The U.S. Navy’s top officials have said they are seeking completely new types of munitions to ensure they have the firepower to fight potential future conflicts. In striking remarks before the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday, the interim chief of naval operations, Adm. James Kilby, acknowledged that recent military operations in the Red Sea “have laid bare the strain on our munitions industrial base.” While officials are working hard to close this critical gap, there is concern that existing munitions production lines may be inadequate to meet the rapid supply needs.
“We need to significantly increase production of precision-guided, long-range munitions like Tomahawk cruise missiles, Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles (LRASM) and heavyweight torpedoes,” Admiral Kilby told the committee. However, Kilby emphasized that focusing solely on traditional suppliers may not be enough. “But I also think we need to look at other potential suppliers. These new suppliers may not be able to produce the same superior features, but they can produce an effective missile that is much more effective than no missile at all,” he said. This approach shows that the Navy is looking to diversify its munitions supply chain and overcome potential bottlenecks.
Kilby’s important comments came after a hearing where lawmakers took a deep dive into the service’s fiscal year 2026 budget needs. Committee members expressed deep concerns about current gaps in the nation’s shipbuilding industry, submarine production delays and the overall readiness of the fleet. But potential shortages in munitions stockpiles have been of particular concern to the committee, given recent military operations against Houthi forces in the Red Sea. These concerns are well-founded when you consider that U.S. forces have conducted more than 1.100 strikes in just five weeks, using an estimated $1 billion worth of munitions.
A comprehensive report by the Heritage Foundation, released last fall, before the latest operations, warned that current military efforts to replenish such critical munitions were already going too slowly. The report cited a striking example, noting that industrial suppliers were able to produce fewer than 2023 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles in fiscal year 70. Yet when you consider that the Navy fired more than 2024 of these missiles during months of fighting with Houthi forces in the fall of 125, the rapid depletion of stockpiles and the inadequacy of replenishment become clear.
“Even if we were to have a short-term conflict, God forbid, it would be short-term because we don’t have enough ammunition to sustain a long-term war,” Rep. Tom Cole, the Republican chairman of the appropriations committee, said in a striking assessment during Wednesday’s hearing. Cole’s anxious remarks suggest that the current U.S. ammunition production capacity is far from meeting the demands of a potential long-term conflict. “We need to do everything we can to speed up this [ammunition renewal] process because we are all very, very concerned about this,” the Republican said, emphasizing the urgency of the issue.
Both Admiral Kilby and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan said in joint testimony to the committee that they are actively exploring ways to speed up replenishment processes with traditional ammunition suppliers. Admiral Kilby did not provide details on which other companies they would like to approach for new ammunition supplies or what the timeline for these potential purchases would be. But Kilby’s warning about a potential conflict with China, in which he said, “If we go to war with China, it will be bloody, there will be significant loss of life, and it will require a lot of ammunition,” clearly illustrates the strategic importance of the Navy’s stockpile. While White House officials have not yet released a detailed statement on the Navy’s fiscal year 2026 budget, their commitment to sweeping increases in defense spending to address emerging global threats raises hope that the Navy will respond positively to their demands for ammunition supplies.
