding that, and we’re giving that platform a joint or coalition viability in a Pacific flight. And so, the relevance now has increased. We’re taking what was before, a single-domain, fully land-based capability. We’re turning it into multi-domain, so now surface, meaning maritime, and land. And then we’re taking the target sets, which were traditionally tanks, maybe threats that we get from ground forces, etc. Again, we’re expanding that so it can be maritime threats and ground threats. It’s kind of a revolution in the way that the Army is going to fight and what they’re going to contribute to the joint coalition force. The Army desperately needs this capability.
A U.S. Army AH-64D Apache fires a Hellfire missile during training. The basic Hellfire has an operational range of anywhere between four and just under seven miles (seven to 11 kilometers). U.S. Army photo by Spc. Dean John Kd De Dios
TWZ: And what are the differences between the Wolf Pack family members?
Brad Reeves: Our launched effects offering, we call it the Wolf Pack family of systems. Today, we have two high-level mission capability variants. We have the Red Wolf, which is the kinetic variant, so a cruise missile. We have the Green Wolf, which has a purely (non-kinetic) electronic warfare payload. So now you’re also doing suppression of enemy air defenses. These types of missions, the DILR mission — detect, ID, locate, report — and/or electronic attack to suppress this threat.
Wolf Pack is designed to have multiple variants, so one aircraft, let’s say an Apache in this instance, you could launch multiple variants, Green and Red. You have a Green Wolf that goes out ahead and is searching and building the EMBM, the electromagnetic battle management. Through some software we call DISCO, which is AI-driven software, it’s building the landscape where the threats are, whether on the surface or on the land.
The wait is over.
Introducing Red Wolf ᵀᴹ and Green Wolf ᵀᴹ, the first vehicles in our expanding pack of launched effects systems. pic.twitter.com/d4oG7fgeE4
Brad Reeves: It comes out of our Wolf Pack family. It’s a unique variant designed for the U.S. Marine Corps AH-1Z Viper, and we’re delivering early operational capability. They did a long-range precision fire, LRPF, last September, and that was somewhat of a graduation event. Now we’re basically starting to work with production at our plant in Virginia.
In February 2025, NAVAIR released this image of a Red Wolf-toting AH-1Z, at which time the munitions were identified only as “a new Long Range Precision Fire (LRPF) capability.” U.S. Navy
TWZ: So these are basically loitering munitions?
Brad Reeves: We don’t consider it a loitering munition, but technically, by definition, yes, what it’s doing is it’s flying a pattern. It’s very smart: it goes out, starts detecting threats, then it will set up a pattern to make sure that a) it’s survivable itself, so it doesn’t fly over a threat and get shot down. But b), it will maximize the search pattern, and then it will deconflict with the others in the pack, so that you can, if you have a large area, you can have one, one will say, “hey, I’m going to go do maybe a zigzag pattern over here looking for threats. You go do a zigzag pattern and then report those back.” Once they find the threats, they’ve got options. Either the aircraft can just avoid the threats because they know where they are, or if they need to go through them, then you can either use electronic attack to jam them, or you can send a signal to one of the kinetic variants. Then the kinetic variant does the destruction of enemy air defenses mission.
That’s kind of why we call it the Wolf Pack: working together collaboratively in a pack to perform a mission that’s assigned by the pilot, and they do that autonomously. They have been ground-launched. They have been air-launched from both manned and unmanned platforms, and they can be launched from rotary-wing or fixed-wing. Since we’re here with the Army, the target is Black Hawks and Apaches very specifically.
In the past, L3Harris has also highlighted the potential benefits of pairing its Red Wolf miniature cruise missile with the U.S. Air Force’s OA-1K Skyraider II. L3Harris
TWZ: Would you say that the Wolf Pack is oriented generally towards the SEAD/DEAD mission?
Brad Reeves: It is much broader. But certainly one of the main applications is SEAD/DEAD. With the EW variant, that’s really applicable when you’re doing SEAD/DEAD, or you’re just looking for platform survivability, meaning you’re going towards a mission, but you want to maybe send something out ahead. These fly at high subsonic speeds. They’re going out ahead when launched from a helicopter. They’re scouting out the area, giving them the picture, and allowing them to either avoid, suppress, or defeat threats that may be in their way.
A graphic depicting a notional ground mission scenario involving the employment of Red Wolf and Green Wolf launched effects vehicles. L3Harris
TWZ: Presumably, the cost point of these means the numbers can be fairly scalable, depending on the requirement?
Brad Reeves: Absolutely, it depends on the mission set. One of the advantages is that, while it is an affordable mass munition, it also comes with significant capability. There are some, what I would call differentiators, that put this capability at the high end of the affordable mass, meaning it’s very inexpensive compared to traditional legacy weapons that the forces are using today. We usually say it’s about five times cheaper than what these aircraft would be using today. There are BAAs, broad area announcements, something the U.S. government will release to industry, asking for different capabilities. Right now, when they’re asking for this type of capability, they’re usually targeting somewhere between $300,000 to $500,000 for that market, per round, and we’re certainly in that sweet spot.
TWZ: Aside from the small turbine engine that they share, how modular are the Wolf Pack vehicles themselves?
Brad Reeves: Some people call it a truck, but for some reason, that offends me. But you’ve got the platform, and we’ve designed it modularly with what’s called WOSA, weapon open systems architecture. And so you can interchange the payload. You can take the platform, you can put a warhead in it, and it becomes kinetic. You can take the warhead out, you can put an EW payload in it. I’m oversimplifying a little bit because with the kinetic variant, there are sensors and other stuff. So you probably wouldn’t physically take a kinetic one and swap out the warhead for an EW payload.
Side-by-side renderings of the Red Wolf and Green Wolf, showing them to be functionally identical, at least externally. L3Harris
TWZ: When it comes to Green Wolf, which has no warhead, is this designed to be expendable or recoverable?
Brad Reeves: We have both. We have a recoverable variant. It depends on what the customer wants. In some instances, they want recoverability. And with recoverability, you lose a little bit of range. So in some instances, it’s going to be on a one-way mission; they just want maximum range. Basically, the parachute equipment we use to recover it takes up a little bit of space that otherwise would be fuel tank space.
The Deceptor small-form-factor software-defined radio frequency (RF) electronic warfare (EW) payload from L3Harris. In its promotional material, the company has indicated that this is a potential payload for the Green Wolf. L3Harris
TWZ: How do these vehicles navigate?
Brad Reeves: It has the standard inertial navigation and GPS. It has those capabilities inside of it, and then the seeker effectively is used purely for in-game targeting.
TWZ: To what degree would you be able to surge production to meet urgent demands?
Brad Reeves: We gave our manufacturing team the problem and said, “Hey, multiple customers are asking for as many as a thousand per year. We expect this to really blow up. How do we know how big a plant to build? How do we know what we can do?” And so they actually designed a modular, scalable production plan. In theory, you can scale up to as many as you want. But right now, what we’re doing is we’re scaling towards a thousand a year, which is the current path, and then if the demand signal spikes, we have the ability to scale above that.
The beauty of this vehicle is that there’s a lot as a significant amount of commonality, which does allow us to scale, and also gives us economies of scale, price, etc.
Meet the “Wolf Pack”
TWZ: Where are you now with testing?
Brad Reeves: We’ve flown over 50 times in test events with the military. So we’ve done multiple services. We’ve done formal testing with those services. It’s been launched twice off the AH-1Z. We’ve launched off fixed-wing UAS, but this gets a little sensitive with the customers, as to what those platforms are. And we’ve done ground launch.
TWZ: Do you have a pathway toward testing on the Black Hawk and Apache?
Brad Reeves: I am very passionate about making sure this gets fielded to U.S. Army soldiers, specifically the Apache and the Black Hawk. Right now, we’ve obviously got Epic Fury. But if something lights off in the Pacific, this just pales in comparison. If I were young enough to be flying in that fight, I would want more capability. And so I am a little bit of a zealot. The U.S. Army, I know, has to have this capability, and I believe they want it. It’s going to be a game-changer for them, and it’s going to be important to the joint force and coalition forces. It is a significant transformational capability.
Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy.
Short-range kamikaze drones operated by an Iran-backed militia appear to have successfully targeted a U.S. military Black Hawk helicopter and a critical air defense radar at an American base in Iraq. This is the first known example of a successful attack of this kind on a U.S. military aircraft. It’s also not the first time we have seen evidence of these kinds of drones zipping over the same installation in recent weeks.
The incidents underscore the reality of the threat posed by small drones in the Middle East, where a wide variety of nefarious players have already employed these systems for surveillance and attacks against U.S. forces on multiple occasions, for years now. It is also a preview of what the U.S. could end up facing on its own homefront as it grapples with constant and sometimes highly perplexing drone incursions over sensitive bases and facilities. Even since the war began, there have been very alarming drone incursions over one of America’s most important bases that houses nuclear weapons and B-52 bombers that carry them. You can read all about these developments here.
One of the videos that began circulating yesterday, filmed from a first-person view (FPV) drone, shows a pair of Black Hawk helicopters sitting in a compound, protected only by a low blast wall. The video feed cuts out just before detonation, on or close to the main rotor, but the assumption is that one of these helicopters (at least) was struck.
An Iranian-backed militia carried out a successful FPV drone strike on Camp Victory in Iraq yesterday, successfully hitting multiple targets.
The location has been identified as the Victory Base Complex (VBC), a cluster of U.S. military installations surrounding Baghdad International Airport close to the Iraqi capital.
As for the helicopter, this appears to be a medical evacuation (medevac) configured HH-60M, emphasized by the video editing, in which it seems the prominent identification panels marked with red crosses have been obscured.
Noticing they blurred out a portion of their attack video (green). I think they were trying to hide the fact they attacked a medevac helo. Note white mark circled in orange.
These are actually US Army HH-60M CASEVAC helicopters. Not UH-60s. Assigned to Charlie Company, 2nd Battalion (General Support), 4th Regiment, 4th Infantry Division Combat Aviation Brigade. https://t.co/OIjvcxagz6
Whether the helicopter was damaged or even destroyed by the drone is unclear at this point, but most significant is the fact that such a target was able to be engaged by a relatively simple, low-cost threat. The same goes for the second video, where the extent of the damage is much clearer.
The target in this case is a container-based AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel radar, a system used to alert and cue short-range air defense (SHORAD) weapons, including the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS). The radar is in operating mode, its antenna clearly rotating.
A video showing a U.S. Army AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel radar in action with the 10th Combat Aviation Brigade:
Sentinel Radar
This footage includes the perspective from another drone, which confirms that the radar was hit, after which it is seen burning.
While it’s clear that more than one drone was in the vicinity of the radar during the attack, there have also been unconfirmed reports that the militia used some kind of swarming tactics, or at least multiple kamikaze drones to perpetrate this attack, with some degree of coordination.
Reportedly, the attacks on the Black Hawk and Sentinel radar occurred yesterday. In both cases, it is apparent that there is no degradation in the video feeds as they drop very low over the ground, even behind structures. This might be the result of the drones having been launched very close to their targets, or that they used fiber-optic control links. Both those scenarios are alarming, but a fiber-optic FPV drone would explain why passive sensor systems would not have detected them as they approached the base.
Wow, for the first time, fiber-optic drones have been spotted in use by the Azawad Liberation Front (FLA) in Mali, who are fighting against both the Malian Armed Forces and Russia’s Africa Corps/Wagner Group. The drones and training were likely provided by Ukraine, with previous… pic.twitter.com/OxemaEbWwO
The drone strikes are notable for a number of other reasons.
First, there is no sign of air defenses attempting to engage the incoming drones.
Of course, a response to the drones in the form of electronic warfare and cyber warfare, or other ‘soft-kill’ options, is a possibility. In regards to other counter-drone capabilities, there is no indication that the limited number of directed-energy weapons the U.S. has were deployed to this facility, while surface-to-air interceptors are not generally suitable for engaging such small drones. Other options would include gun-based systems, as well as drone-based systems, like the Coyote, and the laser-rocket-slinging VAMPIRE. On the other hand, we also know there is a chronic scarcity of many of these systems.
Video footage shows Block 2+ Coyote drones engaging drones in an undated demonstration:
Raytheon Missiles & Defense proves counter-UAS effectiveness against enemy drones
It should also be noted that, for all their relative simplicity and low cost, FPV drones are very hard to spot and target, especially when they are moving quickly at very low level. In many cases, they will evade detection by traditional radars, while even microwave radars, tailored for counter-drone work, can provide sporadic coverage at very low altitude.
The apparent vulnerability of the Victory Base Complex is all the more surprising since this is not the first time that the same installation has been targeted by FPV drones.
Earlier this month, videos emerged showing drones purportedly belonging to the Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah group.
A screenshot from a video released by the Iran-backed Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah showing an FPV drone approaching a hardened shelter at the Victory Base Complex earlier this month. via X
There have been suggestions that all of these various videos may have been recorded during the same (complex) attack, although the latest footage appears to come from a separate attack on a different date.
Thirdly, the threat posed by drones of this kind, while proliferating significantly since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, has been recognized long before that.
Last year, we reported on how U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had created a new task force specifically to counter the growing threats posed by small drones at home and abroad.
“There’s no doubt that the threats we face today from hostile drones grow by the day,” Hegseth stated at the time. “Emerging technologies — we see it in battlefields, in far-flung places, and we see it on our own border in small unmanned aerial systems. [These drones] target and bring harm on all warfighters, our people, our bases, and frankly, the sovereignty of our national airspace.”
Hegseth said the Pentagon “must focus on speed over process” when it came to new counter-drone efforts.
Soldiers from 2-130th Infantry Regiment hone their skills in a counter-drone training exercise at McGregor Range, New Mexico, last year. U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Raquel Birk
While there have been various regulatory barriers that have prevented the fielding of more robust drone defense of key installations and assets in the United States, this is not such a problem in Iraq, and especially in the course of a regional conflict.
It is notable, too, that there have been reports that some type of quadcopter-type drones may have been used for surveillance ahead of the Iranian strike on a U.S. logistics operations center in Kuwait on March 1. That attack led to the deaths of six U.S. service members, and more were wounded.
The incidents also underscore the very real risk faced by military infrastructure in the United States, a point that TWZhas repeatedly raised in the past. In particular, near-field attacks like these pose a huge threat and one that is hard to stop. Compared to a combat theater, something like this could be far more successful at home, where there are fewer defenses and more limited surveillance. As in Iraq, aircraft parked on the ground and radars are highly vulnerable, and the same threat even extends to traditional air defenses.
On June 1, the Security Service of Ukraine carried out a brilliant operation— on enemy territory, targeting only military objectives, specifically the equipment used to strike Ukraine. Russia suffered significant losses.
We have reached out to U.S. Central Command for more information about exactly what happened at the Victory Base Complex, and what kind of defensive measures are in place there.
As we wait for more details to emerge, to paint a fuller picture of these attacks on American assets in Iraq, it is clear that there are still questions to be asked about the resilience of the U.S. military in the face of kamikaze drones and similar threats.