AARGM / VFDR Missiles

Anyone have any insight into the problems with the new Northrop Grumman Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range, AARGM-ER, the follow-on to the AGM-88E HARM with ~ double the range, which has following test failure the Pentagon/Navy wants to freeze funding and reallocate $200 million to other priorities.

https://insidedefense.com/daily-new...n-plans-after-test-failure-seeks-divert-funds
software-related flight test failure that occurred earlier this year.
 

Attachments

  • Northrop_Grumman_Strike_Missile_Fam_Gemini_Generated.png
    Northrop_Grumman_Strike_Missile_Fam_Gemini_Generated.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 95
  • Northrop_Grumman_Strike_Missile_Fam_2.png
    Northrop_Grumman_Strike_Missile_Fam_2.png
    4.1 MB · Views: 83
An F-35A assigned to the 461st Flight Test Squadron, F-35 Integrated Test Force, at Edwards Air Force Base, CA soars over the Mojave Desert ahead of an AARGM-ER jettison mission on Dec. 3, 2025. This particular aircraft, referred to as AF-1, remains the oldest flying F-35A in the world. Despite its age, the aircraft remains critical to weapons testing for the entire F-35 enterprise.
 
March 4, 2026:
BACKGROUND/REQUIREMENT

The USAF is seeking to enhance its capabilities to suppress and neutralize enemy air defenses in contested environments. This effort aims to identify and potentially acquire a weapon system that provides similar or improved capabilities compared to the SiAW, focusing on extended range, advanced targeting, counter-countermeasures, and integration with existing and future platforms.

Required Capabilities

Interested vendors are requested to provide information regarding their capabilities to provide a weapon system (or key subsystems) with the following characteristics (at a minimum):

  • Extended Range: Weapon system capable of engaging targets at significant standoff distances.
  • Targeting:
    • Advanced anti-radiation seeker with broad frequency coverage.
    • Ability to target modern and advanced radar systems, including frequency-agile and low-probability-of-intercept (LPI) emitters.
    • Ability to target modern ballistic threats, and other non-cooperative targets
    • Precision navigation and guidance system (e.g., GPS/INS with anti-jamming capabilities).
    • Potential for pre-emptive targeting capabilities.
    • Ability to re-attack.
  • Electronic Counter-Countermeasures (ECCM): Robust ECCM capabilities to defeat enemy countermeasures, including chaff, flares, and jamming.
  • Lethality: High probability of kill against a wide range of targets.
  • Platform Integration:
    • Compatibility with F-35, F-16, F-47 and B-21.
    • Open architecture design to facilitate integration with future platforms to include foreign partners.
    • MIL-STD-1760 and Universal Armament Interface (Rev6) compliance (or equivalent) for aircraft integration.
    • Common Flexible Weapon Interface Control Document compliance highly desired
  • Reliability and Maintainability: High operational availability and minimal maintenance requirements with ability to meet a 15-year service life.
  • Logistics Support: Comprehensive logistics support package, including training, maintenance manuals, spare parts, technical assistance, transportation and shipping at AUR and section level and missile compatibility with both CMBRE + and CE.
  • Cybersecurity: Compliant with current cybersecurity standards for weapon systems IAW DoDI 8500.01, DoDI 5200.44, NIST SP 800-53, and CNSSI 1253 .
  • Exportability: Expected to be open and modular such that future exportability and potential partner compatibility is not restricted.
  • Affordability & Producibility: Capabilities should be affordable and producible in support of delivering quantities of up to 600 production AURs per year.
  • Security:Expected to already have facilities and personnel to support classified requirements
    • Current access to CORE
    • Current ability to handle and process SECRET and TOP SECRET data and materials
 
"Ability to target ballistic theats, and other non-cooperative targets"

Able to shoot down incoming AAMs? Or do they really mean ballistic missile defense from the air?
 
What problems?
AARGM-ER has suffered significant delays across the board. From performance shortfalls due to software, initial issues with the solid rocket motor production IIRC. So much so that the Navy decided to postpone the production lot for a year later I believe.

But they returned to testing earlier this year. I have not seen a confirmation from the Navy that AARGM-eR would be ready to enter IOTE this summer and no journalist has as far as I can tell reached out to ask them this. We'll see if the updated milestones are met. But F-35 testing has started based on recent press-releases from the JPO.
 
I thought AARGM-ER was already developed and being tested. The AAEGM-ER is the missile that SiAW was based off of.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2598.jpeg
    IMG_2598.jpeg
    1 MB · Views: 18
It seems like NG is having a lot of issues with SiAW/AARGM-ER, which seems odd since they were not especially technically challenging programs.
 
Aaaand, it's dead, Jim. (In this environment, "strategic pause" means this is an ex-missile.)


EDit: and my browser didn't update properly, so I missed all the past articles on this same exact topic. I stand by my assessment, though.
 
Last edited:
Aaaand, it's dead, Jim. (In this environment, "strategic pause" means this is an ex-missile.)


EDit: and my browser didn't update properly, so I missed all the past articles on this same exact topic. I stand by my assessment, though.
Interesting decision. So USN has paused AARGM-ER but is SiAW still in play for USAF? AARGM-ER was also expected to be the first ARM on the F-35 and also has a pretty strong foreign orderbook from Australia, Finland and Poland.
 
The only actual ASM in god knows how long and they cancel it for no good reason. Classic USN.
 
Sounds like they are likely going to blow up SIAW as well.
+1, the USAF has pushed SiAW back and is searching for other options. I had thought this was a stand in/both situation, but with the USN decision this seems like a hard No.
 
Aaaand, it's dead, Jim. (In this environment, "strategic pause" means this is an ex-missile.)


EDit: and my browser didn't update properly, so I missed all the past articles on this same exact topic. I stand by my assessment, though.
This is strange, AARGM-ER is like the most simple they could have made as an upgrade over AARGM: no scramjet, no ramjet, same seeker. How come they still fuck it up?
 
This is strange, AARGM-ER is like the most simple they could have made as an upgrade over AARGM: no scramjet, no ramjet, same seeker. How come they still fuck it up?

That’s what seems weird to me as well. Random guess: maybe they did not hit it on cost or production rate, rather than execution of the mission goal?
 
Sounds like MACE (aka Blackbeard) may be the functional replacement. The missile doesn't need a radar homing seeker if it is very fast and the launcher has really good target location data at launch, I guess.

 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom