CEO Chris Calio emphasized the urgency of delivering critical products for national security, stating, 'We understand that our products are critical to national security. And I can tell you across the organization, we absolutely feel the responsibility and urgency to deliver more and to deliver it faster.'
"To accelerate current weapons development timelines, DARPA is considering an alternative development paradigm to increase the nation's magazine depth and breadth."
The Pentagon has dismissed the report, stating that neither Hegseth nor any of his representatives approached BlackRock about any such investment. Pentagon chief spokesperson Sean Parnell called the report 'entirely false and fabricated,' demanding a retraction from the Financial Times.
Asgard will help it realise the ambitions of the government's 2025 Strategic defence review, which promised to 'deliver a tenfold increase in lethality over the next 10 years' via a combination of enhanced 'firepower, surveillance technology, autonomy, digital connectivity and data'.
Ondas said Q4 revenue landed between $29.1 million and $30.1 million, comfortably above the $27 million to $29 million range it had guided to in January. For the full year, revenue came in at $49.7 million to $50.7 million versus prior guidance of $47.6 million to $49.6 million. Adjusted EBITDA losses narrowed in line with expectations, and the company reiterated its 2026 revenue target of $170 million to $180 million.
Our war fighters are leveraging a variety of advanced AI tools. These systems help us sift through vast amounts of data in seconds so our leaders can cut through the noise and make smarter decisions faster than the enemy can react. Humans will always make final decisions on what to shoot and what not to shoot and when to shoot, but advanced AI tools can turn processes that used to take hours and sometimes even days into seconds.
The U.S. military has fired more than 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles in four weeks of war with Iran, burning through the precision weapons at a rate that has alarmed some Pentagon officials.
From the very beginning, this has been about one fundamental principle: the military being able to use technology for all lawful purposes. The military will not allow a vendor to insert itself into the chain of command by restricting the lawful use of a critical capability and put our warfighters at risk.
Number one is speed takes priority over perfection. We can iterate to get to operational capability. And the second is that early soldier feedback is critical in order to make sure we're getting the right technology for the future fight, and then we want to be able to prove the demand signal before we spend big dollars on programs.
We've got no shortage of munitions. Our stockpiles of defensive and offensive weapons allow us to sustain this campaign as long as we need. Iran is hoping that we cannot sustain this, which is a really bad miscalculation.
Small British defence companies are set to gain easier access to Ministry of Defence contracts after the government launched a dedicated unit to simplify procurement and boost spending with smaller suppliers. The Ministry of Defence has unveiled the Defence Office for Small Business Growth, a new service designed to cut through what ministers describe as labyrinthine procurement processes that have historically shut small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) out of the defence market.
John Conafay, a veteran of the US Air Force, has spent most of his career leading business development at public and private aerospace companies, including Spire, Astranis, and ABL Space Systems. At each company, Conafay ran into the same software hurdle: collaborating on government contracts was a logistical mess that forced his teams and their federal counterparts to rely on a tedious back-and-forth of PDFs and Excel files.
Germany's military, the Bundeswehr, is currently on a spending spree: it has more than 108 billion ($129 billion) at its disposal this year a gigantic, unprecedented sum. This is being financed both by the official federal budget and special funds, for which the state is taking out loans. This money is intended to make the Bundeswehr, which has been subject to decades of cutbacks, more powerful and modern. There is also time pressure.
Military weapons are designed to give commanders an advantage, but that advantage is rarely permanent. Systems that once multiplied combat power can become burdens as threats evolve, environments shift, and missions change.Some weapons begin to demand more protection, maintenance, or political consideration than the value they provide. Here, 24/7 Wall St. is taking a closer look at the weapons that became liability issues instead of force multipliers.
For some weapons, the hardest fight wasn't against the enemy, in fact it was more so against wear and time. Advanced technology has delivered decisive advantages but in some cases has imposed relentless upkeep on crews and logistics chains. Here, 24/7 Wall St. is taking a closer look at how these systems became a maintenance nightmare for the U.S. Military.
According to the Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's memorandum on the Strategy, this AI-first status is to be achieved through four broad aims: Incentivizing internal DOD experimentation with AI models. Identifying and eliminating bureaucratic obstacles in the way of model integration. Focusing the U.S.'s military investment to shore up the U.S.'s "asymmetric advantages" in areas including AI computing, model innovation, entrepreneurial dynamism, capital markets, and operational data.
The cost for the US and other militaries to keep newer combat aircraft ready to fly is going to soar in the coming years, a new report on sustainment trends argues. A new report from the American consulting firm Oliver Wyman projects global military aircraft spending over the next decade, including an annual sustainment cost growth of 1.1% through 2036. That's a pace roughly 11 times faster than the previous decade.
But logistical consistency, like coherence and gravitas, does not characterize the new NDS. It is a document that supposedly nests within the National Security Strategy, explaining at greater length the implications of overall policy for the armed forces. The 2026 version does not do that. Rather, it restates some of the basic priorities of the Trump administration but for the most part confines itself to flattery of the president, insults, and bombast.
