US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

SlothmanAllen said:

So with these two news pieces we see plans for significant increases in production of PAC3, PRISM, JASSM/LRASM and THAAD:

• PAC3: 2,000 missiles per year
• THAAD: 400 missiles per year
• PRISM: 2,000 missiles per year
• JASSM/LRASM: 2,200 (potentially 3,300) missiles per year

Looking at this, there are still many other missiles that would need to expand production. For example, Tomahawk, SM-2, SM-3, AIM-120, AIM-9X and AIM-260 among others I am sure. I suspect we will see increased production rates on similar scales for these weapons if they are investing in others.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

• Tomahawk: 1,000+ missiles per year
• AIM 120 AMRAAM: 1,900 missiles per year
• SM-6: 500+ missiles per year
• SM-3 IIA / SM-3 1B: no definitive numbers given.

TUCSON, Ariz., Feb. 4, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon, an RTX (NYSE: RTX) business, entered into five landmark framework agreements with the U.S. Department of War to significantly increase production capacity and speed deliveries of Land Attack and Maritime Strike variants of Tomahawk, AMRAAM® missiles, Standard Missile-3® Block IB interceptors (SM-3 IB), Standard Missile-3® Block IIA interceptors (SM-3 IIA), and Standard Missile-6® (SM-6).

Click to expand...

• PAC3: 2,000 missiles per year
• THAAD: 400 missiles per year
• PRISM: 2,000 missiles per year
• JASSM/LRASM: 2,200 (potentially 3,300) missiles per year
• Tomahawk: 1,000+ missiles per year
• AIM 120 AMRAAM: 1,900 missiles per year
• SM-6: 500+ missiles per year
• SM-3 IIA / SM-3 1B: no definitive numbers given.

WASHINGTON — The fiscal 2027 budget season has barely started, but the head of the House Armed Services Committee is setting two major goals for the year: securing $450 billion for defense in an upcoming

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

bill, and using the next defense policy bill to expand the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Click to expand...

Rogers explained his math thusly: If the White House requests a budget equivalent to last year’s, at about $1.03 trillion, and rolls over the $20 billion left over from last year’s reconciliation bill, that leaves a gap of about $450 billion to hit $1.5 trillion.

And while appropriators have final say on defense spending during the normal budget process, authorizers, such as Rogers, have control in reconciliation.

Click to expand...

While Republicans are able to pass a reconciliation bill without help from Democrat votes, they will face tight margins and a narrow timeframe for doing so, as Democrats are projected to take back the House in the upcoming midterm elections. And securing Republican support for additional defense funding in reconciliation is not a given: A recent blueprint for the second reconciliation bill put out by the House Republican Study Committee did not list defense among other priority areas such as home ownership and health care.

Click to expand...

AlexYe said:

To be fair in fallout the bombs fell oct 2077, so they got time. Curiously in fallout verse Canada got annexed by US a couple of years before the 'end' (right after Tel-aviv got nuked), specifically to take complete control of the resources and had internment camps and everything.
Hell they even called canada 'big 51'

I do wonder of all the possible verse's in fiction if we are on the 'fallout path' instead of.. idk star trek... (though star trek also had ww3 happen during 2040's-2050's)

Ukraine war prob helped/caused this too, the war of terror didnt really consume interceptors or amrams on a big scale, Ukraine war prob helped revitalizing some us productions of many of these munitions to start up again, then 12-day iran-israel war happens and us spends up half of its supply of thaads globally. At current production level it would take like 2 years just to stock up US's own numbers, not even counting the overseas ones.

Click to expand...

Acquiring an extra 100 B-21s and 115 F-47s would come with significant upfront costs—rough estimates peg the total north of $100 billion—but stand-off forces aren’t cheap either, particularly in a conflict that would require striking hundreds if not thousands of targets, Penney noted. The U.S. Army’s Dark Eagle Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon costs upwards of $40 million per shot, so striking just 25 targets would cost $1 billion.

Click to expand...

And that’s assuming those stand-off forces work. Gunzinger and Penney noted in their report that long-range kill chains are technically complex and present a broad “surface area” for enemies to attack and disrupt them. Missiles’ range and firepower are inherently limited compared to the heavy weaponry and intercontinental range of a bomber.

Click to expand...

Stand-in forces, meanwhile, allow leaders to use airpower to its full potential, Penney argued. In World War II and Operation Desert Storm, she noted, long-range strikes disrupted adversaries’ war machines and accelerated the end of the conflicts.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, in Korea and Vietnam, and even now in Ukraine’s war against Russia, policy decisions to not strike deep into enemy territory created sanctuaries where “adversaries [can] husband their resources, produce war materiel, train replacement warfighters, secure their military leadership, and protect lines of communication to their fielded forces,” Penney and Gunzinger wrote.

Click to expand...

ACuriousPLAFan said:

So it seems that some in the USAF still want (or dream) to be able to fly right over Chinese soil with their B-21s and F-47s.

Click to expand...

ACuriousPLAFan said:

So it seems that some in the USAF still want (or dream) to be able to fly right over Chinese soil with their B-21s and F-47s.

New Report: Air Force Needs 200 B-21s, 300 F-47s to Deny Enemy ‘Sanctuaries’

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...