Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Russia’s flagship international business summit in St Petersburg was targeted with Ukrainian drones that used Estonian territorial waters to evade Russian air defenses. Other Baltic states are also implicated in carrying out the large-scale attack last week.

According to the well-informed Borzikkman channel, scores of kamikaze drones were launched from ships in the Baltic Sea. They flew at low altitude over Estonian territorial waters before striking St Petersburg. The flight path was designed to take Russian defenses by surprise.

Most of the drones were shot down by Russian defenses, but a few managed to hit their targets. The biggest hit was on the St Petersburg oil terminal. That had the desired propaganda effect of creating a pall of black smoke visible to delegates on the opening day, June 3, of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF).

Western media outlets like the BBC were delighted to report on the embarrassing vista in the skies over Russia’s second city and a forum that President Putin would address.

The BBC’s Steve Rosenberg was positively gleeful, writing: “The abiding image of SPIEF 2026 will be the huge plume of thick black smoke which dominated the St Petersburg skyline on Wednesday… All the delegates saw the smoke as they arrived at the expo centre on the edge of the city.”

Drones from ships in the Baltic Sea with flights through Estonian territorial waters means that NATO states were involved in the execution of the air strikes. On the same day, NATO chief Mark Rutte was in Kiev on an unannounced visit to meet the Ukrainian leader, Vladimir Zelensky.

The level of NATO participation in waging war on Russia with its Ukrainian proxy has become absurdly obvious. In recent weeks, hundreds of Ukrainian drones have crashed in Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, and Romania. The Kiev regime has repeatedly apologized to European capitals for the infringements that have resulted in injuries to civilians. Still, the European Union and NATO take no action to sanction or reprimand Kiev. They indulge in the claims that the drones are being redirected by Russian electronic jamming. Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson has even urged that NATO states should help Ukraine in targeting Russia to avoid “misakes”.

The duplicity is contemptible. Russian military intelligence has pinpointed drone manufacturing sites in the Baltic states and other NATO nations that are participating in Ukrainian attacks.

Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s National Security Council, commented: “The Russian Defence Ministry’s statement should be understood extremely literally: the publication of production sites for drones and other military equipment in Europe is a register of potential legitimate targets for the Russian armed forces.”

Evidently, the NATO states are providing targeting data and permitting the use of their territory to maximize the attacks on Russia. Hundreds of Russian civilians have been killed in these NATO-assisted drone operations, the most dreadful being the murder of 21 students at a college dormitory in Starobelsk, Lugansk, on May 22. Last week, on the same day as the drone attack on St Petersburg, eight civilians were killed, and 10 were injured when their bus was blown up in an air strike while traveling through the Donetsk region towards Crimea.

Anger across Russia is growing, analyst Stas Krapivnik told Danny Haiphong’s channel. Russia has retaliated with heavy strikes on military sites and decision-making centers across Ukraine. But, as Krapivnik points out, Moscow is under pressure to take action against NATO culprits from where the Ukrainian offensives are stemming. He says that Russia should do like Iran is doing, hitting back hard where it hurts.

Since the U.S. and Israel launched their aggression against Iran 100 days ago, on February 28, the Iranians have destroyed dozens of American installations across the Persian Gulf and Israeli bases with their formidable arsenal of hypersonic and ballistic missiles, as well as drones.

When Israel violated a shaky truce by bombing Beirut’s southern district of Dahiyeh at the weekend, Iran struck back immediately, as it had warned it would do, to hit airbases in Israel and a U.S. base in Saudi Arabia.

Iran’s defiance has put manners on Washington. Israel is a slow learner, but it will come round to realizing that Iran is not going to take any aggression lying down. It’s hitting back hard and fast in the places that hurt. The days of U.S. and Israeli aggression with impunity are over.

The other thing is that Tehran has called Trump’s bluff about his “madman threats” to escalate the war and obliterate Iran. The Iranians have demonstrated to Washington and the Israelis that the aggressors have much more to lose if they persist in their belligerence.

Russia might want to take note, as Krapivnik, Borzikkman, Sergey Karaganov, and other analysts have advised. The EU and NATO are acting with impunity and a delusional sense that they can escalate attacks on Russia, killing civilians and damaging Russia’s economy, all because of some cynical charade that Ukraine is alone in carrying out the attacks.

Of course, the risk is that if Russian hypersonics were to take out a NATO drone-launching ship in the Baltic Sea, then that would trigger the U.S.-led military alliance’s joint defense commitments. In that case, we are potentially in a situation of World War Three.

But hold on a moment. Are we not already in that situation, given that, despite the charade, NATO states are directly involved in attacking Russia, its capital, Moscow, and St Petersburg, and killing hundreds of civilians?

The NATO and EU leaders are so imbued with Russophobia and arrogance that they are beyond rational thinking. The only language they understand is direct threat and force. Unless they pay a price, the deranged Russophobic leaders will keep escalating as they are doing.

Iran has shown a viable self-defense policy. The enemy is hit hard for daring to aggress against the Iranian people.

A kick in the Baltics might be what it takes to concentrate Russophobic minds. Before it’s too late.

As the Iran war drags on, Oman — a U.S. ally and mediator with Iran — has found itself at odds with the Trump administration and some of its own neighbors.

© Altaf Qadri/Associated Press

Volunteer divers have recorded what researchers believe is the first footage of a great white shark filmed underwater in the Mediterranean, captured during a ghost net removal dive near a shipwreck in the Strait of Sicily.

Derk Remmers, a technical diver with Ghost Diving, was about 40 meters (131 feet) below the surface between Sicily and Tunisia when the shark appeared. He filmed the encounter. The footage and photographs were released on June 8 to mark World Oceans Day.

Remmers said that the odds of meeting such an animal underwater are far lower than winning the lottery, and that his hands were shaking as he filmed.

The shark circled the group, then turned and moved back toward the divers. Remmers said that its behavior appeared calm and curious, not aggressive. When the team released air from their regulators, the shark picked up speed and disappeared from view.

First great white shark sighting in the Mediterranean stuns researchers

Marine biologists who reviewed the footage called the sighting rare and scientifically significant.

Dr. Carlo Cattano, a researcher at the Sicily Marine Centre of the Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn, said that most knowledge of great white sharks in the region has come from dead animals caught accidentally in fishing nets, and that direct observations help researchers better understand the species.

A great white shark circled divers in the Mediterranean as they worked to pull deadly ghost nets from a shipwreck in the Strait of Sicily. pic.twitter.com/tdJKJ37TMY

— Tom Marvolo Riddle (@tom_riddle2025) June 9, 2026

He said that prior research had already identified the area as a key location for threatened species and that this sighting reinforces its conservation value. Researchers cautioned that broader conclusions would require further study.

The mission was organized by the Healthy Seas Foundation, along with Ghost Diving and the Society for the Documentation of Submerged Sites. The wreck’s location is being kept confidential.

Ghost nets, fishing gear lost or abandoned at sea, continue killing marine life long after leaving a vessel. Previous dives at the site documented loggerhead sea turtles and large fish species caught in the gear.

Shipwrecks attract marine life, and when ghost nets settle on them, those structures become underwater traps.

Ghost nets turn shipwreck ecosystems into ongoing ocean traps

Veronika Mikos, director of Healthy Seas, said that the sighting is a reminder of how much marine life still exists in offshore Mediterranean waters and how much is at risk from discarded gear and overfishing.

Remmers said that between 1% and 10% of all fishing gear worldwide is lost each year, possibly adding more than 500,000 metric tons of abandoned nets to the ocean annually.

He said that the shark’s presence near the wreck signals an abundance of prey, and that those same animals face entanglement risk. Volunteer cleanups alone cannot resolve the problem, he said, and stronger action against industrial and illegal fishing is needed.

The mission also included environmental DNA sampling and underwater monitoring. Healthy Seas said that it plans to release additional footage and scientific material in the coming weeks.

A U.S. Navy uncrewed surface vessel (USV) found and rescued the crew of a U.S. Army Apache that went down overnight near the Strait of Hormuz, in the Gulf of Oman. This is the first known use of a drone boat executing a personnel recovery action as part of a military search and rescue operation, and it’s likely a glimpse of what’s to come. The cause of the incident is otherwise under investigation.

Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, a U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesman, has confirmed the use of the Navy USV in the rescue effort to TWZ. This had already been hinted at by mention of Task Force 59, the Navy’s main drone force in the Middle East, in an official CENTCOM statement. What specific type of drone boat was utilized in this case is not yet known. Task Force 59 operates a variety of USVs, including speedboat-like types. The Task Force has been experimenting with all types of new uncrewed naval technologies and this rescue is clearly a major win for the forward-looking unit.

“At 7:33 p.m. ET on June 8, two crew members from a U.S. Army AH-64 Apache were rescued by American forces after their helicopter went down near the coast of Oman while patrolling regional waters,” per CENTCOM’s statement. “The Soldiers were safely rescued within approximately two hours and are in stable condition. The cause of the incident is under investigation.”

“Rescue efforts were led by U.S. Naval Forces Central Command and the 82nd Airborne Division, with support from U.S. Air Force and Navy units including U.S. 5th Fleet’s Task Force 59,” the statement added.

The New York Times was first to report that an Apache had gone down near the Strait of Hormuz. President Donald Trump had also confirmed the crew was safe while speaking to reporters earlier this morning.

“We are going to issue a report tomorrow, but the pilots are fine,” Trump said after returning to Washington from the NBA Finals in New York.

A US Army Apache helicopter went down near the Strait of Hormuz and it wasn’t clear if the aircraft suffered mechanical troubles or had been shot down by Iran, the New York Times reported.

Asked about the episode by @jendlouhyhc, Trump said the pilots were fine and that a report…

— Annmarie Hordern (@annmarie) June 9, 2026

As we have reported in the past, Army AH-64s have been part of an effort by the U.S. military to enforce the ongoing blockade of Iran and protect commercial shipping. Last month, Apaches and U.S. Navy MH-60 Seahawk helicopters destroyed six small Iranian boats that were threatening commercial ships in and around the Strait of Hormuz, according to Navy Adm. Brad Cooper, head of CENTCOM. Apaches had already been conducting missions targeting Iranian naval assets in and around the Strait of Hormuz before the announcement of the ceasefire in April. All of this has shown that armed helicopters remain important assets in maritime operations, especially for defending against swarms of small boats.

As TWZ regularly highlights, search and rescue operations present inherent complexities and risks, especially when conducted in or near hostile territory. The F-15E rescue effort in Iran put a particular spotlight on the immense risks that combat search and rescue (CSAR) forces take, with helicopters and C-130 variants sent into areas where even a high-end fighter aircraft didn’t survive.

Open-water recoveries can present distinct additional challenges. There is always the possibility of the loss of additional assets and personnel in the process, no matter where a CSAR mission occurs.

The use of Navy drone boat in the rescue overnight highlights a new dimension for maritime CSAR going forward. These uncrewed assets can be more readily pre-positioned in a distributed manner. For example, in the broad expanse of the Pacific, USVs could be forward-deployed at multiple points along certain flight paths for this exact purpose. USVs could offer other distinct advantages in certain scenarios where they might be able to get into areas where traditional assets cannot and without risking additional personnel. These realities extend well beyond the maritime domain, and we are only likely to see uncrewed platforms of all kinds increasingly taking part in rescue efforts, especially in denied areas. The U.S. military is coming to terms with just how vulnerable their CSAR assets are and the ranges that would be needed to access highly defended areas, especially during a peer fight. Using drones to execute personnel recovery is being viewed as one part of a larger set of solutions to this pressing problem.

With the Apache going down near the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. military has now lost at least seven crewed fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters since the start of the latest operations against Iran in February. In addition, several aircraft have been damaged in the air and on the ground, including by Iranian fire. The TWZ graphic below offers a visual tally of damaged and destroyed aircraft as of April 10.

Despite the loss of the Apache, the use of a USV in the rescue effort is a major development and a sign of things to come.

UPDATE: 12:56 PM EDT –

President Donald Trump said the Apache was shot down by Iran and that the U.S. will retaliate.

“I have just been informed by our Great Military that last night the Iranians shot down one of our highly sophisticated Apache Helicopters while patrolling over the Strait of Hormuz,” the president said on his Truth Social network. “There were two pilots involved, both are safe and uninjured. Nevertheless, the United States must, of necessity, respond to this attack.”

Trump says that Iranian forces shot down the Army AH-64 Apache attack helicopter that went down over Hormuz yesterday.

He says that the US "must, of necessity, respond to this attack" pic.twitter.com/divKHkhgZm

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 9, 2026

UPDATE: 1:53 PM EDT –

You can read more about Trump’s shoot-down statement and what could happen next in our story here.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post AH-64 Apache Crew Rescued By Drone Boat After Going Down Near Strait Of Hormuz (Updated) appeared first on The War Zone.

Here’s TWZ’s weekly carrier tracker monitoring America’s flattop fleet, including deployed Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) and Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), using publicly available open-source information. Check out last week’s report here.

Amphibious assault ship USS Iwo Jima returned to Naval Station Norfolk on Saturday, wrapping a nearly 10-month deployment to the U.S. Southern Command-4th Fleet area of responsibility (AOR). During the 296-day deployment, the Iwo Jima ARG launched over 6,000 sorties, flew 1,850 flight hours, and transited more than 130,000 combined nautical miles. The ARG was the first group of expeditionary naval assets deployed to support Operation Southern Spear, which involved enhanced counter narcotics operations, and played a key role in Operation Absolute Resolve to exfiltrate ex-President Nicolas Maduro from Venezuela.

Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) returned to its homeport of Norfolk, Va. on June 6 following a historic 10-month deployment to the U.S. Fourth Fleet area of operations.

Story:https://t.co/GakDhjvaky pic.twitter.com/6w6Ungogn4

— U.S. 2nd Fleet (@US2ndFleet) June 6, 2026

Aircraft carrier USS Nimitz departed Kingston, Jamaica, after a 4-day port call. Nimitz is now reportedly en route to the United States, according to the U.S. Embassy in Jamaica, “as it finished its 2026 Southern Seas goodwill tour.” The two ships supporting Nimitz, destroyer USS Gridley and oiler USNS Patuxent, also got underway after a brief stop in Ponce, Puerto Rico. Over the weekend, Nimitz embarked officials from the Dominican Republic for a distinguished visitor tour and Gridley fired the Mk 45 Mod 4 5-inch gun during a live fire demonstration.

The USS Nimitz (CVN 68) departed Kingston Harbor at 12pm on June 5 enroute to the United States as it finished its 2026 Southern Seas goodwill tour. Thank you for stopping in Kingston and strengthening the U.S.-Jamaica bilateral partnership as well as enhancing our… pic.twitter.com/RKimaXy6ia

— US Embassy Jamaica (@USEmbassyJA) June 6, 2026

The U.S. maintains dual-carrier coverage in the Middle East enforcing the naval blockade of Iranian ports. USS Abraham Lincoln conducted a replenishment-at-sea with USNS Arctic in the Arabian Sea on June 3, and USS George H.W. Bush is operating at an undisclosed location in the AOR. U.S. Central Command forces have redirected 134 commercial vessels and disabled seven ships attempting to run the blockade, according to a press release.

The officer of the deck aboard USS Michael Murphy (DDG 112) observes a merchant vessel while the guided-missile destroyer enforces the U.S. blockade against Iran in the Arabian Sea. As of June 7, CENTCOM forces have redirected 132 commercial vessels and disabled 6 to ensure… pic.twitter.com/mZtfSMTIRG

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) June 7, 2026

The George Washington CSG is operating in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command-7th Fleet AOR. Washington was spotted alongside oiler USNS Earl Warren during a fueling-at-sea evolution on June 8 in the Philippine Sea and, during the last week of May, embarked Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 5 and completed carrier qualifications (CQ). CVW-5 includes a squadron of F-35C fighter aircraft.

Coming in loud and clear!

An F/A-18E roars in for a landing on the flight deck of USS George Washington while underway in the Philippine Sea. Forward-deployed strike capabilities maintain regional stability and guarantee a free and open Indo-Pacific.#FlyNavy | #US7thFleet pic.twitter.com/lAlxexD4hs

— 7th Fleet (@US7thFleet) June 8, 2026

Note: Positions are general approximations.

Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@teamrecurrent.io

The post Iwo Jima Completes Deployment, Nimitz Heading Back To The United States appeared first on The War Zone.

One-way attack drones from Ukraine's Unmanned Systems Forces struck five Russian cargo ships on the Sea of Azov on 5 June.

The strikes, which left at least one ship a burned-out hulk, are a kind of corollary to Ukraine's escalating campaign of middle-distance strikes on Russian supply lines on land in occupied territories. Aiming to weaken Russian regiments before they can attack across the disputed gray zone, Kyiv's drone units aren't only hitting trucks and vans on land—they're also hitting ships at sea.

"There's a method to the madness here," Ukraine Control Map explained. "Take out the ships, force Russia to use more trucks, more logistic bottlenecks." Then hammer the bottlenecks with drones.

The ultimate goal is to make it more difficult for the Kremlin to resupply and reinforce its 700,000 troops in occupied Ukraine. It's cheaper and easier to defeat an attack before it even begins by starving the attacking troops of food, fuel, batteries, ammunition and other vital supplies.

The ships the USF hit with Fire Point FP-1 drones on 5 June were spread out across a wide area. They were in occupied Mariupol and Berdiansk and along the coast of occupied Ukraine — the same Berdiansk port where Ukrainian drones struck a Russian munitions cargo ship on consecutive nights at the start of June.

What they had in common was their disguise. Civilian-owned but allegedly illegally working on behalf of sanctioned Russian entities, the ships sail without obvious markings or easily tracked radio transponders. There could be scores of such ships plying the Black Sea on Russia's behalf every day.

Two of the ships hit on 5 June, the dry cargo vessels Natra and Zirkon, were inbound from Türkiye to Rostov-on-Don when Ukrainian drones struck them in Taganrog Bay—empty, heading to load grain at a port Western governments and Ukraine identify as a transit hub for grain looted from occupied Ukrainian territory. Five Azerbaijani crew members on private contracts were killed and three wounded, Azerbaijan's foreign ministry said. Brovdi didn't address the deaths.

Telling apart a ship hauling Russian military fuel from a ship empty and heading to pick up looted grain is the kind of distinction that's hard to make from a drone's-eye view.

Ships that can haul thousands of tons of supplies every trip are much more efficient than trucks that can haul just a few tons apiece. Cargo ships can't deliver supplies to inland forces, of course, but they can move cargo between ports in southern Russia and ports in occupied Ukraine, bringing that cargo as close as possible to the gray zone before trucks must take over the shipping effort.

A thick-skinned ship is a tougher target than a thin-skinned truck, of course. But Ukraine's FP-1 drones carry a 100-kg blast-fragmentation warhead, with a TNT main charge boosted by the more powerful OKFOL explosive. The combination throws fragments outward and starts fires inside the target—the same mechanism that left the corvette Boikiy burning for hours at Kronstadt on 3 June.

The destroyed cargo ship CIRCON (IMO 8887519), targeted by Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces in the Sea of Azov several days ago. https://t.co/0Xpc3K9XXf pic.twitter.com/KI1PCzsjKf

— Special Kherson Cat (@bayraktar_1love) June 8, 2026

Sitting duck trucks

Russia's thousands of military supply trucks are already squarely in the crosshairs of Ukrainian drone units. Since launching their coordinated counterlogistics campaign this spring, the Ukrainians have increased their monthly truck strikes nearly tenfold, from around 60 per month to nearly 500, as per the Ukrainian general staff.

But a comprehensive assault on Russian logistics requires raids on sea traffic, as well. That effort may have begun in earnest on 5 June. "Cargo ships and tankers with their names painted over by Black Sea looters and their transponders switched off, used for the quiet theft of Ukrainian grain and the transport of military cargo and fuel, can no longer count on either long service lives or uninterrupted schedules," the 414th Unmanned Strike Aviation Brigade crowed.

If they can disable enough ships, the Ukrainian drone teams may compel Russian logisticians to shift more supplies by land. To reach Russian regiments in southern and eastern Ukraine, those supplies normally travel east to west along the M-14 highway that runs close and parallel to the Black Sea coast.

That highway and connecting roads have become a kill zone for Russian trucks as more FP-1, FP-2, Hornet and Bulava drones take to the sky, increasingly unbothered by Russia's collapsing air defense network. Ukrainian industry now churns out tens of thousands of middle-strike drones every month, some for as cheaply as a few thousand dollars apiece.

The Russians are trying to find alternate routes that avoid the most heavily droned roads, but once a truck gets close to its destination, it has no choice but to follow a dwindling number of paths. Ukrainian intelligence knows where the Russians' main divisional bases are; they know the trucks must eventually turn into these bases. The near approaches are now becoming kill zones alongside the M-14 and other main roads.

It'll take many more strikes on Russian ships to seriously dent the sea logistics and force more supplies onto land routes. But the effort is underway. "The occupier's smuggling logistics must be stopped," the 414th Unmanned Strike Aviation Brigade explained.

Footage has emerged showing the destruction of a drone by a French Rafale fighter over Latvia earlier today. The engagement underscores how the drone war unleashed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine is increasingly spilling over borders, as well as the growing reality of the drone threat to NATO.

The French Air and Space Force confirmed that its Rafales, currently deployed in neighboring Lithuania, were scrambled in response to the drone incursion. The drone was identified before one of the fighters shot it down over an uninhabited area. The incident was a “demonstration of the French Armed Forces’ commitment to contributing to the security of Europe’s eastern flank,” the service said in a statement on X.

Lettonie | Destruction d’un drone par les Rafale

Survol d’un drone au dessus du territoire letton
Décollage sur alerte des chasseurs engagés dans la mission de l’OTAN Baltic Air Policing depuis la base aérienne de Šiauliai
Identification et destruction… pic.twitter.com/NFIMSP7Ibl

— Armée française – Opérations militaires (@EtatMajorFR) June 8, 2026

A detachment of French Air and Space Force Rafale jets is currently engaged in the NATO Baltic Air Policing mission from Šiauliai Air Base, Lithuania.

This morning, French fighter jets deployed to NATO Air Policing at Šiauliai Air Base shot down a drone that entered Latvian airspace.

Lithuania thanks our French allies for their swift and professional action in safeguarding the security of our region.

— Lithuanian MOD (@Lithuanian_MoD) June 8, 2026

This is not the first time that a NATO fighter has shot down a drone in the Baltic region as part of the Baltic Air Policing mission. On May 19 of this year, a Romanian F-16 shot down a Ukrainian drone over Estonia after it strayed into NATO airspace, reportedly due to Russian electronic warfare interference. Last September, NATO fighters shot down at least three, and likely four, Russian drones, after 19 reported violations of Polish airspace. Polish authorities assessed that the drones “did not veer off course but were deliberately targeted.”

However, this is the first time that an incident of this kind has been captured on camera.

At least two videos are now circulating on social media showing the engagement playing out.

One shows the moment that a Rafale launches an air-to-air missile, leaving a prominent trail of smoke, before detonating seconds later.

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

— Marko Mihkelson (@markomihkelson) June 8, 2026

Another video, from a different angle, shows the immediate aftermath of the shootdown. Another trail is seen in the background of both videos, but it’s unclear if this is evidence of a previous missile launch, or a contrail from another aircraft that previously transited the airspace at a different altitude.

Rogovkā, Rēzeknes novadā notriekts lidrobots. NBS apstiprina.#Rogovka #Rēzekne #Latvija pic.twitter.com/kBdojUHanB

— BreakingLV (@breakinglv) June 8, 2026

In a typical Baltic Air Policing configuration, the Rafale is armed with MICA air-to-air missiles. These beyond-visual-range weapons can be fitted with either an active radar seeker or an infrared seeker head, with a mix normally being loaded. The MICA uses a thrust-vectoring motor for improved agility and has a reported maximum range of around 37 miles.

Lituanie | Le succès des vols conjoints commence au sol
 
Préparation d'un vol d'entraînement avec des avions de chasse et :

Montage d'armements entre mécaniciens des deux pays alliés

Échanges sur les procédures, matériel et méthodes des équipes… pic.twitter.com/LPYygu0P5r

— Armée française – Opérations militaires (@EtatMajorFR) June 6, 2026

The Latvian Armed Forces provided more details of the shootdown, noting that a yellow alert was originally issued for the Ludza, Balvi, and Aluksne districts this morning at 9:20 a.m. local time. This led to NATO fighters being launched.

At 9:40 a.m., this alert level was increased to orange for the Ludza and Rēzekne districts. At this point, it was confirmed that some kind of drone was entering Latvian airspace. A military spokesperson told the Reuters news agency that the drone entered Latvian airspace from Russia.

NATO iznīcinātāji šorīt neitralizēja ārvalstu dronu, kas krievijas elektromagnētiskās karadarbības rezultātā bija ielidojis Latvijas teritorijā #WeAreNATO #StrongerTogether pic.twitter.com/07blbd7TUw

— NBS (@Latvijas_armija) June 8, 2026

Izsludināts gaisa telpas apdraudējums Krāslavas un Ludzas novados, informē Nacionālie bruņotie spēki.

Brīdinājums par iespējamu gaisa telpas apdraudējumu izsludināts Rēzeknes un Balvu novados. pic.twitter.com/PFcMZmhhga

— LTV Panorāma (@ltvpanorama) June 8, 2026

The Latvian Armed Forces warned residents in these areas to “Seek shelter indoors, close windows and doors — follow the two-wall principle.” It added: “If you notice a low-flying, suspicious, or dangerous object, do not approach it and call 112.”

At 10:05 a.m., the Latvian Armed Forces confirmed that NATO fighters were over the Rēzekne district, and a “foreign” drone was shot down over the Berzgale parish.

Berzgale is less than 20 miles from the nearest Russian border, and around 340 miles from the closest Ukrainian border, with Belarus, a close Moscow ally, separating Latvia and Ukraine.

NATO’s Baltic Air Policing mission has safeguarded the airspace of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania since the three countries joined the alliance in 2004. Because the Baltic states do not maintain fighter fleets capable of continuous air-defense duties, allied nations rotate detachments of combat aircraft to bases in Lithuania and Estonia, where they remain on quick-reaction alert around the clock.

The mission routinely scrambles fighters to identify and intercept Russian military aircraft operating near NATO airspace, particularly flights to and from Russia’s heavily militarized Kaliningrad exclave that often occur without flight plans, radio contact, or active transponders.

Following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, NATO expanded the mission with additional aircraft and operating locations, making Baltic Air Policing one of the alliance’s most visible peacetime deterrence operations on its eastern flank.

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the expanding drone war between the two countries has provided another layer of responsibility to the Baltic Air Policing mission.

For most of its history, Baltic Air Policing centered on scrambling fighters to identify Russian bombers, fighters, reconnaissance aircraft, and transports flying near NATO airspace. The war in Ukraine has seen the increasing proliferation of drones that can travel hundreds or even thousands of miles, creating a new challenge for NATO air defenses.

Since 2022, there have been several incidents, including drones and missile debris entering or crashing in NATO territory, including in Poland and Romania. Late last month, a Russian kamikaze drone strayed into Romanian airspace before striking a residential building, injuring civilians, in what appears to have been the first incident of its kind.

A russian drone carrying explosives, involved in the bombing of infrastructure in Ukraine crashed in Galați, Romania, causing a fire on the roof of a residential apartment building.

Two persons sustained minor injuries and several residents required medical attention, the… pic.twitter.com/P8jzYFrEEp

— Toiu Oana (@oana_toiu) May 29, 2026

We asked NATO for more details of today’s incident, including whether it could confirm reports citing the Latvian military that the drone had entered its airspace as a result of Russian electronic warfare. This is a threat that is by now commonplace in the Baltic region.

“While the circumstances surrounding this incident are still under review, jamming is known to occur in this region, and can pose serious safety risks, including to civil aviation,” a spokesperson for the alliance told us.

In recent days, Ukraine has carried out a number of high-profile drone attacks against Russian targets in and around the Baltic region.

In the last week, Ukrainian drones appear to have hit the St. Petersburg oil terminal, the Baltic Fleet base at Kronstadt, and a weapons factory in the Tambov region.

As we observed in our previous reporting, there have been very few confirmed Ukrainian attacks of any kind against the Baltic Fleet. However, satellite and other imagery that emerged in the wake of the recent drone strike reveals extensive damage inflicted on the  Steregushchiy class corvette Boikiy.

Footage of the Russian Navy Baltic Sea Fleet corvette Boikiy burning in its Kronstadt drydock after a Ukrainian drone strike yesterday. pic.twitter.com/9CHz4aLdY8

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 4, 2026

Another satellite image of the Russian corvette Boikiy following yesterday's Ukrainian strike. What is interesting here is that the active fire was captured before firefighting crews managed to extinguish it. @planet image taken on June 3 at 16:30 local time. It burned for hours. pic.twitter.com/PzcHxoSxGk

— Mark Krutov (@kromark) June 4, 2026

Today’s incident provides visual evidence of advanced NATO fighters used to shoot down drones over alliance territory. While effective on this occasion, this kind of interception can be inefficient due to the mismatch in cost between the drone and missile. It is notable that the French Ministry of Defense has plans to introduce a lower-cost counter-drone capability on the Rafale by the summer. Trials of a pod loaded with 68mm laser-guided rockets have already begun.

Un Rafale équipé de roquettes guidées laser aperçu à Istres. Les essais ont donc enfin démarré. Ici une nacelle Thalès JF12, donc 24 roquettes 68mm au total. Une corde de plus à l'arc du Rafale, la chasse au Shahed est OUVERTE ! pic.twitter.com/6v0xSMkUJ1

— bruno aviation (@Bruno_Aviation) April 16, 2026

As a result, NATO has accelerated work on layered defenses that include short-range ground-based air defenses, electronic warfare, and other counter-drone technologies.

Fighters, however, will always remain a critical last-resort option, especially when a drone poses an immediate threat or when a visual identification is required.

Today’s video not only illustrates the changing face of the Baltic Air Policing mission due to the Russian war in Ukraine, but highlights the growing threat posed by drones and cruise missiles that can cross borders with little warning, whether deliberately or not.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Video Captures Rafale Fighter’s Drone Kill Over Baltic appeared first on The War Zone.

Ukrainian drones set a major oil depot ablaze near the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossiysk overnight on 7-8 June 2026, in a strike confirmed by Ukraine's Unmanned Systems Forces (SBS). Residents reported a string of blasts and heavy smoke over the Grushovaya storage site, which feeds Russia's busiest oil-export port. Ukrainian forces hit two more targets in southern Russia the same night.

Drones spark a blaze at Novorossiysk's oil hub

The strike came before dawn. Residents of Novorossiysk, in Russia's Krasnodar Krai, reported about 50 blasts, then heavy smoke over the Grushovaya oil depot. Operators of the SBS's 1st Separate Center, working with Special Operations Forces (SSO) and other units, confirmed the hit. Ukraine's General Staff also confirmed the strike and said a fire broke out, with damage still being assessed. Russian officials claimed no one was hurt.

NASA's FIRMS satellite service detected abnormal heat at the site at 02:48 on 8 June. Ukrainian Telegram channel Exilenova+ began reporting the attack around 3 a.m., posting photos and videos of fire in the mountains above the city. OSINT Telegram channel Falcon insight pinpointed the location. Russian news Telegram channel ASTRA confirmed the burning tank farm from eyewitness footage shot about 11 km away.

A fuel storage depot is burning in Novorossiysk, Russia, after a drone strike hit the tank farm overnight

Novorossiysk is one of Russia's most strategically important Black Sea ports, handling a significant share of Russian oil exports
Supernova pic.twitter.com/d2ab4SSuH0

— Euromaidan Press (@EuromaidanPress) June 8, 2026

What the Grushovaya depot feeds

The Grushovaya site is a transshipment depot for the Sheskharis terminal. Chernomortransneft runs it, under Russia's state pipeline monopoly Transneft. It sits in the Grushovaya Balka tract beyond the Markotkh Ridge, about 12 km from Novorossiysk. The tank farm holds more than 1.2 million m³ of fuel across dozens of tanks, on a site of about 212 hectares. SBS called it one of the largest oil-product stores in the Caucasus.

Novorossiysk is southern Russia's biggest oil-export hub, the Moscow Times reported. The port ships up to 700,000 barrels a day, and its terminals moved 19.8 million tonnes of oil products in 2025. That trade feeds Russia's budget, which bankrolls the war on Ukraine. The port has become a recurring target in Ukraine's strikes on Russia's Black Sea oil logistics.

Volgograd and a coastal radar also hit

The same night, Ukraine's General Staff said its forces struck the Krasny Yar oil-pumping station in Volgograd Oblast, where a fire broke out. Volgograd governor Andrei Bocharov claimed the blaze came from falling drone debris at the Zhirnovsk pumping station and was quickly put out, the Moscow Times reported. Ukrainian forces also hit a Russian radar station near Kabardinka in Krasnodar Krai, according to the General Staff.

Not the first strike on Novorossiysk's oil chain

Ukrainian forces have hit this infrastructure before. Ukrainian defense outlet Militarnyi reported that drones struck the Grushovaya depot on 23 May 2026, when fire spread across much of the site. Strike drones also hit the Sheskharis terminal on 6 April, damaging oil-metering systems and shut-off valves at the loading berths. ASTRA said the wider complex was attacked in early March, early April, and on 22 May.

For decades, the massive MH-53E Sea Dragon helicopter has served as the Navy’s primary airborne mine countermeasure platform, dragging massive mine hunting sleds through waters all around the globe. However, the Sea Dragon’s days are now numbered, with the last 11 aircraft scheduled to sunset sometime next year. With the MH-53E’s demise on the horizon, we reached out to one of its former pilots, Steve Jones — a man who came to know this monster intimately during the Global War On Terror. He had plenty of stories to tell and provided us with a new understanding of the often misunderstood counter-mine mission.

The MH-53E’s mission is also, of course, extremely topical right now thanks to ongoing tensions with Iran. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently told senators that the Islamic Republic mined “large segments” of the Strait of Hormuz, endangering shipping in the region.

As it currently stands, the mighty Sea Dragons, which are considered one of the military’s most dangerous to fly due to numerous fatal mishaps, are being phased out in favor of the smaller MH-60S Seahawk paired with a suite of new aerial mine countermeasures systems, as well as other new technologies, like uncrewed underwater and surface vessels. The Navy’s overall mine hunting force is going through a transition that is controversial, to say the least, with many questioning if the Pentagon is investing enough resources in this critical missions set.

With all these issues in play, in an exclusive, wide-ranging, two-hour interview, Steve Jones offered in-depth insights about the Navy’s airborne counter-mine mission, the Sea Dragon’s capabilities and dangers, current mine sweeping operations, as well as everything from what it was like to narrowly avoid getting entangled with a surfacing sub to his experiences ferrying celebrities like Robin Williams and Tom Jones around a war zone.

So, with the stage being set, let’s get into this incredible exchange.

Some of the questions and answers have been lightly edited for clarity.

Q: How did you end up becoming an MH-53 Sea Dragon pilot?

A: During the time that I selected, you could choose SH-60 Seahawks, you could choose CH-46E Sea Knights and the MH-53 Echo. You could choose SH-3 Sea Kings, but they were kind of winding down the H-3s, which is the same as the presidential helicopter Marine One that they fly now, but they were flying out of Norfolk and Puerto Rico, primarily for VIP transport. 

So, I looked at the 53 for a lot of reasons. One, I liked the instructors that came from that community in the advanced helicopter training. And two, I just thought the helicopter just really looked awesome, and it was big, and so that’s why I chose it, and I just thought it would be a good personality fit, work fit for me, and it ended up being that way.

Q: What are the main differences between the Navy’s MH-53E and the Marines’ CH-53E Super Stallion?

A: It’s primarily the same aircraft. Except our aircraft has larger fuel sponsons, so we could carry more gas. The reason for that is ideally we’d want to be able to fly an hour to where the mission objective was, be able to stay on station for about an hour, and be able to fly back. That requires at least three and a half, four hours of gas and extra fuel in those side sponsors. And that allowed us to do that. So instead of a small sponson with two tanks, we had one big sponson with four fuel tanks that were inside each of the sponsons on either side of the aircraft.

Q: So how much gas would that larger sponson hold?

A: About 22,000 pounds of gas.

Q: Talk about the training and some of the biggest challenges of flying that huge aircraft. 

A: Typical Navy training is two years of flight school, and then after flight school, we went to our Replacement Air Group, which we call the RAG, that was in Norfolk, Virginia. You spend about a year, or up to 10 months, in Norfolk, Virginia, learning primarily how to fly the helicopter, how to land the helicopter, and we do that in the combination with the Airborne Mine Countermeasure Squadron. We used aircraft from Helicopter Mine Countermeasures Squadron (HM) 14 to learn how to fly the different mission sets and learn aircraft familiarization. And then from there you either get assigned to HM-14, which was in Norfolk, Virginia, or HM-15, which was in Corpus Christi, Texas. HM-15 has now moved to Norfolk, Virginia. [Editor’s note: HM-14 sunsetted in 2022.]

The training takes about 10 months. Mine was a little bit longer because when I actually joined that community, the aircraft were down because of a crash off the coast of Corpus Christi, Texas. There was a problem called ‘thermal runaway,’ where the bearings in the main rotor head would fail, and they would seize together and get hot, and we lost a few sailors from HM-15. And until they figured out why and how to prevent it, it took about a year for those aircraft to come back up, so I was in Norfolk for maybe about a year and a half, almost two years, before I got to Corpus because of that bearing issue.

Q: What was it like when you finally got out there and learned how to fly while pulling a mine countermeasure sled?

A: There’s different types of equipment that you use and it takes a special kind of person to be able to maintain the situational awareness – both flying the aircraft and what’s happening in the back – because there’s dangers in the back. You have a very confined area, lots of equipment, and under lots of tension, and so the very first couple of times, the instructor is kind of handling everything, and you’re just kind of riding along.

Then eventually you start to do more tasks, physical tasks, in terms of flying and maintaining a stable platform for the men and women that are working in the back, and then over time those skills translate into a larger situational awareness, where you’re now a mission commander – where you’re flying the aircraft, but also, conducting the mission in the back is your primary responsibility. The positions are second pilot or co-pilot, and then you become a Helicopter Aircraft Commander (HAC), which is like the captain, and then you become an Airborne Mine Countermeasures Mission Commander (AMCM MC), meaning you’re flying the aircraft, you’re the commander of the aircraft, but you’re also commanding the mission.

Q: Did you become a mission commander?

A: I did. So I was fully qualified in the MH-53 Echo in my squadron, so I was a mission commander. I worked the maintenance side, so I was the maintenance check pilot and functional check pilot. It takes a lot of maintenance, and then post maintenance, and you have to do post maintenance flights to be able to make sure the aircraft is safe for anyone else to fly. So I spend most of my time in those areas in that squadron.

Q: What are the MH-53’s unique quirks and advantages?

A: One of the advantages was pure brute strength. You had three GE engines, so you could handle lots of torque, and the way that we hunted and swept for mines was pulling sleds in the water, which causes thousands and thousands of pounds of stress, so it’s really like a forceful instrument in the water. The operation requires the coordination of not only meteorologists and Operations Specialists, which are like intel specialists in mine warfare, but then you have the maintainer, you had two pilots and a crew chief, plus it could be up to four people in the back, depending on the type of gear you’re stowing in the back, so it really takes coordination from the front.

The disadvantage is that it’s a very expensive aircraft to operate. Every hour of flight, required 24 hours of maintenance, and if a squadron had 10 helicopters, which we did at one point in time, you’re looking at the largest deployable squadrons in the Navy, like 600-plus people to operate these aircraft.

With everybody working together, we advertise that we could be anywhere in the world in 72 hours, where there’s a mine threat. We could break down the helicopters, put them in a C-5 and then reassemble them anywhere in the world in 72 hours. After 9/11, for Operation Iraqi Freedom, we did deploy by C-5. We took half the helicopters to Sicily and the other half went to Bahrain and took 11 C-5s in order to move a squadron that size into those two locations, so big footprints, lots of money, lots of parts.

Q: How fast could the Sea Dragons fly?

A: The 53 is a fast helicopter. One of the fastest out there. We were limited to 150 knots for airframe preservation. Under towing conditions, we typically flew between 18 and 25 knots, depending on the device in the water.  Each vehicle had different performance parameters to properly deploy the device. Under rapidly changing conditions we always had to maintain proper speed and altitude control. 

Q: The Sea Dragon has experienced a notoriously high rate of mishaps. Did that ever concern you? What do you think contributed to this record?

A: It did. If you’ve ever seen one or been on one, been close to one, or heard one, you’ve got 100-foot long machine with millions of moving parts, right? 

Our maintenance crews were very good, I always felt safe flying. I think you have to if you choose to fly that particular weapon system, but there were a lot of accidents. And I knew folks that were killed in MH-53 accidents who I went to flight school with, and buddies.

It’s a very complicated machine that did a very important mission, and accidents do happen, both mechanically, but also because of pilot error. In combination, you end up losing a lot of airframes. Besides the United States, there is only one other nation that flew that airframe, and that was the Japanese for their mine sweeping operation. It’s a very complicated, expensive machine, and that’s why not very many people flew it.

Q: Did the danger concern you?

A: You know, you’re in your 20s, right? So you feel a little bit invincible. I’ll tell you a story. When I switched from 53s and started flying C-130s, after the Haitian earthquake, I flew into Guantanamo Bay, and my old squadron was there on the same ramp as we were. So I walked over to see who I still knew there, and they had a 53 turning on the deck there, and I was just going, ‘wow, I couldn’t believe I used to do that,’ and not thinking about how many things have to go right in order to have a good day. And I just kind of said to myself, ‘it’s really a young person’s game,’ because you gotta kind of hit the ‘I believe’ button on a lot of things, because there’s just a lot of opportunity for negativity to come in. Weather, environment, and then the mechanics of things.

Q: What were the biggest factors contributing to the Sea Dragon mishaps?

A: With any aircraft system, the largest factor that contributes to any accident is the human factor. Yes, engines will fail, components will fail, but a lot of times it was human error that caused the ultimate catastrophe because when an emergency happens, you have three criteria in order to gauge when you should land.

The two critical ones are ‘land immediately,’ meaning if you do not ditch in the water or put the aircraft down, it is going to come apart in flight. The other critical criteria is ‘land as soon as possible,’ meaning as soon as you have a safe place to land, then you land as soon as possible. Then you have another condition where you can continue to fly, but flying is not recommended. And so that decision factor between land immediately and land as soon as possible, it’s a bit of a gray area, right? You have a set of skills you can fly, but you can never time when the aircraft is going to come apart.

For example, in the Corpus Christi crash, they knew that they had a problem. I’m not second-guessing the pilot, but it was in that gray area between land immediately and land as soon as possible.

The aircraft commander chose to try to bring the aircraft closer to the beach, so you could survive a ditch, because putting a helicopter in the water – nothing is guaranteed, right? Then you have no control. However, bring it closer to the beach means you’re flying that much longer. So land immediately, there could have been more survivors.

Not to ‘Monday morning quarterback’ anything. I probably would have made the same call. And then with the new equipment that was put on the aircraft, there are lights now placed in a monitoring system that kind of took the gray area out of those decisions when it came to thermal runaway with the main rotor head. So now the decision is clear. Land immediately if certain indications happen, and land as soon as possible if certain indications happen. Prior to 2000, we didn’t have that.

Q: The Sea Dragon community has been well-documented for being neglected by the Navy. What was your experience when you were flying it? Why do you think that was?

A: It’s a unique mission set. It kind of came online during the Vietnam War and Haiphong Harbor, and clearing those mines, and then again in Desert Storm, when the USS Tripoli was hit by a mine.

Mining sea straits is a very cheap way to stop a huge navy, such as the one that we have in the United States. However, the Navy, in my opinion, didn’t necessarily see the value in that mission. There are very limited resources. There’s only so much money to go around, and large strike groups and ships just took priority. We were always probably a little bit underfunded, in my opinion, for a mission that’s important, which you can see today with the Strait of Hormuz. But it was definitely a huge problem that many people did not talk about during the first two Gulf Wars.

Q: Why was it a huge problem?

A: Well, when you try to move a carrier strike group into a small area like the Persian Gulf, by putting mines in the water, you create doubt in a captain’s head. The captain is responsible for thousands and thousands of lives, and the battle group commander is responsible for thousands and thousands of more lives, plus the strategic reason of why they’re there. If a mine is discovered, then everything has to pause. You can’t land Marines on the beach, you can’t move the strike group closer to the shore. The ability for you to project power ashore, all that kind of comes to an end. 

Q: How does the MH-53E go about this unique mission set? Can you walk us through what a mission would look like from start to finish? 

A: Depending on the intel, you’ll have a threat and the threat could be you suspect that there’s mines in the water, or that you know that there’s mines in the water. So, typically it’s ‘you suspect,’ right? And we used the AN/AQS-14, or “Q-14.” There’s about three different versions of the Q-14. It’s a side-looking sonar, which you drag in the water – we call it the fish. We would fly the fish at certain depths based on the terrain and what was in the water. That was called mine hunting. 

So initially you would always kind of begin with a hunting mission, where we could, or the OS operator, or the console operator would mark what they view as a mine-like contact. You’re really kind of looking at the sonar and distinguishing between man-made objects and natural objects. If you believe it’s a man-made object, and then you would mark a tape. You could also, real time, send that image back to the ship, but that capability came a little bit later.

We also had devices that allow you to sweep. A mine can be triggered by different mechanisms. Sometimes they’re triggered by contact.

Some mines are acoustically triggered, meaning you can set that mine to blow up for a certain type of ship acoustics. For instance, a destroyer has a different set of acoustics from an amphibious ship, from an aircraft carrier. If you want to let 1,000 destroyers pass you or a submarine and then wait for the aircraft carrier, you can tune it to that way. So we had devices that could mimic the sound signatures of different ships, and you could tow that in the water, you could tow it really fast. One of the reasons why we were successful is that we could do large areas of the ocean relatively quickly. 

The last piece for sweeping is the magnetic variation. Each ship is a metal hull, and as a ship is moving through the water, it has a magnetic signature, and then we have gear, which you could tune to mimic certain types of ships in the water, in order to have them explode behind the gear that we’re towing in the water.

So you hunt, that means you’re searching, and then you sweep, and then that means you’re clearing. Sometimes you can clear using other technology, such as sometimes the Avenger class ships would go in and sweep, and not us. Sometimes you would use dolphins to work with EOD teams in order to sweep mines. It just depends upon the threat, on what the second tool is used after you hunt.

The most time that I spent was in the hunting phase of the mission set. In Bahrain, every week, a couple days a week, we would hunt. We would do the Strait of Hormuz. We would do the approaches into Saudi Arabia for the tankers. We would do the approaches into the Suez Canal, just to be sure that there are still no mines in that area.

That is for what we call change detection, meaning you map the ocean floor, and then over time, because of consistency, you’ll be able to tell if something changed. If something changed, then you went in to investigate further. It’s constant because the ocean floor is constantly moving, and then somebody could easily place a very cheap object that could be devastating.

Q: Walk me through how a mission would take place.

A: The intel can be good sometimes, sometimes the intel is lacking. The weather has to be at a certain sea state in order for it to be successful, and you can’t do it at night, right? You have to do it during a daytime in littoral situation, so you’re pretty close to shore and you are susceptible to threats that are on the beach. That is the mission set and if you don’t know where the mines are, that’s why you begin with hunting. The Q-14 is a relatively quick device to deploy. You can pull it in the water relatively fast. Then you can real-time send images back, or you can collect tapes to study for that change detection.

When you’re going out for a mission, you’ll have your standard aircraft brief, where the crews get together and talk about the state of the aircraft, the conditions, the environmental conditions of today. And then you’ll get into the mission brief on where the ship is, or where the shore is, and where actually the square, or the box, or the rectangle is, where we’re going to conduct a mission. We talk about the distances from that point that we’re going to deploy the gear, because it takes time to be able to do that, and then we’ll enter what we suspect is a minefield or an area of interest from which we want to be able to tow in.

Then we fly what we call tracks. It’s almost like rows on a field, like cornrows, and we go up, down, up, down, and you have to stay within track by feet, okay? If you, if you stray as little as 20 feet off track, then you have to redo that track, because you want to have a continuous picture of the ground. And so it may take two or three sorties to cover an entire minefield.

And then times where the device may have strayed off track. It takes time, but we can do it quicker than a ship doing it on its own, like the Avenger class ship, and so between the aircraft brief and the mission brief, and executing, it’s like a six, seven hour day in the heat or in the cold, depending on where you are.

There’s no air condition on that helicopter. So everybody’s working in those conditions based on the information that we bring back. Then the tactics folks that are supplied to us by COMINEWARCOM  (Commander, Mine Warfare Command), which was our bosses, those intel folks will say what needs to happen next, meaning there’s nothing that needs to happen now, or we need to investigate this further. And then they pick the next tool for us to be able to deploy, or they go with the EOD and dive teams to go take a closer look.

Q: How fast are you flying, and how high are you flying? How deep do the sleds go?

A: The helicopters are anywhere between 25 and 75 feet over the water, depending on the gear, because the speed in which we pull through the water is extremely important. You could go as fast as 25 knots in some cases, which is about the top speed, or you’d have to go as slow as 12 knots.

Q: How deep do the sleds go?

A: The depth of some of the gear is classified, or at least it was at my time. I’m not sure now, but you could go relatively deep. It’s under lots and lots and lots of tension, and the reason why you had to go very deep is that some gear has to be able to get to the sea floor at certain distances, because there’s also the subsurface fleet that is operating down there, and mines will affect them as well.

Q: What’s the tension like when you’re dragging a sled?

A: You’re looking at around 15,000 to 20,000 pounds of tension. The aircraft will kind of buckle. You look at the side of a 53, it has a crease from the tension that goes on it.

If there is a swell in the sea state, sometimes the Doppler radar – which would kind of track how fast you’re going forward, backwards, or sideways – it’ll go from forward to negative, meaning we’re actually getting pulled backwards by the sea state. And the engines would automatically just start – the torque would come in as the blade did a bigger bite out of the air. And the aircraft will kind of turn, because of the torque. It’ll kind of turn and whine, and you’re just flying an out of balance flight, nose down.

Q: Did you ever have the sled get tangled up behind you?

A: Yes. It can get caught on things in the water, and the tension will spike. If the tension spikes too high, or the gear gets fouled in something, you always have the option to guillotine or cut the gear.

Q: Did the aircraft have other devices that helped in the mine hunting mission?  

A: Yes. In addition to the Q-14, we had the Mk 104 acoustic device, mine chain cutting devices and the Mk 105, a huge gas generator, which produces electrical charges in the water for those magnetic-seeking mines that change the magnetic variation.

There’s at least six devices that I know of that are used for hunting mines, including something as simple as what we call a MOP, which is stands for Magnetic Orange Pipe, which is what they used in Vietnam.

Essentially you have this pipe, it looks like a telephone pole, which is about the size of a telephone pole or larger, and it’s orange. It has a positive charge on one end and negative on the other end. It’s just a magnetic pipe that we would tow in the water. It’s probably the easiest thing that you can tow, and the simplest, but it’s looking for those magnetic variations. The problem with the magnetic orange pipe is you can’t change it, so it’s set for a certain amount of tactics. You can see how that could become obsolete in today’s environment.

Q: How does the Sea Dragon integrate with other mine hunting capabilities, like the Avenger class ships or other assets?

A: We worked as a team, but obviously we’re a tool in that larger mine warfare strategy. We were the speed aspect of that, meaning we could have left holes, but if you’re trying to move at the speed of war, then sometimes we were the tool that was required. And if you have 72 hours to be somewhere, speed is required. We could do that to be sure that the fleet can continue to do what it needs to do, but if you’ve got time, then you could sail a ship or move one of those slower small boats into that environment, that makes sense.

Q: Did you ever work together with Avenger class ships?

A: Maybe in the same AOR, but other than an exercise where you would see an Avenger class ship working the tow area, and then we will be working our tow area. It was under controlled condition. When I was doing change detection, and during work conditions, we were operating concentrated on our mission set, they’re probably concentrating on their mission set, and between the two pictures, they came together in the operation center to have a very clear picture.

Q: When was the Sea Dragon actually used for this mission operationally? How did it perform?

A: It was used throughout Iraqi Freedom, from Shock and Awe to the pull-out to the drawdown. If not every day, every week there was change detection in mine operations, because it’s always a threat. It’s a very cheap weapon that non-state actors can get off the black market. One mistake or one mishap causes devastating consequences for the individuals on that ship, but also the mission, so it’s a constant threat, and still is a threat. 

During my time, actively hunting for mines to be sure that those straits and those approaches remain clear, dominated my entire career in the community. From the time I started  and then I towed to my last days in the squadron, which was in 2005.

Q: How did the Sea Dragon perform?

A: I would say, since there was not a mishap, it performed as designed. It doesn’t mean that the mines were not there. During Iraqi Freedom, mines were put in the water, but we didn’t have the mishaps like we had before that I can recall. So I would say it was a success.

Q: Any close calls during any of your sled-towing flights? 

A: I got disoriented one time with vertigo. Like I mentioned earlier, you’re on an out-of-balanced flight, so your ears are doing one thing, your eyes are doing another thing, and sometimes there’s low fog over the water early in the morning. Under tow there was a time where I got vertigo and put the aircraft in an undesired state, but there’s two pilots. I recognized it and told the aircraft commander ‘I’ve got vertigo.’ He took the control and saved it. Being that close to the ground, getting vertigo could have devastating effects, right? We just ended up releasing the gear that day.

Q: How do the big rearview mirrors help with towing?

A: Mirrors are super important for situational awareness when lowering the equipment into the water and for ensuring the tow cable is staying on track. The co-pilot is crucial while under tow because they are responsible for making sure the aircraft remains clear of obstacles and threats. The pilot flying will be head-down monitoring performance of the helicopter and the gear deployed. The pilot flying will maintain navigation in the minefield and overall safety. When flying, looking out of the windows was a brief luxury. 

Q: Tell me about the time you encountered a surfacing sub while dragging your sled.

A: It was sometime in 2003 or 2004. We were flying over the Strait of Hormuz, towing a side-looking sonar to do bottom mapping. I’ve got a very loud helicopter in the air and a sonar that’s pinging on the bottom, so it probably was not a surprise where we were to the submarine, but their location was a surprise to us.

It’s a bright sunny day. The water looked beautiful, and we’re just doing a random tow. And all of a sudden, this big black submarine surfaced right in front of us. Just popped out of the water, and right in line with our track.

I think I was maybe 50 feet over the water and the gear is behind me. Now I have to turn like a semi truck, having to turn myself and the gear all at the same time to maneuver around the submarine. I said something like ‘holy shit’ and I remember I banked to the right because I think it was the easiest thing to do. There’s more space.

We ended up able to clear the sub, but it had a startling effect. So either they were in the wrong spot or we were in the wrong spot, I couldn’t tell you. But no one came and knocked on the door, saying that I did something wrong. So I’m gonna leave it as if they were in the wrong spot.

Q: What was it like aerial refueling such a monstrous helicopter and did you use it operationally often?

A: Very intimidating at first. However, it is all about training. Yes, you are very close to the other airplane, but that is not your focus. Your focus is on check points. Align your check points and the aircraft will plug. Once you connect and position the aircraft above the wing and propeller wash, the ride is smooth. When I switched over the flying C-130s, it would have been nice to go full circle, but never got the chance to give fuel.

We almost did aerial refueling during a possible mission scenario, but the plan was scaled back and we ended ship hopping. I only used the boom in training. I’m sure it happened, but didn’t know anyone who did it. They were there for a reason, and we trained for it.

Q: What’s the operational situation regarding Iran at the time you were flying?

A: Annoying. They have a lot of islands that are in the Persian Gulf that are their territory, and sometimes during operations, when you’re either delivering cargo or going to field a tow, it puts you in close proximity with those islands. At the same time, if it’s necessary, you could have your own boat team in the water as well. It was post-Cole [a reference to the October 12, 2000 attack on the USS Cole just a few years earlier by explosive-laden suicide boats at the port of Aden in Yemen. The blast ripped a 40-foot-wide hole near the destroyer’s waterline, killing 17 U.S. sailors and injuring nearly 40 other crew members.]

So you have fishing boats in the water, and you don’t know who’s on that boat that is getting close to your ship. But when you got close to Iranian territory, they will speak up on the radio, and tell you to turn around, that you’re approaching their territory,. Even though you know exactly where you are, and you know exactly where this island is, they’re still going tell you are in violation of their airspace. 

Then it’s always a constant threat, right? So, if I were to have to ditch a helicopter or airplane in the water, they’ve got boats in the water. You wouldn’t want to get captured by them, where they could say you are in violation of their sovereign territory by mistake, and then it becomes an issue.

We were flying helicopters without GPS, so you’re using visual navigation maps and whatnot.  I’m sure there’s a GPS on those birds now, but at the time, I had a handheld GPS from Academy Sport, where I marked the islands myself, so I knew exactly where I was, or at least the best that I could manage with the equipment, to be sure that was in the right position. 

Q: Did they ever directly threaten you while you were on those missions?

A: No. They talked about violating their airspace, but they never intercepted or anything like that. I think that would be a huge mistake. It would not be a good day for them.

Q: Tell us about other locales where Sea Dragons operated.

A: We had detachments in South Korea for the North Korean threat from underwater mines. We did exercises in the Pacific. We did exercises with Japan because there’s a threat of mine in those straits, like the Strait of Malacca. 

There’s obviously a threat in the Pacific theater. But because of the situation with Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, I spent most of my time in the Middle East.

Q: Were there any difference between operating in the Persian Gulf area and the Pacific, or Europe?

A: A lot of the effectiveness of what we do is dependent upon water. The salinity of the water, the sea state, the amount of garbage and trash that’s in the water. So those environmental threats change the tactics. That’s why you need to practice out there.

In terms of the purpose of the mission, that does not change, but how you go about it does change. If you’re closer to a near-peer actor, it’s going to require better intelligence, different types of equipment in order to counteract the threat. I would say the Iraqi Navy was not near-peer in terms of mine tactics, but the Chinese could probably be very different in terms of mine tactics. They would be a more sophisticated enemy in this case, which would heighten everything.

Q: Did the Iraqi Navy or the Iraqis present a threat to your aircraft? Did they harass you, fire at you?

A: No, not during my time. I think maybe possibly during the first Gulf War. The threat was that there, it was always a threat when you’re operating close. So yes, something could have happened. They’ve got boats, they’ve got men in the water.

Q: What are your thoughts about the current MCM missions taking place now in the Middle East? Just how hard is it to clear an area of mines like the Strait of Hormuz?

A: I would say that it is difficult. All mine clearing operations are difficult because you’re talking about the needle in the haystack. Like literally, and you know they’re deploying something that can be hoisted by one person and thrown overboard into the water or by a machine, and you can deploy a lot of mines in a very short time in a concentrated, tactical way, or randomly. It really doesn’t matter, it’s still a threat. 

I would say it is difficult because people talk about how narrow and small the Strait of Hormuz is, but you have to remember the earth is large, and there is just a sheer volume of water, and square miles or square kilometers on which something can happen.

It is a very daunting task, and so having more MH-53E helicopters probably wasn’t the solution for the future.

From reading, and then from hearing from my peers that are still in, the tactics are different, but also the equipment that they use to detect this threat is also different. It is faster. It is unmanned. You can deploy more assets quicker because you’re not relying upon one machine or two machines at one time being deployed.

Q: What equipment are they using now? What are the differences?

A: I retired in 2017 and it has changed dramatically. For one, it is more integrated into the fleet, so you’ll have multi-mission capabilities, meaning an MH-60Ss can be used for different sets of missions, from delivering cargo, to deploying different sensor arrays. You have AI for detection assistance. You have side-looking sonar, which instead of being towed are now on underwater unmanned vehicles. So I think more of what you’re looking at now is a mission package of sensors that can be deployed.

When you have sensor sets, it’s integrated into the larger Navy strategic picture better. I think that that was lacking in the past in a way, because you have to cover such a large volume of area, you need more sensors and eyes to be able to do that, and I think that’s the strategy today.

Q: Do you talk to any of the current pilots/crews of the last squadron flying them? What do they say about the current status of the fleet? Are they involved in the mine clearing operation in the Strait?  

A: So I talked with folks, there’s still some folks that are still active duty. Some of them have transitioned out of the 53 pilot-wise and have transitioned into the MH-60S community and so they are deploying those tactics and new systems.

I would say it is probably still a neglected community in their opinion. Everybody’s fighting for resources, but I think when you’re talking about the current situation with Iran in the straight, there’s always a time where mine countermeasures become a very hot topic, because people do forget about it. 

Q: Are the MH-53Es still performing airborne counter-mine missions?

A: I’m not sure. 

Q: What other missions does the MH-53 community perform? Can you talk about your experience with those and what they entail?

A: When you have that much capability, you move a lot of things. And so we did a lot of moving cargo. I could move an F-14 Tomcat engine with the afterburner completely attached. I could move it at 150 knots from shore to ship internally, so I didn’t have to sling it underneath the aircraft in a pod. I can have the engine assembled together and be able to move it. So we moved things that the C-2 Greyhound couldn’t.

The primary mission was mines, the secondary cargo and people. We would do people movement, if a better ride wasn’t available to move an admiral or someone for an important meeting, then we would do so. Obviously, you know, it’s a very dirty ride.

Q: What admirals did you move?

A:  I can’t remember the admirals, because they kind of all blend together, but we did move fun people. We did Tiger Woods for all the USO engagements. Blink 182. We did Tom Jones, Robin Williams, a number of NASCAR folks and other celebrities. We did a lot of that.

Q: What was Robin Williams like?

A:  Funny. He was on from the time that we picked him up in Bahrain, and then giving him the brief. He liked talking with sailors and making jokes. Tom Jones was memorable because he’s got the hair right, and he didn’t want to wear a cranial or helmet on his head to mess up his hair before he did the show, and so that became a thing. But you know, the hair won out. The hair was not going to get covered by the helmet.

Q: What will the Navy miss when that last squadron is finally retired next year and there are no more Sea Dragons flying? Can the MH-60S handle the job?

A:  With the Greyhounds going away, I think even with the CMV-22, which is a very capable aircraft, a very fast aircraft, but in terms of lift capacity internally, there’s something to that. If it’s outsized or weirdly shaped or is on wheels, the MH-53E is your catch-all aircraft. The Navy will miss that and the large numbers of people that we can move.

During the start Operation Iraqi Freedom, when I was in Sigonella we spent four days offloading the Marine Corps battalion landing team from the Iwo Jima on to Souda Bay for them to be flown into the northern part of Iraq. With those two helicopters and in one helicopter with Helicopter Detachment 4, we moved hundreds and hundreds of Marines from a ship to the shore for them to be staged in order to be moved into Iraq in a matter of days. I don’t think that same amount of capability in terms of volume of moving at that speed can be done with what’s available today. So I think they’re going to miss the kind of the ad hoc nature of having a big aircraft to move odd things. It’s good to be a generalist sometimes.

Q: What about the mine countermeasures mission? Is there anything that the Navy will miss from the capabilities of the 53 from that standpoint?

A: I can’t speak on it with the new equipment, because I’ve never operated it, but I think what the Navy won’t miss is the price tag, and maybe the lack of full mission capability. We operated a lot of times in that partial mission capability, because of the complexity of the equipment and the machine, and then you have to get the equipment and the machine to work together, the machine being the helicopter. I don’t think the Navy will miss that part of it.

Q: Can the MH-60 do the job?

A: They can do the job, but they don’t conduct it the same way we did. They can’t pull big sleds like we did for underwater sonars because of power and tension. And you can’t send as many crew members in the back in order to make that mission successful. But the 60 is a very capable platform in order to conduct the mission the way they do it now.

Q: What’s the difference between what they do and what you did?

A: They’re deploying sensor arrays and underwater vehicles from the thing, so they have standoff distance. They’re capable of not putting the helicopter in the same proximity to danger. They can’t put a Mk 105 in the water, but they don’t need to, because they have other types of technology to do it. 

Q: What was your most fear-inducing flight in the Sea Dragon?

A: For me, I was on the sea wall in Corpus Christi, Texas, about to do a towing training mission off the coast of Texas. In the 53 you have three engines, and then you have an auxiliary power unit – another gas turbine that’s above the cockpit.

The purpose of the auxiliary power unit is to run the hydraulics and various components and accessories when the engines and the rotor head aren’t turning. The idea is, once you get the engines going and the main rotor is turning, there is a shaft that goes from the main gear box into that auxiliary power unit, where all your generators and hydraulic systems are run. So we had the engines running, we were on the sea wall – we had a hanger, and then we had an apron, and right there was the Corpus Christi Bay.

I was taxiing out to take off from the helipad, and you’re over the water as soon as you take off from the sea wall. Well, that shaft sheared while I was taxiing up. I have to push the cyclic (the stick) forward in order to tip the rotor head forward to pull me along the ground. If you lose hydraulics in a 53 there is no amount of strength that you or the other copilot has to help to change the path of that helicopter. 

When the shaft broke, it meant whatever condition that rotor head was in, it was not going to move, and that rotor head was in position for me to be able to take off, but I did not have enough power in order for me to lift off. Even if I lifted off, I probably would have just careened into the water. 

So we were going in a situation where I heard it pop, and then all of a sudden the controls froze, and I told the co-pilot, Ty Jurica, that I was so concentrated at that point because I could not control the aircraft. I said ‘I don’t have control, I cannot move the controls.’ But Ty’s quick thinking noted that he could get the hydraulic power unit started again, which it takes time to spool up, but he was able to hit the start on the APU, and we managed to spool up to get hydraulics back, and as soon as the pressure came on at 3000 psi, I was able to move the controls again.

We stopped the aircraft where we were, and we shut it down at that particular time, but in a few seconds, maybe, we probably just would have taxiied off over the sea wall, and into a very bad situation.

Q: What was your best memory of a mission you flew, or a moment during one of your missions in your time in the Sea Dragons? Put us in your shoes of what that was like.

A: Oh man, my best day there? There were a lot of good days. A lot of times, we would fly in formation – two ships going out to whether it was an aircraft carrier or whatever – and we would take off before sunrise. When you’re flying in formation low over the water, and the sun is coming up over the Persian Gulf, those are those are great days. Because everything is working. You have two planes actually going to conduct the mission and not training. I don’t care who you are, it’s always a lot of fun. 

You’re going relatively fast. I mean, we’re not Hornets or whatever, but we were low and fast at that time for us, and we thought we were pretty cool.

You couldn’t touch us on those days.

Author’s note: we added three additional sets of questions and answers to this story. We asked Jones about how fast the Sea Dragons could fly, how helpful the big rearview mirrors were when pulling a sled and what it was like conducting aerial refueling in the giant helicopter.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post Confessions Of A Navy MH-53E Sea Dragon Minehunter Pilot appeared first on The War Zone.

Concerned about a cascading impact on America’s already strained nuclear shipbuilding industry, the House Armed Services Committee wants the Secretary of the Navy to prove that procurement of the proposed nuclear-powered Trump class battleships won’t exacerbate existing construction delays on aircraft carriers and submarines. This follows a congressional move last month to block the Navy from starting construction of the first of the new class of battleships until the service provides assurances that key weapon systems are “sufficiently mature.” You can read more about that in our original report here.

New worries about the status of U.S. nuclear shipbuilding were raised Thursday during the House Armed Services Committee’s Markup of the current draft of the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the annual defense policy bill. An amendment adding new directed report language related to the Trump class, which was approved by the Committee, mirrors issues TWZ has frequently addressed about procurement of nuclear-powered vessels.

“The committee continues to support efforts to expand the U.S. maritime industrial base and accelerate U.S. shipbuilding production and recognizes the progress that has been made on these efforts through coordination between Congress, the Department of Defense, and industry,” the amendment, which had been put forward by Rep. Joe Courtney, a Connecticut Democrat, says. “However, the committee is concerned about the possibility of strain on U.S. nuclear shipyards and maritime industrial base posed by the aggressive schedule proposed for producing a nuclear-powered BBG(X) platform.”

The Trump class has also been referred to as BBG(X), the hull classification code for a guided missile (G) battleship (BB). The Navy has more recently used the term BBGN, reflecting the decision to utilize nuclear propulsion.

The main concern raised by Rep. Courtney is that there is a limit on where nuclear-powered warships can be built.  

“The committee notes that the United States operates only two shipyards that are qualified to construct nuclear-powered vessels and that only one of these two shipyards, located in Newport News, Virginia, actively constructs surface vessels, including the Gerald R. Ford class aircraft carrier program,” Courtney noted. He was referring to Newport News Shipbuilding, a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries.

“The committee is aware that the timelines for completion of the three Ford class aircraft carriers currently under construction have experienced significant delays due to a variety of reasons including supply chain and workforce challenges,” the amendment continues. “The committee is concerned that these factors, coupled with a lack of physical shipbuilding capacity, could be further exacerbated by a new nuclear-powered surface vessel program and without careful planning could jeopardize Ford class delivery.”

Beyond concerns about building the ships, the committee is troubled by the Trump class battleship’s impact on the U.S. naval reactor base, which is also limited to a single supplier.

That company, BWXT Technologies, is providing reactors for the Ford class carriers, as well as Virginia and Columbia class nuclear submarines under construction. It was recently awarded $1.4 billion in contracts by the U.S. Naval Propulsion Program.

“Procurement of naval nuclear reactors typically occurs 2-to-3 years ahead of procurement of a respective vessel and reactor production timelines typically range from 6-to-8 years,” Courtney posited in his amendment. He is “concerned that the accelerated procurement timeline for the BBG(X) program will result in a negative impact on this supply chain.”

The first formal announcement that the Trump class ships would be nuclear-powered came when the Navy unveiled its new shipbuilding plan last month. The Navy hasn’t had a nuclear-powered surface combatant since the 1990s.

The service’s stated plan is to acquire 15 Trump class ships between Fiscal Year 2028 and 2055. Orders are to be placed essentially one every other year. However, two are slated to come back-to-back in Fiscal Years 2030 and 2031.

The most recent publicly available official estimate for the price tag on these boats is about $17 billion each. That eclipses what the service expects to spend on each of the next three Ford class carriers, the projected unit costs of which range from roughly $13 to $15 billion.

With all this in mind, the committee now wants the Navy Secretary and the Director of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program to provide a report by March 1, 2027, on the “Navy’s strategy to design and construct BBG(X) without interfering with existing nuclear-powered shipbuilding plans,” including the scheduled construction of third, fourth, and fifth Ford class carriers, the future USS Enterprise (CVN-80), USS Doris Miller (CVN-81), and USS William J. Clinton (CVN-82).

The committee wants the information about:

• “the Navy’s strategy to reduce construction delays for CVN-80, CVN-81, and CVN-82;”

• “the Navy’s projection for construction and delivery timelines for a nuclear-powered BBG(X) program, to include procurement of long-lead material such as naval nuclear reactors;”

• “an assessment of the capacity of existing U.S. shipyards, certified for nuclear-powered vessel construction, to support construction of a nuclear-powered BBG(X) without delaying scheduled construction of projected and under-contract vessels within the Virginia class, Columbia class submarine, and Gerald R. Ford class carrier programs;”

• “an assessment of the capacity of the U.S. naval nuclear reactor industrial base capacity to support the construction of a nuclear-powered BBG(X) without delaying scheduled construction of projected and under-contract submarines and aircraft carriers” and

• “a summary of the maritime industrial base vendors, particularly those with long-lead time items or that have single source suppliers and their capacity to support the construction of the BBG(X) without delaying construction of already scheduled shipbuilding efforts.”

In addition to the issues raised by Courtney, Representative Christopher Deluzio, a Pennsylvania Democrat, expressed concern that the Navy is making “optimistic assumptions about technologies” in a separate amendment to the latest draft of the House NDAA. He specifically cited “operating with a nuclear weapon, ship design, costs, schedule, and production and lack clear concepts of operations or a commitment to incorporating commercial leading practices” when it comes to the Trump class program. Deluzio’s full amendment also touched on aspects of the Trump administration’s Golden Fleet naval modernization initiative.

Deluzio’s amendment directs the Comptroller General of the United States to provide a brief to the House Committee on Armed Services no later than January 1, 2027, on how they will assess:

• “the business case for the BBG(X) program, including the planned cost, schedule, and performance parameters, as well as any assumptions that are inherent to the execution of the business case;”

• “the novel systems and technologies required to build, operate, and sustain the BBG(X), including the costs and risks of these technologies and the Navy’s steps to mitigate these risks;”

•  “the extent to which and how the Navy envisions executing Distributed Maritime Operations with the BBG(X) as well as other Golden Fleet assets;”

• “the extent to which the Navy plans to incorporate commercial leading practices into its acquisition approach for BBG(X) and other Golden Fleet assets” and

• “the impact of BBG(X) and other Golden Fleet assets on acquisition and construction plans for existing Navy shipbuilding programs.”

We reached out to Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao’s media office for comment and will update this story with any pertinent insights shared.

There are still a number of legislative hurdles the committee’s proposals have to jump. Regardless, the reality that the Navy will ever procure a Trump class battleship, at least as currently envisioned, is already highly questionable, an issue TWZ raised when the class was first announced. President Donald Trump, who sees his namesake battleship class as a key component of the Golden Fleet, will be out of office before major decisions about how to go forward will be made. These congressional actions could be seen as a way to slow-roll plans for the battleship to kill it without directly confronting Trump about the logic of building it in the first place.

The next administration faces massive competing priorities, and there are already questions by members of Congress about whether the battleship effort is the best use of available resources.

The committee’s demand that the Navy prove these vessels won’t gum up the nuclear shipbuilding works is another reminder that there are rough waters ahead for the Trump class.

Contact the author: howard@TWZ.com.

The post Legislators Demand Navy Prove Trump Class Battleships Won’t Sink U.S. Nuclear Shipbuilding appeared first on The War Zone.

The U.S. Marine Corps is aiming to put in an order for new anti-drone 5.56x45mm ammunition for its M4 carbines and M27 rifles by the end of the year. Produced by a company called Drone Round, the L Variant cartridge has a projectile that breaks into multiple segments to improve the probability of scoring a hit on a small, fast-moving aerial target. The idea is to give anyone with a rifle an immediate boost in their ability to defend against growing drone threats, especially first-person view (FPV) kamikaze types now proliferating around the globe after becoming a fixture in the war in Ukraine.

Marine Corps Systems Command (MARCORSYSCOM) announced its intention to buy an unspecified number of 5.56x45mm L Variant cartridges through a sole-source contract with Drone Round in a notice posted online yesterday. The projected date of the contract award is December 2026.

“The 5.56mm Drone Round ‘L Variant’ is the only kinetic munition currently available in the commercial or defense marketplace that meets the Marine Corps’ strict minimum capability requirements for immediate c-sUAS [counter-small uncrewed aerial systems] defense,” according to an accompanying document justifying the need for a sole-source deal. “Specifically, this round is the only solution offering ‘drop-in’ compatibility that requires no physical modifications, specialized upper receivers, or distinct weapon platforms to be operable in current-issue Marine Corps 5.56mm weapons (e.g., M27, M4, and M4A1).”

“Furthermore, its deployment requires zero additional New Equipment Training or specialized occupational specialties, rendering it immediately effective upon issue,” the justification adds. “Failure to deliver this capability places an unnecessary risk to Marines and could lead to mission failure and loss of life.”

Drone Round has been developing specialized anti-drone ammunition for small arms since at least 2025. At the time of writing, the company offers two 5.56x45mm versions, the aforementioned L Variant and a K Variant. The L and K versions have projectiles designed to split into five and eight segments, respectively.

With their different loadings, the L and K Variants are effective out to around 328 and 164 feet (100 and 50 Meters), both of which are relatively short ranges, according to Drone Round. No special modifications are required to use the ammunition in existing guns, and the company says the rounds are “full-auto and suppressor capable.”

L and K Variants in 7.62x51mm have also been developed, but are still in testing. Work is underway on 6.8x51mm versions, which could be fired from the U.S. Army’s new M7 rifles, M8 carbines, and M250 light machine guns. Other calibers could be on the horizon, as well.

Some Army units have at least evaluated the 5.56x45mm L Variant already. There are reports that Ukrainian forces have done so, as well.

Marine Corps interest in ammunition of this kind, broadly, is also not new. “Enhanced ammunition for existing firearms (buckshot-like 5.56, 7.62, .50, .40mm)” was among a list of desired squad and platoon-level counter-drone capabilities included in a separate contracting notice MARCORSYSCOM put out back in 2024. This reflected the then-recent rollout of a larger service-wide counter-drone vision, the core of which is ensuring that virtually every Marine can play a role.

“For our ammunition portfolio, we need industry’s help in counter-UAS munitions for our existing weapon systems,” Marine Col. Paul Gilikin, the Program Manager for Combat Support Systems at MARCORSYSCOM, said during a talk at the Navy League’s annual Sea-Air-Space conference in April.

The basic idea of multi-projectile small arms ammunition to help improve hit probability is decades old. The U.S. Army notably explored this concept extensively in the 1950s and 1960s, but did not ultimately field any of the rounds it developed. Armed forces elsewhere around the globe have pursued similar projects over the years.

Different types of pellet-filled rounds have also been developed for various small arms, including rifles and handguns, in the past, with the Glaser Safety Slug seen in the video below being one of the better-known examples. However, small arms cartridges of this kind have typically been designed primarily for very close-range self-defense, survival, or even pest-control use.

Porting these concepts of multi-projectile small arms cartridges over to counter-drone is a growing trend at this point, too. In February, the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division (NSWC Crane) unveiled multiple Drone Killer Cartridge (DKC) designs it had internally developed in 5.56x45mm, 7.62x51mm, and .50 caliber flavors.

“During a recent demonstration at Camp Atterbury in Edinburgh, Indiana, DKC achieved a 92% success rate against drone targets,” according to a Navy press release. What further progress has been made since then in the development of any of the DKC designs, or their fielding, is unknown.

Various multi-projectile small arms cartridges intended specifically for engaging small drones have already emerged in recent years on both sides of the conflict in Ukraine. This includes locally fabricated designs, some of which use 3D-printed sabots loaded with commercially available metal BBs, and mass-production types made by established companies like the Kalashnikov Group in Russia.

High-Precision Complexes Holding has begun rolling out the first batches of its 'Многоточия' (Ellipse) triplex C-sUAS rounds. These are the СЦ 226 (STs 226) in 5.45×39, and the СЦ 228 (STs 228 in 7.62×39. Claims hit probability is improved by a factor of 2.5x at 300 m. pic.twitter.com/DUSFXHlb55

— Amaël Kotlarski (@JakOSpades) January 23, 2026

To reiterate, the key benefit that multi-projectile counter-drone cartridges offer is the boost in hit probability when engaging small and highly maneuverable drones. They can also be fired from existing guns without modification. This, in turn, presents a way to give anyone in a unit with an M4 or M27 an additional means of protecting against uncrewed aerial threats without adding to the bulk and weight that personnel already have to carry around.

The Marine Corps and other branches of the U.S. military have already been pursuing other add-on capabilities to improve the effectiveness of small arms against small drones, especially for individual rifles. In particular, variants of the SMASH family of computerized optical sight systems from Israeli firm Smart Shooter have been in growing use across America’s armed forces, and elsewhere globally, for years now. The Marines have at least tested another counter-drone rifle aiming system that uses a buttstock designed to automatically move the gun in line with the target. These are capabilities that could easily be paired with specialized ammunition. It might be possible to tweak software behind these systems to better work with multi-projectile loadings, too.

At the same time, questions have been raised about the efficacy and utility of responding to drone attacks with rifles and other individual small arms like shotguns. Since they already fire multi-projectile rounds, shotguns have already emerged as another counter-drone tool, and are notably in regular use in this role on battlefields in Ukraine, regardless.

Ukrainian soldier shoots a Russian (presumably) drone out of the sky with a semi auto 12ga shotgun

I wonder what load they're using? I'm thinking #4 buck would be a good option but maybe some heavy steel shot… #war #ukraine #russia #shotgun #12ga #drone pic.twitter.com/J1IQxi879l

— Mrgunsngear (@Mrgunsngear) September 25, 2025

Soldiers from Ukraine's 58th Motorized Brigade with a C-UAS gun and shotgun for countering FPVs.https://t.co/MSLEJTT19i pic.twitter.com/jIrVHKjCIr

— Rob Lee (@RALee85) July 24, 2024

Range has been cited as one limiting factor, especially for shotguns. Specialized rifle rounds like Drone Round’s L Variant and the DKC types developed by NSWC Crane, which are fired at higher velocities than shotgun shells, are intended to help mitigate this, at least to a degree. However, as noted, Drone Round says that the effective range that it has demonstrated with its 5.56x45mm types to date is 328 feet (100 meters). As a point of comparison, the stated effective range of an M4 carbine firing standard single-projectile ammunition is around 1,640 feet (500 meters), according to the Army.

The closer a counter-drone engagement occurs, the less time there is to react, overall. There is the additional question then of whether standing and fighting is the best course of action.

“When shooting you are static, which makes it easier for the operator to aim the drone,” a contemporary Russian manual on counter-drone tactics notes, according to a report in April from Forbes. That being said, there might not be somewhere safer to move in many cases.

Russian correspondent hides from a Ukranian drone … it looks for him like in a scary movie. pic.twitter.com/XPPQGzDzn0

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 11, 2024

Ukrainian drone operators located a concentration of Russian hardware inside a large warehouse somewhere in the south of Ukraine, preparing for an assault.

The very skilled drone operators sent in several drones and eliminated several MBTs, IFVs, trucks and more. In the end, the… pic.twitter.com/jgcqibiJRD

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) February 20, 2024

Having to manage multiple ammunition types on the fly could also present challenges. What kind of effectiveness rounds like L Variant might offer against more traditional targets is unclear.

All this being said, counter-drone rifle rounds do continue to be fielded on both sides of the conflict in Ukraine, even if the full extent of their use is not entirely clear. The explicit fielding of shotguns as counter-drone weapons is another trend that is growing globally, including in the U.S. military.

Small arms are, of course, just one part of a layered ecosystem of defenses necessary to challenge the ever-growing threats posed by various tiers of drones. For the Marine Corps, specialized counter-drone 5.56x45mm ammunition is now in line to be part of that larger equation.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Anti-Drone 5.56mm Rifle Rounds That Break Into Multiple Projectiles Sought By Marines appeared first on The War Zone.

A new type of submarine that appears to lack a traditional sail has emerged in China. The same shipyard launched a smaller ‘sailless’ submarine — a technology demonstrator — eight years ago. More recently, a top Chinese shipbuilding conglomerate put forward a concept for an uncrewed underwater vehicle (UUV) with a broadly comparable hullform. Designs of this kind can offer benefits in terms of speed, maneuverability, and reduced acoustic signature, but also have major drawbacks.

TWZ has obtained imagery of the submarine in question at JN (Jiangnan) Shipyard in Shanghai on June 1, as seen at the top of this story and below, from Vantor (previously Maxar Technologies). The boat, the name and/or designation of which are currently unknown, first appeared there sometime at the end of May, according to Naval News. That outlet was first to report on this development.

From the imagery, the submarine does not have a traditional sail. However, the exact shaping of what is present is also not entirely clear from the view that is currently available. As noted, JN Shipyard is known to have built at least one other ‘sailless’ submarine in the past, which we will come back to later on.

Writing for Naval News, undersea warfare analyst H.I. Sutton has assessed the design to be roughly 394 feet (120 meters) long and to be between 33 and 36 feet (10 and 11 meters) wide. What its intended missions might be are unknown, but this is certainly larger than common diesel-electric submarines (SSK) and even longer than most nuclear fast attack submarines. For comparison, variants of China’s Type 093 nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN), some of the most modern submarines in People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) service today, are approximately 356 to 360 feet (108 to 110 meters long) and 36 feet wide. The official stated length and width of the U.S. Navy’s Virginia class SSNs, across all existing subvariants, are 377 feet (114.8 meters) and 34 feet (10.36 meters), respectively.

We can also see that the submarine at JN Shipyard has an X-form rudder configuration, something that first appeared on a submarine in China in 2024. This offers advantages over cruciform stern arrangements with horizontal and vertical rudders when it comes to maneuverability, efficiency, and safety.

An X-shaped stern is a feature now further associated with a next-generation Chinese attack submarine design commonly, but still unofficially, referred to as the Type 095. Naval News also reported today on the recent launch of what may be another Type 095, which has a traditional sail, at the Bohai Shipyard in Huludao, hundreds of miles to the north of Shanghai. This may have caused some confusion online, with some mistaking a boat at Bohai for a ‘sailless’ type.

Just translated via @type36512: CSSC Bohai Shipbuilding: Launch of a New Submarine

Satellite imagery captured on May 29. I believe this image depicts the new 120m-class, sail-less submarine discussed in the accompanying article. However – due to limitations in image resolution – https://t.co/sHF9Y8gkGe

— @Rupprecht_A (@RupprechtDeino) June 3, 2026

Even if we scale 09V's hull diameter with this mystery submarine (for illustration purposes), it is a fair bit shorter, meaning it probably isn't a 09V, but it also doesn't correspond to what a 10m diameter, 120m length submarine would look like…

I'm open to ideas. https://t.co/oy9nrbiLtt pic.twitter.com/AIcv5ZjXy3

— Rick Joe (@RickJoe_PLA) June 3, 2026

The newly emerged submarine at JN Shipyard may also have a shrouded propulsor, which could be a pumpjet type. Pumpjets offer further benefits for quieter operation, especially at higher submerged speeds.

The absence of a traditional sail is still the most notable aspect of the new submarine at JN Shipyard. Omitting a large structure sticking out of the top of the hull helps significantly with streamlining the overall design. Eliminating that drag can allow greater optimization for speed and maneuverability while submerged. It can also help make the submarine quieter and, by extension, harder to detect, even while transiting through an area at higher speeds. This can be especially useful when racing out to threats, even those far away.

Not having a traditional sail could impose certain design constraints. Traditionally, naval submarines have used their sails to mount periscopes and other sensor masts, as well as extendable communication antennas and snorkels to help cycle air without fully resurfacing. That is space that can be used for other purposes, including launchers for countermeasures and general storage.

Above all else, while running on the surface, the sail is key for general navigation and situational awareness. It can also provide an elevated position for local force protection or supporting vertical replenishment (VERTREP) operations. If sufficiently hardened, it can even break through feet of ice during operations in and around the polar regions.

The lack of a sail might reflect a focus on seabed operations far from the surface where mast deployment and other considerations might be less pressing. At the same time, the design’s features could just as easily be centered on improving performance, including the ability to make transits as quickly as possible during blue water operations. It could also offer benefits for shallow-water operations, though we have noted that, overall, it is very large compared to SSKs.

As mentioned, a smaller ‘sailless’ submarine had already emerged at JN Shipyard in 2018. H.I. Sutton previously estimated that design to be around 150 feet (45 meters) long and 15 feet (four to four-and-a-half meters) wide. That submarine also had a non-X-shaped rudder arrangement and what appeared to be an unshrouded propeller. The exact reasons for building that boat and how it has been utilized over the years remain unknown, but it would have at least provided a testbed and technology demonstration platform to explore this design concept, and potentially other capabilities. Whether it was designed for crewed or uncrewed operation, or to be optionally crewed, is not clear, either. The same is true of this new submarine, though it seems unlikely it is uncrewed.

At the Zhuhai Airshow in 2024, the state-run China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) did show a model of an unprecedentedly large, diesel-electric UUV. Its overall design was highly reminiscent, at least in broad strokes, of JN Shipyard’s original ‘sailless’ submarine, as TWZ noted at the time. JN Shipyard is one of many subsidiaries of CSSC.

CSSC said at the time that the drone submarine could be configured to perform a wide array of missions, including launching attacks on enemy vessels, laying mines, supporting special operations forces, and serving as a mothership for smaller uncrewed underwater vehicles (UUV). You can read more about all of this here.

Other shipyards and navies around the world have explored low-profile submarine designs in the past, but designs have generally been consigned to the world of paper concepts and limited experimentation. The U.S. Navy, for instance, previously tested a Large Scale Vehicle Range (LSVR) subscale demonstrator submarine with a novel sail structure. The Navy’s Acoustic Research Detachment (ARD) conducted that work in a lake in Bayview, Idaho.

In 2021, the Navy also notably put out a contracting notice calling for concepts for inflatable sail structures, which could combine the benefits of traditional sails and low-profile designs. What degree of work the service may have conducted since then on this Inflatable Deployable Sail System (IDSS) is unclear, but it underscores how important a sail is for general operations on the surface.

The PLAN’s submarine force otherwise continues to grow in terms of capability and capacity, with an increasing number of more modern types. U.S. officials have openly said in the past that the quality of newer Chinese submarines has been getting closer in parity to American designs. All of this is further underscored by the recent appearance of the other new submarine at Bohai. In addition to new nuclear-power designs, China is also understood to be developing at least one design with a hybrid nuclear/conventional propulsion system, referred to as the Type 041 or Zhou class. The first known example of the Type 041 came to light after it looked to have sunk in a shipyard in 2024.

Greater use of nuclear propulsion promises to extend the reach of Chinese submarines in the Pacific and beyond, and is clearly part of the PLAN’s larger vision for naval power projection going forward.

“The PLA Navy is executing a significant strategic shift from diesel-electric to all-nuclear construction, representing a fundamental departure from historical construction patterns,” U.S. Navy Rear Adm. Mike Brookes, head of the Office of Naval Intelligence, wrote in prepared remarks ahead of a hearing before members of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission in March.

Brookes also highlighted how the hybrid Type 041, specifically, could offer “greater endurance, potentially filling regional patrol and presence missions more economically than full-size SSNs [attack submarines] and SSGN [guided missile submarines].”

China has significant demands for naval presence, in general, especially to assert its extensive and widely disputed maritime territorial claims in the South China Sea and elsewhere. The PLAN continues to expand the scale and scope of its combat fleets, overall, at a pace that far exceeds that of other navies globally. This includes the U.S. Navy, where the disparity has become increasingly concerning, as TWZ routinely highlights.

More remains to be learned about the newly emerged submarine at JN Shipyard, but it could point to new low-profile designs without traditional sails, possibly to act as the PLAN’s underwater high-speed interceptor, being part of China’s larger future submarine future.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post New Large Chinese Submarine With Very Unique Feature Just Caught On Satellite Imagery appeared first on The War Zone.

Today, the U.S. Marine Corps celebrated the end of more than half a century of Harrier ‘jump jet’ operations with a sundown ceremony at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point in North Carolina. For more than 20 percent of the history of the republic, the British-originated jump jet helped to defend America. The story of how the U.S. military first got involved in the program is a little-known but fascinating one. Michael Pryce, who has worked on various aircraft projects, from the Harrier to the Tempest, explains, and, in the process, connects the dots between the AV-8 and its replacement with the Marine Corps, the F-35B Lightning II.

Read our coverage of the Marine Harrier sundown here.

Right from the start, the Harrier had been of immense interest to Britain’s ‘cousins’ across the pond. In the 1950s, the threat of nuclear war led to the creation of jump jets, and NASA, plus the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Army soon found that developing rockets seemed easy in comparison to this new class of combat aircraft.

Despite valiant efforts, no American jump jet could be made to work.

A video shows the Ryan X-13 Vertijet during tests. It was one of many Cold War-era jump jet projects that ended in failure:

All three services got involved in trials of the Hawker Siddeley P.1127 Kestrel, the first iteration of what would become the Harrier, initially in a joint British-American-West German trials squadron. Then, six of the Kestrels were taken to America to continue testing there, and they were renamed as XV-6As once on U.S. soil. Unlike other jump jet projects, the P.1127 utilized four adjustable exhaust nozzles beneath the wing, which rotated to provide thrust for vertical, backward, or hovering flight as well as conventional forward movement.

The thing that impressed the Americans was the sheer simplicity of the British jump jet. With just one engine, and ‘not an electron’ needed in its flight controls, the Kestrel soon transformed into the Harrier, and in 1968 the U.S. Marine Corps decided they would acquire them. Despite not having flown any of the Kestrel trials, they knew they wanted to bring the jump jet into the front line as soon as possible.

The British makers of the Harrier, Hawker Siddeley, first found out about the U.S. Marines’ interest when two men in uniform walked into the Hawker Siddeley hospitality chalet at the 1968 Farnborough Airshow and said they wished to fly the jet. Within two weeks, they had. It was the start of the Marines’ love affair with the Harrier, but it was not America’s first encounter with the British jet.

Over 10 years before, another American had walked into Hawker’s fancy tent at another Farnborough airshow and asked to see their design for what would become the Harrier. Col. Willis “Bill” F. Chapman of the U.S. Air Force was an American in Paris, there to find European weapons that America could fund. Jump jets were all the rage, and the Hawker P.1127 seemed to him to be the most promising.

As leader of the 340th Bomb Group in Italy in World War II, Chapman had seen dozens of his B-25 bombers wiped out, first by a volcanic eruption and then by a Luftwaffe attack. He knew nuclear missiles could do much worse. Soon, he had funded the Pegasus engine, the heart of the Harrier, and struck up a strong friendship with the Hawker design team led by Ralph Hooper, driving their design forward, from the drawing board into the sky.

In 1968, one of the U.S. Marines who walked in at Farnborough would play an equally vital role in getting the Harrier into Marine service. Col. Tom Miller had flown in Korea and Vietnam, and scored a speed record in a McDonnell F4H Phantom for good measure. Deeply impressed by the Harrier, he went into battle on ‘The Hill’ to secure it for the Corps, then on to lead it into service as the commander of the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing at Cherry Point — the same unit that retired the Harrier today, 55 years later.

The rest of the history of the Harrier is well known. From the initial, British-built AV-8A to the jointly-developed, with mostly American technology, second-generation AV-8B Harrier II, the Harrier found more use, and created more jobs, in America than in Britain. The American connection was the making of the British jump jet, and helped cement relations between the two countries’ pilots, engineers and ground crews over decades.

In the 1980s, there were attempts to make a new, supersonic successor, with the speed of the Marines’ F/A-18A Hornet and the vertical flight ability of the Harrier. Once again, the Americans turned to British designers. In 1981, Hooper and a team of engineers from the Harrier factory at Kingston-upon-Thames went to work at McDonnell Douglas in St. Louis, Missouri, to design the ultimate jump jet. Over drawing boards and at tailgate parties after ball games, they evolved a great beast of a jet, the P.1218, with two crew, two engines and the latest tech, to succeed the U.S. Navy’s F-14A Tomcat fleet interceptor and A-6E Intruder all-weather strike aircraft. Despite arriving at a joint design, money was limited, and the work was re-focused on research with NASA — the start of what in time would become the Joint Strike Fighter program.

Although the U.S Navy buys jets for the Marines, the big twin-engined design was of less interest to the Corps than another of Hooper’s designs, a smaller, single-engine jet that weighed the same as the Hornet. This supersonic jump jet was seriously studied in the United Kingdom, with tests and design work over many years. The U.S. Marines were involved too, officers visiting the Kingston factory to talk about its prospects. When Britain delayed jump jet plans in favor of what became the Eurofighter Typhoon, it meant Hooper’s single-engined P.1216 design, with its wild-looking twin-boom configuration, seemed to miss its chance with the Marines. The British designer retired too, but he did not let that stop him.

Keen to see a supersonic jump jet in Marine service, he turned to Miller once again. As the accompanying letter in this article shows, in 1992 he gave Miller the technical plans of the new jump jet, and Miller showed it around at Marine HQ at a vital time — just as 10 years of research was turning into the serious acquisition program for the Joint Strike Fighter.

The emerging requirements specified a weight the same as the Hornet — the same, too, as Hooper’s P.1216. Speed, range and weapons load were close too. While avionics and stealth had advanced beyond the British jet’s capabilities, the knowledge that the man who made the Harrier thought a practical jump jet of Hornet size would work helped get the ball rolling on the third generation of jump jets. Miller’s support ensured the Corps got behind it, leading to the Lockheed Martin F-35B now taking over Cherry Point.

Making a fighting jump jet that works is extremely challenging. The Harrier had its problems — without rigid training, accident rates echoed those of its 1950s origins. The F-35B has had to overcome its own hurdles too.

In the early 2000s, Hooper was called in to help fix those. The transatlantic story of the Harrier may have ended today, but the people who found ways to cut bureaucratic corners by trusting each other, and who cracked the technical code of making the Harrier work, continue to support the next generation of F-35Bs.

The ‘Harrier Mafia’ worked their own way, but always in line with the motto of the Marine Corps. “Semper Fi” was a value shared by British pilots who flew American Harriers in combat operations on exchange as much as by the men and women who made, and supported, 55 years of Harrier operations at Cherry Point.

Jump Jet: The Secret History of the Harrier by Michael Pryce is published on August 27 and is available for pre-order.

Contact the editor: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post The Hidden History of America’s Harrier Jump Jets appeared first on The War Zone.

The prestigious Russian Navy base at Kronstadt, near St. Petersburg, came under Ukrainian drone attack overnight, in what may well be the first strike of its kind against the Baltic Fleet. Ukrainian drones targeted the naval base, including the Project 20380 Steregushchiy class corvette Boikiy, highlighting the fact that Russian warships are vulnerable even when hundreds of miles from Ukraine’s borders.

According to the official account of the Ukrainian 414th Separate Unmanned Strike Aviation System Brigade on X, the corvette was set ablaze while in the Veleshchynskyi dry dock in Kronstadt, where it is said to have entered scheduled maintenance in February of this year. The same account posted a video showing the attack. While we are used to kamikaze drone video feeds cutting out just before detonation, the fact that multiple drones were involved means we can see the burning vessel from several angles.

KRONSTADT (St. Petersburg), June 3.
Birds of the @1usc_army, @usf_army hunted down and set ablaze the corvette Boikiy, a guided missile weapons carrier.

06:35, 03.06.26. Veleshchynskyi Dry Dock, Kronstadt (St. Petersburg) – the cradle of the russian Navy.

Tired after its… pic.twitter.com/2HjrlyVKdc

— 414 Magyar's Birds (@414magyarbirds) June 3, 2026

Reportedly, the drones that hit the corvette were from the 1st Separate Center of Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces. Considering the long distance to the target, it is interesting to note that video from the seekers was available. This indicates that either a local operator on the ground was involved in targeting and recording the feed, or otherwise a satcom link was used to do the same. While it is conceivable that the drones used autonomous guidance, they would still have needed someone nearby or connected via satcom to record the seeker’s view. Another possibility is that shorter-range drones were used for the attack, something that Ukraine has done before for attacks deep in Russia, although this seems less likely here.

Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces stated that the Boikiy was involved in escorting ships associated with Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, the collection of older tankers operating under foreign flags that Moscow relies on to export oil despite Western sanctions. According to Ukrainian officials, Russia has increasingly tasked Baltic Fleet vessels with escort, monitoring, and security missions for these tankers as they transit the Baltic Sea carrying sanctioned Russian oil to markets prepared to bypass Western restrictions.

The Steregushchiy class ships are among Russia’s more modern corvettes. With a standard displacement of 1,800 tons, a length of 343 feet, and a flight deck for a helicopter, the corvettes are closer to frigates, according to some classification systems. Their primary armament consists of two quadruple launchers for Uran anti-ship missiles, a 12-cell Redut vertical launch system for various air defense missiles, and two quadruple tubes for Paket-NK anti-torpedo/anti-submarine torpedoes.

The attack on the naval base was part of a wider Ukrainian drone barrage directed against other military and energy sites in and around St. Petersburg early on Wednesday. Footage of the attacks showed drones, reportedly FP-1/2 types, low over the Gulf of Finland and in the skies above the city.

A video published online shows a Ukrainian FP-1 drone flying just a few meters above the water in the Gulf of Finland during the morning attack on Saint Petersburg. pic.twitter.com/ZTtGb71zdT

— WarTranslated (@wartranslated) June 3, 2026

The attacks occurred just hours before international guests gathered for the city’s flagship economic forum. “The Petersburg forum is opening with a nice plume of black smoke in the background after Ukrainian strikes,” posted Serhiy Sternenko, an adviser to the Ukrainian defence minister.

Smoke is rising over Kronstadt also.

Naval base there, some ships could be hit
https://t.co/RY3SGUIPBd pic.twitter.com/LytOUoXZWu

— Liveuamap (@Liveuamap) June 3, 2026

Several long-range drones also crashed into oil storage facilities in St. Petersburg after Russian air defenses reportedly tried unsuccessfully to shoot them down. Loud explosions were heard, and black smoke could be seen rising from the blazing oil terminal, one of the largest on Russia’s Baltic Sea coast.

In this footage you can even see two Ukrainian drones flying in formation over the oil terminal in Saint Petersburg, Russia, with one dive-bombing into the oil terminal. pic.twitter.com/eMUdpwsDiz

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) June 3, 2026

The entire city of Saint Petersburg, Russia, received a front row seat for the destruction of the local oil terminal. This includes also the attendees of St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), which will start today. pic.twitter.com/HxDsF6kQ6p

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) June 3, 2026

Russian authorities confirmed that the attacks had taken place, with St. Petersburg’s governor, Alexander Beglov, saying that the Kirovsky and Krasnoselsky districts had been targeted.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, writing on social media, said that drones had hit “important facilities on Russian territory,” including the St. Petersburg oil terminal, the Kronstadt base, and a weapons factory in the Tambov region.

“I thank our warriors for their precision. Ukraine’s plan for long-range sanctions is being implemented exactly as needed to bring peace closer,” Zelensky said.

Our long-range sanctions carried out by the warriors of the Security Service of Ukraine, the Unmanned Systems Forces, the Special Operations Forces, the Defense Intelligence of Ukraine, and the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine have yielded good results. Important facilities… pic.twitter.com/esxYMexU8d

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) June 3, 2026

The significance of the strikes is manifold.

First off, the drone strikes have a highly symbolic value, and will be especially embarrassing for the Kremlin, since they come immediately in advance of the three-day annual summit being held in St. Petersburg, and billed as Russia’s answer to Davos.

The Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum of 2026 (SPIEF 2026) in Russia has started with a very fiery keynote speech by the Ukrainian surprise guests. pic.twitter.com/VVIuGcQCO7

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) June 3, 2026

FP-1 drones fully demonstrating the greatness of Putin's regime ahead of the St Petersburg Economic Forum. https://t.co/cgFNw24Xum pic.twitter.com/ztGCVHGEWQ

— Anton Gerashchenko (@Gerashchenko_en) June 3, 2026

Guests arrived for today’s opening ceremony under a pall of thick smoke, and Russian President Vladimir Putin is due to make a keynote speech at the event on Friday. There was further disruption for arriving guests as St. Petersburg’s airport was temporarily closed.

Secondly, the drone strikes underscore Ukraine’s ability to strike targets deep within Russia, using a growing array of long-range one-way attack drones and cruise missiles. The targets are around 680 miles from the nearest Ukrainian border.

Finally, by targeting Kronstadt, the attacks also signify the opening up of a new front in the drone war, namely against the Baltic Fleet while it is in port.

A fire has reportedly broken out aboard the Russian warship Boykiy in Kronstadt near St. Petersburg following Ukraine’s latest drone attack.

The corvette repeatedly escorted vessels from Russia’s shadow oil fleet through the English Channel in recent years. pic.twitter.com/Zhsn3nVsVp

— KyivPost (@KyivPost) June 3, 2026

Located on Kotlin Island in the Gulf of Finland, about 18 miles west of St. Petersburg, Kronstadt is one of the principal bases associated with the Baltic Fleet. Today, it primarily hosts corvettes and patrol vessels, naval support ships, training units, as well as repair and maintenance facilities. Since any naval threat approaching St. Petersburg from the Gulf of Finland must pass near Kronstadt, the base effectively acts as the maritime gateway to Russia’s second-largest city.

There have been very few confirmed Ukrainian attacks of any kind on the Baltic Fleet compared with the extensive campaign waged against Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.

In April 2024, there was a fire on a Russian warship at Baltiysk in Kaliningrad. The fire damaged communications and electronic systems aboard the Buyan class corvette Serpukhov. A Ukrainian military intelligence official subsequently claimed that this was the result of a covert joint operation conducted by his GUR agency and a pro-Kyiv Russian military group.

For the first time in the war, an attack took place in the Baltic Sea, the Russian Serpukhov missile ship was burned in Kaliningrad.
The Buyan-M class Serpukhov corvette belonging to the Russian navy was burned by Ukrainian sabotage teams.
The ship was severely damaged. pic.twitter.com/Isl9sVWF1R

— Mete Sohtaoğlu (@metesohtaoglu) April 9, 2024

So far, of course, Ukraine’s naval campaign has focused overwhelmingly on the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Many successful attacks have been recorded against Black Sea Fleet vessels and facilities, forcing the general evacuation of Russian naval assets from occupied Crimea and to bases in Russia proper.

In recent months, Ukraine has waged an aerial campaign to disrupt Russia’s economy. Long-range drones have hit ports and oil storage facilities, military factories, and airbases. There has also been an uptick in attacks against tankers and trucks moving between occupied southern Ukraine and Crimea, leading to fuel shortages across the peninsula.

Meanwhile, the scale of Russian missile and drone attacks on Ukraine remains undiminished. On Monday, a barrage of Russian strikes killed 23 people across Ukraine and injured many more. This led Zelenskyy to renew his plea for the U.S. government to provide Kyiv with more Patriot missiles. Today, he said that “an agreement at the highest political level on the purchase of Patriot systems […] is awaiting implementation at the financial, legal, and technical levels.”

I held a meeting on additional ways to supply air defense to Ukraine – both systems and interceptors. We have an agreement at the highest political level on the purchase of Patriot systems, and this agreement is awaiting implementation at the financial, legal, and technical…

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) June 3, 2026

Whether or not the overnight strike caused significant damage, its strategic message was unmistakable. By reaching Kronstadt, one of Russia’s most historic naval bases, Ukraine demonstrated that even the Baltic Fleet is no longer beyond its reach. The attack highlights Kyiv’s growing long-range capabilities and signals that Russia’s efforts to protect both its regular fleet and its shadow oil-export network may face increasing pressure, even far from the front lines.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post Russia’s Baltic Fleet Successfully Attacked By Ukrainian Drones appeared first on The War Zone.

The unmistakable howl of the AV-8B Harrier II has been a soundtrack to U.S. Marine Corps aviation for more than four decades. From the deserts of the Middle East and Afghanistan to the decks of amphibious assault ships at sea, the aircraft’s ability to take off from short runways, operate from austere forward bases, and land vertically made it one of the most distinctive combat aircraft ever to wear American markings. Before then, its predecessor, the first-generation AV-8A Harrier, had pioneered the ‘jump jet’ in U.S. service, after entering Marine Corps service in 1971.

Now, that illustrious era has come to an end.

In a ceremony today, the Marine Corps said its official farewell to the AV-8B when its final operational Harrier II squadron, Marine Attack Squadron 223 (VMA-223), known as the “Bulldogs,” marked the retirement of the aircraft at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina.

The event closes a remarkable chapter in Marine aviation history. The Harrier’s departure marks more than the retirement of an aircraft; it represents the conclusion of a concept that shaped Marine air power for generations and helped define the Corps’ expeditionary character.

The Harrier was more than just another attack jet. It was the embodiment of the Marine Corps’ longstanding determination to bring airpower wherever Marines fought, regardless of whether a conventional airfield existed.

The Harrier’s story began long before the AV-8 entered U.S. military service. Derived from the British Hawker Siddeley Harrier jump jet, the aircraft was built around a revolutionary concept: vertical and short takeoff and landing, or V/STOL. Using swiveling engine nozzles, the aircraft could launch from improvised sites, roads, damaged airfields, and the decks of even relatively small ships. During the Cold War, when planners feared that traditional runways would be among the first targets destroyed in a major conflict, the concept had obvious appeal, but it was only the Harrier that saw real success as a V/STOL combat jet.

The Marine Corps embraced the idea early on. While the first-generation AV-8A proved the concept, the AV-8B Harrier II transformed it into a truly capable battlefield strike aircraft. The AV-8B featured a larger composite wing, improved performance, greater payload capacity, and significantly enhanced avionics. Later upgrades introduced night-attack capabilities and radar-equipped AV-8B Plus variants, keeping the aircraft relevant well into the 21st century. In recent years, all the Marine single-seaters still in service were ‘radar birds’ equipped with the AN/APG-65 radar that was ported over second-hand from F/A-18A/B Hornets and which conferred a significant air-to-air capability.

What made the Harrier exceptional was not simply its ability to hover. Its real value lay in its flexibility. Marine commanders could position Harriers close to frontline forces, reducing response times and increasing the effectiveness of close air support missions. The aircraft became a natural fit for Marine Expeditionary Units operating from amphibious assault ships, where its unique capabilities allowed fixed-wing tactical aviation to accompany Marines far from traditional airfields or aircraft carriers.

The Harrier quickly earned its combat credentials.

During Operation Desert Storm in 1991, Marine Harriers flew thousands of sorties in support of coalition ground forces. The aircraft demonstrated its ability to sustain a high operational tempo while flying in demanding conditions. In the decades that followed, Harriers participated in virtually every major Marine Corps combat operation, including missions over the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and against ISIS.

The post-9/11 period of relentless operations arguably became the Harrier’s defining period. The AV-8B was a natural fit for counterinsurgency warfare. Equipped with advanced targeting pods and precision-guided munitions, Marine Harriers became a common sight over Iraq and Afghanistan, where their ability to remain close to ground forces made them particularly valuable.

Yet, even as the Harrier continued proving its worth in combat, its future was becoming increasingly uncertain.

The aircraft’s age, maintenance demands, and limited growth potential eventually caught up with it. The jet was also notably demanding on its pilots, requiring a unique training syllabus to operate safely and efficiently.

Looking toward the demands of future potential conflicts against sophisticated adversaries, Marine aviation planners concluded that its next jump jet would require stealth, advanced sensors, networked warfare capabilities, and greater overall survivability than a fourth-generation attack aircraft could provide.

The answer was the F-35B Lightning II.

Like the Harrier, the F-35B possesses short takeoff and vertical landing capability. Unlike the Harrier, however, it combines that flexibility with stealth technology, sensor fusion, powerful electronic warfare systems, and the ability to operate as an intelligence-gathering node across the battlespace. For Marine aviation leaders, the F-35B offered a path to preserve the expeditionary advantages pioneered by the Harrier while dramatically expanding combat capability. You can read more about the changes the F-35B is bringing to Marine Corps tactical aviation here and here, as well as on-scene reporting of its operations from an improvised forward arming and refueling point, here.

Notably, however, the service is also procuring F-35C versions that can operate from big-deck aircraft carriers, as well as land bases.

One by one, Marine Harrier squadrons began converting to the F-35B. Aircraft were retired, maintainers retrained, and pilots transitioned to the new platform. The process accelerated as the Marine Corps pursued broader modernization efforts focused on preparing for future conflicts, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region.

The signs of the Harrier’s approaching retirement became increasingly visible. In 2024, the final two Marine pilots completed AV-8B qualification training, becoming the last aviators ever designated as Harrier pilots by the Corps. Their graduation marked the beginning of the end for the ‘Flying Leatherneck’ Harrier community.

The final operational chapter belonged to VMA-223, which carried the Harrier banner to the very end. Their deployment aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7) represented the last operational deployment of Marine Corps Harriers.

As part of the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group (ARG), the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit and its Harriers were part of Operation Southern Spear, the U.S. strikes on boats suspected of carrying illicit narcotics in the Caribbean. The Iwo Jima ARG was also in the region for the U.S. operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, earlier this year.

When the squadron completed its mission and the final aircraft returned home, the countdown to retirement entered its final phase.

For the Marines who flew and maintained the aircraft, the retirement is bittersweet.

The Harrier demanded respect. Its unique flight characteristics and vertical landing operations required exceptional skill from pilots. Maintainers often worked tirelessly to keep aging aircraft mission-ready. Yet those challenges helped create a close-knit community built around a platform unlike any other in American service.

In proving that fixed-wing tactical aviation can operate from challenging locales, the Marine Harrier continued a concept of operations that the service had pioneered in the Pacific in World War II. It gave Marine commanders unprecedented flexibility and reinforced the Corps’ expeditionary identity. Long before concepts such as distributed operations and expeditionary advanced bases became buzzwords, the Harrier proved that combat aircraft could operate from unconventional locations and support dispersed forces.

As the Harrier’s designated successor, it is fitting that the F-35B preserves the ability to operate from amphibious ships and austere locations while adding capabilities unimaginable when the AV-8B first entered service.

Still, there will never be another aircraft quite like the AV-8B, especially as far as charisma is concerned, and the type was a firm airshow favourite.

As the final Marine Corps Harriers make their last flights, they leave behind an enduring influence on Marine aviation doctrine and expeditionary warfare. While the United Kingdom gave up its Harrier IIs in a rushed retirement that you can read more about here, the AV-8B remains in frontline service in smaller numbers with Italy and Spain. It remains to be seen if a customer for former Marine Corps Harriers will come forward, but these aircraft remain capable and offer unique capabilities, something we have addressed in the past.

The Marine Corps jump jet era is over. But the impact of the Harrier, and the men and women who flew and maintained it, will continue to shape Marine aviation for years to come.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post The USMC’s AV-8B Harrier Has Flown Off Into The Sunset appeared first on The War Zone.

The pressure is mounting on the shaky ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran with an increasing pace of tit-for-tat strikes between the two foes and Iran’s suspension of peace talks after blaming Israel’s deepening advance into Lebanon. Exacerbating tensions, Tehran claimed it will “completely block” the Strait of Hormuz while threatening to close the Bab al-Mandeb Strait as well. Located at the mouth of the Red Sea, it is another critical regional chokepoint. The Strait of Hormuz has been largely closed to most traffic by Iran since not long after the launch of Epic Fury on Feb. 28.

All these actions are taking place against the backdrop of sputtering negotiations between the U.S. and Iran that have yet to achieve any tangible results.

“Given the continuation of the Zionist regime’s crimes in Lebanon and considering that Lebanon was among the preconditions for the ceasefire, and now this ceasefire has been violated on all fronts including Lebanon, the Iranian negotiation team will stop ‘dialogues and text exchanges through intermediaries,’” the IRGC-affiliated Tasnim news agency stated on Monday. The two sides had been talking through mediators in Pakistan and Qatar.

“Also, the resistance front and Iran have resolved to completely block the Strait of Hormuz and activate other fronts including the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, in order to punish the Zionists and their supporters,” the outlet added.

فوری | ایران تبادل پیام با آمریکا را در اعتراض به جنایات صهیونیست‌ها متوقف می‌کند

عزم نیروهای مسلح ایران و تمام محورهای جبهه مقاومت برای واکنش به جنایات صهیونیستها و گشودن جبهه‌های جدید

— خبرگزاری تسنیم – خبر فوری (@Tasnimbrk) June 1, 2026

Iran has been allowing some ships to transit the Strait of Hormuz through what it calls a system of fees paid for environmental and other services. Meanwhile, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) has helped guide the passage of about 70 commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, according to The New York Times. This involves communicating and coordinating with ships, not escorting them, CENTCOM told the publication. Most of these transits appear to be closer to Oman than Iran, the publication added.

There were no details provided by Iranian officials about how Iran would completely close the Strait of Hormuz or when such a move could begin.

According to the New York Times, citing U.S. officials, U.S. forces have guided approximately 70 commercial vessels, both ways, through the Strait of Hormuz in the last three weeks. Per the report, most of the vessels transited with their transponders off to avoid being targeted… pic.twitter.com/tfdN1YFeAp

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 31, 2026

Tasnim also did not offer specifics about Iran’s threat toward the Bab al-Mandeb Strait or what it could entail. However, the Houthi rebels of Yemen, an Iranian proxy group, waged a protracted 15-month campaign against shipping in that region starting in the fall of 2023. TWZ has previously highlighted concerns that the Houthis could resume these attacks on behalf of Iran in the current conflict. As we have noted, Houthi strikes in this area would add further global economic strain and place additional burden on U.S. forces.

With the Strait of Hormuz closed, Saudi Arabia is rerouting its oil exports through pipelines to the Red Sea. A disruption of that transit option could cause oil prices to rise much higher and more quickly than they already have, creating a cascading wave of financial impacts and shortages across the globe, and especially in Asia. Even if the Strait of Hormuz were opened today, it will still take months for the global economy to recover from the shock. Meanwhile, for Saudi Arabia, the simultaneous closure of both straits is a long-standing nightmare, a financial double-whammy.

Just the recent news of the kinetic exchanges between the U.S. and Iran and Tehran’s decision to call off talks has sent the price of oil once again shooting upwards.

After dropping to a little more than $91 per barrel partly in the wake of President Donald Trump’s unfounded claim he was lifting the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports, the price as of 11:20 a.m. EDT was once again closing in on $100 per barrel, according to OilPrice.com. It reached a high this year of more than $114 a barrel in early May.

Defending against renewed Houthi attacks could require military assets at a time when the U.S. is already heavily committed to Operation Epic Fury and its aftermath that has seen a significant amount of equipment destroyed or damaged and munitions expended. During the previous Houthi Red Sea campaign, the U.S. and allies deployed numerous warships, including the Eisenhower and Truman Carrier Strike Groups (CGS) to both defend against Houthi attacks and strike targets in Yemen. These operations resulted in a large expenditure of air defense and strike munitions, with Houthi capabilities remaining degraded, but intact after it was all over.

You can see video from some of those encounters below.

Despite the widespread publicity over Tehran’s new positions, Trump told NBC News on Monday that he ​had not heard from Iranians that ‌they were suspending talks. The president added that silence would be fine and he was ​willing to wait.

“I think we’ve been talking ​too much if you want to ⁠know the truth. I think going silent ​would be very good, and that could be ​for a long time,” the president proclaimed. “It doesn’t mean we’re going to ​go and start dropping bombs all ​over there. We’ll just go ‌silent. ⁠We’ll keep the blockade.”

“I think I can wait as long as they want,” Trump continued. “They’re losing a fortune.”

Trump told NBC News that he has not heard from Iran on its decision to suspend talks, saying, "I think we've been talking too much. I think going silent would be very good. It doesn't mean we’re going to go and start dropping bombs all over there. We’ll keep the blockade." https://t.co/ncw1G1Tko7

— Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) June 1, 2026

Meanwhile, amid all this turbulence, the U.S.-Iran negotiations remain in limbo.

Early Monday morning, Trump took to social media to claim “Iran really wants to make a deal, and it will be a good one for the U.S.A. and those that are with us.”

Iran really wants to make a deal, and it will be a good one for the U.S.A. and those that are with us. But don’t the Dumocrats, and various seemingly unpatriotic Republicans, understand that it is MUCH tougher for me to properly do my job and negotiate, when political hacks keep… pic.twitter.com/aqE6G0UKGv

— Commentary Donald J Trump Truth Social Posts On X (@TrumpTruthOnX) June 1, 2026

Iranians have pushed back on the notion that they are eager for or close to making a deal. You can read more about the reported terms and scope of the talks in our previous reporting here.

The status of US-Iran talks remained unclear Monday after Trump said negotiations were continuing, while Iranian state media reported Tehran had suspended indirect talks. https://t.co/dvHIHHATnU

— The Jerusalem Post (@Jerusalem_Post) June 1, 2026

As we mentioned earlier in this story, even before Iran reportedly called off talks, there was a heightened state of tension as the U.S. and Iran exchanged a new round of blows.

In a statement on X, U.S. Central Command said that at about 7:30 a.m. Tehran time on Monday,  “U.S. forces successfully intercepted two Iranian ballistic missiles targeting American forces based in Kuwait. These missiles were immediately defeated and no American personnel were harmed.”

The command added that it “remains vigilant and will continue to protect our forces from Iranian aggression while supporting the ongoing ceasefire.”

Last night at 11 p.m. ET, U.S. forces successfully intercepted two Iranian ballistic missiles targeting American forces based in Kuwait. These missiles were immediately defeated and no American personnel were harmed.

U.S. Central Command remains vigilant and will continue to…

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) June 1, 2026

Kuwait condemned the attack.

The Kuwaiti Foreign Ministry “affirms the State of Kuwait’s reservation of its full right to take whatever measures are necessary to preserve its security and defend its territories, holding Iran fully responsible for these heinous aggressions, in accordance with international law, the United Nations Charter, and the relevant Security Council resolutions,” it stated on X.

بيان صادر عن وزارة الخارجية
الاثنين 1 يونيو 2026

تُعرب وزارة الخارجية مجدداً عن إدانة واستنكار دولة الكويت، وبأشد العبارات، للهجمات الإيرانية الآثمة والمتكررة، لما تمثله من تصعيد خطير واعتداء مباشر على أمن دولة الكويت واستقرارها، وخرق فاضح لقواعد القانون الدولي وميثاق الأمم… pic.twitter.com/FsVqBu7phB

— وزارة الخارجية (@MOFAKuwait) June 1, 2026

Iran, for its part, claimed it launched strikes on an unnamed U.S. base in response to U.S. attacks on Iranian targets on Saturday and Sunday.

Iran’s IRGC says it struck the airbase used to launch a recent U.S. attack after a communications tower on Sirik Island was targeted earlier today.

The IRGC said designated targets were destroyed and warned any further attacks would bring a much stronger response. https://t.co/e2nS7ZgAHn pic.twitter.com/FPlPzcwK6D

— Egypt's Intel Observer (@EGYOSINT) June 1, 2026

In a post on X late Sunday, CENTCOM said it “conducted self-defense strikes on Iranian radar and command and control sites for drones in Goruk, Iran and Qeshm Island this weekend. The measured and deliberate strikes occurred on Saturday and Sunday in response to aggressive Iranian actions that included the shootdown of a U.S. MQ-1 drone that was operating over international waters. U.S. fighter aircraft swiftly responded by eliminating Iranian air defenses, a ground control station, and two one-way attack drones that posed clear threats to ships transiting regional waters.”

“No American service members were harmed,” the command stated. “CENTCOM will continue to protect U.S. assets and interests in response to unwarranted Iranian aggression during the ongoing ceasefire.”

UPDATE: 5:43 PM EDT –

Netanyahu says “he spoke this evening with President Trump and told him that if Hezbollah does not stop firing at our cities and citizens – Israel will strike terrorist targets in Beirut,” according to the Israeli prime minister’s office. “This position of ours remains unchanged. Concurrently, the IDF will continue to operate as planned in southern Lebanon.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:
“I spoke this evening with President Trump and told him that if Hezbollah does not stop firing at our cities and citizens – Israel will strike terrorist targets in Beirut.

This position of ours remain unchanged.

Concurrently, the IDF will…

— Prime Minister of Israel (@IsraeliPM) June 1, 2026

The conversation came after Trump claimed on Truth Social that: “I had a conversation with Bibi Netanyahu today, asking him not to go into a major raid of Beirut, Lebanon. He turned his Troops around. Thank you Bibi! I also had a conversation with Representatives of the Leaders of Hezbollah, and they agreed to stop shooting at Israel, and its soldiers. Likewise, Israel agreed to stop shooting at them. Let’s see how long that lasts — Hopefully it will be for ETERNITY.”

"I had a very productive call with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, of Israel, and there will be no Troops going to Beirut… I had a very good call with Hezbollah, and they agreed that all shooting will stop." – President Donald J. Trump pic.twitter.com/DJhysrmVnO

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) June 1, 2026

Meanwhile, Hezbollah continued firing on Israeli troops.

“Following the sirens that sounded a short while ago in the area of Metula, a launch was identified falling adjacent to IDF soldiers operating in southern Lebanon,” IDF stated on Telegram. “No injuries were reported.”

Other sirens heard in northern Israel, meanwhile, were determined to be false alarms, according to IDF.

BREAKING: Incoming rocket sirens sound in northern Israel, hours after Trump announced Hezbollah agreed to cease attacks on Israeli territory. pic.twitter.com/visWa1gVa4

— Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) June 1, 2026

UPDATES

As we noted earlier in our story, Iran is using the escalation of the Israeli-Hezbollah fight as a reason to walk away from peace talks, at least for now.

The move came after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday ordered attacks on what he called “terror targets” in the Hezbollah stronghold of the Dahieh section of Beirut. 

“Together with the Minister of Defense, I have instructed the IDF to strike terrorist targets in Beirut,” Netanyahu announced. “There will not be a situation in which Hezbollah attacks our cities and our citizens, and its terrorist headquarters in Beirut, in Dahiyeh, remains out of bounds.”

The Israeli leader added that “we are continuing to deepen our operational activity on the ground in southern Lebanon and are eliminating Hezbollah strongholds. Hezbollah is on the run. We are determined to restore security to the residents of the north, just as we did for the residents of the south.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:
"Together with the Minister of Defense, I have instructed the IDF to strike terrorist targets in Beirut. There will not be a situation in which Hezbollah attacks our cities and our citizens, and its terrorist headquarters in Beirut, in Dahiyeh,… pic.twitter.com/g93PGk19aY

— Prime Minister of Israel (@IsraeliPM) June 1, 2026

Netanyahu’s statement followed Israel proclaiming that it is operating north of the Litani River, a traditional demarcation line for Israeli incursions into Lebanon. Advancing north of the river marks a large escalation and the first time Israel has been that far from its border since withdrawing from southern Lebanon in 2000.

The IDF on Sunday announced it captured Beaufort Castle on Sunday. Overlooking the Beaufort Ridge on the Litani, the castle was once home to Crusaders, seized by them in 1139.

Footage of IDF forces taking Beaufort Castle in southern Lebanon. pic.twitter.com/D8Vr0qVfQH

— Amit Segal (@AmitSegal) May 31, 2026

Netanyahu claimed the latest battle over the ancient structure was a victory for Israel.

“The capture of Beaufort is a dramatic stage and a dramatic change in the policy we are leading,” Netanyahu postulated. “We have broken the barrier of fear. We are taking the initiative. We are operating on all fronts – in Syria, in Gaza, in Lebanon. We have established security zones beyond our borders to protect our communities.”

הלוחמים הגיבורים שלנו כבשו את הבופור ואנחנו ממשיכים עד שנשלים את המשימה pic.twitter.com/j0oBy2z9cG

— Benjamin Netanyahu – בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) May 31, 2026

An unspecified aircraft fired an AGM-114 Hellfire missile into the engine room of a Gambia-flagged merchant vessel trying to run the blockade, CENTCOM said in an X post on Sunday.

CENTCOM forces “observed M/V Lian Star transiting international waters toward an Iranian port on the Gulf of Oman and issued more than 20 warnings while informing the vessel it was in violation of the U.S. blockade” on May 29, the command stated. “A U.S. aircraft disabled the vessel by firing a Hellfire missile into the ship’s engine room after Lian Star’s crew failed to comply. The ship is no longer transiting to Iran.”

Since the blockade went into effect April 13, “U.S. forces have disabled five commercial vessels and redirected 116 to fully enforce the blockade as a ceasefire with Iran remains in effect,” CENTCOM added.

Other ships have been stopped from running the blockade by having bombs dropped down their smoke stacks, fighters firing 20mm cannon shells at their rudders and inert rounds from a destroyer’s five-inch gun blasting their engine rooms.

A U.S. military aircraft fired a Hellfire missile into a ship’s engine room to prevent it from breaking through the American blockade of Iranian ports. U.S. forces issued more than 20 warnings to the Gambia-flagged ship.

Read more at: https://t.co/PHz1HnlxHk

— Stars and Stripes (@starsandstripes) June 1, 2026

Further highlighting the ongoing danger to shipping in and around the Strait of Hormuz, a cargo vessel transiting the Gulf about 40 nautical miles southeast of Umm Qasr, Iraq, has been hit by an unknown projectile on its starboard side, causing a large explosion, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported on Monday.

UKMTO said it was unaware of any immediate environmental impact.

Since the launch of Epic Fury, UKMTO has received 53 reports of incidents affecting vessels operating in and around the Arabian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz (SOH), and Gulf of Oman. There have been 29 reported attacks, 22 reported suspicious activities and two reported hijackings.

UKMTO WARNING 063-26

Click here to view the full warninghttps://t.co/RyUM9BRf69#MaritimeSecurity #MarSec pic.twitter.com/tZtykTLbyN

— UKMTO Operations Centre (@UK_MTO) June 1, 2026

Iran claims it produced a new fast attack speedboat for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN). Dubbed the Rajab 27th, the semi-official Iranian Mehr News Agency described the vessel as a “fast attack watercraft featuring a trimaran hull design, which enhances stability and maneuverability in challenging maritime conditions.”

Mehr also said that the Rajab 27th is “capable of launching two sea-based cruise missiles with a range of 700 kilometers.”

The vessel, stated Mehr, is designed to conduct operations in sea states with wave heights of up to nearly 10 feet, the outlet added.

The unveiling of the new speedboat “highlights the continued development of the IRGC Navy’s fast-attack and missile-equipped maritime capabilities, which play a key role in Iran’s naval defense strategy and operations in southern waters,” Mehr posited.

TWZ cannot independently verify the Iranian claim, though it should be noted that the IRGC has invested heavily in its fleet of small boats for decades as TWZ has explored in the past. In addition to being armed with anti-ship cruise missiles, as well as artillery rockets and other weapons, they can also be used to lay naval mines. While the president claimed that 159 Iranian ships have been destroyed, the IRGC still has a large number of these small vessels.

The images below, taken during the unveiling ceremony, show glimpses of the Rajab 27th with what appear to be a missile container on either side of the boat.

Iran also claims it has restored gas production at three offshore platforms in the South Pars gas field, the head of the Pars Oil and Gas Company has told state media. As we previously reported, the facility was attacked by Israel in March.

Touraj Dehqani said on Sunday that the platforms had not been damaged in the attacks, Iran’s official IRNA news agency claimed.

“Dehqani said production ⁠from the three platforms ⁠was being ⁠routed to other processing plants in the region while repairs ‌continued at damaged facilities,” Al Jazeera noted.

Iran has restored gas production at three offshore platforms ⁠in the South Pars gas field that had been forced to halt output after Israeli attacks disrupted processing capacity ⁠at some onshore facilities, Iranian state media reports citing the chief executive ⁠of the Pars… pic.twitter.com/SGyTCRa2yH

— Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) May 31, 2026

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post U.S.-Iran Ceasefire On The Brink After Tit-For-Tat Attacks (Updated) appeared first on The War Zone.

Here’s TWZ’s weekly carrier tracker monitoring America’s flattop fleet, including Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) and Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), using publicly available open-source information. Given the carrier picture is largely unchanged compared to last week, this week’s tracker highlights the big-deck amphibious fleet.

Much of America’s fleet of nine amphibious assault ships is hard at work as the U.S. opts to replace the Iwo Jima ARG in Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) with a “sub-optimized” Littoral Combat Force (LCF). The LCF appears to be the first deployment that embodies the Navy’s new more flexible deployment strategy, which could have wider impacts across the fleet in the future. “It’s the way to have force multiplication, to punch bigger than yourself, and that’s done through tailored offsets,” Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle said at SNA earlier this year about the new tailored deployments concept. “That whole thing builds a way to present forces to allow me to do more with less.”

The 24th MEU, operating under the designation LCF-24, deployed to SOUTHCOM and replaced the Iwo Jima ARG. “Distinct from a standard Amphibious Ready Group/MEU deployment, LCF-24 is a purpose-built MAGTF engineered for distributed operations,” SOUTHCOM explained in a statement. The Marine Air-Ground Task Force, with more than 1,300 Marines and Sailors, will operate from both shore-based nodes and aboard Fort Lauderdale, and is certified to “execute a wide array of mission essential tasks, including but not limited to Quick Reaction Force operations such as embassy reinforcement and the tactical recovery of aircraft [and] personnel, while standing ready to support disaster relief activities.”

America’s forward-deployed crisis response forces, the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, is deployed to the @Southcom Area of Responsibility as Littoral Combat Force-24.@USMC | @USNavy #24thmeu #lcf24 #opsouthernspear #magtf #caribops #southcom pic.twitter.com/vAsHFChBTQ

— 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit (@The24MEU) May 29, 2026

Amphibious assault ship USS Boxer departed Singapore on May 30 after spending 12 days in port. “USS Boxer (LHD 4) pulled into Sembawang, Singapore, May 19, for maintenance and resupply,” a U.S. Navy spokesperson told TWZ. Notably, the nearly two-week stop coincided with a visit from Sec. Hegseth, who spoke at the Shangri-La Dialogue over the weekend. Boxer transited the Singapore Strait eastbound and entered the South China Sea, according to ship spotters and public AIS data.

USS Boxer (LHD 4) Wasp-class amphibious assault ship leaving Singapore – May 30, 2026 SRC: INST- dc_ah pic.twitter.com/JOeL49ReD5

— WarshipCam (@WarshipCam) May 30, 2026

The three-ship Boxer ARG disaggregated despite initial reports the group was headed to the Middle East to join the war. Dock landing ship USS Comstock is operating in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility (AOR), alongside the three-ship Tripoli ARG, enforcing the ongoing blockade of Iranian ports. Amphibious transport dock USS Portland was last spotted training in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) AOR.

A U.S. Sailor aboard USS Comstock (LSD 45) observes a commercial vessel while enforcing the U.S. blockade against Iran, May 21. U.S. forces have redirected 97 commercial vessels and disabled 4 since the start of the blockade. pic.twitter.com/1Zgsoykhy4

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) May 22, 2026

USS Iwo Jima and the embarked 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) are heading home after an almost 10-month deployment in the SOUTHCOM AOR, and were spotted today off Topsail Beach, North Carolina. USS San Antonio returned to Norfolk in late April, while USS Fort Lauderdale remains in the Caribbean to support the recently announced LCF-24 and Operation Southern Spear.

U.S. Marines with Maritime Raid Force, Littoral Combat Force-24, approach a UH-1Y Venom helicopter assigned to Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM) 365 (Reinforced), @The24MEU, during a Maritime Interdiction Operation Full Mission Profile rehearsal aboard San Antonio-class… pic.twitter.com/vbSEEfUpAb

— U.S. Southern Command (@Southcom) May 30, 2026

Back stateside, USS Kearsarge is in New Orleans for Sail 250, a “global gathering of tall ships and military ships to celebrate the 250th Anniversary of the founding of the U.S.” After completing landing deck certifications earlier this year, Kearsarge has been working up off the east coast and participating in public events. USS Makin Island is training in preparation for an upcoming deployment and completed Surface Warfare Advanced Tactical Training (SWATT) on May 28. USS Essex returned to homeport in San Diego after a week-long visit for L.A. Fleet Week. USS America, USS Bataan, and USS Wasp are, or have recently been, in maintenance.

https://t.co/4mVCaF4HEX pic.twitter.com/EhXXQavDfS

— SA Defensa (@SA_Defensa) May 31, 2026

Note: Positions are general approximations.

Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@teamrecurrent.io

The post Littoral Combat Force Takes Up Station In Caribbean Under Navy’s New Deployment Concept appeared first on The War Zone.

President Donald Trump on Friday announced he was lifting the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports enacted last month. The move comes amid media reports and administration messaging that Washington and Tehran appear to be drawing closer to a deal that could lead to ending the conflict. Iranian officials have rejected that notion. TWZ cannot confirm either side’s assertions.

“Ships caught in the Strait due to our amazing and unprecedented Naval Blockade, which will now be lifted, may start the process of ‘heading home!’” Trump proclaimed on Truth Social, referring to the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic chokepoint has been largely closed to most traffic by Iran since not long after the launch of Epic Fury on Feb. 28.

pic.twitter.com/kTepK9K1Lh

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) May 29, 2026

Trump’s comments may reflect a still unsigned Memorandum of Agreement with Iran that paves the way for reopening the Strait and is designed to create negotiating space to deal with the larger issues of Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

“Iran must agree that they will never have a Nuclear Weapon or Bomb,” the U.S. leader added. “The Hormuz Strait must be immediately open, no tolls, for unrestricted shipping traffic, in both directions. All water mines (bombs), if any, will be terminated (we have removed, through detonation, numerous such mines with our great underwater mine sweepers. Iran will complete the immediate removal and/or detonation of any mines that are left, which will not be many!).”

Last month, the head of U.S. Central Command stated that he was deploying uncrewed underwater vehicles (UUVs) to the region for the counter-mine effort. UUVs are a critical part of modern minesweeping operations.

“The Strait of Hormuz is an international sea passage and an essential trade corridor that supports regional and global economic prosperity,” Adm. Brad Cooper said in an April 11 media release. “Additional U.S. forces, including underwater drones, will join the clearance effort in the coming days.”

The Navy has various types of uncrewed undersea vehicles, remotely operated vehicles and an airborne mine neutralization system to perform mine sweeping operations. You can read more about these systems and how they work in our story about minesweepers here.

Trump ordered the blockade on April 13 to create economic pressure on Iran by limiting its ability to export oil or import needed weapons or other materiel. 

“As of May 29, 115 commercial vessels have been redirected to ensure no commerce enters or leaves Iranian ports,” CENTCOM said in a post Friday morning about an hour before Trump made his announcement about the blockade.

U.S. forces continue to enforce the blockade against Iran. As of May 29, 115 commercial vessels have been redirected to ensure no commerce enters or leaves Iranian ports. pic.twitter.com/ioKe4A6p7T

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) May 29, 2026

Trump did not spell out the mechanics for ending the blockade and CENTCOM declined to say what Trump’s announcement means for the assets arrayed around the region to enforce it. The command referred us to the White House, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It is also unclear why Trump would lift the blockade at such a critical time, before any agreement is signed. According to various media reports, such a move would have been in conjunction with Iran easing its restrictions on Strait shipping. However, Iranian officials have insisted that has yet to happen. In essence, the U.S. lifting the blockade on Iran would do nothing for mariners trapped in the Persian Gulf unless Iran also lifts its threats to attack ships transiting the waterway without its permission.

According to Axios, the memorandum between Iran and the U.S. calls for the following:

• The U.S. naval blockade will also be lifted, but that will happen in proportion to the restoration of commercial shipping, a U.S. official said. The U.S. would also issue some sanctions waiver to allow Iran to sell oil freely.
• The MOU will include an Iranian commitment not to pursue a nuclear weapon, the officials said. It will also state that the first issues to be negotiated during the 60-day window will be how to dispose of Iran’s highly enriched uranium and how to address Iranian enrichment.

The U.S. will commit to discuss sanctions relief and the release of frozen Iranian funds as part of the negotiations, the publication added.

• The MOU will also include a discussion of a mechanism to help Iran start receiving goods and humanitarian aid.
• The MOU would also state that the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon would end — an issue on which Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have had at least one tense discussion.

In addition to stating that he lifted the blockade, Trump also claimed in his Truth Social post that the U.S. and Iran reached an understanding on Tehran’s supply of highly enriched uranium.

“The enriched material, sometimes referred to as ‘Nuclear Dust,’ which is buried deep underground with virtually collapsed mountains, caused by our powerful B2 Bomber attack 11 months ago, sitting on top of it, will be unearthed by the United States (which, it is agreed, is the only Country, along with China, with the mechanical capability of doing so!), in close coordination and conjunction with the Islamic Republic of Iran, plus the International Atomic Energy Agency, and DESTROYED. No money will be exchanged, until further notice,” Trump asserted. “Other items, of far less importance, have been agreed to.”

Iranian officials have rejected Trump’s claims.

“No final understanding has been reached between Iran and the US so far,” according to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-connected Tasnim News Agency.

“Trump’s post follows his usual pattern of one-sided, self-aggrandizing statements,” the outlet added. “His claims about lifting the naval blockade should be viewed with skepticism—and even if implemented, it would merely mark the cessation of one ceasefire violation, as the blockade should never have been imposed in the first place.”

“Trump’s nuclear claims are baseless, as no details on that issue have been discussed,” Tasnim posited. “His insistence on not releasing Iran’s blocked funds only deepens Tehran’s doubts about Washington’s seriousness.”

No final understanding has been reached between Iran and the US so far, according to Tasnim News Agency.

According to the report, Trump's post follows his usual pattern of one-sided, self-aggrandizing statements. pic.twitter.com/bRDZfjGT7K

— Press TV (@PressTV) May 29, 2026

In his post, Trump said that he “will be meeting now, in the Situation Room, to make a final determination,” on the agreement with Iran.

This is a developing story.

UPDATE: 2:36 PM EDT –

Trump “left a two-hour meeting on a possible deal with Iran without making a decision,” The New York Times reported, citing a senior administration official.

The administration “believes it is close to an agreement but there are still certain matters being debated including the unfreezing of funds for the Iranians,” the newspaper added.

NYT: "President Trump’s meeting in the Situation Room lasted about two hours, but the president did not reach a decision on any new deal with #Iran, according to a senior administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity to speak about internal deliberations.

"The…

— Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) May 29, 2026

In the wake of Trump’s claims and media reports about negotiations with Iran, some positive economic news is emerging.

“Stocks rose in afternoon trading on Wall Street Friday, adding to the all-time highs they set a day earlier,” CBS News reported. “The S&P 500 rose 0.2% Friday. The index is coming off six gains in a row and is headed for a ninth straight winning week, which would be the longest such streak since 2023.”

The Dow Jones Industrial Average “rose 382 points, or 0.8%, as of 12:01 p.m. Eastern,” the outlet added. “The Nasdaq composite rose 0.2%. Every major index is on track for records and to close out May with solid gains.”

Of course, all that could change should talks break down and major hostilities resume.

"U.S. stock markets are surging toward new records as of May 29, 2026, driven by breakthrough reports of a potential $300 billion peace and reconstruction framework between the U.S. and Iran"

Well?https://t.co/q9OoxkZYhz

— Don Keyhoty (@dkearnsjr) May 29, 2026

UPDATE: 3:24 PM EDT –

The United Arab Emirates “carried out dozens of airstrikes against Iran beginning in the early days of the war and continuing through the day after the April cease-fire was announced,” The Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter. This represents a “deeper involvement than was previously known in the air campaign led by the U.S. and Israel,” the publication added.

The attacks were conducted in coordination with the U.S. and Israel, both of which provided intelligence, the people said. “They included targets on Qeshm and Abu Musa islands in the Strait of Hormuz; Bandar Abbas; the oil refinery on Lavan island in the Persian Gulf; and the Asaluyeh petrochemical complex,” the Journal continued.

During the Iran War, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) carried out dozens of airstrikes against Iran in coordination with Israel and the United States, beginning in the early days of the war and continuing through the day after the ongoing ceasefire was announced, targeting both… pic.twitter.com/FvyIYVw2qk

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 29, 2026

UPDATE: 3:47 PM EDT –

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf says “Tehran secures its diplomatic advantages through missiles rather than talks,” according to the official Iranian Press TV news outlet.

قاليباف: لا نكسب الامتيازات عبر المفاوضات بل نكسبها عبر الصواريخ#أخبار pic.twitter.com/60reuTxETb

— قناة المسيرة (@TvAlmasirah) May 29, 2026

UPDATE: 5:03 PM EDT –

NBC News is reporting that the U.S. military “has not confirmed that Iran placed mines in the Strait of Hormuz despite continued searches of the critical waterway.” The network cited two U.S. officials and a person familiar with the matter, adding to growing confusion around the war.

Around the start of the war in February, “U.S. intelligence officials believed that Iran placed mines on the southern side of the strait either before the conflict began or in its early days, the sources said,” NBC added. “They said there have also been numerous intelligence reports from the United States and its allies about Iran placing mines in various locations in the strait.”

Military searches using underwater drones, water robots and manned and unmanned aircraft have found some objects that could be mines, but none have been definitively identified, the outlet continued.

“If anything, the threat has been far less robust than we had feared,” the person familiar told NBC.

The lack of confirmed evidence “raises key questions about the war, which is set to enter its fourth month,” the network posited.

U.S. has not confirmed that Iran placed mines in the Strait of Hormuz, sources say
The U.S. military has not definitively identified any mines during repeated searches of the waterway, raising questions about how ‘robust’ the threat may be, sources say.https://t.co/als5U3naYI

— Giovanni Staunovo (@staunovo) May 29, 2026

UPDATE: 6:20 PM EDT –

The White House replied to our query about when Trump will make a decision on the MOU with Iran.

“The Situation Room meeting has concluded and lasted approximately two hours,” a White House official told us. “President Trump will only make a deal that is good for America and satisfies his redlines. Iran can never possess a nuclear weapon.”

UPDATE: 7:00 PM EDT –

U.S. Navy Central Command (NAVCENT) issued guidance Friday afternoon that the “military blockade of Iranian ports remains in effect restricting all traffic inbound and outbound from these ports. Vessels violating the blockade by conducting or participating in ship-to-ship transfers are also in violation of the blockade.”

Enforcement actions include “disabling and destructive fires upon vessels who do not demonstrate immediate compliance with blockading forces,” NAVCENT stated. “Vessels subject to blockade enforcement should continue compliance with direction from blockading forces. Failure to immediately comply may result in rapid escalation to disabling or destructive fire.”

In addition, aircraft and ships traversing the identified area “are advised to navigate with caution and avoid navigation within this zone, if possible,” the NAVCENT notice explained. “The blockade is being enforced strictly and rapidly. While the maritime warning zone is not intended to impede neutral or merchant shipping, vessels should make their intentions clear, particularly demonstrating that they are not intending to visit/depart from an Iranian port. If vessels do not comply with blockading forces immediately upon being contacted, they risk being fired upon. Vessels are free to navigate international waters.”

However, “the establishment of the warning zone is intended to provide notice that dangerous military operations are taking place from within these locations and the U.S. Navy cannot guarantee the safety of neutral or merchant shipping,” NAVCENT additionally cautioned. “Ships or aircraft traversing the area that threaten U.S. naval forces may be subject to proportional measures in self-defense. Ships and aircraft should maintain a listening watch on VHF channel 16 and be prepared to respond to any hails or queries from U.S. military forces.”

In addition to the potential use of self-defense measures, “aircraft and vessels may put themselves at risk from misidentification by forces hostile to the U.S. Recommend aircraft and ships keep clear of the designated area. Vessels continuing to transit the areas should maintain a standoff of 30 nautical miles from U.S. units to reduce risk of being mistaken as a threat.”

JMIC Advisory Note: 006-26 (Blockade Reminder)

Click here to view the full advisory notehttps://t.co/Hp4vuJbzue#MaritimeSecurity #MarSec pic.twitter.com/jgc9HPgz0S

— UKMTO Operations Centre (@UK_MTO) May 29, 2026

The Friday afternoon NAVCENT notification followed one issued around noon warning that military operations “will be conducted within the area north of the Musandam Peninsula in the Strait of Hormuz (SOH).”

The peninsula, part of the United Arab Emirates, juts out into the Strait about 50 miles from the southern coast of Iran and about 30 miles southeast of Iran’s Qeshm Island. It is the main chokepoint in the Strait.

“Iran continues to attempt illegal control of the Strait of Hormuz, to include dangerous and illegal mining that places ships and mariners at risk,” NAVCENT warned. “The United States is committed to freedom of navigation. As a result, the U.S. Navy Central Command is providing notice to mariners and airmen that dangerous military activities will be taking place.”

JMIC Advisory Note: 005-26 / May 29 2026

Click here to view the full advisory notehttps://t.co/5Betnixlk7#MaritimeSecurity #MarSec pic.twitter.com/pEAvhEJOd3

— UKMTO Operations Centre (@UK_MTO) May 29, 2026

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post Trump Declares He Is Lifting The Naval Blockade On Iran (Updated) appeared first on The War Zone.

Members of Congress are moving to push the U.S. Navy to develop a containerized version of its High-Energy Laser with Integrated Optical Dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) system. Containerized designs could help accelerate the service’s fielding of laser directed energy weapons on a wider array of ships, providing added layers of close-in defense. The Navy has already been experimenting with palletized designs as part of its larger laser development efforts, which have faced continued hurdles in recent years.

An early draft of the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2027 Fiscal Year, would authorize the addition of $5 million to the Navy’s budget for work on a containerized HELIOS. It would also add $2.5 million for a “Containerized Maritime High Energy Laser Weapon System,” which does not otherwise appear to be mentioned, at least by that name, in the service’s proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year. The House Armed Services Committee released this draft NDAA earlier this week.

The Navy’s proposed budget for the next fiscal cycle does already include a request for $75.6 million for a separate Joint Laser Weapon System (JLWS) effort. The development of a containerized 150-kilowatt-class laser directed energy weapon, along with work toward 300 and 500-kilowatt-class designs, are part of the stated plans for JLWS. It’s unclear whether the Maritime High Energy Laser Weapon System mentioned in the draft NDAA is related to JLWS.

HELIOS, which the Navy has also designated Mk 5 Mod 0, is a 60-kilowatt-class laser directed energy weapon. At that power level, it is able to destroy or at least damage certain targets, such as drones or small boats, a capability that has now been demonstrated in multiple tests. There has been talk in the past about scaling HELIOS’s power rating up to 150 kilowatts.

Currently, the Navy only has one HELIOS laser, installed on the Arleigh Burke class destroyer USS Preble. Despite integration on an operational warship, the service describes this system as a “Non-Program of Record (POR) Research & Development (R&D) asset” in its most recent budget request.

As an aside, another laser system, the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN), is currently found on seven other Arleigh Burke class destroyers. An eighth example was integrated on the USS Kidd, but has been temporarily removed while that ship is completing a two-year maintenance availability. That ODIN system is currently being used for land-based training at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme Division, in California. Designed as a “dazzler,” ODIN is lower-powered than HELIOS, and is intended to blind or confuse electro-optical and/or imaging infrared systems, including seekers on incoming munitions, sending them off course rather than shooting them down.

As noted, HELIOS offers demonstrated capability now, and a containerized version is something the Navy might be able to field more widely in the near-term. This, in turn, could help provide a bridge to future developments under JLWS. Containerized systems, as well as palletized ones, inherently offer valuable flexibility, especially in a maritime context. Integration can be more readily achieved on a broad array of ships – including carriers, amphibious warfare ships, sea base-type vessels, and sealift ships, as well as certain surface combatants – as long as there is sufficient deck space and available power.

In April, the Navy disclosed a test of a palletized version of AeroVironment’s LOCUST laser counter-drone system on the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush, underscoring exactly this kind of flexibility. For that test, AeroVironment leveraged a palletized configuration of LOCUST it had already developed for the U.S. Army. However, various changes were made to adapt it to shipboard use, including “hardened electronics for salt fog, humidity, vibration, and long deployments” and the addition of “stabilization hardware to manage ship motion,” according to a company press release.

Counter-drone defense has emerged as a critical priority for the Navy, both at sea and on land. This has only been underscored by experience gained during the latest conflict with Iran, as well as operations in and around the Red Sea in recent years. The service has already been adding counter-drone systems that use physical interceptors as their effectors to an ever larger number of ships, something TWZ has been closely tracking.

When it comes to a containerized version of HELIOS, which could also be used to bolster defenses ashore, it would benefit from having been developed for maritime use from the start. It might still be less hardened against environmental conditions, as well as battle damage, than its more deeply integrated counterpart on the USS Preble. There are also questions about how the system might be integrated onto the host ship and its combat system, if it has one at all.

In general, as long as there is sufficient power and cooling capacity, laser directed energy weapons like HELIOS offer essentially unlimited magazine depth. This offers cost benefits, especially when compared to employing traditional surface-to-air interceptors. As one comparative example, the latest versions of the RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM), which many Navy ships are armed with for point defense, have unit costs in the $1 million range. All of this could also help in addressing long-standing concerns about the sufficiency of stockpiles of critical anti-air interceptors (as well as other munitions), and the ability to readily replenish those inventories, which have only been reinforced by the latest conflict with Iran.

Laser directed energy weapons do also have limitations, especially when employed in the maritime domain, as TWZ has highlighted in the past:

“A single laser can only engage one target at once. As the beam gets further away from the source, its power also drops, just as a result of it having to propagate through the atmosphere. This can be further compounded by the weather and other environmental factors like smoke and dust. More power is then needed to produce suitable effects at appreciable distances. Adaptive optics are used to help overcome atmospheric distortion to a degree. Altogether, laser directed energy weapons generally remain relatively short-range systems.”

“In addition, laser directed energy weapons, especially sensitive optics, present inherent reliability challenges for use in real-world military operations. Shipboard use adds rough sea states and saltwater exposure to the equation. There is also the matter of needing to keep everything properly cooled, which creates additional power generation and other demands.”

Overall, the Navy’s current top leadership is already very supportive of containerized systems and directed energy weapons, including both lasers and high-power microwave types. In March, Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Daryl Caudle, the service’s top officer, unveiled a formal Containerized Capability Campaign.

“From towed-array-systems, to drone swarms, to electronic attack systems, to high-powered lasers … I want to containerize everything,” Caudle said at the annual McAleese Defense Programs Conference in March. “Tailored capabilities give our combatant commanders something they value above all else: options.”

Containerized systems are particularly central to the Navy’s current vision for future fleets of USVs, as well as its new FF(X) frigates.

Laser directed energy weapons are also central to the current plan for the Navy’s future Trump class battleships, but they are expected to be deeply integrated into that design rather than containerized. Adm. Caudle has been outspoken more broadly in his view that laser-directed energy weapons are key to bolstering close-in defenses on his service’s warships going forward, including against the growing threat posed by drones.

“My thesis research at [the] Naval Post Graduate School was on directed energy and nuclear weapons,” the CNO told TWZ and other outlets at a roundtable at the Surface Navy Association’s (SNA) annual symposium in January. “This is my goal, if it’s in line of sight of a ship, that the first solution that we’re using is directed energy.”

In particular, “point defense needs to shift to directed energy,” Caudle added at that time. “It has an infinite magazine.”

Even before assuming his current role as CNO, Caudle has been a vocal supporter of Navy directed energy weapon developments. At the same time, as mentioned, the service has faced continued stumbling blocks to more widespread fielding of these capabilities. This is, in many ways, reflected just in HELIOS, which remains a largely experimental effort despite years of testing and previous talk about expanding it into a broader operational capability. The Navy has integrated other one-off lasers onto other ships in the past. This includes the Laser Weapon System Demonstrator Mk 2 Mod 0 installed for a time on the San Antonio class amphibious warfare ship USS Portland, which is seen being tested in this video below.

Several U.S. Air Force and Army laser directed energy programs have also been realigned, curtailed, or outright cancelled in recent years due to technical hurdles and other factors.

Despite it adding funding for containerized system development, the draft NDAA that the House Armed Services Committee also proposes to cut $5 million from the Navy’s Directed Energy and Electric Weapon Systems line item due to what it simply describes as “unjustified growth.” The bill is also very likely to change in substantial ways in the coming weeks and months before it is ever put to a full vote, let alone sent to President Trump’s desk.

Whether or not the extra funding for a containerized version of HELIOS, or the Maritime High Energy Laser Weapon System, comes across in the end, the Navy is already heavily committed to new developments in this arena despite the continued challenges.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Containerized Variant Of Navy’s Drone-Swatting HELIOS Laser Being Pushed By Congress appeared first on The War Zone.

The environmental organization iSea, in collaboration with the Hellenic Ornithological Society and the Municipality of Lemnos, has launched an ambitious project to restore the Eastern Mediterranean’s largest marine meadow—a 140-square-kilometer Posidonia sanctuary off the coast of Lemnos, widely known as the region’s “Amazon.”

This massive underwater ecosystem serves as a vital carbon sink, holding over 270,000 tons of stored carbon dioxide and effectively absorbing the annual emissions produced by the vehicles of an entire small city.

To mark World Environment Day 2026, the project partners are celebrating the completion of the initiative’s pilot phase under the “Reviving Lemnos” program, which successfully transplanted more than 250 posidonia shoots.

A Vital Marine Ecosystem

Posidonia oceanica is not an algae, but a flowering marine plant (seagrass) that forms dense underwater meadows. These meadows act as a crucial sanctuary for an abundance of marine life. While most people recognize it from the long, brown “seaweed” leaves that wash ashore, its true value lies beneath the surface.

The Lemnos marine meadow thrives at depths of up to 30 meters and stretches over 20 kilometers long, extending beyond the boundaries of the Natura 2000 Protected Area and into international waters. According to data from iSea, this single ecosystem hosts more than 66 species of marine organisms.

Looking Ahead: The “Reviving Lemnos” Project

During this pilot phase, the transplanted shoots have been secured inside protective metal cages to shield them until they mature, and they will remain under close scientific monitoring.

This initial phase sets the foundation for a much larger effort: restoring more than 10,000 posidonia rhizomes across a 400-square-meter area over the coming years.

“The knowledge gained from monitoring this pilot application will provide a valuable roadmap for completing our restoration actions and ensuring the long-term success of ecosystem conservation in Lemnos,” said Nikoletta Sidiropoulou, Project Manager at iSea.

The “Reviving Lemnos” project is one of seven large-scale initiatives funded by the international Endangered Landscapes & Seascapes Programme.

Related: Posidonia Seagrass Meadows in Greece Reveal their Secrets