• PlayStation Plus Game Catalog for June: FBC: Firebreak, Battlefield 2042, Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 and more

    This month, join forces to tackle the paranormal crises of a mysterious federal agency under siege in the cooperative first-person shooter FBC: Firebreak, lead your team to victory in the iconic all-out warfare of Battlefield 2042, test your skills as a new Fazbear employee managing and maintaining the eerie pizzeria of Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 or live for the thrill of the hunt in the realistic hunting open world theHunter: Call of the Wild. All of these titles and more are available in June’s PlayStation Plus Game Catalog lineup*.   

    Meanwhile, PS2’s Deus Ex: The Conspiracy merges action-RPG, stealth and FPS gameplay in PlayStation Plus Premium.   

    All titles will be available to play on June 17.  

    PlayStation Plus Extra and Premium | Game Catalog 

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    FBC: Firebreak | PS5

    Launching on the PlayStation Plus Game Catalog this month is FBC: Firebreak, a cooperative first-person shooter set within a mysterious federal agency under assault by otherworldly forces. Return to the strange and unexpected world of Control or venture in for the first time in this standalone, multiplayer experience. As a years-long siege on the agency’s headquarters reaches its boiling point, only Firebreak—the Bureau’s most versatile unit—has the gear and the guts to plunge into the building’s strangest crises, restore order, contain the chaos, and fight to reclaim control. Join forces with friends or strangers to tackle each job as a well-oiled crew. Survival in this three-player cooperative FPS hinges on quick thinking and seamless teamwork as you scramble to tame raging paranatural crises across a variety of unexpected locations.   

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    Battlefield 2042 | PS4, PS5

    Battlefield 2042 is a first-person shooter that marks the return to the iconic all-out warfare of the franchise. With the help of a cutting-edge arsenal, engage in intense, immersive multiplayer battles. Lead your team to victory in both large all-out warfare and close quarters combat on maps from the world of 2042 and classic Battlefield titles. Find your playstyle in class-based gameplay and take on several experiences comprising elevated versions of Conquest and Breakthrough. Explore Battlefield Portal, a platform where players can discover, create, and share unexpected battles from Battlefield’s past and present.

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 | PS5

    Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 is the sequel to the terrifying VR experience that brought new life to the iconic horror franchise. As a brand new Fazbear employee you’ll have to prove you have what it takes to excel in all aspects of Pizzeria management and maintenance. Find out if you have what it takes to be a Fazbear Entertainment Superstar!

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    theHunter: Call of the Wild | PS4

    Discover an atmospheric hunting game like no other in this realistic, stunning open world – regularly updated in collaboration with its community. Immerse yourself in the single player campaign, or share the ultimate hunting experience with friends. Roam freely across meticulously crafted environments and explore a diverse range of regions and biomes, each with its own unique flora and fauna. Experience the intricacies of complex animal behavior, dynamic weather events, full day and night cycles, simulated ballistics, highly realistic acoustics, and scents carried by the wind. Select from a variety of weapons, ammunition, and equipment to create the ultimate hunting experience. With a diverse range of wildlife, including Jackrabbits, Mallard Ducks, Black Bears, Elk, and Moose, you will need to strategically match prey to weaponry to successfully track, lure, and ambush animals based on their unique behavior and environment.

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    We Love Katamari Reroll + Royal Reverie | PS4, PS5

    We Love Katamari Damacy, the second title in the Katamari series released in 2005, has been remastered with redesigned graphics and a revamped in-game UI. The King of the Cosmos accidentally destroyed all the stars in the universe. He sent his son, the Prince, to Earth and ordered him to create a large katamari. Roll the katamari to make it bigger and bigger, rolling up all the things on the earth. You can roll up anything from paper clips and snacks in the house, to telephone poles and buildings in the town, to even living creatures such as people and animals. Once the katamari is complete, it will turn into a star that colors the night sky. You cannot roll up anything larger than the current size of your katamari, so the key is to think in advance about the order in which you roll things up around the stage. In Royal Reverie, roll up katamari as the King of All Cosmos in his boyhood!

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    Eiyuden Chronicles: Hundred Heroes | PS4, PS5

    Directed and produced by the creator of treasured JRPG series Suikoden, Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes provides a contemporary take on the classic JRPG experience. In the land of Allraan, two friends from different backgrounds are united by a war waged by the power-hungry Galdean Empire. Explore a diverse, magical world populated by humans, beastmen, elves and desert people. Meet and recruit over 100 unique characters, each with their own vivid voice acting and intricate backstories. Over four years in the making, and funded by the most successful Kickstarter videogame campaign of 2020, Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes features turn-based battles, a staggering selection of heroes and a thrilling story to discover.

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    Train Sim World 5 | PS4, PS5

    The rails are yours in Train Sim World 5! Take on new challenges and new roles as you master the tracks and trains of iconic cities across 3 new routes. Immerse yourself in the ultimate rail hobby and embark on your next journey. Be swept off your feet with the commuter mayhem of the West Coast main line with the Northwestern Class 350, the twisting Kinzigtalbahn with the tilting DB BR 411 ICE-T, or the sun-soaked tracks of the San Bernardino line and its Metrolink movements, powered by the MP36 & F125. 

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    Endless Dungeon | PS4, PS5

    Endless Dungeon is a unique blend of roguelite, tactical action, and tower defense set in the award-winning Endless Universe. Plunge into an abandoned space station alone or with friends in co-op, recruit a team of shipwrecked heroes, and protect your crystal against never-ending waves of monsters… or die trying, get reloaded, and try again. You’re stranded on an abandoned space station chock-full of monsters and mysteries. To get out you’ll have to reach The Core, but you can’t do that without your crystal bot. That scuttling critter is your key to surviving the procedurally generated rooms of this space ruin. Sadly, it’s also a fragile soul, and every monster in the place wants a piece of it. You’re going to have to think quick, plan well, place your turrets, and then… fireworks! Bugs, bots and blobs will stop at nothing to turn you and that crystal into dust and debris. With a large choice of weapons and turrets, the right gear will be the difference between life and death.

    PlayStation Plus Premium 

    View and download image

    Download the image

    close
    Close

    Download this image

    Deus Ex: The Conspiracy | PS4, PS5This is an emulation of the classic PS2 title, Deus Ex: The Conspiracy, playable on PS4 and PS5 for the first time. The year is 2052 and the world is a dangerous and chaotic place. Terrorists operate openly – killing thousands; drugs, disease and pollution kill even more. The world’s economies are close to collapse and the gap between the insanely wealthy and the desperately poor grows ever wider. Worst of all, an age- old conspiracy bent on world domination has decided that the time is right to emerge from the shadows and take control. 

    *PlayStation Plus Game Catalog and PlayStation Plus Premium/Deluxe lineups may differ by region. Please check PlayStation Store on release day. 
    #playstation #plus #game #catalog #june
    PlayStation Plus Game Catalog for June: FBC: Firebreak, Battlefield 2042, Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 and more
    This month, join forces to tackle the paranormal crises of a mysterious federal agency under siege in the cooperative first-person shooter FBC: Firebreak, lead your team to victory in the iconic all-out warfare of Battlefield 2042, test your skills as a new Fazbear employee managing and maintaining the eerie pizzeria of Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 or live for the thrill of the hunt in the realistic hunting open world theHunter: Call of the Wild. All of these titles and more are available in June’s PlayStation Plus Game Catalog lineup*.    Meanwhile, PS2’s Deus Ex: The Conspiracy merges action-RPG, stealth and FPS gameplay in PlayStation Plus Premium.    All titles will be available to play on June 17.   PlayStation Plus Extra and Premium | Game Catalog  View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image FBC: Firebreak | PS5 Launching on the PlayStation Plus Game Catalog this month is FBC: Firebreak, a cooperative first-person shooter set within a mysterious federal agency under assault by otherworldly forces. Return to the strange and unexpected world of Control or venture in for the first time in this standalone, multiplayer experience. As a years-long siege on the agency’s headquarters reaches its boiling point, only Firebreak—the Bureau’s most versatile unit—has the gear and the guts to plunge into the building’s strangest crises, restore order, contain the chaos, and fight to reclaim control. Join forces with friends or strangers to tackle each job as a well-oiled crew. Survival in this three-player cooperative FPS hinges on quick thinking and seamless teamwork as you scramble to tame raging paranatural crises across a variety of unexpected locations.    View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Battlefield 2042 | PS4, PS5 Battlefield 2042 is a first-person shooter that marks the return to the iconic all-out warfare of the franchise. With the help of a cutting-edge arsenal, engage in intense, immersive multiplayer battles. Lead your team to victory in both large all-out warfare and close quarters combat on maps from the world of 2042 and classic Battlefield titles. Find your playstyle in class-based gameplay and take on several experiences comprising elevated versions of Conquest and Breakthrough. Explore Battlefield Portal, a platform where players can discover, create, and share unexpected battles from Battlefield’s past and present. View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 | PS5 Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 is the sequel to the terrifying VR experience that brought new life to the iconic horror franchise. As a brand new Fazbear employee you’ll have to prove you have what it takes to excel in all aspects of Pizzeria management and maintenance. Find out if you have what it takes to be a Fazbear Entertainment Superstar! View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image theHunter: Call of the Wild | PS4 Discover an atmospheric hunting game like no other in this realistic, stunning open world – regularly updated in collaboration with its community. Immerse yourself in the single player campaign, or share the ultimate hunting experience with friends. Roam freely across meticulously crafted environments and explore a diverse range of regions and biomes, each with its own unique flora and fauna. Experience the intricacies of complex animal behavior, dynamic weather events, full day and night cycles, simulated ballistics, highly realistic acoustics, and scents carried by the wind. Select from a variety of weapons, ammunition, and equipment to create the ultimate hunting experience. With a diverse range of wildlife, including Jackrabbits, Mallard Ducks, Black Bears, Elk, and Moose, you will need to strategically match prey to weaponry to successfully track, lure, and ambush animals based on their unique behavior and environment. View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image We Love Katamari Reroll + Royal Reverie | PS4, PS5 We Love Katamari Damacy, the second title in the Katamari series released in 2005, has been remastered with redesigned graphics and a revamped in-game UI. The King of the Cosmos accidentally destroyed all the stars in the universe. He sent his son, the Prince, to Earth and ordered him to create a large katamari. Roll the katamari to make it bigger and bigger, rolling up all the things on the earth. You can roll up anything from paper clips and snacks in the house, to telephone poles and buildings in the town, to even living creatures such as people and animals. Once the katamari is complete, it will turn into a star that colors the night sky. You cannot roll up anything larger than the current size of your katamari, so the key is to think in advance about the order in which you roll things up around the stage. In Royal Reverie, roll up katamari as the King of All Cosmos in his boyhood! View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Eiyuden Chronicles: Hundred Heroes | PS4, PS5 Directed and produced by the creator of treasured JRPG series Suikoden, Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes provides a contemporary take on the classic JRPG experience. In the land of Allraan, two friends from different backgrounds are united by a war waged by the power-hungry Galdean Empire. Explore a diverse, magical world populated by humans, beastmen, elves and desert people. Meet and recruit over 100 unique characters, each with their own vivid voice acting and intricate backstories. Over four years in the making, and funded by the most successful Kickstarter videogame campaign of 2020, Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes features turn-based battles, a staggering selection of heroes and a thrilling story to discover. View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Train Sim World 5 | PS4, PS5 The rails are yours in Train Sim World 5! Take on new challenges and new roles as you master the tracks and trains of iconic cities across 3 new routes. Immerse yourself in the ultimate rail hobby and embark on your next journey. Be swept off your feet with the commuter mayhem of the West Coast main line with the Northwestern Class 350, the twisting Kinzigtalbahn with the tilting DB BR 411 ICE-T, or the sun-soaked tracks of the San Bernardino line and its Metrolink movements, powered by the MP36 & F125.  View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Endless Dungeon | PS4, PS5 Endless Dungeon is a unique blend of roguelite, tactical action, and tower defense set in the award-winning Endless Universe. Plunge into an abandoned space station alone or with friends in co-op, recruit a team of shipwrecked heroes, and protect your crystal against never-ending waves of monsters… or die trying, get reloaded, and try again. You’re stranded on an abandoned space station chock-full of monsters and mysteries. To get out you’ll have to reach The Core, but you can’t do that without your crystal bot. That scuttling critter is your key to surviving the procedurally generated rooms of this space ruin. Sadly, it’s also a fragile soul, and every monster in the place wants a piece of it. You’re going to have to think quick, plan well, place your turrets, and then… fireworks! Bugs, bots and blobs will stop at nothing to turn you and that crystal into dust and debris. With a large choice of weapons and turrets, the right gear will be the difference between life and death. PlayStation Plus Premium  View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Deus Ex: The Conspiracy | PS4, PS5This is an emulation of the classic PS2 title, Deus Ex: The Conspiracy, playable on PS4 and PS5 for the first time. The year is 2052 and the world is a dangerous and chaotic place. Terrorists operate openly – killing thousands; drugs, disease and pollution kill even more. The world’s economies are close to collapse and the gap between the insanely wealthy and the desperately poor grows ever wider. Worst of all, an age- old conspiracy bent on world domination has decided that the time is right to emerge from the shadows and take control.  *PlayStation Plus Game Catalog and PlayStation Plus Premium/Deluxe lineups may differ by region. Please check PlayStation Store on release day.  #playstation #plus #game #catalog #june
    BLOG.PLAYSTATION.COM
    PlayStation Plus Game Catalog for June: FBC: Firebreak, Battlefield 2042, Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 and more
    This month, join forces to tackle the paranormal crises of a mysterious federal agency under siege in the cooperative first-person shooter FBC: Firebreak, lead your team to victory in the iconic all-out warfare of Battlefield 2042, test your skills as a new Fazbear employee managing and maintaining the eerie pizzeria of Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 or live for the thrill of the hunt in the realistic hunting open world theHunter: Call of the Wild. All of these titles and more are available in June’s PlayStation Plus Game Catalog lineup*.    Meanwhile, PS2’s Deus Ex: The Conspiracy merges action-RPG, stealth and FPS gameplay in PlayStation Plus Premium.    All titles will be available to play on June 17.   PlayStation Plus Extra and Premium | Game Catalog  View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image FBC: Firebreak | PS5 Launching on the PlayStation Plus Game Catalog this month is FBC: Firebreak, a cooperative first-person shooter set within a mysterious federal agency under assault by otherworldly forces. Return to the strange and unexpected world of Control or venture in for the first time in this standalone, multiplayer experience. As a years-long siege on the agency’s headquarters reaches its boiling point, only Firebreak—the Bureau’s most versatile unit—has the gear and the guts to plunge into the building’s strangest crises, restore order, contain the chaos, and fight to reclaim control. Join forces with friends or strangers to tackle each job as a well-oiled crew. Survival in this three-player cooperative FPS hinges on quick thinking and seamless teamwork as you scramble to tame raging paranatural crises across a variety of unexpected locations.    View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Battlefield 2042 | PS4, PS5 Battlefield 2042 is a first-person shooter that marks the return to the iconic all-out warfare of the franchise. With the help of a cutting-edge arsenal, engage in intense, immersive multiplayer battles. Lead your team to victory in both large all-out warfare and close quarters combat on maps from the world of 2042 and classic Battlefield titles. Find your playstyle in class-based gameplay and take on several experiences comprising elevated versions of Conquest and Breakthrough. Explore Battlefield Portal, a platform where players can discover, create, and share unexpected battles from Battlefield’s past and present. View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 | PS5 Five Nights at Freddy’s: Help Wanted 2 is the sequel to the terrifying VR experience that brought new life to the iconic horror franchise. As a brand new Fazbear employee you’ll have to prove you have what it takes to excel in all aspects of Pizzeria management and maintenance. Find out if you have what it takes to be a Fazbear Entertainment Superstar! View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image theHunter: Call of the Wild | PS4 Discover an atmospheric hunting game like no other in this realistic, stunning open world – regularly updated in collaboration with its community. Immerse yourself in the single player campaign, or share the ultimate hunting experience with friends. Roam freely across meticulously crafted environments and explore a diverse range of regions and biomes, each with its own unique flora and fauna. Experience the intricacies of complex animal behavior, dynamic weather events, full day and night cycles, simulated ballistics, highly realistic acoustics, and scents carried by the wind. Select from a variety of weapons, ammunition, and equipment to create the ultimate hunting experience. With a diverse range of wildlife, including Jackrabbits, Mallard Ducks, Black Bears, Elk, and Moose, you will need to strategically match prey to weaponry to successfully track, lure, and ambush animals based on their unique behavior and environment. View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image We Love Katamari Reroll + Royal Reverie | PS4, PS5 We Love Katamari Damacy, the second title in the Katamari series released in 2005, has been remastered with redesigned graphics and a revamped in-game UI. The King of the Cosmos accidentally destroyed all the stars in the universe. He sent his son, the Prince, to Earth and ordered him to create a large katamari. Roll the katamari to make it bigger and bigger, rolling up all the things on the earth. You can roll up anything from paper clips and snacks in the house, to telephone poles and buildings in the town, to even living creatures such as people and animals. Once the katamari is complete, it will turn into a star that colors the night sky. You cannot roll up anything larger than the current size of your katamari, so the key is to think in advance about the order in which you roll things up around the stage. In Royal Reverie, roll up katamari as the King of All Cosmos in his boyhood! View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Eiyuden Chronicles: Hundred Heroes | PS4, PS5 Directed and produced by the creator of treasured JRPG series Suikoden, Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes provides a contemporary take on the classic JRPG experience. In the land of Allraan, two friends from different backgrounds are united by a war waged by the power-hungry Galdean Empire. Explore a diverse, magical world populated by humans, beastmen, elves and desert people. Meet and recruit over 100 unique characters, each with their own vivid voice acting and intricate backstories. Over four years in the making, and funded by the most successful Kickstarter videogame campaign of 2020, Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes features turn-based battles, a staggering selection of heroes and a thrilling story to discover. View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Train Sim World 5 | PS4, PS5 The rails are yours in Train Sim World 5! Take on new challenges and new roles as you master the tracks and trains of iconic cities across 3 new routes. Immerse yourself in the ultimate rail hobby and embark on your next journey. Be swept off your feet with the commuter mayhem of the West Coast main line with the Northwestern Class 350, the twisting Kinzigtalbahn with the tilting DB BR 411 ICE-T, or the sun-soaked tracks of the San Bernardino line and its Metrolink movements, powered by the MP36 & F125.  View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Endless Dungeon | PS4, PS5 Endless Dungeon is a unique blend of roguelite, tactical action, and tower defense set in the award-winning Endless Universe. Plunge into an abandoned space station alone or with friends in co-op, recruit a team of shipwrecked heroes, and protect your crystal against never-ending waves of monsters… or die trying, get reloaded, and try again. You’re stranded on an abandoned space station chock-full of monsters and mysteries. To get out you’ll have to reach The Core, but you can’t do that without your crystal bot. That scuttling critter is your key to surviving the procedurally generated rooms of this space ruin. Sadly, it’s also a fragile soul, and every monster in the place wants a piece of it. You’re going to have to think quick, plan well, place your turrets, and then… fireworks! Bugs, bots and blobs will stop at nothing to turn you and that crystal into dust and debris. With a large choice of weapons and turrets, the right gear will be the difference between life and death. PlayStation Plus Premium  View and download image Download the image close Close Download this image Deus Ex: The Conspiracy | PS4, PS5This is an emulation of the classic PS2 title, Deus Ex: The Conspiracy, playable on PS4 and PS5 for the first time. The year is 2052 and the world is a dangerous and chaotic place. Terrorists operate openly – killing thousands; drugs, disease and pollution kill even more. The world’s economies are close to collapse and the gap between the insanely wealthy and the desperately poor grows ever wider. Worst of all, an age- old conspiracy bent on world domination has decided that the time is right to emerge from the shadows and take control.  *PlayStation Plus Game Catalog and PlayStation Plus Premium/Deluxe lineups may differ by region. Please check PlayStation Store on release day. 
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    456
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • Scottish mobile developer Outplay Entertainment cuts 15% of staff to "align operations with current business realities"

    Scottish mobile developer Outplay Entertainment cuts 15% of staff to "align operations with current business realities"
    "This was not a decision we took lightly," CEO says

    Image credit: Outplay Entertainment

    News

    by Vikki Blake
    Contributor

    Published on June 5, 2025

    Outplay Entertainment has cut more than 20 jobs to "alignoperations with current business realities."
    The Dundee, Scotland-based studio, self-described as "the largest independent mobile game developer in the UK," states on its website that it employs 135 staff, although it's unclear if this figure includes the 21 roles that have been laid off. That's around 15% of its headcount.
    In a statement to MobileGamer, CEO Douglas Hare said: "Earlier this week, Outplay made the difficult decision to restructure parts of the business, which has affected as many as 21 team members across several departments.
    "This step was taken to align our operations with current business realities and to support a strategic shift toward partnering with publishers for future game releases.
    "This was not a decision we took lightly," Hare concluded. "We are incredibly grateful to the talented individuals affected, many of whom have made lasting contributions to our games and culture. We are doing everything we can to support them through this transition."
    Outplay develops a number of licensed mobile games, including Gordon Ramsay's Chef Blast, Angry Birds Pop!, and Subway Surfers Blast.
    Over 2200 developers have lost their jobs in 2025 so far, with cuts and closures at Freejam, Splash Damage, Piranha Games, Jar of Sparks, Ubisoft, ProbablyMonsters, Iron Galaxy, Sumo Group, Liquid Sword, NetEase Games, Toast Interactive, Night School Studio, Striking Distance, Ballistic Moon, Eidos Montréal, PlaySide, AppLovin, Nerial, Reality Labs, and, most recently, there have been multiple cuts at EA, including Respawn, as well as People Can Fly and Jagex.
    #scottish #mobile #developer #outplay #entertainment
    Scottish mobile developer Outplay Entertainment cuts 15% of staff to "align operations with current business realities"
    Scottish mobile developer Outplay Entertainment cuts 15% of staff to "align operations with current business realities" "This was not a decision we took lightly," CEO says Image credit: Outplay Entertainment News by Vikki Blake Contributor Published on June 5, 2025 Outplay Entertainment has cut more than 20 jobs to "alignoperations with current business realities." The Dundee, Scotland-based studio, self-described as "the largest independent mobile game developer in the UK," states on its website that it employs 135 staff, although it's unclear if this figure includes the 21 roles that have been laid off. That's around 15% of its headcount. In a statement to MobileGamer, CEO Douglas Hare said: "Earlier this week, Outplay made the difficult decision to restructure parts of the business, which has affected as many as 21 team members across several departments. "This step was taken to align our operations with current business realities and to support a strategic shift toward partnering with publishers for future game releases. "This was not a decision we took lightly," Hare concluded. "We are incredibly grateful to the talented individuals affected, many of whom have made lasting contributions to our games and culture. We are doing everything we can to support them through this transition." Outplay develops a number of licensed mobile games, including Gordon Ramsay's Chef Blast, Angry Birds Pop!, and Subway Surfers Blast. Over 2200 developers have lost their jobs in 2025 so far, with cuts and closures at Freejam, Splash Damage, Piranha Games, Jar of Sparks, Ubisoft, ProbablyMonsters, Iron Galaxy, Sumo Group, Liquid Sword, NetEase Games, Toast Interactive, Night School Studio, Striking Distance, Ballistic Moon, Eidos Montréal, PlaySide, AppLovin, Nerial, Reality Labs, and, most recently, there have been multiple cuts at EA, including Respawn, as well as People Can Fly and Jagex. #scottish #mobile #developer #outplay #entertainment
    WWW.GAMESINDUSTRY.BIZ
    Scottish mobile developer Outplay Entertainment cuts 15% of staff to "align operations with current business realities"
    Scottish mobile developer Outplay Entertainment cuts 15% of staff to "align operations with current business realities" "This was not a decision we took lightly," CEO says Image credit: Outplay Entertainment News by Vikki Blake Contributor Published on June 5, 2025 Outplay Entertainment has cut more than 20 jobs to "align [its] operations with current business realities." The Dundee, Scotland-based studio, self-described as "the largest independent mobile game developer in the UK," states on its website that it employs 135 staff, although it's unclear if this figure includes the 21 roles that have been laid off. That's around 15% of its headcount. In a statement to MobileGamer, CEO Douglas Hare said: "Earlier this week, Outplay made the difficult decision to restructure parts of the business, which has affected as many as 21 team members across several departments. "This step was taken to align our operations with current business realities and to support a strategic shift toward partnering with publishers for future game releases. "This was not a decision we took lightly," Hare concluded. "We are incredibly grateful to the talented individuals affected, many of whom have made lasting contributions to our games and culture. We are doing everything we can to support them through this transition." Outplay develops a number of licensed mobile games, including Gordon Ramsay's Chef Blast, Angry Birds Pop!, and Subway Surfers Blast. Over 2200 developers have lost their jobs in 2025 so far, with cuts and closures at Freejam, Splash Damage, Piranha Games, Jar of Sparks, Ubisoft, ProbablyMonsters, Iron Galaxy, Sumo Group, Liquid Sword, NetEase Games, Toast Interactive, Night School Studio, Striking Distance, Ballistic Moon, Eidos Montréal, PlaySide, AppLovin, Nerial, Reality Labs, and, most recently, there have been multiple cuts at EA, including Respawn, as well as People Can Fly and Jagex.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    285
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • Inside the Design of a High-End Ballistic Helmet Liner

    Here's an adjective, used to describe materials, that you may not have heard of: "Rate-sensitive." It refers to when a material responds to the speed of a force applied to it. As an example, concrete is not rate-sensitive: If you walk into a concrete barrier or drive into it at 80 miles an hour, it remains the same hardness. In contrast, water is rate-sensitive. You can gently push your hand down through the surface of a lake. But if you slap downwards with all your might, the water turns hard and resists.This magical property has been engineered into a proprietary material by Delta Three Oscar, a British manufacturer of ballistic protection gear. The material, D3O, contains a secret sauce of polymers suspended in a lubricating medium. Wrapped in foam that has been specially engineered for comfort on the human head, D30 is what the company's Halo 3 Ballistic Helmet Liner is made out of. The resultant product exceeds the U.S. Army's AR/PD 10-02 blunt impact requirements by 33%, and its shape is designed to accommodate a variety of communications headsets. At just 80g, the company bills it as "the world's lightest, most comfortable ballistic helmet liner." It features 12 integrated airflow channels for ventilation, and the material contacting the head is anti-microbial and moisture-wicking. It's also been designed to be easy for soldiers to install these in the field. The head-contacting side features type on it, which both labels the three different parts and allows the soldier to determine the pieces are oriented correctly. These notches help the soldier align the pieces correctly from side-to-side. The helmet-facing side is lined with hook-and-loop fabric that adheres it to the helmet interior. Embossed letters indicate which of the three pieces you're holding. Two corners on the front and rear pieces are recessed so that they don't interfere with the helmet's harness bolts.The Halo liners have been integrated into the U.S. Army's new Integrated Head Protection Systemhelmets, which are replacing the two-decades-old Advanced Combat Helmetand Enhanced Combat Helmetover the next three years.Fun fact: The cost of the Riddell SpeedFlex helmets worn by many players in the NFL, where the average salary is million, costs roughly the same as an IHPS helmet worn by a PFC in the 82nd Airborne, average salary About a pop.
    #inside #design #highend #ballistic #helmet
    Inside the Design of a High-End Ballistic Helmet Liner
    Here's an adjective, used to describe materials, that you may not have heard of: "Rate-sensitive." It refers to when a material responds to the speed of a force applied to it. As an example, concrete is not rate-sensitive: If you walk into a concrete barrier or drive into it at 80 miles an hour, it remains the same hardness. In contrast, water is rate-sensitive. You can gently push your hand down through the surface of a lake. But if you slap downwards with all your might, the water turns hard and resists.This magical property has been engineered into a proprietary material by Delta Three Oscar, a British manufacturer of ballistic protection gear. The material, D3O, contains a secret sauce of polymers suspended in a lubricating medium. Wrapped in foam that has been specially engineered for comfort on the human head, D30 is what the company's Halo 3 Ballistic Helmet Liner is made out of. The resultant product exceeds the U.S. Army's AR/PD 10-02 blunt impact requirements by 33%, and its shape is designed to accommodate a variety of communications headsets. At just 80g, the company bills it as "the world's lightest, most comfortable ballistic helmet liner." It features 12 integrated airflow channels for ventilation, and the material contacting the head is anti-microbial and moisture-wicking. It's also been designed to be easy for soldiers to install these in the field. The head-contacting side features type on it, which both labels the three different parts and allows the soldier to determine the pieces are oriented correctly. These notches help the soldier align the pieces correctly from side-to-side. The helmet-facing side is lined with hook-and-loop fabric that adheres it to the helmet interior. Embossed letters indicate which of the three pieces you're holding. Two corners on the front and rear pieces are recessed so that they don't interfere with the helmet's harness bolts.The Halo liners have been integrated into the U.S. Army's new Integrated Head Protection Systemhelmets, which are replacing the two-decades-old Advanced Combat Helmetand Enhanced Combat Helmetover the next three years.Fun fact: The cost of the Riddell SpeedFlex helmets worn by many players in the NFL, where the average salary is million, costs roughly the same as an IHPS helmet worn by a PFC in the 82nd Airborne, average salary About a pop. #inside #design #highend #ballistic #helmet
    WWW.CORE77.COM
    Inside the Design of a High-End Ballistic Helmet Liner
    Here's an adjective, used to describe materials, that you may not have heard of: "Rate-sensitive." It refers to when a material responds to the speed of a force applied to it. As an example, concrete is not rate-sensitive: If you walk into a concrete barrier or drive into it at 80 miles an hour, it remains the same hardness. In contrast, water is rate-sensitive. You can gently push your hand down through the surface of a lake. But if you slap downwards with all your might, the water turns hard and resists.This magical property has been engineered into a proprietary material by Delta Three Oscar, a British manufacturer of ballistic protection gear. The material, D3O, contains a secret sauce of polymers suspended in a lubricating medium. Wrapped in foam that has been specially engineered for comfort on the human head, D30 is what the company's Halo 3 Ballistic Helmet Liner is made out of. The resultant product exceeds the U.S. Army's AR/PD 10-02 blunt impact requirements by 33%, and its shape is designed to accommodate a variety of communications headsets. At just 80g (2.8 oz), the company bills it as "the world's lightest, most comfortable ballistic helmet liner." It features 12 integrated airflow channels for ventilation, and the material contacting the head is anti-microbial and moisture-wicking. It's also been designed to be easy for soldiers to install these in the field. The head-contacting side features type on it, which both labels the three different parts and allows the soldier to determine the pieces are oriented correctly (i.e. the type should be read so that none of it appears upside-down). These notches help the soldier align the pieces correctly from side-to-side. The helmet-facing side is lined with hook-and-loop fabric that adheres it to the helmet interior. Embossed letters indicate which of the three pieces you're holding. Two corners on the front and rear pieces are recessed so that they don't interfere with the helmet's harness bolts. (Absent this feature, the liner would try to push away from the helmet at these points.) The Halo liners have been integrated into the U.S. Army's new Integrated Head Protection System (IHPS) helmets, which are replacing the two-decades-old Advanced Combat Helmet (ACH) and Enhanced Combat Helmet (ECH) over the next three years.Fun fact: The cost of the Riddell SpeedFlex helmets worn by many players in the NFL, where the average salary is $3.2 million, costs roughly the same as an IHPS helmet worn by a PFC in the 82nd Airborne, average salary $27,119. About $450 a pop.
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • This giant microwave may change the future of war

    Imagine: China deploys hundreds of thousands of autonomous drones in the air, on the sea, and under the water—all armed with explosive warheads or small missiles. These machines descend in a swarm toward military installations on Taiwan and nearby US bases, and over the course of a few hours, a single robotic blitzkrieg overwhelms the US Pacific force before it can even begin to fight back. 

    Maybe it sounds like a new Michael Bay movie, but it’s the scenario that keeps the chief technology officer of the US Army up at night.

    “I’m hesitant to say it out loud so I don’t manifest it,” says Alex Miller, a longtime Army intelligence official who became the CTO to the Army’s chief of staff in 2023.

    Even if World War III doesn’t break out in the South China Sea, every US military installation around the world is vulnerable to the same tactics—as are the militaries of every other country around the world. The proliferation of cheap drones means just about any group with the wherewithal to assemble and launch a swarm could wreak havoc, no expensive jets or massive missile installations required. 

    While the US has precision missiles that can shoot these drones down, they don’t always succeed: A drone attack killed three US soldiers and injured dozens more at a base in the Jordanian desert last year. And each American missile costs orders of magnitude more than its targets, which limits their supply; countering thousand-dollar drones with missiles that cost hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars per shot can only work for so long, even with a defense budget that could reach a trillion dollars next year.

    The US armed forces are now hunting for a solution—and they want it fast. Every branch of the service and a host of defense tech startups are testing out new weapons that promise to disable drones en masse. There are drones that slam into other drones like battering rams; drones that shoot out nets to ensnare quadcopter propellers; precision-guided Gatling guns that simply shoot drones out of the sky; electronic approaches, like GPS jammers and direct hacking tools; and lasers that melt holes clear through a target’s side.

    Then there are the microwaves: high-powered electronic devices that push out kilowatts of power to zap the circuits of a drone as if it were the tinfoil you forgot to take off your leftovers when you heated them up. 

    That’s where Epirus comes in. 

    When I went to visit the HQ of this 185-person startup in Torrance, California, earlier this year, I got a behind-the-scenes look at its massive microwave, called Leonidas, which the US Army is already betting on as a cutting-edge anti-drone weapon. The Army awarded Epirus a million contract in early 2023, topped that up with another million last fall, and is currently deploying a handful of the systems for testing with US troops in the Middle East and the Pacific. 

    Up close, the Leonidas that Epirus built for the Army looks like a two-foot-thick slab of metal the size of a garage door stuck on a swivel mount. Pop the back cover, and you can see that the slab is filled with dozens of individual microwave amplifier units in a grid. Each is about the size of a safe-deposit box and built around a chip made of gallium nitride, a semiconductor that can survive much higher voltages and temperatures than the typical silicon. 

    Leonidas sits on top of a trailer that a standard-issue Army truck can tow, and when it is powered on, the company’s software tells the grid of amps and antennas to shape the electromagnetic waves they’re blasting out with a phased array, precisely overlapping the microwave signals to mold the energy into a focused beam. Instead of needing to physically point a gun or parabolic dish at each of a thousand incoming drones, the Leonidas can flick between them at the speed of software.

    The Leonidas contains dozens of microwave amplifier units and can pivot to direct waves at incoming swarms of drones.EPIRUS

    Of course, this isn’t magic—there are practical limits on how much damage one array can do, and at what range—but the total effect could be described as an electromagnetic pulse emitter, a death ray for electronics, or a force field that could set up a protective barrier around military installations and drop drones the way a bug zapper fizzles a mob of mosquitoes.

    I walked through the nonclassified sections of the Leonidas factory floor, where a cluster of engineers working on weaponeering—the military term for figuring out exactly how much of a weapon, be it high explosive or microwave beam, is necessary to achieve a desired effect—ran tests in a warren of smaller anechoic rooms. Inside, they shot individual microwave units at a broad range of commercial and military drones, cycling through waveforms and power levels to try to find the signal that could fry each one with maximum efficiency. 

    On a live video feed from inside one of these foam-padded rooms, I watched a quadcopter drone spin its propellers and then, once the microwave emitter turned on, instantly stop short—first the propeller on the front left and then the rest. A drone hit with a Leonidas beam doesn’t explode—it just falls.

    Compared with the blast of a missile or the sizzle of a laser, it doesn’t look like much. But it could force enemies to come up with costlier ways of attacking that reduce the advantage of the drone swarm, and it could get around the inherent limitations of purely electronic or strictly physical defense systems. It could save lives.

    Epirus CEO Andy Lowery, a tall guy with sparkplug energy and a rapid-fire southern Illinois twang, doesn’t shy away from talking big about his product. As he told me during my visit, Leonidas is intended to lead a last stand, like the Spartan from whom the microwave takes its name—in this case, against hordes of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. While the actual range of the Leonidas system is kept secret, Lowery says the Army is looking for a solution that can reliably stop drones within a few kilometers. He told me, “They would like our system to be the owner of that final layer—to get any squeakers, any leakers, anything like that.”

    Now that they’ve told the world they “invented a force field,” Lowery added, the focus is on manufacturing at scale—before the drone swarms really start to descend or a nation with a major military decides to launch a new war. Before, in other words, Miller’s nightmare scenario becomes reality. 

    Why zap?

    Miller remembers well when the danger of small weaponized drones first appeared on his radar. Reports of Islamic State fighters strapping grenades to the bottom of commercial DJI Phantom quadcopters first emerged in late 2016 during the Battle of Mosul. “I went, ‘Oh, this is going to be bad,’ because basically it’s an airborne IED at that point,” he says.

    He’s tracked the danger as it’s built steadily since then, with advances in machine vision, AI coordination software, and suicide drone tactics only accelerating. 

    Then the war in Ukraine showed the world that cheap technology has fundamentally changed how warfare happens. We have watched in high-definition video how a cheap, off-the-shelf drone modified to carry a small bomb can be piloted directly into a faraway truck, tank, or group of troops to devastating effect. And larger suicide drones, also known as “loitering munitions,” can be produced for just tens of thousands of dollars and launched in massive salvos to hit soft targets or overwhelm more advanced military defenses through sheer numbers. 

    As a result, Miller, along with large swaths of the Pentagon and DC policy circles, believes that the current US arsenal for defending against these weapons is just too expensive and the tools in too short supply to truly match the threat.

    Just look at Yemen, a poor country where the Houthi military group has been under constant attack for the past decade. Armed with this new low-tech arsenal, in the past 18 months the rebel group has been able to bomb cargo ships and effectively disrupt global shipping in the Red Sea—part of an effort to apply pressure on Israel to stop its war in Gaza. The Houthis have also used missiles, suicide drones, and even drone boats to launch powerful attacks on US Navy ships sent to stop them.

    The most successful defense tech firm selling anti-drone weapons to the US military right now is Anduril, the company started by Palmer Luckey, the inventor of the Oculus VR headset, and a crew of cofounders from Oculus and defense data giant Palantir. In just the past few months, the Marines have chosen Anduril for counter-drone contracts that could be worth nearly million over the next decade, and the company has been working with Special Operations Command since 2022 on a counter-drone contract that could be worth nearly a billion dollars over a similar time frame. It’s unclear from the contracts what, exactly, Anduril is selling to each organization, but its weapons include electronic warfare jammers, jet-powered drone bombs, and propeller-driven Anvil drones designed to simply smash into enemy drones.

    In this arsenal, the cheapest way to stop a swarm of drones is electronic warfare: jamming the GPS or radio signals used to pilot the machines. But the intense drone battles in Ukraine have advanced the art of jamming and counter-jamming close to the point of stalemate. As a result, a new state of the art is emerging: unjammable drones that operate autonomously by using onboard processors to navigate via internal maps and computer vision, or even drones connected with 20-kilometer-long filaments of fiber-optic cable for tethered control.

    But unjammable doesn’t mean unzappable. Instead of using the scrambling method of a jammer, which employs an antenna to block the drone’s connection to a pilot or remote guidance system, the Leonidas microwave beam hits a drone body broadside. The energy finds its way into something electrical, whether the central flight controller or a tiny wire controlling a flap on a wing, to short-circuit whatever’s available.Tyler Miller, a senior systems engineer on Epirus’s weaponeering team, told me that they never know exactly which part of the target drone is going to go down first, but they’ve reliably seen the microwave signal get in somewhere to overload a circuit. “Based on the geometry and the way the wires are laid out,” he said, one of those wires is going to be the best path in. “Sometimes if we rotate the drone 90 degrees, you have a different motor go down first,” he added.

    The team has even tried wrapping target drones in copper tape, which would theoretically provide shielding, only to find that the microwave still finds a way in through moving propeller shafts or antennas that need to remain exposed for the drone to fly. 

    EPIRUS

    Leonidas also has an edge when it comes to downing a mass of drones at once. Physically hitting a drone out of the sky or lighting it up with a laser can be effective in situations where electronic warfare fails, but anti-drone drones can only take out one at a time, and lasers need to precisely aim and shoot. Epirus’s microwaves can damage everything in a roughly 60-degree arc from the Leonidas emitter simultaneously and keep on zapping and zapping; directed energy systems like this one never run out of ammo.

    As for cost, each Army Leonidas unit currently runs in the “low eight figures,” Lowery told me. Defense contract pricing can be opaque, but Epirus delivered four units for its million initial contract, giving a back-of-napkin price around million each. For comparison, Stinger missiles from Raytheon, which soldiers shoot at enemy aircraft or drones from a shoulder-mounted launcher, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop, meaning the Leonidas could start costing lessafter it downs the first wave of a swarm.

    Raytheon’s radar, reversed

    Epirus is part of a new wave of venture-capital-backed defense companies trying to change the way weapons are created—and the way the Pentagon buys them. The largest defense companies, firms like Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin, typically develop new weapons in response to research grants and cost-plus contracts, in which the US Department of Defense guarantees a certain profit margin to firms building products that match their laundry list of technical specifications. These programs have kept the military supplied with cutting-edge weapons for decades, but the results may be exquisite pieces of military machinery delivered years late and billions of dollars over budget.

    Rather than building to minutely detailed specs, the new crop of military contractors aim to produce products on a quick time frame to solve a problem and then fine-tune them as they pitch to the military. The model, pioneered by Palantir and SpaceX, has since propelled companies like Anduril, Shield AI, and dozens of other smaller startups into the business of war as venture capital piles tens of billions of dollars into defense.

    Like Anduril, Epirus has direct Palantir roots; it was cofounded by Joe Lonsdale, who also cofounded Palantir, and John Tenet, Lonsdale’s colleague at the time at his venture fund, 8VC. 

    While Epirus is doing business in the new mode, its roots are in the old—specifically in Raytheon, a pioneer in the field of microwave technology. Cofounded by MIT professor Vannevar Bush in 1922, it manufactured vacuum tubes, like those found in old radios. But the company became synonymous with electronic defense during World War II, when Bush spun up a lab to develop early microwave radar technology invented by the British into a workable product, and Raytheon then began mass-producing microwave tubes—known as magnetrons—for the US war effort. By the end of the war in 1945, Raytheon was making 80% of the magnetrons powering Allied radar across the world.

    From padded foam chambers at the Epirus HQ, Leonidas devices can be safely tested on drones.EPIRUS

    Large tubes remained the best way to emit high-power microwaves for more than half a century, handily outperforming silicon-based solid-state amplifiers. They’re still around—the microwave on your kitchen counter runs on a vacuum tube magnetron. But tubes have downsides: They’re hot, they’re big, and they require upkeep.By the 2000s, new methods of building solid-state amplifiers out of materials like gallium nitride started to mature and were able to handle more power than silicon without melting or shorting out. The US Navy spent hundreds of millions of dollars on cutting-edge microwave contracts, one for a project at Raytheon called Next Generation Jammer—geared specifically toward designing a new way to make high-powered microwaves that work at extremely long distances.

    Lowery, the Epirus CEO, began his career working on nuclear reactors on Navy aircraft carriers before he became the chief engineer for Next Generation Jammer at Raytheon in 2010. There, he and his team worked on a system that relied on many of the same fundamentals that now power the Leonidas—using the same type of amplifier material and antenna setup to fry the electronics of a small target at much closer range rather than disrupting the radar of a target hundreds of miles away. 

    The similarity is not a coincidence: Two engineers from Next Generation Jammer helped launch Epirus in 2018. Lowery—who by then was working at the augmented-reality startup RealWear, which makes industrial smart glasses—joined Epirus in 2021 to run product development and was asked to take the top spot as CEO in 2023, as Leonidas became a fully formed machine. Much of the founding team has since departed for other projects, but Raytheon still runs through the company’s collective CV: ex-Raytheon radar engineer Matt Markel started in January as the new CTO, and Epirus’s chief engineer for defense, its VP of engineering, its VP of operations, and a number of employees all have Raytheon roots as well.

    Markel tells me that the Epirus way of working wouldn’t have flown at one of the big defense contractors: “They never would have tried spinning off the technology into a new application without a contract lined up.” The Epirus engineers saw the use case, raised money to start building Leonidas, and already had prototypes in the works before any military branch started awarding money to work on the project.

    Waiting for the starting gun

    On the wall of Lowery’s office are two mementos from testing days at an Army proving ground: a trophy wing from a larger drone, signed by the whole testing team, and a framed photo documenting the Leonidas’s carnage—a stack of dozens of inoperative drones piled up in a heap. 

    Despite what seems to have been an impressive test show, it’s still impossible from the outside to determine whether Epirus’s tech is ready to fully deliver if the swarms descend. 

    The Army would not comment specifically on the efficacy of any new weapons in testing or early deployment, including the Leonidas system. A spokesperson for the Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, or RCCTO, which is the subsection responsible for contracting with Epirus to date, would only say in a statement that it is “committed to developing and fielding innovative Directed Energy solutions to address evolving threats.” 

    But various high-ranking officers appear to be giving Epirus a public vote of confidence. The three-star general who runs RCCTO and oversaw the Leonidas testing last summer told Breaking Defense that “the system actually worked very well,” even if there was work to be done on “how the weapon system fits into the larger kill chain.”

    And when former secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth, then the service’s highest-ranking civilian, gave a parting interview this past January, she mentioned Epirus in all but name, citing “one company” that is “using high-powered microwaves to basically be able to kill swarms of drones.” She called that kind of capability “critical for the Army.” 

    The Army isn’t the only branch interested in the microwave weapon. On Epirus’s factory floor when I visited, alongside the big beige Leonidases commissioned by the Army, engineers were building a smaller expeditionary version for the Marines, painted green, which it delivered in late April. Videos show that when it put some of its microwave emitters on a dock and tested them out for the Navy last summer, the microwaves left their targets dead in the water—successfully frying the circuits of outboard motors like the ones propelling Houthi drone boats. 

    Epirus is also currently working on an even smaller version of the Leonidas that can mount on top of the Army’s Stryker combat vehicles, and it’s testing out attaching a single microwave unit to a small airborne drone, which could work as a highly focused zapper to disable cars, data centers, or single enemy drones. 

    Epirus’s microwave technology is also being tested in devices smaller than the traditional Leonidas. EPIRUS

    While neither the Army nor the Navy has yet to announce a contract to start buying Epirus’s systems at scale, the company and its investors are actively preparing for the big orders to start rolling in. It raised million in a funding round in early March to get ready to make as many Leonidases as possible in the coming years, adding to the more than million it’s raised since opening its doors in 2018.

    “If you invent a force field that works,” Lowery boasts, “you really get a lot of attention.”

    The task for Epirus now, assuming that its main customers pull the trigger and start buying more Leonidases, is ramping up production while advancing the tech in its systems. Then there are the more prosaic problems of staffing, assembly, and testing at scale. For future generations, Lowery told me, the goal is refining the antenna design and integrating higher-powered microwave amplifiers to push the output into the tens of kilowatts, allowing for increased range and efficacy. 

    While this could be made harder by Trump’s global trade war, Lowery says he’s not worried about their supply chain; while China produces 98% of the world’s gallium, according to the US Geological Survey, and has choked off exports to the US, Epirus’s chip supplier uses recycled gallium from Japan. 

    The other outside challenge may be that Epirus isn’t the only company building a drone zapper. One of China’s state-owned defense companies has been working on its own anti-drone high-powered microwave weapon called the Hurricane, which it displayed at a major military show in late 2024. 

    It may be a sign that anti-electronics force fields will become common among the world’s militaries—and if so, the future of war is unlikely to go back to the status quo ante, and it might zag in a different direction yet again. But military planners believe it’s crucial for the US not to be left behind. So if it works as promised, Epirus could very well change the way that war will play out in the coming decade. 

    While Miller, the Army CTO, can’t speak directly to Epirus or any specific system, he will say that he believes anti-drone measures are going to have to become ubiquitous for US soldiers. “Counter-UASunfortunately is going to be like counter-IED,” he says. “It’s going to be every soldier’s job to think about UAS threats the same way it was to think about IEDs.” 

    And, he adds, it’s his job and his colleagues’ to make sure that tech so effective it works like “almost magic” is in the hands of the average rifleman. To that end, Lowery told me, Epirus is designing the Leonidas control system to work simply for troops, allowing them to identify a cluster of targets and start zapping with just a click of a button—but only extensive use in the field can prove that out.

    Epirus CEO Andy Lowery sees the Leonidas as providing a last line of defense against UAVs.EPIRUS

    In the not-too-distant future, Lowery says, this could mean setting up along the US-Mexico border. But the grandest vision for Epirus’s tech that he says he’s heard is for a city-scale Leonidas along the lines of a ballistic missile defense radar system called PAVE PAWS, which takes up an entire 105-foot-tall building and can detect distant nuclear missile launches. The US set up four in the 1980s, and Taiwan currently has one up on a mountain south of Taipei. Fill a similar-size building full of microwave emitters, and the beam could reach out “10 or 15 miles,” Lowery told me, with one sitting sentinel over Taipei in the north and another over Kaohsiung in the south of Taiwan.

    Riffing in Greek mythological mode, Lowery said of drones, “I call all these mischief makers. Whether they’re doing drugs or guns across the border or they’re flying over Langleythey’re spying on F-35s, they’re all like Icarus. You remember Icarus, with his wax wings? Flying all around—‘Nobody’s going to touch me, nobody’s going to ever hurt me.’”

    “We built one hell of a wax-wing melter.” 

    Sam Dean is a reporter focusing on business, tech, and defense. He is writing a book about the recent history of Silicon Valley returning to work with the Pentagon for Viking Press and covering the defense tech industry for a number of publications. Previously, he was a business reporter at the Los Angeles Times.

    This piece has been updated to clarify that Alex Miller is a civilian intelligence official. 
    #this #giant #microwave #change #future
    This giant microwave may change the future of war
    Imagine: China deploys hundreds of thousands of autonomous drones in the air, on the sea, and under the water—all armed with explosive warheads or small missiles. These machines descend in a swarm toward military installations on Taiwan and nearby US bases, and over the course of a few hours, a single robotic blitzkrieg overwhelms the US Pacific force before it can even begin to fight back.  Maybe it sounds like a new Michael Bay movie, but it’s the scenario that keeps the chief technology officer of the US Army up at night. “I’m hesitant to say it out loud so I don’t manifest it,” says Alex Miller, a longtime Army intelligence official who became the CTO to the Army’s chief of staff in 2023. Even if World War III doesn’t break out in the South China Sea, every US military installation around the world is vulnerable to the same tactics—as are the militaries of every other country around the world. The proliferation of cheap drones means just about any group with the wherewithal to assemble and launch a swarm could wreak havoc, no expensive jets or massive missile installations required.  While the US has precision missiles that can shoot these drones down, they don’t always succeed: A drone attack killed three US soldiers and injured dozens more at a base in the Jordanian desert last year. And each American missile costs orders of magnitude more than its targets, which limits their supply; countering thousand-dollar drones with missiles that cost hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars per shot can only work for so long, even with a defense budget that could reach a trillion dollars next year. The US armed forces are now hunting for a solution—and they want it fast. Every branch of the service and a host of defense tech startups are testing out new weapons that promise to disable drones en masse. There are drones that slam into other drones like battering rams; drones that shoot out nets to ensnare quadcopter propellers; precision-guided Gatling guns that simply shoot drones out of the sky; electronic approaches, like GPS jammers and direct hacking tools; and lasers that melt holes clear through a target’s side. Then there are the microwaves: high-powered electronic devices that push out kilowatts of power to zap the circuits of a drone as if it were the tinfoil you forgot to take off your leftovers when you heated them up.  That’s where Epirus comes in.  When I went to visit the HQ of this 185-person startup in Torrance, California, earlier this year, I got a behind-the-scenes look at its massive microwave, called Leonidas, which the US Army is already betting on as a cutting-edge anti-drone weapon. The Army awarded Epirus a million contract in early 2023, topped that up with another million last fall, and is currently deploying a handful of the systems for testing with US troops in the Middle East and the Pacific.  Up close, the Leonidas that Epirus built for the Army looks like a two-foot-thick slab of metal the size of a garage door stuck on a swivel mount. Pop the back cover, and you can see that the slab is filled with dozens of individual microwave amplifier units in a grid. Each is about the size of a safe-deposit box and built around a chip made of gallium nitride, a semiconductor that can survive much higher voltages and temperatures than the typical silicon.  Leonidas sits on top of a trailer that a standard-issue Army truck can tow, and when it is powered on, the company’s software tells the grid of amps and antennas to shape the electromagnetic waves they’re blasting out with a phased array, precisely overlapping the microwave signals to mold the energy into a focused beam. Instead of needing to physically point a gun or parabolic dish at each of a thousand incoming drones, the Leonidas can flick between them at the speed of software. The Leonidas contains dozens of microwave amplifier units and can pivot to direct waves at incoming swarms of drones.EPIRUS Of course, this isn’t magic—there are practical limits on how much damage one array can do, and at what range—but the total effect could be described as an electromagnetic pulse emitter, a death ray for electronics, or a force field that could set up a protective barrier around military installations and drop drones the way a bug zapper fizzles a mob of mosquitoes. I walked through the nonclassified sections of the Leonidas factory floor, where a cluster of engineers working on weaponeering—the military term for figuring out exactly how much of a weapon, be it high explosive or microwave beam, is necessary to achieve a desired effect—ran tests in a warren of smaller anechoic rooms. Inside, they shot individual microwave units at a broad range of commercial and military drones, cycling through waveforms and power levels to try to find the signal that could fry each one with maximum efficiency.  On a live video feed from inside one of these foam-padded rooms, I watched a quadcopter drone spin its propellers and then, once the microwave emitter turned on, instantly stop short—first the propeller on the front left and then the rest. A drone hit with a Leonidas beam doesn’t explode—it just falls. Compared with the blast of a missile or the sizzle of a laser, it doesn’t look like much. But it could force enemies to come up with costlier ways of attacking that reduce the advantage of the drone swarm, and it could get around the inherent limitations of purely electronic or strictly physical defense systems. It could save lives. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery, a tall guy with sparkplug energy and a rapid-fire southern Illinois twang, doesn’t shy away from talking big about his product. As he told me during my visit, Leonidas is intended to lead a last stand, like the Spartan from whom the microwave takes its name—in this case, against hordes of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. While the actual range of the Leonidas system is kept secret, Lowery says the Army is looking for a solution that can reliably stop drones within a few kilometers. He told me, “They would like our system to be the owner of that final layer—to get any squeakers, any leakers, anything like that.” Now that they’ve told the world they “invented a force field,” Lowery added, the focus is on manufacturing at scale—before the drone swarms really start to descend or a nation with a major military decides to launch a new war. Before, in other words, Miller’s nightmare scenario becomes reality.  Why zap? Miller remembers well when the danger of small weaponized drones first appeared on his radar. Reports of Islamic State fighters strapping grenades to the bottom of commercial DJI Phantom quadcopters first emerged in late 2016 during the Battle of Mosul. “I went, ‘Oh, this is going to be bad,’ because basically it’s an airborne IED at that point,” he says. He’s tracked the danger as it’s built steadily since then, with advances in machine vision, AI coordination software, and suicide drone tactics only accelerating.  Then the war in Ukraine showed the world that cheap technology has fundamentally changed how warfare happens. We have watched in high-definition video how a cheap, off-the-shelf drone modified to carry a small bomb can be piloted directly into a faraway truck, tank, or group of troops to devastating effect. And larger suicide drones, also known as “loitering munitions,” can be produced for just tens of thousands of dollars and launched in massive salvos to hit soft targets or overwhelm more advanced military defenses through sheer numbers.  As a result, Miller, along with large swaths of the Pentagon and DC policy circles, believes that the current US arsenal for defending against these weapons is just too expensive and the tools in too short supply to truly match the threat. Just look at Yemen, a poor country where the Houthi military group has been under constant attack for the past decade. Armed with this new low-tech arsenal, in the past 18 months the rebel group has been able to bomb cargo ships and effectively disrupt global shipping in the Red Sea—part of an effort to apply pressure on Israel to stop its war in Gaza. The Houthis have also used missiles, suicide drones, and even drone boats to launch powerful attacks on US Navy ships sent to stop them. The most successful defense tech firm selling anti-drone weapons to the US military right now is Anduril, the company started by Palmer Luckey, the inventor of the Oculus VR headset, and a crew of cofounders from Oculus and defense data giant Palantir. In just the past few months, the Marines have chosen Anduril for counter-drone contracts that could be worth nearly million over the next decade, and the company has been working with Special Operations Command since 2022 on a counter-drone contract that could be worth nearly a billion dollars over a similar time frame. It’s unclear from the contracts what, exactly, Anduril is selling to each organization, but its weapons include electronic warfare jammers, jet-powered drone bombs, and propeller-driven Anvil drones designed to simply smash into enemy drones. In this arsenal, the cheapest way to stop a swarm of drones is electronic warfare: jamming the GPS or radio signals used to pilot the machines. But the intense drone battles in Ukraine have advanced the art of jamming and counter-jamming close to the point of stalemate. As a result, a new state of the art is emerging: unjammable drones that operate autonomously by using onboard processors to navigate via internal maps and computer vision, or even drones connected with 20-kilometer-long filaments of fiber-optic cable for tethered control. But unjammable doesn’t mean unzappable. Instead of using the scrambling method of a jammer, which employs an antenna to block the drone’s connection to a pilot or remote guidance system, the Leonidas microwave beam hits a drone body broadside. The energy finds its way into something electrical, whether the central flight controller or a tiny wire controlling a flap on a wing, to short-circuit whatever’s available.Tyler Miller, a senior systems engineer on Epirus’s weaponeering team, told me that they never know exactly which part of the target drone is going to go down first, but they’ve reliably seen the microwave signal get in somewhere to overload a circuit. “Based on the geometry and the way the wires are laid out,” he said, one of those wires is going to be the best path in. “Sometimes if we rotate the drone 90 degrees, you have a different motor go down first,” he added. The team has even tried wrapping target drones in copper tape, which would theoretically provide shielding, only to find that the microwave still finds a way in through moving propeller shafts or antennas that need to remain exposed for the drone to fly.  EPIRUS Leonidas also has an edge when it comes to downing a mass of drones at once. Physically hitting a drone out of the sky or lighting it up with a laser can be effective in situations where electronic warfare fails, but anti-drone drones can only take out one at a time, and lasers need to precisely aim and shoot. Epirus’s microwaves can damage everything in a roughly 60-degree arc from the Leonidas emitter simultaneously and keep on zapping and zapping; directed energy systems like this one never run out of ammo. As for cost, each Army Leonidas unit currently runs in the “low eight figures,” Lowery told me. Defense contract pricing can be opaque, but Epirus delivered four units for its million initial contract, giving a back-of-napkin price around million each. For comparison, Stinger missiles from Raytheon, which soldiers shoot at enemy aircraft or drones from a shoulder-mounted launcher, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop, meaning the Leonidas could start costing lessafter it downs the first wave of a swarm. Raytheon’s radar, reversed Epirus is part of a new wave of venture-capital-backed defense companies trying to change the way weapons are created—and the way the Pentagon buys them. The largest defense companies, firms like Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin, typically develop new weapons in response to research grants and cost-plus contracts, in which the US Department of Defense guarantees a certain profit margin to firms building products that match their laundry list of technical specifications. These programs have kept the military supplied with cutting-edge weapons for decades, but the results may be exquisite pieces of military machinery delivered years late and billions of dollars over budget. Rather than building to minutely detailed specs, the new crop of military contractors aim to produce products on a quick time frame to solve a problem and then fine-tune them as they pitch to the military. The model, pioneered by Palantir and SpaceX, has since propelled companies like Anduril, Shield AI, and dozens of other smaller startups into the business of war as venture capital piles tens of billions of dollars into defense. Like Anduril, Epirus has direct Palantir roots; it was cofounded by Joe Lonsdale, who also cofounded Palantir, and John Tenet, Lonsdale’s colleague at the time at his venture fund, 8VC.  While Epirus is doing business in the new mode, its roots are in the old—specifically in Raytheon, a pioneer in the field of microwave technology. Cofounded by MIT professor Vannevar Bush in 1922, it manufactured vacuum tubes, like those found in old radios. But the company became synonymous with electronic defense during World War II, when Bush spun up a lab to develop early microwave radar technology invented by the British into a workable product, and Raytheon then began mass-producing microwave tubes—known as magnetrons—for the US war effort. By the end of the war in 1945, Raytheon was making 80% of the magnetrons powering Allied radar across the world. From padded foam chambers at the Epirus HQ, Leonidas devices can be safely tested on drones.EPIRUS Large tubes remained the best way to emit high-power microwaves for more than half a century, handily outperforming silicon-based solid-state amplifiers. They’re still around—the microwave on your kitchen counter runs on a vacuum tube magnetron. But tubes have downsides: They’re hot, they’re big, and they require upkeep.By the 2000s, new methods of building solid-state amplifiers out of materials like gallium nitride started to mature and were able to handle more power than silicon without melting or shorting out. The US Navy spent hundreds of millions of dollars on cutting-edge microwave contracts, one for a project at Raytheon called Next Generation Jammer—geared specifically toward designing a new way to make high-powered microwaves that work at extremely long distances. Lowery, the Epirus CEO, began his career working on nuclear reactors on Navy aircraft carriers before he became the chief engineer for Next Generation Jammer at Raytheon in 2010. There, he and his team worked on a system that relied on many of the same fundamentals that now power the Leonidas—using the same type of amplifier material and antenna setup to fry the electronics of a small target at much closer range rather than disrupting the radar of a target hundreds of miles away.  The similarity is not a coincidence: Two engineers from Next Generation Jammer helped launch Epirus in 2018. Lowery—who by then was working at the augmented-reality startup RealWear, which makes industrial smart glasses—joined Epirus in 2021 to run product development and was asked to take the top spot as CEO in 2023, as Leonidas became a fully formed machine. Much of the founding team has since departed for other projects, but Raytheon still runs through the company’s collective CV: ex-Raytheon radar engineer Matt Markel started in January as the new CTO, and Epirus’s chief engineer for defense, its VP of engineering, its VP of operations, and a number of employees all have Raytheon roots as well. Markel tells me that the Epirus way of working wouldn’t have flown at one of the big defense contractors: “They never would have tried spinning off the technology into a new application without a contract lined up.” The Epirus engineers saw the use case, raised money to start building Leonidas, and already had prototypes in the works before any military branch started awarding money to work on the project. Waiting for the starting gun On the wall of Lowery’s office are two mementos from testing days at an Army proving ground: a trophy wing from a larger drone, signed by the whole testing team, and a framed photo documenting the Leonidas’s carnage—a stack of dozens of inoperative drones piled up in a heap.  Despite what seems to have been an impressive test show, it’s still impossible from the outside to determine whether Epirus’s tech is ready to fully deliver if the swarms descend.  The Army would not comment specifically on the efficacy of any new weapons in testing or early deployment, including the Leonidas system. A spokesperson for the Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, or RCCTO, which is the subsection responsible for contracting with Epirus to date, would only say in a statement that it is “committed to developing and fielding innovative Directed Energy solutions to address evolving threats.”  But various high-ranking officers appear to be giving Epirus a public vote of confidence. The three-star general who runs RCCTO and oversaw the Leonidas testing last summer told Breaking Defense that “the system actually worked very well,” even if there was work to be done on “how the weapon system fits into the larger kill chain.” And when former secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth, then the service’s highest-ranking civilian, gave a parting interview this past January, she mentioned Epirus in all but name, citing “one company” that is “using high-powered microwaves to basically be able to kill swarms of drones.” She called that kind of capability “critical for the Army.”  The Army isn’t the only branch interested in the microwave weapon. On Epirus’s factory floor when I visited, alongside the big beige Leonidases commissioned by the Army, engineers were building a smaller expeditionary version for the Marines, painted green, which it delivered in late April. Videos show that when it put some of its microwave emitters on a dock and tested them out for the Navy last summer, the microwaves left their targets dead in the water—successfully frying the circuits of outboard motors like the ones propelling Houthi drone boats.  Epirus is also currently working on an even smaller version of the Leonidas that can mount on top of the Army’s Stryker combat vehicles, and it’s testing out attaching a single microwave unit to a small airborne drone, which could work as a highly focused zapper to disable cars, data centers, or single enemy drones.  Epirus’s microwave technology is also being tested in devices smaller than the traditional Leonidas. EPIRUS While neither the Army nor the Navy has yet to announce a contract to start buying Epirus’s systems at scale, the company and its investors are actively preparing for the big orders to start rolling in. It raised million in a funding round in early March to get ready to make as many Leonidases as possible in the coming years, adding to the more than million it’s raised since opening its doors in 2018. “If you invent a force field that works,” Lowery boasts, “you really get a lot of attention.” The task for Epirus now, assuming that its main customers pull the trigger and start buying more Leonidases, is ramping up production while advancing the tech in its systems. Then there are the more prosaic problems of staffing, assembly, and testing at scale. For future generations, Lowery told me, the goal is refining the antenna design and integrating higher-powered microwave amplifiers to push the output into the tens of kilowatts, allowing for increased range and efficacy.  While this could be made harder by Trump’s global trade war, Lowery says he’s not worried about their supply chain; while China produces 98% of the world’s gallium, according to the US Geological Survey, and has choked off exports to the US, Epirus’s chip supplier uses recycled gallium from Japan.  The other outside challenge may be that Epirus isn’t the only company building a drone zapper. One of China’s state-owned defense companies has been working on its own anti-drone high-powered microwave weapon called the Hurricane, which it displayed at a major military show in late 2024.  It may be a sign that anti-electronics force fields will become common among the world’s militaries—and if so, the future of war is unlikely to go back to the status quo ante, and it might zag in a different direction yet again. But military planners believe it’s crucial for the US not to be left behind. So if it works as promised, Epirus could very well change the way that war will play out in the coming decade.  While Miller, the Army CTO, can’t speak directly to Epirus or any specific system, he will say that he believes anti-drone measures are going to have to become ubiquitous for US soldiers. “Counter-UASunfortunately is going to be like counter-IED,” he says. “It’s going to be every soldier’s job to think about UAS threats the same way it was to think about IEDs.”  And, he adds, it’s his job and his colleagues’ to make sure that tech so effective it works like “almost magic” is in the hands of the average rifleman. To that end, Lowery told me, Epirus is designing the Leonidas control system to work simply for troops, allowing them to identify a cluster of targets and start zapping with just a click of a button—but only extensive use in the field can prove that out. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery sees the Leonidas as providing a last line of defense against UAVs.EPIRUS In the not-too-distant future, Lowery says, this could mean setting up along the US-Mexico border. But the grandest vision for Epirus’s tech that he says he’s heard is for a city-scale Leonidas along the lines of a ballistic missile defense radar system called PAVE PAWS, which takes up an entire 105-foot-tall building and can detect distant nuclear missile launches. The US set up four in the 1980s, and Taiwan currently has one up on a mountain south of Taipei. Fill a similar-size building full of microwave emitters, and the beam could reach out “10 or 15 miles,” Lowery told me, with one sitting sentinel over Taipei in the north and another over Kaohsiung in the south of Taiwan. Riffing in Greek mythological mode, Lowery said of drones, “I call all these mischief makers. Whether they’re doing drugs or guns across the border or they’re flying over Langleythey’re spying on F-35s, they’re all like Icarus. You remember Icarus, with his wax wings? Flying all around—‘Nobody’s going to touch me, nobody’s going to ever hurt me.’” “We built one hell of a wax-wing melter.”  Sam Dean is a reporter focusing on business, tech, and defense. He is writing a book about the recent history of Silicon Valley returning to work with the Pentagon for Viking Press and covering the defense tech industry for a number of publications. Previously, he was a business reporter at the Los Angeles Times. This piece has been updated to clarify that Alex Miller is a civilian intelligence official.  #this #giant #microwave #change #future
    WWW.TECHNOLOGYREVIEW.COM
    This giant microwave may change the future of war
    Imagine: China deploys hundreds of thousands of autonomous drones in the air, on the sea, and under the water—all armed with explosive warheads or small missiles. These machines descend in a swarm toward military installations on Taiwan and nearby US bases, and over the course of a few hours, a single robotic blitzkrieg overwhelms the US Pacific force before it can even begin to fight back.  Maybe it sounds like a new Michael Bay movie, but it’s the scenario that keeps the chief technology officer of the US Army up at night. “I’m hesitant to say it out loud so I don’t manifest it,” says Alex Miller, a longtime Army intelligence official who became the CTO to the Army’s chief of staff in 2023. Even if World War III doesn’t break out in the South China Sea, every US military installation around the world is vulnerable to the same tactics—as are the militaries of every other country around the world. The proliferation of cheap drones means just about any group with the wherewithal to assemble and launch a swarm could wreak havoc, no expensive jets or massive missile installations required.  While the US has precision missiles that can shoot these drones down, they don’t always succeed: A drone attack killed three US soldiers and injured dozens more at a base in the Jordanian desert last year. And each American missile costs orders of magnitude more than its targets, which limits their supply; countering thousand-dollar drones with missiles that cost hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars per shot can only work for so long, even with a defense budget that could reach a trillion dollars next year. The US armed forces are now hunting for a solution—and they want it fast. Every branch of the service and a host of defense tech startups are testing out new weapons that promise to disable drones en masse. There are drones that slam into other drones like battering rams; drones that shoot out nets to ensnare quadcopter propellers; precision-guided Gatling guns that simply shoot drones out of the sky; electronic approaches, like GPS jammers and direct hacking tools; and lasers that melt holes clear through a target’s side. Then there are the microwaves: high-powered electronic devices that push out kilowatts of power to zap the circuits of a drone as if it were the tinfoil you forgot to take off your leftovers when you heated them up.  That’s where Epirus comes in.  When I went to visit the HQ of this 185-person startup in Torrance, California, earlier this year, I got a behind-the-scenes look at its massive microwave, called Leonidas, which the US Army is already betting on as a cutting-edge anti-drone weapon. The Army awarded Epirus a $66 million contract in early 2023, topped that up with another $17 million last fall, and is currently deploying a handful of the systems for testing with US troops in the Middle East and the Pacific. (The Army won’t get into specifics on the location of the weapons in the Middle East but published a report of a live-fire test in the Philippines in early May.)  Up close, the Leonidas that Epirus built for the Army looks like a two-foot-thick slab of metal the size of a garage door stuck on a swivel mount. Pop the back cover, and you can see that the slab is filled with dozens of individual microwave amplifier units in a grid. Each is about the size of a safe-deposit box and built around a chip made of gallium nitride, a semiconductor that can survive much higher voltages and temperatures than the typical silicon.  Leonidas sits on top of a trailer that a standard-issue Army truck can tow, and when it is powered on, the company’s software tells the grid of amps and antennas to shape the electromagnetic waves they’re blasting out with a phased array, precisely overlapping the microwave signals to mold the energy into a focused beam. Instead of needing to physically point a gun or parabolic dish at each of a thousand incoming drones, the Leonidas can flick between them at the speed of software. The Leonidas contains dozens of microwave amplifier units and can pivot to direct waves at incoming swarms of drones.EPIRUS Of course, this isn’t magic—there are practical limits on how much damage one array can do, and at what range—but the total effect could be described as an electromagnetic pulse emitter, a death ray for electronics, or a force field that could set up a protective barrier around military installations and drop drones the way a bug zapper fizzles a mob of mosquitoes. I walked through the nonclassified sections of the Leonidas factory floor, where a cluster of engineers working on weaponeering—the military term for figuring out exactly how much of a weapon, be it high explosive or microwave beam, is necessary to achieve a desired effect—ran tests in a warren of smaller anechoic rooms. Inside, they shot individual microwave units at a broad range of commercial and military drones, cycling through waveforms and power levels to try to find the signal that could fry each one with maximum efficiency.  On a live video feed from inside one of these foam-padded rooms, I watched a quadcopter drone spin its propellers and then, once the microwave emitter turned on, instantly stop short—first the propeller on the front left and then the rest. A drone hit with a Leonidas beam doesn’t explode—it just falls. Compared with the blast of a missile or the sizzle of a laser, it doesn’t look like much. But it could force enemies to come up with costlier ways of attacking that reduce the advantage of the drone swarm, and it could get around the inherent limitations of purely electronic or strictly physical defense systems. It could save lives. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery, a tall guy with sparkplug energy and a rapid-fire southern Illinois twang, doesn’t shy away from talking big about his product. As he told me during my visit, Leonidas is intended to lead a last stand, like the Spartan from whom the microwave takes its name—in this case, against hordes of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. While the actual range of the Leonidas system is kept secret, Lowery says the Army is looking for a solution that can reliably stop drones within a few kilometers. He told me, “They would like our system to be the owner of that final layer—to get any squeakers, any leakers, anything like that.” Now that they’ve told the world they “invented a force field,” Lowery added, the focus is on manufacturing at scale—before the drone swarms really start to descend or a nation with a major military decides to launch a new war. Before, in other words, Miller’s nightmare scenario becomes reality.  Why zap? Miller remembers well when the danger of small weaponized drones first appeared on his radar. Reports of Islamic State fighters strapping grenades to the bottom of commercial DJI Phantom quadcopters first emerged in late 2016 during the Battle of Mosul. “I went, ‘Oh, this is going to be bad,’ because basically it’s an airborne IED at that point,” he says. He’s tracked the danger as it’s built steadily since then, with advances in machine vision, AI coordination software, and suicide drone tactics only accelerating.  Then the war in Ukraine showed the world that cheap technology has fundamentally changed how warfare happens. We have watched in high-definition video how a cheap, off-the-shelf drone modified to carry a small bomb can be piloted directly into a faraway truck, tank, or group of troops to devastating effect. And larger suicide drones, also known as “loitering munitions,” can be produced for just tens of thousands of dollars and launched in massive salvos to hit soft targets or overwhelm more advanced military defenses through sheer numbers.  As a result, Miller, along with large swaths of the Pentagon and DC policy circles, believes that the current US arsenal for defending against these weapons is just too expensive and the tools in too short supply to truly match the threat. Just look at Yemen, a poor country where the Houthi military group has been under constant attack for the past decade. Armed with this new low-tech arsenal, in the past 18 months the rebel group has been able to bomb cargo ships and effectively disrupt global shipping in the Red Sea—part of an effort to apply pressure on Israel to stop its war in Gaza. The Houthis have also used missiles, suicide drones, and even drone boats to launch powerful attacks on US Navy ships sent to stop them. The most successful defense tech firm selling anti-drone weapons to the US military right now is Anduril, the company started by Palmer Luckey, the inventor of the Oculus VR headset, and a crew of cofounders from Oculus and defense data giant Palantir. In just the past few months, the Marines have chosen Anduril for counter-drone contracts that could be worth nearly $850 million over the next decade, and the company has been working with Special Operations Command since 2022 on a counter-drone contract that could be worth nearly a billion dollars over a similar time frame. It’s unclear from the contracts what, exactly, Anduril is selling to each organization, but its weapons include electronic warfare jammers, jet-powered drone bombs, and propeller-driven Anvil drones designed to simply smash into enemy drones. In this arsenal, the cheapest way to stop a swarm of drones is electronic warfare: jamming the GPS or radio signals used to pilot the machines. But the intense drone battles in Ukraine have advanced the art of jamming and counter-jamming close to the point of stalemate. As a result, a new state of the art is emerging: unjammable drones that operate autonomously by using onboard processors to navigate via internal maps and computer vision, or even drones connected with 20-kilometer-long filaments of fiber-optic cable for tethered control. But unjammable doesn’t mean unzappable. Instead of using the scrambling method of a jammer, which employs an antenna to block the drone’s connection to a pilot or remote guidance system, the Leonidas microwave beam hits a drone body broadside. The energy finds its way into something electrical, whether the central flight controller or a tiny wire controlling a flap on a wing, to short-circuit whatever’s available. (The company also says that this targeted hit of energy allows birds and other wildlife to continue to move safely.) Tyler Miller, a senior systems engineer on Epirus’s weaponeering team, told me that they never know exactly which part of the target drone is going to go down first, but they’ve reliably seen the microwave signal get in somewhere to overload a circuit. “Based on the geometry and the way the wires are laid out,” he said, one of those wires is going to be the best path in. “Sometimes if we rotate the drone 90 degrees, you have a different motor go down first,” he added. The team has even tried wrapping target drones in copper tape, which would theoretically provide shielding, only to find that the microwave still finds a way in through moving propeller shafts or antennas that need to remain exposed for the drone to fly.  EPIRUS Leonidas also has an edge when it comes to downing a mass of drones at once. Physically hitting a drone out of the sky or lighting it up with a laser can be effective in situations where electronic warfare fails, but anti-drone drones can only take out one at a time, and lasers need to precisely aim and shoot. Epirus’s microwaves can damage everything in a roughly 60-degree arc from the Leonidas emitter simultaneously and keep on zapping and zapping; directed energy systems like this one never run out of ammo. As for cost, each Army Leonidas unit currently runs in the “low eight figures,” Lowery told me. Defense contract pricing can be opaque, but Epirus delivered four units for its $66 million initial contract, giving a back-of-napkin price around $16.5 million each. For comparison, Stinger missiles from Raytheon, which soldiers shoot at enemy aircraft or drones from a shoulder-mounted launcher, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop, meaning the Leonidas could start costing less (and keep shooting) after it downs the first wave of a swarm. Raytheon’s radar, reversed Epirus is part of a new wave of venture-capital-backed defense companies trying to change the way weapons are created—and the way the Pentagon buys them. The largest defense companies, firms like Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin, typically develop new weapons in response to research grants and cost-plus contracts, in which the US Department of Defense guarantees a certain profit margin to firms building products that match their laundry list of technical specifications. These programs have kept the military supplied with cutting-edge weapons for decades, but the results may be exquisite pieces of military machinery delivered years late and billions of dollars over budget. Rather than building to minutely detailed specs, the new crop of military contractors aim to produce products on a quick time frame to solve a problem and then fine-tune them as they pitch to the military. The model, pioneered by Palantir and SpaceX, has since propelled companies like Anduril, Shield AI, and dozens of other smaller startups into the business of war as venture capital piles tens of billions of dollars into defense. Like Anduril, Epirus has direct Palantir roots; it was cofounded by Joe Lonsdale, who also cofounded Palantir, and John Tenet, Lonsdale’s colleague at the time at his venture fund, 8VC. (Tenet, the son of former CIA director George Tenet, may have inspired the company’s name—the elder Tenet’s parents were born in the Epirus region in the northwest of Greece. But the company more often says it’s a reference to the pseudo-mythological Epirus Bow from the 2011 fantasy action movie Immortals, which never runs out of arrows.)  While Epirus is doing business in the new mode, its roots are in the old—specifically in Raytheon, a pioneer in the field of microwave technology. Cofounded by MIT professor Vannevar Bush in 1922, it manufactured vacuum tubes, like those found in old radios. But the company became synonymous with electronic defense during World War II, when Bush spun up a lab to develop early microwave radar technology invented by the British into a workable product, and Raytheon then began mass-producing microwave tubes—known as magnetrons—for the US war effort. By the end of the war in 1945, Raytheon was making 80% of the magnetrons powering Allied radar across the world. From padded foam chambers at the Epirus HQ, Leonidas devices can be safely tested on drones.EPIRUS Large tubes remained the best way to emit high-power microwaves for more than half a century, handily outperforming silicon-based solid-state amplifiers. They’re still around—the microwave on your kitchen counter runs on a vacuum tube magnetron. But tubes have downsides: They’re hot, they’re big, and they require upkeep. (In fact, the other microwave drone zapper currently in the Pentagon pipeline, the Tactical High-power Operational Responder, or THOR, still relies on a physical vacuum tube. It’s reported to be effective at downing drones in tests but takes up a whole shipping container and needs a dish antenna to zap its targets.) By the 2000s, new methods of building solid-state amplifiers out of materials like gallium nitride started to mature and were able to handle more power than silicon without melting or shorting out. The US Navy spent hundreds of millions of dollars on cutting-edge microwave contracts, one for a project at Raytheon called Next Generation Jammer—geared specifically toward designing a new way to make high-powered microwaves that work at extremely long distances. Lowery, the Epirus CEO, began his career working on nuclear reactors on Navy aircraft carriers before he became the chief engineer for Next Generation Jammer at Raytheon in 2010. There, he and his team worked on a system that relied on many of the same fundamentals that now power the Leonidas—using the same type of amplifier material and antenna setup to fry the electronics of a small target at much closer range rather than disrupting the radar of a target hundreds of miles away.  The similarity is not a coincidence: Two engineers from Next Generation Jammer helped launch Epirus in 2018. Lowery—who by then was working at the augmented-reality startup RealWear, which makes industrial smart glasses—joined Epirus in 2021 to run product development and was asked to take the top spot as CEO in 2023, as Leonidas became a fully formed machine. Much of the founding team has since departed for other projects, but Raytheon still runs through the company’s collective CV: ex-Raytheon radar engineer Matt Markel started in January as the new CTO, and Epirus’s chief engineer for defense, its VP of engineering, its VP of operations, and a number of employees all have Raytheon roots as well. Markel tells me that the Epirus way of working wouldn’t have flown at one of the big defense contractors: “They never would have tried spinning off the technology into a new application without a contract lined up.” The Epirus engineers saw the use case, raised money to start building Leonidas, and already had prototypes in the works before any military branch started awarding money to work on the project. Waiting for the starting gun On the wall of Lowery’s office are two mementos from testing days at an Army proving ground: a trophy wing from a larger drone, signed by the whole testing team, and a framed photo documenting the Leonidas’s carnage—a stack of dozens of inoperative drones piled up in a heap.  Despite what seems to have been an impressive test show, it’s still impossible from the outside to determine whether Epirus’s tech is ready to fully deliver if the swarms descend.  The Army would not comment specifically on the efficacy of any new weapons in testing or early deployment, including the Leonidas system. A spokesperson for the Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, or RCCTO, which is the subsection responsible for contracting with Epirus to date, would only say in a statement that it is “committed to developing and fielding innovative Directed Energy solutions to address evolving threats.”  But various high-ranking officers appear to be giving Epirus a public vote of confidence. The three-star general who runs RCCTO and oversaw the Leonidas testing last summer told Breaking Defense that “the system actually worked very well,” even if there was work to be done on “how the weapon system fits into the larger kill chain.” And when former secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth, then the service’s highest-ranking civilian, gave a parting interview this past January, she mentioned Epirus in all but name, citing “one company” that is “using high-powered microwaves to basically be able to kill swarms of drones.” She called that kind of capability “critical for the Army.”  The Army isn’t the only branch interested in the microwave weapon. On Epirus’s factory floor when I visited, alongside the big beige Leonidases commissioned by the Army, engineers were building a smaller expeditionary version for the Marines, painted green, which it delivered in late April. Videos show that when it put some of its microwave emitters on a dock and tested them out for the Navy last summer, the microwaves left their targets dead in the water—successfully frying the circuits of outboard motors like the ones propelling Houthi drone boats.  Epirus is also currently working on an even smaller version of the Leonidas that can mount on top of the Army’s Stryker combat vehicles, and it’s testing out attaching a single microwave unit to a small airborne drone, which could work as a highly focused zapper to disable cars, data centers, or single enemy drones.  Epirus’s microwave technology is also being tested in devices smaller than the traditional Leonidas. EPIRUS While neither the Army nor the Navy has yet to announce a contract to start buying Epirus’s systems at scale, the company and its investors are actively preparing for the big orders to start rolling in. It raised $250 million in a funding round in early March to get ready to make as many Leonidases as possible in the coming years, adding to the more than $300 million it’s raised since opening its doors in 2018. “If you invent a force field that works,” Lowery boasts, “you really get a lot of attention.” The task for Epirus now, assuming that its main customers pull the trigger and start buying more Leonidases, is ramping up production while advancing the tech in its systems. Then there are the more prosaic problems of staffing, assembly, and testing at scale. For future generations, Lowery told me, the goal is refining the antenna design and integrating higher-powered microwave amplifiers to push the output into the tens of kilowatts, allowing for increased range and efficacy.  While this could be made harder by Trump’s global trade war, Lowery says he’s not worried about their supply chain; while China produces 98% of the world’s gallium, according to the US Geological Survey, and has choked off exports to the US, Epirus’s chip supplier uses recycled gallium from Japan.  The other outside challenge may be that Epirus isn’t the only company building a drone zapper. One of China’s state-owned defense companies has been working on its own anti-drone high-powered microwave weapon called the Hurricane, which it displayed at a major military show in late 2024.  It may be a sign that anti-electronics force fields will become common among the world’s militaries—and if so, the future of war is unlikely to go back to the status quo ante, and it might zag in a different direction yet again. But military planners believe it’s crucial for the US not to be left behind. So if it works as promised, Epirus could very well change the way that war will play out in the coming decade.  While Miller, the Army CTO, can’t speak directly to Epirus or any specific system, he will say that he believes anti-drone measures are going to have to become ubiquitous for US soldiers. “Counter-UAS [Unmanned Aircraft System] unfortunately is going to be like counter-IED,” he says. “It’s going to be every soldier’s job to think about UAS threats the same way it was to think about IEDs.”  And, he adds, it’s his job and his colleagues’ to make sure that tech so effective it works like “almost magic” is in the hands of the average rifleman. To that end, Lowery told me, Epirus is designing the Leonidas control system to work simply for troops, allowing them to identify a cluster of targets and start zapping with just a click of a button—but only extensive use in the field can prove that out. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery sees the Leonidas as providing a last line of defense against UAVs.EPIRUS In the not-too-distant future, Lowery says, this could mean setting up along the US-Mexico border. But the grandest vision for Epirus’s tech that he says he’s heard is for a city-scale Leonidas along the lines of a ballistic missile defense radar system called PAVE PAWS, which takes up an entire 105-foot-tall building and can detect distant nuclear missile launches. The US set up four in the 1980s, and Taiwan currently has one up on a mountain south of Taipei. Fill a similar-size building full of microwave emitters, and the beam could reach out “10 or 15 miles,” Lowery told me, with one sitting sentinel over Taipei in the north and another over Kaohsiung in the south of Taiwan. Riffing in Greek mythological mode, Lowery said of drones, “I call all these mischief makers. Whether they’re doing drugs or guns across the border or they’re flying over Langley [or] they’re spying on F-35s, they’re all like Icarus. You remember Icarus, with his wax wings? Flying all around—‘Nobody’s going to touch me, nobody’s going to ever hurt me.’” “We built one hell of a wax-wing melter.”  Sam Dean is a reporter focusing on business, tech, and defense. He is writing a book about the recent history of Silicon Valley returning to work with the Pentagon for Viking Press and covering the defense tech industry for a number of publications. Previously, he was a business reporter at the Los Angeles Times. This piece has been updated to clarify that Alex Miller is a civilian intelligence official. 
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • Core77 Weekly Roundup (5-27-25 to 5-30-25)

    Here's what we looked at this week:Crucial Detail's Ona Wine Chiller is an unusual-looking object for keeping wine bottles cool. Marc 3DP's love letter to 3D-printed fidget toys.A jeweler shows you her method for making Trinity Rings.The Newave: A modular surfboard that breaks down for transport.Inside the design of the Delta Three Oscar Halo system, a high-end ballistic helmet liner.China hosts world's first humanoid robot fighting competition, and more are on the way.Remedial design: Touchscreen backlash prompts aftermarket control knob and buttons for Teslas.Mafell's crazy pull-push portable table saw.A Dutch-Danish housing crunch solution: Build floating neighborhoods.MAFGA?Swatchbox's Second Life Samples program is an easy way to recycle your firm's material samples.Extreme package design: The Art Edition of the "Calatrava - Complete Works" book.Once known for scissors, Fiskars has a hit with a demolition tool, their Pro IsoCore Wrecking Bar.A modern take on the doorknob by industrial designer Will Zhang.Industrial design case study: PDR brings dignity to catheter bags.
    #core77 #weekly #roundup
    Core77 Weekly Roundup (5-27-25 to 5-30-25)
    Here's what we looked at this week:Crucial Detail's Ona Wine Chiller is an unusual-looking object for keeping wine bottles cool. Marc 3DP's love letter to 3D-printed fidget toys.A jeweler shows you her method for making Trinity Rings.The Newave: A modular surfboard that breaks down for transport.Inside the design of the Delta Three Oscar Halo system, a high-end ballistic helmet liner.China hosts world's first humanoid robot fighting competition, and more are on the way.Remedial design: Touchscreen backlash prompts aftermarket control knob and buttons for Teslas.Mafell's crazy pull-push portable table saw.A Dutch-Danish housing crunch solution: Build floating neighborhoods.MAFGA?Swatchbox's Second Life Samples program is an easy way to recycle your firm's material samples.Extreme package design: The Art Edition of the "Calatrava - Complete Works" book.Once known for scissors, Fiskars has a hit with a demolition tool, their Pro IsoCore Wrecking Bar.A modern take on the doorknob by industrial designer Will Zhang.Industrial design case study: PDR brings dignity to catheter bags. #core77 #weekly #roundup
    WWW.CORE77.COM
    Core77 Weekly Roundup (5-27-25 to 5-30-25)
    Here's what we looked at this week:Crucial Detail's Ona Wine Chiller is an unusual-looking object for keeping wine bottles cool. Marc 3DP's love letter to 3D-printed fidget toys.A jeweler shows you her method for making Trinity Rings.The Newave: A modular surfboard that breaks down for transport.Inside the design of the Delta Three Oscar Halo system, a high-end ballistic helmet liner.China hosts world's first humanoid robot fighting competition, and more are on the way.Remedial design: Touchscreen backlash prompts aftermarket control knob and buttons for Teslas.Mafell's crazy pull-push portable table saw.A Dutch-Danish housing crunch solution: Build floating neighborhoods.MAFGA (Make American Fonts Great Again)?Swatchbox's Second Life Samples program is an easy way to recycle your firm's material samples.Extreme package design: The Art Edition of the "Calatrava - Complete Works" book.Once known for scissors, Fiskars has a hit with a demolition tool, their Pro IsoCore Wrecking Bar.A modern take on the doorknob by industrial designer Will Zhang.Industrial design case study: PDR brings dignity to catheter bags.
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • Trump's Golden Dome defence project could spur a space arms race

    US President Donald Trump, accompanied by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, announces the Golden Dome missile defense shieldCHRIS KLEPONIS/POOL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
    US President Donald Trump has proposed a defence project, called the Golden Dome, to intercept any incoming hypersonic, ballistic and advanced cruise missiles that threaten the country.
    “Once fully constructed, the Golden Dome will be capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides of the world and even if they are launched from space,” said Trump during the White House announcement on 20 May.
    But such a thorough interception system may not be possible. Some experts also warn that, even if it works, the Golden Dome would take at least a decade to build, cost more than half a trillion dollars – and accelerate the global nuclear arms race and the weaponisation of space.Advertisement

    What is the Golden Dome?
    The project’s name is inspired by Israel’s Iron Dome system, which uses ground-based missiles to intercept incoming rockets and artillery fired from relatively short distances. But the Golden Dome would need to defend a far larger area – the land mass of the contiguous US alone is more than 350 times the size of Israel – from a wider variety of sophisticated missiles.
    According to Trump and his officials, the system should be able to counter ballistic missiles that could be launched from the other side of the world, advanced cruise missiles that fly on flatter trajectories at lower altitudes and hypersonic missiles that can fly and manoeuvre at speeds exceeding Mach 5, five times the speed of sound. These missiles can carry either nuclear warheads or conventional explosive warheads.

    Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox.

    Sign up to newsletter

    To detect and intercept the threats, the Golden Dome will use both “space-based sensors and air and missile defense”, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said in a statement. That implies an umbrella system of “Golden Domes” with different technologies countering different threats, says David Burbach at the Naval War College in Rhode Island, who shared some comments with New Scientist in a personal capacity.
    However, not all of these defences exist. For instance, the Golden Dome would supposedly use space-based interceptor missiles in low Earth orbit, an unprecedented technological feat that has never been demonstrated before, says Thomas González Roberts at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta.
    A similar idea, nicknamed Star Wars, was originally proposed by US President Ronald Reagan in his Strategic Defense Initiative during the cold war. In fact, Trump has described the Golden Dome as an effort to complete “the job that President Reagan started 40 years ago”.
    How will the Golden Dome work?
    Missile defence experts describe the challenge of intercepting long-range nuclear missiles as being like “hitting a bullet with a bullet, in the dark” because “the targets are small, not emitting any radio or infrared signals, and fast moving”, says Burbach. “One thing to keep in mind is that even optimistic technical experts admit 100 per cent interception is unlikely.”
    The US already has a system of ground-based interceptor missiles, primarily based in Alaska. They can shoot down “a couple dozen incoming warheads at best”, says Burbach. He also pointed out that Russia and China are developing countermeasures to make it harder to detect and intercept their missiles.
    “Stopping subsonic cruise missiles or short-range ballistic missiles launched from just outside US borders would use established technology, but it could be expensive to deploy enough of those defensive systems to cover the whole country,” says Burbach. “The real challenge will be Golden Dome’s aim to stop large numbers of intercontinental missiles – President Trump said ‘100 per cent’ of them – such as an attack from China or Russia.”
    Trump’s claim that the Golden Dome would defend against missile strikes from the other side of the world or even from space implies it would require a “dense constellation of likely low-Earth orbiting, space-based missile interceptors that could deorbit and strike a missile within minutes of it launching” from anywhere, says Roberts.
    “The number of satellites you would need is bigger than any constellation that’s ever been launched,” he says. Currently, the largest constellation consists of around 7000 Starlink satellites operated by SpaceX.
    How much will the Golden Dome cost?
    Trump proposed a budget of billion for the Golden Dome, although that funding has not yet been approved by the US Congress. And the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan federal agency, estimated that a space-based interceptor system like Golden Dome could cost as much as billion.
    “It’s unclear what expenditures are included in the billion figure,” says Patrycja Bazylczyk at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, a think tank in Washington DC.
    Trump also claimed the Golden Dome would be “fully operational” by the end of his second term in office in early 2029, although experts doubt that is possible. “The three-year timeline is aggressive – this initiative is likely to span at least a decade, if not more,” says Bazylczyk.
    Much of the timeline may depend upon how many existing military systems it uses. “Significant progress is feasible in the near term, including fielding new interceptors, over-the-horizon radars, space-based sensors and technology demonstrations,” says Bazylczyk.
    But there are major limitations to how quickly the US could launch the potentially thousands of satellites required for Golden Dome – to say nothing of developing the space-based interceptor technologies.
    “I think you’d be very hard-pressed to find a launch cadence that could support a large constellation going up in just three years,” says Roberts. “SpaceX launches more things more often than anyone in the history of space operations, and the ask here is to crack open that ceiling even further.”
    “I think it is almost impossible a system could be ‘fully operational’ in the sense of ‘stop 100 per cent of a missile attack’ that quickly,” says Burbach. “Reaching even a small-scale operational capability that soon would be very difficult.”
    Will Golden Dome make the US safer?
    There is already an ongoing arms race between the US, China and Russia, with all three countries modernising and expanding their nuclear arsenals, as well as developing space-based systems to support their militaries.
    If the Golden Dome system can improve US air and missile defences, it could “change the strategic calculus” by reducing the confidence of any missile-armed adversary, deterring them from launching attacks in the first place, says Bazylczyk.
    On the other hand, the Golden Dome has the “potential to contribute to instability” by “signalling to your nuclear adversaries that you simply don’t trust them”, says Roberts. China’s foreign ministry responded to Trump’s announcement by saying the Golden Dome carries “strong offensive implications” and raises the risks of an arms race in space. A Kremlin spokesperson suggested the Golden Dome plans could lead to resumption of nuclear arms control discussions between Russia and the US.
    To counter this system, China and Russia might try to “destroy or disable US satellites”, says Burbach. Both countries already have missiles capable of shooting down satellites, and they could also try to electronically jam or hack US satellite systems, he says. In February 2024, the US government warned that Russia had plans to launch a space weapon capable of disabling or destroying satellites, possibly using a nuclear explosion.
    These countries could also bulk up their missile arsenals and possibly develop more manoeuvrable weapons that also use decoys, says Burbach. He pointed out that Russia has already started developing weapons less vulnerable to space-based interception, such as intercontinental nuclear torpedoes that travel underwater.
    Topics:
    #trump039s #golden #dome #defence #project
    Trump's Golden Dome defence project could spur a space arms race
    US President Donald Trump, accompanied by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, announces the Golden Dome missile defense shieldCHRIS KLEPONIS/POOL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock US President Donald Trump has proposed a defence project, called the Golden Dome, to intercept any incoming hypersonic, ballistic and advanced cruise missiles that threaten the country. “Once fully constructed, the Golden Dome will be capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides of the world and even if they are launched from space,” said Trump during the White House announcement on 20 May. But such a thorough interception system may not be possible. Some experts also warn that, even if it works, the Golden Dome would take at least a decade to build, cost more than half a trillion dollars – and accelerate the global nuclear arms race and the weaponisation of space.Advertisement What is the Golden Dome? The project’s name is inspired by Israel’s Iron Dome system, which uses ground-based missiles to intercept incoming rockets and artillery fired from relatively short distances. But the Golden Dome would need to defend a far larger area – the land mass of the contiguous US alone is more than 350 times the size of Israel – from a wider variety of sophisticated missiles. According to Trump and his officials, the system should be able to counter ballistic missiles that could be launched from the other side of the world, advanced cruise missiles that fly on flatter trajectories at lower altitudes and hypersonic missiles that can fly and manoeuvre at speeds exceeding Mach 5, five times the speed of sound. These missiles can carry either nuclear warheads or conventional explosive warheads. Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox. Sign up to newsletter To detect and intercept the threats, the Golden Dome will use both “space-based sensors and air and missile defense”, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said in a statement. That implies an umbrella system of “Golden Domes” with different technologies countering different threats, says David Burbach at the Naval War College in Rhode Island, who shared some comments with New Scientist in a personal capacity. However, not all of these defences exist. For instance, the Golden Dome would supposedly use space-based interceptor missiles in low Earth orbit, an unprecedented technological feat that has never been demonstrated before, says Thomas González Roberts at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. A similar idea, nicknamed Star Wars, was originally proposed by US President Ronald Reagan in his Strategic Defense Initiative during the cold war. In fact, Trump has described the Golden Dome as an effort to complete “the job that President Reagan started 40 years ago”. How will the Golden Dome work? Missile defence experts describe the challenge of intercepting long-range nuclear missiles as being like “hitting a bullet with a bullet, in the dark” because “the targets are small, not emitting any radio or infrared signals, and fast moving”, says Burbach. “One thing to keep in mind is that even optimistic technical experts admit 100 per cent interception is unlikely.” The US already has a system of ground-based interceptor missiles, primarily based in Alaska. They can shoot down “a couple dozen incoming warheads at best”, says Burbach. He also pointed out that Russia and China are developing countermeasures to make it harder to detect and intercept their missiles. “Stopping subsonic cruise missiles or short-range ballistic missiles launched from just outside US borders would use established technology, but it could be expensive to deploy enough of those defensive systems to cover the whole country,” says Burbach. “The real challenge will be Golden Dome’s aim to stop large numbers of intercontinental missiles – President Trump said ‘100 per cent’ of them – such as an attack from China or Russia.” Trump’s claim that the Golden Dome would defend against missile strikes from the other side of the world or even from space implies it would require a “dense constellation of likely low-Earth orbiting, space-based missile interceptors that could deorbit and strike a missile within minutes of it launching” from anywhere, says Roberts. “The number of satellites you would need is bigger than any constellation that’s ever been launched,” he says. Currently, the largest constellation consists of around 7000 Starlink satellites operated by SpaceX. How much will the Golden Dome cost? Trump proposed a budget of billion for the Golden Dome, although that funding has not yet been approved by the US Congress. And the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan federal agency, estimated that a space-based interceptor system like Golden Dome could cost as much as billion. “It’s unclear what expenditures are included in the billion figure,” says Patrycja Bazylczyk at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, a think tank in Washington DC. Trump also claimed the Golden Dome would be “fully operational” by the end of his second term in office in early 2029, although experts doubt that is possible. “The three-year timeline is aggressive – this initiative is likely to span at least a decade, if not more,” says Bazylczyk. Much of the timeline may depend upon how many existing military systems it uses. “Significant progress is feasible in the near term, including fielding new interceptors, over-the-horizon radars, space-based sensors and technology demonstrations,” says Bazylczyk. But there are major limitations to how quickly the US could launch the potentially thousands of satellites required for Golden Dome – to say nothing of developing the space-based interceptor technologies. “I think you’d be very hard-pressed to find a launch cadence that could support a large constellation going up in just three years,” says Roberts. “SpaceX launches more things more often than anyone in the history of space operations, and the ask here is to crack open that ceiling even further.” “I think it is almost impossible a system could be ‘fully operational’ in the sense of ‘stop 100 per cent of a missile attack’ that quickly,” says Burbach. “Reaching even a small-scale operational capability that soon would be very difficult.” Will Golden Dome make the US safer? There is already an ongoing arms race between the US, China and Russia, with all three countries modernising and expanding their nuclear arsenals, as well as developing space-based systems to support their militaries. If the Golden Dome system can improve US air and missile defences, it could “change the strategic calculus” by reducing the confidence of any missile-armed adversary, deterring them from launching attacks in the first place, says Bazylczyk. On the other hand, the Golden Dome has the “potential to contribute to instability” by “signalling to your nuclear adversaries that you simply don’t trust them”, says Roberts. China’s foreign ministry responded to Trump’s announcement by saying the Golden Dome carries “strong offensive implications” and raises the risks of an arms race in space. A Kremlin spokesperson suggested the Golden Dome plans could lead to resumption of nuclear arms control discussions between Russia and the US. To counter this system, China and Russia might try to “destroy or disable US satellites”, says Burbach. Both countries already have missiles capable of shooting down satellites, and they could also try to electronically jam or hack US satellite systems, he says. In February 2024, the US government warned that Russia had plans to launch a space weapon capable of disabling or destroying satellites, possibly using a nuclear explosion. These countries could also bulk up their missile arsenals and possibly develop more manoeuvrable weapons that also use decoys, says Burbach. He pointed out that Russia has already started developing weapons less vulnerable to space-based interception, such as intercontinental nuclear torpedoes that travel underwater. Topics: #trump039s #golden #dome #defence #project
    WWW.NEWSCIENTIST.COM
    Trump's Golden Dome defence project could spur a space arms race
    US President Donald Trump (left), accompanied by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (right), announces the Golden Dome missile defense shieldCHRIS KLEPONIS/POOL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock US President Donald Trump has proposed a defence project, called the Golden Dome, to intercept any incoming hypersonic, ballistic and advanced cruise missiles that threaten the country. “Once fully constructed, the Golden Dome will be capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides of the world and even if they are launched from space,” said Trump during the White House announcement on 20 May. But such a thorough interception system may not be possible. Some experts also warn that, even if it works, the Golden Dome would take at least a decade to build, cost more than half a trillion dollars – and accelerate the global nuclear arms race and the weaponisation of space.Advertisement What is the Golden Dome? The project’s name is inspired by Israel’s Iron Dome system, which uses ground-based missiles to intercept incoming rockets and artillery fired from relatively short distances. But the Golden Dome would need to defend a far larger area – the land mass of the contiguous US alone is more than 350 times the size of Israel – from a wider variety of sophisticated missiles. According to Trump and his officials, the system should be able to counter ballistic missiles that could be launched from the other side of the world, advanced cruise missiles that fly on flatter trajectories at lower altitudes and hypersonic missiles that can fly and manoeuvre at speeds exceeding Mach 5, five times the speed of sound. These missiles can carry either nuclear warheads or conventional explosive warheads. Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox. Sign up to newsletter To detect and intercept the threats, the Golden Dome will use both “space-based sensors and air and missile defense”, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said in a statement. That implies an umbrella system of “Golden Domes” with different technologies countering different threats, says David Burbach at the Naval War College in Rhode Island, who shared some comments with New Scientist in a personal capacity. However, not all of these defences exist. For instance, the Golden Dome would supposedly use space-based interceptor missiles in low Earth orbit, an unprecedented technological feat that has never been demonstrated before, says Thomas González Roberts at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. A similar idea, nicknamed Star Wars, was originally proposed by US President Ronald Reagan in his Strategic Defense Initiative during the cold war. In fact, Trump has described the Golden Dome as an effort to complete “the job that President Reagan started 40 years ago”. How will the Golden Dome work? Missile defence experts describe the challenge of intercepting long-range nuclear missiles as being like “hitting a bullet with a bullet, in the dark” because “the targets are small, not emitting any radio or infrared signals, and fast moving”, says Burbach. “One thing to keep in mind is that even optimistic technical experts admit 100 per cent interception is unlikely.” The US already has a system of ground-based interceptor missiles, primarily based in Alaska. They can shoot down “a couple dozen incoming warheads at best”, says Burbach. He also pointed out that Russia and China are developing countermeasures to make it harder to detect and intercept their missiles. “Stopping subsonic cruise missiles or short-range ballistic missiles launched from just outside US borders would use established technology, but it could be expensive to deploy enough of those defensive systems to cover the whole country,” says Burbach. “The real challenge will be Golden Dome’s aim to stop large numbers of intercontinental missiles – President Trump said ‘100 per cent’ of them – such as an attack from China or Russia.” Trump’s claim that the Golden Dome would defend against missile strikes from the other side of the world or even from space implies it would require a “dense constellation of likely low-Earth orbiting, space-based missile interceptors that could deorbit and strike a missile within minutes of it launching” from anywhere, says Roberts. “The number of satellites you would need is bigger than any constellation that’s ever been launched,” he says. Currently, the largest constellation consists of around 7000 Starlink satellites operated by SpaceX. How much will the Golden Dome cost? Trump proposed a budget of $175 billion for the Golden Dome, although that funding has not yet been approved by the US Congress. And the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan federal agency, estimated that a space-based interceptor system like Golden Dome could cost as much as $542 billion. “It’s unclear what expenditures are included in the $175 billion figure,” says Patrycja Bazylczyk at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, a think tank in Washington DC. Trump also claimed the Golden Dome would be “fully operational” by the end of his second term in office in early 2029, although experts doubt that is possible. “The three-year timeline is aggressive – this initiative is likely to span at least a decade, if not more,” says Bazylczyk. Much of the timeline may depend upon how many existing military systems it uses. “Significant progress is feasible in the near term, including fielding new interceptors, over-the-horizon radars, space-based sensors and technology demonstrations,” says Bazylczyk. But there are major limitations to how quickly the US could launch the potentially thousands of satellites required for Golden Dome – to say nothing of developing the space-based interceptor technologies. “I think you’d be very hard-pressed to find a launch cadence that could support a large constellation going up in just three years,” says Roberts. “SpaceX launches more things more often than anyone in the history of space operations, and the ask here is to crack open that ceiling even further.” “I think it is almost impossible a system could be ‘fully operational’ in the sense of ‘stop 100 per cent of a missile attack’ that quickly,” says Burbach. “Reaching even a small-scale operational capability that soon would be very difficult.” Will Golden Dome make the US safer? There is already an ongoing arms race between the US, China and Russia, with all three countries modernising and expanding their nuclear arsenals, as well as developing space-based systems to support their militaries. If the Golden Dome system can improve US air and missile defences, it could “change the strategic calculus” by reducing the confidence of any missile-armed adversary, deterring them from launching attacks in the first place, says Bazylczyk. On the other hand, the Golden Dome has the “potential to contribute to instability” by “signalling to your nuclear adversaries that you simply don’t trust them”, says Roberts. China’s foreign ministry responded to Trump’s announcement by saying the Golden Dome carries “strong offensive implications” and raises the risks of an arms race in space. A Kremlin spokesperson suggested the Golden Dome plans could lead to resumption of nuclear arms control discussions between Russia and the US. To counter this system, China and Russia might try to “destroy or disable US satellites”, says Burbach. Both countries already have missiles capable of shooting down satellites, and they could also try to electronically jam or hack US satellite systems, he says. In February 2024, the US government warned that Russia had plans to launch a space weapon capable of disabling or destroying satellites, possibly using a nuclear explosion. These countries could also bulk up their missile arsenals and possibly develop more manoeuvrable weapons that also use decoys, says Burbach. He pointed out that Russia has already started developing weapons less vulnerable to space-based interception, such as intercontinental nuclear torpedoes that travel underwater. Topics:
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • All of Tom Cruise's 'Mission: Impossible' movies, ranked from worst to best

    Tom Cruise is taking on one last daring adventure in "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning," which pits Ethan Hunt against an evil AI that threatens to destroy the world.The actor has been the face of the franchise since the first movie in 1996, and has starred in eight films in total.The Impossible Mission Forcefirst debuted in the "Mission: Impossible" TV series in 1966, which starred Steven Hill and Peter Graves and ran for six seasons until 1973, before it was revived for another two seasons on ABC in 1988.With the franchise set to end with "The Final Reckoning," here are all the "Mission: Impossible" movies, ranked.

    8. "Mission: Impossible 2"Tom Cruise riding a motorbike in "Mission: Impossible 2."

    Paramount Pictures

    "Mission: Impossible 2" should be given way more love than it gets, mainly because the Hong Kong cinema legend John Woo helmed it. Yes, the "Hard Boiled" and "Bullet in the Head" director brought his signature bullet ballet style to the "Mission: Impossible" sequel, with all the slow-motion flair you could ask for.Is it cheesy? Sure. Does the script need some work? Definitely. Is there any smart subtext or meaning underneath all the action? Absolutely not. This is a peak 2000s action movie, and it knows it. "Mission: Impossible 2" is so over the top that once you've made peace with it, it's best to just go along for the ride. Come on, Tom Cruise and Dougray Scott play motorbike chicken with each other before a midair tackle sends them both crashing to the ground. What's not to love? It's the type of vehicular chaos that the "Fast & Furious" franchise's Dominic Toretto would be proud of.Even so, "Mission: Impossible 2" ranks at the bottom of the bunch.

    7. "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol"Tom Cruise on the side of the Burj Khalifa in "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol."

    Paramount Pictures

    The 2011 film "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol" takes the franchise into the modern era. It follows Hunt and his team as they're forced to go on the run when they're framed for bombing the Kremlin.It quickly becomes a race to stop the villainous Kurt Hendricks, who wants to start a nuclear war so that only the strongest members of humanity will survive. It's this plot that keeps "Ghost Protocol" from ascending the ranking, because, as spy thrillers go, stopping a nuclear war feels predictable, and the film fails to do anything unique with the premise. Plus, there's nothing particularly extraordinary about Hendricks as a baddie.But generic plot devices aside, the film features some brilliant fights and gripping set pieces. The stand-out moment is when Cruise's hero climbs the Burj Khalifa in Dubai with nothing but sticky gloves and rope.One of the most surprising elements of the film is Jeremy Renner's William Brandt, a disgraced former agent who's grappling with the guilt of failing Ethan on a former mission. That sub-plot works very well among the rest of the action, and it's a clever way of injecting a bit of heart into the mission.

    6. "Mission: Impossible 3"Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt and Keri Russell as Lindsey Farris in "Mission: Impossible 3."

    Paramount Pictures

    Two words: JJ Abrams. The "Lost" and "Fringe" creator made his big screen debut in 2006 with "Mission: Impossible 3," which takes a mid-noughties approach to the Impossible Mission Force and gives it a brutal edge.The sequel pits Ethan, Luther Stickell, Zhen Lei, and Declan Gormleyagainst a nefarious arms dealer played by the incomparable Phillip Seymour Hoffman.Part of what elevates "Mission: Impossible 3" from previous films is that it never actually explains what Ethan and the gang are chasing. It's known only by its mysterious codename, the Rabbit's Foot. It could be an infectious disease, a computer virus, a hard drive teeming with currency, or nuclear codes — and that's what makes it so compelling. It's also refreshing to see Ethan settled and in love with Michelle Monahan's Julia Meade. What does married life look like for a superspy? How does that complicate his responsibility to save the world? The sequel feels very busy, as Abrams packs a lot into a tight two-hour run time. And some parts don't quite work, like Ethan's dynamic with his young mentee Lindsey Farris. But there are some stellar sequences throughout, like the ballistic shoot-out on the bridge, which is an eye-popping piece of action choreography.

    5. "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning"Tom Cruise in "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning."

    Skydance/Paramount Pictures

    "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning" is the sequel to 2023's "Dead Reckoning," and sees Hunt race to stop an assassin known as Gabrielfrom controlling a sentient AI called the Entity. Just to raise the stakes, the Entity has already taken control of the world's nuclear weapons and plans to wipe out humanity.While the 2025 movie is billed as the final entry in the franchise, its story doesn't quite live up to the high expectations set by "Dead Reckoning." The first hour is bogged down by lengthy exposition and generic action movie silliness.That being said, as soon as the action picks up and Cruise embraces his adrenaline junkie persona once more, "The Final Reckoning" provides a breathtaking cinematic experience.Whether it's the suspenseful scuba dive into a wrecked submarine or how Hunt climbs between two biplanes in the sky to fight Gabriel, the film's ambitious sequences deserve to be seen on the big screen.

    4. "Mission: Impossible"Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt in "Mission: Impossible."

    Paramount Pictures

    Taken from the 1966 TV series of the same name, 1996's "Mission: Impossible" introduces Cruise's Ethan Hunt, a field agent working for Jim Phelps, the main character from the show. It has audiences instantly on their toes when Ethan's entire team, including Phelps, are assassinated by a double agent in the opening — forcing our hero to go on the run after being framed for their deaths."Mission: Impossible" earned itself a place in cinema history thanks to the brilliantly intense break-in scene, in which Cruise's Hunt hacks into a CIA mainframe computer while suspended on cables.And of course, the high-octane ending on top of a Channel Tunnel train is a pulse-pounding affair set to the iconic theme music. Cruise effortlessly brings Hunt to life alongside top-notch performances from Voight, Kristin Scott Thomas, and Ving Rhames, which really help sell the paranoid atmosphere of the film

    3. "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation"Rebecca Ferguson as Ilsa Faust in "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation."

    Paramount Pictures

    "Rogue Nation" is where frequent Tom Cruise collaborator Christopher McQuarrie properly put his stamp on the franchise. McQuarrie expands the world in a fascinating way with the introduction of the Syndicate, a vast organization made up of rogue agents from every intelligence agency on the planet.Their missionis to create disorder and chaos to destabilize the global intelligence community, although their true goals don't become apparent until 2018's "Mission: Impossible - Fallout." Hunt is determined to root out the Syndicate, and its sinister leader, Solomon Lane."Rogue Nation" also introduces Ilsa Faust, an enigmatic British agent who has a delicious will-they-won't-they dynamic with Cruise's hero.A brawl in the rigging above an opera stage in Vienna is a stunning highlight, as is Cruise's underwater dive to retrieve a computer chip from a submerged safe. Cruise broke the world record for holding his breath for six minutes while completing that stunt in 2014.

    2. "Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One"Esai Morales as Gabriel and Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt in "Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One."

    Paramount Pictures

    "Dead Reckoning Part One" sees Hunt's IMF team chasing a key that will lead them to an unstoppable AI that could wreak havoc on the world.And, of course, every government agency in the world wants to get their hands on it, so Hunt and his team are effectively on the run from everyone. "Dead Reckoning's" focus on AI gives it a grounding in the real world, but the film also continues to elevate the sheer scale of action that audiences have come to expect from the "Mission: Impossible" franchise. That jaw-dropping mountain jump at the movie's climax has to be seen to be believed, and it only gets more bonkers after that.It's a testament to Cruise and McQuarrie that the film feels fresh and new — even if the script does drag on at points. Then again, audiences are coming to see Cruise throw himself off a mountain, not to hear Oscar-winning dialogue.

    1. "Mission: Impossible - Fallout"Tom Cruise in "Mission: Impossible - Fallout."

    Paramount

    There's no question that McQuarrie's "Mission: Impossible - Fallout" is the best movie in the franchise, which is impressive considering it's the sixth outing for Hunt and the gang. It continues the Syndicate storyline from "Rogue Nation" and dives further into Solomon Lane's scheme. He wants to destabilize the world by irradiating the Siachen Glacier, which supplies water to India, Pakistan, and China. This would kill off a third of the world's population and drastically change society in the process.  But most of the story revolves around a CIA and IMF mole who goes by the codename 'John Lark.'The hunt to find this rogue agent crosses the world, introducing the likes of Henry Cavill's CIA agent August Walker and Vanessa Kirby's underworld matriarch, Alanna Mitsopolis. The scope of McQuarrie's movie is massive, and its huge stunts mirror that size. A gobsmacking scene sees Hunt dive with Walker from a plane and parachute into Paris. Cruise shot the stunt alongside a cameraman to properly capture the chaotic dive. Then, of course, there's the film's exhilarating helicopter chase through a New Zealand mountain range — just another example of McQuarrie and Cruise's commitment to filming these stunts in the most jaw-dropping way possible."Fallout" is a thrilling chapter of the "Mission: Impossible" franchise that deepens the audience's understanding of Cruise's hero while delivering a stunning cinematic experience.
    #all #tom #cruise039s #039mission #impossible039
    All of Tom Cruise's 'Mission: Impossible' movies, ranked from worst to best
    Tom Cruise is taking on one last daring adventure in "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning," which pits Ethan Hunt against an evil AI that threatens to destroy the world.The actor has been the face of the franchise since the first movie in 1996, and has starred in eight films in total.The Impossible Mission Forcefirst debuted in the "Mission: Impossible" TV series in 1966, which starred Steven Hill and Peter Graves and ran for six seasons until 1973, before it was revived for another two seasons on ABC in 1988.With the franchise set to end with "The Final Reckoning," here are all the "Mission: Impossible" movies, ranked. 8. "Mission: Impossible 2"Tom Cruise riding a motorbike in "Mission: Impossible 2." Paramount Pictures "Mission: Impossible 2" should be given way more love than it gets, mainly because the Hong Kong cinema legend John Woo helmed it. Yes, the "Hard Boiled" and "Bullet in the Head" director brought his signature bullet ballet style to the "Mission: Impossible" sequel, with all the slow-motion flair you could ask for.Is it cheesy? Sure. Does the script need some work? Definitely. Is there any smart subtext or meaning underneath all the action? Absolutely not. This is a peak 2000s action movie, and it knows it. "Mission: Impossible 2" is so over the top that once you've made peace with it, it's best to just go along for the ride. Come on, Tom Cruise and Dougray Scott play motorbike chicken with each other before a midair tackle sends them both crashing to the ground. What's not to love? It's the type of vehicular chaos that the "Fast & Furious" franchise's Dominic Toretto would be proud of.Even so, "Mission: Impossible 2" ranks at the bottom of the bunch. 7. "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol"Tom Cruise on the side of the Burj Khalifa in "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol." Paramount Pictures The 2011 film "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol" takes the franchise into the modern era. It follows Hunt and his team as they're forced to go on the run when they're framed for bombing the Kremlin.It quickly becomes a race to stop the villainous Kurt Hendricks, who wants to start a nuclear war so that only the strongest members of humanity will survive. It's this plot that keeps "Ghost Protocol" from ascending the ranking, because, as spy thrillers go, stopping a nuclear war feels predictable, and the film fails to do anything unique with the premise. Plus, there's nothing particularly extraordinary about Hendricks as a baddie.But generic plot devices aside, the film features some brilliant fights and gripping set pieces. The stand-out moment is when Cruise's hero climbs the Burj Khalifa in Dubai with nothing but sticky gloves and rope.One of the most surprising elements of the film is Jeremy Renner's William Brandt, a disgraced former agent who's grappling with the guilt of failing Ethan on a former mission. That sub-plot works very well among the rest of the action, and it's a clever way of injecting a bit of heart into the mission. 6. "Mission: Impossible 3"Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt and Keri Russell as Lindsey Farris in "Mission: Impossible 3." Paramount Pictures Two words: JJ Abrams. The "Lost" and "Fringe" creator made his big screen debut in 2006 with "Mission: Impossible 3," which takes a mid-noughties approach to the Impossible Mission Force and gives it a brutal edge.The sequel pits Ethan, Luther Stickell, Zhen Lei, and Declan Gormleyagainst a nefarious arms dealer played by the incomparable Phillip Seymour Hoffman.Part of what elevates "Mission: Impossible 3" from previous films is that it never actually explains what Ethan and the gang are chasing. It's known only by its mysterious codename, the Rabbit's Foot. It could be an infectious disease, a computer virus, a hard drive teeming with currency, or nuclear codes — and that's what makes it so compelling. It's also refreshing to see Ethan settled and in love with Michelle Monahan's Julia Meade. What does married life look like for a superspy? How does that complicate his responsibility to save the world? The sequel feels very busy, as Abrams packs a lot into a tight two-hour run time. And some parts don't quite work, like Ethan's dynamic with his young mentee Lindsey Farris. But there are some stellar sequences throughout, like the ballistic shoot-out on the bridge, which is an eye-popping piece of action choreography. 5. "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning"Tom Cruise in "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning." Skydance/Paramount Pictures "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning" is the sequel to 2023's "Dead Reckoning," and sees Hunt race to stop an assassin known as Gabrielfrom controlling a sentient AI called the Entity. Just to raise the stakes, the Entity has already taken control of the world's nuclear weapons and plans to wipe out humanity.While the 2025 movie is billed as the final entry in the franchise, its story doesn't quite live up to the high expectations set by "Dead Reckoning." The first hour is bogged down by lengthy exposition and generic action movie silliness.That being said, as soon as the action picks up and Cruise embraces his adrenaline junkie persona once more, "The Final Reckoning" provides a breathtaking cinematic experience.Whether it's the suspenseful scuba dive into a wrecked submarine or how Hunt climbs between two biplanes in the sky to fight Gabriel, the film's ambitious sequences deserve to be seen on the big screen. 4. "Mission: Impossible"Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt in "Mission: Impossible." Paramount Pictures Taken from the 1966 TV series of the same name, 1996's "Mission: Impossible" introduces Cruise's Ethan Hunt, a field agent working for Jim Phelps, the main character from the show. It has audiences instantly on their toes when Ethan's entire team, including Phelps, are assassinated by a double agent in the opening — forcing our hero to go on the run after being framed for their deaths."Mission: Impossible" earned itself a place in cinema history thanks to the brilliantly intense break-in scene, in which Cruise's Hunt hacks into a CIA mainframe computer while suspended on cables.And of course, the high-octane ending on top of a Channel Tunnel train is a pulse-pounding affair set to the iconic theme music. Cruise effortlessly brings Hunt to life alongside top-notch performances from Voight, Kristin Scott Thomas, and Ving Rhames, which really help sell the paranoid atmosphere of the film 3. "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation"Rebecca Ferguson as Ilsa Faust in "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation." Paramount Pictures "Rogue Nation" is where frequent Tom Cruise collaborator Christopher McQuarrie properly put his stamp on the franchise. McQuarrie expands the world in a fascinating way with the introduction of the Syndicate, a vast organization made up of rogue agents from every intelligence agency on the planet.Their missionis to create disorder and chaos to destabilize the global intelligence community, although their true goals don't become apparent until 2018's "Mission: Impossible - Fallout." Hunt is determined to root out the Syndicate, and its sinister leader, Solomon Lane."Rogue Nation" also introduces Ilsa Faust, an enigmatic British agent who has a delicious will-they-won't-they dynamic with Cruise's hero.A brawl in the rigging above an opera stage in Vienna is a stunning highlight, as is Cruise's underwater dive to retrieve a computer chip from a submerged safe. Cruise broke the world record for holding his breath for six minutes while completing that stunt in 2014. 2. "Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One"Esai Morales as Gabriel and Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt in "Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One." Paramount Pictures "Dead Reckoning Part One" sees Hunt's IMF team chasing a key that will lead them to an unstoppable AI that could wreak havoc on the world.And, of course, every government agency in the world wants to get their hands on it, so Hunt and his team are effectively on the run from everyone. "Dead Reckoning's" focus on AI gives it a grounding in the real world, but the film also continues to elevate the sheer scale of action that audiences have come to expect from the "Mission: Impossible" franchise. That jaw-dropping mountain jump at the movie's climax has to be seen to be believed, and it only gets more bonkers after that.It's a testament to Cruise and McQuarrie that the film feels fresh and new — even if the script does drag on at points. Then again, audiences are coming to see Cruise throw himself off a mountain, not to hear Oscar-winning dialogue. 1. "Mission: Impossible - Fallout"Tom Cruise in "Mission: Impossible - Fallout." Paramount There's no question that McQuarrie's "Mission: Impossible - Fallout" is the best movie in the franchise, which is impressive considering it's the sixth outing for Hunt and the gang. It continues the Syndicate storyline from "Rogue Nation" and dives further into Solomon Lane's scheme. He wants to destabilize the world by irradiating the Siachen Glacier, which supplies water to India, Pakistan, and China. This would kill off a third of the world's population and drastically change society in the process.  But most of the story revolves around a CIA and IMF mole who goes by the codename 'John Lark.'The hunt to find this rogue agent crosses the world, introducing the likes of Henry Cavill's CIA agent August Walker and Vanessa Kirby's underworld matriarch, Alanna Mitsopolis. The scope of McQuarrie's movie is massive, and its huge stunts mirror that size. A gobsmacking scene sees Hunt dive with Walker from a plane and parachute into Paris. Cruise shot the stunt alongside a cameraman to properly capture the chaotic dive. Then, of course, there's the film's exhilarating helicopter chase through a New Zealand mountain range — just another example of McQuarrie and Cruise's commitment to filming these stunts in the most jaw-dropping way possible."Fallout" is a thrilling chapter of the "Mission: Impossible" franchise that deepens the audience's understanding of Cruise's hero while delivering a stunning cinematic experience. #all #tom #cruise039s #039mission #impossible039
    WWW.BUSINESSINSIDER.COM
    All of Tom Cruise's 'Mission: Impossible' movies, ranked from worst to best
    Tom Cruise is taking on one last daring adventure in "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning," which pits Ethan Hunt against an evil AI that threatens to destroy the world.The actor has been the face of the franchise since the first movie in 1996, and has starred in eight films in total.The Impossible Mission Force (yes, really) first debuted in the "Mission: Impossible" TV series in 1966, which starred Steven Hill and Peter Graves and ran for six seasons until 1973, before it was revived for another two seasons on ABC in 1988.With the franchise set to end with "The Final Reckoning," here are all the "Mission: Impossible" movies, ranked. 8. "Mission: Impossible 2" (2000) Tom Cruise riding a motorbike in "Mission: Impossible 2." Paramount Pictures "Mission: Impossible 2" should be given way more love than it gets, mainly because the Hong Kong cinema legend John Woo helmed it. Yes, the "Hard Boiled" and "Bullet in the Head" director brought his signature bullet ballet style to the "Mission: Impossible" sequel, with all the slow-motion flair you could ask for.Is it cheesy? Sure. Does the script need some work? Definitely. Is there any smart subtext or meaning underneath all the action? Absolutely not. This is a peak 2000s action movie, and it knows it. "Mission: Impossible 2" is so over the top that once you've made peace with it, it's best to just go along for the ride. Come on, Tom Cruise and Dougray Scott play motorbike chicken with each other before a midair tackle sends them both crashing to the ground. What's not to love? It's the type of vehicular chaos that the "Fast & Furious" franchise's Dominic Toretto would be proud of.Even so, "Mission: Impossible 2" ranks at the bottom of the bunch. 7. "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol" (2011) Tom Cruise on the side of the Burj Khalifa in "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol." Paramount Pictures The 2011 film "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol" takes the franchise into the modern era. It follows Hunt and his team as they're forced to go on the run when they're framed for bombing the Kremlin.It quickly becomes a race to stop the villainous Kurt Hendricks (Michael Nyqvist), who wants to start a nuclear war so that only the strongest members of humanity will survive. It's this plot that keeps "Ghost Protocol" from ascending the ranking, because, as spy thrillers go, stopping a nuclear war feels predictable, and the film fails to do anything unique with the premise. Plus, there's nothing particularly extraordinary about Hendricks as a baddie.But generic plot devices aside, the film features some brilliant fights and gripping set pieces. The stand-out moment is when Cruise's hero climbs the Burj Khalifa in Dubai with nothing but sticky gloves and rope.One of the most surprising elements of the film is Jeremy Renner's William Brandt, a disgraced former agent who's grappling with the guilt of failing Ethan on a former mission. That sub-plot works very well among the rest of the action, and it's a clever way of injecting a bit of heart into the mission. 6. "Mission: Impossible 3" (2006) Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt and Keri Russell as Lindsey Farris in "Mission: Impossible 3." Paramount Pictures Two words: JJ Abrams. The "Lost" and "Fringe" creator made his big screen debut in 2006 with "Mission: Impossible 3," which takes a mid-noughties approach to the Impossible Mission Force and gives it a brutal edge.The sequel pits Ethan, Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames), Zhen Lei (Maggie Q), and Declan Gormley (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) against a nefarious arms dealer played by the incomparable Phillip Seymour Hoffman.Part of what elevates "Mission: Impossible 3" from previous films is that it never actually explains what Ethan and the gang are chasing. It's known only by its mysterious codename, the Rabbit's Foot. It could be an infectious disease, a computer virus, a hard drive teeming with currency, or nuclear codes — and that's what makes it so compelling. It's also refreshing to see Ethan settled and in love with Michelle Monahan's Julia Meade. What does married life look like for a superspy? How does that complicate his responsibility to save the world? The sequel feels very busy, as Abrams packs a lot into a tight two-hour run time. And some parts don't quite work, like Ethan's dynamic with his young mentee Lindsey Farris (Keri Russell). But there are some stellar sequences throughout, like the ballistic shoot-out on the bridge, which is an eye-popping piece of action choreography. 5. "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning" (2025) Tom Cruise in "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning." Skydance/Paramount Pictures "Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning" is the sequel to 2023's "Dead Reckoning," and sees Hunt race to stop an assassin known as Gabriel (Esai Morales) from controlling a sentient AI called the Entity. Just to raise the stakes, the Entity has already taken control of the world's nuclear weapons and plans to wipe out humanity.While the 2025 movie is billed as the final entry in the franchise, its story doesn't quite live up to the high expectations set by "Dead Reckoning." The first hour is bogged down by lengthy exposition and generic action movie silliness.That being said, as soon as the action picks up and Cruise embraces his adrenaline junkie persona once more, "The Final Reckoning" provides a breathtaking cinematic experience.Whether it's the suspenseful scuba dive into a wrecked submarine or how Hunt climbs between two biplanes in the sky to fight Gabriel, the film's ambitious sequences deserve to be seen on the big screen. 4. "Mission: Impossible" (1996) Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt in "Mission: Impossible." Paramount Pictures Taken from the 1966 TV series of the same name, 1996's "Mission: Impossible" introduces Cruise's Ethan Hunt, a field agent working for Jim Phelps (Jon Voight), the main character from the show. It has audiences instantly on their toes when Ethan's entire team, including Phelps, are assassinated by a double agent in the opening — forcing our hero to go on the run after being framed for their deaths."Mission: Impossible" earned itself a place in cinema history thanks to the brilliantly intense break-in scene, in which Cruise's Hunt hacks into a CIA mainframe computer while suspended on cables.And of course, the high-octane ending on top of a Channel Tunnel train is a pulse-pounding affair set to the iconic theme music. Cruise effortlessly brings Hunt to life alongside top-notch performances from Voight, Kristin Scott Thomas, and Ving Rhames, which really help sell the paranoid atmosphere of the film 3. "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation" (2015) Rebecca Ferguson as Ilsa Faust in "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation." Paramount Pictures "Rogue Nation" is where frequent Tom Cruise collaborator Christopher McQuarrie properly put his stamp on the franchise. McQuarrie expands the world in a fascinating way with the introduction of the Syndicate, a vast organization made up of rogue agents from every intelligence agency on the planet.Their mission (should they choose to accept it) is to create disorder and chaos to destabilize the global intelligence community, although their true goals don't become apparent until 2018's "Mission: Impossible - Fallout." Hunt is determined to root out the Syndicate, and its sinister leader, Solomon Lane (Sean Harris)."Rogue Nation" also introduces Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson), an enigmatic British agent who has a delicious will-they-won't-they dynamic with Cruise's hero.A brawl in the rigging above an opera stage in Vienna is a stunning highlight, as is Cruise's underwater dive to retrieve a computer chip from a submerged safe. Cruise broke the world record for holding his breath for six minutes while completing that stunt in 2014. 2. "Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One" (2023) Esai Morales as Gabriel and Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt in "Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One." Paramount Pictures "Dead Reckoning Part One" sees Hunt's IMF team chasing a key that will lead them to an unstoppable AI that could wreak havoc on the world.And, of course, every government agency in the world wants to get their hands on it, so Hunt and his team are effectively on the run from everyone. "Dead Reckoning's" focus on AI gives it a grounding in the real world, but the film also continues to elevate the sheer scale of action that audiences have come to expect from the "Mission: Impossible" franchise. That jaw-dropping mountain jump at the movie's climax has to be seen to be believed, and it only gets more bonkers after that.It's a testament to Cruise and McQuarrie that the film feels fresh and new — even if the script does drag on at points. Then again, audiences are coming to see Cruise throw himself off a mountain, not to hear Oscar-winning dialogue. 1. "Mission: Impossible - Fallout" (2018) Tom Cruise in "Mission: Impossible - Fallout." Paramount There's no question that McQuarrie's "Mission: Impossible - Fallout" is the best movie in the franchise, which is impressive considering it's the sixth outing for Hunt and the gang. It continues the Syndicate storyline from "Rogue Nation" and dives further into Solomon Lane's scheme. He wants to destabilize the world by irradiating the Siachen Glacier, which supplies water to India, Pakistan, and China. This would kill off a third of the world's population and drastically change society in the process.  But most of the story revolves around a CIA and IMF mole who goes by the codename 'John Lark.'The hunt to find this rogue agent crosses the world, introducing the likes of Henry Cavill's CIA agent August Walker and Vanessa Kirby's underworld matriarch, Alanna Mitsopolis. The scope of McQuarrie's movie is massive, and its huge stunts mirror that size. A gobsmacking scene sees Hunt dive with Walker from a plane and parachute into Paris. Cruise shot the stunt alongside a cameraman to properly capture the chaotic dive. Then, of course, there's the film's exhilarating helicopter chase through a New Zealand mountain range — just another example of McQuarrie and Cruise's commitment to filming these stunts in the most jaw-dropping way possible."Fallout" is a thrilling chapter of the "Mission: Impossible" franchise that deepens the audience's understanding of Cruise's hero while delivering a stunning cinematic experience.
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • 7 free games we’re playing this long weekend to keep our brain sharp

    7 free games we’re playing this long weekend to keep our brain sharp

    Tamar Hela for Arkadium

    Tamar Hela for Arkadium

    Published May 23, 2025 8:00am

    These games are the perfect way to spend the long weekendAh, the long weekend – that blissful stretch of time when the pace of life slows down just enough for us to breathe, relax, and recharge. Whether it’s a bank holiday or you’ve simply taken a well-earned day off, weekends are the perfect opportunity to take a break from the chaos of daily life.
    For some people, that break means heading outdoors for an adventure. Others may catch up with friends over drinks or dance the night away.
    But what if your idea of relaxation leans toward a quiet but cosy solitude? No problem! There’s absolutely nothing wrong with staying in and unwinding with a few rounds of online games.
    Online games offer you an easy, enjoyable escape without needing to spend a single penny. They come in a massive variety of genres – from soothing puzzles to mind-bending brain teasers and fast-paced timed challenges – so there’s always something to suit every mood.
    They help pass the time and offer the benefits of keeping your brain sharp and engaged while still feeling relaxed.
    We’re spotlighting some of the most entertainingArkadium games you can play for free. So grab a cuppa, put your feet up, and let’s explore some brilliant ways to unwind this weekend, all from the comfort of your favourite device.

    Easy Crossword

    A classic for a reason, thiseasy crossword is just challenging enough to get your brain ticking without leaving you stumped. It’s ideal for a slow morning with a coffee in hand, giving you that satisfying ‘a-ha!’ moment when the clues click into place. With a fresh puzzle every day, it’s a great way to keep your mind sharp over the weekend.

    Mahjong Candy

    Sweet, colourful, and endlessly replayable,Mahjong Candy is a sugary twist on the traditional tile-matching game that’s visually delightful and mentally engaging. Its fast pace makes it perfect for quick bursts of fun, and the satisfying animations add a playful charm. It’s a solo game that’s easy to get into and hard to put down.

    Cooking Live

    Channel your inner chef and keep your reflexes sharp with thisfast-paced cooking game. You’ll need to juggle multiple tasks at once by prepping, cooking, and serving hungry customers under time pressure. It’s a vibrant, high-energy option that’s as entertaining as it is addictive. Although it’s great fun for solo play, you can’t help but compare scores with your mates.

    Deal or No Deal

    Deal or No Deal is an entertaining way to test your luck and decision-making skills. You’ll feel the tension build with each briefcase as you try to outwit the banker and walk away with the highest virtual prize. While it’s a single-player game, it’s also a crowd-pleaser that’s fun to play alongside friends or family for a bit of friendly competition.

    Word Scramble

    Word lovers, rejoice!Word Scramble is a great brain workout that challenges your vocabulary in a rapid format. Each round gives you a fresh set of letters and a ticking clock, pushing you to think creatively under pressure. While you play solo, racing against friends to beat each other’s word counts adds a competitive edge. And if that’s not enough words, more word games are available around the corner from Arkadium.

    Texas Holdem
    Fancy a bit of strategy and competition? A weekend poker classic,Texas Holdem is the perfect mix of luck, bluffing, and brains. You can play against real opponents, which adds excitement and unpredictability to every hand. It’s a brilliant pick for weekend game nights when you want something a bit more tactical.

    Ballistic

    Fast, colourful, and satisfying to play, this game is the kind ofarcade-style challenge that hooks you instantly. Your goal is to break through layers of blocks with precision and planning, all while the balls bounce and ricochet in chaotic, satisfying patterns. It’s perfect for winding down after a long day or squeezing in a few energetic rounds between weekend plans.

    More Trending

    Discover other addictive games atFreegames at Metro.

    GameCentral
    Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content.
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy
    #free #games #were #playing #this
    7 free games we’re playing this long weekend to keep our brain sharp
    7 free games we’re playing this long weekend to keep our brain sharp Tamar Hela for Arkadium Tamar Hela for Arkadium Published May 23, 2025 8:00am These games are the perfect way to spend the long weekendAh, the long weekend – that blissful stretch of time when the pace of life slows down just enough for us to breathe, relax, and recharge. Whether it’s a bank holiday or you’ve simply taken a well-earned day off, weekends are the perfect opportunity to take a break from the chaos of daily life. For some people, that break means heading outdoors for an adventure. Others may catch up with friends over drinks or dance the night away. But what if your idea of relaxation leans toward a quiet but cosy solitude? No problem! There’s absolutely nothing wrong with staying in and unwinding with a few rounds of online games. Online games offer you an easy, enjoyable escape without needing to spend a single penny. They come in a massive variety of genres – from soothing puzzles to mind-bending brain teasers and fast-paced timed challenges – so there’s always something to suit every mood. They help pass the time and offer the benefits of keeping your brain sharp and engaged while still feeling relaxed. We’re spotlighting some of the most entertainingArkadium games you can play for free. So grab a cuppa, put your feet up, and let’s explore some brilliant ways to unwind this weekend, all from the comfort of your favourite device. Easy Crossword A classic for a reason, thiseasy crossword is just challenging enough to get your brain ticking without leaving you stumped. It’s ideal for a slow morning with a coffee in hand, giving you that satisfying ‘a-ha!’ moment when the clues click into place. With a fresh puzzle every day, it’s a great way to keep your mind sharp over the weekend. Mahjong Candy Sweet, colourful, and endlessly replayable,Mahjong Candy is a sugary twist on the traditional tile-matching game that’s visually delightful and mentally engaging. Its fast pace makes it perfect for quick bursts of fun, and the satisfying animations add a playful charm. It’s a solo game that’s easy to get into and hard to put down. Cooking Live Channel your inner chef and keep your reflexes sharp with thisfast-paced cooking game. You’ll need to juggle multiple tasks at once by prepping, cooking, and serving hungry customers under time pressure. It’s a vibrant, high-energy option that’s as entertaining as it is addictive. Although it’s great fun for solo play, you can’t help but compare scores with your mates. Deal or No Deal Deal or No Deal is an entertaining way to test your luck and decision-making skills. You’ll feel the tension build with each briefcase as you try to outwit the banker and walk away with the highest virtual prize. While it’s a single-player game, it’s also a crowd-pleaser that’s fun to play alongside friends or family for a bit of friendly competition. Word Scramble Word lovers, rejoice!Word Scramble is a great brain workout that challenges your vocabulary in a rapid format. Each round gives you a fresh set of letters and a ticking clock, pushing you to think creatively under pressure. While you play solo, racing against friends to beat each other’s word counts adds a competitive edge. And if that’s not enough words, more word games are available around the corner from Arkadium. Texas Holdem Fancy a bit of strategy and competition? A weekend poker classic,Texas Holdem is the perfect mix of luck, bluffing, and brains. You can play against real opponents, which adds excitement and unpredictability to every hand. It’s a brilliant pick for weekend game nights when you want something a bit more tactical. Ballistic Fast, colourful, and satisfying to play, this game is the kind ofarcade-style challenge that hooks you instantly. Your goal is to break through layers of blocks with precision and planning, all while the balls bounce and ricochet in chaotic, satisfying patterns. It’s perfect for winding down after a long day or squeezing in a few energetic rounds between weekend plans. More Trending Discover other addictive games atFreegames at Metro. GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy #free #games #were #playing #this
    METRO.CO.UK
    7 free games we’re playing this long weekend to keep our brain sharp
    7 free games we’re playing this long weekend to keep our brain sharp Tamar Hela for Arkadium Tamar Hela for Arkadium Published May 23, 2025 8:00am These games are the perfect way to spend the long weekend (Picture: Getty Images) Ah, the long weekend – that blissful stretch of time when the pace of life slows down just enough for us to breathe, relax, and recharge. Whether it’s a bank holiday or you’ve simply taken a well-earned day off, weekends are the perfect opportunity to take a break from the chaos of daily life. For some people, that break means heading outdoors for an adventure. Others may catch up with friends over drinks or dance the night away. But what if your idea of relaxation leans toward a quiet but cosy solitude? No problem! There’s absolutely nothing wrong with staying in and unwinding with a few rounds of online games. Online games offer you an easy, enjoyable escape without needing to spend a single penny. They come in a massive variety of genres – from soothing puzzles to mind-bending brain teasers and fast-paced timed challenges – so there’s always something to suit every mood. They help pass the time and offer the benefits of keeping your brain sharp and engaged while still feeling relaxed. We’re spotlighting some of the most entertainingArkadium games you can play for free. So grab a cuppa, put your feet up, and let’s explore some brilliant ways to unwind this weekend, all from the comfort of your favourite device. Easy Crossword A classic for a reason, thiseasy crossword is just challenging enough to get your brain ticking without leaving you stumped. It’s ideal for a slow morning with a coffee in hand, giving you that satisfying ‘a-ha!’ moment when the clues click into place. With a fresh puzzle every day, it’s a great way to keep your mind sharp over the weekend. Mahjong Candy Sweet, colourful, and endlessly replayable,Mahjong Candy is a sugary twist on the traditional tile-matching game that’s visually delightful and mentally engaging. Its fast pace makes it perfect for quick bursts of fun, and the satisfying animations add a playful charm. It’s a solo game that’s easy to get into and hard to put down. Cooking Live Channel your inner chef and keep your reflexes sharp with thisfast-paced cooking game. You’ll need to juggle multiple tasks at once by prepping, cooking, and serving hungry customers under time pressure. It’s a vibrant, high-energy option that’s as entertaining as it is addictive. Although it’s great fun for solo play, you can’t help but compare scores with your mates. Deal or No Deal Deal or No Deal is an entertaining way to test your luck and decision-making skills. You’ll feel the tension build with each briefcase as you try to outwit the banker and walk away with the highest virtual prize. While it’s a single-player game, it’s also a crowd-pleaser that’s fun to play alongside friends or family for a bit of friendly competition. Word Scramble Word lovers, rejoice!Word Scramble is a great brain workout that challenges your vocabulary in a rapid format. Each round gives you a fresh set of letters and a ticking clock, pushing you to think creatively under pressure. While you play solo, racing against friends to beat each other’s word counts adds a competitive edge. And if that’s not enough words, more word games are available around the corner from Arkadium. Texas Holdem Fancy a bit of strategy and competition? A weekend poker classic,Texas Holdem is the perfect mix of luck, bluffing, and brains. You can play against real opponents, which adds excitement and unpredictability to every hand. It’s a brilliant pick for weekend game nights when you want something a bit more tactical. Ballistic Fast, colourful, and satisfying to play, this game is the kind ofarcade-style challenge that hooks you instantly. Your goal is to break through layers of blocks with precision and planning, all while the balls bounce and ricochet in chaotic, satisfying patterns. It’s perfect for winding down after a long day or squeezing in a few energetic rounds between weekend plans. More Trending Discover other addictive games atFreegames at Metro. GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • Why Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ Won’t Shield the U.S. from Nuclear Strikes

    May 21, 202510 min readWhy Some Experts Call Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ Missile Shield a Dangerous FantasyThe White House’s -billion plan to protect the U.S. from nuclear annihilation will probably cost much more—and deliver far less—than has been claimed, says nuclear arms expert Jeffrey LewisBy Lee Billings U.S. President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House on May 20, 2025, during a briefing announcing his administration’s plan for the “Golden Dome” missile defense shield. Jim Watson/AFP via Getty ImagesDuring a briefing from the Oval Office this week, President Donald Trump revealed his administration’s plan for “Golden Dome”—an ambitious high-tech system meant to shield the U.S. from ballistic, cruise and hypersonic missile attacks launched by foreign adversaries. Flanked by senior officials, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the project’s newly selected leader, Gen. Michael Guetlein of the U.S. Space Force, Trump announced that Golden Dome will be completed within three years at a cost of billion.The program, which was among Trump’s campaign promises, derives its name from the Iron Dome missile defense system of Israel—a nation that’s geographically 400 times smaller than the U.S. Protecting the vastness of the U.S. demands very different capabilities than those of Iron Dome, which has successfully shot down rockets and missiles using ground-based interceptors. Most notably, Trump’s Golden Dome would need to expand into space—making it a successor to the Strategic Defense Initiativepursued by the Reagan administration in the 1980s. Better known by the mocking nickname “Star Wars,” SDI sought to neutralize the threat from the Soviet Union’s nuclear-warhead-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles by using space-based interceptors that could shoot them down midflight. But fearsome technical challenges kept SDI from getting anywhere close to that goal, despite tens of billions of dollars of federal expenditures.“We will truly be completing the job that President Reagan started 40 years ago, forever ending the missile threat to the American homeland,” Trump said during the briefing. Although the announcement was short on technical details, Trump also said Golden Dome “will deploy next-generation technologies across the land, sea and space, including space-based sensors and interceptors.” The program, which Guetlein has compared to the scale of the Manhattan Project in past remarks, has been allotted billion in a Republican spending bill that has yet to pass in Congress. But Golden Dome may ultimately cost much more than Trump’s staggering -billion sum. An independent assessment by the Congressional Budget Office estimates its price tag could be as high as billion, and the program has drawn domestic and international outcries that it risks sparking a new, globe-destabilizing arms race and weaponizing Earth’s fragile orbital environment.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.To get a better sense of what’s at stake—and whether Golden Dome has a better chance of success than its failed forebears—Scientific American spoke with Jeffrey Lewis, an expert on the geopolitics of nuclear weaponry at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies.It’s been a while, but when last I checked, most experts considered this sort of plan a nonstarter because the U.S. is simply too big of a target. Has something changed?Well, yes and no. The killer argument against space-based interceptors in the 1980s was that it would take thousands of them, and there was just no way to put up that many satellites. Today that’s no longer true. SpaceX alone has put up more than 7,000 Starlink satellites. Launch costs are much cheaper now, and there are more launch vehicles available. So, for the first time, you can say, “Oh, well, I could have a 7,000-satellite constellation. Do I want to do that?” Whereas, when the Reagan administration was talking about this, it was just la-la land.But let’s be clear: this does not solve all the other problems with the general idea—or the Golden Dome version in particular.What are some of those other problems?Just talking about space-based interceptors, there are a couplemy colleagues and I have pointed out. We ran some numbers using the old SDI-era calculation fromEd Teller and Greg Canavan—so we couldn’t be accused of using some hippie version of the calculation, right? And what this and other independent assessments show is that the number of interceptors you need is super-duper sensitive to lots of things. For instance, it’s not like this is a “one satellite to one missile” situation—because the physics demands that these satellites ... have to be in low-Earth orbit, and that means they’re going to be constantly moving over different parts of the planet.So if you want to defend against just one missile, you still need a whole constellation. And if you want to defend against two missiles, then you basically need twice as many interceptors, and so on.You probably have to shoot down missiles during the boost phase, when the warheads are still attached. For SDI, the U.S. was dealing with Soviet liquid-fueled missiles that would boost, or burn, for about four minutes. Well, modern ones burn for less than three—that’s a whole minute that you no longer have. This is actually much worse than it sounds because you’re probably unable to shoot for the first minute or so. Even with modern detectorsmuch better thanwe had in the 1980s, you may not see the missile until it rises above the clouds. And once it does, your sensors, your computers, still have to say, “Aha! That is a missile!” And then you have to ensure that you’re not shooting down some ordinary space launch—so the system says, “I see a missile. May I shoot at it, please?” And someone or something has to give the go-ahead. So let’s just say you’ll have a good minute to shoot it down; this means your space-based interceptor has to be right there, ready to go, right? But by the time you’re getting permission to shoot, the satellite that was overhead to do that is now too far away, and so the next satellite has to be coming there. This scales up really, really fast.Presumably artificial intelligence and other technologies could be leveraged to make that sort of command and control more agile and responsive. But clearly there are still limits here—AI can’t be some sort of panacea.Sure, that’s right. But technological progress overall hasn’t made the threat environment better. Instead it’s gotten much worse.Let’s get back to the sheer physics-induced numbers for a moment, which AI can’t really do much about. That daunting scaling I mentioned also depends on the quality of your interceptors, your kill vehicles—which, by the way, are still going to be grotesquely expensive even if launch costs are low. If your interceptors can rapidly accelerate to eight or 10 kilometers per second, your constellation can be smaller. If they only reach 4 km/s, your constellation has to be huge.The point is: any claim that you can do this with relatively low numbers—let’s say 2,000 interceptors—assumes a series of improbable miracles occurring in quick succession to deliver the very best outcome that could possibly happen. So it’s not going to happen that way, even if, in principle, it could.So you’re telling me there’s a chance! No, seriously, I see what you mean. The arguments in favor of this working seem rather contrived. No system is perfect, and just one missile getting through can still have catastrophic results. And we haven’t even talked about adversarial countermeasures yet.There’s a joke that’s sometimes made about this: “We play chess, and they don’t move their pieces.” That seems to be the operative assumption here: that other nations will sit idly by as we build a complex, vulnerable system to nullify any strategic nuclear capability they have. And of course, it’s not valid at all. Why do you think the Chinese are building massive fields of missile silos? It’s to counteract or overwhelm this sort of thing. Why do you think the Russians are making moves to put a nuclear weapon in orbit? It’s to mass kill any satellite constellation that would shoot down their missiles.Golden Dome proponents may say, “Oh, we’ll shoot that down, too, before it goes off.” Well, good luck. You put a high-yield nuclear weapon on a booster, and the split second it gets above the clouds, sure, you might see it—but now it sees you, too, before you can shoot. All it has to do at that point is detonate to blow a giant hole in your defenses, and that’s game over. And by the way, this rosy scenario assumes your adversaries don’t interfere with all your satellites passing over their territory in peacetime. We know that won’t be the case—they’ll light them up with sensor-dazzling lasers, at minimum!You’ve compared any feasible space-based system to Starlink and noted that, similar to Starlink, these interceptors will need to be in low-Earth orbit. That means their orbits will rapidly decay from atmospheric drag, so just like Starlink’s satellites, they’d need to be constantly replaced, too, right?Ha, yes, that’s right. With Starlink, you’re looking at a three-to-five-year life cycle, which means annually replacing one third to one fifth of a constellation.So let’s say Golden Dome is 10,000 satellites; this would mean the best-case scenario is that you’re replacing 2,000 per year. Now, let’s just go along with what the Trump administration is saying, that they can get these things really cheap. I’m going to guess a “really cheap” mass-produced kill vehicle would still run you million a pop, easily. Just multiply million by 2,000, and your answer is billion. So under these assumptions, we’d be spending billion per year just to maintain the constellation. That’s not even factoring in operations.And that’s not to mention associated indirect costs from potentially nasty effects on the upper atmosphere and the orbital environment from all the launches and reentries.That, yes—among many other costly things.I have to ask: If fundamental physics makes this extremely expensive idea blatantly incapable of delivering on its promises, what’s really going on when the U.S. president and the secretary of defense announce their intention to pump billion into it for a three-year crash program? Some critics claim this kind of thing is really about transferring taxpayer dollars to a few big aerospace companies and other defense contractors.Well, I wouldn’t say it’s quite that simple.Ballistic missile defense is incredibly appealing to some people for reasons besides money. In technical terms, it’s an elegant solution to the problem of nuclear annihilation—even though it’s not really feasible. For some people, it’s just cool, right? And at a deeper level, many people just don’t like the concept of deterrence—mutual assured destruction and all that—because, remember, the status quo is this: If Russia launches 1,000 nuclear weapons at us—or 100 or 10 or even just one—then we are going to murder every single person in Russia with an immediate nuclear counterattack. That’s how deterrence works. We’re not going to wait for those missiles to land so we can count up our dead to calibrate a more nuanced response. That’s official U.S. policy, and I don’t think anyone wants it to be this way forever. But it’s arguably what’s prevented any nuclear exchange from occurring to date.But not everyone believes in the power of deterrence, and so they’re looking for some kind of technological escape. I don’t think this fantasy is that different from Elon Musk thinking he’s going to go live on Mars when climate change ruins Earth: In both cases, instead of doing the really hard things that seem necessary to actually make this planet better, we’re talking about people who think they can just buy their way out of the problem. A lot of people—a lot of men, especially—really hate vulnerability, and this idea that you can just tech your way out of it is very appealing to them. You know, “Oh, what vulnerability? Yeah, there’s an app for that.”You’re saying this isn’t about money?Well, I imagine this is going to be good for at least a couple of SpaceX Falcon Heavy or Starship launches per year for Elon Musk. And you don’t have to do too many of those launches for the value proposition to work out: You build and run Starlink, you put up another constellation of space-based missile defense interceptors, and suddenly you’ve got a viable business model for these fancy huge rockets that can also take you to Mars, right?Given your knowledge of science history—of how dispassionate physics keeps showing space-based ballistic missile defense is essentially unworkable, yet the idea just keeps coming back—how does this latest resurgence make you feel?When I was younger, I would have been frustrated, but now I just accept human beings don’t learn. We make the same mistakes over and over again. You have to laugh at human folly because I do think most of these people are sincere, you know. They’re trying to get rich, sure, but they’re also trying to protect the country, and they’re doing it through ways they think about the world—which admittedly are stupid. But, hey, they’re trying. It’s very disappointing, but if you just laugh at them, they’re quite amusing.I think most people would have trouble laughing about something as devastating as nuclear war—or about an ultraexpensive plan to protect against it that’s doomed to failure and could spark a new arms race.I guess if you’re looking for a hopeful thought, it’s that we’ve tried this before, and it didn’t really work, and that’s likely to happen again.So how do you think it will actually play out this time around?I think this will be a gigantic waste of money that collapses under its own weight.They’ll put up a couple of interceptors, and they’ll test those against a boosting ballistic missile, and they’ll eventually get a hit. And they’ll use that to justify putting up more, and they’ll probably even manage to make a thin constellation—with the downside, of course, being that the Russians and the Chinese and the North Koreans and everybody else will make corresponding investments in ways to kill this system.And then it will start to really feel expensive, in part because it will be complicating and compromising things like Starlink and other commercial satellite constellations—which, I’d like to point out, are almost certainly uninsured in orbit because you can’t insure against acts of war. So think about that: if the Russians or anyone else detonate a nuclear weapon in orbit because of something like Golden Dome, Elon Musk’s entire constellation is dead, and he’s probably just out the cash.The fact is: these days we rely on space-based assets much more than most people realize, yet Earth orbit is such a fragile environment that we could muck it up in many different ways that carry really nasty long-term consequences. I worry about that a lot. Space used to be a benign environment, even throughout the entire cold war, but having an arms race there will make it malign. So Golden Dome is probably going to make everyone’s life a little bit more dangerous—at least until we, hopefully, come to our senses and decide to try something different.
    #why #trumps #golden #dome #wont
    Why Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ Won’t Shield the U.S. from Nuclear Strikes
    May 21, 202510 min readWhy Some Experts Call Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ Missile Shield a Dangerous FantasyThe White House’s -billion plan to protect the U.S. from nuclear annihilation will probably cost much more—and deliver far less—than has been claimed, says nuclear arms expert Jeffrey LewisBy Lee Billings U.S. President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House on May 20, 2025, during a briefing announcing his administration’s plan for the “Golden Dome” missile defense shield. Jim Watson/AFP via Getty ImagesDuring a briefing from the Oval Office this week, President Donald Trump revealed his administration’s plan for “Golden Dome”—an ambitious high-tech system meant to shield the U.S. from ballistic, cruise and hypersonic missile attacks launched by foreign adversaries. Flanked by senior officials, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the project’s newly selected leader, Gen. Michael Guetlein of the U.S. Space Force, Trump announced that Golden Dome will be completed within three years at a cost of billion.The program, which was among Trump’s campaign promises, derives its name from the Iron Dome missile defense system of Israel—a nation that’s geographically 400 times smaller than the U.S. Protecting the vastness of the U.S. demands very different capabilities than those of Iron Dome, which has successfully shot down rockets and missiles using ground-based interceptors. Most notably, Trump’s Golden Dome would need to expand into space—making it a successor to the Strategic Defense Initiativepursued by the Reagan administration in the 1980s. Better known by the mocking nickname “Star Wars,” SDI sought to neutralize the threat from the Soviet Union’s nuclear-warhead-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles by using space-based interceptors that could shoot them down midflight. But fearsome technical challenges kept SDI from getting anywhere close to that goal, despite tens of billions of dollars of federal expenditures.“We will truly be completing the job that President Reagan started 40 years ago, forever ending the missile threat to the American homeland,” Trump said during the briefing. Although the announcement was short on technical details, Trump also said Golden Dome “will deploy next-generation technologies across the land, sea and space, including space-based sensors and interceptors.” The program, which Guetlein has compared to the scale of the Manhattan Project in past remarks, has been allotted billion in a Republican spending bill that has yet to pass in Congress. But Golden Dome may ultimately cost much more than Trump’s staggering -billion sum. An independent assessment by the Congressional Budget Office estimates its price tag could be as high as billion, and the program has drawn domestic and international outcries that it risks sparking a new, globe-destabilizing arms race and weaponizing Earth’s fragile orbital environment.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.To get a better sense of what’s at stake—and whether Golden Dome has a better chance of success than its failed forebears—Scientific American spoke with Jeffrey Lewis, an expert on the geopolitics of nuclear weaponry at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies.It’s been a while, but when last I checked, most experts considered this sort of plan a nonstarter because the U.S. is simply too big of a target. Has something changed?Well, yes and no. The killer argument against space-based interceptors in the 1980s was that it would take thousands of them, and there was just no way to put up that many satellites. Today that’s no longer true. SpaceX alone has put up more than 7,000 Starlink satellites. Launch costs are much cheaper now, and there are more launch vehicles available. So, for the first time, you can say, “Oh, well, I could have a 7,000-satellite constellation. Do I want to do that?” Whereas, when the Reagan administration was talking about this, it was just la-la land.But let’s be clear: this does not solve all the other problems with the general idea—or the Golden Dome version in particular.What are some of those other problems?Just talking about space-based interceptors, there are a couplemy colleagues and I have pointed out. We ran some numbers using the old SDI-era calculation fromEd Teller and Greg Canavan—so we couldn’t be accused of using some hippie version of the calculation, right? And what this and other independent assessments show is that the number of interceptors you need is super-duper sensitive to lots of things. For instance, it’s not like this is a “one satellite to one missile” situation—because the physics demands that these satellites ... have to be in low-Earth orbit, and that means they’re going to be constantly moving over different parts of the planet.So if you want to defend against just one missile, you still need a whole constellation. And if you want to defend against two missiles, then you basically need twice as many interceptors, and so on.You probably have to shoot down missiles during the boost phase, when the warheads are still attached. For SDI, the U.S. was dealing with Soviet liquid-fueled missiles that would boost, or burn, for about four minutes. Well, modern ones burn for less than three—that’s a whole minute that you no longer have. This is actually much worse than it sounds because you’re probably unable to shoot for the first minute or so. Even with modern detectorsmuch better thanwe had in the 1980s, you may not see the missile until it rises above the clouds. And once it does, your sensors, your computers, still have to say, “Aha! That is a missile!” And then you have to ensure that you’re not shooting down some ordinary space launch—so the system says, “I see a missile. May I shoot at it, please?” And someone or something has to give the go-ahead. So let’s just say you’ll have a good minute to shoot it down; this means your space-based interceptor has to be right there, ready to go, right? But by the time you’re getting permission to shoot, the satellite that was overhead to do that is now too far away, and so the next satellite has to be coming there. This scales up really, really fast.Presumably artificial intelligence and other technologies could be leveraged to make that sort of command and control more agile and responsive. But clearly there are still limits here—AI can’t be some sort of panacea.Sure, that’s right. But technological progress overall hasn’t made the threat environment better. Instead it’s gotten much worse.Let’s get back to the sheer physics-induced numbers for a moment, which AI can’t really do much about. That daunting scaling I mentioned also depends on the quality of your interceptors, your kill vehicles—which, by the way, are still going to be grotesquely expensive even if launch costs are low. If your interceptors can rapidly accelerate to eight or 10 kilometers per second, your constellation can be smaller. If they only reach 4 km/s, your constellation has to be huge.The point is: any claim that you can do this with relatively low numbers—let’s say 2,000 interceptors—assumes a series of improbable miracles occurring in quick succession to deliver the very best outcome that could possibly happen. So it’s not going to happen that way, even if, in principle, it could.So you’re telling me there’s a chance! No, seriously, I see what you mean. The arguments in favor of this working seem rather contrived. No system is perfect, and just one missile getting through can still have catastrophic results. And we haven’t even talked about adversarial countermeasures yet.There’s a joke that’s sometimes made about this: “We play chess, and they don’t move their pieces.” That seems to be the operative assumption here: that other nations will sit idly by as we build a complex, vulnerable system to nullify any strategic nuclear capability they have. And of course, it’s not valid at all. Why do you think the Chinese are building massive fields of missile silos? It’s to counteract or overwhelm this sort of thing. Why do you think the Russians are making moves to put a nuclear weapon in orbit? It’s to mass kill any satellite constellation that would shoot down their missiles.Golden Dome proponents may say, “Oh, we’ll shoot that down, too, before it goes off.” Well, good luck. You put a high-yield nuclear weapon on a booster, and the split second it gets above the clouds, sure, you might see it—but now it sees you, too, before you can shoot. All it has to do at that point is detonate to blow a giant hole in your defenses, and that’s game over. And by the way, this rosy scenario assumes your adversaries don’t interfere with all your satellites passing over their territory in peacetime. We know that won’t be the case—they’ll light them up with sensor-dazzling lasers, at minimum!You’ve compared any feasible space-based system to Starlink and noted that, similar to Starlink, these interceptors will need to be in low-Earth orbit. That means their orbits will rapidly decay from atmospheric drag, so just like Starlink’s satellites, they’d need to be constantly replaced, too, right?Ha, yes, that’s right. With Starlink, you’re looking at a three-to-five-year life cycle, which means annually replacing one third to one fifth of a constellation.So let’s say Golden Dome is 10,000 satellites; this would mean the best-case scenario is that you’re replacing 2,000 per year. Now, let’s just go along with what the Trump administration is saying, that they can get these things really cheap. I’m going to guess a “really cheap” mass-produced kill vehicle would still run you million a pop, easily. Just multiply million by 2,000, and your answer is billion. So under these assumptions, we’d be spending billion per year just to maintain the constellation. That’s not even factoring in operations.And that’s not to mention associated indirect costs from potentially nasty effects on the upper atmosphere and the orbital environment from all the launches and reentries.That, yes—among many other costly things.I have to ask: If fundamental physics makes this extremely expensive idea blatantly incapable of delivering on its promises, what’s really going on when the U.S. president and the secretary of defense announce their intention to pump billion into it for a three-year crash program? Some critics claim this kind of thing is really about transferring taxpayer dollars to a few big aerospace companies and other defense contractors.Well, I wouldn’t say it’s quite that simple.Ballistic missile defense is incredibly appealing to some people for reasons besides money. In technical terms, it’s an elegant solution to the problem of nuclear annihilation—even though it’s not really feasible. For some people, it’s just cool, right? And at a deeper level, many people just don’t like the concept of deterrence—mutual assured destruction and all that—because, remember, the status quo is this: If Russia launches 1,000 nuclear weapons at us—or 100 or 10 or even just one—then we are going to murder every single person in Russia with an immediate nuclear counterattack. That’s how deterrence works. We’re not going to wait for those missiles to land so we can count up our dead to calibrate a more nuanced response. That’s official U.S. policy, and I don’t think anyone wants it to be this way forever. But it’s arguably what’s prevented any nuclear exchange from occurring to date.But not everyone believes in the power of deterrence, and so they’re looking for some kind of technological escape. I don’t think this fantasy is that different from Elon Musk thinking he’s going to go live on Mars when climate change ruins Earth: In both cases, instead of doing the really hard things that seem necessary to actually make this planet better, we’re talking about people who think they can just buy their way out of the problem. A lot of people—a lot of men, especially—really hate vulnerability, and this idea that you can just tech your way out of it is very appealing to them. You know, “Oh, what vulnerability? Yeah, there’s an app for that.”You’re saying this isn’t about money?Well, I imagine this is going to be good for at least a couple of SpaceX Falcon Heavy or Starship launches per year for Elon Musk. And you don’t have to do too many of those launches for the value proposition to work out: You build and run Starlink, you put up another constellation of space-based missile defense interceptors, and suddenly you’ve got a viable business model for these fancy huge rockets that can also take you to Mars, right?Given your knowledge of science history—of how dispassionate physics keeps showing space-based ballistic missile defense is essentially unworkable, yet the idea just keeps coming back—how does this latest resurgence make you feel?When I was younger, I would have been frustrated, but now I just accept human beings don’t learn. We make the same mistakes over and over again. You have to laugh at human folly because I do think most of these people are sincere, you know. They’re trying to get rich, sure, but they’re also trying to protect the country, and they’re doing it through ways they think about the world—which admittedly are stupid. But, hey, they’re trying. It’s very disappointing, but if you just laugh at them, they’re quite amusing.I think most people would have trouble laughing about something as devastating as nuclear war—or about an ultraexpensive plan to protect against it that’s doomed to failure and could spark a new arms race.I guess if you’re looking for a hopeful thought, it’s that we’ve tried this before, and it didn’t really work, and that’s likely to happen again.So how do you think it will actually play out this time around?I think this will be a gigantic waste of money that collapses under its own weight.They’ll put up a couple of interceptors, and they’ll test those against a boosting ballistic missile, and they’ll eventually get a hit. And they’ll use that to justify putting up more, and they’ll probably even manage to make a thin constellation—with the downside, of course, being that the Russians and the Chinese and the North Koreans and everybody else will make corresponding investments in ways to kill this system.And then it will start to really feel expensive, in part because it will be complicating and compromising things like Starlink and other commercial satellite constellations—which, I’d like to point out, are almost certainly uninsured in orbit because you can’t insure against acts of war. So think about that: if the Russians or anyone else detonate a nuclear weapon in orbit because of something like Golden Dome, Elon Musk’s entire constellation is dead, and he’s probably just out the cash.The fact is: these days we rely on space-based assets much more than most people realize, yet Earth orbit is such a fragile environment that we could muck it up in many different ways that carry really nasty long-term consequences. I worry about that a lot. Space used to be a benign environment, even throughout the entire cold war, but having an arms race there will make it malign. So Golden Dome is probably going to make everyone’s life a little bit more dangerous—at least until we, hopefully, come to our senses and decide to try something different. #why #trumps #golden #dome #wont
    WWW.SCIENTIFICAMERICAN.COM
    Why Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ Won’t Shield the U.S. from Nuclear Strikes
    May 21, 202510 min readWhy Some Experts Call Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ Missile Shield a Dangerous FantasyThe White House’s $175-billion plan to protect the U.S. from nuclear annihilation will probably cost much more—and deliver far less—than has been claimed, says nuclear arms expert Jeffrey LewisBy Lee Billings U.S. President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House on May 20, 2025, during a briefing announcing his administration’s plan for the “Golden Dome” missile defense shield. Jim Watson/AFP via Getty ImagesDuring a briefing from the Oval Office this week, President Donald Trump revealed his administration’s plan for “Golden Dome”—an ambitious high-tech system meant to shield the U.S. from ballistic, cruise and hypersonic missile attacks launched by foreign adversaries. Flanked by senior officials, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the project’s newly selected leader, Gen. Michael Guetlein of the U.S. Space Force, Trump announced that Golden Dome will be completed within three years at a cost of $175 billion.The program, which was among Trump’s campaign promises, derives its name from the Iron Dome missile defense system of Israel—a nation that’s geographically 400 times smaller than the U.S. Protecting the vastness of the U.S. demands very different capabilities than those of Iron Dome, which has successfully shot down rockets and missiles using ground-based interceptors. Most notably, Trump’s Golden Dome would need to expand into space—making it a successor to the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) pursued by the Reagan administration in the 1980s. Better known by the mocking nickname “Star Wars,” SDI sought to neutralize the threat from the Soviet Union’s nuclear-warhead-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles by using space-based interceptors that could shoot them down midflight. But fearsome technical challenges kept SDI from getting anywhere close to that goal, despite tens of billions of dollars of federal expenditures.“We will truly be completing the job that President Reagan started 40 years ago, forever ending the missile threat to the American homeland,” Trump said during the briefing. Although the announcement was short on technical details, Trump also said Golden Dome “will deploy next-generation technologies across the land, sea and space, including space-based sensors and interceptors.” The program, which Guetlein has compared to the scale of the Manhattan Project in past remarks, has been allotted $25 billion in a Republican spending bill that has yet to pass in Congress. But Golden Dome may ultimately cost much more than Trump’s staggering $175-billion sum. An independent assessment by the Congressional Budget Office estimates its price tag could be as high as $542 billion, and the program has drawn domestic and international outcries that it risks sparking a new, globe-destabilizing arms race and weaponizing Earth’s fragile orbital environment.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.To get a better sense of what’s at stake—and whether Golden Dome has a better chance of success than its failed forebears—Scientific American spoke with Jeffrey Lewis, an expert on the geopolitics of nuclear weaponry at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies.[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]It’s been a while, but when last I checked, most experts considered this sort of plan a nonstarter because the U.S. is simply too big of a target. Has something changed?Well, yes and no. The killer argument against space-based interceptors in the 1980s was that it would take thousands of them, and there was just no way to put up that many satellites. Today that’s no longer true. SpaceX alone has put up more than 7,000 Starlink satellites. Launch costs are much cheaper now, and there are more launch vehicles available. So, for the first time, you can say, “Oh, well, I could have a 7,000-satellite constellation. Do I want to do that?” Whereas, when the Reagan administration was talking about this, it was just la-la land.But let’s be clear: this does not solve all the other problems with the general idea—or the Golden Dome version in particular.What are some of those other problems?Just talking about space-based interceptors, there are a couple [of issues that] my colleagues and I have pointed out. We ran some numbers using the old SDI-era calculation from [SDI physicists] Ed Teller and Greg Canavan—so we couldn’t be accused of using some hippie version of the calculation, right? And what this and other independent assessments show is that the number of interceptors you need is super-duper sensitive to lots of things. For instance, it’s not like this is a “one satellite to one missile” situation—because the physics demands that these satellites ... have to be in low-Earth orbit, and that means they’re going to be constantly moving over different parts of the planet.So if you want to defend against just one missile, you still need a whole constellation. And if you want to defend against two missiles, then you basically need twice as many interceptors, and so on.You probably have to shoot down missiles during the boost phase, when the warheads are still attached. For SDI, the U.S. was dealing with Soviet liquid-fueled missiles that would boost, or burn, for about four minutes. Well, modern ones burn for less than three—that’s a whole minute that you no longer have. This is actually much worse than it sounds because you’re probably unable to shoot for the first minute or so. Even with modern detectors [that are] much better than [those] we had in the 1980s, you may not see the missile until it rises above the clouds. And once it does, your sensors, your computers, still have to say, “Aha! That is a missile!” And then you have to ensure that you’re not shooting down some ordinary space launch—so the system says, “I see a missile. May I shoot at it, please?” And someone or something has to give the go-ahead. So let’s just say you’ll have a good minute to shoot it down; this means your space-based interceptor has to be right there, ready to go, right? But by the time you’re getting permission to shoot, the satellite that was overhead to do that is now too far away, and so the next satellite has to be coming there. This scales up really, really fast.Presumably artificial intelligence and other technologies could be leveraged to make that sort of command and control more agile and responsive. But clearly there are still limits here—AI can’t be some sort of panacea.Sure, that’s right. But technological progress overall hasn’t made the threat environment better. Instead it’s gotten much worse.Let’s get back to the sheer physics-induced numbers for a moment, which AI can’t really do much about. That daunting scaling I mentioned also depends on the quality of your interceptors, your kill vehicles—which, by the way, are still going to be grotesquely expensive even if launch costs are low. If your interceptors can rapidly accelerate to eight or 10 kilometers per second (km/s), your constellation can be smaller. If they only reach 4 km/s, your constellation has to be huge.The point is: any claim that you can do this with relatively low numbers—let’s say 2,000 interceptors—assumes a series of improbable miracles occurring in quick succession to deliver the very best outcome that could possibly happen. So it’s not going to happen that way, even if, in principle, it could.So you’re telling me there’s a chance! No, seriously, I see what you mean. The arguments in favor of this working seem rather contrived. No system is perfect, and just one missile getting through can still have catastrophic results. And we haven’t even talked about adversarial countermeasures yet.There’s a joke that’s sometimes made about this: “We play chess, and they don’t move their pieces.” That seems to be the operative assumption here: that other nations will sit idly by as we build a complex, vulnerable system to nullify any strategic nuclear capability they have. And of course, it’s not valid at all. Why do you think the Chinese are building massive fields of missile silos? It’s to counteract or overwhelm this sort of thing. Why do you think the Russians are making moves to put a nuclear weapon in orbit? It’s to mass kill any satellite constellation that would shoot down their missiles.Golden Dome proponents may say, “Oh, we’ll shoot that down, too, before it goes off.” Well, good luck. You put a high-yield nuclear weapon on a booster, and the split second it gets above the clouds, sure, you might see it—but now it sees you, too, before you can shoot. All it has to do at that point is detonate to blow a giant hole in your defenses, and that’s game over. And by the way, this rosy scenario assumes your adversaries don’t interfere with all your satellites passing over their territory in peacetime. We know that won’t be the case—they’ll light them up with sensor-dazzling lasers, at minimum!You’ve compared any feasible space-based system to Starlink and noted that, similar to Starlink, these interceptors will need to be in low-Earth orbit. That means their orbits will rapidly decay from atmospheric drag, so just like Starlink’s satellites, they’d need to be constantly replaced, too, right?Ha, yes, that’s right. With Starlink, you’re looking at a three-to-five-year life cycle, which means annually replacing one third to one fifth of a constellation.So let’s say Golden Dome is 10,000 satellites; this would mean the best-case scenario is that you’re replacing 2,000 per year. Now, let’s just go along with what the Trump administration is saying, that they can get these things really cheap. I’m going to guess a “really cheap” mass-produced kill vehicle would still run you $20 million a pop, easily. Just multiply $20 million by 2,000, and your answer is $40 billion. So under these assumptions, we’d be spending $40 billion per year just to maintain the constellation. That’s not even factoring in operations.And that’s not to mention associated indirect costs from potentially nasty effects on the upper atmosphere and the orbital environment from all the launches and reentries.That, yes—among many other costly things.I have to ask: If fundamental physics makes this extremely expensive idea blatantly incapable of delivering on its promises, what’s really going on when the U.S. president and the secretary of defense announce their intention to pump $175 billion into it for a three-year crash program? Some critics claim this kind of thing is really about transferring taxpayer dollars to a few big aerospace companies and other defense contractors.Well, I wouldn’t say it’s quite that simple.Ballistic missile defense is incredibly appealing to some people for reasons besides money. In technical terms, it’s an elegant solution to the problem of nuclear annihilation—even though it’s not really feasible. For some people, it’s just cool, right? And at a deeper level, many people just don’t like the concept of deterrence—mutual assured destruction and all that—because, remember, the status quo is this: If Russia launches 1,000 nuclear weapons at us—or 100 or 10 or even just one—then we are going to murder every single person in Russia with an immediate nuclear counterattack. That’s how deterrence works. We’re not going to wait for those missiles to land so we can count up our dead to calibrate a more nuanced response. That’s official U.S. policy, and I don’t think anyone wants it to be this way forever. But it’s arguably what’s prevented any nuclear exchange from occurring to date.But not everyone believes in the power of deterrence, and so they’re looking for some kind of technological escape. I don’t think this fantasy is that different from Elon Musk thinking he’s going to go live on Mars when climate change ruins Earth: In both cases, instead of doing the really hard things that seem necessary to actually make this planet better, we’re talking about people who think they can just buy their way out of the problem. A lot of people—a lot of men, especially—really hate vulnerability, and this idea that you can just tech your way out of it is very appealing to them. You know, “Oh, what vulnerability? Yeah, there’s an app for that.”You’re saying this isn’t about money?Well, I imagine this is going to be good for at least a couple of SpaceX Falcon Heavy or Starship launches per year for Elon Musk. And you don’t have to do too many of those launches for the value proposition to work out: You build and run Starlink, you put up another constellation of space-based missile defense interceptors, and suddenly you’ve got a viable business model for these fancy huge rockets that can also take you to Mars, right?Given your knowledge of science history—of how dispassionate physics keeps showing space-based ballistic missile defense is essentially unworkable, yet the idea just keeps coming back—how does this latest resurgence make you feel?When I was younger, I would have been frustrated, but now I just accept human beings don’t learn. We make the same mistakes over and over again. You have to laugh at human folly because I do think most of these people are sincere, you know. They’re trying to get rich, sure, but they’re also trying to protect the country, and they’re doing it through ways they think about the world—which admittedly are stupid. But, hey, they’re trying. It’s very disappointing, but if you just laugh at them, they’re quite amusing.I think most people would have trouble laughing about something as devastating as nuclear war—or about an ultraexpensive plan to protect against it that’s doomed to failure and could spark a new arms race.I guess if you’re looking for a hopeful thought, it’s that we’ve tried this before, and it didn’t really work, and that’s likely to happen again.So how do you think it will actually play out this time around?I think this will be a gigantic waste of money that collapses under its own weight.They’ll put up a couple of interceptors, and they’ll test those against a boosting ballistic missile, and they’ll eventually get a hit. And they’ll use that to justify putting up more, and they’ll probably even manage to make a thin constellation—with the downside, of course, being that the Russians and the Chinese and the North Koreans and everybody else will make corresponding investments in ways to kill this system.And then it will start to really feel expensive, in part because it will be complicating and compromising things like Starlink and other commercial satellite constellations—which, I’d like to point out, are almost certainly uninsured in orbit because you can’t insure against acts of war. So think about that: if the Russians or anyone else detonate a nuclear weapon in orbit because of something like Golden Dome, Elon Musk’s entire constellation is dead, and he’s probably just out the cash.The fact is: these days we rely on space-based assets much more than most people realize, yet Earth orbit is such a fragile environment that we could muck it up in many different ways that carry really nasty long-term consequences. I worry about that a lot. Space used to be a benign environment, even throughout the entire cold war, but having an arms race there will make it malign. So Golden Dome is probably going to make everyone’s life a little bit more dangerous—at least until we, hopefully, come to our senses and decide to try something different.
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
  • Do these Buddhist gods hint at the purpose of China’s super-secret satellites?

    Higher power

    Do these Buddhist gods hint at the purpose of China’s super-secret satellites?

    Until recently, China's entries in the realm of spaceflight patches often lacked originality.

    Stephen Clark



    May 17, 2025 1:00 pm

    |

    14

    This illustration of Chíguó, protector of the east in Buddhism's Four Heavenly Kings, shows the divine being strumming a pipa, a traditional Chinese musical instrument.

    Credit:

    Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology

    This illustration of Chíguó, protector of the east in Buddhism's Four Heavenly Kings, shows the divine being strumming a pipa, a traditional Chinese musical instrument.

    Credit:

    Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology

    Story text

    Size

    Small
    Standard
    Large

    Width
    *

    Standard
    Wide

    Links

    Standard
    Orange

    * Subscribers only
      Learn more

    Mission patches are a decades-old tradition in spaceflight. They can range from the figurative to the abstract, prompting valuable insights or feeding confusion. Some are just plain weird.
    Ars published a story a few months ago on spaceflight patches from NASA, SpaceX, Russia, and the NRO, the US government's spy satellite agency, which is responsible for some of the most head-scratching mission logos.
    Until recently, China's entries in the realm of spaceflight patches often lacked the originality found in patches from the West. For example, a series of patches for China's human spaceflight missions used a formulaic design with a circular shape and a mix of red and blue. The patch for China's most recent Shenzhou crew to the country's Tiangong space station last month finally broke the mold with a triangular shape after China's human spaceflight agency put the patch up for a public vote.
    But there's a fascinating set of new patches Chinese officials released for a series of launches with top secret satellites over the last two months. These four patches depict Buddhist gods with a sense of artistry and sharp colors that stand apart from China's previous spaceflight emblems, and perhaps—or perhaps not—they can tell us something about the nature of the missions they represent.
    Guardians of the Dharma
    The four patches show the Four Heavenly Kings, protector deities in Buddhism who guard against evil forces in the four cardinal directions, according to the Kyoto National Museum. The gods also shield the Dharma, the teachings of the Buddha, from external threats.
    These gods have different names, but in China, they are known as Duōwén, Zēngzhǎng, Chíguó, and Guăngmù. Duōwén is the commander and the guardian of the north, the "one who listens to many teachings," who is often depicted with an umbrella. Zēngzhǎng, guardian of the south, is a god of growth shown carrying a sword. The protector of the east is Chíguó, defender of the nation, who holds a stringed musical instrument. And guarding the west is Guăngmù, an all-seeing god usually depicted with a serpent.

    The patches for a quartet of Chinese satellites launched since March each portray one of the Four Heavenly Kings. We know little about these satellites, other than their names and locations, and they were reportedly manufactured by the Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology, a division of China's main state-owned aerospace contractor. They are part of a series of Chinese missions known as Tongxin Jishu Shiyan, or what China calls communication technology test satellites. But that's likely a cover for their real purpose.

    This artwork released by one of China's state-run space companies shows the Four Heavenly Kings. Clockwise, in order of launch from the upper left: TJS-15 as King of the West, TJS-16 as King of the East, TJS-17 as King of the North, and TJS-19 as King of the South.

    Credit:

    Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology

    China launched TJS-15, the first satellite with a Heavenly King mascot, on March 9 aboard a Long March 3B rocket. A Long March 7A rocket launched the TJS-16 satellite March 29, and another Long March 3B deployed the TJS-17 payload April 10. Finally, on Monday, a Long March 3C rocket sent China's TJS-19 satellite into orbit, skipping TJS-18 in the sequence.
    All four satellites are on their way to, or already operating in, geosynchronous orbit more than 22,000 milesover the equator. At that altitude, a satellite's orbital velocity matches the speed of Earth's rotation, allowing it to remain over the same part of the planet.
    Notably, ground-based trackers have detected unexpected objects that appear to have separated from TJS-15 and TJS-17 in geosynchronous orbit. These may be remnant rocket engines that helped inject the satellites into their operating orbits, but a handful of earlier Chinese satellites also released smaller spacecraft to perform their own maneuvers.
    Orbital intrigue
    US officials believe China uses many of the TJS satellites for missile warning or spy missions. In the first instance, some of the TJS satellites may be similar to the US Space Force's fleet of early warning satellites, on guard with heat sensors to detect the thermal signature of a ballistic missile launch. TJS satellites filling the role of a reconnaissance mission might have enormous umbrella-like reflectors to try and pick up signals transmitted by foreign forces, such as those of the United States.

    It's not difficult to start making connections between the Four Heavenly Gods and the missions that China's TJS satellites likely carry out in space. A protector with an umbrella? An all-seeing entity? This sounds like a possible link, but there's a chance Chinese officials approved the patches to misdirect outside observers, or there's no connection at all.
    All of the TJS satellites are parked in geosynchronous orbit over the Indian Ocean, Southeast Asia, or the Western Pacific, except for one—TJS-7—positioned over the Eastern Pacific, with good visibility over the entire United States.

    A Long March 7A rocket carrying the TJS-16 satellite lifts off from the Wenchang Space Launch Site on March 30, 2025, in Wenchang, Hainan Province of China.

    Credit:

    Liu Guoxing/VCG via Getty Images

    Mike Dahm, a researcher at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and a former naval intelligence officer, told the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission last year that TJS-7 is probably a missile warning satellite, but it could be spying on signals coming from the US homeland.
    Some of the TJS satellites might also be capable of maneuvering near other satellites for closeup inspection. The US military has its own inspector satellites, known as GSSAP, to get a closer look at interesting things happening in geosynchronous orbit. And the Space Force is using them.
    One of these GSSAP platforms, designated USA-324, approached within about 10 miles of China's new TJS-16 and TJS-17 satellites on April 26 and April 29, according to COMSPOC, a commercial satellite tracking company. A video animation released by COMSPOC, embedded below, shows how the USA-324 satellite maneuvered close to each of the Chinese satellites last month over the Western Pacific Ocean.
    It seems the Space Force is intrigued by China's flurry of new top secret satellites missions, too.

    Stephen Clark
    Space Reporter

    Stephen Clark
    Space Reporter

    Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet.

    14 Comments
    #these #buddhist #gods #hint #purpose
    Do these Buddhist gods hint at the purpose of China’s super-secret satellites?
    Higher power Do these Buddhist gods hint at the purpose of China’s super-secret satellites? Until recently, China's entries in the realm of spaceflight patches often lacked originality. Stephen Clark – May 17, 2025 1:00 pm | 14 This illustration of Chíguó, protector of the east in Buddhism's Four Heavenly Kings, shows the divine being strumming a pipa, a traditional Chinese musical instrument. Credit: Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology This illustration of Chíguó, protector of the east in Buddhism's Four Heavenly Kings, shows the divine being strumming a pipa, a traditional Chinese musical instrument. Credit: Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Mission patches are a decades-old tradition in spaceflight. They can range from the figurative to the abstract, prompting valuable insights or feeding confusion. Some are just plain weird. Ars published a story a few months ago on spaceflight patches from NASA, SpaceX, Russia, and the NRO, the US government's spy satellite agency, which is responsible for some of the most head-scratching mission logos. Until recently, China's entries in the realm of spaceflight patches often lacked the originality found in patches from the West. For example, a series of patches for China's human spaceflight missions used a formulaic design with a circular shape and a mix of red and blue. The patch for China's most recent Shenzhou crew to the country's Tiangong space station last month finally broke the mold with a triangular shape after China's human spaceflight agency put the patch up for a public vote. But there's a fascinating set of new patches Chinese officials released for a series of launches with top secret satellites over the last two months. These four patches depict Buddhist gods with a sense of artistry and sharp colors that stand apart from China's previous spaceflight emblems, and perhaps—or perhaps not—they can tell us something about the nature of the missions they represent. Guardians of the Dharma The four patches show the Four Heavenly Kings, protector deities in Buddhism who guard against evil forces in the four cardinal directions, according to the Kyoto National Museum. The gods also shield the Dharma, the teachings of the Buddha, from external threats. These gods have different names, but in China, they are known as Duōwén, Zēngzhǎng, Chíguó, and Guăngmù. Duōwén is the commander and the guardian of the north, the "one who listens to many teachings," who is often depicted with an umbrella. Zēngzhǎng, guardian of the south, is a god of growth shown carrying a sword. The protector of the east is Chíguó, defender of the nation, who holds a stringed musical instrument. And guarding the west is Guăngmù, an all-seeing god usually depicted with a serpent. The patches for a quartet of Chinese satellites launched since March each portray one of the Four Heavenly Kings. We know little about these satellites, other than their names and locations, and they were reportedly manufactured by the Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology, a division of China's main state-owned aerospace contractor. They are part of a series of Chinese missions known as Tongxin Jishu Shiyan, or what China calls communication technology test satellites. But that's likely a cover for their real purpose. This artwork released by one of China's state-run space companies shows the Four Heavenly Kings. Clockwise, in order of launch from the upper left: TJS-15 as King of the West, TJS-16 as King of the East, TJS-17 as King of the North, and TJS-19 as King of the South. Credit: Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology China launched TJS-15, the first satellite with a Heavenly King mascot, on March 9 aboard a Long March 3B rocket. A Long March 7A rocket launched the TJS-16 satellite March 29, and another Long March 3B deployed the TJS-17 payload April 10. Finally, on Monday, a Long March 3C rocket sent China's TJS-19 satellite into orbit, skipping TJS-18 in the sequence. All four satellites are on their way to, or already operating in, geosynchronous orbit more than 22,000 milesover the equator. At that altitude, a satellite's orbital velocity matches the speed of Earth's rotation, allowing it to remain over the same part of the planet. Notably, ground-based trackers have detected unexpected objects that appear to have separated from TJS-15 and TJS-17 in geosynchronous orbit. These may be remnant rocket engines that helped inject the satellites into their operating orbits, but a handful of earlier Chinese satellites also released smaller spacecraft to perform their own maneuvers. Orbital intrigue US officials believe China uses many of the TJS satellites for missile warning or spy missions. In the first instance, some of the TJS satellites may be similar to the US Space Force's fleet of early warning satellites, on guard with heat sensors to detect the thermal signature of a ballistic missile launch. TJS satellites filling the role of a reconnaissance mission might have enormous umbrella-like reflectors to try and pick up signals transmitted by foreign forces, such as those of the United States. It's not difficult to start making connections between the Four Heavenly Gods and the missions that China's TJS satellites likely carry out in space. A protector with an umbrella? An all-seeing entity? This sounds like a possible link, but there's a chance Chinese officials approved the patches to misdirect outside observers, or there's no connection at all. All of the TJS satellites are parked in geosynchronous orbit over the Indian Ocean, Southeast Asia, or the Western Pacific, except for one—TJS-7—positioned over the Eastern Pacific, with good visibility over the entire United States. A Long March 7A rocket carrying the TJS-16 satellite lifts off from the Wenchang Space Launch Site on March 30, 2025, in Wenchang, Hainan Province of China. Credit: Liu Guoxing/VCG via Getty Images Mike Dahm, a researcher at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and a former naval intelligence officer, told the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission last year that TJS-7 is probably a missile warning satellite, but it could be spying on signals coming from the US homeland. Some of the TJS satellites might also be capable of maneuvering near other satellites for closeup inspection. The US military has its own inspector satellites, known as GSSAP, to get a closer look at interesting things happening in geosynchronous orbit. And the Space Force is using them. One of these GSSAP platforms, designated USA-324, approached within about 10 miles of China's new TJS-16 and TJS-17 satellites on April 26 and April 29, according to COMSPOC, a commercial satellite tracking company. A video animation released by COMSPOC, embedded below, shows how the USA-324 satellite maneuvered close to each of the Chinese satellites last month over the Western Pacific Ocean. It seems the Space Force is intrigued by China's flurry of new top secret satellites missions, too. Stephen Clark Space Reporter Stephen Clark Space Reporter Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet. 14 Comments #these #buddhist #gods #hint #purpose
    ARSTECHNICA.COM
    Do these Buddhist gods hint at the purpose of China’s super-secret satellites?
    Higher power Do these Buddhist gods hint at the purpose of China’s super-secret satellites? Until recently, China's entries in the realm of spaceflight patches often lacked originality. Stephen Clark – May 17, 2025 1:00 pm | 14 This illustration of Chíguó, protector of the east in Buddhism's Four Heavenly Kings, shows the divine being strumming a pipa, a traditional Chinese musical instrument. Credit: Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology This illustration of Chíguó, protector of the east in Buddhism's Four Heavenly Kings, shows the divine being strumming a pipa, a traditional Chinese musical instrument. Credit: Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Mission patches are a decades-old tradition in spaceflight. They can range from the figurative to the abstract, prompting valuable insights or feeding confusion. Some are just plain weird. Ars published a story a few months ago on spaceflight patches from NASA, SpaceX, Russia, and the NRO, the US government's spy satellite agency, which is responsible for some of the most head-scratching mission logos. Until recently, China's entries in the realm of spaceflight patches often lacked the originality found in patches from the West. For example, a series of patches for China's human spaceflight missions used a formulaic design with a circular shape and a mix of red and blue. The patch for China's most recent Shenzhou crew to the country's Tiangong space station last month finally broke the mold with a triangular shape after China's human spaceflight agency put the patch up for a public vote. But there's a fascinating set of new patches Chinese officials released for a series of launches with top secret satellites over the last two months. These four patches depict Buddhist gods with a sense of artistry and sharp colors that stand apart from China's previous spaceflight emblems, and perhaps—or perhaps not—they can tell us something about the nature of the missions they represent. Guardians of the Dharma The four patches show the Four Heavenly Kings, protector deities in Buddhism who guard against evil forces in the four cardinal directions, according to the Kyoto National Museum. The gods also shield the Dharma, the teachings of the Buddha, from external threats. These gods have different names, but in China, they are known as Duōwén, Zēngzhǎng, Chíguó, and Guăngmù. Duōwén is the commander and the guardian of the north, the "one who listens to many teachings," who is often depicted with an umbrella. Zēngzhǎng, guardian of the south, is a god of growth shown carrying a sword. The protector of the east is Chíguó, defender of the nation, who holds a stringed musical instrument. And guarding the west is Guăngmù, an all-seeing god usually depicted with a serpent. The patches for a quartet of Chinese satellites launched since March each portray one of the Four Heavenly Kings. We know little about these satellites, other than their names and locations, and they were reportedly manufactured by the Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology, a division of China's main state-owned aerospace contractor. They are part of a series of Chinese missions known as Tongxin Jishu Shiyan (TJS), or what China calls communication technology test satellites. But that's likely a cover for their real purpose. This artwork released by one of China's state-run space companies shows the Four Heavenly Kings. Clockwise, in order of launch from the upper left: TJS-15 as King of the West, TJS-16 as King of the East, TJS-17 as King of the North, and TJS-19 as King of the South. Credit: Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology China launched TJS-15, the first satellite with a Heavenly King mascot, on March 9 aboard a Long March 3B rocket. A Long March 7A rocket launched the TJS-16 satellite March 29, and another Long March 3B deployed the TJS-17 payload April 10. Finally, on Monday, a Long March 3C rocket sent China's TJS-19 satellite into orbit, skipping TJS-18 in the sequence. All four satellites are on their way to, or already operating in, geosynchronous orbit more than 22,000 miles (nearly 36,000 kilometers) over the equator. At that altitude, a satellite's orbital velocity matches the speed of Earth's rotation, allowing it to remain over the same part of the planet. Notably, ground-based trackers have detected unexpected objects that appear to have separated from TJS-15 and TJS-17 in geosynchronous orbit. These may be remnant rocket engines that helped inject the satellites into their operating orbits, but a handful of earlier Chinese satellites also released smaller spacecraft to perform their own maneuvers. Orbital intrigue US officials believe China uses many of the TJS satellites for missile warning or spy missions. In the first instance, some of the TJS satellites may be similar to the US Space Force's fleet of early warning satellites, on guard with heat sensors to detect the thermal signature of a ballistic missile launch. TJS satellites filling the role of a reconnaissance mission might have enormous umbrella-like reflectors to try and pick up signals transmitted by foreign forces, such as those of the United States. It's not difficult to start making connections between the Four Heavenly Gods and the missions that China's TJS satellites likely carry out in space. A protector with an umbrella? An all-seeing entity? This sounds like a possible link, but there's a chance Chinese officials approved the patches to misdirect outside observers, or there's no connection at all. All of the TJS satellites are parked in geosynchronous orbit over the Indian Ocean, Southeast Asia, or the Western Pacific, except for one—TJS-7—positioned over the Eastern Pacific, with good visibility over the entire United States. A Long March 7A rocket carrying the TJS-16 satellite lifts off from the Wenchang Space Launch Site on March 30, 2025, in Wenchang, Hainan Province of China. Credit: Liu Guoxing/VCG via Getty Images Mike Dahm, a researcher at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and a former naval intelligence officer, told the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission last year that TJS-7 is probably a missile warning satellite, but it could be spying on signals coming from the US homeland. Some of the TJS satellites might also be capable of maneuvering near other satellites for closeup inspection. The US military has its own inspector satellites, known as GSSAP, to get a closer look at interesting things happening in geosynchronous orbit. And the Space Force is using them. One of these GSSAP platforms, designated USA-324, approached within about 10 miles of China's new TJS-16 and TJS-17 satellites on April 26 and April 29, according to COMSPOC, a commercial satellite tracking company. A video animation released by COMSPOC, embedded below, shows how the USA-324 satellite maneuvered close to each of the Chinese satellites last month over the Western Pacific Ocean. It seems the Space Force is intrigued by China's flurry of new top secret satellites missions, too. Stephen Clark Space Reporter Stephen Clark Space Reporter Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet. 14 Comments
    0 التعليقات 0 المشاركات
الصفحات المعززة