It’s a downsized Navy that, save for pirate sniping, is having a hard time grabbing the limelight in a ground-intensive war (sorry, contingency operation) against Islamic extremists.
So, you’ve just got to be ready for the knife when the bean counters try to find money for jeeps and cannons and wonder why you’re spending $2 billion on subs, right?
Well, when the budget finally shook out for 2010, the Navy didn’t stand in terrible shape. A few airplanes cut here, a ship or two there, but in the end, the sea service’s top line increased by about $10 billion over 2009 to more than $156 billion, with another kicker of $15.3 billion for “overseas contingency operations” as the new GWOT is called (and most of that money is for Marine Corps vehicles, ammo and personnel).
Navy procurement jumped $5.7 billion to $44.8 billion, while research and development funding slumped $400 after the VH-71 presidential helo was axed.
Winners: DDG-51 with a one ship build in 2010 that restarts the line; one SSN-774 and some advanced money kicked in to build 12 Virginia class subs; two TAKE transport ships and another Joint High Speed Vessel; two more STOVL JSFs for a total of 16 funded in ’10; one more C-40A (the admirals will love that); and six P-8A multi-mission aircraft beginning the Lot 1 LRIP buy and 325 new Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System missles designed to compliment the Hellfire rotor wing missiles.
Losers: DDG1000 one ship killed; LPD-17 no ships in 2010; one Maritime Prepositioning Force (Aviation) ship cancelled for a zero buy in 2010; and one MPF Mobile Landing Platform ship deep sixed for a zero buy; cut in half the number of Super Hornets from 18 to nine purchased in 2010, three MH-60Rs cut to 24, one E-2D cut for two; two KC-130Js cut for a zero buy and four T-6A trainers cut for a 38 aircraft buy and one MQ-8B drone cut for a five Fire Scout buy to match LCS needs.
The Navy is devoting $495 million to a ballistic missile sub replacement program for the 2030 timeframe — the money will be used for propulsion and missile compartment research, LCS gets $361 million, $572 million for the CH-53K and $1.7 billion in R&D funds for the JSF program.
The Corps is finally going to get more of its Growler Internally Transportable Vehicles with 48 purchased in 2010 and 52 new Humvees. The Corps gets the lion’s share of OCO funding, buying 18 LW155s, 933 Humvees and — drumroll please — ZERO MRAPs.
Navy officials said a lot of this will of course be dependent on Congresses concerns and also the mulling over the next Quadrennial Defense Review.
We’ll have a lot more detail in the coming days as we analyze deep into the numbers, but that’s a quick wrap up of what’s going to the Blue-Green team.
– Christian
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
This is the defensetech blog Valc, not the politicalecon blog…
So only 2 Zumwalts Even though congress approved 3…
They failed to mention all of the personnel cuts, aka “military layoffs” while they are still actively recruiting.
Any word on how the cuts will affect the MRAP-lite or the JLTV programs?
Thank god they funded the Growler. Now we will definitely do well in Afghanistan…..
Thank god they funded the Growler. Now we will definitely do well in Afghanistan…..
That’s the million dollar jeep and mortar tube, right?
Good Morning Folks,
Another improvement in the Defense budget. What is missing of course is the LCS or as Sec. Gates suggested the NSCS (Near Coast Combat Ship). The Navy says it has to defend Blue Water, Green Water and brown Water. Blue and Brown Water is well known but when asked what is green Water, and who are the threats the Navy was stymied.
Of course the LCS for the current threat (Pyrates) is to big at 3K tons, to long at about 180 ft., way to expensive at $400+ million a copy and to slow at 35 knots and to lightly armed for this threat. The light fast patrol boats that Sec. Gates asked for in a speech at The Naval War College in Newport RI. on Friday April 17th, is as he said we need, we need them now and we need a lot of them.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
The Growler with the mortar and the ammo is supposed to be about a million. The Growler itself is ‘only’ 200,000 or so. Say, what do you think the Corps would give me for my CJ-7?
Bryon,
While I agree with most of what you wrote on the LCS, how exactly can a ship with a 57mm automatic cannon, .50 calibur MG’s and whatever missiles they want to stick in the mission modules be ‘too lightly armed’ to fight a bunch of pirates in fishing boats and captured freighters?
I thought the U.S.S. Freedom would do 45 knots… That’s what she is spec’d for. The 57mm gun can reach WAY out there for it’s size and put a lot of rounds on target in a short span of time, plus one of the mods is an 30mm Bushmaster in addition to the 57. What more do you need against trawlers & speed boats armed with RPG’s and AK’s?
Back a few years when ADM Verne Clark was CNO, I heard him give a talk at the Naval War College about the LCS. At the start he said the LCS could do well over 50 knots, which is truly amazing for such a powerful platform. But he went on. That was with an essentially empty hull and no sea state. With a full-up mission module and stores, the speed he cited was over 40 knots. With much wind and waves thrown in, he said something about 33 knots. Which BTW is the speed of an Arleigh Burke. It was later at the same conference that I first heard some active duty Navy people make side comments re the “Little Crappy Ships.” In a private discussion elsewhere, it was suggested by a retired flag officer that the LCS had been pitched to Congress on the basis of cost figures that didn’t include any mission modules. Surprised the program is stalling now?
Good Morning Joe,
I have heard the same comments about the “LCS’s” that you talked about. In a way they are not unlike the Cyclone Class of PC’s in the 1980′s. The difference now of course is that the United States is at War and their is strong indication that Islamic terrorists are looking had at the worlds oceans as a theatre of operations that exploited. I would suspect that other traditional areas of pyracy will soon get hot.
If you let the pyrates get on the water the advantage is all there’s. With only a 107 armed combat ships and most of them costing over a $billion the U.S.N. is ill equipped to deal with this low tech threat to the world economy and if the terrorists get involved the environment.
What is needed are cheap, very fast, light costal patrol boats, not unlike the PT boats of WWII but more capable. It should be about a third to half the tonnage of the Cyclone, since because of it’s size it would be and unstable weapons platform so precision fire power is not a requirement (the GAU-12U 25mm, the Bushmaster II 50mm and TOW-W along with pedestals to mount machine guns) if engaging a target out of LOS is required the mission should be turned over to another platform. The Stinger would be all the AA that would be needed. ASW would be for the SSN down stairs.
The Navy crew size in the 20-25 range including two officers and a chief engineer. The boarding party, using a Zodiac, would be a Marine Spec. Ops., there would be to many of these units required for SEALS, “platoon” of an officer, boat driver (Navy Small boats unit?) and a six man team of borders. These boats would have to have a kick arse speed of a min. of 55 Knots, faster if possible, to chase down and catch the speed boats that are carrying the pyrate boarding parties.
To quote Sec. Gates we will need lots of them and we will need them fast. This is not a decades long LCS project, it’s down and dirty Naval fighting, 19th. Century style, and when the fighting is done the boats will either be given to the natives for their embryo navies, or sent to the deep, no names, just numbers, these are not keepers.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
DC2,
Get your facts straigh. Defense spening is DOWN. It is only including war spening (which in previous years has been in supplemental appropriations) as part of the base defense budget does it APPEAR to have gone up.
And actually the DOD got rid of the MOST useful/vital systems…
Good Morning Folks,
Interesting comment by pfcfm. “Defense spending is DOWN,… it’s only including war spending that brings it up.”
If the cost of fighting war(s) is not a legitimate cost to defense then way does the DoD exist in the first place?
What is the purpose of all these uber expensive toys the Admirals, Generals and the Defense Contractors want if not to defend the Country and win Wars?
In his reckless use of the language pfcfm may have stubbled onto an unwelcomed truth. That is, the purpose of all the trillions of dollars in post WWI spending on defense systems has nothing to do with fighting and winning wars.
The only conclusion that this line of thinking can come to is that the arms merchants and Generals and Admirals KNOW that this stuff will never face the crucible of war and thus it’s only a game who’s purposes are to create more flag ranks to administer more weapon systems, during development, fielding and operations during war games that the out come is know before they start. The concept that a given system will effect the outcome of a war or for that matter even work is of little or no consideration when developing and buying these hundreds of billions $ of what is useless junque.
The end game for the Generals and Admirals is lucrative post service careers with economic wind falls in the “defense industry”,in the Elite Media as hockers of these systems, and cloning future generation of themselves. Not even Lewis Carroll could have come up with this fiendish scheme.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Byron Skinner,
The only thing “interesting” about the FACT that defense spending is DOWN,…it’s only including war spending that brings it up is how far to many people are fooled by it. It is a double-wammy. First it fools those who don’t know better into thinking that defense isn’t being cut & 2nd instead of making war spending more transparent it ACTUALLY hides it in base budget where as before most of the additional cost of the war was easily separatable from the base budget BECAUSE the additional war costs were funded through separate supplimental appropriations.
Who ever said the cost of fighting war(s) is not a legitimate cost to defense?
You are absolutely wrong about “all the trillions of dollars in post WWI spending on defense systems has nothing to do with fighting and winning wars”. Just look at all the wars we HAVE fought post WWI.
About the closest you have come to the truth is that once (many/most) Generals & Admirals spend too much time working in/at the Pentagon they tend to loose sight of everything exept for life in/at the Pentagon & basically become politicians where THE only/most important thing on their mind is furthering their own careers at the expense of everything else.