jet

Oct. 26 (UPI) — Two U.S. Navy aircraft went down in the South China Sea in two incidents separated by half an hour on Sunday, according to U.S. Pacific Fleet, which said all service members were rescued.

In a statement, the U.S. Pacific Fleet said a U.S. Navy MH-60R Sea Hawk helicopter crashed while conducting routine operations at about 2:45 p.m. local time.

It had deployed from aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and was assigned to “Battle Cats” of Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 73.

All three crew members were rescued.

The second incident involved a F/A-18F Super Hornet fighter jet assigned to the “Fighting Redcocks” of Strike Fighter Squadron 22.

According to the Navy, it went down at 3:15 p.m. while also conducting routine operations.

“Both crew members successfully ejected and were also safely recovered by search-and-rescue assets assigned to Carrier Strike Group 11,” it said.

“All personnel involved are safe and in stable condition.”

The incidents are under investigation.

Commissioned in 1975, the USS Nimitz is on its final deployment, which began late March, USNI News reported. It had operated in the Middle East this summer as part of U.S. military plans to thwart Houthi attacks on shipping vessels in the Red Sea and had entered the South China Sea on Oct. 17.

Our Jamie Hunter went to Wichita to fly aboard Beechcraft’s M-346 jet trainer, which could replace the Navy’s T-45 Goshawk. Steven Helmer, a flight test and demonstration pilot for Textron Aviation and Defense, gave us a walk-around tour of the M-346 prior to taking to the skies.

The demonstrator Beechcraft is using is an M-346FA (fighter-attack) model of Leonardo’s M-346 Master family of jets. Leonardo and Textron, the latter of which owns Beechcraft, have joined forces for the Navy’s next generation trainer opportunity. The Navy’s M-346 variant will be configured slightly different, with the company giving the concept the designation M-346N. You can read all about this proposed variant here.

The next generation Navy jet trainer is unlikely to be required to land or launch from a carrier, a controversial move to say the least, but this decision has opened up the field to types that won’t require as extreme of a modification.

With all that being said, check out our walk-around tour below and stay tuned for a much deeper dive in the M-346 for the Navy in an upcoming video of Jamie’s flight.

You can also check out Textron’s pitch for the M-346N in our previous video below from Sea, Air, Space symposium earlier this year:

Contact the author: [email protected]

South Korea has selected an L3Harris Global 6500 bizjet-based solution for its new airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft. As we discussed at the time, Seoul launched its search for a new radar plane back in 2020, to bolster its current fleet of four Boeing E-737s, the South Korean version of the E-7 Wedgetail that has been selected by the U.S. Air Force, NATO, and the United Kingdom, and is in service with Turkey, South Korea, and Australia. Reports from earlier this year suggested that Boeing had already been eliminated or dropped out of the new South Korean AEW&C competition, something that the company appeared to deny.

According to L3Harris, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) has selected its proposal for its next-generation AEW&C program. The L3Harris solution allies a Bombardier Global 6500 airframe with the EL/W-2085 radar from Israel’s Elta. This series of radars is already used in AEW&C aircraft operated by Israel, Italy, and Singapore. It uses side-mounted active electronically scanned arrays (AESA), with additional antennas in the nose and tail helping to provide 360-degree coverage. 

For the South Korean bid, L3Harris had also been in competition with Sweden’s Saab, offering its Erieye Extended Range (ER) radar, also on a Global 6500 platform, a package known as GlobalEye.

According to South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency, DAPA chose the L3Harris option after it received a higher score following an evaluation.

Yonhap quoted DAPA as saying: “There was no significant difference in the evaluation of the performance of the target equipment, and L3Harris received high scores in the areas of operational suitability, domestic defense industry contribution, and operation and maintenance costs, while Saab received high scores in the areas of contract terms and acquisition costs. As a result of synthesizing the scores for each evaluation item, L3Harris received a high score.”

DAPA further stated: “Through this project, we expect to secure the ability to conduct constant aerial surveillance of enemy aerial threats in both wartime and peacetime, and to enable smooth execution of air control missions led by the Korean military.”

The four new AEW&C aircraft are due to be introduced by 2032, at a cost of 3.0975 trillion won (roughly $2.2 billion).

Exactly what happened to Boeing in the competition is unclear.

Having provided the Republic of Korea Air Force (ROKAF) with its four E-737s, under the Peace Eye program, it might have been viewed as a frontrunner in the second phase of the AEW&C acquisition.

In July of this year, reports emerged that the Boeing offering (again based on the E-7/E-737) had been removed from the South Korean competition.

At the time, Boeing provided the TWZ with the following statement: “We continue to support the U.S. government, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, and the Republic of Korea Air Force on our offering for additional E-7 AEW&C aircraft via the Foreign Military Sale process. In addition to detecting, tracking, and identifying targets, the E-7 AEW&C provides unmatched battle management capabilities ideally suited to the ROKAF’s needs.”

Meanwhile, sources familiar with the acquisition told TWZ that Boeing had submitted a proposal and supporting documents for its bid, but that none of the bidders involved met all the requirements outlined in two previous rounds. As a result, DAPA reissued the request for proposals (RFP), albeit with no changes in cost or requirements. Although the U.S. government didn’t resubmit the Boeing offer, it apparently remained a bidder in the competition. Once the RFP was reissued, the U.S. government and Boeing together submitted a letter stating that the original proposal still stood, with the same price tag attached.

We have reached out to Boeing for an update on the competition, but reports from South Korea, at least, suggest that, by the end, the bidding was a two-horse race between L3Harris and Saab.

Once the ROKAF fields its new radar planes, they will be a critical part of a broader effort to significantly enhance the country’s intelligence, surveillance, targeting, and reconnaissance (ISTAR) capabilities. In particular, they will help shore up possible gaps in its aerial surveillance coverage as the threat from North Korea, as well as from China, continues to grow.

Seoul approved the new AEW&C acquisition plan in June 2020, with DAPA already discounting any potential domestic solution.

As we reported in the past, South Korea first identified an emerging airborne early warning requirement as long ago as 1980, which it deemed necessary due to the country’s topography. This limits the performance of ground-based radar stations.

However, the first phase of its AEW&C acquisition wasn’t launched until 2005. On that occasion, the Boeing E-7 was chosen in favor of a U.S.-Israeli consortium of Gulfstream, L3, and Israel Aerospace Industries/Elta offering the Gulfstream G550 Conformal AEW (CAEW) — a forerunner of the L3Harris Global 6500-based solution.

Interestingly, however, it seems that Seoul would have opted for the U.S.-Israeli product, especially due to its low acquisition and through-life costs, but export restrictions ruled this out, and the Boeing offer was selected by default in August 2006.

The resulting $1.6-billion Peace Eye project included four E-737 aircraft, the last of which was delivered in 2012.

But there have also been reports that the ROKAF may have been dissatisfied with its E-737s.

In October 2019, the South Korean daily newspaper Munhwa Ilbo reported on a ROKAF document that had been submitted to the Korean parliamentary National Defense Committee. It cited “frequent failures” in the period from 2015 to September 2019 that meant the E-737s had failed to meet a targeted availability rate of 75 per cent. This lack of airframes reportedly exposed gaps in South Korea’s air defense coverage due to aircraft being unavailable to maintain constant patrols.

These kinds of concerns will only have increased since then, as North Korea has only expanded its activities in the field of low-flying drones and cruise missiles, which have small radar signatures but pose a big threat to South Korea.

Since Seoul launched its latest AEW&C competition, Boeing has found additional customers for the E-7, with the U.S. Air Force and NATO choosing it to replace or partially replace their aging E-3 Sentry AWACS fleets.

However, the future of the U.S. Air Force E-7 procurement remains somewhat precarious, with a Pentagon plan to axe the acquisition, amid a push to eventually move most, if not all, of its airborne target warning sensor layer into space. In July of this year, the House Armed Services Committee made a move toward reversing that decision.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has also now laid out plans to buy more of the U.S. Navy’s E-2D Hawkeye AEW&C aircraft to mitigate any capability gaps in the interim.

Whatever is decided, the U.S. Air Force’s E-7 program had already suffered notable delays and cost growth, which the Pentagon has said were major factors in the cancellation decision.

With all that in mind, today’s decision in South Korea looks like especially bad news for Boeing.

It should also be recalled that the Global 6500 is a new platform for this technology. It would appear that L3Harris will have to reintegrate the entire CAEW configuration, including its conformal systems, and flight-test it on a new airframe. With the production of the G550 ended, this would appear to be the only solution if a new-build airframe is to be used. We have asked the company for more details on this process.

A Colorado company displayed at the Air & Space Force Association’s annual conference this week a model of a new very heavy lift cargo jet it is designing. Though still in its aspirational phase, Radia’s WindRunner concept comes at a time when the future of heavy lift cargo capabilities is in question, including within the U.S. military as it looks to eventually replace its fleet of aging C-5M Galaxy and C-17A Globemaster III transports. Globally, the ability to move very large, outsized loads over long distances by air also has something of an expiration date, without any clear replacement for existing aircraft waiting in the wings. So, while by all accounts Radia’s dream may be a big long shot, it’s certainly worth examining.

The four-engined WindRunner, far bigger in size than either of the two U.S. Air Force airlifters, was originally designed to carry 300-foot-long wind turbine blades. In other words, it originated with the goal of offering a transport solution to commercial customers. However, Radia claims that when it’s built, it could be an attractive airframe for moving tanks, helicopters, collaborative combat aircraft (CCAs) and other large war materiel to austere locations, as well as rocket boosters and other outsized loads.

“As interest grew and development progressed, WindRunner’s unprecedented volume similarly appealed to the defense, aerospace and commercial cargo sectors,” company spokesperson Grace O’Connor told The War Zone.

The C-17A, which first entered service in 1995, has a maximum payload capacity of some 82 tons, according to the official Air Force fact sheet.

The much larger C-5, which has been around since the 1970s, and is now in its enhanced C-5M configuration, can carry up to 140 tons. What’s arguably more important than just the raw weight it can lift, the C-5 can carry far larger items than the C-17.

Capable of being refueled in flight to extend their range, neither this aircraft nor the C-17 is currently in production.

By comparison, Radia states that the 356-foot-long WindRunner, first conceived of in 2016, will be able to deliver 72.6 tons of cargo. However, payload weight only tells a small part of the story, the company suggests.

“Current defense cargo aircraft run out of room before they run out of lift capability,” O’Connor posited. “In other words, military operations cube out on missions before they gross out, making volume the limiting factor. The massive dimensions of today’s military aircraft, modern satellites, missile systems, and mobile hospitals make it challenging to transport mission-ready.“

Instead, many weapons systems have to be disassembled to fit aboard a Galaxy or Globemaster.

Radia claims that WindRunner, with some 270,000 cubic feet of cargo space, delivers seven times the volume of a C-5 and 12 times the volume of a C-17. Among other cargo, Radia says WindRunner can carry six ready-to-fly Chinook C-47 helicopters. The placement of the cockpit in a bulge above the cargo hold offers more vertical space to roll items into its very long hold.

The WindRunner is also claimed to be able to take off and land on 6,000 feet of runway, which is pretty short for such a large plane. One limiting factor, however, may be range. While the C-17 can fly about 2,400 miles with a heavy load without refueling and the C-5 can fly over double that distance with cargo packed in its belly. The WindRunner has a loaded range of just 1,200 miles, according to Radia. So, aerial refueling capability would be a prerequisite for U.S. military service. Still, this may be a worthwhile trade for the ability to easily move very large cargoes while keeping the cheapest aircraft acquisition price possible and tankers already service the C-5M and C-17A fleets heavily for long-distance missions. It may also be possible to extend the giant aircraft’s 261-foot wingspan to increase its range, among other concepts commonly employed to increase an aircraft’s range, such as auxiliary fuel tanks. Radia told us aerial refueling capability would be added for military contracts, but not for the initial tranche of commercial jets

As a scale-model mockup of the WaveRunner was on display on the conference showroom located at the sprawling Gaylord Conference Center at National Harbor, a top Air Force general was in a small meeting room two stories above, talking about the future of the service’s heavy lift.

The U.S. Air Force is still in the early stages of figuring out what it needs for a Next Generation Airlift (NGAL) platform that will replace the C-5s and C-17s. However, the flying branch said it will emphasize greater speed and operational flexibility, as well as the ability to better defend against growing threats when on the ground and in the air.

The commander of AMC, Air Force Gen. John Lamontagne, told reporters, including from The War Zone, that the service currently seeks one aircraft to replace both the Galaxy and Globemaster. Given various budgetary and functional considerations, it is unlikely that a future NGAL would have the same cargo capacity as the Galaxy. You can read more about the tough choices the Air Force faces over its NGAL program in our story here.

Among the NGAL options is an aircraft with a blended wing body, or BWB, configuration. The design could provide increased lifting abilities with large amounts of internal volume, among other advantages. In 2023, the Air Force selected aviation startup JetZero to design and build a full-size demonstrator.

There likely won’t be a replacement aircraft that can match the size of the Galaxy, meaning the Air Force will have to look externally to move its largest cargo. However, there are limited options right now. There are a small number of commercially chartable An-124 Condors, which have roughly similar roll-on, roll-off heavy lift capabilities as the C-5, available today. The existing Soviet-designed Condors won’t last forever. It’s possible that Ukraine could put the Condor back into production in modernized form, but this would be a very large undertaking and it won’t solve the U.S. military’s issue of losing its organic ability to move outsized loads if the single aircraft that will replace the C-17 and C-5 won’t be capable of meeting the latter’s ability to swallow massive cargoes, which seem very unlikely.

It’s worth noting that the world’s largest operational cargo hauling aircraft at the time, the An-225 Mriya, which is an outgrowth of the An-124, was destroyed by Russia at the beginning of its all-out invasion of Ukraine. It served for decades as the heaviest-lifting charter aircraft available, supporting everything from wars to disaster relief operations to moving rail cars and aircraft.

With all this in mind, Radia’s giant cargo hauler could offer the U.S. military a new option to move big loads, if it actually becomes a real aircraft. While this may be more of a niche capability, even if it was offered just on a contracting basis, it would likely be an attractive option for some missions. A militarized version of this aircraft is a far bigger reach, but a small fleet could help fill the gap left by a ‘compromise’ C-5 and C-17 replacement design. The Pentagon has certainly been intrigued with far more exotic heavy lift concepts than this.

Radia claims it is shooting for the first flight of its WindRunner by 2030.

“Radia has raised over $150 million to date and is in discussions to raise additional billions through government support, commercial partnerships, and private capital to complete WindRunner development and production,” O’Connor said when asked how much it will cost to turn the clean sheet design into reality. “Radia has completed concept development and wind tunnel testing and is now preparing for system integration and manufacturing. WindRunner uses largely proven, off-the-shelf systems that are currently certified and flying today. We’ve focused on digital design and analysis, and we are now progressing toward building the full-scale aircraft for certification.”

Radia “has received Letters of Intent (LOIs) from major global customers across wind energy, defense, aerospace, and cargo sectors,” O’Connor added. However, an LOI is not a contract for delivery.

At this point, it is not publicly known where Radia intends to build these jets, if it actually gets the opportunity to do so.

“We are getting closer to publicly announcing our final assembly line location and production capacity,” O’Connor explained.

Radia may not ultimately produce any jets that wear USAF insignias — or any jet at all. However, there appears to be a heavy airlift gap that may form in the coming decades and it may take a mixture of assets, commercial and military, to fill it.

Contact the author: [email protected]

A business jet converted into a tanker is among the options the U.S. Air Force has been considering as part of plans for a future aerial refueling ‘system of systems.’ The service is also still looking at stealthy designs and other options to meet its tanker needs going forward as the anti-air threat picture continues to expand and evolve.

“We are working on the Next Generation Air Refueling System, NGAS, as it’s effectively known. Put the finishing touches on that last year. And that was a really wide look at how we would do air refueling in the future,” Air Force Gen. John Lamontagne, head of Air Mobility Command (AMC), told TWZ and other outlets earlier this week. “When I say a wide look, looking at conventional tankers [as] we know it today, you know something like a [KC-]135 or KC-46 as is; something with a bunch of mission systems added to it, with a defense systems [sic], connectivity, intelligence and more; a business jet; a blended wing body; or a signature-managed [stealthy] tanker.”

“So, a pretty wide look at the effectiveness of those,” he added. “We still are looking at a pretty wide look.”

Lamontagne was speaking at a roundtable on the sidelines of the Air & Space Forces Association’s 2025 Air, Space, and Cyber Conference, at which TWZ was in attendance.

To provide some quick context, the Air Force currently has some 370 KC-135s and 96 KC-46s in its inventory. The service finished retiring its fleet of KC-10s last year. Under its existing contract with Boeing, the service expects to eventually receive 188 KC-46s, and it now has plans to acquire 75 more. What will eventually replace the last of the aging KC-135s, as well as fill the gap left by the departure of the KC-10s, remains to be seen. This is where NGAS, which continues to be described as a future family of capabilities, comes in.

Both the KC-135 and the KC-46 evolved parallel to or are based on full-size jet-powered transcontinental airliner designs, as was the now-retired KC-10. The KC-135 and KC-46 are also configured to refuel receivers primarily using the boom method, though they can also dispense gas via probe-and-drogue. The boom method is the Air Force’s preferred option when it comes to topping up the tanks on fixed-wing aircraft in mid-air.

A tanker converted from a business jet could offer a comparable cruising speed and service ceiling, but with lower operating and maintenance demands. It would also be able to take off and land from shorter runways and have more limited logistical needs, offering increased flexibility. The Air Force does currently envision future high-end operations centering on dispersed and distributed concepts of operations (CONOPS), collectively referred to as Agile Combat Employment (ACE), primarily to complicate enemy targeting cycles and reduce vulnerability. The U.S. Marine Corps has also been completely restructuring its forces around similar CONOPS in recent years.

At the same time, those comparative benefits come at the cost of maximum range and on-station time, and especially to the core of its entire reason for being — the total fuel available to offload to receivers. This could be offset to a degree by being able to fly from airstrips closer to operating areas. If the business jet-based tanker is itself able to refuel in mid-air, it could be utilized as one part of a multi-tier hub-and-spoke concept. Regardless, these aircraft will never be able to compete with offload capacity of the KC-135 or KC-46.

It’s also worth noting here that not every mission necessarily requires a full airliner-sized tanker. Business jet-based types could be used primarily to support more routine activities, especially in peacetime, like training and testing, and moving small numbers of fighters from point a to point b, freeing up larger tankers for more demanding operations. Simply not having to fly bigger tankers as often would also help reduce the wear and tear on those fleets.

Lower acquisition costs could also help the Air Force buy more business jet-based tankers. Depending on how they are configured, they could also be used as light transports when not needed for aerial refueling missions.

The idea of turning business jets into tankers is not new. At the Singapore Airshow in 2010, Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) presented a concept for a boom-equipped tanker based on the Gulfstream G550, with a particular eye toward supporting training needs. An IAI brochure available at the show also reportedly depicted a hub-and-spoke refueling concept of operations, with the modified G550 acting as ‘spoke’ between a larger traditional tanker and tactical jets operating closer to the front lines.

The G550 is now out of production, but Gulfstream continues to produce other models that might serve as a starting point for new tankers. There are other options on the market, too. The Air Force and other branches of the U.S. military already operate multiple Gulfstream types, as well as members of the Bombardier Challenger family. This includes highly modified types in service to perform specialized missions, like the EA-37B Compass Call electronic warfare jet and the E-11A Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN). Smaller airliners, including current-generation variants of the Boeing 737, could offer additional options for conversion into aerial refueling platforms.

There may be other, more novel avenues, as well. As part of a design challenge in 2023, the Air Force itself produced a graphic showing a business jet as one option for carrying a potential platform-agnostic boom-equipped refueling system, which could also be small enough to be fit on a tactical jet like the F-15. The service has been exploring concepts in this general vein for years now, which could also feed into a future NGAS family of systems.

As Lamontagne noted at the Air, Space, and Cyber Conference earlier this week, the Air Force is still taking “a pretty wide look” at potential NGAS options. The need for any future tanker to be able to survive in more contested environments remains top of mind for the service. The possibility of acquiring a fleet of stealthy tankers, something TWZ has long highlighted the growing need for, remains very much on the table. Tankers, as well as other critical supporting assets, would be top targets in any future major conflict, such as a potential high-end fight against China in the Pacific. On top of this, the Air Force has been publicly warning that the threat ecosystem is only set to continue expanding in the coming years, and that it predicts there to be anti-air missiles with ranges of up to 1,000 miles by 2050.

“Really, at the end of the day, we are trying to upscale and change the equation on our survivability,” Lamontagne said at the roundtable. “We’ve got to be able to go into much higher threat environments. … and so how do we do that with both the force that we have and, potentially, a new platform?”

The cost of a future stealthy tanker remains a significant factor in work on NGAS.

“The Secretary of the Air Force approved another request out to industry that was sent out just a few weeks ago with a return from industry in just a couple of weeks, and that is really to help us better understand some cost estimates,” the AMC commander added. “When we did the first analysis of alternatives on NGAS last winter, I would say those cost estimates were really rough on what a signature-managed platform might look like.”

“Is it an F-35 level of exquisite stealth with a KC-135-size platform, or something in between? Tough to cost,” he continued. “So we got some really rough costs associated with that first analysis of alternatives. This is really, at its simplest, an attempt to refine those costs, go back out to industry, and figure out what’s in the realm of the possible at the right level of signature management, if we go down that road.”

Regardless, “we still know that … our current tanker force is not going to serve us well in a high threat environment,” Lamontagne stressed. “So, we’re either going to need a really long stick, right, weapons that can go a long way and keep the tanker out of the WEZ [weapons engagement zone], or we’re going to be able to need to go in there and not just survive, but thrive.”

The timeline for fielding any NGAS capabilities, especially new tankers, whether they are converted business jets, stealthy designs, or something else, is also unclear. The Air Force’s stated goal in the past has been to begin fielding next-generation aerial refueling platforms no later than 2040, and hopefully well before then.

It’s also important to point out here that U.S. military officials have been warning for years now already about strains on the Air Force’s existing tanker fleets and raising concerns about its capacity to meet even existing demands. This has been compounded in part by persistent technical issues and quality control problems with the KC-46. The Air Force, as well as the U.S. Navy, has been making increasing use of private contractors in recent years to bolster their ability to meet non-combat-related aerial refueling needs.

At least as of this week, “just about every option is on the table” to help meet the Air Force’s still evolving requirements for NGAS, according to Lamontagne.

Contact the author: [email protected]

ARIEL, Wash. — Music thumps. Boots stomp. Smoke swirls.

It rises like a dry mist from red-glowing cigarettes. It ebbs around an elk’s skull, five-point antlers still attached, and a muzzle loader hanging on the wall.

A potbellied stove washes its warmth over strutting men, women and children. A skinned-out bobcat dangles from the ceiling. A two-man chain saw with a 12-horsepower engine roosts on a canopy over the bar. A sign says: “This Business is Supported by Timber Dollars.”

Tab tops pop. Bartenders slide Budweiser and Rainier and Miller and Coors across the varnished bar top, 3,120 cans and bottles in all. On a wall nearby, these people have tacked up $40. The money is waiting for D.B. Cooper. If he ever shows up, they would like to buy him a drink.

Classic stories from the Los Angeles Times’ 143-year archive

All of this is in his honor. For 11 hours, a guitar and a bass and a mandolin and a sax and a dobro and an accordion and some drums do not stop, and neither does the dancing nor the singing nor the drinking nor the joking. One husky man lifts his redheaded lady high in the air, puts her feet gently back on the floor and gives her a big kiss.

Maybe that is him. Or maybe that is her. The thought stops conversation cold. If D.B. Cooper were a woman, would she be a redhead? “Nah,” shouts Bill Partee, over the pounding of the band. He is 64 and has lived here a dozen years. He has a full, white Old Testament beard, and he wears a cap that says: Ariel Store, Home of D.B. Cooper Days. “She had dark hair when she did this thing, but by now she’s a blond.”

What D.B. Cooper did was hijack a plane. It had just taken off from Portland, Ore. At Seattle, he forced airline officials to bring him four parachutes and $200,000 in $20 bills. In the air again, somewhere around here, high over the cedars and the firs and the hemlocks that cover the Cascade Mountains, he strapped on two of the parachutes, and he jumped out. He disappeared. Vanished. No ripped rigging. No bones. Nothing.

In this undated file photo, a helicopter takes off from search headquarters to scour the area where hijacker Dan Cooper might have parachuted into in Woodland, Wash.

(Associated Press)

That was 25 years ago on Thanksgiving eve. People have found only two things in the wilderness to show that this hijacking ever happened: a placard that blew off the back door of the plane when he opened it, and money–a few bundles of $20 bills with serial numbers that match the loot. These prove that he died, some say. Others say no, he simply dropped some of the dough. Too bad, they add, not unkindly.

To many, D.B. Cooper is a folk hero. Nobody else in America has ever hijacked a commercial airliner for money and never been caught. He has become a legend, a new Jesse James, Butch Cassidy, Billy the Kid. Books have been written about him, a play staged, a movie filmed. He is the inspiration for ballads and bumper stickers and T-shirts and coffee mugs. Saloons across the country adopt his name and invite people to “drop in on us sometime.”

Every year, on the weekend after Thanksgiving, his fans gather here at the Ariel Store and Tavern, in this mountain town of 50 people, 35 miles north of the Oregon state line. This year they are 500 strong, and they come from as far away as Brooklyn, N.Y., and Birmingham, Ala., and even Seward, Alaska. Their appraisals of D.B. Cooper and what he did offer a case study in how Americans create mythic figures and the ways in which they worship them.

Some stand and read the walls in the southeast corner of the bar, which are covered with newspaper accounts of D.B. Cooper’s exploit. They scrawl their names on a white parachute canopy spread across the front porch. They eat D.B. Cooper stew and D.B. Cooper sausages. They shake their heads at a photograph of a headstone someone put up in a front yard across the Lewis River. “Here Lies D.B. Cooper,” it says. “We spent your money wisely.”

The headstone, regardless of its attempt at humor, runs contrary to an article of faith: that D.B. Cooper is very much alive and enjoying a modest and well-deserved decadence. To his fans, the headstone shows an impertinence that borders on the unseemly. They are relieved to learn that the stone and an oval of smaller rocks outlining a faux grave were judged in bad taste and that the attempted humorist finally removed them.

Mostly, though, they party. For much of Saturday and often into Sunday they holler and dance and set off roaring fireworks. Each explosion sends clouds of white smoke billowing into a light rain and then up through the trees. They draw for prizes, mainly D.B. Cooper T-shirts, and they stage a D.B. Cooper look-alike contest. One year the winner was a basset hound in D.B. Cooper’s trademark disguise: sunglasses.

This year the contest is hard-fought. Dona Elliott, 59, owns this combination country store and saloon, built in 1929 of clapboard and shingles, uphill from the river and hard by a narrow woodland road. She holds one hand over a young man, then an older man, both in sunglasses; then a man with a $20 bill pasted on his forehead; then a couple wearing torn clothes and parachute rigging with fir twigs snagged in the straps.

By hooting and yelling and applauding, the crowd decides. Jim Rainbow, 48, a Susanville, Calif., mortician, tangled in the rigging and the twigs, is here with his wife for their 10th anniversary. He runs second. The older man in sunglasses, Eldon Heller, 70, a retired contractor from Washougal, Wash., wins by a hair. He thinks for a minute about D.B. Cooper’s current age and then smiles. “I’m just about right, huh?”

The crowd cheers again, and the band, called the Enlightened Rogues, swings through another verse about “good women who drink with the boys.” Dona Elliott is short, soft-spoken and has wavy brown hair, but she has been known to throw unruly drunks out the front door bodily and by herself. She pronounces the event a good one.

She knows that celebrating D.B. Cooper angers pilots, the airlines and especially Ralph Himmelsbach, 71, a retired FBI agent who spent the last eight years of his career trying to find him. He has written the most authoritative book about the hijacking, called “NORJAK: the Investigation of D.B. Cooper.”

Himmelsbach, who code-named the case NORJAK when he was still with the agency, spends D.B. Cooper Day at his home in Redmond, Ore. To him, Cooper is “a bastard,” nothing more than a “sleazy, rotten criminal who jeopardized the lives of more than 40 people for money.”

“That’s not heroic,” he declares, and he means it. “It’s selfish, dangerous and antisocial. I have no admiration for him at all. He’s not at all admirable. He’s just stupid and greedy.”

Elliott understands. She knows why people on the hijacked plane, for instance, might not appreciate what goes on here. But she wishes that Himmelsbach would come up anyway.

Himmelsbach, for his part, says: “I know I wouldn’t be welcome there.”

“Oh, sure he would!” Elliott responds. She chuckles. “He’s chicken.”

Thanksgiving Eve 1971

As people here tell and retell the tale of D.B. Cooper and his feat, they praise Himmelsbach’s book as the most thorough.

Folklore has entwined itself around the story like heavy brush. But from Himmelsbach’s account and news reports at the time, this much can be said:

Shortly before 2 p.m. on Nov. 24, 1971, a man stepped out of a blowing rain at the airport in Portland, Ore., and walked to the Northwest Orient Airlines ticket counter. He asked for a seat on the next flight to Seattle.

The man was middle-aged, pleasant. He stood nearly 6 feet tall. He had olive skin, dark brown eyes and dark hair. It was cut short, neatly trimmed. He wore a lightweight black raincoat and loafers, a dark business suit, a crisp white shirt, a narrow black tie and a pearl stick-pin.

He had no luggage to check. In his left hand, he carried an attache case.

Returning?

“No,” the man replied.

His name?

“Dan Cooper.”

The fare was $20. He placed a $20 bill on the counter.

Ticket in hand, he walked to Gate 52, unhindered at the time by X-ray machines or metal detectors. As he walked, he slipped on a pair of dark glasses.

Departure was scheduled for 2:50 p.m. He waited and smoked a cigarette, a filter-tip Raleigh. Finally a gate agent called Flight 305 for Seattle. Dan Cooper shuffled into line. He handed his ticket envelope to the agent, who took it and checked off his name on a boarding list, then handed back the envelope and his boarding pass.

Cooper stepped onto the plane. It was a jet, a Boeing 727. It had a pilot, a co-pilot and a flight engineer. It had three flight attendants, and it offered nearly 100 seats. But it was less than half full. Besides himself, there were only 36 passengers. He walked to an empty row in back and sat in seat 18C. But he did not take off his sunglasses or his raincoat.

The plane began to taxi. A flight attendant, Florence Schaffner, took a seat nearby. She asked him to put his attache case beneath the seat in front of him.

She settled in for the roll-out and climb.

He handed her a note.

It was Thanksgiving, and he was away from home, and she was attractive. She thought that he was proposing something indiscreet. So she paid no attention and put the note aside.

“Miss,” he said, “you’d better look at that note.”

He paused. “I have a bomb.”

To Jim Lissick, 69, of South St. Paul, Minn., who is here at the Ariel Store and Tavern to celebrate with a son and a daughter, such good manners are a sign that Cooper is a gentleman. “He was a caring person,” Lissick says, then catches himself. “Still is.”

Certainly, Lissick says, people such as D.B. Cooper can be tough and extremely demanding. But history, he says, is full of hard cases who were unfailingly polite to women and always kind to children. All of this, he adds, simply becomes part of the mythology that grows up around them.

Mike Holliday, 40, agrees. He has lived in this area since the days when loggers came to the Ariel Store and Tavern after work, hung up their wet clothes to dry and sat around the potbellied stove in their long johns drinking beer and telling stories.

To him, D.B. Cooper shows the unflappable cool of a modern Robin Hood. “But I doubt like hell that he is the kind of guy who gives money away.”

3 p.m.

Florence Schaffner glanced at the man’s note. It was neat, clear. She looked at the man’s face. He was not joking.

The note specified his demands. Take it up to the captain, he ordered, and then bring it back with his response. The man repeated: Return the note.

She hurried to the cockpit and gave the note to Captain William Scott and First Officer Bill Rataczak. They radioed that Flight 305 was being hijacked: A man with a bomb wants $200,000 in negotiable bills, a money sack and a pair of back-pack parachutes.

Part of the money that was paid to legendary hijacker D.B. Cooper in 1971 is shown during an F.B.I. news conference, Feb. 12, 1980, where it was announced that several thousand dollars was found 5 miles northwest of Vancouver, Wash., by Howard and Patricia Ingram and their 8-year-old son Brian on Feb. 10.

(Eric Risberg / Associated Press)

Schaffner returned to Dan Cooper with his note. He opened his attache case. She saw red cylinders, a battery and wires. She hurried back to the cockpit and described the contents to Scott and Rataczak. They radioed authorities on the ground: It looks like dynamite.

Cooperate, responded Northwest Airlines headquarters in Minneapolis, and try not to alarm the passengers. By now Flight 305 was over Seattle, but Cooper refused to let it land until the money and the parachutes were ready. Scott told the passengers that the plane had a mechanical problem requiring it to circle and burn off fuel. The flight attendants served drinks. Cooper had a bourbon and water. He paid with a $20 bill.

Tina Mucklow, another of the flight attendants, sat down next to him. She was easygoing, pretty and wore her hair long and flowing. They developed a rapport. He smoked another Raleigh. She lit it for him so he could keep both hands on his briefcase. “He wasn’t nervous,” she recalled later. “He seemed rather nice. He was never cruel or nasty. He was thoughtful and calm.”

Now Cooper wanted two more parachutes, for a total of four–two front packs and two backpacks. Four meant that he might jump with a hostage, and this signaled: Do not tamper with the gear. The Air Force offered two. But Cooper demanded civilian models. Civilian parachutes meant that he might free-fall away from the flight path before pulling the rip cord, and this signaled: A tail plane will be useless.

As Flight 305 circled over Seattle, airline officials, FBI agents and Seattle police scrambled to get the money that Dan Cooper was demanding. They rounded up $20 bills from several banks. Twenties would be easy to pass and would signal cooperation. It took time, but they found enough–10,000 of them. The bills weighed 21 pounds and filled a white cotton sack. The FBI microfilmed every one.

Cooper grew impatient. He ordered another bourbon and water. Then he demanded that a truck meet the plane and refill it with fuel when it landed in Seattle. He said he would release all passengers, but he wanted meals brought on board for the crew.

A skydiving school finally came up with four civilian parachutes. In a mistake that the rigger would not discover until later, they included a dummy chute that would not open.

At 5:39 p.m., a message went by radio up to Flight 305. “Everything is ready for your arrival.”

Captain Scott eased the jet onto runway 16R. He taxied to a corner of the airfield. “He says to get that stuff out here right now.”

A fuel truck drove over.

Dan Cooper sent Tina Mucklow out to get the money and the parachutes.

Then he let the passengers go.

It is commonly held in Ariel that all of this demonstrates beyond the silly doubt of any pinch-nosed naysayer exactly how brilliant D.B. Cooper really is.

“He pulls it all off pretty good,” says Steve Forney, 40, of Kelso, Wash., a biker who parks his 1979 Harley shovelhead in a special spot at the door that Dona Elliott reserves for motorcycles.

A friend, Jim Smith, 49, of Castle Rock, Wash., who pulls up on a 1987 Harley blockhead, wipes the rain off his leather jacket. He declares with approval:

“D.B. Cooper is one smart outlaw.”

6 p.m.

Arguably, ground crews were less smart. The first fuel truck they sent out to the plane had a vapor lock. The second ran dry. Finally a third topped off the tanks.

Inside the plane, Cooper announced that he wanted to go to Mexico City, and he wanted to fly in a certain way: with the landing gear down, the wing flaps down and the aft air-stairs down.

Flaps?

“Fifteen degrees,” Cooper said, with precision.

This meant that he knew the rear stairway on a 727 could be lowered in flight. It also meant that he knew flying with the gear and the flaps down would slow the plane, and he knew how far the flaps could be lowered to do it safely.

He gave another order: Stay below 10,000 feet.

This meant that he knew flying any higher with the aft door open would be risky. At 10,000 feet, the outside air had enough oxygen in it to make it safe to breathe. But any higher it did not.

First Officer Bill Rataczak figured that flying this way would burn a lot of fuel. By his calculation the plane would have a range of only 1,000 miles. Mexico City was 2,200 miles away.

This called for refueling stops on the way. Cooper agreed that one would be Reno, Nev.

A hijacked Northwest Airlines jetliner is seen in this Nov. 25, 1971 file photo as it sits on a runway for refueling at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, Nov. 25, 1971, Seattle.

(Associated Press)

He freed attendants Alice Hancock and Florence Schaffner but kept Tina Mucklow seated next to him. At 7:37 p.m., Flight 305 was back in the air.

Cooper told Mucklow to go up to the cockpit and pull the first-class curtain closed behind her. She glanced back once. He was cutting cord from one of the parachutes and tying the money bag to his waist.

At 7:42 p.m. Captain Scott saw a cockpit light indicating that the aft stairs were down.

The plane leveled off at 10,000 feet and cruised at 196 mph. Outside it was dark, stormy and 7 degrees below zero. Now First Officer Rataczak’s watch showed almost 8 p.m.

“Everything OK back there?” he asked on the intercom. “Anything we can do for you?”

Finally a light showed that the stairs were fully extended.

“No!” Cooper replied.

At 8:12 p.m., the nose of the plane curtsied, and its instruments showed a small bump in cabin pressure. This meant that the tail had suddenly gotten lighter and that the stairs had bounced up and into the plane and then dropped down again.

Dan Cooper had jumped.

Around the potbellied stove in Ariel, two airline employees marvel at D.B. Cooper’s knowledge.

Phil Brooks, 34, of Speedway, Ind., an aircraft dispatcher, thinks that Cooper either was involved with an airline or did his homework very well.

“He was intelligent and gutsy,” Brooks says. “That tells me he had a good background, maybe Special Forces or intelligence. He didn’t work down at the carwash. And he was a major stud; he had the guts to jump out of an airplane at night in the winter.”

Brooks proudly shows off a Cooper Vane, a device named after D.B. Cooper, which locks aft air-stairs from the outside during flight. It was installed on all 727s after the hijacking to prevent further Cooper capers. Years later, Brooks found the hijacked jet in a Mississippi scrap yard. He recovered the Cooper Vane from the Cooper plane.

With Brooks is Dan Gradwohl, 30, a first officer on 727s for Ryan International Airlines, a charter service. “Cooper knew something about the 727,” Gradwohl says, “or he had to have talked to somebody and learned about it.

“He beat the system,” Gradwohl points out, and spectacularly so. “If D.B. Cooper would have simply robbed a bank, he wouldn’t be a legend.

“But he robbed several banks, and then he parachuted out of a plane.”

When Flight 305 landed in Reno, the FBI found two parachutes, the butts of eight filter-tip Raleighs and 66 fingerprints. None matched prints in the FBI files.

The next day in Seattle, the parachute rigger realized his mistake. Cooper had jumped with a good parachute and a backup that would not open.

At one point, a reporter for United Press International spotted FBI agents at the Portland police station and asked a clerk what they were doing.

“They’re looking for a guy named Cooper,” the clerk replied. “D.B. Cooper.”

The reporter phoned in his information. While it was a fact that agents were checking out a man named D.B. Cooper, they cleared him almost immediately.

But the initials stuck.

Dan Cooper entered history–and folklore–with the wrong name.

The only significant evidence that Ralph Himmelsbach ever processed was the $5,800, found on a Columbia River sandbar by Brian Ingram, 8, of Vancouver, Wash., while he was picnicking with his family. Himmelsbach matched the $20 bills to Cooper’s loot.

Will D.B. Cooper ever be located?

“I doubt it,” Himmelsbach says.

Officially, though, the FBI case against Dan Cooper is not closed. Ray Lauer, an agency spokesman in Seattle, says:

“We’re still trying to find the guy.”

Researchers Paul Singleton, Julia Franco and Steve Tice contributed to this story.

Sept. 1 (UPI) — Russia is suspected of interfering with the Global Positioning System of a jet carrying European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the European Union said Monday

She was in a chartered jet Sunday headed from Poland to southern Bulgaria as part of a tour of eastern EU countries, including “front line” states of Latvia, Finland, Estonia, Poland, Lithuania and Romania bordering Russia and Belarus. She was expected to discuss defense readiness as part of the tour.

Bulgaria borders Romania and is 1,000 miles from western Russia.

Despite no functional GPS, the plane landed safely at its intended airport in Plovdiv, Bulgaria, though pilots relied on paper maps, the Financial Times reported.

Von der Leyen, accompanied by Bulgarian Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov, visited an arms producer in Sopot.

On Monday, she traveled to Lithuania and Romania.

“We have received information from the Bulgarian authorities that they suspect that this was due to blatant interference by Russia,” Arianna Podesta, deputy spokesperson of the commission, said in a statement obtained by Politico.

“This incident underlines the urgency of the president’s current trip to frontline member states, where she has seen firsthand the everyday threats from Russia and its proxies.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Bulgaria’s information was “incorrect.”

Bulgaria’s government explained how the plane landed at the airport.

“Air Traffic Services immediately proposed an alternative landing approach using ground-based navigation aids [Instrument Landing System],” the Bulgarian government said in a news release. “The ground-based navigation aids used in Bulgaria are independent of GPS systems. We further clarify that there was no need to divert the flight.”

Without correct GPS information, there is a risk of colliding with other planes or unintentionally flying into the ground, water or other object.

“Threats and intimidation are a regular component of Russia’s hostile actions,” the European Commission said, adding they would “ramp up our defense capabilities and support for Ukraine.”

Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, GPS jamming has worsened, Cyrille Rosay, a senior cybersecurity expert at the European Union Aviation Safety Agency, told the BBC.

The BBC reported no proven link has yet been established between Russia and GPS jamming.

Bulgaria, which was a satellite state in the Soviet Union with Russia until the collapse in 1989, has had a “noticeable increase” in GPS incidents, the nation’s Air Traffic Services Authority said.

In March 2024, a British air force plane carrying Defense Secretary Grant Shapps had its GPS signal jammed while flying close to Russia’s Kaliningrad between Poland and Lithuania. Legitimate signals are replaced with fake ones, indicating an incorrect location.

“They have gone from isolated incidents to being normalized,” Keir Giles, a senior consulting fellow at Chatham House’s Russia and Eurasia Program, told the BBC. “No one has been willing or able” to convince Moscow to stop an expanding “campaign of interference.”

Airlines operating around the Baltic coast in the last few years in three countries — Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia — have reported tens of thousands of jamming incidents.

Over the past week, as the summer holidays draw to an inevitable close and the return to work and school looms, searches for ‘how to get over jet lag’ have risen by more than 400%

A flight attendant has suggested that passengers switch on one setting to maximise their chances of beating jet lag.

Returning from summer holidays can feel less than fun when jet lag hits. Over the past week, as the summer holidays draw to an inevitable close and the return to work and school looms, searches for ‘how to get over jet lag’ have risen by more than 400%.

A British Airways flight attendant, who spoke on condition of anonymity, has shared her tips for overcoming the worst of the timezone-based ailment. Here are her top techniques:

READ MORE: Europe’s ‘prettiest’ country that costs ‘a fraction’ of Spain holidayREAD MORE: Tourists abandoning iconic UK seaside town as locals say ‘it shows’

1. Adjust your phone’s blue light settings

One of the primary causes of jet lag is the disruption of your body’s natural sleep-wake cycle. To counteract this, change the setting on your phone to automatically switch off blue light after a certain time. Blue light, similar to natural daylight, tricks your eyes into staying awake, hindering your ability to wind down to a restful sleep.

2. Wear sunglasses upon arrival

If your destination is ahead of your body’s time zone, wearing sunglasses upon arrival can be a clever hack to block out excessive daylight exposure. Flight crews always suggest donning sunglasses during your journey from the airport to your accommodation to help your body adjust to the local time and ease into a more relaxed state without straining your eyes.

3. Gradually adjust your sleep schedule

When travelling east, it is often the time difference that presents the most significant challenge for combating jet lag. To prepare your body for the shift, adopt a gradual approach. Start adjusting your sleep schedule one week before your trip by going to bed an hour earlier each night. This pre-emptive step will make the time adjustment smoother and help you feel more refreshed upon arrival.

4. Nourish with light snacks

During instances when you need to stay awake a little longer, especially when the clocks go back, we recommend having a light snack. Some travellers might be hesitant to eat during the nighttime of their home country, but it’s important to remember that food is fuel. A light snack can provide a much-needed energy boost and keep you alert during extended periods of wakefulness.

5. Brush your teeth

A common tip among flight crews is to brush your teeth. The mint in the toothpaste can provide an invigorating sensation, giving you a quick burst of energy and temporarily fighting off fatigue.

6. Gel eye patches for revived eyes

Travelling can take a toll on your eyes, leaving them feeling tired and dehydrated. Flight attendants swear by gel eye patches as an effective remedy. These patches combat tired eyes and help rehydrate the delicate skin around the eyes, leaving you looking and feeling refreshed. You can find some great gel eye patches on Cult Beauty.

7. Take short naps strategically

Napping can be tempting, especially if you are feeling fatigued after a long flight. However, taking long naps or napping at the wrong time can disrupt your sleep schedule even further, so as soon as you arrive, adjust to the local time. And opt for short power naps (20-30 mins) to recharge without interfering with your nighttime sleep.

A unique aerial transport operation had been unfolding in the Pacific Northwest this week. The U.S. Marine Corps was prepared to sling-load a retired U.S. Coast Guard HU-25 Guardian jet (based on the French Dassault Falcon 20 business jet) from Astoria, Oregon, to Tillamook, Oregon, under the U.S. military’s most powerful helicopter — the new CH-53K King Stallion. The 50-mile journey would have delivered the retired jet from the Coast Guard Air Station in Astoria to the Tillamook Air Museum for final display. Unfortunately, this will not happen after the HU-25 was damaged during a sling-load test, but at least the jet technically took to the skies, however briefly, one last time.

The news of the aborted mission came today from the great folks from Port of Astoria Regional Airport. Marines had placed straps around the HU-25, and the CH-53K lifted it into the air to make sure the load would hold up for the 50-mile flight. Apparently, once the jet was sat back down on the tarmac, it became clear that the lift had damaged its structure significantly and it would no longer be able to make the flight to the museum. The images below show the crumpled wing root area from the test lift.

The plan was for the CH-53K and an MV-22 Osprey, both from VMX-1, the USMC’s premier air combat test and development unit, which you can read all about in our previous feature here, to both make the flight from Astoria to Tillamook, along with a Coast Guard MH-60T Jayhawk, a handful of which are based at Astoria.

The operation was seen as a valuable training and test event for the USMC, which has to do these types of recoveries both in peacetime and especially during a conflict. For a fight in the Pacific, being able to rapidly pluck stricken aircraft from remote locales will be a critical capability on many levels, for instance. The three-engined CH-53K, which just entered service in 2022, is the undisputed heavy-lift king within the U.S. military’s stable.

The HU-25 entered service with the USCG in 1983 and served for over three decades, doing everything from search and rescue to drug interdiction missions. Coast Guard Air Station Astoria was one of the type’s bases. The HU-25 in question has been at the installation since its retirement over a decade ago.

It isn’t clear if the lift will be reattempted anytime in the future. It’s possible the aircraft could be partially disassembled and delivered via roadway instead.

We will keep you updated if new info about the HU-25 airlift mission emerges.

Contact the author: [email protected]

The Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) has shared new insights with TWZ into its proposal to replace the U.S. Navy’s T-45 Goshawk jet trainers. The company announced yesterday that it was putting forward its twin-engine Freedom jet, the only clean-sheet design currently known to be in the running, to meet the Navy’s future Undergraduate Jet Training System (UJTS) needs.

Our Jamie Hunter had a chance to talk in depth about the Freedom jet with Ray “Fitz” Fitzgerald, Senior Vice President of Strategy and Technology at SNC, and Derek Hess, Vice President of Strategy at SNC, at the Tailhook Association’s main annual symposium, which kicked off yesterday.

As part of its rollout yesterday, SNC had already highlighted the Freedom jet’s 16,000-hour airframe life and ability to perform 35,000 touch-and-goes and/or Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) landings in that time, which we will come back to later on. The company also says Freedom has a 40-percent lower lifecycle cost than the existing T-45, as well as the ability to fly 30- to 40-percent longer sorties. In terms of performance, SNC says the jet is “representative” of 4th and 5th generation types, being able to pull down to -3 and up to +8 Gs, and reach an angle of attack up to 27 degrees.

“The advantages that we’re bringing to the table is that it’s a clean sheet design, which means that we are tailoring this exactly to the Navy’s needs. So, we talk about, train like you fight, zero compromises,” Fitzgerald said. “Every aircraft in the world has its compromises, but the Navy is special.”

“So, the three things that we’re trying to get across as a value proposition for the Navy, number one is over the entire life cycle of the of the aircraft, the entire life of the aircraft, is a significant cost savings,” he explained. “This plane was designed around two engines. These two engines have 20 million hours of flight time on them, well sustained out there in the world.”

The Freedom jet is designed around a pair of Williams FJ44-4M turbofan engines. FJ44 variants are in widespread use globally, especially on business jets, such as members of the popular Cessna Citation family. Having two engines also offers an additional margin of safety over single-engine types. The Navy’s existing T-45 jet trainer is notably a single-engine aircraft.

The “number two value proposition is that we are the only competitor right now, and this is very important, that can do field carrier landing practice, FCLP-to-touchdown,” he added. “Very important for the Navy. You have to train like you fight. And every time you land on an aircraft carrier, you’re flying it into the deck. You’re not flaring or pulling throttles back. FCLP-to-touchdown is critical.”

FCLP landings, which are part of the Navy’s current curriculum for training naval aviators, are conducted at bases on land, but are structured to mimic as closely as possible the experience of touching down on a real carrier. In March, the Navy publicly released new requirements for the UJTS effort, which axed the need for its future jet trainers to be capable of performing FCLP training. Years ago now, the service had already announced that it was eliminating the requirement for the jets to be able to actually land on or take off from carriers, as T-45s do now. If the Navy does not reverse course, these controversial changes are set to fundamentally alter how the service trains new naval aviators. They may not see a carrier until they reach the Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) in charge of the aircraft type they have been assigned to fly.

SNC’s Fitzgerald also took the time to point out here that the 16,000-hour airframe life SNC says the Freedom jet will offer is double the Navy’s current stated requirements for UJTS.

“The third point in the value [proposition] is the fact that when we designed this, and [if] we are selected by the Navy, we are handing the Navy the entire digital package for this aircraft,” he continued. “We want to have the ability to compete in the future for future changes, but the Navy will have the data. They can do upgrades, modifications, whatever. They’re going to own it [the data rights] on onset.”

Fitzgerald claimed that this is the first time in the history of U.S. defense contracting where an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) has offered this level of data rights, and described it as an “absolute game-changer.”

The core elements of SNC’s proposal are reflected in the basic design of the Freedom jet.

“I think it is a natural tendency to go, ‘how do you replace the T-45?’ That’s not the question we had ourselves,” Hess, the Vice President of Strategy at SNC, said. “We pride ourselves on delivering, solving tough problems for our customers, in this case, the U.S. Navy. So what we designed this aircraft around is better quality training for UJTS at a lower lifecycle cost than they’re currently paying.”

“The landing gear is a dead giveaway that this was always envisioned for the naval training mission,” he continued. For “FCLPs, using this trailing link landing gear is a huge design cycle.”

A trailing link or trailing arm landing gear is specifically designed to help smooth the impact of landing and/or operating from rougher fields.

One of “the other things that we did was put a cockpit in this that is a thoroughly modern cockpit that can display things like an F-35 or an F-18,” Hess continued. “And then we gave it an eight G capable platform and a 27 degree high AOA [angle of attack] maneuvering capability. And we did that because we just avoided the supersonic and transonic region.”

“If you try and do something that gets up into that transonic region, you compromise on what your wing is, and therefore you can’t get the performance,” he explained. “And so that’s why you need a giant engine that pushes you through the drag rise of what a normal, typical fighter wing is. This is a much higher aspect wing, and we get the G onset rate, the sustained turn rates, and maneuvers that you need to train young men and women to become naval fighter pilots.”

“So all of the modeling that we have done in the MBSE [model-based systems engineering] and fluid dynamics world has been borne out by our wind tunnel testing and all those kinds of things. And we’re always a degree or two conservative,” Hess also said. “For example, this is a 32-degree angle of attack capability that we tame down to 27 degrees to make sure that it has level one handling qualities. The other thing is, this aircraft, this wing, builds all the lift through conventional means. Where you have other aircraft that have large chines on them, and that is what you need when you get into the transonic region, because your wing can’t produce that lift, so you do vortex lift over those large chines, and that’s, frankly, where you end up with problems in handling qualities, is because you can’t control the shedding of the vortices and things of that nature.”

“And it becomes a watershed there, right? So when you start with the chines, that the drag coefficient on that becomes huge, which means you need a bigger motor to dig that out, which means higher fuel – you know, just boom, boom, boom. It just bespoke,” Fitzgerald also interjected. “We started with the motor, went with the wing, went with the training capability up front, and really thought this through.”

In addition to its core shaping, Freedom’s wing will feature leading-edge slats and flaperons, as well.

Hess and Fitzgerald were responding here to a specific question about the use of digital modeling in the Freedom’s design. While digital engineering has proven to be useful across the aerospace industry, there has been growing skepticism about the full extent of the benefits it offers in recent years. Boeing’s T-7A Redhawk jet trainer for the U.S. Air Force had been a notable poster child for digital engineering and design tools, but developmental troubles with that aircraft have added to a growing view that the technologies are not as revolutionary as many had hoped. A navalized version of the T-7 is also a contender to replace the Navy’s T-45s.

“I really think it is important to say you don’t need a fighter to learn how to fly a fighter,” Hess added. “You need something that gives you all the tools to practice everything you want to and then move the graduates who are more prepared to get into those gray jets after graduating in this airplane.”

“You can complete a lot more training in this jet at a much lower cost per hour,” Fitzgerald, the SNC Senior Vice President of Strategy and Technology, further noted. “And then as you step into the fleet, you’re not having to burn the very exquisite, expensive aircraft to do very mundane training tasks.”

It is important to reiterate here that SNC’s proposal, overall, stands in contrast with the Navy’s currently stated requirements, especially when it comes to the matter of FCLP capability. The requirements changes, which have notably come on the back of Navy investments in virtualized training and automated carrier landing capabilities like Magic Carpet, have significantly opened the field offerings based on existing land-based jet trainer designs. In addition to Boeing’s navalized T-7, Lockheed Martin and Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) have been offering the TF-50N, while Textron and Leonardo are pitching what is now branded as the Beechcraft M-346N. Both of those aircraft are based on in-production designs with significant global user bases already.

“You want … your – I call it your lizard brain – to be trained to do the things you are going to do when things go south on you, because the way a [former Air Force pilot] like me lands an airplane is 180 degrees different than a carrier guy,” Hess said in talking about why SNC has made FCLP capability a focus of its proposal. “I touch down, go to idle. He touches down, slams down, goes to MIL [maximum non-afterburner thrust], and is ready to take off again.”

“This is why FCLPs are so important,” Fitzgerlad, a former naval aviator himself, added. “On that dark, stormy night, and everything’s just going bad, you rely on muscle memory, right? So when you think about muscle memory, as a carrier aviator, you’re on speed, so you’re on the right AOA, so the hook and the gear are the right AOA to trap, and everything hits at the same time. If I’m at a slow AOA, it means my nose is up, which means the hook grabs first and slams you down. You can break a jet like that. If I’m at a fast AOA, the nose is lower, hook is up, you skip across, and you go flying again, which is not good either.”

“So every single time we’re doing an FCLP, as soon as you fly into the deck, you crash into that deck, he [the Air Force pilot] goes idle, and [says] ‘I want a nice flare, soft thing.’ We [naval aviators] fly it into the deck, and as soon as we touch it, it’s full power, 180 out,” he continued. “So that muscle memory, I mean, it’s what will save lives.”

SNC’s Hess also argued that if the Navy’s future jet trainers do not allow for FCLP landings, it will put additional more onus on FRSs and operational units to do that training. That, in turn, could take time away from other priorities and increase wear and tear on the Navy’s fighter fleets.

In addition, while SNC is a firmly established name when it comes to the special mission aircraft conversion and modification business, especially for U.S. government customers, Freedom is its only foray to date into actually building an aircraft from scratch. The jet first emerged from a partnership with Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI, and also abbreviated TUSAS in Turkish), but SNC has been working on it independently for some years now.

“The Navy hasn’t really put out hard requirements yet. We’re expecting a draft RFP [request for proposals] soon, this fall, with a hard RFP by winter. That’s the latest we’ve heard from the Navy,” Fitzgerald said. “I think they’re still trying to figure out what their hard requirements are, which is why we’re here, trying to say, ‘Hey, make sure the aperture is open enough so that we can compete,’ because that’s what we want to do. That’s all we’re asking for is a shot at the table.”

Altogether, the Navy’s forthcoming UJTS competition is shaping up to be hotly contested, as well as an important watershed moment for how the service trains new naval aviators going forward.

Contact the author: [email protected]

FOOTBALL isn’t just about goals and ­trophies — it’s about people.

After all, clubs don’t make anything, don’t manufacture anything; all our assets are people.

3

3

Dealing with people is a key part of my job as West Ham CEO. And dealing with a wantaway player is one of the toughest jobs in football.

We had our own Alexander Isak moment at West Ham in 2017 when Dimitri Payet wanted out… and the whole club felt it.

One day he just packed his bags, went to the airport and took a flight to Marseille.

That was despite the fact we told him we did not want him to leave, expected him to honour his contract and had done no deal with Olympique de Marseille for him to be transferred there.

We loved him, our supporters loved him, but he didn’t love us back and that’s hard to take.

The fans were heartbroken, the dressing room unsettled and every training session turned into a circus.

That’s the reality when a star man downs tools. The ripple effect is huge.

The press were camped outside, questions wouldn’t stop and the tension was obvious.

BEST ONLINE CASINOS – TOP SITES IN THE UK

I look at Newcastle’s situation with Isak and genuinely sympathise.
He’s a top striker, adored by the Toon Army, but once a player has his head turned, it changes everything.

Suddenly, the focus isn’t on football any more — it’s on one man’s future.

The hard truth is you can’t make an unhappy player happy. But that doesn’t mean you roll over.

The club has to stay strong, because it’s bigger than any one player.
Fans rightly expect loyalty, but as club executives, we have to protect the value of the asset and the pride in the badge.

With Payet, we stood firm. We made sure West Ham got the right deal. It hurt at the time, but the club came out stronger.

Newcastle will be thinking the same way. They will fight to keep Isak if they can, but if the moment comes where he has to go, they’ll make sure it’s on their terms — not his.

That’s exactly how it should be. Players come and go. Clubs don’t. That’s the heartbeat we’re all here to protect.

Isak has not been an isolated case — but the dynamics don’t change much. Remember Pierre van Hooijdonk ­refusing to play at Nottingham Forest?

Isak to Liverpool transfer saga timeline

• JANUARY: First links to Liverpool emerge

• FEBRUARY: £150million record fee mooted

• MARCH: Isak denies Newcastle contract talk

• APRIL: Eddie Howe hails Isak as “very professional.”

• MAY: Howe insists Isak will not be sold
• Last match in Newcastle shirt

• JUNE: Transfer links to Liverpool heat up

• JULY: Flies with Newcastle for Austria training camp
• Left out of Celtic friendly
• Liverpool hijack Toon’s Hugo Ekitike deal after making Isak enquiry
• Doesn’t travel for pre-season tour of Singapore and South Korea, citing injury

• AUGUST: Training by himself at Newcastle
• Liverpool have £110m bid rejected
• Isak stops training and goes on strike
• Moves out of his apartment
• Releases angry statement blasting ‘trust has been lost’
• Newcastle respond by insisting he won’t be sold unless it benefits club

And what about William Gallas, Peter Odemwingie, ­Carlos Tevez, Saido Berahino and even Cristiano Ronaldo’s ill-fated decision to return to Manchester United?

For a CEO, the challenge is balancing three things: the expectations, hopes and dreams of the supporters, the manager’s needs, and the dignity of the badge.

It’s not about forcing anyone to stay against their will. Unhappy players rarely, if ever, perform at their peak.

But it’s also not about rolling over at the first sign of discontent. The club’s interests must come first.

That means securing fair value, protecting the integrity of the squad and making sure supporters know their loyalty is matched in the boardroom.

In Payet’s case, we stood firm until the right solution came and the player moved. The lesson was that while football is very emotional, decisions must be rational.

Players come and go but, West Ham, like every great club, remains. That’s what we protect every single day.

Newcastle have been a football club for 144 years. And they will be around a lot longer than any one footballer.

3

TRANSFER NEWS LIVE – KEEP UP WITH ALL THE LATEST FROM A BUSY SUMMER WINDOW

The Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) has rolled out a new pitch for a successor to the Navy’s T-45 Goshawk jet trainers. Interestingly, SNC’s proposal focuses heavily on the ability of its clean-sheet twin-engined Freedom jet design to meet certain carrier training requirements that the Navy has axed from its T-45 replacement plans.

SNC made a formal announcement about putting the Freedom jet forward for the Navy’s forthcoming Undergraduate Jet Training System (UJTS) competition today, around the Tailhook Association’s main annual symposium, at which TWZ is in attendance. SNC has been working on the Freedom design in cooperation with Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI, and also abbreviated TUSAS in Turkish) for years now. Freedom was previously presented as a contender for the U.S. Force’s T-X trainer requirements, a competition Boeing won with what became the T-7A Redhawk. SNC has also teased the aircraft as a possible T-45 replacement in the past. TAI is not mentioned in the current pitch to the Navy.

The Navy currently has just under 200 T-45Cs in service, which are used to train future Navy and Marine aviators. The original T-45A variant, a carrier-based derivative of the British Aerospace (subsequently BAE Systems) Hawk jet trainer, began entering Navy service in 1991. The C model fleet includes a mixture of new-production and upgraded A-model jets with new avionics and glass cockpits. Other upgrades have been added to the jets over the years, as well. A proposed land-based T-45B was never produced.

“SNC’s Freedom Family of Training Systems” is “the only training aircraft capable of carrier touch-and-go and Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) to touchdown with a 16,000 hour airframe life,” a product card handed out at the Tailhook Association symposium declares. “Freedom delivers uncompromising training performance and significant lifecycle cost savings for the U.S. Navy training enterprise.”

Beyond the airframe life, SNC also asserts that Freedom offers a 40 percent lower lifecycle cost than the existing T-45, as well as the ability to perform 35,000 touch-and-goes and/or FCLP landings in that time – something we will come back to. The company also says the jet can fly 30 to 40 percent longer sorties and offers performance “representative” of 4th and 5th generation types, including the ability to pull down to -3 and up to +8 Gs, and reach an angle of attack up to 27 degrees.

“With a focus on efficient aero performance, low lifecycle cost, FCLPs to touchdown and UNS-ownership of Digital Technical Data Package (DPP) rights, Freedom stands ready to elevate naval aviation training standards by allowing the Navy to train the way you fight – zero compromise,” it adds.

“Its innovative design and robust reliability … eliminate the need for unplanned Service Life Extension Programs (SLEP),” according to a separate press release put out today. “Further, Freedom’s US Navy-owned digital design and modular open system architecture ensures that NAVAIR controls future upgrades for the life of the UJTS program including the capability for seamless third-party system integration.”

Of particular note here are the numerous references to touch-and-go and FCLP landings. The Navy’s current naval aviation training cycle utilizing the T-45 involves FCLP landings, which are conducted at airfields on land, but are structured in a way that “simulates, as near as practicable, the conditions encountered during carrier landing operations,” according to the service. This is then followed by touch-and-goes on an actual aircraft carrier, and then actual carrier landings and catapult departures.

In 2020, the Navy publicly disclosed that it was looking to axe requirements for the future UJTS aircraft to be capable of performing actual carrier landings and takeoffs. By 2023, the Navy had moved forward with that decision, but with FCLP and touch-and-go landings still part of the syllabus. Last year, it then emerged that the Navy was also looking to eliminate the FCLP requirement, cited as a key cost and schedule driver for UJTS, something that was confirmed when new requirements were publicly released in March. In the future, naval aviators may not see a carrier until they reach the Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) in charge of the aircraft type they have been assigned to fly.

Carrier-capable aircraft have to be designed in fundamentally different ways from their land-based counterparts, especially when it comes to the landing gear, which is typically heavily reinforced. Carrier landings are substantially harder on aircraft, overall, given the need to get down quickly in a very confined landing space that can be moving independently, coupled with the stress of catching an arrestor wire. Launch via catapult imparts additional stresses on airframes that land-based aircraft do not experience. Sustained operations at sea also require additional hardening against corrosion from saltwater exposure. All of this, in turn, can also make aircraft designed to operate from carriers more complex and expensive than similarly capable types that only need to fly from bases ashore.

Eliminating various carrier landing requirements immediately opens up a host of additional options for a new jet trainer, which could also be lower cost and lower risk. At the same time, there has already been criticism and concern for years now about the potential downstream impacts from cutting live training events from the naval aviator pipeline that cannot be fully recreated in any sort of virtualized environment.

SNC’s proposal taps into this entire debate and is presented as offering a hedge against the Navy changing course again in the future.

“It is clear to SNC that since early 2020, the Navy has been considering compromising its long-standing and important requirement to train with FCLP-to-landing,” the company told Aviation Week. “It is important to the Freedom Team that the U.S. Navy has an option to continue its essential FCLP training and avoid the unnecessary risk and cost associated with foregoing that requirement in the [Chief of Naval Air Training] syllabus.”

“As a clean-sheet design focused on the UJTS mission, the design features for FCLP-to-touchdown are minimal and affordable,” SNC further noted. “SNC believes FCLP-to-touchdown should be, at a minimum, a scored objective in the UJTS competition.”

Beyond the specifics of the Freedom design, it is certainly interesting to see a company openly buck a customer’s stated requirements. It does look set to make SNC’s proposal for UJTS distinct from the other competitors, which include a navalized version of the T-7 from Boeing, the TF-50N from Lockheed Martin and Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI), and the M-346N offered by Textron and Leonardo. The TF-50N is based on KAI’s T-50, a losing entrant in the Air Force’s T-X competition, but an increasingly popular type worldwide (including in its FA-50 light combat jet form). In July, Textron and Leonardo also unveiled a new pitch to the Navy involving the M-346N, but rebranded as a Beechcraft product. Beechcraft is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Textron.

Boeing’s T-7, the Lockheed/KAI TF-50N, and the Textron/Leonardo M-346N “are not designed to take that type of beating [from FCLP landings and other carrier training], and would require re-engineering to the point where some industry officials have said UJTS would become an engineering and manufacturing development program,” Aviation Week noted in a report last year.

It is worth noting here that the Navy had previously wanted to phase out the T-45 by 2018 and that the current UJTS plan has itself been delayed. The goal had been to kick off a formal competition last year and pick a winner in 2026. The UJTS contract award date is now projected to come sometime in 2027.

“SNC has worked to support the Navy for more than 40 years and the Freedom Trainer program represents the culmination of our decades of experience and unwavering commitment to safety and superiority for the U.S. Navy,” Jon Piatt, executive vice president of SNC, said in a statement today. “We are proud to leverage our deep expertise and innovative spirit to deliver a training solution that not only meets the Navy’s current needs but also anticipates future demands. This is a testament to our dedication to providing cutting-edge technology and superior performance for our nation’s sons and daughters who will train as naval aviators for generations.”

It remains to be seen what the Navy will pick as the successor to its T-45. With SNC’s Freedom in the running, there is a potential that the winner of the UJTS competition will still have at least some capacity to perform FCLP landings, whether the Navy requires pilots in training to perform them or not.

Contact the author: [email protected]

July 31 (UPI) — A U.S. Navy F-35 fighter jet crashed following an “aviation incident” in California, authorities and officials said.

The incident occurred at about 6:30 p.m. PDT on Wednesday, Naval Air Station Lemoore said in a statement.

Specifics about the crash were not made public, but the Navy said the F-35C “went down” not far from Naval Air Station Lemoore, located about 38 miles southwest of Fresno.

“We can confirm the pilot successfully ejected and is safe,” it said.

The aircraft was attached to the Strike Fighter Squadron VFA-125, known as the Rough Riders.

It is the second crash involving an F-35 fighter jet so far this year in the United States.

In late January, an F-35 Lightning II aircraft crashed at Alaska’s Eielson Air Force Base.

The Air Force said the pilot was safe following the incident.

The F-35C is the fifth-generation of a long-rang stealth fighter jet used by the United States Navy, Marine Crops and Air Force. According to the Navy, it is used to perform air-to-air combat, air-to-ground strikes, reconnaissance and electronic warfare.

The Lockheed Martin-manufactured plane costs between $62.2 million and $77.2 million, according to a December Congressional Research Service report.

Ni jet lag drag – prep is key for your long-haul flight, as Nigel Thompsonlearns with help from Qantas and Maddy Edgar, Qantas Business and First Class flight attendant

Have you ever stood in an airport immigration queue at the end of an overnight long-haul flight feeling like death warmed up?

And then the cheery cabin crew from your plane breeze by in their special fast-track lane looking as fresh as a daisy? The jet lag from eight hours or (much) more at 40,000ft in an aircraft cabin can leave you feeling – and looking – like you’ve been dragged through a hedge backwards.

Australian flag carrier Qantas, which has had a cabin crew base in London for 20 years, operates some of the longest flights in the world. It is currently working on Project Sunrise, which by 2027 should link both London and New York City directly to Sydney with record-breaking 20-hour nonstop journeys.

We asked Maddy Edgar, Qantas Business and First Class flight attendant, to share her top tips for travelling long haul, including how to prepare, pack, and manage jet lag.

READ MORE: Reason riders are ducking on 1932 UK rollercoaster with best sea view

PRE AND POST- FLIGHT CARE

First up, plenty of sleep is key. The night before one of my long-haul flights, I steam my uniform, pack the essentials (more on that later), and log into our Qantas portal to confirm my crew position and review roles and responsibilities. Then I head to bed to get as much sleep as possible.

It’s also incredibly important to stay hydrated. I have an extensive skincare routine and hydration plays a huge role both before and after a long-haul flight. The lack of humidity in cabin air can really dry out your skin and lips, so besides drinking plenty of electrolyte-infused water, a hydrating skincare routine is a must.

In the morning, to prepare for our 17-hour direct flight from London to Perth – one of the longest in the world – I start by cleansing my face with Effaclar Purifying Gel Cleanser. Now I have a clean base, I apply The Ordinary Hyaluronic Acid over Mario Badescu Rosewater spray to maximise water absorption. It makes a huge difference in keeping my skin plump.

Next, I use a thicker-than-usual moisturiser, such as Wella Skin Food, to protect my skin barrier. Then, even though I’m inside a plane, we’re also closer to the sun, so I apply a generous amount of 50+ La Roche-Posay SPF to protect against higher UV rays and premature aging. Plus, as an Aussie, the smell of SPF makes me feel right at home. I’d also add that Laneige lip mask is essential.

READ MORE: Friends claimed they’d been shopping in New York but their luggage said otherwiseREAD MORE: ‘Do not travel’ zones where tourists overwhelm locals revealed

A top tip for your skin throughout the flight – invest in a mini travel-sized version of your favourite hydration mist so you can keep spritzing during the flight.

Then once we land and I’m at my hotel it’s time for a much-needed skin reset and some self-care. Face masks are a must. I love using the viral Bio Collagen mask or Kiehl’s Ultra Facial Overnight Rehydrating Mask.

WHAT’S IN MY CARRY-ON BAG?

Inside my bag I have some long-haul flight attendant essentials I just can’t live without.

I always keep fresh supplies of everything I need because there’s no Australian Priceline or Tesco 40,000ft up.

Here’s what I pack:

• Travel-sized Mario Badescu Rosewater spray.
• My entire long-wear make-up kit, including my favourite Hourglass Concealer and Rimmel lip liner for touch-ups after waking up from crew rest.
• Travel-sized hair spray, bobby pins, and spare hair ties.
• Latte coffee sachets.
• Mints and fresh mint gum.
• Toothbrush and toothpaste.
• iPad, iPhone and chargers.
• Nail glue, in case one of my French tip acrylics pops off unexpectedly.
• PJs and a book for getting cosy in our crew rest area.
• Healthy high-protein snacks such as protein bars, protein shakes, and boiled eggs.
• Sometimes, I even squeeze in a quick Sainsbury’s shop for Galaxy chocolate bars to bring back to my Aussie family in Perth.

MANAGING JET LAG POST-FLIGHT

As a former primary school teacher, I had a pretty regular bedtime. Now, as an international long-haul flight attendant with Qantas, jet lag and time zones can throw me. But honestly, I wouldn’t trade this dream job for anything.

My main go-to tip? Focus on sleep hygiene. I love listening to meditation music to unwind after a flight. Keeping the room dark and cosy is a must, and I can’t resist a bit of lavender pillow spray. It makes all the difference.

I also try not to stress about when to sleep or wake up. If I’m tired, I just close my eyes and enjoy the quiet.

It’s all about finding that balance, so I’m ready to welcome our Qantas customers with a smile when I fly again.

Turkiye is waiting for a price proposal for the possible acquisition of Eurofighter jets after submitting a list outlining its technical needs to Britain’s Defence Ministry, a Turkish Defence Ministry source said today according to Reuters.

The Eurofighter Typhoon jets are built by a consortium of Germany, Britain, Italy and Spain, represented by companies Airbus AIR.PA, BAE Systems BAES.L and Leonardo LDOF.MI.

Ankara has been in talks with Britain and Spain to purchase 40 Typhoons and Germany took a step toward clearing the deal after initially being opposed to it.

“The […] document, prepared within the scope of the procurement of 40 Eurofighter Typhoon Aircraft, was sent to the British Ministry of Defence and the relevant company,” the source told a briefing in Ankara.

“We expect the price offer to reach us in the coming days.”

READ: Germany reconsiders Turkiye’s request to purchase Eurofighter