The goal is to create a variant of the SeaSparrow that can be used by the 12 nations in the NATO SeaSparrow Project Office consortium, or NSPO, according to the Navy Sources Sought notice. The deadline is Oct. 19.

The NSPO is looking for a weapon that can be employed against a wide variety of threats. The NSV SeaSparrow “should have capability against current and future threat classes spanning a variety of threat characteristics including velocity (low-speed to high-speed), altitude (sea skimming to high diver), maneuverability (non-maneuvering to high Gravitational (G)-Force maneuvers), and signatures,” the Navy said.

The NSV is also meant to defend the fleet against massed salvos of missiles and function despite jamming.

The weapon “should be able to work in complex natural, contested, Radio Frequency (RF), Electro-Optical (EO), and/or Infrared (IR) environments.”

“The missile should have the capability to discriminate and resolve between multiple closely spaced targets and provide threat-track measurements to support missile guidance, navigation and lethality functions,” the Sources Sought notice continues. “The missile should have the capability to handle threat countermeasures.”

The notice included a graphic that appeared to depict surface ships — including two aircraft carriers — being targeted by a dozen missiles and torpedoes, plus a hostile fixed-wing aircraft and a helicopter. The friendly ships appeared to be using active illumination to paint some threats, while the SeaSparrow used its on-board sensors to intercept others.

NSPO seeks a modular, open-source design that would give the U.S. government “maximum rights in technical data, computer software, and computer software documentation (including source code), design artifacts, and interface specifications.”

“This approach will simplify future upgrades, promote interoperability across consortium platforms, and outpace evolving threats,” the notice said.

The NSPO wants contractors who can provide a complete missile system, including airframe, propulsion, guidance and software. The missile should have no more than a 10-inch diameter and fit inside a Mark 41 vertical launch tube.

The Sources Sought notice emphasized that the missile and its technical data should be releasable to the entire NATO SEASPARROW Consortium: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey and the U.S. Other users include Thailand and the United Arab Emirates.

The Block II RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow is currently manufactured by Raytheon, which doubled production to more than 350 missiles in 2025. Amid naval operations in the Persian Gulf, where Iran has launched numerous missiles and drones against dwindling stocks of U.S. and allied interceptors, future demand for short-range air defense weapons is likely to be brisk.

First fielded in 2004, the Evolved SeaSparrow is descended from the 1950s AIM-7 Sparrow radar-guided air-to-air missile.

Though the original Sparrow had a mixed combat record as an aerial combat weapon in the Vietnam War, the Evolved SeaSparrow was intended as a low-cost defense against anti-ship missiles, aircraft, helicopters and fast attack boats. The current version has an estimated range of around 30 miles.

Qatar’s government requested to buy up to four KC-46As, eight PW4062 turbofan engines, 10 AN/ALR-69A radar warning receivers, 15 Guardian Laser Transmitter Assemblies for Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasure systems and 8 LAIRCM system processor replacements, according to a Thursday release.

The proposed sale also includes “non-major defense equipment,” such as precision navigation, transportation and airlift support, personnel training and training equipment and other related logistical and program support items, per the statement.

“The proposed sale will increase Qatar’s capability to meet current and future threats by enhancing its defense capabilities and interoperability with U.S. and allied forces and reinforcing Qatar’s strategic role in regional security,” the release reads.

The potential sale is meant to support U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives through assisting in Qatar’s security. The U.S. government statement describes the country as a “strategic regional partner” that continues to be an “important force” for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East.

Principal contractors for the envisioned deal include Boeing, Pratt & Whitney Military Engines, RTX Corporation and Northrop Grumman Corporation.

The proposed sale’s implementation will not require any additional U.S. government or contractor representatives to Qatar, the announcement says.

“At this time, the U.S. Government is not aware of any offset agreement proposed in connection with this potential sale,” the statement says. “Any offset agreement will be defined in negotiations between the purchaser and the contractor.”

The KC-46A provides aerial refueling support to the U.S. Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and partner nations and has greater refueling, cargo and aeromedical evacuation capabilities than the aging KC-135s.

The announcement comes as questions persist surrounding the security features of a Qatari-donated Air Force One aircraft that has been modified for U.S. presidential use. President Donald Trump began using the new jet in July and has since announced it will be “maxed out” for upgrades.

The Aug. 7 statement followed a review of the Modular Handgun System, a program led by the Army’s Project Manager Soldier Lethality, initiated after an airman was shot and killed because of an alleged “uncommanded discharge” with an M18 handgun.

Last year’s incident resulted in an immediate inspection of all M18 handguns issued by the Air Force Global Strike Command as well as a temporary pause of their use, which was lifted a month later.

Additionally, three airmen involved in the deadly shooting were charged with lying to investigators. They claimed the gun just “went off” when the shooter slammed his duty belt against a desk, when in reality, he had pointed it at the victim in a “joking manner.”

According to the statement, the Army has investigated all reports of incidents involving MHS pistols discharging without a trigger pull, and firearms mishaps account for less than 0.006% of all MHS pistols issued.

“All investigated incidents of alleged ‘uncommanded discharges’ have been traced back to the trigger being pulled,” Army officials say, adding that they blame “public speculation and online misinformation” for the safety concerns regarding the handgun design.

However, the civilian version of the handgun has been linked to dozens of injuries and a handful of deaths, with victims claiming the gun discharged a round without a trigger pull. In turn, the design has been the subject of more than 100 legal challenges since it was introduced in 2014, with varying outcomes.

In many of the lawsuits, attorneys argue that the design’s passive safeties can fail to adequately prevent unintentional manipulation of the trigger. It’s important to note that unlike the civilian P320, the M18 and M17 pistol designs are equipped with a manual safety.

Since the SIG design won DoD approval in 2017, M17 and M18 pistols have become the standard-issue sidearm for the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Navy. There are more than 400,000 currently in service.

The agency announced that the company AVIDrone pushed the limits with its electric helicopter design that lifted an unprecedented payload-to-weight ratio of 3.84 to 1.

In practical terms, that means the company’s Katana heavy-lift drone, weighing 29.3 pounds, lifted and carried a payload weight of 112.4 pounds across approximately five nautical miles.

AVIDrone, a Canadian company with U.S. headquarters in Maryland, specializes in cargo delivery drones for the defense and commercial sectors.

In a statement, the company called its first-place performance the “result of bringing together years of know-how, our proprietary autopilot and flight-control technologies, and decades of experience designing and flying aircraft specifically for heavy cargo lift.”

With the DARPA Lift Challenge, the agency aimed to advance vertical lift in a small unmanned aerial system. Calling it the “heavy-lift bottleneck,” multirotor drones typically can only carry payloads equal to or less than their own weight.

Phillip “Donna” Smith, the Lift Challenge program manager, described heavy vertical flight as the “next great technological inflection point that is economical for widespread adoption.”

He explained that its application could revolutionize industries like agriculture, logistics, construction and more.

By placing first, AVIDrone won $1.25 million in prize money. But the company also described the competition as an “outstanding environment for accelerating new ideas and turning them into real-world applications.”

The second-place winner, Massachusetts-based MTech Operations, was awarded $750,000 for lifting 3.64 to 1; and the third-place winner, California-based Xtreme Aerial Concepts, was awarded $500,000 for lifting 3.45 to 1.

And then DARPA issued awards for subjective categories, which were determined by a panel of program managers with deep aviation expertise.

These included the University of Maryland team for the Most Revolutionary Aerodynamic Design, the Texas-based Portal Aircraft Company for the Most Revolutionary Powertrain Design, and the Utah-based DefendTex for the Most Promising Technology.

For the latter, DARPA said it had the highest ratio in the competition, with 9.63 to 1, but it did not complete a scored run.

Smith told Military Times that besides the prize money and the cool demonstrations, the Lift Challenge created a huge networking event that allowed inventors, investors and users to set new goals and create future projects.

“So now, the challenges can get organized and the community that is built can start moving and (try) to solve problems that different organizations have across the United States or even the world,” Smith said. “Like we’ve seen in past challenges, the people here oftentimes combine forces and build the next generation of aircraft or whatever the challenge is.”

Unitree’s $1,600 Go2 model, launched in 2023, helped the company rapidly dominate the global quadruped robot market — its Shanghai IPO has drawn frenzied demand. Another Unitree robot has been shown on Chinese state television, armed and accompanying People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops on an exercise.

These robots draw on breakthroughs in quadruped movement financed by the U.S. DEVCOM Army Research Laboratory (ARL) and other military programs, the researchers and the former official told Reuters.

The Army-funded project turned into, “basically, the first Unitree robot that had any kind of scale,” said Gavin Kenneally, a former University of Pennsylvania researcher involved in the program.

Ben Katz, who worked at Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Biomimetic Robotics Lab, among a consortium of universities financed by the military programs, said the dimensions of Unitree’s popular Go series were “to the millimeter” almost identical to a groundbreaking robot he helped develop called Mini Cheetah.

Reuters is the first media outlet to detail connections between Unitree designs and the Army program.

The episode underscores broader problems with the United States’ ability to compete with China’s state-directed manufacturing sector in high-tech strategic industries, including those critical to national security.

Backed by subsidies, clusters of component factories, and a tolerance for heavy losses, Chinese companies have seized market share across industries such as solar panels, drones, EVs and quantum communications, many of which were first developed in the U.S. with government or military backing.

Kenneally commercialized the U.S. breakthroughs through his company Ghost Robotics, which supplies U.S. special forces with advanced, ruggedized robots. But compared to Unitree, its production is small and costly.

In June, the Pentagon added Unitree to a list of Chinese military companies, calling it a “contributor to the Chinese defense industrial base.” That designation falls short of a sanction but limits the U.S. military’s future use of Unitree’s technology. Unitree has said its robots are for civilian use.

Unitree, China’s State Council and China’s defense ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

Unitree did nothing underhanded in using the U.S. Army research. The program’s findings were published openly to stimulate progress in the field, a common practice.

ARL spokesperson Amanda Ligon said the research “strengthened the broader U.S. robotics ecosystem” and informed subsequent work across government and the private sector.

ARL referred questions about Unitree’s commercialization of the technology to the Pentagon, which declined to comment.

US companies versus China’s industrial policy

Unitree sold more than 5,500 humanoids and 18,000 quadrupeds last year, company filings show, and it’s now valued at about $9 billion ahead of its stock market debut on Wednesday.

By contrast, no U.S. company has mass-produced such robots, including Elon Musk’s Tesla, which has displayed prototypes of its Optimus humanoid for years. On a January earnings call, Musk called China “incredibly good” at scaling production.

Boston Dynamics, the U.S. company whose 2019 canine, Spot, used different technology, recently argued in a Congressional hearing that China’s low pricing would drive U.S. firms out of the market.

None of the U.S. robotics researchers who spoke with Reuters advocated for keeping such government-financed research secret. Instead, they said, U.S. policymakers should focus on enabling companies to quickly commercialize such advances to compete with China.

ARL also said publication was important to scientific and technological advancement.

The U.S. excels in innovation and software development but needs to ensure the capital, industrial base, highly skilled workforce and parts supply chains to scale up breakthroughs, said Vijay Kumar, dean at Penn Engineering.

For now, U.S. authorities often protect companies with trade restrictions on innovative Chinese products. In July, the Federal Communications Commission banned imports of future models of foreign-made humanoid and quadruped robots, including those from Unitree. China has threatened to retaliate against the FCC ban.

China’s Washington embassy said in a statement its companies are making new technologies affordable and accessible internationally. It accused the U.S. of abusing administrative power, and of “market distortion and unilateral bullying.”

Most of the experts who spoke to Reuters supported the U.S. ban but said the policy is not enough to build an industry to catch up with China.

“This isn’t just a competition between U.S. and Chinese robotics companies,” said Kenneally, the Ghost Robotics founder. “It’s between private U.S. companies and China’s coordinated national strategy.”

In 2015, Chinese President Xi Jinping set out a 10-year plan to lead industries including green energy, electric vehicles and robotics. Since then, China has channeled capital into risky bets on low-margin 21st-century advanced manufacturing.

Chinese robot manufacturers’ rapid reverse-engineering of products draws on the country’s dominance in refining critical minerals needed for magnets in robotics applications and the density of suppliers of motors, gears, ‘muscles’ known as actuators, and other components clustered near Unitree’s base in Hangzhou.

Reyk Knuhtsen, a robotics analyst at SemiAnalysis, called the United States’ failure to commercialize domestic research a “dropped ball,” citing U.S. venture capital’s preference for high-return software startups. It would take more than trade barriers on China to boost robotics manufacturing, he said.

“This is a very big hill for the U.S. to climb,” he said.

The White House did not respond to requests for comment about U.S. industrial policy. An FCC spokesperson said the commission was protecting Americans from foreign threats and preparing the country “to deliver on President Trump’s vision to lead the world on the next generation of technologies.”

Jaret Riddick, who as a former Army Research Laboratory director oversaw the Army-funded robotics project, said it did kick-start the U.S. quadruped industry. But in the end, without support for large-scale production, Unitree in China “just kind of consumed that space.”

Teaching robot dogs new tricks

The Army funded the Robotics Collaborative Technology Alliance (RCTA) between 2010 and 2020.

The RCTA gathered government, academic and industry researchers from UPenn, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Boston Dynamics, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and other research institutions. The alliance’s top commercial partner was General Dynamics Land Systems, the Michigan-based defense manufacturer that makes Abrams M1 tanks.

In 2016, UPenn researchers, including Kenneally, eliminated heavy central gearboxes and placed motors in robots’ legs, enhancing the ability to sense and respond to terrain. UPenn’s progress built on the MIT lab’s work funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, DARPA.

In 2019, the MIT lab presented the Mini Cheetah, building on UPenn features with increased strength – and the ability to do backflips.

Months earlier, Katz published his MIT masters thesis, detailing Mini Cheetah’s actuators. Within six months, he found Chinese companies manufacturing actuator copies “you could buy on AliExpress,” he said, referring to the Chinese online retail giant.

Unitree had been founded three years before by Wang Xingxing, then 26 years old. In his 2016 master’s thesis from Shanghai University, which Reuters reviewed online, Wang cited the work done at MIT, including on earlier iterations of the Cheetah, and set out principles consistent with those developed at the U.S. lab. He acknowledged the lab’s “pioneering” contributions.

In his thesis, Wang explored design tweaks to speed up development, saying his findings could have future “defense, security, family and education” applications. He referenced Kenneally’s ARL-funded UPenn paper.

On its website, Unitree says the company “independently developed the motors, reducers, controllers, and even some sensors of the quadruped robot.”

Katz told Reuters he decided against taking his actuators into production, thinking there would be no market. He said China’s ability to move fast had broad benefits: Robotics “has advanced a lot because of the availability of actuators.”

Joao Ramos, who did research at the same time as Katz at the MIT lab, said Unitree copied the Mini Cheetah shape, structure and design. But he credited the company with doing “proper engineering” to perfect a mass-produced robot.

“The actual practical implementation, bringing it to real life, that’s all on them,” Ramos said.

Gun-totting robot dogs

Walking robots aren’t yet widely deployed on battlefields, but the United States and Chinese militaries have both explored the prospect. In October, another Chinese company’s “Robot Wolf” quadrupeds featured in Chinese media coverage of the PLA conducting mock beach landings.

Unitree has said in public statements that its products are intended for civilian use. In 2022, the company signed an open letter along with U.S. companies pledging not to weaponize robots, citing risks of harm and serious ethical issues.

But Chinese state television has featured Unitree’s Go2 model robots alongside Chinese troops and a modified version of the firm’s B1 series robot firing a mounted assault rifle.

In September 2023, the U.S. Army secured a federal waiver from laws requiring government agencies to prioritize American-made products, in order to purchase two Unitree Go2s, according to procurement records that described the devices as crucial tools in the absence of sufficient commercial quantities of U.S.-produced alternatives “of a satisfactory quality.” Reuters could not establish whether the purchases went ahead.

Later that month, U.S. Marines conducted an exercise attaching a rocket launcher to a Go1 to enable remote firing.

Kenneally’s Ghost Robotics has shipped about 1,000 of its Vision 60 robots, mostly to military and government customers for surveillance and search applications in harsh environments. The company’s first customer was Navy Special Warfare Command, which oversees Navy SEAL teams.

Some components for the Vision 60s, which sell for upwards of $165,000, are built in China, though the company has sought to move its supply chain. By comparison, Unitree lists its B series robot for below $100,000 in the U.S.

Ghost Robotics shifted its motor supply from China to South Korea two years ago, though it still finds it difficult to eliminate Chinese magnets and some metal components, Kenneally said.

The only way to escape China’s chokehold on the robotics supply chain, he said, is to secure supplies from other countries that have the manufacturing capacity that the United States lacks. In 2024, South Korea’s LIG Defense & Aerospace acquired a 60% stake in Ghost Robotics for $240 million. The company is exploring production in Taiwan, Kenneally said.

“We need to work closely with our allies,” he said. “There’s absolutely no path forward without them.”

The service sent out a request this week for manufacturing 133,014 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, or GMLRS, rockets by 2034, according to the Army’s Sources Sought notice. Contractors have until Sept. 1 to submit white papers on plans to meet that quota.

The timeline calls for churning out 19,002 rockets per year from 2028 to 2034, with the first actual deliveries starting in February 2030.

“The scope of the contract includes production, tooling, engineering change proposals, and supporting activities of GMLRS rockets including unitary, alternative warhead (AW), and extended range (ER) rockets,” the notice said.

Current GMLRS manufacturer Lockheed Martin already announced last year that it is ramping up production capacity to 14,000 rockets annually. The Army’s new plan would require a nearly 36% increase in capacity on top of that.

“Submissions must outline the most efficient and cost-effective methods for achieving this production rate,” the Army noted. Army efforts to ramp up U.S. munitions production have stumbled, including a facility to manufacture components for 155mm shells that failed to produce any parts.

GMLRS rockets are launched from the M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System armored vehicle. The munitions can also be fired from the smaller truck-mounted M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS.

The base version of GMLRS has a range of 70 kilometers, while the extended-range version can reach up to 150 kilometers.

Lockheed Martin had delivered 75,000 GMLRS rockets to the U.S. Army by 2024. But that still hasn’t satisfied demand for the munitions.

Originally designed as Cold War weapons to unleash massive firepower against a hypothetical Soviet attack on Europe, U.S. multiple rocket launchers became some of the stars of the war in Ukraine.

The M270, HIMARS and their GMLRS rockets have proved instrumental in enabling Ukrainian resistance to the Russian invasion. GMLRS rockets devastated targets such as command posts, supply depots and troop formations.

Ukraine even used HIMARS to hit a power plant inside Russia last September. However, heavy Russian jamming of the GPS guidance system in the rockets eventually compromised some effectiveness.

Between deliveries to Ukraine and a protracted conflict with Iran, U.S stockpiles of GMLRS and other guided munitions have been depleted. Replenishment, meanwhile, has been complicated by a shortage of rocket motors.

The goal is to create a family of drones that can “represent the full range of airborne threats, spanning from inexpensive ‘hobby drones’ to the most advanced adversary fighter and large-scale aircraft,” according to the Air Force’s Request for Information, which has a deadline of Sept. 28.

At the same time, the Air Force desires next-generation target drones that are so inexpensive and easy to manufacture that they can be “treated as attritable or expendable when required.”

As with drones and other new technologies, the Pentagon is turning to private industry for fresh ideas, “including commercial, modified commercial, dual-use, and non-developmental solutions,” the RFI said. “The government is particularly interested in non-traditional, commercially derived, or dual-use solutions that offer advantages in cost, scalability, and simplicity over legacy systems.”

The new target drones are expected to simulate a wide array of capabilities.

For fighters, the drones should have “supersonic capabilities (up to and exceeding Mach 1.6 at 40,000 feet), high-agility/high-G combat maneuvers, precise low-observable Radar Cross-section (RCS) profiles, multi-spectral Infrared (IR) signatures, active RF emissions, and integrated Electronic Attack (EA) capabilities,” according to the RFI.

To simulate C-130-sized multiengine aircraft, the focus is less on high performance and more on “matching the physical scale, slow subsonic flight envelopes, and propeller or turbofan propulsion characteristics of larger multi-engine aircraft. These platforms must prioritize representative physical volume, basic RF/IR emissions, and realistic radar returns to verify missile seeker guidance, and warhead lethality against large-frame targets.”

For even bigger aircraft, such as strategic bombers and AWACS planes, the key is “replicating the massive physical dimensions, multi-spectral thermal signatures, and heavy-aircraft radar strategic threats.”

To mimic big Group 5 unmanned aerial vehicles, the target drone should be capable of flying at 50,000 feet. For Group 3 and 4 UAVs, the targets should be capable of flying at Mach 0.5 to 0.8, and maneuver at 3 to 6 Gs. For small Group 1 and 2 drones, the targets should fly at speeds of less than 150 knots and be capable of drone-swarm operations.

Remote-controlled target drones have been used for nearly a century, including Britain’s Queen Bee — a converted Tiger Moth trainer — in the 1930s.

More recently, the U.S. Air Force has relied since 2007 on the subsonic — and subscale – BQM-167A. At 20 feet long and with a wingspan of 11 feet, it hardly resembles a 67-foot-long Chinese J-20 stealth fighter or a 108-foot-wide Chinese H6 bomber.

The Air Force also has the QF-16, a converted F-16 that can play the role of a full-sized target, such as a fourth-generation fighter. While a practical way to make use of retired jets, they aren’t meant to simulate fifth-generation stealth fighters or large aircraft, nor are they cheap enough to be expended in quantity.

The U.S. payload rode a Japanese H3 rocket from Tanegashima Space Center. It is the second and final sensor in the Quasi-Zenith Satellite System-Hosted Payload program, the first national security space partnership of its kind between the United States and Japan, according to a recent release.

The new payload will deliver near-real-time data to the Space Surveillance Network, improving the U.S. Space Force’s understanding of activities within geosynchronous orbit above the Indo-Pacific. Geosynchronous orbit, about 22,000 miles up, is where a satellite matches Earth’s rotation and remains over the same spot.

Combat Forces Command’s Mission Delta 2 will operate the sensor to identify and track objects in orbit and help operators understand potential threats or opportunities.

The Japanese QZS-7, built by Mitsubishi Electric in Kamakura, Japan, is part of a constellation that primarily augments GPS signals over Japan and the surrounding region.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Lincoln Laboratory designed and built both U.S. payloads for the program. Space Force and laboratory teams worked with Japanese partners for two years to integrate and test the second sensor with its host satellite.

“The successful launch of QZS-7 is a powerful testament to the enduring strength and rapid modernization of the U.S.-Japan alliance,” Col. Bryon McClain, Space Force portfolio acquisition executive for Space Combat Power, said in the release.

“By continuing to merge our capabilities in space modernization and satellite communications, we are maintaining security in a contested space domain and fortifying our shared deterrence capabilities across the Indo-Pacific region,” he continued.

Col. Gina Peterson, deputy commander of Mission Delta 2, said the program helps the Space Force meet threats from peer adversaries and build “resilient capabilities to detect, understand, and maintain custody of objects in deep space.”

The first sensor launched in February 2025 on QZS-6. Mission Delta 2 runs both payloads through the Multi-Mission Space Operations Center/Enterprise Command and Control-Schriever enclave in Colorado.

The U.S.-Japan partnership on this program began with a December 2020 agreement between the Space Force and Japan’s National Space Policy Secretariat.

Brig. Gen. Brian Denaro, commander of U.S. Space Forces Pacific, called the alliance one of the nation’s greatest strategic advantages in the Pacific and said the program demonstrates how the two countries enhance security across the region through collaboration from design through launch.

The deals cover avionics and ejector assemblies Boeing supplies to prime contractor Raytheon, an RTX business, for both the SM-3 Block IB and the newer Block IIA. Both variants operate with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System to destroy incoming missiles outside the atmosphere.

“These agreements ensure our Warfighters get the munitions they need to win,” Michael P. Duffey, under secretary of war for acquisition and sustainment, said in the Pentagon release. “We are stabilizing our supply chains, expanding munitions production and putting our entire defense industrial base on a wartime footing.”

The frameworks run for seven years and allow Boeing to start building components before a contract is in place, while the three sides negotiate a multiyear deal. The long-term commitment is intended to give suppliers enough certainty to invest in added capacity. Neither the Pentagon nor Boeing released dollar figures or quantities.

“This gives us a clear demand signal to build and deliver SM-3 interceptors at the levels needed to counter threats,” Bob Ciesla, vice president of Boeing Precision Engagement Systems, said in a company statement. “The SM-3 is an essential part of the layered air and missile defense architecture that protects the U.S. and its allies worldwide.”

The approach mirrors a seven-year deal Boeing struck in April to triple production of PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement seekers, part of a broader Pentagon effort to lock in supply from key subcontractors alongside the prime contractors.

Earlier this month, the Missile Defense Agency awarded Raytheon a $745 million contract to produce fully assembled SM-3 Block IIA interceptors for the United States and Japan.

Demand for the interceptor traces back to April 2024, when Navy destroyers first fired SM-3s in combat, helping to thwart an Iranian ballistic missile attack on Israel. Far more interceptors have been launched since, including those fired in Operation Epic Fury.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated the SM-3 inventory at 414 as of December 2025. A May analysis from the center put wartime expenditures between 130 and 250 missiles and warned that replenishment will take years.

Congress has stepped in to keep the Block IB line open, the cheaper of the two variants covered by Friday’s agreements, after the Missile Defense Agency proposed ending new purchases in the fiscal 2025 budget request.

American officials are backpedaling too. Trump on July 20 told the Financial Times that the U.S. has to be “a little bit careful of who we license to.” Despite that, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Saturday posted on X that the two sides have “now reached an agreement.”

The glacial progress may reflect American defense giants’ fear that Kyiv could become a defense industry competitor — rather than posing risk to technology or intellectual property — a Republican official on Capitol Hill told The Atlantic.

“Their real worry is that the Ukrainians will find a way to improve the Patriot and then produce them at scale faster and for much less money than what the existing production lines in the U.S. could do,” the official said, adding that the companies will publicly frame their concerns around “IP theft and tech transfer” instead.

Ukraine’s weapons industry, honed by nearly five years of Russia’s full-scale invasion, has been booming since the U.S.-Israel war with Iran began in the spring. The conflict with Iran has drained an estimated two-thirds of America’s pre-war Patriot interceptor inventory, sparking discussion about inventory and strategy.

Some defense partners are eager to work with Ukraine, a country with rare recent experience fighting a large-scale land war, and have shown strong interest in collaborating with Kyiv to develop and field cheaper, faster-to-produce alternatives to million-dollar weapons.

The race toward competition is problematic for the defense giants, the official said — not because Ukraine might steal the Patriot — but because the country’s partners might outbuild it, cutting into the current monopoly on antiballistic capabilities and profits.

Trump first pledged the license at the July NATO summit in Ankara, promising Ukraine permission to produce Patriot missiles for the first time.

“We’re going to give a license to you to make Patriots. That’s pretty cool. This way, you can’t complain that we’re not giving ‘em enough,” Trump said, adding that the companies had not yet been consulted on the plan.

Zelenskyy said the next day that the question had been “resolved politically,” telling reporters that technical teams needed to start work “without delay, so that we can get licenses very quickly and start production in Ukraine as soon as possible.”

Five days after Trump’s pledge, Ukraine, nine European countries and defense heavyweights including Eurosam, Leonardo, Thales and Saab launched a coalition in Paris to field Freyja, an entirely new antiballistic system built around a Ukrainian interceptor priced at roughly one-fifth of a Patriot round.

A week after that, Lockheed unveiled its own cheaper, faster-to-produce Patriot missile at the Farnborough International Airshow, advertising the PAC-3 ACE at roughly $2 million a round – less than half the price of the round Ukraine fires at Russian ballistic missiles today.

The Patriot line rarely moves that fast. Its current top round, the PAC-3 MSE, was first accepted by the U.S. Army in 2015 and took until 2018 to reach full-rate production, per the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance.

On July 21, one day after the ACE debut, Tim Cahill, president of Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, described production talks with Ukraine as simply “early,” telling reporters the company will “support the US Army and the [Trump] administration on what they want to go do,” according to Breaking Defense.

Raytheon’s process “has just started,” with the company working with the U.S. government “to determine what is feasible and what is best for Ukraine,” its president of land and air defense systems, Tom Laliberty, said at the same show.

Two days later, Zelenskyy wrote in a post on X that he was “grateful for the company’s readiness to take our partnership to an even higher level, where Ukraine would co-produce, together with Raytheon, some of the most vital air defense assets – Patriot interceptors,” after meeting representatives of the group.

But when Zelenskyy asked Trump for “several hundred” interceptors at a July 28 Oval Office meeting, the president refused, citing America’s shrunken stocks, The Atlantic reported.

Three days later, Trump reversed course on the license entirely.

“We have not agreed to that,” he said at a Camp David Cabinet meeting. “We’re talking about it, but it’s a hard thing to give away that kind of technology.”

Then, U.S. NATO Ambassador Matthew Whitaker dampened expectations further on Aug. 3, telling Fox News that “we do not allow anybody but US manufacturers to make those in the United States,” adding that a long-term production agreement “will not be concluded before this winter,” per Euronews.

The deal’s current status is unclear.

“The decision has been made,” Zelenskyy said during an interview on Ukrainian television over the weekend, according to United24. “It was made by the President of the United States and other important American government institutions.”

American officials have yet to respond to Zelenskyy’s latest comments.