When Caudle takes the helm, he will be the first Senate-confirmed CNO since Trump fired Adm. Lisa Franchetti from that post in February without explanation. Adm. James Kilby, the Navy’s vice chief, has been serving as acting CNO since Franchetti was removed.

Caudle told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation hearing last week that he approves of Franchetti’s CNO Navigation Plan, or strategic vision, that was released last year. That plan included Project 33, an effort to accelerate the acquisition and fielding of unmanned systems, AI and “information dominance” capabilities to deter or defeat a Chinese attack on Taiwan or other U.S. interests in the Indo-Pacific.

Caudle told lawmakers that his top priorities for Navy transformation, if confirmed, would be to invest in platforms, sensors and weapons systems that are “modular, scalable and built for rapid upgrade cycles” to stay ahead of emerging threats; boost sailors and warfighters through advanced training, leadership development and talent management; and “accelerate delivery of integrated, networked capabilities across the joint force, including unmanned systems, artificial intelligence, and resilient C3 architectures to enable decision advantage and operational dominance in contested environments.”

Adopting cutting-edge tech such as AI, uncrewed platforms, cyber tools and data-driven decision-making could enable the Navy to “outpace adversaries by leveraging faster learning curves and feedback loops from the assessment of existing combat operations,” he wrote in response to senators’ advance policy questions ahead of this confirmation hearing.

Caudle suggested a more aggressive push to adopt robotic platforms might be needed if Navy shipbuilding programs face further budget constraints or cost growth problems.

“Robotic and Autonomous Systems (RAS), also referred to as Unmanned Systems, are a force multiplier already being employed across a wide range of missions. Prioritizing the integration of RAS at scale, as appropriate, into naval and joint force architecture would be a necessary step [to deal with further fiscal constraints]. Additionally, we could potentially expand and accelerate current RAS systems further across the fleet, in all cases focusing on affordability, training, and interoperability with manned platforms,” he wrote.

The nomination of Caudle — a four-star who has been serving as commander of Fleet Forces Command — for the CNO role wasn’t a controversial pick.

Caudle’s confirmation was approved by voice vote, along with a slew of other military nominations, as the Senate nears its August recess.

The post Senate confirms Adm. Daryl Caudle as chief of naval operations appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The memo, signed by Chief Information Officer Jane Rathbun and acting Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition Brett Seidle, established a new DON-wide policy for “containerization technology usage.”

Containerization is a software deployment process that “bundles an application’s code with all the files and libraries it needs to run on any infrastructure,” according to an AWS description of the concept.

Navy officials see major benefits in adopting that capability for the department.

“Software containerization offers transformative advantages for the DON’s IT infrastructure and software deployment capabilities. This technology enables the Department to deploy applications consistently across highly varied environments while enhancing security, reducing computing resource overhead, and accelerating development cycles. Prioritizing containerization technology aligns with the Department’s software modernization goals and supports mission-critical operations with greater reliability and efficiency,” the memo states.

The new directive, publicly released Wednesday, applies to all new software development efforts across the department’s commands and programs enabled by cloud services and deployment models where enterprise container platforms and DevSecOps pipelines exist or are in development. It comes as the Navy and Marine Corps are pursuing wide-ranging software and IT modernization initiatives, including cloud adoption and migration.

“In the drive to increase operational agility, resiliency, optimization of our investments, and to achieve an organically digital state; we must advance to modem, proven software development and delivery practices. Securely accessing and transporting data across boundaries at the speed of relevance requires operating in a cloud-enabled ecosystem and software must be designed to effectively maneuver within it,” Rathbun and Seidle stated. “Effective immediately, all software development activities transitioning to the cloud and/or upgrades that are hosted in a cloud as outlined above must utilize containerization technology to the greatest extent practical.”

Seidle signed the directive July 17. Rathbun had previously signed it.

Officials can request exemptions to the policy, but they must provide the designated cybersecurity technical authority with a detailed justification.

“Exceptions will be granted where the risk of not leveraging containerization technology is deemed acceptable or the implementation would be prohibitively expensive. Potential exceptions may include production representative digital twins (where production cannot be or is not containerized), alternative cloud scaling capabilities like serverless technologies, or virtualization technologies for hardware in the loop. An itemized bulk exception can be granted,” per the memo.

The policy will be reviewed and updated annually, according to the directive.

The post Navy rolls out new software policy on containerization technology usage appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The next-gen aircraft program, known as F/A-XX, has encountered funding shortfalls which are expected to slow down the initiative. The Navy delayed around $1 billion for the project in fiscal 2025 due to spending caps imposed by the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act. The Trump administration’s budget request for fiscal 2026 includes just $74 million in R&D funds for the effort — far less than the $454 million the service received in FY’25 and nearly $900 million less than the Navy had previously planned to spend in FY’26, according to budget documents.

As part of advance policy questions submitted to the nominee ahead of his confirmation hearing with the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, Caudle was asked how the Navy would be able to maintain air superiority without fielding a next-gen fighter on its original timeline.

“Nothing in the Joint Force projects combat power from the sea as a Carrier Strike Group, which at the heart has a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier (CVN). To maintain this striking power, the CVN must have an air wing that is comprised of the most advanced strike fighters. Therefore, the ability to maintain air superiority against peer competitors will be put at risk if the Navy is unable to field a 6th Generation strike fighter on a relevant timeline. Without a replacement for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and E/A-18G Growler, the Navy will be forced to retrofit 4th generation aircraft and increase procurement of 5th generation aircraft to attempt to compete with the new 6th generation aircraft that the threat is already flying,” Caudle wrote in his response.

Defense Department officials are especially concerned about China’s military advancements, which include developing next-gen fighter aircraft that the U.S. Navy might have to go up against someday.

“The Navy’s ongoing efforts to maintain technological superiority will ensure our ability to challenge any adversary. Deterring and denying China will require an ‘All Hands on Deck’ approach from the Joint Force including the massing of lethal fires from the sea, which comes from carrier strike groups with the latest and most capable strike fighters,” Caudle told lawmakers

“The Navy has a validated requirement for carrier-based 6th generation aircraft, and it is critical that we field that capability as quickly as possible to give our warfighters the capabilities they need to win against a myriad of emerging threats,” he wrote.

Last month, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine told lawmakers that he believes the requirement for a platform like the F/A-XX is “still valid.”

“As we look at the threat picture out in the Pacific, the requirements themselves I think are still valid. I think it comes down to a question that many of the folks on the committee have talked about, and that’s the ability [for industry] to produce at a particular time. And I’ll defer to my civilian leaders on the timing and synchronization [of] that program. But we do need, you know, capability that is mobile, whether it’s F/A-XX or others, that enable us to win on the battlefield to the future,” Caine said at a House Armed Services Committee hearing.

However, the Pentagon is prioritizing the development of the Air Force’s sixth-gen fighter, the F-47, to the tune of planning to spend $3.5 billion on the program in fiscal 2026. DOD officials have said they’re willing to slow down the Navy program due to concerns about the ability of the defense industrial base to handle two sixth-gen fighter programs simultaneously.

Trump in March announced the award of the prime contract for the F-47 to Boeing, but the prime contractor for F/A-XX still hasn’t been selected.

Navy officials have said the F/A-XX is expected to be extra stealthy, have significantly longer range than the fighter jets that are currently in the fleet, and incorporate AI capabilities.

Caudle noted that the service also plans to develop highly autonomous drones known as Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCAs) to complement sixth-gen fighters and other Naval aviation platforms. He suggested the drones would be “multi-role capable.”

“It is too early to predict the exact mix of manned and unmanned aircraft. However, as autonomous systems demonstrate increasing capability and warfighting effectiveness, we intend to iterate to deploy the most effective combination of manned and unmanned aircraft to maximize the lethality, combat effectiveness, and range of the naval aviation combat power,” Caudle told lawmakers.

Trump nominated Caudle for the CNO role last month. In February, the president fired then-CNO Adm. Lisa Franchetti without explanation. Adm. James Kilby has been serving as acting chief of naval operations.

Caudle, who is currently serving as commander of Fleet Forces Command, wasn’t a controversial pick for the top job and his nomination is expected to be confirmed by the Senate.

The post CNO nominee Adm. Caudle warns F/A-XX delays could jeopardize Navy’s air superiority appeared first on DefenseScoop.

Via its commercial solutions opening contracting mechanism, DIU is trying to find solutions that meet the U.S. military’s need for undersea kamikaze drones and UUVs that can be launched from submarines.

To address the first challenge, the organization is looking for hunter-killer systems that can be deployed from a government-provided platform or pier.

“The host vessels can either be surface or housed subsurface and most likely be uncrewed. The vehicle must be able to deliver a payload with the speed and endurance necessary to hone in and interdict a static or moving target,” per the solicitation for low-cost “undersea effectors.”

The Defense Department is aiming to acquire systems that are about 12.75 inches in diameter, 120 inches in length, and less than or equal to 800 pounds while equipped with government-furnished payloads.

To address the second challenge, DIU is also on the hunt for UUVs that can be launched and recovered via a torpedo tube without the need for drivers.

“The Vehicle should operate for at least 2 days and/or 120 nautical miles while operating with a payload,” officials wrote. “The proposed UUV should be able to support multiple communication pathways to the host submarine. Tethered options will be considered. Accurate long-range navigation systems limiting the need for GPS, transponders, or bottom lock is preferred.”

The system must not be more than 21 inches in diameter and 256 inches in length, according to the solicitation.

DIU noted that the DOD has a critical need for “affordable small and medium” UUVs that can perform intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and expeditionary missions.

“Current and legacy systems are designed to be multi-mission, exquisite systems requiring long production timelines, significant training, reconfiguration prior to mission, and technical experts to process data. However, there are situations where a single use, mission specific UUV can be more desirable to the end user in the kinetic, ISR, and expeditionary domains,” officials wrote.

DIU has played a major role in the Pentagon’s Replicator initiative, which aims to add thousands of low-cost uncrewed systems and counter-drone platforms to the U.S. military’s arsenal. The solicitation released Wednesday didn’t explicitly say whether it was tied to Replicator efforts, but it appears to be focused on those types of technologies.

Industry responses to the solicitation are due July 24.

The DOD is looking to award other transaction agreements.

“Companies are advised that any prototype OT agreement awarded in response to this [effort] … may result in the award of a follow-on production contract or transaction without the use of further competitive procedures. The follow-on production contract or transaction will be available for use by one or more organizations in the Department of Defense and, as a result, the magnitude of the follow-on production contract or agreement could be significantly larger than that of the prototype OT,” officials wrote.

The post U.S. military is on the hunt for killer UUVs appeared first on DefenseScoop.

Navy officials revealed earlier this year that the sea service would be expanding operational tests and other deployments of small unmanned vessels around Naval Base Ventura County and the Ventura and Channel Islands harbors between April and August.

“An incident occurred at approximately 3:28 p.m. [local time] on June 23 within the Channel Islands Harbor Marina involving the overturning of a support boat by an unmanned vehicle that was being towed out of the harbor,” a spokesperson from Naval Information Warfare Systems Command (NAVWAR) said. 

The area is considered somewhat of a hotspot for Navy-supporting autonomous technology development and demonstrations. It includes controlled and cornered off locations designed for the secure demonstration and refinement of uncrewed vessels of different types and sizes. 

Granted anonymity to speak freely, a source familiar with the June 23 incident raised concerns that the captain of the support boat appeared to be in danger after the towboat was overturned by the maritime drone.  

The NAVWAR spokesperson told DefenseScoop that the operator involved declined medical attention after they were recovered by the emergency responders.

“A preliminary investigation indicated that the unmanned vehicle received an inadvertent command that turned the engine on, causing the towed vehicle to accelerate past and capsize the support boat. As a result, the training activity immediately held a safety stand-down with all members of the activity and is implementing additional safety procedures,” the spokesperson said.

They did not respond to follow-up questions regarding whether the “inadvertent command” that resulted in the flip came from a human or technical malfunction.

NAVWAR spokespersons also declined to confirm if the drone involved was a Global Autonomous Reconnaissance Craft, or GARC, which sources initially suggested. The Navy recently unveiled plans to boost production of the 16-foot GARC — an unmanned surface vessel built by BlackSea Technologies, formerly known as Maritime Applied Physics Corp.

A spokesperson from BlackSea acknowledged DefenseScoop’s inquiry last week, but did not respond to questions regarding whether it was a GARC that flipped the tugboat.

The post Navy experiment cut short after unmanned vessel flipped a support boat appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The Air Force is requesting nearly $3.5 billion in FY’26 to continue work on the F-47, a sixth-generation fighter under development by prime contractor Boeing. According to budget documents released Thursday, the allocation includes $2.6 billion in discretionary funds and $900 million from the GOP-led reconciliation bill currently under debate in Congress.

In contrast, the Navy’s sixth-gen fighter program known as the F/A-XX, would receive just $74 million in R&D funds — 84 percent less than the $454 million the service received in fiscal 2025. The decision comes after the Navy already delayed around $1 billion for F/A-XX in FY’25 due to spending caps imposed by the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act.

“We did make a strategic decision to go all-in on F-47,” a senior defense official told reporters during a Pentagon briefing Thursday. The move was prompted “due to our belief that the industrial base can only handle going fast on one program at this time, and the presidential priority to go all-in on F-47 and get that program right, while maintaining the option for F/A-XX in the future,” they added.

President Donald Trump announced that Boeing had beat out Lockheed Martin for the F-47 contract in March, ending a months-long pause to the program’s selection process caused by budgetary and design concerns. The aircraft is envisioned as a long-range crewed fighter jet that will replace the Air Force’s fleet of F-22 Raptors and is expected to field sometime in the 2030s.

The F-47 platform is the centerpiece of the Air Force’s future Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) family of systems, which also includes robotic wingman drones called Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA). Budget documents indicate that the CCA program would receive a total of $807 million in FY’26, with a majority of those funds coming from $678 million added in the reconciliation bill.

Similarly, the carrier-based F/A-XX is expected to feature longer ranges, enhanced stealth capabilities and be more survivable than the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet it will eventually replace. After Lockheed Martin dropped out of the competition earlier this year, Boeing and Northrop Grumman are both vying to lead the program.

While budget documents at press time did not disclose the specific work planned for the F/A-XX in the next fiscal year, the funding would allow the Navy to “preserve the ability to leverage F-47 work” and prevent “over-subscription of qualified defense industrial base engineers,” the senior defense official said.

The details provided by budget documents end months of ambiguity over the sea service’s plans for the F/A-XX. After Trump’s dramatic rollout of the Air Force F-47 contract award in March, reports surfaced that the Navy would follow suit and name the prime contractor for its sixth-gen fighter the same month.

But that announcement never came, and subsequent reports from Reuters and Bloomberg indicated that funding disputes and industrial base concerns had delayed the program — potentially by three years.

The Navy’s decision to once again scale back funds to F/A-XX is likely to spark ire among lawmakers, many of whom have recently pressed service leadership to move the program forward.

“I’m concerned that any hesitancy on our part to proceed with the planned procurement of the sixth-gen fighters for the Navy will leave us dangerously outmatched in a China fight. We cannot wait,” Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Calif., said in May during a House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense hearing with Navy leadership. “Further, we cannot expect to grow the industrial base by undermining aviation programs that rely on highly specialized supply chains and skilled labor that cannot be turned on and off like a switch.”

Ultimately, the final decision on the F/A-XX program’s fate is under discussion by Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Trump, a senior defense official told reporters Thursday. When asked whether the Pentagon was considering to create a joint Air Force-Navy program — repeating the F-35 Lightning II acquisition model — the official said “pretty much everything is under consideration to get the tactical air capability that our warfighters need as quickly as possible.”

The post Pentagon budget goes ‘all in’ on Air Force’s F-47, putting Navy’s sixth-gen fighter on hold appeared first on DefenseScoop.

Detailed budget materials are being released on a rolling basis this week, but the officials provided insights into the nearly $1 trillion spending plan in an off-camera press briefing Thursday morning.

“This budget is the first year that we are calling out — specifically — our autonomy line in its own section. So, it will be $13.4 billion for autonomy and autonomous systems,” a senior defense official told DefenseScoop. 

“For counter [unmanned aerial systems], the total request is $3.1 billion across the services,” they also confirmed. 

The new requests for additional drone and counter-drone funding come as the U.S. military confronts serious challenges integrating and defending against the rapidly evolving weapons, which often cost much less to produce than the multimilllion-dollar missiles that have been deployed to take them down.

The senior defense official supplied a high-level breakdown on the robotics and autonomy-enabling budget lines.

“For unmanned and remotely-operated aerial vehicles, it’s $9.4 billion; autonomous ground vehicles, $210 million; on the water autonomous systems, $1.7 billion; underwater capabilities, $734 million; and enabling capabilities — that’s the autonomy software, the things that underlie all these systems, working and operating together as a central brain — it’s $1.2 billion to work across all those platforms on autonomy,” they said.

A senior Navy official at the briefing also pointed to what they consider to be a “big increase” associated with autonomy investments for the sea service.

“[It’s] $5.3 billion across all systems. And that’s $2.2 billion above FY 2025. That includes procuring three MQ-25s, which we’ll have our first flight in 2026 — and then additional unmanned air [assets], new efforts in unmanned undersea and in unmanned surface, to include procuring our medium unmanned surface vessel. So, we have a lot of efforts across all domains,” the senior Navy official told DefenseScoop.

Two aircraft carrier strike groups operating in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility are “engaged in combat every day” against enemy-launched drones, they noted.

“We have the [USS Gerald R. Ford] that is just now deploying. Ford will deploy with some additional counter-UAS capabilities, and then we’ll continue to look and learn and develop those kits that we sent before, and [applying] part of what we’re learning,” the senior Navy official said.

Representatives from the other military services did not share information about their departments’ autonomy toplines during the briefing.

The post Billions for new uncrewed systems and drone-killing tech included in Pentagon’s 2026 budget plan appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The document, dated June 17 and signed by acting CTO Justin Fanelli, noted the need to “accelerate the adoption of game changing commercial technology.”

The list of priorities “can help shape resource allocation decisions across the enterprise,” he wrote, adding that it should serve as a “signaling tool” to industry partners and private capital to inform how they allocate their resources and focus their efforts.

Artificial intelligence and autonomy top the list of “Level 1” technologies in the hierarchy.

“AI and autonomy play a vital role in information warfare by enabling decision advantage and enhancing the ability of human-machine teaming. The DON seeks AI-driven solutions for real-time data analysis and automated decision-making to enhance operational effectiveness,” Fanelli wrote.

Level 2 technologies under this category include capabilities like applied machine learning and natural language processing; model verification and AI risk governance; mission platforms and human-machine interfaces; and edge AI infrastructure and DevSecOps pipelines.

Next on the list is quantum tech, which Fanelli said will transform secure communications, computing and sensing for information warfare. He noted that quantum encryption could protect the department’s networks from adversaries, and quantum computing would boost data processing and cryptographic resilience.

Level 2 technologies in this area include tools such as post-quantum cryptography and quantum-enhanced communication; hybrid quantum-classical architectures; quantum gravimetry and inertial navigation; and “quantum interconnects and cryogenic systems.”

“Transport and connectivity” are third on the list. According to Fanelli’s memo, the Navy is prioritizing advanced networking, secure communications, 5G and FutureG tech to enable real-time data sharing and command and control.

Level 2 technologies under this category include things like 5G and FutureG nodes and mesh architectures; dynamic spectrum sharing and anti-jamming techniques; datalinks and “ship-to-X” mesh networks; and cloudlets and intelligent routing.

Fourth on the list is command, control, communications, computers, cyber, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance — also known as C5ISR — as well as counter-C5ISR and space capabilities.

“The DON seeks to integrate advanced sensor networks, improve automated data fusion, and develop resilient space-based architectures to support real-time intelligence gathering,” Fanelli wrote.

Level 2 technologies in this area include capabilities such as multi-INT engines and automated targeting; operational pictures and targeting algorithms; hybrid constellations and positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) from space; and open architectures and multi-coalition information sharing.

Fifth on the list is tech related to cyberspace operations and zero trust.

“Cyber threats are evolving rapidly, making Zero Trust Architecture essential for securing DON information networks. Priorities include advanced cyber defense frameworks, threat intelligence automation, and proactive security measures to counter adversarial cyber operations,” per the memo.

Level 2 capabilities under this category include things like identity and access management — such as attribute-based access control and federated identity systems — micro segmentation and risk-adaptive controls for zero trust, cyber threat hunting and deception, and operational technology (OT) security — such as industrial control system and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) protection and remote access.

The complete list of tech priorities for Levels 1, 2 and 3 can be found here.

“A lot of these areas are mainly being driven by commercial tech,” Deputy CTO Michael Frank said in an interview. “It’s going to be a mix of … traditional defense vendors, traditional primes. But you know, we are really focused on getting some new entrants in, right? So, expanding the defense industrial base, getting some new players on the field. And this is a signal to them. This memo is meant to be a signal to them and what we’re focused on, what our priorities areas are, so they can better make decisions … If you’re an entrepreneur in this area or if you’re a VC who’s looking to invest, you know these are the general areas that we’re looking at.”

The Navy is looking to cast a wide net for new capabilities.

“We’re going to be looking at emerging tech from anybody and everyone who is operating in these areas and developing things in these areas, to include the other players in the defense innovation ecosystem. So, you know, looking at what DIU is doing, partnering with In-Q-Tel and what they are doing, because we want to make sure that we have awareness of all the various efforts across government to reduce waste, to reduce redundant spend, reduce redundant efforts, given the fact that we are operating in a resource-constrained environment, both with money and with people and time and effort and all of that,” Frank said.

The CTO’s office is aiming to accelerate the transition of key capabilities to the Navy and Marine Corps.

“We are absolutely more interested in higher [technology readiness levels],” Frank said. “We are more focused on things that we can start testing, validating and transitioning to the warfighter now.”

The list of priority technology areas is meant to be updated over time, he noted.

“This is a living list, it’s an evolving list. You know these technology areas are not going to be static. I mean, Level 1 will probably not change for a while, but the Level 2 and Level 3 … will and should be regularly updated in order for it to be useful to industry partners,” Frank said.

The post Navy CTO unveils list of priority areas for tech investment appeared first on DefenseScoop.

In February, Trump fired Adm. Lisa Franchetti as CNO and the administration has been looking for a permanent replacement. Adm. James Kilby has been serving as acting CNO since Franchetti was removed.

On June 17, the commander-in-chief submitted Caudle’s nomination for the role to the Senate and it was referred to the Armed Services Committee for consideration, according to a notice posted on Congress.gov.

Caudle is currently serving as commander of Fleet Forces Command, Naval Forces Northern Command and Naval Forces Strategic Command.

The admiral comes from the Navy’s submarine community. He previously served as commander of Submarine Forces, Submarine Force Atlantic, Allied Submarine Command and Submarine Forces, Pacific Fleet. He was also commanding officer of the USS Jefferson City (SSN 759), USS Topeka (SSN 754) and USS Helena (SSN 725), and commanded Submarine Squadron 3, among other assignments.

At the Pentagon, he served on the Joint Staff as vice director for strategy, plans, and policy, J-5, and assistant deputy director for information and cyberspace policy, J-5, according to his Navy bio.

If confirmed as CNO, Caudle would be in a position to shape the fate of high-tech initiatives such as Project 33, which aims to accelerate the fielding of robotic platforms and AI enablers to deter Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific.

“The right way, in my opinion, to think about robotic autonomous systems, uncrewed, unmanned systems, is how we package them to solve our problems and where they are best-suited,” Caudle said in January at the annual Surface Navy Association symposium. “They can be best-suited where the acceptable level of risk of loss of life is too high, the depth of water too shallow, the air domain too complicated, [or] the mission is just not worth a manned combatant.”

He added: “We are still nascent in figuring out those … robotic autonomous system force packages … The way we fight in the Navy is through units of force that are packaged to make them lethal packages, OK. We build together a composite system knowing the how we’re going to be countered and knowing what we need to actually win against that hypothetical scenario. That’s the work that’s ongoing right now is how we build out those force packages.”

He’s also advocated for accelerating the fielding of new weapons to shoot down one-way attack drones instead of expending expensive munitions for that task.

At the SNA symposium, Caudle said the Navy should be “embarrassed” that it hasn’t fielded directed energy systems, such as high-energy lasers, faster.

During a meeting with reporters in March, Caudle laid out some military use cases for artificial intelligence.

“I kind of put these into kind of three-plus-three bins of capability of exploiting AI. In the first part … think about the ability for a sensor to see a thing and actually, you know, understand what that thing is. The second one is enhanced data search, sort and processing in a large-scale way against where no analyst can look at that amount of data … And then the last one that’s becoming more is the generative AI piece. So having AI do things for me in which I would have to spend time doing but I can have the artificial intelligence kind of go after that,” he said, according to a video posted by TV news station WTKR.

AI capabilities could aid personnel readiness, materiel readiness and warfighting readiness, including decision-making, he noted.

The technology could even have a role in the U.S. military’s nuclear deterrence mission, Caudle said, including by presenting “optimizing response options.”

“We have, you know, [ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles] that are alert, we’ve got ballistic missile submarines that are alert, and we have the capability to generate and place bombers on alert. Like any warfare area, there are targets and there are weapons that have to be matched to those targets, and even in the nuclear parlance, that’s true. U.S. Strategic Command is responsible for making those options to the president. So that optimization of our current number of missiles, the warhead on board, the destructive capability, the actual placement, the height in which detonation occurs — all of that complexity for a given optimized response option to the president can be enhanced by artificial intelligence. The speed in which I need to generate an order to a firing unit could be a generative AI process. Once I make a decision, then I turn on a machine and that order with high degree of accuracy is given to a potential firing unit. So AI has a role there,” Caudle said.

However, decisions about whether to launch a nuclear attack aren’t expected to be left to AI systems, he noted.

“There is no desire for that. This is a human decision. At the end, when you’re using strategic-level weapons, the president is owed a fulsome discussion between his most subject matter expert combatant commanders and their teams to advise him on the use of nuclear weapons because of their size, scale and scope and destruction capability. So this is going to be a human decision. This is not going to be any type of automated decision using an algorithm. But can that decision be enhanced by AI technologies? Certainly,” he said.

Caudle’s nomination to be the next CNO must be confirmed by the Senate.

The post Trump nominates Adm. Caudle to be chief of naval operations appeared first on DefenseScoop.

Congress funded the F/A-XX project to the tune of $454 million in fiscal 2025. However, the Defense Department wants to slash spending to just $74 million in 2026, according to budget documents viewed by DefenseScoop. Meanwhile, the DOD plans to spend $3.5 billion in the next fiscal year on the Air Force’s next-gen fighter, the F-47.

The 2026 request “slows” the Navy’s program “due to industrial base concerns of two sixth-generation programs occurring simultaneously,” according to the document.

Lawmakers this week expressed concern about the projected cuts.

“We know that in the FY ’25 [continuing resolution] there was $453.8 million … put towards that — I’ll get the number right — and in reconciliation $500 million. So you can see Congress is consistently pushing ahead and saying, ‘This is … where we need to go.’ And we’d be a little surprised if the support for this fell off, especially since we’re looking at the requirements and not seeing any change there,” Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., said Thursday during a House Armed Services Committee hearing.

Wittman asked Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, who was testifying during the hearing, if the requirements that military officials previously laid out for that platform are still the same.

“As we look at the threat picture out in the Pacific, the requirements themselves I think are still valid. I think it comes down to a question that many of the folks on the committee have talked about, and that’s the ability [for industry] to produce at a particular time. And I’ll defer to my civilian leaders on the timing and synchronization [of] that program. But we do need, you know, capability that is mobile, whether it’s F/A-XX or others, that enable us to win on the battlefield to the future,” Caine replied.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who was testifying alongside Caine, said the fiscal 2026 budget request “funds the complete design of F/A-XX.”

However, he suggested the Pentagon is reevaluating plans for the program.

“We’re certainly reviewing it — working with the Joint Staff, working with the [combatant commands] — at its application around the globe. So it’s in the mix, but we recognize we need — we also need a capability as quickly as possible for the threats that we face,” Hegseth said.

Navy officials have said the F/A-XX is expected to be extra stealthy, have significantly longer range than the fighter jets that are currently in the fleet, and incorporate artificial intelligence capabilities.

The service also wants the manned jet to be able to team up with advanced drones.

“It will also, with the integration of AI and other technical advantages, allow us to have increased battle space management. And it will be our next platform that, instead of being man in the loop, will truly be man on the loop and allow us to have fully integrated architecture with our unmanned systems that we’re going to be fielding with concepts like the CCAs — whether it’s those collaborative combat aircraft, the small increased mass, or also teaming with larger unmanned vehicles that we may foresee into the future,” Rear Adm. Michael “Buzz” Donnelly, then-director of the air warfare division, N98, in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, said at the Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space conference in April.

At the same conference, acting Chief of Naval Operations Adm. James Kilby said the Air Force isn’t the only service that needs a sixth-gen fighter for a potential conflict against advanced adversaries like China.

“We need F/A-XX in the United States Navy,” he said. “We’re talking about a fight in the Pacific. We fight together as a joint force, so having that capability is very important for us.”

Many observers had expected the service to award a large development contract to either Boeing or Northrop Grumman in the spring.

However, Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, who stepped into his new role in March, told lawmakers Wednesday that officials continue to look at force structure needs for the future.

“As it comes to next-gen fighters … we’re looking at the full composition of the air wing of the future. And so we have to focus on the capabilities and technologies for years to come that are going to win, and that includes manned and unmanned platforms that we have to look at,” he said during a House Armed Services Committee hearing.

He noted that he also has concerns about the industrial base and how some of the Navy’s other programs are faring.

“I do not have a lot of confidence. All of our programs are in trouble. We have number of companies that are not performing. We’ve got to get those done. So I think looking at this system, sixth-gen is important. And I know it’s important to the admiral [Kilby], he should always give you his best military advice. I think we’re looking at the whole panacea of what we’ve got and then … what makes the most sense to use in the future. And so I think we have to get more confidence in the [industrial] base,” Phelan said.

“This is a system that you know, as I said in my opening statement about readiness, readiness means, like ready, like today and then in the future — and how is that future changing and how do we think about that? And so that’s we’re looking at it, evaluating it, and trying to make sure that we’re not back here in two years saying, ‘We told you it was going to cost X, it’s actually going to be X plus 50, and by the way, it’s going to be late,’” he told the committee.

Rep. Jen Kiggans, R-Va., said the Pentagon shouldn’t be cutting funding for the F/A-XX.

“We need that money for a lot of reasons,” she said at Wednesday’s HASC hearing. “China is … already testing and flying J-50s and J-36 fighters, which is their sixth-generation fighter. The Navy to be competitive with that has got to make that investment.”

The Trump administration has not yet submitted its full fiscal 2026 budget request to Congress. Lawmakers may end up appropriating much more money for the F/A-XX than the Defense Department proposes.

The post Despite proposed cuts, Navy requirements for F/A-XX next-gen fighter ‘still valid,’ Joint Chiefs chairman says appeared first on DefenseScoop.