What's new

Carter Unveils Budget Details; Pentagon Requests $582.7 Billion

F-22Raptor

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
16,980
Reaction score
3
Country
United States
Location
United States
WASHINGTON — President Obama’s fiscal year 2017 budget will request $582.7 billion in funding for the Pentagon, including $71.4 billion for research and development, $7.5 billion to fight the Islamic State group, $8.1 billion for submarines, and $1.8 billion on munitions, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter announced Tuesday morning.

In a speech previewing next week’s budget release, Carter also highlighted new technologies his department is developing to meet what he called a “major inflection point” that takes “the long view” for the Department.

The budget, Carter explained, was driven by five key factors: the rise of great powers in Russia and China, the threat of North Korea to the US and its Pacific allies, Iran’s “malign influence” against allies in the Gulf, and the ongoing fight against the Islamic State group, commonly known as ISIL or ISIS.

“We don’t have the luxury of just one opponent, or the choice between current fights and future fights – we have to do both,” Carter said. “And that’s what our budget is designed to do.”

In other words, the budget again reflects the dual nature of the threats facing the Pentagon – both from near-peer nations such as Russia and China that require new technologies to counter, and from counterinsurgency operations.

“Key to our approach is being able to deter our most advanced competitors. We must have – and be seen to have – the ability to impose unacceptable costs on an advanced aggressor that will either dissuade them from taking provocative action, or make them deeply regret it if they do,” Carter said, adding that “In this context, Russia and China are our most stressing competitors.”

Among the numbers put out by Carter:

  • The Pentagon is allocating $7.5 billion in 2017, or 50 percent more than 2016, for the fight against ISIL.
  • The Defense Department is also investing $1.8 billion in 2017 to buy more than 45,000 more precision-guided munitions, separate from the anti-ISIL funding. Although Carter did not explicitly say so, that is expected to go under the overseas contingency operations (OCO) account.
  • The retirement of the A-10 has been deferred until 2022, when it will be replaced by squadrons of F-35A joint strike fighters coming online. The fight over the A-10 had raged through the past two budgets, with members of Congress shutting down the Air Force’s attempts at retiring the attack aircraft. By pushing the retirement to 2022 and out of the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), the Obama administration is essentially punting the retirement fight to the next administration.
  • The European Reassurance Imitative (ERI), the umbrella under which funding for European support has been funneled following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014, will be more than quadrupled from 2016, going from $789 million to $3.4 billion for this budget.
  • For submarines, the Pentagon invests $8.1 billion in 2017, and more than $40 billion over the next five years. That buys nine Virginia-class attack submarines over the next five years, while equipping "more" with the Virginia Payload Module.
  • For cyber, the department is planning to invest $7 billion in 2017 and almost $35 billion over the next five years.
  • Although Carter did not offer a figure for spending on space assets, he did say the Pentagon will be spending “even more” than last year, when it offered $5 billion for new space systems.
  • For the second year in a row, the budget grows the research and development accounts for the department, for a total of $71.4 billion in 2017.

The last point is key if the Pentagon is to move forward with the so-called third offset technology development strategy, as acquisitions head Frank Kendall expressed at a December event.

"If you don't do the R&D, you won't have a product at all," Kendall said. "It's a fixed cost. Once you take the R&D out you are denying yourself future products, in any quantity, period."

And the budget does feature the development of new projects, with Carter highlighting the work of the Strategic Capabilities Office, a group he created in 2012 to “re-imagine existing DoD, intelligence community, and commercial systems by giving them new roles and game-changing capabilities to confound potential opponents.”

The first piece Carter highlighted was a navigation program that featured researchers putting “the same kinds of micro-cameras and sensors that are littered throughout our smartphones today, and putting them on our Small Diameter Bombs to augment their targeting capabilities.” The goal, he said, is to create a modular kit that will work with many other payloads.

The second is focused on swarming, autonomous vehicles.

“For the air, they’ve developed micro-drones that are really fast, and really resilient – they can fly through heavy winds and be kicked out the back of a fighter jet moving at Mach 0.9, like they did during an operational exercise in Alaska last year, or they can be thrown into the air by a soldier in the middle of the Iraqi desert,” Carter said. “And for the water, they’ve developed self-driving boats, which can network together to do all sorts of missions, from fleet defense to close-in surveillance – including around an island, real or artificial, without putting our sailors at risk.”

Another program involves taking the projectile developed for the electromagnetic railgun and installing it on existing weapons – “including the five-inch guns at the front of every Navy destroyer, and also the hundreds of Army Paladin self-propelled howitzers” – to turn them into missile defense systems. Carter noted that this system was successfullytested on a Paladin a month ago.

Finally, Carter offered the vision of an “arsenal plane,” which takes an unnamed, older Air Force platform turns it into “a flying launch pad for all sorts of different conventional payloads. In practice, the arsenal plane will function as a very large airborne magazine, networked to 5th-generation aircraft that act as forward sensor and targeting nodes – essentially combining different systems already in our inventory to create wholly new capabilities”

Missing from Carter's speech was a mention of the F-35, which is expected to face cuts as part of the tradeoffs to fund other priorities. He also did not mention the decision to turn the Navy's UCLASS system into a refueling asset known as CBARS, first revealed Monday by Defense News.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/br...ils-pentagon-requests-5827b-funding/79686138/
 
.
Threats From Russia, China Drive 2017 DoD Budget

PENTAGON: After 25 years of war in the Middle East, the Pentagon’s 2017 budget is the first driven by Russia and China.

“The program has been shifted to a more acute focus on the two high-end competitors, Russia and China,” a senior defense official told Sydney in an interview ahead of Secretary Ash Carter’s budget speech this morning.

“The secretary feels strongly that we’re at a strategic inflection point,” the official said. “We’re going to have to start thinking differently for the next 25 years than we have been accustomed to in the last 25, and it’s primarily because of the reemergence of great power competition.” We must jettison assumptions like Russia being “a responsible international partner” and US forces going down to zero in Iraq and just 1,000 in Afghanistan. “None of that has come to pass.”

In his speech before the Economic Club of Washington, Carter put the case for a revamped budget simply. “Two of these challenges reflect a return to great power competition. The first is in Europe, where we’re taking a strong and balanced approach to deter Russian aggression – we haven’t had to worry about this for 25 years, and while I wish it were otherwise, now we do,” he said.

“The second is in the Asia-Pacific, where China is rising, and where we’re continuing our rebalance to maintain the stability in the region that we’ve underwritten for the past 70 years, and that’s allowed so many nations to rise, prosper, and win.”

So “what’s different about this budget…a very tight budget?” the first official said. “What [we] needed to do first was refocus the program on the two high-end competitors that we have, great powers [and] let’s start to shift away…from a real heavy focus on counterinsurgency.”

“We knew we weren’t going to get any [more] money, ” the first official continued: Last fall’s hard-won budget deal allocated $582.7 billion to the Defense Department, $524 billion in the base budget plus $58.8 billion in overseas contingency operations (OCO) funds.

Here’s a summary of the top weapons modernization efforts Carter outlines in his speech.

Cyber will get “nearly $7 billion dollars in 2017 and almost $35 billion dollars over the next five years.”

Undersea capabilities get $8.1 billion dollars in 2017, and more than $40 billion over the next five years for nine Virginia-class attack submarines over the next five years. More of them will get “the Virginia Payload Module, which triples each submarine platform’s strike capacity from 12 Tomahawk missiles to 40.”

Counterterrorism gets $7.5 billion dollars in 2017 – 50 percent more than 2016.

Precision munitions. Carter noted “we’re starting to run low on the ones we use against terrorists the most. So we’re investing $1.8 billion dollars in 2017 to buy over 45,000 more of them.

Research and development spending increases for the second year in a row, up to $71.4 billion dollars. Carter highlighted work of the little-known Strategic Capabilities Office, which he created when he was Deputy Defense Secretary. We’ll have a separate story about this.

“So instead of arguing a lot, trying to get a bigger force,” the senior defense official said, “let’s reshape the force so it can meet these requirements….with a specific emphasis in the program on being able to bolster conventional deterrence against our two high-end adversaries, Russia and China; being able to continue our fight in the Middle East; and making sure that we would be able to respond to Iran and North Korea.”

The four states are certainly not equal. While Iran and North Korea have been consistently hostile for a generation, Russia and China have become much more hostile of late, and they were always far more powerful. Despite all their differences, Russia and China pose some very similar threats. They both posses nuclear weapons, cyber/electronic warfare capabilities, increasingly sophisticated naval and air power, and the complex layering of long-range sensors, communications, and missiles — anti-aircraft, anti-ship, and land attack — known as “anti-access/area denial.”

“When you’re going up against top-end competitors like Russia and China, you will hear a lot about the A2/AD threat,” the official said. “The advanced capabilities that you might buy are very similar and can be used in both potential theaters of operation,” just with a maritime tilt in the Asia-Pacific and a continental emphasis in Europe.

For naval warfare specifically, Carter has ordered the Navy to cut back on the lightweight Littoral Combat Ship to invest more in destroyers, strike aircraft, and missiles.

“In the Pacific, a large surface combatant” — such as a destroyer — “is better than a small surface combatant” — such as a Littoral Combat Ship — “because it can do ballistic missile defense, it can do ASW [anti-submarine warfare], it can do all those things.” US naval forces have focused on attacking land targets, not enemy fleets, ever since the first Tomahawk strikes on Iraq in 1991, but that too is changing.

“There’s going to be a lot of stuff coming off airplanes and off ships that is going to, we believe, reassert surface dominance,” the official said. “We’re very confident in our undersea dominance.”

“We’re probably most stressed right now in the air, against these advanced SAMs (Surface to Air Missiles),” the official went on. “We’re spending a lot of money on the F-35 [Joint Strike Fighter] and the Long-Range [Strike] Bomber, which provide us the stealthy capabilities to go up against these things.

Stealth is key. “Compared to the top end competitors that we have, F-35 is better than A-10, because A-10 wouldn’t survive against a Russia or a China,” the official said. “It’s terrific in the counter-ISIL fight.”

What about ground forces? That’s a work in progress, the official said frankly. “Both the Marine corps and the Army are trying to figure out…this high technology battlefield that they might face against these high end competitors — primarily Russia, because we don’t anticipate a ground fight against China,” he said.

“The Defense Science Board said combined arms maneuver in 21st century will be a combination of fire and maneuver, EW and cyber on the tactical battlefield,” the first official said. “We haven’t got the operational concept yet to really tell us how to do that. Once we get that operational concept, we’ll start to make investments.”

“We have a ground force SPR this year, a ground combat Strategic Portfolio Review, and so in ’18 we’ll be making recommendations” for the Army, he said.

For example, the 2017 budget doesn’t accelerate the Army’s electronic warfare program, which on the current schedule can’t afford a long-range jammer until 2023. That struck me as at odds with both the Russians’ devastating use of EW in Ukraine and the emphasis DoD leaders have put on electronic warfare.

This year, “we really focused on air and sea EW and we focused on cyber because we felt those were the pressing needs,” the official replied. There’s about $7 billion in the budget for cyber in ’17 and $35 billion over five years.

But Deputy Secretary Bob Work’s executive committee on electronic warfare will probably make major recommendations for the 2018 budget and beyond. “The EXCOM is supposed to tell us where is our best bang for the buck,” the official said. “We’re going to be taking a look, a hard work, on what more we can do on EW this year.”

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/02/russia-china-drive-2017-budget/
 
. . .
when are we going to go back to the days when the DoD budget was just $300 billion

imagine what we could do with that extra $300 billion for infrastructure,education,space and technology.

how much you think it would cost to build HSR in both on the West and East coast??? I am sure the Chinese,Japanese, and Europeans would die to get that contract.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom