US Navy MACE (Multi-Mission Affordable Capacity Effector)

[Seragina]

I've determined these issues ages ago in the art threads.
Backbeard is 10" but the strakes that are now there increases it to yet unknown width. The key problem is non-foldable wings. Since it's (forebody) a bit shorter it will fit in IWB, but will need staggering to fit 2 side by side.
The booster is clearly 13.5". The complete round at ~183" can only be carried under a wing not in IWB (156" for F22/F35).

 

[Sferrin]

 

[Not James Stockdale]

I've determined these issues ages ago in the art threads.
Backbeard is 10" but the strakes that are now there increases it to yet unknown width. The key problem is non-foldable wings. Since it's (forebody) a bit shorter it will fit in IWB, but will need staggering to fit 2 side by side.
The booster is clearly 13.5". The complete round at ~183" can only be carried under a wing not in IWB (156" for F22/F35).

How did you get the 183" figure? Are you just assuming the 13.5" booster diameter?

From a use case perspective, it doesn't really make sense to me. That length is too long for internal carriage and way too long for an MFOM pod (maybe it would work on CAML). But, if you only use the first stage, that is much shorter than what you could fit in an F-35's IWB, so you have a lot of unused volume, which means a shorter range and/or lighter payload. Even if the overall length is 4.6 m, that would make the upper stage just 2.5 m long, which is about 30 cm longer than a Mk 82 bomb. There's no reason for the upper stage to be that short if that is the only part that's internally carried.

 

[Seragina]

How did you get the 183" figure? Are you just assuming the 13.5" booster diameter?

From a use case perspective, it doesn't really make sense to me. That length is too long for internal carriage and way too long for an MFOM pod (maybe it would work on CAML). But, if you only use the first stage, that is much shorter than what you could fit in an F-35's IWB, so you have a lot of unused volume, which means a shorter range and/or lighter payload. Even if the overall length is 4.6 m, that would make the upper stage just 2.5 m long, which is about 30 cm longer than a Mk 82 bomb. There's no reason for the upper stage to be that short if that is the only part that's internally carried.

Cool down. Ofc the main missile withou booster will be slower and have less range. But it's not supposed to meet the same specs in both configurations. Makes no sense anyway. The longer body of the surface launched version won't fit either, unless they have redesigned it, too.
The hypersonic round for IWB is already set to be the ALRRM missile. So it makes sense why we only get to see this longer round.
The RAACM will do a better job with the same range and more even as the full booster length hypersonic Blackbeard here.
It's unlikely, the Blackbeard will get used without booster.

 

[Not James Stockdale]

The hypersonic round for IWB is already set to be the ALRRM missile.

Are you talking specifically about the Blackbeard upper stage vehicle in the Castelion pictures? Even with your dimensions, that won't weigh more than 250 kg. The ALRRM requirement is for a 70 kg warhead going 650 km at Mach 4+, which is significantly higher performance than the MACE requirement for a 34 kg payload with a range "Complimentary to LRASM C-1", which I think means on the order of 400 km. If what you say is the case, it would be more reasonable for the AUR w/ booster to be the ALRRM weapon and the upper stage to be the MACE. Based on the pictures, I can't rule out a chin-mounted ramjet, but that is not a favorable mass ratio even for an air-breather, so say nothing of a rocket-propelled vehicle.

RAACM is a subsonic cruise missile, so that has nothing to do here.

 

[Seragina]

Are you talking specifically about the Blackbeard upper stage vehicle in the Castelion pictures? Even with your dimensions, that won't weigh more than 250 kg.

Even if I go with a lower end dimension the full length is still ~168" too long for F35 (but within 15ft of FA-XX).

The ALRRM requirement is for a 70 kg warhead going 650 km at Mach 4+, which is significantly higher performance than the MACE requirement for a 34 kg payload with a range "Complimentary to LRASM C-1", which I think means on the order of 400 km. If what you say is the case, it would be more reasonable for the AUR w/ booster to be the ALRRM weapon and the upper stage to be the MACE. Based on the pictures, I can't rule out a chin-mounted ramjet, but that is not a favorable mass ratio even for an air-breather, so say nothing of a rocket-propelled vehicle.

Perhaps, but ALRRM's booster isn't small/short enough to make it work with IWB. A new shorter booster design is needed.

RAACM is a subsonic cruise missile, so that has nothing to do here.

Under the new CHOAS program RACCM (& Rusty Dagger) does get a booster, too. CHAOS basically is a booster module to be added to existing solution. Perhaps, this will compement the upper stage, but Blackbeard wans't included in the press release.
It may not be as fast even then but range will be a lot more.

 

[Not James Stockdale]

Even if I go with a lower end dimension the full length is still ~168" too long for F35 (but within 15ft of FA-XX).

How did you get these length estimates? That was my first question.

Perhaps, but ALRRM's booster isn't small/short enough to make it work with IWB. A new shorter booster design is needed.

So what is the purpose of the missile that Castelion published pictures of? We know that the MACE requirement includes internal carriage of 4 AURs by the F-35, and that the Blackbeard won the MACE program. Internal F-35 carriage is listed as a "Desired Requirement" rather than mandatory, so the only possible option that works with your assumptions is that the Navy just decided not to pick an option like a lightweight, subsonic cruise missile that could fit inside an F-35.

Under the new CHOAS program RACCM (& Rusty Dagger) does get a booster, too. CHAOS basically is a booster module to be added to existing solution. Perhaps, this will compement the upper stage, but Blackbeard wans't included in the press release.
It may not be as fast even then but range will be a lot more.

Subsonic cruise missiles only need a booster for ground launch to get them to a few thousand feet at something like 200 knots. You can see how small the boosters on surface-launched Tomahawks are compared to the missile itself. A hypersonic missile needs a booster that can push to extremely high altitudes and speeds in comparison. I would guess something like 100k ft at 1.0 - 1.5 km/s for the Blackbeard. There wouldn't be any commonality between a booster designed to get a cruise missile off the ground and the first stage of a multi-stage hypersonic missile.

 

[Seragina]

How did you get these length estimates? That was my first question.

Originally, from the test article photos and angled photo.
The more precise is based on the 30" lug from the video.

So what is the purpose of the missile that Castelion published pictures of? We know that the MACE requirement includes internal carriage of 4 AURs by the F-35, and that the Blackbeard won the MACE program. Internal F-35 carriage is listed as a "Desired Requirement" rather than mandatory, so the only possible option that works with your assumptions is that the Navy just decided not to pick an option like a lightweight, subsonic cruise missile that could fit inside an F-35.

We'll have wait for a photo that shows lugs on the main body for final confirmation.

Subsonic cruise missiles only need a booster for ground launch to get them to a few thousand feet at something like 200 knots. You can see how small the boosters on surface-launched Tomahawks are compared to the missile itself. A hypersonic missile needs a booster that can push to extremely high altitudes and speeds in comparison. I would guess something like 100k ft at 1.0 - 1.5 km/s for the Blackbeard. There wouldn't be any commonality between a booster designed to get a cruise missile off the ground and the first stage of a multi-stage hypersonic missile.

RAACM-ER is already earmarked for surface launch, too. And we got surface launched Barracuda 500, too. So I question the need to do the same for RAACM. Unless it'S for small vehicles rather than TEL?

 

[Not James Stockdale]

Originally, from the test article photos and angled photo.

Are you talking about the test articles that look like old SM-2ERs with the rail-launch boosters?
Edit: Those missiles or test articles they were launching from a PLS did look closer to 5 m long.

This is the picture I've been looking at:

I derived my estimate of 4227 mm OAL from the "Remove Before Flight" tags. If the points that the tags are attached to are 762 mm apart, then the OAL would be 4010 mm (5% reduction on all other dimensions). That would be well within the capacity of an F-35's IWB and could also fit in an MFOM pod for ground-launch by a HIMARS. The vehicle in this picture looks like it is designed to be air-launched with the booster. The upper-stage vehicle has a smooth upper surface with no apparent disturbance of the skin for potential attachment points (you can see a little more detail in the X video Castelion posted).

 

[Scott Kenny]

Its vaguely possible MACE is skinny enough to fit two side by side in a bay?

9-10" diameter is half the diameter of a 2000lb bomb.

 

[Forest Green]

US Navy Awards Castelion $90M for Blackbeard Hypersonic Weapon EOC​

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2026/08/us-navy-castelion-90m-blackbeard-hypersonic-weapon-eoc/

The US Navy has awarded Castelion an $89.9M contract to advance the Blackbeard hypersonic strike weapon toward Early Operational Capability (EOC) by 2028.

Blackbeard is a compact, low-cost long-range hypersonic strike weapon designed specifically for high-rate mass production. Blackbeard features vertically integrated propulsion and guidance systems optimized to achieve speeds exceeding Mach 5 with an operational strike range of up to 500 nautical miles (approx. 800 km).**

**920km actually because nm not miles.

While initially tested for land-based platforms, Blackbeard has quickly become a pivotal element of U.S. Navy carrier aviation strategy. The Navy is heavily prioritizing the weapon for integration onto the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fleet, providing carrier air wings with a rapid-response, standoff hypersonic capability to penetrate modern anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) bubbles.

Blackbeard trades heavy warhead payload for unit affordability—aiming for production costs under $500,000 per round. By enabling high-volume magazine capacity on aircraft carriers, Blackbeard aims to compress enemy decision-making timelines and offer the U.S. Navy scalable, conventional strike volume across contested maritime environments.

Stick an ARM guidance suite on this and it makes a pretty good ARM. But is the 500nm air-launched or ground-launched?

 

[TomcatViP]

Flight time at max range with averaged speed of Mach 5: 5min (I guess boost glide profile).
That's interesting and probably would get better results with time-sensitive targets due to the air launch.

 

[bring_it_on]

Stick an ARM guidance suite on this and it makes a pretty good ARM.

Yes. But it would have to create one and integrate and test to the full extent the HARM and AARGM guidance packages have been put through. Castelion has been working on the seeker side of the equation as well. But it will take some time..all that hasn't been happening by 2028. For reference, the Navy expects to continue to develop, test, integrate, and operationalize enhancements to the AARGM and AARGM-ER capabilities through the early 2030s.

 

[Josh_TN]

Even if I go with a lower end dimension the full length is still ~168" too long for F35 (but within 15ft of FA-XX).

Perhaps, but ALRRM's booster isn't small/short enough to make it work with IWB. A new shorter booster design is needed.

Under the new CHOAS program RACCM (& Rusty Dagger) does get a booster, too. CHAOS basically is a booster module to be added to existing solution. Perhaps, this will compement the upper stage, but Blackbeard wans't included in the press release.
It may not be as fast even then but range will be a lot more.

CHAOS seems to be the air launched ERAM program missiles converted to surface launch and anti ship. I think it completely unrelated to MACE or ALRRM.

 

[Josh_TN]

It is hard to imagine the full weapon stack would be developed to be just barely too long for F-35 IWB, although with the Tailhook photo on F-18 we can confirm that the weapon is air launched with both stages and hangs from lugs on the booster. So I was wrong about air launch using just the forward section. In any case, it looks like F-18 will be the primary platform initially anyway (actually I believe the MACE RFI always specified that despite asking for two AUR per IWB). Interesting that one mounts to the external pylon of the F-18 in the photo - so we are talking about ~1000 lb store or less. If the booster is as narrow as some suggest above, I would if tandem ejector rack carriage is on the table? Six weapons plus a full set of drop tanks would be huge. Even four is a nice step up.

The range/speed of that stack had got to be something fierce when air launched. If the guidance system can accurately deliver that small warhead (I believe the Naval News article explicitly stated 95#), that would be a huge capability leap - 4-6 long range hypersonic/highly supersonic weapons that must have a thousand km or so of reach.

 

[Ronny]

9-10" diameter is half the diameter of a 2000lb bomb.

first stage booster probably too big I think? where do you get the diameter from?, if they can put 4 in the bay then they probably put 2 under each BRU-55/57 dual rack

 

[Ronny]

It is hard to imagine the full weapon stack would be developed to be just barely too long for F-35 IWB, although with the Tailhook photo on F-18 we can confirm that the weapon is air launched with both stages and hangs from lugs on the booster.

Look similar to AARGM-ER in length ?

 

[Scott Kenny]

first stage booster probably too big I think? where do you get the diameter from?, if they can put 4 in the bay then they probably put 2 under each BRU-55/57 dual rack

Sorry, that was said with more confidence than it should have.

Should read: "A 2000lb bomb has a 19.something" wingspan, so a missile that is 9-10" in diameter should be able to double pack in the same volume."

 

[Ronny]

Stick an ARM guidance suite on this and it makes a pretty good ARM.

Even without ARM sensor, it is likely very good DEAD weapon already: extremely fast, extremely long range, unironically very small RCS (the third stage probably have as much as RCS as an artillery round)

But is the 500nm air-launched or ground-launched?

Either same or the ground version need to be much bigger?

 

[Forest Green]

Even without ARM sensor, it is likely very good DEAD weapon already: extremely fast, extremely long range, unironically very small RCS (the third stage probably have as much as RCS as an artillery round)

True, with space-based GMTI providing the positions of SAM assets in real time, homing is less of a concern. Third stage? I thought 2 stages, do we know it's 3 stages for sure?

 

[Josh_TN]

Clearly targeting for these new long range weapons is going to have to come from off board. It seems unlikely a fighter is tracking an aircraft at 250nm, and a ground target is going to be on the other life of the earth at that range. But even assuming this system is larger supersonic, not truly hypersonic, for most of its flight path, the reaction time is going to be ~ 15 minutes out to 600mi/1000km. Most of the relocatable targets the U.S. would be most interested in have take down times longer than that, even assuming they knew they were observed and attacked. Sufficiently accurate INS/GPS would be enough for guidance.

 

[Josh_TN]

Thinking about the flight profile of this…given air launch and the much larger weight/volume of the first stage, would it make more sense to delay second stage ignition until well after separation to reduce thermal load? Or even just use a base bleed? Ideally one wants the highest average velocity for the lowest possible peak velocity to reduce stress on the airframe.

 

[Forest Green]

Clearly targeting for these new long range weapons is going to have to come from off board. It seems unlikely a fighter is tracking an aircraft at 250nm, and a ground target is going to be on the other life of the earth at that range. But even assuming this system is larger supersonic, not truly hypersonic, for most of its flight path, the reaction time is going to be ~ 15 minutes out to 600mi/1000km. Most of the relocatable targets the U.S. would be most interested in have take down times longer than that, even assuming they knew they were observed and attacked. Sufficiently accurate INS/GPS would be enough for guidance.

It takes about 13 minutes to even setup an S-400 after it's stopped and another 5 minutes to start moving again. 25-50 minutes to reload depending on crew training.

 

[Forest Green]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2099624672572690795

View: https://x.com/Castelion/status/2099624672572690795?s=20

Castelion Moves Blackbeard into Production with U.S. Navy Order Valued Up to $200 Million​

https://www.castelion.com/news/blackbeard-200-million-production-order-us-navy/

Castelion today announced a production delivery order from the U.S. Navy, with a total value of up to $200 million, to manufacture, assemble, test, and deliver an initial lot of Blackbeard Hypersonic Weapons to the fleet. Awarded by Portfolio Acquisition Executive Aviation (PAE(A)) through its Future Capability Development and Integration Aviation Rapid Capabilities Cell, these rounds will follow the 50 Early Operational Capability (EOC) weapons ordered in June of this year.

 

[Ronny]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2099624672572690795

View: https://x.com/Castelion/status/2099624672572690795?s=20

https://www.castelion.com/news/blackbeard-200-million-production-order-us-navy/​

Black beard pop out of no where is such a nice surprise, the fact that it is cheap HGV is like the cherry on top

 

[TomS]

although with the Tailhook photo on F-18 we can confirm that the weapon is air launched with both stages and hangs from lugs on the booster.

From that "exclusive" photo I think they did something potentially clever. The strongback actually runs over the very tail end of the forward stage as well, and the forward lug is there, so there is a load path from the aircraft to the forward stage and it's not just a bending load on the connection point. I also think there's a shoe holding the forward stage to the strongback so it can just slide forward at separation.

 

[CastleBravo]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2099624672572690795

View: https://x.com/Castelion/status/2099624672572690795?s=20

Castelion Moves Blackbeard into Production with U.S. Navy Order Valued Up to $200 Million​

https://www.castelion.com/news/blackbeard-200-million-production-order-us-navy/

Is that an EO seeker window?

 

[Josh_TN]

My personal guess is AESA antenna, but there is only one grainy picture from Tailhook of the forward section of the missile.

 

[CastleBravo]

IMO, $500k per unit likely rules out an AESA.

 

[opkilo]

IIR seeker probably.

 

[TomS]

IMO, $500k per unit likely rules out an AESA.

They're doing some ridiculous things with low-cost AESA antennas these days.

Unless the forward stage rolls over at some point, though, it's on the wrong side for targeting. Maybe SATCOM instead?

 

[CastleBravo]

They're doing some ridiculous things with low-cost AESA antennas these days.

Unless the forward stage rolls over at some point, though, it's on the wrong side for targeting. Maybe SATCOM instead?

I thought that was the right spot for HGV seeker placement as it would be mostly shielded from the plasma during terminal phase when it rolls inverted and pulls some AoA for a high-g dive.

 

[Josh_TN]

IMO, $500k per unit likely rules out an AESA.

How expensive is a Starlink antenna? Wrong frequency for a terminal seeker but it seems not out of the question. If it is IR, the window looks a little big, plus cooling must suck.

 

[Josh_TN]

They're doing some ridiculous things with low-cost AESA antennas these days.

Unless the forward stage rolls over at some point, though, it's on the wrong side for targeting. Maybe SATCOM instead?

I was thinking inverted launch, since the forebody probably generates lift.

Cannot exclude satcom, but why mount it on the nose?

 

[TomS]

I was thinking inverted launch, since the forebody probably generates lift.

Cannot exclude satcom, but why mount it on the nose?

Because the rest of the fuselage is either motor or warhead?

 

[quellish]

I don't really understand all the speculation.

Ku-Band Affordable Resiliently Manufactured AESA (KARMA)

Castelion’s proposed Ku-band Affordable Resiliently Manufactured AESA (KARMA) starts where other SBIR efforts finish – with a proof-of-concept demonstration of a low-cost seeker designed for our 7in hypersonic missile. With KARMA, Castelion takes a page from Freedom’s Forge to design a seeker using commercial suppliers vs. commercial parts. By tapping into the automotive electronics market, we enter a highly competitive and fairly standardized marketplace. Use of standard industry “plug-and-play” sizes results in a seeker that is about 30% larger than its purely defense-industry counterparts, but dramatically lowers supply-chain risk and reduces cost. In this effort, Castelion leverages its ready-to-build 7-in seeker design to demonstrate functionality of the commercial-grade components and put it through a series of tests, including near-field chamber, far-field chamber, and thermal performance testing. Then, over the course of a 20-month period of performance, Castelion will identify the key requirements necessary for a “low-cost, multi-function radar system for attritable airborne platforms” and adapt the design to meet the SWaP and cost constraints outlined in topic AF244-D010. We are currently estimating that a 25% reduction in elements will allow us to meet performance, SWaP, and cost constraints, while maintaining the rest of the design. The effort will also include SAR data collection, algorithm development, and data link development. These additional steps will allow Castelion to fully model the performance of the seeker hardware. KARMA leverages technology developed under DARPA’s Shared Spectrum Access for Radar and Communications (SSPARC) program which allows coordination and communications between weapons simultaneously with radar operation. Castelion will test this capability with waveforms that include such modulations and demonstrate the radar-scene-radar communication path.

Compact Hypersonic Missile/Effector Reactive Material (CHyMERA) Warhead Prototype & Demonstration

Castelion’s Compact Hypersonic Missile/Effector Reactive Material (CHyMERA) Warhead Prototype & Demonstration, developed in close cooperation with MATSYS, will prototype and test a new type of warhead – showcasing the effectiveness of reactive material warheads for hypersonic weapons. The use of a reactive material warhead provides dual benefits to the platform. These multifunctional warheads allow for its advanced structural case material to provide (a) kinetic defeat mechanisms upon fragmentation and engagement with the target, and (b) highly energetic incendiary and blast events upon breakup of each frag within target due to the extremely rapid combustion of the reactive material alloy. These combined effects provide unmatched target defeat at a smaller payload than traditional warheads. This makes it ideal for the new class of “affordable mass” weapons that are being sought by the Government. CHyMERA is being developed for Castelion’s Blackbeard family of hypersonic weapons which requires a compact, but high performing, warhead that can be accommodated in the common 7-in diameter kill vehicle. This Direct-to-Phase 2 (DP2) effort will prototype the CHyMERA warhead and demonstrate its effectiveness in an arena test against a Castelion-built solid rocket motor (SRM). With novel threats emerging, such as hypersonic vehicles, there is an urgent need for payloads offering multiple defeat mechanisms, such as those offered by high density reactive materials (HDRM) warheads. The proposed effort will demonstrate CHyMERA’s effectiveness against specific components of “live” target surrogates. This research is critically needed to support MDA’s missile defense mandate. The proposed demonstration provides MDA with valuable insights into the expected damage created by a reactive materials warhead against an incoming hypersonic missile threat. It also advances Castelion’s Blackbeard missile line – which can be used as an offensive or defensive weapon – by not only maturing the warhead subsystem, but by beginning insensitive munitions testing of our SRM design.

On April 5, 2025, Castelion received a $1.39 million Phase II award for an advanced radar system. In May 2025, the company was selected for an AFWERX Strategic Funding Increase, aligning approximately $15 million in Air Force SBIR funding with $30 million in private investment and additional government funding to support transition from prototype to operational use. Across the STRATFI portfolio, 63.5% of supported companies have transitioned to Phase III.
Capabilities developed through these efforts informed the design and manufacturability of Castelion’s hypersonic missile system, which is undergoing integration with Army and Navy platforms. Government-coordinated testing included prototype vehicle launches at Dugway Proving Grounds, Utah, on Nov. 6, 2025, and at San Nicolas Island within the Point Mugu Sea Range, California, on Dec. 5, 2025, to collect performance data under operationally relevant conditions.

 

[TomS]

I don't really understand all the speculation.

Much appreciated. It's hard for some of us to keep track of all the moving parts, and sadly the kinetic parts of the system do tend to get more attention than the electronics.

There's probably an aphorism in that somewhere, akin to the old "amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics" line.