Douglas A. Macgregor's Blog, page 16

Army sunsets Futures Command, activates Transformation, Training Command

WASHINGTON — The Army has officially deactivated Army Futures Command after seven years in service and will combine it, along with the also-deactivated Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), into a new organization dubbed the Transformation and Training Command, or T2COM.

“The deactivation ceremony for the Army Futures Command took place Thursday, Oct. 2, 2025, at 7:45 a.m. at the LBJ Auditorium on the University of Texas campus in Austin, Texas,” a spokesperson from T2COM told Breaking Defense today. “The event marked the end of the command’s seven-year history and was followed by the activation of the Transformation and Training Command.”

The combination of the two organizations is part of the service’s sprawling Army Transformation Initiative (ATI) effort announced in May. ATI aims to cut the number of general officer billets and restructure the service’s offices responsible for crafting requirements and buying weapons. The idea is to build a “leaner, more lethal force,” according to Secretary Pete Hegseth’s memo announcing the initiative. 

AFC was stood up in 2018 in Austin, Texas, under the first Trump administration with a four-star general at the helm. It was created in an attempt to speed up the requirements process and break down bureaucratic processes to get tech and weapons into the hands of soldiers quicker. At the time, part of TRADOC’s mandate was redirected towards AFC, with the new command assuming responsibility for shepherding in new weapon requirements.

“Some of this is back to the future, for example, AFC mostly came from TRADOC and so putting it back makes sense,” John Ferrari, a senior nonresident fellow at AEI and retired Army Maj. Gen., told Breaking Defense before the ATI initiative was announced.

“Additionally, AFC was premised on devolving to its acquisition authority and that did [not] happen, so it is a brave leader who says we tried it and it is not delivering results we expected and admits that out loud.”

Before it was sunset, AFC was headed by Gen. James Rainey and TRADOC was headed by Gen. Gary Brito, both of who retired with the activation of T2COM.

Lt. Gen. David Hodne, previously the deputy commanding general for futures and concepts at AFC, will lead the new T2COM. The new command will operate mostly out of Austin, Texas, and will have some operations in Fort Eustis, Va. — TRADOC’s old headquarters — according to Association of the United States Army. Hodne was nominated for a fourth star earlier this year which is currently awaiting Senate confirmation. 

“My replacement, my current deputy, Dave Hodne, is going to take over for me next week, staying in Austin,” Gen. Rainey said earlier this month during a Special Competitive Studies Project event. 

“He will have more authority, more ability, [more] control of basically the entire institutional Army to get the ability to transform even faster … names will change, patches will change, but we’re not going … the Army is not leaving Austin, [we’re] doubling down on transforming.”

Hanwha Defense taps Tom Anderson to run American shipbuilding arm

WASHINGTON — Hanwha Defense today announced it has hired Tom Anderson, formerly a top officer overseeing US Navy ship construction and maintenance, to lead its American shipbuilding business.

“Anderson will be responsible for the execution of Hanwha’s U.S. shipbuilding programs and shipyard operations, including developing the company’s strategy for future shipbuilding programs as well as building the company’s shipbuilding infrastructure and associated workforce to accommodate future growth,” according to a statement from Hanwha.

A retired rear admiral, Anderson was the program executive officer for ships, the flag officer billet overseeing one of the Navy’s largest shipbuilding acquisition portfolios including the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, big- and small-deck amphibs and future surface combatants such as DDG(X), among other programs.

“Tom has had a distinguished and impactful naval career, and we are delighted to bring his deep industry expertise, creative thinking, and demonstrated leadership to Hanwha,” said Mike Smith, president and CEO of Hanwha Defense USA. “This is a pivotal time for the Navy and U.S. shipbuilding writ large. Tom brings a wealth of experience and unique perspectives that will accelerate the delivery of novel solutions to our customers’ most elusive industrial base challenges.”

Hanwha’s announcement comes as the South Korean conglomerate has aggressively pushed to integrate itself into the American defense industrial base, most notably by acquiring Philly Shipyard, a former Navy facility that up until Hanwha’s acquisition in December 2024, was owned by a Norwegian industrial investment group.

Amid continued rhetoric from the White House about increased investment in American shipbuilding, firms such as Canada’s Davie Shipbuilding and Hanwha competitor HD Hyundai Heavy have also either purchased or publicly floated the idea of acquiring US-based shipyards.

How layered defense systems are adapting to ever-shifting drone threats

When it comes to countering small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS), the battlefield clock moves fast. In Ukraine, new drone tactics evolve weekly, driving a rapid innovation cycle for counter-UAS weapon system providers.

From drones hugging the tree line to evade radar, to fast and dynamic flight paths that defeat optical trackers, to swarms of dozens attacking simultaneously from all different directions, the threats have multiplied in complexity. The Pentagon’s demand signals reflect that urgency, spanning every service and the Coast Guard. 

Paul Stoelting, engineering director, Space and Defense Group, Moog

“There is not a magic bullet,” said Paul Stoelting, director of engineering for the Space and Defense Group at Moog, emphasizing that no single C-UAS answer will suffice. “It has to be adaptable and affordable, a low-cost-per-kill-type weapon that has to be scalable to what you’re trying to defend.”

For Moog, a company with decades of defense engineering experience, the goal is not to build a single exquisite weapon, but to create a range of flexible and affordable weapon systems that can scale to meet the ever-changing C-UAS threat. 

Building a layered and modular defense

The Department of War is countering the drone threat with layered defense solutions that range from platoon-level protection up through brigade assets, and from mobile vehicles to static sites like airfields or missile batteries. That layering must extend across the detect, track, and defeat kill chain, and it has to accommodate rapid integration with new sensors and command-and-control (C2) systems. 

“It’s everyone’s responsibility to address counter-UAS,” said Stoelting. “The Army is calling it a Military Occupational Specialties (MOS)-agnostic approach, so they’re moving fast too.”

Moog’s C-UAS products reflect that layered and modular approach. Three complementary elements form the backbone of its offerings: the Reconfigurable Integrated-weapons Platform (RIwP), the Flexible Mission Platform (FMP), and the Weapon Stores Management System (SMS). 

RIwP merges precision motion control, sensors, and fire control into a single unmanned turret. A PlayStation-like hand controller allows the gunner to operate remotely, while intelligent fire control and video tracking handle real-time tracking and targeting. FMP is a ruggedized pan-and-tilt mount that can also host a variety of sensors and/or weapons.

SMS is a Modular Open System Approach (MOSA)-compliant, commercial-off-the-shelf, weapon control system that integrates with sensors and mission management systems to provide aerial and ground operators with a superior fire-control solution. It can be installed on vehicles ranging from skid steers to helicopters to provide rapid weaponization. 

Andrew Layer, strategic opportunities manager for growth and innovation, Moog

“Moog’s counter-UAS position is bigger than just one product,” said Andrew Layer, strategic opportunities manager for growth and innovation at Moog. “We have a suite of offerings at different price points and varied sizes. Even the RIwP is multiple products under one platform, built to be reconfigured with any effector depending on the mission.”

Weapons, platforms, and artificial intelligence

RIwP is vehicle agnostic and has been integrated on a variety of platforms to include Stryker, Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV), MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV), and small, Tracked Robots. The FMP has been mounted on Humvees and light trucks. SMS has been installed on fixed and rotary-wing aircraft, including the UH-60 Black Hawk. However, the modularity of Moog’s products extend beyond payloads and platforms. RIwP can carry guns, such as the 30mm Bushmaster cannon, air-defense missiles such as Stinger, Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS), and Coyote as well as a variety of sensors. “The reconfigurability is deliberate,” said Layer. “You can send RIwP out one day with Stingers, bring it back the next day and configure it with APKWS.” 

Moog is investing to deliver operator-centric capability for smart, fast, and robust target tracking using artificial intelligence and sensor fusion. Working to enable a single gunner to operate multiple remote systems, Moog’s team has developed its own autonomous fire-control system, consisting of an edge computer running fusion and detection algorithms. This advanced tracking and targeting capability can be deployed onto legacy systems, such as RIwP, using existing interfaces, allowing fielded weapons to evolve with the changing UAS threat. 

“Over the last year, we’ve taken our advanced targeting system into the field and have demonstrated several new capabilities,” said Layer. “Number one, we can fire without radar. We’re using AI/ML to do passive range estimation for what we call silent-watch, firing on aerial targets without emitting.”

“Number two, we are speeding things up. We are using edge processing and autonomous targeting to dramatically reduce the time from detect to defeat, a key enabler for remote operation.”

“And most importantly, our on-board AI maintains targets through the most difficult tracking conditions; cluttered backgrounds, muzzle flash, and dynamic maneuvers.”

These advanced capabilities make Moog’s systems responsive, resilient and reliable; providing kinetic weapons an advantage in the air-defense fight.

Moog’s counter-UAS systems are installed on vehicles to offer mobile counter-drone defense capabilities. (SGT Stout Program; photo courtesy of U.S. Army)

Demonstration and moving at the speed of change

“Moog’s RIwP turret is redefining the counter-UAS battlespace, delivering unmatched performance across critical U.S. Army programs including SGT Stout, MLIDS 2.0, and MLIDS 2.1. Our leadership is not just measured by today’s capabilities, but by our relentless pursuit of tomorrow’s solutions—driven by deep user engagement, a culture of continuous innovation, and live-fire validation. In this rapidly evolving threat environment, Moog remains committed to staying ahead of the curve and empowering the warfighter with adaptable, mission-ready technology. We are not following the future—we are engineering it,” said Mike Gruver, SVP – Space and Defense Group, Moog.

Moog has taken systems to numerous live-fire and engineering experimentation events, including Project Convergence (PCC) at Fort Irwin, Northrop Grumman’s Bushmaster User Conference (BUC) at Big Sandy, and the Maneuver and Fires Integrated Experiment (MFIX) at Fort Sill. Additional engagements with OUSD R&E, US-CENTCOM, and DEVCOM-C5ISR, are driving the company’s research and innovation, with future capabilities and new products already underway. 

Globally Moog leverages a base of ninety-five sites across twenty-five countries, including a dedicated systems integration lab for counter-UAS. Said Stoelting: “We have an operational excellence 100/100 mantra, which is 100-percent quality, 100-percent on-time delivery. That fact itself has won us contracts.”

Sikorsky unveils Nomad drone fleet with Group 3 flight tests to begin in coming months

WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin subsidiary Sikorsky announced today the launch of its Nomad drone fleet, a family of vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) twin-proprotor UAS.

The aircraft, which will range in size from medium-sized Group 3 UAS to Black Hawk-sized Group 5, are designed to operate in “austere” environments for reconnaissance, “light kinetic,” and cargo missions, all while operating on Sikorsky’s MATRIX autonomous technology using an open-systems architecture, company executives told reporters ahead of today’s announcement. Right now the company said it is focusing on developing its Group 3 UAS, but is drawing up plans for a Group 4 model.

“The resulting Nomad family of drones will be adaptable, go-anywhere, runway independent aircraft capable of land and sea-based missions across defense, national security, forestry and civilian organizations,” Rich Benton, Sikorsky vice president and general manager, said in a company announcement.

The Nomad family of systems, which will run on hybrid-electric power are being funded through internal company investments. The Nomad fleet is also part of DARPA’s EVADE program. Though the company is not on contract with the Army to develop the Nomad fleet, executives said they foresee the Group 3 solution acting in the same capacity of the Army’s RQ-7 Shadow fleet — a Group 3 UAS designed for the brigade level that was completely shelved last year. As Breaking Defense previously reported, Army leaders are looking for a replacement to the Shadow by 2026. 

“If you’re thinking about an Army application, you would see the Group 3 variant doing what was the Shadow mission for the Army, focused on brigade reconnaissance capabilities,” Erskine “Ramsey” Bentley, Sikorsky director of Future Vertical Lift Programs, told reporters.

He added that he foresees the Group 4 Nomad solution serving in the same caliber as the Army’s Gray Eagle drone. The Army halted purchases of the Gray Eagle as part of the Army’s Transformation Initiative and plans to keep the newer ones in inventory and upgrade them, while phasing out the older variants around the fiscal 2028 timeframe. 

The company said the Nomad fleet could be useful to not only the Army, but also other services and the civilian side of the government. 

“We see these aircraft as being multi-role, but also multi-service, and we also see civilian applications, or commercial applications for these aircraft also being vertical takeoff and landing. They would be ideal for shipboard operations with the Navy or the Marine Corps,” Bentley said. “We could use these for spotting wildfires, for wildfire suppression operations, or they could be used for humanitarian assistance operations.” 

Before the Nomad family was officially announced, Sikorsky was developing a small rotor blown wing VTOL UAS deemed the “Nomad 50,” but has since turned its attention to Group 3 systems. Along with the announcement of the Nomad family, the company unveiled the Nomad 100, a Group 3 UAS that will undergo flight testing later this year, an executive said. He added that Sikorsky is in the beginning stages of developing a Group 4 Nomad. 

“Group 4 is really on our drawing boards [in the] preliminary design review. We are discussing it with a couple of customers. There is no contract,” Igor Cherepinsky, the director of Sikorsky Innovations, told reporters last week. “We’re going to go build one [and] demonstrate it anyway, sometime within a year.”

Changing the game in flight testing; a helicopter that reconfigures avionics in-flight

With operating environments growing more complex and threats evolving faster than ever, it’s imperative for the Army and its vendors to field new capabilities at a relevant speed. This need to compress timelines and shrink development from years to months or even weeks is further fueled by the strategic use and integration of more off-the-shelf technology and rapid development of software updates.  

As a result, the historic distinction between initial development and its in-service improvement is effectively being dissolved, creating a continuous, high-speed feedback loop between the battlefield and the factory floor. 

Traditional in-flight testing of system improvements offers the most realistic performance data, but it comes with a slower timeline for tweaking performance issues and then scheduling another flight to test them. Changes can be made faster in a virtual test environment, but that can miss some of the complexities of a live flight in a real operating environment.

Thales has sought to remake the traditional in-flight paradigm by developing a test and demonstration helicopter that allows for capability iterations in real time, literally. 

In creating this flying testbed, Thales hasn’t just changed how the company’s engineers can identify, fix and test performance issues on in-development technologies. It has improved how it interacts with its customers in defense, government, and civil aviation – allowing them to see a system perform in a live flight, provide real-time feedback data on its performance, and potentially see the next iteration during that same test flight.

The Thales Demonstration Helicopter is a modified Airbus H125 light helicopter (formerly named the Eurocopter AS350 Écureuil) that is meant to be both a testbed for the company’s new systems and a tool for direct engagement with customers. 

The platform has a custom cockpit equipped with large display screens, the company’s compact four-axis autopilot, and helmet-mounted displays. It’s built on a modular open-architecture backbone that allows Thales to easily integrate its own hardware and software – or that of its collaborators in industry. And, importantly, it’s connected during flight to Thales engineers on the ground via a secure internet connection so the team can monitor the performance of systems undergoing flight testing and even upload software changes mid-flight.

“It gives us a rapid fly-fix-fly capability that’s very unique; there is nothing better than flying customers in the aircraft so they can see how technologies operate in real environments,” said Ryan Walters, US Army retired Special Operations Chief Helicopter Pilot and GM, Thales Flight Avionics US.

The rapid fly-fix-fly capability is enabled by an encrypted data link using a 5G commercial modem that allows the air crew to talk to and share data with engineers or customers anywhere in the world, according to Jim Sleigh, a Thales flight test engineer and pilot.

In one example, “during a demonstration, a customer suggested a change to one of our digital map products,” said Sleigh. “Over the phone, I was able to call an engineer at his desk who connected to the aircraft in real-time. The engineer said, ‘I think I know the problem: hang on, I’m taking control of the display.’ He changed the code, rebooted the display, and asked: ‘how does it look now?’ It was improved!

“At that moment, I realized that we had changed the paradigm, the fly-fix-fly, from what used to be weeks, days, to not hours but literally minutes. It’s a transformative capability for us and our customers in terms of development.”

This type of flying testbed could support incremental upgrades or security patches to Thales avionics, or the integration of entirely new products. Due to the modular open-architecture design, it also creates an opportunity to partner with other companies on integrated capability packages.

“This makes it easy for us to do something like fly someone else’s mission computer, software, or sensor,” Sleigh added. “Our software running on someone else’s hardware, for instance, is easy to do on this helicopter,” thereby improving Thales’ relationships with both the end users and the industry partners.

Customer feedback matters

If having this demonstrator is beneficial from a development and test perspective, it’s equally beneficial from a customer engagement perspective.

As with the digital map mentioned earlier, the company’s ability to communicate while in flight in the Thales Flight Demonstration Helicopter, get real-time feedback, and write and upload new code even before the helicopter lands can be considered revolutionary. An Army test engineer could have been on the flight, seen a system feature or behavior that wasn’t quite what the Army wanted, and had the Thales team on the ground start engineering a fix right away.

Importantly, Walters noted, feedback isn’t being relayed from an Army operator through an Army engineer to a Thales engineer to the Thales business development team. “It’s us flying with our customers for immediate feedback.”

As a former Army aviator, Walters said this could also be a major shift in how industry understands and responds to customer needs.

“Our number one priority is enhancing safety, improving situational awareness, and getting the customer’s thumbprints on our products so that we’re not developing stuff just to requirements or in a vacuum. We’re focused on what the end-user customer and the program offices have to say. They get to actually see that their feedback matters.”

A tangible investment in the US market

The idea for the Thales Flight Demonstration Helicopter surface in 2020 when Thales partnered with StandardAero to integrate its compact autopilot system onto an Airbus H125 and complete a test and evaluation plan to achieve FAA flight certification, allowing Thales to sell its autopilot package to light helicopter operators.

“At the completion of that program, we were reflecting on the helicopter not flying anymore, and the vision came to us that we should repurpose this helicopter as a Thales flying testbed and demo platform,” Sleigh explained.

He noted that on the surface some competitors have a similar demonstrator, but this flying testbed is unique as a “fully integrated, fully mission-representative integrated cockpit platform.”

The future of Army aviation will be modular integrated avionics, according to Walters, where Thales may need to ensure its capabilities can operate seamlessly with partner companies’ products. This modular testbed, designed to demonstrate MOSA compliance, allows Thales and others in industry to collaborate and internally work through interoperability challenges that give the Army confidence that an integrated avionics package will work as planned once installed on a military aircraft.

Said Sleigh: “We’re making investment in tangible terms and now have a platform to invite partners to come fly and bring their technology aboard.” 

“We are part of the equation to reduce risk and enhance safety and can do that through the iterative processes we have with our aircraft to incorporate what we think the customer needs with real time feedback,” said Walters. “At the end of the day, the warfighter deserves the best capabilities industry can provide. We want people to use our solutions because they trust them and it enhances safety and reduces risk, and they get to come home safely each night.”

For more information about the Thales Demonstration Helicopter, visit our website.

How a ‘priority’ on next-gen tankers paved the way for more Boeing KC-46s

WASHINGTON — A renewed emphasis on fielding next-gen air refueler by the mid-2030s has left Boeing’s KC-46 Pegasus as the only tanker that can readily meet the Air Force’s tanker needs, though supply chain and data rights issues could be a factor longterm, the service said in a new document.

The justification and approval (J&A) notice posted by the Air Force Oct. 2 recaps the service’s tumultuous plans for its air refueling fleet over the last few years, culminating in a decision this summer to order up to 75 more KC-46s. The J&A was required since the service is contracting with Boeing for more tankers without a competition.

The document says requests for information for the Air Force’s now-defunct KC-135 Tanker Recapitalization Program garnered a wide range of industry responses, including from a teamup of Lockheed Martin and Airbus up against Boeing. The Air Force said that based on industry replies, only Airbus and Boeing — after Lockheed backed out of its partnership with the European conglomerate — could “partially meet the draft requirements” outlined by the program, including that a solution should be ready to field by fiscal 2031.

But in early 2025, the Air Force changed course as “evolving global threats and competing DoD priorities” resulted in a next-gen tanker known as NGAS becoming a “priority.” In the process, the document says the Air Force found that for the original recapitalization program, both Boeing and Airbus would need “significant development” to meet requirements. The Air Force thus deemed the recap option unaffordable since it also needed to spend money to develop the NGAS platform.

So, the service ditched requirements for a new tanker effort and opted instead to use ones that already exist for the KC-46 until NGAS eventually comes online, the document says. That decision essentially cleared the way for Boeing, since the A330 MRTT Airbus was pitching would need “significant development to meet mandatory requirements.” 

A key driver of the decision to use KC-46 requirements, according to the document, was time. The Air Force is currently replacing its aging KC-135 Stratotanker fleet with the KC-46, but Pegasus deliveries under an existing contract are set to conclude in 2030 — roughly six years before NGAS would be ready at the earliest. To keep replacing the KC-135 with newer refuelers, the Air Force needs a tanker that could fill that six-year gap, which the service says only the KC-46 can do. 

Still, buying more KC-46s will come with problems. Boeing “will need to resolve” diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages (DMSMS) along with parts obsolescence, which the document says impacts both the current KC-46 program and its extension. Additionally, the document raises the prospect of negotiating for more rights to technical data and software, particularly when current rights are “less than the level required” for the KC-46’s production extension.

Boeing referred a request for comment to the Air Force. In a statement to Breaking Defense, Airbus said, “We stand by our proven tanker solution and its evolution, the MRTT+. Airbus remains engaged with the USAF as they continue to evaluate their Next Generation Air Refueling Solution.”

NGAS: Back To The Future

NGAS’s fate until recently had been in doubt, as officials under the Biden administration said the platform might not be affordable, while the Air Force’s FY26 budget devoted limited resources to research and development efforts.

As the document makes clear, the Air Force now treats NGAS as a critical need, though it does note that the “final path to NGAS has yet to be defined given the competing defense priorities.” The program has completed an analysis of alternatives, the document says, though additional fact-gathering is currently underway to refine its requirements.

According to Gen. John Lamontagne, chief of the Air Force’s Air Mobility Command, the service examined a wide range of potential platforms — from business jets to blended wing body aircraft and stealthy, “signature managed” refuelers — for the NGAS mission. The platform is expected to operate in hazardous environments like the Indo-Pacific, where runways are few and air defenses are formidable.

An RFI for the NGAS program was released to industry in August.

“We got some really rough costs associated with that first analysis of alternatives,” Lamontagne told reporters during a roundtable at the AFA conference in September. The August RFI “is really, at its simplest, an attempt to refine those costs, go back out to industry and figure out what’s in the realm of the possible at the right level of signature management, if we go down that road.” 

In the meantime, industry is readying candidates to offer the Air Force for next-gen refueling. According to Roderick McLean, vice president and general manager of air mobility and maritime missions at Lockheed, the company expects a survivable, clean-sheet aircraft will be needed for the mission.

“We do see that you will need to have a survivable vehicle much more refined” than standard tube-and-wing designs “so that it can operate closer in to provide air refueling to a number of systems that will operate in the theater,” McLean said in an interview with Breaking Defense on the sidelines of the AFA conference. 

“We’re very much excited and interested in shaping that opportunity to pursue that,” he added. 

Space Force taps SpaceX, ULA for first set of critical launches beyond FY27

WASHINGTON — The Space Force announced today that it has assigned the first seven future launches under its National Security Space Launch Program (NSSL) program for critical missions: five to SpaceX and two to United Launch Alliance (ULA).

NSSL Phase 3 Lane 2 launches carry high-value, must-go payloads and/or those headed to orbits that are more difficult to achieve. The Space Force is using firm-fixed price, indefinite-delivery contracts for these types of launches. Under this task order, SpaceX will receive $714 million and ULA $428 million, according to the announcement provided to reporters by Space Systems Command.

SpaceX’s missions include: USSF-206/WGS-12, USSF-155, NROL-86, USSF-149, and USSF-63.

USSF-206 will carry the twelfth Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS) encrypted military communication satellite, according to the press release. Space Systems Command did not specify the satellites being carried by USSF-155, -149 and -63, indicating that the payloads are classified.

ULA will launch NROL-88 and USSF-88/GPS IIIF-4; the latter carrying the fourth of the Global Positioning System III Follow-on (GPS IIIF) satellites designed to upgrade earlier GPS birds and bring new capabilities, including stronger encryption.

Both the of the NROL missions will carry classified payloads for the National Reconnaissance Office and will be launched in partnership with the spy-sat agency, according to the press release.

As the Space Force contracts for launches two years in advance, the assigned Phase 3 Lane 2 launches will loft at the earliest in fiscal 2027.

The service in April chose three vendors to compete for the NSSL Phase 3 Lane 2 launches: SpaceX, ULA and Blue Origin. Individual launches will be assigned to each firm between now and 2030. The Space Force said at the time that it anticipates 54 launches under Phase 3 Lane 2, with SpaceX expected to take the bulk of the launch load.

Blue Origin was assigned no launches under this first tasking, as the company’s New Glenn heavy-lift rocket has yet to pass its required second launch to obtain Space Force certification to carry the Lane 2 payloads. That certification launch is expected to take place in late October.

Here’s how the Army is scaling its Next Gen C2 platform to an entire division

This is part two of a two-part series on the Army’s Ivy Sting events, in which the service is working to scale up the Next Generation Command and Control prototype to the division level. Check out part one here.

FORT CARSON, Colo. — Brig. Gen. Michael Kaloostian wasn’t subtle about the impact he thinks the service’s Next Generation Command and Control (NGC2) initiative will have: “The expectation is this is going to entirely change the way the Army is going to fight.

“It’s going to change the way the Army is organized … . It’s going to change MOSs [military occupational specialties],” he said in an exclusive interview with Breaking Defense at Fort Carson in Colorado. “Things are going to change.”

For now NGC2 is in the prototype stage, albeit being used by units, and here the 4th Infantry Division is the frontline of the data management revolution, as Kaloostian and other Army officials described it during a mid-September visit to Fort Carson for the first of several Ivy Sting command and control exercises.

Following what the Army deemed a successful demonstration for a “proof of principle” prototype at the battalion level last year, the next step to maturing its modernized network is to scale it to a division holistically. The Army has less than a year to do so, following a July award of nearly $100 million to Anduril and a team of vendors to develop a division-level NGC2 prototype, if it hopes to have the tech ready for Project Convergence Capstone 6 this summer.

NGC2 is the service’s number one modernization priority and is meant to provide commanders and units a new approach to manage information, data, and command and control with agile and software-based architectures. But as Kaloostian said, to make way for NGC2, the Army has already had to make its own tempo and organizational changes.

“I was doing this for a year and got the chance to watch us, and knew, okay, if we don’t start going relatively quickly, we’re going to be challenged. What we did is: PCC6 is in July, we started doing our own analysis here and realized, look, we need these events, these routinized touch points,” Maj. Gen. Patrick Ellis, commander of 4th ID, told reporters.

Ellis previously served as the director of the C2 Cross Functional Team for Army Futures Command and was charged with overseeing the development of the prototype last year at Project Convergence Capstone 5.

The answer is serialized events dubbed the Ivy Sting series in which every six weeks or so, the division will incrementally add new capabilities, culminating in a division-wide event called Ivy Mass that will transition into Project Convergence.

Ivy Sting 1 took place the week of September 15 and focused on a very narrow fires thread to validate data could be passed over the NGC2 ecosystem using a beta version of the Artillery Execution Suite (AXS) software.

Ellis and the division realized that with the Ivy Sting set of events, there needed to be an internal organization focused solely on integrating the new gear and coordinating with the vendors and other elements of the Army enterprise.

As a result, 4th ID created the C2 Support Element, an organization under the division’s chief of staff and will serve as the overall lead synchronizing NGC2 for the division by integrating the technical expertise into a support entity. The element owns the integration, data, and application layers while the division’s G6 owns the transport layer.

NGC2 In The Wild, And In The Lab

In addition to the experimentation at Fort Carson with the Sting series, all the units across the division will have to receive, train and integrate new NGC2 capabilities. The division has several brigades that are deployed, with some in Korea, the southern border and in the Middle East. They have begun receiving equipment and logins to start playing around with the capabilities, even getting real world data to start training the system.

“I have division elements that are spread all over the place, so we’ll get the chance to bump this in multiple theaters. The Korea guys are going to start using it there and with another division,” Ellis said. “2nd Brigade, 2/4, is down at the southwest border right now. We’re looking to pull in some of the operational once we get all this stuff sorted out. Their operational data threads to pull that into the Next Gen C2 architecture. I can use that to train some of my AI models. I can use that to help with some of the aided target recognition stuff and to use the operational experience they’re getting down there.”

The Army and 4th ID also established an integration lab at Fort Carson, which will house all the industry engineers to work on the technology. The lab provides ability is to test NGC2 with the unit on ground, iterate and modernize the division outside of traditional ways for test and evaluation and conduct risk reduction.

“In a way, we are co-engineering with the customer and so that is occurring every day and then we’re just bringing that functionality forward,” Tom Keane, senior vice president of engineering at Anduril, said in an interview. “When you look at what we’re doing here, we’re talking to systems that we weren’t talking to at PCC5 because now we’re talking to real weapons. We’re bringing in more real-world data. We’re in an exercise setting here, but there’s a lot more data. Then, of course, we’re running in a more production setting. Regardless of whether the award says production or prototype, we are treating this as a production system.”

The integration lab also includes acquisition professionals, requirements professionals and doctrine writers in order to tackle and coordinate NGC2 holistically across the service, known under the tongue-twisting moniker of DOTMLPF or doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel and facilities.

Col. Chris Anderson, program manager for NGC2 with program executive office for command, control, communications-tactical, said such Ivy Sting “sequential events with new learning demands for each one is a giant pressurization of the system.

“Human nature would be, ‘okay your contract awarded, let’s focus on PCC6 next summer and we don’t need to do anything between now and then,'” he said. “This is forcing Army, big A acquisition from the PM, industry team, the unit, the requirements community, the doctrine community, everybody has to revisit this every six weeks and these events are a great forcing function for that.”

The overall goal of the Sting events is not only to add more capability, but ensure the formations are getting better at using them and ensuring they work. Additionally, the Army believes these events in concert with NGC2 could prompt those major changes for the service long term that Kaloostian described.

“The formation is learning how to use that capability and use it effectively every single Ivy Sting exercise. This is not just about the tech. This is a complete DOTMLPF crosswalk. We’re thinking through organizational structure. We’re thinking through the training that’s going to be required. We’re thinking through the personnel and how we reorganize,” he added.

There has been cooperation across other units as the Army is looking at getting feedback on multiple systems, vendors, formations and even regions. The Army has said it won’t be “pure fleeting” systems in the future, meaning the same gear will not be fielded to the entire Army. Instead, it will look to tailor certain equipment to certain units based on the priority, mission and theater.

Another NGC2 Prototype, And The Post Ivy-Sting World

Anduril’s NGC2 prototype isn’t the only one in the works. Lockheed Martin and its team of vendors were awarded a contract recently to work an integrated data layer for 25th Infantry Division under the NGC2 portfolio. But officials said it’s more of a complimentary effort than a competing one.

“It’s not a apples to oranges exactly. It’s two different units, two different missions, different industry teams,” Anderson said. “Competition is always good. Having two really solid teams just makes everybody better. I think one of the big hopes is if we develop AXS in partnership with 4ID, then we lift and shift that over to 25th ID. Meanwhile, we’re doing something with 25th that will lift and shift over to 4th ID. It’s not duplicating investments, but cross pollinating between the divisions.”

Officials from 25th ID were in attendance at Ivy Sting 1 to learn lessons and share their experience as well.

The Army will be evaluating the after-action reviews from Ivy Sting 1. Officials said they already know the stretch goals for Ivy Sting 2, which is five weeks out from the conclusion of Ivy Sting 1, and may seek to adjust those based on what they fine from the first iteration, possibly adding in more.

Ellis explained Ivy Sting 2 won’t just be fires, but will include airspace management and command and control elements of the headquarters.

Future iterations will also include more contested and congested environments such as jamming, a feature that was absent at Project Convergence last year for the prototype.

“The way that we need to train is we’re going to fight, we’re going to have EW assets are going to contest EMS [electromagnetic spectrum] and we’ll really learn how resilient our network is at that time,” Kaloostian said.

Following Project Convergence 6, the Army will be working on what specific systems it wants to purchase and for what unit. It will also be looking at what the official data layer is and what software components are in that initial mix.

The goal is to have decisions ready to go to be able to begin buying and fielding to units across the Army following the demonstration of the prototype with 4th ID. And then, if Kaloostian is right, bigger service changes are sure to follow.

The US-ROK test case: Can visas and rules unlock American shipbuilding?

In 1890, Alfred Thayer Mahan wrote, “Whoever rules the waves rules the world.” His ideas quickly shaped US foreign policy and inspired leaders such as Theodore Roosevelt, who embraced naval expansion as the key to American power projection.

Today, America faces its most significant great-power challenge since the end of the Cold War, and it is playing out on the seas. China has absorbed Mahan’s lessons with ruthless efficiency. A state-backed shipbuilding base, expansive merchant fleet, and rapidly growing navy now operate as one. China has become the world’s top shipbuilder, controls one of the largest shipping companies, and commands the largest navy by number of ships. Massive subsidies, approaching $100 billion, have helped Beijing capture more than half of the global shipbuilding market and secure influence over port and shipyard infrastructure worldwide.

China’s surge has left the United States facing a shipbuilding challenge it can’t solve on its own. That is why South Korea’s “Make America Shipbuilding Great Again” proposal could mark a turning point in the alliance.

In 2025 tariff negotiations, Seoul pledged $150 billion to revitalize America’s maritime sector. The package includes upgrading US shipyards, training American workers, easing Navy maintenance backlogs, and co‑producing vessels in US yards. Korea’s shipbuilders are global leaders in modular construction and on-time delivery, and this proposal would bring the capital and expertise into American facilities to reinforce rather than replace US industry.

If Washington can clear workforce and legal obstacles that stand in the way of progress, this infusion could provide the industrial foundation needed to meet China’s scale with allied strength. However, as recent events have painfully made clear, changes are going to have to come, both for rules around workforce and for legal restrictions on working with foreign partners.

Workforce Issues In The Spotlight:

On the workforce side, America does not have a clear pathway for the skilled foreign specialists who install equipment, commission lines, and train crews. The ICE raid in early September that detained more than 300 South Korean technicians in Georgia underscored how fragile the current patchwork approach has become. Without these specialists, schedules slip, and the workforce struggles to build the skills needed to deliver on time.

Recent events show these obstacles are not abstract. After the Georgia raid, South Korean President Lee Jae-Myung said companies would be “very hesitant” to expand in the United States without a predictable visa channel. The following day a chartered Korean Air flight carried many of the detained technicians back to Seoul, a vivid image of capital and know-how leaving American soil.

Following this high-profile incident, however, there is reason for cautious optimism. The American Chamber of Commerce in Korea hosted a Sept. 29 business roundtable, where US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau said in a video message: “Investment from Korean companies in absolutely key to President Trump’s vision for our country. Our commitment is to make this process easier, so that both Korea and the US can prosper together.”

A day later, the two countries held a working-group talk about improving the visa system. That session, convened in Washington, produced concrete outcomes: the two governments agreed to establish a dedicated “Korean Investor Desk” at the US Embassy in Seoul to help companies navigate visa issues, and reaffirmed that Korean firms may continue using the B-1 business visa and ESTA program for equipment installation and servicing. As the US State Department put it in its official readout, “The United States strongly supports investment that drives American reindustrialization, strengthens the U.S.–ROK alliance, and enhances shared prosperity.”

These are important first steps that show momentum, but administrative fixes alone will not provide lasting certainty. The Partner with Korea Act (H.R. 4687), introduced in July by Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.) and Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.), would create 15,000 visas for highly skilled Korean specialists with strict safeguards to ensure they do not displace American workers. Similar visa categories exist under US trade agreements with Australia, making this a tested model.

The working group can shape the near-term administrative lane, while the Partner with Korea Act can lock in a durable, capped channel so South Korean training teams arrive on schedule and leave once the work is done.

Legalities Blocking Partnerships

On the legal side, the Byrnes–Tollefson Amendment (10 U.S.C. § 8679) and the Jones Act shape what foreign partners can do. One forbids building US Navy hulls in yards overseas, another requires that ships moving cargo between US ports be built in America.

Neither prevents allied firms from investing in US facilities, but both create a level of uncertainty about where cooperation ends and where American control must remain.

However, Korean officials have shown that this can be managed. At a Washington forum hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Korean Defense Acquisition Minister Seok Jong-gun outlined options: components supplied from Korea for U.S. use, blocks built abroad but assembled in American yards, and partially outfitted hulls completed in the United States. He stressed that decisions in Washington are needed to determine how the Byrnes-Tollefson Amendment and the Jones Act will apply.

The rapid moves by companies such as HD Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI), from its merger with Hyundai Mipo  to  an MOU with Huntington Ingalls Industries, show that Korean industry is prepared to invest. Together these steps show that the legal questions are not fixed barriers but solvable issues, provided both governments set clear rules and allow allied capital and expertise to flow into American yards.

History will not wait. More than a century after Mahan, the contest is again decided in shipyards and on the sea. South Korea is signaling a desire to help its loyal ally, with money, machinery, and skill. If the U.S. wants the advantage, it must align rules with reality and let proven teams train American workers in American yards, with clear legal parameters for co-production.

The outcome is what matters: ships delivered on time and on budget, supported by allied capital and expertise already moving into place. With the inaugural US–R.O.K. visa working group meeting concluded, and a dedicated Korean Investor Desk set to launch, the window to act is open.

Jeffrey M. Voth is an engineering and technology executive focused on strengthening the US defense industrial base and allied cooperation. For over two decades, he has worked on US-ROK partnerships, including the KDX-III program.

Photos of China’s tailless J-50 aircraft give hints about stealth profile, likely mission: Experts

NAHA, Japan — Recent images of what appears to be China’s J-50 stealth fighter have revealed what experts told Breaking Defense are new details about the plane’s design, and hints towards its likely eventual mission.

The first clear photos of the aircraft, which has been variously referred to by a temporary designation of J-50, J-XD, or J-XDS in the absence of any official acknowledgement by China’s government, were first published online on social media in late September.

They showed the front and rear quarter views of the aircraft that has is being developed by the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (SAC), showing all-moving wingtips which act as control surfaces and thrust vectoring exhaust nozzles.

It also features twin Diverterless Supersonic Intakes, heavy-duty twin-wheeled nose landing gear and a low-profile canopy for a single pilot.

RELATED: How China’s next-gen fighters could impact America’s plans for NGAD

Justin Bronk, senior research fellow for airpower and technology in the Military Sciences team at the Royal United Services Institute, told Breaking Defense that the design is clearly optimized for improved wideband stealth, even when compared to fifth generation fighters, through the removal of canted vertical stabilisers.

The use of 2D thrust vectoring engine exhaust nozzles, like those found on the US Air Force’s F-22 Raptor, would provide enhanced pitch control to partially compensate for the lack of the canted vertical tails.

“The design is very low drag, and with two even current WS-10C class engines would likely have significant supercruise capabilities at high altitudes, allowing enhanced range and missile reach,” noted Bronk.

Andreas Rupprecht, who has authored several books on Chinese air power, said that the design is likely the “low” component of a future next generation hi-lo mix for China’s air forces, noting that the aircraft appears to be slightly smaller than the Shenyang J-16 multirole fighter.

RELATED: What’s in a pin? Trump dons golden F-22 during Erdogan meeting

Such a “low” aircraft will likely replace some of the older aircraft in China’s inventory, such as the Xi’an fighter-bomber, early Chengdu J-10 multirole fighters and the last of the Shenyang J-11 fighters. The “high” component would be filled by a larger design that has been tentatively designated as the Chengdu J-36, another Chinese stealth design that has been sighted undergoing flight testing.

Bronk pointed out that the twin-wheeled nose landing gear could suggest that China sees the design as a potential carrierborne aircraft, although the tailless design could result in complications during carrier operations due to limitations in high angle of attack performance and controllability in the yaw axis.

“This will limit agility compared to traditional fighters, increase flight control system complexity and make adaption for carrier operations more challenging,” he warned.

He added that this smaller design will likely be intended for high-end air superiority missions first and foremost, albeit with a shorter range and smaller internal payload than the J-36.

Nevertheless, Rupprecht expects that the J-50 will still have significant internal volume for fuel and weapons, with earlier photos of the aircraft in flight showing it has two separate weapons bays on the bottom fuselage.

He also told Breaking Defense that much would depends on how successful and capable the unmanned assets China is known to be developing would be, as there is a possibility that some of the loyal-wingmen unmanned aircraft could also replace the aforementioned fighters in the to some degree.

China has shown off five different types of these loyal wingmen at its recent military parade, and is known to be developing the H-20 bomber. In addition, what appears to be a new and larger stealthy unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) known as the GJ-X has also been seen on satellite imagery of an airbase deep inside western China that has previously been used for testing new designs.