malice

Big news has broken out of the Tailhook Association’s convention in Reno, Nevada this weekend. The Navy has disclosed the existence of an all-new very long-range air-to-air missile, the AIM-424 “Malice.” An image released by the Navy taken last April shows a Super Hornet from Navy Air Test And Evaluation Squadron 23 (VX-23) loaded with four of the weapons. Another image shows the missile installed in an F-35C’s weapons bay.

The news of the new missile was first reported by our friends Brian Everstine and Steve Trimble over at Aviation Week.

The AIM-424 Long Range Air-to-Air Missile (LRAAM), which is already deep in testing, is meant to arm F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, F-35C Joint Strike Fighters and the upcoming F/A-XX next-generation naval fighter. The missile is clearly larger and significantly farther-reaching than the long-serving AIM-120 AMRAAM and the new AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile, which shares the AIM-120’s general mold-line. It isn’t known where Malice slots in next to the very far-reaching AIM-174B “Gunslinger,” which was adapted from the Navy’s surface-launched SM-6. According to Aviation Week, the missile is a two-stage design, which should result in extreme range and very high-speed.

The Pentagon has been interested in multi-stage air-to-air missiles for years and is now floating the goal of developing extreme-range air-to-air weapons that can reach out to the 1,000-mile mark in the years to come. This number is seen as critical to surviving future enemy anti-access capabilities of equal reach and to take advantage of very long-distance kill chains that will dominate future combat.

In addition, closing the air-to-air missile gap, specifically with China, and attempting to leap significantly in front of the PLA’s capabilities in this regard, has become a top priority for the Pentagon. A multitude of classified programs to develop new and more capable air-to-air missiles have been well underway and now we are seeing yet another example of this work in the form of Malice. One of these secretive programs, the Long-Range Engagement Weapon (LREW,), date back at least a decade, which also point to the development of multi-stage air-to-air weapons.

While we don’t know for certain the manufacturer that built this weapon or if this is its only configuration,

It also isn’t clear if this new weapon has other secondary modes, such as anti-ballistic missile and/or air-to-surface capabilities, nor what types of flying targets it is intended to destroy. For instance, is it capable of hitting maneuverable fighters at extreme distances as well as lumbering force multiplying support aircraft? Again, we don’t know at this time.

We will be doing additional analysis reporting on this weapon soon, stay tuned.

Contact the author: Tyler@twz.com

UPDATE:

We now have a specifications page from the Navy. The highlights include a weight of 1500 pounds (roughly three times that of an AIM-120), and a range in excess of 250NM. Keep in mind that these figures may be intentionally skewed for counter-intelligence purposes, as is often the case, in particular the range figure. Regardless, this weapon possibly sits in between the AIM-260 and the AIM-174B Gunslinger in terms of range, and closer to the latter. We also know the missile is built by Raytheon.

The product page reads:

The Department of Navy is developing the Air Intercept Missile (AIM)-424 Long Range Air to Air Missile (LRAAM), a next-generation missile intended to strengthen fleet defense and maintain a decisive air domain overmatch against advanced threats. Also known as Malice, LRAAM directly supports the Department’s contribution to integrated deterrence by increasing range, lethality, and combat effectiveness for Marine and Naval aviation forces that are defending our fleets, our interests, and our homeland.

LRAAM sustains the Department’s first look, first shot, first kill advantage by providing our aviators greater reach, greater survivability, and greater tactical flexibility in the air-to-air fight. Built for 4^th, 5^th, and 6^th generation platforms, LRAAM is designed for the air wing of today and the future.

Specifications

Primary Function: Air-to-Air Missile

Contractor: Raytheon

Propulsion: Solid-propellant rocket motor

Length: 13.5 feet (4.11 meters)

Diameter: 13.5 inches (0.34 meters)

Wingspan: 26.2 inches (0.67 meters)

Weight: 1500 pounds (680.4 kg)

Range: In excess of 250 nm (463 km)

Warhead: Blast fragmentation

*Author’s note, similarities of the design to a Boeing concept was removed due to the manufacturer being disclosed by the Navy

The bitter legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni over allegations of misconduct and retaliation tied to the making of “It Ends With Us” moved closer to a conclusion Friday after a federal judge ordered Baldoni and his production company to pay Lively’s attorneys fees related to his unsuccessful defamation lawsuit against her, while rejecting her bid for additional damages.

In a 47-page order, U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman found that Lively was entitled to recover legal fees under a California law intended to protect people who report sexual misconduct from retaliatory defamation claims, ruling that Baldoni’s side had failed to show she acted with malice when making her allegations.

But Liman denied Lively’s request for treble and punitive damages, concluding that the procedural mechanism her lawyers used permitted recovery of attorneys fees and costs but not broader financial penalties.

Lively’s attorneys, Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb, called Friday’s ruling a victory for their client and emphasized that the judge found “there was no evidence she acted with malice.”

“The Court is awarding Ms. Lively attorneys’ fees and costs and has explained that a prevailing defendant under Section 47.1 may seek damages using different procedural mechanisms,” the attorneys said in a statement. “The parties’ settlement agreement expressly preserves Ms. Lively’s rights to obtain those damages.”

While the judge rejected Lively’s request for additional damages in this particular motion, her legal team said she could still seek them through other legal avenues permitted under the statute.

Bryan Freedman, Baldoni’s attorney, sharply disputed Lively’s characterization of the ruling, arguing that the court’s prior decisions had substantially undercut many of her original claims.

“There was no sexual harassment. There was no retaliation. There was no smear campaign,” Freedman said in a statement. “The court recognized it, the record reflects it, and we have maintained it from the very beginning.”

The amount Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios ultimately may have to pay has not yet been determined. Lively’s lawyers must still submit billing records and fee calculations for court approval.

The ruling follows last month’s settlement between Lively and Baldoni, which came just before what had been expected to be a closely watched federal trial in Manhattan. Under that settlement, neither side received financial compensation. But the agreement preserved Lively’s ability to seek attorneys fees and damages under California Civil Code Section 47.1, a relatively new statute designed to shield sexual harassment and assault accusers from retaliatory defamation claims.

Lively sued Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios, Wayfarer CEO Jamey Heath and others in December 2024, alleging Baldoni and his associates orchestrated a coordinated effort to damage her reputation after she raised concerns about misconduct during production of the film, which Baldoni directed and co-starred in. Baldoni denied wrongdoing.

Baldoni and Wayfarer later filed a $400 million defamation suit against Lively, her publicist Leslie Sloane and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, that was dismissed last year. Friday’s ruling dealt specifically with whether Lively could recover attorneys’ fees and damages tied to that dismissed suit under California Civil Code Section 47.1.

The latest ruling comes after Liman earlier this year dismissed 10 of the 13 claims in Lively’s lawsuit, including sexual harassment and defamation claims, while allowing retaliation-related claims to proceed.

In Friday’s ruling, Liman wrote that Baldoni’s team had produced no evidence demonstrating Lively acted maliciously when making her allegations.

“Allegations are insufficient on their own to demonstrate that statements were in fact made with malice,” the judge wrote. “That determination requires some evidence.”

Friday’s ruling offered each side new grounds to claim vindication in a legal battle that has played out as much in public statements as in court filings. Lively’s team pointed to the judge’s finding that she acted without malice, while Baldoni’s attorneys emphasized that many of her original claims had been dismissed.

Still, the settlement agreement bars either side from appealing Liman’s ruling, potentially drawing one of Hollywood’s ugliest recent legal fights to a close.