Thank you for your interest in this special report from the Virtual Analyst. If you are interested in learning more about the Virtual Analyst, sign up for a free demo online now.
With the budget finally released, it’s mark-up season on the Hill. Battles between the Pentagon and Congress are an annual reality, but with dollars scarce, expect the conflicts over certain programs to be that much more intense. Here are some of the top programs to keep an eye on over the next few months:
LCS — A Muddied Future for the Green-Water Navy
— The Navy’s decision to end the Littoral Combat Ship at 32 hulls recently did not sit well with lawmakers in Wisconsin and Alabama, where the two classes are built. As a result, you can expect a concerted lobbying effort by those representatives, but a major question is whether we will see any push for changes in this budget cycle. After all, the move to building three ships per year through fiscal 2018 actually results in a net increase of two ships over the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) even if it is a decrease of one ship this year. That gives those lawmakers more time to lobby the Pentagon and congessional allies to reconsider closing down the line. Still, if the budget situation doesn’t improve over that time period, it will be difficult for Wisconsin and Alabama to find something other lawmakers will consider more worthy of the axe.
F/A-18 / F-35 — Battle Royale for the Navy Skies — Perhaps the most intriguing question of this budget cycle is the Navy’s strike fighter shortfall, and what that means for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. This particular situation has a number of key actors: the Pentagon, which has moved all-in on the F-35 program and defends it fiercely from attempts to slow it down; the Navy, which officially takes the same stance but in reality seems less enthused about the F-35C carrier variant, even going so far as to add EA-18G Growlers to its unfunded priority list; and Congress, which doesn’t buy the Pentagon’s word on F-35 and has consistently urged the Defense Department to fill the gap with Super Hornets. When Congress added Super Hornets in the fiscal 2013 budget, the Pentagon responded by submitting a budget that cut all procurement of Super Hornets in fiscal 2014, thus ending production, which in turn prompted Congress to add $75 million in advance procurement for 22 Super Hornets in fiscal 2015. The question is, will Congress follow through? The intent is there, but some analysts — such as Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group — believe that the Navy is too strapped for cash to afford more Super Hornets. That hasn’t stopped Congress from adding funding for aircraft in the past, but each new budget cycle brings its own challenge. For certain, many will be watching to see if fiscal 2015 is any different, or if the Super Hornet will be back on the menu.
C-130 — Pentagon Wants to End AMP, Again — Last year, the Pentagon tried to kill the C-130H Avionics Modernization Program (AMP), and authorizers — with backing from appropriators — added $47.3 million in research and development to continue the program, banning the Air Force from cancelling or modifying the program. This bill once again attempts to end the C-130 AMP program, which has already drawn the ire of at least one congressman: Rep. Tim Griffin (R-Ark.), according to the Arkansas News. The program appears to enjoy bipartisan support in Congress, which appears to feel that the C-130 fleet needs recapitalization and the Pentagon hasn’t come up with a better idea than the AMP program, so look for lawmakers to push for similar language to what was in the fiscal 2014 bill to be included in the upcoming mark-ups — as well as a scolding for the Obama Administration.
AH-64 / UH-60 — An Unhappy National Guard — Of all the battles going on in Army acquisition, probably none are as significant as the service’s active duty component butting heads with the National Guard. The active component wants to take the Guard’s AH-64 attack helicopters and give them UH-60 utility variants, which the Guard feels takes away their offensive teeth. The budget request represents this reshuffle, with an increase in AH-64 remanufactures through the FYDP, and an even bigger increase in UH-60 procurement. The question is whether Congress will weigh in on the debate as it marks up the bill this year, or whether lawmakers will simply be happy to see the Army increase its procurement of helicopters — especially since the Army reversed its stance on ending the UH-72 line as well.
M1 Abrams — Tank Upgrades Once Again an Issue — Year in and year out, the M1 Abrams tank has been a conflict point between Congress and the Pentagon. The latter wants to shut down Abrams upgrades for a little while, arguing that international orders is enough to keep the line running in the interim, and the former disagrees strongly. Congress last year added $90 million for upgrades, and the lobbying muscle out of Ohio has managed to consistently strong-arm the Defense Department on the issue. But again, with a constantly changing budget environment, priorities can shift on a dime.
MQ-9 — Reaper Cuts Deeper This Time — Appropriators did not mince words when the Air Force decided to slash MQ-9 aircraft in the fiscal 2014 budget after Congress added them a year before: “This decision represents complete and brazen contradiction of congressional intent.” This time around, instead of cutting just 12 aircraft in one year, the Pentagon wants to slash 29 through fiscal 2018. Expect Congress to weigh in on the issue, as appropriators last year wrote in their bill that the Air Force should be buying a consistent quantity of 24 aircraft each year moving forward.
JLTV — Pentagon Pushes for Big JLTV Ramp — To say that the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle has had a rocky history would be an understatement, but despite often being near the chopping block, the Pentagon finally plans to start producing the JLTV with this year’s budget submission. The bill calls for 176 vehicles for the Army and seven for the Marine Corps, quickly ramping up to more than 3,000 vehicles between the services by the end of the FYDP. Congress has often criticized the Pentagon in the past for ramping up programs too quickly, and it remains to be seen whether lawmakers will want to slow the ramp for this program somewhat — especially for a program that has struggled as much as the JLTV.