LongRange

China fields the largest and most sophisticated ballistic missile arsenal in Asia, supported by what the U.S. Department of Defense has described as “the world’s most active and diverse missile development program.” In the first of this series, TWZ provides an overview of the country’s intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (ICBMs and SLBMs), representing the leading edge of Beijing’s nuclear deterrent forces.

China has rapidly expanded and modernized the arsenal of its People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF), fielding a growing number of ballistic missiles capable of delivering either conventional or nuclear warheads. The backbone of the force now consists of road-mobile, solid-fuel medium-, intermediate-, and intercontinental-range missiles. However, legacy liquid-fueled systems such as the Dong Feng-5 (CSS-4) remain in service, and a new silo-building program will change the balance yet again.

The expansion shows no signs of slowing. According to one report, by the start of this decade, the number of Chinese ballistic missile brigades had grown by more than 35 percent in just three years, with most new formations operating medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs and IRBMs) alongside ground-launched cruise missiles (GLCMs).

Perhaps most dramatically, China has embarked on a rapid expansion of its ICBM silos. In 2021, open-source researchers observed the construction of several hundred new missile silos. These are located near Yumen (120 silos), Hami (110 silos), and Ordos (around 90), and they raise big questions about how many ICBMs China aims to deploy. The analysts responsible for locating the new solos described it as “the most significant expansion of the Chinese nuclear arsenal ever,” but its full significance remains to be seen.

Leaving some of the new silos empty might be an option, revisiting the ‘shell game’ that was planned for the U.S. Peacekeeper ICBM in the late 1970s. However, the U.S. State Department has said that the U.S. intelligence community believes every silo will have a missile ‘loaded.’ You can read our previous assessment of this development here.

At the same time, Beijing is improving the survivability and effectiveness of its strategic arsenal through the deployment of multiple independent re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) and penetration aids, while advancing new sea- and air-based nuclear delivery systems. These include the Type 096 ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) and its JL-3 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), as well as the nuclear-capable H-20 stealth bomber currently under development, further strengthening China’s emergence as a fully fledged nuclear triad power.

As for the nuclear warheads that arm the ICBMs and SLBMs discussed below, the numbers available are a closely guarded secret. However, the Pentagon has estimated that China had surpassed 600 operational nuclear warheads in its stockpile as of mid-2024 and will have over 1,000 operational warheads by 2030, much of which will be deployed at higher readiness levels.

DF-5 (CSS-4)

Range: 12,000+ kilometers

With the DF-4, a ‘limited-range ICBM,’ having been retired from service around 2023, the DF-5, China’s first true ICBM, is now the oldest in the inventory.

On account of its size, the two-stage, liquid-fueled DF-5 was always intended for silo deployment.

Although tested as early as 1971, the missile wasn’t successfully flown over longer ranges until 1980. It appears that China had particular challenges getting the powerful new engines to work, and other new developments over the DF-4 included using nitrogen tetroxide as an oxidizer and steering via gimballed engines and vernier engines rather than jet vanes.

As tensions with the Soviet Union increased, China accelerated the program, placing the missiles in experimental silos by December 1980, a month after the handover of the first DF-5.

As early as 1983, work began on the improved DF-5A, known in the West as the CSS-4 Mod 2, four units of which were reportedly operational by 1992. Deployed DF-5 units were gradually replaced with the DF-5A. The DF-5 and DF-5A both featured a multi-megaton warhead.

In 2015, the further-improved DF-5B (CSS-4 Mod 2) variant was unveiled. In a first for China, this version is understood to differ from its predecessors in carrying multiple warheads, reportedly four re-entry vehicles per missile. The delay in fielding a missile with nuclear-armed multiple independent re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) may seem surprising, but reflects the major technological challenges, which saw China lag behind the Soviet Union (later Russia) and the United States for many years.

At the same time, it appears that, instead of attempting to boost penetrative power against enemy defenses by adopting MIRVs, China instead focused more on rapid launch sequences and hardened silos for its ICBMs.

It should be noted that the DF-5 also served as the basis for China’s important Long March 2 series of space launch vehicles and its successors.

The latest version of the missile is the DF-5C (CSS-4 Mod 4). This features an enlarged final stage section, which the Pentagon has suggested carries a multi-megaton-sized warhead. This would indicate a counter-value rather than a counter-force system, i.e., expected to target enemy population centers and economic assets, rather than its military capabilities like missile silos and command bases.

The DF-5 and its improved variants remain in service as China’s last liquid-fueled ballistic missiles. According to Western estimates, there are 20 known DF-5 silos, although China is building additional silos which may well also be used to house these weapons, as well as more modern missiles.

DF-31 and DF-31A (CSS-10 Mod 1 and CSS-10 Mod 2)

Range: DF-31 (CSS-10 Mod 1) 7,000+ km; DF-31A (CSS-10 Mod 2) 11,000+ km

With Sino-Soviet relations hitting a low in the early 1970s, China launched the development of a solid-fuel ICBM (and a submarine-launched counterpart) as part of a major overhaul of its strategic forces.

Initial work on what became the DF-31 began in 1974, but the program made little progress until 1978. Successful tests of a new solid-fuel motor in 1983 spurred these efforts and led Beijing to scrap work on a new liquid-fuel ICBM. In 1984, an official directive called for a shift from liquid to solid propellants, as well as a focus on tactical rather than strategic missile systems.

Solid-fueled missiles, when combined with mobile launchers, can leave cover and launch far more quickly, eliminating the lengthy fueling process required while the missile is erected. As a result, they are significantly less vulnerable to preemptive strikes. The shorter launch timeline also drastically improves the ability to respond to a crisis.

From 1985, China embarked on its ‘second-generation strategic missile’ program, spearheaded by the DF-31 and the submarine-launched JL-2.

In 1999, the three-stage DF-31 was publicly unveiled for the first time during a parade. However, the missile didn’t enter service until 2006, reportedly due to difficulties related to the guidance systems.

As a mobile solid-fuel ICBM, the closest match to the DF-31 is perhaps Russia’s Topol. The U.S. Minuteman III is similar in terms of size and configuration but is exclusively silo-based and has significantly better performance.

The DF-31 is an important part of Beijing’s strategic force. Most significantly, perhaps, it reflects a shift from a Chinese ICBM force dominated by heavy, liquid-fuel missiles to one fielding a larger number of smaller, mobile solid-fuel missiles.

As well as the original DF-31 (CSS-10 Mod 1), of which around eight launchers are understood to be deployed, China operates around 24 launchers armed with the DF-31A (CSS-10 Mod 2). The DF-31A reportedly first flew in 1999 and has a longer range thanks to a lighter guidance system and other improvements. Both types carry a single warhead.

There is also a silo-based version of the missile, which Beijing is now presumed to have installed in many of the silos in its missile fields. This is designated as the DF-31BJ, but few details about it are known.

DF-31AG (CSS-10 Mod 3)

Range: unknown

In 2017, China publicly displayed a new variant of the DF-31, the DF-31AG. Mounted on a new transporter-erector-launcher (TEL), the new missile system has a distinctly unique appearance and likely has certain different capabilities, perhaps including multiple warheads. Based on commercial satellite imagery, it appears that China is converting at least some of its existing DF-31A brigades to this new variant.

Compared to the tractor-trailer configuration of the MEL used on the DF-31/DF-31A, that for the DF-31AG is highly mobile and much more suitable for off-road operations, suggesting a different employment concept. Around 30 launchers are understood to be deployed.

DF-41 (CSS-20)

Range: 12,000+ km

While the DF-31 series marked a step change for China’s strategic forces, these ‘second-generation strategic missiles’ were just a part of the process of modernizing the deterrent.

By 1986, China was working on an even more ambitious three-stage solid-fuel missile, the DF-41. This was intended to fully replace the liquid-fuel DF-5 by no later than 2010, although this goal was not achieved.

Like the DF-31, the new ICBM would be mobile, and, in parallel with its development, China made efforts to make portions of its highway network more suitable for handling the heavy mobile launchers.

The DF-41 was revealed to the public during a parade in 2019. At the time, it was announced that two brigades were already equipped with this system.

In contrast to the DF-31, the DF-41 is thought to be equipped with multiple warheads, although sources disagree on how many. Published figures range from three to 10 MIRVs, although it’s probable that a range of different numbers and yields can be accommodated. One Pentagon assessment said that “the system is likely intended to carry no more than three warheads per missile and has improved range and accuracy over DF-31 class ICBMs.”

In addition to the road-mobile version, the U.S. Department of Defense has assessed that both silo-based and rail-based variants are under development. Potentially, the newly built silos could accommodate other ICBMs, like the DF-31 and DF-5, but the more modern DF-41 appears a more likely candidate.

Looking at the road-mobile type only, a total of 18 launchers for the DF-41 are understood to be deployed.

DF-61

Range: unknown

The latest Chinese ICBM to have been revealed is the DF-61, shown publicly for the first time during the parade celebrating the 80th anniversary of victory in World War II, in September 2025. There have been suggestions that the missile could be the launcher for one or more intercontinental-range nuclear-armed HGVs. (It is unclear what happened to the ‘missing’ DF-51 designation, which only ever appears to have been used speculatively).

U.S. intelligence considers that there is a Chinese counterpart to Russia’s Avangard, namely, an intercontinental-range hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV), which may be carried atop the DF-61. Designed to fly at high speeds and low altitudes, it would seriously complicate an adversary’s ability to provide precise warning. It is likely the same gliding re-entry vehicle that China tested in 2021 as a fractional orbital bombardment system (FOBS) capable of defeating U.S. missile defences.

Chinese officials have hinted at such a capability in the past. In 2024, then-Principal Assistant Deputy Secretary of Defense for Space Policy, Dr. Vipin Narang, described a ‘strategic hypersonic glide missile that can carry nuclear warheads’ in Beijing’s arsenal. Such a missile would provide a long-range, strategic complement to the theater-range, conventionally armed DF-17 hypersonic boost glide vehicle.

JL-2 (CSS-N-14)

Range: 7,000 km

Soon after embarking on its nuclear program, China began looking at launching a ballistic missile from a nuclear-powered submarine. The ambition was long delayed, since the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) did not commission its first nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) until 1984. The goal was further thwarted when it deprioritized its SSBN program, and only a single Type 092 class boat was ever fielded.

Ultimately, China did not possess a true sea-based deterrent until the mid-2010s. The PLAN deployed its first Type 094 Jin class SSBN in 2007 and commissioned its sixth example in 2021.

Each Jin class submarine carries 12 JL-2 (CSS-N-14) submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), which are derived from the DF-31 ICBM. The three-stage solid-fuel missile was reportedly tested for the first time in 2004. British and U.S. intelligence reports on the status of the JL-2 were generally circumspect, and they only started to list the missile as operational around 2015.

The limited range of the JL-2 means that the Type 094 submarines would need to operate in areas north and east of Hawaii if China wanted to strike targets on the U.S. east coast. This puts a serious dent in the credibility of China’s sea-based deterrent, and this is exacerbated by the fact that only a portion of what is already a small SSBN force will be on patrol at any given time.

Most Western sources consider that the JL-2 is armed with a single warhead, although there have been rumors of a multiple-warhead configuration with three to eight MIRVs.

JL-3

Range: 10,000 km (estimated)

China is developing a follow-on to the JL-2, the JL-3, which would allow it to target portions of the continental United States from its own territorial waters. This missile is expected to be deployed on the new Type 096 submarine, which China likely began constructing in the early 2020s. These new SSBNs are expected to enter service in the 2030s and will provide China with a much more credible sea-based deterrent. The Pentagon has also reported that some of the older Type 094 submarines may have been equipped to carry the JL-3 as well as the older JL-2.

The JL-3 is presumed to be a three-stage, solid-fuel weapon carrying multiple warheads.

“Over the next decade, the PRC [People’s Republic of China] probably will continue to modernize, diversify, and expand its nuclear forces rapidly,” the Pentagon had noted in the unclassified version of an annual report on Chinese military developments that it sent to Congress in December 2024.

“The PLARF is advancing its long-term modernization plans to enhance its ‘strategic deterrence’ capabilities,” the report added.

The development of new ICBMs and SLBMs is an important part of this, and one that will significantly improve its nuclear-capable missile forces. However, these weapons are just one part of the picture. China is busy working on fielding a larger and more diverse missile force, both nuclear and conventional. China’s bewildering array of intermediate-, medium-, and short-range ballistic missiles will be discussed in a forthcoming article.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

July 8 (UPI) — NATO countries in Europe, plus Canada, agreed Wednesday to jointly spend $50 billion over the coming decade on developing new ground-based “deep precision strike capabilities,” including an advanced missile with a 1,250 mile range to defend the continent and beyond.

Launched by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer at the NATO Summit in Ankara, the project brings together Britain, France, Italy, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Greece, Czechia, Slovakia, Turkey and Canada, Downing Street said in a news release.

The initiative was, Britain said, proof that allies were taking action to strengthen Europe’s ability to defend by “radically boosting NATO’s defense and deterrence capabilities” and ensuring a “more European NATO.”

“We must step up to deliver a stronger, more European NATO. The U.K.is already working with partners to develop exquisite capability that will give our Armed Forces the ability to defend and deter thousands of kilometres from the front line, but this U.K.-led initiative will allow us to step up our cooperation, bringing European Allies together to ensure NATO remains safe and secure for years to come,” said Starmer.

NATO said in a statement that the breakthrough came after NATO allies “made progress on providing innovative and cost-effective solutions for munitions and deep strike systems, delivering them faster and at greater scale.”

The costs and complexity involved in developing and making advanced strike capabilities, together with recurring compatibility and interchangeability problems and the rapidly evolving threat of long-range strikes requiring a nimble response, meant it made sense for allies to work together, NATO said.

Leveraging multinational projects and shared defense purchasing would spread the cost, realize economies of scale and deliver field capabilities much faster than working individually, it added.

Britain, France, Italy, Denmark, Norway and Turkey will work together on developing the proposed long-range missile deterrent and other “novel deep precision strike capabilities,” including new missiles and launchers.

The remainder of the countries — plus Denmark, Norway and Turkey — agreed to work together to address issues created by the array of different weapons systems used by NATO member states by developing a prototype generic NATO artillery round, aimed at establishing standards for a “future fully interchangeable, interoperable NATO 155mm munition.”

Speaking in Ankara, British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said the new deep precision strike capability would deter would-be aggressors by enabling NATO to target high-value military assets and “the logistical engines that drive armies.

“At Ankara we are sending a clear message to President Putin; NATO is stronger, more European and ready to defend our citizens against the long-term threat posed by him and the Russian state,” said Cooper.

Britain is already working on a multi-billion-dollar project to jointly develop long-range stealth and hypersonic missiles with Germany as part of an enhanced defense cooperation pact between the countries signed in summer 2024.

It is also working with France and Italy on Stratus, a new family of long-range cruise and anti-ship weapon, to replace the Storm Shadow cruise missile and Harpoon and Exocet anti-ship weapons used by the militaries of the three countries.

Stratus is being developed by the pan-European defense contractor MBDA Missile Systems.

Wednesday’s developments came amid a summit at which the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump has been doubling down on its burden-sharing message that Europe must shoulder more responsibility for its own defense and for member states to meet pledges made in The Hague in 2025 to up core military spending to 3.5% of GDP, or 5% total defense and security-related spending.

Ukraine is increasingly emerging as a potential player in Europe’s race to build-up its long-range conventional strike capabilities. New partnerships centered on the Ukrainian Flamingo and Neptune cruise missiles underscore how the European defense industry is moving from supplying Kyiv to co-developing and manufacturing combat-proven Ukrainian missile technology for NATO’s own future arsenal.

Diehl Defense recently confirmed that it plans to launch production of Ukraine’s Flamingo cruise missile in Germany. Diehl’s chief executive, Helmut Rauch, said that his company was planning talks in the coming weeks with Fire Point, the manufacturer of the Flamingo. Previously, Diehl had signed a technology agreement with Fire Point but had not disclosed any details.

Meanwhile, another European missile manufacturer, MBDA, the largest company of its kind in Europe, has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Ukrainian defense firm Luch to expand collaboration on deep-strike capabilities by focusing on the Neptune family of cruise missiles. Under the agreement, MBDA and Luch will work together on the so-called Neptune 2 missile, via what the European missile house describes as a process of “disruptive innovation.”

Reflecting this broader trend, during a visit to Kyiv last month, German Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius noted Ukraine’s “remarkable” wartime technological advances and said that Berlin was looking at joint ventures that included long-range drones, air defenses, and electronic warfare.

Looking at these Ukrainian cruise missiles in more detail, Luch’s Neptune first emerged as an anti-ship missile, based on the Soviet-era Kh-35, known to NATO as the SS-N-25 Switchblade in its surface-launched form. The Neptune came to prominence when it was used to sink the Russian Navy’s Slava class cruiser Moskva in 2022.

Ukraine reportedly began work on a new land-attack version of the Neptune in 2023. A Ukrainian defense official told TWZ that this version has a range of up to 225 miles (360 kilometers). This compares to a reported maximum range of around 190 miles (300 kilometers) for the anti-ship version.

Subsequently, Ukraine introduced the extended-range Long Neptune, which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has stated has a range in the region of 620 miles (1,000 kilometers). The Long Neptune features an extended body to accommodate additional fuel for its turbofan engine. It has reportedly been used against dozens of targets inside Russia.

The land-attack versions of the Neptune reportedly use a GPS-assisted inertial navigation system (INS) and an imaging infrared sensor in place of the anti-ship missile’s active radar seeker.

At least one more version of the Neptune has also been developed, this one apparently featuring fuel tank ‘bulges’ for increased range. As you can read about here, this model appears to be something like an intermediate-range version, falling between the original land-attack Neptune and the Long Neptune.

Turning to the Flamingo, also known as the FP-5, this was designed from the ground up to hit targets deep within Russia, the missile having a reported range of 1,864 miles (3,000 kilometers). The Flamingo is significantly bigger than the Neptune series, being launched from rails mounted on a trailer, rather than from canisters on the flatbed of a truck.

The Flamingo also features a notably larger warhead, reportedly weighing around 2,205 pounds (1,000 kilograms).

A video of the Flamingo cruise missile in action:

Випробувальний пуск ракети “Фламінго”

In terms of guidance, the Flamingo is said to use a combination of methods, including various types of satellite navigation. An underlying inertial navigation system is likely to be present. The missile is powered by an AI-25 turbofan engine, a type produced in Ukraine for military and civilian aircraft, including the L-39 Albatros trainer and the Yak-40 feederliner.

Ukraine’s development of increasingly long-range land-attack cruise missiles is driven by the requirement to strike targets deeper inside Russia. Kyiv has received standoff missiles from its allies, including the air-launched Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG from the United Kingdom and France, respectively, as well as the U.S.-supplied Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) short-range ballistic missile. However, these are not available in large numbers and are limited by restrictions imposed upon their use. Additionally, none of them have the kind of range or warhead capacity offered by the Flamingo.

Kyiv has long been campaigning to receive Tomahawk cruise missiles from the United States, but so far, Washington has refused these requests, with U.S. President Donald Trump saying he is “not looking to see an escalation” in the conflict. These highly accurate missiles would be able to hit targets roughly 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) from Ukraine’s borders.

As well as cruise missiles, Ukraine has also developed a huge variety of long-range one-way-attack drones, and other designs that blur the line between long-range kamikaze drones and cruise missiles, including Palianytsia, Peklo, and Trembita.

Kyiv has also been working on developing new ballistic missiles. However, the longest-range one of these, as far as is known, is the Hrim-2, which can hit targets at 174 miles (280 kilometers) or possibly up to 310 miles (500 kilometers).

Meanwhile, Fire Point has developed the FP-7 ballistic missile, a weapon with a stated range of around 124 miles (200 kilometers), and a warhead of approximately 331 pounds (150 kilograms).

In both cases, however, these ballistic missiles lack true strategic reach. This would be partially addressed by the FP-9, which Fire Point aims to start testing this summer, and which is expected to have a range of 530 miles (855 kilometers).

🇺🇦 Fire Point’s at the Paris exhibition:

• FP-5 Flamingo

• FP-7

• FP-9 (ballistics at 700+ km)

• FP-1/2 pic.twitter.com/3OzjHEpM7h

— MAKS 26 🇺🇦👀 (@Maks_NAFO_FELLA) June 16, 2026

Ukraine’s efforts to develop new and more destructive missiles, and to build them at scale, come as Europe’s NATO members also increasingly look to field weapons in this class.

The scale factor is an important one, since Ukrainian wartime weapons development stresses equipment that can be produced rapidly, in large numbers, and at a lower cost point. Fire Point has said that it aims to increase Flamingo production to a daily rate of at least seven missiles by October of this year. This would translate to 2,555 built annually. It remains questionable whether this is a realistic target, but the prospect of additional production lines elsewhere in Europe would change things.

Additional details have been released about Ukraine’s new domestically-produced long-range cruise missile, dubbed the FP-5 “Flamingo” which is manufactured by Fire Point. According to an interview with Chief Technical Officer Iryna Terekh, the “Flamingo” has entered serial… pic.twitter.com/2D5GisrmFP

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) August 21, 2025

At the same time, it should be noted that the Flamingo and Neptune cruise missiles, for all their capabilities, are not especially sophisticated. They both fly at subsonic speed and do not appear to have any attempts at signature control. While they are certainly destructive, they are far from immune to interception.

Their effectiveness can be increased by using them in missile barrages and combined with drones and potentially decoys, to overwhelm air defenses. Here, too, is an area in which Ukrainian experience could help, creating a mix of high-end missile capabilities with combat mass from lower-end drones.

With this in mind, it is perhaps not surprising that Diehl is already looking at how it can improve the Flamingo.

Diehl’s Helmut Rauch has said that his company could outfit the Flamingo with a much more advanced seeker, leveraging the German firm’s experience in this area.

An unverified video that appears to show a Flamingo cruise missile strike on a military factory in Cheboksary in western Russia:

Similarly, MBDA’s expertise in missile development and production could potentially be incorporated in future versions of the Neptune.

Either way, Ukraine would benefit from advanced technologies that otherwise might not be immediately accessible.

What is clear is that European NATO allies are increasingly looking to address their lack of land-based long-range strike capabilities. As well as facing an increasingly belligerent Russia equipped with an expanding arsenal of long-range missiles, Europe is also confronting the prospect of its U.S. ally being unwilling to provide the same kinds of capabilities.

Ukraine is not alone in being unable to secure U.S.-made Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Berlin, in particular, is looking for alternatives to the U.S. Army long-range fires battalion equipped with various conventionally armed standoff missiles — including Tomahawk — that was expected to be deployed in Germany on a rotational basis, starting this year. The U.S. move was an apparent response to disagreements with Germany over the Iran war as well as ongoing tariff tensions. 

While Europe does have new long-range strike programs underway, they are not expected to bring new systems into service until the 2030s. At the same time, efforts like the European Long-Range Strike Approach (ELSA), which involves France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, still have to agree on common requirements, provided that is even possible.

Separately, Germany and the United Kingdom have unveiled plans to jointly produce a “deep precision strike” weapon with a range of over 1,240 miles (2,000 kilometers). At this point, however, no industrial framework has been agreed on. Potentially, an advanced version of the Flamingo could meet that requirement, even if only as an interim measure before a more bespoke solution can be developed.

Russia’s extensive use of ground-launched missiles in Ukraine, along with its deployment of long-range weapons in Kaliningrad, has only highlighted the deficiencies in Europe’s deep-strike capabilities as NATO seeks to strengthen conventional deterrence against Moscow.

For Europe, Ukrainian missile developers like Luchs and Fire Point bring the valuable experience of wartime innovation, while established defense firms like MBDA and Diehl provide additional industrial capacity and advanced technologies. If either of these projects succeeds, they could not only help Ukraine field more advanced and capable cruise missiles, but also help address one of NATO’s most pressing capability gaps.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

A timeline has been provided for the arrival of Saab Gripen fighters in Ukraine, with the first jets to be delivered early next year. Significantly, as well as getting another modern Western combat jet, Ukraine expects to receive highly capable Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missiles, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has announced.

After meeting Zelensky in the city of Uppsala, Sweden today, Sweden’s Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson announced that his country will donate up to 16 Gripen C/Ds to Ukraine. These will be secondhand jets drawn from Swedish stocks, to expedite delivery. Handover of the jets in Ukraine will take place in early 2027, Kristersson added.

According to Swedish officials, the training of Ukrainian pilots and technicians on the Gripen C/D is already underway and will be expanded this fall.

In the longer term, Kristersson confirmed that Ukraine plans to acquire an initial batch of up to 20 of the more advanced Gripen E/F versions. Writing on X today, Swedish Minister for Defense Pål Jonson said that the Gripen E/F would be financed with a $2.9-billion European Union loan. The long-term ambition remains 100-150 Gripen aircraft, he added.

Despite it having a similar outward appearance to the Gripen C/D, the Gripen E (and the two-seat Gripen F version) is regarded as a completely new aircraft type — as you can read about here.

“Ukraine has clearly identified the Gripen aircraft as a priority option for its air force in the long term and intends to purchase the newest version, the Gripen E,” Kristersson said. “Negotiations are ongoing, and we will be able to transfer these aircraft by 2030.”

In a press release, Saab reiterated that it has not yet signed any contract nor received an order relating to the Gripen E/F for Ukraine, meaning this transfer only exists as a statement of intent for now.

According to Saab, “The next steps for the Ukrainian and Swedish authorities will be to complete the negotiations regarding Ukraine’s acquisition of Gripen E/F, which is expected to take place in batches, and Saab will support this process.”

In the meantime, the Swedish government has also announced that it will replace the donated Gripen C/D aircraft in the Swedish Air Force inventory. “Dialogue regarding Sweden’s replacement of the donated capability will be initiated soon,” Saab said.

Last October, as we reported, Kristersson and Zelensky signed a letter of intent (LOI) including a potential export deal covering “likely between 100 and 150 fighter jets,” according to Kristersson. The LOI was signed at Linköping, the site of Saab’s manufacturing facility for the Gripen.

As for second-hand Gripens, Ukraine has repeatedly been linked with a possible transfer of secondhand Swedish Air Force Gripen C/Ds, and Zelensky previously said he would like to see the first of these delivered from 2026.

While the Gripen C/Ds are now set to arrive later than hoped, it remains a big deal for the Ukrainian Air Force. Although the service has already received Western-supplied F-16s and a smaller number of Mirage 2000s, the Ukrainian Air Force still relies heavily on its Soviet-era fighters. The MiG-29, in particular, has been continually adapted to carry new weaponry, both Western-supplied and locally developed, but these are aging jets and the fleet has been steadily reduced by attrition.

Perhaps the most important part of the Gripen transfer will involve the armament for the fighter.

Zelensky specifically mentioned that he expects the Gripen C/Ds to be armed with the Meteor missile.

Swedish Minister for Defense Pål Jonson said that the Gripen C/D “can be delivered with weapons such as IRIS-T, AMRAAM, and the long-range Meteor missile. This is about aircraft, weapons, skills and sustainment.”

Earlier this year, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense confirmed that the Meteor was one of the weapons being lined up for the next Swedish security aid package for Ukraine.

As we have discussed in the past, the Meteor would provide Ukraine with a class of air-to-air weapon that it badly needs to redress the balance against Russian fighter jets.

Undoubtedly, the Meteor is among the most capable air-to-air missiles in operational service anywhere in the world. Thanks to its ramjet propulsion, which can be throttled during different phases of flight, the Meteor is generally considered to be effective against certain types of targets out to around 130 miles.

Meteor

The Meteor also features an active radar seeker for the terminal phase and a two-way datalink that feeds it with in-flight updates as it flies out to its target and provides information to the pilot in the launch aircraft.

While the AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) that arms Ukraine’s F-16 fighters also has an active radar seeker, it lacks the range of the Meteor.

The most capable AMRAAM identified as being used by Ukraine is the AIM-120C-8, which is generally assumed to be able to hit targets at a distance of between 75 and 100 miles.

Of course, in practical applications, the range of both the Meteor and AMRAAM is affected by a whole range of factors, above all, the energy and altitude state of the launching aircraft and the target.

However, the Meteor could bring a significant shift to the airpower balance over Ukraine.

Russia has repeatedly exploited the long range of its R-37M air-to-air missile, known to NATO as AA-13 Axehead, typically launching them from jets flying outside the range of the missiles carried by Ukrainian fighters, as well as from most ground-based air defense systems.

With a reported range of 124 miles against certain types of targets, the R-37M flies to its target on a lofted trajectory, controlled by an inertial navigation system with mid-course radio correction, and uses an active radar seeker for its terminal phase attack.

Mainly used by Su-35S Flanker multirole fighters and MiG-31BM Foxhound interceptors, the R-37M is a missile we have examined in detail in the past. It has long been a thorn in the side of Ukrainian Air Force fighter pilots.

As TWZ had previously pointed out, Meteor is the best candidate for Ukraine to try and redress the balance in the air war when faced by the far-reaching R-37M and would finally put Russian aircraft at risk within their own missile ranges.

At the same time, the Meteor would give Ukraine a weapon that can target Russian jets delivering standoff munitions, again from outside the range of Ukrainian air defenses. Zelensky today said the missile “would stop Russian glide bomb attacks,” something that has been a huge problem for Ukrainian air defenses since this class of weapons was introduced.

As we’ve highlighted in detail as far back as April of 2022, aside from its Meteor capability, the Gripen, even in its earlier C/D versions, would be the best fit for Ukraine.

Designed during the Cold War to meet the Soviet threat, the Gripen was engineered for efficiency, durability, and ease of operation under wartime conditions. It was specifically designed to be serviced and rearmed by small teams — often including conscript personnel — while operating from dispersed locations such as roads and improvised airstrips instead of traditional air bases. The aircraft’s entire concept centers on maintaining combat operations in demanding environments, including prolonged cold-weather conditions.

“Gripen was built for a country that may have to fight outnumbered, under pressure and from dispersed bases,” Swedish Minister for Defense Pål Jonson said. “That makes it highly relevant for Ukraine: high readiness, rapid turnaround, modern weapons and the ability to operate under constant threat,” he added.

Overall, the Gripen is particularly compatible with the decentralized and highly mobile style of warfare Ukraine is currently practicing.

At the same time, it should be noted that even with the F-16, the Ukrainian Air Force has developed tactics and equipment to operate these jets from dispersed locations around the country. Even before the current conflict, Ukrainian fighters were training to make use of highways as alternatives to traditional runways.

A video shows vehicles intended to help with distributed operations of Ukrainian F-16s:

Project 61: an ecosystem for F-16s by Come Back Alive Foundation

The capabilities of the Gripen and Meteor would also be enhanced by working in combination with the two Saab 340 airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft equipped with Erieye radar that have been donated by Sweden.

Ukraine’s Saab 340 AEW&C can function as an airborne fighter control platform by detecting and tracking Russian targets, prioritizing threats, and directing fighters to intercept them. Through its datalink system, the aircraft can also transmit mid-course guidance updates directly to missiles in flight. As a result, fighter pilots may not even need to activate their own radar when engaging a target. Instead, the missile can be assigned a target before launch, fired, and then continuously guided by updates from the AEW&C aircraft throughout its flight.

The first evidence of the Saab 340 AEW&C being used over Ukraine emerged in March this year, but its activities have remained closely under wraps.

Taken together, the arrival of the Gripen and Meteor missile would represent one of the most significant upgrades yet for the Ukrainian Air Force. Beyond simply adding another Western fighter type, the package would introduce a highly survivable, dispersed-operating combat jet paired with one of the world’s most capable long-range air-to-air missiles and supported by Swedish AEW&C assets.

Even without the Meteor, the Gripen C/D could help Ukraine challenge Russia’s long-standing advantage in beyond-visual-range air combat while fitting naturally into the more decentralized operating model the Ukrainian Air Force has already been forced to adopt throughout the war. At the same time, it will provide valuable experience for crews and serve as a stepping stone for the future Gripen E/F.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com