U.S. Navy and Marines Move Fast—But F-35 Radar Delays Raise New Questions

On June 26, 2026, the U.S. Navy accepted delivery of two modernized destroyers—USS Chung-Hoon (DDG 93) and USS James E. Williams (DDG 95)—ahead of schedule, citing accelerated acquisition planning and execution milestones led by the service’s new Portfolio Acquisition Executive (PAE) Maritime office. The delivery underscores a push to compress timelines for surface combat capability, with Northrop Grumman identified as a key industrial partner. In the same news cycle, The War Zone reported that the U.S. military has confirmed acceptance of at least six F-35 Joint Strike Fighters for the U.S. Marine Corps without radars, tied to development issues around the new AN/APG-85 radar under a major upgrade initiative. The juxtaposition is stark: ships arrive early, while aircraft are being fielded in a radar-deficient configuration pending radar maturation. Strategically, the pattern points to a U.S. effort to maintain forward readiness and presence by prioritizing deliverables that can be accepted sooner, even if some subsystems lag. For the Navy, faster modernization delivery can translate into earlier improvements in combat systems and electronic warfare integration, strengthening deterrence and maritime domain awareness. For the Marine Corps, radar-less F-35 deliveries shift the risk calculus toward interim capability management, training adaptations, and reliance on other sensors and networked targeting until the AN/APG-85 path stabilizes. This creates a power-dynamics tension: adversaries may probe the seams of U.S. sensor coverage, while U.S. planners attempt to offset gaps through doctrine, basing, and joint data fusion. Market and economic implications are most visible in defense procurement and aerospace supply chains. Northrop Grumman’s role in destroyer modernization supports near-term revenue visibility for surface combat modernization and associated combat system work, while Lockheed Martin’s F-35 radar upgrade trajectory becomes a focal point for program risk and potential cost/schedule adjustments. Investors tracking defense primes and electronics suppliers may see differentiated sentiment: “on-time/early delivery” is supportive for ship modernization, but “acceptance without radars” can pressure expectations for near-term upgrade completion and could increase scrutiny of avionics and radar subcontracting. While no commodities or FX moves are explicitly cited in the articles, the defense-equipment channel can still influence defense-sector ETFs and contract-related equities through revised delivery and upgrade timelines. The next watch items are concrete program milestones rather than broad announcements. For the Navy, monitor whether additional PAE Maritime-led deliveries continue to show acceleration without quality or integration regressions, including follow-on sea trials and combat system validation. For the F-35, the key trigger is progress on the AN/APG-85 development and the timing of radar installation retrofits or subsequent deliveries that restore full sensor capability. Executives should also track any official statements on interim operational employment of radar-less aircraft, including changes to mission profiles, training syllabi, and reliance on external cueing. If radar issues persist into later delivery lots, escalation risk shifts from geopolitical confrontation to capability shortfalls that could force costly catch-up procurement or extended retrofit schedules.

Geopolitical Implications

• 01

  Accelerated naval modernization can strengthen U.S. maritime deterrence, but radar gaps in fifth-generation aircraft can create exploitable seams in sensor coverage.

• 02

  Industrial and program-management signals (early ship delivery vs. radar-less aircraft acceptance) may affect how adversaries assess U.S. near-term combat effectiveness.

• 03

  If radar integration delays persist, U.S. may need costly catch-up procurement or extended retrofit timelines, shaping future force posture and readiness planning.

Key Signals

• —Next PAE Maritime-led delivery milestones and whether combat system/electronic warfare integration passes validation on schedule.
• —Official updates on AN/APG-85 development, including test results and retrofit installation timelines for earlier F-35 lots.
• —Changes in Marine Corps F-35 mission profiles or reliance on external cueing while radar-less configurations remain in service.
• —Any contract amendments or schedule rebaselines involving radar/avionics subcontracting.