Picture a weapon with the same range and payload as a Tomahawk cruise missile, but instead of cruising at Mach 0.7, it screams across the sky at Mach 7. This isn’t science fiction. It’s the reality of hypersonic weapons, and America stands at a critical decision point that could reshape global military balance.
After years of false starts and shifting priorities, the United States finally has two tactical hypersonic systems approaching deployment. But the window for maintaining strategic advantage is narrowing, and the choice facing military planners is stark: deploy capable systems now or risk ceding the hypersonic high ground to rivals who have been moving aggressively.
The Long Road to Hypersonics
America’s hypersonic journey began with promise during the Bush administration, when visionaries like Air Force Chief Scientist Dr. Mark Lewis championed transformative air power capabilities. But the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan fundamentally altered defense priorities. Resources shifted from future technologies to immediate battlefield needs, cutting programs like the F-22 fighter and B-2 bomber while hypersonics development took a back seat.
This strategic pivot created an unintended consequence. As military strategist Jim Molan warned, America risked fighting future wars with fighters and bombers that were 20 to 30 years old, potentially unable to project sufficient power to deter China in the Western Pacific. The focus on today’s wars created tomorrow’s strategic blind spot.
The pattern continued through the Obama years, despite “pivot to Asia” rhetoric. While China and Russia made sustained hypersonic investments, American resources remained focused on Middle Eastern conflicts. It wasn’t until the Trump administration — shocked by Russia’s Kinzhal and Avangard demonstrations alongside China’s public displays — that hypersonics shot to the top of modernization priorities.
Today’s Systems, Tomorrow’s Deterrence
Despite the winding path, America now has two promising systems nearing operational status. The Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW), developed by Lockheed Martin, is a boost-glide system that has not just passed tests but exceeded expectations. B-52s can carry four per aircraft, providing substantial firepower projection.
The Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM), featuring a Raytheon design with a Northrop Grumman scramjet engine, offers exceptional packaging flexibility. F-15s, B-2s, and B-52s can carry these weapons, with bombers potentially fielding 15 or more per aircraft.
But the real game-changer isn’t just having the technology. It’s adversaries knowing you have it and can use it. China’s current advantage stems largely from psychological deterrence, creating a “threat in being” that shapes regional thinking and planning. American weapons must move from laboratory benches to operational status to achieve similar psychological impact.
The Indo-Pacific Chess Game
Hypersonics are crucial enablers for America’s distributed force strategy in the Indo-Pacific. China’s main advantage is geographic and their ability to mass forces quickly close to home. Hypersonic weapons deployed across the Pacific complicate Chinese planning by threatening rapid strikes against advancing naval forces, buying critical time for American and Allied positioning.
As Admiral Paparo, the current INDOPACOM commander, starkly puts it: “The coin of the realm of the 21st Century is speed. Who does things faster wins.” If opponents can strike five times faster, it incentivizes them to act first thereby making rapid deployment essential.
International cooperation amplifies this effect. The Strategic Capabilities International Framework (SCIF) program could enable Australian F/A-18s and F-35s to carry these weapons. Japan is collaborating on hypersonic defense systems. This coalition approach creates multiple potential launch points across the region, making Chinese planning exponentially more difficult while signaling unified allied commitment.
The Detection Dilemma
Hypersonics force fundamental changes across military operations. These weapons present detection challenges—they fly low with heat signatures 10 to 20 times fainter than traditional ballistic missiles, described as “tracking a slightly brighter candle in a sea of candles.”
Yet physics creates opportunities alongside challenges. The extreme speed generates plasma sheaths that, while interfering with communications, also produce unique electromagnetic signatures detectable by advanced multi-spectral sensors. This drives a paradigm shift from ground-based radar toward integrated space-based sensors and AI-driven networks.
The Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor (HBTSS) program has already demonstrated successful prototype tracking, providing crucial “birth to death” capability. But engagement timelines measured in minutes or seconds demand artificial intelligence and edge computing—human decision-making loops are simply too slow.
The Nuclear Paradox
Perhaps most troubling is hypersonics’ relationship with nuclear deterrence. While offering conventional alternatives to nuclear weapons, their speed and penetration capabilities might actually lower nuclear thresholds. If adversaries know they can be hit five times faster, does this incentivize first strikes? Attribution problems compound the risk—how do you know if an incoming hypersonic missile is conventional or nuclear until impact?
This “decision compression” forces critical choices with incomplete information under extreme time pressure, potentially triggering nuclear responses based on misidentification. When allies deploy these systems, they become potential retaliation targets, complicating America’s nuclear umbrella commitments.
The Moment of Truth
America possesses the technology and understands the strategic necessity. What remains is institutional will. The critical choice facing policymakers is whether to deploy “block zero” capabilities now, basic versions that can learn and evolve through real-world use, or continue perfecting systems in laboratories while rivals gain operational advantages.
The nations that master this transition while managing inherent risks will hold decisive advantages going forward. For America, the choice is clear: deploy capabilities now that can mature through experience, or risk arriving to the hypersonic battlefield when it’s already too late. In the words of one expert, this isn’t about inventing cool new technology anymore, it’s about deploying what we have within sensible operational plans.
The clock is ticking at hypersonic speed.
Editor’s Note: This dynamic and challenge is discussed in our special report on hypersonic weapons.
Hypersonic Weapons and Strategic Competition: From Science Project to Operational Reality
The report is discussed in a podcast to be found here:
Hypersonic Weapons and Strategic Competition: From Science Project to Operational Reality
And the report is discussed in a video to be found here:
The Coming of Hypersonic Weapons to the U.S. Operational Force