long range standoff nuclear cruise missile

• Air Warfare
• Cyber (Opens in new window)
• C4ISR (Opens in new window)
• Training & Sim
• Asia Pacific
• Mideast Africa
• The Americas
• Top 100 Companies
• Defense News Weekly
• Money Minute
• Whitepapers & eBooks (Opens in new window)
• DSDs & SMRs (Opens in new window)
• Webcasts (Opens in new window)
• Events (Opens in new window)
• Newsletters (Opens in new window)
• Events Calendar
• Early Bird Brief
• Digital Edition (Opens in new window)

Nuclear Arsenal

The air force made a surprise decision to sole-source the long range standoff weapon. here’s who will move forward..

WASHINGTON — In a surprise move, the Air Force on Friday announced plans to continue its Long Range Standoff Weapon program with Raytheon as the prime contractor.

The LRSO program, which aims to field a new air-launched cruise missile capable of both nuclear and conventional strikes, is currently in its technology maturation and risk reduction phase, with both Raytheon and Lockheed Martin developing their own versions of the weapon.

Typically, the Air Force would downselect to a single company in fiscal year 2022, when it awarded the engineering and manufacturing development contract that precedes low-rate production.

Decades late, the B-52 is getting a new nuclear weapon

To keep the b-52 bomber relevant for its nuclear mission, the u.s. air force is preparing to spend billions of dollars to develop a new air-launched cruise missile..

However, the Air Force decided to press ahead with Raytheon’s design after an “extensive evaluation” of the company’s technology as presented during the preliminary design review, said Maj. Gen. Shaun Morris, who leads the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center.

“Our competitive TMRR phase, which included both Lockheed Martin and Raytheon as the prime contractors, enabled us to select a high-confidence design at this point in the acquisition process,” he said, according to an Air Force release.

“And this early off-ramp of a contractor is completely in line with the existing LRSO acquisition strategy, which included periodic reviews to assess contractor designs,” Morris said. “Lockheed Martin has been an excellent contractor and partner throughout the TMRR effort and this pivot to Raytheon does not represent a lack of effort or commitment on their part. Lockheed Martin has supported the nuclear enterprise for decades and we continue to value their expertise in sensors and nuclear certification and surety.”

Elizabeth Thorn, the service’s program manager, characterized the decision as “not a downselect, per se,” adding that the Air Force will continue to work with Lockheed on specific technologies that could drive down risk to the LRSO design or otherwise be beneficial to the program.

The Air Force noted that the company had begun the “closeout process” to stop work on risk reduction phase of the program, leaving Lockheed’s precise role in the LRSO program unclear.

“We’ve supported our nation’s nuclear triad for more than 60 years and look forward to working with the USAF to support the LRSO mission, specifically leveraging our sensor technology and nuclear certification and surety expertise,” Lockheed said in a statement.

LRSO is set to replace the AGM-86B Air Launched Cruise Missile or ALCM, but the program has come under intermittent fire from lawmakers who believe that arming aircraft with a weapon that could be either nuclear or conventional could unnecessarily raise the risk of miscalculation, triggering a nuclear war.

The Air Force has argued that it needs a nuclear missile that can be fired from standoff distances to enable the non-stealthy B-52 to remain a credible deterrent to adversaries with advanced air defense systems.

Due to the decision to select Raytheon early, the Air Force wants to shift funding that will allow the company to begin certain work early, such as flight tests, the service said. A contract award for the next phase of the program is still scheduled for fiscal year 2022.

Morris added that the service was also confident in its ability to keep the program affordable in a sole-source environment, despite the lack of competition that usually helps the government negotiate a lower-cost product.

Roman Schweizer, a defense analyst with Cowen Washington Research Group, said the Air Force’s announcement prompts additional questions about Lockheed’s future role and the information both companies presented during the preliminary design view.

“It’s possible the USAF made an industrial base/cost decision based on other long-range weapons,” he wrote in an email to investors. “Singling up on LRSO could have been an industrial base decision or a way to reduce cost and speed up development.”

In a statement, Raytheon noted that the company is on track to complete risk reduction efforts by January 2022.

“LRSO will be a critical contributor to the air-launched portion of America’s nuclear triad,” said Wes Kremer, president of Raytheon Missiles and Defense.

Valerie Insinna is Defense News' air warfare reporter. She previously worked the Navy/congressional beats for Defense Daily, which followed almost three years as a staff writer for National Defense Magazine. Prior to that, she worked as an editorial assistant for the Tokyo Shimbun’s Washington bureau.

More In Nuclear Arsenal

Defense Innovation Unit prepares to execute $800 million funding boost

Diu director doug beck said he doesn’t foresee any issues with quickly putting to work the $983 million in fy-24 funding congress provided in march..

Army may swap AI bill of materials for simpler ‘baseball cards’

"we know innovation's happening in the open-source environment," said the army's bharat patel. "we also know who's contributing to the open source.".

How L3Harris is shoring up its small satellite supply chain

The president of l3harris’ space systems sector, recently sat down with c4isrnet to discuss the challenges of developing a diverse yet mature supply base..

From customer to sanctioned ‘proliferator,’ drones extend Iran’s reach

Iranian contractors and government officials have picked up on market demand, frequenting arms expos and other events in russia, iraq, qatar and more..

How the Space Force is making its systems more resilient

A little-known board has been working over the last year to identify resiliency measures and ensure the systems the space force buys meet those standards., featured video, not even a bullet through the mouth could stop this soldier in vietnam.

New naval drones and big benefit bumps for troops | Defense News Weekly Full Episode, 4.20.24

Small Business Tips for Veterans — Money Minute

Meet an autonomous underwater drone you can fit in a backpack

Trending now, navy looks to apply jet readiness gains to surface ship fleet, us air force stages dogfights with ai-flown fighter jet, lockheed martin eyes patriot interceptor production in spain, house passes contentious ukraine, israel, taiwan aid package, nigeria expects first batch of leonardo m-346 fighter jets this year.

Defense Daily subscriber and registered users, please log in here to access the content.

Email or Username

• FREE E-Letters
• Publications
• Contracts – FREE ACCESS
• Defense Daily Issue Archive
• Career Center
• Advertise With Us

U.S. Air Force Holds Critical Design Review for LRSO

• Army’s $185.5 Billion FY ‘24 Budget Pushes Modernization Ahead Without ‘Wholesale’ Program Cuts
• Navy’s 2024 Budget Seeks $33 Billion For Nine New Ships, $17 Billion For 88 Aircraft
• U.S. Space Force Request Reflects Effort to Provide Resilience for Space Systems
• U.S. Air Force Decides on Engine Core Upgrade for F-35 Fighter
• Details on Collaborative Combat Aircraft Close Hold in USAF Budget
• DoD Boosts Munitions Focus In $842 Billion FY ‘24 Budget, Sees Future $1 Trillion Request As ‘Inevitable’
• Voyager Space Acquires ZIN Technologies To Bolster Starlab Development
• AUKUS Deal Sells Up To Five U.S. Virginia SSNs To Australia Followed By New U.K.-Australia SSN-AUKUS Design
• CBP Seeks Boost In Funding For Border Surveillance Towers

The U.S. Air Force said that it conducted a Critical Design Review (CDR) for the Raytheon Technologies [RTX] AGM-181 Long Range Stand-Off (LRSO) nuclear-tipped cruise missile on Feb. 27-March 2 at Eglin AFB, Fla.

As of June 2021, the Air Force planned to buy 1,087 LRSOs–67 for development and 1,020 in procurement–at a unit cost of $13.3 million, per the Government Accountability Office Weapon Systems Annual Assessment last June.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is to provide the W80-4 warhead for LRSO. Air Force bombers, including the future Northrop Grumman [NOC] B-21 Raider, are to carry LRSO, which is to replace the Boeing [BA] AGM-86B Air-Launched Cruise Missile, which has a W80-1 warhead that Air Force officials said can come in a lower-yield configuration.

The Air Force fiscal 2024 budget requests more than $978 million for LRSO, including $911 million in research and development funding and about $67 million in procurement.

LRSO “being developed by Raytheon in Tucson, Arizona is going to play a critical role in the deterrence of our top four adversaries, and the ability to forward deploy this missile on U.S. bombers sends a powerful message to our adversaries, but also our allies,” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) said during a March 9 hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Kelly suggested that the U.S. needed to reconfigure its nuclear posture against China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, especially given last year’s Russian assault on Ukraine, Russia’s rejection of the New Start Treaty, and Russia’s refusal to admit inspectors for its nuclear arms.

Kelly then asked Air Force Gen. Anthony Cotton, the head of U.S. Strategic Command, to elaborate on why LRSO is a “critical asset” for the U.S.

ALCM “is still a reliable weapon,” Cotton said. “It’s a safe and secure weapon, but it’s well past its life as far as capability to sustain so we need to replace it with the LRSO, and you’re absolutely right–I’m quite pleased with what I’ve seen with the contractor on the work that they’re doing. It’s fundamental because it’s fundamental to long range stand-off for the air leg of the nuclear triad.”

It appears that the projected acquisition cost for LRSO remains stable and that the Air Force is on schedule for a LRSO Milestone C production decision in 2027. The LRSO program manager’s Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) for LRSO Milestone C has been between April and October 2027, and the Air Force said on March 13 that the production decision is slated for the third quarter of fiscal 2027. The CDR came in on time, as the APB had targeted the CDR between February and August this year.

The estimated acquisition cost for LRSO is $16.2 billion.

The Pentagon’s 2021 Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) on LRSO noted that among significant technical risks were a “B-21-to-LRSO handoff error greater than requirements, [which] potentially reduces LRSO range resulting in LRSO being unable to reach the intended target” and calculations indicating “that when four or more stores are loaded on the rotary launcher, the stores clash with the fuel tank.”

The SAR said that the LRSO program was expected to resolve the handoff error by March last year and the stores-fuel tank interference by June last year.

“The risk addressing B-21 to LRSO handoff error has been fully mitigated and is closed,” the Air Force said on March 13. “The risk concerning interference from rotary launchers has been fully mitigated.  Upon receipt of confirmation documentation in May 2023, this risk will be closed.”

Recommended

Lrso program receives nearly $382 million boost in usaf request, stratcom nominee: development of lrso for u.s. air force on track, lockheed, raytheon win air force contracts for new nuclear cruise missile, air force makes progress on long range standoff weapon.

• Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Belonging
• Accessibility Statement

Featured Categories

• Advanced / Transformational Technology
• Business/Financial
• Force Multipliers
• Homeland Security
• Intelligence Community
• International
• Missile Defense
• Nuclear Modernization
• Partner Content
• Press Releases
• Special Operations
• Unmanned Systems

America Is Building a New, Stealthy Nuclear Cruise Missile

Long Range Stand Off Weapon is meant to fight a nuclear war. Critics charge it could start one.

The U.S. Air Force yesterday awarded two $900 million contracts to Lockheed Martin and Raytheon to develop a new, nuclear-armed cruise missile. The Long Range Stand Off Weapon, or LRSO, is meant to modernize the offensive punch of American bombers, keeping even older planes such as the B-52 relevant. Critics, however, argue that as older nuclear cruise missiles age out they should not be replaced, as they increase the likelihood of a misunderstanding that could lead to nuclear war.

In a statement, U.S. Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson said about LRSO, ""This weapon will modernize the air-based leg of the nuclear triad. Deterrence works if our adversaries know that we can hold at risk things they value. This weapon will enhance our ability to do so, and we must modernize it cost-effectively." "

The justification for nuclear cruise missiles is that in the event of a nuclear war, bombers can launch them toward distant targets without getting too close to enemy air defenses. A stealthy bomber armed with LRSOs could use them to punch its way through enemy defenses , nuking fixed anti-air missile, radar, and command-and-control sites in its path before striking the final, main target. Non-stealthy bombers such as the B-52H could stand off at a distance and kick in the door for stealthy bombers (but would be unable to accompany the B-2A and B-21 into hostile enemy territory).

On the other hand, people including former Secretary of Defense William Perry charge that nuclear-tipped cruise missiles make accidental nuclear war more likely. (His new op-ed in the Washington Post is called, " Mr. President, Kill the New Cruise Missile .") They say that non-nuclear cruise missiles, which have been used since the 1991 Persian Gulf War, are now a regular part of conventional warfare. Here's a video of Russian nuclear-capable bombers launching Kh-101 cruise missiles (which also have nuclear variants) against targets in Syria:

The existence of nuclear cruise missiles ups the stakes in a conventional war, as an adversary observing a flight of cruise missiles on his radar screens does not know whether he is about to get hit with conventional or nuclear weapons. If the adversary assumes the worst case scenario, he may believe he should launch his own nuclear weapons in response, inadvertently starting a nuclear conflict.

As reported in FlightGlobal , the $1.8 billion dollar contracts will cover the technology development phase of the missile through 2022. Between now and 2022, the two defense contractors will start nailing down the technologies necessary to bring the missile to life, demonstrate critical technology in prototypes, and complete preliminary design. (For a PowerPoint-friendly, layman-unfriendly, brain-melting guide to the defense acquisition process, see here .)

Read more at FlightGlobal

Kyle Mizokami is a writer on defense and security issues and has been at Popular Mechanics since 2015. If it involves explosions or projectiles, he's generally in favor of it. Kyle’s articles have appeared at The Daily Beast, U.S. Naval Institute News, The Diplomat, Foreign Policy, Combat Aircraft Monthly, VICE News , and others. He lives in San Francisco.

.css-cuqpxl:before{padding-right:0.3125rem;content:'//';display:inline;} Weapons .css-xtujxj:before{padding-left:0.3125rem;content:'//';display:inline;}

The U.S. Has Built an Unstoppable Microwave Weapon

The Army Has a Plan to Kill Drones

Army: The Days of Towed Artillery Are Over

The US Army Has Deployed Lasers to a Combat Zone

The Manhattan Project's Deadly Legacy in St. Louis

The Army Is Clearing Out for Coyote Drone Hunters

This Long-Range Howitzer Has Met Its Achilles Heel

Inside the Development of America's New Nuke

What’s in the Pentagon’s 2025 Defense Budget

A Ballistic Missile’s Wrath Wreaks Havoc

America’s Nuke Factory is Threatened by Wildfires

USAF Solicits Long-Range Standoff Missile Integration on B-52

The US Air Force is seeking a vendor to integrate the upcoming Long-Range Standoff (LRSO) nuclear missile on the B-52H Stratofortress bomber.

The service expects the vendor to build and integrate the Bomber Weapon Interface Equipment (BWIE) on the aircraft in support of the LRSO.

Carriage equipment for the LRSO include “the B-52 suspension underwing unit -72 conversion to SUU-103, common strategic rotary launcher/conventional rotary launcher (CSRL/CRL) conversion to the nuclear rotary launcher (NRL), and manufacture of a nuclear stores interface unit inserted into SUU-103 and NRL,” the service wrote in the solicitation notice.

Bomber Weapon Interface Equipment 

All three subsystems are expected to be built simultaneously for field integration on the aircraft.

“Production will be a stepping stone process as existing equipment will be pulled from operational units or 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group, refurbished and upgraded to meet B-52/LRSO BWIE requirements,” the service added.

Requirements

The service wants 14 underwing units per year for four years with short-term storage before and after production. 

Refurbishment of the rotary launchers, along with the upgrade of the NRL and fielding, is pegged at nine systems annually for four years.

Additionally, 25 nuclear rotary launcher upgrade kits should be provided over two to three years with the ability to provide depot/field installs if required. 

“The technology required to meet B-52 BWIE requirements for LRSO integration exists today,” the notice said.

“Fabrication and qualification phase will build on the design phase and focus on system level integration and qualification.”

Long-Range Missile

The Raytheon cruise missile will replace the 1980s-vintage nuclear AGM-86B Air-Launched Cruise Missile, with a production decision expected in 2027.

It passed a critical design review in March 2023 following the completion of flight tests in 2022.

A total of 1,020 missiles, plus 67 for testing, were originally planned, with the B-52 and the upcoming B-21 Raider bomber as the launching platforms.

The $13 million missile is expected to have a range of over 1,500 miles (2,400 kilometers).

Subscribe to our mailing list

Related articles.

AFRL to Construct AI, Machine Learning Research Facility in Ohio

US Air Force to Transform F-16s Into Autonomous Flight Testbeds

US Navy, Air Force to Begin Joint Fighter Jet Training in 2024

Advanced Hearing Aids Increase Veterans’ Readiness to Confront Hearing Loss

USAF Taps Lockheed to Develop Adversary Radar Training System 

US Air Force Showcases Wearable Cooling Equipment for Troops

US Air Force Awards $3.7B for Ground Test Support in Tennessee

US Military Families Less Likely to Recommend Service Amid Treatment Woes: Poll

US Air Force Seeks Proposals to Power Next-Gen Tanker Fleet

Us military urged to provide troops more protection from blasts.

Defense Media Network

Your web browser doesn't fully support this site. Consider upgrading your browser .

Newest Defense Media Network Promotion

Special operations outlook 2019 digital edition is here, air force awards long range standoff weapon contracts, nuclear arsenal modernization continues with lrso contracts to lockheed martin, raytheon.

By U.S. Air Force Press Release - August 24, 2017

Artist’s rendering of the Long Range Standoff (LRSO) nuclear-tipped cruise missile.

By Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center Public Affairs

The Air Force is on track to replace the aging AGM-86B Air Launched Cruise Missile with modernized weapon capabilities designed for its nuclear bomber fleet, to include the B-21.

Today, the Air Force awarded contracts to Lockheed Martin Corporation and Raytheon Company to mature design concepts and prove developmental technologies for the new Long Range Standoff weapon.

“This weapon will modernize the air-based leg of the nuclear triad,” said Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson. “Deterrence works if our adversaries know that we can hold at risk things they value. This weapon will enhance our ability to do so, and we must modernize it cost-effectively.”

Each company was awarded a contract of approximately $900 million, with an approximate 54-month period of performance. Upon successful completion of the contracts, the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center will choose a single contractor for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development and Production and Deployment phases of the program.

“The LRSO missile will ensure the bomber force continues to hold high-value targets at risk in an evolving threat environment, including targets deep within an area-denied environment.”

The current Air Launched Cruise Missile was first fielded in the early 1980s with a 10-year design life, and Lockheed and Raytheon are charged with developing the technologies and demonstrating reliability and maintainability of a replacement weapon. The aging ALCM will continue to face increasingly significant operational challenges against emerging threats and reliability challenges until replaced. The Air Force plans to start fielding LRSO in the late 2020s.

“Secretary Wilson and I are responsible for organizing, training, equipping, and presenting ready nuclear forces to the Strategic Command commander,” said Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David L. Goldfein. “The Long Range Standoff is a critical capability required to support Gen. John Hyten’s war plans.”

“The LRSO will be a reliable, long-ranging and survivable weapon system and an absolutely essential element of the nuclear triad,” Gen. Robin Rand, commander of Air Force Global Strike Command, told the House Armed Services Committee’s Strategic Forces Subcommittee in May. “The LRSO missile will ensure the bomber force continues to hold high-value targets at risk in an evolving threat environment, including targets deep within an area-denied environment.”

“These contract awards mark another important step in replacing our aging Air Launched Cruise Missiles,” said Maj. Gen. Scott Jansson, commander of the AFNWC and Air Force program executive officer for strategic systems. “Continued competition will help ensure the bomber leg of the nuclear triad is cost-effectively modernized with a survivable, reliable, and credible standoff capability.”

The LRSO program office, located at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is part of the AFNWC Air Delivered Capabilities directorate. Headquartered at Kirtland AFB, AFNWC is responsible for synchronizing all aspects of nuclear materiel management on behalf of Air Force Materiel Command, in direct support of AFGSC. The center has more than 1,100 personnel assigned to 17 locations worldwide.

By U.S. Air Force Press Release

Sharing Options:

• Facebook Comments

Your source for trustworthy defense news

[email protected]

Popular Articles

History of army corps of engineers projects: missile and space programs to the american recovery and reinvestment act, how 80 coast guardsmen saved an alaskan town during spanish flu pandemic of 1919, 100th anniversary of the american aircraft carrier, digital magazine, command failure: lloyd fredendall and the battle of kasserine pass, ‘tactical napping’ and other tips to sleep well on deployment, advertise with us, get our newsletter.

• DefenseMediaNetwork.com Newsletter
• Coast Guard Outlook
• Research and Development Outlook
• SpecOps Outlook
• Veterans Affairs and Military Medicine Outlook

LRSO: The Nuclear Cruise Missile Mission

By Hans M. Kristensen

[Updated January 26, 2016] In an op-ed in the Washington Post , William Perry and Andy Weber last week called for canceling the Air Force’s new nuclear air-launched cruise missile.

The op-ed challenged what many see as an important component of the modernization of the U.S. nuclear triad of strategic weapons and a central element of U.S. nuclear strategy.

The recommendation to cancel the new cruise missile – known as the LRSO for Long-Range Standoff weapon – is all the more noteworthy because it comes from William Perry, known to some as “ALCM Bill,” who was secretary of defense from 1994 to 1997, and as President Carter’s undersecretary of defense for research and engineering in the late-1970s and early-1980s was in charge of developing the nuclear air-launched cruise missile the LRSO is intended to replace.

And his co-author, Andy Weber, was assistant secretary of defense for nuclear, chemical and biological defense programs from 2009 to 2014, during which he served as director of the Nuclear Weapons Council for five-plus years – the very time period the plans to build the LRSO emerged [note: the need to replace the ALCM was decided by DOD during the Bush administration in 2007].

Obviously, Perry and Weber are not impressed by the arguments presented by the Air Force, STRATCOM, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the nuclear laboratories, defense hawks in Congress, and an army or former defense officials and contractors for why the United States should spend $15 billion to $20 billion on a new nuclear cruise missile.

Those arguments seem to have evolved very little since the 1970s. A survey of statements made by defense officials over the past few years for why the LRSO is needed reveals a concoction of justifications ranging from good-old warfighting scenarios of using nuclear weapons to blast holes in enemy air defenses to “the old missile is getting old, therefore we need a new one.”

LRSO: What Is It Good For?

When I wrote about the LRSO in 2013 , the Air Force had only said a few things in public about why the weapon was needed. Since then, defense officials have piled on justifications in numerous public statements.

Those statements (see table below) describe an LRSO mission heavily influenced by nuclear warfighting scenarios. This involves deploying nuclear bombers “whenever and wherever we want” with large numbers of LRSOs onboard that “multiplies the number of penetrating targets each bomber presents to an adversary” and “imposes an extremely difficult, multi-azimuth air defense problem on our potential adversaries.” By providing “flexible and effective stand-off capabilities in the most challenging area denial environments” to “effectively conduct global strike operations” at will, the LRSO “maximally expands the accessible space of targets that can be held at risk,” including shooting “holes and gaps [in enemy air defenses] to allow a penetrating bomber to get in” to be able to “do direct attacks anywhere on the planet to hold any place at risk” whether it be in “limited or large scale” nuclear strike scenarios.

It seems clear from many of these statements that the LRSO is not merely a retaliatory capability but very much seen as an offensive nuclear strike weapon that is intended for use in the early phases of a conflict even before long-range ballistic missiles are used. In a briefing from 2014, Major General Garrett Harencak, until September this year the assistant chief of staff for Air Force strategic deterrence and nuclear integration, described a “nuclear use” phase before actual nuclear war during which bombers would use nuclear weapons against regional and near-peer adversaries (see image below).

This Air Force slide from 2014 shows “nuclear use” from bombers in a pre-“nuclear war” phase of a conflict. This apparently could include LRSO strikes against air-defense systems.

Although the LRSO is normally presented as a strategic weapon, the public descriptions by U.S. officials of limited regional scenarios sound very much like a tactical nuclear weapon to be used in a general military campaign alongside conventional weapons. “I can make holes and gaps” in air defenses, Air Force Global Strike commander Lieutenant General Stephen Wilson explained in 2014 , “to allow a penetrating bomber to get in.” Indeed, an Air Force briefing slide from 2011 shows the LRSO launched from a next-generation bomber against air defenses to allow a next-generation penetrator launched from the same bomber to attack an underground target (see image below).

This Air Force briefing slide from 2011 shows the LRSO used against air-defense systems, similar to scenarios described by Air Force officials in 2014.

Use of bombers with LRSO in a pre-nuclear war phase is part of an increasing focus on regional nuclear strike scenarios. “We are increasing DOD’s focus on planning and posture to deter nuclear use in escalating regional conflicts,” according to Robert Scher , US Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities. “The goal of strengthening regional deterrence cuts across both the strategic stability and extended deterrence and assurance missions to which our nuclear forces contribute.” The efforts include development of “ enhanced planning to ensure options for the President in addressing the regional deterrence challenge.” (Emphasis added.)

The Pentagon appears to be using the Obama administration’s nuclear weapons employment policy to enhance strike options and plans in these regional scenarios. “The regional deterrence challenge may be the ‘least unlikely’ of the nuclear scenarios for which the United States must prepare,” Elaine Bunn, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy, told the Senate last year . And “continuing to enhance our planning and options for addressing it is at the heart of aligning U.S. nuclear employment policy and plans with today’s strategic environment.” (Emphasis added.)

Cruise Missile Dilemma: Nuclear Versus Conventional

The arguments used to justify the LRSO sound like the United States has little else with which to hold targets at risk. But bomber standoff and targeting capabilities today are vastly superior to those of the late-1970s and early-1980s when the ALCM was developed. Not only are non-nuclear cruise missiles proliferating in numbers and deliver platforms, the Air Force itself seems to prefer them over nuclear cruise missiles.

The Air Force plan to buy 1,000-1,100 LRSOs represents a significant increase of more than 40 percent over the current inventory of 575 ALCMs. Armed with the W80-4 warhead , the LRSO will not only be integrated onto the B-52H that currently carries the ALCM, but also onto the B-2A and the next-generation bomber (LRS-B) .

Assuming the LRSO force will have the same number of warheads (approximately 528) as the current ALCM force, the roughly 180 missiles that would be lost in flight tests over a 30-year lifespan does not explain what the remaining 300-400 missiles would be used for.

Air Force Global Strike Command appears to hint that the extra missiles might be used for a conventional LRSO. “We fully intend to develop a conventional version of the LRSO as a future spiral to the nuclear variant.” Yet a lot of other conventional cruise missiles and standoff weapons are already in development – some even making their way onto smaller aircraft such as F-16 fighter-bombers – and Congress is unlikely to pay for yet another conventional air-launched cruise missile.

It is a curious dilemma for the Air Force: it needs the LRSO to help justify the long-range bomber program, but it prefers to spend its money on conventional standoff weapons that are much more flexible and – in contras to the LRSO – can actually be used. The trend is that new conventional standoff weapons are gradually pushing the nuclear cruise missiles off the bombers. To reduce the nuclear load-out under the New START Treaty and prioritize conventional weapons, the Air Force is currently converting  stripping the B-52H of its excess capability to carry the ALCM internally in the bomb bay.  a total of 44 sets of Common Strategic Rotary Launchers (CSRLs) are being modified to Conventional Rotary Launchers (CRLs). This will give the B-52H the capability to deliver the non-nuclear Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) and its 1,100-kilometer (648 miles) extended range variant JASSM-ER (AGM-158B), weapons that are more useful for deterrent missions than a nuclear cruise missile. Once completed in 2018, each remaining nuclear-capable B-52H will only be capable of carrying nuclear cruise missiles externally: 12 missiles under the wings compared with a total of 20 today.

The Air Force is stripping the B-52H of its capability to nuclear air-launched cruise missiles in its bomb bay. By 2018, each B-52H will only be able to carry 12 ALCMs, down from 20 today. Instead it the bomber will  equipping it B-52Hs to carry new conventional cruise missiles in its bomb bay.

While the B-52H will lose the capability to carry nuclear cruise missiles internally,  The JASSM in contrast will be integrated for both internal and external carriage. As a result, each B-52H will be equipped to carry up to 20 JASSM, of which as many as 16 can be JASSM-ER. Moreover, while only 46 B-52H will be nuclear-capable, all remaining 76 B-52Hs in the inventory will be back fitted for JASSM. An interim JASSM-ER capability is planned for 2017 – nearly a decade before the LRSO is scheduled to be deployed – providing essentially the same standoff capability (although with less range).

The B-2A Spirit stealth-bomber cannot currently carry ALCMs but the Air Force says but will be fitted to carry the LRSO internally in addition to the new B61-12 guided nuclear bomb. The B-2A, which is scheduled to fly until the 2050s, is also scheduled to be back-fitted with the JASSM-ER.

The next-generation long-range bomber (LRS-B) will also be equipped with the LRSO (probably 16 internally) in addition to the B61-12, and probably also the JASSM-ER. Once it begins to enter the force after 2025, the LRS-B will probably replace the B-52H in the nuclear mission on a one-for-one basis.

Approximately 5,000 JASSMs are planned, including more than 2,900 JASSM-ERs. Although the nuclear LRSO has a “significantly” greater range than the JASSM-ER (probably 2,500-3,000 kilometers), the conventional missile will still enable the bomber to attack from well beyond air-defense range against soft, medium, and very hard (not deeply buried) targets.

JASSM-ER has been integrated on the B-1B bomber that recently was incorporated into Air Force Global Strike Command alongside B-2A and B-52H bombers. After it is added to the B-52H and B-2A, the JASSM will also be added to F-15E and F-16 fighter-bombers and possibly also to some navy aircraft. Several European countries have already bought JASSM for their fighter-bombers (Poland and Finland).

Clearly, conventional standoff missiles rather than the LRSO appear to be the priority of the Air Force.

Conclusions and Recommendations

In their op-ed, Perry and Weber describe the justification that was used during the Cold War for developing the existing cruise missile, the ALCM (AGM-86B). “At that time, the United States needed the cruise missile to keep the aging B-52, which is quite vulnerable to enemy air defense systems, in the nuclear mission until the more effective B-2 replaced it. The B-52 could safely launch the long-range cruise missile far from Soviet air defenses. We needed large numbers of air-launched nuclear cruise missiles to be able to overwhelm Soviet air defenses and thus help offset NATO’s conventional-force inferiority in Europe,” they write.

The anti-air defense mission that justified development of a nuclear ALCM during the Cold War is no longer relevant. According to Perry and Weber, “such a posture no longer reflects the reality of today’s U.S. conventional military dominance.”

They are right. All U.S. bombers, as well as many fighter-bombers, are scheduled to be equipped with long-rang conventional cruise missiles that provide sufficient capability against the same air-defense targets that LRSO proponents argue require a standoff nuclear cruise missile on the next-generation bomber.

Canceling the LRSO would be an appropriate way to demonstrate implementation of the Obama administration’s nuclear weapons employment strategy from 2013 that directed the Pentagon to “undertake concrete steps toward reducing the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy” and “conduct deliberate planning for non-nuclear strike options to assess what objectives and effects could be achieved through integrated non-nuclear strike options.”

Instead, statements by defense officials reveal a worrisome level of warfighting thinking behind the LRSO mission that risks dragging U.S. nuclear planning back into Cold War thinking about the role of nuclear weapons. Instead of implementing the guidance and use advanced conventional weapons to “make holes and gaps” in air defenses, the LRSO mission appears to entertain ideas about using nuclear weapons against regional and near-peer adversaries in the name of extended deterrence and escalation control before actual nuclear war.

Although bombers armed with nuclear gravity bombs can be used to signal to adversaries in a crisis, loading the aircraft with long-range nuclear cruise missiles that can slip unseen under the radar in a surprise attack is inherently destabilizing. This dilemma is exacerbated by the large upload-capability of the bombers that are not normally on alert with nuclear weapons. Pentagon officials will normally warn that re-alerting nuclear weapons onto launchers in a crisis is dangerous, but in the case of LRSO they seem to relish the option to “provide a rapid and flexible hedge against changes in the strategic environment.”

Perry and Weber’s recommendation to cancel the unnecessary and dangerous LRSO is both wise and bold. The strategic situation has changed fundamentally, conventional capabilities can do most of the mission, and arguments for the LRSO seem to be a mixture of Cold War strategy and general nuclear doctrinal mumbo jumbo. Some people in the Obama administration will certainly listen (as will many that have already left). Others will argue that even if they wanted to cancel LRSO, they have little room to maneuver given a hostile Congress, Russia’s return as an official threat, and China’s military modernization and posturing in the South China Sea.

Moreover, the development of the LRSO and its W80-4 warhead is already well underway and rapidly approaching the point of no return. The decision to replace the ALCM with the LRSO was reaffirmed by the Obama administration’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, the Airborne Strategic Deterrence Capability Based Assessment, and the Initial Capability Document. The LRSO Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) study is already complete and has been approved by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC), and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force signed the Draft Capabilities Development Document in February 2014. LRSO was selected by the assistance secretary of the Air Force for acquisition (SAF/AQ) as a pilot program for “Bending the Cost Curve,” a new acquisition initiative to make weapons programs more affordable (although with a cost of $15 billion to $20 billion that curve seems to point pretty much straight up). The critical Milestone A decision is expected in early 2016, and program spending will ramp up in 2017 as full-scale development begins with $1.8 billion programmed through 2020.

Similarly, development of the W80-4 warhead for the LRSO is well underway with $1.9 billion programmed through 2020. Warhead development is in Phase 6.2 with first production unit scheduled for 2025.

If national security and rational defense planning – not institutional turf and inertia – determined the U.S. nuclear weapons modernization program, then the LRSO would be canceled. At least Perry and Weber had the guts to call for it.

This publication was made possible by a grant from the New Land Foundation and Ploughshares Fund. The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the author.

A military depot in central Belarus has recently been upgraded with additional security perimeters and an access point that indicate it could be intended for housing Russian nuclear warheads for Belarus’ Russia-supplied Iskander missile launchers.

The Indian government announced yesterday that it had conducted the first flight test of its Agni-5 ballistic missile “with Multiple Independently Targetable Re-Entry Vehicle (MIRV) technology.

While many are rightly concerned about Russia’s development of new nuclear-capable systems, fears of substantial nuclear increase may be overblown.

Despite modernization of Russian nuclear forces and warnings about an increase of especially shorter-range non-strategic warheads, we do not yet see such an increase as far as open sources indicate.

Advertisement

A Look at Iran’s Military Capabilities

The direct military confrontation between Iran and Israel has brought renewed attention to Iran’s armed forces. What are they capable of?

• Share full article

By Farnaz Fassihi

• Published April 12, 2024 Updated April 14, 2024

The start of a direct military confrontation between Iran and Israel has brought renewed attention to Iran’s armed forces. Early this month, Israel attacked a building in Iran’s diplomatic compound in the Syrian capital, Damascus, killing seven of Iran’s senior commanders and military personnel .

Iran vowed to retaliate, and did so about two weeks later, starting a broad aerial attack on Israel on Saturday involving hundreds of drones and missiles aimed at targets inside Israel and the territory it controls.

Here’s a look at Iran’s military and its capabilities.

Why is Iran’s military relevant right now?

Israeli officials had said they would respond to any attack by Iran with a counterattack, which could prompt further retaliation from Iran and possibly expand into a wider regional war. There is even a chance that a conflict of that sort could drag in the United States, although Washington has made clear it had nothing to do with the Damascus attack.

Analysts say that Iran’s adversaries, primarily the United States and Israel, have avoided direct military strikes on Iran for decades, not wishing to tangle with Tehran’s complex military apparatus. Instead, Israel and Iran have been engaged in a long shadow war via air, sea, land and cyberattacks, and Israel has covertly targeted military and nuclear facilities inside Iran and killed commanders and scientists.

“There is a reason Iran has not been struck,” said Afshon Ostovar, an associate professor of national security affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School and an expert on Iran’s military. “It’s not that Iran’s adversaries fear Iran. It’s that they realize any war against Iran is a very serious war.”

What sort of military threat does Iran pose?

The Iranian armed forces are among the largest in the Middle East, with at least 580,000 active-duty personnel and about 200,000 trained reserve personnel divided among the traditional army and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, according to an annual assessment last year by the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

The army and the Guards each have separate and active ground, air and naval forces, with the Guards responsible for Iran’s border security. The General Staff of the Armed Forces coordinates the branches and sets the overall strategy.

The Guards also operate the Quds Force, an elite unit in charge of arming, training and supporting the network of proxy militias throughout the Middle East known as the “axis of resistance.” These militias include Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, militia groups in Syria and Iraq and Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza.

Power by Proxy: How Iran Shapes the Mideast

A guide to the armed groups that let Iran extend its influence throughout the region.

The commander in chief of Iran’s armed forces is the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the last word on all major decisions.

While the proxy militias are not counted as part of Iran’s armed forces, analysts say they are considered an allied regional force — battle ready, heavily armed and ideologically loyal — and could come to Iran’s aid if it was attacked.

“The level of support and types of systems Iran has provided for nonstate actors is really unprecedented in terms of drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles,” said Fabian Hinz, an expert on Iran’s military at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Berlin. “They could be viewed as part of Iran’s military capability, especially Hezbollah, which has the closest strategic relationship with Iran.”

What kinds of weapons does Iran have?

For decades, Iran’s military strategy has been anchored in deterrence, emphasizing the development of precision and long-range missiles, drones and air defenses. It has built a large fleet of speedboats and some small submarines that are capable of disrupting shipping traffic and global energy supplies that pass through the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has one of the largest arsenals of ballistic missiles and drones in the Middle East, Mr. Ostovar said. That includes cruise missiles and anti-ship missiles, as well as ballistic missiles with ranges up to 2,000 kilometers, or more than 1,200 miles. These have the capacity and range to hit any target in the Middle East, including Israel.

In recent years, Tehran has assembled a large inventory of drones with ranges of around 1,200 to 1,550 miles and capable of flying low to evade radar, according to experts and Iranian commanders who have given public interviews to the state news media. Iran has made no secret of the buildup, displaying its trove of drones and missiles during military parades, and has ambitions to build a large export business in drones. Iran’s drones are being used by Russia in Ukraine and have surfaced in the conflict in Sudan.

The country’s bases and storage facilities are widely dispersed, buried deep underground and fortified with air defenses, making them difficult to destroy with airstrikes, experts say.

Where does Iran get its weapons?

International sanctions have cut Iran off from high-tech weaponry and military equipment manufactured abroad, like tanks and fighter jets.

During Iran’s eight-year war with Iraq in the 1980s, few countries were willing to sell weapons to Iran. When Ayatollah Khamenei became Iran’s supreme leader in 1989, a year after the war ended, he commissioned the Guards to develop a domestic weapons industry and poured resources into the effort, which was widely reported in the Iranian news media. He wanted to assure that Iran would never again have to rely on foreign powers for its defense needs.

Today, Iran manufactures a large quantity of missiles and drones domestically and has prioritized that defense production, experts said. Its attempts to make armored vehicles and large naval vessels have met with mixed results. It also imports small submarines from North Korea while expanding and modernizing its domestically produced fleet .

How do other countries see Iran’s military, and what are its weaknesses?

Iran’s military is viewed as one of the strongest in the region in terms of equipment, cohesion, experience and quality of personnel, but it lags far behind the power and sophistication of the armed forces of the United States, Israel and some European countries, experts said.

Iran’s greatest weakness is its air force. Much of the country’s aircraft date from the era of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who led Iran from 1941 to 1979, and many have been disabled for lack of spare parts. The country also bought a small fleet from Russia in the 1990s, experts said.

Iran’s tanks and armored vehicles are old, and the country has only a few large naval vessels, experts said. Two intelligence gathering vessels, t he Saviz and Behshad, deployed on the Red Sea, have aided the Houthis in identifying Israeli-owned ships for attacks, American officials have said.

Will Israel’s attack disrupt Iran’s military?

The assassinations of the senior military officials are expected to have a short-term impact on Iran’s regional operations, having eliminated commanders with years of experience and relationships with the heads of the allied militias.

Nevertheless, the chain of command for the armed forces inside Iran remains intact, experts say.

An earlier version of this article misstated the name of a group in the Gaza Strip. It is Palestinian Islamic Jihad, not Islamic Palestinian Jihad.

How we handle corrections

Farnaz Fassihi is the United Nations bureau chief for The Times, leading coverage of the organization, and also covers Iran and the shadow war between Iran and Israel. She is based in New York. More about Farnaz Fassihi

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

North Korea says it tested ‘super-large’ cruise missile warhead and new anti-aircraft missile

Korean Central News Agency released photos showing at least two missiles being fired off launcher trucks on a runway. The missiles in the image were not identified. State media said North Korea’s missile administration on Friday conducted a ‘power test’ for the warhead designed for the Hwasal-1 Ra-3 strategic cruise missile and a test-launch of the Pyoljji-1-2 anti-aircraft missile.

The South Korean and U.S. air forces held joint air drills in Gunsan, South Korea on Friday, where they practiced ways to detect and counter enemy threats.

A TV screen shows an image of North Korea’s missile launch during a news program at the Seoul Railway Station in Seoul, South Korea, Saturday, April 20, 2024. North Korea said Saturday it tested a “super-large” cruise missile warhead and a new anti-aircraft missile in a western coastal area as it expands military capabilities in the face of deepening tensions with the United States and South Korea. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

• Copy Link copied

South Korean army soldiers pass by the barbed-wire fence in Paju, South Korea, near the border with North Korea, Friday, April 19, 2024. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

A U.S. Army soldier from the Eighth Army and South Korean army soldiers throw simulated grenades during the Expert Soldier, Infantry, and Medic Badge (E3B) competition at the Rodriguez Live Fire Complex in Pocheon, South Korea, Friday, April 19, 2024. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

U.S. Army soldiers from the Eighth Army compete during the Expert Soldier, Infantry, and Medic Badge (E3B) competition at the Rodriguez Live Fire Complex in Pocheon, South Korea, Friday, April 19, 2024. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — North Korea said Saturday it tested a “super-large” cruise missile warhead and a new anti-aircraft missile in a western coastal area as it expands military capabilities in the face of deepening tensions with the United States and South Korea.

North Korean state media said the country’s missile administration on Friday conducted a “power test” for the warhead designed for the Hwasal-1 Ra-3 strategic cruise missile and a test-launch of the Pyoljji-1-2 anti-aircraft missile. It said the tests attained an unspecified “certain goal.”

Photos released by the North’s official Korean Central News Agency showed at least two missiles being fired off launcher trucks at a runway.

North Korea conducted a similar set of tests Feb. 2, but at the time did not specify the names of the cruise missile or the anti-aircraft missile, indicating it was possibly seeing technological progress after testing the same system over weeks.

KCNA insisted Friday’s tests were part of the North’s regular military development activities and had nothing to do with the “surrounding situation.”

Tensions on the Korean Peninsula are at their highest in years, with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un dialing up his weapons demonstrations, which have included more powerful missiles aimed at the U.S. mainland and U.S. targets in the Pacific. The United States, South Korea and Japan have responded by expanding their combined military training and sharpening their deterrence strategies built around strategic U.S. assets.

Cruise missiles are among a growing collection of North Korean weapons designed to overwhelm regional missile defenses. They supplement the North’s vast lineup of ballistic missiles, including intercontinental ballistic missiles aimed at the continental United States.

Analysts say anti-aircraft missile technology is an area where North Korea could benefit from its deepening military cooperation with Russia , as the two countries align in the face of their separate, intensifying confrontations with the U.S. The United States and South Korea have accused North Korea of providing artillery shells and other equipment to Russia to help extend its warfighting in Ukraine.

Russia's firing new, long-range Kh-69 cruise missiles, war experts say, piling on the misery for Ukraine's dwindling air defense

• Russian forces have deployed a new cruise missile, the Institute for the Study of War said.
• The Kh-69 was used in an attack on a major power station near Kyiv this week.
• The Kh-69 is a leap forward in Russian tactical munitions.

Russian Forces are deploying a new, long-range cruise missile, known as the Kh-69, as it steps up attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure.

The Washington DC-based think tank, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), noted in its Friday report that the new air-to-surface missiles were part of Russia's "continued efforts to improve strike packages and penetrate Ukraine's degraded air defense."

Russia has renewed its attacks against Ukraine's energy infrastructure in recent weeks, exploiting Kyiv's dwindling air defense systems.

"We need air defense systems and other defense assistance, not just turning a blind eye and having lengthy discussions," President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a post on X.

The post was in response to a Russian missile attack overnight on April 11 that destroyed the Trypillia Thermal Power Plant. The plant is one of the primary energy suppliers to Ukraine's capital, Kyiv. The plant was hit by the new Kh-69 missiles, according to the Ukrainian military.

"ISW has not previously observed the Russian use of Kh-69 missiles in Ukraine," it said.

"Russian forces have reportedly launched Kh-69 missiles from 400 kilometers away from their targets, exceeding a previous estimated range of 300 kilometers and the 200-kilometer range of the most recent Kh-59MK2 variant," wrote the ISW.

Related stories

Illia Yevlash, a spokesperson for Ukraine's Air Force, confirmed on Friday that Russia had launched the new missiles during its massive aerial assault on Thursday.

"This is an improved system of the Kh-59 version," Yevlash said.

"We are currently establishing what kind of missile it was, what type it was. These are fresh missiles with parts manufactured in 2023. That is, we can see that Russia is constantly trying to produce new missiles."

Yevlash said Russia was manufacturing the Kh-69 domestically, but that continued production relied on the ability to source key components from abroad. ISW analysts noted that while the Russian stockpiles and production capability of these Kh-69 missiles are unclear, "Russia is unlikely to be able to produce them at a significantly greater speed or quantity than its other domestically produced missiles."

The Kh-69 is Russia's latest cruise missile

Reports that Russia was employing the Kh-69 first appeared on Ukrainian Telegram channels in early February.

On February 7, a Ukrainian military blogger posted a photo on Telegram purporting to show the destroyed rear fins of a Kh-69. A Ukrainian war monitor account, which tracks Russian aviation activity, claimed that three Kh-69s were fired at Ukraine overnight on February 7-8.

In September last year, the UK-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think tank reported that the Kh-69 was still undergoing testing. It described the missile as an "air-launched land-attack cruise missile likely akin to the European Storm Shadow or Taurus KEPD 350 missiles."

According to The War Zone, the Kh-69 was developed by Raduga, part of Russia's Tactical Missile Corporation. The missile weighs around 1,700 pounds, has an operating speed of up to 621 miles per hour, and has the option of either a penetration or a cluster warhead weighing up to 680 pounds. The missile's shape offers some degree of reduced radar signature.

Russian forces can launch the missiles from Su-34 and Su-35 tactical aircraft rather than solely from strategic bombers.

Watch: Ukraine says it shot down 6 hypersonic missiles over Kyiv during 'exceptional' night of attacks

• Main content