Lt. Gen. David Tabor, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for plans and programs, described the report at an Oct. 20 Pentagon roundtable with reporters, Air & Space Forces Magazine reported. Reporters did not receive a copy of the report, and the service did not respond to a Defense News request for it by publication.

F-35s would make up about 40% of the fleet by 2035, up from about 30% today, according to figures Tabor cited. F-22s and their replacement, the F-47, would make up about 20%. The service plans to replace its F-22s with about the same number of F-47s, Tabor said.

F-15s and F-16s would split the remaining 40% about evenly. The figures exclude A-10s, which are not currently part of the Air Force’s plans for 2035.

Tabor said the analysis was based on what regional commanders say they need to carry out their missions at medium risk. The military rates risk on four levels: low, medium, significant and high. At medium risk, forces would likely achieve their goals but could be strained in long operations.

The analysis began before the war with Iran this year and was not driven by it, Tabor said. He cautioned that the 1,509 figure is likely to change with world events, new requirements and the rise of new technology.

Reaching the goal depends on Congress funding the jets and on Lockheed Martin and Boeing building them in time, Tabor said. Industry has “assured us that they can, and we believe them,” he told reporters, according to Air & Space Forces Magazine.

Air Force officials have long said the service needs to buy 72 fighters a year. The fiscal 2027 request seeks 38 F-35s and 24 F-15EXs, a total of 62. Tabor said purchases can increase over time.

The budget counts on $2.34 billion to pay for 14 of the 38 F-35s. That money would come through a reconciliation bill, a budget package that can pass the Senate with a simple majority. If that bill fails, Tabor said, the service could pull money from other programs or push the buys to 2028.

The Air Force is seeking multiyear contracts for the F-35 and F-15EX, a request now pending in Congress. Tabor said such deals would give industry more stability to expand production.

Older F-16s reach the end of their service lives in the mid-2030s, Tabor said, but the service has not decided whether to buy a new-build F-16, tentatively called the F-16G. That decision likely won’t come in the fiscal 2028 budget, he said.

The 1,509 figure does not count Collaborative Combat Aircraft, or CCAs, the drone wingmen that will fly alongside crewed fighters. The Air Force plans to field 500 CCAs by 2032. Tabor said the drones are not yet changing the fighter requirement but could reduce it in future reports.

The relocation is expected to be completed later this year and executed as a permanent change of station for the aircraft carrier’s crew and family members. The move, while long planned, had left many family members in limbo after the USS Abraham Lincoln’s routine six-month deployment was extended twice after the U.S. jointly launched Operation Epic Fury with Israel on Feb. 28.

The ship, which returned to San Diego, California, on Oct. 8, spent 322 days at sea — and 265 consecutive days without a port call.

At an August town hall meeting in San Diego, family members spoke with Acting Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao and other senior officials, expressing frustration with Navy officials over reported food shortages, concerns about self-harm and confusion over the timeline regarding the impending move to Washington.

According to the release, the home port shift is part of the Navy’s “strategic dispersal of ships,” while noting that “Regularly scheduled depot-level maintenance maximizes the lifespan of our Navy vessels and keeps our fleets lethal, modern, and ready to defend the nation. The work conducted during the maintenance period will maximize the lifespan of Abraham Lincoln and re-establish the carrier at the highest state of material and combat readiness.”

The Navy did not provide a start date for the maintenance period. Naval Base Kitsap is the Navy’s third-largest Fleet Concentration Area and its most complex multi-mission installation, according to its website. The Lincoln will join its fellow Nimitz-class carrier, USS Ronald Reagan, in Kitsap.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced on Oct. 7 that the carrier strike group had been awarded the Presidential Unit Citation, the military’s highest unit-level valor award.

Hegseth, who visited the carrier one day prior to the ship reaching shore, announced the award to the 5,000 sailors aboard the Lincoln, citing the “historic mission” that included completing “3,693 combat flights, sinking 64 Iranian warships, launching 450 Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles and shooting down 77 one-way aerial attack drones.”

Explosive ordnance disposal warfare lieutenants with six years of commissioned service and lieutenant commanders with 10 years of commissioned service are eligible for bonuses of up to $100,000.

Both ranks can commit to a 2-year or 4-year contract with different payment plans.

Lieutenants who sign up for the 4-year contract bonus receive a $100,000 retention bonus and must complete the EOD Department Head Qualified training by 8 years of commissioned service.

Lieutenants can also opt for a 2-year contract bonus, netting $12,500 annually, with the possibility of another two-year bonus worth the same amount at eight years of commissioned service.

This track would ensure $50,000 in bonuses.

The Navy is offering lieutenant commanders $100,000 in retention bonuses if they sign a 4-year contract after notching 10 years of commissioned service.

They can also instead sign up for a 2-year contract after those 10 years, with a $15,000 annual payment. If they re-up the 2-year contract at 12 years, they are eligible for the same yearly payment until they reach 14 years of commissioned service.

Eligible officers can submit an application through their commanding officer for the retention bonus within one year of being eligible.

The officer must submit a copy of their original signed contract and commanding officer approval to the Bureau of Naval Personnel for consideration.

The Navy has recently devoted its explosive ordnance resources to Arctic training, as the U.S. and allied nations focus on defending the frozen terrain from Chinese and Russian infiltration.

U.S. sailors worked alongside Swedish and Norwegian troops during February’s Arctic Specialist 26 exercise to destroy explosives underwater and on land.

The Government Accountability Office discovered that 29 of 64 efforts outlined in the Defense Department’s Responsible AI Strategy and Implementation Pathway remained incomplete as of April 2026.

According to a report published Oct. 14, the GAO also found that staffing shortages had hindered the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer’s ability to take additional steps to implement responsible AI, which the department uses to help accelerate AI adoption.

GAO recommended that the department address staffing needs in its Responsible AI Division, which falls under the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office, and issue a formal charter for the working council.

“Responsible AI should be considered the same as operationally effective AI,” said Owen Daniels, associate director of analysis at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology.

Effective testing, evaluation, verification and validation practices can help the military manage risks while ensuring systems operate as intended and operators understand their strengths and limitations, Daniels said.

Council ‘at risk of lapsing’

The GAO found that the Responsible AI Working Council did not meet from late 2024 until August 2025.

Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer, or CDAO, officials told the watchdog agency that other priorities, including developing guidance for generative AI and contributing to government-wide AI risk-management resources, had prevented the Responsible AI Division from organizing meetings.

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., raised a related concern about accountability during a May 2025 hearing regarding the Pentagon’s AI posture.

“It’s my observation that the Defense Department doesn’t lack in the number of principals, but rather, it often struggles with too little clarity in who is responsible for what.”

Officials from four DoD components told the GAO they faced implementation challenges during the hiatus that could have benefited from greater collaboration.

Six of the 10 DoD components surveyed said sharing responsible AI resources and best practices would increase their ability to incorporate the department’s six Responsible AI tenets into their AI use cases.

The council resumed meetings in August 2025, but the GAO found it still lacked a formal charter defining its responsibilities and specifying how frequently it should meet.

“Without a charter that defines roles and responsibilities for the council ... and that specifies the frequency of council meetings, the council is at risk of lapsing again,” the GAO report reads. “Such a lapse could increase the risk of DOD facing Responsible AI implementation issues that it would not have the collaborative capacity to swiftly and effectively resolve.”

Slow staffing

CDAO officials told the GAO they were unlikely to fill vacant positions or increase staffing while the office underwent restructuring, following its realignment to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

In response, the GAO argued that “by ... taking action to ensure it has staff in place to meet those needs,” CDAO could make better progress toward its goal of accelerating AI across the department.

Daniels said the staffing shortfall could make it more difficult to build AI literacy throughout the force.

“Operationally, the force needs to become AI literate, as warfighters will be responsible for determining when to deploy AI-enabled systems,” he said.

Service members need to understand AI systems’ limitations and recognize when delegating decisions to machines may be inappropriate, rather than defaulting to a machine’s judgment, Daniels said.

“Exercising meaningful human control — or to use the department’s term, appropriate levels of human judgment — over a military AI system requires robustly understanding a system’s operating boundaries through development, rigorous testing and evaluation, and training,” he said.

Congress’ role

The DoD agreed with the GAO’s two recommendations to issue a charter for the Responsible AI Working Council and address the Responsible AI Division’s workforce needs, according to the watchdog.

The GAO also urged Congress to order the department to implement earlier recommendations, including defining the responsibilities of organizations involved in AI activities and assigning responsibility and a timeline for identifying and managing the department’s AI workforce.

In a Sept. 21 letter, Sens. Jack Reed, D-R.I., Mark Warner, D-Va., and Chris Coons, D-Del., expressed concern that the Pentagon’s AI push could be outpacing its governance efforts.

“Recent events have given us growing concern about the extent to which agencies under your oversight have prioritized acceleration of AI capability adoption and ‘experimentation’ over effective governance,” the letter reads.

Reed has also called for Congress to establish clearer guardrails for military AI.

“Congress must do its job and provide balanced oversight, standards, and rules of the road,” he said.

The service said the course — which included on-site field evaluations at eight Danish dairy facilities currently approved for U.S. military procurement — aimed to ensure military members and their families overseas receive dairy that meets or exceeds U.S. standards.

In the U.S., commercial milk must be processed according to the Food and Drug Administration’s Pasteurized Milk Ordinance. Because commercial pasteurization methods are “udderly” different across the world, the course gives officers the skills to evaluate pasteurization technology in different regions, the Army said in a Monday release. The course has been taught and revised since 2004.

Military auditors from around the world, including Public Health Command Pacific, Area Support Group Kuwait and Public Multinational Force and Observers Egypt, trained to improve their pasteurization skills. Public Health Command Europe is unique, the service said, because it offers military inspectors the chance to see more than 65 pasteurizer setups.

During the course, led by Chief Warrant Officer 4 Clayton Davenport, the command food safety officer for Public Health Command Europe, the Army said officers gained realistic experience assessing equipment in operation.

“The primary training objective was to provide progressive and sequential auditor development training in pasteurizer operations that enhances understanding of the public health controls of various pasteurizers,” Davenport said in the release. “Maintaining specialized auditing capabilities remains essential to force health protection, particularly amid budgetary pressures.”

Commander of I Corps Lt. Gen. Matt McFarlane told reporters at a media roundtable in Washington that the desire to see the platform deployed across the formation by the end of fiscal 2027 was dependent on what the service was able to provide.

“Scaling and speed up is based on resources available,” said McFarlane. “That’s not in my job jar.”

The Army’s NGC2 platform will permit technologies, weapons, sensors, devices and applications from across the force to co-exist on the same network, streamlining decision-making during combat environments.

As the service expands the new platform across the I Corps, which oversees troops across the Indo-Pacific, the Army will get a close-up look at how the system allows military personnel and machines to communicate with each other over vast geographical distances and in communication-contested environments.

Among its many responsibilities, the I Corps works with Security Assistance Group-Ukraine, a U.S.-led joint military command headquartered in Germany that provides weapons and training support to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

I Corps uses SAG-U to digest lessons learned from the unique military dynamics of the war in Ukraine and determine how to apply them to other potential conflicts worldwide.

The Army recently awarded defense tech company Anduril Industries a contract worth up to $1.8 billion to continue developing NGC2’s common data baseline, or software foundation.

Anduril, along with Palantir, Raft and Striveworks, has been refining the technology to help the service move NGC2 from the experimental phase to fielding.

The resources McFarlane referred to include funds, which are currently up in the air as the Senate still works to pass the National Defense Authorization Act.

With Congress currently in recess, the timeline for approval of those funds is murky.

The Army’s proposed budget for fiscal 2027 includes a $904 million request for the research, development and scaling of NGC2.

“This enterprise licensing provides all assigned and attached personnel at any echelon within the specified commands the ability to gain MSS accounts within those domains they have authorized access,” the service said in last week’s announcement.

Maven is an AI-enabled software platform owned by the government but developed by the company Palantir. The system aggregates and analyzes data from several feeds like intelligence reports, drone video, satellite imagery, maps and more in support of real-time decision-making by commanders and analysts across services and allies.

For example, Defense Department officials say they used Maven to identify and bomb more than 2,000 distinct targets in Iran within the first 96 hours of Operation Epic Fury. Officials add that the system is used to process about 6 million pages of text per day for intelligence and operational workflows.

Ahead of a Maven training summit in August, the Marine Corps also explained that its demand for Maven has grown, noting that some 5,500 Marines used the system in the month prior. Additionally, the Marines replaced its manual process for filing Situational Reports with a Maven application.

Before the Oct. 1 agreement, the service’s license only allowed specific commands and organizations to use the AI-enabled battle management system and only through a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network, or SIPRNet. In that August 2025 rollout, the service provided dozens of units with access and training to the system.

The Marine Corps is encouraging commands to designate an MSS implementation lead for their respective organization. The service said that training materials are available on the secure website Intelink. It added that further guidance such as an MSS Implementation Plan will be published separately.

At the commission’s second meeting, members reviewed two service-level efforts: an Air Force and Space Force pilot in which the commission reported a 60% increase in military spouse placements over three weeks.

Members also called for measuring actual hires, promotions and retention rather than relying on participation figures alone.

The pilot matches spouses with hiring managers before they arrive at their next duty station.

Spouses can use the Air Force Civilian Careers website to identify where they expect to move, even before receiving formal permanent change of station, or PCS, orders. The program then facilitates introductions to hiring managers at the gaining installation.

The pilot entered its second phase in September, expanding to additional installations in the United States and overseas, according to the commission.

The military spouse commission also reported a 70% year-over-year increase in completed job profiles through SpouseWorks, a career and education resource for military spouses. Officials said they are working to make the platform easier to use and improve its ability to connect spouses with employment opportunities. The commission also announced that SpouseWorks is now available to spouses of all ranks.

Jennifer Hegseth, commission chair and wife of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, said the increase in completed job profiles suggested that spouses were ready to pursue employment but needed a better way to connect with opportunities.

“So that just shows that spouses are wanting to work, they’re ready to apply, and they just needed the right outlet,” she noted in the meeting.

The Army’s Department of the Army Voluntary Reassignment Program, or DAVRAP, takes that approach a step further by helping eligible civilian employees maintain career continuity when a permanent change of station requires them to relocate.

Launched in May 2025, the voluntary program allows eligible Army civilian employees to seek noncompetitive reassignment to positions at their gaining installations.

The commission reported that more than 11,000 candidates had created profiles since the program launched, with more than 12,000 hiring managers participating across Army installations in the United States and overseas. Members in attendance did not discuss in detail the number of completed reassignments nor specify how many candidates were military spouses.

Linda Lelande, a Coast Guard representative, asked that the Coast Guard be kept in mind along with the other services, and said spouses can face similar employment disruptions when moving between Coast Guard installations.

“They often experience this very same problem where they have a job, maybe in childcare and then they go to another Coast Guard base and have to start over,” Lelande said.

She asked whether the service could adopt elements of the Army’s reassignment model. Commission members said they wanted to identify existing programs that work and expand them rather than create new initiatives without first examining what the services already offer.

Navy representative Angela Perryman urged the commission to measure whether employer partnerships lead to actual hires.

“It’s one thing to say you’re hiring military spouses, but I want to see numbers,” Perryman said. “I want to see how many military spouses have actually been hired into these positions.”

Members also discussed tracking employment outcomes by region and in relation to PCS moves.

The commission did not announce a finalized department-wide expansion plan or implementation deadline. Member discussions underscored the need to assess whether existing programs deliver measurable employment results before determining how they might be adopted more broadly.

A U.S. Navy administrative message, or NAVADMIN, released Monday, establishes the Submarine Chief of the Boat as a general rating equivalent to a command master chief. The Navy said the change is intended to provide a clearer career path, specialized training and advancement opportunities for submarine sailors seeking the leadership position.

The Chief of the Boat, or COB, serves as the commanding officer’s principal enlisted adviser, responsible for issues affecting sailors’ welfare, morale, job satisfaction and utilization, according to the Navy’s enlisted occupational standards.

Previously, the COB was assigned by billet and identified by Navy Enlisted Classification 8COB, according to the Navy’s personnel manual. The existing policy specified a normal 36-month tour and allowed submarine sailors in paygrades E-8, E-8 selectee and E-9 to qualify for the designation.

Under the previous policy, selection involved a screening process for sailors seeking the assignment. Those historical requirements should not be assumed to remain in effect under the new rating; the NAVADMIN directs applicants to the submarine force’s senior enlisted program assignment instruction, COMSUBLANT/COMSUBPACINST 1306.2, for current application requirements and selection criteria.

The new rating is open to active-duty, submarine-designated sailors, all of whom must be submarine warfare qualified. Non-nuclear submarine ratings will be the primary source of candidates, though other submarine-designated personnel may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Selected Reserve sailors are not eligible.

The Navy will immediately convert E-9 personnel currently holding the 8COB designation to COBCM, according to the NAVADMIN.

The announcement does not specify how many sailors are expected to enter the new rating or detail how all existing selection and assignment procedures will change.

Meyer will now serve as Hegseth’s senior advisor to the task force, which is tasked with addressing the military’s “unacceptable” living conditions, the defense secretary announced Monday in a video on social media.

“Our warfighters should be focused on training, readiness and defending this great nation,” Meyer said during the video. “They shouldn’t have to fight for basic living conditions when they come home at night.”

As senior advisor, Meyer will travel to installations across the country, looking at their barracks, meeting with service members and identifying how to curtail any issues blocking the resolutions.

The first group of installations Meyer is expected to visit are all located in California, with Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton on Tuesday and Wednesday, followed by Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms on Thursday and Marine Corps Air Station Miramar on Friday.

If sticking to schedule, Meyer will have visited 21 bases across the country, with most along the East Coast, by the end of December, according to a map displayed during the social media video.

“I want you to ask this question for the next couple of months: Where’s Dakota?” Hegseth posed during the video. “Could he be coming to my base, to my installation, to my camp, my fort? Because he might be.”

“He’ll be traversing the country on behalf of the Barracks Task Force, on behalf of me personally inspecting, holding town halls, getting real input, and then providing real solutions,” Hegseth continued. “Be on the lookout for him.”

Hegseth first formed the task force in October 2025 to be led by the assistant secretary of defense for energy, installations and environment. The group is meant to identify investment opportunities and create department-wide policies for barracks standards.

The One Bill Beautiful Bill Act, which was signed into law in July 2025, gave the Defense Department $1.2 billion for barracks improvement, with $230 million allotted for the Marine Corps Barracks 2030 initiative and $425 million for enlisted boot camp barracks and other related facilities, as well as $1 billion for Army, Navy, Air Force and Space Force restoration and modernization of military housing.

A Government Accountability Office report from August found that the Defense Department does not request enough funding to meet its installation maintenance and improvement needs, resulting in an estimated $285 billion of maintenance backlogs in fiscal 2025.

Previous GAO reports found that some barracks were “chronically neglected,” resulting in poor conditions that impacted enlisted service members’ quality of life. Thousands of service members lived in subpar barracks, with some having potentially serious health and safety risks, according to a 2023 report.

Recently, the Barracks Task Force funded various projects at installations across the nation, including modernized housing at Fort Stewart-Hunter Army Airfield, Georgia, and a housing installation at Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton, Washington.

“From this point forward, there’s no confusion about who’s accountable,” Meyer posted on social media. “If we don’t get this fixed, there’s only one person to blame. Me.”

Former President Barack Obama awarded Meyer his Medal of Honor in 2011 for his service during the Battle of Ganjgal in Afghanistan in 2009 when he repeatedly entered an enemy ambush zone to rescue wounded comrades and recover the bodies of fallen service members. His actions were credited with saving 13 Americans and 23 Afghan personnel.

Meyer left the Marine Corps in 2010 and reenlisted in the reserves in April 2025, with his oath of enlistment administered at the Pentagon by Hegseth.

Speaking with reporters at the Association of the United States Army’s annual meeting last week, Lt. Gen. John L. Rafferty, commanding general of U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, confirmed that an Army air defense unit had been “earmarked” for GDA support.

The unit, which he declined to identify, is “a well-trained organization that we know can meet the demands of Golden Dome for America when the systems are fielded,” Rafferty said.

With the current air defense systems across the joint force grouped in aggregated packages, including a sensor, an interceptor and a command-and-control package, Rafferty said he understood GDA as a way to do some disaggregation and bring together command-and-control systems into a group that can work together across the United States.

“So now, as you array sensors and interceptors and C2 platforms across the country, you can use any sensor, best shooter, right C2, in that disaggregated way,” he said. “So we believe that right now … we have the most experienced air defense and combat-seasoned air defense formations in the world [and] we have the right people with the right experience to manage the system when they get here, with some training.”

Joint Task Force Gold, a 100-person unit established in January under U.S. Northern Command and led by Army officers, is also leaning into preparation for Golden Dome with planning drills and stakeholder gatherings, said Col. Kevin “Stoney” Stonerook, deputy commander of the task force.

“We are helping put together the team of teams, all the different stakeholder communities, be that vendors and other government agencies, to really provide a cyber warfare capability for GDA,” Stonerook said. “We definitely know that we are involved in putting together some of the sites as we look at building out GDA across the country and other areas, and trying to integrate all those capabilities across the multiple layers of GDA, but there’s a lot we still have to figure out.”

The task force, he said, had hosted a series of planning “sprints” beginning in February, working with about 300 members of the “GDA stakeholder community” on-site in Colorado Springs to hash out a concept of operations for the project and to identify unanswered questions.

The next planning sprint, Stonerook said, was set for the end of October.

“We’re continuing to find out more and help focus the efforts of not just the JTF-Gold 100-plus personnel, but all the rest of the stakeholder communities to really focus on those questions needing to be answered for … operationalization,” he said.

Pentagon officials have said they’re looking to field an early version of GDA by the end of next year — to meet a goal of having an operational shield by the end of President Donald Trump’s second term, with a more fully realized version of the system to be built out by 2035.

But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have expressed frustration with slow progress and inconsistent communication from the White House over the way forward with the ambitious and expensive project.

The Pentagon requested $17.5 billion for Golden Dome in fiscal 2027 through a $350 billion reconciliation package, and just about $400 million for the project in research and development funds, within the base budget request. As Air and Space Forces Magazine reported in September, dispute over passage of the reconciliation bill could leave the bulk of funding in jeopardy.

At the panel with reporters, Rafferty maintained the Army was all in on supporting development of the shield system.

“I really try to draw no distinction between [Army Space and Missile Defense Command] and JTF-Gold,” he said. “It’s going to take all of us to help enable the defense of the homeland through Golden Dome for America, and it is SMDC’s No. 1 priority to protect the homeland. So we’re all in to help to deliver that.”

The F-22 completed airborne tactical command and in-flight control of a YFQ-44A Fury earlier this month, the Air Force announced.

The fighter jet’s pilot served as an airborne “quarterback” and gave high-level directives to an Anduril-made Fury CCA. The unmanned, semi-autonomous aircraft’s onboard autonomy software interpreted and executed the directives in real time, per the release, performing in-flight maneuvers and simulated combat tasks.

“This achievement demonstrates what is possible when we are aligned with industry on a shared imperative: delivering capability to the warfighter at unprecedented speed,” Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink said in the announcement.

“We are driving urgency into every part of acquisition from rapid integration and flight learning to disciplined assessment, so we can turn promising technology into combat capability at the pace the threat demands,” he continued.

Personnel from the 412th Test Wing, 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron, 309th Software Engineering Group, Experimental Operations Unit, F-22 System Program Office and the CCA Software Autonomy and Teaming Branch collaborated during the demonstration.

The service plans to use data from this event to inform software integration, developmental testing and further CCA concepts, the announcement says.

This test follows other milestones in the CCA development after the service announced its intention to have 500 combat-ready, semi-autonomous systems by 2032, with an overall fleet size of 1,000.

The Anduril-made Fury executed its first live-fire test by conducting an end-to-end, beyond-line-of-sight strike against a simulated target during a live-fire test at Edwards Air Force Base, California, in July.

Alongside Anduril’s CCA, the service has made strides with General Atomics’ FQ-42A Vengeance, which was delivered to Creech Air Force Base, Nevada, last month to continue regular test and evaluation operations.

Anduril has yet to announce which Air Force base will house Fury, but Creech airmen conducted an Agile Combat Employment exercise earlier using the defense company’s aircraft, allowing airmen to complete sorties and build foundational tactics and procedures that will mold how CCA are integrated into the force.

The combined tonnage of combat ships built by China in the two years through to December 2025 amounted to 636,208 tons, compared to 270,509 tons for the United States, according to data compiled by Flottes de Combat and French maritime industry association Gican.

China accounted for more than a third of the global naval tonnage constructed in 2024-25, based on the Euronaval report. U.S. lawmakers and congressional researchers have warned that China’s greater shipbuilding capacity, combined with delays and bottlenecks in U.S. naval shipbuilding, could hurt America’s ability to keep up with Beijing’s expanding fleet.

“We are seeing a fairly substantial expansion of naval forces, and consequently of shipbuilding,” said Philippe Missoffe, the general director of Gican, in a press briefing here on Tuesday. “We’re seeing an increase in power capabilities, particularly nuclear-powered attack submarines for example.”

Global naval construction overall was booming in the period, with 1.47 million tons of combat vessels built in 2024-25, compared with 959,671 tons in the prior two years. The value of global naval construction amounted to $123.9 billion, climbing from $81.8 billion in 2022-23.

The value of Chinese combat-vessel construction was US$43.5 billion in the latest two-year period, compared with $26.8 billion for the U.S., the report said.

China has reversed roles from 2022-2023, when production of the country’s naval yards amounted to 202,520 tons, compared with 245,703 tons for the U.S., according to the previous edition of the shipbuilding report published in 2024.

The U.S. fleet of combat vessels of more than 200 tons amounted to 3.11 million tons as of Jan. 1, 2026, compared to 1.44 million tons for China’s fleet, the report showed, That compares with 3.22 million tons for the U.S. and 1.3 million tons for China two years earlier.

Russia was in third place in terms of naval construction in 2024-25, with 149,056 tons built, followed by India with 76,430 tons and Italy with 53,700 tons. Turkey, France, Japan, South Korean and Romania rounded out the top 10 of naval builders.

The four-day Euronaval show, the world’s biggest maritime-defense exhibition, is set to kick of in Paris on Nov. 3. The number of exhibitors will be more than 40% higher than in 2024, according to the organizers.

Doron Spielman, a spokesperson for the prime minister, later confirmed to Reuters that Netanyahu had met with Hegseth at the Uvda Air Force Base in Israel’s southern Negev desert region.

Netanyahu and Hegseth discussed “the threats in the region” and the U.S.-Israel partnership in dealing both offensively and defensively with those threats, he said in a brief phone call.

Hegseth also thanked Israel for hosting U.S. forces, which Spielman said numbered in the thousands, and discussed President Donald Trump’s support for the prime minister.

“There’s a deep personal relationship here that was at the core of this discussion,” Spielman said.

On Sunday, Trump endorsed Netanyahu in next week’s parliamentary election in Israel, the country’s first ballot since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on southern Israel.

The Pentagon has not publicly commented on Hegseth’s visit.

Hegseth earlier posted on X that he had visited U.S. service members in the Central Command area of responsibility, which covers the Middle East, northeast Africa and parts of Asia.

He did not specify where he had met with the forces.

Hegseth’s visit comes as tensions flare between the U.S. and Iran over the Strait of Hormuz and as Yemen’s Iran-allied Houthis intensify their attacks on Saudi Arabia.

U.S. and Israeli forces launched joint strikes against Iran in late February, setting off the wider Middle East war. Netanyahu told Israeli media this month that he’s not seeking to attack Iran before the Oct. 27 Israeli election. Trump has said he will not attack Iran before U.S. midterm elections in November.

Israel has hosted additional U.S. forces, including military aircraft, since at least February as part of the war with Iran.

Gecko Robotics announced Tuesday that the Navy is increasing the value of its initial contract to up to $300 million — just six months after the company reached an initial agreement with the sea service.

“Gecko’s AI and robotic technology can save the U.S. Navy up to $8 million in repair costs per ship and return vessels to sea quicker by identifying structural issues up to 50 times faster than traditional methods — reducing inspections from months to days,” Gecko Robotics said in a release.

The initial contract began as a 5-year, $54 million indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity deal for Gecko to work on 18 ships assigned to the Navy’s U.S. Pacific Fleet.

The company uses drones, wall-climbing robots and fixed sensors to gather data on components, decks, welds and hulls.

That information, paired with AI tools, is used to identify current and potential structural issues that may remain hidden to the naked eye.

A key part of the new contract investment is Gecko Robotics’ Komodo machine system, which analyzes the health of deck coatings by scanning — eliminating the need to physically dig into them.

This allows the Navy to plan repairs and map out damaged areas before the ship enters dry dock, something that previously only occurred after the maintenance cycle began.

The Navy has consistently stated its goal of reaching 80% fleet readiness by 2027, despite criticisms of the service’s deployment capabilities.

The Government Accountability Office reported in December 2024 that readiness rates among the Navy’s amphibious warfare ships fell to 46% between 2011 and 2020, hindering Marine Corps deployment and training plans.

In August 2025, that rate reportedly dipped to just 41%, resulting in a more than five-month gap in Marine Expeditionary Unit deployments that year and further straining resources amid the Trump administration’s push to counter the illicit drug trade in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle, who adopted the 80% goal from his predecessor Adm. Lisa Franchetti, laid out the major tenets for achieving the ambitious milestone.

“Achieving this requires shorter maintenance cycles, increased spare-parts availability, improved training pipelines and targeted upgrades across the fleet,” Caudle wrote for Military Times in December.

The 1st Battalion, 10th Marine Regiment, will be equipped with the Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System, or NMESIS, as part of the ongoing Marine Corps Force Design 2030 modernization plan, according to a recent release.

Lt. Col. Joseph Mozzi, the battalion’s commanding officer, called making the service NMESIS-capable “a crucial step to facilitate the maritime component commanders to fight for sea control.”

“[The NMESIS] is the Marine Corps’ emerging ground-based anti-ship missile capability, and it will also be a ground-based long-range precision fires platform,” he said in the announcement.

The NMESIS consists of an unmanned Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, or JLTV, with two Naval Strike Missiles mounted atop the chassis, according to the service.

The service added that during a 2021 exercise, Marines successfully tested the weapon system off the coast of Hawaii, where it had an effective range of 130 nautical miles. Later, it introduced the system to the 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment in 2024 and to the 12th Marine Littoral Regiment in 2025.

Earlier this month, the Marine Corps deployed NMESIS along with the Marine Air Defense Integrated System, or MADIS, to Japan’s southwesternmost island — some 69 miles from Taiwan — for exercise Keen Sword.

Although the 1st Battalion is now a medium missile battalion, the 10th Marines aren’t done with artillery.

Col. William Soucie, commanding officer of 10th Regiment, 2nd Marines Division, explained that the regiment will retain its lightweight Howitzer capabilities, with NMESIS as a complement to it.

“While the transition of the weapons platform is interesting, what makes the story compelling is that the Marines and Sailors in that formation are not changing,” he said. “They are just as good as they have always been, and they will make the platform successful and whatever mission they are assigned successful because they are phenomenal.”

The close attention that Beijing is paying to the new USMC strategy became clear about a year ago when the Global Times [环球时报] published an unusual editorial decrying Washington’s new determination to deploy anti-ship missiles proximate to China. Arguing that the new American strategy aims to correct a U.S. Navy prioritization for “open ocean control” rather than “close-quarters engagement in confined waters,” this article concludes that Washington’s effort to “control maritime chokepoints [aims to] curtail the freedom of rivals to operate at sea … [and] introduces new risks … .”

A much more detailed study of the new USMC strategy appeared in early 2025 in the naval magazine Modern Ships [现代舰船]. This Chinese assessment noted with considerable alarm that the USMC was experimenting with unmanned surface vessels capable of firing the stealthy LRASM anti-ship cruise missile and that these units could alternatively serve as forward scouts, fixing targets for long-range U.S. military fires. Still, this analysis underlines some weaknesses of the USMC strategy, including the range limitations of related sensors and drones, and even characterized the air-defense capabilities of the USMC as “precarious.” Another study in this same magazine had earlier drawn attention to the logistics quandaries raised by the new strategy.

A 2026 Chinese analysis in another Chinese navy-affiliated magazine, Shipborne Weapons [舰载武器], offers a sharper critique of the Marines’ new approach, noting that the creation of the Marine Littoral Regiments (MLR) “actually represents campaign preparation by the USMC to militarily intervene in China’s unification.” At the outset, this study notes that many American think tanks raised doubts about the strategy, suggesting that forward bases without sea and air control could prove “untenable.”

There is a recognition in this analysis that the new mobile missile launchers that are being deployed by the USMC are small, light, and thus “not easily discovered by … surveillance.” In the end, this study concludes that the USMC strategy is vulnerable because the “U.S has no way to quickly establish air superiority. This could take weeks or months and would entail massive losses.”

Among the most remarkable pieces written by Chinese experts on the new USMC direction is one that was published in translation recently by the China institute at U.S. Naval War College (NWC). That translation deserves extra attention due to the fact that it was written by senior active-duty Chinese Navy officers and also because it was published originally in a sensitive internal circulation Chinese military journal too.

Though this piece does not touch directly on the sensitive Taiwan issue, and it also explicitly notes the USMC strategy aims at deterrence of Beijing, it nevertheless explains that the new USMC deployments amount to “continuous penetration and encroachment into our near seas” and argues that China must “establish effective countermeasures.” Notably, this high-level rendering links the USMC strategy to China’s improving submarine force in significant detail, observing that forward deployed Marine forces could deploy “hydro-acoustic arrays and other assets to establish barrier zones and monitoring areas to track Chinese submarine operations.” Similar arguments are made that U.S. deployments could degrade Chinese air defenses by employing drone swarms “to overwhelm our radar tracking capacity.”

The Chinese Navy authors caution against applying resource-intensive assets to defeat such American asymmetric tactics. However, the conclusion of the article is rather disturbing since it argues that China must counter this posture by deploying a Chinese “proactive offensive posture, aggressively expand[ing] our operational reach, [and] project[ing] forces forward.” Elaborating, they counsel: “We must maintain and normalize forward-deployed forces, extend[ing] undersea combat capabilities as far forward as feasible.”

This conclusion and other aspects of these Chinese-language analyses raise some rather uncomfortable questions for U.S. defense planners. The final translation done by NWC strongly hints that the Chinese Navy may be adopting a more aggressive approach as a direct reaction to the forward lean in American strategy. This seems to be a very clear manifestation of the so-called ‘security dilemma,’ wherein two powers’ defensive measures develop into a dangerous escalatory spiral. Moreover, there is a clear recognition by Chinese strategists that forward USMC elements could be vulnerable due to logistics challenges and lack of proper air and missile defenses. It would not be the first time that the USMC was deployed haphazardly in East Asia at the cost of many American lives.

Understanding these dynamics, American leaders should recalibrate and opt to rely less on forward defense. Alternatively, the USMC should aim to embrace the strategic depth of the Pacific and its myriad island archipelagos (e.g. the Philippines) in a less costly, less risky, more sustainable, and clearly defensive strategy.

Lyle Goldstein is director of the China Initiative at Brown University’s Watson School and concurrently serves as director of the Asia Program at the think-tank Defense Priorities.

APKWS kits convert unguided 2.75-inch rockets into laser-guided munitions. All four services field them, and the weapon has become a cheaper alternative to air-to-air missiles for shooting down drones.

Congress still has to approve and fund the buy, the department said. BAE said it will increase production while the two sides work out a multiyear contract. Neither side announced the deal’s cost.

The framework also outlines a path to increase output to 35,000 kits a year for U.S. allies. The department said that added capacity will come online as partner nations formally request kits through the Foreign Military Sales program.

“By securing multi-year demand, this agreement keeps production lines running at capacity, provides our forces with interceptor inventory, and flips the cost calculus in the taxpayer’s favor,” Michael Duffey, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for acquisition and sustainment, said in the announcement.

BAE, which builds the kits in Hudson, New Hampshire, and Austin, Texas, said in February that it had delivered its 100,000th kit.

The 25,000 figure in this framework agreement matches capacity BAE has cited before. A company official said in 2023 that APKWS was in full-rate production with room to grow to 25,000 units a year.

“APKWS delivers proven, reliable and affordable precision at scale to counter evolving threats and ensure our warfighters maintain a decisive advantage,” said Tom Arseneault, president and CEO of BAE Systems Inc.

The Navy’s current five-year APKWS contract with BAE, awarded in August 2025, is worth up to $1.74 billion. It covers up to 55,000 kits for the Navy, the Army and foreign customers, with work expected to be completed by December 2031.

Among allied buyers, Saudi Arabia won State Department approval in July for a possible $1.96 billion package that includes up to 20,000 APKWS kits, split evenly between air-to-air and air-to-ground versions. Italy is also weighing a buy of 5,031 kits for counter-drone defense.

The APKWS agreement is the latest in a series of framework deals the Pentagon has signed this year to boost munitions production.

In January, Lockheed Martin agreed to more than triple production of the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 Missile Segment Enhancement, or PAC-3 MSE, interceptor.

In March, BAE and Lockheed agreed to quadruple production of seekers for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, interceptor. A separate THAAD framework signed in January led to a June contract worth more than $35 billion for the interceptors themselves.

Around 11 p.m. Sunday, seven or eight members of the National Guard were “monitoring” a situation on the 400 block of 8th Street SE when a shooting broke out, Jeff Carroll, interim chief of police of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, said during a press conference following the incident.

The guardsmen were sitting in a van when they observed a fight break out near the sidewalk and exited their vehicle to intervene. Then, an individual involved in the fight pulled out a firearm and began shooting.

When members of the National Guard instructed the individual to put down the gun, the suspect turned toward the guardsmen and began discharging, Carrol said.

The guard members returned fire. In the shootout, both the suspect, who was placed under arrest, and a guardsman were struck and transported to local hospitals for treatment.

The guardsman was shot in the leg, and the suspect was struck in the abdomen. Both are expected to survive the non-life-threatening injuries, Carrol said.

The incident occurred a mile from the Capitol building near the Eastern Market Metro Station in front of Cafe 8, a hookah bar and restaurant.

Councilmember Charles Allen, D-Ward 6, who represents the area where the shooting took place, said that the city has seen “repeated issues” outside of Cafe 8 involving gunshots, prompting him to urge an emergency closure until “this business changes how they operate.”

The MPD Internal Affairs Division and Criminal Investigations Division are investigating the incident, and there is no further threat to the community.

Sunday’s shooting comes one year after two members of the West Virginia National Guard, who both later received Purple Hearts, were shot blocks from the White House in front of the Farragut West Metro Station. Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, succumbed to her injuries a day after the shooting, while Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, survived after undergoing surgery.

There are roughly 4,500 soldiers currently deployed to D.C., costing taxpayers about $1.5 million per day. The National Guard is scheduled to remain in the District through January 2029 at a total cost of $1.4 billion.

In August, the Defense Department ordered 30 private and state universities to review their ties with foreign institutions listed under Section 1286 of the fiscal 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, which seeks to restrict nations like China and Russia from gaining access to American research and technology.

Failure to comply could have resulted in a cutoff of federal research funding.

“All 30 universities have fully mitigated identified relationships with foreign entities of concern,” according to a DoD announcement on Monday. “Overall, the audits resulted in more than 80 termination-related actions across the 30 universities.”

The Pentagon did not publicly list the 30 institutions but hailed seven of them on Monday for going “above and beyond” by “quickly terminating problematic relationships.” Those seven included: Oklahoma State University, The Pennsylvania State University, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of South Carolina, University of Southern California, University of Texas at Austin and Virginia Tech.

“These academic institutions that went above and beyond deserve immense credit for setting the benchmark in domestic research security,” said Joseph Jewell, assistant secretary of defense for science and technology. ”Rather than settling for minimum compliance, these institutions took bold, self-initiated steps to protect their labs, faculty, and intellectual property from foreign exploitation.”

In addition to auditing their ties with foreign institutions listed in the 2019 NDAA, the Pentagon ordered the universities to review partnerships with “organizations associated with rebranded Confucius Institutes” that teach Chinese language and culture — but which the U.S. government fears actually spread Chinese government propaganda on college campuses.

The August review followed the July release of DoD’s fiscal 2025 update of “foreign institutions engaging in problematic activities.” The list named 130 academic and research institutions located in China, Russia and Iran.

“These institutions have been confirmed to engage in activities that increase the likelihood of U.S. government-funded research and development efforts being misappropriated,” the Pentagon said.

In addition to severing ties with the designated entities, American colleges also conducted “precautionary terminations involving entities not specifically identified on the list,” the Pentagon said Monday.

The U.S. government has been cracking down on both military and civilian research collaboration with China. In August, Ohio State University agreed to a $2.1 million settlement after civil allegations that it failed to disclose employee affiliations with Chinese institutions regarding NASA and National Science Foundation projects.

Other nations are also scrutinizing ties between local universities and Chinese colleges. Last month, the UK ordered British universities to cease working with the China General Technology Research Institute, which British security services believe to be a front for Chinese espionage. Beijing denied the allegations.

Tech. Sgt. Ian Patterson, a Tactical Air Control Party instructor assigned to the 6th Combat Training Squadron, Detachment 2, at Joint Base San Antonio, Texas, fell from the stadium’s rafters during a rappelling demonstration before a football game Saturday between the University of Texas at San Antonio and the U.S. Naval Academy.

Videos taken by spectators at UTSA’s annual Salute to Armed Forces & Veterans game show Patterson wearing combat fatigues and rappelling down to midfield from the Alamodome’s rafters before falling onto the field at full speed, feet first. Subsequent videos show medical personnel assisting the airman on the field before he was transported to a local hospital.

Representatives of UTSA and the Navy met with Alamodome management, local authorities, the American Conference Commissioner Tim Pernetti and a working group to discuss next steps, according to a UTSA statement.

The groups decided to continue the game shortly after the incident to mitigate speculation about Patterson’s medical status and to avoid additional distress for his family. The conference also wanted to adhere to the military’s next-of-kin notification and identification process.

Around 11:40 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, confirmed that Patterson died at the hospital.

The 6th Combat Training Squadron is based at Nellis Air Force Base, but Detachment 2, Patterson’s unit, is housed at JBSA.

“This tragedy is felt deeply across the 57th Wing,” Brig. Gen. Scott C. Mills, 57th Wing commander, said in an Air Force release on Sunday. The release identified the airman as Patterson.

“Tech. Sgt. Patterson and his service mattered immensely to our wing, and to the family, friends, and teammates who had the privilege of knowing and serving alongside him,” Mills continued. “Our team is now focused on standing beside Ian’s family, loved ones, and fellow Airmen as we navigate this profound loss together.”

Four service members, including Patterson, were scheduled to participate in the rappelling demonstration. Those who participated were from Detachment 2 in the 6th Combat Training Squadron, trained in rappelling from heights of 100 feet or more. The rafters at Alamodome are around 170 feet above the stadium floor.

Patterson, who hailed from Fort Stewart, Georgia, served for 15 years. His decorations include the Air and Space Commendation Medal with three oak leaf clusters, as well as the Army Commendation Medal, Air and Space Achievement Medal and Army Achievement Medal, each with one oak leaf cluster.

He was named the Air Force Special Warfare Enlisted Instructor of the Year at the headquarters level in 2022.

The incident is currently under investigation, according to the release.

According to the Sept. 29 announcement, the five winners of the Army’s xTechHumanoid competition include ACES Group, IHMC Robotics, Hydroplane Limited, Ras Labs and Velocity Explorations.

Alex Miller, the Army’s chief technology officer, explained that through the program, the service tried to identify “the problems, mission needs, and opportunities” humanoid robots could best be used.

“xTech is our method of surveying the industry landscape and fast-tracking promising technology rather than falling victim to years-long studies,” Miller said.

“Humanoid robots are part of a broader autonomy push to increase the depth and breadth of robotic platforms and components industry can provide for a range of missions,” he added.

The expectation

For the competition, Army officials reviewed each company’s white paper proposal for its humanoid robot. They evaluated the concepts based on several criteria, including military utility, technical merit and technological maturity.

Of the 103 submissions, the Army selected 10 finalists, each of which received $25,000. The service then identified five winners through a live experimentation event.

According to the 2025 competition announcement, the event tested the robots on a series of collective tasks “in the context of a military small unit mission conducted in a combat situation.”

During the event, officials also reviewed the baseline system capabilities and advanced subsystems.

Examples of the former include checkpoint security, gap crossing or obstacle clearing and firefighting. Whereas the latter included technologies like thermal sensors, battery life and autonomy.

The reality

However, Robert Griffin, a senior researcher at IHMC Robotics, told Military Times that the competition’s individual requirements exceeded what current technology could achieve.

“The individual things that were outlined were, in any one element, beyond what is possible given the current state of the art,” Griffin said.

“For example, you don’t have a robot that can run 28 miles an hour while carrying 50 pounds and operating for 24 hours,” he said. “It’s not a thing that exists in the world.”

Because the Army’s “actual full desirements were beyond what can currently be done,” Griffin said, developers had to prioritize different elements of their robots’ capabilities for the demonstrations.

Griffin’s team focused on baseline capabilities.

“The big thing for us was to have the robot show up at the competition, move around in the world, unsupported, at a reasonable pace, and then respond to commands,” he said.

Video of the competition shows IHMC’s robot “Alex” following voice commands directing it to walk through a field and then, under the control of a human with a remote, through the woods and across gravel.

Alex also grasps a small shovel, begins to dig and attempts to pour dirt into a bucket. Although it doesn’t succeed, it demonstrates the movement. And finally, Alex collapses and has to be transported out on a gurney.

Testing subsystems

Other competitors focused on subsystems.

Hydroplane and ACES Group competed with their batteries, while Velocity Explorations entered software that enabled its robot to listen to radio traffic between people and understand their movements and tasks. Using that information to develop an understanding of the broader battlespace, the platform could then determine how to act.

Ras Labs tested highly sensitive fingertip tactile sensors that allowed a robot to handle delicate objects.

While multiple companies said they participated because it was a chance to test their products, Dr. Anita Sengupta, Hydroplane’s founder and chief executive, explained that her company has traditionally done work for large structures and aircraft, but recently started working on smaller and portable systems.

“We saw a good overlap between developing a power system for a humanoid, whether it’s a person or a robot, as well as the drone use case, so it just seemed like an interesting use case for us to take our technology to,” she said.

For the competition, her company adapted a 10-kilowatt system originally designed for the Marine Corps in 2024, but made it smaller because the humanoid only needed a few kilowatts. The device utilizes a fuel cell similar to what a generator uses, but instead of using diesel fuel, it uses hydrogen. Sengupta explained that the benefits are that it has about three times the energy density and a higher conversion efficiency.

Although Hydroplane didn’t directly power a humanoid robot with its fuel cell, the Army tested it to see if it could power a humanoid robot. In turn, Hydroplane helped establish those standards, with the intent to eventually collaborate with a humanoid robot team.

The future

In the recent announcement, the Army said the competition revealed a clear picture of “both the progress commercial industry has made in humanoid robotics and the technical challenges that remain.” The findings, the service said, will help it direct research toward technologies that offer the greatest return for warfighters.

But while humanoid robots might eventually take on more complex military tasks, Griffin said the industry is still a long way from developing machines like Arnold Schwarzenegger’s T-800 from The Terminator franchise.

“I don’t think that any person who has a modicum of ethics is going to say that we need to be having these robots making life or death decisions,” he said, noting how easily current AI models can be confused or manipulated.

Instead, Griffin said the future of humanoid robotics will depend in part on what investors want the machines to do. Industrial companies, for example, may see opportunities to automate tasks typically performed by humans.

“Our goal is to be able to make robots that remove people from having to do harmful tasks,” he said about his company, pointing to scenarios such as first responders entering burning buildings and nuclear cleanup.

The lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, or ACLU, alongside two other groups, asks a federal court to enforce their request for information about why the Pentagon commissioned the study.

In a statement, Gillian Thomas, senior counsel for the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project, argued that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has “repeatedly, without evidence, questioned women’s ability to serve in ground combat,” aims to deliver research to validate his “biased” views.

“Now, without explanation, he has commissioned a study of women’s performance and assigned it to a researcher with a record of criticizing women’s combat readiness,” she said. “The public has a right to know why, and what he plans to do with the results.”

In January, the Defense Department commissioned a non-profit research group called the Institute for Defense Analyses, which is largely funded by the federal government, to study the topic for six months.

However, according to the lawsuit, the study was reassigned to the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, or JHU/APL, in April 2026, where the lead researcher, Jane Pinelis, authored a 2015 study for the Marine Corps that found “negative effects of mixed-gender units.”

The lawsuit adds that the 2015 study “was widely criticized for its flawed design and biased analysis.” Those critics, including the Navy Secretary at the time, described it as attempting to show that men are stronger than women rather than establish minimum standards and see who could meet them.

Additionally, The War Horse reported that Hegseth relied heavily on that study to support his argument that women shouldn’t serve in combat roles in his book The War on Warriors.

“Dads push us to take risks. Moms put the training wheels on our bikes,” he wrote in the book. “We need moms. But not in the military, especially in combat units.”

In a November 2024 interview on the Sean Ryan Podcast, Hegseth shared his explicit view on the issue: “I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles.”

Although he has since softened his rhetoric on women in combat, critics say he continues to push the agenda under the guise of military standards.

According to the lawsuit, the ACLU, the National Women’s Law Center and the Service Women’s Action Network want Defense Department records showing the scope, purpose, methodology and anticipated use of the study.

Speaking at the Association of the United States Army Conference in Washington, Lt. Gen. Christopher Eubank described an iterative human-in-the-loop process in which military personnel learn in real time how to balance giving AI agents autonomy and exercising control over them.

“It’s occurring daily and weekly inside of the headquarters as we watch agents learn and grow, and then determine what we should let them do on their own versus have a human in the loop,” Eubank said. “All work right now is safeguarded human-in-the-loop as we continue to learn across this very important emergent technology.”

Military personnel currently watch AI agents perform routine tasks, with a governance board within Army Cyber Command making decisions on whether that agent should be allowed to continue performing a task without human intervention or whether it should be allowed to work unsupervised.

During its current human-in-the-loop iteration, every machine AI team checked in with the human team daily and was not operating alone.

Every AI agent was also assigned the same work role as a human, so Army Cyber command trained those agents to be masters of their craft in the same way the Army did with the humans.

As the service worked through the iterative process, the uptick in speed that AI ushered in was drastic.

In two days, an AI agent could complete work that took an analytics support officer six months, Eubank said.

Army Cyber Command used artificial intelligence to operate, secure, defend and attack networks, and make sure that technology works hand in hand with the human workforce, according to Eubank.

Artificial intelligence also enabled the command to move faster than it had ever moved and sift through mountains of data at machine speed, which allowed humans to focus on solving critical problems.

The Mission and Installation Contracting Command awarded 21,450 contracts in fiscal 2026 valued at $6.8 billion, with $2.9 billion going to American small businesses, according to a Friday release.

As the command moves to expand its role in the service’s modernization and innovation acquisition, it increased its contracting by more than $1 billion from fiscal 2025, which had 22,000 contract actions valued at $5.5 billion.

Growing facility modernization requirements, increased acquisition authorities and adding the 410th Contracting Support Brigade to the MICC drove the increase from last fiscal year, the release says.

“Some growth was expected as we welcomed the 410th Contracting Support Brigade into the command,” MICC Command Sgt. Maj. JennyAnne Bright said in an early October message to the team. “But $1 billion in growth reflects the growing demand for your expertise and your ability to deliver contracting solutions to Soldiers and our mission partners at the point of need.”

The command had more than 299,000 Government Purchase Card transitions with a value of more than $520 million, giving extra “purchasing power” in support of soldiers, installations and mission partners across the service, the release states.

The MICC employed a wider range of acquisition authorities to address more complex regional requirements and to expand industry collaboration, such as Other Transactions Authorities, Small Business Innovation Research Phase III and Multiple Award Task Orders.

The command’s Facilities, Operations, Readiness, Growth and Experience, or FORGE, initiatives consolidated multiple modernization requirements into larger efforts that grouped related requirements to increase effectiveness, the release says.

One of the MICC FORGE initiatives gave a $169.1 million Other Transaction agreement in support of 17 modernization projects, while another established around $987 million in modernization efforts.

Alongside modernization efforts, for the 12th consecutive year, MICC exceeded its assigned small business goals despite a workforce decrease.

“Exceeding our small business goals across the board for a 12th consecutive year is a phenomenal achievement by our contracting and small business professionals,” Luis Trinidad, director of the Army Contracting Command-MICC Office of Small Business Programs, said in the release. “Operating with a 30% reduction in personnel, our team rose to meet a more demanding workload.”

The command’s small business-eligible dollars increased by $104.8 million, requiring more detailed reviews of acquisition packages.

For fiscal 2027, which began Oct. 1, MICC expects a continued boost in modernization requirements and demand for enterprise contracting solutions, forcing innovative acquisition authorities that are tailored to specific mission and soldier needs, according to the release.

Because MICC was established in October 2008, the end of fiscal 2026 aligned with the command’s 18th anniversary. It was founded under the Army Contracting Command as the Installation Contracting Command, and then redesignated as MICC shortly after.

“In just two short decades, MICC has grown into an indispensable element of the Army’s mission, and that legacy is entirely due to the hard work and excellence of professionals like you,” MICC Commanding General Brig. Gen. Freddy L. Adams said in the release.