For about a month, the United States had refrained from attacking Iranian targets as the Trump administration turned toward economic warfare against the Islamic Republic. However, that changed last night when U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) struck what it said were Iranian rocket launchers preparing to fire naval mines into the Strait of Hormuz. The problem is that mine-deploying rockets are not a common capability, so much so that the statement seemed bizarre at first glance. But it just turns out that Iran does claim to have such a system and that system would have a glaring application in the current state of play of the conflict. In fact, it would be absolutely critical to do exactly what CENTCOM did, blowing them up prior to launching, because if they didn’t, the final and very fragile energy lifeline between the Persian Gulf and the world could be severed at the worst possible time.

“I can confirm that earlier today U.S. forces struck two Iranian launchers on Larak Island,” Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, CENTCOM’s spokesman, told us Sunday evening. “Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces were observed preparing to launch rockets with sea mines into the Strait of Hormuz.”

The U.S. strikes against the launchers on Sunday spurred Iran to respond with ballistic missile attacks on a Jordanian air base housing U.S. troops. Jordanian officials said all eight missiles were intercepted, and no casualties or damage was inflicted.

#JORDAN INTERCEPTS 8 MISSILES

Jordan's @ArmedForcesJO say air defense systems intercepted eight missiles that entered the Kingdom's airspace early Monday.

The military said the missiles were destroyed before posing a threat to civilians or property.

Details:

A…

— Dana Zureikat Daoud دانا زريقات (@DanaZkat) August 31, 2026

Hawkins did not specify what exact type of rocket launcher was struck or whether this was the first time CENTCOM had seen Iran use this type of system to launch sea mines.

Though CENTCOM won’t comment on what kind of system was attacked, Iran did tout just this kind of a system last year with exactly the kind of range needed to be a huge problem for the U.S. and its allies. This system uses a variant of the Fajr-5 rocket that is converted with a sea mine warhead.

You can see a video of that system below.

Video of the Iranian rocket deployed naval mine system which is claimed to be able to deploy hundreds of mines in the sea from the coast in an hour. pic.twitter.com/ba897On0nV

— Mehdi H. (@mhmiranusa) January 24, 2025

The clip shows the rockets being fired from a truck-mounted multiple launch rocket system (MLRS). The video later cuts to nose cone-shaped mines that appear to float on the surface above the spent missile body, however, little is known about the Fajr-5 sea mine warhead conversion process that allows them to be delivered by rocket.

We also don’t know the full extent to which Iran has developed and/or fielded this particular capability, or whether it has other options for similarly deploying naval mines by rocket. Neither Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) think tank, nor the Ambrey maritime security firm has seen any indication that Tehran has used an MLRS to launch sea mines in the past.

At the same time, “the Fajr-5 is an Iranian calling card, a 333mm caliber rocket that can reportedly travel 75 km carrying between an estimated 90 to 170 kg warhead, depending on the payload,” Taleblu, an expert on Iranian weapons systems, told TWZ.

The Fajr-5 is an established design that traces its roots back to the 1990s and has been evolving since then. “The Fajr class was initially designed as unguided artillery rockets, though Iran claims to have developed a guided version,” Taleblu added.

In general terms, being able to seed naval mines via artillery rockets would offer several advantages for Iran, most immediately by offering an alternative to traditional maritime mine-laying platforms. The destruction of Iran’s naval forces was a top stated objective for the U.S. military during the opening phases of the conflict earlier this year. Iranian vessels, including ones capable of laying mines, were heavily targeted. Still, Iran has retained a large number of its smaller boats that can be used for seeding minefields.

Regardless of what boats they have left, mining the area that actually matters most would be impossible to do as any vessel approaching the southern coast of the Strait of Hormuz would be destroyed. It’s through these tight and complex littorals that a reduced flow of commercial vessels are still traveling, under the kinetic umbrella of the U.S. and its Gulf state allies. The Fajr-5, fired from Iranian controlled islands in the strait, has the range to land in these waterways, seeding mines without risking any boat crews or other platforms. If the rocket-delivered mines splash down, the de-mining process would have to begin, which can be arduous and last weeks, potentially shutting down all shipping.

With that in mind, Iran’s weapon is remarkably relevant to the situation, assuming it works. But even if it doesn’t, it could still pose a risk to mariners even if its efficacy is questionable.

Furthermore, being able to turn any launcher for Fajr-5s (and/or potentially ones for other types of artillery rockets) into a naval mine layer rather than having to rely on specialized systems would be a boon unto itself. Artillery rockets and launchers are something Iran had deep stockpiles of before the war with the United States and Israel started earlier this year. How many naval mine rockets Iran might have, and whether it might be possible to convert existing types to that configuration, are open questions.

Using a road-mobile launcher would also give Iranians a ‘shoot-and-scoot’ option for deploying naval mines where the launch could be exposed only for a short period of time. This, in turn, would create additional targeting challenges for U.S. forces. It is possible that, as it does elsewhere, Iran has constructed tunnels under Larak Island to hide these systems, as well. 

Overall, the “deployment of naval mines by missile significantly speeds up the deployment process, improves the ability to penetrate airspace, and increases the standoff distance between the minelayer and the field, making it the least risky minelaying method,” a piece published by the Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC) think tank last year, which also highlighted Iran’s apparent demonstration of the Fajr-5-based capability, noted.

While the Fajr-5’s estimated payload capacity is “light compared to U.S. or Chinese naval mines,” the mines the rockets could deliver “are still heavier than diver-delivered limpet mines and could conceivably disable a ship if struck by enough mines from the field,” the piece added. “Most importantly, this field could be delivered rapidly and with little warning. Even though the explosive capacity of this mine individually is small, the psychological impact from inflicting minor damage on a small number of merchants could still be enough to force shipping companies to avoid the area.”

“Though it’s a bit unconventional, using a rocket launcher again signals that the regime is sensitive to cost and risk, and is trying to deploy mines in a way that doesn’t put as much personnel at risk as by dropping them overboard,” Taleblu posited. “It was reported in the military exercise over a year ago that the regime had used an MLRS system like the Fajr to deploy these, but I haven’t seen significant video confirmation of this most recent round.”

With all this in mind, the point about “psychological impact” mentioned in the CIMSEC piece could be particularly relevant in this case. By launching the attacks on Larak Island, CENTCOM has in a way given credence to Iran having a real capability to launch mines via rocket into the Strait of Hormuz. That threat by itself could be enough to cause commercial ship crews, their corporate operators, and insurance companies to think twice about attempted transits.

This is exactly the issue that President Trump, among others, has repeatedly sought to downplay, including multiple times just within the past week.

“We’re taking them in,” Trump told Glenn Beck last week. “The mines are gone. You probably saw that, we put it out yesterday, all the mines. We got rid of the mines. But the strait, it’s functioning, it’s a functioning strait. Uh, yes, every once in a while, there’ll be a drone or a rocket or something shot, but it is a very functioning strait.”

“Last week, CENTCOM completed clearing sea mines from the strait’s international shipping routes,” Hawkins, the CENTCOM spokesman, told us yesterday. “U.S. forces are monitoring the area closely and remain prepared to protect the free flow of commerce through this essential waterway.”

“The U.S. military has achieved a major milestone in the Strait of Hormuz,” Adm. Brad Cooper, CENTCOM’s commander, stated last week. “We have successfully cleared sea mines in the strait’s international shipping lanes that were laid months ago by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Internationally recognized transit routes in the strait are free of Iranian sea mines, thanks to the incredible work of the U.S. military.”

Update from CENTCOM Commander: pic.twitter.com/osPbltjJ1C

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) August 28, 2026

CENTCOM pushed back Monday on Iranian claims that an oil tanker was hit by mines in the command’s preferred transit route.

“CLAIM: Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claims that a supertanker passing through the southern route of the Strait of Hormuz struck two mines and was brought to a complete stop. This is FALSE,” the command stated on X. “FACT: No ships have hit mines in the Strait of Hormuz. This is yet another IRGC attempt to intimidate regional commercial shipping through disinformation.”

CLAIM: Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claims that a supertanker passing through the southern route of the Strait of Hormuz struck two mines and was brought to a complete stop. This is FALSE.

FACT: No ships have hit mines in the Strait of Hormuz. This is… pic.twitter.com/spkaogBx81

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) August 31, 2026

Still, the Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC) — a group of international navies which provides timely information to the shipping industry — sees mines as an ongoing risk in the strait.

“Commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz remained at reduced levels, with a modest uptick from recent lows, still far below baseline,” JMIC stated on Sunday. “Independent tracking data indicated suppression with single-digit numbers transiting in both directions. There remained a continued risk of drifting or uncharted mines in and near the TSS, with mine danger areas still active.”

JMIC Advisory Note Update 091

Released by UKMTO on behalf of the Joint Maritime Information Centre.

Click here to view the full advisory note https://t.co/jHInhBdVRt#MaritimeSecurity #MarSec pic.twitter.com/T6VzzxSdPD

— UKMTO Operations Centre (@UK_MTO) August 30, 2026

The combination of ongoing dangers in the strait continues to result in reduced traffic, the global trade intelligence firm Kpler noted on X.

“Vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb declined on 25 August, while the IMO [International Maritime Organization] verified no additional attacks,” Kpler added. “Five vessels crossed the Strait of Hormuz, down 28.6% day on day from seven. All five used the Iranian Unilateral Scheme, with two entering the Middle East Gulf and three exiting. Four were classified as shadow vessels and one as sanctioned.”

Strait crossings remain subdued

Vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb declined on 25 August, while the IMO verified no additional attacks. Five vessels crossed the Strait of Hormuz, down 28.6% day on day from seven. All five used the Iranian Unilateral… pic.twitter.com/BI9cFAaJRy

— Kpler (@Kpler) August 26, 2026

The latest flare-up in fighting came after the Trump administration last week unleashed the threat of harsh new sanctions to further isolate Iran. However, that failed to move Tehran to change its position on maintaining control over the Strait of Hormuz, its nuclear ambitions or support for proxies like the Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Monday morning, Trump told Fox News reporter Trey Yingst that he was going to retaliate for Iran launching ballistic missiles last night after the U.S. strike on Larak Island.

“We’re going to hit them hard,” Trump told the network. “There will be a response.”

President Trump says the United States will respond to the Iranian missile attack on U.S. forces overnight.

"We're going to hit them hard," President Trump told Fox News. "There will be a response." pic.twitter.com/sjLOLSxm4g

— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) August 31, 2026

Trump and his senior aides “have been considering waging limited strikes in the Strait of Hormuz to prevent Iran from reconstituting its radar and missile capabilities to attack ships,” Axios reported, according to three U.S. officials. 

“One U.S. official said the idea behind the plan is to reduce the risk of Iranian attacks on oil tankers, U.S. Navy ships and Air Force aircraft — to ‘mow the lawn,’ as this person put it.”

It is unclear if Iran has used rockets to mine the strait or how well this system works if it did. However, the fact the U.S. resumed hostilities just to attack sea-mine-launching rocket systems shows the level of concern they engendered and the options Iran may still have to threaten the strait.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post Iranian Launchers Struck By U.S. Held Exotic And Highly Concerning Rocket-Delivered Sea Mines appeared first on TWZ.

A new Ukrainian intelligence report details the complex production chain behind Russia’s shadowy 3M22 Zircon missile and identifies U.S.-origin electronics inside one of Russia’s most advanced weapons. New details also add weight to the theory that the weapon is a maneuverable quasi-ballistic missile rather than a true hypersonic cruise missile.

The unusually detailed new breakdown of the Zircon missile identifies 70 enterprises and 84 individuals involved in its development and production while providing a component-by-component look at one of Moscow’s most closely watched — and least-understood — weapons.

DIU exposes details of russia’s 3M22 Zircon ballistic missile — including its components, production chain, 70 companies involved, key personnel, and foreign equipment used to manufacture the weapon: https://t.co/oOBqjUb8dS pic.twitter.com/VqRSSA41iV

— Defence Intelligence of Ukraine (@DI_Ukraine) August 31, 2026

The first evidence of Zircon’s combat use emerged in February 2024, when Ukrainian officials displayed recovered debris after a Russian strike. The wreckage included distinctive engine and steering-system components that Ukrainian specialists used to identify the weapon.

Russia has since employed the missile on other occasions. Ukrainian authorities reported that a Zircon was launched from occupied Crimea during a major missile and drone strike in January 2026, as we reported at the time.

While initially developed for use from warships and submarines, Zircon is understood to have been employed from ground-based launchers against Ukraine, with modified launchers from the K-300P Bastion coastal defense system considered the most likely candidate.

The new entry on Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (GUR) War & Sanctions portal includes an interactive 3D model and identifies systems ranging from the missile’s radar seeker and onboard computer to its propulsion system and warhead. It also identifies foreign-origin electronics, including components associated with U.S. manufacturers.

Among them, according to the GUR report, is a TGA2704 amplifier associated with TriQuint Semiconductor, now part of U.S. company Qorvo. The GUR also identifies an Altera Cyclone II EP2C5T144I8N field-programmable gate array (FPGA) associated with Altera Corporation, now part of Intel, and lists it as originating in the United States.

The alleged findings do not establish that either company knowingly supplied Russia’s defense industry, nor do they explain precisely how the components reached Russian production lines. The GUR says it’s seeking additional information on their origins and supply chains. Bearing in mind previous precedents, China could potentially be one source, being a known vector globally for recycled chips.

Nevertheless, the disclosure highlights the continued presence of Western-origin electronics in Russia’s advanced weapons programs despite sanctions and export controls.

The GUR lists the Zircon as approximately 26 feet long, with a body diameter of 2.2 feet, and a warhead weighing about 265 pounds.

The agency gives a maximum speed of Mach 8-9, a flight altitude of approximately 19-25 miles, and a separate “maximum fixed speed” (presumably, sustained cruising speed) of Mach 6.8. These are Ukrainian intelligence assessments and cannot be independently verified.

The database identifies the 3B222 active radar-homing head, manufactured by NPP Radar MMS, and a Baget-83 onboard digital computer produced by KB Korund-M.

It also identifies the 3B915 guidance units, the 3G22 warhead, and the 3L2211 solid-fuel rocket motor manufactured by NPO Iskra. Other Russian companies provide altimeters, control systems, power supplies, and other components.

The reported propulsion information is particularly significant.

Russian and other sources have consistently described Zircon as a hypersonic cruise missile, implying an air-breathing propulsion system burning liquid propellant, capable of sustaining hypersonic flight.

However, the physical evidence for such a propulsion system has always been less clear.

Open-source analysis by Fabian Hinz has highlighted the apparent absence of a conventional air intake on Zircon. A scramjet- or ramjet-powered missile requires an intake to bring atmospheric oxygen into the engine, yet available imagery does not clearly show one. A Russian patent associated with the missile’s jettisonable launch cap likewise does not reveal an obvious intake arrangement.

Just published my new OSINT investigation into Russia's secretive Zircon missile whose combat use has risen sharply in 2026.

Available evidence suggests that Zircon is not a hypersonic cruise missile but rather a quasi-ballistic system.

Link: https://t.co/8DoQePRpX3 pic.twitter.com/bIBS532FUB

— Fabian Hinz (@fab_hinz) June 17, 2026

More significant is evidence from recovered missile debris.

Material examined by Ukraine’s Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise included a circular metal structure interpreted as part of a solid-propellant rocket motor. The hardware appeared to be associated with Zircon’s second stage rather than simply its launch booster (which would be used on a true hypersonic cruise missile to bring it up to operating speed). This suggests a two-stage weapon, with a solid-propellant rocket in each. This would match with what we have seen during shipboard launches.

That finding is consistent with Russian patent activity involving NPO Mashinostroyeniya and NPO Iskra. Patents associated with the companies describe solid-propellant rocket motors incorporating arrangements for aerodynamic-control equipment around the motor’s exhaust system.

There is also evidence that Russian engineers developed advanced composite solid propellants specifically for Zircon.

None of this conclusively proves the missile lacks an air-breathing engine, but it certainly raises more questions about its classification. It should be noted that there are also some solid-fuel ramjet concepts, but these are much rarer applications.

If Zircon is primarily rocket-powered, it may be better understood as a maneuverable quasi-ballistic missile that nonetheless reaches hypersonic speeds.

Such a weapon would use rocket propulsion to accelerate rapidly and climb to high altitude before descending toward its target along a trajectory that is partly ballistic but incorporates aerodynamic maneuvering — a so-called ‘porpoising’ or ‘skip-glide’ trajectory. It could therefore reach hypersonic speeds without requiring sustained cruise under the power of an air-breathing system. The combination of high speed and unpredictable trajectory also makes it notably difficult for air defenses to deal with, characteristics shared with the air-launched Kinzhal, another Russian quasi-ballistic missile.

That interpretation could also help explain reports of a highly variable Zircon speed profile.

Russian officials have claimed that the missile can reach approximately Mach 9. During a 2020 test, Russian military leadership said Zircon reached more than Mach 8 while flying to an altitude of roughly 17 miles.

A Russian Ministry of Defense video that claims to show the Zircon test in the White Sea on Oct. 6, 2020:

Ukrainian assessments have described a more complicated profile, with the missile reportedly flying at around Mach 5.5, accelerating to approximately Mach 7.5 near the target, and then slowing before impact. Those figures cannot be independently confirmed, but a boost-and-glide or quasi-ballistic trajectory could produce such a profile more naturally than sustained powered cruise.

Ru MoD released a somewhat better Zircon launch footage. pic.twitter.com/bxHa6DsFG7

— krakek (@krakek1) December 3, 2024

At the same time, it should be recalled that ‘hypersonic’ does not necessarily imply a ‘hypersonic cruise missile.’ A ballistic or quasi-ballistic weapon can travel well above Mach 5, which appears to be the case here. The characteristics of the Zircon, as presented by the GUR, would also help explain official Ukrainian claims that the missiles have been intercepted successfully by Patriot PAC-3 air defense systems.

There is also a relevant technological precedent. NPO Mashinostroyeniya has previously patented solid-propellant missiles using quasi-ballistic trajectories, including designs intended to maneuver at high-supersonic and hypersonic speeds. That does not establish a direct lineage to Zircon, but it does show that the concept is consistent with the company’s history.

The other major takeaway from the release is the scale of Zircon’s production network.

One of Russia’s leading missile houses, NPO Mashinostroyeniya is identified as the missile’s main designer and manufacturer and prime contractor for Russian Ministry of Defense contracts covering its development and production.

But the weapon depends on dozens of other organizations. NPO Iskra supplies the solid-fuel motor; NPP Radar MMS provides the radar seeker; KB Korund-M produces the onboard computer; and other enterprises supply guidance systems, altimeters, control electronics, warheads, power systems, and other specialized equipment.

Another video, released by the Russian Ministry of Defense in May 2022, is said to show the Gorshkov launching a Zircon, although the missile is seen only at a distance with no details visible:

The U.S.-origin electronics claimed to have been identified by GUR are particularly notable because they demonstrate how Russia’s sophisticated weapons production remains connected to international semiconductor supply chains.

By linking specific enterprises and individuals to individual missile components, Ukraine has provided governments and investigators with new information that could be used to pursue sanctions, export-control enforcement, and efforts to disrupt Russia’s supply chain.

The report also adds weight to continued open-source assessments of what kind of missile Zircon actually is.

Regardless of its classification, Zircon remains a formidable weapon. A rocket-powered missile capable of reaching hypersonic speeds, flying at high altitude, maneuvering, and potentially accelerating during its terminal approach presents a serious challenge to missile defenses. With Ukraine’s ability to intercept even more conventional ballistic missiles already severely eroded, the weapon further complicates the country’s troubling air defense picture.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Russia’s Zircon May Not Be A Hypersonic Cruise Missile After All appeared first on TWZ.

The first of Japan’s two new cruiser-sized Aegis System Equipped Vessels (ASEV) is continuing to take shape, recently receiving its huge main integrated mast, giving the vessel a new and remarkably imposing silhouette. The four very large fixed arrays for the ship’s powerful AN/SPY-7(V)1 radar will eventually be integrated onto this structure. The ASEV’s stated primary mission is missile defense, but Japanese authorities plan to give the vessels additional counter-drone, anti-ship, and land attack capabilities in the future. Tomahawk cruise missiles are notably set to be added to the ship’s arsenal down the line.

The ASEVs are large surface combatants, set to be some 620 feet long, have a beam (the widest point of the hull) of some 82 feet, and a standard displacement of 12,000 tons. For comparison, Japan’s largest surface combatants today, its Maya class destroyers, are just over 557 feet long, have a beam of some 73 feet, and a standard displacement of around 8,200 tons. It is worth noting here that the size of new and advanced destroyers, often optimized for anti-air warfare missions, has been trending upward globally in recent years. This, in turn, has caused the line between destroyers and what have more historically been categorized as cruisers in certain cases.

The first ASEV was laid down at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries’ (MHI) shipyard in Nagasaki in July 2025. The second was laid down in February of this year at Japan Marine United Isogo shipyard, which is situated in Yokohama City near Tokyo, according to a past report from Naval News. The Japanese Ministry of Defense is currently aiming to have the first of these vessels in service before the end of the country’s 2027 Fiscal Year, which runs from April 2027 to March 2028. The second is expected to follow in the 2028 fiscal cycle, which extends into 2029.

Significant progress in the overall construction of the first ship has been made just this year. The addition of the main mast structure, installed on top of the main superstructure, as seen in pictures at the top of this story and below, has drawn particular attention in recent weeks.

Japanese are very fast with ship building.

March 26 and today. ASEV-class destroyer.

190 m hull, SPY-7 Aegis, 128cell Mk 41 VLS. SM-3 for ballistic missiles, SM-6, plus Japan’s long range Type 12 SSM. pic.twitter.com/RQZixtqWwe

— 信濃 Æýà (@Shinano_AEya) August 30, 2026

The especially large size of the ASEV’s integrated mast is driven by that of the AN/SPY-7(V)1 active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar from Lockheed Martin. Each one of the radar’s four rectangular arrays is reportedly around 14 feet (nearly 4.3 meters) tall. This would put them in the same general size category as the arrays for Raytheon’s AN/SPY-6(V)1 Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) found on U.S. Navy Flight III Arleigh Burke class destroyers. That being said, the pictures we have now raise the question of whether the AN/SPY-7(V)1 arrays are bigger than previously assessed. The AMDR is another notably large design heavily optimized for missile defense.

The size and location of the mast provide a centralized, elevated position for the AN/SPY-7(V)1’s large arrays, which will also require significant power generation capacity and thermal management to keep everything cool. This is a notable departure from the placement of the arrays on the main superstructure on existing Japanese destroyers, as well as the U.S. Arleigh Burke class, and offers an unobstructed, elevated line-of-sight to the horizon. Beyond the ballistic missile defense mission, this view farther out over the horizon would be important for tracking and engaging low-flying drones and cruise missiles, which might be targeting the ship itself. This is something we will come back to later on.

“With five times the tracking capability of the SPY-1, it [the AN/SPY-7(V)1] counters lofted trajectories and simultaneous multiple ballistic missile threats,” according to a machine translation of a section of the Japanese Ministry of Defense’s 2026 defense policy white paper, which was released earlier this month.

The passive electronically-scanned array (PESA) AN/SPY-1 was the first radar to be paired with the Aegis Combat System, and both were first introduced in the 1970s. Variants of the SPY-1 are still found on a variety of U.S. and foreign Aegis-equipped warships, including Japan’s Kongo, Atago, and Maya class destroyers.

The AN/SPY-7(V)1 is also a derivative of the U.S. military’s static, land-based Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) in Alaska. Japan also originally planned to employ the AN/SPY-7(V)1 on land at a pair of Aegis Ashore missile defense sites. However, that effort was subsequently cancelled, with the ASEV emerging to fill the resulting gap.

Additional versions of the AN/SPY-7 with much smaller arrays are also being integrated onto new F110 Bonifaz class frigates for the Spanish Navy and the Royal Canadian Navy’s forthcoming River class destroyers (also known as the Canadian Surface Combatant). The use of the AN/SPY-7(V)1 on the ASEV could impact decisions regarding new radars for other future and existing Japanese warships. Raytheon is also pitching versions of its increasingly popular AN/SPY-6 family for use on a successor to the Kongo class and for refit on the Maya class, according to a recent report from Naval News.

When it comes to the ASEV, as already noted, the AN/SPY-7(V)1 is central to the ship’s main stated missile defense mission. As the name makes clear, the ship will also feature the Aegis Combat System. The vessel will be capable of “remote engagement and guidance against anti-air targets tracked by other vessels” via a “Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC),” per the Japanese Ministry of Defense’s most recent annual defense white paper.

The video below provides details about the U.S. Navy’s Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) developments, which are likely very similar to what Japan has planned for the ASEV.

In terms of armament, when the ASEVs first enter service, their main weaponry is expected to be a mix of variants of the Standard Missile-3 and -6 (SM-3 and SM-6). The SM-3 family is designed to engage ballistic missile threats during the mid-course portion of their flights while they are traveling outside of the Earth’s atmosphere. The SM-3 also has a demonstrated anti-satellite capability. The SM-6 is a multi-purpose missile that was originally designed with an anti-air focus. It can be used to target incoming ballistic missiles in the terminal phase of flight and also has at least a degree of capability for engaging hypersonic weapons. SM-6 can be used in a surface-to-surface mode, including against ships, as well. Japan is also a partner in the U.S.-led development of a new Glide Phase Interceptor (GPI), which is being designed specifically to intercept unpowered, but highly maneuverable hypersonic boost-glide vehicles.

SM-3, SM-6, and future GPIs will be loaded into either of the ASEV’s two Vertical Launch System (VLS) arrays, one at the bow end and another toward the stern. Each one of the ships will have a total of 128 VLS cells. For comparison, Japan’s Maya class destroyers, as well as the U.S. Navy’s Flight IIA and III Arleigh Burke class destroyers, have 96 VLS cells apiece. The U.S. Navy’s Ticonderoga class cruisers each have 122 VLS cells, and 128 is also the number of VLSs currently expected to be found on the future Trump class battleships.

At the time of writing, Japanese authorities do not appear to have explicitly mentioned plans to arm the ASEVs with other missiles when they first enter service. That being said, any VLS array capable of accommodating SM-3s and SM-6s should be able to fire a variety of other weapons, including shorter-ranged SM-2s and Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSM), which the ship could use for more localized air and missile defense, as well as protecting the ship itself.

Renderings and models of the ASEV do show the design also armed with a five-inch naval gun in a turret on the bow, along with two Phalanx Close-in Weapon Systems (CIWS) and other automatic cannons for point defense.

As mentioned, while missile defense is the immediate focus for the ASEVs, there are already plans to significantly expand their capability to engage other ships and targets on land. Tomahawk cruise missiles and a new, extended-range version of the Type 12 anti-ship cruise missile are set to be added to the arsenal of these vessels in the 2032 timeframe, according to the latest official Japanese defense white paper.

Japanese authorities want the ASEVs to eventually be able to help fend off waves of enemy drones, too. High-energy laser-directed energy weapons are set to be integrated onto the ships down the line to help address those threats. The overall size and other general characteristics of the ships would leave the door open to the possible addition of high-power microwaves and other capabilities in the future.

TWZ has long noted that the ASEVs will bring huge new boosts in naval air and missile defense and long-strike capability to the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Forces. The vessels also reflect a significant evolution in post-World War II Japanese doctrine, toward what officials currently frame as a “stand-off defense” construct that remains within the bounds of the country’s current pacifist constitution.

Just with SM-3, SM-6, and GPI, the ASEVs will offer an important addition to the air and missile defense bubbles around Japan’s home islands and outlying territories in the face of growing geopolitical friction with China and Russia, two countries that are increasingly cooperating militarily. The vessels will also add to Japan’s deterrent against long-standing and still evolving threats posed by the regime in North Korea, which has its own close ties to the Chinese and Russian governments. All three of these nations continue to expand their arsenals of ever-more capable ballistic, cruise, and hypersonic missiles. Long-range one-way-attack drones are another growing part of the equation, with the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and fighting in the Middle East in recent years underscoring just how real a threat they pose.

With the addition of Tomahawks, the ASEVs, along with other Japanese warships, will gain the additional ability to threaten counterstrikes against targets on land (and potentially at sea) at least around 1,000 miles in any direction. As part of the broader stand-off defense strategy, the Japan Self Defense Forces is developing new land-based long-range strike capabilities, including hypersonic missiles, as well.

It is worth noting that with current plans to acquire only two ASEVs, these will be high-value but also low-density assets, which will have to be very deliberately deployed for maximum effect. They will also stand out as top-priority targets in any future conflict, and will need to be protected as such.

It is possible that the roles and missions of the ASEVs, just like their designs, could evolve further as time goes on. The threat ecosystem facing Japan will continue to evolve, likely more rapidly, in the coming years. The country is also expanding its naval capabilities in other ways, and with an eye toward more blue water operations. This includes expanded light carrier capabilities through refits of existing Izumo class ships. Anti-ship ballistic missiles and hypersonic cruise missiles, among large volumes of more traditional threats, could see the ASEVs used as escorts, even if experimentally. While just two hulls are barely enough to keep one on patrol to protect Japan, more could be built for expeditionary applications.

Regardless, the ASEVs are set to be a major addition to the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force’s fleets that will have big ramifications. From the progress that is visible at the shipyard in Nagasaki, MHI looks to be well on track to deliver the first of these ships next year or two.

Special thanks to @kensakai9310 on X, who also goes by “Sakai,” for sharing recently taken pictures of the first ASEV under construction at MHI’s yard in Nagasaki with us.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Japan’s First Dedicated Missile Defense Warship Is A Monster appeared first on TWZ.

Russia has suddenly ramped-up the number of attacks, and their duration, on Kyiv. Ukrainian officials state there was a record number of waves of one-way attack drones on the capital on Thursday. This is in contrast to the typical Russian mass barrages that launch a larger number of missiles and drones that strike over a short period in an attempt to overwhelm defenses and inflict maximum damage. The change from prioritizing amplitude to frequency of these assaults indicates that Moscow could be switching to a new strategy aimed at wearing down the populace, halting commerce and exhausting air defenders.

“Again and again throughout the day, sirens sounded as Russia launched drones in small groups towards the Ukrainian capital,” the Ukrainian Foreign Affairs Ministry noted on X. “Each new threat put people at risk and forced them to seek safety – while repeatedly interrupting work, public services, transport, and everyday plans. In total, Kyiv spent 872 minutes – almost 15 hours – under air raid alert that day.”

Kyiv faced 13 separate air raid alerts on 27 August.

Again and again throughout the day, sirens sounded as Russia launched drones in small groups towards the Ukrainian capital. Each new threat put people at risk and forced them to seek safety – while repeatedly interrupting… pic.twitter.com/hTxOipgx0I

— MFA of Ukraine (@MFA_Ukraine) August 27, 2026

This was reportedly the largest number of air raid alerts experienced in Kyiv since the opening days of the all-out war. “The previous record appeared to be set on March 1, 2022, when Kyiv was placed under air raid alert 12 times in a single day,” the Kyiv Independent explained.

In addition, “the capital saw eight more air raid alerts by the morning of Aug. 28 as Russian forces continued attacking Kyiv and the surrounding areas overnight,” the publication added.

Russia’s attacks on Kyiv and the surrounding region continue almost nonstop for a second day. Other regions of Ukraine were also targeted overnight.

A Russian strike with guided aerial bombs in Sumy killed a 61-year-old civilian. Seven other people were injured. Residential… pic.twitter.com/XUHlw9CKUG

— Anton Gerashchenko (@Gerashchenko_en) August 28, 2026

This is Kyiv, Ukraine today.

People are sheltering from russian attacks wherever they can – even sitting on the stairs of metro stations.

For the second day in a row, russians are attacking Kyiv and the region.

Another day of life interrupted by war. pic.twitter.com/h7gYGtwpvH

— Angelica Shalagina (@angelshalagina) August 28, 2026

Iryna Terekh, CEO of the Fire Point company that makes FP-1 and FP-2 drones and heavy-hitting Flamingo cruise missiles, suggested that Russia is trying to drain the populace of the will to resist.

“For over 40 hours straight, Russia has been terrorizing Ukraine’s capital with combined barrages, setting a new grim record for the number of air raid alerts and destroyed civilian infrastructure sites,” Terekh stated on X Friday. “The enemy has long employed this tactic in frontline cities, scorching the earth and any chances of normal life. Its goal is to make our hands drop in despair. To make us search for culprits among ourselves. To make us snap at our own. To make us peer into the future with squinted eyes. To leave not a single minute when it’s appropriate to rejoice in anything: from life’s little joys to our successes on the front lines. To let exhaustion win.”

Вже понад 40 годин поспіль росія тероризує українську столицю комбінованими обстрілами, встановлюючи черговий антирекорд за кількістю повітряних тривог і знищених обʼєктів цивільної інфраструктури. Цю тактику ворог давно застосовує у прифронтових містах, випалюючи землю і…

— terekh (@iraterekh) August 28, 2026

A former high-ranking Ukrainian military officer offered us a similar assessment, though he surmised that it could backfire on Moscow.

“They want to keep constant pressure on the population and plant a fear of losing lives, increasing starvation, demoralizing the population, plant panic etc.,” the retired officer told us. “My belief is that they won’t achieve such strategic objectives. It is too late. It could have the opposite effect: more hate, more aggression and anger toward Russians.”

The retired officer posited that this spike in the pace of Russian strikes could be part of the escalation Russian President Vladimir Putin recently threatened. Still, it remains unknown at this point whether this is a one-off or the sign of things to come. The coming days should give us an indication of that.

The Latest

Most of the fiercest fighting at this point is centered around Kupyansk in Kharkiv Oblast and Slovyansk in Donetsk. Here are some key takeaways from the latest Institute for the Study of War (ISW) assessment:

• Kharkiv: Russian forces continued offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast on August 26 and 27 but did not advance as Ukrainian forces counterattacked. The Russians also continued offensive operations in the Kupyansk direction on August 26 and 27 but did not advance as Ukrainian forces counterattacked.

• Donetsk: Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Slovyansk direction on August 26 and 27 but did not make confirmed advances as Ukrainian forces counterattacked around Lyman. Russian forces also continued offensive operations in the Dobropillya tactical area, Pokrovsk, near Novopavlivka itself and northeast and south of Oleksandrivka on August 26 and 27 but did not make confirmed advances.

• Zaporizhia: Russian forces continued limited offensive operations in western Zaporizhia Oblast on August 26 and 27 but did not advance.

• Kherson: Neither Russian nor Ukrainian forces reported ground activity in the Kherson direction on August 27.

Russian Occupation Update, August 27, 2026: https://t.co/KdyVN2ImlK pic.twitter.com/awucfIuRly

— Institute for the Study of War (@TheStudyofWar) August 27, 2026

Ukrainian officials are investigating why weapons were stored in a residential neighborhood after a deadly Russian drone attack on a warehouse in a village near Kyiv. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said the investigation centers on negligence. The strike and resulting secondary explosions at the facility in the village of Myla killed at least 37 people and injured at least another 15, according to Ukraine’s Defense Ministry (MoD).

Zelensky didn’t specify the exact variants of the weapons stored, but the Russians claimed they struck a warehouse containing the Fire Point company’s FP-1 and FP-2 drones and another one in a different Kyiv suburb that stored Flamingo cruise missiles.

TWZ cannot independently verify this Russian claim and Ukriane did not confirm the attack on the warehouse containing the Flamingos. We’ve reached out to Fire Point for more details.

“Since yesterday evening and throughout the day today, I have been receiving reports on the situation in the village of Myla, Kyiv region, where detonation began following a Russian strike,” Zelensky stated on X. “A terrible situation and terrible negligence on the part of those who stored explosives right next to people. Another such crime – after what happened in Vyshneve – is absolutely unacceptable.”

Since yesterday evening and throughout the day today, I have been receiving reports on the situation in the village of Myla, Kyiv region, where detonation began following a Russian strike. A terrible situation and terrible negligence on the part of those who stored explosives… pic.twitter.com/YyRpBxQ8Kz

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) August 29, 2026

Vyshneve is a town where an ammunition depot belonging to the Ukrainian defense conglomerate Ukroboronprom, the country’s largest weapons manufacturer, was attacked in July. The secondary explosions killed seven and wounded 29 others, according to the Kyiv Independent.

“I expect the details to be presented to the public promptly,” the Ukrainian leader added. “The first strike was on an ammunition storage site that definitely shouldn’t have been there – a Defense Forces storage facility. Shells, mines, other ammunition, and drones detonated. The scale is significant. We have already spoken with the Prosecutor General, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Security Service of Ukraine, and the Commander-in-Chief – they have everything necessary for the investigation. I want to separately thank everyone who is there on the ground and at other sites of Russian strikes, doing everything possible to help and save people.”

Smoke is still rising from the ammunition depot in the village of Myla, Bucha District, Kyiv Oblast, which was targeted by Russian Geran-4 drone strikes.

The reported death toll has risen to 37, with at least 42 others injured and 381 people evacuated.

Ukrainian President… https://t.co/PBAQllR7BI pic.twitter.com/toDpPvjFkU

— OSINTWarfare (@OSINTWarfare) August 29, 2026

The retirement home at Myla near Kyiv where twenty people died after a Russian strike caused secondary detonations at a secret ammunition depot placed amidst dense suburbia. pic.twitter.com/iPhODiVXJ7

— Leonid Ragozin (@leonidragozin) August 29, 2026

Additional footage of a powerful explosion at the Ukrainian ammunition depot located in settlement of Myla in Kyiv Oblast that was hit by the Russians on Friday night. https://t.co/ccXgBsFC0K pic.twitter.com/VSRKqwV0L0

— Status-6 (War & Military News) (@Archer83Able) August 28, 2026

The Ukrainian MoD called for a full accounting of all weapons and ammunition storage locations.

“Siting depots holding explosives next to civilians is unacceptable,” MoD stated on X. “The heads of all relevant components of the Security and Defence Forces and of Ukraine’s defence industry must carry out a full audit of the sites where weapons and ammunition are stored. Facilities of this kind must not stand next to residential buildings where people live.”

We bow our heads in deep sorrow together with every family that has lost loved ones in the terrible tragedy in the village of Myla, Kyiv region.

As of 15:00 on 29 August, 37 people are known to have been killed and 15 injured. Two more are still being searched for under the…

— Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) August 29, 2026

As we noted earlier in this story, the Russian Defense Ministry (MoD) claims it hit “an ammunition depot in [Myla] (Fire Point LLC), where components and launch boosters for long-range FP-1/FP-2 unmanned aerial vehicles were stored in warehouses.”

The MoD also claims it struck the “Fim Service transport and logistics centre in Chayki” whose “warehouses were used to store Flamingo long-range cruise missiles.” The village is also near Kyiv; however, there have been no reports of collateral damage. Ukrainian officials have not independently confirmed that weapons were stored there. The Kyivschina24 media outlet reported that the Chayki attack struck a tile warehouse owned by the Agromat company, not a weapons storage area.

Whether it was the case in these instances or not, it should come as absolutely no surprise that Moscow would do everything possible to target Fire Point standoff munitions and their supply chain, considering how big of a threat they have become. Regardless, while Ukrainian officials are now investigating why explosives were stored so close to a residential neighborhood, the incident highlights the precarious nature of the country’s weapons production. Due to repeated Russian attacks, this work is widely distributed to avoid having a single point of failure.

In a recent interview with TWZ, Terekh, the Fire Point CEO, addressed that concern.

“Well, the logistics are hell, to be frank,” she told us. “But we do not have the luxury to have the factory in a classic way, with the walls and roof, … when I say factory — and we have 90 of them in the moment — when I say factory I mean this whole ecosystem with logistics, with warehouses, everything is hidden and dissolved in a way that the critical components are always duplicated, triplicated, quadruplicated. It’s a lot of additional investments and, of course, a lot of risks and a lot of additional time for logistics specifically, but again, we do not have any other choice. Therefore, the factory in this matter is a whole ecosystem.”

In the wake of the Vyshneve attack, Ukroboronprom fired two of its directors after Zelensky said that the ammunition depots were stored too near to civilian areas “in violation of Ukrainian law and orders from military leaders,” the Kyiv Independent noted. The criminal investigation in that case is ongoing.

It is too early to say what will happen with this latest incident. The investigation into the Myla case has just started and there is no immediate word about whether Ukraine is also investigating the storage of weapons in Chayki. We will monitor this situation and provide updates when warranted. A satellite image obtained by TWZ appears to back up Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s claim that his country’s Alpha Unit destroyed a Tu-95MS Bear bomber during a drone attack on Russia’s Engels Air Base. The facility is located about 350 miles east of Ukrainian-held territory.

The satellite image, provided by Vantor, shows the right wing of the bomber partially severed. It is unclear from the image how extensive any damage was caused by shrapnel.

Ukraine has frequently attacked Engels in its effort to destroy the bombers housed there. Russia, trying to defend against this ‘kill-the-archer’ approach, is building protective shelters for its military aircraft, which now extend to long-range bombers, an unprecedented development for the Russian Aerospace Forces.

Engels, also known as Engels-2, is one of the most important airfields of Russia’s Long-Range Aviation Branch. It is home to the 22nd Heavy Bomber Aviation Division, which is responsible for Russia’s only squadron of Tu-160s, plus another squadron of Tu-95MS bombers.

Both of those types have been widely employed in the conflict in Ukraine and especially in the standoff strikes that have targeted Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, among other objectives, civilian and military, across the country.

Zelensky said the U.S. read him in Friday on CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s mysterious visit to Moscow. However, the Ukrainian leader offered no details of what was discussed.

“Today, we received information from the American side about the meetings in Moscow that took place the other day,” the Ukrainian leader stated on X. “There was a series of meetings. We spoke before the meetings, and we have spoken again now with the Americans. Thank you for the information – and for the necessary tone of the conversation with Russia.”

“We value the alignment of steps and the fact that America is advancing a realistic vision of what needs to be done and what must be achieved,” he added. “Russia must end its war, and all the necessary conditions must be created to make that happen.”

Ratcliffe’s visit has sparked a wide range of conjecture, and disparate reports about the purpose. The New York Times, for instance, wrote that the journey was made “to privately share his bleak assessment of the state of the Russian war against Ukraine, and to urge the Russians to cut a deal before their military and economic situation gets worse.”

The Wall Street Journal reported that Ratcliffe was there to warn Putin, whom he didn’t see, not to attack NATO.

President Donald Trump, for his part, tried to downplay the whole thing, calling it “semi-routine,” which doesn’t exactly square with the fact that this was the first publicly known visit of a CIA director to Moscow since November 2021, just months before Putin launched his full-on invasion.

Today, we received information from the American side about the meetings in Moscow that took place the other day. There was a series of meetings. We spoke before the meetings, and we have spoken again now with the Americans.

Thank you for the information – and for the necessary… pic.twitter.com/2dBbHH4y2X

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) August 28, 2026

Kyrylo Budanov, the Head of the Office of the President, said the Armed Forces of Ukraine need to mobilize 30,000 every month in order to keep defending against Russia. He made the comments during an interview on the national nightly newscast.

 “Unfortunately, we have to accept it [mobilization] as it is,” Budanov explained. “We cannot do otherwise. We have to find the courage and honestly say: we cannot mobilize fewer than 30,000 people a month. This is the minimum number needed to maintain what we have.”

Budanov’s comments come as Ukraine is struggling to put enough troops on the front lines and is facing opposition to how recruits are often forced into service, sometimes physically.

“So, no matter how we say that we are now going to recruit people differently, the numbers will not change,” Budanov added. “And that means the number of dissatisfied people will not change either. There is nothing we can do about it.”

Meanwhile, Budanov expressed hope that it would be possible to change the approach to what he described as “forceful mobilization” to some extent.

“I hope we can change the approach to this forceful mobilization, which sometimes takes place,” Budanov acknowledged. “It is not happening everywhere, but such cases do occur. We need to tackle this.”

Kyrylo Budanov: "Unfortunately, we have to accept it [mobilization] as it is. We cannot do otherwise. We have to find the courage and honestly say: we cannot mobilize fewer than 30,000 people a month. This is the minimum number needed to maintain what we have."… pic.twitter.com/csebu3b3cV

— Rob Lee (@RALee85) August 28, 2026

As we have frequently noted, AI plays a key role for Ukraine, especially helping guide weapons to target. To help improve these functions, Ukraine has created a sandbox of sorts where weapons developers can fine-tune their AI systems with real-world data. 

“In the past, coordinating a fire mission – from an observer detecting a target to the actual opening of fire – could take 15–20 minutes, or even longer, when done manually,” the Ukrainian Defense Ministry (MoD) explained. “In modern warfare, such a delay is effectively unacceptable. This is where artificial intelligence comes in to assist human operators.”

“At the find stage of the kill chain, reconnaissance drones can use visual data repositories to detect objects,” the MoD noted. “For this purpose, the Brave1 defense innovation cluster created Brave1 Dataroom, a secure platform that provides developers with access to structured datasets for testing, training, and fine-tuning military AI solutions.” 

Over 100 Ukrainian companies are already using this platform to train AI models on real-world data, MoD added. 

“The platform specializes in detecting and intercepting aerial targets, including Shahed-type drones,” the ministry proffered. “To train drone AI systems using real-world battlefield data, the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine has provided Ukrainian developers with access to Avengers Labs. The platform provides access to an annotated dataset of 5 million frames collected during military missions.”

The dataset is regularly updated, with Ukraine’s homegrown DELTA battlefield management and situational-awareness system serving as its primary source. 

“Targets included in the dataset range from tanks, artillery, and air defense systems to enemy infantry groups and aerial targets, including reconnaissance UAVs and Shahed-type drones,” according to the ministry.

Coordinating a fire mission manually once took 15-20 minutes. In this war, that's a lifetime.

Avengers AI, trained on 5M annotated battlefield frames and integrated into DELTA, now flags 70% of enemy equipment in real time across 100,000+ video streams a month.

Read more:…

— Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) August 28, 2026

The city of Druzhkivka, in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region, is on the front line of a grinding battle. It is part of the so-called fortress belt of cities where ensconced Ukrainian forces have held off brutal waves of Russian attacks for years. Recently released drone video shows the extent of the damage, with virtually no building untouched and vast swaths of the city completely abandoned.

Constant Russian shelling is turning Druzhkivka into a ghost town. Reports from the city say no buildings remain undamaged, municipal services have withdrawn, and entire blocks now stand abandoned. https://t.co/AJ43eoyNIt pic.twitter.com/V7uG4zkvJ4

— ZSU News (@ZSUNews) August 28, 2026

Irish journalist Caolan Robertson provides a gripping view of another fortress belt city, Kramatorsk, and the last power plant in the region, which is a frequent target of Russian attacks.

Another Ukrainian city is being wiped out right now while the world looks away

Here’s what’s happening in Kramatorsk:

• Glide bombs & FPVs pound the city to make them unliveable.

• Civilians evacuated every day but not everyone is leaving.

• I spent the night with power… pic.twitter.com/oUU4FoSfnc

— Caolan (@CaolanReports) August 28, 2026

Ukraine claims that Russian forces have executed at least 345 Ukrainian service members who surrendered and killed 375 Ukrainian citizens whose deaths in Russian captivity have been verified, the Ukrainian Ukrinform news outlet reported.

Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights Dmytro Lubinets made the statement during a press conference held at the publication, focused on Russian disinformation concerning prisoners of war, exchanges, and people missing in action.

According to the ombudsman, the 345 documented executions involved Ukrainian soldiers who had clearly surrendered, including by laying down their weapons, raising their hands, or lying on the ground to demonstrate that they were no longer taking part in hostilities.

TWZ cannot independently verify those figures.

Russian troops have executed at least 345 Ukrainian soldiers after they surrendered, official reports show.

https://t.co/wyYFexRiGI pic.twitter.com/tBZNIC1MID

— UNITED24 Media (@United24media) August 27, 2026

That’s it for now.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post Russia Changing Missile And Drone Attack Strategy On Ukrainian Capital appeared first on TWZ.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) is rapidly expanding a secretive airbase in the northwest of the country that is loosely akin to America’s top-secret proving ground at Area 51. The facility is used to test experimental platforms and next-generation combat aircraft, sporting one of the longest runways in the world at 16,400 feet. It has transformed from a relatively austere and remote airstrip into an increasingly sprawling People’s Liberation Army (PLA) flight-test center over the past few years, and there is no sign that construction will slow anytime soon. In fact, it’s accelerating, and one of its newest features is of significant interest.

Satellite imagery taken by Planet Labs on August 27, 2026, shows the scale and scope of the buildout in high-resolution detail.

The installation is located near the infamous Lop Nur Nuclear Test Base in the desolate, arid Xinjiang autonomous region of northwestern China. Lop Nur is the PRC’s primary testing facility for nuclear weapons and where China detonated its first nuclear device, codenamed Project 596, in 1964, becoming the world’s fifth nuclear power.

Last year, TWZ spotted both of China’s sixth-generation stealth fighter designs, the J-36 and J-XDS, at the base for the first time − far from the home airfields of their respective manufacturers, Chengdu and Shenyang. Before supporting the development of advanced air combat technologies, the facility was linked to military space development efforts and testing reusable space planes as far back as 2020. At that point, the site was nothing more than a 3.1-mile runway with a small hangar and a few scattered vehicles.

In 2023, the main apron was significantly expanded, and a new large hangar was added. In 2025, new hangars were added on both sides of the main ramp area via extensions. These shelters appeared to be optimized for tactical fixed-wing aircraft. Not long after those facilities were complete, the two 6th-generation fighter aircraft showed up. The pace of further construction ramped in May 2025 and hasn’t let up since. The time-lapse below visualizes the gradual, then all-at-once progression over the past six years.

“New taxiways, aircraft turning pads, hangars and possible fuel-storage infrastructure substantially increase the airfield’s capacity to support aircraft movements and sustained flight-test activity,” Damien Symon, a geo-intelligence researcher and friend of TWZ, told us. Symon assisted TWZ in identifying the new structures.

Several key areas of the site have been reshaped since the beginning of the year, marked on the annotated graphic near the top of this story.

Below the southern end of the runway, construction is moving fast on a new taxiway extension running parallel to the runway, connecting it to the central apron and main hangar. The nearly completed route will allow additional aircraft to move more freely without having to back-taxi on the runway, which is a huge problem for higher operations tempos and more complex sortie launches and recoveries.

“Of particular interest are several large aircraft hangars in the southern section of the airbase, each measuring approximately 80 by 40 meters (262 by 131 feet),” Symon said of the three hangars grouped together that are being constructed on the south ramp. A fourth appears on its own just farther south on the apron, with different dimensions. The hangars, with direct access to the new southern taxiway, are sized to accommodate all of the tactical and strategic aircraft in the PLA’s current fleet. For scale, the PRC’s only strategic bomber in active service, the Xi’an H-6, has a wingspan of approximately 108 feet. But what’s already flying operationally isn’t the focus of these new facilities, it’s a unique class of aircraft, some of which are in testing now and more will be in the future.

The hangars’ wide proportions are similar to those of new ones found at China’s other secretive major test airbase in Xinjiang, located near Malan, which is largely focused on unmanned aircraft. The buildout comes as two massive stealth flying wing drones are in flight testing and we await the H-20 stealth bomber. It remains unclear where the H-20, which still hasn’t made a public appearance, will be tested. However, Lop Nur would be an ideal locale considering how sensitive the program is, and these new hangars could very well be in preparation for its arrival. It’s also worth noting that this installation appears more focused on crewed platforms, not drones, like at Malan. So sending the H-20 here for at least part of its test program would make sense, although this is just speculation at this time.

Broad construction continues behind the central apron area, with several buildings that were in development late last year now completed. A cluster of prefabricated containers arranged in tight rows for storage and accommodation has appeared since our last review. The additional laborers, materials, or equipment could be housed there to support the aggressive pace of development, as a much larger workforce would be required to speed up the construction process. Excavation and construction have started at other locations nearby, but they are in the early stages of development and their future purpose is unknown. Farther east, on the outskirts of the facility, a concrete batching plant with wash-water ponds and segregated aggregate stockpiles was recently built.

Grading is underway for another taxiway that will connect the central apron to the northern part of the main runway. The latest imagery suggests that concrete has just started to be poured. A circular pad with a 400-foot diameter has taken shape at the northern end with direct access to both the runway and the main base, which TWZ assesses to be an engine run and turnaround pad. If a shelter were added, it could also act as a “scoot and hide” area for keeping sensitive test articles from being seen by satellites passing overhead. An apron extension near the circular pad is also under construction, with at least two large hangars being built there, although they will have more traditional proportions compared to the four wide ones on the south ramp.

Additionally, Symon identified possible fuel-storage infrastructure under construction that would “further expand the base’s aviation-support capacity.” If confirmed, “the additional infrastructure could support a higher sortie rate and longer periods of sustained flight activity, consistent with an expansion in the scale or tempo of operations at Lop Nur,” he added.

The facility is clearly in the process of taking on a very important role in China’s advanced aerospace development ecosystem, and its significance will only grow as it expands to accommodate more, and bigger, airframes. With the hangar additions we are seeing, major programs are about to migrate there, even on a detachment basis, for extensive testing. The new southern hangars, in particular, suggest the PLA expects to be testing aircraft with far wider wingspans in the not-too-distant future.

Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@recurrent.io or on X @ianellisjones

Author’s note: Special thanks to Damien Symon for assisting with the imagery analysis, be sure to follow him on X at @detresfa_

The post Massive Expansion At China’s ‘Area 51’ appeared first on TWZ.

The U.S. military is planning to revamp Moron Air Base in Spain, including creating new parking spaces for as many as nine additional B-52 Stratofortress strategic bombers. This effort comes even after Spain denied permission to use the base, and its naval station in the country, for direct strike operations on Iran during Operation Epic Fury. Long-range strikes by bombers flying from Europe played a major role in that operation. It also comes as the Pentagon is reviewing its posture in Europe, which could include major basing changes that fit the Trump administration’s vision for NATO and who it prefers to work with the closest, as well as tactical and strategic concerns.

The makeover is part of a nearly half-billion dollar construction program for U.S. facilities primarily in the Rota, Spain, area, which provide a great deal of support for American forces in Europe, Africa and the Middle East. It was announced on Thursday in a pre-solicitation notice posted on the government’s contracting portal that a contract is expected to be awarded next month.

Moron, located in southern Spain, is a Spanish Air Force Base, used by the U.S. Air Force to provide expeditionary combat support and the bed-down of transient aircraft. It also plays a major role in the “staging of aircraft and personnel in support of U.S. and NATO plans, exercises and contingency operations; and to provide Base Operating Support to tenant units,” according to the Air Force Fiscal Year 2027 Military Construction plan.

The first order of business is “a Combat Aircraft Parking Apron in Moron, Spain,” the recent pre-solicitation notice states. The plan calls for the “expansion of the Aircraft Parking Apron to provide nine (9) new aircraft parking spots in an unloaded condition, or three (3) new B-52 aircraft parking spots in a live ordnance [sic] loaded condition.”

The issue of being able to store live ordnance is critical, since extra space is needed for safety purposes in case of an unintended explosion.

“The current apron is not capable of supporting any loaded strategic bombers due to limiting factors associated with unrelated facilities violating inhabited building safety arcs,” the Air Force budget document explains.

Beyond the new parking spaces, the planned expansion at Moron also calls for 10 new fuel pits and associated piping, the relocation of a Civil Engineer Storage Complex – including a new covered storage building and an open storage yard – and the extension of apron shoulders and access roads, among other items.

The Air Force sees these improvements as an imperative.

“This project is required to enhance readiness capabilities at Moron Air Base, Spain,” the Air Force Fiscal Year 2027 military construction budget documents note. “A key enabler for training and combat operations is substantial infrastructure, promoting a quick response and positioning of forces within prescribed response times. The expanded Strategic Bomber Aircraft parking apron will increase Moron Air Base’s ability to meet future mission requirements.”

If these improvements are not made, “[a]dequate airfield infrastructure will not be available to the DoW [Department of War] or its allied partners, and personnel, aircraft, and resources will lack key facilities and infrastructure to support expanded airfield operations for training and contingency environments,” the budget document warns. “This limitation will impede sortie generation and flying schedules, directly limiting airfield presence and impairing airfield capability and readiness. Therefore, responsiveness for bilateral and multilateral exercises and training missions would be compromised, directly limiting theater presence and impairing mission capability, readiness, and contingency support.”

The project has a price tag of between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000 and is “expected to be completed 1,038 calendar days after notice to proceed,” according to the pre-solicitation notice.

In addition, the Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) calls for new construction, renovations, alterations, demolition, repair work, and any necessary design to a wide range of U.S. assets in the region. This includes “airfield, industrial, infrastructure, administrative, training, retail, food service, munition storage, community support facilities and both vertical and horizontal construction in the Rota, Spain region or other areas managed by NAVFAC EURAFCENT, [Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command/Navy Region Europe, Africa, Central],” the pre-solicitation notice explains. “This tool may also be used throughout the NAVFAC area of responsibility (AOR), worldwide.”

However, as the Air Force budget documents stress, the Moron project is a priority.

The installation has long played an important role for American airpower. It has served as a host for B-1B Lancer and B-52 Bomber Task Force missions and as a way station for a wide array of other aircraft from fighters to aerial refueling tankers.

“Morón Air Base is a vital link in any operation moving east from the United States due to its strategic location close to the Mediterranean and the Middle East, its massive flight line, long runway, aircraft refueling systems and excellent weather,” according to the 496th Air Base Squadron, the facility’s host unit.

The facility played a key role in the run-up to Epic Fury, providing a midway point for a wide array of U.S. military aircraft.

In March, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, one of Europe’s most vocal critics of Epic Fury, refused to allow the U.S. to use its bases in his country for direct attacks on Iran. In addition, Sánchez denied permission for the U.S. to use Spanish airspace for Epic Fury, creating a logistics headache for American aircraft movements to the Middle East.

Sanchez’s decision affected Naval Station Rota, another major U.S. installation in that country. Rota supports the movement of personnel, equipment, fuel, and supplies through its three operational piers. It also has a 670-acre airfield capable of supporting U.S. Navy and Air Force aviation operations, and some of the largest weapons and fuel storage facilities in Europe.

Rota is also the home of Destroyer Squadron 60 (DESRON 60), one of three U.S. Navy destroyer squadrons permanently based outside the continental United States and the only one of these to call Europe home.

Sanchez’s moves set off U.S. President Donald Trump, who was already angered by Spain’s refusal to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, previously agreed to at last year’s NATO summit. In March, the American leader called Spain “a terrible partner” and threatened to cut off trade.

The situation reached a critical juncture at the NATO Summit in Turkey in July, with Trump again threatening Madrid. 

“We don’t want to do any trade business with Spain anymore… I’d like you to cut it off,” Trump fumed in Ankara to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent during a press conference with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. “Spain is a terrible partner in NATO. They don’t participate; they don’t pay. I don’t want anything to do with Spain. Cut off all trade with Spain, please, including visits. Watch them, watch them come running back; oh, they’ll come running back.”

At a NATO summit, Trump said he had ordered Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to cut off all trade with Spain, calling Madrid a 'terrible partner' in the alliance https://t.co/1E2VkRee2j pic.twitter.com/Vt2oNxW8QM

— Reuters (@Reuters) July 8, 2026

However, the rift eased after Sánchez agreed to bump up his country’s defense budget, Trump claimed.

On his way back to the United States after the summit, he told reporters aboard Air Force One: “I did have issues, and ​I still do. But Spain, they came back all the way today. Spain was very generous today.”

Asked what Spain had ​done, he said: “They honored a request for lots of payments, and if they didn’t, we wouldn’t have even ⁠talked to them.”

The two leaders displayed new-found cordiality for the cameras while sharing a box at the World Cup Final between Spain and Argentina at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey. 

Though the Moron construction planning predated any of the political drama, as we noted earlier, the Pentagon is reviewing how many troops it will maintain in Europe and where it will base them. Undersecretary of War Elbridge Colby made a rare visit to NATO headquarters on Thursday to meet with officials to discuss the way forward. There, he pointed out that the Pentagon’s review is “designed to ensure that NATO is moving fast and irreversibly toward Europe leading, stepping up to take primary responsibility for the defense of Europe, stepping up to ensure our forces are postured for America’s global needs, and making sure that our access, basing, and overflight are clearly delineated and assured.”

There are a number of other military construction projects on the books for European installations, including about $4 billion earmarked for improvements to bases in the U.K. The largest planned expenditure is more than $1.6 billion for RAF Lakenheath, according to the Guardian. That’s where it is believed that the U.S. is poised to bring nuclear bombs back to the United Kingdom after nearly two decades.

Despite the geopolitical tiffs between the two nations, the investment in Moron and the larger construction package for Spain is a clear signal of how much the military and Congress value having access to bases in that country.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post U.S. Expanding B-52 Bomber Capacity At Moron Air Base In Spain appeared first on TWZ.

Indonesia is about to become the second Southeast Asian country to operate an aircraft carrier, nearly three decades after Thailand became the first with HTMS Chakri Naruebet. The latest addition to the region’s small carrier club is the former Italian Navy carrier Giuseppe Garibaldi, which departed Italy earlier this week, bound for Indonesia, where it will eventually become KRI Gajah Mada. Indonesian Navy Chief of Staff Admiral Muhammad Ali confirmed the ship’s departure on Tuesday.

Garibaldi is expected to spend more than 20 days making the journey from Italy to Indonesia, passing through the Suez Canal and Red Sea. Italian frigates are accompanying the carrier during the transit.

According to Admiral Ali, the ship is scheduled to reach Indonesia between September 15 and 20.

The carrier will retain its Italian identity throughout the voyage, sailing as Giuseppe Garibaldi under the Italian flag until the formal transfer, when it will be renamed and placed under Indonesian command.

Commissioned in 1985, Garibaldi was initially described as a “helicopter cruiser” before being redesignated as an aircraft-carrying cruiser in 1989 and receiving the Italian Navy’s AV-8B Harrier II jump jets. The ship subsequently served as Italy’s flagship and later shifted toward amphibious operations and command-and-control duties after the larger Cavour entered service.

At around 13,850 tons full load, Garibaldi combined a relatively compact aviation capability with a multirole weapon and sensor fit, at least in its early period of service. Its armament historically included two octuple launchers for Sea Sparrow/Aspide surface-to-air missiles, four Otomat Mk 2 anti-ship missiles, two 2 triple torpedo tubes, and three twin Oto Melara 40mm guns.

Indonesia is acquiring the ship through an intergovernmental grant arrangement rather than purchasing it through a conventional commercial transaction.

Although it has spent almost four decades in Italian service, the ship offers considerable flexibility, combining a large aviation facility with the ability to serve as a command and support platform.

Jakarta says it plans to use the ship primarily as a helicopter-capable aviation platform, with aircraft from the Indonesian Navy, Air Force, and Army expected to operate from its deck.

Ahead of the ship’s arrival, preparations have included establishing a training facility at Juanda Naval Air Station/International Airport in Sidoarjo, East Java. Here, the large outline of a carrier flight deck has been painted on an apron/helipad area on the southern side of the installation, to familiarize naval pilots and deck crews with carrier flight-deck procedures.

Thailand’s experience provides useful context here. When Chakri Naruebet entered service in 1997, it was configured to operate AV-8S Harriers as well as helicopters. The Harriers were subsequently retired, leaving the ship to perform a much broader range of roles, including helicopter operations, disaster response, training, and VIP duties. TWZ has previously examined that unusual evolution in detail.

Once in service, Indonesia will likely operate the Gajah Mada as a mobile aviation base. This will allow helicopters to provide transport, surveillance, logistics, search and rescue, disaster relief, and potentially anti-submarine warfare and amphibious support capabilities over much greater distances than when operating from land bases, and in much larger numbers than operating from other Indonesian Navy vessels.

The potential mission set is particularly relevant for Indonesia, whose territory stretches across thousands of islands.

Occupying a strategic position at the southern end of the South China Sea, Indonesia is also locked in a maritime dispute with China, including incidents in which Chinese fishing boats accompanied by Chinese Coast Guard vessels have entered Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone in the South China Sea. The tense situation as regards China seems to be driving something of a defense spending spree in Indonesia, with high-profile acquisitions including French-made Rafale fighters and submarines.

Meanwhile, in peacetime, disaster response is also a significant consideration for Indonesia. The Gajah Mada will be able to bring helicopters, personnel, supplies, and command-and-control capabilities to areas where local infrastructure has been damaged or where access is otherwise difficult.

The ship is also likely to take part in maritime security missions and regional deployments including multinational training exercises.

There is potential for Indonesia to adapt the warship for drone operations too, something that Italian shipbuilder Fincantieri has previously proposed. While Indonesia has not announced such a capability as part of the ship’s initial configuration, it has acquired Turkish-made Bayraktar TB3 drones, which have demonstrated operations from carrier decks.

As well as Turkey’s Anadolu, which has evolved into a platform for operating drones after Turkey lost access to the F-35B program, other navies are similarly experimenting with integrating uncrewed aircraft into helicopter-carrier-sized ships, reflecting a broader shift toward using large flight decks for mixed crewed and uncrewed aviation. The trend includes experiments with fixed-wing drones on amphibious assault ships, including in China and the United States.

For Indonesia, a future combination of helicopters and drones could provide the Gajah Mada with persistent surveillance and potentially strike capabilities without requiring the country to develop a conventional fixed-wing carrier air wing.

How extensively Indonesia eventually makes use of any of its capabilities will depend on its ability to sustain the ship and build the associated aviation infrastructure and expertise.

The Indonesian Navy is constructing the warship’s future base in Lampung, on the southern tip of the Indonesian island of Sumatra. The facility is expected to be finished around the time the ship arrives and operational by the end of September.

The ship’s formal transformation into an Indonesian warship is planned for September 25. A commissioning and flag-changing ceremony is scheduled for that date, with President Prabowo Subianto expected to attend and officiate.

At that point, the carrier will become KRI Gajah Mada, taking its name from the famous Majapahit-era military commander and statesman.

The Navy plans to include the ship in celebrations marking the 81st anniversary of the Indonesian National Defense Forces, or TNI, in October.

Thailand’s experience with the Chakri Naruebet, which only very rarely goes to sea for any length of time, underscores the fact that buying a carrier is the relatively easy part. Creating a sustainable carrier aviation capability around it is much more challenging.

Nevertheless, the Gajah Mada gives Jakarta something it has never previously possessed: a large, dedicated maritime aviation platform capable of carrying helicopters from multiple services. As such, it could prove useful across a wide spectrum of missions.

Ciontact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Indonesia’s First Aircraft Carrier Is On Its Way From Italy appeared first on TWZ.

Saab’s first Gripen F two-seat fighter has taken to the air, marking the beginning of the flight-test campaign for a variant being developed in close cooperation with Brazil.

The aircraft departed Saab’s airfield at Linköping, Sweden, at 9:40 a.m. local time today and remained airborne for approximately 40 minutes. Saab chief test pilot Jakob Högberg and Brazilian Air Force test pilot Lt. Col. Aviator Abdon de Rezende Vasconcelos were in the cockpit for the inaugural sortie.

According to Saab, the flight was intended primarily to verify the aircraft’s core systems and initial flying characteristics. The company says the aircraft will now enter a more extensive test program, including progressive expansion of its permitted flight envelope.

That work will eventually cover the aircraft’s speed, altitude, G-loading, and angle-of-attack limits, as well as the tactical capabilities and systems associated specifically with the rear cockpit.

“This first flight represents an important step forward for both Saab and the Brazilian Air Force,” said Lars Tossman, head of Saab business area Aeronautics.  “Seeing Gripen F take to the skies is particularly significant for all the Swedish and Brazilian teams whose years of engineering work have helped turn this aircraft into a reality. It is designed to accelerate pilot training while enhancing operational performance in advanced combat missions.”

The Gripen F is the two-seat derivative of the Gripen E, but it is not simply a conventional trainer version of the single-seat fighter. Saab has designed the rear cockpit to be independently functional, allowing the aircraft to retain an operational combat role while carrying a second crew member.

The configuration is therefore intended to support conversion training and mission preparation while also offering potential advantages during complex combat missions through the division of cockpit workload. This could also include as a ‘drone controller,’ a growing area of interest for many air forces and something that Saab is also working toward with its uncrewed aircraft plans.

Combining the Gripen F, in particular, with a high-end drone of the kind that Saab envisages, would make a good deal of sense.

Saab has already pitched its stealthy, supersonic Autonomous Collaborative Platform (ACP) ‘fighter drone’ as an adjunct for the single-seater, describing it as “a great asset to the Gripen E.” Saab envisages the Gripen E serving as a tactical mission commander for one or more ACPs, working in conjunction with the company’s GlobalEye airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft.

The dual-crew benefits of the Gripen F, combined with the ACP, could give Saab an even more compelling route into the CCA market. After all, a fourth-generation fighter like the Gripen (Saab, it should be noted, rigorously avoids using this generational terminology), can remain highly relevant when teamed with CCAs, and a high-performance, stealthy drone like the ACP could make that combination even more potent. It could, at least possibly in some cases, allow air forces to skip the sixth-generation crewed combat air platforms altogether, or at least greatly reduce the need for them.

Brazil is central to the Gripen F program. The country was the launch customer for the two-seat variant and participated directly in its development as part of the broader technology-transfer arrangement underpinning its Gripen acquisition.

The first Gripen F was formally rolled out at Saab’s Linköping facility in June. Brazil’s original 2014 agreement with Saab covers 36 aircraft, in the form of 28 single-seat Gripen E fighters and eight Gripen F two-seaters. Deliveries of Brazilian Gripens began in 2020.

The F-model has also attracted interest beyond Brazil. Saab has subsequently received Gripen F orders from Thailand and Colombia. The South American nation will get two Gripen Fs, while the breakdown of Thailand’s Gripen E/F order has not been revealed. According to Saab, the 16 new-build Gripens ordered for Ukraine will all be single-seaters.

As for the Swedish Air Force, it plans to buy 60 single-seat Gripen Es, but bearing in mind the changing security situation in Europe, and the increasing focus on uncrewed aircraft, a future Gripen F order should not be ruled out. In particular, Saab has said it expects the Swedish government to acquire new Gripen E/Fs to backfill the 12 earlier Gripen C/D variants it has donated to Kyiv, and which are expected to arrive in Ukraine early next year.

Ukraine intends to purchase 20 Gripen E/F aircraft. In conjunction with the sale, Sweden will donate up to 16 Gripen C/D, including advanced ammunition. To replace the donated aircraft, new modern Gripen E/F will be procured for the Swedish Air Force. https://t.co/kPHjVDXnSb pic.twitter.com/IxEhsy2yvN

— Försvarsdepartementet (@ForsvarsdepSv) May 28, 2026

Saab also remains upbeat about the prospect of a Canadian order for the Gripen E/F.

Sweden has made a strong push to sell Gripen to Ottawa, and Saab offered to build the jet in Canada, in an effort to secure support for its previous bid, which it lost to Lockheed Martin and the F-35. Since then, Saab has also emerged as the preferred candidate to supply Canada with its future AEW&C capabilities via its GlobalEye.

Days after trade talks between Ottawa and Washington collapsed this month, further straining the Canada-United States relationship, Saab chief executive Micael Johansson told TWZ and other journalists that Gripen would be the “perfect” option if Canada moves ahead with a joint fighter purchase. The Swedish jet would add “combat mass” alongside the F-35, according to Johansson.

“I don’t think Canada will give up the F-35 completely; they will go forward with that to some extent,” Johansson said.

Johansson also pointed to the Gripen’s ability to operate from highway strips as well as conventional runways: “You get to use all kinds of airstrips that you cannot use with the F-35,” he added.

Part of the Saab pitch to Canada is the establishment of a new domestic final assembly line for the Gripen E/F, which would be the third such facility after Sweden and Brazil.

As for the Brazilian connection, this extends well beyond aircraft procurement. Saab says more than 350 Brazilian engineers, technicians, and pilots have participated in activities covering Gripen development, production, flight testing, and maintenance. Brazilian industry, including Embraer, has consequently become deeply involved in the program.

Meanwhile, Saab is continuing to expand what the fighter can actually do once it leaves the factory.

Recent work has included a test launch of the Taurus KEPD 350 cruise missile, as well as last year’s integration of Helsing’s Centaur AI agent, which was tested in a beyond-visual-range combat scenario.

TAURUS LAUNCH
Today a TAURUS KEPD 350 cruise missile was launched from a Swedish JAS 39 Gripen for the first time. The test was conducted at the Vidsel Test Range in Norrbotten.
Today TAURUS is a long-range cruise missile that introduces a new deep-strike capability.
FMV pic.twitter.com/vYcL75Lu4p

— Flygvapnet (@flygvapnet) August 21, 2026

Speaking last week, Johan Segertoft, head of Saab’s Gripen business unit, points to the fighter’s digital architecture as a key enabler of the rapid integration of new capabilities. The company says the Centaur integration took just 10 weeks.

“We chose BVR because it’s one of the most complex things to prove that we could take third-party software and do it, but there’s a lot of things in an aircraft and outside an aircraft that benefit from the advancement of software,” Segertoft said.

Since the Gripen E first flew in 2017, Saab has implemented around 300 capability upgrades, according to Segertoft. He contrasts that with what he describes as a theoretical maximum of around five upgrades for competing aircraft.

That approach is summed up by Saab’s internal mantra, Segertoft says: “code in the evening, deploy in the morning, learn by lunch.”

The Gripen F test campaign will now move beyond basic systems checks toward progressively more demanding flight conditions. Saab’s Flight Test Center in Sweden will conduct the campaign before the aircraft undergoes the remaining acceptance procedures and is eventually handed over to the Brazilian Air Force.

The first flight therefore represents a milestone not only for Saab’s new two-seat fighter but also for the industrial partnership that produced it. Potentially, that model could be repeated in Canada in the future.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Saab’s Gripen F Two-Seater Takes To The Air For The First Time appeared first on TWZ.

Russia used a longer-range Iskander ballistic missile for the first time in an attack on Kyiv, Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence Directorate (GUR) said on Thursday. Missiles fired from deeper inside Russia would present additional challenges to Ukraine’s new campaign to attack the systems before they launch.

“In one of the combined missile strikes on the capital this summer, the enemy first used the updated 9M723-2 ballistic missiles, also known by the code name ‘Iskander-1000,’” GUR stated. “The updated missile, due to the increased engine and, accordingly, the increased launcher, is capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 550 km (about 341 miles).”

According to GUR, the range of the previous Iskander variant, the 9M723-1, is 390 km, or about 242 miles.

In its statement about the new Iskander, GUR included photos of what appear to be recovered components of the weapon. However, the agency did not provide any specifics about what the components were, where they were found or when.

While GUR states that the new Iskander short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) was only recently fired at Ukraine, unconfirmed reports emerged in January that this weapon may have been introduced back then. Reports also began to appear last year that Russia was poised to start mass-producing a new version of the Iskander SRBM, with a range of about 600 miles and improved accuracy. Talk of the development of this new missile emerged after the termination by the United States of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) in 2019. This had previously prohibited the Soviet Union (later Russia) and the United States from fielding any ground-launched conventional or nuclear-capable missile of any type that can hit targets between 500 and 5,500 kilometers (310 and 3,420 miles) away. Russia formally abandoned the treaty a short while after the U.S pulled out.

We have reached out to GUR for details.

A Telegram channel operated by Russian paratroopers lauded the development.

“Now, rearward facilities that were previously considered relatively safe are within range,” gloated the Paratrooper’s Diary. “The missile retains its ballistic trajectory, which means it can maneuver throughout its flight path, making interception more difficult for air defense systems.”

“According to preliminary data, the increase in the fuel compartment may have allowed for adjustments to the warhead mass, but the missile is still capable of carrying both cluster and high-explosive warheads with increased power,” the paratroopers continued. “The deployment of the ‘Iskander-1000’ indicates that the Russian defense industry is not only replenishing stockpiles but also scaling up a major modernization of missile weaponry.”

Reducing the size of the warhead and increasing fuel storage is a well proven way of extending the range of certain missiles without drastically chaining its outer mold line. Other improvements, such as new motors and guidance capabilities can also help in this regard.

Russia produces dozens of these weapons a month, noted missile expert Fabian Hoffmann.

“Recently, Ukrainian intelligence provided an updated estimate of Russian missile production capacity, stating that Russia produces around 60 9M723 ballistic missiles per month,” he pointed out in May.

“Based on recent employment trends, this figure is not entirely implausible (at least compared to when this number was first mentioned in 2024), though it should be treated as an upper-bound estimate,” Hoffmann added. “More realistically, Russia’s combined 9M723 and Kh-47M2 production capacity in mid-2026 may be between 600 and 800 units annually, with monthly production potentially fluctuating significantly depending on the availability of internationally sourced components. This would allow Russia to sustain an average employment rate of roughly 50 to 70 monthly ballistic missile strikes against Ukraine, with greater peaks possible if part of the production is stockpiled in a given month.”

To bolster its stocks of short-range ballistic missiles, Russia is receiving more KN-23 and KN-24 missiles from North Korea, which are loosely akin to the Iskander-M. Russia has also asked Pyongyang for an additional tranche of KN-30 missiles, also known as the Hwasong-11C, according to a separate GUR report issued today.

“The new KN-30 ballistic missiles, which are three times more powerful than the KN-23/24, were requested by Moscow from Pyongyang, but so far, the transfer of these missiles from North Korea to Russia has not been recorded,” GUR added.

The KN-30 is an enlarged derivative of the original Hwasong-11 and designed to carry larger warheads. North Korea has previously said it has tested subvariants of the Da/C type with 2.5-ton and 4.5-ton conventional high-explosive warheads, and that it can also be fitted with a nuclear warhead.

Ukraine has had to absorb a lot of damage because it ran out of Patriots months ago. However, President Volodymyr Zelensky recently said an unspecified number of additional interceptors would be delivered. Evidence has also emerged that a new supply of Patriots is being used against Russian missiles, including Iskanders. Still, the concern stands because of the precarious nature of Ukraine’s interceptor supply and Russia’s ability to make new and improved missiles.

On the night of August 27, Ukrainian air defenses shot down seven Iskander-M/KN-23 ballistic missiles.https://t.co/ROasoQ78WT

— Militarnyi (@militarnyi) August 27, 2026

As we noted earlier in this story, Ukraine has a new campaign, recently announced by Zelensky, to go after Russia’s ballistic missiles prior to launching to offset a dearth of interceptors. However, Russia’s ability to launch missiles another 100 or so miles further away from Ukraine will make them harder to find and hit.

“When our anti-ballistic missile stocks are at a minimum, there is another tactic,” Zelensky commented. “It is more difficult, and we developed it. It is hunting their nearby positions from which ballistic missiles are launched.”

Zelensky offered no details about how the campaign would be carried out. However, “Ukraine has already targeted Russian ballistic missile infrastructure in several operations this year” in Crimea and Rostov, Russia, with drones, Euromaidan Press reported.

Zelensky says Ukrainian forces struck an Iskander-M missile launcher on Russian territory near Ukraine's border. He called it another success and said operational details cannot be disclosed because of the mission's sensitivity, but confirmed the launcher was hit. #Ukraine pic.twitter.com/Ao0ooa8JYt

— NOELREPORTS (@NOELreports) August 23, 2026

It is always preferable to shoot the archer not the arrow, but doing so reliably is very challenging as the Iranians proved again in Epic Fury. Despite a concerted campaign by the U.S. and Israel to go after Iranian missile launchers, the Islamic Republic was still able to fire off numerous volleys, creating a swath of destruction across the region.

For Ukraine, this kind of effort would have to mirror its mid-range strike campaign against Russian logistics using longer-range drones. Ukrainians told us they are hitting targets up to 250 km away in the occupied territories. However, that’s been aided in no small measure by the use of Space X Starlink systems.

Carrying out a similar campaign in Russia would be challenging, because Space X owner Elon Musk is reluctant to allow their use deep inside Russia. As we previously noted, Ukraine is asking Musk for permission to “use Starlink-equipped drones against ballistic missile launchers up to 200km inside Russia,” the Financial Times reported last week.

However, Zelensky recently said Musk ultimately refused to grant that permission.

GUR is calling for increased efforts to cut off the supply of foreign assistance Russia receives.

“To counter the aggressor’s plans, it is crucial to consolidate efforts aimed at limiting Russia’s program for the development, production, and modernization of ballistic weapons,” the directorate proffered.

The Ukrainian intelligence information about the new Iskander was part of a report on the amount of foreign components found on these missiles. The information is published on the directorate’s War & Sanctions portal, which identifies foreign assistance to Russia’s weapons programs.

“Only a quarter of the 140 components published today are manufactured by Russian enterprises,” GUR stated.

Almost half – 63 – were manufactured by American firms, GUR explained. The Iskanders also contained components from Switzerland, Belarus, Germany, Taiwan and China.

“In one of the most important components of the missile guidance system — the flight information processing unit obtained from the laser gyroscope — only 5 out of 43 components are manufactured in the Russian Federation,” GUR added. 

That foreign components would be found in Russian weapons is neither surprising nor new. TWZ has been chronicling this since the start of the war. These parts have been found in everything from helicopters to radars to cruise missiles. There was even a decoy drone found to be made completely of Chinese components.

These parts all found their way into Russian weapons despite international sanctions designed to prevent that from happening.

Russia isn’t the only country whose weapons – reliant on foreign components – have been used in attacks on Ukraine. A short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) produced by North Korea and used against Ukraine by Russia in 2024 relied on more than 290 foreign-sourced components, many of them originating from U.S. manufacturers. This is the alarming result of a study by Conflict Armament Research (CAR), a U.K.-based investigative organization.

China is also providing engines for Russia’s drones, including its jet-powered variants.

All this news about Russian missile supplies comes as President Vladimir Putin has threatened to escalate attacks on Ukraine over its strikes on Russian infrastructure and the faltering peace process. The Russian leader is also reportedly again mulling using tactical nuclear weapons to stop these attacks. That would be a world-changing escalation and TWZ cannot independently confirm those claims.

Though he hasn’t pulled the trigger on expanding attacks yet, Putin is clearly building the means to do so if he chooses.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post Russia Is Now Using Longer-Range Iskander Ballistic Missiles: Ukraine Intel appeared first on TWZ.

Europe is entering an interesting, and potentially highly consequential, period in the development of beyond-visual-range (BVR) air-to-air weapons. While the public emergence of new U.S. weapons in this class has unsurprisingly grabbed the headlines in recent months, Europe is meanwhile working on several projects that ultimately seek to field its next generation of far-reaching air-to-air missiles.

As in the United States, the immediate catalyst is the rapid evolution of Chinese air-to-air missiles, particularly the PL-15 and newer systems that are emerging around it. The India-Pakistan air combat experience from last year has brought the issue into sharper focus, demonstrating the operational consequences of underestimating an opponent’s long-range air-to-air capabilities. However, while Pakistan said its Chinese-made fighters and missiles shot down several Indian aircraft, the precise circumstances, numbers, and tactics involved remain the subject of competing claims and outside analysis.

For Europe, the MBDA Meteor is currently the state of the art in terms of BVR air-to-air missiles, and its unique set of capabilites is something we have discussed in depth in the past. The question is increasingly not simply how to improve the Meteor, but what should come after it, and what kind of weapons architecture (or ‘kill chain’) will be needed for the next generation of crewed and uncrewed combat aircraft and their weapons.

One of the most intriguing current developments is France’s Comet program, which appears to be led by the French side of the pan-European MBDA consortium. Very little is publicly known about the weapon, and its exact specifications remain unclear. It nevertheless appears to represent an effort to provide a significant step beyond the current MICA family, offering greater range and speed. If the apparent timeline of around 2030 is correct, Comet could be viewed as a relatively near-term response to an increasingly demanding threat environment.

Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) research institute in London, told TWZ that Comet looks like “a response to the exchanges between the Pakistanis and the Indians, where, on day one, the Indians underestimated how aggressive the Pakistanis were going to be, particularly with PL-15. It seems coincidental at the very least that this kind of thing has just popped up onto the horizon.”

That would distinguish Comet from the U.K.’s Future Air Superiority Effectors, or FASE, program which appears to be associated much more closely with the longer-term requirements of the U.K.’s Future Combat Air System and GCAP/Tempest.

Talking to TWZ, Justin Bronk, a research fellow for airpower at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), explained that FASE “is likely aimed at providing significantly better combat capabilities by the early-mid 2030s than a mid-life upgrade of the Meteor missile would be able to offer within the bounds of its basic layout and size.”

Creating an interesting overlap with FASE and Comet is a joint Franco-British study looking at what comes after Meteor. In April, the two countries signed a memorandum of understanding launching the 12-month effort that will assess future air-combat threats and potential next-generation missile concepts. The study is intended to identify the technologies required for a successor weapon and establish a development roadmap. While the two countries are at least formally examining the same post-Meteor problem, their longer-term combat air priorities appear to be diverging.

Beyond Meteor

Meteor remains one of Europe’s most capable air-to-air weapons. Its ramjet propulsion system gives it an important advantage over conventional solid-rocket missiles by allowing it to retain propulsion and energy much further into an engagement.

However, the threat environment that Meteor was designed against is changing. Meteor’s requirements were established in an environment dominated by the Soviet/Russian air-to-air missile threat. Today’s planning increasingly has to account for Chinese weapons such as the PL-15 and newer systems that may combine very long range with substantially greater speed.

“Since the Meteor is still more than a match for current Russian air-to-air missiles in air-to-air engagements, it is likely that the capability goals for the FASE program will use far more capable Chinese air-to-air missiles, aircraft, and sensors as pacing threats,” Bronk ​​​​added.

That raises the uncomfortable question of what happens when both sides can launch extremely capable BVR weapons against each other?

Simply put, higher speed now matters more, because it reduces the target’s reaction time and can make the terminal engagement substantially more demanding. One of Meteor’s advantages is the considerable energy it retains when it reaches the terminal phase, but the tradeoff is a slower average speed across the entirety of its flight envelope.

Barrie explained: “Meteor’s fly-out speed is somewhere between Mach 3.5 and somewhere below Mach 4. If you launch a PL-15 off a J-20, which is doing Mach 2, that weapon probably stays above Mach 5 for an awfully long time, which is one of the issues. It’s that risk of a mutual kill. Obviously, if the weapon against the J-20 is coming out at Mach 3.5 to Mach 4, then you have a bit an issue there.”

At the same time, a missile’s effectiveness depends on many other factors, including launch conditions, flight profile, midcourse guidance, seeker performance, electronic warfare environment, and target maneuvering.

However, the nature of the threat may push the next generation of European weapons toward a combination of greater range, substantially higher speed and greater terminal energy rather than simply another incremental improvement to Meteor. Indeed, the United Kingdom has dropped its plans for a Meteor mid-life upgrade, presumably to focus its efforts on an altogether more ambitious and capable successor, or successors.

Does the next weapon need a ramjet?

The Meteor was designed around a ramjet motor, especially since it was expected to face a ramjet version of the Russian R-77 (AA-12 Adder) missile. This was never fielded, and, as far as we know, China doesn’t have a weapon in this class either. A Meteor successor therefore won’t necessarily use the same kind of propulsion.

Meteor demonstrated the advantages of air-breathing propulsion, but there are trade-offs involved in using a ramjet or another air-breathing system. Achieving very high speeds while maintaining useful range and maneuverability can become increasingly difficult, and propulsion complexity adds cost and potentially consumes valuable internal volume.

The performance being attributed in open sources to Chinese solid-propellant weapons like the PL-15 suggests that another approach is possible.

Barrie would not be surprised if the ramjet is dropped. “The issue with a ramjet is it’s not impossible to get above Mach 5, but it’s difficult, and there are lots of compromises you probably have to make … I wonder if they may just look at energetic solids.”

A future European missile could therefore use a substantially larger solid-propellant motor, potentially coupled with a different boost and sustain architecture, to achieve the required combination of speed and range. Using more than one stage, or a multi-pulse solid rocket motor could be other solutions to the issue.

The size problem

Perhaps the biggest opportunity for a new European BVR weapon comes from the aircraft that will carry it.

Meteor was developed within the physical constraints imposed by existing fighter aircraft and their weapons-carriage arrangements, including internal carriage in the F-35. A future combat aircraft such as Tempest is expected to have significantly greater internal volume available for weapons.

“One of the drivers for Tempest is internal carriage, obviously, but lots of it,” Barrie continued. “A big main bay, and then probably sizeable side bays as well. That lets you carry a considerably larger weapon mass internally than an F-35. If you look at size of the platform in terms of what they’ve released, it’s a big aircraft, and one would assume it has a very significant internal weapons bay.”

A larger missile can carry more propellant, potentially support a more powerful propulsion system, accommodate a larger or more capable seeker, and provide additional volume for electronics and other subsystems.

As we have explained in the past:

There are different ways of increasing the range of an air-to-air missile, but this process is always easier if the weapon can be made larger. Bigger dimensions can translate to a bigger engine, more fuel, multi-stage rocket motors, and air-breathing engines, like the ramjet used in the Meteor. Other range-extending options that the United States has examined include throttleable “multi-pulse solid rocket motors” and more exotic “propellants, grain configurations, cases, and liners,” all of which would also be able to ensure greater range — as well as higher speed — compared to existing weapons.

The result could be a weapon that is considerably larger than Meteor but still fully compatible with the aircraft for which it was designed.

This reality, and the use of the plural effectors in the U.K.’s FASE terminology raises the possibility that the future European BVR requirement may not be for one missile, but for a family of weapons — at least as far as the British are concerned.

Why “effectors” may matter

If FASE ultimately refers to multiple effectors rather than a single missile, that could point to the broader direction of future air combat, involving crewed aircraft as well as various uncrewed wingmen.

Tempest is expected to operate as a so-called quarterback, supported by a number of uncrewed combat aircraft, remote carriers, or other systems operating considerably farther forward. Those uncrewed systems will have different size, payload and weapons-carriage constraints from the crewed aircraft.

This means that not every platform will need the same BVR weapon, or even be able to accommodate them, when it comes to the larger missiles.

Instead, a future force might require something resembling a family:

• A large, long-range, high-speed weapon for the crewed Tempest aircraft, optimized for the highest-end air-superiority engagements.
• A medium-sized weapon suitable for existing fighters and potentially future aircraft with more constrained weapons carriage.
• A smaller weapon optimized for CCAs or other uncrewed systems where internal bay dimensions, payload and cost are more restrictive.

A modular missile could possibly cover two of these categories at once. More broadly, these weapons could share technologies without necessarily being identical missiles. Common seekers, electronics, datalinks, software, guidance technologies or other subsystems could potentially be reused across the family.

The result would be a fundamentally different approach from simply developing a single Meteor replacement.

The seeker may be as important as the motor

The front end of a future European BVR weapon is another area where significant change is likely.

An active electronically scanned array (AESA) seeker would seem a logical baseline for a next-generation weapon. The United Kingdom’s previous work with Japan on the Joint New Air-to-Air Missile program, or JNAAM effort was particularly interesting in this regard, given Japan’s experience with active electronically scanned air-to-air seekers.

A future weapon could also incorporate a passive radio-frequency capability alongside its active radar. That would provide another means of detecting or tracking emitting targets and could increase the weapon’s resilience in a heavily contested electromagnetic environment.

For its PL-17 ultra-long-range air-to-air missile, China appears to have chosen a combination of active and passive seekers, although, as Barrie points out, it also appears to have been designed around a very specific target set: E-7 Wedgetail, E-2 Hawkeye, other airborne early warning and control platforms, and support assets, like tankers and strategic electronic surveillance and attack aircraft.

Whether such a capability is worth the additional cost and complexity is another question. A highly sophisticated multimode missile will inevitably be expensive, however, the same technologies could potentially provide utility against a broader range of targets than conventional fighter-on-fighter engagements. An air-to-surface capability should also not be ruled out, with a passive seeker potentially bestowing an anti-radiation missile (ARM) capability on the weapon.

Another passive seeker alternative could be based on an imaging infrared (IIR) sensor. This could provide an interesting complement to an active-radar seeker, making use of the same kind of two-way datalinked midcourse guidance system already included in Meteor. It could be especially relevant for engaging small or low-signature (stealthy) targets and in a heavily contested electromagnetic environment.

The weapon is becoming part of the network

Perhaps the biggest change will be the extent to which future BVR missiles exploit the wider kill chain, becoming much more than weapons guided by the aircraft that launches them.

The key requirement is for the missile to be track-source agnostic. This means a future long-range air-to-air missile could receive targeting information from a CCA, an airborne early warning aircraft, another fighter, a naval platform, or potentially space-based sensors.

For example, with Tempest operating alongside forward-deployed CCAs, the sensor that initially detects a target could be the CCA. The launching aircraft could then receive the track, launch a weapon, and continue receiving updates from multiple platforms.

Alternatively, a CCA could launch the weapon using targeting information generated by the crewed aircraft or another sensor elsewhere in the force, provided it is on the network.

Two-way datalinks, midcourse guidance, electronic warfare resilience, and the ability to accept high-quality third-party targeting information become central requirements. Some of this functionality is available, to varying extents, on some current air-to-air missiles, but it will be even more important as air combat becomes increasingly reliant on distributed sensor networks and crewed/uncrewed aircraft teaming.

If it can rely on offboard sensors, the missile’s engagement range no longer needs to be constrained by the organic sensor range of the launching fighter. Faced increasingly by the realities of an anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) environment, this could enable weapons that fly far beyond what the launch platform could independently detect and engage. The A2/AD threat is already pushing research into much farther-reaching air defense missiles, potentially with a range of up to 1,000 miles.

This also opens the door to more exotic propulsion concepts, including multi-stage weapons designed to combine very high-speed boost with a separate sustain or terminal stage.

The next generation of long-range air-to-air missile may therefore be defined as much by the kill chain they plug into as by the architecture and performance of the missile itself.

What happens to Meteor?

Meteor is one of Europe’s strongest examples of a successful multinational defense program. Six European nations participated in its development, and the program eventually produced a weapon that is widely regarded as a highly capable system.

Now, however, the countries that developed Meteor do not necessarily have identical requirements for the next generation.

The United Kingdom is moving toward GCAP/Tempest with Japan and Italy. Its future combat air requirements will increasingly be shaped by that program and by the threat assessment driving it.

The United Kingdom appears to want a very large, very high-performance weapon optimized for Tempest and the future air-superiority mission, especially in the Indo-Pacific region. Japan likely needs very much the same.

Meanwhile, other Meteor users may prioritize a weapon that can be integrated onto existing fighters and remain affordable in larger numbers.

France’s Comet effort could meet that requirement, since it appears to be a comparatively rapid response to the emerging threat. With that in mind, France could eventually find itself with a near-term weapon, a future clean-sheet requirement, and a continuing relationship with the Meteor family, all while pursuing its own future combat air requirements.

Overall, it is far from clear whether the Meteor consortium will survive for another generation, at least in its current form.

Could Japan become part of the answer?

Given that it’s a partner in GCAP/Tempest, and based on its previous air-to-air missile studies with the British, Japan is particularly interesting in this context.

Japan faces a threat environment in which long-range air combat is of obvious importance, and Japan has already demonstrated advanced capabilities in active electronically scanned air-to-air seekers. The Japanese-developed Mitsubishi AAM-4B became the first air-to-air missile to feature an AESA seeker.

Although earlier air-to-air missile cooperation between Japan and the United Kingdom did not evolve into an operational program, the two countries are now developing a combat aircraft together through GCAP.

With Britain and Japan designing the future combat aircraft together, they could eventually develop some of its principal weapons together as well, although Italy’s requirements are likely very different.

Thinking beyond the missile

Europe can almost certainly build a faster missile than Meteor, but there are plenty more questions about what kind of air combat system that missile — or missiles — will fit into.

A future BVR weapon will have to operate from multiple types of platforms (crewed and uncrewed), receive targeting data from offboard sensors, communicate with CCAs, function in a highly contested electromagnetic environment, engage maneuvering targets at extreme range, and retain enough energy to remain dangerous in the terminal phase.

Increasingly, it seems that, rather than a single weapon, a family of effectors will be the solution.

For the United Kingdom, FASE may become one of the most important programs to watch because it could reveal how Britain intends to bridge the gap between Meteor and the weapons of the GCAP/Tempest era. At this stage, FASE appears to be ‘for U.K. eyes only,’ although Japan and Italy would appear to be likely beneficiaries, due to their teaming on GCAP.

Elsewhere, Comet could provide an early indication of how France intends to respond to the emerging long-range missile threat while maintaining flexibility for a future system.

And for the wider Meteor consortium, it remains to be seen whether the program’s success can be carried forward into another multinational weapon, or whether the emergence of GCAP/Tempest and increasingly divergent national requirements marks the beginning of the end for the Meteor model.

Either way, the next generation of European BVR weapons is likely to be larger, faster, more networked, and more deeply integrated with the combat air system around it. At the same time, the need to create a family of effectors designed around a distributed force of crewed aircraft, CCAs, and offboard sensors will bring some formidable challenges.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post What Europe Needs Next In Beyond-Visual-Range Air-To-Air Missiles appeared first on TWZ.