 Well, look, it certainly sounds like a Russian pilot was horsing around and deliberately trying to destroy what they're saying was a US MQ-9 drone over the Baltics, over the Black Sea rather, and so this is a provocation. It's probably something of a test. The Russians, of course, don't like the fact that we're flying admittedly in international waters there, and they're expressing their displeasure. So it's pretty obvious why they're doing it. It's clearly an irresponsible act, nevertheless, and so we'll see how it develops. Yeah, so the news reports are an MQ-9, that's probably an MQ-9 Reaper, not sure exactly the model, but these are frankly some of very widespread, widely used, let's just call them trucks that can carry any number of payloads. They've been used in the war on terrorism for health fires, but also for ISR, intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance to surveil and spy, but again, these are essentially versatile UAV trucks, and you can put all number of things on them, but it's a pretty common drone. Well, unfortunately, the Russians kind of think of the Black Sea as their own lake. Really speaking, it is international waters. They don't really like that fact, but it certainly from an international law perspective, insulates the United States from any kind of allegation that we were into Russian airspace or something like that. Well, there's been quite a lot of drone and counter drone activity in and around Ukraine, just absolutely tons of it, and it's really been, I would say, one of the most widespread conflicts with not merely UAV, but counter UAV activity, and so it's really advanced the activity, but continued the activity we've seen in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflicts from a couple years ago and the like. I will say also there's another precedent to think about here, and that is, I think it was during the Trump administration, Iran shot down a U.S. global hawk, which is a very large drone that we use for surveillance. We were operating from international waters there as well. Sadly, the United States did not respond. President Trump chose to countermand a kinetic response to that clear shootdown of a U.S. aircraft, and as a result, you saw an escalation of Iranian activity in the months that followed that led up to back and forth the targeting of Soleimani, and then after that the firing of Iranian ballistic missiles into Iraq at U.S. bases. So I don't think that this is going to lead to that, but nevertheless I do think it suggests the need for some kind of firm and clear response on the part of the United States. You know, I think number one is going to be the firmness and the clarity with which the United States responds, identifying it. We don't want our own weakness or indecision here to be perceived by the Russians as an encouragement to try something else and test us on something else. We've had so many statements over the past year about, you know, defending NATO territory and all these other things. We don't want any kind of in the gray zone kind of activities to further test where exactly that line is.