production

A top U.S. Air Force acquisition officer says work to set up a full production line for the F-47 sixth-generation fighter is getting closer and closer on the horizon. Prime contractor Boeing is in the midst of a nearly $2 billion expansion to its facilities in St. Louis, Missouri. The F-47 program otherwise continues to progress along an aggressive schedule, with a first flight still being targeted for 2028 and the goal of production jets entering operational service in the early 2030s.

Air Force Brig. Gen. Timothy Helfrich, the service’s Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Fighters and Advanced Aircraft, provided an update on the F-47 program during a virtual talk hosted by the Air & Space Forces Association’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies yesterday. Boeing won the Air Force competition to produce the F-47 in March 2023, and at least one pre-production example is being built now. The Air Force’s stated plan now is to acquire at least 185 of these jets.

“We have an imperative, I would call it a strategic asset, which is fighter production capacity,” Helfrich said during his opening remarks. “We only have so many production lines, and so we have to get the very most out of those that we can while planning for CCA [Collaborative Combat Aircraft drone] production, and pretty soon F-47 production.”

“There are only three active fighter production lines, right? We got F-35 down in Fort Worth, the F-15EX in St. Louis, and F-16 in Greenville,” Helfrich elaborated later on in the discussion in response to a question about steps the Air Force is taking to maintain sufficient operational capacity across its fighter fleets, in general. “So we need to grow the existing production lines, and we need to – or at least maximize what we can get out of those existing production lines, and we need to add production lines.”

“We’re not too far away from an F-47 production line, which will be additive to the production capacity,” he added.

Since 2023, Boeing has been working to substantially expand its production and other facilities in St. Louis by more than one million square feet. The company has repeatedly shied away from explicitly linking the $1.8 billion construction project to the F-47 program, but there have been clear signs of a connection for years now.

“The project’s first phase includes plans to erect and renovate 1.1 million ft.2 of facilities on the 110-acre Brownleigh and 75-acre Northern tracts adjacent to St. Louis Lambert International Airport, according to planning documents released by the airport authority in 2023,” Aviation Week reported in 2025. “Phase 1 includes the construction of a 880,000-ft.2 aircraft assembly building on the Brownleigh [site], plus a 185,000-ft.2 hangar, 80,000-ft.2 radar cross-section test facility, open aircraft shelters, hush house, maintenance building, fuel calibration building and fire house totaling 90,000 ft.2 on the Northern tract.”

At that time, parts of the new facility were reportedly expected to open in 2026 ahead of the completion of the full project in 2030.

A post across Boeing’s social media accounts in July highlighted continued progress with this construction. This included the completion of roof and exterior panels and the installation of hangar doors at a section of the site dedicated to “Advanced Combat Aircraft Assembly,” as well as the “first steel column installed for the Central Utility Plan” in the North Tract area.

“Momentum continues on our St. Louis expansion,” Dan Gillian, Vice President and General Manager of Air Dominance at Boeing, also said in July, according to Flight Global. “We are expanding our defence footprint while supporting next-generation capabilities.”

All of this is in line with Brig. Gen. Helfrich’s comments yesterday about a full production line for the F-47 steadily taking shape now. This, in turn, fits squarely with the aforementioned aggressive timeline the Air Force is pursuing for the program overall. Accelerated work on the F-47 has been aided by years of flight testing in secret of advanced demonstrator aircraft.

There is also a question of whether Boeing’s expansion of its production capacity in St. Louis could also be tied to the Navy’s F/A-XX next-generation carrier-based fighter program. Boeing has been facing off against Northrop Grumman in the F/A-XX competition with a design that looks related, at least to some degree, to the F-47.

The F-47 and F/A-XX programs have become very closely intertwined in other ways. In 2025, the Pentagon moved to freeze F/A-XX, explicitly over concerns about competition for industrial base resources with F-47. This would include production line capacity. Congress subsequently intervened to keep the Navy effort going, but a final winner still has yet to be announced.

Just earlier this month, Air Force Gen. Dale White, the service’s Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Critical Major Weapon Systems, reiterated concerns about industrial capacity. White’s comments came in response to a question about potential challenges in building F/A-XXs at the same time as F-47s at a media roundtable at the Air & Space Forces’ Air, Space and Cyber Conference at which TWZ was in attendance. The general also acknowledged that these concerns were “not unique” to F/A-XX and F-47.

During the virtual talk yesterday, Brig. Gen. Timothy otherwise touted continued progress on the F-47 program.

“The F-47 is going to be the world’s first sixth-generation fighter, and I can’t wait to fly it [sic; see it fly] this administration,” he said. “That’s a commitment that I made, that we are on track to do.”

The “administration” referred to here is President Donald Trump’s second term in office, which will come to a close in January 2029. With this deadline in mind, the Air Force has openly said in the past that it is aiming for a first flight of the F-47 in 2028. Beyond that, the stated goal is to be operating the jets operationally sometime in the early 2030s.

As noted, the Air Force has said previously that it is planning to acquire a fleet of at least 185 F-47s, which is in line with the original vision of the aircraft as a direct successor to the F-22 Raptor. However, there have already been signs that the final F-47 fleet figure could grow amid an evolving view of the F-22’s continued role in the near-term. A huge, multi-faceted modernization effort for the F-22 fleet is now underway, as you can read more about here.

When the jets do enter service, “one of the things that we know F-47 is going to bring is more survivability and lethality than anything that’s ever been delivered before. And going into that highly contested environment, you have to meet certain levels of survivability if you want to execute there,” Helfrich noted yesterday. “Beyond just the survivability and lethality that we know is going to come, there’s also an adaptability that the F-47 will bring.”

“The F-47 will come out of the box with full open architecture,” he continued. “Amongst other great things, it brings the ability to upgrade rapidly, faster than the threat if needed. That is what is going to be required in that kind of environment. Other things it’s going to bring, it’s going to be much more survivable than our fifth-gen platforms, as well as have a combat radius of over 1,000 nautical miles, which you’re familiar with. That’s a long way, which is needed for that kind of environment. You need to be able to execute and persist there.”

“Especially in these highly contested environments, no one’s going to be fighting alone. So we need to make sure that we are integrating,” he added. “There’s some ability to get lift from one platform to another, right? Whether it’s a mission system, it’s communications, it’s open architectures, we’re seeing that integration pay dividends, so that we are integrated from day one.”

This kind of integration and cross-platform commonality in mission systems will be particularly relevant for F-47s acting as airborne controllers for CCA drones. Brig. Gen. Helfrich’s comments above also came in the midst of a discussion about future operations involving both F-47s and B-21 Raider bombers.

Many questions do still remain about plans for the F-47 and its design, including what engines will power the aircraft when it first enters service. In July, TWZ published a deep-dive feature about what is known about the aircraft to date, which you can find here.

In the meantime, the Air Force and Boeing are continuing to push ahead with laying the groundwork for full production of the F-47 as the jet gets closer to its first flight in the coming years.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Five months after pulling back from most of its Los Angeles soundstage business, production services company Quixote is selling much of its equipment operation.

Equipment rental house Cinelease recently announced that it had acquired Quixote’s grip and lighting and production supplies assets in Los Angeles and New York. The transaction resulted in roughly 60 layoffs, Quixote said. Most of the affected employees were based in L.A. with a few in New York.

The production supplies business will operate as Cinelease Pro Supplies.

“Our sales team is reaching out directly to clients with active or upcoming rentals from these businesses and will work with Cinelease to help ensure a smooth transition,” the company said in an email on Sept. 15 to its clients. “It has been our privilege to serve you, and we look forward to continuing to be your source for production and events transportation.”

In April, Quixote announced it was winding down most of its Los Angeles soundstage business, including its main commercial studio in West Hollywood and its North Valley studio in Pacoima. A producer has since taken over the Pacoima site.

Quixote has also closed its production services operation in Atlanta, following earlier closures in New Orleans and Albuquerque. Quixote’s Griffith Park studio will remain open.

Cinelease, a Los Angeles lighting and grip rental company founded in 1977, has been expanding in recent months. It has added rigging and fencing businesses and is pursuing work in live events and sports alongside film and TV.

Quixote was founded in 1995. Los Angeles-based real estate company Hudson Pacific Properties Inc. bought it in 2022 for $360 million, saying at the time that the acquisition would help address growing demand for soundstage space.

Quixote’s retreat comes amid a major slowdown in Hollywood production, as many productions leave California in pursuit of tax incentives around the world. The downturn has hit studio real estate hard. Radford Studio Center, which sold for $1.85 billion in 2021, was seized by lenders after its previous owner defaulted on its debt. Netflix agreed to buy the lot for between $330 million and $400 million. The Television City lot is also up for sale.

On Thursday, a bipartisan group of congressional leaders introduced a bill to create a federal film and television tax credit, the Motion Picture, Television and Entertainment Revitalization Act. It would establish a 20% tax credit on U.S. labor for eligible film and TV productions. Its path is uncertain, however. The House is in recess until after the midterm elections, and supporters hope to pass the bill at the end of the year.

“As we enter this next chapter, our Fleet team remains committed to providing the service, expertise and support our clients have come to expect from Quixote,” the company wrote in an email. “We look forward to continuing to work with you to make your visions a reality.”

Times staff writer Samantha Masunaga contributed to this report.

The shadow of Bill Cosby hangs over the “The Peterson Show,” a new play by Janine Nabers about the fallout of a disgraced TV dad on the grown-up cast members who played his children on the show.

Echo Theater Company, which is presenting the world premiere of this play in a production directed by Michelle Bossy, has reconfigured its Atwater Village Theatre space for the occasion. The refresh — in terms of the position of the stage and the audience and in the level of the design elements, including video monitors showing clips of Black sitcoms — promises a vital evening of theater.

Unfortunately, the production is hamstrung by fundamental problems in the writing, directing and acting, all pointing to a failure of control. Control of the story, control of the tone and control of the cast.

In my fall preview item for this show, I wrote that the “production is all but guaranteed to be more enlivening than an evening spent surfing Netflix.” Well, it’s certainly lively, but in a boisterous way that made me regret I had left my couch.

Not even Netflix would give “The Peterson Show” the greenlight. The story centers on the adult lives of the sitcom’s five child stars who are thrust once again into the spotlight after a reunion rumor goes viral and their TV mom, Valerie, kills herself.

Deanna Reed-Foster, left, and Tamberla Perry in “The Peterson Show” at the Echo Theater Company.

(Cooper Bates)

Ronika (Tamerla Perry), the troublemaker of the group, careens through life with faulty brakes. Zoe (Kristen Ariza), who has traded TV stardom for an academic career and motherhood, wants the normalcy that her former fame keeps threatening.

Dwight (Devere Rogers) is messy and loud as well as addicted to fame and other substances. Blair (Kelly McCreary), who pulled herself out of a miserable childhood, has made a successful career as an award-winning actor and isn’t going to let her flimsy talent or her TV siblings stand in her way. Elliot (John Clarence Stewart), who seems the best adjusted of this crew, left the business to become a lawyer and hasn’t looked back.

Haywood Peterson, the patriarch of the TV show who’s serving jail time for rape, doesn’t appear in “The Peterson Show.” But his voice tyrannically resounds with sadistic orders and conservative cultural commentary during the second-act flashback scene, in which a fateful day on the set of the show changes the lives of Ronika and Blair.

The unsettled first act, full of false starts, feels like an early draft of the play. Nabers, an Emmy-nominated TV writer and author of the play “Serial Black Face” (winner of the Yale Drama Series Prize), can’t figure out how to center the work.

Ronika is the protagonist, but her introduction is off-putting — not only to Zoe, whose home she has invaded, but to the audience, who isn’t given much reason to care about this abrasive, screechy and just-plain-annoying personality.

The cast members perform at a fever pitch of amateur sitcom acting. Ronika evolves as the scene shifts to Blair’s home (which confusingly has the same layout as Zoe’s house in Michael Kramer’s eye-catching scenic design) for the home funeral of their TV mom. But more thought is spent in reworking Ronika’s hairstyle and outfit than in developing her story.

Kristen Ariza, left, Devere Rogers, Kelly McCreary, John Clarence Stewart and Tamberla Perry in “The Peterson Show” at the Echo Theater Company.

(Cooper Bates)

Ronika’s resentment toward Blair, who has avoided condemning Haywood in public, seethes monotonously until her own backstory is finally unearthed. Ronika’s trauma plot, however, has to compete with Valerie’s related breakdown story, and neither is given its dramatic due.

In the meantime, there’s a lot of unwieldy comic commotion involving a missing corpse, a tweaking, naked Dwight and enough insipid TV sibling bickering to clog the airwaves for a decade.

“The Peterson Show” is exhausting. The play isn’t ready for prime time. Bossy’s direction raises the clamorous volume instead of sorting out the disordered structure or digging into the unexamined silences.

The actors are led completely astray. Echo has built its reputation on quirky plays idiosyncratically performed. The theatrical marching orders here seem to involve throwing spaghetti against the wall and laughing uproariously as it slides to the floor.

Did California come out a winner when Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta settled a multi-state lawsuit against Paramount Skydance on Monday, allowing its $111-billion purchase of Warner Bros. Discovery to move forward?

That’s the question everyone is trying to figure out, as the 32-page agreement is parsed, with pundits pouring over minutiae of cable streaming and tax credits. I’ll leave that to the business experts, but I’m here to give you a big picture of politics, power and possibilities — and one short but unsatisfying answer about whether this deal is good for the Golden State: Yes and no.

I’ll start with this: Did California win is the wrong question. There was always something bigger at play here that was lost behind the fear of further decimation to an industry so central and crucial to the state. The question the lawsuit asked is, “Do we live in an America where government institutions are so broken that power makes its own rules?”

The settlement might not give the entertainment industry all it hoped for but it was “a fight worth fighting,” said George Hay, a professor at Cornell Law School and a former attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, because it sought to answer that question in favor of consumers, and showed that states like California can and will step up to fill a dangerous void.

Under the Trump administration, the U.S. Department of Justice hasn’t so much abdicated its responsibility to enforce antitrust laws — it has embraced an oligarchic ethos that seems happy to feed the American economy into the mouths of behemoths, allowing companies such as Paramount free reign to gobble up whatever lies in their paths like an old-school Pac-Man.

Our president personally invests in industries he’s supposed to regulate (I’m looking at you, Silicon Valley). Corporations dump money into elections that average people can never hope to match. The free press is under increasing attack with multiple outlets banned from the White House — including CNN, which Paramount hopes to own along with CBS and whose editorial independence is at least addressed in this settlement, albeit weakly.

States, even powerful states such as New York and California, don’t have the muscle or money of the federal apparatus, and were never meant to play the role of national enforcer on issues such as these.

The fact that Bonta and the 11 other states involved in the antitrust litigation pulled together not just a credible, but effective team is a victory for all American consumers, and a message to other Pac-Man companies out there that even if federal regulation is on life support, there are still rules.

The states “showed that they could quickly and effectively put together a formidable litigation team, and achieve significant initial success. That’s a big deal. That that changes the role of the states for a long time into the future,” said William Kovacic. He’s a law professor at George Washington University and a former chair of the Federal Trade Commission, so like Hay, he knows a bit about antitrust enforcement.

“This has a ripple effect that goes through the entire federal enforcement system because they showed they could do something that was very difficult,” Kovacic said. “That’s a big institutional win for the states.”

To hear Bonta describe it, California is absolutely a winner in its own right, though, and this will be “very good” for the state. Which to be fair, is exactly what any decent politician would say.

“It will be good for consumers, good for prices, good for jobs, good for choice, quality, competition,” Bonta told me Monday afternoon.

Kovacic is a bit more measured, calling it a “modest win.”

The deal has many parts, but it covers a five-year period in which the new Paramount mega-studio must release between 30 to 32 films each year, many in theaters and some independent. It also has to keep open and running both the Paramount and Warner Bros. lots, a not-insignificant source of L.A. jobs — and maybe one of the most visible wins for the city.

The new company also must spend at least $1.5 billion over the five years on production in the U.S., and increase that figure if there are certain, uncapped federal or state tax credits available to them.

In California, where the budget deficit is in the billions, creating uncapped credits may be a hard sell, but Bonta told me he’s making it a priority in the next legislative session and will push the next governor — likely Xavier Becerra, who once held his job — to back them.

“I think we’re going to get it in California,” he said. It’s somewhat important because the settlement doesn’t specifically address production in California — and tax credits from other states have been drawing production away for years.

We’ll see how successful Bonta is on that endeavor — he hasn’t always gotten what he wants from governors.

Much has been made about the recent threats from Paramount Skydance Chief Executive David Ellison to move business operations out of California. That pressure has been cited as one of the factors pushing the state to settle, and it probably was — but not just because of Ellison.

Gov. Gavin Newsom made it clear that he preferred a settlement to a drawn-out court case, especially after that threat.

You may recall our governor has presidential aspirations, and is in a long-running battle with Trump over whether California is a wasteland for business beset by fraud and regulation, or a utopia of economic activity fueling the world’s fourth largest economy. Paramount reupping its threat to leave, or even worse, decamping for someplace such as Nashville, is not a great look.

So this case, which was never going to be a slam-dunk to win in court and which could easily have run into 2028 if it proceeded, was never a winning issue for Newsom.

Newsom Monday called the deal “a practical path forward,” which it definitely is — for him.

Hay, of Cornell, said it was a “big blow” when the governor failed to back Bonta and go all-in on litigation.

“Once [Newsom] once came out on the other side, it made things really, really difficult,” Hay said.

So there was pressure on Bonta to make a deal even from his friends, though Bonta told me that “what you call pressure was just noise to me. I never felt pressured in this process.”

But of course, nearly everything that happens in politics and litigation is about pressure — who has the power to apply it and who has the power to withstand it. Bonta, to his credit, applied pressure where Paramount never expected it.

“If I were in California, I’d be proud of the attorney general. At the end of the day, he got the best he could,” Hay said. “I’m glad they were there when the government bailed out because it made Paramount tow the line, and maybe that’s all that we could hope for.”

The Paramount settlement is more about possible than perfect, but it proved that states — and consumers — are not powerless, and every brawl that proves that is, as Hay said, a fight worth fighting.

Over the years, the concept of the “song of the summer” has been well-contested: Is it merely based on statistics? Is it the song that has become so omnipresent that many have become sick of it? Does this mean that “Happy” by Pharrell Williams and “Fancy” by Iggy Azalea count?

Last year, it was likely somewhere between Sabrina Carpenter’s “Manchild” and “Luther” by Kendrick Lamar, featuring SZA. Just based on numbers, it was Alex Warren’s “Ordinary,” but this is a strong case for why metrics don’t always matter.

On Sept. 23, the autumn equinox will arrive, officially bringing an end to the summer season and countless attempts at giving it an anthem. This year, there was a plethora of choices. So much so that we couldn’t narrow it down to a definitive tune.

However, you can find our potential picks below.

“The Peace,” underscores

“I don’t speak unless I’m spoken to / And I won’t smoke unless you’re smoking too.”

Underscores, the artist that you are. After “U” dropped in March, “The Peace” was one of the first tracks to go viral across social media. It’s since maintained its cultural relevancy, with the artist performing it as part of her DIY pop-up sets, staged from the back of a U-Haul truck.

Historically, underscores hasn’t written much about her personal life, opting for conceptual work. However, “The Peace” offers a rare, intimate glimpse into the artist’s love life and the feeling of sacrificing basic boundaries in order to satisfy someone else.

Beyond its storytelling, the song’s melody and chopped vocal riff are unforgettable on this track, standing out from the rest of the album. This isn’t a jab at the project — “U” is an incredible album and the song is just that good.

“stupid song,” Olivia Rodrigo

A song from Olivia Rodrigo’s third album, “You Seem Pretty Sad for a Girl So in Love,” was always going to make this list, given the strong reception it’s received and its incredible replayability. As further evidence of this, within weeks of its release, the song hit 300 million streams.

The album’s third single, “stupid song,” just makes it in over “the cure,” its second single. Though the latter has one of the best bridges of the year, its undeniably melancholic and macabre nature is what put it out of contention.

Though “stupid song” has its somber moments, it’s easier to scream in a crowd without catching concerned glares. This call for catharsis is ever-present in Rodrigo’s discography, but this last album is the artist in full stride.

“Dance…,” Slayyyter

Speaking of artists in full stride, Slayyyter has been the breakout act of the summer, which is incredible considering that her debut mixtape released in 2019. She’s got skin in the game but hasn’t really been able to crack the mainstream until the release of “Worst Girl in America” and a subsequent, viral Coachella set.

“Dance…” is the opening track of that album and also arguably the best song on it. After about a full minute of pensive, progressive, electronic buildup, listeners get a taste of bliss, sewn-in synths and heavy bass.

When one individual made the bold claim on X that it was “one of the best album intros ever,” Slayyyter was quick to respond with a simple “TRUE.” Shortly after its release, it went viral on Instagram reels and TikTok as creators used the song in a trend where they’d act fatigued before bursting into motion on beat.

“Caught in a Jam,” Portraits of Tracy

This is easily one of the most fun, captivating tracks of the summer — it’s funky, bouncy, buzzy and everything in between. Solidifying its cool is the reassuring note at the end of the music video description: “No generative AI was used at any stage in the production of this material.”

It features — without a doubt — one of the best bridges and refrains of the year, and perhaps onward. Not to mention, its lyrics are equally as enjoyable as the production.

“Oh, something changed in me, I felt it instantly / I had to hit the club so they could all see / Now I’m the dancing queen / F-f-f-far far from 17”

“Caught in a Jam” would an impressive feat from any artist, but it’s exciting to hear it coming from a 22-year-old. Hopefully, the future is bright and groovy for Portraits of Tracy. Reception of the artist’s latest EP, “Q: From Where Do Our Primal Instincts Originate? A: MTV! EP,” has been overwhelmingly positive, with Pitchfork placing it a 7.6 rating.

“BbY Wow,” Karol G, Judeline, rusowsky

The 2026 Coachella headliner is back at it again. This time around, Karol G released “BbY Wow” at the tail end of July, allowing it just enough time to seep into the brains of all its listeners.

Realistically, it needed no time at all. It didn’t take long for the song to hit No. 1 on Spotify global charts, receiving over 3 million streams within a week of its release.

The song is a masterclass in production, pulling and syncopating a sample from iconic dance hall tune “Coolie Dance Riddim,” released by Jamaican producer Cordel Skatta Burrell in 2003. In this, a lot of the heavy lifting is done, and all three artists are left to ride the smooth beat.

Naturally, Karol G really shines here, but Judeline and rusowsky provide an interesting dynamic to the song, making it an instant hit.

“Girl Like Me,” PinkPantheress

“Girl Like Me” is an odd entry for potential song of the summer. The track was released back in May 2025 as part of her second mixtape, “Fancy That.” However, it didn’t receive much buzz until April 2026, when PinkPantheress performed at Coachella.

Not long after, she released the official music video for the song, which blew up almost as soon as it landed on YouTube. The video, made in collaboration with faceless director Lauzza, features buildings shuffling on beat and other excerpts of British culture.

It would soon witness the same treatment on streaming, garnering a 165% increase in streaming activity over a four-week period, Billboard reported.

But it’s not all about numbers in the world of music and, thankfully, “Girl Like Me,” delivers sonically, as well. The song flips both “Romeo” and “Always Be There” by aughts-defining electronic duo Basement Jaxx and turns it into a thumping dance pop tune.

“Dine N’Dash,” the Strokes

As plainly stated in our coverage of the Strokes’ appearance at Just Like Heaven in August, the band is “currently riding the high” of its first Coachella performance in 15 years. “Reality Awaits” is an incredibly polarizing album. What’s dividing fans is Julian Casablancas’ insistence on using Autotune, as many prefer his raw vocals.

However, Autotune or not, “Dine N’Dash” is reminiscent of the best of the band, confirming that they’ve still got the juice to make hits 25 years after their debut. The chorus is the key here, as its smooth riff pauses for Casablancas to softy wail out “We could never afford it / So we dine and dash / I would always go last.”

Hello, 2001!

“brand new chanel$,” Slayyyter

It’s always difficult to give an artist a double entry on a list, but in the case of Slayyyter, it was mandatory. “Brand new chanel$” is poised to be a song off of a potential upcoming project, which is expected to be an inverse, “brother album” to “Worst Girl in America.”

In that, it completely lives up to her promises, taking the route of a more traditional pop song, while still delivering on all fronts. Notably, her vocal ability really shines through on this track, as she belts out “I‘m holding it alone just for tonight / I wonder if you / got her in your room / I call you on the phone to start a fight” during the chorus.

The song’s outro is equally as intoxicating, referencing the lyrics and melody of its apparent brother track, “Beat Up Chanel$.”

Like “Dance…,” the song was quick to go viral on social media, and the artist revealed that the song was made to process romantic trauma. Just two days before “WGIA” dropped and during rehearsals for her Coachella set, Slayyyter found out she had been cheated on by her then-boyfriend.

“Choosin’ Texas,” Ella Langley

It’s been 22 weeks since Langley’s “Choosin’ Texas” first appeared on top of the Billboard 100, tying Mariah Carey’s seasonally ubiquitous “All I Want for Christmas Is You.” Whether you like the song or not, its appeal is officially undeniable.

On Spotify, it’s racked up more than half a billion streams and on YouTube, nearly 100 million. Not to mention, it’s impossible to crawl into any dive bar in the country without being ambushed by “She’s from Texas, I can tell by the way / He’s two steppin’ ‘round the room,” delivered in a Southern drawl.

Is it the “Happy” or “Fancy” of 2026? We leave that with you to decide.

The staging is simple. A circle of nine stately wood chairs on a bare stage. Four actors, affixed with in-ear monitors, occupy different seats as testimony is elicited, provided and undermined.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is back in session in “The Ford/Hill Project,” now at REDCAT through Saturday. What follows is some of the most riveting and distressing testimony ever delivered in such a setting.

Anita Hill and Christine Blasey Ford are called back to testify under oath about the Supreme Court nominations of Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh, respectively. This documentary drama, created by Elizabeth Marvel and director Lee Sunday Evans, is composed from the verbatim transcripts of these painful proceedings.

In 1991, Hill testified that Thomas had repeatedly sexually harassed her when he was her supervisor at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Education. In 2018, Ford testified that she had been sexually assaulted in 1982 by a 17-year-old Kavanaugh when she was 15.

Marvel and Evans create a double helix from excerpts of these two hearings, which are separated by nearly 30 years yet reveal highly entrenched patriarchal patterns. Two women, summoning the courage to tell what they know about two men who are about to be entrusted with the most consequential governmental power, are put through the wringer as the political machine shifts into gear.

The actors wear in-ear monitors that feed them edited clips from the real audio of the hearings.

(Angel Origgi / REDCAT)

Marvel, one of the treasures of New York theater, takes on the role of Ford at the Brooklyn Academy of Music in a run that ends Sunday. (The piece premiered at Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company in 2024.) At REDCAT, the superb Rosemarie DeWitt assumes Marvel’s place, standing in for Ford but never attempting anything as crass as an impersonation.

The production, under Evans’ precise direction, manages to find a tone that might be paradoxically described as emotionally resonant neutrality. Those in-ear monitors that the actors are wearing feed them edited clips from the real audio of the hearings.

Ford, a psychology professor with an expertise in biostatistics, answers prosecutorial questions about a life-altering trauma in a manner that leans on her scientific training for security. Hill, a Yale-educated lawyer asked to elaborate on the prurient conduct she was chronically subjected to at work, never loses her professional composure.

“Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter,” Ford tells Sen. Patrick Leahy when asked about the strongest memory she has of the incident. (Ford’s voice, resounding at the start of the production, keeps the brutality of the assault at the forefront of our minds.)

Hill, played by Betty Gabriel, describes the threatening nature of the unwanted advances that created such a toxic work environment. Aware of the damage that Thomas could inflict on her young career, Hill was determined to do what she could to salvage an extraordinary legal opportunity.

At times during Thursday’s performance, Gabriel appeared to stumble on her lines, but it was hard to tell because Hill is speaking extempore in the most difficult of public forums and she doubles back on her sentences, carefully parsing out her words. What both DeWitt and Gabriel honor exquisitely in their performances is the quiet integrity of these women as they willingly expose themselves to political attacks for the sake of causes greater than themselves — the truth, first and foremost, but also gender equality and the Senate’s advisory role as a cornerstone of American democracy.

The actors change not only their seats but also their roles.

(Angel Origgi / REDCAT)

Dulé Hill channels the presence of Thomas, who eventually theatrically hijacks the hearing by referring to the experience as a “high-tech lynching for uppity Blacks.” Rich Sommer gives us the voice of Kavanaugh extolling the pleasures of beer and barking at senators who pointedly ask about the extent of his drinking.

The actors change not only their seats but also their roles. The interrogated become the interrogators in a way that gets a little blurry when the focus initially shifts from Hill and Ford to Thomas and Kavanaugh. But the murkiness doesn’t last long in a production that achieves an admirable balance between objectivity and emotion, abstraction and representation.

The restraint imposed by the production adds to its power. There’s no need to editorialize. The proceedings skewer themselves.

When Sen. Alan Simpson quotes from “Othello” in defense of Thomas, he uses Shakespeare’s lyrical authority but fails to realize that he is in fact invoking the false words of the tragedy’s villain, Iago. Not that the easily impressed senators, eager to exculpate a favored man, took note of the irony.

The patriarchy cares mostly about shoring up its own power. Thomas and Kavanaugh were part of the Supreme Court majority that voted to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

The ending, the only time when Evans’ direction loses its poise, blares “make it right,” performed by the Tune-Yards, as Thomas and Kavanaugh, adorning themselves in black robes, find their seated place according to seniority among the nine chairs. The theatrical flourish seems jarring, but so too is the historic moment.

“The Ford/Hill Project” filled me with sadness but not despair. The bravery of Hill, who educated a nation on sexual harassment, and the emotional strength of Ford, who bared her trauma for public enlightenment, live on in the American consciousness as it progresses, in fits and starts, toward justice.

The Pentagon has reached an agreement with Lockheed Martin to lay the groundwork for stepped-up production and delivery of new AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missiles (JATM) to the U.S. military and allied air arms in the coming years. The AIM-260 is still in development, but the head of the Air Force Test Center also touted efforts to further accelerate that work just earlier this week. From the start, the U.S. military has presented JATM as especially critical for ensuring China, with its own growing array of longer-range air-to-air missiles, does not gain an edge in future air combat.

The new framework agreement announced today “is critical to ensuring long-term demand signals flow to key suppliers, allowing Lockheed Martin and the munitions supply chain to invest in manufacturing capacity, workforce, and production efficiencies,” according to a Pentagon press release. “It establishes a framework for future Multi-Year Procurement (MYP) of JATM, executing congressional authority to secure the nation’s highest-priority missile systems.”

“This agreement forms the foundational agreement for a multiyear procurement contract, pending Congressional approval, that provides long-term demand to strengthen and expand the defense industrial base for the program,” according to a separate release from Lockheed Martin.

In response to questions from TWZ, the Pentagon declined to comment on the projected number of JATMs covered under this agreement, as well as estimated costs and delivery schedules.

U.S. Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptors are expected to be the first types to fly operationally armed with AIM-260s. Integration on other platforms, such as variants of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the Air Force’s forthcoming F-47 sixth-generation fighter, is expected to follow. JATM, which is designed to have the same general form factor as the existing AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), has been discussed as part of the arsenal for the Air Force’s future Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drones, as well.

The releases today from the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin confirm that the new framework deal also includes planned foreign military sales of AIM-260s. Australia, one of America’s top allies, is the first confirmed international customer for the JATM, and plans to integrate the missiles on its F/A-18Fs, F-35As, and EA-18G Growler electronic warfare jets. The Royal Australian Air Force’s MQ-28 Ghost Bat CCA-type drones, initial versions of which are already capable of firing AIM-120s, might be another AIM-260 launch platform in the future.

Uncrewed MQ-28 Ghost Bat showcases its combat capability

The AIM-260 remains in development, with the Navy and Air Force test communities supporting that work.

“We are accelerating weapons development from high-end air dominance weapons like the JATM to hypersonic strike systems like the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile,” Air Force Brig. Gen. Mark Massaro, head of the Air Force Test Center (AFTC) at Edwards Air Force Base in California, told TWZ and other outlets at a media roundtable yesterday. The roundtable took place at the Air & Space Forces Association’s (AFA) 2026 Air, Space & Cyber Conference.

“We’re actively testing JATM, and it’s progressing along its program path. In test, we are working through the development stages there,” Massaro added. “So, we’re testing it in [sic] the ground with models, like I mentioned. We’re testing it in the air on aircraft. So, from a performance standpoint, I’ll hold on to that from an operational security perspective. But we’re happy seeing where it’s going, and we expect that to be a key piece of capability for our warfighters to have.”

“Just from a testing perspective, we’re always looking at making sure that we’ve got the throughput,” he added when asked if he could talk about challenges or other issues AFTC has run up against in work on the AIM-260. “So, from a test perspective only, infrastructure and throughput to make sure that we can get things out … and make the testing happen. But I’m not, from a capabilities perspective, worried about the system.”

It is unclear when the first operational AIM-260s may begin entering the U.S. inventory. When the program was first disclosed to the public in 2019, the stated goal was to start fielding the missiles in 2022. There were also reports in late 2025 that funding issues had caused a three-month delay, based on a fact sheet distributed to some members of the U.S. House Committee on Armed Services. The committee later said that the information was incorrect.

Work to date on JATM has been conducted under a heavy veil of secrecy, with the existence of the program only being announced in 2019. The first public glimpse of the missile only emerged in May of this year. Beyond the aforementioned size requirement and that the new missile will offer significantly greater engagement range over the AIM-120, details remain limited. Readers can learn more about what we do know so far here.

What is clear is that the growing reach of Chinese air-to-air missiles has been a key driver behind the JATM program, with Air Force officials having explicitly mentioned the PL-15 in the past. China continues to pursue even longer-ranged and otherwise more advanced air-to-air missiles, as you can learn more about in this past TWZ feature. The Air Force has previously raised the prospect of a general threat ecosystem that includes anti-missiles with ranges of up to 1,000 miles emerging by 2050.

The AIM-260 is not the only longer-ranged air-to-air missile known to be in development in the United States, either. In 2024, the Navy revealed it had begun fielding an air-launched version of the surface-launched Standard Missile-6 (SM-6), called the AIM-174B Gunslinger, at least on a limited level. Just in August of this year, the service disclosed the existence of another very long-range air-to-air missile, the AIM-424 Malice, which has already reached the flight testing phase of development.

An Air Force spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine last month that the service was “closely following” the Navy’s work on the AIM-424. In June, the Air Force itself shared details about another potential future air-to-air missile, dubbed the Air Force Long Range Weapon (AFLRW), including a target requirement for a maximum range of at least 1,000 nautical miles.

Based on past experiences with public disclosures about the AIM-260, AIM-174B, and AIM-424 programs, additional work on advanced longer-range air-to-air missiles is certainly ongoing in the classified realm.

Today’s announcement about the new framework agreement, together with Brig. Gen. Massaro’s brief update yesterday, makes clear there is a continued commitment to JATM amid a still-growing field of new, longer-range air-to-air missiles.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

In another push to revitalize California’s film and TV industry, Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday signed the state’s first standalone post-production tax incentive.

The new incentive is aimed at bringing back jobs for the industry’s editors, sound mixers, composers and visual effects artists. It will allow a 35% to 50% credit on qualified expenses related specifically to post-production work done in California, and unlike the state’s existing film and TV credit, it doesn’t require productions to shoot here.

“This legislation protects the extraordinary people who make this industry possible and makes it unmistakably clear: California is still the future of film and television,” said Gov. Newsom in a statement. “We have the talent. We have the infrastructure.”

The bill, AB 2319, was authored by Assemblymember Nick Schultz (D-Burbank) and introduced earlier this year. It cleared the state Senate 33 to 5 on Aug. 30, and the Assembly approved the final version 72 to 2 the same day. Schultz originally sought $100 million for the program. It is expected to start in January with $10 million, according to the Assemblymember Schulz’s office.

“It’s a historic moment for California’s post-production community. But it’s also just the beginning of what we really need to do to to fight for our industry,” said Marielle Abaunza, president of the California Post Alliance, a group advocating for the bill. She said the group is readying its strategy to get more funding for the program next year.

As Hollywood productions continue chase tax credits to other states and countries, much of the post-production work is going with them. California’s share of U.S. post-production employment has fallen from 53% to 42% over the last 13 years, according to CVL Economics, an economic consulting firm tied to California Post Alliance. The state had about 12,000 post-production jobs last year, per CVL Economics.

Ben Urquhart, 51, spent 18 years as a post-production executive at NBCUniversal. The Culver City resident hasn’t been able to find work in the two and a half years since he was laid off.

“It’s grim and it’s hard. There are jobs, but we have a large amount of extremely qualified people competing for every level of job,” Urquhart said. “When I was a kid, I was a [production assistant] in the 90s, and you could get a job within a couple of weeks. But when I got laid off a couple of years ago, I realized that is certainly not the case at all anymore. It’s been a large-scale transformation.”

Urquhart said the new incentive would help California compete with jurisdictions that already offer these credits and “level the playing field.”

Last year, California expanded its film and TV tax credit program, more than doubling the old $330-million cap to $750 million through June 30, 2030. The existing program already covers post-production, but only if 75% of filming or the overall budget is spent in the state.

Newsom also signed a bill that would strengthen the current tax incentive program overall. In June he revealed a state budget measure that capped how much in tax credits a business can claim each year, a limit industry groups warned would undercut the expanded program. But the new Senate Bill 186 enhances refundability for the industry and exempts independent productions from the credit limits, starting next year.

There’s also been a recent push for a federal film and TV tax incentive. President Trump has previously voiced his support for the effort, and Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Glendale) and Rep. Brian Jack (R-Ga.) are leading a bipartisan effort to draft one.

“The Pineapple” promised to be intense, but even hours before the show had begun, it had me startled.

I was warned, via a waiver attendees must sign to experience the production, to expect “intimate, and/or aggressive physical contact,” “confined spaces and passageways,” and that I may be asked to crawl, kneel or lie down. All of it would happen in a show that I was cautioned would present simulated violence or “disturbing imagery.”

As much as I love participatory, immersive theater — productions that often rely on some form of audience participation — “The Pineapple” was providing me with a checklist of things I generally avoid. It was a feeling that only grew when I reached the waiver’s end, and signed off that I was OK with claustrophobia (I am not).

What had I done?

None of it, though, had fully prepared me for what Candle House’s “The Pineapple” actually was. By the time the hourlong experience in North Hollywood had reached its conclusion, I had been straddled by a woman who forced a gloved finger down my throat, outfitted with hooded, vision-impairing face masks, grabbed by the wrists as they were taped together, ordered to crawl toward a blood-stained room, and spooned or kissed by multiple male performers.

“The Pineapple” is a secretive hourlong show that seeks to disorient attendees.

(Sona Earnest)

“The Pineapple” is a buzzed-about show among the tight-knit immersive community, one that fits into the medium’s long tradition of productions designed for a sole audience member. A short run last year in New Jersey sold out. Candle House has such a devoted following that its L.A. shows have been selling out almost as instantly as they are announced. While it’s thus far been shrouded in secrecy — “The Pineapple” will not even release a program or cast list until its run has concluded — it comes highly recommended from acquaintances who saw it on the East Coast. I was alternately excited and apprehensive to take part, and my editor would like me to note that I pitched this story on my own accord.

“The Pineapple” in its limited online description promises an alien encounter. Sign up, and an email will tell you that it will “change your life.”

For the passionate crowd of immersive enthusiasts who may want to experience “The Pineapple” and are worried I just spoiled the show, I call nonsense. For one, I believe audiences should know exactly what they are paying for, and two, I do not think “The Pineapple” can be properly spoiled. It was at times otherworldly, in moments psychedelic, and while there were scenes in which I felt fear, there were also others in which I laughed. While “The Pineapple” flirts with horror, torture and conspiracy nuts, it also provides space for Jimmy Buffett’s “Margaritaville.”

And in “The Pineapple’s” best instances, it created a sense of personal intimacy with its performers. These were actors who may have earlier been needling at or attempting to push my boundaries. “The Pineapple” wants to toy with our trust, to create a safe space where it can intermix themes of abuse and empathy until their lines are blurred. Consider its waiver, then, not just a warning but an attempt to weed out those who may be offended or triggered.

“The Pineapple” tries to break us. And it charges nearly $250 for the privilege.

“How do I put this,” says the show’s core creator/director Evan Neiden when asked his intentions behind “The Pineapple.” “I think the show is designed to boil you. Like the lobster in the pot. It gets warmer and warmer and warmer and it’s slowly acclimating you to this new set of rules that keep changing to this new environment of degeneracy and conspiracy.”

“The Pineapple” teases an alien encounter. It is theatrical production designed for one guest.

(Sona Earnest)

Neiden, the 27 year-old founder of Candle House, has long specialized in one-on-one phone productions designed to be done from the caller’s home. While drastically different in narrative content, his horror show “Claws,” in which its solo guest acts as an emergency line operator, is good prep for “The Pineapple” as it also seeks to push people to the brink of comfort.

If there is an artistic thesis behind the work of the New York-based Candle House, it is to cast its audience as performers, but then poke, prod and disorient until they stop performing and start reacting on instinct — or, in theory, become unguarded. It’s an idea that simply to get through the day we are playing a role of sorts, tuning our conversations to please others, or presenting exaggerated, false or tidied-up versions of ourselves on social media.

“In an experience like this, you’re alone with the inhabitants of the world, and they’re all there as part of your hallucination, your dream and your journey,” Neiden says. “You don’t need to worry about presenting a certain way or being perceived in a certain way. All the characters in ‘The Pineapple’ are degenerates, and this show invites you to become one as well. That’s very hard to do if someone from the respectable, outside world is watching.”

The setup for “The Pineapple” is simple. I was playing a respondent to an ad for a meeting with an alien. But things quickly spiral beyond clear narrative recognition, as piecing together the story becomes a puzzle unto itself. And it will shift depending on how one reacts, as there are multiple endings. But know only that in its opening minutes we learn that we have been swindled and are now part of a ritual of sorts to summon said alien.

“The Pineapple” offers intimate actor interactions designed to push boundaries.

(Sona Earnest)

You may find yourself, as I did, raising your voice, as “The Pineapple” did light research on me. My career was insulted, and I was mocked for fumbling around while attempting to juice a pineapple with a woefully inadequate kitchen utensil. Neiden says many attendees try to break the show itself, to push back and see how far its narrative can bend. This is typically not how I play, wanting to experience a production as its designers have intended and thus I let “The Pineapple” take the lead rather than trying to force my will upon it.

I am not easily offended and never used the safe word provided, although there were instances where I came close, namely when my feet were being aggressively, unwelcomely massaged. And yet there were scenes in which I thought about deeply personal relationships I have had, specifically when a character asked me to think of a time when forgiveness or an apology was craved from someone I am no longer closely connected with.

“The Pineapple” then began to feel like a metaphor. As I moved from darkened room to darkened room, ridiculed in one, flirted with in another, a thread of finding one’s own personal paradise in a hellscape began to emerge. Is it aliens we are seeking, “The Pineapple” begins to ask, or simply perhaps purpose? The act of forgiveness, Neiden tells me, was on his mind when crafting the show.

“I never really felt like I fully understand it,” Neiden says. “What is forgiveness? Some people say it’s letting someone off the hook. Others say it’s releasing yourself of the burden of a grudge. And it’s a word wrapped in religion and politics. There are so many definitions of it, and we hear it everywhere — forgiveness and its counterparts of guilt, shame and accountability. What does it mean? The show doesn’t answer that.”

Maybe. That’s up to the audience, not its creator.

Days after I’ve seen “The Pineapple,” friends and peers keep asking if I enjoyed it, and I don’t think it’s a simple answer. It’s not for everyone. I’m not sure it’s even for me. Simulated torture is not my idea of a good time. But “The Pineapple” did wear me down, and it’s beautiful in the way it highlights the lonely anguish at the heart of Buffett’s “Margaritaville.”

As its small cast obsesses over a fabled alien encounter and seems willing to stop at nothing to find release in a divine being, be careful, “The Pineapple” argues, of the personal Eden you seek.

At least that was my takeaway. You might walk away with an entirely different message.

“Maybe you just fell in with the wrong crowd and got abducted by aliens,” Neiden says.

The U.S. Air Force has been taking a new look at the feasibility of restarting production of the C-17 Globemaster III cargo plane as part of its still-evolving next-generation airlift plans. The service also continues to explore a wide range of next-generation aerial refueling concepts, including new stealthy and/or uncrewed tankers, but a firm vision for the way forward there has yet to emerge.

Air Force Lt. Gen. Daniel Tulley, head of Air Mobility Command (AMC), shared new details about future airlift and aerial refueling efforts, with TWZ and other outlets at a roundtable at the Air & Space Forces Association’s (AFA) 2026 Air, Space & Cyber Conference.

On the airlift side, the Air Force’s stated plan to date is to replace both the C-17A and C-5M Galaxy with a single Next-Generation Airlift (NGAL) platform, starting in the mid-2040s. Separately, the service is pursuing what could be a family of future aerial refueling capabilities under what is now called the Advanced Tanker Systems (ATS) program. Very broadly speaking, ATS presents a path toward what might come after the retirement of the aging KC-135 tanker fleet, though those aircraft are still expected to keep flying for years to come. The Air Force is also moving to further expand its fleet of newer KC-46A tankers in the interim, but persistent technical and other issues with that design continue to present hurdles.

At the roundtable today, Lt. Gen. Tulley was asked explicitly about restarting C-17 production. The manufacturer of those aircraft, Boeing, shuttered that line in 2015. The company also just marked the 35th anniversary of the design’s first flight yesterday.

“Heck yeah, but with a caveat, right?” Tulley said in response. “So we were just asking this question over the course of last week, and it’s in the context of next-generation airlift. So we are about to embark on the Analysis of Alternatives to replace the C-17 and replace the C-5. All options are on the table.”

“There’s always the option to service life extend the C-17, but the [production restart] question came up,” he continued. “I’ve heard this my entire career. Once we terminate an assembly line, can we ever bring it back? Does somebody store all the machinery and the dies and whatnot, and can you bring that out? So we’re asking that question.”

“But then whatever that answer is from the vendors, what will be the price tag associated with that?” he added. “You have to ask yourself, okay, is rebuilding a C-17 even if you make improvements – and there’s a loose analogy with the C-130J, [a] much more modern, capable variant of the C-130E [author’s note: the C-130J evolved more directly from the C-130H variant] I first learned to fly – if you do that with the C-17, is that the best move? Or are there new technologies that we can incorporate into it so that it can defend itself, so that it’s connected, it’s networked, it does all the things that maybe the current C-17 doesn’t do?”

“We’re looking into it as part of the Analysis of Alternatives. I’m hopeful that we’ll get to answer that question.”

In June, the House Armed Services Committee also directed the U.S. Air Force to prepare a formal briefing on the matter of new C-17 production in a report accompanying a draft of the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for Fiscal Year 2027.

Boeing Pieces Together the Last C-17 on the Line

The RAND Corporation did conduct a detailed, independent analysis more than a decade ago that assessed the costs and complexities that could come from Boeing building more C-17As, as well as other variants and derivatives of the design. RAND’s conclusion was that any of the courses of action would require billions of dollars of new investment and entail risks, as you can read more about in more detail here.

Foreign participation in a new C-17 production run could help at least defray costs. Australia, Canada, India, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom all currently fly Globemaster IIIs. The Strategic Airlift Capability (SAC) initiative, a multinational arrangement with several European members, as well as the United States, also operates three of these aircraft.

Boeing told TWZ directly in June that unnamed C-17 operators had been reaching out about the prospect of restarting the production line, and that the company was “encouraged” by those discussions.

As Lt. Gen. Tulley stressed, there are significant questions about whether buying new-production C-17s, even with substantial improvements, is not only feasible, but a good use of resources. The Air Force’s Globemaster III fleet today continues to prove itself to be critical to the U.S. military’s ability to project power globally, and is in very high demand right now, especially amid the ongoing conflict with Iran.

The Air Force’s desire to replace both the C-17 and C-5, which are very different aircraft in form and function, could still easily lead the service down a different route. Boeing is not the only one looking at future NGAL opportunities. Another company, Radia, has been very actively pitching a clean-sheet design that is physically bigger than either the C-17 and the C-5, and that is geared toward greater operational flexibility, at the Air Force. Radia is targeting a first flight of its aircraft, called Windrunner, by the end of the decade, but it is still in a very aspirational stage at present.

Many questions also still remain about how the Air Force will ultimately proceed on the next-generation aerial refueling front.

“So thinking beyond the current KC-46 buy and the program extension, whatever that next tanker looks like, our Advanced Tanker System, it’s got to be connected. It’s got to be able to defend itself,” Lt. Gen. Tulley said at the roundtable. “But it begs the question: does it need to be manned? Could it be optionally manned? Could it be autonomous? Or is there a family of solutions maybe that would answer that question? So I do not believe that it has to be manned.”

The AMC head was responding to a specific question about how autonomy could play into the Air Force’s future aerial refueling plans, which included a reference ot the U.S. Navy’s MQ-25 Stingray tanker drone. The Navy just announced its first low-rate initial production contract for MQ-25s on Monday.

“I think you’re seeing that with the MQ-25 and the Navy’s work, but then, how do we, the U.S. Air Force, bring that to bear in scope, scale, and range?” Tulley continued. “An optionally manned or an unmanned tanker, at range, the ranges we need to operate at, it’s a very large aircraft. And we’re not yet to where we’re employing fully autonomous large aircraft, but the technology, I would say, is there and rapidly getting there if it’s not.”

The MQ-25 is another Boeing product, and that company has shown a rendering of a larger, land-based derivative in the past. Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works has also put forward several advanced tanker concepts in the past, including stealthy and potentially uncrewed designs.

“We will be going after how to make the tanker survive,” William Bailey, the Air Force official currently performing the duties of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, had also told TWZ and other outlets at a separate roundtable at the Air, Space & Cyber Conference yesterday. Bailey was responding to a direct question about whether the service was moving away from the idea of a stealthy tanker as part of the ATS plan.

“So, lots of work around what do we do in the future for our tankers, and we spent a pretty dedicated effort to go through and look at what do we think those design solutions could look like,” Bailey also said. “We looked internally. We went out to industry, had those guys come back with their thoughts on how to provide a more survivable aircraft.”

“The stuff that was coming in for me might have been an incremental improvement, but [it was] not clear that that represented the next step, the next phase,” he added. “What you’ll see is we’ll take our efforts, and we’ll look at, hey, if the real question is tanker access, then let’s not constrain ourselves to just the aircraft itself and trying to make a stealthy tanker. We need a tanker to have access, so we’ll talk about all those systems that it would take to protect that tanker.”

Bailey said the question of operational “access” applied to next-generation discussions, as well.

As is the case with the Air Force’s airlift fleets, the service tankers are in high demand due to the conflict with Iran and other current operational requirements. Stress on the existing tanker force, compounded by the ever-advancing age of the KC-135s, has been a steadily growing point of concern for years now. U.S. military officials have long been drawing attention to the limits of available aerial refueling capacity to meet even routine peacetime demands. The Air Force, as well as the U.S. Navy, have also expanded their use of contractor-owned and operated tankers to perform certain non-combat aerial refueling missions to help ease this strain.

In the meantime, the Air Force is still pursuing upgrades for its existing airlift and tanker fleets, with heavy focus on increased network connectivity and improved self-protection capabilities.

Greater connectivity “can be a game changer, and it has been a game changer in Operation Epic Fury [against Iran],” Lt. Gen. Tulley said at today’s roundtable. “The ability for air crews to communicate, to coordinate tanker orbits and rendezvous, to pass threat information, to save lives and save aircraft has been everything we expected it to be and more.”

“We have MAF NEXUS that we’re pursuing. The goal is to have this on all mobility aircraft, whether they’re future-built and it’s incorporated, or it’s an add-on capability to existing aircraft,” he continued. “It brings edge compute, the ability to then employ AI [artificial intelligence] and much more computing core power forward on the aircraft, and it does network with the rest of the joint force and the Air Force’s battle management system.”

When it comes to new options for protecting existing tankers, “nothing’s off the table,” the AMC boss added. “Whether it’s [in the] electromagnetic spectrum, whether it’s kinetic self-defense, a layered approach, we’re looking at everything to come up with what might be the best system. But it’s got to be a system that we can afford, and it’s got to be one that we can put on all the aircraft we have and the ones we’re about to build.”

Using Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) or other types of drones to help provide localized defense for airlifters and tankers could be another option. The Air Force has already experimented with this, at least to a degree.

The Air Force is otherwise still clearly continuing to shape its future airlift and aerial fueling visions. As part of that work, the service is now at least considering the possibility of rebooting C-17 production.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

“American Idol” is packing up its stars after 25 years in Hollywood.

In the latest blow to Los Angeles film production, ABC’s long-running program will move its upcoming season to the Atlanta area, according to Fremantle, which produces the show with 19 Entertainment, owned by Sony Pictures Television.

Fremantle declined to comment further.

The move comes as Los Angeles’ production levels have tumbled, prompting concern from film workers, union leaders and elected officials who are scrambling to address the crisis. California, despite boosting its tax incentive program, has been struggling to compete against other states that offer more lucrative credits.

TV production activity in the L.A. region was down 27% in the second quarter compared with the same period a year ago, largely because of fewer reality TV shoots, according to the nonprofit FilmLA.

Earlier this year, another broadcast TV stalwart, Fox’s “The Masked Singer,” made plans to vacate its space on the Fox lot on West Pico Boulevard in Los Angeles and head to New Jersey, also in search of more lucrative tax credits. Another ABC hit, “Shark Tank,” also is relocating to Atlanta from its longtime home base on Sony’s Culver City lot.

“American Idol” has been a local economic engine since launching on Fox in 2002. For years, the show ranked as the No. 1 show on TV and employed hundreds of workers each season as aspiring singers hoped for their big break.

The most recent season originated from Red Studios in Hollywood.

Georgia offers generous tax incentives, including up to a 30% tax credit for reality television productions that spend at least $500,000 in the state. Unlike California, Georgia’s tax program allows compensation for actors and other so-called above-the-line workers to be included.

Like California, Georgia has been grappling with lower production levels. For more than a decade, its soundstages attracted colossal movie productions, but the region was dealt a blow when the Walt Disney Co. recently shifted production of its Marvel superhero films to facilities near London.

On Tuesday, a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, the Motion Picture Assn., industry unions, Hollywood special ambassador Jon Voight and filmmaker Steven Paul made a pitch for a federal film and television tax credit to keep jobs in Hollywood and in the U.S. broadly.

Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Glendale) plans to introduce a bill into Congress as early as this month in collaboration with Rep. Brian Jack (R-Ga.), who represents a district southwest of Atlanta. The MPA released a study estimating a federal tax credit could add 143,000 film and TV jobs.

This year, in particular, has seen big swings as the California Film and TV Tax Credit Program expanded eligibility to include competition shows.

Large-scale competition shows are eligible under the state’s incentive program if they have a minimum budget of $1 million per episode. The credit, however, does not include traditional reality shows, game shows, talk shows or docu-follow television programs.

Changes in California’s formula resulted in a jump to 676 shoot days in the second quarter, compared with 463 shoot days during the first three months of the year. Nonetheless, this year’s April-June quarter still reflected an almost 40% decline when compared with the same time last year.

FilmLA said that over the last five years, reality productions have plummeted nearly 63%.

ABC in late July announced “American Idol” was returning, marking its 10th season on the Walt Disney Co. network. Producers are auditioning potential contestants this week during stops in Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina.

ABC declined to comment on the move.

Ryan Seacrest has long hosted the show, which last season featured Lionel Richie, Luke Bryan and Carrie Underwood, a previous “American Idol” champion, as the celebrity judges.

Deadline first reported the planned move to Georgia.

Game shows are also leaving L.A.

A growing number of programs long based around Hollywood and New York have headed across the ocean to Ireland and Britain to take advantage of tax credits that bring down the cost of production as broadcast network executives contend with shrinking audiences and lower profit margins.

Fox currently has several prime-time game shows produced overseas, including “The Floor,” “Celebrity Name That Tune” and “Beat Shazam.

Staff writer Stephen Battaglio contributed to this report.

Evelina Fernández’s “Antigone: In the Language of Kings” receives a theatrically entrancing staging at the Getty Villa’s Outdoor Theater in a production co-produced with Latino Theater Company.

The adaptation resets Sophocles’ tragedy to Aztec culture in a transposition that is both visually and musically enlivening. If the drama is oversimplified, it nonetheless makes for a gripping spectacle.

It’s not easy to find analogies that can reanimate the importance of burial rites to a modern audience. The production’s creative team, led by the inexhaustibly inventive director José Luis Valenzuela, returns us to a world where the dead are owed sacred duties and the living are fearful to renege on this basic human responsibility.

The incense-filled production — conducted in English, Spanish and Nahuatl (the language of the Aztecs), with English and Spanish supertitles — proceeds like a pageant. Headdress-clad warriors clash on the battlefield. A masked chorus, moving with the coordination of a Broadway musical ensemble, gives voice to the anxiety and grief of the collective. A statuesque figure of death, trailing black fabric, sweeps up the casualties of war with the efficiency of a human vacuum.

In Sophocles, Antigone, Oedipus’ headstrong daughter, defies the edict issued by her uncle Creon, the newly deputized king, declaring that her slain brother Polynices is an enemy of the state and therefore ineligible for burial. For Antigone this is an imposition of political power over divine law, and she puts her life on the line to uphold her obligation to her family and faith.

The ensemble of “Antigone: In the Language of Kings” at the Getty Villa Museum Outdoor Classical Theater.

(Cassia Davis / © 2026 J. Paul Getty Trust)

The German philosopher Hegel considered Sophocles’ “Antigone” the high-water mark of tragedy for the way it dramatizes the collision between two equally justified moral positions. Creon, representing the claims of the polis over the clan, cannot be dismissed outright. Nor can Antigone, whose all-consuming identification with her cause renders her indifferent to other obligations, be adopted as a user-friendly hero.

Tragedy arises from the one-sidedness of their claims. Antigone loses her life and Creon, for all intents and purposes, destroys his own, suffering the deaths of his most cherished loved ones.

Hegel’s reading of “Antigone” illustrates his thesis-antithesis-synthesis view of dialectical progress. Sophocles, it can be surmised from the other plays in his Oedipus cycle, likely conceived “Antigone” with a larger metaphysical design. But even if Hegel’s interpretation would have seemed off the mark to him, Antigone and Creon are too complex to reduce to a schematic argument.

Fernández simplifies these antagonists. Her Antíkona (a formidable Esperanza América) reveals her softer side even when rejecting her sister, Ixmene (Alexis B. Santiago), for not having the courage to zealously join her fight.

Tlahtoani Klion (Cástulo Guerra), Emperor of Tenochtitlan, is a ruler so intoxicated with his own authority that he’s clearly courting rebuke from the gods. It’s only a matter of time before his hubris is slapped down.

The acting is theatrically robust, though not always subtle. I wondered if ambiguity had been outlawed along with the funeral rites of Antíkona’s warrior brother Polynices. The bold clarity of the performances was energizing, but the wailing sometimes sounded like parody grief.

The outsize nature of the production invites overacting. And Ric Salinas, who plays Chachalacani, humorously obliges, bringing his Culture Clash vaudeville skills to the role of the sentry who’s caught between the rock of Klion’s tyranny and his fellow feeling for Antíkona’s sympathetic cause.

Strong performances are elicited from José Eduardo Moreno, who plays Klion’s son Hemon, Antíkona’s fiancé, and Zilah Mendoza, who plays Cihuatlahtoani Euridice, Klion’s wife. Their portrayals, mixing ferocious strength with stark vulnerability, make the tragedy’s pileup of bodies at the end all the more piercing.

The ensemble of “Antigone: In the Language of Kings” at the Getty Villa Museum Outdoor Classical Theater.

(Cassia Davis / © 2026 J. Paul Getty Trust)

América’s Antíkona is as unyielding as any Antigone I’ve seen. It’s a commanding portrayal, but I wish the production didn’t shrink from its protagonist’s fierceness. The obdurate side of the character is lessened with a gesture Antíkona bestows on Ixmene — a reassurance that even though she’s a revolutionary, she’s still an affectionate sister.

Sophocles is made of harsher stuff. Fernández’s adaptation is anxious to turn tragedy into a sermon, offering theatergoers moral solace where Sophocles leaves his audience in a contemplative state of stunned silence.

But the staging makes up for the dramatic shortfall. Valenzuela masterly orchestrates the mise-en-scène. The majestic costumes of Catarina Copelli, invoking a rich brocaded world on the brink of disappearance, might be the real superstar.

François-Pierre Couture’s scenic design is mesmerizing without ever being overbearing. “Lee” Xinyuan Li’s lighting heightens the sense of theatrical foreboding. Yee Eun Nam’s projections inject into this transient world a welcome subtlety.

Urbanie Lucero’s choreography and movement direction maintain the production’s graceful poise. The musicians, discreetly performing at the back of the stage under the guidance of Mesoamerican instruments director Christopher García, charge the air with percussive Indigenous wonder.

“Antigone: In the Language of Kings” marks the Getty Villa’s 20th anniversary of reinventing classical tragedy for our time. This gorgeous staging makes me ardently wish that the theater extends the tradition for at least another 20 years.