Report: Hagel to Outline 2015 Budget on Feb. 24

Report: Hagel to Outline 2015 Budget on Feb. 24

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will outline the Pentagon’s proposed budget for fiscal 2015 on Feb. 24, a week before its official release, according to a news report.

The budget preview will include the department’s priorities and challenges for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, Andrea Shalal-Esa and David Alexander of Reuters reported on Wednesday.

The Defense Department’s base budget, which excludes war funding, is expected to be about $500 billion — some $40 billion less than what the department previously budgeted for the next fiscal year. Congress provided partial relief to automatic budget cuts known as sequestration over the next two years, but agencies still face spending reductions.


“Now, will there be cuts across the board?” Hagel said during a press conference last week. “Of course there will. You can’t do it any other way. Are there going to be adjustments across the board? Of course. But you must preserve readiness and modernization.”

That likely means continued funding for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, the Pentagon’s most expensive acquisition effort, estimated last year to cost $391 billion to develop and build 2,457 F-35 Lightning IIs. The fifth-generation, single-engine jet is designed to replace such aircraft as the F-16, A-10, F/A-18 and AV-8B.

Earlier this week at the Singapore air show, Frank Kendall, the Pentagon’s top weapons buyer, reportedly said the Lockheed Martin Corp.-made fighter remains the department’s top priority. He said it would probably remain so under any budget scenario — despite its recent problematic performance in testing.

The Obama administration will submit the fiscal 2015 budget to Congress on March 4, the White House’s Office of Management and Budget announced last month.

By law, the president’s budget is required to be submitted to Congress no later than the first Monday in February, which this year is Feb. 3, according to the Congressional Research Service. In practice, the spending plan isn’t usually released until later.

Last year, for example, the administration didn’t submit a budget request until April — more than two months late — due in part to a political stalemate over automatic cuts known as sequestration.

Tags: ,

Join the Conversation

Bullcrap. F-35 is not the highest priority. Sun Tzu figured it out a long time ago, that strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory, while tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. The strategic defense is more important than any tactical strike fighter program, and by far the most important leg in the strategic triad is comprised of the Trident-II D5 SLBMs in the Ohio SSBNs and the associated systems that make that work. The most important of the development programs is currently the Ohio replacment, SSBN-R.

Word up!

The cuts are good stopped some wasteful programs and help put the DOD on better priorities for what’s needed. But the leadership is still idiotic as best The JSF is a major blunder and is bleeding funds from other must need projects mainly ships and cyber research. We must cancel the JSF.

The problem with that statement is that the last 60+ years have proven it to be wrong or at least insuffiicient to protect the interests of the country.

We have had strategic over-match for most/all of that time yet we have had Korea, Vietnam, Gulf 1&2, Kosovo, 9/11, etc. A lot of good an SLBM or any nuke has been in preventing these conflicts. Don’t get me wrong, these programs are the bedrock of our nuclear deterent but they are complementary to the conventional forces which are much more important in deterring agression.

Part 2: For my money the LRS-B is the most critical program right now because we are losing our ability to get to targets via A2/AD and we are losing the payload capability to affect enough targets to deter adventurism. These two growing weaknesses are emboldening potenital adversaries and F-35 lacks the payload, range and likely the survivability to change this situation if it ever becomes combat capable. Conventional ballistic missiles and long range cruise missiles are too large and expensive to use in great enough quantities for the distances required but they would play an important role. This leaves LRS-B to carry the fight to the aggressor. When and adversary realizes that the bomber can do this it will become that deterrent to agressive adventurism that we are starting to lack.

I agree that a new long-range bomber is critical. I just worry that the AF will want some super-expensive, super-stealthy, small payload, IAD penetrator that will cost $50B and 25 years to develop, rather than a more economical solution that’s not quite as bleeding edge technology but can carry a good-sized payload of penetrating ordnance.

The JSF Program is the smartest thing the US Military is done in a very long time. As it will provide all three services with a common platform. In addition the F-35 will provide a level of superiority the world has never seen before! Just to bad that every “Arm Chair General” that know nothing of its true capabilities can slander it at every turn!

Nonetheless, those same critics are going to look like fools in several years time. As the F-35 enters wide spread service.

Smoke the whole DOD budget for one weapons platform. Smart.

Wait till you see what the DOD has to give up to have it.

So a $500 billion base budget will be roughly 2.9% of GDP the lowest since the years leading up to .….….September 11, 2001.

I agree but I would include 450 new ICBM’s with a new warhead and super accurate RV along with prompt conventional global strike systems.

Scott, do you work for Lockheed?

Jeff, I think that you got your answer, by Scott’s NO ANSWER.

Lockheed Martin f us over again: As of Thursday night, no American has finished better than seventh place in any of the six long-track speedskating events held so far. Another six long-track events remain. In the 2010 Vancouver Games, the U.S. won four medals in speedskating… The company billed the so-called Mach 39 outfit as “the fastest speedskating suit in the world.” The suits, made from five synthetic fabrics, went through 300 hours of wind-tunnel testing and incorporated the design expertise of Lockheed Martin’s aircraft engineers, the company said. — http://​online​.wsj​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​s​/​S​B​1​0​0​0​1​4​2​4​052

Huh? What’s this got to do with DOD budget?

Yeah, I wonder.

Why do we really need the do everything F-35? We tried that type of program back with the F-111. Today we have the best fighters/bombers in the world. And we have the best trained pilots. We really don’t need a fighter that is several generations beyond what other countries have. Why not just build and use the F-22 as an air superiority fighter. The F-15 has never been beaten in air combat. The Navy should just continue to update the successful F-18 series. The Marines should just continue to update the Harrier jet. All of these are proven platforms, and three of them have a huge advantage over any F-35. Two engines. And, even the single engined F-16 has been a world beater. Why not just update and build more of those? This F-35 program just doesn’t make financial sense to me, and I as pro military as they come.

I’m sure that the people in St. Louis would love to build some new Harriers.

So we rebuild an entire production line (none of the tooling remains or anything) to replicate the best tech 1980 has to offer?

The suits were from Under Armour, but seriously are you going to start criticizing General Electric over their next toaster?

aerodynamic design and testing by Lockheed — who like the F-35 produced another dog.

As Bill so aptly demonstrates Lockheed engineers specialize is blaming others and covering thier arse.

Better than building a production line for the F-35 that cant compete with the 60s

“The company that runs the lab, apparel brand Under Armour, partnered on the project with Lockheed Martin, the aerospace giant better known for brainstorming fighter jets. The collaborators used two years of wind-tunnel testing and motion-capture modelling, and textile trial and error to produce a suit that, in the words of Kevin Haley, Under Armour’s vice president of innovation, will make a “measurable difference” in the results.”

Sure was a measurable difference. Just like the F-35, it cost a fortune and makes sure USA goes from domination to 7th.

You are right on target here. Once the athletes changed out of the horrible Suits and returned to their old suits with which they had won many races, the results of the competitions proved your point here!

LOL

How is the AV8 better then the F35B ?
Performance… carrying weight, mission radius, sensors, etc

Which is why they did so excellent when they switched back to their old suits right?

Except well… they didn’t do any better with the old suits. Or was that Lockheed sabotage?

Perhaps you think it best to rely on 40+ year old designed planes such as the F-18 and F-16? Surely the Chinese and Russians do no think so–they are racing to try to catch up with us.

*required

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

AdChoices | Like us on , follow us on and join us on Google+
© 2014 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.