On March 4, 2025, Lockheed Martin and the F-35 Pax River Integrated Test Force completed an initial flight test integrating the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile, known as LRASM, onto the F-35B Lightning II, the short takeoff and vertical landing variant of the stealth fighter.
U.S. F-35B just became China’s problem in the South China Sea
Photo credit: Lockheed Martin
This test follows a similar evaluation with the F-35C in September 2024, marking another milestone in the ongoing Block 4 upgrade program for the Joint Strike Fighter. The effort aims to expand the aircraft’s capabilities by adding advanced weaponry, specifically the AGM-158 family of munitions, which includes both the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile and its anti-ship derivative, LRASM. For the U.S. military, this represents a step toward enhancing the F-35’s role in multi-domain operations, a move that could reshape its utility in contested environments.
The LRASM is a precision-guided weapon designed to target naval assets, capable of navigating through sophisticated air defense networks. Its range, while not officially disclosed, is widely understood to exceed several hundred miles, allowing launch platforms to engage from a safe distance.
Major milestone unlocked! 🔓
The F-35B flight tested the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) system, paving the way for the integration of this cutting-edge technology into the arsenal of America's premier warfighter. pic.twitter.com/VNb5nufZVJ
— Lockheed Martin (@LockheedMartin) March 5, 2025
Unlike traditional munitions that rely on direct line-of-sight or simpler guidance, this missile uses advanced onboard sensors and autonomous decision-making to identify and strike ships, even in cluttered maritime settings.
For the F-35B, a jet tailored for the U.S. Marine Corps and its expeditionary operations, pairing this weapon with a stealth airframe could extend its reach beyond what legacy systems like the Harpoon missile once offered. The test flight, conducted at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland, kicks off a broader evaluation phase to ensure the missile integrates seamlessly with the aircraft’s systems.
This development arrives as part of a larger push to modernize the F-35 fleet, which now numbers over 1,100 aircraft worldwide and has logged more than 983,400 flight hours. The Block 4 upgrades, a multi-year initiative, aim to address earlier limitations in the jet’s design by improving its sensors, software, and weapons compatibility.
The AGM-158 family, produced by Lockheed Martin, fits into this framework by offering a dual-purpose solution: the JASSM variant targets land-based infrastructure, while LRASM focuses on maritime threats. During the March test, the missile was carried externally on the F-35B, a detail that raises technical and tactical questions about how this configuration aligns with the jet’s stealth profile, a cornerstone of its design philosophy.
Stealth, in the context of modern fighters like the F-35, refers to a reduced radar cross-section, achieved through specialized shaping and materials that minimize detection by enemy systems. The aircraft’s internal weapons bays allow it to carry munitions without compromising this advantage.
External carriage, however, increases visibility to radar, potentially exposing the jet to threats like advanced surface-to-air missiles or fighter intercepts. Lockheed Martin has not clarified whether external mounting is a temporary measure or a permanent feature of the LRASM integration.
Future Block 4 enhancements might enable internal carriage, but for now, this approach suggests a trade-off between firepower and survivability, a decision that military planners will need to weigh in operational contexts.
The choice of the F-35B for this test is significant beyond the technical realm. Unlike the F-35C, which operates from large-deck aircraft carriers for the U.S. Navy, or the F-35A, the conventional takeoff variant used primarily by the Air Force, the B-model supports the Marine Corps’ unique mission set.
It can operate from amphibious assault ships—vessels like those in the Wasp or America classes—enabling rapid deployment in austere or forward-leaning environments. This flexibility aligns with the Pentagon’s shift toward distributed operations, a strategy that emphasizes smaller, dispersed units over concentrated forces to counter adversaries with robust anti-access/area denial capabilities. In regions like the Indo-Pacific, where vast distances and contested waters define the battlespace, such adaptability could prove decisive.
John Hill, vice president and general manager of Air Dominance and Strike Weapons at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, described the AGM-158 integration as a means to provide “increased range and lethality against highly defended strategic targets.”
Chauncey McIntosh, vice president and general manager of the F-35 program at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, emphasized the jet’s evolving role, noting that these upgrades ensure it remains a dominant force in air combat for decades. These statements reflect a corporate confidence in the platform, yet they leave room for scrutiny.
The F-35 program, with a lifecycle cost estimated at over $1.7 trillion, has faced persistent criticism for delays, technical issues, and budget overruns. Expanding its arsenal with LRASM might bolster its case as a versatile warfighting tool, but it also invites questions about whether the investment matches the return. From a strategic perspective, the timing of this test carries weight.
The U.S. military has increasingly focused on countering China’s growing naval power, particularly in the South China Sea, where Beijing has militarized artificial islands and deployed advanced weaponry to assert territorial claims. China’s anti-access/area denial network includes systems like the DF-21D and DF-26 ballistic missiles, often dubbed “carrier killers” for their potential to target U.S. naval assets from long range.
The LRASM, with its ability to strike ships beyond the reach of many defensive systems, could serve as a counterbalance, allowing platforms like the F-35B to engage high-value targets without entering the most heavily defended zones. This capability might deter aggression or, at minimum, complicate an adversary’s planning.
Yet the operational implications extend beyond any single theater. The F-35B’s ability to launch from amphibious ships means it could support a range of missions, from precision strikes in the Middle East to rapid-response operations in the Arctic. Its integration with LRASM enhances this versatility, giving commanders a tool to address both conventional and asymmetric threats.
For the Marine Corps, which often operates as a first-in force, this could translate to greater influence in joint operations, particularly in scenarios where naval supremacy is contested. The question remains whether the added complexity—and cost—of maintaining this capability will strain resources already stretched across a global footprint.
Critics might argue that the F-35’s multi-role design, intended to serve air forces, navies, and marines alike, dilutes its effectiveness in any one domain. Adding a sophisticated weapon like LRASM could reinforce this critique if integration challenges persist or if the jet struggles to balance its stealth roots with new mission demands.
The external carriage issue exemplifies this tension: a stealth fighter forced to shed some of its invisibility to carry a larger payload risks undermining its core advantage. Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon have not detailed how they plan to resolve this, though past upgrades suggest a pattern of incremental fixes rather than wholesale redesigns.
The broader context of the F-35 program adds another layer to the discussion. With over two decades of development and a fleet approaching one million flight hours, the aircraft has matured into a mainstay of Western airpower. Allies like the United Kingdom, Japan, and Australia, all of whom operate or plan to operate the F-35B, may take note of this test as they refine their own maritime strategies.
For the U.S., the LRASM integration could strengthen interoperability with these partners, particularly in coalition operations where anti-ship capabilities are increasingly relevant. Yet the program’s scale also amplifies its stakes: every new feature must justify itself against a backdrop of taxpayer scrutiny and competing defense priorities.
Technical details of the test remain sparse, a common practice for early-stage evaluations. The LRASM’s performance—its accuracy, reliability, and interaction with the F-35B’s mission systems—will likely undergo months, if not years, of analysis before full deployment.
The missile’s autonomous features, which allow it to adjust its flight path and target selection without constant human input, represent a leap beyond older weapons, but they also introduce variables that must be rigorously vetted. For a jet already grappling with software updates and maintenance demands, adding this layer of complexity could stretch engineering teams and operational crews alike.
Looking ahead, the LRASM integration might signal a shift in how the F-35B fits into the U.S. military’s force structure. If successful, it could elevate the jet from a tactical asset to a strategic one, capable of influencing outcomes at the campaign level rather than just the battlefield.
This aligns with the Pentagon’s emphasis on long-range strike options as a hedge against peer competitors. However, success hinges on execution—on ensuring the weapon works as intended without compromising the platform’s other roles. The test on March 4 is merely a starting point, a data point in a process that will unfold over time.
For now, the F-35B’s flight with LRASM offers a glimpse into the evolving nature of air and naval warfare. It reflects a response to a world where threats are more dispersed, defenses more layered, and the margins for error narrower than ever.
Whether this development tilts the balance in any particular region or simply adds another tool to an already crowded arsenal remains to be seen. The answers will emerge not in press releases, but in the skies and seas where these systems are ultimately put to the test.
***
Follow us everywhere and at any time. BulgarianMilitary.com has responsive design and you can open the page from any computer, mobile devices or web browsers. For more up-to-date news, follow our Google News, YouTube, Reddit, LinkedIn, and Twitter pages. Our standards: Manifesto & ethical principles.