The U.S. State Department has approved a potential Foreign Military Sale to Poland of 800 AGM-114R2 Hellfire missiles and related equipment.
The estimated cost of the sale is $150 million.
The Defense Security Cooperation Agency has delivered the required certification to Congress, notifying them of this possible transaction.
Poland has requested the purchase of 800 AGM-114R2 Hellfire missiles and four M36 Hellfire Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM).
The notification is shown below:
“March 16, 2023 – The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Poland of AGM-114R2 Hellfire missiles and related equipment for an estimated cost of $150 million. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale today.
The Republic of Poland has requested to buy eight hundred (800) AGM-114R2 Hellfire missiles; and four (4) M36 Hellfire Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM). Also included is Tactical Aviation Ground Munition Program Office technical assistance; Security Assistance Management Directorate technical assistance; Joint Attack Munition Systems technical assistance; Classified and Unclassified publications; spare parts; repair and return; storage; and other related elements of logistics and program support.
The total estimated cost is $150 million. This proposed sale will support the foreign policy goals and national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of a NATO ally that is a force for political stability and economic progress in Europe. The proposed sale will improve Poland’s military goals of updating capability while further enhancing interoperability with the United States and other allies.
Poland intends to use these defense articles and services to modernize its armed forces and expand its capability to strengthen its homeland defense and deter regional threats. Poland will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces. The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region. The principal contractor will be Lockheed Martin Corporation, Orlando, FL.”
The proposed package also encompasses various forms of technical assistance, including Tactical Aviation Ground Munition Program Office, Security Assistance Management Directorate, and Joint Attack Munition Systems support.
Additionally, the deal covers Classified and Unclassified publications, spare parts, repair and return services, storage, and other logistics and program support elements.
Brimstone defeated yet again? Or are these being purchased as part of a larger package with Apache?
Part of the problem with trying to distribute Brimstone further is ITAR. It gives the Americans the ability to veto the sale and then align themselves to fill the gap with Hellfire instead.
Which is why running away from anything to do with ITAR is sensible.
Now most new production models of UK missiles have no US origin bits in them for that reason. Some of the bits previously ITAR’d were not remotely sensitive.
Purely a mechanism of unfair advantage in exporting. Very little to do with anything else.
ITAR and EAR compliance are a US way of controlling their kit and ensuring a closed shop for US Manufacturers. UK/European manufacturers are moving away from it with all possible haste.
BAe got screwed over years ago by the US Govt for it.
Some of the stuff covered by ITAR and EAR is bonkers. Civilian Distress radios, Lifejackets and even Horses! If an RN ship has a piece of US kit fitted that comes under ITAR, the whole vessel is then ITAR until the kit is removed.
I totally agree.
It is this sense of USA rules the world.
When you try and discuss it, all you get is ‘we have a constitution’
Which out of the two is best ?
Difficult to say, there was talk of them wanting Brimstone qualified for the F50s they are buying. But will need Hellfire for the Apaches so may be just for those, time will tell I guess.
Poland with use them on their A149 helicopters also.
Actually when you consider how many copters they are looking for 800 is probably the right sort of number of missiles just for those.
Out of interest are any fast jets fitted with Hellfire, couldn’t find any reference in that context and I know one of Brimstones advantages is it’s potential to be fired at high speed indeed even at Supersonic speed that is not possible with Hellfire.
Been confirmed via Newsweek that they are for ‘a range of Polish helicopters.
That’s a very interesting question seeing as Hellfire is on the cusp of been replaced by the AGM-179 JAGM (Even the UK has ordered it) There’s also the little fact that the US purchased a load of Spike NLOS for their Apache’s last year in which to afford them the luxury of outreaching the latest AAA systems, Systems which Moscow (and no doubt) China will be bringing more on line after seeing how many Russian Helicopters have been shot out of the sky this past year , the very systems that Poland’s main adversary will be fielding.
Personally, I feel the main decider was cost, seeing as in 2015 the unit cost for Brimstone 1 was £175K, with Hellfire coming in at £124K in 2021
Poland also have Spike but not sure if it is the NLOS version.
Or availability from refurbished stockpiles? If they are being replaced?
There’s that and remaining in close alignment with the US, that’s probably the most important aspect to Poland.
Both seem overpriced to me. Glad they are available to NATO but I would like to see some lower cost options for less hardened targets.
It was confirmed during a recent select committee that the introduction date for FC/ASW has been pushed into the 2030s. I haven’t seen it posted on here yet, so thought to add a comment.
Well there’s a surprise.
I hope that is sarcasm..
Slightly off topic but still talking about missile acquisitions, the US has approved sale via FMS of 200 latest version Block V Tomahawk missiles (capable of striking moving ships) and 20 Block IV for the RAN’s Hobart Class destroyers.
Work is also underway to investigate the feasibility of adding tube launched Tomahawk missiles to the Collins Class submarine as part of their current life of type extension program as a stopgap measure until the first of the Virginia’s arrive under AUKUS where the Tomahawk will be a part of their standard inventory.
I wonder what the range is?
“DSEI Japan 2023: Sea Breaker reaches final development stage17 MARCH 2023″
LINK
Tomahawk typically has a range of 1600 kms (1,000 miles) but it depends on the variant. The Rafael Sea Breaker has a range of 300 kms
👍
Morning OZ, it’s all really good stuff for the RAN and seems to be happening quickly and decisively. We’ll have to wait and see if the UK will order any TLAMs for its aT26 as the FC/ASW has been furthered pushed out, and why they can’t also put Mk41s for TLAMs on their T45s also and not just leave it to their subs. Good to hear about possible TLAMs for the Collins. I’d like to see these subs based more up in Darwin and Townsville/Brisbane, save time and fuel being closer to SCS, Coral sea. Not sure if this is doable though?
I think I’m Quebec Delta.
The Hobart Class are just at the beginning of their service life and are already exhibiting some of the growth potential they have to become a powerful general purpose maritime platform. The acquisition of TLAM adds to other recently announced upgrades including NSM to replace their current Harpoon AShMs.
The RAN had the foresight to specify all ‘strike length’ VLS for the Hobarts making feasible upgrades to larger/longer missiles like TLAM and potentially SM3 and SM6 (for an antiballistic missile capability) or vertical launched LRASM. The Hunter Class (T26) are also having strike length VLS fitted so the RAN will ultimately have at least 12 ships able to launch TLAM and other larger missiles.
The primary constraint on the Hobarts is a lack of magazine depth at just 48 VLS cells, although remembering that the ESSM Block II can be quad packed, so a typical loadout is likely to be up to 96 VLS missiles plus 8 cannister launched AsHMs (104 total).
The Aegis radar and CMS provides a high degree of interoperability with other pacific navies operating Aegis platforms (US, Japan and South Korea) with the RAN being the second navy after the USN to demonstrate the Aegis systems Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) with one ship able to hand off targeting data to another, while the planned upgrade to Aegis Baseline 9 (Project Sea 4000 Phase 6) will provide the software for an ABM capability – paving the way for the acquisition of SM6/SM3.
The Hobart upgrades are ‘baked in’ to the budget through a 6-year $155 million contract with BAE for ‘spiral upgrades’ to the fleet, while a proposal from Navantia to build a further 3 Hobart class AWDs either in Australia or Spain or a mix of the two, is gaining traction. This is partly in response to the threat from China and partly because of ongoing delays and design issues with the Hunter class.
Agree that forward basing of Collins Class would save both time at sea and also make them able to respond more quickly to contingencies and the increasing incursion of PLAAN assets in our EEZ and northern waters.
Forward basing of the Collins in more northern ports could be achieved relatively easily by taking a leaf out of our mining industry and their use of fly-in, fly-out (FIFO) workforces to remote mining camps. This would minimise disruption and allow the submarine crews to continue to be based in Perth/Fremantle and training to remain at HMAS Sterling in Western Australia.
Routine maintenance could be carried out by also flying in engineering crews and parts. It’s no more than a 3-hour flight to anywhere in Australia from HMAS Sterling – while all major refits and upgrades would continue to be conducted at ASC in Adelaide as per current arrangements.
Thanks for your excellent reply OZ, really great detail. Maybe a second batch of Hobart’s might get a stretch for more VLS and bigger fuels tanks for a greater range. I’d also like to see an extra oiler/ tanker in RAN service (and NZ only has the one) for greater fuel logistics security. Can’t quite believe there’s no real push to putting 1-2 Mk41s into the RNs T45s which like with the RANs Hobart’s would be a great force multiplier and shouldn’t impede on it’s AAW speciality. Anyway I’m just a civilian so have to leave this stuff to the experts.
The Polish should be congratulated. They’ve looked at the threat on their borders. Determined what they need to not just defend themselves but defeat that threat then gone out and ordered it.
Well done Poland.
The poles do seem to have the right idea got to give them that. 😉
And once again, Germany gets it’s defense for free.
The countries to the east of Germany have noticed too. Germany has few friends in that part of europe.
And yet, somehow at significant cost to the German taxpayers. They don’t pay for much but they don’t even get what they are paying for. Hans Guderian must be rolling in his grave.
Luftwaffe pilots often brag about their always-superior capabilities on line. I suppose that’s what fighter pilots do. Maybe that’s an important aspect of convincing pilots to et in those planes and go face dangerous enemies. In the case of Germany, how many fighter planes can they actually scramble today if needed? The availability for actual sea duty fr their lovely submarines is horrible. It seems that some of the facilities for their scheduled maintenance are too busy working on foreign contracts. Am I wrong? I hope so. 😯
Spot on 👍
I agree.
I wonder how long it’d take for us to move to a wartime economy if we ever needed? Our forces are so few & stocks so low, we’ve sold off most we had.
Confirmed for AW149 and Apaches that Poland is buying.
Hmm. That’s great. I am glad to see Poland doing their best to defend themselves. Perhaps someone in Germany will pay attention to the German Generals and Admirals.
I am not a defense material expert but I do know a few math tricks. We in the USA have too often used $100,000. Hell Fire missiles to blow up $1,500. used Toyota pickups to hit fleeing jihadists in various deserts.
I understand the favorable economics of hitting a T-80 or (mostly imaginary) T-14 tank with a Hell Fire or some competing contractor’s version of a similar vehicle killer but can we (all of NATO) please have a nice enough $5,000.00 (or less) missile for dealing with fleeing Toyotas etc? My 5 year old nephew is capable of flying the inexpensive drone that I gave him through an open barn window. Surely it’s time for NATO to start hitting targets at lower cost.
The drone testing in the Ukraine war gives me hope for less expensive ways of blowing up Jihadists, unfortunate Russian conscripts etc. I hope the tax payers are paying attention.