Navys

Just weeks after the U.S. military publicly acknowledged using kamikaze drone boats in combat for the first time, the Navy has confirmed that its Global Autonomous Reconnaissance Craft (GARC) uncrewed surface vessel (USV) took part in its first live-fire training exercise. The kamikaze drone boat was employed during RIMPAC 2026, attacking the ex-USS Peleliu in one of the operation’s high-profile sinking exercises (SINKEX). You can learn more about this latest round of SINKEXs here.

On July 24, the Navy released a video showing USVs taking part in the SINKEX in the Pacific Ocean, which targeted the decommissioned Tarawa class amphibious assault ship, but it was hard to tell what the USV in question was. The event itself had taken place on July 17 and saw the former USS Peleliu pummeled by multiple U.S. and allied assets. The video shows significant damage already inflicted on the assault ship, especially around the waterline, and water already being taken onboard. The footage was captured by the second drone boat, as it inspected the damage done by all the fires.

Amazing Footage from USV’s as they Attack the USS Peleliu (LHA 5)

Yesterday, Sarah Weinstein, a Surface Warfare Officer currently serving as the first commanding officer of Unmanned Surface Vessel Division 32, posted on LinkedIn, stating that she was “honored that USVDIV-32 was given the opportunity to execute the Navy’s first GARC Live Fire during RIMPAC 2026.”

A product of Baltimore-based BlackSea Technologies, the GARC is the major platform used by USVDIV-32, a unit that was established early this year. According to the Navy, USVDIV-32 is “tasked with maintaining and implementing unmanned vessels … the division’s sailors regularly conduct exercises and training with multiple platforms, with the most common being Global Autonomous Reconnaissance Craft, or GARC.”

GARC: The Most Proven Tactical USV

“It was incredible to watch my team execute with precision, and we were thrilled to provide a perspective of the former USS Peleliu that isn’t often captured in a SINKEX,” Weinstein added.

A source familiar with the SINKEX operation today told TWZ’s Howard Altman that there were two GARCs present at the SINKEX, but only one was used destructively in an end-to-end attack. The USV used a full autonomy package, in the shape of Anduril’s Lattice. It carried a 1,000-pound payload, although it remains unclear how much of that weight was accounted for by the warhead. We have reached out to RIMPAC officials and others for additional details.

Other specifications of the GARC include a length of around 16 feet, a full-load displacement of 4,800 pounds, and a range of 700 nautical miles at a speed of 22 knots.

USVDIV-32 took its GARC drone boats to exercise Baltic Operations (BALTOPS) 2026 last month. On that occasion, the USVs operated alongside the Blue Ridge class command and control ship USS Mount Whitney. The Navy confirmed that USVDIV-32 was providing realistic counter-USV training to NATO allies while in the Baltic.

“The first difficult part is spotting the USV,” Weinstein said at the time. “What does it look like? What are the telltale signs that it might be a USV? How to tell if it’s coming inbound, and its different behaviors that it’s able to display as it gets closer to the ship”

A defining feature of USVDIV-32 is its inclusion of a new rate, Robotics Warfare Specialist (RW), who are trained to operate and maintain vessels such as GARCs.

In a Navy release last month, Chief Robotics Warfare Specialist Christian Butler explained: “I think most commands, if not all commands, are going to have some component of RWs. Just because there’s no going away from unmanned systems at this point, they’re only going to grow in scale, and you’re going to need RWs to carry that weight.”

Before USVDIV-32 stood up, the GARC took part in maneuvers in the Atlantic Ocean during the UNITAS multinational maritime exercise in September 2025. This was part of an effort that tested the ability of “unmanned and remotely operated vehicles and vessels [to] extend the capability of interconnected manned platform sensors to enhance capacity across the multinational force,” the Navy disclosed.

Yemen’s Houthi rebels were at the forefront of employing kamikaze USVs operationally. We first reported on the capability in January 2017, after an explosive-laden Houthi drone boat struck a Saudi frigate. The technology traces back to Iran, which developed a variety of rudimentary one-way attack USVs before transferring the capability to its Houthi proxies, who became the first to use them in combat in the Red Sea.

As we have reported extensively, Ukraine has demonstrated the devastating potential of USVs against the Russian Black Sea Fleet. The Magura family of drone boats, among others, has been central to that campaign, and has taken on a wide variety of roles.

Repeated successful strikes against Black Sea Fleet vessels and naval infrastructure forced Russia to relocate much of its fleet from occupied Crimea to the relative safety of bases in mainland Russia.

The U.S. military employed USVs as offensive strike weapons in combat for the first time on July 12 during a wave of attacks against “dozens” of Iranian targets, according to U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). The strikes, which involved Saronic-built Corsair USVs, occurred amid an escalating exchange of attacks between the United States and Iran centered on the Strait of Hormuz. Among the targets of the attack was an Iranian Ghadir class diesel-electric midget submarine.

Earlier this month, another Saronic Corsair USV rescued the crew of a U.S. Army AH-64 Apache that crashed in the Gulf of Oman after it was downed by Iran. That was the first known instance of a drone boat being used to recover personnel as part of a search and rescue mission, and further underscored how the U.S. Navy’s use of drone boats in combat is really ramping up.

As we have discussed in the past, the U.S. military’s employment of drone boats in a kinetic strike role sets a new precedent not only for operations in the CENTCOM area of responsibility, but also for potential conflicts elsewhere. The U.S. Navy now has this capability and is gearing up to employ it in the Pacific, which will be yet another threat to deal with for adversaries. With exercises like RIMPAC, the Navy can evolve its playbook for the employment of USVs as kinetic weapons.

With a mission that includes helping the Navy and its allies counter the growing USV threat while refining offensive concepts of operation for one-way attack drone boats, USVDIV-32 appears poised to play an increasingly important role here. As the service pushes toward a hybrid fleet of crewed and uncrewed vessels, GARC is also emerging as one of its most significant new capabilities.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The U.K. Royal Navy has launched a kamikaze drone, the Nyan one-way effector, from a ship at sea, marking a significant step toward the U.K.’s ambition of a so-called ‘hybrid’ naval force. This is just one element of a much broader push toward increased reliance on uncrewed platforms, something that was underscored in the long-awaited Defense Investment Plan, unveiled earlier this week.

During recent trials off the south coast of England, the Nyan one-way effector drone was launched from the experimentation ship XV Patrick Blackett, a platform used by the Royal Navy as a testbed for new technologies.

The trial, known as Exercise Neptune Reach, involved personnel from the Royal Navy’s 744 Naval Air Squadron, 26 Royal Artillery of the British Army, and the Royal Air Force.

In a statement, Luke Pollard MP, Minister for Defense Readiness and Industry, said: “Britain is serious about the transition to a Hybrid Navy with new, powerful drones at the heart of the Royal Navy. By bringing together Army and Navy expertise to field strike drones from a ship at sea, we are accelerating the capabilities our forces need to stay ahead of our adversaries.”

The catapult launcher for the Nyan was installed on the ship’s deck. Operators then programmed the drone to fly to a specific target, which it flew to autonomously, while the ship was underway.

Developed starting in 2022, specifically for precision strike, the Nyan was designed and built by Callen-Lenz, a subsidiary of BAE Systems. It is intended to be a low-cost strike platform, with a unit cost of less than £100,000 ($132,000), according to the manufacturer.

The drone has a wingspan of around 9.5 feet and a reported range of more than 93 miles (150 kilometers) — meaning it can hit targets at a greater distance than the Harpoon anti-ship missile. Built mainly of carbon fiber, the Nyan is powered by a small turbojet engine. The design of the drone and its construction include reference to low observability, including a stealthy exhaust nozzle, making it harder for hostile air defenses to detect and destroy.

The Nyan drone and launcher have already been tested extensively during land exercises. During Exercise Spring Storm in Estonia this year, the British Army used the system in support of NATO allies on maneuvers. Thereafter, the British Army’s Royal Artillery adopted the Nyan for operational service.

Ahead of that, the Nyan made its combat debut in Ukrainian hands.

In the maritime context, the Exercise Neptune Reach trials from the Patrick Blackett were part of the wider, tri-service Project Vantage. This is focused on rapidly testing and delivering one-way effectors for the Royal Navy.

“This trial makes a significant step forward in delivering maritime one-way effectors at pace,” explained Lt. Cmdr. David Burton, Maritime One-Way Effectors Capability Sponsor with the Royal Navy. “Under Project Vantage, we are planning to integrate these capabilities into the Hybrid Navy, combining crewed platforms with uncrewed systems to expand reach, increase tempo and enhance lethality.”

The Nyan is already in quantity production, with more than 1,000 units manufactured so far, according to Matt Foster, CEO of Callen-Lenz.

The Royal Navy has said that the recent at-sea trials pave the way for further experimentation and also potential future deployment of the Nyan across the fleet.

Beyond the strike mission that the Nyan is currently equipped for, Callen-Lenz has said that the Nyan could be adapted to carry other payloads, or potentially be scaled up for increased range or endurance.

Interestingly, BAE Systems has also outlined the potential for further trials of the Nyan aboard the aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth.

In its last Strategic Defense Review, published last year, the U.K. Ministry of Defense described how plans for a hybrid naval force would also affect the two carriers and their air wings:

“The Royal Navy must continue to move towards a more powerful but cheaper and simpler fleet, developing a ‘high-low’ mix of equipment and weapons that exploits autonomy and digital integration,” the review stated. “Carrier strike is already at the cutting edge of NATO capability, but much more rapid progress is needed in its evolution into hybrid carrier air wings, whereby crewed combat aircraft (F-35B) are complemented by autonomous collaborative platforms in the air, and expendable, single-use drones. Plans for the hybrid carrier air wings should also include long-range precision missiles capable of being fired from the carrier deck.”

Earlier this week, the Defense Investment Plan noted that the development effort for the hybrid carrier air wing will include trials of jet-powered drones from the carrier. Previous drone trials aboard the British carriers have involved the QinetiQ Banshee Jet 80+, an adapted target drone, launched from HMS Prince of Wales in 2021. Subsequently, the General Atomics Mojave short takeoff and landing (STOL) drone was operated from the same carrier in 2023, as you can read about here. The Mojave’s impressive STOL capabilities meant that no launch and recovery systems were required for these tests.

Beyond catapult-launched drones like the Nyan, the Royal Navy has a longer-term ambition for ‘cat and trap’ drone operations aboard its carriers, under an effort named Project Ark Royal.

If successful, Project Ark Royal will see the two carriers start to operate drones that can undertake a variety of missions and then increasingly heavier, complex, and higher-performance ones. In the past, General Atomics has pitched to the Royal Navy a carrier-capable fifth member of its Gambit drone family, intended to fit into a future air wing aboard the U.K. carriers.

Later on, full catapult-assisted takeoff but arrested recovery (CATOBAR) capability could even add fixed-wing crewed aircraft, as we have explored in the past.

Of course, the United Kingdom is not alone in these aspirations, with China and Turkey, most notably, also increasingly exploring using drones aboard big-deck amphibious warfare vessels and other non-conventional-takeoff-and-landing aircraft carriers.

For the time being, the Nyan represents a fairly modest strike capability. Based on its range, what is likely a relatively small warhead, and subsonic performance, it is best understood as a low-cost tactical precision weapon. It lacks the reach and payload of the kinds of long-range precision-fires capabilities that the U.K. Armed Forces are increasingly looking to develop. However, it is an affordable means of engaging targets at relatively short distances and could be particularly effective if launched in large numbers and from a variety of platforms. As we have explored in the past, quantity has its own advantages in this context, and launching swarms of these at enemy ships or shore targets would make them very hard to defend against.

At the same time, experience with the Nyan in a maritime environment will help pave the way for introducing more capable drones.

As such, the successful at-sea launch of the Nyan drone marks an important milestone in the Royal Navy’s transition toward a hybrid naval force.

More generally, by demonstrating the ability to deploy low-cost, autonomous strike drones from a moving ship, the trial highlights the U.K.’s commitment to expanding precision strike capabilities and expanding its use on uncrewed platforms.

As the Royal Navy continues to experiment with ship-based drone operations, including air wings featuring uncrewed systems, these kinds of assets are set to play an increasingly important role, complementing traditional platforms and enhancing the fleet’s overall combat effectiveness.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) says concerns it raised last year about the U.S. Navy’s E-130J Phoenix II program “have morphed into realities.” The timeline for moving from the development of the aircraft to putting it into actual production has already slipped by approximately one year. The E-130Js are set to supplant aging E-6B Mercury jets in support of the Take Charge And Move Out (TACAMO) mission. This involves providing aerial command and control support for nuclear ballistic missile submarines, including the ability to send them orders to launch strikes while they are submerged. Platforms tasked with nuclear support missions like TACAMO are commonly called ‘doomsday planes.’

GAO has provided a new update on the E-130J effort in its latest annual assessment of multiple high-profile U.S. military procurement programs. The Congressional watchdog released this report earlier today.

In last year’s iteration of this report, GAO explicitly called into question the choice of C-130J-30 Hercules aircraft, a four-engine turboprop transport plane, as the basis for the E-130J, warning that it might “not meet operational availability requirements.” The existing 16 E-6B aircraft are based on the larger, jet-engined Boeing 707 airliner, which is now long out of production. It is important to note that the Mercury fleet also supports a U.S. Air Force nuclear mission set called the Airborne Command Post (ABNCP), and more commonly known by the nickname Looking Glass. In that role, the planes provide aerial command and control support to nuclear-capable bombers and silo-based Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles. They are equipped to initiate the launch of Minuteman IIIs while in flight. The forthcoming Phoenix IIs will only be tasked with the TACAMO mission, something we will come back to later on.

“As we reported in last year’s assessment, the Navy awarded its contract despite significant technical risks it acknowledged the E-130J program faced. A September 2024 independent technical risk assessment highlighted the complexity associated with the program’s planned integration effort, which officials acknowledged could increase as they integrate additional technologies,” per GAO’s latest assessment. “Since our 2024 report, the program has delayed its low-rate production decision by approximately a year as these system integration risks have morphed into realities.”

“For example, program officials said that contractors are now focused on modifying already-existing mission systems to reduce their weight, which the independent assessment anticipated would be necessary to accommodate them on the C-130J-30 airframe,” the report released today adds.

“The program office stated that the E-130J program remains on track to recapitalize TACAMO capability through developing an MVP [minimum viable product], iterating system capabilities through software improvements, and establishing digital frameworks,” according to GAO. “The program office also stated that it is aligned with Secretary of Defense guidance through an acquisition approach that allows for tradeoffs and implementation of a modular open systems approach. The program office did not provide any documentation to substantiate any of these claims, which run counter to our own analyses of E-130J program documentation.”

In its annual assessment last year, GAO said the Navy “acknowledges technical risk,” but also that the service had highlighted “risk reduction contracts with subcontractors to address obsolescence and size, weight, and power-cooling risks.”

The Navy’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request provides some additional context about the suite of systems the E-130J will need to perform the TACAMO mission.

“A dedicated communications platform, TACAMO aircraft features the ability to communicate on virtually every radio frequency band from very low frequency (VLF) up through Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) using a variety of modulations, encryptions and networks, maximizing the likelihood an emergency message is received by U.S. strategic forces,” per the Navy’s budget documents. “Included in these efforts are Government and Contractor Systems Integration Laboratories, Contractor System Test Integration Laboratory, Government Furnished Property (National Security Agency approved encryption devices, Ultra High Frequency modems), High Frequency and the Advanced Extremely High Frequency solutions, Top Secret network development and building required infrastructure includes power generation systems, cooling, flight deck avionics, Electric Magnetic Pulse (EMP) hardening, cyber hardening, and structural modifications to support integration of E-130J mission system equipment.”

A particularly notable and critical capability found on the existing E-6Bs is the ability to extend a five-mile-long antenna to communicate with submerged submarines. The E-130J will have a very similar, if not identical, antenna system to support the TACAMO mission.

As it stands now, the Navy plans to acquire six pre-production E-130Js in Fiscal Year 2027 to support different aspects of the aircraft’s ongoing development. At least one initial example is already being built. Some portion of those test aircraft might eventually take on operational roles. In its latest report, GAO says a critical design review is expected to come at the end of next year. With the aforementioned delay, the decision to then move into low-rate initial production (LRIP) is now projected to occur in April 2029. The initial LRIP lot is expected to be between three and six aircraft, but the total expected size of the E-130J fleet is unclear.

It is worth remembering that the Navy did previously operate modified C-130s in the TACAMO role before the first E-6A arrived in 1989. The Navy subsequently upgraded those aircraft in the late 1990s and early 2000s to the E-6B standard.

TWZ has previously explored the pros and cons of going back to a C-130-based platform for this critical Navy mission set, writing:

“It’s certainly worth pointing out that the E-6Bs, conversions of what were some of the last and most modern 707 airliners built, were larger and higher performance platforms than the EC-130Qs. The C-130J-30 is certainly a more capable aircraft than the C-130H on which the EC-130Q was based, but it won’t have the base speed and altitude capabilities of an airliner-sized multi-engine jet. Compared to the Mercuries, any TACAMO-configured C-130J-30 would not be able to get on station as quickly, or fly as high, limiting its ability to get above bad weather or establish a better line of sight for its communications systems.”

“At the same time, as the Navy itself has noted, the C-130J-30 platform does immediately open up the ability to use a larger number of air bases, airports, and airfields, including austere ones that the E-6B cannot operate from. This could be very useful in a contingency scenario where an opponent may have destroyed or otherwise rendered unusable many well-established bases, as well as larger secondary dispersal sites, which include large commercial airports. Being able to fly from smaller, tertiary locations could help to ensure that the TACAMO mission continues without significant disruption under such circumstances. This is also true during peacetime as targeting the TACAMOs on the ground would be much harder if they could easily operate from and sit alert at a much larger number of airports.”

“A C-130J-30 configured for the TACAMO mission would certainly have a mid-air refueling capability and the Hercules is already a platform that has demonstrated the ability to loiter over particular areas for long periods of time. Unlike the Boeing 707, the C-130J is still in production, as well, meaning that TACAMO aircraft based on this plane would be inherently easier to maintain and support logistically, and may also be easier to convert to this specialized configuration begin with. As time goes on, the J looks set to increasingly become the default base C-130 model across the U.S. military, as well. Compared to the long out of production 707-based E-6, support for the C-130J is already distributed across the U.S., and beyond. Training C-130J crews is even an easier proposition.”

The issue increasingly looming now is the age of the existing E-6Bs, which are becoming increasingly more challenging to operate and sustain. As noted, the Mercury fleet represents some of the very last 707s ever built before Boeing shuttered that line for good in 1991. The Navy’s plans to phase out the E-6Bs as the E-130Js arrive to help avoid any capacity gaps, which means the Mercury fleet will have to soldier on until that happens.

Last year, the Navy confirmed that it had scrapped plans to convert an ex-Royal Air Force E-3D Sentry airborne early warning and control aircraft, another Boeing 707-based type, into a dedicated TE-6B crew trainer, something TWZ was first to report. The TE-6B was explicitly intended to help relieve strain on operational E-6Bs. The Navy is now utilizing a contractor-owned, but government-operated (COGO) Boeing 737NG airliner to help meet pilot training demands.

To reiterate, the current plan is also for the E-130J to only perform the TACAMO mission. The Air Force is now in the very early stages of a separate effort to acquire what it is currently calling Looking Glass-Next (LG-N) to take over that mission from the E-6B fleet.

Part of that solution may entail integrating ABNCP-specific capabilities onto its future Boeing 747-based E-4C Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC) jets. The E-4Cs are set to replace the service’s four E-4B Nightwatch aircraft, as you can read more about here. The existing E-4Bs already have a ‘doomsday plane’ role, but do not have the exact same mix of capabilities as the E-6B. The Nightwatch jets notably lack the ability to order launches of Minuteman III IBCMs while in flight.

For the Air Force, the LG-N program is tied to larger nuclear command and control modernization plans, which might see more of these functions move to space-based assets, as well. All of this is also heavily intertwined with the ongoing development of the new LGM-35A Sentinel ICBM. Sentinel suffered huge setbacks, delays, and cost overruns, but primarily with the infrastructure side of the program, not the missile, as you can read more about here.

Enabling Peace Through Deterrence

When it comes to the Navy’s TACAMO modernization plans, challenges in integrating the necessary capabilities onto the C-130J-30 platform have now set back these efforts at least by a year.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Boeing has decided not to pursue a bid for the U.S. Navy’s Undergraduate Jet Training System (UJTS) competition. The company had previously planned to submit a version of the T-7A Red Hawk being built now for the U.S. Air Force. The winning UJTS design will replace the Navy’s T-45 Goshawk jet trainers. The new trainers will become part of a future naval aviation training curriculum for prospective tactical jet pilots that no longer requires carrier qualifications or even simulated touch-and-go carrier landings at bases on land.

The Navy issued a formal request for proposals for UJTS in March. The service currently plans to acquire 216 new jet trainers to replace the just under 200 T-45s that are in its inventory today. With Boeing now out of the running, the Sierra Nevada Corporation (which has now partnered with Northrop Grumman and General Atomics) and a team led by Leonardo and Textron are the only known remaining competitors. Lockheed Martin, which had teamed with Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI), also dropped out back in April. Aviation Week and Breaking Defense were among the first to report on Boeing’s decision regarding UJTS.

“Boeing is focused on meeting our commitments, and we bid for programs where we believe we can provide the right solution tailored to our customers’ needs and requirements,” a Boeing spokesperson told TWZ. “After careful evaluation, we have determined the T-7A does not meet the U.S. Navy’s Undergraduate Jet Training System requirements.”

“We have therefore informed the Navy that we will not bid on the current RFP. We remain committed to delivering the T-7A as a modern, growth-oriented training solution for 4th, 5th and 6th generation pilots as requirements evolve,” they added. “We look forward to providing and sustaining both current and future capabilities for the Navy.”

Boeing says its decision on UJTS is tied to the General Electric F404 turbofan. The company has stressed that the F404 is a proven design with millions of flight hours on multiple platforms, including the T-7A, and is a clear example of a ready-to-field design. Still, Boeing’s view is that the UJTS engine qualification requirements would require additional long-cycle development work, and potentially limit its ability to meet the Navy’s initial operational capability target for the new jet trainers.

All this being said, it is still not entirely clear what the specific issues might be, given that the F404 is such a well-established design that has been and continues to be used on a variety of military aircraft. This includes several other land-based jet trainer designs beyond the T-7, like the Scaled Composites Model 400, which competed against the Red Hawk in the Air Force’s T-X competition, and the Turkish Aerospace Industries Hürjet.

Most notably, the F404 also powers the TF-50N that Lockheed Martin and KAI had put forward for UJTS. At the time of writing, neither Lockheed Martin nor KAI looks to have offered a detailed explanation for the decision to withdraw from the Navy jet trainer competition.

The T-7A has also suffered from various technical and other issues over the course of its development, which has led to significant delays in its entry into Air Force service. The service is now hoping to reach initial operational capability with the Red Hawk next year. Any potential for direct synergies in terms of support and sustainment between the Air Force and Navy jet trainer fleets is now off the table.

It is worth pointing out that the TF-50N and the T-7 are also both single-engine designs. The Beechcraft M-346N that Leonardo and Textron have put forward is powered by a pair of Honeywell F124 turbofans. Two Williams FJ44-4M turbofans power SNC’s Freedom Jet, which is also the only clean-sheet design in the running for UJTS. This may point to a general view of the UJTS requirements that make single-engine designs less attractive.

The Freedom Jet design is also tailored to meet now-axed requirements for UJTS to be able to perform carrier qualifications and simulated carrier touch-and-goes at base on land. The requirements for so-called Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) training at facilities ashore have historically been structured specifically in a way that “simulates, as near as practicable, the conditions encountered during carrier landing operations,” according to the Navy.

F-18 Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP). Touch-and-Go Landing.

SNC says its choice to build an aircraft that can still perform these tasks is deliberate, and offers the Navy what could still be important capability and flexibility in the future, as you can read more about here.

The Navy’s decision to remove carrier qualifications and otherwise alter key aspects of the tactical jet aviator training pipeline has been and continues to be controversial. The service has argued that substantial investments in virtualized training and assisted carrier landing capabilities, such as Magic Carpet and its successors, have fundamentally changed the landscape when it comes to training future pilots for carrier-based operations.

Flight Ready: Magic Carpet

Flight Ready: Live, Virtual, Constructive

Earlier this month, the Navy also confirmed that it had raised the total cost ceiling for the prospective UJTS contract from approximately $1.8 billion to $2.7 billion.

“The Government updated the price cap to reflect a change in the program cost estimate due to new information received,” Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) subsequently explained, according to Breaking Defense.

The substantial increase in the projected cost has raised its own questions about the outlook for the competition and the development program that is expected to follow. The Navy’s decisions to scale back its training requirements had previously been seen as opening the door to existing land-based jet trainer designs, or derivatives thereof, like the T-7 and the TF-50N. That, in turn, was viewed as a potential way for the service to help keep costs and risk low.

The Navy’s T-45 replacement plans have already been delayed multiple times, with the service originally planning to pick a winning design this year and to have the first example enter operational service in 2028. The goal now is to award a contract in the middle of next year.

The aging T-45 fleet has faced its own struggles, including a spate of reported hypoxia-like physiological episodes among pilots that led to the development of a new oxygen system. There have been several Goshawk crashes in recent years due to a variety of factors, with the most recent coming just last month. The pilots in that case thankfully survived.

For Boeing, the decision to drop out of the running for UJTS could also allow it to refocus resources to other priorities. The company is also notably one of two remaining competitors vying to build the sixth-generation F/A-XX carrier-based fighter for the Navy. Boeing is already heavily engaged now on work for the F-47 sixth-generation fighter for the Air Force.

When it comes to the UJTS competition, with Boeing having bowed out, the SNC-led and Leonardo/Textron teams are now facing off head-to-head.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

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

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

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

The U.S. Navy appears to be preparing to replace its remaining F-5E/F Tiger II adversary jets with F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, continuing the modernization and rationalization of these critical training assets. The Navy’s apparent acknowledgment that even upgraded F-5s are no longer sufficient for top-tier adversary training reflects a broader Pentagon shift toward higher-end platforms in this role.

The House Armed Services Committee released its first draft of the fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization bill yesterday. Among the many provisions in the defense policy bill is a call for a report “on the status of efforts to transfer F/A-18E/F aircraft to the Navy Reserve to replace the F-5 aircraft.”

The report is to be delivered to the congressional defense committees by March 2027 at the latest.

This seems to be the first confirmation that further Navy adversary units will adopt the F/A-18E/F, the production of which is now ending, with the final deliveries expected next year.

As expected, the report will highlight any potential risk to mission execution, fleet readiness, and pilot and maintainer qualification during the period in which the older F-5s are being transferred and replaced by Super Hornets.

The Secretary of the Navy is also required to inform Congress of how long the transition process will take. This includes acquiring the required support equipment and spares, training for pilots and maintainers, and contracts related to the changeover.

Currently, the Navy has four Fighter Squadron Composite (VFC) squadrons responsible for adversary work.

One of these, VFC-12 “Fighting Omars,” has already transitioned to the F/A-18E/F at Naval Air Station (NAS) Oceana, Virginia.

VFC-13 “Saints,” based at NAS Fallon, Nevada, is equipped with surplus, but significantly upgraded F-16C/Ds, having previously flown F-5s.

This leaves two F-5F/N units.

VFC-111 “Sundowners” flies out of NAS Key West, Florida.

Finally, VFC-204 “River Rattlers” is at NAS/Joint Reserve Base New Orleans in Louisiana. VFC-204 converted from the Legacy Hornet to the F-5 relatively recently.

The Navy has made efforts in recent years to enhance its F-5 fleet, under an effort formally known as the Avionics Reconfiguration and Tactical/Modernization for Inventory Standardization program, or ARTEMIS.

This includes new Mk 16 ejection seats, Digital Air Data Computers (DADC), and Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) transponders, as well as upgrades to its cockpit, including flat panel displays.

The lead contractor for ARTEMIS is the private U.S. ‘red air’ adversary support company, Tactical Air Support, Inc., or TacAir. The ARTEMIS upgrade package is based on the F-5 Advanced Tiger, or F-5AT, configuration developed by TacAir. This includes Nemesis radar, mission computer, threat weapons engagement zone (WEZ) replication software suite, Argus radar warning receiver (RWR), Mason hands-on-throttle-and-stick (HOTAS) controls, Garmin wide area display, Scorpion helmet mounted display, open architecture mission system, and datalink, among other enhancements.

Transport of Swiss AF F-5 in a Navy C-130T

The Navy’s 28 single-seat F-5Ns and its pair of two-seat F-5Fs are being brought up to the ARTEMIS standard, as are a batch of 22 ex-Swiss Air Force F-5E/Fs that are being converted into adversary jets. The former Swiss airframes are being divided between the Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps and are known as F-5N+/F-5F+s once the work on them is completed.

But even with these enhancements, the F-5s are dated aircraft and are increasingly unsuitable for meeting the Navy’s demand for more advanced red air capabilities.

As we have described in the past:

“At its core, the F-5 is a dated, non-stealthy Cold War-era design, but it still can replicate a wide variety of threats, including some capability aspects of fourth-generation fighters and cruise missiles. F-5s do lack the performance to truly mimic a fourth-generation fighter. At the same time, they offer a valuable dissimilar threat for Navy and Marine aviators to train against, thanks to their relatively small size and agility.”

Where the F-5 does come into its own is in economically helping to generate a greater volume of aerial threats to better represent higher-end large-scale conflict scenarios during exercises, something that is especially important as the U.S. military prepares for a potential major fight in the Pacific against China. The degree to which the F/A-18E/F will be able to meet this requirement will depend on how many airframes are made available for adversary work. This is something that will also have to be weighed up against frontline fleet demands, at a time when there is already a shortage of tactical aircraft. It’s also worth noting that the Blue Angels fly some of the oldest Super Hornets in a special display configuration.

You can read what it’s like to fly Navy F-5 adversary jets in this past feature.

As of April last year, the Navy had 325 single-seat F/A-18Es, 250 two-seat F/A-18Fs in inventory, according to official budget documents. These are the primary workhorses of the service’s carrier air wings, as well as for supporting operations from bases on land. Super Hornets and Growlers have been heavily involved in combat operations in the Middle East in recent years and remain heavily engaged today.

Meanwhile, to help meet the surging demand for adversary support, the Navy and other services have turned more heavily to contractors to help fill in for red air requirements. These include TacAir, with its own F-5ATs.

However, there is no escaping the fact that the Navy, and the U.S. military at large, increasingly requires more advanced adversary capacity, especially as it gears up to fight advanced fourth-generation combat jets, let alone stealthy fifth-generation threats. The U.S. Air Force has responded to this requirement by operating its F-35A stealth fighters as a dedicated red air adversary during high-end training, as you can read about here. That service has since stood up an F-35 adversary squadron, while reducing its reliance on contractor red air services flying dated, third generation types, like the F-5.

The Super Hornet, with its AN/APG-79 — arguably the most mature active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar available — as well as its ATFLIR targeting pods and a radar warning receiver, makes a very capable adversary in training scenarios and a good match for replicating advanced Chinese fourth-generation threats, like the J-16 Flanker. Navy Super Hornets can also carry an advanced infrared search and track (IRST) system, like the Flanker.

When flown in a relatively clean configuration, the F/A-18E/F becomes a more effective adversary, eliminating the drag issues caused by the canted underwing pylons. Even when fitted with wingtip stores and a centerline fuel tank, it offers good aerodynamic and energy-maneuverability performance, allowing it to more closely emulate agile adversary aircraft during dissimilar air combat training. In particular, its well-known slow-speed handling performance makes it a good surrogate for the Flanker family of threats. Clean Super Hornets also have the ability to ‘run down’ fleeing targets much better than an F-5 — one negative about the small third generation fighter going up against fourth- and fifth-generation jets.

Looking further ahead, as the program matures, it is likely that a Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) or an adversary variant will be used for more basic Navy red air tasks and for generating combat mass alongside the F/A-18E/Fs and F-16s. With that in mind, it is worth noting that Anduril’s CCA offering for the Air Force has its roots in an adversary drone, as you can read about here. Still, the Navy is moving a bit slower than the other services when it comes to CCA, but they could use the adversary role to reduce risk, increase trust, and as a gateway for fielding loyal wingman drones with its carrier air wings.

As of 2022, the Navy’s stated plan was to continue flying F-5s in the adversary role at least until 2035. It is unclear if this schedule might now change, but we have approached the service for more details.

There is also the question of what will happen with the Marine F-5s, flown by a pair of Marine Fighter Training Squadrons (VMFT). These are VMFT-401 “Snipers” at Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Yuma, Arizona, and VMFT-402 “Grim Reapers” at MCAS Beaufort, South Carolina. These jets are being upgraded with the Red Net system, providing them with a tactical and situational awareness datalink, achieved via a commercially available tablet-kneeboard display.

Ultimately, the Marine F-5s are to be replaced under a program named Adversary Next.

After the latest Marine Aviation Plan (AVPLAN) was released in February, the service told TWZ:

“Planning for Adversary Next is underway and will be detailed in future AVPLANs. Adversary Next is anticipated to be a family of systems that will provide world-class adversary replication to USMC and joint units to prepare for the next fight.”

The latest AVPLAN puts F-5 retirement at 2040-plus.

Until then, the Marines will continue to use their upgraded F-5s, valued above all for their low-cost and highly reliable adversary support. Potentially, they could also bolster their fleet with former Navy examples if the service jettisons them far before the USMC does. Otherwise, Navy F-5s could also find their way to contractor red air providers, once the service retires them.

As for the Navy F-5, it appears that officials are now drawing up plans to finally call time on the iconic jet’s career in the service, one that goes far back in the Navy’s adversary program and the successful operation of Top Gun.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Members of Congress are moving to push the U.S. Navy to develop a containerized version of its High-Energy Laser with Integrated Optical Dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) system. Containerized designs could help accelerate the service’s fielding of laser directed energy weapons on a wider array of ships, providing added layers of close-in defense. The Navy has already been experimenting with palletized designs as part of its larger laser development efforts, which have faced continued hurdles in recent years.

An early draft of the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2027 Fiscal Year, would authorize the addition of $5 million to the Navy’s budget for work on a containerized HELIOS. It would also add $2.5 million for a “Containerized Maritime High Energy Laser Weapon System,” which does not otherwise appear to be mentioned, at least by that name, in the service’s proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year. The House Armed Services Committee released this draft NDAA earlier this week.

The Navy’s proposed budget for the next fiscal cycle does already include a request for $75.6 million for a separate Joint Laser Weapon System (JLWS) effort. The development of a containerized 150-kilowatt-class laser directed energy weapon, along with work toward 300 and 500-kilowatt-class designs, are part of the stated plans for JLWS. It’s unclear whether the Maritime High Energy Laser Weapon System mentioned in the draft NDAA is related to JLWS.

HELIOS, which the Navy has also designated Mk 5 Mod 0, is a 60-kilowatt-class laser directed energy weapon. At that power level, it is able to destroy or at least damage certain targets, such as drones or small boats, a capability that has now been demonstrated in multiple tests. There has been talk in the past about scaling HELIOS’s power rating up to 150 kilowatts.

Currently, the Navy only has one HELIOS laser, installed on the Arleigh Burke class destroyer USS Preble. Despite integration on an operational warship, the service describes this system as a “Non-Program of Record (POR) Research & Development (R&D) asset” in its most recent budget request.

As an aside, another laser system, the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN), is currently found on seven other Arleigh Burke class destroyers. An eighth example was integrated on the USS Kidd, but has been temporarily removed while that ship is completing a two-year maintenance availability. That ODIN system is currently being used for land-based training at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme Division, in California. Designed as a “dazzler,” ODIN is lower-powered than HELIOS, and is intended to blind or confuse electro-optical and/or imaging infrared systems, including seekers on incoming munitions, sending them off course rather than shooting them down.

As noted, HELIOS offers demonstrated capability now, and a containerized version is something the Navy might be able to field more widely in the near-term. This, in turn, could help provide a bridge to future developments under JLWS. Containerized systems, as well as palletized ones, inherently offer valuable flexibility, especially in a maritime context. Integration can be more readily achieved on a broad array of ships – including carriers, amphibious warfare ships, sea base-type vessels, and sealift ships, as well as certain surface combatants – as long as there is sufficient deck space and available power.

In April, the Navy disclosed a test of a palletized version of AeroVironment LOCUST laser counter-drone system on the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush, underscoring exactly this kind of flexibility. For that test, AeroVironment leveraged a palletized configuration of LOCUST it had already developed for the U.S. Army. However, various changes were made to adapt it to shipboard use, including “hardened electronics for salt fog, humidity, vibration, and long deployments” and the addition of “stabilization hardware to manage ship motion,” according to a company press release.

Counter-drone defense has emerged as a critical priority for the Navy, both at sea and on land. This has only been underscored by experience gained during the latest conflict with Iran, as well as operations in and around the Red Sea in recent years. The service has already been adding counter-drone systems that use physical interceptors as their effectors to an ever larger number of ships, something TWZ has been closely tracking.

When it comes to a containerized version of HELIOS, which could also be used to bolster defenses ashore, would benefit from having been developed for maritime use from the start. It might still be less hardened against environmental conditions, as well as battle damage, than its more deeply integrated counterpart on the USS Preble. There are also questions about how the system might be integrated onto the host ship and its combat system, if it has one at all.

In general, as long as there is sufficient power and cooling capacity, laser directed energy weapons like HELIOS offer essentially unlimited magazine depth. This offers cost benefits, especially when compared to employing traditional surface-to-air interceptors. As one comparative example, the latest versions of the RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM), which many Navy ships are armed for point defense, have unit costs in the $1 million range. All of this could also help in addressing long-standing concerns about the sufficiency of stockpiles of critical anti-air interceptors (as well as other munitions), and the ability to readily replenish those inventories, which have only been reinforced by the latest conflict with Iran.

USS Porter Conducts SeaRAM Test Fire

Laser directed energy weapons do also have limitations, especially when employed in the maritime domain, as TWZ has highlighted in the past:

“A single laser can only engage one target at once. As the beam gets further away from the source, its power also drops, just as a result of it having to propagate through the atmosphere. This can be further compounded by the weather and other environmental factors like smoke and dust. More power is then needed to produce suitable effects at appreciable distances. Adaptive optics are used to help overcome atmospheric distortion to a degree. Altogether, laser directed energy weapons generally remain relatively short-range systems.”

“In addition, laser directed energy weapons, especially sensitive optics, present inherent reliability challenges for use in real-world military operations. Shipboard use adds rough sea states and saltwater exposure to the equation. There is also the matter of needing to keep everything properly cooled, which creates additional power generation and other demands.”

Overall, the Navy’s current top leadership is already very supportive of containerized systems and directed energy weapons, including both lasers and high-power microwave types. In March, Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Daryl Caudle, the service’s top officer, unveiled a formal Containerized Capability Campaign.

“From towed-array-systems, to drone swarms, to electronic attack systems, to high-powered lasers … I want to containerize everything,” Caudle said at the annual McAleese Defense Programs Conference in March. “Tailored capabilities give our combatant commanders something they value above all else: options.”

Containerized systems are particularly central to the Navy’s current vision for future fleets of USVs, as well as its new FF(X) frigates.

Laser directed energy weapons are also central to the current plan for the Navy’s future Trump class battleships, but they are expected to be deeply integrated into that design rather than containerized. Adm. Caudle has been outspoken more broadly in his view that laser-directed energy weapons are key to bolstering close-in defenses on his service’s warships going forward, including against the growing threat posed by drones.

“My thesis research at [the] Naval Post Graduate School was on directed energy and nuclear weapons,” the CNO told TWZ and other outlets at a roundtable at the Surface Navy Association’s (SNA) annual symposium in January. “This is my goal, if it’s in line of sight of a ship, that the first solution that we’re using is directed energy.”

In particular, “point defense needs to shift to directed energy,” Caudle added at that time. “It has an infinite magazine.”

Even before assuming his current role as CNO, Caudle has been a vocal supporter of Navy directed energy weapon developments. At the same time, as mentioned, the service has faced continued stumbling blocks to more widespread fielding of these capabilities. This is, in many ways, reflected just in HELIOS, which remains a largely experimental effort despite years of testing and previous talk about expanding it into a broader operational capability. The Navy has integrated other one-off lasers onto other ships in the past. This includes the Laser Weapon System Demonstrator Mk 2 Mod 0 installed for a time on the San Antonio class amphibous warfare ship USS Portland, which is seen being tested in this video below.

USS Portland (LPD 27) tests LWSD laser system

Several U.S. Air Force and Army laser directed energy programs have also been realigned, curtailed, or outright cancelled in recent years due to technical hurdles and other factors.

Despite it adding funding for containerized system development, the draft NDAA that the House Armed Services Committee also proposes to cut $5 million from the Navy’s Directed Energy and Electric Weapon Systems line item due to what it simply describes as “unjustified growth.” The bill is also very likely to change in substantial ways in the coming weeks and months before it is ever put to a full vote, let alone sent to President Trump’s desk.

Whether or not the extra funding for a containerized version of HELIOS, or the Maritime High Energy Laser Weapon System, comes across in the end, the Navy is already heavily committed to new developments in this arena despite the continued challenges.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com