Hypersonic

The U.S. Army says it has successfully completed a live-fire test of a hypersonic warhead using a cannon-based launch system at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona, a demonstration that could provide a cheaper and faster way to evaluate the terminal performance of future hypersonic weapons. The gun in question is the Heavy Artillery Test System (HATS), or a modification of it, from the canceled Strategic Long Range Cannon (SLRC), a huge artillery piece intended to be able to hit targets out to a range of 1,000 miles or more. This suggests that the program could still provide value, this time in the test world.

According to the latest issue of The Outpost, the in-house news organ of the Army’s Yuma Proving Ground, the test marks the first successful live-fire demonstration of a full-scale hypersonic warhead launched from what it describes as a “cannon base test system.” Rather than relying on an expensive flight test of an operational hypersonic missile, the approach uses a gun to accelerate the warhead to high speed before impact, allowing engineers to study its lethality under controlled conditions. Hypersonic velocity means speeds of Mach 5 and above.

The concept has been under development for roughly two years as a way to create what the Army calls “a high throughput, alternative method for assessing terminal effects at velocity and scale.” While the release does not disclose the velocity achieved during the test, or exactly when it occurred, the underlying idea is straightforward. Hypersonic weapons derive some of their destructive effect from the enormous kinetic energy they carry into a target, as well as, at least in some cases, a relatively small warhead. A large-caliber gun offers a comparatively inexpensive way to reproduce at least part of a hypersonic weapon’s terminal conditions without expending an entire missile or firing from an airborne launch platform, costing millions of dollars.

The effort brought together researchers from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Armaments Center (DEVCOM-AC), which developed a specialized launch package capable of surviving the extreme acceleration generated inside the gun barrel. Engineers also incorporated a DEVCOM-AC electronic safe-and-arm fuze while analyzing the internal ballistic forces the warhead would experience during launch. The extreme acceleration of being fired out a cannon is one major difference a warhead or test article would have to endure compared to being mounted on an actual missile and that must be accounted for.

Before the live-fire event, the team conducted an inert proof-of-concept firing that validated the overall approach. Army officials said those results led to a series of design refinements before progressing to a live warhead.

The service offered a detailed description of the final firing sequence.

After instrumentation checks and target preparation were completed, crews positioned the launch package, armed the fuze, and loaded the warhead and propelling charge. Personnel then withdrew to protective bunkers while test officials monitored telemetry.

As the article describes it, the test director issued the command to fire, followed by “a massive boom” that echoed across Yuma Proving Ground. Once the dust settled, engineers reviewed high-speed camera footage before confirming the shot had achieved all of its objectives. According to the Army, the silence was “quickly broken by loud cheers confirming a complete success.”

Beyond the immediate test, the Army reckons the capability could significantly increase the pace of hypersonic weapons development. Instead of relying exclusively on limited and expensive missile flight tests, engineers could use cannon-launched surrogates to generate impact data earlier and more frequently during development. The release says the demonstration has already attracted interest from multiple hypersonic programs that are considering incorporating the methodology into future test campaigns.

Although not mentioned in the article, the “cannon base test system” seen in the accompanying photo is the Heavy Artillery Test System (HATS) that was developed under the Strategic Long Range Cannon (SLRC) program before that was axed, when Congress directed the Army to stop funding the weapon in its fiscal 2022 appropriations act.

At the time, the service said it wanted to move funds into a more general account that it could use to help mature various advanced technologies.

The Army also said that it planned to complete various research and development and testing of SLRC components in the 2021 fiscal year. This included work on the very large rocket-assisted projectile that was supposed to give the cannon its 1,000-mile-plus range, as well as “system integration and technology maturation for SLRC to include designs for long lead prototypes to be used in upcoming major system level demonstrations.”

Returning to hypersonic testing, other alternatives to end-to-end missile flights include rocket sleds, which have long been used to replicate high speeds to test different technologies.

Back in 2022, as you can read about here, the U.S. Air Force successfully recovered a reusable rocket sled after traveling at a recorded speed of 6,400 feet per second, or just about Mach 5.8, beyond the hypersonic threshold, at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.

This was the first time the Air Force successfully recovered a reusable rocket sled after traveling at such a speed. Being able to recover reusable sleds after traveling at hypersonic speeds allows for the collection of critical post-testing data, which is particularly important for hypersonic weapons testing.

Roughly 10 miles long, the Holloman High-Speed Test Track (HHSTT) is the only track capable of recovering sleds that hit hypersonic velocity via high-speed braking.

The Air Force also began the Hypersonic Readiness program (HSR) in 2020, which focused principally on fielding a hypersonic nine-inch monorail sled test with high-speed braking capability.

In general, hypersonic testing, a major priority across the U.S. military, is intended to push weapons and their components to the limits of what they can withstand. Test articles are subjected to the extreme heat, pressure, and mechanical loads associated with sustained flight at speeds above Mach 5 to determine whether materials, structures, and subsystems can survive the operational environment.

If the new gun-based approach proves broadly applicable, it could offer one answer to a persistent challenge in hypersonic development: generating meaningful terminal-effects data without consuming scarce and costly prototype missiles.

Exactly how closely the cannon-launched tests replicate the conditions experienced during an actual hypersonic weapon’s flight, and what velocity envelope the Army has achieved, remain unclear. Those details may ultimately determine how valuable the new test capability becomes across the Pentagon’s growing portfolio of hypersonic weapons. At the same time, any help in accelerating hypersonic weapons development would likely be of high value as China, in particular, has gained a clear lead in this critical new capability set.

Special thanks to X user @lfx160219 for alerting us to this story.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Evidence has emerged indicating that China’s YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship missile is now also being fielded aboard the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) Type 052D class destroyers. These warships are far more numerous than the Type 055 ‘super destroyers,’ from which the missile was previously seen being fired, as we reported at the time. The new development suggests that the PLAN intends to distribute the weapon across a much broader portion of its surface fleet rather than reserving it exclusively for its largest combatants.

A new video apparently originating from the PLAN shows the launch of a YJ-20 from the cold-launch vertical launch system (VLS) on the foredeck of an unidentified Type 052D destroyer, known in the West as the Luyang III class. After being ejected from the launcher, the missile’s solid rocket motor ignites before it accelerates rapidly away. No target engagement is shown.

Typically, the Type 052D’s VLS would be loaded with variants of the HHQ-9 surface-to-air missile, YJ-18 subsonic anti-ship cruise missile, CJ-10 land-attack cruise missile, and CY-5 anti-submarine missile.

The 7,500-ton Type 052D has 64 VLS cells, 32 forward and 32 aft. It’s unclear whether each of these is able to accommodate the big YJ-20 missile.

This compares to the Type 055’s 112-cell VLS system, which makes it the PLAN’s premier surface strike platform. However, only 10 of these ships are currently in operational service, with additional vessels still under construction. By contrast, approximately 35 Type 052D destroyers have entered PLAN service, with production continuing.

Putting the YJ-20 on the Type 052Ds would significantly expand the number of Chinese warships capable of launching hypersonic anti-ship strikes, further strengthening Beijing’s growing anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) posture across the western Pacific. On the other hand, it remains possible — although less likely — that the launch depicted is some kind of trial or experimental effort that might not lead to large-scale fielding on these hulls.

The new video follows the release of official Chinese military footage showing what the PLAN described as a “finalization test” of the YJ-20 launched from the Type 055 destroyer Wuxi, late last year. That video appeared to confirm the missile’s integration with China’s largest surface combatant, a warship design that you can read more about here.

That test from the Wuxi provided the first official acknowledgement of the ship-launched YJ-20. The missile itself had previously been unveiled publicly during China’s military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of victory over Japan in World War II, although speculation surrounding the weapon stretches back several years before that.

A missile first observed during what appeared to be a Type 055 launch in 2022 was widely referred to as the YJ-21. Subsequent official Chinese designations now strongly suggest that weapon was actually the YJ-20, or an earlier developmental version of it.

The YJ-20 is understood to be a hypersonic anti-ship weapon employing either an aero-ballistic flight profile or potentially a boost-glide vehicle: different Chinese sources have described both concepts at various times. In either case, the missile is optimized for extremely high terminal speed combined with unpredictable maneuvering designed to defeat modern naval air defenses.

Unlike a traditional ballistic missile that follows a predictable parabolic arc, an aero-ballistic missile can execute quasi-ballistic maneuvers — including skip-glide or ‘porpoising’ trajectories — as it descends toward its target. These abrupt changes in altitude and direction make interception significantly more challenging.

Chinese state media have also described the missile as employing a conical boost-glide vehicle, which would use a rocket booster to accelerate to high altitude before gliding toward its target while conducting sustained maneuvering throughout the terminal phase.

Although many details remain murky, it is generally considered that the missile achieves speeds well above Mach 6 during cruise and may approach Mach 9 during its terminal attack. Estimated range is generally assessed at more than 620 miles.

Guidance is believed to combine satellite navigation and mid-course updates before transitioning to an active radar and/or infrared seeker during the final approach.

Weapons with these characteristics are particularly well suited to engaging high-value naval targets including aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, cruisers, and other major surface combatants. The missile likely also possesses a secondary land-attack capability against fixed targets.

With their combination of extreme speed and maneuverability, hypersonic weapons can dramatically compress an opponent’s decision-making timeline while reducing opportunities for interception, making them especially valuable against time-sensitive targets. They also require very high-end interceptors, if they can be intercepted at all.

The apparent expansion of the missile to the Type 052D is arguably an even more significant milestone than the Type 055 test itself.

For China, fielding the YJ-20 aboard both the Type 055 and the much more numerous Type 052D dramatically increases the number of PLAN hulls capable of conducting long-range hypersonic anti-ship attacks. Such a move represents another step in expanding the reach of its layered A2/AD strategy. Rather than concentrating hypersonic capability in a small number of flagship destroyers, the PLAN appears to be distributing it across a much larger force capable of operating throughout the First Island Chain and increasingly beyond it.

Clearly, a larger force of PLAN destroyers armed with hypersonic anti-ship missiles would complicate U.S. and allied naval operations across the western Pacific by increasing the number of launch platforms capable of threatening high-value warships from long stand-off ranges.

At the same time, it is unclear if the YJ-20 has formally entered full operational service. However, official test footage, public appearances during military parades, and, above all, launches from two separate destroyer classes all point toward the missile transitioning from a developmental program to a broader capability.

The development underscores two major issues for the U.S. military as it gears up to face the prospect of a potential conflict with China in the Indo-Pacific. On the one hand, the PLAN is growing at an alarming rate, and Chinese shipyards are churning out increasingly capable warship designs, not to mention submarines and other naval weapons.

The latest annual Pentagon report to Congress on China’s military, released at the end of 2025, stated that “China has the world’s leading hypersonic missile arsenal and continued to advance the development of conventional and nuclear-armed hypersonic missile technologies during the past year.”

With that in mind, the case study of the YJ-20 further underscores the fact that China is investing heavily in the development of hypersonic missiles and is now apparently scaling that capability across a larger proportion of its surface fleet, something that will have a significant effect on the regional naval balance.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The U.S. Navy expects the stealthy destroyer USS Zumwalt, with its new launchers for Intermediate-Range Conventional Prompt Strike (IRCPS) hypersonic missiles, to be formally returned to service by September. Upgrade work on the ship, which started back in 2023, is some 10 months behind schedule. One contributing factor in the delay was the first full shutdown of the notoriously complex Integrated Power System (IPS) since the ship was delivered to the Navy six years ago. IPS is a power plant that provides massive amounts of electricity to propel the ship and run its advanced systems.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO), a congressional watchdog, provided new details on the hypersonic missile upgrades for USS Zumwalt, also known by its hull number DDG-1000, in a report released today. The four new launch tubes, each of which will be able to hold three IRCPS missiles, notably take the place of the destroyer’s original pair of 155mm Advanced Gun Systems (AGS).

Zumwalt has also been receiving other improvements, including expanded fuel capacity allowing for increased range and endurance, as well as undergoing routine maintenance, in parallel to the IRCPS integration. The Navy refers to all of this work, collectively, as the Build Yard Modernization Period (BYMP).

The Navy’s other two Zumwalt class destroyers – the USS Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) and the future USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002) – are set to receive the same complete slate of modifications. Work on the Lyndon B. Johnson is already underway as part of the larger process of delivering that ship, which is now scheduled for April 2027. The service also eventually plans to integrate IRCPS onto Block V Virginia class submarines.

The Navy’s IRCPS program is also being run in close cooperation with the U.S. Army. The missile at the core of IRCPS is the same one the Army is working to field in ground-based configuration, which it calls Dark Eagle.

The weapon itself consists of a multi-stage ballistic missile-like rocket booster with an unpowered hypersonic boost-glide vehicle on top. The booster gets the vehicle to an optimal speed and altitude, after which it is released. After separating from the booster, the vehicle glides along a relatively shallow flight path within the Earth’s atmosphere to its target, maneuvering along the way, sometimes erratically. In general, hypersonic boost-glide vehicles offer a combination of speed, flight trajectory, and maneuverability that creates distinct challenges for enemy forces. The vehicles are difficult to spot and track, let alone intercept. Their speed limits the time an opponent has to react in other ways. The ability to pierce enemy air defenses and rapidly strike very high-value targets, even ones that may be fleeting, is what makes hypersonic weapons of this type attractive.

“Over the past year, the cost and schedule performance on the first ship to undergo this [IRCPS and other upgrade] work, the DDG 1000, has degraded,” according to GAO’s report. “Program officials reported that the primary cause of recent delays is unplanned work.”

As already noted, one “source of unplanned work and delays per program officials is that this is the first time that the Navy has shut down and restarted key DDG 1000 class ship systems,” per GAO. “For example, equipment failures in the ship’s complex electrical system, which is akin to a small power plant, contributed to delays.”

Zumwalt‘s IPS is a hybrid-electric system that combines gas turbines and electric generators. Hybrid propulsion is not unique, broadly speaking, to this class of ships, but the DDG-1000 design takes it to a completely different level. IPS can generate up to “approximately 78 megawatts of power, nearly what a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier generates,” according to the Navy. It is also said to be able to pump out 58 megawatts of reserve power even while cruising at 20 knots. This level of power generation is essential to support the ship’s array of advanced capabilities, but it also comes with complexities that have proven troublesome over the years.

Integrated Power System (IPS)

In addition, “the unplanned work addresses the need for more cabling than was anticipated in the initial project design, as the contractor cut and removed more cabling than planned from the forward part of the ship for CPS missile launch tube installation,” the report adds. “The additional cabling was needed to match changes to the ship configuration since new construction cables were installed as part of the BYMP.”

Overall, “program officials noted that the Navy modified the BYMP contract with Huntington Ingalls in August 2025 to add 230,000 hours – at a cost of $20 million – for unplanned work,” according to GAO. “The program reported increasing its estimate to upgrade all three ships from $1.8 billion to at least $2 billion.”

GAO says the Navy also stressed that this is the first time it has ever integrated a hypersonic weapon onto one of its warships, and that it has been a learning experience. The service says it is working to ensure that useful lessons are being woven into ongoing work on Lyndon B. Johnson, as well as USS Michael Monsoor‘s future BYMP availability, which is slated to begin before the end of the year.

The timeline for delivery of the Lyndon B. Johnson and the upgrade schedule for Michael Monsoor are already delayed, as can be seen in the GAO graphic below. Delays have also pushed back the target date for a first live-fire at-sea IRCPS launch, a milestone now set to come next year.

The Navy and the Army have conducted several land-based launches as part of a test plan that has suffered its own setbacks in the past.

The Zumwalt class, as a whole, has suffered various trials and tribulations over the years due to a variety of factors. This includes persistent technical difficulties with various systems, especially the main AN/SPY-3 radar. There have been signs for years now that the Navy could replace the AN/SPY-3 with a version of the newer AN/SPY-6. A growing number of other Navy ships are already sailing with or are set to receive AN/SPY-6 variants. The ships have also seen other cutting-edge capabilities watered down.

Challenges facing the Zumwalt class destroyers have been compounded by the prior decision to slash planned orders for these ships from 32 to just three. This has also made the ships extremely expensive to acquire, operate, and sustain. In a separate annual assessment of major U.S. military programs released earlier this month, GAO reported that the unit cost of each of the destroyers had risen to just over $10.6 billion (inclusive of research and development costs). The total acquisition cost of the DDG-1000 program is now nearly $32 billion. For comparison, the price tag on a new Flight III Arleigh Burke class destroyer is around $2.5 billion, according to data released last year by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Broader questions have been raised about the roles and missions that the trio of Zumwalt class ships can be reasonably expected to perform. IRCPS will give the members of the Zumwalt class a new, very-long-range, high-value strategic strike role. The Navy sees this as a key capability for future high-end fights, such as one against China in the Pacific.

At the same time, GAO’s report today also highlights the small number of missiles the Navy and the Army are in the process of acquiring now for IRCPS and Dark Eagle. Prime contractor Lockheed Martin still has limited capacity to produce them, too.

“Navy data indicate that the contractor facility operations are not currently able to meet demand, making it difficult for Lockheed Martin to keep production commitments,” according to GAO. “Specifically, the facility is currently capable of producing a maximum of six to seven rounds a year out of the 12 rounds per year necessary to stabilize production.”

“Over the past 5 years, CPS costs estimates have fluctuated, driven by factors such as the Navy’s removal or addition of host platforms, revisions to total quantities, planned periodic capability insertions, and production time frames to date, among others,” per GAO’s report. “In fiscal year 2020, early in the MTA [middle tier acquisition] rapid prototyping phase, the Navy estimated it would cost about $31 billion in total lifecycle costs for a program that would deliver 262 missiles. In 2024, the Navy increased its estimate of the total cost to acquire CPS by about 30 percent while reducing the number of missiles to be procured – now $41 billion in total lifecycle costs for 224 missiles.”

“These missile quantities do not reflect a specific program requirement, according to CPS program officials, but rather modeling based on various inputs, including budget documents, analyses of industrial base capacity, and direct, ongoing collaboration with the U.S. Strategic Command and the requirements sponsor – OPNAV N97 [the Undersea Warfare Division within the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations],” the report also notes. “Additionally, the Army is planning to spend more than $10 billion to procure 48 missiles and associated ground support equipment.”

As of April 2026, the average estimated unit cost for each missile was pegged at approximately $67 million. GAO points out that “the exact unit cost will depend on the contractor’s efficiency in production, which is, in part, dependent on stable annual procurement funding for the missile.”

USS Zumwalt‘s formal return to the fleet as the Navy’s first vessel equipped to fire hypersonic missiles will be an important milestone. However, signs still very much point to IRCPS being a relatively limited and costly capability, likely to be held in reserve for very high-priority targets, at least in the near term.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

“Imagine the scenario; one of our Havoc hypersonic missiles loaded on an F-15EX Eagle with a mission profile locked-in and ready to go. This new missile is designed for low-cost and high-effect – it’s very difficult for an adversary to track in flight,” explains Chris Spagnoletti, chief executive officer of Ursa Major, as he discusses the company’s expanding hypersonics activities. Part of a company strategy to help overcome critical Department of War munitions shortages, Ursa Major’s Havoc was unveiled in early 2026. With a unique 3D-printed propulsion system, Havoc has been envisioned as a hypersonic missile that aims to re-write the rulebook for these types of weapons.

Ursa Major’s ambitious vision comes at a time of something of a renaissance in U.S. aerospace development and defense manufacturing, with newer firms establishing major positions within a rapidly evolving marketplace. These fresh takes on cutting-edge defense technologies also come as the United States celebrates its 250th birthday and looks back on a history of unlikely up-starts changing the world with new ideas and ways of doing business. It’s in this same spirit that Ursa Major looks to stake its claim.

The firm is evolving from a propulsion provider into a prime contractor and integrator with a keen focus on hypersonics and solving a need for affordable high-speed missiles at scale for the U.S. and its allies. In recent operations, the U.S. has fired a vast number of standoff air-to-ground weapons including more than 850 Tomahawks cruise missiles in the recent war with Iran and hundreds of high-end interceptors, stressing a system that’s been constrained by prolonged replenishment timelines. 

Spagnoletti says he strongly believes that hypersonic missiles are “the most important and pressing issue within critical munitions, with solid rocket motors coming close behind.” The company’s approach to design and production in both of these areas means Spagnoletti sees Ursa Major as being “well positioned to solve” these pressing requirements for the U.S. military.

“We are innovating on manufacturability and on new munition systems,” he continues. “It’s all under the umbrella of scalable munitions. Ursa Major’s founders really focused on developing very complicated propulsion systems, but with a strong propensity on design for manufacturability – essentially developing very high performing rocket engines as low-cost and as reliably as possible.”

Ursa Major has produced hundreds of engines and motors and accumulated more than 135,000 seconds of hotfire test time in under a decade. From its very beginnings the company has innovated through advanced manufacturing techniques that have evolved to leverage AI-enabled 3D-printing, specifically metal printing. “We’re looking at the problem set, and the landscape here is about how we can help the United States catch up as quickly as possible. We don’t just want a “me too” product, because we find there’s a lot of that in this space. This is about finding real answers to the desperate need to replenish our critical munitions fast,” says Spagnoletti.

Solid rocket motors in high demand

Having started out with liquid rocket engines, Ursa Major increasingly saw a burgeoning requirement for solid rocket motors (SRMs) for munitions, which Spagnoletti says have remained tied to traditional manufacturing approaches. Ursa Major says its approach to SRM manufacturing is designed to complement and strengthen the broader defense industrial base by providing flexible manufacturing capacity, common architectures, and modernized production methods.

Ursa Major’s manufacturing approach fundamentally changes how SRMs are designed and built using additive manufacturing, modular tooling, and software-backed production cells. This enables rapid switching between SRM variants without expensive retooling, which reduces production timelines and increases flexibility. 

In addition, Ursa Major’s highly-loaded grain technology increases motor performance and range without increasing motor size. By leveraging common architectures and using a limited set of qualified propellants, it says it can reduce qualification timelines and simplify production across multiple variants. The company’s energetics (solid propellent grain) strategy aims to expand domestic propellant capacity and reduce dependence on fragile supply chains, while using reliable mix, cast, and cure processes.

“Both in the liquid rocket engine side, and in solid rocket motors, the approach from the outset is deeply embedded in our culture; how we design, how we build, how we scale,” says Nick Doucette, co-founder and vice president of strategic operations for Ursa Major. “We came at the manufacturing problems from a completely different direction. We started out building liquid rocket engines, which were – to a degree – supporting the launch industry. That approach allowed us to develop new platforms that use new types of fuels or higher performance rates and lower costs.”

“From the start it helped support a growing launch industry, but very quickly it started to find its way into the hypersonics community as our engines, products, and performance points really started to solve some interesting problems. As we leaned heavily into the hypersonics needs, we realized that the early Ursa Major approach in manufacturing and the types of tech that we’re using are really solving some of the actual problems, and that led to our solid rocket motor programs.”

When building solid rocket motors, the inert part of the manufacturing leverages additive manufacturing heavily – Ursa Major avoids fixed tooling. “For example, after we qualify a motor, say a specific diameter booster, and then the government comes back to us and says that the adversaries have adapted. Now they want slightly different thrust, or maybe get additional range. We’ve already thought about that, our manufacturing line doesn’t need to change. We can use the same manufacturing line and adapt it,” explains Spagnoletti.

“We kept the energetics formulation essentially the same – it’s tried and true and it has been munition-tested for years – but we looked at the problem from the manufacturability of the entirety of the system. From a contracting point of view, this gives the government a lot more flexibility and to be as agile as the adversary. This has been happening on the development side for the past three years, working with several primes and the U.S. Navy. They’re inherently leveraging our ability to turn things fast, and now that’s translating into contracts for us.”

“The Navy really understood our approach to manufacturing,” adds Doucette. “They challenged us to apply our approach with liquid rockets to the solid rocket motor industry. To look at the problems and peel back the onion on solid rocket motors. What we found is that the choke point actually lies the metallic components that make what we call the inert tube section, that then gets packed with the energetics. The energetics are difficult for sure, but what actually chokes the supply chain is the 36-plus months to make the metallic tube structures. To compound the problem, all these production lines of the last 30, 40, 50 years are designed around one platform. Can you imagine an automotive company that has a huge expensive factory but only ever makes one car model! I mean, it would economically go out of business.”

“We have demonstrated that, by looking at the steps to make a solid rocket motor, be it metal printing the end domes or how we do the internal features and make the actual case to how we in some cases load the highly-loaded grain to get more performance, we can do all of it on the same production line for any motor between two inches and 22 inches in diameter. The same equipment, the same people, the same factory footprint. If we want to scale, we just copy paste the factory. If the demand signal changes in a year – which if recent conflicts give us any indication they probably will – that factory can switch over to a different munition. We just stop making one size and tool up for the new size in a matter of months.”

Ursa Major’s primary 93-acre corporate headquarters is located in Berthoud, about an hour north of Denver, Colorado. Here the company has the facilities to test its liquid rocket engines on site and it also designs, develops, and manufactures here. “Our main building is really split in half,” explains Spagnoletti. “On one side we have liquid rocket engine manufacturing and development to power hypersonics, and on the other behind a steel rolling door are the solid rocket motor development and low-rate production as part of our replenishment of critical munitions.”

“At the Colorado site, we’re actually grinding, mixing, casting, curing thousands of pounds of energetics per year for our solid rocket motors, with a lot of automation built-in to not only protect the people but also to make the process more consistent. We have another site for our high volume solid rocket motor production – it needs a lot of space – and we are targeting to manufacture hundreds of thousands of pounds of energetics for use in various shapes and sizes by the middle of 2027.”

The company has expanded with more than 400 acres for SRM production in Galeton, Colorado.

Solid rocket motors of all sizes

Nick Doucette already sees the solid rocket motor work evolving. “We will eventually boost-power our Havoc system with our solid rocket motors. Remember, we got into SRMs due to seeing the critical munition needs, with an open door for manufacturing innovation and a problem we want to help solve. So we’ve built a manufacturing approach and we are now building a multitude of different size classes for different customers.”

The smallest SRM that Ursa Major is actively working on is for the Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System, or APKWS, from BAE Systems. “This currently uses a very dated motor and there’s been a lot of need in the industry to essentially innovate on that motor,” explains Doucette. “So we’ve been working extensively with both BAE Systems and the U.S. Air Force on that particular platform, especially with highly loaded grain, and we see a very promising future there.”

Doucette explains that Ursa Major has already made several hundred 2.75-inch motors for testing and development. This will be an extended range version of the motor, packing a significantly larger amount of energetic material into the same size rocket casing.

In 2024, Ursa Major won a contract with the Naval Energetics Systems and Technologies (NEST) program to develop and test a new design to apply its SRM manufacturing processes to the Mk104 dual-thrust rocket motor that powers the U.S. Navy Standard Missile 2 (SM-2), used for surface-to-air defense, and the SM-6 anti-air, land, and sea missile.

Trusted solid rocket motor providers are in limited supply, and the versatility of Ursa Major’s production process opens up a raft of potential opportunities, particularly in the missile defense space. The 10-14-inch range is what Doucette calls a “sweet spot” for interceptor missiles.

Asked about air-to-air missiles, Doucette says: “of course, we’re looking at it. There’s been a lot of conversations around how Ursa Major would approach the problem, but we have a lot going on already, so we’re making sure we don’t try to swallow the whole critical munitions list at once.”

“Most of these larger hypersonic weapons are all boosted,” adds Doucette. “These have a booster in the back end, and we have additionally completed internal work to develop that 22-inch diameter SRM capability. So now we can do anything from 2-inch to 22-inch on that same production line using our common modular manufacturing approach.”

Unleashing Havoc

Ursa Major’s parallel efforts in hypersonics brings the story full circle. Alongside the solid rocket motors business, hypersonic missiles have become a critical part of the company’s efforts, as Nick Doucette picks up the story. 

“There’s two specific products that Ursa Major makes in the hypersonics realm right now. The first is an engine that’s liquid oxygen-powered with rocket fuel. We call it Hadley, and we’ve had that for the better part of a decade. Hadley powers the Stratolaunch hypersonic Talon A testbed, for example. We don’t make the vehicle, we just provide the engine and support services, and Hadley has flown 10 times now.”

“The challenge with Hadley is that it uses cryogenic liquid oxygen, which presents a whole suite of issues from a tactical perspective. A military user can’t sit and wait for the propellant to get cold, like you do with liquid oxygen. We needed to make a similar engine, slightly lower thrust, a little smaller, but essentially in the same packaging, make it storable and most importantly, make it tactical, so that you can drop it from a plane or shoot it vertically from a ship. So we switched from liquid oxygen to hydrogen peroxide.”

“The catch there was that the only way we were able to do that in the right packaging, tightness, and density, was to use 3D-printing. Fast-forward through six years of insane additive development and the Draper engine became a reality. It simply would not have been possible without massive advances in the additive world because of the complexity of what we’re doing geometrically. It’s a really challenging thing to do.”

Draper is a 4,000-pound-thrust engine that is powered by hydrogen peroxide and rocket fuel. Its use of non-cryogenic storable propellants enables long-duration storage, rapid deployment, and operational flexibility in real-world conditions. Its massive potential drove Ursa Major to search for a suitable hypersonic vehicle design to match it with.

“We strongly believed that Draper introduced a differentiating threat vector for any adversary,” Doucette continues. “China has had boost-glide hypersonics for a decade. Other hypersonic designs use a scramjet, which are costly and complex. Draper opened up hypersonic performance, where you have a wide range of trajectories and adaptability as well as other really creative mechanisms that, to be honest, the adversaries don’t have. I mean it’s wildly different, which we see as being a very valuable asset to the national security arsenal.

“The concept of using a liquid rocket engine for a hypersonic weapon is absolutely game changing. Draper can be throttled – unlike solid rocket motors that use a pre-mixed propellant and oxidizer that cannot be controlled once ignited – plus it’s designed to be more safely stored than other liquid rocket engines, providing the tactical storage capabilities that are typical of a solid rocket motor.”

Doucette says that Ursa Major looked to find a partner for the vehicle itself, but concluded that none were suitable, particularly when it came to moving fast. The decision was made to go it alone in-house with an air vehicle. The result is Havoc, which is designed like other hypersonic programs to fly in excess of mach 5, and intended to be launched in a variety of ways; as a single-stage from an aircraft or ground-launched with added booster stages. It’s also designed to run out at circa $3-million apiece. “We entered a rapid campaign in partnership with the Air Force Research Laboratory and we went from concept to flight-ready in about six months,” Doucette says.

Hypersonic missiles currently in testing with the USAF include the AGM-183A Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW), which is a boost-glide hypersonic system, with rocket boost and an unpowered glide vehicle inside. The Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile, or HACM, also features rocket boosters, but with an air-breathing scramjet second stage vehicle. Both are limited to operations in the Earth’s atmosphere – whereas Havoc can operate either in or above the atmosphere.

“With regard to propulsion in aerospace defense, there’s three main types; air-breathing, solid powered, and liquid powered,” Doucette explains. “In the world of hypersonics, specifically, we’re talking about fast-moving, somewhat unpredictable, missile systems that are moving at over five times the speed of sound. You have the same propulsion methods, but liquid fuel has never really been introduced.”

“The air-breathing hypersonic weapons are typically scramjets and ramjets, which the U.S. has been developing for a very long time. They’re expensive and exquisite, but very long range.

“China has something in the order of 600-700 operational boost-glide systems in its arsenal right now. This is not new to them. They’ve been practicing, watching, and rehearsing.” Doucette warns that the U.S. fielding a boost-glide or scramjet hypersonic weapon may not really change the dynamic, which is why Ursa Major’s argument for its liquid-powered weapon is so strong.

“The novelty of being liquid-powered is that it carries its own oxidizer and fuel, which means it can go anywhere – in the atmosphere, out of the atmosphere, high, low. A solid rocket can technically do the same thing, but the big difference with the liquid system is that it can turn on and off an infinite number of times. A solid is going where it’s going, but a liquid could be on one trajectory and a split second later turn it off, then instantaneously head on a different trajectory because you can maneuver it from a powered vector perspective. Draper is also fully throttleable down to 10% all the way up to 100%.”

There are currently no competing systems that have the ability to bridge the gap between running in atmosphere and out of atmosphere with such a degree of throttle control. Ursa Major is currently the only company with a hypersonic vehicle and experience in the liquid-powered hypersonic realm. It has twice ground-launched from a rail what it calls “Havoc Block 0” in partnership with the Air Force Research Laboratory, under its Affordable Rapid Missile Demonstrator (ARMD) program. These demonstrator flights have been designed as multi-domain tests. “The great thing about Havoc is that we can alter the wings, add our solid rocket motor boost system, and it means we can ground launch, VLS [vertical launch system] launch, or air-launch,” Doucette says.

“Havoc provides something the Department of War has not previously seen,” adds Chris Spagnoletti. “Having a mid- and long-range tactical weapon that can deep throttle, turn on and off at will, is agnostic to atmosphere, rapidly change vector, accelerate and de-celerate, skim the sea, fly outside the atmosphere – this really opens up the aperture of what a munition can do. This is very tough for conventional systems to figure out what it’s intending to do.”

Rapidly scaling production

Spagnoletti says Ursa Major’s hypersonic program can scale quickly because of the company’s additive manufacturing and AI-driven manufacturing processes. Draper’s liquid propellant also has additional advantages when it comes to production. “We can drain the fuel, bring them into a facility, and that now-inert system doesn’t need massive keep-out distances,” explains Spagnoletti. “So, say in a 100,000 square foot building, we can produce 500 full-up missile systems per year inert, then fuel them right before we ship them or at the operational location.”

“Some companies are advocating for things like multi-year contracts, and that really matters to them because they’re setting up rigid long-term production lines. We’ve flipped that on its head where if a customer decides in say five years they want this weapon to look different, we have a common modular approach that we can swap things out. Most of the aerospace systems I’ve worked on in my career have long five or 10-year windows. Design, build, qualify – they don’t want to make hardware changes because it’s going to take ages and cost a lot of money to modify and qualify those systems. They’re inherently resistant to change, not because they don’t want to help and adapt, but because the system allows a massive amount of inertia, production lines have rigid tooling and processes, they can’t adapt. What’s different about Ursa Major is, again, that we design for manufacturability and leverage advanced manufacturing.’

Ursa Major Additive Manufacturing

In addition to its Colorado facilities mentioned earlier, Ursa Major also has a plant in Youngstown, Ohio, which is a center of excellence for 3D-printing, they then ship to Berthoud for final assembly and test. A lot of parts and components are manufactured in house, including valves, tanks, pressurization systems, avionics, but it does have dependency on some external suppliers where appropriate. “We have some really strong partnerships where we can’t bring things in-house. We’re such experts in additive manufacturing that we know when not to do it.”

“Importantly, we are not reducing costs by using the cheapest parts. In my 36 years in the aerospace industry, when it comes to building a critical munition, I know the devil’s in the details – it has to work every time and there’s only so cheap you can go before you start to sacrifice reliability. Some of our competitors are trying to achieve a lower cost hypersonic system, which is great, but those are typically salvo weapons where you just launch a lot of them. The Havoc missile system is more of a strategic asset.”

Ursa Major is making significant moves in the U.S. military’s missile stockpile recapitalization effort. It has opened up versatile methods of producing solid rocket motors, and it has demonstrated the functionality of Havoc with the Air Force Research Laboratory, including the concept of operations with the liquid rocket. Spagnoletti points out that the U.S. used to use liquid rockets prior to the advent of solid rocket motors. Use of additive manufacturing and 3D-printing is always in the conversation too, it’s how this company can scale its innovations fast.

The next major milestone it’s driving towards is a follow-on demonstration phase for Havoc – a boosted, full hypersonic flight. “We’re pushing for that in 2027,” says Spagnoletti.

As America marks its 250th year, the dream of a hypersonic missile with a 3D-printed engine that can be delivered in large quantities at an affordable price could materialize into another significant landmark in the story of American defense innovation. At least that’s Ursa Major’s goal, and it appears to look more promising by the day.

For decades, satellites have provided critical data for military activities in active and non-active combat zones. One of the most significant integration of space-based technologies emerged in missile defense systems during the Cold War. Satellite constellations provided critical data on the launch sites and trajectories of ballistic missiles. The US Defense Support Program (DSP) was the first program to launch satellite constellations to detect heat signatures of Soviet ICBMs with infrared sensors. The Soviet Union launched the first generation of early warning systems under OKO satellite constellations against US missile threats. These systems of satellite constellations allowed both the US and the USSR to maintain a close watch over each other’s strategic capabilities and allowed for much needed early warning that upheld mutual deterrence between the two powers.

Fast forward to the current era, today’s missile defense systems have shown a very limited success rate against hypersonic missiles. The tracking and interception capabilities of current missile defense systems have remained effectively limited due to speed, maneuverability, and depressed flight of hypersonic missiles. Traditional missile defense systems have been outmaneuvered by hypersonic missiles, which increases the threat level due to their capability to reach and hit targets with a high success rate. Modern hypersonic missiles can still be detected with infrared sensing during their boost phase, but Hypersonic Glide Vehicles (HGVs) are extremely difficult to track and intercept primarily due to their maneuverability. The radar-evading capabilities of HGVs affect the strategic calculus by shrinking detection and reaction time duration during crises and conflicts.

As a remedy, the US has introduced the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensors (HBTSS) to counter the threat of HGVs and Hypersonic Cruise Missiles (HCMs). The HBTSS will be a major component of the US Golden Dome missile defense project. It is a layered network of command-and-control systems, interceptors, and space-based sensors to build an advanced layer of missile defense system. What makes HBTSS different from traditional missile defense systems is the satellite constellation, which provides real-time tracking data of missiles. Traditional defense systems like Space Based Infrared System (SBIR) could detect the launch of missiles, but HBTSS can detect, track, and possibly predict the target of the missile.

Because HGVs present a unique challenge due to low flight path and maneuverability and often operate under the coverage of conventional radars, which make it difficult for traditional defense systems to detect. HBTSS relies on space-based sensors, which can detect and track continuously from space. Theoretically, it can be called a space-based missile defense system reflecting the growing strategic importance of space in the military domain. It relies on an interconnected satellite network that can work as a kill web across the globe against the threat of hypersonic missiles.

HBTSS is an emerging strategic shift as it starts a new era of space weaponization with a layer of satellites for enhanced detection and tracking. A reliable space-based tracking system bolsters a state’s capabilities to deal with the threat of hypersonic missiles with improved early warning and missile tracking systems, and reduces the threat of surprise attacks from an adversary. Although missile forces hold great impact on deterrence stability, the induction of HTBSS will question the effectiveness of missiles during crises and conflicts if a more advance missile defense system is introduced. This will provide a wider view from space with more accuracy and precision, and increase the vulnerability of missile forces of states.

Because ground-based nuclear forces are considered vulnerable, many countries have developed second-strike capabilities, particularly at sea, to preserve deterrence even after absorbing an initial attack. But the development of HBTSS undermines the survivability of a state’s missile forces with an enhanced detection and tracking system. Even though the United States and Russia continue to maintain certain crisis management and risk reduction mechanisms, including hotlines and military deconfliction channels, the suspension of New START has weakened the broader framework of strategic stability. While in conflict-prone regions like South Asia, India and Pakistan possess a more limited and less institutionalized set of confidence-building measures (CBMs), making crisis management in South Asia particularly challenging due to emerging technologies.

The peaceful use of outer space depends on the intent and actions of major powers. Sometimes measures taken for self-defense can also prompt a proportionate reaction in the form of countermeasures. The strategic impact of HBTSS on the missile forces may lead to more advance, fast, and lethal missiles for survivability. The development of HBTSS will not end the arms race, it will intensify the arms race with countermeasures.

Russia pounded Ukraine’s capital overnight on Saturday with drones and ballistic missiles, including a powerful hypersonic Oreshnik missile, killing at least four people and damaging residential buildings. Footage shows people sheltering underground, while firefighters work above.

Just over three years ago, the U.S. Air Force moved to cancel the AGM-183A Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) hypersonic missile. ARRW had been in line to be the U.S. military’s first operational hypersonic weapon. Now, the program has not only reemerged from purgatory, with missiles being ordered for operational use, but a new variant is on the horizon. The “Increment 2” ARRW is set to feature an all-new seeker, which would give it a moving target engagement capability. A version of the AGM-183 able to strike enemy ships at sea could be especially relevant in a future high-end fight against China in the Pacific.

The U.S. Air Force is asking for just over $296 million to support work on the new ARRW variant in its 2027 Fiscal Year budget request. This money would fund “the design, test, and evaluation of Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) Increment 2 with terminal seeker and data link capability and other cost reduction production initiatives into ARRW,” according to official budget documents.

The Air Force’s budget documents also indicate that prior work has already been done that “integrated Air Force and DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] enabled system technologies into a prototype that demonstrated the viability of this concept to be fielded as a long range prompt strike capability.”

Furthermore, the “ARRW [program] designed, developed, manufactured, and tested, [sic] a number of prototype vehicles to inform decisions concerning ARRW acquisition, production, and leave behind capability,” the budget documents add. “ARRW Inc.2 adds enhanced capability.”

“FY27 [Fiscal Year 2027] plans to begin [ARRW] INC 2 technology efforts such as but not limited to integrating pre-planned product improvements, design, trade studies, hardware upgrades, facilitization, affordability initiatives, and testing,” the documents also note.

To take a step back quickly, ARRW is known as a boost-glide vehicle-type hypersonic weapon. Designs of this type use a rocket booster to get an unpowered glide vehicle to an optimal speed and altitude. The glide vehicle then detaches from the rest of the weapon and proceeds to its target along a relatively shallow flight path within the Earth’s atmosphere. The vehicle is also designed to maneuver along the way, sometimes erratically. The combination of speed, flight trajectory, and maneuverability creates particular challenges for opponents when it comes to spotting and tracking incoming glide-vehicles, let alone attempting to intercept them or otherwise reacting to the threat. It is this ability to pierce enemy air defenses and very rapidly strike very high-value targets that makes hypersonic weapons so attractive.

“The Air Force will employ units equipped with ARRW to provide an offensive, high-speed strike capability to destroy high-value, time-sensitive, land-based targets in anti-access/area-denial environments,” according to a report from the Pentagon’s Office of the Director of Test and Evaluation that was released in March. “Launched from bomber aircraft, ARRW provides standoff capability to prosecute targets in a timely fashion.”

To date, the Air Force has disclosed plans to integrate ARRW onto its B-52 and B-1 bombers, but other aircraft could potentially carry these weapons, or variants thereof, in the future.

ARRW, in its current guise, is also understood to only be capable of engaging static targets. Adding a terminal seeker would open up the ability to hit targets on the move, including ones at sea. The budget documents do not provide any further details about what kind of seeker the Air Force is looking to add to the Increment 2 variant. Imaging infrared sensors, radars, or passive signal homing seekers – or some combination thereof – could be potential operations.

The extreme heat and physical stress that hypersonic weapons experience in flight, as well as the shape of the glide vehicle, would make integration of any seeker system of these more complex. It is worth noting that ARRW’s prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, is already developing an anti-ship-optimized version of the Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) short-range ballistic missile for the U.S. Army. A key element of the new PrSM variant is the addition of a multi-mode seeker system to enable engagement of moving targets. It is possible that some of that technology could be applicable now to work on the new iteration of the AGM-183.

A data link would also allow targeting updates to be sent to Increment 2 ARRWs in flight, helping to get it first to a general area where the enemy is, or at least believed to be, before its seeker takes over. That system would also need to be able to communicate under hypersonic flight conditions. Given the AGM-183A’s range, off-board platforms would be required for initial target detection and tracking. The weapon’s ability to close that distance very quickly does limit the time available for the target to try to leave the area.

The Air Force did demonstrate exactly the kinds of networks that would be required to close this extremely long-range kill chain in a simulated ARRW strike during Exercise Northern Edge 2021. The designated target was 600 nautical miles from the launch platform, a B-52 bomber. In that instance, no weapon was actually released.

Multiple ARRW flight tests have been conducted since then, including the launch of an AGM-183A with a live warhead from a B-52 flying from Andersen Air Force Base on Guam in 2024. As TWZ noted at the time, the Guam test sent clear signals to China. The Air Force has made no secret of how important it views the development and fielding of hypersonic weapons as part of larger preparations for a potential future high-end fight against the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in the Pacific. This is further underscored by the fact that the mention of the “terminal seeker and data link capability” for Increment 2 of ARRW is actually contained in the Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI) section of the Pentagon’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request.

In the context of a major conflict in the Pacific, there would also be a very high demand for prompt, long-range anti-ship capability. The ability to conduct those strikes even in the face of dense anti-air defenses would be even more attractive for engaging very high-value vessels, such as China’s growing fleets of aircraft carriers or big deck amphibious assault ships. The PLA Navy’s (PLAN) combat fleets, overall, continue to grow in scale and scope at a prodigious rate, as well. This, in turn, has put additional emphasis on the development and fielding of new and improved anti-ship capabilities that can be air-launched, as well as employed from the maritime and ground domains, across the U.S. military in recent years. Increment 2 ARRWs could also offer another means to strike mobile, high-value targets on land, such as ballistic missile transporter-erector-launchers.

For its part, the PLA has been actively developing and fielding various types of hypersonic weapons, including boost-glide vehicle designs. Its ever-growing arsenal of traditional ballistic missiles now includes several air-launched types, including ones with nuclear and conventional warheads. The latter are widely believed to be capable of being employed against enemy ships, as well as targets on land.

To reiterate, a plan now to develop an Increment 2 version of ARRW is also just an important step forward for the program as a whole. As mentioned, the Air Force had previously moved to cancel work on the AGM-183 in 2023. The announcement followed a number of failed flight tests of what had been expected to be the first operational hypersonic weapon anywhere within the U.S. military. The explicit intent at the time was to shift resources to the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM) effort. HACM is an air-breathing hypersonic cruise missile that functions in a completely different way from ARRW.

In the years that followed, there were steady signs that the Air Force’s position on ARRW was changing and that it had not actually been axed in the end. Last year, it became clear that the service had rebooted the program when it requested funds to purchase missiles for operational use in its Fiscal Year 2026 proposed budget. The Air Force ultimately received $362.15 million for the procurement of ARRWs in the current fiscal year, and is now seeking a little over $452 million to continue doing so in Fiscal Year 2027. How many of the weapons the Air Force has ordered to date, and how many more it plans to buy in the coming years, is currently deemed to be Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) that is not releasable to the general public.

Depending on how ARRW and HACM programs progress, the former could still be the first hypersonic weapon to enter operational U.S. Air Force service, with an Increment 2 version able to hit targets on the move following close behind.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com