Home » News » Acquisition Reform » Hot Docs: DoD’s 2013 Budget Briefing Documents

Hot Docs: DoD’s 2013 Budget Briefing Documents

by John Reed on January 26, 2012

Here’s where you’ll see the weapons programs are going to thrive going forward and the types that won’t (barring Capitol Hill getting involved, which you’ve always got to factor in). Below you’ll the Pentagon’s basic budget documents that the DoD has released to coincide with the budget rollout that we’ve been live Tweeting. The first is a basic fact sheet highlighting the DoD’s 2013 budget numbers. Next you’ll see a Pentagon document laying out DoD’s top spending priorities for the 2013 budget request — it shows some of the weapons programs that are funded and some of the ones that are cut. As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey just said, this budget saves more than $250 billion over the next five years while spending more than $600 billion for this year.

Dempsey just called this budget a “down payment” on an effective future military

Click through the jump to read the documents:

Fact Sheet Budget

Defense Budget Priorities

Share |

{ 33 comments… read them below or add one }

STemplar January 26, 2012 at 2:58 pm

Good to hear they are pursuing the modified VA class boats. We can definitely expect to see a new bomber. Also glad to hear they are going to slow procurement of the F35 until the damn thing proves it works.

Reply

Shail January 26, 2012 at 3:13 pm

Bet all those allies who bought into the F-35 are loving this..
Wonder if it means who might buy more Super Hornets (Australia, poss UK for QE, poss Canada),
more F-15 variants (Israel, Japan?), or force any of the Euro partners finally into the Typhoon/Rafale/Gripen ballpark.

Granted, there isn't a nation out there not facing economic issues,
it's just that some partner nations will be interesting to watch and see how they tolerate our defense decisions…

Reply

blight January 26, 2012 at 10:15 pm

Perhaps we should release the early builds in limited quantities to our foreign customers. Bring them in early for testing.

Reply

Lance January 26, 2012 at 3:03 pm

GCV delayed but by how long??

Reply

Greg January 26, 2012 at 10:29 pm

It was delayed by Boeing protesting not getting a contract, but the stop work order was lifted in December. Everything's go on GCV now.

Reply

Lance January 27, 2012 at 12:12 am

If they don't cancel it in the real budget coming next month.

Reply

mhmm... January 26, 2012 at 3:05 pm

I’m just curious about the use of the CGI of the air craft carrie

Reply

fromage January 26, 2012 at 3:56 pm

Ford Class, under development. Representative of the subject matter. Doesn't float just yet, so…needs photoshop. No biggie.

Reply

moose January 27, 2012 at 2:19 pm

Under Construction, not just development.

Reply

STemplar January 26, 2012 at 3:15 pm

I would think if they are committed to buying them they'd like them to work properly.

Reply

SJE January 26, 2012 at 4:33 pm

Really? That's a novel idea. Maybe the US should try doing the same thing, instead of throwing money at failures.

Seriously, I do recognize that there are large R&D costs. I just think that the contractors should be eating a lot more of the costs if they underbid.

Reply

blight January 26, 2012 at 11:31 pm

Perhaps we should've kept the F-32 around. Then whoever gets to market first with a variant makes the cash. It's kind of what we're stuck with in the LCS competition, two different types floating around.

Reply

VTGunner January 26, 2012 at 4:17 pm

Kinda curious what those 5 or so Air National Guard squadrons are gonna do since they were forced to dump their fighters in order to fly the C-27J. Sucks to be them now that they have no aircraft since their fighters are long gone.

Reply

Roy Smith January 26, 2012 at 7:50 pm

Truthfully,it doesn't matter who the next president is,or which political party he belongs to,this defense budget cut is carved in stone & will not change. Our ground forces will still shrink by 100,000 men. Forces will still be reduced in Europe,Africa,& the Middle East & shifted to the Pacific begging the question,will we still need a regional medical center in Landstuhl if all the predicted future action is in the Pacific & Tripler Army Medical Center in Hawaii will do just fine? Also,our pulling our forces out of Africa & the Middle East,reducing our forces significantly in Europe along with our European allies significantly reducing their militaries makes Israel more vulnerable to her enemies & seem easier to attack.

Reply

blight January 26, 2012 at 8:29 pm

It's unlikely that any forces in Europe could mobilize in time to save Israel. It took us how long to get into Bosnia because tanks can't be moved by train through the mountains?

Maybe the 173rd out of Italy and some air…but anything meaningful isn't going to make it in time to save Israel from attack. If anything, the ability to dispense stupendous amounts of TLAM from the eastern Med is the deterrent that saves Israel, as is nuclear ambiguity.

We'll probably pull out of Ramstein and Landstuhl and hopefully Bondsteel. Perhaps they'll put a hospital facility on Guam?

Reply

SJE January 26, 2012 at 9:32 pm

I'd agree. Israel has a large nuclear arsenal, a well equipped and trained military, and knows that it is fighting for its survival. Even without the nukes, its neighbors have nothing on it in terms of weapons and training. I think they can take care of themselves.

Reply

blight January 26, 2012 at 10:14 pm

At the moment, the Lebanese military is still divided between Christians and Muslims (the leadership is predominantly Christian, the rank and file are Muslim) The Syrian military is Alawite at the top and Shia at the bottom, and at the moment is dealing with internal strife. Jordan has traditionally had an alright military, though lacking in tenacity and initiative where it was needed. Egypt at the moment is the wild card, where the military is still coherent enough as an organization, though at the moment the Muslim Brotherhood has not come out against them…for the moment.

In all honesty all it takes is another surprise attack to make good inroads against Israel. There appear to be a few highways connecting Jordan and Israel (particularly near Jordan). However, the West Bank is likely well militarized, and should at least be partially defended with police-style troops. However, the security wall gives a measure of delay to an invasion force…not sure if it's enough to mobilize reserve units.

There's one highway through the Sinai and to Israel proper. I imagine the Israelis monitor the Sinai as part of counter-smuggling, and it might be hard to sneak an armored force through without being observed.

A single road though is probably pretty vulnerable to cratering, and once that is gone it depends on combat engineers to prep a new one. And in the meantime, there will be hungry export-grade M1's thirsting for kerosene which Egypt does not locally produce in great quantity.

Alternatively, the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza make great human shields for Israel. The fastest path in the heartland takes them through Gaza.

Reply

Roy Smith January 27, 2012 at 5:27 am

They already have a Naval Hospital in Guam,Okinawa also. Mainland Japan has one Naval Hospital & 2 Air Force ones. The closest medical centers reached by air are in Hawaii(Tripler) & Washington state(Madigan at Ft. Lewis or whatever its new name is). It is just that with the deemphasis on Europe,Africa,& the Middle East & with the war in Afghanistan winding down,Landstuhl is unnecessary as a regional medical center. They are talking about the building being outdated anyway,& I doubt anybody wants to put up the money to build a new hospital to replace it. I can see the U.S. Army & Air Force surrendering it to NATO & maybe turning it into a multi-national medical facility with a European or Canadian military commander & reducing the American footprint there.

Reply

blight January 27, 2012 at 8:17 am

All music to my ears.

Farewell Europe, you have our number: call when The Bear comes a hollerin'.

Reply

asdf January 27, 2012 at 5:50 pm

israel can defend itself, why should we help them?

Reply

Tim UK January 26, 2012 at 10:44 pm

Who cares about Israel ? They don't give a damn about the US or any other Western Country.

Reply

STemplar January 27, 2012 at 1:19 am

Read about the Balfour accords? Treaty of Sevres? White paper of 1939? You realize the UK caving to arab pressure pretty much consigned Jews to death in Europe at Hitler's hands? Pray tell why should the Jews care what someone from the UK thinks about them? You're nation has a well documented history of using the Jews when it suited them and then casting them aside when it didn't. You might want to bone up some history, it isn't terribly flattering to her majesty's government.

Reply

asdf January 27, 2012 at 5:53 pm

who cares?

Reply

Ben January 29, 2012 at 5:45 pm

Only a fool wouldn't care about his canary in the coalmine.

Reply

blight January 27, 2012 at 12:23 am

Deja vu. Didn't Rummy promise us a magic military that would use only airpower and minimal fingerprint? And before that, Shinseki's light force of Strykers, and before that, the High Tech Division?

Reply

eric January 27, 2012 at 7:16 am

In the mean time, on that other military blog there is talk about the UK choosing the Rafale instead of the JSF. Just political pressure or a real possibility? I wouldn't blame them: no UK defense budget, rising JSF costs and a US that is leaving Europe make it plausible.

Reply

ziv January 27, 2012 at 9:02 am

So just how many F35's are we going to get this year, next year and in 2014? And how much of a reduction in production is that? My numbers on predicted deliveries for 2013 onward were reduced from 43 to 42 (LRIP 5) for '13, 82 to 62, 90 to 81, 110 to 108 (LRIP 8) for 2016, with the numbers from 2017 on staying near 130 in both the early budget and the later reduced budget. Did anyone see the actual number of F35's to be produced in the next several years?
And just how many F-35's do we actually have now? I see numbers between 33 and 63, but I think the lower figure is the actual production models while the higher number includes 20 pre-production AC.

Reply

STemplar January 28, 2012 at 7:46 am

I would imagine no Cs until the tail hook works.

Reply

ziv January 28, 2012 at 8:21 am

I wonder what would have happened if they had stretched the C fuselage by a foot or so to give more room to allow the tail hook to operate more effectively, and more importantly, allowed room for more fuel to expand the range of the C to truly 'Pacific' levels. Too late now.
I really am curious about the amount of production AC we were going to see vs. the amount now budgeted for. I hope that the reduction in numbers doesn't keep the cost per AC up so high that partner nations start to pull out or reduce their orders. That could be a vicious circle of reductions and cost increases. And Japan's new order doesn't seem to have overcome the negativity surrounding the ongoing series of development problems.

Reply

STemplar January 28, 2012 at 10:09 am

Depends on whether someone speaks reality. This notion about costs rising on a system if you reduce the #s bought is really just accounting baloney. It means the R&D is spread out over fewer models which in one way means it's more expensive if viewed in that light. In reality a system costs what it costs once its developed, adjusted or inflation annually. If we would get away from that total system cost perspective and separate the two values it would be helpful.

Reply

DJacobsen5116 January 27, 2012 at 10:01 am

"Washington state(Madigan at Ft. Lewis or whatever its new name is"

Joint Base Lewis McChord is the new name, commonly referred to locally as JBLM or just Lewis McChord. I still think of it as Ft. Lewis where I did my Army Basic and AIT, interrupted by several weeks in Madigan, years ago

Reply

Roy Smith January 28, 2012 at 4:04 am

Old Madigan or new Madigan?

Reply

Elijah March 10, 2012 at 12:06 pm

Victory does not always go to the strongest or the smarters but to those who can adapt to change.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: