NG Exec Blasts HAC-D Cuts

NG Exec Blasts HAC-D Cuts

If you wanted any proof that the loss of enormous supplemental spending bills, combined with Defense Secretary Gates’ tight control over the budget, is getting to the defense industry, look no further than an extraordinary event at the AUVSI conference.

We’ll have to rely on the gifts of Steve Trimble, correspondent for Flight Daily News, for a summary since I went to another press event yesterday. Trimble says that “a Northrop Grumman executive yesterday stunned journalists by criticizing by name a staff member for the powerful House Appropriations Committee.”

The criticism was not just that a cut had been made. The company’s Global Hawk business development director, Ed Walby, put it in the starkest terms you can in the military world: “It’s a good cut if you want to save the taxpayers money, but I think soldiers’ lives are more important than $300 million or $400 million,” Trimble quoted Walby.

On top of that, Trimble’s story says that Walby claimed the funding cut would result in the loss of 14,000 jobs. What exactly was cut: $270 million for procurement of three RQ-4B Block 40s, and $50 million more for advance procurement of three more, according to Walby. And they sliced $85 million slated for one BAMS Global Hawk.

Company executives rarely disagree publicly with anything Congress does. They may speak on background or leak a document to make their point. And blaming a specific staff member by name is even rarer. Trimble didn’t identify the staffer.

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Join the Conversation

Soldiers lives aren’t saved by the Global Hawk…they are saved by M4’s and M9s that my soldiers need but can’t get because we waste our money on expensive projects like the global hawk…instead of supplying soldiers with the equipment and weapons they need at the individual soldier level.

Though I would have a hard time tracing a specific cut for a specific program to a specific loss of life…

It is refreshing to hear, once in a while, people name names. The one name that I have been on a campaign against is Murtha! He of the Murtha Airport To Nowhere, he who wraps himself in the mantle of the forgotten Marine so he can direct more pork to his district.

Everyone tiptoes around the Congress but we know that the Senate and House are all looking for short term gain rather than long term national interest. Well, most of the time.

Wow it feels good to vent once in a while, I hope that Colin doesn’t ban me like he banned the other guy! :-0

What a gaffe by this Northrop Grummanite! One would think they would endeavor to cultivate good relations with the Congress and their staff since they still plan on bidding for the tanker contract. Instead they resort to name calling.

Pathetic.

John Smith

The most important weapon in ANY war is intelligence. Not guns or bombs or ships or planes. Information if by far and away the single most vital resource for any soldier.

The Global Hawk, Predator, and other such systems enhance a soldiers ability to do their jobs far more than a simple gun or grenade.

One Global Hawk will save more soldier’s lives that 100,000 M4’s or M9’s.

Perhaps Northrop Grumman should address the flwas in their program instead of criticizing Congressional staffers.

“During her final days in office, former U.S. Air Force acquisition chief Sue Payton fired off a letter to Northrop Grumman saying she was “increasingly concerned” about the company’s management of the Global Hawk high-altitude unmanned aerial system program.

Payton’s April 7 letter to Gary Ervin, president of Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems, outlines a series of problems that had contributed to her concerns, including: “poor design, workmanship and failure to follow production processes, which have contributed to delays in the Global Hawk development program,” according to a copy obtained by Aviation Week.

Payton notes the detachment of the landing gear door on the first Block 20 Global Hawk during its maiden flight, faults with the Integrated Mission Management Computer, problems with ruddervator torque that resulted in fleet grounding. and the “inadequate” quality of the Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite designed for use on the Block 20 and 30 UAVs.“
http://​www​.aviationweek​.com/​a​w​/​g​e​n​e​r​i​c​/​s​t​o​r​y​_​g​e​n​e​r​i​c​.​j​s​p​?​c​h​a​n​n​e​l​=​a​e​r​o​s​p​a​c​e​d​a​i​l​y​&​a​m​p​;​i​d​=​n​e​w​s​/​G​H​A​W​K​0​4​3​0​0​9​.​xml

Mr. Walby claims 14,000 jobs will be lost. Given the numbers provided,that comes to $25, 357 per worker. In the aerospace industry?? Please

I am also quite amazed that 14,000 peoples jobs rely specifically on the production of these “6” aircraft.
Could 14,000 workers be involved in the production of the materials, and assembly of the RQ-4Bs? Sure, I’ll buy that. But, I seriously doubt that a large portion of those 14,000 workers labors involve no other projects.

Well, Northrop Grumman kept revising upwards their estimate of the jobs for Americans if they won the tanker competition with their made-in-toulouse-airbus. Why wouldn’t they try the same fuzzy math here?

Good Morning Folks,

While the Global Hawk is a promising reconnaissance platform and is still a long way from being a matured system it is part of the future. Saving the tax payers money is not a sin, the DoD is not a welfare window for the states although it seems that way at times.

To answer Colin’s question of soldiers lives and $300-$400 in spending is rather a dumb one. First of all the defense budget is not all a zero sum game. What the states are saying is we want our cut of the DoD pork and waving the bloody flag is not beneath them.

For those of you old enough the same rational was used against the Army in the 1960 when the DoD was decided to close down the Continental Air Defense Missile Command, the Nike Batteries outside most major American Cities or anywhere else the DoD wanted to leave some dollars.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

There’s only one name behind all of this destruction — and it’s not some lowly staffer, it’s the corrupt, left-wing weasel Obama. He needs money for his bribes. If you are a left-wing interest group then Obama will give you free money, if you aren’t … then Obama wants you to just shut up and do as your told.

It’s nice to see the government standing up against a corrupted right-wing military machine that is draining the American people with its lies, causing children and old people to die starving in the streets! (see Mark, I can throw nonsense statements too. Everyone else, relax, I’m just pointing out how silly his statement was, I am in no means being serious)

To be serious, it is nice to see that there is an effort to bring procurement back under control. Has there been a military project in the last 30 years that has come in on time and on budget? Part of the problem is the military tendency for scope-creep, but the main problem is that the defense industry low-balls everything to get their foot in the door. The only way to counter this is to start cancelling programs that aren’t delivering on their promises.

NG is upset because they are used to the old system: bid an amount and a time, knowing that you can drag your feet and produce a total crap system and the government will pay you 4 times as much over twice the original time estimate.

Globalhawk is a great idea that I feel is needed for today’s military. But you can just keep giving blank-checks to these corporations. If we started forcing them to deliver on their bids and promises, imagine how strong and tech-heavy our armed forces would be.

Jeff, better get your companies correct NG makes a fair bid. Not like Lockheed and Boeing who will make a bid, win a contract then come back in 6 months and tell the government that they are over budget and behind schedule. Look at Lockheeds Follow-on to the Shuttle and the ACS program. There is also another problem that comes from Congress and the military say ok we want a plane that will do A, B and C. The companies bid to that then later after the contract is awarded the military then says oh we forgot we also needs to do D, E and F. That is why there are cost overrunns. Also the government likes to drag their feet and that ends up costing money. But then Lockheed and Boeing are know for low bidding just to win then going back with price hikes and delays

I think our two aircraft companies (Boeing and Lockheed Grummnan) have had it so good for so long that they simply cannot see the need to cut a defense budget. Also, if soldiers lives are the default position in any budget cut, then why cut anything? I mean the argument that soldiers lives depends on your weaponry belies the facts that soldiers lives depend on all weaponry and everything else you bring to the battle.

Obama is fighting to bring procurement under control and it’s long past due.

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup​.com

Daniel, “Lockheed Grumman” may happen down the road at some point, but we’re not there yet.

There are too many items to list that could help soldiers and sailors and ultimately save many lives…but the cost/profit that is required by most industry has been the reason for many of the financial woes for America for a long time. The use of “saving lives” statements is not basis for excessive profit.

Maybe I am just old fashioned, but it seems to me that a fair bid would end in a product that does not have pieces falling off in flight. When that’s not happening I have to wonder if the taxpayer is getting their money’s worth.

Aurora,

Lockheed Grumman may not have happened yet but the two companies bid projects together all the time. Which means essentially they are not competing with each other the way MIG and Sukhoi do.

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup​.com

I don’t even know where to start. I work in Industry and the only thing better than this was when an Exec from Colt stood up in a briefing where the speaker was addressing the numerous jamming and deficiencies in the guy just lost his damn mind. (It was priceless, I’m still laughing….) He interrupted the speaker and started giving his own speech about how much Soldiers love the M4……it was worth the ridiculous admission price.

For my 2 cents, NO ONE should be claiming that their particular product “saves lives” unless that product is either medical or something like Body Armor; and only then when it actually does. (i.e. a Soldier shot center mass and his SAPI plate catches the round..)

And our national defense continues to be chopped away at by Obama and the libtards. Death by 1000 cuts. No new equipment to replace aging aircraft, vehicles, weapons, no new R&D, and soon enough not enough money to maintain current force levels.

All for the sake of an idiotic health care scheme that pays for people’s abortions and sex changes plus billions for other liberal garbage like ACORN.

We will soon spend at least $1 trillion in worthless stimulis projects and not a dime for defense. Our country needs to get back on track!

$270 million for 3 RQ-4Bs? Is that just a per-unit cost? If so, I’m surprised the price had shot up to $90 million each. A RQ-4A runs ~$35 million each.

Does 1000 lbs of extra payload and the addition of MP-RTIP really add $55 million per unit to the price, or does that $270 million include more that just the units themselves?

The original procurement was for 16 Block 40’s. I’m assuming they are still moving forward with fielding the other 10 from the original order.

This cut also doesn’t seem to include the Block 20’s or Block 30’s

ReconTeam — I hate to spoil a good rant, but WTF are you talking about?? How does $635 BILLION (more than WWII spending levels) = “not a dime for defense”

What does ACORN has to do with Defense procurement? If you can show me I’ll give you a $100 bucks. If you can show me a provision in any of the healthcare bills that deals with paying for sex changes you can have my truck.

If I were you, I’d be glad they’re working to fix healthcare because it sounds like you stopped taking your meds.…

Hey OLD391 never let facts get in the way of a good rant… let’s not even mention…DEEPWATER and the utter disaster that NOC pulled on that. So bad they had to pull the product out of service. Feel sorry for any Coastie who has to serve with that garbage.

As an old Marine, I must say that the old concept of vertical envelopement was the best, and marines in boots with rifles, and supporting weapons. But, we must keep developing weapons and concepts, and not be used as a political wedge, every time a new president comes aboard. But.…..perhaps somebody will see the light.

Recon Team

Hate to tell you but Obama is spending more in his first term on the defense budget than any president in history. Given the size of our military budget, it could be the most anyone has ever spend on the military ever.
BTW, the ad agency I used to work at has the USAF account. They just spent $35 million on an Air Force ad campaign…um…out of the stimulus bill.

Daniel Russ
Ciilianmilitaryintelligencegroup​.com

Daniel Russ,

I don’t know what it is you are smoking &/or drinking but if you look at defense spending in inflation adjusted dollars &/or as a % of GDP (or of the federal budget) Obama is NOT spending more on defense. As a matter of fact, Obama is looking to be giving Clinton a run for the money for the President to spend the LEAST on defense! And at least Clinton can be given a break do to ‘inheriting’ the end of the cold war.

Jeff and Daniel, as a percentage of our economy we spend nowhere near the amount we spent during WWII. Regardless the facts speak for themselves. The USAF is in trouble, we didn’t build enough F-22As to replace our old F-15 fleet, most of the missile defense program has been cut, and the ANG will soon face a pretty major fighter gap. Plus there is still no news on our next bomber program, and the purchase of tankers we need now keeps getting delayed.

When it comes to the Army MGV is dead and now GCV is going nowhere, and we are still haven’t been able to upgrade from our M16s and M4s.

And of course the Navy has it’s problems DDG-1000 is pretty much DOA, and CGN(X)? No way that is going to funded, and just look at LCS. Naval aviation has some gaps in it too. The Navy is left without a fifth generation, twin-engined, “high end” fighter to complement the F-35C, and the Super Hornet is far from perfect. A true long range replacement for the A-6 and possibly S-3 is also wanted by some. And now once again we have people questioning the need of the USMC and suggesting we disband the whole force.

Gates “reforms” have accomplished nothing and now he seems to be demanding MRAPs be integrated into the GCV program which is completely idiotic.

The problem indeed is far being one of just money, but once the budget starts getting sliced for the sake of more Democrat vote-buying, it certainly won’t help matters. Nor does this administration’s effort of including other costs in the DoD budget to make it seem larger than the usable amount really is.

I meant to say the problem is far FROM being one of just money. Regardless things seem to be going pretty poorly at the moment.

Editor’s reminder: Personally offensive posts will be either edited or deleted. People who do not mend their ways will be blocked. Address the facts, criticize the actors, rebut rational arguments in a rational manner. Thank you.

Colin Clark,

It seems that some of us do value the opportunity to exchange ideas in a rational manner. The interjection of P.R. blurbs from an organized assembly of attack hacks is so tiresome to read.

You might have heard but, CNN has set a new policy to not have any radio talk show hosts on their broadcast as reported yesterday, due to the anticipated responses that are not on topic.

Inflammatory B.S. is a cancer that has finally reached a level of destruction that teeters on sedition, much like the Nazi propagandists in the U.S. before Pearl Harbor. It reminds me of the beginning of the last century when, “Birth of a Nation” and Jim Crow laws were the rage and racist ideology got a new foothold to destroy the reconstruction, ante bellum efforts from the late 19th century.

There is one other element of technological advancement as a society and that is fear. The pace of increasing info to digest and discern causes anxiety for those forced to move outside of their comfort zone paradigm. It is much like a child’s reaction to the first day of kindergarten, some cry, some freeze and others run around looking at all the interesting things in their new environment. We must be the latter.

Recon,

That’s not correct. None of it is. We are spending more on the military than we ever have.

It is time for us to spend less on the military and perhaps get more at the same time.

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup​.com

pfcem

Bill Clinton did not cut the overall budget. he moved things around but by the end of his second term he was one of the biggest spenders.

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup​.com

PS– I agree with Chief Houston. I am so tired of the “Obama is a lefty socialist and hates the military” shit. It’s ignorant and doesn’t add much to the general discussion. This is a great blog because with the exception of a few nutcases, the discussions are intelligent and inciteful and funny.

Daniel Russ,

The defense budget under Clinton went DOWN nearly every year (except for 1997 where it when back ‘up’ to ALMOST 1995 level down again in 1998 & then back ‘up’ to ALMOST 1991 level in 1999)! And did not reach 1990 levels until 2001. As a % of GDP the defense budget dropped from 5.2% in 1990 to 3.0% in 1999, 2000 & 2001. As a % of discretionary spending from 60% in 1990 to 48% in 2000.

ANYONE can go to http://​www​.gpoaccess​.gov & ses the data for themselves. It is irrefutable.

http://​www​.optimist123​.com/​.​/​p​h​o​t​o​s​/​u​n​c​a​t​e​g​o​r​i​z​e​d​/​c​h​a​r​t​1​.​gif

Chief Houston’s comments apply to some of the more outlandish polemical inputs to this page; however, if he intended his comment to apply to the general national discourse on healthcare/energy policy,the economy, etc, then his comments are over-the-top and sophmoric.

We are having a healthy debate as the American public discover more about the furtive House bills and the Obama administration’s plans to “reform” American healthcare & society. There is nothing seditious about questioning or disagreeing with “government plans” and the debate has nothing to do with race or Jim Crow. The Obama crowd and many in the MSM are using race as a ploy because the Dems are losing the debate on the issues…if you disagree with Obama on healthcare or energy policy then ipso facto you are a “Jim Crow” racist/Nazi?? Preposterous! Nice try Axelrod.

As to Obama and Defense issues…think President Obama has delegated Sec Gates trememdous latitude…suspect that Defense/foreign policy is not a strong suite or interest for the current POTUS (there was ZERO on his resume for foreign affairs & Chicago “community organizers” have a limited horizon on Defense issues). Seems that POTUS is leaving most DOD issues to Sec Gates…so, it may be a bit premature to hammer Obama on Defense as his barely nascent positions are still unclear.

Mark,

You had it right! It was directed at the intented audience of ignorance, no the health care debate.

Team,

We must never underestimate this great opportunity to communicate on issues pertaining to our national defense in such an open and timely format.

If you know about current joint doctrine than you know that high trust=high speed=low cost=high effectiveness.

QDR, UCAV’s, State Dept./DOD team tasking, etc..
are dynamic current and future concerns that
require our best efforts. BS in=BS out, we have no time for that!

Enemies of our state have always used distraction, deception and determination to try to obstruct initiatives in wartime and peace.

Keep the faith! Keep the focus!

Chief did you accuse me of being a Lockheed PR person? Boy, I would love that job considering how much more it would probably pay than what I have now.

Regardless we cannot and must not cut our capability to fight conventional wars and, God-forbid, nuclear conflicts. If we don’t take these opportunity to replace old designs now we will be kicking ourselves down the road.

Not all of those have an important place in COIN warfare, yet nobody knows what the next war may be. Many things like the Army’s GCV program would be damn helpful in today’s wars too.

pfcem

This website’s accounting has been disputed or as some say — debunked. Many defense research projects under Clinton were moved from “Defense” spending to “Private Industry” research investment. A change in book keeping only. At the end of Clinton’s 8 years, he spent as much on the military as the top 5 administrations.

If you are going to look at the pennies on the tax payers’ dollars going to defense spending as a percentage– then you have to admit we spend most of our public funds on the military.

Is anyone looking at this ever creeping defense expenditure figure and ask if we are getting what we pay for? Is patriotism somehow commensurate with the amount of funds we spend on the defense industry?

No. It is decidedly not.

BTW the Peace Dividend was an initiative under Bush 41, not Clinton.

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup​.com

Recon Team,

“Not all of those have an important place in COIN warfare, yet nobody knows what the next war may be. Many things like the Army’s GCV program would be damn helpful in today’s wars too.”

Roger, that! Remember, we must all learn together! Perception, is reality, until we allow qualified input to change it to truth.….

“It may affront the military-minded person to suggest a reqime that does not maintain any military secrets.” — Albert Einstein

“So long as they don’t get violent, I want to let everyone say what they wish, for I myself have always said exactly what pleased me.” — Albert Einstein

“Anyone who doesn’t take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either.“
Albert Einstein

“if you look at defense spending in inflation adjusted dollars &/or as a % of GDP (or of the federal budget) Obama is NOT spending more on defense“
+++
So, what is it then when spending increases over the previous year and gdp shrinks compared to the previous year?

Pardon me if I interrupt and ask if anyone thinks there will be consequences for N.G. after one of their excecutives ran his mouth against a congressional staffer? Will the company apologize? Will the staffer (and his buddies) carry grudges?

In a perfect world, there would be no impact on NG’s future proposals. Considering how many deals are “made on the golf course” these days, I can’t help but think that there will be some blow-back, albiet unofficially, for NG.

Procurement these days doesn’t seem to be an exact science where the best man wins. It should be, but it’s really hard to look at some of these winners over the last 20 years and not think “I guess they sent the better Christmas gifts to the decision makers”.

(Obviously this isn’t always the case and is an oversimplification)

I would expect to see a far greater number of Defense Contractors speaking their mind after the Boeing tirade when it lost the Tanker contract! Boeing embarrassed the industry and has now set the bar for improper business etiquette. When it comes to Congress, they deserve little if any respect, as they are but a group of selfish, over indulgent oafs, whom fail to even remember who they work for.

*required

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement