The US State Department has approved the potential sale of hundreds of Raytheon-made Tomahawk missiles to Japan for $2.4 billion.

“The Government of Japan has requested to buy up to two hundred (200) Tomahawk Block IV All Up Rounds (AURs) (RGM-109E); up to two hundred (200) Tomahawk Block V AURs (RGM-109E); and fourteen (14) Tactical Tomahawk Weapon Control Systems (TTWCS).

Also included is support for the Tomahawk Weapon System (TWS) (the All Up Round, the Tactical Tomahawk Weapon Control Systems (TTWCS) and the Mission Distribution Software Suite Centers (MDSSC)), as well as containers; feasibility studies; software; hardware; training; unscheduled missile maintenance; spares; in-service support; communication equipment; operational flight test; publications; engineering and technical expertise to maintain the TWS capability; non-recurring engineering; transportation; and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated total cost is $2.35 billion”, says a public notice on the Defense Security Cooperation Agency’s website.

“This proposed sale will support the foreign policy goals and national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of a major ally that is a force for political stability and economic progress in the Indo-Pacific region. The proposed sale will improve Japan’s capability to meet current and future threats by providing a long range, conventional surface-to-surface missile with significant standoff range that can neutralize growing threats. Japan will have no difficulty absorbing these articles into its armed forces.”

Avatar photo
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
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

27 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Frank62
Frank62 (@guest_767571)
6 months ago

Japan taking the risks today seriously, especially from an agressive & pernicious PRC. Good to know more can be ordered since I thought Tomahawk production was nearing its end.

Jim
Jim (@guest_767582)
6 months ago
Reply to  Frank62

I though tomahawk production and ended and all that was possible was upgrades of existing stockpiles, however with 400 for Japan and 200 for Australia that is clearly not the case. We should take the opportunity in increase our inventory as well. Even when FC/ASW arrives TLAM is probably likely to remain useful for decades.

DiscoDave
DiscoDave (@guest_767589)
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Wasn’t it the version that could be launched by torpedo tube that has been discontinued as opposed to vertical tube. Might have got this wrong though.

Chris
Chris (@guest_767598)
6 months ago
Reply to  DiscoDave

All variants are still in production. The USN has a standing contract for 196 new production missiles per year.

DanielMorgan
DanielMorgan (@guest_767688)
6 months ago
Reply to  Chris

Not so. The US Navy purchased 154 new Tomahawks for three services for $217 million in 2022 for delivery by 2025. The sale to Japan will be a separate order as will the one for Australia.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_767621)
6 months ago
Reply to  DiscoDave

Exactly this.

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_767717)
6 months ago
Reply to  DiscoDave

You are correct there, TTL option was dropped by the US when TLAM Blk IV was produced due to costs. UK and Raytheon combined to produce a TTL version of Blk IV TLAM acquired by the UK. We are over the next few years, converting all our Blk IV TLAM into Blk V versions. Not entirely sure if we are purchasing any new ones though.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_768363)
6 months ago
Reply to  Deep32

Curious re proposed equal proportion purchase of Block IV and Block V. Cost consideration? Integration issues aboard various classes? Possible acquisition of TTL variant of either Block? Interesting …🤔

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_768379)
6 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Yes, somewhat odd as it’s the same missile, with the newer BLK V having a longer range and updated Comms. Can only conclude that the BLK IV are available now with BLK V later!!! Like you say, perhaps cost comes into it too? Believe this is a stop gap until they get their T12 LAM up and running in full scale production.
Not sure if the will go with TTL version, but, who knows, sometimes needs must.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_768408)
6 months ago
Reply to  Deep32

Japanese m,ay have received an ‘offer they couldn’t refuse’ on Block 4. (Quote from The Godfather, occasionally amuse myself 😁)

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_768409)
6 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Sorry…Block IV…🙄

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_767687)
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim

With all the RNs MK41s to fill you’d hope the UK government is thinking exactly what to put in them. FCASW seems to be taking forever and TLAMs are relatively cheap and available now along with NSM. Hope the UK doesn’t just do nothing on this. Ships FFFreshAir is not a good look especially when your allies and potential adversaries are doing the opposite! With seven Astutes maybe the UK should up its stocks of these a tad too?

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_767691)
6 months ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

You would be very surprised how many of our allies and enemies have empty missile tubes. Including US Navy escorts. They are not all 100% tooled up. They are expensive and require a lot of maintenance. And missiles sat in launches only have a limited shelf life before they need depth maintenance. It’s another case of people thinking our warships are full of fresh air and everyone else’s are full of weapons. They aren’t.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_767732)
6 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

I do agree with you Robert and it’s a juggle of what’s operationally necessary, maintenance of inventory and resupply timelines. But it’s aggressors like Russia and China that at the moment always seem to have their “cannisters full” seeking to take advantage of other nations. I think a bit more of intentionality in some of the things we purchase, in how many, having the vls /cannisters for them all may help to send a signal to our potential adversaries as to what they could be on the receiving end of. All this kind of talk may promote an “arms race”… Read more »

Toby J
Toby J (@guest_767696)
6 months ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

FCASW has always seemed to be a long-term project, hopefully as 2030 approaches they will get the right hat on and sort it because it ought to be a proper gamechanger for RN

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_767733)
6 months ago
Reply to  Toby J

It’s only 2024, so don’t we need a top up of TLAMs now for RN ships and subs? Good common sense to get NSMs (finally) as an interim as have many of our allies.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_767796)
6 months ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Agree Quentin it would seem huge common sense to add more loadouts for our torp launched tomahawks and to fit the MK41 VLS cells (Type 26+31 frigates) with Tomahawk block V and/or LRASM.
We have to have the sovereign ability to conventionally hit defended high priority targets such as C3, air defences, radar sites, airfields and naval dockyard sites.
Come on MOD get with the game plan.

rattman
rattman (@guest_767708)
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Tomahawks are still being made new. Australia will also require another order of a sub launched ones at some stage for LOTE collins and viginia class.

Australia has ‘sovreign guided weapons enterprise’ for domestic production of guided weapons. GMLRS production was the first system announced, but the scuttlebutt is that tomahawks are also one of the priority missiles for the program.

Bringer of facts
Bringer of facts (@guest_767602)
6 months ago
Reply to  Frank62

Plus they have to deal with an aggressive North Korea which keeps test-firing missiles toward Japan.

farouk
farouk (@guest_767577)
6 months ago

Good to see a nation which takes defence seriously

Jim
Jim (@guest_767585)
6 months ago
Reply to  farouk

I like to see us also invest in a large conventional strike capability as well like Japan. A need to deploy 100+ long range cruise missiles in a single day should be the standard we aim for. It’s very doable if we invest in something like Rapid Dragon for storm shadow and increase the TLAM inventory.

Strategic Conventional strike capability is becoming as important as a nuclear deterrent and it’s not like we can glass the Russians for lobbing some conventional cruise missiles our way.

farouk
farouk (@guest_767617)
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim

JIm wrote:
“”I like to see us also invest in a large conventional strike capability as well””

Unions, Schools , Pro Palestine, Stop Oil crowd are investing heavily in that area.

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_767668)
6 months ago
Reply to  farouk

🤣🤣🤣😂🤣 If only so much effort was put into defence mate!

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_767676)
6 months ago
Reply to  John Clark

HMG what’s Defence 🤔

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_767758)
6 months ago

That is some purchase. Well done Japan.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_767795)
6 months ago

Something for our MOD to sit up and pay attention too. You fight wars with the weapons, smart munitions, platforms and personnel you have to hand and in service. Japan ordering 400 Tomahawks is a lesson on how to deliver at scale a conventional overwhelming stand off strike capability.
Remember that Syrian airfield that deployed chemical weapons on civilians. Taken out by a wave of tomahawk missiles that destroyed +30% of the Assad regimens Syrian airforce. Japan can now do this to multiple airfields, dockyards and C3 sites in China if required.

Mickey
Mickey (@guest_767813)
6 months ago

Japan has serious armed forces. Their navy alone is enough to cause China pause. That and in combination with allied navies,

Their Izumo class ‘helicopter destroyers’ are brilliant with the addition of F-35bs onboard soon.

Big in Japan