Latest news with #F-22s
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Air Force F-16's collision with ducks in Alaska ended in ‘flameout landing'
The white-winged scoter is a northern migratory waterfowl — a duck — with what the ornithologist at call 'velvety black' feathers, an 'upturned comma of white around the eye' and an 'orange-tipped bill.' It nests in northern lakes across Canada, where it feeds on freshwater mussels, diving underwater to find them, holding its breath for up to a minute. Though rarely seen in the lower 48 U.S. states, the scoter's migratory range extends as far north as the river valleys of interior Alaska, which is probably why several of the ducks were lurking on the departure end of Eielson Air Force Base's Runway 32 on the afternoon of May 28, 2024 — prime migration season — as a flight of four F-16Cs lifted off for a routine training flight. An Air Force accident report released this week laid out what happened when the ducks and the jets met in mid-air, including the quick actions by the experienced pilot that led to a safe emergency landing, and grisly results for the waterfowl. The four jets were from Eielson's 18th Fighter Interceptor Squadron and were headed towards a simulated dogfight with four F-22s from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, near Anchorage. Both planes regularly patrol Alaskan airspace as part of the NORAD air defense mission. The day's flight was also a yearly evaluation for one of the F-16 pilots, who would act as the flight's mission commander while a senior pilot graded his performance. The F-16s took off 20 seconds apart in full afterburner, and perhaps the roar of the first jets startled the ducks into the air, but when the mission commander's F-16 roared down the runway, the ducks were, well, in the way. His F-16 struck several ducks as it lifted off, and 'at least one' was 'ingested' into the jet's engine, causing an engine stall, a deadly midair event at low altitude. One of the wingmen in another F-16, along with witnesses on the ground, saw flames shooting out of the plane's engine, a sure-fire sign that the engine was failing. The pilot of the stricken jet, the report found, reacted perfectly. He first radioed the other jets of the emergency, calling out 'serious engine stall' on his formation's radio frequency. He then moved to drop his two under-wing fuel tanks that each held 370 gallons of fuel, telling his wingman, 'Stores are coming off here, does it look clear below?' 'You're clear,' the second pilot replied, confirming the jets were over undeveloped forest outside Eielson with no sign of civilians beneath them. The pilot dropped the tanks. Finally, the pilot swung the F-16 around for an emergency 'flameout landing' on the Eielson runway, the procedure pilots are trained to execute when an engine fails during takeoff. As the F-16 settled toward the runway, another plane was already landing, but air traffic controllers instructed the plane's pilot to move quickly off the runway, which it did as the stricken F-16 touched down. Eielson sits in a swampy forest along the Nanana River, a region renowned for wildlife during warm months in Alaska. 'Daily and seasonal wildlife movements of resident and migratory species present an enduring risk to operations at the base,' the report said. The base operates a Bird and Wildlife Strike Hazard program, or BASH, which is managed by U.S. Department of Agriculture wildlife experts who work on base. Between April and September, when ducks and many other migratory birds are passing through, the base activates 24-hour 'increased dispersal efforts' to scare birds away from the flightline, the report said. But no one had noticed the white-winged scoters on the day of the accident, and the base's Bird Watch Condition was set to low for the afternoon flight. 'There is no evidence that the [pilot] or other base personnel could have taken reasonable actions to avert this collision,' the report concluded. Back safely on the ground, maintenance crews determined the ducks had caused close to $1.3 million in damage to the jet, including the lost fuel tanks, which, at $50,000 each, were destroyed on impact. Searchers found their impact site in heavy woods a mile from the runway. Crews spent more than a month excavating the site to remove soil contaminated by the tanks' fuel. 'The total time elapsed from the bird strike to taxing clear was just under three minutes,' the report said, while investigators 'discovered evidence of bird remains scattered throughout the engine.' Army infantry officer calls new XM7 'unfit for use as a modern service rifle' Attempted Fort Leavenworth prison break leaves military inmate tangled on fence When Americans, Germans and POWs fought the SS from the walls of a castle This Army combat medic fought off an active shooter and rendered first aid This 53 aircraft 'elephant walk' has everything you'd need for a war in the Pacific
The Hill
10-05-2025
- The Hill
What's in your router? Compromised hardware threatens our national security.
Threats to national security are constantly changing. While cyberattacks and AI weaknesses often make the news, another hidden danger is compromised computer and network hardware. Bad actors may tamper with the equipment that runs U.S. defense and essential services. Most cybersecurity efforts focus on fixing software problems, but a serious threat lies in the hardware itself. Countries like Russia, China and Iran might carry out long-term 'subtle sabotage' plans by adding hidden weaknesses into key parts like computer boards, microchips and network devices. These hidden changes can stay inactive for years, avoiding regular security checks until they are turned on to cause significant disruptions. This secret risk shows that our hardware can be a weak spot that enemies use whenever they choose. Last fall's Israeli pager attack shows how dangerous this can be. In that case, explosive devices secretly placed by Israel resulted in the deaths and injuries of thousands of Hezbollah terrorists. This event shows how hidden, compromised hardware can be activated remotely to cause massive damage when a determined enemy uses it. The way global supply chains work makes this threat possible. The manufacture of computer chips and boards involves many suppliers worldwide, a complex distribution process, and ongoing maintenance. Every step offers a chance for bad actors to introduce compromised hardware. Enemies can take advantage of many points along the supply chain. Small changes made during design or chip production can hide dangerous flaws. These changes might be further hidden when parts are assembled and tested. As products pass through many hands and locations, it becomes increasingly difficult to check whether they are genuine and safe. This complex process allows fake or tampered hardware to sneak into systems — a 'ticking time bomb' waiting to go off. Fake and unauthorized parts have been found in sensitive systems: Fraudulent electronics sold to the Defense Logistics Agency, for example, were meant for a nuclear submarine and a missile system. Counterfeit Cisco gear was discovered in equipment for F-18s, F- 22s, Apache helicopters and B-52 bombers. These cases reveal a clear risk — if these were found, many more unsafe parts might be hidden in critical systems. The heart of this threat is the deliberate tampering with hardware components using advanced techniques. Bad actors can add hidden circuits, often called 'hardware trojans,' during the design or manufacturing stages, letting them stay hidden until activated to cause a breakdown. Counterfeit microchips that look normal but carry secret backdoors or weakened circuits are equally worrying. And harmful code can be placed in the device's firmware, remaining unseen until it is turned on remotely. All these tricks are designed to pass regular tests and checks, keeping the dangerous features hidden until they are deliberately exploited. Compromised hardware is very dangerous because it stays inactive until remote signals, timers or environmental changes deliberately turn it on. This hidden power can be used to disrupt key systems — to make missiles fail, to change controls in aircraft and submarines, to mess with data flows, and to upset satellites and GPS. Computer networks and data centers are also at risk of attack, which can lead to widespread failures across connected systems. Moreover, these issues break the trust in global supply chains and may create long-term instability in our security. Basically, dealing with compromised hardware forces expensive changes and makes us worry. The fight against this threat requires a strong, multi-layered plan. First, we must secure our supply chain by carefully checking suppliers, tracing every part from start to finish and using trusted manufacturing programs. Better testing methods — such as non-invasive imaging and side-channel analysis — and ongoing checks can ensure every component is safe before it is used. It is also essential for the government and private companies to work together, share information and develop new technology while cooperating with other countries. New rules are needed to enforce strict standards for buying hardware and to support local manufacturing. Finally, we must prepare by setting up dedicated response teams and building strong backup systems to lessen future problems. Compromised hardware is a serious and ever-growing threat to our national security. Its ability to hide in important systems puts us at great risk, and every moment we wait makes the danger worse. We must recognize the full extent of this threat and act now. By taking strong, proactive steps, we can only protect our essential systems and build a defense ready for relentless and smart attacks. Roei Ganzarski is the CEO of Alitheon, an optical-AI technology company focused on ensuring and securing supply chains.
Axios
26-03-2025
- Business
- Axios
What to know about Boeing's F-47, expected to fly during Trump's term
The speculation floodgates flung open in the minutes following Boeing's win of the U.S. Air Force Next Generation Air Dominance fighter contract. Why it matters: The F-47, as it's now known, is highly secretive. President Trump said he couldn't disclose the per-tail cost because it would reveal "some of the technology and some of the size of the plane." "America's enemies will never see it coming," he added. But experts and fanboys are obsessing over every shred of evidence. Their findings give the wider public a better understanding of the futuristic fighter designed to collaborate with drones. Here's what's been gleaned so far: It's manned. It will cost less than the F-22, which it supersedes, according to Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Allvin. There are plans to buy more F-47s than F-22s, which were cut well short of 750. Early stages included X-planes from both Boeing and Lockheed Martin. The aircraft first flew in 2019 and 2022, logging hundreds of hours each, according to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Its involvement dates back to 2014. The F-47 is expected to fly during the Trump administration — in a little less than four years. Its designation is a reference to the World War II-era P-47 and Trump, the 47th president. In an Oval Office address last week, he said it was "a beautiful number." The plane might — might! — have canards. Look near the spade-shaped nose. (This debate is getting spicy on social media.) It's reminiscent of Boeing's X-45 combat drone and Bird of Prey, a single-seat stealth demonstrator. The initial contract is thought to be $20 billion. That's a windfall for Boeing, which has struggled in the commercial and defense markets, and a blow to Lockheed, which is now shut out of the public sixth-generation race. What they're saying: "We argued that Boeing was likely to win this award as its victory would ensure that the U.S. can maintain a diverse defense industrial base, specifically, in this case, the ability to produce stealth fighters," Capstone investment researchers said in recent analysis.
CBS News
16-03-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
The challenge of stopping drone swarms
This week on 60 Minutes, correspondent Bill Whitaker reports on drone incursions that have pierced the skies above significant military and infrastructure sites around the United States over the last six years. No one seems to know where the aircraft are coming from or who is operating them, including three four-star generals, a senior member of Congress, and a Biden White House senior administration official that 60 Minutes spoke with. "We should be concerned that we don't know what these are," said Gen. Glen VanHerck, the former chief of NORAD and NORTHCOM, the agencies that protect U.S. airspace. "And the question that needs to be asked is 'Why don't we know what these are?' And I think you'll see that there are gaps in capability, there are gaps in policy, and there are gaps in law that need to be addressed." One of the most significant recent drone incursions happened in December 2023, when dozens of what the military calls unmanned aerial systems, or UAS, invaded the skies above Langley Air Force Base in Virginia over 17 nights. The incursions were so persistent, the Air Force moved some of the F-22s stationed at Langley to a nearby air base to protect them from being damaged. The nightly incursions at Langley were just one of many recent brazen drone swarms over military sites. In 2019, dozens of drones shadowed naval warships training off the California coast for weeks. Since then, the defense news website The War Zone has documented dozens of similar intrusions at sensitive military and civilian installations, including over the Palo Verde nuclear plant in Arizona and over the U.S. Air Force's secretive Plant 42 in southern California, where defense contractors are building the next generation of stealth bombers. The Army also confirmed 11 drone sightings late last year over the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, where they are designing and building advanced weaponry. That preceded numerous drone sightings over New Jersey over the following weeks. With so many incursions over sensitive military areas, why has it been so hard to stop these drones? The answer, in part, lies in the capability of modern drones. Today's drones are ubiquitous, in the hands of American adversaries and citizens alike. Sophisticated drones can be bought on the internet for a few thousand dollars, and some can fly or hover for up to 10 hours, carrying a 30-pound payload. They also can be modified to fly at extremely high or low altitudes that are not trackable by the standard surveillance radars used by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or NORAD. "If you can't detect them, and track them, and identify if they're potentially a civilian airplane, then it's really challenging," VanHerck told Whitaker. Shooting drones down Even if the drones are determined not to be an aircraft carrying civilians, VanHerck said, the problem with stopping drones over mainland America is not as easy as simply knocking them out of the sky, as the U.S. military might do on a battlefield abroad. "People calling for 'shooting them down' over very populated areas need to understand that a fighter, or a land-based missile, or a missile off of a ship, is going to accelerate to two to four times the speed of sound and have large exploding titanium rods that come out of the warhead at thousands of feet per second," VanHerck explained. "So that's not safe, either." A safety concern would also result from the debris field scattering in a civilian neighborhood, with pieces of a missile and drone that both potentially weigh several hundred pounds. A second issue is one of jurisdiction. Which organization would oversee downing the drones? Depending on where an incursion occurred, numerous entities would have a stake, including local law enforcement, the FBI, the FAA, and the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security. "I believe we'd be in a better position if we had one organization that was resourced, that was empowered, that was tasked with working this problem for the nation," said retired Air Force General Mark Kelly, who was the highest-ranking official at Langley Air Force Base to witness the drone incursion there in December 2023. Jamming drone frequencies The military could jam the frequency the drones use to communicate — but that comes with complications, as well. Most commercial drones operate on the 2.4 GHz or 5.8 GHz radio frequencies, which are the bands typically used for Wi-Fi, wireless LAN applications and networks, and video systems. Jamming those frequencies knocks all of those services out in the surrounding area, Kelly explained. Similarly, the military could deny a PNT service, or precision navigation and timing, which is what most people think of as GPS. According to Kelly, rendering PNT unusable to stop drones also takes navigation ability away from commercial pilots and civilians. VanHerck agrees that blocking drone communication is complicated. "If you jam those frequencies, and they reside in a spectrum that may be for TV, or transportation such as airplanes, then you're going to have interference with those," he said. "And that's the concern about using the electromagnetic spectrum." VanHerck noted that it is possible for the military to issue a so-called "Notice to Airmen," which could notify commercial airlines not to fly in a particular area while the military jammed frequencies. He revealed for the first time that during the incursion at Langley, there was an attempt to jam frequencies that was approved and coordinated by the FAA, which used NASA and Coast Guard assets. But that effort came up short. "I'm not aware of any success that they had," VanHerck said. Fly-away kits to stop future incursions To fight drone incursions, the military is now working on fly-away kits, which are prepackaged bundles of technology that can be deployed to different military installations when there is a persistent incursion of drones. The kits will include systems that would allow the military to see these low-flying aircraft that today's radar misses. "We would have several pre-positioned at various parts of the country, where we could rapidly respond not only with the equipment, but with the authority to operate that equipment to defeat that incursion," said Gen. Gregory Guillot, the current commander of NORAD and NORTHCOM. Guillot said flyaway kits will eventually include equipment that will be able to bring drones down and estimated they will be ready to be distributed within a year. That means, were an incursion like the one at Langley Air Force Base to happen again in 2026, the military would have some ability to respond. "That's my goal," Guillot said. "And we're well on our way, partnering with industry to get there." Videos of drones courtesy of Jonathan Butner and Paul Gerke. The video above was produced by Brit McCandless Farmer and edited by Scott Rosann.
CBS News
16-03-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
How the U.S. is confronting the threat posed by drones swarming sensitive national security sites
Last month – the head of NORAD and NORTHCOM – the military commands that defend North America – told Congress some of those mysterious drones seen flying inside the United States may indeed have been spying. He did not say for whom. 60 Minutes has been looking into a series of eerily similar incidents – going back years – including those attention getting flyovers in New Jerse y recently. In each, drones first appeared over restricted military or civilian sites, coming and going – often literally – "under the radar." The wake-up call came just over a year ago, when drones invaded the skies above Langley Air Force base in Virginia over 17 nights, forcing the relocation of our most advanced fighter jets. Our story starts with an eyewitness and an iPhone. Jonathan Butner: Close around 7 o'clock, I would say, I started seeing these reddish, orange flashing lights that were starting to come in from the Virginia Beach area. It began slowly, like, one at a time. Jonathan Butner's close encounter with drones came on Dec. 14, 2023. He was at his family's cabin on the James River in Virginia, about 100 miles south of Washington, D.C, with a commanding view of several military installations across the water. Jonathan Butner: They started really coming in, like, almost, like, on a conveyor belt. Bill Whitaker: How many in total? Jonathan Butner: I probably saw upwards of 40 plus. When I first saw that, I was like, "Those are going directly over Langley Air Force Base." Langley is one of the most critical air bases on the East Coast – home to dozens of F-22 Raptors, the most advanced stealth fighter jets ever built. Butner says from his perch he has seen it all. Jonathan Butner: I'm very familiar with all the different types of military craft. We have Blackhawks, we have the F-22s. And these were like nothing I've ever seen. Butner took these iPhone videos of the objects coming and going for nearly an hour and a half. These are the only public videos of the drones over Langley. Bill Whitaker: Here's another one. Jonathan Butner: Yes. He shared this video with the FBI for its investigation. Bill Whitaker: And another. Jonathan Butner: Yes. Gen. Mark Kelly (retired): The reports were coming in 20-to-30 sightings, same time every evening, 30-to-45 minutes after sunset. Retired four-star Gen. Mark Kelly was the highest-ranking officer at Langley to witness the swarm. A veteran fighter pilot, Kelly went up to the roof of a squadron headquarters for an unobstructed view of the airborne invaders. Bill Whitaker: So what'd you see? Gen. Mark Kelly (retired): Well, what you saw was different sizes of incursions of aircraft. You saw different altitudes, different air speeds. Some were rather loud. Some weren't near as loud. Bill Whitaker: What was the smallest one? What was the largest one? Gen. Mark Kelly (retired): The smallest, you know you're talking about a commercial-size quadcopter. And then the largest ones are probably size what I would call a bass boat or a small car. Bill Whitaker: The size of a small car? Gen. Mark Kelly (retired): Mhmm (affirm). At the time, Gen. Glen VanHerck was joint commander of NORAD and NORTHCOM, the military commands that protect North American airspace. He has since retired. Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): I actually provided support in the form of fighters, airborne warning and control platforms, helicopters to try to further categorize what those drones were at the time. Ten months earlier, he ordered an F-22 from Langley to shoot down that Chinese spy balloon over the Atlantic after it had sailed across the U.S., but this time, he found himself ill-equipped to respond. NORAD's radar systems, designed during the Cold War to detect high-altitude air, space or missile attacks, were unable to detect low flying drones that could be seen with the naked eye. Bill Whitaker: Why don't we just shoot them down? Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): Well, first, you have to have the capability to detect, track, identify, make sure it's not a civilian airplane flying around. If you can do that, Bill, then it becomes a safety issue for the American public. Firing missiles in our homeland is not taken lightly. Bill Whitaker: We're not able to track them? We're not able to see where they originate? Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): No, it's the capability gap. Certainly they can come and go from any direction. The FBI is looking at potential options. But they don't have an answer right now. And there haven't been answers for similar encroachments for more than five years. In 2019, naval warships training off the California coast were shadowed for weeks by dozens of drones. For years, the pentagon did little to dispel speculation these images, taken with night vision equipment, were UFOs. But ships' logs show they were identified as drones at the time. and the Navy suspected they came from this Hong Kong flagged freighter sailing nearby, but couldn't prove it. Since then, the defense news site, The War Zone, has documented dozens of drone intrusions at sensitive infrastructure and military installations: in 2019, the Palo Verde nuclear plant in Arizona, the largest power producer in the country; in 2024, an experimental weapons site in Southern California where defense contractors are building the next generation of stealth bombers. Last December, the Army confirmed 11 drone sightings over the Picatinny Arsenal in northern New Jersey, where advanced weapons are designed and built, which ignited a public frenzy, with sightings of unidentified flying objects all over the region. While much of the country was fixated on New Jersey, another swarm of drones was disrupting operations at an a ir base in the U.K. where U.S. nuclear weapons have been stored. Sen. Roger Wicker: Clearly, there is a military intelligence aspect of this. Republican Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi is chairman of the Armed Services Committee that oversees the Pentagon. We talked to him this past December. Bill Whitaker: Do you believe that these drones are a spying system, a spying platform? Sen. Roger Wicker: What would a logical person conclude? Bill Whitaker: That. That these are spying incursions. Sen. Roger Wicker: Yes. And, and yet I can tell you, I am privy to, to classified briefings at the highest level. I think the Pentagon and the National Security advisors are still mystified. Bill Whitaker: Still mystified? Sen. Roger Wicker: Yes. More alarming: with drones overhead, some of the F-22s stationed at Langley were moved to a nearby air base for their own protection. There's a new wartime reality: drones that can spy can also destroy. Deep inside Russia, advanced aircraft have been destroyed by Ukrainian drones. Gen. VanHerck told us drones could do the same thing here. Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): I have seen video of drones in various sizes flying over the F-22 flightline at Langley. Bill Whitaker: What's your reaction to that? They could drop ordnance on them, drop bombs on, they could crash into them to disable them. Was that a concern? Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): Absolutely it's a concern. A small UAS, or drones, can do a myriad of missions. President Biden was informed of the Langley intrusions, and meetings were held at the White House to figure out how to bring the drones down. But after 17 nights, the drone visitations stopped. A senior official in the Biden White House later downplayed the incident to 60 Minutes, saying it was likely the work of hobbyists. Bill Whitaker: From what you saw, did you rule out that these might be hobbyists sending these drones up? Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): No. It would be my assessment they weren't hobbyists because of the magnitude of the events, the sizes of some of the drones, and the duration. Bill Whitaker: So what's going on? Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): Well, I wish I had the answer. It certainly could have a foreign nexus, a threat nexus. They could be doing anything, from surveilling critical infrastructure, just to the point of embarrassing us from the fact that they can do this on a day-to-day basis and then we're not able to do anything about it. In overseas war zones, the U.S. military has broad authority to bring down menacing drones with gunfire, missiles, and electronic jamming. Here at home, any of those actions would pose a threat to civilians on the ground and in the air. Gen. Gregory Guillot: Well, we certainly need new systems to counter this threat. A year ago, Gen. Gregory Guillot – a combat veteran – took control of NORAD and NORTHCOM. He ordered a 90-day assessment of operations and says the drones – or UAVs – at Langley became the centerpiece. Bill Whitaker: We're the most powerful military on the face of the earth. And yet, drones could fly over a major Air Force base and we couldn't stop them? How is that possible? Gen. Gregory Guillot: Well, I think the, the threat got ahead of our ability to detect and, and track the threat. I think all eyes were, rightfully, overseas, where UAVs were being used on one-way attack to attack U.S. and coalition service members. And the threat in the U.S. probably caught us by surprise a little bit. Bill Whitaker: As it stands today, could you detect a swarm of drones flying over or flying into the airspace at Langley? Could you detect that today? Gen. Gregory Guillot: At low altitude, probably not with your standard FAA or surveillance radars. Complicating his efforts: bureaucracy. When the drones flew outside the perimeter of Langley Air Force Base, other agencies had jurisdiction: the Coast Guard, FAA, FBI, and local police. There was no one agency in charge. Bill Whitaker: So what did you determine went on at Langley? Gen. Gregory Guillot: Well, that-- that-- that investigation is still ongoing. So I don't think w-- we know-- entirely what happened. Bill Whitaker: You know, when we hear things from the White House that it's not deemed a threat, it seems to me that this is, alarming. I mean, this is kind of hair on fire time. Gen. Gregory Guillot: It is alarming. And, I would say that our hair is on fire here in, in NORTHCOM, in a controlled way. And we're moving out extremely quickly. This past November, Gen. Guillot was given the authority to cut through the red tape and coordinate counter drone efforts across multiple government agencies. He says new, more sensitive radar systems are being installed at strategic bases, and NORTHCOM is developing what it calls fly-away kits with the latest anti-drone technology – to be delivered to bases besieged by drones. Gen. Gregory Guillot: My goal is inside of a year that we would have the flyaway kit capability to augment the services and the installations if they're necessary. Bill Whitaker: So within a year, were Langley to happen again, there'd be some ability to respond? Gen. Gregory Guillot: That's my goal. His predecessor, Glen VanHerck, says the Pentagon, White House, and Congress have underestimated this massive vulnerability for far too long. Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): It's been one year since Langley had their drone incursion and we don't have the policies and laws in place to deal with this? That's not a sense of urgency. Bill Whitaker: Why do you think that is? Gen. Glen VanHerck (retired): I think it's because there's a perception that this is fortress America: two oceans on the east and west, with friendly nations north and south, and nobody's gonna attack our homeland. It's time we move beyond that assumption.
