How GM Is Helping Expand U.S. Defense Manufacturing Capacity

GM Defense’s rapid delivery of PAC-3 components shows how commercial manufacturers can help expand U.S. missile production—and what it takes to sustain that capacity.

The United States needs more defense manufacturing capacity, and an emerging partnership between General Motors Defense and Lockheed Martin shows how commercial manufacturers can help deliver it.

GM Defense delivered its first PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement housing components to Lockheed Martin just 22 days after the companies signed their manufacturing agreement. Components that traditionally can take months or even years to produce moved from contract signing to delivery in less than one month.

The achievement is about more than a single component or missile program. It offers a practical example of how the United States can use commercial manufacturing expertise to strengthen the defense industrial base, expand missile production, and address critical supply chain constraints.

America does not lack industrial capability. However, it often lacks an efficient system for connecting that capability to urgent defense demand. The GM Defense and Lockheed Martin partnership shows what can happen when requirements are clear, demand is credible, and manufacturers are empowered to move quickly.

Why the Defense Industrial Base Needs More Manufacturing Capacity

The PAC-3 MSE is one of the world’s most sought-after air and missile defense interceptors. Demand from the United States and its allies has increased as conflicts in Europe and the Middle East have placed pressure on weapons inventories and exposed the limits of the existing defense manufacturing base.

Lockheed Martin is investing between $8 billion and $9 billion to expand production of the PAC-3 MSE, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, Precision Strike Missile, and other priority weapons across more than 20 U.S. facilities. The company is also adding suppliers and developing new sources for constrained components.

Those investments are necessary, but prime contractors cannot solve the defense industrial base capacity problem alone. Missile production depends on a network of manufacturers supplying castings, forgings, electronics, energetic materials, machined components, tooling, and specialized industrial processes. Many of these defense suppliers face long lead times, aging equipment, workforce shortages, and limited access to capital. Some critical production systems still depend on a single qualified source.

Placing larger defense orders into the same constrained supply chain will not automatically produce more weapons. The United States must add equipment, facilities, skilled workers, and qualified suppliers throughout the value chain. Commercial manufacturers such as GM can help provide that additional capacity.

How Commercial Manufacturing Can Strengthen Defense Production

The automotive industry operates some of the largest and most complex manufacturing systems in the world. Automakers and their suppliers understand high-rate production, automation, quality control, supplier management, tooling, and the coordination of thousands of components across extensive supply chains.

Those capabilities can help defense companies increase manufacturing capacity and improve production performance. A commercial manufacturer may already possess much of the equipment, engineering talent, supplier network, and operational experience required to produce certain defense components. Using an established industrial foundation can be faster and more cost-effective than constructing a new facility or waiting for a traditional defense supplier to complete a major expansion.

The GM Defense and Lockheed Martin partnership demonstrates that potential. According to Lockheed Martin, the companies signed their agreement on August 6, and GM Defense delivered the first PAC-3 MSE housing components on August 28. The 22-day transition shows how quickly commercial manufacturing capacity can support defense production when the component, process, specifications, and qualification requirements are clearly defined.

This type of partnership can also strengthen defense supply chain resilience. Adding qualified manufacturers reduces dependence on individual facilities and gives prime contractors more options when demand rises or an existing supplier experiences a disruption.

However, commercial manufacturing and defense manufacturing are not interchangeable.

Defense suppliers must meet demanding requirements for material traceability, configuration control, cybersecurity, documentation, testing, and quality assurance.

Production volumes may be lower, designs may change over the life of a program, and components must perform reliably under extreme conditions. An automotive company with excellent production capabilities still needs the correct certifications, processes, workforce, and customer support to succeed in defense manufacturing.

The objective should be selective integration. The Department of Defense and prime contractors should identify components and manufacturing processes where commercial companies can increase capacity without compromising performance, quality, or national security.

Expanding Missile Production Requires More Than Speed

Delivering the first batch of Patriot missile components in 22 days is an important milestone. Sustaining production at the required rate will be the more difficult test.

A successful defense production ramp depends on more than the cycle time of one component. Manufacturers need reliable sources of raw materials, available tooling, trained operators, stable engineering requirements, preventive maintenance, adequate inspection capacity, and predictable production schedules. A disruption in any one of these areas can slow or stop the entire manufacturing flow.

Quality must also remain consistent as missile production increases. Early production often receives significant attention from engineers, executives, and customers. The true measure of the GM Defense and Lockheed Martin partnership will be whether the process continues meeting cost, quality, and delivery requirements after it transitions into routine production.

That will require disciplined capacity and capital planning. Lockheed Martin and GM Defense must understand future production rates, identify potential manufacturing bottlenecks, qualify backup sources where appropriate, and align investments with long-term demand. Lower-tier suppliers need the same visibility. A prime contractor or major manufacturer cannot sustain a production increase if its suppliers lack equipment, workers, materials, or working capital.

Government Demand Signals Are Essential for Defense Manufacturing Investment

The federal government also has an important role in expanding defense manufacturing capacity. Companies will not make significant investments in factories, machinery, and workforce development based on uncertain or short-term demand.

Multi-year procurement agreements, clearer production forecasts, faster contracting, and targeted capital support can give manufacturers the confidence to expand. Stronger demand signals must also reach small and medium-sized defense suppliers, not remain concentrated at the prime-contractor level.

The government should also streamline the process for qualifying commercial manufacturers. Defense requirements cannot be weakened, but companies need a clear path through certification, cybersecurity, testing, and production approval. A confusing or unnecessarily slow qualification system can prevent capable manufacturers from entering the defense market.

The goal should be a repeatable process that identifies available commercial manufacturing capacity, evaluates it against defense requirements, and connects qualified companies with programs facing urgent constraints.

A Repeatable Model for Strengthening the Defense Industrial Base

The GM Defense and Lockheed Martin collaboration should be treated as a model to study, refine, and repeat. The Department of Defense should identify other commercial manufacturers with relevant capabilities and connect them with weapons programs facing production shortages. Prime contractors should review their bills of material to determine which components could be manufactured by qualified companies outside the traditional defense supplier network.

This approach should not be limited to the automotive industry. Manufacturers serving commercial aerospace, energy, heavy equipment, electronics, and other advanced industries may possess equipment and technical expertise that can support defense production. Small and medium-sized manufacturers should also be included, particularly those with specialized processes or underused capacity.

GM’s rapid delivery shows what is possible when American industry moves with urgency. The next step is to build a repeatable system that can identify commercial manufacturing capabilities, qualify suppliers efficiently, and sustain increased production over time.

If the United States can apply this model to missiles, aircraft, ships, vehicles, and other critical defense systems, it can expand the defense industrial base without waiting years for entirely new production networks to emerge.

America needs more than individual manufacturing successes. It needs a long-term industrial strategy that turns commercial manufacturing speed into sustainable defense manufacturing capacity.