You’ve probably heard the saying, “War is unpredictable,” right? It’s one of those truisms that you don’t fully grasp until you’re staring directly at its consequences. For years, the U.S. had been cruising along with the confidence of a nation that had no immediate threat on the horizon. We engaged in smaller conflicts, mostly in the Middle East, where the enemies were less industrialized and the wars required far fewer heavy, high-tech weapons.
But now? Now it feels like the world is holding its breath, watching Ukraine fend off Russia’s full-scale invasion and waiting for something to pop off in the Asia-Pacific. It’s unsettling. And it’s in these moments of tension that we realize we might not be as prepared as we once thought. Case in point: missile engines. Yes, missile engines — those little pieces of metal and fire that power some of the most advanced weapons in the world. We’re running out of them, and fast.
It sounds odd, doesn’t it? Here we are, the most powerful country on Earth, and we’re in a bit of a bind when it comes to something as fundamental as missile engines. You’d think we’d have stockpiles of them, or that we’d be able to produce as many as we need at the drop of a hat. But the reality is far more complicated, and frankly, a little frightening.
How Did We Get Here?
Before we dive into the reasons for the shortage, let’s step back for a moment. You could feel the energy in the air when HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) was first introduced into the Russo-Ukrainian War. If you’ve followed the war at all, you know that HIMARS has become a game-changer. It’s a missile system mounted on the back of a truck, and its precision is terrifying — if you’re on the wrong side of it. The rockets can hit a target up to 57 miles away, with a margin of error as small as 8 feet. Imagine being able to stand 50 miles away from a dartboard and nail the bullseye. That’s how accurate this thing is.
When Ukraine started using HIMARS, the results were nothing short of devastating for Russian forces. Bridges were blown apart, supply lines crippled, and military installations behind enemy lines obliterated. For Ukraine, HIMARS represented a lifeline — a way to push back against a larger, better-equipped enemy. For the rest of the world, it was a revelation.
So, naturally, everyone wanted a piece of the action. Countries around the globe started placing orders for HIMARS systems and the rockets they fire, the M31 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS). NATO countries like Poland, Lithuania, and Romania lined up. Even Taiwan, seeing the potential to defend its shores from a possible Chinese invasion, doubled its initial order. The U.S. military, too, wanted more of these rockets, both to replace the ones sent to Ukraine and to build up its own stockpile for future conflicts.
But then came the bottleneck. Missile engines, the essential part of these high-tech rockets, were in short supply. To be honest, it’s not entirely surprising. Over the last few decades, the U.S. military-industrial complex has been optimized for efficiency. Defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and L3 Harris have been producing weapons at a steady, predictable pace — just enough to meet demand. But that demand wasn’t designed for an industrial-scale war like the one we’re witnessing in Ukraine. As it turns out, we’re running the risk of exhausting our missile stockpiles faster than we can replenish them.
The Nature of Military Production
You’d think a country that spends more on its military than any other nation in the world would be able to ramp up production quickly, but it’s not that simple. You see, defense contractors are businesses. They operate in a capitalist economy, and like any business, they aim to maximize profits. To do that, they run lean operations, minimizing waste and excess capacity. They don’t have factories sitting idle or machinery gathering dust just waiting for a surge in demand.
Gregory Sanders, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, put it well when he said, “Surging production in general faces a variety of challenges.” Imagine trying to instantly double or triple the output of your favorite bakery. Sure, they might have the ovens and the recipes, but they’d still need more ingredients, more workers, and more time. It’s the same with missile engines. Lockheed Martin and its subcontractors just don’t have the extra capacity to meet the sudden spike in demand.
And it’s not just about physical space or machines. There’s also a shortage of skilled workers who know how to build these incredibly complex systems. The workers who assemble missile engines are highly trained, and you can’t just pluck someone off the street, hand them a blueprint, and expect them to get to work. Training takes time — time we don’t necessarily have.
Boom-and-Bust Cycles
One of the most frustrating aspects of this crisis is that it’s not entirely new. Military production has always gone through boom-and-bust cycles. When a conflict breaks out, production ramps up. Factories churn out weapons, and defense contractors hire more workers. But when the conflict ends, so does the production boom. Factories slow down, workers are laid off, and companies return to operating at their most efficient, cost-effective levels.
We saw this after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Once those conflicts began to wind down, so did the production of weapons like missiles. Defense budgets were cut, and the defense industry adapted by scaling back production. But now, with the war in Ukraine dragging on and tensions rising in the Asia-Pacific, we’re facing a new reality. The demand for missiles isn’t going away anytime soon. In fact, it’s likely to increase, especially if a conflict were to break out over Taiwan.
The problem is that defense contractors, understandably, are wary of expanding too quickly. They’ve been burned before by the boom-and-bust cycle, and they know that building new factories or hiring more workers could be a risky investment if demand drops off again in a few years. It’s a classic case of short-term thinking in a long-term game.
HIMARS: The Star of the Show
Let’s talk more about HIMARS because, frankly, it’s the star of the show. The U.S. has provided 39 of these systems to Ukraine, and their impact has been nothing short of phenomenal. Ukrainian forces have used them to destroy Russian artillery, disrupt supply lines, and cripple key infrastructure. Just imagine the look on a Russian commander’s face when, in the dead of night, six precision-guided rockets come screaming out of the sky and obliterate a bridge his forces depend on. HIMARS has given Ukraine a fighting chance in a war that might otherwise have been lost.
But with every HIMARS strike comes another rocket expended. And with every rocket expended, we edge closer to a crisis. The U.S. can only produce about 6,000 GMLRS rockets per year. But the demand? It’s closer to 14,000, and that number could keep rising as more countries seek to stockpile these weapons for future conflicts.
The irony here is hard to ignore. We have the technology. We have the know-how. But we’re being held back by something as seemingly simple as engine production. And that’s not just a problem for the U.S. — it’s a problem for the entire world. If America and its allies can’t produce enough missiles, they risk being caught off guard in the next big conflict.
The Global Stakes
The implications of this shortage go beyond just Ukraine. Let’s say a war breaks out in the Asia-Pacific. Taiwan, a small island nation facing the looming threat of a Chinese invasion, has been stocking up on HIMARS systems. They know that if China were to invade, these missile systems could be the key to repelling a beach assault. But what happens if Taiwan runs out of missiles before the U.S. can resupply them? What happens if the missile shortage becomes so dire that even America can’t defend its allies?
It’s a chilling thought, but one we need to confront. The missile engine shortage isn’t just an abstract problem — it’s a ticking time bomb that could have real consequences for global security. And it’s not just about quantity; it’s about timing. In a conflict, timing is everything. If a country runs out of missiles at a critical moment, it could lose the upper hand in a matter of hours or even minutes.
We’re also seeing this play out in NATO countries. Poland, Lithuania, and other Eastern European nations are nervously watching the situation in Ukraine and bolstering their own defenses. They’ve placed orders for HIMARS and GMLRS rockets, but the wait times are long, and production is slow. These countries are on the front lines of a potential conflict with Russia, and they can’t afford to wait months — or even years — for the weapons they need to defend themselves.
A Solution on the Horizon?
So, what’s being done about it? In September, we got some good news. Lockheed Martin, the company that builds the GMLRS rocket and HIMARS system, announced a new partnership with General Dynamics. The goal? To produce more rocket engines, specifically for GMLRS. General Dynamics is expected to start producing these engines by 2025, which could help alleviate the shortage.
There’s also help coming from overseas. Thales, a European defense giant, is set to build rocket motors for Australia’s GMLRS orders. It’s a small step, but every bit helps in a crisis like this.
But even with these partnerships in place, we’re still looking at a couple of years before production catches up with demand. In the meantime, the world holds its breath, hoping that the missile stockpiles we have will be enough to carry us through whatever comes next.
The Human Cost
It’s easy to get caught up in the numbers — the number of missiles, the number of factories, the number of orders placed. But let’s not forget that behind every missile fired, there are human lives at stake. Ukrainian soldiers on the front lines, fighting to defend their homeland. Taiwanese civilians, preparing for a worst-case scenario. American and NATO troops, stationed around the world, ready to defend against an attack.
These are the people who will bear the brunt of this missile shortage if it isn’t addressed. And that’s what makes this crisis so terrifying. It’s not just about engines or production lines — it’s about the very real possibility that we might not have the tools we need to protect ourselves and our allies when it matters most.
In the end, the missile engine shortage is a reminder of just how fragile our military-industrial complex can be. It’s a wake-up call, not just for the U.S., but for the entire world. We can’t afford to take our security for granted, because as we’ve seen time and time again, war is unpredictable. And when it comes, we need to be ready — no matter the cost.
