Capability

PAC-3 Adapted Capability Effector Is Lockheed’s New Low-Cost Patriot Interceptor

Lockheed Martin has unveiled the PAC-3 Adapted Capability Effector (ACE), a lower-cost interceptor for the Patriot surface-to-air missile system. By leveraging the existing PAC-3 fire-control architecture and Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS), the company says the new interceptor will cost less than half as much as the in-production PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) while providing a high-volume option for defeating aircraft, cruise missiles, and shorter-range ballistic missile threats. Based on the ballpark figure provided by Lockheed Martin, a single PAC-3 ACE missile would cost around $2.5 million, compared to roughly $5 million for the PAC-3 MSE. The announcement comes as Patriot missile stocks are under immense pressure globally and after the U.S. Army made its hunt for lower cost interceptors official.

“American and allied warfighters need a solution that is battle-tested and budget-smart, and PAC-3 ACE delivers exactly that by building on the unrivaled performance of the PAC-3 MSE,” said Tim Cahill, president, Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control. “As we look to partner with our allies, we can further enhance resiliency and ensure our forces can swiftly counter emerging threats today and tomorrow.”

Lockheed Martin said the PAC-3 ACE is designed to provide allied forces with a “rapidly fielded complement to existing Patriot interceptors.” The company plans to work with U.S. and European industrial partners on development and production, with the goal of expanding manufacturing capacity and strengthening the resilience of the transatlantic defense industrial base. The idea of the new missile as a complementary effector is especially noteworthy, indicating that the PAC-3 MSE would be reserved for the most challenging or high-risk threats, while the PAC-3 ACE can be used for everything else.

Other than the price point, it’s unclear to what degree the PAC-3 ACE missile differs from the PAC-3 MSE. A rendering released by Lockheed Martin — seen at the top of this story — appears to show a shorter, more compact interceptor. Coupled with the substantially lower cost, the new missile will offer a more degraded capability set than the MSE. This could include shorter range, lower ceiling, and a reduced ability to engage the most advanced threats Patriot batteries face. Notably missing in the rendering is the PAC-3 MSE Attitude Control Section — the ring of tiny rocket motors that wraps around its forward section — that gives it enhanced agility. Sacrificing exactly this kind of feature could lower costs in exchange for capability. In addition, the new missile may not feature the PAC-3 MSE’s “Lethality Enhancer” warhead, for instance, and could just provide a strictly hit-to-kill capability or some other warhead solution to save on cost. Using a less advanced seeker is also highly probable. We have reached out to the company for additional details.

It is notable, however, that the ability to engage short-range ballistic missiles, at least to a degree, is inherited from the PAC-3 MSE.

PAC-3 Missile: How The System Works thumbnail

PAC-3 Missile: How The System Works




Patriot’s ability to engage short-range ballistic missiles in their terminal phase has never been more important, particularly in light of the ongoing conflict with Iran, the war in Ukraine, and the continuing spread of those weapons worldwide. A lower-cost interceptor that can perform that mission for at least some threat profiles would help make missile defense more sustainable in future conflicts.

Overall, the concept behind the PAC-3 ACE suggests that Lockheed Martin is looking to offer a missile that’s closer to the PAC-3 Cost Reduction Initiative (CRI), which is no longer in production.

We do know that the PAC-3 ACE will leverage existing Patriot weapon system hardware, including the PAC-3 fire-control system and the IBCS. These measures should ensure that the process of developing, testing, and deploying the new missile can be accelerated considerably. Essentially, PAC-3 ACE will provide existing PAC-3 operators with a new common interceptor that can slot straight into the air defense system.

Northrop Grumman Integrated Air Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS) Flight Test thumbnail

Northrop Grumman Integrated Air Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS) Flight Test




Northrop Grumman’s IBCS was designed from the start with a modular, open-systems approach to make it easier to integrate new systems and functionality as time goes on. You can read more about IBCS in detail in this past TWZ feature.

Having access to a significantly cheaper alternative to the PAC-3 MSE effector, while maintaining many of its capabilities in terms of the kinds of threats it can target, is a big deal.

An infographic showing the key features of the MSE variant of the PAC-3 missile. Lockheed Martin

A cheaper effector means the cost-per-kill against man target types can be significantly lower. It also helps increase magazine depth, with operators able to buy larger stocks of missiles, addressing a problem that has been encountered in war zones, in particular Ukraine, where Patriot effectors have been expended at such a rate that the supplies have gotten close to being totally exhausted. Recent operations have reinforced the importance of maintaining sufficient inventories of interceptors and other high-demand munitions to meet both operational and strategic requirements — for example, a future high-intensity conflict against China. Under a contract with the Pentagon inked in January, Lockheed is already committed to boosting annual production of the PAC-3 MSE to 2,000, an increase from roughly 600.

When it comes to the cost of the PAC-3 MSE, each interceptor comes with a price tag of approximately $5.3 million, according to the Army’s latest proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year. In the past, a single missile cost around $4 million.

A PAC-3 interceptor seen at the moment of launch. U.S. DoD

Just as critical as cost is speed and scalability of production. PAC-3 ACE has been adapted with this in mind, and drawing upon production facilities outside the United States will also help. Having plentiful supplies of Patriot missiles will only become more critical once they are introduced by the U.S. Navy as well as the Army. The Navy is now working to integrate PAC-3 MSE into the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS), adding a valuable new anti-air interceptor to its sea-based arsenal, but also further increasing demand that the PAC-3 ACE could help meet.

Back in May, TWZ reported on how the U.S. Army’s Low Cost Interceptor (LCI) initiative was looking for proposals for a new effector for the Patriot with a unit cost under $1 million. This amounts to about a fifth of the price of a single PAC-3 MSE missile.

As we described at the time:

As a supplement to existing interceptors, a lower-cost alternative would improve Patriot’s cost-per-intercept ratio, especially against lower-tier threats like drones and cruise missiles. The design could also be easier to produce at scale, helping address increasingly worrisome strains on stockpiles and supply chains. These are issues TWZ has been calling attention to for years now, and that have been magnified by Patriot’s heavy use during the latest conflict with Iran.

Like the PAC-3 ACE, the U.S. Army said it was looking for a missile that can be integrated into existing M903 trailer-based launchers and leverage the service’s IBCS network. The M903 is already capable of accommodating newer PAC-3 series interceptors, including the MSE variant, as well as older PAC-2 types that remain in use.

A graphic showing various load configurations for the M903 launcher, as compared to the previous M901 and M902 launchers. Lockheed Martin

As we noted at the time, the goal of acquiring an anti-air interceptor capable of engaging everything from lower-tier air-breathing threats to SRBMs, at no more than $1 million per missile, is ambitious.

The LCI initiative is also consistent with broader Pentagon efforts to expand access to lower-cost munitions through open-architecture designs and by leveraging new, non-traditional industry partners. LCI calls for Army ownership of the intellectual property, reducing vendor lock-in and enabling future competitions for complete rounds and key subcomponents.

The Army has already stated that the LCI missile and missile subsystem competition is intended to result in multiple awards that can lead to multiple different yet affordable missile interceptor solutions. PAC-3 ACE could be part of that equation for the U.S. Army if the higher price point is deemed acceptable, but clearly the concept will have considerable value for any of the more than a dozen Patriot operators, especially those facing the reality of limited magazine depth in conflict situations. Having a lower-cost effector available could also open the PAC-3 up to additional markets, too.

Even if PAC-3 ACE falls short of the Army’s ambitious sub-$1 million interceptor target, it underscores a reality that has become impossible to ignore. The era of relying exclusively on premium, very high-cost interceptors is giving way to a more layered approach, where lower-cost missiles can absorb a significant share of engagements against cruise missiles, drones, and other less demanding targets. If Lockheed Martin can deliver on its roughly half-price Patriot missile offering while still providing highly relevant capabilities, PAC-3 ACE could become an important addition to the growing effort to make high-end air defense more sustainable in prolonged conflicts.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Thomas Newdick is a staff writer at TWZ, where he covers military aviation, defense technology, weapons systems, and international security. Based in Berlin, Germany, he reports on conflicts, military modernization efforts, and emerging aerospace technologies around the world, with a particular interest in airpower and its role in contemporary warfare. His reporting is informed by deep expertise in modern and historical airpower, particularly in Europe, with a focus on military aviation, air campaigns, and aerospace developments across the continent and beyond.


Tyler’s passion is the study of military technology, strategy, as well as foreign policy, and he has fostered a dominant voice on those topics in the defense and national security space. Tyler was the creator of the hugely popular defense site Foxtrot Alpha before developing TWZ, which he continues to lead as the Editor-In-Chief to this day.




Source link

U.S. Military’s Shahed-136 Kamikaze Drone Clone Is Getting Hivemind Swarming Capability

The U.S. military’s Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System, or LUCAS, the recently combat-proven long-range one-way attack drone designed for massed operations, will be equipped with Hivemind autonomy software from Shield AI. The company was selected for the integration effort by the Office of the Under Secretary of War for Research and Engineering (OUSW R&E) as part of an effort to bring AI-enabled swarming and autonomous teaming to LUCAS. The aim of incorporating swarming capabilities onto LUCAS, which is built by SpektreWorks, is something that officials told us about soon after the program broke cover.

The LUCAS program, developed by the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of War for Prototyping and Experimentation under OUSW R&E, is intended to field ‘affordable mass’ by producing large numbers of relatively low-cost drones that can be deployed in coordinated waves to saturate enemy defenses and expand strike capabilities at scale. Each LUCAS drone costs around $35,000, which is a fraction of the price of available missiles with similar range.

Based on the Iranian Shahed-136, LUCAS was used in combat for the first time when a large number of them were fired against Iranian targets in the opening salvos of Operation Epic Fury, the U.S. part of the joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran that began on February 28 of this year.

“LUCAS, indispensable,” U.S. Central Command boss Adm. Brad Cooper told TWZ when asked how effective the drones had been and how much they helped preserve magazine depth, given their comparatively low cost and faster and easier production.

Meanwhile, the original Shahed-136, as well as Russian Geran-series developments of it, have rapidly become a signature weapon of the war in Ukraine, acting as Moscow’s primary standoff strike munition. For years now, Shaheds have led Russia’s campaign of bombardment against Ukrainian infrastructure and cities. While the Shahed has a range in excess of 1,000 miles, LUCAS, in its current configuration, is a bit smaller, with a range of around half that distance. A version of the current airframe used for the LUCAS program also serves in a target surrogate role for training and testing.

Under the new effort, Hivemind will act as an AI “pilot” for LUCAS, allowing groups of drones to coordinate movements, maneuver collaboratively, and adapt to changing battlefield conditions in real time. The effort will culminate in an operational demonstration this fall in which a single operator will direct a swarm of LUCAS drones, but initial flight tests with the software installed will take place before then, Shield AI told TWZ.

Speaking to TWZ at the annual SOF Week conference yesterday, Shield AI’s Brandon Tseng explained that much of the work on inserting the Hivemind AI pilot into LUCAS has already been proven by the company’s experiences working with Ukraine.

“LUCAS is a reflection of about two years’ worth of work with OUSW R&E, and a reflection of a lot of the work that we’re doing in Ukraine with one-way attack drones,” Tseng explained. “For the past several months, we’ve been shipping hundreds of AI pilots for one-way attack drones into Ukraine. Those drones have increased the probability of a kill. They have reduced [the] kill chain timeline, they have reduced the cost per effect, instead of, one out of every 10 of these one-way attack drones hitting their target, now they’re 10 out of 10 in terms of what we’re seeing, and it’s really about taking a lot of that development that we’ve done over in Ukraine and bringing it to a program like LUCAS to again increase probability of kill, reduce cost per effect, and increase probabilities of success.”

U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY (Nov. 23, 2025) Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS) drones are positioned on the tarmac at a base in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) operating area, Nov. 23. The LUCAS platforms are part of a one-way attack drone squadron CENTCOM recently deployed to the Middle East to strengthen regional security and deterrence. (Courtesy Photo)
Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS) drones are positioned on the tarmac at a base in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) operating area, Nov. 23, 2025. The LUCAS platforms were part of a one-way attack drone squadron CENTCOM deployed to the Middle East to strengthen regional security and deterrence. Courtesy Photo/U.S. Department of War

In the Ukrainian context, Tseng confirmed that its AI agents are employed across a range of uncrewed platforms. At one end of the scale, these include one-way attack drones with a range of around 62 miles and an overall cost of $8,000, out of which the AI pilot costs around $1,000. At the other end of the scale are much larger and more expensive drones and missiles, including cruise missiles from the Switzerland-based Destinus company.

Returning to the U.S. military, the current effort began with Shield AI working on collaborative autonomy with OUSW R&E, something that began before the second Trump administration. That work was carried forward until the company was one of several down-selected to provide AI pilots for LUCAS.

The effort could represent a significant step toward fielding collaborative autonomy, a long-term goal of massed drone operations, with teams of autonomous systems operating together in dynamic and highly challenging combat environments. These could include ones where GPS is denied and communications are degraded, due to heavy employment of electronic warfare by the enemy.

“LUCAS is about delivering affordable mass, but mass without coordination is limited in value,” Tseng, who is the president and co-founder of Shield AI, said in a media release. “Hivemind is the AI pilot that makes that mass intelligent. It’s the autonomy layer that enables teams of drones to sense, decide, and act at scale. We’re proud to partner with OUSW R&E to put this capability in the hands of the warfighter at the speed of relevance.”

Hivemind is intended to streamline the operation of networked uncrewed systems by allowing a single operator to monitor and direct, as needed, multiple platforms simultaneously during complex, highly-coordinated missions. Using Hivemind, human operators retain authority over strike decisions, while the autonomy software handles navigation, coordination, and general mission execution. The operator can override and redirect the swarm’s operations and redefine its objectives at any time. Automating the swarm’s operations as much as a possible accelerates the timeline from target detection to engagement across a kill chain. The swarm should also be able to collectively act faster than an enemy can react, overwhelming and potentially breaking its decision cycle.

251216-N-NO146-1228 ARABIAN GULF (Dec. 16, 2025) A Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS) successfully launches from the flight deck of the Independence-class littoral combat ship USS Santa Barbara (LCS 32) while operating in the Arabian Gulf, Dec. 16. Task Force 59 operated the LUCAS drone, which is part of Task Force Scorpion Strike, a one-way attack drone squadron recently deployed to the Middle East to strengthen regional security and deterrence. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Kayla Mc Guire)
A Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS) drone launches from the flight deck of the Independence class Littoral Combat Ship USS Santa Barbara (LCS 32) while operating in the Arabian Gulf, Dec. 16, 2025. U.S. Army photo by Spc. Kayla McGuire

“It’s our policy that the moral decision behind the use of lethal force is always made by a human, and so ‘human in the loop’ is certainly part of the game for that decision-making process,” Tseng highlighted. “Once you make that decision, in the same way, once you decide to launch a cruise missile, then the AI is actually helping ensure that that decision gets fulfilled.”

For the time being, the U.S. military demands a human operator is ‘in or on the loop’ for kinetic or otherwise potentially deadly actions, as opposed to letting autonomous weapons choose what targets to attack on their own without any extra authorization. While less controversial morally, this can also be a tactical hindrance, slowing the swarm’s potential and adding complexity and vulnerabilities to its operations. The debate around this choice will only get more heated as adversaries bypass this elected restriction in order to get an upper hand in future combat scenarios.

As we pointed out in our initial reporting on LUCAS’s emergence, the fact that some of the LUCAS drones already include miniature SATCOM terminals is very noteworthy. After all, ‘human in the loop’ swarming would not be possible without this form of communications at the beyond line-of-sight ranges these drones fly. At the same time, an entire swarm can be controlled in this manner, even if just a handful are equipped with SATCOM terminals. While a swarm can be mesh networked within line-of-sight, it has to relay all the important information back to an operator. By using some of the drones as SATCOM relay nodes, the entire swarm can be controlled remotely from most places on the planet.

A LUCAS drone equipped with a SATCOM antenna. (DoW)

Regardless, the Hivemind AI pilot will allow appropriately equipped LUCAS drones to perceive their environment, make decisions, and act autonomously without continuous human input. Unlike conventional autopilots tied to fixed flight paths, Hivemind is designed to dynamically adjust mission plans, react to unforeseen conditions, avoid obstacles, and carry out complex tasks with minimal operator oversight.

In terms of how an AI pilot can assist LUCAS drones, including providing autonomous mission execution and swarming in GPS-denied, communications-denied environments, Tseng likened the technology to that which is behind self-driving cars.

“We’re using a lot of the same technical approaches that Tesla or Waymo are using; we use sensors on board these drones and weapon systems to perceive our environment. We got a GPU [graphics processing unit, a specialized electronic circuit designed for digital image processing] that thinks about what to do and is programmed to think about the different missions that it’s executing in said environment, and then we take action, maneuvering the drone or the weapon system in the environment.”

Already, Hivemind has been inserted in a variety of other platforms, including aboard Anduril’s YFQ-44A under the U.S. Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program, the U.S. Navy BQM-177 test aircraft, the Airbus UH-72B Lakota helicopter, and the Destinus Hornet platform. The company says it has integrated AI pilots for 28 different platforms to date.

Teaming Autonomous Jets: Hivemind + MQM-178 Firejets thumbnail

Teaming Autonomous Jets: Hivemind + MQM-178 Firejets




Tseng said the company wants to start flight testing with Hivemind in July. “I hope they make it operational as quickly as possible,” he added.

The path to operational service should be made easier by previous experience from Ukraine, where it took only eight weeks to put an AI pilot into one of their one-way attack platforms.

However, the final decision on fielding AI-equipped LUCAS drones rests with the customer. “It’s up to the government, and I’m not going to disclose timelines on when the government thinks about fielding it,” Tseng said of the Hivemind-equipped LUCAS drone.

While LUCAS drones without AI pilots have already achieved impressive results in the recent conflict with Iran, according to the Pentagon, Shield AI is meanwhile confident that the capabilities of the platform will be significantly enhanced once they are flying with AI onboard. The results should include increasing the probability of kill, lowering the cost per effect, and increasing overall mission success.

“If you have cheap one-way attack drones, but it takes 10 or 20 of them to destroy a target, they’re no longer that cheap, right?” Tseng contended. “But if all of a sudden you have cheap one-way attack drones, and one out of one can kill it, and now you can kill 20 targets, that is a really low cost per effect, and that’s what the United States is after at the end of the day.”

ARABIAN GULF (Dec. 16, 2025) A Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS) launches from the flight deck of the Independence-class littoral combat ship USS Santa Barbara (LCS 32) while operating in the Arabian Gulf, Dec. 16, 2025. Prior to the launch, Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division’s Shipboard Weapons Integration Team validated that the ship could safely store, move, and handle the system at sea. Task Force 59 operated the LUCAS drone as part of Task Force Scorpion Strike operations. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Kayla McGuire)
Another view of a Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS) drone launching from the USS Santa Barbara. U.S. Army photo by Spc. Kayla McGuire

Putting an AI pilot in the LUCAS drone is a big deal for the program. If it works as planned, it should help realize the long-held ambition of coordinated swarms of drones, not just drones being deployed en masse.

Using the software, multiple LUCAS drones will be able to share tasks and maneuver cooperatively, making saturation attacks even more effective. As well as the drones dynamically rerouting, avoiding air defenses, and otherwise adapting to changing battlefield conditions, an AI pilot makes it easier for missions to continue despite hostile jamming or loss of datalink connectivity. Indeed, using AI, drone swarms can maintain near-perfect combat efficiency even if it loses members. Drones can be configured with all different payloads, with the swarm’s makeup tailored to each mission, and the AI system can maximize their collective effectiveness at all times.

With flight testing of Hivemind-equipped LUCAS drones expected to start in only a couple of months, we should begin to get a better look at the transformation of these kamikaze drones from expendable individual weapons into groups of networked weapons that collectively equate to much more than the sum of their parts.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Thomas is a defense writer and editor with over 20 years of experience covering military aerospace topics and conflicts. He’s written a number of books, edited many more, and has contributed to many of the world’s leading aviation publications. Before joining The War Zone in 2020, he was the editor of AirForces Monthly.


Source link