Under a new law, both countries will be allowed to pursue “non-military” airspace violations or unknown threats across their shared border without requiring prior approval from the other capital. This includes all manned or unmanned aircraft suspected of acting illegally and of having breached either Austrian or German airspace without prior authorization.

Additionally, Berlin and Vienna agreed to share day-to-day air surveillance reports.

The Bundestag, Germany’s lower chamber of parliament, ratified the treaty in Berlin late on Feb. 26. Negotiations for it had started in 2018, but its implementation was stalled by the Covid pandemic, shifting priorities and changes of power.

Austria’s equivalent to the Bundestag, the Nationalrat, had already ratified the treaty text in 2024 after German and Austrian officials had signed it in the border town of Berchtesgaden two years earlier.

Per the treaty text, the use of weapons and most forms of threat and coercion are explicitly prohibited in the partner country’s airspace.

The language mirrors existing treaties between Germany and Switzerland from 2007, as well as between Austria and Switzerland, agreed in 2017.

The German-Austrian agreement completes the so-called “Alpine triangle” and addresses the risk of unidentified aircraft being unaccompanied when overflying complicated border regions between the three countries.

The Alpine republics to Germany’s south have longstanding traditions of military neutrality, which limit their ability to enter into military treaties. This likely played a role in the treaty texts singling out non-military threats. Unlike Germany, neither Austria nor Switzerland are NATO members.

However, both of Germany’s southern neighbors joined the Berlin-led European Sky Shield air defense initiative, formally announcing their intent to do so at a joint ceremony in 2023.

The air security treaty between Berlin and Austria will enter into force three months after mutual notification of ratification, likely in May or June.

That’s why U.S. Special Operations Command is seeking acoustic rainbow emitters, or ARE, for its drones, according to a SOCOM Small Business Innovation Research solicitation.

“The ARE would provide a means to redirect the acoustic signature of a UAS and change the frequencies of the acoustic signature,” notes the solicitation, which closes March 25.

Though tactical drones can be small and hard to spot, the noise of their propellers can warn potential targets and put the drone itself at risk to hostile fire. “Acoustic sensors are becoming more prolific on the battlefield,” SOCOM noted.

The project aims to attach acoustic rainbow emitters to Army Special Operations Forces tactical drones. The emitters “should redirect the acoustic signature of a UAS towards the atmosphere and away from the ground,” the solicitation said. In addition, they “should filter the frequency of the sound emitted towards the ground to levels inaudible to the human ear.”

The goal is to reduce a drone’s acoustic signature by at least 50%. The device should weigh no more than 1 kilogram for a Group 1 UAS (under 20 pounds) and 3 kilograms for a Group 2 drone (under 55 pounds). The ARE must also “be colored to maintain a low visual signature.”

SOCOM seems particularly interested in silent attack drones. The solicitation mentions “a low-cost sensor employed from a UAS during terminal attack or when directed from the operator.”

Phase I of the SBIR is a Technology Readiness Level 3 feasibility study to see whether the concept is viable. Phase II calls for a prototype.

Acoustic rainbows have generated much buzz in recent years. The concept is similar to rainbows in the sky, when sunlight passing through water droplets becomes separated into different wavelengths and thus colors.

“Although acoustic rainbows are less well-known, they follow the same principle, being the spatial decomposition of sound in free space where waves oscillating at different frequencies propagate in different directions,” explained a Physicsworld article.

Some animals, such as bats and even humans, have the ability to do this naturally, which helps them to localize sounds. But doing this artificially across a wide range of frequencies has been a problem.

However, Danish and Spanish researchers unveiled last year a 3D-printed acoustic rainbow emitter that splits broadband sound — which would normally radiate in all directions — into separate frequencies that can be individually redirected. The device works on the principle of “passive scattering, where the acoustic system is purely driven by interactions between the hard plastic surface and sound waves, requiring no electricity,” noted Phys.org.

Announced today, the autonomous systems manufacturer will provide two types of its Switchblade family of loitering munitions to the Army, including the Switchblade 600 Block 2 and the Switchblade 300 Block 20 variants.

Loitering munitions are Unmanned Aircraft Systems that represent a blend of FPV drones and guided missiles. Known as “kamikaze” or one-way attack drones, they can seek targets and hover for long periods before zeroing in and exploding on command.

The 600 Block 2 was developed by AV in collaboration with U.S. Special Operations Command and is designed for use in a variety of remote and hostile environments. It can be used at sea and features advanced Artificial Intelligence capabilities that allow it to detect and lock on targets faster.

Its sister system, the 300 Block 2, is a “tank killer” loitering munition that can seek targets at extended ranges beyond line of sight. According to AV, the Army has ordered it equipped with an Explosively Formed Penetrator payload for the first time — a warhead that packs extra punch against armor. The system, designed for small units, is small enough to be carried in a backpack.

Last October, soldiers of the Army’s 1st Cavalry Division tested the Switchblade 600 system at Fort Hood, Military Times reported.

“This delivery order reflects the Army’s confidence in the next evolution of the Switchblade family and its relevance to modern, contested battlefields,” Brian Young, Senior Vice President of Loitering Munitions at AV, said in a statement.

“As we continue to invest in expanding Switchblade manufacturing capacity and accelerating delivery timelines, we are continuing to meet the growing demand for these products from U.S. and allied forces.”

Ursa Major, a Colorado-based defense manufacturer, debuted the HAVOC missile system on Tuesday.

The medium-range hypersonic system is powered by a liquid rocket engine, is able to alter its speed in flight and can be adapted for use with a wide variety of rocket motor systems from warplanes to vertical launch systems.

Additionally, the system can be deployed outside of Earth’s atmosphere, according to the company.

“Keeping pace with our adversaries requires more than exquisite systems. It requires speed to delivery, affordability, and the ability to build at scale,” Chris Spagnoletti, CEO of Ursa Major, said in a statement.

“The Ursa Major HAVOC Missile System delivers a highly capable hypersonic weapon designed from the start to be produced rapidly and in quantity, giving the warfighter a credible and adaptable capability.”

The system has a core module that makes it suitable for striking hypersonic targets as well, the company adds.

Hypersonic missiles, which fly at roughly five times the speed of sound, have become a priority across all U.S. military branches.

The Army, Air Force and Navy are all developing hypersonic missile programs, including: the Army’s Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon; the Air Force’s Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile; and the Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike programs.

While the services have aimed for hypersonic weapons since the early 2000s, development has lagged while Russia and China have gained advantages in this arena.

In a notable divergence, Russian and Chinese hypersonic missiles are designed to field nuclear warheads, while U.S. hypersonics are not.

“Most U.S. hypersonic weapons, in contrast to those in Russia and China, are not being designed for use with a nuclear warhead,” according to a Congressional Research Service report published last August.

The report predicted that U.S. hypersonics would “likely require greater accuracy and will be more technically challenging to develop than nuclear-armed Chinese and Russian systems,” while also noting that Russian and Chinese systems would have a potential advantage since nuclear weapons can inflict devastating damage without need for accuracy.

China has a robust hypersonic program and has conducted up to 20 times as many hypersonic missile tests than the U.S., and is also investing in underground facilities, per the report.

“Analysts disagree about the strategic implications of hypersonic weapons,” the report notes, adding that Congress has previously restricted funding due to concerns of nuclear escalation.

“Differences in threat perception and escalation ladders could thus result in unintended escalation,” the report concluded.

Honeywell will adapt its design for its existing SkyShot 1600 engine to fit unmanned aircraft in the Air Force’s Collaborate Combat Aircraft program as well as other uncrewed systems, according to a company statement.

The SkyShot is a compact engine designed for use in autonomous aircraft. It delivers powerful thrust capability with either turbofan or turbojet propulsion. Turbofan distributes airflow more evenly and quietly, while turbojet is typically used for supersonic military jet engines and missiles.

“We’ve combined decades of proven technologies with the latest advancements to create an engine that can keep pace with cost, speed and performance demands of next-generation platforms,” Dave Marinick, president of Engines and Power Systems at Honeywell, said in the statement.

“We look forward to supporting the U.S. Air Force in the next phase of collaborative combat aircraft and unmanned aircraft systems propulsion efforts.”

The CCA aircraft are unmanned systems powered by jet engines that are designed to maneuver and fly alongside human pilots performing a variety of mission sets, including reconnaissance, air-to-ground and air-to-air combat.

Last July, the Air Force carried out an exercise in which fighter pilots maneuvered two Kratos XQ-58A Valkyrie drones in cohesion with an F-16C Fighting Falcon and an F-15 Strike Eagle.

The U.S. Navy is also exploring CCA technology, awarding contracts to Anduril, Lockheed Martin, General Atomics, Boeing and Northrop Grumman to develop drone aircraft capable of being launched from aircraft carriers.

The test, dubbed Project Overwatch, was conducted at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. It incorporated an AI machine learning model in to the warplane’s information control system.

The AI model generated data based on the plane’s surroundings and analyzed the information to present the pilot with potential targets.

It marked the first time a tactical AI model suggested a combat target to a fighter pilot independently, according to the company.

Jake Wertz, vice president of F‑35 Combat Systems at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, said that Lockheed would continue to pursue AI-driven decision-making models to allow pilots to identify combat targets faster.

“Equally important is our ability to re‑program the AI model on the ground and have those updates available for the next sortie — an essential step toward maintaining a tactical edge in a rapidly evolving threat environment,“ Wertz said in a statement.

The F-35 features advanced electronic warfare capabilities, a low stealth profile, flexible ability to deliver firepower and flies up to about 1,200 miles per hour.

The use of AI on the fighter plane follows the April 2025 release of U.S. Air Force doctrine stating that AI will be integrated throughout the service as a force multiplier.

“AI will supercharge Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) by providing networked sensors capable of identifying hidden ‘needles in a haystack’ without prior threat knowledge,” the document noted.

However the Air Force observed that its approach would be to use AI as a tool to “augment the performance of Airmen,” as AI “lacks context sensitivity and reasoning.”

“Military discretion lies with Airmen, but AI can enable faster and superior operational decisions,” the service stated.

A 2025 report published by Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology noted that AI can have practical appeal from a military perspective but must be used with caution — with skewed data, such as from spoofing or corrupted AI models, being a potential risk.

“When it comes to adversaries, some are more adept at avoiding intelligence collection than others and some may be adept at active deception or data manipulation. Available data on some adversaries may be scarcer than for others,” the report notes.

To properly leverage AI technology, the report recommends that commanders be aware of weaknesses within these systems and “prepare themselves and their teams to use them correctly.”

The deal applies $4.5 billion in funding previously authorized and appropriated under fiscal year 2025 reconciliation legislation, commonly known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

The move accelerates the approved acquisition profile by increasing annual production capacity by 25%, compressing delivery timelines while maintaining cost and performance discipline.

The B-21 Raider, which is manufactured by Northrop Grumman, is currently in low-rate initial production, which began following a contract award in January 2024.

Aircraft deliveries began on schedule in last year, with the first operational aircraft on track to arrive at Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota, in 2027, according to the release.

“The B-21 is foundational to our long-range strike capability and to credible deterrence,” Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink said in the release. “Accelerating production capacity now ensures we deliver operational capability to combatant commanders faster — strengthening our ability to outpace, deter, and, if necessary, defeat emerging threats. This is disciplined execution at the speed the security environment demands.”

The program’s baseline acquisition profile has called for a gradual ramp-up in production rate, with an eventual full production capacity of around seven stealth bombers per year, according to previously published estimates.

The total planned procurement remains classified, though the Air Force has long targeted fielding at least 100 aircraft to replace the aging B-1B Lancer and B-2 Spirit fleets over the coming decades.

“This is what disciplined acquisition delivers,” Gen. Dale R. White, director of Critical Major Weapon Systems and direct reporting portfolio manager to the deputy defense secretary, said in the release. “This decision reflects our confidence in the program’s performance and the stability of the industrial base. By increasing production capacity now, we are responsibly accelerating delivery of a critical, combat-effective capability to the warfighter.”

The B-21 Raider is the Air Force’s top acquisition priority for nuclear modernization and conventional long-range strike, designed to provide decisive advantages in complex battlespaces and against near-peer adversaries.

The production expansion aligns with broader Defense Department efforts under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to accelerate acquisition and field next-generation capabilities rapidly amid threats that continue to evolve.

No new production rate or total fleet numbers were disclosed beyond the 25% capacity increase.

Two carrier strike groups are converging on the region. Fighter squadrons are flowing into bases from Jordan to Qatar, bridged across the Atlantic by aerial refueling. Submarines and destroyers armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles patrol nearby waters. Patriot and THAAD batteries have been rushed forward. B-2 stealth bombers stand ready in Missouri.

Now consider how long it has taken to assemble.

The buildup began in late January. The full force will not be in place until mid-March. This is six to seven weeks to assemble a force capable of imposing meaningful costs on Iran. The reason is simple: aircraft fly, but mass sails. When commanders needed more airpower, they drew on the joint force — two carrier air wings, surface ships, Army interceptors, and sixty-plus land-based strike aircraft sent to Jordan — proving that airpower is bigger than the Air Force.

Some analysts will see this surge as proof the United States needs a larger Air Force. They misdiagnose the problem. Airpower is not the same as the Air Force, and the pursuit of ever more exquisite aircraft has left the service less relevant to the airpower mission it claims to own. Air denial increasingly falls to the Army, electronic warfare to the Navy, and persistent strike capacity to ships and submarines.

Consider each service’s contribution. Air control remains the Air Force’s core mission — but it is increasingly a joint effort. In the event of Iranian retaliation, air control means air denial, defeating the ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and long-range drones Iran is most likely to fire. That mission runs primarily through Army Patriot and THAAD batteries, backed by Navy destroyers. Air Force fighters play a supporting role, intercepting drones and slower missiles first, reducing the volume that surface-based interceptors must engage. That is not the offense-first, air-superiority mission the Air Force prizes. It is a layered defensive fight in which the Air Force is one layer among several — and not necessarily the most important one.

Electronic warfare (EW) tells a similar story. The most capable tactical EW platform in the joint inventory is the Navy’s EA-18G Growler. Six of them operate from Jordan alongside Air Force Wild Weasel F-16CJs armed with high-speed anti-radiation (HARM) missiles and Angry Kitten jamming pods. The F-35 still lacks a fully integrated anti-radiation missile like the AGM-88 HARM or its successor. If Washington strikes Iran, destroying Iranian radar sites depends on a Navy platform. Electronic warfare was once an Air Force strength. The Navy now leads its most critical element.

Exquisite platforms buy exquisite capability for a narrow target set. They do not buy persistence — and persistence is what strategically effective airpower requires. Punishment, as Thomas Schelling argued, depends on the credible threat of continuing pain. What compels an adversary is not a single devastating blow, but the belief that costs will keep coming. Denial aims to degrade capabilities and foreclose retaliation. Both require sustained presence over time, which in turn demands mass.

Washington should have learned this lesson from the last strike on Iran. After a long planning and buildup period, the single night of B-2 strikes last June damaged facilities Iran had spent years building. Months later, however, the United States is assembling its largest regional military force since 2003 to re-engage. The parallel to the no-fly zone over Iraq in the 1990s is hard to ignore: Episodic airpower, while tactically impressive, is strategically inconclusive. Strategic effects require sustained pressure, persistent presence, and continuous operations that force an adversary to make acute choices rather than simply absorb a blow and wait.

The gaps this buildup exposes are not in Air Force strike capabilities. They are in the Army’s ability to sustain air denial at scale, in the munition inventories required for persistence, and in the tanker fleet that keeps U.S. warplanes airborne. More B-21s and F-47s address none of these shortfalls. No procurement strategy centered on $700 million bombers or $300 million fighters can generate sustained presence at scale.

The Air Force does need more airpower—but not the kind it is buying. Persistent presence requires large numbers of lower-cost drones that can absorb losses, deep stockpiles of low-cost munitions that can sustain fires over time, and uncrewed aerial refuelers that can keep fighters and bombers over target areas. These are the capabilities that generate sustained effects at affordable cost—and they are consistently deprioritized in favor of the next exquisite crewed platform.

The deeper problem runs beneath procurement. Washington has long treated “airpower” and “Air Force” as synonymous. They are not. Air control — the ability to deny an adversary the use of the domain while preserving one’s own — is increasingly accomplished by Army interceptors, Navy strike platforms, drones, and munitions fired from ships and submarines. The Air Force’s preferred model — manned fighters striving for air superiority so manned bombers can reach their targets — has yet to demonstrate the scale and stamina needed to bring a conflict to an end.

Until budget priorities reflect that reality, the United States will keep buying the Air Force it prizes and underinvesting in the airpower it needs.

Maximilian K. Bremer is a nonresident fellow with the Reimagining US Grand Strategy Program at the Stimson Center and head of Mission Engineering and Strategy for Atropos Group.

Kelly A. Grieco is a senior fellow with the Reimagining US Grand Strategy Program at the Stimson Center and adjunct professor in the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University.

The live-flight exercise, conducted at Edwards Air Force Base in California, featured a human-piloted F-22 issuing real-time commands to the MQ-20 via advanced autonomy software and a tactical data link.

The Avenger drone responded by executing a range of mission tasks, including waypoint navigation, combat air patrol patterns and simulated engagement of airborne threats, functioning as a direct force extender for the manned platform, according to the release.

The demonstration leveraged government-provided reference autonomy software on the F-22 and GA-ASI’s Autonodyne Bashi Pilot Vehicle Interface aboard the MQ-20.

Onboard sensors enabled the unmanned aircraft to process information independently, coordinate maneuvers and exchange tactical messages with the Raptor in a continuous command loop between the two aircraft.

“We appreciate the flawless execution of this mission using the government’s advanced autonomous systems,” said General Atomics President David R. Alexander. “This demo featured the integration of mission elements and the ability of autonomy to utilize onboard sensors to make independent decisions and execute commands from the F-22.”

The demo, meanwhile, builds on General Atomics’ accelerating timeline for the Collaborative Combat Aircraft program.

On Feb. 12, the Air Force announced validation of the Autonomy Government Reference Architecture, or A-GRA, across multiple vendors. This included successful integration of Collins Aerospace’s Sidekick software on the General Atomics YFQ-42A CCA for its first semi-autonomous airborne mission.

The YFQ-42A, officially nicknamed “Dark Merlin” in a separate press release on Feb. 23, executed precise commands for more than four hours under ground operator control, validating reliable data exchange and autonomy execution that support advanced manned-unmanned teaming, such as the recent MQ-20/F-22 demo.

The Edwards demonstration is the latest in a series of tests underscoring the Air Force’s priority on pairing fifth-generation fighters with autonomous unmanned aircraft.

Such teaming concepts aim to boost lethality, extend sensor reach and enhance survivability in contested environments by enabling pilots to delegate tactical tasks to drones while retaining command authority for complex decisions.

On hand to present awards to the winners, who were selected from more than 200 competitors during the Feb. 17-19 event, were Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and Maj. Gen. Clair A. Gill, commanding general of the U.S. Army Aviation Center of Excellence.

Driscoll, who flew to the Huntsville, Alabama, ceremony after participating in Ukraine-Russia peace talks in Geneva, Switzerland, spoke to Military Times about the significance of the event and how it will inform the future of drone warfare and the scaling of unmanned systems.

Scaling

In remarks shared ahead of the ceremony, Driscoll told Military Times that he hopes the Army will be in position to buy one million drones within the next 18 to 24 months.

“A lot of what we’ve been spending the last year doing is reorienting a lot of our systems so that a drone is not thought of as a piece of equipment that a soldier will have to sign out of an arms room and return, but more like an ammunition or a round that you take to a range,” he said.

Asked about his near-term goals for scaling drone production, Driscoll said the Army is currently focusing on assessing new drone technology for design and potential use.

“I think our near-term goals are more qualitative,” he said. “We as an Army have got to figure out how to reset how we think about purchasing things like drones, how we think about training on things like drones and how we think about repairing them on the edge.”

Driscoll maintained that there is no time to waste when it comes to building drones and integrating them throughout the force.

The existing ability of adversarial nations to build and deploy unmanned systems makes that evolution paramount, he said.

“We know if we look at our threats around the world, like in China or other nations that are producing 5 million to 15 million drones, we are short of that in both our commercial and military sector,” he said. “So, we need to get to a place where we can scale quickly to match them.”

A drone marketplace

Driscoll and Gill told Military Times that the Army is planning to launch a drone marketplace next month, which will allow private industry to market and sell drone innovations throughout the service.

Products will be rated and reviewed, with increased competition expected to drive prices down.

“We’re going to allow the consumers — that’s our soldiers and our units — to rate the equipment that’s being sold there,” Gill said. “It’s going to allow for a natural free market economy to drive the best product.”

Driscoll said that the combined efforts of soldiers and private industry, in addition to the efforts of lawmakers, will help the Army meet its goals to increase manufacturing.

“I think the urgency is there,” Driscoll said. “If you talk to members of Congress, whether it’s a defense prime or a startup, everyone knows we have to solve this problem. If you go speak to any of these soldiers out here, the talent and the innovation is there.”

The Army secretary added that the military’s sense of urgency has ramped up due to the rapid surge of threats unmanned systems pose to national security.

“What keeps me up at night is just the sheer magnitude of the problem that is required and the concept of these layered defenses,” Driscoll said.

“The biggest thing that we in the United States Army and as federal officials and Americans face, the biggest dilemma, is how broad of the threat exists and how you layer in solutions that can take into account how much territory is required to be defended.”

The winners

Driscoll and Gill presented award plaques to the winning soldiers, including a team assigned to the 2nd Cavalry Regiment that took home the prize for Best Tactical Squad.

Meanwhile, 1st Sgt. Javon Purchner earned the title of Best Operator for his drone racing skills, and the Army National Guard’s 28th Infantry Division clinched the award for Best Innovation for a drone-recovering UAS called Project R.E.D.

Driscoll thanked the competitors for exploring how to use drones “offensively, just as any threat against us might,” while drawing from his recent peace talk experiences in the days leading up to the event.

“We started the day in Geneva, and yesterday we spent a lot of time and the day before with the Ukrainians and the Russians,” he said. “One of the things when you spend time with them — beyond the peace talk portion — is them showing you just the violent videos of the drones they’re using, slaughtering the soldiers on the other side. … The videos are horrifying.

“The biggest thing I would convey from having spent a lot of time with the Ukrainians, the Russians, the Israelis, is drones are changing everything. They don’t think of them as an aviation asset. They don’t think of it as something only infantry have to deal with.”

Driscoll stressed that U.S. soldiers are helping mitigate such threats by training tactically with emerging technology.

“We desperately need you to go back to your formations, tell them what we got right,” he said. “Just as importantly tell them what we got wrong.”