The top U.S. Air Force officer in Europe, who also serves as the NATO Allied Air Command leader, said he has been tasked with enacting new alliance plans to defend against cruise missiles and drones. He was responding to questions about a drone that NATO had to shoot down after it entered Lithuanian airspace overnight. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Tuesday morning that the incident was “part of a broader pattern of Russian aggression and provocation against Europe, testing our readiness and our resolve.”

The drone incursion into Lithuania took place against the backdrop of the ongoing Russian war on Ukraine and amid a spate of so-called ‘hybrid’ or ‘gray zone’ actions Moscow has been accused of carrying out throughout Europe, including a recent attempted drone attack on the Leipzig-Halle airport in Germany.

We now know that Russia is responsible for the attempted explosive attack at Leipzig airport. Russia's repeated hybrid attacks on Germany and Europe are unacceptable. (1/4) pic.twitter.com/o3vBjgpeb1

— German Embassy Washington (@GermanyinUSA) September 1, 2026

“I don’t know what’s in the mind of Putin or his fielded forces about those one-way attack drones or even cruise missiles, like we’ve seen enter Polish airspace just a few months ago. In July, we had an AS-23 cruise missile enter Poland,” Lt. Gen. Jason T. Hinds, Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe/U.S. Air Forces Africa (USAFE), and Commander of the Allied Air Command, said in response to a question about the drone shootdown over Lithuania. He was speaking during a media roundtable at the Air & Space Forces Air, Space and Cyber Conference that TWZ is attending.

Hinds added that while he doesn’t “know the why behind” the drone incursion into Lithuania, he has been tasked by U.S. Air Force Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich, who serves as NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), “to fully implement EVA [Enhanced Vigilance Activity] Eastern Sentry and now its Standing Defense Plan 12000, which gives the nations the capabilities that they need to defend their airspace against either one-way attack drones like the one that you described last night, or a cruise missile.”

EVA Eastern Sentry is a mission NATO stood up in September 2025 after “an unprecedented number of Russian drones and planes violated the airspace of several NATO Allies,” according to the alliance. “Allies are contributing additional capabilities and assets to NATO’s deterrence and defense – for instance, more fighter jets, helicopters, transport aircraft, air defense systems, surveillance aircraft and frigates – and improving the coordination of these assets through NATO.”

Standing Defense Plan 12000 is a new plan for integrated air and missile defense across the alliance. Grynkewich introduced the concept during testimony to Congress in March.

Hinds acknowledged that Russia could be testing the alliance.

“It’s not about the small UASs; that’s typically a national responsibility, and it could be probing,” the Air Force general noted. “Regardless of the intent behind it, what we want to be prepared for is the second that a one-way attack drone or a cruise missile is first and foremost detected – hopefully well before it enters NATO territory – we want to know it. We want to know where it’s coming from. We want to have the capability to sense it. We want to be able to have the C2 [command and control] systems to be able to decide what to do about it, and then have the right kit to be able to act.”

Despite an integrated air and missile defense system that includes Patriot surface-to-air missile batteries, NATO currently is primarily “using air power” against drones and cruise missiles “and that’s not putting us on the right side of the cost curve,” Hinds stated. “But we want to get there.”

Using NATO jets to take down drones “is very effective, just like what you saw last night, and many other times,” but not necessarily efficient, Hinds explained. 

“I think there’s been at least five other cases of allied nations providing air power to shoot down one-way attack drones,” he proffered. “I want to get to the point where we’re doing it efficiently, using lower-cost interceptors, hopefully ground-based, and in some cases air-based that are cheaper to use, so we’ll see what the intent may be. Intelligence organizations are going to provide us with that intelligence later on, but I just don’t know yet.”

You can see one of those NATO jet engagements with drones in the following video.

NATO airpower in action this morning, safeguarding Latvian airspace. pic.twitter.com/Ugzbx8aaZS

— Marko Mihkelson (@markomihkelson) June 8, 2026

It should be noted that Europe is starting to follow the American lead in using less expensive laser-guided, air-to-air rockets as drone-killing weapons. TWZ was the first to report about the use of 70mm Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) rockets by the U.S. The U.K. Royal Air Force announced in May of this year that its Typhoons were now equipped with APKWS rockets while the French recently tested their own 68mm laser-guided rockets from Rafale fighters.

The Defence Procurement Agency has successfully completed integration testing of 68 mm laser-guided rockets on the Rafale fighter jet. The time between the contract being awarded for this new capability and initial operational capability being achieved was less than 8 months. pic.twitter.com/rR2Nij9EzY

— French Aid to Europe (@aidefranceukr) July 13, 2026

As the threats have evolved, NATO has “transitioned away from air policing, and we’ve transitioned to air defense for some specific reasons,” the general pointed out. “One is readiness. Air policing is a readiness decrementing mission that the alliance has done for years. There’s also an assurance mission that we did for 32 nations. That’s transitioned to air defense now. Air defense means we have the right kit, multi-domain, to be able to be put in the right place based on indications, warnings, or real threats, like you saw last night, inside of the Baltic nations, to be able to respond decisively and quickly.”

“There’s also a deterrence value there,” Hinds added. “So if Russia does fly a one-way attack drone or a cruise missile, they know that we’re going to be in the right spot to be able to detect it and then defend against it.”

“These are limited incursions, right? Small numbers. Here’s what I see: hybrid activities may, in fact, only be one of the few levers that Putin has available to him, because he sees that he does not have an advantage in geography, domain, or readiness,” Hinds suggested.

“Think about that,” he urged. “So what are we seeing? We’re not seeing a massing of forces across the opposite side of Finland, a new NATO nation. We’re not seeing a massing of forces whatsoever in any domain opposite of Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, or Estonia. You’re seeing a significant number of one-way attack drones in the Black Sea targeting Ukraine. Some of them are entering Romania. What you’re not seeing is a direct confrontation in geography. We’re not seeing direct competition in domains. And I think Putin knows that we are ready. I know he knows that we’re a defensive alliance. I know he knows that we have an advantage in every domain against them, and I think that’s likely why you’re seeing things like what you’re seeing with hybrid activity.”

Though below the level of armed conflict, these Russian activities raise the potential for something worse, Hinds posited.

“The risk about hybrid activity, from my perspective, is it could lead to escalation, and that’s where I hope that we get back towards deterrence again, and that the nations they’re going to decide to do what they want to do when it comes to these hybrid activities,” the general said. “Some of them are law enforcement. Some of them are military responses, and that’s up to the nations to decide how they’re going to deal with that. Not me.”

“But what I owe General Grynkewich is to ensure that we are demonstrating our deterrence each and every day, and we’re doing that effectively across all domains,” Hinds added. “And to ensure that Putin knows that if he tries something against the alliance, that we will be there, and we’re ready to win decisively if challenged.”

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post NATO Air Commander Details Thinking Behind The Alliance’s New Air Defense Plan appeared first on TWZ.

New imagery shared with TWZ by Anduril shows its YFQ-44A Fury Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) configured with air-to-ground weapons, underscoring the fact that the CCA could take on an air-to-ground role in the future in addition to its current air-to-air focus. Yesterday, Anduril executives revealed that the company had begun integration and fit checks for a range of air-to-ground weapons, although they confirmed to us that those weapons had not yet been flight-tested aboard Fury.

The YFQ-44A is one of two aircraft selected by the Air Force for its CCA Increment 1 program, alongside General Atomics’ YFQ-42A Vengeance. The service’s stated priority for the initial aircraft is air dominance, and Anduril says the production FQ-44 will have four external hardpoints capable of carrying four AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles. The YFQ-44A, which currently has two underwing pylons for two AMRAAMs, has already conducted a live AIM-120 firing as part of testing with the Air Force’s Experimental Operations Unit.

The new imagery, however, points toward a substantially broader weapons envelope, with the aircraft shown carrying different air-to-ground stores on its two external stations. The weapons are shown fitted to the aircraft during a ground-based fit check, an important step in the integration process before captive-carry and, ultimately, live-release testing, if Anduril and the USAF choose to go down that route.

During a recent roundtable with reporters yesterday at the Air & Space Forces Air, Space and Cyber Symposium that TWZ is attending, Anduril’s Jason Levin, senior vice president for Air Dominance and Strike, and Erin Simpson, vice president for Strategy for Air Dominance and Strike, said the company had already begun integration and fit checks of 500-pound Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM), 250-pound Small Diameter Bombs (SDB), and low-cost cruise missiles. Pods for 2.75-inch guided or unguided rockets are also seen fitted to the aircraft. In each case, the stores are mounted on a twin adaptor rack.

Furthermore, Anduril’s plans extend to testing the Fury with other air-to-air weapons and targeting pods.

Importantly, the diversity of weapons will give Fury a range of potential missions beyond high-end air-to-air combat, including counter-UAS, counter-cruise-missile, and air-to-ground or air-to-surface strike missions.

“We’ve begun integration and fit checks of a lot of other munitions,” an Anduril executive said. “We’ve done 500-pound guided bombs. We’ve done Small Diameter Bombs.”

The company said it had also begun engineering work to integrate its Barracuda 500 offering for the Air Force’s emerging low-cost cruise-missile effort.

It should be noted that giving the YFQ-44— or YFQ-42A — the ability to deliver a JDAM or SDB against a predetermined fixed target is not particularly complex. This type of austere air-to-ground capability should be relatively straightforward to add, providing a useful secondary strike function without requiring the aircraft to take on the far more demanding requirements associated with dynamic targeting or more sophisticated air-to-ground missions. This could also allow for these increment one CCAs to be used independently as air-to-ground ‘weapons trucks’ if their air-to-air assistance isn’t needed.

When the production FQ-44 arrives, it will have four hardpoints, compared with the two currently fitted to the YFQ-44A. Anduril says loading all four stations with AIM-120s for the Air Force’s air-dominance mission would reduce the range of the aircraft but would not require a larger engine or otherwise push the aircraft outside its basic takeoff, landing, climb, and flight-envelope requirements.

While the Air Force’s initial CCA requirement is heavily focused on air dominance, the same aircraft could potentially be configured for different missions by changing its external stores and sensors. Anduril is already positioning Fury as something more than a single-purpose “missile truck.”

That flexibility could become increasingly important as the Air Force considers how CCAs will be employed alongside crewed fighters. During a July Experimental Operations Unit (EOU) exercise at Creech Air Force Base, Fury flew in the same airspace as crewed fighters and other CCAs while Air Force personnel operated its Mission Autonomy system. Anduril says the aircraft has also flown in formation alongside F-35s, although the fighters were not yet controlling Fury.

The company is now working toward what it calls “quarterback integration,” in which a crewed aircraft will direct autonomous aircraft as part of a larger combat formation. Anduril says that work has already progressed through hardware- and software-in-the-loop environments and onto the aircraft itself, with live testing expected in the near term.

A Fury operating under the direction of an F-35 could potentially carry air-to-air missiles for counter-air missions, while other aircraft in the formation could be configured for strike or other effects. Alternatively, the same autonomous aircraft could be reconfigured for a different mission before being dispersed to another operating location. Having four pylons would also give the production Fury greater scope to undertake “swing-role” missions, flexing between prosecuting air and surface targets as required.

The July EOU exercise also demonstrated a rapid “hot reload” capability, with two Air Force personnel replacing an AIM-120 on a running Fury and reducing the turnaround between sorties to single-digit minutes. The demonstration was intended to show how CCAs could be rearmed and returned to the fight without the large maintenance and ground-support footprint associated with traditional combat aircraft. This will be vital as the Air Force integrates CCAs into its Agile Combat Employment concept, in which the drones can be dispersed across multiple operating locations rather than relying on a single large ground footprint.

Also speaking yesterday at the Air & Space Forces’ Air, Space and Cyber Symposium was Air Force Chief of Staff Kenneth Wilsbach, who confirmed that the service hasn’t necessarily made any decisions on Increment 2 of the CCA program yet, but it could include air-to-ground capabilities.

“We’re going through some thought processes about what Increment 2 should be able to do. Increment 1 is air-to-air, so do we want air-to-ground? Maybe, maybe not. Do we want it to have more sensors? Do we want it to be a lot cheaper? Do we want it to be more attritable or expendable, or do we want it to be more exquisite? Do we want shorter range or longer range? Do we want something that can be dropped from another platform, or does it take off and land by itself?”

“These are all considerations,” Wilsbach continued. “It’s still a bit early to make any definitive decisions on that, especially before we really get our hands on the current Increment 1 aircraft and learn from them.”

It’s also important to note that export customers for Fury may demand an air-to-ground capability set, especially if they will only be buying a limited number of CCA types. Having this option ready to go is relevant to prospects beyond the U.S., which are certainly growing.

Fury’s air-to-ground weapons work is part of a broader effort to make the aircraft a flexible combat system rather than simply an uncrewed air-defense adjunct for crewed fighters. The Air Force’s immediate priority may be air dominance, but the weapons integration underway suggests that the same four hardpoints could eventually support a much wider range of missions. This weapons flexibility could ultimately be central to the broader CCA concept, especially as the Air Force works out what it wants Increment 2 to deliver.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post YFQ-44A Fury Has Been Fit Checked With Air-To-Ground Munitions appeared first on TWZ.

Faced with a growing threat to their bases and personnel from missiles and drones and some recent hard-learned lessons, two top Air Force officials on Monday announced plans to increase protection. The statements were made during the Air & Space Forces Air, Space and Cyber Symposium that TWZ is attending. They were delivered as the service is seeking to improve its organic ability to defend its bases and has developed new doctrine to do so. 

The war against Iran exposed gaps in how the U.S. can provide effective, sustained air defenses for its foreign installations and there are major concerns about a future fight against a peer competitor like China or Russia. Drone incursions at home have raised alarms about domestic base protection as has the war between Russia and Ukraine.

The following video shows a fatal Iranian attack on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan in July.

Video captures the moment that several Iranian medium to intermediate-range ballistic missiles struck Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan overnight, killing at least two and injuring several other American Servicemembers. pic.twitter.com/cJz39E1LvP

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) July 18, 2026

“For decades, American air and space power has often operated from a position of sanctuary. Those days are over,” Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach said during a keynote speech. “We can no longer treat point defense as a side hustle. We must make it a core function of air and space power.”

He acknowledged the widespread damage Iran caused to U.S. bases and suggested that lack of base defense played a large role.

“So, if we had more robust base defense, perhaps those bases wouldn’t have been as damaged as they were,” the general admitted. “Look at Israel; they have a significantly layered, very robust defense of their country, and they didn’t take that many hits. Very few, in fact, and that shows you what a good defensive system can do, which can help you to operate not quite with impunity, but almost, and you can just keep generating air power, and your defensive systems take care of the incoming.”

Wilsbach offered some concrete suggestions about how to make improvements. 

“First, we will establish the point defense weapon system, bringing together kinetic and non-kinetic capabilities to secure our air bases,” the general said. He did not offer any specifics. 

While Wilsbach offered no details about what a point defense weapons system would entail, we recently wrote that the Air Force is seeking an anti-aircraft gun system to help defend its air bases around the world from drones and cruise missiles. Introduced via a Request for Information (RFI) recently posted on the government’s contracting website, the gun system concept is part of a larger Air Force effort to play a greater role in air base defense via ground-based air defenses (GBADs). This role is largely performed by the U.S. Army, most notably with surface-to-air missile systems like Patriot and the Humvee-based Avenger system. The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system can also provide broader area defense against incoming ballistic missiles. Other short-range systems optimized to swat down drones and even incoming rockets include the Centurion Counter-Rocket, Artillery, Mortar (C-RAM) system, Coyote counter-drone interceptors and more.

The Air Force currently has no such systems. Now it is set on changing that.

The Air Force is also looking at directed energy weapons like lasers for force protection and especially for defending bases overseas. While gaining traction across the services due in large measure to the much lower cost of delivering effects, these systems are still works in progress.

It’s one thing to have equipment, but another to have experts that know how to use it, Wilsbach noted.

“Second, we have established a new career field of point defense airmen,” he added. “This new career field will be operational in two years. Together, these two new initiatives will strengthen our defenses, reinforce our ability to generate air and space power under fire, and protect our greatest advantage: our airmen and guardians.”

“Protecting the force and generating combat power are inseparable,” Wilsbach explained. “We need our airmen trained, equipped, and ready to fight from the opening moments of a conflict.”

“Don’t you think we ought to have them at every base?” he suggested when asked about point defenders during a media engagement at the symposium. “Because if every base is going to be threatened, we have to have somebody that knows how to defend it. So, obviously, that’s a long-term objective. But what I’ll tell you for right now is we’re going to develop the career field and push it forward to the critical bases that need protecting most, and then we’ll expand it beyond there.”

Though he wants the Air Force to come up with new defensive systems and personnel with the know-how to operate them, Wilsbach is not quite as sold on building out hardened aircraft shelters (HAS). This is his long-standing position that he reiterated on Monday.

“If you know where you’re going to fight from, hardened shelters aren’t that bad of an idea,” the general posited. “Deeply buried are even better. But if you are like us, and we don’t necessarily know where we’re going to fight from, if you build a hardened shelter and you don’t happen to be there, then you perhaps wasted that money.”

“So, given a resource-constrained environment, I would like to put my dollars in systems that can go anywhere in the world and protect you with basically the same level of security by shooting down incoming rounds versus making a hardened shelter that is impervious to an attack,” Wilsbach explained. “You have to put it 200 or 300 feet underground. Any hardened shelter that you show me that’s above the ground, I can blow up. So unless it’s really deeply buried, and then if it is, it’s expensive. And so that’s my logic: the best bang for the buck.”

To speed up the fielding of defensive systems, the service is interested in building out a procurement process specifically designed to develop weapons and other equipment needed to defend bases.

“How do you make sure that [airmen] have the kit they need to do the job?” Air Force Secretary Troy Meink asked rhetorically at a separate symposium session.

The Air Force, he said, is considering creating a new base defense Portfolio Acquisition Executive (PAE). The service created PAEs at the beginning of the year as part of an overhaul of its acquisition process ordered by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. 

“The creation of PAEs is a central element of that direction,” according to an Air Force memo on the topic. “By organizing acquisition leadership around portfolios of capability, rather than discrete programs alone, the Department seeks to improve integration, decision speed, and outcome-focused execution across the acquisition enterprise.”

Meink acknowledged that there are challenges to creating a new PAE, most notably the overhead cost of establishing a new office with its associated personnel and infrastructure.

“Probably not going to do it right away, but obviously I think we’re on a path to something like that in the future,” the secretary suggested. “But there definitely has to be a continually increasing focus on making sure we can defend our airmen and guardians wherever they are in the world. This is not just an overseas problem; it’s a U.S. problem as well.”

Though we have been raising the alarm for years about the need for domestic base protection, the issue came into sharp focus in December 2023 after Langley Air Force Base in Virginia was beset by mysterious drone incursions for much of that month. The nature of those flights, which we were the first to report, remains publicly unknown. Since then there have been incursions at several other bases in the U.S., including Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, home of B-52 Stratofortress bombers and nuclear weapons storage facilities, and a key part of the airborne leg of America’s nuclear triad. There have also been numerous incursions over U.S. bases in Europe, many of which we were the first to report.

As we noted earlier in this story, the U.S. is already facing a challenge defending against Iranian threats. A war with China would be more devastating and, when it comes to the Air Force protecting its bases, require more robust defenses and a lot more of them at many more locations. At the same time, the Air Force is still very early in the process of taking on more responsibility for protecting its assets.

Meanwhile, the Army has its issues when it comes to air defense. Its existing Patriot battalions have already been shown to be worryingly inadequate to meet heavy existing operational demands, something TWZ has been calling attention to for years now. We have also been raising concerns for a long time about its lack of SHORADS.

For the Air Force, recognizing the problem and taking steps to fix it are important steps. Whether these are the right approaches is something we will keep an eye on.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post Air Force Announces New Plans To Take Over Defending Its Own Bases From Aerial Attack appeared first on TWZ.