vision

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Boeing Pieces Together the Last C-17 on the Line

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Howard Webb says the referees’ body is disappointed with the decision to allow Haaland’s goal against Manchester United.

Pro Ref chief Howard Webb said “tunnel vision” led video assistant referee (VAR) officials to wrongly award Erling Haaland’s goal in Sunday’s Manchester derby at Old Trafford.

Haaland’s second-half strike was initially ruled out for offside before being allowed to stand following a VAR review that concluded the Manchester City forward was onside.

Pro Ref, the body responsible for refereeing in English professional football, later acknowledged the goal should not have been awarded because VAR failed to properly assess the involvement of teammate Enzo Fernandez, who attempted to play the ball from an offside position.

“I was really disappointed with this outcome. We all are. None more so than the officials themselves,” Webb, Pro Ref’s chief refereeing officer, said on Match Officials Mic’d Up on Sky Sports and TNT Sports.

“They take a lot of personal pride in what they do, and they’re obviously hurting now having fallen short in this situation.”

VAR is a refereeing support tool designed to enable the checking, reviewing and correction of clear and obvious errors during a match, according to FIFA. It was intended to be a combination of human expertise and technological accuracy, but has instead become a sour topic in football circles.

Current and former United players, including club legend Wayne Rooney, labelled the use of VAR “horrendous”, while football experts told Al Jazeera the technology has become “far too dominant” in decision-making.

Webb confirmed that VAR officials Matt Donohue and assistant VAR Blake Antrobus would not officiate again until after the international break.

“We’ve reached out to Manchester United and acknowledged the error, as we do when these things happen,” Webb said.

Explaining the decision-making process, Webb said the semi-automated offside system quickly established that Haaland was onside, but the VAR became overly focused on the striker’s position and failed to fully consider Fernandez’s influence on the play.

“But of course, when he then runs it back through the full APP, he doesn’t truly evaluate the full impact of Fernandez’s position,” Webb said.

“He has a look to see if he touches the ball, because then that relates to potentially knocking it to Haaland, who goes on to score. He doesn’t touch the ball, but he doesn’t truly evaluate other elements of offside. In that moment, he gets tunnel vision.”

Manchester United manager Michael Carrick criticised the decision after his side’s 1-0 home defeat, their second loss in four Premier League matches this season.

United next host Brighton in the League Cup on Wednesday before travelling to Fulham in the Premier League on Sunday.

The NFL mountaintop this season sits 10 stories underground.

That’s the subterranean field at SoFi Stadium, playing host on Feb. 14, 2027 to its second Super Bowl. The first came five years earlier when the Rams beat Cincinnati on their home field.

It will mark the ninth Super Bowl in the Los Angeles area across three venues: the Coliseum (two), Rose Bowl (five) and SoFi (two). But in some ways, all those previous games were a drumroll leading up to this one — Super Bowl LXI, in a futuristic $5-billion stadium, absent the lingering restrictions of a pandemic.

“Super Bowl LVI was an amazing experience, but it was still on that tail end of COVID, and it was not everything that this Super Bowl LXI could be,” said Peter O’Reilly, NFL executive vice president of club business, international and league events.

“We didn’t do a Super Bowl Opening Night — it was virtual — and there were a lot of things we were still adjusting. … It was absolutely spectacular during the weekend and on game day, but I do think this Super Bowl gives us all the chance to do it full-on, in the way an L.A. Super Bowl can and should be.”

In the weeks leading up to the first Super Bowl at SoFi, there were misguided rumblings that the game might be moved to Dallas, because the NFL had secured that city as a backup. But those type of contingency plans are in place for every Super Bowl, and the game was not in serious peril of being moved. Still, there was a cloud of public doubt lingering over the event.

“Those rumors created a lot of havoc and uncertainty in our market,” said Kathy Schloessman, chief executive of the Los Angeles Super Bowl Host Committee for both games. “It was hard to get the excitement going because people didn’t know if the city was open or closed. I almost hate to say it because I don’t want to jinx anything, but this is our first normal Super Bowl planning.”

Super Bowls can take over a city. Look at the games played in New Orleans, Indianapolis or Houston. Seemingly every resident was aware the game was happening. But in some of the bigger cities — New York, Los Angeles, Miami — there aren’t reminders everywhere you turn.

Something that might offset that this season is ESPN is broadcasting the game for the first time, and has been hyping it ever since the most recent Super Bowl ended.

“It’s a year of the Super Bowl for them that ends in Los Angeles,” O’Reilly said. “That feels natural and poetic. I can’t say enough good things about the way they’ve embraced it.”

South side view of the field at SoFi Stadium.

(Sam Farmer / Los Angeles Times)

Disney is the parent company of ESPN, and likewise has embraced the game, which feels like a true confluence of the sports and entertainment industries.

“When I think about L.A. and brands coming together — Disney, SoFi Stadium, the Rams — I think it takes advantage of what the NFL had always hoped when bringing a Los Angeles team back,” Rams president Kevin Demoff said. “SoFi Stadium is that marriage of the NFL and entertainment.”

Whether they play in the game or not, the Rams are intimately connected to this Super Bowl, as they are the host team. That means they have a degree of financial responsibility to make good on the commitments made to the NFL when Los Angeles was awarded the game. They also are allotted more tickets to the game than the other franchises not hosting (or playing in) the event.

Although the Chargers were co-hosts for the first Super Bowl at SoFi, they opted not to host this one. According to a Chargers spokesman, they chose to cede the stage to Rams owner Stan Kroenke, whose vision they credit for the stadium and Hollywood Park development, but will make a “significant seven-figure financial commitment” to the host committee in the run-up to the game.

Part of Kroenke’s vision in moving the Rams and building the stadium and surrounding campus was to shift the center of gravity of the sporting world to Los Angeles. It’s worth noting that SoFi was a central location of the World Cup — the first U.S. goal was scored there — and will play host to swimming events in the 2028 Olympic Games.

“[SoFi] is now established as one of the world’s greatest sporting stages, which the Super Bowl helped put on the map the first time,” Demoff said. “But now it’s in the middle of this global run.”

It isn’t just the Super Bowl. SoFi will also play host to the NFL’s first-ever Thanksgiving Eve game — Rams versus Green Bay Packers — on Netflix.

“If you’re looking at the arc — not as a Super Bowl but how the NFL wanted to come back to Los Angeles — you have Disney, a longstanding, old-school entertainment partner,” Demoff said. “And then you have this element of streaming and new media and where the NFL is heading. It’s a really interesting juxtaposition.”