GovExec Space Project - All Content

NASA Scraps Lunar Gateway . . . for Now

Carter Palmer, Forecast International — Thu, 02 Apr 2026 08:55:00 -0400

After years of scrutiny from the space community, NASA has officially adjusted its trajectory for the Lunar Gateway. The agency stated it will "pause Gateway in its current form," opting instead to focus on infrastructure that supports sustained surface operations. This move indicates a preference for a moon base over an orbital outpost.

But what exactly is the Gateway? Conceived as a cornerstone of the Artemis program, the Lunar Gateway is a modular space station designed to occupy a highly elliptical orbit around the Moon. Much like the International Space Station (ISS), it is composed of interconnected modules—four are currently planned, with more expected as the program evolves. Its primary mission is to serve as a multi-purpose hub: facilitating lunar landings, conducting deep-space scientific research, and acting as a staging ground for future missions to Mars.

Initial Core Modules

Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) Module: This is the station's powerhouse. It utilizes a 60-kW solar electric propulsion system to provide high-efficiency power, high-rate communications, and the maneuvering capabilities necessary to maintain the station's unique orbit.

Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO): Serving as the command and living quarters of the station, HALO provides the core command-and-control systems. It manages energy storage, power distribution, thermal regulation, data-handling, and life support, while also acting as the primary docking hub for visiting spacecraft, such as the Orion spacecraft.

Planned Modules

European System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications (ESPRIT) Module: Attached directly to HALO, this module provides enhanced communications and serves as the station's central reservoir, storing additional xenon and hydrazine for the PPE’s propulsion systems.

International Habitation Module: Contributed by international partners, the I-Hab module expands the station’s pressurized living space, allowing for longer crew stays and increased scientific capacity.

Specialized Systems

Canadarm3: While not a module itself, this next-generation robotic arm is essential to the station's longevity. Much like the Canadarm2 on the ISS, it will autonomously perform maintenance, move modules, and facilitate scientific experiments on the Gateway’s exterior.

With Gateway modules already in production, NASA now intends to repurpose equipment to support the future Moon base. What this means for the kit already built remains to be seen. While the future of the completed components remains to be seen, the Power and Propulsion Element may find a new life as a nuclear-electric propulsion demonstrator. Regardless of NASA's current intent, the decision to officially pause the program rests with Congress, whose approval is required to finalize the shift.

]]>

Cost estimate for new Sentinel ICBM plan won’t arrive until year’s end

Thomas Novelly — Fri, 27 Feb 2026 08:31:57 -0500

AURORA, Colorado—The Pentagon won’t have new cost estimates for the way-over-budget Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile program until year’s end, officials said, though they expressed optimism and dismissed concerns in a new Government Accountability Office report as out of date.

“My hope, and hope not being a strategy, is that I can accurately predict exactly what the funding is,” Air Force Gen. Dale White told reporters on Wednesday. “And [Air Force] Secretary [Troy] Meink and the department has, by and large, said that this is one of our highest priorities. I don't foresee any funding challenges.”

White was appointed in December as the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s new direct reporting portfolio manager for critical major weapon systems, a move that took responsibility for Sentinel and other top Air Force programs out of the service’s hands.

Two years ago, the Pentagon informed Congress that Sentinel’s estimated cost had ballooned 81 percent, largely because the Air Force had discovered that it would not be able to reuse the missile silos used by today’s Minuteman ICBMs. Officials revoked the decision to move the program into its engineering and manufacturing development, or EMD, phase, and began to rewrite funding, construction, and schedule plans.

Now the program is on track to return to the EMD phase—Milestone B, in acquisition parlance—by year’s end, a program official told reporters in a separate briefing.

The new price tag, however, remains unknown.

“Cost is one of the things that we are working towards as we restructure the program, so we have not fully baked up the cost,” the official said. “We will, as we go to our next milestone, which is planned for the end of this year, actually fully document the cost.”

Talking about the Sentinel program was a major focus for officials at the Air & Space Forces Association symposium here. Air Force, Sentinel, and Northrop Grumman officials held one media briefing, while military leaders from Air Force Global Strike Command, the Pentagon, and U.S. Strategic Command held another.

Construction is already underway on the program, which is becoming one of the largest government projects of this century. The work includes decommissioning old silos, building prototypes for new ones, and pouring concrete for new command centers and facilities. More than 5,000 miles of fiber-optic cable will connect new launch centers scattered across 32,000 square miles in five states, officials said. Most of Sentinel’s footprint and infrastructure will be on existing government property, but it will also require the military to acquire national or privately-owned acreage to support the 450 nuclear missiles that make up the land-based arm of the nuclear triad.

The Air Force said last week it plans a test launch by 2027 and deliver the initial ICBM by the early 2030s.

The Government Accountability Office is skeptical of that timeline. Concerns included delays to crucial software development and the failure to create a risk management plan, the GAO said in a February update.

“The transition from Minuteman III to Sentinel involves a complex, total weapon system replacement. But the Air Force hasn’t developed a risk management plan for the most complex project the service has ever undertaken,” the report said. “A very large project that costs $1 billion or more, affects 1 million or more people, and runs for years may be referred to as a megaproject. Megaprojects are extremely risky ventures, notoriously difficult to manage, and often fail to achieve their original objectives.”

White said that while building a new ICBM was “something that hasn't been done in six decades,” he remains confident in Sentinel’s new schedule and cost. He said the GAO report “does not reflect where we are today.”

The GAO report acknowledged that the program has moved swiftly since the Nunn-McCurdy breach in 2024, but said that risks remain.

“As a result of delays to Sentinel, the Air Force may need to operate Minuteman III through 2050, 14 years longer than planned,” the GAO report said. “Prolonged operation of the aging system presents sustainment risks. Addressing these risks in a transition risk management plan would help ensure the system meets requirements during the transition.”

In September, Air Force Global Strike Command confirmed it took its first Minuteman III silo offline. Program and service officials told reporters that decommission the silo helped inform the Air Force of what parts and maintenance will be necessary to seamlessly swap one ICBM for the next-generation missile.

“The goal with taking the silo off alert was to get learning. To understand how long it takes to take a Minuteman III launch facility down and decommission it, what hardware is in there that needs to be put back into the Minuteman supply system to help support Minuteman today,” the program official said. “How do we get deliberate in what our timing is of when we take Minuteman down versus when we are ready to start fielding Sentinel.”

The swap between the two ICBMs is happening during heightened global tensions. Earlier this month, the 14-year-old New START agreement, which put strict limits on the U.S. and Russia’s nuclear weapons, lapsed.

Navy Adm. Rich Correll, head of U.S. Strategic Command, told reporters on Wednesday that “nothing’s changed” since the expiration of the New START treaty and adversary threats underscore the need for Sentinel.

“Modernization of the Minutemen III capability to the Sentinel capability continues to contribute what we need from the land link for that capability, and counts for the future threat environment,” Correll said. “So it's not optional. It's essential.”

]]>

It would take the Pentagon months to replace Anthropic’s AI tools: sources

Patrick Tucker — Fri, 27 Feb 2026 08:19:35 -0500

If the Pentagon carries out its threat to blacklist Anthropic’s Claude AI platform, it could be three months or even longer before the U.S. military regains access to such a powerful tool on its classified networks, according to multiple sources familiar with the fight between the Defense Department and the AI maker.

On Thursday, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei reiterated his refusal to allow Claude to be used for mass surveillance of U.S. citizens or to guide fully autonomous weapons, rejecting Pentagon requests to make unfettered use of the model.

Claude is one of just two large generative-AI models that the Pentagon has made available on classified networks, and it is the only one that belongs to the cutting-edge group of frontier models. The Defense Department isn’t saying just how it uses such models. But Emil Michael, defense undersecretary for research and engineering, has suggested that their uses include intelligence (“to synthesize a lot more intelligence using a machine than a human analyst”) and warfighting (“How do you predict what might happen in the conflict, what things you might need in the conflict?”).

Earlier on Thursday, Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said that DOD only seeks the ability to “use Anthropic's model for all lawful purposes,” adding that the idea that the Pentagon wants fully autonomous weapons or mass surveillance is a false narrative “peddled by leftists in the media.”

But Amodei said those are the only two limits he insists on.

In “a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values. Some uses are also simply outside the bounds of what today’s technology can safely and reliably do,” he said in his statement.

Pentagon officials have threatened various reprisals should Anthropic insist on its limits, including invoking the Defense Production Act to use the company’s product without the company’s permission.

On Wednesday, a defense official told Defense One, “The Secretary will not hesitate to invoke the DPA if an agreement cannot be reached.”

Parnell’s post on Thursday made no mention of the DPA. The company, he said, has “until 5:01 PM ET on Friday to decide. Otherwise, we will terminate our partnership with Anthropic and deem them a supply chain risk for DOW.”

In his statement, Amodei responded quizzically. “They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a ‘supply chain risk’—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Claude as essential to national security.”

Easier said than done

If the Pentagon does designate the San Francisco-based AI startup as a supply-chain risk, it would touch off a lengthy and likely expensive series of protective measures, the people familiar said.

Operators would have to reconfigure data inputs that they are feeding into models, re-examine how to share data in real-time with the intelligence community which also uses Claude widely, and re-validate that replacement models were functioning as the military expected it to, they said.

In July, Anthropic received a $200 million contract to provide its frontier-model tools to the Pentagon, as did the other three U.S. makers of such products: OpenAI, Google, and xAI.

Department leaders have urged their people to use the new tools, though they have declined to say how publicly. And even the Pentagon doesn’t really know; it is reportedly asking various commands to describe how much they use Anthropic. (Michael, however, has described U.S. INDOPACOM as “probably one of the premier users.”)

So why is Claude the only one deployed on classified networks? One key reason, according to a defense official: Anthropic’s tools were the easiest to deploy on cloud networks powered by AWS, which contributes the largest chunk of the Pentagon’s Joint Warfighting Cloud Capability.

The two companies are especially close. AWS is the leading cloud-service provider to Anthropic, which trains its models using Amazon’s proprietary Trainium chips.

By contrast, Google runs Gemini on its own cloud and trains it on TPU v5p chips. xAI is partnered with Oracle and does most of its Grok training on NVIDIA H100 GPUs. OpenAI has a “primary” relationship with Microsoft Azure, though it recently announced a “strategic training” partnership with AWS.

None of these relationships are static. Anthropic trained its first models on NVIDIA chips. But as demand grew, the various frontier AI companies inked long-term strategic contracts that mean migrating from one environment to another would undo months of work.

The individuals said it could be twelve months or longer to replace the capability. However, a Defense Department official said that he expected additional frontier AI models to be widely available on the Pentagon’s GenAi.mil interface before summer.

AWS did not respond to requests for comment.

Breaking up for the wrong reasons

Michael has said that his objection to Anthropic’s stance is that it creates unpredictability. What if, he said last week, operators were using Claude during a mission, and “then the model itself learns what you're trying to do… and it stops working. That’s a risk I cannot take.”

But Anthropic executives counter that they must draw lines precisely because of AI’s unpredictability. They say there’s no way to guarantee that their models can perform safely in scenarios that involve lethal autonomy—at least not without meaningful human supervision—and they don’t believe the model is safe in situations that might involve AI for mass surveillance, according to sources familiar with the discussions.

And they agree with Michael’s contention that some of the Pentagon’s frontier models might perform better at various tasks than others.

The sources also said the conversations between the Pentagon and the company had been proceeding along more or less normal lines. Anthropic, they say, had been willing to make various accommodations. But the tone changed after the discussions became public.

On Tuesday, the company released a new version of its safety policies, which many saw as an abandonment of its core safety promise.

In the blog post announcing the change, the company said that it would be moving toward “nonbinding but publicly declared targets” for safety. “Rather than being hard commitments, these are public goals that we will openly grade our progress towards.”

Lawmakers are dipping a toe into the debate. Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., called the fight “another indication that the Department of Defense seeks to completely ignore AI governance–something the Administration’s own Office of Management and Budget and Office of Science and Technology Policy have described as fundamental enablers of effective AI usage,” in a statement. He called the episode further evidence of “the need for Congress to enact strong, binding AI governance mechanisms for national security contexts.”

The Pentagon has in the past placed policy limits on the use of autonomous weapons, but Congress has passed no legislative limits.

]]>

Defense Giants Move Toward High-Volume Manufacturing to Meet Surging Space Force Demand

Richard Pettibone, Forecast International — Wed, 25 Feb 2026 09:19:00 -0500

Boeing has commissioned a new 9,000 square foot production line at its satellite manufacturing facility in El Segundo to accelerate the delivery of advanced missile-defense sensors. This expansion provides the manufacturing capacity required to deliver 12 satellites for the U.S. Space Force Resilient Missile Warning and Tracking (MWT) MEO program, a project designed to detect and track ballistic and hypersonic threats from medium Earth orbit. The space vehicles are being built by Boeing subsidiary Millennium Space Systems and are now scheduled for delivery in mid-2027 following earlier supply chain delays.

The opening of this dedicated line marks a transition from rapid prototyping to high-rate manufacturing for electro-optical infrared (EO/IR) payloads. By establishing standardized assembly processes for these sensors, the company is attempting to resolve the industrial bottlenecks that have previously slowed the deployment of space-based defense systems. This move aligns with a broader push by the Department of Defense to put the defense industrial base on a wartime footing to counter emerging global threats.

Boeing is not alone in this shift toward high-volume orbital hardware. Northrop Grumman has also prioritized scaling its production capacity to meet a commitment of 150 satellites for the Space Development Agency’s proliferated architecture. The company recently dedicated a portion of its $1.65 billion capital expenditure budget for 2026 to ensure its Space Park campus can handle the rapid production cycles required for the latest tracking layers of the national defense network. Lockheed Martin is similarly scaling its infrastructure to support this multilayered shield, focusing on the digital backbone that connects orbital data to ground-based interceptors.

This industry-wide factory expansionis a central component of the Golden Dome initiative, a multibillion-dollar effort to integrate space-based sensors and interceptors into a unified national defense shield. The 12 satellites produced by Millennium Space Systems for the Epoch 1 phase of the MWT MEO program will provide a layer of persistent tracking that bridges the gap between low-altitude constellations and traditional large satellites in higher orbits. This multi-layered architecture is intended to be more resilient against anti-satellite capabilities than the legacy systems it is designed to replace.

Boeing Space Mission Systems has set a goal to deliver 26 satellites across its entire portfolio during 2026, which would represent a doubling of its 2025 output. The new El Segundo line, which is approximately the size of two professional basketball courts, is optimized for the assembly and testing of dual-spectrum detection systems. It allows the company to scale production across multiple programs as the United States and its allies transition toward proliferated, multi-orbit sensor networks.

As the program matures, the Space Force has begun awarding contracts for subsequent phases. In June 2025, BAE Systems was selected as the prime contractor for Epoch 2, receiving a $1.2 billion award to produce 10 additional satellites. L3Harris Technologies is also contributing to the architecture, developing sensor prototypes designed to maintain "custody" of high-speed targets as they move across different orbital planes.

With Epoch 2 now underway, scalable manufacturing has become a central national security priority. The ability to produce high-performance sensors at a predictable rate marks a shift from the historically slow, bespoke construction of individual spacecraft to a more standardized, repeatable production model. This transition reflects the broader move toward volume-based manufacturing needed to field and sustain resilient, proliferated orbital defense networks.

]]>

Boeing moves its defense HQ back to St. Louis

Lauren C. Williams — Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:43:47 -0500

Boeing is moving its defense and space business back to St. Louis after nearly a decade on the East Coast, the company announced Wednesday.

“It’s important for leaders to be side-by-side with our teammates, listening to their feedback and acting to remove obstacles as we continue to stabilize and strengthen our business,” said Steve Parker, CEO of Boeing Defense, Space & Security, in a news release announcing the move. “The headquarters move, coupled with our senior leaders being based at and spending their time at major engineering, production, and manufacturing centers across the U.S., reflects our continued focus on disciplined performance across our business.”

The move aims to ensure leaders stay close to their 18,000 workers in St. Louis, and to production. The move won't affect daily operations, a Boeing spokesperson said, and there isn’t a set number of jobs to be moved from Virginia to St. Louis.

Jesus Malave, the company’s chief financial officer, said in a recent earnings call that Boeing plans to invest in “future products and growth” in St. Louis and Charleston this year. This includes multiyear spending on combat aircraft production facilities in St. Louis, according to the news release.

St. Louis has bustling defense tech and space sectors, anchored in part by the National-Geospatial Intelligence Agency. Boeing’s defense business was previously in St. Louis for 20 years, but has been in Arlington, Virginia, since 2017, where the company’s global headquarters will remain. The defense and space division will also still have a presence in Virginia.

The company also recently moved some engineering work for Boeing’s 737 from Seattle to South Carolina.

]]>

Move over, Best Ranger; the Army’s looking for the best drone pilots

Meghann Myers — Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:40:22 -0500

You’ve probably heard of Best Ranger or Best Sapper: Army competitions that test the skills of teams of infantrymen and combat engineers. This year, the service added Best Drone Warfighter.

The inaugural battle kicked off Tuesday at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, bringing teams from across the active, Reserve, and National Guard components of the Army to test their skills and possibly win a slot on the service’s drone competition team.

“At the end of the day, it's not about receiving trophies or awards—it is about ‘what lessons can we take from this to find out who the best operator is and how they became the best operator? What skills and resources and training allowed them to become the best operator?’” Col. Nicholas Ryan, who leads the unmanned aerial systems team for the Aviation Transformation Integration Directorate at Fort Rucker, Alabama, told reporters. “And who's doing some amazing innovation out there across the Army…that we can then take and scale across the entire Army?”

The service is moving away from its previous drone operator model, which trained soldiers in its aviation branch to operate specific platforms. Instead, it’s likely that soldiers with additional training in operating UAS will be integrated into infantry, armor and other frontline units, where new doctrine will have them working alongside machine gunners, Abrams tanks, and howitzers.

“As we proliferate drones, and we're seeing where they best fit into the formation, what we're going through right now is deciding who are the right people to operate these, and what level of training do they need?” Ryan said. “And this competition really helps pull that out. For this competition, we didn't specify what type of soldier—what branch, [military occupational specialty] came here to do this—it was just: ‘Send your best UAS operators’.”

The three-day meet included two different lanes, plus a separate innovation competition where soldiers could submit white papers and custom drone builds, or demonstrate their piloting skills.

The first lane is a race through an obstacle course flying a first-person viewer drone. The second is a hunter-killer scenario, where soldiers camouflaged themselves with paint, dragged a weighted sled and did an overhead water-can press (events similar to the service’s physical-fitness test), then had a half-hour to identify and fire at five high-value targets.

“The first drone is the hunter drone, their reconnaissance drone, and it's looking at an array of targets—about a company-size element of targets—and trying to decide which one out of those are the most important targets. And then the other drone operator is carrying the killer drones, the smaller one-way lethal drones, but they're not kinetically lethal in this case. And then they have to use those to hit those targets.”

Ryan said that while soldiers have been able to execute the movements and operate their drones properly, there have been communication breakdowns as they worked to get into position, identify targets, and fire on them.

“That's an example of something we didn't anticipate, but it's absolutely standing out as that is something we as an Army need to do better on,” he said. “If we're going to proliferate these drones and want them to be more effective and lethal, we just need to improve on how our soldiers talk to each other to communicate when they're using them.”

Units were invited to bring their own small drones to the competition, with no strict rules about the brand, type or capabilities. That also meant they decided which and how much equipment to carry, something the Army is looking to standardize.

“When we're sending soldiers out to carry this equipment as part of a squad or a platoon, and they're carrying it in their rucksack, what is too much?” Ryan said. “How many batteries? How many drones? What types of controllers?”

Can they carry 20 killer drones, or does it make more sense to pack five?

“So kind of developing a standard packing list for a drone operator is one thing out of this competition that we haven't defined or said yet, but we're definitely seeing a range of solutions from soldiers,” he said.

For next year’s competition, officials want to add more realistic scenarios, including the jamming threat that Ukrainian troops are seeing so often.

“We already talked about flying in a congested environment with electronic warfare and building those into the lane,” Ryan said. “And so that's how we're thinking about this: what should we be pushing as a competition that are the highest-priority things our units should be training on to get really good at for their job in the Army?”

]]>

Space, energy and cyber venture rounds to highlight

Ross Wilkers — Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:39:50 -0500

Agile Space Industries

This maker of in-space chemical propulsion systems has collected $17 million in Series A equity capital, a figure $2 million higher than the initial target with 70% of the financing from existing investors.

Lockheed Martin’s venture capital arm for investing in young technology companies led a financing round for Agile in the fall of 2024 and is continuing its involvement.

Agile is led by CEO Chris Pearson and designs chemical-propulsion rocket thrusters via additive manufacturing techniques. The company started in 2019 to position for opportunities in satellite constellations, missions to the Moon and national security programs.

Agile will use the newfound investment for facility buildouts in Colorado, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania to scale production and test throughput.

Caruso Ventures and Howdy Partners led the Series A round. Other named participants included Cortado Ventures, Denver Ventures and Veteran Ventures.

Efficient Computer

This builder of general-purpose processors that takes energy efficiency into account has fetched $60 million in Series A capital to accelerate its product roadmap and grow the team of engineers and developers.

RTX Ventures, the defense giant’s arm for investing in young tech firms, participated in the round as Efficient Computer naturally falls within the team’s “Compute” focus area. RTX has seven areas that it gears venture investment toward.

Efficient Computer was co-founded in 2022 by CEO Brandon Lucia and his colleagues to build computer processors with lower data movement and architectural overhead than traditional systems.

In general, the idea is to take larger amounts of computer power across edge and infrastructure environments being shaped and reshaped by artificial intelligence.

Triatomic Capital led the Series A round with other named participants including Eclipse, Union Square Ventures, Overlap Holdings, Box Group, Toyota Ventures and Overmatch Ventures

Radiant Industries

In December, this startup pushing to mass produce portable nuclear microreactors completed a $300 million Series D raise to advance on its efforts to break ground on a new factory early this year.

Radiant has since added a new investor in Lockheed Martin Ventures, a move that brings another government market name to the company’s network of backers alongside Washington Harbour Partners.

For Radiant, bringing in a defense industry partner like Lockheed could open more doors for the five-year-old company in the national security landscape.

Radiant is developing nuclear generators to provide reliable power for remote communities, critical infrastructure and defense applications. Led by CEO and founder Doug Bernauer, Radiant working to start up its first reactor this summer at the Idaho National Laboratory’s Demonstration of Microreactor Experiments facility.

All of this is taking place against the larger economic and societal backdrop of increasing electricity demands and stresses on the grid. Many observers see nuclear as a scalable alternative source for power, even when considering the challenges related to production and what to do with the spent fuel.

Seasats

This startup maker of small uncrewed surface vehicles has collected $20 million in Series A capital to fund its work on expanding new facilities, adding new product lines and growing the workforce.

Seasats was founded in 2020 by CEO Mike Flanigan and his colleagues to develop solar-powered USVs for defense, commercial and scientific missions. Seasats sees its vessels as being able to support efforts in resupply and ISR – intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

The company touts its long-endurance vessel as having fully crossed both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, while the interceptor has conducted continuous operations for at least one week.

Within the past year, Seasats has secured contracts with the Navy and Marine Corps for vessel production. Seasats is also participating in the Defense Department’s Procurement and Fielding of Innovative Technologies (APFIT) program, which is set up to fund new technologies that have completed development and look ready to scale.

Konvoy Ventures led the Series A round that also included participation from Shield Capital, DNS Capital, Techstars, Tanis Venture Management, Crumpton Ventures and Dorado Group.

VulnCheck

This specialist in exploit intelligence work has fetched $25 million in Series B capital to expand its offerings that work to help organizations apply automation and artificial intelligence in their threat detection efforts.

In-Q-Tel, the intelligence community’s venture capital arm, is continuing its involvement in VulnCheck after first investing in the company in the summer of 2022. In-Q-Tel has subsequently participated in two investment rounds including this one.

VulnCheck was founded in 2021 by CEO Anthony Bettini with the goal of reducing the timing gap between identifying exploits and acting upon them.

Exploit intelligence is a discipline of cybersecurity that works to analyze active threats from diverse sources and shift security strategies from a reactive to a proactive posture. The company designs its software tool to provide operators a fully autonomous, machine-consumable dataset that analyzes and provides first-party evidence of a network exploit.

Sorenson Capital led the Series B round that also included participation from National Grid Partners and Ten Eleven Ventures.

]]>

DOD’s $66B IT budget pivots to AI and efficiency

Joshua Isler — Fri, 13 Feb 2026 11:12:02 -0500

Where does the Defense Department plan to spend its increased budget for the 2026 fiscal year? Not surprisingly, the DOD as a whole — as well as each branch of service — is adding to its artificial intelligence investment, with cuts planned to some previously ongoing line items, such as defense business systems and cloud.

The department’s total IT budget request for fiscal 2026 is $66 billion, a $1.8 billion increase from 2025. The IT budget includes: $14.3B dedicated to cyberspace activities, which is a $967 million increase; and $51.8 billion dedicated to non-cyber IT, which is an $837 million increase from fiscal 2025.

The largest spending increases include:

$1.53 billion, a 6.7 percent increase, for IT infrastructure
$396 million, a 22 percent increase, for financial management
$305 million, a 55.4 percent increase, for centrally-managed enterprise software licenses

The largest IT spending decreases for FY2026 include:

$446 million, a 13.9 percent decrease, for command and control
$426 million, a 52.1 percent decrease, for battlespace awareness
$320 million, a10.1 percent decrease, for logistics

Budget for the Army

The Army has requested a total IT budget of $16.7 billion for fiscal 2026. This is a decrease of $431 million, or 2.5 percent from 2025. AI tops their priority list, while force training is expected to see the biggest spending decrease from 2025.

The largest IT spending increases for the Army are:

• $507 million, a 38.3 percent increase, for AI

• $443 million, an 820.4 percent increase, for force protection

• $135 million, a 435.5 percent increase, for DOD enterprise services

The largest FY2026 IT spending reductions for the Army

include:

• $613 million, an 11.7 percent decrease from 2025, for non-core network infrastructure

• $550 million, a 32.1 percent decrease from 2025, for force training

• $323 million, a 15.5 percent decrease from 2025, for defense business systems

Budget for the Navy

The Navy requested a total IT budget of $13.3 billion for fiscal 2026. This is an increase of $343 million, or 2.7 percent, from 2025. AI and infrastructure saw the largest increases, while both IT management and HR management are projected to experience double-digit cuts.

The largest IT spending increases for the Navy include:

• $493 million, a 25.7 percent increase from 2025, for non-core network infrastructure

• $308 million, a 22.7 percent increase from 2025, for AI

• $251 million, a 14 percent increase from 2025, for cyberspace activities

The largest IT spending reductions for the Navy are projected to include:

• $583 million, a 56.4 percent decrease from 2025, for IT management

• $223 million, a 31.4 percent decrease from 2025, for human resources management

• $219 million, an 8 percent decrease from 2025, for defense business systems

Budget for Air Force

The Air Force requested a total IT budget of $11.8 billion for fiscal 2026. This is a decrease of $477 million, or 3.9 percent, from 2025. As with the other service branches, the Air Force is expected to increase its spending in AI, although force application is expected to experience an even more substantial bump. Cloud investment is expected to be less in FY2026 than in FY2025.

The largest IT spending increases for Air Force include:

• $415 million, a 21.7 percent increase from fiscal 2025, for AI

• $405 million, a 14.7 percent increase from 2025, for cyberspace activities

• $230 million, a 143.8 percent increase from 2025, for force application

The largest IT spending decreases for Air Force are projected to include:

• $276 million, a 31.1 percent decrease from 2025, for cloud

• $169 million, a 10 percent decrease from 2025, for core network infrastructure

• $157 million, a 9.6 percent decrease from 2025, for defense business systems

Big Beautiful Bill IT priorities

Much of DOD’s and the services’ requests are in keeping with funding priorities approved by Congress in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

The OBBBA funds nearly $143 billion to the department across 10 use areas; about $45.6 billion of that is dedicated to IT-related spending.

The largest investments are in command-and-control systems for air and missile defense to begin funding Golden Dome efforts. The bill also includes more than $9.8 billion for the development of autonomous and unmanned systems across the DOD.

Technologies emphasized in the OBBBA include development of low-cost weapons derived from unmanned systems, AI-enabled analytics, and cyber and electronic warfare.

AI. The OBBBA funds about $2.5 billion for AI. The largest area of funding is $1 billion to improve munition depth and supply chain resiliency, with next-generation automated munitions production factories.

Autonomy and unmanned systems. The bill calls for $9.8 billion for autonomy and unmanned systems. The largest funding line item is $5.1 billion to enhance shipbuilding through expansion of the unmanned vessels fleet.

Command and control. Under OBBBA $13.5 billion is allocated to command and control. The largest amount of funding is $7.2 billion to air and missile defense for development, procurement and integration of military space-based sensors.

Cybersecurity and electronic warfare. About $3.7 billion is earmarked for cybersecurity and electronic warfare. The largest funding area is $1.6 billion to improve munition-depth supply chain resiliency by cryptographic modernization activities.

Infrastructure and modernization. Funding for infrastructure and modernization is $8.9 billion. The largest part of that funding, $2.5 billion, is for readiness improvements through Air Force facilities sustainment, restoration and modernization.

Network and communications. Funding for these projects is set at about $1.3 billion, with the largest amount, $500 million, going toward low-cost weapon development through the accelerated development and integration of advanced 5G/6G technologies.

Commercial solutions and program elimination

The DOD is increasing its preference for commercial solutions and establishing new procedures for non-commercial acquisitions. Policies are indicating a preference for acquisition through Other Transaction Authorities (OTAs) and Commercial Solutions Openings (CSOs) across the DOD. Proposed changes would remove the requirement that a non-traditional defense contractor be involved in OTAs.

DOD also is eyeing the elimination of over-cost and behind-schedule programs.

Executive Order 14265 initiated a review of major defense acquisition programs, with any program 15 percent behind schedule or over budget to be considered for cancellation.

Authority-to-operate (ATO) is being sped up with The Software Fast-Track (SWFT) initiative. SWFT aims to reform the traditional ATO process and to begin continuous authorities-to-operate (cATO). This includes reviewing software supply chains, open-source software, security requirements and information sharing mechanisms. Companies will need their Software Bill of Materials (SBOMs) to undergo third-party assessment for factors, including the company’s cybersecurity posture and overall financial health. Certified documentation will be uploaded to Enterprise Mission Assurance Software Service (eMASS), the DOD web-based application used to automate Risk Management Framework (RMF) processes, manage cybersecurity compliance and generate system authorization packages. That documentation will be analyzed using AI tools to grant an ATO.

Consumption-based solutions are also emerging as a trend. The DOD may acquire solutions such as cloud and AI via a consumption-based model.

Section 809 directs the Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program to explore the use of consumption-based solutions to address DOD needs. The pilot program will result in contracts and other agreements for anything-as-a-service, i.e., technology-supported capability using any combination of software, hardware or equipment, data and labor services. Under this pilot program, anything-as-a-service capability must be metered and billed based on actual usage of fixed price units. program. This pilot program is intended to promote continuous competition and better business practices at the DOD.

Finally, new policies are set to reform program and budget structures away from a program-centric model to a capability-centric model. These changes would place programs under Major Capability Activity Areas (MCAAs) with focuses such as unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), counter-UAS, electronic warfare and others.

Programs within an MCAA would be granted modified transfer authority of up to 40 percent of the total MCAA appropriation without requiring Congressional approval. It is unlikely that Congress will give away their authority over this, but it may change to specialized temporary pools of money for modernization.

Takeaways

When responding to RFIs, here are some key things to remember:

Emphasize efficiency, department-wide usefulness and past commercial successes.

Mission fulfillment is still critical across the DOD, but agencies will look at how solutions can increase efficiency while helping accomplish the mission.

Highlight how your solution can cut government waste, cut costs and speed timelines. The DODis prioritizing solutions that can be used across the entire department, not just one service or agency.

Detail past commercial successes. Explain how your solutions have already helped organizations with similar missions. The DOD is emphasizing dual-use technologies and wants to cut non-commercial solutions from its portfolio.

To understand more details about the Defense Department’s fiscal 2026 budget and discover actual program opportunities, contact immixGroup .

Joshua Iseler is a market intelligence manager for immixGroup, the public sector business of Arrow Electronics. immixGroup delivers mission-driven results through innovative technology solutions for public sector IT. Visit immixGroup.com for more information.

]]>

Oracle books $88M Air Force Cloud One contract

Nick Wakeman — Fri, 13 Feb 2026 11:11:17 -0500

The Air Force has added another major cloud service provider through a new $88 million direct contract with Oracle as part of its Cloud One program.

This award announced Thursday follows a $581.3 million contract with Amazon Web Services the service branch finalized in late January.

The Air Force is using the Cloud One program to modernize its IT infrastructure.

Cloud One also includes a $455 million million contract awarded to Leidos in December for systems architecture and common shared services, as well as a $743 million contract awarded in May to Booz Allen Hamilton for application modernization work.

The firm-fixed price contract with Oracle runs through Dec. 7, 2028.

Under the Oracle contract, the Air Force and the rest of the Defense Department will have access to Oracle Cloud Infrastructure services across multiple classification levels. The agreement also offers data center support for Top Secret/SCI, Special Access Program, and Defense Information Syst Impact Levels 5 and 6.

The agreement also offers data center support through Oracle National Security Regions operated by cleared U.S. citizens.

In the area of artificial intelligence, the contract gives the Air Force and DOD access to Oracle’s AI Database 26ai. This tool is designed to help users “combine organization-specific information and public information when running agentic AI workflows,” according to the Oracle announcement.

“Oracle remains committed to the [DOD’s] mission and our next-generation database services and analytics, including Oracle AI Database 26ai, are transformative additions to [DOD’s] Cloud One strategy,” said Kim Lynch, executive vice president for government, defense and intelligence at Oracle.

The contract also includes Oracle’ security services for DOD agencies to meet the boundary protection needs of the Defense Information Systems Network.

Work will be performed at Oracle facilities throughout the U.S.

]]>

Air Force charts new path to recompete nuclear missile support work

Ross Wilkers — Mon, 09 Feb 2026 13:21:26 -0500

The Air Force has opted for a different approach in how it plans to recompete systems engineering, integration and other related modernization work on the Air Force’s major ballistic missile systems.

Over many years, we have reported on the multiple twists and turns involving what was the potential $12 billion Integration Support Contract 2.0 contract. Long-time incumbent BAE Systems Inc. and Guidehouse traded wins, with each company protesting when the other won the 18-year award.

ISC 2.0 was going down the path of a new solicitation, but the Air Force has taken a left turn there as well after deciding to break up the work into separate competitions.

The Air Force now plans to compete and award separate task orders for what is now being called the ICBM Development, Operations, and Sustainment program. This will happen via the OASIS+ professional services vehicle, the service branch said in a Jan. 30 sources sought notice.

One order will cover systems engineering and integration support services, while the second focuses on program execution support services. Requests for information on those orders is available on the General Services Administration’s eBuy portal.

Companies interested in the SE&I work should look up RFI1794190 and RFI1794191. Firms eyeing the program execution work should look up RFI1794192 through RFI1794195.

IDOS’ core mission remains the same as it will support the Air Force’s work to retire its Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles. Northrop Grumman is building the new Sentinel missile system, also known as the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent.

BAE has held the ISC program since 2013 and that contract is slated to sunset in July 2027. The Air Force has obligated $2.1 billion in task order volume to-date, according to GovTribe data.

While more details are in the works, the Air Force has also indicated it plans to break out the IDOS program’s IT support requirement into a separate competition as well.

The Air Force’s last major update on that front came via a request for information in December, a notice that also included a performance work statement describing the scope of support needed.

That list includes service desk, documentation, project management, software licensing, hardware lifecycle, audio/visual, procurement, data storage, security, operations, compliance, and continuous improvement efforts.

]]>

Three firms move ahead in Army’s future-of-flight-training helicopter training takeover

Thomas Novelly — Mon, 09 Feb 2026 13:13:54 -0500

The Army has cleared three companies to bid on the service’s plan to outsource initial helicopter pilot training, despite some lawmakers’ reservations about the idea.

Bell, Lockheed Martin, and M1 Support Services have all publicly confirmed this week that they are moving to the third phase of the competition for Flight School Next: a contract to take over the Army’s Initial Entry Rotary Wing training program at Fort Rucker, Alabama. The three companies must submit a Commercial Solutions Proposal for their offering, according to a Dec. 9 call for solutions outlining the process on SAM.gov.

“This next phase is a critical point in the competition and Bell along with our teammates are ready to demonstrate what we believe is the most cost-effective and low-risk solution for the Army's next-generation flight training program,” said John Novalis, Bell’s strategic director of flight school next, in a press release.

Service officials and contractors believe the new model, which is intended to produce 800 to 1,500 Army aviators annually for 26 years, will lower costs by taking the aircraft, maintenance, and training out of the service’s hands. Congress isn’t convinced. In December, lawmakers said they wouldn’t make funds available for the initiative until they receive a report detailing the results of a trial program and a briefing from Army Secretary Dan Driscoll on the benefits of the new model.

Lawmakers want details on the cost-effectiveness and “the rationale for any proposed changes to training systems or platforms,” according to a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act passed into law on Dec. 20. It’s unclear if the Congressional inquiry into the program will delay the contract’s anticipated September award date.

Representatives for Bell, Lockheed, and M1 all deferred to the Army when asked about the competition’s progress amid those Congressional concerns.

As part of Flight School Next, the Army wants a new initial-training helicopter to replace the twin-engine UH-72 Lakota, which has been criticized by Army leaders as being too expensive and restrictive for training. Its manufacturer, Airbus, has pushed back on those claims.

Lockheed Martin announced Wednesday that its pitch would include Robinson Helicopter Company’s R66 NxG helicopter.

“Our selection of Robinson brings a safe, proven and innovative platform to the table. We are fully committed to getting this right for the Army—investing the time, expertise and technology needed to accelerate IERW training and ensure aviators are prepared for their next mission,” said Todd Morar, Lockheed’s vice president of Air and Commercial Solutions, in a press release.

M1 is also working with Robinson, along with General Dynamics Information Technology, Quantum Helicopters, and the University of North Dakota Aerospace Foundation.

“We are ready now to conduct an exceptionally low risk transition while introducing a wide range of impactful innovations to transform Army flight training and deliver more proficient aviators at significantly reduced cost,” James Cassella, M1’s chief growth officer, said in a news release.

]]>

Pentagon leaders should have more control over services’ tech budgets, GAO suggests

Patrick Tucker — Mon, 09 Feb 2026 13:13:03 -0500

The Pentagon could further accelerate its technology purchasing if the services’ emerging-tech budget requests flowed through the office of the defense undersecretary for research, the Government Accountability Office says in a new report.

The report urges lawmakers to give "budget certification authority" for the services’ research and engineering spending to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

“This would require the secretary of each military department and the head of each defense agency to transmit their department’s or agency’s proposed budget for research, development, test, and evaluation activities,” the report says. The R&E office would then “review each proposed budget and determine whether it is adequate.”

Unsurprisingly, the proposal was not well received by the services.

“The Departments of the Army, Air Force, and Navy disagreed,” arguing that the change would lead to “delays, restricted autonomy, and increased workload,” the report said.

But GAO says the current setup limits the Pentagon tech chief’s ability to ensure that service purchases fit with broader plans for the joint force—a “key role” the office was intended to play.

Consolidation, happening

The Pentagon has already pushed through a variety of measures to speed up and coordinate technology efforts. A March memo prioritizes the purchase of existing “dual-use” technology, particularly software, over custom, service-built solutions. The Department also is pushing acquisition authority down to the tactical level, allowing colonels and Navy captains to buy equipment in small batches using other transaction authorities.

These moves have met with approval from long-time Pentagon watchers like Paul Scharre, author of Four Battlegrounds and vice president of the Center for a New American Security.

“This leadership team is very invested in shaking things up, moving faster, and clearing out some of the red tape,” Scharre told Defense One in December. “A big piece of this has to happen on Capitol Hill as well. Congress has to be supportive...that has to do with things like getting less control out of the appropriators and giving the Department of Defense more flexibility to spend money very fast and be flexible in how they move money around.”

The NDAA fight

The current draft of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, passed by the Senate in October, includes a provision that echoes the GAO’s recommendation but stops short of full certification power.

Instead, the Senate-passed bill would establish Portfolio Acquisition Executives, or PAEs, to replace traditional Program Executive Officers. These PAEs would have the ability to change requirements on their own and would grant the Pentagon’s research office more direct authority over their activities.

However, the House version of the bill is more cautious. It stipulates that these acquisition executives “shall continue to report through their respective functional commands.” This discrepancy remains a primary point of contention as the House and Senate move to reconcile their versions of the bill. Despite the friction, there is at least a philosophical agreement that the services must buy equipment that aligns with a broader joint-force strategy.

The GAO report also included a pointed note for the Pentagon’s tech leaders: the office “has yet to ensure that Critical Technology Area roadmaps consistently provide sufficient information for military departments to invest in technologies for the joint fight.”

In other words: if the Pentagon is expected to follow a comprehensive tech strategy, the tech chief needs to finish writing it down.

]]>

Space: the Final Frontier for data processing?

Tony James, Space Project — Tue, 03 Feb 2026 14:03:14 -0500

As the final countdown commences for NASA’s Artemis II mission to the moon, the question is not whether the space agency has the fortitude to make this and future initiatives possible. The question is whether astronauts and possible lunar habitats will have access to stable, resilient platforms that can process information and make intelligent decisions in real time.

For decades, Earth has been the hub for analysis and decision-making, with terrestrial data centers transforming raw information from orbit into actionable insight. But as NASA quite literally takes its moonshot, this Earth-centered model may prove limiting. High latency, narrow communication windows, and constrained bandwidth can make it impractical, and often impossible, to rely on land-based data centers for timely decisions.

Future missions will require a shift. Resilience and performance will depend on processing information at the edge of space, where astronauts and autonomous systems operate, rather than relying on a data center thousands of miles away.

New technologies make this possible. Advances in modern edge architectures, lightweight containerized workloads, and scalable off-planet compute are redefining what missions can accomplish independently. Just as important, these same technologies will enable future spacecraft and lunar stations to offload more intensive tasks to orbital data centers, creating a layered computing ecosystem designed for sustained exploration.

Edge compute brings intelligence to the mission site

Recent advances in compact AI-enabled hardware now enable spacecraft, habitats, and orbital platforms to perform tasks once handled exclusively by terrestrial data centers. These systems can interpret sensor readings at the moment they are generated, run analytical models on location, and support autonomous or semi-autonomous operations during communication gaps.

This capability fundamentally changes mission operations. Instead of relying on Earth for every assessment, spacecraft and crews can respond immediately to emerging conditions. Edge-based AI agents can guide astronauts through complex procedures when links degrade, and onboard models can adjust as conditions evolve. By enabling real-time decision making, edge computing becomes essential for missions operating far beyond low Earth orbit.

Offloading work from ground-based data centers

Edge processing also reduces the burden on terrestrial data centers. Rather than transmitting large volumes of raw data back to Earth, spacecraft can perform initial analysis onboard and send only mission-relevant insights. This reduces bandwidth demands, accelerates response times, and allows Earth-based infrastructure to focus on tasks that genuinely require scale, such as long-range modeling and deep scientific analysis.

As edge devices assume greater processing responsibilities, orbital data centers provide a scalable middle tier that further reduces reliance on Earth-based servers. These solar-powered platforms can aggregate data from distributed mission elements, run heavier computational workloads, and support coordination across spacecraft and lunar infrastructure. By handling tasks that exceed the capability of smaller edge devices yet do not require the full scale of terrestrial facilities, they extend computing capacity deeper into space.

The result is a more efficient distribution of workloads. Earth handles tasks that require massive compute resources, while smaller workloads and instant analysis is handled in space. By offloading routine and time-sensitive tasks, missions become more agile and less dependent on continuous connectivity.

Keeping systems updated, stable, and adaptable

For edge systems to reliably stand in for Earth-based computing, they must remain adaptable, stable, and resilient, with the ability to handle the same workloads as conventional systems. Missions evolve, environmental conditions change, and software must keep pace. That requires platforms capable of receiving over-the-air updates without physical access and without jeopardizing mission continuity.

Modern architectures enable this through update mechanisms that can recover automatically from failures. If an update encounters a problem, the system must be able to restore itself to a safe state.

At the same time, containerized applications allow workloads to perform consistently across environments, whether on Earth, in orbit, or on the lunar surface. Containers are reproducible open source technologies that bundle together everything an application needs to run in a highly-portable package. This portability simplifies operations and makes it easier to deploy workloads, applications, or models anywhere, including space.

Using technology built on open standards also reduces complexity. Instead of relying on bespoke software stacks that require niche expertise, mission teams can leverage technologies already familiar to modern IT organizations. This lowers the learning curve for engineers, improves interoperability across mission components, and allows space systems to evolve alongside the broader open source ecosystem.

Moving to the edge of space

Powering the next era of space operations requires a deliberate shift to computing capabilities that can replicate traditional processing without the challenges associated with transmitting information back to Earth. Deploying AI-capable edge systems, offloading analysis from terrestrial data centers, and supplementing them with orbital platforms creates an architecture built for continuous exploration.

When systems can analyze, adapt, and respond at the edge, missions become more independent and capable. These systems will be essential to the success of Artemis, commercial space stations, and other exploratory endeavors.

]]>

Space-based interceptors make even less sense now

Lisbeth Gronlund and David Wright — Tue, 03 Feb 2026 12:50:47 -0500

The rationale behind Golden Dome’s mandate for space-based boost-phase defense made some sense. If orbiting interceptors could hit an enemy missile very early in flight—before it could deploy countermeasures—they would avoid the Achilles’ heel of defense systems that target missiles in midcourse. But now the Pentagon and contractors are proposing to also use space-based interceptors for midcourse defense, which would jack up the cost while defeating the purpose of going to space in the first place.

Today’s Ground-based Midcourse Defense, or GMD, system and its 44 ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California are designed to intercept warheads during their 30-minute travel through space. But in outer space, lightweight decoys follow the same trajectory as the heavier warheads—preventing the defense from identifying and destroying the true warhead. Any country that can build a long-range missile and nuclear warhead can also build decoys and other countermeasures, creating a defensive problem that remains unsolved despite decades of work. As a result, the GMD system would almost certainly be ineffective against an actual attack.

One response to this problem is to focus on a different portion of a missile’s flight: its boost phase, when its rocket motors are burning and before it deploys countermeasures. But the boost phase lasts only about three minutes. The only way to station interceptors close enough to every possible launch point in “peer, near-peer, and rogue” countries is to put them in space.

And “to station” is a misnomer that conceals the true difficulty and massive resource consumption of creating an effective boost-phase defense. Each interceptor satellite has a very brief time to accelerate to reach a boosting missile, requiring the satellites to be closely spaced to provide a defense without gaps. And because satellites move in orbit, those in position for an intercept will quickly move away and must be replaced by others moving in. (This simulation helps show why.)

To ensure that at least two interceptors are in position to reach a single attacking missile during its short boost time, the system would need several thousand interceptors in orbit. Defending against a salvo of 10 missiles would require a constellation 10 times that size—that is, tens of thousands of satellites. Defending against a full Russian or Chinese attack would require hundreds of thousands of satellites.

And that would be for a missile burn time of three minutes. During the Cold War, the U.S. and Soviet Union demonstrated that they could reduce the burn times of their solid-fueled missiles. If the U.S. deploys a space-based boost-phase system, one should expect Russia, China, and North Korea to work to reduce their burn times enough to effectively eliminate the possibility of boost phase intercepts.

The practical difficulties of boost-phase intercept have led the Pentagon and some advocates to talk about using space-based systems for midcourse defense instead. This would give the interceptors more time to reach their targets—perhaps 15 minutes, rather than less than three. That would reduce the total number of interceptors needed to have one or two in place to reach a single target in space at any time.

But this switch would simply return to the first show-stopping problem: countermeasures. These systems cannot distinguish warheads from decoys, regardless of whether the interceptors are based on the ground or in space. Attempting to intercept all the warheads and decoys each missile releases would vastly increase the number of interceptors required in orbit.

And it is far more expensive to field a midcourse defense in space. In addition to the costs of building and launching thousands of interceptors, satellites have a limited lifetime, which depends on their altitude. Midcourse interceptors would all need to be replaced roughly every ten years. The cost of building and launching the satellites would come due again and again.

The Pentagon appears poised to spend enormous amounts of money only to end up where it started: with an ineffective mid-course defense. Policymakers must beware of the promise of high-priced fixes that solve nothing.

The authors are physicists and researchers in the Laboratory for Nuclear Security and Policy at MIT.

]]>

York Space Systems raises $629M in public offering

Ross Wilkers — Fri, 30 Jan 2026 12:16:50 -0500

York Space Systems has collected $629 million in its upsized initial public offering, a figure at the higher end of what the small satellite manufacturer was looking to fetch from investors.

Shares in York closed down 1% to $33.61 in their trading debut Thursday, when they opened up 11.7% from the original $34 price. The S&P 500 closed down 0.1% on negative sentiment surrounding Microsoft's fiscal second quarter results

York sold 18.5 million shares, up from the original plan to offer 16 million shares at a price range of $30-to-$34.

Based on those figures, York achieved a valuation of $4.75 billion by tapping into the public markets for new capital to support its strategy. CEO Dirk Wallinger founded the company in 2012.

York got there after the IPO’s underwriters exercised their initial option to buy 2.5 million additional shares. The underwriters have since been granted a second, 30-day option to purchase up to 2.775 million more shares at the $34 price.

Much of the IPO’s proceeds will go toward growth initiatives and other general corporate purposes that could include building inventory, research-and-development and capital expenditures.

A major acquisition is also on York’s short-term agenda for after the IPO. York is conducting due diligence activities regarding the potential purchase of a key supplier, a move tentatively valued at $120 million in stock.

AE Industrial Partners, the private investment firm that acquired majority ownership of York in 2022, will hold 24% of the total stock post-IPO but retain more than half of the voting power on York’s board of directors.

For York, this iteration of its strategy as a public company is taking shape amid rising investor interest in space on expectations of higher spending in the Trump administration.

York undertook its IPO in the same year of other public offerings by Voyager Technologies and Firefly Aerospace, the latter of which is also controlled by AE Industrial post-IPO.

President Trump has put pressure on U.S. allies to increase their defense spending and one of his priorities is the Golden Dome missile defense initiative, which York highlighted in its filings ahead of the IPO.

York’s largest customer by far is the Space Development Agency, where the company holds contracts to build satellites for three tranches in SDA’s emerging missile warning constellation.

The company aims to apply its experience in that effort, called the Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture, for any potential future work arising out of Golden Dome.

Of course, the much bigger backdrop for York’s IPO includes the widely-reported plan at SpaceX to take that company public later this year. A SpaceX IPO would be one of the largest-ever in the history of the public markets altogether and certainly the space sector’s biggest.

Goldman Sachs LLC, Jefferies, and Wells Fargo Securities are acting as lead bookrunning managers for the proposed offering. J.P. Morgan and Citigroup are acting as joint bookrunning managers. Truist Securities, Baird and Raymond James are acting as bookrunners. Canaccord Genuity, Needham & Company and Academy Securities are the co-managers.

Below is York CEO Dirk Wallinger on CNBC on Thursday.

]]>

Trump nominee to lead NSA commits to backing controversial spying law

David DiMolfetta — Fri, 30 Jan 2026 12:11:05 -0500

President Donald Trump’s pick to lead Cyber Command and NSA told lawmakers Thursday that he supports the use of a contentious foreign spying power, arguing his experience consuming intelligence gathered through the statute is “indispensable” and critical for national security.

The law, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, permits U.S. spy agencies to gather communications of foreigners located abroad without obtaining a court warrant. Critics argue that the collection method, which can inadvertently gather the communications of U.S. persons, effectively bypasses Fourth Amendment safeguards.

Though the law was reauthorized two years ago under then President Joe Biden, it is set to expire in April unless renewed again by Congress.

“What I’ve experienced in my career is that this provides the warfighter, the decision maker, [with] the ability to have critical insight into threats that enables decision making,” Lt. Gen. Josh Rudd told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He also said he knows the law has “saved lives here in the homeland.”

The statements are unsurprising from a nominee set to lead the nation’s premiere foreign eavesdropping and hacking agency. In his role, Rudd would also co-lead U.S. Cyber Command, the digital combatant command responsible for many of the Pentagon’s offensive cyber missions.

702 gives agencies like NSA legal permission to order U.S. internet and telecom providers to hand over communications data on foreign targets for use in national security investigations. But the authority also permits the incidental collection of communications data on U.S. persons linked to those foreign targets.

Some lawmakers and civil liberties groups argue that a warrant should be mandated for searches of collected 702 data that include U.S. persons’ communications. A warrant for such queries has been historically opposed by law enforcement and intelligence officials, who argue they can slow down timely investigations.

Such a mandate is “a topic that I need to look into and get a better understanding, to give you a more wholesome and complete answer on that one,” Rudd told Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., a privacy hawk that backs a warrant measure for the law.

He added that he has “supreme confidence that the men and women of the NSA are committed to protecting civil liberties and privacy of American citizens.”

The spying power is legally limited to the collection of foreign intelligence located abroad. But some lawmakers argue that aggressive immigration enforcement and questions around the Trump administration’s Fourth Amendment interpretations could increase the risk that Americans’ communications are swept up and queried without sufficient safeguards.

“So the administration, a number of months ago, secretly decided that agents can break into homes without a judicial warrant. Basically, they said the Fourth Amendment doesn’t matter anymore,” Wyden said in the hearing, referring to an internal ICE memo reported last week that permits immigration officers to enter a home without a judicial warrant.

It’s not clear how Rudd’s views would run up against the reauthorization process for FISA 702 this spring. Notably, in written questions during her confirmation hearing, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said warrants “should generally be required before an agency undertakes a U.S. Person query of FISA Section 702 data, except in exigent circumstances, such as imminent threats to life or national security.”

Asked about election security, Rudd committed to using NSA resources to inform lawmakers about foreign risks to U.S. elections.

“The electoral process is fundamental to our democratic values, and Americans writ large, and I’ve committed throughout my career to serve to defend and uphold those values,” he said. “Any foreign threat to the electoral process should be viewed as a national security concern.”

As the 2026 midterms approach, the Trump administration has closed or scaled down many agencies and offices that track election threats, including the ODNI’s Foreign Malign Influence Center and the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force. The president has long been a skeptic of the intelligence community, especially due to its prior assessments that concluded Russia sought to help Trump win the 2016 election.

When he testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier this month, Rudd told lawmakers that his experience working with cyber intelligence in the Indo-Pacific qualifies him to serve in the dual-hatted role.

As the number two leader of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, Rudd has spent his career largely in special operations and joint command roles. Some former officials and China analysts view Rudd’s Indo-Pacific background as relevant to U.S. cyber operations involving Beijing.

NSA and Cyber Command have been without a permanent leader for months, after far-right activist Laura Loomer pushed for the firing of their previous head, Gen. Timothy Haugh, in April. Since then, Lt. Gen. William Hartman has led the agency in an acting capacity.

Rudd, if confirmed, will also have to contend with declining morale inside the spy agency, as well as significant workforce cuts that were influenced by Trump 2.0 efforts to shed government bloat and spending waste.

]]>

Lockheed CEO: Air Force RQ-170 drones used in mission to capture Maduro

Thomas Novelly — Fri, 30 Jan 2026 12:10:07 -0500

An extremely secretive Air Force spy drone was used in the U.S. military’s operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro this month, Lockheed Martin’s CEO confirmed, marking a rare disclosure of the aircraft’s operations.

James Taiclet confirmed that RQ-170 Sentinel stealth drones were part of the Jan. 3 Venezuelan mission, dubbed Operation Absolute Resolve, on a Thursday earnings call.

“Lockheed Martin products once again proved critical to the U.S. military's most demanding missions,” Taiclet said. “The recent Operation Absolute Resolve included F-35 and F-22 fighter jets, RQ-170 Sentinel stealth drones, and Sikorsky Black Hawk helicopters, which helped ensure mission success while bringing the men and women of our armed forces home safely.”

Joint Chiefs chairman Gen. Dan Caine confirmed during a press conference on Jan. 3 that 150 aircraft from roughly 20 bases, including “intelligence, reconnaissance, surveillance” assets, were used in the operation, but didn’t publicly name the stealth drones. Video footage purportedly showing two RQ-170s landing in Puerto Rico began circulating on social media following the operation. An Air Force spokesperson did not confirm the use of the RQ-170 in the Venezuela operation and pointed to Caine’s earlier comments.

Taiclet’s mention of the spy drone is the first disclosure of the aircraft’s operations in roughly half a decade. In 2021, the 432nd Wing at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada briefly mentioned the unit had “successfully deployed and redeployed RQ-170 Sentinel forces” in a news release. While the use of the surveillance drone in the Venezuela operations was not surprising to some Air Force analysts, one expert said the disclosure of the mission from Lockheed Martin was abnormal.

“I was a little surprised to see it acknowledged by someone who would know. But, then again, I do suspect that was something that had been vetted beforehand,” said Mark Gunzinger, the director of future concepts and capability assessments for the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.

The revelation of its use in Venezuela also marks one of its most high-profile missions since its reported surveillance of then-Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden before his death in 2011. Later that year, an RQ-170 was captured by Iran and later used as a model for the country’s Shahed drones.

The RQ-170, developed by Lockheed’s secretive Skunk Works research arm, was first spotted in Afghanistan in the late 2000s and later nicknamed the “Beast of Kandahar.”

While the full capabilities of the stealth drone have not been disclosed by the U.S. military, the Air Force has acknowledged in a fact sheet that the aircraft is used for "intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance to locate targets.” Gunzinger said it’s crucial for the U.S. military to keep the RQ-170’s technology a secret.

“The good thing is there were no specific capabilities attributed to it,” Gunzinger said. “I think that's pretty important that kind of information is not revealed.”

]]>

US developed ‘non-kinetic’ cell ahead of Venezuela mission to push cyber operations

David DiMolfetta — Thu, 29 Jan 2026 08:35:52 -0500

In the months leading up to an unprecedented operation that captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro from the capital of Caracas, the U.S. military developed a “non-kinetic effects cell” that has helped push cyber operations to the forefront of specialized U.S. missions, a top official told lawmakers Wednesday.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee’s cybersecurity panel, Joint Staff Deputy Director for Global Operations Brig. Gen. R. Ryan Messer said the cell is “designed to integrate, coordinate and synchronize all of our non-kinetics into the planning, and then, of course, the execution of any operation globally.”

Non-kinetic effects are military actions that influence or disrupt an adversary’s systems without using physical force or causing direct destruction, rather than weapons like missiles or bombs. They often include cyber operations, electronic warfare and influence campaigns.

The operation that ousted Maduro from Caracas included cyber effects that targeted radar and internet, as well as the city’s power grid, which caused a temporary blackout.

Multiple U.S. spy agencies stood up crisis action teams that provided intelligence to Special Operations Command and Southern Command throughout the operations, a U.S. official with knowledge of the matter previously told Nextgov/FCW. The NSA oversaw geolocation support to gather intelligence that aided the operation and monitored other signals that help operators determine if a foreign adversary orders troop movements or seeks to activate radar, the official added.

The development of the cell helps highlight a broader shift toward integrating cyber and other non-kinetic tools into U.S. military operations.

“The reality is that we’ve now pulled cyber operators to the forefront,” Messer said.

Lt. Gen. William Hartman, acting director of Cyber Command and the NSA, and Katie Sutton, the Pentagon’s cyber policy chief, also testified, describing how the cell would operate alongside efforts to increase the number of U.S. cyber warriors under a new Cyber Command structure announced last November.

The revised Cyber Command model — dubbed “Cyber Command 2.0” — is aimed at fixing longstanding problems hiring and keeping skilled military cyber specialists, though it represents a scaled-back version of a broader restructuring effort initially planned for the digital combatant command. The command was established around 15 years ago.

The approach focuses on better recruiting and managing cyber personnel across the armed forces, improving access to specialized training through partnerships with industry and universities, and speeding up the development of new cyber tools and techniques.

“Our intent as part of CyberCom 2.0 is, if you’re a young person — a hacker — and you want to come serve your country, when you show up at your recruiting station, we want you to be administered a cyber aptitude test,” Hartman said. “If you score well on that test, we would like you to be offered a contract to become a cyber operator” and enter a pipeline to join CyberCom, he added.

“I would tell you not just Absolute Resolve, but Midnight Hammer and a number of other operations, we've really graduated to the point where we're treating a cyber capability just like we would a kinetic capability,” Hartman also said, referring respectively to the Venezuela operation and a U.S. bombing run last year that targeted key nuclear sites in Iran.

Sutton also highlighted the CyberCom 2.0-backed Cyber Innovation Warfare Center, which is meant to quickly design and deploy various cyber tools, including new software and tactics used to disrupt adversary networks and defend U.S. military systems. The private sector would play a major role in this.

“It’s not just about acquiring a tool or a technology, there’s a lot of non-material aspects that will need to be successful,” she said. “It’ll be our tie to industry. It ties our operational force directly to industry to allow this to happen at the speed at which we’re seeing the capabilities come out.”

The 2.0 model was initially endorsed during the Biden administration and accelerated under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, albeit with various rewrites and examinations penned over the last year. Many of the initiatives in the 2.0 framework are expected to be fully integrated later this decade or in the early 2030s.

]]>

Northrop CEO: deal to accelerate B-21 production could arrive in months

Thomas Novelly — Thu, 29 Jan 2026 08:33:38 -0500

A deal to increase production of the Air Force’s B-21 bomber could be reached by March, Northrop Grumman’s CEO said. But a looming government shutdown could hinder talks, as one did last fall.

Kathy Warden said no agreement has been reached about the $4.5 billion in reconciliation funding approved last year to speed up next-generation bomber production, but that she was optimistic for a deal in the next few months. As of last year, the company has taken a roughly $2 billion hit trying to accelerate the program and cover material costs.

“We continue to work closely with the Air Force on plans to increase the production rate of the program. Our priority is to establish a mutually beneficial agreement that accelerates the delivery of this game-changing capability to our nation,” Warden said during the company’s fourth-quarter earnings call on Tuesday. “Funding for this acceleration has been approved as part of the reconciliation bill, and I am optimistic that we will come to an agreement with the Air Force this quarter.”

It’s unclear whether those talks would be stalled by the partial government shutdown that would begin on Saturday if the Senate fails to reach agreement on funding for several federal agencies, including the Defense Department.

In October, Warden acknowledged that the then-ongoing government shutdown had “held up” discussions on an increased production agreement with the Air Force.

A Northrop Grumman spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the potential effects this time around.

Douglas Royce, a senior analyst with Forecast International, a sister brand of Defense One, said he didn’t see the looming shutdown as a major factor for Northrop Grumman in accelerating production.

“There's always uncertainty around shutdowns, and theoretically the non-essential workers at DOD involved in any discussions on accelerations will stop talking until it's over,” Royce said. “If it's a short shutdown, no impact. And even if there were no shutdown, it's not a given that the two sides come to an agreement.”

Warden said during the call that an agreement for increased production would help the company’s bottom line, but also require more investment in facilities.

“So, as we sit here today, we are still working through the finer points of that deal and its financial implications for the company,” Warden said. “We do expect to invest $2 billion to $3 billion over a multi-year period.”

The Air Force has planned to buy 100 B-21 bombers, but some officials have made the case for nearly 150 aircraft. Warden said Northrop was awarded the low-rate initial production contract for Lot Three and the advanced procurement funding for Lot Five late last year.

An Air Force spokesperson confirmed to Defense One the service received milestone decision authority approval for those awards and executed them in December.

Warden also said the company is investing in work on future defense programs, such as components for the sprawling Golden Dome missile defense system, its Project Talon drone wingman, and the Navy’s next-generation fighter jet.

“We want to be in a position to have cash on hand to invest more in supporting those because, again, they're well aligned with the administration's priorities in homeland defense, crewed

fighters and uncrewed vehicles to name just a few,” she said.

But Warden added that it’s unclear when contracts will be awarded for those programs.

“As we sit here in January, we have not yet seen those opportunities progress toward contract, and we believe that will happen over the next 24 months,” Warden said. “The timing of that is what is much more difficult to predict as we sit here.”

Last week, congressional appropriators allocated nearly $900 million for development of the Navy’s next-generation fighter, dubbed F/A-XX, bucking the Pentagon’s plans to underfund the effort and focus on the Air Force’s F-47 instead. The annual defense appropriations bill, which includes the aircraft development funding, is one of the budgets being held up in the Senate.

]]>

ICEYE Growing in Popularity as Europe Seeks to Improve Space-Based Capability

Carter Palmer, Forecast International — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 10:00:00 -0500

Europeans are currently moving to improve their space-based capabilities. ICEYE, in particular, is becoming popular amongst European Nations. Poland, Portugal, Greece, the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, and Finland have all made agreements with the Finnish manufacturer to provide Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) satellite capability for their respective armed forces.

Despite the fact that many European nations have some amount of military satellite capability, the United States provides Europe with early missile warning and a large amount of intelligence from earth observation satellites. France (CSO (Composante Spatiale Optique)), Germany (SARah), Spain (PAZ) and Italy (COSMO-SkyMed Second Generation (CSG)) have remote sensing capabilities. The United States serves as the primary backbone for European military space operations, though 2026 has seen a significant shift toward "strategic autonomy" as European nations react to a more "America First" posture from Washington.

Note: Estimated build years, includes PAZ-2 (estimated 2030)

There has been a flurry of arrangements with ICEYE in particular. While traditional players like Airbus and Thales Alenia generally build massive satellites that are destined for GEO (Geostationary Orbit), ICEYE builds smaller satellites that can be deployed in months to LEO (Low Earth Orbit).

Poland: Poland has been expanding its space capabilities in a few ways. Airbus was contracted in 2023 to provide two optical satellites based on Pléiades Neo. The country took a further step in securing SAR capability from ICEYE. In May 2025, Poland ordered three SAR satellites with an option for a further three from the company. These spacecraft launched in November 2025.

Sweden: In a similar vein to Poland, Sweden is currently investing in ten satellites, optical and SAR, with an unknown breakdown at this time. ICEYE will produce the SAR sats while Planet will make the optical component.

Finland: Although a number of satellites were not initially listed, it was reported that three satellites were purchased by Finland from ICEYE. Two of these satellites have already launched, with the opportunity for further options.

Germany: Perhaps the most ambitious ICEYE-related project was the formation of the Rheinmetall ICEYE joint venture. This joint venture will produce the SPOCK-1 (SAR-Spacesystem for Persistent Operational traCKing Stufe 1) constellation with 40 satellites planned. Full deployment of the system will likely be in the 2027/28 timeframe. With Stufe 1 in the name (Level 1), it is highly likely there will be follow-on "Stufen" in the future.

The Netherlands: The Netherlands ordered four SAR satellites from ICEYE to provide Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities to the Royal Netherlands Air and Space Force. One satellite has launched with the remaining three launching in the 2026/27 timeframe.

Greece: Similar to Germany, there is now an ICEYE production line in Greece. The country originally ordered two satellites, and with local production, more satellites will likely be ordered in the future. Both of these satellites have launched.

Portugal: Portugal ordered one ICEYE SAR satellite in June 2025 and a second in December 2025. The first satellite was launched in November 2025. These satellites will be utilized for environmental monitoring and disaster relief. These two ICEYE satellites are the "radar backbone" of the Atlantic Constellation, a joint project between Portugal and Spain.

Note: ICEYE orders with likely future follow-on orders to maintain capability

The common thread with these European countries is the move toward sovereign space tasking. By 2026, these nations have realized that having a seat at the table is no longer enough; they want operational sovereignty. By owning their own microsatellites, these smaller European powers can now monitor their specific borders without needing to request data from Washington.

]]>

The right roadmap to defense innovation in space

Juan J. Alonso, Space Project — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 08:45:52 -0500

Artificial intelligence is reshaping the national security landscape, from intelligence analysis to logistics to battlefield autonomy. Yet one of the most consequential forms of AI is still unfamiliar to many outside engineering circles. Physics AI refers to models that learn from data representing the physical world, such as high-fidelity simulations, experiments, and data collected during the operation of engineering systems. These models are built to predict how real-world systems behave.

For example, it could be the stalling point of an aircraft wing, the performance of a jet engine compressor in a dusty environment, or the aerodynamic heating of a hypersonic vehicle moving through the atmosphere.

Although Physics AI sounds like a recent invention, the underlying concept has been studied for nearly 15 years. The first PhD student who worked with me on this topic finished his thesis on this topic in 2013, and we thought of the work as a promising idea whose time was yet to come. Researchers and engineers have long assumed that once data became abundant enough, Physics AI models would be able to replicate and predict physical behavior with relatively high accuracy. For most of the past decade, this vision seemed distant, limited by exceedingly slow simulations and small datasets.

During the last two to three years, however, we have seen an acceleration of Physics AI, an inflection point, that has exceeded my expectations. Three major developments have converged.

First, engineering teams can now generate far larger, higher-fidelity datasets than ever before, mostly based on synthetic data generated by GPU-native, modern simulation tools. Second, the large language model revolution introduced new model architectures and techniques, many of which can be adapted to physical problems. Third, improved data storage, data curation, and data control infrastructure, together with modern APIs/SDKs, have enabled easier model training and sharing across the enterprise.

These developments produced remarkable results for defense contractors. For example, engineering simulations are currently used to design and manufacture new aerospace products; however, even with the most advanced computing architectures, these processes remain expensive and time-consuming. In contrast, by introducing Physics AI models into engineering workflows, simulations that once required six to eight hours of compute time can now be run in about a second, and without significant compromises in accuracy. Similar improvements are available in other physical disciplines that come together in most modern aerospace systems.

As incredible as that may sound, this shift is just the beginning. Many think that increasing data volumes will be sufficient to realize the full potential of Physics AI in the defense industry. That is not the case. If the defense community wants to achieve the same type of foundational models that are emerging in language AI, more data alone is not enough.

Physical systems follow strict laws and obey specific symmetries and invariants that traditional machine learning does not automatically understand or enforce. Regardless of how much simulation data we generate, there will never be enough real-world data to cover every relevant scenario, and training a model on observed data alone will severely limit its generality.

The next step forward is to embed the physics into the architecture of Physics AI models. We have to make sure that a Physics AI model understands the physics it represents in addition to its uncanny ability to reproduce the data it has seen in training. Doing so will create models that generalize more reliably, behave predictably, and can be applied across a much broader range of aerospace and defense systems.

How can such physics-aware Physics AI models change the way we develop new products in aerospace and defense? When engineers can quickly and accurately test thousands of ideas rather than just a handful, they can look at more alternatives, eliminate the bad ones early, and focus effort on what truly matters. That acceleration translates directly into more capable systems and shorter development cycles. Much as Chinese EV companies have cut new-vehicle development times in half, U.S. aerospace and defense could greatly accelerate the development and deployment of new systems. This use of cutting-edge AI technology could also help overcome cultural resistance to change in the defense industry, as a younger generation of engineers enters the field and is more familiar with AI tools.

This combination of data-driven learning and physics-informed structure will move the field from impressive demonstrations to transformational capability. It will allow engineers to design systems that would have been impractical to explore through conventional simulation and testing. It will strengthen the competitiveness of defense contractors by expanding the design space, shortening iteration cycles, and improving the performance of mission-critical platforms.

There are legitimate concerns about the race to develop artificial generalized intelligence (AGI) and its possible effects on society at large. Based on my observations, the danger with Physics AI in the defense space is that we will not move fast enough - greatly accelerating innovation while simultaneously increasing safety in design. Introducing Physics AI into engineering development processes will enable the workforce to experience significantly more learning loops, making their work product even more valuable.

The defense community faces a fundamental challenge: as requirements grow more complex, timelines expand, and adversaries seize the opportunity to accelerate their own capabilities and leapfrog the leaders. Physics AI is one of the few levers that can fundamentally change the rate at which the United States conceives, designs, and fields new systems, and always maintains a technological edge. It accelerates development by reducing simulation and design times. It improves quality by allowing engineers to explore the design space more thoroughly. Most importantly, it helps eliminate unworkable ideas quickly, supports risk management, and advances concepts that lead to superior performance. And we’ve barely scratched the surface of its possibilities.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has made Pentagon procurement reform a major priority for accelerating the pace of innovation in military programs. In a recent speech, he called on large defense contractors to “change the focus on speed and volume and divest their own capital to get there.”

Continued progress will require ongoing research, better integration into existing engineering workflows, and the development of models that combine abundant data with embedded physical principles. But the direction is clear. Physics AI will help the defense industry operate at the speed required by the strategic environment. It will enable more rigorous design, faster iteration, and more innovative systems. The nation that learns to use it effectively will hold a significant advantage in future conflicts.

]]>

Space Force probably needs twice as many guardians, vice chief says

Thomas Novelly — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 08:24:54 -0500

The number of operational U.S. military satellites has nearly doubled since the Space Force was created in 2019. Now its leaders want to double the size of the service itself.

The Space Force, which consists of about 10,000 guardians and 5,000 civilians, is adding about 500 troops a year—but that’s not enough, Gen. Shawn Bratton, the vice chief of space operations, during an Intelligence and National Security Alliance event late Wednesday evening.

“We’ve got to pick up the pace. We need to grow on the military side, probably around 1,000 a year, something like that, for the next decade,” Bratton said. “I think we really need to double the size.”

That’s because the newest branch of the service has seen the number of satellites under its control grow from 225 at its founding to 515 today, according to the American Enterprise Institute’s global space data navigator, while its budget has grown from $15 billion in 2020 to $39.9 billion in 2026—which includes a big bump from reconciliation funds.

Bratton said he needs more personnel to handle the growth.

“I'm super optimistic about ‘27 and we'll see how that comes out. It's less about budget though,” he said. “Do I have enough operators to fly all that stuff? Do I have enough infrastructure to base it somewhere? Do I have enough intelligence squadrons to develop the intelligence to make operators useful at their job?”

Some of the new personnel are working with the Pentagon’s combatant commands, where the Space Force has been catching up with its elder siblings in establishing service components to help the warfighting commanders. This week, the service and U.S. Southern Command held a ceremony designating the new Space Forces-Southern, which followed the creation of components in Indo-Pacific Command, Central Command, Africa Command, and European Command. It also established subordinate units focused on Japan and Korea.

Service officials also have aspirations to stand up a Space Force Special Operations component command, although Congress and defense experts have expressed skepticism over the plans. Earlier this month, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine noted that space operations and U.S. Space Command played a role in the recent special operations mission to capture Venezuela President Nicolás Maduro.

“We do a lot with the special ops community,” Bratton said during a question-and-answer session. “They understand what they need, and they know how to ask for it, and they have a pretty good understanding of what our capabilities are.”

Bratton was asked about a longstanding cultural divide between the service’s operators and acquisition experts, a situation that has provoked actions by both Congress and service leaders. The vice chief, a career operator, highlighted recent statements by Gen. Chance Saltzman, the chief of space operations, and called reforms to the officer training program a much-needed improvement.

“This is just by sheer force of will, the CSO driving the service to deliver this,” Bratton said. “The operators have to be involved in acquisitions, not just understand it, have to be involved in it. The acquirers have to have operational experience.”

]]>

Space Force previews $200M ground operations support recompete

Ross Wilkers — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 08:23:11 -0500

Space Force has given industry a detailed look at its plan for a potential seven-year, $200 million recompete contract for ground operations and development work focused on experimental systems.

The service branch is seeking to hire an industry partner that can aid the prototyping and operations of satellite ground systems and satellite operations centers. Sustainment and associated support services are included in the scope of work.

The Hybrid Architecture and Development for Experimental Systems contract also is part of Space Force’s efforts to accelerate its posture for launch and on-orbit operations, Space Force said in a Wednesday notice to release the draft solicitation.

HADES will support operations at Space Force’s Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation Support Complex at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico. Also called RSC, this hub is home to Space Force’s main center for research-and-development and command-and-control functions for satellites.

Whomever wins HADES will be responsible for integrating differences in coding between different prototype satellites made by different builders. The idea behind that is to ensure satellites are not lose because of inefficient or conflicting coding or commands.

Science Applications International Corp. captured the current iteration called Engineering, Development, Integration and Sustainment in 2020 at a $655 million ceiling over seven years.

Space Force has obligated $236.6 million in order volume to-date against EDIS to represent 36.1% of the ceiling, according to GovTribe data.

Questions and comments in response to the draft request for proposals are due no later than 6 p.m. Eastern time on March 20, or 4 p.m. Mountain time.

]]>

Booz Allen commits $400M to Andreessen Horowitz's late-stage fund

Ross Wilkers — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 08:21:54 -0500

Booz Allen Hamilton’s partnership with Andreesen Horowitz, one of the venture capital landscape’s highest-profile firms, will go beyond just helping startups land government contracts and developing new technologies.

Only days ago, Booz Allen announced it would connect 16z portfolio companies into the government contractor’s network with an eye toward helping these firms navigate the federal landscape.

In conjunction with that, a16z said it fetched $15 billion in capital across five separate funds including “American Dynamism.” That $1.18 billion vehicle focuses on defense and other industries where the U.S. government is either a customer or key stakeholder.

During Booz Allen’s fiscal third quarter earnings call with investors Friday, chief executive Horacio Rozanski said the contractor has committed to deploy $400 million into a16z’s late-stage venture fund.

That figure exceeds the size of Booz Allen’s own venture investment fund, which tripled to $300 million during the summer and launched in 2022 at $100 million. Booz Allen also added reindustrialization as a new focus area alongside the contractor’s long-standing interests in artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, defense, and deep tech.

But in working with a16z, Booz Allen also is expanding its own network of relationships into the ecosystem of startups and other young companies looking to establish footprints in the federal market.

“Together, we will co-create unique commercial tech for national security, public safety, healthcare and other government missions,” Rozanski told analysts.

Under President Trump, the Defense Department and other federal agencies have made it no secret that they want to expand the industrial base to include more emerging companies like those backed by a16z.

Friday's call took place three days prior to the Treasury Department's Monday announcement that it is cancelling all 31 of its contracts with Booz Allen. Our story on that development can be read here.

Also on the call, Booz Allen executives provided an update on the civilian business that has borne the brunt of cost-cutting efforts at the company amid slowdowns in procurement activity among those agencies.

Booz Allen’s headcount fell 12% from the prior year period to 31,600 as of Dec. 31, owing to several rounds of layoffs including an initial 7% workforce cut.

Kristine Martin Anderson, Booz Allen’s chief operating officer and its former civil business president, said “what changes is the approach” with respect to the missions contractors support at civilian agencies.

The current trend with these agencies is “funding smaller amounts more frequently,” Anderson said, but often at places where the workforce has also shrunk.

In other words, Booz Allen is seeing on-contract growth start to pick up again in its civilian portfolio and new awards slowly being unlocked again.

“You still need a strong (Federal Aviation Administration) and aviation safety, you still need to deliver health care, you still need secure borders, you still need to have the right infrastructure to drive the nation,” Anderson said. “We’re seeing exactly that, the missions are enduring, the same ones that we have invested in for years, but the focus area has changed and now they're really ready to move forward to impact.”

Fiscal third quarter revenue of $2.6 billion was 10% lower than the prior year period, while profit of $285 million showed a 14% year-over-year decrease in adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.

Booz Allen now projects a fiscal year sales decline of 5%-to-6%, compared to the prior outlook of 4%-to-5%.

The contractor did nudge up its adjusted EBITDA guidance range to $1.195 billion-to-$1.215 billion, compared to the prior $1.19 billion-to-$1.22 billion outlook. That new profit guidance keeps the adjusted EBITDA margin expectation at mid-10%.

]]>

Where’s all that Golden Dome money going? Lawmakers want to know

Thomas Novelly — Thu, 22 Jan 2026 09:44:12 -0500

Lawmakers are done asking how the Pentagon is spending $23 billion allocated for the Golden Dome missile-defense program. Now they’re writing their queries into law.

In the annual defense appropriations bill on Tuesday, House and Senate appropriators wrote that while they “support the operational objectives of Golden Dome for national security,” but criticized the Defense Department’s “decision to date not to provide complete budgetary details and justification of the $23,000,000,000 in mandatory funding” provided by the reconciliation bill passed this summer.

“Due to insufficient budgetary information, the House and Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittees were unable to effectively assess resources available to specific program elements and to conduct oversight of planned programs and projects for fiscal year 2026 Golden Dome efforts in consideration of the final agreement,” appropriators wrote.

The criticism, tucked into a four-bill package that included the annual defense appropriations bill on Tuesday, marks Congress’ latest concern over secrecy and spending on the missile defense initiative. Lawmakers said they haven’t received a master deployment schedule, cost schedule, performance metrics, or a finalized system architecture for the project.

The bill needs approval by both houses and the president’s signature to become law. If passed, it would require the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Space Force Gen. Michael Guetlein, the Golden Dome director, to provide a detailed breakdown within two months showing how the discretionary and mandatory funds are used for the initiative through 2027.

Starting in 2028, the Pentagon comptroller would be required to submit a separate budget justification volume annually detailing program descriptions, justifications, and requested funding for the initiative, according to the joint explanatory statement accompanying the bill.

Space and defense budget experts say the bill’s provision illustrates how lawmakers have been kept in the dark on Golden Dome and want answers.

“The fact that Congress is asking about this makes me think that even though you've seen DoD officials saying that they've been briefing Congress, they clearly have not,” said Victoria Samson, the chief director of space, security and stability for the Secure World Foundation. “Because otherwise they wouldn’t be asking for this.”

The provision would also require Guetlein to provide quarterly updates to congressional defense committees “detailing budget execution and the status of ongoing Golden Dome activities to achieve initial operational capability by 2028,” the appropriators wrote.

Golden Dome’s architecture—pitched by Trump and Hegseth as an ambitious defense system which can counter ICBMs, hypersonic missiles, and drones—has not been made public. The provision included in the appropriations bill would offer some transparency, and requires the project’s mandatory congressional reports to be “submitted in unclassified form” but added they may include a classified annex.

“Golden Dome, in particular, has been weirdly classified, and that's a huge priority for this administration,” Samson said. “I think it's encouraging that Congress is saying ‘look if you want all this, you need to be able to have an open discussion about what it is and what you're trying to accomplish.’”

The Missile Defense Agency, through its SHIELD contract vehicle, has cast a wide net to recruit defense firms for work on Golden Dome. So far, 2,440 applicants have been approved out of an original pool of 2,463 hoping to bid for the project.

]]>