tested

The U.S. Air Force said its new interim Air Force One jet, dubbed the VC-25B Bridge aircraft, has officially completed modifications and flight testing and is being painted in the red, white and blue livery sought by President Donald Trump. The extremely lavish 747-8i Boeing Business Jet (BBJ) – donated by Qatar to the U.S. last year for use by Trump – is set to serve in the Air Force One role while the White House awaits the delayed delivery from Boeing of two fully-outfitted VC-25B Air Force One aircraft. There are no plans to retire the VC-25As that currently serve as Air Force One until both full-up VC-25Bs are operational.

The Air Force said the VC-25B Bridge aircraft is on schedule to roll out in its new paint scheme and be delivered to the Presidential Airlift Group this summer. It is not clear when it will start flying Trump. The White House referred us to the Air Force for additional information.

The jet recently underwent flight testing in Texas, which you can see in the following photos that aviation photographer TT-33 operator was kind enough to share with us at the time.

The USAF now says that with the Boeing VC-25B deliveries delayed far past its initial 2024 target and VC-25A heavy maintenance cycles being extended, an interim capability became “an absolute imperative.” How accurate this claim actually is isn’t clear. Trump has been talking about an interim Air Force One aircraft for some time since deliveries of the new VC-25Bs were pushed back beyond his second term. We heard of no actual requirements originating for this capability from within the USAF prior to the new administration or far in advance of Trump’s deal with the Qataris to source the jet. Very early in the new administration, Elon Musk was even working to find out how to get Trump a new Air Force One as fast as possible, for instance.

The Air Force claimed that in February 2025, a dedicated task force launched a “full-court press” on the VC-25B Bridge program while simultaneously working to accelerate Boeing’s long-term VC-25B production.

Though questions were swirling about the legality and ethics of receiving the gifted plane, the Pentagon last May took delivery of the aircraft and said it would rapidly undertake the required modifications.

It’s one thing to have a donated ultra-luxury jet, but turning it into one safe and connected enough to carry a president is another story.

As TWZ has previously noted, converting any aircraft into one that is secure enough to transport the president is a complex undertaking. The aircraft needs to provide constant, secure communications, including what is needed to order a nuclear strike under extreme conditions. Historically, it also needs to be physically hardened both inside and out to withstand myriad threats, from the electromagnetic pulse of a nuclear weapon going off to incoming surface-to-air missiles to enemy intelligence-gathering efforts. To do this requires significant modifications right down to the aircraft’s outer structure. It is very unlikely, if not impossible, that this aircraft was hardened against EMPs in the timeframe required for fielding it.

The VC-25As are speckled with missile approach warning sensors and many laser countermeasures turrets (DIRCM). They also include the legacy Matador infrared countermeasure system above their jet engines and APU. This is in addition to other defensive features which are less visible and remain closely guarded secrets.

Common Infrared Countermeasures (CIRCM)

In previous coverage, we noted that at the very least, “this aircraft will have to feature some kind of DIRCM setup to repel shoulder-fired heat-seeking missiles, and modular units are available that can be attached in a canoe to the bottom of the aircraft. These systems, such as Elbit’s C-MUSIC or Northrop Grumman’s Guardian, are in service with foreign VVIP 747s, as well as commercial aircraft, including those flying for Israeli airline El Al. You can read all about these systems here. Still, while they offer far less defensive capacity compared to what is seen under the belly of a VC-25A, they would offer a significant layer of protection.” We still don’t see any evidence of the aircraft being modified with defensive countermeasures.

L3Harris, known for its communications systems and aircraft alterations, was selected to undertake the “complex modification of the bridge aircraft,” the Air Force explained. The company already delivers “secure, reliable and resilient communications” for VC-25A and the executive airlift fleet “but has extensive experience with self-protection and customization of VIP aircraft,” the Air Force added. “The accelerated timeline was further made possible by a mission-focused partnership with Boeing, who provided the necessary engineering data to support the required structural modifications.”

In addition, “elite specialists from multiple government agencies developed advanced protocols to detect and – if necessary – neutralize potential technical hazards on previously owned aircraft,” according to the Air Force. “Their rigorous approach on the Bridge aircraft has literally ‘written the book’ and set the benchmark for integrating used airframes into the secure military inventory.”

In response to our question about what modifications the jet received, the Air Force told us the following:

“Safety and security were at the forefront of this program. We deliberately minimized interior aesthetic modifications to focus on modifications for safety, security and mission execution. We assessed which requirements were necessary for an interim capability. We had greater flexibility in developing our mission requirements.

After safety and security, we focused on the mission communications systems.

We have made deliberate decisions such as the reduction of the number of airstairs, less chiller space, and exclusion of the Golden Eagle mission [to fly the remains of former presidents] to minimize structural modifications, while prioritizing modifications focused on safety, security and secure communications.”

We also asked whether this jet will be able to fly overseas and into higher-risk areas, but have not gotten a response. At this point, based on the limited info we have at this time, that seems unlikely. But if this is the case, the question then can be raised why the USAF is spending billions on two full-up Air Force One aircraft if standards have been so relaxed that this simpler aircraft can do all their missions? We will update this story with any pertinent details the USAF provides.

To help speed up the delivery process of this interim Air Force One jet, the Air Force said it “constructed an at-scale mockup of the interior, complete with virtual reality views, to enable early commissioning activities for White House staff.”

“Our commitment to providing the president with a secure, resilient and reliable airborne command post is unwavering,” said Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Ken Wilsbach. “The VC-25B Bridge program is a testament to the Air Force’s ability to innovate and rapidly evolve to ensure the continuity of our government under any conditions.”

The Air Force said the estimated delivery of Boeing’s VC-25Bs is now expected in 2028. If that holds up, then this ‘bridge’ aircraft will have served at most around two years until the first full-up VC-25B is delivered.

We will continue to follow developments in this program and provide updates when warranted.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

A two day ceasefire between the United States and Iran has paused direct large scale strikes, but key flashpoints across the region remain active.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz and escalating violence in Lebanon highlight the limited scope of the truce, exposing gaps in its coverage and enforcement.

Strait of Hormuz Remains Closed

Despite expectations that the ceasefire would stabilise energy markets, the Strait of Hormuz remains effectively shut.

This chokepoint normally handles a significant share of global oil shipments, with around 140 vessels passing through daily under normal conditions. In the first 24 hours after the ceasefire, only a handful of ships were able to transit the route.

The continued disruption has driven immediate delivery oil prices sharply higher, with some refiners in Europe and Asia reportedly paying near record levels.

Donald Trump publicly criticised Iran for failing to uphold what he described as an agreement to allow oil flows, while also signalling that shipments could resume soon without detailing mechanisms.

Disputed Scope of the Ceasefire

A central point of contention is whether the ceasefire extends beyond direct US Iran hostilities.

Iran maintains that the truce should include theatres such as Lebanon, where Hezbollah is engaged in conflict with Israel.

The United States and Israel reject this interpretation, arguing that Lebanon falls outside the agreement’s framework. This divergence has created parallel narratives of compliance and violation, undermining the credibility of the ceasefire.

Escalation in Lebanon

Fighting between Israel and Hezbollah has continued, with both sides exchanging strikes.

Israeli forces carried out large scale attacks shortly after the ceasefire announcement, while Hezbollah resumed missile launches following earlier indications it would pause operations.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has since signalled a shift by expressing willingness to begin separate negotiations with Lebanon, focusing on disarming Hezbollah and establishing more stable relations.

Meanwhile, Lebanese officials are attempting to broker a temporary ceasefire as a stepping stone toward broader negotiations, indicating a parallel diplomatic track separate from US Iran talks.

High Stakes Talks in Islamabad

The first direct peace talks between the United States and Iran are scheduled to take place in Islamabad, which has been placed under heavy security lockdown.

Pakistan’s role as mediator underscores its diplomatic positioning, with tight security arrangements including restricted zones and controlled access around the negotiation venue.

The Iranian delegation is expected to be led by Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, while the US side will be headed by JD Vance.

Competing Strategic Objectives

The talks are shaped by fundamentally different goals

The United States seeks

• Limits on Iran’s nuclear programme
• An end to uranium enrichment
• Curtailment of missile capabilities
• Withdrawal of support for regional allies

Iran, by contrast, is expected to demand

• Removal of economic sanctions
• Recognition of its authority over the Strait of Hormuz
• Compensation for wartime damage

Iran’s leadership, now under Mojtaba Khamenei, has adopted a defiant posture, signalling that concessions will come at a high price.

Economic Fallout

The disruption in the Strait of Hormuz is already feeding into global economic indicators.

Oil price volatility is expected to influence inflation data, particularly in the United States, where upcoming consumer price figures may reflect the early economic impact of the conflict.

While futures markets have shown some optimism following the ceasefire, spot prices remain elevated, indicating persistent uncertainty about immediate supply conditions.

Military and Strategic Reality

Despite the ceasefire, the broader strategic objectives of the war remain unresolved

Iran retains missile and drone capabilities capable of targeting regional adversaries
Its nuclear programme continues, with a significant stockpile of enriched uranium
The political system has remained intact despite internal unrest

For the United States, initial goals such as dismantling Iran’s nuclear capacity and weakening its regional influence have not been fully achieved.

Analysis

The current situation reflects a fragmented ceasefire architecture in which the absence of a unified framework allows multiple conflicts to persist simultaneously. The continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz demonstrates how economic leverage can be maintained independently of formal military de escalation, reinforcing Iran’s bargaining position ahead of negotiations.

At the same time, the divergence over whether Lebanon is included in the truce highlights the limitations of narrowly scoped agreements in complex regional conflicts involving multiple state and non state actors. The persistence of Israel Hezbollah hostilities illustrates how parallel wars can undermine broader diplomatic efforts, creating a layered conflict environment.

The decision to proceed with talks in Islamabad despite ongoing violations suggests that both the United States and Iran view negotiations as strategically necessary, even in the absence of full compliance on the ground. This indicates a shift toward diplomacy driven not by stability but by mutual recognition of the costs of prolonged confrontation.

With information from Reuters.

The A-10 may be in the twilight of its career, but that doesn’t mean it’s done proving new capabilities, some of which could impact the USAF’s larger tactical airpower force. In particular, it just tested one capability we have been highlighting as a huge opportunity and potential necessity for a future fight in the Pacific.

A test A-10, looking like it borrowed its nose from an A-6 Intruder, flew for the first time equipped with a refueling probe in place of its nose-mounted aerial refueling receptacle earlier this week. The program has been ongoing for some time. Within days of that first flight, the test ‘Hog’ successfully plugged into a C-130 equipped with aerial refueling drogues. An image, circulating on social media, shows the A-10 in question connected to a drogue trailing behind a Hercules.

The implications of this test go beyond the A-10. We had previously made the case, in detail, how USAF fighters equipped with probes would be of extreme use during a crisis in the Pacific. We also have made the case for smaller tactical tankers supporting these operations and how they could be essential to the USAF’s success in such a conflict.

The ability for fighters to launch with heavy loads from short runways, even those that have been battle damaged, and immediately tank-up on gas before heading deeper into enemy territory would be a huge plus for the USAF. Currently, all of its tactical jets use the receptacle and boom mode of aerial refueling, where a jet tanker plugs into them, usually at high altitudes, for refueling. This makes the USAF’s Agile Combat Employment strategy, where fighters will hop from one austere forward airfield to another in order to stay ahead of the enemy’s targeting cycle, and stay within range of being combat relevant, somewhat problematic. Jet tankers require long runways and do not refuel at very low altitudes. The ability for USAF fighters to utilize MC-130s and HC-130s, or even Marine KC-130s, as well as standard C-130Js modified for aerial refueling, would drastically change this equation, operating from shorter fields alongside fighters with far more flexibility.

CN21 Agile Combat Employment with F-35A Lightning IIs at Northwest Field, Guam, Feb. 16, 2021.

22nd Air Force: C-130 Lands on Wyoming Highway

In addition, refueling at altitude, even what is considered low altitude by special operations focused jet tankers in the USAF’s inventory, which you can read all about here, still is many thousands of feet in the air. This leaves them and their ‘customers’ vulnerable to long-range detection and increasingly far reaching air defenses. This is especially true for an adversary like China, that is investing very heavily into its anti-access/area-denial strategy, which will make normal combat operations far more dangerous much farther from a tactical jet’s target area than in past conflicts. So getting far lower, below the radar horizon, for refueling would go a long way in mitigating this growing threat.

With this in mind, we will likely see aerial refueling by the USAF’s jet tankers, KC-135s and KC-46s, drop lower and new training and procedures will be needed to support this. Risks also increase at these lower altitudes, especially considering that weather can be far more of a factor and aircraft handling changes in the thick air. But even if the USAF adapts its existing jet tanker force to lower altitude refueling operations, they still will not be able to operate out of the airstrips that C-130s can. The USAF also already has many C-130s to leverage for this role, leaving the jet tankers for more traditional, longer-range support missions, which they will be overtaxed with during a major fight in the Pacific to begin with, before even having to support ACE operations.

Thus, giving the A-10, as well as other fighters, like F-16s and F-15s, the ability to be equipped with a probe and pairing them with C-130 tankers, could drastically change the USAF’s ACE equation, and make it far more tactically relevant than it currently is. The C-130s could also work as transports to support small groups of fighters hopping around the Pacific, while also providing tanker support for kinetic sorties.

It’s also worth noting that the USAF is now interested in the exact purpose-built aircraft we originally posited for this mission, but procuring an entirely new type, while sticking to the boom and receptacle concept, is a much bigger ask than adapting the force it already has. Arguably, there would be a place for both concepts in the USAF’s portfolio if it really doubles down on its ACE vision and the boom-equipped tactical tanker could also service probe-equipped fighter aircraft.

For the A-10, the addition of a probe makes even more sense, as these aircraft have the combat search and rescue ‘Sandy’ mission, where they directly escort and provide close air support for special operations helicopters working to pluck personnel out of highly contested territory. This same mission set has been highlighted like nothing in recent memory just today over Iran. The HC-130s and MC-130s are already equipped to provide fuel to rotary-wing aircraft during these operations. They could also support A-10s with aerial refueling, as well. This would extend the endurance and range of the A-10’s Sandy mission set.

It will be interesting to see if the program moves beyond this demonstration and if this capability gets eyed for more of the USAF’s tactical jet force. It was in the works for some time and appears to have been put into purgatory due to the A-10’s pending retirement, before being put back on a fast track recently. This is at least a sign that the USAF sees major merit in the concept.

As for how the USAF’s fighters could be equipped with a probe, multiple solutions exist, including installing them on drop tanks and conformal fuel tanks, to bolting them onto the empennages of the aircraft. Future F-35As could be equipped with both a receptacle and a refueling probe as the latter option is installed on the B and C model.

Regardless of what’s to come, this is an encouraging sign that the USAF at least appears to be questioning its ACE dreams and trying to see how relatively simple alterations to it could make it more operationally realistic. If anything else, the Warthog getting this option could help enhance its CSAR capabilities and open the aperture to what tankers can provide gas to it for other operations. Considering the major challenges of future CSAR operations the USAF is facing, where range will be a huge problem, letting the A-10 tank from the same assets as their rotary-wing brethren would be a huge win.

Contact the author: Tyler@Twz.com