Back
The Army has articulated a clear goal for fires: long-range precision strike that penetrates A2/AD, enables joint maneuver, and deters peers by linking sensors, command and control, and shooters. Leaders want “any sensor, best shooter” and the integration of offensive and defensive fires. Several firms have scored early wins, but momentum is not victory. Every layer still presents opportunity.
Layering is the operating logic. Modernized howitzers and guided 155 mm rounds restore volume and responsiveness, but after ERCA’s cancellation the Army is casting a broad net across industry, including allies, for a solution. The cannon gap is the biggest open problem today.
PrSM remains the backbone of deep fires. Increment 1 is moving to full-rate production with a procurement objective of nearly 4,000 missiles under a $4.9 billion IDIQ to Lockheed Martin. Later increments push range toward 1,000 miles and aim for CAML compatibility. FY26’s trimmed buy is the signal to watch—it may reflect near-term budget pressure or production pacing issues.
Typhon closes the mid-range gap with proven Navy weapons: Tomahawk at roughly 1,000 miles and SM-6 at about 300. The Army plans five batteries of four launchers each with a few hundred missiles per type. But operational testing shows the system is too large, and SM-6’s price point and Navy inventory competition limit scale. The Army wants a form factor compatible with CAML, and industry concepts like modular eject-launch systems could eventually get another look.
Dark Eagle anchors the strategic tier. It has two successful end-to-end tests and one firing battery formed, with a target of six batteries and around 100 rounds as glide-body and motor production scale up. Live missile deliveries remain pending. Technical and cost challenges continue to shape the program’s pace.
What is working is the Army’s focus on speed through integration—adapting proven technology like PrSM on HIMARS or Navy missiles on Typhon—and elevating kill-web software to a core requirement. Networking and targeting tools are now part of the weapon system, not an afterthought.
What is not working is affordability and sustainment. The cannon gap persists. Ammunition and missile production are fragile. In the Pacific, a 1,000-mile envelope still leaves operational shortfalls against a Taiwan scenario. In Europe, the constraint is magazine depth and reload speed. Current procurement plans will not deliver the volume required for high-intensity conflict.
Acquisition and funding uncertainty continue to affect program pacing and industrial scaling. FY26’s PrSM reduction, unclear LRHW production rhythm, and evolving CAML and OWA drone timelines all point to potential delays and shifting priorities.
This is a disrupted, dynamic market. Open areas include propulsion and energetics, seekers and resilient PNT/EW, battle-management and targeting software, and precision manufacturing for hypersonic components and 155 mm rounds. Modular, lower-cost systems—UAS, surface-launched AARGM-ER, or other reactive-strike concepts—can expand magazine depth and improve affordability.
The Army’s fires enterprise is evolving fast. Success will favor those who can translate operational and acquisition problems—range, reload, speed, and cost—into scalable, fieldable solutions. Advantage will go to firms that combine hard tech with software, scalable manufacturing, and flexible teaming. The next two years will reveal who can deliver.
BCE partners with innovators who want to lead the next chapter of Army Fires—those building the systems that will define the fight. Connect with us at AUSA to explore how we can build it together.