General Atomics Aeronautical Systems (GA-ASI) is developing a long-range strike missile capability for its MQ-9B drone, expanding the aircraft’s mission set to include naval and deep standoff attack roles.
The company said work is under way to integrate extended-range precision weapons onto the MQ-9B SkyGuardian and SeaGuardian variants, responding to demand from air and naval forces for platforms able to hold targets at risk over vast maritime and air spaces, particularly in the Western Pacific.
“MQ-9B continues to impress in the field and we keep adding to our global customer list,” said GA-ASI President David R. Alexander. “We want to continue to build value in the aircraft by expanding into more missions. MQ-9B features extraordinary payload capacity, so it only makes sense to add to our mission sets with the ability to carry long-range weapons.”
According to GA-ASI, performance analysis indicates the aircraft can carry such weapons over long distances while retaining endurance and persistence. Engineers are continuing integration work and refining potential concepts of operation.
Weapons being examined include the Lockheed Martin Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), and the Kongsberg/Raytheon Joint Strike Missile (JSM). The company said it intends to conduct a flight with at least one of these weapons as early as 2026.
A notional operating profile described by GA-ASI would see MQ-9Bs launch from friendly bases in the Western or Southern Pacific, fly to a holding point outside an adversary’s weapons engagement zone and, if directed, release long-range munitions in coordination with U.S. or allied forces.
The MQ-9B family includes the SkyGuardian and maritime-focused SeaGuardian, as well as the Protector RG Mk1 currently entering service with the Royal Air Force. The platform has secured international customers including Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, India, Japan, Poland and Taiwan, alongside U.S. operators, reflecting its growing role in allied air and maritime operations.
…..and after several meetings about meetings we will buy a missile for evaluation, or am I being optomistic.
whinge, whine, moan 🥱
Absolutely, my alien friend. Tell me please what I have to be happy about in defence terms. 🙃
Exactly what has that to do with the subject of the article? Assuming you bothered to read it…
I think he read it and his response was based on historic evidence there will be a long drawn out process of deciding perhaps even testing with no certainty it will be acquired. Now you can agree or disagree with the assessment, no problem there but to claim it has nothing to do with the article or claiming he hadn’t read it is patronising, and frankly ridiculous and does you no credit if you yourself wish to be taken seriously. Not that I suspect you care as I have yet to read anything constructive in any of your inane responses.
About as much as your sarcastic post 😊
Sounds like it’s company led so it will likely be quick not the usual drawn out government procurement process.
I can’t imagine an MQ9 B is ever going to be able to carry anything as big as LRASM however a single JSM may be possible on each wing .
Soemthing smaller like Sea Venom or Marte ER might be more practical.
The UK really needs to figure out a way to get MQ9 on the carrier. It fulfills a number of required roles. It will mean that even when not armed with F35B the Queen Elizabeth class is still very useful.
Risk is that RAF then appears on QEC even less often.
Well, the RAF has been trouble trying to find Pilots that want to sit about on a Naval Asset for months without seeing their families… So I wouldn’t be opposed to F-35Bs being directed to Fleet Air Arm making a comeback in the future with new planes. Sure, they’ll be functionally identical and based at the same bases as the RAF, but they’re all Navy personnel. Hell, I’d match their pay with RAF counterparts on land and give them a reduced 0% Taxation on their paypackets for time served at sea. (Like commercial offshore/ship workers outside the UK’s tax boundary).
I think we will go with Stormbreaker for our F-35s. It’s reported as being currently integrated on all F-35 variants.
The amount drones like this can lift is related to the length of the runway. The QE’s runway is too short to get the maximum out of these. We need something on the QE, but whether it’s this particular drone will be up to the spec of the STOL version that I still believe we have no published date for. The maiden flight for the Grey Eagle STOL is hoped to be towards the end of 2027, and right now the smaller Grey Eagle is expected to come some time before the MQ-9B STOL. That suggests to me the MQ-9B STOL won’t be carrier operational before the end of the decade.
Project Vanquish hopes to have a technical at sea demonstration by the end of this year. If the RN manages that (and that’s a big if), MQ-9B STOL may get left behind.
Fitted for but not with a warhead.
Hmmm, considering we already have these with the RAF, if the Fleet Air Arm actually reformed into something, I’d acquire quite a few of them to actually focus on carrier and surface naval aviation ops. You’ve got Long Range Strike as a possible use, you have separate loadouts for ASW and AEWC as well as the long endurance recon aircraft with just the nominal kit or smaller quad racks of Hellfire or JAGM to make smaller strikes on items like skiffs or fast patrol boats.
Course, that relies on the government and the government aren’t sensible or switched on people.