The defense behemoth posted concept art of the F/A-XX on its website, as competition for the contract heats up.

The image appeared on the Northrop Grumman website, under its Naval Aviation section, with text emblazoned across it that reads, “Project Power Anywhere.”

It’s unclear when the image was posted.

The artwork doesn’t reveal much, but does showcase a sleek-looking fighter with a long, sharp nose covered in shadows aboard an aircraft carrier.

The F/A-XX, which will succeed the F/A-18 Super Hornet, is slated to wield new technologies including artificial intelligence and machine learning, according to Rear Adm. Michael Donnelly, who spoke at the 2025 Navy League’s Sea Air Space conference. The upgrades will provide more battle space awareness and sharpen decision-making for naval aviators.

Boeing is set to end its F/A-18E-F Super Hornet production line in 2025 and stopped taking orders for them in 2023.

Donnelly said that the arrival of the fighter could usher in a new era in which unmanned and manned aircraft operate together. He also said the fighter would be expected to fly more than 25% farther than the Navy’s current fighters before needing a refuel.

Currently, the F/A-18 Super Hornet and carrier-based F-35C Joint Strike Fighter can fly more than 1,200 nautical miles.

President Trump announced the Air Force’s sixth-gen jet — the Boeing F-47 Next Generation Air Dominance fighter — at the Oval Office on March 21.

With Lockheed Martin apparently out of the contract race, Northrop Grumman and Boeing appear to be the frontrunners for the F/A-XX contract, according to earlier Military Times reporting. But no official announcement has deemed a winner.

“Strong competition between qualified professionals is one of the strengths of our Navy and your screening speaks highly of your abilities,” the administrative message said of the Active-Duty Navy E7 Advancement Selection Board who made the decisions.

The specific dates for advancement will be published by the commanding officer of Naval Education and Training Professional Development Center in Pensacola, Florida.

The full list of approved CPOs can be found here.

Those serving as Maritime Cyber Warfare Officers and in the cyber warfare technician rating will focus on both offensive and defensive cyberspace operations, and initially will draw from Information Warfare Officers and sailors serving in the Cryptologic Technician-Networks rating, who currently carry the bulk of the Navy’s cyber role.

The new designator and rating are intended to streamline cyber responsibilities and capabilities more efficiently, Vice Adm. Kelly Aeschbach, commander of Naval Information Forces and the Navy’s Information Boss, told reporters Friday.

“The Maritime Cyber Warfare Officer is really going to take the offensive and defensive operating components out of those two designators and provide us with someone who can focus full time on how we maneuver on the net,” Aeschbach said. “And they will lead teams that are delivering our capabilities that are hunting forward…through cyber commands techniques on how we protect our interests.”

“That will alleviate the demand we were putting on other designators that already have really tremendous responsibilities,” Aeschbach said.

Aeschbach said that those in the new rating and designator would predominantly be assigned to shore billets such as staff positions and leadership positions, and instructor billets. However, she said there would be increased opportunities to serve at sea as both the rating and designator mature.

Applications for redesignation for officers are open for the next 90 days as part of a lateral transfer for Information Warfare Officer qualified line officers with documented cyber-focused training. Redesignation applications from all communities will commence in February 2024.

“We also will start taking direct accessions next year, where we will have quotas at the Naval Academy, across the NROTC, and also for Officer Candidate School,” Aeschbach said. “So we can also afford new folks coming in the Navy the opportunity to compete to go directly into the designator.”

The Navy is aiming to fill approximately 300 officer billets for the new designator over the next two years, with the possibility of expanding to up to 500 billets over time, Aeschbach said.

“It’s going to be just a lot of discussion in terms of mentoring, how we advise folks, whether they’re good candidates, and how we get this initial group of officers established by the end of the year, so we can start focusing on their identity…and the kind of training they need to excel over time,” Aeschbach told reporters.

Meanwhile, the new enlisted rating will absorb all the billets and personnel assigned to the Cryptologic Technician-Networks rating, accounting for more than 2,000 sailors. Given that more than 90% of the work sailors assigned to the CTN rating conducted was already classified as cyber, Aeschbach said the new rating more accurately describes the cyber roles that those assigned to the CTN rating were already completing.

But, the service guaranteed that doing so will not negatively impact the careers of those in the CTN rating.

“During the process of establishing the CWT rating, we have been committed to a ‘do no harm’ approach to CTN Sailors,” NAVIFOR Force Master Chief Laura Nunley said in a Navy news release. “No Sailor’s advancement opportunity or Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) will be affected by this rating establishment. All rating specific incentive pays currently entitled to CTN Sailors will be awarded to CWT Sailors.”

Nunley told reporters Friday that the Navy is examining ways to expand opportunities for sailors to cross-rate into the CWT rating, as well as recruiting efforts to bring new sailors into the rating.

Creating the cyber warfare technician rating stems from requirements included in the National Defense Authorization Act approved in December 2022, and was crafted with input from leaders within the CTN rating, Nunley said.

The bonus announcement coincides with recruiting challenges across the services, which military leaders attribute to more thorough medical screenings, fewer Americans eligible to serve, and low civilian unemployment.

Sailors may couple the bonus with the maximum student loan repayment under the Enlisted Loan Repayment Program, in which the Navy covers college tuition loans — such as Stafford Student Loans — that were taken out prior to the sailor enlisting for active duty.

“The maximum current enlistment bonus is $75,000, and the maximum loan repayment is $65,000,” said Rear Adm. Lex Walker, commander of Navy Recruiting Command, in a Navy news release. “They are not mutually exclusive, so if a Future Sailor maximizes both, that … adds up to a life-altering $140,000 and the opportunity to serve in the world’s finest Navy.”

The Navy in February 2022 raised the maximum enlistment bonus to $50,000. Cdmr. Dave Benham, a spokesman for Navy Recruiting Command, told Navy Times at the time that he was not aware of any other previous instances in which enlistment bonuses had reached $50,000. Enlistment bonus and loan repayment program messages list the max at $40,000, dating back to 2006.

Exact amounts for bonuses are contingent upon when an applicant enters the Delayed Entry Program, ship date and the effective message at the time of classification. The Delayed Entry Program allows someone to join the Navy prior to the day they ship out to basic training.

Prior service members are not eligible for the bonuses if they received such a bonus during their first enlistment.

The Navy hit its active-duty enlisted recruitment goals for FY22, but was forced to drain its Delayed Entry Program to the lowest level in 40 years to meet those targets. The Navy did not reach targets for active duty and Navy Reserve officers, or Reserve enlisted personnel, in FY22.

The Navy’s FY24 budget request aims to increase its active duty end strength by more than 5,000 sailors, primarily through enlistment bonuses.

“Faced with a challenging recruiting environment, the Navy increased enlistment bonuses in FY 2022 and will continue to do so as necessary,” the budget document says. “Retention has also been difficult with a strong national economy, so bonuses and incentives to retain our current naval force [are] a priority.

“To attract the most talented and diverse workforce, the Navy continues to evaluate its compensation package and admission requirements, and how it reaches potential recruits through advertising and career events.”

NEW YORK — When former President Donald Trump appeared in federal court Tuesday, he was joined at the defense table by a man well-practiced in standing by his side: his valet turned alleged co-conspirator, Walt Nauta.

Nauta, a Navy veteran from Guam, was a White House military valet to Trump. The BBC reported that Navy records show Nauta enlisted in 2001 and achieved the rank of senior chief culinary specialist in 2021. He was serving in the White House cafeteria when Trump elevated him to serve as his military aide. Nauta retired from the Navy when Trump left the White House, according to the BBC, and joined the former president as his personal aide at Mar-a-Lago.

Nauta now finds himself in legal jeopardy alongside the former president. He is accused of moving boxes from the White House at Trump’s direction and then lying about it to investigators.

On Tuesday, Nauta traveled in the former president’s motorcade to the Miami courthouse, where Trump became the first former president in U.S. history to be indicted on federal charges. In court, the two sat at the defendants’ table together — one of Trump’s attorneys between them — as Trump pleaded not guilty to dozens of felony counts accusing him of hoarding classified documents and refusing government demands to give them back. Nauta himself did not enter a plea because he did not have a local attorney and will instead be arraigned on June 27.

After the appearance, Nauta accompanied Trump to a stop at Miami’s famed Cuban restaurant Versailles, where he helped usher supporters eager to take selfies with the former president.

Nauta is the latest in a series of Trump loyalists to face potential jail time after his work for the former president. Michael Cohen, Trump’s longtime fixer and attorney, spent more than 13 months in prison over payouts he helped arrange during the 2016 presidential race to keep women from going public about alleged sexual encounters with Trump. Allen Weisselberg, the former chief financial officer at the Trump Organization, just finished serving three months at Rikers Island after pleading guilty to receiving $1.7 million in unreported job perks.

“Loyalty to Donald Trump is like First Avenue in Manhattan: one way. History has shown time and again that Donald cares for no one other than himself,” said Cohen, who has since turned on Trump and eventually tried to win leniency by cooperating with prosecutors.

Nauta, according to the indictment unsealed Friday, played a crucial role in the alleged scheme with Trump, who is charged with 37 counts of illegally hoarding classified documents and obstructing the government’s efforts to get them back. The government alleges Nauta helped pack Trump’s boxes before he left the White House and repeatedly moved them to various rooms at Mar-a-Lago in response to Trump’s requests.

At one point, the indictment alleges, Nauta discovered several boxes had fallen over in the storage room, dumping their contents on the floor. Nauta snapped and shared photographs of the scene, which included a document with a visible marking warning it was restricted to only the Five Eyes intelligence alliance of the U.S., U.K., Australia, Canada and New Zealand.

Nauta was key to Trump’s investigation early on, with FBI agents grilling him about the movement of boxes inside Mar-a-Lago weeks before serving their search warrant at the property. Like other witnesses close to Trump, though, his answers to law enforcement put him in legal jeopardy.

Although prosecutors say Nauta moved boxes of documents to Trump’s residence for his review at his direction, Nauta lied to agents by saying he wasn’t aware of that happening, according to the indictment. And when agents asked if he knew where on the property the boxes had been stored, he said, “I wish, I wish I could tell you. I don’t know. I don’t — I honestly just don’t know.”

Nauta’s attorney, Stanley Woodward, declined to answer questions about the charges or any efforts to get his client to turn on the former president.

Nauta faces six federal charges, including conspiracy to obstruct justice, corruptly concealing a document or record and making false statements. His inclusion in the indictment was met by protest from Trump, who praised Nauta as “a wonderful man” who had “done a fantastic job!”

“They are trying to destroy his life, like the lives of so many others, hoping that he will say bad things about ‘Trump.’ He is strong, brave, and a Great Patriot. The FBI and DOJ are CORRUPT!” he wrote on his social media site.

Ty Cobb, the former White House attorney who served as Trump’s lawyer during the Russia investigation, said he felt sorry for Nauta, whom he described as a dutiful worker who “nods and then does what he’s been told to do.”

“I think Walt is easy prey for the president because this is a dedicated patriot,” he said. “The proudest moment he ever had was being named valet to the president and sadly the president he got named valet for was Trump.”

Cobb recalled Nauta stopping by his home, checking in on him and fetching him club soda when he was working late. He said he remembered how Nauta noticed — after dozens of uneaten hamburgers — that Cobb didn’t eat meat and quietly began substituting salmon for his lunches.

“I think it’s really sad that people were not able to convince him of his misplaced loyalty,” Cobb said of Nauta’s decision not to cooperate with prosecutors. “He should be a witness. He shouldn’t be a defendant. But you can only dangle that opportunity for so long before you have to shoot. So I think it’s tragic.”

John Dean, the White House counsel who testified against former President Richard Nixon over Watergate and later served four months for obstructing justice, said that he would advise Nauta to turn against Trump.

“He could strike a good deal and help put it away for the government,” he said on CNN.

As for Cohen, he gave grand jury testimony over the hush money payments that led to the first-ever criminal charges against a former president. Trump was indicted in March in New York on 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection to the payouts to the women who alleged sexual encounters with him. Trump has denied the allegations and any criminal wrongdoing.

Weisselberg, who testified against the Trump Organization at his trial, said on the witness stand that neither Trump nor his family knew about the tax scheme. Prosecutors maintained Trump “knew exactly what was going on.”

Cohen said Nauta should learn from his own experience that devotion to Trump isn’t worth the consequences.

“I predict Walt will suffer the exact same outcome as the rest of us who have all been thrown under the bus for the benefit of Donald J. Trump,” Cohen said, describing “just another Trump acolyte whose life has been turned completely upside down for his misguided loyalty to a man who didn’t deserve it.”

Associated Press writers Alanna Durkin Richer in Miami and Eric Tucker in Washington and Military Times staff contributed to this report.

The full rollout, expected in August, is the latest step in the $136 million Navy Enterprise Service Desk venture, meant to modernize and consolidate more than 90 IT help desks into one central node. General Dynamics Information Technology announced it was awarded the NESD indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract in late 2021.

Sailors, Marines and civilians with a common access card and who can be verified through the Global Federated User Directory will be able to contact Amelia via phone or text. The program should serve more than 1 million users around-the-clock responses based on a depth of training and insider know-how. Additional applications, such as in a classified environment, could follow.

“Predominantly, we’ve had to have agents around who had knowledge of ‘how do I fix a specific issue,’” Travis Dawson, GDIT’s chief technology officer for the Navy and Marine Corps sector, told C4ISRNET in an interview. “Well, that issue can be documented, right? And once it’s documented, we can go ahead and have that resolved via automation, without the human interaction.”

While Amelia is taught to answer questions and complete repetitive tasks, Dawson said it is capable of more, such as sensing frustration in user queries.

“In the AI world, I will tell you, they get really sensitive when you call conversational AI a bot,” he said. “A bot has a back-ended script, right? So it’s only going to tell you the answer that it knows. If it doesn’t tell you, you sit at a dead end.”

Should Amelia be unable to answer a question or fix a problem, it is capable of forwarding the matter to a live agent — the sort of human-to-human interaction traditionally associated with connectivity woes or locked accounts. In testing, Amelia has helped slash the number of abandoned calls “significantly,” and the “first-contact resolution rate has been pretty high, in the higher 90 percentile,” according to Dawson.

“People are able to get their answers quicker than they have historically,” he said.

The Pentagon is spending billions of dollars on AI advancement and adoption. The technology is being applied to both the battlefield and the boardroom. It can assist target identification onboard combat vehicles, and it can parse mass amounts of personnel and organizational info.

GDIT, a division of General Dynamics, the fifth largest defense contractor in the world by revenue, in May launched a tech-investment strategy with focuses on zero-trust cybersecurity, 5G wireless communications, automation for IT operations, AI and more.

The company provided C4ISRNET a rendering of Amelia as a female sailor in uniform. No explanation of the name or gender selection was given.

“The requirement moving forward was to have the integration of an AI capability,” Dawson said. “And with automation that’s out there today, Amelia fit the bill.”

Navy Capt. John W. Kurtz commanded the amphibious transport dock Somerset on July 30, 2020, when the amphibious assault vehicle sunk off California, killing eight Marines and a sailor.

A platoon of amphibious assault vehicles left the Somerset on the evening of the mishap and used two other amphibious assault vehicles as safety boats, because other boats promised by the Somerset were not operational, an investigation found.

Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro issued Kurtz a censure letter in June 2022 that noted that an investigation into the sinking “did not establish that any of USS SOMERSET’s actions or inactions caused the sinking.”

But it also states that Kurtz failed in his duties to oversee amphibious assault vehicle operations as the primary control officer.

“As the primary control officer, you ultimately bear responsibility to ensure positive control and leadership oversight over waterborne AAV operations and you failed to do so,” Del Toro wrote.

Kurtz’s name appeared in late 2022 on a fiscal 2024 aviation major command screening board to helm a carrier, Navy Times reported in November 2022.

But the following month, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Gilday removed Kurtz’s name from the selection list “pursuant to his authorities,” the CNO’s spokesperson, Cmdr. Courtney Hillson, said in an email Monday.

Kurtz’s removal was based on the “adverse information” in the secretarial censure letter and the Navy’s investigation into the mishap, she added.

Task and Purpose first reported Gilday removing Kurtz from the list.

A Marine Corps investigation into the incident found serious deficiencies and errors in judgment made by top leaders, while the Navy investigation mostly exposed flaws in the way the two services interacted during amphibious assault vehicle operations.

NBC News first reported Monday that Paparo’s name was sent to the White House last week.

Two defense officials with direct knowledge of the process, who requested anonymity to discuss the matter, confirmed the accuracy of the NBC report.

President Joe Biden would still need to formally nominate Paparo and send the pick to Congress for approval.

Monday’s news flew in the face of conventional Beltway wisdom, with some news reports and talking heads predicting that the current vice chief of naval operations, Adm. Lisa Franchetti, would become the next CNO and the first woman to hold the title and to serve on the Joint Chiefs.

Multiple sources said privately that high-ranking Pentagon officials were operating under the assumption Franchetti would be nominated for CNO right up until the NBC story broke. Last week, several current and retired flag officers told Defense News that Franchetti’s selection for the job was among the “worst-kept secrets” in Washington.

White House officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday.

Paparo assumed command of PACFLEET — the tip of the Navy spear when it comes to containing China — in May 2021.

His spokesperson did not return a request for comment Monday afternoon.

While Franchetti was expected to be nominated as CNO, command of PACFLEET has in the past often led to the job of leading the joint-force U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, a route taken by current INDOPACOM head Adm. John Aquilino.

Navy officials declined to comment on the Paparo nomination Monday, and Defense Department officials declined to provide an on-record comment by Navy Times’ deadline.

“This is a Presidential decision,” Navy spokesman Rear Adm. Ryan Perry said in a statement. “The United States Navy has several highly qualified senior leaders, and it would be inappropriate to speculate which leader the President will nominate to serve as the next Chief of Naval Operations.”

The current CNO, Adm. Mike Gilday, became the top naval officer in August 2019.

Gilday is statutorily required to step down after four years. His last day will be Aug. 21, and the following day a new leader will have to be in charge. If Biden’s pick for CNO cannot be confirmed by that date — a possibility, as Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville is not allowing military nominations to move forward in the Senate — then Franchetti will be called upon to perform the duties of CNO.

Arnold Punaro, a former staff director on the Senate Armed Services Committee, told Defense News that the services’ current vice chiefs can perform the duties of chief with no limitations, should there be a delay in the Senate confirming new service chiefs.

The House Armed Services Committee included in its annual defense policy bill an amphibious warship the Marine Corps wants but the Navy did not request, and provided authorization to buy 13 attack submarines over the next five years instead of the request for 10.

On the submarines, the Navy submitted a legislative proposal that would have allowed it to enter into a multiyear procurement agreement for 10 Block VI Virginia-class attack submarines from FY24 through FY28.

The submarine-industrial base is currently supposed to produce two boats a year but is struggling to keep pace due to workforce and supplier challenges.

The workload is only expected to increase, both as the Columbia ballistic missile submarine program accelerates its pace and as the U.S. submarine-industrial base takes on additional work so the U.S. Navy can sell three to five Virginia-class subs to Australia as part of the AUKUS agreement.

The sea service wrote in its FY24 long-range shipbuilding plan, released in April, that “the Navy anticipates building additional Virginia class SSNs in the 2030s as replacements for submarines sold to Australia.”

Still, despite that planned timeline, Rep. Joe Courtney of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the committee’s sea power and projection forces panel, and whose district includes submarine builder General Dynamics Electric Boat, said in a June 12 news release he wants to incentivize the industrial base to ramp up its output now.

In allowing the contract to cover 13 boats, the defense bill “ensures the Navy has the authority to exceed the two-per-year build cadence for Virginia-class submarines — demonstrating Congress’ commitment to meeting the Navy’s fleet requirements while supporting the AUKUS agreement. Importantly, this provision sends a robust demand signal to the submarine industrial base which, in the last year, has been making great strides to recover a two-per-year build rate after the pandemic’s disruption. This authority — combined with recent Congressional investment in the workforce and supply chain — will accelerate that positive trajectory.”

As for the amphibious warship, the Navy and the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the FY23 request announced a pause in buying San Antonio-class amphibious transport docks, to instead study what capabilities any future amphibious ship ought to have and if there were ways to save money using a new construction or acquisition strategy.

The Marines fiercely oppose this idea, and in FY23 the Corps persuaded Congress to give $250 million in advance procurement funds to begin buying the next ship in the class, LPD-33.

This spring, Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. David Berger asked for $1.71 billion on his unfunded priorities list to finish buying LPD-33.

That money to buy the remainder of the ship would come earlier than needed, as the LPDs had been bought one every other year, and LPD-33 wouldn’t be bought until FY25 to remain on track. But Berger told lawmakers this year that he included the request at the top of his wish list because the Navy’s shipbuilding plan was insufficient and the request was the only option he had to try to strengthen the amphibious fleet.

The House Armed Services Committee is further raising the cost of its proposal by banning the Navy from decommissioning three specific amphibious ships and two specific cruisers — Germantown, Gunston Hall, Tortuga, Shiloh and Cowpens — or decommissioning more than three other guided-missile cruisers in FY24.

The Navy has argued these ships are becoming too expensive to operate and maintain, and do not constitute a relevant capability in a high-end fight. The Marines, though, eyeing a too-small amphibious fleet, have opposed retiring these aging ships without buying their replacements.

The committee’s language would also prevent the Navy from putting expeditionary fast transport vessels into reduced operating status, and requires the Navy and its Military Sealift Command to develop a concept of operations to use these ships to support operational plans in the Pacific.

The Marine Corps is eyeing these vessels as a temporary capability for its stand-in forces, ahead of the construction and delivery of its highly desired Landing Ship Medium program.

In late May, Congress reached an agreement to raise the debt limit that included spending caps. The defense budget is limited to $886 billion in FY24 — the top line President Joe Biden requested for the year — and $895 billion in FY25. These ship spending additions will have to be offset by cuts elsewhere, and it’s unclear what the committee is eyeing for a trade.

The planned delivery halt of new fighters loaded with Technology Refresh 3 hardware means manufacturer Lockheed Martin may have to store dozens of the planes at its main factory in Fort Worth, Texas, for much of the rest of the year, and perhaps into spring 2024.

The F-35′s Technology Refresh 3 effort — a slate of improvements that aim to give the fighter better displays, computer memory and processing power — was originally due this past April. TR-3 is necessary before the F-35 can receive a more expansive modernization known as Block 4, which will allow the fighter to carry more long-range precision weapons, improve its electronic warfare capability and provide better target recognition.

The TR-3 schedule has slipped considerably, and the F-35 Joint Program Office is now expecting it to arrive no earlier than this December — and perhaps as late as April 2024, a full year behind schedule.

The F-35 Joint Program Office said in a statement to Defense News that the TR-3 delays will in turn disrupt deliveries, causing new fighters to have to be stored in the meantime.

“Starting later this summer, F-35 aircraft coming off the production line with TR-3 hardware will not be accepted until relevant combat capability is validated in accordance with our users’ expectations,” JPO spokesman Russ Goemaere said in an email. “The JPO and Lockheed Martin will ensure these aircraft are safely and securely stored until [acceptance] occurs.”

Breaking Defense first reported the Defense Department’s plan to not accept new F-35s.

Lockheed is now building F-35s with TR-3 hardware installed, and the first such fighter is expected to come off the production line by the end of July, Goemaere said.

The challenge lies in the TR-3 software and getting the programming to work with the new hardware., he said.

In March, F-35 program executive officer Lt. Gen. Michael Schmidt told the House Armed Services subcommittee on tactical air and land forces that the development of TR-3′s hardware had lagged behind and its production started slow, but that it had improved and became reliable.

Software integration, Schmidt said, began late and was proving difficult.

The JPO on Monday said the Defense Department will continue to accept deliveries of fighters with the previous hardware and software known as Technology Refresh 2.

“The government and industry team will continue to work this issue until full resolution is achieved,” Goemaere said.

Lockheed said it remains committed to delivering the first TR-3-enabled F-35 this year.

“Our team is fully dedicated to delivering TR-3 F-35 aircraft and will continue to work with the JPO on software development while maintaining the highest levels of safety and quality,” the company said in a statement to Defense News. “We continue to deliver aircraft in the TR-2 configuration as planned.”

CEO Jim Taiclet this year downplayed the potential for the problems to affect F-35 deliveries. In an April earnings call, after the TR-3 delays were acknowledged to lawmakers, he said the company expected deliveries to be lower than anticipated, but said they would be a “fraction” of total Lockheed’s total deliveries and would have “little to no” effect on the company’s aeronautics revenue.

If the problem is not resolved by the end of the year, perhaps dozens of new F-35s could be undelivered by the end of the year.

Lockheed Martin said in an email to Defense News that it is too early to say how many fighters might be affected, and the company did not say how many F-35s with TR-3 hardware it expects to build this year. The company originally planned to deliver between 147 and 153 total fighters in 2023.

Lockheed on Monday said that it has so far delivered more than 45 F-35s this year, with about 50 more TR-2 F-35s now under construction.

This will be the third time in less than a year that F-35 deliveries have been halted. In September 2022, the Pentagon announced that it had temporarily halted F-35 deliveries after the discovery of a Chinese-sourced alloy had for years been used to make a key magnet in the fighter. Those deliveries resumed in October 2022 after the Pentagon decided the Chinese material did not pose a danger to security or flight safety and issued a waiver.

Pre-delivery acceptance flights were also halted in December, which had the effect of also halting deliveries, due to an engine vibration problem that led to a Dec. 15 mishap involving an F-35B. After a fix was put in place that allowed Lockheed Martin to resume acceptance flights, the Defense Department once again began accepting new F-35s.

In the March hearing, subcommittee chairman Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., called the TR-3 delays “unacceptable,” and said it would hurt Air Force squadrons that need the new fighters to replace older, retiring aircraft.

Wittman also quoted an unnamed Air Force official who said of the F-35, “We currently are paying for a great capability, but we’re currently only getting a good capability fielded.”