From initial "proof of concept" demo in 2020 with first gen #Leonidas High Power Microwave system to fully developing & demonstrating a rugged, deployable #HPM CUAS solution (gen3), Epirus has leaped past established defense primes in supplying operational #HPM systems to the DOD
Epirus leveraged its smart power management experience to focus on Solid State #GaN#HPM which was a deviation from what its competitors delivered. While they missed out on initial competitions, their core tech has far ⬆️ capability & flexibility.
With its #Leonidas solution having evolved from a technology proof of concept system to a ruggedized, higher perf system that was ready for user evaluations, Leonidas was showcased to the US Army's Joint Counter-small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office during live demonstrations.
Earlier this year, the US Army selected Epirus's Gallium Nitride powered #Leonidas solution over six other #HPM systems it evaluated for its Indirect Fire Protection Capability's HPM layer. The $66 MM contract funds the first four systems which to be delivered this year.
The inherent scalability of the #Leonidas design allows it to be adapted across multiple applications. Epirus has leveraged its basic LRAM building blocks to build a pod mounted Leonidas solution, and has integrated its Leonidas array on the Stryker to support maneuver forces.
While Leonidas is directed towards the Counter small UAS mission, the scalability of the design allows for it to grow in size, power and performance. Presently, the USAF's #CHIMERA is the only known program focusing on longer ranged #HPM engagements of more stressing threats.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Setting the accuracy of 👇 aside, I just love the 'VHF counter-stealth' debate online. It’s always: 'VHF detects it, passes it to UHF, passes it to another band, then... Boom.' I love the hustle energy, but you are describing a series of technical miracles. Maintaining a kill chain across that many handoffs isn't trivial. If that is what it's going to take, 'stealth' has already done its job.
My point isn't to dismiss 'counter-stealth' research, but to emphasize the sheer scale of the technical challenge. Developing a resilient counter-LO capability requires mastery across dozens of disciplines. Even then, you’re risking building a fragile kill chain that must be defended against an opponent’s own 'counter-counter' capabilities and TTPs. This isn't plug-and-play. You can't just pair a Chinese VHF radar with a legacy S-series system from Russia and claim a credible capability to thwart an overwhelming VLO force. A brittle kill chain is same or worst than no kill chain at all.
The dismissal of Chinese 'counter-stealth' in the context of export hardware is one thing . The integrated capability they are building in the Pacific is quite another. There is a massive gulf between a mobile VHF radar in 🇻🇪 and the land, sea, air, and space-based 'System-of-Systems' the PLA is maturing. The USAF and DoD take this threat very seriously. They aren't investing billions into next-gen stealth and resilient space architectures for nothing. We are in a race to stay ahead of a peer adversary that is building its own 'technical miracles'.
Why Is the US Air Force investing in a family of high speed weapons when it is also producing tens of thousands of much lower cost JASSM-ER and low-cost cruise missiles? 🧵👇 goes into this in a bit more detail. 1/7 #HighSpeedStrike #Hypersonic
First, let’s look at why high-speed weapons are useful. The 📸👇 captures the challenge. Strike weapons need to deliver range, overcome challenges associated with time and track custody, and be survivable against modern integrated air defense systems. The balance between these three main requirements drivers is crucial. This is why, no single class of weapons can solve all problems. 2/7
Subsonic missiles are very efficient and offer one of the most cost-effective way to achieve long range strike. Their lack of speed, time-of-flight, and depending on the weapon, survivability against sophisticated IADS will always remain a challenge. Cheaper and simpler high speed weapons like modified ground launched ballistic missiles (for Air Launch) or ALBMs offer high speed, mid-long range performance but are still vulnerable against BMD systems. Highly advanced boost glide systems are expensive, technically challenging to develop and produce affordably, and fly slower than traditional ALBMs. But their ability to operate at lower altitudes makes them significantly more survivable. Likewise, air—breathing hypersonics are significantly more efficient, package better (smaller / lighter and easier to carry for tactical platforms) but pose technical challenges in development and testing across the envelope and scaling to longer ranged systems. The threat, to a large degree, dictates the portfolio of capabilities needed. 3/7
Something I’ve been calling for here for at least half a decade if not more. This is the correct way to signal intent to industry and Congress and secure funding for production ramp. 👍
This 4x ⬆️ in the acquisition objective for the PAC-3 MSE also puts into perspective the recent US Army interest in qualifying a second seeker into missile system. With 13,000+ missiles being the objective, the Army can affordable recompete the seeker.
As I have noted before, PAC-3 MSE's kinematic performance exceeds the ability of legacy PATRIOT radar & limits engagement to sub 1,500 km ranged TBMs. This is changing with MSE being integrated into THAAD, MSEs block V seeker, and IAMD & LTAMDS radar.
The administration's 2026 defense budget request includes procurement funding for the AIM-260A missile marking the first time the Joint Advanced Tactical Missile procurement funding has been publicly reported. The PB26 budget includes $368 Million procurement funding for #JATM.
As noted and reported previously, the administration has also requested procurement funding for the AGM-183A #ARRW #Hypersonic missile system. The budget request includes $387 Million funding to begin buying the ARRW missile system.
The administration has also included $600+ Million in funding for the Family of Affordable Mass Missile (FAMM). This procures more than 3,000 missiles.
I'm often asked, why ⤵️costs $100K. Coyote includes features that are highly desirable for its intended role of protecting fixed/semi fixed sites (large OCONUS installations). If all we want is a cheap point defense solution look no further than the standard or L3/TSC upg APKWS.
Its actually quite sensible to have options across the performance & cost spectrum against G2 and 3 threats while focusing more on EW, DEW or gun based solutions for smaller G1 drones. Fielding layered capabilities is highly desirable.
There are genuine needs that cannot be met with a one size fits all solution or just fielding more guns/CIWS or similar systems. Considerations include launcher emplacement, areas of an installation you don't want to engage (or even fly) targets over & having the speed and range
"We were tasked in Jan 2023 to deliver BMD capability to 🇺🇦..the training occurred at Fort Sill, and in April we conducted a validation exercise in 🇵🇱. #PATRIOT was transferred to protect Kyiv in late April & at 02:30 AM [May 04] it engaged the first ALBM " Col Rosanna Clemente
"We parachuted a [ADA] team into 🇺🇦..and they did an assessment in December of 2021..They took some of our #PATRIOT folks/planners. They spent some time with the Ukrainians and looked at the problem set that..2 months later they were absolutely facing" BG Maurice Barnett
"If you want to see some place that's already doing composite go to any major city in 🇺🇦..You all will probably see this in the news in the next few months or so..the team has done a phenomenal job of moving the ball [on integration]" BG Maurice Barnett