Missile

The MQ-9 family of medium altitude, long endurance uncrewed air vehicles, which includes the new SkyGuradian and SeaGuardian variants, are getting the ability to reach out and hit targets at extreme ranges. In essence, the addition of long-range cruise missiles to their quivers — basically turning the drones into standoff “missile trucks” — will give these aircraft another new mission that is also relevant in high-end conflicts.

MQ-9’s long-range and extreme loitering time would offer a level of flexibility not really available in a tactical aircraft-sized package. As it sits now, Lockheed Martin’s stealthy AGM-158 JASSM and its anti-ship variant, LRASM, as well as Kongsberg-Raytheon’s Joint Strike Missile are being looked at as weapons options.

General Atomics writes in a release: “Hypothetically, a mission profile might look like this: MQ-9Bs could launch from a number of friendly bases in the Western or Southern Pacific, fly to a hold point and loiter there outside a hostile power’s weapons engagement zone. If the order came to release the weapons, the aircraft could launch them in coordination with other U.S. or allied operations.”

The goal is to start flying with at least one of the missiles this year.

Our Jamie hunter was on the show floor in Denver Colorado at the Air Force Association’s Warfare Symposium to discuss this new addition to the MQ-9’s repertoire directly with with Scott Gilloon, Sector Vice President for Strategic Programs at GA-ASI. Check out the video at the top of this story to hear what he had to say about the new standoff weapons offering for the MQ-9.

Feb. 21 (UPI) — Ukrainian Defense Forces late Friday night struck a Russian missile production facility that manufactures some of Russia’s fastest and deadliest missile systems.

Ukrainian forces used attack drones to strike the Votkinsk Machine Building Plant in Russia’s Udmurt Republic, which produces the advanced missile systems, Ukrainska Pravda reported.

The factory builds the hypersonic Iskander and Oreshnik missile systems.

Ukraine‘s general staff confirmed the strike in a statement released on Saturday.

“On the night of February 21, units of the Missile Forces and Artillery of the Armed Forces of Ukraine carried out a strike with FP-5 Flamingo cruise missiles. A defense industry enterprise — the Votkinsk Plant in the city of Votkinsk — was hit,” the statement said.

“A fire was recorded on the premises of the facility,” it added. “The results are being clarified.”

The Udmart Republic is located about 770 miles east of Moscow and about 1,300 miles northeast of Kyiv.

The Iskander missile is a mobile system that is carried and launched from atop a large military transport and is capable of carrying conventional or nuclear warheads with a range of up to 310 miles for some variants. The missile travels at hypersonic speeds of up to Mach 7.

The Oreshnik missile is a medium-range ballistic missile that can carry either conventional or nuclear warheads at distances of up to 1,000 miles and possibly more than 3,000 miles, while traveling at up to Mach 11, or 8,000 mph.

Ukrainian Defense Forces also targeted the Neftegorsk Gas Processing Plant in the Samara Region of Russia and fuel and lubricants storage facilities in Russian-occupied parts of the Donetsk region.

The extent of damage from those strikes is under assessment.

Kharkiv regional administration head, Oleh Syniehubov, reported that 175 ‘combat clashes’ were recorded over the past 24 hours.

A Russian attack on the Kharkiv region killed two police officers Saturday during an evacuation in the village of Seredniy Burlyk, as Moscow and Kyiv continue trading attacks.

The head of Kharkiv’s regional administration, Oleh Syniehubov, reported that the city and 10 populated areas had been subjected to Russian attacks over the past 24 hours.

In Seredniy Burlyk, five people were also wounded by shelling.

“Over the past 24 hours, 175 combat clashes were recorded. On the South-Slobozhansky direction, the enemy four times stormed the positions of our units in the areas of the populated settlements of Staritsa, Lyman, Vovchansky Khutory, and Krugle,” Syniehubov wrote.

Moreover, three people were injured, including a woman, after a Russian air strike targeted one of the private sectors of Sumy, the National Police of Sumy Oblast reported.

According to the police, the Russian attack destroyed two residential buildings and damaged at least 10 neighbouring houses and a gas pipe.

It added that three people who were injured included two children aged five and 17, as well as a 70-year-old woman who was hospitalised.

Attack on an industrial site

Ukrainian drones targeted an industrial site in Russia’s Udmurt Republic, injuring 11 people, three of whom were hospitalised, according to the local health minister, Sergei Bagin, who issued an update on Telegram.

The head of the Udmurt Republic, Alexander Brechalov, also wrote in a Telegram post that “one of the republic’s facilities was attacked by drones”, adding that injuries and damage were reported.

Brechalov did not elaborate on what the targeted facility was responsible for. However, an unofficial Russian Telegram channel, ASTRA, reported after analysing footage from residents that the strike targeted the Votkinsk Machine Building Plant, a major state defence enterprise.

The Votkinsk factory produces Iskander ballistic missiles, which are often used against Ukraine, as well as nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Ukraine’s military confirmed the attack on the Votkinsk factory and said in a post on Facebook that a “fire was recorded on the territory of the object. The results are getting real.”

The army added that its troops hit a Russian gas processing plant in the Samara region, which caused a fire.

Separately, Russia’s TASS state news agency reported that Ukrainian drones were attempting to ⁠attack production facilities in ⁠Almetyevsk in Russia’s Tatarstan region, citing the head of the city as saying that defence systems were operating.

Russia’s RIA news agency also reported, citing the defence ministry, that Moscow’s forces took control of the village of Karpivka in the eastern Donetsk region of Ukraine.

The U.S. Navy is exploring options for a new long-range anti-radiation missile designed to home in on radars to help neutralize enemy air defense networks. The capabilities the service wants for this Advanced Emission Suppression Missile (AESM) sound curiously similar to the ones it is already working to acquire through the AGM-88G Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range (AARGM-ER). There is one crucial difference: the AESM needs to be able to engage targets in the air, as well as on the ground. This would give the Navy a single missile it could use to attack critical airborne early warning and control planes, as well as potentially other aerial targets, and air defenses down below.

Naval Air Systems Command’s (NAVAIR) Program Executive Office for Unmanned Aviation and Strike Weapons (PEO U&W) recently put out a contracting notice regarding the AESM.

NAVAIR is “conducting market research to identify potential sources capable of providing an advanced, anti-radiation guided missile weapon system, or key subsystems thereof, with a longer range than existing in the Navy’s current inventory, including associated engineering, manufacturing, testing, and logistics support,” the notice explains. “This All Up Round (AUR) must be compatible with existing launch platforms (e.g. F-18, F-35) and infrastructure currently supporting the Navy and Air Force’s existing inventory of anti-radiation guided missiles.”

The notice later elaborates that AESM needs to be compatible, at least, with the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler, and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It is unclear whether “existing inventory of anti-radiation guided missiles” includes the AARGM-ER, which is a substantial new evolution of the AGM-88 design and is still under development. TWZ has reached out to NAVAIR for more information.

“NAVAIR is seeking to enhance its capabilities to suppress and neutralize enemy air defenses in contested environments,” the AESM notice adds. “This effort aims to identify and potentially acquire a weapon system that provides similar or improved capabilities compared to its current weapons inventory, focusing on extended range, advanced targeting, counter-countermeasures, and integration with existing and future platforms.”

No specific range requirement is included in the notice beyond that AESM needs to be capable of “engaging targets at significant standoff distances.” The missile also needs to have an “advanced anti-radiation seeker with broad frequency coverage,” the “ability to target modern and advanced radar systems,” a “precision navigation and guidance system (e.g., GPS/INS with anti-jamming capabilities),” and the “potential for pre-emptive targeting capabilities.”

Much of this sounds, at least in broad strokes, like the requirements for the AGM-88G. “The AARGM-ER incorporates hardware and software modifications to improve AGM-88E AARGM capabilities to include extended range, survivability and effectiveness against future threats,” according to NAVAIR’s own website.

However, as noted, the requirements laid out in the AESM notice notably differ from those for AARGM-ER in one key respect: the explicit call for anti-air engagement capability. Prospective offers are required to “describe ability to engage air-to-air and air-to-ground targets.”

AESM also needs to have “robust ECCM [electronic counter-countermeasures] capabilities to defeat enemy countermeasures, including chaff, flares, jamming and anti-ARM [anti-radiation missile] techniques.” This might also point further to emphasis on the air-to-air role. Radar blinding chaff and infrared decoy flares are countermeasures typically associated with the air and naval domains.

U.S. military interest in very-long-range air-to-air capable anti-radiation missiles traces all the way back to the Cold War, primarily as a means for engaging enemy airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) planes. Anti-air weapons designed around this role are often colloquially referred to as ‘AWACS killers,’ a reference to the U.S. E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft. A very-long-range air-to-air missile could be used against other aerial targets, as well.

This is also not the first time the Navy, as well as the U.S. Air Force, has pursued an air-launched weapon that would blend together traditional anti-radiation and air-to-air capabilities. Starting in the mid-2000s, the two services worked together on a single missile to replace the AGM-88 and the AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) dubbed the Joint Dual-Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM), which then evolved into the Next Generation Missile (NGM). The NGM effort came to an end, at least publicly, in 2013, ostensibly over high costs. A more secretive parallel development effort, called the Triple Target Terminator (T-3), continued for at least some time afterward. A possible successor to T-3, called the Long Range Engagement Weapon (LREW), emerged in 2017. How far the LREW effort subsequently progressed, and what its current status might be, are unclear.

All that being said, the value of an ‘AWACS killer’ missile is clear-cut. AEW&C are critical surveillance and battle management assets. Shooting them down deprives an opponent of those capabilities, inherently reducing their ability to effectively maneuver air assets and share important information, including with other nodes on the ground or at sea, as well as in the air. Knocking out these flying radar stations, which can be especially well-suited to spotting lower flying threats from their high perches, just hampers an enemy’s overall situational awareness.

The issue, of course, is that AEW&C planes typically orbit well behind the front edges of a conflict, creating additional challenges for targeting them. This is where something like AESM could come into play. A weapon of this type could engage other aerial targets by zeroing in on the radiofrequency emissions they pump out. This could include electronic warfare aircraft, and potentially other aerial targets. AESM might be able to take on a more general anti-air role with the addition of an active radar and/or imaging infrared seeker, as well as datalinks allowing for the use of networked targeting data. AARGM and AARGM-ER both feature an active millimeter-wave radar seeker to enable them to hit fleeing ground targets, but a similar concept could be adapted for air-to-air use.

AARGM F-18

For the Navy, as well as other branches of the U.S. military, this is all particularly relevant in the context of a potential future high-end fight with China, which has made major investments in its fleets of AEW&C and electronic warfare planes. The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has also been pursuing ever-longer-ranged anti-air missiles, including types that could be used to target American AEW&C platforms, as well as other key support aircraft.

TWZ has previously highlighted much of this in a past feature discussing the use cases for the Navy’s new AIM-174B air-launched version of the Standard Missile 6 (SM-6), which was officially unveiled in 2024. Navy officials have previously hinted at further long-range air-to-air capabilities to come when talking about the AIM-174B.

How The Navy’s New Very Long-Range AIM-174 Will Pierce China’s Anti-Access Bubble

“Clearly we recognize that we’ve got to find opportunities to increase reach and range for our weapons,” Navy Rear Adm. Michael “Buzz” Donnelly, then director of the Air Warfare Division (N98) within the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, said at the Navy League’s annual Sea Air Space symposium in April 2025. “We’re doing it in air-to-air. We just recently fielded the air-launched SM-6, or the AIM-174, that we’re capable of carrying off the F-18 Super Hornet. And we’ll look at increasing range and incrementing beyond that.”

“That’s [the AIM-174B] an operational capability. And, as you can see, that one being revealed and shown into the area, there are many more behind [it], things that we’re doing there, making sure that we are staying ahead of the conflict, making sure that we’re prepared for the fight that’s going on,” Navy Rear Adm. Keith Hash, head of NAVAIR’s Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD), also said during a panel discussion at the WEST 2025 conference in January 2025. “And those activities and that development is active and strong.”

In addition, the Navy is now working together with the U.S. Air Force on the development of the AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile. The AIM-260 is intended as a longer-range and otherwise more capable direct successor to the AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM).

As described now, AESM would also offer air-to-surface capabilities in line with a traditional anti-radiation missile in the same package. Even in a future missile ecosystem that also includes the AGM-88G, AIM-174B, and AIM-260, having a single hybrid anti-air/anti-radiation missile would offer extremely useful additional flexibility, especially for addressing threats that might appear unexpectedly in the course of a mission.

One missile capable of being used in those disparate roles could also offer valuable magazine depth benefits, particularly if it has a form factor that allows it to be carried internally by various stealthy crewed aircraft, such as the F-35, and/or advanced combat drones. There had been some speculation that the aforementioned LREW effort, and possibly one or more of its predecessors, had been aiming for a missile that could serve in the anti-radiation and air-to-air roles, and fit inside F-22 and F-35 weapon bays. At the same time, a missile designed to be carried externally could help maximize range, which would be an important consideration for AESM. As an aside, scalable missile concepts have been raised in the past as a way to readily adapt a core design for internal or external carriage.

Altgoether, there is a possibility that AESM requirements could be met by a further variation on the AARGM-ER design. The U.S. Air Force is also already acquiring a more general high-speed strike derivative of that missile called the Stand-In Attack Weapon (SiAW). Prime contractor Northrop Grumman has also proposed a surface-to-surface version called the Advanced Reactive Strike Missile (AReS).

The “market research” the Navy is doing now is intended to see what other options might be available. The AESM contracting also highlights the possibility of a weapon that could be further exported to allies and partners. Additional customers could help defray development and acquisition costs, and support production at scale.

Much is still to be learned about the Navy’s plans for AESM, but the Navy certainly seems to have kicked off a new hunt for an ‘AWACS killer’ type missile that could also be used against other targets in the air and on the surface.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Last year, the U.S. government was able to reverse engineer a critical subcomponent for the 30,000-pound GBU-57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bunker buster bomb. Leveraging technology from the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) short-range ballistic missile saved years of work that would have otherwise been necessary to “eliminate obsolescence issues and meet operational demands.” The reverse-engineering effort also highlights the impacts of being locked into a single vendor, and underscores why the Pentagon is now pushing to make changes to, if not end this practice.

Details about the reverse-engineered component and other aspects of the MOP program were contained in a recent U.S. Air Force contracting announcement regarding efforts to replenish stocks of those bombs following Operation Midnight Hammer. During that operation, B-2 Spirit stealth bombers dropped 14 GBU-57/Bs on Iranian nuclear facilities. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) had to produce a detailed justification for awarding a sole-source contract to Boeing for the production of new MOPs and the sustainment of the existing inventory. Boeing is the bomb’s current prime contractor. A redacted copy of that document is available online.

“The Government has a follow-on need for additional production of [redacted] MOP Tail Kits with projected delivery starting 10 January 2028 to replace expended units and reach the United States Air Force’s [redacted],” the so-called Justification & Approval (J&A) document explains. “The Government has a need for replenishment production of GBU-57 MOP weapon system components.”

It is unclear what the total size of the GBU-57/B inventory was before or after Operation Midnight Hammer. As of 2015, prime contractor Boeing had delivered at least 20 of the bombs, according to the Air Force. However, additional orders have been reported over the years. In 2024, a story from Bloomberg had also said that a facility in Oklahoma was being expanded to help triple or even quadruple the annual output of these bombs.

The MOP’s tail kit, also designated KMU-612/B, contains the bomb’s GPS-assisted inertial navigation system (INS) guidance package and other systems. It is combined with a BLU-127/B penetrating “warhead” and other components, including advanced fuzes designed to help produce the maximum destructive effect on a target after burrowing deep down into the ground, to create a complete GBU-57/B bomb, or all-up-round (AUR).

GBU-57 MOP test

“In August of 2025, the Government successfully reverse engineered a critical subcomponent of the MOP weapon system saving 4-years of design work and enabling the utilization of existing Army ATACMS technology to eliminate obsolescence issues and meet operational demands,” according to the J&A document. “However, the time to reverse engineer all MOP components would result in unacceptable delays in meeting mission requirements.”

The MOP J&A does not elaborate on the ATACMS technology in question, or what company or companies may now be in line to produce the resulting subcomponent for the bombs. Lockheed Martin is the current prime contractor for ATACMS, a family of short-range ballistic missiles that you can read more about here. It should also be noted that the U.S. military’s reverse-engineering parts of key weapon systems is not entirely uncommon, especially if the original source of the components in question has gone out of business or otherwise no longer exists.

The J&A document says it would take an estimated 60 months, or five years, to create an entirely new MOP tail kit design and then go through the required processes to certify it for operational use. It also explains why the KMU-612/B tail kit, specifically, is so central to the need to award a new sole-source contract to Boeing.

“With regards to IP [intellectual property] rights, The [Redacted] Company is the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) of the MOP weapon system and retains ownership of the intellectual property data associated with the munition’s tail kit,” it explains. “In particular, [redacted] owns the technical data package and manufacturing process methodologies of the tailkit unit entirely. [Redacted] has uniquely acquired expertise over a period of ~18 years of adapting this specialized weapon to meet evolving mission needs as MOP transitioned from proof-of-concept to full operational capability. This expertise pertains, but is not limited to, knowledge of the guidance algorithms, navigation systems, hardware components, specialized test equipment, and software critical to producing and sustaining the MOP weapon system.”

“The other components and sub-components, as noted above, have been proprietary to [redacted] from the inception of this weapon system. The USG [U.S. government] does not own or control, via license or by other IP rights, any computer software, methodologies, or technical drawings,” the document adds. “[Redacted] was queried in August 2025 as to the potential of selling IP rights to the USG for the MOP weapon system and the USG was denied.”

That being said, “over the course of the ~18 years of MOP development to the AURs acquired today the USG has, at certain junctures, been able to separate from the sole-source environment for this weapon with Boeing,” the J&A notes. “The USG was able to break away the Warhead Cases for the MOP under a weapon design agent effort, thereby giving the USG complete IP control over the Warhead TDP. Based on the IP ownership of this TDP the USG awards contracts competitively.”

The prospect now of new U.S. strikes against targets in Iran, including deeply buried nuclear sites and other facilities, highlights the continued importance of the depth and readiness of the GBU-57/B inventory. There is clear evidence that Iranian authorities have taken new steps to try to shield key elements of the country’s nuclear program from future attacks, either from the air or on the ground. MOP has been and continues to be the only conventional munition capable of prosecuting many of these targets, and was specifically designed from the outset with sites in Iran top of mind. A conflict with Iran is not the only scenario where the bombs would be relevant. North Korea and China, among others, have also invested heavily in underground and other hardened facilities.

The huge bunker busters are otherwise the definition of high-value, low-density munitions. At present, they can only be employed operationally by B-2 bombers. Each B-2 can also only carry two of the bombs at once. MOP is expected to be an important part of the arsenal of the future B-21 Raider, which is smaller than the B-2 and is expected to be able to carry a single one of these bunker busters.

The details in the MOP J&A document also underscore broader issues surrounding IP rights and ‘vendor lock’ in the U.S. defense contracting space that have increasingly been coming to the forefront in recent years. Competition inherently creates opportunities to lower costs and diversify supply chains. A broader supplier base also offers benefits when it comes to scaling up production of key subcomponents and complete systems.

The continued extent of Lockheed Martin’s control over the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is perhaps the most widely known example of the negative impacts of vendor lock. U.S. officials have been outspoken about the maintenance and sustenance challenges this has created, especially when it comes to the timely sourcing of spare parts, and the operational risks this creates. TWZ previously explored the particular issues surrounding the F-35 in an in-depth feature.

Foreign F-35 operators, especially in Europe, are now also facing regular questions about what could happen to the jets if the U.S. were to cut off access to various sustainment pipelines in light of new diplomatic strains with Washington. Just this past weekend, Dutch State Secretary for Defense Gijs Tuinman caused a stir when he asserted it would be possible to “jailbreak an F-35 just like an iPhone” if necessary, as you can read more about here.

In recent years, successive U.S. administrations have made securing greater IP rights and ensuring opportunities for competition key elements in negotiating new defense contractors. As an example, the Air Force previously made clear that avoiding the F-35 program’s vendor lock was a top priority for the acquisition of the F-47 sixth-generation stealth fighter. President Donald Trump’s administration is now pursuing a host of new contracting reforms, in part to further break up the locks that private companies have on programs like the Joint Strike Fighter.

“We will enable third-party integration without prime contractor bottlenecks. Success will be measured by the ability of qualified vendors to independently develop, test and integrate replaceable — excuse me, replacement modules at the component level throughout the system life cycle,” War Secretary Pete Hegseth said in a speech last November. “There’s no more complacency and no more monopolies.”

At that time, Hegseth had also acknowledged Byzantine processes and other contracting hurdles that the U.S. military had created for itself over the years.

How “the sole-source environment” surrounding the GBU-57/B continues to evolve now remains to be seen. A successor to that bomb, called the Next Generation Penetrator (NGP), is also now in development, and Boeing is involved in that effort, too. The Pentagon’s experiences with MOP, together with the new contracting reform push, are likely to inform how the replacement weapons are acquired.

In the meantime, U.S. authorities continue to try to free elements of the MOP program from vendor lock, including now by repurposing technology originally designed for the ATACMS short-range ballistic missile.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

L3Harris has highlighted the potential benefits of pairing its Red Wolf miniature cruise missile with the U.S. Air Force’s OA-1K Skyraider II. Standoff munitions like Red Wolf could help the OA-1K, originally designed for close air support and surveillance and reconnaissance in support of low-intensity operations, find a role in future high-end conflicts, but questions about the value of doing so remain. The U.S. Marine Corps is already acquiring the Red Wolf to provide a boost in capability for its AH-1Z Viper attack helicopters for the same general reasons.

L3Harris announced today that it had shown “the ability to integrate” Red Wolf on its Sky Warden aircraft. The Sky Warden is based on the Air Tractor AT-802 single-engine turboprop crop duster. In 2022, the Air Force declared the two-seat Sky Warden the winner of its Armed Overwatch competition, subsequently giving the plane the designation OA-1K and the official nickname Skyraider II. The Air Force is planning to eventually acquire 75 OA-1Ks, which will be operated by units under the umbrella of Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC).

L3Harris officially unveiled Red Wolf, as well as the companion Green Wolf (fitted with an electronic warfare payload instead of a high-explosive warhead), last July. However, the development of the “Wolf” family of systems dates back to 2020.

“Our customers demand a lean, agile aircraft that can fly, take off and land anywhere, anytime, outfitted with a wide range of payloads,” Jason Lambert, President for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, Space and Mission Systems at L3Harris, said in a statement today. “Bringing together Red Wolf and Sky Warden demonstrates the rapid reconfiguration and customization of key L3Harris capabilities.”

The OA-1K can carry up to 6,000 pounds of munitions and other stores on as many as eight pylons, four under each wing. L3Harris has also said in the past that aircraft has a “robust suite of radios and datalinks providing multiple means for line-of-sight (LOS) and beyond line-of-sight (BLOS) communications.”

OA-1K Skyraider II Walk-Around Tour With Its Test Pilot

Adding Red Wolf to the Skyraider II’s arsenal would turn the aircraft into a true standoff weapons delivery platform. This, in turn, would help keep the aircraft further away from potential threats, reducing the risk to the crew.

The members of the “Wolf” family are all in the 250-pound class. They have a missile-like core design, powered by a small turbojet, and with at least a degree of low-observability (stealthiness). They are in the 250-pound weight class. “Their endurance has been proven in flight testing, demonstrating high subsonic speeds – 200+ nautical mile range at low altitudes and 60+ minutes duration,” per L3Harris.

Details about how Red Wolf or Green Wolf are guided are limited, but L3Harris says they are capable of “autonomous over-the-horizon engagements.” The Marine Corps, in cooperation with the U.S. Navy, has used tablet-based control systems as part of the engagement process in past testing of Red Wolf.

L3Harris has also talked in the past about how members of the Wolf family could work together. The Green Wolves could help locate targets, especially hostile air defense assets, by zeroing in on their signal emissions, as well as clear a path for Red Wolves to actually strike them.

Red Wolf or Green Wolf are also only the start of what L3Harris hopes to be a larger family of configurations based around the central design. At least one Red Wolf was reportedly employed at the U.S. Army’s Experimentation Demonstration Gateway Event in 2021 (EDGE 21) configured as an airborne signal relay node rather than a munition.

“We can adjust the size of the warhead, the fuel tank, we can even put a parachute on the back of it, and we have,” Matthew “Guicci” Klunder, Vice President for Business Development at L3Harris, said in a promotional video released last year, seen below. “It can be a kinetic effect, it could be a non-kinetic effect, it could even be a decoy.”

Meet the “Wolf Pack”

Changing the size of the warhead would have impacts on range and endurance, as well as the terminal effect on the target. This also opens up the possibility of fitting different types of warheads, including ones with increased penetrating capability. A parachute system would allow for recovery and, by extension, potential reuse.

Overall, L3Harris describes the “Wolf” family collectively as “launched effects vehicles.” The U.S. military uses the term “launched effect” to refer to a broad swatch of uncrewed aerial systems that can be deployed from platforms in the air, on the ground, and at sea, and that can be configured as one-way attackers or to perform other missions. The Wolf family is just one of a growing number of modular, relatively cheap, and small systems that fall under that broad umbrella. Many of them increasingly blur the line between uncrewed aerial systems, especially longer-range kamikaze drones, and cruise missiles, as well as decoys.

As mentioned, just integrating Red Wolf onto the OA-1K would give it a standoff strike capability it currently does not have. Adding Green Wolf to the mix would further expand its capability, including adding a valuable, if not potentially critical, way to suppress hostile air defenses that might suddenly pop up.

In general, standoff capabilities for the Skyraider II could open up important new avenues to employing the aircraft in the context of future large-scale conflicts, including across the broad expanses of the Pacific. When the Air Force first initiated the Armed Overwatch program, U.S. military operations globally were defined by counter-terrorism operations in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria with entirely permissive airspace. By the time the decision was made to acquire the OA-1Ks, a shift was underway across the U.S. military to reorient toward preparing for high-end fights.

“How could we support them [friendly forces] if it’s in the Pacific or anywhere else? The OA-1K certainly has some roles and missions that can [provide] support there. And then in a large-scale combat operation, we are looking at, in partnership with other components of SOCOM [U.S. Special Operations Command], what are some of the things that it could do,” a high-ranking Air Force official told TWZ in an interview last year. “Can it employ air-launched effects, at range, at standoff, in a flexible way that would provide value?”

“The beauty of the OA-1K is that it’s modular, it’s adaptable, and for a relatively small aircraft can carry a lot of payload. And so in a perfect world, in a resource-unconstrained world, I want to be able to have as big a menu as possible of things that I could hang from a hardpoint on there, or attach as a sensor,” Air Lt. Gen. Michael Conley, head of AFSOC, also told TWZ later in the year on the sidelines of Air & Space Forces Association’s main annual ocnference. “I’d love to be able to use long-range standoff mission munitions on multiple airframes.”

Conley was responding to a question specifically about integrating Black Arrow, also known as the Small Cruise Missile (SCM), onto the Skyraider II. Leidos is developing Black Arrow for AFSOC now, but primarily as a new standoff capability for the AC-130J Ghostrider gunship. Questions have also been raised about how to ensure the future relevance of the Air Force’s AC-130 fleets in high-end fights.

Leidos completes successful test launch of a Small Cruise Missile

At the same time, exactly how great the benefit would be to making the OA-1K into a standoff shooter is a matter of debate. A key benefit the Skyraider II offers is its ability to operate with a very small logistical footprint from far-flung locales, including ones that are very austere and close to or even within contested areas. As such, an OA-1K would be able to launch munitions like the Red Wolf from within the enemy’s own weapon engagement zones or from other surprise vectors, and fly low and slow to literally stay out of the gaze of distant radars.

At the same time, the OA-1K’s range and speed are limited, with the aircraft said to have a combat radius of roughly 200 miles with six hours of loitering time once arriving on station. The Skyraider II’s ability to survive in a highly contested areas, even with a standoff capability like that offered by Red Wolf, is also questionable at best.

OA-1Ks could still provide useful support during a high-end fight, but in areas further away from hostile threats. As TWZ has pointed out in the past, in a Pacific scenario, the aircraft could provide force protection and surveillance on a localized level around forward operating locations, including island outposts.

AFSOC’s Conley, among others, has also stressed in the past that AFSOC will still continue to be called upon to conduct lower-intensity missions that require the kinds of capabilities that the OA-1K was originally designed for, as well.

Regardless, the market space for munitions like Red Wolf and Black Arrow is steadily growing, and includes many other designs already that might also find their way onto the OA-1K, as well as other platforms in the air, ground, and maritime domains.

Red Wolf does have the additional benefit of already being elsewhere in the U.S. military ecosystem. As noted, the U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Army have been testing it in recent years. In January, L3Harris announced that the Marine Corps (by way of the Department of the U.S. Navy) had chosen Red Wolf for its Precision Attack Strike Munition (PSAM) requirement for a new air-launched standoff weapon primarily to arm the AH-1Z Viper attack helicopter. The Marines have been facing their own questions about how to keep the AH-1Z, as well as the companion UH-1Y Venom armed utility helicopter, relevant in future high-end fights.

Further orders for different members of the Wolf family from other branches of the U.S. military, and potentially foreign operators, could be advantageous when it comes to sharing the cost burden and driving down unit prices through economies of scale. There could be interoperability and other operational benefits from multiple services operating versions of the same platform, as well.

Whether Red Wolf or Green Wolf ultimately become part of the OA-1K’s arsenal, the demand for launched effects like this only looks set to grow across the U.S. military and globally. For the Skyraider II, some mixture of standoff capabilities increasingly looks to be in the plane’s future to expand its relevance beyond lower-intensity conflicts.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The U.S. Air Force has released details of a live-fire test of the Rusty Dagger, one of two new Extended Range Attack Munitions (ERAM) being developed under a crash program. The milestone suggests that Ukraine is a step closer to getting its hands on thousands of air-launched ERAMs that will provide the country with a powerful new and relatively low-cost standoff strike capability. The event is also significant in terms of the Pentagon’s focus on rapidly developing and bringing into operational service new, less-expensive weapons that can be built at scale.

The Air Force recently confirmed that the ERAM standoff cruise missile was tested at the Eglin Test and Training Range in Florida on January 21, 2025, less than 16 months from the program’s initial contract award. The service’s statement doesn’t mention the Rusty Dagger by name, but the weapon is clearly seen in a sequence of photos that show the missile heading vertically down to engage a static target before its live warhead detonates. It’s unclear what platform was used to launch the missile during the test.

ERAM is understood to have a range of between 150 and 280 miles. It is in the 500-pound class and has a blast/fragmentation warhead with at least some degree of penetrating capability.

Alongside industry, the Eglin test was run by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center’s Armament Directorate and the 96th Test Wing, a unit that you can read more about in this TWZ article.

The manufacturer of the Rusty Dagger, Zone 5 Technologies, also announced the test on its LinkedIn page.

“The event, which met all primary objectives including a full warhead detonation, gathered critical data to mature a new, cost-effective, long-range strike capability,” the Air Force said.

“Moving from a contract to a live-fire demonstration in under two years proves we can deliver lethal, cost-effective capability at the speed of relevance,” said Brig. Gen. Robert Lyons III, Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Weapons, in an Air Force statement. “This is how we rebuild our military — by empowering our teams and industry partners to cut through bureaucracy and deliver the tools our warfighters need to prevail.”

“The future fight demands we create an asymmetric advantage by developing cost-effective, attritable systems like ERAM that give commanders the ability to generate mass,” added Brig. Gen. Mark Massaro, 96th TW commander. “This test is a critical milestone on that path. The expert teams who executed this complex mission provided the high-fidelity data we need to validate this system, ensuring that when it reaches the warfighter, it is a proven and ready tool for the right target. This is the cornerstone of building a more lethal and effective Joint Force.”

In January 2024, the U.S. Air Force issued its first public contracting notice regarding ERAM, a request for information (RFI), but made no mention at that time about any connection to Ukraine.

It was reported in August 2025 that Washington had approved the sale of 3,350 ERAM missiles to Kyiv. That package is said to be worth around $850 million, with most of the funds coming from Ukraine’s European allies.

As well as the Rusty Dagger from Zone 5 Technologies, CoAspire developed the Rapidly Adaptable Affordable Cruise Missile (RAACM) under the ERAM program. It’s unclear if Ukraine will receive only one of these designs or a mixture of both types. You can read more about the implications of the ERAM for Ukraine and the Ukrainian Air Force platforms that might be in line to carry the munitions here.

Two candidate weapon prototypes competing for the US Air Force’s Extended-Range Attack Munition program 👇. Both Coaspire and Zone 5 Technologies were awarded contracts late last year in support of the #ERAM program. Both are expected to enter testing this year. https://t.co/9cGBuB9z3s pic.twitter.com/gc3ZDtX54m

— AirPower | MIL-STD (@AirPowerNEW1) February 9, 2025

RAACM Cruise Missile Video Long Range Flights Summer 2025 Cleared for Public Release

Suffice it to say, the ERAM will provide the Ukrainian Air Force with an important new capacity to strike targets beyond the reach of many of the weapons currently in its arsenal, including Western-supplied precision-guided bombs. It will make Ukraine better able to hold at risk a range of Russian targets far from the front lines — command-and-control facilities, air defenses, logistics hubs, military-industrial capacity, and airfields, for example — helping offset Russian advantages in terms of manpower, weaponry, and resources.

However, it remains unclear whether or not Kyiv will be able to use ERAM to strike targets deep within Russia, with these previously having been designated off-limits, at least for the U.S.-donated Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS).

In addition to what it will provide Ukraine, the ERAM effort could well prove to be a big deal for other U.S. allies and partners, and the U.S. military itself.

In the RFP, it was said that ERAM would be “pivotal for accelerating Ukraine’s capability to meet warfighter needs efficiently and effectively and provides an affordable mass weapon to be produced at scale.” The Air Force added: “The Government is seeking to prototype and adapt commercial autonomous modular open-architecture vehicle [sic] that can deliver affordable long-range effects. The resultant prototype will provide a platform that is mass producible.”

Exactly the same concerns are increasingly at the front of war planners’ minds in the United States, too.

When it comes to planning around a potential future high-end conflict with China, the U.S. military is now looking closely at new kinds of weapons with standoff range. Importantly, these need to be rapidly developed and then their production capacity and stockpiles scaled up.

A number of U.S. efforts are now underway with the aim of reducing costs and speeding up large-scale production of weapons systems, especially uncrewed platforms. In parallel to these are plans to prepare missile stockpiles resilient enough for any future high-end conflict, especially one against China.

The original RFI for ERAM included the requirement that 1,000 examples of the new missile could be built within two years, for an average production output of around 42 missiles per month.

As such, ERAM is very much a test case for this kind of program.

Notably, Zone 5 is also involved in the U.S. Air Force’s Enterprise Test Vehicle (ETV). Under this program, four companies — the others are Anduril, Leidos subsidiary Dynetics, and Integrated Solutions for Systems, Inc. — were tapped to design and deliver prototype ETVs. Ostensibly low-cost cruise missiles, the designs in question skirt an increasingly blurry line separating traditional cruise missiles from uncrewed aerial systems, especially longer-range kamikaze drones, as well as decoys.

Looking at the same kind of space more broadly, it is clearly a growth area among defense contractors, both well-established ones like Lockheed Martin and relative newcomers such as Anduril and Kratos.

In August of last year, it was reported that the first ERAM missiles were expected to be delivered to Ukraine “in around six weeks.”

So far, there’s no sign that the missiles have arrived, but that possibility cannot be ruled out, especially bearing in mind an end-to-end test of the Rusty Dagger a little more than a year ago.

Whether it’s now in Ukrainian hands or not, the combat experience of ERAM in Ukraine will be hugely valuable, not just in terms of the technology that will be employed, but also as a prototype program for how the U.S. military might develop and field its next generation of weapons in this class.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Good news for Ukraine: it looks increasingly likely that it will get its hands on European-made Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missiles, a class of weapon that it badly needs to redress the balance against Russian fighter jets. Bad news: the Meteors would likely only be made available once Kyiv acquires Saab Gripen fighters, a plan that remains questionable, especially in terms of the timelines for when they might materialize.

Earlier this week, 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. Also on the agenda were the Gripen E and undisclosed air defense systems, Saab radars, electronic warfare systems, and drones, including long-range one-way attack drones. The announcement came after talks between the Ukrainian Minister of Defense Mykhailo Fedorov and his Swedish counterpart, Paul Jonsson.

At the Singapore Airshow this week, a Saab official told Defense News that transfer of the Meteor was under discussion and that it would be “natural” for it to be included in any Gripen package.

“The Meteor missile would be a natural content in a weapon package for any Gripen user […] discussions are taking place with several export nations, including Ukraine,” said Jussi Halmetoja, operations advisor in the air domain at Saab.

The Ukrainian Air Force’s need for a weapon in the Meteor class has long been apparent.

As we have discussed in the past, the Meteor is one of the most capable air-to-air missiles in operational service anywhere in the world.

Its key feature is its unique ramjet propulsion system, which can be throttled during different phases of flight. This ensures the missile still has considerable energy reserves during the terminal attack — it’s at this point that more conventional air-to-air missile motors lose energy, leading to a decrease in agility.

Meteor

Propelled by its ramjet motor, the Meteor’s all-important ‘no-escape zone’ is therefore far greater than for comparable weapons. This means the target has a much-reduced chance of evading the missile at the endgame of the engagement, something that would otherwise be far more realistic, using high-energy maneuvering. Another advantage of being able to throttle the motor is that the missile’s autopilot can calculate the most efficient route to the target for very long-range shots.

Highly significant for Ukraine is the fact that the Meteor is among the longest ranged of any Western air-to-air missile, generally considered to be able to engage certain types of targets out to around 130 miles.

The Meteor has an active radar seeker for the terminal phase and a two-way datalink. The datalink feeds the missile with in-flight updates as it flies out to its target and provides the pilot in the launch aircraft with information on the Meteor’s fuel, energy, and tracking state. That data can help determine if and when to fire another, disengage, or even assign a different target of opportunity.

Currently, the Ukrainian Air Force’s most capable air-to-air missile is the AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), which arms its F-16 fighters.

Ukraine’s AMRAAMs include the AIM-120C version, which, as we’ve discussed in the past, offers some significant advantages over the earlier AIM-120A/B models. Most importantly, the AMRAAM is Ukraine’s first active-radar-guided air-to-air missile. This is a class of weapons that was long sought after by Ukraine. Early on in the conflict, one of its fighter pilots, the late Andrii Pilshchykov, better known by his callsign “Juice,” told TWZ: “The lack of fire and forget missiles is the greatest problem for us.”

According to data from one of its operators, the AIM-120C-5 subvariant provides a maximum range of around 46 miles, although the actual range of the missile is tightly controlled information and based on many engagement factors.

For all its capabilities, the AMRAAM’s reach is far outstripped by Russia’s long-range R-37M air-to-air missile, known to NATO as AA-13 Axehead. Typical Russian tactics involve firing the R-37M from outside the range of the missiles carried by Ukrainian fighters.

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.

Last week, we discussed a video showing the shootdown of a Ukrainian Air Force Su-25 Frogfoot close air support jet, apparently by an R-37M.

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.

Speaking to TWZ back in 2022, Ukrainian MiG-29 Fulcrum pilot Pilshchykov said that the R-37M, typically fired from within Russian airspace, was “limiting our capabilities to conduct our missions. Of course, if you’re maneuvering, we are not able to provide an airstrike or something else, so the game is still very, very, very tough in the air and very, very risky. If you’re not aware of the launch of a missile, you’re dead.”

As it stands, the 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.

The Meteor is a product of the European MBDA missile house, with manufacture undertaken by its U.K. branch. Other partners in the Meteor program are France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Sweden, which placed an order for more of the missiles last year. All of these nations are firm supporters of Ukraine, but whether they approve a transfer of the missiles to Kyiv will also depend on how they judge the intelligence risk. After all, the wreckage of such a long-range weapon is very likely to end up on Russian territory, which would expose its technologies to analysis and exploitation.

However, Ukraine will only be able to use the Meteor once it starts to receive Gripens (or, alternatively, Dassault Rafales offered by France).

As it stands, Ukraine has signed letters of intent to acquire as many as 150 Gripen E fighters from Sweden and up to 100 Rafales from France over the next 10 years.

For Ukraine, the Gripen and Meteor could be used in a very powerful combination with the two Saab 340 airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft equipped with Erieye radar that have been donated by Sweden.

The Saab 340 AEW&C will be able to work as a fighter control asset, detecting targets, prioritizing them, and then assigning them to the fighters for interception. Using its datalink, the radar plane can also directly provide the missile with mid-course guidance updates. In fact, the fighter pilot may never have to use their own radar to engage a target. Instead, the missile is assigned a target, is fired, and then gets continuous updates from the AEW&C platform.

Erieye explained

As we have discussed in the past, either the Rafale or Gripen E would become the most advanced combat aircraft in Ukraine’s inventory, but there remain glaring questions about whether the acquisition of one of these aircraft types, let alone two, is actually feasible, especially in such numbers.

The letters of intent underscore Ukraine’s political commitment to buy these fighters, but don’t constitute a purchase deal. For Ukraine, there’s nothing to lose here, and it can cement its relationships with the nations that support it by showing interest in huge arms buys without any liability.

The same applies to the Meteor.

However, official discussions about the missile, together with the Gripen and Rafale, once again signal the scope of Kyiv’s ambitious re-equipment plans, especially when it comes to its air force.

A faster route to getting Meteor operational in Ukraine might involve Sweden providing secondhand Gripen C/Ds, something that has been proposed in the past.

Swedish officials have said it would take around three years for new-build Gripen Es to arrive in Ukraine. With an urgent need for fighters, Ukraine has said in the past that it wants to get its first Gripens delivered by 2026. The earlier Gripen C/D is also compatible with the Meteor.

While we wait for any final Gripen or Rafale deals to be concluded, Ukraine has at least made a first step toward acquiring an air-to-air missile that would finally allow its pilots to engage Russian aircraft at extended ranges, which would offer a powerful challenge to Russia’s current freedom of movement in the air war.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

One of the most enigmatic weapons in the arsenal of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), the PL-17 very long-range air-to-air missile, appears to have been shown for the first time at close quarters. The missile has been around for a relatively long time, but next to no official details about it have been released. Meanwhile, the threat that it and other Chinese air-to-air missiles pose has triggered a flurry of weapons development in the United States.

As is often the case with such images, we must note that the photo of the PL-17 appears authentic, but we cannot be certain of that. The date and location of the image are also unclear, but it shows a PL-17 (more accurately, a full-size mock-up of one) on a display stand at a tradeshow or exhibition. A man poses in front of the missile, face censored, while behind the weapon is a board promoting the J-20 stealth fighter.

We have become accustomed to ‘leaks’ out of China over many years when it comes to new military aircraft designs and their weaponry. Combined with the fact that the PL-17 was first publicly revealed in a blurry photo close to 10 years ago, its appearance at a tradeshow at this point might not be entirely surprising.

For its part, the PLAAF has published official imagery of the PL-17 (albeit showing the missile at a considerable distance, with no real detail visible). The release of the PLAAF photo, seen below, in 2023, was taken as confirmation that the missile was in operational service, or close to it, arming the J-16 Flanker.

When the missile first appeared in public, in 2016, it was dubbed PL-XX in the West; subsequently, the PL-20 designation was suggested, but PL-17 is now confirmed, at least based on the new photo. There are reports that the missile received the Western reporting name CH-AA-12 Auger when it entered service.

From the start, the PL-17 was considered to be a very long-range AAM, based on its prodigious size, roughly 20 feet long. For a missile with this reach, key targets are likely high-value, larger assets, including tankers and airborne early warning aircraft.

In detail, the PL-17 features a dual-pulse rocket motor, while control is provided by four relatively small tail fins and a thrust-vectoring nozzle. Reportedly, the missile has a range of around 250 miles, although that number is dependent on a huge array of factors, and actual range can vary dramatically based on the engagement circumstances. It is thought to have a top speed of at least Mach 4.

Guidance is thought to be achieved through a combination of a two-way datalink and an active electronically scanned array (AESA) seeker, which is said to be highly resistant to electronic countermeasures. There are also reports of a passive anti-radiation seeker to supplement the main seeker. This could be especially useful against airborne early warning and ground moving target indicator (GMTI) radar aircraft.

However, using the PL-17 to its full potential, in terms of range, engagements would likely involve targeting data provided by standoff assets, such as friendly airborne early warning aircraft (a capability set that China has invested heavily into), other aircraft closer to the target, ground and surface-based radar, or even satellites.

In the past, there had been speculation about a possible optical window on the side of the nose of the missile that could indicate an additional infrared seeker, although there is no sign of that in the full-size mock-up version.

So far, the PL-17 has only been seen carried by the J-16, although there has been an assumption that it would be adapted for external carriage on the J-20, too.

Certainly, it seems too large to be used to arm the J-10 series or even the J-35, which would seem to raise a big question about its potential export prospects. On the other hand, the missile may well be envisaged as armament for forthcoming Chinese combat aircraft, most notably the J-36 sixth-generation jet, which features extensive internal weapons capacity.

Regardless, the existence of the PL-17, along with other advanced Chinese air-to-air missile developments, has become a very serious issue for the U.S. military. Concerns about China eroding the ‘missile gap’ with the West have driven work on the still highly classified AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile, among other long-range air-to-air missile initiatives.

Last year, the U.S. Navy introduced, at least on a limited scale, an air-launched version of the Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) under the AIM-174B designation. The range of this weapon is classified but should be far in excess of that of the AIM-120D Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), probably at least double and perhaps even triple the range, against large targets. This would imply an ability to hit some types of aerial targets over multiple hundreds of miles.

How The Navy’s New Very Long-Range AIM-174 Will Pierce China’s Anti-Access Bubble

For now, many questions remain about the full capabilities and technical features of the PL-17. Should the new photo be genuine, however, it would confirm that Beijing is willing to expose at least some aspects of the big missile to a broader audience. With that in mind, we might well learn more about this weapon soon.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com