Lockheed Martin tests Grizzly missile launcher as the US explores expeditionary weaponry

US forces are trying to find ways to fight in the Indo-Pacific. Knowing that air power will be constrained – and very busy – they are exploring expeditionary capabilities. One of them is the Grizzly missile launcher from Lockheed Martin, which recently conducted live test firings. 

By Sam Cranny-Evans, editor of Calibre Defence, published on March 25, 2026. 

Lockheed Martin has completed multiple test firings of its new Grizzly missile launcher, according to a March 24 press release. Working with the US government, the company has developed the system in just six months using commercial components. 

So, what is the Grizzly missile launcher? In a nutshell, it appears to be building on the experience gained with the Typhon Missile Launcher. Typhon takes a Mk 41 vertical launch system that is used in US naval vessels, and turns it into a land-based launcher. The launchers are housed inside large containers and towed by a truck. 

Grizzly uses the M299 launcher rail, which is fitted to helicopters like the AH-64 Apache or the MQ-9 Reaper drone. That rail is mounted inside a Tricon container, which is approximately 2.44 m high, 2.44 m wide, and 1.97 m long. Three of these containers fill the same footprint as a standard 20 foot ISO container. 

The M299 enables Grizzly to fire existing missiles like the AGM-114 Hellfire, which it did during the announced tests. Using the Tricon container as a footprint should enable the system to be rapidly shipped and moved around using existing infrastructure. In that way, it would support the US expeditionary warfare in the Indo-Pacific. 

Lockheed states that the launcher is sensor and command software agnostic, which could enable both the US Army and Marine Corps to use it. 

Calibre comment: How the US approach contrasts with Europe’s

The US Army is adding missiles and loitering munitions to as many echelons as possible. These efforts will extend the effective range of infantry sections out to tens of kilometres, ensuring that an adversary would face mass precision strike from the word go. In most cases, the missiles it is procuring are designed to be expeditionary. However, some of the larger systems like Typhon have proven more difficult to move around than was hoped. You can read about some of these programmes in the links below, but it is in vehicle-mounted kit that the differences between Europe and the US are most stark.

• Typhon missile launcher conducts first overseas live-fire exercise
• US Army pushes M-LRPSM through with new Lockheed contract – Calibre Defence 

If the Grizzly missile launcher enters service, it will be container-based and vehicle agnostic. This will presumably reduce costs – both in development and platform integration. At the same time, it should provide a reasonably effective capability for massed missile strikes against tactical targets. 

In Europe, however, the tendency is to mount large missile capabilities onto exquisite vehicles like Boxer. Several solutions carrying anti-tank guided missiles in Boxer mission modules have been presented over the years. Conceptually, there is a lot of sense in that approach. Europe would start a major war with most of its assets at risk. Protecting them is a sound move, especially as it wouldn’t have to fly or sail them to the frontline. But that same approach raises costs considerably. Boxers are expensive, costing £3-5 million depending on configuration. It is reasonable to assume that if cheaper options for getting missiles to the frontline can be found, there would be some benefit in exploring them. 

The lead image shows the Grizzly missile launcher firing an AGM-114 Hellfire during its live tests. Credit: Lockheed Martin.