Raytheon has been awarded a $32,265,090 contract to procure long-lead hardware for the recertification and modernisation of 257 Tomahawk Block IV All-Up-Round Missiles, including 218 for the U.S. Navy and 39 for Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers, with the UK being the only customer that has existing Tomahawks to be rebuilt to Block V specifications.

This effort aims to extend the missile’s operational life for up to an additional 15 years.

“This modification increases the contract ceiling to procure long-lead hardware for recertification and modernisation of 256 Tomahawk Block IV All-Up-Round Missiles, to include 218 for the Navy and 39 for Foreign Military Sales customers in support of enabling the missiles to be operational for up to an additional 15 years of service.”

The modification also includes the procurement of 24 Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST) missile vertical launch systems and 11 MST missile capsule launch systems for the U.S. Navy. Non-recurring engineering support will facilitate the transition of MST missiles to production.

“Additionally, this modification procures 24 Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST) missile vertical launch systems and 11 MST missile capsule launch systems for the Navy, as well as provides non-recurring engineering in support of the MST missile transition to production.”

The contract is set to be carried out across multiple locations, including El Segundo, California (43%), Tucson, Arizona (31.9%), Pontiac, Michigan (19.5%), Los Alamitos, California (3.2%), and Chandler, Arizona (2.4%). Work is expected to be completed by November 2026.

This contract is part of the UK’s ongoing efforts to enhance its missile systems, particularly in the context of modernising its current arsenal to meet evolving needs.

A first batch of 24 was contracted in March 2024, and the new modification covers items for a further 39 missiles, with at least one more batch of missiles expected to follow in time.

The Block V variant of the Tomahawk missile represents a significant upgrade to the existing fleet of Block IV missiles, offering improved performance, greater precision, and extended range. Key enhancements include a new guidance system, improved propulsion for better range, and a larger payload capacity.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

53 COMMENTS

  1. Tiny number of Tomahawk in UK inventory.

    Very limited war usage case as they give away the location of the Astute.

    But as we have no surface land attack options….and only Storm Shadow…..and then limited NSM shots…..

    I find all this pretty weird as cruise type missiles are vital for Day1 suppression and for dropping out AAW like S3/400.

    But this is the sandy war hangover where a few big bangs were needed for effect Shock & Awe but then it was all on the ground.

    Good think we bought so many Storm Shadow.

    • Hopefully the MK41 silos in the T31 and T26 will get some tomahawks as well. Adm keys did say that the RN is looking for “ the more guns the better” as he put it and he said that in specific regards to having FC, tomahawk and NSM all at the same time.

      • By 2027, why can I hear Vikki Pollard ?
        I’d rather see the Mk41 capable LRASM enter service, and by virtue of similarity JASSM-ER.

    • They’ve been launched in every Tactical strike this country has delivered since 1999 (I was there for the first), they’ll be around for a while yet 🏴‍☠️

  2. “Very limited war usage case as they give away the location of the Astute.” ?? Doesn’t Tomahawk Block V facilitate the general tactic of “shoot and scoot?” Dunno, liking P(survival) w/in a state-of-the-art SSN, in a non-littoral scenario. 🤔

    • Indeed, with a 1000+ mile range on TLAM BlkV, the enemy is frankly pretty unlikely to have sensors in the vicinity to detect the point of launch- and even less likely to have a platform that could prosecute the SSN close enough.

    • True.

      But the reason for not having Harpoon on Astute was the one I just gave! According to a few RN admirals anyway…..

      Actually, the whole reason (OK, most of) 1SL West gave for putting Mk41 onto T45 pretty much hinged round that argument. History records that he lost that debate – he’s said that publicly himself recently.

      Why risk compromising your most stealthy assets doing something that any surface ship can easily do?

      • Yep that was the reasoning given for removing harpoon from the RN SSNs they saw no reason to use a missile that gives away your position when you could use a torpedo that does not.

        • We couldn’t. Astute has 6x 21″ tubes, 2 will always have Spearfish in them, so that leaves 4. They cannot be launched at the same time, but effectively ripple fired, so several minutes to get 4 away. Then about 10 minutes to reload each tube for another go. Call it 45- 60 mins to get 4 away and then reloaded for another go.
          We will be in a better position when we get SSN-A, as they will be fitted with a VLS system. Unfortunately that’s a few years away. At best T26/31 with Mk41 vls will have some Tomahawks for this purpose.

          • Deep,
            Thanks for the realistic operational tempo info, always beneficial to have a valid perspective. 👍 Wouldn’t an SSN logically maneuver during the intervening period between salvos, absent very specific contravening conditions or orders? 🤔 Other than a launch in western SCS, do not envision significant risk to an Astute or Virginia class SSN.

  4. Why do we only have a tiny supply of a key weapon? We broadcast the fact that Astutes have enlarged weapons storage but neglect to mention the fact that we cannot fill all of that lovely space?

    • We fill them with TLAM and Spearfish. There primary role is to take out other submarines or surface vessels.

        • Hi fella, happy NY over in the former colonies.
          Yes, said shooter would certainly have a quick look around to make sure nothing untoward was coming it’s way after loosening off a few missiles before relocating to another firing position. Doesn’t always need to happen of course, depends on the oppositions capabilities.

          • Some site commentators evidently do not realize there is a finite weaps inventory on-board, and therefore, an Astute could only fire a limited number of salvos before retiring to rearm. In any event, HNY! 😊

  5. We have supposedly purchased two batches of Block IV’s, 64 off and 65 off although some may have been fired

  7. 39? Oh what pitiful numbers, bordering on absolute irrelevance. Ten times that number wouldn’t be sufficient in high-tempo ops against a credible peer.

      • Yes in really storm shadow is the UKs big conventional cruise missile deterrent stockpile. It’s good numbers and the potential to build more if needed.

        • The UK set out a requirement for 1000 cruise missiles, ultimately it was decide to have around 100 TLAM and 900. Given limited VLS in the RN that made sense.

          • Given the important support for Ukraine you would imagine that both France and Britain would be sustaining their SCALP/Storm Shadow inventory so keeping that production line alive. Given it’s proven battle honours, you’d expect more interest from allies..

  8. That is interesting as it could mean the RN is aiming for its supply of tomahawks to grow larger than some estimates..Janes put it around 65 missiles But if they have upgraded 39 missiles and now a further 24 that’s 63..or pretty much the lot, but it did say a further batch is expected..which would suggest the RN has more hanging around or is expecting to buy more.

    But we can pull together a picture of UK cruise missile stocks

    Storm shadow is the hardest..700-1000 purchased may be up to 100 used and some given to Ukraine, now we know that the MOD has now stopped storm shadow deliveries to Ukraine, so that says numbers have dropped to a point the RAF has said no.

    Tomahawks ( via sub) 60+
    NSM ( when fully deployed, via 11 surface vessels) 90
    Storm shadow. Let’s say as a finger in the wind 500 left.

    That’s 650 cruise missiles so not bad.

    The really big unknown and possible big positive is the storm shadow production line and how many could be produced, the last large order for storm shadow was in 2022 so it’s very likely the production line in France is still live and so the RAF can if needed buy more..also in extremis it would be possible to reopen a Uk production line.

    All in all thank goodness for storm shadow.

    • I was being really conservative on stormshadow..the RAF probably have a lot more. It actually one of the really good procurements numbers wise and it’s been updated and the stockpile maintained.

      • Not mentioned in open-source articles, but have wondered whether USN will make a gift/favorable sale of some/all sub launched variant of TLAM to RN as the Los Angeles class is supplanted by Virginia class. An interesting coincidence that the recerted TLAMs will be in the inventory until the projected IOC of SSN-A, equipped w/ VPM. It is conceivable that the RN and USN have actually conducted some coordinated forward planning. 🤔😉

        Best wishes to all UKDJ readers for a happy, healthy, peaceful and prosperous 2025! 😊🎉🍻🥂🍷

    • I can’t remember the exact article, but, over the years we’ve fired around 80-90 Tomahawks including test shots out of total of approx 128? 39 is about there or thereabouts it would seem, and anymore are probably a new buy.
      It would seem logical that when the Mk41 vls tubes come on line that we will be purchasing some more Tomahawks to supplements those used by the SSNs. As I understand it we will have both Tomahawk Blk 5 and FCASM fitted simultaneously. As ever with our leadership, money will be the deciding factor.

  9. Get more and get them on ships. Is there something wrong with our navy that they have never thought of that option. I mean the type 45 is an amazing ship. It was originally meant to take them but instead we put a gym where the launcher was meant to be.

    • It’s not a gym anymore it’s the Mushroom farm for CAMM. Ultimately that increased T45 missile capability by (24) 50% vs 16 TLAM.

      • It will probably still be a gym but with a lower ceiling.

        The Sea Ceptor tubes are a lot shorter than full length Mk41.

    • In truth the navy did not consider it a mission of the surface escort fleet to deliver land strike, they admit it only changed recently..

      “We made some decisions in the past with the Type 26 design where this was not an essential initial requirement. We’ve now recognised that the world has changed,” Adm Key told a media briefing at the 2024 conference.”

      “It is a recognition that having a land-attack strike capability is something that you can’t constrain to just a small number of ships or submarines: you need it to be as broadly [prevalent] as you possibly can. That’s how you generate choice,” said Adm Key. “It’s quite clear that we’re being challenged from the land domain; therefore, we need more choice as to how we will engage [that].”

      • Lol….exactly! And put in a highly DG area to boot! Bloody stupid location and missed opportunity to give the T45s a real boost in missile shots not just 50%. If they’re worried about costs why not make the 6 CAMM silo blocks into stretched 8s and get 32 for an 80 missile load? Or, extra 2-4 x 6 down the sides?

  10. It would be nice to see these missiles on all RN Warships starting with the T26 & T31. The RN doesnt have enough fighting hulls. We need at least 20 frigates to support the existing T45 destroyers. I`d like to see te RN buy the San Antonio class ship to replace the current landing ships and recently retired Albion. Then they could be armed with the Tomahawk aswell.

        • Good to learn that you are apparently supporting sales of one of Bonnie Scotland’s significant exports! 🥃. HNY! 😊

      • Extremely interesting year-end review article in Navy Lookout re RN. One paragraph mentioned that SDR team may have been directed to rewrite SDR recommendations, because the initial analysis indicated a 3+% of GDP defence budget was deemed necessary. If that scenario is ever officially acknowledged/disclosed, woe unto those deemed responsible, after hostilities commence.

  11. At least they ARE upgrading them and not letting the drift into obsolescence like the harpoons. Something to be grateful for.

    Not forgetting an “up to” amount of fcaswcsa or whatever it is, is almost nearly due in the inventory to be stuffed into all those T26 and T31 mk41 boxes!
    AA

Comments are closed.