By Jen DiMascio

Appropriators have an agreement to add the purchase of C-17s to a war funding bill that lawmakers will consider next year.

Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, said this week appropriators are looking to increase the size of purchases of several aircraft to bring down the price tag that includes 14 C-17 Globemasters made by Boeing [BA].

“We’re going to buy in the supplemental, enough [C-]130s–we’ll save $12 million per airplane. We’re going to buy more C-17s,” Murtha said. “We’ll save money.”

The defense appropriations act signed into law last month followed similar logic calling for an extension of the multiyear purchase of F-22 fighter jets.

Adding additional funding for the cargo aircraft is not without controversy.

In May, when the House Armed Services Committee included $2.4 billion to add 10 C-17s in a markup of the defense authorization bill, the administration objected in its Statement of Administration Policy.

Unrequested plus-ups, the statement said, “divert funds from higher priority acquisitions,” the president’s statement said.

But portions of the military are calling for additional airlift. Transportation Command Commander Gen. Norton Schwartz recently told Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin he believed the service needs more C-17s (see related story p. 3).

Early last March, Boeing started pressing for the planes by taking the first step to close its production line. The company said it needed orders for at least 15 planes to keep the line open (Defense Daily, March 5).

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) advocates maintaining a warm production line to keep costs down for the future purchase of the planes and, she acknowledged, for her own parochial interests. Boeing maintains a strong presence in St. Louis.

McCaskill championed an amendment that was added to the Senate defense authorization bill to require a study of the nation’s airlift needs.

“My concern was that the basis on which the military was saying they didn’t need more was prior to the requirements of this war. They’ve been flying the wings off those things in Iraq,” McCaskill said.

And in the future, the Air Force will need more C-17s to carry Future Combat System vehicles that will no longer fit on C-130 aircraft.

McCaskill said she supports adding funding for additional C-17s but also said foreign sales of C-17s can keep the line alive and the cost of the plane down.

The Air Force last month was promoting the C-17 and other airlifters at the Dubai Air Show in the hopes of building Middle East partnerships to boost sales (Defense Daily, Nov. 14).

Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.) said at least 10 C-17s have been authorized, and if appropriators reach for 14, that will be the number, he said. He added that the number is clearly needed and disputed the notion that more study is required.

“We don’t need more reports to know that intratheater use has exceeded projections,” Marshall said.