FlashFeed

Full text

The Cara packs a 657 cc turbo three-cylinder with 64 hp and 63 lb-ft.

It’s the sister model to Mazda’s famous Autozam AZ-1 sports car.

This example has covered roughly 20,000 miles since it was new.

It seems Kei cars are having a bit of a moment in the United States. The rules around them are shifting; plenty are being imported thanks to the 25-year rule, and even President Trump has expressed interest in seeing new examples sold on local shores. With all that in motion, now could be a smart time to buy one, before demand pushes prices higher.

var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};

adpushup.que.push(function() {

if (adpushup.config.platform !== "DESKTOP"){

adpushup.triggerAd("0f7e3106-c4d6-4db4-8135-c508879a76f8");

} else {

adpushup.triggerAd("82503191-e1d1-435a-874f-9c78a2a54a2f");

}

});

Only a week ago, we covered a 1993 Autozam AZ-1 that went on to sell for a staggering $63,000. Now another excellent Kei car has surfaced at auction, and this time it’s a Suzuki Cara that has never had the same spotlight as its twin.

Read: Mazda’s Kei Supercar Only Has 63 HP But Still Pulls Miata Money

For anyone unfamiliar, the Cara is a rebadged version of the AZ-1, and while it lacks the name recognition of the Autozam, it holds one serious trump card. Mazda built 4,392 examples of the AZ-1, but total production of the Cara is thought to have topped out at just 533 units, making it far rarer than its better-known twin.

var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};

adpushup.que.push(function() {

if (adpushup.config.platform === "DESKTOP"){

adpushup.triggerAd("ea4d4b5a-f8e5-4d5d-9d9a-53a3b956b6cd");

} else{

adpushup.triggerAd("44c0a4dc-e25b-4ba5-ac64-2c510461b92a");

}

});

Photos BaT

Except “rebadge” undersells Suzuki’s role. The whole concept traces back to Suzuki’s mid-engined RS/1 show car from 1985, and Suzuki supplied the 657 cc turbocharged three-cylinder that powers both versions. Mazda’s team, led by MX-5 father Toshihiko Hirai, carried the idea to production, and Suzuki then sold its own take with little more than a few trim changes to set it apart.

This particular Cara is a 1993 example brought into the United States last March. It has covered roughly 32,000 km (20,000 miles) since new, and although that’s nearly 10 times the mileage of the AZ-1 that recently sold, the Suzuki still presents in very good shape. Someone clearly looked after it, both in Japan and here in the States.

The Perfect Mini-Supercar Recipe

It still wears its original Classic Red paint with Venetian Gray bumpers and rocker panels, and it keeps every one of the supercar-inspired touches that made the AZ-1 special, from the hood scoop to those wonderful gullwing doors.

As with any proper exotic regardless of size, the engine sits behind the cabin, though the 657 cc turbocharged three-cylinder musters only 64 hp and 63 lb-ft (85 Nm). The upside is that all of it goes to the rear wheels through a five-speed manual.

var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};

adpushup.que.push(function() {

if (adpushup.config.platform !== "DESKTOP"){

adpushup.triggerAd("bb7964e9-07de-4b06-a83e-ead35079d53c");

} else {

adpushup.triggerAd("9b1169d9-7a89-4971-a77f-1397f7588751");

}

});

Photos BaT

The cabin looks every bit as sporty as the bodywork, with a pair of fixed-back bucket seats trimmed in black cloth and red inserts. A three-spoke steering wheel sits ahead of the driver, and the car even holds onto its air conditioning and original cassette stereo.

Bidding on this pint-sized Suzuki wraps up in less than a week, so anyone who wants to get behind the wheel should head over to the BaT listing before it closes. Check out the listing here .

var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};

adpushup.que.push(function() {

if (adpushup.config.platform !== "DESKTOP"){

adpushup.triggerAd("bb7964e9-07de-4b06-a83e-ead35079d53c");

} else {

adpushup.triggerAd("9b1169d9-7a89-4971-a77f-1397f7588751");

}

});

Photos BaT

Full text

Ford had a dismal second quarter as group sales dropped 10.3%.

Mustang outsold Mach-E by more than 2:1, while Bronco beat Wrangler.

Lincoln sales plummeted 15.8%, largely due to axing the Corsair.

Ford brought back employee pricing for everyone on May 1 st and the offer is set to expire on July 6 th . However, don’t be surprised if it gets extended as sales have been dreadful.

var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};

adpushup.que.push(function() {

if (adpushup.config.platform !== "DESKTOP"){

adpushup.triggerAd("0f7e3106-c4d6-4db4-8135-c508879a76f8");

} else {

adpushup.triggerAd("82503191-e1d1-435a-874f-9c78a2a54a2f");

}

});

In the second quarter, group sales fell 10.3% to 549,200 units. That’s a decline of 62,895 vehicles and the automaker is down 9.6% year-to-date.

More: Ford Sales Plummet Nearly 14% Even With Employee Pricing For Everyone

Those are brutal numbers and hybrids didn’t even help. Despite sky high gas prices, Ford’s hybrid sales dropped 20% in the second quarter. That stands in stark contrast to rivals as sales of Kia hybrids soared 187% in June and were up 115% for the first half of the year.

var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};

adpushup.que.push(function() {

if (adpushup.config.platform !== "DESKTOP"){

adpushup.triggerAd("89c65a14-4682-4807-a4bb-5436c5361bee");

} else{

adpushup.triggerAd("f25825bd-1260-4574-84ce-2b26e315fad8");

}

});

The automaker didn’t get help from electric vehicles either as sales plummeted 40.7% in Q2. The Mustang Mach-E fell 30.9%, while the discontinued F-150 Lightning was down 58.6% to a mere 2,421 units.

To put those numbers into perspective, the gas-powered Mustang outsold the EV by more than 2:1. This is also echoed in year-to-date sales, where the ICE-powered model is leading 28,725 to 11,632.

As we’ve pointed out numerous times in the past, the decision to eliminate the Escape is costing the automaker an insane number of sales. In the first-half of 2025, Ford moved 82,589 units. This year, they’ve only managed to sell 24,112 Escapes, which is a difference of 58,477. Dealers still have around 3,000 units remaining in inventory, but they’ll be gone soon enough.

It’s also worth noting Escape customers aren’t embracing the Bronco Sport as sales of that model were down 6.7% in Q2 as well as 1.3% year-to-date. However, Ford has been pushing some buyers to the Explorer and it was up 13.8% for the quarter and 21% for the year.

var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};

adpushup.que.push(function() {

if (adpushup.config.platform !== "DESKTOP"){

adpushup.triggerAd("bb7964e9-07de-4b06-a83e-ead35079d53c");

} else {

adpushup.triggerAd("9b1169d9-7a89-4971-a77f-1397f7588751");

}

});

Truck sales were down across the board in Q2 as the F-Series was off 11%, while the Ranger fell 9.8%. Even the Maverick, which offers a popular hybrid variant, was down 0.4%.

Despite a sea of bad news, Ford noted the Bronco set a second quarter sales record of 45,739 and a first-half record of 76,936. More importantly, it outsold the Jeep Wrangler for the quarter. That off-roader was down 12% to 41,793 units.

Overall, Ford brand sales were down 10% to 522,811 vehicles. The Blue Oval is also down 9.6% for the year.

While the automaker didn’t have much to celebrate, they said customer demand for the F-Series remains strong, but it’s still feeling the impacts of last year’s aluminum supply shortages. They also noted the elimination of the Escape and Corsair was bound to put a damper on sales.

var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};

adpushup.que.push(function() {

if (adpushup.config.platform !== "DESKTOP"){

adpushup.triggerAd("b25ecba7-3bbb-4ea7-a3a8-dbea91695c07");

} else {

adpushup.triggerAd("e46c436a-adeb-4b5e-a2c7-56bc36561c10");

}

});

Lincoln Sales

That pain was clearly felt at the luxury brand, where sales fell 15.8% in the second quarter. This was largely due to 4,200 less Corsairs being sold. However, that wasn’t the only problem as the Navigator was down 17.4% while the Aviator was off 1.4%.

The only bright spot was the Nautilus, which had a record-setting Q2 thanks to 10,505 sales. Of course, that could all come to an end soon as the Chinese-built crossover needs special approval to continue being sold in the United States. This same process doomed Polestar in America, but it seems likely that Lincoln will get the green light.

2026 Lincoln Q2 US Sales

Model Q2 26 Q2 25 % Chg YTD 26 YTD 25 % Chg

Corsair 2,656 6,856 -61.3 8,001 13,096 -38.9

Nautilus 10,505 9,869 6.4 18,182 18,533 -1.9

Aviator 7,156 7,252 -1.3 13,422 12,021 11.7

Navigator 6,072 7,355 -17.4 10,394 11,413 -8.9

Lincoln SUVs 26,389 31,332 -15.8 49,999 55,063 -9.2

SWIPE

2026 Ford Q2 US Sales

Model Q2 26 Q2 25 % Chg YTD 26 YTD 25 % Chg

Bronco Sport 36,466 39,075 -6.7 71,487 72,438 -1.3

Escape 11,715 45,232 -74.1 24,112 82,589 -70.8

Bronco 45,739 39,468 15.9 76,936 72,063 6.8

Mustang Mach-E 7,032 10,178 -30.9 11,632 21,785 -46.6

Edge 0 962 -100.0 0 3,040 -100.0

Explorer 65,538 57,615 13.8 126,925 104,929 21.0

Expedition 22,857 31,298 -27.0 40,411 44,780 -9.8

Ford SUVs 189,347 223,828 -15.4 351,503 401,624 -12.5

F-Series 197,900 222,459 -11.0 357,801 412,848 -13.3

*F-150 Lightning 2,421 5,842 -58.6 4,481 13,029 -65.6

Ranger 16,294 18,064 -9.8 34,069 32,977 3.3

Maverick 47,850 48,041 -0.4 81,711 86,056 -5.0

E-Series 8,870 9,785 -9.4 18,229 19,464 -6.3

Transit 44,677 41,477 7.7 78,925 76,057 3.8

*E-Transit 293 418 -29.9 493 4,174 -88.2

Mustang 14,651 14,174 3.4 28,725 23,551 22.0

Ford Brand 522,811 580,763 -10.0 956,516 1,058,323 -9.6

SWIPE

Full text

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) says concerns it raised last year about the U.S. Navy’s E-130J Phoenix II program “have morphed into realities.” The timeline for moving from the development of the aircraft to putting it into actual production has already slipped by approximately one year. The E-130Js are set to supplant aging E-6B Mercury jets in support of the Take Charge And Move Out (TACAMO) mission. This involves providing aerial command and control support for nuclear ballistic missile submarines , including the ability to send them orders to launch strikes while they are submerged . Platforms tasked with nuclear support missions like TACAMO are commonly called ‘doomsday planes.’

GAO has provided a new update on the E-130J effort in its latest annual assessment of multiple high-profile U.S. military procurement programs. The Congressional watchdog released this report earlier today.

In last year’s iteration of this report, GAO explicitly called into question the choice of C-130J-30 Hercules aircraft , a four-engine turboprop transport plane, as the basis for the E-130J, warning that it might “not meet operational availability requirements.” The existing 16 E-6B aircraft are based on the larger, jet-engined Boeing 707 airliner , which is now long out of production. It is important to note that the Mercury fleet also supports a U.S. Air Force nuclear mission set called the Airborne Command Post (ABNCP), and more commonly known by the nickname Looking Glass . In that role, the planes provide aerial command and control support to nuclear-capable bombers and silo-based Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles . They are equipped to initiate the launch of Minuteman IIIs while in flight. The forthcoming Phoenix IIs will only be tasked with the TACAMO mission, something we will come back to later on.

An E-6B Mercury ‘doomsday plane.’ USAF

“As we reported in last year’s assessment, the Navy awarded its contract despite significant technical risks it acknowledged the E-130J program faced. A September 2024 independent technical risk assessment highlighted the complexity associated with the program’s planned integration effort, which officials acknowledged could increase as they integrate additional technologies,” per GAO’s latest assessment. “Since our 2024 report, the program has delayed its low-rate production decision by approximately a year as these system integration risks have morphed into realities.”

“For example, program officials said that contractors are now focused on modifying already-existing mission systems to reduce their weight, which the independent assessment anticipated would be necessary to accommodate them on the C-130J-30 airframe,” the report released today adds.

The first C-130J-30 Hercules airframe destined to be converted into a pre-production E-130J is rolled out in 2025. USN

“The program office stated that the E-130J program remains on track to recapitalize TACAMO capability through developing an MVP [minimum viable product], iterating system capabilities through software improvements, and establishing digital frameworks,” according to GAO. “The program office also stated that it is aligned with Secretary of Defense guidance through an acquisition approach that allows for tradeoffs and implementation of a modular open systems approach. The program office did not provide any documentation to substantiate any of these claims, which run counter to our own analyses of E-130J program documentation.”

In its annual assessment last year, GAO said the Navy “acknowledges technical risk,” but also that the service had highlighted “risk reduction contracts with subcontractors to address obsolescence and size, weight, and power-cooling risks.”

The Navy’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request provides some additional context about the suite of systems the E-130J will need to perform the TACAMO mission.

“A dedicated communications platform, TACAMO aircraft features the ability to communicate on virtually every radio frequency band from very low frequency (VLF) up through Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) using a variety of modulations, encryptions and networks, maximizing the likelihood an emergency message is received by U.S. strategic forces,” per the Navy’s budget documents. “Included in these efforts are Government and Contractor Systems Integration Laboratories, Contractor System Test Integration Laboratory, Government Furnished Property (National Security Agency approved encryption devices, Ultra High Frequency modems), High Frequency and the Advanced Extremely High Frequency solutions, Top Secret network development and building required infrastructure includes power generation systems, cooling, flight deck avionics, Electric Magnetic Pulse (EMP) hardening, cyber hardening, and structural modifications to support integration of E-130J mission system equipment.”

A particularly notable and critical capability found on the existing E-6Bs is the ability to extend a five-mile-long antenna to communicate with submerged submarines. The E-130J will have a very similar, if not identical, antenna system to support the TACAMO mission.

A rendering of an E-130J Phoenix II. Note the antennas trailing behind. Northrop Grumman

As it stands now, the Navy plans to acquire six pre-production E-130Js in Fiscal Year 2027 to support different aspects of the aircraft’s ongoing development. At least one initial example is already being built. Some portion of those test aircraft might eventually take on operational roles. In its latest report, GAO says a critical design review is expected to come at the end of next year. With the aforementioned delay, the decision to then move into low-rate initial production (LRIP) is now projected to occur in April 2029. The initial LRIP lot is expected to be between three and six aircraft, but the total expected size of the E-130J fleet is unclear.

It is worth remembering that the Navy did previously operate modified C-130s in the TACAMO role before the first E-6A arrived in 1989. The Navy subsequently upgraded those aircraft in the late 1990s and early 2000s to the E-6B standard.

The US Navy operated a fleet of EC-130Q TACAMO aircraft like the one seen here before the arrival of the E-6As. USN

TWZ has previously explored the pros and cons of going back to a C-130-based platform for this critical Navy mission set, writing :

“It’s certainly worth pointing out that the E-6Bs, conversions of what were some of the last and most modern 707 airliners built, were larger and higher performance platforms than the EC-130Qs. The C-130J-30 is certainly a more capable aircraft than the C-130H on which the EC-130Q was based, but it won’t have the base speed and altitude capabilities of an airliner-sized multi-engine jet. Compared to the Mercuries, any TACAMO-configured C-130J-30 would not be able to get on station as quickly, or fly as high, limiting its ability to get above bad weather or establish a better line of sight for its communications systems.”

“At the same time, as the Navy itself has noted, the C-130J-30 platform does immediately open up the ability to use a larger number of air bases, airports, and airfields, including austere ones that the E-6B cannot operate from. This could be very useful in a contingency scenario where an opponent may have destroyed or otherwise rendered unusable many well-established bases, as well as larger secondary dispersal sites, which include large commercial airports. Being able to fly from smaller, tertiary locations could help to ensure that the TACAMO mission continues without significant disruption under such circumstances. This is also true during peacetime as targeting the TACAMOs on the ground would be much harder if they could easily operate from and sit alert at a much larger number of airports.”

“A C-130J-30 configured for the TACAMO mission would certainly have a mid-air refueling capability and the Hercules is already a platform that has demonstrated the ability to loiter over particular areas for long periods of time. Unlike the Boeing 707, the C-130J is still in production, as well, meaning that TACAMO aircraft based on this plane would be inherently easier to maintain and support logistically, and may also be easier to convert to this specialized configuration begin with. As time goes on, the J looks set to increasingly become the default base C-130 model across the U.S. military, as well. Compared to the long out of production 707-based E-6, support for the C-130J is already distributed across the U.S., and beyond. Training C-130J crews is even an easier proposition.”

Another look at one of the current E-6B Mercury aircraft. USN An E-6B Mercury. USN

The issue increasingly looming now is the age of the existing E-6Bs, which are becoming increasingly more challenging to operate and sustain. As noted, the Mercury fleet represents some of the very last 707s ever built before Boeing shuttered that line for good in 1991. The Navy’s plans to phase out the E-6Bs as the E-130Js arrive to help avoid any capacity gaps, which means the Mercury fleet will have to soldier on until that happens.

Last year, the Navy confirmed that it had scrapped plans to convert an ex-Royal Air Force E-3D Sentry airborne early warning and control aircraft, another Boeing 707-based type, into a dedicated TE-6B crew trainer, something TWZ was first to report . The TE-6B was explicitly intended to help relieve strain on operational E-6Bs. The Navy is now utilizing a contractor-owned, but government-operated (COGO) Boeing 737NG airliner to help meet pilot training demands.

The ex-Royal Air Force E-3D seen in the proess of being converted into the TE-6B trainer before that effort was abandoned. USN

To reiterate, the current plan is also for the E-130J to only perform the TACAMO mission. The Air Force is now in the very early stages of a separate effort to acquire what it is currently calling Looking Glass-Next (LG-N) to take over that mission from the E-6B fleet.

Part of that solution may entail integrating ABNCP-specific capabilities onto its future Boeing 747-based E-4C Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC) jets. The E-4Cs are set to replace the service’s four E-4B Nightwatch aircraft , as you can read more about here. The existing E-4Bs already have a ‘doomsday plane’ role, but do not have the exact same mix of capabilities as the E-6B. The Nightwatch jets notably lack the ability to order launches of Minuteman III IBCMs while in flight.

For the Air Force, the LG-N program is tied to larger nuclear command and control modernization plans, which might see more of these functions move to space-based assets, as well. All of this is also heavily intertwined with the ongoing development of the new LGM-35A Sentinel ICBM . Sentinel suffered huge setbacks, delays, and cost overruns, but primarily with the infrastructure side of the program, not the missile, as you can read more about here .

When it comes to the Navy’s TACAMO modernization plans, challenges in integrating the necessary capabilities onto the C-130J-30 platform have now set back these efforts at least by a year.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The post Navy’s New ‘Doomsday Plane’ Delayed As Watchdog Says Developmental Concerns Are Now Realities appeared first on TWZ .

Full text

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I have tested a vast number of desks. In fact, I would even be able to venture to say that I'm getting close to the arena of saying I've tested most of the key desks in the market.

Uplift has been stepping up their game big time. When I saw the Parsons and realized it came in a 48-inch-wide silhouette with those beautiful four legs and a sleek frame, I knew I needed to get my hands on it as soon as possible.

Personally, I was absolutely drawn to the sleek frame that wraps around the real walnut desktop. I chose a butcher-block walnut desktop, and I am absolutely in love with it. The material feels fantastic, and the quality is spectacular, and that's coming from somebody who has seen a lot of desks. I have seen a lot of what companies consider their premium desktops, and Uplift stands out among the best.

The soft-touch desk legs and the frame around the desk are also a beautiful touch. Also worth mentioning are the four individual legs. Some desks use four legs for stability, but they are really just the same style as the two-legged, blocky look that everybody knows by now. Uplift chose to use more spindle-type legs that retract into themselves, and they look absolutely stunning, even when on wheels, as I have them. They are still stable and still look just as great.

While this desk really only has one potential flaw, it's not even really a flaw. It's simply just something to know. I have found my way around it, and you can as well with just some simple planning on the forefront. Without further ado, we can get into the full review

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future ) Uplift Parsons Standing Desk: Price and Availability

The Uplift Parsons is available direct from Uplift's website , with prices starting at $829.

My desk configuration alone was about $2,000, including the desktop upgrade, the wheels, some power and lighting, and a few other accessories.

I specifically chose to get the power inlay from Uplift so that it could mount seamlessly to the frame and not have to be bolted into the beautiful wood desktop. I also chose to get the wheels so that I can move this thing around a little bit more easily.

I chose to get the Bluetooth upgrade so that when I wanted to control my Bluetooth from my phone, or when Uplift decides to upgrade their app to be more integrated with my day-to-day technologies, then I could utilize this to its fullest.

The desk was roped in within just a matter of days and assembled quickly as well. I don't remember the exact time, but I believe it was just under 30 minutes, and then it took me several hours to set everything up on top just right. I've been tweaking ever since I built it, which was now, at this point, a hundred days ago or more.

Uplift Parsons Standing Desk: Unboxing and First Impressions

For most desks, I look at the sizing online, estimate the space I have and the features I want to showcase with this desk, and order that way. For this desk, I actually had a very specific spot I could fit it into, so unlike other desks, I measured more than I normally do to make sure it fits perfectly.

Thankfully, Uplift is very true to size, and their desk is exactly 48 inches wide, not 48 in a hair or just over, just under, but it is exactly 48 inches. When I measured and made room for a 48-inch-wide desk, this was spot on. The frame doesn't jut out past it, nor does the desk overlay the frame to add more width. The one thing that does extend a little bit past it is the wheels, but I can just have those swivel in and out instead of out and around when moving the desk.

Assembly was incredibly easy and straightforward, as all the Uplift desks are. I was even able to assemble it in the small room where I was going to have the desk, because assembly was so straightforward. I didn't need a ton of space to spread things out and make a mess. I could do it in a pretty tight space and assemble everything to get it up and running.

It was a quick little build session, and then I spent an absurd amount of time tweaking every little thing about the setup on top of the desk when it came to monitors, placement, docks, and the like.

Uplift Parsons Standing Desk: Design & Build Quality

Since I was going with such a small desk, I wanted to make sure that it was of the highest quality that I could find. That's where I'm thrilled that I was able to get my hands on the Parsons in such a short time. I chose the Walnut Butcher Block, and when I say that this is some of the most beautiful wood I've ever seen, I genuinely mean it. Some desk companies use MDF wrapped in laminate walnut or walnut pieces, but Uplift uses genuine materials and makes an absolutely beautiful desk that you can feel and tell the difference in right away.

This smoke-gray or light-black frame is also fantastic. Feels good in the hand and is made of quality materials. It's not a plasticky frame or something that you feel like is going to chip away, but it's metal parts that click together, forming a sturdy frame to support the weight of the desktop and everything you put on top.

One of the things that Uplift does really well is the allowed cutouts for grommets or power inlays at the top corners or the middle of the desk. For this desk, I chose to add one grommet hole in each back corner, allowing me to install a storage cup in one grommet and a power inlay in the other.

Another spot where Uplift has added some holes is the front plate of the frame to allow for an inlay control panel. This lays flat against the front face of the desk, and it is super clean. The buttons are easy to press. There are four presets, a height readout on the screen, and it's quite aesthetic. All Things considered.

Uplift Parsons Standing Desk: In use

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future ) I'll start with the two things I wish were different about this desk and get those out of the way.

First, the ledge of this desk, or more like the frame, will make it hard for some monitor arms to mount. Not all, just some. Depends entirely on how the clamp works and what that shape looks like. I was able to get two different models with it. Clearly this is not an all-or-nothing problem, but something worth noting if you already have the monitor arm picked out.

Second, I wish that this desk could go just a little bit higher. This is an edge case and truly not a need in any way, shape, or form, nor even a negative about the desk. If it could go just a little higher, I could slide my chair completely under the desk to make space in a small office.

This could also be solved by removing the headrest from my LiberNovo Omni Pro chair. Again, not a negative on the desk at all, just one very, very niche and specific wish.

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future ) Now to talk more about my use case with this desk. I have this as my main desk, which I use some on the weekend and then Monday through Wednesday at the church where I work. Currently, until we finish the renovations, my office is a multi-purpose room used for other things on the weekend as well. The space I had to fit into was unique and only 48 inches wide.

When I saw that the Parsons could fit a 48-inch desk, I was absolutely ecstatic! Even though I didn't have a ton of room to work with, I knew I would still need this desk to be highly functional because of the nature of what I do both at the church and outside.

This desk needed to be able to house:

Two large monitors

My laptop and iPad or two

Accessories like mouse and keyboard

Chargers

Power

Lighting

Plenty of ports which would require a docking station or two

Lastly, I also wanted this to be a hot desk, so a single cable to run it all, with a mouse and keyboard that could switch between whatever was plugged in, which, of course, meant more ports. I chose a Keychron keyboard, the Logitech MX Master 4 mouse, and a Magic Trackpad for some niche scenarios. The keyboard is wired down to a dock that I actually mounted underneath the desk to save space, and so is the dongle for the MX Master 4 mouse. The Magic Trackpad is only used with my MacBook and is wireless over Bluetooth.

Along with those accessories, I have my BenQ RD280UG monitor in landscape on a monitor arm; then I have the brand-new (review coming soon) BenQ MA270UG in portrait off to the right of my main monitor. To the left, I have a Grovemade vertical stand for my MacBook, an air purifier from Uplift, and I still have room for a felt desk pad, and I don’t feel cramped at all.

One thing that helped, of course, was mounting so much underneath the desk and adding a BenQ light bar on top of the main monitor to avoid having another thing on the desk itself.

That's a lot of material on my desk and a lot more underneath my desk, and still the Parsons shines.

It looks clean and elegant. It's minimal. It works beautifully. There are absolutely zero issues in my well over a hundred days of testing this desk every single week, at least five to six days a week, with upwards of six to eight hours straight working at this desk, going up and down several times an hour.

If you're trying to build out an entire workspace, Uplift also has phenomenal shelves, organizers, storage, and other accessories and furniture you should check out. All made from the same incredibly high quality.

Uplift Parsons Standing Desk: Final verdict

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future ) After 100 days, this is still one of my favorite desks. It's clean, elegant, simple, and it doesn't make me feel bad for having a small desk in the slightest. Rather, it makes me feel great about optimizing such a small space to create something amazing, and all that is made possible by the stability and quality of the Uplift desk.

If it weren't for this quality, I wouldn't feel comfortable mounting the things I have. If it wasn't for the slimmest and cleanest design, I couldn't have put a desk where I did in the first place. Thanks to all of these things, this desk is so incredible.

If you're looking for a small or simply elegant desk to put in a non-traditional office, or you just care about your design, then you should check out the Uplift Parsons desk in all of its many shades of colors and materials. This desk is high quality. It's rather pricey, and it holds up to its reputation as a top-tier desk.

Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Getty Images Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future For more office furniture, we've tested the best standing desks and the best office chairs .

Full text

Back in November 2024, TWZ broke a story about a series of incursions over U.S. bases in England by drones of mysterious origin. While the source of these uncrewed aerial vehicles does not appear to have been officially determined, a new report suggests they were launched by Russian ships .

Produced by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), the report investigated a spate of drone incursions across Europe that began in August 2024 and found that “it is highly likely that the Kremlin conducted a UAV campaign over Europe.”

“We assess it is likely that Russian-linked vessels and the ‘shadow fleet’ were used as launch/recovery platforms for UAVs as part of the Kremlin’s wider unconventional war on Europe,” the report added.

This report assesses that it is highly likely the Kremlin conducted a coordinated Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle (UAV) campaign over Europe between August 2024 and February 2026, spanning a dozen NATO states and Ireland.

It is also likely that Russian-linked vessels and the shadow… pic.twitter.com/pGRtWRHPtE

— IISS News (@IISS_org) July 2, 2026

Investigators rely heavily on circumstantial evidence and open-source information. TWZ cannot independently confirm these findings, which offer new insights, if not concrete answers, about who could have been behind the flights.

The drone incursions over the bases we were the first to write about were among the earliest in the wave over Europe investigated by IISS. Around this same time, there were also flights over Ramstein Air Base in Germany, the report notes. We covered those incidents as well .

As we reported at the time, drones of an unknown origin were first spotted over RAF Lakenheath and then over RAF Fairford, RAF Feltwell, and RAF Mildenhall.

RAF Lakenheath. (Google Earth)

The report makes particular note of the importance of RAF Lakenheath, which is being readied to host nuclear weapons, a topic we previously covered .

“A public appeal for information drew roughly 170 reported sightings, about half of which were deemed credible, either corroborated by multiple witnesses or backed by imagery that couldn’t be explained away as ordinary air traffic.”

“Operational security appeared sophisticated,” IISS posited. “The UAVs entered the airspace around the RAF bases at low altitude with their lights visible and departed at higher altitudes. Arrival and departure directions varied across the incident period.”

Witness reports “indicate more than one platform type may have been involved,” the report proffers. “Some observations were consistent with multirotor UAVs; others with fixed-wing platforms. The propulsion noise of the UAVs was inconsistent across accounts, with some observers describing sounds more typical of petrol engines than electric motors.”

“Notably, the Hav Dolphin , a vessel later linked to a 2025 drone incident in Germany , happened to be docked in the UK at the time,” the investigators found.

That vessel was one of many either operated by Russia as part of its so-called “dark fleet” of sanctioned ships, or those connected to Russia, that the report goes into great detail to link to drone incursions throughout Europe after the incidents at U.S. bases there. The report describes these vessels as “Russian-linked commercial vessels, including shadow-fleet tankers, coastal freighters, and smaller craft.”

IISS

IISS suggested that the Russian Orlan-10 drone could have been one of the platforms used during the incursions.

“Orlan-10, a compact, multi-purpose UAV in service with Russian Armed Forces since 2010, has a range and payload profile consistent with stand-off collection against coastal and inland targets and fits the deck space of a mid-sized commercial vessel,” IISS stated.

“Commercial specifications for the platform, including those published by Russian geospatial firms using the Orlan-10 for civilian aerial survey operations, document an operational range of 500 kilometers, endurance of up to 12 hours, and speeds of 90–130 km/h, performance parameters consistent with maritime launch from a vessel operating well beyond visual detection range of the European coastlines in question.”

Moreover, “the Orlan-10’s power is an internal combustion engine, a detail that may be relevant in light of witness accounts from November 2024 incidents at RAF Lakenheath, where propulsion noise was described by some observers as more characteristic of petrol engines than the electric motors typical of consumer and first-person view (FPV) drones.”

In addition, the Orlan-10’s available payloads “include a satellite navigation spoofing module and a Global System for Mobile Communications network monitoring module alongside optical and thermal sensors, indicating the Orlan-10 family has active electronic warfare capability as well as passive ISR.”

The Orlan-10 has been widely used as an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance drone by Russia in its ongoing war on Ukraine. Given that, however, using it for a clandestine operation like this seems very strange. The report critically recognizes this, stating “the use of identifiable Russian UAV platforms carries inherent attribution risk.”

“An alternative, and operationally credible, hypothesis is that commercially available or modified platforms were used precisely to preserve deniability, including long-range [ first-person view] FPV systems, home-built fixed-wing aircraft or commercial UAVs modified to use cellular rather than radio frequency (RF) communications,” IISS added.

The think tank acknowledges that its maritime-launch hypothesis “rests on a convergence of opportunity, demonstrated capability and a consistent geographic pattern — but no European government has yet publicly tied a specific shadow-fleet vessel to a specific incident, despite officials suggesting privately that they could. The rest of this report treats the maritime-UAV link as the most plausible explanation for where and when the incidents occurred, while acknowledging that confirming it will require evidence that isn’t yet public.”

IISS

This is not the first time Russia was accused of being behind the drone incursions.

In February 2025, the U.K.-based The i Paper made similar allegations in its investigation, however, they suggested the flight could have been carried out by Russian operatives on the ground.

That investigation spurred some politicians to call for further investigation.

“Julian Lewis, the former Tory Chair of the Defense Select Committee said: ‘When the US and British authorities detected the drone intrusions at both airbases last November, they stated that investigations were underway,’” the outlet reported. “‘Meanwhile, there is credible evidence here of the possible presence of GRU-linked operatives near Lakenheath and Mildenhall. I shall be asking Ministers to consolidate the findings of all these investigations and to make a Statement in the Commons as soon as possible.’”

Tom Tugendhat, the former Security Minister, told The i Paper that the findings “demand urgent investigation by the MOD and UK intelligence services.”

Still, the MoD investigation into the RAF Lakenheath incidents concluded with no suspects identified, according to the Bury Mercury newspaper .

RAF Lakenheath. (RAF)

Less clear are results from investigations into the other three bases involved.

“The UK takes the security of military bases seriously and works closely with allies, law enforcement partners and other authorities to protect Defense people, sites and capabilities,” the U.K. MoD told us Thursday morning when we asked about the allegations made by IISS that the Russians were likely behind the drone incursions and for their assessment of who was operating them.

“Through the Armed Forces Bill, we’re giving our defense personnel greater powers to defeat drones threatening our bases and we have invested significantly in counter-drone capabilities. We continue to strengthen our ability to detect, deter and respond to potential threats,” MoD added.

MoD declined to provide further details, saying it “does not comment on intelligence matters or on the specific security arrangements at Defense sites.”

A U.S. Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcon from the 555th Fighter Squadron, Aviano Air Base, Italy, taxis out to the runway in preparation for takeoff for a training flight prior to the start of Cobra Warrior 24-2 at Royal Air Force Mildenhall, England, Sept. 11, 2024. (U.S. Air Force photo by Karen Abeyasekere Karen Abeyasekere

We also asked U.S. Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa (USAFE) whether the IISS allegations about Russian involvement in these events were accurate.

“We can confirm small Unmanned Aerial Systems activity took place over several of our UK installations in 2024,” a spokesperson told us. “These events were monitored, and it was determined there was no impact on personnel or operations.”

“Due to operational security, we cannot speak to intelligence matters,” the spokesperson added. “We continue to work closely with our UK partners to ensure the safety and security of our installations.”

The command said it is working on a response to our question about who was behind these incursions, but that it would not be ready before the July 4 holiday.

The issue of drone incursions is not unique to Europe, as we have frequently reported . There have been numerous incursions at military installations across the U.S. , including some near the water, like Langley Air Force Base in December 2023 that The War Zone was the first to report . More recently, Barksdale AFB in Louisiana, home of B-52 strategic bombers and nuclear weapons , experienced a similar series of very troubling incursions . Off the cost of California, American warships were swarmed sporadically for days in the summer of 2019. There are many other examples, as well, and as is case in Europe, it remains publicly unknown who operated those drones in all those instances.

The IISS report does not go into any of the cases outside of Europe. It does, however, clearly point the finger at Russia as the culprit behind the drone overflights that have bedeviled Europe, including U.S. bases in England and Germany.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The post Russia “Highly Likely” Behind Drone Incursions Over U.S. Bases In England Report Concludes appeared first on TWZ .