program

When it comes to the future of Tail 844, the SR-71 Blackbird that mysteriously disappeared from NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center, few people have more insights than Tim Conners. When he worked at NASA in the 1990s, Conners was the lead propulsion engineer for the agency’s Blackbird program. He worked extensively on 844 and has an intimate knowledge of what made the iconic aircraft tick. Now, he brings an insider perspective on NASA’s secretive work to get the Blackbird back in the air and speculates on what it would take to do so, as well as the famed jet’s possible flight test role for the agency after 27 years of dormancy.

Late last month, we wrote about how satellite imagery taken over Armstrong showed that Tail 844 had been missing since at least May. The revelation was first made by Steve Trimble, Aviation Week‘s defense editor and friend of TWZ. It came after NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman cryptically teased plans for a new high- and fast-flying X-plane with a silhouette of an aircraft that immediately drew comparisons to the Blackbird. Trimble reported just this week that NASA had been talking to ex-SR-71 program personnel about coming back to work on the aircraft. This confluence of events has led to rampant speculation about whether NASA was planning to resurrect the Blackbird and for what purpose?

In an exclusive interview with TWZ, Conners, now technical director for advanced weapons systems at Tiberius Aerospace, gave us his take on NASA’s Blackbird revelations and insights into what NASA is working on and how far along they are in the process.

Some of the questions and answers have been slightly edited for clarity.

Q: Tell me about your background with the SR-71 program. How did it begin? How long did it last? And what did you do?

A: So that basically fell in my lap when I was an engineer at NASA’s Dryden [Flight Research Center] back in the early ’90s when NASA took delivery of three of the airframes when the Air Force was retiring the fleet. So NASA got two A models and a trainer. Obviously, tail number 844, which is NASA’s designation, is the one that’s getting all of the attention right now. But those came to Dryden in the early ’90s. 

By luck of the draw, I was in the propulsion group. We were short-staffed for a number of reasons, and they needed an engineer on Blackbird. And I had been with NASA for about three or four years at that point, and I got tapped to prepare the NASA side of the mission for the upcoming research flights. So I had a few years to get familiar. That was a part-time job, by the way. I also owned the F-15 fleet at NASA as a propulsion engineer, and that was occupying a lot of my time, but it did give me an adequate amount of time to get familiar with the way that the airplane operated, at least from the propulsion standpoint. And then we began doing research missions in ’96. I left NASA in ’98, but I was able to support the program through two years of flight testing and all the years of preparation for those two years.

Q: Tell me more about your role with the Blackbirds.

A: I was lead propulsion engineer on the NASA side. So what NASA would do is they would assign disciplinary leads across from their industry and government counterparts. So Dryden’s disciplinary leads, their job was basically to make sure that any experimental packages were integrated safely with the airframe, and that we could execute the proposed test missions safely and successfully. I owned propulsion and I also owned performance. So if you recall the Lockheed Linear Aerospike rocket engine activity, that package weighed 20,000 to 25,000 pounds and was mounted externally on the back of the SR-71. That was a drag issue, obviously. So part of my role was to make sure that we could actually accelerate through the transonic drag rise with that package and get out to the target test conditions. 

Q: There is a tremendous amount of interest in seeing the Blackbird fly again. The biggest question seems to be why? What kinds of experiments or research would an SR-71 provide that couldn’t be done more effectively with a modern aircraft, rocket or unmanned vehicle? Can you walk us through some of the reasons NASA would like to see it in the skies again?

A: Yeah, that’s a question that everybody’s been asking. Why? I’m speculating, although I do have a good feel for where this is going. So bear with me. 

They probably are not going to do this for — or trying to do this — for aerodynamic reasons. You can do CFD [computational fluid dynamics]-based modeling in this speed regime all day long and very accurately in this day and age. It does not take a lot of time or money to do that. What you cannot do is an accurate representation of a new type of engine integrated into a high-speed airframe. You can do the conceptual modeling of it. Of course, it’s difficult to get the final installed answer, especially if it involves an engine that operates at long duration. That is where I think they’re going with this. I believe that they’re developing basically a high-speed engine test bed. That would make the most sense to me.

Q: That’s something you couldn’t do with a more modern aircraft or rocket or unmanned vehicle?

A: That’s a good question. But you know, probably two-thirds of that battle is just developing the airframe. It does depend on the size of the engine that you’re after. 

Obviously, if this were a Williams engine or that size class, you could get by with probably a bespoke drone to do your testing. That wouldn’t be that expensive. If your goal is to test something that’s man-rated or very large, like a J58-size engine, what better way to do it than use an airframe that’s already proven to fly at that speed?

Q: Were you asked to join a team at NASA tasked with getting a jet back in the air? Who else was asked, and what kind of team were they building?

A: I did not receive an offer. There was a tongue-in-cheek text that I got earlier in the year that said, ‘Hey, Conners, how would you like to help get the Blackbirds flying again?’ And that was from somebody who was positioned with inside information. That is where I first heard of this. This was back in spring, but nobody formally reached out to me.

I believe that the only one that’s been tagged so far, as far as a retiree, was Mike Relja. Mike was a crew chief on the Blackbird, and that makes sense that they would potentially want to pull on him. But there was no formal offer, and I tell you what: If somebody approached me to work it, I don’t think I could turn them down.

Q: Do you know where the idea for this project came from and who is in charge?

A: I don’t have an answer. I’d love to know as well.

Q: What can you tell me about this effort? What are the latest developments in this project that you know of?

A: So what I’m hearing is that they’re looking at doing power-on testing fairly soon. That’s pretty big. So of course that’s not engine power on. That’s external power applied to the airframe, seeing which systems still live, which ones don’t, and then moving from there. So that would be an expected first step. 

It’s an encouraging step. That means NASA would have gotten beyond cracking open all the bays, inspecting the interior, making sure that the thing at least passes visual inspection for airworthiness from that standpoint. 

Q: Have they actually gotten any systems working?

A: No, they’ve done the visual inspection, actually, putting electrons on the airframe. [To get systems working] would be the next step, but it is forthcoming, from what I understand.

Q: What is the timeline?

A: That’s supposed to happen within the next couple weeks.

Q: Really? Where is this work taking place?

A: That I do not know for sure. Although I assume it’s happening at [NASA’s] Armstrong [Flight Research Center].

Q: So what is going to happen?

A: That’s a good question. Let me tell you about what I heard more recently, and then you can begin to connect the dots. JP-7. People ask about the fuel. I think it’s pretty well known that NASA had a huge amount of JP-7 stockpiled that they received from the Air Force back in the early ’90s. So much that it was in a dedicated tank, like one of the giant jet fuel tanks at Edwards Air Force Base. You know, the tanks up on the ridge.

From what I understand, that supply unfortunately was discarded about 20 years ago, and JP-7 is a unique fuel. Obviously, low volatility. When I poked at what might be the way forward there, it didn’t sound like that was a showstopper. I got the impression that there’s been dialogue underway with refineries for a replacement or a surrogate that would work. So I went from being deflated, hearing that the fuel was gone, to being encouraged that potentially there was a surrogate workaround.

But that led to the question regarding the engines themselves, so the feedback there was more discouraging in that it looks like the engines are indeed unserviceable. I don’t believe that is based on an actual attempt to run them. It is based on inspection. Probably no surprise. They’ve sat idle, you know, for 27 years. That is what led to questions going back and forth regarding how the airframe would be powered. And that’s what led into where, if you connect the dots, that’s where the airframe would be used as an engine test bed. 

So different engines, they would have to be high-Mach bypass systems. We can speculate on which engine company might be developing those systems, but yeah, I don’t want to give it too much away because I don’t want us to lose the inside information that we got.

Q: Are they working on a completely different engine to power Blackbird?

A: I don’t know that for sure. I think if the J58s are not an option for powering the Blackbird, you either button it back up and walk away from it, or you go bring in engines that are already under development that we’re not privy to at this point in time. But there’s no other option. So what are we going to use? It’s not like we can slap in F100s or F110s. They’re not going to cut it.

The Pratt & Whitney J58 – The Engine of the SR-71 Blackbird

Q: Obviously, restoring an aircraft sitting out in the elements for years into one able to withstand the rigors of Mach 3 flight is one hell of an undertaking. In your mind, what are the biggest hurdles to this endeavor?

A: Number one would be the engines for sure. Number two would be anything that’s made of elastomerics. Plastics, wiring. Covering connectors. All that stuff degrades and oxidizes with time. You can imagine what frayed wiring and broken wiring insulation – what kind of havoc that would create. What Blackbird has going for it is that all those casings and connectors were built for the rigor of sustained Mach 3.2 flight for an hour, an hour plus, so they are not going to deteriorate quickly. The question is: Have they deteriorated in 27 years? So, if the answer is not a significant amount, then we’ve probably addressed one of the biggest questions – other than the engines – regarding reviving the airplane. 

Q: Do you think NASA is going to attempt to just fly Tail 844 largely in its original configuration, or will they deeply modify it or build something new based on it?

A: Completely unknown. They definitely have the ability to modify the airframe, right? They did it before in the ’90s to carry the Linear Aerospike package. That was a huge undertaking on the airframe itself. They did it successfully. Armstrong still has a pretty deep bench in that area, so if they wanted to take on modifying the titanium structure, I think they could do it. 

But it’s a good question. Again, that would probably point to aerodynamic studies, and if it were me and my dollar as a taxpayer, I would lean on computational studies to get those answers. That’s what I tend to do in my day job is forego testing in lieu of computational when it involves external aero, but it’s when you do the integrated propulsion in this speed regime, that’s really when you need test data from the actual operating conditions. 

Q: As opposed to digital modeling?

A: Yes. For instance, say the aerodynamic databases for Blackbird are gone, which they might be. I know there are simple aerodynamic models that still exist, but like a true high-fidelity model that would go into a piloted simulator, that could probably be regenerated fairly quickly. Probably on the order of months computationally in this day and age. So I think simulation capability could be stood up in fairly short order. That, of course, will be foundational for the pilot training task.

Q: We’ll talk more about pilot training later, but first I want to ask about modernization. If NASA were to inject modernized features into the SR-71, what would you like to see? And what makes the most sense in terms of material science, avionics, propulsion and so on?

A: I’m not a materials expert. I think it would be really interesting to see how the airframe could be optimized using adaptive flight control capabilities. So, if the flight control system could be digitized, I think that would lead to some very interesting in-flight experiments. I doubt that that would be. I could be wrong, but if the goal is to get the airframe back up as a propulsion test bed, you don’t need to cut out the hydromechanical flight control system and replace it with a digital one. 

That all said, what I would like to see is what we talked about a few minutes ago, and that’s basically modern high-speed engine technology. So what could be done? The J58s were low operating pressure ratio systems. What could be done with a modern, digitally controlled, multistream, high-Mach engine, I think, would be truly trailblazing. 

One of the reasons why there’s interest in this speed regime, it was neglected for a number of years. The focus was on hypersonics. If you proposed anything going back, say, 15 years in the Mach 3.5 speed regime, it was ignored. The glitz and glamor was on hypersonics. Hypersonics is great tactically for certain scenarios, but the weaknesses of hypersonics are now becoming apparent. 

And as far as countermeasures, hypersonics still has a place. Don’t get me wrong, but every system cannot be hypersonic from an affordability standpoint. So, now you’ve seen it over the last, say, five years. A lot of systems are coming back on the scene that operate in the Mach 2 to Mach 4 regime, and there’s a reason they’re all fitting in there, right? You stay below the speed limit that requires more exotic metallics. You stay in the titanium regime. You can fly, of course, up to [Mach] 3.5 with brief excursions up to about [Mach] 4, so that is tactically relevant against a lot of military targets and defensive systems. So here it is. You know we now have a potential flying test bed that can carry engines in the J58 size class.

The Mighty J58 – The SR-71’s Secret Powerhouse

Q: How much could a project like this cost, and is it really economically feasible? How long do you think it could take?

A: I’ve been thinking that over, and I think it depends on who does it. I don’t want to disparage my former government brethren. I had great respect for the folks at NASA when I worked with them, but one of the reasons why I left the agency is because it was becoming so risk-averse. That was adding bloat to everything. And what we used to do quickly, we no longer could do quickly or cheaply at what was Dryden Flight Research Center, so that is what concerns me. 

If NASA could operate with the agility that it had, if Dryden/Armstrong could operate with the agility it had 30 years ago, they could do this work in probably a few years. I would say again, it would depend on what exactly they need to do to the airframe. If it’s to resurrect the airframe and bolt in new engines using existing interface hardpoints, that would go much, much more quickly than doing extensive airframe modifications.

Q: Given that 844 has been sitting idle since 1999, what would be the very first thing you would want to inspect or test before even considering putting it back in the air?

A: Exactly what I’m hearing the rumor is that they’re doing this. What is the condition of all the components in the airplane that are flowing electrons? Because if the entire airframe is shorted out, you know how it is. 

If you have a car where you’ve hooked up the battery cables backwards – I had a car once where somebody jumped in and did that. It ruined the car because I was chasing shorts constantly, constantly breaking down in the months that followed because the wiring was compromised, melted, bubbled all over the vehicle. And then it would get wet. You get shorts. That, I believe, is what one of the objectives of power-on testing is. To make sure continuity still exists, reliable continuity throughout the airframe. So that’s exactly the first step. 

I would say the second would be hydraulics. That vehicle is hydromechanical. So what is the state of the actuators and whatnot?

Q: And you said that work is taking place now?

A: It’s certainly being inspected. That was one of the reasons why they pulled it off of the display pad at Armstrong. But that work has been going on for a couple of months, and it certainly seems that there was at least reason to be encouraged and to go forward with this next step. Otherwise, they would have just towed it back to the parking spot.

Q: And the next step is testing the systems?

A: That is correct.

Q: We touched on this a little before, but how realistic is it to get an SR-71’s J58 engines operational again after nearly three decades of inactivity? What would worry you most about those engines? How many are left?

A: Well, that’s a good point. As far as [engines] that are readily available, there are several that are at the [Air Force Flight Test (AFFT) Museum at Edwards AFB]. I believe they’ve been stored outside. But if you consider all the museums around the world with Blackbirds on display, almost all of them have installed J58s, and there’s usually one sitting alongside the airframe on display, so there are plenty of engines. Whether or not they’re serviceable, that of course is the question. 

But probably the biggest problem with an engine – well, there are several with a gas turbine that sits unmoved for decades – it’s going to be that you’re going to flatten the bearings. Probably not visible to the eye, but rotating turbo machinery doesn’t like flats on the bearings. So for obvious vibration reasons, you got that. And you’ve got the seals. Seals are going to crack. Trapped fuel is going to turn to gunk and clog up lines. That engine was all hydromechanical, of course, or no digital controls on that because of the heat involved. So fuel hydraulics played a big role in that engine. 

There is likely a lot of goo in those lines. I believe that’s why they’ve essentially been written off as unserviceable. I was discouraged because one of the questions I asked that I didn’t get an answer to was: Did anybody try to run the engines or pull them apart? But I don’t even know if the instructions exist to unstack a J58 at this point. I’m sure it could be figured out with the right people, but you know how it is. Pulling something apart is a lot easier than putting it back together. 

Q: So there’s no manual for that anymore?

A: I don’t know if there’s a manual specific to that. Like I told Steve [Trimble] at Aviation Week, there certainly are operating manuals. You’ve probably seen the pilot’s manual for the SR-71A. It’s a beauty. There are a lot of copies online. You can get PDFs of those. They are very well-written, huge manuals. I know prints exist for the airplane. Those were in the keeping of the Edwards Museum. I believe those have been handed back over to NASA. So, it’s not like there’s a complete dearth of information.

When I was at NASA, I was the person who received everything that Pratt & Whitney had left on the J58s when the Air Force decommissioned the program, and that information was in two or three smallish boxes and consisted of hard copy code printout or printout of numerical data, along with some magnetic reels of code. It was not much. And I was told at the time the only reason I received that information was somebody missed it when the Air Force gave the destruct notice. It was under somebody’s desk, so it was not much in the way of knowledge transfer, unfortunately.

Q: What did you do with all that?

A: I left it behind in 1998 when I left NASA.

Q: What happened to it?

A: I have no idea. Hopefully, somebody scanned it. But again, that was J58 info, right? So if they’re going with a new engine, they’ll have the full digital models for those new systems. And I do believe that recreating the aerodynamic database, including inlet performance, that kind of data can all be regenerated fairly quickly with computational tools.

Q: We touched on this a little bit before, but how difficult would it be to reproduce the JP-7 fuel that powered the Blackbird? It would need designated tankers too, correct? 

A: So that was one of the questions I asked is whether or not that formulation exists still. The answer I got back was that essentially a refinery should be able to recreate a suitable surrogate. If you think about it, JP-7 was unique in that it had a very low volatility characteristic. 

What I’ve learned about Jet A from some of the ramjet work that I’ve been doing is that it has a ridiculously low volatility too, of course, by design. So I don’t know that JP-7 is that far apart from the chemical characteristics of a Jet A-class fuel, JP-8-type fuel. JP-8 was a significant change from JP-4, so the Air Force was using JP-4 in their fleet, and then moved to JP-8 to be consistent in the ’90s with the Navy with their formulations. That’s a lower volatility fuel, and at NASA we had to recharacterize the flight performance of all of our jets with JP-8, but it worked fine. 

We were concerned about operability – that we were going to have flameouts and engine relight and flight relay problems. Those did not materialize, so I don’t want to oversimplify it, but I am thinking that you might be able to take an existing Jet A and with the right additives knock down the volatility to a level that’s safe for flying in the Blackbird. 

Q: What would need to happen to have aerial refueling jets be able to handle fuel for the Blackbird?

A: There were dedicated JP-7 tankers for the Blackbird. I don’t know if they can take an existing system and flush it. It would depend on the formulation, right? JP-7 was notorious for its unseemly characteristics. It was toxic. 

I had a shirt that got dripped on when I was standing under the wing of the Blackbird once, and I had to throw it out. I could not get the stink out of that shirt from the JP-7. It was a weird fuel. So if you can get one that’s more aligned with the fuels used in the service, then I don’t believe that’s going to be a showstopper as far as tanker support, but you do know tanker support is going to be required for that airplane. 

Q: You said the JP-7 fuel stank. What did it smell like?

A: I just remember it turning my stomach. Like I kept smelling something as the day went on, and I reached over and saw a stain on my shoulder. I don’t recall what happened the rest of the day, but I just remember being repulsed by the odor and then not being able to get it out when I washed the shirt. 

Q: Beyond the fuel, the SR-71 depended on a huge ecosystem of specialized equipment, fluids, personnel and procedures. Which parts of that infrastructure would be hardest to recreate today?

A: That was something that Mike Relja pointed out when he talked to Steve Trimble. That’s a good one. You probably heard that the J58s were started with a start cart that was basically a bank of Buick 12-cylinder engines, all next to each other. It’s a beautiful-sounding system, but very unique. But what is starting, you know, other than you’re either doing a power takeoff via shaft, or you’re using compressed air. It depends on what the engine demands. So I think the start cart development would be fairly straightforward. 

But there is a lot of specialized equipment, like Mike pointed out, the wings when they’re split up, they are held in place by a specific scaffolding. The way the engines were craned out of the wing required special equipment. Pulling the inlet spike off that required a special cradle. Those are not insurmountable, but you don’t want to wait till the last minute to realize you need unique equipment. So it’s all got to be taken into consideration.

Q: Could existing SR-71s in museums realistically be used as sources of spare parts for 844, or would cannibalizing those aircraft create more problems than it solves? Were those airframes left structurally intact? 

A: I believe that was the agreement with the Blackbirds. If a museum were to put one on display, there was a certain expectation regarding care and maintenance. Not so much maintenance, but care and preservation. If you think about it, many of them are under [a] roof in climate-controlled facilities. I know several of them that are preserved like that, including one here in Tucson. That, of course, is the best place for preserving anything with elastomerics and plastic. So I think it’s encouraging that so many of them have been so well cared for. Again, it’s going to come down to which components, regardless of whether or not they’re indoor or outdoor, which components are going to fail first, and I believe that’s the exercise NASA is looking at. 

Then you’ve got to start beating down, chasing supply chain sources for some of this, and you know the nightmare that’s out there with supply chain and aerospace. So it’s not going to be an easy task. I don’t want to act like it is. I don’t think it’s insurmountable though.

Q: So these aircraft can be used as sources of spare parts?

A: Sure, absolutely.

Q: Is anyone with a Blackbird already contributing parts?

A: I know that the Edwards Air Museum is contributing what they can as far as spares and prints. I don’t know who else, although I believe the second NASA SR-71A went to the Evergreen Aviation & Space Museum in Oregon. I would expect them to be in the loop. 

(TWZ reached out to the Evergreen to find out what, if anything, it is contributing to this effort.)

Q: How difficult will it be for modern test pilots to fly Tail 844, or whatever aircraft is created from this project? What would actually be the hardest part of training a pilot to fly the aircraft today? Do you think they will convert it into an unmanned configuration?

A: Well, that would be a difficult airplane to convert to unmanned, unless it went with a digital backbone, and like I said, I think that would be an enormous undertaking. It’s not unheard of. NASA, along with McDonnell Douglas, converted a couple of F-15s to all-digital backbones before the F-15E program began. It can be done. It’s just expensive. It’s not easy. 

But the piloting task starts with a good simulator, right? The piloting task is absolutely a big deal. I saw it firsthand at Dryden. That said, it took a couple years, probably two. I would say that’s about right for the Dryden pilots, who are pretty good at what they do, to learn to fly the Blackbird safely, and that was with the use of the two-seat trainer, which we’re not going to have this time.

So I think the key to this happening is getting a digital sim together very quickly, and it wouldn’t surprise me if NASA has begun this process already. Getting that together, plus getting the former pilots who are still with us in the seat to make sure that it aligns with what they recall as far as the unique features of the airplane. 

I have 100 hours of stick time on the Air Force Blackbird simulator. I’m not a pilot, but I used to pre-fly the maneuvers for the pilots and NASA on the high-drag missions, so I’m familiar with the way the airplane flies up and away, and it is a bear to fly. It is not easy. So training is not insurmountable. Like I said, it takes a good, high-fidelity sim. NASA is expert at building those kinds of simulators, modular simulators quickly. In this day and age, we should be able to put a high-fidelity sim together fairly quickly for training. 

If you recall, the cockpit is an analog nightmare on a Blackbird. Breakers everywhere. Dials everywhere. I doubt that somebody suggested that we go with an all-digital cockpit. That would be so much work to do. But if we go for it with just a pure analog cockpit that we used previously, that’s going to require a lot of familiarity. I do believe that the training systems might still exist for that. It would just be for that airplane. It would just be getting them all cobbled back together.

SR-71 Cockpit Checkout

Q: What made the Blackbird so difficult to fly?

A: It’s a low-G airframe, so you got to baby it. It’s easy to get an angle of attack out of range. And then with those chined surfaces, it’s easy to get a pitch-up with the airplane. That’s how I always managed to wreck it in the sim. I would let alpha get away from me.

Q: Do you know if any of the pilots have been recalled for this effort to get this thing flying again?

A: No, I don’t know.

Q: It has been close to 70 years since the A-12 Oxcart first flew. There had to have been other high-speed aircraft that at least came and went in the classified test environment. Considering all the work in hypersonics today, it isn’t hard to believe new platforms exist. Why would the SR-71 still have relevance here, and why not use one of those aircraft instead, if they exist? If they do, is it because the SR-71 is declassified? 

A: Yeah, that could very well be what we’re looking at here. I’ve had friends ask that question this week. We were talking about the SR-72. Where is that at? I don’t know. I know people who went to work on it years ago. I’ve never heard anything since. So it could be that that’s so deep black that there’s no way that platform could be used as a test asset. So I think it’s precisely what you said. The Blackbird’s no longer classified, and that it’s possible that the engines that might be used in Blackbird wouldn’t be classified either.

Q: Would any of those engines be applicable for this SR-71 reboot?

A: Certainly.

Q: Do you know if they exist anywhere?

A: No. But from what was leaked or hinted at regarding the size of the vehicle, it would seem that whatever was the power plant for that aircraft, it would be about the right size.

Q: What do you think generally about the renaissance of sorts in high-speed aerospace capabilities in recent years?

A: I worked on HAWC [Hypersonic Airbreathing Weapon Concept] at Raytheon, which became HACM [Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile]. One of the systems that I helped design was the inlet isolator used on HACM, which is not operational yet, but it will be. But it’s an air breather by Raytheon. That gave me a lot of exposure to the level of exquisite technology that’s required to field a system like that.

It is expensive. It’s difficult. Supply chain is a challenge. There’s a reason why they cost what they do per unit. So you see the push to develop lower-cost hypersonic systems like Castelion’s Blackbeard [lower-cost hypersonic missile]. It’s not an air breather. So I think it’s an easier problem than what we dealt with at Raytheon with an air breather. But nevertheless, it’s impressive that they’ve gotten a price point down to what they’ve gotten, so you see that happening in hypersonics. 

You’re kind of stuck in the same block of speed, but the price is dropping. And then meanwhile, you’ve got this massive group of munitions that are setting up camp in a Mach 2 to Mach 4 speed regime for reasons I mentioned. Those are running much cheaper per shot and per effect, which is why that’s happening. So that you give up something on survivability by pulling down into that speed range, but the price point allows you to volley at such a level that you overwhelm the defensive systems.

Q: If an SR-71 took to the skies again, would it not be one of the highest-profile aviation moments in a generation? It would certainly capture the imagination of many young and old. What do you think about the social aspect of all this?

A: I have yet to find anybody who isn’t excited by the prospect. Certainly, everybody within aviation thinks it’s cool. Some of my family who don’t know much about airplanes – they all think it’s cool. Everybody thinks it’s just super. That said, everybody also wonders why we’re doing it. But what’s funny is everybody still says, ‘Let’s do it anyway because it’s such an iconic airplane, beautiful airplane, an inspiration.’ Hopefully, there would be a good reason to spend the money. But I think even if it’s a bad reason, everybody wants it to take to the skies again.

Q: If you were a betting man, Tim, what would you say are the odds of this thing flying again?

A: I would give it a 25% chance.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

California is set to bring back a program aimed at reducing conflict between wild animals and people, as the state’s rebounding wolf population continues to cause concern among ranchers.

Newsom signed a bill restoring the program Tuesday ahead of a “fireside chat” focused on biodiversity and natural resources, during which he described growing up with a father who was dedicated to protecting mountain lions, condors and other wildlife.

Protecting nature is “a moral issue,” Newsom said, describing a “relationship we have to what’s above us, and … how that connects us to our Creator.”

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife once employed 13 specialists dedicated to resolving human-wildlife conflicts, but it let all but one of them go after funding ran dry in 2024. The loss came as such clashes are increasing, with climate change and urban sprawl bringing people closer to bears, mountain lions and other animals.

State Sen. Catherine Blakespear, author of Senate Bill 1135, said she’s seen it play out with sea lions around La Jolla Cove. This year, someone kicked one of the marine mammals, she said, and in general there have been no government staffers “to provide the guardrails.”

When the program ended, “we weren’t doing the education, and we didn’t have staff at the state that could help intervene or provide guidance,” Blakespear (D-Encinitas) told The Times. “It was a clear lack.”

The legislation also codifies a program to compensate ranchers when they lose livestock to wolves or suffer indirect harm. The program also provides money for nonlethal equipment to deter wolves, such as electric fences with bright flags.

Part of the law is rebranding, adding “coexistence” to both programs’ names.

The California Cattlemen’s Assn. and the California Farm Bureau shifted from opposing the bill to an “enthusiastic neutral,” said Kirk Wilbur, vice president of government affairs for the former trade group, noting his colleague coined the term.

Wilbur’s group was initially concerned about parts of the bill focused on livestock compensation, but he said they were amended in a way to avoid impeding how the program operates. However, the changes “didn’t quite get us to a support position because we didn’t necessarily view it as a significant improvement over the status quo.”

His group is in favor of the bill’s requirement to relaunch the Wildlife Coexistence Program, as it’s now called, saying it “does provide resources, for instance, for my members that are contending with mountain lion depredations of their livestock.”

The bill signing comes as California’s gray wolves had at least 42 pups this year — a record. The apex predators were extirpated in the state in the 1920s, beginning to naturally recolonize their native digs only 15 years ago.

“It’s a great sign for the conservation of the species that the population continues to reproduce, and that the number of individuals continues to reproduce,” said Axel Hunnicutt, gray wolf coordinator for the Department of Fish and Wildlife.

The animals’ success has delighted conservationists but frustrated some cattle ranchers, whose livelihood can become dinner for the endangered canids.

Hunnicutt spoke to The Times from Siskiyou County, where he was trying to get more GPS collars on wolves in the Whaleback pack, linked to 41 confirmed or probable livestock attacks this year, according to a recent report. That’s by far the most of any pack in the state.

Hunnicutt’s team consists of him and two other employees, along with temporary staffers. Collaring wolves in a pack that doesn’t already have the devices is challenging, he said. It involves setting up cameras, howling throughout the night to try to get the animals to respond and sometimes driving hundreds of miles looking for tracks.

Some members of the Whaleback pack are collared, providing a good starting point. While on the phone, he said he could see the tracks of two wolves on the road where he was walking.

Proponents of SB 1135 say it could lead to the expansion of Hunnicutt’s team or more resources for efforts such as collaring, which wildlife officials say helps reduce conflicts by enabling ranchers to know where wolves are.

However, the legislation does not guarantee funding for the programs it establishes.

Pamela Flick, California program director for Defenders of Wildlife, a co-sponsor of the bill, said advocates asked state leaders for $18 million in one-time funding for the human-wildlife coexistence program, followed by $15 million annually. They also asked for around $30 million for wolf compensation and management.

What they got this year is $6 million, with $2.5 million earmarked for compensation, according to Flick.

“It’s really a drop in the bucket when we’re talking about statewide human-wildlife conflicts,” she said. “So we will be advocating for additional funds in out years for sure.”

Sept. 22, 2026 6:56 PM PT

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration plans to limit the number of refugees admitted to the country to 17,500 mostly white South Africans, the administration told Congress on Tuesday, as it continues to transform a program that at one point served as a pathway to safety for people fleeing war and strife from countries around the world.

In a notice to Congress obtained by the Associated Press, the administration said the white South Africans faced seizures of their land and other forms of persecution and would be likely to assimilate when they come to America. The South African government has repeatedly rejected the idea that the white South Africans, who are Afrikaners, are a persecuted minority in the home country.

The Trump administration has dramatically altered a refugee program that historically enjoyed strong bipartisan support as it welcomed tens of thousands of refugees from countries around the world to new lives in America, and instead the administration has transformed it into a vehicle to resettle white South Africans in America.

The administration told Congress in the announcement that it intended to spend about $500 million to resettle the new arrivals to the U.S.

Presidents set the cap on how many refugees the U.S. will approve through the program each year, and historically, they’ve allocated those numbers across various geographic regions while factoring in wars or conflicts that spark humanitarian needs around the globe.

Santana and Kim write for the Associated Press.

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.

Known as MEHKOs, microenterprise home kitchen operations come in many shapes and sizes. They are coffee shops, barbecue joints, supper clubs, backyard tea parties, pickup-only pizzerias and everything in between. For some of these operators, it’s a passion project, and for others, it’s their only source of income.

MEHKOs were first legalized by state lawmakers in 2019, spurred by advocacy from nonprofit organization the COOK Alliance. Riverside County was the first in the state to adopt the program in 2019. MEHKOs were greenlighted in L.A. County in May 2024, and since then over 400 licenses have been approved. While informal backyard restaurants are nothing new in L.A., the program offers a legal, health-department-approved pathway for many existing home kitchens to thrive.

MEHKOs can only sell up to 30 meals per day and no more than 90 meals per week. They’re also not allowed to advertise with signs on their homes or front lawns. And unlike commercial restaurants, where line cooks will often prep ingredients for the rest of the week, MEHKOs can only serve food that was prepared the same day.

“A home kitchen is not designed or required to have the same commercial infrastructure, such as ventilation systems, grease interceptors, specialized wastewater systems,” said James Dragan, who oversees initiatives including the MEHKO program at the L.A. County Department of Public Health. “The limits are important because of the food safety perspective.”

When dining at a MEHKO, be flexible. It might not be as easy as just placing an order. These home businesses are often open just a few days per week with limited hours, and might only accept orders placed in advance. For example, Palestinian home kitchen Mid East Eats — one of L.A.’s first MEHKOs — currently only offers private dinners and monthly supper clubs. It was previously open for walk-ins with a larger menu, but the format was difficult to sustain and would often create food waste.

“I want to continue doing my private dinners because that’s my favorite thing to do,” said Mid East Eats founder Sumer Durkee. “It’s satisfying to me and feels like home, and people leave feeling so happy.”

MEHKOs can serve as a relatively low-cost stepping stone toward opening a brick-and-mortar and offer one-of-a-kind food experiences, even in a city with as rich a culinary vocabulary as L.A. These eight home kitchens, all of which offer dine-in service, are a great starting place to discover the city’s burgeoning MEHKO scene.

It is stunning to see the impact the USAF’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program has made on discourse surrounding the future of the Air Force since it was officially announced. There is still much to prove regarding the concept, but testing is accelerating and the USAF now plans on buying 500 CCAs by 2032. At the same time, the USAF is now hunting for a successor to the MQ-9 Reaper, with plans on procuring hundreds of those drones, as well, by early in the next decade.

With all this in mind, TWZ’s Jamie Hunter talked to Mike Shortsleeve from General Atomics on the show floor at Air, Space & Cyber 2026. The two discussed the latest progress for the company’s newly-named FQ-42 Vengeance Collaborative Combat Aircraft, as well as General Atomics’ new Wildfire platform designed to address the lower-cost Massed Modular Aircraft program that could replace the company’s iconic MQ-9 Reaper.

Check out the interview below or at the top of this post.

FQ-42 Vengeance fighter drone update from General Atomics

Contact the editor: Tyler@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.

Sunday’s highly anticipated premiere of “60 Minutes” scored 7.9 million viewers according to Nielsen, the lowest for a season opener since 2000.

Nielsen data showed the news magazine was down 21% compared to last year’s opener, which averaged 10.3 million viewers. The premiere was the first ratings report card for the program since a major upheaval that occurred behind the scenes under CBS News Editor-in-chief Bari Weiss.

The number — which was also below the 2025-26 season average of 9.1 million viewers — has to be a disappointment to CBS News. The episode received a major promotional push in the weeks leading up to the premiere, which featured an exclusive interview with an Air Force officer who was shot down over Iraq.

The story of the pilot’s heroism may not have been enough to overcome the public’s antipathy toward the U.S. military operation which has gone on much longer than President Trump predicted.

The program did suffer from some comparisons to 2025.

The ratings for “60 Minutes” are often tied to the lead-in from the late afternoon NFL game on CBS, which was also off from 2026. Most of the country saw the Minnesota Vikings top the Green Bay Packers by a score of 39-22 which, with 18.4 million viewers, was down 22% compared to a comparable broadcast window last year.

Broadcasters tend to blame Nielsen when there are significant ratings declines. The NFL has already raised concerns to the research company about changes to its methodology in counting viewers, as the first week of games are down significantly compared to a year ago.

This year, CBS did not have the exclusive late Sunday window with its NFL game. Fox carried the Philadelphia Eagles-Washington Redskins contest in the time period. Last year’s “60 Minutes” opener was on Sept. 28, when CBS had the sole game with a Kansas City Chiefs-Baltimore Ravens contest.

CBS News did see “60 Minutes” retain a larger portion of its audience lead-in compared to last year, despite a later start time of 7:48 p.m. Eastern. The delay meant half of “60 Minutes” competed with NBC’s “Sunday Night Football,” the most-watched TV program of the week. It dropped to 6 million viewers by the final quarter hour.

While there are plenty of rationales, CBS News will have to be patient and hope that viewers will sample the program, which largely had the same look as last year despite Weiss’ changes.

But personalities matter to TV viewers, and the new “60 Minutes” is without four of its longtime correspondents — Anderson Cooper, Scott Pelley, Cecilia Vega and Sharyn Alfonsi. The latter three were fired by Weiss after clashing with her over their belief she is pushing the show to the political right. Weiss — who took over editorial control of CBS News after parent company Paramount acquired her heterodox digital news site the Free Press — also dismissed “60 Minutes” executive producer Tanya Simon and replaced her with screenwriter and documentary filmmaker Nick Bilton, who has no previous experience in TV news.

Viewers on Sunday briefly saw one of Weiss’ new hires, former conservative New York Times opinion writer Ross Douthat, who has no previous experience as a TV presenter.

The first edition of “60 Minutes” since CBS News editor in chief Bari Weiss initiated drastic changes to the venerable program made it to air Sunday. But the changes weren’t all that apparent on screen.

The 59th season premiere was highly anticipated following months of turbulence behind the scenes. Weiss fired “60 Minutes” correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega, both of whom complained the executive pushed them to add right-wing talking points to their stories. Longtime correspondent Scott Pelley was ousted after he angrily questioned the firings at a staff meeting.

Weiss — who took over editorial control of CBS News after parent company Paramount acquired her heterodox digital news site the Free Press — also dismissed “60 Minutes” executive producer Tanya Simon and replaced her with screenwriter and documentary filmmaker Nick Bilton, who has no previous experience in TV news.

Weiss restocked the program’s correspondent corps with one new full-timer — Ross Douthat, the longtime conservative opinion writer for the New York Times — and several new contributors, none of whom showed up in the premiere.

Douthat is the only newcomer added to the opening credits where the correspondents introduce themselves on camera. He also did the closing segment called “The Last Minute,” talking about the dangers of AI and the need for “journalism you can trust.”

But the look and tone of “60 Minutes” remained intact, with only a few minor tweaks to the graphics.

The episode was heavily promoted, with one on-air spot drawing on clips with from the program’s storied past. Correspondents throughout CBS News touted the premiere on their social media accounts.

The program opened with Norah O’Donnell’s exclusive interview with the Air Force officer who was shot down over Iran and rescued by special forces. The U.S. fighter jet was the first to be lost over enemy territory in more than 20 years.

The interview gave a detailed account of the rescue mission and steered clear of any political discussion about the Iran war, which O’Donnell described as “costly and unpopular.” Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth sat for an interview, focusing solely on the rescue mission.

The second segment was a hidden-camera investigation showing how self-styled lobbyists are shopping access to President Trump to felons looking for a pardon. Video captured pardon brokers Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl, who were seen asking for $300,000 for their help, saying they worked with influencers close to Trump who would advocate for their cases. (The White House told “60 Minutes”: “Anyone spending money to lobby for pardons is foolishly wasting their money … President Trump performs his constitutional duties in an ethically sound manner, and to suggest so otherwise is either ill-informed or malicious.”)

Some on social media expressed surprise that “60 Minutes” would do a tough story on the Trump administration under Weiss after repeated reports that she is attempting to make the program more amenable to conservatives. “So I guess Bari Weiss didn’t totally destroy “60 Minutes” after all?” political analyst Chris Cillizza wrote on X.

The Los Angeles Rams made up the third segment in the program, which typically includes sports stories when CBS has a late afternoon football game leading into prime time. The package mostly focused on Rams head coach Sean McVay.

The ratings for “60 Minutes” will be issued by Nielsen later this week. Last year the program averaged 9.1 million weekly viewers, making it the most watched non-sports program in prime time.

The reporter may have misheard the comment, or maybe the person being quoted actually said it, or something odd happened in the editing process.

Whatever: This is what appeared in the Feb. 20, 1985 edition of the Oakland Tribune, quoting a UC Berkeley professor about a protest against immigration sweeps in the Bay Area.

“This probably won’t stop the Iron Ass [federal government] from making raids in the Eastbay.”

“Iron Ass” is how someone might hear the acronym INS, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the forerunner to ICE.

And now, 40 years on, it fits right into the kind of angry, derisory language many Americans use for the present-day hammer-handed operations of federal immigration officers, around the country, especially here in California.

California has always been — and that’s a couple of centuries of “always” — at the fulcrum of the immigration-deportation seesaw in the U.S., with national policies yo-yoing between kicking workers out and inviting them in. Consider the foreign-born who joined the Gold Rush, the Chinese railroad workers, and still and always the Latino population along the long, wide international border.

That underlies the name of a new exhibition at the California Museum in Sacramento, “Help Wanted/Leave Now!” about the “revolving door” of programs and practices that have alternately enticed and expelled workers, legal and undocumented.

The U.S. border with Mexico represents a political borderline but it cannot sever many decades of complicated history and culture. And it’s left us with endless paradoxes and contradictions of who belongs where, with the U.S. government shifting to and fro on deciding and enforcing that, depending on the American economy, and American politics.

Sean Manwaring is curator of the exhibit. “We have historically recruited foreign workers who set down roots, become members of the community, and then, when there’s an economic downturn or it becomes politically expedient, it’s kind of a revolving door.”

The endless argument is that undocumented immigrants, who work for less because of their needs and their vulnerability, take jobs that Americans will, or that Americans won’t do. Something else Americans won’t do: pay higher prices for food, 90 years ago or now.

Last year, the Kansas City Federal Reserve bank, one of 12 regional Feds, noted on its website, “Historically, the supply of U.S.-born farm workers has not been sufficient to meet demand for farm jobs at the going wage rate, contributing to a largely foreign-born workforce.” Even the H-2A legal process for hiring seasonal foreign workers “would likely be more expensive than employing undocumented workers.”

A 1924 immigration law that created the Border Patrol also revealingly put it under the control of the federal labor department. Cheaper Mexican workers had been welcomed during World War I, and were still coming north more casually back then, even as a U.S. labor group was beginning to agitate for organizing American migrant farmworkers.

But when the 1929 market crash and the Depression knifed the American economy, the blame for unemployment in the southwest and California in particular fell on these Mexicans, and the government’s “Mexican Repatriation” program sent hundreds of thousands back to Mexico, some voluntarily, some not, and some numbers of them American citizens.

Once, border migration patterns resembled a loop: thousands of laborers, mostly men, commuted here once or twice a year from Mexico to jobs in the fields, then on to other jobs once harvests were over. Then they’d take their earnings home to Mexico as breadwinners and comparatively rich men, and stay until the next year’s season.

But as U.S. policies over decades squeezed the border shut on this back-and-forth commuting, some workers chose to stay on the side of the border where they could find work, and a number brought their families north to settle, legally or otherwise.

Oct. 15, 1963: Mexican workers in the bracero program work in pepper fields in the Firebaugh area in Fresno County. This image is from the Los Angeles Times Archive at UCLA.

(Bill Murphy / Los Angeles Times)

And then that pendulum swung again. In 1942, Americans by the millions left their peacetime jobs for the war and wartime industries, and the “Bracero” program — from “brazo,” the Spanish word for “arm” — filled in the gaps in the domestic workforce with contracts for employers of Mexican workers, usually in agriculture or on railroads.

Under the program, the U.S. screened Mexicans for aptitude for the work, and for attitude. Manwaring shared with me the notes of Henry P. Anderson, a historian and farm labor organizer, who took a guided tour of a Calexico bracero processing center in 1958:

“Those deemed expendable were described one at a time: this one is too tall, he is too ‘cocky,’ that one a ‘loafer,’ another ‘lazy and irresponsible,’ he’s a ‘smart aleck,’ this one a ‘ladykiller’ and not ‘peon’ enough. On the other hand the ‘right man,’ according to the guide, was ‘built right. He’s a farm worker, you can tell that … he hasn’t got any big ideas. He’s got the right attitude. He’s humble, not fresh and cocky. He’s an Indian type, probably from Jalisco or Guanajuato.’”

Feb. 1, 1954: Unpublished photo from the Mexicali border crossing during the bracero program. Not known if these men are entering or leaving United States.

(Frank Q. Brown / Los Angeles Times)

Through the bracero program’s 22-year span, as many as 4 million workers came in and presumably went home — though not always; a generation of families came here, or were born here, and stayed. About 15 years after it ended, a former Texas labor commissioner and ranking Labor Department official overseeing the program went public. He characterized wages for braceros as unconscionably low, the food substandard and the housing prison-like. “It was not altruistic at all. The bracero program was definitely created by the farmer who needed to make a dollar.”

And then America’s policy yo-yoed again: in 1953, even as the bracero program was still operating, the federal government launched “Operation Wetback,” to rid the country of undocumented immigrants.

With its heavy-handed “sweeps” of labor camps and factories, American citizens were indiscriminately caught up in the operations, just as ICE is doing now.

Consider the breezy tone of a 1931 story in the Los Angeles Evening Citizen News, reporting on 1,200 Mexicans deported from L.A. County in a day, with the casual note that “virtually none of them” was “an undesirable alien — many are American citizens.”

“L.A. was really ground zero for these raids during Operation Wetback and the Mexican deportation,” said Manwaring. Those 1,200 deportees were among at least 50,000 deported from LA County in five months of 1931 — as much as a third of the county’s Mexican and Mexican American population.

Emilia Castaneda was no more than 10 years old when her Boyle Heights family was deported in the 1930s. In an archival videotaped interview made when she was in her late 70s or 80s, and now part of the exhibition, she remembered being teased by the girls in the parochial school she ended up attending in Mexico. “You’re not one of us,” they mocked her. “Go home.”

Just like today, as agriculture and other food chain businesses were hard-hit by Trump’s aggressive deportations, some industries and regions in earlier “sweeps” also asked for carve-outs and exemptions.

“I wouldn’t say there was a backlash but it really impacted agricultural networks across California and Arizona,” said Manwaring. “We came across specific requests from county officials like in Yuma, Arizona, asking for exceptions because they needed these workers, they didn’t have enough help.”

What’s called the Texas Proviso was a wink-and-nudge agribusiness-friendly federal loophole crafted in the early 1950s that for more than 30 years made it a crime to harbor or transport undocumented immigrants — but not a crime to hire them. (Federal law criminalized that in 1986.)

From the Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1954 front page headline: 500 Nabbed by L.A. Wetback Raiders.

(Los Angeles Times)

The 1950s enforcement drive also put the word “wetback” into casual use. Official statements and news stories used it to mean anyone here without documentation. It was derived from the people who waded across Texas’ Rio Grande into the U.S., but it was sometimes used interchangeably with any Latino workers. Sometimes it just got clipped to “wets.”

In 1961, as astronaut Alan Shepard sat aboard his Redstone rocket waiting to become the first American launched in space, hours of delays forced him to urinate in his space suit. “Well,” he remarked nonchalantly, “I’m a wetback now.”

Not much has changed. Court records released this July confirmed that ICE agents had been referring to immigrants during raids with such slurs as “wet” and “tonk,” the last term reportedly derived from the sound an agent’s utility flashlight makes when hitting a migrant’s head.

A 1956 crime drama called “Wetbacks” was a B picture about a human smuggling ring victimizing the undocumented. The Los Angeles Examiner’s movie reviewer called it a “tedious, amateurishly made picture [that] supposedly deals with how illegal Mexican immigrants are smuggled into this country.”

One of the paradoxes of these periodic anti-undocumented worker campaigns is how they divided Latino communities: the “I did it the right way” people who managed to get visas, the people whose forebears may have come illegally but are now themselves established, and the paperless people who have just arrived, or who have lived here for years under the radar.

Cesar Chavez with Richard Ybarra during the 1973 Coachella Grape Strike.

(Richard Ybarra)

César Chávez lived that paradox. The co-founder of the United Farm Workers — along with Dolores Huerta, an advisor on this exhibition — was a U.S. citizen. In the 1960s and into the 1970s, he wanted immigration officials to keep out undocumented workers, believing they’d be exploited as strikebreakers for growers and erode his union’s bargaining power. By the 1980s, though, he was endorsing immigration reform and protections, especially in the face of President Reagan’s recession-era 1982 “Operation Jobs” sweeps.

A Los Angeles Times survey that same year found that within three months of those raids, 80% of the booted-out workers were back on the job. Many of the Americans hired to replace them soon quit. They didn’t like the wages or the working conditions.

The employment manager of B.P. John furniture maker, in Santa Ana, told The Times, 75 of the American-born workers soon quit on him. “They told me they found another job, that the work was too hard, that there wasn’t enough pay.”

In June 1954, The Times covered the Border Patrol’s plans for L.A. Herman Landon, the local immigration chief, described a “stockade” being built in Elysian Park to “imprison illegal Mexicans flushed out” of factories, hotels, and “skid row saloons” at the rate of a thousand or two per day.

Farmers had once requested immigrant workers from smugglers by the truckload, and counted by “the head,” like livestock. When the feds moved in, workers were deported south of the border, sometimes far south, by bus, by ship, by plane. The feds briefly charged each worker $10 each for the cost of being deported.

The caption of a June 1952 photo in the McAllen, Texas, Evening Monitor that showed men boarding a deportation plane read, “It’s a quick bite to eat then off into the wild blue yonder for these wetbacks.” The newspaper offered a $5 prize in a contest to name the airborne deportations. Not all readers were cheering. One acidly suggested calling it “Truman’s Gestapo Airlift.”

The human numbers for any of these programs, coming in or kicking out, are hardly ever confirmed, but over all this time we are talking about the movement of millions — and the deaths, still uncounted.

Trump said he always planned to model his deportations on the Eisenhower-era operation.

“We’re rounding them up in a very humane way, a very nice way,” Trump told “60 Minutes.”

In July 1954, under Eisenhower, 88 workers died of sunstroke in the desert below Calexico, where they’d been deported.

A poster size photo in San Pedro of Alex Pretti, a registered nurse who was fatally shot by ICE agents in Minneapolis.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

In the first 17 months of the second Trump administration, at least 52 people died in ICE custody. ICE agents have shot and killed at least six more people, some in their cars, and some right out in public, like Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, and Keith Porter Jr., shot last New Year’s Eve in front of his L.A. apartment building by an off-duty ICE agent.

The deaths recall a deportation sweep in 1948, when a plane carrying 28 workers back to Mexico, with a crew of four, caught fire and crashed near Coalinga. The press coverage then identified the crew but not the dead Mexican workers, whose individual stories were finally told 70 years later in Tim Z. Hernandez’s book “All They Will Call You.”

The grave marker for the Mexican nationals killed in a 1948 plane crash did not include their names.

(Michael Robinson Chavez / Los Angeles Times)

The title is a line from Woody Guthrie’s celebrated song “Deportees,” about the crash, and what it signified in a nation that used and used up its foreign workers, and it ends like this:

“Is this the best way we can grow our big orchards?/Is this the best way we can grow our good fruit?/To fall like dry leaves to rot on my topsoil/And be called by no name except ‘deportees’?”

Explaining L.A. With Patt Morrison

Los Angeles is a complex place. In this weekly feature, Patt Morrison is explaining how it works, its history and its culture.

ABC comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s interview with Texas Senate candidate James Talarico won’t air on broadcast television amid the network’s high-stakes skirmish with the Federal Communications Commission.

Kimmel, during his Wednesday night monologue, said his talk with the 37-year-old Texas Democrat would instead stream on his show’s YouTube channel — depriving ABC viewers and TV stations of a potentially newsworthy interview with Talarico, who has been surging in the polls.

The Texas race is shaping up as a key contest in what could help decide control of the U.S. Senate in the mid-term elections.

Talarico is running against Texas Republican Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton, who has been endorsed by President Trump.

Kimmel alluded to the Walt Disney Co. network’s ongoing dispute with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr as the reason for the switch. This spring, Carr’s Media Bureau ordered ABC to submit to an early review of its TV station licenses for Disney’s eight owned stations. The FCC launched the review a day after President Trump demanded Kimmel be fired after First Lady Melania Trump became upset over a joke the comedian told on his program, “Jimmy Kimmel Live!”

ABC has since sued the FCC, alleging Trump’s disdain for Kimmel and other ABC programs has fueled the FCC’s heavy-handed approach to the network, in violation of its 1st Amendment rights.

Kimmel pointed to the “unusual circumstances” in his monologue.

“For the whole 20-plus years of our show, in fact, I’ve been interviewing Americans who are running for office with no problem at all, just like [David] Letterman did, [Jay] Leno did, Arsenio [Hall], etc. etc.,” Kimmel said. “I’ve interviewed a lot of political candidates — from Hilary Clinton to Ted Cruz to Donald Trump.”

But, Kimmel said that in the current climate, airing the Talarico interview on the public airwaves carried too much risk.

“Out of consideration for our local stations, especially our ABC affiliates in Texas who would have to deal with this nonsense,” the ABC interview, which was scheduled for Thursday, would instead play on YouTube, he said.

ABC declined to comment. An FCC spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The issue surfaced nearly one year after a major dust-up when ABC temporarily benched Kimmel after comments he made on his show over the shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. During that episode, Carr seemed to threaten Disney by saying that Kimmel should be punished.

“We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said. “These companies can find ways … to take action … on Kimmel or there is going to be additional work for the FCC.”

Two station groups removed Kimmel’s show, but ABC eventually stood by the comedian returning him to his perch the following week.

The Disney-owned station licenses were not set to expire for several years when the FCC demanded that Disney defend its stewardship of the outlets. The license for Disney’s KABC-TV Channel 7 in Los Angeles extends to 2030 but it is now being challenged.

The Burbank giant has asked a federal judge to issue a temporary restraining order and injunction to halt the FCC’s early station review.

ABC also is defending against an FCC probe into whether its daytime talk show, “The View,” should be entitled to an exemption from the so-called equal-time rule for political candidates who appear as guests.

Carr has challenged the status of “The View,” arguing that the topical chat show is not a bona fide news program and, thus, should not be entitled to the exemption.

The same issue tripped up former CBS late night comedian Stephen Colbert who interviewed Talarico in February — before his program, “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, was canceled.

At the time, Colbert told viewers CBS lawyers forbid him from airing a Talarico interview on his program due to the FCC’s increased scrutiny of exemptions to the equal-time rule, an allegation that CBS disputed.

But Colbert’s interview played on the program’s YouTube channel — not the CBS network.

The FCC has said it was investigating ABC stations over whether the company’s diversity and inclusion policies are in violation of the Communications Act of 1934 and the agency’s rules, including its “prohibition on unlawful discrimination.”

Last week, the FCC asked a federal judge in Washington to dismiss ABC’s 1st Amendment lawsuit, calling Disney’s challenge to the early review “meritless” because the commission hasn’t made a decision on whether to escalate the matter or rescind Disney’s station licenses.

Kimmel ended his monologue, saying he was grateful for the YouTube channel “because in the America we live in right now, that is the best that we can do until November.”

Thousands of longtime immigrants from El Salvador and their loved ones are anxiously awaiting word from the Trump administration about whether they will face the possibility of deportation if their temporary legal protections expire as scheduled Wednesday.

The Department of Homeland Security has not yet announced whether it will end or extend Temporary Protected Status for some 170,000 Salvadorans, including 36,000 in California. But federal officials have targeted for arrest other immigrant groups whose TPS expired.

Since their status ended in July, many Haitians have been outfitted with ankle monitors and some have already been sent back to the politically unstable country plagued by gang violence.

As federal officials have whittled down the countries that still qualify for Temporary Protected Status, Salvadorans make up the largest population of remaining beneficiaries.

Just over 100,000 people from Sudan, Ukraine and Lebanon still have TPS protections until later this year, the vast majority of them Ukrainians.

Under TPS, recipients are able to obtain permits allowing them to work legally in the country. More than 150,000 U.S. citizen children nationwide have Salvadoran parents with TPS.

Asked by The Times on Tuesday about the administration’s plans regarding TPS for Salvadorans, border advisor Tom Homan said he does not know and that the decision is up to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin.

Later Tuesday, Homeland Security released a statement that left the long-term outlook for Salvadorans with TPS uncertain: “An announcement on El Salvador’s TPS will be made at the appropriate time. Until such announcement is made, Salvadoran individuals present in the U.S. under TPS retain protection.”

Homan, for his part, noted that El Salvador is a “much safer country” now, perhaps suggesting the conditions that prompted people to leave El Salvador had improved.

Addressing the administration’s handling of TPS in general, he said, “I’m glad they’re finally sticking to what the statute says — temporary means temporary.”

The looming deadline set off a wave of alarm among communities in Los Angeles and beyond.

Lorena Zepeda of Los Angeles spent most of Friday with tears in her eyes as she waited for news about the fate of the program that has spared her, for nearly half her lifetime, from being deported back to El Salvador.

“Even though my work permit has been temporary, my life here is not temporary,” said Zepeda, 57. “From the second I stepped foot in the U.S., I have lived. And, I want to continue to live here. I’ve set down my roots here.”

California has the highest concentration of Salvadoran TPS holders in the nation, with smaller concentrations in Texas, Maryland and New York, according to the immigrant advocacy organization FWD.us. Most work in construction, groundskeeping and in transportation, the organization said, and they pay an estimated $1.5 billion in combined taxes.

About 1.3 million people from 17 countries were enrolled in the program when President Trump returned to office last year. The Supreme Court ruled in June that Trump can, without judicial review, end temporary legal protections for hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Haiti and Syria, a decision that also cleared the way for further TPS terminations.

The administration has now ended TPS for more than 1 million immigrants from 13 countries.

Some terminations were announced at or after the expiration date. For instance, the administration announced the terminations for Nicaragua and Honduras three days after they were set to expire on July 8, 2025, but provided a 60-day extension.

A termination for citizens of El Salvador in particular stands to upend the lives of people with deep roots in the U.S. because they have had TPS for 25 years — the longest of any country. Trump administration officials and other conservatives have argued that the program has gone far beyond its original intent as a temporary means of reprieve.

Originally established in 1990 under the George H.W. Bush administration, TPS has been used in the years since under Democratic and Republican administrations alike. Congress authorized the emergency relief for immigrants whose countries had been racked by armed conflict or natural disasters and who could not safely return home.

Trump tried to terminate TPS for Salvadorans during his first term, but an appeal kept the protections in place until President Biden took office and reversed the decision. Biden then substantially expanded the number of immigrants who qualified for protections under the program.

For Zepeda, who came to the U.S. in the early 1990s, saving TPS has been a years-long pursuit.

Zepeda works as a community coordinator for the Los Angeles-based Central American Resource Center, or CARECEN, the largest Central American organization in the country that provides low-cost immigration legal services and policy advocacy. She has gone to Sacramento and Washington to persuade lawmakers to keep the program alive.

She began receiving calls Tuesday morning from frantic TPS holders asking whether they should still attend medical appointments or how they will pay their rent without work permits. Aging Salvadorans fear losing their retirement benefits, she said.

“We’ve marched. We’ve led hunger strikes. We’ve done it all…No matter what happens, the fight does not end,” Zepeda said. “We will continue pushing to find legal stability in this country.”

Castillo reported from Washington and Luna from Los Angeles. Staff writer Ana Ceballos contributed to this report.

MS NOW wants to offer news viewers a break when they feel overwhelmed.

The Versant-owned progressive-leaning news outlet announced Tuesday that it has entered a partnership with Calm, the San Francisco company that develops apps that help with sleep and relaxation.

Calm will be a part of MS NOW’s new direct-to-consumer product that launches Wednesday.

The digital platform, called MS NOW Membership, will make the cable channel available without a pay TV subscription for the first time, along with other offerings for those who sign up to pay $7.99 a month.

Among those features will be meditation exercises created by Calm to help users process the day’s events.

“They are designed not as an invitation to tune out, but as a way to reset, regain perspective, and return to the news with renewed focus and intention,” according to a staff memo from Marcus Mabry, senior vice president for content strategy at MS NOW.

MS NOW has also enlisted a group of mental health experts who will front programs only available on the MS NOW Membership platform, including former ABC News correspondent and “Nightline” co-anchor Dan Harris. Harris is the author of “10% Happier,” and host of the podcast of the same name. He will host two weekly streaming programs to help viewers absorb the news while managing their anxiety about it.

Harris had a panic attack while delivering a newscast on ABC’s “Good Morning America” in 2004. The experience led him to become a wellness guru. Therapist Nedra Glover Tawwab, pediatric psychologist Dr. Ann-Louise Lockhart, and Dr. Joel Bervell, a physician, will also have regular programs on the site, along with MS NOW breaking news anchor Richard Lui.

The Calm partnership is part of MS NOW’s overall plan to have MS NOW Membership offer more than just streaming programming. The channel’s executives are touting the venture as a gathering place for like-minded individuals who are engaged in politics.

MS NOW Membership is also giving subscribers a chance to join live discussions with the network’s anchors and reporters. There will be a midday online forumwhere they can ask questions of Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, Jen Psaki, Stephanie Ruhle and other on-air talent. MS NOW correspondents will take questions in the evenings.

“We have always understood that MS NOW audiences want more than just headlines,” said MS NOW President Rebecca Kutler in a statement. “They have follow-up questions. They want to understand not only what’s happening, but why it matters. These daily conversations are designed to deepen that relationship and make our journalism even more accessible.”

The initiatives come after research by MS NOW, which broke off from NBCUniversal last year. MS NOW is now part of Versant, a new company made up of former NBCUniversal cable channels that were spun off by former owner Comcast.

Kutler has said the company is committed to providing more experiences for its audience of “super fans.” On average, MS NOW viewers watch the channel nine hours per week, second only to Fox News.

JAKARTA, Indonesia: Nearly 2,000 people, most of them students, fell ill in suspected food poisoning outbreaks linked to President Prabowo Subianto ‘s flagship Free Nutritious Meals program this week, raising fresh concerns about food safety as the government rapidly expands the multibillion-dollar initiative nationwide, officials said Saturday.

The incidents, reported between Tuesday and Thursday in East Java, Central Java, West Sumatra, Aceh and South Sulawesi, affected about 1,950 students, teachers and Islamic boarding school pupils who became sick after consuming meals distributed under the government program, known by its Indonesian acronym MBG.

The outbreaks are the latest setback for Prabowo’s signature free meals program, which has been rolled out across the archipelago despite repeated food poisoning incidents and corruption allegations.

The largest outbreak was reported in Central Java’s Rembang regency, where 752 students and 25 teachers at State Senior High School 1 Lasem, suffered diarrhea, nausea, vomiting and stomach pain after eating meals provided through the program, according to Rembang Health Office head Ali Syofi’i.

In Sidoarjo, East Java, 730 people, most of them students at the Manbaul Hikam Islamic boarding school, were affected in another suspected food poisoning incident linked to the program. Sidoarjo health office chief Lakhsmie Herawati Yuwantina said 706 victims had been discharged and were recovering at home.

Authorities also reported 276 suspected cases involving students and teachers in Agam regency, West Sumatra, where food distribution from the local nutrition service center was suspended pending an investigation. In Aceh’s Bener Meriah regency, 15 elementary school students and a school principal were treated after experiencing dizziness, nausea and other symptoms following a school meal.

Another 152 students from two junior high schools in Tana Toraja, South Sulawesi, were treated at three hospitals after developing symptoms consistent with food poisoning. Regent Zadrak Tombeq ordered hospitals and health centers to prioritize treatment for the victims.

No deaths have been reported, and authorities are investigating the causes of the outbreaks.

The latest incidents add to a growing number of food poisoning cases linked to the program since its launch in January 2025. According to Health Ministry surveillance data as of Sept. 2, food poisoning incidents associated with MBG have affected 50,059 people in 560 cases across 245 districts and cities in 36 provinces.

In a hearing with the House’s Commission IX overseeing health issues, National Nutrition Agency chief Sudaryono said internal reviews found that roughly 80 percent to 90 percent of previous food poisoning incidents were linked to failures to follow food safety procedures, including rules governing food storage, receipt of ingredients, temperature control and consumption deadlines.

“The recent incidents in Sidoarjo, Agam, Rembang and other areas have been a major blow for us,” said Sudaryono, who like many Indonesians uses a single name.

He said the agency was tightening oversight of meal providers and reviewing about 27,000 meal distribution centers nationwide. Inspectors have found hundreds of allegedly fictitious facilities, while at least 833 kitchens have been shut down for failing to meet hygiene and sanitation standards.

The free meals program aims to combat malnutrition and reduce childhood stunting by providing meals to nearly 90 million students, toddlers and pregnant women. The initiative, expected to cost about $28 billion through 2029, is a cornerstone of Prabowo’s administration and one of his key campaign promises.

The first edition of the remade “60 Minutes” under CBS News editor in chief Bari Weiss debuts Sept. 13 with a reliable formula from the venerable newsmagazine’s playbook.

Correspondent Jon Wertheim will lead off the 59th season with an in-depth look at the Los Angeles Rams, the favorite of oddsmakers to win the Super Bowl this season. Wertheim sits down with Rams general manager Les Snead, head coach Sean McVay and veteran quarterback Matthew Stafford. The segment will also explore team owner Stan Kroenke’s investment in technology, including artificial intelligence, to help the team gain an edge on the field.

Jon Wertheim interviews Los Angeles Rams head coach Sean McVay.

(CBS News)

“60 Minutes” has often turned to sports-related segments when a season premiere follows a late afternoon NFL game. Last year, Wertheim profiled Ultimate Fighting Championship Chief Executive Dana White for the 58th season premiere. The program scored more than 10 million viewers and was the most-watched non-sports program of the week. In 2023, Wertheim interviewed University of Colorado head football coach Deion Sanders for the 56th season opener.

CBS News will be under pressure to have “60 Minutes” get off to a strong start in the ratings following the major upheaval at the program earlier this year.

After the completion of a successful season where ratings were up 9% over the previous year, Weiss fired “60 Minutes” correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega — both of whom complained that the executive pushed them to add right-wing talking points to their stories. Weiss also dismissed “60 Minutes” executive producer Tanya Simon and replaced her with screenwriter and documentary filmmaker Nick Bilton, who has no previous experience in TV news.

In response to the firings, longtime correspondent Scott Pelley accused Weiss of “murdering” the program and claimed she was putting “her thumb on the scale” for more favorable coverage of President Trump’s administration. Pelley was shown the door with cause after confronting management at a June 1 meeting. CBS denied the claims.

The discord meant the program spent much of the summer hiring replacement correspondents, including Ross Douthat, a conservative New York Times opinion writer with no experience as a TV journalist.

Weiss, founder of the heterodox digital news site the Free Press, was hired by Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison with a mandate to pull the news division to the political center. The stated goal has put every move by Weiss under heavy scrutiny, as many critics have suggested she is at the network to placate the Trump White House while Paramount pursues its acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery.

Other new “60 Minutes” contributors include author and journalist Sebastian Junger, former CNN and Vice News correspondent Gianna Toboni, and Trevor Phillips, a British journalist who joined CBS News earlier this year as a senior global affairs correspondent. They will join correspondents Wertheim, Norah O’Donnell, Bill Whitaker and Lesley Stahl.

The program will also feature stories with CBS News correspondents outside of the core group at “60 Minutes,” such as Seth Doane and Matt Gutman.

The other two segments on the “60 Minutes” premiere, — which could include a significant newsmaker interview, — will be announced sometime next week.

This year’s premiere should get a strong boost, as most of the country will get CBS coverage of a late afternoon match-up between the Green Bay Packers and the Minnesota Vikings, two contenders in the highly competitive NFC North. The network’s pregame show “The NFL Today” is traveling to Green Bay for the telecast.

The time is now in Berkeley.

“I’m very confident. I think we have the opportunity to go out and be successful,” said Ron Rivera, California’s athletic director and football general manager. “If we can be successful early on, we can most certainly build faster than anticipated as well.”

The Golden Bears haven’t delivered an eight-win season since 2009, an outright conference title since 1958 or a national championship since 1937.

Led by a tenacious new head coach and a left-handed prodigy under center, with a loaded offense and an aligned administration to match, the Golden Bears are earnest as ever entering Saturday night’s home opener against UCLA.

“You can feel the anticipation in the locker room,” Cal quarterback Jaron-Keawe Sagapolutele said. “Everyone’s excited to go out there and play for each other and represent the Bears.”

Lupoi returns

Cal coach Tosh Lupoi waves to fans before throwing out the first pitch before a Giants-Marlins game on April 24.

(Jeff Chiu / Associated Press)

California’s renewed belief largely stems from first-time skipper Tosh Lupoi, who has instilled enthusiasm at his alma mater since taking over for the fired Justin Wilcox in December.

“He’s not scared to get … too hyped,” Golden Bears linebacker AJ Tuitele said of Lupoi said. “The players just match his energy. It’s a big deal for us.”

A Bay Area native, Lupoi was a defensive lineman for the Golden Bears from 2000-05 and became the youngest full-time coach in program history at 26, emerging as an elite recruiter as California’s defensive line coach on Jeff Tedford’s staff from 2008-11.

Lupoi later gained experience at Washington, Alabama, in the NFL and, most recently, as Oregon’s defensive coordinator for the past four seasons. But leading the Cal has always been his dream.

“Every waking second of my life will be dedicated to the success of this program,” Lupoi said during his introductory news conference. “No matter what I say, it’s going to be based off of my actions. And I’m a man of action.”

Nine months in, Lupoi has worked to mold a program that lives by three pillars: relentless effort, ball excellence and power of unit.

The confidence is contagious, prompting Lupoi to take the tarps off at Memorial Stadium for the first time in several years and allow thousands more tickets to be sold for the highly anticipated opener against UCLA.

“Butts in the seats and eyes on the television,” Rivera said. “That engagement is so important.”

A rising star at quarterback

Cal quarterback Jaron-Keawe Sagapolutele looks to throw a pass against Hawaii during the Hawai’i Bowl on Dec. 24 in Honolulu.

(Darryl Oumi / Getty Images)

The Golden Bears also have a proven leader in Sagapolutele, also known as JKS, on their side.

Sagapolutele threw for 3,454 yards and 18 touchdowns as a true freshman with a limited supporting cast and suspect offensive line. A folk hero in his home state of Hawaii, Sagapolutele is projected to be a first-round prospect in the 2028 NFL draft.

The 20-year-old has shown poise in the pocket, patience when going through progressions and ability to throw receivers open anywhere on the field.

“Even if you’re covered, he finds back shoulders and back hips,” UCLA coach Bob Chesney said of Sagapolutele. “Even when under duress … [the football] seems to still be put right on the money. … A kid that’s very hard to fluster.”

He’ll be manning a pro-style scheme in 2026 constructed by first-time offensive coordinator Jordan Somerville, who comes to Berkeley after three years as Baker Mayfield’s assistant quarterbacks coach with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

“[Sagapolutele] is everything that is said about him,” Somerville said. “He is awesome to be around.”

Reeling in top talent

Washington running back Adam Mohammed is tackled by UCLA linebacker Jonjon Vaughns at the Rose Bowl on Nov. 22. Mohammed has transferred to Cal, calling it “a great place to be.”

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

The Golden Bears assembled what recruiting network 247Sports called the ACC’s second-best transfer portal class this spring, rebuilding its defense with younger, high-ceiling players and stocking its offense with more proven talent.

“Cal is a great place to be,” said running back Adam Mohammed, who transferred in from Washington. “You get a good degree and a great education [and an] NFL coaching staff. That basically sums it up.”

It’ll be on first-time coordinator Michael Hutchings, who was the Minnesota Vikings’ safety coach for the last three years, to put together a competent defense. He has solid returning options to work with as well as an influx of transfers.

“Control what we can control [and] focus on us,” Hutchings said of his approach.

The offense’s personnel is much simpler. In Somerville’s system, Sagapolutele will work alongside seasoned transfers, including running backs Mohammed and Carter Vargas (UC Davis), wideouts Chase Hendricks (Ohio), Ian Strong (Rutgers) and Cooper Perry (Oregon), tight end Dorian Thomas (New Mexico) and right tackle Jimothy Lewis (Mississippi State).

California beat several bluebloods in the transfer portal and continues to win high school recruiting battles, with an elite 2027 class on the horizon led by Westlake wideout Charles Davis and Chaparral quarterback Dane Weber.

Assistant general manager Marshall Cherrington, who has largely led the Golden Bears’ roster-building efforts for nearly eight years, remembers when major recruiting wins weren’t realistic.

“The access we have now is unparalleled to what we’ve had here in my time,” Cherrington said. “The positive trajectory only improves the opportunities to do more selecting rather than recruiting.

“It’s not like, ‘Oh, we can’t go after a kid because he’s in Florida or Mississippi or wherever.’ It’s like, ‘Oh, we got access.’”

Claw or nothing

Cal football general manager Ron Rivera, right, and new football coach Tosh Lupoi hold up a jersey during Lupoi’s introductory news conference on Dec. 5.

(Thearon W. Henderson / Getty Images)

Lupoi was the missing piece alongside Rivera and Chancellor Rich Lyons, forming a trio of Berkeley graduates who understand the importance of elevating the university’s profile with a contending football program.

“It’s hard to overstate the importance and benefit of the fact that Tosh, Ron Rivera and I are all Cal alumni who share profound respect for Berkeley’s values, traditions, and persistent pursuit of excellence in all that we do,” Lyons said.

The trio has worked to tap into Berkeley’s alumni network, from Silicon Valley to the NFL — and it’s paying off.

California Athletics recently announced it received $88.5 million in “gifts and pledges” from July 2025 to June 2026, in a year when the football team posted a 7-6 record and both basketball programs missed the big dance.

“This is not a normal university in terms of what people expect and don’t expect from you,” Rivera said. “The expectations at Cal are high.”

It all starts with Saturday’s “Pac-12 After Dark” throwback against UCLA, with game kicking off at 7:30 p.m. and airing on ESPN.

“You should be really excited about what you’re going to see,” Sagapolutele added. “You’re going to want to keep coming to our games, for sure.”