An AIM-174 costs at least $4 million.
Three new long‑range air‑to‑air missiles and the ranges they bring
The United States is fielding a clutch of long‑range air‑to‑air missiles (LRAAMs) that, together, extend engagement ranges by hundreds of kilometres. The interim, ship‑adapted AIM‑174 — a modified, air‑launched version of the Raytheon SM‑6 — flies at least 240 km. The joint USAF/USN AIM‑260 is due to enter service “any day now,” and the AIM‑424, revealed by fleet officials in August, reportedly ranges nearly 300 miles (480 km). Those distances are roughly twice — or more — the reach of earlier U.S. air‑to‑air weapons carried by frontline fighters.
Why range matters: the operational effect on carrier and base defence
Longer‑ranging missiles extend the "outermost ring" of aerial defence surrounding warships, air bases, headquarters and front‑line ground forces. Armed with AIM‑174s, AIM‑260s and AIM‑424s, US fighters could engage Chinese fighters and bombers at substantially greater standoff distances, potentially shooting down hostile aircraft before those aircraft could launch their own weapons. The piece describes this as a dramatic shift in the aerial balance of power over the Western Pacific.
Audit-ready is a season. It shouldn't be.
Evidence in spreadsheets, controls drifting between audits, frameworks multiplying on flat headcount. Nubivance runs continuous compliance on Rapid7 Cyber GRC - SOC 2, HIPAA, ISO 27001, PCI, CMMC.
End the scrambleHow the U.S. got here: a historical arc from the F‑14/AIM‑54 to the crash program
The article places the current wave of LRAAMs in a historical lineage. In the 1970s the Grumman F‑14 Tomcat and its AIM‑54 Phoenix missile extended carrier‑battle‑group defensive reach against Soviet long‑range anti‑ship bombers; carrier groups could engage bombers 1,000 km away using the F‑14’s AWG‑9 radar and help from E‑2 Hawkeye early‑warning aircraft. The F‑14 and AIM‑54 left service in 2006, and the U.S. fleet’s air‑defence ring contracted: F/A‑18E/F Super Hornets and AIM‑120 AMRAAMs did not match that earlier reach.
Meanwhile, the article traces a rapid improvement in Chinese air‑to‑air and anti‑ship missiles through the 2020s. By that decade, Chinese bombers could threaten carriers from about 600 km, and PL‑16 air‑to‑air missiles could reach roughly 300 km — distances that had outpaced then‑fielded U.S. fighter‑launched weapons. With AIM‑260 slipping and the Navy “no longer willing to wait” by 2024, developers pursued a crash modification of the SM‑6 to produce the AIM‑174 and later introduced the longer‑range AIM‑424.
Costs, allied choices, and national alternatives
The new LRAAMs are expensive. The AIM‑174’s unit cost is stated at a minimum of $4 million, and the AIM‑260 and AIM‑424 may cost even more. That price tag helps explain why allies have been cautious. Australia has committed an initial $740 million to buy AIM‑260s. Japan, by contrast, has chosen to develop its own LRAAM — with reported work on an air‑to‑air variant of the ASM‑3 cruise missile that, if successful, could exceed 500 km of range. Tokyo is also advised in the article to maintain an American LRAAM as a back‑up plan.
What this means for the US Navy, the US Air Force, Australia, and Japan
- US Navy: The AIM‑174 and AIM‑424 restore a more extended fleet defensive envelope and provide an interim and then more permanent way to engage distant threats without reverting to vulnerable tanking or older force postures.
- US Air Force: The AIM‑260 — entering service imminently — complements naval LRAAMs and, when paired with future long‑range fighters and aerial tankers in the 2030s, could allow U.S. fighters to contest airspace more than 1,600 km from adversary bases or carriers.
- Australia: With an initial $740 million purchase of AIM‑260s, Australia has signalled willingness to buy U.S. LRAAMs but not yet to match U.S. quantities; cost will be a constraining factor.
- Japan: Pursuing a domestic long‑range option in the ASM‑3 derivative, Japan is hedging — seeking an LRAAM that could exceed 500 km while keeping an American missile as a fallback.
The arrival of three LRAAMs in quick succession is, by the article’s account, the first time since the retirement of the F‑14 that U.S. forces are shaping the terms of the most intensive aerial engagements. The tradeoffs are clear: substantial gains in standoff protection and interceptor reach, but at a high per‑round price and with allied uptake still uneven. The next concrete milestones named in the reporting are the AIM‑260’s entry into service, ongoing flight testing of the AIM‑424, and the planned introduction of new long‑range fighters in the 2030s that could multiply these missiles’ reach.
