LRS-B, Next Boomer May Force Weapons Cuts

[unhappycamper]

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/09/lrs-b-next-boomer-may-force-weapons-cuts/



LRS-B, Next Boomer May Force Weapons Cuts
By Colin Clark on September 04, 2014 at 10:00 AM

WASHINGTON: It won’t happen tomorrow, but the Pentagon may have to start eating its young to pay for two of the most expensive weapons in US history: the Air Force’s Long Range Strike bomber and the Navy’s replacement for the Ohio class nuclear missile submarine.

~snip~

Why? While the budget picture appears sustainable for the next few years, LRS-B and Ohio Replacement will begin to cost so much as the programs ramp up — along with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — that Harrison concludes there just won’t be enough money to pay for it all.

“If you look at fiscal 2020 as a snapshot in time (one year after the end of the FYDP [Future Years Defense Plan]), the Air Force will need $7 billion for the F-35A, $3.4 billion for the KC-46A (tanker), $2.9 billion for EELV (rockets), and $2.2 billion for C-130J (cargo planes). I’m projecting they will need about $3.5 billion for LRS-B that year. The question becomes,” Harrison says, “can they do all of those major programs at the same time?”

The same is true for the Navy in 2020. They will need about $3.4 billion for Ford-Class aircraft carriers, $6 billion for Marine F-35Bs and Navy F-35Cs, $1.4 billion for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), Harrison projects, “and an unspecified amount for SSNs (attack submarines) and DDGs (destroyers) (their SAR projections don’t account for procurements beyond the FYDP, even though the shipbuilding plans says they will keep buying something). My estimate shows they will likely need more than $4 billion that year for Ohio Replacement.”



--

The F-35 program is hopelessly late, very, very expensive and problematic for all concerned.

Ford-Class aircraft carriers cost somewhere between $16 to 40 billion dollars sans people, aircraft and support group. I wonder how many of these will get floated.

We are currently building two types of destroyers:

* The $1.8 billion dollar Arliegh-Buke-class destroyers and
* the $5.6 billion dollar Zumwalt-class destroyers.

Submarines are also expensive - Virginia-class subs cost somewhere between $7~$9 billion a pop. From wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio-class

~snip~

The U.S. Department of Defense anticipates a continued need for a sea-based strategic nuclear force.[12] The first of the current Ohio SSBNs are expected to be retired by 2029,[12] meaning that a platform must already be seaworthy by that time. A replacement may cost over $4 billion per unit compared to the USS Ohio's $2 billion.[3] The U.S. Navy is exploring two options. The first is a variant of the Virginia-class nuclear attack submarines. The second is a dedicated SSBN, either with a new hull or based on an overhaul of the current Ohio.[citation needed]

With the cooperation of both Electric Boat and Newport News Shipbuilding, in 2007, the U.S. Navy began a cost control study.[12] Then in December 2008 the U.S. Navy awarded Electric Boat a contract for the missile compartment design of the Ohio-class replacement, worth up to $592 million. Newport News is expected to receive close to 4% of that project. The U.S. Navy has yet to confirm an Ohio-class replacement program. However, in April 2009, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates confirmed that the U.S. Navy should begin such a program in 2010.[3][dated info] The new vessel is scheduled to enter the design phase by 2014. It is anticipated that, if a new hull design is used, the program must be initiated by 2016 in order to meet the 2029 deadline.[12]
That's an interesting dilemma we are in.

Are these new toys in the Virginia-class ballpark? It kinds looking that way.