Tag: Air Force

  • Washington’s orders to troops after July 4: You’re fighting for a new nation

    The Fourth of July and the signing of the Declaration of Independence severed ties with Great Britain and thus receives its due attention.

    But it was on July 5, 1776, that the former colonials got down to the nuts-and-bolts of governing and winning a war.

    One of the first orders of business that day for members of the Second Continental Congress meeting in Philadelphia was getting cooking kettles to the militia. The Committees of Inspection and Observation were told to “furnish a good kettle to every six men, and give all the assistance in their power, that the said militia be well armed and equipped, and march with the greatest expedition,” according to the Journals of the Continental Congress at the Library of Congress.

    It was also resolved “That a chaplain be appointed to each regiment in the Continental Army, and their allowance be increased to thirty three dollars and one third of a dollar a month.”

    Members then had to deal with the always grumpy John Adams, who got approval to send a copy of the Declaration to Mary Palmer, the daughter of family friends of the Adamses in Braintree, Massachusetts, along with a somewhat-snotty note now preserved by the Massachusetts Historical Society.

    “I will enclose to you a Declaration, in which all America is remarkably united,” Adams’ letter read. “It completes a Revolution, which will make as good a Figure in the History of Mankind, as any that has preceded it — provided always, that the Ladies take Care to record the Circumstances of it, for by the Experience I have had of the other Sex, they are either too lazy, or too active, to commemorate them.”

    On the morning of July 5, the members of the Congress also ordered copies of the Declaration printed by John Dunlap to be distributed throughout the former colonies.

    The thought also occurred to them that somebody ought to tell the troops what they were fighting for now that independence had been declared.

    And so John Hancock, the Boston merchant-smuggler and president of the Second Continental Congress, was authorized to tell Gen. George Washington to have the Declaration read to his fledgling army at formations.

    In his letter to Washington, Hancock wrote that “the Congress have judged it necessary to dissolve the Connection between Great Britain and the American Colonies, and to declare them free and independent States; as you will perceive by the enclosed Declaration, which I am directed to transmit to you, and to request you will have it proclaimed at the Head of the Army in the Way, you shall think most proper.”

    Washington was in New York at the time, warily watching the buildup near the harbor of a British armada that would grow to 400 ships and 32,000 British regulars and Hessians. He scheduled the reading of the Declaration for July 9.

    “The Honorable the Continental Congress, impelled by the dictates of duty, policy and necessity, having been pleased to dissolve the Connection which subsisted between this Country, and Great Britain, and to declare the United Colonies of North America, free and independent STATES,” Washington’s General Orders for July 9 read.

    “The several brigades are to be drawn up this evening on their respective Parades, at six [o’clock], when the declaration of Congress, shewing the grounds and reasons of this measure, is to be read with an audible voice.”

    Washington hoped that movement would “serve as a fresh incentive to every officer, and soldier, to act with Fidelity and Courage, as knowing that now the peace and safety of his Country depends (under God) solely on the success of our arms.

    “And that he is now in the service of a State, possessed of sufficient power to reward his merit, and advance him to the highest Honors of a free Country.”

    Things did not immediately go according to plan, however.

    Washington was livid when a mob of troops and locals rioted, storming down Broadway to Bowling Green where they toppled a statue of King George III and lopped off its head.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • US withdrew forces from Nigeria after operation against ISIS, AFRICOM chief says

    The United States has withdrawn most of the forces it deployed for a recent operation against Islamic State militants in Nigeria and is now providing intelligence support at Abuja’s request, the head of U.S. Africa Command said.

    In May, U.S. and Nigerian forces conducted military operations in northeastern Nigeria that killed Abu-Bilal al-Minuki, the second-in-command of ISIS globally.

    That followed a U.S. strike on Christmas Day against the militants ordered by President Donald Trump, who said they had been targeting Christians in the African country.

    Addressing a conference of African defense chiefs in Angola on Thursday, AFRICOM Commander Gen. Dagvin Anderson described May’s joint U.S.-Nigerian as a model for future security cooperation in Africa.

    “We have withdrawn much of our forces that were just there for that operation, but are continuing the partnership that Nigeria has asked for to help continue with the intelligence sharing,” Anderson told journalists during a U.S. State Department-hosted briefing after the conference.

    Anderson said the operation, in Nigeria’s Lake Chad Basin region, demonstrated Washington’s approach of providing specialized capabilities while allowing African partners to lead security operations.

    He said cooperation with Nigeria had helped significantly degrade Islamic State’s leadership, adding that the impact had extended beyond West Africa because of the militant group’s international network.

    The operation disrupted not only local commanders but also broader Islamic State communications and operations, he added.

    “Nigeria has been very active since that operation in May,” Anderson said. “They continue to prosecute targets themselves.”

    He added that Nigerian military pressure, combined with efforts to publicize the operation, had encouraged additional defections and surrenders among ISIS fighters in northeastern Nigeria.

    The three-day conference in Angola’s capital, Luanda, was attended by military leaders from 35 African countries, alongside representatives from the U.S. and Brazil.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Unemployment for post-9/11 veterans climbs in June as nation’s job market slides

    Unemployment for post-9/11 veterans climbs in June as nation’s job market slides

    The closely watched jobless rate for the post-9/11 generation of veterans bumped up from 4.1% in May to 4.8% in June as the nation’s ability to create new jobs took a nosedive, according to a monthly jobs report released Thursday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    The report also showed an increase in the unemployment rate for all veterans from a remarkably low 3.2% in May to 4.1% in June, despite the continued strong showing of women veterans in the labor market.

    The BLS data showed that the jobless rate for women veterans has come down from 7.1% in March to 4.4% in April and 3.3% in May before ticking up to 3.6% in June, which was still well below the month’s unemployment rate for the general population (4.1%).

    For many analysts, the most concerning figures in the BLS report were the weak numbers on job creation. Total nonfarm payroll employment changed little in June by adding 57,000 jobs, about half of what analysts predicted.

    A main concern was the hiring slowdown in the healthcare sector, which has consistently been setting the pace for adding jobs through both the Biden and Trump administrations.

    The BLS report said that employment in healthcare added 22,000 jobs in June, “but at a slower pace than the average monthly gain over the prior 12 months of 38,000.”

    Leisure and hospitality employment, meanwhile, usually a strong performer, declined by 61,000 jobs in June, “reflecting weaker than usual seasonal hiring,” the report said. Thus far in 2026, “employment in the industry has shown little net change.”

    Overall, “it’s a pretty disappointing jobs report,” Heather Long, chief economist for the Navy Federal Credit Union, told Military Times in a phone interview.

    “Tech is still strong,” she said, “but healthcare has cooled off a little bit,” and “wages are not keeping up with inflation.”

    Long noted increases in the unemployment rates for veterans but added that the data is from a relatively small sample.

    “That’s why you see a lot of movement” in the numbers for veterans, she said, adding that the “verdict is still out” on whether artificial intelligence will be the major job killer that many expect.

    The AI impact on the jobs market is “not showing up in the data yet,” Natasha Sarin, a former assistant secretary at the Treasury Department under the Biden administration, told MS Now, which could be the result of new research showing that the expected impact of AI on white collar entry-level jobs may have been overstated.

    The Trump administration sought to put the best face on the BLS report, showing a weakening labor market. Kush Desai, a White House spokesman, posted that the report “reinforces that the American labor market remains solid thanks to President Trump’s economic agenda.”

    He called attention to the report that the nation added 3,000 manufacturing jobs in June, although that was down from 7,000 manufacturing jobs added in May.

    New acting Secretary of Labor Keith Sonderling stated that “Manufacturing employment, which was devastated under the Biden Administration, continues to grow as we secure historic investments and reshoring of critical industries,” despite the loss of 4,000 manufacturing jobs cited in the BLS report.

    “President Trump’s America first agenda continues to provide greater wages for workers and certainty to the sectors which will fuel the next 250 years of U.S. economic security,” he added.

    Despite the claims, the BLS data showed that wages were not keeping up with inflation. The report showed that wages rose 3.5% in June, while the annual inflation rate through May noted in a separate BLS report (the Consumer Price Index) rose by 4.2%.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Air Force medical commander removed from post at Virginia base

    Air Force medical commander removed from post at Virginia base

    A U.S. Air Force commander for medical services at a Virginia base was removed from her post this week, according to Air Force officials.

    Col. Tracy Allen, commander of the 633rd Medical Group at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, one of the largest Air Force bases, was relieved of command on Tuesday because of a “loss of confidence,” a Langley spokesperson told Military Times on Thursday.

    Allen was removed by Col. Stephen Anderson, 633rd Air Base Wing commander, “after careful consideration.”

    The base did not provide a specific reason for Allen’s removal beyond citing a loss of confidence in her ability to lead.

    Until a new commander of the medical unit is chosen, Col. Michael Blowers, the deputy command surgeon at Air Combat Command, has assumed responsibility of the group.

    Before taking command, Allen previously led the 436th Medical Group at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware. She also served as the chief of the Medical Readiness Division and chief of the Air Force Medical Operations Center, according to her LinkedIn.

    The base houses Air Combat Command, one of the force’s 10 major commands. It has 1,150 assigned aircraft with 35 wings and 1,470 units across 248 locations.

    The 633rd Medical Group has five squadrons and 1,400 personnel that deliver outpatient, specialty and emergent care and operate an outpatient surgical center.

    The unit also supports a local patient population of up to 29,000 active-duty members and their families alongside 426,000 TRICARE beneficiaries in Hampton Roads, the area in which the base is located.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Air Force major arrested on Capitol steps during protest calling for Trump impeachment

    Air Force major arrested on Capitol steps during protest calling for Trump impeachment

    A U.S. Air Force major was arrested Wednesday for protesting alone on House steps as he called for the immediate impeachment and removal of President Donald Trump.

    Maj. Jason Watson was arrested by Capitol Police officers at approximately 1:15 p.m. local time for demonstrating on the House steps without a sitting member of Congress, Capitol Police told Military Times. Watson, an active-duty service member with a military career dating over 20 years, walked halfway up the steps of the House to its chained railing to hold a sign that read “Impeach Convict Remove.”

    Watson was first escorted to the bottom of the steps by Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, who then left the area, causing the officers to arrest Watson under 22-1307 Crowding, Obstructing and Incommoding.

    “When the Member of Congress left the area, our officers gave the man lawful orders to stop the illegal demonstration, or he would be arrested,” the spokesperson said. “The man refused our lawful orders.”

    The spokesperson highlighted that there are other areas on the Capitol where demonstrating is allowed.

    Watson stoically stood wearing his uniform on the steps for roughly one minute before officers first approached him. Another minute later, he was again approached by an officer, who spoke to him briefly and was nodded at by Watson, as shown in video footage posted by Removal Coalition founder Jessica Denson, who organized the demonstration.

    Over a minute later, Watson was approached for a third time. But this time, he quietly and peacefully placed his sign down and was arrested by Capitol Police before being escorted off the steps by multiple officers as protesters chants of “Who do you serve? Who do you protect?” rang clear.

    U.S. Air Force Maj. Jason Watson stand on the House steps in protest, calling for the removal of President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance. (Video footage screenshot)

    Prior to the protest, Watson held a press conference alongside Greene, Denson, constitutional lawyer Bruce Fein, Defenders of Our Republic and About Face Veterans, calling on Trump’s and Vice President JD Vance’s impeachment and removal from office.

    Denson, who introduced Watson for his speech, said that Watson is currently on leave from his commission post as a logistics readiness officer in Poland. She said that he approached the Removal Coalition in February and asked them to create this event for him so that it would not be in “vain.”

    “The question of whether or not his sacrifice, his risk of prosecution, his potential forfeiture of the benefits of an entire [over 20] year career in the military is worth it is whether you follow through with the pressure that is needed on Congress to impeach, convict and remove,” Denson said, calling on the audience and fellow protestors.

    Active-duty service members are strictly prohibited from engaging in partisan political activities, especially while in uniform, per the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Those who do can face criminal or administrative punishment, such as imprisonment, loss of pay, dishonorable discharge and more.

    “Service members must comply with all laws, regulations and policies governing conduct and the wear of the uniform,” an Air Force spokesperson told Military Times. “As commanders verify inappropriate actions, they are responsible for taking the necessary administrative and disciplinary actions to hold service members accountable.”

    The Air Force confirmed that Watson’s title is staff officer with the current duty station of Bydgoszcz, Poland. He entered active duty in late May 2009.

    In his speech before taking to the steps, Watson said he entered basic cadet training in the U.S. Air Force Academy in late June 2005 when he first spoke the oath of office, calling it foundational to the system of government and pertinent to ensure all officials owe allegiance to the Constitution instead of to a political party.

    He said that the greatest threat to the country’s democratic republic was not a foreign one but domestic. “We the people” have played a part in getting the country into the “mess we are all in,” he said.

    “For the past 18 months, we the people have allowed the highest levels of the executive branch of the federal government to violate our Constitution and their oaths to it with impunity,” Watson stated.

    “When the President of the United States orders military action against foreign countries absent an emergency scenario where American interests are under imminent dire threat, as was done with Venezuela, Cuba and Iran, that’s an unconstitutional usurpation of Congress’s authority and a violation of the War Powers Clause,” he continued.

    Watson said that the violations caused the death of 13 service members and injuries of hundreds more, and for that, Trump and Vance should be impeached, convicted and removed from office.

    The major also pointed to other “violations,” such as Elon Musk being allowed to shut down large portions of the federal government and granted access to government databases as well as Trump directing the Department of Homeland Security to deny due process before illegally detaining people and sending them to CECOT, a foreign prison in El Salvador notorious for human rights abuses.

    In Watson’s view, Trump “sponsors violence” on the American people engaged in their right to peacefully assemble and protest as protected by the First Amendment as a reason for the pair’s removal.

    Watson said there are “innumerable more impeachable offenses” that he could list, including denying congressional oversight of immigrant detention centers, suing media, law firms and educational institutions, weaponizing the Department of Justice and attempting to reverse birthright citizenship.

    Although Green did not speak at the conference, he was addressed by Watson who referred to himself as not a Democrat. A spokesperson for Green denied to comment on if the representative was aware that Watson would be arrested for not being escorted atop the House steps.

    Green was the only member of Congress who voted to impeach Trump during his second term. The resolution was dismissed, with the House voting 237-140 to table the measure.

    “I am calling on average Americans everywhere to peacefully exercise your First Amendment rights en masse every day until this administration is removed and our democratic republic is restored,” Watson stated.

    “If just a nobody like me can take a stand for our Constitution and our democratic republic, then you can too. I hope you will join me in the defense of our republic,” he concluded.

    Capitol Police said he is not being held.

    A Spot Fund that was created to gather donations for Watson’s defense has garnered nearly $70,000 as of Thursday afternoon.

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

    Watson is the first-ever active-duty commissioned officer in the military to publicly protest for the impeachment, conviction and removal of Trump and Vance.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Proposed ‘Honor and Remember’ flag resembles communist imagery, Vietnam veterans argue

    Proposed ‘Honor and Remember’ flag resembles communist imagery, Vietnam veterans argue

    Vietnam War veterans are pushing back against the use of an “Honor and Remember” flag because of its resemblance to the Bolshevik Communist flag and the flag flown by the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

    Vietnam Veterans of America, a national veterans service organization, argued Thursday that the flag “cannot serve as a positive symbol” for veterans who fought against communism. The flag shows a gold star on a red background — imagery reminiscent of multiple communist movements, VVA said in a public statement.

    “For Vietnam veterans especially, the striking resemblance to the flag flown by the Democratic Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam War, and seen in all the images of North Vietnamese tanks invading Saigon on April 30, 1975, is impossible to ignore,” the group wrote.

    A congressional effort is underway to designate the Honor and Remember flag as a national symbol of remembrance for service members and veterans who died as a result of their military service. VVA said the proposal was recently attached to the fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, an annual, must-pass defense policy and budget bill.

    The proposal was originally introduced by Reps. Don Davis, D-N.C., Jen Kiggans, R-Va., and Glenn Thompson, R-Pa. The bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus endorsed the measure in February.

    The amendment mandates that the flag be displayed at federal sites, including the U.S. Capitol, White House and national cemeteries on Memorial Day, Veterans Day, Independence Day and other holidays.

    “The brave men and women who laid down their lives in service to our nation deserve our deepest gratitude and lasting remembrance,” Kiggans said in a February statement. “While we can never fully repay the debt we owe them, we must always ensure their legacy is honored.”

    The flag was created by George Lutz after the death of his son, Army Cpl. George “Tony” Lutz, who was killed by an enemy sniper in Fallujah, Iraq, in 2005. Since its creation, 29 states have adopted the Honor and Remember flag as an official symbol.

    VVA National President Tom Burke argued the idea was not adequately discussed before being proposed for a national designation. The American flag already represents the sacrifices of Americans who have died in defense of the nation, he contended.

    “Rather than creating confusion and strife regarding official national symbols by introducing new federally recognized commemorative flags, VVA encourages Congress to direct its efforts towards policies that directly benefit Gold Star families, survivors, wounded veterans, and those currently serving,” Burke said.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Army contractor swindles over $1 million … in MREs

    Army contractor swindles over $1 million … in MREs

    For one U.S. Army soldier-turned-contractor, the lure of a processed lemon poppy seed poundcake seemingly proved too tempting to resist.

    Joseph Lavar Davis, 47, was convicted of stealing over $1.1 million worth of the military’s pre-packaged Meals-Ready-to-Eat, or MREs, in El Paso, Texas, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, said Tuesday, in a scheme involving three other co-defendants and more than 200 pallets of the shelf-stable rations.

    MREs, typically sealed in distinctive brown branding, are used to feed troops basic nutrients in austere situations and training exercises.

    Known for their energy content as opposed to their taste, the emergency rations can be eaten hot or cold and are notorious for producing foul flatulence and blocked bowels — oftentimes contributing to the MRE’s other moniker of Meal, Refusing to Exit.

    A supply of Meals Ready-to-Eat (MREs) is prepared for distribution. (Tech. Sgt. Tyler J. Bolken/U.S. Air Force)

    According to a statement from the office, the group used false paperwork to acquire MREs from Fort Bliss and Davis created false requests, rented vehicles to move the calorically dense provisions, fixed prices and collected compensation in the operation.

    The FBI and Army Criminal Investigation Division agents executed a search warrant on a civilian warehouse in August 2020 and found scores of pallets of MREs that an investigation showed was a holding facility for a company that purchased the rations from people who had pillaged them from Fort Bliss, the statement said.

    Davis was named in the February 2025 indictment — along with the three others — for conspiracy to commit theft of government property and a substantive count of theft of government property between Feb. 4, 2020, and Aug. 12, 2020.

    The office said that Davis learned the Army’s food procurement process while working in food service supply in the service. When he retired, the statements said, he got a job as a civilian contractor in a similar position.

    “Joseph Davis betrayed the very country he once swore to protect in an effort to satisfy his own selfish ambition and a jury of his peers held him accountable for it,” said U.S. Attorney Justin R. Simmons.

    Military Times contacted the Army for details regarding Davis’ time in service, but had not received a response as of publication.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Transgender troops granted class action lawsuit against government

    Transgender troops granted class action lawsuit against government

    A federal court issued a ruling Tuesday that paves the way for all transgender service members to continue serving in the military despite a Trump administration policy that ordered their removal.

    The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a motion to certify Talbott v. USA as a class action lawsuit several weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said in a June 1 ruling that the Pentagon’s transgender military ban was unlawful.

    The June ruling only allowed the plaintiffs in that case to continue serving, meaning all other transgender service members are currently still banned from the military. But if the class action lawsuit goes into effect in two weeks along with with the June ruling, the protections won in Talbott v. USA would extend to all transgender service members currently serving.

    “The protection afforded to our plaintiffs should be available to all transgender servicemembers and their families,” said National Center for LGBTQ Rights Legal Director Shannon Minter. “We know that this ban is discriminatory, rooted in animus, and irrationally excludes highly decorated servicemembers who have deployed around the world and given everything to our country.”

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27, 2025, stating that service members with a history of “gender dysphoria” have medical, surgical and mental health constraints “incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”

    Transgender troops previously needed a gender dysphoria diagnosis in order to receive gender affirming care while in the military and, as a result, many transgender service members have the term in their medical record.

    Approximately 4,240 transgender individuals are serving in the military have a gender dysphoria diagnosis, both on active duty and in the reserves, according to an Associated Press report.

    The Defense Department rolled out a sweeping “voluntary separation” policy last February that attempted to incentivize transgender military service members to separate from the military by offering more money than they’d otherwise receive for involuntary separation.

    Service members who Military Times spoke to at the time said the move was anything but voluntary, as they wanted to continue to serve and saw the policy as a way to kick them out.

    Transgender service members have either been voluntarily or involuntarily separated or are in the process of being separated while on paid administrative leave.

    The National Center for LGBTQ Rights and GLAD Law filed a lawsuit against Trump on Jan. 28, 2025, alleging that the ban was unconstitutional because the policy was based on animus.

    The lawsuit eventually shifted so that the plaintiffs were suing the U.S. government.

    The United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a nationwide preliminary injunction on March 18, 2025, blocking the discharge of transgender service members, which the newly enacted Defense Department policy called for.

    The U.S. government appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which ultimately ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor over a year later on June 1, 2026.

    The government has 45 days after the June 1 ruling to file a petition for rehearing.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit can either accept or deny that request.

    The government can also ask the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to rehear the case, which would comprise 11 active judges, as opposed to a three-judge panel, like the one that decided the June 1 ruling.

    If the government went that route, the ruling of that rehearing would go into effect seven days after the decision.

    The Trump administration could also ask the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an emergency stay to stop the preliminary injunction and class action lawsuit from going into effect.

    The government hasn’t filed as of Wednesday.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • The US military wants a fleet of laser trucks. Here’s what they might look like.

    The US military wants a fleet of laser trucks. Here’s what they might look like.

    Editor’s note: This story originally appeared on Laser Wars, a newsletter about military laser weapons and other futuristic defense technology. Subscribe here.

    The U.S. military is closing in on its high-energy laser weapon of choice for counter-drone missions. Now it needs the vehicles to support it.

    With the demise of its Stryker-based Directed Energy-Maneuver Short Range Air Defense (DE-MSHORAD) program, the U.S. Army has focused its ground-based laser weapon efforts on light tactical vehicles.

    AeroVironment’s 20 kW LOCUST Laser Weapon System has already been operationally tested aboard both the Infantry Squad Vehicle and the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle through the Army Multi-Purpose High Energy Laser (AMP-HEL) effort, establishing that the U.S. military’s preferred mobile platforms can carry and employ directed energy weapons in the field.

    The Army has reinforced this preference with its Enduring High Energy Laser (E-HEL) push, which is explicitly targeting light tactical vehicles like the JLTV for what might become the U.S. military’s first directed energy program of record.

    Both the ISV and JLTV are at the center of the U.S. military’s emerging approach to future distributed operations. For the Army, the speedy and versatile ISV is seen as providing an essential maneuver capability for Mobile Brigade Combat Teams on a battlefield increasingly dominated by low-cost weaponized drones.

    And while the ultimate fate of the JLTV remains uncertain, the vehicle is currently the chosen platform for the Marine Corps air defense system that’s the backbone of the service’s new Marine Littoral Regiments.

    Both platforms, however, face the same big problem: power. The two services’ potential solutions offer a look at what the U.S. military’s future fleet of laser trucks might actually look like.

    U.S. soldiers prepare to sling load a All-Terrain M1301 Infantry Squad Vehicle to a CH-47 Chinook at Fort Bliss, Texas, July 16, 2025. (Staff Sgt. Rynishia Lewis/U.S. Army)

    As the modern battlefield is increasingly defined by unmanned systems and the electronics needed to counter them, consistent and reliable power at the tactical edge has become as important as ammunition.

    During the height of the Global War on Terrorism, a 30-soldier infantry platoon carried 400 pounds of batteries during a 72-hour mission to power equipment, a load that Army researchers have sought to lighten in the intervening years.

    The U.S. military’s new crop of tactical vehicles don’t currently offer a robust solution: the JLTV can only generate up to 15 kW of exportable power, while the ISV’s output beyond baseline vehicle operations is not public (and likely negligible).

    The challenge for building a laser truck is bigger than just raw power. The core problem for directed energy weapons, as Chariot Defense founder and CEO Adam Warmoth told Laser Wars earlier this month, is that while they don’t consume enormous amounts of energy in absolute terms, each engagement demands a significant spike in power sustained for several seconds.

    Conventional generators are optimized for steady output but not for these spikes, and running one at the ready around the clock is not just inefficient and expensive, but actively dangerous on a battlefield where heat signatures and engine noise turn are prime targets for drone-based reconnaissance and precision strikes.

    “That targetable signature is always on because you have to be ready to provide power to that laser system at any moment,” Warmoth said. “So, you have efficiency challenges, signature management challenges and then mobility problems, where you have to bring the generator sized to your peak demand, which is three to five times larger than the equivalent battery system.”

    The proposed solution to this problem is a hybrid architecture: a generator sized for average load paired with a high-voltage battery system capable of delivering instantaneous surges on demand. The battery handles the spike, the generator recharges the battery between shots and the overall system is smaller, quieter and more tactically versatile than alternatives.

    A vehicle with the right hybrid architecture becomes more than just a maneuver capability, but a node in a distributed battlefield power grid capable of charging drone batteries, running C2 and sensor networks and powering electronic warfare equipment — and, when the moment requires it, feeding a laser weapon the juice it needs to fry a target.

    The Army and Marine Corps have understood the benefits of vehicle electrification for some time. In January 2024, GM Defense demonstrated its Next Generation Tactical Vehicle-Hybrid — built on a Chevrolet Silverado HD 3500 with the same Duramax engine used in the ISV and paired with a battery producing roughly 300 kW hours — with soldiers from the 3rd Brigade, 10th Mountain Division in Hohenfels, Germany.

    GM Defense's Next-Generation Tactical Vehicle. (Staff)

    The following February, the service’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office demonstrated a Humvee-based Tactical Hybrid Electric Vehicle at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, highlighting silent watch, silent mobility and increased power generation and export as the core operational advantages.

    And later that month, the Army’s JLTV program office released a market survey for a “projected new production effort of a light tactical wheeled hybrid-electric vehicle.”

    The U.S. military has validated this technology despite ongoing concerns that the Trump administration might put the kibosh on such efforts. Now the Pentagon has to actually field it in the right package.

    The Army’s answer to the power gap is the ISV-Heavy. The name is slightly misleading: what makes the vehicle “heavy” is its chassis and, more importantly, its proposed power generation capabilities.

    According to a commercial solutions opening (CSO) document published in late March, the system must produce and export a minimum 60 kW of continuous high-voltage DC power to support modular mission-specific payloads, from C2 communication equipment and radar to, explicitly, future directed energy weapons.

    If the original ISV, based on GM Defense’s Chevrolet Colorado ZR2, was intended as a high-speed troop transport, the ISV-H is envisioned as a mobile power plant that happens to carry soldiers.

    The ISV-H is designed to fill a “niche requirement there between an ISV and then, say, a JLTV, and it’s really going to be focused on the power generation part,” Jess Tolleson, principal deputy assistant secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology, told the Senate Armed Services Committee during a June 16 hearing.

    “One of the things that we do have a critical capability gap on right now is power generation at that mobile brigade combat team level,” she added.

    The ISV-H, meanwhile, is moving faster than the earlier CSO document might have indicated. According to the Army’s fiscal year 2027 budget request released in April, the service plans on procuring an initial tranche of 34 ISV-H vehicles at a unit cost of roughly $463,000 each, with a total procurement objective set at 606 vehicles.

    The service plans to release proposal requests by the end of this year, Tolleson said, describing the platform’s development as “a top priority” that the service wants to accelerate. The Army wants to award a contract by September 2027 and accept its first deliveries by January 2028, per the budget documents.

    GM Defense had previously announced it will offer the same Chevrolet Silverado model showcased as the Next Generation Tactical Vehicle-Hybrid for the effort.

    The ISV-H’s power specifications track with the hybrid architecture necessary for a mobile directed energy weapon employment, while the silent operations mode addresses the generator signature problem. The vehicle is purpose-built for the demands of the electronically-defined battlefield — a laser truck designed from the outset to fight, and win, the laser wars of the future.

    For the Marine Corps, there is no equivalent clean-sheet solution available. The JLTV is firmly entrenched in the Corps’ redesigned force structure: the Marine Air Defense Integrated System (MADIS) counter-drone and air defense system, which carries a 30mm cannon and Stinger missiles, operates across a fighting pair of the vehicles, while the Navy-Marine Corps Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS), which mounts the Naval Strike Missile on a JLTV, forms the centerpiece of the service’s Indo-Pacific sea denial strategy.

    A Marine Air Defense Integrated System at Yuma Proving Grounds, Yuma, Arizona, Sept. 27, 2023. (Neil Mabini/Navy)

    The main problem is that the Army’s relationship with the JLTV has deteriorated sharply over the past year. In May 2025, Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll published a directive stating that the service would cancel procurement of “excess ground vehicles like the [Humvee] and JLTV” and redirect funds toward modernizing light formations around the ISV. According to the Congressional Research Service, the service planned to procure no additional JLTVs beyond the 250 delivered in January of that year.

    AM General’s JLTV A2 variant, the next-generation successor that was supposed to carry the program forward, is now running more than 20 months behind schedule with roughly 2,000 vehicles in arrears, and House appropriators have proposed cutting $133 million from the program’s $245 million budget.

    The Army’s JLTV ongoing issues jeopardize the Corps’ plans for the platform. As Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith stated during a June 2025 posture hearing, the service would have to buy fewer JLTVs in the future due to the Army stoppage. The Corps has already fielded roughly half its 12,500-vehicle requirement, but with Army volume gone, per-unit costs will rise.

    This past February, the service reaffirmed its commitment to fielding the vehicle as part of its new force structure, as its Marine Littoral Regiments are built around JLTV-mounted capabilities in a way that makes a clean break from the platform effectively impossible.

    In May, the service released a request for information seeking “mature, production-ready, rapidly fieldable” alternatives from vendors capable of supplementing or replacing AM General’s supply, a tacit acknowledgment of the A2’s production troubles.

    This is where original JLTV manufacturer Oshkosh Defense comes in.

    Displaced by AM General in 2023, Oshkosh arrived at Eurosatory 2026 in Paris with a potential answer to the power problem: an upgraded version of the hybrid-electric eJLTV demonstrator the company first unveiled in 2022, capable of generating 115 kW of exportable power and operating in silent drive and watch modes that allow for full electronic functionality without the tactical liability of a engine signature.

    With the purported ability to generate bursts of power up to 250 kW, the system was explicitly designed with future directed energy weapons in mind.

    “[Working out where to] aim the power available for export is a consideration and the top end is kind of where we’re focused,” Logan Jones, chief growth officer of Oshkosh’s transport division, told Shephard Media. “One that we’ve been tracking is the Australian-based Electro Optic Systems Apollo high energy laser weapon. At the other end, another type of integration is the Cilas HELMA-P [counter-drone] system.”

    Oshkosh is already pushing to reclaim its role as primary JLTV supplier for the Marine Corps, but its broader institutional argument for eJLTV adoption is relatively straightforward: a service that already operates JLTVs can easily integrate the electric version into existing maintenance infrastructure, draw on established spare parts supply chains and train crews already familiar with the base vehicle.

    With the Army walking away from the JLTV and the Marines actively shopping for alternatives, Oshkosh’s power-capable variant may prove the most realistic near-term path for the latter service to get directed energy into the fight.

    Together, the ISV-H and eJLTV offer the U.S. military a two-track approach to fielding laser weapons on light tactical vehicles at scale. The Army gets a purpose-built platform with the power architecture, silent operations capability and modular payload bays to support directed energy weapons like the E-HEL from the ground up. Meanwhile, the Marine Corps gets an evolutionary upgrade to a platform it is already committed to.

    Neither track, however, is without risk. The Army has yet to select an ISV-H manufacturer, and 606 vehicles is a modest procurement objective for a capability the service describes as a critical gap.

    The eJLTV remains a demonstrator, and the Marine Corps’ JLTV procurement future depends heavily on whether AM General can close its production gap and Congress will continue to fund a program it has already threatened to cut.

    But if AV’s LOCUST proved the feasibility of a real-world laser truck, the ISV-H and the eJLTV are the U.S. military’s first serious attempts to build enough of the right vehicles to make laser weapons a standard battlefield capability.

    The major challenge ahead, as senior defense officials have repeatedly emphasized, is whether directed energy weapons can be produced, procured, fielded and sustained at the scale required to prove effective. Without the right platforms to support them, these weapons will remain niche capabilities — impressive in demonstrations, but absent when it matters most.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Here’s where the services stand in cutting PCS moves

    Here’s where the services stand in cutting PCS moves

    Editor’s note: This story has been updated to include a response from the U.S. Air Force.

    The U.S. Army is moving ahead to meet the Defense Department’s direction to cut the number of military moves.

    Army officials announced they’re cutting more than 12,000 relocations in fiscal 2026 and more than 13,600 in fiscal 2027, in an effort to provide more stability to soldiers and their families.

    The Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force haven’t established specific numbers of military moves targeted for reduction in 2026 or 2027, service officials told Military Times. All noted that their reviews are ongoing, and key milestones for the Navy and Marine Corps are tied to implementation in 2027.

    Pentagon officials ordered the military service branches in May 2025 to cut by half the amount of money spent on Permanent Change of Station, or PCS, moves by fiscal 2030. DOD spends about $5 billion every year on these moves, which include the physical moves of household goods, as well as allowances and other entitlements related to moving.

    It’s not just DoD that spends money on PCS moves.

    Many service members face financial burdens every time they move, and they’re generally uprooted every two to three years. A recently released Military Family Advisory Network survey conducted in late 2025 found that 60% of active duty families who had made a PCS move in the previous two years paid more than $1,000 out of pocket, above what they were reimbursed. That was an increase over the survey conducted in 2023, when 45% reported paying that much out of pocket.

    Half of those reported the extra cost was attributed to re-purchasing consumable supplies that couldn’t be shipped. They also cited utility deposits, rental deposits, hotel stays, rental cars and new vehicle purchases.

    Pre-move costs like house hunting and preparing their home for a move added to the burden, said Gabby L’Esperance, vice president of research and evaluation for the Military Family Advisory Network.

    The financial burden is just one consequence of being uprooted, with moves contributing to spousal unemployment and difficulty finding child care, in addition to other challenges.

    ‘Much-needed predictability’

    Defense officials outlined that the services will target “discretionary moves,” such as PCS moves within the United States, overseas and individual service member travel. The services are directed to reduce these discretionary move budgets by 10% in fiscal year 2027, 30% in fiscal 2028, 40% in fiscal 2029 and 50% by fiscal 2030. The reductions will be based on the fiscal 2026 budget, adjusted for inflation.

    DoD specified the percentage of reductions in the budget, not the number of moves.

    Do military families really need to move so much?

    In announcing the relocation reductions on June 15, Army personnel officials said various efforts are underway, such as incentives for stabilization to reduce unnecessary moves. Some pilot programs, like the Armor Crewman MOS (19K) stabilization at Fort Riley, Kansas, and Fort Bliss, Texas, offer bonuses for certain soldiers to remain at their current locations.

    Among other things, Army officials are undertaking a broad review of professional military education to find ways to reduce PCS requirements. Their effort emphasizes expanding distance learning options and using options to allow soldiers to complete courses without having to relocate.

    Their PCS reduction efforts are part of their larger Human Resource Continuous Transformation initiatives. The shift will keep warfighting formations intact longer, officials said, and will help them build “more lethal, cohesive teams, boost overall readiness, and provide much-needed predictability for soldiers and their families.”

    The Army’s long-standing High School Stabilization program, which allows families to stay at one duty station through a child’s senior year, benefited about 4,000 soldiers in the past year, officials said. Another program, the Stabilization Retention Option, allowed about 6,200 soldiers to stay at their duty station in fiscal 2025.

    The Navy recognizes the importance of reducing PCS costs while maintaining sailor well-being and operational readiness, said Navy spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Stuart Phillips. Officials are “reviewing policies, procedures, and efficiencies to maintain lethality, readiness and overall effectiveness” in line with the DoD’s direction to reduce the amount of money spent on PCS moves, he said.

    The Marine Corps’ ability to reduce moves “is constrained by the need to ensure the right Marines are in the right billets at the right time,” said Marine Corps spokesman Maj. Jacoby Getty.

    “Every PCS move is tied to a validated operational requirement, including unit readiness, force distribution, professional military development, and global mission demands,” Getty said. “The Marine Corps operates with a highly specialized force structure and limited personnel inventory, which requires deliberate movement of talent across the force to meet operational requirements worldwide.”

    Air Force officials said they are reviewing their internal assignment policies to identify efficiencies. They added that their objective is to “optimize resources without compromising our global power-project, space operations and mission-generation capabilities.”

    This post was originally published on this site.