U.S. President Donald Trump confirmed that Ukraine will receive a license to produce missiles for the Patriot air defense system; however, according to him, this does not refer to the latest version of the interceptor but to a "less advanced" one. In September, journalists asked the White House chief whether Vladimir Zelensky could secure such a right, and Trump answered affirmatively, without specifying which exact model was meant or when a final decision would be made. In early September, he also shared a publication from an American outlet outlining possible options for resolving the issue, indirectly supporting the idea of localizing production of a more affordable version of the interceptor.
What Is PAC-3 ACE
One of the main candidates for the role of the "less advanced" missile that the Washington Post suggested considering for Ukraine is the PAC-3 ACE (Adapted Capability Effector) produced by Lockheed Martin. According to the manufacturer, this interceptor was unveiled at the Farnborough Airshow on July 20, 2026. The missile is built on the basis of the existing PAC-3 fire control system and, per the company's statement, is fully integrated with the Patriot system and the IBCS (Integrated Battle Command System) battle management system. ACE is designed to intercept aircraft, cruise missiles, and short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.
Price as the Main Stated Advantage
The key argument Lockheed Martin makes in favor of ACE is cost: the company states that the missile will cost less than half the price of the PAC-3 MSE — the current main production modification. The manufacturer does not disclose the exact figure, however, but industry publications, citing Pentagon budget documents, estimate the cost of the PAC-3 MSE at roughly $4–5 million per unit. Hence, the approximate price of ACE could come in below $2.5 million. At the same time, the company does not publish separate detailed technical specifications for ACE — range, speed, and warhead type have not been made public, and open information is limited to the missile's concept, its compatibility with existing Patriot infrastructure, and price benchmarks.
Production and Partners
Lockheed Martin emphasizes that ACE uses the existing PAC-3 production and technological base, which, according to the company, allows it to accelerate the missile's development, testing, and deployment. The manufacturer plans to involve American and European partners and suppliers in production. This step fits into a broader context of ramping up production: according to industry publications, Lockheed Martin intends to significantly increase output of PAC-3 missiles for Patriot systems, and the supply of components for Patriot systems by industrial partners (including General Motors) is already underway at an accelerated pace. As an alternative, older option for Ukraine, the Washington Post named the PAC-2 GEM-T missile produced by Raytheon, whose production for Kyiv has already been agreed upon at a plant in Germany.
Contradictory Data
There are several inconsistencies here that are important to point out openly. First, Trump speaks of a "less advanced" version of the interceptor, whereas PAC-3 ACE is formally a new product, presented only in July 2026 — meaning the link between the president's wording and the specific ACE model is not unambiguous. Second, Lockheed Martin itself has not publicly confirmed that it is precisely PAC-3 ACE that is intended for Kyiv. As Aviation Week reported, in July at the Farnborough Airshow, Tim Kehill, head of the company's Missiles and Fire Control division, declined to speculate whether ACE would be tied specifically to a license for Ukraine. Thus, the version about ACE for Ukraine remains an assumption voiced in a Washington Post publication, not an agreed-upon decision by the parties. Finally, the final model and the timing of the decision on the license, as already noted, were not specified by the U.S. president.
Why the License Question Has Been Dragging On for Months
Discussions over transferring to Ukraine the right to produce missiles for the Patriot system have been ongoing between Kyiv and Washington for several months. In mid-August, former U.S. presidential special envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg explained why Washington was holding back on this decision: in his words, the defense companies themselves, in particular Lockheed Martin, are opposed, fearing they would lose control over their own technologies. It was precisely in early September that Trump indirectly supported the idea of localizing production of a less advanced version of the interceptor by sharing a publication with suitable options. Against this backdrop, the confirmation of a license for a "less advanced" model looks like a compromise between Kyiv's interests and the manufacturers' concerns about protecting their technologies.
